Posts by jonathan dough

44

Does Eccl. 9:5 Mean What the WT Says It Does?

by Perry in

shedding our seventh day adventist roots regarding death.

jonathan dough

don't these two verses prove that there will be no resurrection and no paradise earth?"

It doesn't mean there won't be a resurrecton, just not the one they envision, on earth in paradise, but heavenly or in hell, however that is defined.

Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and they have no more forever any share in all that is done under the sun. (Psalm 9:6, RSV) (emphasis added).

Verse 6 completely undermines the Jehovah's Witnesses' multiple salvation plans. They believe that a ruling elite of 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses will eventually reign from heaven over a vast multitude of converted Jehovah's Witnesses on earth. For the majority of mankind, the Jehovah's Witnesses' salvation mantra is, “You can live forever in paradise on earth.” But Ecclesiastes 9:6 just quoted makes that impossible. If the dead “never again have part in anything that is done under the sun (on earth), they cannot live forever in paradise on earth. Mainstream Christianity averts this conundrum because they recognize that the Christian's supernatural reward is in heaven for all redeemed believers. It most certainly is not limited to 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses.

http://www.soul.host-ed.me/i-soul-5.html

15

is the soul mortal biblically speaking

by therevealer in

jw
friends

not being a wise guy or rude here but rather than mess up the thread on is the soul immortal i think the opposite question is interesting as well..

jonathan dough

Factfinder: Ezekiel 18:4- Jws are right about some things.

Not about Eze 18:4.

Ezekiel 18:4 appears to be the crown jewel in the Jehovah's Witnesses' annihilationist argument. The prophet Ezekiel wrote in part that “The soul (nephesh) that is sinning – it itself will die” (“only the one who sins shall die,” NAB). The Jehovah's Witnesses imply that traditionalists are wrong believing the soul (nephesh) is an immaterial spiritual entity because it can die, which also would mean it cannot be immortal. But they are reading too much (or not enough) into this sentence and attribute an interpretation to mainstream Christians that isn't there. Standing back and placing verse 4 into context, it is apparent that chapter 18 deals with personal responsibility. Contrasted with the death of the sinner, a virtuous man shall “surely live” (Ezekiel 18:9). The people shall not be punished for their ancestors' sins, only their own (NAB, notes 18,2) [… his death shall be his own fault]. Verse 18 reads, a virtuous man “shall not die for the sins of his father.” Here, Ezekiel was not making a sweeping statement that all men die, nor was he making a statement that a nephesh (soul) cannot under any circumstances refer to the immortal soul simply because the soul (nephesh) that sins dies. If that were true it would actually make the case for immortality because according to chapter 18 the soul that does not sin does not die if one were to take their argument to its logical conclusion.

We can safely assume, therefore, that death in 18:4 refers foremost to a physical death as punishment for particular sins because, after all, all men die a mortal death, but more importantly, Ezekiel lists the kinds of sins God had in mind which warrant death under the Mosaic Law to which he was referring.

The Hebrew word here for death is muwth (4191) “which is used of physical death.” (Vine's at 151). It can also refer to eventual, natural mortality, and a spiritual death. God told “man that he will surely die if he eats of the forbidden fruit. (Genesis 2:17). “When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, both spiritual and physical death came upon Adam and Eve and their descendants (cf. Rom 5:12). They experienced spiritual death immediately” (Vine's at 151).

God's declaration at Ezekiel 18:1-32 that each man is responsible for his own sins, and that person alone would deserve punishment – which is the core theme of chapter18 – was emphasized in verses 10-13 in the extreme with specific examples of crimes under the Mosaic Law deserving of death, with the exception of theft, robbery and variants thereof such as failure to return a pledge and usury. Crimes specifically deserving death were murder (Numbers 35:16), eating on the mountains (a form of idol worship (Exodus 22:20), defiling a wife (Leviticus 20:10), oppressing the poor and needy (thereby endangering their lives) (Exodus 21-29) such as harming orphans and widows (a term of art for all helpless, needy and destitute (Exodus 22:20-23), or any “abominable thing,” - a wide-ranging concept that may include, but is not limited to, blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16; 1 Kings 21:10), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), and witchcraft (Exodus 22:18).

By no means is this an exhaustive list of those crimes for which each individual is held personally accountable pursuant to chapter 18. The fact that theft and robbery, etc., are not punishable by death is no reason to assume the soul (nephesh) which sins and dies refers to the extinction of the immortal soul as the Jehovah's Witnesses would have you believe. To the contrary; if anything, it illustrates that lesser real-time crimes and sins are included in the doctrine of personal responsibility. Otherwise, a man would not be personally responsible for his own lesser sins, which is illogical and defies the spirit of God's law.

While death, or muwth, refers to physical death, which reasonably presumes inclusion of lesser sins and crimes, here it also refers to a spiritual death, however that may be defined; a cutting off or separation from God. After all, Paul was very succinct when he wrote that neither adulterers, thieves or robbers, and many others, will inherit God's kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:10), thereby dying a death of unimaginable severity. Nothing can logically be inferred in Ezekiel 18:1-4 that God was stating that disembodied, immaterial souls don't exist or survive a person's death. He was not saying that souls aren't immortal because they die and are thus extinguished. To the contrary, the message throughout the Old and New Testament is crystal clear. A conscious, immaterial spiritual entity, a man's ego or self, alternatively called shades, souls or spirits, survives death and immediately is transferred to the intermediate state of the after life of the nether world awaiting reunion with one's resurrected body. They are not annihilated. They are not made extinct as the Jehovah's Witnesses teach.

http://www.soul.host-ed.me/i-soul-5.html

44

Does Eccl. 9:5 Mean What the WT Says It Does?

by Perry in

shedding our seventh day adventist roots regarding death.

jonathan dough

Regarding Ecc. 9:5 and 10

The Jehovah's Witnesses' theory that nothing exists of man after death is premised primarily on a handful of Old Testament verses, once again taken out of context while ignoring other relevant passages. For instance,

… there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol (nether world NAB) to which you are going (Ecclesiastes 9:10, RSV)
His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish (Psalm 146:4)
For the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost (Ecclesiastes 9:5, RSV)

The Jehovah's Witnesses reason that if a dead person knows nothing and has no thoughts because thoughts perish at death, he cannot be conscious and must therefore be extinct, non-existent. A superficial reading might lead one to that conclusion, be we know that's not the case because the departed, such as the Old Testament rephaim or “shades,” as outlined in great detail above, are indeed conscious and can think, communicate and exhibit other cognitive skills. Contrary to the Jehovah's Witnesses' incorrect interpretation, these thoughts, knowledge, rewards, etc. refer to those human traits while on earth, “under the sun,” not in the immediate afterlife, the intermediate state where conscious departed souls dwell. This is made abundantly clear in verse 6 following Ecclesiastes 9:5:

Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and they have no more forever any share in all that is done under the sun. (Psalm 9:6, RSV) (emphasis added).
You can read the entire argument here:
http://www.soul.host-ed.me/i-soul-5.html

57

Is the Soul Immortal...Biblically Speaking?

by Vanderhoven7 in

jw
friends

i wonder if someone would care to produce a list (full quotes) of all the proof texts in scripture they are aware of that establish that the human soul is innately immortal?.

just the scriptures...without comment please...so everyone will see just how clear the bible alone (sola scriptura) is on this issue.

vander.

jonathan dough

This is a thing JWs are correct on: the Bible Does NOT teach we have an immortal soul. None of the above texts say that we do.

But first, you need to establish whether man has a soul, regardless of its duration. Jws and others say there is no soul at all, that man does not have a soul.

Then, determine if that soul, if it exists, is immortal. And then, determine what immortality means; is it inherently immortal in the sense that it is eternity backwards and forwards? Are you talking about absolute immortality, a soul which even God can't destroy? Or an immortal soul which cannot be destroyed by secondary sources?

I've explored many of these issues in a recenct paper you can find here:

http://www.soul.host-ed.me/index.html

114

Immortal Soul? Impossible!

by wannabe in

impossible!.

we notice, paul tells us that two things were handed down, to all mankind through the process of inheritance.

the reason being, if the soul was to be immortal, adam himself would have had to pass that on to mankind.

jonathan dough

Frankiespeakin: What happens when you die? Your brain stops working your consciousness ends, there is no ghost in the machine if your brain stops working you no longer think you no longer feel there is no proof what so ever that you are still alive any where else.

This is classic materialism, and you evidently agree with the JWs on this.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are technically “materialists” and subscribe to the doctrine of materialism (not to be confused with greed and the accumulation of things). Materialists deny body/soul dualism and the very existence of a “soul.” They believe all cognitive functions of thought, emotions, will and conscience, etc. are biological consequences of the material self, the body. When the body dies, that which traditionalists call the soul (spirit) simply vanishes and ceases to exist. “For the materialists, the soul, or the conscious life, is but a function of the organism, and necessarily perishes at death” (www.newadvent.org/cathen/07687a.htm).

Materialism is not unique to the Watchtower Society. It can be traced back to the Greek philosopher Epicurus (341-270 B.C.) who taught, among other things, that nothing exists except matter and space (PBD at 256). Epicurus believed that ... he could disprove the possibility of the soul's survival after death Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epicurus/. Furthermore, “[t]he Epicurean school offers us the most complete and reasoned negation of immortality among ancient philosophers” (newadvent.org/cathen/07687 at 3). Epicureanism was widespread and popular during the time of Christ, and it is logical to conclude that the Jehovah's Witnesses' doctrine of materialism is rooted in this Greek philosophy.

Similarly, the ancient Sadducees, a religious party that existed during the time of Christ and which had members in the Jewish council called the Sanhedrin (which caused Christ to be put to death) denied “personal immortality, and retribution in a future life (PBD at 741), just like the Jehovah's Witnesses. “The doctrine of the Sadducees,” wrote Josephus,” is this, that souls die with the bodies,” (Antiq. Xviii. 1, 4); and again, “they also take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (Jewish War, ii,i,14) (PBD at 741), just as the Jehovah's Witnesses teach.

In contemporary times the Jehovah's Witnesses are allied with secular atheists and other non-Christians on the margins who go to great lengths to deny the existence of the Christian immortal soul, or any soul for that matter, claiming that the Christian soul is nothing more than the product of an organism, secretions of the brain and such, basing their claims in part on “neurophysiology,” (Restoring the Soul to Christianity, DR 502, J.P. Moreland, http://www.equip.org/articles/restoring-the-soul-to-christianity/).

Lastly, there has been a recent rash of materialist apologetics – evangelical preachers – who argue that Christian body/soul dualism is false, that a person is not a composite of body and soul, that the soul does not survive the death of the body, and the resurrected unsaved wicked are not punished eternally, or at all, but are simply extinguished, annihilated, being treated to a kinder, gentler, one-size-fits-all form of punishment. Of course it is no surprise that such modern-day preachers are attempting to overturn 2,000 years of Christian theology, for the Bible warns us that “in the last days, false teachers and false prophets will appear among us (2 Peter 2:1; Matthew 24:11).

You can read my latest in-depth article challenging the Jws on their notion that there is no soul right here:

http://www.soul.host-ed.me/index.html

70

How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc;

by booker-t in

jw
friends

i am just curious about this because although i agree with many of the posters here that the wt society is guilty of many horrible deeds, i still believe they are right when it comes to doctrinal things as i mention.

especially hellfire.

i just don't see how anybody that has studied the bible for many years like many of the ex-jws here can make an about face and go back to believing hellfire.

jonathan dough

On Point.

While traditional Christians teach that man has a soul - the non-material essence and ego of man which survives death and can go to heaven as an invisible spirit creature - the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, and teach, that no such soul exists; that upon death all of man, every vestige of the human being, including his soul, is annihilated and becomes extinct. They believe that Christendom's notion of a soul, particularly an immortal soul, is the work of the devil and a myth devised by Satan to mislead mankind. However, on examining the Jehovah's Witnesses' own theories in this regard, the Watchtower Society's double standard becomes self-evident because they also teach that their resurrected 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses (who alone go to heaven) began to be resurrected to heaven as invisible spirit creatures in 1918, and today are being resurrected as invisible spirit creatures bound for heaven, writing, “He [Christ] went to prepare a heavenly place for his associate heirs, ‘Christ’s body,’ for they too will be invisible spirit creatures” (Let God Be True, p.138).

In other words, in the traditional Christian world a redeemed man dies and his invisible soul (spirit) goes to an intermediate state where it waits. In the Watchtower World a man dies (one of the so-called 144,000) and his invisible spirit goes to a heavenly afterlife also. Regardless of the labels the Jehovah's Witnesses place on this process, such as calling theirs a “resurrection,” the point is that the process is exactly the same: man dies, invisible spirit goes to the afterlife.

With the exception of a few irrelevant labels placed on the process by the Jehovah's Witnesses, there is absolutely no difference in the core concept of a soul (spirit) surviving the body, except the Jehovah's Witnesses claim that with respect to mainstream Christians it doesn't happen at all, and can't happen, and is a lie perpetuated by Satan, but with respect to their 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses it is happening as we speak, and is sanctioned and performed by God Almighty. It is the extent of such blatant hypocrisy which prompted me to explore in detail the Jehovah's Witnesses' false teaching that man does not have a soul (spirit) that survives death.

You can read the new article right here:

http://www.soul.host-ed.me/index.html

11

Did Jehovah Destroy Jesus's Pre-Human Spiritual Body?

by VM44 in

did jehovah destroy jesus's pre-human spiritual body?.

as jesus could not have two bodies at the same time, his "spiritual body" could not continue to exist while he was "human.".

it is said that jesus came to earth as a human, but if his spirtual body was destroyed, what was left to "come" to earch?.

jonathan dough

Which planet doest though hail from?

Did Jehovah destroy Jesus's pre-human spiritual body?

God the Son, the Word, was not destroyed. Jesus was a divine person who assumed a human nature. He was God-man.

The divine Person of Jesus was still fully God, who chose a veiled glory.

Christ possessed equality with God prior to His incarnation, and then for a time veiled that glory, being always God in all of the co-equal attributes, but in the incarnation never using His Godly powers to better Himself. He was fully God, fully man, God taking on the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3), not a man adding Godliness. (Strong and Vine’s, 42)

As Jesus could not have two bodies at the same time, his "spiritual body" could not continue to exist while he was "human."

Totally false. He was, and is, God-man. Fully God, fully man. The mystery of the union is just that, and accepted as mystery by the church.

Maybe you're arguing against the Watchtower in this thread? Are you taking the Christians' side, or the WBTS?

It is said that Jesus came to earth as a human, but if his spirtual body was destroyed, what was left to "come" to earch?

Jesus didn't come to earth as a human. The Word, God the Son, came to earth and assumed a human nature and became Jesus at conception.

Jesus the God-man as God-man didn't exist until Mary conceived him.

17

Did Jesus empty himself of all his knowledge when he came to Earth?

by garyneal in

jw
friends

i learned in church this past sunday that jesus must have emptied himself of all of his knowledge when he came to earth.

this is based on luke 2:51, 52 where it states then he went down to nazareth with them and was obedient to them.

but his mother treasured all these things in her heart.

jonathan dough

The central part of the whole story seems to be the mystery of God becoming human. One aspect of God becomes human leaves plenty of room for God to be remain God.

I can't tell if this is what you believe, or what you claim others believe, or if you, as Anglican, misspoke. Catholics and maintstream Protestants do not teach that God became human, that He stopped being the father and became human, that the creator became the creature, if that is what you are saying. That would be heresy. Mainstream Christianity teaches that God the Son was a divine person who assumed a human nature. Furthermore, orthodox Christians - the overwhelming majority of Catholic and Protestant churches - teach that: “The humanity of Christ is a creature, it is not God” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 922). Fully God, fully man, the hypostatic union that is God-Man.

Understand that Jesus was, and is, God-man and everything fits nicely.

17

Did Jesus empty himself of all his knowledge when he came to Earth?

by garyneal in

jw
friends

i learned in church this past sunday that jesus must have emptied himself of all of his knowledge when he came to earth.

this is based on luke 2:51, 52 where it states then he went down to nazareth with them and was obedient to them.

but his mother treasured all these things in her heart.

jonathan dough

And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.”

It makes more sense if you understand that Jesus was God-man.

Christ’s Knowledge: How much did Jesus know? If he was God, why was some of His knowledge limited?

The Jehovah's Witnesses contend that Jesus could not be God because of his limited knowledge for Jesus “learned obedience” (Should You Believe, Chapter 7), did not know the precise day and hour of the Last Day (ibid.), and was given a revelation by God (ibid.). Much of the Jehovah's Witnesses’ confusion here likewise stems from their inability to comprehend the hypostatic union of the God-man Jesus (i.e., it was the created human Jesus, who was not God, who learned obedience). Nor do they understand the nature of Jesus’ three-fold human knowledge.

