If you look at Ezekiel 18:20 in the kjv.It says the soul that sins it shall die.It doesn't say he or she will die.It says it shall die(referring to the soul).Also in James 5:20 it says the exact opposite.
I think that it is possible that reincarnation occurs. That is, the soul can be reused.
Revelation says that if you change the wording or meaning of Revelation your soul will be written out of the book of life forever. I suppose that means tossed in the lake of fire of the bottomless pit of hell, to burn in agony forever. So, there will be no reincarnation for those who have been written out of the book of life.
By the way, those who claim that Babylon is some other place (perhaps mythical), and not the Babylon in Iraq (which was around for thousands of years), will be written out of the book of life for eternity. The fact is, President W. Bush is the dragon who attacked Iraq (mentioned in Revelation in the bible), and no one had better deny that or burn in hell for all eternity (according to the bible).
So, if the soul can be reused in heaven (reincarnation), and it can burn in hell for all eternity, it appears that the soul is immortal.
Sorry, it is not. We have to establish it is a 'thing' first.
I can see rocks, card tables and so forth. I've never seen, felt, heard, smelt or what ever a soul
Since you are an atheist I am not going to throw a bunch of scriptures at you that you would not understand but rather I am going to give you a description of the soul that I wrote up from what I have learned from my religion.
The soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem whose reality the most learned of men hath failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind, however acute, can ever hope to unravel.
The soul is not “in” the body but rather it is associated with the body and it directs the body and brain and mind. It is the soul that directs human faculties. As outer circumstances are communicated to the soul by the eyes, ears, and brain, the soul communicates its desires through the brain to the physical body, which thereby expresses itself.
The soul works through the brain and while we are alive on earth in a physical body, but when we die and no longer have a physical body the soul continues to live. It lives forever, and that is why it is called an immortal soul.
The soul is the sum total of the personality so it is the person himself; the physical body is pure matter with no real identity. The person, after he dies and leaves his physical body behind remains the same person, and he goes to the spiritual world where he continues the life he conducted in the physical world. The soul takes on some kind of a spiritual form made up of elements that exist in the spiritual world.
“The human spirit which distinguishes man from the animal is the rational soul, and these two names—the human spirit and the rational soul—designate one thing. This spirit, which in the terminology of the philosophers is the rational soul, embraces all beings, and as far as human ability permits discovers the realities of things and becomes cognizant of their peculiarities and effects, and of the qualities and properties of beings”Some Answered Questions, p. 208
I also believe - from reading the entire verse in Ezekiel - that the word "soul" is synonymous with "person" or "individual" - because after claiming that the soul that sins "shall die" Ezekiel claimed that "the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."
It is clear that Ezekiel was trying to teach that we - all of us - cannot be held responsible for the sins of another and that we all will be held accountable for our deeds.
That kind of makes Exodus 34:7 a bit difficult to reconcile, doesn't it?
Ex 34:7 "Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation]."
So you are not a soul? So I would be wrong to call you a soul? Okay. I understand. I object to the ignorant notion of claiming people are animals. There is no proof other than modern beliefs in science, that a human is an animal.
So you are not a soul? So I would be wrong to call you a soul? Okay. I understand. I object to the ignorant notion of claiming people are animals. There is no proof other than modern beliefs in science, that a human is an animal.
That kind of makes Exodus 34:7 a bit difficult to reconcile, doesn't it?
Ex 34:7 "Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation]."
I don't know if there is any need to "reconcile" anything between these various documents and accounts that span multiple centuries.
I mean - Exodus claimed that the Lord Himself hardened Pharaoh's heart and Samuel claimed that an "evil spirit" came from the Lord.
There is no reason to assume that all of these accounts are 100% accurate or that those who recorded them did so without any error.
My interpretation of Exodus 34:7 - given how the Lord acted toward Israel from then on - is that He will forgive all those who humble themselves and obey Him - yet those who disobey Him pass on their rebellious natures (i.e. "iniquity") down to their children, children's children and so on even up until the fourth generation.
Therefore - as they continue to rebel - they will continue to be chastened and possibly destroyed by Him - to preserve the righteous in Israel.
If you look at Ezekiel 18:20 in the kjv.It says the soul that sins it shall die.It doesn't say he or she will die.It says it shall die(referring to the soul).Also in James 5:20 it says the exact opposite.
