| Author | Message | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 543 Registered: 4-2006  |
"The immaterial is sometimes referred to as the soul and sometimes referred to as the spirit, and sometimes referred to as both. They are inseperable, but appear to have different functions." Doug "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." Hebrews 4:12 The Spirit and Soul are different from each other, though they have similarities and they can be divided. In His joy, Martin | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 5538 Registered: 12-2003  |
River, I followed you, and it makes sense. I don't know exactly what the Holy Spirit does in scientific terms to our spirits, but for sure He indwells us and connects us with God, with eternal life, and gives us the mind of Christ (there's that renewing of the mind idea). So interesting. Praise God for Jesus and for new birth! And DougóI went back and read those Peter texts and realized I had never seen the significance of them before, either. Thank you. Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 5539 Registered: 12-2003 |
River, I followed you, and it makes sense. I don't know exactly what the Holy Spirit does in scientific terms to our spirits, but for sure He indwells us and connects us with God, with eternal life, and gives us the mind of Christ (there's that renewing of the mind idea). So interesting. Praise God for Jesus and for new birth! And DougóI went back and read those Peter texts and realized I had never seen the significance of them before, either. Thank you. Colleen | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 544 Registered: 4-2006 |
Sorry Doug, I just noticed that you yourself quoted Heb 4,12 several times. Oh and I think there is a nice thread on this very subject on the closed area. http://rtinker.powweb.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-auth.cgi?lm=1167775642&file=/4529/4958.html Cheryl, made a pretty good argument in favour of the trichotomous view. In Him Martin | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 582 Registered: 9-2006  |
MWH, I always had the understanding that the soul is referring to the mind (Brain function), and the (heart) as the Spirit of man. However, as I said, I have never given the thing much thought before. In fact I don't really even know the relevance of the subject to anything except maybe the Adventist view of "soul sleep" which I think is entirely wrong, both instinctively and Biblically. My view of it in the past is this view "I am that I am". Having said that, it is an interesting and fascinating subject though. As to what I understand you to be saying, if I understood you correctly, that would make it even more complicated. A lot of our thinking really has to do with our preconceived notions. When I started studying Adventist going on five years ago now, I had to change many of my own preconceived notions as I faced the challenge of understanding what they believe it also caused me to grow in the word and to realize grace more fully than I ever have. And then you folks on this forum helped me to realize even more, Gods incredible grace. My cup was full by the time I got here and you folks ran it over, I really feel like I have had a double portion. Keep on keepin on over there Martin. In him River | ||
| Doug222 Registered user Username: Doug222 Post Number: 515 Registered: 3-2001 |
River, I really recommend you read Colleen's article from the September/October Proclamation. I too thought this issue was pretty narrowly focused, but she helped me to see that it addresses the nature of man, Jesus' nature, the state of the dead, how we understand salvation, and probably a couple other topics that I can't think of right now. Its pretty powerful. Doug | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 583 Registered: 9-2006 |
I believe the reference in Hebrews 4:12 is referring to the power of the word of truth to penetrate the mind and the spirit to it deepest level. Not that there would be an actual division of these elements of our being. Nor would it indicate that there is a two separate elements to our non-physical being. IMHO River I would also like to note about that chapter that he talks about entering into Gods rest and resting from our own works. this is a mighty powerful chapter on grace and 4:12 is part of and continuance of that whole context. Again, IMHO | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 584 Registered: 9-2006 |
Thank Doug, I,ll give it a read. | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 585 Registered: 9-2006 |
Thanks Doug, I,ll give it a read. Had to append the correction on the "s" I left out of thanks up there. I tried to edit but it wouldn't let me, all I got was "The poster of this message is not recorded in the posting log. Therefore you cannot edit or delete this message." Maybe Richards puter is broke!!!!! Could be me that's broke, which is more likely!! River | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1013 Registered: 4-2000  |
It is our spirit that the Holy Spirit indwells--not our physical parts such as arms, legs, heart, or brain. The sovereign God of heaven would never indwell sinful human flesh. This is why resurrected bodies need to be "glorified" before their entrance into eternal bliss. Indeed, our collapsing, defunct "tents" need major renovation prior to being fit for enjoying eternal life. "Although the arguments for trichotomy do have some force, none of them provides conclusive evidence that would overcome the wide testimony of Scripture showing that the terms soul and spirit are frequently interchangeable and are in many cases synomymous." (Wayne Grudem; Systematic Theology;Zondervan Publishers, 1994) For those who have Grudem's excellent book, please read the detailed analysis of this topic in pages 478-482. He specifically comments on the most common passages used to support the tripartite conception. Dennis Fischer (Message edited by dennis on March 13, 2007) | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 586 Registered: 9-2006 |
