Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Pastor Mark Eddy" <markeddy AT adams.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pastor Mark Eddy" <markeddy AT adams.net>
To: "Matthew Miller" <biblicalscribe AT hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] nefesh revisited


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Miller" Subject: [b-hebrew] nefesh revisited
>
>
> > I guess what I was asking was specifically how the idea of breath and soul
> > became body or corpse. Any ideas on that particular question? Thanks,
> > Matthew R. Miller
>
> I agree partially with what Liz (seconded by others) has already written. 
> NEPHESH doesn't mean "breath."
> Instead it seems to mean something like "an animated being" or perhaps 
> "what animates a body.". In Gen.
> 1:20f sea creatures are called NEPHESH CHAYAH (living being, or living 
> soul). Sea creatures don't have
> "breath." Land animals do (Gen. 1:24 & 30; 2:19) and so does Adam (Gen. 
> 2:7). But breathing is not a
part
> of the definition of NEPHESH. Being or possessing a NEPHESH seems to 
> distinguish between plants (without
> it) and animals/mankind (with it).
>
> Also if a NEPHESH was always alive, there would have been no need to use 
> the adjective "living" to
> describe it. So already in these first 6 biblical uses of NEPHESH the 
> possibillity is there that a
NEPHESH
> could be dead, since in each of these cases Moses added the adjective 
> "living." Obviously there could be
a
> dead NEPHESH. So we should not be surprised when Lev. 21:11 says that 
> NAPHSHOTH are dead.
>
> As Ben Crick wrote, by synecdoche (a figure of speech, in which a part is 
> used to designate the whole)
the
> Hebrew Bible can refer to any animal or person as a NEPHESH. We have taken 
> this usage into English, as
in
> "how many souls are on my church membership list?" The word "souls" stand 
> for the people, not just a
> certain part of them. So often we should translate NEPHESH as "person" or 
> "being" rather than as "soul"
> (unless we understand that we're using a figure of speech).
>
> So in answer to your question, "the idea of breath and soul" never "became 
> body or corpse". Christian
> theology has made distinctions between body, soul, and spirit. But then 
> people have read this word
"soul"
> back into the OT, using the limited theological sense, instead of letting 
> the OT usage of NEPHESH speak
> for itself. I know. I used to argue "people have souls; animals don't." I 
> can't say that any more. I
think
> I can say "people have spirits, animals don't." But biblically (at least in 
> the OT) animals also do
"have
> souls" or maybe we should says "animals are souls." And these souls (if 
> that's still what we want to
call
> them) can be either living or dead.
>
> But we need not resort to mythology to explain this sort of thing. Nor must 
> we deny that the OT teaches
> that there is an immortal part of a person. Appearances of God in the OT is 
> visible form, even human
form
> (to Abraham, accompanied by two angels in human form), have been seen as 
> appearances of the
pre-incarnate
> Christ, not left-over myths about gods in human form. Gen. 1 states that 
> God (plural in Hebrew).made man
> in His image. I believe that the myth-makers got that turned around, and 
> they made gods in our image.
>
> What makes God a living God is not that He possesses a body but His is a 
> spirit (already in Gen. 1:2).
> Ecclesiastes 12:7 describes what happens to a human being at death: "the 
> dust returns to the earth as it
> was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it." Perhaps this is where you 
> got the idea of "breath"
having
> something to do with life. Although Gen. 2 does not use the word RUACH for 
> breath, in other passages
RUACH
> is translated variously as spirit, wind, or breath. But that's a whole 
> other topic. But in general both
> the OT and NT talk more about the resurrection than about what the spirit 
> of a dead person might be
doing
> now. That's another topic too.
>
> I hope this helps a little.
>
> Mark Eddy
>