Would you sin..... to...

God breathed into man the breath of life. No metaphors involved.

...or the spirit of Adam was sown into his body of dust by the breath (Spirit) of
GOD.

I don't see an answer to my question of "reincarnation". Do you mind answering?
Post #57 AND #58...

OR... are you insisting the the wicked humans "sown" in this life come from hell?
Sheol can only be referred to hell in its old meaning of the place of the waiting dead, not by its popular meaning of the place of eternal damnation. Better to use Sheol than hell so folk do not get mixed up.

And I suggest that being sown into our bodies from Sheol is a viable and useful alternative to the currently accepted theory of our creation and our fall in Adam which impugnes the righteousness of our LORD.

As for no metaphors being involved - how do you interpret Matt 13:36-39 without any metaphor or other literary devices being used, ie, at face value?
 
Last edited:
...or the spirit of Adam was sown into his body of dust by the breath (Spirit) of
GOD.


Post #57 AND #58...

You said you don't believe in reincarnation but your words contradict what you claim. I'm looking for words in your position that equal "zero possibility" of reincarnation. You claim that souls are planted from hell in the this life.

Sheol can only be referred to hell in its old meaning of the place of the waiting dead, not by its popular meaning of the place of eternal damnation. Better to use Sheol than hell so folk do not get mixed up.

And I suggest that being sown into our bodies from Sheol is a viable and useful alternative to the currently accepted theory of our creation and our fall in Adam which impugnes the righteousness of our LORD.

As for no metaphors being involved - how do you interpret Matt 13:36-39 without any metaphor or other literary devices being used, ie, at face value?

Geesh....

No metaphors involved in Genesis where it clearly indicates that God breathed into man the breath of life.

Matthew 13:36-39 is a parable and there is no metaphor that establishes that the soul of man comes from "Sheol".

As far as your suggestion concerning "Sheol"... I'll pass. The Greek text is very clear concerning Hades. Didn't believe everything you read about Hebrew. Many of those arguments are nothing more than "wishful thinking".
 
You said you don't believe in reincarnation but your words contradict what you claim. I'm looking for words in your position that equal "zero possibility" of reincarnation. You claim that souls are planted from hell in the this life.
You need to look up the meaning of reincarnation again. Perhaps an understanding of both theories in full would explain it well enough so the fixation on one word doesn't twist our thoughts... REincarnation refers to the continued cycle of life, death and rebirth of souls into new bodies after death ad infinitum. The idea that spirits are planted here ONCE into this world from Sheol then return to await the judgement of hell after death is not RE-incarnation because it only happens once so it may be an incarnation but it is not a RE-incarnation by any definition and it certainly has no part of the Hindu definition of the eternal cycle of reincarnation.

Reincarnation is also based upon the idea that all spirits/souls are eternal. I obviously don't agree with this since the spirits I speak of are all the Sons of GOD within GOD's creation unless YOU want to argue that the spirits who sang HIS paise when HE proved HIS deity and eternal power by the creation of the physical universe, Job 38:7, were already in existence as eternal spirits, an idea which I vehemently oppose!

I could ask you to wait with your accusations until you find one place where I refer to dead persons being reborn into a new bodies but it would be ignored, eh?
 
Last edited:
You need to look up the meaning of reincarnation again. Perhaps an understanding of both theories in full would explain it well enough so the fixation on one word doesn't twist our thoughts... REincarnation refers to the continued life, death and rebirth of souls into new bodies after death ad infinitum. The idea that spirits are planted here ONCE into this world from Sheol then return to await the judgement of hell after death is not RE-incarnation because it only happens once so it may be an incarnation but it is not a RE-incarnation by any definition and it certainly has no part of the Hindu definition of reincarnation.
reincarnation is coming back in another form or another persons body or a non human body.

noun​

  1. Rebirth of the soul in another human or nonhuman body.
  2. A reappearance or revitalization in another form; a new embodiment.
 
You need to look up the meaning of reincarnation again. Perhaps an understanding of both theories in full would explain it well enough so the fixation on one word doesn't twist our thoughts... REincarnation refers to the continued life, death and rebirth of souls into new bodies after death ad infinitum. The idea that spirits are planted here ONCE into this world from Sheol then return to await the judgement of hell after death is not RE-incarnation because it only happens once so it may be an incarnation but it is not a RE-incarnation by any definition and it certainly has no part of the Hindu definition of reincarnation.

Where did these "things" in "Sheol" come from originally?
 
Matthew 13:36-39 is a parable and there is no metaphor that establishes that the soul of man comes from "Sheol".
Are you refusing to tell me what you think the explanation of the parable means?

I know it does not say from where the seeds, the people of the kingdom and the evil one come from but when the explanation of the parable is supported by the verse saying the wicked RETURN to Sheol, it does no disservice to the language to think it might be where they came from.

A parable is related to figures of speech such as the metaphors and simile. A parable is like a metaphor in that it uses concrete, perceptible phenomena (seeds planted into a garden) to illustrate abstract ideas (people being sown into the world). It may be said that a parable is a metaphor that has been extended to form a brief, coherent narrative. Referring to people as seeds planted in a garden is a perfect metaphor. The explanation of the parable is that the seeds are people and to change that into something else only reduces the explanation to a new metaphor.
 
As far as your suggestion concerning "Sheol"... I'll pass.


Although Sheol is often referred to as the grave; the land of the dead; a type and precursor of hell, Sheol is NOT THE GRAVE, as a cursory study shows;

There is too much evidence to put it all here so I'll post one url of so many that will provide a good introduction of how I use it:

https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/hell-sheol-hades-paradise-and-the-grave/

Hades is the New Testament equivalent of the Old Testament word Sheol. The Greek and Hebrew words speak of the same place, the present Hell. However, this is problematic because Sheol has been translated "grave" as often as it has "hell" and some have mistakenly taught that Sheol and Hades are only references to the grave rather than Hell. This erroneous teaching leads to the denial of the existence of an immediate or present hell. The false doctrine of soul-sleep and other ideas that teach the unconscious state of the dead between death and resurrection, spring from this error.

The common word for grave in the Old Testament is queber. Of the sixty-four times it is used, it is translated "grave" thirty-four times, "sepulcher" twenty-six times, and "burying place" four times. Queber is used five additional times as part of a place name, Kibroth-hattaavah, which means "graves of lust." As we said earlier, Sheol is found sixty-four times, being rendered "grave" thirty-one times, "hell" thirty-one times, and "pit" three times.

A comparison of how Sheol and queber are used reveals eight points of contrast that tell us that they are not the same thing.

1. Sheol is never used in plural form. Queber is used in the plural 29 times.

2. It is never said that the body goes to Sheol. Queber speaks of the body going there 37 times.

3. Sheol is never said to be located on the face of the earth. Queber is mentioned 32 times as being located on the earth.

4. An individual's Sheol is never mentioned. An individual's queber is mentioned 5 times.

5. Man is never said to put anyone into Sheol. Individuals are put into a queber by man (33 times).

6. Man is never said to have dug or fashioned a Sheol. Man is said to have dug, or fashioned, a queber (6 times).

7. Man is never said to have touched Sheol. Man touches, or can touch, a queber (5 times).

8. It is never said that man is able to possess a Sheol. Man is spoken of as being able to possess a queber (7 times). (These eight points of comparison are adapted from "Life and Death" by Caleb J. Baker, Bible Institute Colportage ***'n, 1941).

From the differences between how Sheol and queber are used in Scripture, it is obvious that they are not the same thing. The Greek word Hades in the New Testament would fit into the Sheol column of our chart, strongly indicating that it is the same thing as Sheol. Hades is used eleven times, being rendered hell ten times and grave once.

ibid:
While we have not exhausted the subject by looking at every passage that Sheol is found in, it is clear from these examples that Sheol is not simply the grave but is located at the center of the earth and is the abode of the souls of the unrighteous dead who are awaiting their resurrection unto condemnation. It is equally clear that those in Sheol/Hades are not in an unconscious state of existence but are quite aware of what is going on around them. There is memory, recognition, and communication there.
 
Are you refusing to tell me what you think the explanation of the parable means?

I know it does not say from where the seeds, the people of the kingdom and the evil one come from but when the explanation of the parable is supported by the verse saying the wicked RETURN to Sheol, it does no disservice to the language to think it might be where they came from.

A parable is related to figures of speech such as the metaphors and simile. A parable is like a metaphor in that it uses concrete, perceptible phenomena (seeds planted into a garden) to illustrate abstract ideas (people being sown into the world). It may be said that a parable is a metaphor that has been extended to form a brief, coherent narrative. Referring to people as seeds planted in a garden is a perfect metaphor. The explanation of the parable is that the seeds are people and to change that into something else only reduces the explanation to a new metaphor.

