Soul Sleep Biblically Impossible

[redleghunter]

All of what you've posted here is easily addressed. You've drawn an assumption that the inner man and outter man are two different perssons.

I did not. One person. This is my statement again:

Vines nicely shows that even in Hebrew thought there two ontologically distinct entities, yet even as Paul uses the inner and outer man terms, these are in vital union.​

When Paul speaks of the renewing of the inner man he's talking about what one believes, how they act, etc. They are renewing their mind. They are changing their thought processes. The inner man refers to the mental aspects of a man.

Based on the above, your view is when we die our inner man dies too. This inner man is just our mental capacity and as so ceases to exist upon death. This would make our salvation a matter of mind, or thought and divorce relationship with God spiritually. You are advocating we have no distinct immaterial spirit which remembers. Therefore, for your view the resurrection really is not a resurrection but a reincarnation.

Resurrection is defined as a rejoining of 'us' to our bodies. If there no longer exists an "us" then what really is happing is a recreation or reincarnation of something other than "us."

You are right this is not soul sleep. This is annihilation based on materialism.

It's not a separate person from the body.

We are one person. One person with an immaterial inner man and an outer man (flesh). If this is not evident then the Incarnation will be difficult for you to explain. As the Incarnation gives us insight into how we were made in the Image and according to the Likeness of God. God is Spirit.

Even in your post from Vine's he recognizes that soul, nephesh is translated life. one's life is not something separate from the body. He note Gen 2 where it's a "living soul". This passage shows that a living soul is the combining of the body and the breath of life from God.

This is what Paul exactly makes a distinction of in 2 Corinthians 4. He contrasts being housed in our heavenly bodies (resurrected bodies) and being unclothed. He desires not to be unclothed (I think we all do) but then makes the distinction of absent from these mortal bodies at home with the Lord. This is why you cannot apply "resurrection" to the text. Paul already discussed it and made the distinction clear.

This passage shows that a living soul is the combining of the body and the breath of life from God.

The breath of life from God is God making us in His Image and according to His Likeness. That breath of life He gives us, is "us." It is not an impersonal breath from God but the very life God gives which goes back to His presence when our moral body dies.

then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (Ecclesiastes 12:7)

 

[redleghunter]

That doesn't address the passages. Scripture says the dead cannot praise God and that their thoughts perish. How then can they be conscious in the presence of the Lord?

Yes those who no longer live under the sun cannot do so. A dead body cannot praise God, but the inner man can.

 

[redleghunter]

Right! Their mortal lives. That's all there is.

This is materialism.

As I said, your argument is based on the idea of the immortal soul which is a Greek concept not a Biblical one.

Has nothing to do with Greek concepts at all. It has to do with Promise of eternal life. There is never a break in God's promises.

 

[redleghunter]

One thing to keep in mind is something Peter said. Remember, Peter was one who had his understanding of the Scriptures opened by Jesus Himself. Yet Peter said of Paul,

6 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. (2 Pet. 3:16 KJV)

Even Peter who knew the Scriptures well said that some things Paul wrong were hard to understand. No matter what you believe Paul said, you have to reconcile all of his writings. In 1 Cor. 15 Paul said of dead Christians, if there is not resurrection, then those who have died in Christ have perished. If as you believe, that the dead are with Lord, then Paul's statement would be factually wrong. He leaves no hope for dead Christians except the resurrection. Now, this presents quite a difficulty for the position you hold.

Then stop wresting the Scriptures.

 

[redleghunter]

Having said that, you still didn't address the question. doesn't it bother you that there isn't a single clear statement in Scripture that states that dead people are alive? Like I said, there are clear statements that show the dead are in fact dead.

That is actually your presupposition. There is absolutely no evidence in the Holy Scriptures showing we are only mortal beings without an immaterial inner man.

What you have presented is that we are inhabited with God's breath, have a mental capacity to accept the Gospel, but when we die the breath of God is taken away and has nothing to do with us other than keeping our corpses alive. You are basically advocating we are soulless minions of flesh.

 

[Butch5]

This is materialism.

Huh? What do you think the point of the resurrection is? If people can exist apart from the body what need is there of a resurrection? The whole reason for the resurrection is so people can have eternal life.

Has nothing to do with Greek concepts at all. It has to do with Promise of eternal life. There is never a break in God's promises.

It has everything to do with Greek concepts. It was Plato who popularized this idea of the immortal sou that was prevalent in Greek culture when the NT was written. Greek culture had a huge influence on societies in the regions of the Bible. Many of the Gentiles who became Christians held these Greek concepts of an afterlife etc.when they became Christians.

As I showed you with Jesus words, the promise of eternal life is after the believer has died.

 

[Butch5]

Then stop wresting the Scriptures.

Since I'm not the one who is having trouble incorporating "all" of the passages I don't believe I'm the one wresting them

 

[redleghunter]

Huh? What do you think the point of the resurrection is?

To rejoin "us" to our Resurrected bodies. In fact that is the definition of resurrection.

If people can exist apart from the body what need is there of a resurrection?

Are you really asking this? To be united with our Resurrected bodies. If we have no "us" to unite to our incorruptible bodies then it is not resurrection but reincarnation or re-creation. An intermediary state as Jesus teaches in Luke 16 does not preclude a resurrection as indeed He mentions this in the very same story of Lazarus. Unless of course you think Jesus was teaching error.

The whole reason for the resurrection is so people can have eternal life.

Indeed as the final state of the Promise. Yet again we have eternal life the moment we believe.

 

[redleghunter]

Since I'm not the one who is having trouble incorporating "all" of the passages I don't believe I'm the one wresting them

Butch you have ignored the better half of all the NT passages I provided originally. Don't bother going back, I will just note you did not address them. You have me one verse Ecclesiastes and I showed you full context. Bullinger based his entire theology on that verse and ignored what was later revealed in Holy Scriptures.

 

[Butch5]

That is actually your presupposition. There is absolutely no evidence in the Holy Scriptures showing we are only mortal beings without an immaterial inner man.

The Scriptures do call man mortal. What they don't do is state that man is anything more than mortal. Again, that idea is Greek and must e brought to the Scriptures. That's why there is no statement in Scripture that states that the dead are alive. It's because the Bible doesn't teach it. And again, there is no real world evidence, just a few misunderstood passages.

What you have presented is that we are inhabited with God's breath, have a mental capacity to accept the Gospel, but when we die the breath of God is taken away and has nothing to do with us other than keeping our corpses alive. You are basically advocating we are soulless minions of flesh.[/QUOTE]

Actually, I've pointed out that the body returns to the dust. God told Adam, you are dust. It seems to me that you don't believe that. It seems that you believe that man is something else that simply inhabits a body that can be disposed of. God said to Adam, you are dust.

 

[redleghunter]

Huh? What do you think the point of the resurrection is? If people can exist apart from the body what need is there of a resurrection? The whole reason for the resurrection is so people can have eternal life.




It has everything to do with Greek concepts. It was Plato who popularized this idea of the immortal sou that was prevalent in Greek culture when the NT was written. Greek culture had a huge influence on societies in the regions of the Bible. Many of the Gentiles who became Christians held these Greek concepts of an afterlife etc.when they became Christians.

As I showed you with Jesus words, the promise of eternal life is after the believer has died.

Butch I have quote no Greek philosophers nor have I quoted church fathers.

I have not addressed the usual straw man of Casper the ghost, as I have focused on the presence of the believer upon death of the body. Apostolic teaching is "with the Lord." Do the math.

You cannot accept this because you are using Ecclesiastes 9:5 as your "Rosetta Stone" to interpret the remainder of the Bible. Bullinger did this too and why his arguments could not withstand theological debate.

 

[redleghunter]

The Scriptures do call man mortal. What they don't do is state that man is anything more than mortal.

Can you explain to me your view of the Person and Nature of Jesus Christ? I don't think we are going to get anywhere without discussing the Incarnation. What is your view of Person and Nature of Jesus Christ?

 

[Butch5]

To rejoin "us" to our Resurrected bodies. In fact that is the definition of resurrection.


Are you really asking this? To be united with our Resurrected bodies. If we have no "us" to unite to our incorruptible bodies then it is not resurrection but reincarnation or re-creation. An intermediary state as Jesus teaches in Luke 16 does not preclude a resurrection as indeed He mentions this in the very same story of Lazarus. Unless of course you think Jesus was teaching error.


Indeed as the final state of the Promise. Yet again we have eternal life the moment we believe.

That may be how you see it. However, God gave a clear picture of the Resurrection. If you read Ezekiel chapter 37 you'll see it. In that passage God shows how he will bring the bones back together and cover them with flesh. Then God tells Ezekiel to prophesy to the breath and breath comes into them. Then God tell Ezekiel what this means, He said it was the house of Israel being raised and said that He would put "His" breath into them and they would live. That's the picture of the Resurrection. There is nothing there about reuniting their souls or ghost with their body. And what makes them live is God's breath just like we saw in Gen 2:7 where God breathed into Adam and gave him life. Again, nothing at all about a being alive when dead.

 

[Butch5]

Butch I have quote no Greek philosophers nor have I quoted church fathers.

I have not addressed the usual straw man of Casper the ghost, as I have focused on the presence of the believer upon death of the body. Apostolic teaching is "with the Lord." Do the math.

You cannot accept this because you are using Ecclesiastes 9:5 as your "Rosetta Stone" to interpret the remainder of the Bible. Bullinger did this too and why his arguments could not withstand theological debate.

It's not apostolic teaching to say that the dead are in presence of the Lord. As I've pointed out that passage is about the Resurrection, not an intermediate state. Also, My argument isn't based on Ecc. 9. It's based on Gen 2:7 where Moses tells us how God created man and there is nothing whatsoever about anything in man other than his physical body and the breath of life from God which when combined become a living soul. That's all there is. To claim anymore is at best speculation and without any evidence from Scripture useless. I've also pointed out that Paul, who you're quoting to make this claim stated that if there is no resurrection those who had died in Christ had perished. How could they have perished if they are with the Lord. And, you can't claim it was their body because he's speaking of dead people who supposedly have already lost their bodies. So this would have to be souls or ghosts or whatever lives. Yet he said if there is no resurrection they've perished. That creates a conflict for your position. However, when we understand that 2 Cor. 5 is speaking of the resurrection and not an intermediate state that conflict goes away.

 

[redleghunter]

That may be how you see it.

Actually I gave you the Biblical definition of 'resurrection.' You will have to find a different term for what you propose.

 

[redleghunter]

This is materialism.

Huh? What do you think the point of the resurrection is? If people can exist apart from the body what need is there of a resurrection? The whole reason for the resurrection is so people can have eternal life.

I said what you propose of the human complete makeup is materialistic---aka materialism.

Materialism is the belief that matter is the only thing that exists and that all things can be reduced to matter (and energy since matter is a form of energy). Therefore, materialism would state that all things in the universe, including mankind, are necessarily restricted to operate within the bounds of physical laws. The human mind would cease to exist upon death because the physical brain ceases to function. Materialism would deny the continuation of the mind after death, and would also deny any and all miracles.​

 

[redleghunter]

It's not apostolic teaching to say that the dead are in presence of the Lord.

Here's the complete passage:

2 Corinthians 5: NASB
1For we know that if the earthly tent which is our house is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

{Paul shows here the distinction between our mortal bodies and our yet future resurrected incorruptible bodies....Resurrected bodies the subject and properly modified}

2For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven, 3inasmuch as we, having put it on, will not be found naked.

{When we are resurrected we will not be 'naked' without a body. Still speaking of the Resurrection}

4For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life. 5Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

{The desire is to have our mortal bodies swallowed up by life to be clothed with resurrected bodies. I would gather that is everyone's desire, to be the ones who are immediately translated and not die first. Paul leaves here hanging meaning does not address what unclothed means. Yet unclothed is an option}


6Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7for we walk by faith, not by sight— 8we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord. 9Therefore we also have as our ambition, whether at home or absent, to be pleasing to Him.

{Paul addresses here the status of the believer whose earthly tent has perished, yet has not received their building from God (verses 1-5). He describes this status as while we are at home in the mortal body we are absent from the Lord. Then addresses the converse of verse 6 in verse 8 by stating we should prefer to be absent from the mortal body and to be at home with the Lord.}

The resurrection is addressed in verses 1-4. The intermediary state in verses 6-9.

Confirmation in Philippians 1:
Philippians 1: NASB
21For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.

{Paul making the distinction of living on in the flesh (mortal body) is fruitful labor for him. He says to die is gain. He could be referencing here either the resurrection or immediate presence with the Lord or both.}


23But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;

{Here we get more information. He has a desire that if he dies to depart and be with Christ and that is much better. Makes no mention of the Resurrection here, it is about presence with Christ.}

24yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake. 25Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all for your progress and joy in the faith, 26so that your proud confidence in me may abound in Christ Jesus through my coming to you again.

{Paul referencing the resurrection here is categorically impossible. He makes the distinction that departing them (the Philippians) means he will be with Christ (verse 23) yet to remain with them is more necessary for them. If Paul is referencing the resurrection here, it would mean he is being resurrected and leaving the Philippians behind.}

The key teaching in both passages is the believer's presence with Christ. If a body is decaying in the grave then there is something of 'us' which is present with Christ. That is the apostolic teaching.

 

[redleghunter]

However, God gave a clear picture of the Resurrection. If you read Ezekiel chapter 37 you'll see it. In that passage God shows how he will bring the bones back together and cover them with flesh. Then God tells Ezekiel to prophesy to the breath and breath comes into them. Then God tell Ezekiel what this means, He said it was the house of Israel being raised and said that He would put "His" breath into them and they would live. That's the picture of the Resurrection.

The valley of bones can be a depiction of the Resurrection. As making stones into sons of Abraham explains how God can call Whom He pleases. It is not prophesying 'how' the Resurrection will take place, unless you view we are not the same 'us' upon resurrection. Ezekiel 37 is very impersonal showing how God can revive a nation from dry bones. The vision is explained here:

Ezekiel 37: NASB
11Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off.’ 12“Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel. 13“Then you will know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves and caused you to come up out of your graves, My people. 14“I will put My Spirit within you and you will come to life, and I will place you on your own land. Then you will know that I, the LORD, have spoken and done it,” declares the LORD.’”

There is nothing there about reuniting their souls or ghost with their body. And what makes them live is God's breath just like we saw in Gen 2:7 where God breathed into Adam and gave him life. Again, nothing at all about a being alive when dead.

Again the vision is explained and is not depicting the Resurrection on the last day. It can be a shadow or type but the prophecy addresses the restoration of national Israel in the land.

Again, nothing at all about a being alive when dead.

Meaning after death there is no more 'us' but bones and dust. Then why did Jesus call forth Lazarus? He called him by name and did not say "breath come to Lazarus."

John 11: NASB
38So Jesus, again being deeply moved within, came to the tomb. Now it was a cave, and a stone was lying against it. 39Jesus said, “Remove the stone.” Martha, the sister of the deceased, said to Him, “Lord, by this time there will be a stench, for he has been dead four days.” 40Jesus said to her, “Did I not say to you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” 41So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 42“I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me.” 43When He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth.” 44The man who had died came forth, bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”

Here I thought the dead can't hear.

He obviously did not have his resurrected body as he died again (unless one thinks he's hanging out somewhere).

 

[redleghunter]

@Butch5 , sorry this one might have got buried in our rapid discussion:

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...ally-impossible.8076939/page-10#post-73059176

 

[Dig4truth]

Butch5: "In 1 Cor. 15 Paul said of dead Christians, if there is not resurrection, then those who have died in Christ have perished. If as you believe, that the dead are with Lord, then Paul's statement would be factually wrong. He leaves no hope for dead Christians except the resurrection. Now, this presents quite a difficulty for the position you hold."


Well said and a valid point. When did we get away from the resurrection and believe in this immortal soul?