 
### PREACHING TO THE CORE

AN EXAMINATION AND COMPARISON

OF TWO MODELS OF MAN

AND THE

IMPACT ON PREACHING MINISTRY

by Dr. Robert G. Morrin

#

#

#

#

#

# Preaching to the Core

# By Dr. Robert G. Morrin

# Published by Dr. Robert G. Morrin at Smashwords

# Copyright 2013 Dr. Robert G. Morrin

#

#

#

#

# To my wife and children for their loving support and encouragement
Table of Contents

Section 1 - Reaching the Core in Ministry

Chapter One - The Best Biblical Design of Man

Chapter Two - Two Views of Man at odds

Chapter Three – A Prevalence of Three Functional Components

Chapter Four – Why This Impacts ministry

Chapter Five – Goals in This Book

Section 2 – Two Views of Man Explored

Chapter Six – The Two Part View

Chapter Seven – The Three Part View

Chapter Eight – Distinctions Between Soul and Spirit

Section 3 – The Self Life

Chapter Nine – The Flesh in Soul

Chapter Ten – The Flesh and Spirit Contrasted

Chapter Eleven – A Definition of Core Ministry
Section 4 – Application in Preaching

Chapter Twelve – The Need for Transformational Preaching

Chapter Thirteen – Preaching the Cross: Beyond Information

Chapter Fourteen – Ultimate Soul Care to the Core
Section 5 – Conclusions

Chapter Fifteen – Implications and Applications for Core Ministry

Chapter Sixteen – Recommendations from this Dialogue

End Notes

# Preface

Every Sunday morning thousands go to church hoping for something significant to happen to them personally or in a loved one. Churches and pastors work hard to present something significant as well. Some places of worship develop major productions with a full orchestra, plays and million dollar multimedia systems but are these life-changing? Others stick to the "tried and true" simplicity of saying what the bible says. Still others work to simply find their niche in a community to make a difference for God's Kingdom. These are all good things but what if there is something else more essential to the core of every ministry regardless its size? What if there is one thing that if this doesn't happen people go home unfulfilled, dry, untouched and unchanged regardless of the production, the service or the words spoken? On the plus side what if something deeply significant could happen to each person each and every Sunday in experiencing transformation deep at the core of their God given design? I know this can happen. I think this needs to happen and I have seen this happen again and again, transformation deep within at the core of the individual.

Someone once said that we know good preaching when we hear it because, "it touches us viscerally." But what does this mean? To be touched deeply must mean more than information has been transferred. Something deeper must also occur in biblical preaching for a true and lasting transformational benefit, but what? It is well known that without the empowerment of the Spirit preachers can accomplish little. It is not well known just how that empowerment transpires from the heart of God to the hearts of individuals.

"Preaching to the Core," addresses this issue in man. Is preaching an issue of behavioristic and performance-oriented change through the application of the will or is it something core-energizing through what God accomplishes deep within the heart? If something deeper than volition is concerned how are soul and spirit involved; how does man's divine design come into play? The anatomy and physiology of the inner man is explored here in an extensively researched comparison of spirit and soul in Scripture. The goal is to understand a definition of holistic ministry in a model of man reflecting a biblically synthesized personality so the preacher may more specifically assist the individual toward his best self in accord with God's design.

A clear and widely agreed _functional_ difference between soul and spirit is offered as a biblical view of man to establish a fundamentally sound, broadly acceptable pastoral anthropology that contributes toward preaching to the core of the individual. Man's design is explored toward a healthier, more specifically directed pulpit ministry leading to individual transformation through first understanding and then applying a scholarly biblical physiology of man. The flesh and soul as biblically defined, with inherent inclinations to self-centered desires, are tightly interwoven and in contrast with spirit. A study of this deep-seated physiology contributes to a comprehension of man's spiritual core giving direction for Spirit-generated preaching that touches and transforms the individual from deep within.

There is an agreed upon distinction between references to soul and spirit with man in Scripture. Though one unseen substance of man is understood with both terms there are two functions of that inner man referenced in Scripture by the terms spirit and soul. In this book the term two-partist refers to adherents who theorize that man consists of body and soul alone. Traditionally this has been known as a dichotomy. Three-partist refers to those adhering to the belief that man consists of body, soul and spirit, a term know as trichotomy.

Does contemporary preaching touch spirit or soul and does this matter? Is preaching deeper and more transformational than teaching such as teaching at a university level and is that important? And if preaching is significantly different from secular teaching and if it involves much more than merely a higher content what does this mean? What is core transformational preaching that leads to life, preaching to deep inner change by God's Hand?

If the condition of the church in America says anything at all it says that there is much ministry that is information-oriented alone as opposed to life-transforming. There is a good deal of transmission of information but little transference of Person and consequent inner revolution, much learning but little Christ-like alteration in the core of the individual. Biblical preaching is more than mental gymnastics, even Olympic-level gymnastics.

Preaching to the core addresses the missing link in contemporary preaching. The goal is preaching where words are "spirit and life" (John 6:63). Preaching to the core leads to inner transformation where a greater percentage of attendees respond with core-transformed compliance to the truth. This is something felt but more than felt. This is something experienced. This is the key to transformational change at every preaching opportunity.

# SECTION 1

# REACHING THE CORE IN MINISTRY

# CHAPTER ONE The Best Biblical Design of Man

What is man? This question has been asked since the times of Job (Job 7:17) and David (Psalm 8:4). Since philosophers began debating the basic substance of existence the idea of man's make-up or design has been a major fascination. In a study of man's purpose and design there is a general consensus that man's nature consists of both seen and unseen substances. This body-soul debate, as suggested by John W. Cooper, is far from a dead issue. The components of man comprise the very crux of understanding the basic unity of man and his peak function and purpose. This issue is a significant concern for pastors who are consciously and subconsciously steered in their ministry approach based on their assessment of who man is and of what he consists. What man is for the pastor is therefore a critical consideration. To whom is the preacher preaching and how is the core of the individual reached for life-changing transformation?

The premise that man is holistic in function is attested to in a broad range of philosophical, psychological and theological frameworks. Each individual, regardless of substance(s), functions as a single unit. This holistic function of a multi-component creation, clear in the broad spectrum of Scripture, negates the idea of man as a mere monad from either Testament. Robert Gundry has made a strong case for a treatment of the Old Testament, in a depiction of man that reaches well beyond monistic (or single-substance) interpretation. Monism is broadly considered non-viable as a biblical model and is largely rejected in progressive evangelical thought. It is therefore not included in this exploration of man's design and ministry to the individual.

The separate components mentioned at man's creation in Genesis 2:7 and the many passages referencing an intermediate state reveal that man is more than a single substance creation. Separate biblical aspects of man in terms like soul, spirit, heart, etc. are too replete to ignore. Also the strong implication of an intermediate state in continuity between death and resurrection is attested in the New Testament at least forty five times. It may therefore be deduced that man is a synthesis of at least two parts (body and soul), a composite being from the "neshemah chayyim" that God breathed into man. This too elicits fascination. What is this that is only possessed by God and man? Of what specifically does man consist and why is this particular design vital in spiritual/pastoral leadership?

It is a well known precedent that distinctive theological understandings make a difference in manners of living and have an impact on pastoral ministry. Post-millenialists and Pre-millenialists see the world differently and consequently minister with dissimilar outlooks. Calvinist and Arminian pastors preach differently as a result of their theological distinctions. This will also be the case for distinctions in pastoral ministry rooted in how man himself is basically and functionally perceived. As counselors will respond differently to problems encountered based on their philosophy of man, so pastors will respond differently in their ministry contingent on their theology of man. Pastoral care will be impacted by the individual pastor's theological anthropology. It will have an impact on how that pastor relates to and seeks transformation in the individual.

Pastors have long been considered those who are given the responsibility of soul care. What exactly does this mean? Does this mean that a pastor only has concern for the inner unseen aspect of man while other professionals must deal with the other aspects of man? Or does it mean that the pastor is best qualified to assist in the better functioning of the whole person? It is contended here that the pastor must grasp most biblically and clearly the totality of man in the context of his unique divine design and holistic personhood. The pastor seeks to serve the living soul, the whole person.

What bearing does this basic anthropology have in pastoral ministry? Is it true according to theologian George P. Pardington that man's make-up and the discussion between a three-part view (body, soul, and spirit) and a two-part view (body and soul alone), "does not seriously concern any important truth of Christian Theology?" Or is it true that an overall healthy theology is impossible without a solid theology of the soul? If an understanding of anthropology is important toward impacting many other theologies including some of the most important doctrines of the Bible then this issue is critical to quality pastoral care. A well-rounded and applied anthropology is also vital for an individual's daily life. A refined biblical view of man may also help individuals become better equipped to face the pressing problems of the world today. The issue of man's particular design is a vital issue in ministry to the individual. Pastoral advice, direction, curatives and helps of all kinds will be impacted by that adhered to design.

A difficulty in this task of better understanding man is the underdeveloped nature of this study in the context of pastoral ministry. Anthropology is at a weak and incomplete point in evangelical theology today. Anthony Hoekema suggests that questions about man are being asked with new urgency. "Since Immanuel Kant the problem of epistemology (how do we know?) has become primary, whereas the problem of basic make-up (what is ultimate being?) has become secondary." There is currently however a new desire to consider man's basic make-up in the light of deep spiritual needs in the current culture. What man knows is not nearly as important today as who man is. Nowhere is this problem of design and being more important than in the pastorate where trench warfare is carried out to help God's people live optimally functioning lives along a biblically holistic path of grace and truth.

The goal of this book reaches toward understanding and then applying biblical truth toward the development of an "ordered personality" in the ministry of preaching. An ordered personality consists of an individual fully and functionally living out biblical realities in a grasp of his identity as designed by God. Understanding and applying an understanding of how God designed the individual and how He intends the individual to live is integral in achieving this goal.

# CHAPTER TWO Two Views of Man at Odds

From a historical and biblical perspective the individual consists of at least two parts, body and soul. Like two disconnected streams of thought in Christendom through the ages, differences of opinion between two-part (body and soul) and three-part (body, soul and spirit) views have been adhered to and debated. Although strong entrenchments have been dug on either side it is contended here that both views hold a kernel of truth toward a better overall understanding of man for improved pastoral ministry. Too often have theologians _anchored_ _their thoughts_ 19 in a predisposition or preconceived notion through a less than inclusive study of man and the importance of man's basic make-up and function.

According to a historic view of Scripture man's design consists of at least two-parts. Few orthodox lines of reasoning from Irenaeus and Augustine to Hodge and Grudem lead in other directions toward monism or pluralism in assessing man's basic substance. Throughout history prevailing opinions along either two-part or three-part views have variously prevailed. Current trends may reflect a growing advance in the direction of a three-part view. Kim Riddlebarger notes that although in current evangelical thought the majority of evangelical theologians may adhere to a two-part view, most grass roots evangelicals appear to adhere to a three-part view. Andrew White further suggests a resurgence of a three-part view beginning in the 19th century.

In this current debate a prevalent demeanor from adherents of the two viewpoints is often a mere dismissal of the other view. At the same time there is an uncertainty within the framework of both views. In a core of uncertainty both schools of thought pepper their treatments of the subject with the word "seems." Three-part adherent Winston Smith suggests that the "majority of Christian counselors _seem_ to have adopted a three-fold, or three-part, approach...." Theologian Wayne Grudem takes the stand that "Scripture does not _seem_ to support any distinction between soul and spirit," and "there does not _seem_ to be satisfactory answers to questions we address to adherents of a three-part view." Grudem then concludes his treatment of this subject with a less than scholarly charge of anti-intellectual tendencies in a three-part view.

While three-partists tend to ignore two-part points, two-partists appear more fervent in their refutation of a three-part view with harsh charges. Riddlebarger boldly states that three-partism has been rejected by virtually all major theologians in all streams of Christian tradition. Gary Crampton states that this view "originated in the fourth century with Apollinarius the Younger." These charges may not hold up under close and objective scrutiny. It is well known that Irenaeus in the second century was a three-partist in his beliefs. Theologian Charles Hodge charges blithely that three-partism is anti-scriptural. This is a strong statement that requires close and careful objective examination. Inspection along the lines of a cumulative case for functional three-partism and historic progressive revelation may not be in agreement with Hodge's simple and largely undefended assessment. The application of biblical semiotics also appears to reach beyond historical methods of research in favor of a three-part view of man.

Theologians have traditionally pointed out the belief that revelation is progressive. The theological developments of the Divine Trinity and the Messiah are historic cases in support of this progression. Two-part scholar John Laidlaw posits agreement stating that with regard to anthropology "We must be prepared to find growth in the use of psychological terms in Scripture." George Eldon Ladd points out more particularly with regard to the development of anthropology in Pauline psychology that the term _pneuma_ advances as a priority while _psuche_ is in retreat. This advance toward an understanding of man may be growing in a direction away from a two-part and inclined toward a functional three-partism.

# CHAPTER THREE A Prevalence of Three Functional Components

Many theologians who are two-partists with regard to man's design actually adhere to a functional three-part view. A functional three-part adherent is a two-part scholar who notes a difference in the _functioning_ of the unseen aspect of man. That is that there is a clear and significant difference in the functional modalities in the terminologies of spirit and soul from Scripture. The soul of man represents man in connection with this world and relationships on a horizontal level but when the spirit of man is mentioned the reference is to his interaction with God and a perpendicular relationship. Augustus Strong and Martin Luther are two examples according to Jeffrey Boyd although Luther could be cited as a literal three-part adherent. Others of this persuasion are George Eldon Ladd, Henry Clarence Thiessen, Jeffrey H. Boyd, Larry Crabb and Jay Adams, Dallas Willard, and others.

In 1846 Franz Delitzsch began a quest for an understanding of the biblical references for soul and spirit. This professor of theology with a background in linguistic work began his study adhering to and defending a two-part view with much to commend it. By the end of his studies he had adopted a three-part view of man. Delitzsch seemed to have concluded merits in three-partism from a cumulative case assessment of Scripture. Aside from the charges of two-parts that three-partism is based mostly on Hebrews 4:12 and I Thessalonians 5:23 the view represents a cumulative case assessment of a biblical picture of man. This will be further examined later in this important foundation for engaging in an effective ministry to creatures of God's specific design.

In spite of those who would reject literal three-partism out of hand, there is substance to the view when considering the functioning of man. This functioning of man is the domain of the pastor who seeks to lead the members of his flock toward living life at peak efficiency, growing into the image of the One who created him (Col. 3:10). A major question of first concern is whether or not there is any distinction at all between spirit and soul in man. It is granted as assessed by the two-part view that these two terms for the unseen part of man are very often synonymous, both speaking of the unseen aspect of man. But are they altogether the same? Are the terms altogether accordant? Is A. McCaig correct in stating that there is no faculty ascribed to the soul that is not ascribed to the spirit? If this is true then why is it that many who adhere to a two-part view note two inner functions in practical design signifying a different focus and role of the inner man where Scripture references either soul or spirit?

It is important to address objections that are commonly raised between these two views of man in order to take steps toward a method of helping individuals function best within God's design. If there are functional differences between spirit and soul, something that Grudem suggests is so crucial to this argument, then those differences must be made clear. Other passages on man that appear to state four separate parts to man (Mk 12:30) must be considered in this pursuit as well. Of how many parts is man comprised? These objections are important considerations for an objective, theological and scholarly study and will be addressed.

# CHAPTER FOUR Why This Impacts Ministry

The grand importance of this issue has significant implications in pastoral ministry particularly with preaching. Pastors are those who care for the soul. The "soul" in this context is used, as is often the case in Scripture, for the whole person; the entire synthesized human being not solely an inner aspect of man. Developing a working model of the design of man is a first step toward comprehending the proper functioning of the individual for application in pastoral ministry. Pastoral Anthropology will impact how the pastor approaches preaching as well as all ministries to his flock. How he perceives the individual will steer his approach of leading people toward wholeness and Christ likeness. A pastor who adheres to a strict two-part view will not perceive goals in ministry the same as one who observes three parts or functions. Their views and approaches will be modified by the comprehensiveness of their model of man. Understanding the inner individual will provide a step toward best meeting the needs of the congregants by addressing core needs of the whole individual as divinely designed. Approaches for applied curatives will differ greatly at times. Each ministry leader will additionally approach passages in Scripture regarding the self life with hermeneutical and applicable differences. If there are significant differences between soul and spirit then curatives to the whole man will differ. These differences will be addressed depending on how the pastor perceives the makeup of the individual.

In dealing with the whole man as a care person of the soul the pastor deals directly with man's self life. The inclinations of and struggles with the self are focal points in many Scripture based messages and therefore of particular concern to the preacher. If the inner _soul_ of man is synonymous with the _self_ of man and therefore refers to the self-directing life of man in general, then this should have a major impact not only on preaching but on hermeneutical preparation for preaching. A comparison of Matthew 16:26 where _psuche_ (soul) is translated "self" with its parallel in Luke 9:25 where _eautou_ (himself) is translated "self," reflects that the word soul, where specifically referring to the inner man, implicates man's self-life as problematic to optimal living. Where self is dominant in the outlook of a believer he is said to be "of the flesh." It is this flesh ( _sarx_ ) that wars within the man (Galatians 5:17) in contention with the Holy Spirit. The flesh as an aspect of _self_ is comprised also of the works of the mind functioning without a spiritual leading by the Holy Spirit. If the soul equates strictly with the self in Scripture then a strict two-part view may miss finer points of the differences between references to soul and self but the literal or functional three-part view would not. These distinctions would have an impact on the ministry of proclamation for the individual since the two-part, seeing spirit and soul as strictly synonymous, may fail to see particular aspects of the life of the spirit. A two-part model of man in ministry would lean toward a psychological model of pulpit ministry. The repercussions of such a posture will be detailed later.

Preaching is formulated and delivered differently through lenses of differing anthropological models. Adherents of two-part versus three-part views may very well approach the discipline of sermon preparation, delivery and even assessing results in different ways. Does godly preaching involve something more than merely a higher content of information? And if the Holy Spirit is highly involved in godly preaching how would the two-part and three-part differ in their assessments of just how this is to occur? Thomas Oden suggests that we know good preaching when we hear it because, "it touches us viscerally." But what does this mean? Can the two-part view tell us? Can the three-part view tell us? How would each of these views define a "visceral touch" related to quality preaching? These are things pastors may understand better in a studied scrutiny of man and will be addressed as well.

Anthony Hoekema addresses the notion that the church must be concerned with the whole person in preaching. Addressing the mind, emotion and will should involve more than communicating intellectual information. How specifically may this be approached? Would two-part and three-part views of man differ here in their impartation of truth? If so, then in what ways? Answers to these questions may assist the pastor come nearer to a better model of preaching ministry to the whole man in accord with divine design.

Oden suggests that a quality necessary for the care of souls is psychological insight through a knowledge of effective psychotherapy. Would Pauline psychology agree with this assessment of man's inner need? Is this a limited view of soul care and if so then in what way is it limited, from what theological perspective does it originate and what might replace it? How do psychotherapeutic techniques mesh with the preaching of the cross of Jesus Christ, if they do at all? In what ways do such techniques or approaches minister to man as a selfish being?

The self life takes a central role in this issue and that self as defined by two-part or three-part views requires clarification toward a common ground understanding and best depiction of what the self life entails. It was the lack of self-control in Adam that initiated original sin and that original sin was closely connected to a "feeling orientation" of self-centeredness rather than a "commandment orientation" of God-centeredness with Adam. The manner in which man's soul (his self) is implicated here is important in pastoral ministry generally and pulpit ministry specifically. The concept of self needs to be understood more specifically in order to more effectively minister to the individual.

An important component in this debate is a study of the flesh ( _sarx_ ) in Scripture. The flesh is largely connected with the inner workings of man and closely connected with self. In its most rudimentary form, the flesh is simply human life generally. It is human life on its own and more particularly non-Christian life and practice. Although the apostle Paul points out that people are either controlled by the flesh or the Spirit (Romans 8:9) he also refers to the flesh as something the believer continues to struggle against (Galatians 5:17). This ongoing struggle within man to which Paul himself refers, or referred to, in his own life (Romans 7:21-24) is a significant issue for understanding the physiology of the inner man. Just as the soul aspect of man is said to have to do with man's outer relationships in this world for functional three-partists, so the flesh also refers to the sphere of societal relationships. The flesh includes the volition with a willing subject in order to execute its beliefs. The flesh and the soul appear to have this in common, they are both connected with the self life. Walking according to the flesh (Romans 8:4) involves self effort, self-rule and self-anything, fulfilling the lusts of the flesh. The manner in which the flesh is depicted by a two-part or three-part view therefore is crucial. If the self life may be biblically addressed more specifically rather than merely generally then deeper ministry may be achievable in this specificity.

A major feature in the ministry of the pastor is to seek results in effecting the will for change in individuals toward right or corrected action out of a best inner motive. In this task of soul care the power of volition is particularly crucial. The decision making process in man is a major thoroughfare between light and darkness, between a good life and a not so good life. If the pastor may better prepare himself to unveil this gateway in a manner that allows his flock to continually make better and higher choices in their lives then he will be more fulfilled in his service and his people will be more blessed in their following. The basic constitution of man in God's design may hold an important key in this important task.

For the pastor as well, if he is to be his best self, his consecrated self and his highest self then knowing the anatomy and physiology of that whole self is imperative. The pastor must get beyond felt needs to the core needs of man. To reach the core needs the core of man must be adequately understood. With Jesus as the model of pastoral ministry, the distinction between his ministry and that of the other religious teachers of his day stood out in obvious authoritative contrast (Matt. 7:29). Is this something that may be distinguished through an examination of man's basic design? If the answer is yes in any way then the question is significant. The ministry of Jesus spoke straight to the innermost heart of his listeners. If there is any connection at all between how He addressed man, knowing specifically what was in man (John 2:25), and man's innermost self that we may also know, then this approach must be biblically discernable for the best and highest ministry.

# CHAPTER FIVE Goals in this Book

The primary goal in this work is an analysis and comparison of the two-part and three-part models of man applied in the context of pastoral ministry. It is to understand a definition of holistic ministry in a pastoral context gleaning from both two-part and three-part models of man toward a more refined and biblically specific ministry to the individual with particular application in preaching ministry. Biblical evidence is examined in this analysis and comparison in order to outline the function of man to pastorally assist the individual toward his best self. Two-part and Three-part viewpoints are compared particularly in the context of the soul and self toward a definition of ministry that contributes to an understanding of man in a holistic and synthesized personality.

In this research it is assumed that a biblically holistic ministry to the individual is the best ministry for the individual. An individual, as biblically defined and divinely designed may only be best and fully ministered to in and within the parameters of that biblical definition. A full and clear definition of what exactly constitutes an individual in both seen and unseen substances is therefore required for a clear biblical ministry as opposed to merely a secular form of ministry. Scripture as originally given and understood in perspicuity reveals truth for all life (2 Peter 1:3) including a best workable biblical anthropology. The Bible is considered an inerrant and dependable guide for understanding godliness including God's formation of the holistic individual. Biblical research should fully reveal the "what" and "why" of holistic humanity reflecting a clear inner physiology of man. In this light a complete biblical anthropology is discovered within a scripturally supportable model of man.

Studied and godly biblical scholars disagree on the interpretation of biblical texts in the subject of anthropology. The hope is that this work will contribute toward an applied analysis of man in the context of pastoral leadership and not end the debate on man's individual constituents. Pastoral issues for the most part are applied here in the arena of preaching ministry and therefore other areas of pastoral care such as counseling, administration, ceremonial leadership, leadership in music worship and others are left for another time. The researcher has sought to avoid the limitations imposed by preconceptions. This study prioritizes objectivity toward the best model for the pastor from an understanding of God's design. The researcher desires to avoid his own limitations in perceptions with the awareness that each individual is inclined toward an inborn contractual relationship where the brain is disposed to believe what is perceived and the eye tends to look for what the brain desires. An objective evaluation of truth is the goal in this study toward improved pulpit ministry as listeners are served based on how they are designed by God to be served spiritual truth.

An important objective here is a more universally acceptable view of man from two divergent streams of thought that represent a majority evangelical view of man. A functional three-part view is put forth as a considerable step toward bridging the gap between these disparate views of man for the purpose of establishing a fundamentally sound, broadly acceptable pastoral anthropology that contributes toward nurturing the best functioning individual through the ministry of preaching. Along this path areas of major concern are the soul, the will and the flesh ( _sarx_ ) of man toward a divinely ordered personality with particular attention paid to an application in preaching. The goal is preaching where no distinction is made between the word and the person who utters that word. With the goal in mind that God Himself speaks through His prophets/preachers (Is 55:11), a main consideration here is what this may mean in a two-part versus three-part context?

# SECTION 2

# TWO VIEWS OF MAN EXPLORED

# CHAPTER SIX The Two Part View

### A Case for Two-part view

Historic Evangelical scholasticism leans toward an understanding of man as comprised of at least two parts (body and soul). The most prevalent point made in favor of a substance two-part view over a three part view is the apparent interchangeable nature of the terms soul and spirit as biblical references to an unseen aspect of man. Neither theological school of thought argues this point however it should be pointed out that either soul or spirit may speak of man's unseen nature. At death Scripture states that either the soul departs or the spirit departs. Either spirit or soul are said to be capable of sin. It is also understood that body and soul together constitute the whole man. According to Wayne Grudem, "everything that the soul is said to do, the spirit is also said to do, and everything that the spirit is said to do the soul is said to do." Further, Scripture reflects that devotion to God as well as joy and sorrow are attributed to both the spirit and the soul. The two terms are clearly synonymous in some sense.

The common use of soul and spirit as references to an unseen aspect of man is indisputable. This fact weighs in favor of a two-part view of man. Man is at least, as R. C. Sproul states, "a duality where the human being is one entity with two distinct parts." The spiritual and material aspects of man in the context of unity is important since man is a whole being and not a being of mere separate parts. Although Scripture recognizes a distinction between the inner and outer man, it also stresses the ultimate unity of the individual. God relates to man as a whole and not merely "spiritually." Overtly segregating man into unnecessary parts or substances is perceived as a threat to the wholeness of man everywhere emphasized as vital in Scripture. It is not merely man's soul that needs saved but the whole man. It is not only man's body that requires redemption but man in totality. Overly segregating man in constituent parts toward which a three-part view allegedly leans represents a threat to this wholeness. Simply put, a two-part view retains a view of man in a simpler form, holding less threat of partitioning the individual in unorthodox ways. The Manicheans and others have overly separated aspects of man in ways that threaten the wholeness of the individual and consequently vilify one part of man over another part of man. Adhering to a two-part view of man unquestionably lends itself to avoiding these kinds of errors. The theological ground of two-partism is certainly safe ground.

Genesis 2:7 is a Scripture used by both schools of thought to support their view. It is thought that God's means of creating man must be taken into consideration for an understanding of how man came together. Scripture states, "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 being." (NKJV) John Laidlaw has stated that this is a ground-text of biblical psychology where there are "plainly two constituents in the creation: the one from below, dust from the ground; the other from above, the breath of life at the inspiration of the Almighty." The Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament is in agreement with this interpretation of the text stating that the soul aspect of man mentioned here, "does not refer to the soul merely, but to the whole man as an animated being." In other words, there is no indication here in Genesis 2:7 that there are three distinct components of man but simply that life was breathed from God and as that life was breathed into a constructed material form, man became a living individual.

Two-partists have argued a solid circumstantial case for a two substance view of man. The synonymous nature of soul and spirit with man is unquestionable throughout Scripture. In Matthew 6:25 and 10:28 man consists of body and soul. In Ecclesiastes 12:7 and I Corinthians 5:3&5 man consists of body and spirit. The case for sameness in terms of the hidden part of man is firmly based. Man is at least a two-part view.

### A Three Part Response

In the argument that spirit and soul are essentially the same, Grudem speaks with uncertainty and states that, "it _appears_ that they are sometimes used interchangeably." In light of such a statement it cannot be doubted that spirit and soul are both unseen components of man or aspects of the unseen component of man. They both comprise the inner man consisting of the animating source of life, but that alone does not require or insinuate absolute sameness. Only one passage appears to infer that soul and spirit are essentially the same in the commonality of using the term spirit between both mankind and animals. Since spirit alone is used here it is alleged that soul is inferred in the mention of spirit. Ecclesiastes 3:21 says, "Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?" (NKJV). Certainly the reference may be boiled down to simply creatures alive versus creatures dead with spirit as the animating integral component. The Ecclesiastes verse is easily interpreted as a general statement that both animals and man live and then die. The use of spirit as an aspect of the unseen animating part of life may be used in a very general sense here as simply this animating source of life. The question of Solomon here is actually an _erotesis_ 67 and is posited not for information or to state factually but reflects a question asked in ignorance in keeping with much of Ecclesiastes. The query here therefore is one of general uncertainty regarding specifics with the issue of life and death. It is therefore not necessarily suggesting an absolute sameness between soul and spirit.

A simple two-part view of man may be safe and simple but not necessarily the best or most complete view of man in totality. Although the issue of wholeness does come under threat in an ontological three-part view, such a threat is not altogether missing from two-part view. Monistic viewpoints make the same charge against a dualist view of man. Jose Comblin has stated that, "Often dualistic notions of 'body' and 'soul' have served to simply separate and overly individuate, which can lead to an ultimate devaluing of the human being." Any two-part view leaves a threat of questioning or threatening man's unified wholeness as much as does a three-part view.

### Functional Three-part views Among Two-partists

A glitch in the armor of strict substance two-part view is the widespread agreed upon understanding that the terms soul and spirit, referring to the unseen component of man, are not absolutely synonymous terms. Even those who adhere to a two-part view will concede this reality of differences between soul and spirit as used in Scripture. As stated in chapter one, an overwhelming number of two-partists adhere to a descriptive functional three-part view as they seek to explain obvious differences between the terminology of soul and spirit as used throughout Scripture. A difference of some kind is universally agreed upon. Augustus Strong attempts to clarify the differences by stating that when these terms are employed as contrasting terms they are "designating the immaterial principle from different points of view." Boyd refers to differences in terms of how the individual _relates_ , whether to God (spirit) or to the environment (soul). Even stalwart two-partist Charles Hodge refers to differences in "susceptibilities and powers." Hodge unfortunately does not clarify his idea of "susceptibilities and powers." It would have been helpful to hear from him just what he thought that meant. He only states without qualification that differences in function do not contribute to the case for ontological three-part view and we should therefore be satisfied with his statement.

Scholars agree that the term "soul" refers to a lower aspect of man's inner self and "spirit" refers to a deeper characteristic of man in relation to God. Welch calls the soul an emphasis on mankind's weak and earthly existence while spirit highlights life as derived from God. Simmons refers to the soul as earthward while references to the spirit refer to man's higher part. Strong writes that soul is man's "nature looking earthward, touching the world of sense while spirit is man's higher part, related to spiritual realities." Ladd states this identically adding only that soul designates a person in relation to other people while spirit is the individual in relation to God. The idea that "soul" is that aspect of man inclined toward the horizontal and "spirit" is that aspect of man inclined more perpendicular is repeated again and again by scholars such as Payne, Laidlaw, Sheldon, Boyd, David Clark, Monaghan, Larry Crabb, Hoekema, McDonald, and Ladd. Grudem agrees in effect, acknowledging only that the use of spirit is more frequently used in man's relationship with God. A distinguishing factor in biblical usage of soul and spirit referencing the unseen aspect of man reflects a clear perpendicular (spirit) versus horizontal (soul) proclivity in the functioning of man contingent on Biblical usages of these terms.

Further distinguishing factors emerge identifying a higher versus lower aspect of the inner man where soul is used with reference to the carnal side of man or the feelings, affections and impulses. Spirit in man is then connected with man's intellect and that aspect of man inhabited by the Holy Spirit. This sounds much like the rational, irrational soul of Augustine placing him also in this camp as a two-partist who is a functional three-partist. These proclivities, viewpoints and functions lead to significant differences in the biblical usage of spirit and soul, leaning in the direction of substantial distinction between the two. The designation of two-part adherents that spirit references the highest aspect of man, with higher inner properties and is that aspect of man that is immortal represents a designation not far from a material distinction in three-part views. It is clear that although the terms soul and spirit are often used synonymously, such is not the case exclusively. There are agreed upon diverse abilities within the term usage of soul and spirit in Scripture.

A tertium quid of the inner man is held by Assemblies of God scholar Myer Pearlman. He suggests that both two-partists and three-partists are correct in their essential outlook on man. Spirit and soul represent two sides of man's non-physical substance, two modes of operation. He asserts a sameness and yet distinction where they "permeate and penetrate each other." Pearlman seems to best define at the same time a difference and yet sameness where the spirit is the center and source of human life and the soul adheres to and uses this life. "Thus soul is embodied spirit, or a human spirit operating through a body, the combination constituting man as a 'living soul.'"

This functional three-part view, although not referred to as a three-part view by most two-partists, is more in line with a biblical depiction of the whole man in seen and unseen capacities. This apparent paradox in seeking to define soul and spirit, so difficult to elucidate, has been equated in a metaphor to light. Light is manifest as a wave or a particle (as with all atoms). Seemingly a contradiction, the difficulty is not with the substance itself but with the perception of the examiners. Such is also the case with defining and understanding spirit and soul. The problem is more with the perception of differences than in any other place. The difficulty may be more with a human perspective and limitations therein with grasping spiritual realities than the actual realities themselves.

Since a functional three-part view is nearly universal among those who adhere to only two parts to man how is this different from a material three-part view? If viewpoints are different, perceptions are different, initiative, viewing, susceptibilities and powers are all different within man between spirit and soul as adhered to by substance two-partists as stated above, how is it not more simple and logical to conclude that man is materially three parts as opposed to merely functionally three parts? Does logic dictate that a two-part view is the more rational view or that a functional three-part view more accurately defines the differences within the basic make up of man?

### Weaknesses and Questionable Assertions

Grudem has stated that "Scripture does not _seem_ to support any distinction between soul and spirit," and yet evident distinctions as mentioned above are pointed out by a significant number of many two-part scholars. The soul references a lower, even carnal aspect of man and the spirit references a higher even immortal aspect of man. There is clearly substantial distinction in the biblical usage of soul and spirit.

The trumped up charge that a three-part view has been rejected by virtually all major theologians in all streams of Christian tradition is an allegation without foundation. In this vein of thought, two-partist's rejection of a three-part view is often linked with the heresy of the fourth century Christological teaching of Apollinarius, a man considered a champion of orthodoxy until his later years. Berkouwer points out that Apollinarius developed his Arian Christology in a two-part belief of man. Attributing to Christ a human body, human soul but not a human spirit (reason), his Christology was condemned by several Church Councils (362, 377, 378, and 381). Gary Crampton erroneously states that the three-part view "originated in the fourth century with Apollinarius the Younger," yet it is well known that Irenaeus in the second century adhered to a three-partist view. Thus two-partists tend to link Apollinarius and his mistaken three-part Christology with a three part anthropology. This connection is _non sequitur_. Apollinarius did not develop a three-part model of man. To use his Christological error as a refutation of anthropological three-partism results in a false allegation and conclusion. Apollinarius erred in his Christology, not his anthropology. He denied to Christ a human spirit, teaching the deity of Christ but denying the completeness of His humanity. Thereafter however, the Christology of Apollinarius was erroneously linked with an anthropological three-part view. The two were linked in theological thought and the anthropological three-part view was tarnished by association in the minds of scholars with views of an Arian Christology. As a result, three part views of the human composition were avoided out of fear of Apollinarian heresy. A fear that was clearly unfounded. These views therefore did not experience a revival until rethought in the nineteenth century.

Two-partists repeatedly point out that a three part model for man is inconsistent given the apparent four part suggestion of man in Luke 10:27 and Mark 12:30. The allegation is that the enumeration of soul and spirit in I Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12 carry no more weight in favor of three-part view than the enumeration of heart, mind, soul and strength in Luke 10:27 toward a four part model. This comparison fails to take into consideration the substantial difference between the theology of Jesus and that of the Apostle Paul. Paul was arguably the first great Christian theologian. As a theologian there was a significant difference between what Paul _wrote_ about man and what Jesus _said_ about man. The thematic material in Paul's theological teachings is "strikingly different from those of Jesus." Paul's hermeneutic is certainly more sophisticated since "with the Pauline epistles we are given a theological exposition as a result of the finished work of Christ." Paul unfolded doctrines of grace that were latent in the teachings of Jesus. Jesus taught in simile, metaphor, parable, and other general methods where Paul was more the specific theologian. The Gospels record what Jesus spoke but the epistles of Paul contain specifically penned theological concepts. By comparison, if all we had from the apostle Paul was his speech material written in the book of Acts, his teaching would also be general and meager by comparison. Consequently the generalizations of Jesus in his admonition to follow God with one's entire being are not equal to the specific elaborations of the apostle Paul who was more precise in his teachings to the church. One example of this comparison is where Jesus commands his disciples to love their neighbor as they love themselves already (Mt. 19:19), a description in relationship, whereas Paul is more specific with regard to man himself stating that no man ever hated his own flesh (Eph. 5:29). It may be observed then as Richard Lischer has said, "the Gospels give the plot, and the Epistles give the theological structure." A direct comparison then of Jesus' admonition to love God with all the heart, soul, mind and strength is not on parallel with Paul's admonition to be sanctified spirit, soul and body.

Two-partists will appeal to the "testimony of consciousness" with regard to individuals understanding themselves to be comprised of body and soul. Since no man is conscious of spirit as distinct from soul then existence of more than two substances of man cannot be rationally assumed according to Hodge. This testimony rests in a form of empiricism as opposed to beginning with faith in what God has recorded in His Word. It is a psychological, empirical approach, as opposed to a biblical approach, to assume that what may be known is restricted to that which is discernible by the physical senses. Empirical methods cannot measure that which is not material. That includes a discernment between what is of the soul and what is of the spirit in man, something only Scripture may accomplish (Hebrews 4:12). This argument therefore establishes a slippery precedent and is specious at best. If believers were constrained to believe only what was empirically verifiable individuals would be hard pressed to know for a fact that they have eternal life (1 John 5:13) or any of the many deep truth of divine revelation. The testimony of consciousness is of little assistance in discerning between soul and spirit.

There are a number of cautions pointed out for the two-partist to consider. In denying an ontological distinction between soul and spirit there is potential danger in disregarding God's desire for the kind of worship He is seeking (John 4:24). Both genuine prayer and service may be intimately connected with that spirit in man whether material or functional (Ro. 1:9; 7:6; Eph. 6:18). Those who deny the importance of prevalence with the spirit of man in worship and service may remain weak in their inner man (spirit) and strong in their outer man (soul) – the opposite of God's intention (2 Cor. 4:16). Finally, a two-part view may reflect only an imprecise and generalized expression of distinctions within the soul/spirit nature of man. To retain a general concept because it is intellectually simpler and theologically safer does not make it more accurate.

# CHAPTER SEVEN The Three Part View

### A Cumulative Case

The fact that both soul and spirit refer to unseen aspects of man do reflect similarities. In fact there are many cases in which either may be used in reference to man such as in the departure of animating life from the body at death. One could say that the soul is departed or that the spirit is departed from a man to refer to death and be correct either way. This does not however make a case for utter sameness, only for similarity in that both constitute essential aspects of the animating unseen facet of man. Scripture in fact reflects distinguishing factors between the soul and spirit in no less than six specific instances (I Samuel 1:15; Job 7:11; Isaiah 26:9; I Corinthians 15:45; I Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 4:12). These stated distinctions should not be overlooked but must be understood as revelations of mans design.

Theologians have often pointed out that revelation is "progressive." The theological developments of the Divine Trinity and the Messiah are clear cases in point. The term "trinity" first appears in extant Christian literature during the mid-to-late second century. J. B. Heard states that "in the case of the doctrine of the Trinity it was not fully understood until the Spirit was given, so the distinction of _psuche (soul)_ and _pneuma (spirit)_ is implied rather than taught when the human race was still in its spiritual infancy." George Eldon Ladd points out with regard to the development of anthropology in Pauline psychology that the term _pneuma_ (spirit) advances as a priority while _psuche_ (soul) is in retreat. The main term for the inner aspect of humanity in the Old Testament and the rabbis was _nephesh (Heb. soul)_ or _psuche (Gk. soul)_. In Pauline Scripture the main term is _pneuma (spirit)_. The ascendancy in the use of _pneuma_ over the use of _psuche_ with reference to man in the New Testament depicts an advance in understanding man which is more specific in this Age of Grace and more specific to man in his redeemed state.

A possible advance in an understanding of man may be leaning in a direction away from a two-part view and inclination toward the realization of a three-part view currently. Trends note a growing advance in the direction of three-part agreements since in contemporary evangelical thought most evangelicals in general appear to adhere to a three-part view. Andrew White further suggests the resurgence of a three-part view beginning in the 19th century. It is the case that the church throughout the ages has held to at least a dualistic view of man based on the understanding from Scripture that man survives the death of the body. This simplistic view is accurate as far as it goes but does not rule out a more complex understanding of man such as with a three part view. A dualist view may be rooted in truth while at the same time simply not reaching far enough into man's makeup for a complete comprehension of God's design. Anthropological progression may now be coming into its own as a biblical distinction between soul and spirit is noted by two-partists and three-partists alike. The reality of progressive revelation points to a fresh emphasis in a yet burgeoning anthropology toward at least a functional three-part view.

In 1846 Franz Delitzsch began a quest for an understanding of potential distinctions in the biblical references for soul and spirit. He began his study as an adherent of a two part view. His studies led him to adopt a three part view. Delitzsch seemed to have concluded the merits of a three-part view from a cumulative case assessment in agreed upon distinctions between references in Scripture to soul and references to spirit in man.

The distinguishing factors between soul and spirit are seen by three-partists in the first mention of the difference between the two although both two-partists and three-partists point to Genesis 2:7 in support of their view. Three part adherents would say that all three aspects of man are mentioned at the point of man's origin. We are told that, " _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_ _being_ _."_ (NKJV) The breath (spirit) of God as the source of life was breathed by God into the dust (body) that He had formed for man's frame. At the conjunction of God's breath and the dust of man's body there was created the life or soul of a man. The word breath is from the Hebrew "neshamah" which is also translated "spirit" in Proverbs 20:27 where it says, _"The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly."_ It is therefore pointed out that God's breath specifically formed the spirit of man within him. This also is stated in Zechariah 12:1; _"He also formed the spirit of man within him."_ God's breath of life then, infused into man's body, produced the animating soul as a second component of man resulting in man's complete self. This first reference to spirit, soul and body is important also by a principle of biblical hermeneutics known as The First Mention Principle. This is stated by Dr. A. T. Pierson as follows; "This is a law we have long since noted, and have never yet found to fail. The first occurrence of a word, expression, or utterance, is the key to its subsequent meaning, or it will be a guide to ascertaining the essential truth connected with it." The distinguishing factor of three parts to man in Genesis 2:7 is claimed as an argument for a three-part view. Man at creation is said to have been created in the image of God after the similitude of a tri-unity. The root meaning of the term "image" out of Genesis 2:7 is _shadow_. Man is said to be a reflection, a shadow of God, formed after His triune likeness as one reflection of his image.

In making a cumulative case for the three-part view a number of affirming pictures or types from creation indirectly reflect three parts in man also. A three part creation is common throughout Scripture. There were three courts in the tabernacle, three priesthoods, three heavens, three great feasts, three hells, etc. As recent as 1977 biologists have discovered that the biological world is not bipartite but at least tripartite. In nature there are three kingdoms, animal, vegetable and mineral. Matter exists in three forms, gas, liquid and solid. A prevalence of three parts in the created order suggests a semiotic pattern that contributes toward a three part understanding of man.

In I Corinthians 3:16 the Scripture likens man to the temple of the Holy Spirit. As God dwelt in the tabernacle and temple of old, so He dwells within the believer today. This comparison of the temple/tabernacle as a figure of the Christian man was a viewpoint specifically espoused by Martin Luther in his _The Magnificat_. It is widely known that the tabernacle and temple were divided into three specific parts. There was the outward court that all could see and then the inward, hidden part divided into two sections. The holy place was the first unseen part and after that the Most Holy Place where God Himself dwelt. These three parts of the temple where God dwelt are said to coincide with the three parts of man. The body is like the outer court which all may see. The soul within is like the holy place and is part of the inner life of man in devotion to God followed by the innermost Holy of Holies which equates to the spirit of man. The spirit of man is that place of regeneration and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. All of the activities in the holy place and in the outer court are regulated by the presence of God in the Holiest Place, the innermost place.

Three-partists attest that the image of God in man distinguishes human beings from the rest of creation and man's identity in spirit, soul and body depicts that distinguishing factor from the rest of creation. The three part nature of man then is seen in biblical figures, distinguishing features and also as plainly stated in Scripture.

### Strengths of a Three-part view

In a hierarchy of spiritual realities and a developing relationship with God it has already been observed by many two-partists that references to spirit in man speak more to that relationship with God while references to soul speak more to man's relationship with man. Spirit in man then is at least functionally deeper and higher in relating to God as compared with references to soul. These functional differences are agreed upon by most two-partists. Three-partists tend to explain this in an ontological or material difference between spirit and soul. The difference is based on the sense that the soul has no existence until the spirit and body come together. The spirit of man is the essence of man's life distinct from soul as described by Lamsa who said, "Spirit comes before soul and is finer than soul. The soul is subject to death but the spirit is indestructible." It is conjectured by three-partists that at creation with the spirit of man as the God-conscious part, man's spirit was in control of the whole man. At the Fall, the spirit of man dropped out of communion with God and the whole man fell into ruin. Adam's spirit died toward God relationally the day he ate the fruit. His soul did not die. He still possessed carnal/soulish life. He became dead to God as his spirit was severed from connection with God and fell out of communion. The human spirit thereby lost its dominion over the desires of the flesh and fell under the spell of sensual satisfactions. This ontological difference, it is asserted by three-partists, goes a long way in explaining why functional differences between soul and spirit are so pronounced in directions, susceptibilities and powers.

It is agreed that " _psuchikos_ (soulish) as used in Scripture always denotes the life of the natural world and whatever belongs to it, in contrast to the supernatural world, which is characterized by _pneuma_." Two-partists adhere to two moral _tendencies_ in man but three-partists define this in terms of _substantial differences_ between spirit and soul. These ontological or material differences between spirit and soul are explained in the context of man's initial fall where his spirit became severed from God. Two-partists have a challenge here explaining what died in man at the Fall since God's promise was that in eating the forbidden fruit man would in that day die (Gen. 2:17). Three-partists have no difficulty adding further that in a born from above experience, the Spirit of the Lord lives in the spirit of man (2 Tim. 4:22; 2 Cor. 3:17) and man becomes reunited with God, one in spirit with Him (I Cor. 6:17). The believer is admonished to walk after, follow after, the Spirit (Ro. 8:4,5). The Holy Spirit then lifts his spirit to a place of rule over soul and body by joining his spirit with the Spirit of the Lord making it "one spirit" with Him (I Cor. 6:17).

There are a number of places in Scripture that enumerate what appears to be a material or ontological distinction between soul and spirit. Paul (1 Cor. 2:14, 15), Jude (Jude 19) and James (James 3:15-17) all distinguish between what is essentially soulish (of the soul) and what is spiritual (of the spirit). The factor of separate essential natures between spirit and soul distinguishes them ontologically. In a fulfillment of God's promise of redemption, God gives man a new spirit (Ez. 11:19; 18:21) and yet the mind, as an aspect of the soul, is not yet new but requires the transformation of ongoing renewal (Ro. 12:2). This is another example of significant distinguishing features between soul and spirit.

Two-partists are correct where they notice a three part leaning in Hebrews 4:12 and I Thessalonians 5:23. These two passages specifically outline a clear distinction between soul and spirit. In Hebrews 4:12 _psuche_ and _pneuma_ are named in juxtaposition. The Greek word for "dividing" is used only here and one other place in Hebrews. In the other place where the Greek word for "dividing" is used (Hebrews 2:4, _merismos_ ), the meaning is clearly grammatically different in the context of a distribution of spiritual gifts. The reference in Hebrews 4:12 is unique as an activity of God's operational Word that penetrates into soul and spirit reaching to the notoriously obscure dividing line between these two aspects of man. This need for separability speaks to a fundamental difference between soul and spirit that no doubt has much to do with the agreed upon functional differences of the soul directed horizontally and the spirit directed more perpendicularly. It is notable further that 1 Cor. 15:45 also sets soul and spirit apart as separable elements of the internal structure of man. A distinction between the two cannot be missed biblically speaking. The only question that remains is what is the distinction?

I Thessalonians 5:23 obviously delineates a three part essence of man if it is to be taken at face value and if the theology of Paul is distinct and more sophisticated than the recorded teachings of Jesus in the Gospels. According to Robert L. Thomas, "that Paul saw man here as a threefold substance has been generally recognized since the early church fathers." The arrangement of three nouns with their articles and their connection by means of two "ands" (kai) renders this the most natural explanation. Greek scholar Henry Alford upheld three-partism in his work, _Alford's Greek Testament_. He maintained that _pneuma_ and _psuche_ are distinct in both I Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12. A distinction is also stated by the highly intellectual Adam Clarke where he writes that, "body, soul, and spirit are debased and polluted by sin and each is capable of being sanctified, consecrated in all its powers to God, and made holy."

The question of some kind of distinction between spirit and soul in man has been answered in the affirmative by both two-partists and three-partists. What must also be considered is whether or not A. McCaig is correct in stating that there is no faculty ascribed to the soul that is not ascribed to the spirit. This seems summarily inaccurate since many two-partists are functional three-partists in light of an apparent difference in focus for either soul or spirit in man. If there are functional differences between spirit and soul, something that Grudem suggests is so crucial to this argument,  those differences must be made clear.

It is alleged by three-partists that there are three notable functions of the spirit in man that are not found with reference to the soul of man. The different functions of soul and spirit are given in Scripture as follows. The functions of the spirit are basically three. They are communion (John 4:23), conscience (cf. Romans 1:9 & 2 Timothy 1:3) and an intuitive knowing (Mark 2:8). The specific functions of the soul are however different. These functions are comprised of mental rationalization (Psalm 139:14), volition (Job 7:15), and emotion (Song of Songs 1:7). The particular functions of the spirit of man and soul of man are identifiably both distinct and crucial.

Conviction of sin occurs in the spirit of man as an issue of conscience. It was David crying out from the conviction of his spirit asking God to renew a right spirit in him (Psalm 51:10). His conscience was pricked in his spirit as king who was specifically endued with the Holy Spirit as the anointed (1 Samuel 16:13). Believers who are forgiven and walking with God, have a conscience that is clean as the Holy Spirit bears witness in their spirit so that they have a knowledge and a certainty that they are children of God (Romans 8:16). In this knowledge the spirit therefore reflects the function of a perceptive knowing in a born again condition deeper than mind/brain cognition.

Knowledge of salvation is deeper than a mental assent in the mind (soul). It involves something known intuitively in spirit (Romans 8:16). This is a deeper perception or knowledge than the mental assent of the mind in the soul since the Spirit of God witnesses to the spirit of the individual that he or she is a child of God. The "perception" of spirit as seen with Jesus in Mark 2:8 meaning "to know and perceive fully," is an area of deeper knowledge than cognition because it is a function of the spirit. This is the area of knowing in the same way a person knows his or her own personhood (see I Corinthians 2:11). These tenets are plainly stated in Scripture.

Finally there is also communion as a function of spirit. God seeks those who worship Him specifically in spirit, not in soul alone (John 4:23,24; Philippians 3:3). The spirit of man is the place of direct fellowship with the Father. In spiritual worship, man in spirit is in communion with God (Ephesians 5:18,19) where one's spirit communes with and is energized by the Holy Spirit.

Two texts that are used to attempt to prove sameness between soul and spirit are Luke 1:46, 47 where Mary's soul magnifies and her spirit rejoices and also John 12:27 and 13:21 where Jesus is said to be troubled in soul and then troubled in spirit. If the spirit part of man's nature is deeper and more central to life, then it is not synonymous for Jesus to be troubled in soul at the onset of his passion week and then equally troubled in spirit later at the precipice of announcing his betrayer. Human betrayal is a deep source of affliction and the difference between the trouble in soul and trouble of spirit reflects a growing trauma with betrayal at hand in the John 13:21 passage. It is therefore not required that troubling of the soul and troubling of the spirit be the same. One is deeper than the other just as spiritual knowledge (Ro. 8:16) is deeper than soul knowledge (2 Cor. 5:16).

In the situation with Mary in Luke 1:46, 47 instead of seeing a sameness, there is actually a distinct difference between soul and spirit. If we understand that the spirit part of human nature _possesses_ characteristics whereas the soul only _expresses_ characteristics then Mary's statement makes sense for a three-part view as pointed out by Martin Luther. Her soul was expressive of magnification toward God and her spirit filled with rejoicing. Her rejoicing as a possession of spirit is stated in the aorist tense. The concept of aorist is ideally considered without regard for past, present, or future time and therefore qualifies as all-encompassing possessiveness of the stated verb. That rejoicing of spirit was then expressed through the soul. It is therefore not at all required that we see this mention of spirit and soul as sameness.

Prayer is an aspect of communion with God and spiritual prayer distinguishable from intellectual prayer. Paul describes this distinction in I Cor. 14:14 stating, "my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful." The different terms "suggest a separability of referents where mental prayer is intentional and propositional whereas spiritual prayer is involuntary and ineffable." The spirit of man, in agreement with a two part viewpoint, is that place of communion with God. God is not known by the mind alone or by earthly wisdom. The Bible says, "By wisdom [men] knew not God" (1 Cor. 1:21). God is not known through earthly cognitive wisdom. Knowledge of Him centers in a deeper source, man's spirit.

Distinguishing between soul and spirit reflects that the spirit of man speaks more to man's subconscious part (communion, conscience, intuition), and as internal adviser to the soul (mind, will, emotions). The spirit of man is made alive to God at the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:17). Understanding the things of God then come through this quickened spirit in communion with God by His Spirit. Understanding the things of God is known by means of the spirit of man (Job 32:8). This explains why the Lord's disciples in an unregenerate state were often perplexed with His teachings. They failed to understand much of what Jesus taught because they did not receive the Holy Spirit, quickening their spirit, until the night of His resurrection (John 20:22).

### Weaknesses of a Three-part view

Critics of three-part view have appropriately warned about the dangers of doing violence to the unity of man suggesting that an ontological three-part view of man threatens to "split man up into three parts." As a three-part view is ordinarily defined it may endanger the unity and immateriality of man's higher nature. Overtly dividing man has historically been "a scheme of thought for mystics and sectaries,"  often causing a rejection of a three-part view out of hand in some theological circles. Strong suggests that several errors emanate from a three-part view. They are Gnosticism, Semi-Pelagianism, Annihilationism as well as errors from Placeus and Julius Muller. Unquestionably, overly segregating man through three-partism is a danger. Three-partist Lester Sumrall has fallen into this error stating that at the fall of man, "It was the third person of the triune being inside of man that died." Witness Lee also runs into error falling into Gnosticism when he states that, "Although we cannot find a verse which states that man's body is Satan, there is a verse which clearly indicates that the fallen soul, the self, is Satan" (Mt. 16:22-24). Leanne Payne points out error from the three-partist Jesse Penn-Lewis where the parts of man are so disengaged from one another that the danger of deception for the believer leaves the individual in fear as to the reliability of his own understanding of Scripture or ability to hear from the Lord. Jesse Penn-Lewis adheres to a Manichean view of the body according to Payne. This substance segregation between spirit and soul lends itself to a danger of disengaging the conscious rational mind. Witness Lee's adherents particularly seem to hold to this overt separation of the inner mind with concepts like "get out of your mind and turn to your spirit," and repeated admonitions to turn inside to one's own spirit. Such dual functions within the individual may create a form of spiritual schizophrenia in the individual with apparent multiple forms of consciousness. Less crucial mistakes are also made with three-partism as with Bruce Narramore and his counseling techniques where the three parts of man require three different "physicians" when a pathological condition occurs. According to him a medical doctor, psychiatrist or pastor may be required contingent upon which element in man is most effected by that pathological condition. This danger of overly segregating man is a fair warning regarding weaknesses in a material or ontological three-part view.

Charles Hodge points out what he sees as weaknesses in the three-part view first from a lack of uniformity in Scripture and also opposition to the mention of three parts in the account of man at creation. The uniformity argument is based in the generally interchangeability of the terms soul and spirit for the unseen part of man and this has been easily refuted. The creation of man in Genesis 2:7 is used by both three-partists and two-partists to make their case but the weightier part of the argument seems to lie in favor of a two-part view. The text does not specifically state that man became spirit and soul, and the term "living being" is the same phrase used elsewhere of animals. If a deciding factor hinged on Genesis 2 alone the two-partist would have the stronger case.

# CHAPTER EIGHT Distinctions Between Soul and Spirit

It is agreed upon by both two-partists and three-partists that there is a functional difference between the usage of biblical terms soul and spirit in man. Delitzsch qualifies these differences in part as, "of one nature, but of distinct substances." This distinction may be further observed where the _soul_ of man _expresses_ certain invisible characteristics (Genesis 34:3, Psalm 57:1, John 12:27), and the _spirit_ of man _possesses_ invisible characteristics (Matthew 26:41, Daniel 5:12, Luke 9:55). Milton Valentine states that "The soul is related to the spirit as life to the principle of life, and as effect to that which produces it." This expression/possession distinctive is however sometimes questioned. Oswald Chambers suggests it is reversed in Is. 26:9 where Isaiah says, "With my soul have I desired Thee in the night (possession); yea, with my spirit within me will I seek Thee early" (expression). On the other hand the case may be made conversely that Isaiah's _desire_ for God is an _expression_ of his inner man where in his spirit alone does he have the ability to find God (possession). Another example of this expression/possession comparison is found in Luke 1:46, 47 where Mary's spirit conceived and _possessed_ joy and her soul then caused this joy to be _expressed_ through the body as she magnified God. Job possessed anguish in spirit and expressed bitter anger in his soul (Job 7:11). Hannah possessed a sorrowful spirit and consequently poured out her soul (1 Sam. 1:15). It appears to be conclusive that the spirit, a more central part of man, possesses characteristics and the soul expresses those characteristics.

Spirit and soul are further distinguished in that man has spirit but is soul, a point agreed upon by many two-partists including Laidlaw. Spirit in man is therefore the animating principle of life, the effective power of an individual without which there is no possibility of soul, a living soul. In further distinguishing between the terminology soul and spirit, Jeffrey Boyd points out that "Out of the nine characteristics of the biblical spirit and soul, in only one of these nine ways are the two words synonymous. There is a good deal of agreement that there are more differences than similarities with these two terms.

There are similarities between spirit and soul because both components comprise the unseen part of man. There are similarities between the mind in the thinking of the soul and the intuitive knowing of the spirit where a knowledge of being born again is assured. There are similarities between the emotion of the soul in loving God and the communion of the spirit with God but that communion of the spirit which _possesses_ characteristics is greater and deeper than those of the soul which mostly _express_ such characteristics. According to Scripture the difference between the two may be discernable through an application of the Word of God to the inner man (Hebrews 4:12).

In attempting to categorize the distinctions between spirit and soul either ontologically or functionally it is also notable that Paul classifies believers into three categories; the "spiritual man or _pneumatikos_ " (1 Cor. 2:15; 3:1), the "soulish man or _psuchikos_ " (1 Cor 2:14), and the "fleshly man or _sarkikos_ " (1 Cor. 3:1). These distinctions contribute to the agreed upon differences contingent on man's proclivity with soul or spirit. This _sarkikos_ or fleshly man and the crucial nature of this aspect of the individual for ministry is the topic of the following section.

# SECTION 3

# THE SELF LIFE

# CHAPTER NINE The Flesh in Soul

Throughout the classical period of Greek thought about man _sarx_ (flesh)was nearly always employed in a purely physical sense synonymous with _soma_ (body). From Homer (800 BC ?) to the two-part views of the Stoic Epictetus (AD 135) _sarx_ is almost exclusively a reference to the corporeal body. In its most rudimentary form, _sarx_ is simply human life generally. The ethical dualism where _sarx_ is at times equated with a force or influence within man that is potentially resisted in a development of virtue is not found until the writings of the Apostle Paul in the Greek New Testament. In New Testament times _sarx_ becomes a highly developed concept connected with heredity as an inborn evil tendency with man at enmity with God. It is human life on its own and more particularly non-Christian life and practice. Although the Apostle Paul points out that people are either controlled by the flesh or the Spirit (Romans 8:9) he also refers to the flesh as something the believer continues to struggle against (Galatians 5:17), a concept not agreed with in all two-part models.

### Against the "Sinful Nature" Idea

Jay Adams takes a behaviorist view in alleging that _sarx_ does not refer to a sinful nature within man but "the human body programmed to sin by the mind and behavior." Sarx is therefore a matter of habit or cognitive programming from the experiences of life for Adams. He refers to the idea of a prevailing sinful nature as, "an unfortunate... obvious interpretive bias that is wrong." Two-partist J. Gresham Machen has stated similarly that the idea of a lower aspect of man's nature referenced by the _sarx_ is a "deadly and far-reaching error." He interprets _sarx_ generally as the entire nature of man in a fallen condition, separated from God, repudiating the common notion of the old man new man condition that causes war within the believing individual (Gal. 5:17). Machen would only specifically identify _sarx_ as the inclination away from God found in unbelievers.

### Nature of Sarx

Few Christian scholars argue the notion of two natures with man and most two-partists and three-partists alike interpret _sarx_ as an inclination within, a principle of sin that resides in the individual. Mark Karlberg goes so far as to set apart _sarx_ as a distinct organism within the individual man. Valentine refers to activity of a sensuous nature that turns the soma (body) into _sarx_. Zuck mentions a propensity or orientation away from God where individuals are either unaided or unenlightened by God's Spirit. Ladd points out that _sarx_ is the unregenerate nature remaining with the believer causing inner conflict, even after receiving the Spirit. It is that tendency to disobey God in every avenue of life; that abode of sin requiring an obedient subject to execute its beliefs, the sphere of human rebellion against God. _Sarx_ is man as frail, weak, corruptible and humanly speaking inescapably sinful. It is one of Paul's favorite terms for the sinfulness of man and evidence of a fundamental hold that sin has on the life of the individual. It is his leading expression in counterpoise to the regenerate mind ( _nous_ ) in Romans 7, and to the spirit ( _pneuma_ ) in Romans 8 and Galatians 5. Cooper posits this contrast not as a body-soul dichotomy or duality of substances but an inner ethical-religious antithesis. His caution is to avoid potential Gnostic matter-spirit contrasts or Platonic type body-soul distinctions. The issue in defining _sarx_ is generally seen not of substance but of demeanor; not ontological but functional.

### What Controls Within?

Paul regarded people as motivated or controlled by either _sarx_ or Pneuma (Romans 8:9). The viewpoint of two-partists is inclined to see the _pneuma_ side of this back and forth control solely in terms of the indwelling Holy Spirit as opposed to the spirit of man since with the strict two-partist view there is little distinction between soul and spirit. Accordingly the whole of man is generally portrayed as either "flesh and mind" or "flesh and spirit/soul" referring to mere corporeity and incorporeity. The flesh is often perceived as that fallen nature which resists divine law and is contrasted with something in man's own nature wanting to do what is right. Those believers who are said to be "of the flesh" are babes in Christ who do not yet walk according to the Spirit according to some, but the idea of a carnal Christianity is denied by others who interpret _sarx_ as relating only to unbelievers. All said, there is a pervasive lack of agreement with two-partists in seeking to define the flesh.

### Generalizations of Substance Dualism

For the two-partist a distinction of inclinations within man is acknowledged but the generalization of substance duality fails to take into consideration any specificity with regard to a clear understanding of what the flesh consists. Hodge states that the contrast between _sarx_ and _pneuma_ in the New Testament is clearly a contrast between sinful works in unregenerate man and the Spirit in regenerated man. Strong intimates that _sarx_ is human nature without God, corruptible and perishable, consequently no room is left for that conflict in the believer as seen in Romans and Galatians. The flesh is related almost exclusively to an unregenerated person. These generalizations that do not substantially or functionally distinguish between what is of the soul ( _psuchikos_ ) and what is of the spirit or Spirit ( _pneumatikos_ ) leads to confusion, mystery or simply a dead end in understanding how man functions in higher or lower proclivities. Hodge refers to the relation between spirit and body as "mysterious" and, "That is, it is incomprehensible." Hodge admittedly does not know how man functions in spiritual dimensions and what may be functional distinguishing factors between the spirit (higher side of man) and soul. Dr. Andrew White states in similar fashion, "If there is a distinction between the mind and spirit, what is it? I have a great difficulty conceptualizing the difference." A two part understanding of man, particularly strict substance dualism, seems to reach little further than questions and mysteries in distinguishing the inner realities of man's spirituality. _Sarx_ for the two-partist tends to be limited in reference to unbelievers as a result of a generalized approach to comprehending man.

### Implications of Self for the Two-partist; Self and Soul

Generally speaking for the two-partist, the "soul" is equated to the self emphasizing emotions, desires and will. Ladd points out that Bultmann recognized _sarx_ as sometimes personified and practically equivalent to "I." The equivalence of self and soul in Scripture is common. Ladd also leans toward a functional three-part view stating that "living in the flesh means to live as an unregenerate person," and that the flesh is simply selfishness. Strong asserts that sin is due to the supreme choice of self or selfishness from a selfish state of the will. He states further that "the seat of sin (choice of self) is in the soul." A self-emphasized or soul-emphasized way of life are synonymous.

### Choices

If volition is a function of soul more so than spirit, either functionally or ontologically different from the soul, it poses a problem for the two-partist. The self factor or choices rooted in self-centeredness that makes mankind "people of the lie," is a common generalization for pure substance two-partism with no theological differentiation between soul and spirit as to origin. Where self is indistinguishable from soul the two-partist is pressed to better define spirituality within man outside a patent response and presumption of Holy Spirit inclusion. If self and soul are synonymous then a definition of dying to self for example (I Cor. 15:31) is difficult for the two-partist outside of a general inference of refusal to follow sinful inclinations. Transformation of the individual then rests more heavily on volition and generally trusting in the work of the Spirit. Choices become a matter of power of will without any rooted-ness in deeper transformation or core change.

### A Definition of Ministry from Two-partism

### Two Part Man versus the Psychological

Thomas Oden has suggested that a quality necessary in a care of souls for the pastor is psychological insight through a knowledge of effective psychotherapy. A strict substance two part view of man tends to lean this way in the direction of ministry defined synonymously with psychological models of soul care. Ministry models directed mainly to intellectual issues rely on a psychological outlook for man and reach only that far; to intellectual/emotional issues seeking to address man as a selfish being with problems somehow deeper than cerebral. Two-partism, where there is an emphasis on the rationale aspect of soul, is limited to a vague description of ministry to the inner man and is often relegated to mere intellectual illumination with illumination as an indefinable quality.

### Illumination of Mind

The illumination of the mind is an aim in a ministry that sees man as body and soul alone hopefully leading to right feeling and conduct. Hodge is correct in stating that God must first be known in order to be loved but relegates that knowledge to an illuminative intellectual process alone, a process of the mind. There is no spiritual dimension aside from hoping and trusting that God's Spirit will come alongside in participation for man's illumination. When it comes to spiritual issues with Hodge, understanding of spirituality is divided roughly between those who are born again and have the Spirit and those who are not born again. There is no in-between with Hodge, Grudem, and others in strict substance two-partism. To further complicate matters, illumination for the believer indwelt by the Spirit is actually presumed to a large degree. This presumption relegates automatic spirituality simply by possessing the Holy Spirit in a born again experience with no explanation as to what this may mean or how this may occur. This is a hasty conclusion that does not hold up under a broad study of the issue.

### Information Orientation

Ministry for the two-partist becomes largely a matter of correct information siphoned into the individual. The reception and application of that correct cognitive implant is only vaguely and generally left to the help of the Holy Spirit. Two-part ministry, like a two part view of man, is general in nature leaving loose ends with regard to the spiritual Godward side of an individual's deeper needs of complete inner transformation.

### Differences with Two-partists who are Functional Three-partists

Although a substance two part theory of ministry is somewhat vague and underdeveloped, a two-partist who is a functional three-partist like Ladd will have a more highly refined ministry model that will specify distinct aspects of ministry and assistance to the spiritual growth of the individual closer to that of a substance three-partist in specificity. Both perpendicular God-ward and horizontal man-ward inner needs will be addressed in this ministry model. For the two-partist who is a functional three-partist there are distinguishing factors where soul (inner man on a horizontal level) equates more with _sarx_ and self. Ministry to mans spirit transcends limited foci on horizontal levels, intellectual in nature, and represents a higher goal or target for which to aim in seeking to minister spiritual realities to the inner man for God's work of deep transformation. A substance two-partist makes no such distinction and is left with ministry that looks much like any other educational institution aside from better curriculum.

# CHAPTER TEN The Flesh and Spirit Contrasted

### What is Sarx to the Three-Partist?

Although Plutarch uniquely interpreted _sarx_ in terms of sensualism in his opposition to Epicureanism's synonymous use of _sarx_ and soma, _sarx_ is never classically set in opposition to _pneuma_ so definitively as with Paul in the Greek New Testament. In this distinction the three-partist view of _sarx,_ compared with the two-partist, faces similar differences of opinion with regard to a precise definition. Nee states simply that "man is flesh," also linking _sarx_ with heredity. T. Austin Sparks gives a more specific three part definition stating that man having fallen has become an altogether different type of species than what God created; "he is now a soul-man rather than a spirit-man pre-eminently." The Bobgans are more specific as well stating that _sarx_ is self (self-effort, self-rule, self-anything). Oswald Chambers refers to _sarx_ as the old disposition of man. With three-partists, _sarx_ is often used in connection with soul as opposed to spirit, with self-will of the soul contrasted with God's Will originating in the Spirit.

### Emphasis on the God-ward Aspect of Man

It is agreed among two-partists and three-partists that this self rule and hereditary inclination away from God and His Will rests with volition in the individual but may be superseded by the Spirit/spirit. What the two views disagree on is whether this dependency rests generally on the Holy Spirit or on the Spirit by specific means of the spirit in man. The three-partist's means of delineating this distinction is more specific in emphasizing the God-ward side of man and that it is the spirit made alive by the Spirit within man that may overrule the downward inclinations of the flesh.

### Three-partist's Specificity

Three-partists distinguish between volition leaning in the direction of the soul or self and volition leaning in the direction of spirit or God-wardness. As Watchman Nee states it, "Believers who live in the soul incline toward either will or mind or emotion; they all live in themselves." This natural inclination toward self of the soul is perceived in contradistinction with a man of the Spirit/spirit, a distinction with which a functional three-partist would agree. It is a God-wardness by faith that moves man from the inclinations of the _sarx_. Two-partists and three-partists would agree that although the crux of the issue rests with the will, "choice alone is not enough." Choice and personal involvement in order to be effective are energized by faith in God (Romans 8:5-8). Two-partists center this faith in soul and volition generally speaking, whereas three-partists center faith in the spirit and Godward aspect of man more specifically. For the three-partist, choices in the direction of God-wardness in man may grow to take precedence over soulish choices. Two-partists may agree but have no specific means to reflect how this may occur in man outside a functional three-partism.

### Three-partist's Implications of Self

In a scientific exploration toward a definition of self, Susan Greenfield in _The Private Life of the Brain_ states, "...I found it impossible to distinguish mind from the concept of self." She states further from a secular perspective that, "No one has yet identified the magic bullet, the center of consciousness...." Two-partists and three-partists alike would identify this essence of self, this "magic bullet" as the soul or spirit respectively. Two-partists would identify the soul generally and three-partists the spirit specifically.

### The Link of Soul with Self

Just as the soul of man is said to be linked with man's outer relationships in this world, so _sarx_ also refers to the sphere of societal relationships. _Sarx_ also has as its modus operandi, a perception of life from a human vantage point (2 Corinthians 5:16). Three-partists emphasize this distinction in man counterpoised with the spirit side of man's nature. Paul himself was accused of having operated according to _sarx_ or living according to his own selfish motives (2 Corinthians 10:2). In Scripture the soul (psuche) of man, as distinguished from man as a living soul (life) and distinguished from the spirit, is synonymous with the self and is connected with the self-directing life of man in general. The _sarx_ and the soul then have this in common, they both are intimately connected with the self life. A comparison of Matthew 16:26 where _psuche_ (soul) as the unseen aspect of man is translated "self" with its parallel in Luke 9:25 where _eautou_ (himself) is translated "self," reflects that the word soul may refer to man's self life. Where self is dominant in the outlook of a believer he is said to be of the _sarx_. It is this flesh that wars against the Spirit/spirit in man (Galatians 5:17). The flesh/self is comprised also of the works of the mind aside from the spiritual leading of faith by the Holy Spirit such as in the Galatians' error (Galatians 3:3). They wanted to be perfected through their own righteousness of good works generated by their own self-directing soulish choices instead of the works that come by faith through grace as directed by God. Knowledge of and action solely from the soul, the self, the _sarx_ does not produce spirituality, is not pleasing to God, and is often distinguished from the Spirit/spirit in man.

### Comparing Spirituality with Selfish Carnality

There are two passages that specifically compare what is spiritual with what is soulish, carnal or fleshly. In Romans 8:4-11 the believer is instructed with regard to an absolute difference between the realms "in the spirit" and "in the flesh." The expression "in the flesh" means to live as an unregenerate person. In Romans 8:9 where Paul states that believers are in the flesh unless the Spirit dwells in them, he is saying that there should be evidence of the Spirit making the human spirit alive if indeed the Spirit dwells within. The word "indeed" (NKJV) has the strict connotation of a question to whether or not it is _seen_ that the Spirit of God dwells within, as if to say, "if it is _perceivable_ that the Spirit dwells within." This raises the question of whether or not the work of the Spirit is manifest in a life, not merely residing within. The point is not salvation but an _expression_ of that which is said to reside within as is the case with the redeemed.

### Selfish, Soulish Believers

Another passage comparing believers who are soulish with those that are spiritual is I Corinthians 2:6-10. As spiritual ( _pneumatikos_ ) is contrasted with the fleshly ( _sarkikos_ ) in Romans 8, so also are the spiritual contrasted with the natural or soulish ( _psuchikoi_ ) in I Corinthinas 2. In I Corinthians 2:14 _psuchikos_ occurs in antithesis to _pneumatikos_ in vs. 15, and as a synonym of _sarkikos_ in 3:1. _Psuchikos_ is translated natural or unspiritual in various versions but a literal rendering would be the term soulish (of the soul). This term is used in a "manifestly derogatory sense... in the New Testament." What is observed then is that "in contrast to the _pneumatikoi_ are not only the _psuchikoi_ – those believers who do not evidence the Spirit – but also the _sarkikoi_ (fleshly; I Corinthians 3:1ff). The conclusion of Ladd, speaking like a substance three-partist, is that those who are fleshly are also soulish and unspiritual. This contrast brings out a clear distinction between soulish and spiritual, _sarkikos_ and _pneumatikos_ , and therefore a significant contrast between soul and spirit . When one considers the carnality found prevalent in the church at Corinth and the carnal issues dealt with by Paul at the church in Galatia and also the account in Romans 8 where believers are admonished to live in freedom from the indwelling sin of the flesh; it would seem that a believer may have the Spirit indwelling but not walk in the Spirit and consequently be considered "walking in the flesh."

### Soulish Equals Selfish

What is considered fleshly is considered soulish. To be soulish is to be soul-centered or soul-motivated, equivalent to self-centered or self-motivated. Contrasted with this is a spirit-centered believer who walks after the Spirit. Frequently a distinction is made to emphasize the weakness or inferiority of _sarx_ in Scripture, as opposed to the superiority of the Spirit/spirit. This does not convey the idea of an inherent sinfulness of the flesh (as with Gnosticism) but merely the idea of ignorance and frailty in comparison with the possibilities of a spiritual nature. A fleshly man is one who is controlled by his soul/self rather than the indwelling Holy Spirit. When an individual is controlled by the higher nature of what is spiritual he is then referred to as "spiritually minded" (Romans 8:6) as his spirit indwelt by the Holy Spirit oversees and directs the whole man including functions of his soul (mind, will, emotions). He is inclined toward God and not toward self. He is spiritual and not fleshly or soulish.

### Soulish Versus Spiritual

What is further observed is a widening distinction between soul and spirit. Flesh is always contrasted with Spirit, "to show how earthly orientation, values, and practices contrast with divine values and characteristics." The terms soulish and spiritual in the New Testament refer to individuals who are led by either the soul side of their inner man or the spiritual side of their inner man. In this context it can not automatically be concluded that a soulish man is one yet unsaved. Both Paul and James wrote to believers warning them of soulish living. The contrast is made between the spirit led man (spiritual) who is capable of making wise judgment (I Corinthians 2:15), who receives deeper truths of Scripture and can digest the meat of the Word (I Cor 3:1,2) and restores others in a spirit of meekness (Gal 6:1), and then the soulish man whose wisdom is from below (James 3:13-15), who cannot discern spiritual things (I Corinthians 2:14) and lives as an unbeliever (Jude 19). References therefore to the fleshly ( _sarkikos_ ) as synonymous with soulish ( _psuchikos_ ) can not be references exclusively to unbelievers. This reflects clear direction in ministry to the individual in terms of focus on what is of the Spirit/spirit as opposed to majoring on what is of the self/soul.

# CHAPTER ELEVEN A Definition of Core Ministry

### Spiritual Over Intellectual Goals Alone

In considering a distinction between ministry leanings with a two part outlook of man and those of a three part outlook, Watchman Nee suggests a difference related to soul and spirit in man. The benefits with listening to a biblical message may be considered differently. A two-partist may consider listening to the same sermon more than once as a useless time expenditure because he may consider Christianity and growth an issue of simply doctrine, storing correct knowledge in the mind. By contrast one who listens with his whole heart is touched differently in his spirit at each hearing of the same message. By every listening encounter the spirit is enlivened in God and the believer is edified. Ministry and edification entail a fellowship in spirit and not only a cerebral flow of ideas. Sparks notes a similar approach in ministry identifying differences between spiritual ( _pneumatikos_ ) as opposed to soulish ( _psuchikos_ ) means and goals in ministry, or Spirit/spirit directed versus psychological. This does not discount the intellectual aspect of spirituality but simply means that intellectualism and cognitive influx less than the apex of biblical edification.

### Ministry Flowing from Soul or Spirit

A three part model for ministry takes into consideration the needs of the horizontal aspect of man (soul) and the perpendicular God-ward aspect of man (spirit). The spirit of man (functional or ontological) serves as man's link with God and therefore a subconscious internal adviser to the conscious soul. Spiritual ministry may be contrasted with soulish ministry in a comparison of the ministry of Jesus with that of the biblically knowledgeable Pharisees. In this same contrast Nee proposes that "only the person through whom God can come forth is useful." What emanates from the self or from the Lord is compared with what comes from the soul or the spirit respectively. The goal in ministry is God's light shining on a needy heart bringing exactly what is needed with regard to edification, exhortation, comfort or conviction. As the light of God's presence shines, the flesh is thereby denied since no flesh can live in God's light.

### Reasoning is not Enough

Living by rational thinking alone is not the same as transformational spiritual living. Several examples are given in the Scripture regarding the invalid reasoning of the human mind by the Pharisees (Matthew 16:7,8; 21:25, Mark 2:6,8; Luke 9:46). Reasoning in these contexts means "to occupy oneself with calculations, to utilize the reasoning of the mind." If this use of the mind alone is a function of the soul aside from the spirit of man then this may be an erroneous approach to knowing God. As Deere has stated, "The Pharisees read, studied, and memorized the Bible more than most churchgoing people today... but they could not hear God's voice." Their ministry would not be considered spiritual ministry but one based on soulish rationalizations alone.

### Ministry from Spirit to Connect with God

The soul is clearly designed for horizontal relationships and living. It is not the soul that connects with God who is Spirit, it is spirit. If anything of value can be gleaned from the passages above with regard to the reasoning of the highly biblically literate Pharisees then it is that God cannot be apprehended by means of this function of man presumably in the soul. It is by the spirit, quickened by His Spirit, that man knows God and not by intellect or soul alone. With the mind one may know _about_ God but in spirit is where man worships Him, where God seeks worshippers to worship Him (John 4:23). That is how believers come to know Him personally and intimately, through an intimacy with God in spirit.

The question with ministry in the context of sin, the flesh, and self is what is ministry and what is not? Jesus gave a model of ministry in terms of the Holy Spirit flowing through His servants like rivers of living water (John 7:37-39). The quickening of the Holy Spirit through God's men has been an earmark of Spirit led ministry since Pentecost. By setting aside self-esteem for Christ-esteem and humbling self before God, man experiences renewal and revival that comes through spiritual ministry via the spirit and not merely the soul (Isaiah 57:15). In contrasting soulish ministry, self always desires to lead the way while hoping that the Holy Spirit will come alongside and assist. Self is unfortunately at the forefront in soulish ministry. Both functional and ontological three-partists repudiate mere intellectual, soulish forms of ministry as merely educational and not life-transforming.

It is here that the concept of death to self has a major importance and plays a pivotal role in the difference between what is of the soul (soulish) and what is of the spirit. It is brokenness that releases ministry as the Spirit flows through man's spirit in rivers of living water but the affecting of this comes through understanding the application of trials in life where God breaks the outward selfish part of man's nature. Addressing the needs of the self life in the power of spiritual preaching is a major subject of the following section.

### CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

### Is Ministry a Form of Psychology?

What is the difference in ministry with the controversy between these two theologies of man's constitution and function? What is lost or gained in ministry with regard to a three part versus a two part model of man? The functionability of man and therefore repairing of man's inner self is certainly at issue. If man is two-part then he functions best in an enhanced soul-life but if man consists of three parts (ontologically or functionally) then he functions best in enhanced spirit directedness. If the view is held that man is only comprised of two components without emphasizing functional differences between spirit and soul in terminological emphases (strict dualism), then stumbling into the same venue as a generally accepted psychological view of man is acceptable as ministry. Some assert that an unspiritual inclination of two-partism is that "The psychological way strengthens the flesh and the biblical way encourages the life of the spirit." A psychological way that emphasizes self and human potential feeds pride and self-will. This dualism easily defines ministry in terms of psychological theories and methods as healthy ministry models. The methods of repairing broken people then diverge in a quagmire of psychological theories. A two-part view, without an emphasis on functional differences of the inner man, becomes ministry along the lines of limited secular educational enhancement and is more educational than transformational.

### Ministry as Information Alone is Platonic

It is universally understood that right information is a prerequisite to right action. The renewing or renovation of the mind as stated in Romans 12:2, presumably through input of biblical principle, is an important component for living overcoming lives, overcoming the flesh and sin. William James once wrote that the greatest discovery of his generation was that human beings may alter their lives by altering the attitudes of the mind. Does this mean ministry is simply and singularly an issue of information and application along the lines of spiritual truth? Is it an issue akin to the autosuggestion theory of Emile Coue repeating the phrase, "Day by day, in every way, through the grace of God I am getting better and better?" Will a healthy PMA do as much in inner transformation as anything else? Strict substance two-partists may answer yes in a substance interpretation of biblical information about man but three-partists, both functional and ontological, would respond negatively. The idea that an input of right information will lead the rational being to right action is more Platonic Dualism than applied biblical spiritual growth. Platonism sees man as a soul using a body having within him an element of the divine which may only be cultivated through the gift of reason. Platonism, largely condemned as a viable model for ministry, is reflected more in a two-partist's model than a three-partist's model of ministry.

### A Finer Side of Ministry

The issues of distinctions between soul and spirit in man are acknowledged even in secular sources. Separate divisions of the mind, the conscious and subconscious, are stated as distinct yet interdependent. In Scripture parallels reflect distinguishing similarities between soul and spirit, but the variances are sometimes stark as noted with soul as more horizontally directed and spirit more perpendicularly directed within the individual. This difference is often substantial as noted by George M. Lamsa who states, "Just as there is a difference between atoms and electrons, there is a difference between the soul and the spirit – one is finer than the other." Spirit is finer than soul. Zuck also refers to the "dimension called spirit" in the Christian with a capacity or ability to relate to God. That _dimension_ of spirit within man whether ontological or functional is key to realizing the spiritual dimension of life in coherent and applicable terms. That finer and God-ward aspect of man is the source and focus of God-ward ministry at all facets of ministry.

The difference between the believer and unbeliever is in a quickening of the spirit by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:11&16) and not merely more, better or higher information. The flesh may not be addressed in its effect as a dominating factor of life in any other way than by a quickening of the spirit. As Ladd has stated, "there is a realm that transcends the processes of the mind." This realm is spirit, the God-ward aspect of man's nature.

### Stark Differences

The mindedness of believers may be either toward God or toward self but not both in any given situation. The carnal-mindedness that leads to death is a mindedness of the five senses, or sensual. Carnal mindedness is comprised of allowing the mind to be dominated by the five senses or the physical realm. Such a condition is referred to as _soulish_ in Scripture and includes the soul emphasis of horizontal inclinations. A soul-centered emphasis results where two-partists fail to distinguish (even functionally) between soul and spirit. A two-partist ministry inclines toward a theological shift of flesh and mind in an emphasis on disseminating information as opposed to infusing life in the Spirit/spirit. The contrast between the two modes of ministry distinguished by soul or spirit is stark.

### Strength in Spirit Ministry

The goal in all Scripturally based ministry is focused toward the individual becoming strong in spirit not strong in soul/self. Ministry involves first strength toward God not strength in self or soul. Strength of self is a problem and not a solution as Schaeffer has said, "Is not the central problem of our generation that the world looks upon the church and sees it trying to do the Lord's work in the flesh?" The flesh, the self, the soul as a pivot point or originating point for ministry, is death. Focused on appearance and human effort it is lacking in Spirit-led and Spirit-empowered work that brings life, joy and salvation. Humility is therefore a primary prerequisite if self is to be kept in a place subservient to the Spirit.

### Prerequisite of Humility

A prerequisite for ministry from a strictly three-partist view is humility through which grace may flow. Humility alone sets self (soul) aside, reaching beyond man's intentions and efforts (Ro. 9:15-16) for God to shine and touch life at the core, in spirit. As Jack Deere has written, "Humble people know that neither physical strength (Pr. 21:31), nor intelligence (Pr. 16:9), nor luck (Pr. 16:23) is decisive, but the Lord determines the outcome." Such ministry occurs out of the God-ward (spirit) aspect of man, not the man-ward (soulish) side. It is spiritual more so than merely intellectual.

# SECTION 4

# APPLICATION IN PREACHING

# CHAPTER TWELVE The Need for Transformational Preaching

David Eby says that "Luke employs forty-five verbs in describing the communication of God's Word from preacher to people." Preaching, as a high form of communication, is a complex business and is vital to the spiritual well being of Jesus' disciples. It is most important to the spiritual vitality of those who stand in need of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Preaching, God's chosen means of reaching and building disciples (Ro. 10:14), is the keystone of life-changing ministry.

The state of preaching in contemporary culture is under fire for a number of reasons. The skepticism of the world calls for preaching that is truly life-transforming. The current impoverished state of the church in America may be traceable to weaknesses in the pulpits of America. Albert Mohler suggests that "it would be an exercise in self-delusion if we tried to pretend that nothing is wrong with the preaching that happens in most evangelical churches." Others have charged that contemporary preaching is watered down and only loosely biblical. It's another subject entirely but important to note that aspects of the Emerging Church in America with its open source theology only contribute to this watering down of preaching ministry. John Piper has stated that preaching has become "relational, anecdotal, humorous, casual, laid-back, absorbed in human need, fixed on relational dynamics, heavily saturated with psychological categories, and wrapped up in strategies for emotional healing." R.J. Rushdoony wrote in 1975, "If the church is faltering or straying, then preaching is clearly at fault." Arturo Azurdia places blame on the shoulders of powerlessness; that preaching is "devoid of the vitality of the Holy Spirit." This pervasive lack of spiritual vitality seems to lie at the crux of this issue.

Spiritual power for the church is universally acknowledged as pure necessity in every generation. It is alleged that preachers often attest to their need of Holy Spirit assistance in preaching, tipping their hats in acknowledgement, but when it comes to specifics and theological depth there are few satisfying explanations or answers with regard to how this may specifically occur. Along with the need for the empowerment of the Holy Spirit there is the additional need for ministry to the entire individual in such a way that the Word of God is experienced by the listener.

The whole person requires the ministry of God's presence in life. Preaching therein is more than mere utterance of words, even the best words. Jeffrey London asserts that in preaching, "there must be an experience of touching and handling that occurs." Such preaching stirs the emotions, prods the intellect and ultimately creates an experience of the Word. What is required is an experience of God Himself in the process of transmitting His living Word for transformational results at the core.

### The Need for Deeper Preaching

### Preaching toward soul or spirit

Completeness in effective preaching to the whole man will look different contingent upon the preacher's theological anthropology. How the preacher perceives the individual will steer his approach in seeking to lead people toward wholeness in Christ. Each ministry leader for example will approach passages in Scripture regarding the self life with applicable differences. Practically speaking, if there are significant differences between soul and spirit either functionally or ontologically then curatives to the whole man also will differ. The pastor will address human needs depending on how he understands the makeup of the individual.

In this light Hoekema has stated, "Preaching that merely communicates intellectual information about God or the Bible is seriously inadequate." Biblical Psychologist Paul David Tripp advocates a genre of preaching that pulls man out of the corners of self to no longer live for self in order to view the grand vistas of life in "whole story preaching." Jeff London in his thesis on multi-sensory preaching adds that a cognitive-emotional approach in preaching is still inadequate, that a spiritual element which he calls "spiritual intelligence" must be included. Likening spiritual intelligence to "what we would call faith," he seeks to identify a most necessary element in preaching that must reach the whole man delving beyond the intellect reaching the core of the individual. Arnold Dallimore in his biography of George Whitfield seeks to illustrate this deeper reaching quality of preaching through Great Awakening ministry where Whitfield sought to first reach the intellect, then awaken the emotions and finally move the will. Greg Heisler in his book, _Spirit-Led Preaching_ develops the idea a bit further stating that powerful preaching, "informs the mind, inflames the heart, moves the will, and transforms the life."

It seems imperative to point out at this juncture that preachers are not merely public speakers. There is a vast difference between public oratory and Spirit-illuminated preaching. Jay Adams deplores the typical and secular-like instructive approach in preaching where a text is merely expounded under two or three headings followed by application with his notation that, "preachers are not lecturers." A sermon is not a speech. There is to be something deeper and even otherworldly about a biblical sermon. Azurdia warns that an approach to ministry solely directed to the mind, toward intellectual acquisition and theological knowledge, is a particular flaw in Reformed traditions. It is notable that reformed traditions are typically two-partist in their theological anthropology. A two-partist view of man restricted to body and soul alone may lean toward mere mind-to-mind preaching while the highest aim in powerful preaching reaches beyond the cognitive. Preachers should have their gaze set deeper than public speakers. Further, the importance of this is distinguished by Azurdia saying that, "If the advancement of Christianity depends upon the intellectual prowess of its adherents, then the kingdom of God is doomed to certain failure." Certainly this has been true historically as well as in the contemporary church. Deeper preaching is not a matter of intellect or better information. There is something deeper clearly required from those who proclaim God's absolute truth.

Albert Mohler touches on the essence of the matter when he emphasizes that preaching is worship. It is "essentially an act of worship," where the worshippers worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:23). It is the Spirit's ministry of illumination in man, to the core of the individual, through the preacher that is conducive for the Word of the Lord to break forth. This requires a distinguishing factor of spiritual emphasis in man as a delineating point.

Spiritual or Spirit led, anointed preaching is the desire of sincere proclaimers of God's Word toward the transformation of lives to His glory. As Heisler has said, "the Holy Spirit is the one who ultimately applies the Word to _the deepest parts_ of a listener's soul (italics mine)." The preacher who preaches toward deeper goals than intellectual attainment for the listeners, seeks for Spirit/spirit to touch spirit. It is at that juncture where sinners fall down to capitulate to God as the deepest part of their inner man, the spirit, is touched and they are convicted.

### Spirit to spirit or Mind to mind

Azurdia speaks specifically to the issue when he says, "to attempt a preaching ministry apart from an active dependence on the vitality of the Spirit of God is to blatantly disregard our biblical anthropology." Touching the deepest part of man is the prerogative of the Lord (Luke 24:45). It is God's work (Acts 16:14). And yet the preacher is called into cohort with the divine in such a way as to be a vessel fit for use, a conduit through which the divine may flow. In the context of such need, it is problematic that a presumptive disregard for the ministry of the Holy Spirit would be so widespread in this current generation. It is charged that "churches in the West are currently in confusion about the way to make preaching spiritually significant for the modern congregation, and are treating the problem as primarily one of devising appropriate techniques." Such technique-oriented leanings may be more soulish than spiritual, more self-centered than Spirit-centered, more restricted to two-partism in anthropology than three-partist given the limited simplicity of a two-partist model. Preachers are cautioned against mere brain-oriented preaching in any purely cerebral form of proclamation. Preaching involves something deeper than intellect and more searching than cognition, the individual must be strengthened with power in the inner man (Ephesians 2:16). Something much deeper than the intellect must be touched. Something more than the soul must be engaged.

When Charles Spurgeon said that he could listen to any preacher regardless how poor and yet could always learn something as long as he was "in the spirit," he referred to an aspect of Spirit to spirit communication of divine truth that delves deeper than intellectual transference in preaching. Paul's approach utilized the Word of God as the medium through which the Holy Spirit would operate, "expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words." Teaching from the Spirit/spirit reflects that the understanding gained in I Corinthians 2:14 carries a connotation of grasping something by experience, not cognition or "mind-only" perception. There is a power conveyed in this deeper manner of Spirit-led preaching. Something deeper is happening in quality preaching that reaches beyond the intellect. A deeper part of man is reached and that deeper aspect must be his spirit.

Although the role of the Holy Spirit is assumed to some degree, something more is required first for the vessel, the proclaimer, to be used in the conveyance of spiritual depth. The power conveyed in New Testament preaching was an inward power that first filled the preachers before being transmitted to the listeners. Both ontological and functional three-partists would refer to this essential element as Spirit touching spirit, effecting the Godward side of the inner man.

Although a spirit to spirit connection in the Godward side of man's nature is what may be considered proclamation with depth, it is also true that all preaching to the heart must first pass through the head. The baby cannot be tossed out with the bath water. Paul most certainly directs the believer to the mind as vital (Romans 12:2). "The means by which godly behavior is accomplished is through one's understanding of God's Word and one's volitional conformity to it." A two-partist outlook on man unfortunately says little more than this transferal of truth and a volitional response with man's agreement to the truth by means of appropriate action. All quantification of God's Spirit moving on man for transformation is simply assumed under the rubric of knowledge leading to positive responsive action. It is little different from a secular style of education. A common form of soul-centered preaching seems to be propositional, answering the question, "How will my life be different if I take this text seriously?" Dependence on man's response is heavily weighted in the direction of each individual's power of volition. This is not bad, it just does not go far enough from a biblical standpoint. God's people, touched by God were and should be transformed at the core bringing with that subsequent change in attitude and action. Transformation deep within by a move of God along with deep and life-long inner transfiguration appears lacking in a two-partist model of man that does not distinguish functions of soul and spirit.

### Reaching the Conscience

In a simple act of writing on the ground, those standing by watching and appraising the information laid before them by Jesus were "convicted by their own conscience" (John 8:9). For the Holy Spirit to convict is the foundation of effective proclamation. Conscience is regarded as an individual's knowledge of self in relation to a known law of right and wrong. It is that distinguishing factor between "man and the brute." It is a concept repeated approximately thirty times in the New Testament and vital to change in the inner man. The conscience must first be pierced before change is produced from the negative to the positive. Charles Finney, arguably one of the most successful preachers in more recent church history, established an imperative in reaching the conscience. He stated, "Until the sinner's conscience is reached on this subject, you preach to him in vain." Kierkegaard spoke similarly regarding the "inner address of the word to the hidden conscience of the hearer." It is commonly acknowledged that there is dependence upon the Holy Spirit to convince and convert however something certainly must depend on the demeanor of the preacher and holy fervor with which the preacher approaches men. The Holy Spirit is essential and the medium is not bypassed but passed through and must pass through unhindered. The preacher's spirit or God-ward aspect of the inner man must be engaged. If, as assessed by ontological three-partists, conscience is a function of spirit (cf. Ro. 1:9 & 2Tim 1:3) then spirit-to-spirit communication is essential in reaching that conscience.

The attitude and intention of the preacher is of particular concern for preaching that reaches the conscience of men. For the two-partist who has no model with which to trace or identify the conscience, he is left here with little more than mystery. His efforts to reach the conscience may involve emotionalism, condemnation, or even fatalism in the guise of faith but he cannot describe or define how conscience is affected. For the three-partist who traces the function of conscience in man to the spirit or God-ward side of man's nature (Acts 17:16), he understands particulars on what to aim for in reaching man's conscience. It is his spirit empowered by the Holy One that must be engaged in the transmission of life-saving, transforming truth. His directive in proclamation becomes specifically energized toward setting self and soul-nature aside for the energizing divine touch in his God-ward heart, his spirit.

Hargrove outlines the process of a touched conscience by stating, "the Word is joined to the Spirit in an indissoluble relationship which in turn empowers the revelation of God and penetrates the conscience for God's sovereign desire." He further explains the implausibility that this process would be centered in the psyche or soul. If this is the case as he suggests then all that is left of the heart of man for conscience-piercing ministry is his spirit. The conscience, if it is to be touched to fruition, must be touched from spirit to spirit and not from soul to soul or mind to mind alone.

### Pulpit Apologetics

In order to avoid degeneration into emotional fideism, a good measure of apologetic reasoning is a prerequisite in preaching. When Peter preached in Jerusalem he gave rationale for the truth he proclaimed (Acts 2:31-36). His apologetic included presenting Scriptural support for his claims along with eye witness testimony of his proclamations. Consciences were overturned and lives were forever transformed. When Paul proclaimed the truth of the resurrection in Athens, he presented an incredible apologetic outline for preachers to follow for centuries later in seeking to address the needs and questions in the hearts of men. These apologetic examples drove to the heart of the matter with men. Their preaching drove deep for life-changing results. There was, as John Woodhouse has outlined, an intricate synergism between Spirit and Word with astronomical implications for apologetics. A comparison of the methods of Cornelius VanTil and C.S. Lewis reflect what different approaches may be taken apologetically by three-partists and two-partists respectively.

Van Til perceived an unbridgeable gap between Christian and Secular rationality. Although Van Til was not a strict three-partist his method may be termed "reaching spirit" in man. His goal was to reach beyond rationality to relationality. The total depravity of humankind in Van Til's model prevents unbelievers from grasping truth. His basic premise was that "all is yellow to the jaundice eye" because the unbeliever has colored glasses cemented to his eyes, glasses which he cannot remove. Three-partists would characterize this as darkness of soul consequent with the spirit or God-ward aspect of man dead to God. As Paul told the unregenerate Athenians, God created man to respond to Him and is Himself very close to every person (Acts 17:27). VanTil saw from Scripture that man is made in the image of God, has an innate awareness of His existence and that this is so inherent that knowledge of Him is ultimately inescapable. What is referred to as unbelief is not primarily an intellectual problem but involves according to VanTil _some kind of_ failure such as might be found in any failed relationship. Fallen men made for a relationship with God then already know God at _some level of consciousness_ but are in denial of that consciousness. Three-partists would characterize this as the spirit in man which is hampered toward God without God's salvific touch. For the spirit in man to be made alive to God would require a spiritual touch more so than intellectual enlightenment. It may be said that Van Til's apologetic was a spirit-oriented apologetic.

C.S. Lewis was a cumulative case evidentialist who made a case for presenting theism from many sources in order to reason with men first toward an acknowledgement of God and then toward a relationship with Him. His apologetic bearing was directed toward man's intellect, man's soul. Lewis would point out a case for God in an inherent sense of morality in the heart of all men but would also point to evidences in the created universe as indicators of Gods existence. The theme of Lewis in his appeal to all men would be, **"** from particular data to a universal conclusion **"** because the available data represents a convincing argument for the existence of God. He would appear to let the evidence speak for itself regarding the need for further pursuit of the one true God. Having made a cumulative case for theistic belief, there would be an assumption that the individual having now believed in a single Creator God, would be closer to that one true God and presumably move increasingly toward Him thereafter. For those who did not see their need to move toward Him, he would leave them at that point, seeing no rationale in helping them since they saw no need of repentance themselves. Lewis in his cumulative case evidentialism saw all men as rationally capable of figuring out the reality of God and then taking steps to respond to that rationality in order to grow closer to God. It may be said that his apologetic was mind-oriented or soul-oriented.

Presuppositionalists like Van Til commonly believe that classical arguments are ineffective simply because they cannot reveal enough about God for fallen man in his current condition to assist him in arriving at a knowledge of God. The intellect or reasoning of the soul is not sufficient. Evidentialism such as with Lewis on the other hand maintains that man has within him the power of reason in order to arrive at lucid conclusions about God as Lord and King.

In a critique of Van Til, John Frame agrees with him stating that mankind's inability to respond to God is not so much an intellectual problem but a moral weakness and refusal to accept what is clearly revealed. The intellectual barrier in man to grasp an understanding of God is rooted somewhere deeper than his intellect. Curiously, Lewis also seemed to aim at something deeper than superficial intellect when he emphasized the well known tool or method of _story_ in order to dig deeper than conscious intellect into the heart of man. This indirect method of persuasion was termed, "subversion by surprise." The strategy was to catch people with their conscious guard down. Here is something that Van Til and Lewis had in common. They would agree that the barrier toward faith is not an intellectual barrier alone but something else, something deeper. Three-partists would respond that this "something else" is man's spirit that must be reached for conversion. In their different approaches to apologetics it seems that both Van Til and Lewis would agree with the proposition that something deeper than cognition in man must be reached for effectiveness in the ministry of truth.

Arguably, the impression on the conscience is what moves the will of man to action. The three-partist approach aims for the God-ward side of man, the deepest part of the soul known as spirit. The two-partist may only go so far as rationality and emotions, believing that the act of the will is only informed by understanding and receiving vitality by emotions. The preaching target for the two-partist is often those qualities of the horizontal soul, mind and emotions. Three-partist Lewis Sperry Chafer however, speaking of deeper aims and purposes, looks for a higher appeal than rationalizations in the soul. He therefore says to preachers, "Gentlemen, please do not preach against the world. The world and all it offers is the only anesthesia that people have for the pain they experience. The more you preach against it, the more they will cling to their pain reliever. Instead, preach grace and make the appeal to the kindness of God the thing they may grasp when they let go of the world." With such an appeal, Chafer seeks to reach beyond world-oriented rationalizations to higher and deeper things in man. His admonition was to point man to God not away from the world. Point him God-ward. Since it is the grace of God that brings salvation (Titus 2:11,12), the preacher for success will aim to open pathways to the deeper heart of man for that effective grace.

# CHAPTER THIRTEEN Preaching the Cross: Beyond Information

### Preparation

Reporting on the sharpening of exegetical skills for preaching, Max McGuire has gathered a collective suggestion from Doug Stuart and Gordon Fee consisting of "ten hours of sermon work to get ready for a Sunday morning service." Dennis Kinlaw has stated more particularly that, "the greatest problem in preaching is not the preparation of the sermon but the preparation of the preacher." Heisler has stated similarly that "preaching is more about listening and reporting than about creating and crafting." In seeking empowerment, the preacher must veer away from and even fear preaching in his own strength. What is this "own strength" that must be denied if not that of the soul, the flesh as observed in section three?

The goal in preaching is not merely imparting words of wisdom but pursuing transformed lives. That transformation is contingent on more than what may be amassed with vocabulary and style. Something deeper is required. Dying to the flesh in order to live in the Spirit in preaching is among the most vital aims in preparation in order to be used by God in a transferal of His life to the hearts of men. When a man is emptied of himself and filled with the Spirit, all desires, attitudes, and motivations are directed to glorifying Christ as the main agenda. The difficulty is with the self-life, the soulish side of man, the flesh, getting in the way of transformational preaching.

An individual "does not easily die to self-control and self-interest, he cannot crucify himself, Christ must crucify him." Herein lies a vital key. This death to self is essential in the effective proclamation of the cross. The cross means "no to self" in the abandonment of self-assertion and self-seeking for the sake of Christ. For the three-partist this means to avoid soulishness or self-will in preaching. The two-partist however is hard pressed to do anything with the biblical "death to self" concept besides treat self as an object or thing, leading to the idea of a potential spiritual self-ectomy of sorts. Such a prospect is incoherent and renders a definition of preaching the cross as merely informational by the two-partist when it is the power of the cross that is essential for lasting change in listeners.

In a study comparing different views of how to attain empowerment of Spirit in preaching, a ubiquitous thread is the necessity of prayer. Beyond prayer, different preachers suggest varying means of preparation. R. A. Torrey taught a seven-step method. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones expounded a five-point plan and Spurgeon simply offered biblical advice. All included the necessity of prayer and dependence on God. Biblical preaching first in prayer lays aside all worldly ideas of control and manipulation. The role of the preacher in prayerful selfless preparation then must be understood. Never has a preacher saved anyone. There has never been a sermon that has saved a single soul, but preachers are called to deliver the message of the cross used by God to bring men to salvation (Romans 10:14-17). For the two-partist who may be accustomed to leaning on wit and study, the danger is that "prayer is quickly skipped over to get to the planning, goals and action." Prayerful preparation however, in so elevated a calling as preaching, is absolutely essential. Two-partists will of course generally concur but three-partists will point to soulishness and even selfishness prevalent in the heart of every speaker hardly overcome by more than absolute abandonment to God in much prayer. Both two-partists and three-partists will pray in preparation but those who sense more particular and articulated inner need may in that light pray all the more fervently and effectively.

From prayerful inner preparation, the preacher in preaching after this preparation, "merely discharges the firearm that God has loaded in the silent place." What needs to occur between pulpit and pew requires power beyond any man. If dependence is laid on moral persuasion, explanations or arguments then a task has been undertaken in which the preacher is assured of defeat. The task then, if reliance is made on a psychological foundation being soul motivated and soul directed, mind made or mind targeted, is certain of aiming too low. No lasting change may come. What is needed is something deeper. Along these lines Azurdia laments that "churches are adopting a paradigm for ministry that is constructed upon and driven by the psychological. For example, pastors are often considered ill-equipped to deal with the deep needs of Christian people unless they have become skilled in the latest psycho-therapeutic techniques." Two-partists with a simpler and more general model of man are inclined toward this misguided psychological bearing more so than three-partists who look deeper than the horizontal.

### Delivery

In prominent examples of effective preaching few shine out so brightly as Whitfield and Edwards during the eighteenth century. Their effectiveness is depicted by historians as that which prompted the Great Awakening throughout America. The preaching of Edwards in particular was "aimed to stir up holy affections." Those "holy" affections consist of something beyond unholy or soul-oriented, emotive responses. The "holy" intent turns the meaning of affections toward deeper and higher matters than mere emotions. What this may be to substance two-partists varies but three-partists would point to affecting the spirit in man. A delivery requiring a power of an altogether supernatural kind, of necessity hinges on that Holy Spirit flowing through man's spirit. The resulting prophetic manner of speaking where the Spirit/spirit fills or takes possession of the mind is critical in effective delivery.

Effective preaching begins with first hearing the voice of God. "He who hears the word will have found the means to articulate it." Robert Penny seeking to articulate the dynamic preaching of D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones differentiates between a two-partist and three-partist leaning stating that "many people have accepted the teachings of the Scriptures intellectually, but they have never come under the power of the Word." Such power was perceived by the general populace observing the ministry of Jesus. The results were that they noted Jesus spoke as one who had authority, not like teachers they were accustomed to hearing (Mk. 1:22). His speaking was defined out of his own mouth stating that, "The words I have spoken to you are _spirit_ and they are _life_ " (John 6:63, italics mine). This "spirit and life" are certainly a primary focus and goal for the serious preacher of God's truth.

A distinguishing factor between _logos_ and _rhema_ may be observed here. Two-partists would see little difference in the biblical treatment of _logos_ and _rhema_ aside from the nuance of _logos_ expressing the substance of the message and _rhema_ the actual speaking or announcing of the message. Three-partists however distinguish greatly between ministry generated from _logos_ vs. _rhema_. Where _logos_ is that stable and sure foundation of truth, _rhema_ is God's word as presently spoken in life-changing proclamation, in spirit and life. _Rhema_ is direct communication from God revealing something personal and intimate, particular to the individual. It is something living and authoritative, more than words alone and attended with power from above. _Logos_ may become _rhema_ as in Ephesians 6:17, 18 where the Word is received by means of all prayer, praying at all time in the spirit. Speaking _rhema_ is conversation from God through the preacher resulting in speaking spirit and life as Jesus spoke spirit and life.

J.I. Packer states that the texts themselves are to talk if Christian preaching is to be what it is designed to be. This delivery sought by preachers is an incarnational experience. Every week the preacher seeks to incarnate the Great Speaker in a Wisdom whose name is Jesus. The goal in this incarnational delivery is "a weekly unveiling of God's glory before those who have a hard time seeing," making the One who is wisdom visible and audible.

### Results

An evaluation of results from preaching by two schools of thought discussed here will considerably differ. If the preacher is merely a dispenser of new data or motivator to moral living as may be inclined by a body/mind view of man then evaluation is simple. Was the information presented? Was it received? Were there any immediate activities of response in that context? If the answer is yes to any or all of these then the two-partist would evaluate that preaching in a positive light. Man being body and soul alone could ask for no more. It may however also be true as Azurdia has responded in such a context, "What my brother says is true but so what?" Information may be received but there is a deeper need, a need for core transformation in the individual. A three-part assessment will look for life-long transformation from a deep-seated infusion of new life to the individual.

In the context of data-oriented preaching something appears to be missing. The goal must be more than informational transference. There must be something _essentially_ changed and not only apparently changed. The life-changing goal is fruit and not merely any fruit but fruit of the Spirit in the form of, "love, joy, peace, etc. as necessary and automatic expressions of the gracious event (of preaching) which has broken through into the life of the believers." Restoration to God must be accomplished and not mere education. Such an assessment of results is observed long term and not merely in immediate outcome which can fade like the dew. Lives are changed for life, from that day forward, in deeper preaching from a three-part basis and focus.

As Martin and Deidre Bobgan have pointed out, the way of the Spirit/spirit is diametrically distant from a psychological or soul oriented means of ministry. The two ways are contrasted in Galatians where the works of the flesh (that which is of the soul alone) is contrasted with the work of the Spirit/spirit (Galatians 3:1-3). The evaluation of delivery in preaching by the three-partist may be summarized by Helmut Thielicke who stated, "I have the task of deciding whether "Spirit" [ _pneuma_ ] or "flesh" [ _sarx_ ] will be the power which dominates me." Results will be lasting with _pneuma_ and temporary with _sarx_. For the Spirit to dominate, the speaker must be in the Spirit/spirit and not merely speaking through his soul (mind, will, emotions).

# CHAPTER FOURTEEN Ultimate Soul Care to the Core

### The Ministry of Jesus or of the Scribes

If two-partistic preaching inclines to focus more on information and data, even with a heartfelt desire for the Holy Spirit to move, and three-partistic preaching focuses more on Spirit through spirit, then a contrast in types and results of ministry may be compared in the ministries of Jesus and the Jewish Scribes. The differences in ministry were pronounced. According to Mark 1:22 the people were surprised at the teaching of Jesus because, "He taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes." The listeners were literally struck out of self-possession at the power expressed through His speaking. Jack Deere has pointed out, "The Pharisees read, studied, and memorized the Bible more than most churchgoing people today... but they could not hear God's voice (John 5:37). Their error was that they did "not listen for God's voice apart from the Scriptures, and they never heard his voice in the Scriptures." The consequence was that when they spoke it was not God speaking concurrently through them. They spoke simply from their understanding, their point of view.

In observing how Jesus addressed men and women his approach seemed to be to find a way to reach people where they were in the everyday world. He used stories, presented data, spoke in parables, called men to repentance, answered questions with questions and always sought to aim at deeper parts of the heart than mere intellect. Jesus appeared to aim toward the heart or spirit of man in proclamation toward a heart touched by God. This is shown in John 6:63 where He explained, "It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak to you, they are spirit, and they are life." The Holy Spirit speaking through Him "produced 'spirit' words that when appropriated by faith gave everlasting life," the words themselves being the life.  This is in contrast to the teaching of God-appointed (Romans 13:1) Jewish Scribes where this penetrating proclamation is not observed. Their teaching is contrasted with the life-giving words of Jesus as something without impression or power. Their teaching may have been from Scripture and followed with initial and volitional obedience but not with penetrating life transformation. It may be easy to assume that preaching comes automatically with authority. In a comparison of the proclamation of Jesus set against all other religious leaders of His day this is not an assumption easily made. It is also an assumption that three-partists are less likely to make in a distinguishing contrast between the functioning of soul and that of spirit.

### Preaching Life

Preachers generally acknowledge the difference between the omnipresence of the Spirit and the immediate effects or influence of that same Spirit. The "manifest presence, or felt presence" in immediacy is emphasized in proclaiming and producing life. In preaching with this aspiration it is the divine and human aspects of God's Words that come together. In such a moment, as attested by men like Luther, Calvin, Wesley and others, there is a "real presence" where God Himself speaks; the divine and human join in a confluence of God's flow of life. The Spirit gives life contrasted with the flesh, soul or self that counts for nothing (John 6:63). In such a moment God's men are, as Criswell has stated, "Electrified by the power of the Gospel and swept off their feet by the wonder of the great revelations which had been committed to their trust." Such an event is mentioned by Isaiah speaking of God's Word going forth from His mouth and accomplishing His purpose (Is. 55:11). For the three-partist the emphasis with Isaiah is on God's Words through his chosen vessel. There is no presumption that simply speaking Scripture assumes His purpose and His speaking in that moment and in that way. This may have been the assumption of the Scribes whose proclamations were contrasted with those of Jesus in Mark 1:22, theirs being without authority and without life. To presume that one speaks on God's behalf merely because Scripture is voiced is questioned further in light of a difference between _logos_ and _rhema_ as stated earlier. Words must be "spirit and life" presumably through spirit not soul. It must be in cooperation with a move of God who speaks His desire through His spokesperson at that moment.

Jesus said that His coming was for the express purpose that His people might have abundant life (John 10:10). The life He mentioned is neither _bios_ life nor _psuche_ life but _zoe_ life. As Marks has said, "man was created with _bios_ in his body and _psuche_ in his soul, but God's intention is to dispense Himself as _zoe_ into man's spirit and from his spirit spread into man's soul and body." A flow of God's life is to be expected in Spirit led preaching ministry. To speak as God's instrument anticipates God's life in a way that at the same time does not presume upon God but waits in humble surrender. Heisler describes this in terms of a trialogue in preaching, a three-way conversation between the preacher, the listeners, and the Holy Spirit. If one of the participants does not show up then true transformational, life-giving preaching does not occur. For The Holy Spirit to show up and move in a trialogue may only happen through the preacher's spirit at one with the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:17), whether that spirit is considered the functional God-ward aspect of the soul or ontologically different from the soul. A flow of God's Spirit through preachers in renewing life may not be realized apart from this.

Preachers will wait on God and fill their hearts with Him so that He speaks through Spirit/spirit and ministers to others touching and changing lives. The two-part view would agree with this as a process but has no conceptual recourse to bring it about. A functional or ontological three-part view however has a specific comprehension of man to affect this life-giving revival ministry from the depths of the spirit of the preacher where the Holy Spirit dwells.

### Brokenness First

One of the recurring themes of Paul's writing to the Corinthians is that of power through weakness. Hudson Taylor once remarked that "All God's giants have been weak men." John Piper refers to a desperation in weakness with such a mighty task before the preacher each week. The feeling of desperation culminates in a cry to God, "Who is sufficient for these things?" Such is the environment in which the empowering work of the Spirit through man's spirit seems to flourish. "Weakness creates dependency, dependency fosters humility, and humility gives birth to empowerment" (James 4:10; II Corinthians 12:9, 10). As Dodd has said, "We need to be broken, much like a horse needs to be broken to be useful." What precisely then needs to be broken? The only answer may be the self life connected with _sarx_ and _psuche_.

If the life of Jesus is to be manifest through mortal flesh it is through the difficulties and challenges of life where a breaking of self-rule takes place to the end that God's Spirit may be seen through lives otherwise inclined to flesh and self (soul) (2 Corinthians 4:7-18). Such difficulties in the form of trials in life constitute the working of the cross as a key to His life released through the crucifixion of the flesh (Galatians 5:24). In a two-part outlook with man there is an inherent inclination to avoid weakness in exchange for the strength of self in mental/emotional preparations for preaching. This error of soulish ministry is rooted in a dominance of self. Self always desires to lead the way while hoping that the Holy Spirit will come alongside and assist. The path of life however in the ministry of preaching is brokenness of the self life. "It is being 'Not I, but Christ.'" As Dodd has said, "As we become more and more broken of our self-will, we become more and more able to receive God's direction and impulses. These impulses occur in the God-ward side of man's nature, the spirit where the still, small voice of God drowns out the loud racket of self-will and ego-building impulses.

### SUMMARY

The moving of God's Spirit through preaching is the ultimate aim for preachers of truth. If the preacher sees no anthropological difference in spirit and soul then his inclination will be a general aim at the heart of man even though he would be hard pressed to define such an aim. This does not necessitate carnal or fleshly preaching but simply does not aim at spiritual or higher preaching. Both two-partists and three-partists may equally seek God's Spirit and empowerment through prayer, fasting and other preparations but although equal in faith for this event to occur only the three-partist has a bull's eye at which to aim in the endeavor, whereas the two-partist has less to aim toward. In a passion for Spirit wrought work in the lives of the listeners, three-partists deduct that for inward renewal there appears to be a need for mastery of spirit over soul in the preacher first. This is where pure ministry begins and is generated outward. As Nee has suggested, "Mind may reach mind and emotion may reach emotion, but salvation probes much deeper. Spirit must touch spirit." The results from this connectedness in spirit with God for preaching leads to transformation that lasts a lifetime, not merely application from intellectual or emotional stimulation of the moment. This is not to say that the two-partist of necessity may not accomplish spirit to spirit ministry but if the aim is low, such as merely mind to mind cognitive transference, then hitting the target poorly is more probable.

A word-centered or data-centered preaching system may not accomplish anything at all beyond mind to mind interchange and temporary volitional response. It is only in God and through God that life is found and subsequently transferred. Preachers need the Sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17) not the words of man. The need is for God's Words, God's life, and God's presence in the process, nothing less. Jesus gave a picture of ministry where the Holy Spirit flows through men like rivers of living water (John 7:38-39). By humbling oneself before God, renewal and revival are experienced through spiritual ministry via the spirit and not merely the soul (Isaiah 57:15).

Even after taking into consideration both cognitive and emotive aspects of preaching there is a danger in two-partism of speaking only to that flatland of man's soul in a linear aspect of ministry. Adams suggests that the _experience_ _of an event_ in preaching is a goal for the listeners. Entering into that event so that emotions appropriate to that event are felt as if one was actually going through the event is for him the apex of good preaching. For some, this emotional experience is essential and in a soul-sided approach to ministry an emotional experience may be the best goal achievable. Unfortunately touching the emotive side of man alone may miss the God-ward aspect of the heart especially if emotions are indeed restricted to the soul. Such appears to be the case for a purely two-partistic outlook. For those whose focus is only mind to mind ministry those emotions are merely sought to induce a behavioral response (such as with an altar call) without any deep and lasting change. Whether mind oriented or emotive oriented, such preaching ministry alone may not reach that God-wardness in man as referenced by spirit in the New Testament.

Thomas Oden, suggesting that "we know good preaching when we hear it because it touches us viscerally," presumes that there is a quality of preaching sought after that is deeper than mind and emotion. It moves the individual to deep-seated response. It touches something deeper than what is definable by mind or emotions and it affects change from the core out. The idea that men are needed "who bring the atmosphere of heaven with them to the pulpit and speak form the borders of another world," also seeks to reach beyond a soulish exchange in proclamation. Something more is necessary to effectively proclaim truth with transformational potency. Something deeper than mental service is required in ministry that includes Holy Spirit empowerment. A deeper aspect of preaching seems to incorporate something beyond the soul/mind of the preacher.

The ministry then of the three-partist as opposed to the common two-partist varies greatly. For one the aim is deeper than the other. When the depths of the spirit are touched by God's life the transformation is lasting. Both two-partists and three-partists would agree with a need for more effective, deeper preaching. Given their individual models for man, their approaches could differ widely. The substance two-partist considering the soul a singular aspect of the inner man would have no model or recourse for deeper preaching other than spiritual generalities with the possible inclusion of psychological techniques. Three-partists however would press in toward the God-ward side of man first in preparation and also in an aim toward the recipient's individual spirit or God-ward inner man.

In this process of Spirit centered ministry the concept of death to self holds pivotal importance and plays a major role in the difference between what is of the soul (soulish) and what is of the spirit. It is brokenness that releases ministry as the Spirit flows through the selfless preacher's spirit in rivers of living water. The affecting of this comes through inner brokenness in understanding the application of trials in life where God breaks the outward selfish, fleshly aspect of the soulish nature. A flow of God's Spirit in renewing strength cannot be realized apart from this brokenness. Brokenness of soul is desired not the exaltation of the soul/self. This brokenness is a critical component with both functional and ontological three-partists.

There is a well known danger in the pulpit of creating light but no heat. The work of the preacher is spiritual and only spiritual power can accomplish effective illumination and passion. A danger lies in part with the possibility of turning preaching into a clinical exercise or running through a list of do's and don'ts in seeking effectiveness. David Eby lays out such a list allegedly provided by Luke in his Gospel. Lofty as some of these eleven points appear, they are useless without power from above.  They are no guarantee of a heavenly response in the individual. Spurgeon addresses such a notion by stating, "God connects special success with special states of the heart, and if these be lacking he will not do mighty works." Is preaching merely a teaching seminar yet with different content? Do preachers simply say what they think they should say in the pulpit and hope the Holy Spirit blesses? Such self-will preaching may be iniquitous proclamation according to Jesus (Matt. 7:22-23).

It is sometimes assumed, particularly in a two-partist outlook, that the Word will always accomplish its divine purpose because its source is the Godhead. This may only be the case when the Word spoken is in fact that which God desires spoken at that moment. His promise is that His Word will accomplish what He intends (Is 55:11). God specifically states that those words must emanate from His mouth for what they may accomplish. It may not be assumed that just because the preacher mouths Gods written Words that it is what the Father desires to be spoken at that moment. In other words, for deep renewal and renovation in man, "We are no threat to the devil if we have only the words of Christ and not the life of Christ." To be tuned to God in spiritual communion with Him is the only means for spiritual work. God must be speaking through His preachers for effectiveness. What London refers to as "spiritual intelligence" must be imparted and this impartation logically occurs through spirit not soul. That means the preacher must first listen very carefully before daring to speak. Jack Deere warns the preacher in preparation that there are other voices heard in the heart besides God's voice. The voice of emotions, voice of pressure from others as well as the voice of darkness all serve as other voices to be avoided in the pursuit of first hearing God's Word for His instruction to His people for effective pulpit ministry. The preacher singularly seeks for an expression of God's voice as a main goal in pulpit ministry.

For Spirit wrought ministry the idea of anointing or unction in proclamation, whatever it is, appears to raise the preacher above his normal, everyday, conscious function. Although some distinguish between a conscious mind having processing capacities approximating 2,000 bits of information per second with a subconscious mind at processing power of more like 4 billion bits per second, both functional and ontological three-partists would distinguish this higher functioning in connection with a more God-ward aspect of man, man's spirit and not soul or mind alone. This higher execution of preaching occurs through spirit and soul in functional unity not through soul alone.

The endowment of the Spirit is often agreed as necessary and to be fervently pursued by the proclaimer of truth. Richard Bargas follows up with a warning that chasing subjective feelings is a danger and not a goal. This unction or endowment is not mere emotion in the pulpit or the pew. The idea of and definition of Holy Spirit unction is explored by Bargas who finds a common thread in definitions from various preachers. The common notion of something beyond the individual, an enabling that produces clarity of thought, passion of heart that is found in both the listeners as well as the preachers summarizes something called unction or anointing. Where two-partists in a general approach to man find this a mystery, both functional and ontological three-partists may deduce a priority of spirit over soul in the individual in a heightened sense where the soul and mind become the tool designed to be steered by the spirit of man in contact with the Lord. The preacher becomes a channel through whom the Spirit works, "lifting him out of himself and giving him abilities which are not naturally his as he discourses." This "lifting out" may be defined in terms of "spirit over soul." A definition of powerful preaching then may sound something like, "the God-wardness (spirit) in the preacher shining on and connecting with the God-wardness (spirit) of the listeners as the Holy Spirit moves in the act of preaching."

# SECTION 5

# CONCLUSIONS

# CHAPTER FIFTEEN Implications and Applications for Core Ministry

### IMPLICATIONS

In researching two-partism and three-partism in the context of pastoral ministry a common misunderstanding of contradiction between the two more common views is averted by a _tertium quid_. Strict ontological two-partism and strict ontological three-partism have long been at theological odds in various schools of evangelical thought. A careful review and comparison of the views reveals that the real and practical aspect of man's make-up may be found in a combination of these two views, a third option.

This comparative analysis, comparing and contrasting a two-partist versus a three-partist theological anthropology of pastoral care, has sought a synthesis of the individual toward improved inner transformation specifically applied in the context of pulpit ministry. The way in which two-partist and three-partist biblical anthropologies impact pastoral ministry in the context of preaching has been researched with the following results.

### Man is Functionally Three Parts

The debate between two-partism and three-partism is far from over. Research has shown that the biblically defined individual is comprised of at least two functional aspects of the inner man. There is an agreed upon distinction between references to soul and spirit in man throughout Scripture. Even two-partists in a majority opinion agree that though one unseen substance of man is adhered to in a two-partist outlook, there are two functions of that inner man referenced in Scripture by the terms spirit and soul. When Scripture uses the term soul the reference is to a horizontal relational development and expression whereas where the term spirit is used there is a higher sense of man in the perpendicular, in relationship with God and deeper life. The individual made in the image of God is therefore best described as a _functionally_ three-part being. A functionally three-part man engaged in all aspects of inner unity with both soul and spirit is the best and most precisely defined synthesized individual. A functionally three-part man represents the best sense of an ordered personality. The spirit in man as the centerpiece of the soul is the animating principle of life without which there is no possibility of a living soul. Spirit is most essential in all respects. As Peter Kreeft has stated, "only spirit can progress." It has been found that spirit _possesses_ the characteristics of the individual most perfectly experienced in a relationship with God who is Spirit whereas the soul _expresses_ those characteristics horizontally, in the world.

### Substance Two-partism is Restrictively Nonspecific in Nature

A simple substance dualism of man, with no distinction between soul and spirit terminology, is a representation of truth but is not the whole truth of man. Simplicity of body and soul alone devitalizes man's fully functioning self. Soul and spirit if seen only synonymously is not representative of a fully synthesized individual. As Nicholas Berdyaev has noted, he is not adverse to see truth as more difficult if the easier explanation seems to emasculate the significance of man. Only truth that edifies is truth for men. In considering the entire scope of Scripture it is a stretch to suggest sameness with so many specific references to spirit and to soul throughout the Scriptures. The word soul is used 432 times in the Bible and spirit (Spirit) is used 456 times. The idea that these instances represent synonymous references in the context of anthropology is an overgeneralization and over simplification that does not delve deeply enough into biblical references to three functional aspects of man. A simpler two-partism is not a more edifying depiction of man whose complexities involve both horizontal and perpendicular aspects of his inner self. Two-partism then tends to under-define man in overgeneralizations.

Research has revealed that agreement is found across a broad evangelical spectrum that man is functionally three-part in make-up. It has been shown that the objections from those of a substance two-partist persuasion are not solidly rooted in a specific understanding of Scripture that uses both spirit and soul in reference to the inner man in diverse contexts. Two-partism rightly seeks to avoid segregational errors of ontological three-partism but at the expense of overcorrection in the opposite extreme of oversimplification. Man is devalued in a less than optimal functioning persona. A two-part understanding of man is an over-generalization that leads to soulish conclusions such as that of Thomas Oden who suggests the requirement of understanding effective psychotherapy as necessary for the pastoral care of souls.

### The Importance of This Issue

It has been expressed here that this issue is not merely an issue that represents a difference of opinion that does not matter much in the long run, far from it. The issue is very important in understanding how to address life changing core issues of humanity in a pursuit of Christ likeness, particularly with the huge responsibilities of the pastor. God views and describes man differently from the way that secular psychology and philosophy view man. The issue of ministry consequently is paramount if man is to be approached biblically as opposed to secularly. If a strict two-part view is adhered to with no distinction between soul and spirit then ministry tends to be relegated to horizontal aspects of man's inner self parallel to psychological theories omitting deeper needs of a flow of God's Spirit through the spirit of man. Ministry then may be approached on the level of a soul-led man instead of a spirit-led man in the Holy Spirit. On the other hand to understand man as functionally three-parts gives much more specific comprehension to the individual, his functioning in life and his ministry in the Spirit. A holistically synthesized individual takes into consideration every aspect of man's inner leanings. The synthesized individual then is one who rightly distinguishes between soul and spirit in functional realities, emphasizing the spirit or Godward aspect of the inner man as uppermost in focus, practice, and aim for life-giving ministry to the individual.

The self problem is the problem in both perceptions and conclusions. Only God's perspective of self is a pure and true perspective. Man himself is unable, without God's assistance, to see himself from the outside looking in. This poses a problem of perspective necessitating entire reliance on biblical truth for accuracy regarding the self life. Research about the self life has revealed that the terms _sarx_ and _psuche_ in man, with inward inclinations to self-centered desires and proclivities, are tightly interwoven with and in diametric contrast to spirit. In "dying to self," a familiar phrase in New Testament scholasticism, a two-partist definition of man is relegated to volition alone whereas both functional three-partists and ontological three-partists look to the higher aspect of the inner man as a priority principle of rule in the inner man. Dying to self is an issue of Spirit/spirit centeredness rather than mere volitional control of the self life. If this issue was a matter of will power alone anyone could learn to die to self without God's assistance, without a born again experience.

The higher functioning of man (spirit) best directs the lower functioning of man (soul) in ministry. Spirit infused with Holy Spirit advises and directs the soul more perfectly. Man's perpendicular inclinations of spirit give best direction over the horizontal inclinations of the soul.

### Biblical Ministry is Deeper than What Two-partism Allows

Peak function and purpose in man involves that Godward aspect of man's inner unseen characteristic referred to in Scripture as spirit. Man's Godward-ness must supervise his nature to overcome the flesh or self-life. Only a functional or ontological three-partism seeks this peak efficiency in man, reaching man's innermost being where the Spirit of God dwells. Since ontological three-partism may lead to attending errors of overly segregating man, threatening the wholeness of the individual, a functional three-partism is the best model.

Restrictively cognitive models of ministry develop from a hamartiology in denial of a sin nature in man. If sin is merely a result of behaviorist programming then ministry is simply reversing the programming with better informational indoctrination. If sin is mere conditioning then developing new habits through positive reinforcement represents spiritual growth. New life in a strict two-partist outlook is easily related to an issue of new training. Nothing deeper is required. No spirit needs to be touched, no new life is ultimately required in such a context other than through assumptions and general acquiescence to a generic idea of higher life. Change may be achieved but no core transformation centered in God's life actually realized.

In preaching, every aspect of man must be reached with life saving truth. Man's mind/soul must be stimulated and his spirit/Godwardness must be stirred. This may best occur with a preacher consciously engaged in seeking to reach all parts of man's inner being. An aspect of that endeavor involves the self, flesh or soul of man standing out of God's way in a sought out flow of His ministry through the individual in spirit. It is not to say that this may not occur in a two-partist ministry model but it is more likely to occur in preaching ministry that understands the need for the individual to be reached in both spirit and soul for inner, God-wrought transformation.

For preaching this means the preacher who is aware of man's functional three-partist nature will not be inclined horizontally in ministry but will be inclined perpendicularly in purpose, planning, delivery and assessment. Preparation for preaching will become more spirit-wrought than mentally developed without lacking in stimulating cognitive content. Passionate, soul-searching, heart-tearing prayer will be key in preparation diligently seeking first to hear from God before ever speaking for God. To speak for God, as Jack Hayford has said, "includes hearing clearly from God, aligning clearly with God, understanding God clearly and acting or speaking clearly according to God's Word." Delivery will seek the _rhema_ of God to be communicated more so than a simple didactic of _logos_. Such a purpose may not occur via _psuche_ alone. The minister must be in the Spirit/spirit.

### APPLICATIONS

### The Benign Condition of the American Church

In a scathing expose of the American Church, David Kinnaman in his book _UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity,_ lays out the problems with a Church that seems infatuated with itself. His research has revealed incredibly meager difference between Christians and unbelievers stating, "In virtually every study we have conducted... born-again Christians fail to display much attitudinal or behavioral evidence of transformed lives." Simply put, God is all too often not being experienced through the church. As has been researched in chapter four, transformational preaching seems to be largely missing in the contemporary pulpit. This study suggests a connection between the two. D.A. Carson in his book _The Gagging of God_ has researched to similar conclusions where even loving God with heart, soul, and mind is relegated to intellectual effort alone. Instead of God's people living _coram Deo_ , Christianity is too often fatally linked with a mere intellectual endeavor.

The church in America is decidedly weak even in the midst of pervasive biblical teaching and much biblical knowledge. Knowing what is right to do clearly is not necessarily followed by correct action. Something is lacking. A deeper change is required. This anemia may be traceable to the American pulpit where there is often a soulish two-part emphasis instead of Spirit/spirit to spirit ministry.

### Biblical Soul Care and an Ordered Personality

Dallas Willard has pointed out that in a condition of sin, "our components are not hooked up correctly any longer." Man in his self-wardness does not function correctly. Outside of a God-wardness he is lost. Man functions best in enhanced God-wardness or being strong in spirit. The spirit of man in communion with God through the Holy Spirit is the internal adviser to the conscious soul. This is one reason why Jesus said that what is needed is a righteousness to surpass that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law (Matt. 5:20). An act of the will alone in righteousness is not sufficient. This weak form of righteousness, as exampled by the Pharisees in their teaching, is a simple matter of soul-directed acts of the will. Through willfulness alone people may come near to God with their lips but their heart, their innermost man remains far from Him (Is.29:13). For the director of soul care in the church the development of an ordered personality requires that man's spirit inhabited by God's Holy Spirit be the dominant factor in the personality for effectiveness.

### Biblical Soul Care and Walking in the Spirit

Righteousness is not merely a matter of action alone, but a transformed inner man, a heart for God, a God-wardness deep within. Spirit/spirit oversees the soul or self in an ordered personality of righteousness. This ordered personality aligned with God the Holy Spirit over man's spirit is alone what may keep the flesh in check. In that functioning unity the whole man is synthesized and termed "walking in the Spirit" (Ro. 8:1; 8:4; Gal. 5:16; 5:25). When the spirit side of man's nature is in control under the auspices of the Holy Spirit it leads the individual to intellectual clarity, emotional stability and bodily health, an ordered personality. Man is holistically strong toward God. With the flesh, the self-will or soulish aspect of man in submission to the Spirit, God's light may shine through. His light will not presumably shine through his soul but through that dimension referred to as spirit, the finer God-ward aspect of the inner man.

Scripture warns that if man sows to the flesh then the flesh is reaped in corruption but if the sowing is to the Spirit then everlasting life is the result (Galatians 6:8). If the condition of the church in America says anything at all it says that there is fleshly sowing en masse in pulpits and pews alike. There is an abundance of information but little transformation, much knowledge but little Christ-like depth. In a concern to point leaders away from self-will in ministry Dennis Kinlaw has warned that, "The cleverness and cunning of the ego are such, as it seeks to maintain its own autonomy, that it can claim to be surrendering to Christ while it keeps its hand on the controls." Cognitively centered soulish ministry would seem to be precisely that. The hands of individuals on the controls of life and the mouths of man in his own thinking are the hands and mouths in many pulpits throughout America. Research here has traced that soulish handling and speaking to the foundation of a two-part anthropology. A soul-based driven preaching ministry may be a major cause of American spiritual anemia. Self is still in control in many American pulpits. This self-centeredness that makes humanity what Scott Peck calls, "people of the lie" is alive and well in pulpits or more transformational results would be experienced.

### The Galatian Error in Contemporary America

It is maintained here that the works of the flesh error with the Galatians is paralleled in the current American church. Instances of strife and works of the flesh crop up and multiply in churches nationwide. Dissensions, envy, immorality and adultery, to name a few, are sins that fill the pews each Sunday morning throughout the land. It is alleged that a contributing factor points to leaders who have taken a theory of man from the world for pulpit ministry and have lost sight of true spirituality beginning with how man functions in Spirit/spirit as a priority. An inclination toward a faulty anthropological view that parallels secular psychology is a major catalyst behind believers who look much like the world. Believers in these times are not unlike the scolded saints of Galatia who because of their soulish ways were biting and devouring one another (Galatians 5:15). They had become spiritual cannibals because they left off living by faith through the Spirit/spirit and depended on self-directed works and behavior that they surmised they should perform through false reasoning. This amounted to works of the flesh by means of the soul or horizontal inclinations of man alone; the works of the self (soul) in the flesh are held in great contrast to the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5). It is instead by the Spirit/spirit that revival and wholesale holiness in brokenness before God is established (Isaiah 57:15).

### A Philosophy of Ministry

A new philosophy of ministry is required or rather a recovery of biblically styled and driven preaching. Preachers need to be knowledgeable in the pulpit, need to use quality illustrations and media tools seeking to pique the minds of listeners and engage in dialogue but to stop there would be a tragedy. To think that intellectual and relational preaching alone is quality ministry would be to stop short of deep God-directed transformational proclamation.

Preachers themselves also must be more transformational to the core, directed in spirit by Spirit. This requires more listening than thinking, more praying and fasting than planning, structuring and emotionalizing. Jesus' model for ministry involves speaking words of "spirit and life" (John 6:63). Jesus' example is the goal in ministry and may be realized through depth of spirit without many of the common contemporary communication techniques applied today. A more passionate and even desperate inner searching and pressing into God in order that God Himself would poke through proclamation is largely to be desired rather than an intellectual relegation of truth to cognitive and emotive methodologies.

Needed now is preachers who place themselves at God's disposal in such a way that He may breathe on the dead bones of American churches so that these bones might live again (Ezekiel 37). New life is required. New foci are needed. Those tools of the Spirit that awaken men to their impoverished condition before God are the functions of the spirit in man ignited by divine life **.** A conscience without fault, unbroken communion, and intuitive knowing all in the hand of the Spirit are required for long term transformational results. These functions of the spirit in man may be gleaned from ontological three-partism while adhering to functional three-partism.

Affecting the innermost, Godward aspect of man is a priority in biblically based ministry. This is preaching to the core of the individual. Such a ministry is of an entirely different genre than any other form of teaching in the secular arena. Teaching in general is basically mind to mind. By contrast only God, through the instrumentation of the Holy Spirit and through man's spirit, may reach man's spirit in the listeners and effect transformational living. In spirit, man is transformed deeply when ministry is spiritual in nature rather than soulish in nature, spirit wrought rather than self wrought. The conscience is impacted in this way such as when Paul's spirit was moved, his sense of right and wrong affronted, seeing the idolatry of the Athenians (Acts 17:16). Deep-seated change/transformation only occurs from deep within.

It is in man's spirit that his born again status is known in a knowledge deeper than cognition (I Cor. 2:12; Ro 8:16). This knowledge is deeper than soul knowledge (2 Cor 5:16). Some refer to this as intuitive knowing, a spiritual experience whereby man is made aware of himself in this higher form of comprehension. It consists of a knowing in the spirit and represents confidence for living in and trusting God that reaches beyond intellectual assent. It is a spiritual knowledge rooted in God-wardness.

Fellowship or communion with God as well is not a mere act of will but a reality of spiritual intimacy. Communion takes place in spirit, not in soul (Phil 3:3). Communion's point of origin is in the Godward side of man's inner heart, his spirit. Man's self-ward inclinations need to be monitored and controlled by this God-ward inclination. The mind, will and emotions of the soul need to be under the auspices of the conscience, communion and intuitive knowing of the Godwardness in man, his spirit. Such a condition is referred to as being "spiritually minded" (Romans 8:6) and is a prerequisite for a deeper, more effective preaching ministry.

The pure conscience of the preacher is the channel through which the Holy Spirit brings conviction to the conscience of the listener. The communion with God of the preacher is the conduit with God causing hunger in the listeners stirring a thirst for a closer walk with Him, and further development of communion in fellowship. The intuitive knowledge of spirit in the preacher is the element of God-speak through his pulpit ministry.

For God to speak with authority and expressive power through His spokespersons means different things to different anthropological models. For the three-partist it means seeking _rhema_ to flow through the speaker in the words uttered as God speaks through spirit. Self-will must be subservient to God's will. For the two-partist inclined to mental exercises for preaching it may only mean to do the best he may hoping and trusting that God will bless.

# CHAPTER SIXTEEN Recommendations from this Dialogue

### Encountering The Divine

It is alleged that "The task of pastoral ministry is, above all else, to arrange the contingencies for an encounter with the Divine." The means to accomplish this is decidedly not through the instrumentation of information, mind, feelings and soul alone. The instrumentation of spiritual work is the God-wardness in man, man's spirit. These findings call for a modification from mind-to-mind preaching techniques and approaches in preparation and delivery. Specifically, that preachers emphasize, qualify, and aim for the heart or whole man in preaching; that preachers spend more time praying than thinking, more time seeking and listening than crafting and plotting. If transformational spiritual work is to be accomplished it must reach that spirit-side of the heart reaching out to the spirit where the Holy One resides in the born again listeners and creating an awareness of spiritual need for unbelievers. Only a vessel given to God in brokenness may affect such a ministry. Two-partism does not preclude this but may be hindered in its proclivity to a cognitive based ministry.

### Further Work in Preaching

An emphasis on the God-wardness in man for preaching is essential. Preachers in the current generation simply must get beyond technique, style, oratory and head knowledge in their preparation, delivery and assessment of ministry. A move of God's Spirit is needed in this generation, not knowledge alone. The need is men of the Spirit/spirit who are clear channels of the River of Living Water (John 7:28) as God's Spirit moves through man's spirit. Through deeper living, hearts need scouring for a bedrock connection with God that impacts the hearts of men where one sermon may transform lives for the rest of those lives. This occurs through the function of spirit not soul.

For spiritual ministry Heisler has suggested that if a preacher needs a sure sign that the Spirit of God is moving and ministering in a genuine way that there is a biblical means of determination. He says, "If your audience comes to you and asks you what they need to do before you even finish preaching your message, then the Spirit of God is working" (Acts 2:37-38). Another means of detecting God's speaking through the preacher's preaching is when men say, "no man ever spoke like this man" (John 7:46). He who proclaims under the auspices of heaven will not sound like ordinary communication. Something deeper will be realized. Yet another means of depth detection is where people take note that this preaching is with authority and not what they are accustomed to hearing (Matt. 7:29).

### Further Understanding of a Functional Three-partism

Dialogue must continue on the debate between two-partism and three-partism. Although substance two-partism has its flaws so does ontological three-partism as observed in the defective teachings of Witness Lee, Jesse-Penn Lewis and others. A functional three-partism needs to be further explored as a viable model and already prevalent view among New Testament scholars. Distinguishing factors from ontological three-partism require further examination in light of their transferability to apply in a functional three-partism.

### Further Clarity of Functions

Further study is required in distinguishing specific functions of soul's horizontal inclinations and spirit's perpendicular inclinations as attested by majority opinion. As has been pointed out, most scholars adhere to a functional distinction within man contingent on the Scriptural uses of either soul or spirit. Further elucidations of specific horizontal functions of the soul and specific perpendicular functions of spirit would be helpful in clarifying what it means to position preaching in a more effective God-ward stance for quality, spiritual, and conscience-piercing proclamation.

### A Primarily Biblical not Philosophic Model

As dialogue continues toward biblical clarity, charges brought from either side on the Greek origin or Platonic nature of the other view arising out of emotive adherence to one view or another must be set aside. According to John W. Cooper, Harry Austryn Wolfson has written extensively on differences between two-part and three-part Platonists. Plato is variously cited as either a two-partist or a three-partist contingent on a number of factors. Plato's three-part soul, for example, as noted in _The_ _Republic_ is cited as, but is not at all the same as, a holistic three-part man. What is needed with this study in understanding man is a more clear biblically defined functional three-partism. Scripture dictates who man is and charges of Greek influence and Platonist roots only cloud the issue. A more refined biblical anthropology is therefore required that is purely and objectively biblical in nature distinct from views found in philosophy and psychology.

### What is the Current Focus of Pastors in Preaching

Helpful research in assessing contemporary preaching models may include an analysis of pastoral focus in the pulpits of America precisely with regard to how preachers spend their preparation hours. How are messages currently developed? How is content determined? How much concentrated prayer and how much fasting in humility before God is applied? How much desperation is present for God to move in lives? These kinds of questions need to be asked to assess the current preaching climate toward more holistic Spirit-directed preaching.

Research on widespread preparatory methodology among pastoral leaders in evangelical circles would be enlightening. It is alleged that a soul-centered approach would be discovered as a prevailing process in such a surveyed assessment. This soul-centered process, if discovered as prevalent, would clarify soulishness as a contributing factor to the weak state of the church in America.

### How Much Iniquity in the Pulpit

In Matthew 7:22, 23 Jesus warned that some would proclaim Him in iniquity or self-will. Further study is required to delve into the dangers and potential damage of iniquitous proclamation. If preaching is produced soulishly is this iniquitous? If there is no move of God's Spirit through the speaker then is that proclamation (prophecy) rooted in self-will or iniquity? Such a serious matter needs to be fleshed out more precisely. It is the contention here that much of contemporary preaching is in fact iniquitous, rooted in and delving from a mere two-part idea of man.

### Other Areas of Ministry Affected

Other areas of pastoral ministry may be explored comparing a two-part outlook versus a functionally three-part outlook. Counseling will vary greatly between the two. The two-partist may find it easier to rest on psychological methods wrestling with felt needs whereas the functional three-partist will distinguish between the spirit which possesses characteristics and the soul which only expresses characteristics in the individual. Without following psychological models the three-partist will seek an application of biblically based principles for holistic health in the individual. Since possession (of spirit) precedes expression (of soul), revealing core issues, meeting inner needs of spirit would be more conducive to a holistic cure in any pathological situation.

Application in music ministry where Jesus specifically calls his followers to worship "in spirit" (John 4:24) will differ between these two schools of thought. Various worship methods and preferences may not be the main issue at all. With any style of worship the question that must be asked may be, "is it worship in spirit or in soul?" Is the individual God-ward in attitude or more self-ward in attitude and preference?

Other aspects of pastoral leadership may be affected as well. Even administration may be impacted by anthropological models in an approach to staff development, setting direction for inter-office interaction, establishing focus for the future, etc.

The bottom line is a deep need in this generation for Spirit-empowered proclamation of the living Word of God that deeply convicts and burns with life (Luke 24:32). Neither anthropology nor preaching is an exact science. Pressing into God for His favor and blessing also is not a matter of hitting the correct spiritual switches for the proper effect. Methodology is not the answer but hearts ordered aright in God-wardness that originates in the spirit not the soul.

For the functional three-partist a specific perception of the need for selflessness would motivate passion toward God and God-wardness. The inclination of the three-partist may be to abandon self whereas the inclination of the two-partist to prop self up. Three-partists are more likely to have a sense of desperation toward God where two-partists may rest on presumptive ministry arising out of intellect and cleverness. Three-partists will be inclined toward weakness in a healthy fear of _sarx_ that threatens Spirit/spirit directed ministry where a two-partist may acknowledge a difficulty with _sarx_ but not even question one's own motives in that context. The goal is a pastoral care that prioritizes and develops the God-wardness of the individual for inner transformation, change from the core of man in God's design.

Sola Scriptura

Sola Fide

Sola Gratia

Solo Christo

Sola Dei Gloria
AFTERWARD

Without question the power of Spirit/spirit is multiple times more powerful than that of the soul. Engaging spirit then is primary with regard to preaching certainly and vital as well in every area of our walk with God who is Spirit. One particular benefit to the preacher when spirit is engaged over soul is an unending supply of preaching material from God's heart to that of the preacher. There are simply not enough Sundays in a year to fit it all in. That is my prayer for you, an overflowing of God's provision from His Spirit to your spirit through your mind, will end emotions to your listeners. As far as specific ways and means of engaging spirit over soul, that is the theme of the next book. There are specific clear ways of engaging with God in His Spirit, in His Ways.

Sincerely in Him,

Dr. Robert G. Morrin

www.journeycomm.org

Endnotes

 Thomas C. Oden, _Pastoral Theology: Essentials of Ministry_ , (San Fransisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1983), p 139.

 John W. Cooper. _Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1989), p 1.

 Reid Monaghan, "Are Human beings Constituted of One, Two, Or Three Substances?" RESURGENCE, available from  http://theresurgence.com/reid_monaghan_2005_are_human_beings_constituted_of_one_two_or_three_substances; Internet; accessed January 26, 2009.

 Robert H. Gundry, _Soma in Biblical Theology; With Emphasis on Pauline Anthropology_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: Academie Books, 1987), p106, 107.

 Jeffrey H. Boyd, "The Soul as a Starting Point for Apologetics in a Therapeutic Age," Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA, November 18, 1995. p. 5.

 Kenneth Boa, _Augustine to Freud; What Theologians & Psychologists tell us about Human Nature_, (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2004), p 33.

 Robert B. Sheldon, "A Scientific Survey of the imago Dei in Genesis 1-2 and Surprising Support for Trichotomy: Body, Soul and Spiritual Being _"_ ; Westminster Theological Seminary; available from http://rbsp.info/WTS/Sheldon-ST761.pdf; Internet; accessed March 15, 2009.

 Edward Welch, "How Theology Shapes Ministry: Jay Adams's View of the Flesh and an Alternative;" Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 20, No. 3, 2002, p. 16, [CDROM].

 Glen Marshall, "Some Implications of Pauline Anthropology for Contemporary Pastoral Care, " _Vox Evangelica_ 17 (1987): 23-34.; available from  http://theologicalstudiesorguk.blogspot.com/2009/03/glen-marshall-on-some-implications-of.html; Internet; accessed March 15, 2009.

 Joel B. Green and Stuart L. Palmer, _In Search of the Soul; Four Views of the Mind-Body Problem_ (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2005), p 9.

 John R. Sachs, S.J., _The Christian Vision of Humanity; Basic Christian Anthropology_ , (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1991), p 52.

 George P. Pardington, _Outline Studies in Christian Doctrine_ , (Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publications), p 147.

 James R. Beck and Bruce Demarest, _The Human Person in Theology and Psychology; A Biblical Anthropology for the Twenty-First Century_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2005), p 139.

 Charles Hodge, _Systematic Theology, Vol. II_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1986), p 46.

 Anthony A. Hoekema, _Created in God's Image_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), p 4.

 Beck and Demarest, p. 12.

 Hoekema, p 1.

 Wayne E. Oates, _Behind the Masks: Personality Disorders in Religious Behavior_ , (Louisville, KY: The Westminster Press, 1987), p 121.

 Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini, _Inevitable Illusions; How Mistakes of Reason Rule our Minds_ , (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1994), p 127.

 Kim Riddlebarger, "Trichotomy; A Beachhead for Gnostic Influences;" MODERN REFORMATION online; available from http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=printfriendly&var1=Print&var2=697; Internet; accessed December 24, 2008.

 Andrew A. White, "The Nature of Man and Mental Illness," Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine – Vol 5 No 4, available online at  http://www.bmei.org/jbem/volume5/num2/white_the_nature_of_man_and_mental_illness.php, accessed January 26, 2009.

 Winston Smith, "Dichotomy or Trichotomy? How the Doctrine of Man Shapes the Treatment of Depression;" Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 18, No. 3, 2000, p. 21, [CDROM].

 Wayne Grudem, _Systematic Theology_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: InterVarsity press, 1994), p 477.

 Ibid. p 477.

 Ibid. p 482.

 Kim Riddlebarger,Trichotomy; "A Beachhead for Gnostic Influences;" MODERN REFORMATION online; available from http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=printfriendly&var1=Print&var2=697; Internet; accessed December 24, 2008.

 W. Gary Crampton, "Man as Created in God's Image," The Trinity Review, June 1994, available online at http://www.trinityfoundation.org/keyword_search.php, accessed March 24, 2009.

 Wayne G. Rollins, _Soul and Psyche; The Bible in Psychological Perspective_ , (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), p 8.

 Hodge, p 48.

 Diana Lynn Vaughan Swihart, "The Monistic v. Dichotomic v. Trichotomic Discussion on the Constitution of the Human Being in the Light of Biblical Semiotics," Doctoral Dissertation, Trinity Theological Seminary, February 1995, p i.

 Cooper, p 73.

 John Laidlaw, M.A., _The Bible Doctrine of Man; The Seventh Series of the Cunningham Lectures_ , (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1905), p 51.

 George Eldon Ladd, _A Theology of the New Testament_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1974), p 503.

 Jeffrey H. Boyd, "The Current State of Evangelical Thinking about the Soul;" Theological Research Exchange Network; Presented at the October 10, 1994 annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society Northeast Region, available from TREN; p 11.

 Franz Delitzsch and Robert Ernest Wallis translator, _A System of Biblical Psychology_ , Second Edition, 1861 (Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, ____), p 460.

 Ibid, p 501.

 Henry Clarence Thiessen, _Lectures in Systematic Theology_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1979), p 161.

 Boyd, p. 8.

 Timothy D. Nyquist, "A Biblical Survey of the Constitution of Man with Application to Biblical Counseling," Monograph Presented to the Faculty of Multnomah Graduate School of Ministry, May 1988, p 67,68.

 Dallas Willard, "Spiritual Disciplines, Spiritual Formation and the Restoration of the Soul," The Journal of Psychology and Theology 26: 101, Spring 1998.

 Beck and Demarest, p 13.

 A. McCaig, "Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature," The Evangelical Quarterly 3 (1931): 121-138; available from  http://theologicalstudiesorguk.blogspot.com/2007/10/mccaig-on-tripartite-theory-of-human.html; accessed March 23, 2009.

 Grudem, p 477.

 Thomas C. Oden, _Pastoral Theology: Essentials of Ministry_ , (San Fransisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1983), p 139.

 Hoekema, p 223.

 Oden, p 188.

 Dayton Dean Kitterman, "Developing a Biblical Theology of Emotions," Doctoral Dissertation, Trinity Theological Seminary," 1999, p 28.

 Roy B. Zuck, Editor, _A Biblical Theology of the New Testament_ , (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), p 261.

 Ladd, p510.

 Elmer Leon Towns Jr., "The New Testament Doctrine of the Heart," MS Thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, May, 1958.

 Martin and Deidre Bobgan, _Psycho Heresy; The Psychological Seduction of Christianity_ , (Santa Barbara, CA: Eastgate Publishers, 1987), p 211.

 William Evans, _How to Prepare Sermons_ , (Chicago: Moody Press, 1964), p 17.

 Daniel Gilbert, _Stumbling on Happiness_ , (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), p 167.

 Richard Lischer, _A Theology of Preaching The Dynamics of the Gospel_ , (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2001), p 55.

 Wayne Grudem, _Systematic Theology_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: InterVarsity press, 1994), p 474.

 Grudem, p 475.

 Augustus A. Strong, _Systematic Theology_ , (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revel Company, 1907), p 483.

 Grudem, p 476.

 Andrew A. White, "The Nature of Man and Mental Illness," Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine; Volume 5, Number 2, p 15.

 R. C. Sproul, "Essential Truths of the Christian Faith," (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992), Google Books Online, available from  http://books.google.com/books?id=DC-TRU4tEvsC&pg=PT155&lpg=PT155&dq=%22human+beings+as+body+and+soul%22+sproul&source=bl&ots=TuaK2wzJtc&sig=LGOIl8BJnzbW6LtUKXVHOO5ftLc&hl=en&ei=Kz_uSZncC5fKMuf0tPQP&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1; accessed February 20, 2009.

 Winston Smith, "Two-part view or Three-part view? How the Doctrine of Man Shapes the Treatment of Depression;" Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 18, No. 3, 2000, p. 23, [CDROM].

 ______________, "Body Soul and Spirit," Concordia Theological Quarterly; Volume 66:2, April 2002, p 168.

 John Laidlaw, M.A., _The Bible Doctrine of Man; The Seventh Series of the Cunningham Lectures_ , (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1905), p 54.

 F. Delitzsch, and C. F. Keil, Commentary on the Old Testament in Ten Volumes, Vol. I, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988. p79.

 W. Gary Crampton, "Man as Created in God's Image," The Trinity Review, June 1994, available online at http://www.trinityfoundation.org/keyword_search.php, accessed March 24, 2009.

 Grudem, p 473.

 E.W. Bullinger, The Companion Bible, (Grand Rapids, Zondervan Bible Publishers), 1974, p 911.

 Jose Comblin, _Retrieving the Human: A Christian Anthropology_ trans. Robert Barr, (Mary Knoll, NY; Orbis Books, 1990), p 62-63.

 Boyd, p 10

 Strong, p 485

 Boyd, p10

 Hodge, p 51

 Edward T. Welch, "Who Are We? Needs, Longings, and the Image of God in Man," The Journal of Biblical Counseling," Volume 13, No. 1, 1994, p. 31, [CDROM].

 Simmons, Thomas Paul, A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine, Clarksville, Tennessee: Bible Baptist Books and Supplies, 1979, p 150.

 Strong, p 486.

 Ladd, p 501.

 Payne, p 70.

 Laidlaw, p 65,66.

 Sheldon, p 25.

 Jeffrey H., Boyd, "The Soul as a Starting Point for Apologetics in a Therapeutic Age," Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA, November 18, 1995., p9,10.

 Murrell, Stanford E., "A Foundation for Faith; An Introductory Study of Systematic Theology," available from <http://www.scribd.com/doc/7031663/Stanford-Murrell>, Internet, accessed August 21, 2009.

 Monaghan, p 2.

 Nyquist, p 60.

 Hoekema, p 211.

 Beck, p 136.

 Ladd, p 502.

 Grudem, p 472.

 Boyd, p 10.

 Laidlaw, p 66.

 Ibid, 66.

 Rollins, p 16.

 Eugene F King, "The Doctrine of Man: Christian Anthropology," Concordia Theological Quarterly; Fort Wayne, IN; Volume 48, Numbers 2 & 3, April-July 1984, p 147.

 Pearlman, Myer, Knowing the Doctrines of the Bible, (Springfield, Missouri: Gospel Publishing House, 1937), p 101.

 Ibid.

 Ibid. p 102.

Rev. Thomas Noack. "Swedenborg and Lorber; The Relationship Between Two Revelations," Available at  http://www.scribd.com/doc/9719797/Thomas-Noack-Swedenborg-and-Lorber-The-Relationship-between-two-Revelations, Internet, accessed on August 21, 2009.

 Wayne Grudem, p 477.

 Kim Riddlebarger,Three-part view; "A Beachhead for Gnostic Influences;" MODERN REFORMATION online; available from http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=printfriendly&var1=Print&var2=697; Internet; accessed December 24, 2008.

 Gary Evans, "Christological Errors: Then and Now," Affirmation and Critique Press, Editorial of Living Stream Ministry, October 1998, available at <http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/1998/04/98_04_a5.pdf>, Internet, accessed August 22, 2009.

 Hoekema, p 205.

 Philip Schaff, "History of the Christian Church," Volume III, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great, a.d. 311-600, Fifth Edition revised, available at <http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/About.htm>, Internet, accessed on August 22, 2009.

 W. Gary Crampton, "Man as Created in God's Image," The Trinity Review, June 1994, available online at http://www.trinityfoundation.org/keyword_search.php, accessed March 24, 2009.

 Wayne G. Rollins, _Soul and Psyche; The Bible in Psychological Perspective_ , (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), p 8.

 Schaff, p711.

 Beck, p 128.

 James A. Buswell, _Systematic Theology, Vol. I,_ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1962), p 245.

 J. Gresham Machen, "Jesus and Paul," p 6, Reformation INK, Biblical and Theological Studies, 1912, available at  http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/jgmjesuspaul.htm, Internet, accessed September 2, 2009.

 Ladd, p 704.

 Ibid, p 709.

 Merrill F. Unger, _Unger's Bible Dictionary_ , (Chicago; Moody Press, 1975), p 839.

 Unger, p 840.

 Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ , (Grand Rapids; Zondervan, 2003), p 131.

 Fee, p 128.

 Lischer, _A Theology of Preaching The Dynamics of the Gospel_ , p 25.

 Hodge, p 49.

 Murrell, p 99.

 Mark P. Cosgrove, _The Essence of Human Nature_ , (Grand Rapids; Zondervan, 1977), p 18.

 John Pester, "The Human Spirit in the Experience of the Triune God," Affirmation and Critique Press, Editorial of Living Stream Ministry, April 1996, available at http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/1996/04/96_02_a4.pdf, p 42, Internet, accessed February 24, 2009.

Hoekema, p 205.

 Cooper, p 73.

 Clint Tibbs, "The Spirit and the Spirits among the Earliest Christians: I Corinthians 12 and 14 as a Test Case, Delta State University, available at <http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1465986791.html>, Internet, accessed August 24, 2009, p 317.

 J. B. Heard, _The Tripartite Nature of Man_ , (Edinburgh; T&T Clark, 1875), p 67.

 George Eldon Ladd, _A Theology of the New Testament_ , (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1974), p 503.

 Ibid.

 Kim Riddlebarger, "Three-part view; A Beachhead for Gnostic Influences;" MODERN REFORMATION online; available from http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=printfriendly&var1=Print&var2=697; Internet; accessed December 24, 2008.

 Andrew A. White, "The Nature of Man and Mental Illness," Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine – Vol 5 No 4, available online at  http://www.bmei.org/jbem/volume5/num2/white_the_nature_of_man_and_mental_illness.php, accessed January 26, 2009.

 Beck and Demarest, p 13.

 J. Edwin Hartill, _Principles of Biblical Hermeneutics_ , (Grand Rapids; Zondervan, 1978), page 70.

 Swihart, p238.

 Gerald L. Schroeder, _Genesis and the Big Bang_ , (New York; Bantam Books, 1992), p152.

 Brian Hay, Body, Soul and Spirit, October 2008, available at www.omegatimes.com, Internet, accessed on August 25, 2009.

 Michael Brooks, _13 Things That Don't Make Sense_ , (London; Doubleday, 2008), p115.

 Clarence Larkin, p 171.

 Martin Luther, _The Magnificat, Luther's Works_ , Ed. Jaroslav Pelikan. Vol. 21. (St. Louis; Concordia Publishing House, 1956), pp 295-358.

 Watchman Nee, _The Spiritual Man_ , (New York; Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1968), page 29.

 Ibid. 30.

 Oswald Chambers, _Biblical Psychology; A Series of Preliminary Studies_ , (Fort Washington, PA; Christian Literature Crusade, 1960), p 47.

 George M. Lamsa, _Old Testament Light; A Scriptural Commentary based on the Aramaic of the Ancient Peshitta_ _Text_ , (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.; Prentice Hall, Inc., 1964), p 220.

 J. Stafford Wright, _Mind, Man and the Spirits_ , (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan Publishing House, 1973), p 149.

 J. Patout Burns, _Theological Anthropology_ , (Philadelphia; Fortress Press, 1981), p 8.

 W. Bauer, _Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature_ , ed. By W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker, (Chicago; University of Chicago, 1979), p 894.

 Ed Marks, "The Working of the Law of the Spirit of Life to Dispense the Life of the Triune God into the Tripartite Man,"Affirmation and Critique Press, Editorial of Living Stream Ministry, April 1999, p 20, available at <http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/1999/02/99_02_a2.pdf>, Internet, accessed August 26, 2009.

 Jessie Penn-Lewis, _War on the Saints_ , (New Kensington, PA; Whitaker House, 1996), p 226.

 Delitzsch, p 112.

 Donald Guthrie, , _Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries_ , Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1983. Reprint, 1999, p 118.

 Ibid, 112.

 John R. Himes, Strength in the Inner Man, available at <http://johnofjapan.org/pdf/strength_in_the_inner_man.pdf>, Internet, accessed August 26, 2009.

 Robert L. Thomas, Frank Gaebelein, editor _, I Thessalonians_ in _Expositor's Bible Commentary,_ Vol. 11, (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan Publishing House, 1979), p 295.

 Beck, p 128.

 Adam Clarke, "The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Volume V., Matthew to Acts," (Nashville, Abingdon.), page 555.

 A. McCaig, "Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature," The Evangelical Quarterly 3 (1931): 121-138; available from  http://theologicalstudiesorguk.blogspot.com/2007/10/mccaig-on-tripartite-theory-of-human.html; accessed March 23, 2009.

 Grudem, p 477.

 Ladd, p 501.

 Online Bible, version 2.95, 2009.

 Luther, pp 295-358

 The Online Bible, version 2.95, 2009.

 Cooper, p 98.

 Lester Sumrall, _Spirit, Soul and Body_ , (New Kensington, PA; Whitaker House, 1995), p 182.

 Jack Kelley, "Body Soul and Spirit," Selah; Tough Questions Answered, available online at  http://gracethrufaith.com/selah/tough-questions-answered/body-soul-and-spirit/, Internet, accessed August 28, 2009.

 Kelley, Ibid.

 Hoekema, p 206.

 Strong, p 484.

 Laidlaw, p 60.

 Strong, p 487.

 Sumrall, p 24.

 Witness Lee, _The Parts of Man_ , (Anaheim, CA; Living Stream Ministry, 1969), p 53.

 Leanne Payne, _Restoring the Christian Soul; Overcoming Barriers to Completion in Christ through Healing Prayer_ , (Grand Rapids, MI; Baker Books, 2001), p 214.

 Brent B. Pasyalin, "Dismantling the Tripartite Man," The Public Square Forum, available at <http://www.thebereans.net/forum2/showthread.php?t=36674>, Internet, accessed August 28, 2009.

 Pasyalin, Ibid.

 Nyquist, p 67.

 Hodge, p 48.

 Alan Scholes, Lecture in Anthropology, p 7, International School of Theology, Fall 2001, available at <http://www.isol.cc/isot/htdocs/online/gradclasses/>, Internet, accessed August 28, 2009.

 Delitzsch, p 116.

 Milton Valentine, _Christian Theology_ , (Philadelphia, Lutheran Publication Society, 1906), p 460.

 Chambers, p 60.

 Louis Berkhof, _Systematic Theology_ , (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1941), p 194.

 Laidlaw, p 64.

 Nyquist, p 14,15.

 Boyd, _The Current State of Evangelical Thinking about the Soul_ , p 9.

 David Yoon, "The Economy of God in First Corinthians 6:17," Affirmation and Critique Press, Editorial of Living Stream Ministry, October 1999, p 42, available at http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/1999/04/99_04_a6.pdf, Internet, accessed September 3, 2009.

 Ladd, p 516.

 The New Scofield Reference Bible, note on I Corinthians 2:14, p 1234.

 Ernest De Witt Burton, _Spirit, Soul and Flesh; Historical and Linguistic Studies_ , (Chicago; The University of Chicago Press, 1916), p 48 & 137.

 Dewitt Burton, p 191, 192.

 DeWitt Burton, p 193, 194.

 Zuck, p 261.

 Welch, p 17.

 Jay E. Adams, _More Than Redemption_ , (Phillipsburg, NJ; Presbyterian and Reformed, 1979), p 160.

 J. Gresham, Machen, _The Christian View of Man_ , (London; The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965), p 179.

 Machen, p 180.

 Welch, p 19.

 Mark W. Karlberg, "Covenant Theology in Reformed Perspective," Collected essays and book reviews in historical, biblical, and systematic theology, Wipf and Stock Publisher, 2000, Made available electronically through Two Age Press, "Israel's History Personified: Romans 7:7-13 in Relation to Paul's Teaching on The "Old Man," available at  http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/Covenant%20Theology%20in%20Reformed%20Perspective.pdf, Internet, accessed October 7, 2009, p 184, 185.

 Valentine, _Christian Theology_ , p 462.

 Zuck, p 261.

 Ladd, p 512.

 Hoekema, p 216.

 Elmer Leon Towns, Jr., The New Testament Doctrine of the Heart.

 Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan, editors, _The Oxford Companion Bible_ , (New York; Oxford University Press, 1993), p 231.

 Marshall, p 25.

 Marshall, p 25.

 Laidlaw, p 79.

 Cooper, p 99.

 Laidlaw, p 77.

 Laidlaw, p 78.

 Ladd, p 516.

 Hodge, p 144.

 Strong, p 562.

 Hodge, p 44.

 White, p 16.

 R. Laird Harris, _Man_ – _God's Eternal Creation; Old Testament Teaching on Man and His Culture_ , (Chicago; Moody Press, 1971), p 10.

 Ladd, p 514

 Ladd, p 514.

 Ladd, p 510.

 Strong, p 559.

 Strong, p 562.

 Oates, p 130.

 Oden, p 188.

 Hodge, p 262.

 Hodge, p 262.

 Hodge, 262.

 Dewitt Burton, p 135.

 Nee, The Spiritual Man, p 71

 T. Austin Sparks, _Spiritual Foundations, Volume V, What is Man?_ (Jacksonville, FL; The SeedSowers, ____), p 24

 Bobgan, p 211.

 Chambers, p 261.

 Nee, p 141.

 Bobgan, p 215.

 Susan Greenfield, _The Private Life of the Brain; Emotions, Consciousness, and the Secret of the Self,_ (New York; John Wiley & Sons, 2000), p 185.

 Greenfield, p 42.

 Ladd, p 510.

 Young's Literal Translation; "indeed" from Gk. "ie per," Online Bible, ver. 2.95, 2009.

 Online Bible, 2009.

 DeWitt Burton, p 205.

 DeWitt Burton, p 204.

 Ladd, p 422.

 Ladd., p 514.

 James Orr, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, (Grand Rapids, MI, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, _____), p 1119

 Zuck, p 261.

 Nee, _Release of the Spirit_ , p 90.

 Nee, p 91.

 Sparks, p 142.

 Jack Kelley, "Body Soul and Spirit," available at  http://gracethrufaith.com/selah/tough-questions-answered/body-soul-and-spirit/, Internet, accessed September 29, 2009.

 Jack Kelley.

 Nee, Release, p 17.

 Nee, p 74.

 The Online Bible, 2009.

 Deere, _Surprised by the Voice of God_ , p 28.

 Nee, _Spiritual Man_ , p 116.

 Watchman Nee, _The Release of the Spirit_ , (Indianapolis, Sure Foundation Publishers, 1965) p. 11-13.

 Bobgan, p 212.

 Bobgan, p 212.

 Gary R. Collins, _The Magnificent Mind_ , (Waco, TX; Word Books, 1985), p 36.

 Collins, p 45.

 Stuart Barton Babbage, _Man in Nature and In Grace_ , (Grand Rapids; Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1957), p 26.

 Bruce H. Lipton, _The Biology of Belief; Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter & Miracles_, (New York; Hay House, Inc., 2008), p 97.

 George M. Lamsa, Old testament Light, p 220.

 Zuck, p 265.

 Ladd, p 504.

 Andrew Wommack, _Spirit, Soul & Body_, (Colorado Springs; Andrew Wommack Ministries, 2005), p 21.

 Brian J. Dodd, _Empowered Church Leadership; Ministry in the Spirit According to Paul_ , (Downers Grove, IL; InterVarsity Press, 2003), p 122.

 Dodd, p 125.

 Jack Deere, _Surprised by the Voice of God; How God Speaks Today Through Prophecies, Dreams, and Visions_ , (Grand Rapids; Zondervan, 1996), p 319.

 David Eby, "The Role of Preaching in Growing Churches;" Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 15, No. 3, Spring, 1997, p. 42

 R. Albert Mohler Jr., _He is Not Silent; Preaching in a Postmodern World_ , (Chicago; Moody Publishers, 2008), p 50.

 WordPress, August 29, 2006, _Open Source Theology_ , Available online from:http://carefulthought.wordpress.com/2006/08/29/open-sourceany-source-theology/,[Accessed 111709]

 John Piper, "Preaching as Worship: Meditations on Expository Exultation," Trinity Journal 16 (Spring 1995), p 30.

 R.J. Rushdoony, "Contemporary Preaching: Biblical Preaching vs. Obfuscation," Faith for All of Life; The Official Publication of Chalcedon Foundation, September/October 2009, p 2; Reprinted from The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, Vol. II, No. 2, Winter 1975.

 Arturo G. Azurdia III, "Spirit Empowered Preaching; Involving the Holy Spirit in Your Ministry." Christian Focus Publications online, available at  http://www.christianfocus.com/samples/9781857924138_Sample.pdf, Internet, accessed October 10, 2009, p 12.

 Greg Heisler, _Spirit-Led Preaching; The Holy Spirit's Role in Sermon Preparation and Delivery_ , (Nashville; B&H Publishing, 2007), p 129.

 Jeffrey K. London, "Multi-Sensory Preaching: The Word Made Accessible," A Thesis Presented to the faculty of McCormick Theological Seminary for the Degree of Doctor of Ministry in Preaching, Chicago, IL, June, 2002, p 15, 16.

 London, p 16

 Hoekema, Created in God's Image, p 223.

 Paul David Tripp, "A Community of Counselors: The Fruit of Good Preaching;" Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 21, No. 2, Winter, 2003, p. 45, [CDROM].

 London, p 10.

 London, p 10.

 Arnold A. Dallimore, _George Whitfield: The Life and Times of the Great Evangelist of the Eighteenth Century Revival_ , (Wheaten, IL: Crossway, 1990), p 28.

 Greg Heisler, _Spirit-Led Preaching: The Holy Spirit's Role in Sermon Preparation and Delivery_ , (Nashville; B&H Publishing, 2007), p 10.

 Richard M. Craven, "Pastoral Preaching," An Applied Research Project Submitted to the Faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary in Partial fulfillment of requirements for the Degree Doctor of Ministry, 2005, p 31.

 Craven, "Pastoral Preaching," p 50.

 Azurdia, p 37.

 Azurdia, p 116, 117.

 Azurdia, p 121.

 Mohler, _He is Not Silent_ , p 24.

 Mohler, p 51.

 Heisler, p 122.

 Nee, _The Spiritual Man_ , p 54.

 Azurdia, p 14.

 Azurdia, p 13.

 J. I. Packer, _A Quest for Godliness_ , (Wheaton; Crossway Books, 1990), p 289.

 Geoffrey Thomas, _Powerful_ _Preaching; The Preacher and Preaching_ , ed. Samuel Logan, Jr., (Phillipsburg; Prebyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1986), p 369.

 Jay E. Adams, "A Consumer's Guide to Preaching: How to get the Most out of a Sermon;" A Review by David Powlinson, The Journal of Biblical Counseling, Volume 11, No. 2, Winter, 1993, p. 38, [CDROM].

 Heisler, p 37.

 Heisler, p 46.

 Carl A. Hargrove, "The Role of the Holy Spirit as Convictor and Supporter in Preaching," Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Master of Theology in Systematic Theology, The Master's Seminary, Sun Valley, CA, May 2006, p 58.

 Fred. R. Lybrand, _Preaching on Your Feet: Connecting God and the Audience in the Preaching Moment_ , (Nashville; B&H Academic, 2008), p 151.

 Kitterman, "Developing a Biblical Theology of Emotions," p 226.

 Craig A. Loscalzo, _Evangelistic Preaching that Connects_ ," (Downers Grove, IL; Intervarsity press, 1995), p 27.

 Thiessen, _Lectures_ , p 162.

 John B. Heard, _The Tripartite Nature of Man: Spirit, Soul and Body_ , p 157.

 Charles G. Finney, _Revivals of Religion_ , (Grand Rapids; Fleming H. Revell Company, 1888), p 232.

 Oden, _Pastoral Theology_ , p 130.

 Thomas Cook, Soul Saving Preaching, Wesley Center Online, Wesley Center for Applied Theology, Digitized by God's Acres Inc., November 16, 1998, Available online at  http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyctr/books/0801-0900/HDM0823.PDF, Internet, accessed November 9, 2009.

 Hargrove, p 48.

 Hargrove, p 34.

 John Woodhouse, _The Preacher and the Living Word: When God's Voice is Heard_ , ed. By Christipher Green and David Jackman, (Leicester, U.K.; IVP, 2003), p 44.

 Cornelius Van Til, _The Defense of the Faith_ , (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1955), p 77.

 S. Joel Garver "A Primer on Presuppositionalism," June 1997. URL# http://www.joelgarver.com/writ/phil/presupposition.htm

 Scott R. Burson & Jerry L. Walls, _C.S. Lewis & Francis Schaeffer; Lessons for a New Century from the Most Influential Apologists of Our Time_, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1998), p 142.

 C. S. Lewis, _Mere Christianity_ , (New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1992), page 24

 John M Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1994) p 232.

 Scott R. Burson, p 165.

 Nee, _The Spiritual Man_ , p 54.

 Charles Cameron, An Introduction to Theological Anthropology, Evangel 23.2, Summer 2005. Theological Studies, An Internet Resource for Theological Studies, Available at  http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/anthropology_cameron.pdf, Internet, accessed November 9, 2009, p 53.

 Lybrand, p 133.

 Max Steven McGuire, "A Seminar Designed to Assist Ministers in the Improvement of Preaching," Submitted to the faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Ministry at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL, December 2000, p 87.

 Dennis Kinlaw, _Preaching in the Spirit_ , (Nappanee, IN; Francis Asbury Press, 1985), p 17.

 Heisler, p 95.

 Heisler, p 149.

 Heisler, p 137.

 Kinlaw, _Preaching in the Spirit_ , p 109.

 David K. "Clark, Self, Flesh, and the Old Self: A Theological Interpretation,"  Evangelical Theological Society,  Southeast Regional Conference, March 21, 1986, Nashville, TN, Available online at TREN, The Theological Research Exchange Network, p 13.

 Clark, p 2.

 Bargas, p 4.

 David M. Doran, "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Preaching," _Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal_ 3, (Fall, 1998), pp 103-21.

 Bargas, "The Holy Spirit in the Pulpit," p. 3.

 Bargas, p 80.

 Brian J. Dodd, _Empowered Church Leadership: Ministry in the Spirit According to Paul_ , (Downers Grove, IL; Intervarsity Press, 2003), p 133.

 Calvin Miller, _Spirit, Word, and Story_ , (Dallas; Word Publishing, 1989), p 26.

 Charles Spurgeon, _An All-Round Ministry_ (repr. Ed. Carlisle; The Banner of Truth Trust, 1986), p 322.

 Azurdia, p 30.

 McGuire, p 66.

 Azurdia, p 105.

 Lischer, p 70.

 Robert Lee Penny, "An Examination of the Principles of Expository preaching of David Martyn Lloyd-Jones," (D. Min theses, Harding University Graduate School of Religion, 1980), p101.

 Hargrove, p 53.

 Ed Marks, "From Glory to Glory," Affirmation and Critique Press, Editorial of Living Stream Ministry, Volume VII, No. 1, April 2002, p 18, available at http://www.affcrit.com/pdfs/2002/01/02_01_a3.pdf, Internet, accessed November 11, 2009.

 Marks, "From Glory to Glory," p 18.

 J. I. Packer, edited by Samuel T. Logan, Jr, _The Preacher and Preaching: Reviving the Art in the Twentieth Century_ , (Phillipsburg; Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1986), p 8.

 Paul David Tripp, "A Community of Counselors: The Fruit of Good Preaching," p 47.

 Tripp, p 48.

 Azurdia, p 9.

 Thielicke, _Theological Ethics_ , p 56.

 Bobgan, Psycho-Heresy, p 221.

 Helmut Thielicke, edited by Willia m H. Lazareth, _Theological Ethics, Volume I: Foundations_ , (Grand Rapids; William B. Eerdmans, 1979), p 84.

 Online Bible, ver. 2.95.

 Deere, p 28.

 Deere, p 28.

 Heisler, p 27.

 Craven, p 37.

 Azurdia, p 134.

 McGuire, p 85.

 McGuire, p 64-65.

 W. A. Criswell, _Criswell's Guidebook for Pastors_ , (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1980), p 54.

 Marks, The Working of the Law of the Spirit," p 16.

 Heisler, p 114,115.

 Azurdia, p 145.

 John Piper, _The Supremacy of God in Preaching_ , (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), p 38.

 Heisler, p 35.

 Dodd, p 49.

 Watchman Nee, _The Spiritual Man_ , (New York: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1968), 116

 Roy and Revel Hession, _The Calvary Road_ , (Fort Washington: Christian Literature Crusade, 2004), p 13.

 Dodd, p 173.

 Dodd, p 173.

 John B. Heard, _The Tripartite Nature of Man_ , p 220.

 Watchman Nee, _The Release of the Spirit_ , p 54.

 London, p 12.

 Franklin E. Payne, "A Definition of Emotions," Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine, Volume 3, Number 4, p 9, Biblical Medical Ethics, Inc., available at  http://www.bmei.org/jbem/volume3/num4/payne_a_definition_of_emotions.php; Internet, accessed November 6, 2009.

 Oden, _Pastoral Theology: Essentials of Ministry_ , p 139.

 Azurdia, p 16.

 Watchman Nee, The Release of the Spirit, (Indianapolis: Sure Foundation Publishers, 1965) p. 11-13

 Thomas Cook, "Soul-Saving Preaching," ch. 12.

 David Eby, "The Role of Preaching in Growing Churches," p 44-46.

 Charles H. Spurgeon, _Lectures to My Students: A Selection from Addresses on Preaching to the Students of the Pastor's College_ , (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983), p 423.

 Hargrove, p 72.

 Elmer Towns and Neil T. Anderson, _Rivers of Revival_ , (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1997), p 67.

 London, p 10.

 Deere, p 20.

 Robert M. Williams, _Psych-K: The Missing Piece in Your Life_ , (Crestone, CO: Myrddin Publications, 2004), p 26.

 Richard Paul Bargas, "The Holy Spirit in the Pulpit: The Legitimacy of Divine Unction," Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Ministry in Expository Preaching, The master's Seminary, Sun Valley, CA, March, 2007, p 7.

 Bargas, p 7.

 Bargas, pp 20-22.

 Tony Sargent, _The Sacred Anointing: The Preaching of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones_ , (Wheaton, IL; Crossway Books, 1994), p 58.

 Peter Kreeft, _C.S. Lewis for the New Millenium; Six Essays on The Abolition of Man_ , (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1994), p 53.

 P.L. Holmer, "Spirit in the Thought of Nicholas Berdyaev." _Lutheran Quarterly_ 3, no. 1: 3-22. 1951 Feb., available online at  http://www.library.yale.edu/div/fa/divinity.195.con.html, Internet, accessed 112809, p 8.

 Holmer, p 8.

 Online Bible, Ver. 9.95

 Thomas Oden, _Pastoral Theology; Essentials of Ministry_ , p 188

 Jack Hayford, _Glory on Your House_ , (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1994), p 140.

 David Kinnaman, _Unchristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity and Why it Matters_ , (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007), p 14.

 David Kinnaman, p 47.

 Kinnaman, p 123.

 D.A. Carson, _The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism_ , (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), p 484.

 Carson, _The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism,_ p 484.

 Dallas Willard , "Spiritual Disciplines, Spiritual Formation and the Restoration of the Soul," The Journal of Psychology and Theology, 26 101, Spring 1998.

 Jack Kelley , "Body Soul and Spirit," Selah; Tough Questions Answered, available online at  http//gracethrufaith.com/selah/tough-questions-answered/body-soul-and-spirit/, Internet, accessed August 28, 2009.

 Jack Kelley, "Body Soul and Spirit."

 Kinlaw, p 105.

 Wayne Oates, _Behind the Masks_ , p 130.

 P.L. Holmer, "Spirit in the Thought of Nicholas Berdyaev." Lutheran Quarterly 3, no. 1: 3-22. 1951 Feb., available online at  http://www.library.yale.edu/div/fa/divinity.195.con.html, Internet, accessed 112809.

 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, _Spiritual Care_ , (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1985), p 23.

 Greg Heisler, _Spirit-Led Preaching_ , p 121.

 John W. Cooper, Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting, (Grand Rapids, MI William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1989), p 9.

 Grube, G.M.A. (translator), _Plato Republic_ , (Indianapolis: Hacket Publishing Company, 1992), p 115.

