09-05-2012, 05:51 AM
Shamahsa Paul,
What I was pointing to actually wasn't sin, as he obviously rejected that, but rather I'm puzzled as to why Jesus didn't reject the statement from the disciples (and correct their, as you say, ignorance) regarding the man being born blind. Was it not important or was it possibly an intentional failure to recognize what they said? I just wonder why He overlooked such a comment and didn't say something along the lines of, "how could a child have sinned before he was born?" Perhaps He choose not to answer in such a way so as not to disclose certain information for whatever reason(s) He may have had?
With due respect, I have to disagree. I personally don't think it's horrendous - both karma and reincarnation seem to make sense. Whether or not it's true, I can't say for sure, but it really would clear up a lot of things if such was the case - even if it's not currently an openly-accepted doctrine in the Christian faith. Though, from what I've read, it was accepted by the early church, but I haven't put much research into that just yet, so I'm not sure. What Origen had said seemed to have been accepted for 300 years, though, and then...poof! Just makes you think.
For instance, how long do people usually live these days? I think I read somewhere that the oldest living lady is/was a 116 years old? So are we suppose to follow through with -all- that God wants from us in such a short amount of time? How about those who haven't found Christ that die at half that age? Or worse yet, babies before they're baptized? Do they go directly to hell? Wouldn't it make more sense that He who is defined as love wouldn't do that to children who had not yet been given a chance to learn about Him, repent, become baptized, etc? I mean even statements like, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee", would start to make a bit more sense, wouldn't they?
From what I've recently read, many claim that reincarnation is all about walking from life to life, learning as much as you can about God, having what you've learned move on through to the the next life with you, until you finally reach "the" highest spiritual state. They also claim that scars or birthmarks follow through to the next life, as well. Now maybe I'm reaching here (...and far), but could that possibly have been the case with Jesus? That His scars remained but that He'd been given a new body? Now before you deem me a heretic (if you haven't already) and ban my IP address, please hear me out.
The reason I concluded that such -may- be the case was because of John 20:15, where Mary says to Jesus, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him." How is it that Mary Magdalene, being the first women to have seen Jesus after His resurrection, didn't notice that it was Jesus? Was it dark? Did He have something covering His face? As mentioned, the scars from His previous life remained, but how to explain Mary not realizing it was Him? A woman who had known Jesus, was healed by Him (could you forget someone's face who healed you the way Jesus healed Mary?), more than likely saw Him perform many miracles, was being taught by Him, and actually KNEW what He looked like, was unable to recognize Him? It wasn't until He said her name that she realized it was Him? Is it not possible that Mary simply didn't recognize Jesus because He was in His new ("heavenly") body?
I believe in what scripture teaches - that the child is not responsible for the parents sin. But what about his own? Is it truly outside the realm of biblical possibility that a man could have sinned in a previous life, chose not to accept that Christ has abolished all of His sin, and then suffered the consequence in the "age to come?" Perhaps the reason the apostles asked the question about the man being "born blind" was because they somehow knew that he may have sinned in his past life. Wouldn't that explain a lot? Wouldn't this show us that God isn't "mean" and doesn't cause kids to be born a certain way, but rather the the reason they are born a certain way was because of their OWN choices in a previous life? Maybe the reason paraplegics are born that way is because they committed suicide by jumping off of a high rise building? In other words, they "longed to die, but death eluded them." I know this sounds wild, but who can say with absolute certainty that such things are not true?
As a Christian, I'm not fully convinced of any of this, but I currently can't bring my self to quickly and fully dismiss such ideas either.
Paul Younan Wrote:I think He did reject it by the substance of His answer. He did not mean that the blind man and his parents were sinless, as that would be impossible. But that neither his sins nor their sins were responsible in any way for his being born blind.
What I was pointing to actually wasn't sin, as he obviously rejected that, but rather I'm puzzled as to why Jesus didn't reject the statement from the disciples (and correct their, as you say, ignorance) regarding the man being born blind. Was it not important or was it possibly an intentional failure to recognize what they said? I just wonder why He overlooked such a comment and didn't say something along the lines of, "how could a child have sinned before he was born?" Perhaps He choose not to answer in such a way so as not to disclose certain information for whatever reason(s) He may have had?
Paul Younan Wrote:Many eastern religions like Hinduism teach horrendous things like this, as being a result of "bad karma" from previous lives, and other such nonsense.
With due respect, I have to disagree. I personally don't think it's horrendous - both karma and reincarnation seem to make sense. Whether or not it's true, I can't say for sure, but it really would clear up a lot of things if such was the case - even if it's not currently an openly-accepted doctrine in the Christian faith. Though, from what I've read, it was accepted by the early church, but I haven't put much research into that just yet, so I'm not sure. What Origen had said seemed to have been accepted for 300 years, though, and then...poof! Just makes you think.
For instance, how long do people usually live these days? I think I read somewhere that the oldest living lady is/was a 116 years old? So are we suppose to follow through with -all- that God wants from us in such a short amount of time? How about those who haven't found Christ that die at half that age? Or worse yet, babies before they're baptized? Do they go directly to hell? Wouldn't it make more sense that He who is defined as love wouldn't do that to children who had not yet been given a chance to learn about Him, repent, become baptized, etc? I mean even statements like, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee", would start to make a bit more sense, wouldn't they?
From what I've recently read, many claim that reincarnation is all about walking from life to life, learning as much as you can about God, having what you've learned move on through to the the next life with you, until you finally reach "the" highest spiritual state. They also claim that scars or birthmarks follow through to the next life, as well. Now maybe I'm reaching here (...and far), but could that possibly have been the case with Jesus? That His scars remained but that He'd been given a new body? Now before you deem me a heretic (if you haven't already) and ban my IP address, please hear me out.
The reason I concluded that such -may- be the case was because of John 20:15, where Mary says to Jesus, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him." How is it that Mary Magdalene, being the first women to have seen Jesus after His resurrection, didn't notice that it was Jesus? Was it dark? Did He have something covering His face? As mentioned, the scars from His previous life remained, but how to explain Mary not realizing it was Him? A woman who had known Jesus, was healed by Him (could you forget someone's face who healed you the way Jesus healed Mary?), more than likely saw Him perform many miracles, was being taught by Him, and actually KNEW what He looked like, was unable to recognize Him? It wasn't until He said her name that she realized it was Him? Is it not possible that Mary simply didn't recognize Jesus because He was in His new ("heavenly") body?
Paul Younan Wrote:If the punishment for being born to sinful parents was such, we should all be blind.
I believe in what scripture teaches - that the child is not responsible for the parents sin. But what about his own? Is it truly outside the realm of biblical possibility that a man could have sinned in a previous life, chose not to accept that Christ has abolished all of His sin, and then suffered the consequence in the "age to come?" Perhaps the reason the apostles asked the question about the man being "born blind" was because they somehow knew that he may have sinned in his past life. Wouldn't that explain a lot? Wouldn't this show us that God isn't "mean" and doesn't cause kids to be born a certain way, but rather the the reason they are born a certain way was because of their OWN choices in a previous life? Maybe the reason paraplegics are born that way is because they committed suicide by jumping off of a high rise building? In other words, they "longed to die, but death eluded them." I know this sounds wild, but who can say with absolute certainty that such things are not true?
As a Christian, I'm not fully convinced of any of this, but I currently can't bring my self to quickly and fully dismiss such ideas either.