Creation as presented in Genesis chapters 1 and 2

Hi Jay, In verse 45 Paul specifically refered to the man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7 that God breathed the breath of life into and he became a living soul.He did not mention anything about that man being created in the image/likeness of God.Paul did not translate his writings into English. Translators did.Paul tells us the natural man is natural man.Paul tells us the heavenly man is from heaven.He tells us we are corruptible and must put on incorruption. This will happen when we get our new body at the resurrection. Jesus Christ was the one who formed the man in Genesis 2:7 from the dust of the ground.So no Jesus Christ is not of the linage of the man formed from the dust of the ground or the Adam created in the image/likeness of God in Genesis 1:27. The physical body Jesus Christ lived in while here on earth came through the linage of the man created in the image/likeness of God in Genesis 1:27. Yep we are totally corrupt and separated from God just like the man that was kicked out of the garden after disobeying God's command.That is unless one has been born again. The text says no such thing. That is your assertion. The text says no such thing. That is your assertion. God nor Paul translated the Hebrew or Greek into English. I do believe Christ had a body. One that Thomas could thrust his hand in the side where the spear was thrust in that blood and water ran out of. One that he could put his finger in the prints of the nails in His hands.I believe that God has a family that people can be born into when they are born again.I believe that Jesus began to dome up His Church when He called Peter and Andrew to follow Him and become fishers of men rather than fishes.I believe that Church has existed in all ages from that first calling out those believers that had been baptized by John the Baptist. I love the way you grab a few words and jump off a cliff. Paul asks a question.Is Christ divided?He did not and was not speaking about the Church.Paul asks a second question.Was Paul crucified for you?Paul asks a second question.Were you baptized in the name of Paul?Paul was reminding the people that Christ was crucified for them and they were baptized in the name Of Christ.NOT PAUL. What Body of Christ are you talking about?Are you talking about the one that was crucified on the cross and buried?Are you talking about the body that appeared in the upper room where the disciples were meeting?Are you talking about the body that is at the right hand of God the Father? It would be nice if you knew the Greek the NT was written in. You can look up the words used and the meanings thereof. It would straighten out a lot of your theology.eis means 1) into, unto, to, towards, for, among. Usage must be determined by the context. Explain how one is baptized into Christ?
Explain how one is baptized into his death?It is no problem to explain how one is baptized unto Christ putting Christ in charge of one's life to walk in a newness of life.It is no problem to explain how one is baptized unto His death. Showing one is dead to the old ways. Resurrected a different person to walk a different life. I know what you are trying to do. I don't know why.
We are not one and do not agree in one. In the US we have over 1200 so called christian denominations. That means we are not one. We may agree on a lot of things but very few agree on all things. If we were one we would all agree.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Sorry to butt in again, just a qick note. Neither of these answers are I believe correct.

By all means, speak about the matter.

We like to assume maybe to much about what Gods intentions are or are not. Example, why assume that God needed Satan in the garden for any purpose at all, other than for things to take thier natural course., ie that was satans choice in he first place ​ these answers presuppose that man did not have a choice or could not have made a choice without Satan there in the first place. or atleast they indirectly imply it ​ granted he put a little jelly on the toast, but could they not have made a choice without that jelly. ​ Really the only Will we need suppose, is the Will that issued the command and the Will asked to obey it ​ I dont think he needed to "Set Up" anything other than that which had already been established in the plirst face, simple freewill, with or without Satans influence ​ Perhaps you disagree?

I agree that only one will matters in the universe, God's.I am concerned about the word "need". I did write that perhaps God as having a good pleasure may have the strongest desire for pleasure of all beings.I can see an objection in the way of a question, " Did God NEED to set up things the way He did?"But there is no place, I think, to object that that is how God did establish the matter whether this was a need or not.Let me say that God chooses to put man with his free will in between the two wills in the universe - the will of God and the will of a creature who rebelled against God.Do I have any Scriptural backing to claim God chose to set up man this way in the beginning ?Consider Ephesians 3:9,10 -

" And to enlighten all that they may see what the economy of the mustery is, which throughout the ages has been hidden in God, who created all things. ​ In order that now to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenlies the multifarious wisdom of God might be made known through the church, according to the eternal purpose which He made in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Eph. 3:9,10)

