SEMESTER 1
202 – The Elements of Human Nature
BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CORRESPONDENCE
COURSE: SOTERIOLOGY I LESSON # 2
THE ELEMENTS OF HUMAN NATURE
INTRODUCTION:
1. There are two basic theories that try to systematize the essential elements of human nature: Trichotomous Theory and Dichotomous Theory.
2. I first question whether they indeed differ except in sematics.
3. I rather think that a misnomer may well be the reason for apparent disagreement.
4. That, in my opinion, is the relationship to the idea that no elements, in either God or man’s nature, imply “parts.”
5. I suggest that if we see them as distinctions of being rather than parts, we shall profit much.
I. THE TRICHOTOMOUS THEORY
1. Theory stated, Scripture teaches that man is a “three part” being: body, soul and spirit.
2. The opinion is based upon two basic principles:
i. Revelation of Scripture (as they interpret it).
ii. The parallel to the trinity of God, in whose image we are created.
3. The Scriptures are essentially 1 Thessalonians 5:23
and Hebrews 4:12.
4. There are, of course, innumerable Scriptures which deal with body, soul and spirit, but not grouped together.
II. BASIC OBJECTIONS TO “TRI’S; THEORY
1. If these Scriptures (1Th 5:23 and Heb 4:12) describe specific elements, other Scriptures reveal more than three, Matthew 22:37, etc.
2. That the terms spirit and soul are used to designate the same element of man.
i. Comparison of Scriptures: Gen 41:8 compared to Psa 42:6; Joh 12:27 compared to Joh 13:21; Heb 12:23 compared to Rev
ii. It must be conceded that these terms are interchangeable.
3. That only two elements of the human nature are mentioned in creation, (Gen 2:7) body and soul.
4. That Jesus seems to divide human nature into only two elements. (Mat 10:28)
5. Let it be said that men of equal reliability and orthodoxy hold differing views on this issue.
III. DICHOTOMOUS THEORY STATED
1. The holders of this view justify having a theory at all, by three reasons:
i. Their rejection of the Trichotomous view.
ii. Their rejection of “the material life only” view.
iii. Their interpretation of Scripture.
2. Their rejection of the idea that man is only a “living body,” is held in common in Christianity.
3. Their reasons from Scripture are as follow:
i. Mat. 10:28 – A separation of what man can kill.
ii. Man is alive separate from the body. (2Co 5:1-6)
iii. Physical death is referred to as departing from the body. (Gen 35:18, 2Co 5:6)
IV. QUESTION OF TRUE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THEORIES
1. It seems to me that these theories may more mutually examine and explain, than to deny each other.
2. Man is a body, soul and spirit, but are these “component parts”?
3. I rather see them as descriptive terms, describing man’s mode of existence.
4. Father, Son and Spirit do not describe “parts” of God, but are distinct “persons” of His Being.
5. It seems to me that these three words which describe us, must be seen then as modes of being and not component parts.
6. It seems likely to me that these words describe man thus:
i. Body – The physical state of being.
ii. Soul – His self-consciousness as a living individual.
iii. Spirit – The life, as from God, as to cause of soul life in us. Effect of life as to God consciousness, and transmission of divine character, (positively or negatively) to others.
7. I submit that each of these is constantly related to the other, and that any of them may be described separately or jointly, simply by the words used in a given context.