How Eternal Life is Maintained

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

No, I don't consider Paul to be a distraction and I can certainly address what you're quoting here. However, I do consider that you are using him to deflect from your inability to respond to the points I raise. So instead of looking to harmonize what I've shared previously with your belief system, you seem to jettison whatever doesn't agree with your predetermined outcomes and jump from one confusion to another. All I'm saying is let's stay focussed and deal with what's in front of you.

Let's start with this: Do you agree that God alone is immortal? If yes, then we can move on to how you also believe that your soul is immortal and how you maintain these two contradictory beliefs at the same time.

God bless!

Yes, I believe that God alone is inherently immortal. Only God has no beginning and no end. That does not preclude Him from creating beings that are eternal. The eternality comes from Him. That does not preclude Him from creating beings that have a continued existence after the death of the physical body. I've offered many, many passages that indicate a continued existence after physical death.

 

[Icyspark]

Yes, I believe that God alone is inherently immortal. Only God has no beginning and no end. That does not preclude Him from creating beings that are eternal. The eternality comes from Him. That does not preclude Him from creating beings that have a continued existence after the death of the physical body. I've offered many, many passages that indicate a continued existence after physical death.

Hi Common Tater,

So were Adam and Eve mortal or immortal when they were created?

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

So were Adam and Eve mortal or immortal when they were created?

Physically, they may have been mortal without access to the tree.

Were angels mortal or immortal when they were created.

 

[Common Tater]

How has Enoch remained alive? He may have walked with God, but he was not sinless. Paul tells us in Romans 3 that all have sinned and fallen short. The same applies to Elijah.

Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” Genesis 3:22 NASB

God's reason for not allowing Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Life would have applied to a sinful Enoch as well. How come he or Elijah did not die? Or is there the possibility that they both did die physically, but their souls continued to exist?

Keep in mind that we are told in John 3 that “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man."

Now think about Jesus' parable about the dives and Lazarus and what Jesus called the Bosom of Abraham.

Think about Moses. We know he was not resurrected. Resurrection implies a physical body and 1 Corinthians 15:20 tells us "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep." Yet he and Elijah were at the Transfiguration. Think again of Jesus' mention of the Bosom of Abraham.

 

[Icyspark]

Physically, they may have been mortal without access to the tree.

Were angels mortal or immortal when they were created.

Hi Common Tater,

If, starting all the way back with Adam and Eve, you are claiming that everyone is in any way inherently immortal then you have created a contradiction with the affirmation that God alone is immortal. There's no way to get around that. You've created a logical paradox, something akin to "This sentence is false." If that sentence is true, and the statement is false, then the sentence is true. Even as it's false. This could also be known as cognitive dissonance (the belief in two contradictory ideas at the same time).

If angels are in any way inherently immortal this too contradicts the affirmation that God alone is immortal. God may provide a way to sustain all beings to live eternally via some external source (such as a tree of LIFE) but if angels require no outside source to sustain them then God isn't alone in His immortality. You need to start with this premise and harmonize your beliefs from here. Immortality is a divine attribute, just as omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience are.

 

[Icyspark]

How has Enoch remained alive? He may have walked with God, but he was not sinless. Paul tells us in Romans 3 that all have sinned and fallen short. The same applies to Elijah.

Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” Genesis 3:22 NASB

God's reason for not allowing Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Life would have applied to a sinful Enoch as well. How come he or Elijah did not die? Or is there the possibility that they both did die physically, but their souls continued to exist?

Keep in mind that we are told in John 3 that “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man."

Now think about Jesus' parable about the dives and Lazarus and what Jesus called the Bosom of Abraham.

Think about Moses. We know he was not resurrected. Resurrection implies a physical body and 1 Corinthians 15:20 tells us "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep." Yet he and Elijah were at the Transfiguration. Think again of Jesus' mention of the Bosom of Abraham.

Hi Common Tater,

Let's try to stick to one discussion point at a time so we're not splitting the discussion into a lot of different bunny trails. I'd love to eventually come back around to these points, but for now let's set them aside.

