Is Reincarnation baloney?

[QuantumBit]

Thanks @St. SteVen for inviting me to discuss further. Unfortunately, I have decided to move on from this thread since the OP is unable to participate.

 

[St. SteVen]

Thanks @St. SteVen for inviting me to discuss further. Unfortunately, I have decided to move on from this thread since the OP is unable to participate.

Thanks a million for your level of participation on this thread.
This is a new concept for everyone to get their head around. Don't be discouraged.
Here's a new thread to check out. I invite your input. This OP will treat you better.

Open Discussion of UR Chapter Four - The Gates of Hell...

Jesus said, "... I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." - Matthew 16:18 NIV Question #1) What are the gates of hell? Question #2) What does it mean to not prevail? Question #3) How should the church (the Body of Christ) respond to this? Question #4) How...

www.christianityboard.com

 

[CadyandZoe]

On my rounds of the discussion boards I see that a lot of seemingly intelligent sensible people believe in reincarnation, namely that when we die we're born again as a baby somewhere.
Is there any Biblical scriptural support for it?

Reincarnation is false on the face of it, according to the Bible. The concept of reincarnation is based on Pythagoras' concept of metempsychosis, transmigration of the soul, which is based on the false philosophical concept of the eternality of the soul.

While the eternality of the soul was a major philosophical assumption among Greek thinkers, the Bible teaches that the soul is subject to death.

Consider, for instance, Psalm 33:18-20

18 Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him,
On those who wait for His faithfulness,
19 To rescue their soul from death
And to keep them alive in famine.
20 Our soul waits for the Lord;
He is our help and our shield.

Psalm 56:12-13
12 Your vows are binding upon me, God;
I will render thanksgiving offerings to You.
13 For You have saved my soul from death,
Indeed my feet from stumbling,
So that I may walk before God
In the light of the living.

James 5:19-20
19 My brothers and sisters, if anyone among you strays from the truth and someone turns him back, 20 let him know that the one who has turned a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.

Souls are not eternal; they do not survive death, which is why they need to be saved from death.

 

[St. SteVen]

Reincarnation is false on the face of it, according to the Bible.

On the face of it? What if you dig a bit deeper?
Have you been born again? Did it save your soul from death?

Souls are not eternal; they do not survive death, which is why they need to be saved from death.

What about the spirit? Returns to God who gave it? (Ecclesiastes 12:7) Then what? Given again?

Are you an Annihilationist? Believe that the "lost soul" is incinerated? Nothing remains? (no body, no spirit, no soul)
A wasted life. Billions of "lost" souls gone forever? God's perfect plan for the humankind he created in his own image?
What's wrong with this picture?

 

[Timtofly]

Think rather in terms of life eternal, or everlasting life. Those are the terms that scripture uses.

Scripture is not teaching reincarnation. Stop trying to equate the term with words found in Scripture. Scripture uses a lot of symbolism. Everlasting life is the default creation state of mankind. Life came first, not death. Death comes from disobedience to God, not reincarnation.

Death is the default position for those who disobey. But we are not born sons of God. We are born sons of Adam in Adam's dead state. We already start out dead at conception. That is what Scripture teaches, not that we exist as a soul from a prior carnation. One could take the verse "Jesus wept" and turn it into some pagan concept if they wanted to. The Hebrews came out of Egypt and a pagan culture. You don't think that could be reflected in their thought process, even those placed into Scripture? By the first century they had been influenced by Babylon, Greek, and Roman cultures.

That does not mean Scripture teaches pagan and false religion. It was the Hebrews in Babylon who influenced all the eastern religions. Moses wrote down the facts way before modern religions sprung up. Unfortunately Satan also had his brand of science already brewing before Abraham was called out of ancient Mesopotamia.

 

[St. SteVen]

We are born sons of Adam in Adam's dead state.

Glad you mentioned that. Here's what God did about that, for all of humankind.
How do you suppose this is carried out? That "the many" who were made sinners (all), will be made righteous.

Romans 5:18-19 NIV
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

 

[Timtofly]

The story of Adam and Eve is a story of the very first reincarnation. The couple died on that very day. God had to recreate them.

