SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Questions of life and breath and Spirit

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 )
PosterThread
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Can you see that if the soul is somehow derived from the body (flesh), God Himself is not implicated in its sinfulness?



Yes. Though I don't think we can too soon rule out the possibility of God creating souls individually at conception simply to keep from implicating Him. I think there are ways around that such as I suggested the child somehow was infected with Sin as would a child be infected by a contageous disease of the mother. The child could have been defiled by Sin at some stage in development.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/7/19 13:31Profile









 Re: Questions of life and breath and Spirit - soul or spirit first?

Robert,

Quote:
If that were so then it seems logical that the soul must be present in order for any physical functions beyond that initial transfer to have function.

I don't know if you've had time to process my hypotheses but I'm picking up that it is fixed in your thinking that [u]aspects of soul from the parents are inherited[/u] [i]as 'pure' soul[/i], rather than purely as genetic material capable of [i]generating[/i] soul which is uniquely individual to the child, in accordance with the unique combination of genetic material inherited from its parents.

Thinking this through, would explain how Jesus said 'a [u]body[/u] you have prepared me'.


 2005/7/19 13:32









 Re: Questions of life and breath and Spirit - the paternity of sin

Robert, previously you said 'sin' had to be transmitted through the father (Adam). Every parent has a father, who had a father. Every mother also had a father who had a father. It is necessary to see this is what influences the immediate parents of the child, through which the child also, as his or her mother and father, is subject to the principle of sin by a spiritual effect on [i]flesh[/i]. If it were possible to be born with the principle of sin installed, and somehow not commit a sin, it would still be the principle of sin which would make it impossible to please God.

Quote:
I think there are ways around that such as I suggested the child somehow was infected with Sin as would a child be infected by a contageous disease of the mother.

The spirit which gives life to the flesh, also activates thereby, the [i]sin principle[/i] in the flesh. This is how God is implicated - by giving each child a spirit, which is not intrinsically sinful.

If there is Hebrew text which undoes my thesis, I'm all ears. ;-)

 2005/7/19 14:02
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
If we say that the soul comes directly from God at birth we are left to make God the author of sin. We know God would not create something sinful.


Hi robert
Good to talk, sorry to have left you to it.
Let's probe this a little. The "creationist" (wish we had another name for this group; creationist is bound to cause problems!) view may not necessarily mean than God creates a sinful soul. In all my thinking on this topic I have a verse of scripture that I keep at the forefront on my mind. Heb. 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. This passage juxtaposes three groups and indicates that the word of God 'logos' is able, uniquely?, to pierce and divide between the categories within these three groups; soul/spirit, joints/marrow, thought/intents of the heart. The subtleties required in distinguishing 'thoughts' from 'intents' are a warning here. How could I reliably distinguish between the two? Only I think by revelation, hence the need for the 'logos'. Human perception and even theological knowledge are utterly unreliable here; we need to know what God thinks to separate between thoughts and intents.

The other couplet that is obviously in my mind is 'soul/spirit'. Apparently these two can be so closely associated that only 'revelation' can separate them out. You may have noticed that whenever we get into soul and spirit stuff here on SI, I always bring in my cautions. It is so easy to say that man's action is 'soulish' and mine 'spiritual'. That's just a preamble; a disclaimer! ...we know in part...

The word 'soul' is first found in most versions in Gen. 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. but before we look at that verse we ought to be aware that this word 'nephesh' is used earlier in Genesis;Gen. 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
Gen. 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen. 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Gen. 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.These are KJV quotations; this is Green's Literal translation;Gen 1:21 LITV. And God created the great sea animals, and all that creeps, having a living soul, which swarmed the waters, according to its kind; and every bird with wing according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:24 LITV And God said, Let the earth bring forth the soul of life according to its kind: cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth, according to its kind. And it was so.
Gen 1:30 LITV 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to all birds of the heavens, and to every creeper on the earth which has in it a living soul, every green plant is for food. And it was so.So right at the beginning we have a sense that sentient creatures have something which the Bible refers to as 'soul'. The word almost seems synonymous with 'life' and that is the way most versions have translated it. If 'nephesh' derives from 'breath' then the phrase or concept that we are touching in each of these verses is 'life-chay' and 'soul/breath-nephesh'; the breath of life. These creatures, and I am groping for words here, have life-force, soul-life, they are instinct with a characteristic life; soul.

The next time 'soul-nephesh' is used is in the creation of Adam, but there it is said to be the 'consequence' of God 'breathing' (nshamah - a puff of wind) lives into his nostrils. God formed (potted) Adam of the dust of the ground, puffed lives into his nostrils and Adam became a living soul (chay nephesh). Although the whole of the animal creation was also formed of the dust of the earth, Adam received this special attention from God and, apparently, as a consequence 'became' a living soul. The other sentient animals were already 'living souls' but Adam is different because of this extra 'puff'. I am not being frivolous.

Some Bible students have deduced that 'soul' is the consequence effect of indwelling spirit upon body which produces 'soul', but the remainder of the animal creation also has 'soul' but without this unique experience of being 'God-breathed'. Where did they get their 'soul' from? What is soul? It becomes more obscure as we go on. In the account of the flood we have the verse:Gen. 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. and we might have guessed that this would be 'nephesh' of life, but it isn't; it is 'ruwach'! Gen. 7:15,22 make it clear that we are not just talking about 'human' flesh here because the animal creation which went 'two by two' into the Ark also had 'ruwach'.

The word 'soul' is later used as an apparent synonym for 'life'. “All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob’s sons’ wives, all the souls were threescore and six; And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.”
(Gen. 46:26-27, KJVS) Here 'souls' come from Jacob's loins; is that traducianism?

I begin to wonder whether 'soul' is the same kind of word as 'flesh' in that we have to interpret it from its context; it is a multi=purpose word. Consequently, I am not sure that your comment quoted above can stand. If 'soul' is context sensitive then God could give an 'innocent' soul which would immediately find itself in the context of a fallen humanity and necessarily partake of that humanity. It would find itself within a trichotemy (I prefer trichotomy to tripartite) sharing with body and spirit, but with the spirit already 'dead' as regards its relationship with God. It must inevitably sink towards domination by the 'life forces' which affect it; a fallen physicality and a the law of sin and death in the spirit. This would make 'creationism' possible without charging God with the folly of creating a sinful soul.

what do you think?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/19 14:22Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

I think you make a good case here. I have a hard time coming to terms with a soul being anything other than 'blank' in the sense that it is predisposed to anything or is comprised of the parents. I'm not saying it's not possible and it does answer some other questions, but I have a hard time with it. Yet do you think we could safely take this position and not have to forsake original sin? My immediate thoughts was one in which I heard or read once where someone believed that a person did not fall and become victim of Original Sin until they actually performed the act. Actually I'm not so sure Paris Reidhead did not believe in Original Sin as we come to know it. I keep that in mind as I hear him teach on appetites, etc. and how they are good. I still believe he has some very good points though.

You mention "trichotomy". Have you heard the saying?:

1) Plants are a 'body'.
2) Animals are a 'soul' and 'body'
3) Man is 'spirit' 'soul' and 'body'.

Apart from the requirement of obedience, I have viewed this as a partial portion of the reason as to why God rejected Cain's offering. The herbs were given to the animals for food. How valuable were the herbs in comparison to the animal? How much more the human than the animal. You are worth more than many sparrows, etc. What is man that thou are mindful of him? Yet we see that in some way we were created in the image and likeness of God. Could it be that when God got ready to make man in His likeness- He made him in the form of a trinity also? And if so be that the mystery of the Holy Spirit carries over into our conversation we can conclude:

[i] "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but [u]canst not tell whence it cometh[/u], so is everyone that is born of the Spirit." [/i] (John 8)

Am I giving in too quickly?


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/7/19 16:06Profile









 Re: Questions of life and breath and Spirit

philologos,

Thank you for this detailed exposition.

Quote:
The word 'soul' is later used as an apparent synonym for 'life'.

“All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob’s sons’ wives, all the souls were threescore and six; And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.”(Gen. 46:26-27, KJVS)

Here 'souls' come from Jacob's loins; is that traducianism?

I begin to wonder whether 'soul' is the same kind of word as 'flesh' in that we have to interpret it from its context; it is a multi=purpose word.

Is this the same Hebrew word as in Genesis 14:21
'And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself'? {persons: Heb. souls}

Have I understood correctly that physical breath is implict in both 'nephesh' and 'ruwach'?

And, in the light of Genesis 6:17, is it possible to say there an inextricable link between 'nephesh' and 'ruwach'?

 2005/7/23 19:32









 Re: Questions of life and breath and Spirit

Robert,

Quote:
we see that in some way we were created in the image and likeness of God. Could it be that when God got ready to make man in His likeness- He made him in the form of a trinity also? And if so be that the mystery of the Holy Spirit carries over into our conversation we can conclude:

"The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, so is everyone that is born of the Spirit." (John 8)

Am I giving in too quickly?

The parallels between the natural and the spiritual extend to the life of the unbeliever, who nevertheless is aware of a growing awareness of spiritual truth, but has no power until he is born again of the Spirit.

Quote:
Apart from the requirement of obedience, I have viewed this as a partial portion of the reason as to why God rejected Cain's offering.

It occurred to me that God had cursed the ground and that whatever it had brought forth, may not have satisfied the criteria of which, if Abel was aware, one feels sure Cain would also be.

Possibly, because Cain was elder, he had been working with Adam on the cultivation of food - the tougher job - of necessity. Little Abel comes along and has an easier job, looking after the sheep.

Nevertheless, one sees the same attitude in Cain, as in the Prodigal's elder brother. Whether it was favour with God or favour with man, neither [i]understood[/i] something about the fairness and generosity of the Father, or, about the love which sought to please Him by doing the right thing, especially outside Eden, because [i]all[/i] were in sin.

 2005/7/23 19:51
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:


Ron:

God 'breathing' (nshamah - a puff of wind) lives into his nostrils

Do you have anything that will help clear up this for me?

I've read "lives" (plural)before. But when adam sinned he lost both eventually, one immediately, right? And his seed passed down the sin principle to all , so wouldn't the soul be the area in the life of man that contained that principle of sin?


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/7/24 0:37Profile
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:

Have you ever read the Genesis acct as found in the book of Jaser ? Interesting read , but the dialogue between Able and Cain in that book is pretty extensive in comparison to our KJV bible. I'm sure there's alot more to that whole thing. Maybe when God placed coats of skins on Adam and Eve He instituted a system of sacrifice that He would accept and Cain and Abel both knew of it? But Cain was self willed and refused to bend to God's will and out of envy killed Abel thinking that now God would have to come to him on his terms and recieve him. They both seem to have been having fellowship with God up to that point, face to face.


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/7/24 1:02Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy