PRINCIPLE 5 |
While many philosophers and psychologists believe that a human being is entirely physical, the Bible clearly teaches that man is more than that. Man was created in the image of God, who is spirit (Genesis 1:27; John 4:24). Thus, man must have a spirit as well as a body. This spirit is completely nonmaterial and can exist apart from the material body, although the body is not alive without the spirit (2 Corinthians 5:1-8; James 2:26). While body and spirit are together, the spirit is able to govern the conscious actions of the body (perhaps through the cerebral cortex of the brain).
When the Bible refers to the nonmaterial part of a human being, it uses a variety of words including heart, mind, affections, soul, spirit, and will. These are not separate and distinct entities within a human being. Rather, they are simply different ways of referring to the nonmaterial part of man, which we will call the "inner person." (These various biblical words are sometimes used interchangeably and sometimes used to distinguish particular inner functions, but they are never used explicitly to differentiate between distinct inner essences or entities.)
In this section (chapters 5, 6, and 7) we will analyze the functions of the inner person . In the next two sections we will use this analysis in order to derive some very important and practical principles of Christian ministry.
Human beings have three basic kinds of internal functions, as indicated in the diagram below. (This diagram is admittedly an oversimplification of a complex subject. Nevertheless, it is best to begin with a simple analysis and refine it later.)
The intellectual functions include recognizing, thinking, understanding, knowing, remembering, establishing a system of beliefs and a system of values, evaluating, planning, and imagining. The emotional functions include all sorts of feelings, desires, and motives such as sorrow, happiness, hate, love, anger, sympathy, fear, and satisfaction. The volitional function is the function of the will, that is, choosing or deciding.
These three areas, the intellectual, emotional, and volitional, are three areas of function of the inner person, not three separate internal entities. Therefore, instead of saying that the intellect thinks, or that the emotions feel, or that the volition decides, it is more accurate to say that the person thinks, feels, and decides. It is dangerous to break up the inner person in such a way that more than one center of responsibility results, as we do when we claim that our intellect told us to do one thing but our emotions told us to do something else. Such talk is pure rationalization – an attempt to avoid accountability for one's choices and actions.
Ryrie makes a similar point after discussing the multifaceted nature of both the material and the nonmaterial aspects of man.
Although man is a many-faceted being … man is a unity and acts as one. What I do, I do, not a part of myself. It is a mistake to speak of "my old nature doing thus and so" or to say that "this stemmed from the soul and not the spirit." True, certain aspects of my being may originate an action, but that action is performed by me, not part of me. Too often when we speak like that, we tend to excuse ourselves from some evil action by relegating it to some part of our being which somehow becomes detached so that we are relieved of responsibility. …. I am responsible for my actions and cannot shift the blame to some part of me which I have tried to make not a part of me. The hand that pulls the trigger to murder brings imprisonment or death to the whole person. ... No one can say that is was merely the hand ... that was to blame. The person is to blame. (Charles Ryrie, Balancing the Christian Life, Moody Press, 1969, pages 32-33)
Only three basic inner functions are identified on the diagram. Some would add the conscience as either a separate function or a separate entity. But the conscience is merely one of the ways the intellectual functions and the emotional functions work together. The conscience is nothing more than a learned bond which ties together a particular thought with a particular feeling. For example, the memory of a certain act, or a plan to commit a similar act, automatically brings about a particular negative (or positive) feeling.
The fact that our intellectual and emotional functions can cooperate in such a manner is due to God's design. In other words, the conscience is God-given. However, the content of the conscience – that is, the particular emotional reactions that are paired with thoughts about particular acts – is not necessarily God given. The content of one's conscience is learned, often as a result of childhood examples and conditioning.
The fact that the content of the conscience is not implanted by God can be seen in the example of the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 8:4-13). They had long believed that their idols were real gods. When they became Christians this previous "knowledge" (actually false knowledge) was combined with their new knowledge of the true God. So, when they thought of eating food that had been offered to one of the idols, their emotional reaction was strongly negative. This negative reaction of their conscience was determined by the false knowledge they had learned earlier in life; but for many believers the conscience would not register anything negative. So these guilt feelings were not God-given; God had not implanted this emotional reaction in their conscience.
Since the content of the conscience is not God-given, one's unaided conscience is not necessarily a reliable monitor of right and wrong. It may be overly sensitive, as was the case for the Corinthians. Or, it may be insensitive, as is the case with the hypocrites foreseen by Paul (1 Timothy 4:2). But one's conscience can be "instructed" by the Bible's teachings and thus become a more reliable monitor of right and wrong.
The intellectual functions operate on various levels of awareness. Although we can possess a vast store of information, we can be consciously aware of only a small portion of that information at any one time. Conscious thoughts and experiences that are stored in the memory can be likened to black and white pictures that are dropped into a barrel. Those that were dropped in most recently are most easily recalled. Some experiences are more vivid than others, like color pictures, and these too are more easily recalled.
Usually, we are not able to turn our thoughts on and off. Rather, what we are consciously thinking about depends on our current experiences and particularly on whatever is presently impinging on our senses. In fact, it is almost impossible to stop thinking, or to clear the mind. If we want to get rid of one thought, we must replace it with another thought. The last thought in our mind is there until another one replaces it.
The intellect, then, has two distinctive features which set it apart from the other inner functions. First, many of our thoughts come directly from our experiences and sensory input. Second, the intellect can store many ideas, but only a few of these ideas will be in our conscious awareness at any one time. Our emotions are quite different.
Our emotions are positive and negative reactions to whatever thoughts are consciously being considered at any given moment. We do not emote just to emote. For example, if we are going to cry genuinely, we will cry about something. If we are going to be happy, we will have something which makes us feel happy. In other words, emotions do not occur in isolation; they are always a reaction to some intellectual activity (some observation or some recollection).
Also, emotions are not stored. Instead, they are "of the moment." A sad memory may evoke a sad emotional response every time it is recalled to consciousness, but it is the memory which is stored, not the emotion. Emotions are always for the nonce.
Because of what we know about the intellectual functions and the emotional functions, we can determine the sequence in which the three inner functions always occur. As indicated on the diagram: first, something in the environment is sensed. It is seen or heard or detected with one of the other senses. The individual becomes aware of that thing. This awareness is an intellectual function which can be stored and recalled later. Then the individual responds to it emotionally, either positively or negatively. Next, based on what the person is aware of and how he feels about it, he makes a decision, which in turn leads to an action. Thus, there is input, then personal operations (intellectual, then emotional, then volitional) based on that input, and finally output. Or, in other words, there is impression, personal functions, and expression.
Here is a simple scenario which illustrates this sequence:
Or, consider this scenario:
This sequence could be illustrated many times over, both from Scripture and from our common experiences, but it is always the same: impression, three personal functions, expression. Or, in more psychological terms: stimulus, organism, response.
As ministers and workers we would like to be able to influence an individual directly in his inner person. However, we are quite limited in what we can do. The only entrance we have into the inner person is through the senses.
Perhaps we need to refine this last statement. For the purposes of ministry and education, the only legitimate entrance we have into the conscious inner person is through the senses. There are, of course, some approaches which are capable of the direct influence either of the inner person or of the person's behavior. For example, drugs can be used in such a was as to produce certain feelings and actions apart from the individual's usual conscious mental analysis. And behavioral conditioning can be used in such a way as to produce certain behaviors while overriding the individual's conscious thought and personal decisions. But such uses of these methods short circuit the process and are thus just as manipulative as shouting demands while putting a gun to a person's head. They have no place in true education or ministry.
Some might argue that parents use behavioral conditioning all the time, often without realizing it. And this objection is valid. However, our point is not that behavioral conditioning is always bad and always to be avoided, but that if we want meaningful learning and growth to occur, we must engage the inner person in such a way that the child or adult is thinking things through and governing his behavior by making his own decisions. A similar point could be made about drug therapy.
So, for all practical purposes, our influence on a person must "get through" to his inner person through his senses, especially the senses of seeing and hearing. And thus the functions of the inner person which we can influence most directly are the intellectual functions.
… in presenting the Christian gospel we must never, in the first place, make a direct approach either to the emotions or to the will. The emotions and the will should always be influenced through the mind. Truth is intended to come to the mind. The normal course is for the emotions and the will to be affected by the truth after it has first entered and gripped the mind. … Still less should we ever bring any pressure to bear upon either the emotions or the will. We are to 'plead' with men, but never to bring pressure. We are to 'beseech', but we are never to brow-beat. (D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Conversions Psychological and Spiritual, Inter-Varsity Press, 1959, page 39, italics in original)
But the Holy Spirit does not have this same limitation. For one thing, he is not available to be sensed in the same way that we are. A person's senses are designed to receive stimuli from the physical environment. That physical environment includes us, but it does not include the Holy Spirit since he is a spirit. The Holy Spirit, rather than being sensed by the individual as we are, has direct access to every area of the individual's inner person. He can directly influence his thinking, his emotions, and his decisions. This does not mean that the Holy Spirit does in fact give him information directly, or produce certain emotional reactions directly, or make decisions for him. It only means that he can do so. As we will see later in our discussion of evangelism, the Holy Spirit influences people directly, but never overrides their inner functions. In other words, the Holy Spirit never forces anyone to think, feel, decide, or act a certain way. Human freedom of thought and action is one of God's highest priorities, and it should be one of ours also.