Theologians are in general agreement that Jesus had a) the beatific, or intuitive, vision of God; b) infused knowledge, and c) acquired knowledge (Catholic Encyclopedia, 930).

A) Vision/Intuitive or Beatific Knowledge

With respect to His vision knowledge it is taught that “Christ in His humanity, i.e., in His human intellect, from the very first instant of the incarnation, had the immediate vision of God, (ibid., 930). “[T]he two, hypostatic union and vision, of necessity go together.”

Christ’s self-awareness as a Divine Person in His human nature includes the beatific, or immediate, vision of God.

Christ’s vision of God, it is common teaching, was not comprehensive with regard to its primary object, the divine essence; it was limited because it was human. Nor does it extend, as to its secondary objects, to all that the divine knowledge comprehends, but only to what pertains to the object of God’s vision knowledge…. not to the object of the knowledge of simple understanding …; and here it extends particularly, if not exclusively, to all that pertains to His mission and man’s salvation. (ibid.)

B) Infused Knowledge

Whereas “the vision is inexpressible in human concepts (Catholic Encyclopedia, 930) and is a knowledge that ‘Christ derived from His contact with the Father,” Christ’s infused knowledge is “expressible in human concepts and words” (ibid., 938). “The distinction may be explicit in Scripture (cf Jn 7.16; Mt 11.27). Infused knowledge is similar to angelic knowledge, “Because vision knowledge is incommunicable in human terms, and Christ’s mission entailed the communication to men of divine mysteries …” i.e., salvation, “ … a communicable knowledge of these mysteries was necessary” (ibid.). Infused knowledge was required because of Jesus’ mission.

Today theologians incline to explain the extension of Christ’s infused knowledge from the purpose and nature of His mission; this was a coming in lowliness, not in glory, and did not require the knowledge of all human learning … but only of all that pertains to men’s salvation …. This was necessary and sufficient for Christ to discharge His mission.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 938)
C) Acquired Knowledge

“The fact of Christ’s experiential, or acquired, knowledge is considered certain by theologians today,” and like all of us was “limited and restricted.” This knowledge “was perfect in keeping with the concrete circumstances of His time and place, age and mission, and His dealings with people for His redemptive and prophetic mission” (ibid.). Jesus “grew” in this knowledge (cf Luke 2.40, 52) through observation and experience and from other people (ibid.).

D) The Three Kinds of Human Knowledge were Distinct, but not Separate

“[The] three kinds of human knowledge in Christ, required by what Scripture and revelation say of the God-man, did not hinder or exclude but rather complemented one another. The three were required on different grounds and existed on different levels, while uniting in one human consciousness for the purpose of Christ’s mission” (ibid., 938, 939).

The three kinds of knowledge were the acts and possession of one human intellect and one human awareness; they were distinct, not separated. Their perfect harmony, however, remains mysterious; it is part of the very mystery of Christ.” (ibid., 939)

Some modernists place less emphasis on Christ’s vision knowledge believing that it could lead to interference and the exclusion of genuine human experience (Encyclopedia of Religion, 25).

17

Did Jesus empty himself of all his knowledge when he came to Earth?

by garyneal in

jw
friends

i learned in church this past sunday that jesus must have emptied himself of all of his knowledge when he came to earth.

this is based on luke 2:51, 52 where it states then he went down to nazareth with them and was obedient to them.

but his mother treasured all these things in her heart.

jonathan dough

Jesus emptying Himself of His Deity when He came down to Earth as is taught by most churches.

Most Christian churches don't teach this; He never stopped being God the Son.

The divine person of Christ, even if sent by God t he Father, and even if He voluntarily subjected Himself, did not in so doing become less equal to God with respect to His essential being, nature and essence. When the Word assumed a human nature he did not cease being God, but willingly assumed a different relationship; a different grade, order or manifestation as Tertullian theorized. His incarnation and obedience did not diminish the divine essence of His being or make Him less consubstantial. The divine Person of Jesus was still fully God, who chose a veiled glory.

Christ possessed equality with God prior to His incarnation, and then for a time veiled that glory, being always God in all of the co-equal attributes, but in the incarnation never using His Godly powers to better Himself. He was fully God, fully man, God taking on the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3), not a man adding Godliness. (Strong and Vine’s, 42)