WEBVTT - 7 Reasons Reincarnation is False

0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:03.640
<v Speaker 1>Life audio.

0:00:05.640 --> 0:00:08.640
<v Speaker 2>Is there a good reason to believe reincarnation is true?

0:00:08.720 --> 0:00:12.440
<v Speaker 1>Let's say this little boy's name is Sam, and he'll say,

0:00:12.480 --> 0:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>don't call me Sam anymore. My name is Peter. No, honey,

0:00:16.920 --> 0:00:19.360
<v Speaker 1>we gave you the name Sam. No, but I'm Peter.

0:00:19.880 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 1>I know I'm Peter, and I lived in the town

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:25.439
<v Speaker 1>of x That's famous. Those are famous. Little kids have

0:00:25.480 --> 0:00:26.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of details.

0:00:26.400 --> 0:00:29.520
<v Speaker 2>On a popular level, so many people in America, some

0:00:29.560 --> 0:00:33.159
<v Speaker 2>who claimed to be Christians and worldwide, embrace reincarnation.

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:37.320
<v Speaker 1>The best critique is this, I will take either discarnate

0:00:37.360 --> 0:00:41.519
<v Speaker 1>possession or demon possession. These are almost toss ups. I

0:00:41.520 --> 0:00:44.680
<v Speaker 1>don't like demon possession, but discarnate is a toughie, and

0:00:44.720 --> 0:00:46.559
<v Speaker 1>I think it's a good rival and position.

0:00:47.120 --> 0:00:50.240
<v Speaker 2>One third of all Americans claim to believe in reincarnation,

0:00:50.760 --> 0:00:54.280
<v Speaker 2>and the number is even higher among millennials and gen z.

0:00:55.000 --> 0:00:57.960
<v Speaker 2>Is there a good reason to believe reincarnation is true?

0:00:58.320 --> 0:01:02.720
<v Speaker 2>Do near death experiences evidence for reincarnation? And how does

0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:06.160
<v Speaker 2>the evidence for reincarnation compare with the evidence for the

0:01:06.160 --> 0:01:09.560
<v Speaker 2>resurrection of Jesus. Our guest today is perhaps the world's

0:01:09.720 --> 0:01:13.119
<v Speaker 2>leading expert on the resurrection, been on this show many

0:01:13.200 --> 0:01:16.559
<v Speaker 2>times a personal friend, doctor Gary Harbrmos, thanks for coming back.

0:01:17.680 --> 0:01:20.119
<v Speaker 1>I am glad to be with you. Doctor Sean.

0:01:21.680 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 2>Well, on that note, let's jump in. I've actually been

0:01:23.680 --> 0:01:26.480
<v Speaker 2>thinking about this episode for a long time. I've never

0:01:26.560 --> 0:01:29.920
<v Speaker 2>done a deep dive on this, and it's so prevalent

0:01:30.040 --> 0:01:32.880
<v Speaker 2>today that in some ways I'm surprised that I haven't.

0:01:32.959 --> 0:01:36.039
<v Speaker 2>But let me start by just asking this question. When

0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:38.479
<v Speaker 2>you wrote your book Beyond Death, there's about a quarter

0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:41.080
<v Speaker 2>of Americans say the turn of the twenty first century

0:01:41.120 --> 0:01:44.560
<v Speaker 2>bleeds to reincarnation. Now it's about a third. Why do

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 2>you think so many Americans and beyond believe in it?

0:01:50.080 --> 0:01:52.080
<v Speaker 1>I think there's a lot of answers to that, But

0:01:52.240 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 1>just to mention a few off the top of the

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:59.320
<v Speaker 1>the bat here, I don't think it's for intellectual reasons

0:01:59.400 --> 0:02:02.720
<v Speaker 1>for the most part. Now, remember you work on one

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:04.480
<v Speaker 1>side of the ocean, and I work on the other

0:02:04.560 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 1>side of the ocean. It's not as common over here.

0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:09.919
<v Speaker 1>I have to introduce it to my students. They don't

0:02:09.960 --> 0:02:13.120
<v Speaker 1>bring it up. I mean, I mean PhD students. They

0:02:13.160 --> 0:02:17.680
<v Speaker 1>don't bring it up in philosophy or in PhD apologetics

0:02:17.720 --> 0:02:20.080
<v Speaker 1>classes and say, hey, I've been having to deal with

0:02:20.120 --> 0:02:24.400
<v Speaker 1>the reincarnation. Lady, I haven't heard this objection in years,

0:02:25.040 --> 0:02:27.760
<v Speaker 1>so I think it does have a lot to do

0:02:27.840 --> 0:02:30.959
<v Speaker 1>with where you live. I think that's one thing. Another thing,

0:02:31.440 --> 0:02:35.280
<v Speaker 1>I think this generation, these generations that you mentioned, are

0:02:35.320 --> 0:02:40.839
<v Speaker 1>not real well grounded. When I see surveys on how

0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:46.200
<v Speaker 1>scholarship goes for college students, I hear more and more

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:50.160
<v Speaker 1>things like, oh, I'm doing all my degrees online. What

0:02:50.240 --> 0:02:52.200
<v Speaker 1>do you have to do? Not a lot. I just

0:02:52.320 --> 0:02:55.240
<v Speaker 1>kind of read these articles and I read a few

0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:57.640
<v Speaker 1>paragraphs and I'm ready to go. I think up some

0:02:57.720 --> 0:03:01.280
<v Speaker 1>good reasons and I could you know? And and then

0:03:01.480 --> 0:03:05.920
<v Speaker 1>I see something on Wikipedia or something and it says

0:03:05.919 --> 0:03:08.560
<v Speaker 1>college students today, I think they're scholars after reading an

0:03:08.639 --> 0:03:11.760
<v Speaker 1>article and they usually quit halfway through the article. So

0:03:12.120 --> 0:03:16.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm not putting down college kids. I don't teach that level.

0:03:16.680 --> 0:03:20.760
<v Speaker 1>I teach PhD students. But it's like, no one's into

0:03:20.800 --> 0:03:23.400
<v Speaker 1>reading and studying now. It's like, go on your phone

0:03:23.440 --> 0:03:25.959
<v Speaker 1>and read a few things. And I think we are

0:03:26.440 --> 0:03:30.560
<v Speaker 1>into I don't want to say equality and religion, but

0:03:30.639 --> 0:03:34.519
<v Speaker 1>I think we are into plurality. I think we are

0:03:34.520 --> 0:03:38.720
<v Speaker 1>into anything goes. I think we are into well, I

0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:40.800
<v Speaker 1>don't want to put you down, and I don't want

0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:43.320
<v Speaker 1>to say your view is false. And what about the

0:03:43.360 --> 0:03:46.600
<v Speaker 1>problem of evil? Well, come on, I know what the

0:03:46.640 --> 0:03:49.040
<v Speaker 1>Bible says, but things have changed a lot, and I

0:03:49.120 --> 0:03:55.320
<v Speaker 1>kind of think God will approve of anybody who seeks him. Honestly,

0:03:55.560 --> 0:03:57.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think it's all those things. I think

0:03:57.400 --> 0:04:03.360
<v Speaker 1>it's changing world views and changing times, not well thought

0:04:03.360 --> 0:04:04.120
<v Speaker 1>out positions.

0:04:04.960 --> 0:04:06.880
<v Speaker 2>That's really fair that. The only thing I would throw

0:04:06.880 --> 0:04:08.960
<v Speaker 2>in there is we've just seen such an explosion of

0:04:09.360 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 2>interest in Eastern religions and new spiritualities over the past

0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:16.360
<v Speaker 2>few decades, and I argue the past two or three

0:04:16.440 --> 0:04:19.760
<v Speaker 2>years there's kind of this growth and interest in supernatural

0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:23.080
<v Speaker 2>phenomenon and we're seeing the data and millennial and gen

0:04:23.200 --> 0:04:26.480
<v Speaker 2>z express that interest. But of course they're not shifting

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:31.280
<v Speaker 2>back towards historic Christianity traditional faiths always, but sometimes in

0:04:31.360 --> 0:04:34.640
<v Speaker 2>New Age Now, I think it might be really helpful

0:04:34.680 --> 0:04:39.160
<v Speaker 2>to define what we mean by reincarnation and maybe compare

0:04:39.200 --> 0:04:42.920
<v Speaker 2>and contrast what reincarnation is and how it's similar and

0:04:43.120 --> 0:04:45.400
<v Speaker 2>or different from what we mean by resurrection.

0:04:46.839 --> 0:04:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Sure, I would say that, Well, I'll tell you what.

0:04:50.240 --> 0:04:53.880
<v Speaker 1>Let me use the definition of the he's passed away

0:04:53.920 --> 0:04:56.200
<v Speaker 1>now a few years ago, but he was known as

0:04:56.240 --> 0:05:00.240
<v Speaker 1>the world's leading scholar and reincarnation had a very to

0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:03.760
<v Speaker 1>his position. He was a psychiatrist in the area of

0:05:03.760 --> 0:05:07.680
<v Speaker 1>brain sciences at University of Virginia, one of the top

0:05:07.800 --> 0:05:11.600
<v Speaker 1>universities in the country, and his name was Ian Stevenson.

0:05:12.400 --> 0:05:14.680
<v Speaker 1>Last time I heard, well, I mean he's passed away now.

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.880
<v Speaker 1>But years ago i'd heard that he'd written five books

0:05:18.440 --> 0:05:22.080
<v Speaker 1>on reincarnation and one maybe the best known one published

0:05:22.120 --> 0:05:25.800
<v Speaker 1>by the University of Virginia Press, was called Twenty Cases

0:05:25.839 --> 0:05:32.520
<v Speaker 1>Suggestive of Reincarnation. And he was a nice guy, well spoken.

0:05:33.440 --> 0:05:36.400
<v Speaker 1>I'd never found him to be dogmatic. He would lay

0:05:36.480 --> 0:05:38.600
<v Speaker 1>data out there, and when you would give data on

0:05:38.640 --> 0:05:41.960
<v Speaker 1>the other side, he'd say, hey, I understand, I can

0:05:42.040 --> 0:05:44.800
<v Speaker 1>roll with that. I just think there's some data for reincarnation.

0:05:44.880 --> 0:05:48.039
<v Speaker 1>And you say, well, here's a comeback or two. He'd say, hey,

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:50.000
<v Speaker 1>you give me your one or two and I'll give

0:05:50.000 --> 0:05:52.600
<v Speaker 1>you a couple more reasons. That why reincarnation is kind

0:05:52.600 --> 0:05:55.719
<v Speaker 1>of you know, you know, that's why his books entitled

0:05:55.760 --> 0:05:59.760
<v Speaker 1>twenty Cases Suggestive. And here's how he defines it. He says,

0:05:59.800 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 1>re incarnation is when one spirit enters another person, but

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:14.840
<v Speaker 1>in between conception and birth. That's reincarnation. Possession, which he

0:06:14.920 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 1>does a lot of talking about and I will too.

0:06:18.520 --> 0:06:25.480
<v Speaker 1>Possession is a spirit entering another person's spirit in between

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:30.760
<v Speaker 1>birth and life, sometime in the living process. But reincarnation

0:06:31.240 --> 0:06:35.320
<v Speaker 1>is prior to birth, between conception and birth, and that's

0:06:35.360 --> 0:06:38.760
<v Speaker 1>going to become really significant here as we get talking,

0:06:38.760 --> 0:06:42.760
<v Speaker 1>because there's some cases that Stevenson gives where he says, well,

0:06:42.800 --> 0:06:46.719
<v Speaker 1>I've found some cases I think reincarnation's true, but I'll

0:06:46.720 --> 0:06:50.880
<v Speaker 1>give you a couple cases where reincarnation by my definition

0:06:51.000 --> 0:06:54.200
<v Speaker 1>is not true and it looks more like possession, and

0:06:54.240 --> 0:06:56.720
<v Speaker 1>he just says things just I mean, he's I think

0:06:56.720 --> 0:06:57.839
<v Speaker 1>he's pretty straightforward.

0:06:59.120 --> 0:07:03.359
<v Speaker 2>So reincarnation is a soul that stays constant over time

0:07:04.000 --> 0:07:08.200
<v Speaker 2>and reanimates a new body sometime between say birth and

0:07:08.279 --> 0:07:11.520
<v Speaker 2>conception or conception and birth.

0:07:12.080 --> 0:07:13.480
<v Speaker 1>That's correct, conception and birth.

0:07:13.800 --> 0:07:18.720
<v Speaker 2>Possession would be a separate, at least one additional spirit

0:07:18.880 --> 0:07:23.520
<v Speaker 2>taking over an existing spirit that is animating a body,

0:07:23.560 --> 0:07:25.520
<v Speaker 2>so there's at least two, or in the case of

0:07:25.560 --> 0:07:31.680
<v Speaker 2>the demoniac, there's multiple possessing the individual. That's one key distinction,

0:07:33.200 --> 0:07:35.120
<v Speaker 2>define resurrection for.

0:07:35.040 --> 0:07:38.120
<v Speaker 1>Us sean before I go to resurrection, I'd be glad

0:07:38.120 --> 0:07:40.440
<v Speaker 1>to do that, of course. But let's how about a

0:07:40.480 --> 0:07:46.440
<v Speaker 1>third definition. Okay, what's the difference between possession and oppression?

0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:50.840
<v Speaker 1>Because in some of the some of the best treatments

0:07:51.360 --> 0:07:54.760
<v Speaker 1>of possession, and there's more than one kind, by the way,

0:07:54.800 --> 0:07:59.960
<v Speaker 1>but some of the best cases of possession are oppression.

0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:03.520
<v Speaker 1>And you say, well, that's that's not possession. No it's not.

0:08:04.000 --> 0:08:06.880
<v Speaker 1>But some of the books will say possession can be

0:08:06.960 --> 0:08:10.760
<v Speaker 1>so strong that many people will think it's a case

0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:14.520
<v Speaker 1>of possession. In other words, as a clouding of definitions

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:19.480
<v Speaker 1>between oppression and possession. So you can be really bothered

0:08:19.840 --> 0:08:22.560
<v Speaker 1>but not really infiltrated. If that makes.

0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 2>Sense, Yeah, it does.

0:08:24.160 --> 0:08:24.320
<v Speaker 1>So.

0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:29.880
<v Speaker 2>Reincarnation would be an individual soul that would have multiple lives,

0:08:30.080 --> 0:08:32.959
<v Speaker 2>lived through different bodies at different times. And of course

0:08:33.000 --> 0:08:35.440
<v Speaker 2>we don't have to go there, but in some faiths

0:08:35.440 --> 0:08:37.640
<v Speaker 2>it would be a common soul that takes over a

0:08:37.800 --> 0:08:42.880
<v Speaker 2>non human body for a season or a time. But reincarnation,

0:08:43.280 --> 0:08:46.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm sorry, resurrection give us a definition of what we

0:08:46.200 --> 0:08:46.760
<v Speaker 2>mean by that.

0:08:48.000 --> 0:08:54.880
<v Speaker 1>Resurrection is usually a definition where one person dies and

0:08:54.960 --> 0:08:59.720
<v Speaker 1>lives again. Now, that person. There's different discussions about what

0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:02.920
<v Speaker 1>this new body is, and boy, this could take us

0:09:02.960 --> 0:09:04.679
<v Speaker 1>all day, so you don't want to you don't want

0:09:04.679 --> 0:09:06.599
<v Speaker 1>to go to a lot of detail here. But the

0:09:07.360 --> 0:09:12.640
<v Speaker 1>traditional Christian response is that after the death of a

0:09:13.240 --> 0:09:19.079
<v Speaker 1>human body, there's an uh, well, colloquial language would be

0:09:19.080 --> 0:09:23.680
<v Speaker 1>an in between state. But this state right after death

0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:28.840
<v Speaker 1>is usually believed to be disembodied. So I love what

0:09:28.920 --> 0:09:33.800
<v Speaker 1>Peter Krefft says that the Thomas philosopher who he accepts

0:09:34.160 --> 0:09:37.760
<v Speaker 1>the Thomas accept the Thomas and the Aristotelian tradition, not

0:09:37.880 --> 0:09:41.120
<v Speaker 1>the Platonist one. But he still says this comment about

0:09:41.120 --> 0:09:46.000
<v Speaker 1>the intermediate state. He says Plato is right as far

0:09:46.080 --> 0:09:49.400
<v Speaker 1>as he went, and I think the great comment. In

0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:53.280
<v Speaker 1>other words, the Christian view tewod Corinthians five seems to

0:09:53.280 --> 0:09:57.000
<v Speaker 1>be that immediate after death, immediately after death the person

0:09:57.800 --> 0:10:02.160
<v Speaker 1>is does not live and in between ron falses you're

0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:05.240
<v Speaker 1>still with the Lord and it's better than here. But

0:10:05.760 --> 0:10:10.640
<v Speaker 1>he says I wished I weren't here too long, because

0:10:10.679 --> 0:10:14.240
<v Speaker 1>twice in those ten verses and second Corinthians five he says,

0:10:14.320 --> 0:10:16.920
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to be found naked, and the Greek

0:10:17.280 --> 0:10:22.600
<v Speaker 1>word there naked refers to bodyless. So if you go

0:10:22.640 --> 0:10:24.560
<v Speaker 1>back to Peter Craft, he's going to say, yep, that's

0:10:24.559 --> 0:10:26.680
<v Speaker 1>my point, because I'm atoms and I believe we have

0:10:26.720 --> 0:10:29.480
<v Speaker 1>to be re embodied to be our full persons. But

0:10:29.520 --> 0:10:32.640
<v Speaker 1>there is an intermediate state and then there's a final

0:10:32.720 --> 0:10:38.720
<v Speaker 1>state resurrection has to do. The traditional Christian view is

0:10:38.800 --> 0:10:43.000
<v Speaker 1>living forever, and you can't say in a different body,

0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:46.439
<v Speaker 1>but you'd say, you'd say living forever and your body,

0:10:46.760 --> 0:10:49.160
<v Speaker 1>but for eternity, and.

