is the soul physical or spiritual?

[vnct]

It is not a silly argument, but an important one as vnct is asking many questions and getting contradictory answers that are not biblically based.

this is probably why i'm asking so many contradictory questions, lolol. my questions become multiplied.

 

[GenemZ]

what then sustains the existence of righteous and wicked souls in the afterlife if not their human spirits? is the the Holy Spirit instead sustaining the souls of the righteous and the wicked in the afterlife?

Those souls can not be sustained in time and space without a body. God does have other dimensions... spiritual spheres ... where a soul can experience sensation and life, all without a physical body. The account of Lazarus and the Rich man is a perfect example. The Rich man who was placed in Torments begged for a cool cup of water for his painful tongue. You can try and say its a myth, but the way Jesus presented it, to be a myth, would make him out to be a deceiver.

what then sustains the existence of the souls in hell if not the human spirits of the wicked? The Holy Spirit?

Why should a soul that is placed outside of time and space be needing something to sustain it?

did the Holy Spirit then replace the human spirit of Jesus for sustainment of the soul?

Matter of fact. Yes.

1 Peter 3:18-20
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for
the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put
to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,
by whom also He went and preached to the spirits
in prison, the ark was being prepared, in which a
few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.
who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine
long suffering waited in the days of Noah, while ​

.




.

 

[GenemZ]

are these souls conscious between the time of mortal death and the acquisition of the resurrection body?

Yes... obviously. They were recalling what got them into Heaven, and were petitioning the Lord for judgment and revenge for their unjust deaths. You really can not see this?

Revelation 6:9-10
"When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar
the souls of those who had been slain because of the word
of God and the testimony they had maintained.
They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord,
holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth
and avenge our blood?"



​

.

 

[GenemZ]

Hi Genez,
RND has answered you much earlier in this thread, and to the point and then so did I.

Here is one question. How does a disembodied soul get a white robe to wear?

Revelation 7:13-14



Then one of the elders asked me, "These in white robes—
who are they, and where did they come from?"

I answered, "Sir, you know."

And he said, "These are they who have come out of
the great tribulation; they have washed their robes
and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Blood is white? These robes were washed in the blood of Jesus.

White robes?
​

They were wearing robes of righteousness!
​

Job 29:14
"I put on righteousness as my clothing;
justice was my robe and my turban."


and...



Isaiah 61:10
"I delight greatly in the LORD;
my soul rejoices in my God.
For he has clothed me with garments of salvation
and arrayed me in a robe of righteousness,
as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest,
and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels."
​

.
Their souls were robed (covered) with the blood of the Lamb. They were made righteous and arrayed in robes of righteousness.

Revelation 3:4-5
"Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled
their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white,
for they are worthy. He who overcomes will, like them,
be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from
the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my
Father and his angels."
​

These white robes are not physical robes that go on a physical body. They are robed in RIGHTEOUSNESS.


And, last but not least...

Revelation 19:8
"It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen,
bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous
acts of the saints."

The Bible defines what is being said in the context of the complete book.





.
​

 

[RND]

The Bible defines what is being said in the context of the complete book.

​

That's right. And clothing is always compared to righteousness in the scripture, both Old and New.

Job 29:14 I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment [was] as a robe and a diadem.

Isa 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh [himself] with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth [herself] with her jewels.

That's why we are encouraged to "put on" Christ, to be clothed in his righteousness.

Rom 13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to [fulfil] the lusts [thereof].

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Rev 19:14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
The same word applies for each highlighted word. Enduo which means: (in the sense of sinking into a garment); to invest with clothing (literally or figuratively):--array, clothe (with), endue, have (put) on.

 

[Mikecpking]

Fantastic source?

​

Not exactly my idea of someone being led of the Holy Spirit and providing insight into the Word of God. Yet? That is a recommended sight to see what you believe?

John 16:13​

"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will


guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own;


he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you


what is yet to come."​

I also noticed another link that was provided by another on your side. That one was produced by Christadelphians. They do not believe in the Deity of Christ, nor in the Trinity.​

What are these really "fantastic" references your side has been providing so far? Authoritative?​

So far, I have an Atheist telling me what the Bible means, and even denies Moses was a prophet? Denies that God's Word transformed the Jews and that it was simply their own creation? And, another group (Christadelphians) giving the breakdown on the soul and spirit, and denies the Trinity and the Deity of the Holy Spirit?​

Sorry to say...I don't buy it. What Spirit filled Christian would?​

.​

Sure, I agree with you about the Christadelphians, but it does not mean that the atheist writing an academic study of the Hebrew word 'nephesh' would necessarily be in error.

Here is another one:
http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_14.pdf

This one is from the Seventh Day Adventists. Even though I am not a member of that faith group, and am not a follower of Ellen White, on this point they are right.


Now, are you simply going to hide by this kind of smoke screen or are you goind to answer post #318 or any of my earlier postings?

 

[Gary51]

While it may not seem like it (much to my chagrin actually), I really have no desire to "win" a debate with Gene or anyone else. I do earnestly feel very compelled to stamp out the extreme error that most Christians have adopted from the ancient pagan religions with this notion that man, in his present condition, is somehow "immortal" without Jesus Christ.

Gary, I wanted to again let you know I appreciate your comments and to let you know that for me it's not about debate but correcting error.

Kudos to that.

 

[GenemZ]

Sure, I agree with you about the Christadelphians, but it does not mean that the atheist writing an academic study of the Hebrew word 'nephesh' would necessarily be in error.

Here is another one:
http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_14.pdf

This one is from the Seventh Day Adventists. Even though I am not a member of that faith group, and am not a follower of Ellen White, on this point they are right.

If you say so, he must be?

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.? He was booted out of Compurserve by consensus when it was owned by H&R Block. When it was the best debate forums online. Many of the Christians boo'd his posts to his face because of the spirit they were written in. He would complain that his qualifications deserved more respect than that. They did not buy it.

I remember his name for that reason. He had strained rationales backed up with all sorts of data, just like you do. He was seen through a mile away. Sorry, you are consistently hitting upon heretical sources to make your point. Some of his data will be correct, but the mind he concludes with is what counts when he crosses over the finish line.

Now, are you simply going to hide by this kind of smoke screen or are you goind to answer post #318 or any of my earlier postings?

Its not a smoke screen, sir. I am trying to clear the air. So far you offer an atheist, anti-Trinitarians, and this last one. Not a very good batting record in my book. Like I said earlier (and got called on it)... I am tempted to being bored with what I am dealing with here. I had a similar experience with a Jehovah Witness in another forum that also used to give the same kind of long posts with lots of data, but unbiblical conclusions. To begin refuting even one point would be to invite a long litany of distortions and rationales. That's why I wish to leave this thread as soon as deemed right to.

I am content to leave anyone who wishes to believe your heresy if they want to. If they want to believe it, they are welcome to it. They deserve it.

That is how I feel about such a matter when it comes to our very soul. I give you passages that prove souls are alive without bodies? And, you want to to look at yet another link to tell me to forget what we read. I have had enough of this. Anyone who can believe the human soul which was created in God's image, is nothing more than what your conclusions state? They deserve to believe it, and can have it. The Holy Spirit in almost any Christian would say that what you conclude is dreary and loveless. That is the only way I can describe it.

What you present almost sounds like the same rationale Communism used in regards to the human soul. That man is only a superior animal.


Have a nice Day, GeneZ


.

 

[RND]

If you say so, he must be?

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.? He was booted out of Compurserve by consensus when it was owned by H&R Block. When it was the best debate forums online. Many of the Christians boo'd his posts to his face because of the spirit they were written in. He would complain that his qualifications deserved more respect than that. They did not buy it. I remember his name for that reason. He had strained rationales that he was seen through a mile away. Sorry, you are consistently hitting upon heretical sources to make your point. Somew of his data will be correct, but the mind he concludes with is what counts when he crosses over the line.

