What Makes Man Unique in Creation

[Lovinglove]

[FONT=CIMIKO+TimesNewRoman]What makes man unique in God’s creation is not that he possesses a soul but that he has a spirit which, joined to the soul, constitutes the man. Such union marks out man as extraordinary in the universe. Man’s soul is not related directly to God; according to the Bible, it is his spirit that relates itself to God. God is Spirit; all who worship Him, therefore, must worship in spirit. It alone can commune with God. Only spirit can worship Spirit. We thus find in the Bible such statements as: “serving with my spirit”. (Rom. 1.9, 7.6, 12.11) ; “knowing through the spirit” (1 Cor. 2.9-12); “worshiping in spirit” (John 4.23-24; Phil. 3.3); “receiving in spirit the revelation of God” (Rev. 1.10;1 Cor. 2.10). [/FONT]

 

[chaoschristian]

[FONT=CIMIKO+TimesNewRoman]What makes man unique in God’s creation is not that he possesses a soul but that he has a spirit which, joined to the soul, constitutes the man. Such union marks out man as extraordinary in the universe. Man’s soul is not related directly to God; according to the Bible, it is his spirit that relates itself to God. God is Spirit; all who worship Him, therefore, must worship in spirit. It alone can commune with God. Only spirit can worship Spirit. We thus find in the Bible such statements as: “serving with my spirit”. (Rom. 1.9, 7.6, 12.11) ; “knowing through the spirit” (1 Cor. 2.9-12); “worshiping in spirit” (John 4.23-24; Phil. 3.3); “receiving in spirit the revelation of God” (Rev. 1.10;1 Cor. 2.10). [/FONT]

Hello Lovinglove! What a loverly user name.

Welcome to CF and welcome to OT.

Your post inspires me to ask this question of you: do you view man as existing in three parts: body, spirit, soul?

 

[Pats]

Welcome Lovinglove

The only things I can think in scripture that really point to what seperates man from other creations is that the scriptures say God made us in his image and gave us dominion over the rest. Cheers!

 

[Lovinglove]

It is true God made us in His image:

"And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life [spirit]" (Gen. 2.7). When God breathed the breath of life to create the spirit of man it made contact with the body to create the soul life.

It is like when dye (spirit) and water (body) are mixed to create ink. This analogy is limited though in that in God's creation the ink would be another indivisible component (soul).

"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[bodily movement] and marrow [bodily sensation], and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (Heb. 4.12).

"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" (1 Thess. 5.23).

Spirit is first! Then soul, and then body.

 

[Raphael777]

It is true God made us in His image:

"And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life [spirit]" (Gen. 2.7). When God breathed the breath of life to create the spirit of man it made contact with the body to create the soul life.

It is like when dye (spirit) and water (body) are mixed to create ink. This analogy is limited though in that in God's creation the ink would be another indivisible component (soul).

I'm not at all convinced that the existence of the "breath of life" in humans distinguishes us from animals, as Psalm 104:29-30 indicates that all animals possess the "breath of life".

I think the differences between humans and animals are sometimes overemphasised and this distinction in some instances provides a justification for our exploitative treatment of animals. While we are certainly made in God's image (Jesus assuming a human form underlines this), a number of theologians observe that humans are animals are more interconnected than has been assumed: we are both created on the same day (I don't interpret the narrative literally, but its significance remains valid) and Adam is made from "dust", signifying that he too belongs to the natural world.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Spirit is first! Then soul, and then body.


i am always surprised at how many tripartite believers there seem to be on these online forums. Or is it that they are more vocal?

 

[Lovinglove]

I'm not at all convinced that the existence of the "breath of life" in humans distinguishes us from animals, as Psalm 104:29-30 indicates that all animals possess the "breath of life".

All animals are created with life otherwise they would not exist, yes, but they are not made in the image of God with a life having a spirit that is permanently existing with a spirit of God-consciousness. Do you see the difference yet?

I think the differences between humans and animals are sometimes overemphasised and this distinction in some instances provides a justification for our exploitative treatment of animals. While we are certainly made in God's image (Jesus assuming a human form underlines this), a number of theologians observe that humans are animals are more interconnected than has been assumed: we are both created on the same day (I don't interpret the narrative literally, but its significance remains valid) and Adam is made from "dust", signifying that he too belongs to the natural world.

There is not justification for the exploitation of animals because we are made in the image of God. How absurd! If it is not right for God then surely it would not be right for us. Animals are not as connected as you seem to think, for they will cease to exist. However, they are still part of God's beautiful and glorious creation and ought not to be abused or mistreated. There is no mention of animals in the new city or the new earth. It is as though God gave us animals for a short time to be pleasant for us and show God's diversity. The body from dust is similar to animals, but again, the body is different than that of animals, for the body of man too was made in God's image, whereas animals were not. Be careful you do not idolize animals as an environmentalist.

 

[Lovinglove]

Spirit is first! Then soul, and then body.


i am always surprised at how many tripartite believers there seem to be on these online forums. Or is it that they are more vocal?

So far in this thread there has been those arguing against our having a spirit and a soul, and on another thread I recently posted arguing the same thing, believing in the fallen bipartite view of man (e.g. Ben Johnson).

Additionally, there is the problem of those who in their head know our being tripartite, but in reality it is not effected in them the dividing of the spirit from the soul. Again, this is the problem of fusing the spirit with the soul, not having it be a spiritual reality, and quite a few here I might add have this problem too.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

So far in this thread there has been those arguing against our having a spirit and a soul, and on another thread I recently posted arguing the same thing, believing in the fallen bipartite view of man (e.g. Ben Johnson).

Additionally, there is the problem of those who in their head know our being tripartite, but in reality it is not effected in them the dividing of the spirit from the soul. Again, this is the problem of fusing the spirit with the soul, not having it be a spiritual reality, and quite a few here I might add have this problem too.

One of the most difficult problems any theological tradition faces is that there are often times
fundamental differences at critical points between the ?official doctrine? affirmed by the divines
and academics of that tradition, and those doctrines actually believed and practiced on a popular
level by the rank and file. There is, perhaps, no greater illustration of this than the popular notion
of trichotomy. Rejected by virtually all major theologians in all streams of the Christian tradition
as a speculative Greek philosophical notion rather than a biblical conception, trichotomy is very
likely the reigning notion of human nature in American evangelical circles today. With few
exceptions, the Christian church has affirmed, with one voice, that human nature is bipartite. As
men and women, we are necessarily a body?the physical aspect of our nature?and we are also a
soul-spirit?the immaterial aspect described in the Bible as either soul or spirit. These two are
united together as one person in a psychosomatic unity. This is simply known as dichotomy.
Trichotomists, however, contend that human nature is tripartite, that is, as men and women we
are body, soul and spirit. But while the theologians of evangelicalism, following the historic
precedence, overwhelmingly reject the notion of trichotomy, the popular teaching and literature
of evangelicalism abounds with trichotomistic views of human nature in one form or another.

from: http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/theological-essays/trichotomy.pdf

i found this awhile back when looking for why so many people seemed to think tripartite was the historical understanding of the church. Probably the single best essay online on the topic i'm familiar with.


sorry about the hard line feeds, i'm unable to get rid of them.

 

[Lovinglove]

i found this awhile back when looking for why so many people seemed to think tripartite was the historical understanding of the church. Probably the single best essay online on the topic i'm familiar with. sorry about the hard line feeds, i'm unable to get rid of them.

Gnostics live in their soul, while Christians walk by the spirit. The writer of your article altered Heb. 4.12 from says "dividing of spirit and soul". This part is completely left out conveniently.

Why would he do that? Obviously, he is a false teaching.

The fact that you have a spirit and a soul, must mean they have unique differences to discern what they are. I know what they are, but you don't, because you hath not an ear to hear. Verses of Scripture describe plainly those differences every time you see the word soul or spirit used as various adjectives are used to describe the soul or the spirit's operations.

Percentage wise very few accept our being tripartite. In reality very few accept that we have a spirit and a soul, but prefer to confuse them to be controlled by a man-made organization that teaches otherwise.

The Bible says "spirit and soul and body" and "soul and spirit". Is God lying? I don't think so.

So what is the agenda of the fallen bipartite view? It's purpose as taught by the organization and others is to control you to manipulate you.

How can they manipulate you if you are walking according to the spirit and not exalting your soul above your spirit? They need to control you by you being unaware of what is of your soul and what is of your spirit, even by confusing the emotion of your soul with your spirit's sensitivity. Explaining this to someone who has not receive the dividing of their spirit and soul is like trying to explain to someone how to do math when they only know how to do addition. It takes time to break down your outer hardened shell, and quite often you don't want to learn how to do math anyway.

That is how the deception occurs. Ask yourself why your spirit is so insenstive to this? It is because of will worship of your soul that smothers sensitivity of your spirit to walk by the spirit and to listen to the voice of God therein that "still small voice".

 

[Raphael777]

All animals are created with life otherwise they would not exist, yes, but they are not made in the image of God with a life having a spirit that is permanently existing with a spirit of God-consciousness. Do you see the difference yet?

I never denied that we were made in God's image or that we do not possess "God-consciousness".

There is not justification for the exploitation of animals because we are made in the image of God. How absurd!

But that verse has been used - and is used - to justify humanity's right to use animals in any way we wish; it is indeed "absurd".

If it is not right for God then surely it would not be right for us. Animals are not as connected as you seem to think, for they will cease to exist. However, they are still part of God's beautiful and glorious creation and ought not to be abused or mistreated. There is no mention of animals in the new city or the new earth.

I don't entirely agree. In the vision of heaven in Revelation, which is filled with strange, dreamlike symbolism, there are four living creatures "in the centre around the throne" (Rev. 4:6b-8) which signify the universal praise of God's creation. In chapter 5, they even praise God, not only as their creator, but also as their redemer (v. 8-9). The notion of cosmic redemption is also evident in St. Paul's letters (Romans 8:20-21; Colossians 1:20).

Be careful you do not idolize animals as an environmentalist.

I don't entirely believe that environmentalists worship animals as you claim they do, but I think the Christian tendency for an anthropocentric approach is simply mistaken and has been distorted way out of proportion.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Gnostics live in their soul, while Christians walk by the spirit.


This appears to be Watchman Nee/Witness Lee teaching.
It is possible to be tripartite and be orthodox Christians, for example Andrew Murray, however in today's online world the issue is dominated by the Local/Little church people who seem to take every opportunity to push their distinctiveness.

The witness of the Church historically to the teachings of Scripture have consistently been dichotomous, that is man is two substances, physical and spiritual. Dividing soul from spirit is not necessarily heretical but Neeites are.


post-edit

this appears to be the case here. I searched the FAQ for CF without success to see if we are to report Neeites. PM me if you know or can point me to the proper rule, tia.