What if greedy authorities hid bible verses from the world at talked about reincarnarion being real?

Hanging by a Thread said:

Maybe it’s not hidden at all. Jesus flat out said that John the Baptist is Elijah. I have one of those Bibles that has the footnotes below put together by theologists explaining the meanings of scripture. This assertion, among several others falls under the “well, Jesus didn’t really mean that” category. But that’s what the man said. There’s no way around that. He even brackets the assertion with comments that seem to anticipate disbelief: “If you are willing to accept it”…i.e – I know this will be a leap for you guys.
“He who has ears to hear, let him hear”… i.e.- that’s right, you heard me correctly.
I don’t know if there is reincarnation and if this is actually what Jesus meant, but food for thought anyway.
You could say it’s not reincarnation because I believe Elijah technically never died.
There's also the instance where Elijah later appeared as himself during the transformation.
You could also say that John denied he was Elijah. I don’t know the rules of reincarnation but the standard seems to imply that you’re not fully aware of any previous lives. And John also denied he was a prophet. But Jesus said John was both a prophet and Elijah. So who you gonna believe, John or Jesus himself?
All things are possible with God, so who knows? Maybe some get more than one chance.

Click to expand...

Jesus meant what He said--John is the Elijah promised to come. And so John fulfills the promise of the coming of Elijah before the Day of the Lord. And so John came "in the spirit and power" of Elijah.

John was not a reincarnated Elijah, but he was the fulfillment of the prophecy and promise of the coming of Elijah.

John, in a sense, bore the torch and mantle of Elijah, to turn the hearts of fathers to their children, and children to their fathers, to call the people to repentance, in anticipation and hope of the One who would to come, the promised Christ. And John then bore witness upon seeing Him, saying, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". And so then John said "I must decrease that He may increase" and then John suffered a martyr's death at the hands of Herod. St. John the Forerunner is indeed the one who came in the spirit and power of Elijah, fulfilling the mission and purpose of coming of Elijah, as a voice calling out in the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Hanging by a Thread said:

Maybe it’s not hidden at all. Jesus flat out said that John the Baptist is Elijah. I have one of those Bibles that has the footnotes below put together by theologists explaining the meanings of scripture. This assertion, among several others falls under the “well, Jesus didn’t really mean that” category. But that’s what the man said. There’s no way around that. He even brackets the assertion with comments that seem to anticipate disbelief: “If you are willing to accept it”…i.e – I know this will be a leap for you guys.
“He who has ears to hear, let him hear”… i.e.- that’s right, you heard me correctly.
I don’t know if there is reincarnation and if this is actually what Jesus meant, but food for thought anyway.
You could say it’s not reincarnation because I believe Elijah technically never died.
There's also the instance where Elijah later appeared as himself during the transformation.
You could also say that John denied he was Elijah. I don’t know the rules of reincarnation but the standard seems to imply that you’re not fully aware of any previous lives. And John also denied he was a prophet. But Jesus said John was both a prophet and Elijah. So who you gonna believe, John or Jesus himself?
All things are possible with God, so who knows? Maybe some get more than one chance.

Click to expand...

Um idioms and metaphors actually do exist and exist in scripture. Even if you believe in something like transubstantiation of the Eucharist based on scripture that is much different than the disciples chowing down on Jesus, Zombie Apocalypse style. The same goes for Peterine Primacy of Peter according to traditional Catholic dogma, that is much different than believing that Jesus actually saying that Peter is made of stone or is a literal foundation stone.

Most people likewise do not expect people to cut off their hands and pluck out their eye balls to avoid things like envy and lust but see that as hyperbole by Jesus to avoid various sins of thought, habit and passion. Of course, if you are Origen you may take such advice literally and actually neuter yourself....

ViaCrucis said:

Are you saying that the soul/spirit of Elijah entered into the womb of St. Elizabeth to become John the Baptist?

That never happened. The Prophet Elijah and St. John the Baptist are two entirely different human persons. John fulfilled the prophecy of the coming of Elijah, and thus came in the spirit and power of Elijah as Christ our Lord clearly teaches. But at the Mount of Transfiguration when both Moses and Elijah appear with Christ, it is Elijah, not John, who is there.

No person entered the zygote in Elizabeth's womb; that which was conceived in the womb of Elizabeth, sired by Zachariah, was a brand new human person--John the Baptist. Who came in the spirit and power of Elijah as the forerunner of the Messiah.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Jesus clearly said that's Elijah. I don't see where anything beyond that is clearly taught.

ViaCrucis said:

Jesus meant what He said--John is the Elijah promised to come. And so John fulfills the promise of the coming of Elijah before the Day of the Lord. And so John came "in the spirit and power" of Elijah.

John was not a reincarnated Elijah, but he was the fulfillment of the prophecy and promise of the coming of Elijah.

John, in a sense, bore the torch and mantle of Elijah, to turn the hearts of fathers to their children, and children to their fathers, to call the people to repentance, in anticipation and hope of the One who would to come, the promised Christ. And John then bore witness upon seeing Him, saying, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". And so then John said "I must decrease that He may increase" and then John suffered a martyr's death at the hands of Herod. St. John the Forerunner is indeed the one who came in the spirit and power of Elijah, fulfilling the mission and purpose of coming of Elijah, as a voice calling out in the wilderness to make straight the paths of the Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Jesus said that's Elijah. You're the one saying he came in the "spirit and power".

You mean the absurd idea that I was once someone else who wasn't me? Well, if it wasn't me, then in what sense did "I" "reincarnate"?

Pavel Mosko said:

Um idioms and metaphors actually do exist and exist in scripture. Even if you believe in something like transubstantiation of the Eucharist based on scripture that is much different than the disciples chowing down on Jesus, Zombie Apocalypse style. The same goes for Peterine Primacy of Peter according to traditional Catholic dogma, that is much different than believing that Jesus actually saying that Peter is made of stone or is a literal foundation stone.

Most people likewise do not expect people to cut off their hands and pluck out their eye balls to avoid things like envy and lust but see that as hyperbole by Jesus to avoid various sins of thought, habit and passion. Of course, if you are Origen you may take such advice literally and actually neuter yourself....

Click to expand...

Well, by that logic then maybe Jesus didn't mean we shouldn't envy or lust. Maybe he didn't mean that there's a heaven or hell. See this is where I run into problems with how we use the Bible. When we come across something that doesn't quite line up- even if it's from Jesus himself - we dismiss the comment as metaphorical. But we'll take one line from a proverb - which can be seen as poetry/musing- and act as though every letter of the quote is to be taken literally. I don't know if we're in a postition to discern what's metaphorical vs literal if it's not clearly stated or implied. If we are, then that just means we can essentially create our own doctrine. Personally, I don't know if there is such a thing as reincarnation or if Jesus is actually saying there is. All I'm saying is that Jesus clearly stated that's Elijah (bracketed with the emphasis I pointed out in my post) and there isn't much else said on the matter to indicate idiom,hyperbole or metaphor. Your position, to me, just makes it seem that if a piece to the puzzle doesn't fit, we can just break off a piece and make it fit. (That last sentence was a metaphor, btw. I know there's no puzzle...... )

Hanging by a Thread said:

Jesus said that's Elijah. You're the one saying he came in the "spirit and power".

Click to expand...

It's what Scripture teaches: Luke 1:17

-CryptoLutheran

Hanging by a Thread said:

Well, by that logic then maybe Jesus didn't mean we shouldn't envy or lust. Maybe he didn't mean that there's a heaven or hell. See this is where I run into problems with how we use the Bible. When we come across something that doesn't quite line up- even if it's from Jesus himself - we dismiss the comment as metaphorical. But we'll take one line from a proverb - which can be seen as poetry/musing- and act as though every letter of the quote is to be taken literally. I don't know if we're in a postition to discern what's metaphorical vs literal if it's not clearly stated or implied. If we are, then that just means we can essentially create our own doctrine. Personally, I don't know if there is such a thing as reincarnation or if Jesus is actually saying there is. All I'm saying is that Jesus clearly stated that's Elijah (bracketed with the emphasis I pointed out in my post) and there isn't much else said on the matter to indicate idiom,hyperbole or metaphor. Your position, to me, just makes it seem that if a piece to the puzzle doesn't fit, we can just break off a piece and make it fit. (That last sentence was a metaphor, btw. I know there's no puzzle...... )

Click to expand...

Hanging by a Thread said:

Well, by that logic then maybe Jesus didn't mean we shouldn't envy or lust. Maybe he didn't mean that there's a heaven or hell. See this is where I run into problems with how we use the Bible. When we come across something that doesn't quite line up- even if it's from Jesus himself - we dismiss the comment as metaphorical. But we'll take one line from a proverb - which can be seen as poetry/musing- and act as though every letter of the quote is to be taken literally. I don't know if we're in a postition to discern what's metaphorical vs literal if it's not clearly stated or implied. If we are, then that just means we can essentially create our own doctrine. Personally, I don't know if there is such a thing as reincarnation or if Jesus is actually saying there is. All I'm saying is that Jesus clearly stated that's Elijah (bracketed with the emphasis I pointed out in my post) and there isn't much else said on the matter to indicate idiom,hyperbole or metaphor. Your position, to me, just makes it seem that if a piece to the puzzle doesn't fit, we can just break off a piece and make it fit. (That last sentence was a metaphor, btw. I know there's no puzzle...... )

Click to expand...

No there is such thing as history. The Bible didn't exist in a cultural vacuum. The stuff that exists in the Bible has a cultural and a historical back drop. The Flood and Creation stories in Genesis share some common elements with the other near eastern cultures of the day. Like the world at creation existing as a dark watery chaos. This also true of many other elements in the Bible, like how angels look, etc. and how the supernatural is depicted. Their is imagery, idioms, story tropes etc. lifted from the other cultures that were used by the various Bible writers, those things were part of their culture in the same way we have cultural things like wanting to depict the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil as an apple when it was undefined (When the Jews and early Christians assumed or depicted it as a fig).
The video below goes through some of the ways the Bible used the iconography of the pagan cultures surrounding Israel.




You don't find anything on reincarnation till the advent of the Greeks as far as the Judeo Christian tradition goes, and even then the sources are not strong at all. This Carm article actually quotes sources that people who believe in Reincarnation actually try to cite to justify their belief in it. But if you read a Jewish Encyclopedia, they cite the origins in contemporary Judaism as coming from the Kabbalah which doesn't really get its start until medieval times.

Reincarnation and the Early Jews: What did they really believe?

TRANSMIGRATION OF SOULS - JewishEncyclopedia.com


Anyway I realize that you are probably simply being a contrarian for the fun of it, so I probably will wrap it up here. But this belief would not pass "the Vincentian Canon" as far as early Church teaching goes.

CHURCH FATHERS: Commonitorium (Vincent of Lerins)

Hanging by a Thread said:

Well, by that logic then maybe Jesus didn't mean we shouldn't envy or lust. Maybe he didn't mean that there's a heaven or hell. See this is where I run into problems with how we use the Bible. When we come across something that doesn't quite line up- even if it's from Jesus himself - we dismiss the comment as metaphorical. But we'll take one line from a proverb - which can be seen as poetry/musing- and act as though every letter of the quote is to be taken literally. I don't know if we're in a postition to discern what's metaphorical vs literal if it's not clearly stated or implied. If we are, then that just means we can essentially create our own doctrine. Personally, I don't know if there is such a thing as reincarnation or if Jesus is actually saying there is. All I'm saying is that Jesus clearly stated that's Elijah (bracketed with the emphasis I pointed out in my post) and there isn't much else said on the matter to indicate idiom,hyperbole or metaphor. Your position, to me, just makes it seem that if a piece to the puzzle doesn't fit, we can just break off a piece and make it fit. (That last sentence was a metaphor, btw. I know there's no puzzle...... )

Click to expand...

Dont forget that the disciples asked Jesus if the man, who was born blind, sinned before his current life, to deserve to be born blind... Jesus did not act as if the notion was crazy.....He just explained that this was not the reason. This shows the common belief during this time..... I find this more convincing than the John-Elijah discussion.

PaulCyp1 said:

You mean the absurd idea that I was once someone else who wasn't me? Well, if it wasn't me, then in what sense did "I" "reincarnate"?

Click to expand...

The you that is YOU reincarnates. Yet, your personality dies....unless you kill it first? See? it is not that difficult to understand.

He who seeks to save his life shall lose, and he who loses it shall save it.

If you deny yourself, and follow him....you will never die.. If you choose to hang onto your personality now...you will die.....

Let us become, no longer i.....but Christ....so we can take off corruptible and conversations like this one will become irrelevant....

"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?"

ViaCrucis said:

Are you saying that the soul/spirit of Elijah entered into the womb of St. Elizabeth to become John the Baptist?

That never happened.

Click to expand...

Not according to your dogme but does scripture ever deny this is possible? No, it does not yet there are many verses which would allow this to be what happened...

Matt 13:36 Then Jesus dismissed the crowds and went into the house. His disciples came to Him and said, “EXPLAIN to us the parable of the weeds in the field.” 37 He replied, “The One who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed represents the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

First, an explanation cannot be built on a metaphor or other linguistic device but must be the straight truth.

Second, to sow is to remove from a storage place and scatter or plant in a field for growth, not to create the seed.

Third, this sewing cannot refer to our creation because it is said that the devil sows also and he cannot create.

Where is this place of storage we may have been moved from to enter the world? Ps 9:17 The wicked will RETURN to Sheol—all the nations who forget God. This is what is written in this verse. The interpretations that they go to hell or the grave are just that, eisegetic interpretations of these words to support church dogma. The worst of these interpretation are those which claim the wicked go to hell or Sheol or retreat to there when the word yā·šū·ḇū, Strong's Hebrew 7725, clearly denotes it means to return.

Since you can't return to somewhere you have never been, the wicked tares must have come from there to be able to return to there. There is no proof that the sinful elect, the good seed, are not in Sheol also before their conception on earth when they are also sown into the world. They just return to GOD when they die, not back to Sheol.

TedT said:

Not according to your dogme but does scripture ever deny this is possible? No, it does not yet there are many verses which would allow this to be what happened...

Matt 13:36 Then Jesus dismissed the crowds and went into the house. His disciples came to Him and said, “EXPLAIN to us the parable of the weeds in the field.” 37 He replied, “The One who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed represents the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

First, an explanation cannot be built on a metaphor or other linguistic device but must be the straight truth.

Second, to sow is to remove from a storage place and scatter or plant in a field for growth, not to create the seed.

Third, this sewing cannot refer to our creation because it is said that the devil sows also and he cannot create.

Where is this place of storage we may have been moved from to enter the world? Ps 9:17 The wicked will RETURN to Sheol—all the nations who forget God. This is what is written in this verse. The interpretations that they go to hell or the grave are just that, eisegetic interpretations of these words to support church dogma. The worst of these interpretation are those which claim the wicked go to hell or Sheol or retreat to there when the word yā·šū·ḇū, Strong's Hebrew 7725, clearly denotes it means to return.

Since you can't return to somewhere you have never been, the wicked tares must have come from there to be able to return to there. There is no proof that the sinful elect, the good seed, are not in Sheol also before their conception on earth when they are also sown into the world. They just return to GOD when they die, not back to Sheol.

Click to expand...

