Trichotomy

A Beachhead For Gnostic Influences

Kim Riddlebarger
One of the most difficult problems any theological tradition There are many
faces is that there are often fundamental differences at notable instances
critical points between the "official doctrine" affirmed by
among influential
the divines and academics of that tradition, and those
doctrines actually believed and practiced on a popular Evangelicals
level by the rank and file. There is, perhaps, no greater wherein
illustration of this than the popular notion of trichotomy. trichotomy, and
Rejected by virtually all major theologians in all streams of the related Carnal
the Christian tradition as a speculative Greek philosophical Christian teaching,
notion rather than a Biblical conception, trichotomy is very
has led to a
likely the reigning notion of human nature in American
Evangelical circles today. With few exceptions, the foothold for the
Christian church has affirmed, with one voice, that human Gnostic impulse.
nature is two-fold. As men and women, we are necessarily
a body--the physical element of our nature--and we are also a soul-spirit--an
immaterial aspect described in the Bible as either soul or spirit. These two are united together as one person;
as a psychosomatic unity. This is simply known as dichotomy. Trichotomists, however, contend that human
nature is tri-partite, that is, as men and women we are body, soul and spirit. But while the theologians of
Evangelicalism, following the historic precedence, overwhelmingly reject the notion of trichotomy, the popular
teaching and literature of Evangelicalism abounds with trichotomistic views of human nature in one form or
another.
It is also no accident that the Gnostic impulse, now so rampant in the quest for spirituality, finds a ready-made
beachhead into Evangelical circles through the trichotomist view of human nature. If the Gnostic impulse is
defined as a quest for secret knowledge (gnosis), and a disparaging of matter, including an aversion to things
physical and intellectual, coupled to the notion that religion is essentially a quest for a vaguely defined
spirituality attained via a mystical ascent into the heavenlies to encounter God apart from means and a
mediator, then the notion that humans are essentially spiritual beings rather than a body-soul unity, opens the
door to a host of serious theological errors and interesting paradoxes. While on the one hand Evangelicals work
feverishly to oppose the New Age Movement as it attempts to secretly infiltrate the church, on the other, the
same Evangelicals can be quite unwittingly seduced by the same dualistic separation of reality into a spirit-
matter dichotomy that has spawned fads like the New Age movement in the first place. For if we are
essentially spirit rather than flesh, as the trichotomists propose, then, in effect, we establish the same kind of
dualistic hierarchy associated with classic Gnosticism, in which the spirit is exalted above both soul and body.
Whether we intend to do so or not, we have opened the door wide to the essence of Gnosticism, namely, that
matter is evil and spirit is good. If we adopt the trichotomist understanding of human nature, we inevitably set
up the same dualistic conception of reality in which the Gnostic impulse thrives, and which we immediately
recognize in the New Age movement, but fail to see when it comes from the lips or pens of certain popular
Evangelical figures, because it is couched in Biblical rather than philosophical terms. Therefore, it is important
to set out the Biblical evidence for dichotomy, and then evaluate the arguments raised by defenders of
trichotomy. It is also important to evaluate how trichotomy, and its theological cousin, the so-called "Carnal
Christian" notion of sanctification, provides an unwitting justification for the Gnostic impulse. As we will see, it
is surprising how effectively a trichotomistic understanding of essential human nature enables such a pagan
ideology to establish a significant bridgehead in the hearts and spirits of countless Evangelicals.
Historically, Christians have argued that dichotomy is clearly taught throughout Scripture. There is no doubt
that the Scriptures not only teach a material aspect that is essential to human nature, the same Scriptures
preclude any notion of the Gnostic tendency to depreciation of the body because it is material. God created
our bodies first, and only then did God breathe life into the body he had made (Gn 2:7). The creation account is
unmistakably clear; God pronounced everything that he had made to be "good" (Gn 1:31), including the
human body. We are, in one sense, dust, and therefore material (Gn 3:17), but as John Murray notes, "the
reason for [Adam's] return to dust is not that he is dust, but that he has sinned." (1)
In addition to the creation account, there are other vital considerations proving the importance of this material
aspect of being human. First, in the Incarnation, Jesus Christ, as the second person of the Holy Trinity, assumed
to himself a true human nature (Gal 4:4). It is the Gnostic impulse that is condemned as the "spirit of
Antichrist" because this spirit emphatically denies that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh (1 Jn 4:2,3). It is the
docetic heresy which teaches a truly divine Jesus who only appears in human form, rather than a divine Logos
who takes on a true human nature, as taught in the prologue to John's Gospel. A second, equally important,
consideration is that of the Resurrection. Jesus' resurrection is a bodily one (1 Cor 15:3-8; Lk 24:40-43), and his
resurrection is itself the basis for the bodily resurrection of those who are in Christ (1 Cor 15:35-58). We will not
spend eternity as spirits with harps, floating weightlessly on the clouds, but instead as redeemed persons in
resurrected and glorified bodies, forever rejoined to our soul-spirit, as Jesus Christ through his own bodily
resurrection and glorification has undone the penalty of sin, which is death and separation of body from soul. It
is with this in mind, that Murray reminds us of the dangers of the Gnostic impulse to the Christian.
The body is not an appendage. The notion that the body is the prison-house of the soul and that
 the soul is incarcerated in the body is pagan in origin and anti-biblical; it is Platonic, and has no
resemblance to the Biblical conception. The Bible throughout represents the dissolution of the
body and separation of body and spirit as an evil, as the retribution and wages of sin, and,
therefore, as a disruption of that integrity which God established at creation. (2)
The fact that we have an immaterial element (called "soul" or "spirit" in Scripture), in addition to our bodies, is
equally clear in Scripture. It is our Lord who taught us that we are "body and soul" (Mt 10:28), and in Matthew
26:41, Jesus likewise contrasts "flesh and spirit." The terms seem to be used interchangeably. A "spirit" is
immaterial (Lk 24:39); it is "within us" (1 Cor 2:11), and sanctification is spoken of as purifying ourselves from
"everything that contaminates body and spirit" (1 Cor 7:1). James tells us that a body without a spirit is "dead"
(2:26), for at death the spirit leaves the body (Mt 27:50; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30 and Acts 7:59). The term soul is
used in various ways throughout Scripture as referring to "life constituted in the body" (Mt 6:25; 10:39; 16:25-
26; 20:28; Lk 14:26; Jn 10:11-18; Acts 15:26; 20:10; Phil 2:30; 1 Jn 3:16). (3) Soul certainly appears to be
synonymous with spirit, in addition to serving as a synonym for the person themselves (Mt 12:18; Lk 12:19;
Acts 2:27, 41, 43, 3:23; Rom 2:9; 3:11; Heb 10:38; Jas 1:21; 5:20; 1 Pt 1:9; 2:25). In light of this evidence,
Murray concludes, "the thesis is simply that, with sufficient frequency, 'soul' as 'spirit' is used to designate the
distinguishing component in the human person." (4)
A doctrine is not necessarily false simply because it has a dubious pedigree, but it is important to remember
that a doctrine's pedigree is often times a very good clue as to its source and its ultimate consequences. And
when viewed from the perspective of Christian reflection across the ages, there is no doubt that trichotomy has
a very dubious pedigree. With its roots in Plato's distinction between body and soul, and Aristotle's further
division of soul into "animal" and "rational" elements, the trichotomist notion of human nature as tri-partite is
unmistakably Greek and pagan, rather than Hebrew and biblical. As Louis Berkhof notes, "the most familiar but
also the crudest form of trichotomy is that which takes the body for the material part of man's nature, the soul
as the principle of animal life, and the spirit as the God-related rational and immortal element in man." (5)
Whether the Gnostic impulse is a cause or an effect, the trichotomist structure of human nature has served
gnostically inclined Evangelicals quite well by appearing to cover several Biblical bases. Trichotomy allows for a
doctrine of depravity--the body is bad and makes us sin. Furthermore, since we are spiritually dead, the
miraculous work that God performs upon us when we are born again, is that he gives to us a new spirit, or as
some would prefer, he creates a spirit within us. Thus, as Christians, we have new life, which the non-Christian
does not possess. B. B. Warfield, the great Princeton theologian, astutely noted that such schemes fail to see
the obvious and fatal theological flaw associated with trichotomy, namely...
that thus the man is not saved at all; a different newly created man is substituted for him. When
the old man is got rid of--and that the old man has to be ultimately got rid of [we do] not doubt--
the saved man that is left is not at all the old man that was to be saved, but a new man that has
never needed any saving. (6)
In addition, the trichotomist scheme also allows for a doctrine of free will, since the body, as flesh, tends
toward evil, and we are said to be spiritually dead; nevertheless, the soul retains the ability (with sufficient
enticements, of course) to make a decision to accept Christ as Savior. This enables the trichotomist to attempt
to take seriously those Biblical passages describing the fallen human condition, and yet still allows for the
typically American idol, namely the conception that the human will, and not the grace of God, is the ultimate
factor in determining just where, exactly, we will spend our eternity.
