Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 6)
By John Woodward
HOLISTIC TRICHOTOMY
Holistic Trichotomy Proposed
Before seeking to answer theological objections to trichotomy, this model needs to be defined more precisely. Delitzsch gave attention to true and false trichotomy, and Heard did the same. Dichotomist Gordon Clark acknowledges that some writers have refuted a crude form of trichotomy, yet he was not aware of any current proponents of a less objectionable form of it. He compared trichotomy to man consisting of three separable elements, using an example from chemistry. He compared dichotomy to a compound like NaCl, but withheld biblical approval of this analogy (while maintaining dichotomy). He then compared trichotomy to a compound of three elements--H2SO4. [151] It seems the crude analogy can stigmatize trichotomy without a similar objec-tion to dichotomy. This raises the issue of the need to accurately define terms and clarify a model of trichotomy that does not go beyond what is written in Scripture. The writer's proposed title for this expression of doctrine is "holistic trichotomy."
The first aspect of this model is to affirm man's basic unity. Physical death, which separates the soul from
84
the body until the resurrection, is an abnormal state; it is outside of God's primary design for man. Hence, the Hebrew perspective of man's primary unity is valued. A human is "one" in regard to personhood, identity, responsibility, and ultimate destiny. Although Paul distinguished sin in one's members as distinct from the ego, he did not absolve the individual of personal responsibility for his actions (Rom 7:17). The detailed study on the soul and spirit in this paper is not intended to emphasize separation within man. If the contrast of three and one in this nomenclature of holistic trichotomy is disapproved of by the dichotomist, it should be noticed that terms such as "conditional unity" and "psychosomatic unity" (versions of dichotomy) are no less problematic to the monist.
The more difficult task is to find terms that accurately convey the degree of distinction between body, soul, and spirit. Theologians have used a variety of expressions in defining the soul's distinction (or lack of it) from the spirit. Phrases describing the soul include "constituent part" (Hoekema), "substantive entity" (Buswell), "substance" or "part" (Strong), "essential element" (Hodge), and "constituent element" (Berkhof). These authors do not regard soul and spirit to be distinct parts according to these terms; they view the soul and spirit as having have a functional rather than an ontolo-gical distinction. Trichotomists have used terms such as "parts," "elements," "substances," "natures," "portions," "aspects," and "components." Thus, it is necessary to clarify the terms used in defining a model of man. Many
85
traditional terms are misleading; they conceptualize the spirit as a kind of separate, spiritual layer. Some have insisted that for man to have three parts, the parts must necessarily be capable separation and auto-nomous existence. However, holistic trichotomy concedes that the wording of Heb 4:12, "the division of soul and spirit," does not require the possibility of having a separate existence. Therefore, the soul cannot exist apart from the spirit in the way body and soul can. This view avoids the objection of scholars who argue that man has only two elements (body and soul). Likewise the ontological distinction between soul and spirit does not require that they be distinct in essence; the soul contains the spirit and both share an immaterial nature. This writer agrees with Delitzsch in distinguishing the spirit's substance from that of the (complete) soul, but without designating the spirit as being a separate entity.
Holistic trichotomy has no problem with seeing the fundamental duality in the individual as body and soul; he is material and immaterial, physical and non-physical, corporeal and non-corporeal. If this admission seems to allow the dichotomist to deny the spirit's distinct existence, one should note than some evangelical dichoto-mists would rather be monist--the only impediment being the biblical data about the separation that occurs in physical death. Yet, Adam would have had both a material and immaterial substance even if death did not enter human history (causing the soul to separate from the body temporarily at death and proving this duality). Even so,
86
the spirit can be distinct from the soul without having to prove this distinction by a separate, independent existence from it. Some regard this kind of distinction in the immaterial realm as an unnecessary refinement, yet such precision is scriptural. For example, in interpreting the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, one must discern that the Holy Spirit indwells the believer's imma-terial part as "one spirit" (1 Cor 6:17) without deifying man (as in the nirvana state of Hinduism).
The threefold makeup of man fits with many aspects of his design and role. In regard to life, the body has biological life, the soul has personal life, and the (regenerated) spirit has eternal life (cf. the usage of the New Testament vocabulary for life: bios , psuche , and zoe). In regard to aptitude, the body is fitted for the environ-ment of earth, the soul is fitted for personal relation-ships, and the spirit is fitted for worship (John 4:23; Rom 12:11). In regard to spiritual gifts, the body can carry out the soul's decisions, and the soul can cooperate with the spirit (when endued with a gift). Paul indirectly confirms this distinction in his corrective remarks to the Corinthians: "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding [soul] is unfruitful." (1 Cor 14:14 cf. 14:2,15,16). In regard to awareness, the body is sense-conscious, the soul is self-conscious, and the (regenerated) spirit is God-conscious (1 Cor 2:14). In regard to organic qualities, the life of the body is distinct from the life of plants, the life of the soul is distinct from the life of animals (depending upon higher reason instead of instinct),
87
and the life of the born-again believer's spirit is distinct from the unbeliever's spirit (Eph 2:1; Jude 19).
In the soul and spirit there are a variety of func-tional attributes. These faculties involve both parts, but are primarily attributed to one or the other. Watchman Nee's extensive work is representative of the allocation of faculties to the soul and spirit among trichotomist writers in this century. Nee identified the faculties of the soul as will, intellect, and emotions. The spirit's faculties include intuition, communion, and conscience. [152] The flesh, when used ethically, is associated with the soul. The thought patterns, emotional conditioning, and habits of man in a fallen world are still hostile to the Spirit of God (Gal 5:16). The heart seems to be used as a synonym for the soul and spirit together, with an emphasis on values and affections.
Analogies for Holistic Trichotomy
The task of defining the distinction of spirit from soul requires theological precision and exegetical sensi-tivity; concrete terms are used for abstract concepts. A term that may be useful in clarifying the spirit's distinc-tion from soul is that of "organ" (as in an organ of the body). Just as the body has a plurality of organs, yet is one organism, so the soul (a spiritual organism) has a distinct organ, i.e., the spirit. The biblical data support the distinctive usage of spirit as it relates to man's
88
makeup. As an organ has a particular, distinct function in the organism, so the spirit has a distinctive function in the soul. The spirit is the organ that "died" at the fall, and is regenerated at conversion. To enhance this analogy, this organ can be compared to the physical eye, serving the soul as "the lamp of the Lord" (Prov 20:27). This parallel is illustrated in Christ's warning of the use of the eyes: "The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore, when your eye is good, your whole body also is full of light. But when your eye is bad, your body also is full of darkness" (Luke 11:34). Similarly, if the human spirit is unregenerate, the mind has no true, personal knowledge of God. The Holy Spirit is the One Who regenerates and sanctifies the believer; the human spirit is the primary locus of that communion.
It seems to this writer that the symbolism of the tabernacle's Holy Place and Holy of Holies (as Luther observed) can be a useful construct in clarifying the kind of distinction between soul and spirit. What at first may be an unexpected comparison becomes more reasonable when one recalls the believer's role as a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; Col 1:27). The tabernacle had a court-yard with a fenced perimeter (like the physical body), and one structure for the ministry of the priests. The ques-tion, "is the immaterial aspect of man composed of one part or two?" may be compared to the question, "Was the taber-nacle building one part or two?". In one sense, it was one building, distinct from the courtyard, and overlaid with protective skins. Even so the soul is often used in Scrip-
89
ture to denote the immaterial aspect of man. Yet, the tabernacle building was designed by God as having two parts. The Holy of Holies was only separated from the Holy Place with a curtain (a less obvious distinction than the entrance to the building from the courtyard). The Holy of Holies was unknown experientially, except for the high priest who entered it on the Day of Atonement. Likewise, the distinc-tion of the spirit from the soul does not rest on empirical data; it rests on revelation.
Holistic trichotomy differs from dichotomy by insisting on the ontological distinction between soul and spirit. The human spirit is more than that a particular function, attribute, aspect, capability, or relationship of the soul. The spirit is a part of the soul, an organ, or a component. Returning to the analogy of the tabernacle, the Holy of Holies had properties, features, and roles that separated it from the Holy Place. The furniture was different, its accessibility was different (only the high priest), its frequency of access was different (only on Yom Kippur), and its source of light was different (no lampstand as in the Holy Place). Even so, man's spirit can be illumi-nated only by the Spirit of God, not by naturalistic inquiry through the physical senses (1 Cor 2:11-14).
Other analogies may facilitate a Scriptural concep-tion of the distinction of soul and spirit in a holistic context. For example, the human brain is one organ, yet the dynamics of right and left hemisphere are more than merely different functions of one part. Another potential analogy is the composite nature of the nation of Israel in the Old
90
Testament. Israel was one covenant people, yet in the era of the divided kingdom there were different kings, different approaches to worship, and different exiles. A theological
parallel could be seen the nature of the trinity. God the Father is a distinct person from God the Holy Spirit, yet both are spirit (and neither has clothed themselves with human nature as the Son has). These illustrative parallels do not prove trichotomy; they are suggestive of the analogies which may be useful in conveying the twofold immaterial nature of man as soul and spirit.
Summary
Defining this model does not remove the mystery of the inner workings in the immaterial part of man. Dichoto-mists affirm that there remains a mystery in how the body and soul interact. Berkhof confessed, "Body and soul are distinct substances, which do interact, though the mode of their interaction remains a mystery for us." [153] How much more should theologians use sensitivity in debating the finer distinctions of the soul and spirit.
Holistic trichotomy retains the Old Testament perspective on the essential unity of the human person, while fully accepting the more detailed, distinctive identification of the human spirit as revealed in the New Testament epistles. It also recognizes the two fundamental aspects of man's existence: material and immaterial. Its essential difference from dichotomy is the refusal to view
91
the spirit and soul are mere synonyms of the same ontolo-gical part of man. Instead, the spirit can be described as an organ of the soul, analogous to the relationship of the eye to the physical body, or like the relationship of the Holy of Holies to the Holy Place in the tabernacle.
This proposed model of man may be acceptable to the dichotomist camp, for only two parts of man are said to be separable. Names are just linguistic tools to help people understand reality. If the concepts of the distinction of soul and spirit are defined as proposed in this paper are accepted, the name of the model is secondary. It is conceivable that those who emphasize the unity of man could acknowledge the soul and spirit distinction with a desig-nation like "complex monism." Those who emphasize duality, yet concede the soul and spirit distinction, might use a designation such as "distinctive dichotomy." The main task for biblical psychology, however, is this articulation of scriptural definitions of man's constituent parts and related faculties. The goal of this chapter has been to affirm insights about man's makeup that do not go beyond what is written, but to accurately express the implications of New Testament revelation on the subject. The next chapter will acknowledge prominent challenges to trichotomy as a test of its defensibility.
151 Clark, The Biblical Doctrine of Man , 33.152 Nee, The Spiritual Man , 1:31-38.
153 Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 195.
by John Woodward
The purpose of Grace Notes is to highlight the dynamics of abundant living as summarized in Galatians 2:20: "I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me" (NKJV). Many articles are available online to freely use for personal ministry, newsletters, etc.. (To find an article by topic or key word, click "Grace Notes"/search.) Please pray for God's blessing on this internet ministry.
Grace Fellowship is an international discipleship, counseling, and training training ministry. (GFI does not charge fees for counseling, but is supported through tax deductible contributions. In Canada, through Crossways to Life, 79 Weber St. E. Kitchener, ON. N2H 1C6
Phone: 519-696-2500 http://www.CrossWaystoLife.org.) To request resources or inquire about hosting a conference, please contact us: john@gracenotebook.com.
Grace Notes editor - Dr. John Woodward
from Grace Fellowship International
President of GFI - Dr. Charles Solomon,
P.O. Box 368, Pigeon Forge, TN 37868 USA.
Phone: 865-429-0450 Fax: 865-429-0144
Home page: http://www.GraceFellowshipIntl.com
Home study: http://www.GFICounselingInstitute.com
Online video and audio: http://www.GFImultimedia.com
Online video channel: http://www.YouTube.com/gracefellowshipintl
Multi-language books & tracts: http://www.SolomonPublications.org
"Man as Spirit, Soul, and Body": http://www.BiblicalPsychology.net
Praise & prayer news: http://gfipraiseandprayer.blogspot.com
Children's Ministry: http://www.CarawaySt.com
GFI Bookstore: GFI site and 1-888-66GRACE (toll free in USA)
Online giving: http://www.gracefellowshipintl.com/ Home / Give
Subscribe ...
Subscribe to receive Grace Notes for free!
You may also wish to read ....
Next article by date ...
The Resurrection Life by John Woodward
Similar Titles ...
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 1) by John Woodward
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 2) by John Woodward
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 3) by John Woodward
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 4) by John Woodward
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 5) by John Woodward
Man As Spirit, Soul, and Body (Chapter 7) by John Woodward
Other publications by John Woodward ...
Jekyll or Hyde? by John Woodward
The Stinkin' Visitor by John Woodward
Bearing the Cross by John Woodward
Maladjusted Flesh by John Woodward
Well-Adjusted Flesh by John Woodward
New Imprinting by John Woodward
Proof of Identity by John Woodward
The Basis of Your Identity by John Woodward
Corporate Identity by John Woodward
The Value of Humility by John Woodward
Other articles belonging to these series ...
Biblical Counseling Series
Theological Papers Series
View Comments
Add Comment