Does the soul exist?

[BetheButterfly]

Buddhism negates the existence of a soul, could I just point out.

There is no such thing as a 'soul', as far as Buddhists are concerned.

And I still think this kind of discussion is really just a bit too deep for this thread, because I don't believe the OP ever meant it to go so deep.

 

That's my perception though.

 

In order to not hijack Katzee's thread, this intrigued me and I researched the Buddha's teaching about the soul.

 

I found the following website:

 

Lewis Richmond: The Buddha's Teachings About the Soul

 

and thought the following interesting:

 

In some sermons, the Buddha seems to acknowledge the existence of a soul. In others, he seems to deny the soul. And still others (as here in his replies to Vaccha), he declines to say one way or the other. In reading through all the many sermons of the Buddha, it seems that he adjusted his teachings to the needs and capacities of his listeners."

 

and this:

 

"Finally, in complete exasperation, Vaccha said, "Venerable Gautama, have you nothing to say about the existence of the soul? Does the soul exist?" At these words Gautama was silent.

"How is it, Venerable Gautama? Is there no such thing as the soul?"

Gautama was again silent.

What are we to make of this teaching? Why won't the Buddha say one way or the other? How can we trust a religious teacher who won't answer our questions, who remains silent when we implore him to respond? Do we, like Vaccha, walk away in confusion and bewilderment?

As Vaccha turns to go, the Buddha calls out to him, "Vaccha, this teaching ... is profound, subtle, hard to see, hard to comprehend, beyond the sphere of mere logic, to be understood only by the wise."

 

Based on Jesus Christ's teachings, I believe the soul is a part of each person, along with each person's spirit. Now, I don't understand or know how exactly a person's spirit and soul reside in a person's shell (the body) but I do believe a person in his or her composition is triune: body, spirit, and soul. Other people, like my Grandpa who recently died, believe the soul and spirit are one, not 2, which I understand though disagree.

 

The following are some quotes of Jesus accounted in the Bible concerning the soul: (I boldened some verses.)

 

Matthew 10 (NIV)

"26 “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.[b] 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows."

 

(The followers of Jesus were later and still are in some parts of the world tortured and/or killed for their beliefs, yet Jesus taught not to be afraid of what mankind can do to them. He also, and it is important to note, did not teach his followers to kill or torture anyone. It is interesting that he states that humans cannot kill the soul. Obviously, Jesus was not wishy-washy about whether he believed in the existence of the soul or not.)

 

Matthew 11 (NIV)

"25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do. 27 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

 

(Here we can learn that our souls need rest, and Jesus says learning from him gives rest to our souls. I personally have experienced this is true!

)

 

Matthew 16 (NIV)

 

"21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. 22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”

23 Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life[f] will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. 26 What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done."

 

(Here on earth, we don't pay much attention to the value our souls, I suppose since we can't see them. Many people don't believe their souls even exist. However, according to Jesus' teachings, souls are much more important than what the world has to offer.)

 

Matthew 22 (NIV)

 

"37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

 

(A definition of soul - Soul | Define Soul at Dictionary.com :

"the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part."

 

It is interesting that the commandment said to love God with all your heart. Well, we believe the heart exists and understand both meanings: the organ that pumps blood as well as the emotional meaning attached to the word. The following are the definitions of heart concerning emotions:Heart | Define Heart at Dictionary.com

 

"3. the center of the total personality, especially with reference to intuition, feeling, or emotion: In your heart you know I'm an honest man.

 

4. the center of emotion, especially as contrasted to the head as the center of the intellect: His head told him not to fall in love, but his heart had the final say."

 

 

So, Jesus' followers are to love God with their hearts (which I assume to be both the physical and the emotional definition), their minds (brain) which controls their bodies, and their souls, which I think includes their spirits.).

 

They are also to love their neighbors as themselves. Jesus explains who neighbors are in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37). Neighbors are everyone around you, basically.)

 

Matthew 26 (NIV)

 

"36 Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” 37 He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled. 38 Then he said to them, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.” 39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”

40 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. “Couldn’t you men keep watch with me for one hour?” he asked Peter. 41 “Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

42 He went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.”

 

(Here, Jesus says that his soul has an emotion. This confuses me a bit since the heart is what usually is talked about when there is emotion. However, I guess the soul and heart (emotions) are connected on earth?