Another significant impact of the trichotomist understanding of human nature, is that it provides much of the
theological justification for the rapid growth of Pentecostalism. In this case, trichotomy allows Pentecostals to
argue that because the spirit is the higher element of human nature, "speaking in tongues" is the divinely
appointed means of bypassing the lower elements of human nature, such as the rationality of mind and soul.
In the Pentecostal scheme, we can commune with God directly, without the hindrances of the lower elements
of human nature and language. Indeed, in such schemes, we can commune with God directly, apart from any
means at all. Trichotomy conveniently provides the means for a host of neo-gnostically inclined Pentecostal
practices.
The notion of trichotomy has been defended in a number of ways. In popular literature and preaching, it is
often asserted that since God is a Trinity, and since as humans we are created in God's image, humans, too,
are tri-partite, having a body, a soul and a spirit. But such analogies are not drawn directly from the Biblical
data itself; they come only by way of crude inference. In addition, there are two texts that have been used to
supposedly prove trichotomy to be the Biblical anthropology. Several early Christian writers, such as Origen,
found a kind of confirmation to these Greek categories in the words of Paul, recorded in 1 Thessalonians 5:23.
Paul's words, "may your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless," are interpreted to mean that Paul
endorsed the tri-partite distinction of body, soul and spirit. But as the late Anthony Hoekema has pointed out,
when viewed in the light of the rest of the Biblical data, which teaches otherwise, there must be some other
intention on Paul's part.
When Paul prays for the Thessalonians that the spirit, soul, and body of each of them may be
preserved or kept, he is obviously not trying to split man into three parts, any more than Jesus
intended to split man into four parts when he said, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind" (Luke 10:27). This passage
therefore also provides no ground for the trichotomic view of the constitution of man. (7)
In Hebrews 4:12, it is argued that the author makes a clear division between soul and spirit, implying that they
cannot be synonymous. But John Murray contends that the verb used here--translated as "dividing" in the NIV--
is never used elsewhere in Scripture in the sense of distinguishing between two different things, but is always
used when distributing and dividing up various aspects of the same thing (see Heb 2:4; Lk 11:17-18; Mt 27:35;
Jn 19:24). (8) The point is not that the Word separates two distinct things--soul from spirit--but that "The Word
of God judges the thoughts and attitude of the heart" (Heb 4:12). The Word does not divide soul from spirit, as
though these were two distinct entities, but the Word does divide soul and spirit in the sense of penetrating
into our inner most parts.
Every doctrine we affirm has consequences which will inevitably effect our lives as Christians, and trichotomy
is no exception. There are many notable instances among influential Evangelicals wherein trichotomy, and the
related Carnal Christian teaching, has led to a foothold for the Gnostic impulse, with all of its associated
doctrinal fall-out. There are several clear examples of this which are important to consider because they so
powerfully illustrate how pervasive this tendency can be, and how easily it slips into what are otherwise
effective Christian ministries. There are always direct consequences in the life of the church whenever
Gnosticism makes its influence known.
Calvary Chapel founder and pastor, Chuck Smith, is a prime example of one whose trichotomist leanings have
produced serious doctrinal and ideological consequences. In commenting upon 1 Thessalonians 5:23, one of
two key trichotomist proof-texts, Smith asserts, "we meet God in the realm of our spirit." (9) In his treatment of
1 Corinthians 2-3, Smith affirms the classic Carnal Christian teaching. We read that "many of the Corinthian
Christians hadn't entered the spiritual dimension yet," and that the "Holy Spirit gives us knowledge beyond our
experience." (10) The Gnostic impulse associated with trichotomy is at its height when Smith declares that
"our problem arises from living as redeemed spirits in unredeemed bodies. We desire to be delivered from
these bodies of flesh so that we can enjoy the full, rich, overflowing life in the spirit." (11)
In Smith's conception, God does not meet us as Protestants have historically affirmed--through means such as
the Word and Sacrament--but instead, God meets us immediately "in the realm of our spirit." Because this is
the case, not all Christians have "entered into the spiritual." According to Smith, we now have two categories
of Christians, the "carnal" and the "spiritual," when the Bible knows only of one category, "Christians."
