Is 'soul sleep' doctrinal?

[Butch5]

 

Look at Scriptures they say Adam, "Became" a soul, not Adam "Has" a soul.

 

But Adam became a body,  became a spirit and became a soul because of God. Adam has these things because of God.

 

That's not the issue.

[Butch5]

 

 

That scripture in 1 Thessalonians is pretty plain in showing man is a 3 part being.  I don't see how anyone can explain that away and make a case to the contrary. 

 

I haven't read through this thread, but as to the general question of soul sleep, I don't see it as scriptural at all.  Jesus spoke of the rich man and Lazarus, and the rich man was in hell immediately at his death and Lazarus was with Abraham in paradise.  Jesus spoke with Moses and Elijah.  The Bible states that God is not the God of the dead but the God of the living.  Revelation speaks of saints that were killed during the tribulation being in the presence of God in heaven asking how long till they would be avenged?  There is just too much scripture that shows that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord, if you belong to Christ, and that you are in hell if you don't know Jesus as your Lord and Savior, immediately after your body dies.  Your body sleeps in the ground, but your Spirit is eternal.  When a person dies, they "give up the ghost."  The real person leaves the body.  When you see a dead body, you are only seeing an empty shell.  The person has departed. N

No, the Scriptures don't teach that. Some of the passages you've quoted have already been addressed. The idea that man is  something that lives outside of the body is not from Scripture it is from Greek Philosophy and Gnosticism and it contradicts quite a few passages of Scripture. The passages you've quoted here are not saying that man exists outside of the body. They need to understood in the context in which they were written. 

 

The rich man and Lazarus, as well as Abraham were shown to be existing outside the body by Jesus.  The people that were killed in Revelation were also alive outside the body.  There is no getting around that.  You are making a huge stretch to compare what I am saying to Gnosticism, that teaches that what we see in the natural is what is not real.  I have read some gnostic writings, and your comparison is a ridiculous attempt to demonize with the comparison.  For those who want to know what the gnostics taught, there is a book called, "The Other Bible" that includes a lot of their teachings.  Philosophers teach a lot of different things, and I feel confident in saying that there are just as many Greek Philosophers that don't believe in any after life as those who teach the spirit can exist outside the body.  I could turn this around and say that your teachings remind me of the Sadducees, because there are some similarities. 

 

No they weren't Jesus is using an allegory to say that the kingdom is being taken from the Jews. The passage about the souls under the alter is figurative language which is used elsewhere in Revelation. 

 

Gnosticism was a combining of Greek Philosophy and Christianity. The belief that there is something in man that lives apart from the body comes from primarily from Plato. He is the one who promoted the eternal soul idea. There were some people early one that incorporated this idea in to their Christian doctrines. It was flatly rejected in the beginning but found it's way into Christianity most likely in Alexandria Egypt around the 200's. 

 

You could say my teaching reminds you of the Sadducees because it's very close to what they believed, after all they were Jews who had the OT Scriptures. However, the Sadduccees didn't believe in the resurrection. They believed when one died that was all there was. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead, however, that is the only afterlife they believed in. What that says is that the OT doesn't teach any afterlife other than the resurrection. That's why the Jews didn't believe in one (with the exception of the Essenes).

 

Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages. It was in the NT times that people were influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally, That idea however is expressly refuted in Scripture by Paul who states that the Father alone has immortality.

[Guest Butero]

 

 

 

That scripture in 1 Thessalonians is pretty plain in showing man is a 3 part being.  I don't see how anyone can explain that away and make a case to the contrary. 

 

I haven't read through this thread, but as to the general question of soul sleep, I don't see it as scriptural at all.  Jesus spoke of the rich man and Lazarus, and the rich man was in hell immediately at his death and Lazarus was with Abraham in paradise.  Jesus spoke with Moses and Elijah.  The Bible states that God is not the God of the dead but the God of the living.  Revelation speaks of saints that were killed during the tribulation being in the presence of God in heaven asking how long till they would be avenged?  There is just too much scripture that shows that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord, if you belong to Christ, and that you are in hell if you don't know Jesus as your Lord and Savior, immediately after your body dies.  Your body sleeps in the ground, but your Spirit is eternal.  When a person dies, they "give up the ghost."  The real person leaves the body.  When you see a dead body, you are only seeing an empty shell.  The person has departed. N

No, the Scriptures don't teach that. Some of the passages you've quoted have already been addressed. The idea that man is  something that lives outside of the body is not from Scripture it is from Greek Philosophy and Gnosticism and it contradicts quite a few passages of Scripture. The passages you've quoted here are not saying that man exists outside of the body. They need to understood in the context in which they were written. 

