dichotomous VS trichotomous

[Theognome]

Regarding Body/Spirit and body/soul/spirit arguments, I noticed that I have only heard the trichotomous position espoused from my Baptist brethren. Is this position not in line with other confessions?

Theognome

 

[Guido's Brother]

The TFU lay out a dichotomous anthropology.

i.e. HC Lord's Day 1: "That I am not my own, but belong with body and soul, both in life and in death, to my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ..."

 

[Neogillist]

No, the trichotomous position is not orthodox. There are a few odd modern theologians who adopt it, but a careful evaluation of Scripture will reveal that both "spirit" and "soul" are used interchangeably both in Hebrew and in Greek. John Calvin himself also clearly holds to the dichotomous view of man in his institutes, and if I remember correctly, he explains that the only difference that might be admitted is that the soul is the spirit once departed from the body. See the Institutes. In the end it is not a serious heresy, but the trichotomist position is simply the result of those odd guys trying to draw too much metaphysics out of Scripture.

 

[cih1355]

No, the trichotomous position is not orthodox. There are a few odd modern theologians who adopt it, but a careful evaluation of Scripture will reveal that both "spirit" and "soul" are used interchangeably both in Hebrew and in Greek. John Calvin himself also clearly holds to the dichotomous view of man in his institutes, and if I remember correctly, he explains that the only difference that might be admitted is that the soul is the spirit once departed from the body. See the Institutes. In the end it is not a serious heresy, but the trichotomist position is simply the result of those odd guys trying to draw too much metaphysics out of Scripture.

I have been reading James Montgomery Boice's, Foundations of the Christian Faith, and he advocates the trichotomous position. He believes that man has a body, soul, and spirit and he also believes that animals have both body and soul.

 

[Wannabee]

Historically I'm not sure of the dangers. But in the contemporary setting a danger that CAN exist is in the treatment of what ails each portion of the human. For the dichotomous there can be a physician to minister to the body. But only a doctor of the soul (psyche) can minister to the spiritual condition of man. For those holding the trichotomous position there is the possibility of seeing the soul as being ministered to by psychology while the spirit is ministered to by pastors. This understanding has lead many pastors to relegate the healing of the soul to so called experts rather than relying on the sufficiency of Scripture (2 Tim 3:15-17).

 

[Whitefield]

I have been reading James Montgomery Boice's, Foundations of the Christian Faith, and he advocates the trichotomous position. He believes that man has a body, soul, and spirit and he also believes that animals have both body and soul.

Please give references (page numbers) so we can look it up.

 

[Theognome]

No, the trichotomous position is not orthodox. There are a few odd modern theologians who adopt it, but a careful evaluation of Scripture will reveal that both "spirit" and "soul" are used interchangeably both in Hebrew and in Greek. John Calvin himself also clearly holds to the dichotomous view of man in his institutes, and if I remember correctly, he explains that the only difference that might be admitted is that the soul is the spirit once departed from the body. See the Institutes. In the end it is not a serious heresy, but the trichotomist position is simply the result of those odd guys trying to draw too much metaphysics out of Scripture.

I suspected as much. The context where I've heard it espoused has been along the lines of 'psychology justification' as opposed to solid exegesis.

Theognome

-----Added 1/15/2009 at 08:42:29 EST-----

Historically I'm not sure of the dangers. But in the contemporary setting a danger that CAN exist is in the treatment of what ails each portion of the human. For the dichotomous there can be a physician to minister to the body. But only a doctor of the soul (psyche) can minister to the spiritual condition of man. For those holding the trichotomous position there is the possibility of seeing the soul as being ministered to by psychology while the spirit is ministered to by pastors. This understanding has lead many pastors to relegate the healing of the soul to so called experts rather than relying on the sufficiency of Scripture (2 Tim 3:15-17).

Exactly. This is (as mentioned above) what I've seen done, though in some cases the pastor plays the psychologist role as well.

Theognome

 

[Wannabee]

Exactly. This is (as mentioned above) what I've seen done, though in some cases the pastor plays the psychologist role as well.

And many "ministries" have not helped this situation. Prominent para-church ministries especially fall into the psychobabble/self-esteem/self-help integrated counseling philosophy. This permeates our churches. One local church's pastor touts his pscych doctorate and what he's learned from his training is evident in his preaching, from what I've been told. I've not heard him personally, but most of us have seen this. Taken to its ultimate conclusion the minister of God's Word is sufficient only for salvation, weddings and funerals. Leave everything else to the trained professionals.

 

[Theognome]

Exactly. This is (as mentioned above) what I've seen done, though in some cases the pastor plays the psychologist role as well.

And many "ministries" have not helped this situation. Prominent para-church ministries especially fall into the psychobabble/self-esteem/self-help integrated counseling philosophy. This permeates our churches. One local church's pastor touts his pscych doctorate and what he's learned from his training is evident in his preaching, from what I've been told. I've not heard him personally, but most of us have seen this. Taken to its ultimate conclusion the minister of God's Word is sufficient only for salvation, weddings and funerals. Leave everything else to the trained professionals.

This of course brings up the question: Is Trichotomy tangental to this teaching, or essential?

Theognome

 

[Stomata leontôn]

Gen. 2:7 - "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."

spirit + body --> 1 soul

Therefore, there are but 2 parts: spirit & body, which yield one personality.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

The Trichotomous position is common and popular among the followers of Watchman Nee...

 

[Theognome]

The Trichotomous position is common and popular among the followers of Watchman Nee...

Indeed.

Perhaps a thread split might be in order. I'm very curious as to which is the predicate of the other- Trichotomy and self-esteem prosperity teaching. They appear to be linked (And no, I have not heard the Tri position from Reformed Baptist brethren) but is this link coincidental or intentional? If intended, which came first?

Theognome

 

[VictorBravo]

Regarding Body/Spirit and body/soul/spirit arguments, I noticed that I have only heard the trichotomous position espoused from my Baptist brethren. Is this position not in line with other confessions?

Theognome

Please don't lump all of us into the trichotomous camp. None of my Baptist brethren that I personally know hold to it. In fact, none of the looser evangelical baptist churches that I've known hold to it either.

I think the LBCF, ch.4, par. 2, teaches a dichotomy:

"After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change."

-----Added 1/15/2009 at 11:24:50 EST-----

(And no, I have not heard the Tri position from Reformed Baptist brethren) but is this link coincidental or intentional? If intended, which came first?

Theognome

Cross posted. I see my defense of the RB was already mooted.

 

[Theognome]

Regarding Body/Spirit and body/soul/spirit arguments, I noticed that I have only heard the trichotomous position espoused from my Baptist brethren. Is this position not in line with other confessions?

Theognome

Please don't lump all of us into the trichotomous camp. None of my Baptist brethren that I personally know hold to it. In fact, none of the looser evangelical baptist churches that I've known hold to it either.

I think the LBCF, ch.4, par. 2, teaches a dichotomy:

"After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change."

As I mentioned in the post immediately above yours, I have never heard this position from a Reformed Baptist brother, only some of those from 4 point (or less) positions. I do not in any way lump all Baptists into such a position.

Theognome

-----Added 1/15/2009 at 11:29:16 EST-----

Lots of cross posting around about.

 

[VictorBravo]

Regarding Body/Spirit and body/soul/spirit arguments, I noticed that I have only heard the trichotomous position espoused from my Baptist brethren. Is this position not in line with other confessions?

Theognome

Please don't lump all of us into the trichotomous camp. None of my Baptist brethren that I personally know hold to it. In fact, none of the looser evangelical baptist churches that I've known hold to it either.

I think the LBCF, ch.4, par. 2, teaches a dichotomy:

"After God had made all other creatures, he created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change."

As I mentioned in the post immediately above yours, I have never heard this position from a Reformed Baptist brother, only some of those from 4 point (or less) positions. I do not in any way lump all Baptists into such a position.

Theognome

Right, we have been cross posting. I saw yours only after I posted mine.

 

[Theognome]

Well Vic, I've 'broadened my horizons' some since I first posted this and found the Tri teachings pretty much across the denominations (sans Catholic); being most prevalent in the Indi Baptist, CoC and Four-Square sites I've stumbled upon. Might their be a deeper connection?

Theognome

 

[CharlieJ]

I have been reading James Montgomery Boice's, Foundations of the Christian Faith, and he advocates the trichotomous position. He believes that man has a body, soul, and spirit and he also believes that animals have both body and soul.

Boice is not a typical trichotomist. Among the trichotomists I've known, the body is externally aware, the soul is internally aware, and the spirit is God-aware. At least some trichotomists believe that man does not have a spirit (or it is dead or sleeping) until conversion. At that point the spirit wars for righteousness against the body (and soul?), ending up in a Keswick white-dog black-dog theology.

Boice is using "soul" in the place of the older term anima, as that faculty which controls movement and instinct but is below "consciousness" as humans possess. Our word "animal" derives from anima, showing that we draw a distinction between volitionally moving creatures and, say, plants.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I have been reading James Montgomery Boice's, Foundations of the Christian Faith, and he advocates the trichotomous position. He believes that man has a body, soul, and spirit and he also believes that animals have both body and soul.

Boice is not a typical trichotomist. Among the trichotomists I've known, the body is externally aware, the soul is internally aware, and the spirit is God-aware. At least some trichotomists believe that man does not have a spirit (or it is dead or sleeping) until conversion. At that point the spirit wars for righteousness against the body (and soul?), ending up in a Keswick white-dog black-dog theology.

Boice is using "soul" in the place of the older term anima, as that faculty which controls movement and instinct but is below "consciousness" as humans possess. Our word "animal" derives from anima, showing that we draw a distinction between volitionally moving creatures and, say, plants.

Where does Dr. Boice address this? References please.

 

[cih1355]

I have been reading James Montgomery Boice's, Foundations of the Christian Faith, and he advocates the trichotomous position. He believes that man has a body, soul, and spirit and he also believes that animals have both body and soul.

Please give references (page numbers) so we can look it up.

Boice advocates his trichotomous position on pages 150 - 153 and 201 - 204 of the one volume edition of his book, Foundations of the Christian Faith.

You can go to this link to see those pages:
http://books.google.com/books?id=o_...ian+faith&ei=ejBwSda5KYq6kwTBz-CZDg#PPA151,M1