This is a classic case of the Gnostic impulse establishing a major beachhead in the very heart of
Evangelicalism. If this is true, what then is the likely source of this Gnostic influence? No, Chuck Smith has
probably not been going to New Age seminars or studying the works of Plotinus. But Chuck Smith is an ardent
supporter of the dispensational system of annotations found in the famous Scofield Reference Bible, at first
glance an unlikely source for Gnostic influences. When one considers, however, several of the notes
advocating trichotomy contained in the Scofield Reference Bible, the reader is immediately intrigued, for
example, by the affinities between the notes on 1 Corinthians 2:14, and the mystical and speculative
philosophy of Plotinus. A simple comparison will suffice. The Scofield Bible asserts:
Paul divides men into three classes: (1) psuchikos, meaning of the senses, sensous, (Jas 3:15; Jude
19), natural, i. e. the Adamic man, unrenewed through the new-birth (Jn 3:3,5); (2) pneumatikos,
meaning spiritual, i.e., the renewed man as Spirit-filled and walking in the Spirit in full communion
with God (Eph 5:18-20); and (3) sarkikos, meaning carnal, fleshly, i.e. the renewed man who,
walking "after the flesh," remains a babe in Christ (1 Cor 3:1-4). The natural man may be learned,
gentle, eloquent, fascinating, but the spiritual content of Scripture is absolutely hidden from him;
and the fleshly or carnal Christian is able to comprehend only its simplest truths, "milk" (1 Cor
3:2). (12)
Plotinus, in but one example that may be cited, affirms an amazingly similar tri-partite structure:
All men, from birth onward, live more by sensation than by thought, forced as they are by
necessity to give heed to sense impressions. Some stay in the sensate their whole life long. For
them, sense is the beginning and the end of everything. Good and evil are the pleasures of sense
and the pains of sense; it is enough to chase the one and flee the other. Those of them who
philosophize say that therein wisdom lies....Others do lift themselves, a little above the earth.
Their higher part transports them out of the pleasurable into the honorable. But, unable to
perceive anything higher and with nowhere to set themselves, they fall back in virtue's name--on
the activities and "options" of that lower realm they had thought to escape. But there is another, a
third class of men--men godlike in the greatness of their strength and the acuity of their
perceptions. They see clearly the splendors that shine out from on high. Thither, out of the mist
and fogs of the earth, they lift themselves. There they stay, seeing from above what is here below,
taking their pleasure in truth. (13)
Note that the first level of men, the so-called "sensate" of Plotinus corresponds directly to the natural man of
Scofield. Then in the second class, there are those who lift themselves above the earth, but are not able to
perceive anything higher. In Plotinus' conception, this corresponds well to Scofield's "Carnal Christian" who can
only comprehend the simplest truth, the "milk" of Scripture. Scofield's "Spirit-filled Christian," who is said to
have full communion with God, mirrors Plotinus' third class of men, those who attain the highest level above
the fog and mist. Thus, one may not have to look to the mystery religions of the Middle East, or to the New Age
Movement here in America to be influenced by Gnosticism. One may be unwittingly taken in merely by
adopting the trichotomist anthropology, or "Carnal Christian" understanding of sanctification, so often
associated with the Keswick or "higher-life" teachings that have become part and parcel of fundamentalist
theology--a theology from which Chuck Smith has drawn deeply.
While Calvary Chapel has done great things in terms of evangelism, and in giving many of us our first exposure
to serious Bible study--there are indeed elements of the true Evangel present--it is no accident that Calvary
Chapel, under Chuck Smith's leadership, has also pioneered the experience-based form of worship known as
"Praise and Worship" associated with Maranatha Music. While in many cases, there has been a commendable
emphasis upon the singing of Scripture, a historic Reformed practice, Calvary Chapel's now ubiquitous "praise
songs" have opened the door to a seemingly endless stream of praise and worship choruses specifically aimed
at arousing the subjective emotions of the worshipping subject, thereby enabling the worshipper to escape the
natural, and enter into the spirit above the mists. Content-laden hymns, and liturgy based upon biblical texts,
can only hinder such a quest. Yes, our doctrines do have consequences, even for our worship.
Claiming to be the "ministry of balance," Calvary Chapel is characterized by a marked imbalance in what it
opposes: Sacraments as means of grace, liturgy in any form, Reformation theology (especially the doctrines of
election, justification by an imputed righteousness, and a clear Law-Gospel distinction), an educated clergy,
denominationalism and any form of tradition. It is important to notice that the things which are condemned are
the very things that Protestants have historically thought quite important, if not essential. The things that are
condemned are clearly fruit of the Gnostic impulse, brought into the movement by means of a trichotomist
anthropology, and "Carnal Christian" conception of the Christian life.
