The Joy Unto Life

Earlier this week I had the chance to spend some time in good discussion with friends. The topic of discussion, spurred on by the burgeoning spring season, was the seed. And both in our discussion and my personal reflection on the seed it became clear that the essence of the seed is potential. Within the seed is so much potential… but that potential is yet to be realized. And that potential (seed) may or may not be realized, depending on what is done with it. This is one important theme of Jesus’s parable of the soils (or parable of the sower) in Mathew 13 (and other places). In reflecting on potential as the essence of the seed and what it means for the self, I recalled:

…the self is just as much possible as necessary; although it is indeed itself, it has to become itself. To the extent that it is itself, it is necessary; and to the extent that it must become itself, it is a possibility [or potential]…. Surely what the self now lacks is actuality…. [Yet] it is not the case… that necessity is a unity of possibility and actuality; no, actuality is the unity of possibility [potential] and necessity.

Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death, p. 66

So in understanding the self, there are three concepts here to grasp: potential, necessity, and actuality. Who one is in actuality is a synthesis of one’s potential self, or what one could be, with one’s necessary self, or who one is now. Another way to put this is that one’s essence in actuality is the marriage of what one could be (potential) with what one is doing now (necessity), because what one is doing now either brings into being that potential (making it actual), or it does not… in which case the seed (one’s potential) is wasted. So the essence of one’s self is not only who one is today, but it is also that self that one is becoming… which depends upon one’s actions and decisions today. The self that clings to possibility but does not yield to the necessary steps it takes to realize that possibility, loses itself.

Here the self becomes an abstract possibility; it exhausts itself floundering about in possibility, yet it never moves from where it is nor gets anywhere, for necessity is just that ‘where’.

Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death, p. 66

So it is the synthesis of possibility and necessity that is the essence of the self as it unfolds within the dimension of time.

But what if we consider the self from another dimension, one of a higher order… that of consciousness? For a self cannot possess the will to synthesize one’s potential in the future with one’s actions and decisions in the present apart from consciousness. Here within the dimension of consciousness, the self in actuality is the synthesis of the infinite with the finite.

The self is the conscious synthesis of infinitude and finitude, which relates to itself, whose task is to become itself, which can only be done in the relationship with God. To become oneself, however, is to become something concrete. But to become something concrete is neither to become finite nor to become infinite, for that which is to become concrete is indeed a synthesis.

Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death, p. 60

These two dimensions of the self are isomorphic: Just as the self in time is a synthesis of one’s potential with one’s necessary actions and decisions today, the self in consciousness is a synthesis of the infinite (soul… and its potential) with the finite (body… as the necessary element). But necessary for what?… The body (finitude) is necessary for the soul’s (infinitude) expression of its potential. And that expression is the self.

Just as it is true that the ripe tomato on the vine is a synthesis of the seed (potential) and the (necessary) elements [soil, water, sunlight], the self too is a synthesis of the seed from the infinite (soul… and its potential) and the necessary (finite) element [the body]. Our language expressions of Father God and mother earth are no accident, though we seldom consciously reflect on their meaning. There is a clear sexual image here, a marriage of the infinite with the finite in which their union produces oneself. And oneself is created when the seed of “the One” from the infinite (soul) is implanted within the soil of the earth (body).

In the synthesis between the soul (infinite) and the body (finite), that infinite potential works within the necessary finite to formulate the best possible expression of itself that it can. And the first task in necessity is to develop that vehicle by which one’s potential may be expressed. And that’s exactly what happens! That breathe of life (spirit) in us, which is conceived at the synthesis, moves to organize and formulate the body utilizing the material it is given to work with.

That breath of life unpacks the genetic material passed down in the finite and begins to utilize it as the blueprint for constructing the body. And that genetic material is a significant part of the expression of other selves passed down from generation to generation, streamlining and improving on past designs within the finite in order to maximize that potential expression of this self in development now. So each individual has an expression (self) to make, but the collective human race is likewise contributing to ever clearer, culminating, maximized, and diverse expressions of the infinite over time too. Why diverse? Well because the infinite cannot be grasped or contained by the finite… the material is too limiting, and so the unity that is the infinite must find unique and diverse expressions in the material world to maximize the potential in those expressions (selves). And together, the many diverse expressions find harmony and unity in their song of the infinite (God, or “the One”).

And so that breath of life (spirit) unpacks the genetic material and gets to work, developing that body by which it is to find its expression. As the spirit moves to construct the body it finds necessary the addition of material to work with (food, etc.) by which it constructs the body for its expression. And yet even now, in constructing that body, the spirit finds an expression. And that expression is the self now in necessity, but synthesized with the potential of what it could be in the future. And it is this synthesis of necessity and potential, of the now and the not yet, it is this spirit which is conceived in the union, which pushes the self within an infant forward in development (motor development, cognitive development, emotional development, moral development, language development, psychosocial development) up through childhood and in to early adulthood.

