Spirit and Soul

[Guest]

I've often heard that the human consists of three parts. Body, Soul and Spirit.

Body is a simple enough concept. But Soul and Spirit are a little fuzzy to me.

Does anyone know what the differences between the two are?

[Guest]

No. Nobody does.

Some claim the soul is the immaterial part of you, "the REAL YOU" ---- the conscious part, and that the "higher" animals have one too. The spirit is supposed to be the part which can perceive spiritual things --- be aware of God, etc. This concept of the soul is not derived from the Bible, but from Greek philosophical thought. This concept had crept into Christianity, very early in the history of the church, through early gnosticism, and some of the second century Christian Greek teachers.

Others say your spirit is "the REAL YOU", and that the soul is merely, your mind, will, and emotions".

From the beginning of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word, "nepesh", often translated as "soul" has a quite different meaning. The first occurence of the word follows:

Ge 1:20 And God said, "Let the waters bring forth swarms of living souls, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens."

Of course the translations do not translate "nepesh" as "souls" in this context, but as "creatures".

Have you ever heard of a "dead soul"? It's in the Bible!

Nu 6:6 All the days that he separates himself to the LORD he shall not go near a dead soul.

Of course the translators do not translate "nepesh" as "soul" in this context. They they translate it as "body". The better traslators translate it as "person" ---- much better but not quite accurate either, since mammals are also said to be "nepesh".

Interstingly , when it comes to translating the creation of man, then the King James translators chose to translate "nepesh" as "soul".

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. AV

Any idea why? Could it be the Greek influence on the translators?

YLT and ESV use "creature" here, too. The NASB, NIV, NKJV, RSV, and NRSV translated "nepesh" as "being". This I believe to be the best translation of the word.

Notice in Gen 2:7, man doesn't receive a "soul"; he becomes a living "soul". Or better, he becomes a living being. First God creates a body from the earth. Then He breathes into the body the "breath" or "spirit" of life, and the man becomes a living being. To illustrate this with an equation:

Body + spirit ---> soul

The scripture says that the human spirit returns to the God that gave it.
This spirit is not the person, but the life of the person.

As far as being "living beings" is concerned, we are no different from the "higher" animals, except that man has been created in the image of God, and therefore, unlike the "higher" animals, we can become conscious of God.

When we die, the spirit of life is gone from our body, and all that is left is the body. There is no consciousness after death, since the spirit of life is not a person, nor is the body by itself a person. But somehow when the two are combined in the way that only God can do it, a "living soul" or a conscious being is produced.

We die like beasts.

Ecclesiates 3:19 For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts ...

However, there is one major difference. God is going to raise every human being from the dead. Somehow, by a means only God knows or can carry out, the same individual who died will be raised again.

[Guest]

Thanks, Paidion,
Looks like my confusion on the subject is a sensible confusion. There's so much back and forth of what is the soul and the spirit, no wonder there's so much confusion.

Thanks a million. Very informative!

[Guest]

But Soul and Spirit are a little fuzzy to me.


My understanding is that the soul is the mind and the spirit is our heart. I think Paul used the phrase "inner man" more then once which suggests we have an intelligent spirit man capable of having a relationship with the Lord upon our death.
I think OT terminology may have not had a complete revelation about this.
After all Paul said "to die is gain" which does'nt sound like he expected to sleep a couple of thousand years.

[Guest]

After all Paul said "to die is gain" which does'nt sound like he expected to sleep a couple of thousand years.

Well... our Lord used the term "sleep" in referring to death.
I agree with you that Paul didn't expect to sleep in death for over 2000 years. He expected Jesus to return, and thus his personal resurrection, in his own life time.

However, what practical difference does it make. Paul is dead, and not experiencing anything. The next thing Paul will know is being alive in the resurrection. Upon his rising, Paul will not know whether he was dead for a year, 50 years, 2000 years, or 90000 years. He will know only if he is told.

The proof texts used to try to show immediate consciousness after death, in their contexts, deal with one's personal resurrection. Here are two examples:

Jesus said:

Mark 12:27 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken! NIV

When we look at the context, we see that this is part of Jesus' answer to the Saducees who disbelieved in the resurrection. Jesus was saying that if God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, they are not going to stay dead, for He is the God of the living.

And now for one that is not in the Bible, but has been misquoted for so long, that everyone thinks it is:

To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

If that had been what Paul had written, that would pretty much settle it in favour of immediate consciousness after death.

Here is the entire passage --- again dealing with the resurrection:

2 Corinthians 5:1-8

51 Lo! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.
]1 For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Paul imagines living in the body to be analogous to living in a tent. So he calls our body our "earthly tent". He thinks of the resurrected body as a "heavenly building" which God prepares for us, a permanent structure.

2 Here indeed we groan, and long to put on our heavenly dwelling,

We can get pretty tired living in this decaying body. We long to have our permanent heavenly body.

3 so that by putting it on we may not be found naked.

When we die, we don't just lose our "earthly tent" and go to heaven as a disembodied spirit. In the resurrection, we will be raised imperishable.

4 For while we are still in this tent, we sigh with anxiety; not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

Paul makes a similar statement in different words. Now he compares dying to "being unclothed" and being raised again as "being further clothed."
"Not that we would be unclothed" --- not that we would be disembodied.
"that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life," seems to be very similar language to "This mortal must put on immortality" I Cor 15:53. Paul wrote the latter statement in the context of the his teaching about our resurrection:

51 Lo! I tell you a secret. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. I Cor 15:51,52

Continuing with 2 Corinthians 5:
5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.
6 So we are always of good courage; we know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord,
7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.

As long as we live in this corruptible body, we are away from the Lord.

8 We are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

Paul states that we would rather be absent from this present corruptible body and to be present with the Lord in the immortal body which we will receive when we are raised from death at the coming of the Lord.

[Guest]

Greetings,

Well... our Lord used the term "sleep" in referring to death. I agree with you that Paul didn't expect to sleep in death for over 2000 years. He expected Jesus to return, and thus his personal resurrection, in his own life time.

However, what practical difference does it make. Paul is dead, and not experiencing anything. The next thing Paul will know is being alive in the resurrection. Upon his rising, Paul will not know whether he was dead for a year, 50 years, 2000 years, or 90000 years. He will know only if he is told.

Rev 20 (NKJV)
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

I take exception to you based on this text.
According to it: martyred souls currently live, judge, and reign with Christ in heaven (with Paul among the martyred, being beheaded for his testimony to Christ, circa 67AD). Paul and every other soul (person) who has died a martyrs death have special places of prominence in heaven at this very second: They LIVE! and reign with Christ!

And now for one that is not in the Bible, but has been misquoted for so long, that everyone thinks it is:

To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

If that had been what Paul had written, that would pretty much settle it in favour of immediate consciousness after death.

Correct! (on what Paul actually wrote).
2 Co 5 (NKJV)
6 So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. 7 For we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

Question: What's verse 8b about? (I don't completely follow ol' Paul here).

Philippians 1 (NKJV)
19 For I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayer and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, 20 according to my earnest expectation and hope that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor; yet what I shall choose I cannot tell. 23 For I am hard-pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better. 24 Nevertheless to remain in the flesh is more needful for you. 25 And being confident of this, I know that I shall remain and continue with you all for your progress and joy of faith, 26 that your rejoicing for me may be more abundant in Jesus Christ by my coming to you again.

The "gain" of verse 21 is the "to [die and] be with Christ" of verse 23. Paul sees his being with Christ as happening immediately upon his death (and seems to anticipate his martyrdom, "magnified in my body...by death," verse 20). If Paul taught soul-sleep; he didn't to the Philippians!

Paul states that we would rather be absent from this present corruptible body and to be present with the Lord in the immortal body which we will receive when we are raised from death at the coming of the Lord.

Paul wasn't teaching (writing about) about an intermediate state in this section. He compared and contrasted the present bodily state with the final (eschatological).
Rick