Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: torbakke@loke.idt.unit.no (Torbjoern Bakke) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Reincarnation Message-ID: Date: 23 Jun 91 01:00:56 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH) Lines: 247 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu > = sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) writes: >> = torbakke@loke.idt.unit.no (Torbjoern Bakke) writes: >>> = sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) writes: >>> "Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born >>> blind?" (John 9:1-2) > > This question of the disciples' is stating two possibilities for the man's > blindness: (1) that it was due to the sin of his parents; or (2) that it > was due to his own sin. > > If the man was indeed born blind due to his own sin, then this sin must > have occurred prior to his birth..... > > Perhaps you would care to give your own interpretation of this passage? I understand what you are trying to say with this passage, but I feel that it is taken somewhat out of context. I cannot deny reincarnation out from this verse, but I cannot see how it supports reincarnation either. I think you are trying to read more out of this verse than was intended at the time of writing. The whole idea with John 9, is not only to show that Jesus can cure people physically. It is also shows us how people that are born "spiritually blind" can be cured by Jesus - they learn to see Jesus as he really is. The pharisees thought they knew the truth (that they could see) when they actually didn't know the truth (they were blind). Jesus tries to tell us that those who insist that their blindness actually is perfect vision can not be helped. This is what God tries to tell us in John 9. If he wanted to tell us that we should believe in reincarnation, I think he would have removed any doubt about the matter. John 9(:2) does neither support nor deny reincarnation. >>> There are also the questions to Jesus (Matt 16:14) and to John the Baptist >>> (John 1:21) as to whether each was the reincarnation of the Prophet Elias.. >> And the answers to these questions where that Jesus was the Messiah, and >> that John the Baptist was not the Prophet Elias. These verses does not >> in any way support the idea of reincarnation. > Again, when faced with questions implying reincarnation, Jesus does not > deny the possibility. It certainly seems like Matt 16:14 supports the idea that some people believed in reincarnation 2000 years ago also (just like today), but neither the disciples nor Jesus support this idea in any way. In fact, both Jesus and the disciples agree that Jesus was Messiah, and not a reincarnation of somebody else. I do not think that you would say that Jesus Christ was a reincarnation of some other person either. About John 1:21, a couple of verses earlier - in verse 19 - we see that it was the jews that wanted to know if John was either the Messiah, Elias or "the prophet". - If he was the Messiah, it wouldn't be reincarnation. - If he was Elias, it still wouldn't be reincarnation. Read 2 Kings 2:11. This verse clearly states that Elias never died. There has been only two persons that has gone directly to heaven without dying first. Those are Enoch (Genesis 5:24, Hebr 11:5) and Elias as stated above. Read also Luke 1:17 which I will discuss in a little while. - If it was "the prophet" it wouldn't be reincarnation. Read Deut 18:18 > In fact, Jesus Himself raises the issue at one point: > > "Who do men say that I am?" And they told Him, John the Baptist, > and others say Elijah; and others, one of the prophets. (Mark 8:28) Be careful! Jesus is only asking a simple question. If I asked you this same question, would you then say that I believed in reincarnation ? This verse is a parallell to Matt 16:13-16 which I have already discussed above. > It also appears that Jesus states in Matt 11:14 and 17:11-13 that John the > Baptist is in fact the reincarnation of Elias. I would like to quote Luke 1:17; "And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias...". Clearly - the bible does not mention a physical reincarnation. It seems more like Jesus is talking about what the life of John the Baptist would be like - not who he was. > I do not follow how John 11 (the raising of Lazarus) supports your view. Read John 11:11-14. Jesus first said that Lazarus was sleeping (his soul was sleeping), then he made it clear to the disciples that Lazarus was dead. Why did Jesus say that he was sleeping? How would it be possible to raise somebody from the dead if he was already reincarnated into someone else? Read John 11:25-26. We will rise again in the resurrection in the last day. It seems quite clear to me that we will not rise again (or be reincarnated) before that day. Read 1 Tess 4:13-18 also, these verses support the idea that death is like sleep - in other words: no reincarnation. We can continue to 1 Cor 15:22-23. These verses clearly states that when we die, we will stay dead until the day when Jesus returns. We shall not be made alive again before Jesus returns. > In the case of Heb 9:27, I would say that if Paul was referring to physical > death (rather than spiritual death), then he was mistaken. "Just as man is destined to die once and after that to face judgement, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people;" (Heb 9:27-28) You are stating that the bible is wrong with regards to these verses. Be careful, you are on very thin ice here. Jesus Christ was sacrificed once - he died physically once. Likewise, we will die *physically once*, and then face judgement. In these verses the bible is very clear - reincarnation is definitely not biblical. I would like you to state your interpretation of this verse. > Once again, I have to ask you then, what is your own interpretation of > the cited passage (Matt 24:34)? "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulflled." (Matt 24:34) I read my norwegian translation of the bible (1988-version), and it does not say "generasjon" which is the norwegian word for "generation". Instead it says "Slekt" - or "family/age/relatives/race" in english (some of these I believe can also be translated to "generation"). I do not have a concordance at hand, so I do not know what is the most accurate translation from the original texts. So, my interpretation of this verse must be that mankind (as we know it) will not cease to exist before Jesus returns at the end of this age. If anybody has any comments on this, I would like to know. >>> Too, the words of Paul, "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." >>> (Gal 6:7) express the knowledge of the Law of Sowing and Reaping, which >>> is often carried out over the course of several earth lives. >> You don't need several earth lives to verify this verse, it can >> easily be done during one earth-life (or even in one day). The >> idea of reincarnation and karma comes from Greek philosophers like >> Plato, and from "mystical" religions like Hinduism, New Age etc. >> It does not come from the bible. > Although there well may be cases of sowing and reaping being carried out > even instantaneously, I think there are also countless cases where it occurs > over the course one or more earth lives. The Konnersreuth case of the > stigmatism of Therese Neumann being one obvious example. You cited Gal 6:7 in an earlier posting, I would really like to know how you support reincarnation using that verse. Again, I think you are reading far more out of the text than was intended. I do not know the Konnersreuth case, so I am unable to make any comments on this. > We all know of the saying, "The mills of God grind slowly, but they > grind exceedingly fine!", but what is the meaning of it? > The meaning is that sowing and reaping is not necessarily fulfilled > within the limited time frame overseen by human beings in a single > earth life, but it is always fulfilled just the same. In other words: The sacrifice Jesus made on the cross was not enough. We also have to keep going through life after life until we are perfect enough for God. What about Luke 23:43 where Jesus forgives the sins of a man who was sentenced to death ? Would that man have to come back and live more lives until he had made up for his sins ? What about all the other cases where Jesus forgave sins ? No - I do not believe in reincarnation. I believe that Jesus made a perfect sacrifice at the cross. It is necessary and sufficient for salvation. Nothing we ever do can make up for our sins - our only hope for salvation is Jesus Christ. We cannot save ourselves. > And just because other peoples in other places and times already knew > about reincarnation and sowing and reaping (karma) does not mean that > these ideas are wrong. What would be the sense of claiming that? > Gold is gold, whether a prince or a pauper holds it in his hands! I have never said that the idea of sowing and reaping was wrong - quite the opposite. If I decide to break the left arm of any of my friends, I will have to face the consequences (he/she wouldn't like it). It doesn't have anything to do with reincarnation. >> I think the rejection of reincarnation is very legitimate. The >> bible tells us that we will die only once (that is - before the >> final judgement). Keep in mind that the bible talks about a >> first death, and a second death. There is no third, fourth >> or fifth death. > Once again, past teachings gave mankind that which was most appropriate > for his level of spiritual development *at that time*. Today we are in > the position to understand far more about the Creation in which we live. > And in fact we seriously *need* to do so. Science has certainly changed a lot in 2000 years, but I do not think there is a great difference in "spiritual development". The biggest change - in my opinion - is a synchretic (I think that is the english word for it) tendency. People mix different religions so they can believe what they want to believe. > Once again, I believe that Jesus Himself must have spoken about sowing > and reaping, and this is why it is also stated by Paul. If some want to > call sowing and reaping by the name karma, I have no problem with that. > It's not "new age" -- it's there in the Bible. It's just that we haven't > troubled ourselves to learn more about it hitherto. I am just as sure as you that Jesus spoke about sowing and reaping. But just to make sure we understand each other. When I talk about karma, I mean the combination of reincarnation and sowing and reaping - not sowing and reaping alone. I do not think Jesus supported the idea of karma. > The love and the grace of God exist to be quite sure, but they in no > way cancel or negate the need to fulfill His Laws and His Justice. > Love and justice cannot be separated, they are ultimately one. We certainly must try to do our best to do Gods will. But knowing that our best will never be good enough, I am glad that it is the grace of God and not our deeds that save us. I would like your interpreatation of the following bible-verse. In my opinion, it seems to contradict the idea of reincarnation. Acts 2:24 (Death could not hold Jesus. Doesn't this imply that death can hold all others? Yes, we are talking about physical death.) We clearly have disagreements, but I hope we can avoid starting a flamewar. If I have been rude, it was never my intention. Keep in mind that I usually communicate in norwegian and not in english. (In other words - there is a possibility that we might misunderstand each other). I will be going away for some time now, so I would be very glad if any responses to this was also directly emailed to me (both from you Mark, and from any others). God Bless You. -Torbjoern- -- ----- Torbjorn Bakke (Research Assistant) Internet: torbakke@idt.unit.no Div. of Computer Systems & Telematics torbakke@solan.unit.no Norwegian Institute of Technology