Originally posted by JS357Because parts of man are all together part of our total humanity it is not easy to neatly divide them as say the parts of an automobile.
Discernment: The ability to judge well. I am discussing the reality of the situation. What do we refer to when we say "I"?
I am interested in what it is that says "I have a soul" or I have a body" or the various ways that people have of speaking of body, soul and spirit as if these entities are "other" to them. What is it that "has" a soul?
eg:
New In the minds of most Christians. It doesn't weigh on mine either, but I am interested.
To illustrate, I would like to use Galatians 2:20. Needess to say, this is the utterance of a man with considerable experience as a Christian. Let's rightly assume that his experience in Christian spirituality is very deep.
Here we go.
"I am crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.
I do not nullify the grace of God ..."
1. "I [ego] am crucified with Christ ".
Since believing into the living and available resurrected Christ, something of Paul's old Godless, indendent living has been "crucified" with Christ. Because he knows Christ something of his old way of living has been terminated.
Paul calls this "I".
2.) " ... and it is no longer I [ego] who live ..."
Paul says since the old I has been terminated - crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who lives.
Right here I admit that this seems like the annhilation of Paul's ego. Paul is gone. Paul is out of the picture. Paul the "I" has died along with Christ's crucifixion.
It seems here that Paul no longer exists and is replaced by Someone else.
3.) " ... it is not longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me ..."
Though it seems that Paul the "I" is terminated, Paul still talks about "me". Paul says "BUT ... it is Christ who lives in me."
So he is not altogether annhilated. He is now Paul, with his "me" which is Someone living in him - Christ lives in me.
This is not sentimental. This is actual because Christ is in His pneumatic form as "life giving Spirit" living in Paul's innermost being.
First Corinthains 15:45 speaks of Jesus Christ, in resurrection, and in a FORM in which He can dispense Himself into man to give divine life - "the last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit"
"It is not longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me ..."
Christ indwells the "me" of Paul. Paul apart from Christ, apart from God has been terminated. What now lives in Paul indwelt with by Christ. Christ in His form as "life giving Spirit" now lives in Paul.
This is not Christ replacing the ego of Paul. This is Paul the "I" being GRAFTED into Another One. Paul is grafted into Christ as a branch is grafted into a tree. Now Paul lives in union with Christ the resurrected Savior. Now Paul lives in a blended and mingled way with Christ having actually come into him.
4.) " ... it is Christ who lives in me; and the life which I [ego] now live in the flesh I live in faith ..."
Christ has not exactly replaced Paul. Christ has come to live in Paul. Paul now enjoys this relationship by faith. The life that he now lives is not independent from God. It is not independent from Christ. It is a life of a man grafted into Christ who BY FAITH allows this relationship to grow and flourish in his experience. He learns to live a life blended with Christ, not in sentamentality but in actuality.
5.) "and the life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself up for me."
Now part, I am not completely sure of Paul's meaning. One of two things must be meant.
A. He lives now by having Christ as the object of his faith.
B. He lives now by Christ's faith that he has access to.
I am not sure which or if both were Paul's thought. Anyway the marvelous inwelling of Jesus Christ in the Christians has taken place at the new birth. Post the new birth the Christian, like Paul, must learn to exercise faith in this mingling, this "organic" union of himself with the living Christ.
The Christian may have been USED to living apart from God as an unbeliever. Now he must see the revelation. He must grasp the truth that will set him freee. He has been crucified with Christ and now lives with Christ indwelling him.
She now lives a grafted life, a mingled life, a life of "I" who has Jesus Christ actually living within. This is of the supernatural.
6.) All the above concerning Paul being terminated in the independent ego with Christ, and now living with Christ indwelling him - is a matter of Paul taking advantage of "the grace of God".
"I do not nullify the grace of God."
The grace of God is more than simple "unmerited favor". The grace of God here includes the resurrected Person of Jesus Christ living a mingled life with the believer. Christ to be our everything. Christ to be our wisdom. Christ to be our endurance. Christ to be our guide, our counselor, our great physician, Prophet, Priest, King, Servant.
The grace of God Paul takes full advantage of. Paul does not neglect the grace of God. He does not nullify the grace of God by neglecting this revelation - Christ lives in him.
My final point here. We have seen that it is not easy to cleanly separate where the ego is. Is it destroyed? No, not really. Is it annhilated ? Not really.
It is Christ within the "me" of Paul now. And the phrase "the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself up for me" means, I think, more than just Jesus died for me on the cross.
Though Jesus did die a redemptive death for Paul, even more so Jesus gave Himself to BE our new "I" - the man mingled with God. He gave Himself up for me, makes it very personal. But it is even more personal that Christ is alive to BE Paul's new life -
" ... the life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."
Through this passage - Galatian 2:20, we can trace the mysterious way of the new birth and union with the real, living and available Son of God.
From Pagan Teaching to Church Doctrine
Does not the New Testament teach the immortality of the soul?’
Not at all. The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The N[ew] T[estament] remains faithful to this [Old Testament] understanding of death.” In other words, the “New Testament” teaches that the soul dies. Jesus Christ demonstrated that he did not believe that the soul was immortal. He asked: “Is it lawful on the sabbath to do a good deed or to do a bad deed, to save or to kill a soul?” (Mark 3:4) The Christian apostle Paul likewise endorsed the “Old Testament” view of the soul by quoting Genesis 2:7: “It is even so written: ‘The first man Adam became a living soul.’”—1 Corinthians 15:45.
How, then, did Platonic thinking become church doctrine? The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, by James Hastings, explains: “When the Christian gospel passed out through the gate of the Jewish synagogue into the arena of the Roman Empire, an idea of the soul fundamentally Hebrew was transferred into an environment of Greek thought, with no slight consequences in the process of adaptation.” Church teachers endeavored to make their message “intelligible to a Greek-thinking world” by using “the established terms and conceptions of Greek psychology.” Jewish theologians likewise began to demonstrate “strong influences of Platonism” in their writings.—Encyclopædia Judaica.
The Biblical teaching about the soul was thus discarded and replaced with a doctrine that was unmistakably pagan. This can in no way be justified on the grounds that doing so made Christianity more appealing to the masses. When preaching in Athens, the very heart of Greek culture, the apostle Paul did not teach the Platonic doctrine of the soul. On the contrary, he preached the Christian doctrine of the resurrection even though many of his Greek listeners found it hard to accept what he said.—Acts 17:22-32.
Indeed, the apostle Paul warned against any combining of Bible-based truth and paganism when he said: “What sharing does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Belial?” (2 Corinthians 6:14, 15) There can be no question that in allowing a pagan teaching to become one of the cornerstones of her philosophy and theology, Christendom has brought dishonor on God himself!
What does happen to the soul after death?
Since the soul is the person, clearly, the soul dies when the person dies. In other words, a dead person is a dead soul. Scores of scriptures confirm this. “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die,” says Ezekiel 18:4. At Judges 16:30 we read: “And Samson proceeded to say: ‘Let my soul die with the Philistines.’” Other scriptures show that souls can be cut off (Genesis 17:14), slain by the sword (Joshua 10:37), suffocated (Job 7:15), and drowned (Jonah 2:5). A deceased soul, or a dead soul, is a dead person.—Leviticus 19:28; 21:1, 11.
What, then, is the condition of dead souls? Simply stated, death is the opposite of life. All our senses are linked to our physical bodies. Our ability to see, hear, and think depends on the proper functioning of our eyes, ears, and brain. Without eyes we cannot see. Without ears we cannot hear. Without a brain we cannot do anything. When a person dies, all these physical organs cease to function. We cease to exist.
In harmony with this, Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 says: “As for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all . . . There is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol [the grave], the place to which you are going.” Similarly, Psalm 146:3, 4 states: “Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. His spirit [life force] goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” So when people (souls) die, they simply cease to exist.
Read the scriptures to see what the Bible says......................
It may be noted that in many texts reference is made to “my soul,” “his [or her] soul,” “your soul,” and so forth. This is because nephesh and psykhe; can mean one’s own self as a soul. The sense of the term can therefore often be expressed in English by use of personal pronouns. Thus Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (p. 627) shows that “my nephesh” means “I” (Ge 27:4, 25; Isa 1:14); “your [singular] nephesh” means “thou” or “you” (Ge 27:19, 31; Isa 43:4; 51:23); “his nephesh” means “he, himself” (Nu 30:2; Isa 53:10); “her nephesh” means “she, herself” (Nu 30:5-12), and so forth.
Again Jesus warned very clearly that after some time false teachings and beliefs would be allowed into the Christian congregations and it would bring in a paganistic influance.
The belief of an importal soul was one of many that were accepted and that originated in paganistic Egypt and Babylon long before the Bible was written.
Originally posted by galveston75beautiful, but they do not care if their doctrines are pagan, because of their traditions
It may be noted that in many texts reference is made to “my soul,” “his [or her] soul,” “your soul,” and so forth. This is because nephesh and psykhe; can mean one’s own self as a soul. The sense of the term can therefore often be expressed in English by use of personal pronouns. Thus Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (p. 627) shows that “my nephesh” ...[text shortened]... e, himself” (Nu 30:2; Isa 53:10); “her nephesh” means “she, herself” (Nu 30:5-12), and so forth.
have made the word of God invalid, their house is abandoned to them.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by jaywillThanks.
Because parts of man are all together part of our total humanity it is not easy to neatly divide them as say the parts of an automobile.
To illustrate, I would like to use [b]Galatians 2:20. Needess to say, this is the utterance of a man with considerable experience as a Christian. Let's rightly assume that his experience in Christian spirituality ...[text shortened]... iving and available Son of God.[/b]
5.) "and the life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself up for me."
Now part, I am not completely sure of Paul's meaning. One of two things must be meant.
A. He lives now by having Christ as the object of his faith.
B. He lives now by Christ's faith that he has access to.
I am not sure which or if both were Paul's thought. Anyway the marvelous inwelling of Jesus Christ in the Christians has taken place at the new birth. Post the new birth the Christian, like Paul, must learn to exercise faith in this mingling, this "organic" union of himself with the living Christ.
The Christian may have been USED to living apart from God as an unbeliever. Now he must see the revelation. He must grasp the truth that will set him freee. He has been crucified with Christ and now lives with Christ indwelling him.
She now lives a grafted life, a mingled life, a life of "I" who has Jesus Christ actually living within. This is of the supernatural.
I see another aspect of the verse: "The life I NOW live in the flesh" (emphasis added). One thing the sentence means (to me) is that Paul does not identify himself, his "I" with the flesh he now lives "in". "In" implies an abode or location metaphor, like a house or Houston.
But he says "It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me."
That is beyond the scope of my question on this thread.
Whatever Paul meant... here we are.
I will mull these ideas over. Thanks again.
Originally posted by galveston75Thats absolutely brilliant Galveston ! Thank you so much for all that cut and paste info. I read every word and Im now a converted person. I cannot thank you enough for opening my eyes to the truth.
Again Jesus warned very clearly that after some time false teachings and beliefs would be allowed into the Christian congregations and it would bring in a paganistic influance.
The belief of an importal soul was one of many that were accepted and that originated in paganistic Egypt and Babylon long before the Bible was written.
Originally posted by Rajk999If only your meant it.......
Thats absolutely brilliant Galveston ! Thank you so much for all that cut and paste info. I read every word and Im now a converted person. I cannot thank you enough for opening my eyes to the truth.
Crystal clear proof of it's pagan origin from other sourses then the JW's and proof of what a soul truly is from the Bible but still you don't see it. Why is that? You need to ask God why.....
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by Rajk999And thank you raj, for restricting your comments to theists.
Thats absolutely brilliant Galveston ! Thank you so much for all that cut and paste info. I read every word and Im now a converted person. I cannot thank you enough for opening my eyes to the truth.
Originally posted by galveston75Yes its true, nothing is defined in clear and unequivocal terms, one can read any of the
They like the mystery of it I guess just like the trinity.
posts and its a pile of sheer speculative attempts to grasp at formless entities, wispy
and ethereal assertions pass as profundity, intangibility as cleverness. Try to grasp at
the substance and it disintegrates in your hand like sand falling through ones fingers.
Its strange, really strange.
Originally posted by galveston75
What does happen to the soul after death?
Since the soul is the person, clearly, the soul dies when the person dies. In other words, a dead person is a dead soul. Scores of scriptures confirm this. “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die,” says Ezekiel 18:4. At Judges 16:30 we read: “And Samson proceeded to say: ‘Let my soul die with the Philis ...[text shortened]... simply cease to exist.
Read the scriptures to see what the Bible says......................
Since the soul is the person, clearly, the soul dies when the person dies. In other words, a dead person is a dead soul. Scores of scriptures confirm this. “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die,” says Ezekiel 18:4. At Judges 16:30 we read: “And Samson proceeded to say: ‘Let my soul die with the Philistines.’” Other scriptures show that souls can be cut off (Genesis 17:14), slain by the sword (Joshua 10:37), suffocated (Job 7:15), and drowned (Jonah 2:5). A deceased soul, or a dead soul, is a dead person.—Leviticus 19:28; 21:1, 11.
You are only partially right. You are not right in a full way. And now to prove this without a shadow of doubt. You have to depend on the Old Testament always to establish your teaching. You cannot come to the New Testament to verify your concept.
"Therefore being always of good couragee and knowing that while we are at home in the body, we are abread from the Lord ... We are od good courage then and are well pleased rather to be abroad from the body and at home with the Lord." (2 Cor. 5:6,8)
If when the apostle's BODY is killed their SOUL becomes non-existent, then they COULD NOT be "abroad from the body and at home with the Lord".
According to your teaching there NO being abroad from the body at all. According to you when the body is dead there is nothing LEFT to be "abroad from the body" let alone for that one to be at home with the Lord.
According to your teaching for the body to be killed there EXISTS NOTHING to be "abroad from the body". Whatever was in the body was made non-existent with the death of the body, according to your doctrine.
Paul, however, says "While we are at home in the body" [PHYSICALLY ALIVE] " we are abroad from the Lord." But while we Christians are "abroad from the body" [PHYSICALLY DEAD] we can be "at home with the Lord".
Do not try to sidetract the argument with points about souls not going to heaven. That is IRRELEVANT to the point. It doesn't matter. And it doesn't say there "in Heaven". It simply says "at home with the Lord".
There are other places that the soul of man could be absent from the physically killed body yet "at home with the Lord". We don't even have to know the details of where that is. All that is necessary to defeat your concept is to take Paul's word.
When the physical body is dead, there still exists something of the Christian to be at home with the Lord. If when the body was killed there was nothing LEFT of the Christian, there would be NOTHING to be "at home with the Lord" .
Furthermore, your concept directly contradicts Christ's teaching from Luke 12.
Man has authority to kill the body but the soul is left unkilled. God's authority goes beyond that. He can destroy the soul AFTER the body has been killed.
Now I know you pointed out some verses in the Old Testament about the souls being killed. But in the fuller study of ALL the Scripture says this cannot mean the annhilation of the soul into non-existence.
But in the progressive revelation of the Bible, certainly we may consider Samson dying as his SOUL dieing. You cannot use that verse to make Jesus WRONG in Luke 12:5.
The earlier word of the Old Testament in the progressive revelation has to be evaluated through the lense of the latter revelation of the New Testament.
In Ecclesiates "UNDER THE SUN" - sure, when a man dies it is ALL OVER. He is gone, from the standpoint of those left living. All true. To those left living there is no praise or rejoicing in death.
You cannot use Ecclesiates to prove Jesus wrong in Luke 12:5 in the latter and more complete revelation of the Bible.
Why should God be feared above man ? Because man can only kill the body and can do nothing else to that man's soul. God, on the other hand, still can inflict destruction upon the man's soul AFTER his body is killed.
What, then, is the condition of dead souls? Simply stated, death is the opposite of life.
In Second Corinthians the opposite of being at home in the physical body is not NONEXISTENCE to the Christian. The opposite is to be at home with the Lord.
All our senses are linked to our physical bodies. Our ability to see, hear, and think depends on the proper functioning of our eyes, ears, and brain. Without eyes we cannot see. Without ears we cannot hear. Without a brain we cannot do anything. When a person dies, all these physical organs cease to function. We cease to exist.
Logically to what we are familar with this seems reliable. However, to agree with it entirely is to say Christ knows LESS than we do. For Christ warns sturnly that man can only kill the body. God can go further and destroy the soul after the body is killed.
And He may choose NOT to destroy that soul of the one who has been killed by man. And certainly this is Paul's thought in Second Corinthians.
"We are of good courage then and are well pleased rather to be abroad from the body (PHYSICALLY DEAD) and at home with the Lord (Their immaterial part of their being in existence and with the Lord ).
Again, in Philippians, the very same thought:
"But I am constrained between the two, having the desire to depart (PHYSICALL DIE) and be with Christ, for this is better.
But to remain in the flesh [PHYSICALLY ALIVE] is more necessary for your sake.
And being confident of this, I know that I will remain [REMAIN PHYSICALLY ALIVE RATHER THAN DEPART TO EXIST BEING WITH THE LORD] and continue with you all for your progress and joy of faith." (Phil. 1:23-25)
Paraphrased - "Now I am between two decisions - to be alive and continue to minister to you for your benefit OR to DIE and in my immaterial part, my soul and spirit, be with the Lord. To die and be with the Lord is better. But I will decide rather to continue living physically for the sake of you all."
In other words, just as he taught in Second Corinthians, for the Christian apostles - at home in the body = away from the Lord. Away from the body = at home with the Lord.
Don't try to escape through little side issues which only are distractions to the main point.