Introduction to essay

This is an essay which I have broken down into smaller parts for the sake of this blog, in the hope of being able to locate and address smaller issues within the larger theme with greater ease, and possibly provoke more discussion....

I have entitled this essay Soul-Destroying, not because I believe that man’s soul is ultimately to be destroyed (for I do not) but because I believe that the Scriptures destroy the popular church teaching of what the soul is. The title also metaphorically describes my emotional experience when confronted with the likelihood that what I had been taught for almost thirty years had misled me into serious doctrinal error. However, only when faced with this realisation was I able to reconstruct my understanding of the soul and see the saint’s true hope: bodily resurrection from the dead.

Though my convictions on this doctrine have strengthened over the last few years, mainly as a result of testing them against the biblical texts used in this essay, I must accept that others may wish to point out where they think I err. I may be making some obvious mistakes with the texts I examine. I may not have considered other obvious texts. The purpose of this essay, therefore, is to provoke discussion.

This essay originally emanated from a request that I explain and defend my views concerning the doctrine of ‘going to Heaven when you die’. I had not envisioned that the task would produce something of this size. The reason it did so is because of the wealth of biblical texts that many people (I believe) are either ignoring or misinterpreting. The reader can assume from the offset that I am neither a skilled nor experienced essay writer – this much will become obvious – so I accept that there will be many structural flaws and clumsy use of language. Hopefully any negative feedback, therefore, will be premised upon a sincere disagreement with biblical interpretations and not upon the academic presentation of these views.

In order to be consistent I must accept that, if I have been wrong before, I can be wrong again. But ought this reality to hinder me from re-examining and challenging popular doctrines? I do not think so. I must not be ashamed to ask any question, even should I challenge what transpires to be the truth. Such a process should ultimately serve to give me more confidence in the truth.

Were it to come down to which doctrines I would prefer to espouse, it would undoubtedly be those I formerly held. Why should I wish to destroy things I once considered fundamental to biblical faith, and risk strong disagreement with many important influences and friends?  

I do not hold these things lightly and would therefore trust that any response to them is taken seriously, the responses themselves being open to testing.