PDF version. Is it a man just body and soul or is he body, soul and spirit? This I believe is one of the most fundamental questions that somebody needs to have correctly answered. I consider the subject of body, soul and spirit as one of the most important subjects dealt within this magazine.
Therefore I would like to ask you to please pay close attention as we go through the Word to find the answer not only to the matter of body soul and spirit but also to some other equally important questions related to it. To start approaching the topic of body soul and spirit we need to go to the first book of the Bible, the Genesis. There, after God made man, He imposed a restriction on him, making also clear the penalty, for the case that this restriction was violated:. Genesis "And the Lord God commanded the man, saying "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die".
The restriction that God imposed on Adam was that he should not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The penalty for the case that this restriction was violated was that: " in the day [pay attention: that very day] that you eat of it you shall surely die". Two very significant things have to be noted in that penalty.
The first is that if Adam ate from the tree death would happen immediately, in that very day. The second is that this would happen surely. Now from Genesis we all know how Satan deceived Adam and Eve to violate the only restriction God had imposed on them, and eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. After eating from that tree and according to what God had told them in Genesis , they should have died at that moment.
The problem here is that Genesis says about Adam:. So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. Therefore, according to the Bible, Adam continued to have life in his body for many years after he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
So what really happen in the day that Adam and Eve ate from that tree. Did they die as God said, or they did not die? Who will solve us this "problem"? Man's ideas, theories, religion and tradition? Only one can give us answers, and this is no other than the Word of God. And if you want this Word to give you answers, you have to leave it to speak for itself self interpretation. In our case, since God cannot lie Numbers in the day that Adam and Eve ate from that tree they really died.
Actually, it was the Devil that said, when he deceived Eve, "you shall not surely die". Thus, if they did not die that day, as God said, then Satan was right and God was wrong, which is simply impossible. However, that's exactly what many teach today when they say "actually when God said that they would surely die He meant that just the sperm of death would be planted". The Word of God does not need such kind of defense.
Actually it does not need any defense at all for it is truth and truth can stand by itself. However, since they continued to have life in their bodies even after they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, it is self-evident that they must have had another form of life, in addition to the life of their bodies, that was lost in the day that they ate and for this reason it was death absence of a form of life. So, we have to search the Scriptures to see how man was created and what were the parts of his being.
Knowledge of what composed the life of the first man will also enable us to see what was lost in that day. Starting our research on how the first man was created, let's go to Genesis There it says:. Which part of man did God form of the dust of the ground?
Son of God
His body. That's why the elements of the human body can be found in the ground. So one part of the first human being was the body. But let's continue:. We saw that God formed man's body of the dust of the ground. However, this body did not have life. It was just formed, without life. Then, the Word of God tells us that God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul".
Therefore, what is soul? Soul is what gives life to the body. The fact that people do not understand the simple truths of the Word of God described at that point has caused no end of confusion. Here the Word of God tells us that soul is what gives life to the body. Without soul the body is dead. Where is the soul, the life of the body, the life of the flesh? The Word of God again is very precise:. Leviticus , " For the life [nephesh in Hebrew] of the flesh is in the blood Whatever man of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell among you, who hunts and catches any animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood, and cover it with dust; For it [i.
I also understand what you mean when you say "they are not word directed by God". That is true, otherwise it would take away peoples "Free Will" to act as they will, but despite the wilful actions of men and women in the bible, God was working out his plan amongst all of it. And it's in that sense, "All Scriptures are inspired of God" 2 Timothy At the end of the day Jeremy, nobody is a master of "anyones" faith or how they understands things, but the botton line for me is where that geneology lead to. Mathew 1 Jesus. God prevented that from happening because the Messiah Jesus would come through the lineage of Abraham.
There's no way, no how God was going to allow anyone to touch their wives. To much was at stake. The rest are just details. If you reject or dispute these situations ever occurred in the first place? We don't need to use hermeneutics or reinterpret the scriptures. If we cannot do that? Then we're better of walking away from it all. I imagine this would be a very popular story. Tell that one again. I do think there was a forbidden fruit. And I do think there was a character playing the role of temptation the serpent.
It wasn't the fruit that was significant, or magical in some kind of way.
