A Bible truth....

Originally posted by Rajk999
Their bodies died. Their souls did not die. Only God can kill the soul in hell.
The promise is the return of Christ to establish his kingdom.
Dont try to sidestep the issue. How can Christ say that Abraham saw his day (I would think its his arrival into this world) and was glad ?

actually its a common misconception. A soul, is the person, plus the breathe of life. A living breathing entity. When a person dies, the life force returns to God and the person dies. I have pointed this out on numerous occasions. In fact here is the very same post that i gave to Joseph, which he ignored, for it did not fit in with his world view.

Soul
Definition: In the Bible, “soul” is translated from the Hebrew nephesh and the Greek psykhe. Bible usage shows the soul to be a person or an animal or the life that a person or an animal enjoys. To many persons, however, “soul” means the immaterial or spirit part of a human being that survives the death of the physical body. Others understand it to be the principle of life. But these latter views are not Bible teachings.

What does the Bible say that helps us to understand what the soul is?
Gen. 2:7: “Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul.” (Notice that this does not say that man was given a soul but that he became a soul, a living person.) (The part of the Hebrew word here rendered “soul” is nephesh. KJ, AS, and Dy agree with that rendering. RS, JB, NAB read “being.” NE says “creature.” Kx reads “person.&rdquo😉

1 Cor. 15:45: “It is even so written: ‘The first man Adam became a living soul.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (So the Christian Greek Scriptures agree with the Hebrew Scriptures as to what the soul is.) (The Greek word here translated “soul” is the accusative case of psykhe. KJ, AS, Dy, JB, NAB, and Kx also read “soul.” RS, NE, and TEV say “being.&rdquo😉

1 Pet. 3:20: “In Noah’s days . . . a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.” (The Greek word here translated “souls” is psykhai
;, the plural form of psykhe;. KJ, AS, Dy, and Kx also read “souls.” JB and TEV say “people”; RS, NE, and NAB use “persons.&rdquo😉

Gen. 9:5: “Besides that, your blood of your souls [or, “lives”; Hebrew, from nephesh] shall I ask back.” (Here the soul is said to have blood.)

Josh. 11:11: “They went striking every soul [Hebrew, nephesh] that was in it with the edge of the sword.” (The soul is here shown to be something that can be touched by the sword, so these souls could not have been spirits.)

Where does the Bible say that animals are souls?
Gen. 1:20, 21, 24, 25: “God went on to say: ‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls* . . . ’ And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. . . . And God went on to say: ‘Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds . . . ’ And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind.” (*In Hebrew the word here is nephesh. Ro reads “soul.” Some translations use the rendering “creature[s].&rdquo😉

Lev. 24:17, 18: “In case a man strikes any soul [Hebrew, nephesh] of mankind fatally, he should be put to death without fail. And the fatal striker of the soul [Hebrew, ne′phesh] of a domestic animal should make compensation for it, soul for soul.” (Notice that the same Hebrew word for soul is applied to both mankind and animals.)

Rev. 16:3: “It became blood as of a dead man, and every living soul* died, yes, the things in the sea.” (Thus the Christian Greek Scriptures also show animals to be souls.) (*In Greek the word here is psykhe;. KJ, AS, and Dy render it “soul.” Some translators use the term “creature” or “thing.&rdquo😉

Do other scholars who are not Jehovah’s Witnesses acknowledge that this is what the Bible says the soul is?
“There is no dichotomy [division] of body and soul in the O[ld] T[estament]. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepes [nephesh], though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person. . . . The term [psykhe] is the N[ew] T[estament] word corresponding with nepes. It can mean the principle of life, life itself, or the living being.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 449, 450.

“The Hebrew term for ‘soul’ (nefesh, that which breathes) was used by Moses . . . , signifying an ‘animated being’ and applicable equally to nonhuman beings. . . . New Testament usage of psyche (‘soul&rsquo😉 was comparable to nefesh.”—The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1976), Macropædia, Vol. 15, p. 152.

