Separation of Body and Soul is Unbiblical.

[Reinitin]

On 12/12/2021 at 1:53 AM, Scott Free said:

 

"It is generally accepted that in biblical thought there is no separation of body and soul and, consequently, the resurrection of the body is central. The idea of an immortal soul is not a Hebrew concept but comes from Platonic philosophy. It is, therefore, considered a severe distortion of the NT to read this foreign idea into its teaching.", Vogels, "Review of "The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality", by James Barr", Critical Review of Books in Religion, volume 7, p. 80 (1994).

"Indeed, the salvation of the 'immortal soul' has sometimes been a commonplace in preaching, but it is fundamentally unbiblical. Biblical anthropology is not dualistic but monistic: human being consists in the integrated wholeness of body and soul, and the Bible never contemplates the disembodied existence of the soul in bliss.", Myers (ed.), "The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary", p. 518 (1987).

"A broad consensus emerged among biblical and theological scholars that soul-body dualism is a Platonic, Hellenistic idea that is not found anywhere in the Bible. The Bible, from cover to cover, promotes what they call the "Hebrew concept of the whole person." G. C. Berkouwer writes that the biblical view is always holistic, that in the Bible the soul is never ascribed any special religious significance. Werner Jaeger writes that soul-body dualism is a bizarre idea that has been read into the Bible by misguided church fathers such as Augustine. Rudolf Bultmann writes that Paul uses the word soma (body) to refer to the whole person, the self, so that there is not a soul and body, but rather the body is the whole thing. This interpretation of Pauline anthropology has been a theme in much subsequent Pauline scholarship.", McMinn & Phillips, "Care for the soul: exploring the intersection of psychology & theology", pp. 107-108 (2001)

 

A NICE compilation of hebrew scripture for edification. 

The word חַי chay "life" (Strong's #2416, x501),  is first used in the Creation narrative when God commands, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures" (Genesis 1:20, NKJV). The AV renders this "moving creatures that hath life", both miss the literal Hebrew translation "living souls" clearly having a problem with the implication that animals can be described as having or being souls. Man's distinction, apart from being made in the image of God, is the direct receipt of éç chay "life" breathed into his nostrils by God himself (Genesis 2:7). In Genesis 1:28,30; 2:19-20, the expression "beasts of the field" is actually "life of the earth" or "life of the field", so that חַי chay can mean simply creature "wherein there is life" (Genesis 1:30).

In Genesis 2:9 the tree of life is mentioned which, curiously, is a singular tree followed by a plural life, חַיִּים chayyîym, so literally "tree of lives". Maybe there is a hint already at our need for a second resurrection life, this life and the life of the world to come. חַיִּים chayyîym can sometimes be used as an emphatic plural, i.e., "life in all its fullness", as in the Jewish toast leChaim, literally, "to life(s)". The ancient Jewish habit of saying leChaim over a glass of wine, much as we say cheers, or bottoms up, is reputedly first recorded in Machzor Vitri 80, Shnayim. It has been suggested that the custom grew up to distinguish drinking wine "to life" from the practice of giving wine to a condemned man, to ease the pain of execution (Midrash Tanchuma, Pekudei 2; Kol Boh, 25, U'B'Seudat) or to remind that wine should lead to life not to sin, as in the case of some patriarchal incidents (Noah, Genesis 9:20-21; Lot, Genesis 19:31-34).

In the Jewish and biblical worldview the possession and enjoyment of life is a high ideal, not to be surrendered cheaply. The law of life superseded many others so long as staying alive did not mean denying your God. The wisdom of Ecclesiastes 9:4 that a "a living dog is better than a dead lion" is seen too in Jesus' reminder that even the Pharisees would commend breaking the Sabbath rules to save an animal out of a pit (Matthew 12:11).

Daniel's usage of éç chay is interesting in that he is renowned for possibly making the first use of the concept of eternal life explicit. Daniel 12:2, "many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life", uses עוּלָם ôwlâm (Strong's #5769, x439) "ages past/future" to augment the plural חַיִּים chayyîym. Some have taken the plural in this instance to mean eternal life. Certainly, a few verses later, Daniel 12:7 describes God as "Him who lives forever", using חַי chay in the singular with עוּלָם ôwlâm again. So, whatever the duration of Daniel's חַיִּים chayyîym is seems to point to something of the quality of חַי chay that God himself enjoys.

[missmuffet]

56 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Thank you! Let me start over since I believe I have severely failed to make any sense ... it must have been late and my brain froze, however, let me try again this morning and see if that was the norm or it was just the wrong time to respond.

There is a formula in Genesis where God describes how He made man. It is, to me, unambiquous and yet I understand how it can still cause some interpretation issues.

Let me know your thoughts on this-especially since if this interpretation is correct, there is no reason to think any words or phrases found later in the Scriptures would think to mean otherwise... they can then be considered as 'ways of getting a certain point across or a figure of speech king of thing.

In Genesis, God took earth and breathed into it and it BECAME a living soul. Meaning A + B = C. (two parts). The confusion, for me, is just what does B include?

Does B include the breath of life which gives the clay its ability to operate both in a physical manner (body) as well as in a mental capacity (call it spirit - lower case)?

If that is so, then we have our A and B identified and the product of those two coming together by the power of God will give us C. Meaning of course, that C is NOT anything of itself but a name given to something just created. If either A or B is lost or taken away then no more C. 

But there IS one more concern to this seemingly unambiguous formula; This creation, unlike the fish, the animals and any other life form on the planet was 'breathed' into A AND thus became a 'living soul' MADE IN HIS IMAGE. There are many interpretations of what that phrase may mean, but the only one that makes the most sense (again just my opinion) is when God 'breathed' into Adam (clay) He ALSO breathed into him the 'Spirit' (capital S) at the same time. This 'S'unlike the small 's' had to represent God's giving or providing this unique creation with 'His Spirit'. First, there was only one action from God and we are also told that Adam was (my terms) seen in a cloud like or spirit like or angelic like (difficult for me to get across at this time) covering. This, to me, would be the most significant part of Adam that represented his 'made in God's image' statement. He was at that time sinless and therefore would be able to 'see God and live' while in this state. So, perhaps we now have a change to man's formula; A + B + B (plus) = C where B (plus) represents God's Holiness or Spirit imparted into Adam at the time of his creation. And to take this a step further, when God made Eve from Adam's rib, this B (plus) also came with it. It had ALL the  same components of Adam - exact same formula. (I think of it and the Trinity (although this is certainly a simple way of trying to understand the Trinity), where you take a match that has already been lite and then take another small stick and place it next to the lite match. The fire will quickly catch on to the small stick and immediately become the same size, temperature, etc., as the lit match. And there is no change or reduction to the original lit match. 

So why bring all this up? Because God has defined the make up of man in Genesis and it can not change because of the use of words in the Scriptures. The ONLY change that takes place is the ONE also found in the Garden when Adam and Eve sinned. Immediately, they realized they were naked - meaning this B (plus) or this outer covering which represented their sinless nature or Holiness breathed into them by God, was taken away or lost. They had to be escorted out of the presence of God without this unique and Holy component imparted into them by God. 

This means that God's Plan of Salvation is to restore us to the original state that He created us - with the B (plus) the Holy Spirit (not to be confused with THE HOLY SPIRIT). Where did this B (plus) go? It went right back to its Giver, God.

Now, Adam has lost  B (plus) but is still alive and breathing and will continue on, but no longer 'holy'. Now when Adam dies, which was never intended to happen as long as he was sinless in this 'shroud like covering', there really is nothing more to occur then C (the living being (I changed it from 'living soul' only to differentiate it by man no longer having B(plus) within him). The body (which is now A + B is turned back to dust or the clay it was formed from. Nothing else to consider sine B (plus) had already been taken from Adam... he was now just 'from the earth' if you will. There was / is no longer a 'Spiritual / Holy' component within him. There still is A  and B (but the B component is just the mental / emotional / intellectual side of man. But this obviously will go away and die no differently than A at the time of death.

When a believer is resurrected by God he will then once again be given the B (plus) God's Holy Spirit within him and be able to be in His presence. For those who rejected Jesus, they too will be resurrected after the 1000 years along with Satan and will be immediately destroyed by HIS brightness since they, without His Holy Spirit (again not THE HOLY SPIRIT) was not restored to them. - Full circle.

Therefore, given this formula in Genesis, and knowing God indeed removed Adam and Eve from the Garden and the only thing lost by them was this B (plus), this is the only thing we need to get back with God. Nothing else can return to God after we die because nothing we are left with after we sinned came from God - it is ALL from the earth and NOTHING UNCLEAN OR UNHOLY COULD EVER BE ALLOWED IN HEAVEN. Only when God 'perfects' us once again will we be allowed to be with Him in heaven.

Just my thoughts, Charlie (look forward to your thoughts).

 

There is no formula. You have made it too complicated..  The Bible tells us the true Christian's soul will immediately go to heaven. The body will be resurrected with the soul. The souls of those who are not believers will go immediately to Hades. Their soul will resurrect with their body at the end of the 1000 year millennium and they will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment and they will be thrown into hell. 

[Charlie744]

2 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

There is no formula. You have made it too complicated..  The Bible tells us the true Christian's soul will immediately go to heaven. The body will be resurrected with the soul. The souls of those who are not believers will go immediately to Hades. Their soul will resurrect with their body at the end of the 1000 year millennium and they will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment and they will be thrown into hell. 

Would you mind going to Genesis and read those verses that speak directly to man’s creation? Thanks, Charlie 

[Starise]

Daniel 4:25-35. The story of Nebuchadnezzar living for a time like an animal.

This story may be unique or there may be other cases of it I am unaware of. It is unique to the bible. God decided to take away Nebuchadnezzar's consciousness. I think we see a parallel to it every time someone gets sedated for surgery or has a physical issue that is mentally debilitating. 

Was Nebuchadnezzar still himself? I think we could say his essence left the building. Where was it? Narcotics can have a similar effect although most people aren't grazing round' like sheep when they are under. It almost seems he became an animal for a time. He wasn't even aware of his change until it was over.

I believe a study of this takes us closer to what we are. 

[Dennis1209]

17 hours ago, Starise said:

I don't see the direct correlation between God being triune and the need to describe man the same way. I say this because there is no requirement for a being made in God's image to be made in the same way. I am not saying men and women are not multi layered in some way. I just can't see the rationale in saying since God is made up this way, so are men?

I see men as having a body and a soul. That's only two parts. Not three. Where do you get the 3rd part? A man made in God's image means simply we are made with the general appearance of God. 

Death is an unnatural event in so far as it was never intended to happen in the beginning. Even though men had layers, we were made to be one unified being forever. When death came along as the result of sin, God ordained men and women would die.

 

Good morning there Starise. I'd like to discuss a couple of your points, to clarify our thoughts?

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. [emphasis added]

My thinking is; if this is the second death, what was the first death? It has to be the body's physical death in my opinion. Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Triune, or three, is the biblical number for Divine completeness and perfection, and Resurrection, most everyone agrees on that. Do you disagree, that man was created with three distinct divisions; body, soul, and spirit? Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

It is my contention, from Adam and the moment of every human conception, every soul is created eternal. That would also include the angels and heavenly host. All of humanity and the heavenly host was created with free will, and the ability to choose. I don't believe in any sort of annihilation of existence or trace of existence. I don't see the Bible even remotely teaching that. 

One of the reasons I think Satan and his minions hate us so much, is they are jealous and resentful. We are created in the image of God, and they were not. If we can understand exactly what being created in the image of God means; we can better comprehend a number of other questions. 

I've previously written at length on what I believe it means, so I won't rehash the subject, other than to say: It's not a set of attributes, or what most people suspect. If it is a set of attributes, we share some of those attributes with the animal kingdom, therefore, that does not make us unique and in God's image. I believe humanity was God's crown jewel of creation, a second family with the spiritual angels, in the flesh.

Where do we get the third part, spirit? 

Matthew 26:41 (KJV) Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

There are many examples in the Bible, where we are spoken of as consisting of three separate and distinct parts of our being. 

Yes, physical death was never intended for humanity: Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Death = ἀθάνατος (athanatos), ον (on): adj.; ≡ Str 2288 + 1—immortal (1Ti 1:17 v.r.).

I understand this death to mean; loss of physical bodily immortality, not the death of the spirit or soul. 

Where do our hermeneutics differ Starise? 

 

 

[Charlie744]

4 hours ago, Starise said:

Daniel 4:25-35. The story of Nebuchadnezzar living for a time like an animal.

This story may be unique or there may be other cases of it I am unaware of. It is unique to the bible. God decided to take away Nebuchadnezzar's consciousness. I think we see a parallel to it every time someone gets sedated for surgery or has a physical issue that is mentally debilitating. 

Was Nebuchadnezzar still himself? I think we could say his essence left the building. Where was it? Narcotics can have a similar effect although most people aren't grazing round' like sheep when they are under. It almost seems he became an animal for a time. He wasn't even aware of his change until it was over.

I believe a study of this takes us closer to what we are. 

Did you mean to post this in this OP? Sorry if so ... I missed the connection, Charlie

[Starise]

3 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Good morning there Starise. I'd like to discuss a couple of your points, to clarify our thoughts?

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. [emphasis added]

My thinking is; if this is the second death, what was the first death? It has to be the body's physical death in my opinion. Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Triune, or three, is the biblical number for Divine completeness and perfection, and Resurrection, most everyone agrees on that. Do you disagree, that man was created with three distinct divisions; body, soul, and spirit? Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

It is my contention, from Adam and the moment of every human conception, every soul is created eternal. That would also include the angels and heavenly host. All of humanity and the heavenly host was created with free will, and the ability to choose. I don't believe in any sort of annihilation of existence or trace of existence. I don't see the Bible even remotely teaching that. 

One of the reasons I think Satan and his minions hate us so much, is they are jealous and resentful. We are created in the image of God, and they were not. If we can understand exactly what being created in the image of God means; we can better comprehend a number of other questions. 

I've previously written at length on what I believe it means, so I won't rehash the subject, other than to say: It's not a set of attributes, or what most people suspect. If it is a set of attributes, we share some of those attributes with the animal kingdom, therefore, that does not make us unique and in God's image. I believe humanity was God's crown jewel of creation, a second family with the spiritual angels, in the flesh.

Where do we get the third part, spirit? 

Matthew 26:41 (KJV) Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

There are many examples in the Bible, where we are spoken of as consisting of three separate and distinct parts of our being. 

Yes, physical death was never intended for humanity: Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Death = ἀθάνατος (athanatos), ον (on): adj.; ≡ Str 2288 + 1—immortal (1Ti 1:17 v.r.).

I understand this death to mean; loss of physical bodily immortality, not the death of the spirit or soul. 

Where do our hermeneutics differ Starise? 

 

 

Hello Dennis,

If you've followed me for any length of time on this forum I'm sure you know I played with the idea of annilationism mainly because of what we read in Ecclesiastes. Those passages more than imply we are immobile and powerless after death while in the grave. Comments from @Josheb about there being no human spirits free from bodies caused me to search the scriptures a little more on the subject. I admit I had some questions about way before this but never delved into them. While we disagree on some of this, that thread caused me to dig a little deeper to find an answer.

I am not nor will I ever be SDA, but some of what they say seems to fall in line with these ideas. I also reasoned that a soul in stasis does not need to be away from the Lord, therefore a soul can be with the Lord in any way shape or form. If we "die" and we do, then something about us doesn't entirely die, so death is merely a physical aspect. What does die actually mean in this context? Apparently something isn't really dead then. Death is not total even before the resurrection according to that view.

God both breathes a soul into man and receives that soul back at death. I don't think this is in question. The WAY we assume it to go down might be much different than the actual reality. Before we were born God had our souls all ready to go into our bodies. At that time we were none of us lucid with an awareness( like Nebechudnezzar), so it only stands to reason the soul that returns to the Lord in the same form as it came might have the same characteristics. 

I think I was trying to provoke thought on the whole idea of us being so very much like God that we even mimic His three part characteristics. We could get more into the technicals of the trinity parts of God as well. Most protestants and others all teach that the parts are all equal. They may well be, but one is over the others. Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. The Holy Ghost is not mentioned in the same contexts. 

What I really think we all sometimes tend to do is create explanations we think sound good that we are emotionally drawn to. I believe these descriptions are probably the most dumbed down they can be and be understood by mere humans. The complexity of man is far beyond our understanding and so the bible simplifies it. God's essence even more so. He is infinitesimal . We can't even begin to comprehend it so we get the dumbed down version of it.

The parts of man seem to be regarded as three things as you have quoted in your post. In other texts though we are a body and a spirit. I suppose we could pick and choose which makes the most sense to us. I see it more like the soul is a major component and the mind is a lesser one. Enough to maybe make a distinction, yet not an equal distinction, so often they are referred to as two rather than three things. 

I see someone else posted while I was posting this. Hopefully I didn't walk on his or her ideas.

This is the starting point for the way I had been reasoning this. Not exhaustive by any stretch.

[Starise]

15 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Did you mean to post this in this OP? Sorry if so ... I missed the connection, Charlie

Yes, just food for thought. Where is the soul of the person who is brain dead on life support? Is it trapped in them unaware of what's happening? I would probably say yes. If we say yes, then we have to admit the existence of the non thinking soul. If there are non thinking souls, then why can't some accept that when we die we could be in the same state until the resurrection?

[Biblican]

On 12/12/2021 at 2:53 AM, Scott Free said:

 

"It is generally accepted that in biblical thought there is no separation of body and soul and, consequently, the resurrection of the body is central. The idea of an immortal soul is not a Hebrew concept but comes from Platonic philosophy. It is, therefore, considered a severe distortion of the NT to read this foreign idea into its teaching.", Vogels, "Review of "The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality", by James Barr", Critical Review of Books in Religion, volume 7, p. 80 (1994).

"Indeed, the salvation of the 'immortal soul' has sometimes been a commonplace in preaching, but it is fundamentally unbiblical. Biblical anthropology is not dualistic but monistic: human being consists in the integrated wholeness of body and soul, and the Bible never contemplates the disembodied existence of the soul in bliss.", Myers (ed.), "The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary", p. 518 (1987).

"A broad consensus emerged among biblical and theological scholars that soul-body dualism is a Platonic, Hellenistic idea that is not found anywhere in the Bible. The Bible, from cover to cover, promotes what they call the "Hebrew concept of the whole person." G. C. Berkouwer writes that the biblical view is always holistic, that in the Bible the soul is never ascribed any special religious significance. Werner Jaeger writes that soul-body dualism is a bizarre idea that has been read into the Bible by misguided church fathers such as Augustine. Rudolf Bultmann writes that Paul uses the word soma (body) to refer to the whole person, the self, so that there is not a soul and body, but rather the body is the whole thing. This interpretation of Pauline anthropology has been a theme in much subsequent Pauline scholarship.", McMinn & Phillips, "Care for the soul: exploring the intersection of psychology & theology", pp. 107-108 (2001)

 

As Christians we save souls because the soul survives the death of the body and will end up in hell or heaven depending on the choices made in this life. We are shown very clearly in Jesus' Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, that the soul survives and in this parable the two souls of the beggar and the rich man are seen in paradise and hell. This was a belief of the Hebrews that when the body dies, the souls went to this place.  The Apostle Peter concurs when he taught that after Jesus died, He went to minister to the souls in prison which is a reference to hell which had these two compartments one for the righteous dead and one for the evil.

Paul also very clearly taught the distinction between soul and spirit likening them to two parts of a bone, bone and marrow.  It is fairly ridiculous to assume that there is no distinction between soul and body which undermines the entire concept of Jesus having to die to save our souls. 

[Starise]

2 minutes ago, Biblican said:

We are shown very clearly in Jesus' Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, that the soul survives and in this parable the two souls of the beggar and the rich man are seen in paradise and hell.

And this is a......................parable.

"While the parables are fictitious, however, they never indulge in the fanciful or fantastic, but remain true-to-life. They derive their persuasiveness from being told in a simple, vivid and fresh way which engages the hearer. Though the Gospels do not use these words, the parables are "once upon a time" stories."