The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures in Christ

All men have a spirit/soul its what makes man being made in the image of God means. The image of God never changed.

Spiritually dead is nothing but a misnomer. :)

And spirit/soul are used interchangeable as synonyms throughout the N.T.

You are conflating the spirit in man with the spirit of God.

hope this helps !!!
You make stuff up....
 
Which is what I said and if you think that is what @GeneZ was saying, (Jesus needed regeneration) I think you need to go and reread the post.
I’m just stating a fact and not accusing anyone of saying it believing that but I e dealt with people on other forums who believe it.
 
You make stuff up....
I guess the majority of Biblical Scholars like me make things yup too eh ?

This if from Wayne Gruden below :

Others argue that “spirit” is not a separate part of man, but simply another term for “soul,” and that both terms are used interchangeably in Scripture to talk about the immaterial part of man that lives on after our bodies die. The view that man is made up of two parts (body and soul/spirit) is called dichotomy. Those who hold this view often agree that Scripture uses the word spirit (Hebrew “rûach”, and Greek “pneuma”) more frequently when referring to our relationship to God, but such usage (they say) is not uniform, and the word soul is also used in all the ways that spirit can be used.

This is the most-widely held scholarly view on the soul and spirit. Later, we’ll look in more detail at the reasons why many scholars believe spirit and soul are synonymous.

5 reasons the soul and spirit are synonymous​

The reasons why many scholars believe humans are made up of two parts, not three, can all be traced back to one essential argument: the Bible uses “soul” and “spirit” interchangeably.

1. Scripture uses “soul” and “spirit” interchangeably.​

When we look at the usage of the biblical words translated “soul” (Hebrew “nephesh” and Greek “psychē”) and “spirit” (Hebrew “rûach” and Greek “pneuma”), it appears that they are sometimes used interchangeably.

In John 12:27, Jesus says, “Now is my soul troubled,” whereas in a very similar context in the next chapter John says that Jesus was “troubled in spirit” (John 13:21). Similarly, we read Mary’s words in Luke 1:46–47: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” This seems to be an example of Hebrew parallelism—a poetic device that repeats the same idea using synonymous words.

Additionally, people who have died and gone to heaven or hell are referred to as either “spirits” (such as in Hebrews 12:23 and 1 Peter 3:19) or “souls” (such as in Revelation 6:9 and Revelation 20:4).

2. When people die, Scripture says either that the “soul” departs or the “spirit” departs.​

When Rachel died, the Bible says, “Her soul was departing (for she died)” (Genesis 35:18). Elijah prays that the dead child’s “soul” would come into him again (1 Kings 17:21), and Isaiah predicts that the Servant of the Lord would “pour out his soul [Hebrew “nephesh”] to death” (Isaiah 53:12). In the New Testament God tells the rich fool, “This night your soul [Greek “psychē”] is required of you” (Luke 12:20).

Other times death is viewed as the spirit returning to God. So David can pray, in words later quoted by Jesus on the cross, “Into your hand I commit my spirit” (Psalm 31:5, see also Luke 23:46). At death, “the spirit returns to God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7). When Jesus was dying, “he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:30), and likewise Stephen prayed before he died, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59).

A trichotomist might argue that these passages are still treating the soul and spirit as different things, for when a person dies both soul and spirit go to heaven. But Scripture never says that a person’s “soul and spirit” departed or went to heaven or were yielded to God. If soul and spirit were separate things, we would expect that would be affirmed somewhere, if only to assure the reader that no essential part of the person is left behind. But the biblical authors do not seem to care whether they say that the soul departs or the spirit departs at death, for both seem to mean the same thing.

3. Man is said to be either “body and soul” or “body and spirit.”

Jesus tells us not to fear those who “kill the body but cannot kill the soul,” but that we should rather “fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28).

Here the word “soul” clearly refers to the part of a person that exists after death. It cannot mean “person” or “life,” for it would not make sense to speak of those who “kill the body but cannot kill the person,” or who “kill the body but cannot kill the life,” unless there is some aspect of the person that lives on after the body is dead. Furthermore, when Jesus talks about “soul and body” he seems to be clearly talking about the entire person even though he does not mention “spirit” as a separate component. The word “soul” seems to stand for the entire nonphysical part of man.

However, man is also sometimes said to be “body and spirit.” Paul wants the Corinthian church to deliver a sinful brother to Satan “for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:5). Paul hasn’t forgotten that the man’s soul would be saved, too; he simply uses the word “spirit” to refer to the man’s entire immaterial existence.

Similarly, James says that “the body apart from the spirit is dead” (James 2:26), but mentions nothing about a separate soul. And when Paul speaks of growth in personal holiness, he approves the woman who is concerned with “how to be holy in body and spirit” (1 Corinthians 7:34), and he suggests that this covers the whole of the person’s life. He’s even more explicit in 2 Corinthians 7:1: “let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, and make holiness perfect in the fear of God.” Cleansing ourselves from defilement of the “soul” or of the “spirit” covers the whole immaterial side of our existence (see also Romans 8:10, 1 Corinthians 5:3, and Colossians 2:5).

4. The “soul” can sin or the “spirit” can sin.

Verses such as 1 Peter 1:22 and Revelation 18:14 seem to imply that our souls can sin. Those who hold to trichotomy will usually agree that the “soul” can sin since they think that the soul includes the intellect, the emotions, and the will.

The trichotomist, however, generally thinks of the “spirit” as purer than the soul, and, when renewed, as free from sin and responsive to the prompting of the Holy Spirit. This understanding (which sometimes finds its way into popular Christian preaching and writing) is not really supported by the biblical text:

  • When Paul encourages the Corinthians to cleanse themselves “from every defilement of body and spirit” (2 Corinthians 7:1), he clearly implies that there can be defilement (or sin) in our spirits.
  • Similarly, he speaks of the unmarried woman who is concerned with how to be holy “in body and spirit” (1 Corinthians 7:34).
  • The Lord hardened the “spirit” of Sihon the king of Heshbon (Deuteronomy 2:30).
  • Psalm 78 speaks of the rebellious people of Israel “whose spirit was not faithful to God” (Psalm 78:8).
  • A “haughty spirit” goes before a fall (Proverbs 16:18), and it is possible for sinful people to be “proud in spirit” (Ecclesiastes 7:8).
  • Isaiah speaks of those “who err in spirit” (Isaiah 29:24).
  • Nebuchadnezzar’s “spirit was hardened so that he dealt proudly” (Daniel 5:20). T
  • he fact that “All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the Lord weighs the spirit” (Proverbs 16:2) implies that it is possible for our spirits to be wrong in God’s sight.
  • Other verses imply a possibility of sin in our spirits (see Psalm 32:2 and 51:10).
  • Finally, the fact that Scripture approves of one “who rules his spirit” (Proverbs 16:32) implies that our spirits are not simply the spiritually pure parts of our lives that are to be followed in all cases, but that they can have sinful desires or directions as well.
The Bible seems to suggest that both the soul and the spirit can sin, which could be because they are the same thing.

5. The soul can do everything the spirit can, and the spirit can do everything the soul can.

Those who advocate trichotomy face a difficult problem defining exactly what the difference is between the soul and the spirit. If Scripture clearly supported the idea that our spirit is the part of us that directly relates to God in worship and prayer, while our soul includes our intellect (thinking), our emotions (feeling), and our will (deciding), then trichotomists would have a strong case. But Scripture doesn’t appear to allow such a distinction.

The activities of thinking, feeling, and deciding things aren’t only said to be done by our souls. Our spirits can also experience emotions. Paul’s “spirit was provoked within him” (Acts 17:16), and Jesus was “troubled in spirit” (John 13:21). It’s also possible to have a “downcast spirit,” which is the opposite of a “cheerful heart” (Proverbs 17:22).

The functions of knowing, perceiving, and thinking are also said to be done by our spirits. For instance, Mark speaks of Jesus “perceiving [Greek “epiginōskō”, ‘knowing’] in his spirit” (Mark 2:8). When the Holy Spirit “bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Romans 8:16), our spirits receive and understand that witness, which is certainly a function of knowing something. In fact, our spirits seem to know our thoughts quite deeply, for Paul asks, “What person knows a man’s thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him?” (1 Corinthians 2:11). (See also Isaiah 29:24, which speaks of those who now “err in spirit” but “will come to understanding.”)

“Soul” and “spirit” are both general terms to describe the immaterial side of people, and it’s difficult to see any real distinction between their use in Scripture.

