Does Philosophy or Theology Better Explain Soul?

[spiffy]

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

there is no separate entity called the soul, it is made up of the interrelationship between body and spirit.

So how do you define the word soul?

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

Are you born again? That should be your question.

You haven't answered any of my questions.  Assuming you belong to the group who you seemed to suggest is in possession of the greatest share of truth, this is puzzling.

[spiffy]

13 hours ago, Yowm said:

For the third time, the soul is the interrelational product between the body and spirit.

So the soul is by your definition as an "interrelational product" a definable entity.  I'm trying to follow your thinking.  What properties does this entity you identify as "soul" have?  For example, does the interrelational product you call the soul consist of those properties and characteristics typically applied to cognition and reason?  Or do these things belong to spirit?

 

13 hours ago, Yowm said:

Are you born again?

I don't see that my, your or anyone's being born again has anything to do with the discussion at hand.  If you want to discuss the parameters of what entails being 'born again', start a new thread and I'll participate in it.  I'd rather this thread not be derailed by non-essential topics.

[spiffy]

1 minute ago, Yowm said:

If you were born again, you would be able to perceive some of these issues, otherwise we are just playing philosophical phootsies...

Oh, now I see.  If I was "really" born again I'd just fall into place with everything you believe and say, right?  Do you "born again" folks--those like you who are "really" born again--all just read one another's minds so that discussion among you is fruitless and unnecessary?

Look, if you can't or don't want to discuss the topics raised in the thread, just don't post any more.  No wonder this message board is dying.  If one posts something someone doesn't like and gets grilled about his spiritual "legitimacy", participation in reasonable, forward-moving discussion can't take place.

[spiffy]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 1:22 PM, Yowm said:

I believe early  on I said we 'see through a darkened glass', so no all knowledge of God does not just fall into place. But when our spirit has been regenerated (born again) we do have a much better grasp on things spiritual than those who are not. I had said your question should be (to yourself) 'are you born again?'. This is the essential matter of the conversation and would give me a clue as to how to proceed.

I agree that regeneration provides insights into spiritual or prescriptive truth.  But I don't agree that whether one is born again is essential to the thread's topic.  It can be factored in, but isn't essential.

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 1:22 PM, Yowm said:

I don't understand the static against the inquiry as most born again christians delight in that fact. But be it as it may. If you reread my posts I have pretty much covered all I will have to say on the topic.

I suspect you mean most Christians who share with you a particular view of what it means to be born again delight in the their testimony of it with one another.  My views on regeneration stand a bit outside the traditional so starting a side discussion on it would almost certainly detract from the body-soul-spirit discussion targeted here.  The 'static' as you put it stems from being first told I should ask myself if I am born again--which is mildly offensive--to what appears to be demanding to know if I am born again--in bright red text no less.  I don't see why this is a mystery to you.  If you've covered all you have to say on the topic, then thanks for your contribution to the discussion Youm.

[simplejeff]

On 10/17/2016 at 5:43 PM, spiffy said:

If those who are born again have a more direct path to truth, how does one find this group? 

pm me.  This is a very good question.  (the question itself often makes most people mad though, or upsets many of them in various ways).

I don't know if I have an answer for you or not - just saw this question while breezing thru the forum. 

The answer is clearly in YHWH'S WORD though.  You can get it directly from HIM.  (pending HIS REQUIREMENTS and HIS GOOD PLEASURE) ...

[DJ7]

Maybe you need to read Watchman Nee's The Spiritual Man.

 

[ytLiJC]

On 10/1/2016 at 6:58 PM, spiffy said:

The 'spirit/soul' question has interested me for years.  There are few topics in Christianity that give more widely varying answers than this one.  I tend to think Scripture alone is not sufficient to properly distinguish between soul and spirit.  The addition of philosophy (or maybe more accurately metaphysics) helps flesh out the issue, but still can't provide anything like a proper distinction. 