“The belief that the soul continues its existence after the dissolution of the body is a matter of philosophical or theological speculation rather than of simple faith, and is accordingly nowhere expressly taught in Holy Scripture.”—The Jewish Encyclopedia (1910), Vol. VI, p. 564.

Can the human soul die?
Ezek. 18:4: “Look! All the soulsto me they belong. As the soul of the father so likewise the soul of the son to me they belong. The soul* that is sinning—it itself will die.” (*Hebrew reads “the nephesh.” KJ, AS, RS, NE, and Dy render it “the soul.” Some translations say “the man” or “the person.&rdquo😉

Matt. 10:28: “Do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul [or, “life”]; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” (*Greek has the accusative case of psykhe. KJ, AS, RS, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, and NAB all render it “soul.&rdquo😉

Acts 3:23: “Indeed, any soul [Greek, psykhe] that does not listen to that Prophet will be completely destroyed from among the people.”

Is the soul the same as the spirit?
Eccl. 12:7: “Then the dust returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit [or, life-force; Hebrew, ruach] itself returns to the true God who gave it.” (Notice that the Hebrew word for spirit is ruach; but the word translated soul is nephesh. The text does not mean that at death the spirit travels all the way to the personal presence of God; rather, any prospect for the person to live again rests with God. In similar usage, we may say that, if required payments are not made by the buyer of a piece of property, the property “returns” to its owner.) (KJ, AS, RS, NE, and Dy all here render ruach as “spirit.” NAB reads “life breath.&rdquo😉

Eccl. 3:19: “There is an eventuality as respects the sons of mankind and an eventuality as respects the beast, and they have the same eventuality. As the one dies, so the other dies; and they all have but one spirit [Hebrew, ruach].” (Thus both mankind and beasts are shown to have the same ruach, or spirit. For comments on verses 20, 21, see page 383.)

Heb. 4:12: “The word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul [Greek, psykhes; “life,” NE] and spirit [Greek, pneumatos], and of joints and their marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Observe that the Greek word for “spirit” is not the same as the word for “soul.&rdquo😉

Does conscious life continue for a person after the spirit leaves the body?
Ps. 146:4: “His spirit [Hebrew, from ruach] goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” (NAB, Ro, Yg, and Dy [145:4] here render ruach as “spirit.” Some translations say “breath.&rdquo😉 (Also Psalm 104:29)

What is the origin of Christendoms belief in an immaterial, immortal soul?
“The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the West was the soul established as a spiritual substance and a philosophical concept formed of its nature. . . . His [Augustine’s] doctrine . . . owed much (including some shortcomings) to Neoplatonism.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 452, 454.

“The concept of immortality is a product of Greek thinking, whereas the hope of a resurrection belongs to Jewish thought. . . . Following Alexander’s conquests Judaism gradually absorbed Greek concepts.”—Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la Bible (Valence, France; 1935), edited by Alexandre Westphal, Vol. 2, p. 557.

“Immortality of the soul is a Greek notion formed in ancient mystery cults and elaborated by the philosopher Plato.”—Presbyterian Life, May 1, 1970, p. 35.

“Do we believe that there is such a thing as death? . . . Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and the body is released from the soul, what is this but death? . . . And does the soul admit of death? No. Then the soul is immortal? Yes.”—Plato’s “Phaedo,” Secs. 64, 105, as published in Great Books of the Western World (1952), edited by R. M. Hutchins, Vol. 7, pp. 223, 245, 246.

“The problem of immortality, we have seen, engaged the serious attention of the Babylonian theologians. . . . Neither the people nor the leaders of religious thought ever faced the possibility of the total annihilation of what once was called into existence. Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556.

knock yourself out Raj i am going to sleep.

