I personally lost interest when I noticed the trend of argument for argument sake !!

frosbel: I personally lost interest when I noticed the trend of argument for argument sake !!

he has tuned soul to spirit, imagined!

frosbel: I personally lost interest when I noticed the trend of argument for argument sake !!

I fully agree with you here. . .

frosbel: I personally lost interest when I noticed the trend of argument for argument sake !!

you absolutely hit it on the head.. seems to be a trend here..

mazaje: Anony claims that there is an elusive soul somewhere, he refuses to tell us where it is located and completely refuses to provide a single evidence for it. . .So far his argument for the soul remains people think and reason that means "soul". . .LOL!. . .Show us that the soul exist independently of the brain, all we get to read about is endless long English. . .

the problem with arguments of this nature is that they are made largely from a position of chronic lack of thought.

The question in bold is one example... now imagine if i asked you to show me your brain independent of your head?

davidylan:

the problem with arguments of this nature is that they are made largely from a position of chronic lack of thought.

The question in bold is one example... now imagine if i asked you to show me your brain independent of your head?

I can show you images of my brain inside my head. . .Can anony show us any evidence to show us any evidence that the soul exist on its own independent of the brain?. . .He says there is a soul that exist independent of the brain, he is the one making the claim, all we need is just a little evidence to back that claim up. . .

davidylan:

the problem with arguments of this nature is that they are made largely from a position of chronic lack of thought.

The question in bold is one example... now imagine if i asked you to show me your brain independent of your head?

Your analogy doesn't make sense. Is the head the soul?

Clearly the brain is at the centre of thought - being as certain damage to the brain is known to affect thinking ability. That we don't know how the brain does it exactly, doesn't take away the fact the cognitive functions stem from it.

The theory of invisible soul that survives death is just confused.

Why does the soul need the brain? You say the brain is the physical outlet for this soul.

Ok, now this same soul that can't interact physically, will somehow feel the physical sensation of heat in some Hellfire, independent of the body? How does that work? (Hellfire teaching is another very dumb teaching).

Other questions:
At what point does a newborn baby develop a soul? Where does the soul come from? Does God create a soul for each newborn and send it down or does it develop with the fertlized egg? Does it grow with the baby?

As a Christian, I find this teaching senseless. And I see no backing for it in the bible.

mazaje:

I can show you images of my brain inside my head. . .Can anony show us any evidence to show us any evidence that the soul exist on its own independent of the brain?. . .He says there is a soul that exist independent of the brain, he is the one making the claim, all we need is just a little evidence to back that claim up. . .

No. I didnt ask for images of your brain. I asked that you show me your brain... a picture can be faked.

See the idea was much more rhetorical to show that some questions... while making logical sense on the face of it... really are a mask for ignorance and inability to understand simple logic.

You know full well that your question will not get an answer... you ask it purely for arguments sake. Well i could just as well ask you to show me your thoughts... afterall you are the one claiming to have one no?

TroGunn:

Your analogy doesn't make sense. Is the head the soul?

Plain idiocy imo. Analogy does not have to be an exact match. Surely you attended college.

TroGunn:
Clearly the brain is at the centre of thought - being as certain damage to the brain is known to affect thinking ability. That we don't know how the brain does it exactly, doesn't take away the fact the cognitive functions stems from it.

No one has refuted this claim. However you do not seem to be understanding anything... the brain being at the center of thought does not mean the brain is the originator of thought. Those are two different things.
For example, the brain is the center of sight but is your brain the tool you use to see?

TroGunn:
The theory of invisible soul that survives death is just confused.

Because you're confused about an issue does not make the issue confused. Perhaps you just need to go back and think rather than posting no?

TroGunn:
Why does the soul need the brain? You say the brain is the physical outlet for this soul.

Why does the eye need a brain... cant it just see and tell us without having to bother with long circuitous signals to a white lump of meat all the time?

TroGunn:
Ok, now this same soul that can't interact physically, will somehow feel the physical sensation of heat in some Hellfire, independent of the body? How does that work? (Hellfire teaching is another very dumb teaching).

Again not understanding a matter does not rubbish it. Perhaps you should ask for better understanding first.

TroGunn:
Other questions:
At what point does a newborn baby develop a soul? Where does the soul come from? Does God create a soul for each newborn and send it down or does it develop with the fertlized egg? Does it grow with the baby?

The soul is spiritual in nature... kinda makes your questions a bit nonsensical if i may say.

