Our role in evangelism

[Iconoclast]

The Natural man
"JonC,

We can discuss this after you provide the post of me rejecting 1 Cor. 2:14.
In short I will simply say you are wrong.

Getting closer,lol

I do deny the "Christian" mythology you have created about a "spiritual life" not "in Christ" but original to Adam. I deny this fictional life was lost. I deny that "spiritual life" is temporary, even. I deny that Adam was in fact separated from God (God was there even outside the Garden) except in terms of a righteous standing and need for reconciliation.

I believe "natural man" is a reference to the flesh (whether lost or Christian).

The natural man is unsaved.
Anyone trying to teach otherwise does not know what they are talking about.
Archangel added this;
This is not true. "Carnal" is an old English translation of ψυχικός and ψυχικός means "unspiritual" or "worldly." It can mean "natural," but Paul's usage (four times in 1 Corinthians) shows that natural is meant only when talking about the body (as he discusses it 1 Cor 15).

The natural man receives not the things of God
In This thread JonC claims he is a Calvinist???

In 2019,lol
when he has told us he abandoned it as God showed him he was mistaken in teaching it???
He said it was years ago,lol


I am not here to defend Calvinism (I do not believe it needs defending). I am here to learn about other people's views, to evaluate my own, to discuss differences, and to fellowship as Christians.

I am a Calvinist BUT Calvinism is not my religion.



Since I have been here I've affirmed the "Doctrines of Grace" (how the BB defines "Calvinism"). But this does not matter.
I do not believe that "Calvinism" can mean anything less than an affirmation of the five "points"....anything less is not "Calvinism"). I'd actually argue that double predestination is a necessary conclusion of Calvinism based at least on divine omniscience (I'd argue that "Calvinists" like @Iconoclast and @SovereignGrace are not true to the conclusions of their theology and hold a quasi-Calvinistic position).

That is why I explained my views on this forum (if you recall, I argued the five points and a double predestination which TCassidy considered a hyper viewpoint).

This is why others have explained their view points as well.

But I do reject the aspects of Calvinism that are anti-Baptistic (Covenant Theology - depending on degree, infant Baptism, elder leadership, etc).

Jon,

How can you say elder leadership and covenant theology are anti-Baptistic when Baptists trace their origins before Darbyism and elder leadership among Baptists is centuries old? Baptists are not a monolithic group. Of course, every Baptist faction can say of another faction that they are anti-Baptistic but I am not sure that gets us anywhere.

On infant baptism we are agreed. That has always been a Baptist distinctive that all Baptist factions agree on...I think.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Most of the time yes. Then the board gets screwy.

 

[Alan Gross]

No...the reality is you and your friend offer philosophy and not scripture.
I am not going to respond to such ramblings.

So will it be with this wicked generation.”

 

[JonC]

Getting closer,lol



I believe "natural man" is a reference to the flesh (whether lost or Christian).

I do. This is how Paul speaks of the "old man". When a Christian insults another, slanders them, makes false claims, gossips, tries to "expose" them, tries to trap them, etc. that is the natural man (the old man, sin) in them

 

[JonC]

Getting closer,lol



I believe "natural man" is a reference to the flesh (whether lost or Christian).

Wait....."getting closer"? How old is this post you just referenced??!!!!

I have always believed that natural man cannot understand the things of the Spirit. To them spiritual things are foolish.

You are wasting your time "trying" to find the post "you read" where I denied that passage.

I do not know if you just misunderstood something you read, read something and attributed it to me, or just made it up to slander a Christian. I have my suspicions, but I don't know.

 

[Iconoclast]

Spiritual Life and Spiritual Death

Scripture also tells us that Adam was created flesh and not spirit.

So I view the spiritual life that Adam did have as based on his relationship with God, but not based on anything in Adam himself.
Jon, perhaps I was too vague.
I am asking you to quote the scripture and explain how that scripture actually proves your assertion.
From my perspective, you are speaking around the Bible and instead arguing a philosophy apart from the Bible. I have no desire to talk philosophy.

Oh. Well, first of all the passage does not prove my assertion. We are speaking of something that God chose not to reveal in Scripture. In fact, "spiritual life" and "spiritual death" are not spiritual terms. Therefore it is up to us to come up with definitions to communicate our ideas about these terms in a meaningful way.

