Do serve God...or a 'Trinity'?

[talib-al-kalim]

1. The Hebrew word for soul is "nephesh" which also means "creature" or "being". Ezekiel uses this same word when he said in Ezekiel 18:4 "The soul who sins shall surely die". I know of no scripture that states that the soul of anyone lives on after death.

2. Luke 23:43 And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

I would assume you already know that commas didn't exist in Greek writings. So an interpreter placed the comma in the incorrect spot.

"Assuredly, I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise".

See? Moving the comma changes the meaning. Jesus asserted to the thief that He had determined, today, that the thief would be in paradise with Him. The thief is still dead, as is his soul. Either that or Jesus contradicted
the Bible. I think it's safe to say the comma was placed incorrectly.

..according to your own creed, maybe..

The vast majority of Christians and Muslims believe otherwise.

I think perhaps @moralorel is saying (according to scripture) the souls of men are not revived to life until the last judgement? Until then the soul is in a state of suspended animation. But for that soul, no time seems to have passed since death of the body.

Would time have any meaning ?

It's a common belief for Muslim, Christians and Pharisee/present Jews that we will live after the end of time.
Jesus promised that those who have entered the Kingdom of God in lifetime won't "taste death".
Little is said in commonly accepted sources about the time between physical death and the return of the Messiah. I can live without knowing the answer to this.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..Until then the soul is in a state of suspended animation. But for that soul, no time seems to have passed since death of the body..

I know what you mean .. I guess we can only guess on the details..
..but yes .. we know that 'time', as we measure it, is not absolute.

 

[Faithfulservant]

I know what you mean .. I guess we can only guess on the details..
..but yes .. we know that 'time', as we measure it, is not absolute.

We serve a God who is outside of time. Heaven will be a place where there is only now and no past and present that is corrupted.

 

[moralorel]

..according to your own creed, maybe..

The vast majority of Christians and Muslims believe otherwise.

I don't have a creed.

So like I said before, I know of no scripture that says our souls live on. I base this on scripture which I read like a book.

 

[moralorel]

I think perhaps @moralorel is saying (according to scripture) the souls of men are not revived to life until the last judgement? Until then the soul is in a state of suspended animation. But for that soul, no time seems to have passed since death of the body.

Would time have any meaning ?

No.

I'm saying that the Bible literally equates a soul with a physical body. So your soul dies. The immortal soul creed is not biblical and is a Greek religious concept

However, if you replace the word "soul" with "spirit", then I think you and I are much closer to an agreement.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I don't have a creed..

We all have creeds, including atheists / agnostics.

The immortal soul creed is not biblical and is a Greek religious concept.

In your opinion.
soul .. spirit, whatever .. picking hairs.

 

[moralorel]

We all have creeds, including atheists / agnostics.


In your opinion.
soul .. spirit, whatever .. picking hairs.

Well, I don't know what my creed is.

But it's not picking hairs in scripture. Soul and spirit are not the same in biblical scripture.

 

[juantoo3]

However, if you replace the word "soul" with "spirit", then I think you and I are much closer to an agreement.

Wouldn't that be the word "ruach" (sp?), not "nephesh?"

 

[juantoo3]

This is why I came to the conclusion that arguing over the placement of a comma is pointless.

How long before we end up discussing Holy bowel movements, snot and earwax?

 

[moralorel]

I have a few things about this .

You could easily use that same argument by saying someone put a comma in the wrong place.

My next thing is that Jesus is consistent.. nowhere else in ALL His Truly or Assuredly did He add the word Today as if He was speaking for that moment. So your argument changes the entire doctrine of absent from the body present with the Lord. If we didn't have souls how could we be absent from our bodies?

2 Cor 5:6-8 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

1 These 5:23 Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

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

Rev 6:9-11When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. They cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.

He 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Acts 7:59 And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

Mark 12:30 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

Deut 6:5 and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’

Rev 4:2 At once I was in the Spirit, and behold, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne.

1. You have stated previously that you follow the Bible literally. Show me. As nice and knowledgeable of a person that you are, you are not a follower of literal biblical texts. Anything that literally defies your religious opinion conveniently goes out the window. So show me that you literally follow the Bible.

2. You can NOT easily argue that the comma is in the correct spot. Here's why.

Did Jesus ascend to heaven or paradise that day? Literally? Nope. No scripture will defend that stance at all. If He went to heaven or paradise he would be a liar (or someone who felt that a tomb was somehow paradise). He told Mary that He hadn't yet ascended to heaven.

John 20:17 Jesus saith 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 God.

Jesus also described paradise. He said that the Tree of Life will be there next to the Father.

Revelation 2:7 "To him who overcomes I will give to eat from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God”

And where is this tree? The New Jerusalem, which hasn't been created yet.

Revelation 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and His servants shall serve Him.

So either Jesus lied and told the thief that they would be together in paradise that day, or the comma was placed there by an interpreter trying to make the literal Bible line up with their own personal Greek beliefs.

3. Today? Jesus used the word with its proper meaning. We have very few examples of Jesus even using the word "today", so I think your logic here is found wanting. How many times did Jesus even use the word "today".... maybe 5? Using this logic to overturn the fact that the Bible never said Jesus went to heaven or paradise immediately after crucifixion? Maybe just move the comma.

But if you believe that Jesus was the God of the OT, then Jesus did use the word "today" like I said He did. When the Israelites were told of curses and blessings, God told them what would happen to them if they obeyed Him and if they disobeyed Him.

Deut. 30:16 For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to Him, and to keep His commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess. 17 But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18 I declare to you TODAY that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

He didn't say they would die today. I doubt any Israelites were killed that day by God.

4. I've already addressed the word "soul". The Bible literally, and I repeat, literally uses the word "soul" to mean a physical entity. It does mention humankind having a spirit. Spirit and soul are not literally the same. Literally.

5. I am quite familiar with Ecc 12:7. Solomon wrote that scripture. But he didn't believe that the dead knew of anything going on.

"For who knows what is good for a person in life, during the few and meaningless days they pass through like a shadow? Who can tell them what will happen under the sun after they are gone?"
Ecclesiastes 6:12

And...
For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten” Ecclesiastes 9:5.

Doesn't sound like Solomon, a man considered to be one of the wisest men of the bible, believed that people went to heaven or paradise after death. But he acknowledged that God took back their spirit. I assume you know that the same thing happened to Jesus when He died. His spirit went to God. But Jesus was still dead and said He never ascended to heaven. God had yet to accept the wave sheaf offering of Jesus.


6. The apostles never mentioned Jesus going to heaven or paradise immediately after crucifixion. You would think they would. But instead they say that He was dead and buried.

I Corinthians 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,


Note: We also don't know when the thief died. Jesus was already dead when the soldiers started breaking the thieves' legs. Unlike the thieves, Jesus was scourged which would have caused Him to lose a lot of blood before crucifixion. So that is probably why He died before them. Criminals were known to live for days after their legs were broken. So if the thief was still alive the next day... move that comma.

 

[moralorel]

Why would Jesus tell the story of Lazarus at Abraham's side and the rich man in Hades then? I believe everything Jesus said was with purpose and full of truth. Why would Abraham be able to speak to the rich man if he wasn't a soul without a body... by then his body would have been dust. This story would have made no sense to the listeners if they had believed we had no soul.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 16:19-31 - English Standard Version

The Rich Man and Lazarus - “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and...

www.biblegateway.com

This one is easy.

1. It's a parable. It is telling a hypothetical story. Not literal.

2. It was a lesson for the Pharisees. They believed that their status and wealth made them righteous. In Satan's world, they were correct. But not in God's mind.

2. It is speaking of life when everyone is resurrected. So everyone is alive, including sinners. So the 1st and 2nd resurrections have already happened. But the 2nd death has not happened. As you see, the sinner is being warned of his eventual punishment. The resurrections easily can be their own thread. But as many figures have mentioned in the Bible, in this life everything is practically opposite. The meek inherit the Earth. Who is first originally ends up finishing last. Those who are great today will be the lowest in the resurrection. The rich man and his family have done nothing to change this. They haven't observed the Feasts or obeyed God. So they are on their way to death (or are already dead). After being resurrected they had access to Abraham, Noah, Jesus, Moses, David, the apostles, etc. but they didn't listen. So they will be forever dead.

3. If the story were considered to be true and literal then it would contradict what the apostle John said:

John 3:13 "No one has ascended to heaven, but He who came down from heaven, that is the Son of Man who is in heaven."

Jesus told the story like as if it had already happened. John would have heard this story, so therefore John didn't interpret it as already happening. So neither should you.

4. The rich man's fate, assuming he doesn't change, will be his eventual casting out of God's kingdom.

"There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out" (Luke 13:28)

 

[moralorel]

This is why I came to the conclusion that arguing over the placement of a comma is pointless.

How long before we end up discussing Holy bowel movements, snot and earwax?

My suffering in grammatical theory classes tells a different story. The placement of commas is NOT pointless. 1 comma has confused many bible readers over the years. So it is not pointless. Especially seeing as that one specific pointless comma pertains to the afterlife, probably the most important subject of the Bible.

Of course, it is just a book made up of paper.

 

[moralorel]

Wouldn't that be the word "ruach" (sp?), not "nephesh?"

"ruach" means "breath", "wind" or "spirit".

"nephesh" is never translated as "spirit".

 

[juantoo3]

Just a point of note, breaking of the legs was to hasten the inevitable. Remember, the High Holy Sabbath was preparing to commence. Hanging for days with broken legs is stretching credibility, particularly when one takes into account the effects on the body of crucifixion. The subject slowly suffocates, and without being able to use their legs to push up, that process is accelerated dramatically.

There is also the little quandary in that some teach Jesus immediately went to hell upon His death. There, according to this teaching, he set some captives free, presumably to return with Him to the Father.

Be that as it may.

 

[juantoo3]

My suffering in grammatical theory classes tells a different story. The placement of commas is NOT pointless. 1 comma has confused many bible readers over the years. So it is not pointless. Especially seeing as that one specific pointless comma pertains to the afterlife, probably the most important subject of the Bible.

Of course, it is just a book made up of paper.

Your point earlier is that there are no commas in the originals. Period.

The commas are English translators' whim and fancy, in an attempt to make it read better in English. No more, no less.

 

[juantoo3]

And none of this holds any bearing on salvation. Either we believe and behave accordingly, or not. Emphasis on behave.

Once again I invoke the teaching of Hillel; the Torah standing on one leg.

 

[moralorel]

Just a point of note, breaking of the legs was to hasten the inevitable. Remember, the High Holy Sabbath was preparing to commence. Hanging for days with broken legs is stretching credibility, particularly when one takes into account the effects on the body of crucifixion. The subject slowly suffocates, and without being able to use their legs to push up, that process is accelerated dramatically.

There is also the little quandary in that some teach Jesus immediately went to hell upon His death. There, according to this teaching, he set some captives free, presumably to return with Him to the Father.

Be that as it may.

I just made note of it, but didn't make it one of my main points. However, recently I met someone who researches executions and torture in history (long long story to be told here) and he told me that he had found accounts of people who had lived for days after having their legs broken. While it is true the practice was used to hasten death, some people just really hold on for dear life. I have come across similar articles online, but in good taste I refuse to share them. Take my word for it, it is very disturbing what happens to a person who is crucified, has their legs broken, and still tries to stay alive.

I am well aware that some people claim that Jesus went to Hell after crucifixion. But there isn't scriptural evidence to support this claim.

 

[moralorel]

Your point earlier is that there are no commas in the originals. Period.

The commas are English translators' whim and fancy, in an attempt to make it read better in English. No more, no less.

Actually they were first added by Greeks. When the Bible was translated to English, they kept the commas in the same place. If they moved the comma back to where it belonged, they most likely would've been arrested. You can't translate a Bible to English and not keep it in agreement with church doctrine. Just ask William Tysdale.

 

[moralorel]

And none of this holds any bearing on salvation. Either we believe and behave accordingly, or not. Emphasis on behave.

Once again I invoke the teaching of Hillel; the Torah standing on one leg.

As long as a person follows God's laws, I suppose you are correct. Doctrine changes, but not salvation.

 

[moralorel]

This one is easy.

1. It's a parable. It is telling a hypothetical story. Not literal.

2. It was a lesson for the Pharisees. They believed that their status and wealth made them righteous. In Satan's world, they were correct. But not in God's mind.

2. It is speaking of life when everyone is resurrected. So everyone is alive, including sinners. So the 1st and 2nd resurrections have already happened. But the 2nd death has not happened. As you see, the sinner is being warned of his eventual punishment. The resurrections easily can be their own thread. But as many figures have mentioned in the Bible, in this life everything is practically opposite. The meek inherit the Earth. Who is first originally ends up finishing last. Those who are great today will be the lowest in the resurrection. The rich man and his family have done nothing to change this. They haven't observed the Feasts or obeyed God. So they are on their way to death (or are already dead). After being resurrected they had access to Abraham, Noah, Jesus, Moses, David, the apostles, etc. but they didn't listen. So they will be forever dead.

3. If the story were considered to be true and literal then it would contradict what the apostle John said:

John 3:13 "No one has ascended to heaven, but He who came down from heaven, that is the Son of Man who is in heaven."

Jesus told the story like as if it had already happened. John would have heard this story, so therefore John didn't interpret it as already happening. So neither should you.

4. The rich man's fate, assuming he doesn't change, will be his eventual casting out of God's kingdom.

"There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out" (Luke 13:28)

I notice that I can't count. So much for any credibility on my behalf. Sorry about that.