Adam Redux
The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Genesis 2:23 NASB
This is now – Sometimes the smallest words require considerable investigation. This is one of those times. We’ve looked at this verse over and over. We’ve noticed that in this verse Adam changes his identity in the presence of the woman. The verse begins with “the man”—Adam—and ends with ish and ishshah. The “man” recognizes that his self-awareness is altered by the presence of another one like him. A great point about the necessity of human relationship. But concentrating on this shift might mean that we miss the importance of Adam’s opening word, happa’am. It’s translated, “This is now,” in the NASB, but that makes the word into a temporal location. In fact, there is a lot more.
There are numerous expressions for “time” in which paʿam is one of the elements. For example, “This is ‘at last’ (happaʿam) bone of my bones” (Gen 2:23). “And I will speak ‘but this once’ ” (ʾak-happaʿam) (Gen 18:32). “ ‘Now this time’ (ʿattâ happaʿam) will my husband be joined to me” (Gen 29:34). “ ‘Many times’ (pĕʿāmîm rabbôt) he delivered them” (Ps 106:43).[1]
Hamilton’s definition helps us realize that Adam is not simply marking a date on the calendar. He is expressing the completion of a long process. Now, at last, God has created something—someone—who can provide Adam with the necessary means to become what he was intended to be—a fully relational being. The creative activity of God is not finished until Man discovers himself in another.
The Genesis account of creation is a very powerful story. It provides the answers to the following essential questions:
1) Why am I here?
2) What is my connection to God?
3) What is my responsibility toward the rest of creation?
4) What is my connection to other human beings?
5) Who am I?
6) Who are you?
These questions are the fundamental questions of being human in the world. Every civilization in the ancient world attempted to answer these questions. But the Hebrew answers are unique in their interconnected totality. The answers to these questions have formed our conception of ourselves until we reach the modern post-biblical period. Today our society has no satisfying answers. Today we live in a desacralized world. And the toll on each of us is beyond measure.
Topical Index: ish, man, this is now, happa’am, self-awareness, Genesis 2:23
[1] Hamilton, V. P. (1999). 1793 פָּעַם. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 730). Chicago: Moody Press.
If the definition of “I” is defined by differentiation from the Other – or even opposition to it – I believe we have already found the crux of the problem.
Singular individualism, as defined and pursued by modern society, does not exist in nature; or, I believe, in heaven, either. I think it is a mythical, artificial construct. Believing it ‘exists’ (is possible to achieve), – much less defines our very existence – has, I am convinced,’ produced most of the woes of our world today.
Back to beginning (again!). And back to you, Skip. Let’s fix this problem. I mean, er, I am waiting for you to! Thank you for going over and over this ground, I need it every time you do.
Or maybe we should understand what makes us a living soul above the fleshly body.
Careful. You might be stepping into a Platonic dualism here. Please remember that the idea of a soul separate from the body (and eternally existing) comes from Pythagoras, not Moses.
Thank you, I accept that but the creation of man is so different.
God creates man blows into nostril man becomes living soul.
This does not happen with any other creation, animals, fowls sea live or woman… Surely this must say something about the uniqueness of a living soul versus the rest of creation…
Brother Skip reading David Rohl’s books ” Pharaohs and kings” and “The Lord’s of Avaris” might adjust you paridgm on just when Moses actually lived in what context he wrote and to whom his books where written…
Skip…I’m a little confused by your answer above. Are you saying that we don’t live eternally after death?
If I may…
I do not think we live eternally with our knowledge and gender. The spirit returns to God and all our natural being to dust. It is the spirit that lives eternally.
Yeshau said something similar himself. There is no recognisable entity hereafter. I won’t meet up with my twenty girlfriends and fall in love again. Nor will I meet my wife and be reunited… That is a scriptural given.
The dead shall rise and live that is the purpose of doctrine and not this creation or intention of YHVH to bring about something we do not know anything of. We just reflect on different possibilities one being eternal life.
One questions, Seeker. If the spirit returns to God and our body goes back to dust, how is it that Enoch and Elijah ware taken to haven in their bodies?
That Olga I read as visions seen as someone commented earlier regarding the meeting on the mount. I could be wrong but the only thing that outlasts the worms and insects eating away our flesh are our bones… Peter refers to baptizing the souls in the death region. This would then make living beings different entities from souls if I read direct into the words.
Skip said we need to be cautious of not moving onto a platonic dualism – an interesting choice of words. And I add we should be careful of viewing the exceptions as the norm…
Thank you.
No, I am saying that the idea of an eternal SOUL, separate from embodiment, was introduced into Western thought by Pythagoras. The notion that we are body and soul, and when we die our soul goes to heaven while the body rots in the ground is not found in the Tanakh. Its introduction into Jewish thought comes through Greek mysticism. Take a look at Jacques Ellul’s comment on this (cited in a TW long ago). The Greeks believed in an eternal soul, existing before it was embodied and after the death of the body. Christians adopted part of this except with the Trinity where they included the pre-existent soul of Jesus. But the Tanakh doesn’t view the afterlife like this. You might also look at the things I wrote about the cult of Dionysus and the lecture I gave in Israel about this.
Christians adopted part of this except with the Trinity where they included the pre-existent soul of Jesus. I’ve never heard this before. My belief, and what I’ve read in Christian literature with respect to Jesus, is that His existence began at the conception in Mary’s womb. His preexistence is en morphȩ̄ theou (in the ‘form’ of God, Philippians 2:6) according to Paul , and in the ‘form’ of “the Word”, according to the Gospel of John.
I’m not setting out to begin anew the Trinitarian debate, just stating what I see as historic Christian orthodoxy, over against your specific statement here.
I guess you misread me, or I wasn’t clear. Pythagoras introduced the idea that the soul is immortal. In Greek philosophy, the soul pre-exists its manifestation in the body. When the body dies, the soul returns to its pre-existent realm. In other words, all human beings are really represented in pre-existent soul form and are only temporarily captured in physical form. My point is that Christianity adopted this Pythagorian idea but altered it so that the soul exists eternally after birth (for most humans). That is, the soul and the body are created together by God at birth (conception) and while the body dies and returns to its material (and corrupted) realm, the soul continues to eternity. This is why Christians generally believe one will see departed “souls” in heaven. But Christianity also adds the Pythagorian idea of pre-existence in the one case of Jesus whose “soul” existed eternally before his physical birth. So Jesus is the true Pythagorian person. He exists eternally in both directions but only was manifested physically for a specific period of time.
I understand the Pythagorean view of the preexistence of the soul. I also understand that some Christians adopted a variation of this view in which the human soul, though it does not preexist, continues on post-earthly death (“immortal soul”). But, in my rather extensive studies into Christology, I’ve not once encountered a view akin to Jesus being “the true Pythagorean person”, whether in that specific language or anything approaching this particular idea. I’m not stating that no one may have had such an idea, as I can’t possibly have read everyone on this subject. If you have a specific source you can cite regarding this, I’d appreciate it.
Now, continuing to explain as I’ve always read it, Jesus is eternal in ‘both directions’, so to speak, in virtue of His Deity—Deity preexisting His human conception/birth. In other words, His humanity in no way preexists His conception. Thus, when speaking of Jesus’ preexistence, it is His Deity that is being referred to—never His humanity.
At the Incarnation, the preexistent Divine “Word” (using John’s terminology) ‘took on’ human nature, becoming Jesus of Nazareth. From that point forward, Deity (“the Word”) was ‘attached’ to humanity in the Person of Jesus the Christ. In other words, Yeshua’s humanity continues on eternally.
When Christians say “the Son of God” they may mean strictly His temporal earthly existence as the “God-man”, Jesus of Nazareth, or they may mean it in a Trinitarian sense pre-Incarnation. Or they may mean both.
Again, I’m just explaining, not intending on starting another Trinitarian debate. I think it important that everyone at least fully understand the Christian perspective so that they do not envision a distorted version of it.
Skip your historic reference is correct but sorry I read the Tanakh different.
Pythagoras lived 570 – 495 BC, did this influence Ecclesiastic 12:7 (presumed to be written somewhere between 450 – 180 BC) view where it is stated that the spirit returns to God and dust to earth from where it came? Clearly a permanent separation supporting Pythagoras’s view.
In earlier scripts it seems that burials were important to keep the remains with forefathers. I am thinking of Jacob’s wish to have his bones reburied where he came from.
That Christ the will, power and wisdom of God existed before the foundation is recorded in Corinthians by Paul… That the sending or anointment represents Christ that is a Hebraic and Christian view or is it Greek influenced. Now very confusing with only my biblical upbringing and self study.
Judi,
We will live “eternally” but not right away. This is a big subject with some seemingly conflicting verses but the righteous dead are not in heaven. Does God, in the entire Old Testament, promise anyone that they will go to heaven? Jesus said,
Joh 3:13 “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
And even after Jesus ascended Paul said,
1Th 4:15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.
In Paul’s thinking, the fallen asleep were dead (unconscious). Neither one precedes the other. That is why the euphemism “asleep” is used. We are unconscious. Your soul dies. We are “asleep”, not alive rejoicing in heaven, (nor some kind of zombie wandering around in Limbo.)
Why is there such emphasis on the future expectation of a resurrection if the dead already have some kind of immortal body, mind, soul and spirit now in heaven?
Your last question is a really good one.
Just one other comment. Jewish belief in the Tanakh is not that the soul dies. The “soul” is the animating force of God. As the body returns to its source, so does the “soul.” It isn’t ours. It’s borrowed. The owner takes it back. Resurrection is a reality for ALL of us.
I disagree. I believe you have it backwards. I quoted from the Tanakh (on Dec 15) to show precisely the opposite. The soul dies and returns to the ground and the spirit returns to God. See these and many more (JPS is Jewish Publication Society)
Eze 18:20 JPS The soul [nephesh] that sinneth, it shall die;
Lev 21:11 JPS neither shall he go in to any dead body [nephesh/soul]
A dead nephesh/soul/body is mentioned four times just in Numbers 5 and 6.
Ecc 12:7 JPS And the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it.
The spirit (not the soul) is the animating force that brings the body (dust) to life and PRODUCES a soul, which is not only a mortal LIFE BUT ALSO (its FLESHLY soulful) DESIRES, needs and feelings. (Soul food and soul music are perfectly correct uses of the word pointing out its fleshly cravings.) See these and many more fleshly passions of the soul.
Gen 34:8 JPS The soul of my son Shechem longeth for your daughter.
Exo 15:9 JPS my lust [nephesh/soul] shall be satisfied upon them;
Lev 26:15 JPS and if your soul abhor Mine ordinances . . .
Lev_26:30 JPS My (YHWH’s) soul will loathe you.
The SOUL is in the FLESH. The life is in the blood. They are almost synonymous. Many desires of the soul/flesh are necessary but when they are uncontrolled the soul wars with the urgings of the spirit (which focuses on spiritual matters.)
Gal 5:16 NASB But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. [your spirit pleases.]
Rom 7:25 NASB Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.
The laws of God are the instructions of the spirit, but the laws of sin are the instructions (the desires) of the flesh/soul/nephesh.
Thank you for the referral back to the previous block. If I understand correct soul is creature while living soul would rather be a reference to spirit. This would then also explain why Yeshau refers to a rebirth that was not understood by Nicodemus. What is earth is earth what is spirit is spirit and later life eternal… Eat and drink as we were also reminded by Yeshau not just work fun and joy. Joy, righteousness and peace in the holy spirit is the kingdom or everlasting life…
Seeker, it seems I did not make myself plain. ALL living breathing things ARE a soul. (As such, I do not think plants have a soul.) The soul and the spirit are very much different.
A robot is a reasonable allegory. The hardware is the dust, the physical elements, but alone it is dead. Electricity is the spirit, but alone, neither is it alive. But what the two of them produce together IS alive. Now it can see, think, feel, react and serve a purpose according to its programmer. Now it is a functioning soul. But when corruption in the hardware becomes too great, it dies. The electrical spirit returns to its source, the hardware rusts away and the soul ceases because it needs both to exist.
Daniel, thank you I believe I understand the principle. A living soul or spirit in biblical terms seem to imply more than just being a living entity or soul as discussed. That is as I read the records.
Thx
Skip, Eventually got it be careful of claiming the soul is trapped in the flesh while the soul is formed by the activity of the flesh….
Yes Laurita, ~ He must increase, but “I” must decrease!!! ~
Thanks Skip. I am hoping that you are about to walk us through those six questions!!
Wishing you a blessed Christmas.
What happens is the spirit is recreated? ( Born Again) original purpose? Or the other direction? What happened when it lost its original purpose?
The “man” (this man!) recognizes that his self-awareness is altered by the presence of another one like him. Yes, “this man” recognizes “the Word was made flesh…!” And his world (my “world”) will never be the same! It was the Incarnation of the Word of God (His Name, btw) that was (read IS) the “game-changer!”
For He, …stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave and being born as mortal man. And, having become (hu)man, He humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, even to the extent of dying, and the death He died was the death of a common criminal. That is why God has now lifted Him so high, and has given Him the Name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus “every knee shall bow”, whether in Heaven or earth or under the earth. And that is why, in the end, “every tongue shall confess” that Jesus Christ” is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
The fact is “He” was born. The (long-promised) Messiah was born in a barn, wrapped in swaddling clothes (this does work for crying babies, btw) and laid in a feeding trough for animals. I’m not pushing “Christmas” on anyone, but I will say there is a 1 in 365 chance He was born on December 25th. Maybe not the “date” of His birth, but the “fact” of His birth ought to be celebrated!!
I want so bad (at this point) to say, “but wait.. – there’s more!!” (a commercial for Christ?) After all, He is our “Sponsor!” Eternal life (and abundant life – remember this “today’s word?”),is “brought to you by…”