The Sean McDowell Show - 7 Reasons Reincarnation is False

Episode Date: December 31, 2025

What is the evidence for and against reincarnation? When analyzed carefully, what does the science reveal? Gary Habermas is one of the world's leading experts on the Resurrection of Jesus. In this video, we do a deep dive on the common evidences given for reincarnation (e.g., child memories, birthmarks) and offer some additional critiques. We discuss the work of Ian Stevenson, leading researcher and pioneer for scientific reincarnation studies. While there is some interesting evidence for reincarnation, there is another supernatural explanation that accounts for the data, which must be considered. READ: Beyond Death, by Gary Habermas and JP Moreland (https://amzn.to/4bdNDeO) *Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (https://bit.ly/3LdNqKf) *USE Discount Code [smdcertdisc] for 25% off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (https://bit.ly/3AzfPFM) *See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (https://bit.ly/448STKK) FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA: Twitter: https://x.com/Sean_McDowell TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@sean_mcdowell?lang=en Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/seanmcdowell/ Website: https://seanmcdowell.org Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

Looking for a simple way to stay rooted in God's Word every day? The Daily Bible Devotion app by Salem Media gives you morning and evening devotionals designed to encourage, inspire, and keep you connected with scripture. Plus, you'll enjoy Daily Bible trivia and humor, a fun way to learn and share a smile while growing in your faith. Get the Daily Bible Devotion app for free on both iOS and Android. Start and end your day with God's Word. Search for the Daily Bible Devotion app in the App Store or Google Play Store, download it today.

Life Audio. Is there a good reason to believe reincarnation is true? Let's say this little boy's name is Sam, and he'll say, don't call me Sam anymore. My name is Peter. No, honey, we gave you the name Sam. No, but I'm Peter. I know I'm Peter, and I lived in the town of X, and that's famous. Those are famous.

Little kids have a lot of details. On a popular level, so many people in America, some who claim to be crazy, and worldwide embrace reincarnation. The best critique is this. I will take either discarnate possession or demon possession. These are almost toss-ups. I don't like demon possession, but discarnate is a toughie, and I think it's a good rival position.

One third of all Americans claim to believe in reincarnation. And the number is even higher among millennials and Gen Z. Is there a good reason to believe reincarnation is true? Do near-death experiences provide evidence for reincarnation. And how does the evidence for reincarnation compare with the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus? Our guest today is perhaps the world's leading expert on the resurrection, been on this show many times a personal friend. Dr. Gary Habermas, thanks for coming back. I am glad to be with you, Dr. Sean. Well, on that note, let's jump in. I've actually been

thinking about this episode for a long time. I've never done a deep dive on this. And it's so prevalent today that in some ways I'm surprised that I haven't. But let me start by just asking this question. When you wrote your book Beyond Death, there's about a quarter of Americans, say the turn of the 21st century, bleeds and reincarnation. Now it's about a third. Why do you think so many Americans and beyond believe in it? I think there's a lot of answers to that. But just to mention a few off the top of the bat here, I don't think it's for intellectual reasons. For the most, part. Now, remember, you work on one side of the ocean, and I work on the other side of the ocean. It's not as common over here. I have to introduce it to my students. They don't bring it up,

I mean, I mean PhD students. They don't bring it up in philosophy or in PhD apologetic classes and say, hey, I've been having to deal with a reincarnation lady. I haven't heard this objection in years. So I think it does have a lot to do with where you live. I think that's one thing. Another thing, I think this generation, these generations that you mentioned, are not real well grounded. When I see surveys on how scholarship goes for college students, I hear more and more things like, oh, I'm doing all my degrees online. What do you have to do? Not a lot. I just kind of read these articles and I read a few paragraphs and I'm ready to go.

I think up some good reasons and I could, you know. And then I see something on Wikipedia or something, and it says college students today think they're scholars after reading an article. And they usually quit halfway through the article. So I'm not putting down college kids. I don't teach that level. I teach PhD students. But it's like no one's into reading and studying now. It's like go on your phone and read a few things.

And I think we are into, I don't want to say equality and religion. but I think we are into plurality. I think we are into anything goes. I think we are into, well, I don't want to put you down, and I don't want to say your view is false. And what about the problem of evil? Well, come on. I know what the Bible says, but things have changed a lot.

And I kind of think God will approve of anybody who seeks him honestly. You know, I think it's all those things. I think it's changing worldviews. and changing times, not well-thought-out positions. That's really fair. The only thing I would throw in there is we've just seen such an explosion of interest in Eastern religions and new spiritualities over the past few decades. And I argue the past two or three years, there's kind of this growth and interest in supernatural phenomenon. And we're seeing the data in millennial and Gen Z express that interest.

But, of course, they're not shifting back towards historic Christianity and traditional faiths. but sometimes a new age. Now, I think it might be really helpful to define what we mean by reincarnation and maybe compare and contrast what reincarnation is and how it's similar and or different from what we mean by resurrection. Sure. I would say that, well, I'll tell you what, let me use the definition of the, he's passed away now a few years ago, but he was known as the world's leading scholar in reincarnation,

had a very prestigious position. He was a psychiatrist in the area of brain sciences at University of Virginia, one of the top universities in the country, and his name was Ian Stevenson. Last time I heard, well, I mean he's passed away now, but years ago, I'd heard that he written five books on reincarnation, and one, maybe the best known one, published by University of Virginia Press, was called 20 cases suggestive of reincarnation. And he was a nice guy, well-spoken. I'd never found him to be dogmatic. He would lay data out there.

And when you would give data on the other side, he'd say, hey, I understand. I can roll with that. I just think there's some data for reincarnation. And you say, well, here's a comeback or two. He'd say, hey, you give me your one or two, and I'll give you a couple more reasons that why reincarnation is kind of, you know, that's why his book's entitled 20 cases suggestive. And here's how he defines it. He says, reincarnation is when one spirit enters another person, but in between conception and birth, that's reincarnation.

Possession, which he does a lot of talking about, and I will too, possession is a spirit entering another person's spirit in between birth and life. sometime in the living process, but reincarnation is prior to birth between conception and birth. And that's going to become really significant here as we get talking, because there are some cases that Stevenson gives where he says, well, I've found some cases where I think reincarnation's true, but I'll give you a couple cases where reincarnation by my definition is not true, and it looks more like possession. And he just says things. I mean, I think he's pretty straightforward. So reincarnation is a soul that stays constant over time and reanimates a new body, some time between, say, birth and conception, or conception and birth.

That's correct. Conception of birth. Possession would be a separate, at least one additional spirit taking over an existing spirit that is animating a body. So there's at least two. Or in the case of the demoniac, there's multiple possessing the individual. That's one key distinction. Define resurrection for us. Sean, before I go to resurrection, I'd be glad to do that, of course. But let's, how about a third definition? What's the difference between possession and oppression? because in some of the best treatments of possession, and there's more than one kind, by the way, but some of the best cases of possession are oppression,

and you say, well, that's not possession. No, it's not. But some of the books will say, possession can be so strong that many people will think it's a case of possession. In other words, there's a clouding of definitions between oppression, and possession. So you can be really bothered but not really infiltrated if that makes sense. Yeah, it does. So reincarnation would be an individual soul that would have multiple lives live through different bodies at different times. And of course, we don't have to go there, but in some

faiths, it would be a common soul that takes over a non-human body for a season or time. But reincarnation, I'm sorry, resurrection, give us the definition of what we, we mean by that? Resurrection is usually a definition where one person dies and lives again. Now, that person, there's different discussions about what this new body is. And boy, this could take us all day. So you don't want to go in a lot of detail here. That's right.

But the traditional Christian response is that after the death of a human body, there's in, well, colloquial language would be an in-between state. But this state right after death is usually believed to be disembodied. So I love what Peter Kreft says, the Thomas philosopher who he accepts the Thomas, he except the Thomas in the Aristotelian tradition, not the Platonist one, but he still says this comment about the intermediate state, he says, Plato is right as far as he went. And I think it's a great comment.

In other words, the Christian view, 2 Corinthians 5, seems to be that immediately after death, the person does not live. And the in-between bump, Paul says, you're still with the Lord, and it's better than here. That's right. But he says, I wished I weren't here too long. because twice in those 10 verses in 2 Corinthians 5, he says, I don't want to be found naked.

And the Greek word there, naked, refers to bodiless. So if you go back to Peter Kraft, he's going to say, yep, that's my point because I'm a tolmist, and I believe we have to be reembodied to be our full persons. But there is an intermediate state, and then there's a final state. Resurrection has to do the traditional Christian view is living forever. And you can't say in a different body, but you'd say, you'd say living forever in your body, but for eternity. And of course, that is a transformed now immortal body that won't die again, as Paul says in 1st, Corinthians 15. So oftentimes people think resurrection is just coming back to life.

But like we saw with those Elijah and Paul raised and the three Jesus raised, Lazarus, son of the widow at Nain and the daughter of Jiris, they were to die again. And resurrected body is animated for eternity, although physical, it's our same body, but even greater than it is here with the limitations of sin. Right. And usually it said that that starts after the return of Christ. Whatever, you know, if there's different views on, you know, what that is too. You know, did, well, I don't want to. Yeah, don't worry about that right now. We'll get a side track on that. But it's after Christ came back, and that's the Christian view. Exactly. It's a new body, it's a new body, but it's my body. Yeah.

And the key distinction, reincarnation, you die, come back, die, come back many or potentially infant number of times. Resurrection, you die once, and you face judgment. That's the key difference here for people to see. Now, you lay out in your book, you have a chapter on this in Beyond Death, where you give some of the different kinds of evidence is often cited for reincarnation. list out some of those for us, if you will. Yeah, I think I give five in that chapter. So it's not like reincarnation is so stupid, you can't think of any reason for it. But I think by far, if I believe in reincarnation, my chief evidence would be cases, very well-known cases.

Now, you don't have very long to look for them. Children who will give me an example. You have to use Indian names. usually American nation happens in Indian or Indian-friendly cultures. That's not always a case. But let's say this little boy's name is Sam. And sometime after his birth, he could be very young. He could be three or four. And he'll say, don't call me Sam anymore. My name is Peter. No, honey, we gave you the name Sam. No, but I'm Peter. I know I'm Peter. and I lived in the town of X, and I even remember who my parents were, and I remember the house. It looks like this.

And they'll say, well, whether that's true or false. And he'll say, no, no, no, it looks like this. And when you go in the house, you turn left, and you go down the hallway, and the third room on the right is my bedroom. And so the parents do a little bit of checking, and they find out, you know, because he tells them the town. and where's a house like this? And this culture is really open to this. They've heard these stories. So other parents are used to helping you do this.

And they bring the little guy there, the newly made Peter, and he takes you in the house and turns left and goes down. And there's his bedroom. He goes, well, they've changed this all around. But my bed used to be over there underneath the window. So he knows a lot about this. And that's famous. Those are famous.

Little kids have a lot of details. Lesser examples, but they can see. still be something that convinces some people, of course, would be cases of scars. Let's say, Sam slash Peter talks to the parents and they say, oh yeah, he had this real strange birthmark on his left shoulder. Oh, you mean like this? And the guy pulls his shirt down and they go, yeah, just like that. Where did you get that? So birth marks are deformities, a limp, and the same leg that the other boy had. Sometimes these people can even tell you where the boys buried. But a deformity or a scar, that's one. We're familiar with this in Christianity, but glossolalia or speaking in tongues, Christian, this guy might start rattling off a scar. a different language and he might talk in the dialect that Peter spoke in. But remember his name's his given name is Sam. And he starts talking to that language. So there's three of them

right there. And those are three of the best ones. The main one is details. I can tell you where I lived, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And deformities speaking in tongues, I mean by that, not your birth language, but you're pretty good at it. You're only four years old. Yeah. So. That's a great list. And the other one that we're going to get to is some of the so-called biblical evidence in favor of reincarnation. That's really interesting. We'll take that one by one. Now, we're going to walk through some of the claims, get your response to it. But the way you frame this, the first time I read this chapter years ago was really eye-opening to me. Here's what you said. You said, are there other hypotheses other than reincarnation that can account for much of the same data? In other words, if there are two hypotheses, that explain the data equally, or at least sufficiently. How do many reincarnation experts... Looking for a simple way to stay rooted in God's Word every day? The Daily Bible Devotion app by Salem Media gives you morning and evening devotionals

designed to encourage, inspire, and keep you connected with scripture. Plus, you'll enjoy daily Bible trivia and humor. A fun way to learn and share a smile while growing in your faith. Get the Daily Bible Devotion app for free on both iOS and Android. start and end your day with God's Word. Search for the Daily Bible Devotion app in the App Store or Google Play Store and download it today. And how should we choose which option between those two is the best? Okay.

Let me use Ian Stevenson. Now, people may have missed this, but when I call him a psychiatrist, you remember, a psychiatrist as an MD, a psychologist is at best, a PhD. So he's a medical doctor, University of Virginia. He's really up on this stuff from a medical viewpoint. And he admits in his book, I cite the book several times in that chapter. And he himself says the best two hypotheses are reincarnation and possession. And several times throughout, well, the chapter where I cite him, several times you'll say, actually here, possession seems like it's pretty good.

And then he'll introduce another problem. He'll go, well, there's a number of ways to explain this. But the best two, we can just cut to the chase, the best two are still reincarnation and possession. He says it over and over again. Now, you may have a quote there. I've got one here. I can read it if you want. Please.

This is Ian Stevenson himself, the leading scholar. And it's not because he's like not a believer. He wrote the book, 20 cases, suggest a reincarnation. Here he is. He says that the data fall, quote, along a continuum in which the distinction between reincarnation and possession becomes blurred, close quote. Then he says, another statement, the data, quote, do not permit a firm decision between the hypothesis of possession and reincarnation, close quote. Now, it seems like he definitely is saying these are the two best. But it almost sounds at points. I got another one here I can read you, but it almost sounds like he thinks it's a toss-up.

Now, he'll tell you why he doesn't like, well, I don't know how far you want to go to this on, but this is going to involve two definitions of possession. And some Christians are going to be very, ill at ease with one of the two definitions. But I'll just define them and you can go where you want, of course. One is called discarnate possession, and I'll define that. And the other one is demon possession. Now, this is interesting.

I can only guess what's in this man's mind, this doctor, the medical doctor. But Stevenson makes the comment, of those two options, discarnate and demon, I don't prefer the demon one. And I'm thinking, wow, let me think through this. You already believe in the supernatural. I think, yeah, I, you know, I believe in reincarnation. Okay. So you're already open to the supernatural and you think there is a supernatural slash spiritual realm. Yeah. You don't like demon possession, though? No. He could say, well, that's a Christian view. Well, that's, it's not true. You can find. on demon possession in many world religions. I mean, major ones. But he could say, yeah, I'm just guessing

here, Sean, I don't know. But he could say, demon possession implies a Satan. And whether or not you believe in a Satan, there's probably a hell or a bad place to go. And that's the, my religion doesn't believe that. I think he's rejecting it for damnation slash judgment slash, you know. Okay. And first, yeah, again, is not the only one that believes that. But he does. does say that's not my favorite. Now here's the one that's going to cause some trouble, I think. Okay. Discarnate possession. D-I-S-C-A-R-N-A-T-E, Discarnate Possession. Discarna Possession is the possession of one individual by a second previously deceased individual, but they're both human beings.

and person A after death can enter Now again, what's the re-in, what definition you're going to use? But if you believe in reincarnation, you want him to enter another body between conception and birth. If you like what we might call more of a Western Christian-Jewish discarded view, not too many people talk about this, but it would be after that person's birth. So it sounded a little bit like demon possession,

but it's possession by another individual. And you tell me whether you want to go any further. But here's the only thing I want to say about it. We'd say, no, God doesn't let one, a deceased spirit into the body of another one. And I'd say, how do you know that? And they'd say, well, Hebrews chapter 9 says it's a, you know, it's appointed a man wants to die and after that's a judgment. Well, I think that's kind of an

odd verse. It might be your best shot. But which judgment do you mean? And if it's the judgment at the end of time, golly, there's a lot of time between 51 AD and today. What's been going on all those years? And you say, well, I don't know. Maybe I can't give you a good verse. I just don't think God would allow that. Okay. Then here's my comeback. Would Satan allow that? with Satan, whom Paul calls the God of this world, who has a lot of power, who could do miracles, who can deceive the very elect? Could he let the spirit of a person who is his person that he controls? Could he mess Christians or others up by having the spirit of a dead person enter a living person? All I'm saying is, I don't say it's got to be true, but there's a number of cult experts

all Brecht and others, there's a number of called experts who believe you can't rule it out biblically. There's no problem. So there's two kinds, human, dead human spirit into a live human spirit or a demon. And I think it's good to have two options. Here's my personal view. I don't think we can rule out discarnate possession, at least as the possible province of Satan himself. over with regard to one of his minions, he lets all kinds of strange things happen, even blaspheming God.

This isn't even that bad. So what's wrong with that? Well, I don't know. I just don't like it. Well, maybe you don't, but how do you dismiss it? My mind is running wild with theological questions about discarnate possession, but let me hold that for a minute. I want to make sure that our viewers are tracking with a point.

So Ian Stevenson gives, at least you cite, at least five different lines of evidence for reincarnation. One of the strongest pieces are the multiple cases of children who have specific detail about names and places people live, activity that they did, and they discovered that it lines up and is likely true. You're convinced that at least something supernatural is taking here. And I say that because sometimes as Christians, when we hear miracles in other religions like Islam and in, say, Mormonism, we can either explain and say, no, it's false. Miracle didn't happen or explain away by supernatural forces, arguably demonic. But in this case, in this line of reasoning, you argue there's enough here to make you think at least something supernatural is taking place. Is that fair insofar as it goes? Most likely. But in that chapter, I give about 20 reputations. I have three, well, I have at least two major ones. If you want to count the two different kinds of possessions, now I have three. I have a bunch of little ones that just throw monkey wrenches into the reincarnation. And one of them, here's a couple of them.

Hang on before we come back, we're going to come to those critiques, and that's fair. Sure. But I want to draw out for people that say we have a murder suspect and we actually, let's say we have a murder and we have two suspects that we're curious about this murder, both wear size two tennis shoes. Well, then we can't say, oh, suspect A wear size tennis shoes. So this is evidence for suspect A but not suspect B. It minimally fits. Both. Well, if that's the case for murder trial, when it comes to reincarnation, you're saying even if this is supernatural, we're going to come to your other critiques of it to show that you're not convinced. But even if it is, there's another suspect or two, namely that wear size two tennis shoes that can also explain the data. So it's not as forceful for reincarnation as somebody would think it is. Does that sum up how you look at it? that's fair because in in logic or in a lesser subject than straightforward logic but in good persuasive reasoning if you can get in there and rip that up you you might say yeah but what you're raising is the case of special pleading you're not asking all the people you're going to size two here's a second guy with size two. And I could say, well, I did some research and some of the people in the group you're talking about, there's 10 of them. I mean, after a while, you're really playing with that thesis.

I also would raise questions like natural hypotheses. Why can't we raise natural hypotheses like this one? Well, these are cultures that almost always, these occur in cultures where either reincarnation in general is allowed or believe in, or they're Indian or maybe Buddhist. cultures, but especially Indian cultures. If the parent wants your child, their child, to be a star witness, why can't the parent do some research, pass it on to the child, get it into his mind? So he says, no, my name's Peter. Now, come on. We named you Sam. Now, the kid might spill the beans if he said, yeah, but you told me to tell everybody my name's Peter. Like kids do. What I mean is the parents or somebody else could do research.

See, there's a lot of these families where they affirm this. Give me an example, in Christian circles, apologists aren't going to buy this as what I'm going to say here is a great evidence. But we pray for healing and we see a healing in church and we see a case maybe where this healing wasn't totally what we prayed for, but it prayed in a few. It was fulfilled in a few areas. So we would, and they were good areas. So we'll put those in the back burner, but it's not a one-to-one relationship. Maybe the parents do a little bit of research and teach the child. Why?

That's trickery. No, it's them believing in their own religion. And we do that as Christians. We do that as Christian parents. I just think there's alternative reasons. So I wouldn't say it has to be supernatural. But I would say for many people, both views are going to involve supernatural. Yes.

That's really fair. So we're going to look at some of your critiques of reincarnation. There's some plausible naturalistic explanations, but even if it is supernatural, it doesn't uniquely point towards reincarnation. It still can be explained away with another phenomena. Now, before we get to some of your critique, one of the interesting things is how much this comes up in studies of near-death experiences. Now, you were on, I don't know, three, five months ago talking about how you've studied near-death experiences. since the 70s, really about five decades. And as you well know, the moment I talk about this, one of the biggest objections that comes up is people talk about, well, it points towards reincarnation. In fact, some studies suggest that NDEs tend to increase belief in reincarnation. What's your response to that concern? I think that that's true. And I think that it involves some kind of overly easy reasoning. I don't think, I don't, I can't think of any. Now, I can tell you, we have a problem here with Peter because he can go to that house

and point things out. So we got something we got to deal with. I don't think NDEs have anything like that. I can tell you my, if you want me to say it, I don't want to get you off the subject, but I can tell you why I don't trust that kind of NDE data. So the kind of data you'd have to say, here's a, Here's the easy comment. Anybody who reads any of my stuff on NDE's, the distinction I make probably more than any other one is I only accept with very few exceptions. There are a couple

exceptions, but they don't come close to reincarnation. But my argument is I only accept evidential cases that are this worldly evidence that is produced. So the person's hopefully, there's dozens of cases now, a measurably, got to put that in there. as far as we know, a measurably flat heart, flat brain state, and they report something in the physical world out there, so to speak, and we've got data for it. And easiest way to say it, let's say you're lecturing, I'll make it you, Sean, instead of me. And you pass out on the floor. And the emergency people come in, and they know what time you went down because somebody looked at their watchers, a lot of students in the class. He went down at about 1203. Okay. And they get, you situated at 405. But let's say there's a car accident five miles away, 10 miles away, and you have a reason to be interested in that because maybe your family member was in the car accident, so you're drawn to that. And the accident happened at 203, and it got reconciled at 303. So all the data were in the space where you had no brain or heart research. Now, to me,

it's this worldly stuff of that nature. But I don't, I don't trust, I don't cite. This goes back to the beginning of my studies. I don't think there's much evidence for these kind of things. Well, first I was here and I saw the trees in the mountains, but then I zipped up to heaven. And by the way, not that many people go down tunnels, but a fair number, not even 50%.

