By the way, funny thing that you mentioned that the WTS`s view on this more means "re-creation" than ressurection, Leolaia. I tried discussing this with a JW on another forum once, and to me it was just amazing how difficult this is to understand for a JW, something that was confirmed to me when I had a similar discussion with a DFed friend of mine, who still believes the JWs have the "truth". Anyway, here`s the discussion I had with a JW on a discussion board. (The JW is Dan, I am "Baal" on that board, but I`ll just write me):
Dan: What do you think the soul is or made up of, ie emotion intelluct etc?
Me: Hm, I have no idea, other than that it is the essence of the person. Try to think of it this way:
The JW-view, and interpretation of the Bible, is that what the Bible calls "the soul", is nothing more than the "life" in the person. This "life" is the result of body mechanics,the heart beating, the blood flowing thru the system, bringing oxygen to the vital organs, to the brain, which enables thought, etc. When the heart stops beating. the body and brain dies. After a while, in the grave, the body eventually (after decades, or centuries) is no more, not even bone. Nothing left. All is dust.
The other idea, that of the rest of christianity, is that man has both a spiritual part and a physical part. Paul is very clear on this, in my view. Exactly what this spiritual part is, is not known to us, but both the jews of Jesus time, and the early christians, had an idea about this, and this is reflected in the Biblical texts.
When I said that a "ressurection" of a person in the JW-view, a "ressurection" of a person that has no soul, would not be a ressurection at all, but a re-creation, the following might illustrate what I meant:
When the twin towers fell, they were completely destroyed. Nothing was left, apart from a few tons of dust and rubble, which had to be removed by bulldozers. Now, if the twin towers were to be built again (ressurected, he he), would they be the same twin towers? No, they would not. They would be two new twin towers, not the same as those that stood there before the planes came. They could be re-created, but not ressurected. No matter how you look at it, it would be two completely new, different twin towers standing there. However: If they had not collapsed, even if the had collapsed partially (lets say the top half of each tower), they could have been "ressurected" (as in repaired).
In many ways, the WTS is unique in the dismissal of the soul doctrine. They are the very first known christians (of course, I don`t see this religion as christian,I hope that doesn`t hurt your feelings) to dismiss this doctrine. (I think I know the reason why they did it though, but the reasons are not pretty, and you wouldn`t believe them, so I won`t bother mentioning them). The belief in the soul as a surviving entity after death precedes christianity, and was part of christianity ever since Christ walked the earth.
Dan: If you put the same business back in them and who knows even some of the same materials is used for building is this not resurrrection?
Me: The same businesses back in them? Sure. They would then be the equivalent of the SOUL in this little example/experiment of ours...Yes, then we could call it a ressurection!
Dan: So the business stopped and became nothing more than a memory for their creator until the owner decided to to take his memory and and resurrect his business in the new building
Me: He he. Well, obviously we have a completely different definition of the term "existence". I had a cat once, but now it`s dead. I loved that cat, and have vivid memories of it. Does that mean that it exists? Well, you can claim that it "exists" in my mind, but does it still really exist? I would answer no. What is the difference between my diseased cat and, oh, say, unicorns? Or leprecons? Or dragons? These creatures do not exist, they are just fictives of the imagination. Is there really a difference between a dead cat and a unicorn? Not much. I have a vivid image of how a unicorn would look like, even how it would behave (I have seen the Harry Potter-movie). But does that mean that they exist? Of course not. But they exist just as much as my once dear cat, because they don`t exist. My cat died ten years ago,and I had it cremated, so there`s not even dust left of it. Hence, it exists just as much as a unicorn or a dragon.
Now, you can of course claim that this would be different to God ! To GOD a dead person could still exist, "in his mind". Well, this is, in that case, something no philosopher in the world would agree with. It is such a different definition of "existence" that no person could comprehend what this would mean.
By the way: Where exactly in the Bible is there even a hint of such a definition of "existence"? I know the Bible pretty well, and I can`t remember a single passage that would hint to this claim of yours, that the dead are "existing to God". On the other hand, the word "soul" is used in the Bible 136 times...all in different contexts and with several different meanings, and among these different meanings, in the context of "an immaterial part of us that lives on after death"
Dan: Let's say you know that cat down to the number of hairs on it's body, every nuiance all of its like and dislikes, now if you had the power to take all that and form for it a new body then place everything you kenw about it into that new body have not made your cat alive again?
Me: No. It wouldn`t be the same cat. It would be a replica. There has been written some books on this issue by contemporary philosopher, I wrote an essay on one of these for my exam, but I can`t remember the name of the man, it was many years ago. No matter how many times you ask me, you`ll never get me to agree on this. The answer is no.
Anyway, after the discussion I had now, in this thread, I now realize that I was wrong in some of the things I said in the discussion with this JW, but I still stick to the belief that the Bible teaches that there is "something" that doesn`t die, which is kept alive, although the words "soul" and "spirit" in the Bible doesn`t refer to what we, living in the 20th century and having 2000 years of christianity (regardless of JW-upbringings) as part of our cultural identities. After 2000 years of christianity, the doctrinal frontlines become sharpened. To us, there either IS a soul (and we then think of it in a plato-like sense) or there isn`t. To a jew in Palestine 2000 years ago, I think he wouldn`t understand this question, but if he was asked directly "do you believe there is something in the person that lives on after death, to be with either God in heaven or with something much darker and scarier in Hades), then that question would most likely be "answered in the affirmative" (ha ha, I just love that expression, I`ve been reading thru some old WTs).
