Showing posts with label Religions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religions. Show all posts

Some thoughts on reincarnation

Books on reincarnation cite a significant pedigree. And the idea has pervaded history, becoming increasingly prominent during the last few decades in the west. Hearing this and reading accounts of individuals who have remembered past lives can easily leave the Christian wondering whether there is truth here after all.

The following has been written for a church member I am seeing who has admitted she holds to reincarnation. A number of things can be said in response.

Problems with reincarnation
It does not resonate with what it means to be human.
Reincarnation affirms an impersonal end that neither corresponds with human nature or instinct. Although it is said that the individual’s soul-life reincarnates, they are not the same individual in the sense that we understand identity, not least, because they may have previously been an animal. Moreover, their destiny on reaching perfection is to be absorbed into an impersonal reality. This is a far cry from the Christian hope of resurrection in which the individual becomes more fully themselves, and lives in community in a perfected world. Whereas this resonates with who we are now and what our humanity cries out for in this life, reincarnation essentially denies this.

It does not resonate with our sense of justice and compassion.
Reincarnation can lead to a callousness over suffering, stating that its cause is the impersonal justice of karma and therefore it is deserved for one’s acts in a past life. Moreover, it implies differing degrees of humanity. Some who believe in reincarnation may act inconsistently here, and care for the suffering. Nevertheless, the caste system in India shows only too well where the logic of karma leads. By contrast, Jesus affirmed the dignity and equality of all human beings as made in God’s image, and the injustice of much suffering as we are sinned against.

It logically leads to despair.
Reincarnation offers little hope of deliverance from suffering as it anticipates a huge if not unending period of reincarnation before attaining perfection. One can only hope in the face of death, to be reincarnated in a better context. But there can be no guarantee of that, and one can be led to great fear over what one’s sins in this life might lead to in the next, and to deep despair in trying to do enough to ensure the much needed progression. Indeed, in not knowing what happened in one’s previous life, one cannot never know if they are doing better or worse. Essentially reincarnation is therefore a system where salvation is granted according to human works that our consciences tell us we will never manage to do. By contrast, Jesus spoke of salvation by grace, where simple but sincere belief and trust in his identity and work grants free forgiveness of sins and, with it, the certainty of eternal life with no return to this harsh world.

It potentially encourages evil.
Reincarnation encourages evil by removing any idea of personally giving account for one’s actions. The individual will rarely be aware in the next life of the previous one. And so they can be tempted to act as they wish, knowing that although karma may dispense some justice, they will never be conscious of it as the person they are now. This cannot be said of Christians who really believe there will be a judgment day in which all we have done will be revealed and called to account by a personal God.

Evidence against reincarnation
In some senses, all the above points stand against reincarnation in showing that it just doesn’t resonate with our instincts. However, our instincts are always an ambiguous and more debatable test of truth. More firm are the following two points.

It does not deliver what it promises.
Reincarnation assumes moral progress within humanity, yet this just isn’t seen. The idea of karma is that the experiences of the present life help us learn from the previous one and ‘work off’ the bad so that we progress towards perfection. Logically this should mean humanity gets better and better, and strikingly so, considering the billions of years life has existed. However one only needs consider the horror of the two world wars or the depravity found in any city to recognize that the evidence is strongly against such a claim. Indeed, the pockets of civilization that do seem more morally advanced are those with a Judao-Christian heritage. And where that is being eroded, a moral regression is being witnessed.

It contradicts God’s own teaching.
This must be the decider for the Christian. We have significant evidence that Jesus was God made man: The coherence of the Bible in predicting and pointing forward to him, Jesus’ wisdom, his character, his miracles and resurrection all combine to prove his claim. And as the Son of God who returned from death he is the only one fully qualified to teach on life, death and what lies beyond.

Those who propound reincarnation try to read it into the pages of the Bible and place it on the lips of Jesus. But any straightforward reading of the gospels recognizes that on almost every other page Jesus says something about a judgment day to come, followed by either hell or the kingdom of God in a perfect world. Moreover, he affirms not our need to better ourselves to attain salvation, but our need to come to him for forgiveness. Moral change is then to be motivated out of love for him, not a desire to receive a better incarnation.