Seems to me the pertinent issues lie in at minimum trying to fit the following topics into a coherent whole:

* properties of each (spirit-soul) and how one works with the other in psychological terms; (is spirit better explained theologically and soul philosophically?)

* how do "good-evil" fit into the picture?

* can we find a way to overcome the "material-immaterial" conundrum and unify this with the "good-evil" and "spirit-soul" issues?

I'm interested to hear opinions.

 

material is not a scriptural term/concept - we should rather talk about "earth" or, more precisely, the manifest diversity of good given that there can be no "heaven" without "earth" or "earth" without "heaven" (Rev 21:1), because life would be kind of flat if there was no manifest diversity of good

soul is the individual unit of sentience and (of) the consumption of life, while the spiritual is what rules soul or, to put it another way, what makes soul be or not be

the good and the negative aspects of the spiritual are the "Light" and the "darkness", respectively, which doesn't mean there is only one God that is both good and evil, because there is a true God independently of/separately from a wicked one - a person could (try to) work for or at least be on the side of the true One

so the significant difference is between good and evil, not between material and immaterial - if there was no physical matter, we might wander into outer dark space without sensing anything physical like a person who has no eyes, ears, hands, legs, etc.

Blessings

[spiffy]

On 4/10/2018 at 8:57 PM, ytLiJC said:

 

material is not a scriptural term/concept - we should rather talk about "earth" or, more precisely, the manifest diversity of good given that there can be no "heaven" without "earth" or "earth" without "heaven" (Rev 21:1), because life would be kind of flat if there was no manifest diversity of good

soul is the individual unit of sentience and (of) the consumption of life, while the spiritual is what rules soul or, to put it another way, what makes soul be or not be

the good and the negative aspects of the spiritual are the "Light" and the "darkness", respectively, which doesn't mean there is only one God that is both good and evil, because there is a true God independently of/separately from a wicked one - a person could (try to) work for or at least be on the side of the true One

so the significant difference is between good and evil, not between material and immaterial - if there was no physical matter, we might wander into outer dark space without sensing anything physical like a person who has no eyes, ears, hands, legs, etc.

Blessings

"Material" is certainly a Scriptural concept, regardless of whether the word itself is found in the Bible.  The things of heaven were recognized to be [primarily] non-material in contradistinction to the material or [in some contexts] fleshly existence.  [Flesh can also have a spiritual sense of badness, of course.]  I don't see that if follows that there can be no heaven without earth or vise versa, or that Rev 21:1 suggests this.

Okay, sounds like you embrace a tripartite view of man, soul-spirit-flesh (or matter).  I prefer to use this construct myself, despite its problems.  The problem with this view is that if soul is produced by the union of spirit and matter--and spirit leaves the body after physical death--then whence goes sentience/mind/consciousness of soul?  Apparently recognizing this metaphysical problem, the bipartite view of man was put forth roughly in the time of the Reformers: man is two things, the soul-mind (same thing) and matter or physical body.  This seems to soften the separation problem of the tripartite view, but is unable to erase it completely.  As science progressed, stronger correlations were found between brain and consciousness.  Materialsts were in 7th heaven (pun intended); they hooted and hollered, celebrating that they at last had proof that man is purely machine and spirit was contrived by religion.  But Materialism took a hard hit with Chalmers' caveat that the "hard problem" still existed: the materialist doctrine could not explain the deepest experience of consciousness, e.g., what it is like to experience "redness" or any such quality.  There simply is no material path to such experiences.  In the last decade or more materialism had been and is today losing ground, despite its stubborn hanging on in the realm of science and among the non-theist crowd, especially in light of recent findings in quantum physics, revealing that there are some really spooky non-material things going on below the microscopic level of reality. 

How do you arrive at the notion that "the significant difference is between good and evil, not material and immaterial" from what was posted in the op?  In retrospect, the question was awkwardly put.  I should have asked, "are there any valid connections for the theological concept of soul from the metaphysical point of view?"  From a purely theological point of view, sure, good and evil is the pronounced and most significant dualism.  But I think metaphysics can also have a hand in helping define the theology of good and evil.  This may not be the right board for discussing the issue, though.

[Hawkins]

Human is designed to live an eternity. In order for this design to work, a human must have an identifiable part which lasts the whole timeline of eternity. Apparently our body can't be such an identity as body decays along with a physical death. The only part which continues forever (say, can be witnessed by the angels) is our soul, such that any witnessing done on a human won't discontinue. That's why we have a soul as a design necessity.

Our body is our image for humans to recognize each other in a physical realm. It means that angels don't necessarily reckon us by our faces, angels may/can reckon us via our souls. An angel knows its you even when you are dead in Hades or sheol without a body. Soul however is 'transparent' to other humans. Humans can only rely on a body as the image to recognize each other. That's the default, by default soul won't be visually reckoned by another soul.

Spirit on the other hand it's not you, though in a broader sense they can be interchangeable terms. In a stricter sense they are different things. Spirit is a necessity of part of the human design as it carries something necessary during a specific period of time. For example, humans on earth are living an earthly life. They have earthly emotions. They love their parents, lovers children and etc. These earthly affections are 'stored' in the spirit. Once you are dead, the spirit is said to return back to God. You no longer have the earthly emotions in you. That's why when we make our way to Heaven, we will all be brothers and sisters. Similarly, when you are dead in Hades you will no longer have the same love for your parents or kids or lovers whatsoever. You may not have conscience either, conscience is more or less about God's Law "written in our hearts". So unbelievers once reached Hades, they are the ones with no love, no conscience and no anything belongs to God. In the end they will turn into a sinning machine under Satan's influence.

Loving God however can be something from your soul. Good and evil is a choice made by you. If you are familiar with computer, you are a processor going through a list of options and to deliver a decision on either 0 or 1, that's good and evil.

[enoob57]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 1:08 PM, spiffy said:

Oh, now I see.  If I was "really" born again I'd just fall into place with everything you believe and say, right?  Do you "born again" folks--those like you who are "really" born again--all just read one another's minds so that discussion among you is fruitless and unnecessary?

Look, if you can't or don't want to discuss the topics raised in the thread, just don't post any more.  No wonder this message board is dying.  If one posts something someone doesn't like and gets grilled about his spiritual "legitimacy", participation in reasonable, forward-moving discussion can't take place.

Quote

Oh, now I see.  If I was "really" born again I'd just fall into place with everything you believe and say, right?  Do you "born again" folks--those like you who are "really" born again--all just read one another's minds so that discussion among you is fruitless and unnecessary?

Our minds are formed from The Word of God and not the darkness and perversion of the world...

Quote

Look, if you can't or don't want to discuss the topics raised in the thread, just don't post any more.  No wonder this message board is dying.  If one posts something someone doesn't like and gets grilled about his spiritual "legitimacy", participation in reasonable, forward-moving discussion can't take place.

Your very begin in this topic is in direct opposition to The Word of God dealing with the sufficiency of Scripture:

On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 10:58 AM, spiffy said:

  I tend to think Scripture alone is not sufficient to properly distinguish between soul and spirit. 

2 Tim 3:15-17
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.  KJV

To shine truth upon this there are three sources to draw from: God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit); Lucifer and his demons; man and his imaginations puffed up through assumed knowledge... seeing How God, Himself, guarantees His Word, The Bible, is His... I'm going with that! This to topic:

The Genesis tells us we are a three part being: Body=dust of the ground, God's Breath=Spirit/inner man, soul=mind, will, emotion. By this we understand the Genesis account of

Gen 2:17

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
KJV

when you read the account Adam and Eve are energized by soulish functions of body only:
 Gen 2:25
25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
after disobedience resulting in death
Gen 3:7
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
KJV

They no longer had The inner man connected with God to teach them s/Spiritually but only through the body and creation (sensual perception) to learn from...
The very top verse I posted explains this...