WagooMusic

Man a Trinity (Spirit, Soul, Body)

Study By: Lehman Strauss

The Christian doctrine of immortality cannot be understood apart from the right conception of the tripartite nature of men. many think that man is a physical being only. there is a great danger of any man thinking thus of himself. In his desire to satisfy the needs of the body there is the tendency on man’s part to lose sight of the fact that he is immortal. there have been persons who have lived all of their lives either in ignorance or willful neglect of a life after death, but upon their death-bed they suddenly realized that they were more than physical beings.

There is an idea also that prevails largely today that man consists of only two component parts: namely, body and spirit. In the thinking of the writer this view appears to be one that might create confusion in the minds of any Christians. While soul and spirit are so closely related that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish accurately between them, there seems to be only one logical conclusion: namely, that “soul” and “spirit” are not the same. the Bible does make a distinction.

Man is a triune being because he is created in the image of God. “God said, Let us make man in Our image” (Genesis 1:26). We know that God is a Trinity. the Holy Trinity is clearly set forth in the Apostle Paul’s benediction that closed his second Corinthian Epistle: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen” (2 Corinthians 13:14). Our Lord Himself said, in what we call “The great Commission”: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 28:19). Created in the image of God, man is likewise a trinity. He has a spiritual nature that is separate and distinct from the body in which it dwells.

The two following passages from the Bible clearly establish the fact that man is a triune being composed of spirit, soul, and body:

I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thessalonians 5:23).

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow (body), and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Hebrews 4:12).

In spite of the erroneous teaching of “Jehovah’s Witnesses” and of other false sects that “no man has a soul,” the Bible states emphatically that man was created a trinity of spirit, soul, and body even as the eternal God is Himself a trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. the trinity of man is an essential part of the image relationship between him and God. Life is not ultimately physical and the body is not the whole man. and we might add that neither the body in itself, nor the soul in itself, nor the spirit in itself makes up the whole man, but he is “spirit and soul and body.” this must be seriously considered and definitely agreed to before we can comprehend with any accuracy the subject of life after death. In this opening chapter we shall confine our material to the spirit and the soul inasmuch as the body will be considered in succeeding chapters on the resurrection.

Earlier this year, I had breakfast with George Church, professor of genetics and director of the Center for Computational Genetics at Harvard Medical School. (Click here to read my profile of Church in the New York Times.)

A pioneer in developing DNA sequencing technologies, and in researching everything from epigenetics and microbiomics to synthetic biology, Church has co-founded or advises over 20 companies. he also has launched the Personal Genome Project with a goal of sequencing the complete genomes of 100,000 volunteers.

When I asked Church what he was most excited about right now, he answered without hesitation: “I’m thinking a lot about using regeneration as the key to treatments and keeping people healthy.”

TR: You mean regeneration using stem cells?

Church: Yes, induced pluripotent stem (IPS) cells (see, “Growing Heart Cells Just for You”). this is where I’m putting almost all of my chips these days, because it combines many of my interests–genomics, sequencing, epigenetics, synthetic biology, stem cells. I don’t think people have fully appreciated how quickly adult stem cells and sequencing and synthetic biology have progressed. They have progressed by orders of magnitude since we got IPS. Before that, they basically weren’t working.

Is this because IPS cells are relatively easy to create and to engineer?

You can use them to reprogram genomes–not sequence them, but to reprogram them genetically and epigenetically. In other words you make the minimum changes it takes to get them where you want them to be genetically and epigenetically and then you program the cells into tissues.

What do you mean?

Let’s use stem cells in bone marrow as an example. They are easy to use and to get to work when you implant them in bone marrow. You might one day have three choices. You can have bone marrow from someone else that is matched to you, or that is from you, or bone marrow that is matched to you and comes to you, but is better than you. this better bone marrow might be [engineered to be] resistant to one virus, or to all viruses. It could have a bunch of alleles that you picked out of super centenarians, alleles that you have reason to believe are at least harmless and possibly helpful. so now you have choice, a patient who can take a good bone marrow that he might reject and you’ll be on immunosuppressants your whole life. Or you might use your own, or your own that might fix the cancer, or your own enhanced bone marrow. and you will be able to do that for almost every stem cell population. Some of them are a little bit harder to replace, though.

Does IPS really work to accomplish this regeneration?

We have good evidence that you can create an entire mouse from IPS cells.

Has this been done?

This has been done. They have used IPS cells to grow a mouse, and they made IPS cells from that mouse. They’re totipotent [able to make an entire organism], not merely pluripotent. we haven’t done this for humans for obvious ethical reasons, but we will do it. as far as I know the mice have done fine.

But haven’t there been some problems with mutations occurring with IPS-generated tissue?

We have a recent paper in Nature that shows that when you make human induced pluripotent stem cells you actually do get mutations in coding regions at a slightly elevated level. but I think this is temporary. We’re going to use this information as an assay to make the process work better, to correct problems. You will be able to use this to improve the quality of gene therapy because that’s been the problem with gene therapy the last ten years.

How far are we from testing that in humans?

Almost everything I’ve described has been done in rodents, so we’re talking about years, not decades. It’s shorter than the Human Genome Project [which took 13 years], not less expensive, but definitely shorter.

Could this technology be used to support personalized genomics, and can it verify a personal risk factor?

That’s why we do IPS. we want to establish an IPS line for every single person who gets sequenced in the PGP [Personalized Genome Project, which aims to sequence 100,000 people].

When is regeneration likely to happen in humans?

There is much to be worked out. but here’s the leap. if you want to accelerate this, you have to pick an intermediate target that doesn’t sound so scary. so you’ll start out with bone marrow patients. and you’re going to basically make a synthetic version of that patient’s bone marrow using IPS, which is going to work much better than the diseased bone marrow. and once this works that’s going to catch on like wildfire. and then you’ll do skin, and then you’ll do every other stem cell you can get.

Who is going to do this?

The only way people are going to get this is through some brave soul. It will start with a sick person, and they will end up getting well, possibly more well than before they got sick. so you didn’t just correct the sickness, you actually did more. and they’ll give testimonials, and someone from the New York Times will interview them, and tell this appealing anecdote.

Will people who are, say, aging but not yet sick ever be able to use this technology?

I don’t consider this medicine, it’s preventive. I expect somebody who is truly brave, who has nothing wrong with them other than maybe the usual aging, saying: ‘I want a bone marrow transplant’, or intestinal, or whatever. and it will gain momentum from there.

Won’t this cost a lot?

Initially it will be wealthy people who will try this. Ironically, wealthy people are often willing to be the guinea pigs that are really in a sense the front line of new technologies. They’re the foot soldiers. They’re willing to put themselves at risk, and to spend money on it.

• Share

After amassing an impressive collection of prestigious awards and penning hit songs for some of R&B’s most iconic legends such as Anita Baker, Beyonce, Usher, Brownstone, Whitney Houston, Aretha Franklin, Yolanda Adams, Patti Labelle, and The Isley Brothers, esteemed Grammy award-winning singer-songwriter Gordon Chambers is on the precipice of yet another exciting milestone in his career as a recording artist with the release of his third solo album, Sincere. Featuring production by The BeatBanggahz (Kenny Lattimore, Trey Songz, J. Holiday); A. Jermaine Mobley (Music Soulchild, Lalah Hathaway, Carl Thomas, Eric Roberson), and Chambers himself—alongside flavorful newcomers Darien Dorsey, Blake Melodius and Mike Severson, Sincere effortlessly melds a pop/ R&B sound with a classic soul aesthetic that is certain to surprise and delight contemporary R&B fans and soul enthusiasts alike.

–Tom Estey Publicity and Promotion

Cocoa Cure: Which is more fulfilling, writing or performing?

Gordon Chambers: I love them both. Ultimately, I see myself as a visionary and a storyteller. I get joy in being a messenger with a message. Sometimes, I’m the singer for that message. Sometimes another artist is the best messenger. But it’s all about the message and the story for me.

CC: overall, do you like the music that’s being played on the radio? And what part will Sincere play in the musical landscape?

