Something I found on the internet

7. THE CASE FOR CONSCIOUS BELIEVERS I found this on this website:


A Need for Consistency

As pointed out in Chapter Four, when Scripture talks about departure of the spirit or soul, we see that the essence of our being stays with the body. Examples given were:

Genesis 35:18 says, "her soul was departing," not "she was departing."

1 Kings 17:21-22 says, "the child's soul came back to him," not "the child came back."

Psalm 146:4 says, "his spirit departs, he returns to the earth." It does not say "he departs, his body returns to the earth."

Luke 8:55 says, "her spirit returned and she awoke," not "she returned and awoke."

Acts 20:10 says, "his soul is still in him," not "he is still in his body."

The above passages are consistent because they mention either the spirit or soul. We should expect all passages about death to follow the same design, yet we do not see this in two favorite proof texts against soul sleep. In Luke 23:43, for example, Jesus does not tell the thief that his soul will be with Jesus. Paul also ignores this pattern because he does not say his soul will be with Christ in Philippians 1:23. These two texts are clearly different from passages that emphasize death.

Instead, Luke 23:43 and Philippians 1:23 resemble Scriptures that emphasize the resurrection. Numerous passages say we will be with Christ when He returns (e.g. John 5:28-29, 6:39-40, 44, 54, 11:24, 1 Corinthians 15:22-23, Colossians 3:4, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). Why are Luke 23:43 and Philippians 1:23 different from these other texts?

Soul sleep follows a consistent pattern of interpretation. When the passage does not mention spirit or soul, it talks about the whole person. In Luke 23:43, Jesus makes the promise that day about the resurrection; in Philippians 1:23, Paul ignores the time of unconsciousness between death and resurrection because it is irrelevant. These two inconclusive passages should not be overemphasized at the expense of numerous other verses that support soul sleep.

Traditionalists are very subjective and inconsistent when they interpret these passages. If the passage could support conditionalism, they insist it is only talking about the body; if the passage could support continued consciousness, they insist it is talking about the soul outside the body. Since their minds are already made up, God's Word is of no effect (Mark 7:13)

If you look at Psalms 90:10.It says we fly away.Instead of just our souls fly away.

Like in Genesis 35:18 says, "her soul was departing," not "she was departing." Notice again that here it compares and contrasts the person being a soul.Instead of just owning a soul.

I believe that by adding the word we in Psalms 90:10.It is basically the same idea.That we our souls.And we just are not souls in bodies.

Gen 35:18 And it happened that when her life was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-Oni. But his father called him Benjamin. (LEB)

The word 'soul' refers to the life. Like when Adam became a living life (soul). When Adam's soul departed his life left him and Adam himself died and returned to the dust he was.

To become a living life or soul or creature, Adam required the spirit of the breath of life. The spirit is the breath of life of the living life or soul.

Without the breath of life, the living life will leave the living creature, and the creature or living life(soul) will cease to live.

You don't even need the Bible to learn this truth. Science will tell you the same thing. They will tell you when a person, a living life (soul), stops breathing then the person(soul) dies. They also know that the person is buried and will turn to dust eventually.

The only reason any of this becomes confusing is because man invented the idea of an immortal soul being created into the flesh of the body of Adam.

The KJV is very inconsistent with it's translation of the Hebrew word nephesh and it's Greek equivalent psuchē because the translators were believers in an immortal soul in the body of flesh.

For example:

Mat 10:28 And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul, but instead be afraid of the one who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Man can kill your body but not take away your LIFE (soul) completely because God can raise the life(soul) to again live.
On the other hand, fear God because God can destroy completely your SOUL (life) whereby your soul (life) will never live again. Therefore souls are NOT immortal!

If the KJV translators were consistent they would have translated psuchē as LIFE rather than SOUL. And the verse would read:

Mat 10:28 And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are not able to kill the LIFE, but instead be afraid of the one who is able to destroy both LIFE and body in hell.

if fear is at all a motivator, one needs to stop and consider very carefully,
who is up to what [exactly] with such "leading" ideas?

If you look at Psalms 90:10.It says we fly away.Instead of just our souls fly away.

Like in Genesis 35:18 says, "her soul was departing," not "she was departing." Notice again that here it compares and contrasts the person being a soul.Instead of just owning a soul.

I believe that by adding the word we in Psalms 90:10.It is basically the same idea.That we our souls.And we just are not souls in bodies

I am posting this again so more people can see what my main point is.

I have noticed that amongst those who posit that there is an ephemeral/invisible "soul/spirit" aspect to individualized consciousness there are a couple of positions:
-that one has to grow/develop this soul aspect and transcend this frame of existence.....or else face consequences;
-that one has to 'save' it, merely by assuming an intellectual position and get granted immortality;
-that one must remember or find it, so as to use the faculties found therein, to gain meaning from this existential condition, which leads to further unknowns [bridges to cross at their own time and place]

which is the basic list [any others please add]
[ I lean towards the 3rd suspicion/speculation, based on my own experiences and findings]

Frank Goad said:

If you look at Psalms 90:10.It says we fly away.Instead of just our souls fly away.

Like in Genesis 35:18 says, "her soul was departing," not "she was departing." Notice again that here it compares and contrasts the person being a soul.Instead of just owning a soul.

I believe that by adding the word we in Psalms 90:10.It is basically the same idea.That we our souls.And we just are not souls in bodies

I am posting this again so more people can see what my main point is.

Click to expand...

I believe it is a specious argument. Of course the spirit when it departs does not take the physical body with it. Why would one think so?