A very interesting thread.
Thank you for presenting your research.
~cab
Growing Old and Dying on the Paradise Earth
by Leolaia 32 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Leolaia
PP....Thanks for making this point...I didn't realize the text was used in such a manner. Does anyone have access to Children? It would be interesting to see how Isaiah 65 is used in that old book.
Midget....LMAO!! I love how they divine "world population equilibrium" out of Isaiah 65:17-25. It just goes to show that they can write any sh*t and then just add an arbitrary "--Isaiah 65:17-25" or "--Romans 4:23-30" etc. to suddenly, magically, make it look "scriptural".
-
Leolaia
It is interesting to read how the intertestamental book of Jubilees interprets this passage:
"In those days, they will cry out and pray to be saved from the hand of the sinners, the Gentiles, but there will be none who will be saved, and the heads of children will be white with gray hairs, and an infant three weeks old will look aged like one whose years are one hundred, and their stature will be destroyed by affliction and torment. And in those days, children will begin to search the Law, and to search the commandments, and to return to the Way of Righteousness. And the days will begin to increase and grow longer among the sons of men, generation by generation, and year by year, until their days approach a thousand years, and to a greater number of years than days. And there will be no old men and none whose days would not be full. Because all of them will be infants and children, and all of their days they will be complete and live in peace and rejoicing" (Jubilees 23:24-29).
The passage begins by describing the future evil generation which, from the standpoint of the author of Jubilees, was in the immediate future, and this generation was mentioned after describing the decline in longevity from the days of the old patriarchs: "Abraham was perfect in all his actions ... but he did not complete four jubilees in his life until he grew old in the presence of evil and his days were full. And all the generations which will arise henceforth until the Day of Great Judgment will grow old quickly before they complete two jubilees" (Jubilees 23:10-12). Then the present evil generation is followed by a repentent generation who would return to the Law, and henceforth longevity would again gradually increase, generation after generation, "until their days approach a thousand years". This shows that death was still a feature of the future era of God's blessing, and that men will still "fulfill their days," but in a life filled with youth, peace, and rejoicing. Longevity is thus restored to that of the antediluvian patriarchs.
This same sense occurs in 1 Enoch. When Michael the archangel shows the Tree of Life to Enoch, Michael tells him: "No flesh has the right to touch it until the Great Judgment, in which there will be vengeance on all and a consummation forever. Then it will be given to the righteous and the pious, and its fruit will be as food for the chosen. And it will be transplanted to the holy place ... and they will enter into the sanctuary. Its fragrances will be in their bones, and they will live a long life upon the earth such as your fathers lived also (zóén pleiona zésountai hén ezésan hoi pateres) in their days, and torments and plagues and suffering will not touch them" (24:4-6). This conception is clearly utilized in Revelation (which is dependent on 1 Enoch, see my post on this), and longevity is here compared to that of Enoch's ancestors ("your fathers"), suggesting a lifespan exceeding 900 years. But note that those eating from the Tree of Life are said to "live a long life upon the earth," not "live eternally". Similar prophecies occur earlier in the book:
"Then wisdom will be given to all the chosen and they will all live, and they will sin no more through godlessness or pride ... And they will transgress no more, nor will they sin all the days of their life, nor will they die by the heat of God's wrath; but the number of the days of their life they will complete; and their life will grow in peace; and the years of their joy will increase in rejoicing and eternal peace in all the days of their life" (1 Enoch 5:8-9).
"Let the plant of righteousness and truth appear, and it will become a blessing; and the deeds of righteousness and truth will be planted forever with joy. And now all the righteous will escape, and they will live until they beget thousands, and all the days of their youth and their old age will be completed in peace. Then all the earth will be tilled in righteousness and all of it will be planted with trees and filled with blessing" (1 Enoch 10:16-18).
Regarding the "author's use of material from Isaiah 65," Nickelsburg in his commentary on 1 Enoch, states: "The same element occurs in other texts already cited, 1 Enoch 10:17; 25:6; Jub. 23:25-29, where the contrast between a short and long life is explicit. The present text does not indicate that the righteous will live an eternal, that is, an unending life on earth; they will complete their days. The analogy of 1 Enoch 25:6 and Jub. 23:27 may indicate that a life as long as the prediluvian patriarchs" (pp. 163-164). Thus what is reversed is the decree on longevity in Genesis 6:3 and the eschatological conception assumes the continued existence of death as the fitting conclusion to a well-lived life. What would be eternal here is God's blessing and peace on the earth, under which future generations would live long and fulfilled lives.
-
Bryan
Leolaia,
Great research! Thanks so much.
Bryan
Have You Seen My Mother
-
Narkissos
Interesting, and very helpful to the many "newbies" who come out of the WT with the idea that it teaches rightly about "everlasting life on earth" (I can remember a few previous discussions, on Psalm 37 for instance).
Bottom line: individual everlasting life on earth is clearly beyond the scope of the Bible and related texts.
-
outoftheorg
Thanks Leolaia. I am glad this was all cleared up. I was rather concerned about the sea going away.
But the seven headed dragon, whose vomit causes the rivers is much more clear and understandable.
I am sorry Leolaia, I am only pulling your leg. I couldn't resist a little sarcasm here.
I appreciate your post on the mythology involved in the bible. This sort of mythology is one of a few reasons I no longer trust the bible completely.
Outoftheorg
-
vitty
As I have no knowledge of other christian religions. How do they answer, the question about Adam and Eve. If they had not eaten the fruit and disobeyed, they would still have been alive today. Surly this is the crux of the paradise earth and living forever.
Gods original purpose, to have people live forever on the earth.
I know im missing something, please tell
-
Justin
It is true enough that Isaiah 65 refers to a restoration to the pre-flood lifespans as depicted in Genesis rather than to everlasting life. But at the same time, Jehovah's Witnesses are viewing this passage from the standpoint of the Christian Apocalypse in which, as has been admitted, "there shall be no more death." (Rev. 21:4) So we find here a case, not of JWs forcing the NT to conform to the Old, but the reverse. And such is standard Christian practice. In an attempt to harmonize the two, JWs have placed the Isaiah passage within the Millennium, in which death is possible.
I think we must distinguish between a critical exegesis and a Christian one. I recall, Leo, that in a previous discussion Narkissos made a point that if we really want to understand the teachings of Jesus we must go back to the original Aramaic, and you replied that JWs were allowed to use the Greek text because that was basic to their approach, or words to that effect. Similarly, I say now that they should be allowed to play in their own ballpark.
The principle of using the New Testament to interpret the Old is well established in Christianity. The description of the New Jerusalem, for example, in the Revelation (chs. 21-22) is based on texts in Isaiah (chs. 60, 62) as well as Ezekiel (48:31-35). But though the same images may be used, they do not necessarily have the same meanings in their respective contexts. Yet, I cannot object to a Christian, as such, using Revelation to interpret the earlier scriptures. But to be even more fundamental, the prophecy in Jeremiah 31:31-34 about the new covenant is a restoration prophecy, stating specifically that Yahweh would conclude a new covenant with the houses of Judah and Israel with regard to the same Law or Torah that had been given through Moses. If this had been taken literally in the first century, the mission of Paul would never have gotten off the ground. Yet, classical Christianity interprets this to refer to a new law given through Christ. As has been pointed out by a previous poster, this could even be used as a Jewish polemic against Christianity. Yet Christianity exists now in its own right and has been appropriating the old scriptures for the past 2,000 years.
I do not say that the JW way of harmonizing scriptures is the best. To harmonize Revelation 21 with Isaiah 65, they have had to say that the "new heaven and new earth" of Revelation begins with the Millennium (instead of in eternity) and then claim that the "death" which will be no more is the "Adamic death" (because in Isaiah 65 people do die). But in principle they haven't done anything worse with their harmonizing than the larger Christian tradition from which they come. Perhaps a better approach when reading the Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) would be to take them on their own merits, and then when reading the New ask why the authors chose to use the Old in the way they did.
-
Narkissos
I recall, Leo, that in a previous discussion Narkissos made a point that if we really want to understand the teachings of Jesus we must go back to the original Aramaic, and you replied that JWs were allowed to use the Greek text because that was basic to their approach, or words to that effect.
More exactly, I suggested that one could not at the same time believe that the Gospels are a reflection of what Jesus really taught in Aramaic and then interpret it along distinctions that are only possible through Greek etymology (that was about the WT parousia / erkhomai distinguo).
Back to the topic, I think that JWs outstep the current Christian tradition when they interpret the OT texts as meaning individual everlasting life on our current earth, because this is not what is taught in the NT either (even in Revelation, which implies the destruction of the present earth and heavens, just as 2 Peter 3).
About "the death will be no more," it can be traced back to the Isaiah great apocalypse (25:8), which draws on the older Levantine mythology of the cosmogonical theomachy (struggle between the gods): the slaughter of the god(s) of chaos / death / the underworld on the mountain, with a subsequent banquet, is a very old motif, and its use in Isaiah, although future, doesn't imply the prospect of individual eternal life either. I think Leolaia developed that in another thread.
Edit: The thread I was thinking of (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/68098/1.ashx) doesn't mention Isaiah 25:8 but the latter can easily be related to the same general imagery:
On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples
a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wines,
of rich food filled with marrow, of well-aged wines strained clear.
And he will destroy on this mountain the shroud that is cast over all peoples,
the sheet that is spread over all nations;
he will swallow up death forever.
Then the Lord GOD will wipe away the tears from all faces,
and the disgrace of his people he will take away from all the earth,
for the LORD has spoken.OK, here it is: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/67843/1.ashx
-
peacefulpete
Thats an interesting question vittvin. I've been wondering how to answer it. First we must realize that the Genesis story was an ancient adaptation of other mythologies that provided a moral and offered a justification for male dominance and explained birthpains. Just how literally the readers in antiquity took the story is hard to say. We do know that at least one OT tradition asserted that the curse of Adam was lifted by Noah in that legend and this makes us wonder how likely it is that early Jews interpreted the Adam and Eve story as something with universal implications. In later years Adam himself became a popular figure both as a disappointment and as a patriarch equalling Abraham in importance. The ancient Jews ingeneral certainly did not aspire beyond the idea of having a prosperous nation and safety from marauders. The idea of universalism (the world being affected by the God of the Jews) really developed after the Persian period. But even early on some felt that the reward and justice would be served in an afterlife. The earth being destroyed has echos in the OT and was quite clearly expressed in the literature written between the Testaments. So what I'm trying to say is that there was no one single interpretation of the legends and it appears that for most the adam and eve story was understood either as allegorical or an ancient tragedy. The story was simply not taken and extrapolated upon to arrive at a doctrine of "Original Purpose" (tm) would yet be fullfilled as a Garden of Eden thoughout the earth.