Against the Spiritual Monist

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Tex

New Member
Jun 29, 2014
199
7
0
The title is rather philosophical, but it seems to be a necessary discussion for today. Of what is the human being made? In Christian circles, it seems to be largely accepted that the essence of a person, the fundamental aspect of what a person is, is the soul and the soul alone. The body is called a shell in which our souls are contained, and at death, we continue existence as a soul. This is an absolute logical blunder and has led to many, many greater heresies in Christian history. Human beings are not essentially souls, but instead we are essentially body AND soul. God intentionally created mankind with bodies as a gift that adds yet another dimension to how God can love us.

First, the problem: people are not souls. While many would disagree and even cite biblical passages supporting "people are souls", its just not true, and it is actually pretty easy to understand. If I walk up to little Timmy and break his nose, I have hurt little Timmy. I have not simply "damaged little Timmy's property", I have hurt a person. Although this isn't the most definitive of proofs, it still communicates that our bodies are not simply property or physical representation, but they body is 100% us.

Church history has multiple different heretics that operate off of the premise "a person is a soul"; the large category of "gnostics" (Naw-sticks, silent 'g') are the most notable. Gnostics believe that knowledge is the best thing, and certain levels of knowledge are required to enter into better and better afterlives. Pagan gnostics were able to pass the celestial spheres. If you knew this much, you could go past the moon. If you knew more, maybe venus? Christian gnostics took multiple different approaches. The "three levels of heaven" turned into blessings your soul would receive based on merits, the body became referred to as a prison, and in Manicheaism (Augustine's religion before Christianity), the body was from Satan, used to trap your soul in darkness. Later in time, there were the Albigensians, who preached that no one should procreate because that would make one more soul enter into original sin via the body. While gnosticism temporarily died, it seems now as if people from every denomination hold to some sort of gnosticism.

Modern Christian denominations are not gnostic (except LDS and a few charismatic/evangelical congregations), but still seem to be confused by the purpose of the body and it's necessity as a human being. Scripturally, our body is definitely the same as the self. New Testament verses are more sparse, but Romans 6:4 says "We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life." So lets look at Jesus post-resurrection and see how we are supposed to be. Luke 24:39 says "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

Jesus' glorified body was a physical body. And we are going to be resurrected in the same manner. God created mankind not as beings with property, but as one being, inherently body and soul. Jesus became man for salvation, but if "becoming man" only includes the body, why did Jesus have a body at all? The body is part of being a person.

Each person is a body and a soul. A body without a soul is nothing more than an animal, and a soul without a body is dead.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
53
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i tend to believe the word soul to include body and spirit. plato called the spirit, "soul"
 

Madad21

Boast in Christ
Dec 28, 2013
1,108
39
0
Tex said:
The title is rather philosophical, but it seems to be a necessary discussion for today. Of what is the human being made? In Christian circles, it seems to be largely accepted that the essence of a person, the fundamental aspect of what a person is, is the soul and the soul alone. The body is called a shell in which our souls are contained, and at death, we continue existence as a soul. This is an absolute logical blunder and has led to many, many greater heresies in Christian history. Human beings are not essentially souls, but instead we are essentially body AND soul. God intentionally created mankind with bodies as a gift that adds yet another dimension to how God can love us.

First, the problem: people are not souls. While many would disagree and even cite biblical passages supporting "people are souls", its just not true, and it is actually pretty easy to understand. If I walk up to little Timmy and break his nose, I have hurt little Timmy. I have not simply "damaged little Timmy's property", I have hurt a person. Although this isn't the most definitive of proofs, it still communicates that our bodies are not simply property or physical representation, but they body is 100% us.

Church history has multiple different heretics that operate off of the premise "a person is a soul"; the large category of "gnostics" (Naw-sticks, silent 'g') are the most notable. Gnostics believe that knowledge is the best thing, and certain levels of knowledge are required to enter into better and better afterlives. Pagan gnostics were able to pass the celestial spheres. If you knew this much, you could go past the moon. If you knew more, maybe venus? Christian gnostics took multiple different approaches. The "three levels of heaven" turned into blessings your soul would receive based on merits, the body became referred to as a prison, and in Manicheaism (Augustine's religion before Christianity), the body was from Satan, used to trap your soul in darkness. Later in time, there were the Albigensians, who preached that no one should procreate because that would make one more soul enter into original sin via the body. While gnosticism temporarily died, it seems now as if people from every denomination hold to some sort of gnosticism.

Modern Christian denominations are not gnostic (except LDS and a few charismatic/evangelical congregations), but still seem to be confused by the purpose of the body and it's necessity as a human being. Scripturally, our body is definitely the same as the self. New Testament verses are more sparse, but Romans 6:4 says "We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life." So lets look at Jesus post-resurrection and see how we are supposed to be. Luke 24:39 says "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."

Jesus' glorified body was a physical body. And we are going to be resurrected in the same manner. God created mankind not as beings with property, but as one being, inherently body and soul. Jesus became man for salvation, but if "becoming man" only includes the body, why did Jesus have a body at all? The body is part of being a person.

Each person is a body and a soul. A body without a soul is nothing more than an animal, and a soul without a body is dead.
Agreed

We are told to worship in three ways with all our heats minds and souls, but this is one worship in one being. The image of God in man is three in one, mind body and soul.

Jesus is not separate to the Father and the Father from the Spirit all three are one God and they work in unison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tex

Tex

New Member
Jun 29, 2014
199
7
0
aspen said:
i tend to believe the word soul to include body and spirit. plato called the spirit, "soul"
Perfectly acceptable, just not common. "Soul" is the whole person, "body" and "spirit" are parts. But, I actually argue that there are three distinct parts, body, soul, and spirit. It's not a big point of mine, but it makes sense that the crown of the physical world would be as trinity-like as possible.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
62
0
Idaho
Good thread, Tex.

You're right about the inseparable nature of our being that we are permanently fused, body and soul, and will be raised that way as Jesus is, with flesh and blood. Many books have been written and movies made about disembodied spirits and it seems to be the essential premise in the erroneous belief in ghosts and hauntings. So inextricably entrenched in our psyche is this idea of body and soul that we think of it like a hermit crab which goes from one shell to another and even contrive hilarious fictions about body swapping (think Freaky Friday).

And just as entrenched in Christian belief is the idea that when we die, our body stays here while our spirit ascends to heaven. Then when Jesus returns he will raise our bodies and we will repossess them. Mormons take this one step further with their belief that spirits in heaven are issued every time a baby is born and then it returns when the person dies. If indeed this is what Jesus taught, it would have caused quite a controversy among Jews who believed "the dead know nothing," (Ecclesiastes 9:5) From the perspective of the dead, final judgment follows immediately after death (Hebrews 9:27) because those who die no longer have a perception of time.

It's a difficult subject because of the way people have been raised to believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tex

Nomad

Post Tenebras Lux
Aug 9, 2009
995
143
43
58
Philadelphia, PA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This Vale Of Tears said:
And just as entrenched in Christian belief is the idea that when we die, our body stays here while our spirit ascends to heaven. Then when Jesus returns he will raise our bodies and we will repossess them.
How would you like to explain the following?

2Co 5:6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord,
2Co 5:7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.

2Co 5:8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

Php 1:23 I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better.
 

Tex

New Member
Jun 29, 2014
199
7
0
"Presence with the Lord" does not mean "experiencing the Lord". Paul is concerned with the distance between us and God.

If God made you choose running around on Earth doing good works or to be with Him in heaven, albeit unconscious, what would you choose?
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
62
0
Idaho
Tex, I agree that "present with the Lord" is something different than how it's popularly translated, the disembodied spirit belief. But as I'm arguing with another person on a different thread, the reason we're with Christ after death is because like Christ, we are no longer subject to time and the linear/temporal/sequential laws that govern our existence here. When one steps out of time, they don't wait for Christ's final triumph over Satan, the final judgment of man, and the assignment of eternal reward or punishment. It's already happened. Jesus alludes to this timelessness that exists outside of this sphere when he says, "Before Abraham was, I am." God exists from everlasting to everlasting and from his perspective, we've yet to see the final victory that's already been won. Christians have always believed in the communion of saints, the "cloud of witnesses" described in Hebrews 12. How is there a cloud of witnesses unless the saints have already gone to glory, even though from our perspective it hasn't happened yet? The logical explanation can be found only by imagining heaven as timeless.
 

Nomad

Post Tenebras Lux
Aug 9, 2009
995
143
43
58
Philadelphia, PA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Tex said:
"Presence with the Lord" does not mean "experiencing the Lord".
This is a distinction without a difference unless you flesh it out and substantiate your assertions with Scripture.

Paul is concerned with the distance between us and God.
Where exactly does Paul say this?

If God made you choose running around on Earth doing good works or to be with Him in heaven, albeit unconscious, what would you choose?
Let's see. I can choose bearing fruit to the glory of God and the benefit of fellow believers or I can choose to be temporarily "dead as a doornail." My desire is the same as the Apostle and I don't believe for second that the Apostle considers being with Christ as an unconscious state of being. I just don't see how that can be "far better."

Php 1:23 I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better.
Php 1:24 But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account.
Php 1:25 Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith,
Php 1:26 so that in me you may have ample cause to glory in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again.
 

Tex

New Member
Jun 29, 2014
199
7
0
@ This Vale of Tears

Actually, I think we are making the same argument. =)

While the body is dead, all senses cease, including being able to sense time. Relative to the deceased, the time between Resurrection and their own death is literally non-existent. I'm describing from the perspective of the Church Militant and you're describing from the Church Triumphant.

I love using traditional terminology!!!

@Nomad

Ecclesiates 9:5 and 9:10 do well to talk about death, showing indeed that "present with the Lord" does not mean "experiencing the Lord".

And you quoted where Paul says why he's concerned about distance. Php. 1:23. Christ is there. Therefore, it's better.

"If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me.", the opposite is death, in which there would be no labor. But, his desire is to be with Christ, because being with Christ is better.