Thats my thinking on it Dennis, although I always used the term soul as referring to the brain, what you are saying makes more sense. come to think of it using the word "soul" for mind makes no sense. That "soul" and "spirit" having the same meaning would make sense to me. Haven't read any of Grudems stuff but my theology instructor did recommend that book as recommended reading and seemed to think highly of that book. River | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 5542 Registered: 12-2003 |
I second the recommendation, River. Grudem's book is just plain fascinating reading and so very clear and explanatory. It's like a well-researched Bible study on every major doctrine. Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 727 Registered: 10-2002  |
While the Thessalonians text might be argued to contain parallel terms for impact (redundancy), Hebrews 4:12 can't be seen that way. Just as "joints and marrow" are different things in the body, so "soul and spirit" are also different. To the untrained eye looking at the body from the outside (or to someone nearly as medically illiterate as myself!), there might be little difference between "joints and marrow". But even if we have a little medical knowledge, we know what "joints" are, and we could never confuse them with "marrow". Since these are different, "soul and spirit" are also different, for both sets can be "divided" by the Word of God. I understand that there are many places which seem to use the terms interchangably, and perhaps if we think of the "body" metaphor (viewing the body from the outside), we can refer to either the joints or the marrow of the body. Yet we cannot make a theology from the seemingly interchangable parts while ignoring Hebrews 4:12. Doing such a thing reminds me of Desmond Ford's old claim that since the Bible had over a hundred "positive" Sabbath texts and only one "negative" one, we shouldn't let the one negative one change our view of it. What his rationale ignored was that the Colossians text on the Sabbath looks at the Sabbath issue directly, and that the other texts (such as those in the gospels) look at the Sabbath issue more peripherally. In the same way, while the seemingly interchangable texts can tell us something, they look at the issue of "soul & spirit" peripherally, while the Hebrews text looks at it more directly. Taking things deeper, perhaps "soul and spirit" are analgous to "joints and marrow"? Joints are that which hold the body together. Marrow is the inner life inside of bones (if I'm not mistaken). Could it be that the "spirit" is the inner life inside, and that the "soul" is that which holds body and spirit together, the "joint"? In Hebrew, Strong's reveals two common but separate words for soul and for spirit. Let me quickly state that I think we are hitting up against the imperfection of human language to describe realities (both material and immaterial) -- in English and also perhaps in Greek. The Hebrew language seems to agree with the book of Hebrews (and Paul in Thessalonians) in saying that "soul" and "spirit" are two distinct realities. However, in English (and perhaps in Greek), we don't have as specific of an understanding, so we may often use the terms more broadly yet with less idea of the distinction in realities. Looking at Genesis 2:7 again with the two words for soul and spirit highlighted is interesting ("soul" is in italic, "spirit" is in bold) - Thus, the expression "the breath of life" could be translated in direct parallel as "the spirit of soul". This is in harmony with what Justin Martyr explained about the soul being the seat of the spirit (just as the body is the seat of the soul). However, above all, according to Hebrews 4:12, it is only the living Word of God (that is, Christ) who can convict us of the difference. I confess that in staring at the issue, it does become cloudy. But in His presence, well, it becomes clear, though I don't know how to explain it. | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 728 Registered: 10-2002 |
It would also be somewhat humorously interesting to note that, if "soul" and "spirit" are truly interchangable, why do we never refer to the Holy Spirit as "the Holy Soul"? | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 587 Registered: 9-2006 |
