When do you think an individual's life begins?

[Hinds Feet]

22 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Why wouldn't Gen 2:7 be the most logical order of things?  Complete physical body, and then the immaterial soul/spirit?

Lev 17:10-14 includes the phrase "the life of the flesh is in the blood" in v.11 and v.14.  The reference is to animals, which are sacrificed on the altar.  The phrase does not apply to human beings.

The life of human flesh is in the soul.  Because man can die without shedding a drop of blood.  And James 2:26 says the body without the soul/spirit is DEAD.

So, human life ends when the soul/spirit leaves.

Only in animals is the life of the animal flesh in the blood.

It's not ultrasound images that determine when the soul/spirit is placed in the body.  We have God's order in Gen 2:7.  God first formed the complete physical body.  Then He breathed into that body the "breath of life3" and THEN "man became a living being (human being).

This isn't relevant to the question of when the soul/spirit is placed into the body.

The most logical explanation is aligned with how God created the first human being.  After the body is complete (fetus ready to be born), the soul/spirit is placed into the body.

 

God told Noah and his family that the life of the flesh was in the blood.  And He said if someone sheds the blood of a person, by man his blood will be shed. (Genesis 9 : 5-6).  So it is the same for all flesh, animals and humans alike.  

Adam's body was certainly formed before God gave him the breathe of life.  Yet, Adam wasn't born like we are.  I imagine when God formed Adam's body, it wasn't moving.  It's much like the body of a person who has passed away, except Adam's body wasn't deteriorating.  Yet once God breathed into Adam, I imagine he began moving.  In the same way, we see the fetus moving inside their mother's womb.  In terms of movement and activity, that is aligned with Adam.  The only difference is Adam didn't have a mother, and was never inside a womb. 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Hinds Feet

[FreeGrace]

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

God told Noah and his family that the life of the flesh was in the blood.  And He said if someone sheds the blood of a person, by man his blood will be shed. (Genesis 9 : 5-6).  So it is the same for all flesh, animals and humans alike. 

God didn't tell Noah what you claim here.  This is what God actually said, in v.4 - “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.

iow, man is forbidden to eat (drink) blood of animals.  There is no verse that says that "the life of the flesh is in the blood".  I've checked.  

As I pointed out in a previous post, the life of a human is in the soul.  And when the soul/spirit leaves the body, that is the definition of death.  Animals don't have a soul.

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Adam's body was certainly formed before God gave him the breathe of life.  Yet, Adam wasn't born like we are.

The point is that Gen 2:7 is the order of how God created the first human being.  First, a complete body, and THEN the soul/spirit.

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  I imagine when God formed Adam's body, it wasn't moving.

Let's not imagine.  Let's just accept what the Bible says.  The fact is, when the fetus is complete and ABLE to live outside the uterus, birth occurs.  That is how God designed it.  

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

It's much like the body of a person who has passed away, except Adam's body wasn't deteriorating.

I don't see relevance here to the discussion.  Could you expand?

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yet once God breathed into Adam, I imagine he began moving. 

I don't imagine.  We know that underdeveloped fetuses move in the uterus, but that doesn't prove they have a soul.  What they do have is physiological life.  In every cell there is movement.  

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

In the same way, we see the fetus moving inside their mother's womb.  In terms of movement and activity, that is aligned with Adam.

Actually, no, it's not at all.  That is just your imagination about things.  The clear point of Gen 2:7 is that God created a complete physiological body before He placed the soul/spirit in it.  That can be called a pattern.  And we can't ignore the last part of the verse:  and man BECAME a living being.  ie:  a human being.  Complete body and soul/spirit.

39 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  The only difference is Adam didn't have a mother, and was never inside a womb. 

But that isn't relevant to the discussion.  The only thing we have is the pattern that God used to create the first human being.  Complete body first, and then He added the soul/spirit.

So, in the process of procreation, why would God put a sou/spirit in an underdeveloped fetus that still can't live apart from the umbilial cord?  

People need to understand there are 2 kinds of life in each human:  physiological and soul/spirit.  

Both are needed in order to be a "living human being".

Remove the soul/spirit, and you just have a dead physical body.  The "person" has passed away.  What's left is just the "house" or "shell".

[Hinds Feet]

5 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

God didn't tell Noah what you claim here.  This is what God actually said, in v.4 - “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.

iow, man is forbidden to eat (drink) blood of animals.  There is no verse that says that "the life of the flesh is in the blood".  I've checked.  

As I pointed out in a previous post, the life of a human is in the soul.  And when the soul/spirit leaves the body, that is the definition of death.  Animals don't have a soul.

The point is that Gen 2:7 is the order of how God created the first human being.  First, a complete body, and THEN the soul/spirit.

Let's not imagine.  Let's just accept what the Bible says.  The fact is, when the fetus is complete and ABLE to live outside the uterus, birth occurs.  That is how God designed it.  

I don't see relevance here to the discussion.  Could you expand?

I don't imagine.  We know that underdeveloped fetuses move in the uterus, but that doesn't prove they have a soul.  What they do have is physiological life.  In every cell there is movement.  

Actually, no, it's not at all.  That is just your imagination about things.  The clear point of Gen 2:7 is that God created a complete physiological body before He placed the soul/spirit in it.  That can be called a pattern.  And we can't ignore the last part of the verse:  and man BECAME a living being.  ie:  a human being.  Complete body and soul/spirit.

But that isn't relevant to the discussion.  The only thing we have is the pattern that God used to create the first human being.  Complete body first, and then He added the soul/spirit.

So, in the process of procreation, why would God put a sou/spirit in an underdeveloped fetus that still can't live apart from the umbilial cord?  

People need to understand there are 2 kinds of life in each human:  physiological and soul/spirit.  

Both are needed in order to be a "living human being".

Remove the soul/spirit, and you just have a dead physical body.  The "person" has passed away.  What's left is just the "house" or "shell".

Why do you separate what God told Noah concerning not consuming blood, from what God told Noah about shedding human blood?  It's pretty straightforward.  Genesis 9:4-6 states.... 
 

"But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.  Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.  Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man."
 

It is very clear that the life of all flesh, not just animals, is in the blood.  Now obviously with Scripture, blood plays one of the most pivotal, if not the most pivotal role concerning the faith.  During the Passover, we know the people of Israel placed blood on their doorposts, so the destroyer wouldn't take their firstborn.  Now obviously there is something spiritual that went on there.  It's not like God was telling Moses and the people of Israel to go through the motions for the fun of it.  In the same way, Jesus had to literally come to earth and pour out His blood.  Was all of that just for show?  Or is there something spiritual concerning blood?


