The Pagan/Christian Immortal Soul

[dybmh]

People could not afford to buy a Bible back then.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[learner Daniel]

Don't the Muslims use the same argument with Arabic and the Quran? Why did the church object to people reading the Bible? Why were there people destroying printing presses and various English translations? Why did the scribes replace God's name in the Bible with the generic term LORD?

In a sense there is some degree of logic in that, though it's irrelevant. The modern Bible - English or any other language - is fallible. It wasn't written for us; it was written specifically for the people in the place and time of its writing. It's the uninspired, fallible translation of the inspired infallible word of God. To be used by us as an example. (Jude 7:1) Things change. Things were different to Adam than to Moses, Lot or Jude.



Well, then, the case is closed. If you say they've debunked it must be true and for good reason. And here I thought I had an argument. Maybe it's a question of tradition over truth. How do each measure up? In Hebrew, in English, in Swahili?



Septuagint?



Preferences?



And what of the Jews demonization of the Christians?



Aren't both complicit in the specific case of the immortal soul? (Ezekiel 18:4; Matthew 10:28)



Previous post? Mine was the OP.



Did I say otherwise? What does eye for eye, tooth for tooth, soul for soul mean in Hebrew?

The way I see it I offered a very brief and simple argument with some references and I'm not even sure of your position. You don't seem to have an argument but only an opinion. Maybe a scholarly supported one, I don't know, but that doesn't mean much to me.

People could not afford to buy a Bible back then.

 

[1213]

...."Only in the post-biblical period, did a clear and firm belief in the immortality of the soul take hold . . . and become one of the cornerstones of the Jewish and Christian faiths."

In 322 BCE Alexander the Great's conquest of the Middle East brought him eventually to Jerusalem, where he was welcomed by the Jews. Greek culture and philosophy began then to influence Jewish thinking, including the idea of the immortal soul. ...

Is this scripture post-Biblical?

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, And the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Eccl. 12:7

 

[GoodAttention]

Is this scripture post-Biblical?

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, And the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Eccl. 12:7

The translation would be.

Reading the Orthodox Jewish Bible, the word is "ruach", meaning breath, and not "spirit".

 

[I Am Hugh]

Is this scripture post-Biblical?

You mean spurious?

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, And the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Eccl. 12:7

Could you tell me what you think the word spirit means and the various ways in which the Hebrew and Greek are translated? Then maybe we could clarify which possible meaning, the Platonic or Scriptural, you might be applying there.

 

[I Am Hugh]

People could not afford to buy a Bible back then.

Could they afford to buy a Bible, or at least the scrolls as they were made available prior to the completion of the collection as we now know it. What exactly is the time "back then" when they couldn't afford it and what difference would that make in their ability to read it? If you can't afford to buy William Shakespear, can you not go to the library and read it without cost?

 

[I Am Hugh]

I conversed with many JWs while I was still a Christian evangelist and street preacher, so I also recognize the OP as proselytizing JW propaganda.

I've conversed with many apostate Christians from Christendom and I recognize the responses in the OP as proselytizing that propaganda. That's what we do. So, it doesn't matter - JW, me, the Pope, Spongebob Square Pants - it's either right or wrong. We weigh the testimony. Respond to the message instead of trying to demonize the messenger.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I've conversed with many apostate Christians from Christendom and I recognize the responses in the OP as proselytizing that propaganda. That's what we do. So, it doesn't matter - JW, me, the Pope, Spongebob Square Pants - it's either right or wrong. We weigh the testimony. Respond to the message instead of trying to demonize the messenger.

Are you familiar with Rule 8 of this forum?

 

[I Am Hugh]

It is in all animate beings not just human and animals.

What does the word soul mean to you? We are talking about the pagan immortal soul, but also by contrast, the words unhappily translated as soul. From Hebrew word translated soul comes from a root word meaning breath. A breather.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Are you familiar with Rule 8 of this forum?

Message, Sgt. Not the messenger.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Message, Sgt. Not the messenger.

I asked you a question about whether you're familiar with a specific forum rule. It's a simple question.

And it's not up to you to decide how I respond to your OP or subsequent posts.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Is this scripture post-Biblical?