0:10:49.120 --> 0:10:53.000
<v Speaker 2>Of course that is a transformed now immortal body that

0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:56.160
<v Speaker 2>won't die again, as Paul says in one Corinthians fifteen.

0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:59.960
<v Speaker 2>So oftentimes feel think resurrection is just coming back to life.

0:11:00.559 --> 0:11:03.360
<v Speaker 2>But like we saw with those Elijah and Paul raised,

0:11:03.400 --> 0:11:07.040
<v Speaker 2>and the three Jesus raised Lazarus, son of the widow

0:11:07.040 --> 0:11:09.480
<v Speaker 2>at Nane and the daughter of Gyrus, they were to

0:11:09.559 --> 0:11:15.000
<v Speaker 2>die again. Resurrected body is animated for eternity. Although physical,

0:11:15.040 --> 0:11:18.360
<v Speaker 2>it's our same body, but even greater than it is

0:11:18.400 --> 0:11:20.120
<v Speaker 2>here with the limitations of sin.

0:11:21.080 --> 0:11:24.600
<v Speaker 1>What right? And usually it said that that starts after

0:11:24.679 --> 0:11:29.120
<v Speaker 1>the return of Christ. Whatever, you know, there's different views

0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:33.520
<v Speaker 1>on you know what that is too. You know did

0:11:33.640 --> 0:11:36.040
<v Speaker 1>did well? I don't want to.

0:11:36.400 --> 0:11:38.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, don't worry about that right now. We'll get a

0:11:38.840 --> 0:11:39.760
<v Speaker 2>side on that.

0:11:40.200 --> 0:11:42.960
<v Speaker 1>But it's after Christ came back, and that's the Christian

0:11:43.040 --> 0:11:45.800
<v Speaker 1>view exactly. It's a new body. It's a new body,

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:47.240
<v Speaker 1>but it's my body. Yeah.

0:11:47.280 --> 0:11:50.720
<v Speaker 2>And the key distinction and re incarnation, you die, come back, die,

0:11:50.800 --> 0:11:54.760
<v Speaker 2>come back many or potentially infant number of times. Resurrection

0:11:54.920 --> 0:11:58.720
<v Speaker 2>you die once and you face judgment. That's the key

0:11:58.760 --> 0:12:01.760
<v Speaker 2>difference here for people to see. Now you lay out

0:12:01.840 --> 0:12:03.320
<v Speaker 2>in your book, you have a chapter on this and

0:12:03.360 --> 0:12:06.160
<v Speaker 2>Beyond Death where you give some of the different kinds

0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:11.160
<v Speaker 2>of evidence is often cited for reincarnation. List out some

0:12:11.200 --> 0:12:12.400
<v Speaker 2>of those for us if you will.

0:12:12.880 --> 0:12:15.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think I give five in that chapter. So

0:12:16.440 --> 0:12:19.360
<v Speaker 1>it's not like reincarnation are so stupid you can't think

0:12:19.400 --> 0:12:22.200
<v Speaker 1>of any reason for it. But I think by far,

0:12:22.760 --> 0:12:27.680
<v Speaker 1>if I believe the reincarnation, my chief evidence would be cases,

0:12:28.600 --> 0:12:30.520
<v Speaker 1>very well known cases. Now you don't have very long

0:12:30.559 --> 0:12:35.960
<v Speaker 1>to look for them. Children who will give you example.

0:12:37.800 --> 0:12:41.120
<v Speaker 1>You have to use Indian names. You usually mariincarnation happens

0:12:41.160 --> 0:12:45.240
<v Speaker 1>in Indian or Indian friendly cultures. That's not always a case,

0:12:45.880 --> 0:12:51.400
<v Speaker 1>but let's say, this little boy's name is Sam, and

0:12:52.840 --> 0:12:55.120
<v Speaker 1>sometime after his birth, he could be very young, he

0:12:55.160 --> 0:12:58.880
<v Speaker 1>could be three or four, and he'll say, don't call

0:12:58.960 --> 0:13:04.720
<v Speaker 1>me Sam anymore. My name is Peter. No, honey, we

0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:08.160
<v Speaker 1>gave you the name Sam. No, but I'm Peter. I

0:13:08.280 --> 0:13:10.679
<v Speaker 1>know I'm Peter. And I lived in the town of

0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:14.840
<v Speaker 1>X and I even remember who my parents were, and

0:13:14.920 --> 0:13:18.720
<v Speaker 1>I remember the house. It looks like this. And they'll say, well, well,

0:13:18.760 --> 0:13:22.480
<v Speaker 1>that's true or false, you know, and he'll say, no, no, no,

0:13:22.520 --> 0:13:24.440
<v Speaker 1>it looks like this. And when you go in the house,

0:13:24.760 --> 0:13:27.679
<v Speaker 1>you turn left and you go down the hallway and

0:13:27.720 --> 0:13:31.280
<v Speaker 1>the third room on the right is my bedroom. And

0:13:31.360 --> 0:13:34.720
<v Speaker 1>so the parents do a little bit of checking and

0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:37.240
<v Speaker 1>they find out, you know, because he tells them the

0:13:37.320 --> 0:13:40.920
<v Speaker 1>town and where's a house like this? And this culture

0:13:41.000 --> 0:13:43.360
<v Speaker 1>is really open to this. They've heard these stories. So

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:47.080
<v Speaker 1>other parents are used to helping you do this. And

0:13:47.120 --> 0:13:49.959
<v Speaker 1>they bring the little guy there, the newly made Peter,

0:13:50.679 --> 0:13:53.120
<v Speaker 1>and he takes you to the house and turns left

0:13:53.160 --> 0:13:55.280
<v Speaker 1>and goes down and there's his bedroom. He goes, well,

0:13:55.320 --> 0:13:57.439
<v Speaker 1>they've changed this all around, but my bed used to

0:13:57.480 --> 0:14:00.360
<v Speaker 1>be over there underneath the window. So he knows a

0:14:00.400 --> 0:14:03.320
<v Speaker 1>lot about this, and that's famous. Those are famous. Little

0:14:03.400 --> 0:14:07.400
<v Speaker 1>kids have a lot of details. Lesser examples, but they

0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:11.120
<v Speaker 1>can still be something that convinces some people. Of course,

0:14:11.600 --> 0:14:18.880
<v Speaker 1>would be cases of scars. Let's see, let's say Sam

0:14:19.560 --> 0:14:25.880
<v Speaker 1>slash Peter talks to the parents and they say, oh, yeah,

0:14:25.920 --> 0:14:31.600
<v Speaker 1>he had this real strange birthmark on his left shoulder.

0:14:32.120 --> 0:14:35.120
<v Speaker 1>Oh you mean like this, And the guy pulls his

0:14:35.160 --> 0:14:39.080
<v Speaker 1>shirt down and they go, yeah, just like that. Where

0:14:39.120 --> 0:14:42.880
<v Speaker 1>did you get that? So birthmarks are deformities, a limp

0:14:43.480 --> 0:14:48.240
<v Speaker 1>and the same leg that the other boy had. Sometimes

0:14:48.240 --> 0:14:52.560
<v Speaker 1>these people can even tell you where the boys are buried.

0:14:54.040 --> 0:14:59.080
<v Speaker 1>But a deformity or a scar, that's one we're familiar

0:14:59.120 --> 0:15:02.880
<v Speaker 1>with us and Christian. But glossolalia or speaking in tongues.

0:15:04.320 --> 0:15:08.520
<v Speaker 1>This guy might start rattling off a different language and

0:15:08.600 --> 0:15:12.800
<v Speaker 1>he might talk in the dialect that Peter spoke in.

0:15:13.080 --> 0:15:16.160
<v Speaker 1>But remember his name, his given name is Sam, and

0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:18.960
<v Speaker 1>he starts talking to that language. So there's three of

0:15:19.000 --> 0:15:21.080
<v Speaker 1>them right there, and those are three of the best ones.

0:15:21.800 --> 0:15:24.320
<v Speaker 1>The main one is details, I can tell you where

0:15:24.360 --> 0:15:28.200
<v Speaker 1>I lived, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, and deformities.

0:15:28.920 --> 0:15:32.680
<v Speaker 1>Speaking in tongues. I mean by that not your birth language,

0:15:32.680 --> 0:15:34.280
<v Speaker 1>but you're pretty good at it and you're only four

0:15:34.360 --> 0:15:35.240
<v Speaker 1>years old. Yeah.

0:15:35.320 --> 0:15:37.680
<v Speaker 2>So that's a great list. And the other one that

0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:39.360
<v Speaker 2>we're going to get to is some of the so

0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:43.640
<v Speaker 2>called biblical evidence in favor of reincarnation. That's really interesting.

0:15:44.320 --> 0:15:46.080
<v Speaker 2>We'll take that one by one. Now we're going to

0:15:46.160 --> 0:15:48.680
<v Speaker 2>walk through some of the claims. Get your response to it.

0:15:49.160 --> 0:15:50.680
<v Speaker 2>But the way you frame this the first time I

0:15:50.720 --> 0:15:53.520
<v Speaker 2>read this chapter years ago was really eye opening to me.

0:15:53.560 --> 0:15:54.360
<v Speaker 1>Here's what you said.

0:15:55.360 --> 0:16:00.440
<v Speaker 2>You said, are there other hypotheses other than reincarnation that

0:16:00.560 --> 0:16:04.960
<v Speaker 2>can account for much of the same data? In other words,

0:16:04.960 --> 0:16:08.520
<v Speaker 2>if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally

0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:13.160
<v Speaker 2>or at least sufficiently, how do many reincarnation experts choose

0:16:13.280 --> 0:16:17.640
<v Speaker 2>and how should we choose which option between those two

0:16:18.280 --> 0:16:19.320
<v Speaker 2>is the best?

0:16:20.520 --> 0:16:25.440
<v Speaker 1>Okay, let me use Ian Stevenson. Now people may have

0:16:25.440 --> 0:16:27.560
<v Speaker 1>missed this, but when I call them a psychiatrist, you

0:16:27.560 --> 0:16:31.120
<v Speaker 1>remember a psychiatrist as an MD. A psychologist is a

0:16:31.200 --> 0:16:34.920
<v Speaker 1>best a PhD. So he's a medical doctor University of Virginia.

0:16:34.960 --> 0:16:37.960
<v Speaker 1>He's really up on this stuff from medical viewpoint, and

0:16:38.040 --> 0:16:41.800
<v Speaker 1>he admits in his book. I cite the book several

0:16:41.800 --> 0:16:46.280
<v Speaker 1>times in that chapter, and he himself says, the best

0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:53.640
<v Speaker 1>two hypotheses are reincarnation and possession. And several times throughout

0:16:54.280 --> 0:16:57.440
<v Speaker 1>well the chapter where I cite him several times, you'll say,

0:16:58.000 --> 0:17:01.720
<v Speaker 1>and actually here possession and seems like it's pretty good.

0:17:02.120 --> 0:17:05.800
<v Speaker 1>And then he'll introduce he'll introduce another problem. He'll go, well,

0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:10.239
<v Speaker 1>there's a number of ways to explain this, but the

0:17:10.280 --> 0:17:12.359
<v Speaker 1>best to, well, we can just cut to the chase.

0:17:12.680 --> 0:17:17.359
<v Speaker 1>The best to are still reincarnation and possession. He says

0:17:17.359 --> 0:17:18.960
<v Speaker 1>it over and over again. Now you may have a

0:17:19.040 --> 0:17:20.960
<v Speaker 1>quote there. I've got one here. I can read it

0:17:21.000 --> 0:17:24.720
<v Speaker 1>if you want please. This is this is Ian Stevenson himself,

0:17:24.720 --> 0:17:27.679
<v Speaker 1>the lading leading scholar. And it's not because he's like

0:17:27.760 --> 0:17:31.120
<v Speaker 1>not a believer. He wrote the book twenty cases suggests

0:17:31.119 --> 0:17:34.480
<v Speaker 1>of reincarnation. Here he is. He says that the data

0:17:34.600 --> 0:17:39.520
<v Speaker 1>fall quote a long continuum in which the distinction between

0:17:39.600 --> 0:17:44.800
<v Speaker 1>reincarnation and possession becomes blurred close quote. Then he says

0:17:45.080 --> 0:17:50.760
<v Speaker 1>another statement, the data quote do not permit a firm

0:17:50.920 --> 0:17:56.720
<v Speaker 1>decision between the hypothesis of possession and reincarnation. Close quote.

0:17:57.200 --> 0:18:01.200
<v Speaker 1>Now it seems like he He definitely is saying these

0:18:01.200 --> 0:18:04.920
<v Speaker 1>are the two best, but it almost sounds at points

0:18:05.359 --> 0:18:07.000
<v Speaker 1>I got another one here. I can read you, but

0:18:07.320 --> 0:18:09.360
<v Speaker 1>it almost sounds like he thinks it's a toss up.

0:18:09.800 --> 0:18:15.199
<v Speaker 1>Now he'll tell you why he doesn't like. Well, this

0:18:15.320 --> 0:18:16.560
<v Speaker 1>is I don't know how far you want to go

0:18:16.560 --> 0:18:19.040
<v Speaker 1>to the shoan, but this is going to involve two

0:18:19.080 --> 0:18:24.480
<v Speaker 1>definitions of possession, and some Christians are going to be

0:18:24.640 --> 0:18:29.440
<v Speaker 1>very ill at ease with one of the two definitions.

0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:31.840
<v Speaker 1>But I'll just define them and you can go where

0:18:31.880 --> 0:18:36.760
<v Speaker 1>you want. Of course, one is called discarnate possession, and

0:18:36.800 --> 0:18:40.440
<v Speaker 1>I'll define that, and the other one is demon possession.

0:18:41.480 --> 0:18:45.159
<v Speaker 1>Now this is interesting. I can only guess what's in

0:18:45.200 --> 0:18:49.239
<v Speaker 1>this man's mind, this doctor, the medical doctor. But uh,

0:18:50.240 --> 0:18:55.280
<v Speaker 1>Stevenson makes the comment, of those two options, discarnate and demon,

0:18:55.920 --> 0:18:59.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't prefer the demon one, and I'm thinking, wow,

0:18:59.680 --> 0:19:03.359
<v Speaker 1>let me think through this. You already believe in the supernatural,

0:19:03.520 --> 0:19:08.399
<v Speaker 1>I think, yeah, I you know, I believe in reincarnation. Okay,

0:19:08.640 --> 0:19:11.240
<v Speaker 1>so you're already open to the supernatural, and you think

0:19:11.240 --> 0:19:16.360
<v Speaker 1>there is a supernatural slash spiritual realm. Yeah, you don't

0:19:16.400 --> 0:19:20.640
<v Speaker 1>like demon possession though, No, he could say, well, that's

0:19:20.640 --> 0:19:23.080
<v Speaker 1>a Christian view. Well, that's it's not true. You can

0:19:23.080 --> 0:19:27.240
<v Speaker 1>find demon possession in many world religions, I mean major ones.

0:19:27.680 --> 0:19:31.000
<v Speaker 1>But he could say yeah, and I'm just guessing her Sean,

0:19:31.040 --> 0:19:34.439
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, but he could say, demon possession implies

0:19:34.640 --> 0:19:38.000
<v Speaker 1>a satan, and whether or not you believe in a satan,

0:19:38.200 --> 0:19:41.080
<v Speaker 1>there's probably a hell or a bad place to go.

0:19:41.520 --> 0:19:44.720
<v Speaker 1>And that's the my religion doesn't believe that. I think

0:19:44.760 --> 0:19:50.360
<v Speaker 1>he's rejecting it for a damnation slash judgment slash you know, okay,

0:19:50.400 --> 0:19:52.679
<v Speaker 1>and Christianity again is not the only one that believes that.

0:19:52.880 --> 0:19:55.200
<v Speaker 1>But he does say that's not my favorite. Now here's

0:19:55.240 --> 0:19:58.360
<v Speaker 1>the one that's going to cause some trouble. I think, okay,

0:19:58.640 --> 0:20:02.440
<v Speaker 1>just discard it. Possession d I s c A r

0:20:02.640 --> 0:20:08.520
<v Speaker 1>n A TE discarnate possession. Discarnate possession is the possession

0:20:09.160 --> 0:20:15.719
<v Speaker 1>of one individual by a second, previously deceased individual. But

0:20:15.760 --> 0:20:24.440
<v Speaker 1>they're both human beings and person a after death can enter.

0:20:25.760 --> 0:20:28.760
<v Speaker 1>Now again, what's what's the what you know, what definition

0:20:28.800 --> 0:20:32.320
<v Speaker 1>you're going to use. But if you believe in reincarnation,

0:20:32.400 --> 0:20:37.960
<v Speaker 1>you want him to enter another body between conception and birth.

0:20:38.240 --> 0:20:41.119
<v Speaker 1>If you like the what we might call more of

0:20:41.160 --> 0:20:45.600
<v Speaker 1>a Western Christian Jewish discardate view. Not too many people

0:20:45.680 --> 0:20:49.200
<v Speaker 1>talk about this, but it would be after that person's birth.

0:20:49.240 --> 0:20:51.639
<v Speaker 1>So it sounds a little bit like demon possession, but

0:20:51.680 --> 0:20:56.280
<v Speaker 1>it's possession by another individual. And you tell me whether

0:20:56.280 --> 0:20:58.720
<v Speaker 1>you want to go any further. But here's the only

0:20:58.760 --> 0:21:01.280
<v Speaker 1>thing I want to say about it. We'd say, no,

0:21:02.320 --> 0:21:07.760
<v Speaker 1>God doesn't let one a deceased spirit into the body

0:21:07.840 --> 0:21:10.720
<v Speaker 1>of another one. And I'd say, how do you know that?

0:21:11.400 --> 0:21:15.119
<v Speaker 1>And they'd say, well, Hebrews chapter nine says it's a

0:21:16.160 --> 0:21:18.159
<v Speaker 1>you know, it's a point that that man wants to die.

0:21:18.160 --> 0:21:20.280
<v Speaker 1>And after the judgment, Well, I think that's kind of

0:21:20.280 --> 0:21:22.959
<v Speaker 1>an odd verse. It might be your best shot. But

0:21:23.080 --> 0:21:26.000
<v Speaker 1>which judgment do you mean? And if it's the judgment

0:21:26.040 --> 0:21:27.679
<v Speaker 1>at the end of time, golly, there's a lot of

0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:32.280
<v Speaker 1>time between fifty one a d And today. What's been

0:21:32.320 --> 0:21:35.000
<v Speaker 1>going on all those years? And you say, well, I

0:21:35.040 --> 0:21:37.160
<v Speaker 1>don't know. Maybe I can't give you a good verse.

0:21:37.520 --> 0:21:40.400
<v Speaker 1>I just don't think God would allow that. Okay, then

0:21:40.400 --> 0:21:45.600
<v Speaker 1>here's my comeback. Would Satan allow that? With Satan? When

0:21:45.720 --> 0:21:48.159
<v Speaker 1>Paul calls the God of this world, who has a

0:21:48.160 --> 0:21:51.159
<v Speaker 1>lot of power, who could do miracles, who can deceive

0:21:51.200 --> 0:21:55.879
<v Speaker 1>the very elect. Could he let the spirit of a

0:21:55.920 --> 0:22:01.359
<v Speaker 1>person who is his person that he controls? Could he

0:22:02.040 --> 0:22:05.199
<v Speaker 1>mess Christians or others up by having the spirit of

0:22:05.200 --> 0:22:08.760
<v Speaker 1>a dead person enter a living person. All I'm saying is,

0:22:09.320 --> 0:22:11.680
<v Speaker 1>I don't say it's got to be true. But there's

0:22:11.680 --> 0:22:14.960
<v Speaker 1>a number of cult experts all bricked in others, there's

0:22:15.000 --> 0:22:18.160
<v Speaker 1>a number of cult experts who believe you can't rule

0:22:18.200 --> 0:22:21.880
<v Speaker 1>it out. Biblically, there's no problem. So there's two kinds

0:22:22.520 --> 0:22:26.919
<v Speaker 1>human dead human spirit into a live human spirit or

0:22:28.040 --> 0:22:32.320
<v Speaker 1>a demon, and I think it's good to have two options.

0:22:32.800 --> 0:22:35.880
<v Speaker 1>Here's my personal view. I don't think we can rule

0:22:35.880 --> 0:22:40.600
<v Speaker 1>out this carrent possession, at least as the possible province

0:22:40.840 --> 0:22:46.040
<v Speaker 1>of Satan himself over with regard to one of his minions.

0:22:46.560 --> 0:22:50.240
<v Speaker 1>He lets all kinds of strange things happen, even blaspheming God.

0:22:50.680 --> 0:22:53.679
<v Speaker 1>This isn't even that bad. So what's wrong with that? Well,

0:22:53.720 --> 0:22:55.680
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. I just don't like it. Well, maybe

0:22:55.680 --> 0:22:57.479
<v Speaker 1>you don't, But how do you dismiss it?

0:22:58.240 --> 0:23:01.760
<v Speaker 2>You know, my mind is run wild with theological questions

0:23:01.760 --> 0:23:05.359
<v Speaker 2>about discarnate possession. But let me hold that for a minute,

0:23:05.920 --> 0:23:08.479
<v Speaker 2>I want to make sure that our viewers are tracking

0:23:08.520 --> 0:23:11.919
<v Speaker 2>with a point. So Ian Stevenson gives at least, you

0:23:11.960 --> 0:23:14.920
<v Speaker 2>say it, at least five different lines of evidence for reincarnation.

0:23:15.680 --> 0:23:19.240
<v Speaker 2>One of the strongest pieces are the multiple cases of

0:23:19.320 --> 0:23:25.080
<v Speaker 2>children who have specific detail about names and places people live,

0:23:25.320 --> 0:23:29.199
<v Speaker 2>activity that they did, and they discovered that it lines

0:23:29.280 --> 0:23:32.840
<v Speaker 2>up and is likely true. You're convinced that at least

0:23:32.880 --> 0:23:37.280
<v Speaker 2>something supernatural is taken here. And I say that because

0:23:37.280 --> 0:23:40.520
<v Speaker 2>sometimes as Christians, when we see hear miracles in other

0:23:40.600 --> 0:23:45.960
<v Speaker 2>religions like Islam and in say Mormonism, we can either

0:23:46.000 --> 0:23:48.919
<v Speaker 2>explain and say no, it's false, miracle didn't happen, or

0:23:48.960 --> 0:23:54.600
<v Speaker 2>explain away by supernatural forces arguably demonic. But in this case,

0:23:54.680 --> 0:23:56.880
<v Speaker 2>in this line of reasoning, and you argue, there's enough

0:23:56.920 --> 0:23:59.880
<v Speaker 2>here to make you think at least something supernatural is taken.

0:24:00.400 --> 0:24:04.119
<v Speaker 2>Is that fair insofar as it goes most likely.

0:24:04.320 --> 0:24:10.399
<v Speaker 1>But in that chapter I give about twenty reputations. I

0:24:10.440 --> 0:24:14.560
<v Speaker 1>have three, well, I have at least two major ones.

0:24:14.560 --> 0:24:16.719
<v Speaker 1>If you want to count to two different kinds of possessions,

0:24:16.800 --> 0:24:19.359
<v Speaker 1>now I have three. I have a bunch of little

0:24:19.400 --> 0:24:24.439
<v Speaker 1>ones that just throw monkey wrenches into the reincarnation and

0:24:24.520 --> 0:24:26.120
<v Speaker 1>one of them, here's a couple.

0:24:25.920 --> 0:24:28.160
<v Speaker 2>Of them, hang on before before we come back, we're

0:24:28.160 --> 0:24:32.000
<v Speaker 2>going to come to those critiques. And that's fair. But

0:24:32.240 --> 0:24:34.560
<v Speaker 2>I want to draw out for people that say we

0:24:34.640 --> 0:24:39.840
<v Speaker 2>have a murder suspect and we actually let's say we

0:24:39.880 --> 0:24:43.400
<v Speaker 2>have a murder and we have two suspects that we're

0:24:43.520 --> 0:24:50.280
<v Speaker 2>curious about this murder. Both wear size two tennis shoes. Well,

0:24:50.400 --> 0:24:54.680
<v Speaker 2>then we can't say, oh, suspect A wear size ten shoes,

0:24:54.960 --> 0:24:58.560
<v Speaker 2>so this is evidence for suspect A, but not suspect B.

0:24:59.320 --> 0:25:03.199
<v Speaker 2>It minim fits both. Well, if that's the case for

0:25:03.359 --> 0:25:06.600
<v Speaker 2>murder trout when it comes to reincarnation, you're saying, even

0:25:06.760 --> 0:25:09.320
<v Speaker 2>if this is supernatural, we're in come to your other

0:25:09.440 --> 0:25:12.399
<v Speaker 2>critiques of it to show that you're not convinced. But

0:25:12.560 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 2>even if it is, there's another suspect or two, namely

0:25:17.359 --> 0:25:21.360
<v Speaker 2>that wear size two tennis shoes that can also explain

0:25:21.480 --> 0:25:25.640
<v Speaker 2>the data. So it's not as forceful for reincarnation as

0:25:25.680 --> 0:25:28.160
<v Speaker 2>somebody you would think it is. Does that sum up

0:25:28.160 --> 0:25:29.000
<v Speaker 2>how you look at it?

0:25:29.720 --> 0:25:38.000
<v Speaker 1>That's fair because in logic, or in a lesser subject

0:25:38.000 --> 0:25:44.600
<v Speaker 1>than straightforward logic, but in a good persuasive reasoning. If

0:25:44.600 --> 0:25:48.000
<v Speaker 1>you can get in there and rip that up, you

0:25:48.400 --> 0:25:51.160
<v Speaker 1>might say, yeah, but what you're raising is the case

0:25:51.160 --> 0:25:54.240
<v Speaker 1>of special pleading. You're not asking all the people you're

0:25:54.240 --> 0:25:57.200
<v Speaker 1>going to size too. Here's the second guy with size two,

0:25:57.280 --> 0:25:59.359
<v Speaker 1>And I could say, well, I did some research and

0:25:59.560 --> 0:26:01.400
<v Speaker 1>some of the people in the group you're talking about,

0:26:01.440 --> 0:26:04.360
<v Speaker 1>there's ten of them. I mean, after a while, you're

0:26:04.359 --> 0:26:07.640
<v Speaker 1>really playing with that thesis. I also would raise questions

0:26:07.720 --> 0:26:12.679
<v Speaker 1>like natural hypotheses. Why can't we raise natural hypotheses like

0:26:12.760 --> 0:26:17.960
<v Speaker 1>this one? Well, these are cultures that almost always these

0:26:18.000 --> 0:26:23.440
<v Speaker 1>occurr in cultures where either reincarnation in general is allowed

0:26:23.520 --> 0:26:27.200
<v Speaker 1>or believe in, or they're Indian or maybe Buddhist cultures,

0:26:27.200 --> 0:26:32.480
<v Speaker 1>but especially Indian cultures. If the parent wants your child,

0:26:32.640 --> 0:26:37.000
<v Speaker 1>their child to be a star witness, why can't the

0:26:37.119 --> 0:26:40.359
<v Speaker 1>parent do some research, pass it on to the child,

0:26:41.080 --> 0:26:43.080
<v Speaker 1>get it into his mind. So he says, no, my

0:26:43.200 --> 0:26:46.720
<v Speaker 1>name's Peter. No, come on, we named you Sam. Now

0:26:46.760 --> 0:26:48.520
<v Speaker 1>the kid might spill the beans if he said, yeah,

0:26:48.560 --> 0:26:50.560
<v Speaker 1>but you told me to tell everybody my name's Peter.

0:26:53.160 --> 0:26:56.120
<v Speaker 1>The parents or somebody else could do research. See, there's

0:26:56.160 --> 0:26:59.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot of these families where they affirm this, they

0:26:59.160 --> 0:27:02.439
<v Speaker 1>can't give me exactly. In Christian circles, apologists aren't going

0:27:02.480 --> 0:27:04.200
<v Speaker 1>to buy this. Is what I'm going to say. Here

0:27:04.320 --> 0:27:09.040
<v Speaker 1>is a great evidence. But we pray for healing, and

0:27:09.080 --> 0:27:12.359
<v Speaker 1>we see a healing in church, and we see a

0:27:12.440 --> 0:27:18.280
<v Speaker 1>case maybe where this healing wasn't totally what we prayed for,

0:27:18.720 --> 0:27:21.399
<v Speaker 1>but it prayed in a few it was fulfilled in

0:27:21.400 --> 0:27:24.080
<v Speaker 1>a few areas, so we would and they were good areas.

0:27:24.240 --> 0:27:26.520
<v Speaker 1>So we'll put those in the back burner. But it's

0:27:26.560 --> 0:27:29.439
<v Speaker 1>not a one to one relationship. Maybe the parents do

0:27:29.520 --> 0:27:32.439
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of research and teach the child why

0:27:33.000 --> 0:27:36.480
<v Speaker 1>that's trickery. No, it's them believing in their own religion,

0:27:36.880 --> 0:27:39.040
<v Speaker 1>and we do that as Christians. We do that as

0:27:39.119 --> 0:27:42.119
<v Speaker 1>Christian parents. I just think there's alternative reasons. So I

0:27:42.119 --> 0:27:45.280
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't say it has to be supernatural, but I would

0:27:45.320 --> 0:27:48.640
<v Speaker 1>say for many people, both views are going to involve supernatural.

0:27:48.760 --> 0:27:50.639
<v Speaker 2>Yes, that's really fair. So we're going to look at

0:27:50.680 --> 0:27:53.919
<v Speaker 2>some of your critiques of re incarnation. There's some plausible

0:27:54.080 --> 0:27:58.440
<v Speaker 2>naturalistic explanations. But even if it is supernatural, it doesn't

0:27:58.560 --> 0:28:03.720
<v Speaker 2>uniquely point to exactly. Reincarnation still can be explained away

0:28:03.760 --> 0:28:06.479
<v Speaker 2>with another phenomena. Now, before we get to some of

0:28:06.520 --> 0:28:10.120
<v Speaker 2>your critique, one of the interesting things is how much

0:28:10.200 --> 0:28:13.840
<v Speaker 2>this comes up in studies of near death experiences. Now,

0:28:13.880 --> 0:28:16.240
<v Speaker 2>you were on I don't know three five months ago

0:28:16.440 --> 0:28:20.199
<v Speaker 2>talking about how you've studied near death experiences since the seventies,

0:28:20.280 --> 0:28:23.320
<v Speaker 2>really about five decades, and as you well know, the

0:28:23.320 --> 0:28:25.720
<v Speaker 2>moment I talk about this, one of the biggest objections

0:28:25.760 --> 0:28:28.560
<v Speaker 2>that comes up is people talk about, well, it points

0:28:28.640 --> 0:28:34.639
<v Speaker 2>towards reincarnation. In fact, some studies suggests that NDEs tend

0:28:34.760 --> 0:28:39.640
<v Speaker 2>to increase belief in reincarnation. What's your response to that concern.

0:28:41.080 --> 0:28:44.560
<v Speaker 1>I think that that's true, and I think that it

0:28:44.680 --> 0:28:50.000
<v Speaker 1>involves some kind of overly easy reasoning. I don't think.

0:28:50.360 --> 0:28:53.160
<v Speaker 1>I don't I can't think of any Now I can

0:28:53.160 --> 0:28:55.960
<v Speaker 1>tell you we have a problem here with Peter, because

0:28:56.000 --> 0:28:58.520
<v Speaker 1>he can go to that house and point things out.

0:28:58.560 --> 0:29:00.840
<v Speaker 1>So we got something we got to deal with. I

0:29:00.880 --> 0:29:06.320
<v Speaker 1>don't think indies have anything like that. I can tell

0:29:06.360 --> 0:29:08.640
<v Speaker 1>you if you want me to say it. I don't

0:29:08.640 --> 0:29:10.200
<v Speaker 1>want to get you off the subject, but I can

0:29:10.280 --> 0:29:13.040
<v Speaker 1>tell you why. I don't don't trust that kind of

0:29:13.040 --> 0:29:17.600
<v Speaker 1>Indie data. So the kind of data, you'd have to say.

0:29:18.760 --> 0:29:22.280
<v Speaker 1>Here's the easy comment. Anybody who reads any of my

0:29:22.280 --> 0:29:24.920
<v Speaker 1>stuff on indies. The distinction I make, probably more than

0:29:24.960 --> 0:29:30.240
<v Speaker 1>any other one, is I only accept with very few exceptions.

0:29:30.240 --> 0:29:33.280
<v Speaker 1>There are a couple exceptions, but they don't come close

0:29:33.320 --> 0:29:38.280
<v Speaker 1>to reincarnation. But my argument is I only accept evidential

0:29:38.360 --> 0:29:43.479
<v Speaker 1>cases that are this worldly evidence that is produced so

0:29:43.520 --> 0:29:47.760
<v Speaker 1>the person's hopefully there's dozens of cases. Now I measurably

0:29:48.120 --> 0:29:49.720
<v Speaker 1>got to put that in there, as far as we know,

0:29:50.240 --> 0:29:54.080
<v Speaker 1>a measurably flat heart, flat brain state, and they report

0:29:54.200 --> 0:29:57.400
<v Speaker 1>something in the physical world out there, so to speak,

0:29:57.720 --> 0:30:00.840
<v Speaker 1>and we've got data for it. The easiest way to

0:30:00.840 --> 0:30:04.480
<v Speaker 1>say it, let's say you're lecturing, I'll make it you

0:30:04.600 --> 0:30:08.200
<v Speaker 1>sea instead of me, and you pass out on the floor,

0:30:08.720 --> 0:30:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and the emergency people come in and they know what

0:30:11.960 --> 0:30:14.200
<v Speaker 1>time you went down because somebody looked at their watch.

