Spiritual Death is Not Biblical

In various discussions, the concept of spiritual death rises to help explain inconsistencies between Bible authors.My contention is that the Old Testament prophets and writers of the Torah do not present a concept of spiritual death. I feel that the spiritual death concept is a later concept influenced by Greek philosophers. I’m not even sure that the current usage of the term spiritual death is the same as the Greek concept of material and spiritual.One example of this issue are the verses Exodus 20:5 and Ezekiel 18:20 It has been argued that the punishment in these verses may deal with spiritual death and not real time physical punishment or death.
I feel that the verses show a change in the society. The Priestly Exodus verse is corporate oriented and pertains to those who supposedly hate God. Probably written before the fall of the southern kingdom.The later Ezekiel verse deals with individuals and administering punishment. According to the author of John, even the disciples of Jesus associated physical afflictions with sin of the individual or their parents. I don’t feel that either verse is referring to a spiritual death or a future ethereal punishment. I don’t feel that the prophets or the Torah writers referred to spiritual death. Punishment and death were real time and physical.The threat of death for eating from the tree of knowledge is also attributed to spiritual death and not real time physical death.Show me that any of the plain text readings of the prophets or the Torah writers speak of spiritual death or future ethereal punishment without invoking later concepts or adding to the text.(I request this be placed in "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy" thread. - Thanks)Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.Edited by purpledawn, : Typo

quote:

---

Bt this I assume you mean the Old and New testament

---

You don't need to assume. I made my position very clear in the OP which contains my argument, not the title.

quote:

---

By (later concepts)I assume you mean the New Testament and its teachings, which clearly do speak about a spiritual death, ie, "and this is the second death", Rev, etc, etc, etc. So then Spiritual death is BIBLICAL, if you use the WHOLE Bible, correct

---

Again, no need to assume anything. I made it very clear. See quote above.If you're going to participate in this thread, please address the topic and present your arguments.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

If not, will you explain what you mean by 'biblical in your topic,

---

My contention is that the Old Testament prophets and writers of the Torah do not present a concept of spiritual death. I feel that the spiritual death concept is a later concept influenced by Greek philosophers. I’m not even sure that the current usage of the term spiritual death is the same as the Greek concept of material and spiritual.

quote:

---

Your topic and the OP are in contradiction, by common usage of the term Biblical, so please answer a direct question, please.

---

The opening post is the topic. The title is just a general idea of what the topic is about and an attention getter. The title is not the argument.Show me that any of the plain text readings of the prophets or the Torah writers speak of spiritual death or future ethereal punishment without invoking later concepts or adding to the text.

An opening post should consist of the topic question or statement being considered and the poster's own position concerning the subject. Some background information on the topic question is also good when the question could be perceived several ways.My topic statement: My contention is that the Old Testament prophets and writers of the Torah do not present a concept of spiritual death. I feel that the spiritual death concept is a later concept influenced by Greek philosophers. I’m not even sure that the current usage of the term spiritual death is the same as the Greek concept of material and spiritual.My topic statement tells readers that I am focusing this topic on the OT prophets and the writers of the Torah (1st five books). (Admins like the topics narrowly focused.) I have also told readers that I feel the spiritual death idea is a later concept influenced by the Greek philosophers, which gives them a timeline of when the influence might have began. I've also given the idea that the current religious usage of the term "spiritual death" may not be the same meaning as the Greek concept that inspired it.I then gave two examples of where the "spiritual death" idea has been used to help smooth textual inconsistencies between authors.My closing statement explained what I would like to see take place in this discussion.Show me that any of the plain text readings of the prophets or the Torah writers speak of spiritual death or future ethereal punishment without invoking later concepts or adding to the text.This statement clarifies that I want to look at the plain text and not added unsupported stories or later ideas projected backwards. As Modulous pointed out, that means any concept after the writing of the OT prophets or the Torah.I also restate that the focus is on the OT prophets and the Torah writers (1st five books). Biblical means being in accord with the Bible.Where you pull your information from for your argument is up to you, but if you bring up a later concept and apply it to the past; you also need to provide support as to how the plain text in the past says what you claim it says.Dost thou comprehend?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Thanks for answering and narrowing down your first premise. the second one is even more important. Are these the writings of men only, or is there the possibilty that not only the Old but New is the work of God through inspiration. If no, then it makes little difference what they thought in relation to someone else 1000 years later.

​

However, if the author is God, then expressions even made by people who dont fully understand what they are speaking through inspiration, could have a deeper meaning than just physical death, even if spoken by thise long ago.

---

That's your schtick? The writers didn't understand what they were writing? That would mean the audience didn't understand what they were hearing. That would make it pointless for God to have something written before people could understand it. Please show evidence that the writers and the people didn't understand what they wrote or heard.The plain text is simply that. It doesn't matter if it was written by men or imparted by God. You need to show that the text says what you claim it says. Inspiration is not impartation. Only the prophets claim visions from God. If you feel they also didn't understand what they were saying, then again you please show evidence that the prophets didn't understand what they wrote and their audiences didn't understand what they heard.

quote:

---

though spoken centuries apart the writers could or could not have the samething in mind, if they are the only source and motivation for the statements they may mean only physical death, or something totally different from eachother

---

My contention is that Ezekiel meant the one who sins will pay the price for the sin, not the rest of his family. Real time penalty for real time sin. If you feel he meant spiritual death, please show evidence to support your position.

quote:

---

Now I doubt satan understood Gods statement, I doubt Moses or the suthor understood it, but it had a meaning that was later to be revealed in further instances and other writings.

​

To Abraham, "I will make of thee a great nation and through thy SEED all the nations of the earth will be blessed." Now watch this, I doubt the Abraham or the writer understood the ramifications of this statement. but it was not necessary that they did. The point here is that it is not ALWAYS for the writer to understand what is spoken through inspiration.

---

That's projecting a later concept onto the document. As I said in Message 10, if you bring up a later concept and apply it to the past; you also need to provide support as to how the plain text in the past says what you claim it says.

quote:

---

Since they did not die immediately you would need to demonstrate that the author did not have something else in mind as well, if it is not a product of inspiration, ie, "the soul that sins it will die" Since as I have already indicated before and to which you did not respond, why would you need to THREATEN OR TELL someone they are going to die as a result of this or that, IF THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE GOING TO DIE ANYWAY.

---

Please don't channel other threads without linking to the post. We are looking at the plain text. Show evidence that the word die didn't refer to physical death, but referred to spiritual death. Show evidence that the ancient audience understood spiritual death and not physical death.

quote:

---

the iorny is that you are playing the role of Satan here. You are telling people the same thing Satan told Eve, "You will NOT surely die, for in the day you eat your eyes will be opened and you will be like God. Satan told a half truth, it is true they did not die immediately, because this is not the ONLY type of death God had in mind. Its almost as if you are trying to convince people of the samething Satan was, that they need not worry about any spiritual death because its not real. Whoo, now that is a wierd coincidence isnt it?

---

Wow, usually I get lumped with Satan further into the thread, but thanks for getting that out of your system early.Yes, when we understand the plain test interpretations, Satan is exposed for what he is. Dogma hides what Satan really is and doesn't allow people to face the reality. Just like a writer needs to know his audience, a warrior needs to know his enemy.Just as the snake misled Eve, you mislead people about the reality of Satan and death.

quote:

---

So be even more helpful in helping us to understand what your position on these texts are, ie, mans words, Gods and mans words, Gods words only, or, I dont know, or, I dont care or its irrelevant to the subject at hand, from your perspective

---

It is irrelevant to this discussion. Either the text says what it means or it doesn't. If it doesn't mean what it says, then evidence is needed.

quote:

---

Paul said, "Recieve the weaker brother but not to doubtful disputations" (arguments over questions) I almost feel like I am violating his stipulation when dealing with you and you contentions

---

Well don't worry yourself about it. I'm not the weaker brother.I'd appreciate it, if you choose to continue in this discussion, if you would cut the bravado and just address the topic of the thread and the arguments concerning it.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Hey Peg,

quote:

---

you would do well to begin with exactly what you mean by spiritual death. In my opinion a spiritual death is when God cuts a person off from his presence. In this sense, we could say that Adam and Eve suffered a spiritual death before they suffered a physcial death. Similar with Cain, he was banished from the sight of God (so to speak) And its also noteworthy that isrealites who failed to comply with the law were to be cut off from the assembly.

​

so what is your interpretation of a spiritual death? And how does a person come to life spiritually...because if there is a spiritual death, there must be a spiritual life too.

---

Great question and an excellent way to get a discussion rolling.I agree that spiritual death is presented in Christianity as the separation or alienation of the soul from God. I'm not sure whether you meant that or physically separated since you said presence.In ancient Judaism the body and spirit weren't considered separate. One can't be removed from the presence of God without the other. Dualism was a later Greek development. In the A&E story, they are physically removed from the garden body and soul. The soul didn't die or cease to exist. One cannot survive without the other. Remember, in the story of A&E the soul is what gave life to the dirt. Removing the soul, removes the life.Since there is no actual death in the current usage of spiritual death, the text of the A&E story doesn't support the idea of spiritual death. If one actually dies, they both die.

quote:

---

Try Ezekiel 37:1-12 & vs 13-14

​

the prophet uses death to represent a change in the spiritual condition of God’s people when they were taken into exile in Babylon as punishment for their disloyalty to God.