Before we continue, may I ask a question?

How do you reconcile the idea of reincarnation with resurrection?

At the resurrection and the renewal of creation in the Age to Come, who will be there: Elijah or St. John the Baptist? Which person, whose body of flesh will we see, meet, and encounter in that glorious new world?

According to the teaching of the Christian Church, the answer to that question is simple: Both. Both will be there, because Elijah and John are two entirely distinct individual persons, two minds, two distinct souls, two unique bodies--two human beings.

Because as I see it, the strongest argument against reincarnation is the fact that it makes no sense in the context of the Christian hope.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

No person entered the zygote in Elizabeth's womb; that which was conceived in the womb of Elizabeth, sired by Zachariah, was a brand new human person--John the Baptist.

Click to expand...

If you accept that John was conceived in Adam's inherited sin then a corollary must be that GOD created this brand new human person as evil...

The stench of blasphemy is strong in this interpretation of how John became a sinner on earth. No one believes that Satan was created evil but became evil by choosing by his free will to sin against GOD but they are all willing to accept that GOD creates HIS church, HIS Bride, as evil without any free will decision on their part to rebel against HIM!

Therefore the doctrine that we are sinners at conception point us to accept we made a free will decision to rebel against GOD or HIS commands prior to our conception when we are sown into this world.

TedT said:

If you accept that John was conceived in Adam's inherited sin then a corollary must be that GOD created this brand new human person as evil...

The stench of blasphemy is strong in this interpretation of how John became a sinner one earth. No one believes that Satan was created evil but became evil by choosing by his free will to sin against GOD but they are all willing to accept that GOD creates HIS church, HIS Bride, as evil without any free will decision on their part to rebel against HIM!

Therefore the doctrine that we are sinners at conception point us to accept we made a free will decision to rebel against GOD or HIS commands prior to our conception when we are sown into this world.

Click to expand...

It would seem that in this case, you are struggling with understanding the doctrine of Original Sin.

Original Sin does not mean that God creates human beings as evil; but that human beings inherit a broken and fallen humanity from Adam.

God created the earth--is He to blame when pressure builds up under the earth's crust and causing a volcanic eruption? God created the seas, do we blame Him when a shark mistakenly attacks a human being, or when a tsunami crashes on land? God created the stars, including our sun which shines brightly and warms the earth--and also is the cause of skin cancer.

No, we don't. Because the reality of the world as fallen is not impugned against God. And we, human beings, part of this same fallen world, we too have been made captive to sin and death, held as hostage. God is not to blame for that.

That is why Christ came, to redeem and save the world. Not just us individual human beings, but all of creation.

So no, Original Sin does not mean God created evil people. It means God created His good image-bearing creation who have, through falling from grace, become estranged from the good Creator God who loves us. And we need the healing balm of God's mercy to not only restore us to a renewed and reconciled relationship with Him, but also to liberate us from the power and captivity of death.

That is why we confess that Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.

We look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the Age to Come.

-CryptoLutheran

RaymondG said:

Dont forget that the disciples asked Jesus if the man, who was born blind, sinned before his current life, to deserve to be born blind... Jesus did not act as if the notion was crazy.....He just explained that this was not the reason. This shows the common belief during this time..... I find this more convincing than the John-Elijah discussion.

Click to expand...

A common belief? Consider that since this was a foreign idea to Jewish theology as their writings prove, that it was only after after listening to Christ that they thought to ask about the possibility. Iow, Christ taught about our pre-conception existence, not reincarnation

ImCo, this refers to our pre-conception existence but not to reincarnation. Reincarnation really discredits all we know from the bible about salvation from the natural and legal consequences of our choice to rebel against GOD. That those who were not elected to salvation might reincarnate is possible though I make nothing of it...they are dross.

ViaCrucis said:

How do you reconcile the idea of reincarnation with resurrection?

Click to expand...