God, according to His "eternal purpose" desires to display the multifarious depth of His wisdom through the church, TO the rulers and authorities in the heavenlies.I believe that Paul means both the good angels and the rebellious angels. That is that they would see that having allowed Satan to do the very best that he could, God's multifarious wisdom cannot be defeated by any authority or ruler no matter how smart or powerful.It is through the church that the many faceted and infinitely capable Divine Wisdom is manifested.Whether this gives me ground to say that God NEEDED to do things this way, may be a philosophical argument. I do think it proves that God desired to do things this way.He allowed the highest being he created to establish himself as an opposition party opposed to the divine will of God. Even though this Satan seduces man to join the Satanic revolt, God's grace, love, and power still accomplish His will.God can still display to the authorities and rulers, good and bad, that all things can only work together for good to those who are called according to His eternal purpose.He desired to set up the created and dusty creature man between the eternal will of God and the temporary evil will of a creature Satan. Man is in the middle to choose. And though he choose wrongly, the result is that eternal display of God's multifarious wisdom to save the man He loves and establish him in His eternal purpose regardless.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hi Jay, Well Judas was not a member of the family of God. But he did accompany with the Chruch he was the treasurer and carried the money bag.The Church is told to withdraw fellowship from wayward members.In other words kick them out of the Church if they do certain things.We can't kick nobody out of Gods family. If we live long enough maybe we can discuss it. The only quibble I have with this section is that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one.So whether it is God's image or His image is the same thing.We all have a mind, body and spirit. Where was man placed before the tree of life?Had he know where it was he would have made a bee line for it when he ate the fruit and knew he was going to die. He could have eat of the tree of life and lived forever. There is no information in the text that says the man formed from the dust of the ground had anything other than a physical body with life in it. We have mentioned about him that he named the animals showing he had an intelect.He did not know good and evil.God does know good and evil.Therefore he could not have been like God.God said he became like God when he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Jesus came as he had before and as He did many times in the OT. If so he knew good and evil. The breath of life is not the spirit of man. You make the spirit and the breath of life the same thing.If that is so when you draw your last breath it is over there is nothing after. That is the easiest question you have ever asked.The form was a pile of dirt. You must have been asleep because in Message 403 you wrote in answer to a question I asked: They are your words. I gave you the definition of the Greek word translated as heart. It makes no difference what I think it means or what you think it means. It means what it means and nothing else. I know that is your position Inspite of a lot of facts.The man in Genesis 2:7 was formed in the beginning when the Heaven and the Earth was created.He was formed before any life form of any kind. Genesis 2:7He was placed in a garden. Genesis 2:15
He was forbidden eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16, 17.In comparison the man in Genesis 1:27 was:He was created after all other life forms. Genesis 1:27He was created male and female in the image of God. Genesis 1:27He was told he could eat all fruit none was forbidden. Genesis 1:29This man was never placed in a garden.This man did not have a mate made from one of his ribs.You can apparantly stick your head in the sand with your fingers in your ears and declare.THIS MAN AND WOMAN IN GENESIS 1:27 ARE THE SAME AS THE ONES IN GENESIS 2:7.Could you remove any of these differences? One man is like God at his creation.The other man becomes like God after he eats the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.BIG DIFFERENCE. The only thing damaged was man's relationship with God as they were separated. God kicked the man and woman out of His presence in His garden.All mankind suffer this separation.All mankind suffer the penalty of sin which is death. Now if you want to say the soul is the mind I have no problem with that.That would give the man formed from the dust of the ground a physical body with a mind. I can dig that.He is still not like God.He does not become like God until he eats the forbidden fruit.The man created in the image/likeness of God was like God and did not have to become like God. Conscience is a function of the mind not the spirit.The brain is the storage area for information. The information stored in it controls all the functions of the human body. There are many things that are hardwired into the brain. God's laws are one of those things. When a young child disobeys he knows it. But by practice he can suppress that conviction.The natural man is deceitful above all things, and is capable of comitting henious crimes.The spirit is the part that gets sealed by the Holy Spirit at the new birth.The mind is the battle ground between the spirit and the natural man.For the born again child of the King.The natural man wants to fulfill the pleasures of the flesh.The decision is made in the mind to obey the flesh or the Holy Spirit which is trying to lead us in all truth.The problem is the mind is like a computer processor. If you put garbage into it you will get garbage out. Make up your mind.Is the spirit and the soul/mind the same things?According to above quotes I answered you say they are different.

quote:

---

The spirit of man needs REGENERATION.
The soul of man needs TRANSFORMATION.
And the body of man needs TRANSFIGURATION.

