Soul: Why do Christians ignore the evidence?

[Radrook]

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
and all are justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Romans 3:23-24

82 Bible Verses about Sin

But that scripture cannot be understood in isolation from all others which demand that we qualify its application. Scriptural interpretation in isolation is a common mistake.

 

[SkyWriting]

But that scripture cannot be understood in isolation from all others which demand that we qualify its application. Scriptural interpretation in isolation is a common mistake.

Good call! It's lazy to just condemn others with no research.

1. (Romans 3:9-10)--"What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one."
2. (Romans 3:23)--"for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
3. (Psalm 14:3)--"They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one."
4. Ephesians 2:3 3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

82 Bible Verses about Sin

 

[Bob Carabbio]

The atheist doesn't believe I a resurrection of the dead while I do.

BTw
Why would total inexistence or being totally annihilated be preferable to a resurrection or having an immortal soul?

Completely OBVIOUS: "Heaven" isn't an option for non-believers, or Atheists according to the Biblical record, so naturally Annihilation is INFINITELY PREFERABLE to eternity in Hell, and the Lake of fire with some REALLY lousy neighbors (satan and his folks).

Simple as that!!

 

[Radrook]

Completely OBVIOUS: "Heaven" isn't an option for non-believers, or Atheists according to the Biblical record, so naturally Annihilation is INFINITELY PREFERABLE to eternity in Hell, and the Lake of fire with some REALLY lousy neighbors (satan and his folks).

Simple as that!!

I agree! Given the idea of ECT and annihilation, annihilation obviously is preferable.

 

[Hillsage]

Jesus has eyes of fire in revelation. The garden of eden is protected by a flaming sword, and he will baptize with fire. Wow. The lake of fire, baptism is done in a lake isn't it?

"God is a consuming fire" Thank God I won't have to be 'thrown' into Him (the lake of fire?) at His final consummation of ALL things. Because I have already learned to 'walk into' both the waters of baptism and the purgative fires of our God WILLINGLY.

ISA 43:2 When you pass through the waters I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you.

Thankfully "death" is also thrown into the lake of fire (God?), along with "Hell/HADES". And thank God they both are, because they are both enemies of God and man.

1CO 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave/HADES, where is thy victory?

1CO 15:26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

As I make that final walk into God, whatever is left that needs purifying will certainly be consumed/destroyed/burned up/off. If there is then, nothing supportive for death then I find no logic dictating the need for a grave/HELL, either. Which only leaves praise for my victorious God!

 

[W2L]

"God is a consuming fire" Thank God I won't have to be 'thrown' into Him (the lake of fire?) at His final consummation of ALL things. Because I have already learned to 'walk into' both the waters of baptism and the purgative fires of our God WILLINGLY.

ISA 43:2 When you pass through the waters I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you.

Thankfully "death" is also thrown into the lake of fire (God?), along with "Hell/HADES". And thank God they both are, because they are both enemies of God and man.

1CO 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave/HADES, where is thy victory?

1CO 15:26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

As I make that final walk into God, whatever is left that needs purifying will certainly be consumed/destroyed/burned up/off. If there is then, nothing supportive for death then I find no logic dictating the need for a grave/HELL, either. Which only leaves praise for my victorious God!

Thanks for the scriptures.

 

[Der Alte]

...The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia explains: “We are influenced always more or less by the Greek, Platonic idea that the body dies, yet the soul is immortal. Such an idea is utterly contrary to the Israelite consciousness and is nowhere found in the Old Testament” (1960, Vol. 2, p. 812, “Death”)...

Now let us read the rest of the paragraph this quote is taken from.

