"Reincarnation Is a More Coherent Concept That Resurrection". Discuss.

1092 Words5 Pages
Many religions, whether they believe in resurrection such as Christians and the Islamic faith or in reincarnation like many forms of Hinduism and Buddhism, believe that the status of an individual's afterlife is the reward or punishment, for how they have lived their life. Reincarnation is the idea that after biological death, the soul begins a new life in a new body. Alternatively, resurrection is the belief that after the body dies the soul ascends up to heaven, in a state of being with God. The debate of what happens after the body dies is widely debated amongst religion, however only one can be true. Therefore, which of these two concepts is more logically coherent? Some would say that reincarnation is entirely more logical than resurrection. As Descartes suggests, if body and soul divide into two categories the body is admittedly perishable and this idea is therefore constant as we have evidence that corpses remain on earth. The possibility of a separate soul is also plausible and difficult to dispute therefore the soul is constant and as Plato suggests a direct link to the form of life, suggesting that the soul must live eternally in some form, as it is unable to die. This is more possible than the idea of resurrection because the souls is not dependent on the body, the theory of reincarnation is logical in saying that the soul passes consistently through this world, entering a different flesh form. Reincarnation comes from a belief in a cyclic existent, making it a more plausible idea as it follows the laws of nature more than resurrection does. In addition, reincarnation is more coherent because it emphasises the continuity of the soul whereas, resurrection implies that the body can be resurrected into a constant form on par with the consistent soul however, it will not be the same person. In this way reincarnation is more logistically plausible as
Open Document