Given the contrast is always between the material and immaterial I come to the dicohtomist view, although recognize the trichotomist view as orthodox and historic as well.
IOW '
orthodox' doesn't mean correct....correct?
A point I've believed for quite a while actually.
I did not address the issue as this is not a thread about the soul.[/quote]
And if a '
soul' is a
breathing creature according to the Hebrew, then it would appear that the final knitting together takes place in the womb this is not a '
living soul' until it takes a living breath on its own just like in the Garden? And just like Jesus became a dying soul when He gave up his
spirit to the hands of the Father and "
breathed His last" or
EXPIRED/DIED?
If a man is spirit soul body as I believe then just exactly when are those three
"knit together" into a functioning '
everything ('the whole'/kol) makes a huge difference as to when one is a 'finished breathing biparte or triparte being'.
Ecclesiastes 11:5 As you do not know how the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child, so you do not know the work of God who makes everything/kol.
3605
kol: prop.
the whole; hence all, any or every (in the sing. only but often in a plur. sense)
More you are leaving out. Nephesh as well as pneuma (Greek) heavily depends on the context of the passage. To apply 'breath' as in breathing to all instances is error. Here's why.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:26-27 NASB)
I'm leaving nothing out of my POV, I'm simply not talking to the depths that most aren't even capable of dealing with IMO. This 'medium' does not help either. I say that because I've tried so many times here, with the typical 'no response' to the tough questions I've had. Questions I've spent time in study and seeking of God in order to come to conclusions I have (right or wrong, God knows). This above 'comment of yours' is also one of them.
GOD IS SPIRIT, that's what the bible said long after Jesus had ascended to glory with a SPIRITUAL body to replace the "
sinful flesh" body his Father had
the spirit of Christ from God dwell in, here on earth. (Rom 8:3) Your flesh isn't the image of God nor is your soul....your SPIRIT IS.
IMAGE is a
substance thing and
LIKENESS is a
character thing. Adam and Eve were not 'LIKE' God and that's why they sinned by falling for that very temptation from the devil "
don't you know that you will be LIKE God knowing." They wanted to be '
like God' for God created that desire within them. Legitimate desire, illegitimate source for procurement of that knowledge.
Since God created humans in His image and according to His likeness, it begs the question is God some sort of human form? Of course after the Incarnation one sees the Son of God, God the Son comes in the flesh. However, at that instance in Genesis 1 when Adam and Eve are created and called in the image and according to the likeness of God, what does that imply?
It doesn't IMPLY it illuminates that GOD IS SPIRIT and that God put a spirit from His Spirit into some freshly created dirt. God never lived in a fleshly body before creating one to put a 'spirit' which was 'of His spirit' into. GOD IS SPIRIT, always was always will be.
But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:23-24 NASB)
And you quote the very verse I am referring to.
God is spirit. Our immaterial aspect is spirit according to the image and likeness of God. In this verse where Jesus says God is spirit, I don't think anyone would conclude that means God is "breath" or 'air.'
Now it is you, and Vines that is disagreeing with your former point that there is a separation between that which is physical and that which is immaterial....E.G. SPIRIT.
A. Noun. nepesh (5315), “soul; self; life; person; heart.” This is a very common term in both ancient and modern Semitic languages. It occurs over 780 times in the Old Testament and is evenly distributed in all periods of the text with a particularly high frequency in poetic passages. The basic meaning is apparently related to the rare verbal form, napash. The noun refers to the essence of life, the act of breathing, taking breath. However, from that concrete concept, a number of more abstract meanings were developed. In its primary sense the noun appears in its first occurrence in Gen. 1:20: “the moving creature that hath life,” and in its second occurrence in Gen. 2:7: “living soul.” However, in over 400 later occurrences it is translated “soul.”
A definition which fits with the zao life of oxygen life. But it is not the zoe life of spirit life.
Context matters always. So the above is evidence we have a material aspect and an immaterial aspect. But what you are getting at is 'when' are we "endued" with the immaterial which goes back to God after we die (Ecclesiastes 12:7; 2 Corinthians 5:6-8; Philippians 1:23). Brings us to your next quote below I believe:
We are endued with that which GOD IS and that is SPIRIT. He is not some cosmic soul as Eastern religion believes nor is he a fleshlyly body 'devoid of blood' as he appeared to the disciples in his GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL BODY.
Based on what I presented up post, your quote above assumes every instance of nepesh or pneuma must mean 'breathing' or 'breath.' This is not true as context matters on what words mean in the Hebrew and Greek.
If we follow your model we would conclude that God is breath. Makes no sense.
However, if you truly want to get technical you would have to look to the blood and not the breath:
'For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.' (Leviticus 17:11 NASB)
Interesting here in verse 11 'the life' by the lexicon is nepesh Stongs 5315.
Which is just another piece of evidence we can't call nepesh 'breath' in every verse. Context matters.
Just some general information on when there is a first sign of blood in the embryotic stage:
That is about at 23 days of development.
What
makes no sense to you may not be based upon you being right, it may simply be you don't comprehend where I'm coming from. Just like the oxygen in that blood of the yolk sac. It never came from a 'whole person' in the womb. That's why a '
spontaneous miscarriage' births a dead fetus.
Ask the question....Was there ever a point in the development of Jesus of Nazareth where his truly human nature was 'soulless' or lacking the 'inner man?'
Your question makes no sense to me because my '
inner man' is the
spirit given me by my
Father in heaven. My
flesh came from my father's sperm and mother's egg. My 'functioning brain'/
'living soul' which started working/living with the oxygen which came from my fleshly mother came from her not me breathing. My zao life came from mom and dad until I started breathing it myself.
The only thing that the Word became when it
became FLESH was
FLESH. The Word didn't become a
SOUL or a
SPIRIT.
This is taking too much time again, which I don't have to spend here. So maybe we can just move past this post and realize we are coming from two different perspectives. The depths of which not easily plumbed in this cumbersome medium of exchange.