Three-fold nature of Man

And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. - Deut. 6:5

The term "heart" here does expresss the conscious inner nature of man whereas the term "soul" has reference to the outward expression of that conscious inner nature in the "life" or "as a man thinketh in his heart SO IS HE" in his life. The term "strength" is the power that makes the inward conscious nature expressed in the outer life. This is the only way that the COMPLETE inward and outward expression of obedience by man can be conveyed. This is the immediate context, that God desires the COMPLETE conscious expression of obedience both inwardly and outwardly and that is why the context goes on to emphasize the outward expression as both the inward and outward are inclusive in these three terms.


The point here in Deuteronomy is the same as in Matthew that man is responsible to express complete CONSCIOUS obedience to God so that the inward conscious expression of this obedience is manifest in everything said and done or his expressed life is that of obedience as well.

In addition, the term "heart" as used in the Old Testament is not the only word used to express the conscious inward aspect of man. When the intellectual aspect is emphasized the Hebrews use the term "mind" or directly associate terms to express the intellectual aspect with the term "heart" (e.g. "for as a man THINKETH in his heart so IS HE). The Old Testament uses the term "heart" in some cases is used to simply emphasize the emotional aspect of affection rather than intellectual.

My point is this. Your argument is only valid if the Old Testament used only the term "heart" for the inward conscious expression of man OR if the Old Testament did not use other terms to express varied aspects of the inward man OR if the Old Testament did not use the term "heart" in contexts to emphasize intellectual versus emotional aspects. None of these are true. Therefore, Christ may add terminology to this command in order to express the same variety of aspects found in the use of "heart" in the entire Old Testament context as well as other Old Testament synonyms used either separately from the term "heart" but have to do with the conscious inner self-expression or terms which emphasize the very same aspects that the Hebrew term "heart" expresses in certain contexts (intellect/mind or affection/heart).

Moreover, when "heart" and "mind" are found in the same context the term "heart" emphasizes the emotional/affections and the "mind" emphasizes the intellection/thinking aspect of the inward conscious self.

Therefore you argument is mute as you cannot possibly restrict the conscious inner self-expression to the one word "heart" in the Old Testament nor can you deny that the term "heart" in the Old Testament is not used to emphasize DIFFERENT aspects of the inner conscious self nor can you deny that other Hebrew terms are used to emphasize those varied aspects of the inward conscious self. Thus, it is perfectly legitimate for Christ to ADD other terms in His use of this quotation for broadening the understanding of the inward and outward conscious expression of the personality, especially when the broader New Testament context confirms such distinctions (Heb. 4:12; 1 Thes. 5:23).

Mt 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

Mr 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Mr 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength,

Lu 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind;

In Deuteronomy the term "heart" stands for the entire inward conscious expression, whereas the term "soul" takes in the entire outward expression of that inward conscious self and the term "strength" is the modus operandi between the two.

In the Gospel accounts the Lord adds the term "mind" or "understanding" with the term "heart" in order to give the fuller expression of the "heart" content in the Old Testament so as to emphasize both the emotional/affection aspect with the intellectual/mind aspect. The term "soul" gives the outward obedient expression of both mind and affection and the term "might" or "strength" gives the modus operandit between the inward and outward expression.

There is no contradiction, no conflict between either the context of Deut 6 or with the overall use of the term "heart" in the Old Testament or with its synonyms.

 

Your welcome. I am sorry I failed to convince you of this truth. It was a pleasure discussing it and many blessings to you as well.

Walter

 

It is obvious that you don't understand what the soul is but to say that no one can rise above your level is a little egotistic.

The Greek term translated "soul" is also translated life. It is the conscious inner (soul) and outer (life) self-expression of man. The inner soul is the seat of self-consciousness expressed in the activity of the intellect, will and affections. The inner activity of intellect, will and affections is manifest in the daily life of words and actions or as the Old Testament says "as a man thinketh in his heart so is he." The New Testament tells us to set our "affections on things above" or "think on these things" because what we think on or set our affections upon is what controlls our attitude, words and actions = walk = our life.

You may not agree with me but I guarantee you will not be able to honestly and objectively overthrow this definition.

