LDS and JW's

[dj_dave]

I am not sure what you are trying to prove by that. I had emphasized that verse because it refers to the resurrection of mankind, not of Jesus. Yet we know that the resurrection of mankind will be a physical one, not a spiritual one; and as far as I can recall that is what JWs believe as well (although they differ in not believing in an immortal spirit). So that verse actually works against your argument, not in favor of it.

Romans 6:5
5* For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,*

There are two resurrections…THE 144,000 WILL BE RESURRECTED LIKE JESUS. (1 John 3:1,2; 2 Pet 1:4-- The rest of mankind who will have an opportunity to live on earth (Ps. 37:29) will have a physical resurrection. Paul is speaking to the ones “with the Heavenly calling” --Heb. 3:1; and “called to be holy ones” 1 Cor 1:2 See also:
*(Romans 8:30) Moreover, those whom he foreordained are the ones he also called; and those whom he **called **are the ones he also declared to be righteous. Finally those whom he declared righteous are the ones he also glorified.
(1 Corinthians 1:9) God is faithful, by whom YOU were **called **into a sharing with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Philippians 3:14) I am pursuing down toward the goal for the prize of the **upward call **of God by means of Christ Jesus.
(1 Thessalonians 2:12) to the end that YOU should go on walking worthily of God who is calling YOU to his kingdom and glory.
(2 Timothy 1:9) He saved us and called us with a holy calling, not by reason of our works, but by reason of his own purpose and undeserved kindness. This was given us in connection with Christ Jesus before times long lasting,
(2 Peter 1:10) For this reason, brothers, all the more do YOUR utmost to make the **calling *and choosing of YOU sure for yourselves; for if YOU keep on doing these things YOU will by no means ever fail.

*“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for according to his great mercy he gave us a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an incorruptible and undefiled and unfading inheritance”. * 1Pet 1:3
and finally back to 1 Cor 15:53
(1 Corinthians 15:53) For this which is corruptible must put on incorruption, and this which is mortal must put on immortality.

Back tomorrow with “THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS”

 

[dj_dave]

“I agree that there is a problem here with Saul seeking to commune with Samuel though a spiritual medium which had been forbidden in the Law of Moses. But contrasting that with the fact that Samuel did appear to him, and did give him correct advice that should have come from the Lord, and a prophecy that was fulfilled, coupled with the fact that the writers of the sacred writ considered it worthy of being recorded in the sacred annals of the Hebrew scripture, suggests that we shouldn’t be too hasty in judging it as having come from an evil source. We don’t know enough about how these things operated in those days to be able to say definitely that it must have come from an evil source. I think it would be unsafe to hurriedly jump to that conclusion.”

END OF QUOTE

God’s true servants never looked to such persons for information. When the Law was given to Israel shortly after their release from bondage in Egypt, they were strictly forbidden to consult “professional foretellers of events.” (Le 19:31) Having “immoral intercourse” with them would result in being cut off (in death) from among God’s people. And as to the one practicing the art, the law went on to say: “As for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail.” (Le 20:6,*27)

Nearly 400 years after Saul’s reign, King Manasseh of Judah “did on a large scale what was bad in Jehovah’s eyes, to offend him,” including the consulting of professional foretellers of events, who flourished under his rule. (2Ki 21:6; 2Ch 33:6) All of these had to be cleaned out of the land by Manasseh’s grandson, righteous King Josiah.—2Ki 23:24.

BUT NOW REMEMBER: The only mention in the Christian Greek Scriptures of demonic predicting of the future is the instance in which the apostle Paul, in the city of Philippi, freed “a certain servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination.” She had furnished her masters with much gain “by practicing the art of prediction.” Manifesting the fact that such practice is truly demonic and diametrically opposed to God, the masters of the girl from whom the demon was cast out caused Paul much trouble in Philippi, bringing Paul and his companion Silas before the magistrates, who gave the command to beat them and then threw them into jail.—Ac 16:12, 16-24.

 

[zerinus]

/… Continued

That simply means that he will receive a more glorious (physical) body, which will be quickened by the Spirit rather than by a natural agent such as “blood,” which is life giving agent of natural bodies.

Where does the Bible say this? Did you read 1 Cor 15? Does this really say a “more glorious (physical) body”?

The idea that the resurrection is of the physical and natural body is a “given” in the Bible. Whether it talks about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, or that of the rest of mankind, it is just “understood”. The writers of the NT write under the assumption that they don’t have to prove that the resurrection something other than physical. The only incredulity they faced was whether it happened at all, not whether it was physical or not. Take for example Paul’s sermon before the Greek philosophers at Mars Hill at Athens. This is what happens when Paul preaches about the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Acts 17:

31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

32 And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter.

33 So Paul departed from among them.

The problem that those philosophers had was that they disbelieved in the resurrection period, not whether it was physical or spiritual. So the problem Paul faced was disbelief in the resurrection itself, not whether it was physical or something else. When Paul told the Athenians that God “raised him from the dead,” the assumption among the Athenians would have been that it meant being raised physically from the dead. Now if Paul didn’t mean a physical resurrection, but some kind of spiritual one, he could have easily explained that to his audience. He could have said: “But wait a minute, I don’t mean that God physically raised Him from the dead; it was just some kind of spiritual thing that happened etc.” Maybe he could have persuaded his audience to listen to him or take him more seriously. But he doesn’t. When Paul or the other Apostles talk about Jesus being raised form the dead, the assumption must be that they are referring to a physical one, not some spiritual thing. Paul repeatedly refers to the resurrection of Jesus Christ without qualifying it with anything, by which we can only assume the obvious, that he means a physical resurrection. Here are some examples:

Acts 13:

30 But God raised him from the dead:

Acts 17:

31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Romans 10:

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Galatians 1:

1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead

Ephesians 1:

20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

Colossians 2:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Your demand that where does it say in the Bible that the resurrection was physical begs the question: where does it say in the Bible that it wasn’t? It is like asking, “Where does it say in the Bible that water makes you wet?” Well it doesn’t because everybody knows that that is what it does! Similarly, when Paul talks of Jesus being raised from the dead, he does not have to qualify it by saying that it was physical because everyone understands that that is what it means to be raised form the dead.

Continued … /

 

[zerinus]

/… Continued

"35 Nevertheless, someone will say: “How are the dead to be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming?” 36 You unreasonable person! What you sow is not made alive unless first it dies; 37 and as for what you sow, you sow, not the body that will develop, but a bare grain, it may be, of wheat or any one of the rest; 38 but God gives it a body just as it has pleased him, and to each of the seeds its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same flesh, but there is one of mankind, and there is another flesh of cattle, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish. 40 And there are heavenly bodies, and earthly bodies; but the glory of the heavenly bodies is one sort, and that of the earthly bodies is a different sort. 41 The glory of the sun is one sort, and the glory of the moon is another, and the glory of the stars is another; in fact, star differs from star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in *corruption, it is raised up in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised up in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised up in power. 44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. 45 It is even so written: “The first man Adam became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 Nevertheless, the first is, not that which is spiritual, but that which is physical, **afterward **that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second man is out of heaven. 48 As the one made of dust [is], so those made of dust [are] also; and as the heavenly one [is], so those who are heavenly [are] also. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the one made of dust, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly one."

The trouble with that is that you give all your quotes from the JW Bible that nobody except the JWs accept—and in parts it reads very differently from the KJV or other generally accepted translations of the Bible. If we can’t even agree on what the Bible actually says, that makes discussing religion with a JW extremely difficult, because we have to reduce our discussion to a more fundamental level of what the Bible actually says, rather than accepting that as a given, and building our discussion on a common ground that we both can accept. If we can’t agree on what the Bible actually says, then we have really no common ground which to build on. We have to establish a common ground before we can do anything else.

I still stand by what I said eailier:

After Jesus’ resurrection he appeared in different bodies. Mary mistook him for the gardener. (Joh 20:14,*15) He again appeared, entering a room with locked doors, having a body with wound marks. (Joh 20:24-29) Several times he manifested himself and was recognized, not by his appearance, but by his words and actions. (Lu 24:15, 16, 30, 31, 36-45; Mt 28:16-18) Once a miracle performed at his direction opened his disciples’ eyes to his identity. (Joh 21:4-7,12) Jesus, having been resurrected as a spirit (1Pe 3:, could materialize a body for the occasion as the angels did in past times, when they appeared as messengers. (Ge 18:2; 19:1,*12; Jos 5:13,*14; Jg 13:3,*6; Heb 13:

I think I have already answered that adequately, and don’t need to comment on it any further.

Also, During the days before the Flood, the angels that “did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place” performed an incarnation and married human wives. That these angelic sons of God were not truly human but had materialized bodies is shown by the fact that the Flood did not destroy these angels, but they dematerialized and returned to the spirit realm.—Jude 6; Ge 6:4; 1Pe 3:19,*20; 2Pe 2:4.

This is another typical example of how JW Bible differs from the KJV or other generally accepted Bibles; and how it destroys any common ground which we can build on. That interpretation of those verses is way out! :whacky: That is simply not what we read into those verses that you have quoted.

 

[zerinus]

First let me say to everyone…that all of my answers are not given to change your beliefs. They are simply what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe…(Acts 28:22) What you do with the information is up to you.

And thank you for your willingness to discuss the various aspects of your religion. I should also add that I read that book on JW theology around twelve years ago, and have forgotten most of the details. The thing that has stuck in my mind most since first read it is that the weakest point of JW theology at which it can be attacked is the JW belief regarding the identity of Jesus and Jehovah. If it can be shown that Jesus is the same as Jehovah, that is what torpedoes JW theology. It blows it out of the water. And that is something that can be proved quite easily, as I showed in my latest blog.

(Matthew 27:52-53) 52 *And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, 53 (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people. * NWT

This is another case in point. That reading from the JW Bible is so different from the KJV that I read and trust that we first have to decide which reading is the correct one before we can go any further; and that destroys the common ground on which we can build. I don’t accept the JW translation. I think that the KJV is the more correct reading.

Think about it; what does an earthquake do to cemeteries?

Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs. The latter opinion, however, “did not gain wide recognition,” comments scholar Erich Fascher. When rendering Matthew 27:52, 53, many modern Bible translations give the impression that a resurrection took place. Not so the New World Translation, which points to the effects of an earthquake. Why?

Well, whoever “the holy ones” were, Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were.
Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e•gei′ro, meaning to “raise up,” does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to “lift out” from a pit or to “get up” from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69)

We believe the upheaval at Jesus’ death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and, in 1962, in Colombia.

This view of the event harmonizes with Bible teachings. In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, the apostle Paul gives convincing proof of the resurrection, but he completely ignores Matthew 27:52, 53. So do all other Bible writers. (Acts 2:32, 34) ALSO— The other three gospels don’t mention the resurrection of these saints. Partly for this reason, many biblical scholars doubt that it really happened. They argue that such an extraordinary event, if it really occurred, would provide strong evidence for the divinity of Jesus, and therefore the other gospel writers would have also described it.

Another reason for doubt is that these resurrected saints would have created a lot of excitement when they appeared in Jerusalem, and a historian like Josephus, who wrote a detailed account of the period, probably would have said something about it. But he doesn’t mention it at all.
The corpses raised up at Jesus’ death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for **on the third day thereafter, Jesus became “the firstborn from the dead.” **(Colossians 1:18) Anointed Christians, also called “holy ones,” were promised a share in the first resurrection during Christ’s presence, not in the first century.—1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:14-17.

Who were those that “entered into the holy city” a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Jehovah’s Witnesses believe Matthew is referring to persons *who visited the tombs *and brought news of the event into Jerusalem.

Basically you are now questioning the generally accepted reading of the Bible, which I do not accept. As a Mormon, I can in fact tell you more. The Book of Mormon also has an account of the Saints among the Book of Mormon people being raised form the dead at the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That provides us with a second witness that the events described in the New Testament are true. Therefore we in particular cannot accept your alternative interpretation of those events.

 

[zerinus]

Romans 6:5
5* For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection*,

There are two resurrections…THE 144,000 WILL BE RESURRECTED LIKE JESUS. (1 John 3:1,2; 2 Pet 1:4-- The rest of mankind who will have an opportunity to live on earth (Ps. 37:29) will have a physical resurrection. Paul is speaking to the ones “with the Heavenly calling” --Heb. 3:1; and “called to be holy ones” 1 Cor 1:2 See also:

Thank you for correcting me on that. Like I said, I read all of those things a long time ago, and have forgotten the details. From our perspective, however, there is only one kind of resurrection, and that is a physical one, applicable to both Jesus and the rest of mankind.

(Romans 8:30) Moreover, those whom he foreordained are the ones he also called; and those whom he **called **are the ones he also declared to be righteous. Finally those whom he declared righteous are the ones he also glorified.
(1 Corinthians 1:9) God is faithful, by whom YOU were **called **into a sharing with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Philippians 3:14) I am pursuing down toward the goal for the prize of the **upward call **of God by means of Christ Jesus.
(1 Thessalonians 2:12) to the end that YOU should go on walking worthily of God who is calling YOU to his kingdom and glory.
(2 Timothy 1:9) He saved us and called us with a holy calling, not by reason of our works, but by reason of his own purpose and undeserved kindness. This was given us in connection with Christ Jesus before times long lasting,
(2 Peter 1:10) For this reason, brothers, all the more do YOUR utmost to make the **calling **and choosing of YOU sure for yourselves; for if YOU keep on doing these things YOU will by no means ever fail.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for according to his great mercy he gave us a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an incorruptible and undefiled and unfading inheritance”. 1Pet 1:3
and finally back to 1 Cor 15:53
(1 Corinthians 15:53) For this which is corruptible must put on incorruption, and this which is mortal must put on immortality.

I am not quite sure what you are trying to prove by those quotes, or how they support your case; and they are from the JW Bible which do not sound familiar to me.

 

[zerinus]

“I agree that there is a problem here with Saul seeking to commune with Samuel though a spiritual medium which had been forbidden in the Law of Moses. But contrasting that with the fact that Samuel did appear to him, and did give him correct advice that should have come from the Lord, and a prophecy that was fulfilled, coupled with the fact that the writers of the sacred writ considered it worthy of being recorded in the sacred annals of the Hebrew scripture, suggests that we shouldn’t be too hasty in judging it as having come from an evil source. We don’t know enough about how these things operated in those days to be able to say definitely that it must have come from an evil source. I think it would be unsafe to hurriedly jump to that conclusion.”

END OF QUOTE

God’s true servants never looked to such persons for information. When the Law was given to Israel shortly after their release from bondage in Egypt, they were strictly forbidden to consult “professional foretellers of events.” (Le 19:31) Having “immoral intercourse” with them would result in being cut off (in death) from among God’s people. And as to the one practicing the art, the law went on to say: “As for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail.” (Le 20:6,*27)

Nearly 400 years after Saul’s reign, King Manasseh of Judah “did on a large scale what was bad in Jehovah’s eyes, to offend him,” including the consulting of professional foretellers of events, who flourished under his rule. (2Ki 21:6; 2Ch 33:6) All of these had to be cleaned out of the land by Manasseh’s grandson, righteous King Josiah.—2Ki 23:24.

