Did Jesus teach reincarnation?

That's not what I'm arguing. I just pointed out that Abraham knew that Isaac would live to have children:

quote:

---

Genesis 17:19 And God said, 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.

---

If he expected God to instantly resurrect Isaac, it wasn't much of a sacrifice.Note that when Job went through his trials and tribulations, he got everything back except his children. That was a sacrifice. Why didn't God instantly resurrect them too?

I don't regard this as a really serious question.So you are a clever skeptic of the Christian faith.
I got that.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Of course you don't. When the Bible contradicts your doctrines, the standard practice is to run away.(For what it's worth, I agree with you that Jesus didn't teach reincarnation. I'm just saying that that one argument is weak.)

Oh, I don't mind at all when the Bible offers me some contradictions, paradoxes.
That doesn't bother me.You're clever. You're clever. Okay, I got it.

It isn't about being clever. It's about reading what the Bible says. If you use such a weak argument, why would anybody take your other arguments seriously? Instead of thanking me for helping you, you mock me as a "skeptic".

I noticed that you looked askance at the matter of Jesus teaching reincarnation.I already told you that Paul's word on Abraham carries a settled argument for me.
That is it would supersede my feeling just on reading the Genesis story aloneSo I don't think Abraham's hope in "the God who gives life to the dead " is a weak rationale.God's dealings with Job were His dealings with Job.
I don't expect, as I read through the Bible, God's dealings will be exactly the same with all men and women..
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

If he expected God to instantly resurrect Isaac, it wasn't much of a sacrifice.

---

I think I'll run away if you don't mind.

quote:

---

Note that when Job went through his trials and tribulations, he got everything back except his children. That was a sacrifice.

---

Job was not asked by God to give up his children.
They were just taken from him.
He had no choice in the matter.So I don't think the two experiences are alike in that regard.

quote:

---

(For what it's worth, I agree with you that Jesus didn't teach reincarnation. I'm just saying that that one argument is weak.)

---

So if we just look at Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac WITHOUT the words of the Apostle Paul in Romans 4 or the description in the book of Hebrews, just as a first time reader of the book of Genesis ... Okay. we may very well overlook his hope in resurrection.Sure, it may escape our notice even when he said they would come back after the sacrifice.Why be hostile to what the New Testament explains about Abraham's experience? Do you have some basic reason why the NT should not be taken as legitimate discussion of the book of Genesis ?

Because it is an after the fact explanation. People are skeptical for the same reason they are skeptical regarding those Nostradamus prophecies that get mapped onto events after they occur.

quote:

---

Because it is an after the fact explanation. People are skeptical for the same reason they are skeptical regarding those Nostradamus prophecies that get mapped onto events after they occur.

---

In this case of Genesis and Romans, usually it is not because it is an after the fact explanation. Rather some peoples' problem is that it is an after the fact explanation which is theistic. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

After after the fact explanations, particularly when used to claim predictions and prophecy are always going to be an issue. People rightly question such arguments regardless of whether theology is involved as my example using Nostradamus was designed to show.If your arguments regarding your theology built on such things, it is then questionable to make accusations about why your arguments are not accepted, because the argument has an inherent weakness. Perhaps you simply need a better argument.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

quote:

---

If your arguments regarding your theology built on such things, it is then questionable to make accusations about why your arguments are not accepted, because the argument has an inherent weakness. Perhaps you simply need a better argument.

---

Naa, I need more faith.Do you think Jesus taught reincarnation ?
I don't think so.

You are ignoring some elements of the story. What Abraham told Isaac (that a sheep would be provided for sacrifice) was completely inconsistent with an expectation that Isaac would die and then be resurrected. Further, this story and others in Genesis tell us that Abraham was quite capable of lying if he felt the circumstances warranted it. One egregious example is telling King Abimelech that his wife was his sister where the clear expectation was that his wife would be raped and Abraham would be spared.So the question becomes exactly which of Abraham's utterances we should take as being the truth. A second question is whether Abraham was expecting that "the Lord would provide" a sheep or a resurrection. Regardless of his expectation, the story is clear that Abraham intended to do what God asked. But what isn't clear even if Abraham was truthful about his expectation of Isaac returning, is exactly how Abraham anticipated the situation to be resolved.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

No, I don't.