How is it that the Soul is Immoral and Imperishable - Essay Example

This paper will seek to explain how the soul is immoral and imperishable. Diverse sources used by evolutionary psychologists opine that afterlife; people will go either to heaven or to hell. However, this will depend on the fact that whether you believe in any of the two places. Some dualists believe that people’s bodies and souls intertwine. Experience has confirmed that every person eventually dies (Stewart 85). Simultaneously, Hasidic lore maintains that people’s souls live forever even after the body dies. Particularly, the soul is immoral in the aspect that people represent the wholeness of all the others in the entire world. In simple terms, take for example the analogy of an ocean. The ocean comprises many drops of water; every drop is a single entity and at the same time, forms at least a part of the entire ocean. Thus, in this ocean filled with life, human beings are little drops. This doctrine indicates that every person must identify himself with life for in everything that lives, the majesty of life in God’s presence perpetuates.

Scholars point out that blood and flesh do not have the power to inherit God’s Kingdom. Additionally, they go ahead to state that the perishable cannot inherit the imperishable. For instance, many Greeks rejected Pluto’s argument towards death. To those who opposed it, death’s prospect caused a sense of terror, thus clarifying the mystery (96). This means that our mortal bodies do not have the ability to inherit the Kingdom of God as well as that which is perishable cannot be what is imperishable. This shows that the soul is imperishable and immoral in that when people talk of inheriting the kingdom of God, they do not exactly mean they will go physically to claim it. However, their souls will claim God’s kingdom. Agreeably, people die after serving their life existence in this world (86). Therefore, for them to inherit God’s kingdom, their souls need to remain in existence in order to fulfill this quest. Ideally, the need to inherit the kingdom of God makes the soul remain immoral and imperishable. The argument of life after death is not something new but existed anciently. This was a common perception among Greeks. Nevertheless, Stewards argues that the doctrine was not hopeful. This doctrine was objected to by some of the Greeks despite the fact that a reasonable number followed the soul’s immortality doctrine.

In addition, it is undoubtedly unwise to question the willpower of Almighty God. When people talk of resurrection during the end days, they refer to the resurrection of the soul. According to the scriptures, the soul will come back to life as opposed to our physical bodies. As noted, our bodies are subject to sickness, diseases, and decay and thus cannot inherit the kingdom of God, as they are perishable. Nevertheless, our spiritual bodies shall rise again gloriously and dwell afterward in the kingdom of God. In simpler terms, that who neglects the life present in the soul simply casts away the present good. This highlights that this kind of person refuses to live for God and squanders all that he has. Under this spectrum, the soul is immoral and imperishable in the way that those who neglect the life in it squander the life in their bodies and bodies do not last forever.

In conclusion, noting that the souls that sin shall die are imperative. It is arguable that righteousness shall be upon those who do right and wickedness shall be upon those who do wickedness (88). Likely, Go manifests his presence in innumerable states in the universe. Every manifestation commands people’s spontaneous reverence. In the same way, God is everlasting, the soul that inhabits and manifests its presence is indeed imperishable. David Stewart asserts that this world of sense is perpetually changing and every moment is coming to a state of flux hence indicating that it is immoral (96). The way in which this happens is another way in which the soul is immoral and imperishable.