Adam soul?

[loDebar]

Some believe this shows Adam receiving a soul, instead of being a living being

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.

need to consider the

1Co 15:45 KJV
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
or in the YLT
so also it hath been written, 'The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam is for a life-giving spirit,

The word "soul" in Gen 2:7 is "nephesh" is a person but might include the spiritual aspect of a person in translation. as in "The ship sank, all sous were lost"

but in the Greek,

! Cor 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

This soul is psyche which is not the Gr, for soul as pneuma the word used for quickening spirit or pneuma in the second part

so the assertion that Adam received his soul in Gen is wrong. He became a living being.

not Traducianism or Creationism (physical)

 

[HankD]

Some believe this shows Adam receiving a soul, instead of being a living being

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.

need to consider the

1Co 15:45 KJV
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
or in the YLT
so also it hath been written, 'The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam is for a life-giving spirit,

The word "soul" in Gen 2:7 is "nephesh" is a person but might include the spiritual aspect of a person in translation. as in "The ship sank, all sous were lost"

but in the Greek,

! Cor 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

This soul is psyche which is not the Gr, for soul as pneuma the word used for quickening spirit or pneuma in the second part

so the assertion that Adam received his soul in Gen is wrong. He became a living being.

not Traducianism or Creationism (physical)

loDebar you won't get much response here.

Have you actually had any formal education in Greek/Hebrew?

 

[loDebar]

i agree, but this response is about the same as the atheists

no formal training, I have to rely on the others translations and definitions

It is hard to deny the teachings we have been given since childhood even though scripture plainly shows a difference

 

[Darrell C]

Have you actually had any formal education in Greek/Hebrew?

You view formal education as a necessity to understanding the original languages?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Some believe this shows Adam receiving a soul, instead of being a living being

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.

You are partly right. The popular teaching is that men are body, spirit, and soul, when in fact man was created a body and spirit, and became a living soul.

Two texts seem to justify that view:


1 Thessalonians 5:23
King James Version (KJV)

23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.


On this one I would suggest that the preservation of a spirit likely deals with the mental outlook (i.e., not having a spirit of fear) rather than the spirit of the individual, which is unquestionably preserved by God in salvation, whereas one's spirit in the sense of their attitudes are not necessarily preserved, for which we are to be ever vigilant about.

"Soul" is properly used to speak of the individual themselves apart from the body (i.e., "souls in heaven though their bodies are in graves on the earth), so Paul's prayer is that we are preserved as ourselves but physically as well.

This one...


Hebrews 4:12
King James Version (KJV)

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.


...is a little easier to understand, because it simply speaks, in my view, of the person (soul) being divided from their physical bodies. Men become liable for the Word of God when they hear it, so the concept presented is that of the Word of God causing death, which fits with this Biblical principle seen elsewhere.

For example:


Romans 7:9-11
King James Version (KJV)

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.


2 Corinthians
3:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


God bless.

 

[HankD]

You view formal education as a necessity to understanding the original languages?


God bless.

It certainly doesn't hurt.

 

[Darrell C]

It certainly doesn't hurt.

Doesn't really answer the question, and to be honest...

...formal education is, in my opinion, sometimes the worst thing that can happen to a Bible Student.

The reason is because they are often indoctrinated into the System of Theology their school teaches, and instead of searching the Scriptures to find truth, they search the Scriptures to proof text their adopted System.


God bless.

 

[loDebar]

You are partly right. The popular teaching is that men are body, spirit, and soul, when in fact man was created a body and spirit, and became a living soul.

Two texts seem to justify that view:


1 Thessalonians 5:23
King James Version (KJV)

23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.


On this one I would suggest that the preservation of a spirit likely deals with the mental outlook (i.e., not having a spirit of fear) rather than the spirit of the individual, which is unquestionably preserved by God in salvation, whereas one's spirit in the sense of their attitudes are not necessarily preserved, for which we are to be ever vigilant about.

"Soul" is properly used to speak of the individual themselves apart from the body (i.e., "souls in heaven though their bodies are in graves on the earth), so Paul's prayer is that we are preserved as ourselves but physically as well.

This one...


Hebrews 4:12
King James Version (KJV)

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.


...is a little easier to understand, because it simply speaks, in my view, of the person (soul) being divided from their physical bodies. Men become liable for the Word of God when they hear it, so the concept presented is that of the Word of God causing death, which fits with this Biblical principle seen elsewhere.

For example:


Romans 7:9-11
King James Version (KJV)

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.


2 Corinthians
3:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


God bless.

no , there is three soma, body. psyche spirit, and pnuema soul within or are a person

you use these term s soma for body of an organism
psyche for spirit or mind,, psychology thinking, doing math
pnuema as pneumatic for soul, or spiritual matters , knowing God,,, admiring paintings
We only feel a rock through soma, you use your psyche for abstract thinking, and pnuema of which we can know God or spiritual ideas .
There is no cross knowledge, Our bodies cannot do math nor the Bible.

The OT combines body and soul as one word
The NT greek uses three

 

[HankD]

Doesn't really answer the question,

In your opinion it doesn't answer it Darrel.
However you asked,and I gave an answer which didn't satisfy you

and to be honest...

Thank you for that.

...formal education is, in my opinion, sometimes the worst thing that can happen to a Bible Student.

Or in my opinion sometimes the best thing that can happen to a Bible Student..

The reason is because they are often indoctrinated into the System of Theology their school teaches, and instead of searching the Scriptures to find truth, they search the Scriptures to proof text their adopted System.
.

And what if they do actually prove it to be true?

 

[HankD]

no , there is three soma, body. psyche spirit, and pnuema soul within or are a person

you use these term s soma for body of an organism
psyche for spirit or mind,, psychology thinking, doing math
pnuema as pneumatic for soul, or spiritual matters , knowing God,,, admiring paintings
We only feel a rock through soma, you use your psyche for abstract thinking, and pnuema of which we can know God or spiritual ideas .
There is no cross knowledge, Our bodies cannot do math nor the Bible.

The OT combines body and soul as one word
The NT greek uses three

loDebar - its the following

Soma - Body - Earth perception
Psuche - Soul - Self perception
Pneuma - Spirit - God perception

 

[Darrell C]

no , there is three soma, body. psyche spirit, and pnuema soul within or are a person

Now you contradict yourself:

so the assertion that Adam received his soul in Gen is wrong. He became a living being.

you use these term s soma for body of an organism

Body is also used of a spiritual entity...the Church.

psyche for spirit or mind,, psychology thinking, doing math

Well, do the math on these...


Acts 27:37
King James Version (KJV)

37 And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.


Genesis 12:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.


Acts 7:14
King James Version (KJV)

14 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls.

pnuema as pneumatic for soul, or spiritual matters , knowing God,,, admiring paintings

What ineffable twaddle.

We only feel a rock through soma, you use your psyche for abstract thinking, and pnuema of which we can know God or spiritual ideas .

The soul (which refers to the person) is quite capable of knowing God:

There is no cross knowledge, Our bodies cannot do math nor the Bible.

We use our brains, powered by our spirits, to do math, my friend.

The OT combines body and soul as one word

Please provide the Scripture that supports your theory.

The NT greek uses three

Only if you ignore how soul is used throughout the Bible and buy into modern, popular teaching.

Scripture is much easier to understand when we properly understand the function of the words being employed.

The "soul" refers to the person, regardless of their disposition (alive or dead). Adam was formed of the dust (elements) of the earth, God breathed into him the breath of life, and he became a living soul.

Why do you contradict yourself in your own OP?




God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

In your opinion it doesn't answer it Darrel.
However you asked,and I gave an answer which didn't satisfy you

The question is, "Do you think it is necessary to have formal training to understand the Word of God?"

I did not imply that if men have formal training they could not, I am just trying to get a straight answer as to whether you think they must have formal training. You seem to deny any possible understanding in our friend LoDebar and imply you feel he has not had formal training.

So a straight answer would be appreciated.

Thank you for that.

No thanks needed, I am almost always honest with my antagonists.

Or in my opinion sometimes the best thing that can happen to a Bible Student..

I would agree with that. I would love the opportunity to take some formal training in the original languages, but because life has intervened in my schedule, am forced to rely on the work of those who have come before me.

However, I am not a new student who would enter in without first having a background in Scripture, and would be, in my opinion, better prepared than many students coming under the influence of someone they view to be authoritative.

And what if they do actually prove it to be true?

not going to happen. There is simply no System of Theology that is not flawed by extreme doctrines which exclude the inclusion of relevant elements, which ironically, are the very doctrines the system usually seeks to deny.


God bless.

 

[HankD]

The question is, "Do you think it is necessary to have formal training to understand the Word of God?"

Sometimes but not always with everyone. It depends on the individual.

I did not imply that if men have formal training they could not, I am just trying to get a straight answer as to whether you think they must have formal training. You seem to deny any possible understanding in our friend LoDebar and imply you feel he has not had formal training.

So a straight answer would be appreciated.

Hmm, What does "straight" imply and where is my answer crooked?
In loDebar's case I questioned his formal training because he referred to the Greek/Hebrew but his references are/were not always accurate.

I would agree with that. I would love the opportunity to take some formal training in the original languages, but because life has intervened in my schedule, am forced to rely on the work of those who have come before me.

However, I am not a new student who would enter in without first having a background in Scripture, and would be, in my opinion, better prepared than many students coming under the influence of someone they view to be authoritative.

OK

not going to happen. There is simply no System of Theology that is not flawed by extreme doctrines which exclude the inclusion of relevant elements, which ironically, are the very doctrines the system usually seeks to deny.

Disagree somewhat.

 

[Darrell C]

Sometimes but not always with everyone. It depends on the individual.

Thank you.

Hmm, What does "straight" imply and where is my answer crooked?

Not crooked, lol, just not direct. It is a yes or no question. "It doesn't hurt" could be viewed as a no, I guess.

In loDebar's case I questioned his formal training because he referred to the Greek/Hebrew but his references are/were not always accurate.

Not going to argue with that, lol.

Disagree somewhat.

Well, if you can point out a System that is inarguable and cannot be found to hold serious flaw, please let me know which one it is.


