Which one?

Why?

My reading of the Puritans and Reformers seem to indicate a bipartite consensus. Does WCF IV.2 necessarily teach man is a bipartite creature? Are there any notable tripartite advocates during the reformation era?

__________________
Chris
Presbyterian Reformed Church of Charlotte (PRC)
Student, Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
SC

...hope is nothing but the nourishment and strength of faith.
~ Calvin's Institutes III.ii.43

natural/spiritual - bipartite



-----Added 2/23/2009 at 03:20:32 EST-----

Just to muddy the water - one might make the case that the regenerate are tripartite

__________________
-JD

"The majority of modern evangelical scholars prefer the dichotomous view of the human person . . . That is, . . . no real ontological distinction between soul and spirit."

R.E. Olson, The Westminster Handbook to Evangelical Theology, p. 205.

__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA

Ok, well I might really not understand this so well, but I said tri because we are mind, body and spirit. I voted before reading what the reformers said, which leads me to think I should read more about it.

__________________
sarah
WI
OPC
My Pastor's Sermons: Mark Jenkins...he's awesome!!!

It’s a very interesting question, so there is only a difference in perception, is it a synonym?

I know both words soul and spirit are often interchangeable

But these passages always make me wonder about it.

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Hebrews 4:12

And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.1 Thessalonians 5:23

Any thoughts on these?

__________________
César Proença

there is no will nor running by which we can prepare the way for our salvation, it is wholly of the Divine Mercy Jean Calvin Institutes II . V. 17

Reformed Churches in The Netherlands (liberated) http://www.gkv.nl/main.asp?intTreeviewID=954

Igreja Reformada em Massamá Portugal http://www.igrejareformada.pt

Cesar, you give the primary proof text for those who hold to a Trichotomous view of man in biblical anthropology, which can be found in Tertullian for example. However, I believe the dichotomous view has carried the day.

a view...
for bitartite...

http://twitpic.com/1nkw7 (image keeps disappearing...)

I know, and that's why I trust those who made a good exegesis of Scripture,

so I lean towards the dichotomous view.

A small confession I used to read a lot of Watchman Nee in my early 20s

Calvin:
Institutes of the Christian Religion I:XV.2

__________________
Sterling Harmon
Presbyterian Church of Coventry (PCA)
Coventry, CT
Deacon
________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Interim Pulpit Supply of New England

My Facebook

Owner/Administrator @ Reformed Theology Institute

RC Sproul put me into the Bipartite camp!!!

__________________
et

For what it is worth, Douglas Kelly agrees with Calvin as well. (I was just listening to his lecture on this subject the other day.)

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

If Sproul is Bipartite that settles it for me, I was going that way, but that settled it

__________________
Martin - Reformed
Husband to the most godly, honorable and loyal wife Line
Searching for a Church
Webpage www.5solas.dk
Free Online Reformed Seminary - http://www.tnars.net
Soli Deo Gloria

I've held to the bipartite view ever since I joined a reformed church in the mid 90's. It was explained to me by the pastor that the tripartite view is inconsistent with reformed theology and is typically taken by Semi-Pelagians who believe that while the spirit of man is dead in trespasses and sins because of Adam, the soul is still reachable because it is the center of the intellect and the emotions.

I've always associated tripartism (?) with pop psychology-infused evangelicalism a la Minirth and Meyer, Larry Crab, James Dobson, etc.

I've also heard it compared with the Trinity and our being made (tripartite) in God's Image - very dangerous ground.

However, what's interesting is, we are acquainted with a brother (a Five Point Calvinist) who is not sure whether or not we are bipartite or tripartite and doesn't think we can know for sure this side of heaven. And I know for a fact that he does not hold to any of the things I elaborated on.

Just a side note - another thing that scared me away from tripartism is Benny Hinn's using it to explain his (later recanted I believe) 9 persons in the Trinity doctrine.

__________________
Toni Cunningham, Wife of Bill (Theognome)
Parkwoods OPC, Overland Park KS

"Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As, to be hated, needs but to be seen; Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace." ~ Alexander Pope

Glad to help Martin, but really, what he wrote just made a LOT of sense!

Discussion of the Trichotomous vs Dichotomous views of man's constitutional nature is addressed in Robert Reymond, Chas. Hodge, Louis Berkhof, and any decent Systematic Theology. I like Louis Berkhof's discussion (Sys. Theol. p. 191-196). It gives a good historical overview with pros and cons. Reymond contends that the Reformation Creeds all adopt a dichotomous view of man. He references the WCF 32.1 in support.

I thought that only fringe dispy's held to the tri- view.

__________________
Kevin Rogers
Sovereign Community Church, PCA
Moncton NB

In Collected Writings of John Murray vol II, chapter 2, The Nature of Man, he affirms man is dichotomy (bipartite). In chapter 3, Trichotomy he traces out this view from history up to the present. He even provides hybrid examples but concludes they can still be classified in one of the two camps.

It is well worth the read.

A product of too much Patty Dungan in school, perhaps? I was force-fed that garbage in college, too. (I'm an ER nurse). Trichotomy has been suspect (and rightly so) since the Apollinarian controversy.

__________________
Jacob Mearse
Reformation Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Olympia, WA
Student, Reformed Theological Seminary (Virtual)
Lieutenant, U.S. Navy
Husband to April; Daddy to Wesley, Cyrus, FaithMarie and SarahAnn.

Bipartite-And happy about it

__________________
Brian
Grace Bible Church;E.Bridgewater
East Bridgewater MA
http://www.gracebiblehome.org

Thanks for the info. I've got Murray's writings and will look into it. The bi/tri controversy has been something I've really gotten interested in the past few months, but I'm not at all familiar with the various points of vew. I trust Murray and will definitely look into his view and comments.

__________________
Kevin Guillory
Pastor
Redeemer Christian Congregation
Baltimore, MD

I don't interpret Scripture. Scripture
interprets itself. And in the process ...
Scripture interprets me!

But, you voted for tripartite? Accident?

Hanging chad?

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

Good one Perg!

Where's unipartite? Or is that considered heretical?

__________________
Scott Roper
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Winston-Salem, NC
scottandjenny.ws

To my knowledge, there is no such thing as a "unipartite" doctrine. To my mind, it appears that even the word is self-contradictory.

What do you mean to say?

Is it even possible? If one were an atheistic materialist, wouldn't he still have to say that a mind exists? And even idealists still have to say that the body exists, even if only as a perception.

__________________
Ben Maas. . . . .Facebook
In college, attending First Presbyterian Church (PCUSA), Ada, OH, and
Belle Center Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA), Belle Center, OH
When at home, attending Covenant Presbyterian Church (OPC), Mansfield, OH

“Prayer is as natural an expression of faith as breathing is of life.”
-Jonathan Edwards-

I voted Bi Partite. I had this debate with an Assemblies seminarian some time ago and shivered at his pelagian view of corruption.

__________________
Michael P Doyle
Waukesha WI
Member of http://www.cornerstone-pca.com/
Attending http://www.lampseminary.org/

I would think it would just mean "one part." It would mean that the division between body and mind or body and spirit is arbitrary (or at least, nonessential).

I could be confused. Doesn't bipartite mean that man has a material part and an immaterial part? How does tripartite even work since material and immaterial seem to cover all posibilites? What would be the division?

Generally, bipartite has been defined as separating man into body and spirit/soul, while tripartite separates man into body, spirit, and soul.

So, the entire distinction is whether or not spirit and soul are separate things. (I think.)

As a grad student in Mental Health, the very phrase "unipartite" brings flashbacks of B. F. Skinner (shudder)! Man is two parts - material (mortal) and immaterial (eternal).
Of course, at the resurrection, man will be unified once again forever.