@Viaro;

Welcome. All my dictionaries have finished downloading so I'm ready now whatever language you choose to use  

@DeepSight:

Please refrain from using me as attestation of reason in your posts. I'd be a poor certificate since I was arguing that you were moving the goal posts. I said 'ascension is a transition. Death also is a transition. BUT YOUR OWN DEFINITION (bandied between you and Viaro) of Re-incarnation is birth-[b]death-rebirth NOT transition-transition-transition. If death is a transition, then birth also is a transition and re-birth also is a transition! [/b]

Considered as above (in entirety), I was trying to say this is ridiculous - transition - transition - transition. Everything ends in life. We both know that! Where do "your" transitions end? in more transitions! But that is not even the question - it is where does it start? with "transitions" too! That, I see as meaningless since you earlier posited it starts with God but now decided it starts with transitions! Capische?

For clarity, I do not believe Death and Ascension mean the same for that would suppose I believe Jesus is dead. You think that?

I notice you've left out Abraham's exemption from re-incarnation and the fact that even the "ascended" Elijah showed up at the transfiguration! Would you say Elijah is Omnipresent since re-incarnation doesn't seek us to believe in multiple simultaneous instances? oh, I forgot - his importance had to be emphasized so he 'temporarily' became omnipresent, abi?

Viaro -

Alright, let's see who is making a mockery of logic.

Answer me these two questions only and the matter must rest -

 1. Is death a transition?

 2. Is ascension a transition?

Simple.

Krayola:

The Hebrews expected Elijah to return because he never died. Reincarnation was not something that was part of their belief system. . . Even resurrection was only believed by some Hebrews and that was much later, long long long after Elijah. The identification of JTB with Elijah was most likely symbolic and in reference to his function, and not his personal identity. Even, sef, Elisha had the "spirit" of Elijah even though they lived at the same time for crying out loud, which I think supports your opponents arguments. In 2 Kings 2:1-12 Elisha asks Elijah for a double portion of his "spirit", and he "inherits" it and serves a certain prophetic function. Was that also reincarnation? YOur opponents, IMHO, are not twisting anything. Rather than isolating certain texts, they are interpreting them in light of how the Hebrews understood their religion.

Hebrews were more concerned with functionality. Worrying about the "nature of being" etc were Greek tendencies. If, at all, JTB was identified, by Jesus, with Elijah, it was most likely because of his function. . . he was in the "spirit" of Elijah. For example All those genealogies (Matthew and Luke) that say Jesus is the son of David are interested in his function as "King", "Messiah/liberator", and not whether or not he was an actual descendant of David. A lot of the Bible is symbolic, and a lot of it must be read thru Hebrew eyes to put things in context. I think you are injecting foreign ideas into the mix. Just my opinion though.

There's a paper on this stuff here. . . kinda long, but it's pretty interesting. http://www.columbiaseminary.edu/forstudents/pdf/termapersample.pdf

Krayo, thank you for putting it in very simple terms.

nuclearboy:

@Viaro;

Welcome. All my dictionaries have finished downloading so I'm ready now whatever language you choose to use

Shooks man! I'm in deeper trouble now!!

Deep Sight:

Viaro -

Alright, let's see who is making a mockery of logic.

Answer me these two questions only and the matter must rest -
 1. Is death a transition?
 2. Is ascension a transition?
Simple.

^^^^ Brilliant ehn? Ok, so lets re-phrase the question?

[1] Men are animals
[2] Pigs are animals

Are men pigs? Simple!

