Hi
@nPeace :
EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY VS THE J.W. MOVEMENT - THE INABILITY OF THE JEHOVAHS WITNESS MOVEMENT TO SURVIVE IN THE HISTORICAL WORLD
1) THE ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BELIEF THAT MANKIND HAVE SPIRITS ANIMATING THEIR PHYSICAL BODIES VS THE JEHOVAHS WITNESS DOCTRINE ON SPIRITS
The early Christian movement possessed a set of doctrines, beliefs and assumptions that underlie their belief system. One of these doctrines was the belief that mankind possessed a cognitive and intelligent spirit that gave the physical body life and will.
The schism that became the Jehovahs Witness movement did not adopt this specific Christians belief regarding the existence of a spirit into their belief system and thus, this is a profound difference between Early Judeo-Christianity and the Jehovahs Witness movement and this is one reason the two cannot be reconciled historically.
The ancient Judeo-Christian belief in a spirit is basic belief underlies the multiple biblical texts which refer to the spirit.
THE EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN LITERATURE ASSUMES SPIRITS EXIST
For examples :
In
Luke 23:46 Jesus says, upon the death of his body,
“into thy hands I commend my spirit” - Jesus cannot commend his spirit if he does not have a spirit. Thus, Jesus had a spirit.
Gal. 5:17 says
“flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh” - The flesh cannot “lust against” a spirit that doesn’t exist.
In
Ps. 16:10 (or Acts 2:27, 31) the psalmist rejoices that God “thou wilt not leave my spirit in hell” – A spirit must exist if it is to be “left” anywhere.
James 4:5 "spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy" – A spirit dwells in us that is capable of lust.
Job 14:22 his spirit within him shall mourn – The spirit within man can mourn.
Ps. 22:29 none can keep alive his own spirit – A living spirit must exist in the first place if one is unable to keep it alive.
Matt. 10:28 fear him which is able to destroy both spirit and body – A spirit must exist if it can be destroyed.
Hebrews 12:9 "...be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?" -- one cannot Be the Father of spirits unless spirit exist.
James 1:21 engrafted word, which is able to save your spirit – A spirit must exist if it can be saved.
1 Pet. 1:22 ye have purified your spirit in obeying – A spirit must exist if it can be purified.
Ezek. 11:19 (36:26–27; 37:14) I will put a new spirit within you – A spirit must exist if it is to be put into us.
Luke 24:39 spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me – A spirit must exist if it either has or lacks something. .
Acts 7:59 Stephen ... saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit – A spirit must exist if it can be received.
Acts 23:8 Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit – The concept of a spirit existed, else the concept could not have been denied by the Sadducees.
Rom. 8:16 spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit – A spirit must exist if it can be witnessed to.
1 Cor. 6:20 glorify God in your body, and in your spirit – A spirit must exist if it can “glorify God”.
Such biblical texts reference this belief that mankind has a dual nature, spirit and body. While you’ve notice frequently that though the words “spirit” and “soul” are conflated to mean the same thing, technically, they are not. As Katpur pointed out, the LDS agree with the early Christian concept that when a spirit is united with a body, it then becomes a living “soul”. Still, much of Christianity uses the terms as synonyms. We have evidence that this confusion existed anciently as well. For example, the Gospel of Phillip explains the early basic Christian belief that “
The soul of Adam came into being by means of a breath, which is a synonym for spirit.” (the actual text says "synonym for spirit")
Translators sometimes do not make this distinction in their renderings and it creates some confusion for historians that make the technical distinction. Frequently the translator will render the word for “spirit” as “soul” in translations and it is only by reference to the original language text that one can tell what the actual word was. Such mistakes in rendering are common.
For example, as I’ve pointed out, the Jehovahs Witness paraphrase for a bible made multiple incorrect modifications to the authentic text, (presumably to support their own theology). Ironically, Frederick Franz rendered 1 Corinthians 15:45 as :
"…The first man Adam became a living person.” This is another mistake. The Greek actually says
“the first man Adam became a living soul “…ο πρωτος ανθροπος αδαμ εις ψυχην ζωσαν “ (gk ψυχη does not specifically mean a "person" without added context). In this case, one can excuse Franz to some degree since he had no training in Koine Greek before creating his bible. Still, it causes consternation for historians when such mistakes cause confusion.
The distinction can also cause problems for religionists when they are trying to create and apply meaning to texts.
