Bryan Johnson's quest to unlock immortality by 2039.

[Dages]

19 hours ago, Dré said:

I think you're reasoning this way because you've never been hungry, literally. Try not eating for at least one week. And then tell me how you feel.

I've seen people going "hunger strike" for many weeks

[Osprey]

On 12/19/2025 at 7:02 PM, ucastrobr said:

Immortally = their don't depend anyone to survive. Even they don't depend some energy to survive.

 

But if someone else immortal sin against Jehovah is possible Jehovah eliminate him because they are immortals but not stronger like Jesus or Jehovah.

 

That is an interesting point to think about, on the one side it would seem logical to me that Jehovah could still end life of immortal being because he is stronger. On the other hand I remember hearing in a talk or reading somewhere that the fact that Jehovah grants them immortality shows how much he trusts them that they will stay faithful. If he could still end the life of immortal being that may negate the main meaning of this word, right? But have to say I am not 100% sure what is the right answer to this question.

[ucastrobr]

2 hours ago, Osprey said:

On the other hand I remember hearing in a talk or reading somewhere that the fact that Jehovah grants them immortality shows how much he trusts them that they will stay faithful.

Remember majority of congregations had a lot of trouble, even a guy commit incest was removed at the congregation and after return.

Do you think everyone go to heaven is equal the apostles? Majority is like us. Just read the letters of apostle Paul or even the Revelation about the congregations.

Edited Sunday at 09:25 PM by ucastrobr

[Dages]

10 hours ago, Osprey said:

If he could still end the life of immortal being that may negate the main meaning of this word, right?

If it's only on Jehovah, not really. We have to be careful with the "omni/all/everything/nothing/forever" expressions, they very often allow exceptions

Edited Monday at 05:21 AM by Dages

[Osprey]

I understand that, it's just that then I somehow fail to see a meaningful difference between being immortal or not. If you are not immortal, you ultimately depend on Jehovah to sustain your existence. But he will never stop to do that as long as you are faithful (in the new world). If you are immortal, you don't depend on him to sustain you, but he can still end your existence, if you don't stay faithful. Where is the big difference then? Where is the need that he has a great trust in them that they will stay faithul?

[Dré]

The concept of eternity has a broad range of interpretations for this state. Immortality is one form of eternal life. Perhaps in the future, we will learn more about what the concept of eternity encompasses and what other varieties of state Jehovah can apply to something or someone. For example, Jehovah describes himself as eternal. We do not doubt his immortality. However, angels, cherubim, and seraphim, just like humans, are not endowed with such a capacity. The Bible nowhere mentions this. Of course, we can compare our state of eternity to that of the angels. However, we are not talking about the state of the body, but about the state of eternity that Jehovah applies. Jesus and anointed Christians receive eternal life, which includes a state of immortality, autonomy (as we understand it). But, whatever the state of Jehovah's creation, it will always be subordinate and under Jehovah's control. Jehovah is the Supreme Ruler, the Creator of everything.

 

Here, the issue is most likely not one of trust, but of the reward Jehovah bestows upon his creations. Immortality is a reward, like eternal life, not a matter of trust. When there are several children in a family, the Father will want to give each one a unique gift. This doesn't mean He trusts one child more than the other. It's a reward, not a trust.

Edited Monday at 11:02 AM by Dré

[Dré]

● At Matthew 4:1 it is said that “Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil.” Does this refer to God’s holy spirit?

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1981490#h=10:2-13:730

 

I don't think Jehovah would have allowed Jesus to literally starve while in fellowship with the Father. This wasn't a forced fast. Moreover, the Bible says that at the end of 40 days, Jesus felt hungry. But didn't he feel hungry before that? “After he had fasted for 40 days and 40 nights, he felt hungry.”—Matthew 4:2

 

Jesus is the reflection of His father and He, as the Son, acted like His Father. Matthew 14:15-21; Mark 6:35-44; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-13

[Osprey]

Well, it has some connections with trust too of course. From Insight:

 

Quote

 So the grant of “indestructible life” (Heb 7:16) or “indissoluble life” to those Christians who gain the privilege of reigning with God’s Son in the heavenly Kingdom marvelously demonstrates God’s confidence in them.

