CONTENTS
IMPORTANT PREFACE - 2021 DEDICATION - TO MY FATHER INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE - WHAT IS MAN? CHAPTER TWO - THE LIVING SOUL CHAPTER THREE - THE SPIRIT WITHIN MAN CHAPTER FOUR - IS THE SOUL IMMORTAL? CHAPTER FIVE - LIFE, DEATH AND RESURRECTION IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES CHAPTER SIX - A WEEKEND IN HELL OR IN THE TOMB? CHAPTER SEVEN - HELLFIRE AND DAMNATION CHAPTER EIGHT - THE WRATH TO COME CHAPTER NINE - THE DAY OF JUDGMENT APPENDIX SCRIPTURE INDEX |
INTRODUCTIONThe Bible Vs. the Traditions of Man
THUS HAVE YE MADE THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD OF NONE EFFECT BY YOUR TRADITION Matt 15:6 
HAT is a soul? Does man have a soul that departs when he dies? Do souls go to heaven, or burn eternally in hell? Where are the dead? The Bible has much to say about the soul, man, and his destiny. As our final authority in faith and practice the Bible alone must provide us with the definitive answers to such important questions. Many in our day claim to follow what the Bible says, but will their beliefs stand close scrutiny by the word of God? If we can be shown from the Bible that long held beliefs are in serious error, are we willing to give up our traditions and follow its teachings alone without regard to the scorn or ridicule that others may try to heap upon us?
The problem with many Christians in our day is their attitude toward the Bible. They read the Bible not expecting to be taught of God from it. Most get their teaching from pastors, preachers, and commentaries, and then go to the Bible only expecting to find proof for what they have already been taught. The problem begins when one comes across a passage of scripture which would seem to contradict what they have been taught. How many of us at times such as these reach for our commentaries or run back to our pastors to have these verses explained to us rather than calling out to God for help, wisdom, and understanding. This is not how it should be. Each Christian has a command from God to 'Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.' 2 Tim 2:15. Every Christian needs to ask themselves if they know for surewhy they believe what they profess to believe, and to 'be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear' 1 Pet 3:15 Notice what is involved in the above:
|
|
The fact that so many in our day are prone to accept a teaching just because it's 'orthodox', or comes from a 'reliable source' is very troubling in light of the apostle Paul's words:
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. Acts 20:29-31 The apostle Peter warns of the same:
|
Expelling the Money Changers from the Temple
|
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 2 Pet 2:1-2
Paul and Peter both knew that apostasy would creep into the church very shortly after the deaths of themselves and the other apostles. Even a rudimentary study of church history will show that this is exactly what took place. Christianity absorbed more and more from its surrounding cultures and religions until the pure stream of truth was thoroughly polluted. The pollution came from many sources, but Greek philosophy was in many ways the most damaging. The reformation helped undo some of this damage, but did not address many other issues. What we are left with today is a legacy of theology which was developed to answer questions raised by platonic and neo-platonic philosophy, rather than explicate scripture. What is most troubling about this is the average Christians reluctance and ambivalence in asking questions about the origins of some of these teachings.
Greek philosophy taught that the soul or psyche of man represented an inner man, a higher reality, or the true self. They came to view the soul as something which could be separated from body at death and survived to go on to a higher plane or reality. This concept of man as a dichotomy (body and soul) or a trichotomy (body, soul, and spirit) has become more or less the accepted view of all mainline Christian denominations. In contrast, those who hold to the teaching that man does not have an immortal soul, that he is by nature a mortal being who must rely on God alone for any future hope of life, are often considered 'fanatics', 'splinter groups', or 'cults'.
But what does the Bible really teach? Even those who strongly advocate the dichotomy or trichotomy of man admit that the concept is virtually nonexistent in the Old Testament. There was either a living soul who had the breath of life, or a dead soul without the breath of life. To the Hebrew way of thinking there could not be a person without a body. This is why the Biblical concept of an afterlife requires a resurrection. This concept was in stark contrast to the pagan religions that believed in the immortality of the soul requiring no resurrection.
Christianity sprang directly from Judaism and brought with it the teaching of the resurrection of the dead as the only hope for life after death. Are we to suppose that by the first century AD, Judaism and early Christianity had come to embrace Greek philosophy as the truth? Sadly, as we shall learn, Judaism had indeed begun to incorporate the teachings of Greek philosophy into its traditions in order to answer questions raised by the Platonists. The question we are concerned with is; did Jesus and the apostles accept and teach these same corrupt traditions?
It is the position of this author that Jesus and the apostles did not accept the teachings of pagan Greek philosophy and as such did not teach the concept that man is a dichotomy or a trichotomy. If such can be established as fact, then it must also be true that:
Greek philosophy taught that the soul or psyche of man represented an inner man, a higher reality, or the true self. They came to view the soul as something which could be separated from body at death and survived to go on to a higher plane or reality. This concept of man as a dichotomy (body and soul) or a trichotomy (body, soul, and spirit) has become more or less the accepted view of all mainline Christian denominations. In contrast, those who hold to the teaching that man does not have an immortal soul, that he is by nature a mortal being who must rely on God alone for any future hope of life, are often considered 'fanatics', 'splinter groups', or 'cults'.
But what does the Bible really teach? Even those who strongly advocate the dichotomy or trichotomy of man admit that the concept is virtually nonexistent in the Old Testament. There was either a living soul who had the breath of life, or a dead soul without the breath of life. To the Hebrew way of thinking there could not be a person without a body. This is why the Biblical concept of an afterlife requires a resurrection. This concept was in stark contrast to the pagan religions that believed in the immortality of the soul requiring no resurrection.
Christianity sprang directly from Judaism and brought with it the teaching of the resurrection of the dead as the only hope for life after death. Are we to suppose that by the first century AD, Judaism and early Christianity had come to embrace Greek philosophy as the truth? Sadly, as we shall learn, Judaism had indeed begun to incorporate the teachings of Greek philosophy into its traditions in order to answer questions raised by the Platonists. The question we are concerned with is; did Jesus and the apostles accept and teach these same corrupt traditions?
It is the position of this author that Jesus and the apostles did not accept the teachings of pagan Greek philosophy and as such did not teach the concept that man is a dichotomy or a trichotomy. If such can be established as fact, then it must also be true that:
- When a man dies, he is really dead. No part of the man survives. Neither his soul, nor his spirit depart to a spirit world.
- The only hope for the dead lies in a resurrection. Ultimately the believer's hope for any future life lies in the hands of his Creator.
- That the dead remain in their graves in an unconscious state, compared to sleep, until the resurrection day. They experience neither bliss nor pain.
- That the final state of the wicked is not eternal torment where an immortal soul burns for eternity, but a second death from which there is no hope for future life or resurrection.
I realize this goes 'against the grain' of common Christian thought in our day. I also realize that truth has cut across the grain of 'accepted truth' in every age. We are told of the ancient Greeks, some of which mocked Paul after hearing him preach the truth of the resurrection on Mars Hill, (Acts 17:32) and of Festus, who upon hearing of the same yelled in Paul's face 'Thou art beside thyself, much learning doth make thee mad!' (Acts 26:24).
The question may arise: How can two diametrically opposed views both claim to be based solely on Scripture? So often scriptural views are expressed in such a way as to make it seem as though all opposing viewpoints are so obviously in error that there can be no serious debate about the truth of the matter. Of course, talk is cheap, and unfortunately in our day much of what passes itself off as Biblical scholarship is nothing more than empty rhetoric which is too often accepted by like-minded people who take neither the time or effort to carefully study matters for themselves.
If this were simply a matter of providing 'proof-texts' to support our claim, then we can be sure that we'll get nowhere. Anyone with even a slightly open mind will admit that scriptures can be cited for any number of opposing viewpoints. To some this presents a real problem because they see the Bible as 'an old fiddle on which any old tune can be played'.