---

Ezekiel speaks of bringing the Israelites back to the land of Israel, but it doesn't speak of the human soul.

quote:

---

Zech. 7:11-14 speaks of the nation of isreal refusing to listen to God and thus becoming 'desolate'

---

The land was left so desolate behind them. It isn't a reference to their spirit. God threw them physically out of the land, but the text isn't talking about a spiritual death. The body and soul are still together.

quote:

---

You could also look at these scriptures which also refer to the isrealites in captivity Isaiah1:5-6; 33:24 & 35:5-6
Jerimiah 33:6

---

I don't see how the plain text in these verses deals with spiritual death.

quote:

---

Isaiah speaks of spiritual food and shows the lack of it causes the spirit to 'breakdown'

​

Isaiah 65:13-14
"Look! My own servants will eat, but YOU yourselves will go hungry. Look! My own servants will drink, but YOU yourselves will go thirsty. Look! My own servants will rejoice, but YOU yourselves will suffer shame. 14 Look! My own servants will cry out joyfully because of the good condition of the heart, but YOU yourselves will make outcries because of the pain of heart and YOU will howl because of sheer breakdown of spirit"

---

I don't see that Isaiah is speaking of spiritual food. The text seems to be referring to real food. The breakdown of spirit is their mood or frame of mind due to the hardship.I'm looking at the plain text and I don't see the connections. I see a later concept projected backwards.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

EAM writes:

So be even more helpful in helping us to understand what your position on these texts are, ie, mans words, Gods and mans words, Gods words only, or, I dont know, or, I dont care or its irrelevant to the subject at hand, from your perspective

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

PD writes:

It is irrelevant to this discussion. Either the text says what it means or it doesn't. If it doesn't mean what it says, then evidence is needed.

​

Great, thanks for that response, now lets do it one more way, In YOUR estimation,(YOUR BELIEFS) are these the words of God or of men. It always helps if you have a common frame of reference. Not if it is irrelevant but in your educated opinion, whos words are these in these texts we are quoting.

---

It is extraneous to this discussion. Either the text says what it means or it doesn't. If it doesn't mean what it says, then evidence is needed.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

The book of Daniel in Judaism is classified with the writings not the prophets. This reads as a physical resurrection, not something in heaven. What in the text makes this ethereal (unrelated to the real world)?I guess I was thinking of a harsher punishment than shame and contempt. Most people bring out the lake of fire.

quote:

---

This seems to be describing a punishment which is everlasting, not temporal. I would associate this with spiritual death.

---

From the reading it seems the stay on the planet, body and soul, but live in God's favor or out of God's favor. There really isn't any separation of the soul and body in this passage though. What are you seeing as spiritual death?The term, spiritual death, itself is confusing since the definition doesn't include death; just falling out of favor.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

1. This is a science forum.
2. I don't debate links.
3. Argue the position and not the person.

quote:

---

If the text means what it says and we should take it at face value, why did Adam and others live to extreme ages, was God lying. If God meant death at some future point, it is not evidenced in the text is it. So how can we take the text at face value, your argument seems to make no sense. You seem to want it both ways. Now since this flexible interpretation is clearly evident, it may mean something else given the various definitions of the word 'Soul', given by the author I provided in the link.

---

The tale of Adam and Eve is a "just so" type of story. It explained why things were the way they were. The word translated as die, means to kill. As the story progresses we see that God didn't kill them for their transgression and chose to throw them out of the Garden. Whether God lied or changed his mind is irrelevant. Adam and Eve were relocated and penalized; but they still had contact with God (Chapter 4), so they hadn't fallen out of favor with God. God even gave Eve a son to replace Abel.If you view spiritual death as alienation of the soul from God, I don't see it in this story since the writers probably didn't believe in dualism.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Why do you say it means "kill" instead of "die?" The Hebrew is mut in the Qal imperfect. I can find no translation that renders this "kill," and no grammatical reason to render it so.

---

In the story God says that if they eat of the tree they will die. So death is the penalty for eating from the tree. If we were hearing the story for the first time, we might think the tree is poisonous, but once they eat of the tree we know that the tree isn't poisonous. So for Adam and Eve to die the day they eat, they would have to be killed. I think we have become so accustomed to the story that the drama is lost.

quote:

---

Perhaps you and I are defining "spiritual death" differently? NET Bible has this study note for Gen 2:17:

Death is essentially separation. To die physically means separation from the land of the living, but not extinction. To die spiritually means to be separated from God.

