Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (9014 total)
39 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 38 visitors)
Newest Member: Ashles
Post Volume: Total: 881,962 Year: 13,710/23,288 Month: 228/412 Week: 15/40 Day: 0/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Jesus teach reincarnation?
jaywill
Member (Idle past 630 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 46 of 230 (777001)
01-24-2016 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 12:14 AM


Re: Hebrews 11:35 quote.
quote:
And most scholars say 2 Peter used Jude (you said Jude copied 2 Peter).

I see that you have the exact number of inspired books cataloged away. 66? Gee, where have I heard that before.

Nice to see that you think for yourself.


Ah, you're flaming already. So you want to see me say "Look everybody, I can say something original !"

So Peter faithfully repeated Jude or Jude faithfully repeated Peter. Does it make that much difference ? The disciples continued in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles. So they lived the same life and they followed the same teaching, if they were wise.

Yes, I have a Bible of 66 books. And NO I did not do the ancient work of sorting though the huge amounts of writings to discover the inspired writings. That was done by ancient brothers led by the Holy Spirit before I was born. I trust the leading of the Holy Spirit and the eventual last word by the Holy Spirit in this.

The question is how did the inspired books USE the quotations from non-canonical writings. This is more important than going back to those writings and assuming everything written there is the word of God.

God told the three friends of Job that they did not answer rightly as His servant Job had done. There are some quotations from the three friends of Job in the New Testament. I do not discount them as untrue because those men were rebuked by God.

Rather I tend to how those quotations were used by the inspired writers of the New Testament. The same would go for quotations from Enoch or from one of the poets Paul quoted.

In that sense the situation is the same to me.

My general rule runs something like this:

If an interpretation causes me to love Jesus and be more dependent upon Jesus, then it is at least a safe interpretation, even if it is not so good. Of course I seek a good interpretation.

If an interpretation causes me to be bothered about Jesus or cold in my love towards Jesus or feel I can be independent from Christ, then there is something wrong with the teaching no matter how good it sounds.

Over forty years I have heard lots of interpretations of Bible verses.
My smell test is "Does this cause me to love God and Christ more? Or does this cause me to feel drawn back from God, cold towards God, indifferent towards Christ?"

If the latter is the case, even is it sounds very scholarly, something is wrong there.
For the renewing and cleansing of my soul, I look to Christ's salvation.
I don't feel to replace that sense with a high hope in reincarnation.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 12:14 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 11:33 AM jaywill has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 47 of 230 (777002)
01-24-2016 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by jaywill
01-24-2016 10:16 AM


Re: Hebrews 11:35 quote.
quote:

Ah, you're flaming already. So you want to see me say "Look everybody, I can say something original !"

You said I was just seeing what I want to see.

Then you went and said that a bunch of men led by the Holy Spirit did your thinking for you.

quote:

So Peter faithfully repeated Jude or Jude faithfully repeated Peter. Does it make that much difference ? The disciples continued in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles. So they lived the same life and they followed the same teaching, if they were wise.

Yes, I have a Bible of 66 books. And NO I did not do the ancient work of sorting though the huge amounts of writings to discover the inspired writings. That was done by ancient brothers led by the Holy Spirit before I was born. I trust the leading of the Holy Spirit and the eventual last word by the Holy Spirit in this.


The people who came up with the "66 books" were a bunch of mass murderers. They had absolutely nothing to do with the Holy Spirit.

Be careful about calling a bunch of theocrats, who kill everybody "unorthodox", "Holy Spirit filled individuals" (or whatever).

The people they killed, especially the Manicheans, were devout pacifists. Mani and his followers did indeed follow the example that the Bible sets out as "Spirit" filled individuals.

quote:

The question is how did the inspired books USE the quotations from non-canonical writings. This is more important than going back to those writings and assuming everything written there is the word of God.

Jude quoted the Book of Enoch. And he presented it as the actual words of Enoch.

quote:

God told the three friends of Job that they did not answer rightly as His servant Job had done. There are some quotations from the three friends of Job in the New Testament. I do not discount them as untrue because those men were rebuked by God.

Show me where Enoch was rebuked.

Jude quoted the Book of Enoch in agreement with it message and he felt Enoch, the man, actually said what he quoted. Jude wasn't attacking people who believed in the Book of Enoch, was he?

quote:

Rather I tend to how those quotations were used by the inspired writers of the New Testament. The same would go for quotations from Enoch or from one of the poets Paul quoted.

Enoch was an Old Testament hero. He had a book named after him that people believed. Although there is a dispute about when the various parts were written, it is actually a Trinitarian book. (the "holy spirit" parts are generally dated after the time of Jesus, though some argue for early dates). By the time of Jude (100 AD), even the Holy Spirit parts were in existence.

Jude was quoting from a book that was felt to date from before the flood and it had all three Trinitarian parts.

quote:

In that sense the situation is the same to me.

My general rule runs something like this:

If an interpretation causes me to love Jesus and be more dependent upon Jesus, then it is at least a safe interpretation, even if it is not so good. Of course I seek a good interpretation.

If an interpretation causes me to be bothered about Jesus or cold in my love towards Jesus or feel I can be independent from Christ, then there is something wrong with the teaching no matter how good it sounds.

