Is Reincarnation baloney?

[Timtofly]

Like I said earlier, what other religions teach of reincarnation is irrelevant. The Bible defines what reincarnation is. The teachings are not the same, although there are overlapping areas that agree.

Is the word 'reincarnation' in the Bible? Not that I can see, however the concept is interwoven all throughout.

Some of the Key Words/Phrases to look for are...

• Mystery of Iniquity
• Was, and is not, and yet is
• Child of Gehenna
• Son of Perdition
• Quicken Again
• Curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth

Those are all reincarnation terms. There are more, but you get the idea.

The church taught the body itself was reincarnated or reanimated. That is not eastern reincarnation where the soul enters a new body the second time.

Reincarnation is not the change from Adam's dead flesh to God's permanent incorruptible physical body. That is still not reincarnation. That is just changing bodies.

Reincarnation is the point at conception a soul enters the body. That is wrong. The soul itself is conceived at each new birth.

Reincarnation is that an already existing soul literally stops the life of the conceived soul and takes over the body. That cannot happen ever.

What is happening is that demons have lived in body after body and feeding former experiences to the current soul they have invaded. It is not a soul traveling from body to body, but a demon which is a spirit, not a soul nor a body.

The verse, Phillipians 2:5

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:"

The mind and soul go hand in hand. It would be wrong to say Paul was teaching reincarnation. We also tell new believers that Christ lives in us. That is not reincarnation. Paul is teaching that we need to conform our will into alignment with Christ and God.

But the point that another individual, the soul can come back as a baby is in direct contradiction to the point that at conception a new soul is formed. That has always been the start of every human since God created the sons of God on the 6th Day. No soul lived in a prior state prior to the 6th Day. Souls do not wait in limbo some place for a new body to form in any womb, human, animal, insect, or plant. Genesis 2:7 explains the process that happened on the 6th Day.

"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

The sons of God were not given souls. They became souls. The soul was given a body and the spirit was placed over the physical body. That is the image of God.

The instant Adam disobeyed God, Adam lost both physical body and spirit. Adam was only a soul in dead corruptible flesh, at that point. Spiritual death was being separated from one's spirit. To have a spirit inside you, is to either have the Holy Spirit, or a demon. Having someone elses spirit is not reincarnation. That would be called possesed. The term reincarnation can simply mean to give one another body. But never at a conception, like eastern religion teaches. When the soul leaves Adam's dead corruptible flesh at physical death it enters God's permanent incorruptible physical body in Paradise. That is the only true reincarnation in all of creation. The soul does not incarnate, but is carnated into a new physical body. But that is not a birthing scenario, but the original physical body Adam and all the sons of God were created with. 2 Corinthians 5:1

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."

Adam's flesh is not resurrected. The soul is given God's building at any resurrection where the soul now has a permanent incorruptible physical body. Those in Revelation 20:4 don't get their beheaded bodies of sin back. They get God's permanent incorruptible physical body. The root word "carn" simply means flesh, a physical body. How it is used in context makes all the difference.

The angels are the stars created on the 4th Day. They don't have physical bodies other than whatever makes them shine as bright lights. A spirit could be a bright light as much as a physical apparatus that is a light. Satan's science has us thinking they are balls of gas. Not sure if the angels agree with that term for their physical makeup. Most of them would be considered "overweight". When an angel comes to earth it appears as having human flesh. Not a spirit or "ghost" floating around. And certainly they "turn off" their bright light form. Angels don't possess humans. Those angels who rebelled were immediately chained with darkness in the pit. They never came to earth. They were imprisoned upon leaving their post in the firmament. They did not pass go/earth, and collected 200/offspring.

 

[St. SteVen]

One reference would be, God told him no graven images, and he’s holding a set of tablets allegedly engraved by God?

That's an interesting observation.
So, "allegedly" means they probably weren't engraved by God (in your view), since God didn't allow the Israelites to do that? (any more)

What should Moses have done instead?

 

[St. SteVen]

My apologies Moses was given the pattern of the tent. It was David that Nathen told that God would build the house.

Did God build the house?

 

[Timtofly]

They never will either. No one has. I have been waiting for someone to debunk it for years. There is simply no verse that teaches that the Unsaved 'burn for infinity' or are 'annihilated' etc.

This would be considered two seperate and totally different issues.


Reincarnation does not prevent eternal punishment. Living in Adam's dead flesh is God's punishment on Adam's disobedience to all his offspring. God can start or stop the concept of punishment itself.

If you want to remove eternal punishment, you have to compare the LOF with the 6,000 years of temporal punishment God did give. We don't have enough Scripture to describe or declare any future events, other than, as for now the LOF has no temporal description.

From the OT prophecy we see this earth lasting forever, until we see John write in Revelation 21 that there will be a totally different creation and reality, so current reality does not last forever. Now the concept may. To apply that to eternal punishment still gives a concept of eternal punishment whether it will be a different set of beings or not.

God could just as well wipe every thing out and start over and none of us will exist after that. God never told us that would happen, but is a plausible possibility. Even more so than those who claim we existed prior to Genesis 1. God never told us that nor implied that. That is just a plausible human reasoning based on the understanding we have.

