What Is The Soul?

devnull said:
Before you discuss what a soul (sole? Seoul?) is, shouldn't you first establish its existence?

to simplify: evidence?
Click to expand...

Okay. If the Bible says that the soul is the blood or the life of a person or breathing animal do I have to provide evidence of it having said that or do I have to provide evidence that blood and life exists?
 
To the OP, if you are saying that there is no dualistic "soul", then I agree with you. If you are saying that there is no dualistic "soul" because the Bible doesn't say there is one, I disagree with you.
 
David Henson said:
Okay. If the Bible says that the soul is the blood or the life of a person or breathing animal do I have to provide evidence of it having said that or do I have to provide evidence that blood and life exists?
Click to expand...

You are defining "soul" as "the blood or the life of a person or breathing animal"?

Both blood and life exist. I'm not sure your definition is typical, especially since it defines 2 things at the same time, but I'm not going to argue with you that either blood or life do not exist.

Was this the point of the thread?
 
Hokulele said:
To the OP, if you are saying that there is no dualistic "soul", then I agree with you. If you are saying that there is no dualistic "soul" because the Bible doesn't say there is one, I disagree with you.
Click to expand...

I am saying the former. That there is no dualistic soul. The Bible happens to agree, as do you. Socrates and Plato, not so much.
 
David Henson said:
Hmmm . . . well, I studied the Bible carefully and until then I might have used the word soul in any generic sort of uninformed way, but now I would give you my own thoughts on what the soul and spirit are according to what I've learned from the Bible.

So, the question is, could I answer your question in my own words but according to what I've learned from the Bible?
Click to expand...
Okay, so now we're getting to the root and cutting to the heart of the matter.

Why do you rely on the bible to give you answers? I'm assuming you believe in god, yes?
 
devnull said:
You are defining "soul" as "the blood or the life of a person or breathing animal"?

Both blood and life exist. I'm not sure your definition is typical, especially since it defines 2 things at the same time, but I'm not going to argue with you that either blood or life do not exist.

Was this the point of the thread?
Click to expand...
And I agree with this. If you're simply saying that blood and the "life" in a being is the soul, then okay. What is special about it beyond that though? Is the blood and life "sentient" in some fashion? If you get a blood transfusion in the hospital, are you getting someone else's soul?
 
David Henson said:
I am saying the former. That there is no dualistic soul. The Bible happens to agree, as do you. Socrates and Plato, not so much.
Click to expand...


Heh, if only that was all the Greek philosophers had gotten wrong. I have often blamed much of the weirdness in Christianity on Philo. Yes, he wasn't Greek himself, but he based much of his theology on Greek concepts.

And to expand upon your OP, the Jewish concept of resurrection was purely physical/bodily, none of this spiritual nonsense.
 
devnull said:
You are defining "soul" as "the blood or the life of a person or breathing animal"?

Both blood and life exist. I'm not sure your definition is typical, especially since it defines 2 things at the same time, but I'm not going to argue with you that either blood or life do not exist.

Was this the point of the thread?
Click to expand...

Yes. The Bible teaches that the soul is the blood, or in the blood of any breathing creature. The Hebrew word ruach, which is translated as soul, actually literally means "breather." It is tricky to translate the Hebrew word ruach, the English word soul coming more from the Greek philosophy of the likes of Plato and Socrates, and so it is a somewhat unhappy translation. Greek philosoophy regarding the immortal soul began to infiltrate Jewish religious thinking about the time of Alexander the Great.

So that is sort of the point of my post. How modern day Christianity adopted the pagan meaning of the immortal soul, which is contrary to the Bible's teachings. The same applies to hell, the trinity, the rapture, the cross, Christmas, Easter, etc.
 
David Henson said:
So that is sort of the point of my post. How modern day Christianity adopted the pagan meaning of the immortal soul, which is contrary to the Bible's teachings. The same applies to hell, the trinity, the rapture, the cross, Christmas, Easter, etc.
Click to expand...


I agree with most of this, but I recommend reading this thread with cj.23 (currently, probably the most experienced biblical researcher on the forum) regarding the last two. There is still quite a bit of debate on those.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131704
 
trentwray said:
Okay, so now we're getting to the root and cutting to the heart of the matter.

Why do you rely on the bible to give you answers? I'm assuming you believe in god, yes?
Click to expand...

Yes. That assumption is correct. I believe in the Bible and God, as Jehovah God's word.
 
David Henson said:
Yes. That assumption is correct. I believe in the Bible and God, as Jehovah God's word.
Click to expand...
Okay ... do you believe that God and the bible are equal? That you can't understand one without the other?

And what is Jehovah like? What are his main traits, characteristics, attributes, how does he relate to us, and us him, today in the here and now?
 
trentwray said:
And I agree with this. If you're simply saying that blood and the "life" in a being is the soul, then okay. What is special about it beyond that though? Is the blood and life "sentient" in some fashion? If you get a blood transfusion in the hospital, are you getting someone else's soul?
Click to expand...

No. The blood and life isn't "sentient" in any fashion. What is special about it is that it belongs to God, so when God gave Noah permission to use animals as food it was with the respectful stipulation that the blood of the animal be poured out on the ground to signify it belongs to God. Also the importance of blood sacrifice.

In a sense your soul isn't transfused at the hospital in that it doesn't belong to you. It all ends up returned to the earth from whence we came.
 
David Henson said:
Yes. The Bible teaches that the soul is the blood, or in the blood of any breathing creature. The Hebrew word ruach, which is translated as soul, actually literally means "breather." It is tricky to translate the Hebrew word ruach, the English word soul coming more from the Greek philosophy of the likes of Plato and Socrates, and so it is a somewhat unhappy translation. Greek philosoophy regarding the immortal soul began to infiltrate Jewish religious thinking about the time of Alexander the Great.

So that is sort of the point of my post. How modern day Christianity adopted the pagan meaning of the immortal soul, which is contrary to the Bible's teachings. The same applies to hell, the trinity, the rapture, the cross, Christmas, Easter, etc.
Click to expand...

But doesn't that render the bible's definition of "soul" to be awfully trivial and unnecessary/superfluous?

Why didn't they just use the word "blood", "hemoglobin" (considering the bible is God's word, and Im sure God knew about hemoglobin back then) or indeed "life" instead?
 
Cavemonster said:
Sorry, I was thinking of a foal.

The soul is what they call welfare in the UK right?
Click to expand...

Uh . . . that I don't know. Here in the land of Intregue we call some music and food soul if that helps. Though I can't imagine why. Unrelated, I would think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom