Basic HTML Version
181
the giving up of the soul, Gen. 35:18; I Kings 17:21; Acts 15:26; and then again as the giving up
of the spirit, Ps. 31:5; Luke 23:46; Acts 7:59. Moreover both “soul” and “spirit” are used to
designate the immaterial element of the dead, I Pet. 3:19; Heb. 12:23; Rev. 6:9; 20:4. The main
Scriptural distinction is as follows: the word “spirit” designates the spiritual element in man as
the principle of life and action which controls the body; while the word “soul” denominates the
same element as the subject of action in man, and is therefore often used for the personal
pronoun in the Old Testament, Ps. 10:1,2; 104:1; 146:1; Is. 42:1; cf. also Luke 12:19. In several
instances it, more specifically, designates the inner life as the seat of the affections. All this is
quite in harmony with Gen. 2:7, “And Jehovah God . . . breathed into his nostrils the breath of
life; and man became a living soul.” Thus it may be said that man has spirit, but is soul. The
Bible therefore points to two, and only two, constitutional elements in the nature of man,
namely, body and spirit or soul. This Scriptural representation is also in harmony with the self-
consciousness of man. While man is conscious of the fact that he consists of a material and a
spiritual element, no one is conscious of possessing a soul in distinction from a spirit.
There are two passages, however, that seem to conflict with the usual dichotomic
representation of Scripture, namely, I Thess. 5:23, “And the God of peace Himself sanctify you
wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame at the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”; and Heb. 4:12, “For the word of God is living, and active, and
sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both
joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart.” But it should be
noted that: (a) It is a sound rule in exegesis that exceptional statements should be interpreted
in the light of the analogia Scriptura, the usual representation of Scripture. In view of this fact
some of the defenders of trichotomy admit that these passages do not necessarily prove their
point. (b) The mere mention of spirit and soul alongside of each other does not prove that,
according to Scripture, they are two distinct substances, any more than Matt. 22:37 proves that
Jesus regarded heart and soul and mind as three distinct substances. (c) In I Thess. 5:23 the
apostle simply desires to strengthen the statement, “And the God of peace Himself sanctify you
wholly,” by an epexigetical statement, in which the different aspects of man’s existence are
summed up, and in which he feels perfectly free to mention soul and spirit alongside of each
other, because the Bible distinguishes between the two. He cannot very well have thought of
them as two different substances here, because he speaks elsewhere of man as consisting of
two parts, Rom. 8:10; I Cor. 5:5; 7:34; II Cor. 7:1; Eph. 2:3; Col. 2:5. (d) Heb. 4:12 should not be
taken to mean that the word of God, penetrating to the inner man, makes a separation
between his soul and his spirit, which would naturally imply that these two are different
substances; but simply as declaring that it brings about a separation in both between the
thoughts and intents of the heart.[Cf. for a discussion of the psychology of Scripture especially,
Bavinck, Bijbelsche en Religionize Psychologie; Laidlaw, The Bible Doctrine of Man, pp. 49-138;