One last time, Gene: The word NEPHESH has been covered BY THIEME extensively, is in lexicons by scholars for centuries in agreement with what he explained, and the term is used pan-Bible to mean DIFFERENT THINGS. The use of anthropopathisms and morphisms is also well known, and Thieme is famous for explaining them also, so there is again agreement on BIBLE here. And, the text itself supports that.
So you have the burden of proof that ONLY 'soul' is intended when talking about God, since NOT only 'soul' is the way nephesh is used pan-Bible (with Greek psuche being the LXX and hence NT equivalent).
So you also have the burden of proof that 'hate' ONLY means the sin and is never used as an anthropopathism, especially when in verses where God is the subject of the verb.
This is all published material, which you denigrate and deny and instead ASSERT your own groundless positions absent answers to the above burdens, with no proof as to how your position is superior to Thieme's, the scholars, or Bible's. Which means, you're playing God yourself.
So no good can come from discussing this with you further, until and unless you actually DO YOUR HOMEWORK in lieu of maligning the homework Thieme and others for centuries have done, so we must respect THEM by bringing up valid objections. Which were you honorable, you would take the time to answer.
Finis. I won't be talking to you again.
TO OTHERS: at issue are several important doctrines which have been debated for years:
* Whether your soul existed prior to creation, which was a contention of the gnostics, both pagan and Jewish, and later Christians. So a variant of this is the Prototype Soul, the World Soul, the Original Soul. The doctrine is usually called 'prexistence of souls'. The so-called 'holy books' used to justify these doctrines are not Bible books, but wanna-be Bible books. Movies are made on the topic too.
*Whether your soul exists pre-birth, is a much larger topic and is contended a yes by Catholicism, and most notably today in the claims of so-called 'prolifers'. There's no Biblical support for the claim, and I've had to start making many to show how the Bible maintains you are not HUMAN until BORN because the soul. is made at BIRTH.
*My pastor also taught the foregoing extensively. So Christ Himself was God and God alone, until BORN, at which point a SOUL was created, Hebrews 10:5. My pastor exegeted that extensively, published tracts and did classes showing how Bible says you're not human until BORN. Whether or not one agrees with his studies is of course an individual journey one chooses to take. But if claiming to be under that pastor but claiming the opposite of what he taught as Gene is here doing, well.. then it must be called out. What PROOF is there of a contrary position? For we can present evidence of not human until born, and soul created at BIRTH, directly from Scripture (starting at Genesis 2:7).
*The topic of whether God 'hates' is also extensively covered in theology, with the general consensus (right or wrong) that such terms are anthropopathisms, meaning assigning to God human characterstics as language of accommodation for man to understand God better. So verses like Deut. 12:31; 16:22; Prov. 6:16 are understood to be juridical positions, not the emotion of hatred (God has no emotion). So to contend otherwise, would require special added evidence to prove how and why from Scripture, that such attitudes of God are literal yet not sin.
Sorry for this digression, but it seemed important to explain why the arguments in this thread occurred.