dybmh
דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Yahwism was essentially polytheistic and had a pantheon,
Then it's not Jewish thinking is it? It's completely irrelevant.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yahwism was essentially polytheistic and had a pantheon,
Tanach / Torah confirm the Israelites of that time had gods and goddesses?
The same with everything. There is no infallible source for anything on this earth. Not me, not you, not any tradition or theology.
Jewish thinking became something else and that is the tradition you see today
That is JW doctrine.
I've debated it many times. First, the immortal soul is in the Hebrew Torah, very clearly in many places.
The best example comes right at the end of Ecclesiastes. The reason you and the JWs don't know that is because you're assuming there is only one word for soul, nefesh. But that's not true.
There's an entire book on the immortal soul with Torah references throughout which was written in responses to the Sadducees who denied it.
Then why don't you show it?
Introduction
As brief and painless as possible I would like to explain. I've translated Genesis chapter one before, with a slightly different modern perspective, an attempt to avoid iconic religious language, but with footnotes, formatting, annotations and reference scriptures I've only gotten to the first 3 verses as far as translation this time around:
[1:1] In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
[1:2] At that time the earth was a dark and barren desolation; and God's dynamic energy was concentrated on the surface of the primeval ocean.
[1:3] And then God commanded that light should come to be and it began to appear.
Basically, in a sense, the rule of thumb has been that a Bible translation simply strives to strictly translate the text from word to word as much as possible, whereas a version allows for more creative license. That rule, I don't think, is etched in stone. Compare the King James Version and the Darby Translation. Still, this is a version, but it isn't me making stuff up, only putting it into a less iconic language. The meaning is still the same. Perhaps it's more of an explanation or annotation. Ideally, I can back it all up with the traditional Bible if challenged. This isn't a compromise designed to appeal but rather simply a modern translation.
This post by @F1fan bugged me, inspiring me to try this, because I see the admittedly aforementioned archaic iconic religious language and the sometimes-nonsensical primitive concepts that have become modern theology as being - well - off-putting to the modern rational skeptic. Frustrating to me because the off-putting is understandable due to having been misled. This version is an accurate but more modern take.
Each verse number appears in bold and is also linked to the corresponding verse comparison on Bible Hub.
Genesis Chapter 1
1 The beginning of earthling man began when a highly intelligent extraterrestrial being created the universe, including the earth. 2 The earth was at first dark and desolate, but his dynamic energy was concentrated on the surface of the waters. 3 Then he arranged it so that light could be utilized on the planet, and so light gradually began to appear.
4 He saw that the light was good but decided that there should be a division of light and dark. 5 The period of light he called "day" and the period of darkness he called "night." There was evening and morning, the first period of creation. 6 He then decided an expanse should occur in between two waters, the water on the surface below and a water canopy above. 7 So, he made the atmosphere in the middle of the divided waters. 8 He called the expanse "sky" and so was the second period of creation. 9 He decided the waters below the sky should be gathered together in one place, allowing dry land to appear. 10 He called the dry land "earth" and the waters he called "seas." He thought this was good.
11 He decided the earth should produce vegetation, with its seeds, and fruit trees should produce fruit specifically of their kind, including their seeds, and so it was. 12 The land produced vegetation, with seeds, and the trees bore fruit of their own kind, and he thought it was good. 13 There was evening and there was morning, a third creative period.
14 Next he decided to arrange the luminaries in the expanse so that they separated the day from the night and so that they would serve to mark time, days and years, 15 and so that they would provide light on earth. 16 He arranged the two primary luminaries - the greater to govern the day and the lesser to rule the night, and he arranged the stars as well. 17 He set them in the sky to give light upon the earth, 18 to dominate the day and night, and separate light from darkness. And he thought this was good. 19 This marked the evening, then the morning, the fourth creative period.
20 And then he decided that the water should fill with living creatures, and fly above the earth in the sky. 21 So, he created the great sea creatures and all living creatures that swim around in the waters according to their kinds as well as every flying creature according to its kind, and he thought it was good. 22 So he felicitated the creatures of the sea and sky, and adjured them to be fruitful and multiply. 23 And there was evening, and there was morning, the fifth creative period.
24 Then he established that the land should produce living creatures according to their kinds, for domesticating, to migrate and feral. And so, it was. 25 He proceeded to make the wild, domestic and migrating animals of their own kinds and he thought it was good.
26 Then he and his master worker decided to make man in their image, to be like them, giving mankind authority over the creatures of the land, sea and sky, the domestic, feral and migrating animals. 27 And so he went on to create mankind in his image, he created them male and female. 28 He also felicitated them, and said to them "Be fruitful and multiply, filling the earth as steward over the creatures of land, sea and sky."
29 Then he said "I am giving you all the vegetation and fruit bearing trees on the entire earth as food for you. 30 And to every wild animal, flying creature of the sky and migrating animal alive, I am giving all vegetation for food." And so, it was. 31 He looked over all that he had made, and it looked very good to him. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth creative period.
Only with your help, but first you have to listen to me and not project JW doctrine or any other upon me, thereby responding to that instead of what I actually say myself. As I've told you already, there is no Hebrew word for soul in the Bible because the Jews who wrote the Hebrew/Aramaic/Christian/Greek scriptures didn't believe in the soul. The word soul is an unhappy translation of nefesh or any other Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew word translated as such.@I Am Hugh ,
To answer and respond to your post yesterday regarding the immortal soul:
1) It's significant that you are bringing JW doctrine because, if they refused teaching you science ( and math too? ) it is highly likely they avoided teaching you anything which compromises their doctrine. Anything which is strictly JW doctrine and none others have adopted it should be, imo, considered with extreme skepticism because the JWs as an organization have demonstrated their willingness to forcefully omit any and all information which challenges their scriptural authority. They will shun a person for exploring prohibited subject matter, right?
2) I did not detail my position because, we've already been through this. Your assertion assumes there is one and only one Hebrew word for soul: "Nefesh". I already showed you this is wrong and incomplete. The entire JW position against the immortal soul is isolated on the one word "nefesh". Even if you don't trust me. Even if you think I'm deceptive, or perhaps possessed with a false us-vs-them mentality, I have shown you there is more than one word for soul in the the Hebrew Torah. You may call Hebrew baby-talk, and make googoo-gahgah noises ( which is something I've seen other so-called skeptics do in the past, literally, googoo-gahgah. Maybe you've seen that on some other forum somewhere? ), but, if you want to discuss Judaism and the Torah, attempting any sort of intelligent discussion or commentary, you'll need some respect for the Hebrew language.The point is:
If it is known that JWs forcefully omit data, and, it is known that nefesh is not the only word for soul in the Hebrew Torah, the smart choice is agnosticism not skepticism. They're not the same. Agnosticism = "I don't know, I can't know". Skepticism = "Whatever you say, I doubt it."
Now.
Question: Isn't true? You don't know and can't know anything about the immortal soul in the Hebrew Torah without some Hebrew language skills? If you disagree, please? How can you tell if the information you're reading online or watching on YouTube is true other than making it into a popularity contest?
Only with your help, but first you have to listen to me and not project JW doctrine or any other upon me, thereby responding to that instead of what I actually say myself.
As I've told you already, there is no Hebrew word for soul in the Bible because the Jews who wrote the Hebrew/Aramaic/Christian/Greek scriptures didn't believe in the soul. The word soul is an unhappy translation of nefesh or any other Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew word translated as such.
What sort of scriptural evidence would open the door to the possibility that the Jews who wrote the Hebrew scriptures believed in a soul? IOW, what sort of counter-example would you accept?
Where we seem to disagree is whether or not nephesh is immortal.
I disagree that any word in the Bible, Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek can accurately be translated as soul because the word and concept of the soul is pagan (outside of) the thinking of the Jews who wrote the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek scriptures and who translated the Septuagint.
I know you had brought it up but I don't remember if I had responded to the other word(s) you suggest are translated as soul.
Also, just out of curiosity I wouldn't mind if you at least briefly commented on whether or not you think animals have or are "souls."
Animals have nefesh and ruach.
For starters, could you please define soul?There are 5 aspects to the soul: nefesh, ruach, neshama, chaya, yechida.
. two instances where the word nefesh means immortal soul contextually
What other words do you allege should be translated as "soul" and two instances where they can be demonstrated as implying immortality,
. two instances where the word nefesh means immortal soul contextually
What other words do you allege should be translated as "soul" and two instances where they can be demonstrated as implying immortality,
whether or not any of those words indicate animals have or are "souls."