Did Jesus teach reincarnation?

One thing I don't like your style of argument is that you do not acknowledge trivial fact and is still trying to argue by shifting goalpost.I said all believers accept God. Accept that, regardless it may mean this God or that God.

For one thing, you make Him out to be exclusive, which is a direct contradiction of how Jesus described Him.

I do not acknowledge what you claim is fact when it isn't fact. If you missed the goal, it isn't because the posts moved. Which is false. If you mean "some random concept of gods", say so. That does not qualify as "truth beyond logic".

You are beyond logic debate by not respecting literal words. I will ignore this kind of reply from now.

The problem is that your use of words is not literal enough.

I am not going to make any arguments as I am not allowed to paste enough to make my argument on a controversial topic.But this thread has been hit quite often.

Why not simply make your argument in your own words? Read what you research and then explain your personal belief on the subject *without* sending ten links along with it.I do not believe that Jesus taught reincarnation.Looking back through this topic, I can see that you have already sourced dozens of links which you can reuse if you want, but you also need to explain your position in your own words.

The reason is that my own words are almost completely practically worthless when it comes to demonstrating plausible arguments for a controversial position. They are then 100% worthless in making my claims +likely+ true.Example is my long citations of J Vernon Mcghee. He said Jesus said "no" as the answer to whether John the Baptist was Eljah. I needed to quote both the Synoptic Gospels plus McGhee himself to show the fallacious interpretation. See my post 167 in this thread. Tell me how you can argue the position of McGhee verses me without quotations. It is worthless assertion, but those who hold the popular institutional view have the advantage when bald assertion is all that can be presented at the table. I have no chance of overthrowing the Grand Roman Ayatollah view.Here is another example where I need to quote:Bart Ehrman said this in 2019

quote:

---

BDEhrman March 29, 2023 at 7:04 pmLog in to Reply

​

None that I know of. Almost no one in the ealry Christian tradition definitely held to it — until Origen.

​

Just a moment...

---

So I need to quote scholars plus I need to quote ancient texts to respond.Chapter 9 of Hippolytus' Refutation of All Heresies will need to be quoted

quote:

---

This Elchasai puts forward as a decoy a polity (authorized in the) Law, alleging that believers ought to be circumcised and live according to the Law, (while at the same time) he forcibly rends certain fragments from the aforesaid heresies. And he asserts that Christ was born a man in the same way as common to all, and that Christ was not for the first time on earth when born of a virgin, but that both previously and that frequently again He had been born and would be born. Christ would thus appear and exist among us from time to time, undergoing alterations of birth, and having his soul transferred from body to body.

---

But then I will need to quote scholarly works to date the Elkesaites.I can't even make the best case on just some of the issues MINUS PASTING SCHOLARS AND TEXTS.Bald assertion benefits those who hold the institutional view.It is only going to ruin any chance I have of making an impact. I remember - ONE TIME in another thread - I quoted to you fragments of the Gospel of the Hebrews to help make the case for reincarnation/soul separation/wandering, and your only response was to tell me to link it instead of quote it.The Gospel of the Hebrews is completely ignored - and to quote it won't convince people who don't care about it. But some do care about it, and they should.Just like they should care about the Elkesaites.(And we should also be using quotations of AI and Co-Pilot because I asked the AI a lot of different ways questions about whether Jesus "is Elijah" predicate has any parallel in any text from ANY time when it is not referring to a direct identification of the literal persona) (We should all be pasting AI answers)

In your own words, make the argument or present the information or whatever, then provide a link. From the Forum Guidelines:

6. Avoid lengthy cut-n-pastes. Introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference. If your source is not on-line you may contact the Site Administrator to have it made available on-line.

In other words, nothing prevents you from saying exactly what you want to say (though there are limits, for instance expressions of racism). The idea is to have members making the points, not copy-n-pastes.

This IS Elijah
He is ElijahCo-Pilot can give us some good answers on the use of the Predicate Nominative in ancient texts.Can we paste co-pilot answers showing us other examples of PREDICATE NOMINATIVE identifications of one person with another persona?We could use answers from a database that searches the entire web of texts.

Your posts were what appeared on ALL section of google on page 1 under JESUS REINCARNATION. It was one hit among 8-10.Now they are completely gone on the ALL section. I was backing out of your posts, to get back to google, and the back button took me to a google page where your link was all by itself (under Jesus reincarnation) on a page - previously it was one of 8-10. (recap) Thus when I hit the back button - from EvC - and when it took me back to google, the updated page automatically came refreshed (like always), and I guess the lone link was a way of showing you were taken out of the ALL section of Google.Your posts are still on page 1 of Forums section of Google under "Jesus Reincarnation".Guess they took EvC completely off of ALL.There is not much of EvC on Google anymore. I wonder if you know anything about this.

Jesus Reincarnation still saw your EvC posts at hit 5 or 6 on page 1, on Google Forums, just a few hours ago. I decided to check again and now it is all the way down to page 3.So much for this thread getting views. EvC is becoming a timeless land that nobody will ever find.Just like the early "Christianity" of Jesus' early followers - following his death. Well, it's not that lost to time. I am still amazed at how much of a selective blackout the Elcesaites have suffered. Even with the shocking 1971 discovery demonstrating that the (Iranian born) Manichaeans were actually an offshoot of the Elkesaites, nevertheless the bias in Christian institutions against their Jewish Christian beliefs has still caused a near complete failure to mention.(I still find CO-Pilot often saying the reincarnation views of Mani came from India!)
(I have to play around a bit with copilot to get an accurate answer)A true case study in the reality of propaganda.Just think:Imagine if future generations (say in the year 2336) deny that 21st century Christianity still had remnants of creationism in the theology of its most conservative adherents. Imagine if all forms of 20th century media were only preserved on digital hard drive storage. Then imagine if the drives somehow suffered data failure the world over. Then imagine if data restoration only recovered only a sliver of the lost text of books, websites, and video humanity had produced/recorded in the 20th century.You could have a situation where everything preserved from the 21st century lacked any reference to Christian Creationism. And only some "dubious" hints that creationism was still alive in the few late 20th century documents existing in the year 2336.There would be only some remaining references - still available in 2336 - to an Evolution vs. Creationism website from a bit less than 300 years previously (say some vague references from a preserved email from 2041, and a small line in a diary entry from a 2044 book that was one of the few physically preserved from the first half of the 21st century).What would the common interpretation be:"It was a debate over interpretations of quantum mechanics - a hot topic from that period when the Many Worlds Interpretation was not yet the decisive view, and "Quantum Darwinism" was still a disputed notion.""Nobody debated the origin of biological species as late as the 21st century - especially as far as 2041.""You have to understand the context of the period - the zeitgeist!""Only a few isolated pagan oddballs and a few witches still held to biological creationism at that time - not Christians"Just imagine

Hi LamarkNewAge. Thanks for mentioning me. It's been almost six years since I logged in and posted on this forum.Since then, I made a video on reincarnation...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQsV04O8CLw&tI just published an article on 'X' called "The Reincarnation of Adam and Eve (and the Serpent)"...https://x.com/MostHolyPlace/article/2031587670485508533

https://t.co/DFydBGweAH

— Most Holy Place (@MostHolyPlace) March 11, 2026

delete.i made an incorrect post.will post later

I will watch the video.I am still trying to figure out the google forum page. It seems like even the non personal setting is manipulated by past searches. I am trying to figure out if it is only my searches that show the high placement on searches for JESUS REINCARNATION.