Therefore, what consensus is there for any evidence for a soul(s)? As the existence of the soul is very central to any belief or religion.
(my first post
Moderator: Moderators
I see where you are coming from, but do not draw your conclusion.marco wrote:I quoted the passage.Checkpoint wrote: [Replying to post 77 by marco]
He did? Where?Jesus referred to the body becoming a spirit on death.
In Luke 24:39 we have Christ saying:
King James Bible:
"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. "
Jesus defines the properties of a spirit in illustrating that his is a real body. This supports the idea that Christ accepted that, after death, the spirit survives as a ghost perhaps. He does not dismiss this idea as nonsense.
I have no idea what you mean. The only extraction I take is that Christ talked about spirits, meaning they could have been taken as a possible explanation for his appearance. I am not claiming he actually was a spirit; apparently he had a glorified body. And Christ explains he wasn't a spirit for a spirit has no flesh.Checkpoint wrote:I see where you are coming from, but do not draw your conclusion.marco wrote:I quoted the passage.Checkpoint wrote: [Replying to post 77 by marco]
He did? Where?Jesus referred to the body becoming a spirit on death.
In Luke 24:39 we have Christ saying:
King James Bible:
"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. "
Jesus defines the properties of a spirit in illustrating that his is a real body. This supports the idea that Christ accepted that, after death, the spirit survives as a ghost perhaps. He does not dismiss this idea as nonsense.
His resurrection took place three days after he died, not at his death.
It was not to heaven or hell, but to life from death.
marco wrote:
Earlier, you wrote:
"There is no evidence bibilcally that people have something invisible part of them inside their bodies that continues to live after they die. That is something many churches adopted from Greek philosophers."
If you are now denying this sentence, that's okay.
I never confuse the two terms because the bible uses the two words to refer to two different things neither of which is an invisible part of the person that escapes his body at death so that his consciousness continues to exist after "death" in another form YOU are the one that seems to think they are synonyms (indeed you don't even seem to be aware when you interchange the two words).marco wrote:By referring to this something as "soul" rather than "spirit" we don't change the idea that something spiritual survives the body.
How would I if you don't explain yourself logically. In words.marco wrote: This is an old argument and the picture you offered is not a biblical reference. You know what my point is.
If you want to dispute interpretation that's fine, feel free to do so with anyone interested enough in your opinion to enter into an exchange with you, but my point was about how how the words are written on the page. Do you want to continue to suggest I am wrong when I say the two words ("soul" and "spirit") are not the same in Hebrew?marco wrote:So you say, in order to maintain some semblance of correctness.JehovahsWitness wrote:
The word under discussion is soul. You posted a scripture that doesn't even mention the world "soul". "soul" and "spirit" are not the same words.
The soul is a physical breathing person or animal, made up solely of a physical body animated by the power of active force from God. When the body dies there is no part of a person that "survives". His life ends, his body decomposses and the person ceases to exist.dio9 wrote: Still no one here has said what a soul is

It would have been simpler to say you didn't understand the point I was making. Here it is:JehovahsWitness wrote:
The idea that something spiritual "survives" the body is completely unbiblical.