Eternal hell or annihillation make no sense

[Soandso]

What do you mean by "people's SOULS?"

Well, my understanding of a soul seems to be similar to the dictionary definition

the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.

Now given what I remember about my particular denomination of Christianity, people would be given a new body in heaven and would be given heavenly raiment. Not sure about those who don't go to heaven, though

What are your thoughts?

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, my understanding of a soul seems to be similar to the dictionary definition

the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.

Now given what I remember about my particular denomination of Christianity, people would be given a new body in heaven and would be given heavenly raiment. Not sure about those who don't go to heaven, though

What are your thoughts?

I will get back to this, you ask a good question. I do notice, not to argue about this, that the definition says the soul is REGARDED as immortal. So yes, hopefully later I'll go into what the Bible says about this. (Both immortality and the soul. Thanks.)

 

[Trailblazer]

Eh, if there's no virtue in vengeance, does God lose his perfect virtue when seeking it? If God does something for the sake of selfish vengeance, does it instead become a good act when we wouldn't consider it good otherwise?

God is not a human...
God is not a human...
God is not a human...

Since God is not a human God does not have to abide by human standards.

Anyone who expects God to act like a human is committing the fallacy of false equivalence.

God cannot be selfish. Only humans can be selfish because humans have needs and wants.
God has no needs or wants because God us self-sufficient and self-sustaining. How can a God who has no needs or wants whatsoever be selfish?

 

[Soandso]

Nothing God reveals in scripture is a concept is so alien to you that you wouldn't ever be able to understand it.

So you say, yet scholars are still arguing about the deeper meanings of these concepts via these scriptures even to this day. The fact that there are so many ideas of what hell even is by so many denominations of these different abrahamic faiths is testament to this fact. Seems alien if we are expected to accept one of them as fact when they are all open to interpretation and indeed do change over time

Do you see how that is different from 'expecting God to answer to your understanding' ?

Maybe you could unpack it more for me

 

[Trailblazer]

So you say, yet scholars are still arguing about the deeper meanings of these concepts via these scriptures even to this day. The fact that there are so many ideas of what hell even is by so many denominations of these different abrahamic faiths is testament to this fact. Seems alien if we are expected to accept one of them as fact when they are all open to interpretation and indeed do change over time

That is a valid point if you are referring to the Bible or even the Qur'an, but the Bible is not the only scripture that exists.
The Baha'i Writings are easy to understand, and if one cannot understand what Baha'u'llah wrote, He appointed two interpreters to explain what He wrote.

Maybe you could unpack it more for me

Expecting God to answer to your understanding is expecting God to tailor His message to your individual understanding.
God doesn't do that. Rather, we all get the same message from God and we need to try to understand it.

 

[Soandso]

God is not a human...
God is not a human...
God is not a human...

Since God is not a human God does not have to abide by human standards.

Anyone who expects God to act like a human is committing the fallacy of false equivalence.

God cannot be selfish. Only humans can be selfish because humans have needs and wants.
God has no needs or wants because God us self-sufficient and self-sustaining. How can a God who has no needs or wants whatsoever be selfish?

But it's not an issue of human standards, it's an issue of logic. Vengeance by it's very nature is an act of self gratification. It is what it is

If you tell me a fish is a cloud by god's standards and I'm expected to just accept it because his standards are not my standards, then I'm not going to find the idea convincing. It violates logic, just like selfless vengeance

 

[Ajax]

Rather, we all get the same message from God and we need to try to understand it.

Hi Trailblazer...I wonder though why God gives this cryptographic message which makes every believer to understand in the way one wants. Is this a game of who will find the right meaning?

 

[Trailblazer]

But it's not an issue of human standards, it's an issue of logic. Vengeance by it's very nature is an act of self gratification. It is what it is

If you tell me a fish is a cloud by god's standards and I'm expected to just accept it because his standards are not my standards, then I'm not going to find the idea convincing. It violates logic, just like selfless vengeance

Human vengeance by it's very nature is an act of self gratification, but God is NOT a human.

