In my article, Response to Douglas V. Pond on Biblical and LDS Anthropology and Eschatology, I provide some of the evidence, from both the Old and New Testaments, for belief in a conscious intermediate state, contrary to Seventh Day Adventist and other theologies that hold to “soul sleep” (psychopannychism) or even “soul death” (thnetopsychism).
Reformed Protestant scholar, Paul R. Williamson (lecturer in OT, Hebrew, and Aramaic at Moore College, Sydney), in a recent work on death and the afterlife in the Bible, provided some interesting information supporting belief in a conscious intermediate state:
The Evidence from Necromancy and Veneration of the Dead
Necromancy and the veneration of the dead
The Old Testament forbids necromancy—the consultation of the dead. The Torah expressly prohibits the practice (Lev. 19:31; 20:6, 27; Deut. 18:11), condemning it as offensive to Yahweh. Such prohibitions, however, would be unnecessary if consultation with the dead were not considered feasible—at least in the minds of those involved in such nefarious activity. Moreover, it is clear from the subsequent need to ban mediums—both at the beginning and the end of Israel’s monarchy period—that this illicit activity was practised. Indeed, this is further confirmed by repeated allusions to such heterodox practices in Isaiah (Isa. 8:19; 19:3; 29:4). One can thus infer that at least some Israelites believed in the concept of a post-mortem existence: the dearly departed were not thought to cease to exist . . . Such may be further substantiated by the so-called ancestor cult or veneration of the dead . . . For some, the evidence suggests that this was once an acceptable Israelite practice, which was subsequently prohibited, accordingly, most traces of it have allegedly been removed or suppressed by later orthodoxy. Thus understood, in addition to generally acknowledged references or possible allusions (e.g. Deut. 26:14; Isa. 57:6; Ps. 106:28 [cf. Num. 25:2]; Jer. 17:5-6), many other texts may originally have referred to the veneration of the dead, but these have been suitably altered or suppressed by later Yahwists . . . In addition to these, the following instances have also been suggested: the meal following Saul’s nocturnal séance (1 Sam. 28), the psalmists’ veneration of ‘the holy ones who are in the earth’ (Ps. 16:3, understood as spirits in the underworld rather than either living human saints or celestial beings), an alleged allusion to the invoking of ancestors in Ps49:11, and the reference to putting away ‘the corpses of their kings’ in Ezek. 43:7, 9; alleged cultic associations of a marzēaḥ banquet (mentioned twice explicitly in the OT [Amos 6:7; Jer. 16:5-9], and purportedly alluded to in Ezek. 8:7-12, Pss. 23:5 and 133); the alleged associations of tĕrāpîm (as ancestor figures), the erection of pillars , kinship-theophoric names, sacrificial and burial customs with an ancestor worship. (Paul R. Williamson, Death and the Afterlife: Biblical perspectives on ultimate questions [New Studies in Biblical Theology 44; London: Apollos, 2017], 38-39, 39 n. 22, italics in original, emphasis in bold added)
The Expression “Being Gathered to One’s Peoples”
[“Gathered to his peoples” is] a distinctive expression that appears ten times in the Pentateuch (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29, 33; Num. 20:24; 27:13a; 31:2; Deut. 32:50 [twice]), and mentioned alongside death and burial. The fact that it is used of Jacob several months before his actual burial (c. Gen. 49:33; 50:13) rules out identification with burial itself; moreover, that it does not indicate being interred in the family tomb is clear from the cases of Abraham, Aaron, and Moses—none of whom was literally buried with his ancestors. Most likely, therefore, ‘being gathered to his peoples’ suggests joining one’s ancestors in the afterlife. (Ibid., 40, emphasis added).
The Evidence from Luke 24:37-39
Jesus appears to his disciples shortly after his resurrection. Not anticipating such an event, they assumed that the resurrected Jesus was simply a ghost (pneuma). Here Luke is arguably using ‘spirit (pneuma) as a synonym of phantasm, the term employed by both Matthew and Mark when the disciples previously mistook Jesus for a ghost (cf. Matt. 14:26; Mark 6:49). In other words, pneuma is used here to denote a deceased human being who nevertheless has bodily shape and appearance. Thus, as even Green (Body, Soul, and Human Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible [Paternoster, 2008], 166) concedes, ‘It is difficult not to see in the disciples’ response a dualist anthropology.’ But more than this, how Jesus responds to their concern here is significant. While overturning their analysis, Jesus’ response is not the typical ‘rationalist’ observation: ‘Ghosts don’t exist, stupid!’ Rather, he underlines that a ghost/spirit does not have flesh and bones, as he has. Now we can read this in one of two ways: (1) Jesus is simply accommodating himself to the superstitious notion just expressed by his disciples, without endorsing it; or (2) Jesus is acknowledging that the spirits of the dead do continue to exist, but are obviously not corporeal beings, with physical flesh and bones. Now that may raise more difficulties than it solves, but if we follow the latter interpretation, then this is yet another text that seems to imply not only a dualistic anthropology but also the possibility of some kind of post-mortem existence prior to bodily resurrection . . . Such an interpretation of Luke 24:37-39 may be further supported by the fact that Jesus does not correct such a premise earlier: the disciples drew a similar conclusion when Jesus walked on water (cf. Matt. 14:26-27 || Mark 6:49-50); it also receives academic support from Peter Bolt (“Jesus, the Daimons and the Dead,” in The Unseen World: Christian Reflections on Angels, Demons, and the Heavenly Realm, ed. A.N.S. Lane [Paternoster, 1996], 75-102), who maintains that daimōn/daimonion language in the Gospels relates more to dead spirits than to demonic possession. (Ibid., 55-56, 56 n. 78, emphasis added).