TroGunn:
As a Christian, I find this teaching senseless. And I see no backing for it in the bible.

Obviously you've not been reading your bible. Feel free to move to the side of the atheists.

davidylan:

No. I didnt ask for images of your brain. I asked that you show me your brain... a picture can be faked.

See the idea was much more rhetorical to show that some questions... while making logical sense on the face of it... really are a mask for ignorance and inability to understand simple logic.

You know full well that your question will not get an answer... you ask it purely for arguments sake. Well i could just as well ask you to show me your thoughts... afterall you are the one claiming to have one no?

I can provide evidence to show that the brain exist independent of the head. . .Can he provide evidence to show that the soul exist independent of the brain?. . .Your question is invalid because we KNOW that the brain and the head are two different things. . .What do we know about the soul beside baseless claims and counter claims?. . .

mazaje:

I can provide evidence to show that the brain exist independent of the head. . .Can he provide evidence to show that the soul exist independent of the brain?. . .Your question is invalid because we KNOW that the brain and the head are two different things. . .What do we know about the soul besides baseless claims and counter claims?. . .

well that is your opinion. I could just as well say that unless i see your brain, there is no proof that it exists. See... that sounds preposterous right? Thats exactly the way you sound to me when you go claiming that claims of a soul are baseless... YOU DONT KNOW does not mean it doesnt exist. That unfortunately seems to be the train of thought around here...

Of course he cannot provide evidence of the spiritual... that is impossible. You cant provide evidence for the black hole either... but of course you firmly believe it exists no?

davidylan:

Plain idiocy imo. Analogy does not have to be an exact match. Surely you attended college.


No one has refuted this claim. However you do not seem to be understanding anything... the brain being at the center of thought does not mean the brain is the originator of thought. Those are two different things.
For example, the brain is the center of sight but is your brain the tool you use to see?



Because you're confused about an issue does not make the issue confused. Perhaps you just need to go back and think rather than posting no?



Why does the eye need a brain... cant it just see and tell us without having to bother with long circuitous signals to a white lump of meat all the time?



Again not understanding a matter does not rubbish it. Perhaps you should ask for better understanding first.



The soul is spiritual in nature... kinda makes your questions a bit nonsensical if i may say.



Obviously you've not been reading your bible. Feel free to move to the side of the atheists.

Make analogies that fit the issue. Don't try to mask this failure with insults. The eyes, the head are physical and have relations with the brain. If you must make analogy of how your spiritual soul controls the physical brain, be smart about it.

You really should be studying the bible more without twisting it to fit your preconceived Greek myth of undying soul.

Gen 3:19 - By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

TroGunn:

Make analogies that fit the issue. Don't try to mask this failure with insults. The eyes, the head are physical and have relations with the brain. If you must make analog of how your spiritual soul controls the physical brain, be smart about it.

Believe me, i try. Its frustrating because you thick heads would not get it even if i drew the picture right infront of your very eyes. Largely because you already have your mind set on your opinion and any alternative opinion is not so much to be considered as much as it is to be ridiculed.

The eyes and head are physical agreed... well the only way to help you understand is to use ideas that you can easily grasp. It would make little sense to use a spiritual thing to explain a spiritual point to someone who rejects any idea of the spiritual world.

TroGunn:
You really should be studying the bible more without twisting it to fit your preconceived Greek myth of undying soul.

Daft. The very essence of the bible - the death and resurrection of Christ - is all about saving the undying soul from eternal destruction in hell. Perhaps you need to read your bible instead?

TroGunn:
Gen 3:19 - By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

And i suppose you forgot this part - Gen 2:7?

davidylan: Believe me, i try. Its frustrating because you thick heads would not get it even if i drew the picture right infront of your very eyes. Largely because you already have your mind set on your opinion and any alternative opinion is not so much to be considered as much as it is to be ridiculed.

The eyes and head are physical agreed... well the only way to help you understand is to use ideas that you can easily grasp. It would make little sense to use a spiritual thing to explain a spiritual point to someone who rejects any idea of the spiritual world.



Daft. The very essence of the bible - the death and resurrection of Christ - is all about saving the undying soul from eternal destruction in hell. Perhaps you need to read your bible instead?



And i suppose you forgot this part - Gen 2:7?

No point responding to the ramblings, except the part about the biblical soul.

The biblical soul is the man. That much is clear from Gen 2:7 - God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul"

Man became a soul, not have a soul that escapes. Other verses show the soul, man dies.

TroGunn:

No point responding to the ramblings, except the part about the biblical soul.

The biblical soul is the man. That much is clear from Gen 2:7 - God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul"

Man became a soul, not have a soul that escapes. Other verses show the soul, man dies.

Daft again. If the soul was the man then the entire new testament is a complete waste of time. Why bother with a gospel of salvation when the man ceases to exist after death?

davidylan:

Daft again. If the soul was the man then the entire new testament is a complete waste of time. Why bother with a gospel of salvation when the man ceases to exist after death?

A good question! That's why the resurrection is a very key teaching, which would be unnecessary if the man continues living after death. Lots of verses point to the resurrection as the real hope of those "asleep" in death.

davidylan:

well that is your opinion. I could just as well say that unless i see your brain, there is no proof that it exists. See... that sounds preposterous right? Thats exactly the way you sound to me when you go claiming that claims of a soul are baseless... YOU DONT KNOW does not mean it doesnt exist. That unfortunately seems to be the train of thought around here...

Of course he cannot provide evidence of the spiritual... that is impossible. You cant provide evidence for the black hole either... but of course you firmly believe it exists no?

I repeat, everything can be shown to be from the brain. . .You are yet to show what the soul does on its own. . .I can show you many things the brain does on its own. . .Can you show me one single thing the elusive soul does on its own. . .So far the only thing you have shown is that the elusive soul is actually nothing. . .

mazaje:

... have shown is that the elusive soul is actually nothing. . .

Elusive indeed...

i rather find this two statement below rather confusing, amusing, and curious expercially coming from a supposed "christian".

davidylan:

Plain idiocy imo. Analogy does not have to be an exact match. "Surely you attended college"

yes "college"

did the apostles of Jesus need to attend "college to understand the scriptures?

When did the attendance of college became a prerequisite for understanding the scriptures?

When has the study of philosophy become a prerequsite for the understanding of the scriptures?

Jesus disciples were fisher men and unlettered. No?

"Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus." (Acts 4:13).
..................

I believe we should accept all you have to say because you "attended college"? No

well, my bible did not tell me that attendance of college is a prerequisite for understanding of the scriptures, am not saying that going to school is bad though, just that you brought it up.

davidylan:
Obviously you've not been reading your bible.

can you show us where God put soul in addition to spirit into the man in the bible?

Can you show us where the bible said that the soul leaves the man just as the spirit leaves the man at death?

Why is it so difficult to POINT out where the soul is located in man but you wish we should accept from you that the soul is a distinct entity from the man?

Should this difficulty not be a pointer to the fact that what you are passing to us is possibly an illusion?

davidylan:
Feel free to move to the side of the atheists.

is asking that the bible should be a bench mark for christians meaning that the person will pass for atheist?

I dont think so.

I know what platonic philosophy says, and plato did not make use of the bible to arrived at that, why should such a stand be force on the bible?

If i am so wrong and since you are a christian and so right can you leave out your opinion and use the bible to point out what you are teaching us?

Is it also true with you as it is true with many on this thread that the bible is ill qualified or not qualified as an authority to reference this issues?

Please, your answer to the foregoing will help one know exactly the way forward with your postulations. Thank you.
Peace

davidylan: Believe me, i try. Its frustrating because you thick heads would not get it

insult is not really my strength:

"And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient," (2 Timothy 2:24).

davidylan:
Daft. The very essence of the bible - the death and resurrection of Christ - is all about saving the undying soul

so, Jesus did not die?

How did he pay the ransom?

Did the bible lied to us that he spent three days in the grave and that God will not forget him there?
*Smh*

did Adam soul need to exist some where befor Yahweh can bring him back to life? No. He had no soul(life) befor the putting of the spirit by God.
so, Jesus soul does not need to exist somewhere befor God brings him back to life.

davidylan:
from eternal destruction in hell.

i see, you also believe in the doctrine of eternal torment, well i dont.

There is a thread by frosbel running right now this 12 of Jan. 2013 with 30 questions concerning the contradiction of eternal torment (hell fire) doctrine, can you kindly go to that thread and answer the questions of the op and educate us please?

Why have you not been seen coming to the hell fire threads?
you would have been been more useful there

davidylan:
And i suppose you forgot this part - Gen 2:7?

what does that portion of the bible says? :

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7).
.................

Na wao!

Is it my "lack of college education"?

Did that place not mention two things that form the soul(living man)? = body and spirit? =

"and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7).
..............

This is interesting, how did you read it?

Did God put soul into the man? No.

God put his "breath of life" = the spirit of God.

It is this spirit of God that goes back and not the soul. :

"His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." (Psalm 146:4).
..................
Fantastic!

Where is the mention of the "a distinct" soul also leaving the man there?

Is the thought the soul?

If yes, it does perish when the spirit of God leaves.


What am i missing? Ok, college!


You sabi pass God?

I think here you are doing what we call panel beating verses of scripture to fit your doctrine. I'll show you what I mean.

TroGunn:

Note that soul in the Bible is the man or animal (Gen 2:7 - man became a soul when he received breath of life). Similarly soul is used to describe dead men or dead bodies, meaning soul (man) dies (nephesh-soul used at Leviticus 21:1, Numbers 9:6, Numbers 9:7)

Soul is also used often to mean "life that a person or animal has". Most of the verses you quoted refer to soul in this usage.

I agree that "nepfesh" is used as the Hebrew word to denote that something is living and breathing but then it is also used to denote an inner self(soul), personhood (i.e. pronouns like "him" or "her" a ghost, the mind, death, and as well as to describe abstract mental states like desires of the heart, the will, e.t.c. . Limiting it to one meaning so that you can use it as you like is plain dishonesty.

A good example is Isaiah 10:18 The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land the LORD will destroy, both soul and body, and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.

Here it makes it clear that two separate entities will be destroyed i.e a soul and a body. and here it uses the word "nephesh" to signify soul and for the body it uses another word "basar" (which means flesh) so as to distinguish between the two. Remember that in Numbers 9 it didn't have to use the word "basar" when it was talking about a dead body because a distinguishing wasn't necessary.

If there is no "nephesh" in a "basar", then Isaiah 10 won't make any literal sense. Also if we follow your argument and substitute "nephesh" with "life", then the verse would read that "...God will kill the life and the body". Doesn't also make literary sense.

Example of soul being used to refer to "life" is Acts 20:10 - "To whom, when Paul had gone down, he laid himself upon him, and embracing him, said: Be not troubled, for his soul is in him". (Douay Rheims). Most translations use life, though it should be soul.

Note too that "spirit" is used to mean character or mental disposition/attitude - e.g spirit of jealousy (Numbers 5:14). Most of the verses you quoted refer to spirit in this usage.

In Matt 10:28 - Here soul is used to mean "life" or prospect of life. Jesus here meant we should be concerned about God who can deprive us of life. Satan and his agents can kill us, but God can give us life again (by resurrection). Only God can permanently take away life from a person - as if by burning in a fire, meaning permanent destruction without possibility of resurrection.

Hebrews 4:12 simply means the Bible can change lifes and show people up for what they really are. Soul here is life and spirit is character - combined to denote a living person's inner feelings or mental disposition/character that can be laid bare or change by the bible's message. Unless you think the bible can attack real joints and marrow.

In 1Thessalonians 5:23, here Paul was talking of the preserving (used by some translations instead of sanctifying - no biggy) the church or congretion. From the context, the Thessalonians were to remain blameless by praying (verse 17), quench not the Spirit (verse 19), keep away from evil ( verse 22) so that the spirit ( mental disposition or character of the congregation), body (members of congregation - 1 Corinthians 12:12-13), and soul (life or existence ) of the congregation is preserved.

Paul couldn't have been talking of preserving physical body (why would physical body need to be preserved at death - until our Lord Jesus Christ comes again - when it returns to dust) or preserving spirit in the context you are looking at.

Again you are doing the same thing you did with the old testament where you pull out a word that can be used in multiple contexts, isolate one of it's possible meanings and then you try to force that meaning upon all your readings in the bible. Interestingly I was hoping that you would investigate their Greek meanings as you did for the Hebrew in the old testament verses but you didn't. If you had you would have come across the word "psuche" which means breath, life, soul, mind, heart, etc. Now when Jesus says do not fear the one that can only kill the "soma" but not the "psuche", I think it is very clear that he is distinguishing between two distinct entities one which can be physically killed and the other which survives physical death.
If we use your translation i.e. "life", we'll have "...Do not fear the person that can kill your body but cannot kill your life...." This does not make sense.
The same applies to the other verses. The same word "psuche" is used.

Now you did something else that I equally find suspect which is claiming that "spirit" means character. That is simply untrue. The Greek word used in those verses was pneuma which is very closely related to psuche and does not mean character but "breath" or "essence of life" and it is often used interchangeably as soul. Paul is clearly not saying what you are trying to force into his mouth. The part in Thess 5 is quite simply a terrible attempt from you to obfuscate.

