What is the meaning of spirit?

Answer 1

Take away the brain and what's left is spirit.

Answer 2

"Spirit" means living force, which moves our body.

For example: take an aeroplane, which is a huge body, still it needs a pilot to move. Our body is also a mechanical arrangement like a plane. Plane appears to fly because there is pilot in the flight. The plane itself has no capacity to move by itself; it needs a driver; similarly our body moves because of that "living force", the driver of our body.

I say: "this is my finger, this is my leg, this is my head, this is my head", but where is that "I" to which our bodily parts belong? That "I" in the body is the "spirit" soul.

Here is a simple explanation of the soul given in Vedas:

=====
"As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A self-realized soul is not bewildered by such a change." (2.13)

"As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, similarly, the soul accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones."

======

The spirit is the "Seer" in our body, but not our "eyes". This "seer" is uneffected by the changes of body, but can perceive the changes of body. So, just as we give up old and useless clothes and wear new clothes, similarly, when the body becomes invalid and useless, the soul (spirit) gives up this body and enters the womb of another mother, at the time of death.

There is no death of birth of the spirit soul; what we perceive is so called birth and death of body.

Answer 3

The spirit is the part/parts of the brain that holds "you", this is the part that people also refer to as the soul. Its nothing more that chemical and electrical signals, when the brain dies, the spirit also dies.

Answer 4

The Greek pneu′ma (spirit) comes from pne′o, meaning “breathe or blow,” and the Hebrew ru′ach (spirit) is believed to come from a root having the same meaning.

1.Spirit Persons-

a)God
b) God's son- Jesus
c)other spirit creatures-angels and demons

2.Holy Spirit-God's force

3. breath of life-given to man that returns to God at death

Answer 5

Spirit of God and knowledge we are not aware of the human beings, no doctor or scientist to know what is the secret !!!!!! spirit?

Answer 6

the spirit exists in harmony with matter and science. it is what you perceive that cannot be seen or analyzed. it is the soul, the ability to feel, what makes things alive.

Answer 7

The spirit is the real you. The image of Almighty God.
II Cr 13;8a, Love never fails!!!!!

Answer 8

There is always a good conscience inside you. It is your soul. So when you think something, it is your mind and when you want to do things not right, it is your soul that telling you not to do so. You can feel it if you try.

Answer 9

What Is the Spirit in Man?
Saying that man has no immaterial soul within is not to say that man is not distinguished from the animal kingdom. Man is made in the image of God; the animals and plants are not. Man has intelligence and reasoning ability and shares a number of characteristics with his Maker. Nothing must be done to take away from man's uniqueness in the created order. However, we need not build myths to sustain our uniqueness and supremacy in the earthly created order.
Some believe that the spirit in man, which goes back to God upon death of the body, can enable man to have conscious existence at that time.
Ecclesiastes 12:7 says that "the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit [ruach] returns to God who gave it."
The spirit is the life force which God breathed into man which made him a living soul. It is the life principle, the life energy, without which human life is not possible. As Job says, "If he [God] should take back his spirit [ruach] to himself, and gather to himself his breath [neshamah], all flesh would perish together, and man would return to the dust" (Job 34:14,15). The spirit animates human life. It has no separate existence apart from the body.
The breath of life which God breathed into man is equated with the spirit in man. Notice the Hebrew parallelism in Job 27:3: "[A]s long as my breath is in me, and the spirit of God in my nostrils; my lips will not speak falsehood." Notice this other parallelism (where the same thought is expressed in two ways for emphasis) in Job 33:4: "The spirit [ruach] of God has made me, and the breath [neshamah] of the Almighty gives me life."
Yet another example of this parallelism is found in Isaiah 42:5: "Thus says God, the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out...who gives breath to the people upon it and spirit to those who walk in it." The Scriptures are, indeed, abundantly clear that the breath of life is equated with the spirit in man.
Those who use Ecclesiastes 12:7, which says that "the spirit returns to God who gave it," to prove that the spirit is equated with the immortal soul have a very uncomfortable dilemma: They are forced to teach that everyone who dies, not just the saved, goes to heaven irrespective of whether he had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ!
No, the spirit in man is the breath of life which was given to man. As Job 34:14,15 says, "If [God] should back his spirit to himself...all flesh would perish"-cease from existence.
Objection after objection crumbles as we look at the scriptural teaching on what man really is. Yet all the world's religions, all New Age philosophies, all of Eastern mysticism, and almost all of the Christian-professing world have accepted the very opposite of what the Bible teaches.
Some Major Objections Considered
We now turn to some of the major objections raised against the view that the soul is mortal. We will see in each instance that the objection is not sustained.
Rachel's Departing Soul
Let's begin with Genesis 35:18, which says of Rachel, "And as her soul was departing (for she died), she called his name Benno´ni...." Now does her soul's departing mean that it had a separate, conscious existence?
Samuele Bacchiocchi puts it well in his book Immortality or Resurrection?: "The phrase 'her soul was departing' most likely means that 'her breath was stopping' or, as we might say, she was taking her last sigh. It is important to note that the noun soul-nephesh derives from the verb by the same root which means 'to breathe,' 'to respire,' 'to draw breath.' The inbreathing of the breath of life resulted in man becoming a living soul, a breathing organism.
"The departing of the breath of life results in a person becoming a dead soul. Thus as Edmund Jacob explains, 'The departure of nephesh is a metaphor for death; a dead man is one who has ceased to breathe.'"
Another text commonly misunderstood is 1 Kings 17:21,22, which says of Elijah: "Then he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried to the Lord, 'O Lord, my God, let this child's soul come into him again.'"
If the soul is not a separate part of the person, how could Elijah make this prayer? The Lord heard Elijah's prayer, "and the soul of the child came into him again and he revived."
Notice first that in verse 17 it is said that "there was no breath left in him," which harmonizes well with what we have covered, showing that the departure of the breath of life results in death. It was when God breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life that man became a living soul. When the breath of life came back into the widow's son mentioned here, his nephesh (or life-force) came back and he became conscious again.
The soul of the child coming back into him simply means that his life returned! Nothing more, nothing less.
Lazarus and the Rich Man
But the most popular of all the misunderstood texts is found in Luke 16, which records the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. For many Christians, this is the single text which seals the issue.
First, note that this was a parable. It was not a real historical event or the reporting or recounting of an actual event. It was a parable, a teaching, a pedagogical device designed to express truths in symbolic or metaphorical terms.
It is important, in looking at parables, to notice the contexts carefully, to see what were the lessons which the storyteller wanted to convey.
Jesus had been teaching on covetousness and stewardship (Luke 16:1 13). Jesus usually selects an appropriate parable to illustrate his ethical teachings. The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was a classic one showing the rich's insensitivity to and exploitation of the poor.
Many theologians realize that Luke was the Gospel writer most concerned about social and political issues and that his gospel focuses more on the justice and equity issues. (Advocates of "Liberation Theology" are particularly fond of Luke.)
This parable highlights Luke's emphasis on concern for the poor and downtrodden and God's judgment of the selfish and sinful rich. Even the distinguished evangelical theologian Murray Harris, author of the book Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament, admits that "the parable of the rich man and Lazarus was told to illustrate the danger of wealth (Luke 6:24) and the necessity of repentance (Luke 16:28 30), not to satisfy our natural curiosity about man's anthropological condition after death." (See his article, "The New Testament View of Life after Death" in the January, 1986, issue of the scholarly journal, Themelios.)
Read the entire parable again.
Jesus is emphasizing the importance of the Pharisees and His hearers accepting His message then while He walked among them, for He was the ultimate revelation. For those hearers, that was their window of opportunity. The punch line is in Luke 16:31: "He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.'"
Persons who knowingly and deliberately reject the truth of the gospel now would not accept it even if they were given another chance after the resurrection. (Of course, every human being will be given one chance and those who reject that one chance will forfeit salvation. Millions of ignorant sinners, however, will get their first chance for salvation after their resurrection. Write for our free brochure entitled Does God Love the World Enough to Save It? for a full discussion on this controversial topic.)
If this parable were teaching us about the intermediate state, it would be absolutely irrelevant to the context, as Murray Harris implies. How one can construct a theology of the afterlife based on a parable is beyond exegetical warrant.
An interesting point to show that the rich man in the parable is not suffering the pangs of hell, as described by the preachers, is that the word translated "hell" in the passage is hades, the equivalent of the Hebrew sheol which means simply the grave-where everyone, including the righteous, go. Only in this parable do we see hades used in any way to describe any kind of activity other than dead silence!
Jesus used literary license in this case, which was consistent with the allegorical method He often used.
The Witch of Endor
Perhaps the most challenging passage in the Old Testament for a group like the Church of God International is found in 1 Samuel 28, concerning the witch of Endor and her supposed bringing forth of the prophet Samuel.
Saul had been seeking a word from the Lord as to his encounter with the Philistines, but the Lord had spoken not a word to him, either by dream or through the prophets. In desperation he turned to a medium and asked for Samuel to be brought up. Saul had to disguise himself and go to the witch, for it was he who had abolished witchcraft in Israel and punished the sorcerers.
But let's read the troubling passages in 1 Samuel 28:11: "Then the woman said, 'Whom shall I bring up for you?' He said, 'Bring up Samuel for me.' When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice; and the woman said to Saul, 'Why have you deceived me? You are Saul....' [T]he woman said to Saul, 'I see a god coming up out of the earth.' He said to her, 'What is his appearance?' And she said, 'An old man is coming up; and he is wrapped in a robe.' And Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground, and did obeisance" (verses 11 14). On the surface, this appears to be a pretty devastating passages to our view. But let's examine it more closely.
First, look at the implications from within the doctrinal perspective of the immortal soul defenders themselves. God, on a number of occasions in the Old Testament, speaks against wizards, mediums, and the like, and in the law pronounces the death penalty for witchcraft. It was that serious (see Leviticus 19:31 and Isaiah 8:19,20).
Notice, too, that 1 Chronicles 10:13,14, in reporting on Saul's death, makes the rather striking commentary: "So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to the Lord in that he did not keep the command of the Lord, and also consulted a medium, seeking guidance, and did not seek guidance from the Lord. Therefore the Lord slew him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse."
That one act was sufficient to cause Saul to lose his kingdom. But notice what the immortal soul defenders would be saying. They would be asserting, in effect, that Yahweh, who outlawed witches and seers, actually caused one of them to bring up one of His faithful servants, Samuel!
Incidentally, if Samuel was already in Abraham's bosom as a righteous man in heaven, then how was he seen coming up out of the earth? Is that the abode of the righteous? Some believe this, but the evidence against the view that sheol had different compartments and was not the common abode of the dead is so overwhelming that even some immortal soul advocates reject that view. Bacchiocchi documents the case against that view in his book, Immortality or Resurrection?, quoting one theologian who defends the immortal soul as saying, "Perhaps most interesting for traditional Christians to note is the fact that it [sheol] is the resting place of the dead, irrespective of their religion during life....There is no doubt that believers and unbelievers all were thought to go to Sheol when they die."
Desmond Alexander, professor of Semitic studies, says in his article on "The Old Testament View of Life after Death" in the January 1986 issue of Themelios that "while it is tempting to suggest, especially in light of later Jewish thinking, that in Old Testament times Sheol was perceived as consisting of different regions, the biblical texts themselves do not support such a possibility."
But let's get back to the Saul-Samuel story. Apart from the gross anomaly of Samuel's coming up from the earth when he was supposed to be in heaven, how do we explain the fact that the righteous man Samuel, apparently by the power of the witch of Endor, cooperates with her in her ungodly craft by actually coming up to see Saul?
Do witches and mediums have the power to rouse the righteous from their heavenly bliss, or from "paradise"? Obviously, this was a satanic impersonation. The fact that the Bible writer says it was Samuel is not meant to be taken on the surface. We have already seen the inexplicable problems with accepting that it was really Samuel. The writer obviously means to convey the point that a person looking exactly like Samuel and representing himself like Samuel was seen. As far as Saul was concerned, it was Samuel who was seen. The narrator mentions a dialogue between Saul and Samuel to advance his point of how Saul reacted to the person he thought was Samuel. We can't impose our modern, precise standards of journalism and reporting on the biblical text. The Holy Spirit inspired enough passages to show where the dead really are-unless we are stating flatly that the Bible contradicts itself. That is the only alternative to the view that it was not actually Samuel.
To Die Is Gain'
Philippians 1:21 is another misunderstood text: "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If it is to be life in the flesh, that means fruitful labour for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better" (verses 21 23).
So did Paul really believe that he would be with Christ immediately upon death? If that is so, then he would flatly contradict himself.
In 1 Timothy 4:7,8 Paul says, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me [kept] the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but also to those who have loved his appearing."
It was the same Paul who wrote in 1 Corinthians 15 that the dead in Christ would rise "at the last trumpet" (verse 52). He knew when the dead would get their opportunity with the Lord. Was he telling the Philippians one thing and the Corinthians another?
No, Paul was simply telling the Philippians from this prison epistle that with all the pressures and frustrations of his life, with all his suffering, death would be gain to him, for he had the assurance of salvation. He knew that at the next moment of consciousness, he would be with his Lord. For him death would be gain-"But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account" (verse 24), for there was much more work to be done. As for him, he could well die and take his rest. We must not read our biases into Scripture, but must let the texts speak for themselves.
