What are we made of? It’s not a question about our breakfast choices or career background—it’s one of the most fundamental questions in Christian theology. Are we composed of two parts (body and soul) or three parts (body, soul, and spirit)?

This isn’t academic hairsplitting. How we understand human nature affects how we view salvation, spiritual growth, death, and the resurrection. The good news? Scripture gives us a clear, consistent answer that has guided faithful Christians for centuries.

 

THE THREE-PART APPEAL

The trichotomist view—that we consist of body, soul, and spirit—has obvious appeal. It seems to map neatly onto our experience: our physical body, our emotional and mental life (soul), and our connection to God (spirit). Proponents often point to 1 Thessalonians 5:23 as proof text, where Paul prays that God would sanctify the Thessalonians “completely” and preserve their “whole spirit and soul and body.”

Case closed? Well, not quite.

 

WHAT SCRIPTURE ACTUALLY TEACHES

When we examine the full witness of Scripture, a different picture emerges—one that consistently presents humanity as having two parts, not three.

The Foundation: Genesis

The creation account establishes the pattern. Genesis 2:7 tells us “the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul.” Notice what’s missing: any mention of a third component. God creates a physical body and breathes life into it, creating a “living soul”—the Hebrew word nephesh, which encompasses the entire inner person.

This isn’t an oversight. When Moses describes the most fundamental moment in human existence, he presents a clear two-part structure.

Jesus Confirms the Pattern

Fast-forward to Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 10:28: “Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Here, Christ presents only two components of human nature. If we possessed a separate spirit, why would Jesus omit it from this crucial warning about eternal judgement?

The apostle Paul follows the same pattern. In 2 Corinthians 5:1-8, he contrasts being “at home in the body” with being “away from the body and at home with the Lord.” Paul’s language is consistently binary—there’s the body, and there’s the person who inhabits it.

The Interchangeable Terms

Scripture often uses “soul” and “spirit” to refer to the same reality from different angles. Consider Mary’s song in Luke 1:46-47: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour.” This is Hebrew parallelism—saying the same thing twice using different words for emphasis and beauty.

Similarly, when Jesus died, Matthew 27:50 says he “gave up his spirit,” while Luke 23:46 records his words: “Into your hands I commit my spirit.” These aren’t describing different parts of Jesus departing at different moments—they’re using synonymous terms for the same reality.

James 2:26 provides another clue: “The body apart from the spirit is dead.” Here, “spirit” simply means the breath of life, echoing Genesis 2:7. It’s not a separate component but the life principle that animates the body.

 

MAKING SENSE OF 1 THESSALONIANS 5:23

But what about Paul’s prayer for “spirit and soul and body”? Context is everything. Paul isn’t providing a technical breakdown of human anatomy—he’s emphasising the completeness of God’s sanctifying work. This is a literary device called merism, where you mention parts to represent the whole.

Think of Jesus’s command to love God with all your “heart and soul and mind and strength” (Mark 12:30). Is Jesus teaching we’re made of four distinct parts? Of course not. He’s emphasising totality—complete, wholehearted love.

Paul does the same thing. “Spirit” and “soul” represent the same immaterial part of human nature viewed from different perspectives: soul as the life principle, spirit as our capacity for relationship with God. Paul’s point isn’t division but unity—God’s sanctification affects our entire being.

This interpretation aligns with Paul’s typical two-part language elsewhere. In 2 Corinthians 4:16, he speaks of our “outer self” and “inner self.” In 1 Corinthians 5:5, he mentions “flesh” and “spirit.” Paul thinks in terms of two, not three.

 

WHY THIS MATTERS

Understanding our two-part nature has profound implications. It means we’re unified beings, not collections of separable parts. When God saves us, He doesn’t save our “spirit” while leaving our “soul” behind—he redeems the whole person. When we grow in holiness, it’s not just our “spiritual component” that changes—our entire inner being is transformed.

This unity also clarifies what happens at death. We don’t fragment into pieces; rather, our body separates from our soul/spirit (the unified immaterial part), which goes immediately to be with Christ while awaiting the resurrection reunion.

