Soul and Spirit - Is there a difference?
#21
I think that it is easy to accept humans have flesh and spirit. Two components, and the body has become corrupt (for a good reason, if we did not die, it would be very hard for us to even try to keep following God. Death is a great mercy given to us to prevent ourselves from destroying ourselves for certain).

Look at the angels. They have only spirit.

Matthew 26:41 Wrote:Watch ye, and pray that ye enter not into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh weak.

Luke 16:13 Wrote:No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

Luke 24:39 Wrote:See my hands and feet, that it is I myself; handle, and see: for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see me to have.
Reply
#22
If it helps at all, I'll always remember meeting an "Assembly of God" chick who took issue at my misuse of the word "soul" when, according to her and her teachers, I meant either "emotions" or "spirit" (I can't remember which) - and I just couldn't understand (to say the least) why anyone would want to split "soul" and "spirit". I was actually kind of stunned that anyone would think of splitting them. I didn't know much outside of my own experiences of God back then!

I guess I can put it into words now - that a human "soul" isn't really "alive" without the "spirit". In other words, what animates a human should be the Holy Spirit. That's the supernatural "norm" for the human soul. So for Catholics, there shouldn't be a need to distingush between "soul" and "spirit", if the soul is in grace.. Since the redemption, the human soul without grace is not a fully "human" soul, if you don't mind that pretty JP2-ish way of saying it. A human soul that isn't spiritual is like a circle that isn't round, and all those kinds of silly metaphors...
:)

In other words, it's a red herring.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)