Re: Death before the Fall

From: <>
Date: Tue Apr 19 2005 - 12:25:07 EDT

We are probably more in agreement than disagreement
truthfully. I am just pointing out that claiming that the
translation as "nephesh" as "soul" is incorrect because it
reflects the influence of western ideas of dualism on
modern translations, ignores that fact that the Hebrews
had a dualistic concept of some sort themselves.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:24:50 -0400
  Jan de Koning <> wrote:
>At 07:06 AM 4/19/2005, jack syme wrote:
>>That is an oversimplification.
>>Certainly there were platonic influences to later ideas
>>about bodies and souls as seperate concepts.
>>But the Israelites clearly believed that some type of
>>spirit existed after the body died, for they resided in
>>Hades. In other words after the body died there was some
>>type of existence. To quote John Cooper:
>>"Death is not the end of existence. It is rather the
>>entrance of the individual as a ghost-and etherial
>>quasi-bodily being, not a Platonic soul or Cartesian
>>mind-into the dreary and lethargic, if not soporific,
>>existence of the underworld, Sheol, Abaddon, or in the
>>Septuagint, Hades.
>I never said that death was the end of existence. But I
>do say that "time" is a creation of God, and that when we
>die we are out of "time" whatever that means. Sheol,
>Abaddon, Hades, are not necessarily places which are in
>"time". "Time" is a creation of God as well. Besides
>the translation of "nephesh" is not so sure as you seem
>to think, and as is clear from all the different
>translations for that word in the OT.
>For now, I do not have "time" nor do I wish to go on with
>a discussion which, when it is properly done involves
>basic differences in philosophy, philology, science and
>maybe more in other areas. The discussion needs to go
>on, but I do not have the "time" now. I mentioned the
>different ways the word "nephesh" is translated, which
>indicates the influence of certain philosophies. Also,
>as someone else noted, the Lord spoke top people in a
>language they understood, so no modern science,
>philosophy etc. should be deduced from a particular
>Jan de Koning
Received on Tue Apr 19 12:26:09 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 19 2005 - 12:26:12 EDT