The Spirit of Man

The Spirit of Man

Thomas Allen

In “The Soul,” I showed that the Hebrews believed that the soul was mortal and ceased conscious existence when the body died. On the other hand, pagans believed that the soul was immortal. When the body died, the soul was liberated from the body to continue conscious existence elsewhere. In that article, I mention the spirit of man in passing and that like the soul, it ceased to exist when the body died.

In Babylonian Connection Between Ancient and Modern Religions (Phoenix, Arizona:  America's Promise, 1978), Stephen E. Jones gives an excellent explanation of the spirit of man (pages 20-23). A summary of his explanation follows.

Some theologians argue that the spirit of man is that part of human nature that allies with God. Also, some identify the spirit of man as what makes man a rational being. Nearly all believe that the spirit like the soul is immortal and continues to exist beyond the death of the body.

However, the Hebrew understanding of the spirit of man is the breath of God that animates the soul, which gives the body life. Thus, the soul of man contains the life-giving spirit of God. That is, the breath of life is the spirit of life. The Hebrew word for “breath” and “spirit” is the same word.

And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7)

According to Genesis 2:7, God gave man whom he formed from dust life when He breathed the breath or spirit of life into his nostrils.

(For my life is yet whole in me, And the spirit of God is in my nostrils); (Job 27:3)

As stated by Job, a person lives if he continues to breathe. Once he ceases to breathe, his body, soul, and spirit die and cease to have any conscience existence.

According to the Hebrews, man is not a spirit. Man is composed of a body (flesh) and soul (blood). His spirit is merely the air in his lungs. When one breathes, the lungs give life (spirit) to the blood (soul). Then, the blood transfers life-giving air to the body. Thus, the spirit gives life to a person, but it is not the actual person. Like the air that a person breathes, the spirit is something that the person uses, but it is not the person.

At death, the body, soul, and spirit return to the original state where they wait until the resurrection. Upon death, the body returns to dust; the soul returns to Sheol (Hades), i.e., nonexistence; the spirit returns to God from where it came. Consequently, death is a reversal of creation.

At death, the spirit (breath) separates from the soul (blood). “When the breathing stops, the blood loses its life supply, and both flesh and blood begin to corrupt in death. The air (spirit) neither lives nor dies; it simply gives life for a season and then returns from whence it came” (pp. 21-22). 

The Bible describes death as follows:

and the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it. (Eccl. 12:7)

Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; Thou takest away their breath [spirit], they [the people themselves] die, And return to their dust. (Ps. 104:29)

According to Acts, David is not in heaven. (For David ascended not into the heavens: . . . [Acts 2:34]) Therefore, “that the spirit returning to God does not imply that the person goes to heaven” (p. 22).

Likewise, when Jesus said, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said this, he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46), his spirit went to God, but he did not spend three days in heaven with his Father. John 20:17 proves that he did not go to heaven when he died. Jesus said to Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father.” Furthermore, Peter states that Jesus’ soul went to Hades, oblivion, where it had no conscience existence (Acts 2:31). 

Thus, neither man’s soul nor spirit is immortal. They cease existence when the body dies. Only when God resurrects the body do they return as they returned to Jesus when God raised Jesus from the dead.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

No Longer a Federation of Republics

 No Longer a Federation of Republics

Thomas Allen

The United States are no longer a federation of republics. That federation and the original Constitution died with Lincoln’s War. Now the United States is (notice the change in the verb from the previous sentence) a judgeocracy with an imperial president and an impotent Congress.

John Marshall, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, laid the foundation for a judgeocracy. President Abraham Lincoln established the imperial presidency with his war to suppress Southern independence. Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt carried the imperial presidency to completion.

By the middle of the twentieth century, the judicial coup d’etat had been completed. Chief Justice Earl Warren completed what Marshall had started. Now the United States are a judgeocracy with an imperial president.

Under judicial rule, federal judges under the supervision of the Supreme Court have usurped the legislative authority of the State legislatures. Federal courts have absolute control over the States even to the point of forcing State governments to levy taxes to spend on a judge’s predilection. Federal judges even intervene on purely political issues like drawing boundaries for legislative districts. The States have been reduced to little more than personal fiefdoms of federal judges.

Also, federal judges under the supervision of the Supreme Court have usurped the legislative authority of Congress. Judges, especially those on the Supreme Court, have usurped the power to rewrite laws that Congress has enacted to suit their preferences. If Congress enacts a law that they do not like, they veto it. If Congress fails to enact a law that the Supreme Court desires, it will enact such a law with a ruling on a related issue. Thus, the Supreme Court is an unaccountable legislative body. 

Moreover, the Supreme Court has even usurped the authority to amend the Constitution — however, without changing the words of the Constitution. Why bother getting two-thirds of each house of Congress and three-fourths of the States to agree on an amendment when five judges can amend it with their rulings?

What does the Supreme Court use as a guide for amending, vetoing, and promulgating laws? It certainly is not the Constitution. Instead of the Constitution, the Justices of the Supreme Court use their personal biases and prejudices.

Thus, the Supreme Court has elevated itself above the Constitution. It has claimed the sole and final power to decide what the Constitution means, and it amends the Constitution with its rulings to conform with its whims. Whatever the Supreme Court rules is the supreme law of the land. Its rulings are superior to the Constitution. (The Supreme Court gives the Constitution only cursory and perfunctory notice.)

Federal judges no longer seem able to distinguish between the judicial function and the legislative function. Since Marshall, personal biases and personal preferences are much more of a guide in their ruling than is the Constitution and even the clear wording and intent of the law.

Similarly, the executive branch has usurped the legislative authority of Congress  — often with Congress delegating its legislative power to the executive branch. Congress has created numerous regulatory agencies that have the authority to issues regulations that have the effect of law. Further, the President often issues executive orders that have the effect of law. Consequently, Congress enervates its vitality.

Thus, the United States became a judgeocracy with an imperial president, an impotent Congress, and emasculated States. The federation of republican States (nations) that the Constitution established died long ago never to be resurrected.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

The Effects of School Integration

The Effects of School Integration

Thomas Allen

Adherents of school integration promote the integration of public schools to raise the self-esteem of Blacks and, by that, eliminate the academic gap between Blacks and Whites. Furthermore, integration should lead to better race relations.

At least the self-esteem of Blacks has been raised. Now, no other racial group approaches the self-esteem of Blacks. Yet, the academic gap between Blacks and Whites remains as far apart as ever. Moreover, race relations have only improved by Whites becoming self-hating racial nihilists, many of whom are consumed with political correctness and wokeism. Many Blacks despise Whites more than ever. (How can any self-respecting Black, or any other person, respect any White person who hates his own race so much that he wants to genocide it?)

Along with its failures to close the academic gap, integration has brought many other undesirable effects. The following is a list of some of these effects.

– Integration has caused many Whites to flee cities in large numbers. As a result, many major cities have become majority-run Black cities with the accompanying deterioration.

– Integration has increased interracial marriages, and, thus, is genociding the American Negro.

– In integrated schools, Black girls suffer from White girls taking away potential boyfriends. (These White girls need to explain why they want to genocide Blacks.)

– Once the student body becomes about 20-percent Black, Black culture and customs begin to dominate, and the school is lowered to the level of Blacks.

– Instead of Whites making Blacks better students by becoming a model for Blacks, Blacks become a model for Whites. Consequently, many Whites begin acting like Blacks.

– Although integration is supposed to raise the academic standards of Blacks, it has failed to do so. Not only has it failed to raise the academic standards of Blacks, but it has also often lowered the academic standards of Whites.

– Blacks in integrated schools often have lower test scores than Blacks in predominantly Black schools. Thus, Blacks in integrated schools often feel more intellectually inferior to Whites than do Blacks in predominately Black schools.

– Although integration offers some academic advantages to the more intelligent Blacks, it demoralizes the less intelligent Blacks. (The less intelligent Blacks far outnumber the more intelligent Blacks.)

– Though standard test scores for Blacks have risen during the era of integrated schools, the rise was similar for Blacks in integrated schools and Blacks in predominantly Black schools. Therefore, integration is not the cause. Nevertheless, the gap between Black and White students remains about the same no matter whether Blacks are in integrated schools or predominantly Black schools.

– At least, integration has shown that Blacks do not need to be in integrated schools to learn. Further, they do not need to sit next to a White person to learn. They can learn just as well, if not better, in a predominantly Black school. (Although they will not admit it, most integrationists believe that Blacks are so inferior that they cannot learn unless they sit next to Whites.)

– Integration has led to a large number of Blacks dropping out of school before they graduate — especially when they attend schools in White neighborhoods. 

– Integration leads to the resentment of Black parents about their children being disciplined more often than White students.

– Also, integration has reduced role models for academic success for Blacks because fewer Black adults teach Black students. Often, Black students do not relate to White teachers.

– Frequently, integration removes teachers from the neighborhood in which they teach, i.e., the teachers live in one neighborhood and teach in another. Thus, teachers are less involved with their students. Under segregation, Black teachers were part of the Black community, remained in contact with parents, and provided Blacks with the support that they needed.

– Integration destroys community cohesion, especially for Blacks, as students are assigned to schools outside their community. This is also true for Blacks when Whites are assigned in large numbers to previously Black schools.

– Moreover, integration has led to school systems working so hard to achieve integration that they neglect the children.

– Integration has taught many Blacks that integration is not necessarily the best means for achieving quality education for their children. However, integrationists, White and Black, such as the NAACP types, have never learned this lesson — probably, because of their low opinion of the common Black.

– Also, integration leads to the disdainfulness of Blacks for the paternalistic attitude of White integrationists, who believe that Blacks cannot learn unless Whites are in the classroom and cannot succeed without the company of Whites.

– Further, integration raises the racial consciousness of Blacks and causes Whites to have a more negative attitude toward Blacks. Accordingly, integration reinforces Blacks’ stereotypes of Whites and Whites’ stereotypes of Blacks. (Studies have shown that 75 percent of racial stereotypes are at least partially accurate and 50 percent are completely accurate.)

– Although integration has failed to reduce White prejudice toward Blacks, it has increased Black prejudice toward Whites.

– Overall, Whites students have suffered from integration. Black students are a bad influence on Whites. Moreover, academic standards have been lowered to accommodate Blacks, who on average are less intelligent than Whites.

For the most part, nearly all the predictions about the great results of school integration that the integrationists made before the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 was enacted have turned out to be wrong. The opposite of what the integrationists predicted has come to past, which the opponents of the law predicted would happen.

Reference

Wolters, Raymond. Race and Education, 1954-2007. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri Press, 2008.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More social issues articles.