How about the thief on the cross next to Christ? Jesus said to Him "today you shall be with me in Paradise"? Kinda seems like a slam dunk to me!!?? Or Christ was lying to the thief? seems to me the first and personal too. Christ said you will be with me. Also Paul said to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Also I've been thinking about Enoch. Why did God take Him? He walked with God the scripture says. God was so pleased with Enoch that God took him. Which begs the question Where did God take Enoch? If just to a state of un-conscientiousness what would be the point? No God took Enoch to be with him I think. Also Elijah God took Him up it says in a fiery whirlwind and Chariot. My JW friends you guys really do deny the power of God. Jesus said your are sadly mistaken for God is not the God of the dead but of the living.

Matthew 22:32
I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."



Manny

Originally posted by galveston75
Back home from a couple days out of town.

Anyway the reason you can't accept a black and white scripture and then have to make an excuses for it, is because it can't jive with your beliefs of the immortal soul. So in the world your in as many others are, Bible must contradict itself alot.

Actually, as a Catholic, I have no problem with the idea that consciousness terminates after death (this, mind you, is different from the doctrine of the immateriality of the soul.) In fact, it makes a lot of sense to argue that consciousness does end after death because the whole person is both body and soul and so his personhood is severely damaged in death. I do not, however, think that this picture fits with Scripture.

So there you go, I do not have any vested interest in this debate. Your pithy ad hominem needs to be revised.

This is laughable, Robbie and Galvo. You have been refuted.
"Spirit" means that which is beyond the material.
I wouldn't be worried about proving that there is no conciosness after death. There is no conciousness during life, it seems. And yet we are concious. Even if we are only dreaming.
I think the way you two have been treated by the posters on this thread proves that God loves everyone. And that everyone has a conciosness that survives after death. Really. Its just beyond me how blinkered your views are. Then again the stupidity of humans is abundantly verifiable. I'll start with dealing with my own first.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
This is laughable, Robbie and Galvo. You have been refuted.
"Spirit" means that which is beyond the material.
I wouldn't be worried about proving that there is no conciosness after death. There is no conciousness during life, it seems. And yet we are concious. Even if we are only dreaming.
I think the way you two have been treated by the posters o ...[text shortened]... the stupidity of humans is abundantly verifiable. I'll start with dealing with my own first.

Actually Karoly Poly, you have no idea. Please tell the forum, the different nuances of the word 'spirit', as used in a biblical context. I can guarantee that you have no idea and that your unfounded statement should likewise be treated with a barge pole as having neither qualification nor foundation.

Originally posted by menace71
How about the thief on the cross next to Christ? Jesus said to Him "today you shall be with me in Paradise"? Kinda seems like a slam dunk to me!!?? Or Christ was lying to the thief? seems to me the first and personal too. Christ said you will be with me. Also Paul said to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Also I've been thinking a ...[text shortened]... AC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."



Manny

What is the origin of Christendoms belief in an immaterial, immortal soul?

“The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the West was the soul established as a spiritual substance and a philosophical concept formed of its nature. . . . His [Augustine’s] doctrine . . . owed much (including some shortcomings) to Neoplatonism.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 452, 454.

“The concept of immortality is a product of Greek thinking, whereas the hope of a resurrection belongs to Jewish thought. . . . Following Alexander’s conquests Judaism gradually absorbed Greek concepts.”—Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la Bible (Valence, France; 1935), edited by Alexandre Westphal, Vol. 2, p. 557.

“Immortality of the soul is a Greek notion formed in ancient mystery cults and elaborated by the philosopher Plato.”—Presbyterian Life, May 1, 1970, p. 35.

“Do we believe that there is such a thing as death? . . . Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and the body is released from the soul, what is this but death? . . . And does the soul admit of death? No. Then the soul is immortal? Yes.”—Plato’s “Phaedo,” Secs. 64, 105, as published in Great Books of the Western World (1952), edited by R. M. Hutchins, Vol. 7, pp. 223, 245, 246.

“The problem of immortality, we have seen, engaged the serious attention of the Babylonian theologians. . . . Neither the people nor the leaders of religious thought ever faced the possibility of the total annihilation of what once was called into existence. Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556.

What have you pagans to say for yourselves now?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Actually Karoly Poly, you have no idea. Please tell the forum, the different nuances of the word 'spirit', as used in a biblical context. I can guarantee that you have no idea and that your unfounded statement should likewise be treated with a barge pole as having neither qualification nor foundation.

Just cause someone defined any word some time in the past,(and was sometimes claimed to be inspired by God), does not mean their definition is better than mine.
How conveniant to use the distant past as a defense.
Nuances. Lol! Your reasoning techniques are laughable.
I have no idea indeed. I have a direct experience.
I offer my views in all sincerity.
What foundations do I need? what qualifications?
Surely I need answer only to God, who is unverifiable, and who will smite me if I am out of line. You think I'm scared?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What is the origin of Christendoms belief in an immaterial, immortal soul?

“The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the ...[text shortened]... ria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556.

What have you pagans to say for yourselves now?

What have you pagans to say for yourselves now?

Well, as I have explained in the past, I have significant problems with your reasoning -- basically, if there are similarities between pagan and Christian doctrines, you assume syncretism must have occurred. In fact, if you read early Christian sources, you will see that the Church Fathers had great reservations about the pagans and while acknowledging similarities with Platonic theory, they also pointed out many substantial differences. For example, Christians rejected the idea of a transmigration and reincarnation of souls and the pre-existence of souls. While appreciating Plato as a good philosopher, they were also keen to disagree with his belief that the body is a punishment -- instead affirming the belief in a bodily resurrection. The accusation of syncretism does not sit in this case.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]What have you pagans to say for yourselves now?

Well, as I have explained in the past, I have significant problems with your reasoning -- basically, if there are similarities between pagan and Christian doctrines, you assume syncretism must have occurred. In fact, if you read early Christian sources, you will see that the Church Fathers had great ...[text shortened]... ing the belief in a bodily resurrection. The accusation of syncretism does not sit in this case.[/b]

yes yes, and i have significant problems with the assertion of mere opinion masquerading as truth, fess up Conrau my man, is the idea pre Christian and of essentially pagan origin or not. Was it unkown to Judaism as has been proposed and essentially been adopted through Hellenistic culture.

I deliberately stuck a little titbit from the New catholic encyclopaedia for you to have a nibble upon, or should i say a 'rant', that it has been taken out of context, no doubt will follow the usual claims of misrepresentation, intellectual dishonesty and so forth

“There is no dichotomy [division] of body and soul in the Old Testament. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepes [nephesh], though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person. . . . The term [psykhe] is the New Testament word corresponding with nepes. It can mean the principle of life, life itself, or the living being.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 449, 450.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Just cause someone defined any word some time in the past,(and was sometimes claimed to be inspired by God), does not mean their definition is better than mine.
How conveniant to use the distant past as a defense.
Nuances. Lol! Your reasoning techniques are laughable.
I have no idea indeed. I have a direct experience.
I offer my views in all sinc ...[text shortened]... y to God, who is unverifiable, and who will smite me if I am out of line. You think I'm scared?

i rest my case, someone in a room full of mirrors should not pontificate to others in terms such as laughable, blinkered, refuted etc etc

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
actually its a common misconception. A soul, is the person, plus the breathe of life. A living breathing entity. When a person dies, the life force returns to God and the person dies. I have pointed this out on numerous occasions. In fact here is the very same post that i gave to Joseph, which he ignored, for it did not fit in with his world vi ...[text shortened]... Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556.

knock yourself out Raj i am going to sleep.

Im so impressed with your knowledge ... 🙂

Anyway Christ must have been mistaken when he said :

Mat 10:28 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.

In that one sentence he states --
body and soul are separate and distinct
man can kill only the body NOT THE SOUL
the soul survives after the death of the body
God only can kill both body and soul

Originally posted by Rajk999
Im so impressed with your knowledge ... 🙂

Anyway Christ must have been mistaken when he said :

Mat 10:28 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.

