what's the difference between soul and spirit?
349472
There is a difficulty with this question, at least as usually asked.  It assumes any distinction will be a nice, neat one like that made made between ""hand" and "foot",   or perhaps, on the other hand, that the words are pretty much interchangeable.\n\nFor the purpose of this question, the second view is much closer to the truth than the first.   Because each of these CAN be and is used to speak of the whole "inner being", that is, in at least some important contexts, they CAN be interchanged. (Examples cited by Source #1 -Luke 1:46-47; Phil. 1:27; Matt. 20:28, cf. 27:50; Heb. 12:23, cf. Rev. 6:9)\n\nThe key point to note is that the Bible is NOT interested in laying out a careful distinction of the human person into a number of distinct "parts".  If we head down that road, we'll have to add in "heart" and ""mind", not to mention "kidneys"...  each of which has its own emphasis and flavor, and each of which appears in its own figures of speech.   In other words, you cannot take ANY of these words and simply be interchange it wherever it may appear with one or more of the others.  That is, each carries a particular idea, or better cluster of ideas.   BUTthat does NOT mean that we should start thinking that each refers to a distinct "part" of a human person.  In fact, the biblical writers are not interested in laying out a detailed "structure" of man.    (Looking at someone from the point of view of their ideas, emotions, will, etc. does not mean that you think each of these is a distinct "part".)\n\nI've listed three links below which, at different levels, lay out the facts very nicely -- I won't try to do the same here.   But basically, I believe the biblical view boils down to this:  man [each person, that is] is a unitary/unified being, but there are TWO basic 'aspects'.   I hesitate to say too much about 'parts' because the complete person is created to be BOTH.  Thus our "inner being" ('immaterial') -- most often called "soul" or "spirit"-- is joined to the physical/material body.  (But it is NOT the Greek view of the "real person"/"spirit" trapped inside a body that it wants to escape.  The Hebrew & Christian hope is the RESURRECTION of the body -- in our being COMPLETE beings, 'body and spirit/soul'.)\n\nThe sources discuss the few (two actually) passages that seem to distinguish "soul" and "spirit" very well.  The point is to emphasize the COMPLETE person, not to divide him up.     In fact, the 'greatest commandment' does the same thing ('Love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength!')   We would miss the point if we tried to use it as a list of our distinct "parts" -- and we'd probably be further confused in this, because the OT and NT versions have slightly different lists!  \n\nMuch of the confusion on this question stems not just from the assumption I mentioned at the start, but from a related assumption that each of these words is used in only ONE sense, a neat technical sense, the same whenever it is found.  But, like much of human language, this is simply not so.   In fact, we ourselves continue to use these words in a variety of senses.   Example: "When I finally arrived not a soul was there!"  In this case the word simply means 'persons' or 'individuals'  (it has this as ONE of its biblical uses).   "I was very troubled in my soul"  and "He spoke with such soul" are two other uses that clearly do not have exactly the same sense as the first.\n\nThis should not be troubling, since we are perfectly able to distinguish the range of meanings of words in our own language; the same is true of biblical Hebrew and Greek.  Reading through ALL the passages that use these words we are generally pre
914453
Well, the "in between" are still dead, but yes, there are souls that don't know they're dead.  This happens primarily when a person dies a tragic death, e.g. in an accident.  Sometimes, when they don't want to go to the Light, because they feel they have something to take care of, they will also be Earth-bound.\nIt has been reported that on occasion, a spirit could drain a person's energy, but that is also true for the living.\nSpirits see both, dead and alive.  You can't guarantee anything, including what you will WILL yourself to do after your body dies.
921447
"Ghost" implies a specter or lost soul, so the church shifted to "spirit". I interchange the terms myself
545881
I think you should try posting in the philosophy section or spirituality next time.\n\nHow big is the soul.\n\nWell, hopefully bigger than the body and more durable. But it seems like the universe "the container" for all matter, and the soul, the container for everything spiritual would be of a different quality. \n\nI think the soul is bigger.  Imagine being condemned to live forever without a soul? It's hard enough trying to get through a Sunday afternoon.
1124287
Yes .There is life before birth and life after death.Soul is carried by body.Man is a soul having body.That is why we say we donot know from where we have come and where we are going?World is a passing phase.
27494
soul is spirit and can not be seen but can be FELT.  What all you feel Joy, Sorrow etc .... works of soul....
608301
What happened to your soul?
1180791
Depends on your definition of "soul". According to the Bible, a living being IS A SOUL...not HAS a soul. In Genesis 2:7, it says that Adam BECAME a soul. It goes on to say that even the animals are souls. Psalms, says that "BLOOD" flows in the veins of a soul. The Hebrew word used to apply to both humans and animals was the same word. "nephesh". The word was used 750 times and translated 472 times as soul, and 282 times as spirit, breath or other words. The translators of the King James did this on their own initiative.\n\nIn I Kings 17:17; is says,"And it came to pass after these things, that the son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick; and his sickness was so sore, that there was no breath left in him. The phrase "BREATH" was also the same Hebrew word, nepheshs.\n                                                                      \nEcclesiastes 3:19-20, shows us, "For that which befallen the sons of men befallen beasts; even one thing befallen them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." Again, the phrase "BREATH" was also the same Hebrew word, nephesh.\n\nAccording to the Biblical definition, a person dies when the lose their "soul" because they are no longer living. In the same sense animals die, they are also no longer a "SOUL".\n\nThe Bible also NEVER states that the nephesh is immortal. Just as our breath and life force cannot live by itself without a body, neither can  the BIBLICAL soul.\n\nScience also agrees with this. When someone dies ... they are dead! The same life force that animates us is the same life force that animates dogs and cats.\n\nBuddhism somewhat agrees with that understanding. According to Buddhism, we have no soul. It is our "life force" that keeps us alive. It is our mind and memory that lives on.
456727
They are different, Spirit is of course the Spirit of man, Soul is the Body and the spirit together.
844032
Questor, I'm going to go out on a limb (again).This may not be the type of answer you intended to receive . To me spirit is Identity and energy is Action. Quote;"Identity may be termed action which is conscious of itself. For the purposes of our discussion,the terms 'action' and 'identity' must be seperated, but basically no such seperation exists. An identity is also a dimension of existence, action upon action, an onfolding of action upon itself,--and through this interweaving of action with itself, through this re-action, an identity is formed. The energy of action, the workings of action within and upon itself, forms identity. Yet though identity is formed from action, action and identity cannot be seperated. Identity, then, is action's effect upon itself. Without identity action would be meaningless, for there would be nothing upon which action could act. Action must, by it's very nature, of itself and it's workings, create identities. This applies from the most simple to the most complex. ....action is not a force from without that acts upon matter. Action is, instead, the inside vitality of the inner universe--it is the dilemma between inner vitality's desire and impetus to completely materialize itself, and it's inability to do so. This first dilemma results in action, and from action's own workings upon itself we have seen that identity was formed, and that these two are inseperable. Action is, therefore, a part of all structure. Action, having of itself and because of its nature would seem to destroy identity, since action must involve change, and any change seems to threaten identity. It is a mistaken notion, however, that identity is dependent upon stability. Identity, because of its characteristics, will continually seek stability, while stability is impossible. This is our second dilemma. It is this dilemma, between identity's constant attempts to maintain stabilty and action's inherent drive for change, that results in the imbalance, the exquisite creative by-product that is 'consciousness of self'. For consciousness and existence do not result from delicate balances as much as they are made possible by lack of balances, so richly creative that there would be no reality were balance ever maintained....Identity must seek stability while action must seek change; yet identity could not exist without change, for it is the result of action and a part of it. Identities are never constant as you yourselves are not the same from one moment to the next. Every action is a termination...And yet without the termination, identity would cease to exist, for consciousness without action would cease to be conscious. Consciousness, therefore, is not a 'thing' in itself. It is a dimension of action, an almost miraculous state, made possible by what I choose to call a series of creative dilemmas. It should be fairly easy to see how the second dilemma evolved from the first. I have said that the second one resulted in ---and constantly results in---consciousness of self. This is not ego consciousness. Consciousness of self is still consciousness directly connected with action. Ego consciousness is a state resulting from the third creative dilemma, which happens when consciousness of self attempts to seperate itself from action. Since this is obviously impossible, since no consciousness or identity can exist without action, we have the third dilemma....consciousness of self involves a consciousness of self within---and a part of---action. Ego consciousness, on the other hand, involves a state in which consciousness of self attempts to divorce itself from action---an attempt on the part of consciousness to perceive action as an object...and to perceive action as initiated by the ego as a result, rather than as a cause, of ego's own existence. These three dilemmas represent three areas of reality within which inner vitality can experience itself. And here also
27109
In the Old Testament, the soul is the entire individual, his body and mind.\nSpirit is the breath of God, who breathes life into the soul. A life force.\n\nGreek influence on Judaism and Christianity, created a dualism between the body and soul. The soul leaves the body at death. Spirit is sometimes used as the same soul. Deepak Schopa (not spelling that right) makes a distinction between all 3.
1030421
death is physical\nsoul never dies it always sustain\nand soul is like a part of god and it is always remain inside a human to direct him in a right path but its all the brain of human who took decision
299145
whats a with the we kemo sabi ,you cant speak for every body else,\nmost people of science believe the essence of spirit or soul is actually with in the electric field surrounding the body (aura)that intimately is connected to the brain and so produces feelings.
1175776
The soul according to many religious and philosophical traditions, is the ethereal substance — spirit (Hebrew:rooah or nefesh) — particular to a unique living being. Such traditions often consider the soul both immortal and innately aware of its immortal nature, as well as the true basis for sentience in each living being.
800885
There is only one God, and God is a spirit, but there are many spirits.  Angels are spirits; people are a combination of body and spirit; even animals have spirits.  But, only one spirit is God.  A spirit does not take-up any space; it is not made out of anything.\n\nI hope this helps.
1180124
I am my God.\nMy Self (Soul/Spirit) is my God and nothing is above it.
640063
your spirit is your thought, your soul is your being