http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=191
The Origin, Nature, and Destiny of the Soul [Part II]
[
EDITOR’S NOTE: Part I of this five-part series appeared in the
February issue. Part II follows below and continues, without introductory comments, where the first article ended. Part III appeared in
May issue. Part IV appeared in the
June issue. Part V appeared in the
July issue.]
THE ORIGIN AND SOURCE OF
MAN’S IMMORTAL NATURE
Biblical teaching regarding man acknowledges that he is composed of two
distinct parts—the physical and the spiritual. We get an introduction
to the origin of the
physical portion as early as Genesis 2:7
when the text states: “Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground,
and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living soul (
nephesh chayyah).” It is important to recognize both what this passage is discussing and what it is not. Genesis 2:7
is teaching that man was given
physical life; it is
not teaching that man was instilled with an
immortal nature.
The immediate (as well as the remote) context is important to a clear
understanding of the intent of Moses’ statement. Both the King James and
American Standard Versions translate
nephesh chayyah as “living
soul.” The Revised Standard Version, New American Standard Version, New
International Version, and the New Jerusalem Bible all translate the
phrase as “living being.” The New English Bible translates it as “living
creature.”
The variety of terms employed in our English translations has caused
some confusion as to the exact meaning of the phrase “living soul” or
“living being.” Some have suggested, for example, that Genesis 2:7 is
speaking specifically of man’s receiving his immortal soul and/or
spirit. This is not the case, however, as a closer examination of the
immediate and remote contexts clearly indicates. For example, the
apostle Paul quoted Genesis 2:7 in 1 Corinthians 15:44-45 when he wrote:
“If there is a
natural body, there is also a
spiritual body.
So also it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living soul.’ The
last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” The comparison/contrast offered
by the apostle between the first Adam’s “natural body” and the last Adam
(Christ) as a “life-giving spirit” is critical to an understanding of
Paul’s central message (and the theme of the great “resurrection
chapter” of the Bible, 1 Corinthians 15), and must not be overlooked in
any examination of Moses’ statement in Genesis 2:7.
There are six additional places in the Old Testament where similar
phraseology is employed, and in each case the text obviously is speaking
of members of the animal kingdom. In Genesis 1:24, God said: “Let the
earth bring forth living creatures (
nephesh chayyah) after their
kind.” Genesis 1:30 records that God provided plants as food “to every
beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that
creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life (
nishmath chayyah).” When the Genesis Flood covered the Earth, God made a rainbow covenant with Noah and with every living creature (
nephesh chayyah)
that was in the ark with Him (Genesis 9:12). God pledged that He would
remember the covenant that He made with every “living creature” (
nephesh chayyah;
Genesis 9:12), and therefore He never again would destroy the Earth by
such a Flood. The rainbow, He stated, would serve as a reminder of that
“everlasting covenant” between God and every living creature (
nephesh chayyah,
Genesis 9:15). The final occurrence of the phrase is found in Ezekiel’s
description of the river flowing from the temple in which every living
creature (
nephesh chayyah) that swarms will live (47:9).
Additionally, the Bible declares: “For that which befalleth the sons of
men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth,
so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; and man hath no
preeminence above the beasts” (Ecclesiastes 3:19). Does this mean,
therefore, that man possesses only a material nature and has no immortal
soul/spirit? No, it does not! In speaking to this very point, Jack P.
Lewis wrote:
It would seem that arguments which try to present the distinctiveness
of man from the term “living soul” are actually based on the phenomena
of variety in translation of the KJV and have no
validity in fact. Had the translators rendered all seven occurrences by
the same term, we would have been aware of the fact that both men and
animals are described by it. To make this observation is not at all to
affirm that the Old Testament is materialistic. We are concerned at this
time only with the biblical usage of one term. Neither is it to deny a
distinction in biblical thought between men and other animals when one
takes in consideration the whole Old Testament view. Man may perish like
the animals, but he is different from them. Even here in Genesis in the
creation account, God is not said to breathe into the animals the
breath of life; animals are made male and female; there is no separate
account of the making of the female animal; they are not said to be in
God’s image and likeness; they are not given dominion. Man is the crown
of God’s creation (1988, p. 7).
When Dr. Lewis suggested that “man may perish like the animals,” he
captured the essence of the passage in Ecclesiastes 3:19. It is true
that both men and beasts ultimately die, and that in this regard man
“hath no preeminence above the beasts.” Yet while both creatures are
referred to as
nephesh chayyah, the Scriptures make it clear that
God did something special in reference to man. Genesis 1:26-27 records:
“And God said, Let us make man
in our image, after our likeness.
...And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he
him; male and female created he them.” Nowhere does the Bible state or
imply that animals are created in the image of God. What is it, then,
that makes man different from the animals?
The answer, of course, lies in the fact that man possesses an immortal
nature. Animals do not. God Himself is a spirit (John 4:24). And a
spirit “hath not flesh and bones” (Luke 24:39). In some fashion, God has
placed within man a portion of His own essence—in the sense that man
possesses a spirit that never will die. The prophet Zechariah spoke of
Jehovah, Who “stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of
the earth, and formeth the spirit (
ruach) of man within him” (12:1). The Hebrew word for “formeth,”
yatsar,
is defined as to form, fashion, or shape (as in a potter working with
clay; Harris, et al., 1980, 1:396). The same word is used in Genesis
2:7, thereby indicating that both man’s physical body and his spiritual
nature were formed, shaped, molded, or fashioned by God. The authors of
the
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament noted:
The participial form meaning “potter” is applied to God in Isa. 64:7
where mankind is the work of his hand. When applied to the objects of
God’s creative work, the emphasis of the word is on the forming or
structuring of these phenomena. The word speaks to the mode of creation of these phenomena only insofar as the act of shaping or forming an object may also imply the initiation of that object (Harris, et al., 1980, 1:396, emp. added).
As the Creator, God “initiates” the object we know as man’s immortal
nature (i.e., his soul or spirit). Solomon, writing in Ecclesiastes,
noted that “the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit
returneth unto
God who gave it” (12:7, emp. added). Man’s
physical body was formed of the physical dust of the Earth. Would it not
follow, then, that his spiritual portion would be formed from that
which is spiritual? When the writer of Hebrews referred to God as “the
Father of our spirits” (12:9), he revealed the spiritual source of the
soul—God.
WHEN DOES MAN RECEIVE HIS IMMORTAL NATURE?
When does man receive his soul/spirit? In one of the most illustrative
passages within the Bible on this topic, James wrote: “The body apart
from the spirit is dead” (2:26). This brief but important
observation—offered by inspiration on the part of the Bible
writer—carries tremendous implications. Without the presence of the
spirit (
pneuma), the physical body cannot live. There is, however, an important corollary to James’ assessment. If the body is living,
then the spirit (
pneuma)
must be present!
But when does life actually begin? The answer, quite simply, is that it begins
at conception.
When the male and female gametes join to form the zygote that
eventually will grow into the fetus, it is at that very moment that the
formation of a new body begins. It is the result of a
viable male gamete joined sexually with a
viable female gamete which has formed a zygote that will move through a variety of important stages.
The first step in the process—which eventually will result in the
highly differentiated tissues and organs that compose the body of the
neonatal child—is the initial mitotic cleavage of that primal cell, the
zygote. At this point, the genetic material doubles, matching copies of
the chromosomes move to opposite poles, and the cell cleaves into two
daughter cells. Shortly afterwards, each of these cells divides again,
forming the embryo. [In humans and animals, the term “embryo” applies to
any stage after cleavage but before birth (see Rudin, 1997, p. 125).]
As the cells of the embryo continue to divide, they form a cluster, or
ball, of cells. These divisions are accompanied by additional changes
that produce a hollow, fluid-filled cavity inside the ball, which now is
a one-layer-thick grouping of cells known as a blastula. Early in the
second day after fertilization, the embryo undergoes a process known as
gastrulation in which the single-layer blastula turns into a
three-layered gastrula consisting of ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm
surrounding a cavity known as the archenteron. Each of these layers will
give rise to very specific structures. For example, the ectoderm will
form the outermost layer of the skin and other structures, including the
sense organs, parts of the skeleton, and the nervous system. The
mesoderm will form tissues associated with support, movement, transport,
reproduction, and excretion (i.e., muscle, bone, cartilage, blood,
heart, blood vessels, gonads, and kidneys). The endoderm will produce
structures associated with breathing and digestion (including the lungs,
liver, pancreas, and other digestive glands) [see Wallace, 1975, p.
187].
Within 72 hours after fertilization, the embryo will have divided a
total of four times, and will consist of sixteen cells. Each cell will
divide before it reaches the size of the cell that produced it; hence,
the cells will become progressively smaller with each division. By the
end of the first month, the embryo will have reached a length of only
one-eighth of an inch but already will consist of millions of cells. By
the end of the ninth month, if all proceeds via normal channels, a baby
is ready to be born. As one biologist (and author of a widely used
secular university biology textbook) noted: “As soon as the egg is
touched by the head of a sperm, it undergoes violent pulsating movements
which unite the twenty-three chromosomes of the sperm with its own
genetic complement. From this single cell, about 1/175 of an inch in
diameter,
a baby weighing several pounds and composed of
trillions of cells will be delivered about 266 days later” (Wallace,
1975, p. 194, emp. added).
Is it alive? Of course it is alive. In fact, herein lies one of the
most illogical absurdities of arguments set forth by those who support
and defend abortion. They opine that the “thing” in the human womb is
not “alive.” If it is not alive, why the need to abort it?
Simply leave it alone!
Obviously, of course, from their perspective that is not an option
because, as everyone knows, in nine months that growing, vibrant,
developing fetus results in a
living, human baby. The truth of
the matter is that human life begins at conception and is continuous,
whether intrauterine or extrauterine, until death. Consider the
following important scientific facts regarding the living nature of the
fetus.
(1) The baby’s heart starts beating 18-25 days after conception.
(2) By the age of two months, the heart beats so strongly that a doctor actually can listen to it with a special stethoscope.
(3) At about this same time, brain activity can be recorded by use of
an electroencephalogram. Brain waves are readily apparent.
(4) By the age of two months, everything is “in place”—feet, hands,
head, organs, etc. Upon close examination, fingerprints are evident.
Although less than an inch long, the embryo has a head with eyes and
ears, a simple digestive system, kidneys, liver, a heart that beats, a
bloodstream of its own, and the beginning of a brain.
(5) The unborn child hiccups, sucks his thumb, wakes, and sleeps.
(6) The unborn child responds to touch, pain, cold, sound, and light.
Is the child alive? Do you know any
dead creature that attains such marvelous accomplishments?
But is the fetus growing in the uterus actually
human? It is the result of the union of the
human male gamete (spermatozoon) and the
human female gamete (ovum)—something that certainly guarantees its humanness. [The
Washington Post
of May 11, 1975 contained an “Open Letter to the Supreme Court”—signed
by 209 medical doctors—which stated: “We physicians reaffirm our
dedication to the awesome splendor of
human life—from one-celled infant to dottering elder.”]
And how, exactly, does God view this unborn yet fully human child? He
said to the prophet Jeremiah: “Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew
thee, and
before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee” (Jeremiah 1:5, emp. added). Jehovah knew the prophet—even while he was
in utero—and
viewed him as a living person. Further, God already had “sanctified”
Jeremiah. If his mother had aborted the baby, she would have killed
someone that God recognized as a living person.
The same concept applied to the prophet Isaiah who said: “Listen, O isles, unto me, and hearken ye peoples, from afar;
Jehovah hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.... And now, saith Jehovah that
formed me from the womb
to be his servant...” (Isaiah 49:1,5, emp. added). Jehovah not only
viewed Isaiah as a person prior to his birth, but even called him by
name.
David, in Psalm 139:13-16, provided one of the clearest and most compelling discussions on the nature and importance of life
in utero when he wrote:
For thou didst form my inward parts: Thou didst cover me in my mother’s
womb. I will give thanks unto thee; For I am fearfully and wonderfully
made: Wonderful are thy works; And that my soul knoweth right well. My
frame was not hidden from thee, When I was made in secret, And curiously
wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see mine
unformed substance; And in thy book they were all written, Even the days
that were ordained for me, When as yet there was none of them.
The phrases, “I was made in secret” and “curiously wrought in the
lowest parts of the earth,” refer to the psalmist’s development in the
womb (see Young, 1965, p. 76). Notice also that David employed the
pronouns “me,” “my,” and “I” throughout the passage in reference to his
own prenatal state. Such usage clearly shows that David was referring to
himself, and one cannot talk about himself without having reference to a
living human being. The Bible thus acknowledges that David was a human
being while he inhabited his mother’s womb (and prior to his birth).
Job, who was undergoing a terrible life crisis, cursed the day he was born when he said: “Why did I not
die from the womb? Why did I not give up the ghost when my mother bore me?” (3:11). It is clear that if the fetus had
died in the womb, prior to that it must have been
living.
Something (or someone) cannot die if it (or they) never lived. It also
is of interest to observe that in Job 3:13-16, the patriarch listed
several formerly-living-but-now-dead people with whom he would have had
something in common
if he had died
in utero. Included in
the list—along with kings and princes—was the child who experienced a
“hidden untimely birth” (i.e., a miscarriage). Job considered the
miscarried child to be in the same category as others who once lived but
had died. Obviously, the Holy Spirit (Who guided the author of the book
of Job in what he wrote) considered an unborn fetus as much a human
being as a king, a prince, or a stillborn infant.
In the Old Testament, even the accidental termination of a pregnancy
was a punishable crime. Consider Exodus 21:22—“If men strive together,
and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm
follows; he shall be surely fined, according as the woman’s husband
shall lay upon him...but if any harm follows, then thou shalt give life
for life.” The meaning of the passage is this: If the child was born
prematurely as the result of this accident, but “no harm follows” (i.e.
the child survived), then a fine was to be exacted; however, if “harm
follows” (i.e., either mother or child died), then the guilty party was
to be put to death. Look at it this way. Why would God exact such a
severe punishment for the accidental
death of an unborn child—if that child were not
living?
The same understanding of the fetus as a living child is found within
the pages of the New Testament. The angel Gabriel told Mary that
“Elisabeth thy kinswoman, she also hath conceived
a son in her old age” (Luke 1:36, emp. added). Please note that the conception resulted in neither an “it” nor a “thing,” but in
a son.
In Luke 1:41,44, the Bible states (in speaking of Elisabeth, who was
pregnant with John the Baptist) that “the babe leaped in her womb.” The
word for “babe” in these passages is the Greek term
brephos, and
is used here for an unborn fetus. The same word is used in both Luke
18:15 and Acts 7:19 for young or newborn children. It also is used in
Luke 2:12,16 for the newborn Christ-child.
Brephos therefore can
refer to a young child, a newborn infant, or even an unborn fetus (see
Thayer, 1958, p. 105). In each of these cases a living human being must
be under consideration because the same word is used to describe all
three.
The fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is living (an inescapable
conclusion supported by both weighty scientific and biblical evidence)
thus becomes critically important in answering the question, “When does
man receive his immortal nature?” When James observed that “the body
apart from the spirit is dead” (2:26), the corollary automatically
inherent in his statement became the fact that
if the body is living, then the spirit must be present.
Since at each stage of its development the zygote/embryo/fetus is
living, it must have had a soul/spirit instilled at conception. No other
view is in accord with both the biblical and scientific evidence.
[to be continued]
REFERENCES
Harris, R.L., G.L. Archer, Jr., and B.K. Waltke (1980),
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago, IL: Moody).
Lewis, Jack P. (1988), “Living Soul,”
Exegesis of Difficult Passages (Searcy, AR: Resource Publications).
Rudin, Norah (1997),
Dictionary of Modern Biology (Hauppauge, NY: Barrons).
Thayer, J.H. (1958 reprint),
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark).
Wallace, Robert A. (1975),
Biology: The World of Life (Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear).
Young, Edward J. (1965),
Psalm 139 (London: The Banner of Truth Trust).
