Raise Your Hand If You Have A Soul; No, Seriously . . .

It’s not a simple thing to define, and especially not, to totally comprehend, the concept of the human soul in the Bible. The Old Testament seems to define the human soul differently than the New Testament does. It doesn’t help clarify the subject, that the OT was primarily written in Hebrew and the NT in Greek, and both have been translated into all the written languages of modern humanity. Translating a complex concept like soul from Hebrew to Greek to English or another modern (or ancient) language seriously muddies the waters of understanding. Further translation into the vernacular of believers with varying degrees of accurate and mistaken biblical knowledge provides a totally confusing mixture of variant understandings of what it means to have, to be, to lose, or to regain one’s soul.

In the Old Testament (Genesis 2:7), God breathed into Adam the breath of life and Adam became a living nephesh—that's the phonetic spelling of the Hebrew word translated into the English word soul or being (depending on the version you read). When the different writers of the OT books used the word we translate as soul, they were speaking of the whole person, whom they saw as composed of different parts such as a physical body, different organs that performed different functions such as thinking (heart), feeling (kidneys), intuiting (gastro-intestinal system), and breath (which refers more to one’s life force and personhood than our modern understanding of processing air via our lungs in a biochemical way to feed the cells of our body, so that they and we stay alive). When it says that Adam became a living soul, it was referring to Adam’s totality. It would make no sense to the Hebrew mind that Adam’s soul was a separate part of himself that could be removed. Adam’s soul was Adam. To lose his soul would have been to cease to exist. Understanding the Old Testament concept of souls makes the New Testament concept of resurrection more comprehensible. Why would you need or desire to be resurrected (like Jesus was) if you’re going to be a completely spiritual being in Heaven?

The beautiful thing about the Old Testament and even the New Testament is their use of metaphors. God constructing Adam’s body out of the dust of the Earth points to the modern scientific understanding that we’re physically composed of some of the same atoms from which our planet and every other item in the universe are composed. Pure science sees this as a totally physical aspect of evolution. Believers understand it as a miracle performed by God. Neither one can disprove the other (trust me they've tried). Had God provided the story of creation in blow by blow, architectural-scientific language, rather than in metaphorical, symbolical, and allegorical ways, the Bible would probably be trillions of pages long (whew, think of the royalties).

Then there’s the New Testament concept of the soul. The Greek word for soul is sometimes translated soul and sometimes life. To understand the NT’s concept of soul is to be able to navigate between the Greek words for to breathe, body, consciousness, soul, life, vitality, spirit, persona, psyche, self, heart, character, intelligence, immortality, eternal life, Hades, resurrection, ascension, rapture, in the spirit, the Holy Spirit, and various other phrases composed of these and related terms. It’s a far more complex subject than in the OT. 

Part of the reason for the differences in the OT and NT ideas of the soul is the influence of the Persian religion of Zoroastrianism during the latter centuries of OT formation and several centuries prior to the coming of Christ and the writing of the NT. The Magi (wise men from the east) who visited Jesus in the second chapter of Matthew were most likely Zoroastrian Priest (who happened to be very interested in astrology--"they had seen his star in the east" from Persia (the same geographical area known today as Iran). People of that religion influenced the Israelites from 6th century BC and into the Inter-testamental period (200 years between the close of the OT writings to the beginning of the NT writings). We can see some of their influence in the OT, especially in Daniel and some of the other latter prophets, but a much greater influence on the NT writers and on the sacred books of the Muslims. Don't let it disturb you that the Israelites, Christians and Muslims got some of their ideas from each other and from other religions. Can't God speak to us in any way God decides to? All of us acknowledge today, that God speaks to us in many ways, leading us to do this or that. Isn't that what prayer is all about--Asking God for guidance--listening to God's guidance--following God's guidance? Isn't that what it means to say one has been led by the Holy Spirit? There's no doubt that the Zoroastrians came up with certain ideas about the spiritual universe that the Jews and Christians later adopted as their own, and there's no doubt that the Muslims adopted much of what the Jews and Christians believed.

Some of the major influences of Zoroastrianism on Christianity (as well as Islam and Judaism) are a more developed concept of Heaven and Hell, resurrection of the body, the Last Judgment, eternal life, angels and demons and their influence on humans, the essential equality of all humans in God’s sight, the importance of good thoughts, words and deeds, the idea of a being who is at the center of and head of evil. Christians came to see the character of Satan mentioned a few times in the OT as the leader of the evil forces in the universe, even identifying him as the serpent who tempted Eve in Eden. Jesus taught that Satan was the Prince of the Earth whom he defeated through his ministry and conclusively through his sacrificial death on the cross.

I hope nobody reading this thinks I’ve presented you with a complete diagram of these things. That would take several very heavy books covering comparative religion of at least the three major religions today plus Zoroastrianism. Along with that, scholars debate the influence, the details, and the broad history of all four of these religions and their influences on each other, and I’m sure, since I’m working from memory of what I’ve read about this, including my comparative religion studies in seminary and other graduate studies, that I may have included a detail or two that someone may find erroneous. An essay on social media can’t do justice to such scholarship. I didn’t post this to accomplish a thing of that magnitude, but to inform those who are interested.

I’m posting this, because I’m fairly confident that most people who consider themselves to be Christians, including those who are in Church services every Sunday are more than likely not aware of the things I’ve written here. I thought some of you may be interested, and since I’m a teacher at heart, I’m offering this knowledge to you (at no charge).

What inspired me to write this is that part of my current sequel to my last novel includes some information about Satan and the nature of our human souls. As I was writing, I felt an urgent need to relay some of the information I’m dealing with to you in a brief post. As you can see, it’s not very brief. When it comes to words, I have trouble being brief. If you’re interested in what I’ve written here, it’s in much simpler details woven into the course of my new novel which is not yet finished. However, you may want to read my current novel, The Four Rivers of Eden, in order to better enjoy the new one that should be finished and published in two or three months. You can buy The Four Rivers of Eden at www.amazon.com/dp/B07YGQHNK7 or at any other major book store (but it's cheaper to order it from Amazon, especially if you're an Amazon Prime member.