Christian anthropology
In the context of Christian theology, Christian anthropology is the study of the human (anthropos) as it relates to God. It differs from the social science of anthropology, which primarily deals with the comparative study of the physical and social characteristics of humanity across times and places.
One aspect of Christian anthropology studies the innate nature or constitution of the human, known as the nature of humankind. It is concerned with the relationship between notions such as
Early Christian writers
Gregory of Nyssa
The reference source for
Augustine of Hippo
Augustine of Hippo was one of the first Christian ancient Latin authors with very clear anthropological vision. He saw the human being as a perfect unity of two substances: soul and body.[9] He was much closer in this anthropological view to Aristotle than to Plato.[10][11] In his late treatise On Care to Be Had for the Dead sec. 5 (420 AD) he insisted that the body pertains to the essence of the human person:
In no wise are the bodies themselves to be spurned. (...) For these pertain not to ornament or aid which is applied from without, but to the very nature of man.[12]
Augustine's favourite figure to describe body-soul unity is marriage: caro tua, coniunx tua – your body is your wife.[13] Initially, the two elements were in perfect harmony. After the fall of humanity they are now experiencing dramatic combat between one another.
They are two categorically different things. The body is a three-dimensional object composed of the four elements, whereas the soul has no spatial dimensions.[14] Soul is a kind of substance, participating in reason, fit for ruling the body.[15] Augustine was not preoccupied, as
According to N. Blasquez, Augustine's dualism of substances of the body and soul doesn't stop him from seeing the unity of body and soul as a substance itself.[11][18] Following ancient philosophers he defined man as a rational mortal animal – animal rationale mortale.[19][20]
Terms or components
Body
The
Rudolf Bultmann states the following:[21]
- "That soma belongs inseparably, constitutively, to human existence is most clearly evident from the fact that Paul cannot conceive even of a future human existence after death, `when that which is perfect is come' as an existence without soma – in contrast to the view of those in Corinth who deny the resurrection (1 Cor. 15, especially vv. 35ff.)."[22]
- "Man does not have a soma; he is a soma"
Soul
The semantic domain of
The New Testament follows the terminology of the Septuagint, and thus uses the word psyche in a manner performatively similar to that of the Hebrew semantic domain,[29] that is, as an invisible power (or ever more, for Platonists, immortal and immaterial) that gives life and motion to the body and is responsible for its attributes.
In
On the other hand, a number of modern
Spirit
The spirit (Hebrew ruach, Greek πνεῦμα, pneuma, which can also mean "breath") is likewise an immaterial component. It is often used interchangeably with "soul", psyche, although trichotomists believe that the spirit is distinct from the soul.
- "When Paul speaks of the pneuma of man he does not mean some higher principle within him or some special intellectual or spiritual faculty of his, but simply his self, and the only questions is whether the self is regarded in some particular aspect when it is called pneuma. In the first place, it apparently is regarded in the same way as when it is called psyche – viz. as the self that lives in man's attitude, in the orientation of his will."[32]
Charles Taylor has argued in Sources of the Self: Making of Modern Identity that the attempt to reduce spirit or soul to the "self" is an anachronistic project claiming historical precedence, when in reality it is a modern, Western, secular reading of the Scriptures.
Constitution or nature of the person
Christian theologians have historically differed over the issue of how many distinct components constitute the human being.
Two parts (Dichotomism)
The most popular view, affirmed by a large number of lay faithful and theologians from many Christian traditions, is that the human being is formed of two components: material (body/flesh) and spiritual (soul/spirit). The soul or spirit departs from the body at death, and will be reunited with the body at the resurrection.
Three parts (Trichotomism)
A significant minority of theologians across the denominational and theological spectrum, in both the East and the West, have held that human beings are made up of three distinct components: body or flesh, soul, and spirit. This is known technically as trichotomism. The biblical texts typically used to support this position are 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12.[33]
In the personhood of Jesus Christ God there are a Body, a rational Soul and the third person of the Holy Spirit God whom He received in the
One part (Monism)
Modern theologians increasingly hold to the view that the human being is an indissoluble unity.
An influential exponent of this view was liberal theologian Rudolf Bultmann.[36] Oscar Cullmann was influential in popularizing it.[37]
Origin of humanity
The Bible teaches in the book of Genesis the humans were created by God. Some Christians believe that this must have involved a miraculous creative act, while others are comfortable with the idea that God worked through the evolutionary process.
God's image in the human
The Book of Genesis also teaches that human beings, male and female, were created in the image of God. The exact meaning of this has been the subject of theological debate throughout church history.
Origin/transmission of the soul
There are two opposing views about how the soul originates in each human being. Creationism teaches that God creates a "fresh" soul within each human
Traducianism, by contrast, teaches that the soul is inherited from the individual's parents, along with his or her biological material.
Human nature
Most Christian Theology traditionally teaches that human nature originates holy but is corrupted by the fall. Part of the development of church doctrine has historically been concerned with discerning what role the human plays in "redemption" from that fall.[38][39][40]
The
During the
Within Protestant Circles a
Synergism and its affirmation of the participation of human will in salvation is the classic
Death and afterlife
Christian anthropology has implications for beliefs about
- "The bodies of men, after death, return to dust, and see corruption: but their souls, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them"
Intermediate state
The question then arises: where exactly does the disembodied soul "go" at death? Theologians refer to this subject as the
Fully developed Christian theology goes a step further; on the basis of such texts as Luke 23:43 and Philippians 1:23, it has traditionally been taught that the souls of the dead are received immediately either into heaven or hell, where they will experience a foretaste of their eternal destiny prior to the resurrection. (
- "the souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God, in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies. And the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain in torments and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day." (Westminster Confession)
Some Christian groups that stress a monistic anthropology deny that the soul can exist consciously apart from the body. For example, the
Final state
In Christian belief, both the righteous and the unrighteous will be resurrected at the
See also
- Human nature, Person
- Philosophical anthropology
- List of important publications in anthropology
- Christian psychology
References
- ISBN 0-8010-2182-0.
- ^ The Greek text: PG 44, 123–256; SCh 6, (1944) Jean-Jacques Courtiau (ed.)
- ^ Étienne Gilson, p. 56
- S2CID 231919881.
- ^ Maspero & Mateo Seco, p. 38
- ^ Maspero & Mateo Seco, p. 39
- ^ Maspero & Mateo Seco, p. 41
- ^ a b Maspero & Mateo Seco, p. 42
- ^ Cf. A. Gianni, pp.148–149
- ^ Hendrics, E., p. 291.
- ^ a b Massuti, E., p.98.
- ^ De cura pro mortuis gerenda CSEL 41, 627[13–22]; PL 40, 595: Nullo modo ipsa spernenda sunt corpora. (...)Haec enim non ad ornamentum vel adiutorium, quod adhibetur extrinsecus, sed ad ipsam naturam hominis pertinent; Contra Faustum, 22.27; PL 44,418.
- ^ Enarrationes in psalmos, 143, 6; CCL 40, 2077 [46] – 2078 [74]); De utilitate ieiunii, 4,4–5; CCL 46, 234–235.
- ^ De quantitate animae 1.2; 5.9
- ^ De quantitate animae 13.12: Substantia quaedam rationis particeps, regendo corpori accomodata.
- On the free will(De libero arbitrio) 2.3.7–6.13
- ^ cf. W.E. Mann, p.141-142
- ^ El concepto del substantia segun san Agustin, pp. 305–350.
- ^ De ordine, II, 11.31; CCL 29, 124 [18]; PL 32,1009; De quantitate animae, 25,47–49; CSEL 89, 190–194; PL 32, 1062–1063
- ^ Cf. Ch. Couturier SJ, p. 543
- ^ Bultmann, Rudolf (1953). Theologie des Neuen Testaments (in German). Tübingen: Mohr. pp. 189–249. (English translation Theology of the New Testament 2 vols, London: SCM, 1952, 1955)
- ^ Bultmann, I: 192
- ^ Hebrew-English Lexicon, Brown, Driver & Briggs, Hendrickson Publishers.
- ^ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology.
- ^ Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Father Xavier Leon Dufour, 1985.
- ^ New International Dictionary.
- ^ New Dictionary of Biblical Theology
- ^ "A careful examination of the βiblical material, particularly the words nefesh, neshama, and ruaḥ, which are often too broadly translated as "soul" and "spirit," indicates that these must not be understood as referring to the psychical side of a psychophysical pair. A man did not possess a nefesh but rather was a nefesh, as Gen. 2:7 says: "wayehi ha-adam le-nefesh ḥayya" (". . . and the man became a living being"). Man was, for most of the biblical writers, what has been called "a unit of vital power," not a dual creature separable into two distinct parts of unequal importance and value. While this understanding of the nature of man dominated biblical thought, in apocalyptic literature (2nd century BCE–2nd century CE) the term nefesh began to be viewed as a separable psychical entity with existence apart from body.... The biblical view of man as an inseparable psychosomatic unit meant that death was understood to be his dissolution."—Britannica, 2004.