I believe the answer to this problem will never be found in simply an intellectual study of this subject. On a topic this important, it simply will not do to take the advice of a pastor, teacher, or commentator, and then run to the scriptures for 'proof-texts' to support our view.
Ultimately, it is the Holy Spirit which must guide us into all truth. While many will acknowledge that this is indeed what is needed, we have to ask; how many have really cried out to God for understanding and wisdom in determining truth? I believe it is only through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, diligent study, and much prayer that truth can be firmly established on controversial subjects such as this.
The question may arise: How can two diametrically opposed views both claim to be based solely on Scripture? So often scriptural views are expressed in such a way as to make it seem as though all opposing viewpoints are so obviously in error that there can be no serious debate about the truth of the matter. Of course, talk is cheap, and unfortunately in our day much of what passes itself off as Biblical scholarship is nothing more than empty rhetoric which is too often accepted by like-minded people who take neither the time or effort to carefully study matters for themselves.
If this were simply a matter of providing 'proof-texts' to support our claim, then we can be sure that we'll get nowhere. Anyone with even a slightly open mind will admit that scriptures can be cited for any number of opposing viewpoints. To some this presents a real problem because they see the Bible as 'an old fiddle on which any old tune can be played'.
I believe the answer to this problem will never be found in simply an intellectual study of this subject. On a topic this important, it simply will not do to take the advice of a pastor, teacher, or commentator, and then run to the scriptures for 'proof-texts' to support our view.
Ultimately, it is the Holy Spirit which must guide us into all truth. While many will acknowledge that this is indeed what is needed, we have to ask; how many have really cried out to God for understanding and wisdom in determining truth? I believe it is only through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, diligent study, and much prayer that truth can be firmly established on controversial subjects such as this.
WHAT'S AT STAKE?
Why should a study like this be considered important anyway? A slight amount of reasoning should be enough to convince anyone of its utmost importance. If we are wrong about the nature of man, then we will surely be wrong on the nature of man's salvation. If we are wrong concerning the afterlife, then we are in danger of misrepresenting the only hope which God holds out to mankind.
But the issues involved are even more serious than this. If in fact we have taught that man has an immortal soul contrary to the scriptures, then we have served to propagate Satan's very first lie; 'Ye shall surely not die', and we have ignored the apostle's warning not to be beguiled by 'philosophy and vain deceit'. If we have wrongly taught a heavenly hope immediately at death, then we have frustrated and made of little need the great truth of the resurrection. If we have taught that our infinite, just, wise, and loving Creator, will endlessly torment those who fail to worship him in this frail life, while the scriptures say no such thing, then we are guilty of the vilest possible slander against God's character.
But someone may ask; What if you're wrong? Won't this teaching serve only to send many souls, and possibly yourself to the very hell you teach doesn't exist?
To this, the only answer I can give, is that we must make sure we are not wrong. We must 'prove all things' and 'hold fast to that which is good' (1 Thes 5:21) This study was undertaken with the greatest gravity and soberness, believing that the God of the Bible really does grant truth to those who earnestly seek him. I have confidence and faith that God has done just that.
But I would ask the reader the same question; what if you are wrong?
Then you have spent your life maligning God's name and character to the whole creation. What makes you so sure that you are right? Is it because you just feel close to God? Has your Pastor told you what is true and what is not? Have you read some author who very convincingly agrees with you? Do you have a few proof texts?
And then ask yourself:
'If I'm wrong, are any of my excuses going to be of any merit when I stand before my Savior?' 'Have I ever really repented of shallow and superficial study of God's word?'
'Have I ever accepted the fact that God wrote the Bible to teach me, and not merely my pastor, the commentators, or Christian authors?'
'When I come to a passage in the Bible I don't understand, do I cry out to God for understanding, or do I reach for the commentary?'
'Do I know exactly why I believe the things I do?'
'Could I show a sincere seeker of truth, why I believe what I do from the scriptures?'
But the issues involved are even more serious than this. If in fact we have taught that man has an immortal soul contrary to the scriptures, then we have served to propagate Satan's very first lie; 'Ye shall surely not die', and we have ignored the apostle's warning not to be beguiled by 'philosophy and vain deceit'. If we have wrongly taught a heavenly hope immediately at death, then we have frustrated and made of little need the great truth of the resurrection. If we have taught that our infinite, just, wise, and loving Creator, will endlessly torment those who fail to worship him in this frail life, while the scriptures say no such thing, then we are guilty of the vilest possible slander against God's character.
But someone may ask; What if you're wrong? Won't this teaching serve only to send many souls, and possibly yourself to the very hell you teach doesn't exist?
To this, the only answer I can give, is that we must make sure we are not wrong. We must 'prove all things' and 'hold fast to that which is good' (1 Thes 5:21) This study was undertaken with the greatest gravity and soberness, believing that the God of the Bible really does grant truth to those who earnestly seek him. I have confidence and faith that God has done just that.
But I would ask the reader the same question; what if you are wrong?
Then you have spent your life maligning God's name and character to the whole creation. What makes you so sure that you are right? Is it because you just feel close to God? Has your Pastor told you what is true and what is not? Have you read some author who very convincingly agrees with you? Do you have a few proof texts?
And then ask yourself:
'If I'm wrong, are any of my excuses going to be of any merit when I stand before my Savior?' 'Have I ever really repented of shallow and superficial study of God's word?'
'Have I ever accepted the fact that God wrote the Bible to teach me, and not merely my pastor, the commentators, or Christian authors?'
'When I come to a passage in the Bible I don't understand, do I cry out to God for understanding, or do I reach for the commentary?'
'Do I know exactly why I believe the things I do?'
'Could I show a sincere seeker of truth, why I believe what I do from the scriptures?'
SCOPE OF THIS STUDY
When I first set out to write this study, it was never my intention to attempt anything approaching a detailed work. However, during the course of my research I became much more aware of the sheer amount of argumentation against the position I am taking. Most of this comes in apologetic or polemic form from evangelical 'cult-awareness' groups. Admittedly this makes me a bit nervous. No one wants to believe that a doctrine they are advocating will be labeled by most of evangelical Christianity as a 'cult teaching'. For this reason I spent much more time investigating what they have written, and much more time thoroughly testing and trying my own beliefs. In the course of so doing, I became even more convinced that the teachings expressed in this work are correct, sound, Biblical, and logical. But I also became aware that a brief discussion on this topic would never do. For this reason I determined to make the study much more detailed and comprehensive than I had originally planned. While I do not have the resources to do an exhaustive study, I have endeavored to be as complete as possible to the extent that God has given me understanding on this subject.
It is not my goal to merely state my view and provide simple proof-texts, but to thoroughly consider all arguments, both pro and con, in light of the scriptures. It is my conviction that once all the proof-texts which are offered in opposition to the views expressed here are examined, they will each be shown to fail in proving the argument they are set forth to maintain, and in many cases will establish the opposite as fact. If we find that one or more scriptures is in contradiction to what another scripture elsewhere teaches, we can be more than certain it is our understanding which if faulty, and not the scriptures.
This study has been approached with the assumption that the inspired scriptures NEVER contradict one another. In the course of this research I have found that an apparent contradiction in scripture can almost always be traced to one or more of the following causes:
It is not my goal to merely state my view and provide simple proof-texts, but to thoroughly consider all arguments, both pro and con, in light of the scriptures. It is my conviction that once all the proof-texts which are offered in opposition to the views expressed here are examined, they will each be shown to fail in proving the argument they are set forth to maintain, and in many cases will establish the opposite as fact. If we find that one or more scriptures is in contradiction to what another scripture elsewhere teaches, we can be more than certain it is our understanding which if faulty, and not the scriptures.
This study has been approached with the assumption that the inspired scriptures NEVER contradict one another. In the course of this research I have found that an apparent contradiction in scripture can almost always be traced to one or more of the following causes:
- A scripture mistranslated to conform to the bias of the translator - If a verse has been mistranslated from the way the original author wrote it, then it will certainly conflict with another clear teaching somewhere else in the Bible, although sometimes such a contradiction may not be immediately apparent. In this case the solution is to propose a translation which would seek to harmonize the scriptures and satisfy the immediate context of the verse, as well as the sense of the original language.
- A figurative passage taken literally - We are to assume that a passage means what it says in the clearest sense, unless the passage is clearly symbolical or allegorical. The scriptures themselves must be used to define their own terms and symbols. If a passage is symbolic, then we must never form from it a doctrine which would overturn the clear statements of scriptures which are doctrinal in nature.
- A literal passage taken figuratively - We are not at liberty to explain away any passage as symbolic unless its immediate context shows it to be so, or the same figure is used elsewhere in scripture in a symbolical sense.
- Scripture must always be compared to and corroborated by other scripture to arrive at its correct meaning. We can not use one verse of scripture to build an entire doctrine.
- Failure to account for context - This would include not only the immediate context in which a scripture is placed, but also its doctrinal context throughout the Bible, as well as its historical context. We need to ask ourselves; who was this written for? Why was it written? Was it written to address any specific issues? We must ask these questions consistently, even when the answers lead us to conclude that much cherished beliefs may be in error.
- Failure to understand the original languages of the scriptures- This is difficult because most people who read this (the author included), are not Greek or Hebrew scholars. We will however use whatever tools we have at our disposal to better understand the sense of the original languages. This not only applies to the allowed definitions for the words, but their context, as well as the figures of speech used in the original languages.
We must always keep in mind that we are almost two-thousand years from the source of these writings. Words and concepts have come down to us with significant baggage which was not part of the original writings. The word 'soul' for example conjures up a myriad of meanings most of which never had anything to do with the original use of the word. We are also living in a day of which it was warned that the apostasy would be at its peak
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils. 1 Tim 4:1
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 2 Tim 4:3-4
Knowing this, let us determine at the beginning to not let our preconceived ideas get in the way of what God is trying to show us.
Throughout this study, I may use the terms 'dualist' or 'traditionalist' to refer to those who teach the immortality of the soul. These terms are so applied because of the teaching that man consists of at least two parts; a body and soul, a body and spirit, a body, soul, and spirit, etc, and the prevalence of these beliefs in our day. I have quoted from others, not because their opinions are considered authoritative, but because they are good examples of common logic brought forth by opposing viewpoints. I have also made it a practice here, not to merely cite scripture references, but to put the actual scriptures themselves into the body of this work so that the reader may easily examine them without having to stop and look them up.
Finally, it is my earnest desire that some reading this will find peace, and possibly some answers to questions which have long troubled them. I hope that it may awake the interest and curiosity of some to dig deeper into the scriptures, to make the truth their own, and to learn of the 'depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God'
Throughout this study, I may use the terms 'dualist' or 'traditionalist' to refer to those who teach the immortality of the soul. These terms are so applied because of the teaching that man consists of at least two parts; a body and soul, a body and spirit, a body, soul, and spirit, etc, and the prevalence of these beliefs in our day. I have quoted from others, not because their opinions are considered authoritative, but because they are good examples of common logic brought forth by opposing viewpoints. I have also made it a practice here, not to merely cite scripture references, but to put the actual scriptures themselves into the body of this work so that the reader may easily examine them without having to stop and look them up.
Finally, it is my earnest desire that some reading this will find peace, and possibly some answers to questions which have long troubled them. I hope that it may awake the interest and curiosity of some to dig deeper into the scriptures, to make the truth their own, and to learn of the 'depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God'
LET GOD BE TRUE
AND EVERY MAN A LIAR
ROMANS 3:4
AND EVERY MAN A LIAR
ROMANS 3:4
