Soul and Spirit: Similarity or Difference or Identity?

[RamistThomist]

At the end of the day I hold to the dichotomist view of soul and spirit. I reject trichotomism if by that we mean that man is composed of three substances: body, soul, and spirit. I am familiar with the arguments pro and con for each position. Even though I am dichotomist, I wonder if soul and spirit can be neatly identified.

I remember reading in Richard Muller that "soul" is a combination (but not composition, since the soul, being simple, cannot be divided) of "mind" and "will."

This leads me to Leibniz's law of the identity of indiscernibles.

(x)(y)[(x=y)--->(P)(Px<-->Py)]

For any x, and for any y, if they are identical to each other, then for any property P, P will be true of x iff P is true of y.

Therefore, does it hold that if soul = mind/will, then when we see "spirit" in the Bible, is it simply (no pun intended) talking about mind/will? Or is it something else?

 

[MW]

I wonder if soul and spirit can be neatly identified.

Ontologically they must be identified because there can only be material and immaterial aspects to human nature. Were soul and spirit ontologically distinguished it would require the introduction of another kind of immaterial being into the human constitution.

Functionally, however, Scripture makes four distinctions which equate to the fourfold state of man. First, man at creation is placed in a state of probation, and this natural order of things does not reach to the "spiritual" state of eschaton. Secondly, through the fall man has become self-oriented, which makes him soul-ish or self-ish. Thirdly, in the regenerate state there is a new God-oriented (spiritual) condition which is not yet perfected, so that soul and spirit can be spoken of as if they were two different things. Lastly, in the intermediate state, "souls" are not yet united to their bodies so as to attain to their fully realised spiritual state, whereas at the resurrection soul and body are glorified in perfect unison.

 

[RamistThomist]

I wonder if soul and spirit can be neatly identified.

Ontologically they must be identified because there can only be material and immaterial aspects to human nature. Were soul and spirit ontologically distinguished it would require the introduction of another kind of immaterial being into the human constitution.

Functionally, however, Scripture makes four distinctions which equate to the fourfold state of man. First, man at creation is placed in a state of probation, and this natural order of things does not reach to the "spiritual" state of eschaton. Secondly, through the fall man has become self-oriented, which makes him soul-ish or self-ish. Thirdly, in the regenerate state there is a new God-oriented (spiritual) condition which is not yet perfected, so that soul and spirit can be spoken of as if they were two different things. Lastly, in the intermediate state, "souls" are not yet united to their bodies so as to attain to their fully realised spiritual state, whereas at the resurrection soul and body are glorified in perfect unison.

That makes sense. I like that distinction.

 

[God'sElectSaint]

I haven't really pondered this deeply. But this verse came to my mind when I saw this thread where Paul may be making a distinction: "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1Th 5:23