---

What is that comatose spirit going to do in the lake of fire?I think it is very much alive.But like I said I believe God's laws are hardwired into the brain just like the functions of your body that is controled by the brain. Lamp appears 12 times in the OT.3 times in Proverbs, 6:23, 13:9 and 20:20The Hebrew word for lampin Proverbs is ניר
1) lampThere is another word for lamp that means torch.The Hebrew word for breath is נפח
Meaning 1) to breathe, blow, sniff at, seethe, give up or lose (life)They are not the same and do not have the same meaning.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi Jay, The man created in the image/likeness of God had a mind/soul as you call it, a body, and a spirit.That spirit is an eternal spirit it can never die. It will have eternal life with God or eternal death in the lake of fire separated from God. But Christ can not work Himself into us.He can only control as much of our life as we will let Him control.That is why we are told to study. When we study the Word of God the Holy Spirit can work on us trying to convince us in our mind to make the right decisions to let Christ live through us.Paul said for me to live is Christ. Paul is saying for him to live is for Christ to live through him. But to die would be better for him as he would then be with Christ.That should be the attitude of every person that claims to be a christian.But it is absolutely paramount for a born again child of God to have that motto. That war has not been fought yet. It is yet future Satan still goes and comes in Heaven as he pleases. He has not been cast out yet. I been preaching that same story since 1962. Created is used 45 times in 38 verses.Actual creation events took place in Genesis 1:1, 1, 21 and 1:27 all other uses of the word created in reference to these three events.The Heaven and Earth was special.The fish to swallow Jonah was special.Modern man in the image/likeness of God was special.Everything in Genesis 2:4-25 was formed. With the earth producing all the vegetation.Everything in Genesis 1:2 -27 was made visible, called forth after their kind or created which great whales were and mankind. The Greek word ktizo translated as created in Col 1:16, Eph 3:9, and Rev 4:11 means:1) to make habitable, to people, a place, region, islandSo yes according to that definition everything was created.But according to the Hebrew word for created only the Heaven and the Earth, great whales, and mankind was bara' created. Biblical Hebrew and Greek are very specific languages. They know the answer now so why would they be puzzled?They have probably found out that the man in chapter 1 and the man in chapter 2 is not the only mankind that have inhabited this universe. This is more of my vivid imagination.I can't see God twiddling His thumbs for eternity. Most scholars agree that there are two different stories in Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 2.So no I don't expect them to be the same as they are about two different events billions of years in our time separated.The one in Genesis 2:4-4:24 took place in the beginning which I nor anyone else has a clue as to when it took place.The other in Genesis 1:2-2:3 took place about 6,000+ years ago. Actually I don't know if the man in Genesis 2:7 could sleep. I know God caused a deep sleep to come over him but that was not induced by the man.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi DB, But the man did make a choice on his own. Satan did not tempt him nor decieve him.The mans defense was; The woman was deceived by the serpent. She ate the fruit and her eyes were not opened.She gave the fruit to the man he then made a choice to eat the fruit. He did not have to eat the fruit and he was not deceived he knew exactly what he was doing. If you notice in the story their eyes were then opened.God had said the day ye eat the fruit you will die. The woman had eaten the fruit and he thought she would die and leave him with all the animals.He chose to eat the fruit and die with her instead.But pay close attention to his blame game.He first blamed God and then the woman who blamed the serpent.Mankind has been makeing excuses every since and blaming somebody else for all their problems.Have you ever noticed how much God is blamed for everything on EvC?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi Dr,Glad to see you are reading along. Yes you can. And I bet your Mom had to coax you to eat a lot of things when you were little.But you are not the man who was formed from the dust of the earth and given the command not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.BTW that man was not egged on by anyone. The serpent deceived the woman but the man ate without any coaxing that I can find.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Well Judas was not a member of the family of God. But he did accompany with the Chruch he was the treasurer and carried the money bag. ​ The Church is told to withdraw fellowship from wayward members. ​ In other words kick them out of the Church if they do certain things. ​ We can't kick nobody out of Gods family.

A local church in the eyes of God is only those in the locality who have Christ within as life. Now we humans may make a mistake. We may assume that an unregenerated person is a constituent of the local church.God, who knows who are His, and of His family, makes no such mistake. He knows who has His Spirit and who does not. And in reality the practical church ONLY consists of those who have His Spirit of Christ.I don't think this is a serious disagreement. However, I would point out that a wayward and ambitious leader did put some genuine Christian brothers OUT of the local churh. But he could not put them out of the family of God.This is recorded in Third John: "I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not receive us.

​

For this reason, if I come, I will bring to rememberance his works which he does, babbling against us with evil words; and not being satisfied withthese, neither does he himself receive the brothers, and those intending to do so he forbids and casts out of the church." (3 John 9,10) This Christian brother Diotrephes was a self assuming leader who did cast genuine Chrfistian brothers out of some local assembly. But he could not cast them out of the family of God.The local church should of course should seek the discernment to only count regenerated brothers as constituents of the church on one hand. And on the other be careful not to cast out of the local church Christian brothers for essentially wrong headed reasons.

jaywill writes: The image in the Godhead is the Son. When the Godhead was designing man's creation, the Bible indicates that man would be made in "Our image" . But when the Godhead was in the actual process of making man, the Bible says that man was made in "His" image. And "His" denotes the Son of God (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3; 2 Cor. 4:4) ​ The only quibble I have with this section is that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one.

There is no problem to me here. The Triune God is very mysterious. And the Three are one and the One is three.

So whether it is God's image or His image is the same thing. ​ We all have a mind, body and spirit.

I just said that Christ is the image of the invisible God according to Scripture. So man was made in view of what Christ is. But there is no absolute separation between the Son and the Father and the Spirit. They are distinct but not separate.I don't think there is any cause for a serious dispute here. But exhausting the profoundity of the Trinity in a few sentences is impossible for either one of us.

jaywill writes: Man was placed before a tree called "the tree of life" ​ Where was man placed before the tree of life?

The Bible does not specifically say that man was placed before the tree of life. But I use this expression because the tree of life was in the middle of the garden (Gen. 2:9) .It was CENTRAL. It was FOR Adam's partaking. And in light of the whole revelation of the Bible it is CRUCIAL. In THAT sense man was placed before the tree of life.Of course one could say that the other tree was ALSO in the middle of the garden. However, it was forbidden. It was NOT for Adam. And we never hear about it specifically again after chapter 3. So Adam was only placed before it in a negative sense.

Had he know where it was he would have made a bee line for it when he ate the fruit and knew he was going to die. He could have eat of the tree of life and lived forever.

I don't think Adam at any time partook of the tree of life.I don't know why. I think you are right that he would have made a bee line to the tree of life AFTER he realized that he had eaten the tree of death. As we know God cut off the "bee line" to him.Until Christ accomplished redemption for man, being crucified for us, that line to the tree of life has been cut off. Christ has opened the way for us to come to the life of God. Praise Him. "Blessed are those who wash their robs that they might have right to the tree of life and may enter by the gates into the city." (Rev. 22:14)

jaywill writes: You have proposed that Adam in Gen. 2:7 was not created in the image of God. But I showed you how God came looking for Adam in the cool of the day. Adam was hiding. ​ There is no information in the text that says the man formed from the dust of the ground had anything other than a physical body with life in it. We have mentioned about him that he named the animals showing he had an intelect.

