big_tj vs Pegg - Does the bible suggest reincarnation?

Big_TJ · Sep 12, 2012

Pegg said:
im not flip flopping, reincarnation is the rebirth of the same life over and over again in an unending cycle.

Reference please; I could not find any definition of reincarnation that tells this.

But the bible teaching of a resurrection is certainly not the same thing as a reincarnation. You need to be clear on the difference.

I full agree with this. I also agree that resurrection is out of scope of this debate

A reincarnation assumes that their is an immortal soul that keeps being reborn. But resurrection is an act of God where he purposely brings a dead soul back to life as the same person with the same memories and personality.

Pegg, there are (at least) 5 definitions for "soul;" Why are you just focusing on the last of the 5 definitions? The bible DOES NOT define what a soul is - what you are suggesting is YOUR (or JWs) understanding of "soul." There is no where in the bible that tells that a soul is a human being. Here are the definitions that I pulled from an online dictionary:

dictionary.reference.com said:
noun
1. the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.

2. the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.

3. the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.

4. the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.

5. a human being; person.

Four of the 5 definition clearly show that the essence of the "soul" is separate from the physical body and that what reincarnation is about. Furthermore, since Reincarnation is not a religious term, then it would be difficult to seek a religious (or biblical) definition for it. The "soul" as used in the definition of reincarnation would be in line with the first 4 definitions - not with the 5th.

i have studied the bible long enough to know that no reincarnation exists in it. See my point above about reincarnation....in the bible, the body does not contain an immortal soul - the body is a mortal soul. So when it dies, it cannot reincarnate into someone else because it returns to dust and exists no more.

Firstly, you are doing selective reading - for example, you already accept that that concept of reincarnation does not exist biblically so whatever you see in the bible that suggest it, you try to "harmonize it" by assigning your own interpretation. therefore, respectfully, your studying of the bible is irrelevant here. Many others have studied the bible and many others would disagree with you. What you fail to understand (I dont know why) is how reincarnation works. So, don't simply stick with your own definition of "soul" and "reincarnation;" here are some facts:

1) Biblically, there is a difference between a physical body and a spiritual one - this fact cannot be biblically disputed. It is the "spiritual" one that is considered the "soul" in the definition of reincarnation.

2) Biblically, there is a difference between what happen to the "spirit" and your "physical body" when you die - again, this fact cannot be biblically disputed.

3)Biblically, your "spirit" return to God when you die - again, cannot be biblically disputed.
4) The bible does not say what happen afterwards (or what God does after regaining your spirit) - cannot be biblically disputed.

5) There are scriptures in the bible that talk about (or suggest) persons who had lived either living again (not physically) or have lived again.

6) Whether or not you dismiss them as the impact on pagan beliefs on early writers, there are multiple evidence where the concept of reincarnation is referred to in the bible - this cannot be biblically disputed.

7) There is even biblical suggestion that JESUS is the reincarnation of Adam. You cannot dispute this biblically other than assigning your own (of JWs) bias definition to 1 Corinthians 15:45.

In essence, the premise for your claim of "nothing in the bible suggest reincarnation exist" (the immortal soul or soul being a living person) has been totally refuted by me so I am unable to see you you could recover in this debate. :shrug:

:yes:

Pegg · Sep 12, 2012

Big_TJ said:
Reference please; I could not find any definition of reincarnation that tells this.

good article in wiki

Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, begins a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spiritual depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions. This doctrine is a central tenet of the Indian religions [1]

Big_TJ said:
Pegg, there are (at least) 5 definitions for "soul;" Why are you just focusing on the last of the 5 definitions? The bible DOES NOT define what a soul is - what you are suggesting is YOUR (or JWs) understanding of "soul." There is no where in the bible that tells that a soul is a human being. Here are the definitions that I pulled from an online dictionary:

the various definitions of soul come from various sources. I only accept the source of Gods word as the true meaning of soul. And here it is:

In the Bible, “soul” is translated from the Hebrew ne′phesh and the Greek psy·khe′. Bible usage shows the soul to be a person or an animal or the life that a person or an animal enjoys

ie, soul in its first occurrence: Gen. 2:7: “Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul.” (Notice that this does not say that man was given a soul but that he became a soul, a living person.)
The Hebrew word here rendered “soul” is ne′phesh. KJ, AS, and Dy agree with that rendering. RS, JB, NAB read “being.” NE says “creature.” Kx reads “person.&#8221

1 Cor. 15:45: “It is even so written: ‘The first man Adam became a living soul.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” So the Christian Greek Scriptures agree with the Hebrew Scriptures as to what the soul is....it is a living person.

How many people survived the flood? 1 Pet. 3:20: “In Noah’s days . . . a few people, that is, eight souls (psy·khe′), were carried safely through the water.”
The 8 living people (noahs family) were called souls.

So that is what a soul is in the bible. It is always the living person, the complete individual. When they die, that soul dies and returns to dust as Adam was told in genesis 'to dust you are and to dust you will return' .
How can you ignore such a clear simple statment of fact? God has no reason to lie to us about such an important thing. But Satan has every reason to lie to us because he was the one who invented the idea that Eve would not die but she would become like God...that idea is still fooling many people sadly.

Big_TJ said:
Furthermore, since Reincarnation is not a religious term, then it would be difficult to seek a religious (or biblical) definition for it. The "soul" as used in the definition of reincarnation would be in line with the first 4 definitions - not with the 5th.

Firstly, you are doing selective reading - for example, you already accept that that concept of reincarnation does not exist biblically so whatever you see in the bible that suggest it, you try to "harmonize it" by assigning your own interpretation. therefore, respectfully, your studying of the bible is irrelevant here. Many others have studied the bible and many others would disagree with you. What you fail to understand (I dont know why) is how reincarnation works. So, don't simply stick with your own definition of "soul" and "reincarnation;" here are some facts:

1) Biblically, there is a difference between a physical body and a spiritual one - this fact cannot be biblically disputed. It is the "spiritual" one that is considered the "soul" in the definition of reincarnation.

2) Biblically, there is a difference between what happen to the "spirit" and your "physical body" when you die - again, this fact cannot be biblically disputed.

3)Biblically, your "spirit" return to God when you die - again, cannot be biblically disputed.
4) The bible does not say what happen afterwards (or what God does after regaining your spirit) - cannot be biblically disputed.

5) There are scriptures in the bible that talk about (or suggest) persons who had lived either living again (not physically) or have lived again.

6) Whether or not you dismiss them as the impact on pagan beliefs on early writers, there are multiple evidence where the concept of reincarnation is referred to in the bible - this cannot be biblically disputed.

7) There is even biblical suggestion that JESUS is the reincarnation of Adam. You cannot dispute this biblically other than assigning your own (of JWs) bias definition to 1 Corinthians 15:45.

In essence, the premise for your claim of "nothing in the bible suggest reincarnation exist" (the immortal soul or soul being a living person) has been totally refuted by me so I am unable to see you you could recover in this debate.:yes:

i might come back to this later, sorry i've run out of time this morning... or I might let you win this seeing you've already won I can't imagine i will recover this one. better luck to me next time

Big_TJ · Sep 12, 2012

Pegg said:
good article in wiki

Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, begins a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spiritual depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions. This doctrine is a central tenet of the Indian religions [1]

Right! Nothing about unending cycle. Also note is said "soul" or "spirit" so even if "soul" means a living being (person), that's not the definition used in reincarnation.

the various definitions of soul come from various sources. I only accept the source of Gods word as the true meaning of soul. And here it is:

scriptures...scriptures...scriptures

In the Bible, soul is translated from the Hebrew ne′phesh and the Greek psy·khe′. Bible usage shows the soul to be a person or an animal or the life that a person or an animal enjoys

So that is what a soul is in the bible It is always the living person, the complete individual.

Well you have two issues here: First, you seem to be suggesting that everytime the greek ne′phesh is translated to soul in the bible, it is talking about a living human being. This is clearly not the case. For example, in 1 Samuels 1:15, the "soul" could NEVER be talking about a living being. In Matthew 10:28, it could NEVER be talking about a living being. It is debatable if Zachariah 11:8 could be possibly mean "a human being. So, to say that:

Bible usage shows the soul to be a person or an animal or the life that a person or an animal enjoys. So that is what a soul is in the bible.

especially the portion in which you said:

It is always the living person, the complete individual.

is demonstratively FALSE. Here is a site that TOTALLY debunk your claim, and analyze the usage of "ne'phesh" and "soul" in the bible : Nephesh

Secondly, Strong's Lexicon seem to have over 20 definitions for the word "nephesh" and not all suggest "a person" or "the life that a person enjoy." So, you are limiting the use of nephesh in a way that it is not limited biblically.

Whe they die, that soul dies and returns to dust as Adam was told in genesis 'to dust you are and to dust you will return' .
How can you ignore such a clear simple statment of fact?

You are missing an important point. There are numerous examples (like the one above) where "soul" means "living persons" but there are many others where "soul" does not refer to a living person. So to show scriptures that tell "soul" to be a living being clearly does not tell you all the usage of soul in the bible, and certainly does not tell that "soul" always mean the living person.

i might come back to this later, sorry i've run out of time this morning..

No rush.

. or I might let you win this seeing you've already won I can't imagine i will recover this one. better luck to me next time

Hopefully you willl continue as I am also learning through this excercise.

Big_TJ · Sep 15, 2012

Any response, Pegg. Also, others that are viewing this debate, feel free to comment and let us have your thoughts

savagewind · Sep 15, 2012

Big_TJ said:
Any response, Pegg. Also, others that are viewing this debate, feel free to comment and let us have your thoughts

I think both sides did very well in the debate.

I think it is difficult to believe that the personality (the spirit) of a person cannot exist without the flesh. The reason why is I am sure God thinks but God has no flesh. If it is true that man is in God's image then it is possible that the person can live on in some way without his flesh.

To believe the death must happen one way or another is believing God's power is limited. I believe God's power is not limited in any way except that God can not lie.

Thank you for inviting the readers to the debate. I have been enjoying it.
And it appears so far to me that the Bible is not definitive on the matter of soul free from flesh. I do believe Ecclesiastes 9:10 which says; Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom
It might be liken to a boat journey. Once you are dressed, packed and ready to sail you get on the boat but there is no going back to get prepared for the journey. The preparation part is over.

Pegg · Sep 15, 2012

Big_TJ said:
Right! Nothing about unending cycle. Also note is said "soul" or "spirit" so even if "soul" means a living being (person), that's not the definition used in reincarnation.

i dont know what definition you are using, but I am using the one that is the most widely accepted and most common to all religions who teach it.

If your definition is different, then we are not speaking about the same thing.

Big_TJ said:
Well you have two issues here: First, you seem to be suggesting that everytime the greek ne′phesh is translated to soul in the bible, it is talking about a living human being. This is clearly not the case. For example, in 1 Samuels 1:15, the "soul" could NEVER be talking about a living being. In Matthew 10:28, it could NEVER be talking about a living being. It is debatable if Zachariah 11:8 could be possibly mean "a human being. So, to say that:

its not unusual to use the term 'soul' differently in different contexts...such as in 1Sam or Matt 10:28... 'soul' can also mean the 'life' of the individual. But it never means an immortal part of man that lives on.

Here are some uses of soul in the scriptures:
Animals are souls at Gen 1:20 ' Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls"

A living person or individual is a soul at Ge 2:7 '...the man came to be a living soul

The soul is mortal, destructible
Ge 12:13 '..my soul will be certain to live due to you
Deut 27:25 Cursed is the one who accepts a bribe to strike a soul fatally
Romans 11:3 ..they have killed your prophets,.. they are looking for my soul.
Acts 3:23 Indeed, any soul that does not listen...will be completely destroyed
Luke 6:9 Then Jesus said... Is it lawful on the sabbath to do good or to do injury, to save or to destroy a soul?
Ezek 13:19 And will YOU profane me toward my people for the handfuls of barley and for the morsels of bread, in order to put to death the souls that ought not to die and in order to preserve alive the souls that ought not to live by YOUR lie to my people

Life as an intelligent person
Judges 9:17 when my father fought for YOU and went risking his soul...
1Peter 1:22 ...YOU have purified YOUR souls by [YOUR] obedience...
John 15:13 No one has love greater than this, that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends

these few scriptures show that soul is the living breathing person...not an immortal part of the living breathing person.

Big_TJ said:
is demonstratively FALSE. Here is a site that TOTALLY debunk your claim, and analyze the usage of "ne'phesh" and "soul" in the bible : Nephesh

I hate to tell you this, but that link is saying exactly what I have been saying...the soul is the entire living person...everything that a person is.
That is what Nephesh means...the entire whole living person. Its not an immortal part of a living person which is what I think you believe it means.

Big_TJ said:
Secondly, Strong's Lexicon seem to have over 20 definitions for the word "nephesh" and not all suggest "a person" or "the life that a person enjoy." So, you are limiting the use of nephesh in a way that it is not limited biblically.

Soul is an engligh word, not hebrew. so it is not a good idea to use soul to try and find a meaning for nephesh because the english soul is completely different in meaning.

Ne′phesh comes from a root meaning breathe and it can literally be rendered as a breather.
Koehler and Baumgartners Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958, p. 627) defines it as: the breathing substance, making man a[nd] animal living beings Gn 1, 20, the soul (strictly distinct from the greek notion of soul) the seat of which is the blood Gn 9, 4f Lv 17, 11 Dt 12, 23: (249 X) . . . soul = living being, individual, person.

The soul that you are ascribing to is from a greek definition...an immortal part of man has nothing to do with the hebrew nephesh.

Big_TJ said:
You are missing an important point. There are numerous examples (like the one above) where "soul" means "living persons" but there are many others where "soul" does not refer to a living person. So to show scriptures that tell "soul" to be a living being clearly does not tell you all the usage of soul in the bible, and certainly does not tell that "soul" always mean the living person.

the hebrew nephesh is EVERYTHING that a living breather is. It is their love, their hate, their need for food, their need for shelter, the blood running through their veins...it is everything that a physical living creature is. God created living souls...and everything that a living soul requires for life is what the true meaning of nephesh is.

Big_TJ said:
Hopefully you willl continue as I am also learning through this excercise.

well im glad that I can join you on this voyage of discovery

Big_TJ · Sep 17, 2012

Pegg, I will respond to the interesting points you raised shortly.
Just to recap where we are: Pegg's claim is that there is nothing in the bible that suggest that reincarnation exist. Her main argument is that since reincarnation suggested a immortal soul, then reincarnation cannot exist as the soul is mortal. She stated that the only definition she accepted for "soul" is the bibical definition, which is, a living person. To back up this definition, she mentioned that the word "soul" is translated from "nephesh" which, whenever translated as "soul" in the bible, always means " a living person." One of the definition that she posited for reincarnation is " the rebirth of the same life over and over again in an unending cycle" and she stated that this is the widely accepted definition.

My rebuttal of Pegg's view is that she is using a definition for reincarnation to which there is no reference. No material that she provided, nor that I could find, define reincarnation as rebirth over and over again "in an unending cycle." As such, there is no need for an immortal soul. I also pointed out that her view that whenever "soul" is used in the bible it is always talking about the living person is incorrect, but she adjusted her stance to be that the soul is " all what a living person is." I want to make it clear that there is a difference with both positions.

I pointed out to her where scriptures DOES allude to reincarnation, but her response was that it was because of the Jewish influence. I pointed out where Elijah and John the Baptist is mentioned to suggest reincarnation, but she tries to supply an explanation of the scripture rather than accepting or denying that it suggest reincarnation.

Of extreme interest is Pegg's failure to answer my fundamental question, which is: "what would suggestion of reincarnation looks like?" After failing to answer this question, I supplied a prospective answer and ask if she was in agreement. She indicated that she was in agreement except that there should be some information about "pre-human" life. My response is that I do not even know what that mean, since reincarnation does not suggest that you exist in some "pre-human life" before you were human. My concern is that if Pegg has absolutely ZERO idea what suggestions of reincarnation would look like, how can she say that/those suggestions doesn't exist -whether inside or outside the bible??

Our recent discussion was around the soul. Pegg's point is that the soul is not immortal, nor is it a separate from the physical body; it soul IS the living person. While I agree that that the soul is not immortal, I provided scriptural evidence that the other portion of her ascertion is wrong, since scriptures such as Matthew 10:28 could not be referring to the living person. We where having a more indepth discussion on the topic of "nephesh." The relevance of my discussion of "nephesh" is not to discuss an immortal soul, but to show that the definition DOES leave enough room for the soul to be separate from the living person's physical body.

On the matter of spirit, Pegg's claim is that the spirit is not a "thing;" but (i am pretty sure) did not sufficiently respond to the scripture that tells what happen to the spirit when you die. She also did not answer my question as to 1) what happen to that spirit after it returns to Jehovah, and 2) why is it impossible for Jehovah to send that spirit back in another body?

That's about where we are; Pegg, I leave out anything or misrepresented your views, I apologise, and please let me know where.

Big_TJ · Sep 19, 2012

Pegg said:
i dont know what definition you are using, but I am using the one that is the most widely accepted and most common to all religions who teach it.

If your definition is different, then we are not speaking about the same thing.

Pegg, I think you need to check into this because it's simply incorrect. My understanding is that the two largest 'religions' that teaches reincarnation is Hinduism and Buddism. However, their teachings are vastly different, and only one group suggests that the soul keep living keep living over and over (NOT that it is immortal [cannot die or everlasting or unending]). So, to say that the definition that you use is the "most widely accepted" and "most common to all religions who teaches it" is incorrect. You are even unable to give me a reference for a definition of reincarnation that matches the definition that you stated.

its not unusual to use the term 'soul' differently in different contexts...such as in 1Sam or Matt 10:28... 'soul' can also mean the 'life' of the individual. But it never means an immortal part of man that lives on.

While I agree that it never means an immortal part of a man that lives on, there are three issues here: Firstly, it is YOU who is trying to force "immortal part of man" in the meaning of reincarnation - there is no such concept in the official, referenced meaning. Again, here is the meaning of reincarnation:

from_wiki said:
Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, begins a new life in a new body that may be human, animal or spiritual depending on the moral quality of the previous life's actions

or:

dictionary.com said:
re·in·car·na·tion/ˌrē-inkärˈnāSHən/

Noun:

The rebirth of a soul in a new body.

A person or animal in whom a particular soul is believed to have been reborn

Secondly, this clearly showing that "soul" has a meaning that is separate from the physical body. Therefore, if someone say "A person is made up of a physical body and a soul", then they are absolutely not wrong. And thirdly, this totally debunk your previously stated stance that "soul" is "always the living person." Here is clear example where "soul" is NOT the living person.

Life as an intelligent person
Judges 9:17 when my father fought for YOU and went risking his soul...
1Peter 1:22 ...YOU have purified YOUR souls by [YOUR] obedience...
These few scriptures show that soul is the living breathing person...not an immortal part of the living breathing person.