 

The rich man and Lazarus, as well as Abraham were shown to be existing outside the body by Jesus.  The people that were killed in Revelation were also alive outside the body.  There is no getting around that.  You are making a huge stretch to compare what I am saying to Gnosticism, that teaches that what we see in the natural is what is not real.  I have read some gnostic writings, and your comparison is a ridiculous attempt to demonize with the comparison.  For those who want to know what the gnostics taught, there is a book called, "The Other Bible" that includes a lot of their teachings.  Philosophers teach a lot of different things, and I feel confident in saying that there are just as many Greek Philosophers that don't believe in any after life as those who teach the spirit can exist outside the body.  I could turn this around and say that your teachings remind me of the Sadducees, because there are some similarities. 

 

No they weren't Jesus is using an allegory to say that the kingdom is being taken from the Jews. The passage about the souls under the alter is figurative language which is used elsewhere in Revelation. 

 

Gnosticism was a combining of Greek Philosophy and Christianity. The belief that there is something in man that lives apart from the body comes from primarily from Plato. He is the one who promoted the eternal soul idea. There were some people early one that incorporated this idea in to their Christian doctrines. It was flatly rejected in the beginning but found it's way into Christianity most likely in Alexandria Egypt around the 200's. 

 

You could say my teaching reminds you of the Sadducees because it's very close to what they believed, after all they were Jews who had the OT Scriptures. However, the Sadduccees didn't believe in the resurrection. They believed when one died that was all there was. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead, however, that is the only afterlife they believed in. What that says is that the OT doesn't teach any afterlife other than the resurrection. That's why the Jews didn't believe in one (with the exception of the Essenes).

 

Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages. It was in the NT times that people were influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally, That idea however is expressly refuted in Scripture by Paul who states that the Father alone has immortality.

 

What you are giving us is based on writings of so-called historians.  It is not based in fact.  In other words, you can't prove any of the things you are saying about Plato being the first person to promote mankind's existence outside the body.  You can't prove this teaching was widely rejected at the start.  You can't prove it only began to get acceptance around AD 200.  There are people who have written books making those claims, but they can't prove any of them.  It is revisionist church history. 

 

You do say something here I find disturbing.  You said, "Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages.  It was in the NT times that people influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally."  This only makes sense if you deny the inerrancy of scripture.  You are saying that we can't fully trust some things written in the NT because the writers were influenced by Greek philosophers. 

 

BTW, I reject the notion that Paul "states that the Father alone has immortality."  I would agree that God alone has existed eternally, but he has given followers of Christ eternal life.  Please provide scriptures to back that up. 

[Guest DRS81]

 

Well that's the thing, we have made a case using scripture, but the veil is over your eyes bro.

 

No, you haven’t. All you’ve done is present a few passages and inferred your doctrine from them.

 

What else do you want from me Butch. Do you want me to pull Jesus down from his thrown and have him physically tell you himself? The veil is over your eyes because you don't understand body, soul and spirit yet. You know how when love is blind, and it's difficult to see the truth in that person. Well, same metaphor here. Your love for your doctrines have been embedded in your brain to the point where nothing else is getting in.

 

Show me a single passage of Scripture that says man is a three part being or that man was created by combining a body, a spirit, and a soul.

 

We have shown you scripture multiple times. Again, the veil is over your eyes. Man was created by combining a body, a spirit and soul. How? Now listen carefully, God formed and created Adam's body from the dust. (That's the first part of man BODY). Then God breathed his own spirit into the nostrils of Adam and gave him life. (That's the second part of man LIFE). Then man became a living soul. (That's the third part of man SOUL). By combining a body, a spirit and soul what you have is the result of....(MAN). Man cannot exist without a body, life and a soul. A body, life and soul were combined to create MAN. Do you understand now? - DRS81

 

 

Yes there was scripture. (Rev 21:1-2). Yes Jerusalem is a city on this earth right now, but we're talking about Heaven Butch. The new Jerusalem is in the afterlife. The first heaven is a place where Jesus resides and lives right now. We can't physically see this place until we die, but it is there. After judgment day, this first heaven will be washed away and a new heaven will emerge. The new heaven IS THE NEW JERUSALEM. (Rev 21:1-2 Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.) The new earth WILL be different than this old earth. This old earth is corrupted with sin, the new earth will be without pain and suffering..(Rev 21:4 He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.")

