I got into a fight with my dad about the bible

[Kenny]

It's right there in the verse Ken. Verse 9... Tell the vision to no man.

so they DID see something?

Or maybe people were awakened when it says:

Revelation 6:10
And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

Maybe they were awakened to speak and then put back to sleep? Or was that just another dream?

 

[nPeace]

so they DID see something?

Or maybe people were awakened when it says:

Revelation 6:10
And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

Maybe they were awakened to speak and then put back to sleep? Or was that just another dream?

Yes, they saw a vision.
What is a vision?
Perhaps you can cite a reference for your understanding.
From Wikipedia...
A vision is something seen in a dream, trance, or religious ecstasy, especially a supernatural appearance that usually conveys a revelation.

This is not different to my understanding of a vision.
*** it-2 pp. 1158-1159 Vision ***
A sight or scene presented to a person’s mind by day or by night, usually through other than ordinary means, and sometimes while the recipient was in a trance or was dreaming. (Ac 10:3; Ge 46:2) It is often difficult to establish a clear demarcation between visions and dreams described in the Bible, and at times they are combined.

When a person received a vision from God during waking hours, it appears that the impression was made upon the conscious mind. The vision could later be recalled and described or recorded by the recipient, in his own words. Some persons, such as Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, also had nocturnal visions, or ‘visions of the night.’ These seem to have been impressed upon the subconscious mind while the recipient slept.

Sorry, I can't provide a link, as this publication appears to be no longer available on the jw online library.
So whether awake, or asleep, a vision is not a real event, but rather, a scene presented to convey a message, and usually it is symbolic representations.
We see this in Daniel, Ezekiel, and yes, Revelation, and others... including Matthew 17:2-10.

 

[cataway]

I think your dad is on the stronger grounds. "To be absent with the body is to be present with the Lord" leans in his favor

Jesus even said in John 2 to 'ear down this body and in 3 days I WILL RAISE IT UP" so Jesus in his divinity raised Jesus in his humanity. That is also something I lean in favor of Dad's POV

When we die, “the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it” (Eccl. 12:7).

no not really . dear O dad is tiring to use scripture that does not apply to his argument .

 

[Audie]

Yes, they saw a vision.
What is a vision?
Perhaps you can cite a reference for your understanding.
From Wikipedia...
A vision is something seen in a dream, trance, or religious ecstasy, especially a supernatural appearance that usually conveys a revelation.

This is not different to my understanding of a vision.
*** it-2 pp. 1158-1159 Vision ***
A sight or scene presented to a person’s mind by day or by night, usually through other than ordinary means, and sometimes while the recipient was in a trance or was dreaming. (Ac 10:3; Ge 46:2) It is often difficult to establish a clear demarcation between visions and dreams described in the Bible, and at times they are combined.

When a person received a vision from God during waking hours, it appears that the impression was made upon the conscious mind. The vision could later be recalled and described or recorded by the recipient, in his own words. Some persons, such as Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, also had nocturnal visions, or ‘visions of the night.’ These seem to have been impressed upon the subconscious mind while the recipient slept.

Sorry, I can't provide a link, as this publication appears to be no longer available on the jw online library.
So whether awake, or asleep, a vision is not a real event, but rather, a scene presented to convey a message, and usually it is symbolic representations.
We see this in Daniel, Ezekiel, and yes, Revelation, and others... including Matthew 17:2-10.

That should read "believed to be supernatural"

 

[nPeace]

no not really . dear O dad is tiring to use scripture that does not apply to his argument .

At least you seem to understand @whirlingmerc's point. I'm afraid I missed it.
Sorry whirlingmerc, your point seem to have flew by me.
Would you mind running it by me again, with some clarity.
Once again, I apologize for not understanding.

 

[nPeace]

You are posing questions in relation to JW's.
Are you being honest with yourself and looking
at JW material on-line? And no, not JW.org.

I have noticed that @Frank Goad usually checks other websites besides JW's, and he compares the scriptures, and scriptural reasoning. So I think when Frank says, he likes the JWs teaching, it is because he sees that the JWs reasoning is based on scriptures, and the scriptures agree with their teaching.
That's what I appreciate in any person, including Frank - going with what the Bible actually teaches, rather than religious views and idea... which are not supported scripturally.

 

[Kenny]

Yes, they saw a vision.
What is a vision?
Perhaps you can cite a reference for your understanding.
From Wikipedia...
A vision is something seen in a dream, trance, or religious ecstasy, especially a supernatural appearance that usually conveys a revelation.

This is not different to my understanding of a vision.
*** it-2 pp. 1158-1159 Vision ***
A sight or scene presented to a person’s mind by day or by night, usually through other than ordinary means, and sometimes while the recipient was in a trance or was dreaming. (Ac 10:3; Ge 46:2) It is often difficult to establish a clear demarcation between visions and dreams described in the Bible, and at times they are combined.

