Body, Soul, and Spirit

[Rollo Tamasi]

I'm not sure I understand you brother. If our consciousness is part of the flesh, then how could it not be outside of Gods Spirit? Either i totally missed what you said, or you contradicted yourself?



and I thought so much of what is being said is entirely vague and non-specific. This is a confusing subject for sure.

One thing i am sure of...consciousness is not 100 dependent upon the flesh, for two reasons. One, NDE's, there's too many of them for all of them to be lies. Two, People being taken up in the spirit for various reasons, visions and visitations and so forth. The flesh may indeed play a role in consciousness in order for us to live as men, but consciousness (of a sort at least) is possible apart from the flesh.


Amen brother.

When God breathed his Spirit into the man, he became a living soul.
That's when he became conscious.
Spirit into the body.
A living soul.
Am I missing something?

 

[Butch5]

This is true a spirit does not have flesh and bone. That doesn't not mean flesh and bone does not have a spirit and a spirit given to them by God.
Paul doesn't say he prays and sings with the Holy Spirit, he says in prays and sings with his own spirit.
1Co 14:14 for if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit doth pray, and my understanding is unfruitful.

The Textus Receptus, Byzantine Majority, Alexandrian, Hort and Westcott all say the same thing.
ean gar proseucwmai glwssh to pneuma mou proseucetai o de nouV mou akarpoV estin

Literally, 'spirit my' and 'mind my'.
Not only does he say they are his own but he clearly sees a difference between the spirit and the mind.

In the Thessalonian scripture where he says
1Th 5:23 and the God of the peace Himself sanctify you wholly, and may your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved unblameably in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ;
autoV de o qeoV thV eirhnhV agiasai umaV oloteleiV kai oloklhron umwn to pneuma kai h yuch kai to swma amemptwV en th parousia tou kuriou hmwn ihsou cristou thrhqeih
you and your

If our spirit and soul are God's breathe of life, why would God's breathe need to be sancitified?

Hi Deb,

Many claim that man is a spirit that lives in a body, Jesus' words flatly deny that idea. I agree that a person has a spirit in them (the Breath of Lives), I've said that from the beginning. According to Gen 2 our soul is not God's breath but rather God's breath is a part of our soul. The word soul is used both concretely and abstractly in Scripture. When it is used concretely it is used of a living person, when it is used abstractly it is usually translated "life". What Scripture says your soul it can usually be translated, your life. It's not God's breath that needs to be sanctified, set apart, it is our life that needs to be sanctified, set apart. In 2 Cor. Paul told the Corinthians to come out from among the people that being sanctified.

14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?
16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you1 are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people2."
17 Therefore "Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you1."
18 "I will be a Father to you, And you shall be My sons and daughters, Says the LORD Almighty1." (2Co 6:14-18 NKJ)

That Paul says "our" spirit shows that man is not a spirit. The word "our" shows possession of something but the something is not the "us" In other words, If I said, our truck, no one would think we were a truck, but rather that we had a truck. The truck is not who we are but rather something we possess. If man was a spirit living in a body then rather than saying our spirit, Paul would need to say "us". That would indicate that we and spirit were one and the same.

 

[Butch5]

So, if it is the breath of God which gives man's consciousness...how can you be so sure that the consciousness arises from the flesh? Conclusively, not a flesh minded logical assumption?

Hi Edward,

I've been thinking on this and I think I have an analogy that may explain what I mean more easily. Let's use a computer as an example. A manufacturer builds a computer, He has this mice machine but it just sits there doing nothing. I think this could describe the body (man) as God created it. Another person writes the operating system for this computer telling it how to run and what to do/ This operating system is part of the computer and I think it could be compared to the mind. However, the computer doesn't do anything so even putting the operating system into the computer doesn't really do anything. However, when we bring electricity to the computer the machine springs to life and begins to operate. The mechanical parts begin to move, the operating system tells the computer what to do and it does it. I think we can compare the electricity in the computer to the Breath of Lives in the man. The electricity is not the computer as the Breath of Lives is not the man. The physical computer is not changed in any way by the electricity other than the electricity animating the computer. Likewise God created the man from the dust of the earth, the Breath of Lives is what gives the body life. Just as the computer cannot operate without the electricity neither can the man operate without the Breath of Lives. The point is that the electricity is not the computer.

