Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
_Gen. 41:8_—“_his spirit was troubled_”; _cf._ _Ps. 42:6_—“_my
soul is cast down within me._” _John 12:27_—“_Now is my soul
troubled_”; _cf._ _13:21_—“_he was troubled in the spirit._” _Mat.
20:28_—“_to give his life (ψυχήν) a ransom for many_”; _cf._
_27:50_—“_yielded up his spirit (πνεῦμα)._” _Heb. 12:23_—“_spirits
of just men made perfect_”; _cf._ _Rev. 6:9_—“_I saw underneath
the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of
God._” In these passages “_spirit_” and “_soul_” seem to be used
interchangeably.
(_d_) The mention of body and soul (or spirit) as together constituting
the whole man.
_Mat 10:28_—“_able to destroy both soul and body in hell_”; _1
Cor. 5:3_—“_absent in body but present in spirit_”; _3 John 2_—“_I
pray that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul
prospereth._” These texts imply that body and soul (or spirit)
together constitute the whole man.
For advocacy of the dichotomous theory, see Goodwin, in Journ.
Society Bib. Exegesis, 1881:73-86; Godet, Bib. Studies of the O.
T., 32; Oehler, Theology of the O. T., 1:219; Hahn, Bib. Theol. N.
T., 390 _sq._; Schmid, Bib. Theology N. T., 503; Weiss, Bib.
Theology N. T., 214; Luthardt, Compendium der Dogmatik, 112, 113;
Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, 1:294-298; Kahnis, Dogmatik, 1:549; 3:249;
Harless, Com. on Eph., 4:23, and Christian Ethics, 22; Thomasius,
Christi Person und Werk. 1:164-168; Hodge, in Princeton Review,
1865:116, and Systematic Theol., 2:47-51; Ebrard, Dogmatik,
1:261-263; Wm. H. Hodge, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Apl. 1897.
2. The Trichotomous Theory.
Side by side with this common representation of human nature as consisting
of two parts, are found passages which at first sight appear to favor
trichotomy. It must be acknowledged that πνεῦμα (spirit) and ψυχή (soul),
although often used interchangeably, and always designating the same
indivisible substance, are sometimes employed as contrasted terms.
In this more accurate use, ψυχή denotes man’s immaterial part in its
inferior powers and activities;—as ψυχή, man is a conscious individual,
and, in common with the brute creation, has an animal life, together with
appetite, imagination, memory, understanding. Πνεῦμα, on the other hand,
denotes man’s immaterial part in its higher capacities and faculties;—as
πνεῦμα, man is a being related to God, and possessing powers of reason,
conscience, and free will, which difference him from the brute creation
and constitute him responsible and immortal.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account