172 
pared with. Luke xii. 4, 5, shows that it is life in the resurrec- 
tion state that is there spoken of, for it is life not m Hades, 
hut in Gehenna. The participles used also indicate this pro- 
lepsis. The words “kill the body and are not able to kill the 
soul.” (Psyche), might seem at first sight to favour the view 
that soul survives the body, and lives independently of it ; but 
a little consideration will show this not to be the sense. 1 or 
the same Teacher cannot mean in one passage that Psyche 
survives the body, and in another that Psyche may be lost 
even in this life. He means that Psyche is to be understood 
of life in two senses and under two conditions, the one ot a 
temporal, the other of an eternal kind. . 
12. There are half a dozen or more passages that might 
seem not to square with the view that Soul or Psyche never 
means spirit in the intermediate state, and were it. not that 1 
should have to trespass too far upon pure exegesis I should 
be glad here to examine them. But I must content myselt 
with simply pointing to one or two. . 
13. Acts ii. 27 — 31 is a quotation from the Septuagmt, and 
must be understood in the light of Old Testament usage. 
There Nephesh means sometimes a bodily organism, sometimes 
the living animal principle, and sometimes a dead corpse.. 
But it is never applied, I think, to pure spirit, as the Spirit ot 
God, like Neshama and Ruach. . 
14. Delitzsch quotes two passages to show that Psycne is 
sometimes referred to as in the intermediate state (Rev. vi. 9, 
and xx. 4) ; but the former passage is symbolic, calling up the 
altar and its victim, or life in this present condition, while the 
latter speaks in plain terms of life in the “first resurrec- 
tion” Neither passage gives the smallest colour to the view 
that Psyche is used in the sense of Delitzsch. He says, ihe 
soul and spirit outlast the corruption of the body. And 
nevertheless it is true of the soul, in a certain sense, that it 
dies. It dies so far as it went to centralize itself in the 
natural powers of the body, and to pervade the organs of the 
body with its own spirit-like fife. It does not die so far as it 
is of the spirit; but it dies so far as it becomes part ot the 
body.” This view, as I have already said, is Platonic ; it is 
exactly that which I have given from the writings of Plato. 
But is it “Biblical”? Delitzsch seems to me to crown a 
work of labour on “ Psychology ” by denying the existence ot 
“ Psyche ” ! His trichotomy becomes under the pressure ot 
theory dichotomy. The soul is neither itself, nor body , J^or 
spirit ! It dies, and it does not die ! I do not think that 
the New Testament trumpet gives this uncertain sound. 
15. The Word of God, as quick and powerful, would not 
