Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The Immortal Soul

The immortal soul is a pagan concept. Soul comes from a root word which means to bind. Superstitious pagan peoples would bind the hands and feet upon burial to prevent the dead from harming the living. The word evolved into a similar meaning always associated with large bodies of water (the sea) for the same reason. It was thought that the immortal souls were confined in large bodies of water, preventing them from bothering the living.

When translating the Bible from the Hebrew and Greek to English the word soul would be problematic due to it's pagan roots. However, it was the closest word we had. The Hebrew nephesh and the Greek psykhe are the Biblical terms translated into soul. The Hebrew word comes from a root that literally means "breather." The Greek word has a similar meaning. It means life and all that involves. A living being. That can be somewhat complicated by the usual obstacles, like variation in the the use of the word. Greek philosophers or modern day psychiatrists use the Greek word psykhe corresponds to the Hebrew word nephesh (nefesh, etc.)

The soul, according to the Bible, that is, nephesh or psykhe, is mortal, destructible.

Compare translations Ezekiel 18:4: "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins, he shall die." (WEB)

Compare translations Matthew 10:28: "Don't be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." (WEB)

[sep]

Journal of Biblical Literature (Vol. XVI, p. 30): “Soul in English usage at the present time conveys usually a very different meaning from נפש [ne′phesh] in Hebrew, and it is easy for the incautious reader to misinterpret.”

The New York Times, October 12, 1962: H. M. Orlinsky of Hebrew Union College states regarding nefesh: “Other translators have interpreted it to mean ‘soul,’ which is completely inaccurate. The Bible does not say we have a soul. ‘Nefesh’ is the person himself, his need for food, the very blood in his veins, his being.”

New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, V:ol. XIII, p. 467): “Nepes [ne′phesh] is a term of far greater extension than our ‘soul,’ signifying life (Ex 21.23; Dt 19.21) and its various vital manifestations: breathing (Gn 35.18; Jb 41.13[21]), blood [Gn 9.4; Dt 12.23; Ps 140(141).8], desire (2 Sm 3.21; Prv 23.2). The soul in the O[ld] T[estament] means not a part of man, but the whole man—man as a living being. Similarly, in the N[ew] T[estament] it signifies human life: the life of an individual, conscious subject (Mt 2.20; 6.25; Lk 12.22-23; 14.26; Jn 10.11, 15, 17; 13.37).”

The New American Bible Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms (pp. 27, 28): “In the New Testament, to ‘save one’s soul’ (Mk 8:35) does not mean to save some ‘spiritual’ part of man, as opposed to his ‘body’ (in the Platonic sense) but the whole person with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, loving and willing, etc., in addition to being concrete and physical.”

Koehler and Baumgartner’s Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958, p. 627) on nephesh: “the breathing substance, making man a[nd] animal living beings Gn 1, 20, the soul (strictly distinct from the greek notion of soul) the seat of which is the blood Gn 9, 4f Lv 17, 11 Dt 12, 23: (249 X) . . . soul = living being, individual, person.”

New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 449, 450: “There is no dichotomy [division] of body and soul in the O[ld] T[estament]. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepeš [ne′phesh], though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person. . . . The term [psy‧khe′] is the N[ew] T[estament] word corresponding with nepeš. It can mean the principle of life, life itself, or the living being.”

The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1976), Macropædia, Vol. 15, p. 152: “The Hebrew term for ‘soul’ (nefesh, that which breathes) was used by Moses . . . , signifying an ‘animated being’ and applicable equally to nonhuman beings. . . . New Testament usage of psychē (‘soul’) was comparable to nefesh.”

The Jewish Encyclopedia (1910), Vol. VI, p. 564: “The belief that the soul continues its existence after the dissolution of the body is a matter of philosophical or theological speculation rather than of simple faith, and is accordingly nowhere expressly taught in Holy Scripture.”

New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 452, 454: “The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the West was the soul established as a spiritual substance and a philosophical concept formed of its nature. . . . His [Augustine’s] doctrine . . . owed much (including some shortcomings) to Neoplatonism.”

Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la Bible (Valence, France; 1935), edited by Alexandre Westphal, Vol. 2, p. 557: “The concept of immortality is a product of Greek thinking, whereas the hope of a resurrection belongs to Jewish thought. . . . Following Alexander’s conquests Judaism gradually absorbed Greek concepts.”

The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556: “The problem of immortality, we have seen, engaged the serious attention of the Babylonian theologians. . . . Neither the people nor the leaders of religious thought ever faced the possibility of the total annihilation of what once was called into existence. Death was a passage to another kind of life.”

Plato’s “Phaedo,” Secs. 64, 105, as published in Great Books of the Western World (1952), edited by R. M. Hutchins, Vol. 7, pp. 223, 245, 246: “Do we believe that there is such a thing as death? . . . Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and the body is released from the soul, what is this but death? . . . And does the soul admit of death? No. Then the soul is immortal? Yes.”

Presbyterian Life, May 1, 1970, p. 35: “Immortality of the soul is a Greek notion formed in ancient mystery cults and elaborated by the philosopher Plato.”

Phaedo, 80, D, E; 81, A: Plato, quoting Socrates: "The soul, . . . if it departs pure, dragging with it nothing of the body, . . . goes away into that which is like itself, into the invisible, divine, immortal, and wise, and when it arrives there it is happy, freed from error and folly and fear . . . and all the other human ills, and . . . lives in truth through all after time with the gods."

Also see

Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, revised by H. Jones, 1968, pp. 2026, 2027;
Donnegan’s New Greek and English Lexicon, 1836, p. 1404
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
The breather and the breath are two separate things right? Can we say the breath is eternal? The breath is Life
BibleData · M
@Heavenlywarrior The writers of the Bible were pragmatic people. In the modern day their writings are often interpreted in a way that isn't pragmatic. The breather is the animal or person. The breath is the air they breath. So, in what way could the breath be said to be eternal? We won't run out of air to breath?

The breath of life, or life force, is no more after a person dies.
revenant · F
@BibleData Perhaps through the breath you find the eternal like Hindu practices.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData the breath literally leaves the body when we die. It goes into the wind. The breath or air also is where the life force is that animates the body. I have to disagree
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@revenant exactly. Becoming one with the breath.
BibleData · M
@Heavenlywarrior Okay, but, how is it you disagree? The breath isn't you. You aren't the wind. No more than you are the decaying flesh the worms eat. From the earth you were made, and to it you return, but you weren't there until you were born nor are you there after you die. So, you need to define what "you" are and how you are "one" with everything and what that "everything" or "all" is.

Now, you can do that, and it's fine. To each his own. But it isn't Biblical. Which only means your beliefs aren't Biblical. That's fine, of course, but It's one thing to have different beliefs than the Bible, it's quite another to claim those are Biblical. Not that that's what you were doing, but you are responding to my post on the Biblical teaching in contrast to the pagan teaching. By pagan I simply mean outside of, in this case, the Bible. What you are saying is outside of the Biblical.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData that’s just it tho… we are One with God… just as Christ was. We are “I Am” that breath is “I Am” living in this flesh. We are one with all things.. that’s the reason in the account Christ was killed… because he proclaimed this very message of He and The Father are One. Before Moses was. “I Am”
BibleData · M
@Heavenlywarrior We've been through this before. You're not telling me anything that means anything. You're not telling me where your beliefs come from. That's fine. But, you're not telling me what you, one or all is and what that means. Now you add two empty phrases from the Bible that mean nothing, or at least, not what you say they mean.

When I try to get anything out of you you just repeat. You don't explain. That indicates to me that you have some mix of a teaching that you like to compare to the Bible as some spiritual sort of amalgam. Like you're trying to mix clay with metal. They don't mix.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData being that the foundation of the “Bible” is transliteration mixed from ancient scrolls and tablets from Egyptian, Sumerian, Hebrew etc…. It’s only right in my opinion that my perspective be combined.

Let’s not forget the countless books that are left out of the Christian cannon.

We have been so brainwashed that we now create our theologies and way of life based on a religion instead of the general idea, or Collective truth in the Word.
BibleData · M
@Heavenlywarrior
being that the foundation of the “Bible” is transliteration mixed from ancient scrolls and tablets from Egyptian, Sumerian, Hebrew etc…. It’s only right in my opinion that my perspective be combined.

But that isn't at all the case. The "Bible" comes from Hebrew scrolls, a few verses in Aramaic and then Greek koine. No Sumerian or Egyptian at all.

Let’s not forget the countless books that are left out of the Christian cannon.

They were left out for a reason. It's like if you had an American history book and decided to combine it with Lord of the Rings. They don't go together. They aren't harmonious.

