What is a "soul?"

[Charlie744]

Josheb, has indeed brought to our attention there are some 30 pages of posts... so far!  

There are so many interesting and enjoyable thoughts posted— the quality of these posts are just incredible.... 

Everyone, to one degree or another are able to bring the most powerful PC anyone could buy. These PC’s have ALL the latest software money could buy- it is amazing to watch! Unfortunately, I have been only able to bring my latest and best Etch-a-Sketch... which I understand needs to be upgraded!

However, despite all the knowledge and talent commenting on this subject, we still are not in agreement.

 I went back to the first two chapters of Genesis. Whenever there is a difference or conflicting views it is my practice to try and go back to the beginning of things... 

I would like to ask for your thoughts and if there are is any relevance here:

1) It seems within these two chapters God blesses both man and the creatures,

2) Of course He created both man and all living things,

3) So far, There doesn’t seem to be a separation of the two,

4) God does refer the fowl, beasts and creeping things as either “things, or creatures”,

5) He never refers to man as either of those two,

6) But in 1:30, He has given you (Adam) ....dominion over.... WHEREIN THERE IS A LIVING SOUL, 

7) But in 2:7, God forms man of the dust.... and man BECAME A LIVING SOUL.

IF the differences between man and all the other creations of God are in items 6) and 7) above (ASSUMPTION), then what might it tell us, if anything about a soul found IN the creatures v. man BECOMING a living soul?

8) Also, God BREATHED life into man and not the animals.

Thanks, Charlie 

[Frits]

9 hours ago, Josheb said:

Well, since you've just contradicted your previous post I'd say it does need explaining. If criminals don't want to "disappear" then that is punishment. It was previously such a punishment would be without meaning. I don't know many criminals who would like to cease to exist, either, and I have known criminals serving lengthy terms and those awaiting execution. Few hold to the belief they'll cease to exist because they find more comfort in the idea they get to continue on, however suffering-laden that existence might be. To cease to exist is humanity's greatest fear. The Existentialists created an entire philosophy around it. 

 

It does need additional proof. Self-contradictory views are always self-refuting and generally considered a consequence of inadequately thinking through the position held. 

Brothers @Josheb and @Alive,

Good morning! I had a great night's sleep and now a new day has arrived here in Europe.

Summarizing the question of whether the soul ceases to exist, I have shown from various Scriptures that the soul does not disappear into 'nothingness', but that feelings such as grief and anger persist even after the death of the sinner.

A striking proof of this are the words of the Lord Jesus Himself, when He explains in Marc 9 that there will be 'wailing and gnashing of teeth' in the outer darkness.  (v44,46,48)
I also used a text from Daniel to indicate that after the judgment for the unjust there is 'everlasting contempt'. (12:2)
In addition, from the teachings of the apostle Paul, I have used a text from 2Th.1:8-9, which leaves no ambiguity about the fact that the soul of the disobedient to the Gospel of Jesus Christ undergoes an "everlasting destruction" after death. So the soul does not dissolve into nothingness, but has an eternal destination.

In order to continue this discussion somewhat mature, it now seems to me that it is about time on your part to demonstrate the opposite  -  that is, that the soul no longer exists after death!  -  from the Bible is shown.

And I don't mean linguistic nitpicking and analysis of archaic Greek words, which fill long sheets by copy/paste, but simply from the accepted text in our Bible.

In all this it's a mystery to me why you both try to defend the thesis that the soul would no longer be there after death, against the statements of the Lord Jesus and Paul.
Are you perhaps followers of the soul sleep theory, as we see it eg at JW? This would explain a few things.

So my request: if you think your thesis is supported by Scripture, please do not use silly theories laced with illegible Hebrew and Greek characters, just a single text from the Bible.

 I look forward to it,
 Hallelujah, God bless.

Edited December 22, 2020 by Frits

[Charlie744]

Frits, happy to hear y0u got a good nights sleep......... You are looking for Scripture to support if the soul sleeps or the soul no longer be after death.

Before one c0uld answer this and provide the appropriate Scripture, do we not have to agree on the definition of a soul?

I sent a post earlier attempting to solicit opinions on the first mention of the soul in Genesis. For me, all the information in the past 30 pages has not changed my thoughts on this and so I wanted to go back to square 1 and attempt to see what others see from Genesis. 

Can you please identify for me where in the creation of man do we find the 3 separate parts of man?  Thanks so much, Charlie

[Frits]

2 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Frits, happy to hear y0u got a good nights sleep......... You are looking for Scripture to support if the soul sleeps or the soul no longer be after death.

Before one c0uld answer this and provide the appropriate Scripture, do we not have to agree on the definition of a soul?

I sent a post earlier attempting to solicit opinions on the first mention of the soul in Genesis. For me, all the information in the past 30 pages has not changed my thoughts on this and so I wanted to go back to square 1 and attempt to see what others see from Genesis. 

Can you please identify for me where in the creation of man do we find the 3 separate parts of man?  Thanks so much, Charlie

Hi Charlie,

I had already said that I do not subscribe to the theory the soul originated as a 'product' of spirit and 'earth'.
The soul and spirit form a whole and belong to the heavenly realms, in contrast to the material body that has its appearance on earth.
(In the fulness of time this 'mortal body' of the Christian will also put on immortality, just like his soul has. 1Cor.15:54  But this aside.)