But the Gnostic impulse does not always make a frontal assault. Another important illustration of the way in
which the Gnostic impulse operates in evangelical circles, is seen in the work of Charles Ryrie, former professor
of Dallas Theological Seminary, and whose name appears on a rather popular evangelical study Bible. While
Ryrie wholeheartedly rejects trichotomy, (14) he nevertheless affirms, in slightly modified form, the "Carnal
Christian" teaching associated with Lewis Sperry Chafer, (15) founder of Dallas Theological Seminary. In Ryrie's
system, the front door is deliberately slammed to the Gnostic impulse. Men and women are not tri-partite, but
dichotomous. For this we should be glad. The problem is, however, the back door is left wide open. For once it
is argued that there are two-levels of the Christian life (the Carnal and the Spiritual), a hierarchy is re-
introduced that once again has the practical consequences of making the "Spiritual Christian" operate on a
higher plain than the "Carnal Christian," who has merely trusted Jesus as Savior but, as of yet, has not fully
surrendered to Christ's Lordship. If the "Natural Man" is not a Christian, and the "Carnal Christian" is a Christian
but not yet a disciple, the question naturally arises, "What must one do to move on to the next level--the
spiritual level?" Thus, another Gnostic principle is unintentionally re-introduced back into the discussion, and
that is the notion that religion is a kind of mystical ascent to the divine. Whether Ryrie intends to or not, once
we have offered a bifurcated notion of sanctification, we have set up a system in which climbing the ladder to
the next spiritual level is the norm, and we feed the Gnostic impulse yet again. We move progressively from
Natural Man, to Carnal Man, to Spiritual Man. And it is no wonder then, that so many, who will not hear Ryrie's
rejection of trichotomy, will instead hear his natural, carnal and spiritual categories through a trichotomist grid.
Once again, we see the importance of recovering and articulating the biblical concept of human nature as a
dichotomy of body and soul-spirit, as well as retaining the conclusions of historic Christian reflection on these
issues. If our doctrines do have consequences--and they certainly do--there is no doubt that trichotomy will
lead down some very predictable and problematic roads. Any scheme which depreciates the body and the
mind, and which correspondingly elevates the spiritual without due regard to the fact that God the Holy Spirit
works through the means that God Himself has created, is in fact, deeply influenced by the Gnostic impulse.
There is always a real danger in divorcing what God has joined together (body and soul). No matter how well
intended we are, and no matter how fashionable spirituality may be, the Gnostic impulse lurks behind every
attempt to build a ladder to heaven, and we must be very careful to avoid its destructive influence. We need to
be ever mindful of how easy it is to allow our minds to be captured by "hollow and deceptive philosophy which
depends upon human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ" (Col 2:8).

1 [ Back ] John Murray, "The Nature of Man," in Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2 (Carlisle: Banner of
Truth, 1977), p. 14.
2 [ Back ] Ibid.
3 [ Back ] Ibid., p. 21.
4 [ Back ] Ibid.
5 [ Back ] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1986), pp. 191 ff.
6 [ Back ] B. B. Warfield, "Review of He That Is Spiritual, by Lewis Sperry Chafer," reprinted in Mike Horton, ed.,
Christ The Lord (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), pp. 211-218.
7 [ Back ] Anthony A. Hoekema, Created in God's Image (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1988), pp. 204 ff;
John Murray, "Trichotomy," in Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2, pp. 23-33.
8 [ Back ] John Murray, "Trichotomy," pp. 30-31.
9 [ Back ] Chuck Smith, New Testament Study Guide (Costa Mesa: The Word for Today, 1982), p. 113.
10 [ Back ] Ibid., p. 78.
11 [ Back ] Ibid., p. 193.
12 [ Back ] The New Scofield Reference Bible, note on 1 Corinthians 2:14, p. 1234.
13 [ Back ] Plotinus, "The Intelligence, the Ideas and Being," in The Essential Plotinus, trans. Elmer O' Brien
(Indianapolis: Hacket Publications, 1964), pp. 46-47.
14 [ Back ] Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1988), pp. 195-196.
15 [ Back ] See for example the notes in The Ryrie Study Bible, especially notes on 1 Cor 2:10 ff. See also
Ryrie, Basic Theology, pp. 338-339; and So Great a Salvation (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1992).
Kim Riddlebarger is pastor of Christ United Reformed Church (Anaheim, California) and co-host of The White
Horse Inn radio broadcast. He is author of A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times and Man of
Sin: Uncovering the Truth about the Antichrist (Baker, 2006). Kim blogs at
www.kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com.
Issue: "Gnosticism" July/August Vol. 4 No. 4 1995 Pages 22-26
Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format
provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of
reproduction, and you do not make more than 500 physical copies. For web posting, a link to this document on
our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by Modern Reformation.

Copyright © 2007 Modern Reformation