Are the words Spirit and Soul used interchangeably in scripture? Is man bipartite or tripartite?

Yes, I read your perception, and my response was to your suggesting that others have explained to me already what the soul is, and of course you and others do not all agree as to your perception therefore stating that others have explained what the soul is as if I was supposed to have learned from such posts is not helpful because your perception and that of others is rarely the same, and none of these perceptions has the authority of scripture.


So me not including it was a bad thing? Even though we both know it is not a valid view as to scripture? How does

it is very hard to discuss with you

that would be because you really do not discuss as I pointed out way back and I guess people think I am a smart aleck or something when I say things like that, that others have not yet seen for themselves

your response above does not even begin to address what I wrote . don't forget your white cane when you leave the house

it is very hard to discuss with you

that would be because you really do not discuss as I pointed out way back and I guess people think I am a smart aleck or something when I say things like that, that others have not yet seen for themselves

your response above does not even begin to address what I wrote . don't forget your white cane when you leave the house

well, now you do. the trend is now towards monism apparently and you can find it in that article by wiki you quoted from,

For now, until I see a reason in the scriptures to think of it differently I will continue to use biblical language and use the word soul and spirit interchangeably as it relates to the unseen part of man and that which goes to be with Christ after the body dies. (for the believer of course) Here are some of the many scripture examples that form my biblical view.

Starting with the only one New Testament verse that can be used to suggest a three part view, and then the verse that states that a soul and spirit can be separated by the Word of God, these two verses do not by themselves give me any reason to modify my understanding of all the many verses that use soul and spirit interchangeably. At this time, (I am always open to change my mind based on sound interpretation of scriptures, (not human reasonings) ) and since the many responses in this thread so far, I am still thinking that the intention of 1 Thess 5:23 is to express... "your spirit and soul, as that immaterial part of you" (what you love, what you think, decisions you make about serving God) and your body being that physical part of you, how you stay sexually pure, etc. That you stay blameless and holy as you wait for the coming of the Lord. The same with Heb 4:12, that God sees the inside of our hearts and knows what we are really like and what our motives are. So there may be an intention here of saying that the Word of God can expose whether we are lying to ourselves. The poetic Joints and Marrow gives us reason to take the Spirit and Soul as poetic as well. As "if there is a way to separate soul and spirit it is the Word of God that can do that" I am still studying this from the Greek and I appear to be on the right track.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 (ESV): ‘Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ’.:



Heb 4:12 (NIV): ‘For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart’. Soul and spirit are clearly different words and they can be ‘divided’ according to this verse.

The Greek construction of 1 Thess 5:23 (transliterated): hagiazw hymeis holoteleskai kai terew hymeis ho pneuma kai ho psyche kai ho swma terew holokleros

The literal translation is: ‘and may [the God of peace] sanctify you completely your (the) spirit and the soul and the body be preserved (completely) whole’.



Matt 10:28 (NIV): Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell’.

Matt 22:37 (NIV): ‘Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’

Mark 8:36 (NLT): ‘And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?’

Mark 12:30 (NIV): ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’

1 Cor 7:34 (NIV), ‘An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband’.

Rom 1:9 (NIV), ‘God, whom I serve in my spirit in preaching the gospel of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you’.

Genesis 35:18 (ESV): ‘And as her [Rachel’s] soul was departing (for she was dying), she called his name Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin’.

Matt 10:28 (ESV): ‘And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell [Gehenna].

Rev 6:9 (NIV): ‘When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne’.

James 2:26 (ESV): ‘For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead’.

Eccl 12:7 (ESV): ‘and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it’.

Luke 23:36 (ESV): ‘Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last’.

Luke 8:54-55 (ESV): ‘But taking her by the hand he called, saying, “Child, arise.” And her spirit returned, and she got up at once. And he directed that something should be given to her to eat’.



Is this sending a contradictory message about the naming and function of the immaterial part of a human being? Some verses state the soul leaves the body at death while others take the view the spirit departs from the body. How do we resolve this difficulty?

the evidence points to the soul and spirit being evidence for the unseen part of human beings.[/QUOTE)

Consider the Old Testament promises to rest with thy fathers until a latter time resurrection and see if it leads you anywhere

“Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?”
‭‭John‬ ‭11:23-26‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.”
‭‭John‬ ‭5:21-22, 24-25‬ ‭

Didn't know that, but now when you say it, nod nod. I've definitely noticed the tendency. Nowadays when it comes to complex teachings, people try to solve that by occam-razor-ing and simplify the teaching to make it palatable to the logical understanding, which often flies right in the face of the Bible...

The wikiquote says it is increasing,
"Modern theologians increasingly hold to the view that the human being is an indissoluble unity.[32] This is known as holism or monism. The body and soul are not considered separate components of a person, but rather as two facets of a united whole."

I would not interpret that as say, "it is trending" or that it is taking over the bipartite, or tripartite view. It says it is increasing among modern theologians. What is a modern theologian? Does it mean Liberal Theologians that do not believe that the bible is infallible or inspired?
Do we really care what is increasing among them?

that's my point, Pilgrimshope. Only Adam/Eve were created in the image of God.

The chay nephesh of Gen 1:21 is same chay nephesh of Gen 2:7.

There is no difference between the chay nephesh within mankind and the chay nephesh within creatures of Gen 1:21-25.

What makes mankind different from the creatures of Gen 1:21-25 is the image of God in which mankind was created. Only Adam/Eve were created in this image. The rest of us descendants of Adam/Eve were/are begotten after the image of our parents.

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Seth was not born in the image of God. Seth was born in image of Adam after Adam's fall.





The chay nephesh within you is the same as the chay nephesh in other living creatures. There is no difference between your chay nephesh and other animals' chay nephesh.

The only difference between mankind and other creatures is that image of God in which Adam/Eve were created. However, when they sinned, that image of God was drastically changed ... could not be fixed. It took the birth, life, giving up of life, resurrection, ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ to bring about the new creation which is now available to believers today.

At some point in the future, full transformation will take place and we will see the Lord Jesus Christ as He is and we will be like Him:

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

We are sons of God now, in this lifetime, but full realization of all that encompasses will not be known until He appears. For now [we] see through a glass darkly, but then face to face





If you are chay nephesh and animals are chay nephesh … do animals have spirit of God in them?

I found this from an article by John Woodward:

Monism has been the trend in academic circles in this century. Liberal theologians as well as neo-orthodox scholars have been advocating it. Wayne Ward summarized this trend by stating,


“Present theological and psychological emphasis is almost altogether upon the fundamental wholeness or unity of man’s being. . . “[3] This monistic perspective is also held by some evangelical scholars:

“Today the dichotomy/trichotomy issue has been largely superseded by an emphasis on the unity of the person. According to Scripture I do not consist of composite ‘parts,’ whether two or three; I am a psycho-somatic unity.” [4]

Likewise, Anthony Hoekema avoids the use of the terms “dichotomy” or “trichotomy” because they deemphasize man’s essential unity.

” . . . We must reject the term “dichotomy” as such, since it is not an accurate description of the biblical view of man. The word itself is objectionable. . . It therefore suggests that the human person can be cut into two “parts.” But man in this present life cannot be so cut. . . The Bible describes the human person as a totality, a whole, a unitary being.”5

Both Milne and Hoekema concede that man’s immaterial part separates at the time of physical death, thus they actually hold to a form of dichotomy. Physical monism, however, requires the belief that the soul does not survive the death of the body. Some theologians reconcile this in their eschatology, teaching that the soul and body are recreated by God ex nihilo at the resurrection. This view is known as recreationism.

https://gracenotebook.com/man-as-spirit-soul-and-body-chapter-3/
This article seems worth reading. It is long and the part above was simply one of the views being taught. I think the author is a Baptist and probably holds a dichotomy view. I have not read it yet, but I plan to get to it later. It promises some answers to the questions I have.