I read the other day, (don’t remember where) that it was perfectly acceptable among ancient Jews to adhere to reincarnation? Has anyone else heard this and would it be acceptable as a Christian to believe it?
Wouldn’t we have to be ‘incarnated’ first? I know Jesus was incarnated, but I’ve never thought of human beings being ‘incarnated’. Or am I just being picky? I’ve been known to be…
And to be re-incarnated, my way of thinking would be that we die, and some part of us survives, and at the same moment a sperm and egg are joining somewhere in the world, that part of us which survives gets in the mix? Do we kick out the potential person that just got conceived? Or do we enter someone else’s body and dispossess them then? Or are we then two minds, one nature?
I know nothing about it, really…
Interesting Dave 
I never thought about that – in order to be RE incarnated, you’d first have to have been previously incarnated. Nice. I guess I never thought much about reincarnation at all. I’d probably come back as an iguana or something. 
I read the other day, (don’t remember where) that it was perfectly acceptable among ancient Jews to adhere to reincarnation? Has anyone else heard this and would it be acceptable as a Christian to believe it?
User avatar
nimblewill
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:38 pm
Some ancient Jews believed it. I’m sure you could google info on this. Reincarnation is an Eastern Religious belief not a Christian belief. In Christianity we have one body for eternity. Some gnostics (i think) believed in reincarnation because of Jesus saying we must be born again and they take that as meaning reincarnation.
There is apparently some evidence that Origen taught “transmigration of souls” or reincarnation but from what I found in a quick search suggests this is pretty controversial. Maybe[tag]JasonPratt[/tag] can enlighten us?
I’ll bet [tag]Sobornost[/tag] would know the answer to this . . . (sorry, Dick, but you’re the one who knows this stuff . . .)
As I see it, even the Jews in Jesus’ day believed in reincarnation.
When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” (Matt 16:13,14 NKJV)
Now how could people say He was Elijah, or Jeremiah, or one of the prophets, unless they believed that He was reincarnated?
I guess it’s even more surprising that some thought He was John the Baptist, a man who was a contemporary of Jesus. How could THAT have been a reincarnation? But perhaps some did not know this. For example, Herod thought He was John the Baptist, risen from the dead (Matt 14:1,2)
As for the point that one must be incarnated prior to being reincarnated, that is true. But I think the assumption, in coining the word, was that everyone has been incarnated. For it was a common view in the middle ages (and yet endures) that every human being pre-existed—that God created a bundle of “souls” and plunks one into a baby, either at conception, or at birth, or some time in between.
I personally don’t subscribe to reincarnation but that some Jews of Jesus’ day may have wouldn’t be a surprise given the diversity of opinion among them on many things, “resurrection” for example.
Anyway I think there is NT evidence of notional reincarnation in the assumption posed by the disciples when they asked… “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?” – that blame could be apportioned to the man “born blind” suggests at least some concept/belief in prior existence for him to be inflicted accordingly IF he had sinned… presumably beforehand. That seems a logical conclusion to me.
Dick really does want to take a break from the forum, but he gave me this link where he already discussed reincarnation: Pharisees and Reincarnation I haven’t looked at it as I’m not especially interested in reincarnation, but maybe it will have some ideas for you guys.
Correct, Davo. I had meant to refer to that as well, but I forgot. Thanks for bringing that up. There’s no way that “that man” could have sinned so that he was born blind unless he had been re-incarnated—or he somehow was able to sin as a pre-incarnate spirit. Many in the middle ages believed we were all created as spirits, and that God put us into a baby at conception or birth or some time in between.
Cindy, I’m not interested in the concept of reincarnation either. But I think it’s somewhat important to recognize that the Jews of Jesus’ day seemed to have believed in it.
Anyway I think there is NT evidence of notional reincarnation in the assumption posed by the disciples when they asked… “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?” – that blame could be apportioned to the man “born blind” suggests at least some concept/belief in prior existence for him to be inflicted accordingly IF he had sinned… presumably beforehand. That seems a logical conclusion to me.
Right and good point. Also some believed that this “born blind” man could have sinned in the womb.
Yes quite possibly some may have believed as you say… but for mine I think that would not be possible given that “practising” sin or righteousness is usually considered as a wilful conscious action of a sentient being, something not possible to that degree in the womb, especially in light of “(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),” Rom 9:11.
Not only that, but as far as determining or judging “good from evil” not even ‘the born’ under the age of accountability [whatever that is actually said to be] had personal transgression held to their charge, as per…
Deut 1:39 ‘Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.
Do you folks believe that there is anything inherently wrong with believing it?
The doctrine is taught to allow for enlightenment in the next body or the next etc - escaping the wheel of fate - getting more and more perfect, however many lifetimes it takes.
That is not a Christian concept at all - whether you want to call it ‘wrong’ to believe it or not, I suppose is up to you.
There was a thread posted above from Cindy that dealt with the concept.
Yes I agree Dave, but that the question was phrased as it was “by the disciples” certainly lends support that such a notion was popularly enough held to be asked.