There is one heaven and one earth, they will be restored. Notice the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven. The imagery is that it is on earth. It is the Jerusalem that exists now in its restored state. This is made clear all over the Scriptures. Peter speaks of it.

 

20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:

21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Act 3:20-21 KJV)

 

KJV  Revelation 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. (Rev 21:5 KJV)

 

Notice He said, I make all things new, not I make all new things. All things will be made new.

 

You had asked if the thief was with Jesus in Jerusalem.

The correct usage of words to ask is if the thief was with Jesus in the first heaven.

Confirming the right words is important so as to not mix them up.

 

and yet you still haven't answered the question. Wow Butch. When you answer the question you will then see what bearing it has.

 

 

I did answer the question. You asked if I knew what the Holy Spirit is and where it comes from come  and I answered Yes, I know who the Holy Spirit is and where He comes from.

 

 

Ok, so since you know then tell me. Do you see how you still haven't answered the question.

[Butch5]

. 

 

Edited January 26, 2014 by Butch5

[Butch5]

 

 

What you are giving us is based on writings of so-called historians.  It is not based in fact.  In other words, you can't prove any of the things you are saying about Plato being the first person to promote mankind's existence outside the body.  You can't prove this teaching was widely rejected at the start.  You can't prove it only began to get acceptance around AD 200.  There are people who have written books making those claims, but they can't prove any of them.  It is revisionist church history.

 

Yes, it can be proven. All one has to do is read the writings of Plato. Read the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Justin, Hippolytus, and others. We can see the doctrines that they were refuting shortly after the apostles deaths.

 

 

You do say something here I find disturbing.  You said, "Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages.  It was in the NT times that people influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally."  This only makes sense if you deny the inerrancy of scripture.  You are saying that we can't fully trust some things written in the NT because the writers were influenced by Greek philosophers.

 

No I’m not. I’m saying that this idea of man existing outside of the body wasn’t imposed on the Scriptures until the time of Greek influence. There were 4000 years of Jewish history where people didn’t believe this idea of a ghost that lives on after death. It wasn’t until the time of Greek influence that we see this being imposed on the Scriptures. The Pharisees and Sadduccees didn’t believe it. Jesus and the Apostles didn’t believe it and the early church didn’t believe it. It wasn’t until after the deaths of the apostles that Gnosticism came on strong and reared it’s head in Christian doctrine.

 

 

BTW, I reject the notion that Paul "states that the Father alone has immortality."  I would agree that God alone has existed eternally, but he has given followers of Christ eternal life.  Please provide scriptures to back that up.

 

Well, you can reject it but he still said it.

 

14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1Ti 6:1 KJV)

 

Take note that when Paul wrote this Christ had already risen. So Christ had been resurrected when Paul wrote this and he says that it is the Father “ONLY” who has immortality.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Butch5

[Guest Butero]

 

 

 

What you are giving us is based on writings of so-called historians.  It is not based in fact.  In other words, you can't prove any of the things you are saying about Plato being the first person to promote mankind's existence outside the body.  You can't prove this teaching was widely rejected at the start.  You can't prove it only began to get acceptance around AD 200.  There are people who have written books making those claims, but they can't prove any of them.  It is revisionist church history.

 

Yes, it can be proven. All one has to do is read the writings of Plato. Read the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Justin, Hippolytus, and others. We can see the doctrines that they were refuting shortly after the apostles deaths.

 

 

You do say something here I find disturbing.  You said, "Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages.  It was in the NT times that people influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally."  This only makes sense if you deny the inerrancy of scripture.  You are saying that we can't fully trust some things written in the NT because the writers were influenced by Greek philosophers.

 

No I’m not. I’m saying that this idea of man existing outside of the body wasn’t imposed on the Scriptures until the time of Greek influence. There were 4000 years of Jewish history where people didn’t believe this idea of a ghost that lives on after death. It wasn’t until the time of Greek influence that we see this being imposed on the Scriptures. The Pharisees and Sadduccees didn’t believe it. Jesus and the Apostles didn’t believe it and the early church didn’t believe it. It wasn’t until after the deaths of the apostles that Gnosticism came on strong and reared it’s head in Christian doctrine.