BUT NOW REMEMBER: The only mention in the Christian Greek Scriptures of demonic predicting of the future is the instance in which the apostle Paul, in the city of Philippi, freed “a certain servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination.” She had furnished her masters with much gain “by practicing the art of prediction.” Manifesting the fact that such practice is truly demonic and diametrically opposed to God, the masters of the girl from whom the demon was cast out caused Paul much trouble in Philippi, bringing Paul and his companion Silas before the magistrates, who gave the command to beat them and then threw them into jail.—Ac 16:12, 16-24.

Thank you. As I said, I agree that there is a potential problem there; but I am not sure your wholesale rejection of the event is totally justified, after taking all the factors into consideration.

 

[dj_dave]

And thank you for your willingness to discuss the various aspects of your religion. I should also add that I read that book on JW theology around twelve years ago, and have forgotten most of the details. The thing that has stuck in my mind most since first read it is that the weakest point of JW theology at which it can be attacked is the JW belief regarding the identity of Jesus and Jehovah. If it can be shown that Jesus is the same as Jehovah, that is what torpedoes JW theology. It blows it out of the water. And that is something that can be proved quite easily, as I showed in my latest blog.

This is another case in point. That reading from the JW Bible is so different from the KJV that I read and trust that we first have to decide which reading is the correct one before we can go any further; and that destroys the common ground on which we can build. I don’t accept the JW translation. I think that the KJV is the more correct reading.

Basically you are now questioning the generally accepted reading of the Bible, which I do not accept. As a Mormon, I can in fact tell you more. The Book of Mormon also has an account of the Saints among the Book of Mormon people being raised form the dead at the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That provides us with a second witness that the events described in the New Testament are true. Therefore we in particular cannot accept your alternative interpretation of those events.

Then how was Jesus “the Firstborn from the Dead”? ALSO " If it can be shown that Jesus is the same as Jehovah"–it cannot. Moreover you will find that many
Cambridge University Scholars and Hebrew University Scholars
agree that the NWT is the best Bible Translation to date. It was featured on “Jeopardy” as best Bible Translation too.

 

[dj_dave]

Thank you for correcting me on that. Like I said, I read all of those things a long time ago, and have forgotten the details. From our perspective, however, there is only one kind of resurrection, and that is a physical one, applicable to both Jesus and the rest of mankind.

I am not quite sure what you are trying to prove by those quotes, or how they support your case; and they are from the JW Bible which do not sound familiar to me.

jehovah.to/xlation/mi.html

 

[dj_dave]

The idea that the resurrection is of the physical and natural body is a “given” in the Bible.

*Your demand that where does it say in the Bible that the resurrection was physical begs the question: where does it say in the Bible that it wasn’t? *
Continued … /

Your demand that where does it say in the Bible that the resurrection was physical begs the question: where does it say in the Bible that it wasn’t?

At 1 Cor 15 "It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. If you can’t see this, i’m sorry…nuf said.*

 

[dj_dave]

You do not believe that he was God.

Take the expression “Son of Man” In the Gospel accounts the expression is found nearly 80 times, applying in every case to Jesus Christ, being used by him to refer to himself. (Mt 8:20; 9:6; 10:23) The occurrences outside the Gospel accounts are at Acts 7:56; Hebrews 2:6; and Revelation 1:13; 14:14.
Jesus’ application of this expression to himself clearly showed that God’s Son was now indeed a human, having ‘become flesh’ (Joh 1:14), having ‘come to be out of a woman’ through his conception and birth to the Jewish virgin Mary. (Ga 4:4; Lu 1:34-36) Hence he had not simply materialized a human body as angels had previously done; he was not an incarnation but was actually a ‘son of mankind’ through his human mother.—Compare 1Jo 4:2,*3; 2Jo 7;

For this reason the apostle Paul could apply Psalm 8 as prophetic of Jesus Christ. In his letter to the Hebrews (2:5-9), Paul quoted the verses reading: “What is mortal man ’enohsh′] that you keep him in mind, and the son of earthling man [ben-’a·dham′] that you take care of him? You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones “a little lower than angels,” at Hebrews 2:7], and with glory and splendor you then crowned him. You make him dominate over the works of your hands; everything you have put under his feet.” (Ps 8:4-6; compare Ps 144:3.) Paul shows that, to fulfill this prophetic psalm, Jesus indeed was made “a little lower than angels,” becoming actually a mortal “son of earthling man,” that he might die as such and thereby “taste death for every man,” thereafter being crowned with glory and splendor by his Father, who resurrected him.—Heb 2:8,*9; compare Heb 2:14; Php 2:5-9.

How could he be GOD and Man? Yet, " a Little Lower than angels"?

 

[dj_dave]

Thank you. I do recall from my reading that that is another peculiar teaching of the JWs. …They believe that when you die, your identity or personal consciousness vanishes into nothing. The only thing that remains is the material body which returns to the dust. it. …,.,While on the cross, Jesus said to the thief that was crucified alongside Him, “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). If the thief on the cross didn’t have an immortal soul or spirit, how could be with Jesus in paradise after both of them had died? Case of the rich man and beggar who died is another good example. It is a bit lengthy, but all of it is significant, so I am going to quote it in full:

Mark 12
*
27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.*

OKAY, get ready! I am going to explain the Jehovah’s Witnesses teachings regarding the above quotes one at a time.

