I was reading a book that started talking abotu the ancient christian belief of reincarnation and was wondering how it sat with all you folks. First of all I will quote the text "The early christian church accepted the doctrine of reincarnation...... the doctrine was first declared a heresy in AD 553 by the second council of constantinople. At that time many christians thought the doctrine of reincarnation afforded man to ample a stage of tme and space to encourage him to strive for immediate salvation. But truths suppressed lead disconcertingly to a host of errors. THe millions have nuot utilized their one lifetime to seek god, but to enjoy this world -- so uniquely won, and so shortly to be forever lost! The truth is that man reincarnates on earth until he has consciously regained his status as a son of God.' I have also read this about the second council of constantinople in other places as well. I know a lot of christians argue that we are not the son of God, only jesus is and by claiming that we are, we are violation of the ten commandments.... ..to which I respond "be ye therefore perfect, even as your father which is in heaven is perfect (matthew 5:48)" and "behold what manner of love the father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God (I john 3:1)" therefore god perfection is not unattainable by us but something we must strive for other biblical quote supporting reincarnation: "And as he was passing by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who has sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?" (John 9:1) if he was blind from birth how could it be the result of sin unless he had a previous life that he sinned in and is now being punished? Also very suggestive of reincarnation is the episode where Jesus identifies John the Baptist as Elijah. "For all the prophets and the law have prophesied until John. And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who was to come." (Matthew 11:13-14) "And the disciples asked him, saying, 'Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?' But he answered them and said, 'Elijah indeed is to come and will restore all things. But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also shall the Son of Man suffer at their hand.' Then the disciples understood that he had spoken of John the Baptist." (Matthew 17:10-13) Here again is a clear statement of preexistence. Despite the edict of the Emperor Justinian and the counter reaction to Origen, there is firm and explicit testimony for preexistence in both the Old and the New Testament. Indeed, the ban against Origen notwithstanding, contemporary Christian scholarship acknowledges preexistence as one of the elements of Judeo-Christian theology. As for the John the Baptist-Elijah episode, there can be little question as to its purpose. By identifying the Baptist as Elijah, Jesus is identifying himself as the Messiah. Throughout the gospel narrative there are explicit references to the signs that will precede the Messiah. "Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." (Malachi 4:5) This is one of the many messianic promises of the Old Testament. One of the signs that the true Messiah has come, according to this passage from Malachi, is that he be preceded by a forerunner, by Elijah. Although the Bible also contains other reincarnational passages, these Elijah-John passages constitute clear proof of reincarnation: 1. The Old Testament prophesied that Elijah himself (not someone "like" him or someone "similar" to him, but Elijah himself) would return before the advent of the Messiah. 2. Jesus declared that John the Baptist was Elijah who had returned, stating bluntly "Elijah has come". Now, based on these passages alone, either (A) or (B) must be true: (A) John the Baptist was Elijah himself, meaning that Elijah had reincarnated. If this is true, then reincarnation must belong in Christian theology, and the West's entire doctrinal interpretation of "Life After Death" in general, and the "Last Day Resurrection" in particular, must be radically revised, or... (B) John the Baptist was not Elijah himself, meaning that Elijah himself had not returned. If this is so, then either: (1) The Old Testament prophecy about Elijah returning before the Messiah failed to come to pass (meaning that Biblical prophecy is fallible), OR (2) Jesus was not the Messiah. Basically, it comes down to this simple question: What do you want to believe? One of the following A, B, or C, must logically be true: A. Reincarnation is true, or B. Jesus was not the Messiah, or C. The prophecies of the Bible are unreliable.
When quoting give credit. So if you quote a book, cite the book by title and author, prefably with a hyperlink as evidence.
Or, since the Jews saw Elijah go up to Heaven on a chariot they expected him to come back in a chariot. Such a position (logic) cannot be applied to re-incarnation; since a person dies fully grown he or she is not expected to be born fully grown. The question of Jesus being the only Son of G-d is up to conjecture, but even if he was "only" Enlightened, that doesn't mitigate his statements, "Before Abraham was, I Am," since Abraham, Moses, etc. were probably not Enlightened persons. One could make the claim that Moses was Enlightened, though, and could even say that since Jesus "met" with Abraham, Moses and Elijah that they also were Enlightened persons. Therefore your logic is flawed. When positing a hypothesis and making a declaration, "either (A) or (B) must be true," is disengenious. It may be logical to you but it is structured incorrectly.
i dont see how this supports reincarnation...Jesus is speaking in the past tense, about John, after he had been beheaded [well i cant check this to make sure, but im pretty sure by Matthew 17 that John is dead] it would be like me saying "tiki posted in the forum, and showed people how to delete bad posts... and then people treated him badly, and then they will treat me badly"...doesnt mean you did this in another life, it just means you did it already
tiki, you're opening a big can of worms with this post in the Christianity section...beware of the wrath that will befall thee.
