Was Jesus Reincarnated after His Crucifixion?

By Doug Peterson

My central thesis is that the New Testament writers believed in reincarnation. In this article I will expound upon this idea by arguing that Jesus might have been reincarnated after his crucifixion.

Under this theory the traditional Easter story that Jesus was crucified and appeared to his disciples on the third day following the crucifixion is incorrect. Rather, on the third day after the crucifixion, Jesus was reborn into the world. He was reincarnated with a full memory of his past life.  Jesus was crucified in AD 30.

When the reincarnated Jesus was about 5 years old, and old enough to communicate, he traveled to Jerusalem to reveal himself to the disciples. At the end of a Sabbatical year (likely in AD 35) on the first day of the week he appeared to Mary and the disciples. Given the fact he was born on the third day following the crucifixion, and given the fact that he had knowledge of things he had said to his disciples when he was Jesus, he was able to prove rather convincingly that he was the risen Christ--reincarnated.

With this theory the events described in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21 all occurred about 5 years (and not two days) after the crucifixion. I will elaborate on the evidence supporting this chronology.

The Traditional Easter Story

The single biggest problem I have with the traditional Easter story is that it proves nothing. If Jesus' crucified body had somehow come back to life, then how does this support a belief in a heavenly realm not of this earth? How does it prove that people will enter heaven after death? Billions of people have died throughout history and have seemingly vanished from the face of the earth. The idea that Jesus' dead body came back to life and later ascended into a heavenly realm not of this earth is in effect no different. The end result is the same. A man died 2,000 years ago and he's presently nowhere to be found on earth. How is Jesus any different from billions of others?

All of the gospels agree that the disciples didn't recognize Jesus when he appeared to them after he was crucified. This fact alone supports reincarnation.  Jesus' soul transmigrated into a new body born on the third day following the crucifixion. If Jesus' crucified body was somehow brought back to life, then why didn't the disciples recognize him? Yet, Matthew 28:17 states that even after Jesus appeared to his disciples some still doubted. Likely it was because they didn't recognize him. Mark 16:12 states that Jesus appeared to two of the disciples "in another form." This implies he didn't look at all like the Jesus of old.  Luke 24:16 indicates that two women didn't recognize him. Then after he displayed knowledge of the occurrences of the last supper, "their eyes were opened and they knew him" (Luke 24:31). Finally, the disciples didn't recognize him when they were fishing (John 21:4).

One should also note that when Jesus revealed his hands and feet to Thomas during his appearances the text never states that they actually bore the wounds of a crucifixion (Luke 24:39-40; John 20:25-28). Of course, initially, Thomas wanted to see scars in Jesus' hands and feet before he believed Jesus had risen (John 20:25). Likely Thomas initially didn't believe in reincarnation and only would believe if (years later) Jesus' body still bore the scars from the crucifixion.

So, why would Jesus show his hands, feet and side to his disciples if he had reincarnated and they didn't bear any marks of the crucifixion?  He might have been showing the locations on his body where the nails had been driven and where the sword had pierced his side to prove he had knowledge of the crucifixion.  This certainly would provide some proof that he had reincarnated.  On the other hand, the traditional interpretation makes no sense. Are we to believe that Jesus revealed scars on his hands and feet and this really convinced his disciples that he was the risen Jesus? Why wouldn't they recognize him by simply looking at his face? Isn't it common for people to make identifications based on facial appearance alone?

Typically, many claim that Christ was the fulfillment of the prophecy Peter cites in Acts 2:31:

(David) seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

The contention is that Jesus' dead body came back to life and therefore his flesh did not see "corruption" or decay. However, one can more easily interpret this passage to mean that the flesh Jesus possessed when he rose again was not corrupted--i.e., it bore no scars from a crucifixion. In fact Jesus was given a new body through reincarnation.  Paul and Peter indicate in other passages that Jesus' soul would never again see corruption or destruction because Jesus would always reincarnate with a complete memory of any previous life.