You do not believe that Adam's human spirit was part of Adam's life? I don't see why.Neither would it seem logical to me to say that because no soul or spirit OR body of man is mentioned in Genesis 1:26,27 therefore man was created without a spirit or soul or body.I think you have a perculiar way of interpreting the Bible's silence about certain things sometimes.

He did not know good and evil. ​ God does know good and evil. ​ Therefore he could not have been like God.

Adam still could be created in the image of God and was. In that sense he was "like" God wating to receive God into his vessel.This is not an non-livng vessel. Man is a living vessel with feelings, emotions, will, intentions, who is nevertheless designed to receive and contain God as life.The point that I am making here is really that the man in Genesis 2:7 was certainly created in the image of God. His not having the knowledge of good and evil did not make him NOT created in the image of God.

God said he became like God when he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. ​ Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Yes. In that aspect Adam gained something that God had.But Adam did not gain, for example, omnipresence, omnipotence, omniscience, or the ability to create universes, or the right to be worshipped. So his becomming like God was in a limited sense: "And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, KNOWING GOOD AND EVIL" (3:22) My point here is that Adam of Genesis 2:7 was made in the image of God. Silence as to that in chapter two does no mean that he was not made in the image of God.And silence as to dust of the earth in Genesis 1:26,27 does not mean that man there was NOT formed from the dust of the earth.The two accounts belong together is so far as they are different versions of the initiation of the human race.

jaywill writes: Now, I think this was God coming into the garden in the likeness of a man, asking such questions as "Where are you?" . God Almighty came into the garden in a manner like the Adam He created. This is much the same as God wrestling with Jacob or God coming to have a good lunch with Abraham. ​ Jesus came as he had before and as He did many times in the OT.

The Son of God came in the Old Testament, before His incarnation.My point was that he came LIKE Adam was. And since it says it was God coming, I think it proves that Adam in Genesis 2:7 shared that same image and likeness as God.But I concede that this is rather mystrious. And it is like a chicken and egg paradox. Christ preceeded Adam and served as a model for Adam's creation.We might puzzle and say "But WHO is in the image of WHO?"

jaywill writes: God breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life. And in doing so God formed the spirit of man within him. ​ If so he knew good and evil.

I don't know that that has to follow. Right now I would only say that God placed into His creation something like a braking system just in case his creation did go astray.The human conscience seems to have awoken once man sinned. God asks Adam "Who told you that your were naked?" .The potential for discriminating between good and evil was placed into man apparently. Once Adam came out from under God's authority and joined Satan's rebellion, that breaking system of the human conscience came into action.Now, I do not claim to understand all of this completely. I don't think you do either. But my point here is that Adam was made in the image of God in Genesis 2:7.His not yet having the knowledge of good and evil doesn't change that. His receiving this mysterious matter of "the breath of life" from God doesn't change that.In my opinion, searching for reasons to prove that Adam in Genesis 2:7 was not made in the image of God, is a futile matter. I think you are grasping for proof texts to confirm your theory of two initiations of the human race.I think it is far better to consider Genesis 1:26,27 and Genesis 2:7 as two accounts of the same matter: Namely "How did the human race start to exist on the earth."

jayeill writes: The spirit out from God was breathed into the matter formed from the dust. ​ The breath of life is not the spirit of man.

I will at this point simply quote the footnotes to a couple of passages in my Recovery Version:

" Jehovah God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." (Gen. 2:7) ​ Footnote 7(5) for the word "breath" ... ​ "Heb. neshamah, tanslated spirit in Proverbs 20:27, indicating that the breath of life breathed into man's body became the spirit of man, the human spirit (cf. Job 32:8). Man's spirit is his inward organ for him to contact God, receive God, contain God. and assimilate God into his entire being as his life and his everything. It was specifically formed by God and is ranked in importance with the heavens and the earth in God's holy Word (Zech. 12:1). The spirit of manis for man to worship God (John 4:24), to be regenerated by God (John 3:6b), and to be joined to God (1 Cor. 6:17); 2 Tim. 4:22) that man may walk and live in an organic union with God (Rom. 8:4b) to fulfill God's purpose. ​ "But there is a spirit in man, And the breath of the Almighty gives them understanding" (Job 32:8) ​ Footnote 8(1) for "there is" ... ​ "Or, it is the spirit in man, indeed the breath of the Almighty, that gives them understanding. In this verse "a spirit in man" and "the breath of the Almighty" are in apposition, indicating that the spirit of man is the breath of God (see ...Gen.2). ​ Footnote 8(2) for the word "breath" ... ​ "Heb. ruach ... neshamah"

I am not clear whether the note is saying the Hebrew word is ruach or neshamah.But the teaching that is being conveyed to me is that Job 31:8 puts "a spirit in man" and "the breath of the Almighty" are made equivalent.I may have to do some more study of this matter. But regardless of the linquistic issues of the Hebrew, man consist of spirit and soul and body. And I believe that Adam in Genesis 2:7 was a normal (probably the MOST normal) human man.It it not reasonable for me to believe that Adam formed of the dust of the ground did NOT have a human spirit. And it is also not reasonable for me to believe that this Adam was not made in the image of God.I am willing to look more deeply into the word pictures of the Hebrew language. But I think there is a word which is beyond the Greek and the Hebrew. That is the word of God.We human beings had our start with Adam. He was made in the image of God, and we are made like him. He did fall into sin and became damaged. The extent of that fall into damage maybe we cannot fully comprehend. But sin and death entered the world through this man.But if we have a human spirit Adam must have had once first.

jaywill writes: So where is the contradiction in what I said about a three part human ? ​ You make the spirit and the breath of life the same thing.

