Do People Have Spirits? What Do the Early Texts Say?

by Cold Steel 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Mephis

  @Cold Steel.

  I'd obviously disagree with parts there, but the point is really that trying to rely on Old Testament Jewish writing to buttress Christian beliefs seems a little flawed whoever does it. Because we know that the Jews themselves did not have a belief system which required the issue to be set in black or white. One can force whichever interpretation one wishes upon the Torah is essentially the point. The Jews did that for a long time,. The adventist movement are just paying the price for going with one interpretation and then trying to harmonise everything in the bible to that interpretation. Sometimes they hit pay dirt (Ecclesiastes) other times it's just nonsensical and they have to try to explain away some of the points you've raised.

  Our earliest christian writings are the letters everyone agrees are Paul's. And we know for sure that Paul's interpretation of doctrine was not shared by every Christian even at the time he wrote them. Something he acknowledges himself. So how far can one push that onto christianity as a whole? I really don't know there is an answer which can't be criticised, so just raising the point. By the late first century, I think we are looking at a gradual consolidation towards what you say. Some people get upset even if I air quote 'orthodoxy', so I'll label it a proto-orthodoxy. The things which can safely said to be in common. I look to the Didache though and I see a group of millenarians waiting for Christ to arrive, with a resurrection of the just just before it. That's not really fitting the story of one idea in Christianity about this.
• 

  2+2=5

  We are just playing and pretending Jeffro, stop spoiling it with reality.
• 

  Cold Steel

  Nothing at all about 'spirits' has been 'demonstrated' by 'near death studies'. People who are near death have an uncontrolled release of neurotransmitters, resulting in 'experiences' not unlike a vivid dream or a drug-induced hallucination. There is zero evidence that people 'have' 'spirits'.

  I hope you have something better to do this fine Saturday evening than sit around answering this thread, Jeffro. We just went for a walk, had a nice dinner, filled the car for less than two bucks a gallon and returned to find three responses from you on this topic.

  Now, regarding the above, I reckon it all depends on what one means by "demonstrated" and "evidence." I recall the words of Thomas Jefferson who, after hearing an account of meteorites falling over Connecticut on December 14, 1807, was reported to have said: "I would more easily believe that two Yankee professors would lie than that stones would fall from heaven."

  At that time, even the most learned of scholars would have laughed their heads off at the notion that rocks could fall out of the sky, even though there were credible witnesses who claimed otherwise. In like manner, there are numerous witnesses from all religions and walks of life who claim to have left their bodies, seen and conversed with God, angels; seen visions, and we use various criteria to judge the veracity of what they say. The more skeptical someone is in any given area, whether it be the existence of God, the reality of revelation, life after death, Bigfoot, the Big Bang or the theory of evolution, the more resistance will be exerted as part of the cognitive process. And the more invested someone is to a certain way of thinking, the less resistance will be exerted. I've had personal friends that I've known for years and whom I trust. And though none has ever had a near death experience, they have had experiences that fall into the paranormal range.

  The question of the paranormal is one, the question of the theological is another. It seems to me that if one is true, so is the other. If there are evil spirits roaming the earth, it stands to reason that it is balanced by good.

  You attempt to explain away near death experiences by saying they're the result of the uncontrolled release of neurotransmitters in the brain. This has never been proven to be the cause of near death experiences, especially when brain activity is flat. Also, this theory cannot explain the exchange of intelligence that takes place -- such as learning things one didn't know, but which are true. Some people can recite conversations that were taking place in other rooms between hospital staff or family members, or scenes they had witnessed many miles away that they were later able to recall in detail.

  Atheists shut out things they can't understand, or don't want to understand. Then they resort to ad hominem attacks and ridicule in an attempt to discredit it.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  I was associated with the Dubs from the late 1950s when my mom had her free home brainwashing sessions until the mid 1970s, when I left my mom's home and, soon after that, left the JWs for good.

  There used to be a part of the TMS that was reading through the Bible, end-to-end, not even skipping the "begats." (That was tedious!)

  When we finally got to Ecclesiastes I thought to myself, "AHA! Now THIS is TRUTH!"

  The comment "Atheists shut out things they can't understand, or don't want to understand" has it backwards.

  There is no spirit realm containing any kind of sentient life, and there is no such thing as the soul. We are made of meat, and WE ARE DELICIOUS!
• 

  Jeffro

  Cold Steel:

  I hope you have something better to do this fine Saturday evening than sit around answering this thread, Jeffro. We just went for a walk, had a nice dinner, filled the car for less than two bucks a gallon and returned to find three responses from you on this topic.

  Huh... I made a few responses in the space of just a few minutes, but for some reason you felt the need to imply that I'd spent the whole day dwelling on your silly thread while you went about much more exciting things like... fuelling your car.
  

  Now, regarding the above, I reckon it all depends on what one means by "demonstrated" and "evidence." I recall the words of Thomas Jefferson who, after hearing an account of meteorites falling over Connecticut on December 14, 1807, was reported to have said: "I would more easily believe that two Yankee professors would lie than that stones would fall from heaven."

