Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu soc.religion.christian:21698
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!pitt.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!geneva.rutgers.edu!christian
From: sun075!Gerry.Palo@uunet.uu.net (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Jacob and Esau (reincarnation)
Message-ID: <May.19.05.15.30.1993.1038@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Date: 19 May 93 09:15:31 GMT
Sender: hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu
Lines: 58
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

In article <May.12.04.30.10.1993.10089@athos.rutgers.edu> JEK@cu.nih.gov writes:

>Gerry Palo wrote that there is nothing in Christianity that excludes
>the theory of a succession of lives.
>
>I wrote that the Apostle Paul, in Romans 9, speaks of God as
>choosing Jacob over Esau, and adds that this is not as a result of
>anything that either child had done, since they had not been born
>yet.
>
>Clearly, Paul does not believe that they had had previous lives, nor
>does he suppose that his readers will believe it. For if they had
>had previous lives, it would not make sense to say, "Neither of them
>has done anything good or bad as yet, since they are not yet born."
>

Paul's statement only asserts that that particular choice was not
a matter of karmic fulfillment of the past, just as the fate of the
man born blind (John 9) was not.  There is no question here of the
simplistic idea of karma as a machine that is the sole determiner
of one's destiny.  Even the eastern traditions, or many of them,
do not say that, as one knowledgeable poster pointed out.

And if in fact that Paul did not know about or believe in reincarnation
does not say anything one way or another about it.  Even John the Baptist,
who Jesus says emphatically is Elijah (Matt 11:14), does not appear to 
have been aware of it, at least at the point at which he was asked. But 
it is interesting that his threefold denial -- to the question whether 
he is the Christ, the Prophet (i.e. Isaiah), or Elijah, is emphatic in 
the first case and very weak in the third.

I would like to add once again that, while it is important to discuss the
different passages that may point directly to the teaching of repeated
earth lives, one way or another, what I really see as important in our
time is that the subject be revisited in terms of the larger view of
Christianity and Christian doctrine.  For the most part, those who do
accept it either reject the central ideas of Christianity or, if they
are Christians, hold their conviction as a kind of separate treasure.
I believe that Christianity has important new understanding to bring
to bear on it, and vice versa, much that is central to Christianity
takes on entirely new dimensions of meaning in light of repeated earth
lives. It has a direct bearing on many of the issues frequently discussed 
in this newsgroup in particular.

I have said openly that I have developed my views of repeated earth lives
largely from the work of Rudolf Steiner.  Not that I hold him as an
authority, but the whole picture of Christianity becomes clearer in light
of these ideas.  Steiner indicated that the old consciousness of reincar-
nation necessarily had to fade away that it could be renewed in later
times, after a time of development of the Christ idea through the first
two millenia after Christ's deed on Golgotha.  In our own time, it becomes 
important that, having received the basic gospel of salvation, our 
understanding of life and of the human being can now grow to embrace the 
significance of this idea.  For the discussions in this newsgroup, I 
have tried to focus on that which can be related as directly as possible 
to scripture and to fundamental Christian teaching and tradition.

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