By authorizing the Old Testament and the apostolic writings we have in the New Testament, Jesus also points us to the many ways they contradict and challenge the idea of reincarnation. As already mentioned, we might consider in particular the fact that as those in God’s image, human beings are created as set-apart from other animals. To suggest that the same soul might incarnate an animal in one life and a human being in the next is therefore to deny the distinctions of creation.

There is just no way then that someone who believes in reincarnation can affirm Jesus’ authority to teach us, nor say the Apostles’ Creed recited every week in church: “I believe…he will come to judge the living and the dead…I believe…in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.” To read reincarnation into these statements is to do some significant linguist gymnastics that does no justice to their original intent. The question arises therefore: Will we accept Jesus’ authority to teach us, or deny it for the sake of our own uncertain feelings or the teachings of mere humans?

The danger of reincarnation
This is now apparent. It keeps people from receiving God’s salvation. Jesus was adamant that this can only be received if we (1) recognize that we can never be good enough to deserve or earn it, (2) believe that God raised Jesus from the dead, proving him to be his Son and King who will one day judge us, (3) come to him for mercy and with a willingness to change our lives out of love for him.

By contrast, reincarnation requires us to deny a judgment day and with it the need of God’s forgiveness. It therefore requires us to look to what we can do to be saved, rather than to what Jesus has done. In short, it keeps us from God’s salvation.

But what of the experiences people have of past lives?
It is striking in reading accounts, how many have given them under the fairly strong leading of others who have ‘drawn out’ or even suggested the stories, whether in formal sessions of past life regression or informal comment on the experiences the individual is having. We should be very cautious indeed of this. Our dreams alone show how powerfully the mind can recall or even create ideas and situations on the basis of things we may not even remember seeing or hearing. Moreover, those who already have a leaning towards reincarnation can only too easily interpret a powerful sense or experience in those terms, when it could well be explained by other means.

As Christians, however, we must also acknowledge that although many stories of past lives may be explained purely at this level, demonic powers can also suggest all manner of ideas, particularly when an individual opens themselves to contact with spiritual beings as many within the New Age movement do. There is, in fact, a striking similarity between the accounts of physical manifestations that have taken place as people have recounted past lives, and the manifestations I have personally seen in the context of demon possession.

The way ahead
I hope it is clear that there can be no possibility of truly following Jesus and holding to reincarnation. In the end, the question comes down to one of trustworthiness. Will we accept that he is the Son of God and so the ultimate authority on issues of life, death and beyond? Or will we give our own experiences or the ideas of others this status? There is great temptation to choose the latter. But I hope the points above, and our own awareness of how uncertain our experiences and the ideas of others are, will keep us from it. As mentioned, the stakes are very high in this.

Jonah, other religions and salvation

A bit more controversial. But preaching Jonah has shifted me slightly on this topic.

The intent of Jonah 3 in particular seems to be to assert the surprising grace of God. The Ninevites were pagan synchretists, notoriously wicked and even hostile to God’s chosen people. There is no sense that Jonah explained the fullness of all he could – Yahweh’s redemption of Israel and promises to one day be fulfilled in Christ, the requirements of the law centred on the commandments etc. No, on the basis of chapter 1, the most we might insert is that he declared that the God bringing the judgement was the God of Israel, who made heaven and earth (1v9).

Yet the Ninevites then reasoned (probably through the concepts of their own religions) that this God might show mercy, and so cried out with repentance to that end – a repentance Jesus teaches as a model of saving repentance (Matthew 12v41). Now we can’t even be sure that these Ninevites then rejected all other gods. Nevertheless, because of the wideness of God’s mercy, he relented in a way consistent with his character as declared in Exodus 34 (Jonah 4v2). And as this character was a revelation of his glory, he glorified himself in doing so.

In the light of this specific purpose to the book of Jonah, we just cannot therefore assert with any certainty that there is no salvation apart from conscious faith in Jesus Christ. Romans 1 tells us that although we suppress the truth about God, all humanity still instinctively know there is a Creator (v20-21) and that we deserve punishment at his hand (v32). Moreover, there is a widespread consensus today that the God who revealed himself to Israel is the God of heaven and earth (agreed by Jews, Christians, Muslims and pluralists). It would seem quite possible then, that by the initiative of God’s grace, some may respond in a way equivalent to that of the Ninevites.

