Genesis 2:7

Patristic

The Church Fathers interpreted Genesis 2:7 from various anthropological perspectives, not always reducible to Platonic dualism. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202), in his Adversus Haereses (especially V,6,1 and V,7,1), developed an explicit tripartite anthropology: the perfect man is composed of flesh (sarx/caro), soul (psyche/anima), and spirit (pneuma/spiritus). For Irenaeus, the 'breath of life' (nišmat ḥayyîm) in Genesis 2:7 is not the soul but the Spirit of God that enlivens man; the image of God is something dynamic and progressive, not a static soul-body dualism. Augustine of Hippo (354-430), in De Genesi ad Litteram VII,1-28 and De Trinitate XIV-XV, interpreted the verse as the infusion of the rational and immortal soul by God, adopting a position closer to Middle Platonism, though nuanced: man is a composite substance of soul and body, the soul being the image of God by virtue of its intellective capacity. Tertullian (c. 160-220), in De Anima (especially chapters 3-22), argued that the soul—infused through the divine breath—possesses a subtle corporeality (corpus tenue), transmitted by traducianism from Adam; this distinguishes him radically from Greek dualism, since the soul is not incorporeal but of a refined material nature.

Reformed

Reformed theology, following Calvin, has generally adopted a dichotomous anthropology (body and soul/spirit), viewing the 'soul' as the immaterial and immortal part of the human being. Calvin, in his Institutes, discusses the nature of the soul as the seat of reason and will, and its immortality. Although he recognizes the unity of the human being, the distinction between body and soul is fundamental to his soteriology and eschatology.

Interpretive tension: Tension arises when trying to reconcile the holistic Hebrew view of 'nephesh' as the complete living being with the need to maintain a clear distinction between body and soul for doctrines such as the immortality of the soul or the intermediate state, which are theological inferences necessary for the system but not explicitly developed in Genesis 2:7.

Arminian

The Arminian tradition, through figures like Wesley, has also held a dichotomous anthropology, where the soul is the immortal and conscious part of the human being, created by God. Human free will, central to Arminianism, is often associated with the soul's capacity to choose. The interpretation of Genesis 2:7 aligns with the idea that God infuses a 'divine spark' or a rational soul that enables relationship with God and moral responsibility.

Interpretive tension: Similar to the Reformed tradition, the tension lies in the need to infer an inherent immortality of the soul and a clear ontological separation between body and soul to support the doctrine of moral responsibility and eternal destiny, without the text of Genesis 2:7 explicitly establishing it as a separate 'part'.

Contemporary

Contemporary biblical Hebrew scholars and theologians such as John Walton, J. Richard Middleton, and N.T. Wright have emphasized the holistic Hebrew view of the human being. They argue that 'nephesh' in Genesis 2:7 does not refer to a separate immaterial part, but to the complete person as a living being animated by the breath of God. This perspective seeks to correct the overlay of Greek philosophical categories onto the biblical text, promoting a more integrated anthropology that values both the body and the 'life' or 'being' of the person. It is emphasized that immortality is not an inherent property of the 'soul', but a gift from God.