Nothing here to hold onto to support story of the immortal soul that survives and lives indepndent of the body at death.

Actually almost everything there points to it to a soul that survives physical death especially Jesus' statement in Matt 10:28. Not necessarily immortal but definitely surviving physical death.

The bible's message is so clear, no point twisting unrelated verses. Here's what was going to happen to man (Adam) after his sin:

Gen 3:19 - By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

Eccl 3:19-20 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

Psa 115:17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.

Lol again here you panelbeat scripture some more with a little quote mining. In Genesis, you are arguing from silence because it doesn't follow that the fact fact that God doesn't talk about man soul in that instance means that man has no soul. Psalms is taken out of context and in Ecclesiastes you purposely left out verse 21 where the preacher suggests the existense of man's man's undying spirit that leaves the body. The verses you quoted really don't help your case because they do not contradict the existence of a soul that survives physical death.

Man stays dead untill resurrection. That's the whole point of resurrection - if man had an immortal (and better) component that continues to live after death, then the whole point of resurrection would be meaningless.

I used to hold this view but the more I have studied the bible, the less true this view appears.

davidylan:

Daft again. If the soul was the man then the entire new testament is a complete waste of time. Why bother with a gospel of salvation when the man ceases to exist after death?

na na na and No.

You are limiting God to your limited senses as human. Yes, we human are limited in knowledge.

If God brought the whole univers out of nothing and also brought Adam to life without him existing befor, why is the resurrection of the death an inpossility with God?

Are we bigger than the planet earth that he created out of nothing?

Why is the need to store up treasure in heaven if not to give reason for God to remember us?

Will any bank know that you exist if you dont have an account with them? No.

We give reasons for God to remember us when we die by storing up treasure in heaven, with our name in God's memory or "book of life" he said all he will do is call.

If the soul is already alive in heaven why the need for a resurrection?

mazaje: Anony claims that there is an elusive soul somewhere, he refuses to tell us where it is located and completely refuses to provide a single evidence for it. . .So far his argument for the soul remains people think and reason that means "soul". . .LOL!. . .Show us that the soul exist independently of the brain, all we get to read about is endless long English. . .

This is pretty silly. I defined the soul as a non-physical person who that operates through a physical body. You reject this and ask me provide for you a physical location of a non-physical being. A very irrational question indeed.

You on the other hand agree that thoughts are non-physical functions of a physical brain. I am sure you can't show me a physical thought because they are by definition non-physical. So why the double standard?

The next thing is that you claim that physical chemical reactions in the brain create non-physical thoughts. You haven't shown how.

These physical chemical reactions create subjective thoughts that are not repeatable if all the same stimuli are provided.....yet you claim that it is a scientific fact.

I have shown that you can decide what your brain thinks in the same way that you can decide where your legs go there fore your brain is subject to you. You have said that it is your brain that controls itself and everything about you yet there are involuntary actions that your brain cannot control about you. Contradiction

You have sited brain injuries as causes of a change in personality and behaviour to which I have replied that the brain is a tool for thinking in the same way the mouth is the tool for talking and you will think differently and talk differently if the two sustained any damage.

I have shown you that interestingly, there is no amount of brain damage that can make a person not know that he is a person distinct from a chair. or take a persons will or ability to make choices or ability to desire away.

You have not been able to show how the physical creates the non-physical but yet you ask me the physical location of a non-physical entity. My friend you are being very IRRATIONAL.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]
This is pretty silly. I defined the soul as a non-physical person who that operates through a physical body. You reject this and ask me provide for you a physical location of a non-physical being. A very irrational question indeed.

Wrong !

A Person is the complete MAN, just like you get your Trinity wrong and divide GOD into 3, you are now attempting to divide MAN into 3 distinct persons and yet call him ONE, nay this is not at all biblical.

MAN is complete with body and spirit , joining to form a SOUL.

Will talk on the rest a little later , but let's start from Gen 2:7 because that's were you seemed to have missed the point.

Mr_Anony: I think here you are doing what we call panel beating verses of scripture to fit your doctrine. I'll show you what I mean.


I agree that "nepfesh" is used as the Hebrew word to denote that something is living and breathing but then it is also used to denote an inner self(soul), personhood (i.e. pronouns like "him" or "her" a ghost, the mind, death, and as well as to describe abstract mental states like desires of the heart, the will, e.t.c. . Limiting it to one meaning so that you can use it as you like is plain dishonesty.

