Introduction

In the book, Whatever Happened to the Soul, the authors argue in support of a view they call non-reductive physicalism. According to this view, Nancey Murphy says the human person “is a physical organism whose complex functioning, both in society and in relation to God, gives rise to ‘higher’ human capacities such as morality and spirituality.”¹ This view that ontologically we humans are only physical but that we have real freedom, consciousness and so forth, is supported by a number of Christian authors of different specializations today including the areas of neuroscience, philosophy, biblical studies and theology. These authors generally believe that individual human persons cease to exist when their bodies die but that they will be reconstituted by God in a future bodily resurrection.² In this paper, as a believing Christian and a Catholic theologian, I offer some responses to non-reductive physicalism. In brief, while I agree with a number of points made by authors supporting non-reductive physicalism, I disagree with their denying that we human beings have immaterial immortal souls.

Christian authors who support non-reductive physicalism generally support a number of tenets of traditional Christian faith such as that God loves us, that human beings are created in the image of God and have free will, and resurrection of the dead. They, however, disagree with the traditional Christian view that we human beings have immaterial immortal souls. This “traditional” view of the human soul has been articulated and defended, for example, by many mainstream patristic and scholastic authors, the Protestant Reformer John Calvin, and more recent authors such as neuroscientists John Eccles and Mario Beauregard, philosophers Karl Popper and Karol Wojtyla (who became Pope John Paul II), and theologians Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Benedict Ashley and Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI).³ These authors generally hold that the human soul transcends the human physical body, that it is immaterial or incorporeal and immortal. In line with this, the traditional Christian view also affirms that the individual human person does not completely cease to exist with bodily death but that the person’s soul continues to exist in an intermediate state until the future resurrection of the dead.

In general Christian authors who support non-reductive physicalism argue that viewing human beings as only physical organisms ontologically is in accord with the Hebrew view of the Bible.⁴ They also consider this view to be in accord with empirical scientific data including the findings of neuroscience which demonstrate a tightening of mind-brain-behavior links.⁵ In general they argue that the traditional Christian view of the human soul, beginning with many patristic authors, was overly influenced by a Platonic “dualism.”

While it is true that patristic and later “traditional” Christian authors often borrowed some of the language and ideas from non-Christian authors such as Plato and Aristotle, in general they appropriated these critically. They accepted views which they considered to be true, to be compatible with Christian faith, but they did not accept views which they considered to be contrary to biblical teaching and God’s revelation. For example, although Plato believed the human soul survived death, a view also held by traditional Christianity, he also believed in reincarnation and that the human soul pre-existed the human body, beliefs not accepted by most patristic and later traditional Christian authors.⁶

In my view the traditional Christian view of the human soul can better account for all of the related data from the Bible and human experience than can non-reductive physicalism. Discussion of this will be arranged in three main parts in this paper: 1) Some Related Biblical Data; 2) Some Related Christian Traditions; and 3) Some Related Data of Human Experience.

1.) Some Related Biblical Data

There are a number of biblical texts, according to some good biblical scholars and theologians, which support the view that the human soul continues to exist in an intermediate state between bodily death and resurrection. This implies that the human soul transcends the physical body, that it is incorporeal or immaterial or spiritual. Without being exhaustive, we will consider here some of the most relevant biblical texts, as well as some related commentary by a number of biblical scholars.⁷

The Jewish Scriptures / Christian Old Testament

1 Samuel 28:3-19 begins by saying that the prophet Samuel had died and was buried in Ramah. King Saul asks a medium to consult a spirit for him even though this was forbidden in Israel. He asks her to bring up Samuel who appears as a ghost [“an ’elohim (a ‘god,’ or ‘elohim’ being) coming up from the earth.” According to biblical scholar James Turro, “this term is frequently reserved for members of the heavenly court.”⁸]. The ghost of Samuel then enters into a conversation with King Saul. A related scholarly note in The New Jerusalem Bible says that, “The narrator seems to share the popular belief in ghosts (though he regards it unlawful to consult them)…. The incident is presented as a genuine recalling of Samuel’s spirit…” According to biblical scholar Antony Campbell, the time of composition of 1-2 Samuel “covers the centuries from the beginnings of the monarchy in Israel to the exile and the postexilic period.” He himself argues that “a late 9th-cent. Prophetic document” lies behind the present text.⁹

