Bishop's Epistle: SORTING OUT THE CONFUSION (Biblical Anthropology)

Understanding the Difference Between the Body, Soul and Spirit

There are those who build a doctrine from Genesis 2:7 which would postulate that there is no soul separate from the body. The “soul,” they would say, is formed by the union of the “breath” of God with the physical body (sōma). Therefore, upon death the “breath” (spirit) of God returns to whence it came and the life, called the “soul,” is no more.

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Historical Christianity has read this text in a much different way. The orthodox have said that there is a dualism to man. Two substances. A body of flesh and an immaterial substance called, alternately, soul or spirit. A substance is made known by its actions. The idea of substance is one of the truths of reason. Universally, men are aware of their thoughts, feelings and volitions. We also know that these thoughts, feeling and volitions are in constant flux, but that there is a “something” of which they are the manifestation. This “something” is an entity. A nonentity does not act and produce effects.

“Whatever acts is, and what is is an entity” (Hodge).

We follow Hodge’s reasoning further to agree that we can know nothing of substances but by their phenomena. So, then, when we witness, in our reasoning, phenomena that is not only different but also incompatible we conclude that it is produced by different substances. So, since phenomena of matter is different from the phenomena of mind, we must conclude that matter (the body) and mind (the soul) are two different substances. “To identify matter with mind, or mind with matter; it is necessary to pretend that sensation, thought, volition, are reducible, in the last analysis, to solidity, extension, figure, divisibility, etc.; or that solidity, extension, figure, etc., are reducible to sensation, thought, will” (Cousin). It logically follows that matter and mind (such as the body and mind/soul) are two different substances.

We may argue philosophically (as we have above) and our points be considered as logical and appropriate. But for the person whose conscious has been taken captive by the Word of God, all of our philosophizing may seem as so much sophistry. So, it is important that the philosophy is supported by holy Scripture. I believe this is solidly accomplished by a multitude of texts, but two will be introduced here: Genesis 35:18 and Matthew 10:28.

In Genesis 35:18 we are told the story of the birth of Benjamin. Rachel dies in child birth. The way the Bible describes her death is important to our study: “It came about as her soul was departing (for she died), that she named him Ben-oni; but his father called him Benjamin” (NASB). Notice that the holy Scripture describes her death as her soul departing. If the soul is the product of the union of the breath of God with the physical body this could hardly be an accurate accounting of the event. However, we know that it is a truthful telling of the story. According to this account death is the result of the soul departing the body. Thus, demonstrating the difference between the soul and the body.

Also, in Matthew 10:28 Jesus is instructing His disciples to not fear what men might do to them. According to the Teacher men could only kill the body, but could not kill the soul. He said it this way: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” If words mean anything at all, according to the words of Jesus men can kill the body but not the soul. This not only declares the difference between the body and the soul, but also demonstrates the life of the soul after the death of the body.

Those who imagine that the soul is called spirit because it is but a breath or energy that has been divinely infused into the human body that is void of essence without it, swim in gross error. It is sadly true that many person are so attached to this world that they cannot imagine surviving the grave and therefore have trouble conceiving of an immortal soul.

“Were not the soul an essence separate from the body, Scripture would not teach that we dwell in houses of clay, and at death remove from a tabernacle of flesh; that we put off that which is corruptible, in order that, at the last day, we may finally receive according to the deeds done in the body. These and similar passages which everywhere occur, not only clearly distinguish the soul from the body, but by giving it the name of man, intimate that it is his principle part. Again, when Paul exhorts believers to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, he shows that there are two parts in which the taint of sin resides. Peter, also, in calling Christ the shepherd and bishop of souls, would have spoke absurdly if there were no souls toward which he might discharge such an office. Nor would there be any ground for what he says concerning the eternal salvation of souls, or for his injunction to purify our souls, or for his assertion that fleshly lusts war against the soul; neither could the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews say, that pastors watch as those who must give an account for our souls, if souls were devoid of essence. To the same effect Paul calls God to witness upon his soul, which could not be brought to trial before God if incapable of suffering punishment. This is still more clearly expressed by our Savior, when he bids us fear him who, after he has killed the body, is able also to cast (the soul) into hell fire. Again, when the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews distinguishes the fathers of our flesh from God, who alone is the Father of our spirits, he could not have asserted the essence of the soul in clearer terms. Moreover, [if] the soul, when freed from the fetters of the body, [did not] continue to exist, our Savior would not have represented the soul of Lazarus as enjoying blessedness in Abraham's bosom, while, on the contrary, that of Dives was suffering dreadful torments. Paul assures us of the same thing when he says, that so long as we are present in the body, we are absent from the Lord. Not to dwell on the matter of which there is little obscurity, I will only add, that Luke mentions among the errors of the Sadducees that they believe neither [in] angels nor spirits.” —John Calvin

There is some confusion over the difference between the terms “soul” and “spirit” because they are sometimes used interchangeably (or seem so to be) by the sacred writers. In the OT the Hebrew is nephesh (soul), and ruach (spirit). In the NT the Greek is psychê (soul, or mind), and pneuma (spirit). The confusion exists because “soul” is used by sacred writers to denote the inner man (consisting of the will, emotions, and intellect), and also to reference the complete human, material and immaterial combined. In like manner the term translated as “spirit” (that primarily means “life force,” is ruach in the Hebrew, found some 378 times in the OT (with at least 100 times referring to the human spirit), and literally meaning “breath,” “wind,” or “spirit”; cf. Ezekiel. 37:1-14 where ruach is translated as all three.

Ezekiel 37;1-14 The hand of the Lord was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the Lord, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones, 2 And caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry. 3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord God, thou knowest. 4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. 5 Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live: 6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the Lord. 7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. 8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them. 9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army. 11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts. 12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. 13 And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord.

The corresponding Greek term is pneuma (occurring 379 times in the NT) and is sometimes used interchangeably with the term translated as “soul” by sacred writers. In this manner “spirit” may reference the element of man (2 Cor. 4:16) that is fashioned in God’s image (Gen. 1:26-27), and thus be a synonym of “soul.” This is also true of Zechariah 12:1 “… saith the LORD, which … formeth the spirit of man within him.” This has lead some to suppose that there is no difference between the soul and spirit of man. However, as we will see in the next chapter, this is a mistake in our opinion.

“Soul” may signify merely an individual person: e.g. the prophet Ezekiel declared that the “soul” (i.e., the person) who sins will surely die (Ezek. 18:20), or, as Peter would write centuries later, “eight souls” were saved by water in the days of Noah (1 Pet. 3:20). See also Exodus 1:5. Conversely, “soul” can have to do with that aspect of man that is characterized by the intellectual and emotional dimension (Gen. 27:25; Job 30:16). It is the eternal component of man that is fashioned in the very image of God (Gen. 1:26), and that can exist apart from the physical body (Mt. 10:28; Rev. 6:9). The term “soul,” as with the word “spirit” may take on different senses, depending upon its contextual setting. Since “soul” and “spirit” are used interchangeably by scared writers, one must consider the context of the Hebrew and Greek words to determine the proper understanding.

Hello friends, I am a full time biblical researcher. I rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

Dear friends, thousands of you read and benefit from our essays each month. If each of you invested only $1.00 each month, all of our financial needs would be met. Thank you for your support.

Synecdoche (si nek´də kē)

Also, and perhaps more to our point, “spirit” (as well as the term “soul”) can be used, by way of the figure of speech known as the synecdoche (part for the whole, or vice versa) for a person himself. John wrote: "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1; emphasis added). Note that the term “spirits” in this text has reference to the persons of the “false prophets.” A particular part is identified for the whole.

Spencer Stewart, coming from the idea of the synecdoche, writes in “Dichotomy versus Trichotomy,” Copyright © 2010, “… an overlap in usage of terms does not necessarily negate distinction. Dichotomists negate the distinction between soul and spirit because of apparent overlaps in language. But they themselves do not negate the difference between body and soul, even though there is overlap there, too. The word for “soul” is often used (alone, without “body”) for the whole person as an individual (e.g. Lev. 2:1, 7:20, 27:22; Jer. 52:28). Yet dichotomists still believe such usage of soul implies relationship with a body. Similarly, Scripture also uses nephesh (soul) to refer to a dead body without life or the departed soul (and spirit). Yet dichotomists do not therefore say the soul is the same as the body. Trichotomists are using the same kind of sensibility to still see the spirit as a distinct third part, even when not listed explicitly (as it is in places such as 1 Thess. 5:23 and Heb. 4:12, …). Literature is not simple math. Especially not literature breathed by a transcendent, mysterious God through more than forty human writers spanning over 1,500 years in diverse geographies, languages, and cultures. Yet spiritual believers can discern spiritual truths by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:13).”

John B. Woodward argues that less detail does not necessarily contradict more detail. To say that a Man has a body and a soul does not contradict having a body and a soul and a spirit. J.B.W. artfully draws correlation with other facets of Scripture: was there one angel at the tomb (Mt. 28:2) or two (Lk. 24:4)? Was there one demoniac in Gadara (Mk. 5:2) or two (Mt. 8:28)? Was there one blind man outside Jericho (Mk. 10:46) or two (Mt. 20:30)? Because we believe God-breathed words cannot contradict themselves, we believe both are true; there were two. If there is two, then it is also true there is one, because one is included in two. “Suppose there are three and only three cars in a parking lot” (Steward argues). “One is a Ford; another is a Toyota; another, a Chevy. One author could correctly write, ‘There are three cars in the parking lot.’ Another author could write less specifically, but still correctly, ‘There is a Ford and a Toyota in the parking lot.’ Still another author would be equally correct to write, ‘There is one Ford in the parking lot.’ Yes, I am one person. Yes, I have a body and soul. Yes, I have body and spirit. Yes, I have a body and a soul and a spirit. Less detail does not necessarily contradict more detail.”

The Magnificat

Reformed theologian Louis Berkhof introduces Mary’s Magnificat in Luke 1:46-47, as evidence of dichotomy. He developes his argument by stating that duplication was the popular style in the poetic Hebrew culture: “And Mary said, ‘My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God, my Savior.” Dichotomists, like Berkhof, claim this parallelism repeats the same idea with synonyms; both the spirit and the soul worship God because they are the same immaterial part. (They rightly stress that her body also worshiped, as evidenced by the vocal expression, because Man is a whole.

The parallelism of the soul and spirit in the Magnificat does not reduce to simple redundancy. Mary, referencing the Spirit, chose different nouns, verbs, and direct objects to more fully describe the nuances of her worship.

46 Καὶ εἶπεν Μαριάμ, Μεγαλύνει ἡ ψυχή μου τὸν κύριον,

47 καὶ ἠγαλλίασεν τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπὶ τῷ θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρί μου,

Many translations do not maintain the change in tenses from Luke 1:46 to 1:47. Truly, the soul’s action is present tense (Μεγαλύνει ἡ ψυχή μου τὸν κύριον — My soul magnifies the Lord), while the spirit’s is aorist (Greek past tense: ἠγαλλίασεν τὸ πνεῦμά μου — my spirit has rejoiced). The soul magnifies, whereas the spirit rejoiced. It places the spirit’s action logically before the soul’s. The spirit rejoiced; then the soul magnified. We do not suggest that the soul cannot participate in worship; the Scriptural point is an issue of source and order. Worship must begin in the spirit, for God is spirit (Jn. 4:24). Then the spirit communicates truth to the soul, and the soul magnifies it and expresses it through the body.

Another argument for the soul and spirit being the same is a pairing of John 12:27 with John 13:21. It is pointed out that these two passages state that Jesus was troubled in both His soul and spirit, respectively, in connection with the crucifixion.

John 12:27,

Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.

John 13:21

When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

Trichotomy is not explicitly disproven by this argument. If fact it is demonstrated that the two texts just mentioned fit nicely within the framework of trichotomy, when it is considered that the body of Jesus was also troubled by the crucifixion. It makes sense that John would choose in 12:27 to emphasize the trouble of Jesus’ soul, because the will resides in the soul. This passage describes the struggle within Jesus’ will to lay down His soul-life (psuchē), dying in order to bear fruit for the salvation of the world (12:23-28). Later, after the Last Supper and washing the disciples’ feet, Jesus was troubled in spirit and spoke of His betrayal by one of His disciples (13:21). The spiritual warfare was intensifying: Satan had already put it in Judas’ heart to betray Him (13:2), and then Satan entered Judas during Jesus’ offering of the sop (13:27). Still later, His body was also troubled – to the point of sweating blood (Lk. 22:44). So, during the hours leading up to crucifixion proper, the holy Scripture reveals the three-fold troubling in all three parts of His Manhood: soul, spirit and body.

Trichotomy is also demonstrated by 1 Corinthians 14:13-14, “Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.” Speaking in tongues is an activity of the human spirit while the mind (soul), i.e. the understanding, is disengaged. Since the mind is seated in the soul, the soul, then, is by-passed by the spirit. The spirit of a person, having by-passed the soul, engages the physical sense of speech directly. Here it is shown, by Paul, that when a believer is praying in tongues it is the spirit moving on the body’s sense of speech without involving the soul. Thus, the three distinct elements of man are shown to be functional realities in practice. By this, and other proofs, the tripartite human is taken from the realm of subjective theory and placed into the arena of objective reality.

The teaching of the Apostle concerning the resurrection is all telling concerning our subject. Paul wrote: “It is sown a natural body (the Greek says “soulish body” σπείρεται σῶμα ψυχικόν); it is raised a spiritual body (ἐγείρεται σῶμα πνευμα-τικόν). There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit”.

Paul would have had no reason to contrast the soulish body from the spiritual body if there is no difference. The only way Paul’s teaching makes sense is if soul and spirit are two different parts of man. We look forward to a body, that is led by, filled with, and wholly characterized by spirit. We will be saturated with God, who is spirit, and He will be all in all (1 Cor. 15:28).

Apostolically Speaking

☩☩ Jerry L Hayes