Man DOES NOT HAVE a soul; Man is - is - is a living soul.

 

Man DOES NOT HAVE a soul.

Man is - is - is a living soul.

When his body and spirit are in union, man is a living soul.

When his body and spirit separate, man is a dead corpse, not a living soul.

Ge 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 soul.

Ec 11:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

While alive, the Lord preserves our whole soul. While dead, the Lord preserves BOTH our whole body and spirit... that they may be united again into a glorified living soul. Blessed be our Lord God. 
========

Alan Lloyd
Well explained pastor, Pastor; that clears up a lot of confusion, thanks.

Charles Page
Amazing how people cling to the Greek concept of the body being a vessel and containing a soul/spirit

Sing F Lau
Brother Matthew, do you think the usage of soul and spirit synonymous in 1Th 5:23 ALSO?

It is true that, in some contexts, the two words are synonymous because the context clearly indicates parallelism.

Many people do use 1Th 5:23 to prove that man is tripartite.

(Matthew Ong has deleted all his comments!)

Sing F Lau
Matthew, so man is tripartite: one part is void and needs to be filled?

We are talking about the essential constitution of man: is he body and spirit, or is he body, spirit, and soul?

A bipartite man filled with the Holy Spirit is still bipartite.

Sing F Lau
Matthew, did you read this?
Ge 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 soul.

Is this a Greek fable?
What is the Greek fable? Please tell us what it is.

Sing F Lau
Ge 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 soul.

Matthew @ "That same breath that gave the first Adam his life back in Genesis seems to be the same breath that contains spirit and soul for Adam."

Are you saying the same thing as Gen 2:7? The Scriptures say: because of the breath of life, man became a living soul.

You say: the breath of life contains spirit and soul for Adam.

Are you saying what the Scriptures say?

Sing F Lau
Matthew @ "But then the later statement is contradicting this verse, and I have to disagree."
=======

Which statement is contradicting Ecc 11:7? Please elaborate.

Thanks.

Sing F Lau
Matthew @ While dead, the Lord preserves our whole body and spirit... that they may be united again into a glorified living soul. <<< I disagree with part of this statement, the body is not preserved. It is shown clearly as corrupting continue unto the dusk.
=======

So, you don't believe in the resurrection of the body that has turned into dust? If the Lord does not preserve the body unto resurrection, would there be dust left for the resurrection?

Sing F Lau
No one is saying that the mortal body is preserved in the sense that it will not rot and decompose and return to the dust!

Nevertheless the Scriptures plainly declares that the Lord preserves the body... in that SENSE that the SAME BODY that has decomposed and returned unto dust shall be resurrected and glorified!

Of course the glorified body is entirely different in the sense of its quality, immortal instead of mortal, spiritual instead of natural, but it is still the same body that shall be resurrected!

Sing F Lau
The Scriptures say, "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it."

You say, "... and the spirit and soul leaves this mortal body and return to the Lord for the elected saints."

God's word says, 'the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.'

You say, 'the spirit and soul return to the Lord for the elect saints.'

So, who am I to believe? You, or God's word? Please help me.

Sing F Lau
 Matthew @ "We should alway believe scripture and NOT man's concept of creation. '

========

Here it is, what the Scripture says. Do you believe it?

Ge 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 soul.

Do you need a clearer statement?

And here is another:

Ec 11:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Do you need a plainer statement? Where is the mention of your soul?

Sing F Lau
The confusion is here:
If you want to know the constitution of man, go to those passages that tell us that. Don't go to those passages that speak of the life of men.

Don't be carried away by SOUND-byte; get the SENSE.

How does Isa 26:9 speak of the constitution of man? Just because the phrases 'my soul' and 'my spirit' appear in the passage, you conclude that man is tri-partite?

If that's your conclusion, then what do you want to do with the clear declaration of Ge 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 soul.'

Let me give an illustration. Table salt is sodium chloride - made up of the element sodium and chloride. Some insist that table salt is made up of three elements: sodium, chloride and sodium chloride. That would be a salty fable! <LOL>

Sing F Lau
Matthew, then you have missed the whole point of the discussion! The whole subject is about the essential constitution of man!

That is why I say... you must know what the subject of discussion is about, and stick to the subject... otherwise we are just loitering around the subject.

What is the problem with the term?

Do you also have a problem with a term like 'trinity'?

Sing F Lau
The term 'trinity' and the meaning of the term are two different thing.

Don't be so fixated on the RC... the subject has nothing to do with them!!! <LOL>

Do you have a problem with the term 'trinity'? You seem to have a problem with terms like 'bi-partite' and 'tri-partite.' Or do you prefer terms like 'bichotomy' or 'trichotomy'?

Terms are necessary shorthand in discussion.

No, no, no. The Scriptures are clearly BI-partite concerning the essential constitution of man.

