The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology

Volume 13 · Number 2 Summer 2009

Editor-in-Chief: R. Albert Mohler, Jr. Theological Anthropology Executive Editor: Russell D. Moore 2 Editorial: Stephen J. Wellum Editor: Stephen J. Wellum The Urgent Need for a Theological Anthropology Today Book Review Editor: Chad Owen Brand Associate Editor: Christopher W. Cowan 4 Gregg R. Allison Assistant Editors: Brian Vickers Toward a Theology of Human Embodiment Brent E. Parker Advisory Board: 18 Bruce A. Ware Timothy K. Beougher Human Personhood: An Analysis and Definition John B. Polhill Chuck Lawless Peter J. Gentry 32 John W. Cooper Esther H. Crookshank The Current Body-Soul Debate: A Case for Dualistic Holism Mark A. Seifrid Randy Stinson 52 Russell D. Moore Design: David Yeiser Joan or John? An Ethical Dilemma Typographer: John Rogers

Editorial Office & Subscription Services: William R. Cutrer and Robert M. Cutrer SBTS Box 832 58 A Call to a Wellness Lifestyle: Some Practical Suggestions 2825 Lexington Rd. Louisville, KY 40280 (800) 626-5525, x 4413 68 TheSBJT Forum Editorial E-Mail: [email protected] 80 Book Reviews

Yearly subscription costs for four issues: $25, individual inside the by the American Theological Library Association, 250 S. Wacker Dr., U. S.; $50, individual outside the U. S.; $40, institutional inside 16th Flr., Chicago, IL 60606, [email protected], www.atla.com. the U. S.; $65, institutional outside the U. S. Opinions expressed in The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology are solely the responsibility The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology is published quarterly of the authors and are not necessarily those of the editors, members by The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2825 Lexington of the Advisory Board, or the SBJT Forum. Road, Louisville, KY 40280. Summer 2009. Vol. 13, No. 2. Copyright ©2009 The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. ISSN 1520-7307. This periodical is indexed in Religion Index One: Periodicals, the Index Second Class postage paid at Louisville, KY. Postmaster: to Book Reviews in Religions, Religion Indexes: Ten Year Subset on Send address changes to: SBTS, Box 832, 2825 Lexington Road, 1 CD-ROM, and the ATLA Religion Database on CD-ROM, published Louisville, KY 40280. Editorial: The Urgent Need for a Theological Anthropology Today Stephen J. Wellum

he age-old questions —W hat is various technologies alongside these ideological T man? What is our purpose? Do we have any viewpoints which have further questioned our value?—have become pressing and urgent ques- understanding of ourselves. After all, living in a day tions today. No doubt, people in every day have of test-tube babies, trans-sexual operations, genetic wrestled with these anthropological questions. But engineering, artificial intelligence, and potential today, especially in the West, it seems as if these human cloning, the question of human dignity, questions now consume us. Part value, and personhood have indeed become press- Stephen J. Wellum is Professor of the reason for this is due to the ing. Are we creatures of dignity because we are of Christian Theology at The South- so-called “demise” of the Christian created in God’s image? Or are we merely animals, ern Baptist Theological Seminary. worldview in the West and its influ- by-products of an impersonal evolutionary pro- Dr. Wellum received his Ph.D. ence upon our larger society. Prior cess, things that can be, technologically speaking, degree in theology from Trinity to the Enlightenment, Christian manipulated and re-fashioned for whatever ends Evangelical Divinity School and theology largely shaped our society, we deem best? has also taught ­theology at the Associated Canadian Theological but due to the rise of competing This collective identity crisis is best illustrated Schools and Northwest Baptist “isms,” as represented by the larger in the postmodern university (better: “di-versity”) Theological College and Seminary categories of modernism and now where any Christian or unified view of human in Canada. He has contributed to several publications and a postmodernism (e.g., Marxism, beings has disappeared. For example, in the biol- collection of essays on theology secular humanism, existential- ogy classroom, humanity is viewed as nothing and worldview issues. ism, nihilism, deconstructionism, more than a “naked ape,” to use the words of Des- etc.), our culture is now suffering mond Morris. From the perspective of neurobiol- from a collective identity crisis. What makes this ogy, humans are viewed merely as physical beings identity crisis even more acute has been the rise of which seems to entail that the mind is reducible

2 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 2-3. to the brain and that all human behavior, affec- difficult to see the disastrous results of such think- tions, and willing is explained solely in terms of ing everywhere around us—e.g., our devaluation neuro-chemical factors. In other disciplines we of human life in abortion, infanticide, euthanasia; find competing images of human beings, but at the break-down of the family, gender confusion; their core, all of these disciplines attempt to under- false views of human nature as applied to political stand the nature of human beings from the per- theory; and the list could be multiplied. spective of biological and social factors alone. In Secondly, there is an important lesson for fact, various negative postmodern thinkers across Christians to learn as well, namely, we will never the disciplines, have specifically questioned the understand correctly who we are apart from a overly optimistic Enlightenment view of human theological anthropology. Scripture and Christian beings as “rational beings” and free and autono- theology rightly affirm that human beings enjoy mous “knowing subjects.” Instead, they now con- neither metaphysical nor methodological pride of tend that humans have no fixed nature; there is no place: humanity comes second to God, both in the “givenness” to us. Rather we are simply finite, mal- order of being (namely, creation) and in the order leable, even determined beings conditioned solely of knowledge (namely, revelation). John Calvin by our social-cultural-linguistic backgrounds. In develops this point in the opening sentences of such a situation, it is nigh impossible to sustain any his famous Institutes: “Without the knowledge view that human beings are creatures of dignity of God there is no knowledge of the self.” That is and value. why Christian theology has typically placed our From a Christian perspective, this current iden- discussions of anthropology after the doctrine tity crisis demonstrates both a sad irony and an of God. Why? Because we only begin to know important lesson. First, it is a sad irony because who we are once we view ourselves in relation our present-day confusion, especially in the West, to our Creator. In this regard, in contrast to our is directly tied to our rejection of the Christian present-day views of human beings, Christianity worldview and our refusal to acknowledge that affirms at least two crucial truths about us: first, we are creatures of God. Starting in the Enlight- human beings are unique and significant—we enment era up until our present day, it has been have incredible value—because we are created in fashionable to argue that “we have come of age,” God’s image. Scripture explains us in relation to a that we do not need to retain the God of Scripture personal beginning (Gen 1:1), namely the Triune in our thinking in order to understand who we God. Second, given the Fall, we who were created are, or in the famous words of Alexander Pope, to be great are now moral rebels before God and “the proper study of mankind is man” not God. deeply flawed by sin to the very core of our being. But the sad irony of this rebellious approach to That is why the only solution to our problem is anthropology is that, in the end, it leads to futility. nothing less than the sovereign and gracious ini- It is a perfect illustration of the important truth, tiative of the Triune God on our behalf. “ideas have consequences.” If we try to grasp who In the end, it is a theological anthropology which we are apart from our Creator, the consequence we desperately need today, given the anthropolog- is not understanding but disaster. Anthropology ical crisis of our day. That is why we are devoting which seeks to study human beings apart from the this issue of SBJT to this crucial topic. Our world Triune God inevitably ends up viewing us merely needs to be confronted afresh with the truth of in terms of impersonal origins, products of matter, who we are in light of God’s Word. It is my prayer motion, time, and chance. And even more: these that this issue will better equip each one of us not false ideas never remain theoretical. Inevitably, only to know the truth but also to practice it, in an people act upon what they believe, and it is not increasingly dark and de-humanizing age.

3 Toward a Theology of Human Embodiment Gregg R. Allison

arly in my career of teaching systematic I countered with an observation: His body was E theology, a student arranged an appointment (literally) breaking down before his eyes, and he with me in my office. After the customary small would soon be no good for himself, his family, talk, he cut to the quick: He was experiencing and the church ministry for which he was prepar- multiple physical problems, plagued by insomnia, ing through his seminary studies. And, I added, I digestive and excretory problems, thought the problem was a physical one, not a spir- Gregg R. Allison is Professor of blood in his urine, lethargy, and itual one. But that was not the answer a “spiritually Christian Theology at The Southern attention deficit. He wondered minded” evangelical like him was accustomed to Baptist Theological Seminary. what spiritual causes could lie at hearing. Besides, this student had come to me with Dr. Allison has eighteen years the heart of these physical symp- an expectation that I would share something with of ministry experience as a staff toms, and he wanted my advice him from the Word of God. But I was not prepared member of Campus Crusade, where he worked in campus ministry about how to become well again. to do so. and as a missionary to Italy and I hardly needed to probe much, This encounter plunged me into a crisis: As a Switzerland. He serves as the but my questions caught him off professor of theology at an evangelical seminary, book review editor for theological, guard because they focused on I wondered what I should have shared with this historical, and philosophical studies for the Journal of the Evangelical physical matters: What are you student from Scripture that would have helped Theological Society. Dr. Allison is the eating? (junk food) Are you sched- him with his physical problems. If you found your- author of Getting Deep: Understand uling rest periods? (Too busy for self in a similar situation, what would you com- What You Believe About God and relaxation) How are you exercis- municate? Why (B&H, 2002) and Jesusology: Understand What You Believe About ing? (No need for that) Becom- The purpose of this article is to sketch a theol- Jesus and Why (B&H, 2005). ing irritated with my line of ogy of human embodiment, the fruit of years of questioning, he offered the follow- study flowing from the encounter related above. It ing: Because his body was going to be sloughed off is my contention that evangelicals at best express at death anyway, he did not need to be concerned an ambivalence toward the human body, and at about eating well, resting well, and exercising well. worst manifest a disregard or contempt for it.

4 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 4-17. Many people, often due to tragic experiences with The Creation of the Body the body (e.g., physical/sexual abuse), abhor their Human beings are this way because God body, and many Christians, due to either poor or designed them to be embodied. This was true of non-existent teaching on human embodiment, the first man, as “the Lord God formed the man consider their body to be, at best, a hindrance to of dust from the ground and breathed into his spiritual maturity and, at worst, inherently evil nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a or the ultimate source of sin.1 By contrast, in my living being” (Gen 2:7).3 This was also true of the study of Scripture, I have discovered a remarkable first woman, as God removed part of the man’s perspective toward the body, one which impacts body, and “the rib that the Lord God had taken how we live out our existence as created beings, from the man he made into a woman and brought how we view and experience our salvation, and her to the man” (Gen 2:22). Moreover, it is true how we trust and obey God as maturing believ- of each and every human being since the original ers in Jesus Christ. After giving a definition, I creation, as God is intimately involved in fash- will outline various elements of my theology of ioning human life from the moment of concep- human embodiment: the creation of the body, the tion. As David extols God in a psalm, “For you gendered body, the sexual body, the disciplined formed my inward parts; you knitted me together body, the sanctification of the body, the clothing in my mother’s womb…. My frame was not hid- of the body, the body and the worship of God, the den from you, when I was being made in secret, suffering and healing of the body, the death of the intricately woven in the depths of the earth” (Ps body, and the future of the body. For each element 139:13, 15). Through advancements in medicine of discussion, I will draw some practical applica- and technology, we are now able to understand tion for living our human embodiment.2 the development of a human being in utero, so what was formerly “hidden … in secret” has been Definition: The Human Body revealed. Still, human ability to explain this mag- and Human Embodiment nificent process genetically and physiologically Let me begin with a definition. The human does not take away from the truth that God is body is an essential aspect of human beings dur- also at work to bring about human development. ing their earthly existence and, following Christ’s Moreover, human beings are created holistically, return and the resurrection of their body, in the so that in this earthly existence, soul and body are age to come. Specifically, the body is the mate- an inseparable unity. Indeed, being made in the rial component of human nature distinct from— image of God entails the embodiment of the image but intimately linked with—the immaterial com- bearers.4 Human embodiment, then, is according ponent, commonly called the soul (or spirit). to divine design. Only between physical death and the return of Accordingly, people should embrace embodi- Christ will human existence be a disembodied ment as a gift from God. In an article inBooks and one. The soul (or spirit) will survive death and Culture, Frederica Mathewes-Green provided a continue to exist while the body is sloughed off, quote from C. S. Lewis that represents a common but this is an abnormal condition (2 Cor 5:1-10). viewpoint that people have of their bodies: “The Embodiment, therefore, is the state of human exis- fact that we have bodies is the oldest joke there tence between conception and death, and again is.” Such disdain for human embodiment is not in after the resurrection of the body and for all eter- accord with Scripture. Mathewes-Green offered nity. The normal state of human existence is an a corrective insight: “The initial impression that embodied existence. we stand critically apart from our bodies was our first mistake. We are not merely passengers riding

5 around in skin tight racecars; we are our bodies. The Sexual Body They embody us.”5 Embodiment is God’s creative An important aspect of gender, and hence of design for human beings, who should be grate- human embodiment, is sexuality. Indeed, God ful for their physical existence.6 Moreover, the created human beings as both male and female church is called to minister to people as holistic so that they could fulfill the cultural mandate to human beings created in the image of God. This “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Gen worldview entails treating all people—both Chris- 1:28).8 This universal command means that the tians and non-Christians alike—with respect for majority of human beings will be married, and their inherent dignity. Furthermore, the church the general portrait that arises from Scripture is should be engaged in helping the poor and mar- that marriage is between a man and a woman who ginalized through deeds of mercy, communicat- commit themselves to living in a monogamous ing the gospel of Jesus Christ to everyone, and relationship. Sexual intercourse is to be enjoyed discipling Christians by addressing their many within the bounds of this covenantal framework needs—intellectual, emotional, volitional, physi- and is designed for several purposes, including cal, educational, and socio-economic. pleasure, procreation, and unity. Tragically, the fall into sin wreaks havoc with The Gendered Body human sexuality, and Scripture presents instruc- As embodied creatures, human beings are tions intended to help people overcome tempta- either male or female (Gen 1:26-27); indeed, gen- tion and failure in this area. For example, Paul der is a fundamental reality of human existence. denounces sexual immorality (1 Cor 6:12-12), Unlike secondary characteristics such as hair and placing it into a category by itself by explaining eye color, height, and body type, gender is a pri- that “every other sin a person commits is outside mary characteristic. God does not create a generic the body, but the sexually immoral person sins human being and then add on gender; rather, he against his own body” (v. 18). This heinous sin creates a human being either as a male person or wrenches away one’s body—which “is not meant as a female person. Human genderedness means for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the that a man is conscious of and knows himself as Lord for the body” (v. 13)—from its rightful mem- a man, he relates to other human beings as a man, bership—with Christ and, if married, with one’s and as a man he relates to God. Similarly, it means spouse—and unites it in membership with the that a woman is conscious of and knows herself as body of someone other than one’s spouse. The a woman, she relates to other human beings as a result is that the two become one flesh (v. 16), woman, and as a woman she relates to God. Try which is a tragic disorientation of the body. In as I might, even urged on by my wife, I cannot see no uncertain terms, Paul warns against sexual life from her—a woman’s—perspective. Human immorality, reminding Christians “that your body beings are perspectivally gendered—as designed is a temple of the Holy Spirit” and urging them by God. to “glory God in your body” (v. 20). The apostle Accordingly, men and women should be thank- echoes this alert in another place (1 Thess 4:3-8), ful for the gender with which God created them, urging married people to engage in sexual activity and any sense of superiority or inferiority because in a God-honoring and spouse-respecting manner they are male or they are female is wrong and dan- (vv. 4-5).9 Tragically, Christian men were commit- gerous. Gender differences should be celebrated, ting adultery with the wives of other Christians, and men and women should learn to enjoy per- so Paul also warns the church “that no one trans- sonal, pure relationships with the other gender.7 gress and wrong his brother in this matter” (v. 6). The close relationships that church members

6 enjoy with one another should never be allowed to nizant of these many challenges, we should never cross the lines of proper morality so that members lose sight of the fact that human sexuality, and defraud one another by taking that which does not sexual intercourse between married couples, are belong to them. wonderful gifts from God for his embodied crea- The apostle also issues instructions (1 Cor 7:1- tures, gifts that should be celebrated and enjoyed. 9) to ascetically minded Christians, telling them that they cannot pursue holiness before God by The Disciplined Body refusing to engage in sexual intercourse if they are In the above discussion, Paul’s reminder to married. Such proper sexual activity acts as a pro- Christians “that your body is a temple of the Holy phylactic against immorality (v. 2), so spouses are Spirit” (1 Cor 6:19), while specifically directed at duty bound to enjoy a mutually satisfying sexual the problem of sexual immorality, has a broader relationship (vv. 3-4). Paul concedes—not com- application: Human beings are to respect and care mands (v. 6)—that regular sexual activity may be for their body. Such attention requires physical interrupted for a time if the two mutually agree, if discipline. Elsewhere, the apostle gives instruc- there is a good purpose, and if they reengage after tion to Timothy: “train yourself for godliness; for the period is complete. This abstinence, however, while bodily training is of some value, godliness does not make them more holy but can instead lead is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the to disastrous results if not treated properly (v. 5). present life and also for the life to come” (1 Tim In his discussion of marriage, Paul also 4:8). Using the metaphor of athletic preparation addresses the reality of singleness (1 Cor 7:7-9). for the Isthmian games, Paul urges his disciple This state, like that of marriage, is a gift of God (v. to focus on training in godliness, which would 7). Paul’s preference is that “the unmarried and include study of Scripture, prayer, and other spiri- the widows … remain single” as he is (v. 8), for tual disciplines. Pausing for a moment on actual celibacy offers many advantages (1 Cor. 25-40), athletic training, he comments that physical disci- including avoidance of “worldly troubles” (v. 28), pline, while not as valuable as spiritual discipline, freedom from “anxieties” (v. 32), and promotion is nonetheless important. Certainly, it does not of “undivided devotion to the Lord” (v. 35). The hold promise for the life to come, but bodily train- advantages of singleness are many, yet only those ing has value for embodied human beings during to whom this gift is given should remain single. their earthly existence. Paul quickly adds, “But if they cannot exercise self- Such physical discipline does not entail asceti- control, they should marry. For it is better to marry cism—for example, prohibiting marriage and for- than to burn with passion” (v. 9). Those with the bidding the consumption of certain foods (1 Tim gift of celibacy are not asexual beings who lack 4:3-5; Col 2:16-23)—for these legalistic rules and sexual desire, but they are able to control those regulations “have indeed an appearance of wis- urges by channeling them in God-honoring ways. dom in promoting self-made religion and asceti- Lacking such self-control, people should pursue cism and severity to the body, but they are of no getting married so they are not overwhelmed by value in stopping the indulgences of the flesh” sexual desire and thus fall into immorality. (Col 2:23). But it does require intentional care for Anyone reading this article is certainly aware and control of the body, as Paul elsewhere notes, “I of the many troubles Christians and the church discipline my body and keep it under control” (1 encounter in this area of human sexuality: ram- Cor 9:26). Specifically, bodily discipline includes pant sexual immorality, adultery, homosexuality, regular exercise, good nutrition, proper rest and sexual abuse of children and women, pornography, sleep, and avoidance of body-harming substances. “sexting,” prostitution, and other problems. Cog- Insights from exercise physiology and nutrition

7 can be helpful in this regard. at the heart of it. Gluttony is often associated with It would be embarrassing to ask when was the drunkenness, “Do not be with heavy drinkers of last time you heard a sermon on physical discipline wine, or with gluttonous eaters of meat; for the or participated in a Sunday school class about diet heavy drinker and the glutton will come to pov- and exercise. While it is not my purpose to mini- erty, and drowsiness will clothe a man with rags” mize the importance of practicing spiritual disci- (Prov 23:20-21). Biblical portrayals of gluttonous plines, a proper theology of human embodiment people and the tragic end into which their sin corrects a much-overlooked aspect of Christian plunged them include Esau (Gen 25:29-34; with living and church education: Physical discipline in comment in Heb 12:16-17), the sons of Eli (1 Sam regard to eating, exercising, resting, and avoiding 2:12-17), and the people of Israel (Numbers 11). harmful substances is an important component of Gluttony is a deadly sin of human embodiment. life in the human body. Additionally, when spiri- A third sin is sloth, which is psychological indif- tual disciplines call for accompanying physical ference and physical weariness toward the work activities like fasting, solitude, temporary celibacy, that God has provided for one to accomplish.11 and the foregoing of other legitimate bodily plea- Sloth results in the lack of resources for living: “Go sures, the goal should always be increased spiritual to the ant, O sluggard, consider her ways, and be vitality and never the punishment of the body as wise. Without having any chief, officer, or ruler, an opponent or enemy of spiritual maturity. she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest. How long will you lie there, O The Sanctification of the Body sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? Indeed, the pursuit of spiritual maturity is the A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the process of sanctification, a divine work for which hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you Paul prays, “Now may the God of peace himself like a robber, and want like an armed man” (Prov sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit 6:6-11; cf. Prov 10:26; 13:4; 20:4; 26:13-16). Paul and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming denounced idleness for Christians: “If anyone is of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 5:23). Holistic not willing to work, let him not eat. For we hear sanctification, including holiness of the body, is that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at the goal and blessing for which the apostle prays. work, but busybodies” (2 Thess 3:10-11). Sloth is a Sanctification consists of two aspects, one deadly sin of human embodiment. negative, the other positive. As for the former These deadly three sins—lust, gluttony, and aspect, sanctification involves avoiding or ridding sloth—are to be avoided or overcome as part of oneself of certain sins. If we consider the seven the sanctification of the body. deadly sins—pride, gluttony, envy, sloth, anger, Positively, sanctification involves the pursuit lust, covetousness—three are directly connected of holiness in terms of God-honoring attitudes to embodiment. Lust has been dealt with above; and actions. As for sanctification of the body, Paul it is a deadly sin of embodiment. As for a second emphasizes that the body is “for the Lord” (1 Cor sin, “gluttony is the immoderate consumption 6:13), urging Christians to “present yourselves to of food arising from the unchecked appetite for God as those who have been brought from death something more than, or other than, what the to life, and your members to God as instruments Lord has provided and is therefore judged a sin by of righteousness” (Rom 6:13). In other words, the God”10 Indeed, Paul’s comment about enemies of body is to be used for God’s purposes. Concretely, the cross—“their god is their belly” (Phil 3:19)— Christians are to work hard so as to provide for underscores that this sin is not only about over themselves (2 Thess 3:12) and for their family (1 consumption of food, but also about the idolatry Tim 5:8) and to “have something to share with

8 anyone in need” (Eph 4:28). Instead of cursing mands, “Do not let your adorning be external— other image bearers, they are to bless the Lord the braiding of hair, the wearing of gold, or the (Jas 9-10); rather than lying, they are to “speak putting on of clothing—but let your adorning the truth” (Eph 4:25). As sanctification is pursued, be the hidden person of the heart” (1 Pet 3:3- Christians should not ignore the important bibli- 4). Clearly, cultural perspectives are operative in cal teaching that their body is part and parcel of these instructions (e.g., there is nothing inherently this process of becoming more like Jesus Christ.12 wrong with braided hair, but this hairstyle com- municates something evil in some cultures), but The Clothing of the Body rather than overlooking these passages, Christians One concrete expression of dedicating one’s can learn from their principles. These principles body for divine purposes is the clothing one wears. include (1) Understand that clothes communicate This seemingly mundane matter actually receives something about those who select and wear them. more attention in Scripture than one might Thus, Christians should dress sensibly, being con- expect; indeed, it is an important aspect of human scious of their selection in clothing. (2) Avoid embodiment. ostentatious clothes that draw attention to one’s When God created Adam and Eve, they were status of wealth and privilege. (3) Dress modestly, “naked and unashamed” (Gen 2:25). Their fall not sensually, avoiding seductive clothes that draw into sin, however, introduced a sense of shame attention to one’s sexuality. (4) Dress properly, and led them to a futile sartorial attempt to rectify using good judgment, and avoiding clothes that their predicament (Gen 3:7-11). In his mercy, God associate the wearer with rebellion and evil. (5) provided appropriate clothing to cover human Spend wisely and fittingly on clothes, guarding nakedness (Gen 3:21). Thus, clothing is a post-fall against purchasing so as to overtax one’s bud- necessity to deal with sin and shame. get and considering what is appropriate in light Though definitely a cultural matter and of personal, family, church, and world needs. thus varying widely, the clothing of the body is Clearly, these principles apply as much to men addressed by certain principles in Scripture. The as to women. Even the clothes Christians wear prohibition against cross-dressing—“a woman should confirm their profession of godliness. shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these The Body and the Worship things is an abomination to the Lord your God” of God (Duet 22:5)—underscores the givenness of gender When most Christians think of worshipping and rebukes anyone who refuses to embrace the God, they imagine such activities as singing songs gender with which they were created; such rejec- of praise and thanksgiving, listening to the Word tion of their God-given maleness or femaleness is of God read and preached, praying corporately, a heinous sin before their Creator. Accordingly, and the like. Few would consider the role of their clothes should reflect a man’s creation as a man body in worship. Indeed, in a popular definition, and his acceptance of his maleness; similarly, they Archbishop William Temple described worship should reflect a woman’s creation as a woman and as involving a person’s conscience, mind, imagi- her acceptance of her femaleness. nation, heart, and will—with no mention of the Two passages directly address women’s cloth- human body!13 ing: Paul desires “that women should adorn them- Scripture, however, presents an active, physi- selves in respectable apparel, with modesty and cal involvement in worship: the raising of hands, self-control, not with braided hair and gold or indicative of both blessing God (Ps 134:1) and pearls or costly attire” (1 Tim 2:9), and Peter com- pleading for his help and mercy (Ps 28:1-2; 88:8-

9 10); kneeling, bowing, and falling down, exhibit- God’s blessings, which are also tangibly exhibited ing humility and abject shame before the Lord by the concrete, tangible rites of baptism and the (Rev 4:9-11; 5:8-14; Ezra 9:5-6; 2 Chron 6:12- Lord’s Supper. Unsurprisingly, then, Paul urges 14; Ps 35:13-14; Neh 8:5-6); dancing or leaping, Christians “by the mercies of God, to present your manifesting intense joy (Psa. 149:3-4; Ex. 15:20- bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to 21; 2 Sam. 6:14-17); and clapping and shouting God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1). praise to God (Ps 47:1-2; 66:1). Certainly, many cultural—including generational, ethnic, geo- The Suffering and Healing of graphical, socio-economic, and denominational— the Body realities must be considered in this discussion, but Human embodiment is a relatively short-lived embodied human beings qualified to worship God existence, as the curse of death due to sin is meted “in spirit and truth” (John 4:23-24) are to engage out on all human beings (Rom 5:12; 3:23). Even in this activity with the entirety of their being— before this end point is reached, as the human and that includes their body. body ages, it wears down, provoking physical suf- Moreover, Jesus Christ ordained physical, tan- fering. Oftentimes, service for the Lord entails gible means by which he expresses and grants his great physical suffering as well (2 Cor 4:7-18). grace to his followers. Baptism and the Lord’s Sup- Scripture presents suffering both as necessary, per are the two ordinances given by Christ to his because of living in a fallen world, as well as tragic, church. The initial rite, baptism, is administered because suffering is not the way it is supposed to to new converts as a concrete portrayal of their be. At the same time, the lessons and character- entrance into a new covenant relationship with building that Christians can learn and experience the triune God (Matt 28:18-20); their identifica- from it are very beneficial (Rom 5:1-5; Jas 1:2-4). tion with the death, burial, and resurrection of Indeed, Paul emphasizes the proper perspective on Christ (Rom 6:3-5; Gal 3:26-28); their cleansing trials and afflictions of all types, including physi- from sin (Acts 26:16; 2:38); and their escape from cal suffering: “Though our outer self is wasting divine judgment (1 Pet 3:20-21). These mighty away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. works of God are visibly depicted through baptism For this light momentary affliction is preparing by immersion, a very physical act. The ongoing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all com- rite, the Lord’s Supper, is celebrated regularly by parison, as we look not to the things that are seen church members as a concrete portrayal of the but to the things that are unseen. For the things death of Jesus Christ—the loaf split in two, sym- that are seen are transient, but the things that bolizing his broken body; the cup of the fruit of are unseen are eternal” (2 Cor 4:16-18). Chris- the vine, representing his shed blood—and their tians are to view trouble and heartache as “light participation in his blood and body (1 Cor 10:16). momentary affliction.” This attitude is not a denial As the church administers the Lord’s Supper, it of the reality of suffering; afflictions are real, not proclaims “the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 illusory. But compared to what is to come—the Cor 11:26)—not a verbal proclamation, but an glory of a future existence with Christ—the pres- enacted portrayal of the gospel. The mighty work ent, earthly troubles are relatively light and of brief of Christ on behalf of sinners is visibly depicted duration. Indeed, a right estimation of the true through the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, a worth of what is to come, and a resolute focus on very physical act.14 that unseen reality, will help Christians to perse- Worship, then, involves bodily participation as vere in the midst of suffering. Though the eternal Christians physically express their praise, confess treasure that is in heaven is now hidden, though their sins, plead for divine mercy, and exalt in the expected glorious existence is now invisible,

10 that does not make the future reality any less real. the elders pray would ever die. At the same time, Christians who suffer are to wait patiently for the the elders and the sick person should expect heal- great hope that one day will be revealed. ing to take place. Their prayer and anointing “in Such an attitude of hope stands in stark con- the name of the Lord” should reflect that confi- trast to society’s selfish insistence on happiness dence. Second, failure to obtain healing cannot and a pain-free existence. Certainly, some Chris- simply be attributed to a lack of faith. Certainly, tians may be blessed with little affliction and pain, the elders are to pray for the sick person with the but their attitude should be one of thanksgiving, expectation of God’s intervention to heal; they not of entitlement. Indeed, they should hold such pray believing that the Lord can heal and plead- blessings loosely in their hands, acknowledging ing that the Lord will indeed heal the sick per- them as privileges that they can live without, if son. Such prayer, however, is always cognizant of God so wills (Phil 4:11-13; 1 Tim 6:6-8). To hold divine sovereignty. Earlier, James addresses this on to them tight-fistedly, demanding them as matter in his discussion of human planning, when rights, may result in such blessings becoming spiri- he urges Christians not to purpose arrogantly as if tual curses. Tragically, Christians can too easily their intention alone decides what will take place. become lukewarm, compromising their faith and Rather, they are to acknowledge, “If the Lord wills, settling for something less than wholehearted ser- we will live and do this or that” (Jas 4:13-16). This vice for Christ and his cause. The pursuit of hap- same attitude must characterize praying for the piness and ease, as the world defines such things, sick: “If the Lord wills” this person will be healed, may cloud the vision and muffle the call of God to and it is for healing that the elders pray. But such suffer for Christ’s sake (Phil 1:29). healing may not be the Lord’s will; in that case, the Relief from suffering, including physical afflic- prayer for healing reflects the proper desire—both tion, is also possible, if the Lord so wills. In his that of God and the church—for life rather than instructions to the church, James offers, “Is any- death, but ultimately yields to God’s sovereign one among you sick? Let him call for the elders of good purpose. Third, not all sickness is caused by the church, and let them pray over him, anointing personal sin, but a particular case of sickness may him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the be the result of such sin.19 In conversation with prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the sick person before the time of anointing and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has com- prayer, the elders should ascertain if sin has been mitted sins, he will be forgiven” (Jas 5:13-15).15 involved and could therefore be responsible for Sick members of the church are to turn to God this illness. If it is the case, they should encourage for endurance and help during suffering, and God the person to confess that sin or those sins; after has given the responsibility to pray for them to the confession, the elders should assure the person the elders. They anoint the sick person with oil, that he is forgiven. At this point (as well as if the consecrating him to the Lord and marking him sickness is not attached to personal sin) the elders out for God’s particular attention and blessing.16 should proceed with the anointing and prayer. In While anointing the sick person, the elders pray this way, relief from suffering may be obtained over him (quite commonly, they lay their hands on through praying for the healing of the sick. the sick person),17 believing that the Lord can heal him and beseeching the Lord that he will grant Death of the Body such healing.18 Eventually, of course, even this biblical pre- Several misconceptions concerning this prac- scription for the healing of physical suffering is tice need to be addressed: First, the promise of unfruitful. Indeed, though the focus of a theology healing is not absolute; if it were, no one for whom of human embodiment has thus far been on life in

11 the body, one of the great inevitabilities of life is a biblical art of dying, we affirm: (1) Death is the death. Ecclesiastes describes the inescapable final- gateway between the current earthly existence and ity of death (Eccl 9:2-3), speaking of it in terms of eternal existence of either blessedness in the pres- an appointment that all people have (Eccl 3:1-2). ence of the Lord or of misery and torment away Specifically, “it is appointed for man to die once, from that blessed presence (Matt 25:46; 2 Thess and after that comes judgment” (Heb 9:27). This 1:5-12). (2) This gateway of death is unnatural, destiny is sealed for all people because of the soli- the result of sin and not part of the created human darity of the human race with Adam and his sin (1 order. There is no hint in Scripture that God cre- Cor 15:21-122; Rom 5:12). As a divine judgment ated Adam and Eve with the eventuality of death upon sin, death affects not only the head of human- as the natural result of the aging process of their ity but all those represented by him as well. Thus, bodies. Rather, death was introduced into the death inevitably comes to all human beings.20 human realm as a punishment for sin (Gen 3:19; While Scripture addresses several kinds of Rom 5:12). The experience of death, therefore, is death—physical death, spiritual death, and eter- unnatural, even if it is universal. (3) Christians nal death—for the purpose of our discussion I should view their own death as a homecoming, will limit comments to the first of these. Scrip- leaving their earthly body and going home to be ture presents physical death as the cessation of with the Lord (2 Cor 5:8). Death, then, as the the functioning of the material aspect of human passage into their future life, is “gain” and means nature. The body ceases its physiological activity, departing this life as so to “be with Christ,” which and the life principle that energized the body is is “far better” (Phil 1:21, 23). Christians do not withdrawn from it. Thus Solomon, picking up on need to fear death, because the evil one who holds the narrative of Gen 2:7, comments on the death everyone in fear of death has been defeated by of a living being: “the dust returns to the earth Christ’s death and resurrection (Heb 2:14-18). as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave (4) While grieving deeply over the death of other it” (Eccl 12:7; cf. Gen 3:19).21 Similarly, James believers (e.g., Acts 8:2; 20:37-38; Phil 2:27), comments that the body without this spirit, or Christians should also rejoice with hope (1 Thess life principle, is dead (Jas 2:26). Another impor- 4:13), knowing that these Christ-followers are tant component of death has to do with the rela- now in the presence of Christ experiencing his tionship between this material aspect, the body, blessings, comfort, and rest (Rev 14:13). (5) Such and immaterial aspect of human nature, the soul anticipation is not the case with the death of those (or the spirit). Jesus warns, “Do not fear those who did not embrace Jesus Christ. Though Chris- who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather tians may eulogize them at their funeral, giving fear him who can destroy both soul and body in thanks for their good character and deeds, and hell” (Matt 10:28). He implies that the immate- though Christians may hope that they repented rial aspect survives the death of the body. Thus, of their sins and trusted Christ on their deathbed, at physical death, a temporary separation of the the sorrow that is experienced “is not mingled body and the soul occurs. The body is sloughed with the joy of assurance that they have gone to off, returning to dust from which it was derived, be with the Lord forever.”23 (6) A steadfast hope while the soul continues in a conscious state of is nurtured for the complete defeat and disappear- existence (2 Cor 5:1-9). Death, therefore, is not ance of death, a future reality that will one day be the end of all existence, bur the end of existence in realized through Jesus Christ. Then the church this earthly state.22 redeemed by its Lord will be able to cry (1 Cor In the medieval church, people were fascinated 15:54-55): with ars moriendi, or the art of dying. Constructing

12 Death is swallowed up in victory. earthly reign of Christ in the millennial kingdom O death, where is your victory? that, at its conclusion, will give way to the renewal O death, where is your sting? of the entire creation, issuing in the new heavens and new earth (the historic premillennial and The Future of the Body dispensational premillennial positions). In either This cry of exultation will accompany the case, embodiment is the future hope and blessing return of Jesus Christ, which will result in major for human beings. changes for those who have already died and for Thus, as fallen and sinful, human beings are those who are alive at his second coming. Paul called to salvation through Christ, and they are describes this event and its mysterious corollaries: not just “souls to be saved;” the human body is included in this divine work. Indeed, “the Lord is I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot for the body” (1 Cor 6:13) in that his completed inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perish- work of salvation will include bodily resurrec- able inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a tion. Indeed, against the prevailing view held by mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be many Christians, death resulting in disembodied changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, existence in the presence of the Lord is not their at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, ultimate hope. Rather, the resurrection and glori- and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we fication of the body at his second advent, leading shall be changed. For this perishable body must to embodied existence in (the millennial king- put on the imperishable, and this mortal body dom and) the new heavens and the new earth, is must put on immortality (1 Cor 15:50-53). their ultimate hope (Rom 8:18-25; 2 Pet 3:8-13; Rev 21-22). For those who have died as Christ-followers, who exist as disembodied beings in heaven with the Conclusion: Human Embodiment Lord (2 Cor 5:1-9), the return of Christ will result As divine image bearers created for embodied in the resurrection of their bodies. They will be existence both now and in eternity, we do well re-embodied with glorious, new bodies. For those to live our human embodiment cognizant of the who are still alive at the second advent, who are rich instruction given in Scripture and here devel- embodied Christ-followers on earth at that time, oped in a brief article. Whether we are confront- the return of Christ will result in their bodies ing questions from people experiencing physical being instantaneously changed into glorified bod- problems, addressing the uniqueness of human ies. In both cases, these resurrected and glorified genderedness and sexuality, struggling personally bodies will be imperishable, glorious, powerful, with gluttony or sloth, selecting clothes to wear, and dominated by the Spirit (1 Cor 15:42-44; Phil expressing our worship through physical acts, 3:20-21; Rom 8:11). It is important to recognize praying for the sick, or pondering the mystery that for the dead in Christ, his return is the point of the life to come, Scripture provides abundant at which their future embodiment commences teaching that corrects wrongful attitudes toward (and continues for all eternity).24 the body and underscores the wonderful reality of Depending on one’s eschatology (Rev 20:1- human embodiment. 6), the return of Christ and the resurrection of Christians will be followed (1) by the immediate Endnote renewal of the entire creation, issuing in the new 1Regrettably, the church has developed its neglect or heavens and new earth (the amillennial and post- rejection of this embodied reality because of being millennial positions), or (2) by a thousand year negatively influenced by Platonic philosophy. Plato

13 maintained that the human soul or spirit, being of human beings (with others understanding the last divine origin, is inherently good, while the human phrase “and the man became a living soul” [Hebrew body, being of earthly origin, is inherently bad. Salva- nephesh] to refer to the soul, another element of the tion, therefore, consisted of the spirit’s escape from immaterial aspect), this is not my position. First, the body, facilitated by focusing on spiritual rather “the breath of life” is a property that is shared by all than bodily matters. This philosophy infiltrated the living creatures (Gen 1:30), and it is this energizing church and resulted in some Christians considering principle that is given at conception and withdrawn at the body and its physical appetites to be a hindrance death (Gen 7:22; Eccl 12:7). Second, the last phrase to spiritual maturity and even the root of human of Gen 2:7 explains “the man became a living being” sinfulness. As a result, monastic movements arose and does not indicate that to his immaterial spirit was that denied legitimate, physically pleasing activities added an immaterial soul. Rather, the material entity such as eating and drinking certain things, sleep- formed by God, the lifeless “lump of clay” (Luther), ing and resting comfortably, and engaging in sexual was enlivened by the vitalizing principle, and it thus intercourse. At the same time, the church insisted became a living person. If a complaint is registered on the goodness of the human body, appealing to that this interpretation demeans man’s existence by God’s creation of the physical world, the incarnation relegating him to the same level as all other living of Jesus Christ (which included the Son of God tak- creatures, it should be noted that the text specifies ing on a human body), and the future resurrection of that God himself breathed this breath of life into the the body. This article is a counter attack against the man’s nostrils, something that is not said of any of prevailing Platonic philosophy and its denigration of the other creatures. This personal impartation of the human embodiment. energizing principle to the man distinguishes him 2 Much of the following is an expansion of a forthcom- from, and elevates him above, all other creatures. ing article of mine: Gregg R. Allison, “The Human 4According to Clines, “The body cannot be left out of Body,” The Dictionary of Everyday Theology (ed. Bruce the meaning of the image; man is a totality, and his Demarest; Colorado Springs: NavPress, forthcom- ‘solid flesh’ is as much the image of God as his spiri- ing, 2010). For further reading, see: Mary Timothy tual capacity, creativeness, or personality, since none Prokes, Toward a Theology of the Body (Grand Rap- of these ‘higher’ aspects of the human being can exist ids: Eerdmans, 1996); Benedict Ashley, Theologies in isolation from the body. The body is not a mere of the Body: Humanist and Christian (Braintree, MA: dwelling-place for the soul, nor is it the prison-house The Pope John Center, 1985); John Cooper, Body, of the soul. In so far as man is a body and a bodiless Soul and Life Everlasting: Biblical Anthropology and man is not man, the body is the image of God; for the Monism-Dualism Debate (2d. ed.; Grand Rapids: the man in the image of God. Man is the flesh-and- Eerdmans, 1989); John A. T. Robinson, The Body: blood image of the invisible God. D. J. A. Clines, “The A Study in Pauline Theology (London: SCM, 1952); Image of God in Man,” Tyndale Bulletin 19 (1968): 86. Robert H. Gundry, Sõma in Biblical Theology: With 5Frederica Matthews-Green, “The Subject Was Noses: Emphasis on Pauline Anthropology (Grand Rapids: What happens when academics discover that we Zondervan, 1987); Robert Jewett, Paul’s Anthropo- have bodies,” Books and Culture (January/February logical Terms: A Study in Their Use in Conflict Settings 1997): 14-16. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971); James B. Nelson, Body 6Divine creation of the body has important impli- Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, cations in the ethical realm. Both abortion at the 1992). beginning of human existence, and euthanasia/ 3Though Christian interpreters of Scripture have tra- physician-assisted suicide at the end, are ruled out. ditionally understood “the breath of life” to refer to God and God alone is the Creator of human life, and the spirit (Hebrew ruach) or immaterial aspect of he and he alone decides when that life is over. His

14 human creatures do not possess this divine preroga- sights and correcting potential missteps before they tive and may not take human existence into their own are taken. (3) Opportunities to be built up and grow hands. Additionally, embryonic stem cell research through enriching experiences of others’ gifts, char- certainly resulting in the destruction of fertilized acter, faith, love, and the like. As Gilbert Meilander eggs, and experimentation to develop human clon- noted, “friendship between the sexes may take us not ing that similarly results in the destruction of human out of ourselves but beyond ourselves and may make life, are wrong. Also, genetic engineering that feeds us more whole, balanced and sane than we could human pride and greed for the creation of perfect otherwise be.” (4) Pastors are responsible to teach, children, and transhumanist experimentation that disciple, and equip the women members, and even fuels human autonomy in the development of super- if they delegate most or all of those responsibilities human beings or cyborgs (man-machine complexes), to women leaders, they as pastors are still ultimately are evil. responsible for instructing and building up those key 7This imperative is especially directed at the church, women. Painfully aware, then, of the potential pit- which Paul portrays metaphorically as a family: “Do falls, but encouraged also by the opportunities, men not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you and women should take precautions in cross-gender would a father, younger men as brothers, older women relationships to help prevent a fall into sin. These pre- as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity” (1 cautions include: (1) Commitment to be faithful to Tim 5:1-2). Such family relationships assume men one’s spouse. (2) Accountability to others (to expose and women in the church know and love one another one’s self-deception, fiction-making, dangerous deeply. An intriguing question that is raised is how desires, etc.) (3) Bringing one’s spouse into the rela- close should be the relationships between men and tionship (at the minimum, the spouse should know women who are not married to each other. Imme- about meetings and conversations with the friend). diate attention is drawn to the many pitfalls such (4) Being concerned for the other’s spouse’s perspec- cross-gender relationships present: (1) Occasions for tive, feelings, etc. and for the health of the friend’s sexual immorality (1 Cor 6:12-20) that, when actu- marriage. (5) Being careful of physical expressions alized, perpetuate the terrible reputation (rightly) (e.g., don’t go beyond those gestures appropriate earned by churches because of sexual scandals. (2) to express toward one’s sibling, or beyond those to The weakening and/or destruction of the existing which the spouses would object if they knew of such marriage(s), including (a) non-sexual jealousy (the expressions). (6) Pray for continued purity. (7) Focus friends’ spouses are jealous of the relationship), (b) on friendship and not romance, on relationship and non-sexual rivalry (e.g., the male friend’s wife is not intimacy. Important to recall in this discussion is worried that her husband finds the other woman that such relationships are part of life, as a section of easier to talk to or her personality more captivating), a Madeleine L’Engle poem expresses: and (c) exacerbation of already existing problems in an already weak marriage. (3) Opportunities for We may not love in emptiness; lust, fantasies, inappropriate closeness, etc. (4) The We married in a peopled place; appearance of evil. At the same time, benefits accrue The vows we made enrich and bless and opportunities are created from such cross-gender The smile on every stranger’s face. relationships: (1) Opportunities to obey the com- mands to love one another (John 13:34; 1 John 3:11) The above ideas are expressed in or generated by and to treat one another as brothers and sisters with an important article: Caroline J. Simon, “Can Men all purity (1 Tim 5:1-2). (2) Occasions to gain the and Women Be Friends?” The Christian Century, 19 other gender’s perspective on life, issues, ministry, Feb 1997, 188-94. The Meilander citation is on p. 188. and the like, with the benefit of identifying over- 8A second aspect of this mandate—“subdue it [the

15 earth] and have dominion”—is vocation. All men and tional Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: women, therefore, are to contribute to what could be Eerdmans, 1992); Luke Timothy Johnson, The Letter called “civilization building.” Genesis 4 narrates some of James: A New Translation with Introduction and specific examples of this aspect of the cultural man- Commentary (The Anchor Bible; New York: Double- date being fulfilled, as Enoch built a city (v. 17), some day, 1995). dwelt in tents and had livestock (v. 20), artists played 16I understand the anointing with oil to be symbolic, the lyre and pipe (v. 21), and Tubal-cain was “the not medicinal or sacramental. The medicinal inter- forger of all instruments of bronze and iron” (v. 22). pretation takes the oil to be a balm that brings about 9Marital rape, for example, is precluded. the healing. Certainly, some types of olive oil contain 10Jeff Olson,Once a Deadly Sin: A Contemporary Assess- medicinal qualities. For example, oleocanthal, a com- ment of the Sin of Gluttony (unpublished Th.M. thesis, pound found in some brands of olive oil, acts as an Western Seminary, 2000), 22. anti-inflammatory agent, much like ibuprofen. How- 11Solomon Schmimmel, The Seven Deadly Sins: Jewish, ever, the prescription to anoint all sick people with Christian, and Classical Reflections on Human Psychol- oil would seem to imply that the oil is capable of heal- ogy (Oxford: University Press, 1997), 193. ing all kinds of sickness; the medical facts, however, 12In a 2007 study of Americans’ views on sin, only betray this notion. Moreover, the emphasis of James’s thirty-five percent of Americans consider “not tak- imperative is on the prayer of faith, which would seem ing proper care of your body” to be a sin. Ellison to be superfluous if the oil were the curative power at Research, cited in The Rainer Research Report (March, work. Furthermore, why would a medicinal cure need 2008). This tragic attitude must be overcome if sanc- to be administered by the elders of the church? The tification is to be pursued as it is holistically intended sacramental interpretation is best seen in the Roman to be followed. Catholic “sacrament of the anointing of the sick” 13In Temple’s words, “Worship is the submission of all (also called “last rites” and “extreme unction”). At the our nature to God. It is the quickening of conscience heart of this practice is the grace of God that is con- by his holiness; the nourishment of mind with his veyed by the administration of the sacrament, grace truth; the purifying of imagination by his beauty; the that may restore the sick person to health or that may opening of the heart to his love; the surrender of will prepare the person for death. See Catechism of the to his purpose.” William Temple, Readings in St John’s Catholic Church, part 2, article 5, sections 1499-1532. Gospel (Wilton, CT: Morehouse Barlow Co., 1985 A discussion of the Roman Catholic theology of the reprint of 1939 edition), 67. sacraments is beyond the scope of this article (though 14Another important discussion on this topic is how the I intend to address it in a forthcoming book: Intrigue physical environment in which worship takes places and Critique: An Evangelical Assessment of Roman either enhances or detracts from that worship. I will Catholic Theology and Practice [Wheaton: Crossway, treat this idea in a forthcoming book on the doctrine forthcoming]). Suffice it to say that this passage in of the church. James does not support a sacramental interpretation. 15Excellent commentaries on this passage include: The symbolic interpretation, which I favor, finds sup- Douglas J. Moo, James (Tyndale New Testament port in the practice of anointing people with oil as Commentaries; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985); a sign of dedication to God for a specific purpose Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James (Pillar New Tes- or task. As for the type of oil to be used, James does tament Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, not specify; given the (agri)cultural context of the 2000); Sophie Laws, The Epistle of James, Harper’s letter, olive oil was most likely used. When I have New Testament Commentaries (San Francisco: been involved in this elder responsibility, one of our Harper & Row, 1980); Peter H. Davids, The Epistle of men took a small amount of olive oil from a small James: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New Interna- bottle used exclusively for this ministry and marked

16 the sign of a cross on the sick person’s forehead. death (or neocortical death). Such discussion will 17The practice of praying for and/or consecrating peo- have to be postponed for another time. See: Presi- ple with the laying on of hands finds biblical support: dent’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Prob- Mark 10:16; Acts 8:18; 9:17; 1 Tim 5:22; 2 Tim 1:16; lems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Heb 6:2. Research, Defining Death: A Report on the Medical, 18According to James, all prayer is to be offered in Legal and Ethical Issues in the Determination of Death faith (Jas 1:5-8). But his instructions both in 1:5-8 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing and 5:15 underscore the possibility of falling short Office, 1981); Robert M. Veach, Death, Dying, and in this matter. So the elders must engage in their the Biological Revolution (New Haven: Yale Univer- responsibility believing God for healing. It has been sity, 1976); B. Holly Vautier, “Definition of Death,” in my practice to ask elders who do not or cannot believe Dignity and Dying: A Christian Appraisal (ed. John F. that God may heal through our prayer for the sick to Kilner, Arlene B. Miller, and Edmund D. Pellegrino; dismiss themselves from the time of prayer and sim- Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 96-104; Thomas A. ply observe what takes place. For some, it is a stretch Shannon, An Introduction to Bioethics (3d ed., rev. and to pray in faith for healing, so to be in obedience to updated; New York: Paulist, 1997), 77-78; Sherman James’s instructions, I ask them to remove themselves B. Nuland, How We Die: Reflections on Life’s Final from the activity of praying. I also assure them that Chapter (New York: Vintage, 1995). their self-dismissal is of no embarrassment to them; 23Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduc- rather, it gives them an opportunity to observe the tion to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, practice in which, on another occasion when they can 1994), 815. pray in faith, they may participate. 24The same experience of a future resurrection is com- 19The expression “if he has committed sins, he will be ing for non-believers, though when their resurrection forgiven” (v. 15) is a third class conditional; there is will take place is a matter of debate depending on uncertainty with respect to the commission of sin. one’s eschatological perspective. One should not assume, therefore, that the person is sick because of personal sin. 20Interestingly, Scripture encourages people to face death as a key to life: “It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, for this is the end of all mankind, and the living will lay it to heart…. The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth” (Eccl 7:2, 4). This call to contemplate death is not an injunction to engage in morbid introspec- tion for long periods of time. But it does encourage personal examination. A measured reflection on the inevitability of death, avoiding undue preoccupation with and morbid attachment to it, should change the way people live. 21See the earlier discussion of Gen 2:7. 22To this biblical discussion of death could be added an explanation of death from a physiological point of view, a discussion that involves several definitions of death, including whole brain death and higher brain

17 Human Personhood: An Analysis and Definition Bruce A. Ware

Introduction tion, one invokes a set of functional criteria for ne of the gravest issues of our day concerns personhood and evaluates whether, or to what Othe nature of human personhood. What is a degree, those functions are manifest. Those indi- person? What is a human person? Which individu- viduals manifesting some certain minimal expres- als may rightly be included within sion of the relevant functions are judged to be Bruce A. Ware is Professor of or without the category of human persons; those failing to meet the stated criteria Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. person? And, on what basis can are judged to be non-persons. these determinations be justified? Second, others argue some variation of what Prior to this, he taught at Trinity There has been an enlarged dis- may be called an essentialist model for discerning Evangelical Divinity School, cussion in recent years pertaining the personhood of individuals. Here, one judges Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, and Bethel Theological to these and other related ques- that it is the inherent nature or essence of the Seminary. Dr. Ware has written tions. On analysis, it is clear that human being that grounds the individual’s person- numerous articles, book chapters, the literature on this issue can be hood, regardless of whether or not any number and reviews. He is the author of divided into two broad categories. of normal human functionings may actually be God’s Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism (Crossway, First, many argue some variation manifest. Personhood is grounded, then, not on 2000), God’s Greater Glory: of what may be called a functional- the actual expression of distinctive human func- The Exalted God of Scripture and ist model for discerning the person- tionings but on the essence of the human person the Christian Faith (Crossway, 2004), Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: hood of individuals. Accordingly, whose nature possesses a natural capacity for the 1 Relationships, Roles, and Relevance various functional criteria are full range of such human expressions. (Crossway, 2005), and Big Truths itemized, each of which is judged Having offered a brief overview of the compet- for Young Hearts: Teaching and to be distinctive of and essential to ing models in this debate, we wish now to proceed Learning the Greatness of God (Crossway, 2009). human life as we normally experi- to examine more closely some representative pro- ence it and observe it to be. When posals from leading advocates of each model. On an individual or a grouping of individuals (e.g., assessment of these respective approaches, it will fetuses, PVS patients) is considered on this ques- be argued that the functionalist model fails while

18 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 18-31. the essentialist model succeeds in providing legiti- A pattern is evident throughout Fletcher’s discus- mate basis for defining human personhood. sion. He proposes some characteristic of fully- formed human life and suggests a minimal level of Functionalist Model of its expression as necessary for human personhood. Human Personhood What he never suggests, however, is any rational A leading advocate of the functionalist model basis by which he determines which characteris- is Joseph Fletcher. His early articles of 1972 and tics become criteria or what guides his judgment 19742 defined the terms of the debate over person- of the minimal levels necessary for personhood to hood in ways in which many have found appeal- be properly grounded. One is left to wonder from ing and persuasive. In the earlier article, Fletcher where this list of fifteen positive and five negative itemizes fifteen positive and five negative proposi- criteria arose. tions3 which, together, are meant to provide a basis Fletcher’s second article, two years later, for critical, rational determination of individuals’ only exacerbates these questions. Now, instead personhood. He proposes these without any rank- of twenty criteria we are given a list of four ing of importance and simply affirms in each case traits which, in response to critics of his earlier some minimal level of functioning that must be article, he proposes as “contenders” for “the sin- present for the individual rightly to be considered gular esse of humanness.”6 Of these four—neo- a person. A sampling of how he offers these criteria cortical function, self-consciousness, relational is instructive. Regarding his criterion of “minimal ability, and happiness—it becomes clear that there is intelligence,” he writes, one which is most basic. Neocortical functioning is, for Fletcher, “the key to humanness, the essential Any individual of the species homo sapiens who trait, the human sine qua non.”7 He writes further, falls below the I.Q. 40-mark in a standard Stan- ford-Binet test, amplified if you like by other tests, The point is that without the synthesizing func- is questionably a person; below the 20-mark, not tion of the cerebral cortex (without thought or a person. Homo is indeed sapiens, in order to be mind), whether before it is present or with its end, homo. Theratio , in another turn of speech, is what the person is nonexistent no matter how much the makes a person of the vita. Mere biological life, individual’s brain stem and mid-brain may con- before minimal intelligence is achieved or after tinue to provide feelings and regulate autonomic it is lost irretrievably, is without personal status.4 physical functions. To be truly Homo sapiens we must be sapient, however minimally. Only this Or consider how Fletcher describes the criterion trait or capability is necessary to all of the other of “self-control”: traits which go into the fullness of humanness. Therefore this indicator, neocortical function, If an individual is not only not controllable by is the first-order requirement and the key to the others (unless by force) but not controllable by definition of a human being.8 the individual himself or herself, a low level of life is reached about on a par with a paramecium. What commends neocortical function most If the condition cannot be rectified medically, so strongly, for Fletcher, is both its basicality and its that means-ends behavior is out of the question, universality. “The non-neocortical theories (or the individual is not a person—not ethically, and paraneocortical) fall because they do not account certainly not in the eyes of the law—just as a fetus for all cases,” he writes. In contrast, the neocorti- is not legally a person.5 cal criterion “necessarily covers all other criteria, because they are by definition impossible criteria

19 when neocortical function is gone.”9 employing them, millions of individuals on the Evidently, the irony of this claim escapes edges of life and others with severe injury may be Fletcher’s notice. While he asserts that the cri- judged non-persons and as such be devoid of the terion of neocortical functioning covers “all moral rights attaching to persons alone. On what, cases,” in fact this criterion, a priori, precludes then, does Warren found her case for these critical innumerable cases (e.g., a human embryo, PVS five criteria? In the introductory paragraph of her patient) which others in the debate argue, on article, she writes that “it is possible to show that, other grounds, must be included. More will be on the basis of intuitions which we may expect said of this problem below, but for the moment it is even the opponents of abortion to share, a fetus important to register the question-begging nature is not a person, and hence not the sort of entity to of Fletcher’s proposal, despite his confident asser- which it is proper to ascribe full moral rights.”15 tions to the contrary. In short, her case rests on personal intuitions, Another earlier article in the recent literature which intuitions she is confident are widely, if not on personhood which has had significant influ- universally, shared. ence is Mary Anne Warren’s, “On the Moral and One further proposal may be helpful in illus- Legal Status of Abortion.”10 Warren affirms what trating the trajectory of the functionalist model many in the pro-choice movement would deny, in assessing individual personhood. In their viz., that “it is not possible to produce a satisfac- widely-read volume, Should the Baby Live?, Helga tory defense of a woman’s right to obtain an abor- Kuhse and Peter Singer16 propose that one of the tion without showing that a fetus is not a human major deficiencies of Fletcher’s proposal is that being, in the morally relevant sense of the term.”11 he assumed (in a way in which Warren does not) Then, in a manner similar to Fletcher, Warren that true humanhood and true personhood over- proposes five criteria which must be fulfilled for lap. That is, Fletcher assumes that membership an individual to be judged rightly and morally12 in the species Homo sapiens is necessary for per- to possess personhood: consciousness, reason- sonhood, although clearly it is not, in itself, suf- ing, self-motivated activity, the capacity to com- ficient for personhood. Kuhse and Singer dispute municate, and the presence of self-concepts and this assumption arguing that personhood criteria self-awareness.13 Having asserted her five criteria, stand independent of a consideration of an indi- Warren comments, vidual’s species membership. Lest we be found guilty of “speciesism,” we must apply functionalist All we need to claim, to demonstrate that a criteria to any individual, human or animal, and fetus is not a person, is that any being which predicate personhood with its attending moral satisfies none of (1) - (5) [i.e., her five criteria of implications of all who qualify. In a chapter in personhood] is certainly not a person. I consider which they critique and reject the “sanctity of life this claim to be so obvious that I think anyone doctrine,” Kuhse and Singer write, who denied it, and claimed that a being which satisfied none of (1) - (5) was a person all the Obviously there are gradations between the same, would thereby demonstrate that he had normal members of different species. Equally no notion at all of what a person is—perhaps obviously, there are gradings within species, because he had confused the concept of a person and especially within the human species. There with that of genetic humanity.14 is no clear-cut distinction between humans and other animals in respect of capacities like Obviously, then, much hinges on the correct- self-awareness, a sense of the past and future, or ness of these personhood establishing criteria. By rationality. Instead there is an overlap: the best-

20 endowed non-human animals rank well above Obviously, this notion , viz., that legalized kill- those members of our species whose capacities ing of others “threatens none of us” so long as it are most limited. is the “us” who writes the rules by which “we” are Since the boundary of our species does not morally exempt from such treatment, is an idea run in tandem with the possession of the mor- which has been invoked often throughout his- ally significant capacities, the species boundary tory to justify all manner of injustice, cruelty, and cannot be used as the basis for important moral murder toward undesirable others. And here it is distinctions.... applied to those who are among the weakest and Now we can see what is wrong with the most defenseless in society. The potential applica- traditional principle of the sanctity of human tions of this principle boggle one’s mind. life. Those who hold this principle invariably In all this, it is important to see that what take “human” in the strictly biological sense. underlies Kuhse’s and Singer’s proposal is pre- They include within the scope of the principle cisely the same basic idea underlying Fletcher’s all members of the species Homo sapiens and no and Warren’s, viz., that personhood is rightly members of any other species. The principle is defined in a manner in which I as a person see as “speciesist”; it is indefensible for the same reason fitting. In other words, it goes without saying that that racism or sexism are indefensible. Those I who make this proposal qualify as a person. So, who hold the principle are giving great weight the personhood-determining question becomes: to something which is morally irrelevant—the what is it about me and my capabilities that must species to which the being belongs.17 be present also in others for them, likewise, to be judged persons? The functionalist model of Here we have, then, a straight-forward application personhood works uniformly in this manner. The of functionalist criteria on the basis of whether or only difference between the Fletcher proposal not relevant functions, per se, obtain, irrespective and the Kuhse/Singer proposal is that the former of the kind or species of individual one is consid- considers functions true of me which are found also ering. With only brief reflection, it is apparent that in other Homo sapiens, whereas the latter consid- an application of this proposal would confer the ers functions true of me found in any individuals, moral rights of personhood on many chimpan- regardless of their species’ membership. zees, gorillas, and perhaps even pigs, cows, and chickens,18 whereas all human fetuses and new- Essentialist Model of borns and many other humans would thereby be Human Personhood denied such rights. In responding to the concern In contrast to the functionalist model depicted that infanticide may follow in the wake of their above, many are arguing that an individual’s proposal, with chilling detachment Kuhse and ­personhood attaches not to variable functional Singer respond, capabilities but to the kind of essence one is, whose nature is rational, volitional, spiritual, Unlike many other forms of homicide, infanti- etc., and hence, personal. The point here is not cide carried out by parents or with their consent that these qualities necessarily find expression poses no threat to anyone in the community who by the individual but that one possesses a nature is capable of grasping what is happening. This whose natural kind is, in fact, personal. Our focus fact goes a long way towards accounting for the here will be on select representative advocates of equanimity with which many other cultures have the essentialist model providing an overview of accepted it.... Infanticide threatens none of us, some of the main objections to the functionalist for once we are aware of it, we are not infants.19 model and reasons for adopting an essentialist

21 view of human personhood. The living being is generated as a whole, it devel- The status of the human embryo is a particu- ops and sustains itself as a whole, and it dies as larly important question for many who deny the a whole. The living organism manifests itself to functionalist model for human personhood. Obvi- be a whole by its unified organic constitution and ously, if functionalist criteria are applied, human powers of self-growth, self-organization, self- embryos must be ruled non-persons. Granted, in preservation, self-fulfillment, even self-healing. most cases they may be valued as potential per- We indeed observe the living organism to come sons and so offered guarded and respectful treat- into being as a living whole, to move and function ment.20 But persons, they are not, and the legal as a whole, to grow as a whole, to die as a whole.... and moral value attached to persons, they lack. The true primacy is that of the whole, of the living Teresa Iglesias addresses the question, “What unit and its organisation: it is an ontological pri- kind of being is the human embryo?”21 by prob- macy over all the parts either considered singly ing, what she calls, “the true ontological status” of or as a totality. The brain and all the other parts the human embryo.22 She states her concern and or organs develop in harmony with each other conviction at the outset, manifesting at every state the unified organic activity of the whole. The unity and power of the Is the human embryo a mere conglomeration whole determines­—and is prior to—the form of molecules and cells, “human embryonic and function of the parts.24 material”? Is the human embryo a living human being but not a human person? Is the embryo a What the human embryo and human adult have living human being and a human person? My in common, then, is the presence of the ontologi- conviction is that the human embryo is a human cal unity of their respective organic wholeness. Of person, a being of human nature with an eternal neither can you rightly say it is merely a collection destiny.... [I]f I do not know what kind of being of cells. In both cases, there is an obvious and the human embryo is, neither will I know how demonstrable organic wholeness which accounts I should act towards it. If I do not know for for all current and potential functionings of the certain what the human embryo really is, then I organism. It is precisely the organic wholeness cannot know what is its proper value and hence of the embryo which defines its ontological sta- the moral claims it has upon me. It is clear that tus as a human being and human person. “All we need to know what things are as a necessary the potentialities which one needs if one is to condition for knowing how we should treat them acquire the mental and spiritual activities of the and the kind of respect owing to them.23 human person are inextricably bound up with the embryo’s potential to develop all organs including For Iglesias, the key concept in enabling a deter- the brain; in this sense the human conceptus is mination of the ontological status of the embryo “organically complete,” nothing can be added to is that of “ontological wholeness.” The essential it.”25 Continuity of development, which is the out- unity of a whole organism does not reside in working of the organizational and organic unity of any one of its parts. Even though certain of its embryonic life, demonstrates the presence of an parts may be necessary to its existence (e.g., the ontology which is fully human and fully personal. brain is necessary for human life), no part or In similar fashion, Agneta Sutton argues her partial collection of parts is sufficient to pro- case for an essentialist model of human person- duce the entity’s wholeness. What is distinctive hood.26 She begins by noting the radically differ- about an organism ontologically is the primacy of ent notions of personhood found in Boethius and the whole over the parts. Iglesias writes, Locke, respectively. Boethius’s classic definition

22 of a person as naturae rationalis individua substan- a functional unity and teleological directedness tia (an individual substance of a rational nature) towards the formation of the fetus immediately suggests two individually necessary and jointly after fertilization. She writes, sufficient criteria for establishing personhood: a demonstrable individuality and the possession of a From the time cell-division begins, the different certain kind of nature, viz., a rational nature. Thus, cells develop together in synchronised harmony we have in this classical definition an essentialist as integral parts of one organism. And their understanding of personhood. Locke, on the other development as a functional whole is teleologi- hand, defined personhood functionally, point- cally orientated and so is guided by an inherent ing to presently manifestable abilities and states principle of life, of what Aristotle calls a soul. of mind as indicators of an individual’s person- For the early cells could never have reached hood. For Locke, a person is a “thinking intelligent the primitive streak state if they had not been being, that has reason and reflection, and can con- programmed to do so and to do so in unison as sider itself as itself, the same thinking thing, and of a functional whole. The primitive streak stage is those personal abilities which are associated with neither the beginning nor the end of the func- consciousness and self-consciousness.”27 tional unity of the organism. It is but one of the Sutton argues that because of the variable- many stages of the continuous teleologically ness of actual functionings, one can never prop- orientated development of the embryo.28 erly define personhood in Lockean fashion. The Boethian approach takes priority because it Further, even the fact that early differentiating focuses on the nature of the individual in ques- of embryonic cells is partly directed towards the tion, regardless of whether or not certain func- formation of the placenta does not dispute the tions may be presently manifest. That is, because organic unity of the embryo. This is clear in that functions flow out of nature, not the reverse, it the embryo, by an “inherent self-organizing prin- makes sense to define personhood on what has ciple of life,” is able to direct the differentiation priority, namely, one’s intrinsic nature. of cells as it does to support and advance its own Two questions regarding the embryo must be development.29 The clearest explanation of the answered. First, is the early human embryo an data, then, supports the notion that there is one individual organism? Here, Sutton disputes the individual at the point of conception, an indi- contentions of those who would deny the individ- vidual in the form of an early embryo possessing uality of the embryo on the basis of the supposed a nature inherently disposed to develop and grow. undifferentiated and plenipotential character of Second, does the early embryo possess a ratio- the early embryo’s cells. It is commonly argued, nal nature? According to Sutton, it is evident that she notes, that since some of the cells of the early there is present from the zygote and early embryo embryo become placental rather than fetal tissue, to the fetus and baby a teleologically oriented individuation, strictly speaking, cannot be said developmental power which directs the organ- to have occurred. And, more significantly, the ism’s stages of growth. Because this developmen- possibility of monozygotic twinning, prior to the tal power is inherent within the organism at every appearance of the primitive streak, provides the stage, it stands to reason that the same kind of strongest evidence that there is no continuous nature exists throughout. “It would therefore individual life until after that stage has past. Con- appear,” she writes, “that the zygote, the fetus, the cerning these contentions, Sutton denies the view baby, the child and the adult must share the same that the cells of the very early embryo are totally kind of nature, a nature determined by an inher- undifferentiated and argues, instead, that there is ent teleological principle of life which governs the

23 formation and development of the organism.”30 develop those rational abilities. Moreover, since What, then, would Sutton say about the Lock- this radical capacity is a capacity to develop ratio- ean functional capabilities that seem intuitively nal abilities, the nature in which it resides must to describe human personhood as we experience be understood as a rational nature. This nature normal and fully-developed human life? After all, possesses an inherent potential to manifest pre- most people would agree that there is something cisely those abilities which are associated with significant about manifesting certain rational rationality. Thus the nature of the zygote, of the abilities and powers of self-determination, etc. early embryo, of the fetus and of the infant must Are these not defining characteristics of human be understood as a rational nature.31 personhood? Sutton argues that these actual man- ifestations of functional capabilities cannot define In other words, to account for human life in its full personhood, lest we preclude infants, comatose adult expression, it is clear that every adult func- individuals, and perhaps even sleeping individuals tional capability extends out of a nature whose from personhood. Rather, it must be the nature inherent, natural capacity it is to function in these that underlies these and other such functional ways. To make sense of our adult existence, then, capabilities which defines one’s personhood. If we must see any and all capacities in their mature the nature is present, the individual is a person; expression as having been developed from what manifestation of the functional capabilities of was true of us (i.e., what it is our nature to be) that nature is a relative matter in which some may from the very outset. Inherent in the nature of express more or less, or higher or lower function- a person, then, is a radical capacity to manifest ings than others. But possession of the nature personal characteristics, even though the extent itself is not relative, but absolute; either one has to which these characteristics may actually be such a nature or one does not. With clarity and manifest may vary greatly. insight, Sutton writes, A final representative of the essentialist model of human personhood, Kirkland Young, describes Adult human beings normally possess exercis- the two broad and competing approaches to the able abilities such as self-consciousness and ratio- question of defining personhood as the function- nality. These abilities are manifestations of their alist and natural kind views, respectively.32 In the rational nature. But the possession of inherent functionalist view, personhood is acquired by a abilities which were not always present must have human being at some particular point at which a originated from a capacity to develop these abili- sufficiently developed expression of personhood- ties which was inherent in the individual’s nature defining characteristics is evident. Young finds from the outset. Otherwise the present abilities this approach unsatisfying, first and foremost, would have sprung from nothing and so would be because underlying any and every functional inexplicable. Ex nihilo nihil: out of nothing noth- capacity is an abiding substance which gives rise ing can come. That is to say, a being possessing to such capacities. Even when those functions abilities associated with rationality must always are not expressed, or if they were never to be have possessed a nature inherent in which was a expressed, there may be present, nonetheless, a radical capacity to develop such abilities. It must substance of a particular “natural kind” whose therefore be concluded that the human zygote nature it is to be a human substance. “Natural which develops into a fetus, an infant and even- kind,” he writes, “being more basic than function, tually an adult person possessing manifestable should be considered more decisive in the deter- abilities associated with rationality, possessed mination of personhood.”33 from the very beginning a radical capacity to Beyond this, Young finds the functionalist view

24 wanting. The concept of personal identity (i.e., powers are muted or interfered within the course the same person existing through time) is dif- of its development, its nature continues to exist.35 ficult to account for on a functionalist model of personhood. If personhood attaches to functions, Twinning is taken up by Young as a feature of real- and if functions may come and go, or some cease ity, so it is claimed, which cannot be accounted for altogether, then what do we say of the person adequately within his model. If, prior to implan- who performs certain functions but then stops? tation, an embryo can develop in any of several When the functions stop, so does the person, it ways, including into twins, it cannot be said to be would seem. Or, thinking from the other direc- an individual. But if not an individual, then how tion, on the functionalist account we would have can one claim rightly the embryo possesses the “no reason why, for example, we could not say that nature of a person? According to Young, the ques- a different person comes into existence every time tion here concerns how many individuals may be that function operates.”34 Furthermore, Young present, not whether any individuals at all might cites the inherent subjectivity of the functionalist be there. He writes, model as a weakness. On what basis do we arrive at the particular personhood-bestowing criteria The argument, then, is that because each cell that we do? Who is to say which ones belong on could develop into a person, we should not the list and what minimal level of expression is treat the four-cell mass with the respect that we needed to qualify one as a person? treat a person. This position is open to disagree- Applying the priority of nature (or natural ment. It seems close to a statement of the nature kind) over function to the question of the status that since we do not know whether one or four of the zygote, Young observes, persons are present, we are within our rights in treating what is before us as if there were no Agents act according to their nature/natural persons present.36 kind. Thus, fish become fish, and not trees. It is in the proper concept of nature or natural kind Still, there needs to be some reason for thinking that the right understanding of rationality is to that a human nature is present in the embryo, be found. “To be human is to be rational,” as the even when twinning may still occur. Most telling people who place rationality as the sine qua non of in this regard is the fact that however the embryo personhood remind us. However, what is not rec- develops, it does so by an internal mechanism ognized by such functionalists is that the zygote of development rather than from some external is properly described as a rational being, because source of direction. That is, the growth and spe- that is the type of fundamental being that all cific individuation of the embryo is the outwork- humans, at whatever stage, are. It is what humans ing of the intrinsic nature possessed from the are that determines what they do, not the other point of conception. Because the organizing prin- way around.... Given that the individuality of the ciple is from within, not from without, that in offspring (and thus its substance) is admitted to itself evidences the presence of a nature which, begin at conception, the human entity with its if allowed to develop normally, has the potential nature is present in its totality at conception. to become a fully functioning human being. The Only its development is necessary. Thus, this only reasonable conclusion to draw, then, is that view holds that human zygotes and embryos the embryo possesses a human nature. A final are not different in kind from a fully developed statement by Young, brings the issue into focus: human. Therefore, the respect due them is the same. Even if certain of the zygote’s or embryo’s As the embryo plays itself out, we will be able to

25 measure certain aspects of it and we may wish for this assessment may be seen in the fact that to note several landmarks of development. But functionalists do not agree themselves on which it has always been one and only one entity in criteria are correct, how many ought to be on the continuous development, variously visible to us list, and to what degree they must be manifest by the level of our technology, but one in which for one to qualify as a person. Granted that some- there is always continuity; an individuate form thing must constitute one as a person, it seems as from the moment of fertilization. The entity’s though appeal to some list or other of manifest unity is still properly found in the kind of being functions is hopelessly incapable of succeeding that it is, in its essence. Therein lies its person- in doing just this. In principle, we could have as hood.37 many lists of person-defining characteristics as there are proponents whose subjective intuitions Analysis of Competing Models of suggest to them what ought to be included on Human Personhood those lists. It is abundantly clear from the above repre- Second, because it is always “individuals like sentative descriptions of the functionalist and me” who are persons, and because the relevant essentialist models of human personhood that features that constitute ones “like me” are the very different bases are offered for founding the result of subjective assessment, it is easy to see the personhood of individuals and strikingly different devastating abuse such a principle could inflict implications follow from each model, respectively. upon vast portions of the human population. In Although some criticisms and points of assess- fact, this is already the case, argues the essential- ment have been suggested already, it seems war- ist, as it pertains to the unborn. To the extent ranted to consider more systematically certain that legalized abortion depends on a functionalist aspects of the proposals before us. view of persons, the result is the killing of mil- The ad hoc and subjective nature of the functional- lions of those who, on essentialist grounds, are ist model. Clearly one of the main criticisms regu- fully human beings and human persons. But what larly and rightly made of the functionalist model is currently happening in the abortion industry is its inherent subjectivity. It is interesting to note could easily be extended to other segments of that those properly understood as persons, on this the population. There is no reason, in principle, model, turn out to be individuals basically like given functionalist criteria for personhood, why the ones proposing the criteria for personhood. newborns deserve treatment any different than That is, it is rational, self-conscious, self-directed, that accorded to fetuses. Furthermore, what is to volitional, relational individuals who propose keep some political or medical or judicial social rationality, self-consciousness, self-directedness, engineer from defining personhood (individu- volitionality, and relationality as criteria for per- als like me, that is) in a way in which inferior or sonhood. In short, individuals like me (in ways I troublesome or unproductive segments of the specify) are persons; those unlike me (according human population are denied their legal standing to the characteristics I have selected as signifi- in society? cant) are not. The impossibility of a consistent application of the There are two main problems with this functionalist model. One irony of the functional- approach. First, there is no objective, rational, ist model is that while it rejects an essentialist and absolute ground upon which one may appeal basis for human personhood, it must appeal at to just one or a set of functional criteria as the points to just such an essentialist basis if it is to basis for assessing the personhood or non-person- avoid preposterous results. Were one to take the hood of any given individual. Part of the evidence functionalist model seriously, one would seek

26 for evidence of present and manifest functioning would urge ongoing personal care and treatment of certain specified capabilities as the basis for of such comatose patients betray the failure of determining a subject’s personhood. And if one their model to account adequately for what even found the absence of present and manifest func- they sense must be the case. tioning of these specified capabilities, one would The place for and validity of functionalist criteria. be obligated to conclude the non-personhood of Clearly, one of the strengths of the functionalist the individual. model is that, generally, aspects of human life are But what happens in the case of a comatose selected which most people would agree make patient? Functionalists are reluctant to conclude human existence morally significant. Most, if in such cases that, despite the absence of such not all, would agree that a level of conscious self- present and manifest person-defining functions reflection, the ability for self-determination, the that the patient is a non-person. Mary Anne War- experience of personal relationships, acts of love ren, for example, in discussing her five criteria for and forgiveness, promise-keeping, worship and personhood, comments, “Some human beings self-sacrifice have something to do with the heart are not people, and there may well be people who of what it means to be a human person. And so, for are not human beings. A man or woman whose some, the notion that, say, an embryo is a person consciousness has been permanently obliterated in just the same sense in which I am a person seems but who remains alive is a human being which is counter intuitive at best and simply contrary to no longer a person.”38 Presumably, what Warren fact at worst. That is, it seems to us that these would say of a comatose patient who, after say functions which we have identified as particularly several months, regains consciousness and other human types of functioning are so important to indications of personhood functioning, is that, our sense of human identity that to talk of one in such a case, he continued to be a person. This being fully a person when none of those morally is implied by the qualifying word “permanently” significant functions obtains seems at least odd in the statement above. But if this is the case, on and perhaps misguided. what grounds can we say that a comatose patient, Before attempting to resolve this tension, per- during an episode of unconsciousness, is a per- mit me first to aggravate it further by reminding son? On functionalist grounds, there simply is no us of a common way in which theologians discuss basis. To do so, the functionalist must draw on the what it is to be made as humans in the image of currency of the essentialist who argues that the God. Robert Saucy’s discussion on the image of patient’s personhood remains, owing to who he is, God may be used illustratively here. In a section despite the fact that some physical malfunction entitled, “The Biblical Meaning of Mankind ‘in has blocked the present and manifest expression the Image of God,’” Saucy identifies the following of his intrinsic nature. That his nature persists “different aspects which comprise the image of through the coma is evident by the fact that when God in man”: a being of relationships, the endow- he regains consciousness, he maintains personal ments of personality, self-conscious rationality, identity with who he was prior to his comatose self-determination or freedom, a moral nature, state. On functionalists grounds strictly, one must and original righteousness.39 As one examines conclude that the moment that present and mani- this list, it is immediately apparent that some of fest functioning of person-defining capabilities the same functional characteristics cited by a are absent, the person has ceased to exist. Either Joseph Fletcher or a Mary Anne Warren are found personhood is defined by functions or by essence, here. That is, the kinds of characteristics that func- and if by functions, personhood ceases when tionalists say comprise personhood a theologian the relevant functions cease. Functionalists who may say comprise the image of God. And obvi-

27 ously, the theologian, in a manner similar to the image while asleep, but he is as such still fully functionalist, has selected these characteristics human. So also those who have not yet fully from a sense of their importance to the experience developed their relational capacities, such as of a full human life as God created it to be lived. infants or the mentally retarded, as well as those But then, what are we to say of the embryo, the who have lost these abilities through accident fetus, or the PVS patient? If one lacks, say self- or old age are still human beings in the image of conscious rationality or is incapable at present God. In the final sense, it must be acknowledged of expressing oneself as a being of relationships, that no fallen human fully lives out existentially does one lack the image of God? Strictly speak- the meaning of the image.40 ing, if these qualities comprise the image of God yet these qualities are lacking, it seems there is no These are wise words, I believe, and they help choice but to deny of one so lacking the status of chart the way past the horns of this dilemma. bearing the image of God. Clearly we sense two conflicting intuitions simul- To his credit, Saucy avoids this problem and taneously. First, we sense that there is something suggests, in the process, a resolution to the tension highly significant about the functional capabili- we feel so deeply on this issue. In his discussion of ties pointed to by theologians discussing what humans as beings of relationships, Saucy makes it means to be made in the image of God or by the point that whereas most historical discussion medical ethicists who attempt to describe those on the image of God focused on man’s rational defining characteristics of human life which make and moral capacities, he supports the notion that it, more than anything else, fully human. And relationships humans have with God, others, and yet, we realize that we are more than our func- nature more centrally depict what it is to live as tions, and that there are many cases when an indi- the image of God. Yet, to avoid the possible mis- vidual’s functioning falters or fails that there is understanding that actual relationships (i.e., pres- still reason to consider the individual a person ent and manifest relationships) must be enacted deserving of treatment and respect. So, on the one for one to be in the image of God, he writes, hand we uphold such functional characteristics as supremely important, yet on the other hand Having said this, however, it is also clear that we admit we can account for human worth apart the existential dynamic of relationships are not from them. by themselves definitive of the image of God or Another contemporary evangelical under- what it means to be human. Existential relation- standing of human personhood and the image ships are the expression of a prior existing self of God, while problematic, is also instructive. which possesses the endowments or capacities Richard Lints expresses his dissatisfaction with for active existence. Thus while the full expres- both the functionalist and essentialist approaches sion of the image of God in humanity includes to human personhood and argues instead for a relationships, these are grounded in and are the relational understanding of personhood extend- expression of the ontological being of human ing more from the Trinity. He writes, person. The image thus involves an essential human nature which includes the attributes of I take the recent revisioning of theological existence entailing relationships. These may anthropology after a Triniatrian model to suc- not be fully developed, but they are nonetheless cessfully suggest that neither essentialist nor endowments of the essence of humanity in the functionalist accounts adequately capture image of God even in their potentiality. A person the larger context of personhood as centrally may not be fully expressing the concept of the defined by its relations-in-community. The

28 very relational identity of the triune God is believe, is by establishing, as the essentialist model reflected in the created order most especially in does, the priority of essence over function. More the creation of persons-in-relation. To be more simply, who we are is more basic to our identity precise, humanness is a function of “being-in- than what we do. This is true both because what we relation,” rather than of an individual who is in do may vary greatly (i.e., we may grow and develop possession of certain qualities or functions and in certain ways and while diminishing or ceasing who derivatively enters in relations with other to function in others) and because the things that individuals. The relationality of personhood we do are always, as Saucy puts it, “grounded in means that persons are not actually persons and are the expression of the ontological being of outside of relations.41 human person.” As such, we may celebrate the host of functional characteristics which reflect a fully- Unlike Saucy, quoted above, Lints does not fur- developed human life. These truly are significant ther qualify this understanding of personhood as our self-reflection and outward observations requiring relationality in consideration of what make so abundantly clear. And yet, we realize that this means for those human individuals not in each and every one of these celebrated functions is relationship with others, in any meaningful owing to something more basic. It is only because understanding of the term “relationship.” Ironi- we are human beings by nature that such qualities cally, while Lints rejects functionalist criteria for of life are made possible. Human personhood, personhood, as he rejects essentialism, his own then, attaches at root to our natures as human proposal ends up being a version of the function- beings, whose natures are so constituted, in the alist model of understanding human personhood. normal course of events, to give expression to a To say that “persons are not actually persons out- multitude of joyous human experiences. side of relations” could easily and legitimately, given this understanding, be invoked to say of Complementary and embryos and PVS patients that they lack the req- Dependent Definitions of uisite characteristic for being considered truly Human Personhood persons. Saucy is to be commended for taking I conclude by offering definitions of two impor- greater care to distinguish between the expressions tant senses of personhood. By employing these of full personhood, which Lints rightly would distinct senses of human personhood, and by suggest to include centrally the reality of persons- understanding the logical and dependent relations in-relationship, from the essence of that person between them, I hope that greater clarity and pre- or the “prior existing self” with natural capaci- cision may be gained in the ways in which we both ties entailing its full personhood, regardless of conceive and articulate these important concepts. whether or to what degree these capacities find First, essential personhood may be understood as actual expression. But Lints is right to point out the primary, fundamental, and first-order status the crucial role of relationality in the full expres- of personhood which, as such, is more basic than sion of personhood. So, we see again the need, on any other kind of personhood and grounds any the one hand, to acknowledge the legitimacy of other sense of personhood. Essential personhood functional characteristics of persons as supremely is rightly attributable to any living member of the important, yet on the other hand we also insist species Homo sapiens who, as such, possesses an that can account for human worth and genuine inherent rational nature (á la Boethius), whose human personhood apart from them. How can we nature grounds, governs and guides each aspect have it both ways together? of the full range of human experiences and expres- The only satisfying resolution to this quandry, I sions that are appropriate to its natural kind. Sec-

29 ond, expressive personhood may be understood as 3In Fletcher, “Indicators of Humanhood,” his fifteen the secondary, dependent and second-order status positive criteria for human personhood are as fol- of personhood which, as such, is grounded fully in lows: (1) minimal intelligence, (2) self-awareness, one’s essential personhood and is given rise only (3) self-control, (4) a sense of time, (5) a sense of out of the human nature that constitutes one’s futurity, (6) a sense of the past, (7) the capability to essential personhood. Expressive personhood is relate to others, (8) concern for others, (9) communi- rightly attributable to any living member of the cation, (10) control of existence, (11) curiosity, (12) species Homo sapiens whose inherent rational change and changeability, (13) balance of rationality nature gives rise to given expressions or functions and feeling, (14) idiosyncrasy, and (15) neocortical appropriate to that nature and expressive of its function. Fletcher’s five negative criteria are (1) man natural kind. is not non- or anti-artificial, (2) man is not essentially Because essential personhood is more basic parental, (3) man is not essentially sexual, (4) man is and may stand independent of expressive per- not a bundle of rights, and (5) man is not a worshiper. sonhood while expressive personhood is always 4Ibid., 1. dependent upon and extends out of essential 5Ibid., 1-2. personhood, one’s status as a human person must 6Fletcher, “Four Indicators,” 4. rightly attach ultimately and only, then, to whether or 7Ibid., 6. not one possesses essential personhood. Clearly, there 8Ibid. is a natural desire for greater, fuller, and more 9Ibid., 8. profound expressions of that essential person- 10Mary Anne Warren, “On the Moral and Legal Status hood through the range of human functionings of Abortion,” The Monist 57 No. 1 (January 1973): of one’s expressive personhood. But since who we 43-61. are, in the end, is not grounded in these expres- 11Ibid., 43. sions but in the essence that comprises our human 12See, ibid., 53-54, where Warren distinguishes two nature, human personhood, with the obligations senses of “human”: the genetic sense in which any and respect that adhere to it, is rightly attributable and every member of the species Homo sapiens is to all who possess essential personhood.42 human, and the moral sense in which an individual member of the species Homo sapiens is rightly judged Endnotes to be “a full-fledged member of the moral commu- 1For a brief but helpful historical survey of concepts of nity.” For Warren, personhood, which implies the human personhood, see Peter Hicks, “One or Two? possession of moral rights, attaches only to humans A Historical Survey of an Aspect of Personhood,” in the morally relevant sense of the term. in Evangelical Quarterly 77, no. 1 (January 2005): 13Ibid., 55. 35-45. And for a Christian discussion of the question 14Ibid., 56. of personhood particularly related to prenatal life, 15Ibid., 43 (italics added). see Bob Smietana, “When Does Personhood Begin? 16Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer, Should the Baby Live? And What Difference does it Make?” in Christianity The Problem of Handicapped Infants (Oxford: Oxford Today, July 2004, 24-28. University, 1985). 2Joseph Fletcher, “Indicators of Humanhood: 17Ibid., 122-23. A Tentative Profile of Man,” The Hastings Center 18Ibid., 122. Report 2, no. 5 (November 1972): 1-4.; and Joseph 19Ibid., 138. F. Fletcher, “Four Indicators of Humanhood—The 20See Warren, “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abor- Enquiry Matures,” The Hastings Center Report 4, no. tion,” 59: “There may well be something immoral, 6 (December 1974): 4-7. and not just imprudent, about wantonly destroying

30 potential people, when doing so isn’t necessary to 36Ibid., 6. protect anyone’s rights. But even if a potential person 37Ibid. does have some prima facie right to life, such a right 38Warren, “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abor- could not possibly outweigh the right of a woman tion,” 56 (italics added). to obtain an abortion, since the rights of any actual 39Robert L. Saucy, “Theology of Human Nature,” in person invariably outweigh those of any potential Christian Perspectives on Being Human: A Multidis- person, whenever the two conflict.” For similar lines ciplinary Approach to Integration (ed. J. P. Moreland of argument, see, e.g., Richard A. McCormick, “Who and David M. Ciocchi; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993) or What is the Preembryo?” Kennedy Institute of Eth- 24-29. ics Journal 1 (1991) 12-13; and Lisa Sowle Cahill, 40Ibid., 26. “The Embryo and the Fetus: New Moral Contexts,” 41Richard Lints, “Imaging and Idolatry: The Sociality Theological Studies 54, no. 1 (March 1993): 128-32. of Personhood in the Canon,” in Personal Identity in 21Teresa Iglesias, “What Kind of Being is the Human Theological Perspective (ed. Richard Lints, Michael S. Embryo?” in Embryos and Ethics: The Warnock Report Horton, and Mark R. Talbot; Grand Rapids: Eerd- in Debate (ed. Nigel M. de S. Cameron; Edinburgh: mans, 2006), 206-07. For another evangelical discus- Rutherford House, 1987) 58-73. For more extended sion of personhood which finds the biblical notion discussion of personhood and related issues, see Igle- of personhood necessarily to require a broader rela- sias, IVF and Justice (London: Linacre Centre, 1990). tional understanding of persons, see Max Turner, 22Ibid., 58. “Approaching ‘Personhood’ in the New Testament, 23Ibid., 59-60. with Special Reference to Ephesians,” in Evangelical 24Ibid., 65-66. Quarterly 77, no. 3 (July 2005): 211-33. 25Ibid., 69. Iglesias continues by arguing that neither 42I wish to extend to Mr. Oren Martin my thanks twinning nor recombination rightly threaten this for his assistance with research and editing of this concept of the organic wholeness of the embryo. article. Although there can be a fragmentation in parts of living beings (including human embryos), there is neither a fusion nor a splitting of living beings taken as total wholes; hence the integrity of embryonic organic wholeness and the human personhood this entails remains in place (ibid., 69-71). 26Agneta Sutton, “Arguments for Abortion of Abnor- mal Fetuses and the Moral Status of the Developing Embryo,” Ethics & Medicine 6, no. 1 (1990): 5-10. 27Ibid., 5. 28Ibid., 6. 29Ibid. 30Ibid., 8. 31Ibid. 32Kirkland Young, “The Zygote, The Embryo, and Per- sonhood: An Attempt at Conceptual Clarification,” Ethics & Medicine 10, no. 1 (1994): 2-7. 33Ibid., 2. 34Ibid. 35Ibid., 3-4.

31 The Current Body-Soul Debate: A Case for Dualistic Holism John W. Cooper

Overview ics. It surveys why the debate about the body and he title of a recent anthology, In Search soul developed, introduces the current positions, Tof the Soul, reflects the current diversity of and identifies the important biblical, theological, opinion and occasional confusion among Chris- philosophical, scientific, ethical, and practical- tian scholars about the constitution of humans as pastoral issues involved. It argues that dualistic body and soul. Four evangelical philosophers each holism—the existential unity but temporary sepa- present different theories of body and soul, only ration of body and soul—remains the most ten- 2 John W. Cooper is Professor of some of which are consistent with able view. Philosophical Theology at Calvin historic doctrine, and the book’s Theological Seminary in Grand introduction raises more ques- Historical Background of the Rapids, Michigan. tions about the traditional view Current Positions 1 Dr. Cooper served in the United than about recent alternatives. Traditional Positions States Army as a Chaplain’s It may surprise ordinary church Throughout history, the ecumenical Christian Assistant. From there he continued members to learn that, for a gen- tradition—Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catho- his studies at the University eration, Christian academics have lic, and most historic Protestant churches—has of Toronto and then at Calvin Theological Seminary. He taught vigorously debated which theory of affirmed that God created humans as unities of Philosophy at Calvin College body and soul best reflects proper body and soul but that disembodied souls exist in from 1978 to 1985, when he joined exegesis of Scripture, sound phi- an intermediate state between death and resurrec- the seminary faculty. Dr. Cooper 3 has written many articles and is losophy, and cutting-edge science. tion. In other words, body and soul are distinct the author of Body, Soul, and Life The traditional view that our souls and normally integrated, but the soul can exist Everlasting: Biblical Anthropology are separable from our bodies has separately, sustained by God. They are unified in and the Monism-Dualism Debate been challenged by many scholars, creation, redemption, and eternal life, whereas (2d. ed.; Eerdmans, 2000). including evangelicals. separation is a temporary consequence of sin and This article attempts to make sense of this situ- death. An appropriate term for this view is dual- ation for those who are not professional academ- istic holism, which emphasizes the union of body

32 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 32-50. and soul but recognizes the dichotomy. Dualistic challenged the distinctness of the soul. Evolution holism is a general position represented by more implied that consciousness gradually emerged than one theological and philosophical definition from matter as organisms became more complex, of body and soul. and thus it claimed to explain human mental and There are two main kinds of dualistic holism in spiritual capacities without postulating a soul. traditional Christian thought. Substance dualism In addition, study of brain functions and inju- holds that soul and body are distinct substances ries revealed the dependence of personality and (things, entities) that are conjoined to form a mental functions on the brain, and many thinkers whole human being. Adapted from Plato, this view concluded that mind and personality are produced is held by Augustine, Anselm, Eastern Orthodox by the brain. For more than a century, a growing theologians, Calvin, Descartes, many Protestant number of intellectuals have affirmed the physical theologians, and contemporary Christian phi- basis of the soul. losophers such as Alvin Plantinga and Richard Christians persuaded by this paradigm have Swinburne.4 Christian substance dualism could be adopted philosophical theories consistent with called Augustinian dualism. The other theory was it. One is called emergentism, the idea that the proposed by Thomas Aquinas, who adapted Aris- soul (personality and mind) gradually emerges totle and taught that humans consist of a substan- from the physical body and brain during normal tial soul that informs matter to constitute a bodily development, but that the soul is distinct from the human person. A human is not two substances but body, acquires its own powers and characteristics, one being consisting of a spiritual soul and matter. and reciprocally affects the body. Some emer- We can label this theory soul-matter dualism or gentists believe that God sustains the soul apart Thomist dualism. Most Roman Catholics, some from the body after death.6 Physicalism asserts that traditional Protestants, and contemporary Chris- personality and mental activities are functions of tian philosophers such as Eleonore Stump, Brian the brain. Most Christians who hold this view are Leftow, J. P. Moreland, and Scott Rae are Thomist non-reductive physicalists.7 They claim that the soul dualists.5 All dualists affirm that body and soul and mind are generated by brain processes. But are distinct and that the soul can exist apart from they also admit that the mind and the brain have the body. Thomist dualism is more holistic than different characteristics, and that science cannot Augustinian dualism because it emphasizes that explain how the brain generates the mind or the a human being is one thing, not the conjunction mind affects the brain. In this way they aim to of two things. preserve room for human freedom and genuine personal interaction with God and other human Modern Challenges to Traditional beings. However, physicalism precludes the pos- Dualism sible existence of the soul apart from the brain, Philosophy and Science and so they cannot affirm the intermediate state. Developments in modern philosophy and sci- A few Christian philosophers are material consti- ence challenged traditional Christian dualism. tutionists, which means that human persons are Already in the seventeenth century, philosopher constituted (generated, organized, and empow- Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) anticipated current ered) by, but not identical with, their bodies.8 physicalism by claiming that the soul results from Some constitutionists allow for persons to exist in the movement of parts of the body, and Baruch an intermediate state by postulating that the mate- Spinoza (1632-77) was a monist who argued that rial body divides (“fissures”) at death into a corpse soul and body are inseparable aspects of a single and a body that continues to constitute the person. substance. Nineteenth-century science further

33 Modern Biblical Scholarship and Theology ism, emergentism, non-reductive physicalism, and Developments in modern biblical scholarship material constitutionism. and theology also undermined belief in a sepa- rable soul. Studies of the Hebrew and Greek words Scripture and Scholarship: for body, soul, and spirit concluded that biblical Two Books of Revelation— anthropology is more holistic and less dualistic the Bible and Nature than had been supposed. To explain traditional Before proceeding to interpretations of bibli- dualistic exegesis, historians pointed out that the cal teaching, we must consider the relationship church fathers, such as Justin Martyr, Origen, between Scripture, philosophy, and science, and Augustine, were trained in Platonic philoso- which can affect how we interpret Scripture. One phy and often read the biblical terminology for reason for disagreement about body and soul is body and soul accordingly. Modern theologians that Christians do not relate doctrine and scholar- have advocated more monistic views of human ship the same way. nature and repudiated dualism as residual Greek Theologians have long spoken of God’s revela- philosophy that is incompatible with holistic tion as two books, the book of Scripture and the Hebrew thought.9 book of nature, also called special or supernatural But if we do not have separable souls, what revelation and general or natural revelation (cf. Ps happens when we die? Two modern alternatives 19, Rom 1:18-25). Until modern times, Scripture to the traditional doctrine of a disembodied inter- was regarded as the final authority on everything mediate state are current. One is immediate resur- that it addresses, including topics also studied by rection: at death we instantly acquire resurrection philosophy and science. From Augustine through bodies that generate our personalities without Aquinas to the Protestant Reformers and dog- interruption. The other is non-existence-resurrec- maticians, theology derived from the Bible was tion: at death our personalities cease to exist until the queen of the sciences, and the conclusions of God raises us as bodily beings in the future. philosophy and science were read and evaluated through the lenses of interpreted Scripture. But Positions in the Current Debate modern science posed a problem because some In sum, to understand and evaluate the cur- of its conclusions seem to conflict with Scripture. rent debate about body and soul, we must con- Since the seventeenth century, most Christians sider three competing doctrines of the afterlife have conceded that the Bible’s references to nature in the light of Scripture: intermediate state- are not always intended to teach scientific truths. resurrection, immediate resurrection, and non- For example, even Christians who reject evolution existence-resurrection. If the Bible teaches that have different beliefs about the size, structure, and human persons exist between physical death perhaps the age of the universe than the writers of and resurrection, then a sufficient body-soul or Scripture did. Modern Christian thinkers have body-person duality is necessary to make this handled this tension in two general ways; one possible. Other biblical teachings that a theory affirms a comprehensive biblical worldview; the of body and soul must reflect include the unity other views Scripture and science as autonomous of human nature and the spiritual and moral sources of knowledge. responsibility of human action—the free- Many contemporary Christian scholars con- dom of the will. There are five theories of body tinue to affirm the comprehensive authority of and soul that we must evaluate in the light of Scripture and Christian doctrine. They grant the Scripture, philosophy, and science: Augustinian validity of science on empirical matters but recog- substance dualism, Thomist soul-matter dual- nize that science is limited, rests on philosophical

34 principles, and requires interpretation. They also scholarship is one significant issue involved in the understand that philosophy is not self-validating current body-soul debate. or conclusive on basic questions of God, human On this question I side with the Christian tra- nature, and worldview. Biblical doctrine finally dition of Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and leading answers those questions. In this way Christian contemporary thinkers, including Alvin Plantinga intellectuals continue to affirm the traditional and John Paul II, who insist that Holy Scripture order of revelation and reason, which recognizes presents an enduring and reasonable perspective the limited autonomy of science. in terms of which the rest of life and learning Other Christian scholars advocate complemen- should be integrated.11 That is the main reason tarism, the idea that Scripture and science do not why I am a body-soul dualist. In addition, comple- conflict because they address different topics or mentarism is unnecessary because contemporary approach the same topics in different ways. Each neuroscience does not really conflict with tradi- source of knowledge has its own authority. The tional theories of the soul, as explained below. Bible reveals the way of salvation and other truths unavailable to reason, whereas science tells us The Biblical View of Humanity: about the structure and functions of the natural Dualistic Holism world. Thus science cannot contradict Scripture, Overview and Scripture cannot contradict science. Comple- During the last century, numerous studies have mentarism is evident in the maxim, “Scripture addressed the biblical view of human nature. Any tells us that God created the world, and science summary or conclusion risks over-generalization tells us how he did it.” If they do apparently con- and caricature. I remain convinced, however, that flict, then one or both sources is reinterpreted dualistic holism best describes the presentation of to restore complementarity. Thus, for example, Scripture as a whole. Holism means that humans either Genesis does not affirm a recent creation or are created and redeemed by God as integral per- science does not affirm an old universe.10 sonal-spiritual-physical wholes—single beings Different ways of relating Scripture and science consisting of different parts, aspects, dimensions, are behind the current debate about body and and abilities that are not naturally independent soul. Some of us insist that Scripture provides the or separable. Dualism means that our core per- comprehensive framework or worldview in terms sonalities—whether we label them souls, spirits, of which philosophical and scientific concepts persons, selves, or egos—are distinct and, by God’s of the soul must be construed, and others look supernatural providence, can exist apart from our primarily to science and philosophy for concepts physical bodies after death. The emphasis of Scrip- of the soul. A major reason why traditional dual- ture is on holistic unity because God’s revealed ists hold their position is that Scripture presents intention for creation and redemption is that we souls as separable. Those who oppose body-soul are whole bodily persons. Separation occurs only dualism are typically more persuaded by science because of sin and death. Had Adam and Eve not than Scripture on this issue. They might even sinned, the separation of body and soul would not concede that the biblical writers believed in sepa- have occurred and perhaps we would not even rable souls, just as they believed a three-tiered have thought about the possibility of disembodied universe, a flat earth, and recent creation. But existence. Christ, the Second Adam, took on our opponents of dualism do not consider such beliefs mortal human nature, body and soul, to redeem, to be enduring teachings of Scripture that bind restore, and glorify it. Our eternal destiny is to be modern Christians. In sum, the proper authority immortal, resurrected, bodily persons on the new and relationship between Scripture and modern earth, not disembodied souls in heaven. What fol-

35 lows is a brief consideration of the biblical basis for a soul but is a soul, a single being consisting of dualistic holism within the biblical worldview— formed earth and breath/spirit (neshamah, a syn- the creation, fall, redemption, and consummation onym of ruach). In philosophical terms, a human of God’s kingdom.12 being is one substance, entity, or thing constituted of two distinct ingredients or components. Earth The Physical-Spiritual Biblical and spirit are irreducible: spirit does not come Worldview from earth, and earth is not a form of spirit. How- A worldview is an understanding of reality ever, earth and spirit are not substances—distinct as the context of human existence—the natu- entities—that are conjoined to form a complex ral order, the moral order, possible supernatural entity, like bread and cheese make a sandwich. beings and/or God, a possible afterlife, and so Earth is a physical or material ingredient—dirt, forth. The biblical worldview includes more than soil, clay—in bodily form. Spirit is an empower- God plus the physical universe. Scripture distin- ing non-material force—the whole set of human guishes God from creation absolutely, and it views powers and abilities: The power of life and repro- creation as having both natural and supernatural duction is shared with other living things, but our dimensions. Angels, demons, and invisible pow- personal, cognitive, moral, and spiritual abilities ers are part of the picture. God and the angels uniquely image God. God combines earthy stuff are spiritual beings with powers of knowledge, in bodily form and spiritual power to make liv- agency, and communication. Animals do not have ing human individuals. The wholeness of human such powers. The biblical view of human nature nature is basic—thus holism. is cut from the same cloth. God made humans The anthropology of the entire Old Testament from and for the earth, but we are also part of the reflects the psychophysical holism of creation for spiritual realm. We are dust and spirit, natural life in this world—distinct parts and capacities and supernatural (but not divine) beings, a little networked within whole beings.15 To illustrate, higher than the animals and a little lower than the Hebrew terms translated as spirit, soul, heart, the angels. flesh, and inward parts have both physical and An issue behind the body-soul debate is intellectual-moral-spiritual meanings. There is whether the biblical worldview is still normative no systematic division between the physical and for contemporary Christian thought. The vast spiritual parts during life which implies that soul majority of Christian thinkers since the church and body are distinct substances, as in the philos- fathers have affirmed a physical-spiritual universe ophies of Plato and Descartes. However, refined and have rejected materialism as incompatible versions of substance dualism are not necessarily with biblical teaching about humanity as well as ruled out by the Old Testament, as monists fre- God.13 But currently some Christians believe that quently claim.16 a materialist ontology of the universe and humans The corresponding New Testament terms can be a friend, or at least a neutral party. I affirm (pneuma, psuchē, kardia, sarx, sōma) come from the the traditional correlation of Scripture’s world- Septuagint, the Jewish translation of the Old Testa- view and its understanding of humanity. ment into Greek, and preserve their holistic mean- ings. Thus when Jesus speaks of loving God with Life and Holism our whole “heart, soul, mind, and strength,” and Genesis 2:7 states that God made Adam as a Paul refers to “body, soul, and spirit,” these terms soul or living being (nephesh chayah), forming him almost surely indicate integral aspects and powers from the dust of the ground and giving him the rather than separable parts.17 Traditional exegetes breath of life (neshamah).14 A human does not have claim too much when they appeal to such texts

36 as proof that body and soul are distinct things. view, probably influenced by Plato’s philosophy, affirms an immortal soul without bodily resur- Death and Dualism rection. A third doctrine, developed from the Death, like sin, was an avoidable possibility in Old Testament by the Pharisees and some rabbis, the good creation that God foresaw and permit- affirms both that disembodied souls or spirits ted our first parents to actualize. Death is both exist after death and that bodily resurrection will spiritual and physical, separating us from God, occur at the coming of the Messiah. the source and sustainer of body and soul. It is important to keep all three positions in Although some traditional Christian thinkers mind because modern scholarship often acknowl- have argued that the soul was created essentially edges only two options—either psycho-somatic immortal and indestructible, there is nothing in unity with bodily resurrection, or body-soul Scripture which implies that a part of humans dualism with an immortal soul.21 Given this is naturally impervious to death and disintegra- choice, if we reject the immortality of the soul tion. The fact that we exist beyond physical death as Greek dualism, then we must affirm monism is more surprising than predictable from com- as the biblical position. Many biblical exegetes mon human experience. But it is clearly affirmed have approached the New Testament assuming throughout Scripture. that it either presents Old Testament monism or In the Old Testament, the dead are thought Greek dualism. Historians of doctrine have often of as ghosts who depart to Sheol or Abbadon, a accused the church fathers of incoherently syn- dark and lifeless place below the earth, quite thesizing Hebrew and Platonic views of the soul. unlike Paradise.18 They are not joyful or active But this is dilemma is false. There is no con- in any meaningful sense, but they do continue tradiction between a holistic view of life and a to exist even after their flesh and bones decay. dualistic view of death. The Pharisees taught both Saul’s encounter with Samuel at Endor is the bodily resurrection and an intermediate state. clearest example. Samuel is at rest, but he can More significant, a straightforward reading of the still prophesy for God. But Sheol is not the end. entire New Testament yields “both-and” rather Believers hope to “dwell in the house of the Lord than “either-or.” The writers continue the holistic forever” (Psalm 23; also Ps 49:15). A few Old Tes- emphasis of the Old Testament with respect to tament texts envision bodily resurrection when salvation in this life and the life to come, and they the Lord returns to establish his Kingdom.19 In envision temporary personal existence between sum, although human life is holistic, some kind of death and the general resurrection. dualism is actualized at death. An essential aspect Key texts consistently affirm the general res- of living persons survives death and is eventually urrection at the return of Christ. Limited space physically resurrected. Thus the Old Testament requires listing them without quotation or com- outlines an intermediate state-resurrection doc- mentary. In the letters of Paul, 1 Thess 4:14-16, trine of the last things. 1 Cor 15:23-24 and 52, and Phil 3:20-21 explic- After the Old Testament, the story becomes itly locate the resurrection at the second coming. complicated. Second Temple Judaism, the Jewish Romans 8:18-23 links our resurrection with the religion between the Testaments, developed at renewal of creation, which will occur at Christ’s least three different views of the afterlife.20 One, return. In the Gospels, Luke 20:35, John 5:28- held by the Sadducees, emphasizes bodily life in 29, and John 11:23-24 speak of the resurrec- this world and does not envision future resurrec- tion as a single event at a future time in history, tion or any significant afterlife. Sheol—also called not beyond time. Revelation 20 places resur­ Hades—is the final destination of all. Another rection at the return of Christ and the final judg-

37 ment. These texts must be given full weight in If there is any doubt about the straightforward debates about the biblical view of the human con- interpretation of the New Testament on its own, stitution. Thinkers who avoid disembodiment then placing it in the context of Second Temple by affirming immediate resurrection must either Judaism, especially the doctrine of the Pharisees, show that their position is more tenable than the provides strong corroboration. In Acts 23:6-8 traditional reading of these texts, or that a general Paul states his position unambiguously. He iden- resurrection at Christ’s return is not permanent tifies with the Pharisees against the Sadducees biblical doctrine. in affirming the resurrection of the dead. Luke Other texts refer to the souls or spirits of the explains that the Pharisees also believe in angels dead, sometimes implying their existence in an and spirits, the latter term almost certainly refer- intermediate state. Spirits in Heb 12:23 and most ring to deceased humans. Without an equally likely in 1 Pet 3:19-20 are instances. Matthew sound alternative explanation, this text confirms 27:50, Luke 23:46, and John 19:30 assert that Paul’s commitment to the intermediate state- Jesus gave up his spirit (not merely his last breath) resurrection eschatology.22 to God at death. Mark 7:49 and Luke 24:37 use Current defenders of monism often portray spirit to mean a ghost, a deceased human, which dualism as an academic anachronism held by indicates that this notion was commonly under- a few traditionalists who are out of touch with stood. In Matt 10:28 Jesus clearly implies that the current biblical scholarship.23 But this picture is existence of the soul is not dependent on the body. inaccurate and self-serving. Although dualism is Revelation 6 and 20 envision souls of the dead out of fashion, a number of world-class scholars awaiting resurrection and final vindication. Paul continue to endorse the intermediate state-res- does not use the terms soul and spirit for the dead urrection interpretation of Scripture from which but instead refers to himself, I [egō], as able to exist it follows. Best known is N. T. Wright, whose apart from his body (sōma) or flesh sarx( ) in 2 Cor 800-page The Resurrection of the Son of God is 5:6-9, 12:2-4, and Phil 1:21-24. The intermedi- the most thorough study of the biblical texts in ate state is certainly real for Jesus—his presence their historical context to date. He corroborates in Paradise between his death and resurrection the reading of the Pharisees, Acts 23, and Paul’s (Luke 23:43). An intermediate state is logically position stated above. Summarizing the eschatol- entailed by all the New Testament references to ogy of the entire New Testament, he concludes, the existing dead in books which also affirm the “Christianity appears as a united sub-branch of final resurrection. Pharisaic Judaism,” which affirms the “two-stage” In conclusion, although the emphasis of the sequence of intermediate state and final resur- New Testament is on the resurrection, it also con- rection.24 Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, tains a number of significant references to souls, also cogently defends the traditional position in spirits, and an intermediate state that cannot be Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life.25 It is not a ignored, denied, or explained away. Those think- marginal anachronism. ers who try to avoid dualism by affirming non- For all the reasons summarized, dualistic existence between death and resurrection must holism remains the most responsible conclusion show either that their reading of these texts is both according to traditional exegesis and modern more tenable than the traditional view or that the biblical scholarship. Those who reject this conclu- intermediate state, like the three-tiered universe, sion have yet to produce a counter-proposal that is is not permanent biblical doctrine. nearly as thorough, comprehensive, and coherent as the case for the historic Christian position.26

38 Conclusion: Dualistic Holism and body is a distinct organization, like a magnetic Current Theories of Body and Soul field is distinct from its magnet. God can miracu- A philosophical model of body and soul that lously sustain persons in existence without the fully comports with biblical teaching must be bodies on which they normally depend. How- both holistic and dualistic in the ways speci- ever, emergentists who do not affirm supernatural fied. To test for holism, let’s take Gen 2:7, which miracles cannot suppose that persons exist when presents humans as single integral beings consti- their brains cease to function. tuted of two irreducibly distinct components— Even material constitutionists have devised a formed earth and spirit—material and immaterial theory of possible personal survival. Miraculously, ingredients. Some philosophical theories fit this atomic fission might take place at death, resulting description better than others. in two bodies—the corpse and another body that Full-blown substance dualism recognizes dis- continues to constitute the person. The soul is sus- tinct constituents but treats them as substances tained by a body in the intermediate state. (distinct entities), which implies that humans are Only physicalism precludes personal existence compounds of two things, a body and a soul. This between death and resurrection. If the soul or seems more dualistic and less holistic than the person is identical with or totally dependent on biblical picture. Thomism comes closer because processes in the neurosystem, then when that it affirms that two distinct ingredients constitute system ceases functioning, there is nothing left for one living being. But like Augustinian dualism, it God to sustain. Physicalists must either affirm an holds that the spiritual component is a subsistent immediate bodily resurrection or non-existence soul. It also claims that the soul forms the body, between death and resurrection. whereas the body is already formed by God in In conclusion, Thomism is the body-soul the- Gen 2:7 and Ezekiel 37. So the fit is not exact. ory that most closely fits both holism and dualism. Physicalism, materialism, and emergentism do Augustinian dualism is a near second, a bit more not fit the holism of Genesis 2 very well because, dualistic than holistic. Emergentism and mate- although they distinguish spirit and matter, they rial constitutionism qualify in some respects, but hold that spirit is generated by matter, which they do not recognize the basic duality of dimen- denies that there are two irreducible original prin- sions and constituents affirmed by the worldview ciples. At least emergentism affirms that the soul and anthropology of Scripture. Physicalism is the or person is a non-physical organization or force- most difficult to reconcile with Scripture. field distinct from the body. A model that would fit Gen 2:7 holism and With respect to dualism, conformity to Scrip- post-mortem dualism is this: God originally cre- ture requires a theory to allow that the soul, spirit, ated humans as single personal-bodily beings person, self, or ego is sufficiently distinct from the from distinct physical and spiritual components, brain and bodily organism that it can exist when not by conjoining an existent soul to an existent the body dies, perhaps sustained only by God’s body. Human reproduction passes both physi- miraculous power. Obviously both Augustinian cal and spiritual aspects to our offspring.27 What and Thomist dualisms meet this condition. They continues after death—the soul or spirit—is not conceive of the body-soul relation differently, but simply one original component without the other. both affirm that the conscious, active soul is sepa- Rather, God supernaturally sustains the immate- rable from the body. rial form of the whole person without the mat- Emergentism can likewise be sufficiently dual- ter of his/her physical body but still possessing istic. Although it begins as physicalism, it holds consciousness, bodily shape, and location. (God that the soul or person who emerges from the preserves us in this “unnatural” condition just as

39 he could have chosen to sustain our heads in exis- urrection postulates that we receive resurrection tence separate from our bodies.) Samuel in Sheol bodies the instant we die. But if the person is gen- and the martyrs under the altar in Revelation 6 erated by the body, then the resurrected person is still wear robes. Ghosts in the Bible and in world a different person than the earthly person because literature still have immaterial bodily form and the resurrection body is different than the earthly location, as do the deceased envisioned in near- body. Non-existence until final resurrection also death experiences. Perhaps the dead do retain has this problem, compounded by a gap in exis- non-physical bodily form and presence between tence. Is the resurrection body that comes into death and resurrection. existence after perhaps millennia identical with the earthly body, especially if there is no part of Philosophical Issues in the one that is part of the other? Perhaps the resur- Body-Soul Debate rection body is a different entity made of wholly A Christian theory of body and soul must qual- different stuff. And if the person is generated by ify as good philosophy as well as sound theology. the body, then perhaps the person is different even It must be conceptually clear, logically coherent, though she appears the same. What is the basis for and adequately address such standard philosoph- essential individual identity? ical problems as personal identity, interaction Those who hold these views of the afterlife between mind and body, and freedom of the will. respond that identity does not depend on continu- We briefly survey how the five theories fare on ous existence but on having a unique set of char- these three topics.28 acteristics. Bob Smith is physically and personally unique. If someone exactly like him is immediately Personal Identity resurrected or resurrected after a period of non- Each human remains the very same being existence, then that person is Bob Smith. But this throughout his or her existence even though we explanation is not sufficient. It does not preclude constantly change from the moment we are con- the possibility of multiple replication—that two ceived, and even though our awareness of self- or more persons with Smith’s characteristics could identity may change or be lost. Individual identity come into existence—each one qualifying as Smith, is metaphysical and logical, not just a matter of fact which is impossible. Defenders respond that God or of self-consciousness. It is absolutely impossible could or would not create multiple replications. But for me to be another person or for there to be two even so, the mere conceptual possibility illustrates of me. A fully adequate philosophy of human that individual identity is contingent for the imme- nature must account for personal identity in this diate resurrection and non-existence until resurrec- life and the life to come. tion scenarios, whereas it is a matter of necessity for Dualist theories and any theory that affirms common sense and most philosophy. the intermediate state should be able to do so. The This issue is not decisive. But it demonstrates soul, spirit, or core person that exists during this that the dualist, intermediate state-final resurrec- life endures after death until bodily resurrection tion position of Christian tradition is philosophi- and beyond. One and the same being continues cally stronger on personal identity than most of its from the beginning of existence forever, whether modern challengers. or not there is continuity between the earthly body and resurrection body. Mind-Body Interaction and Theories that make the person and mind Neuroscience dependent upon the body and brain have prob- Common sense and traditional philosophy lems with identity in the afterlife. Immediate res- recognize that the body affects the mind, will, and

40 personality—currently referred to as “bottom-up framework for scientific study of the brain and the causation”—and vice-versa—“top-down causa- philosophical mind-body problem. Christians can tion.” Bottom-up, hot metal on one’s hand causes retain a robust view of the authority and scope of pain, and drinking too much alcohol impairs one’s biblical teaching and avoid complementarism. mind and will. Top-down, trying to fold one’s Both kinds of dualism and emergentism assert hands in prayer moves one’s hands, causing many that soul/mind and body are sufficiently distinct other events in the brain and body to occur as and capable of engaging in reciprocal action. well. Soul, spirit, mind, will, brain, and body inter- Physicalism and materialism handicap themselves act. No plausible philosophy can deny or fail to because they assert that the soul, personality, and allow for this fact. mind are functions of the brain, which has evolved Thus an adequate philosophy must recognize from matter. This dependence implies that our that mind and body are both capable of acting and personal and mental capacities are entirely subject being acted upon by the other. Each has its own to the forces and laws of physics. No room is left organization, activities, and initiatives. But no for uniquely immaterial events and causes. For philosophy is capable of identifying and explain- materialism and physicalism, the physical causes ing the causal chain or mechanism by which such the mental, but it is hard to see how the mental interaction occurs because body and mind are can be non-physical or causally affect bio-physical different categories of being with utterly different processes. Non-reductive physicalists attempt characteristics. Strictly speaking, all we can do to mitigate the problem. They concede that the is notice their correlation. For the same reason, causal dependence of the mind on the brain can- science cannot help to explain the causal connec- not be explained by science, and that the mind tions. It can explain how genes cause blue eyes does have different characteristics and processes and how smoking causes cancer because these than the organism upon which it “supervenes.” processes are entirely bio-physical and partially They also affirm that there are “top-down” effects accessible to scientific observation. But no one can of the mind on the brain as well as “bottom-up” observe the brain secreting thoughts, or decisions effects of the brain on the mind. But the problem triggering synapses. We simply notice the regu- remains if mind is generated and governed by lar sequential correlation of physical and mental physical reality. The concessions of non-reductiv- states and events and conclude that there is a ism do not leave room for a possible resolution; causal relationship. they circumvent the problem. The implication of The mind-body question is a matter of philo- physicalism is that physical forces rule, whether sophical modeling, not scientific explanation— or not we can explain how. Bottom-up causation metaphysical, not physical. Honest physicalists is real, whereas top-down causation is merely how admit that science cannot justify physicalism.29 interacting brain processes appear in conscious- Current brain science is conceptually compatible ness. Dualism and emergentism are better suited with various theories of body and soul. In fact to accommodate genuine interaction. some prominent neuroscientists are dualists.30 Another philosophical problem is even deeper, This point cannot be over-emphasized, because and it also afflicts emergentism: It does not seem many thinkers assume or claim that neuroscience metaphysically possible for merely physical reality vindicates or favors physicalism and the evolu- to cause mental reality in the first place. Accord- tion of the soul. Neither substance dualism nor ing to the principle of sufficient reason, a cause the traditional reading of Scripture are incom- must be capable of producing its effect. It is pos- patible with the verified results of contemporary sible for a magnet to produce a magnetic field, for science. Dualistic holism can still function as the winds to form a tornado, and for a single cell to

41 become an organism, because these effects are both monists and dualists, hold their views pri- different modes of the same kind or level of being. marily for philosophical and/or scientific reasons. But is it possible for space to produce color, for Others, including myself, look for a tenable philo- brain events to generate justice, for hormones to sophical model of body and soul that fits best with become selfless love? Mental events and qualities biblical teaching. are utterly different than physical ones. Given the principle of sufficient reason, it is perennially Responsible Agency and Freedom of questionable whether physical stuff can produce the Will thoughts, values, and aspirations, much less the Common human experience confirms the spirits, souls, minds, and persons who have them, biblical teaching that humans are responsible either by the long process of evolution or in the agents—beings who know and can do what is right development of an individual from a fertilized egg. or wrong. To be sure, we are determined, limited, As stated above, there is no scientific way to deter- enabled, and influenced in many ways by physical, mine whether matter can produce mind without emotional, social, cultural, and spiritual factors, begging the philosophical question. All forms of including our sinful nature. Normally, however, materialism, physicalism, and emergentism are we are also significantly free. These involuntary open to the question of sufficient reason. Maybe factors do not make us do what we do. We are they are valid. But maybe they invoke metaphysi- moral-spiritual agents who are able and obligated cal magic—attempting to pull an immaterial rab- to deliberate among possible actions and motives, bit out of a material hat. Dualism begins with choose the right ones, and act accordingly. Our spiritual as well as physical ingredients, and so wills are free because the determinations, limi- in principle it does have sufficient reason for our tations, inclinations, beliefs, and commitments distinctly spiritual and physical capacities. that bear on our choices and actions do not cause But there are challenges to both kinds of dual- them, or make them inevitable, or (usually) make ism as well. Philosophers have two issues with only one of them viable. Even if I love God and substance dualism. First, is it justified to conclude affirm his commandments, I can choose not to that there are two different kinds of entity—a obey him. Neither God’s sovereignty nor our sin- soul/mind and a physical body—from the dif- ful nature eliminates the freedom and responsibil- ferences between physical and mental properties ity of the will. and events? Second, the two substances are so This capacity for free choice is crucial, because completely different that it seems impossible for if our actions are determined, then it is hard to them to interact. Thomist dualism also has its crit- see how we are morally responsible for them. To ics. One objection is that its concept of the soul as illustrate, a person who is hypnotized to tell a lie a subsistent principle seems to be an incoherent is not morally responsible for lying. Similarly, we mix of a substance (entity) and a principle (form distinguish between criminally responsible and individuated in matter). Another objection is from legally incompetent persons. Freedom is crucial in science: the genetic code, not the soul, structures the biblical perspective because if the sin of Adam the body and determines some personal-mental and Eve was the inevitable result of their nature, characteristics. then sin is God’s fault—wired into the world he In the end, all philosophers adopt models of the created. Christian theology teaches that sin was body-soul relation after weighing their strengths foreknown and permitted by God, but God is not and weaknesses. No position is entirely free from the cause of sin, and it was genuinely avoidable in objections or convincing to all. All philosophers his good creation. In sum, Scripture and human offer reasoned responses to their critics. Some, experience require any Christian philosophy of

42 body and soul to ground a robust account of free- explain how it occurs. Non-reductivism is an epis- dom and responsibility, as well as recognizing our temological position—addressing what we cannot natural and sinful limitations. know. Physicalism is a metaphysical position— Dualist and emergent theories of body and soul addressing the nature of what there is. In my view, can provide full accounts of responsible agency it is unpersuasive and fallacious to claim that real because they consider the soul, mind, and person moral responsibility is possible if physicalism is distinct from and sufficiently independent of the non-reductive instead of reductive. body and brain that deliberation and action can The concept of freedom actually operative here transcend natural determination and physical is compatibilism, the idea that moral freedom and causality in the requisite sense. responsibility are compatible with complete deter- Physicalist and materialist theories have a prob- mination of the will. Compatibilism is determinis- lem because they imply that all things and events tic because it asserts that one’s choices are caused in the world consist of physical stuff and operate by one’s nature, desires, beliefs, and inclinations according to physical laws. In the material world, in response to the factors of one’s situation. The everything that happens is causally determined combination of personal and situational factors with the possible exception of subatomic random- collectively determines one choice and eliminates ness. If human minds are generated and operated others. Yet that choice is free and responsible if by brains, and if brains are physical things, then it expresses one’s own nature, beliefs, and val- human minds, including their choices and actions, ues, and it is neither internally compelled (like operate according to the laws of physics. Thus they obsessive behavior) nor externally coerced (like a are entirely causally determined except for sub- gun to one’s head) against one’s will. In this way atomic randomness, which is irrational spontane- determinism, freedom, and moral responsibility ity, not rational-moral freedom. So if physicalism are thought to be compatible. Respected think- or materialism is true, then there is no genuine ers, including Hume, Hegel, William James, and moral freedom. Our sense of freedom and respon- Jonathan Edwards, are compatibilists (but not sibility is an illusion allowed by our ignorance of physicalists). Perhaps compatibilism is tenable what actually causes our choices and actions. The for Christians if it rejects physicalism and affirms apparent influence of our minds and decisions on genuine spiritual, moral, and intellectual factors. our brains, bodies, and the world—top-down cau- But many philosophers, determinists and libertar- sality—is merely the reflection of complex brain ians alike, consider it incoherent. Either a choice functions interacting with stimuli from the exter- is wholly determined or it isn’t. It can’t be both.31 nal world, not genuine mental causation of physi- Body-soul dualism does not guarantee a Chris- cal events. Physicalism and materialism entail tian view of the will. A dualist could affirm deter- determinism of the will. There is no wiggle room. minism or deny the sinful nature of the soul. But Non-reductive physicalism attempts to wig- dualism does provide space for a Christian view of gle, however, by claiming that there is room for moral freedom and responsibility that physicalism freedom because science cannot “reduce” our and materialism do not. Emergentism likewise thoughts, deliberations, and efforts to brain events allows sufficient personal transcendence of and and their interaction with the external world. affect upon the physical world, but it may be guilty But this move changes the subject and avoids of metaphysical magic, as suggested above, for the problem, as stated above. Physicalism is a claiming that moral-spiritual agents emerge from metaphysical position that entails determinism purely physical organisms. of the will. Determinism does not evaporate just because someone concedes that physics cannot

43 Ethical Issues and the Body- are members of the human family who deserve Soul Debate our care, or simply that such acts are against God’s Moral responsibility is a crucial issue for our will. Thus it is unfair to allege that thinkers who status as persons, but it is not the only one. Theo- hold these body-soul theories are weak on Chris- ries of body and soul also have implications for tian ethics. The point remains, however, that dual- fundamental ethical questions about persons at istic holism provides a stronger foundation for the beginning, end, and during life—issues such right to life ethics than the other theories do.32 as abortion, fetal research, euthanasia, and treat- ment of the severely impaired. If a human being is Practical and Pastoral essentially and irreducibly both soul/person and Concerns about the Body-Soul body, then biological death is always the death of Debate a human person, even if that soul/person does not In one way or another, all the issues that arise yet have, no longer has, or never in this life will in the body-soul debate are matters of practical have the capacities for self-consciousness, thought, and pastoral concern because all God’s truth is communication, or moral and spiritual activity. But important for our spiritual health and disciple- if the soul/person is produced by the body or is just ship. I close with four specific concerns: dealing the brain’s capacities higher human activity, then with death, trusting doctrine, faithful academic a human body is not always a human person, and witness, and holistic practice. biological death is not always the death of a person. Embryos and fetuses are not yet persons; babies What Happens When We Die? with severe impairments will not become persons; The body-soul debate can be troubling to ordi- wives in vegetative states and grandparents with nary Christians because it calls into question advanced dementia are no longer persons. deeply-held beliefs about death and the afterlife. It is easy to see that body-soul dualism is a We might not be bothered by the idea of an imme- much stronger foundation for “right to life” ethics diate resurrection, but non-existence until the than physicalist, materialist, or emergentist theo- resurrection can be disturbing. “Do you mean ries. The latter do not regard the soul/person as an that Mother is not in heaven with Jesus?” “So essentially original and enduring component of a when I die today, I’ll be nothing but a memory in human being. Because the soul/person is gener- God’s mind, possibly for centuries?” Some find ated and sustained by the brain, if the brain does these thoughts deeply upsetting. It is little comfort not yet function in those ways, or does not func- to point out that the dead could not be conscious tion properly, then the soul/person does not exist of their non-existence but would instantly experi- or is diminished. Active or passive termination ence resurrection. of a sufficiently non-functioning biological life is If traditional doctrine were clearly tenuous not the death of a human person. For the dualist, or mistaken, it would be proper to re-educate however, a human being is always a soul/person ordinary believers in a pastoral manner. But the even if he or she currently lacks the capacities to doctrine stands up well. Those Christians who function as a person. challenge it publicly should acknowledge its dura- Of course emergentists, physicalists, and mate- bility, and they should take responsibility for the rialists can reject abortion, embryonic experimen- effect that their views might have on the spiritual tation, and euthanasia for other reasons. They can security of less educated believers. argue that abortion and fetal research are wrong because they kill potential persons, or that eutha- Has the Church Been Wrong? nasia is wrong because the impaired and elderly Body, soul, and the afterlife are among many

44 doctrines currently challenged by Christian Christian Academic Witness intellectuals. Among evangelicals, open theism I have a similar concern about Christian wit- and the theological eclecticism of the emerging ness in professional scholarship. Two positive church are examples. The argument of revisionists features of postmodernism are its challenge to is standard: Either the traditional doctrine got the the monolithic secularism of modernism and its Bible wrong, or it was once a valid reading that openness to diverse meta-perspectives. Christians is now obsolete, or Scripture can be interpreted should take advantage of this attitude to produce in different ways. But no one can claim that the academically excellent mainstream scholar- traditional doctrine is the only right one. ship from a Christian perspective. I believe that At stake is the trust of ordinary Christians in the classical Christian worldview approach to the church’s proclamation of biblical truth. If the all of scholarship is a more faithful witness than best Christian minds got it wrong for centuries, complementarism, which concedes unwarranted or if core doctrines are merely possible readings autonomy to philosophy and science. I agree that of Scripture, then we ought to embrace doctrinal Scripture does not speak in scientific language or pluralism or agnosticism. Constant criticism and present scientific explanations, and that science revision without affirming what endures exacer- does have its own sphere of authority. But the bate the pernicious dynamics of postmodernism body-soul question is not primarily a scientific (which also has healthy dynamics). issue, as explained above. It is more a matter of I recognize the fallibility of human formu- philosophy shaped by worldview and theology. lations and the diversity within Christianity. In addition, apologetics ought to press the case Debate and reform have their rightful place. But for as many Christian truth-claims as it can, not disagreements do not mean that truth is inac- preemptively concede ground in case scientific cessible. In fact debates have validated common materialism becomes compelling. doctrinal affirmations that underlie our diver- I respect the Christian conviction and commit- sity.33 The Nicene Creed is a powerful example. ment to truth that motivates those with whom I These core doctrines stand up well against mod- disagree. But I regret what I regard as concessions ern objections. Revisionists occasionally prevail to modern biblical scholarship, theology, phi- on peripheral issues. But their challenges usually losophy, and science. I am especially concerned reflect non-traditional views of Scripture, biblical about the effect of their approach on intellectually authority, hermeneutics, and/or the church’s role immature college and seminary students whose and responsibility for preserving biblical truth. doctrine and worldview are still being formed. The body-soul relation—dualistic holism— Their approach models accommodation to cul- and the intermediate state-resurrection doctrine ture, not confrontation of culture with biblical of the last things are part of the traditional ecu- truth. Those who disagree with the traditional menical consensus, still affirmed by Orthodox, Christian view of body, soul, and the afterlife Catholic, and most historic Protestant churches. I ought at least to acknowledge its strength as they have argued that this position is more tenable than present their alternatives. its modern challengers, given traditional views of Scripture and Christian scholarship, and that the Holistic Christian Life and Ministry challenges arise mainly from weighting science and Orthodoxy and orthopraxis go together. Like philosophy more than Scripture. My concern is that most Christians doctrines, models of body and Christians who are not academics realize what is soul can shape Christian life and ministry, so it at stake in the body-soul debate and not have their is worth examining their practical implications.34 confidence in established doctrine undermined. Scripture teaches that body and soul are integral

45 to creation, redemption, and the Christian life. dualistic holism to implement the world and life Thus our approach to Christian living and min- view taught in Scripture. istry should be comprehensive and holistic. But Scripture also teaches that spiritual well-being is Conclusion more important than physical well-being in this This article has surveyed the current debate life and that our eternal destiny is more impor- among Christians about the nature and relation tant than the quality of our present life. Holistic of body and soul and the doctrines of the afterlife discipleship and ministry must be consistent with involved. I have argued that sound scholarship Scripture’s spiritual focus and Kingdom-seeking still favors dualistic holism. If that conclusion is priorities. too bold, it is clear that dualistic holism follows Critics have frequently blamed traditional from a traditional approach to Scripture and a dualism for distortions of the Christian life. They Christian worldview perspective on philosophy allege that a real body-soul distinction promotes and science. Having considered five theories of otherworldly spiritualism, individualism, con- soul and body on matters of biblical interpreta- cern for soul but not body, culturally insensitive tion, theology, philosophy, ethics, and Christian evangelism, and other practical aberrations. They practice, I rank them as follows: Thomist dualism, claim that monism is more conducive to biblically Augustinian dualism, emergentism, material con- obedient life and ministry. stitutionism, and physicalism. But these broad allegations are largely mis- Thomist dualism fits more closely with bibli- directed or false. Although some dualists have cal holism and is more than adequate on all the advocated reductive views of the Christian life, other issues. But some philosophers wonder if its most have attempted to practice dualistic holism. concept of the soul is coherent. Although Augus- Most missionaries have fed the hungry, tended the tinian substance dualism is more dualistic than sick, and educated people for a better life in their holistic, it can account for the unity of human cultures as they preached the gospel of salvation. nature and ground a comprehensive view of the Most Christians have contributed to the common Christian life. But some philosophers question the good as well as cultivating personal holiness and logic of two different substances. On its surface, piety. In the end, the entire issue of anthropology emergentism is adequately dualistic and holistic, and orthopraxis is probably irrelevant because but its underlying materialism seems inconsistent until recently virtually all Christians—whether with Scripture’s physical-spiritual duality and holistic or otherworldly, zealous or slothful— raises the metaphysical question whether soul and were dualists. Failures of orthopraxis are due mind can emerge from mere matter. Material con- mostly to factors such as sloth and greed, rather stitutionism and non-reductive physicalism dis- than body-soul dualism or monism. tinguish person/soul/mind from body. But their Furthermore, simply endorsing monism materialist ontology seems to undercut the actual is inadequate. Denying a separable soul does distinctness of the soul and its functional tran- emphasize that humans are bodily beings made scendence the body, as well as conflicting with for life in the world. But if the replacement for the original physical-spiritual duality of Scripture. dualism is physicalism or materialism, then we Constitutionism can account for the possibility of may have an imbalance toward physical-bodily personal existence between death and resurrec- life and determinism, as stated above. Christian tion, but physicalism cannot. advocates of physicalism reject reductionism, and Exciting work on the Christian view of body I accept their claim even if it is undercut by their and soul remains to be done. It seems possible to ontology. But materialism must work harder than revise or construct theories that reflect biblical

46 perspective even more fully than those consid- 1997), argues that the soul could not have been gener- ered above. However, Christian scholars need not ated by evolution. wander In Search of the Soul because it has not been 5Moreland and Rae, Body and Soul (see note 1 above); lost. Unless compelling new interpretations of Eleonore Stump, “Non-Cartesian Substance Dualism Scripture are forthcoming, dualistic holism should and Materialism without Reductionism,” Faith and remain the standard for Christian theories of the Philosophy 12, no. 4 (October 1995): 505-31; Brian human constitution. Leftow, “Souls Dipped in Dust,” in Soul, Body, and Survival (ed. K. Corcoran; Ithaca, NY: Cornell Uni- Endnotes versity, 2001), 120-38. 1In Search of the Soul: Four Views of the Mind-Body 6William Hasker, The Emergent Self (Ithaca, NY: Problem (ed. Joel B. Green and Stuart L. Palmer; Cornell University, 1999) defends an intermediate Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005). Green’s intro- state as a supernatural act of God. Philip Clayton, duction provides an overview of many reasons for Mind and Emergence: From Quantum to Consciousness the debate and the issues involved. Steward Goetz (Oxford: Oxford University, 2004) does not address presents substance dualism, William Hasker defends the issue explicitly but would find disembodied exis- emergentism, Nancey Murphy argues for non-reduc- tence difficult to postulate. tive physicalism, and Kevin Corcoran promotes mate- 7Warren Brown, Nancey Murphy, and H. Newton rial constitutionism. I explain each theory below. A Malony, eds., Whatever Happened to the Soul? Scien- significant omission from the book is Thomist dual- tific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature (Min- ism, also explained below. J. P. Moreland and Scott neapolis: Fortress, 1998); Nancey Murphy, Bodies B. Rae’s Body and Soul: Human Nature and the Crisis and Souls, or Spirited Bodies? (Cambridge: Cambridge in Ethics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000) is an University, 2006). excellent exposition of this model. 8Lynne Rudder Baker, Persons and Bodies: A Constitu- 2I defend this position in Body, Soul and Life Everlast- tion View (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2000); ing: Biblical Anthropology and the Monism-Dualism Kevin Corcoran, Rethinking Human Nature: A Chris- Debate (Eerdmans 1989; Eerdmans and Apollos tian Materialist Alternative to the Soul (Grand Rapids: 2000). The first edition argues for holistic dualism; Baker, 2006). the introduction to the second edition recommends 9Joel Green (“Body, Soul, Mind and Brain: Critical dualistic holism to recognize that body-soul unity is Issues,” introduction to In Search of the Soul) surveys natural and primary whereas separation is accidental developments in biblical scholarship. and temporary. 10J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig explain but do 3See, for example, Catechism of the Catholic Church not advocate complementarism in “Philosophy and (1994), exposition of Articles 11 and 12 of the Apos- the Integration of Science and Theology” in Philo- tles’ Creed; Rt. Rev. M. Aghiorgoussis, Bishop of sophical Foundations of a Christian Worldview (Down- Pittsburgh, The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox ers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003), chapter 17. See also Church, “The Creation of Man” and “Orthodox “Religion and Science: Compatible or Incompatible?” Eschatology” (http//www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/ in Reason and Religious Belief (ed. M. Peterson, W. articles/article8038.asp); The Heidelberg Catechism, Hasker, B. Reichenbach, and D. Basinger; Oxford: Question/Answer 1 and 57 on unity in life, separa- Oxford University, 1998, 2003), chapeter 11. John tion at death, and reunion at resurrection. Polkinghorne advocates complementarism in Theol- 4Alvin Plantinga, “Darwin, Mind, and Meaning,” ogy and Science (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998). Books and Culture, May/June 1996, defends dualism 11Two significant reiterations of the traditional position against materialism. Richard Swinburne, The Evolu- on revelation and reason are John Paul II’s encycli- tion of the Soul (rev. ed.; Oxford: Oxford University, cal, “Fides et Ratio” (1998); and Alvin Plantinga,

47 Warranted Christian Belief (Oxford: Oxford Univer- or spiritual entity without the physical component. sity, 2000). It is also evident in the title of Moreland 17Matt 22:37, Mark 12:30, and Luke 10:27 from Duet and Craig’s Philosophical Foundations for a Christian 6:5; 1 Thess 5:23. Worldview. Francis Schaeffer and Charles Colson are 18They are most often called rephaim, whose meaning popular evangelical leaders who have promoted this is uncertain, but nephesh (soul) refers to those in perspective. Sheol in Gen 35:18; Ps 16:10; 30:3; 49:15; 86:3; and 12Cooper, Body, Soul and Life Everlasting (chapters 139:8. Philip Johnston, Shades of Sheol: Death and 2-7), surveys the Old Testament, intertestamental, the Afterlife in the Old Testament (Downers Grove: and New Testament basis for dualistic holism that is InterVarsity, 2002) is very informative but argues summarized in the following paragraphs. that Sheol was for unbelievers, not faithful Israelites. 13Most traditional Christian thinkers adapted ver- 19Isa 26:14-19; Dan 12:2. Ezekiel 37 might mean sions of Plato’s philosophy to articulate and defend national restoration. Job 19:26 might mean regained the biblical worldview. There is validity to modern health. Christian criticisms that some aspects of Platonism, 20E. P. Sanders, “Life after Death,” in Judaism: Practice such as the essential immortality of the soul, do not and Belief, 63 BCE-66BC (London: SCM, 1992), reflect Scripture and should be rejected. But we must 298-303; Richard Bauckham, “Life, Death, and the be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath Afterlife in Second Temple Judaism,” in Life in the water. We should not reject biblical supernaturalism Face of Death: The Resurrection Message of the New even if we reject Platonic philosophy. Testament (ed. R. Longnecker; Grand Rapids: Eerd- 14Ezekiel 37 depicts a similar process for resurrection: mans, 1998), 80-95. God forms a physical body and then adds ruach or 21A prominent recent example is Alan F. Segal, Life after spirit to make it live. Spirit does not necessarily mean Death: A History of the Afterlife in the Religions of the a substantial soul; more likely it means the power of West (New York: Doubleday, 2004); also Joel Green, life and personal-mental-spiritual abilities. The same “Body and Soul, Mind and Brain: Critical Issues,” is true of Ecc 12:7, which speaks of spirit depart- In Search of the Soul. Caroline Bynum’s illuminating ing at death. It is helpful to know that animism was study, The Resurrection of the Body in Western Chris- common in the ancient near east: a generic spiritual tianity, 200-1336 (Columbia: Columbia University, (divine?) life-force animates all living things. The Old 1995), does not commit this fallacy but recognizes Testament adopts but demythologizes this idea: crea- both intermediate state and resurrection. turely ruach is not divine, but human ruach uniquely 22However, many higher critics doubt that Acts gives images God. an accurate picture of Paul’s beliefs. 15Hans Walter Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testa- 23See, for example, Joel Green, “Body and Soul, Mind ment (trans. M. Kohl; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1974) and Brain,” In Search of the Soul, esp. 18-21. remains the best, most comprehensive study. 24N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Min- 16A modified version of substance dualism is consistent neapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), summaries on 372, with the OT view: The formed body is a distinct but 424, and 448; quote from 477. Wright discusses all incomplete, non-living, physical entity that is inca- of the points I raise about the Old Testament, Second pable of continuous existence without spirit; spirit is Temple Judaism, and the New Testament. non-material power that becomes a subsistent entity 25Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life when infused into a formed body to become a living (trans. M. Waldstein; ed. A. Nichols; Washington, soul. Thus neither spirit nor body is a complete sub- DC: Catholic University of America, 1988). stance (entity) on its own, but they remain distinct 26Recently Jaime Clark-Soles, Death and Afterlife in components when conjoined. At death God super- the New Testament (London: T & T Clark, 2006) naturally sustains the soul in existence as a “ghost” emphasizes the diversity among NT authors on many

48 particular issues and denies that there is a single brain events.… It follows, then, that no amount of coherent NT eschatology. But she acknowledges the evidence from neuroscience can prove a physicalist body-soul distinction and intermediate state-future view of the mental.” resurrection in some NT books and does not produce 30Sir John Eccles, a dualist neuroscientist, won a Nobel any arguments that invalidate the conclusions of the Prize in the 1970’s. His position is not out of date. See canonical approach taken by Ratzinger and Wright. I Mario Beauregard and Denys O’Leary, The Spiritual have not yet seen Joel Green’s Body, Soul, and Human Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible (Grand Rap- Soul (New York: HarperCollins, 2007), which exten- ids: Baker, 2008). But unless he goes far beyond what sively criticizes the use of neuroscience to justify he has already published, he is not close to providing physicalist monism. justification for an alternative to the traditional posi- 31Many Reformed theologians are compatibilists tion. See John W. Cooper, “The Bible and Dualism because they wish to affirm both divine sovereignty Once Again: A Reply to Joel B. Green and Nancey and human responsibility. My own position is Murphy,” Philosophia Christi 9, no. 2 (2007): 459-69. Reformed, but I affirm limited free will, as follows. 27I am a traducian (the soul comes from the parents) God eternally knows and ordains everything in this rather than a creationist with respect to the origin of world, which he has freely chosen to create. Thus individual souls. Sperm and egg are spiritual as well everything surely and inevitably occurs according to as physical. Scripture teaches that creatures repro- his sovereign will, sustained by his constantly con- duce according to their kind, and humans are both curring providence. But inevitability is not necessarily body and soul. Scripture teaches that what God cre- determinism. God’s knowledge, will, and providence ates is good, but creationism implies that God cre- do not directly cause the events that take place in the ates new souls infected with original sin. Scripture world, except for the occasional miracles and other teaches that God rested from creating on the seventh special supernatural acts that he performs. Sustained day, but creationism teaches that God continues to by God, creatures act according to the natures he create souls, even when humans fornicate or fertilize has given them, which means that humans regularly eggs in laboratories. Historically, the arguments for exercise their natural God-imaging ability to choose creationism are more philosophical than biblical. freely. Their choices are completely known and per- 28The literature, including works by Christians, on missibly willed but are not deterministically caused these topics is vast. Instead of providing references by God or by creaturely factors. Thus I reject both for each topic and point, I recommend the books cited open theism and theological determinism. elsewhere in this article. In Search of the Soul includes In Reformed theology, election and predestina- essays by four philosophers that address these issues, tion to salvation mean that God eternally wills to each with responses by the other three. The debated regenerate our hearts only because of his sovereign points are clear. Moreland and Craig, Philosophical grace and not because of his foreknowledge of our Foundations for a Christian Worldview, and Reason and positive response to the gospel. Regeneration, which Religious Belief, ed. Peterson, Hasker, Reichenbach, enacts election, is a sovereign act of God that does and Basinger, include sections that introduce these directly and involuntarily change us. But regenera- topics. tion is not the paradigm for everything that happens 29See, for example, Nancey Murphy, “Nonreductive in the world or for all human choices and actions. Physicalism: Philosophical Issues,” Whatever Hap- Furthermore, regeneration does not eliminate free- pened to the Soul (ed. Warren Brown, Nancey Murphy, dom of the will, which both fallen and regenerate and H. Newton Maloney; Minneapolis: Fortress, humans possess as image-bearers. Regenerated by 1998), 139: “It is still possible to claim that there is a God and empowered by the Holy Spirit, Christians substantial mind and that it is neatly correlated with can again freely choose how to love and obey him

49 and to resist our residual sinful nature. In my view, Reformed theology can and should avoid determin- ism and compatibilism. 32Moreland and Rae in Body and Soul argue that dual- ism and right to life ethics are strongly correlated. 33Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant churches gener- ally agree on the divine inspiration, infallibility, and authority of Scripture. We differ over the authority of church tradition in addition to Scripture. 34Stuart Palmer, “Christian Life and Theories of Human Nature,” In Search of the Soul, 189-215, evalu- ates substance dualism, emergentism, non-reductive physicalism, and material constitutionism regarding their implications for Christian life and ministry. He is concerned that affirming the distinctness of the soul will lead to overly individualistic, spiritualistic, and otherworldly practices. His project is legitimate, but his analysis is sometimes flawed by use/abuse fallacies: He confuses distinctness with indepen- dence of body and soul, and he regularly infers the “danger” of faulty practices from their mere theoreti- cal possibility.

50 New from Baker Academic

Christ-Centered Worship Heaven and Earth LETTING THE GOSPEL SHAPE OUR PRACTICE in the Gospel of Matthew Bryan Chapell Jonathan T. Pennington 9780801036408 9780801037283 320 pp. • $24.99c 416 pp. • $42.99p Available August 2009 Available July 2009 The church’s worship has always been “Pennington’s work on heaven and earth shaped by its understanding of the in Matthew enriches readers at several gospel. Here Bryan Chapell, author of levels. He challenges long-standing ex- the well-regarded text Christ-Centered egetical assumptions, showing that they Preaching, provides churches with a lack a credible foundation. He offers a Christ-centered understanding of wor- deft and insightful interpretation of the ship to enable them to transcend the terms heaven and earth in Matthew and traditional/contemporary worship de- fruitfully explores the theological import bate and unite in ministry and mission of the terms. We stand in debt to Pen- priorities. Churches will learn how to nington for this signifi cant and creative shape their worship based on Christ’s study.”—Thomas R. Schreiner, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary ministry to and through them and will be challenged to let the gospel shape every element of their corporate worship. A Reader’s Guide to Calvin’s Institutes Are You the One Who Is to Come? Anthony N. S. Lane THE HISTORICAL JESUS AND THE MESSIANIC 9780801037313 QUESTION 176 pp. • $14.99p Michael F. Bird “Lane is one of the world’s most well- 9780801036385 respected Calvin scholars. In this book, 240 pp. • $22.99p he draws on his impressive knowledge of the Reformer to provide contemporary Available August 2009 readers with a careful guide to the struc- “Bird has written one of the clearest and ture, argument, and content of the 1559 most compelling treatments of Jesus edition of the Institutes. . . . This work and the messianic question that I have clearly supersedes previous reading read. Ancient literature and modern guides and is likely to become the stan- literature are alike handled with great dard overview.”—Carl R. Trueman, expertise and excellent judgment. Westminster Theological Seminary, PA . . . I recommend this book highly.” —Craig A. Evans, Acadia Divinity What Does the Lord College Require? A GUIDE FOR PREACHING AND TEACHING The Meaning of Sex BIBLICAL ETHICS CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND THE MORAL LIFE Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Dennis P. Hollinger 9780801036361 9780801035715 256 pp. • $19.99p 272 pp. • $19.99p “In today’s churches, many ethical “Hollinger offers here a careful, well- pronouncements are made without fi rm researched, up-to-date, and well-written biblical grounding, and many biblical evangelical account of sexual ethics sermons are preached without concrete against the backdrop of the sexual application to the issues of the day. This chaos and confusion of our time. This book will help preachers and teachers text may become the standard account speak to the ethical challenges facing of evangelical sexual ethics. Highly the church from an informed perspec- recommended.”—David Gushee, tive rooted in sound biblical theology Mercer University and solid scholarship. I heartily urecommend it.”—John Jefferson Davis, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary Available at your local bookstore, www.bakeracademic.com, or by calling 1-800-877-2665 Subscribe to Baker Academic’s electronic newsletter (E-Notes) at www.bakeracademic.com

51 Joan or John? An Ethical Dilemma Russell D. Moore

ditor’s Note: As explained below, the following Every year at the conclusion of my Survey Eis a five-part response by Dr. Moore to an ethical of Christian Ethics class at Southern Seminary, question posed to his Southern Seminary ethics class. I give my students a final ethical situation to We have included it in this issue of SBJT as a won- answer for their final examination. They are derful example of theology in practice, especially in graded not on their conclusion, but on how they relation to the doctrine of human beings. Systematic arrived there. They answer, and then we discuss theology is not merely the affirmation of particular it communally as a class. The question below is truths that Scripture teaches, even this year’s dilemma. Also included is my five-part Russell D. Moore is Dean of though it is that. It is also the appli- response to the question originally published at the School of Theology and Senior Vice President for Academic cation of those truths to all of life www.russellmoore.com in May 2009. Administration at The Southern with the goal of helping the church Baptist Theological Seminary, live out the Gospel in our daily lives The Question where he also serves as Professor of to the glory of God. One can learn This question takes place sometime in the Christian Theology and Ethics. a lot about a person’s theology when future, in your ministry. Joan is a fifty-year-old Dr. Moore is a Preaching Pastor one sees how it is applied to real life woman who has been visiting your church for a at the Fegenbush campus of situations and what is given below is little over a year. She sits on the third row from the Highview Baptist Church in a fine example of seeking to take the back, and usually exits during the closing hymn, Louisville, Kentucky, where he ministers weekly. He is a senior whole counsel of God and to apply often with tears in her eyes. Joan approaches you editor of Touchstone: A Journal of it to real ethical issues that we face. after the service on Sunday to tell you that she Mere Christianity and is the author Regardless of whether you would wants to follow Jesus as her Lord. of Adopted for Life: The Priority of Adoption for Christian Families and have answered the question precisely You ask Joan a series of diagnostic questions Churches (Crossway, 2009). in the way Dr. Moore answers it, may about her faith, and it is clear she understands the this article spur us on to work hard at gospel. She still seems distressed though. When bringing all of our thought and lives captive to Christ you ask if she’s repented of her sin, she starts to cry and to his Word. and grit her teeth.

52 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 52-56. “I don’t know,” she says. “I don’t know how…. terms of a Christian ethic. Use Scripture, Chris- I don’t know where to start…. Can I meet with tian theology, and wisdom to demonstrate not just you privately?” your final decisions, but how you arrived at them. You, Joan, and a godly Titus 2-type women’s You may use any resource that would be available ministry leader in your church meet in your office to you in a real life pastoral situation. This includes right away, and Joan tells you her story. Holy Scripture, books, articles, and the seeking of She wasn’t born Joan. She was born John. From outside counsel from others. Furthermore, show early on in John’s life, though, he felt as though he me how you would lead the rest of your congrega- was “a woman trapped in a man’s body.” Joan says, tion to think through and act in this situation with “I don’t mean to repeat that old shopworn cliché, the mind of Christ. but it really is what I felt like.” Joan tells you that when she was twenty she Did Jesus Die for Joan? began the process of “transitioning” from life as a Put a bit more succinctly, Joan was born John, man to life as a woman. She underwent extensive but has lived as Joan for thirty years. She has a hormone therapy, followed by extensive plastic daughter. She now is convicted of sin and wants surgery—including so-called “gender reassign- to follow Christ. She’ll do whatever Jesus would ment surgery.” She has lived for the past thirty have her to do, but she needs some direction from years—physically and socially—as a woman. you, her pastor. “I want to do whatever it takes to follow Jesus,” Now, let me begin by saying that I’m using the Joan tells you. “I want to repent…. I just, I don’t name “Joan” and the female pronouns here simply know how to do it. as a literary device, to postpone the debate a bit “I am surgically now a woman. I’ve taken hor- as to whether this person is really male or female. mones that give me the appearance and physical In class, I let my students bat around and debate makeup of a woman,” she says. “Even if I were to one another about how this situation should best put on a suit and tie right now, I’d just look like a be handled, and then I weighed in. Here’s what I woman with a suit and tie. Not to mention the fact think is at stake in this situation, and how a Chris- that, well, I am physically … a woman. tian ought to look at it. “To complicate matters further,” Joan says The first issue is the gospel. Christ Jesus came through tears, “I adopted my daughter, Clarissa, to save sinners. The Lord Jesus offered up his life when she was eight months old, and she’s ten years as a sacrifice for this person (this isn’t an extent of old now. She doesn’t know about my past life as … the atonement debate, so save that one for later), as a man. She just knows me as her Mom. and his bloody cross and empty tomb are enough “I know the sex change surgery was wrong. to reconcile any sinner, including this one, to God. I know that my life is twisted. I’m willing to do The pastor should abandon any sense of revulsion whatever Jesus would have me to do to make it because Joan’s situation is “weird” or “perverted.” right,” she says. “But what would Jesus have me All sin is weird and perverted. The fact that any to do? of it (especially our own) seems “normal” to us is Joan asks you, “Am I too messed up to repent part of what we need the gospel for. and be saved? If not, what does it mean for me to The second issue is repentance. Repentance repent and live my life as a follower of Jesus? What is necessary for salvation, as is articulated in the is right for me to do?” gospel message throughout the Scripture (Mark Show me, step-by-step, what you would say 1:15; Acts 3:19; 17:30). I think the account of our to Joan. Show me what you would tell her to do, Lord’s interaction with the rich young ruler (Luke short-term and long-term, and show me why in 18:18-29) is in order here, as well as his confronta-

53 tion by the Syro-Phoenocian woman (Mark 7:24- what the destination is to which he’s headed. And 30). In both cases, Jesus probed in order to bring that’s as a man. forth, in the first case, a visible lack of repentance, Furthermore, the pastor cannot deceive his or, in the second, a visible manifestation of faith. congregation. He doesn’t need to elaborate on The message Joan has heard is the same message every aspect of this person’s past (any more than every Christian has heard, “Come, follow me.” he would with any other repentant sinner). But The pastor wishes to know, as he would with any the church baptizes, not an individual, and the sinner, whether she’s counted the cost of doing so. church must know the person being baptized. To At the same time, the pastor ought to know baptize one created a man as “my sister in Christ” there is no simple solution here. Whatever Joan (whatever the baptismal formula used) isn’t doing does will leave havoc in its wake. Her daughter justice to a God who speaks the truth. will either grow up with a “mother” who has But that’s only the start of the ethical and pas- deceived her all life long about the most basic toral dilemmas erupting here. aspect of who she is, and what their relationship is, or she will go through the trauma of discovering Should the Surgery Be her Mom is actually her Dad. Reversed? My counsel would be, after discerning that To respond to the question as to whether Joan is truly trusting in Christ (and it certainly “Joan” should go reverse her so-called “gender appears that she is), to make sure she understands reassignment” surgery, my answer is no. First of that part of the sin she’s walking away from is a all, no surgery can reassign gender. The surgery root-level rebellion against the Creator. God’s mangled John, and sought to create an illusion of creation is good, and he does not create generic a biological reality that isn’t there. There is no way persons but “male and female,” in his own image that this surgery can be “reversed,” only another (Gen 1:27). In seeking to “become” a woman, cosmetic illusion created on top of the old one. John has established himself as a god, determin- Additional surgery would only compound the ing the very structure of his createdness. Part of problem. He should see himself as the equivalent the freedom that comes in Christ is his recogni- of a biblical eunuch, someone wounded physically tion that he is a creature, not a god, not a machine, by his past sin, but awaiting wholeness in the res- not a freak. urrection from the dead. This means that the pastor should, in his role He should, though, stop taking the female hor- as an undershepherd of Christ, start speaking mones, allowing his body to revert to its (rela- to Joan as “John,” and identifying him as “him.” tively) natural state. This will seem strange and discordant to Joan. Of The issue for John is honesty, it seems to me. course it will. What is going on in this person’s This means that he should present himself as what life, however, is what goes on in every Christian’s he is, a man created by God as such. This means he life. We’ve put on a “new man,” crucifying the old should identify himself as a man, and should start way (Eph 4:21-24). We are a “new creation” with dressing in male clothing. This is going to be very, the past done away with (2 Cor 5:17). We have a very difficult for him, and he will need his pastors “new name” (Rev 2:17) that seems strange and and congregation to bear with him through all mystifying, with an extended family we have to the stumbles and backsteps that will come along learn to love and walk with. with this. Joan is not going to “feel” like John, and that’s The most difficult aspect of this new honesty, okay. But the pastor must start ministering to him however, is not what restroom John uses or the by helping him identify what peace looks like, name on his driver’s license. It is how he presents

54 himself to a young daughter who has only known slow, painful, but, in the end, worth it for the sake him as “Mom.” of the gospel.

What About the Daughter? How Should the The issue of how to deal with Clarissa is, admit- Church Respond? tedly, the most difficult part of this puzzle. A So, if John follows through at this point, what’s friend said including the daughter in the narrative the expectation of the church, and the responsibil- was the “evil genius” part of the whole thing. For ity of the congregation, for change in the life of a my students at Southern Seminary, the daughter man who once thought himself a woman? was the most heart-wrenching part of the whole In saying that I don’t think Joan can continue question, and those who had difficulty typically to live as a “woman,” I am not saying that regen- had difficulty at this point. I’m glad that such is eration will mean that he suddenly “feels” like a the case. The compassion for this daughter, hav- man. John is telling you the truth when he says ing her entire spectrum of reality turned over, is a that he has felt all of his growing-up life like a mark of a Christian, and certainly a necessary trait woman trapped in a man’s body. He will probably for a sheep-herder of God’s flock. not suddenly turn into a lumberjack. He will prob- First, let me say that I’m aware that “Joan” ably grapple with this issue for the rest of his life. becoming “John” will wreak havoc on her daugh- I was saved from, among many other things, ter’s life and psyche. I think such havoc will be covetousness. Coveting seems natural to me. Not unleashed either way, and that honesty at this coveting is unnatural to me. There’s not a day that point is less destructive than continuing the illu- goes by in which coveting isn’t the easier, more sion. The question, at this point, is not whether natural thing for me. But I fight against covet- the daughter will have a normal life or a traumatic ousness because God is conforming me into the one. The question is whether the people of Christ image of Christ (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18). He does will be with her through the trauma. I would this through suffering, through discipline, and counsel Joan to tell her daughter at an appropri- through the warlike struggle of the Spirit against ate (but not unduly delayed) time. the flesh, the new creation against the satanic This will be difficult, and John will need his powers (Rom 5:3-5; Heb 12:5-11; 2 Cor 2:11). pastor there, along with many godly women from Your testimony is the same, if you’re in Christ, the congregation who are willing to spend hours with any number of sinful patterns and weak with this young girl. John should tell her that years points in your life. The same will be true for John. before she was born, he was confused, and felt Don’t give up on him if he has setbacks, and don’t like he was a girl instead of a boy, and that he had give up on him if he still “feels” like a woman for spent the last thirty years trying to be a girl. He the rest of his life. Keep pointing him to the gos- should tell his daughter, though, that something pel, and to the faith that hears and acts. had changed, he was born again in Christ Jesus, John’s presence in your congregation will and that means that he gets a new start. He should probably mean that some Pharisaism will emerge. tell her that he loves her just the same, and that Some people will find John “freakish.” Some of he’ll always be here, but he wants her to know that the men will be revolted by the whole idea, and Jesus is putting his life back together, as a man. will think they are asserting their masculinity This will be confusing and disruptive, but, by mocking or marginalizing him (even if just in with the wise counsel of his congregation and its subtle, eye-rolling sorts of ways). The responsibil- pastors, John can visibly demonstrate before his ity of the pastor is to lead his people away from daughter what life in Christ actually looks like: this destructiveness. John’s life in the congrega-

55 tion can be a visible signal of the mercies of God. about how American culture is slouching toward This means the church should, immediately upon Gomorrah. We should hope, if there are transgen- receiving John as a repentant sinner, announce dered persons in the cities and towns and villages that his sin (not in part but the whole!) is nailed to around us, that we will see them in our church the cross of Christ, buried with Jesus, and obliter- pews. And we should pray, feverishly, that they ated by his resurrection power. This means any will hear the gospel we’re preaching as good news ongoing gossip or judgment of John’s sin or John’s for them. past is itself violence against the gospel, as well This doesn’t mean that we create a new “trans- as divisiveness in the congregation, and will be gendered” Sunday school class. That’s not good disciplined as such. news at all; anymore than a “coveters” Sunday The shepherds must lead your people to receive school class would be good for me! A gospel John, as they were received by Christ (Rom 15:5- church, though, is a church that says whatever 7). The pastors and leaders of the church can help you’re running from or running to, Jesus offers people to see how they can help bear their broth- you life. As long as you’re alive, it is not too late for er’s burdens (Gal 6:2). you to find new life in Christ. Jesus loves sinners, This means, first of all, that women in the con- and we do too. gregation will be needed to help show his daugh- You see, the scenario about “Joan” isn’t really ter what it means to be a godly woman. Some of all that hypothetical. Chances are in your town them will want to take her into their homes and right now, there are people in that situation. Why lives, being mothers and grandmothers in Christ don’t they show up in our churches? Is it because for her (Titus 2:3-5). This also means that the they doubt if our gospel is really addressed to men in the congregation should make a concerted them? Is it because we doubt it too? effort to disciple John, receiving him into their cir- If Joan comes to your church this Sunday and cle of friendship, and showing him what it means hears the gospel, if “she” decides to throw away to follow Christ, and what it means to be a man. everything “she” knows and follow Christ, will For some of them, it will be awkward. So what? It your church be there to love him, and to show seems awkward for the Lord Jesus to spend time him how to stop pretending and to fight his way with drunkards, prostitutes, and Gentiles like us, toward what he was created to be? Maybe it would but he did it, and does it even now. take a Joan at the altar call to make us question whether we really believe what we say and what Why Does it Matter? we sing. Is there really power, wonder-working Since I posted the question about John/Joan, power, in the blood of the Lamb? Is our gospel I’ve had two kinds of responses. Some Christians really good news for prodigal sons, even for sons have said things along the lines of, “I’m glad I’m so lost they once thought they were daughters? not in your ethics class! That question is hard!” Others though have said, “You know, that very situation happened in my church.” We’re going to have more and more so-called “transgendered” persons in American society, as the culture around us changes. A woman in my congregation told me the other day she was asked when giving blood, “What gender were you at birth?” Now, we could always bemoan this, and talk

56 57 A Call to a Wellness Lifestyle: Some Practical Suggestions William R. Cutrer and Robert M. Cutrer

eloved, I pray that in all respects you ministry in community, and powerful devotion in Bmay prosper and be in good health,just as solitude. Each of these represents a key element your soul prospers (3 John 2, NASB). to our anthropology; wellness of mind, body, and soul. As Paul told the Corinthians, humans need But I buffet (discipline) my body and make both physical and spiritual discipline. To illus- it my slave, so that after Ihave preached trate his points he incorporated many athletic to others, I myself will not be disqualified metaphors, including those of runners and box- (1 Cor 9:27). ers. Clearly when he used the word “buffet” (1 Cor 9:27, quoted above), he meant the word we These verses reveal the real- William R. Cutrer is the pronounce with stress on the first syllable. Yet C. Edwin Gheens Professor of ity that our physical health has most who read this word now envision a long table Christian Ministry and Director spiritual significance in that God filled with delectable foods at an “all you can eat of the Gheens Center for Marriage has entrusted us with the gift of buffet” where we harm our bodies for lack of self and Family. humanity. Indeed, humans are control. That lack of self control represents the He received his M.D. from the made in God’s image, yet embod- absence of one of the key elements of a healthy University of Kentucky College of ied. And when Christ came to iden- lifestyle—responsibility. Each of us is responsible Medicine and his M.A. from Dallas tify perfectly with our humanity, for the choices we make, whether it is the food we Theological Seminary. Dr. Cutrer has published many books in the He took on not just human form, choose to nourish our bodies, the activities we areas of medicine and bioethics, and but a human body—complete with pursue to keep ourselves fit, or the decisions we is the author of The Church Leader’s the physical needs of nutrition, make to follow Christ moment by moment. To cre- Handbook: A Guide to Counseling hydration, rest, and recovery. The Families and Individuals in Crisis ate a wellness lifestyle is to accept responsibility (Kregel, 2009). very lifestyle of Christ may best for the choices we make and to continue to grow exemplify a “wellness” lifestyle, and learn how to better care for this magnificent, evidenced as it was by regular exercise (walking), Christ-like, human body we have been given. nutrition (broiled fish, whole grain breads), active

58 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 58-66. What is Wellness? he said, “The key to living is to die young—at an Wellness is a proactive choice to create a life- old age.” While our physical capabilities gradu- style that enables an individual to live fully— ally diminish, our spirits can remain vibrant as integrating spirit, mind, and body—for a life of we grow in intimacy with our Lord each day. Yes, meaning and purpose. Consider how most people we age and fail, yet we can glorify God with and in their youth envision their lives at age forty or through our bodies until that day when we meet beyond. Few would answer, “I plan to be over- the Lord and later receive resurrection bodies, weight, under-fit, addicted to caffeine, stuck in equipped anew for eternity. As we pursue well- a job that I hate, in a career going nowhere, and ness, we can either live in obedience, worship, and married to a couch potato.” Yet while this is not gratitude, or we can be self-focused, making even a vision to which anyone aspires, a glance at the good health an idol. Our relationship with God American public indicates many have arrived at should supersede attention to our physical wellbe- this very state. ing. The apostle Peter listed many virtues of the The proactive nature of wellness requires Christian life: faith, moral excellence, knowledge, action be taken before such a dismal outcome. self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly The individual bears responsibility for making kindness, and love. And he concluded with, “For informed, intelligent decisions about health and if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they well-being. The impetus for choosing a wellness render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the lifestyle should be to live a life of purpose and true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Peter meaning, obedient to the teaching of Scripture, 1:5 –8). Thus, even if aging or physical limitations fulfilling God’s calling. Contrary to the popular greatly hamper our abilities, we can still be useful bumper sticker, the one who dies with the most and fruitful as we grow in the Lord’s grace. toys does not win. “Winning” comes from a life well lived, a life of service to the Lord and others, Fitness a life of sharing and caring for the world and those On the other hand discipline yourself for the around us. We enter this life crying, while those purpose of godliness; for bodily discipline is around us are smiling. Perhaps when we leave this only of little profit, but godliness is profitable for earth, we do so with the roles reverse—those we all things, since it holds promise for the present leave behind shed tears of joy for a life well lived life and also for the life to come Robert M. Cutrer is the Director while we smile when we hear the Lord say, “Well (1 Tim 4:7b-8). of Wellness, Physical Education done good and faithful servant, enter into the joy and Human Development at the of my kingdom” (Matt 25:21). A holistic approach to body McCallie School in Chattanooga, Wellness encompasses all that we are and “wellness” includes fitness and Tennessee. expands beyond the absence of illness into every nutrition, as well as stress aware- He received his Doctor of Arts from sphere of our existence. This article will focus on ness and management. Begin with Middle Tennessee State University, a narrow segment of our complex humanity—our an honest evaluation of where you and is in his thirty-fourth year physicality. Though made in the very image of currently stand. Prayerfully con- of teaching healthy lifestyles, presently to middle school and high God, we inhabit flesh. Unfortunately, humanity’s sider your physical conditioning, school boys. His teaching career fall into sin corrupted every cell, every strand of which includes weight for height has included children from Pre-K DNA from the first couple down through the suc- (BMI),1 cardiovascular condition, through graduate school, adults, ceeding generations. Thus, illness, disease, dete- strength, flexibility, and balance. seniors, special populations, and coaching a variety of sports. rioration and ultimately death await all of Adam Some abilities reflect genetics, oth- and Eve’s descendants until the return of Christ. ers age, nutrition, and activity schedule. With the The late comedian Bob Hope spoke wisely when guidance of your physician, set personal goals.

59 Reasonable target weight, fitness level, and appro- literally and figuratively. A fitness routine can priate exercise regimens are available in books, include any number of available activities that magazines, online, and with the assistance of a are highly beneficial to body, mind, and spirit. personal trainer available at many fine health and The best plan incorporates a variety of activi- fitness centers. ties—not only to avoid boredom but to enable A simple formula for fitness regardless of your cross-training, that is, using multiple activities current activity level would be “4 x 30 x Comfort- to avoid overuse injuries and reach fitness goals. able x Large.” The 4 represents 4 days per week, Such activity can include walking, jogging, biking, the minimum number of days of activity to begin swimming—any activity that engages the large achieving fitness. This allows more days of activity muscle groups over a period of time. Variety can be than inactivity, helps develop the habit of fitness, very helpful as any exercise targets specific muscle and still allows for days of rest and the always groups and not others, so just jogging, for example, unplanned occurrences that make life so unpre- can lead to overuse injuries if not coupled with dictable and enjoyable. Are more than 4 days per flexibility and balance work. Weight-independent week better? Absolutely! Going from no days of exercise (biking, swimming) has an advantage of activity to 4 days of activity is the big challenge, being less stressful to joints and enjoyable even though. Adding additional days beyond the first 4 during pregnancy. Having a fitness partner can should be a joyful experience clearly demonstrat- provide essential encouragement on those days ing that fitness is becoming a part of a lifestyle and when you’d rather do anything but exercise. not just something that has to be done. Resistance exercise, using free weights, weight The “30” represents thirty minutes at a time. machines, elastic bands or other devices develop Longer is better, but building up to longer periods muscular strength and bulk depending on how the should be done slowly and gradually. A thirty- exercise is conducted. Free weights help develop minute routine gives the heart time to work at ele- balance when used with proper technique, but vated workloads, strengthening cardiac muscle. having a partner to spot your lifts can help you That thirty-minute timeframe allows the metabo- avoid injury when moving large weights. The lism to increase, thereby burning more calories. machines are safer than free weights in this regard. This sustained elevated heart rate and metabolic As with cardiovascular work, regular resistance rate also combine to continue the higher rate of exercise is important, but rest and muscle recov- caloric burn long after the actual activity is com- ery are important too. In general do not exercise pleted, a post-exercise benefit. the same muscle group two days in a row. Allow “Comfortable” refers to a comfortable pace, the at least a 24-hour rest, recovery, and rebuild time. intensity of the activity. The talk test is the sim- Also, as with cardiovascular exercise, a resistance plest way to measure this. You should be working exercise routine can quickly bore or discourage, harder than you are at rest, but not so hard that so select activities you enjoy and vary them.Flex- you cannot talk to someone next to you. You may ibility work is important in protecting the joints, or may not be able to engage in deep, philosophi- thereby allowing maximal range of motion and cal discussions, but you should always be able to superior performance in athletic endeavors and communicate with those nearby. physical exertion. Whether you enjoy stretching “Large” refers to involving large muscles in any activities alone or with other people, you can find fitness program. Large muscles include legs, hips, a variety of such exercises to incorporate into your core muscles of the abdomen, and lower back. cardiovascular and/or resistance work. In fact While including upper-body muscle groups would beginning serious weight work without a warm up be ideal, getting the body moving is the first step, with stretching, flexibility movements, and bal-

60 ance moves could easily lead to injury. As for bal- Nutritional Awareness ance, most of the stretching exercises will allow Whether then you eat or drink or whatever some balance development. Again, making flex- you do, do all to the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31, ibility work a priority can prevent injury, enhance NASB). performance, and make your workout time more enjoyable. As we age, the joints tend to stiffen, An essential facet of overall wellness relates range of motion becomes more limited, and the to the intake of calories: what we eat and drink. propensity to lose balance and fall increases. So America as a nation has been richly blessed, gentle stretching, flexibility/balance poses can yet the statistics covering recent decades show improve the quality of life. Choose activities that a remarkable downward spiral in wellness mir- you will enjoy. No one stays with an exercise pro- roring a steep rise in obesity. Though the nor- gram if it is too hard, too boring, too stressful, or mal range for body weight is quite broad, one too “un-fun.” Here are some suggestions for mak- third of all Americans—72 million people—have ing your “bodily discipline” more pleasant so you broken through the limits into “overweight” can achieve that “little profit.” and even beyond that to the “obesity” category. This includes 16 percent of all U.S. children.2 • Find support. Many people find the friendship Looking beyond our borders, one billion people and camaraderie of their chosen activity itself to in the world are now overweight, 300 million be the most motivating factor in staying involved of whom are obese. And obesity brings with it with fitness. Having a partner or a group tends associated medical issues. Being obese “confers to support your commitment and provides you physical stress on multiple biologic processes someone to depend on—as well as someone who and is associated with an increased risk of devel- depends on you. oping cardiovascular disease, Type 2 Diabetes, • There are always opportunities to exercise hypertension, osteoarthritis, and certain forms of independently, and for some such times become cancer, not to mention sleep apnea, asthma, and another bonus of their fitness program—time fatty liver disease.” Remarkably “a reduction of alone to think, reflect, ponder, pray. only 5 to 10% of body weight improves lipid pro- • Take time to “smell the roses.” If training files, insulin sensitivity and endothelial function becomes solely training, just a matter of time (reducing clotting risk and inflammation).”3 Most and distance, miles and minutes, then the great of us understand the balance between energy gifts of our bodies and our world are being lost in expenditure and calories consumed, but perhaps the narrow pursuit of better fitness. Walks, runs, a simple review buttressed by the newest research bikes, and hikes provide opportunities both to in weight loss can be instructive. Our bodies are enjoy the wonders of the human body and also the temples of the Holy Spirit, and we should the wonders of the world around us. glorify God in our bodies. That includes choosing • Slower, gentler stretching and exercise pro- to eat wisely. We can estimate how many calo- grams provide excellent opportunities not only ries each person needs based on his or her height to stretch and strengthen the body but also allow and current weight. Using this information, we for quiet meditation and reflection, perhaps can also determine whether weight gain or loss time to consider the integration of spirit, mind, are needed and what the neutral nutrition needs and body. are. Basic truths include the fact that fat contains twice the calories that protein and carbohydrate The best advice from the marketing world is carry for the same basic weight of food. A calorie Nike’s slogan: Just do it! (more technically a Kilocalorie) represents the

61 energy available to be burned in a given amount of some of the newer electrical impedance devices food. For example, one gram of protein contains for measuring body fat are quite useful.) Most four calories, and one gram of fat contains nine foods now come with package labeling clearly calories. To burn up one pound of fat, a person providing the number of calories, carbohydrates, would need to expend about 3,500 calories! Or fat grams, and protein, but the information may put another way, each extra 3,500 calories con- be so detailed that it confuses. Can “low fat,” sumed generates one pound of fat if not burned by diet, fat-free items really be worse that the more exercise or the normal activities. Clearly, weight fat-filled items? Absolutely, if the fat grams have gained is acquired slowly, and wisdom requires for been replaced by more sugar. In such cases, if long term success at weight loss that it be burned you consume many such products, you may wind off gradually. Fad diets, crash diets, and diets that up gaining weight. Sugar is a simple carbohy- involve only one food group or type are generally drate that the body absorbs quickly. Sugar shoots bad for one’s health and contrary to an overall goal the blood glucose higher causing the release of of wellness. In addition the rebound weight gain insulin, which drives the blood sugar back down, after these dramatic programs often exceeds the perhaps lower than when you started, resulting starting weight. in lightheadedness and hunger. So, even snacks The simplest formula for weight management can be detrimental. A diet plan of three “square is, “Calories In = Calories Out.” “Calories In” rep- meals” daily will virtually guarantee failure. The resents your daily caloric intake, what you eat and 4- or 5-hour time span between the three big drink on any given day. “Calories Out” are the cal- meals triggers some bodily responses that actually ories you burn during exercise and normal daily cause it to slow the metabolism, and cling to the activities. If you burn off as much as you eat each “fatty stores” to protect against anticipated fam- day your weight will remain the same. If you wish ine. Thus wisdom means eating more frequent, to lose weight, rather than making drastic adjust- smaller meals that still total the proper number of ments to your diet or over-exercising, a healthier calories. Snacks between meals would be planned choice would be to slightly reduce caloric intake for, and they might include fruits, and definitely and slightly increase activity levels. This pattern include protein, as protein does not have the wild allows for responsible choices and changes to be impact on the blood sugar and insulin system. made slowly and gradually, making them easier Many programs are available for creating an to adopt and incorporate into your lifestyle. No appropriate nutritional program. Weight Watch- one gains fifty pounds overnight—they gain it ers® with its point system can be very helpful and one pound at a time! Weight loss follows the same far more “doable” than tracking calories. Monitor- pattern, although it comes off much slower than ing “fat grams” can be useful as well. Many calo- it goes on! A healthy diet includes a wide variety rie-restricted balance meals are available. Still, of foods that include a balance of protein, carbo- constant vigilance, awareness, and commitment hydrates, and some fats, all of which are prepared to wellness over time has been shown to bring in healthy ways. That is, bake it, broil it, roast it, the best results. A recent study of more than 800 but don’t fry it. Also, beware of rich sauces and dieters assigned different diet plans demonstrated heavily buttered dishes (butter is basically fat). By that no diet was superior. The determining factor wisely selecting food and preparing it with good was consistency and accountability with coun- health in mind, you can eat well, feel satisfied, and selor visits.4 still be moving toward your ideal body weight and percentage body fat. (Underwater weighing Eating Disorders is the best measure, but skin fold calipers and Most articles on nutrition focus on obesity

62 because of the sheer volume of statistics, but a Anorexics lie about their food intake, lie about discussion of wellness must also include mention the exercise, and often cover up the fainting spells of increasing numbers of those struggling with and irregular heart rhythms that characterize a eating disorders. For such people, the flood of metabolism that is totally out of balance. In addi- information about obesity and wellness can make tion, medically, when the menstrual cycle fails them feel unacceptable or worthless if their body because of significantly depressed estrogen levels, image does not match the “norm.” As mentioned, calcium is lost from the bone, just like in an aging more than half of adult Americans are overweight, woman. Key organs in the body shrink and lose with one-third exceeding 20 percent of their nor- functionality. Blood sugar and blood pressure mal, healthy weight. And such information can often fall below normal levels. motivate some to abuse their bodies in efforts to conform either to the norm or to what they per- Bulimia ceive as the norm. Eating disorders are potentially Bulimia is an eating disorder characterized by fatal problems affecting an enormous number of binge eating (rapid and massive consumption of our young people. Data collected by the American food at one sitting) followed by purging (induced Anorexia and Bulimia Association (AABA) sug- vomiting, laxative abuse, diuretics). Some esti- gests that 1 percent of all female adolescents suf- mate that as many as 5 percent of college women fer with anorexia, while 4 percent of college-aged are bulimic. Though they may not be severely women suffer from bulimia. underweight, the process of binging and purging leads to intense guilt and shame. As with anorexia, Anorexia those suffering from bulimia have a preoccupation Anorexia (also called anorexia nervosa) is char- with body weight and shape. The purging can acterized by a preoccupation with dieting as well trigger depression and mood swings, Rather than as thinness as a body image. While our society being in control, the person suffering from buli- exalts the super-slender model build, anorexics mia may often feel out of control. Forced vomiting go way beyond even this to excessive weight loss. can cause dental problems as well as throat and They experience a genuine fear of fat and gaining stomach issues. Heartburn, bloating, and swollen weight. When they look into a mirror, even when lymph glands can indicate bulimia. Once again, they are emaciated with almost zero body fat, they in young women, because the nutritional status still see their body shape as obese. The sufferer does is poor, the menstrual cycle disappears. Dehydra- not recognize the problem! tion can result, as well as permanent injury to the Twenty percent of anorexics die without treat- intestines, liver, and kidneys. Also, the imbal- ment! And even with treatment, the death rate ance in blood chemistry can lead to abnormal approaches 3 percent. With the best available and potentially fatal cardiac rhythms. Obviously, treatment, roughly 60 percent fully recover and eating disorders deserve prompt attention. another 20 percent experience some improve- ment.The lives of these individuals revolve around Fluid Intake food and weight concerns. Refusing to eat is all What you drink may affect the weight and about control. Early symptoms include depres- nutrition equation. Your body needs plenty of sion, loneliness, helplessness, and hopelessness. water, which perfectly satisfies thirst and bodily Telltale symptoms include hair loss, cold hands requirements and has zero calories. I would rec- and feet, fainting spells, and compulsive, excessive ommend you gradually shift to water as your pri- exercise. Such exercise can be hidden, often done mary beverage and squeezed fruit or vegetable in the middle of the night, taken to the extreme. juices when you need flavor. Common soft drinks

63 are loaded with sugar giving a calorie boost and dead are stress-free, and that would apply only to triggering the insulin reaction leading to more the believing dead. Stress is an inevitable, inescap- hunger. Sports drinks can be reasonable if used as able part of the human experience, and in proper an exercise recovery drink, but they may contain amounts, it is essential to living maximally. too much sugar and excessive salt. What about Stress is defined as the normal internal physi- the carbonated waters and diet drinks? Wisdom ological mechanism that adapts us to change. For would be to avoid these. The carbonation can example cold temperatures are an external stress. trigger the insulin response according to some The body responds to it in the ways designed new research, and the long-term effects of the within our humanity to preserve heat (constrict- artificial sweeteners are uncertain. Caffeine, so ing blood vessels) and ultimately preserving life popular to lace drinks with now, is indeed a stimu- (sacrificing non-essentials—fingers and toes) to lant. Caffeine will accelerate heart rate, increase shunt life saving blood to the essential organs blood pressure, and draw fluid from the body, (brain, heart, lungs). The body has a remarkable possibly causing dehydration. God designed us ability to respond to external stress through inter- to need water and to thrive on it. So drink up! In nal mechanisms, but some basic pathways follow summary, avoid extremes and “gimmicky diets,” virtually all forms of significant physical, emo- balance your caloric intake, prepare your food tional, and even intellectual stress (remember the properly from a wellness standpoint, and drink stress of the last unannounced quiz?). plenty of water. And here’s another principle—fol- When your body interprets environmental low the 80 percent rule. That is, if 80 percent of the factors as stressful, the stress response is initi- time you eat healthy, enjoy the other 20 percent! ated. Pulse becomes more rapid, as does breathing Of course you can still have pizza. You just can’t rate; blood pressure elevates; and the body is pre- eat the whole thing in one sitting. Desserts are pared for a fight-or-flight response. Key hormonal fine, as long as you understand the caloric impact mediators of this response are adrenaline (also and factor that into your dietary plan. called epinephrine, made in part from the adrenal gland) and a surge of corticosteroid hormones Stress Awareness including a powerful one called cortisol. Focus is Be anxious for nothing, but in everything with heightened, but fine motor control is lost (remem- prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let ber that near miss car collision and how your your requests be made known to God and the hands and feet felt like cement?). Thus, if athletic peace of God which surpasses all comprehension performance or quick thinking are needed, the will guard your hearts and mind in Christ Jesus stress response enables one to run faster, farther, (Phil 4:6-7). or quickly assess the stressor as real or imagined. These are “good stress” responses. Casting all your anxiety on Him because He Yet if you live under the constant impact of cares for you (1 Pet 5:7). stressors, the cumulative effects of adrenaline and cortisol will lead to “distress” and the break- Having considered the impact of nutrition and down of the human body. Symptoms would be exercise, both essential to overall wellness and life headaches, backaches, irritable bowel symptoms, in the body, we now turn to consider stress. Stress migraines, fatigue and ultimately physical col- has both negative and positive consequences and lapse or emotional meltdown. has enormous impact on successfully walking Easily identified current stressors in the lives of worthy of God’s high calling for each believer. the minister and those preparing to serve include First of all, there is “normal stress.” Only the not only the educational process itself but finan-

