Curious about this post...

[Der Pilger]

I came across the following explanation on another forum in a thread about Calvinism vs. Arminianism. I thought I'd post it here to see what others thought of it. I agree with it insofar as the distinction between soul, spirit and body goes, but I'm not sure of the rest of it. What do you make of it?

This is much like the trinity issue; there are well-developed doctrinal views built in place of an understanding of man as spirit-soul-body. (1Thess. 5:23, Gen. 2:7, Heb. 4:12). It's difficult to strip away the "free will" contention and deal simply with man's will (boule/boulema) and God's will (thelo/thelema). A series of word-studies is important, since man's will and God's will aren't the same type of will. Man's will functions freely as opposed to being externally coerced, but it has extremely limited capability of itself and is internally bound to the influences of the body of sin/death. (See my post in the free will thread.)

The real issue is the fact that man's soul-spirit roles were "inverted" by original sin; and they need to be "redistributed" by dividing asunder of the Word. The mind-will-emotion faculties of the soul weren't designed to function initiatively; they were designed to respond to God's Spirit through the faculties of man's spirit. God doesn't deal directly with man's will; the structural flow is from God's Soul-Spirit through man's spirit-soul. That flow has been disrupted and must be restored by the indwelling Christ of the Holy Ghost. It is a wholly intrinsic structural function that requires God's own indwelling presence to reconnect.

Man's soul is totally depraved; man's spirit is inherently good, though tainted by the filth of the flesh. (Flesh is a whole 'nother study; it isn't just the body.) Man's soul has no conscience-communion-intuition faculties to directly communicate with God; those are man's spirit faculties. Since man's will must access God's Will from a spirit-Spirit interface that has been separated by sin... the "free will" concept becomes pragmatically meaningless. It's an issue of strutural composition, not will-function.

There are volumes and volumes of teaching, but this topic is dismissed in favor of well-established tangents. EVERY principle of the Word is tied to the operational structure of man's constitution and God's. Predestination, foreknowledge, and election must all be understood in light of God's character of doing everything decently and in order.

It's not an issue of various teachings being incorrect so much as it is being incomplete. All things must be reconciled to Him, and thus to each other.

I can lay out a thesis on many other vital interrelated subjects, but most reject the foundation of God as Spirit-Soul-Body and man as spirit-soul-body. Most don't even really comprehend what a soul is, and contend that we can't know much because the Word seems to say little about it. Yet... these entire opposing theological systems are built on differing fundamental premises of one of man's soul faculties versus God's.

The whole Calvi/Armi debate is a futile engagement over an abstraction: "free will". The relevant truth is about His constitution and ours.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

It's bunk. His distinction is un-Scriptural. Spirit and soul are used interchangeably in the Scriptures. He sounds like a Gnostic to me.

I wouldn't waste time reading anything he wrote.

 

[Steve Curtis]

Yeah ,this sounds like a guy who thinks he's figured something out that escaped orthodoxy for the last couple thousand years.
I also agree with Rich that the trichotomous view of man (spirit-soul-body) is not in accord with Scripture. The verse in Thessalonians where the "three" are mentioned and Hebrews 4:12 both seem to be examples of literary devices (the first meaning "every bit of ya" and the second meaning, in the words of Matthew Henry: "[The Word of God] cuts off ignorance from the understanding, rebellion from the will, and enmity from the mind") - not sure what he is suggesting with Genesis 2:7. Not only is this view unbiblical, it is potentially dangerous. A number of "weird" teachings have been built around this distinction (the quote in the OP, for example!)

 

[Skyler]

An "intrinsic structural function"?

Judging from the jargon he uses, this poster is either a computer science major or a sci-fi addict. Probably both.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[Der Pilger]

It's bunk. His distinction is un-Scriptural. Spirit and soul are used interchangeably in the Scriptures. He sounds like a Gnostic to me.

I wouldn't waste time reading anything he wrote.