Now, concerning the thought that a soul can only inhabit a fully functioning body, we know this can't be the case.  As we know, sin has done a number on the world.  There are people who are born without limbs, faulty organs, and other diseases that causes disability.  However, we would not say someone without a fully functioning body, has no soul/spirit.  I would say if movement is not a indicator God placed a person's soul/spirit into their body, then what is?  We could then argue no one has a soul/spirit.  And concerning animals, the Bible doesn't say animals do not have a soul.


Getting back to Adam, God formed His body, and then breathed into him.  Our bodies then are formed in the womb.  At some point in that formation, God places the soul/spirit inside the person.  I would say if you disagree with this, and point back to Adam, we must also remember that Adam was a fully developed man.  He was never a baby, child, or a teenager.  If we get too literal with what you say is the pattern, then should we assume a person doesn't have a soul/and or spirit until they turn 25 or the age a person fully develops?  These are the things we must think about.  The Bible doesn't tell us everything point by point, but it does give us enough to meditate on.  From everything I've written on, it is speculated upon with good thought behind it based on Scripture.

Edited December 4, 2024 by Hinds Feet

[FreeGrace]

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

Why do you separate what God told Noah concerning not consuming blood, from what God told Noah about shedding human blood?  It's pretty straightforward.  Genesis 9:4-6 states.... 

Because they are separate.  Again, for humans, the "life of the flesh is in the soul" and James 2:26 makes that case.  In the OT animal sacrifice was a shadow of the Messiah dying for the sins of mankind.  And they were killed by draining all their blood.  Then, the priests ate the animals for survival.  

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

"But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.  Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.  Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man."

The first line proves my point.  The statement refers to animals, not humans.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

It is very clear that the life of all flesh, not just animals, is in the blood.

Again, the statement refers to animals.  And James 2:26 refutes your idea re: humans.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Now obviously with Scripture, blood plays one of the most pivotal, if not the most pivotal role concerning the faith.  During the Passover, we know the people of Israel placed blood on their doorposts, so the destroyer wouldn't take their firstborn.  Now obviously there is something spiritual that went on there.  It's not like God was telling Moses and the people of Israel to go through the motions for the fun of it.  In the same way, Jesus had to literally come to earth and pour out His blood.  Was all of that just for show?  Or is there something spiritual concerning blood?

Sacrificing animals on an altar was a shadow of the singular sacrifice of the Messiah on behalf of all humanity.  And, the "death" on the cross was spiritual, not physical.  We know this because Jesus said "tetelestai" BEFORE He died physically.  The word means "paid in FULL" and He said that BEFORE He died physically.  So His physical death was simply the way to leave earth since His mission was now finished (it is finished).

When He was "bearing our sins", the Father and Spirit forsook Him.  That is separation from the Trinity, or spiritual death.

So every mention of the "blood of Christ" refers to His spiritual separation from the Trinity while paying for our sins.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

Now, concerning the thought that a soul can only inhabit a fully functioning body, we know this can't be the case.

So, how do we "know this"?  If you are thinking of comatose people in nursing homes, let's be real here.  I have been saying "complete" physical bodies, which is the pattern God used in creating Adam.  Complete body first, and THEN the soul/spirit.  There's no reason to assume the system for procreation of the human race would or should be any different.

Can you explain WHY an incomplete fetus needs a soul?

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  As we know, sin has done a number on the world.  There are people who are born without limbs, faulty organs, and other diseases that causes disability.

This is just splitting hairs and has nothing to do with God's system for procreation.

Again, the pattern is Gen 2:7.  No need to vary from that.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  And concerning animals, the Bible doesn't say animals do not have a soul.

Have you examined Genesis?  God breathed the soul/spirit into a complete human body.  Gen 2:7  Are there any verses that say that God breathed into ANY animal?  Nope.

Do you know what the soul is?  Why humans have a soul?  Please answer.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

Getting back to Adam, God formed His body, and then breathed into him.  Our bodies then are formed in the womb.  At some point in that formation, God places the soul/spirit inside the person.  I would say if you disagree with this, and point back to Adam, we must also remember that Adam was a fully developed man.

No reason to disagree.  It is what I've been saying.  How humans come to be is the same pattern that God used to create the first human being.  Body fully developed and then the soul/spirit is placed in it.  That's what God did, and that's what happens when couples have kids.  Except they have no say about the soul/spirit.  That is from God, and the subject of this thread:  WHEN is the soul/spirit put in the body.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  He was never a baby, child, or a teenager.

Irrelevant.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  If we get too literal with what you say is the pattern, then should we assume a person doesn't have a soul/and or spirit until they turn 25 or the age a person fully develops?

This shouldn't be difficult.  All that is needed is a body that can survive outside the uterus.  There's no need for a soul before that.  Unless you have deeper insight.

7 hours ago, Hinds Feet said:

  These are the things we must think about.  The Bible doesn't tell us everything point by point, but it does give us enough to meditate on.  From everything I've written on, it is speculated upon with good thought behind it based on Scripture.

No need to even speculate.  The pattern has been given in Gen 2:7 already.  No need to deviate from that.

When the fetus is fully developed and able to survive outside momma with the cord severed, is when the fetus will come out.  That is when the soul/spirit is needed for the fetus to be a human being.  Prior to that, the fetus is a physiological being, but not yet a human.  Looks human, etc, but isn't yet.

Just as a human body on life support machines looks human, etc, it isn't when the soul/spirit has left.  Per James 2:26

[Hinds Feet]

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Because they are separate.  Again, for humans, the "life of the flesh is in the soul" and James 2:26 makes that case.  In the OT animal sacrifice was a shadow of the Messiah dying for the sins of mankind.  And they were killed by draining all their blood.  Then, the priests ate the animals for survival.  

The first line proves my point.  The statement refers to animals, not humans.

Again, the statement refers to animals.  And James 2:26 refutes your idea re: humans.

Sacrificing animals on an altar was a shadow of the singular sacrifice of the Messiah on behalf of all humanity.  And, the "death" on the cross was spiritual, not physical.  We know this because Jesus said "tetelestai" BEFORE He died physically.  The word means "paid in FULL" and He said that BEFORE He died physically.  So His physical death was simply the way to leave earth since His mission was now finished (it is finished).

When He was "bearing our sins", the Father and Spirit forsook Him.  That is separation from the Trinity, or spiritual death.

So every mention of the "blood of Christ" refers to His spiritual separation from the Trinity while paying for our sins.

So, how do we "know this"?  If you are thinking of comatose people in nursing homes, let's be real here.  I have been saying "complete" physical bodies, which is the pattern God used in creating Adam.  Complete body first, and THEN the soul/spirit.  There's no reason to assume the system for procreation of the human race would or should be any different.

Can you explain WHY an incomplete fetus needs a soul?

This is just splitting hairs and has nothing to do with God's system for procreation.

Again, the pattern is Gen 2:7.  No need to vary from that.

Have you examined Genesis?  God breathed the soul/spirit into a complete human body.  Gen 2:7  Are there any verses that say that God breathed into ANY animal?  Nope.

Do you know what the soul is?  Why humans have a soul?  Please answer.

No reason to disagree.  It is what I've been saying.  How humans come to be is the same pattern that God used to create the first human being.  Body fully developed and then the soul/spirit is placed in it.  That's what God did, and that's what happens when couples have kids.  Except they have no say about the soul/spirit.  That is from God, and the subject of this thread:  WHEN is the soul/spirit put in the body.

Irrelevant.

This shouldn't be difficult.  All that is needed is a body that can survive outside the uterus.  There's no need for a soul before that.  Unless you have deeper insight.

No need to even speculate.  The pattern has been given in Gen 2:7 already.  No need to deviate from that.

When the fetus is fully developed and able to survive outside momma with the cord severed, is when the fetus will come out.  That is when the soul/spirit is needed for the fetus to be a human being.  Prior to that, the fetus is a physiological being, but not yet a human.  Looks human, etc, but isn't yet.

Just as a human body on life support machines looks human, etc, it isn't when the soul/spirit has left.  Per James 2:26

I'll respond to your points numerically.  I'm still new to these forums, so I'm not yet adapt at quoting point by point.

 

1.  That is pretty hard-pressed to separate what God says about blood and explaining why not to consume it, along with him mentioning the blood of people.  Even when we look at when Cain killed Abel, God made it a point to say it was Abel's blood crying out to Him.  God basically tells Noah for someone to shed man's blood, that is the very definition of taking their life. (And God Himself explains humans are made in His image, which I assume you believe has spiritual implications?  All that is wrapped within God's commentary of blood)  Both men and animals have blood.


2.  Both verses 4 and 5 in Genesis 9 use the same verbage.  In truth when you look at the Hebrew, it actually uses the word for soul which is "נֶפֶשׁ" (nephesh).  So both animals and men have nephesh, and its wrap up in the blood of flesh.  Now we might say the soul is a kind of spiritual energy that animates the body.  Well, it appears it physically manifests itself (to some degree) with our blood.  I'm not saying the blood is the soul, but its connected according to Scripture.

 

 

3.  James 2:26 doesn't say anything against what I've been speaking on.  Perhaps you can explain further what you mean, and what you believe I'm saying.


4.  So are you saying Jesus' physical suffering and death on the cross was all just for show?  That it really didn't mean anything?  And to clarify, are you telling me Jesus could have paid for our sins without all the beatings, being nailed to the cross, and dying?

If that is what you're saying, I would disagree.  All of Jesus sufferings and the spilling of His blood, had spiritual significance.  That is to say, something was literally happening "behind the scenes" in all of Jesus physical sufferings.  And when Jesus said "It is finished", He was signifying He had successfully received the sin of all humankind onto His shoulders, and Him dying was the end result.  Think about it like this, with all the torture Jesus went through before being nailed to the cross, any normal man would have died along the way.  Jesus was struck in the head multiple times by both the Jewish people and the Roman soldiers. (And I doubt they were giving Him love taps)  He was also struck across the head with a reed staff, and I doubt it had a soft exterior.  Things like this was going on all through the night and morning.  Jesus' face must have been horribly bruised and battered. (Add on to it, they plucked out the hair from His beard)

Then with all that, we know the Roman soldiers whipped Jesus with a cat-o-nine tails, which most likely had pieces of metal scraps attach to the ends.  According to Jewish law, a man was not to endure more than 40 lashes.  Yet for Romans, they weren't bound to such law.  We don't know how many times Jesus was whipped, but we can imagine by the end of it, His entire back was probably flayed open.  So much so, you could probably see bones from Jesus' ribs.  Like I said, any normal man would have probably been dead from all that abuse.  Yet Jesus endured all this, and He was strong because He was completely righteous in Himself.  Perhaps He couldn't die until sin was completely transmitted onto Him.  He was nailed to the cross at around 9 am.  At 3 pm, He said, "It is finished", meaning the sin of the world was now on His shoulders.  And from that, He died.  This is my understanding.  What is your understanding?


5.  Your definition of a complete physical body seems to only mean being able to exist without the umbilical cord.  This may be your definition, which would be speculation concerning when God places a soul/and or spirit inside a person.  Yet even outside the womb, a baby doesn't have a complete functioning body like Adam's.  Adam on the day he was created, could walk and talk.  He could reproduce with Eve.  He had all his limbs, he had all his teeth, he was fully developed. (Him and Eve)


You ask me why an incomplete fetus needs a soul?  I hate to answer a question with a question, but perhaps the best answer is why not?  You believe God puts the soul/and or spirit in a person when their body develops to the point of being able to survive outside the womb.  Yet, none of us can remember what life was like as babies.  Our earliest memories come in at around the age of 3-4.  So what is the point of having a soul for the previous 3 years, if we can't remember anything we did during that time?  Our person was basically on auto-pilot, which might as well be similar to the idea of a soul being placed in a forming fetus.  The argument then could be made perhaps God places the soul of a person around the age of 3-4.  Yet ultimately again with this idea of full development, we could argue God places the soul in a person at the age where their body is indeed fully developed.  If the soul indicates things like personality for instance, all of us act differently from when we were children.


6.  Its not splitting hairs at all.  If the pattern is a complete body in the most literal sense, then it must be a body similar to Adam's body.  Adam's body had limbs, it had a fully functional brain.  All of his organs were fully developed, no puberty.

 

So if a person is born without parts in their brain or defective parts, they don't have a fully functioning body.  If someone is born without limbs, they don't have a fully functioning body.  Yet, they are alive, and we assume they have a soul/and or spirit. 

 

7.  So Genesis states God breathed into Adam, "the breath of life".  During the flood judgment in Noah's day, Genesis 7:22-23 states.......

 

"Of all that was on dry land, everything that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.  And every living thing on the face of the earth was destroyed—man and livestock, crawling creatures and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth, and only Noah and those with him in the ark remained."

 

It's stated every land dwelling creature, both man and animals alike, had the breath of life in their nostrils.  So it wasn't just Adam.  And something interesting about the flood judgment is, the animals were also condemned along with men concerning corruption in the earth.  God was grieved over the actions of both men and animals.  We usually equate spiritual matters with the sense of morality.  Here we see God judged the animals for their lack of morality.  These things might be heavy indicators that animals also have souls/and or spirits. (That is if we equate these things with morality)  Remember in Genesis 1, God blessed the animals as well as humans.  God didn't speak to the stars and blessed them.  God didn't speak to the sun or moon and blessed them.  Yet to the creatures, He spoke to them.  To us, He spoke to us.  These are indicators.


8.  Then its all speculation as to when God places the soul and spirit, including when you believe it happens.  How do you know ability to exist outside the womb indicates a fully developed body?  Physically speaking, a body is not fully developed at birth.  We don't even know who we are at birth, or can speak and interact with the world from our person.  Our earliest memories are again around 3-4.  Yet if believing God places the soul/and or spirit in the body at 4 is ridiculous because clearly there is life there, why not say there is life there when we see a fetus sucking their thumbs?  This is not grasping straws or splitting hairs, because at the end of the day, we don't explicitly know when God does it.

 

And this is the point of the thread overall.  Speculating when He does it based on what is written.  Most responses say it all happens at the very conception of a fertilized egg.  I listed three problems for why this may not be the case.  Most aren't fully willing to dive into this conversation, and I can respect that.  To your specific points, I would argue against, but you could be right as well.  Between our two views, I would say at the end of the day, it is both speculation.  My view isn't definitive when God does it, but I suggest it could be around the time there is blood in the fetus.  You believe God does it at the time the fetus can survive outside the womb.  Both are speculative, but I imagine you may see your view as more definitive based on what Genesis 2:7 says.  I want you to see there are holes in this take if we equate Adam's body with how we are brought into the world.

 

So I should have covered all your points and questions.  From your points, it may be we have different views concerning the soul/and or spirit.  Do you believe the soul/and or spirit is just energy, or is it our core being?  This is to say when we die, do you believe we are conscious beings with just our soul/and or spirit?  Do you believe in the idea of soul sleep?

Edited December 4, 2024 by Hinds Feet

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

I'll respond to your points numerically.  I'm still new to these forums, so I'm not yet adapt at quoting point by point.

1.  That is pretty hard-pressed to separate what God says about blood and explaining why not to consume it, along with him mentioning the blood of people.  Even when we look at when Cain killed Abel, God made it a point to say it was Abel's blood crying out to Him.  God basically tells Noah for someone to shed man's blood, that is the very definition of taking their life. (And God Himself explains humans are made in His image, which I assume you believe has spiritual implications?  All that is wrapped within God's commentary of blood)  Both men and animals have blood.

Still not 'hard-pressed' at all.  James 2:26 already proves that "the life of the flesh is in the soul".  So that's that.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

2.  Both verses 4 and 5 in Genesis 9 use the same verbage.  In truth when you look at the Hebrew, it actually uses the word for soul which is "נֶפֶשׁ" (nephesh).  So both animals and men have nephesh, and its wrap up in the blood of flesh.  Now we might say the soul is a kind of spiritual energy that animates the body.  Well, it appears it physically manifests itself (to some degree) with our blood.  I'm not saying the blood is the soul, but its connected according to Scripture.

The huge difference between what animals and man have is that God breathed into the nose of Adam.  And no verses that even suggest that animals have souls.  What evidence do you have that any do?

And, I asked if you know what the "soul" is and what it does.  And you haven't answered that.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

3.  James 2:26 doesn't say anything against what I've been speaking on.  Perhaps you can explain further what you mean, and what you believe I'm saying.

Maybe you are not clear, but James sure is.  When the soul/spirit leaves the body, the body is DEAD.  Real simple.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

4.  So are you saying Jesus' physical suffering and death on the cross was all just for show?

Please give me a break.  Are you kidding?  Please listen carefully.  When Jesus said "it is finished" He meant it.  What He came to do, which was pay the sin debt for mankind, He was DONE.  So His physical death had nothing to do with paying the sin debt, or He simply COULDN'T HAVE SAID WHAT HE DID.  Is that clear enough?

btw, while He was being forsaken on the cross, the literal Greek indicates that He was screaming.  Prior to the cross, with all the torture He went through, "He opened not His mouth" (Isa 53:7).  The suffering He dreaded was His being forsaken (spiritual death) by the Father and Spirit.  

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  That it really didn't mean anything?

Now, did I really say that?  Of course not.  I said it had nothing to do with paying the sin debt.  It was the way to leave earth.  So it was functional.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  And to clarify, are you telling me Jesus could have paid for our sins without all the beatings, being nailed to the cross, and dying?

I'm saying the death He experienced that did pay for our sins was spiritual.  Otherwise He couldn't have said "it is finished" while still alive.  Why isn't that obvious?

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  All of Jesus sufferings and the spilling of His blood, had spiritual significance. 

This is an opinion.  Explain how the physical suffering and death has "spiritual significance".  The better understanding is that His spiritual death is what has obvious spiritual significance.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

That is to say, something was literally happening "behind the scenes" in all of Jesus physical sufferings.  And when Jesus said "It is finished", He was signifying He had successfully received the sin of all humankind onto His shoulders, and Him dying was the end result.

That is not what He meant at all.  The Greek tense proves you wrong about what He meant by "it is finished".  It meant what He was there to do WAS DONE.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Think about it like this, with all the torture Jesus went through before being nailed to the cross, any normal man would have died along the way.  Jesus was struck in the head multiple times by both the Jewish people and the Roman soldiers.  He was also struck across the head with a reed staff, and I doubt it had a soft exterior.  Things like this was going on all through the night and morning.  Jesus' face must have been horribly bruised and battered. (Add on to it, they plucked out the hair from His beard)

No doubt the "Son of man" was very tough.  But it wasn't His physical death that paid the debt; it was His spiritual death that did.  That is the spiritual significance.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

Then with all that, we know the Roman soldiers whipped Jesus with a cat-o-nine tails, which most likely had pieces of metal scraps attach to the ends.  According to Jewish law, a man was not to endure more than 40 lashes.  Yet for Romans, they weren't bound to such law.  We don't know how many times Jesus was whipped, but we can imagine by the end of it, His entire back was probably flayed open.  So much so, you could probably see bones from Jesus' ribs.  Like I said, any normal man would have probably been dead from all that abuse.  Yet Jesus endured all this, and He was strong because He was completely righteous in Himself.  Perhaps He couldn't die until sin was completely transmitted onto Him.  He was nailed to the cross at around 9 am.  At 3 pm, He said, "It is finished", meaning the sin of the world was now on His shoulders.  And from that, He died.  This is my understanding.  What is your understanding?

My understanding is what the Bible says.  The single Greek word for "it is finished" is 'tetelestai' and was used during Jesus' time in a financial sense for "paid in full".

Now that you know what the word really means should show you that He had already paid the debt in full.  If His physical death was required, He COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

5.  Your definition of a complete physical body seems to only mean being able to exist without the umbilical cord.

Did God have to "tweak" Adam's body after breathing into his nose?  No.  That's what I mean.  A body able to live independently.  

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  This may be your definition, which would be speculation concerning when God places a soul/and or spirit inside a person.

Gen 2:7 isn't speculation.  I see a pattern.  Doesn't matter whether you do or not.  It WAS God's pattern in creating the first human being.

So, explain why God would deviate from that pattern in setting up the procreation of humans after that.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yet even outside the womb, a baby doesn't have a complete functioning body like Adam's. 

Yes, it is independent from its mother.  Do you know what a parasite is?  An organism that feeds off another living thing.  That is basically what a fetus is until the cord is cut.  That's what I'm talking about.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

Adam on the day he was created, could walk and talk.  He could reproduce with Eve.  He had all his limbs, he had all his teeth, he was fully developed. (Him and Eve)

But I already said I wasn't talking about walking, talking etc in order to have a soul.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

You ask me why an incomplete fetus needs a soul?  I hate to answer a question with a question, but perhaps the best answer is why not?

That wasn't a question in a question.  It was 1 question.  If the "best answer" is 'why not?', you're only punting.  That's no answer.  That so-called "answer" is only another question.  So explain why "why not" is such a good answer, because it doesn't answer anything.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  You believe God puts the soul/and or spirit in a person when their body develops to the point of being able to survive outside the womb.

I believe that because that is how God created Adam.  I see the pattern.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yet, none of us can remember what life was like as babies.

Why does this matter?  It is totally irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

6.  Its not splitting hairs at all.  If the pattern is a complete body in the most literal sense, then it must be a body similar to Adam's body.  Adam's body had limbs, it had a fully functional brain.  All of his organs were fully developed, no puberty.

Why did you add "in the most literal sense" when I made no such claim?  I see no point in putting a soul into a parasite.  But apparently you do.  OK, that is your opinion, to which you are entitled.  

The point of Gen 2:7 is that Adam wasn't a "living being" (human being) until the soul was placed into the body.  That is quite clear.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

So if a person is born without parts in their brain or defective parts, they don't have a fully functioning body.

I'm not going to entertain your 'in the most literal sense' because I never suggested that.  

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

7.  So Genesis states God breathed into Adam, "the breath of life".  During the flood judgment in Noah's day, Genesis 7:22-23 states.......

"Of all that was on dry land, everything that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.  And every living thing on the face of the earth was destroyed—man and livestock, crawling creatures and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth, and only Noah and those with him in the ark remained."

So what?  Is there a point here?

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

It's stated every land dwelling creature, both man and animals alike, had the breath of life in their nostrils.  So it wasn't just Adam.

If you can find any verse about God breathing the 'breath of life' into even just 1 animal, you'll have a point.  Otherwise, you just have an opinion.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  And something interesting about the flood judgment is, the animals were also condemned along with men concerning corruption in the earth.  God was grieved over the actions of both men and animals.  We usually equate spiritual matters with the sense of morality.  Here we see God judged the animals for their lack of morality.  These things might be heavy indicators that animals also have souls/and or spirits. (That is if we equate these things with morality)  Remember in Genesis 1, God blessed the animals as well as humans.  God didn't speak to the stars and blessed them.  God didn't speak to the sun or moon and blessed them.  Yet to the creatures, He spoke to them.  To us, He spoke to us.  These are indicators.

Flooding the earth to rid it of evil humans means that animals have to go as well.  Do you think God would have Noah build an ark large enough for all of them?

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

8.  Then its all speculation as to when God places the soul and spirit, including when you believe it happens.

Speculation is a wild guess.  I have the pattern of Gen 2:7.  So I'm comfortable with that.  If you are comfortable with speculation, go ahead.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  How do you know ability to exist outside the womb indicates a fully developed body?

Again, I said 'complete', meaning able to live without external support.  Like being disconnected from momma.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Physically speaking, a body is not fully developed at birth.

I never said it was.  But it seems you really like to take things to an extreme.  God created Adam's body for independent life.  Then He breathed into that body the breath of life and THEN and ONLY THEN does the Bible say that Adam "was a living being", meaning a human being.

If Moses had written that God "made Adam out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into the living being the breath of life", you'd have a point.  But, as it is written, you don't.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  We don't even know who we are at birth, or can speak and interact with the world from our person.

Irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

Our earliest memories are again around 3-4.  Yet if believing God places the soul/and or spirit in the body at 4 is ridiculous because clearly there is life there, why not say there is life there when we see a fetus sucking their thumbs?  This is not grasping straws or splitting hairs, because at the end of the day, we don't explicitly know when God does it.

Just irrelevant speculation.  We have the pattern.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

And this is the point of the thread overall.  Speculating when He does it based on what is written.

No, speculating is taking a wild guess, which means without ANY evidence at all.

There is a clear pattern in Gen 2:7.  No speculation, no guessing, just the fact.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Most responses say it all happens at the very conception of a fertilized egg.

We have no evidence for that speculation.

1 hour ago, Hinds Feet said:

So I should have covered all your points and questions.  From your points, it may be we have different views concerning the soul/and or spirit.  Do you believe the soul/and or spirit is just energy, or is it our core being?  This is to say when we die, do you believe we are conscious beings with just our soul/and or spirit?  Do you believe in the idea of soul sleep?

I've already asked what you think the soul is and does.  And you "answer" here with a plethora of more questions.

Please answer first, since I asked first.  Seems from your questions you really aren't sure what the soul is or does.  But give it a try.

[Hinds Feet]

18 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Still not 'hard-pressed' at all.  James 2:26 already proves that "the life of the flesh is in the soul".  So that's that.

The huge difference between what animals and man have is that God breathed into the nose of Adam.  And no verses that even suggest that animals have souls.  What evidence do you have that any do?

And, I asked if you know what the "soul" is and what it does.  And you haven't answered that.

Maybe you are not clear, but James sure is.  When the soul/spirit leaves the body, the body is DEAD.  Real simple.

Please give me a break.  Are you kidding?  Please listen carefully.  When Jesus said "it is finished" He meant it.  What He came to do, which was pay the sin debt for mankind, He was DONE.  So His physical death had nothing to do with paying the sin debt, or He simply COULDN'T HAVE SAID WHAT HE DID.  Is that clear enough?

btw, while He was being forsaken on the cross, the literal Greek indicates that He was screaming.  Prior to the cross, with all the torture He went through, "He opened not His mouth" (Isa 53:7).  The suffering He dreaded was His being forsaken (spiritual death) by the Father and Spirit.  

Now, did I really say that?  Of course not.  I said it had nothing to do with paying the sin debt.  It was the way to leave earth.  So it was functional.

I'm saying the death He experienced that did pay for our sins was spiritual.  Otherwise He couldn't have said "it is finished" while still alive.  Why isn't that obvious?

This is an opinion.  Explain how the physical suffering and death has "spiritual significance".  The better understanding is that His spiritual death is what has obvious spiritual significance.

That is not what He meant at all.  The Greek tense proves you wrong about what He meant by "it is finished".  It meant what He was there to do WAS DONE.

No doubt the "Son of man" was very tough.  But it wasn't His physical death that paid the debt; it was His spiritual death that did.  That is the spiritual significance.

My understanding is what the Bible says.  The single Greek word for "it is finished" is 'tetelestai' and was used during Jesus' time in a financial sense for "paid in full".

Now that you know what the word really means should show you that He had already paid the debt in full.  If His physical death was required, He COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT.

Did God have to "tweak" Adam's body after breathing into his nose?  No.  That's what I mean.  A body able to live independently.  

Gen 2:7 isn't speculation.  I see a pattern.  Doesn't matter whether you do or not.  It WAS God's pattern in creating the first human being.

So, explain why God would deviate from that pattern in setting up the procreation of humans after that.

Yes, it is independent from its mother.  Do you know what a parasite is?  An organism that feeds off another living thing.  That is basically what a fetus is until the cord is cut.  That's what I'm talking about.

But I already said I wasn't talking about walking, talking etc in order to have a soul.

That wasn't a question in a question.  It was 1 question.  If the "best answer" is 'why not?', you're only punting.  That's no answer.  That so-called "answer" is only another question.  So explain why "why not" is such a good answer, because it doesn't answer anything.

I believe that because that is how God created Adam.  I see the pattern.

Why does this matter?  It is totally irrelevant.

Why did you add "in the most literal sense" when I made no such claim?  I see no point in putting a soul into a parasite.  But apparently you do.  OK, that is your opinion, to which you are entitled.  

The point of Gen 2:7 is that Adam wasn't a "living being" (human being) until the soul was placed into the body.  That is quite clear.

I'm not going to entertain your 'in the most literal sense' because I never suggested that.  

So what?  Is there a point here?

If you can find any verse about God breathing the 'breath of life' into even just 1 animal, you'll have a point.  Otherwise, you just have an opinion.

Flooding the earth to rid it of evil humans means that animals have to go as well.  Do you think God would have Noah build an ark large enough for all of them?

Speculation is a wild guess.  I have the pattern of Gen 2:7.  So I'm comfortable with that.  If you are comfortable with speculation, go ahead.

Again, I said 'complete', meaning able to live without external support.  Like being disconnected from momma.

I never said it was.  But it seems you really like to take things to an extreme.  God created Adam's body for independent life.  Then He breathed into that body the breath of life and THEN and ONLY THEN does the Bible say that Adam "was a living being", meaning a human being.

If Moses had written that God "made Adam out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into the living being the breath of life", you'd have a point.  But, as it is written, you don't.

Irrelevant.

Just irrelevant speculation.  We have the pattern.

No, speculating is taking a wild guess, which means without ANY evidence at all.

There is a clear pattern in Gen 2:7.  No speculation, no guessing, just the fact.

We have no evidence for that speculation.

I've already asked what you think the soul is and does.  And you "answer" here with a plethora of more questions.

Please answer first, since I asked first.  Seems from your questions you really aren't sure what the soul is or does.  But give it a try.

 

Haha, you even quoted and split the numbered sections.  If you keep doing that, you will have posts ten miles long.  That said, I'll try to keep this post shorter and address the most important responses.  Yet overall we may have come to an impasse.  Which is cool.  I respect our convictions.  You asked me what I believe the soul is?  I ultimately believe the soul/and or spirit is our core person.  Just as God is Spirit, angels/sons of God are spirits, we too are spirits.  We have an extra element with our bodies.  I also believe when God made Adam, God also created his soul/and or spirit within the body.  So Adam's existence began in that moment, with his spirit inside the body.  When Adam died, his body was left here, but his very person which is his soul/and or spirit, went to the place where the righteous dead would wait for Jesus. (Or at least I think Adam was apart of the righteous dead.  If not, he went to the other side of it)


So that is my understanding of the soul/and or spirit.  One person's soul, as Jesus stated, is more valuable than all the world put together.  I don't believe it is just an energy source from God, but that we ourselves are literally souls/and or spirits.  On to whether or not animals have souls, or have the breath of life, Scripture does say animals indeed have the breath of life.  Genesis 1:30 states......

 

"And to every beast of the earth and every bird of the air and every creature that crawls upon the earth—everything that has the breath of life in it—I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.

 

Also Genesis 2:19 says........

 

"And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and He brought them to the man to see what he would name each one. And whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name."

 

Here we see God formed the animals out of the ground, just like man, and they are called living creatures.  In the Hebrew, that is the same phrase used to describe Adam in Genesis 2:7, "living soul" "living creature" Hebrew "נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה" (hayyah nephesh).  Now, if you're looking for an exact phrase of God breathing into animals nostrils, no, you won't find it.  Yet as we can see here, animals have the breath of life within them and are declared as being living souls just like Adam.  It would be splitting hairs to say because there is no verse speaking of animals' nostrils, is evidence animals have no soul.  And again if having a sense of morality is also equated with having a soul, as many Christians believe and debate with atheists over, God judged the morality of animals during the flood judgment.  God declared animals corrupted their way on the earth as well as men.  Genesis 6:7 says.....

 

So the LORD said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”

 

So animals were judged right along with man.  Jesus also stated that God cares for the animals, and not one sparrow falls without Him knowing.  In the laws concerning sacrifice, if the people didn't do it correctly, they could be held guilty for murdering an animal.  Leviticus 17:3-4

 

‘Anyone from the house of Israel who slaughters an ox, a lamb, or a goat in the camp or outside of it instead of bringing it to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting to present it as an offering to the LORD before His tabernacle—that man shall incur bloodguilt. He has shed blood and must be cut off from among his people.

 

This is a very serious penalty, and it is over shedding the blood of animals.  So this is convincing evidence animals have a soul.  Finally on the case of souls being placed inside fetus who depend on their mother, you asked me what would be the purpose of God placing it there during that time?  I responded why not?  The implication I get from your first question is what good is it to place the soul in a vessel that is not complete.  In a vessel where you can't do much of anything, its almost like a prison.  Well, if that is the case, as I mentioned, our earliest memories are at around 3-4.  So before that time, we are much like that forming vessel.  We aren't doing anything on our own.  We are VERY much still dependent on our mom, and those taking care of us.  Adam was independent.  He was able to function, and he knew who he was.  All the implications are if you go by the "pattern", then go by the whole pattern.  Adam had a fully functional body before becoming the living soul.  If we argue the full pattern, then placing a soul in a body that is still dependent on their parents is pointless.  Yet you wouldn't argue a person doesn't have a soul until their body is fully developed.  You are not going the whole way according to the pattern.

 

Now you say you aren't arguing "full development", but Adam was indeed "fully developed".  That's what we see in the Bible.  Yes, Adam had legs, he had arms, he had bones, he had working organs, so on and so forth.  To say this is splitting hairs is not a viable response.  No one would say Adam didn't have these things.  This is the pattern.  It doesn't matter if you wasn't arguing this if this is what is in Scripture.  So I speak to what is written in Scripture, and Adam's body was perfect from the jump.  That is the pattern.  So it is right to argue the holes in this.  Are people who are born without limbs have no soul?  Are people with defects in their bodies are simply physical life, but not spiritual?  What is the point of them having souls/and or spirits without a functioning body? (People who are born blind, people who are born deaf.  People born with brain disorders that don't allow them to mature to adult ways of thinking.  Is that no different from being a fetus?)  So these are the questions you must ask yourself, but if you choose not to, it still doesn't deny the full pattern we see that Adam had a functioning body with all these things present.

 

So I think that is the gist of what I want to respond to.  I'll read your final response as well.

[FreeGrace]

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

 

Haha, you even quoted and split the numbered sections.  If you keep doing that, you will have posts ten miles long.

That's how I post.  I split the post up to respond to each point, section, or whatever.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  That said, I'll try to keep this post shorter and address the most important responses.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yet overall we may have come to an impasse.  Which is cool.  I respect our convictions.  You asked me what I believe the soul is?  I ultimately believe the soul/and or spirit is our core person.  Just as God is Spirit, angels/sons of God are spirits, we too are spirits.  We have an extra element with our bodies.  I also believe when God made Adam, God also created his soul/and or spirit within the body. 

Gen 2:7 says plainly that God created the physical body first and THEN breathed into his nose the "breath of life", which is the soul and spirit.

We know the soul and spirit are different from Heb 4:12.  And Jesus told the woman at the well why we need a living human spirit;  to worship God.

When Adam ate the fruit, he died "on the day" he ate the fruit.  But that wasn't physical death.  It was the death of his human spirit.  That is why everyone needs to be born again.  

When the Trinity said, "let US make man in OUR image" they weren't referring to physical characteristics, but their essence.  Just as the Trinity is Father, Son and Spirit, so man is body, soul and spirit (1 Thess 5:23).

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  On to whether or not animals have souls, or have the breath of life, Scripture does say animals indeed have the breath of life.  Genesis 1:30 states......

Of course animals have physical or physiological life.  So what?  God didn't breathe the "breath of life" into any animal.  And animals don't have a soul or spirit.  They have instinct.

And you haven't explained what the soul is.  All you said is it is the "core person".  That doesn't help.  The soul is the summation of the personality of the person:  consciousness, conscience, emotions, etc.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

"And to every beast of the earth and every bird of the air and every creature that crawls upon the earth—everything that has the breath of life in it—I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.

And, so what?

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Here we see God formed the animals out of the ground, just like man, and they are called living creatures.

Yes, all living things share the chemicals of the ground.  That's just life on earth.

The key is that only man has a soul/spirit, with the ability to make moral decisions.  Animals have only instinct.  

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

‘Anyone from the house of Israel who slaughters an ox, a lamb, or a goat in the camp or outside of it instead of bringing it to the entrance to the Tent of Meeting to present it as an offering to the LORD before His tabernacle—that man shall incur bloodguilt. He has shed blood and must be cut off from among his people.

Is there a point about this verse?

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

This is a very serious penalty, and it is over shedding the blood of animals.  So this is convincing evidence animals have a soul.

Hardly.  That would mean animals have a moral compass, which is silly.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Finally on the case of souls being placed inside fetus who depend on their mother, you asked me what would be the purpose of God placing it there during that time?  I responded why not?  The implication I get from your first question is what good is it to place the soul in a vessel that is not complete.  In a vessel where you can't do much of anything, its almost like a prison. 

You're not making your case so far.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Well, if that is the case, as I mentioned, our earliest memories are at around 3-4. 

Actually, around 2.5 years.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

So before that time, we are much like that forming vessel.  We aren't doing anything on our own.  We are VERY much still dependent on our mom, and those taking care of us.

Thanks for making my point.  There is no point in having a soul while the body is still forming and developing.  And Gen 2:7 is the pattern for mankind.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Adam was independent.  He was able to function, and he knew who he was.  All the implications are if you go by the "pattern", then go by the whole pattern.

I go by what the Bible says, not opinionators.  Your "demand" isn't legitimate because you didn't get to place any demands on God.  The pattern in Gen 2:7 is simple and straightforward and easily fits how all humans are born.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Adam had a fully functional body before becoming the living soul.

And you keep missing my point.  My point is only that God completed the physical body BEFORE He breathed the breath of life into that body.  I never said anything about "fully functioning" as you are taking it.  Yes, I do mean a body that can live after being detached from momma.  Otherwise, you have a soul in a parasite, basically.

Physiological life can be sustained and maintain AFTER the soul leaves the body (physical death) and that is NOT a living human being any more.  

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  If we argue the full pattern, then placing a soul in a body that is still dependent on their parents is pointless.

You haven't made your point and keep missing my point.  The pattern from Gen 2:7 is simple but you are trying to make it way more complicated.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yet you wouldn't argue a person doesn't have a soul until their body is fully developed.  You are not going the whole way according to the pattern.

Well, it is clear to me that you are the one who doesn't understand the simplicity of the pattern of Gen 2:7.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Now you say you aren't arguing "full development", but Adam was indeed "fully developed".  That's what we see in the Bible.

See what I mean?  Adam was created as an ADULT male.  So that doesn't fit the pattern that you are trying to redefine.  Adam's body was complete, meaning that it didn't need external life support.  His adultness is irrelevant to the pattern.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  Yes, Adam had legs, he had arms, he had bones, he had working organs, so on and so forth.  To say this is splitting hairs is not a viable response.

OK, it seems you don't want to understand the simple concept of Adam's body was complete, meaning no need of external support  (like an umbilical cord attached to someone else).  You're twisting my point into something else.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  No one would say Adam didn't have these things.  This is the pattern.

The pattern is a complete body that doesn't need attachment to another human being.  The pattern is applied to how every other human comes to be.  As long as the fetus needs external support (momma), there is no reasonable or rational need for a soul.  And you haven't made the point that there is.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  It doesn't matter if you wasn't arguing this if this is what is in Scripture.

Well, it does matter because you aren't comprehending the simple concept of what it means to be independent of external support. 

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  So I speak to what is written in Scripture, and Adam's body was perfect from the jump.

In spite of all my explanation, you still are missing the point.  The pattern in Gen 2:7 is God formed a complete independent body (never mind it was as an ADULT male), and then breathed in the breath of life.  

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  That is the pattern.  So it is right to argue the holes in this. 

lol.  All the "holes" are what you are making.  If you'd stop making holes, you'd find there are no holes.  Just a simple pattern that applies to all human beings after Adam and Eve.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Are people who are born without limbs have no soul? 

After ALL I've been explaining, please save your silly questions.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

Are people with defects in their bodies are simply physical life, but not spiritual?

Ditto.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  What is the point of them having souls/and or spirits without a functioning body? (People who are born blind, people who are born deaf.  People born with brain disorders that don't allow them to mature to adult ways of thinking.  Is that no different from being a fetus?)

Ditto.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

  So these are the questions you must ask yourself, but if you choose not to

These so-called "holes" in the pattern are your own making.  Stop making them and you would see that there are no holes.

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

it still doesn't deny the full pattern we see that Adam had a functioning body with all these things present.

Let me say it again:  that is irrelevant.  The ONLY POINT is that God created a complete body that didn't need life support.  All zygotes, fetuses, etc in the womb NEED life support and attachment to momma.  Why can't you see that?

33 minutes ago, Hinds Feet said:

So I think that is the gist of what I want to respond to.  I'll read your final response as well.

I conclude that you have no point to make, or case with evidence, so you created 'holes' in my pattern in order to attack what isn't there.  

If you remove your "fully functional" stuff, there are no holes.  

[Luther]

On 12/2/2024 at 8:02 PM, FreeGrace said:

To be accurate, God is said to "breath into Adam's nostrils the breath of life".  The Bible doesn't designate which Person of the Trinity did the breathing.  

And no, I don't agree that something happens to the soul when a person becomes saved.

The change is to the dead human spirit, which is what God does in the NEW birth.

Regeneration is described in several ways in the Bible:  "made alive", RE-born, NEW birth, RE-generation.

Humans are born physically alive and spiritually dead.  Which is why everyone needs to be born again (spiritually).

Why do we need a living functioning human spirit?  Jesus told the woman at the well that to worship God, one has to worship "in spirit and in truth".  The English translations are mixed regarding whether the word "spirit" is capitalized.  It appears Jesus is telling the woman (and teaching all of us after her) that apart from the RE-birth of the human spirit, we can't worship God properly.  

iow, we need a living functioning human spirit AND 'truth', which is God's Word which describes how to worship God properly.

One more thing to consider;  where exactly does the Holy Spirit reside in the believer?  The Bible says all believers have the Holy Spirit in them.  But where, exactly?

The most logical place would be the RE-born human spirit, which is the place from which we worship God.  

That would mean the dead human spirit would be "made alive" (Eph 2) when the Holy Spirit makes His home in the believer.

The apostle John taught that we can't sin from the human spirit, which supports the idea that the Holy Spirit resides in our human spirit.  But we still sin from our soul.

1 John 3:9 - No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God.  NIV

This, I believe, refers to the human spirit, where the Holy Spirit resides.  Makes total sense that we don't and can't sin from our human spirit.

Some view this verse to teach that believers don't sin any more, but every honest believer knows better.  

Matthew 16:26

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Hebrews 4:12

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.

Two very powerful verses. Yes, I would agree that soul and spirit are two unique things according to Hebrews 4:12. But the soul " essence of man"? needs to be made "new" as well. 

Hebrews 10:38-39

Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.

[39]But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

Proverbs 20:27

The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly.

Romans 7:22

For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

2 Corinthians 4:16

For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.

So it's like the soul is the "inward man" that likewise becomes "new" along with the new "spirit" that God gives us.

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, Luther said:

  FreeGrace said:

And no, I don't agree that something happens to the soul when a person becomes saved.

Hebrews 4:12

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.

Two very powerful verses. Yes, I would agree that soul and spirit are two unique things according to Hebrews 4:12. But the soul " essence of man"? needs to be made "new" as well. 

Heb 4:12 proves that the soul and spirit are two separate things.  It is the human spirit that must be born AGAIN, or RE-generated, or made alive.

1 hour ago, Luther said:

Hebrews 10:38-39

Proverbs 20:27

Romans 7:22

2 Corinthians 4:16

So it's like the soul is the "inward man" that likewise becomes "new" along with the new "spirit" that God gives us.

None of these verses (or any other) say that the soul is made new.  Only the dead human spirit is born AGAIN, or RE-generated or made alive.

The soul is the intellect, personality and emotions that complete the body.  The human spirit is for worshiping God, as Jesus told the woman at the well in John 4:24 -  God is Spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”

When Adam and the woman sinned, their human spirit died "on the day" they ate the fruit.  The literal Hebrew says "on the day you eat of it, DYING, you shall DIE".

The "dying" refers to the aging process that leads to physical death.  So Adam's death at 930 years was after eating the forbidden fruit, not his creation.

What died on the day they ate the fruit was their human spirit.

When God said, "Let US make man after OUR own image" that was referring to the Trinity itself.  So God made man with a body, soul and spirit, which is specifically mentioned in 1 Thess 5:23.

All humans are born physically alive and spiritually dead.  So everyone needs to be born AGAIN, or RE-generated, or made alive, which occurs the moment one believes in Christ's finished work on the cross for them.