Back
Table Talk
New Age/Reincarnational Distortion of Church History
The doctrine of reincarnation has been a major tenant of the Eastern mindset
for thousands of years. It is widely held in the United States, particularly
by those with a New Age worldview. When discussing the doctrine of reincarnation
with New Agers, Christians need to be aware that the new age first line
of defense will be to present a falsification or distortion of church history.
(To be fair, most new agers present their argument from church history
ignorant of the true facts! They will typically refer to standard reincarnational
materials without going to the primary documents themselves)
The argument generally goes like this:
Christian: 'You believe, Mr. new ager, that reincarnation
is true, but the Bible does not teach it anywhere!'
New Ager: ' Well, that's where you're mistaken; let me explain:
actually, reincarnation was taught as a biblical doctrine until the sixth
century when it was 'removed' from the Bible at the 2nd Council of Constantinople
(553). Further, did you know that many of the early church fathers believed
in and taught the doctrine of reincarnation as well?!'
Christian: 'Really!? ... I had no idea! ... Can you document
the early church father's teachings and demonstrate with conclusive evidence
that the doctrine of reincarnation was removed from the Bible in the sixth
century?'
New Ager: 'I certainly can...check out these facts...'
In our witness to new agers, we must be prepared to respond to what seems
to be an insurmountable problem, namely, if reincarnation was a biblical
doctrine and was expunged from the Bible at a point in church history,
how can we, in good conscious, say it shouldn't be taught?! (While there
are obvious reasons why Christians reject reincarnation [see IBA's Orthodox
Christianity & Reincarnation]), most Christians are taken back when
new agers speak with absolute authority regarding early church fathers
and the 2nd Council of Constantinople. Therefore, it is incumbent for Christians
to be fully informed as to the true facts of church history. Moreover,
we cannot speak with reincarnationist about the integrity of the Bible
unless we are certain that it can be fully trusted If reincarnation was
removed from the Bible, we have today an unreliable Bible. However, if
we can demonstrate that reincarnation was not held by early church fathers;
that it was never a biblical doctrine; and that church history reveals
nowhere at any time that it was removed from the Bible, we can safely say
we have a reliable Bible and reincarnation is false, contrary to the orthodox
biblical worldview.
Let's remember also, the burden of proof is on the new ager to produce
true historical fact with regards to their position. They have challenged
the direct teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, the early church fathers,
the conclusions of the ecumenical church counsels, and, in effect, the
whole of orthodoxy! As Christians, we need not disprove their position,
but present reasons for the hope within us!
The purpose of this paper is to present the facts of church history.
Our prayer is for new agers to challenge the facts for in doing so, they
will be convinced beyond reasonable doubt regarding the integrity of the
Scriptures and the truthfulness of the Christian message!
Reincarnation and the Early Church Fathers
As stated above most new agers appeal to the early church fathers in support
of their belief in reincarnation. For example, new agers believe that Justin
Martyr was the first Christian reincarnationist. However, they generally
quote him out of context and then, only partially. Here's the facts: about
the middle of the second century (155 A.D.) history records Justin Martyr
involved in a heated discussion with Trypho the Jew. In their dialogue,
they discuss at length the idea of transmigration and conclude on this
note:
Trypho: ' Therefore souls neither see God nor transmigrate
into other bodies ; for they would know that so they are punished, and
they would be afraid to commit even the most trivial sin afterwards.'
Justin Martyr: 'You speak the truth, I agree.' (emphasis mine)
Clement of Alexandria is often cited in support of reincarnation. Again,
new agers supply their interpretation of what this church father actually
said. In one of his writings, Clement a states that 'before the foundation
of the world were we.' Reincarnationist believe he was referring to the
preexistence of souls and hence, reincarnation. However, here's the facts:
in context, Clement was asserting the preexistence of Jesus Christ as the
Word, and God's foreknowledge and purpose to create us before creation!
There's not a single reference to reincarnation in Clement's writings but
a clear rejection of it! (See also his Stromata IV 12 and VI 4)!
We are told that the great church father Irenaeus believed in reincarnation
yet he devoted an entire chapter in his refutation of Gnosticism to the
doctrine of transmigration which he entitled 'Absurdity of the Doctrine
of Transmigration of Souls.' This masterpiece was written as an extended
attack upon the Gnostics in which he criticizes Carpocrates' doctrine of
transmigration of the soul, particularly on the ground that we have no
memories of previous lives. Those are the facts regarding Irenaeus!
What about the great theologian an d lawyer, Tertullian? Did he believe
in reincarnation? Some new agers say he did. Here's the facts: About 200
A.D. Tertullian wrote attacking both the platonic doctrine of the soul's
preexistence and the pythagorean doctrine of transmigration and later asserts
that the doctrine of transmigration ...'is a falsehood which is not only
shameful, but hazardous' and that ...'dead men are formed from living ones;
but it does not follow from that, that living men are formed from dead
ones.'
There are many other church fathers cited by new agers in support of
their belief in reincarnation. Space will not permit referencing them all.
Notably, though, are Jerome and Origen. New Agers usually quote Jerome's
letter's to Avitus and then to Demetrias as proof that he believed in reincarnation.
However, in actually, the facts indicate that Jerome's letter to Avitus
severely criticizes Origen's platonic ideas and nowhere condones the teaching
of reincarnation. So also is his letter to Demetrius. Jerome again refutes
Origen's teaching on preexistence, calling his (Origen) literary perambulations
'a fountainhead of gross impiety.'
Origen is cited by new agers more than any other in their support of
reincarnation. In a number of places in his writings, Origen discusses
the concept of reincarnation and the preexistence of the soul. But as with
other church fathers, new agers summarily quote him out of context or omit
definitive statements which prove his rejection of the doctrine. The facts
indicate though he believed in the preexistence of souls, he denied the
doctrine of reincarnation. Note the following: In this place [Matthew 17:10-13]
it does not appear to me that by Elijah the soul is spoken of, least I
fall into the dogma of transmigration, which is foreign to the church of
God, and not handed down by the Apostles, nor anywhere set forth in Scriptures...'
I think it's safe to say, the early church fathers, though aware of
the doctrine and in dialogue with others on the subject, were not believers
in reincarnation; neither did they teach it as a biblical doctrine!
The Second Council of Constantinople
Without the blink of an eye, new agers will tell you that the early church
taught reincarnation until the 2nd Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.
where it was 'deemed unacceptable and necessarily suppressed' as a church
doctrine. Shirley McLaine states this in her teachings; the Association
of Research & Enlightenment (Edgar Cayce) appeal to this council; the
Church Universal & Triumphant with Elizabeth Clare Prophet make reference
to this council as the time and place where reincarnation was removed from
the church as an official doctrine. What really are the facts? Notice the
details not often cited by reincarnationist:
The Emperor Justinian, believed that he had a special mission to reconcile
certain heretics in the kingdom, to unite all parties of the church, and
to establish the genuine orthodoxy for all time to come, convoked at Constantinople,
A.D. 553 the fifth Ecumenical Council. Justinian was a great admirer of
the decrees of Chalcedon (451), and ratified the four ecumenical councils
in his Code of Roman Law. His wife, though, was secretly devoted to the
Monophysite heresy (the belief that Christ had but one nature-divine) which
was causing quite a stir at that time as well as the controversial teachings
of Origen, frustrated all of his plans.
In an attempt to put an end to the 'Three Chapters' (regarding the persons
and writings connected with the Monophysite heresy), without the concurrence
of the Pope, convoked the Council at Constantinople. Pope Vigilius refused
to attend because he insisted on giving an independent judgment on the
points at issue because of the authority of the papacy. Justinian promptly
banished Vigilius who was later freed when he conceded the legitimacy of
the council. The Pope rightly agreed with the condemnation of those who
defended the 'Three Chapters' and with the condemnation of many of Origen's
teachings. Please note that it was Origen's doctrine of preexistence of
souls (and other teachings) that were condemned, not reincarnation!
One of the results of this council was the adoption of 15 anathema's
against Origen. It is to these anathema's that new agers appeal in support
of their contention that reincarnation was removed as a biblical teaching.
However, what do the facts support? Simply this, there is no reference
to reincarnation in any of the anathema's against Origen whatsoever! What
was explicitly condemned was Origen's teaching of preexistence of souls
which, say new agers, implies the belief in reincarnation! Yet, we demonstrated
earlier that Origen rejected the idea of transmigration of souls into bodies!
The church wasn't condemning something Origen didn't believe! The truth
of the matter is, new agers make the leap from preexistence of souls to
reincarnation without any warrant whatever! The belief in preexistence
of souls does not necessitate the belief in reincarnation. For example,
Mormonism teaches in the preexistence of souls but deny emphatically the
doctrine of reincarnation!
To make the statements regarding early church fathers, the council of
Constantinople, and to argue that the Bible teaches reincarnation is based
on misinformation or pure fabrication. When witnessing to new agers, it
would be to our advantage to have the facts before us to share with them.
Many of them truly believe they've been told the truth without checking
out the facts of history! If they're honest, and want to truly dialogue
with us, we've got to challenge them with the facts of history and the
truth of the Gospel! The devil has sold them a bill of goods; let's present
them reasons to receive the gift of grace through our Lord Jesus Christ!
Dan
|
