Sunday School Musings

I knew that I didn’t agree with the teaching last Sunday – but I didn’t know why. After having talked with several other people and reading the articles they recommended, I began to gain a simpleton’s understanding of Biblical Anthropology; the nature of man as derived from Scripture. I found there are essentially two camps in Christian anthropological circles:

1. Dichotomy (or dualism): Man consists of a physical (body) and non-physical (soul / spirit) element. The words "soul" and "spirit" are viewed as being synonymous.
2. Trichotomy (or tripartite): Man consists of a physical (body) and two non-physical components (spirit and soul). The words "soul" and "spirit" refer to different elements.

The trichotomy view has taken many forms – most of which become confusing given only casual study such as mine. A form of this position was held by many of the early church leaders – including such notable theologians as Irenaeus and Origen. However, failing to derive support from Biblical scholars such as Augustine, the view largely disappeared from church history until the 18th century. More recently (20th century), Watchman Nee and Charles Solomon have advocated a tripartite understanding of man. Today, this position enjoys considerable support in Charismatic and Pentecostal circles.

I do not subscribe to the tripartite view of man for a host of reasons – outlined in the mini treatise below. Instead, I find the words spirit and soul to be used interchangeably in the Bible. Further, while recognizing that man can be categorized into the material and the immaterial, the two are so entwined as to be viewed as one. That is, no part is greater than the other (good part vs. evil part), and apart from one the other cannot survive. According to Mark Balthrop, dividing man into two, three (or even four) parts unnecessarily "does violence to the unity of man".

My conclusions are largely summaries of the following articles:

• David P. Scaer, "Body, Soul, and Spirit", Concordia Theological Quarterly, April 2002
• Kim Riddlebarger, "Trichotomy: A Beachhead For Gnostic Influences", Modern Reformation Magazine, July/August 1995
• Mark W. Balthrop, "Biblical Anthropology", Heritage Presbyterian Church, Wednesday Bible Study handout
• A. McCaig, "Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature", The Evangelical Quarterly 3, 1931
• R R Byrum, "Christian Theology"
• Chalres Hodge, "The Nature of Man", Systematic Theology, Vol. II, Chapter II

My original intent was to keep my points short and to the point (queue laughter). As a result, my writing on the subject fails to fully develop many of the points made by the referenced authors. I would hope that the serious reader take the time to fully digest each of the listed articles; they constitute a wealth of knowledge (and additional references) on the issue. Without further ado…

The Biblical Case Promotes Unity

As is easily demonstrated, the words for spirit and soul are constantly interchanged and practically synonymous in the Greek and Hebrew – both in the old and new testaments. Attempts to divide the two into separate elements are, according to Hodge, "Opposed to the uniform usage of scripture"

The body of Scriptural support for the interchangeable nature of the two words is staggering – especially when approached with a Hebrew (rather than a Greek) mindset and context. The following is taken directly from Mark Balthrop’s article on Biblical Anthropology:

Man is described in the Bible both as someone who is body and soul and as someone who is body and spirit:

• Matthew 10:28 (body and soul)
• 1 Corinthians 7:34 (body and spirit)
• James 2:26 (body and spirit)

Grief is referred to the soul as well as to the spirit:

• 1 Samuel 1:10 (soul)
• Isaiah 54:6 (spirit)
• John 12:27 (soul)
• John 13:21 (spirit)
• Acts 17:16 (spirit)
• 2 Peter 2:8 (soul)

Praising and loving God is ascribed to both the soul and spirit:

• Luke 1:46-47 (soul and spirit)
• Mark 12:30 (heart, soul, and mind)
• Luke 10:27 (heart, soul, and mind)

Salvation is associated with both the soul and the spirit:

• James 1:21 (souls)
• 1 Corinthians 5:5 (spirit)

Dying is described either as the departure of the soul or of the spirit:

• Genesis 35:18
• 1 Kings 17:21
• Psalm 31:5
• Matthew 27:50

Proof Texts?

The favorite trichotomy "proof texts" can also be interpreted in support of dichotomous and tetrachotomous positions. Perhaps the most common support trichotomy support text is 1 Thessalonians 5:23:

"May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Following the same line of interpretive reasoning, Luke 10: 27 (see also Mark 12:30) can just as easily be shown in support of heart, soul, and mind – adding a fourth dimension to man.

"He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"
Luke 10:27

Similarly, the word "heart" at the end of Hebrews 4:12 adds credence to the tetrachotomy view of man:

"For the word of God is living 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."

I find it impossible to believe that anyone, after reading the above, could state that the intent of either verse was to display or validate the tripartite nature of man. The reasoning is faulty and the context says otherwise.

Scripture And…

Separately, it is easily argued that trichotomy derives as much or more support from Greek philosophy (Plato) and Oriental spirituality than Scripture. The early church fathers who championed the tripartite view (Irenaeus, Origen, etc..) were heavily influenced by Platonic thought and based many of their arguments (apart from Scripture) on this understanding. More recent champions of the doctrine such as Watchmen Nee rely heavily on Oriental religiosity and "modern" psychology to enhance their arguments.

It’s not the point

The Bible does not describe man scientifically, nor does it provide us with a comprehensive psychological understanding. Attempts to divide man into constituent parts necessarily miss the point – not only of their "proof texts" (both their context and meaning), but also in the broader sense of Scripture itself. Spirituality by no means constitutes the primary point(s) of the Bible! This is not the "Good News" that Jesus came to proclaim, but rather a subplot which is easily elevated to thematic.
To quote Mark W. Balthrop of Heritage Presbyterian Church:

".. the Scriptures are not primarily interested in the constituent parts of man or in his psychological structure, but in the relationships in which he stands."

Put another way:

"We may say without much fear of contradiction that the most striking thing in the Biblical portrayal of man lies in this, that it never asks attention of man in himself, but demands our fullest attention for man in his relation to God."
-- G.C. Berkouwer

But it is important

Charles Hodge, author of Systematic Theology, coined the term "Realistic Dualism" to refer to man’s dichotomous nature. By linking the doctrine to several other key doctrines, Hodge placed immense importance on its rightful understanding:

"It [the doctrine of "Realistic Dualism"] is intimately connected with some of the most important doctrines of the Bible; with the constitution of the person of Christ, and consequently with the nature of his redeeming work and of his relation to the children of men; with the doctrine of the fall, original sin, and of regeneration; and with the doctrines of a future state and of the resurrection. It is because of this connection, and not because of its interest as a question in psychology, that the true idea of man demands the careful investigation of the theologian."

In other words, mess this up, and you open yourself to a host of errors.

It has historically served as an enabler for heresy

According to R R Byrum, "The principal reason for the opposition to Trichotomy was the use made of it to support certain heresies". Chief among these – especially in the early church was Gnosticism. Indeed, it is nearly impossible to dwell on this topic for extended periods without becoming obsessed with secret knowledge (gnosis); a heretical path well traveled.

Each of the following heresies built upon a false trichotomistic view of man:

• Gnostics: The spirit, part of the "divine essence" is incapable of sin
• Apollinarians: Christ had a human body and soul joined with the divine logos instead of the spirit or the rational part of human nature
• Semi-Pelagianism: "Native depravity" affected the soul, but not the spirit

In each case listed above, a trichotomistic anthropologic view served (serves) as an enabler of false doctrine; taking many different shapes in the process. It should also be noted that the trichotomy viewpoint is also closely associated with fringe Pentacostalism / Charismatics and Dispensationalism (ref. Scofield Bible notes, 1 Thess 5:23)

"…trichotomy allows Pentecostals to argue that because the spirit is the higher element of human nature, "speaking in tongues" is the divinely appointed means of bypassing the lower elements of human nature, such as the rationality of mind and soul. In the Pentecostal scheme, we can commune with God directly, without the hindrances of the lower elements of human nature and language. Indeed, in such schemes, we can commune with God directly, apart from any means at all. Trichotomy conveniently provides the means for a host of neo-gnostically inclined Pentecostal practices."
-- Kim Riddlebarger, Trichotomy - A Beachhead For Gnostic Influences

It often sets the material in opposition to the immaterial

Finally, the tripartite view necessarily creates a sharp antithesis between spirit and body; with the former seen as holy and the latter as evil. Matter, as created by God, should not be considered evil - just as it should not be viewed as a “tomb for the soul” which is to be gladly abandoned at death. In direct contrast, Scripture teaches that the elect will be united in a bodily resurrection (Romans 8:23, 1 Corinthians 15:12-57). This sharply contrasts with the common view of a spiritual nature of the resurrection (i.e. spirits floating amongst the clouds playing harps).

Recognizing that there exists a spiritual component of man, Hodge stresses the unity of the material with the immaterial:

"...[Man] according to the Scriptures, is a created spirit in vital union with a material organized body. The relation between these two constituents of our nature is admitted to be mysterious...the relation between the two is a vital union, in such a sense as that the soul is the source of life to the body. When the soul leaves the body the latter ceases to live."

Scripture supports this view through its description of death as the departure of either the soul or spirit (Genesis 35:18, 1 Kings 17:21, Psalm 31:5, Matthew 27:50).

Thus, it is rightful to think of man of consisting of two parts - material and immaterial, physical and non-physical – acting as one. Much in the same way that we are able to speak of the Trinity as three, yet one, we should view the dichotomy of man as one.