Learn more in Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology online course.
 
When he emptied himself of all His right to the powers that are God?

What was left? His human Soul.

The seed of the Father you speak of is not mentioned in Scripture. It does sound good... But it is not Scripture.

What we have is the "seed of the Holy Spirit."
Jesus said to Nicodemus that what is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Our human spirit is what the Spirit "begets" in us. That being... our 'human spirit.'

Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." John 3:6​

At regeneration the born again believer becomes body, soul, and human spirit."
The human spirit is not to be mistaken for the indwelling Holy spirit.
For we have become body, soul, and human spirit.

May the God who gives us peace make you holy in every way and
keep your whole being—spirit, soul, and body—free from every fault
at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 Thes 5:23​

For the Church age believers? Not the OT believers. We receive an additional gift when born again.
That new gift is the Indwelling Holy Spirit which is not to be confused for our human spirit that all receive at regeneration.

The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children." Romans 8:16​
grace and peace......
1 John 3:9 says God. But I can go with Holy Spirit also. My point is as born again Christians we are like Christ who was conceived with the seed of the Father. Romans 8:29
 
I agree. Not anymore. According to John 17:5 "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." Jesus now has the God qualities that only God has, the 3 omnis.

But before He received back what He emptied himself of to become human, He still possessed the seed of the Father, which we as born again Christians also have. So Jesus is not the only human that can be sinless. He showed us His sinless behavior from birth, and that is the only difference. All because Christ's blood could make us like Him.
If Jesus is fully God then He would be the same as the Holy Spirit and the Father who are Fully God lacking nothing.
 
One who is not a fool (one who refuses to believe in Christ) can also be a believer who is being foolish!


Ephesians 5:15-17

Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity,
because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is."

God does see unwise believers as being foolish... not "fools."
You're not Paul. You have no authority to judge anything. You're trying to display authority you do not have.
 
So.. now you know how it feels when someone uses the "heretic! ploy" on someone without even understanding what was actually being said..
And, not caring to know what was actually being said.

No sparing our feelings when our feelings are a stronghold.. God wants us to be purified by fire.

He seeks to find in the believer what amounts to being pure gold and silver, without any dross.


For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.
If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay or straw,
their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light.
It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work."
1 Corinthians 3:11-13​


Its much better to face a little pain of some fire now when another believer levels with you.
When he confronts you with what you do not want to hear.

To not hear, because one hates to admit to himself that he has been wrong about what he has already
bonded with others with. Others who are now his friends.

Sometimes God sends someone who will not pull any punches...
One who will not accept excuses when distortions are offered in their defense as a way to escape.

And, that is why in the past there were those who wanted to kill prophets whom God approved of....

So be it.... the choice is yours.
God hasn't sent you anywhere. Prove it.
 
The fact is you , I or anyone else can say something someone believes or teaches is a heresy but that is not the same thing as calling someone a heretic , false teacher or cultist.
Absolutely! HUGE difference.

Jesus referenced those that would after Him that could carry His authority. "Signs" would follow them. As those signs began "waning" in the early church it was an indication of authority diminishing relative to establishing judgement among members of the Body of Christ. Even Paul began to teach that such judgements should come from esteemed fellow members of the assembly (Church). There always seems to be someone that wants to just "claim" authority without providing evidence of God's approval. It is why I often say (and I believe I'm right) that all the eyes and ears of the Body of Christ have long been gone from this earth.
 
Absolutely! HUGE difference.

Jesus referenced those that would after Him that could carry His authority. "Signs" would follow them. As those signs began "waning" in the early church it was an indication of authority diminishing relative to establishing judgement among members of the Body of Christ. Even Paul began to teach that such judgements should come from esteemed fellow members of the assembly (Church). There always seems to be someone that wants to just "claim" authority without providing evidence of God's approval. It is why I often say (and I believe I'm right) that all the eyes and ears of the Body of Christ have long been gone from this earth.
ditto
 
If Jesus is fully God then He would be the same as the Holy Spirit and the Father who are Fully God lacking nothing.
The difference is when are you talking about? When He was preaching on earth? That would be no. The only thing missing were the omnis. That is what Jesus asked the Father to restore to Him making Him all powerful which is what He emptied Himself of. Those are also what a born again Christian is missing.
 
The difference is when are you talking about? When He was preaching on earth? That would be no. The only thing missing were the omnis. That is what Jesus asked the Father to restore to Him making Him all powerful which is what He emptied Himself of. Those are also what a born again Christian is missing.
They were not missing He just chose not to use them to His own advantage. He expressed them on numerous occasions. The day/hour no one knows is an example of this. Revelation say no one knows the name written except Himself. That would make the Father/Holy Spirit not knowing the name using that same logic.
 
They were not missing He just chose not to use them to His own advantage. He expressed them on numerous occasions. The day/hour no one knows is an example of this. Revelation say no one knows the name written except Himself. That would make the Father/Holy Spirit not knowing the name using that same logic.
That went right over my head. Name?
 
The difference is when are you talking about? When He was preaching on earth? That would be no. The only thing missing were the omnis. That is what Jesus asked the Father to restore to Him making Him all powerful which is what He emptied Himself of. Those are also what a born again Christian is missing.

Have you ever heard of a Theophany?

Did the form of the Theophany rob "God" of power?
 
GINOLJC, to all
as this topic states, "The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures"......nonsense. scripture, Hebrews 2:14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;" if he "took part" of the same, then he's not a "Partaker" of flesh and blood....... that's as straight forward as one can get. but .... Oh well.....

the OT, God's ECHAD in the Plurality as the EQUAL ONE........ who is "JESUS", the Holy One, the Holy Spirit. to those who have ears to hear, Listen to God.

The word in the NT that correspond to the OT word, "ECHAD", in the OT is the Greek term, "ANOTHER", (WHICH IN GREEK HAS TWO MEANING). G243 ALLOS and G2087 HETEROS. let's understand these two Greek words, (WHICH IS OUR ENGLISH ONE WORD, ANOTHER), in doing so we may understand the Godhead perfectly.

using the W.E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words [ 1,,G243 G2087 ,allos heteros ] have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages. Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;" heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort." Christ promised to send "another Comforter" (allos, "another like Himself," not heteros), John 14:16.

let's break them apart for clarity.

G243 ALLOS: "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort"

G2087 HETEROS: "heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort".

Now that we see these two words clearly, let's break them down so we can understand them in KNOWING the Godhead.

#1. G243 ALLOS: "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort"
we will examine these two critical words "a numerical difference". and "sort"

so, what is a numerical difference. the very first step is to KNOW the difference between numeric and numerical. Both "numeric" and "numerical" are adjectives that relate to numbers or numerical values. However, "numeric" refers specifically to anything that relates to numbers, especially in systems or formats. For example, a numeric keypad or a numeric code. on the OTHER HAND, "Numerical" refers to anything that relates to the use or representation of numbers, especially in quantities and mathematical relationships For example, a numerical analysis or a numerical value.
please NOTE: "Numerical" refers to anything that relates to the use or representation of numbers. Not the Number or it's value itself always. which bring us to the numerical difference of Cardinal Numbering vs Ordinal Numbering. what's the simple difference.... Cardinal numbering 1 + 1 =2 ...... a sum total. but Ordinal representation of numbers as in, "FIRST", and "LAST", which shows or Identifies POSITION, and not a sum total as Cardinal numbers do. let's give an example as to demonstrate the Cardinal system vs the Ordinal system. Imagin a tall building with say, for argument sake, has ten/10 floors. say for instance you want to get to floor 5. does one punch the floor button #2 two times plus the One floor button to get to the 5th floor? no, one just punch the #5 floor button. so Ordinal is Positional. knowing that let's look at out second word in "ANOTHER", which is Sort that we want to examine.

using the Dictionary.com. SORT: when used as a NOUN, #1 a particular kind, species, variety, class, or group, distinguished by a common character or nature. #2. character, quality, or nature: examine both definitions carefully.

now OT scripture. we will start with this one and work our way back to Genesis 1:1 if need be. Zechariah 13:7 "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones." we all know that this is in reference to the Lord Jesus who is to come,,, Matthew 26:31 "Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad." Matthew 26:32 "But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee." So, without doubt this man who is God's "FELLOW" is Jesus the Christ. now let's see how the Hebrew renders the word "FELLOW", 101G is using the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments.
H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') n-m.
1. companionship.
2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man.

[from a primitive root meaning to associate]
KJV: another, fellow, neighbour.
notice definition #2. and also how the KJV can translate this word, "another". but definition #2 states this FELLOW of God is concrete, a KINDRED MAN. or the "ANOTHER" of God as his FELLOW. so now we have the connection of the term ANOTHER, which will guide us in understanding the ECHAD in the NT. this ANOTHER as the Greek NT states, a. is G243 Allos (Another), or G2087 heteros (Another). well here in Zechariah 13:7 the definition states that this Fellow of God is Another of God as A. Concrete. and B. Kindred. we need to go no further than what the bible stated. concrete is not Spirit/spirit, as God and the angels are..... for God is a Spirit, Per. John 4:24, and the angels he maketh spirts, per. Hebrews 1:7, so that leave only one CONCRETE PATHWAY, (INCARNATION), the incarnation of God. since the bible never stated that no angel was incarnated, well that leave only GOD. did not Gabrel tell Mary, Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." so, "BORN" is this fellow of God, meaning Flesh and blood. now let's see it clearly. Revelation 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." BINGO there is our answer.
the term OFFSPRING says it all. which is the Greek term,
G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man), diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
Root(s): G1096

Note KIN, here in revelation 22:16, as in KINdred man in the definition of Fellow in Zechariah 13:7 which he is the KINSMAN REDEEMER, or the Offspring, and as said in Revelation 22:16 as the KJV can translate Offspring as ...... get this "diversity". and one wonder where 101G gets "Diversified Oneness" from..... (Smile). yes, God "SHARED EQUALLY" in flesh and blood... "Concrete" as Fellow states in Zechariah 13:7. this is just too easy not to understand.

so, for those who have ears to hear, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" HEAR O ears, who has them. God is the First "LORD" and he is the Last "Lord" the same one Person. but the Numerical difference is in the "ORDER" of TIME, and PLACE and RANK as "FIRST" and "LAST". too easy.

next time the KINSMAN REDEEMER God's Fellow in Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me (God's Fellow, the KINSMAN REDEEMER), whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

101G.
 
If Jesus is fully God then He would be the same as the Holy Spirit and the Father who are Fully God lacking nothing.
he is. only in flesh to REDEEM and SAVE us he LAID down or adide his Powers. but his Spirit NATURE, NO. supportive scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" the term "BEING" is present tense. so his NATURE, "Spirit", did not change", for the term "Form" of God is NATURE,
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.

[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

101G.
 
Learn more in Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology online course.
Correct brother-

B. Biblical Data

Before asking whether Scripture views “soul” and “spirit” as distinct parts of man,
we must at the outset make it clear that the emphasis of Scripture is on the overall
unity of man as created by God.

When God made man he “breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life; and man became a living being” (Gen. 2:7). Here Adam is a unified
person with body and soul living and acting together. This original harmonious and
unified state of man will occur again when Christ returns and we are fully redeemed
in our bodies as well as our souls to live with him forever (see 1 Cor. 15:51–54).
Moreover, we are to grow in holiness and love for God in every aspect of our lives, in
our bodies as well as in our spirits or souls (cf. 1 Cor. 7:34). We are to “cleanse
ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit and make holiness perfect in the
fear of God” (2 Cor. 7:1).


But once we have emphasized the fact that God created us to have a unity between
body and soul, and that every action we take in this life is an act of our whole person,
involving to some extent both body and soul, then we can go on to point out that
Scripture quite clearly teaches that there is an immaterial part of man’s nature. And
we can investigate what that part is like.


1. Scripture Uses “Soul” and “Spirit” Interchangeably. When we look at the usage
of the biblical words translated “soul” (Heb. פשֶׁנ ,ֶH5883, and Gk. ψυχή, G6034) and
“spirit” (Heb. רוּח , ַH8120, and Gk. πνεῦμα, G4460),4
it appears that they are
sometimes used interchangeably. For example, in John 12:27, Jesus says, “Now is my
soul troubled,” whereas in a very similar context in the next chapter John says that
Jesus was “troubled in spirit” (John 13:21). Similarly, we read Mary’s words in Luke
1:46–47: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.”
This seems to be quite an evident example of Hebrew parallelism, the poetic device in

3 3. See Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology pp. 191–92, for a survey of views held in
the history of the church.
4

4. Throughout this chapter it is important to keep in mind that several recent Bible
translations (especially the NIV) do not consistently translate the Hebrew and Greek
terms noted above as “soul” and “spirit,” but sometimes substitute other terms such as
“life,” “mind,” “heart,” or “person.”