Actually it is not. Besides, reincarnation would have happened before Adam's disobedience not after.

Reincarnation is not "getting a new body", that is the white lie to make reincarnation palatable. Even you tried to dismiss your version as not "just getting a new body".

I have pointed out reincarnation is literally stealing the new soul that God creates at conception, and places a child of sheol in place of that soul. That is Satan stealing what birth is and placing a false hope of having a second chance.

God already has "a second chance" built into creation through His redemption process, but the church has even messed that up through established theology. In the end most will reject God, just because they have their mind and soul made up because they have their own morality that is alien to God.

God had already changed what it meant to be a son of God way before Adam disobeyed, when God separated Eve from Adam. According to you Eve was already reincarnated and Adam became 2 halves of a whole. That was when marriage was instituted. Now today we see Satan pushing the point, a single person should be neither sex. Would that not be what a created Son of God is? Now humans are trying to justify their own sexless creation. Which John told us would happen when Satan and the FP sets up such an image in Revelation 13. This beast will be Satan's "Adam" and the one prophecied as an AC.

Of course Adam and Eve died and no longer had a physical body of life. But being placed into a dead physical body is not reincarnation that you are trying to white coat. Reincarnation is simply not just a new body. They were not birthed out of a womb when they died. They were literally dead dead, not birthed again.

Adam literally would have stopped being a son of God when God separated the sexes, but no one really talks about the physical reality of that separation. Just the marriage aspect. But eating of the tree did nothing except add calories to the body. And did not even work out as that body was taken away and the body of death instantly replaced the perfect body they had. They went from a clean diaper to a soiled and dirty diaper. That is not reincarnation. That may be a use of the words, but not the reincarnation you espouse. It was not a birth process, but instant death as God promised. Most posters here deny the two seperate bodies as well. Except they do know the process will be reversed, they are just hazy on the detail.

Obviously facts are not important unless one thinks they won an argument.

Obviously your explanation of eating would not work either, as God took that body away and gave them a body that had not eaten from the forbidden tree. But don't let facts get in the way of your theology, it may fall apart or cause cognitive dissonance. Just saying, not trying to be mean or rude.

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they certainly gained the knowledge of what death is. That was all that changed by way of eating. They certainly were not the originators of the reincarnation process.

 

[Timtofly]

The reason I have to take the verses literally is because if I do not, I would be in contradiction with this verse...

1 Corinthians 15:36
"Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die"

Only that which is physically dead can be quickened. Moreover, there is a new Body afterwards.

One problem here. We are not seeds sown into the ground.

Second problem we are born dead, so can be quickened without dying a second time.

Being born dead is a state of condition. It is not an an acknowledgment we come from death. Every conception is literally a genetic copy of two humans, but that is not coming from sheol. That is coming from two biological entities. The conception is still a work of God forming a brand new soul, not reincarnation. There is no process of God that can insert a soul from sheol.

That may be a feel good human theory, but it is not logical, nor practical. Is this supposed to be Satan and God playing a game of chance and the one who wins, gets to insert their soul into the womb? You make it sound natural, but it is anything but natural.

That some verses uses figurative words to describe a physical process, does not mean you can take that as literally what happens. Thoughts can be easily manipulated, but not facts. Anyone can make verses sound like they are saying one thing, when in reality they say something different.

 

[Timtofly]

Speaking of Trees, there is an interesting verse about the Trees of Eden going to Hell...

Ezekiel 31:16
"I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit: and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth."

How does that work?

The Flood.

 

[Mr E]

@Mr E

When you were in the loins of your father you were something something totally different than what you are now. There were millions of others similar to you when the race began. But only one received the prize. Some were burnt up in the heat off the day while others became complacent and fell to the wayside.

You persevered and became something new/ a new creation the moment you entered the egg. Good job!

You then were born and have grown and absorbed knowledge,,, I have no idea of your age but now you may be entering the entropy stage. Unfortunately the next step will be death. Depending on what stage you are in.

Don’t be discouraged there will be a new birth into something greater.

Another way of looking at this is to say that I wasn't in the loins of my father at all. That's wasn't "me." There was no "me" in him. The "me" that became me didn't form at all until that seed (egg) that was in my mother was fertilized by that seed (sperm) that was in my father, but neither of those were "me" per se.

A better way of considering this concept is to understand that the "Life" that was in my father, joined with the 'Life" that was in my mother and from that union of mother and father- that same "Life" was birthed in me. Life was re-birthed.

And this is the problem that so many have as they struggle with the concept. They think in physical terms only, and neglect to consider that Life itself is not physical at all, but spiritual and the spirit enters into a physical container.

What you phrase as- Don’t be discouraged there will be a new birth into something greater. -is the essence of the gospel. The good news is that though you die (and you will) you will live again. That the end of your physical, temporary, momentary life is not the end of Life itself. Life goes on. la la la la life goes on. People think in terms of the afterlife. I understand eternal life to be a life after life, afterlife.

 

[Timtofly]

Hello?



What translation can you offer to back up your claim?

Do you have one that says- In the beginning judges, rulers, men of high station, nobles, goldy men or sons of the rulers created the heavens and the earth?

It was not God that had sex with the daughters.


A son of God is humanity not the angels. The angels were not created on the 6th day in God's image. Nor are they begotten of God.

When Jesus took on human flesh he was the only begotten son of God. Not an angel.

No where in Scripture should son of God be translated nor construed as an angel.

Of God part, or of Elohim is not the issue. The son part is the point being discussed. Angels are not sons. Humanity is. Adam was a son of God, then he physically died. After that point he was the father of all dead humanity.

Thus, the offspring of the original sons of God created on the 6th day, eventually saw the offspring of dead flesh Adam. When flesh without sin and death had offspring from those with flesh of sin and death, the result was not perfection and death being removed. The perfect flesh became corrupt into Adam's dead corruptible flesh. The ongoing result may have made Adam's dead flesh "physically" better, but the corruptible flesh made the offspring more wicked in nature.

 

[Timtofly]

It's a common understanding that the "sons of God" mentioned are angels.
That was why I said it was debatable. No need to fight about it, right?

A common misunderstanding.

 

[Mr E]

So universalism with a fancy new garment on, called reincarnation?

I don't know what you are referring to here. I was talking about eternal life. That means life without end for those who remain. Not all remain. The tree of life is pruned, for the good of the tree. The prunings are destroyed and no more.

 

[Mr E]

Being born again is a reincarnation of sorts.

Unless a seed dies... (John 12:24)

Jesus returned from the dead. What was that? If he actually died, then he lived again.
If he didn't die and live again, where does that leave you? (1 Corinthians 15:14)

You are saved by reincarnation.

cc: @QuantumBit

Because people get so stuck on the word-- I would say instead that Life continues by regeneration. Of course, what we are talking about is the same thing, that life returns from where it originated and then falls again from there and incarnates (re-incarnates) again and again.

 

[Mr E]

A son of God is humanity not the angels. The angels were not created on the 6th day in God's image. Nor are they begotten of God.

When Jesus took on human flesh he was the only begotten son of God. Not an angel.

No where in Scripture should son of God be translated nor construed as an angel.

Of God part, or of Elohim is not the issue. The son part is the point being discussed. Angels are not sons. Humanity is. Adam was a son of God, then he physically died. After that point he was the father of all dead humanity.

Thus, the offspring of the original sons of God created on the 6th day, eventually saw the offspring of dead flesh Adam. When flesh without sin and death had offspring from those with flesh of sin and death, the result was not perfection and death being removed. The perfect flesh became corrupt into Adam's dead corruptible flesh. The ongoing result may have made Adam's dead flesh "physically" better, but the corruptible flesh made the offspring more wicked in nature.

You reply here to me, as if I said any of those things. I did not. But I'll respond to your misdirection.

1. It was not God that had sex with the daughters.
God didn't have sex with daughters. No incubus, succubus or City bus carrying demons 'had sex' with men. Spirit and flesh are two completely different things and that's not how they interact.

2. When Jesus took on human flesh he was the only begotten son of God. Not an angel.
Jesus was human. He was flesh. He received the spirit of God-- it filled him. Spirit of God in him. We call it anointing. Christ in him. The "word" of God comes by the spirit of God by messenger. The messenger becomes flesh by entering in. Messengers are angels.

3. No where in Scripture should son of God be translated nor construed as an angel.
The sons of God are indeed angels, --in spirit. They are not begotten (born/fallen) but they are sent as messengers. My understanding is not limited by yours. Start a thread on this if you like, I'd enjoy showing you your error.

4. Of God part, or of Elohim is not the issue. The son part is the point being discussed. Angels are not sons. Humanity is. Adam was a son of God, then he physically died. After that point he was the father of all dead humanity.
You don't know what you are talking about here. Sorry, but you don't. God sent His son to Adam, because He loved the world and desired the garden of His delight to overcome death and remain fruitful forever.

5. Thus, the offspring of the original sons of God created on the 6th day, eventually saw the offspring of dead flesh Adam. When flesh without sin and death had offspring from those with flesh of sin and death, the result was not perfection and death being removed. The perfect flesh became corrupt into Adam's dead corruptible flesh. The ongoing result may have made Adam's dead flesh "physically" better, but the corruptible flesh made the offspring more wicked in nature.
This isn't even coherent. It's based on several assumptions that aren't rooted in reality. It's nonsense as a result.

 

[Timtofly]

Therefore, Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven, but is procreation possible in heaven outside of marriage?
Apparently so. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

Procreation is a process between two halves of the same being, male and female.

A son of God was not created as two on day 6. Eve was taken from Adam years later, and literally over a thousand years after Adam was created on day 6.

Is Procreation a totally different process if both sexes are in the same physical body?

Many think we will still be separated males and females after we die. Not if we are given back the original created bodies before Adam and Eve were split into two seperate identities. The point of Paradise is not being alone and needing two halves as the process is already completed on earth, and Paradise is already full of Adam and Eve's offspring.

If you think about it, at that point (Genesis 6) Adam's male offspring never had a womb to produce offspring, so only the females could. It may not be "politically correct" to state that the sons of God were both sexes, but they had to be, because it never says they were ever separated like Adam and Eve.

Many just erroneously assume only Adam and Eve existed, and don't even pay attention to what God even gives us in Scripture. You can thank theology for doing all the thinking for most people. Then people think only angels are around to fill in the logical gaps.

There were two different bodies prior to Adam's disobedience. One contained both sexes, and then God formed Eve out of Adam which technically would have changed Adam as that part of him was no longer there. Adam was still a son of God, but now both halves were sons of God. That changed when Adam disobeyed and they both physically died. Now we have the dead corruptible bodies that are genetic copies of fallen Adam and Eve. But we are not getting back our old bodies.

That is clear that once we leave this physical body, we are not getting it back by what Jesus said. He never said we become angels. He said like (as) the angels, who do not procreate. Jesus told you all right there it was not angels in Genesis 6. That is physically impossible. Jesus was just not explicit in saying we will have a body that is of one sex, or will contain two sexes, or no sex at all period. But if like the angels, in Paradise, the default, without explanation, would be no sexes at all. That ability would no longer be part of the physical makeup of the body.

 

[Timtofly]

Of course that's true-- words do have different senses, depending on their usage. That's my point.



I'm not asking why 'Our Creator' does or did things differently.... but why MOSES did. Moses, chooses to use those words in different ways purposefully with intent to draw a distinction between how, why and when he uses them. It's not like it's a different person writing at a different time and place-- he's telling us the story of his understanding of how it all came about and he intentionally says it just the way he said it-- on purpose.

Secondly, it's not a single account. It's not the same story told two different ways-- well, it is, but that's not ALL it is. It's more like our friend @QuantumBit has discovered the temple to be.... not just one thing, and not the thing we might first perceive.

And stop jumping back and forth between the usage of LORD and God-- that's one thing that the translators didn't slip up on the way they slip-slide with eloheim and God and gods as if those usages are interchangeable. They realize that there is a difference when Moses is referring to this specific God by name. They often neglect to note the different uses elsewhere like in Gen 1:1 where that One is not referenced by name at all, rather the text refers to something else--- yet the translators choose for you and write (generic) God. It's given birth to confusion.

I agree with you in that the text actually does differentiate between the Creator-- those eloheim beings mentioned in Chapter 1 and one particular Eloheim, who we come to know by name.

This all fits quite well into this overall topic of incarnation and rebirth-- or re-incarnation, if you can tolerate the term. Many cannot.

The reason why generic God is used is because the Trinity is given as 3 seperate parts in chapter 1.

In chapter 2 Moses states the Trinity as one being.

It is God as one (Lord) who takes Adam and places him in newly formed Eden, that God made a distinct location, from all the other sons of God spread across the earth.

In Genesis 1 we see God, the Word, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[CadyandZoe]

A wasted life. Billions of "lost" souls gone forever? God's perfect plan for the humankind he created in his own image?

All lives have purpose and none are wasted. But not all lives will enter the afterlife. Death and loss are facts of our existence. The sooner you realize this the better.

Compare the Biblical Picture with the false doctrine of Reincarnation.

Bible: Death is the enemy.
Reincarnation: Death is irrelevant.

Bible: Death renders life futile and meaningless.
Reincarnation: Death does not render life futile.

Bible: Jesus died to save souls.
Reincarnation: souls are indestructible and don't need saving.

Bible: The soul is finite, perishable.
Reincarnation: the soul is eternal.

Bible: The afterlife depends on God's grace
Reincarnation: Deeds are meritorious and the afterlife depends on Karma or some other scale of virtues.

Man craves a point system; man craves a religion.

Bible: There is no point system and God hates religion.
Reincarnation: prior karma determines one's status in life

Bible: Belief and trust in Jesus is necessary for liberation.
Reincarnation: Karma is necessary for liberation.

Need we say more?

Okay, it's simply a matter of mathematics. There are more people alive today than have ever lived in the past.

 

[Timtofly]

Yes I think reincarnation is biblical. It's in the Bible from the lips of Jesus.
Matthew 17:12 - But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

I have come to fully reject Protestant Christian view of the Bible as well as the catholic. I think we have this all wrong. I think the church his worshiping the beast and doesn't even know it. Christ came here to give us a new doctrine, to release us from religion. YHWH is the beast.

Go read revelation 13 and then go read Hosea 13 and tell me who the beast is.....

You are not seeing what Jesus said though.

"And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist."

They only understood it as John the Baptist. Not that Elijah is John the Baptist.

The coming of Elijah to restore all things is still future. Then Jesus said, "but".

Is Jesus contradicting Himself then? No.

Jesus was pointing out that John the Baptist in the spirit of Elijah already came. John told every one he was not Elijah. Was John lying as well? John 1:20-22

"And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?"

If Jesus was correct even John the Baptist did not know he was Elias. Which means reincarnation will not even work as it is posited in this thread, as a means of escape from sheol. No one even knows who they are. How can they consciously be redeemed?

Luke explains who John was in Luke 1.

"But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."

Jesus was not teaching at the moment, and certainly not reincarnation. Jesus could have been saying that an Elias would come, but not the reincarnation of Elias. The prophecy was fulfilled in John the Baptist with the spirit and power of Elijah, not Elijah himself. The way Jesus put it, Elijah could still come as prophecied. But in preparation for the first coming, John the Baptist, a totally different soul, was the one who came to prepare the way of the Messiah.

Jesus was not saying John the Baptist was Elijah, but that John the Baptist fulfulled the prophecy in part, not Elijah reincarnated. If Elijah came back it would not be through a womb and birth. He would simply show up as Elijah and declare himself to be Elijah.

Instead of the disciples thinking Elijah was reincarnated they just thought that John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecy instead of Elijah, no?

 

[St. SteVen]

All lives have purpose and none are wasted. But not all lives will enter the afterlife. Death and loss are facts of our existence. The sooner you realize this the better.

I'll check with the pharmacy to see if they have any Prozac.