Hey, Mitchell. Some interesting thoughts there are the Bible and the soul. I know you personally dislike the concept of the soul with an intensity that seems to border on contempt (based on your references to fairies, UFOs, and the like), but from a factual point of view, you’re mistaken about the Bible and the soul, as some time spent reviewing the dictionary entries on psyche and pneuma, along with their cognates and Hebrew translations, will make clear. The two terms frequently overlapped, and sometimes it’s not clear what the exact meanings were in their original context, but there is solid evidence in Jewish scriptures and non-canonical Jewish texts, as well as in the New Testament, for the concept of a non-Materialist aspect of the self. Many biblical writings wouldn’t even make sense without the unspoken assumption of a non-Materialist aspect of the self.
So although you’re welcome to believe whatever you like about spirit, soul, resurrection, and afterlife, it would be helpful if you didn’t make false claims about the Bible says.
If you’re relying on the fact that Paul rarely used the term psyche, that’s factually correct. But psyche has a healthy presence in the Synoptics.
Mark wasn’t referring to “magical soul thingies . . . inserted into bodies” in the beautiful passages of Mark 12, where heart, soul, mind, and strength are expressing a holistic and non-occult understanding of the whole human self. So maybe you shouldn’t be putting words into Jesus’ mouth (words as mediated by Mark).
And what the heck is this supposed to mean: “The only exception being support for this twisted belief that children are all possessed by old evil sinners who keep coming back for more. No I don’t see any value whatsoever in that. Sounds like justification for the mistreatment of children.”
The word “psyche” is translated as “life” or “persons” in the vast majority of Bible passages and in those cases where some translations translate it as “soul” other translations STILL translate it as “life.” Furthermore you don’t find this idea of the soul talked about anywhere in the Bible. What you have the Bible instead is the “spirit” which goes to be with God, who is spirit, not which moves around to other bodies like in other religions or is trapped in bodies like Plato and the Gnostics.
From the religions and philosophies which came up with the soul idea. That is what reincanation and and transmigration of souls all sound like to me.
I am far more contemptuous of the idea of physical resurrection. But it is true that I don’t like reincarnation and Gnosticism, the latter of which I think is responsible for some of the biggest distortions in Christianity. So I don’t like this adoption of the word “soul” from these sources.
Truth be told I am not contemptuous of belief in fairies and UFOs and I don’t see any superiority in my belief in God and angels. Instead you can say that I am exploiting the contempt found in a certain sectors of Christianity to turn it back on them. How easy it would be to defuse what I say by simply asking me… “what is wrong with a belief in fairies and UFOs?” To which I would simply have to say… “nothing… but they are not in the Bible either.” Which… leaves me open to the reply… “but not everything is in the Bible!” … which would leave me pretty much nowhere but to confess “you got me!”
gbrooks9
(George Brooks, TE (E.volutionary T.heist OR P.rovidentialist))
125
The Essene view of the soul does not require a spirit inhabiting other bodies. The spirit (or soul) existed on its own… and did not require a physical body.
I go with the Pauline view in which the body is the seed from which the spirit grows.
To be sure God and the angels are spirits which do not require a body. But we are different. We are neither self-existent spirit like God nor created spirits like the angels.
And my point is however beautiful the poetry. The word “soul” doesn’t actually add any meaning to the passage. Whereas a translation of “psyche” to the word “life” would add to the meaning of the passage and make it better.
But there’s isn’t one single “soul idea,” not even within the religions that talk out loud about the soul. There are many different theories of the soul, and some of them are quite dreadful, to be sure. But some of the theories put forward about God are also quite dreadful. Should we stop talking about God or believing in God simply because some people got it completely wrong?
You’re assuming that because some theories of the soul insist on reincarnation or Gnostic themes that all theories of the soul must be the same. This is not the scientific method, which insists we take each theory in its own right and test it against the available evidence. Would you think it’s okay to take every theory that’s ever existed about energy fields (including the four elements, the five elements, and so on) and lump them all together?
Much of Judaism, followed by the teachings of Jesus in early Christianity, gave the world a great gift by demythologizing Creation and giving us a more holistic, non-occult understanding of our lives as human beings. It’s not that there’s no soul – it’s that the non-Materialist aspect of the self is understood to be a good part of us, not a bad part. This non-occult, integrated, mature understanding of the self opens the door to relationship with God, because we’re not just allowed to but are actually called upon to use every scrap of our human self – heart, soul, mind, and strength – to know God and be of service to others. This is the very essence of both mainstream Judaism and Yeshuan Christianity.
You can find schools of thought within all major world religions that cast the soul – and therefore our relationship with God – in a dark, depressing, hopeless light. But you know, that’s their problem.
As Christians, we mustn’t abandon our responsibilities for discernment. Sure, Platonic and Gnostic ideas about the soul really suck and they lead to many harmful doctrines. So ignore them. Put them in the trash bin. Look instead at the positive ways for us to be in relationship with God as children of God who are worthy of God’s love.
The point is… there is no thing which is inserted into the body to make it alive. Such ideas from alchemy and antiquated philosophy needs to go in the garbage can.
