1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Afterlife in the Old Testament?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by thomas t, Apr 8, 2021 at 3:32 AM.

Tags:
  1. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    That is certainly part of the issue probably. Also he didnt want the Israelites to even resemble other nations, as evidenced by the way he commanded them to dress and groom. Maybe, following mediums would lead them astray from what he wanted them to follow.


    OK. I understand that.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,393
    Ratings:
    +364
    Religion:
    Christian
    In the NT the New Jerusalem comes down to earth and God will be with His people forever with the Lamb. (Rev 3:12, Rev 21) This is the same as in the OT where God says that He has chosen Jerusalem to be the place He will dwell forever. (Psalm 132:14 etc) It is as if heaven comes to earth. If heaven exists still then there would be no problem with the saved going there anyway imo.
    In the OT it is the Holy Spirit who is the presence of God with Israel in the wilderness and who is grieved at what Israel does there. (Isa 63:7-11)
    The Holy Spirit, God's Spirit, is God in the OT as in the NT but the full revelation had not come with clarity and so it is easier to see the Spirit as an it in the OT even if all of God is alive.
    I don't see the heavenly calling in the NT as applying to only some and I don't see it as meaning that we some are called to heaven anyway. The heavenly calling is a call from heaven, and all those who are called have that.
    I have asked the JWs to give me verses which say there are 2 classes of Christians and all I got were verses which that could be read into if you had that belief already,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but the belief comes from the Governing Body and their ideas about the 144000 in Revelation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    This harmonisation makes the most sense to me. In the end heaven does descend to earth as per Rev 21. So it isn't that people are permanently in heaven or only on earth, but that people go to heaven and then the heavenly city descends to the new earth.


    If the OT then didn't go into clarity then that would mean that it didn't teach such a thing. The NT teaches it but the OT doesn't disqualify the NT understanding.

    Their interpretation isn't biblical. Romans 8 outrightly disproves it. Remember, they don't believe that they can interpret the Bible without the Governing Body's help, so they offload reasoning to them, so the GB can say whatever they want and the sheep will follow. That is why all JW's use the same reasoning and the same type of wording when promoting or defending their beliefs. It is straight out of the publications.

    The scriptures they use for their reasoning obviously don't mean what they say it means. For instance, with the little flock and the other sheep, they interpret it as those who go to heaven and those who remain on earth, but the most obvious understanding is that the little flock are Jews and the other sheep are gentiles and is best supported by the bible itself. No mental gymnastics needed. And they use this scripture as the basis for their anointed teaching. Romans 8 also says that if one isn't a child of God they cannot be accepted by him. They haven't commented on verses 9-13 for decades for obvious reasons, because it says that if one isn't anointed then they are not from God. JW's gloss over this because their books don't comment on the verses. The anointed and 144 000 teaching is easily debunked, as I have done on here once or twice. JW's simply cannot answer these points.
     
  4. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    How do you conclude that this "special place" is "after life"?
     
  5. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,665
    Ratings:
    +421
    Religion:
    Christian
    Hebrews 11:5 says so.
    Every child would understand it as afterlife.
    Because Henoch was included in a long list like that:
    X was the father of Y and then lived some z years and died aged t years.
    Just in the case of Henoch it says:
    He was the father of a and then lived some b years and... "then God took him".

    This "then God took him" was in the place of death. So I think it's afterlife.
     
  6. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    But enoch was alive wasn't he?
     
  7. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    I asked @thomas t about this, because that was my point as well. His understanding of afterlife doesn't preclude that one must be dead before hand. So one can be alive, taken to heaven, and he would consider that as an afterlife, if I understand his position correctly.
     
  8. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    Oh okay.

    I just dont consider that a good enough reasoning for an "After Life". After life actually means life after death. If someone argues that this after life is while being alive, then the whole premise of death and a life afterwards goes down the drain.

    According to the Tanakh God is "all powerful". Thus, he is capable of taking enoch to a "special place" when ever he wishes. This place does not have to be a place where people go after death. Not necessarily. The concept of after life, where people go after death either to be rewarded or punished does not exist in the Tanakh as far as the text is concerned. But maybe some inferences could be made.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    My thoughts as well. I even separate after life from the Biblical view of resurrection because afterlife is your soul surviving death whereas biblical resurrection is the body being brought back to life.
     
  10. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    Thus the question is, since he was alive, is that trip a good enough reason for inferring an after life to the episode?
     
  11. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,665
    Ratings:
    +421
    Religion:
    Christian
    ah I deleted my post since @Israel Khan explained it well, already.
    But you were faster.
    I think, this wasn't a mere trip.
    The text goes like this:
    A died aged x,
    B died aged y,
    C died aged z,
    Enoch was taken aged x1.
    D died aged y1,

    and so on.

    Now you say a mere trip is worth mentioning it in such a list?
    You may keep your opinion, as a Muslim you sometimes reach interpretations of the Tanakh that I would call stunning. I stay with my take concerning the afterlife.
     
  12. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    Thats just ad hominem mate. Useless argument to make. Also, maybe you are not aware of other views of Christians and Atheists and Jews of the Tanakh, maybe not all, but a lot so you have one single argument to make, "since you are muslim you are wrong". Amazing argument. Since your approach was so cheap, I would say that you have no clue and are absolutely ignorant of some scholarship so you have no other option but some logical fallacies.

    "When Enoch had lived 65 years, he became the father of Methuselah. After he became the father of Methuselah, Enoch walked faithfully with God 300 years and had other sons and daughters. Altogether, Enoch lived a total of 365 years. Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away." - Genesis 5

    Every tom, dick and harry in the field know these verses extremely well, and everyone died, but not enoch (according to the Tanakh).

    So rather than making genetic fallacies, address the argument.
     
  13. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,665
    Ratings:
    +421
    Religion:
    Christian
    this wasn't meant to be against the person.
    I don't have anything against Muslims.
    Stunning did not mean to be negative. Perhaps there are more Muslims who see this passage that way. That was what I was going to get across.

    Ok, now you say Enoch didn't die (this was what I didn't get from your last post) - well, so we interpret the verse identically.
    It's just that, even if he didn't die, what he is having now is what I would call "afterlife".
    afterlife for me means, anything after death OR anything after your earthly existence.


    :)
    that wasn't a genetic fallacy.
     
  14. firedragon

    firedragon Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    10,010
    Ratings:
    +2,742
    No they don’t. This is the general understanding of scholars and I have already said that. This has nothing to do with Muslims.
     
  15. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,393
    Ratings:
    +364
    Religion:
    Christian
    The OT doesn't disqualify the NT understanding imo and even if official Judaism did not end up with the NT understanding it does not mean that Jews had not or do not see the New Testament understanding in the OT.

    And I hear that reasoning that opposes the GB interpretations and reasoning is from Satan.

    I imagine Romans 8 is fuzzed up a bit in JW thinking because all JWs are said to have the Holy Spirit guiding them I hear, but that is different to being anointed by the Holy Spirit. (sort of like the OT prophets etc being guided by the Holy Spirit but not born again).
    Certainly loyalty to what the GB says creates confirmation bias. It is the same with members of most religion no doubt,,,,,,,,,,,some more than others.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    Christianity was founded by Jews so obviously there were Jews who saw the NT understanding in the OT. Paul is a good example.



    Yes, that is true. That is why they close their ears to objections, especially difficult ones that they cannot answer.



    The JW's ignore the problems in Romans 8 and don't deal with them. Their understanding of the Holy Spirits role in their lives is sort of contradictory. They are cessationist and don't believe that miracles happen today. Yet they say that there are still gifts of the spirit (although selective in which ones exist) and believe that they are guided and helped by the Holy Spirit which is actually a miraculous trait. They believe that they are guided by the anointed yet they simultaneously say that one cannot tell who is anointed or not, so how they know if any anointed are leading them is anyones guess. They go so far as to say that many people who claim to be anointed |(as there have been more than 144 000 people in history who claimed to be anointed) have emotional or psychological problems. Its a confused mess.


    That is true. But the problem here, and in many other religions, is also that it is institutionalized confirmation bias. Everybody has confirmation bias, because humans are also tribalistic and irrational creatures, even the non religious.
     
  17. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,393
    Ratings:
    +364
    Religion:
    Christian
    True they did. They had the help of knowing Jesus existed and what He did. That would have helped them find Him in the OT. Also Jesus is said to have shown the disciples where He was mentioned in the OT. That would certainly have helped.

    I get a lot of unanswered objections even when I answer theirs, and seem to be expected at times to answer their objections.

    It sounds like a confused mess. The problem of who is leading is no doubt overcome a bit by the change of doctrine to the GB being the faithful and discreet servant.

    That is true. Whole sections of society and religions can end up believing and doing things that are not in the Bible and are against the Bible. They justify it but the real reasons are probably tribal and institutional confirmation bias and begun by a desire of many to do what the Bible condemns.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,715
    Ratings:
    +2,532
    Religion:
    None
    But also Christian beliefs didn't arise out of a vacuum. There were other groups of Jews as well as the history of Jewish teachings that also had elements of Christian belief before Jesus was around.



    Yeah and they usually focus on one point of yours because they see it as an "obvious" error and try to use that "flaw" in your argument to discredit everything else you say. It is a dodging tactic. Just keep bringing them back to the unanswered questions because therein lies their weakness.


    Well, who was leading was never in doubt. It was the anointed and GB. Only now the GB have claimed all authority for themselves since they became popular through their JW broadcasting televangelising. It is an ego trip. Something for you to look into if you care, is how many times the idea of who the faithful and discreet slave is has changed over the century. That really shows that JWs do not know who that slave is using their own reasoning.



    It isn't even just a bible issue. It goes beyond that.
     
  19. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    36,444
    Ratings:
    +5,288
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Seems to me you take an “all or nothing” approach to the Hebrew texts here. The ancient Jews didn’t deal much with “afterlife” — at least not in the way we conceive it. The concept is neither congruous from text to text, nor is it ever established as a cohesive theological model in these texts. The Judaic model is more concerned with the goal of being righteous in this life, than with attaining a spiritual resurrection after one dies.
     
  20. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,393
    Ratings:
    +364
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes I hear that the Essence beliefs were closer to Christian beliefs.

    True it is not just a Bible thing. From my pov we have come a long way from knowing right and wrong when A&E roamed the earth to the point where we disagree about right and wrong as humans much of the time, the finger being pointed at religious people a lot of the time for holding the rest back.
    Once society starts down a road we end up getting used to it, especially if it provides some benefits, and we easily justify what we want to and then feel like hypocrites when it comes time to teach our kids and know that we want to teach them not to do the things that we did.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...