When a person received a vision from God during waking hours, it appears that the impression was made upon the conscious mind. The vision could later be recalled and described or recorded by the recipient, in his own words. Some persons, such as Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, also had nocturnal visions, or ‘visions of the night.’ These seem to have been impressed upon the subconscious mind while the recipient slept.

Sorry, I can't provide a link, as this publication appears to be no longer available on the jw online library.
So whether awake, or asleep, a vision is not a real event, but rather, a scene presented to convey a message, and usually it is symbolic representations.
We see this in Daniel, Ezekiel, and yes, Revelation, and others... including Matthew 17:2-10.

Yes... that is a JW perspective but hardly explains the reality of what is said and what was seen, let alone even addresses what was seen.

 

[nPeace]

Yes... that is a JW perspective but hardly explains the reality of what is said and what was seen, let alone even addresses what was seen.

You haven't done either.
First, you have not accurately defined vision, and second you have not shown anything to support the claims you have made.
I don't even know if you disagree with the Wiki definition, or not.

A JW perspective is apparently in agreement with a factual definition of vision.
That's is better than claiming something with no support at all, isn't it?

 

[Kenny]

You haven't done either.
First, you have not accurately defined vision, and second you have not shown anything to support the claims you have made.
I don't even know if you disagree with the Wiki definition, or not.

A JW perspective is apparently in agreement with a factual definition of vision.
That's is better than claiming something with no support at all, isn't it?

I don't agree.

You can have a vision that is factual. You can have operating a "gift of discerning of spirits". When Peter had "a vision" of an angel speaking to him... it was an angel.

The JW perspective is a perspective... I don't agree with it.

The vision of John in Revelation - was when he was in Heaven (whether he was in his body or not, he may not have known) - but he did see EXACTLY what was happening in the Heavenlies.

 

[nPeace]

I don't agree.

You can have a vision that is factual. You can have operating a "gift of discerning of spirits". When Peter had "a vision" of an angel speaking to him... it was an angel.

The JW perspective is a perspective... I don't agree with it.

The vision of John in Revelation - was when he was in Heaven (whether he was in his body or not, he may not have known) - but he did see EXACTLY what was happening in the Heavenlies.

A vision is real (factual).
The scenes usually are not real events,but convey a message.
The message is real.

Can you give me please, one vision where the scene is a real event... from the Bible. Thanks

 

[BilliardsBall]

My dad said that Ecclesiastes 12:7 and 2 Corinthians 5:6-9 point to the idea that the soul survives bodily death.What should I say to him?.Because my dad likes the christian religion.And I like the jehovah's witness religion.

It's not religion, but the Bible: The Bible uses the same word for "eternity" describing the future of believers and unbelievers. As every sect except the JWs has noted, the Bible does not teach annihilation of unbelievers . . .

 

[nPeace]

@KenS My apologies. For clarity. I don't mean that the vision is not actually happening (real), but that usually the events taking place represent something (a revelation) being conveyed.

 

[nPeace]

It's not religion, but the Bible: The Bible uses the same word for "eternity" describing the future of believers and unbelievers. As every sect except the JWs has noted, the Bible does not teach annihilation of unbelievers . . .

That's a great confirmation!

"And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." - (Jesus - Matthew 10:28)
Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
"These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength," (Apostle Paul - 2 Thessalonians 1:9)
2 Thessalonians 1:9 They will suffer the penalty of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His might,
"When the wicked sprout like weeds And all the wrongdoers flourish, It is that they may be annihilated forever." (Psalm 92:7).
Psalm 92:7 that though the wicked sprout like grass, and all evildoers flourish, they will be forever destroyed.
Jehovah guards all those who love him, But all the wicked he will annihilate. (David - Psalm 145:20)
Psalm 145:20 The LORD preserves all who love Him, but all the wicked He will destroy.

So JWs are the only group that agrees with Jesus and his apostles (early footstep followers), and all the scriptures.
Thanks. I would feel shame otherwise.

So where does that leave all those sects?

 

[Vichar]

You do know that?

Yes. Well, as much as I know anything. I mean, all I know for sure is that I'm having a conscious experience. I could be a brain in a vat. I could be someone else's avatar in a video game they are playing. But consider: you go to sleep each night and when you wake up, some nights you don't remember your dream. But upon waking, you remember the previous day. How do you know those memories of the previous day weren't implanted in you? Are you really that person from yesterday?

OK, so for me, I have memories and impressions that aren't from this lifetime. Are they real? Well, they seem real to me, as real as my memories of the previous day. I fully acknowledge I could be delusional, but I don't think I am. A major reason I don't think I'm delusional is because I've been sticking to my spiritual practice for over 16 years and I have been able to consciously move out of the body consciousness (not astral travel, out of the physical consciousness inside). It's not a dream; I'm awake, but I'm not in the body consciousness. Given this is the case, the simplest, most scientific explanation is that there is some part of me which is not the body. Of course, logically this could be some elaborate misunderstanding on my part, but once again the nature of the experience suggests that is not the case. When I consider the two explanations (consciousness exists independent of the body, consciousness is a by-product of the body), the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the explanation that consciousness exists independently from the body. But these are my experiences and my conclusions. I have met others with nearly identical experiences and conclusions, but I acknowledge most people have not had these experiences.

