WT Study for October 11, 2009

[James]

http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0001.jpg
http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0002.jpg
http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0003.jpg
http://http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0004.jpg
http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0004.jpg

http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p480/Jamesx777/WT_101109_0005.jpg

[billy2]

Thank you James for posting the WT study - i didnt make the meeting today - didnt feel too good - and didnt have the wt study mag

I thought i would get a hold of these writings that were quoted in paragraph 2 - the review on Amazon looks interesting:

Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era, George Foot Moore

Editorial Reviews
Product Description

Serious students of Judaism in the early centuries of the Common Era consider these three volumes indispensable for studying the Jewish world of the New Testament period. Besides looking at the historical issues surrounding Judaism, Moore examines Judaism's theology, its religious observances, views toward morality and piety, and Jewish reflections on the hereafter. His thoroughgoing familiarity with the primary sources—Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash, and other writings from Judaism of the Common Era—puts Moore in a class by himself. A comprehensive index and a volume of notes make this a prize, especially since it has not been available in its full form for more than twenty-five years. (Three volumes in two hardcovers.)

About the Author

George Foot Moore (1851-1931), was ordained in the Presbyterian ministry in 1878. He was professor of Hebrew at Andover Theological Seminary from 1883-1902. In 1902 he became Professor of Theology at Harvard, and from 1904-1928 was Professor of Religious History there. An eminent Asian scholar and a noted teacher, he wrote a number of books, including The Literature of the Old Testament (1913), and History of Religions (Vol. I, 1913; Vol. II, 1919).

Im always amazed when the WT quotes research from Christendom to interpret the bible - so there must be some things the WT agrees with Christendom as the WT constantly condemns them and the b&s wont take any literature from its members!

[SWORDOFJAH]

Good morning. Interesting study and very scriptures based.

We can have a clear picture on the term Re-Creation.
What is "the re-creation" that Jesus speaks about at Matthew 19:28?
Why?

Well when Jesus Christ sits down in heaven upon his glorious throne, along with those who will rule with him, he will establish a righteous new system of things. (2 Timothy 2:11, 12; Revelation 5:10; 14:1, 3) By means of Christ’s heavenly rule, God’s original purpose for the entire earth to be a paradise will be fulfilled!

Wonderful blessings we all wait soon!

[Jinnvisible]

Of the content of the article shown here, I think is very good.

“Today many religion and bible scholars deny that the hope of living forever on earth is a Christian teaching.” ~ WTBTS.

This statement is perhaps even more relevant when regarded from the history of Christendom’s teachings than just purely a statement of present teachings. The older Bethel scholars would perhaps be more aware of this.

The major churches used to teach the earthly resurrection, to the point that when cremation became a more practical option of corpse disposal many people rejected it, concerned that so utterly destroying the physical mortal remains might interfere with their hopes for an earthly physical resurrection. Cremation has become more practical due to the amount of land that is needed to entomb a human body and the fact that the most highly populated places such as urban and suburban; the places where there are larger amounts of human mortalities occur, are also the areas of higher costing land.

The tomb that Jesus’ body was placed in was lent by Joseph of Aramathea; it seems to have been fairly interior to Jerusalem, those who visit it in the gospel accounts do not seem to need to engage in extensive journeying to reach it. This also supports the facts that we know it was the tomb denoting a wealthy patron.

In a city where the dead bodied of criminals were simply thrown on the city dump, this may also be considered a surreptitious statement by Joseph of Aramathea, that he didn’t support the charges made against Christ.

[James]

Your welcome, Panda.



I have a question for the board. What was the view of 1st century jews regarding the resurrection? Did they only believe in an earthly paradise?

Par.13 tells us about the criminal on the stake, asking Jesus to remember him when he gets to his kingdom. It seems to me that he recognized that Jesus' kingdom was not going to be on earth. The par. goes on to explain that jews knew of a earthly hope only and in par.14 it was the heavenly destination that was foreign or unknown to them.