Hebrew is a very pictoral language. It is about 1,000 times more simplistic then English.Yes, I think in the limitation of human language there, the metaphysical part of man was "breathed" into man's body by his Creator.

​ If that is so when you draw your last breath it is over there is nothing after. ​ jaywill writes: I mean the medical doctors smack a baby on the behind to get that system going. Why could not God have spanked the man on the rear end to get him to take his first gulp of air ? ​ That is the easiest question you have ever asked. ​ The form was a pile of dirt.

Here is the way I presently see it. If the Bible says that the spirit of man is the lamp of Jehovah illuminating all the inward parts of the inner being, I think it is speaking not physically.To illuminate the inner parts, I think, does not mean to shine lights on our liver, stomach, intestines, spleen, spine, and lungs.I don't think that is what the Scipture is meaning. For the spirit of man to be God's lamp illuminating the inward parts of man, I take to mean to illuminate man's psychological being. The lamp of God shines on man's thought, man's intention, man's desire and motive. This spirit of man illuminates to God and man the inner workings of his intentions, true motived, his deep thoughts.This is something that the Creator put into man. And I think the word picture of the Hebrew expresses it as God breathing into the nostrils of Adam the breath of life.I just see this as more than a pile of dirt got blown on by a stream of oxygen. The language may be limited. But I think something more profound is conveyed in Genesis 2:7.This illuminating of Adam's inward parts really is conveyed when he sinned and felt convicted by his awakened conscience. The knowledge did not come simply by the stirring of air in a pile of clay. The lamp of Jehovah within man came into function in a new way.God put this function into man at creation. He caused it to be activated at the proper time. And without this spirit of man this is hardly a human being at all either way.

jaywill writes: It is getting a little confusing. This is something I did not write. I assume that you wrote it. ​ You must have been asleep because in Message 403 you wrote in answer to a question I asked: ​ jaywill writes: ​ Well the problem is that God did not breathe the second breath into that form. The system God set in motion did that. ​ I did not say that God breathed "the second man" into that form. And I am not sure what your objection really is. ​ Man, every man, all men, all women created consist of a human spirit, a human soul, and a human body (1 Thess. 5:23) ​ The human spirit gives us a consciousness toward the spiritual realm included God. ​ The human soul gives man a conscioussness toward other human lives. ​ The human body gives a consciousness toward the physical universe. ​ We a are a three part, tripartite creation. And I believe that Genesis 2:7 reveals the three parts. God breathed His breath of live into the form of a body. And the result of these two coming together was that man became a living soul. He became a being possessing human spirit, human soul, and human body. ​ They are your words.

Thanks. In going over replies to comments made, and shuffling back and forth to see exactly what the points were, I sometimes get confused in remembering the line of reasoning we are both on.Having a hard copy of the discussion before me might help. But I am probably going to keep flipping screens.

jaywill writes: So the heart is the seat of both the soul and the spirit. ​ I gave you the definition of the Greek word translated as heart. It makes no difference what I think it means or what you think it means. It means what it means and nothing else.

The heart in the Bible is composed of the function of the mind, the will, the emotion, and the conscience of man.If you need further substantiation I would have to refer you to a book or two, much longer material then is suitable for this kind of discussion.

jaywill writes: Both the man in Genesis 1:26,27 and in Genesis 2:7 represent the creation of the first initiation of the human race. ​ I know that is your position Inspite of a lot of facts.

The "facts" as I recall them are:1.) Some silences that you take to mean they didn't happen.Ie. Nothing is said about a SOUL in Genesis 1:26 therefore it follows that that creation had no SOUL.2.) Other living things seem to preceed man's creation in Genesis 1:26,27 whereas it seems that the created man preceeds them in Genesis 2:7. Therefore TWO initiations of the human race are being spoken about.3.) "[T]he day" in Genesis 2:4 somehow proving that the time of Genesis 1:26,27 cannot be the same time of Genesis 2:7.There are probably many more "facts" of yours in support of your theory. I don't regard any of these ideas as sufficient to understand that the Bible teaching that God began the human race twice in Genesis.If you know of ANY other Christian teacher who interprets Genesis this way, I would like to know where I can read that person's writings.That is not mandatory that someone else holds these views for them to be correct. But if anyone you know does, let me know.

The man in Genesis 2:7 was formed in the beginning when the Heaven and the Earth was created. ​ He was formed before any life form of any kind. Genesis 2:7

Do you mean that in the exact same second that God called the heavens and the earth into being He also formed Adam from the dust ? This would not seem right because Genesis two speaks of the goings on of things on the earth before Adam was formed.This shows that you cannot press this matter of "when" God created the heavens and the earth too far.I think you have tried to do that by insisting that Adam's formation from the dust HAD to be on the same DAY that the event of Genesis 1:1 took place.I think you only NEED to press this in order to support that Genesis 1:26,27 and Genesis 2:7 are TWO initiations of the human family on this earth.

He was placed in a garden. Genesis 2:15 He was forbidden eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16, 17.

And aside from the puzzle of the animals, why could this not be on the sixth day of the previous chapter ?