First "While on the cross, Jesus said to the thief that was crucified alongside Him, “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). If the thief on the cross didn’t have an immortal soul or spirit, how could be with Jesus in paradise after both of them had died? "

While Jesus was hanging on a stake, one of the evildoers alongside him, observing that Jesus was not deserving of punishment, requested: “Jesus, remember me when you get into your kingdom.” Jesus replied: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” (Lu 23:42,*43) This would require a resurrection for the evildoer. This man was not a faithful follower of Jesus Christ. He had been engaged in wrongdoing, lawbreaking meriting the death penalty. (Lu 23:40,*41) Therefore, he could not hope to be one of those receiving the first resurrection. Additionally, he died 40 days before Jesus ascended into heaven and hence before Pentecost, which was 10 days after that ascension, when God through Jesus anointed the first members of those who will receive the heavenly resurrection.—Ac 1:3; 2:1-4,*33.

The evildoer, Jesus said, would be in Paradise. The word means “a park or pleasure ground.” The Septuagint rendered the Hebrew word for “garden” (gan), as at Genesis 2:8, by the Greek word pa·ra′dei·sos. The paradise in which the evildoer will be would not be “the paradise of God” promised to “him that conquers,” at Revelation 2:7, for the evildoer was not a conqueror of the world with Jesus Christ. (Joh 16:33) The evildoer would therefore not be in the heavenly Kingdom as a member of it (Lu 22:28-30) but would be a subject of the Kingdom when those of “the first resurrection” would, as kings of God and Christ, sit on thrones, ruling with Christ for a thousand years.—Re 20:4,*6.

Luke’s account shows that an evildoer, being executed alongside Jesus Christ, spoke words in Jesus’ defense and requested that Jesus remember him when he ‘got into his kingdom.’ Jesus’ reply was: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” (Lu 23:39-43) The punctuation shown in the rendering of these words must, of course, depend on the translator’s understanding of the sense of Jesus’ words, since no punctuation was used in the original Greek text. Punctuation in the modern style did not become common until about the ninth century C.E. Whereas many translations place a comma before the word “today” and thereby give the impression that the evildoer entered Paradise that same day, **there is nothing in the rest of the Scriptures to support this. Jesus himself was dead and in the tomb until the third day and was then resurrected as “the firstfruits” of the resurrection. **(Ac 10:40; 1Co 15:20; Col 1:18) He ascended to heaven 40 days later.—Joh 20:17; Ac 1:1-3,*9. continued…

 

[dj_dave]

QUOTE: [Case of the rich man and beggar who died is another good example. It is a bit lengthy, but all of it is significant, so I am going to quote it in full:*

Teachers of hellfire and life after death eagerly point to this account as definite proof that there is indeed a hell of torment that awaits the wicked. But, in so doing, they disregard such clear and repeated Biblical statements as: “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die.” (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) And: “As for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) Clearly these statements do not support the idea of torment for “lost souls” in a fiery hell.
(Ecclesiastes 9:10) ...All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in She′ol, (the Grave) the place to which you are going.

Sincere seekers for the truth want to know what is right. They realize that they would only be fooling themselves if they rejected portions of God’s Word while claiming to base their beliefs on other parts. They want to know what the Bible actually says about the condition of the dead. And, to fill out the picture, they want to know the meaning of what is said about the rich man who experienced torment in Hades, and how that fits in with the rest of the Bible.

Please read Luke 16:19-31

Now, Note what is said about the rich man. Why was he tormented in Hades? What had he done? Jesus did not say that the rich man led a degraded life, did he? The rich man lacked compassion for him. But did that failing distinguish him sufficiently from Lazarus?

Think about what Jesus said concerning Lazarus. Is there anything in the account to lead us to conclude that, if the situation had been reversed, Lazarus would have been a compassionate man? He merely described Lazarus as a sickly beggar.

So is it logical to conclude that all sickly beggars will receive divine blessings at death, whereas all rich men will go to a place of conscious torment? The Bible contains the prayerful expression: “Give me neither poverty nor riches.” (Proverbs 30:8) And of his time, King David wrote: “I have not seen anyone righteous left entirely, nor his offspring looking for bread.”—Psalm 37:25.

If we take Jesus’ words literally, we would have to draw still other conclusions that would make the illustration strange indeed. These include: That those enjoying celestial happiness are in position to see and speak to those suffering torment in Hades. That the water adhering to one’s fingertip is not evaporated by the fire of Hades. And, that, although the torment of Hades is great, a mere drop of water would bring relief to the sufferer.Taken literally, do these things sound reasonable to you? Or, do you feel, instead, that what Jesus said was not meant to be taken literally? Is there any way to be sure?

Examine the context. To whom was Jesus talking? At Luke 16:14 we are told: “Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him.”

Since Jesus spoke in the hearing of the Pharisees, was he relating an actual case or was he simply using an illustration? Concerning Jesus’ method of teaching the crowds, we read: “Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them.” (Matthew 13:34) Accordingly, the account about the rich man and Lazarus must be an illustration.

KEEP READING: This illustration was evidently directed to the Pharisees. As a class they were like the rich man. They loved money, as well as prominence and flattering titles. Jesus said of them: “All the works they do they do to be viewed by men; for they broaden the scripture-containing cases that they wear as safeguards, and enlarge the fringes of their garments. They like the most prominent place at evening meals and the front seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called Rabbi by men.”—Matthew 23:5-7.

The Pharisees looked down on others, especially on tax collectors, harlots and others having the reputation of being sinners. (Luke 18:11, 12) On one occasion when officers, sent to arrest Jesus, came back empty-handed because of having been impressed by his teaching, the Pharisees spoke up: “You have not been misled also, have you? Not one of the rulers or of the Pharisees has put faith in him, has he? But this crowd that does not know the Law are accursed people.”—John 7:47-49.

continued…

 

[dj_dave]

The Pharisees looked down on others, especially on tax collectors, harlots and others having the reputation of being sinners. (Luke 18:11, 12) On one occasion when officers, sent to arrest Jesus, came back empty-handed because of having been impressed by his teaching, the Pharisees spoke up: “You have not been misled also, have you? Not one of the rulers or of the Pharisees has put faith in him, has he? But this crowd that does not know the Law are accursed people.”—John 7:47-49.

continued…

Hence, in the parable the beggar Lazarus well represents those humble persons whom the Pharisees despised but who repented and became followers of Jesus Christ. Jesus showed that these despised sinners, upon repenting, would gain a **position of divine favor, **whereas the Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders as a class would lose out. He said: “Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and the harlots are going ahead of you into the kingdom of God. For John came to you in a way of righteousness, but you did not believe him. However, the tax collectors and the harlots believed him, and you, although you saw this, did not feel regret afterwards so as to believe him.”—Matthew 21:31, 32.

What, then, is signified by the death of the “rich man” and of “Lazarus”? We do not need to conclude that it refers to actual death. As used in the Bible, death can also represent a great change in the condition of individuals. For example: Persons pursuing a course of life contrary to God’s will are spoken of as being ‘dead in trespasses and sins.’ But when they come into an approved standing before God as disciples of Jesus Christ they are referred to as coming “alive.” (Ephesians 2:1, 5; Colossians 2:13) At the same time such living persons become “dead” to sin. We read: “Reckon yourselves to be dead indeed with reference to sin but living with reference to God by Christ Jesus.”—Romans 6:11.

We believe Since both the “rich man” and “Lazarus” of Jesus’ parable are symbolic, logically their deaths are also symbolic. But in what sense do they die?

The key to answering this question lies in what Jesus said just before introducing the illustration: “Everyone that divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries a woman divorced from a husband commits adultery.” (Luke 16:18) This statement may appear to be completely unrelated to the illustration. But this is not the case.

By reason of the Mosaic law the nation of Israel was in a covenant relationship with God and therefore could be spoken of as being a wife to him. At Jeremiah 3:14, for example, God refers to the nation as an unfaithful wife: “‘Return, O you renegade sons,’ is the utterance of Jehovah. ‘For I myself have become the husbandly owner of you people.’” Then, with the coming of Jesus, an opportunity was extended to the Jews to become part of his “bride.” .”—John 3:28-30.

IMPOTANT POINT: In order to become part of Christ’s “bride,” the Jews had to be released from the Law that made them, figuratively speaking, a wife to God. Without such release, they could not come into a wifely relationship with Christ, as that would be an adulterous relationship. The words of Romans 7:1-6 confirm this:

“Can it be that you do not know, brothers, (for I am speaking to those who know law,) that the Law is master over a man as long as he lives? For instance, a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is alive; but if her husband dies, she is discharged from the law of her husband. So, then, while her husband is living, she would be styled an adulteress if she became another man’s. But if her husband dies, she is free from his law, so that she is not an adulteress if she becomes another man’s.
“So, my brothers, you also were made dead to the Law through the body of the Christ, that you might become another’s, the one’s who was raised up from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. . . . Now we have been discharged from the Law, because we have died to that by which we were being held fast, that we might be slaves in a new sense by the spirit, and not in the old sense by the written code.”

While the death of Jesus Christ was the basis for releasing the Jews from the Law, even before his death repentant ones could come **into a favored position **with God as disciples of his Son. The message and work of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ opened the door for the Jews to seize the opportunity **to gain divine favor **and put themselves in line for a heavenly inheritance as members of Christ’s bride. As Jesus himself expressed it: “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it.”—Matthew 11:12.

Hence, the work and message of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ began to lead toward a complete change in the condition of the symbolic “rich man” and “Lazarus.” Both classes died to their former condition. The repentant “Lazarus” class came into a position of divine favor, whereas the “rich man” class came under divine disfavor because of persisting in unrepentance. At one time the “Lazarus” class had looked to the Pharisees and other religious leaders of Judaism for spiritual “crumbs.” But Jesus’ imparting the truth to them filled their spiritual needs. Contrasting the spiritual feeding provided by Jesus with that of the religious leaders, the Bible reports: “The crowds were astounded at his way of teaching; for he was teaching them as a person having authority, and not as their scribes.” (Matthew 7:28, 29) Truly a complete reversal had taken place. The religious leaders of Judaism were shown up as having nothing to offer to the “Lazarus” class. Continued…

 

[zerinus]

Then how was Jesus “the Firstborn from the Dead”?

It means He was the first person to be resurrected. But I am not sure what the purpose of your question was. Are you suggesting that the resurrection of the saints (Matthew 27:52-53) could not have happened? Why? They were resurrected shortly after Jesus was resurrected; therefore Jesus was still the firstborn form the dead.

ALSO " If it can be shown that Jesus is the same as Jehovah"–it cannot.

I think it can, and I think I have done it.

Moreover you will find that many
Cambridge University Scholars and Hebrew University Scholars
agree that the NWT is the best Bible Translation to date. It was featured on “Jeopardy” as best Bible Translation too.

Thank you; but I have my doubts.

 

[zerinus]

Your demand that where does it say in the Bible that the resurrection was physical begs the question: where does it say in the Bible that it wasn’t*?

At 1 Cor 15 "It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. If you can’t see this, i’m sorry…nuf said.

See post #145, …nuf said.

 

[zerinus]

How could he be GOD and Man?

It is not a question of how He could be; it is a matter of scriptural declaration that He was.

Yet, " a Little Lower than angels"?

The context answers that question:

Hebrews 2:

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

He was made “a little lower than the angels” by being born into mortality. Angels are not mortal. As Paul says in another place:

Hebrews 2:

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

He was made a little lower than the angels by being born into mortality so that He could suffer death. But His spirit still remained divine (in fact Jehovah).

 

[dj_dave]

Continued…

IMPORTANT POINT

On the day of Pentecost of the year 33*C.E. the change in conditions was accomplished. At that time the new covenant replaced the old Law covenant. Those who had repented and accepted Jesus were then fully released from the old Law covenant. They died to it. On that day of Pentecost there was also unmistakable evidence that the disciples of Jesus Christ had been exalted far above the Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders. Not the religious leaders of Judaism, but these disciples received God’s spirit, enabling them to speak about “the magnificent things of God” in the native languages of people from widely scattered places. (Acts 2:5-11) The “Lazarus” class had indeed come into the **favored situation **by becoming the spiritual seed of the Greater Abraham, Jehovah. This was pictured as the “bosom position.”—Compare John 1:18.

As for the unrepentant Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders, they were dead to their former position of seeming favor. They were in “Hades.” Remaining unrepentant, they were separated from the faithful disciples of Jesus as if by a “great chasm.” This was a **“chasm” **of God’s unchangeable, righteous judgment. Of this, we read in Scripture: “Your judicial decision is a vast watery deep.”—Psalm 36:6.

The “rich man” class was also tormented. How? By the fiery judgment messages of God being proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples.They tried desperately to stop the proclamation. When the apostles of Jesus Christ made their defense before the Jewish supreme court composed of prominent religious men, the judges “felt deeply cut and were wanting to do away with them.” (Acts 5:33) Later, the disciple Stephen’s defense had a like tormenting effect upon the members of that court. “They felt cut to their hearts and began to gnash their teeth at him.”—Acts 7:54.

These religious leaders wanted the disciples of Jesus to come and ‘cool their tongue.’ They wanted the “Lazarus” class to leave the “bosom position” of God’s favor and present his message in such a way as not to cause them discomfort. Similarly, they wanted the “Lazarus” class to **water down God’s message so as not to put their “five brothers,” their religious allies, in a “place of torment.” **Yes, they did not want any of their associates to be tormented by judgment messages.

But, as indicated by Jesus’ illustration, neither the “rich man” class nor his religious allies would be freed from the tormenting effects of the message proclaimed by the “Lazarus” class. The apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ refused to water down the message. They refused to stop teaching on the basis of Jesus’ name. Their reply to the Jewish supreme court was: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Acts 5:29.

If the religious allies of the “rich man” wanted to escape that torment, they could do so. They had “Moses and the Prophets,” that is, they had the inspired Holy Scriptures written by Moses and other ancient prophets. Not once did those inspired Scriptures point to any literal place of torment after death, but they did contain all that was necessary to identify Jesus as the promised Messiah or Christ. (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18, 19; 1*Peter 1:10, 11) Hence, if the “rich man” class and his “five brothers” had paid attention to “Moses and the Prophets,” they would have accepted Jesus as the Messiah. That would have brought them in line for divine favor and shielded them from the tormenting effects of God’s judgment message.

There is little reason for Pastors not to be familiar with this understanding of Jesus’ parable. A leading Protestant commentary, The Interpreter’s Bible, calls attention to a similar explanation. It points out that many interpreters believe Jesus’ words to be “an allegorical appendix that presupposes the conflict between early Christianity and orthodox Judaism. The rich man and his brothers represent the unbelieving Jews. Jesus is made to assert that they have stubbornly refused to repent in spite of the obvious testimony to himself in Scripture and to predict that they will fail to be impressed by his resurrection. It is conceivable that Luke and his readers imposed some such interpretation on these verses.” And, in a footnote on Luke chapter 16, the Catholic Jerusalem Bible acknowledges that this is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.”

