Well, as you mentioned, I read Psalm 31: 1-15 not just 31: 5.
Robert
I consider the first point of disagreement to be more important because
it can much more easily be defended as potentially reflecting something the historical Jesus may have said or taught
as opposed to Luke’s literary portrayal of Jesus.
Steefen
One should leave room for nephesh.
Google AI Overview:
(נֶ֫פֶשׁ) is a Hebrew word often translated as “soul,” but it primarily refers to the whole person as a living, breathing, physical organism. Rather than having a soul, biblical anthropology considers humans and animals to be a nephesh—a sentient, living being that includes the throat, life force, desire, and appetite. It signifies the entire embodied, conscious self.
-
- Literal Meaning: The term literally translates to “throat” or “neck,” serving as a metaphor for the seat of breath, hunger, and life itself.
- Living Being: It denotes a living creature, used for both humans and animals, rather than an immortal spirit
.
- Whole Self: It frequently refers to the entire person, often used in the Bible as a synonym for “self,” “life,” or “person” (e.g., 33 nephesh = 33 people).
- Emotions and Desires: It represents the seat of emotions, passions, and desires, such as in the phrase “the one my nephesh loves”.
- Not a Disembodied Ghost: Unlike the Greek concept of an immortal soul, nephesh is closely tied to the physical body and living, physical existence.
Steefen:
Why did you disagree with the two gospel quotes?
Because Bart Ehrman revised Jesus from a gospel Jesus to an historical Jesus that was in line with historical criticism. That Jesus would not have had the duality understanding of body and soul only of body. Bodies do not immediately go to heaven.
Robert:
No, I didn’t say that.
Steefen:
You didn’t say that?
I simply used quotes from the gospels. You had something to say.
You must have been disagreeing with the Jesus of the gospels and advocating for the historico-critical Jesus.
You disagreed because you wanted to distinguish something from the biblical quotes.
You disagreed because you were putting forth nephesh.
Were you not disagreeing with that but was disagreeing with this:
Bodies do not immediaetely go to heaven?
or
Were you disagreeing with the following?
“it’s not necessarily so that an historical Jesus was locked in only to resurrection of the body.”
You said No, I didn’t say something.
= = =
First verse. Store treasures in heaven.
Heaven on earth or Heaven in the afterlife is a future state.
Do things that score points for the future state for an apocalyptic future earthly kingdom.
Do things that score points for the future state for an apocalyptic future spiritual kingdom.
Steefen:
Why did you disagree with the two gospel quotes?
becomes the first verse for the moment.
You disagreed because
I disagreed with your over-simplification of Bart’s view
as somehow over-stating that ‘no Jew could imagine a soul-conscious afterlife’.
Bart can both recognize a multiplicity of views among 2nd-temple Jews and still conclude that in his opinion Jesus himself probably did not hold to a multiplicity of views, but rather held a particular view as an apocalyptic Jew from Nazareth.
Steefen:
and that particular view involves nephesh — an earthly life, not an afterlife.
So, even though Bart and you are presenting an apocalyptic future earthly kingdom from Jesus,
Bart and you do recognize a multiplicity of views among 2nd-temple Jews.
And that is based on what?
The official position of Pharisees was future earthly kingdom NOT future spiritual kingdom?
(maybe a minority of Pharisees, or a small minority thought of a future spiritual kingdom)
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)