EVERLASTING vs ETERNAL life?

by hamsterbait 8 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hamsterbait

  I don't have access to the references.

  In the late 70s early 80s, the Witchtower argued that the Annointed get eternal life (ie life in themselves like Jesus hence, immortality).

  The other sheep get everlasting life, (they will need to keep breathing, eating, drinking, sleeping, peeing and crapping to stay alive.)

  This is why the "Troof" Book was changed to "Truth that leads to EVERLASTING (not eternal ) life.

  In view of this, do you think the NWT of John 6: 50 - 58 actually shoots the witchtower theology in the foot?

  Can somebody post the relevant WTs??

  HB
• 

  R.Crusoe

  Basically the play on words is a joke the WT employs with timeless effluent!

  Their everlasting crapology is a guarantee you will be eternally covered in it!
• 

  Narkissos

  I did notice a WT preference for "everlasting" (which indeed suits their doctrine of endless life better) but I don't remember an explicit doctrinal distinction from "eternal".

  (This topic raises my curiosity because I used to translate WT literature into French, and such a distinction would have been impossible since we have only one common adjective, éternel, for both "everlasting" and "eternal" -- there are more synonyms in English than in many languages due to the double inheritance of Germanic and Latin.)

  As you pointed out, inasmuch as the NWT uses "everlasting" in the "anointed-only" texts, this would be problematic anyway.
• 

  kurtbethel

  That is an example of WT blowing hot gas by playing semantic games to artfully contrive some point of doctrine.
  
  What never gets explained is how something can be everlasting without being eternal. Why not use a word like durable or persistent life? Because that is not what it really is, just what they want to imply.
• 

  SPAZnik
• 

  Awakened07

  I seem to remember this going even further. Wasn't this in the Climax book? I think that there was even a distinction between angels; some of which had eternal life, and not even Jehovah himself could touch them once they'd been granted this, and then there were the others, that only had everlasting life, i.e. if they misbehaved they could be removed. I may remember this wrong, so don't quote me on this, but this is how I remember it. Not sure it was in the Climax book either, but it's weird enough that it seems it could fit the bill.

  [edited] It seems I meant "immortal". Some are granted 'immortality', some aren't.

  I found this in the climax book:

  8 Only those anointed Christians who truly "wash their robes" so as to be clean in Jehovah’s eyes are privileged to "go to the trees of life." That is, they receive the right and title to immortal life in their heavenly position.

  I think what I remember is that the 144.000 are given 'immortality', while the angels already up there only have everlasting life. But I may be wrong on this. [/edited]
• 

  WTWizard

  All they are doing is creating a maze of crap for people to learn. They do that with just about everything they can. Of course, none of it ever means anything. Everlasting, eternal--same difference.
• 

  NeonMadman

  Many Christian theologians believe that God transcends time, that He effectively exists in an eternal "now" and is not affected by the passage of time. Time, in fact, was itself created by God (as was space) as part of the framework of creation. So time is subject to God, not the other way around. The term for this timeless quality of God is that He is "eternal."

  "Everlasting," on the other hand, seems more to suggest a subjection to time that is the nature of creation. Something that is "everlasting" may exist for an infinite number of moments, but will never be beyond time in the way that God is.

  In JW theology, however, God himself is subject to time, and therefore the terms "eternal" and "everlasting" are synonymous to a JW. Their Jehovah is less than eternal, less than transcendent and less than omniscient (since he doesn't completely know the future). As the late Christian philosopher Dr. Ronald Nash said of such a God, "If I thought that God was really like that, I'd want to pray for him."
• 

  Hortensia

  A distinction without a difference. Mindgames. Keeps you thinking about that kind of thing so you don't wake up and recognize it's all a big bowl of cream-of-you-know-what.