Accept or reject this explaination…i accept it.

 

[dj_dave]

It is not a question of how He could be; it is a matter of scriptural declaration that He was.

The context answers that question:

Hebrews 2:

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

He was made “a little lower than the angels” by being born into mortality. Angels are not mortal. As Paul says in another place:

Hebrews 2:

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

He was made a little lower than the angels by being born into mortality so that He could suffer death. But His spirit still remained divine (in fact Jehovah).

so YOU say. But, Paul said a “little lower than the angels” THEN he said "crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man."NOT “who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death”
…in other words, for the suffering of death he was Crowned with Glory

Notice
New International Version (©1984)
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

International Standard Version (©2008)
But we do see someone who was made a little lower than the angels. He is Jesus, who is crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might experience death for everyone

Bible in Basic English
But we see him who was made a little lower than the angels, even Jesus, crowned with glory and honour, because he let himself be put to death so that by the grace of God he might undergo death for all men.

and many more. By the way how do you explain John14:28…"YOU heard that I said to YOU, I am going away and I am coming [back] to YOU. If YOU loved me, YOU would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am?

 

[zerinus]

OKAY, get ready! I am going to explain the Jehovah’s Witnesses teachings regarding the above quotes one at a time.

First "While on the cross, Jesus said to the thief that was crucified alongside Him, “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). If the thief on the cross didn’t have an immortal soul or spirit, how could be with Jesus in paradise after both of them had died? "

While Jesus was hanging on a stake, one of the evildoers alongside him, observing that Jesus was not deserving of punishment, requested: “Jesus, remember me when you get into your kingdom.” Jesus replied: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” (Lu 23:42,*43)

That is the JW translation, which disagrees with every other major translation, and which I do not accept.

This would require a resurrection for the evildoer.

No it doesn’t! Jesus says that the thief would be with Him the same day in paradise. Where is paradise? The context makes it clear. Jesus was going to die, and so was the thief. Jesus’ spirit was going to the same place that the spirits of all men go when they die—the spirit world. Paradise was obviously the place where good spirits go after death, where Jesus himself was going (before His resurrection); and He was promising the thief that he would be with Him in the same place. Furthermore, Peter tells us that the gospel “was preached to the dead” (1 Peter 4:6). That gives us more information about what Jesus was doing during those three days intervening between His death and resurrection in the spirit world. He was preaching the gospel to the dead. That is where Jesus went, and also the thief, until Jesus was resurrected, while the thief still remaining in the spirit world—in paradise—until the turn for his resurrection should come.

This man was not a faithful follower of Jesus Christ. He had been engaged in wrongdoing, lawbreaking meriting the death penalty. (Lu 23:40,*41) Therefore, he could not hope to be one of those receiving the first resurrection. Additionally, he died 40 days before Jesus ascended into heaven and hence before Pentecost, which was 10 days after that ascension, when God through Jesus anointed the first members of those who will receive the heavenly resurrection.—Ac 1:3; 2:1-4,*33.

The evildoer, Jesus said, would be in Paradise. The word means “a park or pleasure ground.” The Septuagint rendered the Hebrew word for “garden” (gan), as at Genesis 2:8, by the Greek word pa•ra′dei•sos. The paradise in which the evildoer will be would not be “the paradise of God” promised to “him that conquers,” at Revelation 2:7, for the evildoer was not a conqueror of the world with Jesus Christ. (Joh 16:33) The evildoer would therefore not be in the heavenly Kingdom as a member of it (Lu 22:28-30) but would be a subject of the Kingdom when those of “the first resurrection” would, as kings of God and Christ, sit on thrones, ruling with Christ for a thousand years.—Re 20:4,*6.

That is irrelevant to what we are discussing, or to the meaning of the verse that is applicable to our discussion.

Luke’s account shows that an evildoer, being executed alongside Jesus Christ, spoke words in Jesus’ defense and requested that Jesus remember him when he ‘got into his kingdom.’ Jesus’ reply was: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” (Lu 23:39-43) The punctuation shown in the rendering of these words must, of course, depend on the translator’s understanding of the sense of Jesus’ words, since no punctuation was used in the original Greek text. Punctuation in the modern style did not become common until about the ninth century C.E. Whereas many translations place a comma before the word “today” and thereby give the impression that the evildoer entered Paradise that same day, **there is nothing in the rest of the Scriptures to support this. Jesus himself was dead and in the tomb until the third day and was then resurrected as “the firstfruits” of the resurrection. **(Ac 10:40; 1Co 15:20; Col 1:18) He ascended to heaven 40 days later.—Joh 20:17; Ac 1:1-3,*9. continued…

I regret to say it, but I trust the vast majority of the Bible translators on that one. The comma cannot be put anywhere willy-nilly. Every translator knows that where you put the comma can change the meaning of the sentence. The fact that there is no comma in the original Greek is irrelevant. The translator is going to put the comma where he thinks the resulting meaning will most closely match the meaning of the original. If 50 eminent translators agree to put it one way, and the JW translator puts it another way, which one do you think I should accept?