64 cial, relational, grief, even church-related issues catch up to you. and a host of other incidental surprises. Everyone • Learn to say no: Your yes is meaningless if you living will face stress, but will the level of stress cannot appropriately say no. Give others in the become overwhelming or remain manageable? community of faith an opportunity to serve. The danger for the minister is recognizing the • Play: Allow time to enjoy God’s creation, those difference between handling stress appropriately you love, and those who love you. (while growing deeper in one’s personal spiritual • Create margin: Allow sufficient space in your walk) and burnout, defined by a noted Christian schedule to be interruptible so God can use counselor as “compassion fatigue.” Compounding you to minister to people and needs that are stressors lead to physical fatigue whereas crossing unplanned. over the “manageable” line leads to emotional • Laugh more: It releases endorphins in the brain fatigue, depression, and a loss of interest in your making your joy a neurochemical reality. calling to serve. • Remember Christ: He’s our immovable anchor How does one identify and overcome the beyond the veil, our Savior, Redeemer, Brother cumulative effects of abundant stressors? When and Friend. physical exhaustion from over-engagement leads to flattened emotions and lack of motivation,be on Or do you not know that your body is a temple alert. When you feel anxious, hostile, frustrated of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have and resentful of the demands of your calling, your from God, and that you are not your own? For stressors may be overwhelming your capacity to you have been bought with a price: therefore respond. glorify God in your body (1 Cor 6:19). Practically speaking, how can we walk in the Spirit with the enormity of demands facing each In a country in which more than half of adults that would serve the Lord? are either overweight or obese, in a place where diabetes kills 220,000 Americans annually, we • Respect your body: You won’t get another until must engage in the countercultural practice of the Lord returns, and this one suffers the effects caring for our bodies, because they belong to God, of fallenness. purchased by the blood of Christ and indwelt by • Care for your body: Apply what you learned in the Holy Spirit. Consider a quote that very power- the fitness and nutrition sections. fully and eloquently expresses the integration of • Eat Right: Be careful of everything you put spirit, mind, and body: into your body. • Exercise: Do so regularly and responsibly. We are not human beings having a spiritual • Fitness is for everyone, not just the elite athlete. experience. • Practice the disciplines: Even as exercise and We are eternal spiritual beings having a temporal nutrition are everyday essentials, so too are human experience. prayer, Bible study and reflection, worship, fast- ing, giving, solitude, and silence. And part of the human experience that we are • Practice community: The church body needs meant to enjoy is the care and respect we give this your body! We are interdependent. Learn to be marvelous body we have been given—or perhaps comfortable both in community and in solitude. better said, loaned to us for our time here on earth. • Sleep: This one’s really not optional. Cumula- God’s design of our bodies is flawless. It is our tive sleeplessness depresses the immune system responsibility to care for and use them to the best and ages you faster. Skipping proper sleep will of our abilities, each of us with a wide and varying

65 range of talents and gifts. With that thought in mind, it is neither selfish nor narcissistic to make time for the care of the body. We are all better at whatever we do when we feel healthy, confident, and whole. With proper nutrition, exercise, and attention to the stresses of life, we place ourselves in the best condition to deal positively with what- ever demands life presents. We are whole when God is the center of our lives and we are using His vessel (our body) in His service. Pursuing well- ness is not something we can do completely on our own, however. It has been said “You alone can be well, but you can’t be well alone.” None of us knows all there is to know about being well, but in today’s rapidly expanding, information-exploding world, the possibilities for learning are endless. We need to learn more and more from others but, perhaps more importantly, also be there to share and care for those who are fellow pilgrims on the journey of faith. Wellness is a part of the human experience, a part in which we have the respon- sibility to create our lifestyles. It is within every one of us to be well. What choices will you make? How will you respond to this gift of another day?

This is the day the Lord has made, I will rejoice and be glad in it (Ps 118:24).

Endnotes 1Body Mass Index or BMI = weight (kilograms) / height(meters squared) [cited 28 Feb 2009]. Online: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/ adult_BMI/index.html#Interpreted. 2“Obesity: Halting the Epidemic by Making Health Easier” [cited 28 Feb 2009]. Online: http://www. cdc.gov/nccdphp/publications/AAG/obesity.htm. 3“Overweight and Obesity: Key Components of Car- diometabolic Risk,” Clinical Cornerstone 8, no. 3 (2007). 4“Comparison of Weight-Loss Diets with Different Compositions,” New England Journal of Medicine 360 (2009): 859-73.

66 67 TheSBJT Forum Editor’s Note: Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. C. Ben Mitchell, Mark T. Coppenger, Chad Owen Brand, Denny Burk, and Stephen J. Wellum have been asked specific questions to which they have provided written responses. These writers are not responding to one another. Their answers are presented in an order that hopefully makes the forum read as much like a unified presentation as possible.

SBJT: In your view, why must the doctrine ing may produce chimeras—living members of of humanity be articulated afresh and with our species who share either discreet organs from urgency today? another species or DNA from another species. C. Ben Mitchell: One of the most urgent cri- Would an animal-human chimera be a member ses facing us in this first half of the twenty-first of our species? Would an animal-human chimera century is the wide-spread confusion over what be a human person? Would the answer to that it means to be human?1 Pro-life question depend on which, or how many, non- C. Ben Mitchell is Graves Professor of Moral Philosophy Christians have been focused on human organs were transplanted, or, on what per- at Union University in Jackson, the most obvious locus for asking centage of human DNA was retained? Should we Tennessee, and Editor of Ethics & this question: a nearly forty-year define our humanity by the number and identity Medicine: An International Journal of Bioethics. battle over abortion. Meanwhile, of our genes? however, an emerging biotech- A tempting alternative is to define what it means In addition to his academic nology revolution increasingly to be human as the possession of human conscious- work, he also consults on matters challenges us to redefine human ness. The mind, with its awareness of self and oth- of public policy and has given testimonies before policymaking nature for the sake of technologi- ers, its perception of temporal-spacial situatedness, groups, including the U.S. House cal progress. Certain advances in the presence of memory, and so on, might define of Representatives, the Institutes of genetic engineering, pre-implan- a human person. However, how do we account Medicine, and the Illinois Senate. tation genetic diagnosis, cybernet- for human beings at the margins of conscious- Dr. Mitchell taught bioethics and contemporary culture for a decade ics, robotics, and nanotechnology ness—for example, unborn babies and those at the at Trinity Evangelical Divinity depend in large measure on our other end of life who have lost conscious capaci- School before recently joining the willingness as a culture to recast ties? Since many contemporary neuroscientists Union faculty. what it means to be human, what it maintain that the conscious mind is merely the means to be “one of us.” complex interactions of the chemical processes of For instance, trans-species genetic engineer- the brain, then what it means to be human would

68 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 68-78. depend solely on what is going on “in the head.” likely in its endgame.”6 Nevertheless, according to But, surely a human being is not merely a brain in Warwick, machines will not wipe out the human a vat.2 And surely our Christology teaches us that race. Instead, by grafting human consciousness human embodiment—incarnation—is sine qua into extraordinarily fast, durable, and intelligent non to what it means to be one of us. machines, we will become them. “Homo sapiens Cambridge sociologist Margaret Archer has will vanish as a biological species, replacing itself observed insightfully that “Modernity’s ‘Death of with a new race of cyborgs.”7 In fact, inventor and God’ has now been matched by Postmodernism’s futurist Ray Kurzweil is so bold as to maintain that ‘Death of Humanity.’”3 That is to say, as moder- “the singularity”—the merger of our biological nity was the age of philosophical deicide, post- selves with digital technology, “resulting in a world modernity is the age of philosophical homicide. that is still human but transcends our biological In fact, one of the poignant distinctions between roots”—will occur by the year 2045.8 Enlightenment atheism and the new atheism is Finally, with breathtaking hubris, Steven that the older atheists were willing to claim that Grand, developer of the once-popular computer humanity was superior to other species, on the top game “Creatures” maintains that, like Dr. Franken- rung of the evolutionary ladder, and was therefore stein, he may be able “to make thinking, caring, privileged among other animals. Today, the neo- feeling beings and that, when these beings exist, atheists maintain that this is a form of speciesism it may be reasonable to ascribe to them a soul.”9 and that human beings are more parasitic than Only a biblical-theological account of human they are privileged. nature can preserve or, perhaps more appropri- Perhaps there is no future for human beings ately, resurrect human dignity against the acids after all. According to researchers such as MIT’s of modernity and the demolition project of post- robotics professor Rodney Brooks, Homo sapiens modernity, especially in their techno-utopian are evolving into a more perfect species, Robo sapi- versions, where human nature needs the impro- ens. As a consequence, argues journalist Robert visations of techno-socio-biological engineering Wright, this techno-evolution may mean that Con- in order to conform to the vision of a more fully stitutional rights may have to be “recalibrated.” evolved species—the so-called posthuman. Says Wright, “For all I know, it’s true that in 20 Contemporary anthropology cannot be done, or 30 years these nanobots, by malicious design therefore, against the backdrop of the old Enlight- or by accident, will run so rampant that we’ll be enment categories. Human beings must not be fondly reminiscing about the days of termites. On reduced merely to the collection of rational capac- the other hand, this is basically the same problem ity, volition, and conscious awareness. To do so is to that is posed by self-replicating biological agents sign the death certificate forHomo sapiens, for surely (i.e., viruses). In both cases we’re faced with micro- there will be future generations who will ascribe to scopic things that can be inconspicuously made machines those same capacities, just as some cur- and transported and, once unleashed, whether rently ascribe those capacities to Great Apes. intentionally or accidentally, can keep on truckin’.”4 So, not only must we resurrect the doctrine And professors Wendell Wallach and Colin Allen of humanity, we must articulate it in the face of have maintained recently that this robotic revolu- challenges we have never faced before. Simplistic tion is so imminent that we need to determine answers will neither answer the questions being immediately how to program a functional morality put to us, nor will they protect human beings at the into our evolving cyber-neighbors.5 margins. Without the renewal of a robust theologi- Kevin Warwick of the University of Reading cal anthropology, the human future is uncertain. believes “The human race as we know it is very Not that God will not preserve humanity until the

69 return of the One who now sits at the right hand 6Peter Menzel and Faith D’Aluisio, Robo Sapiens: of God in bodily form, but that there may never- Evolution of a New Species (Cambridge, MA: MIT, theless be horrific abuses against humanity in the 2000), 29. name of technological progress unless we are able 7Ibid., 31. to articulate more convincingly what it means to 8Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity is Near: When Humans be one of us, made in God’s image and likeness. Transcend Biology (New York: Viking , 2005). 9Steve Grand, Creation: Life and How to Make It (Cam- Endnote bridge, MA: Harvard University, 2001), 10. 1A host of conferences and books have examined this question during the past decade or so. Provocative SBJT: It has been famously stated, “Ideas have titles include, Warren S. Brown, Nancey Murphy, consequences.” How are false ideas regarding and H. Newton Malony, eds., Whatever Happened to the nature of human beings leading to terrible the Soul? Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human consequences in our culture? Nature (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998); Jean Bethke Mark Coppenger: Let me answer this question Elshtain, Who Are We? Critical Reflections and Hope- by starting with an analogy. Out on the Oklahoma ful Possibilities (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000); plains of Fort Sill and in the forest clearings of John F. Kavanaugh, Who Counts as Persons? Human Georgia’s Fort Benning, I learned how to adjust Identity and the Ethics of Killing (Washington, D.C.: artillery fire. We used the “bracket method,” first Georgetown University, 2001); and Harold W. Bail- shooting over, and then under, and then splitting lie and Timothy E. Casey eds., Is Human Nature the difference. Obsolete? Genetics, Bioengineering, and the Future of I think of that when I look at politicians trying the Human Condition (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005). to put public policy on target with their under- 2This is an image borrowed from philosopher Hilary standing of human nature. Unfortunately, they’re Putnam’s famous thought experiment in Reason, not keen on adjustments. Beguiled by addled ide- Truth, and History (Cambridge: Cam- ology or playing to the gallery, they consistently Mark T. Coppenger is Professor bridge University, 1982). underestimate or overestimate humanity, placing of Christian Apologetics at The 3 Southern Baptist Theological Margaret S. Archer, Being Human: round after round short or long. Seminary. The Problem of Agency (Cambridge: Let’s start with the overestimaters, the utopians Cambridge University, 2000), 1. of one stamp or another. They reason that if we He also serves as Pastor of Evanston Archer goes on to say, “[S]o now it is can just have a better teacher-student ratio in the Baptist Church in Evanston, Illinois; Baptist Collegiate our job to reclaim Humanity which is public schools, if we can just “spread the wealth Ministry Director of Northwestern indeed at risk. At least, it is at risk in around,” then peace will reign, culture will flower, University; and Managing Editor the Academy, where strident voices and dogs will have fellowship with cats. What we of the online Kairos Journal. Previously, Dr. Coppenger served would dissolve the human being into need is a New Deal, a Great Society, an Erewhon of as Executive Director of the State discursive structures and humankind comprehensive government solicitude. Then, the Convention of Baptists in Indiana, into a disembodied textualism” (2). human butterflies will emerge from their cocoons Chairman of the SBC Resolutions 4Ibid., 30. See also Wright’s, The and take flight in glorious colors. Committee, and President of Midwestern Baptist Theological Moral Animal: Why We Are, the Way I think also of two happy-talk schools of over- Seminary. He has written articles We Are: The New Science of Evolution- estimation. First, the Word of Faith movement is and reviews for numerous ary Psychology (New York: Vintage, filling arenas, bookstores, and coffers as its priests publications and has edited and 1995). declare negativity to be spiritually toxic. Today, contributed to several books. 5Wendell Wallach and Colin Allen, the jeremiads of Jeremiah are as unseemly as the Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right From Wrong repentance baptisms of John the Baptist. It seems (New York: Oxford University, 2008). the Lord has commissioned Barnabas to rewrite

70 the Bible in a perkier mode. has noted, everyone born in America since 1973 Second, speech codes designed to criminal- is a survivor. The unaborted have made it through ize criticism are metastasizing. No matter how a hunting season with no limits. Tragically, over outrageous, disgusting, or plain crazy another’s 40 million didn’t escape, but became trophies of behavior might be, you’d better think twice about human selfishness. plain speaking. And if you’re inclined to take Now, in the hysterical drive for health at any up the mantle of Elijah, you flirt with expulsion cost, those who oppose embryonic stem cell and litigation. research are called enemies of science, but since It used to be the case that only when one was when did murder become intrinsic to biology? “home on the range” could he sing, “Never is Since Frankenstein’s journals supplanted Psalm heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not 139 as sacred writ. cloudy all day.” Now it’s the theme song of the It’s ironic that some of the biggest underesti- multi-culturalist movement, sung in education maters pass for humanists. Pushing one social schools, anthropology departments, and litera- program after another, they sound like upward- ture programs throughout the land. Never mind and-onward optimists. But their prescriptions and that certain religions, such as Islam, Hinduism, enthusiasms reveal a low view of man. They treat animism, and secularism, have the reverse-Midas him like a plant, confident that the right combi- effect, turning the cultural gold they touch to base nation of eugenics, nutrients, sunlight, pruning metal. And if unfortunate phenomena persist, and such will make him bloom (and the absence whether female genital mutilation, the caste sys- thereof will make him shrivel). tem, rampant alcoholism, an extinction-oriented But this is demonstrable foolishness. The hero- birthrate, tribalistic nepotism, kleptocracy, and ism of Warsaw Ghetto Jews and the ignominy of infanticide, then it can be blamed on the influence many privileged baby boomers show that man- of imperialists and multi-national corporations. kind is not a branch of botany. And to suggest It’s always someone else’s fault. that a home in the suburbs, better field trips, an On the international scene, it’s all about diplo- iPod, and a hug will make man a benign fruit macy and peace processes. If we will just talk bearer is insulting. nicely, declare moral equivalency, and practice If society could re-embrace the Bible, there enough self-defacement and self-debasement, might be hope for hitting the target with public then nascent splendor will shine through. Thus, policy. Turning through Genesis, we could redis- decade after decade, the world waits for a new cover the imago dei and conclude that unborn birth of shalom, nurtured by boundless esteem, babies are more than regrettable but correctable debt forgiveness, and reparations. “punishments” for the sexually willful and care- Of course, this ignores the old principle less. Following Proverbs, we could describe crimi- that the heart of the problem is the problem of nal recidivists as fools returning to their folly like the heart. Elevate the circumstances however dogs to their vomit; and, of course, we could point you will, and man will still be a sinner. G. K. to any number of verses calling them accountable Chesterton once said (even without knowing sinners. (Contrast this with the fellow described Prince Charles) that the British royalty illustrated in Theodore Dalrymple’s wonderful book, Life at this perfectly. the Bottom;he blamed the good doctor for his acts Then there are those who underestimate of grand larceny since he’d not gotten treatment humankind. For decades now, the courts have for his “addiction to stealing cars.”) treated the contents of the womb as mere tissue. Again, from the Bible, we could thank God for For that reason, as Frederica Mathewes-Green his blunt teaching on the Fall and his intervention

71 at Babel. Here, we gain fresh appreciation for sov- or at least display to them, hell. And in showing ereign nation-states, governmental checks-and- them hell, the preacher must show them the road balances, and the marketplace of ideas, goods, to hell—the pathway of unrepented sin. Preachers and services. In short, we could become biblically must preach on sin. realistic. Of course, there are great temptations not to The bracket system of artillery adjustment has preach on sin(!). Brian McLaren tells us that this its limits. When the target is too close to experi- is not the way to reach Gen-Xers. Robert Schuller ment with the over-under approach, the spotter told us this was not the way to reach Boomers. has to call out, “Danger Close,” and change to the Harry Fosdick told us this was not the way to “creeping method.” Here, he errs on the side of reach Moderns. I am sure we could find such sen- caution, placing the first-round well away from his timents all through history, and the reason is that position. Then he adjusts fire in small increments, we do not like to be told that we are sinners, and inching ever closer to the target, making sure to so, preachers who preach on sin take the chance keep his head down when the rounds fly. of alienating their congregations, or at least some This is our current situation. Ideas do have members of their congregations. Here is the prob- consequences. Indeed, miscalculations on the lem with that fear—at a certain level the task of nature of man are having terrible consequences. preaching is precisely to alienate. We are to expose Babies are dying. Fools are ascendant. Societies the sinfulness of the congregation by preaching and academic disciplines are self-destructing. And the gospel, and such gospel preaching includes yet, with each new off-target barrage, cheers of preaching on sin. If we are unwilling to do that, approbation arise. It’s hard to sort out friends from then we are, in A. W. Tozer’s words, “water-boys enemies any more. of the pulpit.” Let me explain what I do mean by alienation, and what I don’t mean by it. SBJT: The doctrine of human beings not only Both Paul and Jesus begin their gospel presen- reminds us of our significance tations with a discussion of sin. After a few intro- Chad Owen Brand is Professor as creatures made in the image ductory words and a preliminary consideration of Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological of God, but also, sadly, our sin- or two, Paul spends two and a half chapters at the Seminary and Associate Dean of fulness, as creatures who have opening of Romans discussing the sinfulness of Biblical and Theological Studies at rebelled against God and who humanity—all humanity. And of course, he does Boyce College. stand in utter need of a Savior. so eloquently and passionately. These words are He also serves as Pastor of Why is preaching on the doc- endemic to the gospel itself, since, in telling the Northside Baptist Church in trine of sin so important today gospel story we have, presumably, to tell why Jesus Elizabethtown, Kentucky. Dr. and what suggestions would you ever came to die on the cross in the first place. Brand has written many articles and reviews. He has also edited and give for doing so? Without sin, there is no beautiful manger scene contributed to numerous books, Chad Owen Brand: My father- (and of course, it was not all that beautiful, any- including the Holman Illustrated in-law early on was not altogether way); without sin, there is no healing of the sick or Bible Dictionary (B&H, 2003), proud to have a preacher in the raising of the dead; without sin there is no Sermon Perspectives on Election (B&H, 2006), One Sacred Effort: The family, but on one occasion when on the Mount. Here is the point: sin is the context Cooperative Program of Southern I told him that I was on my way in which all of those things took place, and so, we Baptists (B&H, 2006), and The out to preach, he urged me, “Well, cannot preach the gospel without preaching on Apologetics Study Bible (B&H, give ‘em hell.” I tried to retort that sin. In other words, you cannot tell people about 2007). this was not really what I was sup- their best life today until you remind them first of posed to do. On later reflection, though, it seemed their worse life yesterday. to me that I certainly was intended to give them, Paul is not alone in this. Jesus, in the Sermon on

72 the Mount, after some preliminaries, expounded sin itself is alienation. The unrepentant sinner is on the sinfulness of humanity—all humanity. alienated from God—either as a non-believer or In Matthew 5 beginning in verse 21, Jesus, in as a believer under discipline from the Lord. The this wonderful inaugural message in Matthew, in unbeliever, even the one in my church or your which the gospel is explained with great clarity, church on Sunday morning, stands in danger of expounds on six commandments and the ways in hell-fire, as Edwards reminded us in his famous which the Jews were, on the one hand, misunder- sermon. Curiously, in Jesus’ even more famous standing them, and, on the other hand, breaking sermon, after discussing the sins of anger and lust, them. I have space here to elaborate on only the he said exactly the same thing. “If you do not deal first two. Jesus addresses the laws against murder with your sins of anger and lust, you are in danger and adultery. He makes it clear that the common of hell-fire.” Let me tell you something, fellow understanding of those laws is superficial, and in pastor. Your members will not all faint if you occa- his truly authoritative fashion, he says, “Amen sionally use the word “hell” from the pulpit. (Well, I say to you that you shall not live in a state of not all of them!) I know the word was probably settled anger with your brother; Amen I say to overcooked at one time in history, but undercook- you that you must not stare at your sister to lust.” ing is no more palatable than overcooking. Those two sins indict the entire human race. And So, we preach on alienation, but not in order this is something that was obvious even to pagans. to alienate. We preach on alienation in order to In Greek mythology, Ares, the god of war, was reconcile. So, when you preach on sin, do it with romantically linked to Aphrodite, the goddess tears in your eyes and not a flash of anger. (Don’t of sex. War and sex. Anger and Lust. They seem preach against anger angrily.) When you preach opposite, since anger pushes the other away while on sin and alienation, do it recognizing your own lust lures the other close, but they are actually sinfulness and alienation. Admit that you, too, very similar. At the root of each lies the ego. “I have been where they are, and that you are not the have decided you are unworthy. I have decided expert come here to lecture them on getting their to want you.” They are different in content but lives right. You are simply the one who got out of similar in intent. Even the Greeks knew there was the mire before they did, so that you could throw a link between these illnesses, and that even their them a rope of rescue. But when gods were infected with the disease. Of course, you preach on sin, make it clear Denny Burk is Dean of Boyce by the time the Greeks were anesthetized by the that this is a crucial moment. With College and Associate Professor of New Testament at The Southern Romans, they no longer cared. both anger and lust, Jesus said, “Do Baptist Theological Seminary. So, for Jesus, as well as for Paul, an explication something now! This is not the of sin is an essential, a non-negotiable part of the time to mull it over. Get out now, Formerly, he taught at Criswell gospel proclamation. or you may be in hell by morning.” College in Dallas, Texas. Dr. Burk writes a popular daily blog on How deeply this infection runs in modern cul- Preachers need to remind them- theology, culture, and politics. ture! So, do we simply let the disease take its toll, selves of that, too. He also serves as Editor of the or do we do something about it? Let me tell you— Journal for Biblical Manhood and their momma is not going to do anything about it SBJT: There are many ethical Womanhood. Dr. Burk has written many articles and is the author of in many cases. In a day when Baptist septuagenar- entailments tied to the truth that Articluar Infinitives in the Greek ians are shacking up, just who is going to try to humans are created in God’s of the New Testament (Sheffield keep the fox out of the henhouse? Well, if no one image. Why do you believe the Phoenix, 2006). else will do it, then the pastor gets the call. And he pro-life cause is one of the most should. And he better. important entailments and worth fighting for? The preacher must declare that unrepented Denny Burk: There are evangelicals today who

73 support a pro-life position, but in their elec- Yet in America, one group of persons do not toral politics they do not treat the protection of have this baseline protection from their govern- the unborn as a transcendent priority. This is ment. The current law of our land excludes from a mistake. the human community a whole class of human In the run-up to the Presidential election last beings—the unborn. Right now under the regime November, these “pro-lifers” argued that there is of Roe v. Wade, it is legal in our country to kill more to being pro-life than being anti-abortion. unborn human beings at any stage of development According to them, a pro-life ethic would also from 0-9 months gestation. In other words, our include the protection of the environment, the nation’s laws do not recognize an intrinsic right ending of the war in Iraq, and the adoption of to life for the unborn. In some cases, animals progressive economic reforms. Singling-out the have more protection under the law than unborn abortion issue (they would argue) as an electoral people do. priority simply misses the point of what it means The Roe v. Wade decision has presided over to be pro-life. the deaths of nearly 50 million innocent human So here was the dispute we saw among “pro- babies since 1973, and it stands as the singular life” evangelicals before the 2008 election. Evan- legal obstacle to passing laws restricting abortion gelicals such as James Dobson, Albert Mohler, in our country. The only way for the unborn to and John Piper argued that ending legal abortion be protected in law is for Roe to be overturned. It should be a priority for voters as they went to the will take a five-person majority on the Supreme polls. Progressives such as Jim Wallis, Tony Cam- Court to overturn Roe. Absent such a majority, it polo, and Darrell Bock argued that Christians will continue to be legal for the babies to be killed. have focused too narrowly on the abortion issue. Presidential elections are consequential in this For them, simply being anti-abortion would not regard, since Presidents are the ones who appoint make one pro-life in this broader sense, and thus the Justices who have the power to either uphold single-issue voting with respect to the abortion or overturn Roe. issue would be irresponsible. With nearly fifty million babies already dead, is What are we to make of this controversy? How it not clear that in America abortion-on-demand do we make an ethical assessment of the claims is the greatest human rights crisis of our time? of both sides? How should evangelicals weigh the Perhaps the reason that some people do not feel importance of the abortion issue in their engage- the weight of this horror is that abortion is largely ment in the public square and, in particular, in the out of their view. The cries of aborted babies do way that they vote in national elections? In short, not escape their mother’s womb, and citizens don’t how should Christians steward their franchise in hear the screams that would otherwise provoke the presidential elections? the repugnance of any decent person. Thus those My argument has been (and is now) that if who have eyes to see will have no more patience the unborn are truly image-bearers of Almighty for abortion-on-demand than they do for legal God, then the inevitable implication of that view slavery or the holocaust. is that ending legal abortion should be a transcen- In light of all of this, how can pro-life evan- dent value for evangelical engagement in electoral gelicals justify treating the abortion issue as one politics. Why? The fundamental role of govern- among many other “pro-life” issues when they ment in society is to enforce justice and to protect enter the voting booth? As Stan Guthrie has said, innocent human life. Romans 13:1-7 says that if everything is a priority, then nothing is a prior- this is the baseline responsibility of all human ity. Surely the protection of innocent human life is governments. a transcendent value, one that must take priority

74 over policy-disputes about the environment and SBJT: One of the goals in studying theology is the economy. to see the interrelationships between various My contention is that the judgment of history doctrines. With that in mind, do you think will rule against those who were ostensibly pro- there is a relationship between the doctrines life but who nevertheless would not stand for the of human beings and Christ, and if so, what? unborn in electoral politics. But even more impor- Stephen J. Wellum: Most defi- tant than the judgment of history is the judgment nitely anthropology and Christol- Stephen J. Wellum is Professor of God. Prov 24:11-12 commands God’s people to ogy are interrelated in Scripture. It of Christian Theology at The South- ern Baptist Theological Seminary. “rescue” innocent human life from being unjustly has been rightly said that Christol- snuffed out. This command issues from the same ogy requires not only a clear con- Dr. Wellum received his Ph.D. God who said “thou shalt not kill” and “thou shalt ception of God but also of human degree in theology from Trinity not bear false witness,” and it has the same author- beings as well. After all, when we Evangelical Divinity School and has also taught ­theology at the ity over the conscience. speak of the incarnation we affirm Associated Canadian Theological How do we “rescue” the unborn? We cannot that Jesus Christ is one person Schools and Northwest Baptist reduce the protection of the unborn to a matter of who is truly God and truly man Theological College and Seminary in Canada. He has contributed electoral politics. Supporting adoption alternatives in two natures forever. It should to several publications and a and crisis pregnancy centers, for instance, are a not surprise us, then, that what collection of essays on theology part of rescuing the innocents being led to slaugh- the Scripture says about human and worldview issues. ter. That being said, while we certainly should not beings is important for Christol- reduce our defense of the unborn to electoral poli- ogy. Indeed, I would want to state it even stron- tics, we dare not exclude electoral politics from our ger: what Scripture states regarding the nature concern. Thus, faithful Christians will use their of human beings is essential to make coherent democratic privileges to press for the defense of and plausible the very idea of an incarnation. Let the unborn. Christians in China or Saudi Arabia me explain what I mean by briefly highlighting so not have a say in such matters. But in America, two points from theological anthropology which Christians do. Why then wouldn’t an evangelical directly apply to Christology. make it a priority to vote to protect life? First, the Scriptural teaching that human The world is broken, and at the end of the day beings are created in the “image of God” is vitally we do not put our hope in our government to fix it important for Christology. As Genesis 1-2 makes (Ps 20:7). Our hope is in a sovereign and just God clear, human beings are creatures with a close who will one day make all things new (Rev 21:5). affinity to the rest of creation, yet we are also dif- But our hope in God’s perfect justice in the future ferent from the entire creation, even uniquely dif- should never be used as an excuse to be indifferent ferent from angelic beings, precisely because we about injustice in the present. are created as God’s image-bearers. This remark- God has said over and over that He is ardently able fact not only underscores our uniqueness interested in protecting the innocent (e.g., Deut but stresses our distinctness from all that God 10:18; 14:29; Ps 146:9; Isa 1:17, 23; Zech 7:10; has made and how we are uniquely related to Mal 3:5; Jas 1:27). At the last judgment, protect- God as persons. While other created things are ing innocent human life will be seen for the tran- made “after their kind” (Gen 1:11-12, 20, 24-25), scendent value that it is. Evangelicals need to ask human beings are made like God himself, after themselves if their stewardship of the franchise the divine pattern, at a finite level (Gen 1:26-27). reflects that value. That is why, at the heart of understanding who we are as human beings, is the concept of the imago

75 Dei. Biblically and theologically it is the essential person. Given the Creator-creature distinction determination of that which constitutes “human- how is this possible? How do we make coherent ity” as opposed to non-humanity. sense of it? A lot of reflection has taken place in But what exactly does it mean to affirm that this regard (to say the least), but I simply want to human beings are created in the “image of God?” point out (as many have done before me) that, as This is not easy to determine given the fact that difficult as these concepts are, the biblical teach- the expression is not used as a technical term in ing that humans are created as imago Dei—after Scripture. Minimally, I would argue, especially the divine pattern—helps make sense of this even in light of an Ancient Near East background, that though we will never fully be able to fathom it. For “image of God” means that human beings are at the heart of what constitutes humanity, what created like God, especially with capacities and sets it apart from mere animal life, are capaci- abilities to rule as God’s representatives over his ties and resultant roles in creation the originals creation for God’s glory. In other words, under of which are to be found in God. Human nature God’s rule and authority, human beings, as image- as created is already related and similar to what bearers” are his vice-regents over creation. This is God is, albeit at a finite level. Given this fact, to borne out in Gen 1:26c where it is best translated speak of an incarnation, as mind-boggling as it as a purpose clause: “in order that they [human is, is not irrational since what it means to be truly beings] may have dominion,” i.e., function in a human is revealed in and by God himself, particu- kingly and royal way. This does not entail that larly in relation to the divine Son who is nothing dominion is the definition of the image, as some less than the true, exact image of God (Col 1:15; have sought to argue, but rather that dominion cf. Heb 1:3). In this way, the biblical teaching of is best viewed as a consequence of it. A crucial human beings created as the imago Dei provides text which buttresses this point is Psalm 8 which the grounds for helping make sense of the very describes human beings in royal terms. Interest- possibility as well as plausibility of an incarnation. ingly, this text is developed in Heb 2:5-18 where In this regard, it is important to compare and it is applied to Christ who not only is the true contrast the Bible’s teaching with Islam. Why “image of God” as the divine Son—the archetype does Islamic theology deny the very possibility (see Col 1:15; cf. Heb 1:3)—but also the one who of an incarnation? A lot of answers could be given is the “image of God” in that he takes upon our specifically related to their denial of a Triune God, humanity, identifies with us, and fulfills Adam’s the personal nature of God, a wrong view of God’s role by winning for us our salvation as the obedi- transcendence, and so on. But certainly one of the ent Son. So whatever “image” exactly means, it is reasons is due to the fact that Islam denies that a term that signifies our uniqueness, our dignity human beings are created as imago Dei. Given before God, and the representative role we play for their view of God and of human beings, it is no the entire creation so that God deals with creation wonder that the incarnation is denied from the on the basis of how he deals with human beings. outset as impossible. God is so unlike us; we are Indeed, what a unique and incredible role we have, so unlike God that the very concept of an incarna- to say the least. tion is rejected a priori. But this is not the case in Why is this important for Christology? It is Christian theology. Why? Because the Scripture important for at least this reason: the making presents us with an entirely different view of God sense and plausibility of the very idea of an incar- and of human beings vis-à-vis God. nation is found here. Probably one of the most A second important interrelationship between difficult questions in Christology is how the two the doctrines of human beings and Christ is the natures of deity and humanity are united in one biblical development of the first Adam-last Adam

76 typological relationship (see Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor (Rom 8:3), identifies with us, yet does not fail in 15:20-23; cf. Heb 2:5-18). It is hard to overesti- his obedience, in order to bring about our redemp- mate the importance of this typological relation- tion and restoration (Psalm 8; Heb 2:5-18). In ship for understanding the storyline of Scripture other words, Adam, made in the image of God, and specifically Christology. By the time one anticipates another man who will also act as our gets to the NT, especially in the writings of Paul, head and representative, yet, thankfully, he will human history is divided up under the representa- not and does not fail. tive headship of two men: Adam and Christ. On Secondly, and building off the first observation, the one hand, Adam represents all that is tied to as is common with typological structures, the type the “old creation” and “this present age” character- gives way to the antitype, but in so doing it moves ized by sin, death, and judgment. Anyone, then, from the lesser to the greater and from the inferior who is “in Adam,” given Adam’s disobedience, to the superior. This, I contend, becomes one of now comes into this world dead in their sins and the primary means by which Scripture establishes under the judicial sentence of God. In this way, the superiority and uniqueness of Christ and thus Adam’s headship has the deeper privilege of more “does” Christology. In other words, this is how than ordinary fatherhood. It also includes the Christology “works” or is “done” in Scripture as dignity of defining what it means to be human one moves along the storyline of Scripture. As we for he stands not merely as our physical head but progress from Adam to Christ, we progress to one also as our covenantal head. Being human, then, is who not only fulfills the role of Adam, but also equivalent to bearing his image (1 Cor 15:49), but completely eclipses it. That is why the NT does now, sadly, in light of the Fall, it also means that not present Christ merely as another Adam, that we stand under his condemnation as well. On the is, as merely another man. Rather, in Christ, we other hand, we have another man, our Lord Jesus have a man but we also have one who is the God- Christ. He represents all that is associated with man, the Lord of glory, the Word made flesh. Fur- the “new creation” and from the perspective of the thermore, in thinking about the accomplishment OT prophets, “the age to come.” He is associated of his work we have results that no mere Adam or with and he wins for us, all that is characterized any other creature could ever achieve. In him we by salvation, life, and the restoration of what was literally have the inauguration of the new creation lost in Adam’s sin. In fact, by his life, death, and and the coming of God and his saving reign to this resurrection—by his obedience—he wins for us world. By him and through him, thankfully, we our salvation and stands as our covenantal head have a far greater and more powerful work than for us, as our representative and substitute, our anything before him, a work that ultimately only Lord and Savior. a God-man can do, thus establishing his utter What is the significance of this for Christol- uniqueness and superiority. ogy? Two points need to be stressed. First, Adam’s In this way, the storyline of Scripture “unfolds” unique role in creation establishes why, given the the person and work of Christ to us. It is by Fall, there needs to be another man to come who these kinds of typological structures—Adam can undo the corruptive results of the first man. to Christ—that Scripture unpacks the identity, In this way, the entire rationale for the need for superiority, and uniqueness of Christ, and it is by an incarnation and ultimately the cross is laid means of these structures that Scripture presses down. In order to restore what was lost in the first the all-important question upon us: Who do we representative head, viz., Adam, there is the need say that he is? Who is the Christ? Who is this one for another head, another man to come, Jesus the who is able to reverse the effects of Adam and by Christ, who comes in the likeness of sinful flesh his life, death, and resurrection usher in the “new

77 creation” and the “the age to come?” Who is this one who takes on the very role and identity of the God of Israel by inaugurating the kingdom, ushering in eternal life, and achieving for us our justification? Of course the answer that Scripture gives is this: The one who can do all these incred- ible things is nothing less than God the Son, the Lord of Glory who has taken on our flesh; the one who is truly God and truly man, the last Adam; the one who humbled himself even to death on a cross for us and for our salvation; the one who is utterly worthy to receive all of our worship, devotion, love, and obedience for now and for all-eternity.

78 79 Book Reviews

The Holy Trinity in Scripture, History, Theology, and an excellent introduction to the doctrine of the Worship. By Robert Letham. Phillipsburg, NJ: Trinity, although an introduction of a particularly P&R, 2004, xv + 551pp., $24.99 paper. detailed sort. The Biblical Foundations section is thorough (70 pages) without getting bogged Robert Letham has written an excellent and very down. The Historical Development section will be helpful book on the Trinity. The resurgence of extremely helpful for students of many stripes, as trinitiarian theology and interest in the last two- Letham engages in significant detail with the key plus decades has been a good sign. And the time historical figures/schools of thought in Trinitarian indeed is ripe for a lengthy and robust monograph development, ranging from early trinitarianism, on the trinity from an evangelical perspective. through key eastern and western thinkers, and Letham is pastor of an Orthodox Presbyterian ending with John Calvin. The Modern Discussion Church, is an adjunct professor of systematic the- section moves from Barth to Thomas F. Torrance, ology at Westminster Theological Seminary, and and theological students will be immensely helped also teaches at Reformed Theological Seminary in by this guide through modern theology. The last Washington, D.C./Baltimore. Readers may recog- section deals with four critical issues: Trinity and nize him as the author of The Work of Christ, a vol- Incarnation; Trinity, Worship, and Prayer; Trinity, ume in IVP’s Contours of Christian Theologyseries. Creation and Missions; Trinity and Persons. Letham’s monograph is divided into four key All throughout the volume, Letham gives evi- sections: Biblical Foundations, Historical Devel- dence of a careful reading of key thinkers past and opment, Modern Discussion, Critical Issues. Two present, and ranging from Catholic to Orthodox appendices (critiques of Gilbert Bilezikian and to Protestant, and he engages fairly with thinkers Kevin Giles) plus a glossary, bibliography, and scrip- across the conservative to liberal spectrum. The ture, subjects, names appendices close the volume. glossary is helpful, and the bibliography is excellent. The Holy Trinity is undoubtedly the fruit of For thoughtful laypersons or the seasoned scholar, many years of teaching, both in academic and Letham’s The Holy Trinity deserves careful reading. church settings. It is written from a Reformed perspective, and Letham writes, “To be Reformed Brad Green is to be truly catholic, biblical, evangelical, and Union University orthodox” (ix). The monograph would serve as

80 SBJT 13.2 (2009): 80-87. The Mission of Today’s Church: Baptist Leaders ogy professors, and three other denominational Look at Modern Faith Issues. Edited by R. Stanton servants. The preponderance of educators and Norman. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2007, 210 denominational servants should not be seen as pp., $16.99 paper. negative, however, for the writers collectively have many generations of pastoral experience This collection of twelve essays originated with between them. Moreover, the lives and words of a conference entitled “The Mission of Today’s each writer indicate that they are committed to Church,” held at New Orleans Baptist Theological serving the churches through their various roles. Seminary in February 2005 under the auspices Second, the editor comments that the authors of The Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry. are each passionately committed to fulfilling the The Center for Baptist Theology and Ministry at Great Commission within the churches of the New Orleans was directed by the editor, R. Stan- Southern Baptist Convention. There is little doubt ton Norman, at the time of the conference. Since in this regard, but the essays stress the mission of then, Dr. Norman has taken an administrative the church to varying degrees. The essays primar- position at Oklahoma Baptist University. Steve ily devoted to consideration of the Great Commis- Lemke, the provost at New Orleans Seminary, sion as a practice include those by James Jenkins has since been tasked with directing the work of (“Three View of the Church’s Mission in the Black this important locus of Baptist thought and prac- Community”), Charles L. Quarles (“Explaining tice. The purpose of the book is to explore what the Gospel to Kids”), Ed Stetzer, (“The Missional “Baptists believe about the nature and mission of Nature of the Church and the Future of South- the church and how that mission is contextualized ern Baptist Convention Churches”), and Barrett in our contemporary world” (ix). The book meets Duke, (“Being Salt and Light in a Post-Christian its goal, but raises unintended questions about Culture”). The essays by Jenkins and Quarles are divergent views of the nature of the church and perhaps the most practical, even as their practical- its mission. ity necessarily entails a restriction of their subject On the one hand, the commonalities man- matter to the black community and to children, ifested by Baptists within the book should be respectively. Unfortunately, none of the writers stressed. On the other hand, the divergences were tasked with actually defining theologically expressed within the book should be noted, too. and missiologically what the Great Commission Below, we consider the book from the perspec- is and means. tive of both unity and diversity with regard to The essays by Stetzer and Duke are more theo- Southern Baptist understandings of the Great retical, even as they address the mission of the Commission, the nature of the church, and the church in the world today. Both men address the denomination’s direction. (Kenneth D. Keathley’s problem of the relationship between culture and excellent essay on divine sovereignty and human church. Duke carefully threads his way between salvation draws upon the Great Commission, but the opposing reactions of engagement and retreat it is a heavier theological piece that is not easily as the churches are confronted by an increas- classified within this book.) ingly post-Christian, post-modern culture. Duke First, it should be noted that the authors of laments the loss of belief in a universal moral the book are all Southern Baptists and are dedi- truth that accompanies post-modernism, even as cated to Great Commission ministry within that he brings Scripture to bear in order to define and denominational context. Beside Norman, the propose a relevant Christian worldview. Stetzer’s lineup includes one pastor, one state convention essay is much less careful, for even as he notes the executive, three school presidents, three theol- shift to a post-modern paradigm, he is loath to

81 offer any criticism of it. Rather, Stetzer argues for (“Cooperation among Southern Baptist Churches contextualization or cultural relevancy, placing as Set Forth in Article 14 of the Baptist Faith and himself squarely against the dominant South- Message”) discovers four areas of cooperation ern Baptist tendency to regard the culture as a within the common confession of Southern Bap- scandal. (Stetzer also argues for an expanded role tists. Those concerned about the decline of Baptist for younger leaders.) The increasingly stark dif- identity and the rise of evangelical ecumenism ferences between the views of theologians like should consider Richards’ very helpful paradigm. Stetzer, who want to downplay cultural prob- Providing yet another contrast to Sutton, Chad lems in the name of evangelistic effectiveness, Owen Brand (“Toward a Theology of Coopera- and the views of theologians like Duke, who want tion”) argues from the hermeneutic of the regula- to maintain biblical truth in an increasingly anti- tive church principle that Scripture, including the Christian environment, requires further thought descriptive passages in the book of Acts, certainly by Southern Baptist intellectuals. does provide a model for the church and for coop- Third, there are a number of essays that consider eration between churches. the local churches, including offerings by David S. The remaining two essays, actually printed Dockery (“The Church, Worship, and the Lord’s first, consider the progress of Southern Baptists Supper”), R. Stanton Norman (“Together We as a whole. Daniel L. Akin (“Ten Mandates for Grow: Congregational Polity as a Means of Cor- Southern Baptists”) provides a balanced and com- porate Sanctification”), and Jerry Sutton (“Con- prehensive vision for the future of the Southern gregational Polity and Its Strategic Limitations”). Baptist Convention, with regard to a recovery of Dockery intends to recover a Reformation doc- biblical ecclesiology within the churches, with trine of the Lord’s Supper, including the spiritual regard to the Great Commission focus of the presence of Christ within the worshipping con- denomination, and with regard to the function of gregation and the imagery of the supper as the its missionary and educational agencies. Finally, visible Word. Dockery correctly argues that the Charles S. Kelley (“Between Scylla and Charyb- supper should be “more than a mere appendage to dis: Reflections on the Baptist Way”) writes that the preaching service” (49). However, the place Southern Baptists have always been a people of of the Lord’s Supper as the expression of church controversy and rehearses conflicts over Sunday communion and, therefore, of church discipline School, evangelism, sin, and theology. He thus (i.e., excommunication) is remarkably absent. demonstrates that Baptist theology and polity Norman draws upon many years of advocating have helped the Southern Baptist Convention to biblical ecclesiology by defending congregational become a responsive and responsible organization polity as a means of holiness. Sutton, on the other that “emerging leaders” should enthusiastically hand, argues against congregational polity as stra- embrace. “Feeling tensions is not a sign of death. tegically limited, even as he denies that there is It is a sign of life” (35). a discoverable “biblical model” for the church Reflecting upon the current Southern Baptist (citing Millard Erickson, 113). As with the diver- tensions on unintentional display in this book gence between Stetzer and Duke, so the diver- itself, Kelley’s words strike this middle-aged gence between Sutton and Norman is noticeable, reviewer as concurrently biblical and relevant. if not intentional. Perhaps the older generation has some wisdom Finally, there are four essays that consider the to relay to the middle and younger generations progress of Southern Baptists. Two of the four after all. New Orleans Baptist Theological Semi- essays are concerned with the cooperative nature nary is rendering Southern Baptists a great ser- of the Southern Baptist Convention. Jim Richards vice through the continuing work of The Center

82 for Baptist Theology and Ministry. And B&H fundamental way, since it brings him to separate Academic, a division of LifeWay Resources, has the question of finding a gracious God from that rendered Southern Baptists a great service by of the faithfulness of God to his promises. Cor- publishing this fine collection. respondingly for Kirk, there is no condemning voice to the Law (!), but only a witness to salvation Malcolm B. Yarnell III (227; to which one might ask, “From what, mere Center for Theological Research disaster?” That is nothing!). With Wright, Kirk Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary wants to see justification and sanctification as outflows of the gospel, which itself has to do with Unlocking Romans: Resurrection and the Justifica- the salvation of Israel. One of the unhappy effects tion of God. By J. R. Daniel Kirk. Grand Rapids: of this slip is that Jesus’ resurrection becomes Eerdmans, 2008, 245 pp., $32.00 paper. categorically different from our own. His resur- rection is his justification, but it is ours only in This monograph, the fruit of a dissertation writ- a derivative manner, only a by-product of our ten under Richard Hays, represents yet another incorporation in the faithful community. Not brave attempt to read Paul afresh through the lens only that, but Kirk essentially reads Jesus’ work as of God’s dealings with Israel. At various points that of a good Jew, a good human being, who was the influence of N. T. Wright’s work becomes faithful to death. But Christ appears not only as apparent, although Kirk quite rightly distances the obedient human in Romans. He is also the one himself from Wright on the question of continu- who acts as God by his free gift and grace of giving, ity between this age and the one to come, that is, that liberates not only Israel, but all of humanity between a iustitia civilis and the iustitia Dei. As from sin and death (5:15). And despite Kirk’s con- the title indicates, the burden of the book is to fident claim that in 3:21-26 Paul “clearly” speaks show that Jesus’ resurrection is the key to reading of Jesus’ faithfulness to death, it is God, not Jesus Romans, and that this key has to do with theodicy. who is the actor in the passage, and who displays In Jesus’ resurrection, God justifies himself as the his righteousness in Jesus the mercy seat (222). one who is faithful to his promises to Israel. Of course, the larger problem remains that There is some insight in the claim that Romans the act which answers the question of Israel’s has to do with theodicy. Unfortunately, Kirk, suffering turns out to be a radical re-reading of despite his attempt to distance himself from Scripture, in which the people of God become the philosophical abstractions, construes theodicy ethnically mixed community of Jews and Gen- in Leibnizian terms as the justification of God tiles. It is hard to see how Paul’s message brought before the forum of human reason (or, in this case, any comfort to those for whom it was intended in human questions: in this way Kirk attempts to this reading of the apostle. It is also hard to believe approximate biblical categories). But, as is appar- that Paul understood himself to be re-interpreting ent from the very start in the letter, the matter the Scriptures, rather than unlocking them for his of theodicy is not merely the question of God’s readers through the resurrection of Christ. justice, but rather the conflict between the fallen Although Kirk appropriately underscores the human being and God as to who is in the right: significance of “apocalyptic” as opposed to the homo verax, Deus mendax or, as the apostle, citing straight lines of salvation-history, he ends up strip- Ps 51:6 insists, homo mendax, Deus verax. Human ping present participation in Christ of its eschato- beings and God enter into judgment with one logical significance. Against Kirk it must be said another. Kirk’s failure to recognize the biblical that the “place” of obedience (226) is nothing form of theodicy (see Job!) cripples his work in a other than the new creation: the newness of life of

83 the resurrection entered into the present age (6:4). the matters believed, treated, and celebrated form The “sphere of obedience” is that of the age to the content of this commentary (11). Meiser’s come: the life beyond judgment brings us through remarkable erudition in this task provided a real- judgment. It is not a matter of mere grace, as Kirk ity check for the editors: unless each volume was (along with many others) supposes, but whether to become an encyclopedia in itself, the original “future vindication” is already contained within goal of a comprehensive treatment of the patristic the verdict of Jesus’ resurrection for us. literature had to be surrendered. Along the way, Strangely, this Reformed theologian could use Meiser himself found that he had to settle for just a small dose of Luther in order to keep him- the presentation of the major lines of interpre- self orthodox. The matter at stake in Romans is tation. He nevertheless provides a remarkably not “about God” but—to cite the much-maligned thorough treatment of the reception history of Luther—the single, indivisible subject of Romans Galatians from Polycarp and Ignatius to the ven- is the human being under guilt and condemna- erable Bede, including the apocryphal and Gnos- tion and God the justifier and savior of the human tic literature. As the editors of the series indicate, being. Kirk fails to see that in the community of subsequent volumes may not match the extent Jews and Gentiles, the power and love of the Cre- of this outstanding contribution. It is no wonder ator is manifest in his justifying work in the resur- that Meiser, who serves on the Protestant faculty rection of the Christ, so that believers in Messiah of the Erlangen-Nürnberg University, received remain Jews and Gentiles and yet find community the “Pope Benedict XVI” prize in 2008, given in him alone. annually in recognition of especially valuable scholarly, theological contributions. It is well- Mark A. Seifrid deserved. This volume—as well as the series to follow—not only belongs in the library of every Galater. By Martin Meiser. Novum Testamentum theological faculty, but deserves to be translated Patristicum 9. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rupre- into English for use by a broader public. One can cht, 2007, 373 pp., 89 € ($ 112.00). only hope that an American publisher will have the vision to invest in such an endeavor. This first volume to appear in the NTP series offers considerable promise for those yet to Mark A. Seifrid come. Like the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, the project was born of the fresh The Lord’s Prayer - Viewed in Light of Its Jewish interest in the tradition of Christian reading of Context. By Eduard Lohse. Lucas-Preis 2007. Scripture, long ignored by modern scholars but Trans. Shivaun Heath. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, now receiving its rightful place in interpreta- 2008, 110 pp., € 24.00 ($ 36.00). tion. Rather than merely providing a selection of readings with thematic comments (as does The Leopold-Lucas Award, granted annually by the ACCS), the NTP explores the theology and the Protestant Theological Faculty of Tübingen hermeneutics of the Fathers as they interpret and University, was endowed in 1972 by the Consul employ the text, presenting the material verse- General, Franz Dietrich Lucas, in memory of his by-verse or unit-by-unit as the text and tradition father Rabbi Dr. Leopold Lucas, a doctoral gradu- warrants. Already in the conception of the proj- ate of the faculty, and later a victim of National ect, the original editors rightly decided that they Socialism: Leopold Lucas died in Theresienstadt, should set their aim on something more than a his wife at Auschwitz. The gesture of reconcilia- patristic “Billerbeck.” Not only the words, but tion and forgiveness which this endowment to a

84 German theological faculty expresses can hardly that salvation. be overestimated. Here is a wonderfully balanced book which It is entirely fitting that Eduard Lohse should does not make the mistake of either making assur- have been selected as the 2007 recipient of this ance only a matter of the heart (the witness of the prize, given his longstanding concern to show how Spirit), nor merely a matter of works (the practical earliest Christianity remained deeply rooted in its syllogism), but finds value in both sides of the Jewish context. That scholarly interest was more equation. I wish I had access to this book a couple of the exception than the rule when Lohse com- of years ago when I was preaching through 1 John. pleted his doctoral dissertation on “ordination” This is a fine addition to the NAC Studies in Bible in early Judaism and earliest Christianity in 1949. and Theology series. In his address for the occasion of the award, Lohse presents a fresh comparison of the Lord’s Chad Owen Brand Prayer with contemporary Jewish prayers, espe- cially the Eighteen Benedictions and the Qaddish. To the Jew First: The Case for Jewish Evangelism in Lohse’s reflections are thoughtful and measured: Scripture and History. Edited by Darrell L. Bock there is nothing that is stunning here, but much and Mitch Glaser. Grand Rapids: Kregel Aca- that is useful. Lohse here gathers together a fine, demic & Professional, 2008, 347 pp., $ 17.00 paper historical bibliography on the Jewish background to the Lord’s Prayer as a simple by-product of his The essays of this collection go back to confer- own address, which itself is valuable. The address ences entitled To the Jew first in the new millen- is presented with an English translation parallel to nium which were held in New York (a city that the original German, making the lecture available boasts of the largest Jewish population anywhere to the larger world. in the world) and in Florida in 2000 (11). In the rather passionate “Introduction” (11-19) Mark A. Seifrid Jewish Christian M. Glaser notes that “Jewish evangelism is as much a ‘theological football’ as That You May Know: Assurance of Salvation in 1 any other issue deemed ‘politically incorrect’ by John. By Christopher D. Bass. Nashville: B & H some within the Christian and Jewish commu- Academic, 2008, xiv + 241 pp, $24.99. nity” (12). He expresses hope that “the church will love the Jewish people, affirm the Jewish Christopher Bass, Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship identity of Jewish people who become followers Church in the greater Boston area, has given us of Jesus, pray for the Jewish people, and do all it a very insightful and helpful volume on assur- can to support them – especially by bringing the ance that arose from his doctoral dissertation gospel to God’s chosen people” (13). He suggests which was written under the direction of Pro- that proper discipleship should encourage Mes- fessors Thomas Schreiner, William Cook, and sianic Jews to maintain their Jewish identity as Bruce Ware at the Southern Baptist Theological part of the visible expression of the remnant of Seminary. This volume argues that assurance of Israel as well as part of the church and as a testi- salvation is available to believers, and that it is mony to God’s faithfulness (15, this discussion essentially grounded in the cross-work of Christ could be related to Romans 14-15 and to Paul’s on the believer’s behalf, but that it is also rooted in own understanding of his identity and practice the lifestyle of the individual person. A Christian as a Jew among Jews and Gentiles). For Gla- who is not walking in the Spirit, therefore, may ser the biblical base for evangelizing Jews is the be truly saved, but has no right to assurance of salvation-historical priority of Israel (Rom 1:16

85 “to the Jew first”) and Paul’s attempts of making arship. Though it sounds odd, the same case can Israel jealous through his Gentile mission. and should be argued for Jesus in view of older and Part one examines biblical issues. M. A. Seifrid more recent attempts to drive a wedge between writes on “’For the Jew First’: Paul’s Nota Bene for him and the Judaism of this day. Also an article His Gentile Readers” (24-39; the ongoing witness on the nature and consequences of the temporary to the Jewish people is an essential component hardening of Israel by God and its relationship to of the hope of the gospel, the good news to the the prospects of evangelism would have deserved Jews testifies to the truth of God’s gospel). W. C. more extensive treatment. Kaiser examines “Jewish Evangelism in the New Part two discusses theological issues. C. A. Millennium in Light of Israel’s Future (Romans Blaising writes on “The Future of Israel as a 9-11)” (40-52; making a case for the continuing Theological Question” (102-21; arguing against importance of Jewish evangelism; God’s salvific supercessionism/replacement theology, which purposes for humanity include a positive relation- “dangerously undermines a holistic christology ship between the Jewish people and the nations). by de-emphasizing the Jewishness of Jesus; Jesus’ D. L. Bock studies “The Book of Acts and Jewish teaching on the restoration of Israel and its impli- Evangelism: Three Approaches and One Com- cations for the nations, which needy to be fur- mon Thread” (53-65). The three approaches are ther developed). B. R. Leventhal examines “The the missionary speeches of Acts 2, 3, and 13 which Holocaust and the Sacred Romance: A Return address Jewish audiences and present Jesus as the to the Divine Reality (Implications for Jewish one through whom the God of Israel has worked Evangelism)” (122-54). J. Lanier Burns discusses decisively. Bock emphasises the Jewish nature of the concept of “The Chosen People and Jewish these speeches and suggests how the gospel can Evangelism” (155-67; addressing Jewish identity be communicated to Jews today. D. L. Turner and urging those who bring the gospel to the comments on “Jesus’ Denunciation of the Jewish Jewish people to become knowledgeable about Leaders in Matthew 23, and Witness to Religious the broad spectrum of Jewish thinking and to Jews Today” (66-77). He argues that Jesus’ scath- become better equipped to reach Jews; several his- ing criticism needs to be understood as part of an torical examples for this attitude could be cited!). inner-Jewish debate, i.e., as a critique of a segment R. L. Pratt offers “To the Jew First: A Reformed of the Jewish leadership arising from within Jew- Perspective” (168-88; including the Overture on ish life itself, and “The content and style of this Jewish Evangelism of the 20th General Assembly often heated intrafamily discussion within Israel of the Presbyterian Church in America), and A. G. way typical of the time” (23). This also applies Fruchtenbaum, “To the Jew First in the New Mil- to the alleged anti-Judaism of the New Testa- lenium: A Dispensational Perspective” (189-216). ment, which would have deserved an article on Part three is directly devoted to various issues its own in view of its problematic history. R. E. involved in mission to Jews. M. Glaser draws “Les- Averbeck devotes himself to “The Message of the sons in Jewish Evangelism from the past Century” Prophets and Jewish Evangelism” (78-97; there is (220-40; Jewish mission in its social and political a close relationship between the Holy Spirit and framework; Glaser issues a call to learn from the the institution of prophecy in the Old Testament; creative strategies of the past; there are many evangelism should be seen as a prophetic activity interesting instances of Jewish mission before for the church today). An article on Paul the Jew 1900 that could also teach many lessons; cf. also and the thoroughly (early) Jewish nature of his the The Online Jewish Missions History Project, theology would have been helpful. This has rightly accessible at www.lcje.net). been emphasized in recent New Testament schol- Further essays treat the missiological dimen-

86 sions and importance of Jewish evangelism, as well as the ramifications of the gospel for Jews and Gentiles: A. F. Glasser, “Jewish Evangelism in the New Millennium: The Missiological Dimension” (241-60; examining Jesus’ ministry of proclama- tion, stress on the uniqueness of Jewish missions and application of Jesus’ ministry to evangelism today); M. Rydelnik, “The Ongoing Importance of Messianic Prophecy for Jewish Evangelism in the New Millennium” (261-91; Messianic proph- ecy has always been crucial in Jewish evangelism). The author suggests how it can be used today. The hermeneutics of these prophecies should be treated in more detail, more up-to-date research on these prophecies is urgently needed. K. Kjaer- Hansen contributes “One Way for Jews and Gen- tiles in the New Millennium” (292-311; arguing that if the gospel is not for the Jewish people, then it is also invalid for Gentiles; the discus- sion includes a historical overview and critique of two covenant theology). The volume ends with detailed notes for the essays (312-47). This volume offers several interesting per- spectives on the question whether and how the Christian gospel should be proclaimed by Jews. That these essays are written by North American scholars who live in a country with a significant and influential Jewish minority and without the burden of the European history since the middle ages adds to the discussion, though the absence of this burden occasionally adds a touch of naivité to some statements. Compare also the proceed- ings of the Lausanne Consultation on Jewish Evangelism (www.lcje.net and www.lausanne. org/issue-jewish-evangelism/lcje.html – access to the several Lausanne Occasional Papers; some of these helpful and balanced documents should have been included in such a volume).

Christoph Stenschke Missionshaus Bibelschule Wiedenest and Department of New Testament University of South Africa

87