It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does Jesus have a soul?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 




I hope it was and I hope he is having childish fun right now


There is no fun, there is work to be done.

His words.


Why does that make me sad?

How can one work when there is no play?



All work and no play makes Me a dull boy.

Fun is a matter of perspective. Is war fun?
Maybe not to some, but others could be having the time of their life.
But to say Jesus doesn't know how to have fun, is just wrong.
Maybe there is just too much to harvest and not enough workers to make it fun.




posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 




I hope it was and I hope he is having childish fun right now


There is no fun, there is work to be done.

His words.


Without humor, insight, introspection, sardonism, satire, self mockery, irony the human race is SUNK do you catagorize yourself as lacking any or all of these? If so YOU TAKE YOURSELF TOO SERIOUSLY and in so doing no one else can/will as well. His words only to rubber stamp a joking or having some fun with you (maybe)?



posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 




I hope it was and I hope he is having childish fun right now


There is no fun, there is work to be done.

His words.


Without humor, insight, introspection, sardonism, satire, self mockery, irony the human race is SUNK do you catagorize yourself as lacking any or all of these? If so YOU TAKE YOURSELF TOO SERIOUSLY and in so doing no one else can/will as well. His words only to rubber stamp a joking or having some fun with you (maybe)?


He was not having fun as you would say. At the feast he does, but not outside of feast, there is too much work to be completed. This is in his words and by observance of what he does.



posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jhill76
 


Dude are you telling me Jesus doesn't have a sense of humour?


not sarcastic at all?

You say you've spoken to him... but I imagine he would be the king of sarcasm just by remembering all the times he said to his dicsiples... Why don't you get it?


I suppose you would know better then I...


edit on 5-3-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 




I hope it was and I hope he is having childish fun right now


There is no fun, there is work to be done.

His words.


Without humor, insight, introspection, sardonism, satire, self mockery, irony the human race is SUNK do you catagorize yourself as lacking any or all of these? If so YOU TAKE YOURSELF TOO SERIOUSLY and in so doing no one else can/will as well. His words only to rubber stamp a joking or having some fun with you (maybe)?


He was not having fun as you would say. At the feast he does, but not outside of feast, there is too much work to be completed. This is in his words and by observance of what he does.


If that is true he missed the whole point of the exercise.



posted on Mar, 5 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by jhill76
 


Dude are you telling me Jesus doesn't have a sense of humour?


not sarcastic at all?

You say you've spoken to him... but I imagine he would be the king of sarcasm just by remembering all the times he said to his dicsiples... Why don't you get it?


I suppose you would know better then I...


edit on 5-3-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)


He does, I am saying he keeps it to the feast. It is also to be noted before and around that time, the work was not as intense as it is of now. Below gets more bolder since the cycle is nearing end, etc, etc.

Also, when we speak and the others, it is in absolute tones, because of orders, knowledge, etc.

When he speaks to ones here, it is of different.
edit on 5-3-2013 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Just before Jesus died on the cross he uttered "Father,into Thy hands I commend My Spirit."
So,take that for what it's worth.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


A soul? Yes, the soul is a person's mind, will and emotions.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 01:33 AM
link   
A soul is a body + the breath of life. So yes, Jesus has a soul. And guess what, God has a soul too. He has a bodily form, and I would think He is alive, so He has a soul.

I think there is confusion about what the true definition of a soul is.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Everyone has a soul, so to answer your question, yes he did (does) have a soul. The fundamental flaw in your argument is that our soul and God are somehow separate. They're not, they're actually one in the same.
edit on 5-3-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


You are God!

Sweet.

So am I.

So we are all identical. Strange how identical people argue.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


An Interesting question! SnF!

IMO, sitting on right hand of God is just metaphorical.
Right hand=Good side
Left hand= Bad.
All prophets are obviously on the right hand.
God however does not have hands except metaphorically.

Jesus pbuh has his own soul like every human and has nothing from the trinity idea.
Lets see what the christian ATSers have to say about your OP.
edit on 5-3-2013 by logical7 because: (no reason given)


I don't mind that saner view of Jesus as a man only.

But the demography in heaven is god above and all else below.

If Jesus is at God's right hand, then we all are and God would not allow even one of us lowly types to share his level.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by TerryMcGuire
reply to post by Greatest I am
 
I came upon this conundrum forty years ago and decided to just skip over it and relegate it to the " useless to even think about because it tries to make sense out of a fundamentally flawed belief system and is just best left alone" file. And I'm glad I did.



In a way I do not blame you but to allow a flawed system to continue to hurt others is evil and that is why I do not let evil just be.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are moral religionists as well as those who do not believe. They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief or not. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Beliefs in fantasy, miracles and magic are evil.

www.youtube.com...

They also do much harm to their own.

African witches and Jesus
www.youtube.com...

Jesus Camp 1of 9
www.liveleak.com...

Death to Gays.
www.youtube.com...

For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.
Fight them when you can. It is your duty to our fellow man.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Greatest I am
 

If you want an "official" answer on all these Incarnation questions, the thing to do is to go back to the early centuries of the church, because they all got raised and discussed.

The official answer, as decided at the Council of Chalcedon, is that Christ is not only fully God in every respect, but also fully human in every respect..
That means he has a human consciousness. The wording of the Athanasian Creed is "of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting"; which means human consciousness.
The Council insisted on this point because a teacher called Apollinarius had come up with the idea that Jesus did NOT have a "reasonable soul", but it was replaced in him by "the Logos". This view was rejected by the church and decreed heretical.
So the understanding is that being "fully human" involves having a human mind.


edit on 5-3-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)


I agree with your last but going back to the past of a corrupted church is not rewarding.

It took Constantine to force Jesus into the trinity 300 years after Jesus died. Rather a long time to decide if someone is divine or not. Then again Constantine had his own agenda and that is why he forced a vote in his favor.

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.


Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

home.pacific.net.au...


Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian!

The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs!

"It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed".
Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180

"In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament".
R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980

The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306.

"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective"
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by triune
My take on this question is No, Jesus does not have a soul. When Jesus walked the earth as a man, then yes, he had a soul.

A soul is a part of our makeup as a human, bearing in mind that being human is a 'fallen' state from a higher state of being.

Jesus is no longer in this fallen state of humanity as he is 'risen' (i.e. returned to that original higher state)

This is the destiny of ALL humans.......eventually.

As Jesus, and we, return to that original higher state of being, we progress, or evolve to the next level of being or consiouness. This process also applies to our soul. So what was our soul also moves onwards and upwards in the spiritual hierarchy and leaves behind its former state of 'Soul' as we leave behind our former state of 'Human'.


Yet scripture says that only the souls of sinners will die.

Why would God bother giving us souls if all they do is die?

What is a soul good for?

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Does Jesus have a soul?

The hierarchy in heaven is God above and all souls below his position followed by angels if you happen to believe in those. That being the case, the human part of Jesus would also be below God and not at the right hand of God. No human soul can sit beside or be equal to God.

The God part of Jesus would be equal to the Father and Holy Spirit thus indistinguishable from either if he manifested himself. He could then sit at God’s right hand but his soul, being less than God-like could not.

If Jesus is at the highest level with God and it is impossible for a soul to be at that level, this indicates that Jesus somehow had two consciousnesses, one divine and one human in the same body on earth and that they would separate upon reaching heaven. That or Jesus had no soul.

If Jesus was not divine and a part of that strange Trinity concept, then he could not sit at the right hand of God as only God can sit at the highest level.

I see an impossible catch 22 here and wondered if any Christian could shed some light to get out of this catch 22.

Regards
DL


No one that comes from above has a soul. Father acted as his soul while he was in the physical


So if Jesus' body had no soul of it's own, it was more of what they call a mule for God and so the body was meaningless and there was no sacrifice. Right?

Only the death of a useless husk of a soulless body. Right?

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by amrith777
Just before Jesus died on the cross he uttered "Father,into Thy hands I commend My Spirit."
So,take that for what it's worth.


If he was God then he would have said --- my hands.

Then again, if God, God cannot die.

A mule body can but then that is hardly a sacrifice.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


A soul? Yes, the soul is a person's mind, will and emotions.


I can agree with this.

Whose will was in Jesus?

His, God's or both?

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeramie
A soul is a body + the breath of life. So yes, Jesus has a soul. And guess what, God has a soul too. He has a bodily form, and I would think He is alive, so He has a soul.

I think there is confusion about what the true definition of a soul is.


So without a body there is no soul if as you say a soul is a body + life.
Our souls die if our bodies do. Right?

Describe God's body please.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Whose will was in Jesus?
His, God's or both?


Concerning your reply to me, you asked for the view of Christians.
I gave you what was established as and REMAINS the official standard teaching of the Christian church.
Therefore it is the Christian view

Concerning the above question, that was discussed and answered in the early days as well.
Once it was agreed in council that the person of Christ combines two natures, one divine and one human, the view known as "Monothelite" (from the Greek for "one will") tried to argue that they had only one will between them.
This was rejected, and the standard teaching of the church is that there are two wills, one human and one divine.

Taking the agreed standard teaching as the standard avoids the process known as "re-inventing the wheel".



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Whose will was in Jesus?
His, God's or both?


Concerning your reply to me, you asked for the view of Christians.
I gave you what was established as and REMAINS the official standard teaching of the Christian church.
Therefore it is the Christian view

Concerning the above question, that was discussed and answered in the early days as well.
Once it was agreed in council that the person of Christ combines two natures, one divine and one human, the view known as "Monothelite" (from the Greek for "one will") tried to argue that they had only one will between them.
This was rejected, and the standard teaching of the church is that there are two wills, one human and one divine.

Taking the agreed standard teaching as the standard avoids the process known as "re-inventing the wheel".


Square wheels need reinventing.

If Jesus had two wills and consciousness', then is the human consciousness at God's right hand. Not likely as no soul can share God's lofty position.

If the God part of Jesus decided to sacrifice the human part then that is murder.

Regards
DL



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join