But they go up there and they go, I met Jesus, and he hugged me. Need a daily spark of hope and direction? Let the Daily Bible app from Salem Media be that spark. This free Android app delivers an uplifting verse each morning, plus reading plans, devotions, and trusted podcasts from leaders like Joyce Meyer and Rick Warren. Prefer to listen instead? The Daily Bible app reads verses, reading plans, and chapters aloud, handy for the headphones moment of your day.

Choose from versions like ESV, NIV, NIV, KJV, and more, and bookmark favorites to revisit later. Share inspiring messages with loved ones right from the app. Feel God's presence in every notification. Search for Daily Bible app on Google Play and begin your day with hope, purpose, and peace. And he said, you're going to come back here someday, but not now. And then you got the guy who says, what saw the forest and the trees and went up to heaven. And I saw Jesus.

What are you? Well, I'm an agnostic or I'm a Hindu or whatever. And Jesus hugged me and said, I'm going to be here in a little while or some years for now, but not now. Wow, whoa, does that mean Indeese teach other religions or pluralism? Now, the problem is, I can see that you know this event that happened in the woods or on the mountain or the car accident, but how do you know you saw Jesus? Well, I don't know. Did you say it was Jesus? No, it was just a being that was a light being that was just the holiest thing I ever saw and infused me, and it was really impressive.

He never told you that. No. What if he did tell you his name of Jesus? Does that make it true? What's your evidence for that? None. How do you know you're even in heaven? Well, that's what it seemed like to me. Now, see, the evidence is starting to get a little weaker. And I don't make worldview decisions based on, quote, unquote, heavenly data that people see, and they're the only witness, and they're going to come back and be the only interpreter. So they're the only witness. They're the only interpreter. Everybody goes, that's really cool. And if you really saw the car accident, five miles away, you must have met Jesus too. I don't think that follows at all. So I don't think, I don't think Indies are, I don't think their worldview specific. I think a Hindu could use it

as evidence for the afterlife and a Christian could use it as the evidence, like intelligent design or fine-tuning. More like a kind of natural revelation. And so, And by the way, just a side note, I've done, I don't know, maybe 10 or 12 shows on this. And different NDE researchers will give varying degrees of confidence in testimony that people have during an NDE. But your position is you only consider evidential when somebody claims to have some experience, then we can come back and actually confirm it. That's where it's evidentially significant. and so points towards things like life after death, the existence of the soul, but not the particulars of Christian theology or any other view of theology.

That's where you would land. Fair enough. Go ahead. Did you want to add something to that? Well, I would add a second argument, too, a good friend of both of our, Steve Miller. On your show, he probably, I haven't seen your whole broadcasts. I've seen part of it, but did he describe his little test he did where he said, studied 100 NDEs end to end to end.

And this is from a worldwide indie site. And so you got Hindus, you got Buddhists, you got Muslims, you got Christians. And I'd have to go back and check his data. In fact, I think I did the, I think this is the book I did the forward for. I should be a little clearer on this. But I think what happened was the Buddhists never say they saw Buddha. The Hindus never say they saw Krishna. Muslims never mention them my name,

Muhammad, and they're going to say, well, that's because Muhammad's not the son of God anyway. So, okay, I understand. But he's got 20 cases out of 100, one fifth, where they said they saw Jesus. A number of those people are not, or not Christians. So non-Christians say Jesus talked to me, and the ones who are other religions don't even say their founder talked to. them as a general rule. So he uses that. I don't think Steve says that proves that all the other religions are wrong. No, I don't, Steve doesn't go there. But he says it shoots the definition

that NDEs argue for other religions or that it leads people to the east. I think it leads people to the east who are not not paying attention to the evidence real strictly. That's fair. Yeah. When I interviewed them, I don't remember the exact number. but that sounds accurate that Jesus overwhelmingly appears across worldview, across culture, in the preliminary study that he did very carefully, which suggests that's representative of the vast majority of near-death experiences, which would challenge if we allow people's testimonies into the record of what they experience in NBE, it would nonetheless challenge the reincarnation notion.

All right, fair enough. Now, you have, you cited earlier, and I cut you, you off because I was holding until we got there about how you have some additional challenges just to reincarnation in itself. And here's kind of a way you asked a question. I'll put it out there and then you can run the direction you want to. In your chapter, you say, how do we bridge the gap between an individual's detailed knowledge pertaining to a person who lived in the past and the assumption that the two people are one and the same? Really interesting point. Maybe expand on that point or just the general other critiques you have with the evidence for reincarnation.

Now, I lost John the first one, Sean. You said, I get the people who remember, they claim that when my name was Peter and I grew up in this house and my bedroom was a third. Okay, I get that. But what was the other side? What was the other view? Well, the quote says, how do we bridge the gap between an individual's detailed knowledge pertaining to a person who alluded in the past

and the assumption that the two people are one and the same. Okay, I think that was the phrase. How does in the past come into this? That phrase in the past. How are you using that? I'm quoting you on this one. So rather than getting lost in the quote itself, maybe just raise the critique that you have of us relying upon reincarnation in general.

Okay, so this little boy has what we would call evidence for something by claiming to be Peter, going to the house, third bedroom on the right, knows his parents' name. It can even take you to the, let's make it more complicated, even take you to the cemetery where little Peter was buried. Okay, there's some evidence. And compare that to what, an ND E, who reports a car accident 10 miles away, or we're not even talking about Indeers here? You can bring it in if you want to.

talking about your other problems and challenges with the evidence for reincarnation. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. On the car accident, the best kind of case would be if you didn't have any brain or heart measurable brain or heart waves during that point. And there's a police report on the accident and nobody in your vicinity could have been 10 miles away at that same time watching the accident. And of course, the closer you report, it. If you report this within an hour of waking up or a 10 minutes of wake, there are some a lot of close cases like that, you're not going to have been scanning the newspapers and reading about car accidents. But if the thing happens in between that time, the problem I have

with the little boy is multifaceted, I think the best critique is this. I will take either discarnate possession or demon possession. And even even Ian Stevenson himself says, these are almost toss-ups. I don't like demon. I'm talking for Stevenson now. I don't like demon possession, but discarnate is a tuffy. And I think it's a good rival position. So by the way, another reincarnationist, Di Ortega says demon possession is the best hypothesis. and he believes in reincarnation. And that's on the same page there in the book. You can look it up.

And still another one, Maharaj. Now, this would be what you're asking for, it would be a lesser comeback. He's Indian, and he used to be an Indian guru, and he was converted. In fact, his book came under a couple titles, but the first one was an intriguing title. It's called The Death of a Guru.

And that's when he became a Christian. And he says, I'll tell you what, I'll read his statement. It's just my books. My book's open to Ian Stevenson and it's right there. Maharaj says this. He says, he describes his experience as this. This is when he was a budding young guru.

Quote, my world was filled with spirits and gods and occult powers. And my obligation from childhood was to give each its due, end quote. Now, that's a good argument to me from a Hindu for demon possession, because they believe in demon possession too. See, it's not just a Christian thing or a Jewish thing. It's, he believes that. And he said, we were into the cult. And, you know, his other things here, he says, my obligation for childhood was for a cult and spirits and God, small G. I'm going to give my due to all these things.

So if you say, all right, these folks are largely Indians or those cultures, yeah, and you're raised and you're immersed in the occult, or at least very much into it and familiar with it, spirits and demons and so on. I think that makes demon possession a much likelier thesis in that culture. because I don't object to discarnate possession, I would say just a little person gets, I'll give you some other ones, but here's the comment I would make. And that is, if Stevenson, of all guys, says these things are one, two, I mean, I don't even know who's one and who's two. Sometimes it's, I think it's possession. Sometimes it might be discarnate. I mean, reincarnation or discarnate. I think we don't even have to go any further.

I think if these are the options, two kinds of possession, a person in your audience says, now I don't do that discarnate stuff. Let me do demon. Okay, fine. You've got demon versus reincarnation. I think we've got demon and discarnate versus reincarnation. But now here's my question.

All right, you're Hindu. Yep. And you believe these things. Yep. And you think some kind of possession is a good thesis. Yep, your main guy does. And here's another guy who thinks this. mostly demon possessions better.

Yep. Seems to me like this is a battle for worldviews, and now you know where I'm going to go. What is your data for Hindu, Hinduism, and I'll match you one for one, good arguments for Christianity. Okay, I think Christianity's got the best arguments by far. I think, for example, just give you one example,

this is why critics think the Gospel of John is late at plus 65, and they don't complain about Buddha at plus 600. They're just not tough on the world religions, but they're tough on Christianity. Why? Even they recognize we have really good data. So if you want to go just that one conclusion alone,

one type of possession compared to reincarnation, I'm going to say if my worldviews got the best data and you have very little data that we think would be recognized empirically or otherwise, I think case dismissed. I think possession wins. And if you've got two cases of reincolary, two of possession, I think we really win. Now, let me give you some sub arguments that I think are really helpful here. Okay.

Ian Stevenson does this. And he goes, yeah, a couple places. He says, I think possession and, not going to watch, flipping my words around here. I think possession and reincarnation are really, really tight. And then you go, he goes, but I'll talk to you about two cases. And I go, well, please do. And he gives two cases where reincarnation does not work, but possession does. And in both cases, via his definition that we accept, that we handled at the outset here,

the problem is this child wasn't infested by a runagade spirit. in between conception and birth, the person whose spirit, Peter, if we went back to the Indian case, the one saying Peter, Peter died when the little boy was four, and now he's eight. Now Sam is eight. But see, if Peter died when he's four, and Sam can say, well, I know where he lived, and I know where his bedroom was and da, da, da, da, da, da. it's not it's not a reincarnation because the kid was alive and died before the second one started claiming this it doesn't even even Stevenson says here here's a couple things that you know just look like that that's one here's a couple others what about the marks on the shoulder or similar wounds that's kind of intriguing okay hold that hold that thought for a second I'm going to come back to like the birth marks and the xenoglossy.

Let me jump in and clarify for people. This is really important. So certain evidence is put forward for reincarnation. And what you're saying is minimally that same evidence can be explained within a Christian worldview. We're not inventing an explanation, either demon possession, oppression, de-incarnation. We have the resources to account for that.

But the flip side is we have additional evidence. evidence for resurrection and for Christianity as a whole that cannot be explained in the way reincarnation can be explained on the other side. So if we start with the reincarnation data, that alone is not going to solve it. It's going to be interpreted somewhat by somebody's worldview. So now we have to step back and look at the scientific, philosophical, historical evidence as a whole for a particular worldview. And that's where you say, let's have that conversation. We have the additional evidence for Christianity that other faiths don't.

Now, is that a fair summary? Yeah, let me give you. Need a daily spark of hope and direction? Let the Daily Bible app from Salem Media be that spark. This free Android app delivers an uplifting verse each morning, plus reading plans, devotions and trusted podcasts from leaders like Joyce Meyer and Rick Warren. Prefer to listen instead? The Daily Bible app reads verses, reading plans and chapters allowed, handy for the headphones moment of your day. Choose from versions like ESV, NIV, KJV, and more,

and bookmark favorites to revisit later. Share inspiring messages with loved ones right from the app. Feel God's presence in every notification. Search for Daily Bible app on Google Play and begin your day with hope, purpose, and peace. A real good sports illustration if I can. What if we say the best two quarterbacks in the NFL, are A and B. They're the best quarterbacks. The only problem is A also has the best team around them. This guy, they've got the best defense in the league. They've got a great offense.

What does B have? Well, I hate to say this. He's kind of tied for the best quarterback, but they've got a lousy team. That's kind of what we're saying. I'm not trying to call any religion lousy, but I'm saying, whoa, whoa, whoa. Even the best quarterback needs good wide receivers,

needs a great blocking line. We both know examples where he's a great quarterback, but the line can't keep anybody out and the guy's running the whole time. Or you want a good running back because a quarterback wants a break. But if the other team doesn't have anybody at any of those possessions,

the quarterback gets beat up all the time, hurt all the time. In other words, there's two teams of players. A star pitcher needs people in other positions around the field. So I think it's important if Christianity has star players and others, and they say, well, you're just being prejudiced for Christians because we don't always, all right, just stop right there. If you're going to say, I can't play that game with you, that's an issue. If you've got a good quarterback but no team, where's this conversation going?

If you've got a great pitcher throws the ball well over 100 miles an hour, but has no great team and your catcher's always passing the ball, what's going on? So I think it's really important And if it comes right down to it, and remember, the key here is Stevenson. It's basically a draw or close to a draw. All right. When it's a draw from the top reincarnation guys, you've got to ask what is teams like. Love it. To use those two sports illustrations.

You can always use sports illustrations and me, Gary. I love it. That helps. Good stuff. I'm going to come back to some of your critique of xenoglossy, which you mentioned earlier and the birth marks. But first, let's pause from it. I know at this point some people are probably thinking about the biblical evidence that's sometimes given. So, for example, in Matthew 17 verses 10 through 13, the disciples ask Jesus the prophecy that Elijah must come before the Messiah.

And Jesus identifies the Elijah as John the Baptist. And of course, the other early gospels make that connection as well. Herod also responds to the fame of Jesus by saying this is John the Baptist. He has been raised from the dead. That is why these miraculous powers are at work with him. Is this reincarnation in the biblical text? And I would say, absolutely not for this reason. Not necessarily because I can say, oh, this Greek word means not the same but doing similar things.

I'm not, I can't always solve the, you know, first of all, I'm not primarily a language scholar. I told my PhD students, I got a minor in Greek and that makes me dangerous. doesn't make me a Greek scholar. So I can't point to a certain thing here like a word, but I can't tell you this. I want to know whether Jesus is saying they're similar or they're the same. Which one? Because in logic, we know, similarity does not prove sameness. Two things can be similar. You can think of a bunch of ludicrous examples. Two quarterbacks, I just heard. of two quarterbacks this last week comparing two of the top teams going to nationals, their statistics are almost identical, but they're not the same guy.

So what is Jesus saying? Is he saying, this guy's the reincarnation of him? I don't think that's justified anywhere in Scripture. I don't think you can prove the point, and that's just one case. If that's your best case, I don't mean yours, but that's a person's best case. I think there's got to be a closer, the grid, the bridge has got to be a little more solid, then yeah, this is Elijah. What do you mean?

We say that all the time, but we don't mean you're literally the other pitcher on the team that at your high school, this guy was almost as famous then as you are now. It's an analogy. It's not a one-to-one. Let's put this way. It comes on several levels.

There's no, to me, no background philosophical reasons or theological reasons that would make the Bible a book that teaches reincarnation. And if we have to go to two or three cases that could be similarity and not proof, I'm not walking on that bridge. If that thing is going over a big valley, I'm not working on the bridge because if you tell me, no, no, no, don't go out there. I only meant they were similar. Yeah, now I'm dead.

So it's just not a good, similarity argument's not the same as sameness. arguments. And you'd have to tell me that James, that Jesus meant they're the same people. This is, you're teaching us like a basic hermeneutical principle. If you have a contested passage, you look at it in light of the whole. And clearly the gospel of Matthew, arguably the most Jewish of the gospels, is pulling from who God is and the Old Testament scriptures and death and judgment. And so we're going to interpret this contested passage that through the lens of what else Matthew and Judaism taught. Now, if we had independent reason to believe reincarnation was true, then this passage we can maybe interpret in light of it, but we don't. So that's a really good

hermeneical approach. The other thing I throw in there is when they ask the disciples, you know, the prophecy that Elijah must come before the Messiah, are they saying Elijah will come back from the dead or an Elijah type figure will come. And it's an analogy. Now, of course, Elijah shows up with Moses in Mark 9, and I think Luke 9 in the transfiguration, but that's a different point that's being asked here. It's an analogy not saying he'll come. So that's where reincarnation is reading so much in this passage that's obviously not there.

So let me ask you this, Gary. Is there a way to make... reincarnation compatible with Christianity, or are they completely incompatible belief systems? Let me ask a question. We don't have much for reincarnation of the Bible. We have a couple passages that are odd passages, but you might have just mentioned one. It's not a strong contradiction, and you weren't using it that way, but I'm saying it's a mild contradiction, and it's this. In Mark 9, where Jesus, with a sermon, I mean the Transfiguration and the these two Old Testament saints appear before Jesus.

Jesus doesn't say, what's the problem here? This is Elijah. Okay? Who is Jesus' cousin? John the Baptist. They're distinct people. Jesus treats them distinctly. And Jesus doesn't say, oh, this is the guy that was dead where his physical figure is

my seemingly cousin, but he's not really my cousin. I mean, Elijah is already there. Jesus doesn't say, see, I told you he'd come before John the Baptist. See, if we wanted to, we could say this. Wow, darn, Elijah did come before Jesus. Have you ever read Mark 9? He came on the mountain. He came before Jesus did, you know, before his death and resurrection. But you're right. The main problem is there's not a body of data that make reincarnation true. So to jump into a view that is so incredible and deep with all kind of things where Peter can go to his home and go down the hallway and turn to the right. I mean, John doesn't talk like that of anybody.

Jesus doesn't talk like that of anybody. You'd think we'd find a lot of verses like that. So I'm going to go with assimilation, not sameness. To me, you said hermeneutics, and you're right. It's also a logical principle. In this case, sameness does not prove identity. I'm sorry, similarity does not prove identity. So is reincarnation compatible with Christianity, or is it incompatible as a belief system?

I think it's incompatible, and I can give you a lot of reasons for it. Early in the chapter and throughout, I do other things like this. These are two competing worldviews. largely it's an eastern view and a western view and what what's at stake okay the eastern view is usually not always it's a monism uh and it's an idealism now a lot of some christians some well-known christian theologians are idealists jonathan edwards is often called an idealistic philosopher but for the most part idealism is somebody who's totally where almost everybody there is an idealist in Eastern, you know, in some sense, philosophical idealism. And their monists, no,

that's a Judeo-Christian view. They believe in pluralism. They believe in a totally, so it's a culture behind them that is totally different. Your question was, can reincarnation be interpreted with, if I understand it, right? Can it be interpreted within Christianity as a a part of. And I'd say, yeah, their underlying philosophies are totally different. What about polytheism versus monotheism? That's a huge one. I just don't see how reincarnation fits into a Western biblical, either Judaism or Christianity, monotheistic religion, the two views. Hinduism and Christianity, but as posed as you could be as far as having totally different perspectives. And that's helpful. And we step back again on who God is, what God is like, what's

wrong with the world and how we fix it, the nature of what it means to be human, what the afterlife is like. I mean, on the big boulders that define a faith, they're distinctly different. So somebody would have to really force a puzzle piece into a puzzle that doesn't fit. That's a, yeah, that's your, that's your, that's your, that's your, that's your, I use baseball and football there and use puzzle piece. I think they're both right because neither one, the, the map was so many thousand pieces and the baseball game or the football game, they have to fit together. You've got to be a team. And in your case, you've got to be a puzzle. If the piece doesn't fit the puzzle and the players don't fit the team, well, I'm sorry. playing soccer. That's what I call football. Yeah, it's not going to fit our picture. If the big pictures aren't, the philosophical overview is going to be a huge issue to me. So I don't have any reason. I don't have any reason to affirm reincarnation. I don't think it's taught in scripture. I think there's good alternatives by Stevenson and others. Now, like I said,

the other guy says the other reincarnationist says demon possession is a better option. So wow. Now, you're going to criticize me? Okay. I'm going to go to my worldview. And don't forget, I'm open to discarnate possession, which Stevenson says is the better of the two views. And he thinks that's a real rival to reincarnation. Okay, well, on my thesis, I've got, you know, I've got two running backs and you've got one. Or I've got two big home run hitters and you've got one. I'm not saying I'm going to win.

I'm just saying odds are with me. So two more pieces of evidence that are often given for reincarnation. I'll get your take on this. One is xenoglossy. Need a daily spark of hope and direction? Let the Daily Bible app from Salem Media be that spark. This free Android app delivers an uplifting verse each morning, plus reading plans, devotions, and trusted podcasts from leaders like Joyce Meyer and Rick Warren.

Prefer to listen instead? The Daily Bible app reads verses, reading plans, and chapters allowed, handy for the headphones moment of your day. Choose from versions like ESV, NIV, NIV, KJV, and more, and bookmark favorites to revisit later. Share inspiring messages with loved ones right from the app. Feel God's presence in every notification. Search for Daily Bible app on Google Play and begin your day with hope, purpose, and peace.

Where people seemingly have the supernatural ability to speak another language. And the way this is often interpreted with reincarnation is it's the language that their former self or identity spoke. And is being transformed into them, evidence that it's the same. soul now in a new body, what would your response to that be? Just the Xenoglossi alone? Yeah. Okay. Well, on either, see, to me, okay, I'm really prejudiced.

You're getting me going here because I'm going, hey, Sean, if I've got discarnate and beam of possession, I've got some other issues like logic and these other things I mentioned, I'm really kind of getting a tight view here. And I see your view is being kind of loose, you know, the eastern view is like this. And you're going, what about a xenoglossy? I'm going, Sean. time out. Think about it. If this is discard a possession, it's another person. If it's demon possession, it's, the demons could speak a hundred languages. But on my view, I'm surprised

someone's not speaking messages out, you know, other other languages. Don't forget, when you do when you do spiritual gifts, whatever you're, I mean, I'm open to anything, I biblically. spiritual gifts. But there are cases in scripture, for an instance, the little girl who followed Paul, and she was one to, she wanted, they cast a demon out of her, but she was prophesying and making all kinds of things. When you can do supernatural things, they didn't go, whoa, you're one of us. You're doing the supernatural. They go, get out of here. That supernatural is not from us, and they cast the demon out of her. Now, isn't it odd that our thesis, demon is one of two major counter theories and they didn't accept her what she manifested true yeah do you have evidence

yeah is it of us no be gone satan you know so i i just think that's in both discarned and possessive cases i'm surprised if there's not other languages oh wow that that's interesting to hear you say there's not and of course i've done seven Shepard shows a number with Richard Gallagher and people on demonic possession and oppression. And a common phenomenon is speaking in other languages, which shows something supernatural is going on. Yes. Which if we're saying that this person's not really reincarnated from their spirit in a different body, but possession or oppression or deincarnation, this is exactly what we would expect. it fits with both of those. So that's helpful.

That makes sense. What about the birth marks and deformities that somebody seems to have that they had in their previous life as well, which seems to show some kind of continuity between the two lives? Yeah, let me give you an actual, I think, objection that's good, but let me also give a natural objection that I think is good. I'll give you each example. All right. Birth marks, similar marks, deformities. I think that here's a really good comeback. We hear that psychics, psychics frequently do really interesting things.

And one of the things that pop up once in a while are the marks in the poems and where people produce blood. And they say, see, I've been blessed. God's whatever with me, he's very happy with me, I'm showing the same wounds as Jesus does. And my one time a year, whatever the story is, one time a year at Easter, I start, I start bleeding in the palms of my hand. First of all, I got a little bit of a side one. Everybody today, medical and theological, think that the nails went here. So they're bleeding. They're bleeding in the wrong place.

That's true. They're not bleeding in the right place. But give it to them, be that as it may. Here's the comeback. So are you arguing for reincarnation? nation here? I'm just saying people show similar marks. Oh. Ah, so you're Jesus, right? No, I didn't say that. But you got the marks of Jesus on you, the same ones Jesus had, right? Yeah. Are you Jesus? No, I'm a follower of Jesus, but you're not Jesus. No, and I thought this discussion was hilarious.

You're not Jesus, but you manifest his wounds. I guess that means that not all wounds are evidential manifestations of the person themselves. If you can have a mark, but I can think of a couple natural theses. If parents are in on this, and I don't mean necessarily nastily in on it, but the way Christians manipulate things sometimes to make it look like their version of Christianity is more true or more than yours, or I've got this gift, or I've got, you know, I'm not picking on anybody. I believe sign gifts are here, et cetera. but how could what if the parents you know how in that culture fathers choose brides for their daughters

okay what if the parent works with the other parent Sam's parent works with Peter's parent to bring him over to Peter's house and the kid we've told him it's the bedroom is the one room on the right last room on the right okay so I got this kid down he passes all the tests and everything else, he goes in there. But his parents, oh, well, you got a, you got a mark here. What if one of the marks is real, but the other mark is kind of imagined, but the parents make it look up that it's, it's contrived. What if the wounds are contrived?

But I like the one about the signs of the cross, the people bleeding have signs of the cross. Nobody says they're Jesus. You know, so signs don't, again, here's the phrase. similarities do not produce sameness. And even if it were true, even if it were true, I think the marks on the body are one of the least of the evidences. Notice I have it down at the end. It's not because I don't want to answer it.

It's because I almost think it's not a really good objection, but I'm going to put it there anyway because they say it's good. I just don't find it as evidence for anything. I think that to be pretty clear, like the actual marks on Jesus that he shows Thomas and tells him distinctly, rather than vague similarities that could have a natural explanation or in some cases even a supernatural one apart from reincarnation isn't really, really compelling.

Let me ask you something. We teach both sides of the country at two well-known Christian schools. And our traditions, and we both are not one denomination, where, you know, everybody and from all over the world. what would how good would that similarity have to be? How in some cases, yeah, the closeness might be, you know, maybe I'm not telling you that I have a mark on my shoulder like you did, but I also have one of those on my left knee and one of them on my top of my foot.

I just have these kind of mark. What I mean is to me they're just natural theses all over the place. Now, if you have a really good one, like I don't know what a really good one would be. But here's my other question. From the greater picture that we've been developing here, can demons make marks on bodies and duplicate? And could it discard it personality? I don't know. I'm not as sure about the discarnate personality, but I'm sure demons can do that.

Demons do miracles, right? And Jesus said they would deceive the very elect if they could. They would try to deceive the elect. Do you think they could try to put a mark on your shoulder? I just think if you get demon in here and Stevenson goes 50-50 and Ortega goes, no, it's demon, that's just better. You let the cat out of the bag on this one because there's no stopping it. You've got a supernatural person inside you, you know, a demon.

And again, the god of this world. you know, Jesus said, watch out for the miracles. Book of Revelation, watch out for the miracles. I just think that I think it could be about anything. That's why I don't think the marks are very strong. I think on the Christian worldview, the marks are, can be duplicated a lot easier. I think you're right.

If it's a demon. You know, I don't know the line about how specific a mark would have to be. This is kind of the question of like the design filter. How do we recognize when design is there? And of course, if it's like a tattoo that matches with a level of specificity, wouldn't necessarily prove supernatural if somebody was aware of that mark on somebody else before. Like, it doesn't really rule out the supernatural, maybe suggests it. But even then, demons could do that.

And by the way, if somebody's watched this, they don't believe in demons or reincarnation, they're going to think the two of us are crazy. And that's completely fine. All we're trying to show is the evidence for reincarnation has another. explanation that can account for the data, namely demon possession or oppression, so this uniquely doesn't count as evidence for the supernatural. And for you and I who believe in demons and believe there are liars like Jesus says in the gospel of John chapter 8 specifically, Satan is a liar. Well, if resurrection is as central to the Christian faith as you and I have been arguing,

and the chief sign that Jesus gave that the son of man would be in the belly of Jonah for three days, then there would be incentive for demons to lie about this and convince people who've had supernatural experiences to go to the direction of reincarnation rather than resurrection. So my point is that I just think it fits. Now, before we wrap up, anything else that I didn't ask you about a critique of reincarnation that you want to bring in. here or did we cover it we went into a pretty decent depth on it was actually Sean i talked a lot of people who do a lot of interviews and you are regularly mentioned is one of the best of not the best christian interviewers today this is typical you sent me a list how many questions were on my list 20 uh probably yeah 12 15 plus maybe i read him real quickly and i thought to myself yeah he's done his

homework because all these are on my chapter it was not anything you know But I would want to make a point here at the very end. It's not true or false on reincarnation, but I do have, here's my final two points. We've covered the one. We haven't really mentioned the other one. The one I would cover is, I don't think this argument is even challenging. If you said to me, hey, you're the resurrection guy. Your fourth volume is coming anytime.

It's almost 4,000 pages of work on the resurrection. What do you think about the loosening? theory. You got this great big chapter on it and you handle it in a bunch of other places. I'd say, hmm, Sean, that's probably the toughest naturalistic theory to deal with. I acknowledge it's kind of tough. You go, hey, on a world religious question, what do you think about reincarnation? I'd say, Sean, in my view, not close. I don't think they're comparable arguments. I think that's something to be said. And one of the biggest problems is my baseball or football illustration, your puzzle illustration. When the whole, when the whole worldview is at odds with

each other and you start talking about which worldview is right, we're only doing reincarnation on reincarnation. I don't think it's anything to worry about. But if you're going to do a big picture on worldviews, don't even start me. You're going to lose before you start. I mean, the source over here, it's to my left, by a Buddhist PhD, English professor, British professor, he says, we don't, He's a Buddhist. He says, we don't even know what Buddha taught. The earliest sources that I'm in favor of are 600 to 800 years after Buddha died. Wow. We don't, that's not history, but if that's the source you're going to use, we say you're not even in the ballgame. And you admitted it. You said you don't have any evidence as to, okay, on that level, I don't think

that's a good objection. Here's my last one that we haven't really mentioned. I've said this all my life because I'm not proud of this, but in my 20 years of doubting, I got involved in the occult, more than I should have. And I had a leading occult expert who was converted from the occult. He was not a Christian. He was a leader in a non-Christian group. So I thought, oh, here's the guy who can answer my questions. And I wasn't looking at that time for evidence for Christianity. I I wished I knew NDEs in those days because that's a blow away on almost everything. But I thought the occult might give some evidence is for an afterlife, not necessarily for Christianity.

So I was asking everything because I wanted evidence wherever it could be found. I should never have gone there, but this guy scared me to death one time because I kept writing letters to him. He was European. And he kept answering my objections. And one day I wrote him five more questions after I probably written. to him over the years. And he was at the top of his crack. He could do things spiritistically that would make him the apex, one of the apex people in the whole world.

But he sent the letter back to me. I still have it. It's in my file. And it scared me to death. Here's what he said to me. This time, I am not going to answer your five questions. I'm not going to answer any more of your questions. This guy was converted, remember? and he was acting more Christianly than I was. I was a pastor, Sean. And at the time, and he wrote back to me, he goes, I will not answer your questions. And in this sentence, you are playing with fire.

Oh. You heard me to death. And that letter is in my file to this day. Happened 30 years ago. But it's in my file. All right, here's my point. This kind of argument to me is a backdoor argument for the truth. truth of Christianity. Just like evidences for the occult are backdoor arguments for the Christian

worldview. If Satan could do the things that Jesus says he can, i.e. deceive the very elect if he can do it. If Satan does that, and we find out there's Satan, we find out Satan exists, or we find out that occult phenomena exist, and they have, compared to reincarnation, the occultic stuff, I'll give a testimony once a while and say, stay away from it. It's a page turner, but I won't tell you what I was asking. I won't tell you what I'm doing because you're too easy to get sucked into it, Christians. I don't talk about it in my classes. I just say stay away from it like that guy told me.

But it is a backdoor evidence for Christianity. If there's a pile of really supernatural evidence, I don't think reincarnation fits that bill. But if there's really backdoor and you start going, whoa, spiritism, it's a little more inclusive than Christianity, be a little nicer, but that doesn't follow from this stuff. It follows that Satan is not God and he's going to be judged. However, it does say that this world is a supernatural world. It does say there's spirits.

It does say that the general Hebrew, even Muslim, the Islamic Jewish Christian worldview is generally true, with demons and so on, it evidences Christianity. And that's the last thing I'd say. If this argument is even in the ballpark and you want to make an argument for Hinduism, but you've got... Looking for a simple way to stay rooted in God's Word every day. The Daily Bible Devotion app by Salem Media gives you morning and evening devotionals

designed to encourage, inspire, and keep you connected with scripture. Plus, you'll enjoy daily Bible trivia and humor. A fun way to learn and share a smile while. growing in your faith. Get the Daily Bible Devotion app for free on both iOS and Android. Start and end your day with God's Word. Search for the Daily Bible Devotion app in the App Store or Google Play Store and download it today. You know, this little fella telling you where is where the person's buried in which room is his, if this is really evidence, he didn't learn it from his parents and we can't explain it any other way, but you don't have any other ballplayers on your team or puzzle pieces

that fit? I think that favors Christianity by a mile, but it is a backdoor evidence for Christianity because in scripture, the occult exists. That's why in Acts 16, that's why Paul cast the spirit out of the little girl that was doing supernatural things. What she was doing was evidence for Christianity, but not because her beliefs were, her religion was true. So I think this last thing I'd say. Things about spiritism and Eastern thought, thank you for giving us one more evidence for our position. But it doesn't challenge us on any kind of evidence anywhere near legal, anywhere near equal. I personally heard and read a lot of stories and evidences from me, Gary, but that one you shared about the letter is one I have not heard before and gave me chills when you said it

as well. So bottom line is I agree with you that the evidence for reing incarnation does not compare to the historical evidence for resurrection. The reason to not include it in your resurrection volumes is because it doesn't pose a historical challenge. But this video is important because on a popular level, so many people in America, some who claim to be Christians and worldwide embrace reincarnation. So some of you are watching this and saying, hey, Ian Stevenson has passed away. He used to be the expert. There is new evidence for reincarnation.

you guys have not considered. Tag it below, we will take a look at it. I'll talk with Gary and maybe we'll do a response to that. So if you think there's other pieces of evidence, don't tag a dissertation, send us quick articles or points. I'll take a look at if it's there and we need to revisit this. I'd be happy to come back. And before you click away, make sure you hit subscribe.

We've got some other shows cut up on resurrection, near-death experiences, the scientific evidence for God and some of the leading Christian scholars and beyond coming on for conversation. You won't want to miss it. If you thought about studying Apollex, we'd love to have you at Talbot School of Theology online or in person information below. And Gary, as you know, we have a certificate program we offer at Biola. We have just completely updated that.

And there's a significant discount below. If you kind of want to formally study, Paul Jackson, aren't ready for a master's with me or a PhD at Liberty. Take a look at the certificate program. Gary, thanks for coming on. And when your next volume four is out, we will do a show on that for sure. Always appreciate you coming on. And thanks for being a friend as well. You're welcome, Sean. It was a great show. I enjoyed it. I've been looking for it for a long time. And I think it's your questioning that largely pulled this thing off. You directed to the right places that I could not have to say, oh, don't go too far. I've got to give you three other points. You just worked them right in from the beginning. I think it was fantastic. Thanks, brother. Hey friends, if you enjoyed this show, please hit that follow button on your podcast app.

Most of you tuning in haven't done this yet, and it makes a huge difference in helping us reach and equip more people and build community. And please consider leaving a podcast review. Every review helps. Thanks for listening to the Sean McDowell Show, brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University, where we have on campus and online programs in apologetic, spiritual information, marriage and family, Bible, and so much more. We would love to train you to more effectively live, teach, and defend the Christian faith today. And we will see you when the next episode drops.

What if your next chapter is your best one yet? Hi, I'm Monica, host of Hope for the Journey, the podcast for women over 40 who are ready to rise, rebuild, and reclaim their story. Each week, you'll hear powerful comeback stories from women who've walked through the fire and come out stronger. if you're navigating change or dreaming about what's next, you're not alone. Follow hope for the journey on your favorite podcast app and find the hope that you've been looking for.