The only thing I really believe about the 'afterlife', or whatever you want to call it, is that what we observe as 'reality' is only the tip of the iceberg of actual reality. In practice, it's unknowable and therefore not worth worrying about. What's happening right now is the only truly knowable thing, and right now I need to get off my arse and go to work.

Sadly, I would assume oblivion was no longer a choice at that point, but yeah, given the choice, reincarnation or oblivion for me, or I'mma at least ask them to let me see what hell's like before deciding.

Oh yeah? So I guess that's why Jews take off their yarmulkes when they go indoors or are in prayer, right? Oh, they don't? That's strange...

Whole huge wide swathes of what people insist passes for modern Christianity are basically what amounts to fan fiction. Dumber people will fight you tooth and nail insisting that various culturally ingrained tropes and details really are in the book when in fact they're not, but you'll find that the religious apologists with a little more brainpower at their disposal have instead invented an array of tricks and deflections to downplay or just outright dismiss these discrepancies.

A few of my favorites:

The big one, of course, is that pretty much the entire modern interpretation of hell, including what it looks like and how it works, is taken entirely from the Divine Comedy. Particularly Dante's Inferno, and to a lesser extent John Milton's Paradise Lost. The bible itself is actually curiously silent on the location, mechanics, accessibility, and even temperature of hell. The Book of Revelation does make a reference to the "lake of fire" multiple times but it's not actually outright stated that this is hell itself, merely where the devil, the beast, and the false prophet will be cast after their final judgement.

While we're at it, it's the Book of Revelation, not the book of "Revelations," plural, no matter how many times you've watched the Matrix trilogy.

How many wise men visited Jesus in the manger? Wrong! The bible never actually specifies, not even once. Three gifts are mentioned, but the number of magi bearing them is never referenced. The only thing we know is that they were plural, so it must have been at minimum two. It's only assumed that there were three, one per gift. Further, the now traditional names of Melchior, Gaspar, and Balthazar are extrabiblical fabrications that stem from the Excerpta Latina Barbari which was an 8th century Latin translation of a Greek compilation from some 200 years earlier, but still well after the heyday of Big J himself, not to mention anyone who could have been a living eyewitness. At least they managed to make some cameos in Chrono Trigger, though, so we got something out of the whole debacle.

Also, only the gospel of Matthew mentions the magi at all.

Infamously, in 1 Kings 7:23-26 as well as a reiteration in 2 Chronicles 4:2-5, the bible describes in some detail a presumably circular cauldron which, if we believe the dimensions as stated, would force pi to be equal to three. No mention is made as to the involvement of Bergholt Stuttley Johnson in all of this, but in light of that maybe we can't rule it out. Either way, the notion that pi is in fact not equal to three is obviously thus an extrabiblical interpolation in and of itself, never mind the fact that it's part of the math that makes the modern world work and, among other things, keeps satellites from falling out of the sky.

The notion that "Lucifer" is one of the names of the devil is also a modern-ish misunderstanding, and the story that "everyone knows" (possibly courtesy of the Spawn comics, or Jay and Silent Bob) about the devil being a rebellious angel who was cast out of heaven by god and cratered so hard he landed in hell is not really supported by the bible and is probably a myth absorbed from other nearby cultures. The name is only mentioned once in the entire bible, in Isaiah 14. It's never actually said that whoever Lucifer may be was actually an angel, and in fact it's understood that he is actually supposed to be the mortal king of Babylon at the time. Nor anything about how he might have became the devil after falling from heaven. Ezekiel 28 is also trotted out as allegedly being the other half of the Lucifer/casting out of Satan story, but the object of god's ire here is the King of Tyre, also a mortal as explicitly mentioned by god twice. Halfway through god starts calling the dude a cherub and claiming he was present in the Garden of Eden, so suddenly mid sentence he's talking about somebody else? This is god, right, an entity to famously direct he blows up entire cities because a couple of their residents piss him off? And on that note, god clearly burns whoever he's talking about to a crisp and kills him very dead by the end of the passage so that doesn't make any sense either, even if all the purple prose about cherubs and Eden and blamelessness and so forth weren't just mockery for getting ideas above his station (which seems a bit more plausible). So even if said entity were the devil he's not ruling in hell; god killed him.

Revelation is no help there, either. The devil is just there already by then, with no details given on where he came from.

We could go on like this forever.