How do those who believe man is tripartite respond to Gen. 2:7, "the man became a living soul"? Those who believe that man is bipartite (a soul consisting of body and spirit) cite Gen. 2:7 as proof that man does not have a soul, but rather, man is a soul. Consequently, they deny any assertion that a soul continues to exist after the death of the body (i.e., disembodied soul). Yet, certain scriptures seem to confirm the existence of an embodied soul, such as 1 Thes. 5:23,


  And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. (KJV)


How do those who believe that man is tripartite answer the objection (from those who believe that man is bipartite) that a man is a living soul and therefore does not have a soul, based on Gen. 2:7?
Gen. 2:7, which states that "the man became a living soul" (thereby implying that "the man" = "the living soul"), seems to conflict with 1 Thes. 5:23 which states that man is composed of "the spirit and the soul and the body" (τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα). Is man a soul or does man have a soul?

The apparent contradiction can be reconciled if we understand that the author of Gen. 2:7 is using the Hebrew word נפש (Greek ψυχή) as a synecdoche of part for the entire person.

In Approaching Jehovah’s Witnesses in Love: How to Witness Effectively without Arguing, Ch. 6, Wilbur Lingle wrote,



In Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, p. 840, Ethelbert William Bullinger defines the synecdoche of part:



Hence, נפש is used to represent the entire man because it represents one of the more important parts of man.