The Story of Adam And Eve From The Bible
What was significant about it was that God forbade it. To eat that fruit was to act contrary to God's will, unlike anything else in the natural world. I do think the stories of the bible are significant because they are accounts of when this God interacted with humanity. But I do not think they are words directly from God. There's no reason to think they are. The first thing that comes to mind is Abimilech. This means the same thing happened to him twice. After the first, he went right back and did it again.
I did read Genesis 12, 20, 26 again, and never noticed anything to imply it's the same story told 3 times. G Abraham, "There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife". Back in them days, as Abraham himself noticed, the people had no fear of God at all.
If they wanted something, they would just take it. Apart from the 2 times in Abrahams situation that we already know about, I wonder how many other times that situation came up? Isaacs situation would not have been any different. Dealing with the same issues Sometimes the beauty that's noticed in strangers is just the fact that they are different? Isaac was basically dealing with the same situation.
The story behind this? And they soon found that out. What are you talking about? Is it safe for you to exclude examination of the scriptures as if God wrote it? And what harm is it to the soul to search for truth? You say your not comfortable reading the bible as if God wrote it and this is a great example of your bias and your supposed science and "logic" a man of science is allways ready to discard his beliefs for the truth i mean if we truely wish to know if it was God that wrote the bible or not shouldn't we look for ourselfs?
And the fact that you wont arnt you the one then that is just believing what your told about the bible? Arnt you then the hippocrit? I mean you still think it was a snake and an apple in the garden dont you? Becouse that is what you were told So when we then hear the lies of the serpent we speak becouse we know. And it is he who calls us..
It may seem a little odd in this day and age that such things did happen, but those are the kind of things that happened back then.
Thanks Jeremy, but this thought went through my mind which don't happen to often these days. Recognize that I'm laying out the bigger picture across these articles. I'm not dismissing the bible. I just recognize that the way it's interpreted, the way we were all taught to read it and told what it means, is fallible. Modern science has shown us that the traditional interpretations can't be right, but science has not proven the bible wrong. Only that interpretation.
I'm showing here that with the right interpretation, science and the bible do not conflict. Sorry to repeat that same example, but it's a good one. It takes very little explanation. There are others, but they often take more to see. This one doesn't take anymore than just recognizing the duplicated story. You say a "wise man" might examine the differences to understand God's message. Is that really a safe assumption. To think anything you imagine based on comparing these stories is understanding God intended you to get out of this?
So, which is it? Did these same events really happen three times to teach lessons? Or is it repeated three times, whether it ever really happened at all, to teach us lessons? I did read about the "Wife-sister narratives" and "Yes" i was familiar with that, something i never gave a second thought to. To me it's about the story behind it, and the way people behave confronted in a situation. FEAR plays a big part in this "Wife-sister narrative". I must say Jeremy, you have to approach this subject or narrative in an atheistic manner to notice inconsistencies like that.
And talk of inconsistencies, "inconsistencies need not be contradictions" either, especailly when there's things going on behind the scenes, including different cultures and way's of understanding things. Quoting what you said, "This, to me at least, is a pretty obvious edditing error". The question is? Is it? Or are they just standard objection based on atheisic views to begin with? Just one bit of advice, when you look to closely at a painting and scrutinise it close up you will miss the bigger picture.
Again with the gen. Not to familiar with that, or something i noticed. Give me some time, maybe a couple of days or so, could do with looking that up myself. These are commonly known as the "wife-sister narratives". It's the same story told 3 times. First time it's Abraham and a Pharaoh. The second time it's Abraham and Abimilech. The third time it's Isaac and Abimilech.
What likely happened is this story was very popular. Over the ages the protagonist and antagonist was changed to more contemporary names so it's more relatable to the audience. Trying to answer them questions is difficult if we don't understand the concept of Sin or the Transgressions of God.
The worst kind of sickness we can have is a "Spiritual Sickness" a sickness we're not even aware of. God wasn't trying to control people's actions since they were free moral agents with a "Free Will" but there were consequences for their actions nontheless. Not sure how you can say the story isn't consistent with Gods word?
God also had a nation or capital which represented his ruleship on earth during that time, "being Israel" but the invitation to be involved in it was also open to other nations to join as well till the arrival of the messiah. While all this was going on, God's ultimate plan was in fulfilling the first prophecy made in Genesis being that the mesiah, Jesus himself would be born through the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, through Israel, down through the ages till the birth of Jesus.