Over forty years I have heard lots of interpretations of Bible verses.
My smell test is "Does this cause me to love God and Christ more? Or does this cause me to feel drawn back from God, cold towards God, indifferent towards Christ?"

If the latter is the case, even is it sounds very scholarly, something is wrong there.
For the renewing and cleansing of my soul, I look to Christ's salvation.
I don't feel to replace that sense with a high hope in reincarnation.


We, when I hear about the "66 books", then I think of all the murdered Christians and Jews by those who created that sacred canon.

It makes me sick.

But it still doesn't change the facts.

The fact is that Jude quoted Enoch as the inspired antediluvian patriarch. That makes at least 67 books now.

Hebrews quoted 2 Maccabees. That makes at least 2.

That's more quotes than the Gospel of John got from any other book in the Bible. John wasn't even quoted by Polycarp (who I despise btw), Bishop of Smyrna, who (though liar) claimed to be Apostle John's disciple.

John wasn't known by anybody till after 150 AD.

A fake Gospel and a fake disciple who was unaware of the gospel eventually named after the one he supposedly was a disciple of.

The liars testify against each lie.

"Inspired" to lie.

Be careful about attributing the Holy Spirit to these pukes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by jaywill, posted 01-24-2016 10:16 AM jaywill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by jaywill, posted 01-24-2016 2:19 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 48 of 230 (777003)
01-24-2016 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
01-24-2016 9:37 AM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:

The letters of Paul pre-date these I have heard.
So the earliest documents informing us of what Christian evangelists taught are the letters of Paul.

None of the authentic letters of Paul quote the Gospels.

The Gospels did not exist during Paul's lifetime.
(I Timothy does have a quote of the Gospel of Luke or from one of the Logoi that would become part of the Gospel of Luke, thus giving even more evidence that the Pastorals are a forgery)

quote:

Do you have something in Paul's epistles leading you to believe reincarnation was a major tenet of the gospel message ?

Yes.

Paul teaches that Jesus was an incarnation of God (despite many critics harping to the contrary). That is strong evidence that Paul believed in the Avatar doctrine and thus reincarnation.

quote:

Yes, the Gospels record speculation about this and other things.

They speculated that maybe Jesus was John the Baptist come back after being beheaded.

They speculated that Jesus was demon possessed or a drunkard or was a madman.

They speculated that the disciple John was to live until Jesus returned at the end of the age.

The fact that some evidence of speculation occurred is just that.
It doesn't argue for the truth of the matter.
It doesn't argue that it was a part of Christ's teaching or of that of the apostles.
It is simply a record of the concepts that were entertained by some people.


There were Jews in the Gospels who speculated that Jesus was Elijah.

Jesus said John was.

Either you believe Jesus was telling the truth or you think he was a fraud.

quote:

"But I say to you [Capernaum] that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in tha day of judgment than for you."

If each person that lived in Sodom or in Capernaum is recycled in reincarnation to be multiple people, than HOW can God judge each one ? If Mr. Jaywill is the reincarnation of 14 previous people, how can God judge Mr. Jaywill for any OTHER life lived beside the one he lived as Mr. Jaywill?


Be humble and admit that there are a trillion times a trillion times a googolplex MORE THINGS you don't know than know.

I know that Jesus (in the Gospel of Matthew) had a message that was fundamentally different from the one in the Gospel of John.

Read the Gospel of Matthew without preconceived notions. The things Jesus cared about were 100% different than what your preacher has brain-washed you into believing.

quote:

One does not put on a new self in successive ages. Another person born is another person. And John the Baptist will answer to Christ for the life of John the Baptist. And Elijah will answer to Christ for the life of Elijah.

John the Baptist will not have to answer before God for the life of Elijah nor Elijah for the life of John the Baptist.


You seem to know an awful lot.

That leaves people with the impression that you know nothing at all.

Read Matthew without such an arrogant attitude. I can assure you that Jesus knew a heck of a lot more than you, so stop ridiculing him.

quote:

The cleansing from sin is in the redemption of Christ. And that is where the Gospel tells us to put our trust. In Christ's redeeming death on our behalf we are to have confidence in Justification.

After you just called him a speculative fool, and mocked his views that Elijah and John were the same spirit.

quote:

There is transformation and sanctification. But that pertains to each individual.

Now think about what you are teaching. You are saying that Elijah was reincarnated in John the Baptist. Then John the Baptist is beheaded. Then Elijah is seen again on the Mount of Transfiguration with Jesus.


Amazing your chronology works, doesn't it?

So where is Elijah then, Mr. expert?

Do you know that there are 1st century Jewish writings which said Elijah was the same flesh body as a great nephew of Moses? There was an occultation of a person who lived, according to scripture, roughly 600 years before Elijah. Then Elijah was felt not to have died.

Jesus didn't seem to think Elijah died in the 800s BCE, I guess.

quote:

How come it was not John the Baptist seen with Moses ? That was suppose to be the last recycling of Elijah in reincarnation.

So I would advize that you consider Matthew 11:11-18 to mean that HOW God led the people in Elijah He similarly led them in the ministry of John the Baptist. Their functions were very similar. And in similar fashion their function exposed the rebellious hearts of some of the nation of Israel.

Less likely - Jesus was teaching everyone experiences reincarnation.


Palestinian Jewish Christians of the first century AD are my "Spirit filled individuals" who carry the "tradition" of Jesus and James, his brother.

They agree with Jesus that there was reincarnation.

I'll go with them.

quote:

The Blackwell Dictionary of Judaica
Judeo-Christian sect connected with the Essenes. They existed from the 2nd century in the Transjordan. They emphasized ritual purification, encouraged procreation, and regarded Jesus as one of a series of reincarnations of the Messiah.

http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9780...


Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 01-24-2016 9:37 AM jaywill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Admin, posted 01-24-2016 1:56 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 54 by Jon, posted 01-24-2016 8:50 PM LamarkNewAge has responded
 Message 60 by jaywill, posted 01-25-2016 7:44 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18809
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 49 of 230 (777004)
01-24-2016 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by jaywill
01-23-2016 2:26 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
jaywill writes:

Paul's commentary is more conclusive to us disciples of Jesus


I was commenting on the story of Abraham and Isaac and your claim that, "The evidence is that Abraham believed in God's raising the dead." At best, it is weak evidence that Abraham may have believed in the possibility of resurrection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by jaywill, posted 01-23-2016 2:26 PM jaywill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by jaywill, posted 01-24-2016 4:34 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18809
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 50 of 230 (777005)
01-24-2016 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by jaywill
01-23-2016 5:00 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
jaywill writes:

A poster says that Abraham may have expected to wiggle out of the sacrifice.
It is hard to see he thought there was ANY wiggle room in raising up the knife to plunge it into his son.


1. Abraham told his servants that he and Isaac would be back. He didn't say that he'd be back and Isaac would be resurrected eventually. Either he lied to his servants or he didn't believe he'd have to kill Isaac.

2. Abraham told Isaac that God would provide a lamb for the sacrifice. Either he was misleading Isaac into thinking he wasn't the figurative lamb or he didn't believe he'd have to kill Isaac.

3. In Genesis 17:19 God said to Abraham, "Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him." So it was pretty clear that Isaac was not going to die childless.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by jaywill, posted 01-23-2016 5:00 PM jaywill has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12705
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 51 of 230 (777009)
01-24-2016 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 12:05 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
I don't see why you're reacting in such a way to Jaywill's posts. He merely stated that he believed in the Bible of the 66 books, and you reacted in a personal way to that. And he talked about speculation, and you accused him of calling someone a speculative fool. And you responded to other things in similar ways. I disapprove of the tone you're taking, and the Forum Guidelines request that you focus on the discussion and not on the people you're discussing with. If I missed where Jaywill expressed himself in a way that made you feel such responses were justified then I disapprove of those, also.

A mocking tone and sarcasm and so forth are not how someone with strong evidence and arguments proceeds. Whoever has the best evidence and argument, not other stuff, will carry the day here.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 12:05 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 630 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 52 of 230 (777012)
01-24-2016 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 11:33 AM


Re: Hebrews 11:35 quote.
quote:
You said I was just seeing what I want to see.

Then you went and said that a bunch of men led by the Holy Spirit did your thinking for you.


The determination of the books that bear the authority of inspiration has been carried out in previous centuries. I do believe that.

I do have tasks particularly set before me. That task is not one of them

quote:

The people who came up with the "66 books" were a bunch of mass murderers. They had absolutely nothing to do with the Holy Spirit.

That's a wild over generalization. You'll find that I will not be arguing much with you on this process of recognizing inspiration. I am going to steer my discussion more toward reincarnation.

quote:

Be careful about calling a bunch of theocrats, who kill everybody "unorthodox", "Holy Spirit filled individuals" (or whatever).

Though we Christians are eternally redeemed, nonetheless we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ to answer for our service to the Lord as Christians.

Since Paul said "WE" he included himself. However in your system of reincarnation it is difficult to see WHO is going to be responsible for WHAT.

"For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God." (Romans 14:10b)

"We" means Paul himself and all Christians as servants of the Lord Jesus. This judgment seat of God Paul also calls the judgment seat of Christ.

"Therefore also we are determined ... to gain the honor of being well pleasing to Him. For we all must be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done through the body according to what he has practiced, whether it be good or bad." ( 2 Cor. 4:9-10)

God keeps track of the quality of service each of His servants has rendered.

On one hand you want to believe reincarnation bring a person closer and closer to the ideal of goodness. But on the other hand you seem to gloat that some Christian men of the past at least should be judged for wrongdoings.

Is it that the benefits of reincarnation only serve you and not those whom you condemn?

Which is it? Are you happy that said people have by now been reincarnated to be improved individuals or they are still worthy of scorn and contempt for misbehavior ?

quote:

The people they killed, especially the Manicheans, were devout pacifists. Mani and his followers did indeed follow the example that the Bible sets out as "Spirit" filled individuals.

Not knowing much about these blanket generalizations, I have no comment at this time. But it does present something of a genetic fallacy.

IE. " Your New Testament canon cannot be true because all those who recognized inspiration were murderers of the Manicheans."

I am pretty sure that your going overboard in broad generalizations or guilt by association.

quote:

Jude quoted the Book of Enoch. And he presented it as the actual words of Enoch.

I understand that.

quote:

Show me where Enoch was rebuked.

I didn't say Enoch was rebuked.
I said HOW the words were used by the inspired canonical writings was more important to me.

quote:

Jude quoted the Book of Enoch in agreement with it message and he felt Enoch, the man, actually said what he quoted. Jude wasn't attacking people who believed in the Book of Enoch, was he?

I didn't say Jude was attacking anyone.
I said what is important to me is HOW did Jude, under inspiration, use the quotation from the book of Enoch.

That Enoch may have genuinely prophesied from God is not a problem to me.
Enoch of Genesis was definitely a man of God.
This does not mean the a "Book of Enoch" was canonical.

And I think you would have to blame the Jews of the pre-New Testament time for not including a Book of Enoch in the Hebrew canon.

quote:

Enoch was an Old Testament hero. He had a book named after him that people believed.

I understand that. And the book "The Wars of Jehovah" no doubt referred to Hebrew kings heroic and not. Neither the book of the Wars of Jehovah or the Book of Enoch did the Jews under the leading of the Spirit of God include in the Old Testament canon.

That some spiritual things were written IN those books, is not disputed.

quote:

Although there is a dispute about when the various parts were written, it is actually a Trinitarian book. (the "holy spirit" parts are generally dated after the time of Jesus, though some argue for early dates). By the time of Jude (100 AD), even the Holy Spirit parts were in existence.

No comment further.

quote:

Jude was quoting from a book that was felt to date from before the flood and it had all three Trinitarian parts.

If you want to insert the book of Enoch into your Bible, go ahead.
I won't be doing this.

quote:

We, when I hear about the "66 books", then I think of all the murdered Christians and Jews by those who created that sacred canon.

It makes me sick.


So you hold that reincarnation will perfect you to some ideal of goodness?
But you are sickened that it does not apply to others?

I don't understand. How come you are not holding out good news that REINCARNATION by now, how surely made those people you condemn better people?

quote:

But it still doesn't change the facts.

The fact is that Jude quoted Enoch as the inspired antediluvian patriarch. That makes at least 67 books now.


And the Book of the Wars of Yahweh? Or the other books referred to somewhere in the Old Testament ?

You recommended Norman Giesler in a post above. I recommend you read A General Introduction to the Bible by Giesler and Nix. Particularly, pay attention to the chapters on forming the Old Testament and New Testament canons.

You'll find it a thorough discussion on the different schools concerning Inspiration also.

quote:

Hebrews quoted 2 Maccabees. That makes at least 2.

Perhaps you are arriving at a position that there are no apocryphal books at all.

You'll find my responses more steering towards the subject matter of reincarnation, whether Jesus taught it or not.

quote:

Be careful about attributing the Holy Spirit to these pukes.

On the subject matter of REINCARNATION. I don't think the New Testament teaches it. However, it does teach TRANSFORMATION into the image of Christ.

"And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom.

But we all with unveiled face, beholding and reflecting like a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being TRANSFORMED into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17,18)

Here the normal Christian life should be one of being TRANSFORMED in one's Christian lifetime from one degree of expressing Jesus to another degree. But this is not over several reincarnated lifetimes but over one person's individual existence.

Here again we see New Testament renewing and TRANSFORMATION rather than reincarnation -

" And do not be fashioned according to this age, but be TRANSFORMED by the renewing of the mind that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and well pleasing and perfect."

Renewing of the mind and TRANSFORMATION is a part of Christ's salvation.

Reincarnation is not taught in the New Testament but CONFORMATION is:

" Because those whom He foreknew, He also predestinated to be CONFORMED to the image of His Son, that He might be the Firstborn among many brothers ..." (Romans 8:29)

Here we have each believers has a destiny marked out for him or her to be CONFORMED into the image of Christ the Firstborn Son of God. But his pertains to each individual. It is not accomplish through successive instances of reincarnating into someone else.

The New Testament speaks of RENEWING as a putting on of a new holy humanity:

" That you put off as regards your former manner of life, the old man, which is being corrupted according to the lusts of the deceit.

And that you be RENEWED in the spirit of your mind and put on the new man, which was created according to God in righteousness and holiness of the reality." (Eph. 4:22-24) .

Instead of being recycled from life to life to life - changing physical bodies as homes for evolving souls, the Gospel speaks of TRANSFORMATION, CONFORMATION, RENEWING and the process of Christ being formed in the saved person for a "metobolic" change.

Paul was quite burdened about this to the churches in Galatia. He said he was like a laboring mother working that Christ would take shape and be formed in them:

"My little children, with whom I travail in birth until Christ be formed in you." (Gal. 4:19) .

He sees Jesus Christ as a seed planted in man to be developed and formed for their transformation. This is what I hope in rather than Hindu reincarnation. And this was both the prayer and teaching of Jesus.

For example, in His mighty prayer (which cannot fail to be answered) He prays that the PROCESS of perfecting into oneness with God would operate over all His followers.