Wow, I'd love to see actual evidence of this other than hearsay.

 

[GenemZ]

Kudos to that.

Interesting. Do you really understand what he teaches?


I think not.

 

[GenemZ]

Wow, I'd love to see actual evidence of this other than hearsay.

I was there. Saw what a pain he was to others. I left him alone pretty much. He kept popping up, and leaving. Finally left in a huff.

I do not want to get our eyes off of the fact that the first two references your side provided were both from ungodly sources. An atheist, and a sect that among other things, deny the Trinity of God and the Deity of Christ. Lets stick with just those two if you do not believe me about what I witnessed to in Compuserve.


Here's a taste...

Christadelphians reject a number of doctrines held by many other Christians, notably the immortality of the soul, trinitarianism,[65][68] the pre-existence of Jesus Christ.
Christadelphians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christadelphianism teaches the same two lies as literally every cult and false religion: they deny the deity of Jesus Christ and preach a works-based salvation. Regarding the deity of Christ, Christadelphianism teaches that Jesus was more than a man, but less than God.
What is Christadelphianism and what do Christadelphians believe?

Now.. That is what agrees with your doctrinal bias concerning the human soul.

That and an atheist. Not a good place to start.

How about some references where a Christian can know they are of God to begin with? Find any? That's the problem. You can not.



.

 

[RND]

I was there. Saw what a pain he was to others. I left him alone pretty much. He kept popping up, and leaving. Finally left in a huff.

I do not want to get our eyes off of the fact that the first two references your side provided were both from ungodly sources. An atheist, and a sect that among other things, deny the Trinity of God and the Deity of Christ. Lets stick with just those two if you do not believe me about what I witnessed to in Compuserve.


Here's a taste...

Gene, I'm not on any side. I'm a big boy and I can make my own arguments and use my own references. What someone else has tried to reference is not attributable to my arguments because I don't need them. I can make all of my arguments from the Scriptures.

Your dilemma, as I see it, is the number of posts I have made that question your thought process and understanding of scripture have yet to be answered by you.

 

[GenemZ]

Gene, I'm not on any side. I'm a big boy and I can make my own arguments and use my own references. What someone else has tried to reference is not attributable to my arguments because I don't need them. I can make all of my arguments from the Scriptures.

Your dilemma, as I see it, is the number of posts I have made that question your thought process and understanding of scripture have yet to be answered by you.

Your argument is sheer chutzpah and incredulous.

You conveniently ignore what I do present when I do. Yet, demand that I give serious consideration for what you offer. I give positions that you can not refute. You dismiss what I say and say its from paganism. If that were true? A great deal of the NT is invalid.

So? I should still consider your contradictory conclusion of what you present from knowingly corrupted sources? An Atheist, and and sect that denies the Deity of Christ? Why?

Why can't you present scholarly proof from established Christian scholars? Why can't you produce one? If your position were valid there would be some established scholars that would accept it. You only offer heretical minds, or questionable at best. If your position were true there would be a more even divide amongst accepted Christian scholars.

You continue to ignore the passages I do present without refuting them other to repeat your generalized conclusion that is all based upon you biased view.

I'll play the game. Not with hopes of gaining something I did not know. But to study the modus operandi of folks who wish to promote such teachings as these. It amazes me how you will discount the background of the sources you recommended. Just like you dismiss what I present. It appears to be a part of the tactic you opt for.



In Christ, GeneZ



.