The Unleavened Bread Puzzle

Luke 24:30 strongly suggests that Jesus' appearances to Mary and the disciples after his resurrection were not during the week following Passover.  At a meal the risen Jesus broke bread with two of the disciples only two or three days after he first appeared to Mary:

And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. (Luke 24:30)

The problem is that the traditional Easter story suggests these events must have occurred during the feast of unleavened bread.  This is a seven-day feast immediately following Passover during which the Jews were not to eat leavened bread.  However, Luke 24:30 clearly implies this bread was leavened bread.  A different Greek word was used to describe unleavened bread and it is found in Luke 22:1, Mark 14:1, and Matthew 26:17.  Jesus would have violated the traditions of the feast unless the breaking of bread did not in fact occur during the week following Passover.  In fact as I claim the appearances and the breaking of bread likely occurred in autumn.

The Feast of Tabernacles Reference

In John's gospel we find two verses which I believe prove that Jesus' appearance to Mary and the disciples occurred in the fall and specifically during the Feast of Tabernacles.  This chronology strongly suggests that Jesus was reincarnated after the crucifixion and not that his dead body came back to life as is traditionally taught.  The two verses are John 7:53 and John 20:10:

And every man went unto his own house. (John 7:53) 

Then the disciples went away again unto their own home. (John 20:10)

The curious fact is that John 7 describes events that occurred on either the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles or the next day-in the fall (John 7:2, 37).  The statement in John 7:53 implies that every man returned to dwell in his own booth or tabernacle which was the tradition during the Feast of Tabernacles.  John 20:10 implies the same. Yet John 20 describes the first appearance to Mary and the disciples after the discovery of the empty tomb. Isn't this conclusive that Jesus' appearance occurred during the fall?

Mary's Cryptic Response to Jesus

John 20:15 is a telling verse that likewise proves Jesus was reincarnated after the crucifixion.  In the verse Mary asks Jesus about the location of Jesus' crucified body when she is at the empty tomb. The issue in this passage is determining the point in time when Mary realizes she is speaking to the risen Jesus himself:

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. (John 20:15)

The key fact is this: the Greek term used for "Sir" in this verse is the same word that is translated as "Lord" throughout the New Testament.  In other words, if one replaces the term with "Lord" it is obvious that Mary already knows she is speaking to Jesus when she responds to his question.  This proves that Jesus was reincarnated and she is simply wondering what the reincarnated Jesus did with the skeletal remains of his old body. The fact that she presumes him to be the gardener doesn't contradict this interpretation. She could have still presumed Jesus was a gardener and believed he was reincarnated at the same time.

The appearance to Paul

Another problem is that Paul states that Jesus appeared to him. Yet, based on Acts 9, all scholars agree Paul didn't have an encounter with Jesus until years (possibly 5 years) after the crucifixion. In 1 Corinthians 15:3-9 Paul lists Jesus' appearances:

For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

One would naturally assume that these appearances were of the same nature, i.e.-appearances by Christ in the flesh and blood. Paul mentions himself in the last sentence of the passage. Many claim Paul only had a vision of Christ and didn't see him in bodily form. They claim Acts 9:7-8 supports the position that Paul saw no one on the road to Damascus when he met Jesus. That text states he saw "no man." Might we venture to guess that Paul didn't see a man but perhaps a boy of age 5-10 years old? After all, the text states Paul clearly heard Jesus' voice.

Moreover, Paul uses the phrase, "born out of due time" in the 1 Corinthians passage cited above.   Most claim this was in reference to Paul himself.  However, it is more likely a reference to Christ in the context of the passage. Paul meant that Jesus appeared to him to be one born out of due time. This makes sense if we consider that Paul's previous statement about the third day after Jesus' burial denoted a point in time when Christ was to be born again. If so, and Paul knew when Jesus was crucified, he would have known how old a reincarnated Jesus should have been when Paul saw him. If he appeared younger than Paul expected, then he might have thought the reincarnated Jesus was born prematurely. In any event this passage could support reincarnation and the theory that Christ was to be reborn in the world on the third day.

Paul further reinforces this view in Acts 13:32-33 when he gave this speech:

And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

The term "begotten" denotes birth.  Paul equates Jesus' being raised up with the concept of his birth.

John 16 also supports the theory that Jesus was reborn into the world after his crucifixion.  When Jesus tells his disciples that they will not see him in a "little while" he makes this statement:

A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.  And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you.  (John 16:21-22)

In a roundabout way Jesus was telling his disciples that their sorrow about his death would be turned to joy because Jesus would again be born into the world (and in fact delivered of another woman).

Finally, the notion of being "risen again" was equated with reincarnation. Jesus' disciples told him that some believed Jesus was one of the old prophets who had "risen again." (Luke 9:19) Reincarnation must have been envisioned in this text.

Matthew 12:40

Another problem with the traditional Easter view lies with Matthew 12:40:

For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 

Here is a principle of law: in a document where an ambiguous phrase appears, a specific provision addressing the ambiguity takes precedence. In this case, Jesus stated that he would rise again on the third day. That statement is ambiguous. We don't know if he meant three days excluding or including the day of his crucifixion. Matthew 12:40 is more specific and therefore takes precedence. It implies Jesus would remain dead for three days and three nights. All of the gospels agree that Jesus was crucified and buried on the day before a Sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:56; John 19:31).  If this was a weekly Sabbath, a period of three days and three nights clearly expires on the second day of the week. Jesus could not have risen from the dead on the first day of the week. Yet this is the day of the week when the events begin in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20 and the day when Jesus appears again.

Some contend the Sabbath was not a weekly Sabbath but a feast day, likely the first day of the feast of unleavened bread. If this is true (which is highly unlikely) it is impossible to determine the day of the week when Jesus was crucified.

I contend Jesus remained dead for three days and three nights, and on the third day he was reborn into the world. The events described in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20 commence on the first day of the week. But the authors are merely denoting the day of the week when Mary had an occasion to visit Jesus' tomb. These events could have occurred years after the crucifixion.

The Sabbatical Year Reference

Matthew and Mark are the key gospels. In both gospels one finds an introductory statement that could be read to imply years had elapsed from the time of the crucifixion:

In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. (Matthew 28:1)

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.  (Mark 16:1-2)

My contention is that the term "Sabbath" in both gospels implies a Sabbatical year-not a Sabbath day. Luke 24 and John 20 do not contain the reference to the Sabbath. However, Matthew and Mark are considered the oldest accounts and therefore Luke and John might have felt it unnecessary to include the reference. The statements imply that after the next Sabbatical year had expired, on the first day of the week Mary had an occasion to visit Jesus' tomb. The statements imply years expired from the time of the crucifixion until the day Jesus appeared to Mary.

What evidence supports the theory that the term "Sabbath" implies a Sabbatical year? The most basic fact is that everyone knows the first day of the week follows a Sabbath day and therefore the reference to the Sabbath is redundant if it implies a Sabbath day. Moreover, in Mark's gospel the statements suggest Mary bought spices after the Sabbath had ended but before the first day of the week.  This could only be true if the Sabbath was a Sabbatical year. If the Sabbath was in reference to a Sabbath day she must have purchased them in the middle of the night in order to see the tomb at the rising of the sun the next day. This is unlikely. However, if the statement implies she purchased them after a Sabbatical year had expired, then the purchase could have been during a day before the first day of the week.

This reading can be applied to all four gospels.  We can now speculate that the events described in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20 occurred years, and not a mere two days, after the crucifixion. Based on Sabbatical tables for the second temple period, if Jesus was crucified in AD 30, the next Sabbatical year likely would have ended in AD 35.

The gospels, and particularly Luke 24 and John 20, appear misleading to the contemporary reader assuming a large gap in time exists between the crucifixion and Mary's visitation to the tomb. However, likely the post-crucifixion appearances were part of an oral tradition before the gospels were written. Readers at the time knew one tradition was that Jesus had been reincarnated and first appeared to Mary after a Sabbatical year had expired.

The Roman Guards

Of course with this reading other problems arise with Matthew 28. Roman guards are mentioned in Matthew 28:11. Many casually assume these guards were the same guards mentioned in Matthew 27:66.  The guards in Matthew 27:66 were to guard Jesus' tomb until the third day following the crucifixion to make sure the disciples didn't steal his body during the night.  If they were the same guards this means the events in Matthew 28 occurred the day after the events described in Matthew 27:66.

