Reincarnation is a fact. That it is no longer a part of today’s Christian beliefs is due to one power-hungry woman who had all references to reincarnation in the early Bible removed.
What was that thing that skeptics keep throwing at Christians about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence? We have thousands of New Testment manuscripts dating back as far as the 2nd century, and not one mentions reincarnation anywhere. We also have the writings of early church Fathers dating back to people who were contemporary with the Apostles, and again, there is no mention of reincarnation. By the 6th century, when reincarnation was supposedly "removed" from the Bible, the canon had been fixed and copies of the Bible were distributed throughout the civilized world. Are we to assume that one "power-hungry woman" had the ability to gather up every copy of the Bible in the world and change them all so that not even one manuscript remained that reflected this "pillar of belief" of the early church, and also somehow managed to alter all the writings of the early Fathers? You might as well try to alter the Bible today by gathering up all the copies and changing them.
Even the Gnostic gospels, which were about as mainstream to Christianity as the average issue of the Watchtower, don't reflect a belief in reincarnation. The "facts" stated in this article are simply false. The Chalcedon council did not endorse reincarnation, nor was it a topic of discussion there (or did the "power-hungry woman" somehow alter all the records of that council, too?). Whoever wrote this article is either massively ignorant of church history or is simply being deceptive.
Or is this supposed to be like the old joke, where someone claims that reincarnation was taught in the Bible but was removed by the church, and when asked how he knows that the church removed it, answers, "Because it's not there."?