- ^ Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament
- ^ The early Hebrews apparently had a concept of the soul but did not separate it from the body, although later Jewish writers developed the idea of the soul further. Old Testament references to the soul are related to the concept of breath and establish no distinction between the ethereal soul and the corporeal body. Christian concepts of a body-soul dichotomy originated with the ancient Greeks and were introduced into Christian theology at an early date by St. Gregory of Nyssa and by St. Augustine.—Britannica, 2004
- ^ Immortality of the Soul, George Florovsky.
- ^ Bultmann, I:206
- ^ a b Bruce Milne. Know The Truth. IVP. pp. 120–122.
- ^ "The traditional anthropology encounters major problems in the Bible and its predominantly holistic view of human beings. Genesis 2:7 is a key verse: 'Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being' (NRSV). The "living being" (traditionally, "living soul") is an attempt to translate the Hebrew nephesh hayah, which indicates a 'living person' in the context. More than one interpreter has pointed out that this text does not say that the human being has a soul but rather is a soul. H. Wheeler Robinson summarized the matter in his statement that 'The Hebrew conceived man as animated body and not as an incarnate soul.'" (Martin E. Tate, "The Comprehensive Nature of Salvation in Biblical Perspective," Evangelical review of theology, Vol. 23.)
- ^ AJ Gijsbers (2003). "The Dialogue between Neuroscience and Theology" (PDF). ISCAST. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-26. Retrieved 2010-12-27.
- ^ Martine C.L. Oldhoff (2018). The Soul in the Bible: Monism in Biblical Scholarship? Analysing Biblical Studies from a Systematic Point of View (PDF). p. 154. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2023-01-20. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
- ISBN 978-1-62564-998-0.
- )
- S2CID 231919881.
- ^ )
- ^ )
- )
- )
- )
- ^ D. K. Innes, "Sheol" in New Bible Dictionary, IVP 1996.
Bibliography
- Agaësse, Paul, SJ (2004). L'anthropologie chrétienne selon saint Augustin : image, liberté, péché et grâce. Paris: Médiasèvres. p. 197. ISBN 2-900388-68-6.)
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - Blasquez, N, El concepto de substantia segun san Agustin, ""Augustinus" 14 (1969), pp. 305–350; 15 (1970), pp. 369–383; 16 (1971), pp. 69–79.
- Bainvel, J. "Ame. Doctrine des trois premiers siècles; Développement de la doctrine du IVe au XIIIe s.". Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique. Vol. 1. pp. 977–1006.
- Bultmann, Rudolf (1953). Theologie des Neuen Testaments (in German). Tübingen: Mohr. pp. 189–249. (English translation Theology of the New Testament 2 vols, London: SCM, 1952, 1955). The leading scholarly reference supporting a holistic anthropology
- Cullmann, Oscar. Immortality of the soul or resurrection of the dead?: the witness of the New Testament. Archived from the original on 2009-10-26.
- ISBN 0-7220-4114-4.
- Couturier, Charles, SJ, La structure métaphysique de l'homme d'après saint Augustin, in: Augustinus Magister. Congrès International Augustinien. Communications, (1954), Paris, vol. 1, pp. 543–550
- Hendrics, E. Platonisches und Biblisches Denken bei Augustinus, in: 'Augustinus Magister. Congrès International Augustinien. Communications, (1954), Paris, vol. 1.
- Jewitt, R. (1971). Paul's Anthropological Terms. Leiden: Brill.
- Kümmel, W. G. (1948). Das Bild des Menschen im Neuen Testament (in German). Zürich: Zwingli. (English translation Man in the NT. London: Epworth, 1963)
- ISBN 978-0-8028-3443-0.
- Karpp, Heinrich (1950). Probleme altchristlicher Anthropologie. Biblische Anthropologie und philosophische Psychologie bei den Kirchen-vatern des dritten Jahrhunderts. Gütersloh: G. Bertelsmann Verlag.
- Mann, W. E., Inner-Life Ethics, in:Matthews, G. B., ed. (1999). The Augustinian Tradition. Philosophical Traditions. Berkeley-Los Angeles-London: University of California Press. pp. 138–152. ISBN 0-520-20999-0.
- Masutti, Egidio, Il problema del corpo in San Agostino, Roma: Borla, 1989, p. 230, ISBN 88-263-0701-6
- Rondeau, Marie Josèphe (1962). "Remarques sur l'anthropologie de saint Hilaire". Studia Patristica. 6 (Papers presented to the Third International Conference on Patristic Studies held at Christ Church, Oxford, 1959, Part IV Theologica, Augustiniana, ed. F. L. Cross). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag: 197–210.
- Steenberg, M. C. (2009). Of God and Man : theology as anthropology from Irenaeus to Athanasius. London: T & T Clark.
External links
- Mick Pope, Losing our Souls?