What's inconsistent about that? The basic point being that the idea that the Bible as God's infallible word isn't consistent with the story that's told. The OT depicts God interacting with the Israelites, humans with free will, and shows that He was unable to control their actions. So how could God, in the same conditions, accurately author a book through the same means? Assuming we believe in a God, what other way would God use to communicate with man using that very "Free Will" of ours? That's not a trick question, so you don't need to answer it, but to be fair, it's the other way round.
So how did you learn the truth? What's different about you that you were blessed with the real truth and I wasn't? Bla bla bla its not me thats got you all wrong but yourself fooling yourself your logic is a joke You have me all wrong. I'm just not comfortable treating the bible as if it's straight from God's lips to our ears.
There's a lot of finger prints all over it. The authors were men. The people who took all the different pieces, translated them, and bound them into a book were all men. God doesn't control men like puppets. Men do as they will. So man's impressions are going to be all over it. Everything you and I have been told about God and the bible is fallible opinion that generations before us didn't know for sure either. And they knew way less than we know now. You and I live in this modern age where we have a lot more information than was available to the fathers of the churches in the days when they were studying the bible.
You do realize the first books of the Quran and the bible are the same books, right? They both start with God creating Adam and Eve in the garden. Some believe Jesus. Some believe Muhammad. But all believe in the same God. Therefore, followers of the Quran are not atheists. They believe in God. Whether they're Christian or not.
- Lizard Explores Epcot.
- Cain and Abel!
- Henry V (Bantam Classics);
And yes you are an atheist becouse you believe that the bible is just a bunch of stories writen by men about God. Did you just say I'm an atheist because I believe the bible is just a bunch of stories written by men, then accuse me of being a follower of the quran? Wouldn't I believe the same of the quran? If I were an atheist, how could I also be a follower of the quran? Once again this is an article created and maintained by the followers of the quran the olny thing christian about jeremy is his last name t.
To Antonio. The name Adam means man. In Genesis 1 when it says God created man, it literally says, God created Adam.
It is the same event. Furthermore, Eve is the "mother of all living", not some living, or most living, but all living. As to the extent of the flood, we are told that the waters covered the mountains: "The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. Furthermore, we are told that the Ark came to rest on the Mountains of Ararat in the seventh month of the flood. Greater Ararat is 16, ft high, whilst Little Ararat is 12, ft high, and it was not until the 10th month that the "the tops of the mountains were seen.
So we know from these verses that the flood waters were at least 16, feet high, which would cover the vast majority of land, globally. At which point, we might as well trust God that it really was a global flood, that covered all mountains under the entire heavens. I did struggle myself "As Well" at one point with faith and religion, but will tell you, My real struggle came as a result of "self-righteous religious judgemetal critics" constantly talking in Rhetoric who really had issues of "THEIR OWN" deep down.
Quote from Jesus. Thats what i meant when i said Unless they are relating the same events. They can only do that if they share the same history as you mentioned. In the past, a number of biblical commentators used to use the term "Borrowed" to discredit biblical accounts like the flood. They're not borrowed. They both share the same history because they existed at the same time in the same place.
We cannot determine Evolution taking place based on the "Size or varying shapes" of a Skull, since they are all complete living life forms. That "Free Will" is not an "ape to man" moment. Thats what sets us apart as being different from the animal world. Part of the "Spirituality" within man that makes us want to Explore, Search, ask the deep questions, "Whats the ultimate MEANING to life" but when we don't approach it based on faith and trust in the Almighty, we end up with our own answers to these questions, conflicting with each other.
Though i understand the comment All text is divine my understanding is, only as far as being created in the "Image" of God, but not Divine in the literal sense, plus many other Text that came after outright contradict whats written in the bible itself. Regarding "Or you might expect to see their influence reflected in the mythology"? That don't make a lot of sense. Why would all these independent civilizations borrow "mythological" Ideas from each other? Unless they are relating the same events, like the biblical flood? If thats the understanding that "All text is divine"?
They don't actually support that "All text are divine in themselves". You quote 2 Timothy verse 13 "For Adam was first formed, then Eve. You need to read the verse before it and after it for the understanding. Before that it says a woman shouldnt teach, should be silence and not have authority over the man, and its because man was created first. I believe there were already men and women on the earth before Adam and Eve.
Genesis chapter 1 verse God speaks of making man in his image and told them to be fruitful and multiply. The creation of Adam isnt until the 2nd chapter. Adam was a more specific human, start of a lineage of people, his formation was more specific for a reason and also states that man became a living soul. God planted a garden and used the man he just created from the ground and it specifically states that God put him there to "dress it and to keep it" He then made Eve as a help meet for him.
In my opinion, people were already there, but God is illustrating the soulful human, the beginning of the lineage that is referred to throughout the entire bible and it is the beginning of the law and who it started with. Interesting theory, however by Adam not being the first man threatens the whole of Christianity in my opinion. The Bible refers to God as being fair, so why would he punish any other human for not eating from the tree?
Unless all of them did at the same time, but once again only Adam and Eve are mentioned And if other people existed along with Adam and Eve this would surely mean that there would be "pure" lineages Evolution is the biggest lie ever, its a pity for some that would take billions of years to process. Nice try Mr. Evolutionist, but I'm not buying your crap! Something I've been thinking "even more" about lately, something we've all been taking for granted for to long.
And know exactly what you mean by ALL text is divine and where you're coming from on that. Going to be a little busy over the next week or so, but that will give me time to think more of what you said. I have been independently studying this idea for some time now! My greatest hurdle in considering the truth available in these legends has always been that [Adam was formed from dust by supernatural manifestation] and several texts suggest that there may be more to the story than how we presently interpret it.
I tried to find other ways to interpret it, but since I am so prone to dismissing scientific evolution, I had never considered that granting Free Will could be the 'ape to man' moment gift of fire of a Natural Process evolutionary creation of all things. Side note, the Egyptians have a god named Atum - the first of all the gods, self formed from a mound of dirt.
This is why i study the Psalms and Proverbs in their original language to prepare myself before researching these potentially evil ideas generated by the spirit of Flesh or Slander. Unity in diversity don't mean we necessarily agree on things, it just means there's higher and better ways to disagree in peace. There are many ancient text as you say, the "Sumerian King List" is one of them. It supports the biblical Genesis account, but we also know It wasn't inspired by God.
The early bible writers knew what books or writings were to be included or excluded from what we now call the bible. They had the "holy spirit" to guild them in that process, but some of these other ancient text? Regardless of whether some of what they say agrees with the bible or not? They was not inspired by God, and for that wasn't included in the bible canon. That is exactly what i am saying. There are all kinds of ancient texts which seem to agree with several points made by the author of this piece. I have never allowed myself to doubt the instantanious conception "Let Us Create Man" , formation from dust , and activation via breath of Adam human-kind , but this perspective presented is seriously a viable theory for the unification of proper scientific evolution and the Genesis Account.
Another text which supports the article is Theogenes - claiming that women were created just after man was given fire fire could be the free will. If you don't mind me saying? Learn to accept yourself for who you are. People happy in themselves don't try to change others. I simply came here to discuss something with you, if you are unwilling to open and examine my source then I'm at a loss. You cannot argue that there is literally no more inspired material in the history of the world outside of the Bible. The Bible contains ALL that is necessary to salvation and some clues to aid in understanding the heart and wisdom of God.
There are several things that The Almighty Creator has done which you do not understand. If your not to sure yourself whether it's original or not, then why should it be taken seriously? So why would "Our infinite GodKing" In your words Explain passages from Genesis which he never thought important to include in the bible itself? Regarding the "Sumerian King list" nobody can dispute the authenticy of that. Published in November , the title page of the book says: "translated into English by Flaccus Albinus Alcuinus, of Britain, Abbot of Canterbury, who went on a pilgrimage into the Holy Land and Persia, where he discovered this volume in the city of Gazna.
You seem to have not actually read the link you sent me, I am speaking of a potentially valuable material. I was hoping to get some sensible feedback about its relevence to your interesting theories. See of remaining comments. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages and Hubbers authors may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc. As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, owlcation. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so. Jeremy Christian more. Was Adam the First Human? The Mythology of the First Civilization Civilization first began in Mesopotamia over five thousand years ago, and the Sumerians are credited as the inventors.
The Books of Moses Other than the obvious correlation between a handful of stories in early Genesis with Sumerian mythology, the Books of Moses are very much unique. Pre-Flood Genesis in an Already Populated World Context We now know that by 10, BC homo sapiens had already populated the planet and had over the course of many generations established themselves as the dominant species in the animal kingdom, which is exactly what the humans created in Genesis 1 were commanded to do: And God blessed them, and God said unto them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Genesis And we also know through climatological evidence that this same region matched the description given at the beginning of Genesis 2 from around 6, BC due to the dramatic shift in climate that transformed much of the region from lush green lands to desert. Adam, Eve, and the Garden of Eden But where the humans and everything else in Genesis 1 were specifically told what to do, in Genesis 2 Adam was only told what not to do: He was to eat from any tree but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it.
Genesis The humans created in Genesis 1 were given very specific commands that would take generations to realize. They were told to: Populate and subdue the Earth Establish dominance in the animal kingdom So how could Adam, Eve, and their descendants be expected to accomplish these things considering how capable and willing they were to disobey? Genesis It also puts a whole new spin on the first few verses of chapter 6, those which talk about the "sons of God" finding the "daughters of humans" beautiful and having children by them.
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair; and they took for themselves wives of all whom they chose. Was the Flood Really Global? Genesis These descendants come seven generations after Cain, which is the same number of generations Methuselah was from Seth. One before the flood: The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them.
Is this possible? Chapter 1 of the Book of Genesis Video. I must say, i admire your attention to details. John You mentioned something about Life constantly striving to thrive That's an interesting concept that needs picking up on, but don't see it as having anything to do with evolution. Antonio50S, You - ""No real point" because a lot of your views are wrong anyway.
This was the first human civilization. The first phase of Sumer. Look after yourself kid :. To Jeremy. I was aware of the year, but left that out for a reason. That's another story. The13th Dynasty supports this even better if we know what happened then. All in the 13th Dynasty It gets a little difficult trying to reinterpret every event that happened in the bible without hitting contradictions, plus if humans aren't prone to making up gods, why do we have trouble accepting the Sumerian account of a Global flood?
Antonio50S, Re: Sumerians and their gods This is a good place to focus. Squinkey, "Misinterpreting scripture is not advised. Time of the biblical flood. Approx years. Good day. I understand what your saying now, it took a while. No matter what anyone says or thinks, these are historical Facts. Here's a thought Jeremy. Something i forgot to add. Exodus If Egypt and the Sumerians could live in them numbers, so could the Israeltes. But i also know that's how things happened, "give or take" If you wan't a better understanding of these Time Frames, "David Rohl" Egyptologist is the man.
It just doesn't work. The more you look at it the more it falls apart. Antonio50S, Every layer of strata was top soil at one point. It doesn't make sense for the flood to be global. No matter how you look at it. The Ark came to rest on "Mount Ararat" The significance of that is, we know for certain that mount Ararat is at least years old, and many other geological formations and mountains haven't changed that much during this time period.
Antonio50S, This isn't about whether or not we believe the bible, but whether or not we believe a fallible human interpretation of the bible. The Cainian Chronicle Visions of Eden Adam-ondi-Ahman Tomb of Eve. Demon: The Fallen Adam to David according to the Bible. Names in italics only appear in the Greek Septuagint version.
The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil
Prophets in the Quran. Idris Enoch? Nuh Noah.
- Life Lessons from the Golf Course!
- Night Chill.
- Son of God - Wikipedia.
- 1. Body, soul, spirit: what died in the day Adam and Eve sinned?.
Hud Eber? Saleh Salah? Ibrahim Abraham. Lut Lot. Ismail Ishmael. Yaqub Jacob. Yusuf Joseph. Ayyub Job. Shuayb Jethro? Musa Moses. Harun Aaron. Dhul-Kifl Ezekiel? Daud David. Ilyas Elijah. Al-Yasa Elisha. Yunus Jonah. Zakaria Zechariah. Yahya John. Isa Jesus. Muhammad Muhammad. Note: Muslims believe that there were many prophets sent by God to mankind.
The Islamic prophets above are only the ones mentioned by name in the Quran. Legendary progenitors. Cain and Abel. Book of Genesis. Le Jeu d'Adam 12th century Cain Namespaces Article Talk.
Related The Genesis Men, Adam & Sons:Searching The Scriptures To Discover Gods Truth
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved