Do you believe in zombies?

[JimL]

Those hearing Jesus (and Matthew's early readership) would not have assumed He was referring to reincarnation. This would seemly be especially true since II Kings 2:11 makes clear that Elijah did not die but was taken to heaven while still alive. You have to die first before you can be reincarnated.

Yeah right, and he has still, some 6,000 years or so later not died, right rouge?

[Teallaura]

I'm alleging that John is supposed to be exactly who he is prophesied to be, and exactly who Jesus says he is. You Christians believe the body to be just the shell within which the spirit, i.e. within which the actual being is housed. John is the body in which Elijah is housed. Not sure why christians have such a problem with this idea, particularly when that's the way it's literally spelled out in the bible.

Okay, so you also think that the Pharisees were spreading yeast? Not being sarcastic - they are identical forms of reference used by Jesus. If one is not figurative then neither is the other.

Scripture also makes literal mention of a camel (or possibly rope) going through the eye of a needle, Jesus being a vine and Jesus' disciples being sheep. None of those are intended literally - and neither is the reference to John as being Elijah by Jesus. Reading the passage that literally defies rationality - and that level of hyper-literalism is not orthodoxy Christianity.

Rethink this - you're creating a strawman that so obviously has nothing at all to do with Christianity that it becomes itself obviously foolish.

To answer your question, no, that's NOT how Christianity views the body/spirit relationship. Not at all. You're now treating them as if they were merely parts - and any old part will fit any other. This is contrary to how Christians view body/spirit. Humans are both - the critical part being the soul but we are created as physical beings and intended ultimately to be physical beings. Reincarnation is antithetical to this view - in any form. John is not Elijah's reincarnation - John is Elijah's successor. That's what the passage clearly states - it is not a claim of reincarnation and cannot be made into one, unless you (general) accept the notion that the Pharisees were running around spreading yeast - which was clearly not the case.

The issue of succession poses no issue to Christianity here - it's like saying that Tiberius wasn't really Caesar. Technically, he wasn't Julius Caesar - but he most certainly was emperor and entitled to the title Caesar.

[Teallaura]

Ah, if you think you're coming back, then you believe in reincarnation, whether you know it or not. Matter is just matter, it decays in the grave. So if you're coming back in the flesh, then you're coming back reincarnated. And no, it is not patently obvious since it is actual scripture that Elijah would return and in Jesus own words he did return, and John is the returning Elijah.

Um, Jim, that's not what reincarnation is - and even if it were, the assumption here is unsupportable. An omnipotent God can't reuse matter why, exactly?

If you (general) come back as the same person, you're resurrected, not reincarnated. No, Christians do not believe in reincarnation in any form. If Elijah's spirit literally were in John's body (which John denies) that would be reincarnation.

If the prophesy needs a literal occurrence, Elijah made his appearance at the Transfiguration so it's fulfilled both figuratively with John and literally at the Transfiguration. I think that's still hyper-literalism but regardless, there's no issue.

[Tassman]

If you (general) come back as the same person, you're resurrected,

Just curious! Do Christians believe that one comes back as one was at the moment of death...possibly wrinkled and addled. Or does one come back as the optimum person one had been in life...when would that be exactly? And how do you know?

[JimL]

Um, Jim, that's not what reincarnation is - and even if it were, the assumption here is unsupportable. An omnipotent God can't reuse matter why, exactly?

Reincarnation is the concept that an aspect of a living being starts a new life in a different physical body. That is who Jesus claimed John to be, Elijah in a different body.

If you (general) come back as the same person, you're resurrected, not reincarnated. No, Christians do not believe in reincarnation in any form. If Elijah's spirit literally were in John's body (which John denies) that would be reincarnation.

True, and like you say, an omnipotent God that could resurrect could also reincarnate. Jesus said that John is Elijah reincarnate. Jesus is said to be spirit incarnate, so what's the problem with Elijah's spirit being re-incanate. I mean, you do realize that I don't believe any of it, but it is the most logical reading of the text. Malachi prophesied Elijahs return, John appears and is said to be clothed in the exact garb as Elijah wore, with his camel hair robe and leathern belt, and Jesus says refering to John, yep, Elijah has already come, and they killed him.

If the prophesy needs a literal occurrence, Elijah made his appearance at the Transfiguration so it's fulfilled both figuratively with John and literally at the Transfiguration. I think that's still hyper-literalism but regardless, there's no issue.

No the transfiguration doesn't do it, because the Elijah at the transfiguration doesn't fulfill the prophecy set out for him as does John.

[One Bad Pig]

Just curious! Do Christians believe that one comes back as one was at the moment of death...possibly wrinkled and addled. Or does one come back as the optimum person one had been in life...when would that be exactly? And how do you know?

Presumably, better than the optimum person one had been in life, as our bodies will be changed into something incorruptible according to Paul. (1 Cor 15)

[KingsGambit]

Presumably, better than the optimum person one had been in life, as our bodies will be changed into something incorruptible according to Paul. (1 Cor 15)

I do think it's very plausible that disabilities/wounds remain in the New Jerusalem. Jesus's wounds were still present in his post-resurrection appearance, and depending on how literally you want to press Jesus's hyperbole in Matthew 18:9, that might have some weight too.

[One Bad Pig]

I do think it's very plausible that disabilities/wounds remain in the New Jerusalem. Jesus's wounds were still present in his post-resurrection appearance, and depending on how literally you want to press Jesus's hyperbole in Matthew 18:9, that might have some weight too.

Possible, though their extent could be debated. It's also possible that Jesus' wounds were left merely for the sake of evidence, and he's an exception.

[JimL]

Presumably, better than the optimum person one had been in life, as our bodies will be changed into something incorruptible according to Paul. (1 Cor 15)

Yes, incorruptible, according to Paul, how he knows this nobody knows, but as i read it, you will resurrect as an incorruptible spirit, not like the saints at Jesus death who were resurrected in the flesh. "Flesh and blood can not enter the Kingdom of God." So why in the saints case did they resurrect in the flesh?

[tabibito]

Reincarnation is the concept that an aspect of a living being starts a new life in a different physical body. That is who Jesus claimed John to be, Elijah in a different body.

True, and like you say, an omnipotent God that could resurrect could also reincarnate. Jesus said that John is Elijah reincarnate. Jesus is said to be spirit incarnate, so what's the problem with Elijah's spirit being re-incanate. I mean, you do realize that I don't believe any of it, but it is the most logical reading of the text. Malachi prophesied Elijahs return, John appears and is said to be clothed in the exact garb as Elijah wore, with his camel hair robe and leathern belt, and Jesus says refering to John, yep, Elijah has already come, and they killed him.

No the transfiguration doesn't do it, because the Elijah at the transfiguration doesn't fulfill the prophecy set out for him as does John.

You're arguing too many issues concurrently JimL. As for Elijah making a return, based on a strictly literal reading of the Biblical record, you would be correct. As to whether the record is intended to be interpreted literally, mileage varies with the reader.
Before you could mount a viable case for Elijah's resurrection or reincarnation, death being a prerequisite for either, you would have to provide a good reason to believe that Elijah died. On a strictly literal reading of the record, there is no reason to believe that Elijah died prior to John the Baptist getting beheaded.

[Adrift]

As to whether the record is intended to be interpreted literally, mileage varies with the reader.

Not really, no. The very Gospels that refer to John being Elijah deny the literal interpretation. There is is no reading that would suggest such a thing, except one that denies what the very Gospels themselves report on the subject.

[Jedidiah]

Actually I wonder if JimL might be a zombie. He seems to be in serious need of brains.

[Teallaura]

Reincarnation is the concept that an aspect of a living being starts a new life in a different physical body. That is who Jesus claimed John to be, Elijah in a different body.

No, Jesus did not make the claim that John was literally Elijah - it directly parallels Jesus' comments about the Pharisees. Since one is definitely not literal, we can be confident that the other isn't either.

Also, Scripture is very clear that we live ONCE - reincarnation is rejected in all orthodox doctrine.

True, and like you say, an omnipotent God that could resurrect could also reincarnate. Jesus said that John is Elijah reincarnate. Jesus is said to be spirit incarnate, so what's the problem with Elijah's spirit being re-incanate. I mean, you do realize that I don't believe any of it, but it is the most logical reading of the text. Malachi prophesied Elijahs return, John appears and is said to be clothed in the exact garb as Elijah wore, with his camel hair robe and leathern belt, and Jesus says refering to John, yep, Elijah has already come, and they killed him.

Caesar was assassinated. Am I referring to Julius or Caligula? For Julius, Caesar was an actual part of his name. For Caligula, it's a title. But both were in fact Caesar.

John is Elijah's successor, not literally Elijah.

Sure, God could reincarnate - but He doesn't. Scripture interprets Scripture - and Scripture is unequivocal that we live once ant then the Judgment. Reincarnation does not happen.

And live people can't be reincarnated anyway. Elijah never died.

No the transfiguration doesn't do it, because the Elijah at the transfiguration doesn't fulfill the prophecy set out for him as does John.

Both and, not either or. The actual fulfillment is John as Elijah's successor proclaiming the coming Kingdom. This is not literal. But if you are actually correct - I don't see how - that Elijah had to physically come back, he did at the Transfiguration.

[JimL]

Actually I wonder if JimL might be a zombie. He seems to be in serious need of brains.

Well then, you can rest assured that I won't be hunting you down Jed.

[Teallaura]

Well then, you can rest assured that I won't be hunting you down Jed.

Okay, I admit, I giggled at that one...