As to your second statement here...me neither brother, me neither, however, with us not knowing much about how spirits live and function (the spiritual realm)...how can we be so sure that they can not?

I don't think we can make doctrine on things we don't know. We can take what we do know for sure and for doctrine on that.

 

[Butch5]

So if consciousness is in the flesh, what are we to do with the thousands of NDE testimonies that are out there? Do they all lie? Is it mass hypnosis? Now of course it is reasonable to assume that a certain percentage of them are fraudulent, not all of can be imo. All of them are very similar also.

I can't speak to the validity of the events. I don't think they can be real but that's my opinion. I would suggest though, as you point out, they are all so similar, could be because so many believe very similarly on the subject. When I hear of them they are usually like the Hollywood expressions rather than what the Bible says.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Hi Edward,

I've been thinking on this and I think I have an analogy that may explain what I mean more easily. Let's use a computer as an example. A manufacturer builds a computer, He has this mice machine but it just sits there doing nothing. I think this could describe the body (man) as God created it. Another person writes the operating system for this computer telling it how to run and what to do/ This operating system is part of the computer and I think it could be compared to the mind. However, the computer doesn't do anything so even putting the operating system into the computer doesn't really do anything. However, when we bring electricity to the computer the machine springs to life and begins to operate. The mechanical parts begin to move, the operating system tells the computer what to do and it does it. I think we can compare the electricity in the computer to the Breath of Lives in the man. The electricity is not the computer as the Breath of Lives is not the man. The physical computer is not changed in any way by the electricity other than the electricity animating the computer. Likewise God created the man from the dust of the earth, the Breath of Lives is what gives the body life. Just as the computer cannot operate without the electricity neither can the man operate without the Breath of Lives. The point is that the electricity is not the computer.



I don't think we can make doctrine on things we don't know. We can take what we do know for sure and for doctrine on that.

I don't think so.
Do it the other way.
Take a computer and give it electricity and it does nothing until someone puts software into it.
They are all part of each other or they are nothing.

 

[JLB]

I don't think so.
Do it the other way.
Take a computer and give it electricity and it does nothing until someone puts software into it.
They are all part of each other or they are nothing.

Is the flesh temporary or eternal.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Is the flesh temporary or eternal.

Are you asking because you don't know or are you trying to make some sort of point?

 

[Butch5]

I don't think so.
Do it the other way.
Take a computer and give it electricity and it does nothing until someone puts software into it.
They are all part of each other or they are nothing.

my point was simply that without the electricity there is no life in the computer.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

my point was simply that without the electricity there is no life in the computer.

Sorry if I misunderstood.
But you said the electricity is not the computer.
Bad analogy.
Without electricity, the computer is not a computer as we know it.
Without the spirit of God, man is not man as we know it.

The consciousness of the computer which is the software is very much a part of the hardware and the electricity.
The consciousness of man which is the soul is very much a part of the body and the spirit of God.

 

[Edward]

When God breathed his Spirit into the man, he became a living soul.
That's when he became conscious.
Spirit into the body.
A living soul.
Am I missing something?

No, I agree with what you write here. In your other post you said,

"Our consciousness is part of the flesh...


Trying to put consciousness outside of God's Spirit is not found in Scripture."

and those two statements seem to contradict each other. Or so it seems to me.

 

[Edward]

Hi Edward,

I've been thinking on this and I think I have an analogy that may explain what I mean more easily. Let's use a computer as an example. A manufacturer builds a computer, He has this mice machine but it just sits there doing nothing. I think this could describe the body (man) as God created it. Another person writes the operating system for this computer telling it how to run and what to do/ This operating system is part of the computer and I think it could be compared to the mind. However, the computer doesn't do anything so even putting the operating system into the computer doesn't really do anything. However, when we bring electricity to the computer the machine springs to life and begins to operate. The mechanical parts begin to move, the operating system tells the computer what to do and it does it. I think we can compare the electricity in the computer to the Breath of Lives in the man. The electricity is not the computer as the Breath of Lives is not the man. The physical computer is not changed in any way by the electricity other than the electricity animating the computer. Likewise God created the man from the dust of the earth, the Breath of Lives is what gives the body life. Just as the computer cannot operate without the electricity neither can the man operate without the Breath of Lives. The point is that the electricity is not the computer.



I don't think we can make doctrine on things we don't know. We can take what we do know for sure and for doctrine on that.

Oh I understand what you mean brother, I just can't swallow it as a truth. The consciousness of man has been shown scripturally to be able to be apart from the flesh, like when people are taken up in the spirit.

And I agree, that we can not make doctrine on things we don't know. But isn't this what you have done, by saying that yours is a "logical conclusion"?

 

[Edward]

I can't speak to the validity of the events. I don't think they can be real but that's my opinion. I would suggest though, as you point out, they are all so similar, could be because so many believe very similarly on the subject. When I hear of them they are usually like the Hollywood expressions rather than what the Bible says.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and say...maybe.
But in the same vein, you should be able to consider that..."or it could be the truth"

 

[Edward]

Is the flesh temporary or eternal.

It's temporary brother. Good question.

This is answered in scripture!

 

[Edward]

I don't think so.
Do it the other way.
Take a computer and give it electricity and it does nothing until someone puts software into it.
They are all part of each other or they are nothing.

Yessiree brother.

...and the software could be installed in many different computers. :wink
It could be installed, in the twinkling of an eye even.

 

[JLB]

Are you asking because you don't know or are you trying to make some sort of point?

Making a point to those who insist that without the body man is dead.

The scripture teaches just the opposite.

The body without the spirit is dead.

Why would a living being be contingent upon a temporary body to be considered living?

Answer: It's not! The body is contingent upon the spirit to be considered "living".

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. James 2:26

There are those that insist that when the body dies that the whole man is dead.

That is not what Jesus teaches us.


JLB

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Making a point to those who insist that without the body man is dead.

The scripture teaches just the opposite.

The body without the spirit is dead.

Why would a living being be contingent upon a temporary body to be considered living?

Answer: It's not! The body is contingent upon the spirit to be considered "living".

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. James 2:26

There are those that insist that when the body dies that the whole man is dead.

That is not what Jesus teaches us.


JLB

This thread is too long.
I quoted earlier that when God breathed his spirit into man, he became a living soul.
That comes from Genesis 2:7.
I don't know how you interpret that, maybe you care to explain.
I know, some interpretations say living being rather than living soul.
Is there a difference?

 

[Edward]

Is it a parable?

http://www.gotquestions.org/Luke-16-19-31-parable.html

 

[JLB]

This thread is too long.
I quoted earlier that when God breathed his spirit into man, he became a living soul.
That comes from Genesis 2:7.
I don't know how you interpret that, maybe you care to explain.
I know, some interpretations say living being rather than living soul.
Is there a difference?

A living being must have a spirit within. Spirit soul and body

So by saying "living soul" you mean spirit soul and body then yes, your interpretation would be in line with what the scriptures, the whole counsel of God teach.

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:23

 

[Edward]

Matthew 10:28
28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell./(KJV)

So there's that...

What does this verse teach us? There's a 'logical conclusion" here which seriously intimates that there's more to life (consciousness) than a mere body.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Matthew 10:28
28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell./(KJV)

So there's that...

What does this verse teach us? There's a 'logical conclusion" here which seriously intimates that there's more to life (consciousness) than a mere body.

I agree, but that consciousness cannot be the same as we know it now since our present consciousness is due to our brain and senses which are part of the body.
I have often thought of this.
We can know that we are in the presence of God, communicate with him, and experience a peace that surpasses all understanding.
But it will not be the same as we now know it.
This is what I think, anyway.