Some facts
contributed by the author of the book in German: Reinkarnation, Christentum
und das kirchliche Dogma – “Reincarnation, Christianity and the Dogma of
the Church” (Ibera, Vienna, 2001). To die once,
Hebr. 9:27 “And as it is
appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”, hence: die once –
live once – no reincarnation. The Greek word here translated as “once” is hapax.
Greek dictionaries tell us that the word can also mean: “once and for all”, “at
once, suddenly”, “one day, eventually”. Hence, the contradiction to
reincarnation is only apparent and related to a tendentious and subjectively
chosen translation that fits the purpose. [Cf. this note.] John and
Elias, Matth. 11:14, 17:10-13 John the Baptist
is Elias (in earlier texts: Elijah). As a contradiction to this literal
understanding, John 1:21 is referred to, where John the Baptist denies being
Elias. His words are chosen to contradict what Jesus said! Should we believe
him more than Jesus? The Christian view must be, that Jesus knew what John
didn’t know. Very few consciously know their past personality and it may very
well be that John wasn’t one of them. Or he may have avoided the question,
telling only half the truth: “I am not Elias (now, but I once was)”. In any
case, the mere fact that people asked him about this demonstrates that they
took Jesus’ words literally. John
the Baptist was killed. Could this have been his karma? Read 2 Kings 18:40:
“And Elias said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them
escape. And they took them: and Elias brought them down to the brook Kishon,
and slew them there” [some 400 persons…]. The man born
blind, John 9:2 A disciple asked
Jesus about the possibility that the man was born blind because of what he did
before he was born (one of the two alternatives in his question). This shows
that the disciple believed in preexistence. Jesus doesn’t correct him in that,
but instead indicates that in this individual case the blindness had nothing to
do with having sinned before being born. A general conclusion cannot be drawn. Medieval
theology has suggested, referring to rabbinical sources, that the man could
have sinned in the mother’s womb (having had “evil thoughts” there), a
suggestion too absurd to take seriously. Two crucified
malefactors, Luke 23:39-43 One of them
regretted and believed in Jesus, and Jesus said to him: “To day shalt thou be
with me in paradise.” He will have had his last incarnation. The other
malefactor didn’t regret but mocked Jesus. He will still have had many
reincarnations to come… This,
furthermore, contradicts the dogma of inseparability of soul and body. If they
were inseparable, his soul couldn’t go to paradise with Jesus the same day. Discussion
with Nicodemus, John 3-4 and 8 Jesus said:
“Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God”. Nicodemus
asked: “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into
his mother's womb, and be born?” He didn’t see that it would have to be a new
mother. This quotation of Jesus is in modern text versions usually translated:
“Except a man be born from above…”, and it is explained that Nicodemus would
have misunderstood Jesus as saying “…be born again…” This explanation refers to
the double sense of the Greek word anothen, which can mean both (and a
few more things, too). But this is clearly nonsense, because they didn’t speak
Greek! They spoke Aramaic! The Aramaic language has no double-sense word that
fits here, but a single-sense word mille’ela = “from above” and another
single-sense word tanyanut = “again, anew”. Clearly, Jesus used the
latter, since that is how Nocodemus understood it and a misunderstanding is
ruled out in the original language. Later,
Jesus says: “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound
thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every
one that is born of the Spirit.” This seems to make no sense. Here, the word pneuma
occurs twice in the Greek text, and has first been translated as “wind” and
later as “Spirit”. Pneuma means “wind” and in an indirect sense “spirit”
– but also “soul”, that which makes the body alive, the “breath of life” (cf.
Hebrew ruah). The latter meaning is common in religious texts.
Furthermore, “sound” is here a translation of the Greek phoné, which
rather means “voice”. Hence an alternative and correct translation is: “The
soul goes where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice [whispering] thereof,
but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that
is born with a soul.” Now it makes sense. Jesus talks about preexistence: The
soul comes from somewhere, where it was before, and goes on to somewhere else
when the body dies. Of course, preexistence doesn’t necessarily mean
reincarnation – but reincarnation necessarily involves preexistence… Whom say
people that I am? Luke 9:18-19 Jesus said:
“’Whom say the people that I am?’ They answering said ‘John the Baptist; but
some say, Elias; and others say, that one of the old prophets is risen again’.”
John the Baptist would obviously not be possible, but the other alternatives
indicate that some people in him saw a possible reincarnation of Elias or
another old prophet. Origen and
reincarnation Origen’s
relevant original texts were burnt in the 6th century. The only texts remaining
to-day are the Latin translations by Rufinus and Hieronymus, the latter only in
fragments. Both admit in the introduction to the translation that they have adjusted
the text to fit the Dogma and omitted certain “offensive” parts. Thus,
clearly, if Origen had written positively about reincarnation, they will have
omitted that or changed its wording. Through
burning the original texts, the Church has withdrawn for itself the grounds for
proving its allegation that Origen would have contradicted reincarnation. The anathemata
against Origen In the protocols
of the Council in Constantinople of 553, the condemnations of Origen were
mentioned. They were not a subject discussed in the council itself, but this
merely confirmed a condemnation formulated ten years earlier in a local synod
in Constantinople. The Council instead dealt with the “three Chapters”, three
texts by long dead bishops, now condemned as heretical. But before the
Council was opened, waiting for the pope to appear, emperor Justinian presented
the text from 543 and requested the bishops present to sign it. The pope didn’t
come and the Council, therefore, wasn’t opened yet. A week later they gathered
again, but the pope didn’t agree and still didn’t come. The emperor, therefore,
declared the Council opened without the presence of the pope, clearly
against the rules for a Council. Emperor
Justinian wrote in his edict against Origen, in which he ordered the
condemnation at the synod of 543, that, according to Origen: “spiritual
entities were fallen in sin and as punishment banned into bodies… becoming
imprisoned in a body a second and a third time or even still more times…” The
first anathema reads: “If anyone assert the fabulous pre-existence of
souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let
him be anathema.” The Greek words here translated as “monstrous restoration”
are teratodi apokatastasin. Apokatastasis normally refers to the
restoration of God’s creation in its original holy order, which is certainly
not monstrous… hence it will here refer to something else, but to what? Does it
refer to the restoration of a new body for the soul? This would truly be
“monstrous” to the Dogma… This may be a reference to reincarnation, without
mentioning it by name. And if so, it confirms that Origen was viewed as
advocating reincarnation. Since
the condemnation of Origen isn’t a decision by an allegedly “infallible”
Council, it has never been officially forbidden to the Christian to believe in
preexistence, nor in reincarnation… The Council
in Nicaea in 325 It has been
repeatedly alleged that belief in reincarnation was condemned during the
Council in Nicaea in 325. No reference to that is found in protocols of the
Council. However, it is known that these protocols are incomplete. Parts of
them are missing. It is also known that emperor Constantine didn’t allow the
Gnostic Christians to speak at the Council and that he gave their propositions
and petitions to the fire without opening them. It is historically documented
that most of the Gnostic Christians believed in reincarnation, but he didn’t
give them the chance to present their views. The third and
fourth generation? Num. 14:18 “The LORD is
longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by
no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation.” If this were so, it would be a
horrible injustice to punish innocent children, grandchildren and so on for
what an ancestor did! And what “mercy” would that be? Such an interpretation is
contradicted in Deut. 24:16: “The fathers shall not be put to death for the
children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man
shall be put to death for his own sin.” The Christian Gnostics interpreted the
text in Num. 14:18 as referring to the “third and forth incarnation” of
a sinner. That would be just…
NOTES by Jan
Erik Sigdell TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT
REINCARNATION,
THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY