Does a believer still have the "old" nature?

Galatians 5:17 - "For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that you cannot do the things that you would."

Romans 7:21-23 - "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into the captivity to the law of sin which is in my members."

 

There is only one nature in you,for ye are of the circumcision.You shed your old nature and are a new creature.But you are still weak because you are in the flesh still.

 

When you’re saved God doesn’t take away your ability to sin (that fleshly nature inside of you), he just takes away the pleasure of sin…. The thing that we once loved, now we hate… Oh wretched man that I am who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God through Jesus our Lord…. So, the things that I want to do, I find I can’t do them… Yes, there are two natures inside of you….

There are two men in the field, one is taken (the spiritual man) and one is left (the carnal man)… There are two men in bed, one is taken (the spiritual man) and one is left, the carnal man….

Thank God when he comes he will take the spiritual nature, which is born, in his image, and leave the carnal (fleshly) nature to go back to the dust of the earth….

Once you are born again, you have a nature like God… Since God is spirit, you worship him in spirit…. You have two natures (two men) inside of you, if you feed the carnal man, your spiritual man will get weak… If you feed your spiritual man, as the bible tells us to do, the carnal man will be subdued….

There is no longer any condemnation to those that walk after the spirit…. The Bible tells us to walk in the spirit, so that we won’t fulfill the lust of the flesh….

You can look at Adam for an example, God told Adam that he would die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit….. Did he die? No, Adam did not die in the flesh that day, but his spiritual part, the part of him that walked with God, that part of him died that very day…...

WE walk with God in the spirit today, but the carnal nature inside of us, our fleshly nature, it causes us to sin… Thank God that Jesus died for our sins, unlike the first Adam, Jesus overcame sin for us …..

We will never again be condemned with the wicked, because Jesus defeated that OLE nature that we hate…. The devil accuses us, and Jesus excuses us, on the basis of our faith in his blood atonement….

Is it any wonder that Paul counted every righteous thing that he done, but dung, for the love of Christ…..

 

Good enough Grace

 

Preachtheword,

I think we should clarify terms first. Scripture never (correct me if I'm wrong) uses the terms "old nature" and "new nature."

It does use the terms "old man/self" and "new man/self."

Romans 6:6 and Colossians 3:9 teach that the old man/self "has been crucified" and was "laid aside."

Regardless of what terms you use, your self or nature is not a part of you. It's what you are. All of you. Nature is, by definition, what you are, not just one component among many.

That said, the believer's new man is still burdened and affected by the flesh, and that new man is still attracted to and affected by sin.

I must not have got what you got, because it sure can be fun to shoot off my mouth at someone if they make me mad. Sin is still fun to me, but I have stronger desires that war against it. Anybody else feel that way? Yes, I see that hand. Yours too. Thanks, friends. Good to know I'm not the only one.

Romans 7:14-25 is a highly debated passage. I, with many good commentators, believe strongly that Paul is referring to the time period before he was saved. In any case, it's a debated enough passage that it should not be decisive in forming our theology.

I don't think that's what the passage is referring to at all. It's talking about two PEOPLE, not two parts of one person. One is taken to judgment, and the other is left.

I need to stop there, for now.

 

Like your post Siegfried..

I think it is a common misconception by many new believers (it was for me at least) that they expect tempatations to be removed from them entirely - but it can be uplifting to realise that they aren't - we just now have much better way to fight these temptations. This, I think, is the basis of our "dual nature".

 

But I'm arguing for one nature only. The old man has been crucified and laid aside. The new man is no longer enslaved to sin. There is a freedom to be righteous, but also a capacity for sin.

 

Well, in the verses I cited Paul seems to be speaking of some kind of a dichotomy within the christian. But, Paul the apostle is also quite clear that "the old man is crucified with Christ that the body of sin might be destroyed". Every child of God is "dead to sin and alive unto God". They that are Christ's have "crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts". The fact is that, as one "born again", I am a "new creature in Christ, old things are passed away", but I can behave after the manner of the old man from habit, or because I am not taking pains to "mortify the deeds of the flesh" and control, by the power of the Holy Spirit, the natural physical drives God has given me. There is also "pleasure in sin for a season" and this is further inducement to live contrary to who I am in Christ. Furthermore, sin gains prevalence in me when I operate in ignorance of who I am as a child of God. Obviously, if I don't know I am a millionaire I won't live like one. There are also "exceeding great and precious promises" by which I am made a "partaker of the divine nature". Not knowing what these promises are leaves me somewhat directionless spiritually and susceptible to living as a spiritual pauper rather than as a "joint-heir with Christ". But, I think, scripture is fairly clear that "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death". While the things I mentioned may make it seem that I am divided inwardly into two separate natures I am, in fact, singular in nature. I am dead (to self) and my life is hid with Christ in God. Seeing as I have, by accepting by faith Christ as my Lord and Saviour, put off the old man, and put on the new man I need no longer live in conformity to this world, to the flesh, or to the devil.

[ April 26, 2002, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: aiki ]

 

I believe a believer has two natures but only one man. A nature is a complex of attributes and it is what leads us to sin. If a believer did not have an old nature he would never sin because the nature is what is attracted to the sin. MacArthur denies two natures but does posit a sin principle (which by any other name would be a nature). The old man died (Rom 6) but we still have to put off the works associated with the old man (Col 3; Eph 4).

 

Are you saying that you enjoy sin? I guess you haven’t got the same thing as I do…. The bible tells me that the things I once love, now I hate…. Sure, you can overide your conscience for a while, but if you have the spirit of God it will condemn you until you make it right…

Before I was saved (or under conviction) I wasn’t condemned at all with sin… There is pleasure in sin for a season… If you’re a child of God, there is NO pleasure in sin….

If you look long enough you will find someone that believes anything….

 

BTW, Siegfried, If I may ask you a question…. The bible says that they’re two men sleeping in one bed, one is taken and the other left…. Why are two men in one bed?

 

Sorry Siegfried - I should have said "I liked part of your post"

I think Paster Larry hits right on it

And by the way Graceforever - I am hoping they are brothers in a big family where they can only afford one bed for both!!

 

Sig: Yes, I am saying that. After I've done it, I'm always convicted that it was wrong, and am ashamed that I sinned, but that doesn't change the fact that the act of sin can be enjoyable. You say we can override our conscience for a while. Why? Why would you override your conscience and fall into sin if the sin isn't attractive? I think you have an unrealistic view of sanctification.

Sig: Please give me the scriptural reference you're using as the basis of your opinion that a Christian can't enjoy sin momentarily. You seem to be saying that conviction of sin precludes pleasure in sin. David was convicted, but do you think that doesn't mean he enjoyed his sin with Bathsheba? Do you think Moses didn't enjoy whacking that abusive Egyptian? Samson and Delilah? How many examples do we need?

If you look long enough you will find someone that believes anything….</font>[/QUOTE]Sig: I have never read a commentator on Romans 7 (and I've read a bunch) who didn't at least admit that the interpretation of the passage is difficult, and that a case can be made for both sides. I can respect an interpretation that differs from mine, but not attitude that scorns mine.

Sig: First of all, the context shows that the people who are taken away are taken away to judgment, not to the presence of God. The context is also talking about people, not natures. When Jesus mentions those who were destroyed in the flood, he didn't mean that only their carnal natures were destroyed.

Second, Jesus says in Luke 17:35 that two women are grinding "in one place." Why would Jesus say that if he was talking about their natures. Wouldn't it be pretty obvious that they were in the same place? That would be quite the trick if my spiritual nature could be one place and my carnal nature in another.

Pastor Larry,

I just happened to read Combs' article on the subject in the DBTS journal last night. He does a good job of showing how the argument is largely semantic and really more tied to wrong views of sanctification. After reading it I still believe that a nature is "who/what you are." The nature of a believer is inclined to serve God but retains the potential to fall into sin.

I wish I had the article with me. Combs uses (inappropriately, IMHO) Moo's comments on Rom. 7:14-25 to defend his position on natures, when Moo is talking about Paul as an unbeliever. Combs takes Moo's comments out of context and uses them to support a view that Moo rejects.

[ April 28, 2002, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Siegfried ]

 

My personal view on the "nature" issue is that we are just arguing about definitions of terms. I personally don't like the reference to man having 2 natures, because we fought for centuries to agree that Christ had 2 natures in 1 person. Christ is the only One to have 2 natures, in that sense. Man, on the other hand, has one nature. It has been marred by sin and will be perfectly restored at the Coming of Christ. I believe we all agree that a redeemed person still has the vestiges of sin in his life. Paul is very clear on this point. But, introducing the term "nature" here seems to unduly lead to confusion. Then, there really is very little comparison between the two "natures" of Christ and the two "natures" of a redeemed man. I cannot begin to comprehend how deity and humanity could be in the same person. I can however understand how a redeemed man is being saved (sanctified) from his sinful self. The reason for this difference in my mind is that Christ truly had two different "natures" while man only has one nature, though in a different state of marring and perfection.

 

Siegfried, I do think to some degree that the issue is semantic. Combs' article is very good though I didn't understand him to cite Moo in the way you say he does. I would have to look again. I do have it here in my office.

When you say that you believe the unbeliever has a capacity to sin, that is what most "two nature people" call a sin nature. MacArthur calls it a sin principle I believe in his commentary on Col or Rom or one of those (I can't remember which now).

In any event, for whatever name we want to call it, the believer still does sin and is enticed by sin and he must fight against it.

 

I side for one nature. In Genesis, we are created "Very good". Then we achieve sinful nature. But sinful nature does not negate our goodness (because nothing can be greater than what God ordained).

So what we end up with is a saving grace through Christ, that frees us of the sinful nature we inhierited. That brings us back to being "very good" as God ordained us.

We can still sin, and we usually do. But we are no longer slaves to it.