The soul is the combination of "dust" and the "breath of life".(Ben 2:7). Without the "spirit of God", the breath of God, one is among the walking dead. As for the death of the body, that happens to every man (Jer 31:30). James is referring to being cut off from God, not the fact that every man will die and be buried. When you "sin", you are cut off from God, which is a spiritual death. One can always repent, provide fruit fitting that repentance, and be baptized in the spirit. (Mt 3) That does not prevent one from eventually dying of old age are a passing bullet.
Science acts on presumptions, which are often studied and sometimes verified, and often not. F does not equal ma, although at low speeds, it works well enough for engineers to build large structures. String theory is a postulate, which is believed and studied by many scientist, but it is probably totally incorrect. The science of yesterday, that of Isaac Newton, has become the political science of today, the political science of John Kerry, which is bought and paid for my political operatives. The oceans aren't rising apart from causes stemming from the sun and the moon, yet our current education system, manipulated up by the Russian comintern, communist international, set up to overthrow the bourgeoisie in 1919, and represented today by the Marxist BLM and the democratic party, seems to be in the dark.
Science acts on presumptions, which are often studied and sometimes verified, and often not. F does not equal ma, although at low speeds, it works well enough for engineers to build large structures. String theory is a postulate, which is believed and studied by many scientist, but it is probably totally incorrect. The science of yesterday, that of Isaac Newton, has become the political science of today, the political science of John Kerry, which is bought and paid for my political operatives. The oceans aren't rising apart from causes stemming from the sun and the moon, yet our current education system, manipulated up by the Russian comintern, communist international, set up to overthrow the bourgeoisie in 1919, and represented today by the Marxist BLM and the democratic party, seems to be in the dark.
So you are not a soul? So I would be wrong to call you a soul? Okay. I understand. I object to the ignorant notion of claiming people are animals. There is no proof other than modern beliefs in science, that a human is an animal.
Many have called me "a soul," but usually as I win arguments. On the freeway, they talk about my "Kia Soul" with the same irreverent disdain and hand gestures respectfully saluting. The Isuzu was going to sue me.
Ad hominem (insults) aphorisms aside, the debate rages on. Insults neither win debates nor elevate debaters.
DNA is very strong evidence in a court. Yet, among theists, who have never studied DNA, and have an agenda to prove the bible, DNA is like the rest of science....a topic to be avoided. Many theists think of science as the enemy because often debaters use facts and logic against them.
Science and theology can go hand-in-hand, supporting each other, if both are true.
DNA shows clear connection of humans and bonobo chimps. Humans have one less chromosome, but that is because two chimp chromosomes fused together, and that is clearly observed and understood.
Two recent popes have admitted that DNA and evolution are correct, but insisted that God guided evolution (impossible to prove or disprove).
It is easy to be struck with awe at the complexity of life....chemical interactions, nerves, blood vessels, and organs. Yet, there is a clear map of evolution that shows that one species evolved from another.
Even in modern times, we note that the COVID virus is rapidly mutating, and we're worried that current vaccines won't cure the next mutation, and worry that the next mutation might be airborne, rather than spit-borne, which would allow it to travel perhaps 30 feet rather than 6.
We should be praising science for curing COVID, and we certainly cannot rely upon God to protect us. Even the Vatican restricted travel because they felt that God could not protect them from COVID. When the chips are down, science prevails as the true champion.
To deny the truth is to lie, and God doesn't like lies. Science represents the best guess at truth at the moment.
So many here have different opinions about science. I hit you on the head about this proof thing before, I don't want to do it again. Perhaps it will only feel like a bird landed briefly , but a user told me a few moments ago science does not deal with proofs, and this has been repeated here. So... No. No, not based on what is said here, but based on what I pulled up for you before - my own research.
Perhaps you don't remember.
However, this is not about beliefs. What I gave you are facts.
Soul is an English word from Hebrew (nephesh), and Greek (psyche) means living thing (.breather).
It's does nor require one to have a degree in rocket science Alt.
Think of it this way...
2000 years ago and beyond, there was something called _________. In English, we call it _________. It's the same thing.
The use of the word soul has only become an issue among religious folk, because of false religios beliefs, but this word was understood by the Greeks, even though it has taken on various meanings today... due to beliefs.
You can read about it here.
Science acts on presumptions, which are often studied and sometimes verified, and often not. F does not equal ma, although at low speeds, it works well enough for engineers to build large structures. String theory is a postulate, which is believed and studied by many scientist, but it is probably totally incorrect. The science of yesterday, that of Isaac Newton, has become the political science of today, the political science of John Kerry, which is bought and paid for my political operatives. The oceans aren't rising apart from causes stemming from the sun and the moon, yet our current education system, manipulated up by the Russian comintern, communist international, set up to overthrow the bourgeoisie in 1919, and represented today by the Marxist BLM and the democratic party, seems to be in the dark.
Newtonian physics is correct at slow speeds, but it didn't explain why light travels at the speed of light whether we are traveling toward it or away from it (Michaelson-Morley experiment).
Velocities are altered by quantum forces (in small distances), randomizing motion, so velocity can't be calculated, nor can acceleration (derived from velocity). Yet, energy can be, and momentum is still related to energy in the same way (because dependent on mass, not velocity).
String theory has the right idea (mass is made of trapped energy), but, as the Schroedinger equation shows, the Hamiltonian operator must contain complex numbers, and string theory only shows real numbers. Furthermore, M-theory of Dr. Edward Witten, is likely wrong to assume a path of photons (loop of string, short segment of string, etc). It is more likely a random path with a fixed energy, consistent with Stoicastic variables.
Senator John Kerry is right about rising ocean levels (link above). Centripetal force moves the water to the equator, and islands close to the equator are being inundated. The United States doesn't yet feel the main effects of mankind's influence on Global Warming, but it will soon become apparent. Lies have been told, covering up proof that hurricane Katrina was more intense because of Global Warming. Some parts of the US are getting colder, not warmer, because the poles are melting. There is a global crisis of melting ice in glaciers and the poles. Much of the problem is under the surface, as it is in Greenland. The droughts and fires in California are a consequence of Global Warming. The encroaching desert in Africa is also a consequence (link above).
I don't believe that Russia is influencing our educational system. If you are referring to the separation of church and state, which allows everyone to believe their own religion, that was set up by the Founding Fathers who rebelled against the dictatorial rule of the monarch of England (King George III...one of my distant grandfathers).
BLM is not Marxist, though they require that we don't over-use the environment to prevent permanent damage (link above). Salmon fishing must be restricted or serious genetic damage (inbreeding) will occur.
I believe it means, the "spiritual Qualities" die. The soul will have spiritual qualities. If a Soul sinned, its spiritual qualities will die.
For example Jesus said, Let dead bury their own dead.
Although This "dead" is literally alive, but is called dead. It is a metaphor for "death of spiritual qualities", so the person is deaf, dumb and cannot understand.
Ezekiel means the same.
An eternal soul, whose qualities died, burns forever in hell (filet of soul).
We live temporarily as humans, but the long-term battle is for the soul. Why, then, defy God and make wars and torture camps after God has so carefully explained what we may and may not do as humans?
It makes sense to attack an enemy that terrorist attacked our skyscrapers. But it also makes sense not to believe in God. Faith doesn't make sense, but if you believe in God you will follow God's rules (sense or no sense). God knows the future, so he knows what will happen if we follow his rules and knows what will happen if we don't. This is why people have faith in God, whether or not they understand God's orders.
Many have called me "a soul," but usually as I win arguments. On the freeway, they talk about my "Kia Soul" with the same irreverent disdain and hand gestures respectfully saluting. The Isuzu was going to sue me.
Ad hominem (insults) aphorisms aside, the debate rages on. Insults neither win debates nor elevate debaters.
DNA is very strong evidence in a court. Yet, among theists, who have never studied DNA, and have an agenda to prove the bible, DNA is like the rest of science....a topic to be avoided. Many theists think of science as the enemy because often debaters use facts and logic against them.
Science and theology can go hand-in-hand, supporting each other, if both are true.
DNA shows clear connection of humans and bonobo chimps. Humans have one less chromosome, but that is because two chimp chromosomes fused together, and that is clearly observed and understood.
Two recent popes have admitted that DNA and evolution are correct, but insisted that God guided evolution (impossible to prove or disprove).
It is easy to be struck with awe at the complexity of life....chemical interactions, nerves, blood vessels, and organs. Yet, there is a clear map of evolution that shows that one species evolved from another.
Even in modern times, we note that the COVID virus is rapidly mutating, and we're worried that current vaccines won't cure the next mutation, and worry that the next mutation might be airborne, rather than spit-borne, which would allow it to travel perhaps 30 feet rather than 6.
We should be praising science for curing COVID, and we certainly cannot rely upon God to protect us. Even the Vatican restricted travel because they felt that God could not protect them from COVID. When the chips are down, science prevails as the true champion.
To deny the truth is to lie, and God doesn't like lies. Science represents the best guess at truth at the moment.
Thank you.
This is interesting that you brought that into this topic.
What are you suggesting, that science proved that humans are animals?
How did they do that, by classification?
Are you of the opinion that one must accept what scientists believe. Why? Please tell me why? Please.
You are not forgetting what these things are, are you? Phylogenetics These relationships are hypothesized by phylogenetic inference methods that evaluate observed heritable traits, such as DNA sequences or morphology, often under a specified model of evolution of these traits. The result of such an analysis is a phylogeny (also known as a phylogenetic tree) - a diagrammatic hypothesis of relationships that reflects the evolutionary history of a group of organisms.
Microbes acquire DNA from a variety of sources.The last decades, which have seen the development of genome sequencing, have revealed that horizontal gene transfer has been a major evolutionary force that has constantly reshaped genomes throughout evolution.However, because the history of life must ultimately be deduced from gene phylogenies, the lack of methods to account for horizontal gene transfer has thrown into confusion the very concept of the tree of life.As a result, many questions remain open, but emerging methodological developments promise to use information conveyed by horizontal gene transfer that remains unexploited today.
Evolutionary Consequences of Horizontal Transfer
The true evolutionary role and impact that horizontal gene transfer has had on the evolution of life were only realized recently with the advent of genome sequencing. The above mechanisms have relatively low specificity, and thus allow movement of genetic information even between distant species, with correspondingly profound consequences on the modes of adaptation and the concept of bacterial species (Ochman et al. 2005).
Why, in your opinion, do you think everyone should accept inferences and interpretations?
Do you think people should apply that same thinking to documents that contain first hand accounts - primary sources, and which may be supported by secondary sources?
Do you think, scientific, observations, can be made where ancient texts, are concerned, and why do you think the differing opinions reached in one field - the former - are different to opinions reached in the latter?
You seem to believe guesses are science. Maybe I am misunderstanding you... please clarify, if I am.
I understand guesses to fall into the category of hypotheses or ideas.
In fact, that is why much of what, not only theists, but scientists, as well, do not accept as science, is not considered as anything more than an idea. They have not passed the test of observable science.
In other words, one cannot observe what one supposes, or proposes - guesses.
Observations are important to science, if those guesses are to be verified.
In some cases, those guesses cannot be observed, neither can they be tested via the scientific method.
Are you of the opinion we should all accept them, because they are the "best guess" of a community of scientists?
Finally, do you think that only scientist can make observations, but the religious person cannot, and do you think that religious people are against science, just because they do not accept ideas proposed as science?
I really would like to hear from you on these things, because I know of scientists who value greatly, their work in the field of science, and not only scientists, but many religious people - some of whom are scientists, appreciate technology, and what science has contributed to it - including myself. So I am a bit baffled at the kind of thinking I come across... as though to say, that everyone needs to believe what "a group" believes.
Do scientists believe as well? Consensus
The word consensus comes from Latin meaning "agreement, accord", which in turn comes from consentire, meaning "feel together". Its meaning and usage relate to both a generally accepted opinion, and the conclusion of a decision based on collective agreement. Scientific Consensus
Yes they do... and ideas and guesses are not science.
An eternal soul, whose qualities died, burns forever in hell (filet of soul).
We live temporarily as humans, but the long-term battle is for the soul. Why, then, defy God and make wars and torture camps after God has so carefully explained what we may and may not do as humans?
It makes sense to attack an enemy that terrorist attacked our skyscrapers. But it also makes sense not to believe in God. Faith doesn't make sense, but if you believe in God you will follow God's rules (sense or no sense). God knows the future, so he knows what will happen if we follow his rules and knows what will happen if we don't. This is why people have faith in God, whether or not they understand God's orders.
Or were you referring to only theist who are not scientist, as many of them are, and have studied DNA.
In fact some have become theists, through studying DNA.
So, you got me
There is no proof other than modern beliefs in science, that a human is an animal. 