A good example is Isaiah 10:18 The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land the LORD will destroy, both soul and body, and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.

Here it makes it clear that two separate entities will be destroyed i.e a soul and a body. and here it uses the word "nephesh" to signify soul and for the body it uses another word "basar" (which means flesh) so as to distinguish between the two. Remember that in Numbers 9 it didn't have to use the word "basar" when it was talking about a dead body because a distinguishing wasn't necessary.

If there is no "nephesh" in a "basar", then Isaiah 10 won't make any literal sense. Also if we follow your argument and substitute "nephesh" with "life", then the verse would read that "...God will kill the life and the body". Doesn't also make literary sense.




Again you are doing the same thing you did with the old testament where you pull out a word that can be used in multiple contexts, isolate one of it's possible meanings and then you try to force that meaning upon all your readings in the bible. Interestingly I was hoping that you would investigate their Greek meanings as you did for the Hebrew in the old testament verses but you didn't. If you had you would have come across the word "psuche" which means breath, life, soul, mind, heart, etc. Now when Jesus says do not fear the one that can only kill the "soma" but not the "psuche", I think it is very clear that he is distinguishing between two distinct entities one which can be physically killed and the other which survives physical death.
If we use your translation i.e. "life", we'll have "...Do not fear the person that can kill your body but cannot kill your life...." This does not make sense.
The same applies to the other verses. The same word "psuche" is used.

Now you did something else that I equally find suspect which is claiming that "spirit" means character. That is simply untrue. The Greek word used in those verses was pneuma which is very closely related to psuche and does not mean character but "breath" or "essence of life" and it is often used interchangeably as soul. Paul is clearly not saying what you are trying to force into his mouth. The part in Thess 5 is quite simply a terrible attempt from you to obfuscate.


Actually almost everything there points to it to a soul that survives physical death especially Jesus' statement in Matt 10:28. Not necessarily immortal but definitely surviving physical death.


Lol again here you panelbeat scripture some more with a little quote mining. In Genesis, you are arguing from silence because it doesn't follow that the fact fact that God doesn't talk about man soul in that instance means that man has no soul. Psalms is taken out of context and in Ecclesiastes you purposely left out verse 21 where the preacher suggests the existense of man's man's undying spirit that leaves the body. The verses you quoted really don't help your case because they do not contradict the existence of a soul that survives physical death.

I used to hold this view but the more I have studied the bible, the less true this view appears.

in the bible the word soul = the living man or a reference to the life that the body have as a result of the ation of the spirit of God(God's power)

When the bible says :

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. " (Matthew 10:28).
.................
It is telling us not to be afraid of dying as servant of God in the hands of humans or satan since they can only destroy the body, but the life that God gave to you is still assured in that God is the only one that can destroy the body and also prevent the person living again in the future.

That is God will restore the lives of "all" the dead back and it is him and only him that can say no to that persons Resurection:

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. " (John 5:28-29).
............

This future life depends on God and man cannot do Anything about that except God.
as such we should be in fear of God.

Man cannot destroy body and soul.

Mr_Anony:
A good example is Isaiah 10:18 The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land the LORD will destroy, both soul and body, and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.

but why are you not understanding what that scripture is saying?

That is a prophesy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, and we know that a "destruction of soul" (life)by God means a permanent death, a death without resurrection anymore.

Prophetically, God was showing that his destruction of those disobedient Jews is a permanent death and all they have though he will make used of the Assyrian.

It is only God that can destroy the soul permanently(hope of a future life)

can those Assyrians destroy body and soul? No Jesus said.

You should have known this men.

Dont forget unless otherwise, all humans will die with time, but future life is solely dependant on only God. Only him can say no to that.
Peace.

Mr_Anony:

You on the other hand agree that thoughts are non-physical functions of a physical brain. I am sure you can't show me a physical thought because they are by definition non-physical. So why the double standard?

so then, is the thought the soul?

Is that "thinking ability" the soul that leaves the body?

In that case, see what the bible says:

"His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his "thoughts" do perish." (Psalm 146:4). QED.
...................

Immortal soul is not a bible teaching.

[quote author=frosbel][/quote]
@frosbel why do you do to your posts that make them unquotable?

By the way we can start with Genesis 2:7 or any verse you like but you must promise to read the verses as they are and not as you want them to be. Do you agree?

truthislight:

so then, is the thought the soul?

Is that "thinking ability" the soul that leaves the body?

In that case, see what the bible says:

"His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his "thoughts" do perish." (Psalm 146:4). QED.
...................

Immortal soul is not a bible teaching.

My dear truthislight, I have never said that thought is the soul however you have misquoted Psalm 146:4 because thoughts as portrayed there is in regards to a man's future plans - a reading of the whole chapter and comparing with other translations should make this evident.

Please for your own good, stop this habit of bible verse poaching. It helps you not. And it blocks you from truly understanding the Word of God.

Mr_Anony: I think here you are doing what we call panel beating verses of scripture to fit your doctrine. I'll show you what I mean.


I agree that "nepfesh" is used as the Hebrew word to denote that something is living and breathing but then it is also used to denote an inner self(soul), personhood (i.e. pronouns like "him" or "her" a ghost, the mind, death, and as well as to describe abstract mental states like desires of the heart, the will, e.t.c. . Limiting it to one meaning so that you can use it as you like is plain dishonesty.

A good example is Isaiah 10:18 The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land the LORD will destroy, both soul and body, and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.

Here it makes it clear that two separate entities will be destroyed i.e a soul and a body. and here it uses the word "nephesh" to signify soul and for the body it uses another word "basar" (which means flesh) so as to distinguish between the two. Remember that in Numbers 9 it didn't have to use the word "basar" when it was talking about a dead body because a distinguishing wasn't necessary.

If there is no "nephesh" in a "basar", then Isaiah 10 won't make any literal sense. Also if we follow your argument and substitute "nephesh" with "life", then the verse would read that "...God will kill the life and the body". Doesn't also make literary sense.

I pointed out two uses of word "soul" in the bible and feel free to look it up yourself.

Here's another translation, closer to a transliteration of Isaiah 10:18 - "And the honour of his forest, and his fruitful field, From soul even unto flesh He doth consume, And it hath been as the fainting of a standard-bearer."

The idea was that the Assyrian Sennacherib's army, "from the soul to the flesh" that is, entirely will be destroyed or ruined. Besides this ruins the immortal part of your soul theory.

Instead of picking random verses to backup the false undying soul story, read the full story and get the context.

Again you are doing the same thing you did with the old testament where you pull out a word that can be used in multiple contexts, isolate one of it's possible meanings and then you try to force that meaning upon all your readings in the bible. Interestingly I was hoping that you would investigate their Greek meanings as you did for the Hebrew in the old testament verses but you didn't. If you had you would have come across the word "psuche" which means breath, life, soul, mind, heart, etc. Now when Jesus says do not fear the one that can only kill the "soma" but not the "psuche", I think it is very clear that he is distinguishing between two distinct entities one which can be physically killed and the other which survives physical death.
If we use your translation i.e. "life", we'll have "...Do not fear the person that can kill your body but cannot kill your life...." This does not make sense.
The same applies to the other verses. The same word "psuche" is used.

Actually, it does make perfect sense. Satan can destroy the body, but cannot destroy your life because God can give you back that life. Only God completely destroys a person's life with finality. It's not elegant in English because it wasn't originally in English. But that's the idea in that verse.

Now you did something else that I equally find suspect which is claiming that "spirit" means character. That is simply untrue. The Greek word used in those verses was pneuma which is very closely related to psuche and does not mean character but "breath" or "essence of life" and it is often used interchangeably as soul. Paul is clearly not saying what you are trying to force into his mouth. The part in Thess 5 is quite simply a terrible attempt from you to obfuscate.

Actually Paul is. What Paul is not saying is preserving a physical body until Christ comes, by doing the things written in the context.

And in many verses, "spirit" is used to mean one's mental disposition or mental state. Here are a few more:

1Ki 10:4, 5 - "And when the queen of Sheba had seen all the wisdom of Solomon, the house that he had built, the food on his table, the seating of his servants, the service of his waiters and their apparel, his cupbearers, and his entryway by which he went up to the house of the Lord, there was no more spirit in her. " meaning she was overwhelmed, not that she died - thus a reference to a state of mind.

Psalm 142:3 - "When my spirit grows faint within me..." also pointing to a state of mind, mental disposition

Actually almost everything there points to it to a soul that survives physical death especially Jesus' statement in Matt 10:28. Not necessarily immortal but definitely surviving physical death.


Lol again here you panelbeat scripture some more with a little quote mining. In Genesis, you are arguing from silence because it doesn't follow that the fact fact that God doesn't talk about man soul in that instance means that man has no soul. Psalms is taken out of context and in Ecclesiastes you purposely left out verse 21 where the preacher suggests the existense of man's man's undying spirit that leaves the body. The verses you quoted really don't help your case because they do not contradict the existence of a soul that survives physical death.