For example, the authentic version of, Ecclesiates 17:7 says
: “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it”. (
Ecclesiastes 12:7). While the verse seems simple enough, upon death, the body (which in Christian tradition was made from dust) returns to the earth as the body disintegrates while the spirit returns to God who gave it to Adam (and the rest of us).
SUPPORTING DOCTRINE BY INTERPRETATION
For Jehovahs Witness theology, the authentic verse disagrees with their theology. In order to justify the absence of this doctrine, the doctrine must be explained away or modified. In this case, this is done by re-interpretation. For example,
Deeje, the Jehovahs Witness, explains the interpretation which allows one to dismiss the obvious meaning. She says that to her religion, the verse is interpreted to mean :
“Returning the "spirit" (breath) to a resurrected human is what Ecclesiastes means.” (post #91 different thread)
While such re-interpretations allows one to re-purpose the text to support a different theology, this works only as long as one doesn’t enter the world of history where the are multiple versions of Ecclesiates 12:7 and not only confirm the verse means exactly what it says but the literature goes into depth as to the meaning. For example, these historical contextual data
cannot ALL BE explained away or re-interpreted away. THIS is why the Jehovah Witness movement can exist in the world of dogma and argument and in the world of interpretation but dies a quick death the moment we step into the world of History and historical religious literature.
NON-EXISTENCE OF A DOCTRINE IN HISTORY MAKES IT "NOT" HISTORICAL
I said to Katzpur, that The Jehovahs Witness was in the minority on this doctrine. By Minority, I should have said virtually “alone”. Not only does the Jehovahs Witness doctrine on the point not exist in any of the earliest Judeo-Christian literature (zero, zip, nada representation), virtually ALL of the early Judeo-Christian literature stands as a witness against the Jehovahs Witness doctrine of “no spirit” existing and instead describes the deep and longstanding belief that the scriptures mean just what they seem to mean on this subject.
The early Christians had need to reinterpret Ecclesiates 12:7 since it agreed with their belief. Upon death,
“Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it” To them, it simply meant what it appears to mean.
The questions religious historians will ask is not what the verse means in modern Jehovahs Witness theology, but rather what history tells us regarding how the verse was understood
anciently and originally. If I want to know how the ancient Judeo-Christians interpreted the verse, then I can read the early Christians own comments regarding the matter or what they read that gives a clearer picture. I can even look up different versions of the same scripture. For example :
Therefore, fear not death. For that which is from me, that is the spirit, departs for heaven. That which is from the earth, that is the body, departs for the earth from which it was taken.” (The Greek Apocalypse of Ezra 6:26 & 7:1-4)
Such additional context in ancient Christian literature clarify what the scripture meant to the point that no amount of re-interpretation can work. It is not merely the CLARITY of early Christian literature that is, historically important, but the sheer AMOUNT of clarifying literature that confirms historical truth. It is the such the additional historical data that makes clear and confirms he earliest and most authentic interpretation and doctrine that a spirit exists separate from the Body.
This is why non-historical religious movements such as the Jehovahs Witness movements doctrine on "non-existence of spirits" cannot survive in this historical world.
For example, In Apocalypse of Sedrach God sends for the spirit of Sedrach. God says,
“Go, take the spirit of my beloved Sedrach, and put it in Paradise.” The messenger says to Sedrach, “give me that which our Father deposited in the womb of your mother in your holy dwelling place since you were born.”.... give me your most desired spirit." The apocalypse of Sedrach 9:1-2 and 5
The early Judeo-Christian scriptures (the authentic ones) and their early sacred texts, their diaries, their mishnas, their lectionaries, their letters, their romance literature, their ascension and decension literature, and a host of other literature all form a historical world from which one can gain a description of early beliefs and it is in such a world of literature that the Jehovahs Witness cannot survive due to the many, many, many witnesses that their theology is inconsistent with Early Judeo-Christianity on this specific subject.
THE ONLY OPTION FOR SURVIVAL OF NON-HISTORICAL RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN A HISTORICAL SETTING IS TO DENY THE HISTORICAL DATA (SOMEHOW)
The only option for the Jehovah Witness who comes face to face with the historical world of Judeo-Christianity of the earliest periods, is to deny history is correct (since it cannot be “re-interpreted” as a whole) by some means such as to claim the historians are biased or their descriptions are incorrect or poorly sourced, etc.
In any case, I hope your spiritual journey in this life is wonderful and satisfying
nPeace.
Clear
εινεακνεω