0:30:14.200 --> 0:30:16.160
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of students in the class. He went

0:30:16.200 --> 0:30:19.000
<v Speaker 1>down to about twelve oh three, okay, and they get

0:30:19.080 --> 0:30:23.200
<v Speaker 1>you situated at four oh five. But let's say there's

0:30:23.240 --> 0:30:27.640
<v Speaker 1>a car accident five miles away, ten miles away, and

0:30:27.680 --> 0:30:29.560
<v Speaker 1>you have a reason to be interested in that because

0:30:29.560 --> 0:30:31.640
<v Speaker 1>maybe your family member was in a car accident, so

0:30:31.680 --> 0:30:35.840
<v Speaker 1>you're drawn to that, and the the accident happened at

0:30:35.840 --> 0:30:40.600
<v Speaker 1>two oh three, and it got reconciled at three to three,

0:30:41.080 --> 0:30:43.080
<v Speaker 1>so all the data were in the space where you

0:30:43.160 --> 0:30:47.560
<v Speaker 1>had no brain or heart research. Now, to me, it's

0:30:47.640 --> 0:30:51.400
<v Speaker 1>this worldly stuff of that nature. But I don't I

0:30:51.440 --> 0:30:54.360
<v Speaker 1>don't trust, I don't cite. This goes back to the

0:30:54.440 --> 0:30:58.120
<v Speaker 1>beginning of my studies. I don't think there's much evidence

0:30:58.160 --> 0:31:00.960
<v Speaker 1>for these kind of things. Well, first I was here

0:31:01.080 --> 0:31:03.320
<v Speaker 1>and I saw the trees in the mountains. But then

0:31:03.360 --> 0:31:05.080
<v Speaker 1>I zipped up to heaven. And by the way, not

0:31:05.160 --> 0:31:07.640
<v Speaker 1>that many people go down tunnels, but a fair number,

0:31:08.600 --> 0:31:11.040
<v Speaker 1>not even fifty percent, but they go up there and

0:31:11.080 --> 0:31:14.160
<v Speaker 1>they go I met Jesus and he hugged me, and

0:31:14.200 --> 0:31:17.320
<v Speaker 1>he said, you're going to come back here someday, but

0:31:17.480 --> 0:31:20.360
<v Speaker 1>not now. And then you got the guy who says,

0:31:21.200 --> 0:31:24.240
<v Speaker 1>what saw the forest and the trees and went up

0:31:24.280 --> 0:31:27.719
<v Speaker 1>to heaven and I saw Jesus, what are you? Well,

0:31:27.760 --> 0:31:30.640
<v Speaker 1>I'm an agnostic or I'm a Hindu or whatever. And

0:31:30.760 --> 0:31:33.120
<v Speaker 1>Jesus hugged me and said, I'm going to be here

0:31:33.440 --> 0:31:35.840
<v Speaker 1>in a little while or some years for now, but

0:31:35.920 --> 0:31:40.200
<v Speaker 1>not now. Whoa does that mean in the east teach

0:31:41.040 --> 0:31:46.120
<v Speaker 1>other religions or pluralism. Now the problem is I can

0:31:46.200 --> 0:31:48.640
<v Speaker 1>see that you know this event that happened in the

0:31:48.640 --> 0:31:51.640
<v Speaker 1>woods around the mountain, or the car accident, But how

0:31:51.640 --> 0:31:54.800
<v Speaker 1>do you know you saw Jesus? Well, I don't know.

0:31:55.880 --> 0:31:59.360
<v Speaker 1>Did he say it was Jesus? No, it was just

0:31:59.400 --> 0:32:01.760
<v Speaker 1>to be that was all a light being. That was

0:32:01.800 --> 0:32:04.440
<v Speaker 1>just the holiest thing I ever saw and infused me

0:32:04.520 --> 0:32:07.440
<v Speaker 1>and it was really impressive. He never told you that. No,

0:32:07.800 --> 0:32:09.720
<v Speaker 1>what if he did tell you his name of Jesus,

0:32:09.720 --> 0:32:13.440
<v Speaker 1>that make it true? What's your evidence for that? None?

0:32:14.200 --> 0:32:17.080
<v Speaker 1>How do you know you were even in heaven? Well

0:32:17.200 --> 0:32:19.000
<v Speaker 1>that's what it seemed like to me. Now see the

0:32:19.040 --> 0:32:21.520
<v Speaker 1>evidence is starting to get a little weaker. And I

0:32:21.600 --> 0:32:25.720
<v Speaker 1>don't make world view decisions based on quote unquote heavenly

0:32:25.920 --> 0:32:29.880
<v Speaker 1>data that people see. And they're the only witness, and

0:32:29.920 --> 0:32:32.200
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna come back and be the only interpreter. So

0:32:32.240 --> 0:32:34.680
<v Speaker 1>they're the only witness. They're the only interpreter. Everybody goes,

0:32:34.960 --> 0:32:37.280
<v Speaker 1>that's really cool. And if you really saw the car

0:32:37.320 --> 0:32:40.840
<v Speaker 1>accident five miles away, you must have met Jesus too.

0:32:41.600 --> 0:32:44.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that follows it all. So I don't think,

0:32:45.960 --> 0:32:50.280
<v Speaker 1>I don't think indes, I don't think the worldview specific

0:32:51.200 --> 0:32:53.400
<v Speaker 1>I think a Hindu could use it as evidence for

0:32:53.440 --> 0:32:56.000
<v Speaker 1>the afterlife, and a Christian could use it as the

0:32:56.000 --> 0:32:58.760
<v Speaker 1>evidence like intelligent design or fine tuning.

0:33:00.080 --> 0:33:04.320
<v Speaker 2>That a kind of natural revelation. And so, by the way,

0:33:04.400 --> 0:33:06.160
<v Speaker 2>just a side note, I've done I don't know, maybe

0:33:06.200 --> 0:33:09.280
<v Speaker 2>ten or twelve shows on this, and different NDE researchers

0:33:09.320 --> 0:33:13.600
<v Speaker 2>will give varying degrees of confidence in testimony that people

0:33:13.720 --> 0:33:19.120
<v Speaker 2>have during an NDE. But your position is you only

0:33:19.200 --> 0:33:23.200
<v Speaker 2>consider evidential when somebody claims to have some experience, then

0:33:23.360 --> 0:33:27.520
<v Speaker 2>we can come back and actually confirm it. That's where

0:33:27.560 --> 0:33:31.640
<v Speaker 2>it's evidentially significant, and so points towards things like life

0:33:31.680 --> 0:33:35.120
<v Speaker 2>after death, the existence of the soul, but not the

0:33:35.240 --> 0:33:40.040
<v Speaker 2>particulars of Christian theology or any other view of theology.

0:33:40.640 --> 0:33:44.200
<v Speaker 2>That's where you would land. Fair enough, go ahead. Did

0:33:44.240 --> 0:33:45.200
<v Speaker 2>you want to add something.

0:33:45.000 --> 0:33:47.400
<v Speaker 1>To that, well, I would add a second argument too.

0:33:47.600 --> 0:33:50.680
<v Speaker 1>A good friend of both of our, Steve Miller, on

0:33:50.720 --> 0:33:53.400
<v Speaker 1>your show. He probably I haven't seen your whole broadcast,

0:33:53.480 --> 0:33:56.680
<v Speaker 1>I've seen part of it, But did he describe his

0:33:56.800 --> 0:34:00.560
<v Speaker 1>little test he did where he studied one hundred indiease

0:34:00.720 --> 0:34:04.640
<v Speaker 1>and to end ind and he and this is from

0:34:05.480 --> 0:34:10.640
<v Speaker 1>a worldwide in the East site. And so you got Hindus,

0:34:10.680 --> 0:34:13.839
<v Speaker 1>you got Buddhists, you got Muslims, you got Christians. And

0:34:14.280 --> 0:34:16.279
<v Speaker 1>I'd have to go back and check his data. In fact,

0:34:16.360 --> 0:34:17.919
<v Speaker 1>I think I did. I think this is the book

0:34:17.960 --> 0:34:20.160
<v Speaker 1>I did the forward for I should be a little

0:34:20.440 --> 0:34:24.480
<v Speaker 1>clearer on this, but I think what happened was that

0:34:24.760 --> 0:34:29.239
<v Speaker 1>the Buddhists never say they saw Buddha, the Hindus never

0:34:29.320 --> 0:34:34.160
<v Speaker 1>say they saw Krishna. Muslims never mentioned the my named Muhammad.

0:34:34.200 --> 0:34:36.200
<v Speaker 1>And they're going to say, well, that's because muhammadah is

0:34:36.239 --> 0:34:40.439
<v Speaker 1>not a god anyway. So okay, I understand. But he's

0:34:40.520 --> 0:34:42.759
<v Speaker 1>and he's got twenty cases out of one hundred one

0:34:42.880 --> 0:34:46.759
<v Speaker 1>fifth where they said they saw Jesus. A number of

0:34:46.760 --> 0:34:51.640
<v Speaker 1>those people are not or not Christians. So non Christians say,

0:34:51.960 --> 0:34:55.399
<v Speaker 1>Jesus talk to me, and the ones who are other

0:34:55.480 --> 0:34:57.960
<v Speaker 1>religions don't even say their founder talk to them. Is

0:34:58.000 --> 0:35:01.239
<v Speaker 1>a general rule. So he uses that. I don't think

0:35:01.239 --> 0:35:05.719
<v Speaker 1>Steve says that proves that all the other religions are on. No,

0:35:06.200 --> 0:35:09.080
<v Speaker 1>Steve doesn't go there, but he says it shoots the

0:35:09.120 --> 0:35:14.960
<v Speaker 1>definition that nds argue for other religions, or that it

0:35:15.040 --> 0:35:17.520
<v Speaker 1>leads people to the east. I think it leads people

0:35:17.560 --> 0:35:21.319
<v Speaker 1>to the east who are not not paying attention to

0:35:21.360 --> 0:35:24.960
<v Speaker 1>the evidence. Real strictly, that's fair too.

0:35:25.280 --> 0:35:27.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, when I interviewed him, I don't remember the exact numbers,

0:35:27.760 --> 0:35:33.080
<v Speaker 2>but that sounds accurate that Jesus overwhelmingly appears across worldview,

0:35:33.160 --> 0:35:37.960
<v Speaker 2>across culture in the preliminary study that he did very carefully,

0:35:38.200 --> 0:35:42.439
<v Speaker 2>which suggests that's representative of the vast majority of near

0:35:42.480 --> 0:35:47.399
<v Speaker 2>death experiences, which would challenge if we allow people's testimonies

0:35:47.440 --> 0:35:49.920
<v Speaker 2>into the record of what they experience an ND, it

0:35:49.920 --> 0:35:55.000
<v Speaker 2>would nonetheless challenge the reincarnation notion. All right, fair enough, now,

0:35:55.120 --> 0:35:58.040
<v Speaker 2>you cided earlier, and I cut you off because I

0:35:58.080 --> 0:35:59.719
<v Speaker 2>was holding until we got there about how you have

0:35:59.800 --> 0:36:04.600
<v Speaker 2>some additional challenges just to reincarnation in itself. And here's

0:36:04.680 --> 0:36:06.359
<v Speaker 2>kind of a way you asked the question, I'll put

0:36:06.360 --> 0:36:08.000
<v Speaker 2>out there and then you can run the direction you

0:36:08.000 --> 0:36:10.319
<v Speaker 2>want to. In your chapter, you say, how do we

0:36:10.360 --> 0:36:15.920
<v Speaker 2>bridge the gap between an individual's detailed knowledge pertaining to

0:36:15.960 --> 0:36:18.719
<v Speaker 2>a person who lived in the past and the assumption

0:36:18.920 --> 0:36:24.040
<v Speaker 2>that the two people are one and the same. Really

0:36:24.200 --> 0:36:27.040
<v Speaker 2>interesting point. Maybe expand on that point or just the

0:36:27.200 --> 0:36:30.879
<v Speaker 2>general other critiques you have with the evidence for reincarnation.

0:36:31.760 --> 0:36:34.120
<v Speaker 1>Now I lost you on the first one, Sean. You said,

0:36:35.719 --> 0:36:40.880
<v Speaker 1>I get the people who who remember they claimed that

0:36:41.280 --> 0:36:42.880
<v Speaker 1>when my name was Peter and I grew up in

0:36:42.920 --> 0:36:45.279
<v Speaker 1>this house in my bedroom was a third Okay, I

0:36:45.320 --> 0:36:48.400
<v Speaker 1>get that, But what was the other side, what was

0:36:48.440 --> 0:36:49.000
<v Speaker 1>the other view?

0:36:50.360 --> 0:36:52.480
<v Speaker 2>Well, the quote says, how do we bridge the gap

0:36:52.560 --> 0:36:57.240
<v Speaker 2>between an individual's detailed knowledge pertraying pertaining to a person

0:36:57.280 --> 0:37:00.279
<v Speaker 2>that lived in the past and the assumption that the

0:37:00.320 --> 0:37:02.400
<v Speaker 2>two people are one and the same?

0:37:03.440 --> 0:37:05.799
<v Speaker 1>Okay, I think that was the phrase. How does in

0:37:05.840 --> 0:37:10.080
<v Speaker 1>the past come into this? That phrase in the past,

0:37:10.320 --> 0:37:11.120
<v Speaker 1>how are you using that?

0:37:11.960 --> 0:37:15.680
<v Speaker 2>Umm, I'm quoting you on this one. So rather than

0:37:15.680 --> 0:37:19.640
<v Speaker 2>getting lost in the quote itself, maybe just raise the

0:37:19.719 --> 0:37:25.280
<v Speaker 2>critique that you have of us relying upon reincarnation in general.

0:37:25.840 --> 0:37:29.160
<v Speaker 1>Okay, So this little boy has what we would call

0:37:29.239 --> 0:37:32.200
<v Speaker 1>evidence for something by claiming to be Peter. Go into

0:37:32.239 --> 0:37:35.600
<v Speaker 1>the house, third bedroom on the right, Nosa's parents' name.

0:37:35.600 --> 0:37:37.200
<v Speaker 1>It can even take you to this, let's make it

0:37:37.239 --> 0:37:40.720
<v Speaker 1>more complicated, even take you to the cemetery where Little

0:37:40.760 --> 0:37:45.279
<v Speaker 1>Peter was buried. Okay, there's some evidence, and compare that

0:37:45.600 --> 0:37:49.560
<v Speaker 1>to what an Indie yar who reports a car accident

0:37:49.920 --> 0:37:52.040
<v Speaker 1>ten ten miles away or were not even talking about

0:37:52.080 --> 0:37:52.799
<v Speaker 1>Indie years here.

0:37:53.560 --> 0:37:54.920
<v Speaker 2>Uh, you can bring it in if you want to.

0:37:54.960 --> 0:37:57.719
<v Speaker 2>We're talking about your other problems and challenges with the

0:37:57.760 --> 0:37:58.840
<v Speaker 2>evidence for re incarnation.

0:37:59.239 --> 0:38:05.080
<v Speaker 1>Okay, yeah, yeah, okay. On the car accident, the best

0:38:05.160 --> 0:38:07.680
<v Speaker 1>kind of case would be if you didn't have any

0:38:07.800 --> 0:38:11.680
<v Speaker 1>brain or heart measurable brain or heart waves during that point,

0:38:12.080 --> 0:38:16.719
<v Speaker 1>and there's a police report on the accident, and nobody

0:38:16.760 --> 0:38:19.319
<v Speaker 1>in your vicinity could have been ten miles away at

0:38:19.400 --> 0:38:24.200
<v Speaker 1>that same time watching the accident. And of course the

0:38:24.280 --> 0:38:27.279
<v Speaker 1>closer you report it. If you report this within an

0:38:27.320 --> 0:38:30.360
<v Speaker 1>hour of waking up or ten minutes, there are some

0:38:30.760 --> 0:38:34.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of close cases like that. You're not going

0:38:34.640 --> 0:38:37.719
<v Speaker 1>to have been scanning the newspapers and reading about car accidents.

0:38:38.120 --> 0:38:41.880
<v Speaker 1>But if the thing happens in between that time. The

0:38:41.960 --> 0:38:47.400
<v Speaker 1>problem I have with the little boy is multifaceted. I

0:38:47.440 --> 0:38:51.280
<v Speaker 1>think the best critique is this, I will take either

0:38:51.440 --> 0:38:58.280
<v Speaker 1>discarnate possession or demon possession. And even Ian Stevenson himself

0:38:59.440 --> 0:39:04.120
<v Speaker 1>says these are almost toss ups. I don't like. I'm

0:39:04.160 --> 0:39:07.200
<v Speaker 1>talking for Stevenson. Now, I don't like demon possession, but

0:39:07.320 --> 0:39:10.160
<v Speaker 1>discarnate is a toughie, and I think it's a good

0:39:10.280 --> 0:39:17.279
<v Speaker 1>rival position. So, by the way, another reincarnation is Diortega

0:39:17.760 --> 0:39:21.800
<v Speaker 1>says demon possession is the best hypothesis and he believes

0:39:21.800 --> 0:39:25.160
<v Speaker 1>in reincarnation. So and that's on the same page there

0:39:25.160 --> 0:39:27.040
<v Speaker 1>in the book. You can look it up. And still

0:39:27.080 --> 0:39:32.440
<v Speaker 1>another one Maharaj, Now this would be what you're asking for,

0:39:32.600 --> 0:39:36.440
<v Speaker 1>because a lesser comeback. He's he's Indian and he used

0:39:36.480 --> 0:39:41.000
<v Speaker 1>to be an Indian guru and he was converted. In fact,

0:39:41.400 --> 0:39:43.160
<v Speaker 1>his book came under a couple of titles, but the

0:39:43.200 --> 0:39:45.960
<v Speaker 1>first one was an intriguing title. It's called The Death

0:39:45.960 --> 0:39:49.200
<v Speaker 1>of a Guru. And that's when he became a Christian.

0:39:49.960 --> 0:39:52.520
<v Speaker 1>And he says, I'll tell you what. I'll read his statement.

0:39:53.480 --> 0:39:56.640
<v Speaker 1>Just books. My book's opened, Dean Stevenson, and it's right there.

0:39:57.280 --> 0:40:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Maharaj says this. He says he describes his the experience

0:40:02.960 --> 0:40:09.160
<v Speaker 1>as this. This is when he was a budding young guru. Quote.

0:40:09.680 --> 0:40:13.960
<v Speaker 1>My world was filled with spirits and gods and occult powers,

0:40:14.440 --> 0:40:18.640
<v Speaker 1>and my obligation from childhood was to give each its

0:40:18.800 --> 0:40:23.440
<v Speaker 1>due end quote. Now that's a good argument to me

0:40:23.840 --> 0:40:27.480
<v Speaker 1>from a Hindu for demon possession, because they believe in

0:40:27.520 --> 0:40:30.040
<v Speaker 1>demon possession too. See, it's not just a Christian thing

0:40:30.120 --> 0:40:34.080
<v Speaker 1>or a Jewish thing, it's he believes that. And he

0:40:34.160 --> 0:40:38.640
<v Speaker 1>said we were into the cult, and you know his

0:40:38.760 --> 0:40:42.400
<v Speaker 1>other things. Here he says, my obligation for childhood was

0:40:42.480 --> 0:40:46.920
<v Speaker 1>for a cult and spirits and God, small g I'm

0:40:46.920 --> 0:40:49.120
<v Speaker 1>going to give my due to all these things. So

0:40:49.640 --> 0:40:53.880
<v Speaker 1>if you say, all right, these folks are largely Indians

0:40:54.160 --> 0:41:00.160
<v Speaker 1>or those cultures. Yeah, and you're raised and you were

0:41:00.320 --> 0:41:04.200
<v Speaker 1>immersed in the occult, or at least very much into it,

0:41:04.239 --> 0:41:06.960
<v Speaker 1>unfamiliar with the spirits and demons and so on, I

0:41:06.960 --> 0:41:11.640
<v Speaker 1>think that makes demon possession a much likelier thesis and

0:41:11.680 --> 0:41:16.560
<v Speaker 1>that culture. Because I don't object to discarnate possession. I

0:41:16.600 --> 0:41:19.040
<v Speaker 1>would say, just a little person gets I'll give you

0:41:19.080 --> 0:41:24.080
<v Speaker 1>some other ones. But here's here's the the combat I

0:41:24.080 --> 0:41:30.080
<v Speaker 1>would make, and that is if Stevenson of all guys

0:41:30.560 --> 0:41:32.839
<v Speaker 1>says these things are one two, I mean, I don't

0:41:32.840 --> 0:41:36.000
<v Speaker 1>even know who's one and who's two. Sometimes it's sometimes

0:41:36.040 --> 0:41:39.920
<v Speaker 1>it's uh. I think it's possession sometimes it might be discarnate,

0:41:40.160 --> 0:41:44.439
<v Speaker 1>I mean reincarnation or discarnate. I think we don't even

0:41:44.440 --> 0:41:47.799
<v Speaker 1>have to go any further. I think, if the if

0:41:47.840 --> 0:41:50.200
<v Speaker 1>these are the options two kinds of possession, if the

0:41:50.239 --> 0:41:52.799
<v Speaker 1>person in your audience says, now I don't do that

0:41:52.880 --> 0:41:56.000
<v Speaker 1>discarnate stuff, let me do demon. Okay, fine, you've got

0:41:56.000 --> 0:42:00.000
<v Speaker 1>demon versus reincarnation. I think we've got demon and discard,

0:42:00.040 --> 0:42:03.520
<v Speaker 1>aren't it versus reincredation? But now here's my question. All right,

0:42:03.560 --> 0:42:06.239
<v Speaker 1>you're Hindu, yep, and you believe these things yep. And

0:42:06.280 --> 0:42:09.319
<v Speaker 1>you think some kind of possession is a good thesis yep.

0:42:09.360 --> 0:42:11.799
<v Speaker 1>Your main man got your main guy does. And here's

0:42:11.800 --> 0:42:14.960
<v Speaker 1>another guy who thinks it's mostly demon possession is better yep.

0:42:16.440 --> 0:42:18.760
<v Speaker 1>Seems to me like this is a battle for world views.

0:42:18.840 --> 0:42:20.560
<v Speaker 1>And now you know where I'm going to go. What

0:42:20.760 --> 0:42:24.359
<v Speaker 1>is your data for Hindu hindu Is? And I'll match

0:42:24.400 --> 0:42:29.520
<v Speaker 1>you one for one. Good arguments for Christianity? Okay, I

0:42:29.600 --> 0:42:33.200
<v Speaker 1>think Christianity's got the best arguments by far. I think,

0:42:33.239 --> 0:42:36.000
<v Speaker 1>for example, just give you one example. This is why

0:42:36.040 --> 0:42:38.640
<v Speaker 1>critics think the Gospel of John is late at plus

0:42:38.719 --> 0:42:43.360
<v Speaker 1>sixty five, and they don't complain about Buddha at plus

0:42:43.400 --> 0:42:46.359
<v Speaker 1>six hundred. They're just not They're just not tough on

0:42:46.400 --> 0:42:49.920
<v Speaker 1>the world religions, but they're tough on Christianity. Why even

0:42:50.040 --> 0:42:53.880
<v Speaker 1>they recognize we have really good data. So if you

0:42:53.920 --> 0:42:56.920
<v Speaker 1>want to go just at one conclusion alone, one type

0:42:56.920 --> 0:43:01.080
<v Speaker 1>of possession compared to prepared to rec nation, I'm going

0:43:01.160 --> 0:43:04.200
<v Speaker 1>to say, if my worldviews got the best data and

0:43:04.239 --> 0:43:08.279
<v Speaker 1>you have very little data that we think would be

0:43:08.320 --> 0:43:12.239
<v Speaker 1>recognized empirically or otherwise, I think case dismissed. I think

0:43:12.280 --> 0:43:15.200
<v Speaker 1>possession wins. And if you've got two cases of reincarnation

0:43:16.160 --> 0:43:19.320
<v Speaker 1>of possession, I think we really win. Now, let me

0:43:19.360 --> 0:43:22.400
<v Speaker 1>give you some sub arguments that I think are really helpful. Here.

0:43:24.000 --> 0:43:28.439
<v Speaker 1>Ian Stevenson does this, and he goes, yeah, a couple

0:43:28.400 --> 0:43:34.799
<v Speaker 1>of places. He says, I think possession and I gonna

0:43:34.840 --> 0:43:39.040
<v Speaker 1>watch clipping my words around here. I think possession and

0:43:39.960 --> 0:43:44.239
<v Speaker 1>reincarnation are really really tight. And then you go. He goes,

0:43:44.280 --> 0:43:45.719
<v Speaker 1>but I'll give you. I'll talk to you about two

0:43:45.760 --> 0:43:48.520
<v Speaker 1>cases and I go, well, please do. And he gives

0:43:48.560 --> 0:43:55.400
<v Speaker 1>two cases where reincarnation does not work but possession does,

0:43:56.800 --> 0:44:00.680
<v Speaker 1>and in both cases via his definition that we that

0:44:00.760 --> 0:44:04.520
<v Speaker 1>we handled at the outset here. The problem is this

0:44:04.920 --> 0:44:13.040
<v Speaker 1>child wasn't infested by a renegade spirit in between concession,

0:44:13.840 --> 0:44:20.000
<v Speaker 1>conception and birth the person whose spirit Peter. If we

0:44:20.040 --> 0:44:23.280
<v Speaker 1>went back to the Indian case, the one saint Peter,

0:44:24.040 --> 0:44:28.040
<v Speaker 1>Peter died when the little boy was four and now

0:44:28.080 --> 0:44:31.399
<v Speaker 1>he's eight. Now Sam is eight. But see if Peter

0:44:31.560 --> 0:44:35.160
<v Speaker 1>died when he's four, and Sam can say, well, I

0:44:35.200 --> 0:44:38.080
<v Speaker 1>know where he lived and I know where his bedroom

0:44:38.200 --> 0:44:42.359
<v Speaker 1>was in Da Da Da Da Da Da, it's not

0:44:42.600 --> 0:44:49.000
<v Speaker 1>it's not reincarnation because the kid was alive and died

0:44:50.239 --> 0:44:52.719
<v Speaker 1>before the second one started claiming this. It doesn't even

0:44:53.040 --> 0:44:56.239
<v Speaker 1>even Stevenson says, here, here's a couple of things that

0:44:56.360 --> 0:44:59.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, just look like that's one. Here's a couple others.

0:45:00.239 --> 0:45:05.760
<v Speaker 1>What about the marks on the shoulder or similar wounds.

0:45:05.760 --> 0:45:06.840
<v Speaker 1>That's kind of intriguing.

0:45:07.200 --> 0:45:09.560
<v Speaker 2>Okay, hold that thought for a second. I'm gonna come

0:45:09.600 --> 0:45:13.000
<v Speaker 2>back to like the birthmarks and the xeno glossy. Let

0:45:13.000 --> 0:45:15.680
<v Speaker 2>me jump in and clarify for people, this is really important.

0:45:15.719 --> 0:45:20.080
<v Speaker 2>So certain evidence is put forward for reincarnation, and what

0:45:20.120 --> 0:45:24.680
<v Speaker 2>you're saying is minimally that same evidence can be explained

0:45:24.760 --> 0:45:29.919
<v Speaker 2>within a Christian worldview. We're not inventing an explanation either

0:45:30.080 --> 0:45:36.000
<v Speaker 2>demon possession, oppression, deincarnation. We have the resources to account

0:45:36.160 --> 0:45:39.400
<v Speaker 2>for that. But the flip side is we have additional

0:45:39.480 --> 0:45:44.200
<v Speaker 2>evidence for resurrection and for christian as a whole that

0:45:44.560 --> 0:45:49.040
<v Speaker 2>cannot be explained in the way reincarnation can be explained

0:45:49.680 --> 0:45:52.600
<v Speaker 2>on the other side. So if we start with the

0:45:52.600 --> 0:45:56.680
<v Speaker 2>reincarnation data, that alone is not going to solve it.

0:45:56.680 --> 0:46:00.319
<v Speaker 2>It's going to be interpreted somewhat by somebody's worldview. So

0:46:00.440 --> 0:46:02.560
<v Speaker 2>now we have to have to step back and look

0:46:02.600 --> 0:46:07.600
<v Speaker 2>at the scientific, philosophical, historical evidence as a whole for

0:46:07.719 --> 0:46:11.560
<v Speaker 2>a particular worldview. And that's where you say, let's have

0:46:11.680 --> 0:46:15.400
<v Speaker 2>that conversation. We have the additional evidence for Christianity that

0:46:15.520 --> 0:46:19.080
<v Speaker 2>other faiths don't. Now is that a fair summary.

0:46:19.600 --> 0:46:22.360
<v Speaker 1>Let me give you a good sports illustration of it. Ken.

0:46:22.840 --> 0:46:25.279
<v Speaker 1>What if we say the best two quarterbacks in the

0:46:25.360 --> 0:46:29.560
<v Speaker 1>NFL are A and B. They're the best quarterbacks. The

0:46:29.560 --> 0:46:34.000
<v Speaker 1>only problem is A also has the best team around him.

0:46:34.040 --> 0:46:35.799
<v Speaker 1>This guy that got the best defense in the league,

0:46:35.800 --> 0:46:38.600
<v Speaker 1>that got a great offense. What does B have? Well,

0:46:38.800 --> 0:46:41.400
<v Speaker 1>I hate to say this, he's kind of tied for

0:46:41.440 --> 0:46:44.560
<v Speaker 1>the best quarterback, but they've got a lousy team. That's

0:46:44.640 --> 0:46:46.400
<v Speaker 1>kind of what we're saying. I'm not trying to call

0:46:46.520 --> 0:46:49.960
<v Speaker 1>any religion lousy, but I'm saying, whoa wa who. Even

0:46:50.000 --> 0:46:54.600
<v Speaker 1>the best quarterback needs good wide receivers, needs a great

0:46:54.640 --> 0:46:57.920
<v Speaker 1>blocking line. We both know examples where it's a great

0:46:58.000 --> 0:47:00.680
<v Speaker 1>quarterback but the line can't keep anybody out. Guys running

0:47:00.680 --> 0:47:04.240
<v Speaker 1>the whole time, or you want a good running running

0:47:04.239 --> 0:47:06.520
<v Speaker 1>back because a quarterback wants a break. But if the

0:47:06.560 --> 0:47:09.520
<v Speaker 1>other team doesn't have anybody in any of those possessions,

0:47:09.719 --> 0:47:11.880
<v Speaker 1>the quarterback gets beat up all the time, hurt all

0:47:11.880 --> 0:47:15.160
<v Speaker 1>the time. In other words, there's there's two teams of players.

0:47:15.760 --> 0:47:19.400
<v Speaker 1>A star pitcher needs people in other positions around the field.

0:47:20.000 --> 0:47:23.600
<v Speaker 1>So I think it's important if Christianity has star players

0:47:23.640 --> 0:47:27.000
<v Speaker 1>and others, and they say, well, you're just being prejudiced

0:47:27.040 --> 0:47:31.359
<v Speaker 1>for Christians because we don't always all right, just stop

0:47:31.440 --> 0:47:33.279
<v Speaker 1>right there. If you're gonna say I can't play that

0:47:33.360 --> 0:47:36.440
<v Speaker 1>game with you, that's an issue. If you've got a

0:47:36.440 --> 0:47:39.759
<v Speaker 1>good quarterback but no team, where's this conversation going. If

0:47:39.760 --> 0:47:41.719
<v Speaker 1>you've got a great pitcher throws the ball well over

0:47:41.719 --> 0:47:44.680
<v Speaker 1>one hundred miles an hour but has no great team

0:47:44.680 --> 0:47:48.799
<v Speaker 1>and your catcher's always passing the ball. What's going on?

0:47:49.239 --> 0:47:52.279
<v Speaker 1>So I think it's really important if it comes right

0:47:52.280 --> 0:47:54.959
<v Speaker 1>down to it. And remember the key here is Stevenson.

0:47:55.360 --> 0:47:58.879
<v Speaker 1>It's basically a draw or close to a draw, all right.

0:47:59.160 --> 0:48:02.600
<v Speaker 1>When it's a draw from the top reincarnation, guys, you've

0:48:02.640 --> 0:48:07.040
<v Speaker 1>gotta ask what is teams like to use those illstrations.

0:48:07.239 --> 0:48:09.720
<v Speaker 2>You can always use sports illstrations in the carry.

0:48:09.840 --> 0:48:10.279
<v Speaker 1>I love it.

0:48:10.320 --> 0:48:13.040
<v Speaker 2>That helps good stuff. I'm gonna come back to some

0:48:13.120 --> 0:48:17.560
<v Speaker 2>of your critique of a xenoglossy which you mentioned earlier

0:48:17.719 --> 0:48:20.640
<v Speaker 2>and the birthmarks, but first let's pause from it. I

0:48:20.719 --> 0:48:22.600
<v Speaker 2>know at this point some people are probably thinking about

0:48:22.600 --> 0:48:26.839
<v Speaker 2>the biblical evidence that's sometimes given. So for example, in

0:48:26.840 --> 0:48:32.120
<v Speaker 2>Matthew seventeen, verses ten through thirteen, the disciples ask Jesus

0:48:32.160 --> 0:48:36.680
<v Speaker 2>the prophecy that Elijah must come before the Messiah, and

0:48:36.760 --> 0:48:41.040
<v Speaker 2>Jesus identifies the Elijah as John the Baptist, and of

0:48:41.080 --> 0:48:44.560
<v Speaker 2>course the other early Gospels make that connection as well.

0:48:44.680 --> 0:48:48.080
<v Speaker 2>Herod also responds to the fame of Jesus by saying,

0:48:48.239 --> 0:48:51.560
<v Speaker 2>this is John the Baptist. He has been raised from

0:48:51.640 --> 0:48:54.799
<v Speaker 2>the dead. That is why these miraculous powers are at

0:48:54.840 --> 0:48:59.400
<v Speaker 2>work with him? Is this reincarnation in the biblical text?

0:49:00.280 --> 0:49:03.640
<v Speaker 1>And I would say absolutely not for this reason. Not

0:49:03.719 --> 0:49:07.520
<v Speaker 1>necessarily because I can say, oh, this Greek word means

0:49:07.960 --> 0:49:10.800
<v Speaker 1>not the same, but doing similar things. I'm not I

0:49:11.160 --> 0:49:13.440
<v Speaker 1>can't always solve the you know, first of all, I'm

0:49:13.480 --> 0:49:17.280
<v Speaker 1>not primarily a language scholar. I told my PhD. SuDS

0:49:17.320 --> 0:49:19.600
<v Speaker 1>I got a minor in Greek and that makes me dangerous.

0:49:19.640 --> 0:49:23.839
<v Speaker 1>That doesn't make me a Greek scholar. So I can't

0:49:23.840 --> 0:49:26.120
<v Speaker 1>point to a certain thing here, like a word. But

0:49:26.160 --> 0:49:29.480
<v Speaker 1>I can tell you this. I want to know whether

0:49:29.760 --> 0:49:35.800
<v Speaker 1>Jesus is saying they're similar or they're the same, which

0:49:35.840 --> 0:49:41.480
<v Speaker 1>one because in logic we know similarity does not prove sameness.

0:49:42.120 --> 0:49:44.680
<v Speaker 1>Two things can be similar, it doesn't. You can think

0:49:44.719 --> 0:49:49.640
<v Speaker 1>of a bunch of ludicrous examples. Two quarterbacks. I've just

0:49:49.680 --> 0:49:52.080
<v Speaker 1>heard of two quarterbacks this last week, comparing two of

0:49:52.080 --> 0:49:55.920
<v Speaker 1>the top teams going to nationals. Their statistics are almost identical,

0:49:56.080 --> 0:49:59.560
<v Speaker 1>but they're not the same guy. So what is Jesus saying.

0:50:00.120 --> 0:50:02.960
<v Speaker 1>He's saying this guy's the reincarnation of him. I don't

0:50:02.960 --> 0:50:05.279
<v Speaker 1>think that's justified anywhere in scripture. I don't think you

0:50:05.320 --> 0:50:08.200
<v Speaker 1>can prove the point. And that's just that's one case.

0:50:09.920 --> 0:50:11.920
<v Speaker 1>If that's your best case, I don't mean yours, but

0:50:12.400 --> 0:50:15.120
<v Speaker 1>that's the person's best case. I think there's got to

0:50:15.160 --> 0:50:18.320
<v Speaker 1>be a closer. The grit the bridge has got to

0:50:18.360 --> 0:50:23.600
<v Speaker 1>be a little more solid than yeah, this is Elijah.

0:50:24.440 --> 0:50:26.240
<v Speaker 1>What do you mean? We say that all the time,

0:50:26.480 --> 0:50:29.080
<v Speaker 1>but we don't mean you're literally the other pitcher on

0:50:29.160 --> 0:50:31.520
<v Speaker 1>the team that at your high school. This guy was

0:50:31.560 --> 0:50:33.680
<v Speaker 1>almost as famous. This guy was as famous then as

0:50:33.719 --> 0:50:38.560
<v Speaker 1>you are now. It's an analogy. It's not a one

0:50:38.600 --> 0:50:42.600
<v Speaker 1>to one. Let's put this way. It comes on several

0:50:42.840 --> 0:50:48.800
<v Speaker 1>prob levels. There's no to me, no background philosophical reasons

0:50:48.880 --> 0:50:52.560
<v Speaker 1>or theological reasons that would make the Bible a book

0:50:52.920 --> 0:50:56.360
<v Speaker 1>that teaches reincarnation. And if we have to go to

0:50:56.440 --> 0:50:59.919
<v Speaker 1>two or three cases that could be similarity and not proof.

0:51:00.239 --> 0:51:03.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm not walking on that bridge if that if that

0:51:03.040 --> 0:51:06.719
<v Speaker 1>thing is going over you know, a big valley, I'm

0:51:06.719 --> 0:51:09.680
<v Speaker 1>not working on the bridge because if you told me no, no, no,

0:51:09.719 --> 0:51:12.080
<v Speaker 1>don't go out there, I only meant they were similar

0:51:12.239 --> 0:51:15.719
<v Speaker 1>and yeah, now I'm dead. So it's just not a

0:51:15.760 --> 0:51:19.560
<v Speaker 1>good similarity arguments not the same as sameness. Arguments, and

0:51:19.600 --> 0:51:22.560
<v Speaker 1>you'd have to tell me that James, that Jesus meant

0:51:22.920 --> 0:51:24.120
<v Speaker 1>they're the same people.

0:51:25.280 --> 0:51:28.640
<v Speaker 2>This is you're teaching us, like a basic hermeneutical principle,

0:51:28.640 --> 0:51:31.839
<v Speaker 2>If you have a contested passage, you look at it

0:51:31.840 --> 0:51:35.640
<v Speaker 2>in light of the whole. And clearly, the Gospel of Matthew,

0:51:35.840 --> 0:51:40.720
<v Speaker 2>arguably the most Jewish of the Gospels, was pulling from

0:51:40.840 --> 0:51:45.040
<v Speaker 2>who God is and the Old Testament scriptures and death

0:51:45.160 --> 0:51:50.320
<v Speaker 2>and judgment. And so we're gonna interpret this contested passage

0:51:50.480 --> 0:51:56.360
<v Speaker 2>that through the lens of what else Matthew and Judaism taught. Now,

0:51:56.480 --> 0:52:00.120
<v Speaker 2>if we had independent, reasonably reincarnation was true, then this

0:52:00.160 --> 0:52:03.239
<v Speaker 2>passage we can maybe interpret in light of it, but

0:52:03.360 --> 0:52:06.040
<v Speaker 2>we don't. So that's a really good hermonucule approach. The

0:52:06.080 --> 0:52:07.480
<v Speaker 2>other thing I throw in there is when they ask

0:52:07.520 --> 0:52:10.920
<v Speaker 2>the disciples, you know the prophecy that Elijah must come

0:52:10.960 --> 0:52:14.640
<v Speaker 2>before the Messiah. Are they saying Elijah will come back

0:52:14.719 --> 0:52:20.520
<v Speaker 2>from the dead or an Elijah type figure will analogy?

0:52:21.080 --> 0:52:23.719
<v Speaker 2>And it's an analogy. Now, of course, Elijah shows up

0:52:23.760 --> 0:52:26.719
<v Speaker 2>with Moses in Mark nine and I think Luke nine

0:52:26.719 --> 0:52:30.600
<v Speaker 2>and the transfiguration, But that's a different point. That's being

0:52:30.719 --> 0:52:35.120
<v Speaker 2>asked here, it's an analogy, not saying he'll come. So

0:52:35.360 --> 0:52:38.759
<v Speaker 2>that's where reincarnation is reading so much into this passage

0:52:39.280 --> 0:52:41.840
<v Speaker 2>that's obviously not there. So let me ask you this, Gary,

0:52:42.040 --> 0:52:48.520
<v Speaker 2>Is there a way to make reincarnation compatible with Christianity

0:52:48.640 --> 0:52:51.840
<v Speaker 2>or are they completely incompatible belief systems?

0:52:52.200 --> 0:52:54.840
<v Speaker 1>Let me ask a question. We don't have much for

0:52:54.960 --> 0:52:57.880
<v Speaker 1>reincarnation in the Bible. We have a couple passages that

0:52:57.920 --> 0:53:01.560
<v Speaker 1>are odd passages. But you might have mentioned one. It's

0:53:01.600 --> 0:53:04.520
<v Speaker 1>not a strong contradiction, and you weren't using it that way.

0:53:04.560 --> 0:53:08.239
<v Speaker 1>But I'm saying it's a mild contradiction. And it's this

0:53:09.000 --> 0:53:12.799
<v Speaker 1>and Mark nine where Jesus with the sermon I mean

0:53:12.880 --> 0:53:19.440
<v Speaker 1>the transfiguration, and these two Old Testament saints appear before Jesus.

0:53:19.640 --> 0:53:25.120
<v Speaker 1>Jesus doesn't say, what's the problem here? This is Elijah, okay,

0:53:25.920 --> 0:53:30.800
<v Speaker 1>who is Jesus's cousin John the Baptist. They're distinct people.

0:53:31.200 --> 0:53:35.080
<v Speaker 1>Jesus treats them distinctly, and Jesus doesn't say, oh, this

0:53:35.160 --> 0:53:38.320
<v Speaker 1>is the guy that was dead where his physical figure

0:53:38.440 --> 0:53:41.040
<v Speaker 1>is my seemingly cousin, but he's not really my cousin.

0:53:41.440 --> 0:53:46.600
<v Speaker 1>I mean Elijah's already there, and Jesus doesn't say, See,

0:53:46.600 --> 0:53:48.560
<v Speaker 1>I told you he'd come before John the Baptist. See,

0:53:48.560 --> 0:53:51.600
<v Speaker 1>if we wanted to, we could say this, Wow, darn,

0:53:51.920 --> 0:53:54.960
<v Speaker 1>Elijah did come before Jesus. Have you ever read Mark nine?

0:53:55.440 --> 0:53:58.160
<v Speaker 1>He came on the mountain. He came before Jesus. Did

0:53:59.360 --> 0:54:03.279
<v Speaker 1>you know? Before death and resurrection? But you're right. The

0:54:03.320 --> 0:54:06.799
<v Speaker 1>main problem is there's not a body of data that

0:54:06.880 --> 0:54:11.120
<v Speaker 1>make reincarnation true. So to jump into a view that

0:54:11.280 --> 0:54:15.920
<v Speaker 1>is so incredible and deep with all kinds of things

0:54:16.320 --> 0:54:19.080
<v Speaker 1>where Peter can go to his home and go down

0:54:19.120 --> 0:54:21.879
<v Speaker 1>the hallway and turn to the right, I mean John

0:54:21.960 --> 0:54:24.880
<v Speaker 1>doesn't talk like that of anybody. Jesus doesn't talk like

0:54:24.920 --> 0:54:26.719
<v Speaker 1>that of anybody. You think we'd find a lot of

0:54:26.840 --> 0:54:33.840
<v Speaker 1>verses like that. So I'm gonna go with assimilation, not sameness.

0:54:34.760 --> 0:54:37.399
<v Speaker 1>To me, you said Hermaeneutics, and you're right. It's also

0:54:37.440 --> 0:54:42.560
<v Speaker 1>a logical principle. In this case. Sameness does not prove identity.

0:54:43.200 --> 0:54:47.279
<v Speaker 1>I'm sorry. Similarity does not prove identity. So is.

0:54:48.880 --> 0:54:53.960
<v Speaker 2>Reincarnation compatible with Christianity or is it incompatible as a

0:54:54.000 --> 0:54:55.120
<v Speaker 2>belief system?

0:54:55.800 --> 0:54:57.880
<v Speaker 1>I think it's incompatible, and I can give you a

0:54:57.920 --> 0:55:01.279
<v Speaker 1>lot of reasons for it. Early in the chapter and

0:55:01.360 --> 0:55:04.759
<v Speaker 1>throughout I do other things like this. These are two

0:55:04.800 --> 0:55:09.040
<v Speaker 1>completing world views. It's a largely it's an Eastern view

0:55:09.160 --> 0:55:13.640
<v Speaker 1>and a Western view. And what what's at stake? Okay,

0:55:14.000 --> 0:55:19.160
<v Speaker 1>the Eastern view is usually not always it's a monism, uh.

0:55:19.200 --> 0:55:22.719
<v Speaker 1>And it's an idealism. Now, a lot of some Christians,

0:55:22.719 --> 0:55:26.640
<v Speaker 1>some well known Christian theologians, are idealists. Jonathan Edwards is

0:55:26.640 --> 0:55:30.400
<v Speaker 1>often called an idealistic philosopher. But for the most part,

0:55:31.320 --> 0:55:36.120
<v Speaker 1>idealism is somebody who's totally or almost everybody there is

0:55:36.120 --> 0:55:40.000
<v Speaker 1>an idealist in Eastern you know, in some sense philosophical idealism,

0:55:40.480 --> 0:55:46.160
<v Speaker 1>and they're doing their monas. No, that's a Judeo Christian view.

0:55:46.800 --> 0:55:51.359
<v Speaker 1>They believe in pluralism, they believe in oh totally. So

0:55:52.320 --> 0:55:57.240
<v Speaker 1>it's a a culture behind them that is totally different.

0:55:57.680 --> 0:56:01.719
<v Speaker 1>Your question was, can reincarnation be interpreted with if I

0:56:01.800 --> 0:56:06.279
<v Speaker 1>understand it right, could it be interpreted within Christianity as

0:56:06.320 --> 0:56:09.680
<v Speaker 1>a part of And I'd say, yeah, their underlying philosophies

0:56:09.719 --> 0:56:13.920
<v Speaker 1>are totally different. What about polytheism versus monotheism. That's a

0:56:14.040 --> 0:56:20.400
<v Speaker 1>huge one. I just don't see how how reincarnation fits

0:56:20.440 --> 0:56:28.920
<v Speaker 1>into a Western Biblical either Judaism or Christianity monotheistic religion.

0:56:28.360 --> 0:56:32.680
<v Speaker 1>The two views I Hinduism and Christianity about as posed

0:56:32.680 --> 0:56:37.320
<v Speaker 1>as you could be as far as having totally different perspectives.

0:56:36.920 --> 0:56:39.439
<v Speaker 2>And that's helpful when we step back again on who

0:56:39.560 --> 0:56:43.359
<v Speaker 2>God is, what God is like, what's wrong with the

0:56:43.400 --> 0:56:46.960
<v Speaker 2>world and how we fix it, the nature of what

0:56:47.040 --> 0:56:51.360
<v Speaker 2>it means to be human, what the after life is like.

0:56:51.600 --> 0:56:55.320
<v Speaker 2>I mean, on the big boulders that define a faith,

0:56:55.800 --> 0:56:59.200
<v Speaker 2>they're distinctly different. So somebody would have to really force

0:56:59.280 --> 0:57:01.919
<v Speaker 2>a puzzle piece into a puzzle that doesn't fit.

0:57:02.239 --> 0:57:06.480
<v Speaker 1>That's yeah, that's your that's your counter argument to my

0:57:06.680 --> 0:57:10.080
<v Speaker 1>not counter But that's your I use baseball and football

0:57:10.080 --> 0:57:12.399
<v Speaker 1>there and use puzzle piece. I think they're both right

0:57:12.520 --> 0:57:18.160
<v Speaker 1>because neither one. The map with so many thousand pieces,

0:57:18.520 --> 0:57:21.880
<v Speaker 1>and the baseball game or the football game, they have

0:57:22.000 --> 0:57:24.600
<v Speaker 1>to fit together. You've got to be a team, and

0:57:24.640 --> 0:57:27.240
<v Speaker 1>in your case, you've got to be a puzzle. If

0:57:27.280 --> 0:57:30.439
<v Speaker 1>the piece doesn't fit the puzzle and the players don't

0:57:30.480 --> 0:57:33.200
<v Speaker 1>fit the team, well, I'm playing soccer, that's what I

0:57:33.240 --> 0:57:35.600
<v Speaker 1>call football. Yeah, it's not going to fit our picture.

0:57:37.080 --> 0:57:40.280
<v Speaker 1>If the if the big pictures aren't that the philosophical

0:57:40.400 --> 0:57:42.960
<v Speaker 1>overview is going to be a huge issue to me.

0:57:43.560 --> 0:57:45.919
<v Speaker 1>So I don't have any reason. I don't have any

0:57:45.920 --> 0:57:49.040
<v Speaker 1>reason to affirm reincarnation. I don't think it's taught in scripture.

0:57:49.360 --> 0:57:51.920
<v Speaker 1>I think there's good alternatives by Stevenson and others, And

0:57:52.160 --> 0:57:56.240
<v Speaker 1>like I said, the other guy says, the other reincarnation says,

0:57:56.800 --> 0:58:00.680
<v Speaker 1>demon possession is a better option better. So now you're

0:58:00.680 --> 0:58:02.640
<v Speaker 1>going to criticize me. Okay, I'm gonna go to my

0:58:02.720 --> 0:58:06.240
<v Speaker 1>worldview and don't forget I'm open to discarnate possession, which

0:58:06.680 --> 0:58:09.840
<v Speaker 1>Stevenson says is the better of the two views. And

0:58:09.880 --> 0:58:13.040
<v Speaker 1>you think that's a real rival to reincarnation. Okay, well

0:58:13.560 --> 0:58:16.760
<v Speaker 1>my thesis I've got, you know, I got two running

0:58:16.760 --> 0:58:18.880
<v Speaker 1>backs and you've got one. Or I've got two big

0:58:18.920 --> 0:58:21.320
<v Speaker 1>home run hitters and you've got one. I'm not saying

0:58:21.360 --> 0:58:23.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna win. I'm just saying odds are with me.

0:58:24.320 --> 0:58:26.960
<v Speaker 2>So two more pieces of evidence that are often given

0:58:27.040 --> 0:58:31.040
<v Speaker 2>for reincarnation. I'll get your take on this one is

0:58:31.360 --> 0:58:36.560
<v Speaker 2>xeno glossy, where people seemingly have the supernatural ability to

0:58:36.760 --> 0:58:40.880
<v Speaker 2>speak another language, and the way This is often interpreted

0:58:40.920 --> 0:58:44.240
<v Speaker 2>with the reincarnation. Is it's the language that their former

0:58:44.600 --> 0:58:49.000
<v Speaker 2>self or identity spoke and is being transformed into them

0:58:49.360 --> 0:58:52.440
<v Speaker 2>them evidence that it's the same soul now in a

0:58:52.480 --> 0:58:54.960
<v Speaker 2>new body. What would your response to that be.

0:58:56.760 --> 0:59:00.800
<v Speaker 1>Just a xeno glossy? Alum, Yeah, okay, well on either

0:59:01.080 --> 0:59:03.880
<v Speaker 1>see to me. Okay, I'm really prejudiced. You're getting me

0:59:03.880 --> 0:59:06.720
<v Speaker 1>going here because I'm going, hey, Sean, if I've got

0:59:06.760 --> 0:59:10.680
<v Speaker 1>discarnate and demon possession, I've got some other issues like

0:59:10.800 --> 0:59:13.320
<v Speaker 1>logic and these other things I mentioned. I'm really kind

0:59:13.320 --> 0:59:14.800
<v Speaker 1>of getting a type view here, and I see your

0:59:14.920 --> 0:59:16.640
<v Speaker 1>view as being kind of loose, you know, the Eastern

0:59:16.720 --> 0:59:18.880
<v Speaker 1>view is like this, and you're going, what about a

0:59:18.960 --> 0:59:22.760
<v Speaker 1>xeno glossy? I'm going, Sean, time out, think about it.

0:59:22.960 --> 0:59:27.520
<v Speaker 1>If this is discarnate possession, it's another person. If it's

0:59:27.840 --> 0:59:33.040
<v Speaker 1>demon possession, it's the demons. Could speak a hundred languages.

0:59:33.360 --> 0:59:39.240
<v Speaker 1>But on my view, I'm surprised someone's not speaking messages

0:59:39.320 --> 0:59:44.240
<v Speaker 1>out you know, other languages. Don't forget when you do

0:59:44.520 --> 0:59:48.000
<v Speaker 1>the when you do spiritual gifts, whatever you I mean.

0:59:48.040 --> 0:59:54.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm open to anything biblically spiritual gifts, but there are

0:59:54.280 --> 0:59:57.760
<v Speaker 1>cases in scripture. For an instance, the little girl who

0:59:57.800 --> 1:00:02.320
<v Speaker 1>followed Paul and and she was wanted to they cast

1:00:02.320 --> 1:00:04.680
<v Speaker 1>the demon out of her, but she was prophesying and

1:00:04.720 --> 1:00:08.960
<v Speaker 1>making all kinds of things when you can do supernatural things.

