Resurrection Hope - People in the Future who think they have lived before

by VM44 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • parakeet

    It's simple. Since dubs are nothing but braindead robots now, it will be a simple matter for Jehovah to take out their non-functioning computer chips and insert them into brand new braindead robots later. Sort of like R2D2, but without his endearing personality.

  • pseudoxristos

    Interesting point!

    Not only is it illogical to think that a copy of you will actually continue to be you at some future point, but the resurrection hope itself becomes pointless once you're dead.

    Once you're dead according to the Watchtowers definition of death, you will no longer have any desires, much less the desire to be resurrected. Whether you're dead for a day, a million years or all eternity, it's all the same.

    If one truly believes that they will cease to exist at death, then they should also realize any desire to live again will also cease to exist.


  • Thechickennest

    Why does this matter to us? The whole concept of resurrection is scary.

    Have a very good friend still in. She has been disfellowshipped twice. Some wise ass told her that even though her sins were forgiven upon reinstatement she was like a broken vase that had been put back together....and always, always everyone will be able to see the cracks.

    So being reinstated is a bit of a resurrection too.

    I am way off topic, sorry.

  • Fisherman

    Not difficult ot understand reallly, especially to ones that have lost loved ones. The resurrection of the dead is not a wts teaching. It is a biblical teaching. I nurture the hope of seeing loved ones again. Jesus supported this teaching not only by ressurecting the dead but also by what he said and taught about what the dead knew and said after being resurrected and other verses discussing the topic.

    So again, the point is that it is not a wts fabrication It is hope founded in what the bible says rgardless of the wts.

  • VM44
    she was like a broken vase that had been put back together....and always, always everyone will be able to see the cracks.

    Concerning that statement I would like to ask , "Scripture Please?"

  • VM44

    Hi Fisherman,

    The resurrection of the dead is not a wts teaching. It is a biblical teaching.

    Yes, but The Watchtower's explanation of the resurrection is NOT Biblical. Russell came up with it over a hundred years ago, and The Watcthower just kept on using it.

  • mary stewart
    mary stewart

    Sounds like an 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' kinda thing. Or cloning! Pretty creepy shite imho.

  • flyphisher
    The resurrection of the dead is not a wts teaching. It is a biblical teaching

    Fact is: we do not know anything about resurrection....

    All what has been said to this matter is pure speculation. Nothing else.

    In the bible, no verse supports the idea that all synaptic brain operations (= memory) during the life of a human being got saved.

    Maybe in a new world system mankind has the technology to perform time travels into the past to visit people and to take them into the present without violation of the physical causality. Nobody knows.

  • M.J.

    "The resurrection of the dead is not a wts teaching. It is a biblical teaching"

    Yes, but as mentioned already, The concept involving God's memory to recreate a duplicate of the original is entirely foreign to the Bible.

  • Leolaia

    A perfect illustration of this was in last week's episode of Doctor Who (**spoilers** for Americans watching it on SciFi). Rose is a former human companion who had fallen in love with the Doctor (and the feeling was, apparently, mutual, although the Doctor could not verbally tell her), but for the last two years she has been trapped in a parallel universe separated from him. Finally she made it back, but the Doctor and his new companion Donna inadvertantly animated an old severed hand of the Doctor into a half-human half-alien duplicate of the Doctor. This duplicate looks exactly like the Doctor and has all his memories and feelings -- except he is a different individual (more immature personality) and has a human's lifespan. At the end of the episode, the Doctor takes Rose back to the parallel earth where he must banish the duplicate version of himself and he asks her to stay there as well with him -- giving her what she always wanted but what he cannot himself give her. Rose could now marry him and live for the rest of her life with him. But the real man whom she fell in love with was standing right in front of her. She says, "But it's still not right ... he's not you." The clone tells her that he remembers everything she did with him, although it really wasn't him but the other man standing there. Rose then asked both of them to recall the last thing the Doctor told her when they were originally separated. The Doctor was going to say that he loved her but was cut off. She asked the two of them to finish the sentence. The clone Doctor, being more human, told her what the Doctor would have said verbally whereas the real Doctor could not. Rose then kissed the clone Doctor, accepting him as real enough for her, while unbeknownst to her, the real Doctor walks away back to the TARDIS (his time/travelling machine) and leaves her without even saying goodbye. Then Rose realizes that the man she really fell in love with was leaving her forever and turned around to him, but then he was gone.

    I personally hated this storyline as a fan, but it rather well demonstrates the fact that a person that looks like you and has all your memories and feelings is STILL not you.

Share this