excreationist

I'm putting this in the Bible forum because most of what we know about the Sadducees comes from the Bible.

Firstly, some quotes:

from <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13323a.htm" target="_blank">The Catholic Encyclopedia - Sadducees</a>:
from <a href="http://www.livius.org/saa-san/sadducees/sadducees.html" target="_blank">Livius.org - Sadducees Information</a>
I guess they see God as the creator that only occasionally intervenes, like in Moses' day and in Genesis. By the way, the Jehovah's Witnesses, who claim to be very careful readers of the Bible, also don't believe in the immorality of the soul. They believe that when you die, you're dead. But some people are later raised to life again to live in paradise.

excreationist

I also posted this thread at <a href="http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=24&t=000476" target="_blank">BaptistBoard.com</a>.

Then someone pointed out that angels are mentioned in the Torah (the first five books of the OT) - many times!

Then I came up with this theory:
Maybe the Sadducees saw the word angel to mean <a href="http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=04397&version=" target="_blank">"messenger"</a> (the same word is used throughout the Bible to mean angel (111 times), messenger (98 times) and ambassadors (4 times)).

Another quote -
From Lion's "New Concise Bible Dictionary" (1989 edition)

isaac42

Well, they can claim whatever they want, but they have their own proprietary translation, not accepted by anyone outside their sect.

Isaac

-DM-

You are probably referring to The New World Translation [NWT]. Although NWT is their favorite, JWs are quite willing to use other Bible translations, however. It is not so much that the NWT is radically different than other translations, rather it is that JW dogma/theology -- no matter what Bible ones uses -- interprets what the Bible says much differently.

--Don--

-DM-

My understanding is that JWs believe in "soul sleep" -- dead in the grave until such time as the Resurrection occurs. There is support for this interpretation in the Bible regardless of which Bible version one uses. And the JWs are not the only sect which holds this belief; the <a href="http://www.wcg.org/" target="_blank">Worldwide Church of God</a> is another example.

Whether, based on the Bible, the soul or spirit is resurrected immediately upon death or at some future time (e.g., at the Rapture) is one of those theological questions which different people will answer differently. It is similar to the questions as to whether works count towards salvation or whether it is faith by itself, whether the Rapture will occur pre-Tribulation or post-Tribulation, etc.

--Don--

HelenM

I agree; I think there are few places where a key doctrine hinges on the difference between the NWT and the English translations that are used by non-Jehovah's Witnesses. One of those few places is John 1:1 which in the NWT reads that the Word was a god, rather than the Word was God, as other English translations have. Thus the NWT supports the JW's belief that Jesus is not God - since the Word is understood to be referring to Jesus, in that verse.

I don't know of any other verse where the difference in translations is used so centrally to back up the respective beliefs of JWs and 'Trinitarians'.

I'd say that it shows how hard it is to prove that Jesus is God, from the New Testament, that this verse has become a battleground. Christians believe its what the NT teaches (as it were) but few places are as 'clear' and undisputed textually as John 1:1 "The Word was God".

I mean, if it was all over the place, the JWs wouldn't have a leg to stand on .

A key point in Christian doctrine is that God Himself paid the penalty for human sin. Not some stand-in. So it does really matter that Jesus is God, for doctrinal purposes. It's not just the icing on the cake...when atheists talk about, how come God sent someone else to do His 'dirty work' (Jesus dying on the cross), well, in Christian Theology He didn't; it was God who went through that. I'm just saying...for those who don't see why it matters to Christians whether Jesus is God.

love
Helen

xoc

The Sadduccees almost have a theology equivelent to "process theism", rational theology etc. or some of the more liberal Christian theologies of today(except for accepting the Pentateuch point-blank). Notice how they follow the same dividing line of "free will" and the relevency or even possibility of "prophecy" that that brings. I would say that many fundamentalist groups are more of the theological descendents of the Pharisees() and have a similar acceptence of the "full" Scripture set yet are suspicious of modern "movements of God." The charismatics are in a sense closer to the Essenes in that they have an idea of God "doing stuff now", although the Essenes could also be compare to certain factions that box themselves up in a compound and wait for the world to end. Of course the Essene theology is also closer to hyper-Calvanism in it's extreme determinist views.

The obvious question is, "What was Jesus?" He seems to me to be a bit of a cross between Pharisee and Essene in viewpoints, he obvioulsy distinguished himself much from the "Pharisees" but probably did so less with the Pharisees because the broad distinctions were more obvious; he chides them for "lack of faith in the Scripture", denying angels and the resurrection in the one passage in John where he dialogues with them. His views on marriage were both anti-Pharisaical and anti-Essene; it is neither neccesary nor forbidden.

Tharmas

I became familiar with the Sadducee’s views of the immortality of the soul and predestination, not from my Josephus (whom I have yet to sit down and plow straight through), but from a book called Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls by Lawrence H. Schiffman (Doubleday, 1994). I started reading this book because, after getting about a quarter of the way through James the Brother of Jesus I felt the need to educate myself a bit about the Scrolls. After browsing online and at my local Borders I selected the Schiffman because it seemed extremely conservative and careful and not willing to make extravagant claims.

Schiffman makes several points about the Sadducees. First, he summarizes the Josephus discussions of them, especially in comparison to the Pharisees and what we know of the Essenes, along several parallel lines. In other words, how they felt about the soul’s immortality also reflected about how they felt about God’s intervention in human affairs, determinism, etc. Second, he points out that it is reasonable to assume that over the decades there were evolutions and shifts in the various groups’ interpretations. He points out that by the time of Josephus the “mainstream” Sadducees might have been fairly Hellenistic, or at least Josephus would emphasize the most Hellenistic elements. He cautions that this may represent a distortion. I quote: “Josephus’s description of Sadducean theology exactly matches that of the Epicureans, who saw God as playing no role in the world. But it is impossible to accept this as the fundamental Sadducean view, because the Sadducees were devoutly committed to the Biblical tradition...” Third, Schiffman points out that, just as the Sadducees’s views may have evolved over time, they also may have not reflected a monolithic group. There may have been some like those Josephus describes, but they may have been only the ones most useful to Josephus’ literary purpose.

Of course I have to point out that what Schiffman is doing is trying to establish that some group of Sadducees (or near relative of the Sadducees) is actually the Qumran sect that collected/authored the Scrolls, so of course that colors his interpretation. Still, I thought it was interesting and worth mentioning in the context of this thread.

-DM-

Good point. Thanks for bringing it up.

Actually, they have some pretty good arguments that JN 1.1 is mistranslated in those versions which say "... and the Word was God."

After all, right before and right after that [alleged] statement are seemingly conflicting statements that "the Word was with God."

--Don--

excreationist

About JW's:

from <a href="http://www.watchtower.org/library/jt/article_03.htm" target="_blank">Watchtower.org</a>:
So JW's don't think that the dead are just "sleeping" - their soul has ceased to exist. But some can be resurrected.