 

 

BTW, I reject the notion that Paul "states that the Father alone has immortality."  I would agree that God alone has existed eternally, but he has given followers of Christ eternal life.  Please provide scriptures to back that up.

 

Well, you can reject it but he still said it.

 

14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1Ti 6:1 KJV)

 

Take note that when Paul wrote this Christ had already risen. So Christ had been resurrected when Paul wrote this and he says that it is the Father “ONLY” who has immortality.

 

Reading the writings of Plato and other individuals does nothing to prove they were the first to believe the spirit goes on after someone dies.  I reject the notion that the early church didn't believe the spirit goes on after someone dies.  You claim there is 4000 years of Jewish history where people rejected the notion of a spirit living outside the physical body.  I want proof of that, not just your word it was true.  I don't believe it.  You speak as though you were there, and watched as the Greeks influenced Christian thought, and you weren't.  That is the problem with all of the writings of people that make claims like you are.  They can't be proven. 

 

BTW, if you believe God only has immortality, then you can't believe in the resurrection, because that would mean we have eternal life. 

[Butch5]

The veil is over my eyes? Then show me Scripture that says man is created from a body, God’s breath/spirit, and a soul. I’ve asked for this several times and have gotten nothing. If one believes something that they cannot show in Scripture it may be that the veil is over their eyes.

 

 

We have shown you scripture multiple times. Again, the veil is over your eyes. Man was created by combining a body, a spirit and soul. How? Now listen carefully, God formed and created Adam's body from the dust. (That's the first part of man BODY). Then God breathed his own spirit into the nostrils of Adam and gave him life. (That's the second part of man LIFE). Then man became a living soul. (That's the third part of man SOUL). By combining a body, a spirit and soul what you have is the result of....(MAN). Man cannot exist without a body, life and a soul. A body, life and soul werecombined to create MAN. Do you understand now? - DRS81

First you said the body and breath of God became a soul then you said the three were combined to create man. Man is a living soul. That’s like saying to make water you combine, hydrogen, oxygen, and water, and you have water. The first 2 create water. Water is the product of the combination of hydrogen and oxygen just as a soul is the combination of a body and God’s breath/spirit.  You can’t have it both ways.

 

 

You had asked if the thief was with Jesus in Jerusalem.

The correct usage of words to ask is if the thief was with Jesus in the first heaven.

Confirming the right words is important so as to not mix them up.

Why don’t you supply some Scripture showing that he thief is in the first heaven?

 

Ok, so since you know then tell me. Do you see how you still haven't answered the question.

I have answered it. Do you see that there is a communication problem in your statement? You didn’t ask me to explain anything you simply asked if I knew and I answered yes. You have assumptions in your questions that are not stated. It seems you’re interpreting Scripture the same way. It seems you’re reading these passages with the assumption that there is a ghost that lives on after death rather than confirming the idea before bringing it to the Scriptures. If you study the Scriptures you’ll find it’s not there.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Butch5

[Butch5]

 

 

 

 

What you are giving us is based on writings of so-called historians.  It is not based in fact.  In other words, you can't prove any of the things you are saying about Plato being the first person to promote mankind's existence outside the body.  You can't prove this teaching was widely rejected at the start.  You can't prove it only began to get acceptance around AD 200.  There are people who have written books making those claims, but they can't prove any of them.  It is revisionist church history.

 

Yes, it can be proven. All one has to do is read the writings of Plato. Read the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Justin, Hippolytus, and others. We can see the doctrines that they were refuting shortly after the apostles deaths.

 

 

You do say something here I find disturbing.  You said, "Look at the passages you referenced, they're NT passages.  It was in the NT times that people influenced by Greek Philosophy and this idea of a soul that exists eternally."  This only makes sense if you deny the inerrancy of scripture.  You are saying that we can't fully trust some things written in the NT because the writers were influenced by Greek philosophers.

 

No I’m not. I’m saying that this idea of man existing outside of the body wasn’t imposed on the Scriptures until the time of Greek influence. There were 4000 years of Jewish history where people didn’t believe this idea of a ghost that lives on after death. It wasn’t until the time of Greek influence that we see this being imposed on the Scriptures. The Pharisees and Sadduccees didn’t believe it. Jesus and the Apostles didn’t believe it and the early church didn’t believe it. It wasn’t until after the deaths of the apostles that Gnosticism came on strong and reared it’s head in Christian doctrine.

 

 

BTW, I reject the notion that Paul "states that the Father alone has immortality."  I would agree that God alone has existed eternally, but he has given followers of Christ eternal life.  Please provide scriptures to back that up.