Here is what I don't understand. There were two main groups of religious leaders/priests/teachers of jewish law. The Sadducees and the Pharisees.

It's frequently brought out that the Sadducees didn't believe in the resurrection, yet it's hardly mentioned that the Pharisees believed the exact opposite--Including a heavenly hope. Here is what it says in the Insight book:

PHARISEES
...Josephus also provides details concerning the beliefs of the Pharisees. He observes: “They believe that souls have power to survive death and that there are rewards and punishments under the earth for those who have led lives of virtue or vice: eternal imprisonment is the lot of evil souls, while the good souls receive an easy passage to a new life.” (Jewish Antiquities, XVIII, 14 [i, 3]) “Every soul, they maintain, is imperishable, but the soul of the good alone passes into another body, while the souls of the wicked suffer eternal punishment...

So, isn't this what the jews were taught back then. Either this life is all there is(Sadducees) or the soul doesn't die(Pharisees).

Thoughts,anyone?

agape,
James

[The Way]

Hi James,

Interesting questions! I've done some limited research to find an answer. Boy, it get's confusing figuring out the Jewish beliefs concerning an afterlife! What I understand:
- The basic, commonly held view was of Sheol as an underworld, a nether world, were the dead resided in darkness, gloom, silence and in almost complete inactivity, like asleep. This idea derived from the Old Testament, but over the centuries more ideas were added, e.g. of 2 or even 4 different sections in Sheol for the wicked and the righteous etc. Some believed a resurrection from this Sheol was possible, others like the Sadducees regarded it as a land-of-no-return.
- Over centuries a real kaleidoscope of views about the exact nature of an afterlife and a resurrection was developed by writers and thinkers in Judaism, making it all very confusing and often contradictory.
- Under Greek/Platonic influence, some ideas akin to a soul/immortal soul were merged into the existing belief system.

However, prudence is called for: Josephus' description of the beliefs of the Pharisees is likely colored. "Immortality of the soul" and 'a soul which goes to heaven' may not at all have been the terms used by the Pharisees themselves, but only by Josephus who tried to explain these beliefs to his readers in concepts they were familiar with! Just some snippets and their sources, in case you want to look things up for yourself:

"
But it was not the immortality of the soul which the Pharisees believed in, as Josephus puts it, but the resurrection of the body as expressed in the liturgy (see Resurrection), and this formed part of their Messianic hope (see Eschatology).
" -- JewishEncyclopedia.com, Pharisees

"
Resurrection is asserted in all the Apocryphal writings of Pharisaic origin (comp. II Macc. vii. 9-36,xii. 43-44), where arguments against Sadducean Israel are prescented (Book of Jubilees, xxiii. 30; Test. Patr., Judah, 25; Zebulun, 10; Benjamin, 10; Vita Adæ et Evæ, xiii.; Sibyllines, ii. 85; Enoch, li. 1-2; Apoc. Baruch, xxx. 1-5, l.-li.: II Esd. vii. 32; Psalms of Solomon, iii. 16, xiv. 13), and in the Hellenistic writings (see Wisdom iii. 1-9, iv. 7, v. 16, vi. 20; IV Macc. ix. 8; xiii. 16; xv. 2; xvii. 5, 18; xviii. 23). Immortality of the soul takes the place of bodily resurrection. Rabbinical arguments in favor of resurrection are given in Sanh. 90b-92b, from promises made to the dead (Ex. iv. 4; Deut. xi. 9 [comp. Mark xii. 18]; Num. xviii. 28; Deut. iv. 4, xxxi. 16, xxxii. 39), and from similar expressions in which the future tense is applied to the future life (Ex. xv. 1; Deut. xxxiii. 6; Josh. viii. 30; Ps. lxxxiv. 5 [A. V. 4]; Isa. lii. 8); also in Ḥul. 142a, from promised rewards (Deut. v. 16, xxii. 17), which so frequently are not fulfilled during this life (Ber. 16b; Gen. R. xx. 26). Arguments are drawn from the grain of wheat (Sanh. 90b; comp. I. Cor. xv. 35-38), from historical parallels—the miracles of revival wrought by Elijah, Elisha, and Ezekiel (Lev. R. xxvii. 4)—and from a necessary conception of divine justice, body and soul not being in a position to be held to account for their doings in life unless, like the blind and the lame man in the parable, they are again brought together as they were before (Sifre, Deut. 106; Sanh. 91a; with reference to Ps. l. 4).
The Sadducees denied the resurrection (Josephus, "Ant." xviii. 1, § 4; idem, "B. J." ii. 8, § 14; Acts xxiii. 8; Sanh. 90b; Ab. R. N. v.). All the more emphatically did the Pharisees enunciate in the liturgy (Shemoneh 'Esreh, 2d benediction; Ber. v. 2) their belief in resurrection as one of their fundamental convictions (Sanh. x. 1; comp. Abot iv. 22; Soṭah ix. 15).
Both the Pharisees and the Essenes believed in the resurrection of the body, Josephus' philosophical construction of their belief to suit the taste of his Roman readers notwithstanding (see "B. J." ii. 8, § 11; "Ant." xviii. 1, § 5; compare these with the genuine source of Josephus, in Hippolytus' "Refutatio Hæresium," ed. Duncker Schneidewin, ix. 27, 29, where the original ἀνάστασις [= "resurrection"] casts a strange light upon Josephus' mode of handling texts).
" -- JewishEncyclopedia.com, Resurrection

"
It is not quite clear whether the Sadducees, in denying resurrection (Josephus, "Ant." xviii. 1, § 4; idem, "B. J." ii. 12; Mark xii. 18; Acts xxiii. 8; comp. Sanh. 90b), denied also the immortality of the soul (see Ab. R. N., recension B. x. [ed. Schechter, 26]). Certain it is that the Pharisaic belief in resurrection had not even a name for the immortality of the soul. For them, man was made for two worlds, the world that now is, and the world to come, where life does not end in death
" -- JewishEncyclopedia.com, Immortality of the Soul

"
The Finality of Death, and the Underworldly Afterlife of Sheol

Turning to what we can say positively about the Sadducees, we find further
reason to think in the direction that Josephus points us in
Antiquities 18.16. As just noted, Josephus tells us that the Sadducees
reject the characteristically Pharisaic beliefs in immortality of the soul
(Ant. 18.16) and postmortem punishments for the wicked and rewards
for the righteous (War 2.165). In other words, they believe in the finality
of death.
This, of course, is precisely what we find in the wisdom tradition of
ancient Israel. The Wisdom of Ben Sira preserves a number of reflections
on death. Death awaits all (14:17; 17:30; 38:22; 41:1-4), is final (10:10-
11; 38:21; 41:4), and is not particularly worth looking forward to (7:17,
10:11; 14:11-19). On a few occasions, Ben Sira speaks of bodily decomposition
as the punishment for sinners (7:17, 10:11, 21:9). But presumably,
Ben Sira is not suggesting that the wicked suffer after death in a
particularly distinct way; the point seems to be, rather, that the sinners
will slip to their deaths early (21:9), or after some well-deserved earthly
suffering (11:25-28). Everyone’s end is in Sheol, where there will be no
pleasure (14:16), no praise for God (17:27-28), and no argument (41:4;
cf. Eccl 9:10). The only ways around mortality are to be survived by
progeny (Sir 30:4–5; 40:19, 44:12–13) and to be remembered for righteousness
by subsequent generations (41:11-13; 44:14-15). Yet Ben Sira
hardly denies afterlife in all its forms. The nonbeatific, nondualistic
afterlife that characterizes those few biblical passages that do speak of
Sheol (e.g., 1 Sam 28; Job 7:9-10, 17:13-16; Eccl 9:10)45 is precisely
what Ben Sira affirms (esp. 14:12-19 and 41:1-4, both extant largely in
Hebrew).
With good reason, we can surmise that the Sadducees—with their
reverence for scripture and their conservative theology—would have
held similar views, including a belief in Sheol.46 In order to be fully
understood, the Sadducean denial of immortality needs to be translated
into a number of distinct affirmative statements. First, the Sadducees
affirm—precisely as Josephus puts it—that the soul and body perish
together (Ant. 18.16; cf. Bar 3:19). This is not an absolute denial of all
forms of immortality—what they deny (War 2.165) is that the soul
could persist after death apart from the body. The Sadducees affirm—in
line with the general biblical record—that human life consists of an
inseparable amalgam of what others (including Josephus) will refer to
separately as body and soul.47 For the Sadducees, death is a unitary experience:
body and soul (which Sadducees would not separate) together
descend to Hades (= Sheol).
Josephus also tells us that the Sadducees denied that either rewards
or punishments await the deceased in Hades (War 2.165). Once again,
it is important to pay careful attention to precisely what is and is not
denied. The Sadducees’ rejection of rewards and punishments in the
underworld does not need to mean—and most likely does not mean—
that they rejected belief in an underworld altogether. The Sadducees’
approach to death is unitary in this second way, too. They would likely
affirm that Sheol is the “democracy of death,”48 where the wicked and
righteous reside together, for eternity, in a shady afterlife—precisely what
we find in Sirach (38:21-24), and indeed in much of the wisdom tradition
(e.g., Job 17:13-16; Eccl 9:10-11).
"
-- Israel's God and Rebecca's Children - Christology and Community in Early Judaism and Christianity (2007), pp. 269-270

For the really interested: the book A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life - In Israel, in Judaism, and in Christianity, 2nd Ed (R.H. Charles 1913) seems to be a scholarly treatise on the subject. It has two chapters devoted to the afterlife beliefs in the first century AD according to non-Biblical literature. You can get this book here:
http://www.archive.org/details/criticalhistoryo00charuoft
Concerning Josephus it states:
"
He believed in an intermediate state for the
righteous. Thus in Ant. xviii. i. 3 it is said that
"souls have an immortal vigour, and that under the
earth there
will be rewards and punishments, according as they
have lived virtuously or viciously in this life ; and the
latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but
the former will have power to revive and live again."
Here the wicked enter at once into everlasting
punishment. Sheol is here hell. But the righteous
rise from the intermediate place of happiness and
enter into other bodies {B.J. II. viii. 14). Such was
the Pharisaic doctrine according to Josephus. The
Essenes believed that a blessed immortality awaited
the souls of the righteous (B.J. II. viii. 11), but that
those of the wicked were destined to a dark, cold
region, full of undying torment.
The above account of Pharisaic belief which we
derive from Josephus may be regarded as fairly
trustworthy ; but that which he gives in B.J.
III. viii. 5 is misleading to a high degree. There
he describes the soul as a "particle of Divinity"
which has taken up its abode in a mortal body.
After death the souls of the righteous
"receive as their lot the most holy place in heaven,
from whence, in the revolution of ages, they are
again sent into pure bodies."
" -- pp. 354-355

Happy reading ;), although all this may still not give you a clear-cut answer...

So it's rather interesting to see how both Judaism and mainstream Christendom both start from the same Old Testament, but develop quite different ideas regarding the final destination of mankind. And it's the philosophy of an immortal soul that really leads astray from the Biblical truth. That and the trinity doctrine, in case of Christendom. This had lead mainstream Christendom to make the heavenly hope in the NT the general and final destination for all mankind. However, I see the heavenly hope as a callingand an election, a hope given collectively to the Christian congregation, and I read the NT in that way. We can't be all rulers and judges and priests, can we?

[James]

Thanks for your research, The Way!

I'm looking for a better understanding also.

Hoping to post a clearer outlook on this soon.

agape,
James