In that one sentence he states --
body and soul are separate and distinct
man can kill only th ...[text shortened]... OT THE SOUL
the soul survives after the death of the body
God only can kill both body and soul

Impressed? impressed? You should here my punk version of 'three little birds'. 🙂

Its already been taken care of about three zillion times. You see its not what Christ says that's the problem, its your, well for want of a better word, 'slant', on what he said that is really the problem, after all, its not like you people to to take a verse in total isolation to try to prove your point, is it. Oh well, sigh, seeing that you can do with every scrap of knowledge that comes your way, dig this Raji Paji pudding and pie,

“Do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.”

Regarding this text, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (edited by C. Brown, 1978, Vol. 3, p. 304) states: “Matt. 10:28 teaches not the potential immortality of the soul but the irreversibility of divine judgment on the unrepentant.”

Also, Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (revised by F. W. Gingrich and F. Danker, 1979, p. 95) gives the meaning “eternal death” with reference to the Greek phrase in Matthew 10:28 translated “destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” Thus, being consigned to Gehenna refers to utter destruction from which no resurrection is possible.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Impressed? impressed? You should here my punk version of 'three little birds'. 🙂

Its already been taken care of about three zillion times. You see its not what Christ says that's the problem, its your, well for want of a better word, 'slant', on what he said that is really the problem, after all, its not like you people to to take a verse in t ...[text shortened]... ng consigned to Gehenna refers to utter destruction from which no resurrection is possible.

You are a brave soul -- arguing with Christ? 🙂
Nothing you are saying refutes what Christ said, and His words are plain and clear:

1. body and soul are separate and distinct
2. man can kill only the body NOT THE SOUL
3. the soul survives after the death of the body
4. God only can kill both body and soul.

And I never said the soul is immortal. The soul dies, and God ONLY kills the soul.
Plus this doctrine as explained by Christ is further driven home by the example of the Rich man and Lazarus. Read Luke 16. Whether or not its a parable is irrelevant. The principle is explained with and illustration.

But I know how JWs think. Its all about loyalty to the teachings of the organisation. Christ and his teachings are not really important.

Originally posted by Rajk999
You are a brave soul -- arguing with Christ? 🙂
Nothing you are saying refutes what Christ said, and His words are plain and clear:

1. body and soul are separate and distinct
2. man can kill only the body NOT THE SOUL
3. the soul survives after the death of the body
4. God only can kill both body and soul.

And I never said the soul is immortal ...[text shortened]... loyalty to the teachings of the organisation. Christ and his teachings are not really important.

ok, first of all i have no problem with Christ words, secondly, Jehovahs Witnesses did not write this statement,

Regarding this text, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (edited by C. Brown, 1978, Vol. 3, p. 304) states: “Matt. 10:28 teaches not the potential immortality of the soul but the irreversibility of divine judgment on the unrepentant.”

thus as can easily be discerned Christ is not talking of the soul surviving death, but of 'the irreversibility of divine judgement'. Thus we are now able to understand that what Christ is referring to is that no one has the power to to take away the prospects of a resurrection hope, but God, Ge' henna being a figurative use of eternal destruction, from which a person cannot be redeemed.

The Rich man and Lazarus is a pure parable, which is hardly insignificant. Fact of the matter is, nothing survives death, the dead are conscious of nothing whatsoever.

Your attempts to discredit Jehovahs witnesses are mock worthy, for what is important is 'doing', the will of the father. Can you think of any other organisation, preaching and teaching, from house to house as Christ commands, no nether can I.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i rest my case, someone in a room full of mirrors should not pontificate to others in terms such as laughable, blinkered, refuted etc etc

Gosh , Robbie. I was wrong about you. I thought you were seriously interested in spirituality, which is in no way fully defined by any means.
They should start a separate "clown spirituality" forum for you.
they were serious questions. Perhaps if you had've answered them you may have may some inroads into my arguement.
So you rest your case? Oh thats good. At least I wont have to bother with you replying on this one.