Kierkegaard presented us with three stages along life’s way: The aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. And he was right that the aesthetic is necessarily the first stage in life by which the self finds its expression in the developmental process. In order for the spirit to develop that self by which it will maximize its potential expression in the future, it makes the body its primary focus during childhood. In childhood, it is the development of the body which is necessary for maximizing the future self’s potential expression. And so, the aesthetic is the means by which the body maximizes in development. And as that development occurs the potential of the soul (infinite) regenerates itself in the body (finite), for it creates potential within the body itself as a vehicle by which it may maximize its expression (self) in the world.

Still, that potential now generated within the body must be harnessed by necessity in order to actualize its infinite expression (and not be hijacked for merely finite expressions). And so the self enters a new stage intended to harness the potential within the body, the ethical. And this is exactly what happens! As a child grows and enters adolescence and then young adulthood, gradually more and more emphasis and energy is directed toward moral and ethical responsibilities in order to harness the potential within the body and steer it in the right direction. More energy is given to self-discipline in order to maximize the potential which has been generated in the body.  

And the last and final stage is that ultimate expression in which the body with all its potential aligns properly with the soul in all its potential, which aligns properly with the One in all His potential (which is infinity itself), unifying the infinite with the finite in so powerful a way that its euphoric expression (which is worship) generates ever more life. How does this happen? It occurs as one’s self reaches the culmination of its expression, the limits of its capacity and comes to recognize that it is not enough,  and can never possibly be enough. For how could the finite possibly capture and contain the infinite? And so the self recognizes its empty state and lays itself before “the One”, yielding to that which is beyond itself. And by laying itself down, it receives life freely.

Again, a clear sexual image emerges here, as the One fills one’s self with His Holy Spirit. And that Holy Spirit produces fruit within the self, what is called the fruit of the spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control) [Galatians 5: 22-23]. And that union, that worship, is both expressive and submissive without limits in its infinity, but limited only by the capacity of the finite within the self. So in time, the finite within the self gives way, fully yielding to the power of the infinite within, and in death lays itself down in full submission to that greater power which cannot be contained.

When my feeble life is o’er
Time for me will be no more
Guide me gently, safely o’er
To Thy kingdom’s shore, to Thy shore

*Accompanying music for this post is Just a Closer Walk with Thee, performed by the Avett Brothers at Virginia Tech in 2012. I attended this show with two good friends and this song was the highlight. You can have a listen by finding it at the following youtube link (and you get to watch the performance of this song too).

Avett Brothers- Closer Walk with Thee

In His Image

A while back I posted A system for Approaching the World, my first philosophically oriented post that outlined my view of human nature, how to live a good life, and how I understand our drives, needs, pain and suffering in the world. In that post I shared the metaphysical grounding of this approach which is rooted in tenants of the Christian faith, particularly in a) its articulation of God (the creator) as triune in nature: God as One, but in three persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit); and b) that human beings are made in His image (which I take, among other things, to indicate a triune nature in human beings: soul, spirit, body). I’d like to here expand on how I’ve come to view the structure of human beings as isomorphic to that of God.

The key passage that has led me to this understanding is found in the beginning…

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness: and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Gensis 1: 26-27

A number of years ago I was reflecting on this passage and was struck by the realization that it is the trinity talking here with and within itself. In the decision to make man, and to make man in His image, there is clear intention to draw the reader to the triune nature of God in the use of plural language when referencing Him (“Us,” “Our image,” and “Our likeness”). And it is wholly consistent that if this triune nature of God is centralized and highlighted in the stated intention to make man in that image, that this triune nature would be centralized and highlighted in man (who was made in that triune image). This truth I see with a clear and distinct perception in relation to the passage.

Simultaneously, while reading this passage I was very much aware of the different aspects of human nature articulated as soul, spirit, and body in scripture/ and the distinction between soul and body in philosophy:

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Thessalonians 5: 23

Plato’s distinctions between soul and body: The Republic, X, 608ff; Phaedrus (the chariot allegory of the soul).

Descartes distinction between soul and body: Discourse on Method (Part 4); Meditation II (Of the Nature of the Human Mind; and that it is more easily known than the Body).

The distinction between the human soul and body I felt I had clarity on, but the distinction between soul and spirit was more confusing to me. This is in large part due to the manner in which both scripture and philosophy often utilize the two terms interchangeably. Still, I quickly recognized three leads on this front (distinguishing soul from spirit): the first being to look to the relation between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit within the trinity, the second being found in Hebrews 4:12, and the third being to examine the words (as used in Hebrews 4:12 and 1 Thessalonians 5:23) in their Greek roots. 

In examining the relation between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit there are a number of passages that can be examined, yet the most helpful passages to me are:

Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

John 5: 19

For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.

John 12: 49

“When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me…”

John 15: 26

In each of these passages Jesus (the Son) makes clear that he is the manifestation here on earth of the will of His Father. The Father is the one who wills, and He (the Son) is the expression of that will in the finite, temporal world. We also see that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, yet even as the Spirit proceeds from the Son, the Son sends the Spirit from the Father. There is an order of authority here which Jesus is careful to follow: The Father wills, and sends the Spirit with that will to the Son, who empowers the Son to express that will in the finite, temporal world. And then as Jesus obeys he likewise sends the spirit back to the Father in adoration and love. And in John 15:26 He (the Son) sends the Spirit back to the Father with His (the Son’s) will as a request… that the Father send the Spirit to His (the Son’s) followers to testify to Him (the Son). As such, the Spirit is the mediating entity between the Father and the Son. As such, I took the relation between the human soul, spirit, body to be the same. The soul is the seat of human will, intellect, authority; the body is the expression of the soul’s will in the finite, temporal world; the spirit is the mediating force which proceeds from the soul to the body and then back again to the soul.

