The soul (Jesus, ritual, Moses, Earth, beliefs)

[Francine]

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" ("Quid enim prodest homini si mundum universum lucretur animae vero suae detrimentum patiatur aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro anima sua")

Anima means breath. What Jesus really said was, "What good is it for a man to acquire more possessions than anyone in history, and then die?" But since then, the word anima, translated as "soul", has acquired a lot of theological baggage, and now it is an immaterial something you can "save" or sell to the devil. Even with that definition, you end up on an infinite loop when you say you "have" a soul, because the soul is your identity, it is that part of you which can have things, like a body.

[athanasius]

Originally Posted by Francine

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" ("Quid enim prodest homini si mundum universum lucretur animae vero suae detrimentum patiatur aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro anima sua")

Anima means breath. What Jesus really said was, "What good is it for a man to acquire more possessions than anyone in history, and then die?" But since then, the word anima, translated as "soul", has acquired a lot of theological baggage, and now it is an immaterial something you can "save" or sell to the devil. Even with that definition, you end up on an infinite loop when you say you "have" a soul, because the soul is your identity, it is that part of you which can have things, like a body.

It is true no one can sell their soul to the devil. I agree with your assenment. The devil cannot own our soul. But in once sense they can freely choose to disobey God and commit a mortal sin willingly or get so caught up inthe temporal they forget about the eternal which in return would be their own choice to hand there soul to the devil if they decide not to repent and remain obstinent in this sin at their deathbed. I Believe Christ may have also been speaking to this spiritual reality in that verse in polyvalent sense.

[Francine]

Originally Posted by athanasius

It is true no one can sell their soul to the devil. I agree with your assenment. The devil cannot own our soul.

Athanasius, this is part of what I mean by being a renegade Catholic: I don't believe it is possible for created beings to think without a brain and live without some kind of body. That also means I do not believe that angels are separate beings (they are manifestations of God, as in the "angel of the LORD" who appeared to Moses as a burning bush). I believe in the general resurrection, of course, (it is taught in the last section of the book of Daniel) but I do not hold to the current thinking on the intermediate state between death and the resurrection, in which souls flit around in heaven, or hell, or suffer in purgatory. The modern idea of a "soul" has its origins in Plato's ideal forms. Mine is more in line with the Jews, and is similar to the "soul sleep" view held by Seventh-Day Adventists.

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by Francine

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" ("Quid enim prodest homini si mundum universum lucretur animae vero suae detrimentum patiatur aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro anima sua")

Anima means breath. What Jesus really said was, "What good is it for a man to acquire more possessions than anyone in history, and then die?"

Not quite, in my opinion, at least. The passage would seem to be saying that what value is there in accumlating worldy treasures at the expense of ignoring the reality of one's primary identity. It seems more likely, to me, the passage is asserting that by fixating on the glittery objects of the material world one exchanges the value of those pursuits (in both time and energy) for the inherent value of persuing one's identity, almost like a placebo effect, run riot.

Originally Posted by Francine

But since then, the word anima, translated as "soul", has acquired a lot of theological baggage, and now it is an immaterial something you can "save" or sell to the devil.

Hehe. Indeed, the concept has grown to be perceived as an external object that can be bartered away even though the reality of doing so is quite proposterous. The idea that one can "sell" one's identity to an imaginary concept (the devil), however amusing, simply underscores that the purveyors of such thinking had/have little understanding of what they were/are discussing.

However, if one looks at it in the context of having only so much time and energy to "spend" while roaming around on this small rock, then it can be seen as a trade-off of a kind. In effect, it is stating that one cannot have their cake and eat it too, as one pursuit is seen as the ultimate treasure, so much so, that all other pursuits are less worthy. This of course, precludes the idea that individuals come to this small planet for a multitude of reasons and asserts that there is actually only one common goal for all to follow. Rather than promoting the worth of individual persuit it rather denigrates the idea altogether unless those pursuits are focused inwards. This is hardly a wise marketing strategy, but it does make its point -- after a fashion, I suppose.

Originally Posted by Francine

Even with that definition, you end up on an infinite loop when you say you "have" a soul, because the soul is your identity, it is that part of you which can have things, like a body.

Well, Francine, although it is an all too common perception that the "soul" is like a warm and fuzzy "spiritual sweater", some of us realize that it isn't a possession, but rather, it is what we are and that the physical body is simply its reflection. Then again, I could be dreaming, lol.

[athanasius]

Originally Posted by Francine

Athanasius, this is part of what I mean by being a renegade Catholic: I don't believe it is possible for created beings to think without a brain and live without some kind of body. That also means I do not believe that angels are separate beings (they are manifestations of God, as in the "angel of the LORD" who appeared to Moses as a burning bush). I believe in the general resurrection, of course, (it is taught in the last section of the book of Daniel) but I do not hold to the current thinking on the intermediate state between death and the resurrection, in which souls flit around in heaven, or hell, or suffer in purgatory. The modern idea of a "soul" has its origins in Plato's ideal forms. Mine is more in line with the Jews, and is similar to the "soul sleep" view held by Seventh-Day Adventists.

Thats is a interesting view. I now understand what you talking about better. I used to debate with a good hearted SDA Women back in 1999. We never talked about death but she did talk about the soul. She was a former Catholic. it was very interesting dialgue. The JW's also hold a view of soul sleep. When I studied Judaism I found they are very fluid in their beliefs depending on which sect. Many Jews hold to a heavenly afterlife, some do not. Since they have no magisterium they tend not to have doctrinal unity on this. The way I view it is this. Plato had many good ideas and some bad ones. He in my opinion had the correct understanding albeit imperfect and partial about some things . The Church even as far back as its infant Jewish roots held to a platonic view. Typology is one example that even Paul and Jesus used that utilized platonic thought. I view the melding of platonic thought with Christianity as a divine outgrowth of truth. The Church in her wisdom looked at the philosophers(Plato and Aristotle) and took what was true and good and perfected it, a type of development of doctrine in a sense. This is how I view God guiding his Church and to me its seems like a quite natural outgrowth. I am not debating you here. I am just explaining my view. I appreciate your input very much.

[Francine]

Originally Posted by athanasius

When I studied Judaism I found they are very fluid in their beliefs depending on which sect. Many Jews hold to a heavenly afterlife, some do not. Since they have no magisterium they tend not to have doctrinal unity on this.

Four Rabbis had a series of theological arguments, and three were always in accord against the fourth. One day, the odd Rabbi out, after the usual "3 to 1, majority rules" statement that signified that he had lost again, decided to appeal to a Higher Authority.

"Oh, G-d!" he cried. "I know in my heart that I am right and they are wrong! Please give me a sign to prove it to them!"

It was a beautiful, sunny day. As soon as the Rabbi finished his prayer, a storm cloud moved across the sky above the four. It rumbled once and dissolved.

"A sign from G-d! See, I'm right, I knew it!"

But the other three disagreed, pointing out that storm clouds sometimes form on hot days.

So the Rabbi prayed again: "Oh, G-d, I need a bigger sign to show that I am right and they are wrong. So please, G-d, a bigger sign!"

This time four storm clouds appeared, rushed toward each other to form one big cloud, and a bolt of lightning slammed into a tree on a nearby hill.

"I told you I was right!" cried the Rabbi, but his friends insisted that nothing had happened that could not be explained by natural causes.

The Rabbi is getting ready to ask for a "very big" sign, but just as he says "Oh G-d..." the sky turns pitch black, the earth shakes, and a deep, booming voice intones, "HEEEEEEEE'S RIIIIIIIGHT!"

The Rabbi puts his hands on his hips, turns to the other three, and says, "Well?"

"So," shrugged one of the other Rabbis, "now it's 3 to 2!"

[athanasius]

Originally Posted by Francine

Four Rabbis had a series of theological arguments, and three were always in accord against the fourth. One day, the odd Rabbi out, after the usual "3 to 1, majority rules" statement that signified that he had lost again, decided to appeal to a Higher Authority.

"Oh, G-d!" he cried. "I know in my heart that I am right and they are wrong! Please give me a sign to prove it to them!"

It was a beautiful, sunny day. As soon as the Rabbi finished his prayer, a storm cloud moved across the sky above the four. It rumbled once and dissolved.

"A sign from G-d! See, I'm right, I knew it!"

But the other three disagreed, pointing out that storm clouds sometimes form on hot days.

So the Rabbi prayed again: "Oh, G-d, I need a bigger sign to show that I am right and they are wrong. So please, G-d, a bigger sign!"

This time four storm clouds appeared, rushed toward each other to form one big cloud, and a bolt of lightning slammed into a tree on a nearby hill.

"I told you I was right!" cried the Rabbi, but his friends insisted that nothing had happened that could not be explained by natural causes.

The Rabbi is getting ready to ask for a "very big" sign, but just as he says "Oh G-d..." the sky turns pitch black, the earth shakes, and a deep, booming voice intones, "HEEEEEEEE'S RIIIIIIIGHT!"

The Rabbi puts his hands on his hips, turns to the other three, and says, "Well?"

"So," shrugged one of the other Rabbis, "now it's 3 to 2!"

LOL! Great joke!

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by Francine

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" ("Quid enim prodest homini si mundum universum lucretur animae vero suae detrimentum patiatur aut quam dabit homo commutationem pro anima sua")

Anima means breath. What Jesus really said was, "What good is it for a man to acquire more possessions than anyone in history, and then die?" But since then, the word anima, translated as "soul", has acquired a lot of theological baggage, and now it is an immaterial something you can "save" or sell to the devil. Even with that definition, you end up on an infinite loop when you say you "have" a soul, because the soul is your identity, it is that part of you which can have things, like a body.

I interpret this verse very similarly. I think that Jesus is following some Stoic teachers here. A good example is Seneca (from the time of Christ) and Epictetus (about a hundred years after Christ). They taught that people should be who they are despite the lust for riches and power et cetera. Basically, if we are untrue to ourselves we are untrue to God, and the truthfulness to self is following the teacher (Jesus in the case of his followers, and Stoic philosophers in the case of Seneca and Epictetus) rather than pursuing other "worldly" goals.

[agent_smith]

Please tell me...where, exactly, in the human body is the "soul" located? Can it be seen with an x-ray machine, like everything else can? Can the soul's activity be measured like the brain's can?