One is that "spiritual life" is fellowship with God. This is not in the Bible, but I understand the definition and can use "spiritual life" to speak of "fellowship with God".

I have suggested elsewhere (and I will again) that it would be better to use the terms Scripture does use - "flesh" and "spirit". So the question becomes whether God created Adam as spirit or flesh. I believe God created Adam as flesh (a human body and a spirit set on the flesh).

The problem is man, not Scripture, speaks of people dying spiritually. Scripture speaks of human spirits that lack spiritual life (that are spiritually dead).


post62
That said, Scripture does not say that man was spiritually alive and then spiritually died. Scripture places men as naturally flesh with a human spirit which is focused on it's own desires (on the desires of the flesh).

Spiritual Life

Scripture never speaks of Adam, or anyone else, experiencing spiritual death. There is death, there is physical life,

So the inerpretation" on the day you eat of it you shall surely die" is a legitimate interpretation. On that day death became certain and mankind became enslaved to the law of sin and death.

The reason is you are viewing the verse through your theology. Nowhere is" spiritually dying" stated in Scripture. But it is fundamental to your theology.

We are dead and sin John. Yes, that is a fact. Adam was not dead in sin prior to fall because he had not sinned. He was not born in sin like we are. So in the day that he sinned, on that very day, that very moment, he became spiritually dead in his sin. Yes, that is absolutely a fact found in Scripture.

Can you post even one verse that states Adam was created a spiritual being (spiritual life) because I can (and have) provided a verse to the contrary (that Adam was created a natural man, not a spiritual man)?

 

[JonC]

Spiritual Life and Spiritual Death

Scripture also tells us that Adam was created flesh and not spirit.

So I view the spiritual life that Adam did have as based on his relationship with God, but not based on anything in Adam himself.
Jon, perhaps I was too vague.
I am asking you to quote the scripture and explain how that scripture actually proves your assertion.
From my perspective, you are speaking around the Bible and instead arguing a philosophy apart from the Bible. I have no desire to talk philosophy.

Oh. Well, first of all the passage does not prove my assertion. We are speaking of something that God chose not to reveal in Scripture. In fact, "spiritual life" and "spiritual death" are not spiritual terms. Therefore it is up to us to come up with definitions to communicate our ideas about these terms in a meaningful way.

One is that "spiritual life" is fellowship with God. This is not in the Bible, but I understand the definition and can use "spiritual life" to speak of "fellowship with God".

I have suggested elsewhere (and I will again) that it would be better to use the terms Scripture does use - "flesh" and "spirit". So the question becomes whether God created Adam as spirit or flesh. I believe God created Adam as flesh (a human body and a spirit set on the flesh).

The problem is man, not Scripture, speaks of people dying spiritually. Scripture speaks of human spirits that lack spiritual life (that are spiritually dead).


post62
That said, Scripture does not say that man was spiritually alive and then spiritually died. Scripture places men as naturally flesh with a human spirit which is focused on it's own desires (on the desires of the flesh).

Spiritual Life

Scripture never speaks of Adam, or anyone else, experiencing spiritual death. There is death, there is physical life,

So the inerpretation" on the day you eat of it you shall surely die" is a legitimate interpretation. On that day death became certain and mankind became enslaved to the law of sin and death.

The reason is you are viewing the verse through your theology. Nowhere is" spiritually dying" stated in Scripture. But it is fundamental to your theology.

We are dead and sin John. Yes, that is a fact. Adam was not dead in sin prior to fall because he had not sinned. He was not born in sin like we are. So in the day that he sinned, on that very day, that very moment, he became spiritually dead in his sin. Yes, that is absolutely a fact found in Scripture.

Can you post even one verse that states Adam was created a spiritual being (spiritual life) because I can (and have) provided a verse to the contrary (that Adam was created a natural man, not a spiritual man)?

Why are you pretending I denied we were dead in sin?

I haven't.

Why are you pretending I said that Scripture says Adam had Spiritual life?

I didn't. I said Adam was "natural man".

Why are you pretending I said Adam was "dead in sin" prior to Adam sinning?

I didn't.

I agree that "spiritual death" is not a biblical concept.

I disagree that we come up with the definition of "spiritual life":


John 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit

John 6:6
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.

Romans 8:6
For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace

1 John 5:12
He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life

 

[Silverhair]

No. AS FREE WILL DOES NOT EXIST i DO NOT BELIEVE THAT. i WAS ANSWERING YOUR REMARKS.

Well then If there is not free will then you have to be saying
1] That God has arbitrarily condemned all those that are in hell.
2] That calvinism sees not problem with God being arbitrary.
3] That your agreeing clavinism is not biblical, it is just a philosophical concept started by Augustine.

You say your answering my remarks, what would those be?

 

[JonC]

@Iconoclast ,

Instead of reviewing my belief (which according to the previous post you do not understand as you thought I denied Adam was created "natural man", that we were not dead in sin, etc.) why don't you just post a quote of me denying 1 Cor 2:14.

You made one claim, cannot back it up, and have just started rambling about old threads.

Natural man cannot understand things of the Spirit.....period. no "if, and's or buts".
It takes the Spirit of God working in man for a man to understand Spiritual things. God must draw man because man will not turn to God on his own. Natural man has a mind set on the flesh, NOT the Spirit.

What part of that do you not understand?

What part of that do you feel is a denial of 1 Corinthians 2:14?

Where is the post??????

 

[JonC]

Well then If there is not free will then you have to be saying
1] That God has arbitrarily condemned all those that are in hell.
2] That calvinism sees not problem with God being arbitrary.
3] That your agreeing clavinism is not biblical, it is just a philosophical concept started by Augustine.

You say your answering my remarks, what would those be?

The issue is @Iconoclast holds firmly to a philosophy of the cross (NOT theology). He tries to go around the cross by starting with the Father. In fact, what he does not yet realize is his philosophy makes the cross irrelevant. If God could have satisfied the demands of justice by punishing a cow his doctrine would be essentially unchanged. It all hinges on God as a debtor bound by His own rules in such a way He ultimately becomes an abomination to save us.

Iconoclast's philosophy ultimately elevates man and lowers God. He just cannot see it.

This was evident when he believed spiritual truth to be spiritual words combined with spiritual thoughts to be new age thought rather than God's Words recorded as Scripture by Paul.

This is why we are warned not to be carried away by vain philosophy. Once there it is difficult to return to truth.

 

[Silverhair]

That doesnot explain the whole passage.
Stop listening to leighton flowers.

From what I understand he is a former calvinist. Once he started to trust what the bible text said instead of reading into the text he realized that calvinism was wrong.

What did I miss in the passage?

 

[Silverhair]

You said...those who are already saved only....
Yet Paul said this;

10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

So, you keep asking when I say you and your posse do not understand, this is just one small example.
Paul speaks of elected persons, who are not"already saved"
He usedthe word elect...of people not already saved, but will be saved.

As you can see from the following text the view regarding this text is varied. Take from it what you will.

"While the majority of the commentators understand the 'elect' to refer to the unregenerate who have not yet believed (but certainly will), there is good reason to understand the term in this context as a virtual synonym for a regenerate saint. First of all, in every usage of the term applied to men, in the New Testament it always refers to a justified saint. Conversely, it never refers to someone who was elect in eternity past but who has not yet entered into the purpose of their election, justification. . . . It is best to understand by 'the elect' Timothy and the faithful men of 2Ti_2:2. Timothy is being exhorted to suffer in his ministry to the faithful men just as Paul has been imprisoned for his ministry to the 'elect.' The idea of Paul suffering for the sanctification and growth of the churches is a common New Testament theme, and is easily seen in this passage as well. [The Expository Notes of Dr. Constable]

"Here then are saved people in need of salvation! The salvation in view is necessarily sanctification or, perhaps, more precisely, victorious perseverance through trials (2Ti_1:8; 2Ti_2:3; 2Ti_2:9)." [Note: Joseph C. Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings, pp. 127-28. Cf. Knight, p. 400; and Towner, The Letters . . ., p. 504.]

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than 5 pm EDT / 2 pm PST

This thread is closed