From where does the spirit of the deceased prophet Samuel come? The abode of the dead in the Jewish Scriptures is called Sheol. It is generally pictured as a resting place. Some texts “suggest that inactivity and perhaps even unconsciousness are the lot of the departed.” See, for example, Job 3:13, Ecclesiastes 9:10 and Psalm 88:10-12. Some other texts, however, “suggest that at least on occasion the inhabitants of the underworld are conscious and active.” See, for example, Isaiah 14:9-10. The practice of consulting the dead through mediums which was widespread in the ancient Middle East indicates belief in an afterlife. So does the forbidding of such practices in Jewish scriptures (e.g., Leviticus 19:31), since there would be no need to warn against such practices “if the Israelites did not believe the dead existed or that they could be consulted.” With regard to the narrative of the deceased Samuel communicating with King Saul, theologian John Cooper says, “…dead Samuel is still Samuel … He is the very person who was once alive …. Although this is a highly unusual occurrence, Samuel is nonetheless a typical resident of Sheol …. Although he implies that he is resting, it was still possible for him to ‘wake up’ and engage in a number of acts of conscious communication. Activity is still in principle possible for the dead even if they are usually ‘asleep.’” Some later texts in the Jewish scriptures also express the hope that the dwellers in Sheol would be reunited with their bodies in a future resurrection. See, for example, Ezekiel 37; Daniel 12:2; and Isaiah 24-27. All of these as well as some other Old Testament texts imply belief in an intermediate state between bodily death and resurrection.¹⁰

Jewish Apocryphal Literature / Deuterocanonical Books

Between the time that the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament were written, there were some Jewish writings that are often referred to as intertestamental or Jewish apocryphal literature. Within this literature one sees some developments as well as diversity of views with regard to the afterlife. For example, some of these writings express the view that within Sheol there is a place of punishment for the wicked called “Gehenna,” whereas the righteous are taken to “Paradise.” One group within Judaism, the Sadducees, did not believe in bodily resurrection, whereas another group, the Pharisees, did.¹¹ These views continued into the time of Jesus and the writing of the New Testament as we will see below.

A few of these writings which were part of the Jewish Septuagint, the “Old Testament” scriptures used by many Christians in the early church, are called “deuterocanonical” by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. They are considered to be part of the divinely inspired scriptures or canon of the Bible.¹² One of these books, 2 Maccabees 15:11-16, reports Judas Maccabeus’s vision of two deceased just men, the high priest Onias and the prophet Jeremiah interceding with God for the Jewish people and the Holy City. Biblical scholar Neil McEleney says that these two just men represent the law (embodied in the priesthood) and the prophets. “The vision … illustrates the author’s belief in the intercessory power of the saints.” 2 Maccabees 12:44-5 approves of praying for those who have died. Concerning this McEleney says that the author “sees Judas’s action as evidence that those who die piously can be delivered from unexpiated sins… This doctrine, thus vaguely formulated, contains the essence of what would become (with further precisions) the Christian theologian’s teaching on purgatory.”¹³ Related to this deuterocanonical teaching Pope Benedict XVI, an outstanding theologian in his own right, in a recent encyclical “On Christian Hope,” says in part:

Early Jewish thought includes the idea that one can help the deceased in the intermediate state through prayer (see for example 2 Macc 12:38-45; first century BC). The equivalent practice was readily adopted by Christians and is common to the Eastern and Western Church…. The belief that love can reach into the afterlife, that reciprocal giving and receiving is possible, in which our affection for one another continues beyond the limits of death--this has been a fundamental conviction of Christianity throughout the ages and it remains a source of comfort today.¹⁴

The Christian New Testament

Concerning everlasting life, the main focus in the New Testament is on bodily resurrection in the light of Jesus’ own resurrection from the dead. Nevertheless, a number of texts present Jesus, his disciples and the respective New Testament authors as also believing in an intermediate state between bodily death and resurrection. Let us begin by considering the Gospel according to Luke 23:43 which reports Jesus on the cross saying to the dying thief, “Today you will be with me in paradise.” With regard to “today in Paradise,” biblical scholar Caroll Stuhlmueller says, “Jesus’ reply, his last words to any person on earth, puts the emphasis upon ‘today’—before the sun sets.” Concerning “With me,” He tells the thief that he will not be simply in Jesus’ retinue (syn emoi) but will also be sharing his royalty (meth’ emou).” She says, “paradise” is“A word derived from Old Persian … used … in the NT for the abode of the righteous (Ap 2:7; 2 Cor 12:2-4).” Catholic theologian Benedict Ashley, referring to a biblical commentary by G. B. Caird, says, “By the time of the Pharisees, the rabbis taught that at death there is judgment and the shades of the unrighteous go to a place of punishment in Sheol called Gehenna, and the just to a place of happiness called Paradise, like the garden of Eden. It is evidently to this that Jesus refers on the Cross .… to the good thief…”¹⁵ With regard to this passage, Anglican bishop and biblical scholar Tom Wright says, “… in Luke, we know first of all that Christ himself will not be resurrected for three days, so ‘paradise’ cannot be a resurrection. It has to be an intermediate state.”¹⁶

Luke 16:19-31 reports Jesus’ story of the Rich Man and Lazarus. When they die, the poor man goes to the “bosom of Abraham” but the rich man goes to Hades. They are forever separated. With regard to this parable, Stuhlmueller says that the image of “Abraham’s bosom … is expressive of either the eschatological banquet (5:34) or of an intimate fellowship with Abraham (both known in rabbinical literature… in Hades [refers to]Hell, Sheol, abode of the dead. Enoch [a pre-Christian Jewish apocryphal book] ch. 22 speaks of adjoining quarters for the evil and the good in this abode of the dead and seems to imply that they remain there till the judgment and general resurrection. This notion corresponds to the rabbinical teaching…”¹⁷

With regard to the question, where was Jesus himself between his death and bodily resurrection, on the original Good Friday and Easter Sunday respectively, let us consider first of all Eph 4:9-10 which reads: “(When it says, ‘He ascended,’ what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is the same one who ascended far about all the heavens, so that he might fill all things.)” Although some exegetes interpret his descent “to the lower parts of the earth” as a “description of Christ’s incarnation and earthly life,” biblical scholar Joseph Grassi says, “According to some [other] exegetes this would mean the region of the dead, as in the creeds, ‘he descended into hell.’ In support of this theory they cite the parallel in 1 Pt 3:19 and 4:6.”¹⁸ These parallel texts respectively say that when he was put to death Christ went “in the spirit” and “made a proclamation to the spirits in prison…”(1 Pet 3:18-20) and “For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does.”(1 Pet 4:6; cf. Jn 5:25). With regard to these and some other related New Testament passages, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which was composed by a number of outstanding theologians and promulgated by Pope John Paul II, says in part:

The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection. This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there… Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell”—Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek—because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the redeemer; which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”: “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.”(Roman Catechism I, 6, 3) Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him…. The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfillment. This is the last phase of Jesus’ messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ’s redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.¹⁹

In Phil 1:21-24, the apostle Paul, imprisoned and perhaps facing death, says: “For to me, living is Christ and dying is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me: and I do not know which I prefer. I am hard pressed between the two: my desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better; but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you.” With regard to this passage biblical scholar Joseph Fitzmyer says, “To ‘be with the Lord’ was the expectation of Paul for the parousia (1 Thes 4:17; 5:10). Now—due to the proximity of death—he realizes that another possibility exists, to enter sooner than the ultimate resurrection into a state of companionship with Christ in glory (cf. 2 Cor 5:2, 6-8; Col 3:3). Paul’s words indicate that he reckons with an intermediate state in which the deceased Christian is ‘with Christ’ after death and before the resurrection.” Another biblical scholar Brendan Byrne says in part, “Death is gain, not—as in certain strands of Greek philosophy—in the sense of welcome release from bodily existence, but as intensifying the union with Christ, who has already passed through death to resurrection. Resurrection remains the ultimate goal…. Paul seems to envisage here a ‘being with Christ’ in some (disembodied) state prior to the general resurrection (cf. 2 Cor 5:2-4).” In a related New Testament passage, 2 Cor. 5:1-10, the Apostle Paul says in part: “…even though we know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord—for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we do have confidence, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil.”(verses 6-10) Concerning this biblical scholar John O’Rourke says, “This passage has been the object of much discussion. At least eight general classes of interpretation can be found. Among Catholics perhaps the most common” interpretation “…is that which sees here … the doctrine of the possession of essential beatitude by the just (prescinding from purgatory) following the particular judgment.”²⁰

In 2 Cor 12:2-4, the Apostle Paul speaks of a man who fourteen years before had a vision, in which he was not sure whether he was in or outside his body, who was caught up to the third heaven, into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words. In humility Paul speaks of himself here in the third person.²¹ With regard to Paul’s saying he did not know, God knows, whether he was in or outside his body during this vision, does this not imply that Paul understood the human person to transcend one’s physical body? It seems that such a view can be reconciled with a human person having both a body and immaterial soul, but not with physicalism including non-reductive physicalism.

Revelation 6:9-11, describing a vision of John, reads: “…I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; they cried out with a loud voice, ‘Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?’ They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete…” With regard to this passage, biblical scholar Jean-Louis D’Aragon says, “This altar (see 8:3; 9:13; 14:18; 16:7) is the heavenly counterpart of the altar of holocausts in the Jerusalem Temple….” The cry of the souls “does not express a desire for vengeance, which would not be in accord with the teaching of Christ (Lk 6:27f.). The martyrs call for the securing of justice. God would not be just, nor the Lord of history, if he did not punish injustice…. A white robe … means the victory of the martyrs and their sharing in the happiness of eternal life (7:13-17). The individual victory of each martyr is assured as soon as he is with Christ…” With regard to the part of the text which reads “until the number would be complete,” D’Aragon says, “In accordance with Jewish eschatology, Christianity holds that the last judgment will not come until the number of the elect, determined by God, has been completed…”²²

A number of the above biblical passages present human beings as being conscious and able to communicate after their death. And yet, according to the New Testament view the general resurrection of the dead had not yet taken place. With regard to this 2 Tim 2:17-18 reads: “...Hymenaeus and Philetus ... have swerved from the truth by claiming that the resurrection has already taken place.” Anglican bishop and biblical scholar Tom Wright says, “In the Bible we are told that you die, and enter an intermediate state. St. Paul is very clear that Jesus Christ has been raised from the dead already, but that nobody else has yet.” John Cooper, who analyzes various New Testament texts related to the time of the resurrection, concludes that although there are some variations in language, New Testament authors believed the general resurrection of the dead was in the historical future. For the Apostle Paul this will occur with the parousia, the Second Coming of Christ.²³ Biblical data thus contradicts both the non-reductive physicalist view that there is no intermediate state as well as the view that the resurrection occurs immediately at death.

At the time of Jesus, there was some diversity of views among the Jews concerning the afterlife. For example, according to the New Testament, the Saducees did not believe in spirits, angels and bodily resurrection, but the Pharisees, Jesus and the early Christians did. With regard to this consider, for example, Acts 22:30-23:11 which reports that the Apostle Paul was brought before a meeting of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Part of this passage notes that: “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge all three.”(Acts 23:8) During a dispute between the two groups some of the Pharisees say in part, “What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?”(Acts 23:9), that is, to the Apostle Paul. There is a wealth of biblical material related to angels, intelligent personal spiritual beings created by God without real physical bodies. Contemporary theologian Benedict Ashley defends the real existence of angels as compatible with an evolutionary view of the physical universe.²⁴ The Bible also presents God as “Spirit” (see John 4:24), as invisible and transcending the visible created universe (see Rom 1:16-25). The biblical data concerning angels and God supports the view that there is more to reality than what is physical. Such a view is compatible with the traditional Christian view, which we will consider further below, that the human person is a profound union of an invisible spiritual soul and a visible physical body. With regard to the question of consciousness which we will also consider further below, we can note here that God and angels are presented in the Bible as personal conscious beings without bodies including brains. Although the second person of the Trinity took on a human body with the incarnation, God the Father and Holy Spirit did not. God the Son or Word was also conscious before the incarnation. Therefore, consciousness does not necessarily require having a physical body and a brain.

With regard to the early Christians and Jesus believing in spirits or ghosts see, for example, Luke 24:36-43, which reports the Risen Jesus appearing to the disciples and speaking to them. The passage reads in part: “They were startled and terrified, and thought that they were seeing a ghost. He said to them, ‘Why are you frightened, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? Look at my hands and my feet; see that it is I myself. Touch me and see; for a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.’”(verses 37-39) Concerning this passage, biblical scholar Léopold Sabourin says in part that the Greek pneuma in verses 27 and 39 must mean a “ghost,” “the appearance of someone who has died…. To understand Lk 24:39 correctly it is necessary to presuppose that the disciples recognized Jesus but believed they were only seeing his ‘spirit’ and not his true resurrected humanity.” Commenting on this same passage in a biblical commentary, Michael Patella says in part, “Maintaining that the resurrected Jesus is a ghost is more comprehensible to the disciples than believing that he is risen. With this Jerusalem appearance, paralleled in John 19:19-29, Luke presents an apology for those who deny the reality of the resurrection…. This passage introduces the nature of the glorified body, a reality that goes to the heart of Christian belief. The resurrected life that Christ initiates goes beyond spiritual existence in eternity. It is a new life involving the glorified body…”²⁵ Earlier during the public ministry of Jesus, Mt 14: 22-33 and Mk 6:45-52 report Jesus walking on the water. When the disciples on the boat see him they are frightened and think they are seeing a ghost until Jesus identifies himself. While these passages taken together show that the early Christians believed that our final goal includes bodily resurrection, something non-reductive Christian authors also believe, these passages also indicate that the early Christians believed in the real existence of ghosts who, according to Jesus, do not have bodies. This is not surprising in the light of the narrative of the appearance of the ghost of the prophet Samuel to King Saul in the Jewish scriptures which we considered above. This belief in ghosts is compatible with the traditional Christian belief of the intermediate state of the human soul between bodily death and resurrection, something Christian non-reductive physicalist authors deny in spite of the biblical data supporting such a belief.

Of interest, Joel Green, one of the main biblical scholars who supports non-reductive physicalism, says, “Evidence of a body-soul dualism in the New Testament may also be traced in a text like Matthew 10:28, ‘Do not fear those who put the body to death but are unable to kill the soul’... In this text, the Greek term psyche probably refers to the disembodied soul that lives on beyond physical death…” In spite of acknowledging a biblical text like this which supports belief in the intermediate state, Green opts for a physicalist anthropology. Among other things, to support his view that the human person ceases to exist at bodily death, he refers to some Jewish biblical texts which seem to present Sheol, the abode of the dead, as a place of inactivity and unconsciousness.²⁶ With regard to such texts, as well as other biblical texts which we have considered above which support the view of human souls continuing to exist in an intermediate conscious state between bodily death and resurrection, it seems to me that we should appreciate a development of theology and teaching within the Bible itself concerning the afterlife. We certainly find this with regard to belief in bodily resurrection, which is not presented in earlier parts of the Bible, that is, in much of the Jewish scriptures, but is clearly affirmed in the New Testament. In a somewhat similar way we see signs within the Bible, which was composed over many centuries, of a developing understanding of Sheol, the abode of the dead, and the intermediate state. Within the Bible we see a number of other such developments in understanding and theology, for example, related to the law, God’s salvation, and the one God being a Trinity of three divine persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It seems to me that any good theory of biblical interpretation needs to take seriously not just some biblical texts which seem to support one’s position, but all related biblical texts. Related to developments of understanding and theology within the Bible, the Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church speaks of God’s pedagogy and progressive revelation. God’s revelation was completed in Jesus Christ.²⁷

2.) Some Related Christian traditions

Patristics

Although there are some differences, many of the Fathers of the Church, Christian writers in the first few centuries following biblical times, held that the human soul is incorporeal, created by God, does not preexist the body, is immortal, death is the separation of the soul from the body, and that there is an intermediate state between bodily death and resurrection. Related to the intermediate state a number of these authors also speak of a particular judgment of each human person when they die and purgatory.²⁸ These beliefs should not be surprising to us since they are in line with biblical teaching as we considered above.

Thomas Aquinas

With regard to Christian theological views during the Middle Ages, due to the limits of this paper, we will only consider here some of the related views of Thomas Aquinas (13 Cent. A.D.). His “Thomistic” philosophy and theology have had an enormous and lasting influence. Aquinas, with a good knowledge of the Bible, the Fathers of the Churchand philosophy, adapted Aristotle’s hylomorphic theory, the soul as the form or animating principle of the body, to Catholic faith (cf. Catholic Teaching, the Fourth Lateran Council, below). Like Aristotle he spoke not only of human souls but also of plant and animal principles of life or souls. Like Plato and many Fathers of the Church Aquinas understood the human soul as incorporeal or immaterial and immortal. Combining the best in these views, Aquinas understood the human soul to be profoundly united with the human body in this life. The whole soul is present in every part of the body in a way analogous to God’s being wholly present in every part of the physical universe. “Form” makes something what it is, such as the form of a material object. In the case of the human immaterial soul being the form or animating principle of the body, the word “form” is used analogously. The human soul is the ultimate principle by which we conduct every one of life’s activities. It is the source not only of our powers of intellect (understanding) and will, which do not take place in bodily organs, but also of our sense (external: sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch; and internal: common sense, imagination, instinct and memory) and vegetative (generation, growth, nutrition) powers. Intellect and will remain in the soul after death, but the sense and vegetative powers, which have the body-soul compound as their subject, do not remain in actual existence (they survive in the soul in a virtual state only) between bodily death and resurrection. Since Aquinas saw the human person as a compound of body and soul, he considered the human soul in the intermediate state as incomplete and requiring bodily resurrection for completion. With his understanding of human nature, bodily resurrection is thus not a superfluous addition to eternal life but an important part of God’s plan of salvation. Aquinas also made contributions to understanding the traditional Christian belief in angels.²⁹

I find it helpful to understand Aquinas’ compound view of human nature by considering an analogy related to water. A water molecule, although a combination of hydrogen and oxygen atoms, is only one “being” with one “nature.” Nevertheless, the atoms can be separated into their respective components. In an analogous way the living human being in this life, although a compound of physical body and spiritual (incorporeal or immaterial) soul, is only one being and only has one nature. Nevertheless, at death there is a “separation” of body and soul until the resurrection. Although there are some differences with this analogy, as with any analogy, this does not invalidate the real similarities. A Thomist anthropology thus seems to me to fit well with biblical data concerning the unity of the human person, the intermediate state, and bodily resurrection, as well as with the data of human experience, some of which we will consider below.³⁰

Eastern Orthodox Churches

The Orthodox Churches of the East, like the Catholic Church, consider Scripture together with Tradition (cf. Catholic Teaching, first paragraph, below), with a focus on the Greek Fathers of the Church and the Ecumenical Councils of the Church up to the schism with the Roman Catholic Church in 1055 A.D. In their theologies and liturgies one can see an anthropological dichotomy while stressing the unity of the human person, “who is an image and likeness of God in body and soul.” While understand the human soul to be spiritual and immortal, they consider the teaching “concerning the separated souls after death” to be “an impenetrable mystery.”³¹ Their main views regarding the soul are thus quite similar to Catholic views. In general, however, they emphasize more the mystery of the human being with less concern for precise formulations.

Protestantism

The Protestant Reformers did not question the existence of an immaterial soul. Martin Luther and some Radical Reformers, however, argued that the soul either dies with the body or ‘sleeps’ until the general resurrection. John Calvin wrote Psychopannychia to contest such views. He argued in support of the immorality of the soul from moral consciousness. In his Institutes of the Christian Religion he refers to a number of the biblical texts which we have considered above in his support of the immortality of the soul and the intermediate state. Calvin also supported the intercessory role of the saints, although he saw this role as subordinate to Christ’s primary intercessory role.³² This is in line with Catholic teaching.

Today Protestant theologians are divided. Some defend the traditional dichotomy and understand the human person to be a unity of body and spiritual immortal soul (e.g., John Cooper³³). Some speak of three parts to the human being: body, soul and spirit. And some others see the spirituality and immortality of the soul as an alien intrusion from Greek philosophy and emphasize the “Biblical and Hebrew” view whereby they understand man as “flesh-animated-by-soul,” as a “psycho-physical unity (J. A. T. Robinson), whose body is an outer aspect and whose soul as a vital principle is an inner aspect. Death involves the whole” human being.³⁴ “O. Cullman has revived the idea of death as a state of sleep or unconsciousness until the resurrection.” Immortality of the whole human being is understood only in terms of resurrection of the body in Christ. Others who criticize this view and who believe the soul is conscious after death interpret the Apostle Paul referring to death as “sleep” as “a natural metaphor”.³⁵

Catholic teaching

Catholic teaching does not take a sola scriptura (only scripture) approach. While affirming that the human authors of the Bible wrote both as true human authors (cf. Luke 1:1-4) and as inspired by God (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16), it also speaks of a development of doctrine, a growth in understanding of the meaning of God’s Revelation. With regard to this consider, for example, John 16:13 which reports Jesus telling his disciples shortly before his death, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth…” Since the Holy Spirit enlightens whoever is open to him, this growth in understanding God’s Revelation is not limited to the time of the original disciples of Jesus but ideally occurs in Christians of all times. Catholic teaching calls Tradition with a capital “T” whatever within the various human Christian traditions is indeed inspired by the Holy Spirit. It also affirms that:

… the task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form [that is, the Bible] or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it …. with the help of the Holy Spirit…. [Note: this living teaching office of the Church is understood to be exercised by the Pope and bishops united with him. As successors of Peter and the other apostles whom Jesus chose, they are understood to have the same teaching responsibility, authority and “charism of truth” as Peter and the other apostles had in the early church—see, e.g., Mt 28:16-20 and Acts 2:42.]³⁶

A few significant examples of Catholic teaching related to our topic follow.

In 1215 A.D. the Fourth Lateran Council taught that: “God [Father, Son and Holy Spirit] .... Creator of all things visible and invisible … by his almighty power, from the very beginning of time has created both orders of creatures in the same way out of nothing, the spiritual or angelic world and the corporeal or visible universe. And afterwards he formed the creature man, who in a way belongs to both orders, as he is composed of spirit and body....”³⁷ It is not too difficult to see that this teaching is faithful to biblical teaching while providing some clarification.

The Council of Vienne, which was convened from 1311-12 A.D., in response to an error of Peter John Olivi, taught: “We condemn as erroneous and opposed to Catholic truth every doctrine and opinion that rashly asserts that the substance of the rational, intellectual soul is not truly and by its own nature the form of the human body, or that casts doubt on this matter.”³⁸

The Fifth Lateran Council, which took place from 1512-17 A.D., in response to Averroistic monopsychism, taught that: “...the soul is not only truly, of its own nature, and essentially the form of the human body..., but also it is immortal...” An article on the human soul by Bilaniuk notes that these teachings do not make the Thomistic doctrine official but “in the language most convenient at the time, only tried to defend the mystery of man in the plurality of his dimensions and the unity of his being.” Thomistic theses concerning the human soul have been favorably received by the Magisterium as “one of the best illustrations of the mystery of man.”³⁹

More recently Catholic teaching continues to affirm that we human beings are not only physical but that our being includes a transcendent spiritual dimension. For example, the Second Vatican Council, in a document on the Church in the Modern World, speaks of man as a unity of body and soul. In the human body, which is good, the elements of the material world are brought to their highest perfection. When man “recognizes in himself a spiritual and immortal soul, he is not being led astray by false imaginings that are due to merely physical or social causes. On the contrary, he grasps what is profoundly true in this matter.”⁴⁰

In 1996 Pope John Paul II, while speaking of a significant argument in favor of the theory of evolution, also speaks of Revelation telling us that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. With regard to this he says:

It is by virtue of his spiritual soul that the whole person possesses such great dignity even in his body. Pius XII [Humani Generis, 1950] stressed this essential point: if the human body takes its origin from pre-existing living matter, the spiritual soul is immediately created by God.... With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say. However, does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry? Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them with the time line. The moment of transition to the spiritual is not the object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can discover at the experimental level a series of very valuable signs indicating what is specific to the human being. But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of self-awareness and self-reflection, of moral conscience, freedom, or again, of aesthetic and religious experience, falls within the competence of philosophical analysis and reflection, while theology brings out its ultimate meaning according to the Creator’s plans.⁴¹

This teaching reflects a basic presupposition of Catholic teaching and theology, that is, that there is a unity of all truth. This is because the same God, who created us and our minds which are capable of discovering certain truths about reality by means of experience and reason (consider, e.g., the various human sciences and philosophy), also chose to communicate or reveal certain truths to us human beings.⁴²

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which presents a recent summary of Catholic teaching, includes a section called, “Body and Soul but Truly One.”(nn. 362-8) Among other things, it says, “The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the ‘form’ of the body: i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.”(n. 365) Here again we see a number of the main Thomistic theses on the human soul. The Catechism also has sections on the communion of saints including the communion of the Church of heaven and earth and the intercession of the saints in heaven for us (nn. 946-62); resurrection of the body (nn. 988-1004); life everlasting including the particular judgment, heaven, purgatory, praying for the dead, hell, the last judgment, and the new heaven and earth (nn. 1020-60).⁴³

3.) Some Related Data of Human Experience

Besides data from the Bible, a number of Christian traditions, and Catholic teaching, some data of human experience support the view that the human soul is immaterial and does not die with the death of the body including the brain. Related experiences include our basic experiences of consciousness and free will, near-death experiences, many miracles experienced related to requests for intercessory prayer by deceased saints, and our experience related to the continuing identity of the person.

Consciousness and Free Will

Consciousness and free will are basic human experiences which some materialist neuroscientists consider to be illusions created by the brain. Non-reductive physicalist thinkers consider these experiences to be real but they offer no adequate causal explanation for such experiences. Qualia, subjective human experiences, while normally correlated to brain states in this life are fundamentally different than what physically happens in the brain and human body. Nobel prize-winning neuroscientist John Eccles, who dedicated many years researching mind-brain questions, concluded that nothing in the laws of physics, chemistry and biology even begins to explain human consciousness and the human person’s ability to voluntarily influence and control measurable brain and body states. He thought it was necessary to posit the existence of an immaterial self or soul created by God to explain our subjective experiences. Together with distinguished philosopher Karl Popper he developed a hypothesis called dualist-interactionsism involving quantum mechanics to explain how the human “brain is open to influences from the mental events of the world of conscious experiences.”⁴⁴ Of interest, we can also note here that Nancey Murphy, a strong supporter of non-reductive physicalism, acknowledges that it is not possible to disprove dualism with scientific evidence.⁴⁵

Some other neuroscientists have either supported Eccles’ hypothesis (e.g., Charles Probst) or have come up with slightly different versions while supporting the existence of a non-material human soul (e.g., Mario Beauregard).⁴⁶ Some other contemporary philosophers and/or theologians have argued either in favor of some form of dualism (e.g., Keith Yandell) or in favor of a composite view of the human person involving a profound union of physical body and spiritual or immaterial and immortal soul, along the lines of Thomas Aquinas’ influential view (e.g., Benedict Ashley; Hans Urs von Balthasar; Joseph Ratzinger; and John Crosby).⁴⁷ With regard to the latter, for example, in The Acting Person, Karol Wojtyla, a Thomist philosopher who uses the phenomenological method, says in part, “It is to metaphysical analysis that we owe the knowledge of the human soul as the principle underlying the unity of the being and the life of a concrete person. We infer the existence of the soul and its spiritual nature from effects that demand a sufficient reason, that is to say, a commensurate cause.”⁴⁸

Near Death Experiences

There have been many reports of near-death experiences with varying degrees of credibility. Such experiences are commonly reduced to mere by-products of certain physical brain states by neuroscientists who support materialism or physicalism.⁴⁹ Some near-death experiences, however, involve persons after their recovery recalling certain events accurately, as verified by others, which took place when their brains were not functioning.⁵⁰ Consider, for example, the case of singer and songwriter Pam Reynolds who in 1991 had surgery to repair a grossly swollen blood vessel in her brain stem. During the procedure she was brought to a point of “clinical death”--her heart was stopped, her EEG brain waves flattened completely, her brain stem and cerebral hemispheres became unresponsive, and her body was cooled to 60 degrees Fahrenheit (well below the normal of 98.6 degrees). When she recovered she later reported having had an out-of-body experience and hovering above the operating table during the surgery. For someone knowing nothing of surgical practice she accurately described the Midas Rex bone saw used to cut open her skull and what happened during the operation including what the nurses had said. And this happened at a time when she was “clinically dead” and fully monitored by medical instruments. Cases such as that of Pam Reynolds strongly support the view that the mind or soul and consciousness can continue when the brain is no longer functional.⁵¹ Although such experiences do not prove an intermediate state of the soul between bodily death and resurrection, since in these cases the persons returned from near death, it seems to me that they lend credence to this traditional Christian view.

Miracles Related to Intercessory Prayer by Deceased Saints

Many people have experienced miracles related to requests for intercessory prayer by deceased saints. Related to this the official Catholic practice of the canonization of saints involves a very rigorous process. This includes an in-depth study of the person’s life on earth. Among other things, it also requires God working at least two miracles (except for a martyr) in response to specific requests for the “saint’s” intercession after his or her death. It seems to me that this strongly supports the traditional Christian view that there is an intermediate state of the human soul between bodily death and resurrection. If the deceased saints are not really conscious how can they intercede for us? If they are not able to pray for us, why does God often answer such requests, often working miracles in response to such requests? Would this not involve God being deceptive, deliberately acting in a way which supports an illusory human view? Such deception is incompatible with God’s nature. Since God is “Truth” and all-powerful, and has worked many miracles in response to requests for deceased saints to intercede for us, this confirms that the deceased saints really are conscious and able to intercede for us. This implies that they have spiritual immaterial souls which have survived the death of their bodies. With regard to the intercession of the saints compare the discussion of 2 Maccabees 15:11-16 above.⁵²

The Continuing Identity of the Person

While supporters of non-reductive physicalism deny that humans have immaterial immortal souls and an intermediate state, it seems to me that this view presents a serious problem with regard to the continuing identity of human persons between bodily death, which destroys the person according to this view, and their later “reconstitution” with bodily resurrection. Consider an analogy or “thought experiment.” Suppose God were to create a clone of you now, while you are still living, with a body, memory and sense of identity identical to yours. From that point on you and your clone would not have exactly the same experiences since you and your clone would not be in exactly the same place and may indeed travel to different places, meet different people, have different experiences, and so forth. Would this “clone” be you? I think not and that this is the only logical conclusion.⁵³ Similarly, if a person ceases to exist with bodily death and God were to “reconstitute” a person with your memories and sense of identity with bodily resurrection, that person would not be you.

Someone may object that the fact that one person cannot exist as more than one being at the same time does not mean that the same person cannot be destroyed in death and then recreated in the future. But consider another analogy which shows that a difference in time does not make any difference. Suppose you made a violin that was later completely destroyed. Following this, suppose you could remake a violin that had the same properties as your original violin, that is, it was made of the same materials, it was the same size and weight, and so forth. Would this violin be the same violin as the original? No, it would not be; it would be a similar but a different violin. This is because the first violin and the remade violin are different beings. There is no continuity of real existence or being between them. In line with this analogy, if you were to die and you ceased to exist as a person (the non-reductive physicalist view), and following this, God were to recreate a person that is exactly like you, this person would not be you. It would be a person similar to you but a different person nonetheless. There would be no real continuity of being and existence between you and this reconstituted person.

This problem does not arise with the traditional Christian view which affirms an intermediate state of the “person” in a real sense between bodily death and resurrection. As philosophical theologian John Cooper points out, “The person who survives death and undergoes future resurrection is a continuously existing reality.” This is the case even if some of the properties and capacities of the person “may change due to disembodiment or divine sanctification.” The person remains the “self-identical person from life, through death, and into the life to come. The possibility of nonidentity cannot arise.”⁵⁴ This conclusion is supported by our experience of living things such as a tree or a person. Although they can grow and change in many ways over time, as long as there is a real continuity of being and existence without interruption, the tree or the person remains the very same tree or person.

Conclusion

In this paper I have presented some data from the Bible and human experience that supports the traditional Christian view that the human soul continues to exist in an intermediate state between bodily death and resurrection, that it is immaterial and immortal. The position of non-reductive physicalism which holds that a human person is ontologically only physical can not be reconciled with this. The ways of God, who is a mystery of infinite love, are also in line with the criterion of maximum love. This has been shown to us, for example, through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, God incarnate.⁵⁵ It seems to me that the Thomist view, that the human person is a compound of a profoundly united body and immaterial immortal soul, better fits this criterion than non-reductive physicalism does. Having an immaterial immortal soul does not mean that we need to value less our bodies and ecosystem. It, however, provides a more solid foundation for defending the great intrinsic dignity of all human beings,⁵⁶ including the disabled, than non-reductive physicalism can. That our being includes not only a physical dimension but also a transcendent spiritual dimension also means that we have a greater affinity with God who is “Spirit.” This too would allow a more profound union of the human person with God in a way somewhat analogous to the Incarnation. It seems to me that if one who dies loving God can experience heaven before the resurrection and continue to play an active role in the communion of saints with Jesus, then this truly is “good news” compatible with the Christian view that nothing, not even death, can separate us from the love of God (see Rom. 8:38-9).

Endnotes