What is a soul?

[Skrill]

It is fact that the Physical Brain controls memories, personality. Thousands of other actions are all controlled by our nervous system, which is managed by our brains.

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 )

[JehovahsWitness]

Paul draws a distinction between our earthly body and our heavenly body, but it is not clear to me what exactly this means.

Well then its probably best you don't attempt to use what he said to try and support your point. After all how much confidence would you have in a doctor that pointed to his medical journal and said, I'll be treating you for your condition, I think its mentioned here "but it is not clear to me what exactly this means"?

Your honesty is to be commended but that doesn't mean your explanation should be trusted.

JW

[Monta]

[Replying to post 131 by JehovahsWitness]

I think hoghead meant it more as a question.

I wouldn't know where to find the refference but my basic understanding
is that the physical body is of natural substances alone and the spiritual body
of spiritual substances alone.

We are spiritual beings and temporary physical body is provided us by God
in order for us to experience earthly life.

When physical body is no longer of use to the spiritual body they get seperated; physical body dies and the spiritual body lives to eternity.

[JehovahsWitness]

my basic understanding is that the physical body is of natural substances alone and the spiritual body of spiritual substances alone.

We are spiritual beings and temporary physical body is provided us by God in order for us to experience earthly life.

Have you not just contradicted yourself? You begin by saying there are spiritual bodies of spiritual substances ALONE and the same for physical bodies and then go on to say that we are both.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but you seemed to be suggesting that there are two types of bodies, that are competely of different substances while at the same time saying that humans are of both.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 96 by JehovahsWitness]

What we translate as "soul' and "spirit" are essentially equivalent terms in Scripture, each having a number of meanings. Sometimes soul means the whole person, sometimes the psyche. Spirit and psyche also have largely equivalent meanings. The spirit can denote emotional conditions of a person, as in Num. 14:24. In the NT, "spirit" sometimes refers to the higher aspirations of the soul.

I realize the WatchTower Society insists that soul and spirit are very different, with spirit denoting an impersonal, mechanical kind of energy. But that is not al all what Scripture has in mind. God's Spirit, for example, is God's love, not something cold and impersonal.

It is not only the WTS that realizes that "soul" and "spirit" are very different. Many other sources have been quoted here. I guess you missed them. Scripture DOES INDEED have in mind that the "spirit" that keeps a living thing living is an impersonal kind of energy, though given by a very warm God. "Soul" has been demonstrably shown to be the whole person, not something that resides within a person for awhile and then consciously escapes at death to some other realm.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim]

Spirit, in Scripture, means "breath." And "breath" is a very physical reality.

The Bible attributes a body to the resurrected Christ. Thomas saw the holes in his hands.

Paul, in I Cor. 15, sys we will have have a spiritual body (vs. 44). "There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies " (vs. 40).

The Incarnation itself is a powerful revelation that God has a body If the Incarnation is at all revelatory, then it is revelatory of God,s general MO with creation, and that means God is incarnate throughout the whole of creation. IN addition, the Bible speaks of God as omnipresent (Her. 23:23-24) and all inclusive, as in I Cor. 15:28. When Paul says that our lives are hind in God, I think that's what he means.

The fact the Bible attributes many body parts to God means that the ancient Hebrews thought of God as embodied. If such biblical metaphors are to have any real meaning, they must somehow fit the actual reality of God.

The ancient Greeks were responsible for the spirit-matter or mind-body dualism. Plato, for example, saw the world of time, change, and matter as inherently evil, a big illusion. The "really real," the truly divine was a wholly immaterial, static realm of existence. By "immaterial," I mean wholly simple, without extension.

The early church incorporated much Hellenic philosophy into its doctrine of God. Consequently, the classical Christian model of God argued that God is void of body, parts, passions, compassion, wholly simple, wholly immutable, and outside the universe. But that definitely is not the biblical view. Indeed, the Bible pronounces the physical world as something good.