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

If, starting all the way back with Adam and Eve, you are claiming that everyone is in any way inherently immortal then you have created a contradiction with the affirmation that God alone is immortal. There's no way to get around that. You've created a logical paradox, something akin to "This sentence is false." If that sentence is true, and the statement is false, then the sentence is true. Even as it's false. This could also be known as cognitive dissonance (the belief in two contradictory ideas at the same time).

If angels are in any way inherently immortal this too contradicts the affirmation that God alone is immortal. God may provide a way to sustain all beings to live eternally via some external source (such as a tree of LIFE) but if angels require no outside source to sustain them then God isn't alone in His immortality. You need to start with this premise and harmonize your beliefs from here. Immortality is a divine attribute, just as omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience are.

I have not said that anyone but God is immortal. Only God has no beginning and no end. I do not claim an immortal soul. Jesus tells us that there is one who can destroy the soul. I believe that God can destroy angels too, should He so wish. No one is immortal but God. God cannot be destroyed. Tell me, because Jesus died on the cross, do you then believe that he is not God the Son?

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

Let's try to stick to one discussion point at a time so we're not splitting the discussion into a lot of different bunny trails. I'd love to eventually come back around to these points, but for now let's set them aside.

I believe that they are all intertwined.

 

[Icyspark]

I have not said that anyone but God is immortal. Only God has no beginning and no end. I do not claim an immortal soul. Jesus tells us that there is one who can destroy the soul. I believe that God can destroy angels too, should He so wish. No one is immortal but God. God cannot be destroyed. Tell me, because Jesus died on the cross, do you then believe that he is not God the Son?

Hi Common Tater,

A mortal is a living human being who is subject to death. To be immortal simply means not subject to death. Immortality doesn't necessarily imply without beginning or end. Humans will live forever once we get to heaven but we won't be immortal in the sense that God is inherently immortal.

As regards Jesus, He is a perfect mixture of the human and the divine. When He died on the cross it was His humanity that died, not His divinity because God cannot die.

It sounds like since you believe in the separate existence of the spirit and/or soul, that you believe that the purpose of the tree of life is to keep the body alive?


In post #147 earlier in this thread Formersda made the following assertion:

Oh yes Dust +breath/spirit = living soul/ being is an EGW quote and not in the Bible.

Again I state I have not said about immortality that is you Icy, but eternal life is eternal without ending and according to Jesus we have it now.

To which I replied,

Really? It's sad that you claim to have been an Adventist but you are unfamiliar with the Bible texts which you insist do not exist.​

​

Genesis 2:7​

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [soul].​

​

I wonder if you'd like to retract your accusation that the premise that dust + breath = living soul/being "is an EGW quote"?​

​

Do you know that the Bible says that when we die this process is reversed?​

​

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (the Hebrew word translated here as "spirit" simply means "breath." See also how the CEB and CEV translations render this verse).​

In the Genesis 2:7 verse it says "man became a living being [i.e. soul]." Soul simply means "living being." It doesn't imply some intangible apparition that hides inside a human body and is only freed when the body dies. It simply means that when the dust of the ground and the breath of life (i.e. spirit) are combined that man becomes alive and is a "living being" (Hebrew, nephesh).

1. Do you agree with my interpretation of the above two Bible verses?
2. Is Formersda correct in his assertion that SDAs arrive at this belief from "an EGW quote and not from the Bible"?
3. Do you agree that the combination of dust + breath = living being?
4. Do you agree that at death there is a reversal of the above process? (i.e. dust –breath = dead person)
5. Do you agree that what returns to God at the death of a living being is the breath of life?

I pray this helps.

 

[Formersda]

Hi Formersda,

It seems to me that I address all your questions with biblical responses and then you wave them off and then throw down a bunch more questions. You really need to grapple with the Bible concepts you've already received before jumping from one sinking premise to another one. For instance, you still haven't grappled with how you handle the fact that God ALONE is immortal. It seems to me that you want to kinda, sorta affirm this verity but then also deny it at the same time (aka, cognitive dissonance). Human beings in our current state are considered mortal (Job 4:17) and we seek immortality (Romans 2:7), which God gives only to the redeemed. You yourself have acknowledged this latter fact, but then your cognitive dissonance kicks back in where you attempt to hold onto contradictory ideas at the same time.

