|
Abstract
Table of Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1
Part I
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Part II
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Chapter 15
Chapter 16
Chapter 17
Chapter 18
|
Part I: Embodiment — and The
Incarnation
Chapter 3
The Human Body
Designed as an Instrument for the
Human Spirit
To any thoughtful
observer the human body, even in its present state of imperfection
because of abuse and disease, must still appear to be the most
wonderful piece of machinery in the animal world. It is an instrument
uniquely designed to give expression to the human spirit in
all its moods. And even the evolutionists would admit that between
this human spirit and animal spirit there lies a seemingly unbridgeable
gulf. The evidence of this is overwhelming to the open mind.
One has only to watch at close
range the hands of a piano virtuoso playing a composition by
Tschaikovsky, with the fingers striking as many as twenty keys
per second across a keyboard of 88 alternatives, to appreciate
something of the manipulative skills in the human body.
Consider not only the creation
of the music to begin with as an act of the spirit, but the superb
engineering of the grand piano with all its technical refinements
and artistic embellishments. Then add to this the development
of the means of telecasting the performance in colour and movement,
providing close-ups of those fingers so clear as
 pg.1
of 11 
to reveal the very texture
of the skin, and projecting this image over thousands of miles
— to recognize what the combination of head and heart and
hands in man can accomplish.
Consider the performance itself.
The eye of the pianist rapidly scans the score, seemingly without
reference to the keyboard, while his ear monitors the touch and
the timing, and his brain interprets the symbols on the page
and directs both hands unerringly to the proper positions. The
total performance — original creation, provision of means
for reproduction, transmutation of the sound waves into radio
waves, and the sending and receiving of these waves and their
faithful reconversion into the original sounds — all these
achievements are entirely dependent upon the interaction between
a human spirit and a human body within a physical world. No link
in this chain can be omitted.
Even the invention of musical scoring
and the very tuning of the instrument itself are involved in
this performance. Each requires perfect co-ordination. Put together,
this is an achievement which demonstrates the truly extraordinary
capabilities of the human spirit and the human body in producing
an astonishing total performance. The number of messages that
are flashing back and forth within the nervous system at the
speed of light, in both performer and listener, must be reckoned
in the billions: and yet the whole system can actually be expected
to work time after time almost flawlessly.
Head, heart, and hand are involved
in a total co-ordination that all too often we accept without
amazement. Why? Because it is so dependable! Man has not yet
produced a machine which even approaches such capabilities. This
total artistic and technical achievement would be utterly impossible
for a mere angelic being — and, dare I say it, even for God
Himself, unless incarnated. Would it be altogether absurd
to add, "And although God can sing (Zephaniah 3:17), yet
He could not write the score without human hands." It was
a finger that wrote the Ten
pg.2
of 11
Commandments and a hand
that wrote on Belshazzar's wall. . . . The words of George Eliot
are apropos in this connection. In her poem Stradivarius,
she wrote:
'Tis God gives skill,
But not without man's hands:
He could not make
Antonio Stradivari's violins
Without Antonio.
Perhaps it would
be more correct to say, "He will not make. . . ." rather
than "He could not make. . . ." for it is by God's
choice that He has decided to leave such things to us — not
because of any limiting necessity imposed upon his omnicompetence
but perhaps because He desires our company.
The whole performance — artistic,
gymnastic, and technical — is so extraordinary when one stops
to think about it, as to be little short of miraculous. The whole
of man is totally absorbed in such an achievement. Without the
body to support the mind, and the mind via the brain to direct
the body, none of this could be possible. And it would surely
be patently absurd to say, 'Oh, an animal body could probably
come close enough if properly trained.' The human body is no
more an animal body than a human spirit is an animal spirit.
The two are permanently wedded teams operating at entirely different
levels.
It is obvious that the genius of
the composer would not be made apparent without the player and
his piano! Nor the skill of the pianist and the perfection of
his instrument without the creative genius of the composer. Such
accomplishments are interdependent; as they are in the design
and erection of a Gothic cathedral, or — to move into another
area — putting a man on the moon and bringing him back again
with mathematical precision. Man's creative spirit and manipulative
skill combine to produce near miracles, and unlike animals man
has a delightful consciousness of the achievement.
pg.3
of 11
In
an almost infinite variety of forms the potential of the human
spirit and of the human body are found matched in every imaginable
permutation and combination. When Christians speak easily of
the rebirth of the spirit without also telling of the
redemption of the body, they are speaking only of the saving
of half the man — which is really no salvation at all, for
MAN.