I didn't say there were no metaphors in the parable. I said there isn't one there that establishes what you believe.

The explanation given by Jesus is clear. You're adding your twist.

Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

Your appeal to "Return" is a distraction. "Return" a translation from an uncertain/suspect "Hebrew" source. The "Psalms" in extant Hebrew are one of the most suspect editions within the entire Biblical canon. Jerome couldn't complete the Vulgate from a exclusive Hebrew collection in the 4th century. He didn't have the manuscripts to do so because they did not exist. He had to use the LXX. Which is what the KJV follows. The KJV and others follow the Greek OT source that predates any extant Hebrew source for Psalm 9.

You're basing your position on your imagination.
 
Although Sheol is often referred to as the grave; the land of the dead; a type and precursor of hell, Sheol is NOT THE GRAVE, as a cursory study shows;

There is too much evidence to put it all here so I'll post one url of so many that will provide a good introduction of how I use it:

https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/hell-sheol-hades-paradise-and-the-grave/

Hades is the New Testament equivalent of the Old Testament word Sheol. The Greek and Hebrew words speak of the same place, the present Hell. However, this is problematic because Sheol has been translated "grave" as often as it has "hell" and some have mistakenly taught that Sheol and Hades are only references to the grave rather than Hell. This erroneous teaching leads to the denial of the existence of an immediate or present hell. The false doctrine of soul-sleep and other ideas that teach the unconscious state of the dead between death and resurrection, spring from this error.

The common word for grave in the Old Testament is queber. Of the sixty-four times it is used, it is translated "grave" thirty-four times, "sepulcher" twenty-six times, and "burying place" four times. Queber is used five additional times as part of a place name, Kibroth-hattaavah, which means "graves of lust." As we said earlier, Sheol is found sixty-four times, being rendered "grave" thirty-one times, "hell" thirty-one times, and "pit" three times.

A comparison of how Sheol and queber are used reveals eight points of contrast that tell us that they are not the same thing.

1. Sheol is never used in plural form. Queber is used in the plural 29 times.

2. It is never said that the body goes to Sheol. Queber speaks of the body going there 37 times.

3. Sheol is never said to be located on the face of the earth. Queber is mentioned 32 times as being located on the earth.

4. An individual's Sheol is never mentioned. An individual's queber is mentioned 5 times.

5. Man is never said to put anyone into Sheol. Individuals are put into a queber by man (33 times).

6. Man is never said to have dug or fashioned a Sheol. Man is said to have dug, or fashioned, a queber (6 times).

7. Man is never said to have touched Sheol. Man touches, or can touch, a queber (5 times).

8. It is never said that man is able to possess a Sheol. Man is spoken of as being able to possess a queber (7 times). (These eight points of comparison are adapted from "Life and Death" by Caleb J. Baker, Bible Institute Colportage ***'n, 1941).

From the differences between how Sheol and queber are used in Scripture, it is obvious that they are not the same thing. The Greek word Hades in the New Testament would fit into the Sheol column of our chart, strongly indicating that it is the same thing as Sheol. Hades is used eleven times, being rendered hell ten times and grave once.

ibid:
While we have not exhausted the subject by looking at every passage that Sheol is found in, it is clear from these examples that Sheol is not simply the grave but is located at the center of the earth and is the abode of the souls of the unrighteous dead who are awaiting their resurrection unto condemnation. It is equally clear that those in Sheol/Hades are not in an unconscious state of existence but are quite aware of what is going on around them. There is memory, recognition, and communication there.

Funny how you reject the KJV and then appeal to a website largely based upon the KJV.
 
Where did these "things" in "Sheol" come from originally?
Why you would call the Sons of GOD things is beyond me. Are you insulting them or me?

