Towards a Christian Theology of Reincarnation

 "For God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

- 2 Peter 2:3

Recently and due to different inputs from different sources, I've been seriously challenged to reconsider my views on the subject of reincarnation. My previous rambles on the subject have all come to the conclusion that it was as impossible from a neurological/psychiatric standpoint as it was seemingly unbiblical, and certainly against Christian orthodoxy. This last point, that it runs contrary to Christian orthodoxy, cannot change as Christian orthodoxy was codified by the seven Great Ecumenical Councils (four if you are Lutheran) by the latter half of the first millennium and nothing I say here will change what was said about the subject of reincarnation. That leaves the remaining two points, that it is impossible from a neurological/psychiatric standpoint, and that it is seemingly unbiblical. It is these last points I wish to address and then move further to a possible framework for a type of reincarnation within a Christian framework.

As I have previously written, the neural network of each adult human brain is unique, and just like you can't run software meant for a PowerPC processor on an x86 based processor, neither can a psyche ("soul"), essentially a set of instructions for neurons like binary code for a computer processor, "run" in an adult brain in which it wasn't compiled. The organization and connections of the neural network in each human brain is unique and constantly changing and adapting as we learn and grow. Each sensory experience we have through our five senses, as well as each thought and insight we have, essentially programs the neurons which our brains are made up of with the different neurotransmitters which are fired from neuron to neuron, building the brain's own software from the memories of those experiences which then is also influenced by the biologically inherited configuration of the neural network of the person in question (inherited moods, disorders, preferences, talents, etc.). One human brain cannot be rewritten with the software meant for another a la "Freaky Friday."

While this is technically correct, my hypothesis did not address the possibility of a human brain's neural network developing in utero around a preinstalled psyche, so to speak. That is, the neural network forms and makes its connections according to a psyche which was already developed or "pre-written." It would be like writing the software first and then developing a unique processor around the established code. Difficult and complicated, certainly, but not impossible; not even for human beings where computers are concerned.

Where the Bible is concerned, this becomes a bit more nuanced in some places. Virtually every Bible scholar is aware of the potential precedent of John the Baptist as a reincarnated Elijah, and that it was Jesus Christ Himself who said it in Matthew 11:14. There is also Jesus' question to the disciples in Matthew 16:13-16 where He asks them who people say that He is. Their first response is that the people thought He was either John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. So then, the question must be asked, if they didn't understand reincarnation as a possibility, why would they have thought this? There is also the case of the man born blind in John 9:2 where the disciples ask, "Who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?" How could the man have sinned before he was born if reincarnation was not a part of their worldview or understanding? Why would they have even asked these questions? The truth is that a form of reincarnation was a common part of the Hellenistic understanding of the afterlife as written about by Plato in his dialogues surrounding the death of his teacher, Socrates. This understanding of the possibility had passed into Jewish thought by the first century, and to this day the Ultra-Orthodox Jews consider it to be a part of their theology. In opposition to this understanding of the possibility of reincarnation, there is the verse in Hebrews 9:27 which reads, "...and according to as much as it is laid up for human beings to die once, yet with this, judgment..." This verse however does not negate the possibility that the judgment in question might be for a psyche to be reincarnated as a different human being (as in all reincarnational schemes, one is never the same human being twice, and while it might be the same psyche, it would still be different biology and thus a different human being).

When we are talking about reincarnation within a Christian, New Testament context, we cannot be discussing "karma driven" reincarnation, at least not for the Christian. In traditional religions and worldviews such as Hinduism and Buddhism, the cycle of reincarnation is driven by the karma of the person in question. Good actions, thoughts, and words produce good karma, and bad actions, thoughts, and words produce bad karma. In these belief systems, one's karma, good or bad, drives one's reincarnation into a good existence, a bad existence, or anywhere in-between the two. The entire cycle of reincarnation is seen as a kind of purgatorial suffering within Buddhist thought, the goal being to escape the cycle altogether. But with the Christian who has been joined to Jesus Christ, his karma, his actions, words, and thoughts, good or bad, have been wiped out by Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. Whatever sins were committed have been completely cleansed and forgiven, and whatever "good works" which might have induced a "good reincarnation" have been negated in favor of the person of Christ. Put simply, there is no active karma left for those in Christ to induce another reincarnation whether of one's soul or of one's "consciousness." Their karma has been negated and simply no longer exists.

If we were to explore this concept of karma further, it could be seen as being generated by what is commonly called "sin." As I have written and spoken of many times before, "sin" is in fact a malfunction of the human brain which over-excites the hypothalamus into making every decision a survival decision involving fear, aggression, feeding, or sexual responses depending on the agreement with or aversion to the thing, person, idea, or concept. It begins in childhood with what pleases or displeases the child and moves on to agreement or disagreement with rules which also produces either pride or guilt. That which the person agrees with or is pleased by is "good" and that which the person disagrees with or is displeased by is "bad." At its best it can produce a relatively moral person, and at its worst, a severely deranged, mentally ill, or psychotic person. The only cure for this affliction is the death of the body, but, especially in adults, by the time that death comes about, the psyche is already programmed with this malfunctioning brain and influenced by it. The errors caused to the "software" by the malfunctioning "hardware", so to speak, could be seen as what is called "karma." Thus, the only real cure is for the psyche to be conjoined to a Being who is without this malfunction, and this is what occurs at Baptism, the public profession of one's faith in Christ (literally the "Sacrament of Faith"), according to Romans 6.

So, those who are joined to Jesus Christ at the death of the body have no karma to speak of to induce another reincarnation. This however does not preclude the possibility of those not joined to Christ still in possession of karma which could, according to those traditional eastern religious systems, potentially induce more reincarnations. So then the question becomes, exactly how far does the salvation offered through Jesus Christ extend, and does it just wipe out the karma of those who explicitly join themselves to Him, or does it extend to the karma of every soul or consciousness of every human being who has ever lived? As John writes in 1 John 2:2, "and He is an appeasement about our sins, yet not about just ours, but also about the whole world's." In short, must someone explicitly join themselves to Christ in this life or "accept" Christ in this life in order for their karma to be wiped out? And if it already is, is explicit acceptance of Christ the more important as saving, or is explicit rejection of Christ the more important as damning?

This is not a question to be asked lightly. That salvation is through Jesus Christ alone is a central tenet of the New Testament, and Jesus Himself said very clearly and in no uncertain terms that, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." But He also said in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, "The one who is not against us is for us." He also said that the only sin which would not be forgiven "in this age or in the age to come" is the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. In the context within which He spoke, He was warning Pharisees they were crossing a line when they called His exorcism by the Holy Spirit the power of the Satan (or Beelzebub). But the great sin of the Pharisees was that they explicitly rejected Jesus Christ even though they could plainly see the testimony of the Holy Spirit about Him through the miracles and healings. In other words, they knew who He was and explicitly rejected the testimony of the Holy Spirit concerning Him. This was and remains unforgivable as it is also found described in the Letter to the Hebrews of those Christians who knew the testimony of the Holy Spirit, had seen and felt His power themselves, and then had rejected Jesus Christ to return to Mosaic Judaism. There is also the parable of the wedding feast to consider, where those who were invited but refused to come to the wedding were left outside and all the poor and homeless were invited in to feast instead as long as they wore the wedding clothes given to them. So then, by the explicit testimony of Jesus Christ, everything can be forgiven, presumably even ignorance of Him, except explicit rejection of the testimony of the Holy Spirit about Jesus Christ, and thus explicit rejection of Jesus Christ Himself.

A second case where Jesus Christ Himself explicitly states that a person will not be forgiven is in the case of unforgiveness. This condition is repeated in the synoptic Gospels and is reinforced with the parable of the unjust steward who, having been forgiven an unimaginably large sum of money by his owner went out and had a fellow slave thrown into debtor's prison for a measly sum owed to him. When the owner of both found out, he threw the unforgiving steward into prison and sold off his family members to pay his debt. Jesus' warning is clear and explicit at the end of the parable in Matthew 18:35, "Thus will My Heavenly Father also do to you if each of you doesn't forgive his brother from your hearts." And also in Matthew 6:14-15 where He says in no uncertain terms, "Because if you forgive human beings their violations, your Heavenly Father will also forgive you. Yet if you don't forgive human beings their violations neither will your Heavenly Father forgive your violations." A relevant point here for our purposes is that the word in the Greek for "forgive" actually means "let go of, detach, release." In other words, He is saying that your wrongs will not be let go of if you don't let go of the wrongs by human beings. Notice two things here, the first is that He does not specify wrongs against you specifically, and second, you are also a human being. So then the possibility also comes into play that we must forgive those wrongs not directed at ourselves, and also those wrongs we ourselves have committed and hold ourselves responsible for; in other words, we must forgive ourselves as well.

So then, where could reincarnation come into play here? First, potentially as an act of mercy for those who cry out to Him from torment. Those who have explicitly rejected Christ and the testimony of the Holy Spirit about Him, I think, can safely be said to be confined to torment upon the death of the body. But then the question might become, what if they cease their rejection of Him? What if they cry out to Him? The orthodox Christian answer to this would be "too bad." But is it impossible to conceive of Him giving those who sincerely cry out to Him a second chance? As long as they continue in their rejection of Him, of course it is unforgivable. But if they do not? What then? He is not willing that any perish but that "all" should come to repentance. And so here, perhaps, we have candidates for reincarnation as a second chance. What about those who have not let go of those perceived violations by other human beings, or even are unable to let go of the things they themselves have done, effectively condemning themselves? I have written previously that God Himself sends no one into torment, but rather those psyches which are attached to their own possessions, unforgiveness, guilt, etc. continue in torment when their bodies die and they are confined to a place where they can hurt no one else but are tormented by their own insanity. Should these cry out to Him, might they also not be given a second chance, or perhaps a third or fourth as He decides? Perhaps our salvation through Jesus Christ is in fact our choice and always has been, and He will give as many chances as sincerely asked to make that choice.

A second way in which reincarnation could come into play is already seen in Scripture in the aforementioned passages about John the Baptist and Elijah. One could hypothesize from this passage that there are certain circumstances when God might ask one of His saints to return to be born into a physical (and yes malfunctioning) body for a specific purpose. In Elijah's case, it was so he could prepare the way for Jesus Christ as John the Baptist. Understand that this would not be in any way a similar case to the previous ones described. These souls would already be joined to Christ upon their reincarnation as it would be inconceivable that He would put them at risk of damnation. There would be no question about their purpose, their finding their way back into faith, or their ultimate salvation. One might also surmise that there would be a full disclosure about what they might be getting themselves into, and that it would still be their choice to agree or disagree (although I can't imagine a situation where one might say "no" to Him). It would also stand to reason that they would have no memories of their previous life either on Earth or in His presence as John the Baptist seemed to remember nothing of being Elijah and was apparently unaware of it.

So, in considering these two possibilities, what must be readily apparent is that either form represents a reincarnation which is limited in scope to certain individuals and not encompassing the entirety of all human beings or the souls of human beings who have lived. It is not based on one's karma, and is not punitive in either case but merciful to the individual in question in the first case, and merciful to other individuals beyond the trusted saint in question in the other.

In any event, whether any of this is approaching accurate, or this is pure fiction remains mere speculation outside the realm of Christian orthodoxy, and that's okay. It is more a thought experiment with seeing what a New Testament framework for reincarnation might look like. And, whether accurate or not, these things remain true that there is no way to the Father except through Jesus Christ, rejection of Him damns, and all those who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.