However, Matthew 27:66 implies that the guards succeeded in keeping Jesus' tomb secure until the third day ("they went and made the sepulcher sure").   Matthew 28:11 speaks of members of a Roman watch coming "into the city" (i.e., Jerusalem) to meet with the chief priests. It is unlikely these were the same guards who secured Jesus' tomb in Matthew 27:66 because Jesus was buried in Jerusalem and the latter guardian would have already been located in Jerusalem. Finally, on the first day of the week Matthew 28:11-13 indicates that the chief priests bribed the Roman guards into telling people that Jesus' disciples stole his body when everyone was asleep. If these were the same Romans who guarded Jesus' tomb after the crucifixion, this would have been equivalent to admitting they were totally incompetent. They slept on the job when their sole purpose was to keep a night watch over Jesus' tomb. This is implausible. A more plausible reading is that the guards mentioned in Matthew 28 were not the same guards who were obligated to secure Jesus' tomb after the crucifixion. This was years later.  The Jews bribed other guards to agree to tell a story blaming the disciples for Jesus' missing body and a plundered tomb. By agreeing to lie the guards were not incriminating themselves in the process. Years later, the Jews still would not want to shoulder any blame for a plundered tomb that might have been revered by Christian Jews.

Of course the Roman guards aren't mentioned at all in Mark, Luke and John.

Many claim the "keepers" mentioned in Matthew 28:4 were the Roman guards who were obligated to secure Jesus' tomb. The Greek term is not associated with the term used to describe the Roman watch. One can more easily believe the "keepers" might have been gardeners. After all, Mary initially thought Jesus was a gardener when she saw him at the tomb (John 20:15).

One might also keep in mind that if Jesus was reincarnated whether his dead crucified body was missing from the tomb or not is irrelevant.  Skeptics of this theory might ask why Jesus' crucified body mysteriously disappeared at the time a reincarnated Jesus appeared in the company of the two angelic figures (John 20:12).  The likely answer is that the reincarnated Jesus, with the aid of the angelic figures, moved the body.  At least this is what John 20:12-18 implies. The gospels only mention the tomb because it served as a focal point when the reincarnated Jesus returned. Jesus disposed of his old body to underscore the futility of seeking him among the dead when he was truly alive in another body.

The Anointing Problem

Another issue arises concerning Mary Magdalene. According to Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:1, Mary brought spices to Jesus' tomb to anoint his body on the first day of the week.  This might imply she was trying to anoint his body shortly after his death. However, John 19:39-40 states that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea had already anointed Jesus' body before wrapping it in linens and burying him in the tomb.  In other words there was no need for Mary Magdalene to return to the tomb only two days later to re-anoint the body. And even if she had intended to anoint the body, who did she think would roll away the stone securing the tomb? Would Jews likewise remove the wraps from Jesus' body to re-anoint a body already anointed under Jewish custom?

The most likely reason Mary came to the tomb years later to perform an anointing is because the 69th week or Sabbatical year had just expired as foretold in Daniel 9:25. Since she thought Jesus was the "anointed one" described in the seventy sevens prophecy she was attempting to anoint Christ as the Messiah in accordance with that prophecy. I discuss the prophecy in more depth on this web site. 

The mentioning of Joseph of Arimathea also implies Jesus' appearances to his disciples likely occurred years after the crucifixion. In two gospels Joseph is noted as being one of Jesus' disciples (Matthew 27:57; John 19:38).  Yet even though Jesus was buried in a tomb Joseph owned, Joseph is never again mentioned in the New Testament after the crucifixion.  Possibly he died during the intervening years following the crucifixion and before the appearances. The same might be true of Nicodemus who helped anoint Jesus' body after the crucifixion but is never mentioned again. He died during the intervening years. A similar argument could be made about Joses, who is listed as one of Mary's sons at the time of the crucifixion but not when Jesus appeared again (Mark 15:40; 16:1).

Finally in Luke 24:21 two men mention a "third day" in their discussion with the risen Jesus. I believe this is in reference to the statements immediately following in Luke 24:22-24.  In other words, it had been three days since Mary had first visited the tomb on the first day of the week. Likely the two men thought Jesus' prophecy about rising again on the third day meant he might rise again three days after his tomb was discovered empty (and that had in fact happened three days earlier). These two men were traveling to Emmaus on the same day when they encountered Jesus (Luke 24:13).

Summary

In short, Jesus was crucified in AD 30. On the third day he was reincarnated or reborn again into the world with a complete memory of his previous life. On the first day of the week following the expiration of the next Sabbatical year he appeared to Mary and the disciples. This was likely in AD 35 when the reincarnated Jesus was 5 years old.

The event described in the gospels where Jesus ascends into heaven was when Jesus bid farewell to the disciples-never to appear to them again. He later appeared to Paul. He will continue to be reincarnated with a memory of past lives until the world ends.