Your question above regarding Jesus's statement about living and dying is answered in the self same verse. Jesus says it, "I am the RESURRECTION..." Even if Lazarus wasn't resurrected that particular day, if he accepted Jesus as his Savior then he would be resurrected at the Second Coming of Christ. Even though he died, he would live again. When? At the resurrection.

While we're on the topic of Lazarus, you'll notice that even though he was dead for three days he had zero to say about being taken away from heavenly bliss. You know why that is? Cuz, according to the Bible, "the dead know nothing." How much do they know? NOTHING. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Setting aside the cognitive dissonance with God alone being immortal, if mortal humans are also actually immortal then what use is this unending life if you're actually "dead" and "know nothing"?





So if your understanding of the above verses is correct, don't you suppose that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would be with the Lord right now? Aside from the fact that the Bible clearly says, "the dead know nothing," guess what it also says that the dead don't do? They don't praise God. Do you think it's possible for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to be with God and not be praising Him?

Psalm 115:17​

The dead do not praise the Lord, nor any who go down into silence.​

Not only do they "not praise the Lord," but when they die they "go down into silence" ? Why are they silent? Because, "the dead know nothing"—not even how to talk!

Jesus equated death with sleep. For Jesus—even though Lazarus was dead—to the Creator he was alive because Jesus is life. If Jesus says to the dead and rotting corpse of Lazarus, "Come forth!" He can reconstitute the missing life in less time than it took Him to say the words.





Really? It's sad that you claim to have been an Adventist but you are unfamiliar with the Bible texts which you insist do not exist.

Genesis 2:7​

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [soul].​

I wonder if you'd like to retract your accusation that the premise that dust + breath = living soul/being "is an EGW quote"?

Do you know that the Bible says that when we die this process is reversed?

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (the Hebrew word translated here as "spirit" simply means "breath." See also how the CEB and CEV translations render this verse). ​

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Hi Icy,

how unusual for you to not address what Jesus says this hasn’t suprised me as you keep deflecting.
When God breathed into Adam can you agree that Adam wasn’t even a human being?
So let’s get a real definition of spirit that was blown into the dust.
The Hebrew word is Ruach first seen in Genesis 1:2 where it says the Spirit of God was moving over the waters. Is that spirit breath? Therefore you must concede there are different uses of that word and it is used interchangeably. But spirit is not a physical thing, when a baby is born God does not breath into its nostrils for it to become a living being. And God did not do the same for Eve either.
Ruach is used for wind, spirit and breath.
Again I reiterate that God alone is immortal and yes I do believe Abraham, Issac and Jacob are with the Lord and are alive otherwise Jesus wouldn’t have said it. We also know Enoch didn’t die either. Are you suggesting also that when Jesus died He stopped being God?
So please address what Jesus said about even when you die you live.

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

A mortal is a living human being who is subject to death. To be immortal simply means not subject to death. Immortality doesn't necessarily imply without beginning or end. Humans will live forever once we get to heaven but we won't be immortal in the sense that God is inherently immortal.

As regards Jesus, He is a perfect mixture of the human and the divine. When He died on the cross it was His humanity that died, not His divinity because God cannot die.

It sounds like since you believe in the separate existence of the spirit and/or soul, that you believe that the purpose of the tree of life is to keep the body alive?


In post #147 earlier in this thread Formersda made the following assertion:

To which I replied,

Really? It's sad that you claim to have been an Adventist but you are unfamiliar with the Bible texts which you insist do not exist.​

​

Genesis 2:7​

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [soul].​

​

I wonder if you'd like to retract your accusation that the premise that dust + breath = living soul/being "is an EGW quote"?​

​

Do you know that the Bible says that when we die this process is reversed?​

​

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (the Hebrew word translated here as "spirit" simply means "breath." See also how the CEB and CEV translations render this verse).​

In the Genesis 2:7 verse it says "man became a living being [i.e. soul]." Soul simply means "living being." It doesn't imply some intangible apparition that hides inside a human body and is only freed when the body dies. It simply means that when the dust of the ground and the breath of life (i.e. spirit) are combined that man becomes alive and is a "living being" (Hebrew, nephesh).

1. Do you agree with my interpretation of the above two Bible verses?
2. Is Formersda correct in his assertion that SDAs arrive at this belief from "an EGW quote and not from the Bible"?
3. Do you agree that the combination of dust + breath = living being?
4. Do you agree that at death there is a reversal of the above process? (i.e. dust –breath = dead person)
5. Do you agree that what returns to God at the death of a living being is the breath of life?

I pray this helps.

Do you agree with the following quote from page 82 of "Seventh-day Adventists Believe...."?

1. The Biblical meaning of soul. As we have already mentioned, in the Old Testament "soul" is a translation of the Hebrew nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 it denotes man as a living being after the breath of life entered into a physical body formed from the elements of the earth. "Similarly, a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born, each 'soul' being a new unit of life uniquely different, and separate, from other similar units. This quality of individuality in each living being, which constitutes it a unique entity, seems to be the idea emphasized by the Hebrew term nephesh. When used in this sense nephesh is not a part of the person; it is the person, and, in many instances, is translated 'person' (see Gen. 14:21; Num. 5:6; Deut. 10:22; cf. Ps. 3:2) or 'self' (Lev. 11:43; 1 Kings 19:4; Isa. 46:2; etc.).1. The Biblical meaning of soul. As we have already mentioned, in the Old Testament "soul" is a translation of the Hebrew nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 it denotes man as a living being after the breath of life entered into a physical body formed from the elements of the earth. "Similarly, a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born, each 'soul' being a new unit of life uniquely different, and separate, from other similar units. This quality of individuality in each living being, which constitutes it a unique entity, seems to be the idea emphasized by the Hebrew term nephesh. When used in this sense nephesh is not a part of the person; it is the person, and, in many instances, is translated 'person' (see Gen. 14:21; Num. 5:6; Deut. 10:22; cf. Ps. 3:2) or 'self' (Lev. 11:43; 1 Kings 19:4; Isa. 46:2; etc.).

 

[Icyspark]

Do you agree with the following quote from page 82 of "Seventh-day Adventists Believe...."?

1. The Biblical meaning of soul. As we have already mentioned, in the Old Testament "soul" is a translation of the Hebrew nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 it denotes man as a living being after the breath of life entered into a physical body formed from the elements of the earth. "Similarly, a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born, each 'soul' being a new unit of life uniquely different, and separate, from other similar units. This quality of individuality in each living being, which constitutes it a unique entity, seems to be the idea emphasized by the Hebrew term nephesh. When used in this sense nephesh is not a part of the person; it is the person, and, in many instances, is translated 'person' (see Gen. 14:21; Num. 5:6; Deut. 10:22; cf. Ps. 3:2) or 'self' (Lev. 11:43; 1 Kings 19:4; Isa. 46:2; etc.).1. The Biblical meaning of soul. As we have already mentioned, in the Old Testament "soul" is a translation of the Hebrew nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 it denotes man as a living being after the breath of life entered into a physical body formed from the elements of the earth. "Similarly, a new soul comes into existence whenever a child is born, each 'soul' being a new unit of life uniquely different, and separate, from other similar units. This quality of individuality in each living being, which constitutes it a unique entity, seems to be the idea emphasized by the Hebrew term nephesh. When used in this sense nephesh is not a part of the person; it is the person, and, in many instances, is translated 'person' (see Gen. 14:21; Num. 5:6; Deut. 10:22; cf. Ps. 3:2) or 'self' (Lev. 11:43; 1 Kings 19:4; Isa. 46:2; etc.).

Hi Common Tater,

Yes, I agree with this. But why did you post the same thing twice?

Here's a definition of nephesh from a non Adventist source:

Nephesh​

neh'-fesh
Noun Feminine
NAS Word Usage - Total: 688

1. soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion
   1. that which breathes, the breathing substance or being, soul, the inner being of man
   2. living being
   3. living being (with life in the blood)
   4. the man himself, self, person or individual
   5. seat of the appetites
   6. seat of emotions and passions
   7. activity of mind
      1. dubious
   8. activity of the will
      1. dubious
   9. activity of the character
      1. dubious

I'm not seeing an opportunity of where one can insert an alternate meaning of an intangible entity abiding inside a human body.

I pray this helps.

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

Yes, I agree with this. But why did you post the same thing twice?

Here's a definition of nephesh from a non Adventist source:

Nephesh​

neh'-fesh
Noun Feminine
NAS Word Usage - Total: 688

1. soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion
   1. that which breathes, the breathing substance or being, soul, the inner being of man
   2. living being
   3. living being (with life in the blood)
   4. the man himself, self, person or individual
   5. seat of the appetites
   6. seat of emotions and passions
   7. activity of mind
      1. dubious
   8. activity of the will
      1. dubious
   9. activity of the character
      1. dubious

I'm not seeing an opportunity of where one can insert an alternate meaning of an intangible entity abiding inside a human body.

I pray this helps.

Does the Father have a soul? Did the Son prior to the incarnation? Does the Holy Spirit have a soul? Do the angels have a soul?

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

Yes, I agree with this. But why did you post the same thing twice?

Here's a definition of nephesh from a non Adventist source:

Nephesh​

neh'-fesh
Noun Feminine
NAS Word Usage - Total: 688

1. soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion
   1. that which breathes, the breathing substance or being, soul, the inner being of man
   2. living being
   3. living being (with life in the blood)
   4. the man himself, self, person or individual
   5. seat of the appetites
   6. seat of emotions and passions
   7. activity of mind
      1. dubious
   8. activity of the will
      1. dubious
   9. activity of the character
      1. dubious

I'm not seeing an opportunity of where one can insert an alternate meaning of an intangible entity abiding inside a human body.

I pray this helps.

Twice because I hit control-v twice.

If the soul comes into existence upon the birth of the child, then you believe that the unborn child in the womb has no soul? Then Jesus had no soul when he was in Mary's womb?

If you believe that statement that the soul doesn't come into existence until the birth of a child, does this mean you would not see an issue with abortion? Is this statement the reason that so many Adventist hospitals perform abortions upon demand? I am not throwing shade. I believe all of this is intertwined.

 

[Icyspark]

Does the Father have a soul? Did the Son prior to the incarnation? Does the Holy Spirit have a soul? Do the angels have a soul?

Hi Common Tater,

The problem I have is the same as stated previously--you are not addressing information you receive and attempting to assimilate it into your current paradigm. You're just jumping right over it to proceed to your next objection. I supplied a non Adventist definition for the Hebrew word Nephesh. Do you agree with said definition? If so, then how do you reconcile your imposition of an external belief upon said word? Nephesh doesn't include the idea of an intangible, intelligent, immortal soul dwelling inside the shell that is our body. It's not there. Essentially it simply means "a living being." With that definition in mind certainly the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are souls/living beings, but not in the sense that they combine dust with the breath of life. An angel/messenger would probably qualify in the latter sense, although I'd say that the word "angel" doesn't inherently equal "created being."

I pray this helps.

 

[Icyspark]

Hi Icy,

how unusual for you to not address what Jesus says this hasn’t suprised me as you keep deflecting.
When God breathed into Adam can you agree that Adam wasn’t even a human being? [The text says he "BECAME a living being." So no, I don't agree with your statement]
So let’s get a real definition of spirit that was blown into the dust.
The Hebrew word is Ruach first seen in Genesis 1:2 where it says the Spirit of God was moving over the waters. Is that spirit breath? Therefore you must concede there are different uses of that word and it is used interchangeably. But spirit is not a physical thing, when a baby is born God does not breath into its nostrils for it to become a living being. And God did not do the same for Eve either.
Ruach is used for wind, spirit and breath.
Again I reiterate that God alone is immortal and yes I do believe Abraham, Issac and Jacob are with the Lord and are alive otherwise Jesus wouldn’t have said it. We also know Enoch didn’t die either. Are you suggesting also that when Jesus died He stopped being God?
So please address what Jesus said about even when you die you live. [Let's first see if you can acknowledge the previous information you received which corrected a falsehood before we address all these new points.]

Hi Formersda,

Lol. Talk about deflecting

When someone makes assertions about my beliefs not being based on the Bible and insists that they are in fact based on "an EGW quote" I would think that they should be willing to acknowledge their error when it is exposed.

Here's what you previously insisted:

Oh yes Dust + breath/spirit = living soul/ being is an EGW quote and not in the Bible.

Again I state I have not said about immortality that is you Icy, but eternal life is eternal without ending and according to Jesus we have it now.

And my response:

​

Really? It's sad that you claim to have been an Adventist but you are unfamiliar with the Bible texts which you insist do not exist.​

​

Genesis 2:7​

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [soul].​

​

I wonder if you'd like to retract your accusation that the premise that dust + breath = living soul/being "is an EGW quote"?​

​

Do you know that the Bible says that when we die this process is reversed?​

​

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (the Hebrew word translated here as "spirit" simply means "breath." See also how the CEB and CEV translations render this verse). ​

Let's see if you're willing to acknowledge that this premise is indeed found in Scripture before you think to hope that I'll ignore the fact that you attempted to pass by this point unnoticed.

1. According to Genesis 2:7 is it true that DUST + BREATH = LIVING BEING (soul/nephesh)?
2. Is it true that what you claimed previously about the above premise being "an EGW quote and not in the Bible" is actually false?

God bless!

 

[Common Tater]

Hi Common Tater,

The problem I have is the same as stated previously--you are not addressing information you receive and attempting to assimilate it into your current paradigm. You're just jumping right over it to proceed to your next objection. I supplied a non Adventist definition for the Hebrew word Nephesh. Do you agree with said definition? If so, then how do you reconcile your imposition of an external belief upon said word? Nephesh doesn't include the idea of an intangible, intelligent, immortal soul dwelling inside the shell that is our body. It's not there. Essentially it simply means "a living being." With that definition in mind certainly the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are souls/living beings, but not in the sense that they combine dust with the breath of life. An angel/messenger would probably qualify in the latter sense, although I'd say that the word "angel" doesn't inherently equal "created being."

I pray this helps.

There is way more to this than just Genesis 2. You seem to think that one verse negates the possibility of a part of a person continuing to exist after the death of the body. And there are multiple verses that show that the soul exists alongside the spirit and the body.

As our Lord and Savior said:

And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28 NASB

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 NASB

As you have pointed out, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all souls/living beings, despite not being in the sense a combination of dust with the breath of life. The Father, the preincarnate Son, and the Holy Spirit do not/did not have physical bodies. John 4:24 tells us that God is spirit. A physical body occupies physical, three-dimensional space, and there was no such thing as time or space until God created it, yet God already existed. A part of us existing apart from the body is not illogical or unbiblical.

 

[Icyspark]

There is way more to this than just Genesis 2. You seem to think that one verse negates the possibility of a part of a person continuing to exist after the death of the body. And there are multiple verses that show that the soul exists alongside the spirit and the body.

Hi Common Tater,

I'm not relying on one verse at all. I'm merely attempting to slow your roll such that we consider the implications of one thing before moving on to the next. You brought up the word nephesh. Now that I've supplied a non Adventist definition for the word I'm just looking to see if you can honestly and forthrightly admit that your belief is not contained in the definition. Can you do that?

Nephesh​

neh'-fesh
Noun Feminine
NAS Word Usage - Total: 688

1. soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion
   1. that which breathes, the breathing substance or being, soul, the inner being of man
   2. living being
   3. living being (with life in the blood)
   4. the man himself, self, person or individual
   5. seat of the appetites
   6. seat of emotions and passions
   7. activity of mind
      1. dubious
   8. activity of the will
      1. dubious
   9. activity of the character
      1. dubious

As our Lord and Savior said:

And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28 NASB

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 NASB

As you have pointed out, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all souls/living beings, despite not being in the sense a combination of dust with the breath of life. The Father, the preincarnate Son, and the Holy Spirit do not/did not have physical bodies. John 4:24 tells us that God is spirit. A physical body occupies physical, three-dimensional space, and there was no such thing as time or space until God created it, yet God already existed. A part of us existing apart from the body is not illogical or unbiblical.

God is not a human being and He cannot be defined in the same way that we are. If His name is beyond understanding what makes you think that finite beings can attempt to claim any real knowledge about an infinite God? Is it not enough to acknowledge that He is a "living being"? When it comes to His creation of humans it is God's purgative to supply the definition of what constitutes a "living being," and He's the One Who says that human life is ignited when dust is combined with the breath of life. Doesn't it make sense to start with a biblical definition of life before venturing off to other texts which may be less clear? Do you agree that Genesis 2:7 provides a biblical foundation for how God defines life?

I pray this helps.

 

[Formersda]

Hi Formersda,

Lol. Talk about deflecting

When someone makes assertions about my beliefs not being based on the Bible and insists that they are in fact based on "an EGW quote" I would think that they should be willing to acknowledge their error when it is exposed.

Here's what you previously insisted:



And my response:

​

Really? It's sad that you claim to have been an Adventist but you are unfamiliar with the Bible texts which you insist do not exist.​

​

Genesis 2:7​

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [soul].​

​

I wonder if you'd like to retract your accusation that the premise that dust + breath = living soul/being "is an EGW quote"?​

​

Do you know that the Bible says that when we die this process is reversed?​

​

Ecclesiastes 12:7​

Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (the Hebrew word translated here as "spirit" simply means "breath." See also how the CEB and CEV translations render this verse). ​

Let's see if you're willing to acknowledge that this premise is indeed found in Scripture before you think to hope that I'll ignore the fact that you attempted to pass by this point unnoticed.

1. According to Genesis 2:7 is it true that DUST + BREATH = LIVING BEING (soul/nephesh)?
2. Is it true that what you claimed previously about the above premise being "an EGW quote and not in the Bible" is actually false?

God bless

Physical Body + Breath of Life from God = Human Soul https://www.adventist.org/death-and-resurrection/what-is-your-soul-according-to-the-bible/
I disagree with your definition of soul.
so as I have answered your question you need to answer mine when Jesus talking about Lazarus, even when you die you will live. Did Jesus lie?

 

[Icyspark]

Physical Body + Breath of Life from God = Human Soul https://www.adventist.org/death-and-resurrection/what-is-your-soul-according-to-the-bible/
I disagree with your definition of soul.

Hi Formersda,

Thanks for the link, although I'm not sure why you shared it.

Of course you're going to disagree with the biblical definition of soul as it goes contrary to your predetermined belief system. If you have an alternate source that provides a definition of soul more to your liking I'd love to see it. However I'm surmising you can't find such a source. In that case you don't get to just wave off a definition of soul just cuz you don't prefer it.

so as I have answered your question you need to answer mine when Jesus talking about Lazarus, even when you die you will live. Did Jesus lie? [Jesus never lies. Your understanding or mine of what Jesus meant is always going to be the issue. In this case I'd say that your inability to incorporate the definition of soul into your vocabulary is definitely bringing your understanding of this issue to a wrong result.]

But no, you didn't answer my question. You're continuing to neglect addressing the fact that you said the above belief was something expressed solely in the writings of EGW and NOT in the Bible. I'm not seeing that you're acknowledging the fallacy of this position.

Third time:

1. According to Genesis 2:7 is it true that DUST + BREATH = LIVING BEING (soul/nephesh)?
2. Is it true that what you claimed previously about the above premise being "an EGW quote and not in the Bible" is actually false?

God bless.