Theological Anthropology

The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). Section 2. (BADR Part 4)

The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). Section 2
Kairos Podcast Series 8: Biblical Anthropology, Death and Resurrection (BADR Part 4)

Question: In the light of the terrifying prospect of Sheol awaiting the dead, what led Israel to believe in the resurrection of the dead? What is the basis for Israel’s hope (Dan. 12:2-3)?

A. The OT gives two reasons. First, the OT affirms that Yahweh is the living God (Psa. 18:46; Jer. 23:36; Hos. 1:10). With the ever living God, death cannot be the sovereign power in the universe. Second, God’s reign of righteousness and justice extends even to Sheol (Job 26:6; Psa. 139:8; Prov. 15:11; Amos 9:2). Vindication will come at the final resurrection where the wicked will be punished and the righteous will be rewarded (Dan. 12:2). Continue reading “The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). Section 2. (BADR Part 4)”

The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). (BADR Part 3)

The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). (BADR Part 3)
Kairos Podcast Series 8: Biblical Anthropology, Death and Resurrection – BADR Part 3

Question: Some scholars believe that the Bible teaches not dualism but monism. Can you explain the competing view of monism?

Monism argues that according to the Bible, a human being is not divided into separate parts, i.e. body, soul, and spirit, but he exists as a unified or holistic self. The soul and the body are just different aspects of a person. Since existence entails bodily existence, there is no possibility of disembodied existence of the soul after death.

The purpose of this video is to show that monism contradicts the Bible which ascribes to the disembodied soul some forms of consciousness in the intermediate state between death and final resurrection.

You may view the video at:
The Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State). (BADR Part 3)

Related Post:
Old Testament Anthropology as “Dualistic Holism” or “Holistic Dualism”. (BADR Part 2)

Old Testament Anthropology as “Dualistic Holism” or “Holistic Dualism”. (BADR Part 2)

Old Testament Anthropology as “Dualistic Holism” or “Holistic Dualism”

𝐊𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐨𝐬 𝐏𝐨𝐝𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝟖: 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲, 𝐃𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 (𝐁𝐀𝐃𝐑 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝟐)

𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐢𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜. 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐰𝐨 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭? \

While the Bible affirms anthropological dualism, it also views human beings holistically where all their psychosomatic faculties work together as an integrated unity. However, biblical holism differs from philosophical holism or physicalism which considers the organism or anthropological entity as comprising a single substance or stuff. In contrast, biblical “functional holism” recognizes the integration and interrelation of all the parts in the existence and proper operation of the whole, without assuming that each part would necessarily cease to function or disintegrate into nothingness if the whole were broken up. To conclude, OT anthropology is both dualistic and holistic. It may be described as either biblical “holistic-dualism” or “dualistic holism”.

You may view the whole video at
Old Testament Anthropology as “Dualistic Holism” or “Holistic Dualism”

OT Anthropology: The Constituent Elements of Man. (BADR Part 1)

OT Anthropology: The Constituent Elements of Man. (BADR Part 1)
Kairos Podcast Series 8: Biblical Anthropology, Death and Resurrection (BADR Part 1).

A. Contemporary Criticism Against Biblical Dualistic Anthropology
Under the influence of prominent liberal scholars like Adolf Harnack in the early 20th century, the movement to decouple biblical theology from the alleged influence of Greek or Platonic philosophical influences gained momentum…

The distinctive usage of biblical anthropological terms should alert us to the need to examine Scripture on its own terms in order to resolve the controversy between holism and dualism. This post shall examine closely how the terms which describe the constituent elements of man are used in the OT…

B. Man’s Constituent Elements
Bāsār, Flesh
Note that flesh does not connote the principle of sin or the man’s unregenerate nature. It connotes a nature which is frail and transient: “all flesh is grass” (Isa. 40:6; Psa. 78:39). However, “flesh” is open to God’s positive influence so that a heart of stone could be changed into a heart of flesh, something which is soft and yielded to God (Ezek. 36:26).” Continue reading “OT Anthropology: The Constituent Elements of Man. (BADR Part 1)”

All that is Solid Melts into Air: The Recentred but Empty Self

Philosophical and Social Origins of Identity Politics and the LGBTQ Sexual Revolution. Part 2.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
W.B. Yeats, The Second Coming

A) Loss of meaningful sacred order and providence
Since antiquity, people acknowledged that there is a natural order of law and morals. Life is best lived when it is lived in accordance with the requirements of natural order. Among the Greeks, the Stoics taught that man must live in harmony with the rational and purposive order in nature. Ancient Israel also acknowledged a natural order, one that is implanted into creation by the Creator. According to the sages of ancient Israel, knowledge of God comes from experiencing God’s activity in the world. Faith in God’s providence means trusting in the reliability of the creation which the benevolent God has ordered to support human life and guide man in his moral knowledge and action. Gerhard von Rad explains, “This order [of creation] was, indeed, simply there and could, in the last resort, speak for itself. The fact that it quietly but reliably worked towards a balance in the ceaselessly changing state of human relationships ensured that it was experienced over and over again as a beneficent force. In it, however, Yahweh himself was at work in so far as he defended goodness and resisted evil. It was he who was present as an ordering and upholding will in so far as he gave a beneficent stability to life and kept it open to receive his blessings.”¹ Continue reading “All that is Solid Melts into Air: The Recentred but Empty Self”

1
Gerhard von Rad, Wisdom in Israel (SCM, 1972), pp. 191-192.

The Vanished Soul and Quest for the Authentic Self in Modern Western Thought

Philosophical and Social Origins of Identity Politics and the LGBTQ Sexual Revolution. Part 1.

Due to the influence of the Bible, the majority of thinkers in Western society for centuries have acknowledged the reality of the soul which is distinct and yet intimately linked to the body. According to the Christian tradition, what we refer to as body and soul are aspects of one unitary reality and process, that is, the body and soul are viewed as a psychophysical unit, the human person. The physical body changes through time but the soul persists as the person interacts continuously with the world. It is the continuity of the soul, with its faculties of intellect and will, which ensures coherence and defines the personal identity of the person.¹

Knowledge of the soul is inseparable from knowledge of God.² However, from the 17th century, many Western scholars and scientists began to reject both the idea of God and the soul. Indeed, the soul has become absent or irrelevant in contemporary intellectual discourse. How did this happen?

To answer this question, we begin with the French philosopher, Rene Descartes. Continue reading “The Vanished Soul and Quest for the Authentic Self in Modern Western Thought”

1
Due to constrains of a short article, the words “soul”, “self” and “mind” are used in this post interchangeably in the light of overlaps in their semantic domain. For example, the immortality of the soul is linked to the immateriality of the mind and the mind is a power of the soul. However, we should be sensitive to the nuances of each thinker in how he uses these words.
2
John Calvin notes, “true and sound wisdom, consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. But, while joined by many bonds, which one precedes and brings forth the other is not easy to discern. In the first place, no one can look upon himself without immediately turning his thoughts to the contemplation of God, in whom he “lives and moves”… Again, it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God’s face, and then descends from contemplating him to scrutinize himself.” John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Westminster, 1960), Book 1.1.1, 2.

Biblical Dualism and the Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State)

Death, Resurrection and Life Everlasting DRLE Pt.2

Death involves disintegration of a person’s vital power, cessation of bodily life, and separation of the body and the soul (nepeš): Gen. 35:18; 1 Kings 19:4). Does the soul continue to exist after the death of the person? The monist theologian’s answer is “no”. Monism argues that according to the Bible, a human being is not divided into separate parts, i.e. body, soul, and spirit, but he exists as a unified or holistic self. Since the soul and the body are just different aspects of a person, existence entails bodily existence. There is no possibility of disembodied existence of the soul after death. The purpose of this post is to show that monism contradicts the Bible which ascribes to the disembodied soul some forms of consciousness in the intermediate state between death and final resurrection.¹ Continue reading “Biblical Dualism and the Soul Between Death and Resurrection (the Intermediate State)”

1
This post focuses on the biblical teaching on the soul’s disembodied existence in the intermediate state. For a philosophical defence of the tenability of disembodied existence of the soul, see Paul Helm, “A Theory of Disembodied Survival and Re-embodied Existence,” Religious Studies (1978), pp. 15-26; Richard Purtill, “Disembodied Survival,” Sophia 12 (1973), pp. 1-10.

OT Anthropology: Dualistic Holism or Holistic Dualism

Death, Resurrection and Life Everlasting – DRLE Pt.1b

We shall in this post argue that scholars like N.T. Wright, Nancey Murphy and Joel Green are mistaken when they reject substance dualism, the long-held belief that the human being is a compound entity comprising two distinct substances interacting with one another, that is, the body and its immaterial soul. ¹ It is indisputable that this has been the belief of most Christians throughout history. Nevertheless, these scholars claim that this belief owes more to Greek thought than to the Bible. Christians should be mindful that Greek thought and Hebrew thought are incompatible paradigms. Greek or Platonic thought regards human beings partitively since the soul is dichotomizes from the body. In contrast, Hebrew thought views human beings holistically.

However, while these scholars may be justified in rejecting Platonic dualism, they fail to distinguish biblical dualism from Platonic dualism. As we shall see, there are nuances in biblical dualism which should caution scholars from assuming that supporting biblical dualism amounts to supporting Platonic dualism unreservedly. Continue reading “OT Anthropology: Dualistic Holism or Holistic Dualism”

1
Substance dualism [also mind-body dualism]: The mind and body are composed of two ontologically distinct substances, each of which is capable of independent existence – the non-physical mind (or the soul) and the material body. It is noted that while N.T. Wright rejects substance dualism, nevertheless he also acknowledges some form of disembodied intermediate state after death. Wright has not demonstrated how these two contrary viewpoints may be reconciled.

Liberty and Ability of the Will in the Westminster Confession of Faith

One common criticism leveled against Calvinism is that its teaching of predestination and original sin undermines human freedom and responsibility. A two-fold response is required to set aside this deeply entrenched misconception. First, we are mindful that the best apologetic is a rigorous dogmatics. In this regard, the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) is more than able in defending itself. Chapter 9 of the WCF, “Free Will”, comprises a series of affirmations which together presents a dynamic and coherent view of freedom and human nature in its fourfold state (Pre-Fall innocence, Post-Fall depravity, Regenerate man, Glorified man). A closer reading this chapter clearly shows that the criticism against Calvinism is misguided as it is based on an inadequate, one-dimensional and static concept of human freedom. Second, we need to demonstrate that the Reformed teaching of freedom is coherent (cf. Michael Preciado and Guillaume Bignon on compatibilism) and that predestination (rightly understood) does not undermine human responsibility (cf. John Martin Fisher-Mark Ravizza on responsibility and control). [We will post expositions of the works of these thinkers if the discussion subsequent to this post requires it]. But let us begin with a simple explanation of the Reformed understanding of freedom in layman’s terms.

The Westminster Confession of Faith: CHAPTER 9 Continue reading “Liberty and Ability of the Will in the Westminster Confession of Faith”