Luke 20:38 - God is the God of the living not the dead

[Wootah]

[2timothy316]

And I've learned (on this site), that Jehovahs Witnesses defer to their Governing Body for interpretations.

I, being a Jehovah's Witness, did not defer to a GB interpretation. I asked that you read Ecc chapter 9 and then asked what you thought it said about the condition of the dead.
viewtopic.php?p=1047571#p1047571

Read Ecc chapter 9 and then you tell me if dead people are aware of what is happening to them. Unlike others on this thread, I'm not giving you an interpretation of any sort. I'm not asking you to conjure an interpretation either. I'm asking for a simple reading comprehension exercise in exegesis, using your own reasoning skills by reading a chapter in the Bible. You will see many others using eisegesis. If you'd like a detailed explanation of the two go here, https://www.gotquestions.org/exegesis-eisegesis.html it does a really good job two ways to approach reading the Bible. And this is not a link to a GB explanation of exegesis and eisegesis.

That was a very useful link, thanks. I thought I broadly knew the definition of exegesis but hadn't realised it applied mostly to Scripture. And I'd never heard of eisegesis. I do appreciate you putting me onto this.

To respond to your question or suggestion, I read Ecclesiastes 9 as saying death is the ultimate fate for every person ("the great equaliser"), you should "live life", and that the dead experience nothing. The mention of Sheol suggests a 'place of non-being'. That fits well with my own beliefs as a scientific naturalist.

You didn't even need me to 'interpret' it for you to come to same conclusion I have.

You used exegesis to get out of the scripture where, if you look at some of the other posts, others try add to scripture by using eisegesis. Like in post #33. viewtopic.php?p=1047659#p1047659
Do you see how the poster stated their doctrine and then presented verses to support their dogma? In many of the verses they presented there is mention of someone's spirit and just because there is mention of spirit does that mean that the verse is talking about some sort of spirit body? Look closer at the verse 1 Cor 6:20 in post 33. "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."

Now look at the same verse compared in several translations. https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/6-20.htm
Do you see the words added by the translation of the posters choice? What words are missing in most translations? Can you see how doctrine can overshadow what the Bible actually says? It can even creep into Bible translations themselves. One must always stay on high alert for this kind of teaching, where doctrine is injected into the Bible text.

The chapter is (in my opinion) an example of beauty and wisdom in the Bible, and an encouragement to be realistic, not pessimistic.

I agree. Ecclesiastes is my favorite book of the Bible. When I need to center myself I can trust Ecclesiastes to do that for me. When I need the answer to the question, "What in the world should I be doing with myself?" Should I be pursing getting rich? Get a bigger house? Buy a plane? Become famous? Ecc 12:13 always reminds me, "The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the true God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole obligation of man." And doing that is the only thing that leads to true happiness. Everything else is temporary and will not last unless Jehovah God is supporting it and I get behind what He supports.

Finally, I'd never realised you were a Jehovahs Witness. I should properly have stated "Jehovahs Witnesses may defer to their Governing Body for interpretations.", as I didn't intend to imply that all JW's always deferred.

The GB does exactly what I'm doing here. They are not much more than directors to scriptures. They appeal to our reasoning by asking us, 'what do you see'? and not so much 'see what I mean?'
Lets say you and God were about to talk to a person about the truth of all things. Who should speak the most about that truth? You or the Almighty? Many will try to interpret for God. Yet as you have just shown, you didn't need me to interpret Ecc chapter 9 for you. The Bible is God speaking to YOU and not for me to set my doctrine in your head before you read God's word.

So, now that you're scripturally armed with what the condition of the dead is, what is the current status of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

[2timothy316]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #41]

Whether or not an unrighteous person is completely forgotten from His memory or not is not stated word for word in the Bible. Regardless, if a Jehovah says a person is annihilated then they are someone we will never have to worry about living again, with a human body or in a spirit body.

So you don't actually know if anyone is annihilated or not or are you not willing to admit the contradiction here?

I defer to scripture: "Jehovah guards all those who love him, But all the wicked he will annihilate." - Ps 145:20
I have made no contradiction, you've made one up. As you must think that God remembers things like a human and I highly doubt He has a memory like ours. God's word says the wicked He will annihilate. They are physically annihilated so they will not have bodies of flesh. They are also spiritually annihilated so that they will never live as spirits either. Whether He remembers them or forgets them I couldn't care less. As I said before, if God remembers someone, it doesn't make them alive. Only if a person has made Jehovah their God, are they alive to Him. For Jehovah is the God of the living. Jehovah is not God to the wicked. Jehovah is not God of the dead. There is no existence, spiritual or physical awaiting the wicked.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #37]
Spirits did not arise for people to see when the earthquake shook the tombs outside of Jerusalem at Jesus' death. The quake opened up many tombs and dead bodies were thrown up out of their graves. This is what people saw who were passing by, and they went into the city to report it.

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose

Does the word SPIRIT appear in this passage?

No. Why do you ask?

Because you seem to be suggesting that the scripture refers to the spirits of the dead being raised back to life which it does not. Indeed it has nothjng to do with a resurrection of any kind.


If that'is not what you are suggesting then I have no issue with your post.

Which post did I seem to suggest that "Spirits of the dead" came back to life?

What are "Spirits of the dead"?

[Diagoras]

To respond to your question or suggestion, I read Ecclesiastes 9 as saying death is the ultimate fate for every person ("the great equaliser"), you should "live life", and that the dead experience nothing. The mention of Sheol suggests a 'place of non-being'. That fits well with my own beliefs as a scientific naturalist.

You didn't even need me to 'interpret' it for you to come to same conclusion I have.

Thanks.

Can you see how doctrine can overshadow what the Bible actually says? It can even creep into Bible translations themselves. One must always stay on high alert for this kind of teaching, where doctrine is injected into the Bible text.

(This was referring to the word 'spirit' creeping in to some translations). Yes, and the plethora of available translations makes things quite difficult. For instance, the copy of the Bible that I have belonged to my great-grandmother; it's a KJV printed by the Oxford University Press in 1889 and contains the Apocrypha between the Old and New Testaments. Took me a while to understand that it's not by any means the 'definitive' bible.

The Bible is God speaking to YOU and not for me to set my doctrine in your head before you read God's word.

From what you've shown me above though, the particular translation that I choose has some bearing on how 'God speaks to you' though.

So, now that you're scripturally armed with what the condition of the dead is, what is the current status of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

My 'scientific armour' fits me much more comfortably, thanks - but do I take it that you're asking me to answer the question as if my sole source of reference was the Bible? I defer to more expert studiers of scripture in that regard, although my scientific answer would simply be 'Dead'.

[2timothy316]

Can you see how doctrine can overshadow what the Bible actually says? It can even creep into Bible translations themselves. One must always stay on high alert for this kind of teaching, where doctrine is injected into the Bible text.

(This was referring to the word 'spirit' creeping in to some translations). Yes, and the plethora of available translations makes things quite difficult. For instance, the copy of the Bible that I have belonged to my great-grandmother; it's a KJV printed by the Oxford University Press in 1889 and contains the Apocrypha between the Old and New Testaments. Took me a while to understand that it's not by any means the 'definitive' bible.

The Bible is God speaking to YOU and not for me to set my doctrine in your head before you read God's word.

From what you've shown me above though, the particular translation that I choose has some bearing on how 'God speaks to you' though.

This is why it is not wise to limit ourselves to one translation of the Bible. The way people spoke, wrote, and thought thousands of years ago of course is going to differ from us today. By comparing several translations, by avoiding being dogmatic to one particular doctrine, and actually studying the Bible, the message of the Bible becomes crystal clear.

So, now that you're scripturally armed with what the condition of the dead is, what is the current status of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

My 'scientific armour' fits me much more comfortably, thanks - but do I take it that you're asking me to answer the question as if my sole source of reference was the Bible? I defer to more expert studiers of scripture in that regard, although my scientific answer would simply be 'Dead'.