We have been so brainwashed that we now create our theologies and way of life based on a religion instead of the general idea, or Collective truth in the Word.

The problem with Jewish and Christian theology is that over time they combined it with Greek philosophy which itself came from Babylonian teachings. The immortal soul, hell, trinity, cross, Easter, Christmas, etc. That's pretty much the contribution of religion. It is what brainwashed theological Christian and Jewish doctrine.

The general idea and collective truth in the Bible isn't what you're suggesting.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData before the Hebrews// Israelites// Jacob…. It was Sumer/ it was eygpt. It was God Almighty. God was still around and used people… example : the ancient stories of Noah and the flood is found right in the enuma Elisha. Epics of Gilgamesh.

Stories passed down from tribe and culture. Abraham was part of the Chaldean and Sumerian culture. Before him , was eygpt with Joseph … the Hebrews were dwelling in Egypt and ruled in Egypt.

The laws of maat are very similar to the commandments of God.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData also what do you say of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church? Their Canon has many extra books in it. Are they wrong? If so why? Why the Roman Catholics get to dictate what’s right and acceptable?


Oh I know … because they claim to be the vicor of Christ on Earth… that all have to follow.
revenant · F
@Heavenlywarrior yes the Collective Truth and that is why you find again and again the same tales of the flood and world reconstruction.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@revenant right. I’ve noticed when I was a Christian or part of religion I did not accept ANYTHING that didn’t come from the Bible. Or from the denomination or the leading pastors… which kept me in a box and stunted my spiritual growth… there is so much to this world and the story is more complex.
revenant · F
@Heavenlywarrior I have noticed that there is SO much to learn from others and it is very rewarding to compare notes in a figurative manner. I think ancient people were much closer to the truth than we are today.
BibleData · M
@Heavenlywarrior
before the Hebrews// Israelites// Jacob…. It was Sumer/ it was eygpt. It was God Almighty. God was still around and used people… example : the ancient stories of Noah and the flood is found right in the enuma Elisha. Epics of Gilgamesh.

Stories passed down from tribe and culture. Abraham was part of the Chaldean and Sumerian culture. Before him , was eygpt with Joseph … the Hebrews were dwelling in Egypt and ruled in Egypt.

Okay. Let's say you, I and @revenant witnessed an event. The police take our stories. They're all pretty much the same. Some details differ according to our perspective, for example, you say it was light outside, revenant says it was dark and I say it was both. Still light but getting dark.

Then, a screenplay writer writes a book about the event but he spices it up for the big screen. With maybe some explosions, a dragon, a wizard, a romance and exaggerated fight scenes. The public like the film adaptation "based on a true story" because our story is boring.

Then the lawyers come in and try to spin things so the jury don't know night from day. They don't know what to believe. The lawyers are mixing our version with the Hollywood version and trying to make us look bad so our story doesn't fly with the jury. If, they say, our story doesn't fit you (the jury) must acquit.

That's kind of what happened. Elisha and Gilgamesh are Hollywood versions based on the true stories. They were circulated before Moses wrote down the true story. They aren't or even claim to be inspired by God. The true story is inspired. So, then you have to test the inspired story to see if there's anything wrong with it. If it all fits together. That isn't easy because the translation of the Bible isn't inspired. It's like reporters that tried earnestly, for the most part, though not always, to get the story right and although it was close enough, it wasn't perfect.

also what do you say of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church? Their Canon has many extra books in it. Are they wrong? If so why? Why the Roman Catholics get to dictate what’s right and acceptable?


Oh I know … because they claim to be the vicor of Christ on Earth… that all have to follow.

None of that matters too much. If the story doesn't fit then the cannon is wrong. The result is that if you know the Bible then when someone says something the Bible says and it doesn't fit, leave it out.
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@BibleData definitely a good analogy I’ll give u that. There’s so much deception I’ll say…
revenant · F
@BibleData @Heavenlywarrior Yes if you want to create your own spin by leaving out details.
If you wanted to sell a product and create a best seller...
Yesterday I was looking at mushroom powder sold online and perusing some the answers to questions. * true story reality based*
The mysterious fungi sounded all good and miraculous. Then my own lawyers ( in my head ) pointed out that the term " wild harvested in China" was possibly a misnomer and my own former perception possibly got altered with the added information.
Leaving facts out create half lies.