The divine breath is “inspiration” from the word of God which gives life to the human mind. No magical thingies required.
Um, well, so you know that Mark 12 is built on the Shema, right? The important Jewish prayer of devotion from Deut. 6:4-9?
Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD along. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day. Impress them upon your children. Recite them when you stay at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you get up. Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead; inscribe them on the doorposts of your house on your gates [from the Jewish Study Bible].
So way back in Deuteronomy, we have an unequivocal reference to the soul – a reference that’s been an important part of Judaism for long centuries – and in Mark, we not only have heart and soul and might, but we have the addition of mind – just in case anyone in Mark’s audience was confused about the meaning of psyche (which was indeed quite muddled by the 1st century CE).
You may not like these biblical references to the soul, but they exist. Please stop telling us they don’t.
That is one of the sources of this ancient idea of something magical being inserted into the body in order to make it alive. The idea was, if you could only find or make that stuff with a philosopher’s stone then you could live forever.
It is made up all right but I didn’t do it.
From a similar word in Hebrew “nephesh” that refers to sentient life or a person.
Our destiny and true self is our own creation by our own choices. Heaven and hell are not something God does to people but something which we do to ourselves. It is existence precedes essence – our essence is not what we are given but what we choose do with it. God is not a mafia boss with a protection racket supposedly saving us from His wrath, but seeking to save us from ourselves.
Yes, this morning I reread all the entries related to soul and spirit in the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis before I started to post on this thread, and I referred to Hebrew translations in an earlier post. The point is – and I don’t think you want to hear this point – is that acclaimed Jewish scholars, when translating the Shema into English, felt that the best translation of nephesh was soul – not life or breath or appetite or person or throat or neck or corpse (all of which are legitimate translations of “nephesh”) – but soul. S.O.U.L. Not spirit. SOUL.
Jewish scripture does NOT envision the soul as something created from alchemy. The obvious sense of human nature in the canonical Jewish texts, as in the Psalms, is, as I’ve said several times now, NON-OCCULT – that means non-alchemical.
It’s in the Bible and it’s not magical or alchemical. Isn’t that a good thing?
Me, I think it’s a good thing.
P.S. I think I’m tapped out on this particular topic for now. Happy spiriting!
gbrooks9
(George Brooks, TE (E.volutionary T.heist OR P.rovidentialist))
133
(chiefly psychology) The human mind as the central force in thought, emotion, and behavior of an individual.
There is no more appropriate word in the Greek language for “soul”… symbolized by the butterfly… and institutionalized in the nomenclature of psych-ology (the study of the mind).
That just means that we can only control our choices not the results of those choices. But it is the choices not the results which define us. We are not a murderer just because someone dies as a result of our actions. It is intention for them to die (the choice to act so that they would die) which makes us a murderer even if our plans fail and they still live. Not legally, of course, not quite. The law must go by what is measurable and we cannot measure intention so well.
Yes, that is true. But our ultimate destiny is not physical but spiritual. And while the physical operates according to mathematical laws with no regard to our beliefs and desires, the spiritual is just the opposite. That is why the physical is objective while the spiritual is subjective. And this is God’s perfect justice, that what we have made of ourselves by our own choices is our ultimate destiny.
Without any intervention that means everyone is consumed by their sins. But in Christ, God gives us another choice, to put our destiny in His care. This does not, however, mean a magical escape from the consequences of our previous choices but it does mean that God leads us through a process of removing our sins.
Incorrect. If we were created for obedience then we would be obedient, but we are not – given free will instead. This is because we were created for love not obedience. Our ultimate destiny is an eternal loving relationship not mere obedience. Robots excel at obedience, doing whatever the one in charge commands. God is not interested in any such thing. Only the god of this world wants this, and only people abusing religion for their own power make it all about obedience. Love requires choice not obedience, and needs people doing what love requires regardless of commands by those with power and “authority.”
Incorrect. Sin and evil remains in the world. Christians still have sin. The purpose of the cross was a restoration of our relationship with God. And not even a restoration of our own relationship with God was completed at the cross – that requires our repentance and faith, putting ourselves in God’s hands. That is what is referred to as justification. The removal of the self-destructive habits of sin, known as sanctification, then begins. And it is a long painful process. Since this extends beyond death some foolishly call this “purgatory” based on the bizarre premise that some people are without sin. But all of us have sin so there is only two destinations. Heaven where our sin is removed and Hell where our sin devours us.
But for many, Christianity has been replaced with Gnosticism and paganism. Where the salvation they teach is simply appeasement of an angry god, favor purchased by knowing and agreeing with dogma. They replace God with a mafia godfather and Christianity with a protection racket where everyone must purchase protection from the “loving” godfather or be destroyed – purchasing protection with their own integrity exchanged for obedience ready to do whatever their god of this world commands. This is an Satanic mockery of Christianity which must be destroyed before it turns the world into a living hell.
You seem to imply that love to and from God somehow contradicts obedience of God’s command (which includes that we love each other as Christ does, as well as do not kill, steal, lie, etc.).