According to Jehovah's Witnesses, upon death a person's spirit disintegrates, to be recreated by God at the resurrection. Their official website says, "the soul dies when the person dies; it is not immortal. Since a person
is a soul, to say that someone died is to say that his soul died." In addition to being unbiblical, that sentence is deceptive. I will address the first problem, and then come back to the second.
The Watchtower has a problem with selecting isolated verses, then putting their particular spin on them, while ignoring everything else the the Bible says on the matter. This doctrine is a case in point.
In Acts, chapter 7, Stephen the Deacon gives an evangelistic sermon to a crowd of Jews, who are incited against him. Incited so severely that they stone him. As he lay dying, Stephen uttered a final prayer: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). Just by itself, this verse refutes the Watchtower doctrine. If Stephen's spirit would disintegrate when he dies, then what does he expect Jesus to receive? This man of the Lord obviously expected his spiritual essence, not just to survive the death of his body, but even to go to be with his Savior, thus ruling out any concept of Purgatory, too.
And now, for the deceptive element in the Watchtower comment quoted above. It correctly states that a person is a soul (Genesis 2:7). Then it says that to say a person has died is to say that his soul has died. That is equivocation of the most egregious kind. They use "soul" to mean a person and "soul" to mean spirit in the same sentence, treating them as identical. They aren't. If they are going to use "soul" to mean a person, which, I grant, is a biblical usage, then simple integrity would require them to have used "spirit" in the second usage. Yet, they didn't, deliberately obfuscating one thing for the other.
So, I have this question for Jehovah's Witnesses: If the Watchtower is going to use deception to prove their doctrine, why do you want to follow their teachings? Do you not want a religion based on integrity?
No comments:
Post a Comment