  A 19th century politician is not an authority on meteorites.
  

  At that time, even the most learned of scholars would have laughed their heads off at the notion that rocks could fall out of the sky, even though there were credible witnesses who claimed otherwise. In like manner, there are numerous witnesses from all religions and walks of life who claim to have left their bodies, seen and conversed with God, angels; seen visions, and we use various criteria to judge the veracity of what they say. The more skeptical someone is in any given area, whether it be the existence of God, the reality of revelation, life after death, Bigfoot, the Big Bang or the theory of evolution, the more resistance will be exerted as part of the cognitive process. And the more invested someone is to a certain way of thinking, the less resistance will be exerted. I've had personal friends that I've known for years and whom I trust. And though none has ever had a near death experience, they have had experiences that fall into the paranormal range.

  There is evidence of meteorites. Anecdotes are not evidence, and nor is the sincerity of the claimant. It's amusing how you try to shoehorn the 'theory of evolution' into your little list of things about which to be skeptical. There is evidence for evolution (and I do hope you're not abusing the word 'theory' in some unscientific context).
  

  The question of the paranormal is one, the question of the theological is another. It seems to me that if one is true, so is the other. If there are evil spirits roaming the earth, it stands to reason that it is balanced by good.

  Theological claims are a subset of paranormal claims.There is no evidence for either the subset or the superset. Even if 'spirits' did exist, that provides no basis for asserting that 'good' and 'evil' ones would necessarily be 'balanced', nor by what standard said spirits would be judged to be 'good' or 'evil'.
  

  You attempt to explain away near death experiences by saying they're the result of the uncontrolled release of neurotransmitters in the brain. This has never been proven to be the cause of near death experiences, especially when brain activity is flat. Also, this theory cannot explain the exchange of intelligence that takes place -- such as learning things one didn't know, but which are true. Some people can recite conversations that were taking place in other rooms between hospital staff or family members, or scenes they had witnessed many miles away that they were later able to recall in detail.

  Citation needed. I am not aware of any such verified cases carried out under controlled conditions.
  

  Atheists shut out things they can't understand, or don't want to understand. Then they resort to ad hominem attacks and ridicule in an attempt to discredit it.

  You seem to be employing an invalid definition of atheist. Atheists do not believe there is evidence of a deity. That's all. There is nothing precluding any particular atheist from having a belief in any other 'paranormal' phenomena (though many atheists are also skeptical about other things for which there is no evidence).

  Most skeptics examine evidence rather than resorting to ad hominem (which was itself a false ad hominem attack on your part). Skeptics are generally skeptical where there is a lack of evidence.
  
• 

  Half banana

  Jeffro...an important consideration:

  "Theological claims are a subset of paranormal claims."
  

  Mephis I agree with your perspective as an accurate assessment of the state of “proto orthodoxy”. Early Christianity has to be divorced from the modern reading of the past on the basis of conventional expectations. First century Roman christianity was characterised by a loose association of mainly poor and illiterate hopefuls who believed not only in various doctrines but also different christs. (The few rich members notably contributing “love feasts” which made the idea of the FDS a plausible backdrop for the all too familiar illustration).

  By the end of the fourth/ early fifth century, Christianity became orthodox or “catholic” by virtue of Roman decree and it was eventually enforced by punishment for those who refused to believe the state determined doctrines. Along with this codifying of the religion, (albeit still evolving, including the Bible canon) came denunciation of all the pagan teachings and destruction of proto-orthodox and pagan ‘heresy’ which had gone before it which were the ingredients of the blend of ideas which made the Roman Church in the first place.

  The life of the soul after death (in this case borrowed most directly from Mithraism and hence from Persia and India) became the key "Catholic" propaganda weapon to keep the flock loyal.

  I went to a lecture by Karen Armstrong recently in which she mentioned the importance of the city of Alexandria on the Nile Delta after the time of Alexander the Great in the third century BCE. In historical terms this was a significant and vibrant melting pot of Egyptian, Greek and Jewish beliefs within the Classical world.

  Reading up on the subject I realised this is a critical period and location for the fusing of the three strands of culture. Surprisingly up to half of the population of Alexandria was Jewish, and as cosmopolitans, they adopted the Greek and 'pagan' culture of the leading lights of the city, a distinct divergence from the sanitized retrospective view of Jewish orthodoxy. Egypt possibly contributing the immortal soul idea to the religious matrix since the significant Greek perspective was the story of Hades; the gloomy abode of the dead. What is certain is that Classical Greek culture crept into the late Jewish ideas which later were diffused into the Christian cults of the first and second centuries.

  I wonder if “sprit” was a Hebrew convention conflated with the Egyptian “soul” perhaps in 3rd cent. BCE at Alexandria?
• 

  cofty

  Do people have spirits what do early texts say?

  It's a debate about the colour of the Emperor's invisible robes.