Away From the Body'
Yet another puzzling text to some is found in 2 Corinthians 5:8, which says, "We are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord."
Here again Paul writes painfully about his struggles and anguish. "Here indeed we groan, and long to put on our heavenly dwelling....For while we are still in this tent, we sigh with anxiety."
Paul was longing to reach that stage where death would be swallowed up into victory, when sorrow and pain would be no more; where our very mortal, sin-wracked bodies would be changed into Christ's glorious body (Philippians 3:21). He was looking forward to the time when "this perishable [body] would put on the imperishable and this mortal nature must put on immortality" (1 Corinthians 15:53).
At the resurrection-not at death-what is now a "physical body" will be raised as a "spiritual body" (1 Corinthians 15:44). We are only absent from this body at the resurrection! If we read into the biblical texts our Platonic, dualistic notions, then we will come to the wrong conclusions. If we let Scripture interpret itself, we will see that this meaning harmonizes with the rest of the biblical revelation. Notice how Paul juxtaposes his statement about being absent from the body with the resurrection: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive good or evil..." (2 Corinthians 5:10).
Thief on the Cross
Certainly one of the most famous stories in all of the Bible is the story of the "thief on the cross." Jesus promised that repentant sinner, "Truly, I say to you, today you shall be with me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43). If the thief went with Jesus to paradise upon death, then certainly this might prove the immortality of the soul.
But where did Jesus Himself go that day? He went to sheol (Hebrew) or hades (Greek)-the grave! Jesus was dead for three days and three nights and there is nothing to suggest that His death was different from other humans, with whom he shared a common nature, as Hebrews tells us.
With a simple punctuation mark the problem is solved. What Jesus actually said, was "Truly, I say to you today, you shall [in the future, when the Kingdom of God comes (see verse 42)] be with me in Paradise."
The original Greek has no punctuation so it is left up to the translators, who naturally have their bias, to supply the punctuation marks. We choose to punctuate it differently, for that is allowable in the Greek and harmonizes with everything we have read so far.
Paradise is not some place that Jesus went the day He died. Paradise is equated in Scripture with the very presence of God (see 2 Corinthians 12:2,3 and Revelation 2:7).
After Jesus's resurrection on the third day, He told Mary, "Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John 20:17). Jesus was in the grave for three days before His resurrection, so He could not have meant (when He spoke to the thief) that on the day of His death the thief would join Him in a place where He Himself would not be-heaven.
Clearly, the translators have combined the punctuation with their prejudice!
The Worm That Won't Die
Samuelle Bacchiocchi says Isaiah 66:24 is regarded by traditionalists as the "clearest witness to eternal punishment in the Old Testament" (Immortality of Resurrection?). The text says, "And they shall go forth and look on the dead bodies of the men that have rebelled against me for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched..."
We have already dealt with the concept of the unquenchable fire. But what does it mean, "their worm will not die"? Is this contradicting the overwhelming evidence we have seen that man's soul is mortal? Edward Fudge, who, before deeper study, believed man had an immortal soul, comments on this passage in his book, The Fire That Consumes:
"Several kinds of flies lay eggs in the flesh of carcasses. The maggots hatched from them serve a beneficial purpose in hastening decomposition. But they also are a symbol of ignominy precisely because they attack only bodies deprived of burial."
Note that point. It is particularly loathsome and contemptible that one's body would be in the open without a proper burial. What better way to portray the ignominy and disgrace of the eternal fate of the wicked?
Keep in mind also Daniel 12:2, which talks about some awakening (in the resurrection) to "everlasting contempt." The same Hebrew word translated "contempt" in Daniel 12:2 (deraon) is translated "loathsome" in Isaiah 66:24.
As Bacchiocchi says, "This means that the contempt is caused by the decomposition of their bodies, and not by the never-ending suffering of the wicked."
Notice Jeremiah 25:33, which graphically portrays the disgrace of the fate of the wicked: "And those slain by the Lord on that day shall extend from one end of the earth to the other. They shall not be lamented, or gathered, or buried; they shall be dung on the surface of the ground." This is precisely the image of disgrace that fellow-prophet Isaiah wanted to convey in Isaiah 66:24. Their bodies will be left for the worms. "Such discarded corpses are fit only for worms and fire," says Fudge in his book.
Souls Under the Altar
Revelation 6:9 11 is another text used to defend the immortal soul. It speaks about the souls under the altar asking, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before thou wilt judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell upon the earth?"
Now anyone with the slightest training in theology should realize the danger of using an apocalyptic book, largely employing allegory and symbols, to establish doctrine. If the blood of Abel could cry out from the ground against the injustice of that righteous man's murder (Genesis 4:10), why can't the souls of the saints, as it were, cry out against their martyrdom?
Besides, does anyone really believe that all the saints of the Lord are literally located under the altar? The altar in the Old Testament was where sacrifices took place. The martyrs had sacrificed not the blood of bulls and goats but their own on God's altar, symbolically. Let's not stretch the Scripture to fit preconceived ideas.
Spirit, Soul, and Body'
First Thessalonians 5:23 states, "May the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept sound and blameless...." This text, which seems to teach a tripartite view of man-spirit, soul, and body-simply means that Paul hoped the Thessalonians would be wholly, thoroughly prepared for the coming of the Lord.
It is similar to Jesus's saying for emphasis in Mark 12:30: "[Y]ou shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength." This does not mean Jesus felt there were four distinct parts to human nature. Soul is used in a variety of ways in Scripture. Paul hoped that they would sanctify their bodies from the works of the flesh, such as fornication; that they would keep their spirit in tune with God's and purify their soul in terms of their consciousness