I don't want to go into a discussion on what is "life" but I understand life to be a condition that distinguish organic from inorganic matter. However, I would be surprise if we dont agree that "life" is (or can be) separate from the physical body - do we agree? If you don't agree, then are you saying that there cannot be a physical body without life (or life without a physical body)? If you agree, then you are (in essence) agreeing that "soul" - when used to mean "life" is talking about something that is separate from the physical body (which again debunk your argument that "soul" is always the living person). In reincarnation, it is this "soul" or "life" or "spirit" that is sent into another physical body. For example, In referring to Jesus as the "spiritual Adam", the bible could very well be saying that the "life" or "spirit" which was in Adam is the exact same "life" or "spirit" which is in Jesus - thus reincarnation.

I hate to tell you this, but that link is saying exactly what I have been saying...the soul is the entire living person...everything that a person is.

Tell me that you are joking. First, there is a huge difference between "the entire living person" and "everythig that a person is." A person has emotions, but emotions is NOT the entire living person. I am hoping that you made a mistake here. :shrug:

Furthermore, how could you say that the link is exactly what you are saying?? You are saying that "soul" IS the entire living person, while the link is saying that "soul" can be attribute of a living person - how are those two positions the same?

That is what Nephesh means...the entire whole living person.

I can't believe you read the link on "nephesh" is still wrote this. Nephesh is translated with over 20 different meanings - how could you say "nephesh means the entire whole living person" when it also mean life, emotions, etc. Are you saying that "life" and "emotion" is also the entire living person?

Its not an immortal part of a living person which is what I think you believe it means.

Strawman. This is not even relevant. I do not believe it means an immortal part of living person. I agree with you that it means the entire living person, but I am saying that there are other meanings, which include aspects of the person that is separate from the physical body. Whether or not that/those aspects are immortal is irrelevant since reincarnation does not necessarily rely on an immortal soul.

Ne′phesh comes from a root meaning breathe and it can literally be rendered as a breather.

Actually no. Ne'phesh comes from the root word "Napash" which means " to take a breathe" or " to referesh oneself (Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon). Note that the root word is a verb, not a noun. So, it CANNOT be rendered as "a breather" which would be a noun.

The soul that you are ascribing to is from a greek definition...an immortal part of man has nothing to do with the hebrew nephesh.

Can I ask why are you so fixated on the "immortal part of man" strawman/red herring? No one is arguing or suggesting that there is a part of man that is immortal. Reincarnation is simply saying that there is another aspect to man that is separate from the physical body, and that portion of man is sent back in another body in the future.

the hebrew nephesh is EVERYTHING that a living breather is. It is their love, their hate, their need for food, their need for shelter, the blood running through their veins...it is everything that a physical living creature is.

Pegg, you are too sweet:bow::yes:. Let me see if I can say this in a way that it is clearly understood: There is a huge difference between " everything that a living breather is" and "a living person." A living person is a noun, and "everything a living breather is" is describing attributes of the living person. There are not the same.

God created living souls...and everything that a living soul requires for life is what the true meaning of nephesh is.

I think we do accept that Jehovah created living souls, and your repeating it will not make it any clearer. As I said before, there are over 5 dictionary definitions for for 'soul' but you are somehow rejecting all but the fifth definition. Furthermore, "ne'phesh" has over 20 meanings. You actually accept this when you acknowledge that "soul" can mean " life." While "a living person" has life, and emotion, "life" and "emotions" are certainly not "a living person."

So to say that because "god create living souls" means suggest that "soul" is only that living person that God created is demonstratively false.

well im glad that I can join you on this voyage of discovery

I was actually serious when I mentioned that you are assisting me in learning here, so thanks!

Big_TJ · Sep 21, 2012

Any response, Pegg?

Pegg · Sep 22, 2012

Big_TJ said:
Any response, Pegg?

Yes, I want you to read this article about what reincarnation belief entails...what it means:

ie,
1.2 Reincarnation
The doctrine of reincarnation, known also with other terms like, rebirth, transmigration of the soul, metempsychosis (or more accurately, metensomatosis, "passage from one body to another"), palingenesis (Gr., lit., "to begin again"), concerns the rebirth of the soul or self in a series of physical or preternatural embodiments, which are customarily human or animal in nature but are in some instances divine, angelic, demonic, vegetative, or astrological.3 The belief in rebirth in one form or another existed and is still found in tribal or non-literate cultures all over the world, which go to prove that this belief arouse contemporaneously with the origins of human culture per se.4
However it is in India and Greece that the doctrine of rebirth has been most elaborately developed. This belief is shared by all the other major religions of India, Hinduism, Buddhism, Gains, Sikhs and Sufis. [In ancient Greece, belief in rebirth formed part of the philosophical teachings of Pythagorean, Empodocles, Plato, and Plotinus. In modern times, religious teachers like Ramakrishna, Aurobindo or schools of thought, like Theosophy or various new "esoteric" "occultist" religious movements, like New Age or humanistic psychology: thinkers like C. G. Jung and Fritz Perls, hold onto belief in reincarnation.]

perhaps we can discuss this subject based on the same understanding of what reincarnation means...otherwise we are not going to get very far.

Big_TJ · Sep 23, 2012

Pegg said:
Yes, I want you to read this article about what reincarnation belief entails...what it means:

This is a great article, but there are two issues: First, it discusses and define reincarnation from an Hindu's perspective. As I mentioned before, the Hundu's understanding of reincarnation is different from other religions. Secondly, there is no mention (or even a suggestion) in the Hindu's definition of an "unending cycle" or an "immortal soul."

perhaps we can discuss this subject based on the same understanding of what reincarnation means...otherwise we are not going to get very far.

I agree. However honestly, I don't think we have a huge difference in the understanding of reincarnation. If we use any of the 3 definitions that you proposed during this debate, we will still be fine - I only objected to the use of "unending cycle" in the second definition that you proposed, since this seems to be an addition by you - probably to reject reincarnation on the "no immortal soul" premise.

What I think we have a huge difference in is the understanding of "soul." You, on one hand, reject that suggestion of reincarnation exist on the basis that the soul is a living being, and not immortal. You also reject 4 of the 5 definitions of 'soul' on the basis that you only accept the 'biblical definition.' When shown that biblically, 'soul' is not necessarily 'the living being,' you went on to state that 'it is never the immortal part of a person.' I, on the other hand, is saying that the "soul" is not necessarily the living being, as it can be separate from the physical body. I am also proposing that there is no need for an "immortal soul" in any belief of reincarnation, as there is no definition or reference - even if you use the Hindu's belief - that reincarnation requires an immortal soul.

I would like to know what is your understanding of this portion of the text you quote, especially the portion that I highlighted:

"the rebirth of the soul or self in a series of physical or preternatural embodiments"

I don't want you to tell me whether this is right or wrong, or whether you believe it or not. What I would like to know is what you understand this portion to mean.

Big_TJ · Sep 30, 2012

No response? I really had wanted to know what you understand by the statement ""the rebirth of the soul or self in a series of physical or preternatural embodiments"

Pegg · Oct 1, 2012

in the article, the idea of reincarnation is shown to be a common belief in the various religions mentioned...most predominantly in indian religions.

in buddism it is the 'self' that is reincarnated, but in hinduism it is the soul that is reincarnated.

Whichever definition you choose to use, you wont find the teaching in the bible. That is the point.

Big_TJ · Oct 4, 2012

Pegg said:
in the article, the idea of reincarnation is shown to be a common belief in the various religions mentioned...most predominantly in indian religions.

in buddism it is the 'self' that is reincarnated, but in hinduism it is the soul that is reincarnated.

This severely betray your lack of knowledge of reincarnation, even as it relates to these different religions :facepalm:

Whichever definition you choose to use, you wont find the teaching in the bible. That is the point.

I'm sorry - was this debate about whether the teaching of reincarnation is the bible? I thought the debate was about your claim, whic h is :

Pegg said:
Nothing in the bible suggest that reincarnation exist

Perhaps with this new information, I will need to regroup. I am also thinkg that your moving the goalpost is an indication that you accept that your ascertion is wrong. So, hopefully you will really think about the accuracy of ascertions before placing them as factual.

