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 being. (Genesis 2:7)
And the LORD God commanded the man,
saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it
you shall surely die.” (Genesis 2:16-17)
In the sweat of your face you shall
eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust
you are, and to dust you shall return. (Genesis 3:19)
All in whose nostrils was the breath
of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. (Genesis 7:22)
Then the
dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who
gave it. (Ecclesiastes 12:7)
We are part of a race upon whom a severe penalty was
placed. ‘You shall surely die’ was a warning that came into effect the
moment Adam and Eve were found guilty of the first sin. Most have, I believe,
correctly understood that there is a physical element to this death. The proof
is in the fact that not only Adam and Eve, but all sinners die.
However, when we assume there to be an immortal soul
indwelling us we also admit that not every part of us dies. Conscious existence
in whatever form implies life. This relegates the warning given by God to a
half-truth. The comfort that is given to God’s people – that our experiences
immediately from the point of death will be bliss – softens the severity of the
punishment pronounced upon Adam and Eve. Though this understanding of the
penalty still recognises an inherent severity, it nonetheless stops short of
how God pronounced it.
Following the recorded process of Adam’s creation we
see that he was formed from dust and that the only energising factor that made
him ‘a living soul’ was the ‘breath
of life’. Later in the same chapter the warning is given: ‘in the day
that you eat of [the fruit] you shall surely die’. With the information
that we have prior to this pronouncement, should we not assume death to be the
removal of the ‘breath of life’? Adam,
the ‘living soul’, would become a
dead soul.
We are not told of a soul that is separate from Adam’s
body in the first place, and the warning does not say anything of this either.
Therefore if the created being was called ‘Adam’, and this ‘Adam’ was warned
that he would die if he sinned, what else can we conclude except the death of
the created being? Nothing else is spoken of remaining alive. Whatever God
created would die.
When considering Ecclesiastes 12:7 (above), we may
further our understanding of the significance of the ‘breath of life’
from its initial life-giving role to what happens to it at human death. As we
have seen, the ‘breath of life’ is what made Adam the ‘living soul’.
Ecclesiastes 12:7 then tells us that ‘the spirit’ returns to God after
death. The word used in Genesis 2:7 for ‘breath’ is נשמה (NESHAMAH). Strong’s give it no other translation.
The word for ‘spirit’ in Ecclesiastes 12:7 is רוח
(RUACH),
which can translate as spirit, wind or breath. Is it possible that this verse is telling us that
the breath ‘will return to
God’? This speaks nothing of a part that permanently belongs to man. If
anything, it speaks of something borrowed which God, the rightful owner, will
reclaim one day because of the penalty first incurred by Adam. It is this very
withdrawal that effectuates the penalty, reducing man to the dust from which he
was formed.
In fact, it is not just man who is spoken of as
receiving a ‘breath of life’.
All in whose
nostrils was the breath (NESHAMAH) of the spirit (RUACH) of life, all that was
on the dry land, died. (Genesis 7:22) [here
NESHAMAH and RUACH are used together to describe the breath of the creature,
which to me seems a strong suggestion that Genesis 2:7 – NESHAMAH – and
Ecclesiastes 12:7 – RUACH – can be understood as speaking of the same
‘breath’/’spirit’.]
In the Flood all animal life that was killed was said
to possess this ‘breath of life’. Furthermore, this breath is said to be
‘the breath of the spirit of life’’ The same NESHAMAH
and/or RUACH that energised man was also energising animals. We have
already considered reasons for animals being classed as ‘souls’ (NEPHESH).
Now we are also told that, while they lived, they had ‘the spirit’ (RUACH).
What then is different between the constitution of mankind and animals? If we
say that humans have an immaterial, immortal soul and a spirit, we must do the
same for animals. The Bible makes no distinction. However, it would seem more
straightforward to me that both men and animals are ‘souls’, and possess ‘the breath of life’/‘the breath of
the spirit of life’/‘a spirit’ as long as they remain living, breathing
creatures. The major difference between man and animal (apart from obvious
social, intellectual, zoological and physical differences) is the
resurrection-promise, which will be addressed in the final section of this
document.
The quote from Job 14:12 supports the idea that this is
how early members of the human race understood death. ‘Sleep’ can be a euphemism for death (Psalm 13:3; 76:6; Jeremiah
51:39,57; Daniel 12:2; John 11:11-14; 1st Corinthians 11:30; 15:51;
Ephesians 5:14; 1st Thessalonians 4:14; 5:10). Job is explicitly
speaking of death when he talks about ‘sleep’ (v.10) which makes it all
the more striking when he says that man ‘does not rise’. Though all would
agree this is the case with the body, where is Job’s suggestion that the ‘soul’
rises? After all, it is purported to be our ‘true self’, so such a hopeless
forecast by Job does not match up with this popular doctrine that is full of
hope (though I believe it to be a false hope).
What
I believe should be our hope is more
than hinted at in Daniel 12:2 - resurrection. This hope is set against what
precedes it chronologically – not souls in Heaven receiving their resurrected
bodies, but ‘those who sleep in the dust of the earth’. The New Testament
has more to say on this hope
but even Job was aware of it:
For I know that
my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth; and after my skin is destroyed, this I know,
that in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes
shall behold, and not another. How my heart yearns within me! (Job 19:25-27)
Job’s hope was in his own resurrection, or, more accurately, his hope
was in the One who would resurrect him. Knowing therefore the same hope with
which New Testament writers were familiar, one ought to take Job’s less hopeful
statement (14:12) more seriously. If he knew of the resurrection at the Lord’s
return then surely his knowledge of where the dead were at that time would be
just as accurate. Nothing good is said of them, which helps us appreciate the
extent of the punishment of sin.
No comments:
Post a Comment