I don't know about all this reincarnation stuff, but I do recall somewhere in there that Jesus says that everything he did, can be done by us. I understand that to mean we are all "sons of god"
yah when Jesus ascended he said "go forth and preach the gospel to all people, baptising them in the name of the father, the son, and the holy ghost. In my name you will drive out demons and heal the sick."
I love you, seahorse. Can you feel the loooove toniiiiight... Damn, I these margies are getting my buzz on a bit.
i don't believe this one supports reincarnation - more like inherited sin. the question is, why is god punishing the man with blindness, for his sin, or his parents'? i can see how you could interpret reincarnation into it - "why was the man made blind? because of something he did in a past life, or because of inherited sin?" interesting idea though. in mt 16 jesus asks his disciples who people think he is. they respond, some people are saying you're john the baptist, or elias, or this or that, etc. if john the baptist already died, why would people think jesus was john the baptist, unless there was some common belief in reincarnation? but also, back then it was a common belief that genetics are passed on through the paternal side, that the man actually carries the 'seed' for the child to come, and that is how, quite literally, sin is passed on, (ie. original sin, from adam). every father has a the seed already, of his unborn children. so sin is passed on, even through flesh. nowadays we obviously know that it takes the man and the woman's genes to form the child. good quotes from mt and 1john... what is meant by "..that we should be called the sons of God"? Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. from 1john3 irenaeus (~2ndC) believed that God's plan for humanity is for us to become mature, to start off mortals and gradually grow into the likeness of God. this is taken from Gen1:26. essentially, this means that adam and eve were created as 'children' morally, and God gradually shapes us over time to become divine and perfect. i know that doesn't really have to do with reincarnation, but i got to thinking on those two quotes you gave.
so you're saying you are born with sin? how does a catholic confess this I wonder? my source was 'autobiography of a yogi' by paramahansa yogananda and I also read the part about the counsel of constantinople in a ram dass book...I intentionally failed to mention this because most christians would see the indian/hindu reference and immediatly say its false since they are not christian
well one could look at it like this, i guess... you are born with sin [lets say for he sake of argument that Jewish Law and tradition said nothing about paternal sin carrying over to the offspring, but that origioanl sin still applies] because... 1) the stain of Origional sin is already upon you [but then that would make you ask why everyoen is not born "lame"] or 2)God knows what you will do before you do it, so He knows what sin you are going to commit, and then born blind... but in the context of what is going on, the man was born blind to show the glory of God, and the works performed by Jesus so that we may believe
Nah, I want to make sure that he isn't making it up. Who knows, maybe I have the book in my library. If I don't and if it interests me maybe I'll pick it up. At the very least I'll add it to my list and look for it next time I'm at the 'Half Price' bookstore. But I'm almost sure that if it was an anti-Evolution book you'd be screaming for references, demanding the author's name and scrambling to discredit him and it. So before the flaming starts it's easier to ask for references. Satisfied? links: http://reluctant-messenger.com/origen1.html http://www.annyoung.net/reincarnation.html http://www.skepticfiles.org/atheist/reincarn.htm hmmmm. http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles/r/reincarnation.html http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen08.html http://www.blavatsky.net/theosophy/judge/articles/christian-fathers-on-reincarnation.htm http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/reincar/re-imo.htm http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qreinkr.html http://www.christian-faith.com/html/page/reincarnation hmmmm. http://www.letusreason.org/NAM8.htm http://www.comparativereligion.com/reincarnation3.html I'm sure that you can find many more.
it amaises me how adamantly some people can stick to the bible as the only source of truth when its editors and translators for hundreds years were money hungry power whores of the roman catholic church
it isnt that jesus said we can do what he did. we cant touch people and have them come back to life. but he means if we have faith and pray about stuff then we can overcome things and if we pray for someone to get healed of a sickness then he might heal them. also bible prophasys can not always be true. the future is not set in stone. some will not happen. god gives u a chance to change wut will happen. it is like how if you give a little kid a choice etween chocolate and broccoli u kno he will pick chocolate but ur still giving them the choice. god knos wut will happen to us and wut we will do
but if you also tell that kid, "ok, here's some chocolate and here's some broccoli. You can eat either one you want. But if you eat the chocolate, I'm going to spank you, bare assed, till you bleed, then I'm going to punch you in your face a few times as hard as I can. If you eat the broccoli, I'm going to give you 1,000 dollars." That is not a free choice. But God says that to us, and then calls it free will.
its been a while since i last said anything on here and ive changed my position. i still believe the god is there but he is an ass hole. im only in high school and i already kno 2 of my friends who have died. one acciidently strangled himself in his sleep and the other got hit by a car and the driver drove off real fast. if god was really as great as he says then he wouldnt have had 2 kids die before they were even 16
