Does the bible teach reincarnation?

I actually wasn’t disagreeing with that part, I was trying to clarify that the answer to the disciples’ question could be found in the verse immediately following that being disputed. It does, however seem that they may have believed in that possiblity of reincarnation. That does not mean it was taught by Jesus or anyone else in the Bible. Remember, the disciples back then learned just as much as we learn from the Bible - they weren’t born knowing it all.

OK. I’ll cede that.

Hmmmm, these don’t sound like unbiased statements to me (as if there is any such thing where religion rears it’s head).

It’s possible that people in Biblical times and lands believed any number of things, and it’s possible that they wrote it down too, but I thought you were referring to the bible as we know it today (and all the supporting ancient texts), not some hypothetical quasi-bible at some point in history.

was what you said, this suggested to me that you’d read something (or several things in a bible that you felt supported reincarnation as a biblical teaching.

“as a whole idea it would seem the bible is about reincarnation”

Because, it seems to me, the lead character gets reincarnated.

ooops, that didn’t quite come out right…

handy, I’ve got two things to say about your saying that you think the main character of the Bible gets reincarnated…

  1. Keep in mind that the main character, Jesus, was not any normal man, but the Son of God come from heaven for a brief stay on earth in the flesh.

  2. I think everyone involved with this discussion would be curious to hear your definition of the word “reincarnation”. Be specific. If you can.

I believe, in one gospel, some Jewish people asked Jesus if he was [the reincarnation or incarnation of]the prophet Elijah. He answered that he was not but that
John the Baptist was (the reincarnation) of Elijah.
At least this is what I recall. If someone knows how to do a computer search of the Bible, perhaps they could check this out.

Or [gasp] we could try reading it :wink:

Are you talking about the resurrection of Jesus?

Resurrection: to bring back (someone) to life, or bring back (something) into use or existence that had disappeared.

Reincarnation: the belief that a dead person’s spirit returns to life in another body,

Now there are any number of viewpoints (both spiritual and mundane) on what actually happened to Jesus, but I can’t see how reincarnation is the same thing as coming back to life in the same form.

Now Jesus was also described as “The firstborn of the dead”, but again, if this was a reference relating to reincarnation, he would hardly be the first, would he?

Perhaps you’re not talking about Jesus at all, perhaps you’re referring to the recurring theme of a dynamic male leader?, please elaborate.

Mangetout, medical science resurrects (Websters: resurrection: the rising again to life.) people every year; do you consider these resurrectees to be as Holy because they have been resurrected?

As for ‘Reincarnation,’ Webster’s can suffice: e.g : a fresh embodiment(to represent in human or animal form) appears to be a close second idea to me, which is why that ‘oops’ above as I was searching for a more definite answer.

Calm down Handy, I was just trying to find out what you were really asking.

You’re assuming that I consider Jesus to be holy because he was (reportedly)resurrected.
You’re also assuming that I equate medical science with a (supposedly)miraculous happening.

Your question seems more to do with etymology than theology; if I’d realised this from the start, I’d have left it to the scholars.

Whoa there. Medical sciences resuscitates many people every year, but it can’t resurrect them, cause they were never actually dead. If people are already dead, all medical science can do is[Princess Bride]check their pockets[/Princess Bride]

And reincarnation refers to a soul returning to this life in a different body.

Whoa there. Medical sciences resuscitates many people every year, but it can’t resurrect them, cause they were never actually dead. If people are already dead, all medical science can do is[Princess Bride]check their pockets[/Princess Bride]

And reincarnation refers to a soul returning to this life in a different body.

IANATheologian, but I’ve read a lot of this sort of stuff, and this is how I’ve seen these words used.

Sigh You know, If I had started studying New Testament Greek earlier than this past March, maybe I’d know enough in order to figure this out and give you exact answers from the original text…but I personally don’t think there’s much of a question even in English.

[hijack]This reminds me of something interesting. The Greek word translated as resurrection is anastasis, which literally means “the act of standing up again”. A few weeks after learning this, I was reading something about Anastasia, the girl who supposedly survived the massacre of the czar’s family in Russia in 1917 (18?). Now doesn’t it seem just a little curious that the one person who might’ve survived has a name which is very close to the Greek word for “resurrection” (especially in light of the fact that the Cyrillic alphabet was invented by St. Cyril, a Greek)?[/hijack]

Any way, that’s the only thing that knowing NT Greek allowed me to bring to this discussion.

“Medical sciences resuscitates many people every year, but it can’t resurrect them,
cause they were never actually dead.”

Sure they were. 2 hours in some cases…

According to Ezekiel 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

If the disciples were aware of Ezekiel 18:20, they knew that the man could not have been born blind as a result of the sins of his parents any more than he could have been born blind as a result of his own. I always thought that the disciples mentioned those two explanations when questioning Jesus as a way of demonstrating that they saw no reason for his blindness, not a belief that either explanation was possible.