Is "soul sleep" a Scriptural doctrine?

[glorydaz]

No, man does not have an outer court, an inner court, and the innermost court like the Jewish Temple.

The three parts of man can be likened to the Jewish Temple.

The body is the outer court.
The soul is the inner court. Who we are as a person.
The spirit is the innermost court whereby we commune with God....spirit to Spirit.

Man has a body (the physical part of a man),

Yes, our tent, a temporary covering.

man has a spirit (the life-force),

Well, we know the spirit of man knows the things of man, so it's more than a life force wouldn't you think?

1 Corinthians 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.​

We also know the Spirit teaches us spiritual things....Spirit to spirit. We worship God in spirit. That innermost temple where the priest met God.

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.​

and man has a soul (the being/identity).

Yes, that part of man that makes us an individual. Our mind, will and emotions.

Modern medicine has proven that you can swap out the parts of the body.
The Bible says that God can swap out the spirit.

LOL I'm not sure about "swapping out", but He certainly renews a right spirit in us. Psalm 51:10

The only thing that can't be swapped out is the soul.

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.​

Romans 12:2 And we were carnal....not anymore, though.

We are being conformed ....body, soul, and spirit. 1 Thessalonians 5:23

 

[jamie]

Sleep, for instance, is used many different ways in the Bible.

"Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up." (John 11:11)

"Then Jesus said to them plainly, 'Lazarus is dead.'" (John 11:14)

What did Jesus mean by sleep?

Can a person with eternal life die?

 

[JudgeRightly]

"Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up." (John 11:11)

"Then Jesus said to them plainly, 'Lazarus is dead.'" (John 11:14)

What did Jesus mean by sleep?

Can a person with eternal life die?

Jesus was clearly saying that Lazarus was dead.

"Then Jesus said to them plainly..."

Meaning he wasn't speaking plainly prior. He was using sleep as a euphemism for death.

 

[Rosenritter]

Now isn't that odd?

It just goes to show that people read into the Bible those things that support their own premise....like soul sleep which most of Christendom denies.

I see overwhelming evidence that supports exactly what I say....to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. You argue that somewhere unseen in that text is thousands of years of sleeping and unconsciousness. There is NO EVIDENCE to support that conclusion. I submit you do that quite often. Rejecting plain verses and adding your own reasoning.

That's a wonderful example, thank you. Can you please show us ANY bible version anywhere that says to be absent from the body IS to be present with the Lord? You've taken your own interpretation and now when you hear the passage your mind substitutes different words.

2 Corinthians 5:8 KJV
(8) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

The word "and" is a word indicating a sequence, not an equivalence. Glory, you're guilty of the exact thing that you just tried to point at me.

 

[Rosenritter]

Man is not dust. The fact that God used dust to form man doesn't mean man is dust.

Genesis 3:19 KJV
(19) In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Glory says man is not dust, God said man is dust. God must not have known what he was talking about?

 

[Bright Raven]

Genesis 3:19 KJV
(19) In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Glory says man is not dust, God said man is dust. God must not have known what he was talking about?

Open Theology?

 

[glorydaz]

"Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up." (John 11:11)

"Then Jesus said to them plainly, 'Lazarus is dead.'" (John 11:14)

What did Jesus mean by sleep?

Can a person with eternal life die?

Death of the body is also known as "sleep".

 

[glorydaz]

That's a wonderful example, thank you. Can you please show us ANY bible version anywhere that says to be absent from the body IS to be present with the Lord? You've taken your own interpretation and now when you hear the passage your mind substitutes different words.

2 Corinthians 5:8 KJV
(8) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

The word "and" is a word indicating a sequence, not an equivalence. Glory, you're guilty of the exact thing that you just tried to point at me.

Ah very clever. However....I fail to see your point. Of course we have to leave our body before we go to be with the Lord. :think:

Paul knows and is confident that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. Therefore, the following verse is showing the exact opposite (rather). There is no room for an interim condition there.

2 Cor. 5:6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.​

 

[glorydaz]

Genesis 3:19 KJV
(19) In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Glory says man is not dust, God said man is dust. God must not have known what he was talking about?

Odd you should ignore this point just so you could ridicule me about "dust". God formed all the animals from dust, too. But they didn't remain dust any more than we did. We were taken from the dust and shall return to the dust. As the verse plainly says.

Of course God is a spirit...invisible. Yet, the Word, who was WITH GOD and was God became flesh and dwelt among us as a human being in a flesh and blood body. It was only after He rose from the dead that He had a spiritual body. That spiritual body is exactly like the spiritual bodies we will have. Not like some spirit body that God the Father has or the Holy Spirit has.

So, no, a "spiritual body" is NOT the proper way to reference God.

This is actually what I said. I'm surprised you cherry pick my quote so you can mock me. By doing so, though, you miss my point (once again).

Man is not dust. The fact that God used dust to form man doesn't mean man is dust.

In fact, Paul tells us man is body, soul, and spirit. Why do you discount this verse?

YOUR whole spirit, soul, and body. We are NOT just a body formed from the dust of the ground.

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.​

 

[glorydaz]

Open Theology?

Nothing to do with open theology. It's a matter of not paying attention to what was actually said.

 

[Rosenritter]

Open Theology?

I guess God would have to "learn" later that he wasn't right...

 

[Rosenritter]

Death of the body is also known as "sleep".

More accurately, any death that you can be raised from is known as "sleep." There's no such thing as death that leaves a living body.

 

[Rosenritter]

Ah very clever. However....I fail to see your point. Of course we have to leave our body before we go to be with the Lord. :think:

Paul knows and is confident that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. Therefore, the following verse is showing the exact opposite (rather). There is no room for an interim condition there.

2 Cor. 5:6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.​

Using Paul outside the context of Paul? Paul says that we are with the Lord when we are changed and given an incorruptible body. 1 Th 4:17. There is no such thing as existing in a state without a body.

1 Corinthians 15:42-44 KJV
(42) So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
(43) It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
(44) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

"Absent from the body" is death. The dead are not with the Lord, but the dead are raised to be with the Lord at his coming.

1 Corinthians 15:54 KJV
(54) So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Perhaps if you deny the resurrection of the dead it would seem that there is "no room for interim condition" ... do you deny the resurrection? In practical terms you do, because you are saying there is NO NEED for the resurrection for us to be "happy and at home with the Lord" (my paraphrase).

Please answer this question straight Glory: For those believers that are currently perished, do they NEED the resurrection to be happy and at home with the Lord? YES / NO

Spoiler

1 Corinthians 15:16-19 KJV
(16) For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
(17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
(18) Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
(19) If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

If we will be raised from death, then while we are home in the body (alive in this corruptible frame) we know we are still absent from the Lord. We are willing to die in faith and to be absent from this body (to perish) because we know we shall be raised, and meet him in the air, and so shall we ever be present with the Lord.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV
(13) But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
(14) For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
(15) For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
(16) For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
(17) Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
(18) Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

When you take one or two verses, ignore the context of those verses, contradict the very same other from other epistles, deny the rest of scripture that speaks on the subject to the contrary, and use that to support your theory, it's no wonder that you cannot see the original meaning any longer.

If the departed dead were being comforted in heaven already, don't you think that Paul would have told the Thessalonians such a thing had he known it? After you get done sending your memo to God about how he botched Genesis, make sure to instruct Paul as well.

 

[Rosenritter]

Glory, if you are still considering "Infant Salvation" would you please send some bounds on what you consider the "universal infant salvation" range? Children prove that they can lie not too much longer after they can speak, and they prove they can be disobedient not longer after they have proven that they understand the word "no."

If we were to pick an arbitrary number like "5" (children don't learn the meaning of the word "no" or to speak until age 5, right?) then even if one accepts the "Universal Infant Salvation" doctrine (assuming the rest of what I think you have said you believe?) that still leaves trillions of six-year-olds being tortured for an infinity. And then there's the seven-year-olds. And you and I both know that "5" was being generous.

So besides the problem that has been created (and still unanswered) that "Universal Infant Salvation" actually raises murder to a selfless moral act, it seems that your proposes solution only throws a mostly ineffective band-aid on a gaping wound. The scenario still flies in the face of the meaning of a Loving God, besides all of the other scripture gymnastics required such as reading "death" as "life" and "perish" as "torture."

I really don't understand how you reconcile this with yourself. Nor why you are unwilling (and determinedly so) to consider what naturally follows if one reads the scripture with the mind that previously-written scripture is intended as its foundation, and that God and his prophets were not ignorant or mistaken, that words should mean what they usually mean unless context redefines otherwise. The "moral problems" existing with your current interpretation would vanish, for example.

 

[jamie]

Death of the body is also known as "sleep".

The death of a person who has eternal life is known as sleep.

Those with eternal life will be raised at Christ's coming.

These have already been judged.

The rest of the dead will be in the second resurrection for judgment.

 

[glorydaz]

More accurately, any death that you can be raised from is known as "sleep." There's no such thing as death that leaves a living body.

I said NOTHING about a living body. So, what is more accurate about your comment?

 

[glorydaz]

Using Paul outside the context of Paul? Paul says that we are with the Lord when we are changed and given an incorruptible body. 1 Th 4:17. There is no such thing as existing in a state without a body.

1 Corinthians 15:42-44 KJV
(42) So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
(43) It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
(44) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

"Absent from the body" is death. The dead are not with the Lord, but the dead are raised to be with the Lord at his coming.

1 Corinthians 15:54 KJV
(54) So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Perhaps if you deny the resurrection of the dead it would seem that there is "no room for interim condition" ... do you deny the resurrection? In practical terms you do, because you are saying there is NO NEED for the resurrection for us to be "happy and at home with the Lord" (my paraphrase).

Please answer this question straight Glory: For those believers that are currently perished, do they NEED the resurrection to be happy and at home with the Lord? YES / NO

Spoiler

1 Corinthians 15:16-19 KJV
(16) For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
(17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
(18) Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
(19) If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

If we will be raised from death, then while we are home in the body (alive in this corruptible frame) we know we are still absent from the Lord. We are willing to die in faith and to be absent from this body (to perish) because we know we shall be raised, and meet him in the air, and so shall we ever be present with the Lord.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV
(13) But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
(14) For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
(15) For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
(16) For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
(17) Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
(18) Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

When you take one or two verses, ignore the context of those verses, contradict the very same other from other epistles, deny the rest of scripture that speaks on the subject to the contrary, and use that to support your theory, it's no wonder that you cannot see the original meaning any longer.

If the departed dead were being comforted in heaven already, don't you think that Paul would have told the Thessalonians such a thing had he known it? After you get done sending your memo to God about how he botched Genesis, make sure to instruct Paul as well.

All that and you still don't understand that resurrection speaks of the body being raised.

I'm not sure if you're just deliberately acting like a fool or if you are one in fact. :think:

 

[glorydaz]

Glory, if you are still considering "Infant Salvation" would you please send some bounds on what you consider the "universal infant salvation" range? Children prove that they can lie not too much longer after they can speak, and they prove they can be disobedient not longer after they have proven that they understand the word "no."

Right, my grandson tells me there are monsters in the closet. Silly little lying bugger! And sometimes my other grandson refuses to sit down when I tell him to. Is he breaking some law? Do I report him to the proper authorities, or do I teach him to sit down? Is God going to throw them in hell for refusing to sit? Is that the 11th commandment?

I'm afraid, Rossen, that you are judging God according to your own standards. I call that humanistic. A humanist has no spiritual discernment, and so is stuck trying to explain away all the places you THINK scripture contradicts itself. Like...that one is an old Jewish fable. It could not possibly be true. Or the time frames just don't make sense. ETC.

You throw out the one for the many. :think:

If we were to pick an arbitrary number like "5" (children don't learn the meaning of the word "no" or to speak until age 5, right?) then even if one accepts the "Universal Infant Salvation" doctrine (assuming the rest of what I think you have said you believe?) that still leaves trillions of six-year-olds being tortured for an infinity. And then there's the seven-year-olds. And you and I both know that "5" was being generous.

What in the world are you talking about? God knows when each person chooses EVIL over good. There are not going to be trillions of innocent children placed in hell by our great God. Shall He not do right? Apparently, you think this is a difficult call for Him.

So besides the problem that has been created (and still unanswered) that "Universal Infant Salvation" actually raises murder to a selfless moral act, it seems that your proposes solution only throws a mostly ineffective band-aid on a gaping wound. The scenario still flies in the face of the meaning of a Loving God, besides all of the other scripture gymnastics required such as reading "death" as "life" and "perish" as "torture."

Golly gee.....You just keep outsmarting yourself. How do you manage to make it through the day with all these hypotheticals weighing you down?

I really don't understand how you reconcile this with yourself.

Obviously not. :chuckle:

Nor why you are unwilling (and determinedly so) to consider what naturally follows if one reads the scripture with the mind that previously-written scripture is intended as its foundation, and that God and his prophets were not ignorant or mistaken, that words should mean what they usually mean unless context redefines otherwise. The "moral problems" existing with your current interpretation would vanish, for example.

I don't have any moral problems with my "current interpretation". You do. I'm going to chalk this up to a total lack of spiritual discernment on your part.

You go from one problem to the next. Throw out a verse that is offered so you can present ten more. Those ten can be easily understood if your house had any kind of a firm foundation.

 

[glorydaz]

The death of a person who has eternal life is known as sleep.

Those with eternal life will be raised at Christ's coming.

These have already been judged.

The rest of the dead will be in the second resurrection for judgment.

Sleep is used many different ways in the Bible.

Genesis 28:11 And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took of the stones of that place, and put them for his pillows, and lay down in that place to sleep.

Genesis 2:21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

Psalm 13:3 Consider and hear me, O Lord my God: lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death;

Acts 13:36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Romans 13:11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.​

 

[jamie]

Sleep is used many different ways in the Bible.

Do the many different ways imply a state unconsciousness?

Do you believe those with eternal life die?