In comparison the man in Genesis 1:27 was: ​ He was created after all other life forms. Genesis 1:27

Maybe the reference to animals in chapter two is only in relationship to the nature of Adam's humanity with no regard to the actual time sequence of things.

He was created male and female in the image of God. Genesis 1:27

This is probably just general speaking in Genesis 1:26,27. The Spirit of God's burden to convey HOW the female was brought about is reserved for another portion of the Bible's revelation.In Luke's Gospel Jesus on the cross said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Such a sentence is NOT recorded in Matthew or Mark or John.I do not for this reason believe that there is more than ONE Jesus who died on the cross. I rather believe that it is within God's sovereignty to include that detail in one Gospel account and exclude it in another.The Holy Spirit for His own reasons chose to not tell us about the formation of Eve in Genesis one and chose to elaborate on it in Genesis two. That is all.It doesn't require of me to understand TWO initiations of the human race on earth in Genesis.

He was told he could eat all fruit none was forbidden. Genesis 1:29

It is simply a detail which was reserved for the second chapter and withheld in the first.The first account shows the mandate of God for man.
The second account puts on more details as to how God and man carry out this mandate.On one hand God simply calls things not being as being. On the other hand He forms, molds, builds, operates, works out His plan.Many posts ago I showed you that the New Man in the New Testament is said to be RENEWED on one hand and said to be CREATED on the other. It does not mean that there are TWO "new mans."Compare Ephesians 4:24 and Colossian 3:10. Ephesisan 4:24 - And put on the new man, which was CREATED according to God ..." "And have put on the new man, which is being RENEWED unto full knowledge according to the image of Him who created him" On one hand the new man seems ready made. We just need to put him on. On the other hand he needs to be put on by a process of renewal, formation, a gradual evolving into.Genesis speaks of the same human beginning. One way is speaking that God simply created. The other is the God formed and made and built.

This man was never placed in a garden.

In Genesis 1:26,27 it is a detail to which there is no mention. The mentioning of it occurs in the second chapter.Someone, pointed out that these to seeings may have been separated by a long amount of time. Maybe that is so. And maybe Moses brought to revelations together that were unveiled at different times.Did you see EVERYTHING about God in one sitting? Didn't God show you one aspect of Himself at one time and at a latter time show you ANOTHER aspect of Himself?Do you think that the truth of the Bible could be progressive and unfolding in different stages ?We can only take so much revelation at one time. I don't know why you would object to God revealing one aspect of the truth on one section and progressively developing on that with more truth in another section.

This man did not have a mate made from one of his ribs.

The detail of that matter is ignored in chapter one for God's own sovereign reasons. It is elaborated on in chapter two.

You can apparantly stick your head in the sand with your fingers in your ears and declare.

With the same amount of logic that you use, I could say this:Because the man sleeping is mentioned in chapter TWO but is not mentioned in chapter ONE, therefore it follows that in Genesis chapter one God did not create man to SLEEP.And anyone who disagrees with this theological anvil of truth is burying his head in the sand.Furthermore, because the joining of male and female as one flesh was mentioned in Genesis two but was not mentioned in Genesis one, therefore it follows that God did not intend the male and the female in Genesis 1:26,27 to be joined / married.And anyone who does not agree with this theological Rock of Gibralter is just burying his head in the sand.And furthermore, because man in Genesis 2 speaks something but man in Genesis 1 speaks nothing, therefore man in Genesis 1:26,27 was not created to talk.Speaking is not mentioned in chapter one so the man was not created to talk.All those who disagree with this are simply burying thier heads in the sand.I have to stop here today. Your other comments are not ignored.The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I agree that only one will matters in the universe, God's. ​ I am concerned about the word "need". I did write that perhaps God as having a good pleasure may have the strongest desire for pleasure of all beings. ​ I can see an objection in the way of a question, " Did God NEED to set up things the way He did?" ​ But there is no place, I think, to object that that is how God did establish the matter whether this was a need or not. ​ Let me say that God chooses to put man with his free will in between the two wills in the universe - the will of God and the will of a creature who rebelled against God. ​ Do I have any Scriptural backing to claim God chose to set up man this way in the beginning ? ​ Consider Ephesians 3:9,10 - ​ " And to enlighten all that they may see what the economy of the mustery is, which throughout the ages has been hidden in God, who created all things. In order that now to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenlies the multifarious wisdom of God might be made known through the church, according to the eternal purpose which He made in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Eph. 3:9,10) ​ God, according to His "eternal purpose" desires to display the multifarious depth of His wisdom through the church, TO the rulers and authorities in the heavenlies. ​ I believe that Paul means both the good angels and the rebellious angels. That is that they would see that having allowed Satan to do the very best that he could, God's multifarious wisdom cannot be defeated by any authority or ruler no matter how smart or powerful. ​ It is through the church that the many faceted and infinitely capable Divine Wisdom is manifested. ​ Whether this gives me ground to say that God NEEDED to do things this way, may be a philosophical argument. I do think it proves that God desired to do things this way. ​ He allowed the highest being he created to establish himself as an opposition party opposed to the divine will of God. Even though this Satan seduces man to join the Satanic revolt, God's grace, love, and power still accomplish His will. ​ God can still display to the authorities and rulers, good and bad, that all things can only work together for good to those who are called according to His eternal purpose. ​ He desired to set up the created and dusty creature man between the eternal will of God and the temporary evil will of a creature Satan. Man is in the middle to choose. And though he choose wrongly, the result is that eternal display of God's multifarious wisdom to save the man He loves and establish him in His eternal purpose regardless.