 

Well, you can reject it but he still said it.

 

14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1Ti 6:1 KJV)

 

Take note that when Paul wrote this Christ had already risen. So Christ had been resurrected when Paul wrote this and he says that it is the Father “ONLY” who has immortality.

 

Reading the writings of Plato and other individuals does nothing to prove they were the first to believe the spirit goes on after someone dies.  I reject the notion that the early church didn't believe the spirit goes on after someone dies.  You claim there is 4000 years of Jewish history where people rejected the notion of a spirit living outside the physical body.  I want proof of that, not just your word it was true.  I don't believe it.  You speak as though you were there, and watched as the Greeks influenced Christian thought, and you weren't.  That is the problem with all of the writings of people that make claims like you are.  They can't be proven. 

 

BTW, if you believe God only has immortality, then you can't believe in the resurrection, because that would mean we have eternal life. 

 

That's an easy way to protect your doctrine, just reject everything against it outright. The evidence is there if you choose to research it. However, the eternal soul idea contradicts Scripture. So, if one believes that the Scriptures are without error then they cannot logically hold the eternal soul idea.

 

 

And, I can believe that the Father alone has immortality and still believe in the resurrection. It's really simple. The Father as Scripture says gives (present tense) life. The resurrected saint can live for eternity because God can continuously give them life through eternity. It's no different than He does now. In Job we find that if God were to retrieve His spirit and his breath all flesh would die. Paul said that God gives(present tense) life to all things. He didn't say God gave life, he said God gives life. That's a present continuous action on the prat of God.

 

13 Who hath given him a charge over the earth? or who hath disposed the whole world? 14 If he set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and his breath; 15 All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust. (Job 34:1 KJV)

 

Notice where man goes, to dust.

 

NKJ  1 Timothy 6:13 I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate,

[Guest DRS81]

 

BTW, I reject the notion that Paul "states that the Father alone has immortality."  I would agree that God alone has existed eternally, but he has given followers of Christ eternal life.  Please provide scriptures to back that up.

 

Well, you can reject it but he still said it.

 

14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1Ti 6:1 KJV)

 

Take note that when Paul wrote this Christ had already risen. So Christ had been resurrected when Paul wrote this and he says that it is the Father “ONLY” who has immortality.

 

You are taking 1 Tim 6:16 out of context. Christians are only granted immortality because of the gift of salvation Butch.

 

Who only hath immortality http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/1-timothy-6-16.html
Angels are immortal, and so are the souls of men, and so will be the bodies of men after the resurrection; but then neither of these have immortality of themselves, they have it from God; who only has it, of himself, originally, essentially, and in derivatively.

 

First you said the body and breath of God became a soul then you said the three were combined to create man. Man is a living soul. That’s like saying to make water you combine, hydrogen, oxygen, and water, and you have water. The first 2 create water. Water is the product of the combination of hydrogen and oxygen just as a soul is the combination of a body and God’s breath/spirit.  You can’t have it both ways.

 

You're not listening bro. I'm a give you a really simple example. If God made our bodies and gave us spirit/life through his spirit and stopped there, then what's the point of that. Our souls control our will, mind and emotions. If God stopped at just body and spirit/life, then we would be no more than zombies walking around. We all might as well be hooked up to hospital tubes and live off machines. Is the three parts clicking yet. Take your time Butch.

 

 

You had asked if the thief was with Jesus in Jerusalem.
The correct usage of words to ask is if the thief was with Jesus in the first heaven.
Confirming the right words is important so as to not mix them up.

Why don’t you supply some Scripture showing that he thief is in the first heaven?

 

Why? You would have to get over that hump first that the soul exists after death. You're not there yet.

 

 

Ok, so since you know then tell me. Do you see how you still haven't answered the question.

I have answered it. Do you see that there is a communication problem in your statement? You didn’t ask me to explain anything you simply asked if I knew and I answered yes. You have assumptions in your questions that are not stated. It seems you’re interpreting Scripture the same way. It seems you’re reading these passages with the assumption that there is a ghost that lives on after death rather than confirming the idea before bringing it to the Scriptures. If you study the Scriptures you’ll find it’s not there.

 

Oh I'm sorry Butch. I just assumed the normal thing to do was go beyond the word yes. I just assumed at that point that you don't know the answer. I need to make that more clear. Please explain your answer of "yes". What is the holy spirit, and where does it come from?