 

[Audie]

. ........... But upon waking, you remember the previous day. How do you know those memories of the previous day weren't implanted in you? Are you really that person from yesterday?

OK, so for me, I have memories and impressions that aren't from this lifetime. Are they real?................ out of the physical consciousness inside). It's not a dream; I'm awake, but I'm not in the body consciousness. Given this is the case, the simplest, most scientific explanation is that there is some part of me which is not the body. Of course, logically this could be some elaborate misunderstanding on my part, but once again the nature of the experience suggests that is not the case. When I consider the two explanations (consciousness exists independent of the body, consciousness is a by-product of the body), the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the explanation that consciousness exists independently from the body. But these are my experiences and my conclusions. I have met others with nearly identical experiences and conclusions, but I acknowledge most people have not had these experiences.

I take it neither of us does last-thursdayism.

As for the line in bold, no, that is not in any way
scientific. Nor is it the simplest. Nor overwhelming,
other than as it may seem to an individual.

I dont care for "delusional" as a word to use in this
sort of context. It carries too much baggage, and
seems to me variously inappropriate, certainly for
the negative baggage.
We see it for example in "Jesus-real, delusional or liar?"

Which imo, he was none of those.

MY opinion is that the human mind is quite strange, and
so complex and delicate it is a marvel that it works at all.

That odd things go on is hardly surprising.

I read about American Natives going on a spirit quest
perhaps fasting and drumming alone on a remote
hilltop until a vision came to them. And it would! It
would to anyone who did that.
To them it was profound, to me, it seems like their
brain was doing it under stress.

You have no doubt stewed over some problem, just
cant resolve it, day and night, for days, weeks even.

Of three grad schools to which I was accepted, I just
could not decide. How many days did I spend on it!

Then it came to me, out of nowhere, I was not even thinking
about it! GO TO BERKELEY!!

Wow, that was impressive!

But I am not so easy. So I kept worrying. After a few
days, same thing, but a different school.

Anyway,, if it entertains you to go off on your expeditions,
that is fine, no harm in it that I know of. If it were my
project, though, I'd be more analytically inclined, and
interested in the EEG, psychology etc aspects, and
disinclined to any certain conclusions such as you
feel you have come to.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

My dad said that Ecclesiastes 12:7 and 2 Corinthians 5:6-9 point to the idea that the soul survives bodily death.

The Bible says a lot of things. Like Jonah being swallowed by a whale — now what species could that have been? And then there's that talking snake in Genesis… I'm not saying this to be rude about the Bible or Christians, but to point out that if you pick and choose your passages and exercise a bit of imagination, you can prove all sort of things from it. Jesus didn't indulge in that sort of interpretation — he always headed off the people who said "but it says in the scriptures…" — and neither should you or your father.

Does the immortality of the soul make make philosophical sense? Yes, unless you are an materialist — in which case you can hardly believe in God, let alone Christianity. Is there evidence of it from experience? Yes. Therefore, any interpretation of a Bible passage that denies it belongs with the talking snake and man-eating whale.

 

[Windwalker]

my dad likes the christian religion.And I like the jehovah's witness religion.

Yes, there is a difference between the two.

 

[Clear]

My dad said that Ecclesiastes 12:7 and 2 Corinthians 5:6-9 point to the idea that the soul survives bodily death.What should I say to him?.Because my dad likes the christian religion.And I like the jehovah's witness religion.

Hi @Frank Goad

You've received some advice that indicates arguments are generally, counterproductive in religious contexts. One is, after all, usually speaking of firmly held opinions and beliefs rather than dealing with objective fact (there are some exception to this such as when one is discussing discrete historical or linguistic facts, etc). Because we are dealing with belief, it would be wise to at least respect the opinions of others on subjects that are not objective and not proveable. Context is important as well. Perhaps your Father was discussing the early belief in Judeo-Christianity that spirits of individuals are cognisant and live on after death, while you are discussing a later Christianity that has adopted the belief that spirits of individuals are not cognisant after death. These are two different religions you are discussing.

Clear

 

[RabbiO]

@DavidMcCann -

Actually Jonah says nothing about a whale. The text simply says “dag gadol” - a large fish.

As for talking snakes.... well, you obviously haven’t met my mother-in-law.

 

[1213]

....What should I say to him?...

That it is ok to believe what the Bible tells.

I think there is no reason to argue about that. You both will know it at some point. More important than thinking time after death is to think how to use life now. And I think it should be used to love others.