Ge 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 soul.

Sing F Lau
There may be much confusion, and it seems that we are HARDLY communicating!

1. Man IS IS IS a living soul... because his body and the spirit of life is in union. That's what Gen 2:7 is saying.

This MEANS that the spirit and the living soul are different and distinct entities.

Isa 26:9 is not speaking of the CONSTITUTION of man. It speaks of the life-activities of man, where it can be spoken of in terms of the spirit or the soul, as defined in Gen 2:7.

2. Man, whether dead in sin, or regenerated, is ALWAYS the same in his essential constitution. So, man dead in sin, and man quickened unto righteousness are STILL bipartite in their essential constitution.

3. The Spirit that the regenerated man has DOES NOT become part of his essential constitution! A man INDWELT by the Holy Spirit is still a bi-partite man - his essential constitution has not changed.

I have been saying all these things from the beginning...

Probably you didn't read them.

I hope things are clearer now...

Sing F Lau
Matthew, it is ok as long as you are CLEAR about what I have said.

What you choose to believe, you need to square it with the Scriptures.

Joh 10:30 - "I and my Father are one - can you tell us 'are one' in what sense? 'I and my Father' make TWO. So tell us in what sense are the two one. Otherwise, I would know what you want to imply by that passage!

Sing F Lau
Which part of Point #1 do you disagree with?

Point #2: Quickening is always accompanied by adoption, and the adoption is always accompanied by the giving of the Spirit of adoption!!!!!!! That is basic, brother Matthew!

Point #3: How come even when the person is indwelt with Holy Spirit, it is still bi-partite? Did the Holy Ghost replace the spirit of that man? If not, is there now a tripartite?

1) Holy Ghost 2)Mortal body 3)the spirit of the person?

The Spirit that fills a child of God does not become an essential part of that man... the man remains BI-partite.

A Spirit-filled man is still a living soul of spirit and body in union. What do you mean, the Holy Spirit replaces the spirit of the man!!! If the Spirit of God replaces the spirit of man, then where does the replaced spirit go?

Sing F Lau
Matthew @ 'We need to maintain every aspect of man to be the same as it indirectly reflects how we would imply with holy scripture.'
=====

Elaborate this a bit Matthew. I don't understand what you are saying!

Sing F Lau
Matthew, Matthew...

Your words, 'I am trying to explain that Jesus Christ, unlike natural man, has 3-partite (like the term you use).

1) The Father who is God
2) The Word who is God|
3) The flesh body this part is fully man.'
=======

I really hope this is ORIGINAL with you, and no one else believes this fable at all.

Sing F Lau
And just how those two passages prove Jesus being tri-partite as you defined like this:

'I am trying to explain that Jesus Christ, unlike natural man, has 3-partite (like the term you use).
1) The Father who is God
2) The Word who is God
3) The flesh body, this part is fully man.'

 

'EVEN SO' - Two little words with momentous Implications

 

#EVEN_SO

Two little words with momentous implications.

Sola fideism is like a deformed one-fingered-hand monstrosity!

Romans 5
17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
18 ¶Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The legal condemnation for all represented by Adam took place at the fall, EVEN SO the legal justification for all represented by Christ took place at the cross.

The legal condemnation is applied to each individual of Adam's race at his conception of life, EVEN SO the legal justification is applied personally to each individual of Christ's race at his effectual call to grace and salvation. [The effectual call out of the native state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation REQUIRES justification, regeneration, and adoption.]

The legal condemnation that has been applied is experienced, and evidenced in actual acts of sin, EVEN SO, the legal justification  that has been applied is experienced, and evidenced in the actual acts of righteousness such as faith and works.

The biblical doctrine of Justification is like a well-formed five-fingered hand:

- The grand thumb - Justification purposed in eternity for all the elect:
- The index finger - Justification accomplished for all elect at the cross;
- The middle finger - Justification applied to each elect personally at effectual calling;
- The ring finger - Justification experienced & evidenced in those called by the gospel;
- The last finger - Justification glorified/vindicated for all the elect.

Can you imagine if the ring finger is the only finger on your hand?

That's really what sola fideism amounts to - a deformed monstrosity!

The God-formed five-fingered hand stands as a perpetual witness against the horrid lie of sola fideism.

Thou art without excuse, O sola fideist! Thine own hand condemneth thee!
======

Sing F Lau
Brett Null, deal with what I have written. Which point do you not agree, and state why. Thanks. Otherwise, don't be a nuisance here.
(Brett Null has deleted all his comments)

Ante Zivkovic
Sola fide. Conditional salvation conditioned on faith. Arminians require it for regeneration, while Calvinists require it for justification. Arminians think the dead can believe, while the Calvinists think the unrighteus can believe.

Sing F Lau
Brett @ "Those who reject sola fide reject the only Gospel that can save them and by necessity embrace a false gospel."
=============

There is a perverse logic, and a serious error, in the statement above...

Sola fide - a teaching that an unjustified man, still under the condemnation of sin and death, is required to believe in order to be justified - has no gospel at all! It is in fact a false gospel.

Some idiots perceive that their sincere offer of a magical life-giving concoction to the dead for them to accept the offer and drink the concoction will get life, is good news! Such an act is pure stupidity, though very sincere.

So, how can it be said that those who reject the fable of sola fide reject the only gospel? It is to reject a grievous and deceptive lie of the devil!

In addition, the gospel DOES NOT save any one. The gospel is the good news of what God Himself has done to save His people through the finished work of Jesus Christ, and applied to each individual by the Spirit of God.

Sing F Lau
Let me just say the blind like braat numbskull don't read nor believe what the Scriptures also state plainly... they are only good with mouthing religious shibboleth!!!

- Act 13:39 "And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

"And by HIM... by HIM... BY HIM... " So "by faith alone" is just a fiction and fable!!!

- Rom 3:24 "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus..."

"justified FREELY..." HOW? FREELY - thus all conditions excluded, including faith, man's act of believing. It is FREELY by His grace. On what GROUND? The ground being the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. So "by faith alone" is just a fiction and fable!!!

The GROUND of justifying a condemned man is the redemption by Christ. The MANNER a condemned man is justified is FREELY by God's grace.

- Rom 3:28 "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law"

Deluded folks like brat null would start raving and say that this passage proves their fiction of "sola fidei"!!!

This passage speaks of the faithfulness of Christ in rendering perfect obedience to the law. For that is the context... the righteousness necessary for justification before God is either by a man's OWN faithfulness to the law, or by Christ's faithfulness to the law.

Rom 2:21-22

"But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; EVEN the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference."

The righteousness needed for a condemned man's justification before God is "by faith OF OF OF OF OF OF OF Jesus Christ."

The brat null and his kind would read that as "by faith IN IN IN IN IN IN IN Jesus Christ."

But brat null will read what is presented above... and will go on raving and foaming his "sola fidie" fable.

Sing F Lau
Brett @ Jas 2:24 "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
============

First, see brat numbskull's "by faith alone" versus the Scriptures, "not by faith only".

Second: a man's works of righteousness justify him in the same manner his faith (a work of believing) justifies him. They are both evidences of his justified state... both declare, demonstrate, vindicate, justify the man as FREELY justified by God. Only a justified man is capable of believing and doing the works of righteousness.

Third, but brat numbskull DOES NOT see "how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

God's own children can become like the worldlings

#not_only_sad_but_tragic

At least Surgeon's words acknowledge a harsh biblical fact:
God's very own children can become like the worldlings.

Far too many Calvinists vehemently deny even the remote possibility of God's children becoming indistinguishable from the worldlings. The reason! They have twisted and perverted the biblical doctrine of the perseverance of the saints; they sincerely believe God's children do continue in a life of faith and holiness to the end; therefore, any who don't are even God's children to begin with, they pontificate. They will retort, "Mr Spurgeon, your fear is quite unfounded and unnecessary."

Also, many of God's children will end up in hell in the intermediate state EVEN THOUGH none of them shall end up in the eternal like of fire.

Hebrews 10:31 KJV
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

This is addressed to God's children. 

=======

Reggie Lee
You wrote,

“And also, many of God’s children will end up in hell in the intermediate state EVEN THOUGH none of them shall end up in the eternal lake of fire.”

That was a bold statement, bro. And yet, I cannot refute this scripturally.

So many times, my thoughts told me this when reading, even though man’s doctrine said differently. But if I were to say this here in the south, it would ruffle feathers for sure😳😬

Sing F Lau
Speaking to the disciples, Jesus said,

8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Take drastic measures against your sins to save yourselves from hell.

The Lord Jesus not only ruffled the feathers of the establishment of His days, He plucked their feathers!

Imputation of Righteousness is Distinct from Pardon of Sins

Q. 70. What is justification?
A. Justification is an act of God’s free grace unto sinners, in which he pardoneth all their sins, accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone.

Consider the answer above carefully.
Justification (imputation of righteousness) and Pardon (forgiveness of sins)
are distinct theological concepts.
A biblical distinction is the essence of sound theology. 

Demonstrate how the answer plainly REPUDIATES  the popular fable of justification by faith alone.

Ask some questions, and/or draw out some statements from the answer.

Enjoy learning the gospel truths.

Martin Luther famously stated that the doctrine of justification is the "article upon which the church stands or falls" (in Latin, articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae).

On this idea of Luther, how many churches are standing?

Are you in one that STANDS?

===========

Reggie Lee
Ba da bing ba da boom! Perfect!

Justification comes by the imputation of Jesus’ Works to us.

Justification does not come by being forgiven of your sins.

If we were forgiven only, we still would not have good works. Good works must also be a part of our redemption.

At the cross, Jesus not only took our sin, He also imputed unto us, His Righteous Acts.

Every sabbath He kept, every Law He kept, every good deed He performed was placed on our account.

This act of imputation is what actually justified us in The Sight of God.

Sing F Lau
Justification is an act of God’s free grace unto sinners, in which He accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone."

In the revised answer above, I removed these words: "...he pardoneth all their sins..."

Is this a better answer to the question?

The perfect obedience of Christ in His life secured the required righteousness necessary for the justification of His people;

The full satisfaction of Christ in His death secured the full forgiveness of His people.

To accept and account a condemned sinner as righteous requires not only the application of Christ's perfect obedience but also His full satisfaction of the penalty of sins of His people.

"For the Father seeketh such to worship him.

On Nov 8, 2011, at 4:07 PM, SK inquired:

Dear brother,
A friend asked this: "What is spirit and what is the truth? Please tell me what it means to worship the Father in spirit and in the truth."

Can you please share your thoughts? I am sure you have some materials on the above.

I also noticed that in some places, the Spirit is capitalised. Is the one in capital letters solely used to refer to the Holy Spirit?

What is the difference between the Spirit of God and the Spirit of the LORD?

Looking forward to some input from you.

Thank you.

======

Dear brother SK,

Good questions!

That well-known phrase is found in John 4:24, where the Lord Jesus Christ said to the Samaritan woman, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

The Lord Jesus spoke those words in response to the statement made by the Samaritan woman in verse 20: 'Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.'

The woman's statement betrays a serious error, which the statement by Jesus was intended to correct.

The Lord Jesus corrected her:
21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

The Samaritan stated something true to a large extent in the Old Testament, and even right up to the time of Jesus Christ. So much of the worship under the Old Covenant is outward and external worship: performing the various ceremonial rituals and sacrifices under the laws given through Moses, and those ceremonies must be performed at the designated place, i.e. Jerusalem. Of course, the Samaritans (half-Jews of the northern kingdom) had their alternative centre of worship at Mt Gerizim, the mountain mentioned by the woman.

Compared with the Jews, the Samaritans were much worse off - which is why Christ said, "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews." Though the Jews were worshipping correctly under the old covenant, their worship consisted mainly of the performance of external and outward ceremonial rituals. That must change.

With the coming of Jesus Christ, those outward and ceremonial manners of worship have been abolished. 'The hour cometh, and now is...' indicates the abolition of the old covenant way of worship.

Instead of the external and ceremonial, the new covenant worship is going to be in spirit and in truth.

'In spirit' contrasts with external rituals and ceremonies performed by hands; it comes from within the mind and heart, informed and moved by the Spirit of the Lord, with the inner man engaged in worship. It is the Holy Spirit indwelling in His children that enables them to worship the Lord in spirit.

'In truth' in contrast to performing those outward ceremonies and rituals without understanding what those were pointing to, even the promised Messiah. Much of the old covenant worship was performed in ignorance. It was devoid of truth; it was mostly outward motions. The book of Hebrews demonstrates the deficiencies. Not so in the new covenant; it is Christ-centred, for He is the truth. All worship of God is through Him and His finished work.

Whenever the word 'spirit' has an uppercase 'S', it is always a reference to the third person of the triune God. The word with lowercase 's' has a different meaning, depending on the context. It could refer to the spirit of man, in contrast to his body; or a disposition, like 'the spirit of fear.

'Spirit of the LORD' is always used specifically in the context of God dealing with His people as their covenant God... indicated by the uppercase' LORD.' 'Spirit of God' is used in a more general sense, as in Gen 1:2 in the context of creation. Both terms refer to the same divine Person, but each term has its own emphasis.

I hope the above helps. Please ask further if anything is not clear.

======

Please help with verse 35 of the following.
32* And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33* They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
34* Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35* And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36* If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Can you please explain verse 35?

Thank you.

=======

I am SO SORRY. It just occurred to me that you did ask about something.

Jesus was addressing the Jews who boasted that they were children of Abraham... that they belong to the family of Abraham, and are members of his house. But yet, these same people are unbelieving in Jesus Christ, and that is sin. Instead of acting as true children of Abraham, they are behaving as servants of sin. As such, though they claim to be members of the house of Abraham, they shall not abide in the house forever; the time will come soon when they shall be sacked and removed from it. The house refers to the outward Jewish nation that descended from Abraham... those servants of sin shall be destroyed and the house they boast in will also perish, and it did in 70AD. But those in the Son will abide forever because Christ abides forever.

I hope the above helps.

My sincere apology for overlooking your question.

sing