 

I don't think you understand simple English. The soul IS the conscious self expression of human life consisting inwardly of intellect, will and affections and expressed through the body by words and actions. When you die the soul or the conscious self consisting of the personal intellect, will and affections goes to be with the Lord. In heaven it continues to be your personal living self-expression of intellect, will and affections.

This conscious living self-expression is found all through the scriptures and the terms of intellect, will, affections are constantly and consistently attributed to it.

If you don't agree that is one thing but if you can't understand that is another thing. I believe the human soul is no harder to explain and see in scriptures than to explain and see the human body. The human body is the vehicle of expression for the soul and spirit of man.

The immaterial (spiritual) part of man consisting of spirit and soul are placed in their proper order and relationship with each other with the body in 1 Thes. 5:23

The spirit of man is the seat of other world consciousness where communion with Satan or God occurs (Eph. 2:2-3; Rom. 8:14,16) . Whoever in the spiritual world indwells or controls the human spirit controls the soul and body. The soul controls the body as the body is the vehicle of self-expression with the outer world. Therefore Ecclesiastes 9:5 teaches that when the vehicle of expression is dead and buried then all soul expressions (hate, knowledge, love, etc.) ceases to exist UNDER THE SUN because the vehicle of soul expression is UNDER THE SOD.

If you don't understand what I am saying that is one thing. But if you disagree with what I am saying that is another thing.

 

I don't agree with that position but you are in pretty good company as that was the position of Charles Spurgeon

 

The literal Hebrew says "dying that shalt surely die." Death was a process rather than instant. For example, God said "in the day" they eat they eat "dying that shalt surely die." They did not die physically in the day they ate. Physically he died over 930 years later. However, the process of physical death began that very day (aging process). Their soul did not die. Intellectual, volitional and emotional self expression continued to exist another 930 years. They suffered spiritual death instantly in that day. God breathed plural "lives" (Hebrew plural) into Adam. Spiritual life, soulish life, physical life.

Paul talks about physically alive people being previously "dead" and yet some aspect of them other than physical life being quickened (Eph. 2:1). While being "dead" in this sense their soul expressions were very active for Satan (Eph. 2:2-3).

Humans are born physically alive but spiritually dead. Their soulish functions of self-expression are very active until physical death. In physical death the lost person's immateral substance is separated from God into hades. At the resurrection their immaterial substance is reunited with their body and their whole person is separated in the Lake of fire forever which is the "second death."

 

I don't recall ever saying that anyone was "created" dead. Mankind is "born" dead in regard to their spirit. Union with Satan or God has to do with your spirit. I believe the human spirit is the temple or dwelling place of either demons or the Spirit of God (Eph. 2:2; Rom. 8:14,16). When a person is regenerated Satan is booted out or his representative (the law of sin) is removed and The Holy Spirit takes up residence.

It is this UNION of spirits (Holy Spirit and human spirit) that unites us to eternal life. It is this "inward man" born and indwelt by the Spirit that "I" the conscious expression of Paul = soul (Rom. 7:18-25) must "put on" in his mind and affections that the will as empowerd by the Spirit of God makes manifest in the outer life of words and deeds.

Notice in Romans 7:18-25 that Paul sees three aspects of himself. There is the pronoun "I" the conscious inner self (soul - affections, will, intellect) that delights in the "inward man" (regenerated spirit) who wars after the "law of sin" dwelling in and operating through his members (body).

Paul (conscious self = will, intellect, affections) refers to "I" who delights in the law of God after the "inward man" (regenerated spirit) but who is in a war with the law of sin that operates in and through his body. Therefore "I" is not the "inward man" nor is it "my members" or body.

 

Sorry, it can't be read that way. This is not a statement looking back at something that has already occurred and its results (as you interpret it to read) but an advance warning of what will happen the day they should sin.

However, even if we read it your way, then the total man should have died the very day they ate but clearly the total man did not die that day. Neither is the total man born again as evidence by the continuing dying of the physical body of all who have been born again.

Jesus told the theif he would be in paradise that very day. Paul used the Aorist infintives to say "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." Simeltaneous action with no separation gap of time. Something was no longer at home in the body when physical death occurred and that something went to be with the Lord immediately as the Aorist infinitives make it simeltaneous action.