Mankind is given life (Genesis 2:7)

From Genesis 1 we learn that God is the Creator of all things, and in Genesis 2 we have more description of some of His creative acts. As in Genesis 1, there are significant similarities and differences between the creation of mankind and other creatures. 

From or out of the ground

For instance, Genesis 2 describes the formation of mankind as well as trees, beasts, and birds as being from or out of the ground: 

2:7 - Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

2:9 - Out of the ground the Lord God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

2:19 - Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.

Thus mankind’s formation from the ground is not what makes human beings unique among other creatures. Neither do the phrases “living being” and “living creature” accord with any distinction. They’re both the same Hebrew phrase, transliterated chay nephesh. 

Soul

Chay is the word for “life,” “alive,” “living,” “live,” etc. Nephesh is most often translated “soul,” “self,” and “person,” referring to human beings. But together, chay nephesh in Genesis often refers to animals and is translated “living creatures.” 

Here is how various translations handle Genesis 2:7 as it refers to the creation of mankind –

• ESV - “the man became a living creature”
• KJV - “and man became a living soul”
• GNV - “man was a living soul”
• NASB, NLT - “the man became a living person”
• NASB1995, NIV, NKJV, RSV - ”man became a living being”

While the translators seem to have gone to great lengths to find phrases that differentiate men from beasts, they are uniform in choosing to translate chay nephesh as “living creature” when the context refers to animals, as in Gen. 2:19 and 9:10-16. 

Please note the tranlations that say Adam was or became a living soul. It is incorrect to say human beings have souls. But then, if we're to translate Hebrew phrases consistently, we could say animals are souls. I’m not a Hebrew scholar, but I don’t have a problem with that even though I believe human life is sacred.

Breath of life

Is there anything special, then, in God breathing the “breath of life” into man’s nostrils? Perhaps, however two Hebrew words translated “wind,” “breath,” or “spirit”–n@shama and ruwach–are used to refer to both men and animals, as in the following:

Gen. 6:17 - "Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish.”

Gen. 7:15 - “So they went into the ark to Noah, by twos of all flesh in which was the breath of life.”

Note that “all flesh” can refer to men in 6:12, men and animals in 6:17, and animals alone in 7:15. 

If there’s any doubt that men and beasts share the “breath of life,” see Gen. 7:21-23 as well as Job 10:12 and 12:10, Psalm 146:4, and Ecclesiastes 12:7. Especially compelling are these two passages:

You hide Your face, they are dismayed; You take away their spirit, they expire And return to their dust. You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; And You renew the face of the ground. –Psalm 104:29-30* 

For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity. All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust. –Ecclesiastes 3:19-20

*The subjects of Psalm 104 are also both men and animals.

So does it mean anything that the same words or phrases can be used of men or animals? If man is not unique in his creation from clay, being a “soul,” or having God’s breath in him, are men and animals the same? Is there a sense in which people are essentially animals, albeit more advanced? 

The distinction between men and animals has been established in Gen. 1:26-28. Alone among creation, men and women are created in God’s image and likeness. 

It is borne out further in Genesis 2 when man is given a particular place to live and tend (verse 15). He is the only creature given a prohibition, in verses 16-17. He is shown as not having a fit partner among the animals, not even those most closely corresponding to him such as apes or other primates. Also in chapter 2, man is shown exerting dominion in the God-given task of naming animals and birds.

Finally, what is perhaps the greatest distinction of all is shown in the amazing description of Eve’s creation and subsequent introduction to Adam (Gen. 2:21-22). About no other creature did its mate say, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” About no other gendered pairing did God say, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” (vss 23-24). 

So what are we saying? We’re making less of the fact God gives life to men because He also gives it to animals (and plants). We’re attaching more significance to the nature of the creature. As we see in Genesis 5, the nature of the human creature is passed down through the generations. And in Genesis 9 we see that the nature of mankind as bearing the image of God does not alter with time or degeneracy.

Life is a tremendous gift, and we must value it, but God treats human lives differently than He does animal life. This is why it’s important to use the term “sanctity of human life” rather than the sloppier “sanctity of life.” 

Yes, life is sacred because it’s from God. God is the source and sustainer of physical as well as spiritual life. See John 5:26, 6:63; 1 Timothy 4:10; Jeremiah 10:10; Acts 17:24-28; Rev 4:11.

Each member of the Trinity is life-giving. Life is solely of God. If we are alive it is by the will of God, not the will or ingenuity of man.

As we proceed in our study of the biblical pro-life ethic we’ll see that life is never to be taken lightly. We praise and honor God for it. He alone has the power to decide who lives and who dies. We do place great value on plant and animal life, but not at the expense of human life.

Next: What Cain should have known: Genesis 4, part 1

______________________________

Image credit: Adam Naming the Creatures, Nathaniel Currier, 1847