 

The phrase "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" shows the battle between worldly desires and spiritual desires. Spiritually, Jesus wanted to obey His Father yet physically, he did not want to get hurt, understandably. However, even though his soul was overwhelmed with sorrow, he did his Father's will, though as one can see from his prayer asking for the "cup" to be taken away, it was a struggle for him.

 

It makes sense that the physical and the spiritual sides fight because they are so different. The physical often denies the existence of the spiritual because the spiritual is invisible to human senses. However, the spiritual encompasses and surpasses the physical, and ultimately, it is the spiritual (including the soul) that transcends one's physical years on earth.

 

We all know that our bodies will die. Some dead bodies are buried; others are cremated. Others are eaten, and so on. However, we don't know by personal experience what will happen to what makes us us - the life confined in our body when our shell (our body) dies.

 

However, because I believe Jesus Christ's teachings are true, I do believe that the soul, which is related to the spirit, lives on even after the body dies, and can only be destroyed by God. I do believe the soul exists, same as I believe the heart (both physical and emotional) and the mind (the brain) exists.

 

For anyone interested in the topic, what do you believe about the soul, and why? Thanks.

Edited July 10, 2013 by BetheButterfly

[Leegh]

I do believe there is a soul, and I have felt the presence of people that have passed on. Thanks for all of your information on this subject.

[happydate]

The Essenes, which is considered the forefathers of Christianity, had studied various religions and sum it up nicely.

 

Each religion reflects the stage of revelation at that point in time. Basically, our spiritual understanding reflects the "LEVEL" of our spiritual growth on that time line. That's all. There's no right nor wrong.

 

It's like a 3rd grader is going to be taught simple mathematics. You are not going to teach Calculus to a 3rd grader either. If your understanding of math reached grade 12, that's his or her understanding of math. Compared to a seasoned college or university student, their math especially in engineering and biotechnology will be deeper and more evolved.

 

Same with spirituality and the soul as well as re-incarnation.

[happydate]

The soul is a part of God and has god consciousness. If you meditate enough and be able to calm your mind, you can literally speak and listen to god. God is always there, but the noises and interference drowned his wisdom.

 

God can not destroy the soul, cause it is part of the Universe. The patterns and memories of that soul in the book of life/Akashic Records can be wiped clean if the soul projected human entity did such terrible things that it will take eons of lifetimes to balance Karma. A good example is Adolph Hitler. It's easier to wipe his soul clean and start over from scratch.

[Taramere]

The notion of a soul going on to have a wonderful time in an afterlife is something I'd see as just being a comfort for people at times when they're not feeling happy or fulfilled in this life. If you can get to a point where you feel connected to art, music, nature and other forms of life then I think the notion of going to heaven in an afterlife becomes less important. It's enough to know that life will go on for others, and if there's such a thing as eternal life, it's that. The ability to connect with the world around you and life in it giving that sense of "spirituality".

 

As long as you're feeling that connection, you probably don't need much moral guidance, beyond support in maintaining that sense of connection when you're confronted by problems created by people who are out of kilter (whether temporarily or permanently) with the world around them.

[KatZee]

OOO I need to go wash off the beach and then I'm going to read this thread.. Good post.

[WisdomSeeker]

This is a question that I've grappled with for quite some time now, and I am still at a kind of metaphysical stalemate in my thoughts. It's nearly impossible for me to enter into serious contemplation on the existence of the soul because I am unable to satisfactorily answer the questions that come before the matter of existence. Namely, what is a soul? How can I determine if a thing exists if I don't have a clear picture of what characteristics belong to said thing?

 

Also, what does it mean for a soul to "exist"? Most of what I would declare to be in existence has some kind of sensory presence. The walls in my apartment exist because I can feel and see them. The food in my refrigerator exists because I can feel, taste, and smell it. I believe that the people around me exist for similar reasons. It's the most rudimentary argument of being: a thing exists because my senses can interact with it.

 

By that standard, the soul cannot be said to exist. I don't see my soul, nor do I see the souls of any others. I don't hear them, smell them, taste them, or touch them. This is however a weak argument because so much of what I value in life is invisible to the senses but perceptible by the "mind's eye." I cannot "see" love, but I believe it exists. Like most people, I tend to see love and other abstractions as intangible yet independently existing ideals. So perhaps the soul is perceptible while remaining void to the senses.

 

This conclusion raises the question of perception. How reliable is it? More importantly, especially in light of the discussion on Buddhism, who does the perceiving? When we speak of the soul, we tend to speak in terms of possession. I have a soul. Your soul. His soul. Who is this I to whom the soul belongs? Why is the soul (generally considered to be the seat of "self") separate from the I?

[todreaminblue]

I have always thought your soul is your spirit.......but they used to say in days past when describing people they used soul as a person......."how many souls on board captain".....they were describing people not spirits....so maybe a soul is what makes us a unique human........ill ask god when i see him......one day.....ill know..... until then i live in the unknown.....loved reading your post bethebutterfly as always, so thought inducing.....deb

[pie2]

This conclusion raises the question of perception. How reliable is it? More importantly' date=' especially in light of the discussion on Buddhism, who does the perceiving? When we speak of the soul, we tend to speak in terms of possession. I [i']have[/i] a soul. Your soul. His soul. Who is this I to whom the soul belongs? Why is the soul (generally considered to be the seat of "self") separate from the I?

 

So many great questions! . Sorry, I have no answers.

 

For anyone interested in the topic, what do you believe about the soul, and why? Thanks.

 

I'm no expert. I think I'm of the 'soul and spirit are separate' group. I think we all have souls, and I think the spirit is given to those who choose to accept Christ. But I'm not sure.

 

I'm pretty confused about the nature of the soul though. Is it good/evil? We often talk about our fleshly, sinful nature as being something of physical bodies. Jesus was put in a physical body, and had to face the temptations that our bodies desire. But in the end, the soul has to answer for everything that happens. So, does the soul have the ultimate responsibility for doing what's right in this life? What role does our soul play?

 

It's strange how, of the obviously evil, we say they "must not have a soul". It's as if we attribute goodness with the soul. But some souls are probably not going to make it to heaven. Some souls are truly evil, I guess, but I don't know...

 

Interesting topic!

[M30USA]

So many great questions! . Sorry, I have no answers.

 

 

 

I'm no expert. I think I'm of the 'soul and spirit are separate' group. I think we all have souls, and I think the spirit is given to those who choose to accept Christ. But I'm not sure.

 

I'm pretty confused about the nature of the soul though. Is it good/evil? We often talk about our fleshly, sinful nature as being something of physical bodies. Jesus was put in a physical body, and had to face the temptations that our bodies desire. But in the end, the soul has to answer for everything that happens. So, does the soul have the ultimate responsibility for doing what's right in this life? What role does our soul play?

 

It's strange how, of the obviously evil, we say they "must not have a soul". It's as if we attribute goodness with the soul. But some souls are probably not going to make it to heaven. Some souls are truly evil, I guess, but I don't know...

 

Interesting topic!

 

Here is Scriptural support for your idea that spirit and soul are distinct from each other:

 

"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." (Hebrews 4:12)

[pureinheart]

I've always heard the soul being referred to in negative context. Such as "the soulish realm" or "soulish desires".

[TheFinalWord]

Interesting thread. Biblically, there are different models.

 

In terms of human nature, the dichotomy view holds that the soul and spirit are unified. The trichotomy view holds that the soul and spirit are closely related but separate.

 

The trichotomous view typically states that the physical body connects us with the physical world, the soul is our essence (will and mind), and the spirit is our incorporeal body which connects us with God. Thus it is possible for a being to be "soulishly" alive but spiritually dead. Those of the dichotomous view would view the soul as part of the spirit (i.e. like an organ per say) or that these terms are used interchangeably, but speaking of the same "part" of man. In the way the bible uses the word "heart", i.e. not the actual physical organ, but the core of our being; our, true, innate, soulish, desires.

 

These two models are both supported by scripture as there are scriptures which use soul and spirit interchangeably (Matthew 10:28; Luke 1:46-47; Acts 2:31; 1 Corinthians 5:3; 6:20; 7:34; 2 Peter 2:11) and there are verses which indicate separation (Romans 8:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 4:12).

 

"In contrast to trichotomy, the view accepted by most scholars is that man is dichotomous, or consists of two parts; a material aspect, and a non-material aspect. The non-material part is called by many different names; soul, spirit, mind, life force, or any of a dozen or more equivalent Scriptural words. These are not separate parts of a person, but are just different words for the different aspects of the non-material aspect of man."

 

What gets interesting, theologically, is how these two views model the creation of souls.

 

Traducianism states that a soul is created through the act of human procreation. The weakness of this model is that is does not explain how a purely physical process creates the immaterial soul. This is the view mainly held by Lutheran believers.

 

Soul-creationism is the view that God creates a new soul during each act of procreation. This view has the most scriptural data to support it, yet critics state that this view contradicts the notion that God ceased his creative acts on Day 7. This is the view mainly held by Reformed believers.

 

The other view, which lacks biblical data, is pre-existentialism, i.e. that there is a collection of souls which God has already created, which God then connects to a human during some unspecified time. This view is in contrast to the other views which presuppose ex nihilo creation.There is evidence for this model from the Talmud, which is the Jewish commentary of the Torah. In this view, the guff is the repository of pre-created souls.

 

Some sources

 

More thorough review from a scholar at Reasons to Believe:

 

Reasons To Believe : The Origin of the Human Soul, Part 1 (of 4)

 

Others:

 

http://www.theopedia.com/Humanity

 

Trichotomy vs. dichotomy of man - which view is correct?

[Eclypse]

I would say it doesn't in the biblical sense. Your soul is your brain, its what makes you, you. Every person has their own individual thoughts, desires, beliefs. The human mind is a beautifully complicated thing, of which there is so much still to learn and understand. When you die your brain dies in a matter of minutes. After that there's no coming back for you. It's a frightful thought really, and some of my grandparents friends have died recently. It's quite eerie when I think I'll never hear that particular persons voice or air again...

[Mme. Chaucer]

My belief is that we do not have a soul, we ARE a soul. Our bodies are temporary vehicles for it.

[happydate]

When God made us in the image of him and easy way for us to communicate with him. We all have this ability. In fact, he wants us to remember him as I am that I am. You guys made it SOOOO COOMPLICATED!

 

Why is that?

 

Because it is human nature. It is the preservation of power. Power that some of these people can hold citing scriptures, bibles, texts to confuse their followers so they can dangle the "carrot" on their disciples and make them do things and believe in things these masters and spiritual organizations want you to believe. Because they know you can talk and listen to God, they intentionally confuse your mind so you won't have that direct Oneness connection with the creator. All human beings possess the ability to access all Universal truths if you so wish to. But some masters today are only good at making your wallets thinner.

 

Here's the thing. For people who hadn't physically met Buddha or Jesus Christ in person with all your 5 senses, many of you are quoting their teachings. Which means many of you believe in people you never met. Many of you are simply worshiping a physical statue in the church or the temple. That's all you could see in to make believe right? Why do you all believe in them? It's because all of you have certain level of insecurities. Deepak Chopra once said that beliefs are created to address insecurities in people. Of course, he got shot down by a number of other religious factions for being rude and a bully.

 

But then, he's got a point. All of these people believe in Buddha and Christ sight unseen and yet, you don't believe in the soul. They are all looking for a Messiah, someone who can lift them off their burdens, their struggles in the failure of their relationships, etc, etc.. Perhaps what you are looking for is a physical statue to worship. The soul is inside of you. God is always with you. You don't need to worship a statue or a bible to feel that. All you have to do is have faith God and the soul exist. Religion provides the moral values to live a joyful life nothing more.

 

You guys can keep looking high and low for the soul's existence. Without faith in yourself that you have a soul, you will not find it.

Edited July 11, 2013 by happydate

[sillyanswer]

what do you believe about the soul, and why? Thanks.

 

I think it's a human construct invented out of the necessity of "belief" from a time when reality was rather bleak and generally sucked.

[pie2]

I've always heard the soul being referred to in negative context. Such as "the soulish realm" or "soulish desires".

 

Wow, I had never heard those terms before. Do you know any more about the "soulish realm" or "soulish desires"? TFW explained a little about the soul being our true core, where our deepest desires are born...?

 

Here is Scriptural support for your idea that spirit and soul are distinct from each other:

 

"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." (Hebrews 4:12)

 

These two models are both supported by scripture as there are scriptures which use soul and spirit interchangeably...

 

 

M30 and TFW...so many insights and tons of information!

 

So, how much of this debate only came after Christ? Before the Holy Spirit came down over Christ, were we able to connect to God in the same spiritual sense?

Edited July 12, 2013 by pie2

[BetheButterfly]

The Essenes, which is considered the forefathers of Christianity, had studied various religions and sum it up nicely.

 

Each religion reflects the stage of revelation at that point in time. Basically, our spiritual understanding reflects the "LEVEL" of our spiritual growth on that time line. That's all. There's no right nor wrong.

 

It's like a 3rd grader is going to be taught simple mathematics. You are not going to teach Calculus to a 3rd grader either. If your understanding of math reached grade 12, that's his or her understanding of math. Compared to a seasoned college or university student, their math especially in engineering and biotechnology will be deeper and more evolved.

 

Same with spirituality and the soul as well as re-incarnation.

 

I have to admit I don't understand your point of view, but you have instilled in me the desire to research the Essenes and reincarnation, thanks!

[BetheButterfly]

The notion of a soul going on to have a wonderful time in an afterlife is something I'd see as just being a comfort for people at times when they're not feeling happy or fulfilled in this life.

 

Good point. I think it's also a comfort to those who have lost loved ones and do not believe that life ends when the body dies.

 

Although there are some people who say they died and experienced life after death, we don't know for sure. We could call them liars or it was all in their mind, but we don't know for sure...

 

In my view, death is like a cocoon. Eternal life is like the butterfly stage of existence. I don't know if caterpillars look at butterflies and think, "Yep, I'm going to experience life much differently and fly soon!"

 

We just might be caterpillars in our human form... I know that sounds silly but I do believe our decaying bodies are mere shells and are not our only essence or even our ultimate essence.

 

If you can get to a point where you feel connected to art, music, nature and other forms of life then I think the notion of going to heaven in an afterlife becomes less important.

I disagree. Many artists, musicians, and lovers of nature and other forms of life are very spiritual and believe in some kind of afterlife, either Heaven or reincarnation. For them, the afterlife is important and is an inspiration which they draw from for expressing their creativity and convictions.

For example, Michelangelo was a spiritual man who sincerely believed in an afterlife. "Death and love are the two wings that bear the good man to heaven."

Michelangelo

 

Other quotes of his (as far as I know are his quotes) are the following:

I am a poor man and of little worth, who is laboring in that art that God has given me in order to extend my life as long as possible.

Michelangelo

 

I live and love in God's peculiar light.

Michelangelo

 

Many believe - and I believe - that I have been designated for this work by God. In spite of my old age, I do not want to give it up; I work out of love for God and I put all my hope in Him.

Michelangelo

 

Lord, grant that I may always desire more than I can accomplish.

Michelangelo

 

Bach, an awesome musician, also believed in God and an afterlife:

 

The aim and final end of all music should be none other than the glory of God and the refreshment of the soul.

Johann Sebastian Bach

 

Where there is devotional music, God is always at hand with His gracious presence.

Johann Sebastian Bach

 

Bach presented the song [FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][sIZE=3]ch Gott, vom Himmel Sieh Darein - [/sIZE][/FONT]"Oh God, from Heaven Look Down" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ach_Gott,_vom_Himmel_sieh_darein which I believe shows his belief in an afterlife.

 

He is not the only famous composer and musician who believe(d) in God and/or an afterlife.

 

As for lovers of nature and other forms, as well as human rights, many believe in God and an afterlife. Granted and of course, there are many who "feel connected to art, music, nature and other forms of life" that don't consider Heaven or an afterlife important or existing, but there are those who do.

 

It's enough to know that life will go on for others, and if there's such a thing as eternal life, it's that.

 

While I understand this is what you believe, I disagree. I am glad people are continuing to be born and that yes, life goes on for others. However, I do not think life ends once one's body dies, though I understand why others think so.

 

The ability to connect with the world around you and life in it giving that sense of "spirituality".

That is definitely a part of spirituality, but it is not the only factor of spirituality.

 

As long as you're feeling that connection, you probably don't need much moral guidance,beyond support in maintaining that sense of connection when you're confronted by problems created by people who are out of kilter (whether temporarily or permanently) with the world around them.

 

Not everyone feels a spiritual connection with others. When I was young, it took me a long time to realize that not everyone wanted to be friends or considered me a "sister in humanity" for example. Sadly, many people feel it's ok to steal, make fun of, or in physical ways hurt someone with whom they are not "connected." Some people even do so to those to those with whom there is a connection. Thus, because the world is not ideally all spiritually connected, moral guidance is crucial.

 

While it would most indeed be awesome if everyone was connected, that's not the case. I wonder if that's one reason why Jesus prayed for his followers to be unified as one (John 17)? (Please note, when Jesus prayed that the "cup" be taken from him, he noted that he would do God's will, not His. Praying for something doesn't always mean it will come to pass.) However, Jesus' followers really need to grow in unity and love, myself included.

 

While sadly many times Jesus' followers do not hold to loving each other and others, as Jesus taught, it is true that we should be under the moral code of love, both towards those of our spiritual connection (the family of Christ, normally called the bride of Christ or body of Christ), and towards those who do not have that spiritual connection with us. There are many kinds of spiritual and emotional connections in this world, as well as physical connections.

 

I personally love art, music, nature, human rights, and so forth, and I believe in God and the afterlife consisting of Heaven. (I'm still not so sure about what I believe in hell because I lean more towards the Jewish idea of hell. I'm also not sure about the idea of reincarnation, though it is interesting.)

 

Anyways, sure there are many people who love art, music, nature, human rights and so forth who do not believe in God and the afterlife. To love and enjoy these precious factors of life does not require belief in the divine or the afterlife, but to many who believe in both, God and the afterlife are inspiring, as well as the beauty we sense with our physical senses.

[BetheButterfly]

This is a question that I've grappled with for quite some time now, and I am still at a kind of metaphysical stalemate in my thoughts. It's nearly impossible for me to enter into serious contemplation on the existence of the soul because I am unable to satisfactorily answer the questions that come before the matter of existence. Namely, what is a soul? How can I determine if a thing exists if I don't have a clear picture of what characteristics belong to said thing?

 

Also, what does it mean for a soul to "exist"? Most of what I would declare to be in existence has some kind of sensory presence. The walls in my apartment exist because I can feel and see them. The food in my refrigerator exists because I can feel, taste, and smell it. I believe that the people around me exist for similar reasons. It's the most rudimentary argument of being: a thing exists because my senses can interact with it.

 

By that standard, the soul cannot be said to exist. I don't see my soul, nor do I see the souls of any others. I don't hear them, smell them, taste them, or touch them. This is however a weak argument because so much of what I value in life is invisible to the senses but perceptible by the "mind's eye." I cannot "see" love, but I believe it exists. Like most people, I tend to see love and other abstractions as intangible yet independently existing ideals. So perhaps the soul is perceptible while remaining void to the senses.

 

This conclusion raises the question of perception. How reliable is it? More importantly, especially in light of the discussion on Buddhism, who does the perceiving? When we speak of the soul, we tend to speak in terms of possession. I have a soul. Your soul. His soul. Who is this I to whom the soul belongs? Why is the soul (generally considered to be the seat of "self") separate from the I?

 

Great questions and contemplation!!!

[BetheButterfly]

I think it's a human construct invented out of the necessity of "belief" from a time when reality was rather bleak and generally sucked.

 

Thanks for sharing your view.

 

Sadly for many people, their reality still is bleak. For many people today even with modern technology and science, they still have pain in their hearts from thorns that make their reality difficult. Some of these people do believe in God and/or an afterlife, and others don't. Those who do draw comfort in God and/or the afterlife, while those who don't, try to draw comfort from other things, including drugs in some cases.

 

The spiritual however looks beyond the physical pains of life. While I understand how many people don't believe the soul and/or spirit exist, when someone has "looked" into a "spiritscope", then like looking into a microscope or telescope, they understand there is more to life than what their limited human eyes can see...

[BetheButterfly]

I've always heard the soul being referred to in negative context. Such as "the soulish realm" or "soulish desires".

 

I don't remember hearing that before, but it's interesting to google them both.

[TheFinalWord]

So, how much of this debate only came after Christ?

 

Most of it from what I can see First century Judaism, in general, did not have a distinction between body and soul but saw man from the view of psychosomatic unity, i.e. a person has an animated body rather than a dualistic combination of an immaterial soul contained within a physical body. However, there were a wide range of thoughts ("denominations" are not a new concept ). The Sadduccees did not believe in any life after death. Other branches were similar to Platonic Greek thought (man had a body and immaterial soul), the Pharisees believed in a full bodily resurrection at the end of time.

 

In Acts 23 Paul (who was a Pharisee) used their disagreement on this issue to his advantage during his trial.

 

Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.” When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees believe all these things.)

 

Before the Holy Spirit came down over Christ, were we able to connect to God in the same spiritual sense?

 

IMHO no , because of the doctrine of imputed righteousness. Denominations interpret this differently, but basically it states that, through our faith in Christ, His righteousness is imputed onto us. Because of this, we have a greater connection with God, because Jesus, the Great High Priest, directly intervenes for us to God.

These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

 

Before the sacrifice of Christ, the High Priest of Israel, intervened for the people. This is what most of the intricacies from Levitical Law come from; specific rituals required to "atone" for the sin of the people. All of these various rules were pictures to demonstrate the extent of God's Justice. You can see this carried to the cross; God's dual nature of sacrificial love and absolute justice. But now, Christ intervenes for us. Hebrews 5 through 11 are good passages to read on this topic

 

Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

 

Hope it helps!

Edited July 13, 2013 by TheFinalWord

[pie2]

Most of it from what I can see First century Judaism, in general, did not have a distinction between body and soul but saw man from the view of psychosomatic unity, i.e. a person has an animated body rather than a dualistic combination of an immaterial soul contained within a physical body. However, there were a wide range of thoughts ("denominations" are not a new concept ). The Sadduccees did not believe in any life after death. Other branches were similar to Platonic Greek thought (man had a body and immaterial soul), the Pharisees believed in a full bodily resurrection at the end of time.

 

It's crazy to think about how much of our beliefs are based on Christ, and everything that happened during his life. Things we don't even think about, and terms we throw around, are so connected to Christ.

 

In Acts 23 Paul (who was a Pharisee) used their disagreement on this issue to his advantage during his trial.

 

Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.” When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees believe all these things.)

 

Paul was so brave; he never backed off. I guess it was a pretty heated topic back then. I love thinking about how thousands of years ago, people were debating some of the same ideas we do. It's like no matter how connected we get to information (i.e. technology, internet, globalization), society isn't any closer to agreeing on some of the deeper issues. At least we've moved away from corporal punishment in our courts though (as Paul was about to be torn to shreds, according to the chapter! ).

 

IMHO no , because of the doctrine of imputed righteousness. Denominations interpret this differently, but basically it states that, through our faith in Christ, His righteousness is imputed onto us. Because of this, we have a greater connection with God, because Jesus, the Great High Priest, directly intervenes for us to God.

 

I agree. Although the ideas of prophecy and hearing the audible voice of God has maybe changed during these times, the doctrine of imputed righteousness is a major blessing...I feel super close to God (well, not always...) .

 

Hope it helps!

 

Oh, yes!! Beyond helpful. This should be a sermon. Thanks TFW

[sillyanswer]

Thanks for sharing your view.

 

You're welcome!

 

Sadly for many people, their reality still is bleak.

 

Yes, that is sad. If believing in something gives them comfort then I'm all in favour of them doing that.