" given the fact that we are not perfect, that our obstacles and challenges are according to our own needs?"
I can see that all of us are not perfect and we all have challenges so I can connect to your comment a little. However you seem to have fallen into saying that the person born blind in the John passage was born that way as a direct results of his failings in the preexistence.
Well, perhaps direct, or indirect (likely the latter)...but the resulting reasoning could be consistent with a doctrinal view of pre-existence, correct?
Because such failings are volitional they would be sins. You have said he was born blind due to his sin in direct contradiction to the words of Jesus.
This is not accurate. Christ merely severs the notion that a special, or even specific, sin is the direct cause for the blindness - it does not pronounce the man as being sinless. In other words Christ is saying that the man's (or parent's) behavior here is not the cause of the affliction, but that is not to say they are not sinners. So, in effect Christ is speaking to the spiritual blindness of men in general...but perhaps the clarification is necessary as to whether Christ is speaking about the man here and now, or the man before, now, and forever?
Granted Christ's answer is somewhat specific to the design of the question he was asked, but Mormon doctrine - dealing with pre-existence necessarily addresses this issue....and President Lee, may or may have not clarified the point.
I was going to reply to your comment about a Divine collusion but decided I really did not know what you were thinking of with that comment.
well, the notion of pre-existence being specific to Mormon Doctrine brings this into question as a possible explanation.
First, let us recognize that many evangelicals consider the idea of a premortal life to be invalid. So, for them to argue John 9:3 in that context is certainly contrary to their own doctrine, and they would need to extend John 9:3 into a premortal existence.
Second, this collusion would be a necessary line of reasoning to investigate. If one considers the notion expressed in John 9:2-3 we read that Christ speaks of an opportunity being created by those seemingly less-fortunate in our own eyes. Obviously this opportunity is of a divine consequence and not random happenstance. So, if all parties involved were righteous spirits in the pre-mortal life and were on equal spiritual footing, then surely it was intentional for the circumstance to be presented here. That it was intended for a blind man to be upon the earth for the purpose of Christ's miracle(s)...correct?
I think we all share in various ways in the frailities of the flesh and though I do not believe sin is the only element of that frailty but I do think it is an important partand I figure none of us are free of that disablity.
Well, on the one hand I believe these temporal frailties
are symptomatic of our shared spiritual frailties, as Christ alludes to in the above cited passages.
But all this boils down to a conception of what it means to have been in the pre-mortal life, does it not?
So, back to president Lee.
I suppose one could consider the following with regards to a pre-mortal spirit occupying "flawless" body and another pre-mortal spirit occupying a "flawed" body.
If we consider both spirits to be equally "righteous" and equally "lacking" then how would we account for their distinct differences in temporal and spiritual challenges? Perhaps one could argue that one set of challenges is greater and more difficult than the other; that this set of challenges requires "more"...but one may argue that they are equally trying as well. So, why the difference then? Why challenge the blind man with blindness and challenge the sighted man with having compassion for the blind?
President Lee seems to forgo any notion of a spiritual "no child left behind" program and moves towards a reasoning that aligns more with a "head start" program.
Allow me to oversimplify - consider two persons, of equal strength, who are being asked to lift 300 pounds at an event in the near future, and by doing so will result in some sort of reward. Person "A" decides to immediately begin a training regimen, starting with 100 pounds, then working to 125, and so on. Person "B" decides to do nothing and remains at a comfortable lifting ability of 100 pounds (for whatever reason). After some time, Person "A" can lift 250 pounds and Person "B" can still only lift 100 pounds. The event is then revealed as being only a short time away from occurring....Person "B" then begins to train in order to lift the 300 pounds.
Each Person lifts the 300 pounds at the event...but, between the moment when the event time was revealed and the actual occurrence of the event, which person was in a "better" position to achieve the 300 pound goal and which person would have to take on a more challenging training schedule?
I believe this how President Lee was considering the situation....in a manner of speaking. However, does this constitute CoJCLDS Doctrine on the matter? I do not believe it meets that threshold but it is an interesting, albeit an abrasive, point of discussion that involves many points of Doctrine from the Book of Mormon and the NT which are not so easily resolved, alone or in conjunction....and especially not by our modern sensibilities of what is considered temporally "offensive".
what say you?