You keep the thought provoking process churning, Arthur.
We can all believe, hope and pray, but the final decisions aren't ours. We only visit here for a short time.
Thank you for sharing.
Best to you.
Frederick
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Thanks Frederick, it is 'thought' that gets answers - not rote.
Hmmmmm... Well, I'm a Christian. But there are Christians, and there are "Christians". Which one am I? I guess only time will tell. Christians believe that we live at once in both worlds -- the physical and the spiritual -- and that the soul never dies.
I try (!) to live by two things that I consider to be axioms. The first is that you can't believe everything that you hear (or read). The second is that some things are true whether you believe in them or not.
Any thoughtful person can understand your point of view.
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Exactly, James, I had assumed a position from which my point of view could not be ascertained because I was (and am) seeking enlightenment.
Aaaah... we disagree. I do believe we have a soul and it isn't just because "The Bible tells me so" (I could go on about how those who believe in Jesus will have eternal life but then I'd be citing the Bible...) The body goes to dust. The soul lives on. It is soul that makes each of us who we are. But lets say I'm wrong. Let's say that when I die, I will just cease to exist. The fact that I believed in Jesus Christ and did my best to follow His word doesn't matter -- I'm just dead. I won't know it and I won't care.
But what if you and others who don't believe are the ones that are wrong? Truthfully, though, it isn't only Christians that believe in a soul and you don't have to believe to have one. ;)
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Hi, Karla, to ask a question is not to state a belief - it is to try to clarify a position or to pronounce a belief ethic.
I have always sought answers and very often resort to questions to find them. Asking a question does not indicate a level of belief, only a level of conviction.
Belief, like faith, requires no proof - conviction sometimes requires a little reinforcement.
Wonderful, I love to hear / read the thoughts of others on the path to enlightenment. It is said that it is a rarity to even contemplate enlightenment, rarer still for one to actively walk the path of enlightenment, yet the fact that you are on the path of enlightenment makes the end (enlightenment) a certainty...Blessings to You, keep the interesting stuff coming.
xo
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Thanks Atalanta, I live by the maxim that there is no more stupid question than the one you did not ask.
I'd rather be thought a fool than actually be a fool.
Man IS a soul. We don`t have a soul within us that floats off somewhere when we die. When we die, the soul dies. That`s the Bible`s teaching. Immortality of the soul came about as `Christianity` fused it`s beliefs with those of civilizations such as the ancient Greeks.
 |  | odls Feb 15, 2010 05:16 | |
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Hi, odls,
Exactly. It would appear to me that if I have to accept Genesis and other tracts in the Bible, the only way to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven is to be a living soul the day that the Kingdom is declared.
Nowhere is it stated that the dead shall live again - indeed there is great stress placed upon the fact that the dead return to their original state as a part of the earth on which they live with neither awareness nor knowledge.
It is also relevant that the Christian burial service talks about the 'HOPE' of resurection and a life ever lasting. ('Hope' is still 'hope' whether expressed simply or as 'the certain hope'.)
I wrote a small piece entitled Death is final which conveys the personal opinion that when death occurs it's final. There are a plethora of stories, tales and a whole host of other literature about life after death, but nothing as factual or final as a death certificate.
When we pass away, we do so in a very final fashion. Science has proven that all electro-chemical activity ceases to function at the point of death, and no metered electrical activity continues after that point.
To answer the question, do we have a soul, I'd have to say YES, that is to say that what we indeed become are unique individuals while we are alive, our personality, character and disposition all culminate toward building a dynamic living experience that simply dies with us, but could be labelled as a soul.
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
It is a matter of simple fact that each of us can only have a personal opinion about what happens when we die.
My life has been surrounded by death and the only thing that I am certain of is that what we believe will colour our reactions when death approaches. There is a gradation between absolute terror, simple acceptance of a termination and a joyous anticipation of a new life free of all human ills.
The only certain thing about death is that it is not to be feared. Either you will continue or you will not not - the method of achieving the state of being dead - that is a different story altogether!
I believe that there is an existence after this life but I fear that we are so changed that we would not be able to relate to our previous existence(s) except in very exceptional circumstances.
I would like to be able to explain how it is possible for a person under hypnosis to be able to give minute and fascinating detail about a life that has not yet been lived. There are too many instances of these 'future' lives being confirmed for them to be dismissed out of hand.
|
 |
|
The human mind is a wondrous thing, capable of all sorts of amazing and sometimes almost miraculous feats of endurance and intellect, much of which we may never fully understand. I'll say that in many things in life I'm happy to keep an open minded view, but until proven, life after death is nothing more than hearsay hope and imagination.
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
All very true. I believe that primitive man had powers of mental telepathy that enabled him to co-ordinate with his fellows while hunting or seeking a new home. This power has not totally decayed but only becomes evident in times of stress.
Life after death is accepted as many different styles of being depending upon the beliefs of the person explaining it - we shall either discover the truth - or not.
Actually, the Bible does refer to the dead coming back to life. I'll find it and quote it if I have to (later)... I don't see a difference between faith and conviction. Faith is COMPLETE belief; when there is doubt, there is no faith. Faith does not leave room for questioning,for once it is questioned, it is no longer faith. Semantics, I know.
Then again, I may have FAITH that we go to Heaven or otherwise when we die, but who is to say when we die? How many life times might we live? Even the Bible refers to reincarnation (not my only source, of course).
This is almost TOO thought-provoking. I'm out of here. I've got work to do. :)
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
Thought provoking indeed.
Faith requires no proof - it accepts without question. Conviction is acquired after the examination of factors relating and can be of varying degrees of strength.
The Bible mentions a form of reincarnation but not as a tenet of faith - more as a vague possibility.
If you really want to hurt your brain, try to think what would fill space if it wasn't predominantly empty!
Genesis can be a real problem. I used to think that the "light" mentioned in Genesis 1:3 was sunlight especially since the word day is mentioned in verse 5. Then I came to realize that the sun wasn't created on the first day but the 4th day in verse 16.
I am still trying to find someone who can tell me what the light was in verse 3. Of course the answer has to also explain what the darkness was.
Genesis really makes me wonder if it was God inspired at all. If it is perhaps God is confused. If it isn't it's irrelevant.
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
This is an aspect that I have thought long about. The only conclusion that I can draw is that God came from a metaphysical world to create a physical one. The sense He neeeded to guide His creative efforts was light so He caused His radiance to be upon the work place.
It could also be that the initial light could have been a simple indication of a concept that the early writers will not have been familiar with - the ability to perceive in the lack of visible light.
Of course, the creation of the sun and the moon removed the necessity for extra sensory perception and enabled the newly created Earth to be habitable by simple souls with basic senses.
|
 |
|
biblefreeorg, re your comment about Gen. 1v3,16,17-
When God said on Day One, “Let light come to be,” diffused light evidently penetrated the cloud layers even though the sources of that light could not yet be discerned from the earth’s surface. It seems that this was a gradual process, as is indicated by translator J. W. Watts: “And gradually light came into existence.” (Ge 1:3, A Distinctive Translation of Genesis) God brought about a division between the light and the darkness, calling the light Day and the darkness Night. This indicates that the earth was rotating on its axis as it revolved around the sun, so that its hemispheres, eastern and western, could enjoy periods of light and darkness. On the first “day” light (Heb., ʼohr) evidently gradually penetrated the cloud layers still enveloping the earth and would have become visible to an earthly observer, had he been present. (Ge 1:3) On the fourth “day” things changed. The statement that “God put them in the expanse of the heavens” on that day expresses the fact that God caused the sources of light (Heb., ma‧ʼohr′), namely, the sun, moon, and stars, to become discernible in the expanse.
 |  | odls Feb 15, 2010 19:23 | |
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
This is certainly a very plausible explanation of the process and immediacy of the creation. Do you, then, agree that man was created as a living soul and NOT as the container in which a sould may or may not reside?
Yes, Arthur, that`s what I believe. The soul is not described as something distinct and separate from the lifeless body. In fact, only after God energized the lifeless body with “the breath of life,” thus triggering it into breathing, did the soul Adam come to life. When breathing stops and the life-force ceases, the body once again becomes lifeless. Man “goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.” What is the origin of the immortality of the soul doctrine? “The early Christian philosophers adopted the Greek concept of the soul’s immortality and thought of the soul as being created by God and infused into the body at conception.”—The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1988), Volume 11, page 25.
What does the Bible say? “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.”—Ezekiel 18:4, King James Version.
The Hebrew word ne′phesh, translated “soul,” means ‘a creature that breathes.’ When God created the first man, Adam, He did not infuse into him an immortal soul but the life force that is maintained by breathing. Therefore, “soul” in the Biblical sense refers to the entire living being. If separated from the life force originally given by God, the soul dies.—Genesis 3:19; Ezekiel 18:20.
Genesis 2:7 (New International Version)
the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis 2:7 (King James Version)
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
 |  | odls Feb 16, 2010 04:35 | |
CONTRIBUTOR'S REPLY
There certainly seems to be a great deal of Biblical content that denies the concept of ever-lasting life and the continuance of 'self' after death.
Effectively, if you want to look at it from a basic point of view, the natural state of all living things is to be dead or not to exist. We live for a number of years but the total span of our life-time would not register against an infinte time line. 100 years ago none of us existed. In 100 years time none of us will exist.
How far back does time start and how far into the future does it end?
The idea of a life after death is very comforting and makes the suffering in this life bearable but it has to be remembered that Jesus only told those who were to die with him that they would live in his father's house.