@Viaro: Nope, its me that is OUT of trouble now . No more scratching my pate wondering what language you're changing gear in

Quote from Nuclearboy -

@DeepSight:

Please refrain from using me as attestation of reason in your posts. I'd be a poor certificate since I was arguing that you were moving the goal posts. I said 'ascension is a transition. Death also is a transition. BUT YOUR OWN DEFINITION (bandied between you and Viaro) of Re-incarnation is birth-[b]death-rebirth NOT transition-transition-transition. If death is a transition, then birth also is a transition and re-birth also is a transition! [/b]

Considered as above (in entirety), I was trying to say this is ridiculous - transition - transition - transition. Everything ends in life. We both know that! Where do "your" transitions end? in more transitions! But that is not even the question - it is where does it start? with "transitions" too! That, I see as meaningless since you earlier posited it starts with God but now decided it starts with transitions! Capische?

For clarity, I do not believe Death and Ascension mean the same for that would suppose I believe Jesus is dead. You think that?

I notice you've left out Abraham's exemption from re-incarnation and the fact that even the "ascended" Elijah showed up at the transfiguration! Would you say Elijah is Omnipresent since re-incarnation doesn't seek us to believe in multiple simultaneous instances? oh, I forgot - his importance had to be emphasized so he 'temporarily' became omnipresent, abi?

I am going to hope feverishly that this last attempt will sail through to you all; and enable you to recognise just how pedantic you are all being with this point.

What is a reincarnation? It is the act of coming back into the world as a new born baby.

It need hardly be said that in order to return, one must first depart.

Thus the departure (or transition) is what is key.

Now the standard means of departing this world is death; it is therefore not wrong when we define reincarnation in terms of “a previously dead person.” That remains a correct definition, because as far as we know, humans only depart the world via death.

But where it is claimed that a person did not die, but “ascended” to another realm – this causes no problems because it is clear that what is critical is the departure – without which we cannot speak of a return.

So I am exhausted that persons can make an issue between a “death” and a “departure.” (transition/ ascension. Etc) As I have said a zillion times already, in the context of the reincarnation discourse they are the same thing because to return, one must first depart. By death. By Luftansa. By voodoo. Whatever.

Deep Sight:

Viaro -

Alright, let's see who is making a mockery of logic.

Answer me these two questions only and the matter must rest -

 1. Is death a transition?

 2. Is ascension a transition?

Simple.

I answered those questions by DISCUSSING the implications of what you are sweating out here: see post #123.

Excerpts:

(1)

Now-now-now, DeepSight, the Bible makes a strong case of such a 'translation' where someone (Enoch) is said have not experienced death - is that the same thing as in the case of reincarnation where DEATH IS A NECESSARY ELEMENT? If death is necessary in reincarnation, would you be able to discuss the same reincarnation without death as in Enoch's case? How do you then maintain that they are the same, or that "there is no difference"??

(2)

Dear sir, if it was the human spirit out of this world, what you would be arguing here is DEATH!! That is how death is defined in the Bible - "the body without the spirit is dead" (James 2:11) - but in both cases of Elijah and Enoch, it was not 'the body without the spirit', for they were both taken whole: body + soul + spirit! Was that too hard, sir??

(3)

5. Those who teach reincarnation (which I dubbed reincarnationists) do not play with words when it comes to the core elements of that word - these core elements are two, at least: (a) DEATH; and (b) a 'PAST LIFE' - and without these two elements, you CANNOT BE TALKING ABOUT 'reincarnation'.

We CANNOT just peg these different terms on one word of 'transition' - WHY? For at least two reasons:
(a) because there are different types of 'transition/translation' which mean very, very different things with different results and implications to very different people/worldviews;
(b) among reincarnationists, the notion of reincarnation does not just happen by any type of 'transition' - reincarnation for reincarnationists is predicated on DEATH and not on the other types of 'transitions'! Death is the one necessary thing that must constantly be kept in view in your argument, without which there is no possibility of you ever making sense of the term 'reincarnation'.

viaro:

Krayo, thank you for putting it in very simple terms.

haha. Me I no sabi heavy grammar o.

@ deepsight.

- Body dies and soul leaves to return in a new "body". Isn't that what reincarnation is? Continuous transition of souls facilitated by birth and death of bodies?


