Thus, while Mr. Parkhurst admits that Gen. 35:18, is the fairest instance that can be found where _nephesh_ could be supposed to mean the spiritual part of man, yet he will not so far hazard his reputation, as a scholar and critic as to give it that meaning in this or any other instance, declaring that here it may most properly be rendered “breath.” And this is in harmony with the account of man’s creation, where it is seen that the imparting of the breath of life is what made Adam a living soul; and the loss of that breath, of course, reduces man again to a state of death. 1 Kings 17:21, 22: “And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived.” In the light of the foregoing criticism on Gen. 35:18, this text scarcely needs a passing remark. The same principle of interpretation applies to this as to the former. But one can hardly read such passages as this without noticing how at variance they read with the popular view. The child, as a whole, is the object with which the text deals. The child was dead. Something called the soul, which the child is spoken of as having in possession, had gone from him, which caused his death. This element, not the child itself, but what belonged to the child, as a living being, came into him again, and _the child_ revived. But according to the immaterialist view, this passage should not so read at all. For that makes the soul to be the child proper; and the passage should read something like this: “And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the child came and took possession of his body again, and the body revived.” This is the popular view. Mark the chasm between it and the Scripture record. Verse 17 tells what had left the child, and what it was therefore necessary for the child to recover before he could live again. “His sickness was so sore,” says the record, “that there was no _breath_ left in him.” That was the trouble: the breath of life was gone from the child. And when Elijah comes to pray for his restoration, he asks, in the most natural manner possible, that the very thing that had left the child, and thereby caused his death, might come into him again, and cause him to live; and that was simply what verse 17 states, the breath of life. Thus in neither of these passages do we find any evidence of the existence of an immaterial, immortal soul, which so confidently claims the throne of honor in the temple of modern orthodoxy. CHAPTER XIII. CAN THE SOUL BE KILLED? Matt. 10:28: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Luke records the same sentiment in these words:--