remember that song?
"fear not those who kill the body, but cannot destroy the soul" ?
i always thought that was contradictory to the teachings.
~Please help answer this question about a Watchtower doctrine~
by FlyingHighNow 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
candidlynuts
-
DaCheech
remember that song?
"fear not those who kill the body, but cannot destroy the soul" ?i always thought that was contradictory to the teachings.
This is just martyrdon training
-
blondie
It was probably based on this scripture. The NWT rendering matches the NIV and the KJV.
Matthew 10:28 (NWT) And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Ge·hen´na.
Matthew 10:28 (NIV) Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matthew 10:28 (KING JAMES VERSION) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
-
Will Power
- Immortality is given only to spirit creatures but not all (see angels above)
what the hell is "live forever" on a paradise earth if not rendering these glorious JWs as immortal?
-
Room 215
This is one of the few areas in which I believe the WTBTS is on solid ground scripturally. It seems the preponderance of evidence is that the human soul is mortal, and that immortality for Christians is something they acquire at death and resurrection, by a traansformation from flesh to spirit. I believe the theological term for this is ``conditionalism,' derived from the premise that death as presented to Adam and Eve was not an inevitability but rather a condition, i.e. ``IF you sin, you die:" the logical corollary being ``If you don't sin, you don't die."
After all, if man were created as inherently immortal, and his/her spiritual destination after death were predetermined by how virtuous or wicked they were during their life on earth, what relevance would Jesus ransom have for any, either before or after his appearance?
-
candidlynuts
Matthew 10:28 (NWT) And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Ge·hen´na.
Matthew 10:28 (NIV) Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matthew 10:28 (KING JAMES VERSION) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
BUT we were taught that the body IS the soul.. you dont have a " soul" you ARE a soul.. (thats where i see contradiction)
-
Narkissos
This is one of the few areas in which I believe the WTBTS is on solid ground scripturally.
Is it?
Is the old Hebrew she'ol just non-existence, as the WT holds?
When the resurrection doctrine entered the Jewish imaginary (probably from Persian influence), did it come against or along with the Greek concept of soul immortality?
Remember, in the NT Christians are supposed to agree with the Pharisaic concept of resurrection. Now the Pharisees believed in both resurrection and soul immortality. Matthew 10:28, quoted by candidlynuts, does imply a distinction between body and soul, and gehenna is not exactly "death".
Moreover, the consistent translation of nephesh / psuchè by "soul" in the NWT is very misleading, inasmuch as the same word does carry different concepts according to the times and schools of thought.
-
FlyingHighNow
remember that song?
"fear not those who kill the body, but cannot destroy the soul" ?i always thought that was contradictory to the teachings.
I always thought this song to be contradictory to the WT teaching, too. Yes, those scriptures Blondie quoted, that the WT based their song on, actually fly in the face of the WT soul=body and can die doctrine.
I know from experience that intelligent, invisable spirit creatures who can understand English do exist. Five people, including me saw evidence of this the morning after a seance when were children. All five are still alive and none have forgotten that eventful morning. JWs would have you believe that spirit was a demon. I just know it was a spirit and that it did what I asked it to. Was the spirit a disembodied human being? I'd like to know.
Thank you all for your thoughts and contributions. What do you all believe about your soul? Do you believe you will survive the death of your body?
-
Leolaia
This is a cornerstone WT doctrine but it not very biblical. In the OT, particularly the pre-exilic writings, there is a clear belief in Sheol as a place where dead souls (or "shades," Hebrew rp'ym) linger in a meagre half-conscious existence (cf. Job 26:5-6; Proverbs 9:18; and especially Isaiah 14:4-11, 26:14). This concept is simply a continuation of the native Canaanite belief in the afterlife; the rp'ym and rp'm are mentioned widely in Phoenician and Canaanite funerary and religious texts referring to dead kings and individuals thought to influence current affairs and bring blessings. Indeed, this is probably why the word Sheol itself is derived from the verb "ask" because of the frequent practice of necromancy in ancient Canaan. The story of Saul and the witch of En-dor in 1 Samuel 28 is an example of such necromancy and the belief in the conscious existence of the dead in Sheol, and Isaiah, in illustrating the powerlessness that death brings to a mighty king, also describes the dead as conscious in Sheol. Considering the clear implications of the term rp'ym in the OT, it is interesting that the Society has said so little about it. What they have said fails to recognize the term's clear meaning in Phoenician and Canaanite texts as well as in the OT. The Insight book has just this to say on the subject:
The Hebrew repha·´im´ is used in another sense in the Bible. Sometimes it clearly applies, not to a specific people, but to those who are dead. Linking the word to a root meaning "drop down, relax," some scholars conclude that it means "sunken, powerless ones." In texts where it has this sense, the New World Translation renders it "those impotent in death," and many other translations use renderings such as "dead things," "deceased," and "dead."?Job 26:5; Ps 88:10; Pr 2:18; 9:18; 21:16; Isa 14:9; 26:14, 19.
No mention here of the extrabiblical attestations of this term, nor its implications within the Bible as suggesting a continued existence of dead in an afterlife. The etymology is also probably wrong; most scholars aware of its usage in Canaanite texts recognize that it comes from a root meaning "to heal" (cf. the angel Raphael, which means "El Heals"), thus the rp'ym are "healers". Such a meaning, however, would be strange for those who supposedly don't exist after death but it fits naturally with the practice of necromancy wherein the rp'ym were called on to bless and heal. Now, interestingly, despite the clear implications this word has for the OT view on the soul, the Insight book is strangely silent on the rp'ym when it considers the subject of the "Soul". That is, it omits information that contradicts the doctrine it wants to present as "biblical". And indeed, that's about all the Society says on the subject.
The other thing the Society is not very honest about is the claim that the doctrine of immortality derives from "pagan" influence, such as the writings of the Greek philosopher Plato. The truth is, almost the entire range of post-exilic beliefs on personal eschatology were influenced by "pagan" philosophy and religious concepts. That includes the teachings on the resurrection, Gehenna, and even quasi-annihilationism. The favorite proof-text for the Society, Ecclesiastes 9, for instance, is found in a book written most likely by early Sadducees who (small surprise) didn't believe in the resurrection at all. They believed that one's life ends the day one dies, and that's it. But in this belief, they were influenced by Greek Epicureanism which taught the same thing. So in this instance, the Society's own doctrine of the soul appears to draw itself on ancient Greek philosophy. The early Christian community drew instead on Pharisee eschatology, which included notions of personal resurrection, judgment, and final punishment or reward. Such notions were influenced by Platonic dualism and earlier by Persian eschatology and dualism. The Parable of the Rich Fool in Luke 12:13-21 (cf. Gospel of Thomas 63:1) especially parodies the futility of the Sadducee belief, and the Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) explicitly uses the Pharisee belief of the afterlife to expose the Sadducee view as morally deficient. What the Society does not seem to realize is that in post-exilic Judaism and Christianity the belief in the immortality of the soul was expressed in the belief in a resurrection. Resurrection was the way in which a person attains immortality and there were two main ideas about the resurrection: (1) that it was reserved as a reward for the righteous while the unrighteous remain dead (a sort of conditional immortality, expressed in 2 Maccabees 7:9, 16-17), and (2) that both the righteous and wicked receive a resurrection, with the former receiving glory and the latter receiving punishment (this was the dominant view, expressed first in Daniel 12:2). The Society, by denying that anything can survive of a person after death, is forced to construct a quite different doctrine of recreation (in which God recreates a person entirely from his memory) and pass it off as the biblical teaching of resurrection. The absurdity of this notion becomes clear when we examine the case of Jesus' resurrection and the Society's belief that the recreated Jesus was given a body that simulated his execution injuries (in a sort of divine conceit), for the Society denies that neither the body nor the soul survive death.
For more on the Jewish belief in the resurrection, and particularly on the Pharisee notion of Gehenna and punishment of the resurrected wicked, see my post on the subject: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/71230/1.ashx.
-
M.J.
Wow Leolaia, quite an impressive post.
The early Christian community drew instead on Pharisee eschatology
I think it is interesting how in light of the Pharisees' view of the soul, Paul makes the statement in Acts 23:6-8:
"Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, "My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead." When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 8 (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.) "
The Society, by denying that anything can survive of a person after death, is forced to construct a quite different doctrine of recreation (in which God recreates a person entirely from his memory) and pass it off as the biblical teaching of resurrection.
Does anyone know the history of this doctrine of recreation? It sounds different from what you described as "conditional immortality", which, I believe was the doctrine that CT Russell started out with.??