What was it that sounded gnostic to you?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

It's bunk. His distinction is un-Scriptural. Spirit and soul are used interchangeably in the Scriptures. He sounds like a Gnostic to me.

I wouldn't waste time reading anything he wrote.

What was it that sounded gnostic to you?

This:

The real issue is the fact that man's soul-spirit roles were "inverted" by original sin; and they need to be "redistributed" by dividing asunder of the Word. The mind-will-emotion faculties of the soul weren't designed to function initiatively; they were designed to respond to God's Spirit through the faculties of man's spirit. God doesn't deal directly with man's will; the structural flow is from God's Soul-Spirit through man's spirit-soul. That flow has been disrupted and must be restored by the indwelling Christ of the Holy Ghost. It is a wholly intrinsic structural function that requires God's own indwelling presence to reconnect.

The idea that mind-will-emotion operate at some plane of being below the "spirit". Tripartite views of men typically lead to various types of Gnosticism. The above is not only unsubstantiated by Scripture but it's just plain gobbledy-gook.

 

[LawrenceU]

Yep. Gnostic.

 

[Der Pilger]

This:

The real issue is the fact that man's soul-spirit roles were "inverted" by original sin; and they need to be "redistributed" by dividing asunder of the Word. The mind-will-emotion faculties of the soul weren't designed to function initiatively; they were designed to respond to God's Spirit through the faculties of man's spirit. God doesn't deal directly with man's will; the structural flow is from God's Soul-Spirit through man's spirit-soul. That flow has been disrupted and must be restored by the indwelling Christ of the Holy Ghost. It is a wholly intrinsic structural function that requires God's own indwelling presence to reconnect.

The idea that mind-will-emotion operate at some plane of being below the "spirit". Tripartite views of men typically lead to various types of Gnosticism. The above is not only unsubstantiated by Scripture but it's just plain gobbledy-gook.

Thanks for clarifying that. It's a sampling of what results when those who run a forum don't hold their participants to strict standards. The same person who posted the text I cited admitted he was not trinitarian. It made me wonder: If someone who admits to heresy is allowed to post openly, what other poison is being allowed to potentially harm the true believers on the site? I won't mention here which forum it is, but I spoke with two of the moderators, and basically they feel that God led them to keep it open so that they could reach more people with the gospel. I pointed out that reaching people with the gospel is no reason to risk believers being led astray. I suggested that they require all members to adhere to a particular doctrinal statement and those who did not adhere to it could read posts but not post anything of their own, but I don't think they're going to change their approach.

Anyway, that's a bit OT, but I thought I'd get it off my chest since it really bothers me. Thankfully, PB does not take such a loose approach.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I spoke with two of the moderators, and basically they feel that God led them to keep it open so that they could reach more people with the gospel.

Sounds like more Gnosticism...

 

[LawrenceU]

Yep. I did a search and found the forum. The authour of that post has some serious doctrinal issues evident in his views. Even his handle is suspect. Almost every time I run into someone who holds to a trichotomous view of mine it inevitably leads to a gnostic theology. Actually, I can't recall a time that it did not.

 

[Der Pilger]

Yep. I did a search and found the forum.

Then you probably noticed the vast number of people who are on there. God only knows how many of those people are genuine children of God who stand at risk of being poisoned by that stuff as well as other unsound teachings. In another post in the same thread, somebody rejected John 1:12-13 on the grounds that it had been altered. It is astonishing how the leadership of such sites can be so hands-off regarding such serious matters. I don't plan on participating in the forums any longer.

 

[LawrenceU]

Jeremy, I did notice. It is a sad commentary on how un-biblical the thinking of Christians has become. I even thought about registering on the forum to try and inject some sanity into the discussion, but I just don't have the time. I have also done that before on other fora and I usually end up being asked to 'tone it down' or asked to refrain from being so divisive. It grieves me when I see the junk that is trotted out as sound teaching these days; the more esoteric the better.