They are a part of the full creation of GOD, Col 1:16 For in him all things were created... Some part of this all things, some of the heavenly spirits who sang HIS praise when they saw HIS deity and eternal power by the creation of the physical universe, were already fallen (post #50). After the creation of the physical universe, these fallen spirits, both reprobate spirits condemned already and elect elect but sinful spirits who were not condemned but had to be redeemed and sanctified, were flung into the earth, Rev 12:4-9, into Sheol as we have learned elsewhere, 2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare the angels having sinned, but having cast them down to Tartarus, in chains of gloomy darkness, delivered them, being kept for judgment; Berean Literal Bible in which we see that hell is an interpretation, not a translation...some of whom our Lord preached to in their prison, 1 Peter 3:18 ...For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit, 19 in which also having gone, He preached to the spirits in prison. That is where the fallen sinful spirits waited until they were sown into the earth by the will of GOD and to where the reprobate returned on their death, Ps 9:17, while the sinful elect, now holy, return to GOD who gave them earthly life, Ecc 12:7...before the dust returns to the ground from which it came and the spirit returns to God who gave it. Berean Standard Bible
 
Its like when the C's redefine biblical words to suit their doctrines.
Please tell me what words I've redefined for my own use... I constantly refer to Strong's
concordance for all words I must define and it is a well respected source.
 
Please tell me what words I've redefined for my own use... I constantly refer to Strong's
concordance for all words I must define and it is a well respected source.
I was specifically talking about reincarnation where I provided the accepted definition.
 
Your appeal to "Return" is a distraction. "Return" a translation from an uncertain/suspect "Hebrew" source. The "Psalms" in extant Hebrew are one of the most suspect editions within the entire Biblical canon. Jerome couldn't complete the Vulgate from a exclusive Hebrew collection in the 4th century. He didn't have the manuscripts to do so because they did not exist. He had to use the LXX. Which is what the KJV follows. The KJV and others follow the Greek OT source that predates any extant Hebrew source for Psalm 9.
I trust all scripture. I do not reject Psalms, Ecclesiastes, or any book just because it does not seem to fit my understanding as others do because all of them do fit. There is not one verse in all scripture that makes our pre-conception existence impossible or denies it outright. The books of the Bible are truth and if I miss the truth it is my fault, I cannot blame the Books as others do.

The KJV use of return to supposedly mean its opposite to turn into is an egregious mistranslation according to the best scholars, including the Berean scholars and Strong's concordance.
 
Why you would call the Sons of GOD things is beyond me. Are you insulting them or me?

You have appealed to "Sheol" as what? Now you want to call them "Sons of God"? You're all over the place. I have no idea how you're referencing this imaginary scenario you have going. There is no logic to it whatsoever.

They are a part of the full creation of GOD, Col 1:16 For in him all things were created... Some part of this all things, some of the heavenly spirits who sang HIS praise when they saw HIS deity and eternal power by the creation of the physical universe, were already fallen (post #50). After the creation of the physical universe, these fallen spirits, both reprobate spirits condemned already and elect elect but sinful spirits who were not condemned but had to be redeemed and sanctified, were flung into the earth, Rev 12:4-9, into Sheol as we have learned elsewhere, 2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare the angels having sinned, but having cast them down to Tartarus, in chains of gloomy darkness, delivered them, being kept for judgment; Berean Literal Bible in which we see that hell is an interpretation, not a translation...some of whom our Lord preached to in their prison, 1 Peter 3:18 ...For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit, 19 in which also having gone, He preached to the spirits in prison. That is where the fallen sinful spirits waited until they were sown into the earth by the will of GOD and to where the reprobate returned on their death, Ps 9:17, while the sinful elect, now holy, return to GOD who gave them earthly life, Ecc 12:7...before the dust returns to the ground from which it came and the spirit returns to God who gave it. Berean Standard Bible

That is an elaborate imagination you have there.

You need to be careful when dealing with Tartarus. The Greek word for Tartarus is very old. Very very old. It is part of Greek mythology that dates back to the 8th century or more BC....

YET it is only used once in 2 Peter in the entire Greek Biblical Canon. Thousands upon thousands of words and we only find it once. Once in a late edition of 2 Peter. It is one of the reasons that some dispute the veracity of 2 Peter. Not that I do, I happen to believe it is largely intact but suffers in this specific area.
 
I trust all scripture. I do not reject Psalms, Ecclesiastes, or any book just because it does not seem to fit my understanding as others do because all of them do fit. There is not one verse in all scripture that makes our pre-conception existence impossible or denies it outright. The books of the Bible are truth and if I miss the truth it is my fault, I cannot blame the Books as others do.

The KJV use of return to supposedly mean its opposite to turn into is an egregious mistranslation according to the best scholars, including the Berean scholars and Strong's concordance.

I don't need your preferred scholars. I know the evidence myself. Have you "scholars" engage on the matter.

I trust the Greek edition of Psalms that is in the KJV. As referenced, your appealing to scholars that use the KJV. Oh what irony.
 
Back
Top Bottom