- Live body leaves to ___________________

can u please fill in the blanks? What happened to Elijah's live body when JTB had his soul? Was he being saved for his appearance at the Mount of Transfiguration?

Deep Sight:

Quote from Nuclearboy -

I am going to hope feverishly that this last attempt will sail through to you all; and enable you to recognise just how pedantic you are all being with this point.
What is a reincarnation? It is the act of [b]coming back into the world as a new born baby.[/b]
It need hardly be said that in order to return, one must first depart.
Thus the departure (or transition) is what is key.
Now the standard means of departing this world is death; it is therefore not wrong when we define reincarnation in terms of “a previously dead person.” That remains a correct definition, because as far as we know, humans only depart the world via death.
But where it is claimed that a person did not die, but “ascended” to another realm – this causes no problems because it is clear that what is critical is the departure – without which we cannot speak of a return.

So I am exhausted that persons can make an issue between a “death” and a “departure.” (transition/ ascension. Etc) As I have said a zillion times already, in the context of the reincarnation discourse they are the same thing because to return, one must first depart. By death. By Luftansa. By voodoo. Whatever.

Your definition above! Elijah went with his body INTACT! When he came back, where do you suppose he left that body? On Lufthansa? Or maybe Arabia's hordes cut him out of it on his way back to this "plane" in Elizabeth's bedroom? Or would you suggest he entered Elizabeth with his body masked inside that of Little John? Look rather at the transfiguration where he came back and was seen - He still had the body.

So please don't go feverish on us. Rather try align your thoughts with what is actually penned down in the Bible you are quoting. I personally am waiting to see how OOI turns out.

As an aside, DeepSight, perhaps you could go through this post you made and use the same criteria for judging yourself here

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-279591.864.html#msg4603721

Deep Sight:

I am going to hope feverishly that this last attempt will sail through to you all; and enable you to recognise just how pedantic you are all being with this point.

Good - I wish you all the luck you can gather!

What is a reincarnation? It is the act of coming back into the world as a new born baby.

Okay - should we again hold you on that definition. .  or you hope to come back later and cry out "error" yet again??

It need hardly be said that in order to return, one must first depart.

Okay, ride on.

Thus the departure (or transition) is what is key.

Steady on here: WHAT TYPE OF DEPARTURE (or TRANSITION) would that be? Note again:[list]

We CANNOT just peg these different terms on one word of 'transition' - WHY? For at least two reasons:
(a) because there are different types of 'transition/translation' which mean very, very different things with different results and implications to very different people/worldviews;
(b) among reincarnationists, the notion of reincarnation does not just happen by any type of 'transition' - reincarnation for reincarnationists is predicated on DEATH and not on the other types of 'transitions'! Death is the one necessary thing that must constantly be kept in view in your argument, without which there is no possibility of you ever making sense of the term 'reincarnation'.

[/list]

Deep Sight:
Now the standard means of departing this world is death; it is therefore not wrong when we define reincarnation in terms of “a previously dead person.” That remains a correct definition, because as far as we know, humans only depart the world via death.

Good - now please show us where Elijah first DIED!! Please, please, and please. .  stop wasting viaro's time and do that one thing!

But where it is claimed that a person did not die, but “ascended” to another realm – this causes no problems because it is clear that what is critical is the departure – without which we cannot speak of a return.

This is where you are all muddled up!

There are various kinds of "return" in the Bible - two for now:

(a) Jesus spoke parabolically of His second coming as a "return" - 'He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return'; yet, this 'return' is spoken of in various ways in other references:
[list][li]'this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven' (Acts 1:11)[/li]
[li]'So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation' (Heb. 9:28)[/li][/list]

(b) the 'saints' will also come with the Lord: 'And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints' (Jude 14)

Please let me know: are the above speaking about reincarnation? Are you fast losing your grip on the meaning of that word for you?

