Did the Apostle Paul believe in the immortality of the soul?

[Albion]

The problem you have with that is that it's based on an unestablished premise. You come to the text assuming it's possible for someone to live a part from the body.

Is there some way to understand this reply as meaning something other than "the Bible isn't to be believed?" It's beginning to look like this conversation is stalemated thanks to the idea that everything in the Bible is a just a metaphor.

 

[hedrick]

Philippians 1:21-23 should be enough. . .

in addition to Jesus' teaching where

Jesus demonstrated that the spirits of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are still alive in Matthew 22:31-32.

In Jesus' parable of Lazarus and the rich man, both their spirits are alive after their physical death in Luke 16:22-24.

I don’t think Philippians has anything to do with immortality. Paul expects to be wit the Lord in resurrection. The other two passages are not from Paul.

 

[Butch5]

Are you serious? The word of God written may not be a premise for you, but it definitely is one for me.

I come to the text, taking it at its word, and find that Paul demonstrates the human spirit is immortal.

I likewise find Jesus demonstrating that the spirits of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are still alive because "God is a God of the living," and he is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

And I also find Jesus demonstrating in an illustration of the spirits of Lazarus and the rich man being alive after death in the Paradise and Hades of Sheol.

And I choose to accept as truth what the NT clearly presents.

Yours is the kind of illogic with which I do not care to engage.

You're response is interesting and proves my point. Where in Scripture do you find Paul contradicting himself demonstrating "the human spirit is immortal"?

Here are Paul's words, no commentary, just Paul's words

13 I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;
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. (1 Tim. 6:13-16 KJV)

Where do you find Jesus demonstrating that the "spirits" of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are alive? The word spirits is not found anywhere in the passage.

Where do you see Jesus demonstrating the "spirits" of Lazarus and the Rich Man being alive? The word spirit is not found anywhere in the parable.

You see, you have an unestablished premise. You claim these are living spirits, but not one passage speaks of spirits. How does that prove your point?

You said you come to the text taking it at its word. It seems to me you're letting your presuppositions determine how you interact with the text. You already believe that people live on after death and are reading it into the text. It's normal. We all do it.

 

[Butch5]

Is there some way to understand this reply as meaning something other than "the Bible isn't to be believed?" It's beginning to look like this conversation is stalemated thanks to the idea that everything in the Bible is a just a metaphor.

Not at all. The Bible is accurate and to be believed. We just have to remember to whom it was written and what they believed, not what we believe. We have a completely different worldview than they did in ancient Judea.

Just think about how things change over time. The statement, "I'm gay" meant something very different 100 years ago than it does today. Someone reading that in an old book and not knowing that might not understand what the writer meant. That's only 100 years. Now imagine 2000 or more and a different culture. Look at all of the problems Paul had with the church in Corinth. It was a church composed primarily of Greeks. They had a much different culture than that of the Jews and there are quite a lot of things they didn't understand. They abused the gifts, the Eucharist, they were dividing in cliques, just as they did in their culture. Modern Western society thinks like the Greeks and is trying to interpret a book written in an Eastern culture. It's a clash of cultures. If we really want to understand the Bible we need to do so from an Eastern mindset, not a Greek one. The best way to know what the writer meant is to know what his audience believed.

 

[Albion]

Not at all. The Bible is accurate and to be believed. We just have to remember to whom it was written and what they believed, not what we believe. We have a completely different worldview than they did in ancient Judea.

...meaning that it ISN'T to be believed.

 

[hedrick]

Jesus demonstrated that the spirits of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are still alive in Matthew 22:31-32.

Let's look at this passage:

"And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is God not of the dead, but of the living.”"

Jesus is using them to show the resurrection, not disembodied spirits.

 

[Butch5]

...meaning that it ISN'T to be believed.

It is. But again, it wasn't written to a 21st century western world

 

[Albion]

It is. But again, it wasn't written to a 21st century western world

That God of ours should have thought of that before giving mankind of all ages, times, and locations the knowledge of His eternal truths.

 

[Butch5]

People argue that man has an immortal soul, yet the Scriptures don't say that anywhere. In fact, they say the opposite. God told Adam that He was dust. He said that man is flesh. Moses tells us how God created man and says it was from the dust of the ground. Paul calls man mortal. Over and over the Bible tells us that man is a physical being and nowhere does it say he has an immortal soul.

Think about this for a moment. What has God promised the believer? Is it not eternal life? What earthly purpose would there be for God to promise eternal life to people who already have eternal life? If man was immortal there is absolutely no purpose for God to promise eternal life to the believer.

 

[Butch5]

That God of ours should have thought of that before giving mankind of all ages, times, and locations the knowledge of His eternal truths.

I'm sure He did. If I gave you a dictionary in a language you didn't understand, would that make it untrue? No, you'd just have to learn the language to understand it.

 

[Albion]

I'm sure He did.

...and yet He want ahead and misinformed us anyway?

 

[Clare73]

I don’t think Philippians has anything to do with immortality. Paul expects to be wit the Lord in resurrection.

Is that consistent to you with his language?
Agreed, it's not his point, but it is nevertheless demonstrated in the passage.

If to live is Christ, why would he view time in the grave as gain over "living being Christ"?
Where's the gain over, the "more than," in dying, when to live is Christ?
The only gain-over-living by the death of his body is that his spirit will be with Christ immediately, before the resurrection.
And that means his spirit is immortal.

The other two passages are not from Paul.

It matters not.

If Paul received his teaching from Jesus Christ and no man, including himself, (Galatians 1:11-12), the other three passages relating to Jesus, which demonstrate the immortality of the human spirit, show us what Paul believed, which is the question here.

 

[Butch5]

...and yet He want ahead and misinformed us anyway?

He didn't misinform anyone. I think He just expects us to put a little effort into figuring it out. Most of the Christians I know don't pick up a Bible between Sundays, let alone do any serious study. If He expects us to totally change our way of living is it too outrageous to expect us to do more than a cursory reading of His word?

 

[Clare73]

You're response is interesting and proves my point. Where in Scripture do you find

Thanks. . .but no, thanks.

 

[Albion]

He didn't misinform anyone.

If your theory were correct, that his revelation given to mankind was understandable and/or applied only to the people of that time and place, there is no way to deny that He willingly misled us who are from a different time and culture.

 

[Clare73]

Let's look at this passage:

"And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is God not of the dead, but of the living.”"

Jesus is using them to show the resurrection, not disembodied spirits.

Granted, but in the context of what the Sadducees believed--no immortality of the spirit and, therefore, no resurrection--Jesus demonstrated immortality of the spirit (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are living) as proof of the resurrection.

 

[Butch5]

Is that consistent to you with his language?

If to live is Christ, why would he view time in the grave as gain over living being Christ?
The only gain in the death of his body is that he will be with Christ immediately, before the resurrection.
And that means his spirit is immortal.
It matters not.

Only if one believes in an immortal soul. If the dead are dead, then, as the Bible says, the have no knowledge, they know thing. Thus they would have no knowledge of the passage of time. To them, one moment they are alive and the next they know they are standing at the resurrection. So, it would seem instantaneous to the one who died. They have no knowledge of time between the two. So, for Paul, one minute he is here and the next thing he knows is he is standing at the resurrection.

 

[Butch5]

If your theory were correct, that his revelation given to mankind was understandable and/or applied only to the people of that time and place, there is no way to deny that He willingly misled us who are from a different time and culture.

Not at all. The Scriptures were written to who they were written to. It's our job to understand them. God could explain the Bible to each one of us. Why doesn't He? He could make it so every Church believed the truth. Churches believe opposing doctrines, someone is wrong. Why doesn't God make it so all believe the same thing? I don't know. He chose to do give the Scriptures when He thought appropriate. I don't understand why people think they can take a book that is thousands of years old, thousands of pages, read it, and have a full and complete understanding of what it says. I mean most don't even understand Revelation.

 

[Butch5]

Thanks. . .but no, thanks.

That's my point Claire, it's not there. It's something you believe and are bringing to the text. I used to believe the same thing and I saw it in all the same passages. It wasn't until I began to question if what I believed was really what Scripture taught that I didn't see it any more.

 

[Clare73]

Only if one believes in an immortal soul. If the dead are dead, then, as the Bible says, the have no knowledge, they know thing. Thus they would have no knowledge of the passage of time. To them, one moment they are alive and the next they know they are standing at the resurrection. So, it would seem instantaneous to the one who died. They have no knowledge of time between the two. So, for Paul, one minute he is here and the next thing he knows is he is standing at the resurrection.

< sigh >