1:00:09.480 --> 1:00:12.360
<v Speaker 1>They didn't go, whoa, you're one of us, you're doing

1:00:12.360 --> 1:00:15.200
<v Speaker 1>the supernatural. They go, get out of here. That supernatural

1:00:15.240 --> 1:00:17.000
<v Speaker 1>is not from us, and they cast the demon out

1:00:17.080 --> 1:00:20.000
<v Speaker 1>of her. Now is it odd that our thesis demon

1:00:20.400 --> 1:00:24.000
<v Speaker 1>is one of two major counter theories and they didn't

1:00:24.040 --> 1:00:30.520
<v Speaker 1>accept her what she manifested? True? Yeah? Do you have evidence? Yeah?

1:00:30.760 --> 1:00:34.360
<v Speaker 1>Is it of us? No, be gone Satan? You know so.

1:00:35.560 --> 1:00:42.560
<v Speaker 1>I just think that's in both this carnate and possessive cases.

1:00:43.280 --> 1:00:45.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm surprised if there's not other languages.

1:00:46.600 --> 1:00:49.920
<v Speaker 2>Oh wow, that's interesting here you say there's not, And

1:00:49.960 --> 1:00:53.040
<v Speaker 2>of course I've done Separate shows a number with Richard

1:00:53.080 --> 1:00:59.040
<v Speaker 2>Gallagher and people on demonic possession and oppression, and a

1:00:59.440 --> 1:01:04.280
<v Speaker 2>common phenomena is speaking in other languages, which shows something

1:01:04.440 --> 1:01:08.840
<v Speaker 2>supernatural is going on. Yes, which if we're saying that

1:01:09.040 --> 1:01:12.840
<v Speaker 2>this person's not really reincarnated from their spirit in a

1:01:12.880 --> 1:01:17.600
<v Speaker 2>different body, but possession or oppression or deincarnation this is

1:01:17.720 --> 1:01:21.280
<v Speaker 2>exactly what we would expect. It fits with both of those,

1:01:22.520 --> 1:01:24.880
<v Speaker 2>so that that's helpful, That makes sense. What about the

1:01:24.920 --> 1:01:29.400
<v Speaker 2>birthmarks and deformities that somebody seems to have that they

1:01:29.440 --> 1:01:31.640
<v Speaker 2>had in their previous life as well, which seems to

1:01:31.680 --> 1:01:34.400
<v Speaker 2>show some kind of continuity between the two lives.

1:01:34.760 --> 1:01:37.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, let me let me give you an actual I

1:01:37.560 --> 1:01:40.120
<v Speaker 1>think objection that's good. But let me also give a

1:01:40.200 --> 1:01:43.440
<v Speaker 1>natural objection that I think is good. I'll give you

1:01:43.480 --> 1:01:51.800
<v Speaker 1>each example. All right, birthmarks, similar marks, deformities. I think

1:01:52.120 --> 1:01:56.840
<v Speaker 1>that here, here's a really good comeback. We hear that psychics.

1:01:57.720 --> 1:02:02.280
<v Speaker 1>Psychics frequently do really interesting things. And one of the

1:02:02.320 --> 1:02:06.439
<v Speaker 1>things that pop up once in a while are the

1:02:06.480 --> 1:02:10.560
<v Speaker 1>marks and the poems and where people produce blood and

1:02:10.600 --> 1:02:14.600
<v Speaker 1>they say, see, I've been blessed. God's whatever with me.

1:02:14.720 --> 1:02:17.480
<v Speaker 1>He's very happy with me. I'm showing the same wounds

1:02:17.480 --> 1:02:21.680
<v Speaker 1>as Jesus does. And my one time of year, whatever

1:02:21.720 --> 1:02:24.800
<v Speaker 1>the story is, one time a year at Easter, I start,

1:02:25.080 --> 1:02:27.640
<v Speaker 1>I start bleeding in the palms in my hand. First

1:02:27.680 --> 1:02:29.880
<v Speaker 1>of all, I got a little bit of a side one.

1:02:30.000 --> 1:02:33.880
<v Speaker 1>Everybody today medical and theological think that the nails would here,

1:02:34.040 --> 1:02:37.640
<v Speaker 1>so they're bleeding, they're bleeding in the wrong place. They're

1:02:37.640 --> 1:02:40.360
<v Speaker 1>not bleeding, They're not bleeding in the right place. But

1:02:41.200 --> 1:02:43.760
<v Speaker 1>give it to him. Be that as it may. Here's

1:02:43.800 --> 1:02:49.640
<v Speaker 1>the comeback. So are you arguing for reincarnation here? I'm

1:02:49.680 --> 1:02:55.760
<v Speaker 1>just saying people show similar marks. Oh ah, so you're Jesus. Right. No,

1:02:55.880 --> 1:02:58.080
<v Speaker 1>I didn't say that. But you've got the marks of

1:02:58.160 --> 1:03:01.760
<v Speaker 1>Jesus on you, the same ones Jesus had, right, Yeah,

1:03:01.800 --> 1:03:05.320
<v Speaker 1>are you Jesus? Now, I'm a follower of Jesus, but

1:03:05.360 --> 1:03:10.040
<v Speaker 1>you're not Jesus. No, And I thought this discussion was hilarious.

1:03:10.600 --> 1:03:13.680
<v Speaker 1>You're not Jesus, but you manifest his wounds. I guess

1:03:13.720 --> 1:03:17.320
<v Speaker 1>that means that not all wounds are evidential manifestations of

1:03:17.360 --> 1:03:21.200
<v Speaker 1>the person themselves. If you can have a mark, but

1:03:21.320 --> 1:03:23.520
<v Speaker 1>I can think of a couple of natural theses. If

1:03:23.640 --> 1:03:27.040
<v Speaker 1>parents are in on this, and I don't mean necessarily

1:03:27.280 --> 1:03:30.320
<v Speaker 1>nastily in on it, but the way Christians manipulate things

1:03:30.360 --> 1:03:34.120
<v Speaker 1>sometimes to make it look like their version of Christianity

1:03:34.160 --> 1:03:37.439
<v Speaker 1>is more true or more than yours. Or I've got

1:03:37.440 --> 1:03:39.520
<v Speaker 1>this gift or I've got you know, I'm not picking

1:03:39.520 --> 1:03:42.480
<v Speaker 1>on anybody. I believe sign gifts are here, etcetera. But

1:03:44.400 --> 1:03:47.880
<v Speaker 1>how could what if the parents, you know how in

1:03:47.920 --> 1:03:53.480
<v Speaker 1>that culture fathers choose brides for their daughters. Okay, what

1:03:53.520 --> 1:03:58.919
<v Speaker 1>if the parent works with the other parent. Sam's parent

1:03:59.040 --> 1:04:01.640
<v Speaker 1>works with Peter's all right, to bring him over to

1:04:01.680 --> 1:04:04.280
<v Speaker 1>Peter's house. And the kid we've told him it's the

1:04:04.320 --> 1:04:06.640
<v Speaker 1>bedroom is the one of the room on the right,

1:04:06.800 --> 1:04:09.440
<v Speaker 1>last room on the right. Okay, So I got this

1:04:09.560 --> 1:04:11.840
<v Speaker 1>kid down. He passes all the tests and everything else,

1:04:12.440 --> 1:04:15.600
<v Speaker 1>he goes, he goes in there, but his parents, oh, well,

1:04:15.600 --> 1:04:17.880
<v Speaker 1>you got to you got to mark here. What if

1:04:17.960 --> 1:04:19.959
<v Speaker 1>one of the marks is real but the other mark

1:04:20.040 --> 1:04:22.560
<v Speaker 1>is kind of imagine but the parents make it look

1:04:23.000 --> 1:04:26.640
<v Speaker 1>up that it's it's contrived. What if the wounds are contrived?

1:04:27.320 --> 1:04:30.040
<v Speaker 1>But but I like I like the one about the

1:04:30.040 --> 1:04:33.080
<v Speaker 1>the signs of the cross. The people bleeding have signs

1:04:33.080 --> 1:04:36.480
<v Speaker 1>of the Cross. Nobody says they're Jesus, they're you know,

1:04:36.640 --> 1:04:41.920
<v Speaker 1>so signs don't Again, here's the phrase, uh, similarities do

1:04:42.040 --> 1:04:47.280
<v Speaker 1>not produce sameness. And even if it were true, even

1:04:47.280 --> 1:04:49.640
<v Speaker 1>if it were true, I think the marks on the

1:04:49.680 --> 1:04:52.800
<v Speaker 1>body are one of the least of the evidences. Notice

1:04:52.840 --> 1:04:55.520
<v Speaker 1>I have it down at the end I don't because

1:04:55.560 --> 1:04:58.200
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to answer it. It's because I almost

1:04:58.200 --> 1:05:00.000
<v Speaker 1>think it's not a really good objection. But I'm gonna

1:05:00.080 --> 1:05:02.400
<v Speaker 1>put it any there anyway because they say it's good.

1:05:02.880 --> 1:05:05.240
<v Speaker 1>I just don't find it as an evidence or anything.

1:05:05.480 --> 1:05:07.400
<v Speaker 2>I think that have to be pretty clear, like the

1:05:07.480 --> 1:05:11.640
<v Speaker 2>actual marks on Jesus that he shows Thomas and tells

1:05:11.720 --> 1:05:16.000
<v Speaker 2>him distinctly, rather than vague similarities that could have a

1:05:16.120 --> 1:05:20.479
<v Speaker 2>natural explanation or in some cases even a supernatural one

1:05:20.680 --> 1:05:24.760
<v Speaker 2>apart from reincarnation isn't really really compelling.

1:05:25.440 --> 1:05:28.480
<v Speaker 1>So let me ask you something. We teach both sides

1:05:28.480 --> 1:05:31.760
<v Speaker 1>of the country at two well known Christian schools in

1:05:32.000 --> 1:05:36.120
<v Speaker 1>our traditions, and we both are not one denomination where

1:05:36.160 --> 1:05:39.920
<v Speaker 1>you know everybody and from all over the world. What

1:05:40.080 --> 1:05:46.200
<v Speaker 1>would how good would that similarity have to be? How?

1:05:46.760 --> 1:05:50.160
<v Speaker 1>In some cases, yeah, the closest might be. You know,

1:05:50.440 --> 1:05:52.240
<v Speaker 1>maybe I'm not telling you that I have a mark

1:05:52.240 --> 1:05:57.000
<v Speaker 1>on my shoulder like you did, but I also have

1:05:57.080 --> 1:05:58.960
<v Speaker 1>one of those on my left knee and one of

1:05:58.960 --> 1:06:01.360
<v Speaker 1>them on the top of my I just have these

1:06:01.440 --> 1:06:03.640
<v Speaker 1>kind of mark What I mean is to me, they're

1:06:03.720 --> 1:06:06.560
<v Speaker 1>just natural theses all over the place. Now, if you

1:06:06.600 --> 1:06:09.760
<v Speaker 1>have a really good one, like he's I don't know

1:06:09.800 --> 1:06:11.880
<v Speaker 1>what a really good one would be. But here's my

1:06:11.960 --> 1:06:15.520
<v Speaker 1>other question from the greater picture that we've been developing. Here,

1:06:16.520 --> 1:06:21.760
<v Speaker 1>can demons make marks on bodies and duplicate? And could

1:06:21.760 --> 1:06:24.640
<v Speaker 1>a discardate personality? I don't know. I'm not as sure

1:06:24.640 --> 1:06:27.840
<v Speaker 1>about the discarnate personality, but I'm sure demons can do that.

1:06:28.280 --> 1:06:30.840
<v Speaker 1>Demons do miracles, right, and Jesus said they would deceive

1:06:30.880 --> 1:06:33.760
<v Speaker 1>the very elect if they could, they would try to

1:06:33.800 --> 1:06:35.840
<v Speaker 1>deceive the elect. Do you think they could try to

1:06:35.880 --> 1:06:40.240
<v Speaker 1>put a mark on your shoulder? I just I just

1:06:40.320 --> 1:06:43.720
<v Speaker 1>think if you get demon in here and Stevenson goes

1:06:43.760 --> 1:06:48.200
<v Speaker 1>fifty to fifty and our Taga goes no, it's that's

1:06:48.280 --> 1:06:50.920
<v Speaker 1>just better. You've let the you let the cat out

1:06:50.920 --> 1:06:53.160
<v Speaker 1>of the bag on this one, because there's no stop

1:06:53.160 --> 1:06:58.840
<v Speaker 1>in it. You've got a supernatural person inside you, uh,

1:06:59.480 --> 1:07:03.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, demon and again the god of this world.

1:07:04.880 --> 1:07:07.240
<v Speaker 1>You know, Jesus said watch out for the miracles, book

1:07:07.240 --> 1:07:11.360
<v Speaker 1>a revelation, watch out for the miracles. I just think

1:07:11.440 --> 1:07:13.480
<v Speaker 1>that I think it could be about anything. That's why

1:07:13.520 --> 1:07:15.320
<v Speaker 1>I don't think the marks are very strong. I think

1:07:15.320 --> 1:07:18.840
<v Speaker 1>on the Christian world view, the marks are could be

1:07:18.920 --> 1:07:23.240
<v Speaker 1>duplicated a lot easier if it's a demon.

1:07:23.720 --> 1:07:27.040
<v Speaker 2>You know, I don't know the line about how specific

1:07:27.120 --> 1:07:28.520
<v Speaker 2>a mark would have to be. This is kind of

1:07:28.560 --> 1:07:30.920
<v Speaker 2>the question of, like the design filter, how do we

1:07:31.000 --> 1:07:34.400
<v Speaker 2>recognize when design is there? And of course if it's

1:07:34.440 --> 1:07:38.480
<v Speaker 2>like a tattoo that matches with a level of specificity,

1:07:39.120 --> 1:07:42.840
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't necessarily prove supernatural if somebody was aware of that

1:07:42.960 --> 1:07:46.240
<v Speaker 2>mark on somebody else before, like, it doesn't really rule

1:07:46.320 --> 1:07:51.120
<v Speaker 2>out the supernatural, maybe suggests it, but even then demons

1:07:51.160 --> 1:07:53.840
<v Speaker 2>could do that. And by the way, if somebody's watched

1:07:53.840 --> 1:07:56.480
<v Speaker 2>this they don't believe in demons or reincarnation, they're going

1:07:56.560 --> 1:07:58.360
<v Speaker 2>to think that two of us are crazy, And that's

1:07:58.360 --> 1:08:00.960
<v Speaker 2>completely fine. All we're trying to show is the evidence

1:08:00.960 --> 1:08:06.000
<v Speaker 2>for reincarnation has another explanation that can account for the data,

1:08:06.640 --> 1:08:11.400
<v Speaker 2>namely demon possession or oppression. So this uniquely doesn't count

1:08:11.480 --> 1:08:14.760
<v Speaker 2>as evidence for the supernatural. And for you and I

1:08:14.800 --> 1:08:17.600
<v Speaker 2>who believe in demons and believe there are liars, like

1:08:17.720 --> 1:08:21.880
<v Speaker 2>Jesus says in the Gospel of John chapter eight, specifically,

1:08:22.360 --> 1:08:26.640
<v Speaker 2>Satan is a liar. Well, if resurrection is as central

1:08:26.720 --> 1:08:29.280
<v Speaker 2>to the Christian faith, as you and I have been arguing,

1:08:29.760 --> 1:08:32.639
<v Speaker 2>and the chief sign that Jesus gave that the Son

1:08:32.680 --> 1:08:34.880
<v Speaker 2>a Man would be in the belly of Jonah for

1:08:34.920 --> 1:08:38.360
<v Speaker 2>three days, then there would be incentive for demons to

1:08:38.680 --> 1:08:44.320
<v Speaker 2>lie about this and convince people who've had supernatural experiences

1:08:44.320 --> 1:08:47.800
<v Speaker 2>to go to the direction of reincarnation rather than resurrection.

1:08:48.040 --> 1:08:51.040
<v Speaker 2>So my point is that I just think it fits

1:08:51.240 --> 1:08:55.200
<v Speaker 2>now before we wrap up anything else that I didn't

1:08:55.240 --> 1:08:58.800
<v Speaker 2>ask you about a critique of reincarnation that you want

1:08:58.840 --> 1:09:01.000
<v Speaker 2>to bring in here, or did we cover We ended

1:09:01.000 --> 1:09:02.320
<v Speaker 2>a pretty decent death.

1:09:02.520 --> 1:09:04.800
<v Speaker 1>Was actually Sean. I talked to a lot of people

1:09:04.880 --> 1:09:09.520
<v Speaker 1>who do a lot of interviews, and you are regularly

1:09:10.200 --> 1:09:12.360
<v Speaker 1>mentioned is one of the best of not the best

1:09:12.439 --> 1:09:15.880
<v Speaker 1>Christian interviewers today. This is typical. You sent me a list.

1:09:15.880 --> 1:09:17.599
<v Speaker 1>How many questions were on my list? Twenty?

1:09:18.040 --> 1:09:21.480
<v Speaker 2>Uh said, yeah, twelve, fifteen plus maybe.

1:09:21.960 --> 1:09:24.439
<v Speaker 1>I read them real quickly, and I thought to myself, yeah,

1:09:25.120 --> 1:09:27.559
<v Speaker 1>he's done his homework because all these are on my chapter.

1:09:27.640 --> 1:09:30.960
<v Speaker 1>It was not anything you know, but I would run

1:09:31.000 --> 1:09:32.960
<v Speaker 1>and make a point here at the very end. It's

1:09:33.000 --> 1:09:38.880
<v Speaker 1>not true or false on reincarnation, but I do have

1:09:39.120 --> 1:09:42.000
<v Speaker 1>here's my final two points we've covered. The one we

1:09:42.040 --> 1:09:44.519
<v Speaker 1>haven't really mentioned. The other one, the one I would

1:09:44.560 --> 1:09:49.760
<v Speaker 1>cover is I don't think this argument is even challenging.

1:09:50.800 --> 1:09:53.040
<v Speaker 1>If you if you said to me, Hey, you're the

1:09:53.080 --> 1:09:55.760
<v Speaker 1>resurrection guy. Your fourth volumes coming on any time. It's

1:09:55.760 --> 1:09:58.160
<v Speaker 1>almost four thousand pages of work on the resurrection. What

1:09:58.200 --> 1:10:00.400
<v Speaker 1>do you think about the hallucination theory? You got great,

1:10:00.400 --> 1:10:02.960
<v Speaker 1>big chapter on it, and you handle it a bunch

1:10:02.960 --> 1:10:07.800
<v Speaker 1>of other places. I'd say, hmm, Sean, that's probably the

1:10:07.840 --> 1:10:12.160
<v Speaker 1>toughest naturalistic theory to deal with. I acknowledge it's kind

1:10:12.200 --> 1:10:14.840
<v Speaker 1>of tough. You go, hey, on a world religious question,

1:10:14.880 --> 1:10:17.840
<v Speaker 1>what do you think about reincarnation, I'd say, Sean, in

1:10:17.920 --> 1:10:22.559
<v Speaker 1>my view, not close. I don't think they're comparable arguments.

1:10:22.560 --> 1:10:25.280
<v Speaker 1>I think that's something to be said. And one of

1:10:25.320 --> 1:10:28.639
<v Speaker 1>the biggest problems is my baseball or football illustration, your

1:10:28.640 --> 1:10:32.439
<v Speaker 1>puzzle illustration. When the whole when the whole world view

1:10:32.520 --> 1:10:35.000
<v Speaker 1>is at odds with each other, and you start talking

1:10:35.000 --> 1:10:38.560
<v Speaker 1>about which world view is right, we're only doing reincarnation.

1:10:38.640 --> 1:10:42.000
<v Speaker 1>On reincarnation, I don't think it's anything to worry about.

1:10:42.240 --> 1:10:44.240
<v Speaker 1>But if you're gonna do big picture on world views,

1:10:44.760 --> 1:10:47.120
<v Speaker 1>don't even start me. You're gonna lose before you start.

1:10:47.400 --> 1:10:51.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean the source over here's to my left by

1:10:51.040 --> 1:10:57.160
<v Speaker 1>a Buddhist PhD. English professor, British professor. He says, we

1:10:57.240 --> 1:11:00.599
<v Speaker 1>don't he's a Buddhist. He says, we don't even know

1:11:00.640 --> 1:11:04.960
<v Speaker 1>what Buddha taught. The earliest sources that I'm in favor

1:11:05.000 --> 1:11:08.880
<v Speaker 1>of are six hundred to eight hundred years after Buddha died. Wow,

1:11:09.680 --> 1:11:12.599
<v Speaker 1>we don't. That's not history. But if that's the source

1:11:12.640 --> 1:11:15.200
<v Speaker 1>you're going to use, we say, you're not even the ballgame.

1:11:15.240 --> 1:11:17.080
<v Speaker 1>And you admitted it. You said you don't have any

1:11:17.080 --> 1:11:21.639
<v Speaker 1>evidences too, Okay on that level, I don't think it's

1:11:21.640 --> 1:11:24.240
<v Speaker 1>a good objection. Here's my last one that we haven't

1:11:25.560 --> 1:11:30.559
<v Speaker 1>really mentioned. I've said this all my life because I'm

1:11:30.600 --> 1:11:33.519
<v Speaker 1>not proud of this, But in my twenty years of doubting,

1:11:34.280 --> 1:11:37.920
<v Speaker 1>I got involved in the occult more than I should have.

1:11:38.920 --> 1:11:43.280
<v Speaker 1>Then I had a leading occult expert who was converted

1:11:44.920 --> 1:11:47.360
<v Speaker 1>from the occult. He was not a Christian. He was

1:11:47.400 --> 1:11:52.320
<v Speaker 1>a leader in a non Christian group. So I thought, oh,

1:11:52.360 --> 1:11:54.599
<v Speaker 1>here's the guy who can answer my questions. And I

1:11:54.680 --> 1:11:57.439
<v Speaker 1>wasn't looking at that time for evidence for christian I

1:11:57.479 --> 1:12:00.400
<v Speaker 1>wish I knew indies in those days, because that's a

1:12:00.400 --> 1:12:04.200
<v Speaker 1>blowaway on almost everything. But I thought the occult might

1:12:04.240 --> 1:12:07.680
<v Speaker 1>give some evidence is for and after life, not necessarily

1:12:07.680 --> 1:12:10.559
<v Speaker 1>for Christianity. So I was asking everything because I wanted

1:12:10.600 --> 1:12:14.280
<v Speaker 1>evidence wherever it could be found. I should never have

1:12:14.320 --> 1:12:16.599
<v Speaker 1>gone there. But this guy scared me to death one

1:12:16.600 --> 1:12:18.960
<v Speaker 1>time because I kept writing letters to him. He was

1:12:19.120 --> 1:12:24.280
<v Speaker 1>a European and he kept answering my objections, and one

1:12:24.360 --> 1:12:27.240
<v Speaker 1>day I wrote him five more questions after I've probably

1:12:27.240 --> 1:12:29.920
<v Speaker 1>written twenty to him over the years. And he was

1:12:29.960 --> 1:12:33.040
<v Speaker 1>at the top of his craft. He could do things

1:12:33.800 --> 1:12:37.880
<v Speaker 1>spiritistically that would make him the apex, one of the

1:12:37.920 --> 1:12:40.680
<v Speaker 1>apex people in the whole world. But he wrote sent

1:12:40.720 --> 1:12:42.240
<v Speaker 1>the letter back to me. I still have it, it's

1:12:42.280 --> 1:12:44.559
<v Speaker 1>in my file, and it scared me to death. Here's

1:12:44.600 --> 1:12:48.600
<v Speaker 1>what he said to me this time, I am not

1:12:48.680 --> 1:12:51.560
<v Speaker 1>going to answer your five questions. I'm not going to

1:12:51.640 --> 1:12:55.120
<v Speaker 1>answer any more of your questions. This guy was converted. Remember,

1:12:56.240 --> 1:12:58.479
<v Speaker 1>he was acting more Christianly than I was. I was

1:12:58.520 --> 1:13:02.120
<v Speaker 1>a pastor Sean and at the time, and he wrote

1:13:02.120 --> 1:13:04.360
<v Speaker 1>back to me and he goes, I will not answer questions,

1:13:04.400 --> 1:13:10.280
<v Speaker 1>and in this sentence you are playing with fire. Oh

1:13:10.640 --> 1:13:12.640
<v Speaker 1>hear me to death. And that letter is in my

1:13:12.720 --> 1:13:17.240
<v Speaker 1>file to this day. Happened thirty years ago, but it's

1:13:17.240 --> 1:13:20.559
<v Speaker 1>in my file, all right. Here's my point. This kind

1:13:20.560 --> 1:13:24.760
<v Speaker 1>of argument, to me, is a backdoor argument for the

1:13:24.800 --> 1:13:28.760
<v Speaker 1>truth of Christianity, just like evidence is for the occult.

1:13:29.360 --> 1:13:34.040
<v Speaker 1>Are backdoor arguments for the Christian worldview. If Satan could

1:13:34.080 --> 1:13:36.479
<v Speaker 1>do the things that Jesus says he can, I e.

1:13:36.960 --> 1:13:40.120
<v Speaker 1>Deceive the very elect if he can do it. If

1:13:40.160 --> 1:13:43.000
<v Speaker 1>Satan does that, and we find out there Satan, we

1:13:43.040 --> 1:13:45.759
<v Speaker 1>find out Satan exists, or we find out that occult

1:13:45.800 --> 1:13:53.400
<v Speaker 1>phenomena exists, and they have compared to reincarnation the occultic stuff.

1:13:53.439 --> 1:13:55.640
<v Speaker 1>I want to talk. I'll give a testimony once a

1:13:55.640 --> 1:13:58.000
<v Speaker 1>while and say stay away from it. It's a page turner.

1:13:58.160 --> 1:14:00.040
<v Speaker 1>But I won't tell you what I was asking. I

1:14:00.040 --> 1:14:02.519
<v Speaker 1>won't tell you what I'm doing because you're too easy

1:14:02.560 --> 1:14:04.880
<v Speaker 1>to get sucked into it. Christians. I don't talk about

1:14:04.960 --> 1:14:07.360
<v Speaker 1>my classes. I just say stay away from it, like

1:14:07.400 --> 1:14:11.759
<v Speaker 1>that guy told me. But it is a backdoor evidence

1:14:11.760 --> 1:14:16.919
<v Speaker 1>for Christianity. If there's a pile of really supernatural evidence

1:14:16.960 --> 1:14:20.679
<v Speaker 1>I don't think reincarnation fits that bill. But if there's

1:14:20.840 --> 1:14:26.439
<v Speaker 1>really backdoor and you start going, whoa Spiritism, it's a

1:14:26.479 --> 1:14:30.840
<v Speaker 1>little more inclusive than Christianity, be a little nicer. But

1:14:31.680 --> 1:14:35.240
<v Speaker 1>that doesn't follow from this stuff. It follows that Satan

1:14:35.479 --> 1:14:39.160
<v Speaker 1>is not God and he's going to be judged. But however,

1:14:39.600 --> 1:14:41.960
<v Speaker 1>it does say that this world is a supernatural world.

1:14:42.479 --> 1:14:45.320
<v Speaker 1>It does say there's spirits, It does say that the

1:14:45.400 --> 1:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>general Hebrew, even Muslim, that the Islamic, Jewish, Christian worldview

1:14:52.120 --> 1:14:56.800
<v Speaker 1>is generally true with demons and so on. It evidences Christianity.

1:14:57.680 --> 1:14:59.840
<v Speaker 1>And that's the last thing I'd say. If this argument

1:14:59.880 --> 1:15:02.040
<v Speaker 1>is even in the ballpark, and you want to make

1:15:02.040 --> 1:15:07.760
<v Speaker 1>an argument for Hinduism, but you've got data. You know,

1:15:08.080 --> 1:15:11.600
<v Speaker 1>this little fellow tell you whereas the person's buried in

1:15:11.640 --> 1:15:14.400
<v Speaker 1>which room is his? If this is really evidence, he

1:15:14.840 --> 1:15:16.839
<v Speaker 1>didn't learn it from his parents, and we can't explain

1:15:16.840 --> 1:15:18.600
<v Speaker 1>it any other way. But you don't have any other

1:15:18.720 --> 1:15:23.000
<v Speaker 1>ballplayers on your team or puzzle pieces that fit. I

1:15:23.000 --> 1:15:26.640
<v Speaker 1>think that favorites Christianity by a mile. But it is

1:15:27.040 --> 1:15:32.000
<v Speaker 1>a backdoor evidence for Christianity, because in scripture the occult exists.

1:15:32.320 --> 1:15:36.800
<v Speaker 1>That's why in Act sixteen, that's why Paul casts the

1:15:36.840 --> 1:15:40.760
<v Speaker 1>spirit out of the little girl that was doing supernatural things.

1:15:41.240 --> 1:15:44.160
<v Speaker 1>What she was doing was an evidence for Christianity, but

1:15:44.760 --> 1:15:48.800
<v Speaker 1>not because her beliefs were her religion was true. So

1:15:48.880 --> 1:15:50.799
<v Speaker 1>I think that was last thing I'd say things about

1:15:50.800 --> 1:15:54.280
<v Speaker 1>spiritism and Eastern thought. Thank you for giving us one

1:15:54.280 --> 1:15:57.719
<v Speaker 1>more evidence for our position, but it doesn't it doesn't

1:15:57.840 --> 1:16:00.320
<v Speaker 1>challenge us on any kind of evidence that anyway, you're

1:16:00.439 --> 1:16:02.160
<v Speaker 1>legal anywhere near equal.

1:16:03.240 --> 1:16:06.080
<v Speaker 2>Well, I've personally heard and read a lot of stories

1:16:06.200 --> 1:16:08.479
<v Speaker 2>and evidences from me, Gary, but that one you shared

1:16:08.479 --> 1:16:10.839
<v Speaker 2>about the letter is one I have not heard before

1:16:11.280 --> 1:16:14.040
<v Speaker 2>and gave me the hills when you said it as well.

1:16:14.800 --> 1:16:18.600
<v Speaker 2>So bottom line is I agree with you that the

1:16:18.760 --> 1:16:23.520
<v Speaker 2>evidence for reincarnation does not compare to the historical evidence

1:16:23.600 --> 1:16:27.840
<v Speaker 2>for resurrection. The reason to not include it in your

1:16:27.920 --> 1:16:31.919
<v Speaker 2>resurrection volumes is because it doesn't pose a historical challenge.

1:16:32.280 --> 1:16:35.439
<v Speaker 2>But this video is important because on a popular level,

1:16:35.560 --> 1:16:38.400
<v Speaker 2>so many people in America, some who claim to be

1:16:38.479 --> 1:16:43.080
<v Speaker 2>Christians and worldwide, embrace recarnation. So some of you're watching

1:16:43.080 --> 1:16:46.320
<v Speaker 2>this and saying, hey, Ian Stevenson has passed away. He

1:16:46.560 --> 1:16:50.040
<v Speaker 2>used to be the expert, there is new evidence for reincarnation.

1:16:50.240 --> 1:16:54.040
<v Speaker 2>You guys have not considered tag a blow. We will

1:16:54.080 --> 1:16:55.720
<v Speaker 2>take a look at it. I'll talk with Gary and

1:16:55.760 --> 1:16:57.600
<v Speaker 2>maybe we'll do a response to that. So if you

1:16:57.640 --> 1:17:01.480
<v Speaker 2>think there's other pieces of evidence, don't tag a dissertation,

1:17:01.680 --> 1:17:05.160
<v Speaker 2>send us quick articles or points. All take a look

1:17:05.160 --> 1:17:07.120
<v Speaker 2>and if it's there and we need to revisit this,

1:17:07.720 --> 1:17:09.679
<v Speaker 2>I'd be happy to come back. And before you click

1:17:09.680 --> 1:17:12.240
<v Speaker 2>away and make sure you hit subscribe, we've got some

1:17:12.360 --> 1:17:16.080
<v Speaker 2>other shows cut up on resurrection. Near death experience is

1:17:16.120 --> 1:17:18.839
<v Speaker 2>the scientific evidence for God and some of the leading

1:17:18.920 --> 1:17:22.679
<v Speaker 2>Christian scholars and beyond coming on for conversation. You won't

1:17:22.680 --> 1:17:25.120
<v Speaker 2>want to miss it. If you thought about studying poljeics,

1:17:25.160 --> 1:17:27.880
<v Speaker 2>we'd love to have you at Top School Theology online

1:17:28.040 --> 1:17:31.479
<v Speaker 2>or in person. Information below and Gary's you know, we

1:17:31.520 --> 1:17:34.280
<v Speaker 2>have a certificate program. We offer a BIOLA. We've just

1:17:34.400 --> 1:17:39.000
<v Speaker 2>completely updated that and there's this significant discount below. If

1:17:39.040 --> 1:17:41.559
<v Speaker 2>you kind of want to formally study apologetics, aren't ready

1:17:41.600 --> 1:17:44.400
<v Speaker 2>for a masterss with me or a PhD at Liberty,

1:17:44.800 --> 1:17:47.920
<v Speaker 2>take a look at the certificate program. Gary, thanks for

1:17:47.920 --> 1:17:50.719
<v Speaker 2>coming on, and when your next volume four is out,

1:17:50.800 --> 1:17:54.400
<v Speaker 2>we will do a show on that for sure. Always

1:17:54.439 --> 1:17:57.040
<v Speaker 2>appreciate you coming on, and thanks for being a friend

1:17:57.080 --> 1:17:57.479
<v Speaker 2>as well.

1:17:58.560 --> 1:18:00.720
<v Speaker 1>You're welcome, Sean. It's a great show. Oh, I enjoyed it.

1:18:00.760 --> 1:18:02.559
<v Speaker 1>I've been looking forward for a long time and I

1:18:02.600 --> 1:18:04.920
<v Speaker 1>think it's your question that largely pulled this thing off.

1:18:05.240 --> 1:18:08.479
<v Speaker 1>You directed to the right places that I could not

1:18:08.640 --> 1:18:10.360
<v Speaker 1>have to say, Oh, don't go too far. I've got

1:18:10.400 --> 1:18:12.040
<v Speaker 1>to give you three other points. You just worked a

1:18:12.080 --> 1:18:15.440
<v Speaker 1>write in from the beginning. I think it was fantastic.

1:18:16.240 --> 1:18:19.360
<v Speaker 2>Thanks brother, Hey friends, if you enjoyed this show, please

1:18:19.479 --> 1:18:22.240
<v Speaker 2>hit that fall button on your podcast app. Most of

1:18:22.280 --> 1:18:24.679
<v Speaker 2>you tuning in haven't done this yet, and it makes

1:18:24.720 --> 1:18:27.519
<v Speaker 2>a huge difference in helping us reach and equip more

1:18:27.560 --> 1:18:31.719
<v Speaker 2>people and build community. And please consider leaving a podcast review.

1:18:32.080 --> 1:18:35.719
<v Speaker 2>Every review helps. Thanks for listening to The Sean McDowell Show,

1:18:35.840 --> 1:18:39.680
<v Speaker 2>brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University,

1:18:39.720 --> 1:18:43.040
<v Speaker 2>where we have on campus and online programs and apologetic

1:18:43.080 --> 1:18:46.360
<v Speaker 2>spiritual firmation, marriage and family Bible, and so much more.

1:18:46.439 --> 1:18:49.439
<v Speaker 2>We would love to train you to more effectively live, teach,

1:18:49.520 --> 1:18:52.360
<v Speaker 2>and defend the Christian faith today and we will see

1:18:52.400 --> 1:19:00.080
<v Speaker 2>you when the next episode drops. This