The RSV, which I quote unless another version is
specified, tends to be more literal in translating these words in most cases.
In certain contexts these terms can of course be used to refer to the person’s life or
to the whole person, but they are also used many times to refer to a distinct part of a
person’s nature (see BDB, pp. 659–61, 924–25; and BAGD, pp. 674–75, 893–94, for
many examples).
which the same idea is repeated using different but synonymous words. This
interchangeability of terms also explains why people who have died and gone to
heaven or hell can be called either “spirits” (Heb. 12:23, “the spirits of just men made
perfect”; also 1 Peter 3:19, “spirits in prison”) or “souls” (Rev. 6:9, “the souls of those
who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne”; 20:4,
“the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus”).

2. At Death, Scripture Says Either That the “Soul” Departs or the “Spirit”
Departs. When Rachel died, Scripture says, “Her soul was departing (for she died)”
(Gen. 35:18). Elijah prays that the dead child’s “soul” would come into him again (1
Kings 17:21), and Isaiah predicts that the Servant of the Lord would “pour out his
soul [Heb. פשֶׁנ ,ֶH5883] to death” (Isa. 53:12). In the New Testament God tells the
rich fool, “This night your soul [Gk. ψυχή, G6034] is required of you” (Luke 12:20).
On the other hand, sometimes death is viewed as the returning of the spirit to God. So
David can pray, in words later quoted by Jesus on the cross, “Into your hand I commit
my spirit” (Ps. 31:5; cf. Luke 23:46). At death, “the spirit returns to God who gave it”
(Eccl. 12:7).5

In the New Testament, when Jesus was dying, “he bowed his head and
gave up his spirit” (John 19:30), and likewise Stephen before dying prayed, “Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59).

In response to these passages, a trichotomist might argue that they are talking
about different things,
for when a person dies both his soul and his spirit do in fact go
to heaven. But it should be noted that Scripture nowhere says that a person’s “soul
and spirit” departed or went to heaven or were yielded up to God.


If soul and spirit
were separate and distinct things, we would expect that such language would be
affirmed somewhere, if only to assure the reader that no essential part of the person is
left behind. Yet we find no such language: the biblical authors do not seem to care
whether they say that the soul departs or the spirit departs at death, for both seem to
mean the same thing.

We should also note that these Old Testament verses quoted above indicate that it
is not correct, as some have claimed, to say that the Old Testament so emphasizes the
unity of man that it has no conception of the existence of the soul apart from the body.
Certainly several of these Old Testament passages imply that the authors recognize
that a person continues to exist after his or her body dies.
From the same author.
J.
 
GINOLJC, to all
as this topic states, "The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures"......nonsense. scripture, Hebrews 2:14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;" if he "took part" of the same, then he's not a "Partaker" of flesh and blood....... that's as straight forward as one can get. but .... Oh well.....

the OT, God's ECHAD in the Plurality as the EQUAL ONE........ who is "JESUS", the Holy One, the Holy Spirit. to those who have ears to hear, Listen to God.

The word in the NT that correspond to the OT word, "ECHAD", in the OT is the Greek term, "ANOTHER", (WHICH IN GREEK HAS TWO MEANING). G243 ALLOS and G2087 HETEROS. let's understand these two Greek words, (WHICH IS OUR ENGLISH ONE WORD, ANOTHER), in doing so we may understand the Godhead perfectly.

using the W.E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words [ 1,,G243 G2087 ,allos heteros ] have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages. Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;" heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort." Christ promised to send "another Comforter" (allos, "another like Himself," not heteros), John 14:16.

let's break them apart for clarity.

G243 ALLOS: "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort"

G2087 HETEROS: "heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort".

Now that we see these two words clearly, let's break them down so we can understand them in KNOWING the Godhead.