 

w84 4/1:

 

Quote

Jehovah God is the perfect Judge who rewards anointed ones with immortality. When he in his boundless wisdom and insight determines such ones to be completely tested and unquestionably qualified for immortality, we can trust that they will forever be faithful.

 

It is unclear to me why granting them immortality "marvelously demonstrates God's confidence in them" or why in that case "we can trust that they will forever be faithful" if they can still be destroyed at will. I'm not saying this is not true, it just seems to me that we are missing something here.

[Witness1970]

On 12/18/2025 at 5:40 PM, ucastrobr said:

Immortality by 2039 is impossible.
Jehovah will never allow such a thing,
just as He intervened at the Tower of Babel.

 

Jesus and the 144,000 that are already resurrected already have immortality.  The earthly class will never have immortality at all.  They can have everlasting life that depends on Jehovah's will and also on the provision of the physical needs we have to keep us alive.  Anyone who has immortality has no physical needs.  The angels in heaven can live forever but are not immortal because their life still depends on Jehovah.

[Shawnster]

58 minutes ago, Dré said:

This wasn't a forced fast. Moreover, the Bible says that at the end of 40 days, Jesus felt hungry. But didn't he feel hungry before that? “After he had fasted for 40 days and 40 nights, he felt hungry.”—Matthew 4:2

 

 

 

No, it was voluntary. 

 

I not aware of any prophetic significance to this account, either. Sure, he was likely hungry much sooner than 40 days, but that wasn't the point of the account. We should. Not take that scripture to mean he was not hungry at day 35, 37, or whatever. 

 

Besides, many of us have likely been preoccupied with something and missed a meal without realizing it. The principle might be the same here. Jesus had a lot on his mind that could distract him from his hunger. 

[Dré]

So the grant of “indestructible life” (Heb 7:16) or “indissoluble life” to those Christians who gain the privilege of reigning with God’s Son in the heavenly Kingdom marvelously demonstrates God’s confidence in them. (From Insight)

 

I assume that this principle applies in this situation. “Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.”—Luke 12:48

[Dré]

2 hours ago, Shawnster said:

I not aware of any prophetic significance to this account, either. 

 

*** w61 8/1 p. 474 How to Read the Bible ***
Then there is the reading aid of asking questions, such as, ‘Why is this so?’ and, ‘Why did this happen?’ Such questions stir up thinking. Thus one may be reading Matthew 4:1, 2: “Then Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. After he had fasted forty days and forty nights, then he felt hungry.” One might ask himself, “Why were forty days and forty nights necessary?” One might reason that Jesus used that time well, by meditating on God’s Word. But still why that length of time? As you reflect on the matter, by association your mind may think on other similar periods, how both Moses and Elijah experienced them. (Ex. 24:18; 34:28; Deut. 9:25; 1 Ki. 19:8) Further thinking brings to mind the transfiguration scene, wherein Jesus was transfigured with Moses and Elijah, and such thinking has given you insight into the matter: That Jesus went into the wilderness for that specific length of time to conform to these types and that the transfiguration scene required this conformity. So by asking questions to yourself and then reflecting on the matter, your understanding may be greatly enhanced.
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=1961568&srctype=wol&srcid=share&par=15

[Shawnster]

45 minutes ago, Dré said:

 

*** w61 8/1 p. 474 How to Read the Bible ***
Then there is the reading aid of asking questions, such as, ‘Why is this so?’ and, ‘Why did this happen?’ Such questions stir up thinking. Thus one may be reading Matthew 4:1, 2: “Then Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. After he had fasted forty days and forty nights, then he felt hungry.” One might ask himself, “Why were forty days and forty nights necessary?” One might reason that Jesus used that time well, by meditating on God’s Word. But still why that length of time? As you reflect on the matter, by association your mind may think on other similar periods, how both Moses and Elijah experienced them. (Ex. 24:18; 34:28; Deut. 9:25; 1 Ki. 19:8) Further thinking brings to mind the transfiguration scene, wherein Jesus was transfigured with Moses and Elijah, and such thinking has given you insight into the matter: That Jesus went into the wilderness for that specific length of time to conform to these types and that the transfiguration scene required this conformity. So by asking questions to yourself and then reflecting on the matter, your understanding may be greatly enhanced.
https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=1961568&srctype=wol&srcid=share&par=15

 

So. A type ant-type thinking that we have since abandoned.