From Genesis 2, humans became a soul, they were not souls in a prior creation now in physical bodies in this creation. In the next creation all we are, are the same soul and body God started out with in Genesis 1. Nothing new and original.

But when it comes to making stuff up, anything could have happened prior to Genesis 1. I don't see how that is relevant in some future existence. It has been posited that God is on a learning curve as well. But that would be putting God in our image, not the other way around. Especially since we have the understanding that God is omniscient. What is there that God does not know? It is creation from God that is put on a learning curve.

 

[Mr E]

This would be considered two seperate and totally different issues.


Reincarnation does not prevent eternal punishment. Living in Adam's dead flesh is God's punishment on Adam's disobedience to all his offspring. God can start or stop the concept of punishment itself.

If you want to remove eternal punishment, you have to compare the LOF with the 6,000 years of temporal punishment God did give. We don't have enough Scripture to describe or declare any future events, other than, as for now the LOF has no temporal description.

From the OT prophecy we see this earth lasting forever, until we see John write in Revelation 21 that there will be a totally different creation and reality, so current reality does not last forever. Now the concept may. To apply that to eternal punishment still gives a concept of eternal punishment whether it will be a different set of beings or not.

God could just as well wipe every thing out and start over and none of us will exist after that. God never told us that would happen, but is a plausible possibility. Even more so than those who claim we existed prior to Genesis 1. God never told us that nor implied that. That is just a plausible human reasoning based on the understanding we have.

From Genesis 2, humans became a soul, they were not souls in a prior creation now in physical bodies in this creation. In the next creation all we are, are the same soul and body God started out with in Genesis 1. Nothing new and original.

But when it comes to making stuff up, anything could have happened prior to Genesis 1. I don't see how that is relevant in some future existence. It has been posited that God is on a learning curve as well. But that would be putting God in our image, not the other way around. Especially since we have the understanding that God is omniscient. What is there that God does not know? It is creation from God that is put on a learning curve.

I like the way you are thinking these things through.

Probably good topics for a dedicated thread or two.

 

[St. SteVen]

Probably good topics for a dedicated thread or two.

Right.
Down the road across the river. Take a left and keep going. Can't miss it. - LOL

 

[Timtofly]

Of course they do. Let us go over one...

Matthew 23:15 (New American Bible)
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You traverse sea and land to make one convert, and when that happens you make him a child of Gehenna twice as much as yourselves.

The term 'Child of Gehenna' is just as literal as the term 'Son of God' or 'Son of Hagar' or any other 'Son of' in the Bible. Children, as in ALL OF US, are born out of Gehenna. That is what is written and that is what I believe. As a Christian, I have to.

That was Jesus Christ talking by the way. Are you seriously going to tell me that the words of Jesus do not matter?

And with that one verse alone I have been able to completely debunk the false teachings of 'reincarnation is not Biblical'.

Let us debunk the false teachings again...

Psalms 139:15
"My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth."

The above verse is teaching where babies, i.e., you and I and everyone else, comes from. What does that last part say? Just about everyone on the planet knows that the 'lowest parts of the earth' is a reference to Hell, the Underworld, etc. That is where we come from. How did we get there? We got there by passing through the Lake of Fire.

So let us now apply the 'Babies are born from the lowest parts of the Earth' lesson we just learned to this next verse...

Ephesians 4:9
"Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?"

Jesus descended into the womb of Mary to incarnate. See how it all fits? Some believe Jesus 'went to Hell'. What is Hell? It is where babies come from according to Jesus.

What is this next verse teaching?

Psalms 63:9
"But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth."

Wait, we just learned that the 'lower parts of the Earth' is the womb. Yep. The Unsaved go to there to reincarnate.



'Theology' is not the Word of God. Your point is irrelevant.



Looks like someone added to the Word of God. The word 'spiritual' is not there...

Ephesians 2:1
"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins"

You should know better.

Again, there is no such thing as 'spiritual death'. It is a made-up term to hide what actually took place in the Garden of Eden.



The above verse does not debunk reincarnation.

Theology is your interpretation of Scripture. Because Scripture uses symbolic terms does not mean that literally happens. Your version of reincarnation is a Theology taken from your interpretation of symbolism in Scripture.

A womb is no more the pit than death is final.

Is your explanation plausible. Of course. Was the Psalmist teaching reincarnation, no. That is your interpretation in addition to Scripture. Babies are conceived in the womb. That is the finite beginning of the soul. The soul does not form in sheol, and then placed in the physical body at conception. That would be the erroneous teaching of a form of reincarnation, that goes past eastern religious thought. The soul moves from body to body. You want reincarnation to mean no soul happens at conception, period, but already exists, prior to conception.

BTW the symbolism would mean that each soul carries on the dead state of Adam passed from generation to generation.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

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

I wouldn't call it baloney- more like liverwurst!

 

[Waiting on him]

That's an interesting observation.
So, "allegedly" means they probably weren't engraved by God (in your view), since God didn't allow the Israelites to do that? (any more)

What should Moses have done instead?

There was nothing right that he could have done.

 

[Waiting on him]

Did God build the house?

Yes it’s stated from Matthew-Revelation.

 

[Timtofly]

That site contradicts itself:

What is the spirit and power of Elijah, if not Elijah?

As to (John) being asked "Are you Elijah?" the emphasis is on the word "are", they did not ask "were you Elijah?"

As Jesus basically implied some people would find it hard to believe, saying "if you can accept it" (not "you must accept it")

Then it was Elijah and there never was a John the Baptist. Elijah was then beheaded and died. He won't be one of the two witnesses, as he is now certainly dead.

His mother was not Elizabeth, and Zechariah was not his father. That is why reincarnation is not possible. Elijah would not have been the conception of Elizabeth and Zechariah, but a soul taking over another conceived body without a sexual encounter. A soul cannot oust another soul which is impossible. That is why reincarnation as stated in Eastern religion is impossible. It cannot physically work into any life form.

 

[St. SteVen]

There was nothing right that he could have done.

With that in mind, here's an interesting comparative.

Acts 3:22 NIV
For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me
from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you.

 

[St. SteVen]

Yes it’s stated from Matthew-Revelation.

You lost me again.
Didn't we already determine that,
"... the Most High does not live in houses made by human hands." - Acts 7:48 NIV
Why would God build himself a house that he couldn't live in?

Acts 7:48-50 NIV
“However, the Most High does not live in houses made by human hands.
As the prophet says:
49 “‘Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool.
What kind of house will you build for me?
says the Lord.
Or where will my resting place be?
50 Has not my hand made all these things?’[a]

 

[Timtofly]

'Study of God' and 'Word of God' are two different things. If one cannot prove their 'theology' with verses, then they have no proof.

So far no one here has proven reincarnation is not Biblical using actual verses.

One could say the Bible supports slavery. Does not make it right nor Scriptural.

There is a difference between you thinking what Scripture states and it actually stating that point.

 

[St. SteVen]

One could say the Bible supports slavery. Does not make it right nor Scriptural.

Jesus said, “Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right?" - Luke 12:57 NIV

First century middle east. I am a conquering nation. I can run my sword through you, or left you live as a slave.
You would be my property, since I saved your life. You choose to live. Good choice. Did I do you wrong, or do you right?
Should I have run my sword through you in attempt to end slavery, since it such a horrible evil?

There is a difference between you thinking what Scripture states and it actually stating that point.

That saw cuts both ways. How did YOU determine what scripture is ACTUALLY stating?
Is the status quo always right? (nope)

cc: @QuantumBit

 

[Timtofly]

We are discussing the biblical concept of eternal life. Life everlasting. Also known as the good news.

You might think that a person dies and after that they are judged and that 'the good people' go on to live forever (somewhere else-- whatever your idea of Heaven or Paradise might be) and that 'the bad people' go straight to hell without passing Go and collecting $200.

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

 

[St. SteVen]

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

Being born again is a reincarnation of sorts.

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

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

You are saved by reincarnation.

cc: @QuantumBit

 

[Enoch111]

You are saved by reincarnation.

Rather doubtful. Reincarnation has a very specific meaning and REGENERATION is not the same as reincarnation.

 

[St. SteVen]

Rather doubtful. Reincarnation has a very specific meaning and REGENERATION is not the same as reincarnation.

Perhaps reincarnation has a broader meaning. That is what is being discussed here. Hello?

Aside from the eastern concept of reincarnation, what is it? Being reborn. Does regeneration fit?

cc: @QuantumBit

 

[Timtofly]

The term 'Born Again' is very literal. The Saved receive new bodies after death or Rapture. Technically that is another Life. In fact, it is a form of reincarnation. Going from one body to another is literally, reincarnation.

Not the way Paul puts it. The soul changes bodies like one changes a diaper. The soul does not incarnate the new body.

The only reason that there is a change is from death to life. One is death, one is life.

Your form of changing bodies is not that, but a soul entering another body of death. And to top it off you claim at conception which is robbing a brand new soul of it's body.

In 2 Corinthians 5 Paul explains that one body is just temporal from Adam, but the other is eternal and from God. While God is given the credit for forming both new bodies, the purpose of the Second one is to restore mankind into the complete image of God that Adam lost when he disobeyed God.

Your version of "being carnate" is just moving a soul from sheol back into a dead body and rinse repeat over and over again. It is literally a false hope from Satan and a copycat version of God's redemptive plan. You may distinguish it from the accepted version of reincarnation by billions, and even if you don't base it on good works or karma, it is still a hopeless and pointless phenomenon.

Most posters here don't even accept that those redeemed currently in Paradise have had God's permanent incorruptible physical body, that was given to all the OT redeemed at the Cross in 30AD. They claim that will not happen until a single future resurrection.

Now you introduce a theory that they could just be recycled souls from sheol over and over again? That actually sounds worse than having to spend thousands of years in sheol.

Who in their right mind would think they would come back from Paradise after being free from death, and enter death again?