There is nothing wrong with having more information. So no I don't expect your sole source of information to be the Bible. I know of two sources of truth. The book of the Bible and the Book of Creation. The Book of Creation is the world around us. I have a scientific mind like you. For many years I considered myself an atheist. Yet I had to learn not to be dogmatic, thinking that science is the only source of truth. By only observing one, the Bible or Creation, it's like a trying to do everything by hopping on one foot. Sure a person can do it and they can live a somewhat normal life. But there are a lot of places they will not be able to reach and many things they will not be able to do. There is no harm in knowing both the scientific knowledge of the condition of the dead AND the Bible knowledge of the condition of the dead. I'd recommend that you keep both and don't just toss Bible knowledge out the window. I'd never suggest someone toss good scientific knowledge out the window either.

The natural world around us doesn't lie. Yet like the Bible, people can and do have 'doctrines' that they inject into their scientific observations of the world around us. Exegesis and eisegesis is not limited to Bible reading. Anywhere there is a question to be answered, even in science, those two approaches to answering that question will be used by many people. So we still have to be alert about what a person is teaching in science just like what a person is teaching about the Bible. This pandemic and the vaccination is a prime example of people of injecting their doctrine on science. Rather than inspecting the research for themselves they are letting others inject their own dogma onto what the vaccine does. What happens when people do that? Pain, sickness, and sometimes death.

The same thing that happens when people inject their own dogma on the Bible, although it happens mostly in a spiritual sense it came manifest into real pain and death. (The crusades and the Spanish inquisition come to mind)

[Diagoras]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #56]

There's quite a bit in your post that I would enjoy discussing further, but it'd be off-topic and not really fitting with the guidelines for TD&D (e.g. vaccines). So I'll bow out here, and thank you again for putting the time and effort into the debate.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #56]

There's quite a bit in your post that I would enjoy discussing further, but it'd be off-topic and not really fitting with the guidelines for TD&D (e.g. vaccines). So I'll bow out here, and thank you again for putting the time and effort into the debate.

The Vaccine thing was just for an example of how something seemly simple can be bent into fit a person's personal dogma. Though I guess it is a hot topic these days because politics got thrown into the mix. SMH

My goal was to give a satisfactory answer to your question in post 21. viewtopic.php?p=1047445#p1047445
I wanted to show you what I do to get to the best interpretation of the Bible.

I don't really even call an interpretation something made by me, I let the Bible interpret the Bible using simple reading comprehension and critical thinking skills I learned in the 1st and 2nd grades. One must have no fear of examining the scriptures and allowing themselves to actually accept what they have read. If something doesn't make sense there is no reason to panic and defer to a popular doctrine. This is where a good reference Bible is really handy. I'd recommend the New World Translation which is available online https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-e
Next to most scriptures you will find a little letter, a, b, c, and so on. These are links to other scriptures that harmonize or sometimes are directly quoted by other scriptures. I don't just suggest the NWT because it's a Bible provided by JWs but because it actually really is good as a reference Bible and I have compared many. The online verse of the NWT will provide side by side comparisons to a few other Bible translations. When I want more information with more Bible translations I use Biblehub.com. Bottom line, get more Bible information when trying to resolve the correct meaning of scripture before turning to a popular doctrine.

Others rely on doctrines and tradition to explain scripture that they learned from numerous sources too many to list here. Mainly by their parents. Yet why do they cling to these doctrines so much? In my experience, I have found some might live in fear of deviating from these traditions. Fear of backlash from friends and family. Fear from their political party. The threat of burning forever to them is a real motivator to stick to their doctrine. While others cling to a doctrine to feel superior and safe compared to everyone else who they consider doomed. Whatever the reason, it starts at a single source, it's not because of what they got out of the Bible it is because of what someone injected into the Bible for them.

[Revelations won]

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Revelations won in post #58]

No, Jesus said to the thief impaled beside him, "I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." There was no time limit set on that promise. It was not that very day. Jesus said he would resurrect people "on the last day," meaning during the Millennial Reign. (John 6:40,44) That is when the thief would be resurrected.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Revelations won in post #58]

No, Jesus said to the thief impaled beside him, "I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise." There was no time limit set on that promise. It was not that very day. Jesus said he would resurrect people "on the last day," meaning during the Millennial Reign. (John 6:40,44) That is when the thief would be resurrected.

Read what you wrote ... today.

https://biblehub.com/text/luke/23-43.htm

Greek word is apparently semeron:

https://biblehub.com/greek/se_meron_4594.htm

Used in give us this day our daily bread apparently, also so many other uses that seem quite normal.