 

In other words, while there are other similar instances of a 40 day cycle, the scriptures do not say there is any significance in Jesus spending 40 days in the wilderness. 

 

Thanks! 

[vern]

On 12/20/2025 at 7:35 AM, dljbsp said:

and by the power of that nourishment he walked for 40 days and 40 nights to Horeb

I'll take a few freeze dried for the tribulation.   

Thanks in advance. 🙃

[LeolaRootStew]

14 hours ago, Osprey said:

It is unclear to me why granting them immortality "marvelously demonstrates God's confidence in them" or why in that case "we can trust that they will forever be faithful" if they can still be destroyed at will. I'm not saying this is not true, it just seems to me that we are missing something here.

 

God has the physical strength to destroy them at will, but due to his promises that they will never die he will not be able to destroy them if they are unfaithful because that would make Him a liar. That means He is trusting them completely to never sin, because He would have no recourse if they did.

[cme]

Is there a change to signing in?

 

Nevermind. Sorry. Was able to do this post but, not others?

 

Edited 16 hours ago by cme

[minister159]

19 hours ago, LeolaRootStew said:

 

God has the physical strength to destroy them at will, but due to his promises that they will never die he will not be able to destroy them if they are unfaithful because that would make Him a liar. That means He is trusting them completely to never sin, because He would have no recourse if they did.

So, you're saying that their immortality is based on Jehovah's promise and trust in them, not on the quality of their lifeforce and incorruptible organism. If that were the case, it would mean that Jehovah only imputes immortality to them as a quantitative reward but not an actual qualitative condition, much like he imputes righteousness to them when he adopts them as sons while they are still imperfect humans.

 

Also, immortality has nothing to do with who is stronger, but has to do with composition of the spirit body they are given, which is at the heart of what actually makes immortality possible.

 

INCORRUPTION

"Immortality therefore evidently refers to the quality of the life they enjoy, its endlessness and indestructibility, whereas incorruption apparently relates to the organism or body that God gives them, one that is inherently beyond decay, ruin, or destruction." --- it, vol.1 pg. 1198

[Shawnster]

The last discussion on whether Jehovah can or cannot destroy someone granted immortality got a bit emotionally charged. There are various opinions. The Scriptures do not state with authority. Some feel that Jehovah alone has absolutely no limits and that it's wrong to impute otherwise. 

 

 

[LeolaRootStew]

3 hours ago, minister159 said:

So, you're saying that their immortality is based on Jehovah's promise and trust in them, not on the quality of their lifeforce and incorruptible organism.

 

No I didn't say that. In a different thread on this topic I compared the Great Crowd to a lamp that has to be plugged in and the anointed are a solar or battery powered lamps. The anointed no longer need to be "plugged in" to the Source to shine their light, but the rest of us do. This would be a qualitative change (where their power source comes from), but you are right that it doesn't touch on their relative strength - that is also a point I made in the other thread.

 

For the hypothetical, we were discussing what would happen if an immortal sinned. I would argue that Jehovah is just as "physically" capable of destroying a solar lamp as a plug-in lamp because immortality is about where they draw their power, not how powerful they are. However, since He granted them immortality, that is essentialy a promise that they will live forever, so due to his inability to lie He would not be morally able to destroy them even though He has the "physical" strength to do so.

 

Just my opinion.

Edited 5 hours ago by LeolaRootStew

[chuck83]

This whole thread has me like:

 

 

I'll watch what I post going forward.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by chuck83