The three aspects of man, spirit, soul and body can be 'distinguished' and are mentioned by Paul in his epistle to the Thessalonians, in view of the total sanctification of man;  'whole spirit, and soul, and body'.  (1Th.5:23)
A peculiarity about this sanctification is also communicated to us by the Hebrew writer. It says that by his Word God is able to 'dividing asunder of soul and spirit'. (Hebr.4:12)
This is a great bless to us, because when an evil spirit has attached itself to our soul, the Lord Jesus will separate through His Word so that we become free from sin.
So sin always has its origin in the invisible world of soul and spirit(s).  When that 'inside' is cleaned, the true nature of man emerges.

God bless bro.

[Charlie744]

3 hours ago, Josheb said:

Was it established animals have souls? I missed that. Was there scriptural support for that too? 

Thanks Josheb... I am not sure! But in the earlier post I referenced Gen. 1:30 that speaks about Adam’s dominion over ..... WHEREIN THERE IS A LIVING SOUL. So it does not state animals have a living soul but “for those that...” 

Thanks for responding, Charlie 

[Frits]

2 hours ago, Josheb said:

Are you asserting we will be bodiless soul/spirits in the heavenly realms? 

No.

2 hours ago, Josheb said:

Do you believe a person's body can be removed from them and they remain human?

No.

2 hours ago, Josheb said:

Do you believe a person's soul can be removed from them and they remain human?

No.

2 hours ago, Josheb said:

Do you believe a person's spirit can be removed from them and they remain human? 

No.

[Alive]

13 minutes ago, Josheb said:

I don't read the phrase "wherein there is a living soul" in Genesis 1. What verse is that? Not only do I think proof-texting, or basing our views on a single verse good practice, my Bible shows Genesis 1:30 stating the following, 

Genesis 1:30 KJV
"And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so."

Genesis 1:30 NAS
"...and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food"; and it was so."

Genesis 1:30 ESV
"And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so." 

I'm not seeing, "wherein there is a living soul". From whence do those words come? English versions of Tanakh? Darby's translation? 

 

 

 

Perhaps this will be helpful....

[Frits]

29 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Go back and re-read you own posts to see what I'm talking about. Much of what you've posted is dualistic.

Josheb,

I see that you have not understood my explanation at all, is it that difficult for you? That's why I suggest that you go back to my previous post and indicate step by step what you don't understand.
You will see that if I have also answered your new questions, there is nothing dualistic in my explanation at all.
By the way, I notice that there is not a single Bible verse in your post. That's why I advise you to read a bit more in the Bible, so that you can formulate your questions more specifically on the basis of concrete texts and we both know what concerns you.

God bless you

[Alive]

6 minutes ago, Josheb said:

It's not. I don't mean to poopoo your effort, brother, but the meaning of nephesh has already been well established much earlier in the thread. Similarly, numerous problems with wanton interpretations f the term have also been established. Anyone using the term in a manner consistent with the term has a more veracious case than anyone and everyone using the term in a manner different than its inherent meaning. To place the phrase "wherein there is a living soul" in the place of nephesh is circular and begs the question. Depending on how that is intended it may also commit a fallacy of construction (from part to whole) in that a "soul" is not a component of the breath of life, or the fallacy of equivalence since the soul has been argued by some as a distinct constituent element unique to humans. 

From the very beginning I have asserted and made the case for the breath of life to be something all animals possess. If that is what the other poster means then I completely agree and will wholeheartedly commend that position but due to inconsistencies in the posts that's not clear. If so it is also unnecessary to say, "wherein there is a living soul," when the more accurate "breath of life" will suffice and have more meaning and veracity. 

Just saying.

Yup--I get it. I was offering that as a way to grasp why Charlie was saying what he did regarding animals and souls.

:-)

[David1701]

21 hours ago, Josheb said:

My bad. I mistyped something. The tripartite view hold the soul is the intersection of body and spirit (not body and soul). Three parts: body, soul, spirit. I'll go back and correct my post to alleviate any further confusion. thx

Have you read through the posts in this op? I know there are now 30 pages worth of posts but I ask because much of what was just posted has been discussed, some in the affirmative and some refuted. For example, a great number of posters have argued for exactly the opposite of what I just posted. You woud not say that but many here have, and while I tend to agree with you as far as that statement goes what you or I say and what we can prove with scripture or reason are two different things. Another, and perhaps more germane to the moment example is the fact a great deal of time was spent disproving the idea of bodiless souls or disembodied spirits yet you've state the soul/spirit can be separated from it. That's not what scripture teaches in 1 Cor. 15 when it states the "So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body..." 

There is a one-to-correlation between the body buried and the body raised. Different sort of body, but a body nonetheless. I'd like to avoid a rehash of the first 30 pages of posts if we can avoid that. 

I almost never have time to read all the posts in a large thread, so I read a few, then dive in! 

I'm unsure how you reach the conclusion that a man's soul/spirit cannot leave his body, from the verse about the resurrection.  Yes, there is a one-to-one correlation between dead bodies and resurrected bodies; but that makes no difference either way.

If you have been born again, then your spirit has already been resurrected (i.e. brought back to life), which is why it's only the body that is still in need of resurrection (this is the completion of our adoption into God's family, our spirit already having been adopted and we only need a fitting body to go with it). 

If you have died, without being born again, then it is only your body that will be resurrected (your spirit/soul will remain in its dead-to-God state and be reunited with the, now resurrected, body).