 

[vnct]

USES OF NEPHESH​

22 times: of animals alone (Gen. 1:21-28)
7 times: of men and animals together (Num. 31:28)
53 times: of individuals, persons (Gen. 2:7)
96 times: of persons doing things (Lev. 5:1, 2, and 4)
22 times: of man: appetites, and animal desires (Prov. 6:30; Gen. 34:3)
231 times: of man: mental faculties, emotions (Gen. 34:3; Num. 21:4)
22 times: souls cut off by God (Psa. 78:50)
32 times: souls killed by man (Josh. 11:11)
242 times: souls subject to DEATH (Eze. 18:4; Psa. 22:29)
13times: souls actually DEAD (Isa. 53:12)
13 times: souls going to grave (Job 33:22)
(Note: Last 5, over 320 times, souls dead, dying, subject to death)

the bible seems to reference a number of dead souls.

 

[vnct]

SUMMARY​

Now, to sum up the points that have been covered:
1. We have seen that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is admittedly traced to heathen Greek philosophers, and its followers are quite willing to concede that the Bible meaning of soul is something very different.
2. The issue is clear and there is no middle ground we must choose between Bible teaching and human speculation.
3. The words nephesh and psuche, translated "soul," occur 850 times in the Bible and in not one case is there any suggestion of immortality.
4. The translators have used over 40 words in translation and a glance at this list shows how far different the Bible soul is from the orthodox one.
5. The word is first used of ANIMALS.
6. One-third of all its occurrences speak of it in terms indicating its mortality and subjection to death.
7. It is often spoken of as being killed by man, and it is several times spoken of as actually being dead, and being handled and touched in a dead state.

ANYTHING MORE DIFFERENT
FROM THE IMMORTAL SOUL THEORY

IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE.​

is everyone in agreement?

 

[vnct]

Hi,
I don't think it can be compared exactly as the notion of 'soul' in Hinduism and Buddism cannot be compared either. 'Breath' (pneuma, ruach) is of a special in breathing in every human as 'breath of life'. This goes back to God upon death of that person.

they seem a bit similar to me maybe. in what ways might they be different?

 

[RND]

Your argument is sheer chutzpah and incredulous.

Truth does that to some.

You conveniently ignore what I do present when I do. Yet, demand that I give serious consideration for what you offer. I give positions that you can not refute. You dismiss what I say and say its from paganism. If that were true? A great deal of the NT is invalid.

No, that simply means that people view the NT with the eyes of those steeped in paganism for centuries. Just because many. many, many people believe an error doesn't make the error true.

So? I should still consider your contradictory conclusion of what you present from knowingly corrupted sources? An Atheist, and and sect that denies the Deity of Christ? Why?

As I said, my arguments come from the Bible and the Bible alone. Whatever source someone else has used has nothing to do with my argument Gene. Please, don't try to place that on me.

Why can't you present scholarly proof from established Christian scholars?

You mean the Bible isn't satisfactory?

Why can't you produce one?

Brother, I could produce many, but what's the point? The Bible can speak for itself. I can read what it says.

If your position were valid there would be some established scholars that would accept it. You only offer heretical minds, or questionable at best. If your position were true there would be a more even divide amongst accepted Christian scholars.

Brother, understanding Christianity isn't a popularity contest. There are a number of scholars that belief in conditional immortality. Gene, Bible truths are not determined by the most popular view or the one everyone "thinks" is right. And yet the fact remains that nothing in the Bible even hints at man having natural immortality. Thus, I'll stick with proving my argument from the Scriptures.

You continue to ignore the passages I do present without refuting them other to repeat your generalized conclusion that is all based upon you biased view.

Brother, I've "refuted" plenty of your misunderstandings and misinterpretations. I've asked a number of question that you deflect and obfuscate away from.

I'll play the game. Not with hopes of gaining something I did not know. But to study the modus operandi of folks who wish to promote such teachings as these. It amazes me how you will discount the background of the sources you recommended.

Please brother Gene - I recommended no sources to you. That was someone else. Let's move on and stop obfuscating.

Just like you dismiss what I present. It appears to be a part of the tactic you opt for.

Brother Gene, I don't dismiss what you present I correct your error.

 

[GenemZ]

No, that simply means that people view the NT with the eyes of those steeped in paganism for centuries. Just because many. many, many people believe an error doesn't make the error true.

If you are going to use that line all the time you better start producing some specifics. Paganism in many forms believed in life after death. So, we reject eternal life because they believe that? You always give that in a vague generalized fashion. Tell us specifically. Without cutting and pasting. In what way have Christians been paganized in regards to the soul?


The Jews believed in an after life. Those who knew their Torah did.

Brother, I could produce many, but what's the point? The Bible can speak for itself. I can read what it says.

If what you said were true? Your side would not be using the ones you offer. The fact that your side keeps picking heretics or offshoot sects speaks volumes. Your modus operandi? "Deny and Defy." That's all you have to work with.

Brother, understanding Christianity isn't a popularity contest. There are a number of scholars that belief in conditional immortality. Gene, Bible truths are not determined by the most popular view or the one everyone "thinks" is right.

I am the last one to belong to the popular view on issues when it comes to the Bible. When you are in a view that is unpopular the burden is on you to provide greater details which you are not providing. You only provide generic data lists and then demand that we draw the same conclusion that you feel comfortable with. If you could get beyond the generic, it would help you if you are right. Throwing out those lists of lexiconical definitions and then running to a conclusion means nothing.

And yet the fact remains that nothing in the Bible even hints at man having natural immortality. Thus, I'll stick with proving my argument from the Scriptures.

Death does not mean one's soul ceases to exist. Death is a type of existence.

A body without a soul is dead. The body is dead. The soul is then dead to the world without a body, but it remains existing. That is why the euphemism in reference to the believer is "sleep." Because when we sleep our soul does not stop existing, we are simply not body conscious. You are not conscious of your body when you sleep.

Contrary to your thinking in regards to the soul, the Jews who read and understood the OT knew that the soul lived on.

Saul swore to her by the LORD, "As surely as the LORD
lives, you will not be punished for this."
Then the woman asked, "Whom shall I bring up for you?"
"Bring up Samuel," he said.
When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out at the top of
her voice and said to Saul,
"Why have you deceived me? You are Saul!"

The king said to her, "Don't be afraid. What do you see?"
The woman said, "I see a spirit coming up out of the ground."
"What does he look like?" he asked.
"An old man wearing a robe is coming up," she said.
Then Saul knew it was Samuel, and he bowed down and prostrated
himself with his face to the ground.


Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed
me by bringing me up?"

"I am in great distress," Saul said. "The Philistines are fighting
against me, and God has turned away from me. He no longer
answers me, either by prophets or by dreams. So I have called
on you to tell me what to do."
1 Samuel 28:10-15
​

Brother, I've "refuted" plenty of your misunderstandings and misinterpretations. I've asked a number of question that you deflect and obfuscate away from.

You did not refute. You just expressed your opinion against what I presented. Refutation requires a systematic exposing of falsehood. Something like what I did when I showed the character references for the several links to sources for your claimed dogma.

Please brother Gene - I recommended no sources to you. That was someone else. Let's move on and stop obfuscating.

Well, where are your sources then? . They better be better than what I seen already if you are ever going to get me to reconsider. All your side offers is opinion based upon what you have concluded from what someone else taught you. It just does not stand.

Brother Gene, I don't dismiss what you present I correct your error.

You may think you do. But you offer me nothing of substance. Nothing to think with. Only your opinion with conclusions that your buddies amen to.




What your teaching says? Let me make sure I have this right. Is that the soul is our animal life. Do I have that correct?

That without a body we have no soul. The soul requires a body to be a soul. That is what your words have been conveying to me. I want to make sure I am reading that much right.



In Christ, GeneZ


.

 

[Gary51]

Interesting. Do you really understand what he teaches?

Enough to see that you do not!

I think not.

You think wrong!

“And the lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground
And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life
And man became a living soul”
Genesis 2:7

God formed man’s body from dust and blew into him a soul
And death is reverse of that process of that
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was
And the spirit shall return to God who gave it
Ecc. 12:7

What is the spirit mentioned in these texts?
The spirit of god is in my nostrils
Job 27:3

The word spirit in these texts has a marginal reference
Which reads “or breath”
The actual root word is “pneuma”
A word which means breath or air
“And the lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground
And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life
And man became a living soul”
Genesis 2:7

The soul is the combination of these 2 factors
Body (dust)
+
Spirit (breath)

=
A living soul

When one is missing, the soul is dead
Can the soul really die?
“the soul that sinneth, it shall die”Ezekiel 18:20
What happens when a soul dies?
Does the soul go to heaven?
Or Hell?

Answer:It ceases to exist and the breath of life,
Which made up part of the soul,
Returns to God
“all that are in the graves
shall hear his voice
and shall come forth”John5:28-29
What did Christ say about the dead
“Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep
But I go that I may awake him out of sleep
The disciples therefore said unto Him,
Lord, if is fallen asleep ,he will recover
Now Jesus had spoken of his death
But they thought he had spake of
Taking rest in sleep
Then Jesus therefore said unto them plainly
Lazarus is dead”John 11:11-14

“We that are alive that are left unto the coming of the Lord
Shall in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep
…for the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,
With the voice of the archangel
And with the trump of God
And the dead in Christ shall rise first
1 Thess 4:15-16
Meaning all the dead are asleep till the second coming

What about the thief on the cross?
And he said unto Jesus,
Lord, remember me when thou comest into they kingdom
And Jesus said unto him
Verily I say unto thee
Today shalt thou be with me in paradise”
Luke 23:43.

Common Misunderstanding:
Jesus told the thief on the cross
They would both be in heaven on the same day

Cause of misunderstanding:
Placement of comma

True Explanation:
Placement of comma after "today"

CONFIRMATION

“Jesus saieth unto her…”touch me not
For I am not yet ascended to my father
But go to my brethren
And say unto them
I ascend unto my father
And your father
And to my God and your GodJohn 20:17
Two days after Christ’s death
He told Mary he had not yet ascended
To His father in heaven.
This means Christ could not have been in Paradise
The day of His death and the thief on the cross
Is sleeping now, just like all the dead.

But isn’t it truth that all God’s children go to heaven?
Answer:
Yes, but not before the second coming
“Men and brethren let me freely speak to you
Of the patriarch David that he is both dead and buried
And his sepulchre is with us unto this day
Acts2:29
“For David is not ascended into heaven”Acts2:34
So all the dead are still asleep in their graves
And are unaware of what is going on around them.
“so man lieth down and riseth not
till the heavens be no more
they shall not awake or be raised out of their sleep….
….his sons come to honour and he knoweth it not
and they are brought low but he perceiveth it not of them
Job 12:12,21
“so man lieth down and riseth not
till the heavens be no more
Job 14:12
The day of the Lord shall come
in the which the heavens and earth shall pass away2 Peter 3:10
The heavens are still here
And so is the dead.
Christ tells us
“Behold I come quickly
And my reward is with me
To give every man according as his work shall be
Rev 22:12
The Lord himself shall descend from heaven
With a shout…and the dead in Christ shall rise…
And so shall we ever be with the Lord
1 Thess 4:16-17
“we shall all be changed in a moment
in the twinkling of an eye
And the dead shall be raised incorruptible
For this corruptible must put on incorruptible
And this mortal must put on immortality
1 cor 15:51-53

 

[Gary51]

Why can't you present scholarly proof from established Christian scholars?

Just what to you think so called Christian scholars can prove? And who are these so called Christian scholars? Are they mainstream college taught folk waving bits of paper saying, "Look at my credentials?" Are they great authors of published works?

I can give you a list of great scholars on any subject.... Does that make them right? How about reading some great published works written by Islamic scholars!!!

Why can't you produce one? .

He has produce himself.... Deal with him!