“WHERE does the soul go immediately after death? We have lost a small son and we wonder.” These were the words distraught parents directed to one of America’s foremost clergymen. How did he answer? He wrote: “For me, the words of Jesus spoken to the repentant thief are significant​—‘This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise.’ I think of your child . . . as being with him.”

No doubt about it, this clergyman believes that life continues after death. This is also what the ancient Greeks and Romans believed. Thus Socrates stated, “All men’s souls are immortal.” Plato followed his teacher Socrates, and hence this belief about the soul is said to be a Platonic teaching.

Why did these men believe the way they did? One of their arguments was that the human mind was too wonderful to have the same destiny as the brute creation. They also claimed that to have death end all would be weighting matters in favor of the wicked. And the ancient Roman essayist and orator Cicero argued that he himself, even as other noble men, suffered and endured only because of hope of life after death. He therefore referred to the day of his death as the “glorious day” when he would leave this earth to associate with “the divine assembly of departed spirits.”

Early church “fathers” let themselves be influenced by this pagan Greek belief, and, as a result, it has become part of many creeds in Christendom. However, the reasons given by the Greeks for their belief show that they believed as they did, not because of observable facts, but only because that is the way they wanted it to be.

What Does the Bible Teach?

Is the idea that man has a soul separate and distinct from his body, and that it lives forever, taught in the Bible? No, it is not. Thus the New Catholic Encyclopedia (Vol. 13, p. 449), under the heading “Soul (in the Bible),” states: “There is no dichotomy [division] of body and soul in the O[Id] T[estament]. . . . The term nepes, though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body.” Thus also the New American Bible (a Roman Catholic translation), in its Biblical Theology Terms, under the heading “Soul,” states: “In the New Testament to ‘save one’s soul’ (Mk 8:35) does not mean to save some ‘spiritual’ part of man, as opposed to his ‘body,’ (in the Platonic sense) but the whole person with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, . . . in addition to being concrete and physical.”

Similarly Dr. H. M. Orlinsky, one of America’s foremost Hebrew scholars, said regarding the use of the word “soul”: “The Hebrew word in question here is ‘nefesh.’ . . . The Bible does not say we have a soul. ‘Nefesh’ is the person himself.” That God’s Word does indeed take this position is seen from Genesis 2:7:a “Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Thus the man became a living creature [nephesh].” (Other translations read “soul” or “being.”) Since this is so, it follows that when the man dies the soul dies. And so we read: “The soul that sins shall die.”​—Ezek. 18:4, 20.

It is indeed of interest that in recent years one theologian after another has come out in support of this understanding. Professor Milton Gatch, in his book Death: Meaning and Mortality in Christian Thought and Contemporary Culture, states: “Not only do the biblical writers on the whole have no conception of a soul as a separable element of human existence, but also there is agreement that death is the . . . termination of existence and that there is no such thing as an individual afterlife.” Writing in the same vein is Professor O. Cullmann, a theologian of the Universities of Paris and Basel. In his book Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead? he states: “No other publication of mine has provoked such enthusiasm or such violent hostility.” In this book he underscores the fact that man’s hope for the future lies not in his having an immortal soul but in a resurrection.

Objections Considered

Professor Cullmann stated that his book aroused “violent hostility” on the part of some. Yes, many professed Christians feel very strongly that man has an immortal soul. Like the clergyman that sought to bring solace to the grieving parents, they take Jesus’ words to the repentant thief to hold out such a hope: “I tell you this: today you shall be with me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43) But does it?

Let us first note that, since the Bible does not contradict itself, there must be some misunderstanding. The fact is that Jesus himself did not go to Paradise on that day, for the Bible says that he went to Hades, the common grave of mankind, and was resurrected on the third day. (Acts 2:23-32, Revised Standard Version) Jesus himself stated that just as “Jonah was in the sea-monster’s belly for three days and three nights, . . . the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the bowels of the earth.” (Matt. 12:40) That is why after his resurrection he said to Mary that he had not as yet ascended to heaven, to his God.​—John 20:17.

Then how are we to understand Jesus’ words? Not as if he had said, “Today you will be with me in Paradise,” but, rather, “Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43, Rotherham’s translation; see also New World Translation.) The solution lies in correct punctuation. Jesus was on that day telling the repentant evildoer that at some future time he would be in Paradise. That is in harmony with the rest of the Scriptures. But may one change the punctuation? Most certainly. Why? Because punctuation was unknown when the Bible was written, it being systematized first in the sixteenth century of our Common Era. So it is up to the Bible translator to supply the punctuation, and reason would indicate that any text that can be punctuated in more ways than one be punctuated so as to make the text in harmony with the rest of the Bible.

Another common objection raised as to the dead being actually dead, unconscious, is the account of the rich man and Lazarus. It tells that the rich man died and went to Hades and that in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment. (Luke 16:19-31) Seemingly this teaches life after death, but is this account historical? Did it actually happen or is it merely an allegory? It was written that Jesus “never spoke to them without a parable.” (Matt. 13:34) As A New Testament Commentary (1969) well notes, to consider it historical “ignores the element of symbolism that is quite apparent in the story,” such as “Abraham’s bosom, the great Chasm fixed and this flame.” It is also significant that Jesus said nothing about the rich man as being wicked or the poor man as being good. Considered as a parable, it cannot be used to prove life after death.

Another objection raised is that repeatedly in the book of Revelation “souls” are seen, such as “those who had been slaughtered for God’s word for the testimony they bore.” (Rev. 6:9; 20:4) But here again, are we not dealing with symbolisms, with which the Book of Revelation is filled? Surely! (See, for example, Revelation 9:7-10; 12:3.) In view of what Leviticus 17:11 says about the life or soul as being in the blood, it is quite evident that John’s words here mean that he saw the blood of faithful Christians who had been slaughtered because of their faithfulness to God and his Word. And let it be noted that there is a reasonable explanation for every other objection supposedly based on the Bible, such as the fact that some appear to have been able to talk with the dead.

Communication with the Dead

A seeming case in point is the record of unfaithful King Saul when having a witch call forth the deceased prophet Samuel. True, the witch of Endor claimed to get in touch with the dead prophet Samuel, but did she actually do so? She could not have, for the dead are unconscious, asleep in the grave. (Ps. 146:3, 4; Eccl. 9:5, 10) Then whom did the witch see? She saw a demon impersonating the prophet Samuel. (1 Sam. 28:3-25)