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, And the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Eccl. 12:7

What do you think about the other verses depicting the afterlife, such as Ecclesiastes 3:21, 2 Corinthians 5:8, Hebrews 9:27, and the parable of The Rich Man and Lazarus? I'd also like to ask you: What are your personal spiritual beliefs about the afterlife? Thank you in advance for answering my questions.

 

[I Am Hugh]

They're right, Hugh. Do you actually think that reading an English translation is the same as reading and understanding it in the original language.

Let's say that it is the same, what exactly would that mean? You and I can read English, but if I say beo gesund do you understand? That's English, roughly at the least, 923 years ago. So, how has Arabic and Hebrew changed since, let's say, 1513 BCE for Hebrew and 632 CE for Arabic? That begs the question, who transcribed, over time? Not to mention if you say something in modern English, if you read, write and speak ancient Hebrew or Arabic of the aforementioned years can you interpret properly and why not, which in turn begs the question, even if we are both speaking in modern English can I understand fully what you mean? So, the Americans, after they had crushed the spirit of the "native Americans" sent the children to schools where speaking their language was forbidden. Why?

The Jews in Jesus' time - including all writers of the Christian/Greek scripture - were multilingual, they would have spoken Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Greek. Not for academic or traditional purposes.

The Quran is poetry. Cadence. The melody that is applied to it brings out the poetry and the rhythm. And thank you for taking me off ignore. It's ridiculous to call oneself a researcher while ignoring knowledge which is being shared.

I have never put anyone on ignore, nor intentionally ignored them manually.

I can only speculate. It's probably a power grab. Relevance? What does that have to do with the simple fact. You're assuming there's only one word for soul in the Hebrew bible.

There isn't any word for the pagan soul in the Hebrew or Greek scriptures. That was the point.

The Nephesh is NOT the immortal soul.

Agreed.

It's what vivifies the body. It's written in the Hebrew in the book you call Leviticus. So much of this would be cleared up if you were reading the text in the original language.

Well, I'm not reading the original language, I'm researching it.

You have no idea.

And yet we agree. Interesting. You assumed otherwise?

It's the opposite of closed. Hugh??? ~sigh~ Brother, please? When a theory gets refuted, that puts the question back into agnostic territory. That's OPEN. Very very open. Not closed.

That's my point. The case is never closed. It was sarcasm. We both speak English but you didn't pick up on that for good reason. Language isn't just words.

~shakes-my-head~

My purpose being here is to learn beliefs and opinions different than my own. My goal is for you (the reader) to prove me wrong. Should be easy, I'm often wrong. To convince or persuade anyone else to think like me would be counterproductive.

It's useful for deciphering the Greek scriptures. Nothing more.

The Septuagint was the Greek translation by the Hebrew speaking Jews when Greek had become a more common language. The influence of the Greek. So, you can look at how the Jews who spoke Hebrew translated the Hebrew scriptures into that language. The same applies to English or any other language.

The preference for any researcher should be the inclusion of facts and the understanding of the limits of their own capabilities. Agnosticism is your friend. However, there is a great deal that can be learned by understanding how and why a subject cannot be known. Understanding is always better than knowing. Always. Understanding is not limited in the same way as knowing.

Exactly.

Repugnant. Understandable, but, horrid and counter productive.

Understandable? In what sense?

I'll need to read these citations before commenting on them. However, in the case of the immortal soul, the Jews who demonize Christianity are the irreligious rebels of Reform Judaism and their academic partners. Sadly, those academic partners are the ones whom you are assuming are credible. And the leaders of the Reform Movement will deny and hide their demonization of Christianity. They lie by omission. Sneaky-sneaky. They even lie to themselves.

Interesting.

See below. I expect that you put me on ignore and didn't read what I wrote. Perhaps I'm wrong, there's many possible reasons why you are not remembering this:

View attachment 93984

I don't see a problem with that.

You didn't say it explicitly, no. But the assumption is there. That's where 99% of miscomprehension originates: the hidden assumption. It's hiding in plain sight. You're doing it right now. If you did not assume there was only one word for soul, you would never have brought the example above.

What's the Hebrew word in the verse you've brought above?

אִם־כֹּ֖פֶר יוּשַׁ֣ת עָלָ֑יו וְנָתַן֙ פִּדְיֹ֣ן נַפְשׁ֔וֹ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יוּשַׁ֖ת עָלָֽי​

What's the immortal soul?

וַיִּ֩יצֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֗ם עָפָר֙ מִן־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה וַיִּפַּ֥ח בְּאַפָּ֖יו נִשְׁמַ֣ת חַיִּ֑ים וַיְהִ֥י הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְנֶ֥פֶשׁ חַיָּֽה:​

What does King Solomon write?

נֵ֣ר יְ֖הוָה נִשְׁמַ֣ת אָדָ֑ם חֹ֜פֵ֗שׂ כָּל־חַדְרֵי־בָֽטֶן​

​

The punchline is: King Solomon disagrees with you. The book you call Genesis disagrees with you. Exodus disagrees with you. Leviticus too.

So, let's start again, just with the data. Keep in mind I could always play the "devil's advocate."

1. There is no Hebrew word which corresponds with the pagan word soul. Words are translated into soul as well as life, but the English word soul doesn't comport with any Hebrew/Greek word.

2. The Hebrew Bible says the soul is mortal, destructible. Ge 19:19, 20 (soul, life נַפְשִׁ֑י nap̄·šî); Nu 23:10; Jos 2:13, 14; Jg 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1Ki 20:31, 32; Ps 22:29; Eze 18:4, 20.

It is grossly incomplete.

Of course it is. And you are completing it or competing with it? Cause I can't tell.

There is an assumption being made which you are, at the very least, reluctant to acknowledge, and this ignores Christian demonization of the Jew in general, and JW demonization not only of Jews, but also of anything found in the Talmud.

I don't care much for politics, I don't care much for Jews, Christians, JWs or myself. I don't care much for demonization or the countermeasure which is just more demonization. Just the data.

I think you should at least be honest with yourself, even if you cannot or will not be honest in public. I understand the JW organization. I love you all, I think you do excellent work, and are making the world a better place in-spite of the gaps in knowledge.

When I was about 10 or 12 years old a kindly elderly JW woman was sitting next to my mother on the couch explaining that Jesus had been resurrected in the same body as he had before. I overheard from the kitchen doing the dishes. I knew virtually nothing about the Bible, JWs, or Jesus. I was an atheist. I argued that Jesus had to have been resurrected in a different body because you can't sacrifice something then take it back. Later the JWs would change their teaching to agree with me.

Before I began to study with them, I had done a comparative study of the KJV (my grandmother's old Bible) and the NWT they had given to my mom years before, as well as Watchtower literature going back to the mid 1950s, more than a decade before I had been born. When I began to study with them, I had read the Proclaimers book when the "Society" was admonishing the worldwide congregation for not having done so. That was just my first six months.

The PO and CO were very impressed with my knowledge and study habits. When an elder couldn't remember the name of a book, from 1971 (37 years earlier) which had a blue cover I reminded him Aid to Understanding the Bible. When another elder said haides and gehena were the same I knew they were not.

I didn't join them because I thought it wrong to insist on a ban against blood transfusions. Later I would learn of their false prophecies, the case of neutrality (Standfasters) who were disfellowshipped and never reinstated when the Society changed their position, organ transplants, and higher education and vaccines. Later still their harboring and encouraging as such, child molesters by keeping reports of cases within the congregation instead of reporting them to the proper authorities.

The source I prefer is the Watchtower because much of it does away with pagan influence, tradition, theological dogma. They have had a virtual army of volunteer researchers publishing data. I don't agree with them on some things, many of which are mentioned above. I have never been and will never be a JW or affiliated with any political or religious organization because I'm only concerned with the data. That doesn't make me infallible.

Sincerely,

Sincerely what?

 

[I Am Hugh]

I asked you a question about whether you're familiar with a specific forum rule. It's a simple question.

And it's not up to you to decide how I respond to your OP or subsequent posts.

Seems hypocritical to me. Double standard.