Well Agapetos, As I read what you said there about the text in Genesis "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground [body], and breathed into his nostrils the breath [spirit] of life; and man became a living soul [soul]". It dawned on me that what is spoken there would say to me, when God breathed into mans nostrils the (breath)(Spirit) man became a living ìUnitî and that would go along with my thinking that the spirit is the life giving force of this body we live in. Man then became a whole man. (usable unit) So substituting the word ìUnitî for soul would make perfect sense. No man is a whole man without the spirit and vice versa. When Adam fell he became broken, we remain broken until we are regenerated (Born again) we become whole again. One of the definitions for ìsoul is 2c) the soul as an essence which differs from the body and is not dissolved by death (distinguished from other parts of the body) One of the definitions for (spirit) is: 2) the spirit, i.e. the vital principal by which the body is animated 2a) the rational spirit, the power by which the human being feels, thinks, decides. Basically we are no more than two ants trying to describe an elephant, one standing at the head and says itís wearing a tree, the other, standing at the tails says no, itís wearing a rope. What seems to be the problem that is presented in my mind is seeing two driving forces behind the body in the form of something called 1. soul and 2. spirit. That does not compute. Now if you substitute ìUnitî for ìsoulî that does compute. Musingís is the right title for this thread, I have mused that ìsoulî means ìunitî, ìspiritî means ìvital partî. Example: If I take the battery out of my car I no longer have a working unit. Now if I have someone push me up to about 45 mile an hour the thing will run off the generator but thatís a poor way to get to the office. Kind of reminds me of Adventism, that church still functions in a way but it takes a Christian to push them to get them cranked. Some body took EGWís battery out and I think, about three or four plugs and both rear wheels off!! If we get the Holy Ghost 4x4 out and yank them up to speed we just might get them to crankin over. Throw up your handís folks, Iím hopeless!!! River | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 588 Registered: 9-2006 |
To all you book heads out there, I probably don't have much in common. But now, if you are a gear head, hunt, wear cammy's,have more that one gun, scratch in public, pick your nose, drive a 4x4 to the mail box half a block away, own a full set of craftsman wrenches,can tell by the sound of an engine "What's under the hood", smoke in spite of the surgeon generals warnings on the pack, have a town in Arkansas named after you, own a tractor or two, measure each other's education by the amount of tools you own, scratch your head and spit before you speak,we just might have something in common. yawl keep talkin about this book or that and I start gettin dizzy. You say "here, have a book" and i'm thinkin,"I got one, what do I need another one for?  River | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 553 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hey! You forgot the pink lawn flamingos, full beards, and cars up on blocks on the front lawn! | ||
| Doug222 Registered user Username: Doug222 Post Number: 516 Registered: 3-2001 |
Jeremy, Your statement about it not being possible for Jesus' spirit to die has really got me going now (although I do believe he experienced spiritual death/separation at least for an instant when he was on the cross). I have been reading the book of Matthew, and I just finished it this morning. Of course I was reading abut the last supper and the crucifiction. Based on what you said, the thought occurred to me that at the last supper, Jesus offered the bread as a symbol of his body (or our sins that he bore in his body) and that he offered the wine as a symbol of his fully alive spirit (because life is in the blood) that he credits to us. It is the reason why we eat the bread before we drink the wine (not because we need something to wash the bread down with--although that helps too). I always knew the bread sybolized his body and the wine his blood, but I never fully understood why. I also noticed that the Bible says that "the bodies" of many who had died were resurrected after a great earthquake. Jesus comment about the committing his spirit to the father and the statement in the OT about our spirit returning to God at death has me even more convinced that we continue to exist after death I still have some questions, but far fewer than I did before. Yes Colleen, this one simple truth has so many implications doesn't it? I cannot believe the number of verses that I just skipped by previously thinking they were just part of the prose of the Bible that now have so much significance. It now makes me want to go back and read the Bible all over. It makes so much more since once the veil has been removed. I thank God that he continues to remove it. In His Grace Doug | ||
| Timmy Registered user Username: Timmy Post Number: 170 Registered: 8-2006  |
Doug, I am always amazed when like you, so many people say, "It (Bible) makes so much more since once the veil has been removed." I think all of us formers have experianced this in one way or another. Just another one of those big red flags that reminds me we are on the right track. ;) | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 447 Registered: 7-2005 |
More, we really came to the place of liking the Bible. Since we were under the Old Covenant as adventists, the letter of the Bible killed us every time we opened it, having just a hope of being subjects of God's grace, but now, things are different. I can say that we experienced God's righteousness both ways, condemning us and justifying us. I'm remembering the title of a gospel song, "The Other Side of the Cross". By God's wonderful grace we stand on the sunny side of the cross. God's righteousness no longer condemns us, it justifies us. As surely was the condemnation it is also our present justification. God's righteousness is unchangeable, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever, and like Him, the Word of God, the Holy Bible cannot be broken. Jackob |