This one example of the capacities
of human beings could be multiplied almost ad infinitum. It
is not that man can fly with the ease and manoeuverability and
precision of a bird, or run like the cheetah which has been clocked
at 70 miles per hour, or swim with the speed and grace of the
dolphin, or jump like the kangaroo or gazelle, or perform the
aerial acrobatics of the monkey or squirrel, or scale the mountain
cliffs like the goat or mountain sheep. In such particular achievements,
essential to the survival of these animals, they often easily
out-perform the capacities of the human body. But they do not,
except on rare occasions, even in these achievements out-perform
what man can do by his combination of inventive spirit
and unique body.
The capabilities of man are almost
unlimited and they are freed from the necessities of mere survival.
Indeed, such is the spirit in man that he is even willing to
elaborate his culture to the point where it cannot survive! If
we exclude such aberrations, the embellishments with which man
beautifies or seeks to beautify his world are a reflection of
the manifest delight which God Himself took in exhibiting his
own creativeness. They demonstrate a kind of common grace that
smoothes the troubled path man must now follow because of his
fallen nature. Without his body
man would almost certainly be not one whit more creative than
angels appear to be. Only God and man are creative in this sense:
God because He is God, and man because he is MAN, a human
spirit in a human body — both of them designed
and created by God.
With the creativity of his mind
and its brain, the acuity of his stereoscopic vision,
his refined manual dexterity, his
pg.4
of 11
easily maintained erect
posture, his vastly more versatile nervous system that makes
his body an extension of his mind, he can achieve all kinds of
exceedingly complex tasks which often, by reason of his skill,
appear quite simple. Actually, they are far beyond the capabilities
of animals — such as threading a needle which even the most
"educated" chimpanzee cannot do!
Now the idea
that the spirit in man is a direct creation of God is
very ancient and strongly supported by Scripture. Almost all
theologians, Protestant and Roman Catholic alike, agree to this
general thesis in Adam's case, at the very least. But a very
large majority would go one step further and say that each individual
spirit is still being created, one by one, and infused into each
individual human body at some early stage in its development
in the womb or at the very latest at the time of the drawing
of the first breath.
Thomas Aquinas (1226—1274),
one of the giant intellects of Christian Medieval times, argued
that the soul in each case is specifically designed by
the Creator to suit the particular body for which it is intended.
(24) Body and spirit
are thus matched, not merely in a general sense but in a particular
sense in each case. And a number of modern theologians, both
Protestant and Catholic, support this thesis and find it, too,
clearly reflected in Scripture. (25)
If God is sovereign and has appointed
to each of his redeemed children a specific life work, and if
each of us is a duality of body and spirit, then it follows of
necessity that both the genetic endowment of the body and the
life experiences that mold the spirit, must equally have
been divinely ordained as must also the nature of the
spirit which God creates.
Task and talent have to match if
the plan is to work out. As A. H. Strong in his Systematic
Theology put it (quoting W. Gladden): "Heredity is God
working in us, environment is God working around us." (26) God never calls us individually
to a life work for which He has not also equipped us both
24. Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica,
Book I, Question 89; Thomistic Psychology, Robert
Brennan, New York, Macmillan, 1956, p.326.
25. See, for example, Abraham Kuyper, quoted by G. C. Berkouwer,
Man: the Image of God, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans,
1963, p.290.
26. Strong, A. H., Systematic Theology, Valley Forge,
Pennsylvania, Judons Press, 1974 (reprint), p.624.
pg.5
of 11
physically and spiritually.
In a very ancient book, The
Testament of Naphtali, we find this observation (2:2-4):
"As the potter knoweth the vessel, how much it is to contain,
and bringeth the clay accordingly, so also doth the Lord make
the body in accordance with the spirit and according to the capacity
of the body doth He implant the spirit. . . and as the potter
knoweth the use of the vessel, what it is meet to be used for,
so also doth the Lord know how far it is capable."
This extraordinary
combination of body and spirit that is man, is in fact so extraordinary
as to constitute a new "thing" in the animal world.
He appears suddenly on the scene, not just as a continuation
or routine link in the great chain of being with refinements
that are merely quantitative. These refinements are qualitative
to such an extent as to constitute a virtual discontinuity
in any imagined evolutionary process. The geneticist Richard
Goldschmidt proposed that a sudden jump of this kind should be
called a saltation since it clearly involves much more
than a mutation. (27)
George G. Simpson felt that this term came too near to the supernatural
concept of creation. So he proposed instead the use of the term
a quantum leap, borrowing from physics which thus gave
it a more respectable parentage! (28)
Today even this term is unfashionable
and has been replaced by the current phrase punctuated equilibrium,
brought into popular favour by Stephen J. Gould. (29) It means simply that the
normal course of evolution proceeds by very small formal shifts
that scarcely rock the boat until suddenly a dramatic discontinuity
occurs to "punctuate" the smooth course of events.
