Chad wrote:
No, I have never mentioned my sister’s situation. No need for me to go into details. She’s alive and well, she has just made some horrendous choices. Every obstacle we overcome is done through ourselves and/or the help of others. There is no need to propose a Guardian Angel. Choices you make are influenced by many factors that we can observe, such as ones environment, education, state of mind, stress, and influence from any drugs/alcohol and so on. To propose an influence that cannot be observed or tested is side-stepping the actual issue at hand.
However, let’s say this Guardian Angel exists. Why would it decide to ignore the very person it’s been assigned to protect? What happens when the person that they were assigned to dies? Who is making the decisions about what obstacles the Guardian Angels shouldn’t help you with? And off what standard is that decision being made?
From what I understand a Guardian Angel is not "assigned" to a person to stop every bad thing from happening to them, but rather to guide or influence a person on a different level. Bad things will happen to people, but it's how they overcome obstacles that makes the difference. A guardian angel may influence a person whether or not they are even aware of it. They cannot force the person to do things, but may influence a decision that person was contemplating. Ultimately the decision is up to the individual. Circumstances such as death would be a factor that an angel would not be able to influence.
If someone is sent back to Earth via reincarnation for evils, then something must be judging what is evil or not. How can they honestly say what is evil and what isn’t? Granted, something’s are rather obvious, but they all relate to our way society and culture has formed. We ourselves have defined bad and good. Sending someone back to Earth to suffer for the evils they did in a past life seems very sadistic to me. This accomplishes nothing and shows that some higher being is cruel and would rather torture people than truly change things for the better. I mean come on, if they had the ability to send them back to Earth, at least make it worthwhile.
If the premise of reincarnation is true, then obviously there is a higher being that can judge what is evil or not, and there is a set standard of rules by which all are judged and "sentenced". The purpose of sending another back to suffer for a prior evil may be done out of teaching a lesson to that erroneous soul. This is not done out of cruelty or sadism, but rather that it is a matter of action and consequence-"one may never understand another's perspective until they have walked a mile in their shoes" in a very basic sense.
Another example is that there is another belief (pagan) of a three fold rule: every thing you do comes back to you threefold. If you do something good or positive towards another, that good act will find it's way back to you one way or another. But if you do evil or ill will towards another, then that negativity will eventually fall back upon you. Depending upon just how great that evil was, it may follow you and haunt you into your next lifetime.
Another planet very well could sustain life, but to think that the same life forms would evolve individually in separate areas of the Universe is too far of a stretch. Evolution is not a one-way set-in-stone process. However, if you believe that the Creator made Humans, then I guess it would be conceivable that he would jump us on over to spare planet. However, if the Creator is so powerful in the first place, he could have saved a lot of time and suffering of people by just destroying the Asteroid before it hit Earth.
Considering the vastness of space and the universe, I would think that there would be plenty of room for all of those lost souls, somewhere. And figuratively speaking, if the Creator did allow the Earth to be destroyed by said asteroid, then I would think that there was some kind of good explanation for it. Otherwise that Creator is sadistic, indeed.
I’m rather curious now though. Off what evidence leads you to the conclusion to living your multiple lives? Scars, memories, certain dreams? Apparently you have believed this since a young age, so I would be interested if your parents or someone you know also believed this, or how were you introduced to the idea?
Just for the record, I am not positive about the existence of angels, reincarnation, or sprits. I do feel that since they are unknowns, and have not been proven to be completely false then that leaves the possibility of their existence.
My thoughts of reincarnation stem from since I was born. There are certain people throughout my lifetime that when we first met, I felt instantly close to them and felt as though I knew them well, even though I had never seen them before. Upon getting to know these particular persons better, the feeling (mutually felt) that we have known each other for years, when in fact it was only a few months, was puzzling. I have heard the phrase "we must have known each other in a past life" before and that had gotten me to pondering if it was possible.
There have been certain areas that I go to for the first time, and I strongly feel as though I have been there before. I have checked with my parents or specific relatives that I have travelled with in the past to see if I went to these specific areas as a kid (and didn't remember the trip) and I did not to the best of their memories.
Of course all of this could just mean nothing short of I felt a stronger kinship or got along better with certain persons than others, and that these places that I went to I went with someone else that I don't recall. Or there could be other factors that explain these feelings or suspicions. Or it could be remnants of a prior memory that I had from a previous lifetime.
There is no evidence to suppose any supernatural events. Under what conditions would we be able to test the supernatural? I get frustrated every time someone says that something isn’t supposed to be found, or is unable to be tested because science cannot adequately explain the situation…and they take this as ok. There is no need to grasp at straws to explain something we wish to be true. Rather we should be forming conclusions based on real data, and as of yet that real data hasn’t pointed to any supernatural events. If we think there to be an alternate explanation, better than which we already have, then we should start testing that explanation! Don’t just sit back and take the easy way out! There are lots of events that were once considered supernatural, many of which were natural disasters like Floods, Tsunamis, Hurricanes, Volcanoes, Lightening, etc. In light of actual evidence and an understanding of how they occur, there is no need to label these events as supernatural.
Exactly-and I also am skeptical when someone states "that's the way it's supposed to be" or "it is not to be questioned, everything happens for a reason" is not good enough of an answer for me. I believe that there is an explanation for everything-but that we haven't the technology yet to be able to measure certain phenomenon. Or to be able to debunk certain myths such as angels, reincarnation, or spirits. It does not mean that they don't exist, but that we just haven't gotten to the point of
proving that they don't exist.
Of course, those who follow these practices will be at a slightly better advantage for survival, which in turn will pass on their religious ideas to their children or others who think highly of them. Not to mention the fear of an bad afterlife to keep people in line and make them strive to follow the rules and guidelines that much closer. Ok, I trailed off a little...there's much more I would like to relate, but I'll try to get to my point! I just felt like I would share where I stand on the issue.
This post is a combination of sit downs in my spare time trying to piece together a response, hehe.