No you misunderstand, I agree with all of this, it was simply that you seem to be implying that man could not make a choice correctly or properly without bieng pitted excally in the middle of the two Wills. I see now what that is not what you are saying or that is what God had intended, from the standpoint of freewill itselfHe had a higher purpose than simply to see if man could pass a test.DBEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Does that verse say I make peace and create evil? YES/NO

Yes, but in the same way Jesus says I have not come to bring peace but a sword, I have to set a man at variance with his father.Are those direct statements or not? Do you believe this was Jesus'actual mission or a RESULT of his primary mission.

God created evil. Evil gave man a choice. God said eat the fruit and die. Evil said God did not mean you would really die the instant you ate the fruit but that you would become as God, knowing good and evil.

Herein lies the the root problem with this philosophy. Evil did not give man a choice, frewill and a directive gave man a choice, he choice could have been the correct one not an evil one.Evil has not always existed, it exists a result of a choice in the wrong directionTo say evil gave man a choice is to imply that there was no freewill and choice when the directive by God was given in the first place. Hence they could not have obeyed the command until evil was presented, which would render the command usless and thier ability to obey it pointless

All this happened in the beginning. Show me where Satan has ever changed or ceased to try to get humans to deny, and disobey God. He has always been evil and will be.

If satan was LIFTED UP with pride against God,it would follow that this was not always there, it was a process that grew inside of him over a period of timeDBEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Dear ICant,Thank you for your responses. Please provide your evidence for this.‘Genesis 2: 19’, ‘Genesis 3: 17’, etc. treat ‘Adam’ as an individual (Proper Noun) not a ‘Pronoun’ (like ‘them’, ‘they’, ‘mankind’, etc). So I would have to say that ‘Adam’ was a specific individual person.You stated that: the man that was formed from the dust of the ground in the beginning during the light period God created the Heaven and the Earth is not the man that spoken of in Genesis 5:1, 2.v2 refers to ‘Adam’ in the plural sense (I.E. Mankind) However, in v3 the text refers to ‘Adam’ as an individual person. There are many places in these first chapters where ‘Adam’ is spoken of as an individual. (Examples: ‘Genesis 2: 19’, ‘Genesis 3: 17’, ‘Genesis 4: 1’ and ‘Genesis 5: 5’ just to name a few)Since the Bible refers to each of these individuals as ‘Adam’ there are two possibilities:Ether all are referring to the same man named ‘Adam’ or they are speaking of different individual men named ‘Adam’. I see nothing in these verses that says that the earth was restored to a habitable condition. (‘Restored’ meaning: it once was habitable, became inhabitable, and then was once again being made habitable.) Romans 5:12 (Amplified Bible)12Therefore, as sin came into the world through one man, and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men, [[a]no one being able to stop it or to escape its power because all men sinned.In other word’s ‘sin’ was transmitted to all of mankind {spread to all men} through one man {i.e. inherited from our forefather ‘Adam’ the one man who originally sinned}. I would say that the Bible is using two different phraseologies because these are two different things. (image/likeness of God and become like God) So, if I am correct about this:The Bible says that mankind was created in the image/likeness of God baring a three fold personage. (Example: Father, Son, Holy Spirit / mind, body, spirit)Then the Bible refers to mankind becoming like God knowing [the difference between] good and evil and blessing and calamity. In other words this is something mankind learned that God already knew; and in that respect becoming like God.I would love to speak to all of your (vary fascinating) points, however, if we did this our posts would become extremely long.God Bless us; everyone,
JRTjr.

JRTjr,I don't know if this is under your control, but that blue font is difficult for me to see against a blue backround.Do you see it the same way? I could see your words better if they were colored, say, orange or yellow. I have no problem with the white lettered words.And the green works okay too for me.I definitely want to see what you are writing.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I wrote above: I should mean that it contains far far fewer words then English does.

Bro. Bertot,I wrote:

I agree that only one will matters in the universe, God's.

I mean I agree doctrinally.I am far from always putting that into practice in my daily life so far.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hi Jay, I read somewhere that God gave a series of laws to a fellow by the name of Moses that the people agreed to abide by in an agreement with God.Those folks had the tree of life made available to them by meeting certain requirements. Also anyone who had been a proselyte to that faith.They were looking forward to the coming of the sacrifice that would be the ultimate sacrifice for the sin of the world.Paul tells us until the law there was no transgression. The man formed from the dust of the ground was given a law/command which he broke and brought physical death, and separation from God.From then until God gave the law to the children of Israel the Bible is mute on commands. Did they exist maybe, maybe not.We assume that there was some instruction given to Cain and Abel because God had favor to Abel's offering but not to Cain's. But the Bible does not tell us. I know the man had a body. I know the man had a mind/soul as you prefer to call it. I have no text that tells me he had a spirit of any kind.The closest thing is when he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he became like God knowing good and evil. But the text plainly said he was created in the image/likeness of God. God is Mind, body and Spirit. So yes the text does say the mankind in Genesis 1:27 had a mind, body, and spirit. First thing this man was not created. He was formed from the dust of the ground. God then breathed the breath of life into that form and it became a living being.Where does the text say he was created?
Where does the text say anything about the image of God?What about God's statement: God says this man was not like us.Because he is become as one of us.If he become as God he could not have been like God. The mankind created in Genesis 1:27 didn't get any of those either.So what's the point? You are confusing physical appearance with image/likeness. He knew good and evil after eating the fruit.Before eating the fruit he knew good. If you are using image as physical appearance I would agree with you.If you are using image as likeness, Mind, Body, and Spirit I disagree with you. But if the Bible text is correct the two events described are billions of year apart. When was the beginning? During the history declared here to be of the Heaven and the Earth in the day it was created a man was formed from the dust of the ground and God breathed the breath of life into that form and it became a living soul/being.That event transpired prior to Genesis 1:2. The primary meaning of both is breath. The secondary meaning is spirit according to all the younger lexicons. But the context determines how it is translated.neshamah is used in Genesis 2:7 and proverbs 20:27.ruach is used in Job 32:8"there is" that is expounded upon does not exist in the original text it is supplied by the translators.I would use breath of life in Proverbs 20:27 Your recovery version notes does teach that.Fact is that the original text does not teach that. Well you are not going to find the Word of God outside of the Hebrew and Greek language's of the time of Moses and Jesus.You are taking what some other man say's the Word of God is. Why do you say "of man" in this instance instead of Adam?In other words why didn't you say the Bible says "that the spirit of Adam is the lamp of Jehovah illuminating all the inward parts, of the inner being"? Then you are talking about the living breathing physical body with a mind instead of a spirit. That means breath of life should have been used instead of spirit. There may be hope for you yet. Have you ever done any pottery work. That is what God did. He took some dirt and made a form. That form had no life, breath, skin or anything it was just as a piece of pottery.When God breathed the breath of life into that form it became a living soul. It had skin, meat on bones, heart, all the physical parts that you have today. It also was a living soul/mind.So until God breathed the breath of life into that pile of dirt it was just a pile of dirt. Simply pull up two instances of EvC on your desk top in one have only your own posts and you can thumb through them pretty rapidly. I use 2 instances when I am replying to a message that way I don't have to scroll up and down through the message to get to the next point I want to reply too. Just about everybody has the same opinion that you do. I only know about 30 people that agree with me. None of them have wrote a book of any kind.So as far as I am concerned I am the only person on the planet that holds the view that I do.Is it wrong?I was convinced when I was 10 years old that it was the proper view. After 60 years of study and all those years in Bible College no one has dented my belief that what the Holy Spirit gave to that 10 year old boy is wrong.I am a literalist period.If the Bible says it I believe it.I believe in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth. Genesis 1:1.I believe the history of the Heaven and the Earth in the day they were created is found in Genesis 2:4-4:24.I believe in that history a man was formed from the dust of the ground as described in Genesis 2:7.I believe in that history God planted a garden. Genesis 2:8I believe in that history God caused trees good for food and pleasant to sight to grow out of the ground. Genesis 2:9I believe in that history God took the man and placed him into the garden to dress and keep it. Genesis 2:15.I believe in that history God told the man he could eat the fruit of all the trees. Genesis 2:16,I believe in that history that God made one exception and commanded the man not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:17I believe in that history God formed all the creatures as well as the fowl out of the ground.I believe in that history God took a rib from the man and made a woman.There are many other things I believe was included in that history but I will not mention them here.I do believe all those things took place in the day the LORD God created the Heaven and the Earth.I believe all these things took place billions of years in our time before Genesis 1:2.Now if you can prove these things did not take place in the Day the LORD God created the Heaven and the Earth as the text states present your evidence.I don't want what you believe or what someone else believes.I want the evidence that the Bible does not say what it says. There are events that had not taken place as we are told in Genesis 2:5.We are told the earth was watered by a mist that came up from the ground in Genesis 2:6.Nothing else is said to happen before God formed man from the dust of the ground. The text in Genesis 2:4 says in the DAY.According to God DAY is a light period or the combination of a light period and a dark period as it was called the first day. I have expressed several times but I guess you missed it that the beginning was billions of years ago in our time, but that light period which is DAY did not end until we find darkness in Genesis 1:2.I got plenty of existence for anything to happen that God said happened. Because in chapter 1 there are no restrictions placed on what the man could eat. No command not to eat a certain fruit. And if a frog had wings he would not bump his behind every time he hops.It is recorded as it happened unless God lied. I think you said somewhere God can't lie. Maybe not but the history of the DAY God created the Heaven and the Earth does.That is unless you can prove the statement in Genesis 2:4 is false. But the events in the second chapter took place prior to Genesis 1:2 according to Genesis 2:4. Which took place in the history of the DAY the LORD God created the Heaven and the Earth. Which took place prior to Genesis 1:2. I don't have a problem with God revealing things in a progressive manner as we are able to digest them.But God's Word has not changed from the beginning until now. But chapter 2 was completed in the DAY the LORD God created the Heaven and the Earth prior to Genesis 1:2. Why are you repeating this instead of answering my reply to your earlier comments concerning this issue you brought up.Never the less I don't know the man in chapter 2 could sleep.I do know that God cause a deep sleep to come over him and God removed a rib from the man.In the hospital they call that what the anesthesiologist does before surgery.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Your study of Gods word and your life long work and passion for him is nothing short of impressive. your one of his great ones because you have devoted a lifetime to him and that is all that really matters, not your position on this obscure point of andabout what may or may not have taken place at creationBut brother you are only a literalist when it suits your argument.You are AFTERALL, the best, brother formore important reasonsDB