This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe

Well I can't know for sure if reincarnation exists. I haven't seen it in action and I don't feel the least bit guilty when I step on a roach. But I do believe that no one can tell me what I can and cannot do. If I want to reincarnate then by god I will reincarnate. If I want to be a ghost by god ill be a ghost and haunt the old lady down the road. Who is someone to tell you what you can and cannot do with yourself? Are they you? No, I didn't think they were. The human mind is capable of some amazing things and I believe there are people that would try to hold us back from discovering this. I will not let them hold me back.

Crankiebabie,

When I said I believe the possibility of reincarnation that I am opened minded. I also mentioned what earlier christians are rumoured to believe and how some people believe Jesus taught about reincarnation. One response was that I need to get saved. Who is this person to tell me that. There are very judgemental and very closed minded people in this world. Anyway, thank you for your response.

Joe

I personally don't believe that reincarnation exists. As far as the early church in the bible, they did not teach reincarnation. I cannot say no one taught it in the early church because I don't know that. I don't believe having an open or closed mind has much to do with this answer as this goes along with someone personal belief and faith. If their faith states there is no reincarnation and backs this up then so be it and vise-versa. My faith believes, which comes from the bible, once you die you either go to heaven or hell and therefore leaves no room for reincarnation. I would like to see what you have to say about Jesus' teaching on this matter. Just so you know, if you don't get a response from me after this it is because I have seen many debates in this forum on the topic of religion and the many long winded responses people might give that quite frankly I don't have time to respond to. I don't want you to think I necessarily disagree with what you have to say.

Wow, how do I write this answer with out looking like a total idiot?


I was raised by my grandparent basically. They believed in not one God but all gods. They believed that your body was a vessel for your sole. If you completed your mission in life, you pasted on, to the next body and then the next continuing in time. If you did not well let say it was not a nice place to go. Their heaven was not what the bible said, their heaven was to go on an on and on. I think on this often, my grand father loved to talk about life and simple things. He had one goal in life other than taking care of his family it was to be nice to every one he met even it they seemed to be the worst person on earth. I have read the bible but do not completely understand it as do some of the fine people here do. I do believe in god, and when thing are at there lowest point I can go to church any church any religion and feel comforted. Do I believe in reincarnation YES, I have no proof to back me up, but there are times, I feel my grand parents. It may sound stupid but they loved to be outdoors in nature. I can sit in the wood or go for a walk and truly feel him. Is he there somewhere? I don’t know, but I think he is.

Reincarnation is an offense to the Lord. It's like saying He didn't get it right the first time. Are you a Hindu or Budist. There is only one God & there is only one true religion. Through the Son one gets to the Father. I felt my mother's presence too... in a willow tree, but that's because she does live up there & she loved the weeping willow tree. Our loved ones do witness our lives.. they are witnesses... it's in the Bible

We are all entitled to our beliefs. I am Roman Catholic but I do believe there are many mysteries about God that are not revealed to us. No one knows for sure. Only God knows. It is up to us to try to figure it out with little knowledge. There is nothing wrong with exploring the possibilities which are many in this world and the next.

Hi, JesusHelper,

"The Bible contradicts the belief in karma by emphasizing grace. According to the Bible, atonement and forgiveness may be gained only through the death and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. Salvation is based solely upon the work of Jesus Christ, not upon our own merits. The concepts of reincarnation and karma are in clear contrast to Hebrews 9:27, "For it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment." Paul clearly states that the soul does not transmigrate into another living body, but goes to await judgment.

For the Christian, Paul promised that death is the means to being in the presence of Jesus, "we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord (heaven). 2 Corinthians 5:8" It is clear that the Bible does not allow for the concept of reincarnation."
The above quote from:
http://www.christiananswers.net

I am a Christian, and really, do not believe in reincarnation. But, I do believe in Heaven and Hell, and I believe our loved ones, and pets, who have passed on, are watching over us.

My beliefs probably come from watching too many sappy movies…

I believe in reincarnation, but I don't believe that everyone gets reincarnated when they die. I think you are reincarnated so that you have the opportunity to learn. At some point, you reach a level of understanding and can ascend into Heaven.

Some interesting stuff here...

My take on reincarnation is this:

The judgement for a "sinner" is eternal damnation to Hell. The alternative is decending into Heaven. I believe that we are in Hell. This is it... this is the Devil's world. We are eternalled damned to stay here until we lead a good enough life (creating enough positive energy) to transcend this world. Earth/Life is the negative aspect of the positive/balanced Heaven.

Someone quoted that man is only to die once and be judged. That is 100% correct. However, man only lives on Earth. Your soul is not sexed. Each man lives, dies, and is judged. If that judgement is Hell, they are returned to Earth to live again. Not as a slug, not as a dog, but as a human, with the free will to choose their own life. We return to find the positive, balancing energy we need to become one with Heaven.

Jesus hiimself said that we are no different that He. We are all part of the same Entity... God. We are not human beings on a spiritual journey.. we are spiritual beings on a human journey. We are here to bring all back to balance... to be one with God.

In response to one question: No, reincarnation does not mean that God messed up the first time. Man did. Until one can overcome and become enlightened, he will be forever damned to this world... to Hell.

Very good points.

I think reincarnation is the metaphorical extension of re-creation. For everything, including humans , are made from the elements. Stardust if you prefer. How things are created is a matter of chance. Since we have 'borrowed' our bodies, sooner or later we must return them to their elemental state. From there the forces of the universe will determine their new disposition. It may take billions of years but it will happen. The Earth itself will one day be destroyed and discharge it's energy into space. In essence to re-create something 'other'.
As for the soul entering another body intact. I see no evidence of that.
The ratio to living people to all people that have lived is quite small. So if anyone gets reincarnated in the conventional sense, they are literally one in a million. And I would want to believe that there would be a reason for such an honor. And I further believe that that person would be aware of it. Otherwise, what is the point?

Very good points as well. There are lots of sides and opinions to reincarnation.

But you see, when you compare the number of people who HAVE lived to the number of people that ARE living, your numbers would be invalid when arguing reincarnation. How many of the people who are alive today, along with those who have lived before, are the same souls?

Some wouldn't say that it would be an "honor" to be reincarnated. What if this IS Hell... we tend to think that life is such a gift but we do not know, or do not remember what Heaven is. What if we are here to fulfill one purpose... to becomed enlightened... to become, once again, One with God.

At one point, maybe we all sacraficed ourselved for the greater good. We chose to come here to be part of this journey.

Here's an interesting theory:

In the beginning, the rise of Lucifer (the negative force) brought about an imbalance of God which yielded the creations of the Heavens and the Earth (Hell). It was at this time that Lucifer (the negaitve force) was cast to Earth to rule. (*important side note: a lot of this is put into story form for the understanding of by the human mind*)

So you have this positively balanced Heaven and a negative unbalanced Earth (Hell). Now its like chunks of positive energy (us... our souls) were broken off and sent to Earth to bring as much positive energy as possible in order to balance out the negative energy here. We lead good lives and create positive energy, we have done our part and we can transcend into Heaven. If not.. if we sin... if we bring negative energy.. if we strengthen Hell rather than Heaven, we are damned back here to do it again.

You really have it well thought out.

I was raised Christian. Then, I went through a time in my life that I really got into exploring other religions. Later, I had a friend whose mother claimed to be a medium. I never had her do a reading on my, though many of my friends did. I was more interested all these books she had. I dove into them and learned about all kinds of stuff. Then I started buying more and more books of all different faiths, beliefs, religions, theories, ideas, etc... I did this for a good year. I learned a lot just on my own. I would love to get back into that or get involved in discussion groups. This is the closest thing I have been able to find. Of course, my life doesn't allow my much time to study up on things anymore.

I just find it fascinating to be able to relate so much out of the Bible to SO many other ideas and beliefs... even a lot of MOVIES! It just makes me feel that we are ALL onto something. The differences come in the specifics, the politics, and a lot of man-made ideas.

I haven't educated myself much in these areas for years. I would love to just do that for the rest of my life.

This isn't about "traditional" reincarnation, but it's interesting and this thread made me think of it so I thought I'd share.

In the Sefer Zohar, the major book of Jewish mysticism which was written in the middle ages in medieval aramaic, there is a whole section on The Guf, which can be loosely described as a "hall of souls". The Guf and all the souls in it were created at the beginning of time, at the same time that G-d created Adam and Eve. No new souls are now being created; all souls are as old as the earth. When a new baby is conceived or born, its soul comes from the Guf, where it has been "waiting" for a body. Sometimes a soul goes back to the Guf after a person dies, for reasons not clearly explained. If that soul had been in a Jewish body previously, but then goes into the body of a gentile, some of the very Orthodox Hasidic Jews still believe that this person has a "Jewish soul" and will always be drawn to Jewish people. Either with the desire to help Jews (such as Oscar Schindler in World War II), or with the desire to become a Jew themselves. The Zohar also says that when all the souls in the Guf have been "used" by a body, it will be the end of the world.

This is not mainstream Judaism, btw; it's considered fringe and only certain radical Hasidic groups (and maybe Madonna... LOL) still believe it. But is very interesting and seems like a kind of reincarnation to me. And if any of this seems familiar to someone, maybe you saw the movie "The Seventh Sign" with Demi Moore, haha. It mentions the Zohar and the Guf, although not very accurately. ;)

Actually that sounds like a form of reincarnation. If we are all created spirits awaiting to go to this physical place. So we are in this waiting place? HEAVEN MAYBE. Then we come down to live this live and when we die we go back to the same place we came from. So if we go back to the same place we came from that would mean that there is a possibility of repeating the cycle. Just like everything we see in this life has cycles, then it would be common sense that our soul has different cycles to it as well!

My beliefs probably come from watching too many sappy movies…

I believe in reincarnation, but I don't believe that everyone gets reincarnated when they die. I think you are reincarnated so that you have the opportunity to learn. At some point, you reach a level of understanding and can ascend into Heaven.
This is what I have always heard about reincarnation. To me it makes sense.

I believe in reincarnation much more now then I did when I was younger. It just makes sense to me. God gives you one life time to "get it right and be a good person" and that's it? I don't know know onw knows what happens when we die. We will all find out when we get there. All I know is that I believe that our souls survive beyond our earthly bodies, beyond that is still a mystery. But what you believe is your faith as to what happens to your soul.
No one can tell anyone that they are wrong or that they need to "get saved" no one deserves to be talked to like that. GEEZ let people believe the way they want to believe and leave it alone. We all aren't going to agree on the same thing, it isn't worth debating about.

It makes me sad to see a comment like this:

"bizygurl agrees: good comments, if you think about it life on earth is hellsome, I think this is the hell that god was talking about."

I think this life on earth is most excellent, I don't really care about what, if anything, comes afterwards. I hope it gets better for you

It makes me sad to see a comment like this:

"bizygurl agrees: good comments, if you think about it life on earth is hellsome, I think this is the hell that god was talking about."

I think this life on earth is most excellent, I don't really care about what, if anything, comes afterwards. I hope it gets better for you
I didn't mean that comment in the sense as something so dire for myself. But What I mean is life is hard and it can be extremely dreadful at times, look at all war, crime, poverty, these are horrible humanity problems. Is that like hell on earth in my book yes. Compared to what heaven is suppose to be like. That's what I meant by a contrast. Sorry I didn't explain it better, Thanks for the concern though but Im fine.

I see. I'm an empathetic person myself but I try to distance myself from the inhumanity caused by others and focus on my family and the good things around us: a day at the beach, a good party, planning a trip to a Greek island, picnics, etc..

Oh I do too. In the midst of all the negativity in the world I focus on things that make me happy and try to not take everything for granted. But I can't deny what I see as far as inhumanilty goes. Just turn on your local news you can't escape it.
Maybe it just effects me different. I'm sensetive to these things.

Actually I believe hell is on earth too. I'm having a pretty good life right now, but I'm one of the few lucky ones. As you said bizygurl there's all this suffering and wars alll over the world. The majority of people in the world do not live even as well as someone on social assistance (welfare) does in Canada, for example. And living on social assistance here is really quite bleak.

If this is Eden, I want my money back. If life is kind to someone, than that person is lucky, not necessarily deserving. If they recognisee their good fortune than they are blessed. If someone has a poor life but still radiates happiness than that person is to be admired. If someone has it good but still complains, well, go away.
What bothers me is just how fast decent people can become brutes if subjected to stress. Think of a mob or a tortured prisoner. We are always only inches away from becoming animals. Where is our soul than?

Wow, you guys are depressing me. I guess I'm the only one enjoying my time here.

NeedKarma, I am really enjoying my life. Yes, lots of stress at times, many changes and many learning oppurtunities and many disappointments but I also believe the company you keep can influence how you feel. To stay positive, it is good idea to surround yourself with positive people. There are people who feed off each others energies. Or even try to take energy away from others. Who knows EH! Well Just commenting on your comment.

Joe

Saying the Hell and Earth are one in the same isn't saying that my life sucks. Life is pain. Life is suffering. We have learned that through just about every religion.

The reason why you and I (and many others) are happy is because we have found the strength to rise above it and use our free will for the betterment of ours, and others, lives.

That's the whole point! We can create this positive energy in our lives. "Where your attention goes, energy flows... where energy flows, things grow." "What you focus on is what you experience, what you think is what you create."

In Buddhism, we learn that Life Is Suffering (The First Noble Truth). Life includes pain, getting old, disease, and ultimately death. We also endure psychological suffering like loneliness frustration, fear, embarrassment, disappointment and anger. This is an irrefutable fact that cannot be denied. It is realistic rather than pessimistic because pessimism is expecting things to be bad.

We also learn that Suffering can be overcome and Happiness can be attained (The Third Noble Truth); that true happiness and contentment are possible. Lf we give up useless craving and learn to live each day at a time (not dwelling in the past or the imagined future) then we can become happy and free.

That's a really good statement Dr.Jizzle, I completely agree. I didn't know you were a buddhist. Buddhism has always fascinated me. I wanted to comment on your post but I got to spread rep. around and all that jazz

Actually, I wouldn't consider myself a Buddhist. Although, I do believe a lot that is said there. I don't really consider myself anything. Lol I have studied a lot of different religions and faiths, and I feel they all hold a lot of truth.

Thanks for the attempted rep though lol ;)

Oh your welcome. I don't consider myself anything in particular either. I like reading up on different religons also. Buddhism is defenitly a facinating one. I believe a lot of what is said too.

Hi. I just stumbled across this debate the other day, and have found it to be very interesting. Many good and valid points and perspectives. Since the subject of Buddhism has been raised, I thought I would add my perspective. Firstly though, you would have to distinguish "rebirth" and "reincarnation." Reincarnation is a Hindu belief, wherein devout followers believe in an "atman" or soul which aquires a new body upon death.
Rebirth is both more subtle and yet more complex. Buddhism states that all wordly entities and phenomena are characterized by two characteristic hallmarks, "impermanence" and "lack of an inherent seperate identity or existence." True Buddhists don't believe in a soul in the most traditional, strictest sense of the word. Rather, all sentient (self-aware) beings possess "buddha-nature", an inherently perfected state common to all life, beyond boundaries and the dualistic distinctions of self and other. Much the way we were all created in God's image. Were are all children of God, and yet there is only one God. Depending on the school of Buddhism, this perfected state has many names, but ultimately, it is the "ultimate" or "true nature of mind." A union of emptiness, and luminosity which is it's spontaneous unconceived expression. All things arise together from emptiness, and all things return to emptiness. Emptiness is the fullest expression of potential, it is ripe with every possibility. Quantum physics supports many of the ancient assertions of Buddhism in that all wordly manifestions at their grossest level are just light suspended in empty space.
"True mind" must be distinguished from "relative" or "ordinary mind" -- sometimes referred to in Zen as "monkey mind" due to our relative inability to exert control over many of our rapidly changing thoughts, much like a wild chimpanzee swinging from branch to branch. According to Buddhism there are twelve links of causation in the chain of suffering, but it is with the assertion of the ego, the independent self that all trouble truly begins. We spend the rest of our lives attempting to protect this manufactured identity. As DrJizzle stated, desiring after some things, as well as running from others. We constantly pick, rather than accept things for the way they are, perfect in their own right. It is simply our perceptions that are flawed. Like all dualistic concepts, good and bad, pretty and ugly, are simply concepts, judgements calls that have no concrete substance outside the ordinary moving (thinking) mind. It is only through ingrained cultural consensus that most of us are able to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Though often, when encountering another culture or religion, our whole notion of everyday reality can come into question, and our first instinct is to react with hostility, in an attempt to preserve the integrity and sanctity of our ordinary mind, the truest expression of our individual being. It is through our choices that karma is created, as all willful and reasoned choices have consequences. Karma can literally be translated as "volitional action." Karma is ingrained potential, and through such we literally lay the groundwork for our probable futures. It's habitual tendency coupled with opportunity and circumstance. It is these as yet unexpressed karmic potentials that carry over into future lives. An energetic continuum that very much determines the state of our future rebirth depending on our characteristic dominant delusion or negative emotion in this life, of which Tibetan Buddhism states there are six. Anger, Greed, Ignorance, Desire, Jealousy and Pride, leading to rebirth respectively in the Hell Realm, Hungry Ghost Realm, Animal Realm, Human Realm, Demigod Realm, and God Realm.
These notably are all psychological states that we all occasionally cycle through regardless of the fact that we inhabit the Human Realm, and by virture of our karma, our ingrained habitual tendencies, we all tend to gravitate toward certain negative states more than others. As well, for each of these states there is a corresponding wisdom, a virtue which acts as an antidote of sorts. It is our ultimate purpose in life to purify ourselves of these six root afflictions. Until we do, we will continue attaining endless rebirths, perpetuating the cycle of suffering in "Samsara", the world of ordinary existence. Nirvana is the opposite of Samsara, a state free of the suffering of these six characteristic afflictions. Nirvana means "to blow out (extinguish) the flame" of suffering. Though to be truly liberated, we must ultimately go beyond all notions of duality, this includes the notions of Samsara and Nirvana. It is when we go beyond all distinction, affliction and duality that we will ultimately go beyond both birth and death, and will no longer be subject to a cycle of endless rebirths. Like the famous Tai Chi (Yin Yang) symbol of Taoism, though the circles both large and small, represent that nothing can be conceptually understood in absence of its opposite and respective counterpart, fundamentally there is no true distinction -- reality is an unbounded, unbroken whole.
Many people rightfully and validly refer to this world as hell. Ultimately our karma determines our dominant view, Heaven or Hell. Though the traditional Buddhist view would state that such people are dominated by their anger, it is true that all of ordinary existence is tainted with a bit of dissatisfaction. That is why from the Buddhist perspective, a human life is considered a most rare and precious opportunity. Often when consequences are not immediate, we feel we have somehow won, escaped, or beaten the law of cause and effect. Though good people may suffer greatly in this life for actions committed in past lives, remember, you garnered enough virtue to attain the human life you now have. People with no regard for others will ultimately atone in future lives, whether they care to or not. Though the gods may have the longest lives characterized by all the luxuries this life can afford and more, they too will die someday, having lived ingnorant of their own mortality, never having been spurred to strive for something better and far more enduring. Though we all suffer in this life from time to time, yet our lives are hopefully balanced by an equal measure of joy and discerning faculties. We have enough discomfort to motivate us, and enough abilities to potentially recognize our truest nature.
In my own experience, I have read that certain early Christians did believe in reincarnation, most notably in "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche. Also in the book is the most compelling documented evidence of possible rebirth or reincarnation -- a well known story about an Englishman named Arthur Flowerdew.
Rebirth far from implies that God somehow got it wrong the first time. Quite to the contrary, it simply implies that we have been lost and searching outside ourselves for answers for countless millennia. God didn't get it wrong, we did. Whereas Christianity often sees knowledge as the original sin, Buddhism could be said to see it as ignorance. All we have to do is part the drifting clouds, our thoughts, that are the manifestations of our ordinary mind, and we will see ourselves for what we truly are, each perfect in our own right -- a marriage of luminosity and emptiness, the purest expression of Buddha Nature, the face of God. Buddha simply means "Awakened One."
Treat everyone with respect, as they have all been your best friend, mother, father, brother or sister in a past life, as well as your adversary. And ultimately, we are all already Buddhas, we simply need to finally awaken to this fact.

Namaste! :)

Well, thanks for clearing that all up Thomas1970. But I feel like I'm in the 70's just reading it! I don't claim to be well versed in Bible scripture but I can call a psychology lesson when I see it. One thing I noticed regarding your description, is, that you are focusing so hard on yourself & your mind, how can you possibly have peace? Where is the God that helps you not do it alone? Where is the abundant life, the blessings, the faith & true hope, the blissful heaven, that only
Comes from a relationship with Jesus. There's real power for living in the one true God, Jesus Christ, & the Holy Spirit. And Christianity works. The more mature in Christ ( and one be 16 & mature in Christ) the more one can see that it works.
Buddhism actually gives me a headache. I don't have do go through all of that just to meditate & get along with people ( that karma word again) No, it's like worshiping the wind
Love & Peace

Hi 31pumpkin, I appreciate your response. Admittedly, I myself am not well versed in Bible scripture despite having been raised in a Catholic family. I am fairly well versed in Western psychology, though abandoned it along with much of Western science and medicine long ago. Though Buddhism is often referred to as a psychology, a philosophy, and a religion -- ultimately it is nothing more than a "skillful means", a path to liberation from suffering. It is said in Buddhism, that the teachings ferry us across the turbulent waters of suffering. When you reach the far shore of enlightenment, you send the raft back in order that others may make use of it. Only a fool would continue across land with the raft on his back.
I'm certainly not here to argue with anyone. I simply wished to present another view, an alternate path to ultimately the same destination. The purpose of all religions is to help us attain our fullest potentials, not to argue which one is right or best. I don't believe any religion in it's truest form argues for salvation only for its devoutest followers. I know mine certainly doesn't. And I have many good friends ranging in denomination from Catholic to Wiccan. I respect all benevolent religions, all life -- and I certainly respect whatever works. I'm glad you have also found what works for you.
Buddhism is very much about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, forcing yourself to mature in the truest sense. It is very much about discipline, without a degree of which, I feel few good things ever come in life. Earnest effort is always rewarded in some manner.
My life has an equal balance of focus. I spend a great deal of time caring for everything in my world. I care for the people in my life in many ways including listening, and offering healing such as therapeutic massage. I compose healing music. And I spend a great deal of time caring for the natural world, both hands-on and by promoting awareness through photography. I believe the only route to lasting happiness is through giving freely to others, but if we don't take the time to purify our own afflictions, what can we really offer to anyone that will be of any real use. That is the true purpose of formal meditation. Though I also consider time well spent with loved ones and in nature to be the highest form of meditation. I certainly won't argue with you on that.
I never feel alone. I know that the Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and even God are there to offer their help, should I merely ask. I'm not saying my life is in any way easy, but I have far more peace in my life now than I ever could have imagined two decades ago.
I'm sorry Buddhism gives you a headache, and I do apologize if I have given you a headache. But as I said, the most wonderful thing about being human is that we have the powers to discern and choose. I'm glad we both have the peace we are searching for. As a matter of fact, I do worship the wind and the blessings it carries into my life, and I am content in the fact that I have not so much as intentionally squashed a mosquito in over 20 years.

Namaste! (I bow to the divine in you). :)

Hola Thomas1970,
I do agree with some of the philosophy in your note. I cannot say exactly what my job is for legal & ethical reasons, but I am in the business of helping people too. True what you said about suffering. I think you can't help someone if you're hurting yourself, so to speak, and you're throwing back the raft is the same philosophy as giving what's good for you to another... esp. if you are healthier, stronger, richer, etc. However benevolent your faith may seem though, it does not lead to the same destination.
If this is more than a phlosophy & it is your religious faith & u were to die tomorrow, then consider Rev.20:14-15. This is not "death therapy" this is the Word of God. In the natural world it could be though, but God is supernatural.
Worship God only- 1st commandment. Not anyone or thing else. Mt.4:10- Jesus said to him, "Away from me satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'"
Got to go. Can't text like everybody else! Take the world- but give me Jesus!

I'm a christian and I know it because I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior. He has forgiven me of all my sins. He came to this earth lived died and rose again so that I may live a redeemed life. He said He has gone to prepare a place for us (mansion) and He will be back. The dead in Christ shall rise first. To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. We are a Spirit, have a soul which is our mind, our emotions, and we live in a body. There is a heaven and a hell. I do not believe in reincarnation. Once you pass away that is it. You don't come back as another form. We will all be judged by the one and only true God. Those who heard of the gospel and God's great love and still refuse to believe will still be judged. Just because a person doesn't believe doesn't mean it's not true. The Lord is coming soon. Look at the signs of the time. Everything that is going on He said will happen before his return.. . There is a heaven and hell... we will all be judged... we will all bow down to God if not now it will be later...

I am always surprised at how so many people in this country want to believe in reincarnation. The folks in the East where this idea came from know that it is a curse. According to their thought, you must pass through untold incarnations until you build up enough karma to enter Nirvana, which is a state of being something like a drop of water in the ocean, so totally at peace. Now that sounds like DEATH to me! Just to be able to finally die and get it all over with.

Personally, I'm quite happy to accept Jesus' promise of being with Him after I die.

I am always suprised at how so many people in this country want to believe in reincarnation. The folks in the East where this idea came from know that it is a curse. According to their thought, you must pass through untold incarnations until you build up enough karma to enter Nirvana, which is a state of being something like a drop of water in the ocean, so totally at peace. Now that sounds like DEATH to me! Just to be able to finally die and get it all over with.

Personally, I'm quite happy to accept Jesus' promise of being with Him after I die.

Karma is not something one amasses quantitatively until one can pay the doorkeeper and enter Nirvana. In Buddhist teaching, the law of karma, says only this: `for every event that occurs, there will follow another event whose existence was caused by the first, and this second event will be pleasant or unpleasant according as its cause was skillful or unskillful.' A skillful event is one that is not accompanied by craving, resistance or delusions; an unskillful event is one that is accompanied by any one of those things. (Events are not skillful in themselves, but are so called only in virtue of the mental events that occur with them.)

Therefore, the law of Karma teaches that responsibility for unskillful actions is born by the person who commits them.

Let's take an example of a sequence of events. An unpleasant sensation occurs. A thought arises that the source of the unpleasantness was a person. (This thought is a delusion; any decisions based upon it will therefore be unskillful.) A thought arises that some past sensations of unpleasantness issued from this same person. (This thought is a further delusion.) This is followed by a willful decision to speak words that will produce an unpleasant sensation in that which is perceived as a person. (This decision is an act of hostility. Of all the events described so far, only this is called a karma.) Words are carefully chosen in the hopes that when heard they will cause pain. The words are pronounced aloud. (This is the execution of the decision to be hostile. It may also be classed as a kind of karma, although technically it is an after-karma.) There is a visual sensation of a furrowed brow and downturned mouth. The thought arises that the other person's face is frowning. The thought arises that the other person's feelings were hurt. There is a fleeting joyful feeling of success in knowing that one has scored a damaging verbal blow. Eventually (perhaps much later) there is an unpleasant sensation of regret, perhaps taking the form of a sensation of fear that the perceived enemy may retaliate, or perhaps taking the form of remorse on having acted impetuously, like an immature child, and hping that no one will remember this childish action. (This regret or fear is the unpleasant ripening of the karma, the unskillful decision to inflict pain through words.)

If there are no persons at all, then there is no self and no other. There is no distinction between pain of which there is direct sensual awareness (which is conventionally called one's own pain) and pain that is known through inference (conventionally called another person's pain). Whether pain is known directly or indirectly, there is either an urge to quell it or an urge to cultivate it. Whether joy is known directly or indirectly, there is either an urge to nourish it or to quell it. In the conventional language of speaking of events personally, the urge to quell all pain and to nourish all joy is known as being ethical or skillful or (if you like) good. The urge to nourish pain and quell joy is known as being unskillful, unethical or bad.

Being fully ethical is said to be impossible for those who make a distinction between self and other and show preference for the perceived self over the perceived other, for such perceptions inhibit being fully responsive. Being fully ethical is possible only for those who realize that all persons are empty, that is, devoid of personhood.

It is, perhaps, thoroughly unselfish because the aim is to lose one'sself in the mind of God and not be consumed with selfishness.




M:)RGANITE

Wow, you guys are depressing me. I guess I'm the only one enjoying my time here.

Don't kid yourself. I am having a blast!


M:)RGANITE

We are all entitled to our beliefs. I am Roman Catholic but I do believe there are many mysteries about God that are not revealed to us. No one knows for sure. Only God knows. It is up to us to try to figure it out with little knowledge. There is nothing wrong with exploring the possibilities which are many in this world and the next.


I know thee, pilgrim. I lent thee my ox and adze in 1537 and I would like them back!


M:):)RGANITE

All I know is...
If there is reincarnation, I would gladly stand in the sea otter line
When I die just in case I didn't build up enough karma for becoming
Another human. :p

I don't know what awaits after death so I'll just have to wait and see, No hurry though I kind of like it where I am!

Actually that sounds like a form of reincarnation. If we are all created spirits awaiting to go to this physical place. So we are in this waiting place? HEAVEN MAYBE. Then we come down to live this live and when we die we go back to the same place we came from. So if we go back to the same place we came from that would mean that there is a possibility of repeating the cycle. Just like everything we see in this life has cycles, then it would be common sense that our soul has different cycles to it as well!


I disagree that returning to a place we have once been means repeating the cycle of life. Koholeth say that at death, "the dust return[s] to the dust and the spirit to God who have it." This in no way implies reincarnation, which is an almost endless cycle of rebirths in different forms according to the merit gained through the previous existence. That is the Karmic Cycle.

Christianity teaches that "it is given to man once to die" and then comes the resurrection, which is being raised into immortality, whereas on this earth we are mortal. It is not a cycle that will be repated, but a contumuum that will last forever.

M:)RGANITE

All I know is .....
if there is reincarnation, I would gladly stand in the sea otter line
when I die just in case I didn't build up enough karma for becoming
another human. :p

It's the way they contendedly float on their backs cracking nuts without a care in the world. Who could ever want more than that? That's better than Nirvana! LOL

OK. So you guys who believe in reincarnation like something with a lot of supposition and complex ideas. What I believe is infinitely simpler and far better documented. I guess I'm just simple minded.

Well being a catholic, I truly don't believe in the possibility of reincarnation. I think it's a myth made up by other religions spread across the world, simply as a way of taking the fear away from death, by telling people that there is nothing to worry about, since you will be able to live another life. In other ways the bible does mention in a small passage that reincarnation is practically nothing but a hoax, but because of recent and further studies into the catholic church and the bible, it has been found that the bible may not, unfortunately, be all true.

Depressionsthename,

Don't you believe it for a minute! If you reject even one basic primise, you will have to throw the whole thing out. How can a human hope to sort through the Bible and determine what is valid and what is not? I am a catholic (small "c" meaning universal Christian, not Church of Rome), and I have read the many details of prophecy and the details of their fulfillment. God's Word,(unlike Nostradamus) is accurate, and will continue to be if the people of our own time will quit changing it to suit their own twisted agendas.

Depressionsthename,

Don't you believe it for a minute! If you reject even one basic primise, you will have to throw the whole thing out. How can a human hope to sort through the Bible and determine what is valid and what is not? I am a catholic (small "c" meaning universal Christian, not Church of Rome), and I have read the many details of prophecy and the details of their fulfillment. God's Word,(unlike Nostradamus) is accurate, and will continue to be if the people of our own time will quit changing it to suit their own twisted agendas.
They have been twisting not only the bible but most of the HOLY books for centuries. Who's to say what is or what isn't possible/TRUE!

Well being a catholic, i truly don't believe in the possibility of reincarnation. I think it's a myth made up by other religions spread across the world, simply as a way of taking the fear away from death, by telling people that there is nothing to worry about, since you will be able to live another life. In other ways the bible does mention in a small passage that reincarnation is practically nothing but a hoax, but because of recent and further studies into the catholic church and the bible, it has been found that the bible may not, unfortunately, be all true.

Not all doctrine that is claimed to be biblical is biblical. It is a mistake to blame the book and say it is flawed because someone or some organization misinterpretes it.

OK. So you guys who believe in reincarnation like something with a lot of supposition and complex ideas. What I believe is infinitely simpler and far better documented. I guess I'm just simple minded.

What do you mean by "far better documented"? Reincarnation is described in the Vedas, the holy writings of the Hindu people. Many of these writings pre-date the Koran, the Christian Bible, and parts of the Torah. There are approximately 970 million Hindus worldwide.

I'm not really a believer in reincarnation myself, but it is well-documented!

There may be 900 million Hindus worldwide but 890 million of them live in India.
Their philosophy is interesting but the religious writings conflict with the account of the Abrahamic God from the Bible. Maybe that's all they had at the time was their desire to believe and so they drew from their imaginations.
Their concept of reincarnation is a one complex delusion.

Here is a fascinating site about world religions I thought might be of value here? I have not validated it from a secondary source but on the outset it appears very objective in its reporting of statistics.
www.adherents.com

I think it's a myth made up by other religions spread across the world, simply as a way of taking the fear away from death, by telling people that there is nothing to worry about, since you will be able to live another life.

Though I can not speak knowledgeably for the Hindu perspective, from a purely Buddhist frame of reference, it would be difficult to apply this. In the Buddhist teachings, birth and death belong to the realm of the "relative", conceptual mind. They are considered but two more extreme views that have no concrete validity on the deeper level on "ultimate", unconditioned reality. As all forms of "self" are composed of non-self elements, it is taught that death is simply another subtle form of delusion. From a scientific perspective, matter can neither ever be created nor destroyed, simply redistributed and/or rearranged. "Our" molecules eventually live on to become parts of many other forms. All life is intimately interconnected, and dependent on many other forms and factors for its relative survival, a premise known in Buddhism as "dependent co-arising." Sort of like "all for one, and one for all" on the most primal of levels. When causes and conditions are sufficient to support us we manifest, or "be", and when they are not, our constituent metaphysic elements or "skandhas" in Buddhist and Hindu cosmology return to the ultimate ground of existence, or "luminous emptiness" from which all phenoma are said to arise.
Buddhists believe that through meditation -- pure, direct, largely unfiltered experience -- the bonds of ego can be sufficiently loosened to realize such truths. When one sufficiently realizes the falseness of the wholly independent, unchanging self, hope and fear become largely inconsequential as well. Death is rarely feared by experienced practitioners, and is often seen to be eagerly anticipated during its inevitable, perceived approach, particularly among the Tibetan people, as the ultimate opportunity for liberation, the realization of one's truest nature. Death is not perceived as antithetical to life, simply more as just another of it's many transitional experiences or "bardos." Though to willingly wish for rebirth would laregely be considered as tainted by attachment to ego, material form, and self-limiting pleasures -- if one feels one has not sufficient realization to avoid a subsequent rebirth, naturally one prays and strives to be reborn in a higher more conducive realm. This is the core purpose of the "Tibetan Book of the Dead", studied in life and recited by the bedside of the dying and recently deceased. The title itself is somewhat misleading, inaccurately coined upon its first American translation in the 1920's, due to the then popularity of the also grossly misnamed "Egyptian Book of the Dead." A more accurate translation of the former being, "The Natural Liberation Through Hearing in the Between."
Hopefully someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but if I were to guess, I would say that Hindus see subsequent lives or incarnations as necessary opportunities for further "atonement" or perfection on the road to ultimately unity. As Ram Dass says, "The soul's only desire is to unite with God."
Buddhists believe we perpetually rebirth solely on the sheer mometum of our vast ignorance regarding the deepest nature of existence. My keychain sums it up quite aptly in the words, "The only difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits." When we no longer manufacture karma through discriminatory desires, we will no longer inhabit an Earth that is separated from Heaven. They are simply two sides of one very valuable coin. Attempt to take away "heads" and "tails" can no longer exist. In fact, a new "heads" then emerges. Trim the right edge of a piece of paper, and the remainder still possesses a right side. They can only be understood as concepts in direct relation or perhaps juxtapositional opposition to each other. Heaven and Earth, Heaven and Hell, Nirvana and Samsara are not separate, simply dependent intellectually upon our view. Pure experience is always heavenly blissful, otters can certainly teach us that. :)

Dear Orange,
Who else besides Jesus Christ has walked out of his grave under his own power, (nail and spear scars obvious) and then spent 40 days of extra teaching to his disciples, being seen by more than 500 at one time?

Mere antiquity in itself does not prove anything, one way or the other.

As to the Bible being changed hundreds of years ago, (taliniman's comment), the church through the centuries has been very careful not to change the Holy Scriptures, especially at Antioch, from which stream the King James Bible came to us. The church rejected those writings which came by way of Alexandria, rejecting them as being corrupted.

Dear Orange,
Perhaps the reason you are not a Christian is that you have never really been presented with a valid reason to believe the Bible? If you (or anyone else out there) would like to see it, I could post predictions from the Old Testament, followed by the record of their fulfillment from the New Testament. There are a lot of them, so probably won't get back with you today.

galveston,
This thread, or website for that matter, doesn't lend itself well to attempts to convert others. We usually don't try to make others come to our side as it were.

Have a great day.

NK

NK,

Sorry. I just assumed that a discussion was for the purpose of exchanging information and ideas. Was I wrong?

There may be 900 million Hindus worldwide but 890 million of them live in India.
Their philosophy is interesting but the religious writings conflict with the account of the Abrahamic God from the Bible. Maybe that's all they had at the time was their desire to believe and so they drew from their imaginations.
Their concept of reincarnation is a one complex delusion.

We are All complex delusions, some of us just don't know it!

Exchanging ideas is indeed the goal. Telling someone they should become like you with the 'correct information' verges on trying to convert. Kind of reminds me of the Jehovah Witnesses going door to door. :)

By galveston

As to the Bible being changed hundreds of years ago, (taliniman's comment), the church through the centuries has been very careful not to change the Holy Scriptures, especially at Antioch, from which stream the King James Bible came to us. The church rejected those writings which came by way of Alexandria, rejecting them as being corrupted
So the CHURCH decides what's in and what's out and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that the way it was thru-out the middle ages. I doubt if they had foot-notes to mark the changes or explain why. And King James the English high church official surely wouldn't twist the bible for his own gain would he?

Dear Orange,
Who else besides Jesus Christ has walked out of his grave under his own power, (nail and spear scars obvious) and then spent 40 days of extra teaching to his disciples, being seen by more than 500 at one time?

Not sure what you are meaning by this statement. If you are trying to say that Christianity lends itself to the only proven reincarnation which was Jesus, then you should realize that Jesus was not reincarnated.

And I would have to say that "under his own power" is very borderline. This was by the power of the Lord, thy God... not Jesus the Man.

Thomas1970 -
I think you know how I feel. I don't worship the wind. Or Buddha. Dead mute idol. But your all right anyway. It's a peaceful religion. But I have true peace too PLUS I have the promise of eternity spoken by Jesus and the Apostles. :)

As deep calls unto deep... God speaks to" us" through His Holy Spirit. Which He instilled in us when we received Jesus Christ as our Lord. :rolleyes:

Just a thought-Could it be we are all caught up in semantics and we all are saying the same thing?

By 31pumpkin-

We are so not like J.W.'s! My pastor says they're a cult. Anyway, I can't take them coming door-to-door either! The Watchtower, oh no! :eek:
They worship from the same bible as all christians do, now I'm confuse, are methodist a cult? Baptist? Will the real christians please stand up.
Sorry a little off topic.

Talaniman -

Here's some of the list:

Mormons (use actually a bible that differs)
J.W. - don't remember why exactly- would have to look it up.
Kaballah
Scientology
Moon's Unification Church

Actually, don't Mormons follow the same Bible but they also adhere to the lost books that Joseph Smith found in the 1800s?

I think the Mormon Bible has too many differences in it compared to the regular Christian Bible. I haven't looked at the subject in a while, but I think that's why.

Hi Orange. Thank you very much. I very much enjoy your thoughtful and insightful posts as well.
Hi 31pumpkin. Thanks. I believe I do know how you feel, and I do respect such. My beliefs also offer me the promise of eternity. And like yours, I am in theory given a choice as to how I would like to spend it. Christianity offers salvation or damnation; Buddhism, liberation or perpetual corporeal existence. Though not quite damnation, there is generally considered to entail quite a bit of suffering inherent to the first of the latter of these two choices. Ultimately though, I personally don't feel they are really all that different, the two views.
In one final note, there is an old, yet irreverently humorous Zen saying, "If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!"... because the icon or concept is not the true Buddha. The true Buddha is the shared potential we all possess, the divine and the peace within all of us. In that sense he is always very much alive. Our most cherished concepts are often the final obstacle to our fully knowing true peace. Prince Siddartha (Gautama Buddha) was born and died a man as all mortals humans do. But in that time he came to a brilliant discovery that led to the end of all his woes and sufferings. It is this he generously shared out of his love for humanity and all creation. Buddha never asked any man to kneel at his feet in idolatry. Though it is often customary in India to kneel and place one's hands on the feet of a person of truly lofty status or an highly enlightened teacher, a sign of utmost respect, Buddha was known to often practically pull even the poorest man up by the elbow. He abhorred extremes, he abhorred inequality, and ultimately, he would have none of it. Both royal prince and highly realized individual or not. Buddhists pay respect to Buddha for the gifts he has given the world, in much the same way as hopefully they respect all life. Everyone has given us a great deal in order for us to be here at this moment, and hopefully there is more we can continue to learn from and share with others on our own individual journeys.
I see a lot of comments everywhere about who is right, who is the chosen, and who has a leg up on the figurative stairway to Heaven. I've never felt this was or is the highest potential or purpose of any religion. Particularly to question the devoutness or sanctity of a person of any Jewish sect, is literally tantamount to "throwing the baby out with the bathwater", or "biting the hand that feeds." If it were not for the love and generosity of the Jewish people, Christians likely may never have had a written account of the Old Testament, perhaps even Jesus himself, depending on your indivual beliefs. It's truly time to give credit and respect where it is duly due.
On the topic of what defines a cult, I believe there is a hallmark divisiveness inherent to all such systems of belief. Though not every religious sect who aggresively disseminates their beliefs should necessarily be defined as a cult, cults do rely on certain undermining tactics, reinforcing certain doubts and insecurities, and above all, demanding an often total degree of social and familial isolation. Most cults demand that their followers sever most if not all ties to their "former" way of life, and any of an individual's relations who do not fairly strictly adhere to their own, often narrow doctrines. Isolation is typically the key factor. It is initially employed to instill a degree of malleability in the cognitive mind -- much the way a Buddhist would engage in a group or solitary retreat -- but for untimately antithetical and far less benevolent purposes. Uncertainty and unfamiliarity coupled with a degree of deprivation. It is this potentially revelatory gap created, that is ultimately dogmatically refilled. After the initial period of isolation, once doubts have been deeply seeded, conditioning and indoctrination begin. "We can fulfill all your needs. No need to look elsewhere." "No one will ever love you the way we do." It is an artificially fostered state of utmost dependence. But no one person, or even group of people, or earthly thing can ever truly fulfill all our needs. As with all earthly phenomena, there is always a subtle gap between expectation and satisfaction that can never really be spanned. Ultimately these are some of the same psychological dynamics exhibited in any abusive relationship. Like the famous behavioral study of Pavlov's dog, it is a classic case of conditioning. Ring the bell and the dog will continue to salivate, against his better will, even when the meat is no longer delivered. People, like dogs, are creatures of habit and comfort. It is inherent to our natures, and there will always be those who will seek to exploit such characteristics for the sole gratification of their own ego. Religion is simply a powerful guise that many unfortunately choose to use. True religions absolve us of many of our fears and discomforts, never should they unskilfully instill them. True religion is as well, never used for divisive purposes.
I myself have had varying degrees of interaction with many denominations, including the Jehovah's Winesses, the "Moonies" and the Boston Church of Christ. A good Christian friend of mine, raised in a very traditional Jewish family, was once forcefully evicted from BCoC services in my witnessing presence, for attempting to congenially argue what he felt was the greater accuracy of his own preferred Bible, the King James version. He bemusedly takes a certain bit of pride in having been evicted from no less than three churches.
If you were to ask me personally, I feel it is, to a greater or lesser degree, on many if not all levels, an absurd waste of time to argue whose Bible possesses the greatest historical accuracy, as well as to argue who will ultimately be saved and who will not. To do either, is to greatly demean both a great gift, as well as a truly altruistic sacrifice. To say Jesus died for the sole purpose of saving but a small fraction of the world's population, seems to me to greatly demean or belittle the tremendous suffering he endured on all our behalfs. The best way to honor his sacrifice is to attempt to love everyone in much the same way that he did.
As well, to say that God will convey his wrath upon those of his children that would perhaps follow a slightly more winding and meandering path to salvation, is to instill upon what I feel is essentially gloriously unbounded and largely indefinable, perhaps the grossest of worldly restrictions, the ego. As well as the most basest manifestations of such ego. Even as a Buddhist follower, I have always believed God is infinitely well above the worst of human traits. We must remember that, to all those but the most devout atheists, we were made in His image, he was not made in ours. People often also lose sight of the fact that the journey can be both as rewarding and important as the destination. And the company we travel with is everything.
Like any good parent, we hopefully don't stop loving our children because they don't grow up to fulfill every one of our myriad expectations, and all our own unrealized dreams, as seldom they do. We continue to love them because they are unique, we want them to be happy, and ultimately, the more they disappoint us, the more we stand to learn from them, truly great teachers that they are. I believe this patience and forbearance is the essence of a loving, forgiving, and ultimately nondiscriminatory God.
Perhaps Jesus was not reincarnated in the strictest traditional sense. Buddhism teaches the theory that every enlightened being possesses three "kayas" or bodies, the Dharmakaya, the Sambhogakaya, and the Nirmanakaya. It is the latter of these three, the Nirmanakaya, the physical manifestation that enlightened beings employ to interact with mortal beings in order to help bring about their liberation. This theory of three bodies was shared by ancient Egyptians in a remarkably similar form. Perhaps something similar had occurred here. It is not really my inadequately educated place to speculate on such things further, but it does add some interesting food for thought.
Concluding, there is a known saying somewhere in the Jewish teachings, and perhaps Orange or someone can further elucidate or correct me, something to the effect of, "To take the life of one man, is to annhilate a universe." I believe all good religions share this belief. All life is of equal value and importance, an integral thread in the colorful tapestry of existence, and any time we attempt to exclude anyone from community or salvation, we never really know what we are depriving ourselves or others of, or just how many we are depriving. I think one of the greatest lessons we can learn in life is to agree to peaceably disagree. Life would be darn boring without diversity. :)

NeedKarma: Exchanging ideas is indeed the goal. Telling someone they should become like you with the 'correct information' verges on trying to convert.I agree. I find it easier to just be respectful of everyone's religious beliefs. Which means I state my beliefs but don't really challenge anyone else's directly. I can pretty much assume that if someone is interested in how I arrived at my beliefs, they will ask me.

Amongst many of my friends (who are very diverse in their religious beliefs - holy cow!) we talk to the principle of things, the ideas and concepts, etc, without ever ever implying someone is wrong to believe any one thing... to do so would be considered disrespectful. It tends to eliminate any of us commenting on other religions which we know little about. It tends to prevent "My dog's better than your dog" type debate, which is a form of competition.

If someone comes along who doesn't know better and is sort of wild in their approach, they soon feel out of place when the rest of us won't engage them in that manner and they either modify their behavior and stay or lose interest and leave. The hitch here in this forum is that someone always engages.

Religious tolerance for all the wonderous diversity out there allows for a much better discussion and my friends all recognise that and agree to maintain it. I think the same thing would work well here too. That is... if we could pull it off? There is a simple guide one can follow and that is just stick to "I" statements. Voilà!

And just so this is not so terribly off topic, I don't think it takes any reincarnations to see this and modify behaviors! LOL

I think reincarnation is possible. There are some highly spiritually evolved people on this planet. Why are some so evolved and great teachers and others still in kindergarten?

I can not believe when we die God will only allow Christians in heaven. There are so many truly good people on this planet and their heart and souls are filled with love. They do so much for mankind, even dedicate their lives to making life better for others. Some of these people are not Christians. They have certainly earned the right to go to heaven. I have seen someone go to church each Sunday and recite passages from the Bible and still be mean spirited.
I think we may have to come back here more than once to learn the lessons we are to learn in life before we go on further. Possibly it is the hope God gives more than one chance to make it.

Until I finish this lifetime I can only speculate. It is often scarey for some to think outside their box. I have a friend that starts shaking when I talk of reincarnation. HA.

I do not believe that being a "good and loving" person is enough to please the Lord, if one doesn't believe and have faith in Him. That person might be well loved by their family/friends in this life, but choosing to ignore God of the Bible will have its judgment. A mean-spirited Christian you mentioned, just as any mean individual, will have consequences for their actions in THIS life because God wants us to walk in love and get rid of such things like bitterness.
Jesus came and performed many miracles. We have a written account of some of just some of them.
The Bible dispels any ideas of reincarnation. Man is to die once. The prophet Elijah did not even taste death. He was taken up to Heaven in a whirlwind.(2Kings 2:11-12) HEAVEN, not swirled around by some cosmic energy principle back to earth to be someone else.
Lastly, Spirit-filled Christians, those walking in the Spirit (and whose will is led by the H.S.) may be called Pentecostal Christians - but that's just the name of a Church affiliation - anyway, we have a deep reverence for the Old Testament also. It is as important as the New T. but each incomplete without the other.
I only know Messianic Jews the last 2 decades since born-again. One friend I knew when we were both unsaved. Her whole family was a friend of my uncle(the pioneer ) Her sister is far more active in the church than all of us. But my friend sings in the music ministry. (I never knew she could sing!)
The other Messianic Jew is a deacon (I believe that's his title) He delivered
The sermon on the last Sunday before I was to move from Ft. Lauderdale.
It was awesome. He spoke a word from the Bible about "all things I am making
anew!" What a revelation! Good Lord, I could almost cry tears of joy. What an anointing he had! I felt not only the Lord speaking to me but the speaker was actually looking at me even with the 2 hundred people there. I believe a personal relationship with the Lord is the answer for anyone. The Lord gives direction to us through His Holy Spirit. In His word(the Bible) In prayer, and in our circumstances. The Lord brings many blessings and mercies to those who love Him and obey the commands He has established.
I know that no one here cares about me personally. I don't expect strangers to. My life goes deep, and then shallow. I don't expect any understanding from unbelievers, but I have some experiences where God show up and actually showed me things. But I don't think one needs to have dramatic life event changes to seek the Lord. I admire too those who believe because they grew up knowing Jesus.
Thanks y'all for your time!

This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe


That a belief in reincarnation should prevail among Christians seems strange for there is nothing in the Bible or in the teachings of the Church fathers that furnishes the least foundation for such a conception.

Reincarnation or the transmigration of souls -- the rebirth of the same spirits in new bodily forms in successive ages -- is a false doctrine that runs counter to the whole system and plan of God where eternal spirits are born in pre-existence are permitted to pass through a mortalilty, and then in due course be resurrected immortal, incorruptible, and eternal in nature. It is appointed unto man once to be born, "once to die" (Heb. 9:27), once to be resurrected, and thereafter to "die no more." Reincarnation was repudiated by the Jews.


All below here is an essay on Reincarnation by a Christian minister and scholar. Read it only if you are interested.

Reincarnation, often known as metapsychosis, is an ancient doctrine. It dates from the earliest corruption of truth, from the very dawn of human history, when mankind first departed from the simple principles of the gospel. In some form it has existed at all times in all lands. It is an excellent example of the distortion of beautiful, fundamental truths.

Reincarnation, as commonly taught, means that the spirit or "soul" of a human being, after the death of the person, and after intervals of varying duration, returns to earth in another body. This may occur frequently, indeed may be a continuous, unending process.

Usually it is taught that the spirit inhabits from time to time bodies of the same species. That is, the spirit of a man will reappear on earth as a man; a woman as a woman; a human being as a human being. This may not, however, always be the case. Many believers in reincarnation hold that a "soul" which is a man today, may be a woman tomorrow, or vice versa. It is also often taught that the spirit of a man may in the next earthly incarnation, inhabit the body of a lower animal, say a dog or a cat. There is not full agreement among reincarnationists on many of these matters.

Under this doctrine our next-door neighbor may be the reincarnation of a man or a woman who lived centuries ago; our bootblack may be the reincarnation of one of the great philosophers of the past; our school teacher may have been an untutored savage a thousand years ago; our present dog, Sanko, may be nothing else than our dog, Fido, long since dead, in a more recent incarnation. And what is worse, the animating essence, the "soul," of Sanko, may be the former "soul" of a Newton, or a Galileo, or a Plato! Or, the wife who cooks our meals for us, may have been in an earlier reincarnation, the Queen of Sheba. Or, still more to our confusion, a man's wife might have been his husband when he was a woman in an earlier reincarnation.

Three doctrines lie at the foundation of belief in reincarnation.

First, the pre-existence of the "soul" of man; second, the indestructibility of the "soul" of man after death; and, third, the possibility of constant development of the pre-existent, eternal "soul." These are all necessary doctrines to the thinking mind. They are supported by divine revelation. But, in the explanations and applications of these truths, the proponents of reincarnation have failed dismally, and have shown how the semblance of truth, becoming untruth, may lead men into vast fields of deception.

The basic doctrine of pre-existence is always presented in an incomplete form. Clearly, if the "soul" of man has occupied from time to time successive and distinct bodies, birth cannot be the beginning of his "soul." There must be existence before each successive embodiment.

But what about the first incarnation?

One group sidestep the question by saying that before the first appearance on earth, God created the "soul." That merely means that after all, the spirit is not really eternal. Since it began on earth, it may end with the earth.

Another group of believers in reincarnation, sensing the inadequacy of this explanation, seek refuge in the doctrine that the "souls" of men began their existence as lower animals, and then they add that "in the lower kingdoms consciousness evolves in the mass, . . . as these group souls slowly develop, they continually divide and subdivide." (Cooper, Reincarnation, p. 48.)

Finally, by some mysterious process these animals, subdivisions of the mass, acquire a soul" and become human beings. All of which is merely saying that there is an "ocean of consciousness," out of which God dips individuals.

The conditions of reincarnation by which the immortal "soul" may progress are equally unacceptable. "Reincarnation is a plan whereby imperishable conscious beings are supplied with physical bodies appropriate to their stage of growth and through which they can come in contact with the lessons of physical life." (Ibid., p. 17.) This supplying of bodies is repeated endlessly. By this doctrine, the body of man is of little consequence. We take it on, cast it off, and put on another one, much as we do with our old suits of clothing. The "soul" of man is then really confined to this earth, as in a prison. Why this should be so, baffles the mind. His sojourn between incarnations can be of no value to him, since he must return to earth in a mortal body to gain further experience. He is of the earth, earthy. He cannot in reality go beyond the earth or physical experiences. Therefore, an infinity of experiences are beyond his reach. The universe is not his. Such an eternal "soul" demands a vaster area of understanding and action than the earthly life affords. There is no freedom in reincarnation.

The gospel of Jesus Christ declares that man an eternal spirit, acquainted with the spiritual world, came upon the earth when he was fitted and permitted to become acquainted with the material world. To this end he was given a body of material elements. This body belongs to him eternally, to be used by him, in a purified form, in his endless progressive journey among spiritual and material realities. He does not need another. It is a sacred possession, the home of his eternal spirit. With it, composed of celestialized material elements, he may forever explore the universe, in all its aspects, even to the limits of eternity. Without such a body, the immortal spirit would be handicapped in its victorious progress, in the midst of universal elements, toward the likeness of God. Reincarnation has gone far afield to explain that which the Lord has made clear to the human mind.

The doctrine of reincarnation really destroys personality as connected with earth life. The perpetual passage of spirits from body to body on earth, implies that the Lord is using the earth as a playground for a few spirits. As one writer remarks, the soul of the ancient patriarch Seth was probably the spirit of the great prophet Moses. Thus, individuality on the earth is lost. Temporal identification is hopelessly confused. There is no end to the disorder, for the process of reincarnation is unending. That violates the innate desire, even need, of man, for an individual, personal identity on earth as in heaven.

By reincarnation the power of God seems also to be limited. He uses the same, relatively few, spirits over and over again, endlessly, to accomplish whatever may be his purpose. He seems to be short of material and vague in his purpose. This is out of harmony with the gospel, which teaches that there is a host of spirits waiting to take upon themselves mortal bodies, and that the next stage of existence will come when this has been accomplished.

This doctrine of confusion presents no final objective in life. It seems to suggest only living over and over again on earth, much the same experiences, sometimes as a man, sometimes as something else. To what ultimate state does it lead us? Even in human affairs, soldiers who may fight many a battle in various places, come at last to an end -- victory or defeat. Reincarnation sets up no understandable objective of existence, except that we are advancing; but how and to what end? It reduces the spirit of man to the position of a treadmill worker in the affairs of the universe. Some say that the end is nirvana, first held to be extinction of existence; now a fusion into a mass of security. That does not help.

This is in clearest opposition to the doctrine of progression, which lies fundamentally in the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. The objective of life is to move toward the likeness of God. Man rises continually. Once on earth, he experiences earth life, with its joys and sorrows: then bids it farewell, to enter into another life where he continues with added power, in the advancing program of existence. He outgrows the past throughout eternal existence. Reincarnation moves in a circle; the gospel in an ascending spiral. Existence without a definite objective, but with constant repetitions, is valueless.

Finally, reincarnation is incompatible with the resurrection of the body, through the redeeming service of Jesus Christ. The continuous changing of bodies makes the resurrection and any redeeming act, unnecessary. It places the Christ in the class of fakirs. A Christian cannot believe in reincarnation. That should be, in itself, a sufficient answer to the question at the head of this writing.

References:

Rt. Reverend Irving S. Cooper, Reincarnation, The Hope of the World;
E. D. Walker, Reincarnation, A Study of Forgotten Truth.
</I>



M:)RGANITE

What an interesting post and responses. Thanks for the post.
I absolutely believe in reincarnation. It is a fact of life. I know I have lived before, and I know I will live again. For sure I've been both male and female, lived happy lives and sad. Have grown old, and have died young. There are no doubt people I have known before, are here now, and there are souls waiting for my return to the other side. There is simply no doubt. And I am very happy in that belief.

The "one shot and you're done concept" seems very calculated, very coldly vindictive in a way that is most human, and not very divine.. . Of course kings and popes don't want the have-nots think the tables might be turned next time. Much easier to keep the masses in line if you convince them they have only one chance to do it right. And it's so much easier too, to oppress others when there is no chance they are or could ever be 'like you'. Always a good question to ask - who benefits when personal feelings of past-lives are quashed or swept aside? When a person's feelings about God and the big divine plan are overruled or marginalized? Individual relationships with God don't put coins in the collection plate or soldiers on the field of battle. Ah well, to each their own. See you next time. ;)

I'm glad you are happy with your belief in reincarnation. But it is not a fact of life. You know the thought of having to have been responsible for my soul, how it was in a past life, seems horrible(and definitely anti-Biblical). Not divine. Not human, but mad. I've had Déjà vu before too. It turned out each time it was something that happened in this life, way back. :eek:

Also, the sheer numbers don't add up. There are more people alive now than there were souls dying in the past. :cool:

I'm glad you are happy with your belief in reincarnation. But it is not a fact of life. You know the thought of having to have been responsible for my soul, how it was in a past life, seems horrible(and definitely anti-Biblical). Not divine. Not human, but mad. I've had DeJa Vu before too. It turned out each time it was something that happened in this life, way back. :eek:

Also, the sheer numbers don't add up. There are more people alive now than there were souls dying in the past. :cool:

By your logic nothing is a fact of life, but that doesn't stop people from believing it though.

How do you know what my logic is when the only logic was mentioned by the poster and not me?

I don't need you to tell me something obvious like there are people in this world that believe in reincarnation, even if you don't.
So, maybe you'd like to actually comment on reincarnation? Maybe tell us why you do or don't believe there's such a thing?
Quit trying to attack me personally and try to say something in support of an opinion on the subject.

Oh Please don't be so sensitive, my point was that ones belief does not have to be logical and seldom is I know nothing of an after life and really don't care. If I'm meant to come back to this plane of existence as a bug so what! I doubt if I'll be given a choice. Whether I get to see the Kingdom of heaven or burn in hell, again not my call, I don't know period. What I do have control over is what I do here where I have a conscious control, not absolute, but enough shape a life with.
By 31pumpkin


Past life, seems horrible(and definitely anti-Biblical). Not divine. Not human, but mad

Must be okay for you to attack!

I've not piped in here yet... so is it still OK to answer the original question? :o

This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?


The meaning of "reincarnation" has varied greatly over the years. Early Christians were quite certain that they would be resurrected, and nowhere in early mainstream Christianity (not counting gnostics and other sects) do we find teaching supporting what most people today call "reincarnation".

For reference, there is an excellent collection of early church writings online here (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers).

31pumpkin disagrees: I wasn't talking to you. You end up arguing with your own SELF

That has nothing to do with what we are talking about!

By Rickj

The meaning of "reincarnation" has varied greatly over the years. Early Christians were quite certain that they would be resurrected, and nowhere in early mainstream Christianity (not counting gnostics and other sects) do we find teaching supporting what most people today call "reincarnation

Does that mean we should discount it ?

Cassie said:
I can not believe when we die God will only allow Christians in heaven. There are so many truly good people on this planet and their heart and souls are filled with love. They do so much for mankind, even dedicate their lives to making life better for others. Some of these people are not Christians. They have certainly earned the right to go to heaven.

If it were possible for any of us to be good enough to enter Heaven, then what Jesus Christ did for us was totally unnecessary. He didn't have to die for us, and He died for all of us. What some fail to see is that, like soap and water, benefits are only realized when the product is applied.

I can't think of any proof for reincarnation. Hindus write in their books but the writings are from the imaginations of men. Whereas the Bible was God-breathed. And in the Bible we are told that man is to die once. Also, that not by works can man enter Heaven, but by salvation. Believers will be judged further on their works, but that is after salvation in Jesus. So goodness does not equal salvation. You either believe it, or you don't.

I still say in reincarnation the numbers don't add up.

31 pumpkin,

You say the numbers do not add up. That is fine you have your belief and others have theirs. You do seem to get very defensive when somebody does not agree with you. There is no need get all riled up. There are many many mysteries of God. None of us know the whole picture. Not even the bible gives us the whole picture. As far as reincarnations and memory of past lives. All of us are connected, all of us are a creation from God. So the memeries of past lives could be memeries of somebody else that is being picked up by a sensitive.

Joe

Does that mean we should discount it ?

??

I didn't say anything about discounting it.

I guess I was foolish to try to give an answer to a question in a thread that has become all but answers to the original question.

I did not, though make myself clear, so will clarify:

Original questions:
What do you think about reincarnation? Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

My answers:

I don't believe in reincarnation as most define it today.

It was NOT taught in the early christian churches.

????????

I didn't say anything about discounting it.

I guess I was foolish to try to give an answer to a question in a thread that has become all but answers to the original question.

I did not, though make myself clear, so will clarify:

Original questions:
What do you think about reincarnation? Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

My answers:

I don't believe in reincarnation as most define it today.

It was NOT taught in the early christian churches.
I don't believe or disbelieve ,the truth is I don't know whether there is an afterlife or resurrection or reincarnation or crossing over. People will always believe what they want, and that's cool but me I don't have a clue!

Jesushelper -

I know you mean it nicely but you said that I said the numbers don't add up.But is that even a belief? Isn't it a fact?
I know I answer strongly because I have strong relationship with the Lord. After my brother was murdered in 1998, during that time of unbearable sorrow, was when the Lord answered me, in a "burning bush" moment (which lasted about 15 endless seconds) He showed me the answer to a question I asked God and only God many years before.
According to that moment, I can honestly say I know what Heaven feels like. But the only thing that is missing for us in the Bible is what Heaven actually looks like.

God knows some of the revelations were for comfort and because of a price.
But some revelations have been for direction and instruction.

So I'm not upset that people disagree with me. Actually I don't get mad, I get sad. I get sad a little actually for God and His plan.
But I have a best friend who's just as faithful, and some relatives left to agree with me if I really need to talk to someone!

"While my guitar gently weeps". Feeling that way too.

Pumpkin 31,

Just because somebody may differ in their beliefs. Even though the numbers may not add up for you but you need to realize that maybe for others the numbers do add up. You need to respect that. As I respect the fact that your showing others how strong your belief is but it is all in the approach and all in the manner that you do this as well. So I tell you that one day I was meditating privately. I was communicating with God. I was praying to God. I was asking a question about reincarnation. I did get my answer. Yes, reincarnation exists. Only in certain circumstances. So I believe that I was communicating with God. I know I was. Are you telling me that I am wrong and that I do not have as much faith as you because I have differing beliefs then you. That is where people get into trouble when they claim they have higher beliefs, or are better believers or have more faith in God and Jesus because they believe there beliefs are right and others are wrong. We have different paths to follow, different roads to travel, and different cultures , etc.. . I do know for a fact that Gods greatest commandment is for us to Love one another. That is what God is about is Love. Not about who is better, who is not. So love for God and each other is most important everything else comes in second. I am not making that up, I truly communicate with God and we all do and we all have communication with him. Everybody does it differently, people vary in their beliefs but you can not write and tell anybody that somebody else's belief is wrong. By doing that you have already turned that person away from God. The only Greatest Judge in this whole creation is God. Let God decide who's soul is pure and who's is not.

Thank you for your reply and this is what I think and feel.

Joe

O.K. -

First. Don't ever tell me who's religion I'm going to respect or not! I do not have to respect another religion. I only have to accept that there are different beliefs. Period. Joe.

You sure are practicing that love. Ha! More like ego.

Never you minda. It doesn't matter. I don't believe you heard God right about the "Yes" for reincarnation. B/c he never says anything that isn't in line with His word. So sorry. That would be a contradiction to His word.

And yes. There is right and wrong, and God told us what it is in His word.

Your just getting nasty now Pumpkin 31, your true colours are showing and it is not from God.

Off topic Joe, but well said, We should be able to disagree with anothers beliefs but the personel trash talk is unnecessary and takes away from the whole thread. But maybe it's a good thing when people show their true colors, so we can know where they come from no matter what they profess to be. Is intolerence a sin. It should be.

Intolerance should be considered a sin. It has caused so much hatred, fighting, wars, uprisings and murders. God does not teach intolerance. God is about love and peace. Intolerance is man made, intolerance is taught by people and it is a shame that people do not see how intolerance effects everybody. Whether it is in another country, towards another religion, towards another belief, towards lifestyle. It effects the belief other people have. When people have intolerance , they tell others their belief is right and somebody else is wrong. It pushes people away from God. Gods word warns that he will deal with people who push others away from him. I wish some people would actually get that LOVE IS THE GREATEST GIFT. That peace was meant to be. As long as we have intolerance from others that peace and love will not happen. That makes me sad. Truly makes me sad and emotional that people do not know how to respect and love each other. This may be off topic, but to be honest since I started the thread, I think I am able to go off topic a bit? Or maybe I will just start another thread. (; All smiles.

Joe

I deny the accusation about being nasty. Are you sure you're a Brother? B/c Christians are supposed to stand in agreement in the Faith. Perhaps it's just lack of maturity in the faith that you have, but it wears on other Christians' patience when one does not defend the Lord's Truth.


To Taliniman - I suggest you open your Bible. The Lord will repay the intolerable ones. You have stopped learning it seems because you are too proud. You want to argue with me because you can't do it enough at home. So, I try to teach an unbeliever, such as yourself something about the Lord, but you are unwilling & give every excuse and accusation instead.


Let's draw a truce. I'm satisfied that the Lord is in control and will reveal His will to whomever He chooses. And in the end, all will see His will. :rolleyes:

Ok, so what is His Will as it has been revealed to you?

I deny the accusation about being nasty. Are you sure you're a Brother? B/c Christians are supposed to stand in agreement in the Faith. Perhaps it's just lack of maturity in the faith that you have, but it wears on other Christians' patience when one does not defend the Lord's Truth.

This was nasty and rude, showing your lack of maturity and lack of knowing the truth.


To Taliniman - I suggest you open your Bible. The Lord will repay the intolerable ones. You have stopped learning it seems because you are too proud. You want to argue with me because you can't do it enough at home. So, I try to teach an unbeliever, such as yourself something about the Lord, but you are unwilling & give every excuse and accusation instead

My home life is great thank you and none of your business. You cannot teach what you don't know so forget that. Maybe someday after you've matured, you will have something positive to add but for now, I DON'T THINK SO!

Let's draw a truce. I'm satisfied that the Lord is in control and will reveal His will to whomever He chooses. And in the end, all will see His will. :rolleyes:
I have a better idea, Grow up and mind your manners.
I apologise to Jesushelper for hi-jacking this thread, and to all the others who came to discuss the subject but only found this drivel.

Back to the original question, i.e.. Was reincarnation taught in the earlier churches.
It has been stated (and I agree) that the Christian Church has never taught reincarnation. It could not have, because it has always relied on the Bible as its authority. Some things Biblical have been mis-understood, but reincarnation is not something that has ever been argued for. For those who do not accept the Bible as accurate, I pose the following:
All religions have their books, BUT, the Bible is the only one that specifically claims to be the revelation of the Creator to His creation. The other books are a record of mans search for truth by his own ability. If we reject the authority of the Bible, then we have thrown away the only "map" available to us. So when asked whether the early Church taught reincarnation, the only possible answer is "no".

Scriptures from the King James Version of the Bible which hint at Reincarnation. Reincarnation was taught in the Roman Catholic Church until 553 A.D. when it was voted out (3-2) at the Council of Constantinople

I googled reincarnation in the bible and found this among many sites on this subject.

All religions have their books, BUT, the Bible is the only one that specifically claims to be the revelation of the Creator to His creation.

Just curious, but how do you know this, galveston? Have you read and studied the holy scriptures of other religions?

Early christian church did teach reincarnation. That is a fact that there are things that were taught at the beginning of the church and they over the years have changed it. Even books that were decided by the church, which ones were considered to be part of the bible and what should not. Whose to say we are not missing books that should be part of the bible. In the long run in things, the most important part of belief is faith. To have faith in God and everything falls into place.

Joe

I'm seeing evidence to the contrary about Reincarnation being taught in the early Churches. I looked at RickJ link on p.8 of this thread and Morganite's also.

I would like to see at least one article from you, Jesushelper to back up your statement.
From what I have heard from scholars & ministers of Christianity throughout the years regarding "the mysterious missing books of the Bible" is that these books were not included (if at all) because some were redundant (how many miracles of Christ needed to fill more text?) and that some mwere believed to focus on avoidance of evil instead of promoting what Jesus' teachings were; about love.

The problem I have (and plenty of others) with other major religions' sacred text is that the originate from a single person without any interaction and witnesses to verify their revelations.

This I've found with Hinduism and Islam.

One can look (even google) an overview of these religions and see the correlation I'm referring to when I state "man-made religion".

In the Bible, there are witnesses and consistent people to support what God's Spirit inspired those to write down.

Well. I almost was permantly banned from this sight for" disagreeing" or not having respect for others beliefs.(apparently I don't say it nice enough)

Jesushelper - You have a God-given right to believe whatever you choose.
What was overlooked was when you said you believe in reincarnation. Yes faith in Christ is the most important thing. But as a Christian myself I know that worshiping other Gods (which I believe that to be for you) is a sin.

Now if that is disrepectful, I apologize. And maybe there isn't any room for my views on this site.

31 Pumpkin,

How am I worshipping other gods? Just because I believe that reincarnation is a possibility. It is called a discussion and the possilibility in reincarnation and do I believe it exists, the answer is yes. How can you sit there and tell me that I AM SINNING AND I AM WORSHIPPING OTHER gods? Jesus gave us a gift of love. God gave us a commandment to love. All you do here is accuse, spew and much more. You judge me. That is against Gods commandment, yet you state that you have a stronger faith then me. Your what God calls a hyprocrite. Preach about the God of love and spew hate and intolerance.

Joe

I refer to these passages for your perusal:
1) Matthew 11,14 and 17,12-13, concerning the identity of John the Baptist;
2) John 9,2, "Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?";
3) John 3,3, "No one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again";
4) James 3,6, "the wheel of nature";
5) Galatians 6,7, "A man reaps what he sows".
6) Matthew 26,52, ”all who draw the sword will die by the sword”.
7) Revelation 13,10, ”If anyone is to go into captivity, into captivity he will go. If anyone is to be killed with the sword, with the sword he will be killed.”
I've only gone through the first concerning John the Baptist, But If you want to see the entirety of my research simply Google, Reincarnation in the bible and go through it yourself. It is common knowledge that the bible as we know it has been changed and Translated (a lot can be lost in translation) into many languages and it is not far fetched to believe that ancient man put a lot of his own prejudices and beliefs into writing. As Jesus was a Jew and Christianity was founded well after his death I can only assume that the bible was divinely inspired. The fact is I don't know just as I don't know that any other religious book is divinely inspired.

Well I went through some links on "reincarnation and the early churches" and "reincarnation and the Bible"

I learned Christian Gnostics were responsible for the reincarnation belief and were dispelled somewhere around 500 AD for heresy.
Here is a link I was referring to: www.near-death.com/experiences/origen06.html

Also, on the Scripture quotes as a "hint of reincarnation" I found that actually laughable. Everyone of them is referring to what happens to man (due to one's conduct or heart,etc.- in this life.


Somewhere there's suggestion in the readings today that John The Baptist was Elijah "reincarnated". A person has to die 1st in order that his self may be reincarnated in another body. Elijah didn't physically die anyway. He was brought up to Heaven in a whirlwind(2Kings 2,11)
"Finally, the experience of the apostles at the Mount of Transfiguration has to be remembered(Matthew 17,1-8;Mark9,2-8;Luke 9,28-36) when Elijah was identified by the apostles without being confused with John The Baptist"

But those Scriptures on one of the links for "reincarnation and the Bible" - really made me laugh today. But I did learn something also from the research!

What an interesting series of comments! And all from people of the same basic religion. WOW. Brings to mind one of my favorite quotes of all time. "My only regret is that I am not young enough to know everything."

And what is that quote from your bible... "You can tell these Christians by how..." umm, self righteous? Intolerant? Pig headed?. what was it again?

Quote from reincarnation and the bible:


The doctrines of pre-existence and reincarnation existed as secret teachings of Jesus until they were declared a heresy by the Roman Church in 553 A.D. It was at this time that the Roman Church aggressively destroyed competing teachings and so-called heresies within the Church. Along with the destruction of unorthodox teachings came the destruction of Jews, Gnostics, and ultimately anyone who stood in the way of the Inquisition and Crusades
That was a time in history when man was exerting his influence over the people to justify his own greed.

Quote from reincarnation and the bible:
That was a time in history when man was exerting his influence over the people to justify his own greed.


And that sad time differs from our own how?

Whether it was taught as true by early Christians or not doesn't appear to have a great deal of relevance for today's world and there is clearly not much agreement on this topic. I wonder, does it make what we experience here and now any different, Christian or otherwise, if they did or didn't teach it?

Hmmm but now that I think about it off the cuff, I could see wishing that reincarnation could be proved as real since then people would be more careful in their actions with a real personal concern of being reincarnated into, say, a frog next time hanging in the balance, wouldn't they? And I am all for a more careful treatment of each other.

At the most basic level, the belief could prevent us humans from destroying our planet. If you have to come back, do you really want to return to a world more polluted, more disease ridden, more overpopulated. On a political level, sure those Nike's are cool, but do you really want to be the man in the sweatshop making them next time? Would we be so quick to oppress or exploit?

Yes, it would make people think.

Wow. Never really thought of it like that before so it does explain why it could be stricken from the books so to speak, and forbidden and against policy.
ByVBNomad

At the most basic level, the belief could prevent us humans from destroying our planet. If you have to come back, do you really want to return to a world more polluted, more disease ridden, more overpopulated. On a political level, sure those Nike's are cool, but do you really want to be the man in the sweatshop making them next time? Would we be so quick to oppress or exploit?
A lot of food for thought.

One couldn't come back as a cockroach because insects don't have spirits. I don't think they even have a soul.


There will be a new Heaven & a new earth when Jesus' returns. That's why I tell myself, if I don't get to see the Holy Land in this life(b/c of the violence) then I'll have to wait for the next.

Coming back as a cockroach would be a fitting reward for some of us humans who have no soul.

Disagree. Now you're playing God. Judgmental. B/c they could say the same for you.

How do you know who has a soul and who doesn't. All creatures great and small were all created by God. They all have an importance for one thing or another. Can anything be alive without the spirit of God?

One couldn't come back as a cockroach because insects don't have spirits. I don't think they even have a soul.

Short of recalling a prior life as a roach, I think this would be extremely diffuclt to speculate upon. Many people still disagree as to whether animals are capable of feeling and expressing emotion, and aren't simply motivated by instinctual needs and drives.
Though not everyone agrees that animals don't have a soul. There are Hindu temples devoted to rats, which are believed to be reincarnated ancestors. Many Hawaiian people believe the same of sharks. In the country of Bhutan, this belief is so strong regarding Black Cranes, killing one entails a mandatory life sentence with no chance of parole.
One thing is for sure though... Should we finally fire off a few of those nuclear warheads, from a purely biological perspective, meek or not, cockroaches do stand the best chance of inheriting the Earth. And please don't argue this one, unless you have lived with them as I have. :D

Hi Orange,
You are absolutely correct in that. Such religions are referred to as "Animistic", and two examples would be the native religions of Tibet and Japan, Bon and Shinto respectively. Here is a good link explaining Animism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animistic

Dogs, cats, horses, etc. have a soul (mind,will & emotions) A cockroach or lower animal couldn't I think, because it doesn't have a brain or heart. Do you agree?

But how could a rat be someone's relative? Where did the person's spirit go?
God gave man a spirit. It's what separates man from other living things.

I wouldn't think God would be limited to a physical structure or it's size or sophistication. If the lesson you needed to learn was in a worm. God could make your soul experience that existence. And 'you' would perceive as a worm. Not as a person trapped in a worm's body. And we can only speculate on the hierarchy of progression, or even if there is one. After many lives in the human form a master may prefer the life of a pampered cat or wild bird.. to be an otter for the pure joy of it. A racoon to have fun with the humans.

I think a real theological question buried in here is do we continue as souls to perceive as human once we are free of the human body. And after living bodiless, or in other forms would we ever willingly choose the human body again. Or would a spirit body be more like God's real 'image'.

Dogs, cats, horses, etc. have a soul (mind,will & emotions) A cockroach or lower animal couldn't I think, b/c it doesn't have a brain or heart. Do you agree?

But how could a rat be someone's relative? Where did the person's spirit go?
God gave man a spirit. It's what separates man from other living things.

Into the rat, according to Hindus. Many Hindu gods, such as Ganesha, are depicted as having animal characteristics, though fully possessed of the intellectual faculties of humans.
Insects do in fact have a heart and brain, though primitive in comparison to ours. Their "blood" is green in general, as it carries no oxygen. Not possessing lungs, they bring oygen into their bodies through other means.
Though the argument could be made, even in insects, that there is an animating force beyond the simple electrical activity exhibited by the brain, as cockroaches have been known to survive up to thirty days without a head.

Now the discussions are becoming very interesting and informative. Whoo hooo. Clapping and smiling.

Joe

The nervous system and circulatory system of an insect is so primitive and simple that it is controlled innately by reflex and instinct. It reacts to it's own internal stimuli and external stimuli.
What I'm saying is an insect is not capable of thought or learning (as a pet)
I believe anything with a nervous system feels pain when it's crushed. But its brain doesn't(the insect) has the capacity to look at the " exterminator" and look like it's saying "please don't kill me!"

So that's why I don't think they have a soul. Insects are just part of ecology. I don't think there's anything "sacred" about them. Just my opinion, of course.

So is it a sliding scale of "soul"? A cockroach does have one but a dog does. How about a well-trained fish you've had for years? Does a chimpanzee have a soul? Does that cold-blooded killer have a soul? It's such a difficult concept to describe much less to have any form of agreement.

The soul consists of the 1) mind 2) will 3) and emotions. I certainly would think that mammals have the capacity to think & learn, have a will, and have feelings more than just instinctual.(heartfelt feelings) Let's forget about the spirit for now.

But the question I'd like to ask for" believers" in reincarnation is: How does the rat that may have a soul cleanse itself for the next incarnation? What would the criteria be for the rat to improve itself in its life, so that it would return something better? Does it have to reach some kind of Nirvana? What would constitute a judgment of a "good rat"?

This is sounding crazy already to me. So I don't know if it's going to get any saner!

31 Pumpkin,

You need to remember that there is different beliefs of reincarnation as well. One belief is that you may come back in a lower life form depending on the way you live.

There is another belief of reincarnation is you just keep coming back in human form but karma plays a role of what person you will come back as. One lifetime you may be a killer in the next life time you may be the murdered victim. Just using that as an example.

Another theory, is that anybody that had a dramatic exit. Very horrible death, or committed suicide will come back to live life out to the fullest.

Joe

From the bible-
He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance." (Matt. 13:11-12)
I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness - the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Col. 1:25-27)
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed. (1 Cor. 15:51)
Supposedly this an example of the secret teachings of Jesus.

Tal,

Those passages could refer to absolutely anything, including the colonel's secret recipe of 11 herbs and spices.

From the bible-
He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance." (Matt. 13:11-12)
I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness - the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Col. 1:25-27)
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed. (1 Cor. 15:51)
Supposedly this an example of the secret teachings of Jesus.


Hmmm... VERY possible!! Good find!

Forgive me pulling up passages is new so bear with me. What I was trying to show that Jesus discussed reincarnation to his deciples as part of his teaching. Still working on it.

From the bible-
He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance." (Matt. 13:11-12)
I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness - the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Col. 1:25-27)
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed. (1 Cor. 15:51)
Supposedly this an example of the secret teachings of Jesus.


Jesus wasn't teaching reincarnation. In your 1st example, Matt.13:11-12:
Jesus was speaking to them in parables. The Parable of the Sower. In fact one has to read chapter 13:1-23 to understand the meaning of what Jesus was saying to them. The meaning of the parable of the sower had a man who planted some seed in Matt 13:18-23. It has nothing to do with reincarnation. It has to do with man hearing the word of God, and what they do with it.

Second - This is not reincarnation. This is about having the Spirit of Christ (the Holy Spirit) You do know who the saints are ? Answer: fellow believers.
Anyway, further down in Col 2:2-4, Paul explains about the mystery. The sentences cannot be taken out of context. That must be rule #1 for understang the Bible!

Third - 1Cor 15:51 - The word sleep in the sentence means "die". So now if you read from 1Cor15:50-55, you will see that he's talking about death being swallowed in victory through Christ.

Feel free to ask anytime for Biblical explanations.

Cheers!

While being neither "animist" nor "pagan"-- I understand God gave all living things spirit simply because I can both see it, feel it and sometimes even interact with it, which probably makes me sound cracked to many people LOL but I assure you this is as real as any physical object is. I don't know where that fits in with reincarnation but it is what it is.

Thank you And I have many questions. I have no problem what so ever asking them. I am not of your faith but I am committed to understanding, so don't take offense at my... abrupt way of expressing myself. Just me.

I remember a pastor now saying, Jesus takes care of the flesh & blood of things.
So that's it. If it has flesh & blood, it has a soul.

That explains my daughter's 2 Jack Russell terriers! They have some personality! :p

If any teachings of Jesus were secret, they wouldn't be written in a book! He used parables to hide the truth from people who had no intention of following His teachings, but He explained what He meant to those who were willing to follow His teachings. Somewhow, some of you seem to confuse resurrection with reincarnation. They are in no way related.

The nervous system and circulatory system of an insect is so primitive and simple that it is controlled innately by reflex and instinct. It reacts to it's own internal stimuli and external stimuli.

Despite an increased level of complexity, this really doesn't differ much in humans. This is pretty much a description of homeostasis, or the functions of the autonomic nervous system.


What I'm saying is an insect is not capable of thought or learning (as a pet)
I believe anything with a nervous system feels pain when it's crushed. But its brain doesn't(the insect) has the capacity to look at the " exterminator" and look like it's saying "please don't kill me!"

So that's why I don't think they have a soul. Insects are just part of ecology. I don't think there's anything "sacred" about them. Just my opinion, of course.

Some of the most intelligent insects have been proven capable of learning. Jumping spiders -- one of my favorite subjects to photograph -- have been studied extensively under laboratory conditions. They have been proven to recognize and intelligently avoid man-made obstacles repeatedly encountered under test conditions. Scientist believe as well, that they can in fact learn to recognize their own reflection. Try teaching the latter to a dog. This is believed, mostly due to a behavior peculiar to this species -- when presented with a threat, they tend to rear up on their hind legs, and box at it with their pedipalps. This behavior can be observed simply by extending a finger in front of one.
This of course, leads me to the second part of the argument.
It is believed that insects such as spiders are incapable of discerning human beings as an entity in whole, we are simply too large. They can recognize a finger, possibly a whole hand, but not a person. Regardless of this fact, jumping siders are very acute in tracking human movement, constantly turning to face one. And, if felt to be threatened, neraly any insect will attempt to flee. Instinct or not, it is making a concerted attempt to prolong its existence. They cannot express a desire not to be squashed, in the same way that humans can, as they both lack our peculiar features and expressions, and likely the ability to recognize a human face as well.
It likely is true that they don't perceive pain in quite the same way as humans do -- even lobsters, with a very rudimentary nervous system, die within seconds in lukewarm water -- though feel discomfort they do, and their will and instinct to live is no less strong.
Just because something does not perceive the world on the same level, or in the same manner, does not give anyone the right to exterminate it. You can say it is just a part of the ecology, but if spiders alone did not exist, other insects would surely overpopulate the world to the point in where it were no longer livable for humans.
Again, you can say they are nothing more than an expendable part of the environment, but then again, mosquitoes probably view you in much the same way. As an opportune resource, and nothing more. Compassion is a gift unique to higher animals. Why should we waste it? Better on insects than barely at all.


The soul consists of the 1) mind 2) will 3) and emotions. I certainly would think that mammals have the capacity to think & learn, have a will, and have feelings more than just instinctual.(heartfelt feelings) Let's forget about the spirit for now.

Not all beliefs share this view of the "soul." In Buddhism, these are largely considered obstacles to understanding our truest nature.


But the question I'd like to ask for" believers" in reincarnation is: How does the rat that may have a soul cleanse itself for the next incarnation? What would the criteria be for the rat to improve itself in its life, so that it would return something better? Does it have to reach some kind of Nirvana? What would constitute a judgment of a "good rat"?

Well, again, I get the feeling that you are approaching this question from the standpoint that the rat is nothing more than vermin, or an unnecessary part of the ecology.
From the Hindu perspective, the rat needn't do anything, he is a rat because he is blessed. There are temples in India where rats are worshipped, roam freely throughout, and are fed daily by devout followers. Many people eat the rats' food and drink milk from their dishes, believing that doing such will cure them of all illness.
From the Buddhist perspective, the rat neither can, nor really need, do anything. Karma is about volitional action, will. That is what creates karma, keeping us perpetually trapped in delusion and an endless cycle of rebirths. Human actions carry such weight, simply because we the have the ability to reason and choose. A human may become a rat due to an instinct driven existence, a life spent over-indulging in more basic drives, with little regard for others -- such as sex and hunger. Though the rat may continue to live his life in much the same way, this is quite natural for the rat. Because the rat does not choose and discriminate, nor understand the possible consequences of its actions, the negative karma the rat accumulates is quite comparatively small. It has a great deal to do with intent. Thus, eventually the karma that caused the rat to become what it is will eventually run its course. Having not accumulated a great deal of further karma in his current incarnation, he has naught but to move up in further lifetimes. There is as well, the ever-present and compassionate aid of the myriad Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.
There is no such thing as a "good" rat or a "bad" rat. These are dualistic human conceptions that have no bearing in the higher experience of ultimately reality, as opposed to a person's own relative view. And they certainly have no bearing in a rat's existence. Any food, sex or shelter is likely good to the rat. The rat lives and survives in the moment, and like most animals, they are quite Zen in this manner.


This is sounding crazy already to me. So I don't know if it's going to get any saner!

The nice thing about the Buddhist perspective, is that it essentially acknowledges that we are all, on some level, "psychotic." The insanity ends with enlightenment. ;) :)

Not all beliefs share this view of the "soul." In Buddhism, these are largely considered obstacles to understanding our truest nature.

In Christianity the "soul" can also be an obstacle for "walking in the Spirit". Two reasons to walk in alignment, Spirit, soul, body is to hear God's voice and for Spiritual protection. There's of course too much to write here from the Cleansing Seminar I still have notes from, but the soul of man(mind, will, & emotions) can be an obstacle. The clarity of God's voice gets lost in all the elements of our soul, & God's direction for our lives is weakened or lost. If we are walking in the flesh, being ruled by our soul- what God is saying to us must 1st filter through the thoughts, imaginations, & confusion in our mind; through the pain, brokenness, anger, & resentments in our emotions; through the pressures of choices we have made; &, finally, through any other stresses we may be experiencing. If we cannot hear God clearly, we become open to deception by the enemy (Cleansing Stream Ministries 1999)
What this is basically for is to have own's Spirit in control & that the soul needs healing & delverance. The spirit is that eternal part of us that will continue on beyond the termination of our body's life. The spirit stands for the highest elements of man by which we comprehend spiritual truths. Our spirit is the most powerful part of our being. It is the part that deals with right & wrong behavior. (C.S.M. 1999)

In the Bible even animals weren't considered sacred. There were many animal sacrifices in the Old Testament. The then Lord desired mercy, not sacrifice.

I'll stick with Jesus. I had a friend in the early years who got into Buddhism. She invited a couple of us to a retreat where she was working. She told me to get the book "Be Here Now", which I did. One time she came to my apt. & asked if I read it. I said, a little(I didn't want to hurt her feelings that I thought it was stupid) She got very belligerent over this anyway & said she couldn't be my friend anymore because I was too different from her,etc. Then I heard from the mutual friend that her parents had to admit her to a psychiatric hospital because she wouldn't or couldn't stop exercising. I don't know if it was her interests in Buddhism that triggered something in her mentally, but it certainly didn't look like a good thing for her.

"Be Here Now" by Ram Dass and the contemporary version "Power of Now" by Erkhart Tolle are two books that successfully identify in plain language that all reality is only to be found in this very moment, and now that moment is gone. All things occur in the present moment only, and all life force is found there. It is like you can't step into the same river twice since the flowing water makes each part of the river you step in different.

When it came to relating it to God, I was told that "God's name is not I Was nor is it I Will Be but rather I Am". It is because western civilization invites us to spend an inordinate amount of wasted time in our minds in the past (usually in anger) and future (usually in fear) that this perspective of how to reclaim authenticity is so popular. It is part of my daily spiritual practice -- to stay in the Now. Some reckon it to one day at a time; for me its more like one nanosecond at a time LOL.

Val - I believe my friend's problems came from being in the "now" She seemed to be catching all the "karma" onto herself . I say that because when everyone who be laid back hanging out she always started moving. It was obvious, and also unnecessary.
Also, I don't have to "be here now" to live in the present tense. The book seemed to be analyzing the now too, much for me at least.
If I look back in the past, it's not with anger. If I look to the future, it's with hope and not fear.
I think we can all relate to the reality of being here now consciously when walking by some quiet stream or forest. All a person really has to do is become quiet and relax to sense the beauty around.
But then again other people may enjoy a book like that!

Love & Peace

Would a Christian be considered committing a sin if they were to believe in reincarnation? They would be rejecting prescribed doctrine for their own ideas.

Hi, VB
Having been a Christian for over 50 years, I cannot see how a Christian could believe in reincarnation in the first place. There is just no Biblical basis for it. Resurrection, on the other hand, is clearly seen first in the book of Job (considered to the oldest book in the Bible), and then through the rest of the Bible.
Job 19:26
26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
(KJV)
The Sadducees of Jesus' time did not believe in a resurrection, but neither did they believe in reincarnation.

Hi, VB
Resurrection, on the other hand, is clearly seen first in the book of Job (considered to the the oldest book in the Bible), and then through the rest of the Bible.
Have you ever met anyone who was resurrected?

On the matter of resurrection; which body do you get? The one you last had, complete with sickness or old age? Jesus still had his crucifixion wounds, so it's really not that far fetched to ask. Do you get the parts back that were removed by surgery or accident? How about children born with deformities? And what about those sacred unborn babies - do they come back as a lump of cells unable to exist outside a mothers body, or as the fully formed humans that they never were?

VBnomad -

Brand new physical bodies! The embryo - probably as a child.:rolleyes:

Reincarnation, or at least a type of it, might exist if that's what a person believes. In such cases the soul possibly becomes gripped by something less than God, and that power (call it an archetype, if you will) continues to engulf other individuals through history, giving the semblance of reincarnation because individuals come to identify with the archetype. But I don't think this kind of reincarnation fits with the standard theory that the soul is on a path toward enlightenment. In my opinion it's probably enslaved by an archetypal force.

That's pretty abstract and speculative but I outline it as one possibility I've considered.

Myself, I don't subscribe to the theory because I see it as intellectually and spiritually limiting. Possibly people have certain experiences (alleged flashbacks of 'past lives') but they interpret that experience incorrectly. Catholics have suggested that what's really happening is a deceased person (or a demon) is influencing a living person.

Another possibility is that the living person is somehow seeing/experiencing through time, into the past. This isn't so far-fetched when we consider the relativity of space-time as outlined in contemporary physics.

And yet another possibility is that certain memories are encoded in our genes. Or some people just have vivid imaginations, combined with a psychological need to feel special, important, etc.

Sometimes reincarnation believers get quite perturbed when I suggest that they cling to their beliefs just as dogmatically as any cradle Catholic. But there it is. In my view it's just a belief.

Excellent post earthpages. Enjoyed reading your answer.

Joe

I would like to reply to NK & VB.
No, I haven't met anyone who has been resurrected. The first resurrection began with Jesus Christ, but the rest of us will have to wait until the Church age is completed. Have you ever met anyone who has been reincarnated? That's going to be real hard to prove.

As to what kind of body will be resurrected, (at least for believers) I give you the words of the Apostle Paul.

1 Cor 15:35-44
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
(KJV)

Myself, I don't subscribe to the theory because I see it as intellectually and spiritually limiting.And yet another possibility is that certain memories are encoded in our genes.
I agree about the limiting... very bad idea to limit things, especially such unchartered things like intellect and spirit.

As for memories of ancestors being encoded in our genes, I once read an article in Psychology Today of cannibalistic ants that were taught to run a maze, killed and then fed to new batch of the same kind of ants who instantly picked up the maze at the skill level where the first ants left off... kind of hard to fathom but it certainly gives pause for thought.

While being neither "animist" nor "pagan"-- I understand God gave all living things spirit simply because I can both see it, feel it and sometimes even interact with it, which probably makes me sound cracked to many people LOL but I assure you this is as real as any physical object is. I don't know where that fits in with reincarnation but it is what it is.

Thank you for your thoughts on this. It seems evident from scripture that everything is spirit first and material second. That couod explain the difference between them firstthree chapters of Geneis from a Christian pioint of view. First, the spirit creations, then the creation using gross matter to clothe the spirit entities.



M:)

Thank you for your thoughts on this. It seems evident from scripture that everything is spirit first and material second. That could explain the difference between them first three chapters of Genesis from a Christian point of view. First, the spirit creations, then the creation using gross matter to clothe the spirit entities.



M:)
Hmmm that actually fits better how and what I see, Morganite, thanks!

Another thing about reincarnation is that it doesn't consider the possibility that the future might influence the present. Most people shrug when I mention this. How can something that hasn't happened yet influence us now?

But I suspect that space, time and eternity are far more interactive than we realize. So theoretically, every point in space time could have some kind of effect on every other point in space time. More like a multidimensional whole than a linear line of reincarnation.

Another thing about reincarnation is that it doesn't consider the possibility that the future might influence the present. Most people shrug when I mention this. How can something that hasn't happened yet influence us now?

But I suspect that space, time and eternity are far more interactive than we realize. So theoretically, every point in space time could have some kind of effect on every other point in space time. More like a multidimensional whole than a linear line of reincarnation.

Historically, many people have in fact offered up this intriguing theory, everyone from Einstein to Zen author DT Suzuki -- that time is not in fact linear as we traditionally perceive it, more parallel and something of an illusion. This is one way in which the Buddhist theories, including rebirth, differ from the theory of reincarnation. In Buddhism, this is somewhat explained through "co-dependent arising." Nothing can exist independently of many other causes and conditions. All creation ebbs and flows in unison and harmony. Time and space are just two more hypothetical overlays upon a greater state of experiential reality, that we can never adequately express, nor encompass with words.

Multi-dimensional whole... codependent rising... now we are on to something here. Great discussion y'all--I am enjoying this immensely!

Glad to be a part of this thread!

Thomas... I've been discussing this a bit with a Buddhist friend. It seems to me that the main difference between my perspective and the majority Buddhist view (he informed me that there are several variations) is that I can't believe there's no individual self. I'm not speaking about a conceptually constructed or 'conditioned' self, which I agree is, for the most part, a convenient construct. I feel that when we strip down the layers of persona etc. there remains an essential individuality. Like a core, a seed or a spark. (You rightly say that words cannot fully describe it).

I would like to reply to NK & VB.
No, I haven't met anyone who has been resurrected.

If you did you would not know it.

Jesus was not the only one resurrected at the time of his resurrection, although he was the first.


M:)

If you did you would not know it.

Jesus was not the only one resurrected at the time of his resurrection, although he was the first.

M:)
Is that why I feel resurrected, by several times over even?

Is that why I feel resurrected, by several times over even?

My take on this is that if you were resurrected you wold be aware of it, but if you met a resurrected person you would not be able to tell, except that you could not kill them. That is according to Christian teaching.

M:)

If you did you would not know it.

Jesus was not the only one resurrected at the time of his resurrection, although he was the first.


M:)

Really? Who else was resurrected?

I would like to reply to NK & VB.

1 Cor 15:35-44
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
(KJV)

OK. If I'm readingeth this right, his holiness starts by calling me a fool for asking the question. He then describes the flesh, the body and the glory as making up all things. (Hermetisists and alchemists use similar words.) But before that, indicating that all share the seed of God's body. That is a truly pagan idea that the 'flesh' of all thing, even the celestial bodies is of the matter of God. He than sadly chooses the words corruption, dishonor and weakness to equate to the natural body. A real wondrous, miracle of God's creation if you ask me. And it sounds like, he believes, that what is resurrected, is in no way physical or natural, but entirely spirit.

OK. If I'm readingeth this right

We have to remember that the earliest versions of the Bible were mostly written in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). So not only do we have the translation problem. We also have to think about copyists possibly adding stuff through the ages (last I heard, monks and scribes didn't have xerox machines or scanners back then!). Actually, in all seriousness, Biblical scholars call this "gloss."

~gloss : a commentary on, or sometimes a translation of, a manuscript work written between the lines or around the margins of the main text

Source: http://medievalwriting.50megs.com/glossary.htm

A Catholic Bible Dictionary (Eerdmans) says that gloss may be incorporated in the text.

Right. And we are not in medieval England. Why have such an important work be in anyway unclear or difficult to interprete. Maybe because a class of people owe their existence and celebrity to doing the interpreting? Maybe if it's too clear, people will be able to understand it for themselves?

I don't know. Some say that the mysteriousness and ambiguity give it credibility. I mean, if the Church leaders really wanted to fake it, they'd have just ironed out all the difficulties. The Bible is full of difficult stuff.

Right. And we are not in medieval England. Why have such an important work be in anyway unclear or difficult to interprete. Maybe because a class of people owe their existence and celebrity to doing the interpreting? Maybe if it's too clear, people will be able to understand it for themselves?
I'm with you VB, one only needs to observe the natural universe to see how direct and elegant God was in all creation. The "directions" to this, while being complex or indepth, need not be anything complicated or even mystical -- there is a difference. Complicated to the point of bamboozlement belongs in Dr Hook's Medicine Show, frankly.

Really? Who else was resurrected?

Matthew 27:52-53

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

M:)

Right. And we are not in medieval England. Why have such an important work be in anyway unclear or difficult to interprete. Maybe because a class of people owe their existence and celebrity to doing the interpreting? Maybe if it's too clear, people will be able to understand it for themselves?

The Bible is accessible to anyone willing to pay the price for understanding it. That price involves long and serious study, far removed from occasional reference to Strong's Lexicon, etc. or to some particular commentary.

What becomes clear as a result, is that the dearly-held positions of many Christians are shown to be in error and often out of step with what the Bible really says. For many, that price is too high and so they cling to their old understandings that are based on faulty interpretations and populist, often minimalist, theologies.

Sincerity and antiquity are not proofs of Biblical orthodoxy, and there lies the challenge. Much modern theology owes its existence to mediaeval concatenations and some, to a lesser degree, to post modern reinterpretations after the fashion of existentialism dressed in the clothhing of non-existentialism.

Modern translations of the Bibe are in most cases riddled with interpretations forced on the text by theological necessity, unrelated to faithfulness to the Bible's text.


M:)

Glad to be a part of this thread!

Thomas... I've been discussing this a bit with a Buddhist friend. It seems to me that the main difference between my perspective and the majority Buddhist view (he informed me that there are several variations) is that I can't believe there's no individual self. I'm not speaking about a conceptually constructed or 'conditioned' self, which I agree is, for the most part, a convenient construct. I feel that when we strip down the layers of persona etc., there remains an essential individuality. Like a core, a seed or a spark. (You rightly say that words cannot fully describe it).

I can certainly accept and appreciate that view. There are indeed several variations, though not all are widely regarded as wholly authentic to the Buddha's original teachings. Though this is largely why Buddhism distinguishes between relative and ultimately reality. Certain "illusions" are necessarily accepted in order to relate and function meaningfully in the world. The concept of self is one of these. It is said there is no birth and no death, but one would still be a fool to step in front of a moving bus. :) This view is simply in accordance with the scientific law that "matter can neither be created nor destroyed." If you were to be hit by a bus, it is likely conditions would no longer be sufficient to support "you," but every molecule in your body lives on to become an integral part of many other things. In this sense, nothing is ever truly "individual," and nothing ever truly dies. Things just change form. The Buddhist teachings in no way trivialize the preciousness and uniqueness of every life and form. :)

though not all are widely regarded as wholly authentic to the Buddha's original teachings. With all due respect, I find it interesting that when people speak of Buddha's original teachings they often overlook the fact that Buddha himself didn't write any scriptures. I've heard that Buddhist scriptures were written 300-600 years after the death of Buddha. If this is right, then the time lag is much longer than that of Christ and the New Testament writings. Yet Christianity seems to get a bum rap for this far more than Buddhism.

Why?

Anyone have any ideas? ;)

Well, again, with all due respect, I do not overlook this fact, but rely, as all Buddhists do, on the Three Dharma Seals to denote authentic teachings. It is said that all Buddha's teachings contained three hallmarks: no-self, impermanence and nirvana. If any of these can not be found, it is not considered an authentic teaching.
You are correct again. Buddha only gave oral sermons, passing knowledge down orally as was common in those days. But perhaps, as well, he didn't wish to over-emphasize the importance of his words, as they are often referred to as nothing more than "skillful means"; a boat to ferry you across to the far shore, to be abandoned when the ultimate "destination" is reached.
There are in fact two separate cannons of Buddhist teachings, the Northern and Southern Transmissions, one in Sanskrit, the other in Pali. These teachings were collected from many dedicated followers, though one bhikku (monk) is traditionally considered responsible for much of what we have. It is accepted that many of his teachings may have been lost.

Though I'm certainly not the one to answer authoritatively for the Christian perspective, perhaps it is a lack of commonly accepted keys of verification. Another factor is perhaps the unflinching stance that many take in interpreting the Bible. Buddha never advocated taking his words at face value; he always encouraged followers to test his words, and see if they held up as true for them. Neither did he ever advocate giving up one's original faith or beliefs. He understood that true growth was difficult without strong roots.
Though I think the most important factor is that many see it as a one shot deal. Though hell realms exist in Buddhist teachings, there is always a chance for salvation in every single moment. Who doesn't want to be sure when eternity is on the line.
Faced with these intimidating prospects, some people just give up. Like a child hiding under the sheets from the monster in the closet, some people feel if they ignore reality long enough, it will simply go away. :)

Come on you Guys! Why twist the Apostle Paul's words all around? You want to know about the resurrected body? After His resurrection, Jesus walked into a locked and barred room. Then He ate some food to show that He wasn't spirit, but "flesh and bone". Is that really so difficult to understand? John, who wrote the book "Revelation" saw Him in in His glorified state. And His form was still human in shape. You are making something that is straightforward (resurrection) into a mess of your own thinking.

We have to remember that the earliest versions of the Bible were mostly written in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). So not only do we have the translation problem. We also have to think about copyists possibly adding stuff through the ages (last I heard, monks and scribes didn't have xerox machines or scanners back then!). Actually, in all seriousness, Biblical scholars call this "gloss."

~gloss : a commentary on, or sometimes a translation of, a manuscript work written between the lines or around the margins of the main text

Source: http://medievalwriting.50megs.com/glossary.htm

A Catholic Bible Dictionary (Eerdmans) says that gloss may be incorporated in the text.


Although this is way off thread [reincarnation] I would like to squash the nascent idea that Hebrew copyists didn't make mistakes, but if they did (!) they hid their errors in a gematria. The demonstrable fact is that the copyists made many errors, most of which are readily visible to those sufficiently familiar with the Bible (even in English) to stand out like pikestaffs. There are a whole series of different kinds of errors that were commonly made, and in addition thereis no doubt that glosses have been copied into the body of text instead of leaving them as marginal explanations. The first to note the textual errors was a mediaeval rabbi.

Perhaps the best way to deal with this is to start a fresh thread. The original texts were either written in Hebrew or Aramaic (OT), or in Koine Greek (NT). Modern linguistic science finds it useful to retranslate them back into the opriginal languages and look for loan words from neighbour languages such as Ethiopic, etc, and treat some difficulties successfully by their methods.

The major proplem of honestly dealing with the Bible documents comes from those who stand outside the Bible itself and make the unbiblical statement that "the Bible is entirely free from errors!" it is not, neither does it claim to be inerrant.

M:)


Come on you Guys! Why twist the Apostle Paul's words all around? You want to know about the resurrected body? After His resurrection, Jesus walked into a locked and barred room. Then He ate some food to show that He wasn't spirit, but "flesh and bone". Is that really so difficult to understand? John, who wrote the book "Revelation" saw Him in in His glorified state. and His form was still human in shape. You are making something that is straightforward (resurrection) into a mess of your own thinking.

You are absolutely right. Those who disagree are making a mockery of the resurrection of Jesus by insisting that it was a spiritual ecvent and not a literal historic event, as Christianity has long taught.

Jesus himself said, "Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have." I have always been inclined to trust anything Jesus said. The resurrected Jesus appeared to paul no less than six times. He appeared to john on Patmos, and John described his appearance. He is not describing a diaphanous, formless, mass of spirit substance, but the risen Lord himself standing before him.

That is what the Bible teaches about resurrection.



M:)


I don't know. Some say that the mysteriousness and ambiguity give it credibility. I mean, if the Church leaders really wanted to fake it, they'd have just ironed out all the difficulties. The Bible is full of difficult stuff.


It is indeed. That is half the enjoyment of biblical studies. There are puzzles to be resolved.


M:)


Reincarnation is an offense to the Lord. It's like saying He didn't get it right the first time. Are you a Hindu or Budist. There is only one God & there is only one true religion. Through the Son one gets to the Father. I felt my mother's presence too...in a willow tree, but that's bc she does live up there & she loved the weeping willow tree. Our loved ones do witness our lives..they are witnesses...it's in the Bible

I doubt very much that the Lord is offended when his children get things wrong. There are too many people presuming to speak for the Lord and putting their words into his mouth. I need hardly remind anyone that it was the Lord that said he came to save the sick, and not the well. Mor eoffensive ot the Lord is his characterisation as a bad tempered eastern potentate who cannot be gainsaid without lopping of the head of the poor fellow who get it wrong.

Let's put God back together again as he is and not as he has been made to appear by the Ferrovians.



M:)RGANITE

I am Hindu so I cannot comment on whether it was ever promoted in Christianity. However I feel that we are reincarnated, as it is my faith, but it also makes a lot of sense. People often ask ' if God Created us then how can He will us to damn ourselves to hell' I know Xtianity uses the concept of free will in order to answer this question. In my opinion reincarnation makes more sense, there is so much in this world the experience and why shouldn't one get more than one chance to get it right?

I believe that everyone has the right to believe in what they want. I don't personally believe in reincarnation, or God, or Jesus. And I don't believe that the bible is proof of anything at all. Its sad, because I don't think that there is anything after death. Which is why I'm trying to live my life to the full, as there will always be one chance, and one chance only.
What about dinosaurs? There's proof that they inhabited the earth before humans, bones have been found to verify this. But the bible does not mention this anywhere! To me its all a load of old rubbish. Its like saying the tooth fairy is real! But who am I to judge! People have every right to have their own beliefs and that's great :-)

I believe that everyone has the right to believe in what they want. I don't personally believe in reincarnation, or God, or Jesus. And I don't believe that the bible is proof of anything at all. Its sad, because I don't think that there is anything after death. Which is why I'm trying to live my life to the full, as there will always be one chance, and one chance only.
What about dinosaurs?? There's proof that they inhabited the earth before humans, bones have been found to verify this. But the bible does not mention this anywhere! To me its all a load of old rubbish. Its like saying the tooth fairy is real! But who am I to judge! People have every right to have their own beliefs and that's great :-)

There are a great manythings that are bnot mentioned in the Bible. That is because people write of things of which they have experience. As dinosaurs, largely, lived and became extinct before humanity appeared you should not wonder that they are not mentioned. Of course, it is eqaully correct to say that penguins are not mentioned in the Bible, but that does not mean that there weren't any. You might be surprised to learn that my personal journals do not document the sinking of the Titanic.

The Bible is not a chronicle of the complete history of the world, nor is it a scientific treatise, nor is it an astronomical textbook. In fact, the Bible is not a great many things, but that does not mean that is is nothing at all or that it is it is without any value. Millions upon millions of people whose lives have been informed and directed by its contents are convincing and irerefutable proof that it has great, even exceptional value.

That you apparently choose not to believe a word of it does not diminish what the Bible IS, while many Bible believers including myself will heartiily agree with you in regard to many categories of what it IS NOT. One should be ultra-cautious not to forcibly eject the infant with the polluted ablutionary liquid. Equally, one should not set the Bible up as a straw man so as to easily destroy it. Like any other book, the Bible needs to be seen for what it is. When this is done, there remains little about which to object.

The saddest thing of all is that you do not believe in the Tooth Fairy! If the Tooth Fairy isn't real who puts the money under my pillow?

M:)RGANITE - (toothless, but rich!)

Wow, how do I write this answer with out looking like a total idiot?


I was raised by my grandparent basically. They believed in not one God but all gods. They believed that your body was a vessel for your sole. If you completed your mission in life, you pasted on, to the next body and then the next continuing in time. If you did not well let say it was not a nice place to go. Their heaven was not what the bible said, their heaven was to go on an on and on. I think on this often, my grand father loved to talk about life and simple things. He had one goal in life other than taking care of his family it was to be nice to every one he met even it they seemed to be the worst person on earth. I have read the bible but do not completely understand it as do some of the fine people here do. I do believe in god, and when thing are at there lowest point I can go to church any church any religion and feel comforted. Do I believe in reincarnation YES, I have no proof to back me up, but there are times, I feel my grand parents. It may sound stupid but they loved to be outdoors in nature. I can sit in the wood or go for a walk and truly feel him. Is he there somewhere? I don’t know, but I think he is.

If you are not familiar with the poetry of William Wordsworth, I recommend you read him, as he also experienced the divine in nature.

LINES COMPOSED A FEW MILES ABOVE TINTERN ABBEY, ON REVISITING THE BANKS OF THE WYE DURING A TOUR. JULY 13, 1798

Wordsworth writes: "No poem of mine was composed under circumstances more pleasant for me to remember than this. I began it upon leaving Tintern, after crossing the Wye, and concluded it just as I was entering Bristol in the evening, after a ramble of four or five days, with my Sister. Not a line of it was altered, and not any part of it written down till I reached Bristol. It was published almost immediately after in the little volume of which so much has been said in these Notes."--(The Lyrical Ballads, as first published at Bristol by Cottle.)

FIVE years have past; five summers, with the length
Of five long winters! and again I hear
These waters, rolling from their mountain-springs
With a soft inland murmur.--Once again
Do I behold these steep and lofty cliffs,
That on a wild secluded scene impress
Thoughts of more deep seclusion; and connect
The landscape with the quiet of the sky.

The day is come when I again repose
Here, under this dark sycamore, and view
These plots of cottage-ground, these orchard-tufts,
Which at this season, with their unripe fruits,
Are clad in one green hue, and lose themselves
'Mid groves and copses. Once again I see
These hedge-rows, hardly hedge-rows, little lines
Of sportive wood run wild: these pastoral farms,
Green to the very door; and wreaths of smoke
Sent up, in silence, from among the trees!

With some uncertain notice, as might seem
Of vagrant dwellers in the houseless woods,
Or of some Hermit's cave, where by his fire
The Hermit sits alone.

These beauteous forms,
Through a long absence, have not been to me
As is a landscape to a blind man's eye:
But oft, in lonely rooms, and 'mid the din
Of towns and cities, I have owed to them
In hours of weariness, sensations sweet,
Felt in the blood, and felt along the heart;
And passing even into my purer mind,
With tranquil restoration:--feelings too
Of unremembered pleasure: such, perhaps,
As have no slight or trivial influence
On that best portion of a good man's life,
His little, nameless, unremembered, acts
Of kindness and of love. Nor less, I trust,
To them I may have owed another gift,
Of aspect more sublime; that blessed mood,
In which the burthen of the mystery,
In which the heavy and the weary weight
Of all this unintelligible world,
Is lightened:--that serene and blessed mood,
In which the affections gently lead us on,--
Until, the breath of this corporeal frame
And even the motion of our human blood
Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
In body, and become a living soul:

While with an eye made quiet by the power
Of harmony, and the deep power of joy,
We see into the life of things.
If this
Be but a vain belief, yet, oh! how oft--
In darkness and amid the many shapes
Of joyless daylight; when the fretful stir
Unprofitable, and the fever of the world,
Have hung upon the beatings of my heart--

How oft, in spirit, have I turned to thee,
O sylvan Wye! thou wanderer thro' the woods,
How often has my spirit turned to thee!

And now, with gleams of half-extinguished thought,
With many recognitions dim and faint,
And somewhat of a sad perplexity,
The picture of the mind revives again:
While here I stand, not only with the sense
Of present pleasure, but with pleasing thoughts
That in this moment there is life and food
For future years. And so I dare to hope,
Though changed, no doubt, from what I was when first
I came among these hills; when like a roe
I bounded o'er the mountains, by the sides
Of the deep rivers, and the lonely streams,
Wherever nature led: more like a man
Flying from something that he dreads, than one
Who sought the thing he loved.

For nature then
(The coarser pleasures of my boyish days,
And their glad animal movements all gone by)
To me was all in all.--I cannot paint
What then I was.

The sounding cataract
Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,
The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood,
Their colours and their forms, were then to me
An appetite; a feeling and a love,
That had no need of a remoter charm,
By thought supplied, nor any interest
Unborrowed from the eye.--

That time is past,
And all its aching joys are now no more,
And all its dizzy raptures. Not for this
Faint I, nor mourn nor murmur, other gifts
Have followed; for such loss, I would believe,
Abundant recompence.

For I have learned
To look on nature, not as in the hour
Of thoughtless youth; but hearing oftentimes
The still, sad music of humanity,
Nor harsh nor grating, though of ample power
To chasten and subdue. And I have felt
A presence that disturbs me with the joy
Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,
And the round ocean and the living air,
And the blue sky, and in the mind of man;
A motion and a spirit, that impels
All thinking things, all objects of all thought,
And rolls through all things.

Therefore am I still
A lover of the meadows and the woods,
And mountains; and of all that we behold
From this green earth; of all the mighty world
Of eye, and ear,--both what they half create,
And what perceive; well pleased to recognise
In nature and the language of the sense,
The anchor of my purest thoughts, the nurse,
The guide, the guardian of my heart, and soul
Of all my moral being.

Nor perchance,
If I were not thus taught, should I the more
Suffer my genial spirits to decay:
For thou art with me here upon the banks
Of this fair river; thou my dearest Friend,
My dear, dear Friend; and in thy voice I catch
The language of my former heart, and read
My former pleasures in the shooting lights
Of thy wild eyes.

Oh! yet a little while
May I behold in thee what I was once,
My dear, dear Sister! and this prayer I make,
Knowing that Nature never did betray
The heart that loved her; 'tis her privilege,
Through all the years of this our life, to lead
From joy to joy: for she can so inform
The mind that is within us, so impress
With quietness and beauty, and so feed
With lofty thoughts, that neither evil tongues,
Rash judgments, nor the sneers of selfish men,
Nor greetings where no kindness is, nor all
The dreary intercourse of daily life,
Shall e'er prevail against us, or disturb
Our cheerful faith, that all which we behold
Is full of blessings.

Therefore let the moon
Shine on thee in thy solitary walk;
And let the misty mountain-winds be free
To blow against thee: and, in after years,
When these wild ecstasies shall be matured
Into a sober pleasure; when thy mind
Shall be a mansion for all lovely forms,
Thy memory be as a dwelling-place
For all sweet sounds and harmonies; oh! then,
If solitude, or fear, or pain, or grief,
Should be thy portion, with what healing thoughts
Of tender joy wilt thou remember me,
And these my exhortations!

Nor, perchance--
If I should be where I no more can hear
Thy voice, nor catch from thy wild eyes these gleams
Of past existence--wilt thou then forget
That on the banks of this delightful stream
We stood together; and that I, so long
A worshipper of Nature, hither came
Unwearied in that service: rather say
With warmer love--oh! with far deeper zeal
Of holier love.

Nor wilt thou then forget,
That after many wanderings, many years
Of absence, these steep woods and lofty cliffs,
And this green pastoral landscape, were to me
More dear, both for themselves and for thy sake!



M:)

If the Tooth Fairy isn't real who puts the money under my pillow?

The Tooth Fairy is that lie your parents told you until you were old enough to figure things out for yourself.

:)

OK. If I'm readingeth this right, his holiness starts off by calling me a fool for asking the question. He then describes the flesh, the body and the glory as making up all things. (Hermetisists and alchemists use similar words.) But before that, indicating that all share the seed of God's body. That is a truly pagan idea that the 'flesh' of all thing, even the celestial bodies is of the matter of God. He than sadly chooses the words corruption, dishonor and weakness to equate to the natural body. A real wondrous, miracle of God's creation if you ask me. And it sounds like, he believes, that what is resurrected, is in no way physical or natural, but entirely spirit.

Paul was not speaking either to or about you. He was addressing Christians who taught false doctrine in his own time at Corinth.


M:)


The Tooth Fairy is that lie your parents told you until you were old enough to figure things out for yourself.

:)

I don't have parents but the cash still comes in gold pieces!

What now?

M:confused:ORGANITE

I don't have parents but the cash still comes in gold pieces!

What now?

M:confused:ORGANITEYou lie?

Another reason why I don't believe in reincarnation is because in the Bible, God tells us that we are not responsible for the previous generations' sins.
And also it IS an offense to the Lord- that He didn't get it right the 1st time - came from a Christian author, when asked about reincarnation.

Since so many have explained re-incarnation (or attempted to), I want to ask a question of those who believe in it. What evidence can you give in this 21st century that there is any truth whatsoever in the idea of re-incarnation? Don't quote your book, as I insist that the same standards by which you refuse to believe the Bible are applicable to your sacred writings. Can you prove that you have been re-incarnated? Do you know anyone who can? How do you know that it is not just a huge deception? You owe it to yourself to ask these hard questions, as you have so much to lose if you are wrong.

Since so many have explained re-incarnation (or attempted to), I want to ask a question of those who believe in it. What evidence can you give in this 21st century that there is any truth whatsoever in the idea of re-incarnation? Don't quote your book, as I insist that the same standards by which you refuse to believe the Bible are applicable to your sacred writings. Can you prove that you have been re-incarnated? Do you know anyone who can? How do you know that it is not just a huge deception? You owe it to yourself to ask these hard questions, as you have so much to lose if you are wrong.

It makes no sense to ask people to furnish 'proof' of theitr beliefs, because most faith positions are not available to evidence/proof, any more than you can 'prove' any item of belief in your own religion.

Perhaps you should lead the way in this exercise in futility by 'proving' that they have not been reincarnated. It is just as possible as what you demand of them.

I do not believe in reincarnation. Some folks do. I hope they are as happy in their belief as I am in mine. Neither my God, my religion or my Bible require me to go after those who do not believe as I do, but all enjoin me to live in peace with the rest of God's children and not to demand their conformity to my faith perspective as the price of my love and respect.

Jesus Christ died for all people whatever their faith.

M:)RGANITE


You lie?



You signal the end of civilisation! Unhand me, varlet!


I sense bad karmic vibes from you, Brrrrrrrr!!


M:(

It makes no sense to ask people to furnish 'proof' of theitr beliefs, because most faith positions are not available to evidence/proof, any more than you can 'prove' any item of belief in your own religion.

Perhaps you should lead the way in this exercise in futility by 'proving' that they have not been reincarnated. It is just as possible as what you demand of them.


I do not believe in reincarnation. Some folks do. I hope they are as happy in their belief as I am in mine. Neither my God, my religion or my Bible require me to go after those who do not believe as I do, but all enjoin me to live in peace with the rest of God's children and not to demand their conformity to my faith perspective as the price of my love and respect.

Jesus Christ died for all people whatever their faith.

M:)RGANITE





You signal the end of civilisation! Unhand me, varlet!


I sense bad karmic vibes from you, Brrrrrrrr!!


M:(

Now that's the kind of idea and attitude I can appreciate.

This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe

In all the early Christian texts and documents, including those considered by some to be heretical in nature, I have found nothing I have been able to construe as even hinting at reincarnation, where the soul or spirit of the deceased enters a newborn and lives again as a new and separate person. There is nothing in the Bible nor in the teachings of inspired Christian leaders after the NT periond that provides a foundation for belief in reincarnation, and it is strange that any Christian would believe in it as it is utterly foreign to every principle revealed in scripture that addresses the progress of the soul.

M:)

This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe
I do believe in reincarnation. I don't understand it fully, but I absolutley do believe we come back many, many times. X

I do beleive in reincarnation. I dont understand it fully, but i absolutley do beleive we come back many, many times. x

As an unbeliever in reincarnation I'd appreciate if you could explain why you are a believer. Is it more than hopeing for the survival of the personality, or the hope that death does not extinguish us? Do you feel able to share your reasons?

M:)

I have asked any and all for some proof of reincarnaton, yet none of you asks me if I can supply any proof of the truth of Jesus Christ. Why not? The truth of Jesus Christ has always been, is now, verifiable by observation to all who are interested.

I have asked any and all for some proof of reincarnaton, yet none of you asks me if I can supply any proof of the truth of Jesus Christ. Why not? The truth of Jesus Christ has always been, is now, verifiable by observation to all who are interested.Ok, I'm interested, what verifiable observations prove the existence of Jesus Christ?

I have asked any and all for some proof of reincarnaton, yet none of you asks me if I can supply any proof of the truth of Jesus Christ. Why not? The truth of Jesus Christ has always been, is now, verifiable by observation to all who are interested.



Observation? Of what?


M:)

Since the first church at Jeurusalem there has always been a church (sometimes very small in number) in which the following may be observed:

They speak in languages that they have never learned.
They are able to interpret those languages that they never learned.
Sometimes they know things that they have no normal means of knowing.
They lay hands on sick people, and those people are healed.
Occasionally blind eyes see, deaf ears hear, and cripples walk.

I personally observed (1962, San Benito, TX. Sun. AM service) a 12 yr old girl speak in a clear language that she had not learned. She attended the school for the deaf in Austin, Tx. & was home on holiday. She did not speak because she couldn't hear. Since she did not hear anything that was said she could not have been influenced by the sermon. I cannot say why she was not healed at the same time as she was filled with the Holy Spirit, but everyone there witnessed what she said.

Healings and miracles do not happen every day or in every place, but they do happen. A religion without the supernatural has no credentials.

I don't know what awaits after death so I'll just have to wait and see, No hurry though I kinda like it where I am!

My philosophy it to enjoy this present life by making the best of it, all the while preparing for eternity.


M:)

Since the first church at Jeurusalem there has always been a church (sometimes very small in number) in which the following may be observed:

They speak in languages that they have never learned.
They are able to interpet those languages that they never learned.
Sometimes they know things that they have no normal means of knowing.
They lay hands on sick people, and those people are healed.
Occasionally blind eyes see, deaf ears hear, and cripples walk.

I personally observed (1962, San Benito, TX. Sun. AM service) a 12 yr old girl speak in a clear language that she had not learned. She attended the school for the deaf in Austin, Tx. & was home on holiday. She did not speak because she couldn't hear. Since she did not hear anything that was said she could not have been influenced by the sermon. I cannot say why she was not healed at the same time as she was filled with the Holy Spirit, but everyone there witnessed what she said.

Healings and miracles do not happen every day or in every place, but they do happen. A religion without the supernatural has no credentials.

This really "proves" nothing. In a different setting, many would attune this to Satanism, witchcraft, black magic, and other things. Its only in a church setting or something of the like that people will say its an "act of God."

All that aside, there still is no proof of anything unnatural happening. How do you know that the girl never learned this? How do you know she was deaf? How do you know you weren't duped? Did they pass around the collection plate immediately following this "miracle"? Even if this DID really happen, what does it have to do with the exsistence of Jesus Christ?

Don't get me wrong. I believe in miracles and know that they do happen. I also believe that Jesus Christ exsisted. But, even though I have witnesses them myself, I cannot say that they, alone, prove the existence of Jesus Christ.

Since the first church at Jeurusalem there has always been a church (sometimes very small in number) in which the following may be observed:

They speak in languages that they have never learned.
They are able to interpet those languages that they never learned.
Sometimes they know things that they have no normal means of knowing.
They lay hands on sick people, and those people are healed.
Occasionally blind eyes see, deaf ears hear, and cripples walk.

I personally observed (1962, San Benito, TX. Sun. AM service) a 12 yr old girl speak in a clear language that she had not learned. She attended the school for the deaf in Austin, Tx. & was home on holiday. She did not speak because she couldn't hear. Since she did not hear anything that was said she could not have been influenced by the sermon. I cannot say why she was not healed at the same time as she was filled with the Holy Spirit, but everyone there witnessed what she said.

Healings and miracles do not happen every day or in every place, but they do happen. A religion without the supernatural has no credentials.

Similar miracles occur in non-Christian rleigions.

M:)

I think that they''re many mysteries that cannot be explained by man or science and reincarnation is one. Many believe in it, but there is no concrete evidence to either prove or disprove this BELIEF. So if one chooses to believe, it is no better or worse than any other belief going around and yes there are a lot of different things to hang your faith on. I don't know one way or the other.

Gee Tal -that sounds logical(couldn't just rate your answer)

But I keep getting bumped when I ask for the other posters reasons they believe in reincarnation.

I don't know. It's getting where it doesn't seem worth it to share thoughts or opinions.

I imagine sometimes its really hard to explain the why of what it is you believe either through fear of retribution or just because you don't really know. Its really got to be hard when there is no concret evidence to show anybody. You know how much we as himans really know... hardly nothing.

Well being a catholic, i truly don't believe in the possibility of reincarnation. I think it's a myth made up by other religions spread across the world, simply as a way of taking the fear away from death, by telling people that there is nothing to worry about, since you will be able to live another life. In other ways the bible does mention in a small passage that reincarnation is practically nothing but a hoax, but because of recent and further studies into the catholic church and the bible, it has been found that the bible may not, unfortunately, be all true.

As much as I dislike disagreeing with anyone, I do believe that describing belief in reincarnation as a "a myth made up by other religions spread across the world, simply as a way of taking the fear away from death, by telling people that there is nothing to worry about, since you will be able to live another life," is more than a little simplistic.

Religions do not arrive at their doctrines by seeking to assuage the fear people have, but as a way of explaining life, the universe, and everything else. There maybe times when doctrines are not formulated as another religion would or could formulate them, but unless they can be shown to be untrue they ought not to be summarily dismissed. It is one thing to disagree with a belief simply because one holds an irreconcileable view, but it is quite naother to write off the faith of others as inferior or wrong.

It could be difficult to prove that any religion is entirely free from a mythic compnent, especially in cases where there is ample historical evidence to show that what is now believed was not believed when the faith was at an earlier stage of its development.

How hard is it for us to recognise the value that a principle of religion that is unique to one denomination or faith, has as much value for its adherents as those principles and dogmas of our own faith and practice that others sometimes find odd or questionable?



M:)RGANITE

In reply to drjizzle, and Morganite;

1. I was acquainted with the family, and so know about the circumstances that I relate.
2. I am well aware that Satan knows a lot of languages, but I also know that there is one thing he will never do under any circumstances. Satan will never give honor or credence to the name of Jesus Christ.

My question for proof of reincarnation stands.

I also know that there is one thing he will never do under any circumstances. Satan will never give honor or credence to the name of Jesus Christ.
While I realise this is likely going to be answered with bible quotes, Galvestan, can you keep some of the answer more practical too? I am not a believer of the bible so the quotes won't help much and yet I am respectfully curious about how you think you know this as a fact about Satan?

I have asked any and all for some proof of reincarnaton, yet none of you asks me if I can supply any proof of the truth of Jesus Christ. Why not? The truth of Jesus Christ has always been, is now, verifiable by observation to all who are interested.
What is all this obsession with proof? We all believe more than we know, and we know more than we can prove. If whatever you mean by "the truth of Jesus Christ" is constrained enough to be "verifiable by observation", I doubt that it has much relevance to spiritual life and growth. To observe is, by definition, to look outside. But spiritual life occurs within; to quote Jesus himself, "For the Kingdom of God does not come by looking for it; nor can you say 'Look, here it is!', or 'There!' For behold, the Kingdom of God is within you".

You come across to me as a person who thinks that being good depends on being right. Am I right? That would explain your demand for proofs from others and your eagerness to provide yours to them.


This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe
I am fascinated that this thread has generated almost two hundred posts, and shows no sign of dying out. That must mean that it hit some kind of nerve in lots of people. What I notice is that what seems to motivate a lot of the opposition to a belief in reincarnation is a conviction that we only get one chance to get it right, and to embrace any belief that affords the possibility of more than one chance, is to take the easy or cowardly way out, and to spurn the "Lamb of God" whose sacrifice gives us our one and only chance. From my not-very-extensive reading of the Hindu scriptures, at least, I don't think they represent it as easy, or as a way to get out of anything. From that perspective, the whole idea of a sacrificial death by someone else as a means to one's own personal salvation is an easy way out. The hard way is keep at it until you finally get it right.

Personally, I don't find speculation about the particulars of an afterlife very interesting. It's about all I can do to nurture a slender hope that my personality and identity will transcend my death in any form whatsoever.

The Tooth Fairy is that lie your parents told you until you were old enough to figure things out for yourself.

:)

What is there to figure out? You put your tooth under your pillow. Next morning it's gone and you get $100.00 in its place. Who but the Tooth Fairy...


M:)


Reincarnation is an offense to the Lord. It's like saying He didn't get it right the first time. Are you a Hindu or Budist. There is only one God & there is only one true religion. Through the Son one gets to the Father. I felt my mother's presence too...in a willow tree, but that's bc she does live up there & she loved the weeping willow tree. Our loved ones do witness our lives..they are witnesses...it's in the Bible

Can you give the Bible reference?

But, how can a belif in reincarnation be an offense to anyone? It might be wrong, but iof so, then it is misguided and not a dleiberate slap in the face for God.

Since when is God offended by someone believing something that just ain't so? If he was, he would be offended with everyone including Christians because they have such contrary and odd ideas about him that if he was the kind to take offence he would be permanently offended.

Nikos Kozantsakis got it about right when he wrote:


"God is a potter: He works with mud."
("Christ Recrucified")




M:)RGANITE




.

Can you give the Bible reference?

But, how can a belif in reincarnation be an offense to anyone? It might be wrong, but iof so, then it is misguided and not a dleiberate slap in the face for God.

Since when is God offended by someone believing something that just ain't so? If he was, he would be offended with everyone including Christians because they have such contrary and odd ideas about him that if he was the kind to take offence he would be permanently offended.

Nikos Kozantsakis got it about right when he wrote:


"God is a potter: He works with mud."
("Christ Recrucified")




M:)RGANITE




.

Well Morganite, The statement about reincarnation being an offense to the Lord came from a Christian book that I read, so it is a Christian opinion that stuck with me. Funny you ask, as that book is one of 2 that I cannot locate in my storage closets or attic since I moved! I know it's here but I might search for it thoroughly when we get the Christmas stuff out. You know how that is- it could take days!
Anyway, the concept stuck with me because it made sense. God IS perfect and so is His plan for mankind and the world. By saying that His creations must be a "do over" then WE are insulting Him in so many words that He is NOT perfect.
I, as a Christian, reject that statement.
As for different ideas about God or Jesus within the Christian faith- I just like to say that I am a non-denominational (maybe a pentecostal at times) but clearly keep my faith simple... belief in Jesus Christ.(Christian)
I don't get into all the different denominations, although sometimes the are worth or require another look. They(denominations) are just the name of the Church anyway(I"M told) and that I can go to any church(almost) as long as Christ is the creed.
So, it still seems logical what the author was saying about God. I think he was speaking about God and not "for God" and that WAS an opinion. I don't think he said "the Lord spoke to him" about this or pointed to any scripture.

In some of the books taken out of the Bible they spoke of reincarnation. I wonder why they left those books out of the Bible when they revised it.

The bible is a book written by man. There fore it is not perfect.

The bible is a book written by man. There fore it is not perfect.

Yes, it has been revised by man and not just once.

The Bible is the truth but you are right it has been rewritten to benefit man and his politics through the ages. I believe it is based on the truth. Have you ever read much about Elijah and Elisha in Kings!! Great story.

Why is there talk about the bible when the OP was asking what we thought about reincarnation?

*Looks and sees the thread up to 20 pages.* Ah. :)

Well, sure, I believe in it but I don't think its for everyone. In this life, we make our own way to what we were meant to do. That's how I see it.

Anyway, the concept stuck with me b/c it made sense. God IS perfect and so is His plan for mankind and the world. By saying that His creations must be a "do over" then WE are insulting Him in so many words that He is NOT perfect. I, as a Christian, reject that statement.

So therefore all people are perfect, especially Christians! Hmmm, that explains a lot of things...

And if people are perfect, but slow to learn, then why is it not feasible that God himself invented reincarnation as a means of teaching those slow-to-learn-but-perfect creatures? It is rather ingenious if you think about it!

The Bible was "penned" by man but God-breathed AND had many witnesses. Can't claim that about the "holy books" of any of the other "religions" if you read the author's claims.

Have you ever had to speak on the spot and knew the Holy Spirit gave you the words at the most important time?

I thank God I do not doubt my faith. The Bible was inspired by God. AMEN.



PPS- Val- You started with a statement of prejudice. That is entirely your own(about Christians)
No one said MAN was perfect. Only God and Jesus. Man was blameless until Adam sinned. This is the reason man NEEDS God. B/c he is not perfect.

What is there to figure out? You put your tooth under your pillow. Next morning it's gone and you get $100.00 in its place. Who but the Tooth Fairy ............
M:)



Hey man, can you send your toothfairy over to my house -- I put a whole set of dentures under my pillow! :rolleyes:

The Bible was "penned" by man but God-breathed AND had many witnesses. Can't claim that about the "holy books" of any of the other "religions" if you read the author's claims.

Have you ever had to speak on the spot and knew the Holy Spirit gave you the words at the most important time?

I thank God I do not doubt my faith. The Bible was inspired by God. AMEN.


Its not very 'Christian' of you to negatively point out these other religions and faiths.

That is my point since many believe for whatever reason but the bottom line is it is only in the eye of the beholder and there is no proof one way or another that reincarnation even exists or that the reason given here throughout this thread is its conflict with the bible.

Why is there talk about the bible when the OP was asking what we thought about reincarnation

There are some here that have used the bible to refute reincarnation as a belief, and I refute the bible as an imperfect product of mans attempt to explain his beliefs. No side has evidence for or against just conjecture and BELIEF!!

I don't care if someone devoutly reads The Bible, Koran, Torah, etc. and slams it in my face when they want to prove something, because deep inside MYSELF I know what is MY belief, MY opinion, MY way. Not saying that I haven't had a good influence; being surrounded by different religions as a kid I learned to accept diversity, and not persecute it because it didn't fit 'me'.

By saying that His creations must be a "do over" then WE are insulting Him in so many words that He is NOT perfect.

Though I can not speak authoritatively for reincarnation, as this is not a part of my belief system, the doctrine of rebirth states that we are in fact already perfect. It is only through our ignorance of our true nature that we continue to perpetuate in limited existences characterized by suffering. Whereas Christianity is said to regard "knowledge" as the original sin, Buddhism could be said to believe that it is "ignorance" that is the original sin.
And yet, at the same time, looking only to be whisked of into the Heavens, do you not greatly disregard the Earth, also one of God's greatest creations. Buddhism also teaches that Heaven and hell are not separate, only reverse sides of the same valuable coin. Samsara or Nirvana, it's all dependent on your view.

Though I can not speak authoritatively for reincarnation, as this is not a part of my belief system, the doctrine of rebirth states that we are in fact already perfect. It is only through our ignorance of our true nature that we continue to perpetuate in limited existences characterized by suffering. Whereas Christianity is said to regard "knowledge" as the original sin, Buddhism could be said to believe that it is "ignorance" that is the original sin.
And yet, at the same time, looking only to be whisked of into the Heavens, do you not greatly disregard the Earth, also one of God's greatest creations. Buddhism also teaches that Heaven and hell are not seperate, only reverse sides of the same valuable coin. Samsara or Nirvana, it's all dependent on your view.
Thank you for that clarification, Thomas. More and more, I think I am becoming a buddhist.

The Bible was "penned" by man but God-breathed AND had many witnesses. Can't claim that about the "holy books" of any of the other "religions" if you read the author's claims.

Have you ever had to speak on the spot and knew the Holy Spirit gave you the words at the most important time?

I thank God I do not doubt my faith. The Bible was inspired by God. AMEN.



PPS- Val- You started off with a statement of prejudice. That is entirely your own(about Christians)
No one said MAN was perfect. Only God and Jesus. Man was blameless until Adam sinned. This is the reason man NEEDS God. B/c he is not perfect.

You have no proof this is true, that just what you believe, which is cool

Well thanks Tal, at least it's cool!

I thought the new ignorance was radical Islam! Seems others like to use the word ignorance for EFFECT. It shines the light on them themselves. I don't know what college y'all went to, but if you did go, you wouldn't hang your hat on such a negative word. Oh I forgot -you got a degree in what?
I don't know whether you are a believer or not Sentra- so by playing safe & generic faithwise, does that give you the go ahead to say I speak negatively of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, any other false religions or cults I believe are out there? Yes, I can defend Christianity. But I too have to live in a world with diversity. I choose to interact (mostly in person) with all different faiths & cultures, and base that interaction on the persons themselves and how they treat me- and expect vice-versa, and what is the purpose or objective for that interaction? That is what is important. It bears very little on my own private backround or theirs(as far as what we believe our faith to be) Does that make any sense?

... any other false religions or cults I believe are out there?...I think that's what Sentra may be alluding to - the fact that you believe that all other religion but yours is a false religion. Is it possible that the religion you practice is a false religion? :)

PPS- Val- You started off with a statement of prejudice. That is entirely your own(about Christians)
No one said MAN was perfect. Only God and Jesus. Man was blameless until Adam sinned. This is the reason man NEEDS God. B/c he is not perfect.
That was a joke about the perfect Christians, Pumpkin, one that had something of a point but its okay if it was missed or overlooked. I don't have that prejudice, fortunately. And I think we would all agree that people need enlightening, whether that be by a God or a faith or even a few rounds of reincarnation. Its so very much a choice for each of us to embrace that which we see fitting. And can be done without the putting down of any others too.

PPS- Pumpkin: You can't claim your faith is the one true faith and all others are false or cults without having spoken "negatively". That is what Sentra is speaking of, I do believe. Negative = false. What you can do instead to avoid the negative is claim your faith as true according to you... and leave it at that. Then there is no negative!

Its like this... I hold my belief dear but I neither expect any of you to convert to it nor do I wish for, anticipate or make claims about any punishment for you if you don't. That Christianity does and is so vigorously defended by some here along this line of "convert or be punished" is what is getting everyone's dander up. You can hardly be surprised when some respond with... "who me? how dare you!"... since you wouldn't like that whole "convert or be punished" thing handed out to you by some other faith, would you? In fact, no one is going to like that or ever be converted like that either. It used to be that religions could scare people into believing in them but those days are long gone. People are much more sophisticated now due to how much access to information they have.

People are much more sophisticated now due to how much access to information they have.
To add that not only is the information there but the ways of ancient man leading the masses is long gone as more people just think for themselves as men not sheep.(and women too! )

To add that not only is the information there but the ways of ancient man leading the masses is long gone as more people just think for themselves as men not sheep.(and women too!!)
You got that right Tal. Lots less "corn-pone opinions" (http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html) these days and I bet ol' Twain himself would be happy about that!! :rolleyes:

PS - that article is worth reading to the end, it has a killer punchline, LOL.

Well thanks Tal, at least it's cool!

I thought the new ignorance was radical Islam! Seems others like to use the word ignorance for EFFECT. It shines the light on them themselves. I don't know what college y'all went to, but if you did go, you wouldn't hang your hat on such a negative word. Oh I forgot -you got a degree in what?
I don't know whether you are a believer or not Sentra- so by playing safe & generic faithwise, does that give you the go ahead to say I speak negatively of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, any other false religions or cults I believe are out there? Yes, I can defend Christianity. But I too have to live in a world with diversity. I choose to interact (mostly in person) with all different faiths & cultures, and base that interaction on the persons themselves and how they treat me- and expect vice-versa, and what is the purpose or objective for that interaction? That is what is important. It bears very little on my own private backround or theirs(as far as what we believe our faith to be) Does that make any sense?


Its my opinion, take it or leave it. And yes, I AM a believer. In what? Goodness. Faith. TOLERANCE. Honor. Discipline. Forgiveness. Many things. I DON'T believe in 'throwing stones', pointing out others because they are 'different' in what they believe, stuffing what I believe down someone else's throat, trying to drag someone into my own belief system, etc. I could go on and on. Playing it safe and generic, and by that you think I light incense when I am around a buddhist or bury apples when I pass a few wiccans in prayer.

'Playing it safe and generic' would only apply to someone who tosses a book of their faith around and uses it to their advantage when topics exactly like this one show up, in fear of using the brain they were given. To me? THAT doesn't make sense, but I understand why.

To add that not only is the information there but the ways of ancient man leading the masses is long gone as more people just think for themselves as men not sheep.(and women too!!)

You could not be further off the mark in this.

In evidence you only have to look at the masses of the conservative right who hang on every word Bush says and follow him even unto destruction.

Humanity will always look to leaders, despite information that would suggest that they should abandon certain ones, but that is the nature of mnakind and the appeal of leaders and leadership.


For another example, take the Jonesboro scenario... Adfolphus Hitler... Georgius Bush... Benito Mussonlini... Benjamino Hinn... Jacobus Bakker... did I mention Georgius Bush?



M:)


Well thanks Tal, at least it's cool!

I thought the new ignorance was radical Islam! Seems others like to use the word ignorance for EFFECT. It shines the light on them themselves. I don't know what college y'all went to, but if you did go, you wouldn't hang your hat on such a negative word. Oh I forgot -you got a degree in what?
I don't know whether you are a believer or not Sentra- so by playing safe & generic faithwise, does that give you the go ahead to say I speak negatively of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, any other false religions or cults I believe are out there? Yes, I can defend Christianity. But I too have to live in a world with diversity. I choose to interact (mostly in person) with all different faiths & cultures, and base that interaction on the persons themselves and how they treat me- and expect vice-versa, and what is the purpose or objective for that interaction? That is what is important. It bears very little on my own private backround or theirs(as far as what we believe our faith to be) Does that make any sense?

The 'new ignorance' is militant anything, and that includes right wing neo-conservatives whose knee hjerk reactions to everything Ayatollah Bush says are responsible for injecting more fear into the political processes of the world in the name of religion. A Saddam Hussein and a George Bush each use the same methods of 'crowd' control. The only differenc being that one does not pretend to be a religious man and th eother claims to be guided by the voice of God.


The only degree I see is a degree of heat.


M:)RGANITE




.

Anyone who gives their opinion on something leaves whatever is said open for analyzation, criticism, etc. Just doing my part;) Hehe.

You could not be further off the mark in this.

In evidence you only have to look at the masses of the conservative right who hang on every word Bush says and follow him even unto destruction.

Humanity will always look to leaders, despite information that would suggest that they should abandon certain ones, but that is the nature of mnakind and the appeal of leaders and leadership.


For another example, take the Jonesboro scenario... Adfolphus Hitler... Georgius Bush... Benito Mussonlini... Benjamino Hinn... Jacobus Bakker... did I mention Georgius Bush?


Well there are still a lot of sheep and so there will always be a leader for them. The wheels turn slowly, but they still are turning.

Its like this... I hold my belief dear but I neither expect any of you to convert to it nor do I wish for, anticipate or make claims about any punishment for you if you don't. That Christianity does and is so vigorously defended by some here along this line of "convert or be punished" is what is getting everyone's dander up. You can hardly be surprised when some respond with .... "who me? how dare you!".... since you wouldn't like that whole "convert or be punished" thing handed out to you by some other faith, would you?
Isn't it interesting that aggressive proponents of Christianity can so easily disregard one of the central teachings of its founder--the golden rule? I have even heard them claim that they are following it when they browbeat others, claiming that if they were steeped in ignorance, they would want to be forcibly enlightened. That kind of foolish logic is why I prefer the inverse formulation of the golden rule: "Don't do to others what you wouldn't want done to you".

This must be the longest thread ever

This must be the longest thread ever

Visit the lounge if you want to see longest.

This stirred up so much anger in another website that I am on, answerway.com

What do you think about reincarnation. Do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists and was taught in the earlier christian churches?

Thank you in advance!

Joe
I believe that all living creatures will live different lives and die different deaths, The reason for this I believe is we would not understand the suffering who/what went through before they died or the joys etc. I also believe that we remember all the knowledge of our past lives when we finally reach heaven, which heaven then would be the perfect place with the who and what's truly understanding exactly what the who and what's have gone through by having similar lives.S

! We all must die once, Is the biblical quotation most frequently used to try and undermine the re-incarnation belief but once this quotation is interpreted in a spiritual way rather than a material way it becomes self explanatory because the truth is, since the crucifixion or more importantly since the resurrection, whosoever accepts Christ as Saviour is released from the pangs of death, liberated, no longer the slave of their past sins or (karma) no longer having to return to this earth to live and die once more. Should we not accept Christ as our Saviour (remember this is a free choice) then we remain entrapped in the ever ending vicious circle of re-incarnation through the signs of the Zodiac, or as Paul said ! You remain slaves of the ruling spirits of the universe as we have been for century after century.

Should we not accept Christ as our Saviour (remember this is a free choice) then we remain entrapped in the ever ending vicious circle of re-incarnation through the signs of the Zodiac, or as Paul said ! You remain slaves of the ruling spirits of the universe as we have been for century after century.Do you know anyone that has not accepted Christ and is currently caught in this vicious reincarnation circle?

Unwaitheto seems to accept some things from the Bible, but I call your attention to the following:

Heb 9:27
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
(KJV)

According to this, you only have one chance to get it right.


You have no proof this is true, that just what you believe, which is cool
This statement only proves that you have made no serious effort to study the Bible. It is filled with prophecies that have been fulfilled to the letter, especially those concerning Messiah. The probability that all of the details of His birth, life, ministry, arrest, and crucifixion could happen by chance are so remote as to be an utter impossibility. Also, the very unity of the book itself, having been written by so many different people over such a lengthyt period is further proof of its authenticity.

When I meet my maker I'll put in a good word for you and Unwaitheto, in case you come back as bugs. Is that cool enough for Ya!!

Unwaitheto seems to accept some things from the Bible, but I call your attention to the following:

Heb 9:27
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
The quote above does not say once only to die Supporting your theory, nor does it say we must die at least once supporting reincarnation. The 2 main reasons for the said verse is frstly Jesus said "
(KJV)[B]Everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die—ever (John3 v 18)
Therfore thay had to be told that they had to die once even after the resurrection of Jesus.
2ndly I f you did believe in Jesus as the Son of God then you only need to esperiance the pangs of death only the once. if not then you are reincarnated to you eathly treasure and not the heavenly one.

According to this, you only have one chance to get it right. This is exactly what the establichment want you to believe, that is wwhatgives them the power over their flock


I believe that all living creatures will live different lives and die different deaths, The reason for this i believe is we would not understand the suffering who/what went through before they died or the joys etc. I also believe that we remember all the knowledge of our past lives when we finally reach heaven, which heaven then would be the perfect place with the who and whats truly understanding exactly what the who and whats have gone through by having simalar lives.S
Support for reincarnation
1Sam ch2 v 6 The LORD brings death and gives life; (L)
He sends [some] to Sheol, and He raises [others] up. (M)

7 The LORD brings poverty and gives wealth; (N)
He humbles and He exalts. (O)

8 He raises the poor from the dust (P)
And lifts the needy from the garbage pile. (Q)
He seats them with noblemen (R)
And gives them a throne of honor. [a]
For the foundations of the earth are the LORD's; (S)
He has set the world on them. (

The bible is a book written by man. There fore it is not perfect.

The Bible is actually a whole library of books. However, you are correct when you say it is not perfect, but remember that it does not claim to be perfect. Biblical inerrantists are in the same league as flat-earthers.

M:)


The Bible is the truth but you are right it has been rewritten to benefit man and his politics thru the ages. I believe it is based on the truth. Have you ever read much about Elijah and Elisha in Kings!!? Great story.

Some of the Bible is the truth, but the erroneous parts are not the truth.

M:)



Only God and Jesus. (were perfect).

And my wife's first husband!

M:)

JK

See Unwaitheto's post:
I did not comment on the passage from Heb. 9:27 as appears in the post, I only referenced it.
It is a real stretch to assign reincarnation ideas to the passages quoted from 1 Sam 2:6.
Look at the original question again. Jesushelper asks 3 things. One, do you believe in reincarnation? Two, do you believe in the possibilities that reincarnation exists? Three, was it taught in the earlier Christian churches?
Questions one and two may be answered any way you please, because it calls for opinion, and we all possess that!
Question three is a different matter. Some of you out there object to scripture quotations, but consider this; the early church believed what the Apostles taught. In order to determine what they taught, we have only one source, and that is the Bible. The New Testament was written mostly by the original Apostles, and entirely by those of that first generation of believers. So, to answer the third question, you are forced to go to the Bible whether you want to or not.

galveston disagrees: Why not point it out? If its wrong, its wrong!

Who is to say it is, or isn't? We all have our opinions, and they reside in places other than this thread.

Should we not accept Christ as our Saviour then we remain entrapped in the ever ending vicious circle of re-incarnation through the signs of the Zodiac, or as Paul said ! You remain slaves of the ruling spirits of the universe as we have been for century after century.

You perspective from a Christian and biblical point of view is a travesty of Christian teaching that owes more to paganism than to Christian belief and teachings. While you are free to disagree with Christian and biblical teaching on any point, you must not mangle what is taught and believed into something that is not taugtht, was never taught, and has never been believed b y Christians who base their beliefs on the Bible.

M:)RGANITE

.

Some of the Bible is the truth, but the erroneous parts are not the truth.

M:)



And how does one determine what of the Bible is erroneous and what is not? Listen to the Church? The very people who have stained the pages of the Bible?


You perspective from a Christian and biblical point of view is a travesty of Christian teaching that owes more to paganism than to Christian belief and teachings. While you are free to disagree with Christian and biblical teaching on any point, you must not mangle what is taught and believed into something that is not taugtht, was never taught, and has never been believed b y Christians who base their beliefs on the Bible.

MRGANITE


This is quite untrue and is a belief that is taught and believed by many... and is completely based on the Bible. What you call travesty is nothing but a different interpritation of your version.

How is this belief NOT based on the Bible?

I have read that certain early Christians did believe in reincarnation, most notably in "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche. Also in the book is the most compelling documented evidence of possible rebirth or reincarnation -- a well known story about an Englishman named Arthur Flowerdew.








There have been several attempts to show that early Christians believed in reincarnation, and one has even suggested that reincarnation is supported by some writings found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The truth is that reincarnation has not been taught nor believed by Christians who have adhered to the central tenets of Christianity, and the efforts some have made to make it appear as if they did are flawed because they are based on an imperfect understanding of the Christian “journey of the soul” and continuous cycles of rebirth that are the proper meaning of reincarnation.

Some Christian language could lead the unwary astray, but when it is explained as it is and always has been understood by Christians then the supposed similarities between reincarnation and Christian teachings vanish like morning mists at noon.

That some thought John the Baptists to be Elijah returned from the dead should not be taken to signify that Christians believed in reincarnation, nor that Jews (who were the ones making the speculative determination as to who John the Baptist might be) believed in reincarnation. While it might be true that individual Christians and Jews might have had personal belief in rebirth in another body as another identity, that has never been part of the normative teaching of either faith.

The notable case of Arthur Flowerdew is a prime example of one who, we may suppose, was a Christian who ‘remembered’ a former life. This has supplied ammunition to some who wish to make a connection between Christianity and reincarnation, but it is an unreliable test, and is no more a reliable indice of what Christianity has believed than taking the case of a Christian who murders his wife and children and on the strength of his acts calling murder a principle of Christianity.

Other biblical passages have been quoted in support of a belief in reincarnation, but when their context is known, the erroneously perceived ‘connection’ goes away.

The Bible does hint many times at pre-existence, but not at mortal existence, rather a pre-mortal existence from which the spirit or soul comes to earth for a period and at death leaves the body to return to God and to await the resurrection, at which time the dead body is revivified by receiving again its spirit but in a changed and permanent condition. Thus, biblical understanding is of a time line continuum that is not circular, and in which the personality of the individual is neither subsumed nor destroyed, and immortal spirits are nor recycled through several incarnation, but are on an eternal journey that passes through mortality once on its way to becoming a resurrected immortal.

Jesus’ statement that to see and enter the kingdom of God a person must be born again has no connection with reincarnation whatever the semantics sound like. Balingenesis in this context is to change the self and become what Paul called ‘ a new creature.’ This is not achieved through rebirths but by improving the self and conforming one’s life to the pattern and standard determined by God and Jesus, and by emulating them through obedience to their teachings and commandments.

Some believe that some Gnostics, Valentinians, Ophites and Ebionites, etc. included reimbodiment among their teachings. Yet others believe that the Church Fathers, including Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen taught reincarnation or one or another aspect of reimbodiment. One can only accept that by misunderstanding what they wrote and what they believed. Their works are available to disabuse the careful reader of any such idea.

Others have misunderstood what Synesius wrote in a prayer: "Father, grant that my soul may merge into the light, and be no more thrust back into the illusion of earth." His reference, as attested by his other works along similar lines, is to self-improvement towards what Aquinas called the “Imitation of Christ.” It has no connection with reincarnation.

Origen's teaching of the pre-existence (not reincarnation) of man’s immortal spirit has persisted although some of its original parameters have been changed, notably the starting point of its existence, and modern Christianity is unable to agree when the life of the spirit of man begins.

Henry More’s essay The Immortality of the Soul has been charged with teaching reincarnation, when it does no such thing.

I would sing the Prae-existency
Of humane souls, and live once o'er again
By recollection and quick memory
All that is past since first we all began.
But all too shallow be my wits to scan
So deep a point and mind too dull to clear
So dark a matter,


Tell what we mortalls are, tell what of old we were.
A spark or ray of the Divinity
Clouded in earthly fogs, yclad in clay,
A precious drop sunk from Aeternitie,
Spilt on the ground, or rather slunk away.

More writes: "there was never any philosopher that held the soul spiritual and immortal but he [also] held also that it did pre-exist."

An interesting subject.

MRGANITE

In some of the books taken out of the Bible they spoke of reincarnation. I wonder why they left those books out of the Bible when they revised it.

On what grounds do you make this statement? I'd appreciate knowing your sources for this.

M:)

And how does one determine what of the Bible is erroneous and what is not? Listen to the Church?? The very people who have stained the pages of the Bible?



This is quite untrue and is a belief that is taught and believed by many... and is completely based on the Bible. What you call travesty is nothing but a different interpritation of your version.

How is this belief NOT based on the Bible?
I would just like to mention that Christmas is derived from paganism so is Easter and Sunday is self explanatory from the pagan sun worship. There are many other so called Christian celebrations can be attributed to the Romans and paganism.
That is why it is important for us to do as Jesus said: Seek and you shall find and Knock and it will be opened to you. The Church is not responsible for our souls, we are.

If you look at it from the quantum physics side: reincarnation IS possible. There are many scientific books and many people have written their experience of it.

If you think of consciousness/soul/beings all there is and all infinite, when u die and reincarnate all you are doing is following a cycle. The cycle of life, of beingness. I don't know or have a way of knowing if you will come back as u are now, but it is your decision to come back if so you wish. It is all about what the higher being decides to do, since you are a part of it and it is a part of you.

all life is about experience and experience is all there is. If you put it in a way that we are part of God; the part of God that is NOT God so God can be God. In other words, if you see things as one thing stretched into 2 sides: God at the top, humans at the bottom. Is still the same thing, just 2 side of it (like a coin).

So reincarnation, for ME, is not u dying and coming back as the same spirit in the same knowledge and identity you have now. It is to return to the infinite Essence and come back as another expression of this.

We are all One.

~Peace & Namaste~

It makes sense to me, given what i read and know about reincarnation

In reference to the Bible, I think that religion and religious people put way too much attention about what the Bible says, not what Jesus said.

If you go back to the essential message, Jesus taught Love.
He showed how he could be Love above all the negativity that was throw against him.
He talked about how the "Kingdom of Heaven is Within."
He said "Be still and know that I'm there"

I think that the teachings have been lost in the discussion of whether is truth or not. I think that in order to something to be true there must be evidence supporting the statement. Most of the things in the bible are very possible not truth (in my opinion) because you can't prove them, but you can always PROVE Jesus' statements by applying them into your life.

Meditate, quiet your mind, be still, and you will find God. God is in every, and you as a son of God, you are God.
Practice Love, practice random acts of kindness, just for the pure pleasure of doing something Lovefull.

Love is not a small line in the emotions spectrum, Love is ALL of the spectrum, the positive and the negative. You cannot know one side without knowing the other. So don't limit your Love to those who "deserve" it, because the more you give, the more you are.

*** On the reincarnation books of the bible: didn't Jesus come back from the dead, wouldn't that be considered reincarnation?
Also, the Judas book has come to light in recent time, although it has been quieted by "they," but that book is filled with wisdom beyond most of what the typical King James bible has to offer. I recommend you search for information on that.

In reference to the Bible, I think that religion and religious people put way too much attention about what the Bible says, not what Jesus said.

If you go back to the essential message, Jesus taught Love.
He showed how he could be Love above all the negativity that was throw against him.
He talked about how the "Kingdom of Heaven is Within."
He said "Be still and know that I'm there"

I think that the teachings have been lost in the discussion of whether is truth or not. I think that in order to something to be true there must be evidence supporting the statement. Most of the things in the bible are very possible not truth (in my opinion) because you can't prove them, but you can always PROVE Jesus' statements by applying them into your life.

Meditate, quiet your mind, be still, and you will find God. God is in every, and you as a son of God, you are God.
Practice Love, practice random acts of kindness, just for the pure pleasure of doing something Lovefull.

Love is not a small line in the emotions spectrum, Love is ALL of the spectrum, the positive and the negative. You cannot know one side without knowing the other. So don't limit your Love to those who "deserve" it, because the more you give, the more you are.

*** On the reincarnation books of the bible: didn't Jesus come back from the dead, wouldn't that be considered reincarnation?
Also, the Judas book has come to light in recent time, although it has been quieted by "they," but that book is filled with wisdom beyond most of what the typical King James bible has to offer. I recommend you search for information on that.

Your last paragraph is really wild! How did you confuse reincarnation with resurrection? Who supposedly wrote the gospel of Judas? He certainly did not. He committed suicide about the same time Jesus was crucified. Baby birds swallow anything dropped into their mouths. Let's be a little smarter than birds.

[quote=8Powell8]
8Powell9

In reference to the Bible, I think that religion and religious people put way too much attention about what the Bible says, not what Jesus said.

Much of what Jesus said is in the Bible, so you cannot pay attention to one without paying attention to the other.

If you go back to the essential message, Jesus taught Love.

Jesus taught love, but also much more. In addition to teaching people to love their neighbours, Jesus taught mankind what it must do to obtain eternal life. While love was part of that, it was not all of it.

He showed how he could be Love above all the negativity that was throw against him.
He talked about how the "Kingdom of Heaven is Within."

Jesus said the kingdom of heaven was at hand – meaning that he was and represented the kingdom. He also said hi kingdom was ‘not of this world.’

He said "Be still and know that I'm there"

It is elohiym who said “Be still, and know that I am God.”

I think that the teachings have been lost in the discussion of whether is truth or not. I think that in order to something to be true there must be evidence supporting the statement. Most of the things in the bible are very possible not truth (in my opinion) because you can't prove them, but you can always PROVE Jesus' statements by applying them into your life.

Almost every other spiritual principle in the Bible can be subjected to the same test.

Meditate, quiet your mind, be still, and you will find God. God is in every, and you as a son of God, you are God.

Job asked: Canst thou by searching find out God? Jesus gave out some advice on ‘finding’ God:

yhvh said: If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.


Practice Love, practice random acts of kindness, just for the pure pleasure of doing something Lovefull.

Love alone, while it will bless the giver as well as the recipient, does not satisfy the requirements that Jesus taught must be obeyed.


Love is not a small line in the emotions spectrum, Love is ALL of the spectrum, the positive and the negative. You cannot know one side without knowing the other. So don't limit your Love to those who "deserve" it, because the more you give, the more you are.

Love is not the sum of all the emotions. Love knows nothing of hatred, greed, jealousy, envy, covetousness, prejudice, etc, etc, etc. Christian love is caritas, the pure love of Christ and has none of these negative and destructive elements in it.

*** On the reincarnation books of the bible: didn't Jesus come back from the dead, wouldn't that be considered reincarnation?

Most definitely not. There is a qualitative difference between resurrection and reincarnation that cannot be reconciled.

Also, the Judas book has come to light in recent time, although it has been quieted by "they,"

THEY? It is readily available from booksellers – if you mean the spurious pseudeppigraphic Gospel of Judas – so how has anyone “quieted” it?

For example: AMAZON.com - The Gospel of Judas (Hardcover)
by National Geographic Society (Author), Bart D. Ehrman (Commentary), Rodolphe Kasser (Editor), Marvin Meyer (Editor), Gregor Wurst (Editor)
(66 customer reviews)
List Price: $22.00
Price: $14.96 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
You Save: $7.04 (32%)

Availability: In Stock. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Gift-wrap available.

Want it delivered Monday, February 19? Order it in the next 18 hours and 5 minutes, and choose One-Day Shipping at checkout. See details

110 used & new available from $2.89

From Nat Geographic: wwww.shop.nationalgeographic.com - The Gospel of Judas Book
Published for the first time since it was condemned as heresy by early church leaders, the Gospel of Judas is told from the perspective of Judas Iscariot, history's ultimate traitor. However, the Judas that emerges in this volume is a hero, not a villain. The gospel has been translated from its original Coptic into clear prose and is accompanied by commentary that explains its fascinating history in the context of the early church, offering a whole new way of understanding the message of Jesus Christ.

* 192 pages
* Hardcover
* 5 1/4'' x 8''
* © 2006




Item# Product Quantity Price Each
6200042C The Gospel of Judas Book

$15.95

but that book is filled with wisdom beyond most of what the typical King James bible has to offer.

Such as?

If you have read it, and you must have to laud it so roundly, why not show where it is superior to the AV in, say, ten principles? I shall read your answer with interest.

Also, what on earth is ‘the typical King James’ Bible? How many versions of the King James Bible are there?

Would I be correct in assuming from the internal evidence of your post that you are unfamiliar with the inside of both the Gospel of Judas Iscariot and with the Bible?



M:)RGANITE

I would just like to mention that Christmas is derived from paganism so is Easter and Sunday is self explanatory from the pagan sun worship. There are many other so called Christian celebrations can be attributed to the Romans and paganism.

That is why it is important for us to do as Jesus said: Seek and you shall find and Knock and it will be opened to you.

The Church is not responsible for our souls, we are.

I presume that you did not write the above with a straight face?

Christmas is NOT derived from paganism, alhtough pagan cermeonies were held at that tiom eof year and still are. But Christ-mass celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ and paganism had nothing to do with it.

Easter celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and while it is held at the same time as pagan rites were and still are, the resurrection of Christ has nothing to do with paganism.

The Greek name for the English Sunday is Kiriagi, which, being translated means, "The Day of the Lord - meaning the Day of Jesus Christ." and from the Latin Dominicus, and has nothing to do with paganism or the sun until you translate it into English, where it is derived from Anglo Saxon sunnandæg. But you cannot lay an Anglo Saxon word at the feet of Aramaic speaking apostles who wrote in Greek and make a case for them calling a day after a star when in truth they cadled it after Kurios - Lord - without being laughed all the way out of court and kicked all the way into the circus to sport with the clowns!

What you so insouciantly describe as Roman and pagan origins of Christian festivals is a travesty of misunderstanding.

The Church was instituted so that the like-minded could attend regularly and receive instruction, inspiration, and emendment to behaviour by the Lord's chosen ministers.

Have you forgotten that "The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved"?

There are three things, nay four, that you should never guess:

1. A lady's age.
2. Whether a frail structure across a ravine will take your weight.
3. What you pension will be worth in twenty years, and,
4. Anything to do with Christianity and the Bible unless you are sure of your facts.

If you had sought, you would have discovered that for yourself.




M:)RGANITE

Dr Jizzle

I have only just stumbled across your questions to me concerning my previous posts:


And how does one determine what of the Bible is erroneous and what is not? Listen to the Church? The very people who have stained the pages of the Bible?

If you are going to ask me a serious question, why not have the decency to wait for my answer before erecting a straw man and them cynically knocking it down. The answer you gave to your question is not from my mouth, from which I would be obliged if you would remove your fingers!

You perspective from a Christian and biblical point of view is a travesty of Christian teaching that owes more to paganism than to Christian belief and teachings. While you are free to disagree with Christian and biblical teaching on any point, you must not mangle what is taught and believed into something that is not taught, was never taught, and has never been believed by Christians who base their beliefs on the Bible.

I wrote that to someone who wrote:

Should we not accept Christ as our Saviour then we remain entrapped in the ever ending vicious circle of re-incarnation through the signs of the Zodiac, or as Paul said !

You remain slaves of the ruling spirits of the universe as we have been for century after century.

This is quite untrue and is a belief that is taught and believed by many... and is completely based on the Bible. What you call travesty is nothing but a different interpretation of your version.

Perhaps I can prevail on you to furnish biblical references to the reincarnation, cycling through the Zodiacal realms, and where Paul said anything like it? I dare say that I am as familiar with the Bible in many versions as most biblical scholars, and there is nothing like these teachings within its pages, not even in the worst translations.

A travesty is a gross mischaracterization, an exaggerated or grotesque imitation that bears little or no resemblance to what it purports to represent, and as such it is not a matter of interpretation. If you have a box with a duck in it, it is hardly a different interpretation to insist that it is an elephant. It is an error, and a pretty stupid one at that.

How is this belief NOT based on the Bible?

It is not based on the Bible because it is not IN the Bible, not HINTED at in the Bible, and cannot be drawn out of the Bible except by a perverted reading that beggars common sense and intelligent understanding.



M:)RGANITE

Your last paragraph is really wild! How did you confuse reincarnation with resurrection? Who supposedly wrote the gospel of Judas? He certainly did not. He committed suicide about the same time Jesus was crucified. Baby birds swallow anything dropped into their mouths. Let's be a little smarter than birds.

The Gospel of Judas Iscariot is of the genre pseudeppigrapha, written later by someone who attached the name of Juidas to it to make it more acceptable to the church. It is apparently quite old but not old enough to be original.

Charles W. Hedrick writes in the Bible Review ("The 34 Gospels: Diversity and Division Among the Earliest Christians"):

In sum, in addition to the four canonical gospels, we have four complete noncanonicals, seven fragmentary, four known from quotations and two hypothetically recovered for a total of 21 gospels from the first two centuries, and we know that others existed in the early period. I am confident more of them will be found. For example, I have seen photos of several pages from a Coptic text entitled "The Gospel of Judas" that recently surfaced on the antiquities market.

The document of which Hedrick speaks has since surfaced and been published under the auspices of the National Geographic Society.

Tixeront, tranlsated by Raemers, states (A Handbook of Patrology, p. 67): "Besides these Gospels, we know that there once existed a Gospel of Bartholomew, a Gospel of Thaddeus, mentioned in the decree of Pope Gelasius, and a Gospel of Judas Iscariot in use among the Cainites and spoken of by St. Irenaeus (i, 31, 1)."

Here is the Roberts-Donaldson translation of this section from Irenaeus:

Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.

H.-C. Puech and Beate Blatz write (New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1, p. 387):

Dating: the Gospel of Judas was of course composed before 180, the date at which it is mentioned for the first time by Irenaeus in adv. Haer. If it is in fact a Cainite work, and if this sect - assuming it was an independent gnostic group - was constituted in part, as has sometimes been asserted, in dependence on the doctrine of Marcion, the apocryphon can scarcely have been composed before the middle of the 2nd century. This would, however, be to build on weak arguments. At most we may be inclined to suspect a date between 130 and 170 or thereabouts.

On the new discovery, Bart Ehrman says,

"The reappearance of the Gospel of Judas will rank among the greatest finds from Christian antiquity and is without doubt the most important archaeological discovery of the past 60 years. What will make this gospel famous—or infamous, perhaps—is that it portrays Judas quite differently from anything we previously knew. Here he is not the evil, corrupt, devil-inspired follower of Jesus who betrayed his master; he is instead Jesus' closest intimate and friend, the one who understood Jesus better than anyone else, who turned Jesus over to the authorities because Jesus wanted him to do so. This gospel has a completely different understanding of God, the world, Christ, salvation, human existence—not to mention of Judas himself—than came to be embodied in the Christian creeds and canon. It will open up new vistas for understanding Jesus and the religious movement he founded."

It remains to be firmly established that the recently uncovered "Gospel of Judas" corresponds to the Gospel of Judas mentioned by Irenaeus of Lyons.

Though I think the most important factor is that many see it as a one shot deal. Though hell realms exist in Buddhist teachings, there is always a chance for salvation in every single moment. Who doesn't want to be sure when eternity is on the line.
Faced with these intimidating prospects, some people just give up. Like a child hiding under the sheets from the monster in the closet, some people feel if they ignore reality long enough, it will simply go away. :)

On the other hand, if hell is eternal, does one really want to find out the hard way? ;) That's pretty much the conclusion I came to after many years of considering diverse perspectives.

This is an interesting question, the whole notion of facing or not facing reality. I think it could at least partially account for why some people become wanderers and homeless. But that's another very complicated issue in itself.

I guess I believe we all have a unique path. Some aren't meant to face the proverbial monster in the closet (i.e. evil) and some are. And yet others do face it but on more of a contemplative, less conspicuous level. In Buddhism you have a similar idea of the holy ones who supposedly regulate the universe through their continuous contemplation.

I suppose the primary notion forwarded by Buddhism that I can't come to terms with is the idea that God is just a construct, something to "get past." To me that's misguided. Although I do appreciate that cultural influences play a role in the image of God.:cool:

I also have a hard time believing in the ultimate negation of core individuality. But I think I've already touched on that.

How interesting this topic (is)! I've been told a million times, and just realized the truth this time (in this life). My past lives and pure pleasures only lead to future infinite pleasured lives. I asked God how many pleasures and how many lives of pleasure ("What was our deal, and for how many lifetimes?"), and the answer is "There is no number high enough. You claimed this in a past life long ago, and the deal is made. Not millions or trillions of years, but forever. Just worship and always serve Me, the One." ("Live and tell others about the coming of the Kingdom of God, as many have done in their own ways/methods/efforts.") I don't understand incarnation; I only accept it. So far this life has been a beautiful dream. And, I've been told, each life gets better and better. I only wish I could desire the hardships, or even realize what they are or how they are defined. :) I have had it revealed over and over again : I was born when wisdom began, and I will live until wisdom ends; and though wisdom may end in human men and women, it never ends in the reality. :)

Pay to call WildcatBoy123 for advice ($60.0/min)
Sixty dollars a minute?! Three Thousand Six Hundred dollars per hour?! Woo-wee WB, you're one expensive guru! Nice work if you can get it, I guess.

On the other hand, if hell is eternal, does one really want to find out the hard way? ;) That's pretty much the conclusion I came to after many years of considering diverse perspectives.

Certainly cause for speculation, no doubt -- but one doesn't need look any further than this life too see the infinite potential of ignorance, both in length and breadth. Ultimately, my own conclusion is, as we are made in His image and he is contained within us all, thus God must also be devoid of ego, and thus the very ugly potential for vengeful instinct that so soils the greater part of humanity these days. Believe in a loving God or not; there is little love in discrimination or abandonment. If I'm so very wrong, I believe God will ultimately forgive me. Though ultimately as well, only I can end my ignorance of the nature of existence, as purported by ancient Buddhist teachings and backed by many solid findings of modern quantum physics; and thus possibly my endless round in samsara, the realms of limited joys and lives.


This is an interesting question, the whole notion of facing or not facing reality. I think it could at least partially account for why some people become wanderers and homeless. But that's another very complicated issue in itself.

Not all who wander are lost. And as for the those who are "habitationally challenged" :) , no doubt some choose to live that way, though having had a great deal of interaction with them, both personal friends and strangers, I can tell you that the vast majority suffer from serious mental illness (of which they were given little choice), the rest are generally under the grip of some sort of an addiction. I myself have spent a share of time sleeping on friends' sofas, with all my worldly possessions in a small cardboard box. I think few people choose to live that way, but in some ways it can be a uniquely liberating experience -- little to defend, and often little else to want. It certainly does teach you what is truly important in life.


I guess I believe we all have a unique path. Some aren't meant to face the proverbial monster in the closet (i.e. evil) and some are. And yet others do face it but on more of a contemplative, less conspicuous level. In Buddhism you have a similar idea of the holy ones who supposedly regulate the universe through their continuous contemplation.

The only monster for me is ignorance. Aside from what Buddhism has ultimately taught me, I largely began to myself abandon the notion of evil when I began to concertedly study Western psychology and the physiological mechanisms of the brain and it's complex development, earlier on in college. I myself largely choose to see the world in terms of ignorance and enlightenment. Evil by its very nature seemingly denotes something not wholly of us as often complicated and fallable human beings, or at the very least beyond our capacity for full understanding. And that is why we mostly fear it. As long as we believe in evil, we will always feel somewhat powerless over our varyingly uncertain destinies. I believe we are always given something of a choice, no matter how thinly disguised, of whether we wish to understand more greatly or not. To label something as evil is to me a blatant cop-out; an outmoded and somewhat childish way of coping, and in the end, it serves neither us nor society at large.


I suppose the primary notion forwarded by Buddhism that I can't come to terms with is the idea that God is just a construct, something to "get past." To me that's misguided. Although I do appreciate that cultural influences play a role in the image of God.:cool:

This could hardly be said to be a primary notion of Buddhism. To even call it a notion is to me a great stretch. Though there have been multiple modern works incorporating and praising the teachings of Jesus, God is scarcely mentioned in near but all modern Buddhist works I have read, never mind those of antiquity. Though I know that some might wish to look upon this as a snub of sorts, and a chance to denigrate the Buddhist faith, consider the practical fact that Buddha and a multitude of other highly enlightened beings are also scarcely mentioned in nearly all modern Christian works, never mind the Bible. Consider also the obvious fact that Buddhism, or at least the teachings of Buddha, predate Christianity by many centuries. If you believe the former is because Buddhism is somehow "evil" or lacking in merit, that is your own personal choice. I simply believe they are two independent and greatly varying systems, though both espousing many of the same great and timeless values.
Buddhists do not deny the existence of God, they simply deny the existence of all that is without change. I agree that God is far more than a simple construct, but if one can not see God in a homeless man, never mind a common housefly, I would to seriously question as well one's deeper grasp of Christianity. If God is not the homeless man, pray tell where might he find him, for surely given his unfortunate circumstance in this life, he might not greatly mind a more personal word or two with Him. Churches are not the only temples of God.


I also have a hard time believing in the ultimate negation of core individuality. But I think I've already touched on that.

I don't reckon I have a whole lot to say here either. :)

Retrotia agrees: Very,very good. Buddhism practices include emptying out the mind & self-whereas in Christianity we are filled-up with the Holy Spirit & connect with the Lord. I love the latter!

Buddhism hardly advocates the emptying of one's mind. Surely an impossible task. Only not identifying with and grasping onto all of it's incessant ramblings. An empty mind, like an idle mind, can scarcely be of any substantial benefit to anyone.
Being filled with the Holy Spirit or God's love is only good if you seek to become a vessel and not a receptacle. If not shared with all, you arguably violate both the sanctity and principle of what you would seek to capture and embody.
As for emptying the self... Well, you can't really empty what isn't inherently real. :)

Buddhism hardly advocates the emptying of one's mind. Surely an impossible task. Only not identifying with and grasping onto all of it's incessant ramblings. An empty mind, like an idle mind, can scarcely be of any substantial benefit to anyone.
Being filled with the Holy Spirit or God's love is only good if you seek to become a vessel and not a receptacle. If not shared with all, you arguably violate both the sanctity and principle of what you would seek to capture and embody.
As for emptying the self... Well, you can't really empty what isn't inherently real. :)
First, that is funny, a receptacle! Of course "we" are givers & do not live our lives "alone." And to do that the best we can we need direction(& instruction) ourselves from the Holy Spirit. It takes "dying to oneself daily" to be a good & faithful servant in Christ.
You spoke about a homeless man- Well, I may not see "God" in his face, but I can see God's love in it. Matthew 25:35-36, "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me." Also, I never take for granted that that could have been me(or you) Whether we would continue to make those poor choices or not is not the issue.
When I say I dislike the psychology of Buddhism- it's because one is still letting their SOUL take control & not spirit. That is why the devil can frighten you. Fear is an emotion. The soul has 3 parts (Biblical) mind-will- & emotions.
When not operating in(or walking in ) the Spirit of God- which is covered by the blood of Jesus, we are walking in the flesh & the soul is in control.(which is not covered by the blood of J.C.) Now, that devil always comes to steal or destroy. Stirring up fear of: lack, loss, etc. onto your mind,(soul) always negative- lack of confidence, security, etc. But with alignment with the Spirit, one has God's promises to lean & meditate on, for that particular problem.
The Spirit is in control-not our "feelings"-bc you see our emotions can be bad also.
Well, anyway, I thought I'd do some input on that. Of course, I don't believe in reincarnation anyway. The Bible says man is to die once, then face judgment (Hebrews 9:27)
And karma neither- Galatians 6:8-9, For he that soweth to his flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing, for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

Not all who wander are lost. And as for the those who are "habitationally challenged" :) , no doubt some choose to live that way, though having had a great deal of interaction with them, both personal friends and strangers, I can tell you that the vast majority suffer from serious mental illness (of which they were given little choice), the rest are generally under the grip of some sort of an addiction.

This is a fascinating thread, both your replies and Retrotia's. Christian churches are sometimes viewed by non-Christians as places where believers routinely go, simply because they've been conditioned to enjoy the security of such structures. While there may be some truth to this, I think it's also possible that the Holy Spirit touches these people at those locations. It's doubtful, from my view, that the practice of churchgoing would last 2000 years (actually much longer if we include the Jewish temples of the so-called Old Testament) if the attraction only had to do with social bonding and aesthetic enjoyment (stained-glass windows, organ music, etc.). Of course, the Holy Spirit could inform the enjoyment of these things, but I really do believe that it stands apart. In my opinion quite a few people just don't seem to consider this possibility.

Now the other interesting thing is this idea of mental health and illness. You might benefit from reading the French philosopher Michel Foucault. He talks about how discourses of power actually create notions of subjectivity. I'm not sure if I agree with everything he says. It seems there are unhealthy or, perhaps better said, "misguided" minds out there. But sometimes I wonder if we're pointing the finger in the right direction or not. The Beatles' I am the Walrus comes to mind. "Don't you think the joker laughs at you!" :)

My beliefs probably come from watching too many sappy movies…

I believe in reincarnation, but I don't believe that everyone gets reincarnated when they die. I think you are reincarnated so that you have the opportunity to learn. At some point, you reach a level of understanding and can ascend into Heaven.


I believe that if there is truth to reincarnation, then it is a process that we go through, human and animal to grow spiritually and it would be a continuous process until our souls are pure and ready for the path to heaven, the path to God. Who is not to say that insects eventually reach human form where the vessel carrying the spirit is much larger and considered more sophisticated? However, this is also saying that Humans are better than animal and insects, and is this right for us to make this judgment.

As a species we are very destructive, perhaps the process of reincarnations is a way of making us less destructive and more pure.

I don't know what I am banging on about folks so I apologise if my response is a bit vague but this thread is excellent and I love open mindedness, best way to be...