Did Jesus teach reincarnation?

Or, that he hoped he'd be able to weasel out of it - which he did.

I was commenting on the story of Abraham and Isaac and your claim that, "The evidence is that Abraham believed in God's raising the dead." At best, it is weak evidence that Abraham may have believed in the possibility of resurrection.

1. Abraham told his servants that he and Isaac would be back. He didn't say that he'd be back and Isaac would be resurrected eventually. Either he lied to his servants or he didn't believe he'd have to kill Isaac.2. Abraham told Isaac that God would provide a lamb for the sacrifice. Either he was misleading Isaac into thinking he wasn't the figurative lamb or he didn't believe he'd have to kill Isaac.3. In Genesis 17:19 God said to Abraham, "Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him." So it was pretty clear that Isaac was not going to die childless.

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

quote:

---

Genesis 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.

---

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

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

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

I didn't say it was. I said that the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac is weak evidence of that hope.

They are similar in that both Job and Abraham accepted the death of their children and remained loyal to God.

I'm not overlooking his hope in resurrection. I'm saying that the story is weak evidence of that hope. It is weak evidence because he said they would come back after the sacrifice. I'm not. I'm saying that Abraham's experience is weak evidence of his belief in resurrection. It is evidence - but it is weak evidence. The basic reason is that any work of literature supersedes second-hand discussion of it. What The Lord of the Rings says is automatically more important that what somebody else claims it says.

Your arguments trip over the stumbling block of canon.First Sect: "According to the Gospel of Flintstone, Jesus believed in reincarnation."
Second Sect; "We don't accept the Gospel of Flintstone."
First Sect: "Why not?"
Second Sect: "Because it talks about reincarnation."

You're preaching to the choir, sister. Now tell it to jaywill.

On the contrary, I welcome any criticism of what I've said.But you don't have any. Your only response was, "I belief, I believe, I believe...." Say something substantive and watch me agree with you.

Yes. I consider that if one person believes that Jesus taught reincarnation and another person believes that He didn't, they can't both be right. There are (at least) as many false beliefs as true ones. Yes. See above.Jesus Himself invited Thomas to examine the evidence. When there is evidence, it trumps belief.You seem to forget that I agree with you about what Jesus taught. I just pointed out one weak spot in your reasoning.

I'd say it's more like sending them back down to the mail room.

That's the whole point of critical thinking: to free us from belief and connect us to reality.