B 01 Refer natural constitution man God's
1. refer to the natural constitution of man as God’s creature. By the constitution God has given him man is fitted for the purposes God designs him to serve, for being acted upon by that discipline through which it is God’s will he should pass, and for being profited by that provision which God has made for his spiritual and eternal welfare; and as these are matters pertaining to the very substance of religion, we expect that the Bible will have something to teach us concerning man s constitution as a being capable of religious relations and of being affected by religious interests.
We have already considered the account which Moses gives of the creation of man, and of the endowment he received at the hand of his Creator when he came forth at His com mand. In what was said regarding the creation of man, our view was chiefly historical and simply expository. I propose to follow up that summary by an attempt at a more scientific analysis and compend of what Scripture teaches generally concerning the nature and constitution of man. The most general statement which the Bible gives con cerning man’s nature is that he is a being consisting of body and spirit. For body (awfjia) we sometimes have flesh (1^3, o-apf), and for spirit (Trvev^a) we sometimes have soul (^ v Xn\ an( l sometimes we have the combination body, soul, and spirit. All are agreed that " body " and " flesh " are synonymous terms, the former describing the material part of man in its organic totality, the latter describing it with refer ence to its constitutive substance or its characteristic affections. But opinions differ as to the terms used to designate the immaterial part of man, some regarding soul and spirit as essentially distinct, others viewing them as designations of the same object viewed under different aspects and relations.
Hence has arisen the question: Does the Bible represent the nature of man as consisting of two parts or of three? or, as it is sometimes expressed, Is the Biblical analysis of man’s nature a Dichotomy or a Trichotomy 1 i. This question can be answered only by attending to the usage of the words translated " soul " and " spirit " in Scrip ture. If we find them used interchangeably or synonymously, we shall then conclude that the Scripture doctrine of man s nature is a dichotomy; and if, on the other hand, we find them used so distinctively as to indicate that the sacred writers regarded the soul as a different part of man’s nature from the spirit, we shall then be constrained to regard their doctrine as a trichotomy.
It is impossible for us here to examine in detail all the passages of Scripture in which these words occur in reference to man. NOT is this necessary. It is enough if we can adduce crucial instances on either side that is to say, instances which agree with the one hypothesis, but are utterly irreconcilable with the other. By such instances the hypothesis with which they are irreconcilable is thereby excluded.
Now, we find that the terms soul and spirit are constantly used so as to exclude the supposition that they denote essen tially different parts of man’s nature.
(i.) In the first place, we find soul and spirit used indiffer ently as the antithesis to body or flesh. Thus (Romans 8:10) the apostle says, " The body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness; " in 1 Corinthians 5:3 he speaks of being " absent in body but present in spirit; " in 1 Corinthians 6:20 he exhorts believers to glorify God " in their body and in their spirit ;" comp. also 1 Corinthians 7:34; Ephesians 4:4; James 2:26. In all these passages spirit evidently denotes simply the higher, the immaterial part of man as distinguished from the lower, the material. But we find " soul " used in the very same way. Thus our Lord says, " Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul" (Matthew 10:28); of the Messiah it is predicted that His soul should not be left in Sheol or Hades, neither should His flesh see corruption (Psalms 16:10; Acts 2:31); and in 1 Peter 2:11 the apostle con trasts the soul with those fleshly lusts which war against it. In these passages soul evidently denotes, not a particular part of man’s inner nature, but that nature itself, and as such, just as in the former spirit is used. But had there been an essential distinction between soul and spirit, they would not have been used thus indifferently to denote the same object.