B
billcu1
Guest
When my mom had me she said there was no pain. As for babies being innocent, well that’s your opinion I guess.
- Status
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
You have a different opinion about babies? Do tell.
B
billcu1
Guest
If you have no conscious choice when coming here, whether it be from sheol or wherever you must have a lot of baggage. I guess that’s getting more into mysticism and OT though.
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
Are you saying you believe in reincarnation or what? Do you believe what the Church teaches? If so, what do you believe the Church teaches about babies?
B
billcu1
Guest
It’s part of our tradition.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgul
Whether you remove it or not is up to you. What you believe is up to you. Things must be made simple for those who think simply. I will leave it at that.
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
Really
If it’s a part of Catholic tradition I would have thought you could reference a Catholic source.
And sometimes things are made super vague (and even a teensy-weensy condescending) because there isn’t a good Catholic answer.
Try again.
Just a reminder: I’m still referring to your comment about babies and your understanding of their innocence.
B
billcu1
Guest
As for the way you want God to speak. His ways are not our ways. But as to his Catholics I don’t know if there is an equivalency or not. I don’t know that Jesus said to the church (or Peter, the left hand, the sheep in this fold) anything like Gigul. Read that link and you’ll see many have a lot of baggage coming into this world or they’re (babies) hardly innocent. Or you wouldn’t need to be here. There are many better places to be. If you don’t understand I would worry about it.Really
If it’s a part of Catholic tradition I would have thought you could reference a Catholic source.
And sometimes things are made super vague (and even a teensy-weensy condescending) because there isn’t a good Catholic answer.
Try again.
Just a reminder: I’m still referring to your comment about babies and your understanding of there innocence.
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
Ah, there it is again. I don’t know if it’s condescension, plain and simple, or passive-aggressiveness.
There isn’t a reputable Catholic source, is there? Because it isn’t Catholic teaching. Yeah, if it isn’t Catholic teaching, I’m not going to worry about it.
B
billcu1
Guest
I found this. It is from one of the church fathers. What I see is a man who seems to not understand what people have said. He seems to mockingly make accusations. I will quote infra. He who has eyes to see. This may not be for you to know. Jesus did say to the left hand concerning his right hand. “What is it to you if I would have him to live until I return. Follow me.” Peter, or the church. Is not to know what John. The head of well, another part of the body knows. Anyway.
Basil the Great
“[A]void the nonsense of those arrogant philosophers who do not blush to liken their soul to that of a dog, who say that they have themselves formerly been women, shrubs, or fish. Have they ever been fish? I do not know, but I do not fear to affirm that in their writings they show less sense than fish”
Who teaches Gilgul that says anything about formerly “being shrubs, or fish.” I have myself no knowledge of that. Animals have no memories really. I don’t know of reincarnation teaching validly being an animal.
If you need the Church, or another to say it for it to be so I don’t know they teach reincarnation overtly if at all.
Jesus says to us “Follow me” He will decide who knows what. “I have sheep in other fields.” Concerning gilgul Jesus maybe saying to you, “What is it to you.”
headcoverings-by-devorah.com/About_GilgulNeshamot.htm
B
billcu1
Guest
Wait I’m sorry. I meant “I wouldn’t worry about it.” It looks like I wrote the exact opposite. My mistake.
E
ethereality
Guest
Where? Citation please. I’m pretty sure it’s both/and, clear from a traditional (i.e. not modern) understanding of Sacred Scripture.
Not really: See original sin, “in Adam, all have sinned” (possibly a quotation of St. Augustine in that article – or maybe that’s actually St. Paul in the Book of Romans). This is a profound topic, I think involving the reality that we are collectively one body, not only individuals. Thus we must be reborn into Christ, to leave this sinful collective body for a redeemed, clean collective body.
I think you are correct to say that those under the age of reason have not yet incurred personal sin, but this does not imply innocence (free of all sin).
You seem to be suffering from being raised within the modern hedonistic philosophy that sees pain as the ultimate evil to be avoided. If you will be Christian, you must realize that this is erroneous: The ultimate evil is not pain, but separation from God. I would agree with you if we were discussing God commanding someone to commit sin (which causes this), but the only case we have approaching that is Abraham’s trial with Isaac, and we see upon analysis of this case that God was not commanding him to sin (i.e. willfully commit filicide), but was rather testing his faith/obedience.
B
billcu1
Guest
Yes of course. Original sin would be there. And I believe the church teaches that. No personal sin.
T
thinkandmull
Guest
I believe infants are innocent in the sense that they do not deserve to be punished for original sin. People who say otherwise are really cultist. As for Abraham, God told Abraham to WILL to kill his son, which he did. I believe this was justified because Isaac was an older boy and had sinned.
The topic of this thread is not worry over hedonism, but the right idea of a perfect God. It don’t believe in the God some Catholics are here believe in: one Who (1) commands painful operations on innocents (2) commands the killing of innocents
D
Deus_tecum
Guest
Where do you get the idea that I am imposing anything on anyone? Why do people on internet forums so often ascribe words, or thoughts, intents, beliefs, emotions, etc. to other people?
E
ethereality
Guest
It sounds like you need to keep studying. On all counts you seem a little bit “off”, almost to a proper understanding but not quite there yet. Watch out for pride, which can cause one to feel he has the right understanding and terminate study prematurely.
For examples: God did not command Abraham to want to kill his son; being guilty of sin does not justify manslaughter; having a different understanding of God doesn’t make the god you follow a different god; God didn’t command killing innocents.
And we’ve already discussed what level of pain there may have actually been, and the nature of pain.
J
JerryZ
Guest
Infants are innocent of personal sin, this is the teaching of the Catholic Church. However it is also a teaching of the Catholic Church that, ALL humans, since Adam and Eve are born with the stain of Original sin.
Jesus came to the world to restore our relationship with GOD by removing the stain of original sin when we baptise infants and forgive original and personal sins for baptism after the age of reason.
Abraham was commanded to offer GOD a sacrifice, and HE requested that it should be Isaac. There are some parallels that we need to take note.
- Abraham showed how far he would go to obey a command form GOD
- Who ended up being sacrificed? a ram (male sheep)
To eat the flesh of a lamb.
Who is the Lamb of GOD?
Jesus!
As for pain. Well as I stated in a previous post, it is relative. Children are vaccinated and some are scared of the needle. Others are less. I am not familiar with the ritual circumcision as practised by the Jews, the one I am familiar with was carried out at a hospital for medical reasons and was not painful. Minor discomfort yes but not really painful.
If GOD required this as part of the Covenant HE established with the Israelites who am I to rebuke HIM. We as Christians do not need to have it done, unless for medical reasons which believe me, can be a whole lot more painful than circumcision.
…
- Status