But a rose by any other name will smell as sweet, and that is
all these terms are — roses by other names. It would be difficult
to distinguish an evolved species from a created one in the fossil
record!
Each of these new phrases is manifestly
the old one spelled differently. . . . They tend to be
presented to the public in the guise of new explanations, whereas
in point
27. Saltation: Richard Goldschmidt, "An
Introduction to a Popularized Symposium on Evolution," Scientific
Monthly, Oct., 1953, p.187.
28. Quantum Leap: G. G. Simpson, Tempo and Mode in Evolution,
New York, Columbia University Press, 1944.
29. Punctuated Equilibrium: Stephen Jay Gould, "Punctuated
Equilibrium — a different way of seeing," New Scientist,
15 Apr., 1982, p.137.
pg.6
of 11
of fact they have no
explanatory value whatever. They are old descriptions, not new
explanations. In no way do they account for the sudden
appearance of man in all his tragic glory. They merely demonstrate
that man's coming established a genuine discontinuity.
Professor Suzanne Langer
who is no friend of the Christian viewpoint, speaking of language
as one of man's singular achievements, put the matter thus: "Language
is without doubt one of the most momentous and at the same time
the most mysterious product of the human mind. Between the clearest
animal call of love or warning or anger, and a man's least trivial
word, there lies a whole day of creation" [emphasis
mine]. (30)
In a somewhat similar vein
Humphrey Johnson wrote: "There is a wider difference between
a man and a gorilla than there is between a gorilla and a daisy."
(31) Such statements
could be multiplied from many sources. J. Fiske, an early contender
for the evolution of man's body, as quoted some years ago by
James Orr, remarked, "While for zoological man you
can hardly erect a distinct family . . . for psychological
man you must erect a distinct kingdom, nay, you must
dichotomize the universe — putting man on one side and all
else on the other." (32)
It is true. Man stands apart from
the rest of nature. And contrary to Fiske's admission, his apartness
relates to his body as well as to his psyche, since without this
body such a spirit would be impotent, while such a body without
such a spirit could only be a total anachronism in the evolutionary
scale of things.
The concept
of a spirit that is specially suited to a body is an ancient
one which we shall look at later, but it is worth noting at this
point because we all too often assume that the only thing God
is concerned with perfecting in his people is their spirit.
This presupposes that the spirit can stand by itself and
will come into the presence of God by itself. But as we shall
see increasingly in the chapters which
30. Langer, Suzanne, Philosophy in a New
Key, New York, Mentor Books, 1942, p.83.
31. Johnson, Humphrey, quoted by P. G. Fothergill, Nature,
4 Feb., 1961, p. 341.
32. Fiske, J., Through Nature to God, 1899, p.82: quoted
by James Orr, God's Image in Man, Grand Rapids, Eerdman's,
1948, p.60.
pg.7
of 11
follow, this is not at
all the case.
It is obvious that Adam's body
was created before his spirit was created. And probably this
is the case in every individual. But this does not signify that
the spirit is then poured into a vessel whose shape has arisen
by chance. Both the vessel and its content are designed with
a single purpose in view for the individual. Certainly a body
can exist without a spirit, as it did in Adam's case while his
body lay on the earth awaiting the breath of God, and so it may
do in ours — for a few hours after our spirit has fled, for
example. This potential for independence of each component from
the other leads me to suggest an analogy regarding the human
body as a vehicle designed ahead of time for the human spirit
which is to animate it.
If a man builds a house for his
animals, he suits its construction to their nature, besides being
guided by what he hopes to do with them. If he was raising snakes
for their venom, he would build a house from they could not escape;
for his cattle he obviously builds a much larger house from which
they can readily be allowed out; for his horses, the egress must
be more carefully managed since they are vagrant creatures by
nature. For his dog he would construct a house that would in
some measure share his own home comforts since this is what the
dog will probably do during much of its life.
Thus the nearer he gets to a house
for a creature sharing his own nature, the more nearly
will its total accouterments resemble his own house. And as to
his own house, how does he build it? As far as he has the means,
he will build it to suit his own nature. To some greater or lesser
extent he will seek to satisfy the natural inclinations of his
wife and his family, but fundamentally if it lies in his power
to do so, the builder will build it as a vehicle for the expression
of his own person.
Now what, then, will God do if
He decides to build a house which is to be fit for Himself,
which in due course will be His habitation, a house which
is to serve Himself for
pg.8
of 11
thirty-three years, in
which He will live and express His character, occupying
it day and night, constantly, actively, fully, sleeping and waking,
being born and dying? It will be a house capable of being so
lived in, appropriately and worthily. It will be a house that
can sustain the demands of habitability that He will make
upon it.
It will be beautiful because God
clearly loves beauty, having created so many beautiful things
in nature. It is difficult to see how the beauty of many creatures
can possibly serve any mere survival purpose, while many very
ugly creatures (especially insects) survive and multiply very
freely! Moreover, it must be flexible enough to allow the whole
spectrum of human mood from delight to near desperation, from
a groaning within to a sudden exclamation of glad surprise, for
it must make communication by gesture or tone of voice, or even
"turning to look" in sorrow and reproof, or turning
in anger. For the body is by no means without its own powers
of communication. And it must be kingly enough that worship at
the proper time is both naturally accorded and accepted with
dignity.
Finally, and even more importantly,
it must be such a house that while it will never of itself wear
out, it can nevertheless be deliberately sacrificed when the
proper time arrives.
All of this, of course, points
to the Incarnation. It was just such demands that were to be
thrust upon the body of the Last Adam for which preparation was
made in every particular by the creation of the body of the First
Adam. And these capacities must therefore apply to the body of
the very first human being as they must to the very last human
being — as we have already noted. If this is not so in the
most complete sense imaginable, then the Last Adam surrenders
his right to that title and can no longer stand as substitute
for the First Adam to act as the new Federal Head of the redeemed
family of man.
Aristotle wrote, "The nature
of man is not what he is born as but what he is born for."
(33a) If I may
convert this into
33a. Aristotle: see Ashley Montague, Human Heredity, New
York, World Publishing 1959, p.19.
pg.9
of 11
Christian terms, it
could be re-written as: "the body of man is not what he
is born as now, but what his body was designed for then."
Tertullian has a wonderfully descriptive
passage in which he depicts the Creator bending over his clay
as He eagerly fashions man's body. "The truth is, a greater
matter was in progress, out of which the creature under consideration
was being fashioned. So often, then, does it receive honour,
as often as it feels the hands of God, when it is touched by
them, pulled by them, drawn out, and molded into shape. Imagine
God wholly employed and absorbed in it — with his hand, his
eye, his labour, his purpose, his wisdom, his providence, and
above all, his love which was dictating the lineaments of this
creature." (33b)
Tertullian concluded, "Whatever
was the form and expression which was then given to the clay
by the Creator, Christ was in his thoughts as one day
to become Man, because the Word, too, was to be both clay and
flesh, even as the clay (in the Creator's hands). For so did
the Father previously say to the Son, 'Let US make man in OUR
image, after OUR likeness.' So God made man, that is to say the
creature which He was molding and fashioning, after the image
of God — or in other words, after the image of Christ
did God make him. . . . That clay which was even at that
moment putting on the image of Christ who was to come in the
flesh, was not only a work of God but actually the pledge and
surety of God [for the redemption of man]." [emphasis mine]
Such a house for the spirit of
man, like Solomon's Temple, was not merely to be like any other
pagan temple already in existence, any more than Adam's body
was merely a copy of some other animal body already in existence.
It was to be exceptional, "exceedingly magnifical"
(1 Chronicles 22:5) as the King James Version quaintly puts it!
And originally it must have been
glorious indeed. Imagine a human body which, despite the defilement
of sin to which it was to become subjected all too quickly, nevertheless
survived with all its energies largely unimpaired for
33b. Tertullian, "On the Resurrectlon
of the Flesh," Chapter VI, in Latin Christianity,
Cleveland Coxe in of Ante-Nicene Fathers of the Christian
Church, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson,
New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, vol.III, 1918, p.549.
pg.10
of 11
nearly a thousand years!
The body in which Jesus Christ took up residence for some thirty-three
years was Adam's original body recovered — and it, too, was
"magnifical."
The divine Architect had designed
it for Himself in the first place, so we may be sure that the
body of the Lord Jesus Christ was not the tumble-down house in
which we struggle through life. His body magnificently supported
Him daily as He lived out his life among men; and it provided
perfectly all the resources for the expression of his divine
nature. His presence in the body was so magnificent that even
the most callous of his enemies had to step back sometimes in
awe, and they only had the courage to abuse Him because He deliberately
veiled his glory, and allowed them to do so.
Undefiled by sin and indwelt by
the Lord Himself, a superb human body appeared on the stage of
human history and men worshipped without shame or hesitation
the One who possessed it. I suspect that in our present sinful
state we might easily have fallen down and worshipped Adam as
he came from the hand of God — such was the glory of his
body.
Evolution can present us with nothing
comparable which could serve as a prototype for the Last Adam.
pg.11
of 11
Copyright © 1988 Evelyn White. All rights
reserved
Previous Chapter Next
Chapter
|
