Resurection with no Soul

by jimakazi 17 Replies latest social entertainment

  • Terry
    Terry

    Oh dear!

    People's imaginations have run riot!

    What ever happened to science?

    Something does not exist simply because we reason it into existence, does it? Not ACTUALLY.

    The entire idea of a soul came from primitive man observing people in the act of dying.

    What was the very last thing that happened at the point of death?

    The breath (ruahh, animus, air) came out of them and then they were still.

    Primitive logic observed this. The air (ruahh, spirit) went out and death followed. The BREATH must be the thing that animates the body!!

    You can't see air; so, it must be just like the person except it is invisible.

    It is logical but it is ERRONEOUS!

    What you are as a living person is a great many processes going at the same time. You can remove quite a number of them and still be a living person. But, without a heartbeat and brain activity and breathing you are not going to exist.

    The idea of a SOUL is parasitic and primitive.

    The Bible contains NO ACTUAL INFORMATION at all about anything.

    Why be fooled into constructing scenarios that make the foolish primitive nonsense sound more plausible? This is what genius has done for thousands of years: repaired the awkward hillbilly mental constructs and made them fly.

    Constant repair of religious ideas is always necessary to keep them alive. When it doesn't happen the religion falls into backward immobility (like in the Musilim world) and the people are dragged down into an abyss of reactionary impulses fighting modernity.

    There is no data in this conversation about a soul.

    If there was somebody would post it. Instead, we have imagination and rhetorical mischief.

    T.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Narkissos....Thanks for that article. I recalled vaguely that they tried to link the etymology of mnemeion with their claim about "God's memory", which is as close to "grasping at straws" as it gets.

    But Jesus had such confidence in his heavenly Father’s power and ability to hold in his memory as many of these as he chose that he deliberately used the expression "memorial tombs," which was in common use in his day.

    Completely unwarranted and imposing an irrelevant etymological meaning on a text; it's like saying that by calling itself the "National Broadcasting Company," NBC is trying to remind its viewers that it supports agriculture (broadcasting was originally an agricultural term, referring to the way seed is cast).

    I was struck by the following as well:

    Perhaps we should explain right away that by the expression "life pattern" we simply mean the kind of person you are and the kind of life you live, according as you are governed by certain guiding principles, or, as is true of many today, by a total lack of principle, just drifting downstream with the prevailing current.

    So this does not even refer to an individual identity, only a generic "kind of person you are". Weird.

  • jimakazi
    jimakazi

    Terry

    Where your sense of humor? Point of this conversation is if you assume the bible is some divinely inspired factual book - which the JW's do, then there is either a soul, or no resurection. Can't have one without the other. I find it fun to tie JW's in knots - perhaps I'm just saddistic.

    Jimakazi

  • DannyBloem
    DannyBloem
    The following reflects the JW standpoint:
    1. We our body and soul is computer hardware.
    2. Our "spirit" is the electrical current without the computer and its memory is useless.
    3. Our experience, ego and memory is the files and programs on our hard drive.
    4. When we die our hardware stops functioning, but God copies the memory to his archive.
    5. The archive is on static media (DVD or CD) not on his active computer, or we would still be "alive".
    6. When resurrected, God creates a duplicate hardware system with a monitor, keyboard and mouse that look just like our originals.
    7. Then God copies the archived "you" onto the new hardware--basically a system restore.

    Some questions that arise from this are:

    • Could not God create more clones of you in this way?
    Yes he could, so what?
  • If our memories, ego and experience are stored in God's memory are we not alive in some way, anyway?

  • IF a program is not running, it is not alive.

  • Since there is not continuity between the original you and the resurrected you, can it really be you? Isn't that a copy?

    • If a copy is a perfect copy there is no difference between the two. So to say the one is something and the other one is not is useless.

    • In what way is a "Stepford Wife" different from a resurrected mate? Perfect in every way...
    Very different in many ways.
  • jimakazi
    jimakazi
    If a copy is a perfect copy there is no difference between the two. So to say the one is something and the other one is not is useless.

    What? Just becasue you have a perfect copy does not make it the same item, it may be identical, but they are 2 items. This may not matter if we are taking about toaster ovens. The discussion is about life.

  • greendawn
    greendawn

    Could it be that the soul is the invisible part that also ceases to be living and that it gets re animated at the resurrection and returned to the body? Does the soul have to be immortal? Just a question.

  • DannyBloem
    DannyBloem
    What? Just becasue you have a perfect copy does not make it the same item, it may be identical, but they are 2 items. This may not matter if we are taking about toaster ovens. The discussion is about life.

    If you din't track it, and there are two things exactly equal. Then there is no way of telling them appart. So yes they are the same.
    Why would this be different with life then?

    Of course they are two items. But if the one of the item is destroyed without you knowing there is no way of knowing that it is not the original.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    As a side note, I wonder if the whole resurrection concept (originally under Persian influence) didn't start by positing a sort of heavenly, glorified "double" of the righteous (not very different from the use of "one's angel" in Matthew 18:10 or Acts 12:15, as has been discussed previously).

    The doctrines of the soul and resurrection do overlap in several ways, but I think basically they were built to answer two distinct questions: (1) a subjective one, i.e. "what will I become when I'm dead?"; (2) an objective one, "how will it be known who was right, who is who and which is which?"

    While the soul doctrine satisfactorily answers the first question, where subjective continuity is essential, the resurrection doctrine is basically meant to answer the second, and in the latter case objective identity and recognition are sufficient since what is at stake is vindication or condemnation. The resurrected righteous are glorified for the evil to see, while the resurrected evil are chastised for the righteous to see. Resurrection is in the eye of the opposite beholder in a dualistic system.

    A lot of texts come to mind, some of them earlier than the full-fledged resurrection doctrine, for instance:

    Isaiah 66:24:

    And they shall go out and look at the dead bodies of the people who have rebelled against me; for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.

    Daniel 12:2f:

    Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.

    Wisdom of Solomon 5:1ff:

    Then the righteous will stand with great confidence
    in the presence of those who have oppressed them
    and those who make light of their labors.
    When the unrighteous see them, they will be shaken with dreadful fear,
    and they will be amazed at the unexpected salvation of the righteous.     They will speak to one another in repentance,
    and in anguish of spirit they will groan, and say,
    "These are persons whom we once held in derision
    and made a byword of reproach--fools that we were!
    We thought that their lives were madness
    and that their end was without honor.
    Why have they been numbered among the children of God?
    And why is their lot among the saints?

    We might also have a case of "heavenly double" of Jesus in the Gospel sayings about the "Son of Man" sitting or standing at the right of God, and coming on the clouds of heaven for his enemies to see.

    The same kind of objective, or even passive vindication is suggested with some "monumental" or "astral" analogies, e.g. Isaiah 56:4f:

    For thus says the LORD:
    To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths,
    who choose the things that please me
    and hold fast my covenant,
    I will give, in my house and within my walls,
    a monument and a name
    better than sons and daughters;
    I will give them an everlasting name
    that shall not be cut off    .

    Matthew 13:43:

    Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

    Revelation 3:12:

    If you conquer, I will make you a pillar in the temple of my God; you will never go out of it. I will write on you the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem that comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name.

    • Share this

    Google+
    Pinterest
    Reddit