Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 in the NWT

by Zico 23 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  drew sagan

  I agree, the two labels I gave aren't that great in retrospect, sorry :)
  

  whether it comes from the same hand or is a later addition is debatable, but even if it does there is quite a leap from it to the Pharisaic and Christian idea of post mortem individual hope.

  
  The reason for this leap can be debated, but for JWs who believe that all things are revealed in Gods word seem to take the opinion that Old Testement writings are on the same level as things that God would reveal later, or so it would be in their minds. It's almost as if they go back to the 'old light' or partial understanding that came before the better explanation.
  By the way, isn't their an old Jewish commentary that explains this scripture as meaning spiritual death? I can't remember where I came across that.
• 

  Narkissos

  for JWs who believe that all things are revealed in Gods word seem to take the opinion that Old Testement writings are on the same level as things that God would reveal later, or so it would be in their minds. It's almost as if they go back to the 'old light' or partial understanding that came before the better explanation.

  Sure. From a slightly different perspective, they made their own mix of two originally antagonistic sets of beliefs, i.e. the Sadducean view of death and the Pharisaic view of resurrection -- resulting in the strange teaching about re-creating a new person out of sheer "memories". The Pharisees, otoh, believed in soul survival as the basis for bodily resurrection.

  By the way, isn't their an old Jewish commentary that explains this scripture as meaning spiritual death? I can't remember where I came across that.

  I don't remember that, but it is possible. While in Ecclesiastes the ruach which returns to God is probably not to be construed as "soul" (being rather on the line of Psalm 104:29f, i.e the "life" that God gives to men and animal alike, and takes back), in later exegesis it is often equated with "soul". But it may also be interpreted as the "Holy Spirit" which God takes back from the sinner, whence "spiritual death", although the context (about old age) doesn't favour this interpretation.
• 

  yaddayadda

  "One should not build doctrine upon what is not said in the Bible. To do so is basing arguements on nothing but conjecture."
  
  Exactly, which is why one can reject the trinity and immortal soul doctrines. They're just not there in the bible and are based on flimsy conjectured arguments.
• 

  Mondo1

  One thing that must be kept in mind is that Psa. 146:4 confirms that Ecc. 9:5-10 is the proper Biblical understanding of the state of the dead. The text says that "his thoughts do perish." It does not say that the body's thoughts perish or that the person lives on as a soul and has thoughts, but the persons thoughts perish, period.
• 

  Arthur

  It does not say that the body's thoughts perish or that the person lives on as a soul and has thoughts, but the persons thoughts perish, period.

  What about other verses in Psalms? Ps. 42:6 says: "Oh my God, my soul is in despair within me" (NASB)

  Ps. 43:5 says: "Why are you in despair, O my soul? And why are you disturbed within me?" (NASB)

  Why would the Psalmist need to specify this; speaking of his soul as something that is within himself; if he knows that he merely is a living soul?
• 

  jwfacts

  This scripture can not be used to support the Watchtower doctrine if read in its entirety. Verse 6 says:

  NWT and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun.

  NRSV never again will they have any share in all that happens under the sun.

  What this implies is they will never be resurrected back onto the earth.

  This scripture is more a statement of how to live on earth, not a doctrine on what happens to the dead.
• 

  Mondo1

  Not at all JWtruth, for the very fact that OLAM is used rules that out. They have no portion in what is done under the son "to the age" which is the kingdom. Within the present age the statement is absolutely true, but it is in "the age to come" that Scripture speaks of when they will be resurrected. The Scripture is entirely accurate. I have saw that argument before in David Reed's JW book and couldn't understand how anyone actually thought that it would hold up. The NWT uses "time indefinite," but for some reason people think that "time indefinite" = "eternity." It can denote it, but often does not.
• 

  jayhawk1

  I was listening to a radio show on a network devoted to SDA's and the speaker said that if the dead were conscious after death then surely Lazarus would have said something about it after Jesus brought him back to life.

  Who is to say that Lazarus didn't say something? As far as I know, there is no quotes in the bible atributed to Lazarus. Is the man ever quoted once in the bible? Maybe there is a long lost scroll somewhere called The Gospel According To Lazarus, detailing life after death. After all, recently it became known to the world there is a Gospel from Judas.

  (This is more or less what sir82 said. I just felt it was worth saying.)
• 

  Gill

  Zico - What I find interesting about this scripture is that the WTBTS use it to uphold their beliefs that the 'dead are dead'.

  However, they do no follow the advice of the scripture that the living should live for today and do whatever they feel they want to do that is good because there is NO tomorrow! The scripture doesn't say to put off living until the New System. It does say 'Live Now'. This they contradict by their teachings of putting off living for real until some unforseen future day.
• 

  jwfacts

  Mondo, According to Strongs Concordance OLAM means long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting, evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world a) ancient time, long time (of past) b) (of future) 1) for ever, always 2) continuous existence, perpetual 3) everlasting, indefinite or unending future, eternity At Blueletterbible.com all 12 versions quoted use the term forever or 'no more', not one uses the term 'to time indefinite'. I imagine the WTS has chosen to use this ambiguous term instead to uphold its doctrine that this world will never end. However, the Bible suggests that this earth will be destroyed (as does science) and will be replaced by a new earth.