I used to hold this view but the more I have studied the bible, the less true this view appears.

Verse 21 of that Ecclesiastes asks a rhetorical question, nothing to base a doctrine on. I know the undying soul story is required by Satan for the other false, God-insulting teaching of eternal physical torment to stand. Reexxamine your belief my friend. Overwhelming evidence from the scriptures point to the dead "sleeping" to be awaken in resurrection.

TroGunn:

I pointed out two uses of word "soul" in the bible and feel free to look it up yourself.

Here's another translation, closer to a transliteration of Isaiah 10:18 - "And the honour of his forest, and his fruitful field, From soul even unto flesh He doth consume, And it hath been as the fainting of a standard-bearer."

The idea was that the Assyrian Sennacherib's army, "from the soul to the flesh" that is, entirely will be destroyed or ruined. Besides this ruins the immortal part of your soul theory.

Instead of picking random verses to backup the false undying soul story, read the full story and get the context.

Lol, you are missing something. No one is talking about an immortal soul here. All I have been trying to show you is that the soul is distinct from the body. Isaiah 10:18 makes this clear.

Actually Paul is. What Paul is not saying is preserving a physical body until Christ comes, by doing the things written in the context.

And in many verses, "spirit" is used to mean one's mental disposition or mental state. Here are a few more:

1Ki 10:4, 5 - "And when the queen of Sheba had seen all the wisdom of Solomon, the house that he had built, the food on his table, the seating of his servants, the service of his waiters and their apparel, his cupbearers, and his entryway by which he went up to the house of the Lord, there was no more spirit in her. " meaning she was overwhelmed, not that she died - thus a reference to a state of mind.

Psalm 142:3 - "When my spirit grows faint within me..." also pointing to a state of mind, mental disposition

I am quite sure I pointed you to the Greek word Paul used: "pnuema" and it does not mean "mental state".

Verse 21 of that Ecclesiastes asks a rhetorical question, nothing to base a doctrine on. I know the undying soul story is required by Satan for the other false, God-insulting teaching of eternal physical torment to stand. Reexxamine your belief my friend. Overwhelming evidence from the scriptures point to the dead "sleeping" to be awaken in resurrection.

How can a person ask a rhetorical question of something he/she has absolutely no concept of?

Mr_Anony:
My dear truthislight, I have never said that thought is the soul however you have misquoted Psalm 146:4 because thoughts as portrayed there is in regards to a man's future plans - a reading of the whole chapter and comparing with other translations should make this evident.

Please for your own good, stop this habit of bible verse poaching. It helps you not. And it blocks you from truly understanding the Word of God.

lol. Imagine!

See twisting!

So, when the person dies and the soul goes out the soul no longer have a future plan abi?

Lol.

Ok, twist this:

"The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence." (Psalm 115:17).
................

Ha ha ha.

Who is twisting now?

The soul is alive somewhere. imo!

So plans are the only thing that makes up thoughts that perish now abi?

Mr_Anony:
My dear truthislight, I have never said that thought is the soul however you have misquoted Psalm 146:4 because thoughts as portrayed there is in regards to a man's future plans - a reading of the whole chapter and comparing with other translations should make this evident.

very funny indeed.

Do you imagine you are talking to children?

So, it is only plans that makes up thought and that is the only thing about the soul that perish?

Soul what then and of what use is your defined soul?

Is this your soul not useless then? It sure is.

The creator of the human does not know what the soul is in the bible but plato does know.

Lol.

truthislight:

lol. Imagine!

See twisting!

So, when the person dies and the soul goes out the soul no longer have a future plan abi?

Lol.

Ok, twist this:

"The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence." (Psalm 115:17).
................

Ha ha ha.

Who is twisting now?

The soul is alive somewhere. imo!

So plans are the only thing that makes up thoughts that perish now abi?




very funny indeed.

Do you imagine you are talking to children?

So, it is only plans that makes up thought and that is the only thing about the soul that perish?

Soul what then and of what use is your defined soul?

Is this your soul not useless then? It sure is.

The creator of the human does not know what the soul is in the bible but plato does know.

Lol.

Psalm 146:3-4 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. (KJV)

Psalm 146:3-4 Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help. When his breath departs he returns to his earth; on that very day his plans perish. (RSV)

Do you see the context now?