What is a "soul?"

[Retrobyter]

23 hours ago, Josheb said:

Thank you for that, Retro. Thank you for answering the questions asked. Much appreciated. I completely agree with this answer. 

Now let's take a look at what this means because one of the most prevalent views of the "tripartite man" take Genesis 2:7 and reads it to say God breathing His spirit into the pile of earth dust He'd formed and the first man became a living soul.  This is predominantly construed from the King James version. 

But that is not what the Hebrew actually says; that's not what the Hebrew teaches us. 

Yes! 

And as a consequence we end up with preachers and teaches teaching the model of the now-deleted graphic illustrating the soul is the intersection of spirit and body. That teaching leads to posters posting it in discussion boards where the less informed and less mature don't test it, and/or accept it uncritically. 

 

Thank you for that information and the concise responsiveness to answers to the questions asked. I hope others verify that content for themselves. 

Shalom, Josheb.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate everything you said up to this point. Right on!

23 hours ago, Josheb said:

God breathed His life-giving breath into the pile of earth dust He'd formed and the first man became a living being.

This is true ...

23 hours ago, Josheb said:

That living being has a tripartite constitution made up of body, soul, and spirit but those constituent elements cannot be separated without the loss of the whole and this is just as true on this side of the grave as it is on the other side of resurrection. We are "sown" in a corruptible mortal body of flesh but will be raised in an incorruptible and immortal spiritual body. 

That is the scripturally proper way to understand our make up. 

But, THIS is suspect! How do you bridge the gap between [the practical definitions and the simple interpretations of these Hebrew words "nefesh" and "ruwach"]  and  [the theological MISTAKE of "a tripartite constitution made up of body, soul, and spirit] that uses English words that are SUPPOSED to be the same as their Hebrew counterparts and yet are defined and used so DIFFERENTLY?"

[David1701]

On 11/26/2020 at 5:52 PM, Josheb said:

Thank you for that, Retro. Thank you for answering the questions asked. Much appreciated. I completely agree with this answer. 

Now let's take a look at what this means because one of the most prevalent views of the "tripartite man" take Genesis 2:7 and reads it to say God breathing His spirit into the pile of earth dust He'd formed and the first man became a living soul.  This is predominantly construed from the King James version. 

But that is not what the Hebrew actually says; that's not what the Hebrew teaches us. 

Yes! 

And as a consequence we end up with preachers and teaches teaching the model of the now-deleted graphic illustrating the soul is the intersection of spirit and body. That teaching leads to posters posting it in discussion boards where the less informed and less mature don't test it, and/or accept it uncritically. 

 

Thank you for that information and the concise responsiveness to answers to the questions asked. I hope others verify that content for themselves. 

 

 

God breathed His life-giving breath into the pile of earth dust He'd formed and the first man became a living being. That living being has a tripartite constitution made up of body, soul, and spirit but those constituent elements cannot be separated without the loss of the whole and this is just as true on this side of the grave as it is on the other side of resurrection. We are "sown" in a corruptible mortal body of flesh but will be raised in an incorruptible and immortal spiritual body. 

That is the scripturally proper way to understand our make up. 

 

Quote

That living being has a tripartite constitution made up of body, soul, and spirit but those constituent elements cannot be separated without the loss of the whole and this is just as true on this side of the grave as it is on the other side of resurrection.

Where, in the Bible, do you get this from?

Jesus' body was dead, in the tomb; but where was his soul/spirit at the time?  He was preaching in Hades...

[David1701]

1 minute ago, Josheb said:

His body was not in the tomb. Where do you get that from??!?? 

It is quite clear Jesus was raise in a body, or with a body. His body was different but it was, nonetheless, a body! 

 

I was referring to Jesus' physical body, which was certainly in the tomb.  It was that same body which was resurrected, on the third day (now imperishable) and walked out of the tomb, once the stone had been rolled away.

The question is, where was Jesus's soul/spirit, while his physical body was lying dead, in the tomb?  The spirit/soul must have a kind of spirit-body; but that was not what I was referring to.

Quote

 

From where did you get that? For the one single verse that says he led captives free? That's not what 1 Peter 3:19 actually states. That's not what 1 Peter 4:6 actually states, either. From where did you actually get that claim? 

 

Remember: Jesus taught in Aramaic, not Greek. We don't actually know the actual words he used. We know only what the translations of the men who wrote in Greek used - or - what the Greek translations used. Furthermore, while Jesus may or may not have actually used the terms "sheol," Hell," and/or "Hades," these are all pagan concepts that Jesus taught AGAINST! 

 

The Holy Spirit inspired the Hebrew/Aramaic (OT) and Greek (NT) autographs, so we know that they are true and accurate, no matter what language the Lord spoke in.  This necessarily includes the use of Sheol, Hades and Gehenna.

Quote

What Jesus taught was the kingdom of God/heaven where the dead do know something. Solomon taught the dead know nothing.

Solomon was referring to the physically dead, in the grave.  Jesus was referring to the spiritually alive (although physically dead), in the kingdom of God.  This actually supports the temporary separation of physical body and spirit/soul.

Quote

 

Hellenistic Judaism held to a Greek-influenced view of the afterlife that was informed by pagan mythologies but Jesus taught there is only one God and He is Master of both the living AND the dead - there's no lesser gods ruling and underworld. 

So where did you get these ideas? 

 

Indeed there is only one God and he is Lord over all; but, who is in charge of the kingdom of darkness?  That would be the devil, with demons under him.  They are subject to God's sovereignty, of course (as demonstrated in Job and many other places).

Quote

 

That's where I get that from. There is a one-to-one correlation between the body buried and the body raised. No disembodied spirits and I have asked anyone to show me an example of a disembodied spirit and none have proven such a thing exists in scripture! It is always an assumption, not something scripture anywhere actually states and in nearly every occasion scripture gives us statements leading us to necessarily conclude a body exists, such is the case with the tormented man who has eyes, fingers, and a tongue who can be satiated by water. 

That's where I get this. 

 

I am referring to a temporary separation of the physical, perishable body from the soul/spirit (which must have its own body of some kind).

Quote

So where did you get the idea Jesus' body was sitting in the tomb while his spirit was someplace else? Where did you get the idea his spirit had left his body and was walking around as a disembodied spirit? Where did you get the idea Hades is literal; that a paganism is what God wants us to understand? 

Hades means the abode of the dead.  For the physical body, this is the grave; for the spirit/soul, this is a temporary place, pending heaven or Gehenna.

[Retrobyter]

On 11/27/2020 at 5:19 PM, Josheb said:

His body was not in the tomb. Where do you get that from??!?? 

It is quite clear Jesus was raise in a body, or with a body. His body was different but it was, nonetheless, a body! 

Shalom, Josheb.

I believe that David was just commenting on when Yeshua` ("Jesus") was dead for the 3 days and 3 nights. During that time, Yeshua`s body WAS in the tomb.

He wasn't talking (as far as I can see) about during the Resurrection. His body at the moment of Resurrection did NOT REMAIN in the tomb, but was indeed raised to life.

Hope this clears it up.

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, all.

While the topic was temporarily closed for review, Josheb and I continued the posts for a while in PMs. With his consent, I'm including those two comments here for others to see, if they've been following along:

Quote

POST 1 by me on Sunday 11/29/20 at 1:33 AM:

Shalom, Josheb.

Sorry to have to do this the hard way, but "Alive" closed the topic.

You said, 

I believe I have already explained this in several of my preceding posts both here in this op and in the one on "the make up of man". The key is noting 1) how scripture always assigns bodies to humans, whether living here on earth or on the  other side of resurrection (or in the intermediate "holding" state some believe but to which I do not subscribe), and 2) how scripture never provides an example or precedent of a bodiless human.

See, this makes sense to me, and I agree with you about this take, as long as "the other side of resurrection" is the Millennium and followed by the Eternal State in which we live upon the New Earth and within the New Jerusalem that descends to that New Earth.

You then said,

This is understood secularly through the very simple reality: if is can be seen then it has mass. That fact doesn't come with a neon sign in scripture because it should be obvious. This is also evident in the appeals to quantum mechanics one poster used (even though I wonder how well that was understood as an analogy. 

Simply put, if one part of the human is removed the whole human ceases to exist. That's true if we remove his/her body. That's true if we remove his soul. That's true if we remove his spirit. That's not my opinion, that's what the whole of scripture teaches when we examine it in depth in its entirety, as we do - for example - when we look at the original language. In the OT "soul" and "spirit" are often used interchangedly but it doesn't appear to some - at least not if the posts are any evidence - this is an indication of their unified and/or noumenous nature. 

Hope that answers the question. If not clarify it for me and I'll try again. 

For me, this is confusion. See, we ARE our bodies; we don't HAVE bodies. Furthermore, the "soul" is not something different than the "air-breathing body!" And, the "spirit" is just the "wind" we produce in blowing. It's just an impersonal movement of air! IMO, we are NOT tripartite! We are a one-part creature. We live because of conception and growth and beginning to breathe on our own after birth. When we die, we give up our breath and cease being an air-breathing body. We cease being a "soul."

TEMPORARILY, that is! In the Resurrection, we - the bodies that we are - shall be raised to life again, being incorruptible and immortal this time, and will live forever as the immortal air-breathers - the immortal "souls" - God intended for Adam and Chavah ("Eve") to live, back in Genesis before the Fall.

This is why I questioned your "tripartite view." It's inconsistent with your first paragraph.

Quote

POST 2 by Josheb on Sunday 11/29/20 at 10:33 AM:

 

I suggest the confusion lies in the neglected middle of "are" and "have." They are not mutually exclusive conditions. The body of flesh and blood gets transformed; it is therefore something we have, not just are. I have an intellect but I am not intellect. I have emotion but am not emotion. But neither am I human without my intellect and affect. They are necessary constituent elements of my being so despite what I just wrote the reality is I am in fact intellect, emotion, and volition - they are simply not the whole of me. 

This "wind" or "air" is an incorrect view of God's life-giving breath. There is nothing I am aware of that says God does not continue to give life to the immortals on the other end of resurrection. Our resurrection is dependent upon the resurrection which is not just an event; it is a person. Furthermore, to the degree that there are animals living in the new heavens and earth God continues to give and sustain life... through His "breath." Do you view this breath literally? Why? Does God have form? Is He literally pursing His lips and literally exhaling literal air? 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Retrobyter
to add dates and times of the posts

[Alive]

Anecdotal--my body is not me.

Long story short—a blood test returned a Hep C viral load that was through the roof. The combination therapy they gave me is infamous now and off the market. It was worse than the symptoms.

I have had since that time, anxiety. Sometimes pretty severe.

There is no need for an external trigger, although those can work to aggravate.

The Lord showed me one day that when that comes over me, that it is not me, but only a chemical thing in the brain. He gave me an illustration that may be of some help.

Have you ever body surfed in the ocean or just walked out through the waves?

Anyway—if when a wave comes at you as if to bowl you over and instead of standing there—you duck under it and let it pass over you—you don’t experience the force of that wave. It doesn’t knock you over.

The Lord showed that in such times when the anxiety comes on like a wave; know two things. It is not you, but only a chemical thing in your brain. And also know that ducking under the wave is analogous to being under that forceful wave and in the quiet place of your Lord.

[enoob57]

22 minutes ago, Alive said:

Anecdotal--my body is not me.

Long story short—a blood test returned a Hep C viral load that was through the roof. The combination therapy they gave me is infamous now and off the market. It was worse than the symptoms.

I went through that also... it was a bummer and didn't work! The new stuff was out and went through a series with it and no ill affects and it worked... whew praise the Lord 

[Alive]

3 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

I went through that also... it was a bummer and didn't work! The new stuff was out and went through a series with it and no ill affects and it worked... whew praise the Lord 

Indeed! Praise the Lord. I am so glad for you.

As an unintentional side affect--I learned to appreciatee the mentrual cycles of women. Chemicals. The LOrd is gracious and merciful.

;-)

[David1701]

On 11/29/2020 at 4:57 PM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Josheb.

I believe that David was just commenting on when Yeshua` ("Jesus") was dead for the 3 days and 3 nights. During that time, Yeshua`s body WAS in the tomb.

He wasn't talking (as far as I can see) about during the Resurrection. His body at the moment of Resurrection did NOT REMAIN in the tomb, but was indeed raised to life.

Hope this clears it up.

Yes; when Jesus was resurrected, his body left the tomb (not only his body of course, but all of Him).

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Josheb.

You said, 

Quote

 

I suggest the confusion lies in the neglected middle of "are" and "have." They are not mutually exclusive conditions. The body of flesh and blood gets transformed; it is therefore something we have, not just are. I have an intellect but I am not intellect. I have emotion but am not emotion. But neither am I human without my intellect and affect. They are necessary constituent elements of my being so despite what I just wrote the reality is I am in fact intellect, emotion, and volition - they are simply not the whole of me. 

This "wind" or "air" is an incorrect view of God's life-giving breath. There is nothing I am aware of that says God does not continue to give life to the immortals on the other end of resurrection. Our resurrection is dependent upon the resurrection which is not just an event; it is a person. Furthermore, to the degree that there are animals living in the new heavens and earth God continues to give and sustain life... through His "breath." Do you view this breath literally? Why? Does God have form? Is He literally pursing His lips and literally exhaling literal air? 

 

What could possibly exist between "are and "have?" You either "are" or you "aren't!" Those ARE INDEED mutually exclusive! If one merely "has" a body, then he is NOT the body itself! To use the word "has" (or "have")  implies OWNERSHIP and POSSESSION! It's thinking of the body as just another vehicle, like a car! If one can "own" something and "take possession" of something, then it is also possible NOT to "own" it or "have it in one's possession!" This is not found in the Scriptures. NO ONE has EVER been described as not "having" their body! That is a purely "THEOLOGICAL" (or rather, PHILOSOPHICAL) position!

Even Yeshua`s parable of the rich man and Lazarus doesn't mention such a state! Rather, the rich man is said to have "eyes," a "tongue," and the ability to feel pain, suggesting a nervous system! And, it is implied within the parable that the rich man can hear a response suggesting ears! He has a mouth and can communicate with Avraham. 

Lazarus, or rather, Eleazar, is said to have a "finger" and the ability to be mobile, suggesting a means of normal locomotion, which would imply legs and feet!

They both had their members as well as their consciousness! They were physically ALIVE! They were both LIVING BODIES! We're not being shown a scene from "hell" or "Hades," we are seeing a scene from the RESURRECTION of the unjust that will accompany the Great White Throne Judgment! It's not "Hades," as the place of death and punishment, depicted in the Greek (and Roman) mythologies; it's "hadees," the Greek word that means the "unseen" - "not-seen" - "no-longer-able-to-be-seen" - which is a close approximation of the Hebrew word "sh'owl," which means "asked [about]!"

Down through the years, I've heard MANY sermons on Luke 16, and ALL of them conclude that, since this was a scene from "hell," then we have some sort of pseudo body in "hell," a "spiritual" body or "spirit" body. But, this is ALL fiction!

The truth is that, in the parable, that is, in the future, God doesn't always tell the unjust the whole picture right away. He thought someone could "go back" and tell his brothers about the Lake of Fire, but he didn't know that his brothers, as he remembered them, were long ago in the past! THAT'S the piece that is missing from the story. Avraham didn't tell him, either. He just said, "Eh, they have Mosheh (the writings of "Moses," the Torah or Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible) and the navi'iym (the prophets), together they make up the greater share of the Tanakh, the Old Testament, the Bible that was extant in the 1st Century A.D.). If they won't hear them, they won't listen to a man coming back from the dead, either!"

Let's be honest here: The myth of the "eternal soul" that survives death and "goes to Heaven when we die" is just so well-ingrained in our thought-patterns, that we can't see it any other way ... at first. However, the Truth is out there, if one is willing to investigate it further. Yeshua` the Messiah of God is the ONLY ONE who currently is an immortal soul, because He was raised from the dead INCORRUPTIBLE and IMMORTAL, as THE Firstfruits of the Resurrection, unlike resurrections before Him! He is now an incorruptible, immortal. air-breathing Person, as we shall be in the First (General) Resurrection!

And, even when one accepts the view that we ARE souls because we ARE air-breathing persons, it's VERY HARD to maintain that acceptance until it becomes ingrained and fixed both in our way of thinking and in our words. It's like learning a new habit; it TAKES TIME to lock it into our thinking! It's not impossible to come to that point; however, it is VERY DIFFICULT to conquer the old way of thinking and speaking. It's next to IMPOSSIBLE to overcome the old ways if one is bombarded with the old speech every day!

I should add that, for me, it took a sabbatical to ingrain it into my thinking. You have to be conscious of all that is said around you, too, and react in your own mind when you hear something contrary to the pre-Hellenistic influence on the churches in Asia.

Edited December 2, 2020 by Retrobyter
to add a thought