Following the second lead about the distinction between soul and spirit I examined the passage in Hebrews:   

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Hebrews 4: 12

Here I found parallels to follow: soul/joints and spirit/marrow. Considering these relations further I recognized the joint as a hinge that connects one bone to the next, as the soul is that hinge that connects the finite to the infinite, the temporal to the eternal, the physical to the spiritual. And likewise I recognized the marrow of the bone to be that internal place in which blood cells (the lifeblood of the body) are produced, as the spirit is the lifeblood of the body empowering it towards its culminating expression.

Following the third lead in distinguishing the soul from the spirit (and what the heck, the body too) I looked up definitions for each term. It appears to me that each definition speaks for itself and generally corresponds to (or at least does not negate) those distinctions already discovered in the previous 2 leads: 

Psuché (psyché): the soul, life, self, breath/ a) the vital breath, breath of life, b) the human soul, c) the soul as the seat of affections and will, d) the self, e) a human person, an individual. (ψυχή, ῆς, ἡ) [Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine]

Pneuma: wind, breath, spirit/ the vital principle by which the body is animated/ the spirit is that which animates and gives life, the body is of no profit (for the spirit imparts life to it, not the body in turn to the spirit; cf. Chr. Frid. Fritzsche, Nova opuscc., p. 239) (πνεῦμα, ατος, τό) [Part of speech: Noun, Neuter]

Sóma: body, flesh, the physical body; the body of the church.( σῶμα, ατος, τό) [Part of speech: Noun, Neuter]

These are the Greek terms used in Hebrews 4:12, and 1 Thessalonians 5:23 for soul, spirit, and body respectively

One question that might be raised is in relation to the feminine part of speech for the soul (Psuché). The key point in addressing this apparent confusion is in recognizing that the soul is not feminine in relation to the human spirit and body, but rather it is feminine in relation to that which created it (God). This adoption of a feminine part of speech for the human soul highlights the ontological distinction between the two (God and human), and likewise highlights that God’s is a necessary existence while human beings exist in an contingent existence

So taking all of this into consideration I’ve continued pondering the interrelation of these three aspects of the human being (soul, spirit, body), understanding them from the Genesis passage to be isomorphic to the triune God. And as I pondered their interrelations I began to read Kierkegaard’s The Sickness Unto Death, and I found immediate confirmation and alignment of my considerations of the soul, spirit, body relations as Kierkegaard described the human spirit:

The human being is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self? The self is a relation which relates to itself, or that in the relation which is its relating to itself. The self is not the relation but the relation’s relating to itself. A human being is a synthesis of the infinite [soul] and the finite [body], of the temporal [body] and the eternal [soul], of freedom and necessity. In short a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between two terms. Looked at in this way a human being is not yet a self.

In a relation between two things the relation is the third term in the form of a negative unity, and the two relate to the relation, and in the relation to that relation; this is what it is from the point of view of soul for soul and body to be in relation. If, on the other hand, the relation relates to itself, then this relation [spirit] is the positive third, and this is the self.

Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death, p. 43-44

This is a potent and powerful expression of the relation between the soul, spirit, and body. The soul and body are distinct, and the spirit is found in the synthesis between the two.

An example: Much like when a husband and wife get married they create a third entity, the relationship itself, and they are both in relationship to one another and both in relationship to the relationship itself. And the relationship is more than the sum of its parts, you cannot simply add the qualities or strengths of each individual together and generate this… it is rather multiplied and not added. The two together create a third entity that is altogether different. And that third synthesizes the relation of the two, binding them together intensely. Each individual will often act for the good of the relationship (even if it is not what either individual wants), which in turn rewards them with its own benefits. And we call this a spiritual connection between the two, rightfully so… because as the relationship grows it becomes more itself, that is, its spirit is manifest in its relating to itself… and in so doing it unifies the two.   

This is how I came to understand the relation between the human soul, spirit, and body. It is by design isomorphic to the triune God and as such, the interrelation of its parts mirror the interrelation among the components of the trinity (Father, Son, Spirit). The human soul is the seat of the will, the intellect, the immortal aspect of humankind that acts as a hinge between the finite and infinite realm, pondering that which is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, and admirable of “the One” and willing that these wonders be expressed in the finite world. The human spirit emanates from the soul as that breath of life in the body, moving it towards that culminating expression. The body, moved by the spirit, works toward the expression of that will (and vision) cast by the soul. And as the body moves as that expression it sends the spirit back to the soul in love and obedience, seeking further clarity and direction in honing that expression. At least that is the design…  

*Accompanying music for this post is “Lost in My Mind” by The Head and the Heart. Give this song a listen by scrolling to the top right side of the blog to find it in the accompanying music.

The Head and the Heart, Lost in My Mind