183 
St. Paul in which the division of man is supposed to be made into 
the three principles of spirit and soul and body, the question arises, 
did the writers of the New Testament use scientific language on this 
subject?* I have examined the New Testament, and I am happy to 
say that Mr. Graham agrees with me in thinking that on this subject 
they did not use scientific language ; and I do not see how it was possible 
for them to have done so without a great deal of previous definition : they 
use the common language of the Hellenic Jewish race. Take the English 
language as an example, and the distinction which Coleridge draws between 
understanding and reason ; the only way of using these terms scientifically 
is by using definitions ; because, as used in common English they have a 
very wide meaning. So it is with the Greek New Testament. But Mr. 
Graham will take up this point in the paper which he is to read here, there- 
fore I will not occupy your time upon this part of the subject any longer, 
but will at once proceed to a point on which I feel more especially called to 
give an opinion. Let us turn to the 18th and 20th sections of the paper, 
which I own to have read with the most profound astonishment. In the 
first of these, Mr. English says : — 
“ The spirit (Pneuma) comprises the directing, self-conscious principle, the 
ego, that which constitutes man’s real personality. ‘ The flesh lusting against 
the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh,’ is the Pneuma in its "renewed 
state, struggling with old habits of the body, become so powerful as to be 
almost a law unto themselves.” 
I shall not argue whether Mr. English is right about Pneuma and Psyche, 
but will assume his principles, and proceed to show that they do not 
carry out his theory. It is very difficult, after Mr. English has evaporated 
all the various parts which we usually think belong to the Pneuma, to make 
out what is left ; but here I read that the personality, or the ego, is found in 
the Pneuma. Then he goes on to say : — 
“ Pneuma, therefore, comprises not only will and self-consciousness, but 
discernment, reason, and I may add also speech (logos)” 
That is a most curious account of what he conceives to be the Pneuma. But 
what is the consequence of it ? Mr. English seems to think that the. per- 
sonality, and what we call the intellect, or understanding, are the chief con- 
stituents in what forms the Pneuma in man, and, I apprehend, of the 
Pneuma of angels, and of God also, for that seems to me to be a necessary 
consequence from all these assertions. Then I should observe that so far as 
language respecting the human mind is concerned, there are several other 
terms used in the New Testament of equal importance ; vovg, for instance, is 
used very strongly in an ethical sense in the New Testament ; and icapka, 
* H . ar °* d Browne says : “ All animals have the body, all the living 
soul (Gen. i. 20, 21), but the breath of life, breathed into the nostrils by God 
himself, is said of man alone. Cp. ‘ the body, soul, and spirit ’ of ancient 
philosophy and of the apostle Paul.” — Ed. 
Q 2 