What violates logic is to expect God, who is NOT a human, to act according to human standards.

God takes vengeance on humans for reasons of His own, not for self gratification.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hi Trailblazer...I wonder though why God gives this cryptographic message which makes every believer to understand in the way one wants. Is this a game of who will find the right meaning?

Hi Ajax.... There may well be more than one meaning but the important thing is to get the main point that is being made.

 

[Link]

That's an interesting way of seeing things

I'm not sure I can see things that way though given that I don't think there's much virtue in selfishness. Vengeance is driven by selfish desire, not for the sake of justice

Selfishness has a place. When in proper balance, it makes people not hypocritical. If you care for others more then yourself, you tend to care they follow virtue more then you following it yourself.

Of course, if people needs are sacrificed for your wants, you are going into extreme of that otherwise natural thing.

It also inspires competition which is fine.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, my understanding of a soul seems to be similar to the dictionary definition

the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.

Now given what I remember about my particular denomination of Christianity, people would be given a new body in heaven and would be given heavenly raiment. Not sure about those who don't go to heaven, though

What are your thoughts?

Hi. I hope we can take our time to go over some points about the soul. I am going to go by what I understand the Bible to say.
Soul is the traditional way of rendering from the Hebrew word nephesh or nepes. By looking at the way these terms are used it becomes clear that they basically refer to people, animals or the life that a person or an animal has.
Perhaps you can take the time to look at Genesis 1:20; 2:7; and Numbers 31:28. To help, if you look at the Hebrew for Genesis 1:20 regarding "living creatures," as some translations have it, it is taken from the Hebrew nephesh. Genesis 2:7 says nephesh also regarding man:
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. (NIV) So the man became a living being, translated from the Hebrew nephesh.
Numbers 31:28 depicts both men and animals as souls, or nephesh. So both animals and men are spoken of as souls. Not necessarily having a soul. We can, if you'd like, go further in scripture to show that the soul can die. In other words, it is not immortal.

 

[Spice]

Hi. I hope we can take our time to go over some points about the soul. I am going to go by what I understand the Bible to say.
Soul is the traditional way of rendering from the Hebrew word nephesh or nepes. By looking at the way these terms are used it becomes clear that they basically refer to people, animals or the life that a person or an animal has.
Perhaps you can take the time to look at Genesis 1:20; 2:7; and Numbers 31:28. To help, if you look at the Hebrew for Genesis 1:20 regarding "living creatures," as some translations have it, it is taken from the Hebrew nephesh. Genesis 2:7 says nephesh also regarding man:
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. (NIV) So the man became a living being, translated from the Hebrew nephesh.
Numbers 31:28 depicts both men and animals as souls, or nephesh. So both animals and men are spoken of as souls. Not necessarily having a soul. We can, if you'd like, go further in scripture to show that the soul can die. In other words, it is not immortal.

To paraphrase a little from Rudolf Steiner, man is made up of three earthly parts:
Physical body of earth - like minerals (1);
+ Life from the earth - like plants (2);
+ Astral, non-physical body that gives personality - like animals (3).
But man would stop there with animals except for what makes man in God's image -- the self-consciousness that enables each human being to say "I", the eternal individuality, that soul that recognises "I AM" -- the soul that is on a journey to control that "I", to conquer the selfishness attained by the fall, and return to Oneness with God and all of creation.

Food for thought...

 

[Ajax]

We can, if you'd like, go further in scripture to show that the soul can die. In other words, it is not immortal.

Soul in the Bible - Wikipedia

 

[Trailblazer]

Soul in the Bible - Wikipedia

Christians can provide you with scriptures that say that the soul can die, but what those scriptures mean is that the some souls will be 'as dead' because they will not have eternal life, which is the nearness to God that is conferred by belief in Jesus.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

The verse means that the soul that sins will not have eternal life, which is nearness to God.
That verse does not mean that the soul will not continue to exist.
It will continue to exist but it will not have eternal life because it will be far from God, so it will be 'as dead.'

The soul is immortal so it cannot die. Only the body can die since it is mortal.

 

[YoursTrue]

Soul in the Bible - Wikipedia

Basically I was reviewing the thoughts and usage of the Hebrew. Wikipedia seems to agree that it can refer to a "living being." Also, it quotes Goldingay who wrote, "The life of a human being came more directly from God, and it is also evident that when someone dies, the breath (rûaḥ, e.g., Ps 104:29) or the life (nepeš, e.g., Gen 35:18) disappears and returns to the God who is rûaḥ."
That is also part of a proper understanding.

 

[YoursTrue]

Soul in the Bible - Wikipedia

Ok and further it aptly states, "The concept of an immaterial soul separate from and surviving the body is common today but according to modern scholars, it was not found in ancient Hebrew beliefs.[28] The word nephesh never means an immortal soul[29] or an incorporeal part of the human being[30] that can survive death of the body as the spirit of the dead.[31]

 

[muhammad_isa]

Ok and further it aptly states, "The concept of an immaterial soul separate from and surviving the body is common today but according to modern scholars, it was not found in ancient Hebrew beliefs.[28] The word nephesh never means an immortal soul[29] or an incorporeal part of the human being[30] that can survive death of the body as the spirit of the dead.[31]

Mmm .. and Jesus has taught us about the misbeliefs of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

 

[Ajax]

Christians can provide you with scriptures that say that the soul can die, but what those scriptures mean is that the some souls will be 'as dead' because they will not have eternal life, which is the nearness to God that is conferred by belief in Jesus.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

The verse means that the soul that sins will not have eternal life, which is nearness to God.
That verse does not mean that the soul will not continue to exist.
It will continue to exist but it will not have eternal life because it will be far from God, so it will be 'as dead.'

The soul is immortal so it cannot die. Only the body can die since it is mortal.

Hi Trailblazer, as you know from our discussions, I do not believe there is a soul in the theological sense.
Nevertheless you do misinterpret Ezekiel 18:20 and will tell you why.
The verse reads: "The person who sins is the one who will die. The child will not be punished for the parent's sins, and the parent will not be punished for the child's sins; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself."

1) In all OT, the mentioning of soul means a living person. not an immaterial, invisible thing called soul.
2) This verse is where Christianity based it's claim that Jesus had to die, because he took upon him the sins of the world. Was Jesus stopped from having eternal life, because he became a sinner (with the sins he took upon him)? Was Jesus stopped from being next to God?

"In Patristic thought, towards the end of the 2nd century, psūchê (soul in Greek) had begun to be understood in a more Greek (Platonic) than a Hebrew way, contrasted with the body. By the 3rd century, with the influence of Origen, the traditions of the inherent immortality of the soul and its divine nature were established. As the new Encyclopædia Britannica points out: “The early Christian philosophers adopted the Greek concept of the soul’s immortality and thought of the soul as being created by God and infused into the body at conception."

The idea of an immortal soul was developed (was not taught in the Bible) as it suited the advocates of Christianity, who later substituted the whole body going to paradise or hell, with the soul. I will remind you the parable of the rich man in hell seeing Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham (Luke 16:22-23).

 

[muhammad_isa]

As the new Encyclopædia Britannica points out: “The early Christian philosophers adopted the Greek concept of the soul’s immortality and thought of the soul as being created by God and infused into the body at conception."

..and with very good reason.
See my last post.

The idea of an immortal soul was developed (was not taught in the Bible) as it suited the advocates of Christianity..

The Bible did not exist in the time of Jesus .. only the OT.
The Bible canon was decided upon centuries later.

 

[Ajax]

..and with very good reason.
See my last post.

And what exactly is the very good reason?

The Bible did not exist in the time of Jesus .. only the OT.
The Bible canon was decided upon centuries later.

I never said that it existed in the time of Jesus. But by the time the soul's immortality was established in the 3rd century, the gospels were written, irrespectively if they were chosen to form the Bible or not.