---

That sounds like dualism which is a later concept. What changes when one is separated from God?Daniel 12 has also been considered an allegory for the restoration of Israel. If the scroll mentioned in Chapter 12 is the book of Daniel, then the resurrection described has already come and gone. The scroll was to be closed up and sealed until the time of the end.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Is there only one meaning to the hebrew word 'Soul', only one application

---

If you have a point to make concerning the word soul, make your argument. This is a debate, not 20 questions.

quote:

---

Now you say God may have lied or changed his mind. now you say that in all the instances where God said people would die as a result of sin, that may not be the case. Does DIE mean what is says or doesnt it.

---

Keep on track please.In Message 23 you asked: If the text means what it says and we should take it at face value, why did Adam and others live to extreme ages, was God lying.To which I responded: The word translated as die, means to kill. As the story progresses we see that God didn't kill them for their transgression and chose to throw them out of the Garden. Whether God lied or changed his mind is irrelevant.Actually I said it is irrelevant whether God lied or changed his mind. I made no claim to all instances of any word. Please refrain from adding words to my argument.

quote:

---

Now watch this point, doesnt your explanation in this regard indicate without doubt that the term 'die' may not indicate physical death, only? The AMBIGUITY which you demonstrate in your explanations is nearly proof positive that one need not be dogmatic about its application.

---

No, die means physical death. It can be used creatively, but you haven't shown evidence that this is the case in the A&E story.

quote:

---

Further, if indeed this is actually a work of God or Gods words, then its meaning could have a spiritual application. there is no need to take a materialistic stance given the fact that in nearly no instance where God made this statement, people died immediately. Is it good exegesis to assume that in every instance and with every person God cahnged his mind or lied.

---

Show these instances that support your position. I have not assumed that in every instance and with every person God changed his mind or lied.

quote:

---

Remember, this pronouncement was on humankind, not just two people in a garden. the logical conclusion is that the word 'Soul' and 'Die' in Ezekiel should be undertood comprehensively and not limited to a single definition.

---

The word translated as soul is nephesh, which refers to a living being and the word translated as die is muwth which refers to physical death. Death is stated as the punishment for sin. According to Ezekiel, only the person who sins will be punished. Please show evidence that it should be understood differently.

quote:

---

The separation is one of RELATIONSHIP not existence.

---

I pointed out in Message 25 that Adam and Eve didn't lose their relationship with God (Chapter 4).

quote:

---

I dont know where you pulled that out of. "thou shalt not kill", means "Thou shalt not die" ???

---

See Message 29.

quote:

---

they most certainly were separated from God by sin and began to die physically.

---

Show evidence that they were separated from God.

quote:

---

perhaps you could give your definition of dualism

---

quote:

---

so soul is you and I according to judaism. Whereas Greeks taught that the soul is a force that lives on separate.

---

Exactly!

quote:

---

The prophet was speaking to the Isrealites who had been taken captive to Babylon. They were in that situation because God had allowed the Babylonians to destroy jerusalem becuase of their unfaithfulness to him. When God abandons them, they become to him as dead bones. They are in effect, spiritually dead. But the prophet speaks of them coming to life again when God breaths into them.

---

Yes, the people were physically exiled/separated from the land of Israel. They were being disciplined. They didn't view the body and soul as separate, so in what way were they separated from God? Other than location, what was different than when they were in the land of Israel?

quote:

---

ok now i know you are using the greek concept of soul and body. If you are reading the accounts of judaism, you probably need to consider their understanding of soul. It is as i said above "the living person"

---

In Zech. 7:11-14, the land is desolate (devoid of inhabitants and visitors), not the people. The people could be desolate (joyless, disconsolate, and sorrowful). By spirit, I meant their mood.My contention is that the Jews did not see the two as separate at the time of these writings and did not convey that in the writings. The dualism is a later concept and I think the creative writing of the prophet lends itself to manipulation to fit the new concept.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Yes, I agree that this sounds like dualism. I believe the ancient Hebrews were dualistic in this sense. I don't know where the author of your quote gets his claim that it was a later concept; this sounds like some sort of modern revisionism.

---

The question would be when dualism came into the culture or was it always there? It is difficult sometimes to weed out later influences.The book of Daniel is dated at 167-164 B.C which is after the Greek influence from what I can tell.I did find some other articles dealing with Sheol as your quote described. But even in those articles the separation is only after death and the "shadow" remained there. There was no concept of individual resurrection or separation from God. The current Christian concept of spiritual death is alienation of the soul from God, whether the person is dead or alive.How is a soul alienated from God while the person is alive?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz