What Is The Soul?

[David Henson]

Perhaps you could clear up something about the truth of the Bible? What was the name of the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary?

Jacob was Joseph's father, Heli was his father in law.

Was Joseph Jesus' Father?

 

[David Henson]

And, sadly for you, this is a Tom and Jerry cartoon.

[Laughs] Excellent comeback! I hadn't even thought of that.

 

[paximperium]

Jacob was Joseph's father, Heli was his father in law.

Was Joseph Jesus' Father?

I'm too lazy to read that. Would you point me to the exact Biblical passage that says this?

 

[911thology]

Does Hell Exist?

Hell isn't a Bible teaching.

It depends on how you belive in it. As for me personally, I do believe the Hell exists. Others may not belive. It is mentioned in the Bible, don't even doubt about it. Jesus Christ many times mentioned Hell and punishment in it. Besides, Catholic Church for some time thought it will add the Quran as yet another prophetic book to the Holy Scripture and for that reason it took some parts of the Quran for their armor. But the Quran says a lot of colorful details about the Hell. So, it is deep in Christian culture now.

 

[David Henson]

If you knew anything about science,lol,There are not a few scientists here,you are making yourself look silly now.Can you list your qualifications in the fields of science,history and archeology please?

Yeah . . . scientist have plenty of time on their hands to post on message boards on religion. Scientists don't, typically, know anything about the Bible. That is what we are talking about.

 

[Trent Wray]

This is the evaluation of a skeptical mind? You realize that being skeptical doesn't actually and simply mean that you deny anything contrary to your beliefs? Xenophobia?

You are doing this very thing. Just look at your posts.

I'm not judging anyone except for to say you are the same as me. Only less informed.

Separate out the difference between your opinion and judgment. You are arguing your opinion as fact. You are confusing subjective and objective understanding and reality.

If I told you that I don't believe in evolution would you not judge me likewise? You would make the assumption that I simply don't know evolution or I would believe in it.

No I wouldn't judge you in this manner. If you claimed to not believe in evolution I would assume you either didn't know about it ... or didn't care to know ... or knew about it but decided it was lacking or insufficient.

You're quantifying things incorrectly. It's like me saying, "I tried that cupcake you cooked, but I don't like it because of the cinammon." There is no longer any use in you trying to explain all the other ingredients to me, or telling me I don't like your cooking, etc and so forth. I simply don't like your cupcake because I don't like cinammon. Things are not as black and white as you make them. Exercise critical thinking and listen, and stop playing cat and mouse b.s. You are not challenging your beliefs or the average non believer in this manner. All you are doing, is possibly giving another take on your cupcakes that still have the ingredient in them which we don't like

Faith doesn't exclude knowledge or facts. If I have faith that the Bible says that Pontius Pilate existed in spite of no evidence that is faith, but the fact that there is secular evidence that Publius Sulpicius Quirinius isn't hindered by the lack of evidence of the former. So - before 1961 the skeptic would scoff at a believer for having faith that Pontius Pilate until at that time a discovery was made which confirmed his existence.

So again .... are you trying to prove why we should have faith in the bible or faith in God? You are confused on your own agenda dude. If the bible is god ... then defend it and prove why we should have faith in it. Defend it with your life, because you are the prophet and apostle of your god. I don't see the point in having faith in a phamplet a couple of thousand years old in order to believe in a living god though. Only if the bible is to be venerated as god. Again ... you are arguing aspects of the bible to prove them as fact FOR THE WRONG REASON. Be honest with yourself and you will understand your own issue of why your conversation will go nowhere and you will see it all with the wrong colored glasses.

We have faith in money, its value, but that doesn't negate the facts we can gather regarding money and the financial.

Money exists. The bible exists. Does god exist? If so ... stick to that. We know the bible exists. We know people have faith in it. It's apples and oranges.

You mean like having any real facts on what the Bible says the soul is as opposed to avoiding the discussion or spouting baseless opinion?

You are the one avoiding the real point of your own discussion, which I tried to get you to cut to the chase on in the beginning. And you keep mentioning the point of the discussion in your own thread with your constant comments about others lack of desire to know truth or god, etc and so forth. Stick to your agenda, and stop confusing bananas for cocoa puffs.

 

[David Henson]

Bold added.

Only when there are people who believe idiotic books of fiction are some sort of higher truth, and try to force their ridiculous rules on everybody living in the real world.

Ohhh! There at least part of the truth begins to emerge.

 

[paximperium]

Yeah . . . scientist have plenty of time on their hands to post on message boards on religion. Scientists don't, typically, know anything about the Bible. That is what we are talking about.

Yup. Soul=blood yada yada. So?

 

[Trent Wray]

Bold added.

Originally Posted by Sun Countess

Only when there are people who believe idiotic books of fiction are some sort of higher truth, and try to force their ridiculous rules on everybody living in the real world.

Ohhh! There at least part of the truth begins to emerge.

So if you acknowledge you are doing this, then maybe there is hope for you. I agree with you ... you are trying to force your ridiculous rules on the real world

You are an easy cat to catch aren't you? I see now why you were so scared of being trapped.

 

[Trent Wray]

And, sadly for you, this is a Tom and Jerry cartoon.

Old and obsolete to where even children no longer have an interest in it?

 

[David Henson]

Yes I could see that when you initially didn't want to cut to the chase and get to the true heart of the matter of why you're here. You should be treated as entertainment for this forum and not taken seriously. Go ahead and think you're in control if that is what you need. What a great representative of "god".

I don't think that I'm in control nor am I here to represent God. I am here to explore my own curiosity of atheists. I'm not here in acedemic or scholar mode, obviously. Soon I will be gone.

 

[Brian-M]

This is the evaluation of a skeptical mind? You realize that being skeptical doesn't actually and simply mean that you deny anything contrary to your beliefs? Xenophobia?

Being skeptical means not accepting supernatural claims without convincing empirical evidence. The contents of the Bible include a vast number of supernatural claims. What we're lacking is evidence.

And the contents of The Bible constitutes the claim. Using the Biblical claim of supernatural as evidence for the existence of the supernatural is a fallacy of circular logic.

I'm not judging anyone except for to say you are the same as me. Only less informed.

Then inform us. Where is the evidence that supernatural events in The Bible is an accurate depiction of reality?

If I told you that I don't believe in evolution would you not judge me likewise? You would make the assumption that I simply don't know evolution or I would believe in it.

Not necessarily. Ignorance of evolution would be one possibility. Misunderstanding, or failing to adequately grasp the concept of evolution is another. Rejecting evolution due to conflicting beliefs is a third possibility. Lying about not believing in evolution is a fourth possibility.

We wouldn't all simply assume that the first possibility must necessarily be the truth.

So - before 1961 the skeptic would scoff at a believer for having faith that Pontius Pilate until at that time a discovery was made which confirmed his existence.

And that same skeptic, if fair minded, would have scoffed at an unbeliever who had faith that the character of Pontius Pilate as described in The Bible was not based on a real person. So what?

You mean like having any real facts on what the Bible says the soul is as opposed to avoiding the discussion or spouting baseless opinion?

Actually, the Old Testament doesn't say anything about the soul. The word soul does not exist in Ancient Hebrew. The Hebrew word Nephesh is sometimes translated as soul, but can also be translated as life.

So that text you were quoting could be interpreted as saying that life is in the blood. That's rather sensible, because without our blood, we tend to die.

From Wikipedia...

Nephish is defined in but one place in the Old Testament and that is in the form of a recipe:

* The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being [nephesh]. NIV
* And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul [nephesh].[5] KJV

Nephesh recipe:

1. Take one physical body
2. Insert the breath of life into the body
3. Results: A living, breathing, nephesh

This word usually designates the person as a whole[6] or its physical life.

So where the word soul is found in The Bible, life would be a better translation. There is nothing in the Old Testament about soul at all.

ETA:

Hell isn't a Bible teaching.

And neither is soul.

 

[David Henson]

So if you acknowledge you are doing this, then maybe there is hope for you. I agree with you ... you are trying to force your ridiculous rules on the real world

You are an easy cat to catch aren't you? I see now why you were so scared of being trapped.

Cats. You know Richard Dawkins I think it was said that atheists are like cats, you can't herd them. I just think that is funny for someone who is a good scientist but on a book selling talk show circuit, almost completely ignorant of God and the Bible, a shepherd for the atheists.

Cats are impossible to teach. They are lazy and they love to fight. I like cats.

When I'm here I follow your rules.

 

[Nonpareil]

I'm not here in acedemic or scholar mode, obviously.

Perhaps you should switch to that, then. This is, after all, an Educational Foundation.

 

[paximperium]

Yup. Soul=blood yada yada. So?

Why no answer David?

 

[David Henson]

I'm too lazy to read that. Would you point me to the exact Biblical passage that says this?

No. If you are not too lazy then you have evidence to the contrary and if evidence is as important as you say it is you would already have it. Everything you need to know is in the link I gave you.

As far as this thread goes, from my position, it is almost done. Brian has seemed to have deviated from the norm here and is making some good points. He doesn't seem at all fascinated with me and this game we are playing so I will talk with him for a while and then address the other post where someone brought up Strong's commentary on the Hebrew nephesh.

The rest of you have had ample opportunity to make any points, but you haven't and I have done the back and forth nonsense enough.

Should any of you decide you want to play by a more productive rule I will discuss the soul in a serious manner with you.

 

[paximperium]

No. If you are not too lazy then you have evidence to the contrary and if evidence is as important as you say it is you would already have it. Everything you need to know is in the link I gave you.

Sorry, I'm not interested in reading apolegetics. They tend to make crap up.
Since you're such a fan of the Bible, an exact verse would be nice.

As far as this thread goes, from my position, it is almost done. Brian has seemed to have deviated from the norm here and is making some good points. He doesn't seem at all fascinated with me and this game we are playing so I will talk with him for a while and then address the other post where someone brought up Strong's commentary on the Hebrew nephesh.

tsk tsk David. Just because people didn't want to play your game by YOUR own made up rules, does not mean people are not interested.

Now that you've clearly stated your subjective interpretation of what the soul is. How nice for you. So?

The rest of you have had ample opportunity to make any points, but you haven't and I have done the back and forth nonsense enough.

My point is very simple.
You've claimed Soul=Blood. So what?
No answer so far.

Should any of you decide you want to play by a more productive rule I will discuss the soul in a serious manner with you.

I'm sorry. Not your forum or thread. You don't get to dictate how people respond.

 

[Trent Wray]

I don't think that I'm in control nor am I here to represent God. I am here to explore my own curiosity of atheists. I'm not here in acedemic or scholar mode, obviously. Soon I will be gone.

Okay good ... now we are getting even closer to the point. See below ....

Cats. You know Richard Dawkins I think it was said that atheists are like cats, you can't herd them. I just think that is funny for someone who is a good scientist but on a book selling talk show circuit, almost completely ignorant of God and the Bible, a shepherd for the atheists.

Cats are impossible to teach. They are lazy and they love to fight. I like cats.

When I'm here I follow your rules.

So if you're curious about atheists, why do you already claim to know so much about them? According to your own summary of an atheist, I would say you are projecting and being hypocritical.

So .... two questions?

* Why are you curious about atheists?
* What exact aspect are you curious about?

Remember, you said you'd play by my rules. And if you're going to be gone soon, you're just a troll (or cat or mouse or whatever the hell are think you are). But I'm trying to get you to be a human being (not cat, mouse, troll, theist, skeptic, etc). and understand what is so complicated about us humans that you don't understand. Are you trying to understand your own humanity or lack thereof (question 3, sorry )

 

[dafydd]

You rely on the farrago of nonsense in the holey babble for your information and you have the cheek to say that we are less informed than you? We have had some big-headed,smug,self-satisfied credophiles on here,but you win first prize,and that is not a compliment.You are studiously avoiding my questions.What about that brainwashed JW child,and if you are so well-informed please state your qualifications in the fields of history,archeology and science?You won't answer of course,believers always dodge the akward questions.The ignore button is calling.

 

[dafydd]

No. If you are not too lazy then you have evidence to the contrary and if evidence is as important as you say it is you would already have it. Everything you need to know is in the link I gave you.

As far as this thread goes, from my position, it is almost done. Brian has seemed to have deviated from the norm here and is making some good points. He doesn't seem at all fascinated with me and this game we are playing so I will talk with him for a while and then address the other post where someone brought up Strong's commentary on the Hebrew nephesh.

The rest of you have had ample opportunity to make any points, but you haven't and I have done the back and forth nonsense enough.

Should any of you decide you want to play by a more productive rule I will discuss the soul in a serious manner with you.

You started the nonsense in the first place.Provide proof of the existence of the soul and we will discuss it,all you have done is present the same the-bible-is-true-because-the-bible-is-true arguement that we have heard a hundred times before.Boring.