 

LIVING AS WHOLE PEOPLE

The biblical view calls us to embrace our unified nature. We worship God with our complete being—body, mind, emotions, and will working together. We fight sin knowing it affects our entire nature, not just isolated parts. We pursue holiness understanding that growth involves our whole person, not compartmentalised spiritual development.

Scripture’s witness is clear and consistent: God made us as unities of body and soul. This isn’t reductionism—it’s biblical precision. We are completely known, completely loved, and completely redeemed by the God who created us as a living soul. That’s a truth worth celebrating with every fibre of our being—all two parts of it.

 

ARE WE BODY + SOUL OR BODY + SOUL + SPIRIT? RELATED FAQs

Which Reformed scholars actually hold to trichotomy, and why? A small minority of Reformed theologians, including Franz Delitzsch and some contemporary scholars like Wayne Grudem, have advocated trichotomy while remaining within Reformed orthodoxy. They typically argue trichotomy better explains the intermediate state and spiritual phenomena, though they maintain salvation affects the whole person. However, the vast majority of Reformed tradition—including Calvin, the Westminster divines, Berkhof, and Bavinck—firmly held to dichotomy as more biblically faithful.

• How do dichotomists explain spiritual gifts and the “spiritual man” in 1 Corinthians? When Paul speaks of the “spiritual person” (pneumatikos) versus the “natural person” (psychikos) in 1 Corinthians 2:14-15, he’s describing two types of people, not two parts within a person. The “spiritual person” is someone whose soul/spirit is regenerated and illuminated by the Holy Spirit, enabling them to understand spiritual truths. This describes the condition of the whole inner person, not a separate spiritual component.
• What about out-of-body experiences and near-death phenomena? Reformed dichotomists acknowledge unusual experiences occur but don’t require trichotomy to explain them. Such experiences could involve God temporarily separating soul from body (as in Paul’s “third heaven” experience in 2 Corinthians 12:2-4) or involve spiritual realities beyond our normal perception. The key is that these experiences involve the whole immaterial person (soul/spirit as unified), not a separate spiritual component leaving while the soul remains.

How does dichotomy relate to the image of God (imago Dei)? The image of God encompasses our entire nature as unified beings—both material and immaterial aspects working together to reflect God’s character. We bear God’s image in our rationality, relationality, moral capacity, and dominion calling, which involve both our physical and spiritual dimensions working as one. Trichotomy isn’t necessary to explain our unique God-imaging capacity; rather, our unified body-soul nature perfectly enables us to represent God in creation.

• Do animals have souls according to Reformed dichotomy? Yes, animals have souls in the biblical sense—the Hebrew word nephesh appears for animals in Genesis 1:20-21. However, animal souls are qualitatively different from human souls, lacking the rational, moral, and God-relating capacities that mark us as image-bearers. When we die, our souls continue to exist with God; when animals die, their souls perish with their bodies. This distinction doesn’t require trichotomy but reflects different types of souls.
• How do Reformed theologians handle Hebrews 4:12’s “dividing soul and spirit”? Reformed interpreters understand this as describing the penetrating power of God’s Word to reach the deepest recesses of human nature, not anatomical division. The phrase uses synonymous parallelism (like “joints and marrow”) to emphasise how thoroughly God’s Word searches and judges human thoughts and intentions. Some suggest it refers to different functions of the same immaterial nature—soul as life principle, spirit as God-relating capacity—but still within unified human nature.

What practical differences exist between dichotomy and trichotomy in pastoral ministry? Dichotomy encourages holistic pastoral care that addresses the whole person without artificial compartmentalisation, while trichotomy sometimes leads to over-spiritualisation where “spiritual” problems are separated from emotional or mental struggles. Dichotomous thinking promotes integrated approaches to counselling, discipleship, and spiritual formation. However, both views affirm we’re more than merely physical and that spiritual ministry is essential—the practical differences are often more subtle than the theological ones.

 

ARE WE BODY + SOUL OR BODY + SOUL + SPIRIT? OUR RELATED POSTS

• Imago Dei: What Does It Mean To Be Made in God’s Image?
• How Can I Be Sure I Have the Holy Spirit’s Indwelling?