Originally posted by no1marauderNo, that's wrong. Official Church doctrine is silent on the fate of unbaptised children (except that they are entrusted to the mercy of God). It does not say they go to Hell.
Then as far as official Church doctrine goes unbaptised children and presumably the majority of "human beings" who perish as pre-embyros go to Hell unless God does something that is not explainable consistent with Church doctrine.
Originally posted by lucifershammerSo Church doctrine is silent on the fate of the majority of "human beings"? That's a bit odd, ain't it?
No, that's wrong. Official Church doctrine is silent on the fate of unbaptised children (except that they are entrusted to the mercy of God). It does not say they go to Hell.
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't think they will require such things. Nevertheless, it is possible, even for a single-cell organism, to experience discomfort at the absence of such things. An unborn human being would experience no such discomfort in limbo; it would experience all the comfort of being well-fed etc.
That wouldn't make it "happy" though it would be necessary for it to physically exist. Will pre-embyros have a physical existence that requires such things in Limbo?
Every living organism is able to experience comfort and discomfort in its own mode. The former is what I mean by 'natural happiness'.
Originally posted by vistesdAre we talking about this group:
I don’t know a lot about it, but the version in Hasidic Judaism seems to be something like the soul, in between incarnations, reflects on its history and chooses the human conditions under which to be reincarnated the next time, in order to continue a progressive journey of spiritual development. So, that does seem to involve some sort of “transmutation” pe ...[text shortened]... d reincarnation per se seems to be that the human soul never reincarnates as, say, a tree frog.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasidic_Judaism
??
Seems almost deutero-Christian to me...
Originally posted by lucifershammerThat's terrible! Those poor zygotes never had a chance! Why should they be denied heaven?
For the record, I believe they are neither eternally damned nor sent to Heaven (not in the way human beings who have attained the age of reason, anyway).
That doesn't mean those of us who are fortunate to have lived are freed from our responsibilities towards God and creation.
Originally posted by telerionNo it doesn't. Your question is analogous to my asking why I should be denied a share in Bill Gates' $42bn personal net worth.
My question makes more sense.
For your question to make sense, you must show first that an unborn child (or any human being, in general) is entitled to make it to Heaven. Without doing that, talk of Heaven being "denied" is misleading.
Originally posted by lucifershammerYou think that single-celled organisms can have conscious states?
I don't think they will require such things. Nevertheless, it is possible, even for a single-cell organism, to experience discomfort at the absence of such things. An unborn human being would experience no such discomfort in limbo; it would experience all the comfort of being well-fed etc.
Every living organism is able to experience comfort and discomfort in its own mode. The former is what I mean by 'natural happiness'.