So I am exhausted that persons can make an issue between a “death” and a “departure.” (transition/ ascension. Etc) As I have said a zillion times already, in the context of the reincarnation discourse they are the same thing because to return, one must first depart. By death. By Luftansa. By voodoo. Whatever.

Oh my goodness!!   DeepSight, I apologise for the 'stupidity', but allow me say that you're a clown per excellence! To even think I have been wasting knowledge on you is. . .?!?

Dear sir,
(1) DEATH is NOT the same thing even in context as ASCENSION
(2) what is TRANSITION for you may not be that same thing for many reincarnationists
(3) reincarnationists can hardly justify 'reincarnation' on any other type of transition other than DEATH!

So, if we're done with your clowning, please release us so we can go pursue what commander nuclearboy had warned me against!

Nuclear - maybe YOU should tell me where Elijah's body is since he  didn't "die."

Like i said before - perhaps he is still roaming the caves in the middle east?

Oh, no wonder centuries later, he was able to appear beside christ - he was alive and kicking here in the physical, eating and drinking all those years! Can you defend this? ? ? ? ?

Now onto pigs and men: if the point being made concerned excreta for example - the common ground stands. Just as surely as the common ground between death and ascension stands when reincarnation is at issue - to wit: they are both a departure from this realm.

I am getting tired.

Deep Sight:

Now onto pigs and men: if the point being made concerned excreta for example - the common ground stands. Just as surely as the common ground between death and ascension stands when reincarnation is at issue - to wit: they are both a departure from this realm.

Just two quick questions:

(1) Please show us where reincarnationists predicate "reincarnation" on any other type of 'transition' than DEATH;
(2) Please show us where reincarnationists predicate reincarnation on ASCENSION and not on DEATH!

I am getting tired.

Perhaps the one reason why you get tired after all this is because you are trying far to muich to gull yourself further.

Reincarnation is predicated on a[b] departure[/b] from the world. However defined.

I cannot say more as i will be repeating myself.

I already explained why death is used in the definition. of reincarnation -

Now the standard means of departing this world is death; it is therefore not wrong when we define reincarnation in terms of “a previously dead person.” That remains a correct definition, because as far as we know, humans only depart the world via death.

This takes nothing away from the fact that a departure is what is at issue.

I cant say more. I feel like i'm spoonfeeding a nursery class.

Deep Sight:

I cant say more. I feel like i'm spoonfeeding a nursery class.

Your nursery class is not going to swallow your bait. You have made clear that -

That remains a correct definition, because as far as we know, humans only depart the world via death.

. . and what that means is that you admit to no other "departure" from the world than DEATH!

This is why I noted 3 simple points for you, among which was that -

(3) reincarnationists can hardly justify 'reincarnation' on any other type of transition other than DEATH!

. . and to that I threw 2 simple questions your way:

(1) Please show us where reincarnationists predicate "reincarnation" on any other type of 'transition' than DEATH;

(2) Please show us where reincarnationists predicate reincarnation on ASCENSION and not on DEATH!

Point in all this is simple: no matter how hard you tried, your reincarnation thesis/program had collapsed before you started to argue - which is why you can't cheat or cut corners with any other type of 'transition' than DEATH. .  the very fact that you have now reiterated and the same thing that reincarnationists attest to.

Nothing will ever work this catachresis for you, DeepSight - unless, of course, you want to cry "error" yet again and produce another redaction. You're free to do so, and once again I shall have the pleasure of wasting it for you. Trust me.

Cheers.

Don't spoon feed us, DeepSight, we are adults and won't accept "this food" from you. Poison ivy is not "food".

What we have said is that Elijah didn't die and ascended with his body - where to, I refuse to speculate on since I have no outright scriptural or otherwise backing for such answer. You are the only one I see on this thread who has stated (claimed) knowledge of where Elijah is so you ought answer the question. And from the message in your posts, it seems you believe Elijah was "transubtutated" into John's Mam, body and all.

As an aside, those OT women must have been very strong - imagine carrying a hairy elderly prophet inside you for 9 months; plus Elijah was very rude too. Probably cussed her each time she made him uncomfortable inside her.

Your problem with departure from the world is this - what happened to the body because, Sir, you do not depart from the world till you leave your body! And I do not give a rats nuts if Elijah lives in a rhombus cloud today - it is you that says he departed the world in the context of re-incarnation so tell me where his body is because he needs must drop one body before he can occupy another else he is divine!

unless, of course, you want to cry "error" yet again

Jesus. You didn't even get that that statement was made just to show you that there's no difference between the "error" and "transition." -

I said - - -

I hope you recognize that in reality i have not abandoned my earlier definition: given that death is a transition!

Cant help this nursery class then.

nuclearboy:

Don't spoon feed us, DeepSight, we are adults and won't accept "this food" from you. Poison ivy is not "food".

What we have said is that Elijah didn't die and ascended with his body - where to, I refuse to speculate on since I have no outright scriptural or otherwise backing for such answer. You are the only one I see on this thread who has stated (claimed) knowledge of where Elijah is so you ought answer the question. And from the message in your posts, it seems you believe Elijah was "transubtutated" into John's Mam, body and all.

As an aside, those OT women must have been very strong - imagine carrying a hairy elderly prophet inside you for 9 months; plus Elijah was very rude too. Probably cussed her each time she made him uncomfortable inside her.

Your problem with departure from the world is this - what happened to the body because, Sir, you do not depart from the world till you leave your body! And I do not give a rats nuts if Elijah lives in a rhombus cloud today - it is you that says he departed the world in the context of re-incarnation so tell me where his body is because he needs must drop one body before he can occupy another else he is divine!

Sir - my legal background gives me to know that he who asserts that a person is alive should simply produce that person.

As an aside, the legal presumption of death kicks in once a person is not seen for seven years.

Sinvce you assert that Elijah did not die, then please produce him. Haba, it cannot be too hard na?

Deep Sight:

Jesus. You didn't even get that that statement was made just to show you that there's no difference between the "error" and "transition." -

Cant help this nursery class then.

Please sir, would you kindly stop pussyfooting over this issue and rather maintain course, huh? The latest is to come back to draw the illation that there is no difference between the error and transition - and therefore what? We should now assume that your 'error' must 'transit' ever so gullibly so you can sell us to a free market?

Look, just stop this yoyo and address the simple point: your reincarnation is predicated on death, and since Elijah did NOT die, how do you 'transit' that conundrum?

Deep Sight:

Sir - my legal background gives me to know that he who asserts that a person is alive should simply produce that person.

Your legal background is not yet mature - that's what we call half-baked 'charge-and-bail' diploma! DeepSight, is your God alive? Yes? Please produce it/he.

As an aside, the legal presumption of death kicks in once a person is not seen for seven years.

Nope, Elijah was seen centuries LATER at the TRANSFIGURATION in Matthew 17. Where you get the 'seven years' from is below you and beyond me - by what legal or philosophical science did you come to that conclusion?

Sinvce you assert that Elijah did not die, then please produce him. Haba, it cannot be too hard na?

Nope, it cannot be hard. You tell us where it is that his spirit left his body, and we shall gather all his constituents for you.

My dear Viaro:

We CANNOT expect DeepSight to produce Infinity so how dare you suggest that?  Don't forget i now have sumfin on you!. Anyway, if you insist on seeing his "God", just type "1" on your keyboard and you have it. 

Seriously though, DeepSight, how do I produce a guy that is in another guy many times over by now. Oh ok, I just had an epiphany - MavenBox is Elijah! There, there's your proof.

Leave this thing please. Its starting to look more of desperation than anything else

this is a personal experience, i used to work with a man who is about 50 years of age, i cant give his name cos of client privacy issue but all i can say is that he is autistic and has a mild challenging behavior.if anyone tells this man his/her date of birth,in less than half a second he would tell you precisely what day of the week you were born!!!if you now try to outsmart him by telling him he didnt get it right,he woulld get upset and start recounting events which supposedly happened to common folks with dates and locations included 30,40,50,60,70,80,90 and even one hundred years ago!!!!!as if thats not enough, he would tell you what happend to their children,grandchildren!!!etcetera, though no one had tried to verify his accounts, the world is vast!!!

JUST HOW FAR CAN OUR RATIONAL MINDS TAKE US?

The case of the Bumblebee ==>


Theoretically, scientists say, the bumblebee should remain grounded, just like the engineless jumbo jet.

Considering that the basic equation governing the aerodynamics of flying insects and airplanes is supposed to be

the same, there is no apparent explanation as to how bumblebees can fly. Its wings aren't big enough.

Aerodynamics says it is impossible. The biggest computers in the world all come to the same conclusion,

it can't fly.


But what does the bumblebee do? It does not know aerodynamics. It ignores the great minds, the skeptics, the computers, and it just goes ahead and flies.

trukoments:

this is a personal experience, i used to work with a man who is about 50 years of age, i cant give his name cos of client privacy issue but all i can say is that he is autistic and has a mild challenging behavior.if anyone tells this man his/her date of birth,in less than half a second he would tell you precisely what day of the week you were born!!!if you now try to outsmart him by telling him he didnt get it right,he woulld get upset and start recounting events which supposedly happened to common folks with dates and locations included 30,40,50,60,70,80,90 and even one hundred years ago!!!!!as if thats not enough, he would tell you what happend to their children,grandchildren!!!etcetera, though no one had tried to verify his accounts, the world is vast!!!

@trukoments:

What you have described is not uncommon with people who have strong ties to the occult (family/past/love-life) in the form of divination spirits. The idea is possession with a knowledge demon that is very boastful. Such would find it very easy to control a person who seems (according to your definition) not totally in control of himself. If you could, I would suggest an experiment - take the person to a church during their praise worship. You just might be surprised to find your client becoming very vocal and violent and saying things that would amaze you.

And yes, the world is vast and satan has no other task but to convince people of anything and everything that will make it difficult to get on God's side. Tricks such as the above are elementary in the occult and help propagate "false theories" like re-incarnation. Such a demon would have access to information that would seem impossible to possess where it not a re-incarnation or such like phenomena

@trukoments: Nukeboy is right, that was a "familiar" spirit, like the kinds that control seances and influence ouija boards. Its not a big deal cos an "elemental" spirit who doesnt die (or LOL, reincarnate and firmly deny it ) will witness prevalent patterns of choices and events in families &the society over the ages, and since the general human nature is not entirely unique, it may thus be thought to "know the future" or stuff. A 17yr old guy in primary 6 cos he has repeated the class 9 times will recognize the course content but that doesnt make him a brilliant chap!

@Deep Sight: I neither fled nor galumphed off in chortling joy. I was just watching the thread evolve. And Im glad at its growth.

@Krayola: you see, this is why i respect your opinion, you may not be a Christian but you always cut the "cr'ap" and leave your sentiments aside, like a religion facts machine. You distinguish between what you believe in, and what authorities with the worldview in question believe in. Thanks for the input.

@Viaro/Nuclearboy: these guys! Hmm. Lol. Na you biko this kain argument (will viaro get this? )

It is wiser to say that one does not believe in reincarnation than to say that it is false. To declare that something, particularly spiritual experiences as false or even true pressuposes that such a person have investigated such a phenomenon and have clear cut, irrefutable evidence. An evidence that is both independent and reproducible if such a claim is subjected to objective, independent investigation. By evidence, I do not mean debates or essays but a reproduction of such evidence in real time and in life. If I say that I believe in reincarnation, then that is my perception and I am entitled to it. The same goes for one who says he does not believe in reincarnation. But if I say that reincarnation is true, then that presupposes that I have personal and independently verifiable evidence of reincarnation and if called upon I can recall evidence of past lives which scholars can check out to see if it matches. The same goes for those who say that reincarnation is false. Reincarnation, miracles, demons and other similar phenomenon must pass independent but objective investigation if it is to be transported from belief or personal perception to the status of Truth or Falsehood. A spiritual experience that has a material manifestation must be subjected to scientific investigation or else a wide door to errors is opened where evertything is possible and impossible. Best wishes.

@m_nwankwo: The deal is that Deep Sight says that JESUS PREACHED REINCARNATION in the Bible.

We're not contending reincarnation, we're discussing whether reincarnation is preached in the Bible, and whether it was advocated by Jesus, and whether the Hebrews had such a mindset. As I once said, if someone tells me that Santa Claus has a red unicorn, and the unicorn is the god of every december, I am not bothered. Just don't tell me that the red unicorn-god is the one that Job described in the Bible, or something like that!

My wisdom has multiplied in recent times, and I have learnt to leave people to believe whatever they want to, light does not argue with darkness so time will tell whoever is really correct. But don't twist my own understanding of the truth to give credence to yours!

Mavenb0x:

@m_nwankwo: The deal is that Deep Sight says that JESUS PREACHED REINCARNATION in the Bible.

We're not contending reincarnation, we're discussing whether reincarnation is preached in the Bible, and whether it was advocated by Jesus, and whether the Hebrews had such a mindset. As I once said, if someone tells me that Santa Claus has a red unicorn, and the unicorn is the god of every december, I am not bothered. Just don't tell me that the red unicorn-god is the one that Job described in the Bible, or something like that!

My wisdom has multiplied in recent times, and I have learnt to leave people to believe whatever they want to, light does not argue with darkness so time will tell whoever is really correct. But don't twist my own understanding of the truth to give credence to yours!

I am aware of what is being discussed and I have already said so in my short post before the penultimate one. I have also stated in that post that it is incorrect to interpret the bible for those that believe in it or the koran for moslems especially when the one doing the interpretation does not believe in whole or in part the contents of the bible or Koran. I also stated in that post that John the Baptist is not a reincarnation of Elijah. In addition, I do not sense that reincarnation is taught in the bible. It is my conviction that Jesus, the son of God taught reincarnation but that teaching is not in the bible and thus I agree with those who say that reincarnation cannot be found in the bible. Stay blessed.

viaro:

Your legal background is not yet mature - that's what we call half-baked 'charge-and-bail' diploma!

Haba na?

DeepSight, is your God alive? Yes? Please produce it/he.

Intangible Divine being.

Nope, Elijah was seen centuries LATER at the TRANSFIGURATION in Matthew 17.

I cant stop giggling at this one. This dude really thinks the tranfiguration was a physical appearance. So Elijah had been living somwhere on Earth for centuries hiding out in a cave and just popped out to say hi to Jeezy Christ at the transfiguration. Wow! Comic relief dont get any better than this!

Where you get the 'seven years' from is below you and beyond me - by what legal or philosophical science did you come to that conclusion?

The legal prsumption of death is a secular legal presumption that kicks in when a person has not been seen for seven years. I dont know what you're weaving boy, but this is sounding rather unhinged right now.

Nope, it cannot be hard. You tell us where it is that his spirit left his body, and we shall gather all his constituents for you.

Many people simply have not thought through their belief systems. Otherwise i don't know how a Christian who believes that by adamic sin ALL of mankind bought into death and lost eternal life - will also believe that one man somewhere escaped the said adamic sin and was exempted from death - EVEN BEFORE CHRIST SUPPOSEDLY PAID THE RANSOM!

Ya gotta luuuuuuuuv these Christians!

@Deep Sight: Enoch did not escape the ransom. He was preserved for a future purpose. There are three records of strange "transitions" in the OT: Enoch, Elijah and Moses. Moses is a peculiar case, God "killed him and buried him" and nobody saw his body (This is a deep matter, because when God kills one and buries him by Himself, how certain are you that it was the kind of death that men usually die?).

But Enoch and Elijah simply transposed beyond the physical plane: body, soul and spirit, and did not see death.

You claim that it is a funny claim. Now I will make it even funnier: if I go to the grocery and purchase vegetables, does it mean I am about to consume it all in one afternoon? What if I refrigerate some of them and preserve them for future consumption? Why should anyone think that, with my busy schedule and love for vegetables, I will have to go to the grocery every day?

Elijah and Enoch were translated that they should not see death, but they were PRESERVED, and not EXEMPTED.

There are two witnesses in revelations, one will be a type of Elijah, and they are so gonna die, thanks to the AntiChrist's schemes. But God will raise them back up to life again. It makes sense to understand that these two are Enoch and Elijah, and they are returning to die once, as it is appointed to all men to die once. Therein lies your answer.

^^^ Interesting, but you will agree with me that i am entitled to view this as bizzarre spin and nothing more.

Deep Sight:

Haba na?

My apologies again - I got carried away (should pay more heed to a discussion and eschew the personal thingy - sorry again).

Intangible Divine being.

I didn't ask for a description - rather, that you 'produce' your god in the same way that you asked for us to produce Elijah.

I cant stop giggling at this one. This dude really thinks the tranfiguration was a physical appearance. So Elijah had been living somwhere on Earth for centuries hiding out in a cave and just popped out to say hi to Jeezy Christ at the transfiguration. Wow! Comic relief dont get any better than this!

If you notice, I'm not the one hanging out with the 'Elijah-hiding-in-a-cave' theory - that belongs to your domain; and I've rather maintained one consistency throughout in my discussions on the subject of reincarnation. As long as you ignore the foundations and core elements upon which reincarnation is predicated, your arguments will ever be cyclical (not to mentain that you are still very far from making a good case).

The legal prsumption of death is a secular legal presumption that kicks in when a person has not been seen for seven years. I dont know what you're weaving boy, but this is sounding rather unhinged right now.

DeepSight, I'm very aware of the so-called 'secular legal presumption', and in various circumstances in many different countries it varies - sometimes less than 2 years, other times less than 4 years, a few are 7 years, and others are arbitrary. I am so very aware bro, so you can play less on the 'legal' thingy and loosen up a bit.

What you just don't get is that Elijah's going to heaven is not a case for your secular legal presumption - at least, he had nothing to answer to (such as in the case of inheritance and property rights, or marital connections). How many people in your reincarnation theory would you be willing to subject to the same secular presumption that you hold out against Elijah? How many reincarnationists lower themselves and theur scholarship to this beggarly presumption that you're making out here - as if that is going to help make a score on your desperate attempt on an non-sequitor reincarnation that you can't even hold in a consistent manner? It makes me wonder that you're jumping ever so desperately on every idea just to keep up your arguments - just keep trying harder: and you'll still find your arguments wasted.

Many people simply have not thought through their belief systems. Otherwise i don't know how a Christian who believes that by adamic sin ALL of mankind bought into death and lost eternal life - will also believe that one man somewhere escaped the said adamic sin and was exempted from death - EVEN BEFORE CHRIST SUPPOSEDLY PAID THE RANSOM!

Bro, this is about reincarnation and nothing else. That was why I took it from the other thread and brought it here so that the tendency to derail a topic would be contained and minimised. I don't see how you have made a good and sustainable argument for reincarnation before trying to drag in unrelated illations into this one. That is not an intelligent approach to discussions, and I wonder if you've lost your grip on every single argument for your reincarnation so that now you're only acting out this diversionary tactics.

Ya gotta luuuuuuuuv these Christians!

I do - it has emerged that Christians here in this thread have made far more sense than your abandoned 'oneness of infinity' thread that is taking you forever to make sense to even you yourself.