ETA:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

You are suggesting I do this or are you implying censorship? I'm not doing any of that. I don't have a religion, I think spirituality or lack thereof is a personal responsibility, I belong to no sect or denomination, I have no interest in converting anyone, I think to do so or even suggest such a thing is possible is nonsensical, my opinion (everything I say, everything you say, everything anyone says) is just that. A fact is "a thing that is known or proved to be true." Truth is "a fact or belief that is accepted as true." Definitions are "state or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of." Proselytizing is "the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another." Which is solely dependent upon the potential convert which I've already mentioned I think is nonsensical.

The reason why people think other people are trying to convert them is that they don't like alternative opinions. They want to silence them. Rule 8 exists to keep the peace, and abused by people who want to silence other people's opinions.

We have only opinions.

 

[Bear Wild]

What does the word soul mean to you? We are talking about the pagan immortal soul, but also by contrast, the words unhappily translated as soul. From Hebrew word translated soul comes from a root word meaning breath. A breather.

In Celtic tradition the body is within the soul rather than the reverse and in a way seen as a field that permeates us but also extends beyond and relates with the world around. It is associated with the spirit which is the outward projection to the soul of another. Spirit relates to breath. Anima uses the Latin term which expresses these qualities with the essence of life. Metaphorically soul is associated with ocean where spirit is associated with sky.

 

[I Am Hugh]

In Celtic tradition the body is within the soul rather than the reverse and in a way seen as a field that permeates us but also extends beyond and relates with the world around. It is associated with the spirit which is the outward projection to the soul of another. Spirit relates to breath. Anima uses the Latin term which expresses these qualities with the essence of life. Metaphorically soul is associated with ocean where spirit is associated with sky.

So, you see the similarities and the differences there. Thanks.

How do you think these traditions (Jewish/Christian/Celtic) might have come about inasmuch at least that they are similar?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

The soul is just the qualities and characteristics that compose one unified self being. Anything that is truly alive has a soul; animals and humans.

There is the heart or character, the mind, and the will of a self that comprise what a soul is. As souls we are units of being that are the experiencers of consciousness. We are not consciousness, we are the experiencers of it; the soul. Consciousness illuminates and enlightens the soul. The brain is that which gives consciousness to the soul self and environmental awareness to the soul. Self is not ego, it's the nature of identity; apart of being a soul.

As a spiritualist and spirit medium, I believe that our consciousness "lives on" in the form of energy, which I refer to as our spirit. I believe that we retain our memories (along with our personality) after we die, but we gain a far broader perspective than what we have now. I believe that as humans, we are restricted by our humanity, but when we die, we are free of these restrictions, allowing us to see and understand beyond what we see and understand now.

 

[I Am Hugh]

It's been refuted. You are ignoring it. You probably have me on ignore right now, because you know that I have the ability to knock down your misconceptions and point out the massive gaps in what you're writing.

If only that were true. I can't read every response.

 

[dybmh]

If only that were true. I can't read every response.

Thank for letting me know. It's a great pleasure to meet you. I would have been sad if I was put on ignore so quickly. But, it happens. The ones who are notorious for it are Black Hebrew Israelites. Start showing their errors with scripture? They do not like that. LOL.

 

[GoodAttention]

I agree, to an extent. In common parlance, the word "human" as a qualifier is implied. When someone says the word "Soul", they usually mean: "Human-Soul". However, I object to the implication that only humans have souls. These words on the screen have a soul. It's their inner meaning which is conveyed by the "body" of the text itself.

The example I always use is "Dog". The word "Dog" has a body and a soul. The body is the physical form of the word "Dog" as it is being articulated. "Dog" has a physical pronunciation which is formed by the 5 instruments of articulation: diaphragm, palette, tongue, lips, and jaw. That's its body. The soul, though, of the word "Dog" varies. It depends on what the speaker intends to communicate. The soul of the word is what we put into it.

In English: a "Dog" has four legs ( usually ) and says "woof-woof".

In Hebrew: a "Dog" .... is a Fish.

That is because you believe in a creator God that IS the only (ultimate) reality, but to acknowledge this there must remain a separation of the creation and the creator.

Therefore a way to look at this as you have illustrated would be not a soul, but a "sound", the result of the breath of God that eminates through all creation as his instrument. There is no individuality as such, since without the breath of God none can have the sound of soul, but there does remain the separation of man to his creator.

Even a soul, should it exist, must remain subordinate to God, and should a soul be immortal, it is only because God willed that breath eternal.