" And the glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they all may be one, even as We are one;

I in them, and You in Me, that they may be PERFECTED into one, that the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them even as You have loved Me." (John 17:22,23)

Christ's New Testament salvation is our hope rather than Hinduism's reincarnation.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 11:33 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 630 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 53 of 230 (777019)
01-24-2016 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by ringo
01-24-2016 1:11 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
I was commenting on the story of Abraham and Isaac and your claim that, "The evidence is that Abraham believed in God's raising the dead." At best, it is weak evidence that Abraham may have believed in the possibility of resurrection.

"Now after these things God tested Abraham and said to him, Abraham. ... etc. Take now your son, your only son ... etc."

When Genesis 22:1 says that God TESTED Abraham I think it means God tested not only his obedience but his FAITH.

That faith included his experience of seeing God follow through and give the two "good as dead" people (Abraham and Sarah) a natural born child.

Just reading Genesis, the case that Abraham believed in the God of resurrection, may be arguable to some, though not to myself.

And Paul's [authoritative] comment in Romans 4 says that an aspect of Abraham's FAITH was that God could give life to the dead. That is resurrection.

' ... God whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls the things not being as being.

He, beyond hope believed in hope in order that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, "So shall your seed be.:

And not weakening in his faith, he considered his own body as already dead, being about a hundred years old, as well as the deadening of Sarah's womb;

But with regard to the promise of God, he did not doubt in unbelief, but was empowered by faith, giving glory to God and being fully persuaded that what He had promised He was able also to do.

Therefore also it was accounted to him as righteousness.' (Rom. 4:17b-21)

So when it says that God TESTED Abraham, it is evident that WHAT was being tested were these things:

1.) The righteousness of believing God and God's promise.

2.) That as God brought life from ones as good as dead, He could further do the same with a slain only son - Isaac.

3.) The empowering to obey God.

4.) The unwavering of his belief in God and hope in God's promise.

5.) That God gives life to the dead and calls the things not being as being.

6.) That God was ABLE to fulfill His promise even if Isaac be slain to death.

I believe that Abraham PASSED the test because he had all these things in his heart, built up over the experiences of his life.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by ringo, posted 01-24-2016 1:11 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by ringo, posted 01-25-2016 10:51 AM jaywill has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 230 (777025)
01-24-2016 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 12:05 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
Paul teaches that Jesus was an incarnation of God (despite many critics harping to the contrary). That is strong evidence that Paul believed in the Avatar doctrine and thus reincarnation.

I'm not feeling up to climbing your walls of text, so forgive me if you've already addressed this, but I'd like to see your evidence supporting this.

If you've already posted it, a link and copy paste will do. I'd like to discuss this aspect of your position more.

Also, I'd be interested in seeing where it is Jesus is described teaching reincarnation.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 12:05 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 10:27 PM Jon has responded

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 821 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 55 of 230 (777027)
01-24-2016 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 9:15 AM


Re: Here is a reasonable evangelical commentary
LNA writes:

This commentary series always was among the most honest of the honest in evangelical conservative works. This is fundamentally slanted for sure (against reincarnation), but not fundamentally dishonest ("He does not necessarily mean" is slightly honest if you give the benefit of the doubt to this commentary being written by massively stupid people. I think the commentators are very smart mind you, but I can let it slide). I do think the text requires a necessary interpretation that John the Baptist is the bodily reincarnation of Elijah. Infact the text requires a reexamination of just what basis the Catholics have in claiming "Apostolic Tradition".

The fact that not a single one of the so-called "Early Church Fathers" thinks belief in reincarnation is anything but a heresy should send chills down our spines when we see just who taught reincarnation (hint hint see Matthew 11:11-15 and 17:10-13).


In other words, YOU claim that the Bible teaches reincarnation. But the Interpreter's Bible Commentary denies this. And the early church fathers also denied this and called it heresy.

No offense, but I will side with early church fathers and expert commentators rather than with revisionist new age mystics.


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." – Albert Einstein

“I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.” – Erwin Schroedinger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 9:15 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 10:12 PM kbertsche has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 56 of 230 (777030)
01-24-2016 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by kbertsche
01-24-2016 9:10 PM


"new age mystics"?
quote:

In other words, YOU claim that the Bible teaches reincarnation. But the Interpreter's Bible Commentary denies this. And the early church fathers also denied this and called it heresy.
No offense, but I will side with early church fathers and expert commentators rather than with revisionist new age mystics.

I suppose the earliest Christian communities were new age mystics then?

Here is what Bart Ehrman said about the Gospel dates from his book,The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (3rd edition), by Bart Ehrman.

quote:

p.93
If Mark was produced around 65 or 70 C.E., then Matthew was obviously written later, but it is difficult to know how much later. Most scholars are content to date the book sometime during the latter part of the first century, possibly, as a right guess, around 80 or 85 C.E.

Since the Sadducees rejected reincarnation and resurrection, then Jesus and the early Christians (before the Gnostics and Apostolic Fathers) were "new age".

Ehrman points out

quote:

p.43
It appears that most of the chief priests who ran the temple and its sacrifices were aligned with the Sadducees.

Among the "Early Church Fathers", were the "Apostolic Fathers", which dated from Clement of Rome ( 1 Clement ) in 96/97 AD up till about 156 AD.

The Gnostics are also an issue.
Here is Ehrman again.

quote:

p.188
So, in the way I will be using the term here, "Gnosticism" refers to a diverse set of views, many of them influenced by Christianity, that may have been in existence by the end of the first century but certainly by the middle of the second. Our best evidence for specific Gnostic groups comes from the second century, the period in which the proto-orthodox opponents of the Gnostics were penning their vitriolic attacks...

It is a demonstrable fact that the Ebionites existed in the 1st century A.D. and lived in the same area that Jewish-Christian associates of Jesus fled. The Elkesaites existed 100/101 AD and came out of that community. Ehrman dates the Gospels these groups used as 1st century and essentially based on Matthew (I would suppose they used pre-Matthew documents that Matthew was based on).

The Apostolic Fathers seem to be liars. Polycarp is accepted as a hero of "Apostolic Tradition" by the same folks who accept the Gospel of John. Polycarp claimed to be a disciple of the Apostle John. Amazing that of Polycarp's 50 clear quotations of the New Testament verses, none come from the Gospel of John.

I will trust the 1st Jewish Christians (pre-Gnostic!) who were genuinely associated with James over these fakers called the "Apostolic Fathers" any day.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by kbertsche, posted 01-24-2016 9:10 PM kbertsche has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by kbertsche, posted 01-25-2016 12:05 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1719
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 57 of 230 (777031)
01-24-2016 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Jon
01-24-2016 8:50 PM


Amazing example of willful ignorance ALERT!
quote:

I'm not feeling up to climbing your walls of text, so forgive me if you've already addressed this, but I'd like to see your evidence supporting this.

If you've already posted it, a link and copy paste will do. I'd like to discuss this aspect of your position more.

Also, I'd be interested in seeing where it is Jesus is described teaching reincarnation.


For crying out loud.

This tired old tactic - "please show me where" - is NOT APPLICABLE when the plain-text, in its 100% literal sense, says what you clearly want to ignore.

I admit that I can't find Clement of Rome or Polycarp quotes that support reincarnation.

I do have quotes of Jesus though. See OP post.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Jon, posted 01-24-2016 8:50 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Jon, posted 01-24-2016 10:46 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 58 of 230 (777034)
01-24-2016 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 10:27 PM


Re: Amazing example of willful ignorance ALERT!

I was trying no tactic.

I am genuinely interested in knowing what parts of Paul's writings make you think he believed in reincarnation and "the Avatar doctrine".

As for your quotes regarding Jesus in the OP - and this goes for when you present the Paul evidence as well - we have all (hopefully) read the books, often many times over. And we have not come to the conclusion you have. So simply quoting a few passages from the gospels isn't enough: You have to show how you get from the text we can all read to the interpretation only you see.

Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Edited by Jon, : No reason given.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 10:27 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 821 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


(1)
Message 59 of 230 (777035)
01-25-2016 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 10:12 PM


Re: "new age mystics"?
LNA writes:

I suppose the earliest Christian communities were new age mystics then?

Here is what Bart Ehrman said about the Gospel dates from his book,The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (3rd edition), by Bart Ehrman.


You have merely CLAIMED, not DEMONSTRATED, let alone PROVEN, that the early Christians held to reincarnation. Your quotes from Ehrman are unrelated to reincarnation and do nothing to support your claims. (This is the case for all of your lengthy quotes, BTW.)

You are not making logical (or even intelligible) arguments. You make nonsensical claims, you provide lengthy off-topic quotes, and then you declare that these prove your ridiculous claims, even though they do not.

Please try to make logical arguments that we can assess and respond to in a logical fashion.

Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." – Albert Einstein

“I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.” – Erwin Schroedinger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 10:12 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-26-2016 11:34 PM kbertsche has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 630 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 60 of 230 (777037)
01-25-2016 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by LamarkNewAge
01-24-2016 12:05 PM


Re: (Un) Conspicuous Appearances?
quote:
None of the authentic letters of Paul quote the Gospels.

I think you are saying now what I said. The earliest documents about what the apostles of Jesus taught are the letters of Paul.

No contradiction here.

quote:

The Gospels did not exist during Paul's lifetime.

The Gospel as a oral tradition existed. And Paul tells the Corinthians about what he received from his predecessors and passed on to them.

This is in First Corinthians 15:1-4 which begins this way:

"Now I make known to you, brothers, the gospel which I announced to you, which also you received, in which also you stand ... For I delivered to you, first of all, that which also I received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; And that He was buried, and that He has been raised from the dead on the third day according to the Scriptures."

You like Bart Erhman. Have you heard of Gary Habermas ?
I recommend you see some YouTube lectures or debates with Gary Habermas.
He is also a NT textural critic and a fine NT historian.

Now "Scriptures" in this passage, you well know would have to be Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus, after His resurrection, taught how the Hebrew Scriptures spoke of Himself and His death and resurrection.

IE. "And He said to them, O foolish and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! And beginning with Moses and from all the prophets, He explained to them clearly in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." (Luke 24:25-27)

So the Gospel as Jesus had preached AND explained from the Hebrew Scriptures was what Paul received and passed on the the church in Corinth. This is earlier than the WRITING of the four Gospels, I think, as you said. But it is NOT earlier than the Gospel.

Did you notice anything in that summary of Paul's about reincarnation ? I didn't.
Rather he does say that "Christ died for our sins". The hope in the redemption from a life of sinning consists in justification through belief in the redeeming death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

It is not a preaching of hope that successive recycling reincarnation into different people or animals or plants will cause one to be cleansed from any moral wrongs.

quote:

(I Timothy does have a quote of the Gospel of Luke or from one of the Logoi that would become part of the Gospel of Luke, thus giving even more evidence that the Pastorals are a forgery)

So you are at war with John and with Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus.

It does strike me that over the years I have seen many people who wish to establish a kind of divine and mystical teaching immediately seek to discredit the Gospel of John. I have come to expect this.

Anyone wanting to put forward a new age or new belief system has to:

1.) Say "Jesus is saying what we say."
2.) Then "John's Gospel is NOT saying what Jesus said."

There are other characteristics of competing "gospels". But these are two tendencies I notice the most.

You're right on time, sorry to say.

Anyway, I am not a NT textural critic. But I have absolutely no problem in believing that Paul wrote those letters to Timothy and Titus.

quote:

jaywill:

Do you have something in Paul's epistles leading you to believe reincarnation was a major tenet of the gospel message ?

Yes.

Paul teaches that Jesus was an incarnation of God (despite many critics harping to the contrary). That is strong evidence that Paul believed in the Avatar doctrine and thus reincarnation.


Paul teaches Jesus is the UNIQUE manifestation of God manifest in the flesh.
He does not teach Jesus was one of many in the sense that I think you believe.

"Concerning His Son, who came out of the seed of David according to the flesh, Who was designated the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness out of the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom. 8:3,4).

Now this is just one passage from a long letter among many letters of Paul. But I would draw your attention to it. For here Paul connects the uniqueness of the Son of God with I RESURRECTION. No one else was raised by God from the dead to be designated the Son of God, though God had raised people from the dead.

To be sure, this manifestation of God in man Paul does say continues. But that is in the BELIEVERS in Christ who also must be conformed to the image of Christ the FIRST BORN of God's sons.

"Because those whom He foreknew, He also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the Firstborn among many brothers;

And those whom He predestinated, these He also called, and those whom He called, these He also justified; and those who He justified, these He also glorified." (Rom. 8:29,30)

The Unique manifestation of God in man is firstly Jesus Christ.
The continuation of God being dispensed into man is through Jesus Christ the Justifier.

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus ... "(Rom. 3:23,24)

This One designated as the FIRST Son of God, is the Redeemer through whom all other human beings can be JUSTIFIED.

"All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

Every other person born has sinned and has fallen short of the glory of God.
This One - Jesus, was both sinless and glorious. He was not just good. He was gloriously righteous in a way of splendor unmatched by any other human being.

Even if successive reincarnations did occur for everyone else, they still have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. It is not towards successive reincarnations men should look to be reconciled to God but to redemption in Christ Jesus through God's grace.

Concerning Jesus saying John the Baptist was Elijah you say:

quote:

Either you believe Jesus was telling the truth or you think he was a fraud.

Here it is a matter of how do we interpret what was said there.
The disagreement is not on the quotation, but on the interpretation.

What you want to prove is that Jesus was teaching that everyone is reincarnated.
In other words, I think you want to say Jesus was teaching Hinduism, at least in this regard.

Now I know you do not like John. I love John But I also love Matthew, Mark, and Luke too. And in Matthew the new covenant which includes forgiveness of sins, is not taught by Jesus to be a matter of reincarnation. But it is in faith in the shed blood He poured out in His redeeming death for sinners.

"For this is the blood of the covenant, which is being poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." (Matt. 26:28)

For peace towards God do not hope in coming back to earth as another better reincarnated person. First look to the shed blood of Jesus to thoroughly cleanse you from your sins. He was JUDGED on His cross in your place, and in my place.

Luke, to which you have not raised objection, says the same thing:

"And He took a loaf and gave thanks, and He broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is My body which is being given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.

And similarly the cup after they had dined, saying, This cup is the new covenant established in My blood. which is being poured out for you." (Luke 22:19,20)

We are justified not because we come back as someone better in reincarnation.
We are justified because the righteous judgment which should have fallen on us, fell instead on a Substitute who had His body broken and shed His sinless and holy blood on our behalf.

Our dept is paid not because God extends it to other subsequent lives we will live. Our dept has been paid on our behalf in the judgment of God upon His Son on His cross.

Concerning what I said about Jesus scolding cities which rejected Him and the final judgment, you wrote:

quote:

Be humble and admit that there are a trillion times a trillion times a googolplex MORE THINGS you don't know than know.

I do admit that there are some unknowns.
I do not claim that God has told us everything.

quote:

I know that Jesus (in the Gospel of Matthew) had a message that was fundamentally different from the one in the Gospel of John.

It is not fundamentally different. It is with a different emphasis.
The two gospels NEED each other to arrive at a full portrait of Christ's full salvation.
Mark and Luke are also needed for this full panoramic view of such a marvelous Person as Jesus Christ.

Matthew is not fundamentally different from John. But it does have its own emphasis.
The demand in Matthew can only be met by the divine life in John.

The being perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect in Matthew can only be attained from the new birth from the begetting Father in John and the subsequent spiritual growth, transformation, and building up together.

quote:

Read the Gospel of Matthew without preconceived notions. The things Jesus cared about were 100% different than what your preacher has brain-washed you into believing.

Could you give me your two strongest examples of this opinion, please?
Your next post to me should include two strongest examples of things in Matthew which are "100%" different from what is in John.

I put myself out here on a limb now. So don't disappoint me.

And "brain washed" just because we have a disagreement ? Come on.

quote:

jaywill:
One does not put on a new self in successive ages. Another person born is another person. And John the Baptist will answer to Christ for the life of John the Baptist. And Elijah will answer to Christ for the life of Elijah.

John the Baptist will not have to answer before God for the life of Elijah nor Elijah for the life of John the Baptist.

LNA:
You seem to know an awful lot.


I don't know everything by a long shot.
I don't think we are told everything by God.

I do think what has been revealed is adequate for our cooperation.
He wants us to believe for His full salvation.

Manifesting God in the flesh and on a very large level IS important to God.
And Jesus did say that His death has a multiplicative aspect to it as well as a redeeming aspect. Right here:

"Truly, truly I say to you, Unless the grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone, but if it dies, it bears much fruit." (John 12:24)

This is certainly about Jesus releasing what was within Him that it might be multiplied in many others. Here it is not the redeeming of His blood for sins which is the emphasis. Rather it is the breaking of the shell of His humanity to release the divine life that was within Him, in multiplication to produce "much fruit" . That is many grains like the one unique grain.

This God wants to do that Jesus would not "abide alone" .
So in discarding as you do the Gospel of John you undervalue a crucial reproductive aspect of His teaching.

IE. "What I am, I desire to mass produce in many other people."

quote:

That leaves people with the impression that you know nothing at all.

You could ask a person like me if there are some things they do NOT know or are not sure of. Then I might plainly tell you of important things, which I really do not know for sure.

quote:

Read Matthew without such an arrogant attitude. I can assure you that Jesus knew a heck of a lot more than you, so stop ridiculing him.

I do try to read the Bible with humility.
Visa Versa ?

quote:

jaywill:

The cleansing from sin is in the redemption of Christ. And that is where the Gospel tells us to put our trust. In Christ's redeeming death on our behalf we are to have confidence in Justification.

you:

After you just called him a speculative fool, and mocked his views that Elijah and John were the same spirit.


I didn't call my Lord Jesus "a speculative fool". I did interpret His words there differently from how you interpret them.

The quotation is not in question. The interpretation is in dispute.

Besides, even if in that one instance Jesus was saying John the Baptist was a reincarnation of Elijah, that is still a long way off from Jesus teaching generally that human beings are all reincarnated as Hinduism teaches.

By the way, it was God who was working in the ministry of both Elijah and John the Baptist. The consistency is really in the things that God does and not so much in those individuals.

Jesus' message there was that the religious opposers of His ministry were predictable in their reactions to God's moving and operating.

quote:

Me:
Now think about what you are teaching. You are saying that Elijah was reincarnated in John the Baptist. Then John the Baptist is beheaded. Then Elijah is seen again on the Mount of Transfiguration with Jesus.

Amazing your chronology works, doesn't it?


I noticed that you didn't answer the question.
Moses and Elijah were seen with Jesus on that vision.
If John the Baptist was Elijah's reincarnation, why wasn't it John the Baptist there ?

quote:

So where is Elijah then, Mr. expert?

I don't know.
But I do believe that God has some places we may not know about.

quote:

Do you know that there are 1st century Jewish writings which said Elijah was the same flesh body as a great nephew of Moses? There was an occultation of a person who lived, according to scripture, roughly 600 years before Elijah. Then Elijah was felt not to have died.

If your point is that other people on earth believed in something like reincarnation besides those in Hinduism, I would not argue against that.

The point of this thread, I think, is whether reincarnation was taught by Jesus.
I don't think so.

So you say that Matthew 11:14 reminds you of things ancient Jews talked about. I think His expression reveals that He was saying something unusual rather than something generally known and accepted as the familiar reincarnation:

"And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah, who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear." .

Isn't His tone rather accommodating rather than insistent? If it were so crucial that they understand that reincarnation took place, He would insist that they receive it. Or He might say "Verily, verily I say to you" which Jesus was prone to doing when He really did not want the disciples to miss something.

"If you are willing to receive it" is an expression of making allowance for their inability to believe it. And I think the important thing to realize is the God was operating in the ministry of John the Baptist in such a similar way as He would in the ministry of Elijah.

The opposers in like manner rejected God's moving in both prophets.

I stop here for length's sake.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-24-2016 12:05 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-26-2016 11:24 PM jaywill has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020