As to whether there is anything “inherently wrong” with reincarnation per se I couldn’t really say because when you think about it reincarnation is ultimately universalism via the long, long, long way around; and given the variation within universalism i.e., some say there is purgatory to go through, others say there is a lake of fire to go through etc, etc, then reincarnation logically speaking is but another extension of that, albeit a much longer process.
Davo - I had already deleted that first message as it occurred to me that I was not replying to the question, you must have nabbed it in the 15 seconds it was posted!!
Sorry Dave, well they’re immortalised now… 
Aaaaaargh…
For the apostle Paul, the Great Hope of the Christian is the resurrection. He seemed to indicate that if there was no resurrection there was no hope; for there would be no after-life.
However, if everyone is re-incarnated after death, then there is an after-life, or an endless series of after-lives for everyone. No need for the resurrection that Jesus promised His disciples would take place on the last day for those who entrust themselves to Him (John 6:39,40,44,54).
The same holds if the “soul” or “spirit” of everyone goes to heaven or hell at death. What need would there be for the resurrection?
A few wee notes since I was tagged here -
My own research into the matter suggested to me that it is very unlikely that either the Palestinian Pharisees or any of the Early Christians believed in reincarnation (but my own research was not exhaustive by any means). It’s true that Alexandrian Jews and Alexandrian Christians believed in the pre-existence of souls – that they existed disembodied before taking physical form; but this does not necessarily imply reincarnation. The passages from the Gospels that some use to suggest the Pharisees taught reincarnation seem to me to be more compellingly explained in terms of other debates about theodicy and suffering – do children sin in the womb and is this why some children suffer from birth? Or is a child infected by its parents personal sin if it is born disabled or otherwise ill? St Augustine centuries later was agonising over the same questions when in his caustic debates with Julian of Eclanum when he asserted that children born with deformities etc are somehow being punished for original sin (a horrible idea IMHO – but abstract theodicy can sometimes lead us to unnatural conclusions). Part of Jesus answer is seems to be that God’s will is to heal suffering not to inflict it (the glory that is revealed in his healing of the blind man is Gods’ gracious and healing power that is not on the side of death or affliction).
There are a number of books and websites which try to show that the big secret kept from ordinary Christians by the Catholic Church (for reason of control) is that the original Christians believed in reincarnation. It seems that these books and websites want to argue this case out of horror at ECT teachings. (Again I think the evidence is lacking for this)Reincarnation has certainly been part of the worldview of some historic Christian universalists like Lady Anne Conway - especially those influenced by Jewish Kabala; and universalists from the ancient Church of the Far East like Jing Jing in the sixth century how were influenced by Chinese Buddhism .
Nicolas Berdyaev, the Russian Orthodox Universalists who had studies Christian esotericism and Jewish Kabbalism background gives some interesting thoughts on this matter in Destiny and the Spirit. “Victory over death,” he writes, “is not the last and final victory. Victory over death is too much concerned with time. The last, final and ultimate victory is victory over hell.”After alluding to the injustice of the traditional notion of hell in which people are tormented eternally for “sins committed in time,” he goes on to note: “There is more justice in the doctrine of Karma and reincarnation, according to which deeds done in time are expiated in time and not in eternity, and man has other and wider experience than that between birth and death in this one life.” But then he goes on to affirm roundly: “Theosophical theory of reincarnation cannot be accepted by the Christian mind.” After so saying, however, he points out at once: “But it is essential to recognize that man’s final fate can only be settled after an infinitely greater experience in spiritual worlds than is possible in our short earthly life.” Berdyaev agrees with Saint Gregory of Nyssa who wrote; “It is absolutely necessary that the soul should be healed and purified, and if this does not take place during its life on earth it must be accomplished in future lives” (Great Catechism). For Gregory, as for Berdyaev, the soul’s eternal progress towards God – which is an adventure that is never exhausted takes place in future spiritual states of progression rather than in future incarnations
So for Berdyaev reincarnation is less problematic than ECT – for reasons that I can sympathise with and many here will also. The problem with reincarnation is that it can make this life and the suffering of others in this life seems unimportant and/or deserved and to be accepted fatalistically (and it can uphold an unjust social order as the poor and the sick suffer for crimes in past lives etc.) If this danger is to be avoided the teaching needs to be hedged about with numerous very complex qualifiers that make the teaching purely notional in order to render it harmless IMHO.
Finally a note on reincarnation and resurrection in Judaism. Those Jews who believe in reincarnation – influenced by Kabala – generally think that the purpose of reincarnation is not punishment but progression in purity and holiness (and that the maximum number of incarnations a soul can have is six - I understand - and this is for especially useful and holy souls who can contribute much to the repair/hallowing of the world). In each incarnation a person builds up their spirit and in their final incarnation their spirit is perfected to the point where they can live in holy and transforming harmony with matter. So it is their last body, perfected by spirit, that is raised at the day of Judgement
Love
Dick