Having said that, we should note: (a) we can never know whether an individual has sufficient knowledge to repent in this way, (b) by nature they do not tend to repent in this way, (c) other religions do not encourage repentance in this way, but discourage it by encouraging a reliance on moral or religious works for merit before God, (d) only a response to the gospel can give us confidence of repentance in this way, of certain salvation and of a life that glorifies God, and (e) the sharing of the gospel is God's normative means of bringing this salvation. Therefore our missionary concern to proclaim Christ to the nations should in no way be lessened. For although some may occasionally be saved without having heard of him, we can only be sure anyone is by seeing them consciously respond to him.

To clarify then, salvation apart from such knowledge would be despite the person’s inherited religion (or beliefs). It would be because they see just enough of the true God through its seriously stained glass (or in the artwork of creation), that they acknowledge him as their Creator and Judge, and so repent with deep sincerity and cry to him alone for mercy.

And can I stress that we should hold the possibility of such salvation not because people are somehow worthy, their religions somehow sufficient, or forgiveness somehow possible without Christ and his death on the cross. No, none of these statements are true. Rather, we must hold this is possible because we want to do justice to the Bible’s whole teaching, and because we want to glorify God in the way scripture does - for the potential wideness of his mercy to those of even deeply limited knowledge about him.

So how should the NT texts of the uniqueness of Christ and the need for faith in him be understood? There is no possibility of salvation but for his incarnation and work. And there is no certainty of salvation but for explicit faith in him. Those throughout the world stand condemned by nature because they sin, suppress the truth of God in creation and do not believe in his Son who alone can remove that condemnation (Eph 2v1-3, Rom 1v18-32, John 3v16-18). There is therefore no other name to believe in for salvation but his name (Acts 4v12).

Nevertheless, Jonah 3 would suggest that those who do not look to other saviours or to pagan gods for salvation, yet do not have sufficiently knowledge about Jesus, may be looking to him in an ultimate sense by believing in the God of heaven and earth as Lord and so as Judge and Master. And this surely fits, because Jesus is this Lord. Of course we should add that the test of a sufficient response will be that when faced with the gospel they will readily accept it as the Spirit enables them to recognise that the God they cry out to is in fact Jesus.

Buddhism and the Bible

Every now and again I meet those who have been churchgoers for some time, who suggest Buddhism and Christianity are somehow consistent. Indeed, one old lady told me she was convinced she had been reincarnated.

For the record, here are some key ways in which Buddhism conflicts with Christianity:
  1. Buddah famously didn't believe in God, and so would reject the Trinity and so the true nature of the person of Christ too.
  2. Buddhism at its core rejects any attempt to grasp at permanence, such as the idea of living for ever. Indeed, it sees these sort of beliefs as one reason why we experience so much suffering. Instead it urges us to see all things, including the self, as transient.
  3. Buddhism holds to reincarnation rather than the Bible's view of death, judgement and then the afterlife for each individual soul.
  4. Buddhism teaches salvation, or attaining to Nirvanah, as reached through the eighfold path. It is therefore utterly inconsistent with a gospel of grace - the essence of Christ's message. Christ taught that in the light of judgement, we need God's forgiveness, and to rely on his obedience on our behalf. Buddah taught that there is no judgement day, no need of forgiveness, no God to forgive anyway, and the necessity of our right living if we are to release ourselves from the cycle of suffering.
It is clear then, we cannot hold both together. There may be ideas in Buddhism that are in common with Christianity, eg. aspects of its morality, the need to govern the mind as well as the actions etc. But this is far from saying the two systems are consistent. Rather, they differ at the very heart of what they teach. In truth, one reason that Buddhism is so attractive to the secular world, is that it's saving god is 'me.' This means that it ultimately falls into the category of 'idolatry.'

Behind Islamic fanaticism

Been meaning to post a link to this article for a while. From the horses mouth, explanation that Islamic theology not our foreign policy is what ultimately lies behind Islamic terrorism. When will western plurliasm wake up to the fact that it must prioritise truth on these matters above a dishonest pretence that all religions are equally peaceful?

See: I was a fanatic...I know their thinking (Daily Mail)