GC: to be honest, I find myself listening more to my Ipod mixes of my old music, and satellite stations that play classics more than the current commercial music. But I’m not a “radio-hater.” Anything that’s popular is so for a reason. And it’s wise to understanding why it’s popping that to sit on the sidelines and criticize it. so I hit the clubs sometimes and get my dance on to the latest Rihanna, Usher and Gaga hits to feel the energy just like everyone else. Sincere is very classic but also my most current-sounding album production-wise. because the producers like Darien Dorsey and The Beatbanggahz are younger than the producers I worked with on my first two solo albums so the feel of this album has some “edge.” It was Darien’s idea that I do “In The Light” which is totally a club-uptempo–yet a song with a lot of substance lyrically. this album was a wonderful “remix” for me of sorts.

CC: Which artists inspire you?

GC: Stevie Wonder, Prince, Aretha Franklin, Miles Davis, Smokey Robinson, Joni Mitchell, Babyface, Ne-Yo, Michael Jackson, Bob Marley, Usher, Beyonce, Anita Baker, Mary J., Whitney Houston, Rufus, Chaka Khan, Donny Hathaway, Roberta Flack. Artists who’ve touched the culture, and have been role models both musically and in their personal lives and artistic choices. Artists are unique in their sound and know who they are. I’m also inspired by lots of the independent soul artists who are friends of mine like Eric Roberson, Ledisi, Lalah Hathaway, Sy Smith (who’s featured in my “I Can’t Love you (If you Don’t Love You)” video) and Anthony David. I feel that they are carrying forth the torch of soul music into another generation.

CC: as a male performer, how challenging is it for you to make love songs without isolating your male audience?

GC: not at all. I have lots of male and female fans. I try to speak “for” the men, and “to” the women. my fans are true music lovers who want the “real thing”. They tell me sometimes that I remind me them of Luther which is a huuuuuge compliment for me.

CC: You’ve been described for having a trademark songwriting style. Please identify some of the records that you’ve contributed to and how they contribute to your style.

GC: People often can tell my songs by the big harmonies, the vocal arrangements, and the words I choose. I was an English major, so I love a well-written sentence, and incorporate that in my writing. I also cross-reference other songs. for instance, in Brownstone’s “if you Love Me”, I love the metaphor that begins the song “I Don’t Wanna Rain In this Parade/But I’m Starting to Question The Love that was Made”. that harkens back to a song called “Don’t Rain On my Parade.” I quote Duke Ellington’s title “Come Rain or Come Shine” in the bridge of Anita Baker’s “I Apologize” with “Come Rain or Come Shine, I’m Gonna do right this Time, I Apologize.”

CC: You’ve worked with a variety of artists who cover various music genres. how do you write a song for another artist and make it sound unique for that artist? What is your songwriting process for other artists?

GC: I listen to many genres so it’s been easy to write in many styles of music. I’ve had songs on pop, R&B, jazz, dance and even country projects! In terms of writing for others, getting to know the artist is ideal but not mandatory. I just go within. if it’s my emotional truth, chances are it maybe someone else’s as well, so I trust my instincts and make the melody one that I think a myriad of singers can follow. if it’s an “assignment” for a specific singer, I incorporate their vocal stylings into the melody, and even imitate them slightly when singing the demo. Flattery has gotten me many placements!

CC: you describe Sincere as being your most personal album to date. Why do you think many artists, including yourself, wait until later in the career to show more vulnerability? is that a business or personal decision?GC: I can only speak for myself, but I know that the older I get, is the more I feel compelled to tell the truth, the emotional truth, and touch lives with honesty. I want people to use my music as a way to “get real, deal, feel and heal.” so I’m not afraid to cry lyrically. my listeners can handle it. They yearn to be moved. Just [as] I do by the artists I listen to.

CC: Which record on Sincere do you think is the most sincere, and why?

GC: “Lead me (The Ocean)” by far. I’m talking to God out loud, telling him that people may think I’m all that, but I, too, am vulnerable and a request for your guidance and strength. People–even men–are crying to that one in my live shows.

CC: You’ve said that you love ‘70s soul music the most. What is it about that period that moves you?

GC: The live instrumentation, the unique voices. Gladys sounded totally different than Patti as did Aretha from Chaka from Roberta and Mavis and Diana, etc. Nowadays, so many singers sound alike. The songwriting in this period was also stellar. And artists of different genres collaborated and covered each other’s songs. The music had depth and feeling!

CC: Gotta ask (smile) – are you single, dating…? What’s your relationship status?

GC: I am single, dating, and married to making this album a smash!