Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Robert Newman" <rob AT designceramics.co.uk>]

Peter wrote:
Well, Rob, I am not sure which part of Essex you are from, but in my 
part, Chelmsford, if you ask an ordinary person what "soul" means their 
understanding wouldn't be anything like the biblical concept or concepts 
of nephesh. If they didn't think of a type of music, they would probably 
think of the part of the human which survives death - which is 
definitely NOT a sense of Hebrew nephesh. And probably a "general Bible 
reader" here would have little better idea of the meaning of "soul", 
depending of course on what version they read.

Hi Peter,
Chelmsford is just down the road, I even have a Chelmsford postcode CM13. I 
partly agree with you as to what 'Soul' signals in English. My point was that 
if an English Thessaurus is anything to go by "soul" is a broad word, I do 
not claim it exactly fits nephesh such as would be the requirement of an 
idiomatic translation, only that it covers much of nephesh. To give examples;
SOS 'save our souls' - "souls" signifies 'lives'
"poor little soul" you may recognise this as refering to an unfortunate child 
- soul here signals 'person'.
If we take the NIV as an example, it principly  uses "soul" where reference 
is to emotion and the inner person. Yet there are a couple of interesting 
verses
Pr 1:11 "let's waylay some harmless soul" where it signals -'person'
Ps 26:1 "Do not take away my soul along with sinners", where it signals - 
'life'
In Pr 25:25 it may signal - 'body'

Peter you write
they would probably 
think of the part of the human which survives death - which is 
definitely NOT a sense of Hebrew nephesh

Response: I agree (though not everyone would), yet someone reading NIV, could 
retain such a viewpoint. "Soul" is a theologically important term, I believe 
and most would agree that theology should be based on scripture. The approach 
of NWT enables the reader to learn the range of meaning of nephesh and the 
concept as a whole. That is labeled "soul". Using this technique when 
possible literal translations can enable readers to learn concepts familiar 
to the ancients. Rather than defining meaning solely on the basis of the 
Engish word 'soul', that word serves as a label for an ancient concept one 
has to learn through context and explaination. Maybe the translators could 
have transliterated it, that would have worked in a similar way, though I 
think it would be harder on the reader, for the most part "soul" communicates 
effortlessly.
Robert Newaman