Understanding Romans 8:5-9

Who are those who are “according to the flesh?” They are natural fallen people, unsaved, unelected and unregenerate. They are “in Adam” and not “in Christ.”

What are the “things of the flesh?” They are, in this context, ungodly behaviors such as immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing and things like these.

Who are those who are “according to the Spirit?” They are people who have been elected, saved and regenerated (born anew). They are “in Christ because God transferred them from the realm of darkness (in Adam) into the Kingdom of Christ.

What are the “things of the Spirit?” They are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

So our first question, and one we will revisit as we work our way through the passage, is whether those who are according to the flesh do at times set their minds on godly things, even though their natural inclination would be set their minds on the things of the flesh. And the answer is verse 5 does not say.

Why is the mind set on the flesh death? This refers to the result or outcome of such behavior. If we set our minds on the things of the flesh, ungodly sinful things, we will reap corruption, and become more hardened and that path leads to death.

Why is the mind set on the Spirit life and peace. If we set our minds on the Spirit we will reap the rewards on following the paths of righteousness, i.e. the things of the Spirit including but not mentioned above eternal life. Paul provides a caveat later in the passage for this outcome.

Thus Paul is contrasting our position – in Adam or in Christ – with the behaviors that go with those positions, ungodly behaviors with godly behaviors.

Next, Paul addresses additional things that go with being in Adam and setting our minds of the flesh. First, the mind set on flesh, referring to the things of the flesh or ungodliness is (1) hostile toward God, and (2) not in submission to God’s law. Then Paul adds those whose mind is set on the things of the flesh are not able to either be devoted to God or follow the law. This is because they are doing just the opposite. It is impossible to be godly at the same time as being ungodly.

And finally, Paul says those who are “in the flesh” cannot please God. Here we have a difficulty. In the flesh can mean in the natural fallen unregenerate unsaved state, or simply the condition of a person in either state, setting their minds on things of the flesh. However, here, I think Paul is saying in addition to points one and two, unsaved people cannot please God even if they set their minds on godly behavior because all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags. This view would bolster his argument for godly behavior of those in Christ, because we were created for good works.

Here in verse 9 Paul shifts his topic from the expected behaviors of those who are according to the Spirit to the essential prerequisite of being “according to the Spirit” rather than striving to please God with godly behavior. Unless we have been born anew, and sealed with the Holy Spirit in Christ, such that we are in Christ and Christ is in us, our efforts at godliness will not please God.

And if we continue reading in Romans 8 we will see that if Christ is in us we have God as our Daddy (Abba) and we are [spiritual] children of God.

Now lets return to our unanswered question, does this passage say or suggest those who are according to the flesh, unregenerate and unsaved, cannot at any time set their minds on spiritual things such as the milk of the gospel.
And the answer is no. In fact it suggests godly behavior cuts no ice if we are according to the flesh.

 

Iconoclast says I ignored Romans 8:7-8, but I quoted the verses, NASB version, and I addressed them in detail. I addressed that people cannot be hostile to God and devoted to God at the same time.

What Calvinists do, and I try not to do, is to extrapolate statements beyond what is actually said. What the verse says is when the mind of the unregenerate is set on the flesh, then they are unable to submit to the law. It does not say the unregenerate are unable to set their minds on anything but the flesh at all times. This is the unwarranted extrapolation of Calvinism and reflects shoddy bible study.

But why not "assume" that is implied, for the verse also does not say they can set their minds anywhere other than the things of the flesh?
If we look at 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 we see that unregenerates cannot, are unable, to discern the spiritual things which are discerned with the aid of our indwelt Spirit. But we see those who are indwelt can set their minds on the things of the flesh, and we see that men in the flesh, i.e. unregenerate men, can understand the milk of the gospel. QED

 

Thanks Beameup, while I disagree, your post was directed squarely at the issue!

I think when we are walking according to the flesh we are being hostile toward God. His Law forbids the sins in view and therefore we are at that moment in time being hostile toward God and friendly toward the world, James 4:4.

However, a person who is "according to the flesh" can in outward appearance "walk according to the Spirit" with a lip service commitment to God. These are the tares among our professing brethren.

Last point, Paul speaks of the "inner man" and the "old man" You might want to study these passages and see if you think they are the same thing. Romans 7:22; 2 Corinthians 4:16; Ephesians 3:16; Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:6; and Romans 6:6

 

Reply to misrepresentation;

First take note that the version posted seems to be Young's Literal Translation. Does the flesh have its own mind? Yes according to Iconoclast. Van says no. The actual idea is if we set our minds on fleshly thoughts and desires our viewpoint will be hostile toward God. But if we set our minds on godly thoughts and desires our viewpoint will be friendly toward God. And in a similar way, when our mind is set of fleshly thoughts and desires, we are unable to submit to the Law of God for those are opposite viewpoints.

What the verse says is when the mind of the unregenerate is set on the flesh, then they are unable to submit to the law. It does not say the unregenerate are unable to set their minds on anything but the flesh at all times. This is the unwarranted extrapolation of Calvinism and reflects shoddy bible study.

But why not "assume" that is implied, for the verse also does not say they can set their minds anywhere other than the things of the flesh?
If we look at 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 we see that unregenerates cannot, are unable, to discern the spiritual things which are discerned with the aid of our indwelt Spirit. But we see those who are indwelt can set their minds on the things of the flesh, and we see that men in the flesh, i.e. unregenerate men, can understand the milk of the gospel.

It is the Calvinists who do not accept what scripture says and adds to it, but with no actual basis in the text.

 

Charge from Calvinist, I contradict myself. Fact, I do not. Thus a calculated spurious charge without merit. That is all these people offer, false charges and silly arguments.

Next, the Calvinist suggests I do not know who is indwelt. Talk about pure twaddle.

Next we see a wholesale demonstration of Calvinism denying the very words of scripture. The babes in Christ, and they would be regenerate and indwelt, have set their minds on fleshly desires.

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, 3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? NASB

Paul's list of the things of the flesh include jealousy. QED

 

Folks, Calvinism is false doctrine, and it is obvious if you just read scripture. They deny verse after verse, James 2:5 does not mean what it says, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 does not mean what it says, Romans 9:16 does not mean what it says, Romans 8:5-9 does not mean what it says, and on and on.

The OP explains my view of Romans 8:5-9, and thus far no credible argument has been offered to refute my view.

I was charged with not addressing Romans 8:7-8, but I quoted it and explained my view of it. False charge #1.

I contradict myself. False charge #2

I willfully pervert scripture. False charge #3

In baseball, three strikes and you are out.

 

One of the hallmarks of Calvinism's defense is they charge their opponents with whatever they are doing. They charge me with altering the text, perverting the teaching to use Iconoclasts words, but Calvinism is the doctrine of adding to the text. Here we have a verse that says when our minds are set on the flesh we are unable to submit to the law. Calvinism adds "unable at any time." But this extrapolation is not actually in the text. So they charge me with adding to the text and sidestep, do not address that Calvinism has added it to the text.

One of the flaws in Calvinism's hermeneutics is that it does not stick with the minimum scope or extent of a statement, they take the scope or extent beyond what the context supports. Hence, rather than when our minds are set on the flesh, Calvinists say it means at all times, whether or not our minds are set on the flesh because unregenerate men are unable to set their minds on godly things. But men of flesh, unregenerate men, can understand the milk of the gospel, obviously they can set their minds on godly things. Therefore the Calvinist extrapolation is unwarranted. QED

 

Why are the Calvinists so upset? Because this passage is one of their "proof" texts where they take something in scripture said and extrapolate it beyond what the context supports. This same behavior where Calvinism takes a passage out of context and extrapolates its scope can be found all through the list of proof texts. But as the OP shows, this behavior does not stand up to study.

 

Yes we can find this capacity to look up or look down all through scripture, whether saved or unsaved. Consider the rich young ruler who came to Jesus looking for a works based salvation. What must I do? The whole premise that the unsaved cannot seek God or put their wholehearted trust in Jesus is shown to be false throughout God's word.