Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead?: The Witness of the New Testament Paperback – November 29, 2000

It was a stilmulating read and I thourghly enjoyed it.

A great approach to an ageless question as more and more people take a critical look at what we have been taught for centuries. Cullman is a man before his time in his challenge to a Hellenistic view of what has become the accepted norm for Christianity.

Most helpful in laying out a controversy.

Although I agree with the author that the idea of the immortal soul is of pagan Greek origin and not a Biblical truth - whereas the resurrection is - the arguments have been poorly constructed. This little booklet is simply not convincing and lacks Biblical support. It is largely philosophical in nature and therefore rather disappointing. If I knew upfront that it was only 60 pages, ie. 20 minutes worth of cursive reading, I certainly would not have ordered it. I believe the blurb on the booklet is misleading. I would not recommend it to serious readers of any persuasion.

Oscar Cullmann (1902-1999) was a German Christian theologian in the Lutheran tradition, best known for his work in the ecumenical movement. He wrote many books, such as Early Christian Worship,The Christology of the New Testament,Baptism in the New Testament,The Johannine circle, etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1955 book (which was the “Ingersoll Lecture on the Immortality of Man” at Harvard University), “No other publication of mine has provoked such enthusiasm or such violent hostility… Friends who have followed my previous work with interest and approval have indicated to me the pain which this study has caused them… the truth I have found it necessary to draw between the courageous and joyful and primitive Christian hope of the resurrection of the dead and the serene philosophic expectation of the survival of the immortal soul, has displeased not only many sincere Christians… but also those whose convictions… are more strongly moulded by philosophic considerations. So far, no critic of either kind has attempted to refute me by exegesis, that being the basis of our study.”

He states in the Introduction, “If one recognizes that death and eternal life in the New Testament are always bound up with the Christ-event, then it becomes clear that for the first Christians the soul is not intrinsically immortal, but rather became so only through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and through faith in Him. It also becomes clear that death is not intrinsically the Friend, but rather that its ‘sting,’ its power, is taken away ONLY through the victory of Jesus over it in His death. And lastly, it becomes clear that the resurrection already accomplished is not the state of fulfillment, for that remains in the future until the body is also resurrected, which will not occur until ‘the last day.’” (Pg. 17)

He contrasts the death of Socrates with the death of Jesus, “For nothing shows better the radical difference between the Greek doctrine of the immortality of the soul and the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection. Because Jesus underwent death in all its horror, not only in His body, but also in His soul… and as He is regarded by the first Christians as the Mediator of salvation, He must indeed be the very one who in His death conquers death itself. He cannot obtain this victory by simply living on as an immortal soul, thus fundamentally NOT dying. He can conquer death only by actually dying, by betaking Himself to the sphere of death, the destroyer of life, to the sphere of ‘nothingness,’ of abandonment of God.” (Pg. 25)

He states, “Belief in the immortality of the soul is not belief in a revolutionary event. Immortality, in fact, is only a NEGATIVE assertion; the soul does not die, but simply lives on. Resurrection is a POSITIVE assertion: the whole man, who has really died, is recalled to life by a new act of creation by God. Something has happened---a miracle of creation! For something has also happened previously, something fearful: life formed by God has been destroyed.” (Pg. 27)

He observes, “Body and soul are both originally good in so far as they are created by God; they are both bad in so far as the deadly power of the flesh has hold of them. Both can and must be set free by the quickening power of the Holy Spirit. Here, therefore, deliverance consists not in a release of soul from body but in a release of both from flesh. We are not released from the body; rather the body itself is set free.” (Pg. 35-36)

He says, “According to 1 Corinthians 15, death will be conquered as the ‘last enemy.’ … John’s Apocalypse [20:14] describes the victory at the end, the annihilation of Death… and a few verses on it is said, ‘Death will be no more.’ This means, however, that the transformation of the body does not occur immediately after each individual death. Here too we must once again guard against any accommodation to Greek philosophy, if we wish to understand the New Testament doctrine.” (Pg. 48-49)

After citing various New Testament texts, he comments, “All these images express simply a special proximity to Christ, in which those dying in Christ before the End find themselves. They are ‘with Christ’ or ‘in paradise’ or ‘in Abraham’s bosom’ or, according to Revelation 6:9, ‘under the altar.’ All these are simply various images of special nearness to God. But the most usual image for Paul is: ‘They are asleep.’ It would be difficult to dispute that the New Testament reckons with such an interim time for the dead, as well as for the living, although any sort of speculation upon the state of the dead in this interim period is lacking here.” (Pg. 51)

He summarizes, “WE wait, and THE DEAD wait. Of course the rhythm of time may be different for them than for the living; and in this way the interim-time may be shortened for them. This does not, indeed, go beyond the new Testament texts and their exegesis, because this expression ‘to sleep,’ which is the customary designation in the New Testament of the ‘interim condition,’ draws us to the view that for the dead another time-consciousness exists, that of ‘those who sleep.’ But that does not mean that the dead are not still in time. Therefore once again we see that the New Testament resurrection hope is different from the Greek belief in immortality.” (Pg. 57)

He concludes, “The answer to the question, ‘Immortality of the soul or resurrection of the dead in the New Testament’ is unequivocal. The TEACHING of the great philosophers Socrates and Plato can in no way be brought into consonance with that of the New Testament. That their PERSON, their LIFE, and their BEARING IN DEATH can none the less be HONORED by Christians, the apologists of the second century have shown. I believe it can also be demonstrated from the New Testament. But this is a question with which we do not have to deal here.” (Pg. 60)

This is a fascinating and very insightful biblical study. Even if one disagrees with Cullmann, his book is a very valuable study of the topic, and is well worth reading by anyone seriously studying the subject.

"Immortality of the Soul Or Resurrection of the Dead? The Witness of the New Testament" by Oscar Cullmann.
The title puts forward the dichotomy, and there is one. Oscar Cullman then goes about illustrating this dichotomy by comparing the death of Socrates to the death of Jesus. Starting with an account of how these two men viewed death he shows the differences in how they died. In Greek philosophy and thought, that still dominates much of western thought despite some 2000 years of Christian influence, death is welcomed as the liberation of the soul. In Jewish/ Christian thought death is an enemy that robs a person of life, "the most precious good" that God has given us. Death takes both body and soul. It is not only the body that is susceptible to death, but also the soul. Jesus dies body and soul, and is raised in body and soul. Only if the soul too dies is the concept of resurrection possible.
Perhaps that is not the most earth shattering concept for Christians trained in theology. But it is one that is often missed on the laity. Not understanding the dichotomy between the immortality of the soul and the resurrection from the dead, is a hindrance to proclaiming the gospel. For the gospel is the fact that Christ conquered death in body and soul on the cross, by invading the territory of death with his death, and rising from the dead to give us life, and secure our resurrection. When this is not understood the gospel is not understood. The better this is understood the better the gospel is proclaimed, the more apt one is to believe upon hearing. Funeral sermons are rendered vapid by a misunderstanding of death and resurrection. Good Friday and Easter are meaningless where the immortality of the soul is held as proper Christian teaching.
For this reason, I highly recommend this book to pastors, theologians, and laity alike. It is written in simple down to earth language that does not require a degree in theology to follow, that despite the fact that Oscar Cullmann was a theological giant of the 20th Century. It is a great book to read in preparation for funerals, and Lent, Good Friday and Easter. It is short enough that it can be read within the confines of an afternoon, only 60 some pages.
I do not know if he has convinced me completely on the state of the dead between death and the Resurrection. He maintains that they too wait for the End. I don't know if "wait" is the right word, though I do believe that it is at the end, when Christ comes to judge the living and the dead, that we are given our spiritual bodies, which are bodies, as Christ has a body. It is the relation of time, eternity and the End, that makes me wonder if the term "wait" is warranted. However, Oscar Cullmann gives one ample reason to hear his concerns and take them into account. It is a book I know I will be reading more than once, and pondering even more.