Yes, the biblical writers did anthropomorphize God, and with good reason. All our knowing is analogous knowing. We generalize from the familiar to the unfamiliar. If there is one thing we know best, it is human existence. Unless, there is an analogy, a genuine likeness between ourselves and the rest of reality, including God, we haven't got an inkling what's going on, can know nothing. Anthropomorphizing and projection are not the problems, they are the solutions.

There is something more to "the breath of life" than something merely "physical." You could breathe into some dead person's nostrils all day and they wouldn't come back to life. Jehovah has to be involved. His power has to be involved....His will that the person become alive.

The Bible does NOT attribute a physical body to the risen Christ. He would be taking back his sacrifice if he was raised in his former physical body. The Scriptures clearly say that he was raised as a spirit. (I Peter 3:18,19; I Corinthians 15:45) You fail to recall that when Jesus suddenly appeared in the midst of the Apostles, the doors had been locked. Did he walk through a locked door with a physical body? I don't think so. He materialized one when he was inside the room (just as angels had done in previous times to appear to Abraham and Lot, etc.).

In I Corinthians 15, Paul speaks of the spirit bodies he and the other co-rulers with Christ will have in heaven. The co-rulers will not be made up of ALL Christians. What sense is there in having billions of former humans ruling over the earth? Most Christians will retain their physical bodies and live on a paradise Earth forever.

(And what is the scripture you cited as Her. 23:23-24? I can't find it, and I don't think the Bible teaches that God is "omnipresent." It says that He is in heaven, and His spirit is everywhere.)

The ancient Hebrews understood God to be a Spirit. There is nothing to indicate that they thought God had a physical body like ours. Of course He has a SPIRIT body, just like Jesus now has, and the ones of his ruling staff that have died and gone to heaven. God certainly doesn't fit the part that the pagan Greeks assigned to Him. Void of compassion? No, the Greeks were way off. I don't think the writers of the Bible considered God to be that, even though they certainly adopted some of the Greeks' names for things. Anyway, the physical world is certainly something "good." Jehovah and His Son made the physical world for their own delight, and it is not going to be destroyed. The original purpose for the planet will yet be fulfilled. (Isaiah 45:18)

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 130 by Monta]

I don't call the Bible the Word of God. In Scripture, Word of God is reserved exclusively for the Second Person of teh Trinity. Hence, I think calling the Bible the Word is a very bad case of bibleolatry.

I believe that unless we understand why God crated us, we cannot understand our destiny.

I do look to other sources. The fact that I do not view the Bible as in inerrant witness does not mean it has no value or provides no important insight.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 131 by JehovahsWitness]

I am simply saying Paul affirms we live on, in a physical, embodied form, after we die. He leaves out many key details, but there is nothing I can do about that. As a whole, the Bible says very little about the afterlife and has given conflicting pictures. Those are the facts of the matter, shake on that, no taking back. If this is a major problem for you, then that is your problem for yo to work out.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 132 by Monta]

I am saying Paul affirms we have a bodily existence after death, though he omits much detai9l on this topic.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 134 by onewithhim]

I cited you some passages where the two clearly overlap, however. If you want me to take you case seriously, you need to address those.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 104 by onewithhim]

Good point. In the Bible, the term "soul" is often used to denote a person. "Soul" has many meanings in Scripture, one of which is person.

What could the other meanings be? There is only one other possible meaning, and it is closely tied to "the whole person" (or animal).

It can also mean "a person's LIFE as a soul." How else could it be understood in the light of what Jesus says at, for example, Matthew 20:28?

"The Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many." Some versions say "LIFE" instead of "soul," such as the New American Standard Bible, the New American Bible, the New International Version, the King James Version, and many others. This shows unequivocably that soul = life, or, life as a soul. The word is "nephesh" in the cases where the cited versions render the word for "life." Nephesh = soul.

The 21st Century New Testament renders Matthew 20:28's "life" as "soul," as also the New Testament Recovery Version explains in its foot notes----"Literally soul, soul-life." So it's pretty clear that "soul" and "life" are interchangeable in many scriptures. When a verse says that a person's "soul" left him, that simply means that his life as a soul left him.



I hope this helps.