The whole man dies, when in death the spirit (Psa_146:4; Ecc_12:7), or soul (Gen_35:18; 2Sa_1:9; 1Ki_17:21; Jon_4:3), goes out of a man. Not only his body, but his soul also returns to a state of death and belongs to the nether-world; therefore the Old Testament can speak of a death of one's soul (Gen_37:21 (Hebrew); Num_23:10 m; Deu_22:21; Jdg_16:30; Job_36:14; Psa_78:50), and of defilement by coming in contact with a dead body (Lev_19:28; Lev_21:11; Lev_22:4; Num_5:2; Num_6:6; Num_9:6; Num_19:10; Deu_14:1; Hag_2:13). This death of man is not annihilation, however, but a deprivation of all that makes for life on earth. The Sheol (she'ōl) is in contrast with the land of the living in every respect (Job_28:13; Pro_15:24; Eze_26:20; Eze_32:23); it is an abode of darkness and the shadow of death (Job_10:21, Job_10:22; Psa_88:12; Psa_143:3), a place of destruction, yea destruction itself (Job_26:6; Job_28:22; Job_31:12; Psa_88:11; Pro_27:20), without any order (Job_10:22), a land of rest, of silence, of oblivion (Job_3:13, Job_3:17, Job_3:18; Psa_94:17; Psa_115:17), where God and man are no longer to be seen (Isa_38:11), God no longer praised or thanked (Psa_6:5; Psa_115:17), His perfections no more acknowledged (Psa_88:10-13; Isa_38:18, Isa_38:19), His wonders not contemplated (Psa_88:12), where the dead are unconscious, do no more work, take no account of anything, possess no knowledge nor wisdom, neither have any more a portion in anything that is done under the sun (Ecc_9:5, Ecc_9:6, Ecc_9:10). The dead (“the Shades” the Revised Version, margin; compare article DECEASED) are asleep (Job_26:5; Pro_2:18; Pro_9:18; Pro_21:6; Psa_88:11; Isa_14:9), weakened (Isa_14:10) and without strength (Psa_88:4).​

 

[Basil the Great]

Remember that even in Augustine's time, he wrote that many did not accept the teaching of eternal punishment.

 

[KawaiiChristianGal]

Well you cited the old testament that was before heaven and hell was opened up, the believers of God went to Abrahams Bosom, and the others went to a resting place of sorts... but there is numerous upon numerous evidences pointing to an afterlife after we die. Jesus talks about it as well. It would make no sense for Christ to have lived and died for our sins if we just die and that's it, the whole thought of dying and ceasing to exist sounds a lot similar to atheism. Now I can understand some Christians going as far as to deny eternal hellfire even though I believe in hell and that it is not temporal but permanent, but I cannot grasp how someone can read scripture and come to such a conclusion as dying and there being no after life...

 

[Gregory Thompson]

a common passage used when christians are debating abortion indicates that the soul was created within God, so if the soul is a breath that comes from God like it was with Adam, then it would be confusing if the very breath of God could die.

 

[Question ?]

Well you cited the old testament that was before heaven and hell was opened up, the believers of God went to Abrahams Bosom, and the others went to a resting place of sorts... but there is numerous upon numerous evidences pointing to an afterlife after we die. Jesus talks about it as well. It would make no sense for Christ to have lived and died for our sins if we just die and that's it, the whole thought of dying and ceasing to exist sounds a lot similar to atheism. Now I can understand some Christians going as far as to deny eternal hellfire even though I believe in hell and that it is not temporal but permanent, but I cannot grasp how someone can read scripture and come to such a conclusion as dying and there being no after life...

 

[Question ?]

Excellently wrote. Well said. name-one

 

[Uncle Tommy]

No I am not attacking Christianity nor Christians.
Only seeking to find out why definitions by learned Christian scholars are totally ignored.
If indeed a Christian wishes to please God then a Christian wants to worship the right way and believe the right things even though they might prove to be different than what the Christian was originally taught.

I have modified my views over the years even though it required discarding concepts which I had believed to have been irrefutably true. But upon closest examination I found that they were not as accurate as had been claimed. So as a Christian my obligation was to readjust my viewpoint which I did.

My quandary, as I said, is why despite the available literature which explains things clearly concerning where the concept of the eternal immortal soul was derived do Christians insist that it was derived from the Bible.

Friend; unfortunately I am having a bit of trouble following you. Is it your contention that because the idea that a soul exists after death was taught before the Canonical Old Testament was recorded that it is not true or valid? Or, are you simply pointing out that the concept did exist prior to the recording of the OT without any conclusion as to it's veracity?

 

[tucker58]

No I am not attacking Christianity nor Christians.
Only seeking to find out why definitions by learned Christian scholars are totally ignored.
If indeed a Christian wishes to please God then a Christian wants to worship the right way and believe the right things even though they might prove to be different than what the Christian was originally taught.

I have modified my views over the years even though it required discarding concepts which I had believed to have been irrefutably true. But upon closest examination I found that they were not as accurate as had been claimed. So as a Christian my obligation was to readjust my viewpoint which I did.

My quandary, as I said, is why despite the available literature which explains things clearly concerning where the concept of the eternal immortal soul was derived do Christians insist that it was derived from the Bible.

Lord Jesus claimed that He was leaving for a place where He was going to prepare a place for us in the house of His Father and an He also claimed that His Father lived in Heaven. Radrook, what you are promoting is the Jehovah Witness version of Christianity, which actually gives the Old Testament more validity than the New Testament and the fact that Lord Jesus said that He came to replace the old law kind of goes down the tube, so to speak. But just for the sake of discussion, even if very few of the folks in the Old Testament were taken to Heaven and most just died and were dead because they fell far short of the glory of God, that does not mean that those that come under the salvation of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus do . Radrook, you are kind of neutering the power of Lord Jesus and what He can do for those that love Him and follow him. And on a personal note, Lord Jesus has showed me Heaven, He took me there, the first level anyway, so I know that it is real. Yes, it is different than here, but it is real. Radrook, as a Christian, you really have no idea of the "power" of your Lord and Savior and the "power" of His love for those who follow Him. The miracle of eternal life in the house of His Father for those that follow Him is quite easy as miracles go for Lord Jesus. But I guess if you want to go back to the old days before Lord Jesus, oh well .

 

[Radrook]

Lord Jesus claimed that He was leaving for a place where He was going to prepare a place for us in the house of His Father and an He also claimed that His Father lived in Heaven. Radrook, what you are promoting is the Jehovah Witness version of Christianity, which actually gives the Old Testament more validity than the New Testament and the fact that Lord Jesus said that He came to replace the old law kind of goes down the tube, so to speak. But just for the sake of discussion, even if very few of the folks in the Old Testament were taken to Heaven and most just died and were dead because they fell far short of the glory of God, that does not mean that those that come under the salvation of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus do . Radrook, you are kind of neutering the power of Lord Jesus and what He can do for those that love Him and follow him. And on a personal note, Lord Jesus has showed me Heaven, He took me there, the first level anyway, so I know that it is real. Yes, it is different than here, but it is real. Radrook, as a Christian, you really have no idea of the "power" of your Lord and Savior and the "power" of His love for those who follow Him. The miracle of eternal life in the house of His Father for those that follow Him is quite easy as miracles go for Lord Jesus. But I guess if you want to go back to the old days before Lord Jesus, oh well .

I am no longer a JWs and have absolutely no interest in promoting their theology.
I attend the local Catholic Church and am planning to get baptized soon at that church.
I go for communion there and participate in the services and have been blessed for it.

Please point out where I said that I don't believe that all Christians go to heaven.

 

[Radrook]

Friend; unfortunately I am having a bit of trouble following you. Is it your contention that because the idea that a soul exists after death was taught before the Canonical Old Testament was recorded that it is not true or valid? Or, are you simply pointing out that the concept did exist prior to the recording of the OT without any conclusion as to it's veracity?

The question is why do you reject the Christian sources cited?
Why proclaim the statements in those sources invalid?
Care to answer that question please.

BTW
The only one spoken of in the Bible as having immortality is God himself.

“I give you charge in the sight of God, who quickens all things [literally ‘makes all alive’], and before Christ Jesus, … That you keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only has immortality [Greek root word athanasia], dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”

• 1 Timothy 6:13–16

 

[Uncle Tommy]

The question is why do you reject the Christian sources cited?
Why proclaim the statements in those sources invalid?
Care to answer that question please.

BTW
The only one spoken of in the Bible as having immortality is God himself.

“I give you charge in the sight of God, who quickens all things [literally ‘makes all alive’], and before Christ Jesus, … That you keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only has immortality [Greek root word athanasia], dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man has seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”

• 1 Timothy 6:13–16

Wouldn't it make sense to ask me if I do indeed proclaim the statements invalid?

 

[Radrook]

Wouldn't it make sense to ask me if I do indeed proclaim the statements invalid?

Well, you seem to be doing so I assumed you had.

 

[Uncle Tommy]

As for your sources; I view them as I view all sources produced by educated men, not to be summarily dismissed and to be compared with their peers and other available evidence. I have not dismissed your resources and am currently learning more about the subject.

 

[John Hyperspace]

Considering what Christian reliable sources of info say about the origin of the concept of an immortal soul, why do Christians insists on the contrary?

The New Bible Dictionary: “The Greeks thought of the body as a hindrance to true life and they looked for the time when the soul would be free from its shackles. They conceived of life after death in terms of the immortality of the soul” (1996, p. 1010, “Resurrection”).

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia explains: “We are influenced always more or less by the Greek, Platonic idea that the body dies, yet the soul is immortal. Such an idea is utterly contrary to the Israelite consciousness and is nowhere found in the Old Testament” (1960, Vol. 2, p. 812, “Death”).

Bear in mind that for every 'reliable source' that says 'that is true' you can also find another 'reliable source' that says 'that is not true' so, really, I'm not sure 'reliable sources' are that special as to be involved in the understanding of doctrine, and we're better off just letting the scripture itself do the teaching and pray to God for understanding.

About the soul,

Genesis 35:18 It has some form that "goes out" at death
1 Kings 17:20-22 And can "come back" after death (though this is obviously not the usual natural case, though the Lord did here listen to the prayer of Elijah and cause the boy's "departed soul" to "come back into him" and he revived)

Matthew 10:28 Here we find Jesus making a clear distinction between death of the mortal body, as opposed to the "soul/psyche" which men cannot kill.

So these seem to be correlating the form of "soul" that is of the idea of something that death has no hold over, and that persists beyond death in some form. I believe what is going on is that the authors are using the material soul (nepesh/taking breath) as the earthly form of the immaterial soul, in the same way the material spirit (ruach/breath) is used in its earthly form to teach of the immaterial spirit. It seems that the earthly things are being used to teach about the heavenly things.

“For the living know that they will die; but the dead know nothing” (Ecclesiastes 9:5)

This is contextually true (as are all the scripture, of course) but I believe it's of note that the phrase "under the sun" is consistently being used by the writer to indicate that he is talking from an earthly point of view on life, and so when the earthly soul dies it naturally has no part in earthly works any longer: it does not praise, nor speak, nor have knowledge. This of course is also relatable to the "heavenly" counterpart in that "spiritual death" meaning, those apart from God, in spiritual darkness.

About immortality,

It seems that the immaterial soul can also die if it is the will of God (it is within the power of God to destroy both material and immaterial soul; though man is only capable of killing a material soul, having no power to kill the immaterial soul) and thus is "mortal" as opposed to God who alone has power over the soul. Yet it is written, 1 Corinthians 15:53-54 Here it seems that though dwelling in mortality, we are to "put on immortality"; thus at the point of the resurrection there "mortality" of the soul will no longer be in danger of "death" and will enjoy the same immortality as God.