Reincarnation doctorine in Christianity

[Probe]

I recently found out that the reincarnation doctorine was banned by emperor Justinius in 553 AD. Since reincarnation was major teaching of Christianity in its early stages shouldn't Christians believe in reincarnation?

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

Of course! It's no less exciting than Lazarus' resurrection. Besides, Justinius was only a man, not Christ, Himself.

[SolarPlexus]

yeah ofc, the reincarnation of the soul

dust to dust

back to the primordial god-mass

its the underlying message in most religions

[+Link of Hyrule]

Reincarnation is not a biblical idea, therefore Christians don't believe it. Considering that the Bible was canonised well before the 6th Century AD, I don't know why an Emperor of any sort would "ban" the belief in reincarnation, I certainly see no biblical reason to accept reincarnation and can imagine many reasons why reincarnation is not a biblical concept.

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

Your Pauline version of Christianity. So yes, I agree, it's not "Biblical," and yet, it's only but one story of Christianity.

[+Link of Hyrule]

Your Pauline version of Christianity. So yes, I agree, it's not "Biblical," and yet, it's only but one story of Christianity.

I follow Christ, not Paul. And there are 39 books of the Tanach written and codified long before Paul was ever born.....

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

Codified by man, not by angels, Christ, or Holy Ghost.

[Sundew]

Hebrews 9:27 "Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment." I suppose exceptions would be people that Jesus and the prophet Elijah raised from the dead, but they merely lived a bit longer within a normal human lifespan and then died; they were not reincarnated and this verse would seem to negate that possibility.

[Frank Merton]

I think the ban on reincarnation was a Christian thing in opposition to others in the ancient world who did believe in reincarnaiton. Christians are quite willing to use state power to enforce their beliefs when they control things.

Plato clearly believed in reincarnation, and used the fact that the Socratic method of teaching (where the teacher just asks leading questions and draws appropriate conclusions from the student) as evidence that we have prior knowledge built into us at birth and just need to have it drawn out. I particularly liked the case of his showing a slave boy that the square root of two is irrational.

He puts into Socrates' mouth a pretty clear doctrine that at death we go to a spirit realm and then later are reborn and in the spirit realm we are said to know all about all our lives. The Christians were delighted with his teaching about the immortal soul but managed to ignore this part of it.

[Harry_Dresden]

Reincarnation is not a biblical idea, therefore Christians don't believe it. Considering that the Bible was canonised well before the 6th Century AD, I don't know why an Emperor of any sort would "ban" the belief in reincarnation, I certainly see no biblical reason to accept reincarnation and can imagine many reasons why reincarnation is not a biblical concept.

If I was a emperor and the thought of recarnating back as a wine taster or goat herder would be enough to ban that part of the good book for ever.

[MichaelFredrek]

Hebrews 9:27 "Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment." I suppose exceptions would be people that Jesus and the prophet Elijah raised from the dead, but they merely lived a bit longer within a normal human lifespan and then died; they were not reincarnated and this verse would seem to negate that possibility.

jesus rose from the death because he had the power over it

Ellijah and enoch where risen to heaven in their mass body because

they will come back at end of times if you read revelations " the Two witnesses"

who will fight the beast and be killed and their bodies be left for 3 days outside the town

then they will be brought to life and rise to heaven again and that be the end

The roman emperor Banned the reincarnation because of various political

advisers who told him it would hurt your ruling image and other issues with Rome but if you

folks want an answer to this topic we need to read first the very reason of this story

which you could find it here for one writer

http://www.ancientquest.com/embark/druidism.html

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

Hebrews 9:27 "Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment." I suppose exceptions would be people that Jesus and the prophet Elijah raised from the dead, but they merely lived a bit longer within a normal human lifespan and then died; they were not reincarnated and this verse would seem to negate that possibility.

Here's one that's older than Hebrews:

Matthew 11:12-14New International Version (NIV)

¹² From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence,^[a] and violent people have been raiding it. ¹³ For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. ¹⁴ And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.

[SkyRainSea]

I've been studying this for myself lately and I'm still trying to fit all of the pieces together. I found this page interesting:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/resurrection01.html

As well as this one:

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Reincarnation/

[+Link of Hyrule]

Codified by man, not by angels, Christ, or Holy Ghost.

And hundreds of years before the time of Christ, which was the point I was making - meaning the idea of "Pauline" doctrines is irrelevant to the idea of reincarnation.

[Probe]

Reincarnation is not a biblical idea, therefore Christians don't believe it. Considering that the Bible was canonised well before the 6th Century AD, I don't know why an Emperor of any sort would "ban" the belief in reincarnation, I certainly see no biblical reason to accept reincarnation and can imagine many reasons why reincarnation is not a biblical concept.

It does not seem like a biblical idea because all references to reincarnation were removed from the bible. Theodora, Justinius wife selected monophysitist monks and gave them the job of completely removing every teaching of reincarnation from all church documents. The fact that early Christians believed in reincarnation and about 3000 christians died to stop Theodora from removing all reincarnation references from the Bible makes the reincarnation idea very important.

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

And hundreds of years before the time of Christ, which was the point I was making - meaning the idea of "Pauline" doctrines is irrelevant to the idea of reincarnation.

Pauline theology is not irrelevant to the concept of reincarnation because he said that salvation was dependent solely upon faith, not on one's efforts and good works.

[+Link of Hyrule]

It does not seem like a biblical idea because all references to reincarnation were removed from the bible. Theodora, Justinius wife selected monophysitist monks and gave them the job of completely removing every teaching of reincarnation from all church documents. The fact that early Christians believed in reincarnation and about 3000 christians died to stop Theodora from removing all reincarnation references from the Bible makes the reincarnation idea very important.

I hate making one-word replies, but I really can't stop myself on this one.... the one word..... EVIDENCE?

Seriously, what evidence exists that the Bible was "edited" to remove the idea of reincarnation?

[+Link of Hyrule]

Pauline theology is not irrelevant to the concept of reincarnation because he said that salvation was dependent solely upon faith, not on one's efforts and good works.

When the Bible is only 27 books long in the New Testament, and 39 books long in the Old Testament, to say that reincarnation is not in the Bible, in neither of the two Testaments, it becomes very much relevant. To complain that Paul doesn't mention it and then blame it on "Pauline Christianity" means tiddly squat.

[Careful_perspective]

I hate making one-word replies, but I really can't stop myself on this one.... the one word..... EVIDENCE?

Seriously, what evidence exists that the Bible was "edited" to remove the idea of reincarnation?

I am curious about this too, especially since I am familiar with Empress Theodora and her life. I am mostly familar with the fact that she is a VERY contentious subject among historians. Mainly because some suspect certain histories of her were altered and changed because of later prejudices about her birth and some of the other activities she was involved with as Empress.

[Careful_perspective]

This site (http://share-international.org/archives/AgelessWisdom/aw_bannned.htm) states that Emperor Justinian had certain teachings of the Theologist Origen banned. I don't see it stating that he had certain parts of the bible altered however.

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

When the Bible is only 27 books long in the New Testament, and 39 books long in the Old Testament, to say that reincarnation is not in the Bible, in neither of the two Testaments, it becomes very much relevant. To complain that Paul doesn't mention it and then blame it on "Pauline Christianity" means tiddly squat.

(to say that reincarnation is not in the Bible, in neither of the two Testaments),

Well, that's a matter of interpretation (but you're not referring to my posts).

(To complain that Paul doesn't mention it and then blame it on "Pauline Christianity" means tiddly squat.)

I'm not complaining; however, early Christians were influenced by Paul's ramblings.

[danielost]

Christians believe in resurrection. which in simple terms mean you rise from the dead with the body you have now. except, that it will be a perfect body. so minus the scares and wrinkles you can look in a mirror and see what you will look like for ever. those of us who have a handicap will be fixed.

[MichaelFredrek]

it is amazing how people are advancing

some would say that Christians have been brain washed

because simply they read what scientists have discovered and voila that is an

evidence of disprove

if we take the shroud of turine

and to those who read on the subject will know that

the picture on the shroud was a negative image

means that the person who was beneath this shroud had

some kind of super power light that forced through the shroud to create an image

in negative with such features...

so if Jesus was a hoax how would you define the image

in negative print on the shroud?

there is not a single hundred percent prove either on the age of earth

all they have is measuring the expansion of the universe to some distant galaxies

but still that has not given a hundred percent prove

another amazing thing is how could a sperm create life?

does the sperm contains life force?

it is just a sperm cell, that means there is another prove that

god gave this gift to us to form life to serve as a share in creation

for good of course...

the body returns to it's formal image.... ashes and earth

while Jesus said he created man from earth

so was this also a hoaxed sentence?

if people believe in ghosts then the evidence of incarnation is true

if false then ghosts are just speculations of our mind

and if ghosts do exist then there is an after life then there is possibility

of heaven and hell

and so on.. science can not tell that heaven does not exist nor hell

but for hell i can prove it already

We are already living in it ....lol

[+Link of Hyrule]

(to say that reincarnation is not in the Bible, in neither of the two Testaments),

Well, that's a matter of interpretation (but you're not referring to my posts).

(To complain that Paul doesn't mention it and then blame it on "Pauline Christianity" means tiddly squat.)

I'm not complaining; however, early Christians were influenced by Paul's ramblings.

And in everything you just said, none of it supports reincarnation.....Paul, no Paul.... Jesus, no Jesus.... Moses, Noah, Abraham, David, Solomon, Jeroboem, Rehoboem, take your pick..... none support reincarnation..... Edited January 27, 2015 by Paranoid Android

[+DieChecker]

I thought it was the Gnostic Christians who believed in Reincarnation.

http://www.near-deat...rrection03.html

The Christian Gnostics believed in reincarnation and the preexistence of the soul. They refused to believe in a resurrection of corpses at the end of time. They emphasized meeting Jesus on a spiritual level to become liberated and attain permanent citizenship in heaven. The Church of Rome of the second century A.D., on the other hand, declared that those who deny a Last Day resurrection of corpses are heretics.

The Gnostics were the Scientologists of their day....

I think the thing going against the Gnostics (and this idea of Reincarnation) is that None of the Apostles founded Gnostic groups. Christian Gnosticism instead was a blend of Christianity and Greek Philosophical thinking. Probably as taught by someone who meant well, but was uneducated in the ways of Christ's message and teachings. As such it was not what had been taught originally, and was more of a hybrid religion, which later became outlawed, then anything else. The followers of the Apostles never considered Reincarnation as being Christian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#Christianity

The necessity of immediate revelation through divine knowledge in order to attain transcendence in a Supreme Deity is important to understand in the identification of what evidence there is pertaining to Gnosticism[57] in the New Testament (NT), which would influence orthodox teaching.[58] Central Gnostic beliefs that differ from orthodox Christian teachings include: the creator as a lower being [‘Demiurge’] and not a Supreme Deity; the belief that all matter is evil and the body is a prison to escape from (versus the Nicene Creed teaching that there will be a physical resurrection of all people); scripture having a deep, hidden meaning whose true message could only be understood through “secret wisdom”;[59] and Jesus as a spirit that “seemed”[60] to be human, leading to a rejection of the incarnation (Docetism).[61] The traditional “formula which enshrines the Incarnation...is that in some sense God, without ceasing to be God, was made man...which is a prima facie [‘at first sight’] contradiction in theological terms...the NT nowhere reflects on the virgin birth of Jesus as witnessing to the conjunction of deity and manhood in His person...the deity of Jesus was not...clearly stated in words and [the book of] Acts gives no hint that it was”.[62] This philosophy[63] was known by the Church Fathers such as Origen, Irenaeus, and Tertullian (questionable).[64]

At its core, Gnosticism formed a speculative interest in the relationship of the oneness of God to the ‘triplicity’ of his manifestations. It seems to have taken Neoplatonic metaphysics of substance and hypostases [“being”][65] as a departure point for interpreting the relationship of the “Father” to the “Son”[66] in its attempt to define a new theology.[67] This would point to the infamous theological controversies by Arius[68] against followers of the Greek Alexandrian school,[69] headed by Athanasius.[70]

1) Gnostics did not believe in a all powerful God, just a demi-god.

2) The belief that the body and the material world is completely evil.

3) The belief there was secret wisdom hidden in scripture.

All of which are completely against what Jesus taught.

Edited January 27, 2015 by DieChecker