Three-fold nature of Man

[Dr. Walter]

And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. - Deut. 6:5

The term "heart" here does expresss the conscious inner nature of man whereas the term "soul" has reference to the outward expression of that conscious inner nature in the "life" or "as a man thinketh in his heart SO IS HE" in his life. The term "strength" is the power that makes the inward conscious nature expressed in the outer life. This is the only way that the COMPLETE inward and outward expression of obedience by man can be conveyed. This is the immediate context, that God desires the COMPLETE conscious expression of obedience both inwardly and outwardly and that is why the context goes on to emphasize the outward expression as both the inward and outward are inclusive in these three terms.


The point here in Deuteronomy is the same as in Matthew that man is responsible to express complete CONSCIOUS obedience to God so that the inward conscious expression of this obedience is manifest in everything said and done or his expressed life is that of obedience as well.

In addition, the term "heart" as used in the Old Testament is not the only word used to express the conscious inward aspect of man. When the intellectual aspect is emphasized the Hebrews use the term "mind" or directly associate terms to express the intellectual aspect with the term "heart" (e.g. "for as a man THINKETH in his heart so IS HE). The Old Testament uses the term "heart" in some cases is used to simply emphasize the emotional aspect of affection rather than intellectual.

My point is this. Your argument is only valid if the Old Testament used only the term "heart" for the inward conscious expression of man OR if the Old Testament did not use other terms to express varied aspects of the inward man OR if the Old Testament did not use the term "heart" in contexts to emphasize intellectual versus emotional aspects. None of these are true. Therefore, Christ may add terminology to this command in order to express the same variety of aspects found in the use of "heart" in the entire Old Testament context as well as other Old Testament synonyms used either separately from the term "heart" but have to do with the conscious inner self-expression or terms which emphasize the very same aspects that the Hebrew term "heart" expresses in certain contexts (intellect/mind or affection/heart).

Moreover, when "heart" and "mind" are found in the same context the term "heart" emphasizes the emotional/affections and the "mind" emphasizes the intellection/thinking aspect of the inward conscious self.

Therefore you argument is mute as you cannot possibly restrict the conscious inner self-expression to the one word "heart" in the Old Testament nor can you deny that the term "heart" in the Old Testament is not used to emphasize DIFFERENT aspects of the inner conscious self nor can you deny that other Hebrew terms are used to emphasize those varied aspects of the inward conscious self. Thus, it is perfectly legitimate for Christ to ADD other terms in His use of this quotation for broadening the understanding of the inward and outward conscious expression of the personality, especially when the broader New Testament context confirms such distinctions (Heb. 4:12; 1 Thes. 5:23).

Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

Mr 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Mr 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength,

Lu 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind;

In Deuteronomy the term "heart" stands for the entire inward conscious expression, whereas the term "soul" takes in the entire outward expression of that inward conscious self and the term "strength" is the modus operandi between the two.

In the Gospel accounts the Lord adds the term "mind" or "understanding" with the term "heart" in order to give the fuller expression of the "heart" content in the Old Testament so as to emphasize both the emotional/affection aspect with the intellectual/mind aspect. The term "soul" gives the outward obedient expression of both mind and affection and the term "might" or "strength" gives the modus operandit between the inward and outward expression.

There is no contradiction, no conflict between either the context of Deut 6 or with the overall use of the term "heart" in the Old Testament or with its synonyms.

Are you lecturing me on hermeneutics? I would re-think that, brother. I might just as well have said "it is not a proper hermeneutic to base your interpretation on a particular passage while completely discounting the correlating passage in the Old Testament and the author's intent in using the said passage."

There are areas where the New Testament authors expand the meaning of the Old Testament. Thank God these passages are clear expansions!

The greatest commandment passage, however, is not one of those passages. It is clear, because of the variation in the synoptics, that it is not the intention to expand this. Further more in Matthew, Jesus says that the two commandments are the summary of the Law and Prophets. So Jesus is not attempting to nor is He intending to expand the specific meaning or to argue for a trichotomist understanding of humanity. He is merely giving to commands that summarize the Law and the Prophets--because of the question that was given to Him.

For all your hermeneutical lecturing, you are ignoring one over-arching and very important principle: The author's main point must become our main point. Therefore, since the context of the greatest commandment is a question about Law and commandments and since Jesus refers to the Law and Prophets, it is clear that our hermeneutical understanding must be in line with His--and it is clear that He is not expanding the understanding.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[percho]

So Adam was created with a body, spirit was breathed into him and he became a living soul. Then God told him that of every tree of the garden he could eat except for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In the day you eat of it dying you will surely die. You, Adam body soul and spirit shall surly die. Yet the serpent said you will not surely die. I believe God the total man died. The serpent (Satan) said something about him did not die, did he not, according to popular belief?

 

[The Archangel]

And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. - Deut. 6:5

The term "heart" here does expresss the conscious inner nature of man whereas the term "soul" has reference to the outward expression of that conscious inner nature in the "life" or "as a man thinketh in his heart SO IS HE" in his life. The term "strength" is the power that makes the inward conscious nature expressed in the outer life. This is the only way that the COMPLETE inward and outward expression of obedience by man can be conveyed. This is the immediate context, that God desires the COMPLETE conscious expression of obedience both inwardly and outwardly and that is why the context goes on to emphasize the outward expression as both the inward and outward are inclusive in these three terms.


The point here in Deuteronomy is the same as in Matthew that man is responsible to express complete CONSCIOUS obedience to God so that the inward conscious expression of this obedience is manifest in everything said and done or his expressed life is that of obedience as well.

In addition, the term "heart" as used in the Old Testament is not the only word used to express the conscious inward aspect of man. When the intellectual aspect is emphasized the Hebrews use the term "mind" or directly associate terms to express the intellectual aspect with the term "heart" (e.g. "for as a man THINKETH in his heart so IS HE). The Old Testament uses the term "heart" in some cases is used to simply emphasize the emotional aspect of affection rather than intellectual.

My point is this. Your argument is only valid if the Old Testament used only the term "heart" for the inward conscious expression of man OR if the Old Testament did not use other terms to express varied aspects of the inward man OR if the Old Testament did not use the term "heart" in contexts to emphasize intellectual versus emotional aspects. None of these are true. Therefore, Christ may add terminology to this command in order to express the same variety of aspects found in the use of "heart" in the entire Old Testament context as well as other Old Testament synonyms used either separately from the term "heart" but have to do with the conscious inner self-expression or terms which emphasize the very same aspects that the Hebrew term "heart" expresses in certain contexts (intellect/mind or affection/heart).

Moreover, when "heart" and "mind" are found in the same context the term "heart" emphasizes the emotional/affections and the "mind" emphasizes the intellection/thinking aspect of the inward conscious self.

Therefore you argument is mute as you cannot possibly restrict the conscious inner self-expression to the one word "heart" in the Old Testament nor can you deny that the term "heart" in the Old Testament is not used to emphasize DIFFERENT aspects of the inner conscious self nor can you deny that other Hebrew terms are used to emphasize those varied aspects of the inward conscious self. Thus, it is perfectly legitimate for Christ to ADD other terms in His use of this quotation for broadening the understanding of the inward and outward conscious expression of the personality, especially when the broader New Testament context confirms such distinctions (Heb. 4:12; 1 Thes. 5:23).

Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

Mr 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Mr 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength,

Lu 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind;

In Deuteronomy the term "heart" stands for the entire inward conscious expression, whereas the term "soul" takes in the entire outward expression of that inward conscious self and the term "strength" is the modus operandi between the two.

In the Gospel accounts the Lord adds the term "mind" or "understanding" with the term "heart" in order to give the fuller expression of the "heart" content in the Old Testament so as to emphasize both the emotional/affection aspect with the intellectual/mind aspect. The term "soul" gives the outward obedient expression of both mind and affection and the term "might" or "strength" gives the modus operandit between the inward and outward expression.

There is no contradiction, no conflict between either the context of Deut 6 or with the overall use of the term "heart" in the Old Testament or with its synonyms.

Dr. Walter,

I want to thank you for this very well-argued post. I must say, I find it completely unconvincing. However, in all genuine seriousness, I appreciate the time and depth you put into it.

Given the context of the question asked of Christ, I believe that context alone discounts your over-all interpretation (trichotomy).

Many blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Dr. Walter]

Dr. Walter,

I want to thank you for this very well-argued post. I must say, I find it completely unconvincing. However, in all genuine seriousness, I appreciate the time and depth you put into it.

Given the context of the question asked of Christ, I believe that context alone discounts your over-all interpretation (trichotomy).

Many blessings,

The Archangel

Your welcome. I am sorry I failed to convince you of this truth. It was a pleasure discussing it and many blessings to you as well.

Walter

 

[RAdam]

That text was not intended to teach us about the nature of man. You are basically reading a lot into a text that was not only not there, but the text was never intended to be read that way.

This differentiation of the soul and spirit, and 3 fold nature of man, and all of that is nothing more than unprofitable and unprovable bible study. Noone is able to even understand what a soul is. What is a soul? What constitutes your soul? You can't even understand it. I can't either. Hebrews said that the Son of God is the one who is able to tell the difference between the soul and spirit. You and I can't even understand what constitutes a soul or spirit, much less the difference between the two. While I may be curious about some things, there are far more profitable studies in the word of God, mainly things that can be proven from the word of God without having to read things into texts.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

Noone is able to even understand what a soul is. What is a soul? What constitutes your soul? You can't even understand it. I can't either.

Soul= immaterial aspect of one's being. That's the best answer I can come up with.

 

[Dr. Walter]

It is obvious that you don't understand what the soul is but to say that no one can rise above your level is a little egotistic.

The Greek term translated "soul" is also translated life. It is the conscious inner (soul) and outer (life) self-expression of man. The inner soul is the seat of self-consciousness expressed in the activity of the intellect, will and affections. The inner activity of intellect, will and affections is manifest in the daily life of words and actions or as the Old Testament says "as a man thinketh in his heart so is he." The New Testament tells us to set our "affections on things above" or "think on these things" because what we think on or set our affections upon is what controlls our attitude, words and actions = walk = our life.

You may not agree with me but I guarantee you will not be able to honestly and objectively overthrow this definition.

That text was not intended to teach us about the nature of man. You are basically reading a lot into a text that was not only not there, but the text was never intended to be read that way.

This differentiation of the soul and spirit, and 3 fold nature of man, and all of that is nothing more than unprofitable and unprovable bible study. Noone is able to even understand what a soul is. What is a soul? What constitutes your soul? You can't even understand it. I can't either. Hebrews said that the Son of God is the one who is able to tell the difference between the soul and spirit. You and I can't even understand what constitutes a soul or spirit, much less the difference between the two. While I may be curious about some things, there are far more profitable studies in the word of God, mainly things that can be proven from the word of God without having to read things into texts.

 

[RAdam]

It is obvious that you don't understand what the soul is but to say that no one can rise above your level is a little egotistic.

The Greek term translated "soul" is also translated life. It is the conscious inner (soul) and outer (life) self-expression of man. The inner soul is the seat of self-consciousness expressed in the activity of the intellect, will and affections. The inner activity of intellect, will and affections is manifest in the daily life of words and actions or as the Old Testament says "as a man thinketh in his heart so is he." The New Testament tells us to set our "affections on things above" or "think on these things" because what we think on or set our affections upon is what controlls our attitude, words and actions = walk = our life.

You may not agree with me but I guarantee you will not be able to honestly and objectively overthrow this definition.

That doesn't tell me what a soul is. Again, what is a soul? You can't even lay a descriptive definition to it. It is beyond our comprehension. "The inner soul is the seat of self-consciousness expressed in the activity of the intellect, will and affections." What a bunch of nonsense! What is your soul when you body is dead? Again, the futility of trying to differentiate between two things we really can't totally understand is clear.

 

[convicted1]

Man, two parts or three?

Here is the way I have kinda believed it(still need to study about it more). Man is two parts-soul and body-and when he is born again, the Sprit comes in takes the "reins". IOW, a sinner man/woman is two parts, whereas the CHRISTian is three parts(soul and body, plus the Holy Spirit). This the Spirit in the boul/soul/Spirit. What say y'all??


Willis

 

[Dr. Walter]

That doesn't tell me what a soul is. Again, what is a soul? You can't even lay a descriptive definition to it. It is beyond our comprehension. "The inner soul is the seat of self-consciousness expressed in the activity of the intellect, will and affections." What a bunch of nonsense! What is your soul when you body is dead? Again, the futility of trying to differentiate between two things we really can't totally understand is clear.

I don't think you understand simple English. The soul IS the conscious self expression of human life consisting inwardly of intellect, will and affections and expressed through the body by words and actions. When you die the soul or the conscious self consisting of the personal intellect, will and affections goes to be with the Lord. In heaven it continues to be your personal living self-expression of intellect, will and affections.

This conscious living self-expression is found all through the scriptures and the terms of intellect, will, affections are constantly and consistently attributed to it.

If you don't agree that is one thing but if you can't understand that is another thing. I believe the human soul is no harder to explain and see in scriptures than to explain and see the human body. The human body is the vehicle of expression for the soul and spirit of man.

The immaterial (spiritual) part of man consisting of spirit and soul are placed in their proper order and relationship with each other with the body in 1 Thes. 5:23

The spirit of man is the seat of other world consciousness where communion with Satan or God occurs (Eph. 2:2-3; Rom. 8:14,16) . Whoever in the spiritual world indwells or controls the human spirit controls the soul and body. The soul controls the body as the body is the vehicle of self-expression with the outer world. Therefore Ecclesiastes 9:5 teaches that when the vehicle of expression is dead and buried then all soul expressions (hate, knowledge, love, etc.) ceases to exist UNDER THE SUN because the vehicle of soul expression is UNDER THE SOD.

If you don't understand what I am saying that is one thing. But if you disagree with what I am saying that is another thing.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Here is the way I have kinda believed it(still need to study about it more). Man is two parts-soul and body-and when he is born again, the Sprit comes in takes the "reins". IOW, a sinner man/woman is two parts, whereas the CHRISTian is three parts(soul and body, plus the Holy Spirit). This the Spirit in the boul/soul/Spirit. What say y'all??


Willis

I don't agree with that position but you are in pretty good company as that was the position of Charles Spurgeon

 

[percho]

I think a good biblical view would be is God formed man (Adam) from the ground breathed into him the breath of life and man (Adam) became a living soul in the image of the living God. Adam sinned and died as God said he would. And so has every man since, except Jesus who did not sin yet was made sin for us, has died. Therefore that which is born of the flesh is flesh.

Marvel not that I said Ye must be born again.

Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

 

[RAdam]

I don't think you understand simple English. The soul IS the conscious self expression of human life consisting inwardly of intellect, will and affections and expressed through the body by words and actions. When you die the soul or the conscious self consisting of the personal intellect, will and affections goes to be with the Lord. In heaven it continues to be your personal living self-expression of intellect, will and affections.

This conscious living self-expression is found all through the scriptures and the terms of intellect, will, affections are constantly and consistently attributed to it.

If you don't agree that is one thing but if you can't understand that is another thing. I believe the human soul is no harder to explain and see in scriptures than to explain and see the human body. The human body is the vehicle of expression for the soul and spirit of man.

The immaterial (spiritual) part of man consisting of spirit and soul are placed in their proper order and relationship with each other with the body in 1 Thes. 5:23

The spirit of man is the seat of other world consciousness where communion with Satan or God occurs (Eph. 2:2-3; Rom. 8:14,16) . Whoever in the spiritual world indwells or controls the human spirit controls the soul and body. The soul controls the body as the body is the vehicle of self-expression with the outer world. Therefore Ecclesiastes 9:5 teaches that when the vehicle of expression is dead and buried then all soul expressions (hate, knowledge, love, etc.) ceases to exist UNDER THE SUN because the vehicle of soul expression is UNDER THE SOD.

If you don't understand what I am saying that is one thing. But if you disagree with what I am saying that is another thing.

You still haven't defined what a soul is. You've given us some nonsense pop-psychology but have yet to define what a soul is. It is beyond definition.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I think a good biblical view would be is God formed man (Adam) from the ground breathed into him the breath of life and man (Adam) became a living soul in the image of the living God. Adam sinned and died as God said he would. And so has every man since, except Jesus who did not sin yet was made sin for us, has died. Therefore that which is born of the flesh is flesh.

Marvel not that I said Ye must be born again.

Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

The literal Hebrew says "dying that shalt surely die." Death was a process rather than instant. For example, God said "in the day" they eat they eat "dying that shalt surely die." They did not die physically in the day they ate. Physically he died over 930 years later. However, the process of physical death began that very day (aging process). Their soul did not die. Intellectual, volitional and emotional self expression continued to exist another 930 years. They suffered spiritual death instantly in that day. God breathed plural "lives" (Hebrew plural) into Adam. Spiritual life, soulish life, physical life.

Paul talks about physically alive people being previously "dead" and yet some aspect of them other than physical life being quickened (Eph. 2:1). While being "dead" in this sense their soul expressions were very active for Satan (Eph. 2:2-3).

Humans are born physically alive but spiritually dead. Their soulish functions of self-expression are very active until physical death. In physical death the lost person's immateral substance is separated from God into hades. At the resurrection their immaterial substance is reunited with their body and their whole person is separated in the Lake of fire forever which is the "second death."

 

[percho]

The literal Hebrew says "dying that shalt surely die." Death was a process rather than instant. For example, God said "in the day" they eat they eat "dying that shalt surely die." They did not die physically in the day they ate. Physically he died over 930 years later. However, the process of physical death began that very day (aging process). Their soul did not die. Intellectual, volitional and emotional self expression continued to exist another 930 years. They suffered spiritual death instantly in that day. God breathed plural "lives" (Hebrew plural) into Adam. Spiritual life, soulish life, physical life.

Paul talks about physically alive people being previously "dead" and yet some aspect of them other than physical life being quickened (Eph. 2:1). While being "dead" in this sense their soul expressions were very active for Satan (Eph. 2:2-3).

Humans are born physically alive but spiritually dead. Their soulish functions of self-expression are very active until physical death. In physical death the lost person's immateral substance is separated from God into hades. At the resurrection their immaterial substance is reunited with their body and their whole person is separated in the Lake of fire forever which is the "second death."

I think it could read because you ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the day that you die you will surely be dead. Of course I think the total man dies. When a man is born even though most increase in size and strength for many years I think they also begin to die in the concept that their days are numbered. What about their soul? Say a certain one is born and dies a week later, three years later, six years later, ten years later, sixteen years later, ninety years later. Jesus said ye must be born again. Why? That which is born of the flesh. The total man must be born again which I think is spoken of in the passage I quoted from Luke 20. Through resurrection one is born into that world therefore the kingdom of God. Jesus doesn't talk about dying and going to heaven but he talks about entering into seeing, or inheriting the kingdom of God. It's when we are conformed to his image at our resurrection that he will be called the first-born of many brethren.

 

[webdog]

The literal Hebrew says "dying that shalt surely die." Death was a process rather than instant. For example, God said "in the day" they eat they eat "dying that shalt surely die." They did not die physically in the day they ate. Physically he died over 930 years later. However, the process of physical death began that very day (aging process). Their soul did not die. Intellectual, volitional and emotional self expression continued to exist another 930 years. They suffered spiritual death instantly in that day. God breathed plural "lives" (Hebrew plural) into Adam. Spiritual life, soulish life, physical life.

You are partly right, but not for the reasons you think you are. When Adam disobeyed God, he immediately died spiritually and the hour glass was turned over physically. The soul, the wholeness of man consisting of material and immaterial remained alive, so yes...the "soul" did not die that day as he was still physically alive.

Paul talks about physically alive people being previously "dead" and yet some aspect of them other than physical life being quickened (Eph. 2:1). While being "dead" in this sense their soul expressions were very active for Satan (Eph. 2:2-3).

...which I believe further shows the dichotomy of man.

Humans are born physically alive but spiritually dead. Their soulish functions of self-expression are very active until physical death. In physical death the lost person's immateral substance is separated from God into hades. At the resurrection their immaterial substance is reunited with their body and their whole person is separated in the Lake of fire forever which is the "second death."

Since death is the ceasing or ending of life, to be created "dead" is an impossibility as life would have to exist for death to occur and subsequently exist. When a human is created, they are created fully alive both spiritually and physically. Physical death occurs due to the curse on humanity, and spiritual death occurs through the same means it did for Adam, by sinning.

 

[Dr. Walter]

You are partly right, but not for the reasons you think you are. When Adam disobeyed God, he immediately died spiritually and the hour glass was turned over physically. The soul, the wholeness of man consisting of material and immaterial remained alive, so yes...the "soul" did not die that day as he was still physically alive.
...which I believe further shows the dichotomy of man.
Since death is the ceasing or ending of life, to be created "dead" is an impossibility as life would have to exist for death to occur and subsequently exist. When a human is created, they are created fully alive both spiritually and physically. Physical death occurs due to the curse on humanity, and spiritual death occurs through the same means it did for Adam, by sinning.

I don't recall ever saying that anyone was "created" dead. Mankind is "born" dead in regard to their spirit. Union with Satan or God has to do with your spirit. I believe the human spirit is the temple or dwelling place of either demons or the Spirit of God (Eph. 2:2; Rom. 8:14,16). When a person is regenerated Satan is booted out or his representative (the law of sin) is removed and The Holy Spirit takes up residence.

It is this UNION of spirits (Holy Spirit and human spirit) that unites us to eternal life. It is this "inward man" born and indwelt by the Spirit that "I" the conscious expression of Paul = soul (Rom. 7:18-25) must "put on" in his mind and affections that the will as empowerd by the Spirit of God makes manifest in the outer life of words and deeds.

Notice in Romans 7:18-25 that Paul sees three aspects of himself. There is the pronoun "I" the conscious inner self (soul - affections, will, intellect) that delights in the "inward man" (regenerated spirit) who wars after the "law of sin" dwelling in and operating through his members (body).

Paul (conscious self = will, intellect, affections) refers to "I" who delights in the law of God after the "inward man" (regenerated spirit) but who is in a war with the law of sin that operates in and through his body. Therefore "I" is not the "inward man" nor is it "my members" or body.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I think it could read because you ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the day that you die you will surely be dead. Of course I think the total man dies. When a man is born even though most increase in size and strength for many years I think they also begin to die in the concept that their days are numbered. What about their soul? Say a certain one is born and dies a week later, three years later, six years later, ten years later, sixteen years later, ninety years later. Jesus said ye must be born again. Why? That which is born of the flesh. The total man must be born again which I think is spoken of in the passage I quoted from Luke 20. Through resurrection one is born into that world therefore the kingdom of God. Jesus doesn't talk about dying and going to heaven but he talks about entering into seeing, or inheriting the kingdom of God. It's when we are conformed to his image at our resurrection that he will be called the first-born of many brethren.

Sorry, it can't be read that way. This is not a statement looking back at something that has already occurred and its results (as you interpret it to read) but an advance warning of what will happen the day they should sin.

However, even if we read it your way, then the total man should have died the very day they ate but clearly the total man did not die that day. Neither is the total man born again as evidence by the continuing dying of the physical body of all who have been born again.

Jesus told the theif he would be in paradise that very day. Paul used the Aorist infintives to say "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." Simeltaneous action with no separation gap of time. Something was no longer at home in the body when physical death occurred and that something went to be with the Lord immediately as the Aorist infinitives make it simeltaneous action.

 

[webdog]

I don't recall ever saying that anyone was "created" dead. Mankind is "born" dead in regard to their spirit.

At what point after conception and before delivery does the person die spiritually? Since spiritual death is always connected with sin and sinning, at what point does the zygote / fetus sin to bring upon this death?

I believe the human spirit is the temple or dwelling place of either demons or the Spirit of God (Eph. 2:2; Rom. 8:14,16). When a person is regenerated Satan is booted out or his representative (the law of sin) is removed and The Holy Spirit takes up residence.

I think this is one instance where you are reading into the text something not intended, as this is where spirit and soul are interchangeable.

Notice in Romans 7:18-25 that Paul sees three aspects of himself. There is the pronoun "I" the conscious inner self (soul - affections, will, intellect) that delights in the "inward man" (regenerated spirit) who wars after the "law of sin" dwelling in and operating through his members (body).

Again, I think you are allowing your doctrine to interpret Scripture. When Paul is speaking from the first person, he is speaking of the struggle between the flesh and Spirit. In Romans 7 Paul states that when understanding of the law occured, sin "sprang to life" and he died (spiritually clearly, as he didn't fall over dead).

 

[Humblesmith]

My friend, it also says between bone and marrow! Are you suggesting that we cannot distinguish between bone and marrow?

Furthermore, the fact that Jesus says it can be done means there is a difference and to deny it is to rebuke Christ. If he teaches that distinction here then so does the rest of God's Word (1 Thes. 5:23).

I've wrestled with this issue off and on for a while. Once you dive in and start asking questions, it gets a bit sticky. You end up with such questions as: Does God create a sinful soul at birth? Some passages separate soul & spirit, and others equate them, so which is right? What about the resurrection of the body being considered essential, if the "real me" is only the soul?


My current understanding is that we can distinguish soul, spirit, and body, but we cannot separate them. Example: a stone is gray and hard. We can distinguish the grayness from the hardness, for they are two distinct things. But they are both the stone; we cannot hold the gray in one hand and the hardness in the other, for they are inseparable.

The Heb. 4:12 sentence is an explanation of a spiritual truth using hyperbole. We can't really hold a knee joint in one hand and the marrow in the other, for the marrow makes up the joint. The passage also talks of "thoughts and intents" which are also similar; an intent is a thought.

Likewise, our soul, spirit, body, mind, etc., are distinguishable, but all a unified part of the one person. You can't really take out a sword and split the joint from the marrow, the thoughts from the intents, or the soul from the body. The soul is not complete until the physical resurrection of the body, for it is as much "me" as my soul is.

This is the best way I've found to answer the many questions that arise on this topic.