Thanks

Pegg · Oct 4, 2012

Big_TJ said:
Perhaps with this new information, I will need to regroup. I am also thinkg that your moving the goalpost is an indication that you accept that your ascertion is wrong. So, hopefully you will really think about the accuracy of ascertions before placing them as factual.

Thanks

perhaps you should present the passages of scripture that you believe show reincarnation... rather then simply assert the bible does have reincarnation as a teaching.

Also, you have not really shown what you believe reincarnation to mean. You have rejected the link I posted which looks at reincarnation from a few different perspectives... so im not sure where you are going with that, but you obviously have a different idea of reincarnation to the mainstream...so you really need to lay your cards on the table before this discussion can go any further.

Big_TJ · Oct 10, 2012

Pegg said:
perhaps you should present the passages of scripture that you believe show reincarnation... rather then simply assert the bible does have reincarnation as a teaching.

Pegg, As i mentioned several times, our debate was not about whether "the bible does have reincarnation as a teaching." It's about your claim that "nothing in the bible suggests that reincarnation exist." So, you are changing the goalpost here

perhaps you should present the passages of scripture

I have done this before and you just preached about what you think the scriptures mean. But in the spirit of transparency, here are some scriptures that SUGGESTS reincarnation exist (I already gave you some of these):

1)John 9:1 - it clearly suggests a belief that the man could have sinned before he was born; which suggests that he existed in some form before. Note, we are not talking about whether the suggestions are right or wrong; simply whether they exist (which is what our debate is about). Now all you have to do is to show me that this scripture does not suggest that reincarnation exist

2) Job 1:20-21 - clearly suggests that Job is of the view that he would be physically born again (he speaks about returning to his mother's womb naked.)

3) Ecclesiastes 1 is clearly shows the circle of life. It even say that there is "no rememberance of former things . . ." Why would it say this if there was not a suggestions that you existed in former times?

4) there are SEVERAL examples (eg in Matthews, Malachi, Luke, Mark, etc) that clearly suggests that John the Baptist is the reincarnated Elijah. Again, we are not debating whether the suggestions is wrong or right; we are simply debating if anything in the bible "suggests that reincarnation exist" (which was your claim).

5) Matthew 16:14 clearly shows that there was a belief among the people that Jesus was the reincarnated John the Baptist (or Jeremiah, or Elijah).

6) There are even discussions whether Jesus was the reincarned Adam, and 1 Cor 15:45 suggests that this is the case. Hebrews 7:3 even suggests that Jesus could be either the reincarnated Melchizedek or they are one and the same. Again, I am not debating whether these beliefs are wrong or right; we are simply debating whether their are suggestions in the bible that reincarnation exist.

And there are more:yes:

Also, you have not really shown what you believe reincarnation to mean.

Wrong. At the starting of the debate, I posited a debate for reincarnation which you accepted. You were the one who, on the other hand, changed your definition at least 3 times. As I said before, we do not have a disagreement on the belief of reincarnation - it is the concept that the soul or spirit will essentially live again in another body. What our disagreement is is with the meaning of "soul."

You have rejected the link I posted which looks at reincarnation from a few different perspectives...

Wrong. I accepted ALL your sources on the view of what reincarnation is. I simply pointed out that that your sources differ on how reincarnation happened.

I think that's enough for you to ponder; now just show me how the above is either :
1) not in the bible or
2) does not suggest reincarnation exist.

big_tj vs Pegg - Does the bible suggest reincarnation?

Big_TJ

Active Member

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One

Big_TJ

Active Member

Big_TJ

Active Member

savagewind

Veteran Member

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One

Big_TJ

Active Member

Big_TJ

Active Member

Big_TJ

Active Member

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One

Big_TJ

Active Member

Big_TJ

Active Member

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One

Big_TJ

Active Member

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One

Big_TJ

Active Member