pull down to refresh
Yea, exactly.
Although, I'm also sorta arguing that we can't really tell what the original authors meant. Maybe what translates to "Resurrection" today was more similar to what ancient people thought of as reincarnation.
The vagueness and supernatural-ness of the subject makes it impossible to make any definitive claims whatsoever. That was really the point I was trying to make.
The original question was, “Do Christians believe in reincarnation?” I answered from the perspective of someone who follows the Way (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:14, 22). If someone rejects the Bible as authoritative, that’s a different discussion.
As for the text itself, the Bible is not vague here.
The New Testament consistently uses ἀνάστασις (anastasis), which literally means “a standing up again,” “rising,” or “resurrection.” It never uses language that means a soul entering a different body.
Likewise, the Greek word παλιγγενεσία (palingenesia), meaning “rebirth” or “regeneration” (Matthew 19:28; Titus 3:5), refers to renewal, not reincarnation.
Enoch and Elijah reinforce that pattern. Neither returns as another person. Both remain Enoch and Elijah, with continuing identities and future roles.
So my answer wasn’t based on speculation. It was based on the consistent language and pattern of the biblical text. If someone doesn’t accept the Bible as authoritative, that’s perfectly their prerogative, but it doesn’t change what the Bible actually says.
Then we are discussing two different questions.
I was answering what the Bible teaches within its own framework. You are arguing that the Bible is fiction and therefore teaches nothing.
That is a separate debate, and not one I was making.
I believe the Bible. You do not. We can leave it there.