God bless.

 

[HankD]

Thank you.




Not crooked, lol, just not direct. It is a yes or no question. "It doesn't hurt" could be viewed as a no, I guess.




Not going to argue with that, lol.




Well, if you can point out a System that is inarguable and cannot be found to hold serious flaw, please let me know which one it is.


God bless.

I'll need time to think about that one.

 

[loDebar]

Now you contradict yourself:







Body is also used of a spiritual entity...the Church.




Well, do the math on these...


Acts 27:37
King James Version (KJV)

37 And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.


Genesis 12:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.


Acts 7:14
King James Version (KJV)

14 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls.





What ineffable twaddle.






The soul (which refers to the person) is quite capable of knowing God:




We use our brains, powered by our spirits, to do math, my friend.




Please provide the Scripture that supports your theory.




Only if you ignore how soul is used throughout the Bible and buy into modern, popular teaching.

Scripture is much easier to understand when we properly understand the function of the words being employed.

The "soul" refers to the person, regardless of their disposition (alive or dead). Adam was formed of the dust (elements) of the earth, God breathed into him the breath of life, and he became a living soul.

Why do you contradict yourself in your own OP?




God bless.

you are being silly, no one said Adam did not have a soul. He just not get it when we think he did.

You brains are not you spirit as you see with more than your eye.

The soul in old English does include the body but not in the Greek from 1 Cor 15:45, two are different words.

This is the scripture you are contradicting

 

[Darrell C]

you are being silly, no one said Adam did not have a soul.

In point of fact we have both said that in this thread, lol:

Some believe this shows Adam receiving a soul, instead of being a living being

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.

so the assertion that Adam received his soul in Gen is wrong. He became a living being.

I will not deny being silly, though.

He just not get it when we think he did.

He never "got one," lol.

He became one:


Genesis 2:7
King James Version (KJV)

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.

You brains are not you spirit as you see with more than your eye.

You said...

There is no cross knowledge, Our bodies cannot do math nor the Bible.

If our brain were to lose its functioning capabilities, we would cease to have the ability to do math. We could still do it in our spirit, but in view is man in his normal course of life.

When a soul dies, and goes to heaven, they can do math, because the spirit is the soul still, even as the body and spirit is the soul. In view is the person themselves.

The soul in old English does include the body but not in the Greek from 1 Cor 15:45, two are different words.

What does the "Old English" have to do with anything? We do not interpret based on a translation, we interpret based on the original languages.

If the Old English uses the word "letteth," do we use the culture that arose from, or today's culture, which have opposing meanings? We use neither, we look at the original, and clarify its meaning as it would have been in the culture it was given in, and in the context it was used. We would then clarify our understanding of "letting" and proceed to use that in our interpretive efforts.

The soul in old English does include the body but not in the Greek from 1 Cor 15:45, two are different words.

Not sure what you mean, because its obvious two different words are used, psychē and pneuma, soul and spirit:


1 Corinthians 15:45
King James Version (KJV)

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.


"Man" is not used twice either, meaning, he doesn't say "The first man Adam and the last man Adam," he states the "...the first man Adam and the last Adam." Distinguishing between them thus.

So I have no idea why you think this statement "Includes the body" in regards to "soul," because right here in this very verse is an affirmation of what I have been saying...

...Adam did not receive a soul he was made a soul.

This is the scripture you are contradicting

Sorry, but again I have shown you contradicting yourself, not to mention Scripture.

So you are trying to say that Adam received a soul at a later time? When? And please find a Scripture to support it, because this one will not.


God bless.

 

[agedman]

you are being silly, no one said Adam did not have a soul. He just not get it when we think he did.

You brains are not you spirit as you see with more than your eye.

The soul in old English does include the body but not in the Greek from 1 Cor 15:45, two are different words.

This is the scripture you are contradicting

Just to share information, when did Adam get his soul?

I have found that one of the complexities humans attempt is in this master of discerning or separating soul and spirit. Only the Scriptures can effectively do that in action, but not in statements.

So, when the OT and NT use soul, mind, body, spirit... it is more often in the terms of all inclusive aspects.

For example: Fred is seen. How is Fred seen? In the style of writing, the picture of his body, the pattern of logic and reasoning, the reputation of his continence and forcefulness, ...

So as in Scriptures, the use of soul, heart, ... may be not as separable as one might desire if they are attempting to discern a separate boundary defined essence of each.

 

[Darrell C]

Just to share information, when did Adam get his soul?

Adam never "got a soul," he was made a soul.

I will give one passage where we see the Lord confirm that when a man dies, his spirit (not his soul) separates from his physical body:


Luke 24:36-39
King James Version (KJV)

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


In view is that the disciples were still unbelieving, and regardless of being told that the Lord would rise again the Third Day, still believed Him to be dead. And it is not a soul they think they see, but a spirit. Not The Spirit, because they were as of yet unbelievers in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.


God bless.

 

[agedman]

Adam never "got a soul," he was made a soul.



God bless.

Which is why I ask the question. I wasn’t in agreement, had no intention of arguing the point, but desired to gather understanding of IoDebar’s thinking.