Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

If man has an immortal soul

Well BenJasher, My viewpoint means nothing, the important point is what the bible says on any given subject. The Bible is its own interpreter.

About the resurrection, the bible is quite specific.
Philippians 3: 20 But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,
21 who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.
At the resurrection of the righteous, at Jesus’ second coming, we will be given glorious bodies just like Christ.

What kind of body did Christ have after he was raised from the dead?

Luke 24: 36 While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."
37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost.
38 He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have."

Christ had a Physical body (flesh and blood) that could be touched.

Also in 1 Corinthians 15: 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed--
52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.
54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."

So to answer your question: “does resurrection dictate a complete re-constitution of body, soul and spirit? Or can you have a resurrection with something less than that?â€Â

So all I can say is, what the bible says on this subject, that our bodies will be transformed from perishable to imperishable, and, mortal to immortal, and being a glorious body which includes our mind, body and spirit, nothing more or nothing less.

God Bless

gazzamore
 
Bubba said:
The “hope†is that Jesus is coming back. Contextually, verses 4:13 to 5:11 speak to this and that it is, our hope and comfort. Then the comfort consists of our participation in the death and resurrection of Jesus by being born again, we to will be raised up bodily, on His 2nd Advent.

No it is not the only hope because Paul tells them to 'sorrow not even as others who have no hope'. If the souls of my loved ones are already in heaven, then Jesus' coming would not being any 'hope'. It would simply play out the remainder of the hope that is already realized. Coupled with 1 corinthians 15, we see that this hope is eternal life. Without the resurrection, there would be no hope. A redundant and useless argument if my complete essence is already enjoying the pleasures of Paradise.


Bubba said:
In II Corinthians 5:1-9 Paul said, "Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. 2 Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, 3 because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. 4 For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. 5 Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. 6 Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7 We live by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it".


What you are ignoring in this passage is that Paul is talking about receiving the 'heavenly body' or our 'spiritual body'. This doesn't occur at death but at the resurrection. Contrary to desperate popular belief, this passage is not talking about an immortal spirit but the resurrection. (Couple this with 1Corinthians 15:35-45). Paul knows that until we put off this body and receive the resurrection body, we cannot enter heaven. Strange thing to say if I have already entered heaven. Again, the confusion of trying to make the bible make a distinction between the body and soul is causing redudancy and contradictions.


Bubba said:
So, our bodies await the resurrection on the “Last Day†as the souls of the saints in glory wait to be clothed (verse 2) with the incorruptible bodies mentioned in 1Cor. 15:42-54..

This is an assumption the bible doesn't make. The bible makes it clear that we await being 'clothed' in the grave and as Jesus died and rose with a new body, so we shall too. Being 'found naked' means to be dead. Paul's wish is that he 'not be found naked but be clothed.' This is a strange thing to say if 'being naked' means my soul is in heaven waiting to be 'clothed'.


Bubba said:
â€ÂThe reappearance of Samuel in a conscious state...the appearance of Moses and Elias at the transfiguration of Christ on the mount... the parable of the rich man and Lazarus... Of dying Stephen, it is declared "so seeing, he cried, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,†and so died....In Acts 1:25, Judas is said to have gone “to his own place.â€Â....In Heb. 12:23, the spirits of the just are represented as “made perfect,†and happy with the angels in heaven. In Rev. 6:9–11, the souls of the martyrs are represented as under the altar in heaven, praying for the punishment of their former persecutors on earth, which of course must be before the resurrection.



There are just too many in here to comment on at this time but they have all been addressed and they are all clearly explainable. Our 'spirits that go back to God' doesn't mean my immortal soul leaves my body. The 'spirit' and the 'soul' are not the same thing. Ecclesiastes 12 uses the same language but doesn't specify that this only happens to Christians. ALL mens' 'spirits' go back to God. The 'ruach/pneuma' is not the living, breathing, spiritual part of man. It is the lifeforce. God gives life, He receives it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Though the rest take considerable time to explain, this is it in a nutshell:

- Hebrews 12 and Acts 1 are not even talking about the state of the dead if you truly look at the context...this is grasping at straws pretty badly
- Rich Man and Lazarus - a parable, not an expose on the state of the dead. Are you willing to concede (with no biblical support) that the wicked are being tormented right now? How do you explain the fact that the other 10 uses of Hades in the NT never give the impression of conscious torment.
- Samuel - a demon in disguise
- Thief on the cross - Did Jesus go to heaven at death? How could the thief be with him 'today' if Jesus didn't ascend to heaven until the resurrection?
- Souls under the altar - So we have a million souls crammed under a literal altar? The word 'souls' here doesn't mean 'disemboded substance' but 'living being'. Do you not see the parallel to Abel's blood 'crying out to God'. Did you know that the Hebrews believed the 'soul' was the life force in the blood? Did you know that when an animal was sacrificed to Yawheh, their blood was poured under the altar? Do you not see this is symbolic for martyrs and not an expose on the state of the dead?
Moses and Elijah - Did you know that Moses' body was being fought over? I believe Moses was taken to heaven after his death in a special resurrection. Hence, the appearance of both Moses and Elijah as opposed to Abraham and David makes complete sense.


Bubba said:
In Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 14:1,3, the souls of believers are represented as being now with Christ and the holy angels.†I disagree with Mr. Morey in respect to conscious torment, for anything other than a finite period...


BTW, I don't believe in an eternally burning hell of torment, either so you're preaching to the choir on that one. However, having said that, there is WAY more concrete evidence for conscious torment than my loved ones souls being in heaven right now. I'm not sure how you can justify one over the other.
 
Gazzamor, what I said about your viewpoints was in your defense. Not that you really needed me to come to your defense, but our friend guibox seemed to have dismissed you out of hand, seemingly without giving clear thought to what you said.
 
gazzamor: That was not my quote. It is part of mutzrein's quote.

Read my second post answering mutzrein.

I believe Paul's letters clearly explain that the church, the body of Christ, and our salvation, is unique, not foretold in the OT. And while we look for his prescence, we are told that while the dead in Christ are resurrected with spiritual bodies, so also, we who are alive at His coming are changed to have the same spiritual bodies, and do not die. This is a secret (mystery) only revealed to Paul. The glorified church/body will then meet the Lord in the air----Not on the earth---where we will enjoy the marvelous blessings prepared by God, and be witnesses of the wisdom and grace of God to the principalities, powers, the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenlies. See 1 Cor.15:51-55; 1 Thes.4:13-18; Eph.1:3-9; 2:6,7; and 3:10,11.

Bick
 
BenJasher said:
Not that you really needed me to come to your defense, but our friend guibox seemed to have dismissed you out of hand, seemingly without giving clear thought to what you said.

How did I 'dismiss' gazz 'out of hand'?

I agree with what he wrote. What I was commenting on was that he seemed to rebut Bick with the idea that Bick was supporting an immortal soul. I believe that Bick does not support the concept (unless I am wrong) and was merely pointing out that I thought gazz might be preaching to the choir.
 
Quibox,
Now honestly can you really broadbrush all the references of individuals in the heavenlies, with extrapolation and rationalization, and still feel confident in your position? Mind you, this is not a salvation issue, one of us may be wrong, and we do end up with the desired ending, but nonetheless we need to look at Scripture without our own bias interferring the clear message. I am going leave you with another person refutation of "Soul Sleep" in the hope you glean something.

Jason Dulle writes:

"In I Thessalonians 4:14-16, speaking of the rapture of the church, Paul said, "For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first." It is pointed out that believers are said to be sleeping in Christ, even at the time of the rapture, and thus gives evidence that there is no consciousness until the rapture. This interpretation completely ignores what Paul said. First, Paul said that those who sleep in Christ, God will bring back with Him from heaven (while descending to the earth), but then it is said that the dead (sleeping) in Christ will be the first to rise in the air to meet the Lord. How can the dead be coming back with Christ from heaven, and at the same time be on the earth to rise up to meet Him? The only way this could be possible is if their spirit/soul was already with Him in heaven, and was returning with Him to be rejoined with their sleeping body. Those that were sleeping in Jesus were the dead saints who had gone on to be with Christ, but would be the first ones to be rejoined with their body at the rapture.

The Scripture is very clear that there is an intermediate state. In II Corinthians 5:1-9 Paul said, "Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. 2 Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, 3 because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. 4 For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. 5 Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. 6 Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7 We live by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it" (NIV).

When Paul speaks of this earthly tent being destroyed, he is referring to death. Even though we may not have an earthly body, we do have an "eternal tent" in heaven. Paul describes the experience following the dissolving of our earthly tent in death as being naked. We desire to get out of this tent (be unclothed) not because we do not wish to be clothed, but because we want to have our mortality swallowed up in life. While we are still in our body we are absent from the Lord, but being absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. This clearly teaches an intermediate state. For those who believe in soul sleep, there will never be a conscious moment of the believer apart from a bodily existence, because he sleeps after he dies, and awakes in the same body he died in, at the resurrection. Only a doctrine of an intermediate state could allow for one to be absent from the body (death) and yet present with the Lord, awaiting to be clothed again with a body (resurrection).

Paul also said in Philippians 1:21-23, "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labor: yet what I shall choose I cannot tell. For I am in a strait between the two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better." If Paul died he would "depart." Where would he go? He says he would go to be with Christ. Where is Christ? In heaven. Was Paul only speaking of the resurrection at which time He would be with Christ? No, because there will be no departing to be with Christ at the resurrection. The body died on the earth, and will be resurrected from the earth.

Another example demonstrating an intermediate existence of the spirit is Jesus' statement to the thief on the cross, "Today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Jesus said that He was going to go to Paradise the same day that He died, and was going to take the thief with Him. If, when Jesus died, His personal existence in His human spirit did not survive, Jesus could not go anywhere the day He died. He would only be asleep until the day He was resurrected. If this is the case, then Jesus lied to the thief on the cross, because the thief was not with Jesus in Paradise that day.

Jesus also told the parable (some believe it to be a real event) of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Most people who hold to an intermediate state believe it to be a real story, whereas those who believe in soul-sleep generally believe it to be a parable. I am a rare-bird in that I believe it is a parable, yet I hold to an intermediate existence. Soul-sleep contenders argue that "since" it is a parable, Jesus' story should not be taken literally, because literally it would teach an intermediate state. I disagree. All of Jesus' parables are based on real life events, even if they are not speaking of an actual historical event in particular. There are people who sow seeds, draw nets, etc. None of Jesus' parables were fictitious, so neither should this parable be taken as such. It is portraying a reality, even if the characters are made up for the purpose of making a point. According to Jesus, Lazarus was carried away to Abraham's bosom, a place which was nowhere near people who were still alive in their bodies on earth. In this state Lazarus and the Rich Man are portrayed as being conscious.
In Revelation 6:9-11 there are martyrs (disembodied individuals) under the altar in heaven that are crying out to God asking Him how long He will wait to avenge them of their enemies. How were they existing apart from a body and before the resurrection?

What about Moses’ appearing with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-8; Mark 9:2-10)? Moses’ body was buried by God, so what the three apostles saw was not Moses’ body, but his spirit. If the human spirit does not survive death then Moses could not have been with Jesus. He even looked like a human person. The apostles were able to identify him as Moses. It seems apparent that the human spirit is an incorporeal entity that survives death. This incorporeal entity is separated from our physical existence after death.

Other evidences that the human spirit survives death in an intermediate state awaiting the resurrection of the body is I Peter 3:18-22 and 4:6. Although the identity of these spirits is disputed, many expositors believe they are the spirits of dead men who lived in Noah's day. If so, then there is evidence here that one's spirit survives death in an intermediate, disembodied state."

In Christ, Bubba
 
Quibox writes:
"Thief on the cross - Did Jesus go to heaven at death? How could the thief be with him 'today' if Jesus didn't ascend to heaven until the resurrection? "


Mt.23:46; "Into thy hands I commend my spirit"

From my commentary "Or, I will commit my spirit-I deposit my soul in thy hands. Another proof of the immateriality of the soul, and of its separate existence when the body is dead." The thief really did go to paradise that very day.
Bubba
 
Please get back to the Original Post. (the OP)

Thanks.


I do have one question myself;

Is the bodily resurrection really a "bodily resurrection'? If so, what is the fate of those who have been burned to death, say, in a fire, or on a stake or other form of martyrdom by fire, or someone who has been cremated? :-? Not to mention the total docomposition the body goes through after death.


Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

:-D
 
Vic,
I am confused, the topic is the immortality of the soul right? Doesn't "Soul sleep" and those who oppose the doctrine are not they both speaking to the condition of the soul at death?
Bubba
 
Don't take it personally just because my post followed yours. It was only a friendly reminder to all to honor bick's wishes when bick said:

Bick said:
Hi: I would like to discuss each question I asked.

Is that possible?

Bick

Plus, my question was meant for self-examination and not meant for anyone to answer, at least until we exuast bick's quesions.

Sorry for the miscommunitation.
 
Well, vic's the man (and ALWAYS will be, thank you :D) and he wants us to answer the questions. However, I think I think along the same lines as Bick so I'm not really going to be answering them as much as confirming them.

Anyway.


Bick said:
Here are some verses that I have trouble understanding, if man has an immortal soul:

John 3:36, "He that believeth on the son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."

Q. If believers have everlasting life, and they die; does this mean Jesus is speaking of their immortal soul? But, if the soul is always alive, why does it need everlasting life? And, if unbelievers shall not see life, does this mean literal death, just of their body, for their soul is immortal?

Yes, the 'immortal soul' candidates don't know where they stand. There seems to be many camps:

1) All men have immortal souls
2) Only the righteous souls are immortal
3) Man did not have an immortal soul until Jesus died and rose, now the wicked go to hell forever, and the righteous to heaven forever
4) Man did not have an immortal soul until Jesus died and rose. Only the righteous have immortal souls now

And yet #1 and#3 can't properly explain texts like John 3:36, John 3:16 and Romans 6:23. To try and make the wicked souls alive, they then concoct the old 'death is conscious torment and quality existence' argument which has no biblical validity in reference to the wicked.

The fact is, is that sin brings death, Christ brings life. The wicked are never immortal, the righteous receive immortality at the resurrection.

Bick said:
John 5:28,29, "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

Q. Jesus indicates people are in the graves to be resurrected. Why wouldn't he call down the believers in heaven (i.e. their souls)? And, if believer's have a soul which has all it's senses, and therefore, some kind of a body, that can be in the presence of God, enjoying all the delights of heaven, why then would they need another body??

This is the same question that Tyndale asked as well. Instead of taking the resurrection texts to apply to the whole man and interpret it exegetically, the traditionalist imposes the 'body soul reunification' argument which has absolutely no support or scriptural validity to then interpret all of the clear 'resurrection to life' texts as only applying to the body.

Such gross assumption is the fruits of the dualistic view of human nature and the ignorance of proper exegetical biblical interpretation.

Bick said:
John 6:39,40, "...all of which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." "...every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

Q. If Jesus is speaking of those given him by the Father, and that even though they die, he will raise them up at the last day, why does he think he could lose them, if they are alive because their souls are immortal?

Yes, another problem created by the 'we have eternal life now' and 'this life is talking only about the body and not the soul' arguments. This also applies clearly to 1 Corinthians 15:18-23, 34. There are many instances where Paul and Christ make it plain that without the resurrection we are 'perished', 'have no hope', 'in our sins' and do not receive eternal life. Making this apply to the body is not only complete assumption, but makes Paul emphasis on the resurrection as an exercise in foolishness and redundancy.

Please show us the clear, numerous texts that my loved ones are enjoying heaven right now....It's not there. Even with all the numerous discourses on the resurrection, not ONCE does Paul make note of this special thing. Yet, he preaches over and over 'resurrection to life', 'resurrection to life' resurrection to life'.

" Oh, but this only applies to the body" :roll:

Bick said:
Q. Again, since these believers have died, does 'everlasting life' not mean their souls? But, if immortal, why do they need everlasting life? And why do they need raised up?

All for now, Bick

Simple, Bick. Because their 'soulish bodies' or their 'immaterial souls' or whatever state they are in heaven with (we must speculate because there is NO BIBLICAL SUPPORT for such things...does that not tell you something?), must be reunited with their immortal bodies so they can properly enter heaven.

Hmmm....as Luther once said, 'It is a fool of a soul that needs a body'

And then theres that 'clear scriptural support' problem...no matter. "Everything that doesn't agree with me is only talking about the body." There's the wonderful assumptive loophole the immortal soul supporter has created for himself.
 
Quibox,
Except for the SDA, JW'S and a few Anabaptist's (Reformation era), the majority of Christendom has believed that man has two parts, the body (physical) and the soul/spirit (invisible). That the invisible part (soul/spirit) goes on after the death of the body, is and has been a majority belief of Christendom for the last 2000 years, yet you write as if those of us who believe differently then your minority view, have no support Scripturally and basically are stupid. That is pride and arrogance at work. Please consider the article found at this web site:

http://www.letusreason.org/Doct15.htm

After reading it, be honest, and ask yourself, does the rest of Christendom really have no reason to believe as we do?
Bubba
 
Bubba said:
Quibox,
Except for the SDA, JW'S and a few Anabaptist's (Reformation era), the majority of Christendom has believed that man has two parts, the body (physical) and the soul/spirit (invisible). That the invisible part (soul/spirit) goes on after the death of the body, is and has been a majority belief of Christendom for the last 2000 years, yet you write as if those of us who believe differently then your minority view, have no support Scripturally and basically are stupid. That is pride and arrogance at work. Please consider the article found at this web site:

http://www.letusreason.org/Doct15.htm

After reading it, be honest, and ask yourself, does the rest of Christendom really have no reason to believe as we do?
Bubba

Let me throw that back on you now. You wrote this:

In Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 14:1,3, the souls of believers are represented as being now with Christ and the holy angels.†I disagree with Mr. Morey in respect to conscious torment, for anything other than a finite period...

The same can be said for eternal torment and yet you seem to disagree with what the majority of Christendom has believed for 2000 years.

The fact is, is that when the Catholic church finally lost their stranglehold of power they held for over a millenia, the truths of Sola Scriptura began to shine forth. Tyndale disagreed with the immortality of the soul as did Luther for most of his life. Others throughout the centuries since have come to this conclusion with an explosion of rejection of Catholic dogma regarding this and in the eternal torment during the 20th century.

The majority doesn't mean that it is always right. If that is the case, then the Reformation was in error.

Justification by faith alone as Luther saw it went against 1400 years of accepted tradition.

Was Luther wrong?

Even past Copernicus the Catholic church believed the earth was the center of the universe.

Was Copernicus and Galileo wrong?

I could go on but you get my point.

Bottom line: The texts you site and the reasoning you give certain bible texts can ONLY be interpreted the way they are when you read it through Greek dualism glasses, not exegetically. Nevermind the myriad of contradictions and redundancies with the rest of scripture that support conditional mortality.
 
Quibox wrote:
“The same can be said for eternal torment and yet you seem to disagree with what the majority of Christendom has believed for 2000 years. “

Yes, I came to the point where I felt that conscious punishment for eternity was not correct, yet the difference, between you and I, is, that I still respect the views of those who adhere to eternal punishment for eternity, because they have legitimate arguments. You write as if the other side has no argument and you yourself can not be wrong.

Quibox writes:
â€ÂThe fact is, is that when the Catholic church finally lost their stranglehold of power they held for over a millenia, the truths of Sola Scriptura began to shine forth. Tyndale disagreed with the immortality of the soul as did Luther for most of his life. Others throughout the centuries since have come to this conclusion with an explosion of rejection of Catholic dogma regarding this and in the eternal torment during the 20th century.â€Â

Luther was ambivalent and from what I have read, never committed himself one way or the other after his youthful statements, and it is safe to say, it wasn’t a paramount concern to him. God’s sovereignty was; one only needs to read “Bondage of the Will†to know that Luther knew the arguments of Erasmus even better then he did.

Quibox writes:
â€ÂThe majority doesn't mean that it is always right. If that is the case, then the Reformation was in error.

Justification by faith alone as Luther saw it went against 1400 years of accepted tradition.

Was Luther wrong?â€Â

There were some within Catholicism that held to God’s sovereignty and the “sola’sâ€Â, Augustine being one example. Nonetheless, yes the majority can be wrong, but did you actually read the article I submitted and wrestle with the verses which seem to speak to man’s duality? Have you ever consider that may be you have the possibility of being wrong about “soul sleepâ€Â? I have read arguments for your view quite thoroughly, especially when I was working through the Hell issue, because many of those who held to Annihilation also believed in Soul sleep. So I am not ignorant of your arguments. I once had an end time view that I thought was correct, because everyone in my denomination pretty much held to that view, and I assume all the authorities were correct, until I was challenged to actually study some of the other beliefs.

Quibox writes:

“Bottom line: The texts you site and the reasoning you give certain bible texts can ONLY be interpreted the way they are when you read it through Greek dualism glasses, not exegetically. Nevermind the myriad of contradictions and redundancies with the rest of scripture that support conditional mortality.â€Â

If you mean Greek Dualism is in part about the nature of man, in that man has a physical aspect as well as a spiritual aspect, then I would agree that the Bible does speak to this, as stated well in the article I asked you to read on Soul Sleep. This is not reading with “dualism†glasses, this reading what Scripture says about the nature of man, regardless of what affiliation I belong to. Just the magnitude of verses that address the difference between the “breath†and the “spirit†of man should at least make you rethink your suppose solid view of the event of a man’s death. Out of curiosity, how do you so quickly dismiss “the great cloud of witnesses†spoken of in Hebrews 12:1, when Hebrews 11 speaks to all these who have gone before us and then verse 1 begins with “Thereforeâ€Â? Especially in light that there were no chapters or verses delineated in the original Greek. What was “erefore†there for? Certainly, there is a possibility that the “witnessesâ€Â, mean something else, but common sense tells me the writer was probably talking about those in chapter 11.
Bubba

I
 
How dogmatic was Luther on Soul Sleep? You be the judge.

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.c ... sleep.html

The Seventh Day Adventist Luther (Part Two) : Do Adventists appeal to Luther to show the validity of ‘soul sleep� A look at selective citations from Luther found in Adventist web pages.

In this entry, I’d like to take a look at Luther’s understanding of ‘soul sleep.’ Soul sleep’ is the idea that after death the soul ‘sleeps’ until the final resurrection. The soul is said to hibernate until the resurrection- when it is then awakened and reunited with its body.

Did Luther believe this? The answer is yes, speculatively. He did so in somewhat undogmatic terms, always cautioning his readers that we don’t have full understanding of this subject. At times he says things that contradict ‘soul sleep’- his was not a dogmatic conclusion. Luther knew that describing the state of the dead was speculative theology. The state of the dead was prone to wild speculation during his time. He would not join in to such folly.

This can be seen early in his career in a letter to Nicholas von Amsdorf (January 13, 1522). Luther responded to the question of what happens to the soul after death. Note how Luther responds cautiously:

“Concerning your “souls,†I have not enough [insight into the problem] to answer you. I am inclined to agree with your opinion that the souls of the just are asleep and that they do not know where they are up to the Day of Judgment. I am drawn to this opinion by the word of Scripture, “They sleep with their fathers.†The dead who were raised by Christ and by the apostles testify to this fact, since they were as if they had just awakened from sleep and didn’t know where they had been. To this must be added the ecstatic experiences of many saints. I have nothing with which I could overthrow this opinion. But I do not dare to affirm that this is true for all souls in general, because of the ecstasy of Paul, and the ascension of Elijah and of Moses (who certainly did not appear as phantoms on Mount Tabor).

Who knows how God deals with the departed souls? Can’t [God] just as well make them sleep on and off (or for as long as he wishes [them to sleep]), just as he overcomes with sleep those who live in the flesh? And again, that passage in Luke 16 [:23 ff.] concerning Abraham and Lazarus, although it does not force the assumption of a universal [capacity of feeling on the part of the departed],yet it attributes a capacity of feeling to Abraham and Lazarus, and it is hard to twist this passage to refer to the Day of Judgment.

I think the same about the condemned souls; some may feel punishments immediately after death, but others may be spared from [punishments] until that Day [of Judgment]. For the reveler [in that parable] confesses that he is tortured; and the Psalm says, “Evil will catch up with the unjust man when he perishes.†You perhaps also refer this either to the Day of Judgment or to the passing anguish of physical death. Then my opinion would be that this is uncertain. It is most probable, however, that with few exceptions, all [departed souls] sleep without possessing any capacity of feeling. Consider now who the “spirits in prison†were to whom Christ preached, as Peter writes: Could they not also sleep until the Day [of Judgment]? Yet when Jude says concerning the Sodomites that they suffer the pain of eternal fire, he is speaking of a present [fire]."[LW 48:360-361]."

Note above, for Luther, the soul does sleep, but he does make exceptions. As Paul Althaus explains, “Some Bible passages do compel Luther to make certain exceptions to the rule that the dead sleep. God can also awaken them for a time- just as he allows those of us here upon the earth to alternate between waking and sleeping. And the fact that they are asleep does not hinder souls from experiencing visions and from hearing God and the angels speak†[Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963), 415].

Above, Luther says “It is most probable, however, that with few exceptions, all [departed souls] sleep without possessing any capacity of feeling.†Elsewhere though he says, “It is true that souls hear, think, see after death, but how they do it we do not understand†[Source: Ewald Plass, What Luther Says III:384]. Luther thus made contrary statements that even in death, the believer still consciously knows God and serves Him. This can be seen in a comment made in his last lectures on Genesis:

“For how is Abraham a servant of God after his death? Will God not be able eventually to forget Abraham? Today he certainly still serves God, just as Adam, Abel, and Noah serve God. And this must be carefully noted; for it is divine truth that Abraham is living, serving God, and ruling with Him. But what the nature of that life is, whether he is asleep or awake, is another question. We do not have to know how the soul rests. It is certain that it is alive.†[LW 5:74].

Ewald Plass says Luther held “paradoxical, if not, incongruous, conclusion†on the state of the dead [What Luther Says III: 385]. He cites this comment from Luther’s last lectures on Genesis:

“But now another question arises. Since it is certain that the souls are living and are in peace, what kind of life or rest is this? But this question is too lofty and too difficult for us to be able to define it. For God did not want us to know this in this life. Thus it is enough for us to know that souls do not go out of their bodies into the danger of tortures and punishments of hell, but that there is ready for them a chamber in which they may sleep in peace.

Nevertheless, there is a difference between the sleep or rest of this life and that of the future life. For toward night a person who has become exhausted by his daily labor in this life enters into his chamber in peace, as it were, to sleep there; and during this night he enjoys rest and has no knowledge whatever of any evil caused either by fire or by murder. But the soul does not sleep in the same manner. It is awake. It experiences visions and the discourses of the angels and of God. Therefore the sleep in the future life is deeper than it is in this life. Nevertheless, the soul lives before God. With this analogy, which I have from the sleep of a living person, I am satisfied; for in him there is peace and quiet. He thinks that he has slept barely one or two hours, and yet he sees that the soul sleeps in such a manner that it also is awake.â€Â[LW 4:313].

But what of those who reject Christ? Do they go to immediate damnation? Luther again responds cautiously, noting he is undecided when they receive punishment:

“…[W]hen the ungodly die, whether they have departed long ago, before the coming of Christ, or today, after Christ has been revealed, they go simply to damnation. But we do not know whether their damnation begins immediately after death; for it is written (Rom. 14:10) that all will have to stand before the judgment seat, and John 5:29 states: “Those who have done good will come forth to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment.

Accordingly, we should remember that after Christ the bosom of Abraham has come to an end and that all the promises about the coming Seed have been fulfilled. We have other and far more glorious promises that were given us by the Son of God, who became incarnate, suffered, and was raised again. If we do not believe these, we are condemned forever. But I am unable to say positively in what state those are who are condemned in the New Testament. I leave this undecided.â€Â[LW 4:316].

His writing on the subject also vacillates. Commenting on the departed Urbanus Rhegius, Luther says, “We are to know that he is blessed and that he has eternal life and eternal joy and participation with Christ in the heavenly Church. For now he has learned, seen with his own eyes, and heard those things which he here in the church on earth explained according to God’s word†(Source: WA 53:400; Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963), 415]. Also speaking of another departed person, “Sickness carried him off to heaven to our Lord Jesus Christ†[Althaus, 415]. Althaus notes that Luther held time was irrelevant from the eternal perspective. For those who die, their awakening from “soul sleep†is felt as immediate. Luther says, “Here you must put time out of your mind and know that in that world there is neither time nor a measurement of time, but everything is one eternal moment†[Source: WA 10III, 194; Althaus, 416].

What can be concluded of Luther’s view? I would assert the following: Luther’s position on this subject is undogmatic. He considers the subject speculative theology. Hence, his opinion doesn’t always add up.

What can be said of Seventh Day Adventist usage of Luther on this point? I suggest they incorrectly present a dogmatic Luther who uses “soul sleep†to refute purgatory and saint worship, which I maintain is not the case. To use Luther correctly, they should at least note Luther’s opinion was specative and undogmatic. He didn’t approach the text of Scripture with the same certainty on “soul sleep†they do. Luther doesn’t even have the same theological motivations for the doctrine of “soul sleep†that the Adventists do. What motivates the Adventists on this doctrine? What motivated Luther? These seem to be crucial questions for anyone wishing to use Luther as an authority.
 
Ben, sorry, I didn’t mean to be defensive with my last post. I was trying to point out that when it comes to personal viewpoints about biblical matters, I don’t have any. The Bible is the only source of truth that I accept.

And sorry Bick, I thought that it was your post with that quote.

After reading some of the posts on the subject of death, whether it be “soul sleep†or “immortality of the soul,†we are confronted with two concepts. It must be one or the other. And depending on what concept you believe in, will determine your theology on this subject.
Illustration: Have you ever buttoned up a shirt, and you started with the wrong button-hole? When you got to the bottom, you found that there was an extra button but no button-hole, and one side of the shirt was longer than the other. All the buttons fitted perfectly, except for that last button that was left out on its own.

It’s the same with this subject of death. If you start off with the wrong concept, you are going to end up wrong. All the texts that are used fits perfectly with your theology. But at the end, there are texts that just don’t fit.
Like the text I used in my first post: John 3:13 where Jesus says to Nicodemus that no one has ever entered heaven except the Son of man. That text does not fit the mould.

I was raised in a church that taught that when you died, depending on what sort of life you led, you would go either to heaven or hell. But as I read the bible for myself, I found texts there that seemed to contradict their theology. In the funerals that I have attended, quite often the comment would be made that the deceased is in heaven and looking down upon us.
If this is the case, then when I die, and I look down upon this earth and see my children who are not in the church, going into perdition and can’t do anything about it, I would suggest to you that it would be a good description of hell for me.

The issue here is the word “soulâ€Â. What is a soul?
Biblical definition: Genesis 2: 7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being (Soul).
Please note: God did not put some conscious entity within man. God gave man the “breath (or spark)of lifeâ€Â. So according to this text: a soul is a living being with all the attributes that makes up life, which is made up of emotional, physical and spiritual aspects of life.

The reverse of Genesis 2:7 is Ecclesiastes 12: 7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
So what is this spirit that returns to God who gave it? It is the breath of life.

So we see here that the word soul means the whole being, not some conscious entity that leaves the body at death and lives on up in heaven or the other place.

The other concept says that the soul cannot die, meaning that it has immortality. So the question is: Can the soul die?
Ezekiel 18: 4 For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son--both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die.
V20 The soul who sins is the one who will die.
So according to the Scriptures, the soul can die. The soul does not have immortality.

these texts are not talking about disembodied spirits. It is talking about persons who sin against God. And God says that they will die.

Soul also can mean the mind of a person. Deut. 4:29 But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul. (nephesh’ Hebrw’ meaning mind).â€Â

To be continued. . . . . . .

God Bless
gazzamor
 
Gozzamor,
Can you work through these verses?
From letusreason.org in regards to “breath and spiritâ€Â:
First thing we need to establish is that man has a soul/spirit, and it is distinct from his body. We have a dual nature, physical (the body) and immaterial (spirit/soul).

Job 32:8: “But there is a spirit in man, and the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding.†The breath is not the same as mans spirit but that which teaches him, being the Holy Spirit from God.
Isaiah 26:9 says this: “ At night my soul longs for Thee, indeed my spirit within me seeks Thee diligently.â€Â

Zech.12:1: “Thus says the LORD, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him:†Here we see that the physical man is different than the Spirit in him.

1 Cor. 6:20: “For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.†Paul distinguishes the body from the Spirit, both existing simultaneously, yet both are united to make man.

1 Cor. 2:11: “For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.†Mans spirit is not the same as Gods Spirit. Our spirit has certain capabilities to understand the things of man but fall short in understanding God unless he reveals them to us. The knowledge is not in our flesh but our spirit, certainly this cannot mean our breath for it knows nothing. There is a comparison here between mans spirit knowing the things of man and Gods spirit knowing the things of God.

Job.14:22: “But his flesh upon him shall have pain, and his soul within him shall mourn.†Job makes the distinction saying the flesh is upon him and the soul is within him.
Now lets address the argument that some claim the soul or spirit is just another word for breath since this is what the Hebrew word Ruach means. That when someone dies their breath leaves them. Lets substitute the word breath where Spirit is and see if it makes any sense scripturally?

Job 34:14-15: “If He should set His heart on it, if He should gather to Himself Spirit (His breath?) and His breath, All flesh would perish together, and man would return to dust.†Here both breath and spirit are distinguished otherwise one would be gathering to himself spirit and his spirit or breath and his breath.

Ps. 19:7: “The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the Breath, the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple;†The conversion is to ones soul, their inner being so it can rule over their body.

2 Cor. 7:1: “Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and Breath (spirit),†Does this mean we take breath mints?

Gal 6:8: “For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the breath ( Spirit ) will of the breath (Spirit) reap everlasting life.â€Â

Acts 23:8: “For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection-- and no angel or breath (spirit); but the Pharisees confess both.†Is there no breath or were they speaking about a spirit that is intelligent (a type of angel). What we will see is that Spirits do exist outside the vehicle of the body as does mans. V.9â€ÂThen there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees' party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.†Certainly they are speaking about a corporeal entity that communicates not just breath.
What of Jesus, did he use this definition? Matt. 12:43 “When an unclean Breath, (spirit) “goes out of a man, he goes through dry places, seeking rest, and finds none.†Certainly he did not mean bad breath. Just as man can have the Holy Spirit live within him alongside his human Spirit so he can have a unclean spirit live in him.

Luke 4:36: “What a word this is! For with authority and power He commands the unclean Breaths, (spirit) and they come out.â€Â

Acts 5:16: “Bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean Breath,†(spirit), and they were all healed.†I guess some peoples souls need breath freshener! Jesus cast out spirit entities not peoples breath, and if he did they would certainly die on the spot.

Luke 12:19: “And I will say to my Breath, “ Breath,â€Â(spirit), you have many goods laid up for many years; take your ease; eat, drink, and be merry.†Can ones breath eat and drink.

James 5:20 “ let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a Breath, (soul) from death and cover a multitude of sins.†Can breath be saved or a person.

2 Pet. 2:8 (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous Breath, (spirit) from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)--

Ezek. 18:4: “Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine; the soul that sinneth, it shall die.†Can breathe die? Obviously this means something than just air in the lungs.

1 Sam 30:6 “ because the soul of all the people was grieved.†Num. 21:4 “ and the soul of the people became very discouraged on the way.†Prov. 21:10 “The soul of the wicked desires evil†Can breath do any of these things, or does it communicate emotion, intelligence and personality? Gen.

34:8 But Hamor spoke with them, saying, “The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him as a wife.†Is Shechem's breath desiring a wife?
Pnuema means wind in Greek it also means breath and spirit. Ruach in Hebrew means wind, it too also can mean breath and spirit. Since Hebrew and Greek have only one word for wind breath and spirit one needs to discern what is meant by certain passages, the context defines the meaning. Jesus breathed on his disciples in John 20 saying receive the Spirit, the rushing wind in Acts is certainly to be interpreted as the Spirit. When Jesus breathed on the apostles the Holy Spirit in Jn.20:22 he wasn't giving them Breath for life but the Holy Spirit in some capacity.
If Spirit is breath and God is Spirit is He breath to? We can see how ludicrous this position of interpretation is. Certainly when Jesus spoke to the Father into your hands I commend my Spirit he was not speaking of his breath.
I think the point is clear, Spirit does not mean breath although at times it is used metaphorically.
Bubba
 
Gozzamor,
Maybe this will help in respect to John 3:13:

By: W. Hall Harris III , Th.M., Ph.D.
3:13 The major difficulty here is the perfect ajnabevbhken, which seems to look at a past, completed event. [Note: This is not as much of a problem for those who take Jesus’ words to end at v. 12, and these to be a comment by the Evangelist, looking back on the ascension.]
On the lips of Jesus, these words are a bit harder to explain. Note however, the lexical similarities with 1:51â€â€Ã¢â‚¬Âascending,†“descending,†and “son of manâ€Â. Here, though, the ascent and descent is accomplished by the Son himself, not the angels as in 1:51. I see no need to limit this saying to the ascent following the resurrection, however; the point of the Jacob story (Gen 28) which seems to be the background for 1:51 is the freedom of communication and relationship between God and men [a major theme of the Gospel of John]. This communication comes through the angels in Gen 28 (and John 1:51); but here (most appropriately) it comes directly through the Son. Possibly Jesus could be referring to a prior ascent, after an appearance as the pre-incarnate Son of Man. More likely, he is simply pointing out that no one from earth has ever gone up to heaven and come down again; the Son, who has come down from heaven, is the only one who has been ‘up’ there. [In both Jewish intertestamental literature and later rabbinic accounts Moses is portrayed as ascending to heaven to receive the Torah and descending to distribute it to men (e.g. Targum Psalms 68:19). In contrast to these Jewish legends, the Son is the only one who has ever made the ascent and descent.]The point is the heavenly origin of the Son of Man. And the descent, at least here, seems to refer to the incarnation (cf. 1:14).


Bubba
 
Bubba, may I ask, which Bible version are you quoting? For clarification and copyright purposes, please include version abbreviation; unless it's KJ, which is public domain. Thanks.

Vic
 
Back
Top