I don't because I do not think that the sinful elect reincarnate. If the wicked do reincarnate then at the Great White Throne, it is the spirit that is judged, bodies would be meaningless.

Also I don't think we resurrect to a human body but to a spiritual body that can manifest as human if desired:
1 Corinthians 15:44 ... is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

ViaCrucis said:

According to the teaching of the Christian Church,

Click to expand...

According to some of the Christian church...

TedT said:

I don't because I do not think that the sinful elect reincarnate. If the wicked do reincarnate then at the Great White Throne, it is the spirit that is judged, bodies would be meaningless.

Also I don't think we resurrect to a human body but to a spiritual body that can manifest as human if desired:
1 Corinthians 15:44 ... is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

Click to expand...

You should probably go and study what "spiritual body" means here, because it doesn't mean what you think it does.

St. Paul contrasts the present soma psuchekon ("soulish body") with the future soma pneumatikon ("spiritual body").

If you believe that the spiritual body refers to a kind of "spiritual matter", rather than actual flesh and bone (which the Scriptures clearly teach, read Luke 24:39); then the corollary to that is that the "soulish body" refers to a kind of "soul matter". But that is quite obviously not the case.

It not a contrast between physical matter--flesh and bones--and immaterial "spirit"; but the contrast between the present mortality and corruptibility of the body under the slavery of sin and death with the future immortality and incorruptiblity of the body in the resurrection. It is a "spiritual body" because it is the quickening power of the Holy Spirit who gives life, compare with Romans 8:11. See also Philippians 3:21.

Once you study and become better acquainted with the basic teachings of Scripture and the Christian faith, I believe it should be quite natural to realize that your interpretations of passages elsewhere in Scripture where you seem to think reincarnation is suggested falls apart quite drastically.

There's no room for reincarnation in Christianity, because Christianity teaches that God became flesh, the Eternal and only-begotten Son of the Father, the very Word of God Himself, became man; He suffered, was crucified, dead, buried, rose on the third day, ascended, sits at the right hand of the Father, will come again to judge the living and the dead; and on that day the dead shall rise, and God shall make all things new--World without end.

Credo in ... carnis resurrectionem.

-CryptoLutheran

TedT said:

According to some of the Christian church...

Click to expand...

No. The Christian Church.

The Creeds aren't optional.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

It would seem that in this case, you are struggling with understanding the doctrine of Original Sin.

Click to expand...

Struggle....? You language is paternalistic. I do not struggle, I know as well as I know anything that MY original sin was rebellion to GOD's command to come away from other sinful elect.

ViaCrucis said:

Original Sin does not mean that God creates human beings as evil; but that human beings inherit a broken and fallen humanity from Adam.

Click to expand...

It does NOT mean that to some who reject the ordinary meaning create. If HE used Adam to make us sinful then HE is creating sinful people. Period. The thousands of words used to try to prove that by making us to inherit sin does not mean HE created us as sinners is astounding in its doublethink.

Before my creation there was x amount of sin in the world. After my creation at my conception there was x+1 amount of sin in the world...and who created me that way? Who decreed for us to inherit Adam's sin when HE might have created us innocent like you think HE created Adam and Eve on earth and Satan in heaven...

ViaCrucis said:

God created the earth--is He to blame when pressure builds up under the earth's crust and causing a volcanic eruption?

Click to expand...

Blame implies fault. There is no fault in HIS judgement of sinners on this earth...it is a prison planet after all [Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was hurled down— that ancient serpent called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. with
2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, actually tartarus, the lowest depth of Sheol in the centre of the earth] even though the earth has a rehab centre [the church] in it for the sinful elect.

And all things under heaven are predetermined and predestined, even shark attacks or you sell GOD's sovereignty out the window for a pittance of false hope.

I am not a universalist because Jesus spoke of the unforgivable sin and He does not babble.

ViaCrucis said:

CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Google: What does crypto mean?
(Entry 1 of 2) 1 : a person who adheres or belongs secretly to a party, sect, or other group.