#1. G243 ALLOS: "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort"
we will examine these two critical words "a numerical difference". and "sort"

so, what is a numerical difference. the very first step is to KNOW the difference between numeric and numerical. Both "numeric" and "numerical" are adjectives that relate to numbers or numerical values. However, "numeric" refers specifically to anything that relates to numbers, especially in systems or formats. For example, a numeric keypad or a numeric code. on the OTHER HAND, "Numerical" refers to anything that relates to the use or representation of numbers, especially in quantities and mathematical relationships For example, a numerical analysis or a numerical value.
please NOTE: "Numerical" refers to anything that relates to the use or representation of numbers. Not the Number or it's value itself always. which bring us to the numerical difference of Cardinal Numbering vs Ordinal Numbering. what's the simple difference.... Cardinal numbering 1 + 1 =2 ...... a sum total. but Ordinal representation of numbers as in, "FIRST", and "LAST", which shows or Identifies POSITION, and not a sum total as Cardinal numbers do. let's give an example as to demonstrate the Cardinal system vs the Ordinal system. Imagin a tall building with say, for argument sake, has ten/10 floors. say for instance you want to get to floor 5. does one punch the floor button #2 two times plus the One floor button to get to the 5th floor? no, one just punch the #5 floor button. so Ordinal is Positional. knowing that let's look at out second word in "ANOTHER", which is Sort that we want to examine.

using the Dictionary.com. SORT: when used as a NOUN, #1 a particular kind, species, variety, class, or group, distinguished by a common character or nature. #2. character, quality, or nature: examine both definitions carefully.

now OT scripture. we will start with this one and work our way back to Genesis 1:1 if need be. Zechariah 13:7 "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones." we all know that this is in reference to the Lord Jesus who is to come,,, Matthew 26:31 "Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad." Matthew 26:32 "But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee." So, without doubt this man who is God's "FELLOW" is Jesus the Christ. now let's see how the Hebrew renders the word "FELLOW", 101G is using the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments.
H5997 עָמִית `amiyth (aw-meeth') n-m.
1. companionship.
2. (hence, concretely) a comrade or kindred man.

[from a primitive root meaning to associate]
KJV: another, fellow, neighbour.
notice definition #2. and also how the KJV can translate this word, "another". but definition #2 states this FELLOW of God is concrete, a KINDRED MAN. or the "ANOTHER" of God as his FELLOW. so now we have the connection of the term ANOTHER, which will guide us in understanding the ECHAD in the NT. this ANOTHER as the Greek NT states, a. is G243 Allos (Another), or G2087 heteros (Another). well here in Zechariah 13:7 the definition states that this Fellow of God is Another of God as A. Concrete. and B. Kindred. we need to go no further than what the bible stated. concrete is not Spirit/spirit, as God and the angels are..... for God is a Spirit, Per. John 4:24, and the angels he maketh spirts, per. Hebrews 1:7, so that leave only one CONCRETE PATHWAY, (INCARNATION), the incarnation of God. since the bible never stated that no angel was incarnated, well that leave only GOD. did not Gabrel tell Mary, Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." so, "BORN" is this fellow of God, meaning Flesh and blood. now let's see it clearly. Revelation 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." BINGO there is our answer.
the term OFFSPRING says it all. which is the Greek term,
G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man), diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
Root(s): G1096

Note KIN, here in revelation 22:16, as in KINdred man in the definition of Fellow in Zechariah 13:7 which he is the KINSMAN REDEEMER, or the Offspring, and as said in Revelation 22:16 as the KJV can translate Offspring as ...... get this "diversity". and one wonder where 101G gets "Diversified Oneness" from..... (Smile). yes, God "SHARED EQUALLY" in flesh and blood... "Concrete" as Fellow states in Zechariah 13:7. this is just too easy not to understand.

so, for those who have ears to hear, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" HEAR O ears, who has them. God is the First "LORD" and he is the Last "Lord" the same one Person. but the Numerical difference is in the "ORDER" of TIME, and PLACE and RANK as "FIRST" and "LAST". too easy.

next time the KINSMAN REDEEMER God's Fellow in Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me (God's Fellow, the KINSMAN REDEEMER), whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

101G.

I tried to follow your reasoning. Not sure I understand. As relative to "nonsense"... I disagree.

1. Do men lie? Do ALL men lie?

2. Did Jesus lie?

3. Are all men equal?

4. Are all men equal to Jesus Christ?

This is a logical construct that I ask you to answer. Appealing to small differences in ancient words do not a "doctrine make". Thanks
 
Back
Top Bottom