Romans 8:6.....What is it getting at.

[Iconoclast]

JonC

Yes, we can learn from those of the past. I agree.

The thing is often you post from both sides of the fence. You said John Owen was not relevant for us today. This work is showing that is not true, The truth is always relevant. Now you say we can learn from them.

[QUOTE]But if we are not able to apply Scripture to our lives then there is a problem.[/QUOTE]

Any Christian has to learn to apply scripture for any growth in grace to take place,

The thread is about what Romans 8:6 means. Scripture tells us what it means. A mind set on the flesh is death, but a mind set on the Spirit is life and peace.[/QUOTE]

That is what it says when we read it, yes. That does not tell us all it means, that is why OWEN wrote what he did. Others have also worked on this theme, and have similar but different observations. You trying to simplify it, does not really deal with the text.

Perhaps before exploring how others centuries ago applied the passage to their lives we should make sure we can apply the passage to our own lives

What you do not seem to understand is that this text expanded on by other portions of scripture has much truth to yield for us.
You think by reading it...YOU GOT IT. YOU DO NOT, NOT EVEN CLOSE.
You believe that is all there is. It seems to me that you have an axe to grind, and you slowly modify your posted view, to sneak out more of your posts against these Evil cabal of Calvinists that you are stalking like Don Quixote going after windmills.
Some times people project their own behavior on those who point out what they do wrong and often wind up revealing their own personal flaws by what they project on the very people who offer correction.
But this thread is not really about that.
You can perhaps start a different thread, on the shallow view of Romans 8 and what that means to you. You might find those who agree with you there.

 

[JonC]

JonC



The thing is often you post from both sides of the fence. You said John Owen was not relevant for us today. This work is showing that is not true, The truth is always relevant. Now you say we can learn from them.

[QUOTE]But if we are not able to apply Scripture to our lives then there is a problem.[/QUOT

Any Christian has to learn to apply scripture for any growth in grace to take place,

This is not true. I see your misunderstanding, and although I have corrected it several times you may have inadvertently glossed over those posts.

I stand by what I have repeatedly posted - we can benefit from reading books by men like Owen (I posted The Valley of Vision, a collection of Puritian poems, is outstanding). But John Owen is not relevant today (in terms of theology, with the exception of historic theology in regards to Puritianism).

The truth is God's Word, which is always relevant. How a man interpreted and applied God's Word a few centuries ago is not theologically relevant.

A decade is generally the standard for relevance. I expanded this to two decades to give a broader range, but generally 10 years is the standard. The key is that the writing be privy to contemporary issues.

Pick up a newspaper that is 50 years old and read the opinion section. The truths behind the opinions remain true (truth does not change) but the opinions themselves are not relevant.

Does that help you understand what I mean by we can benefit from reading Puritian writings, but at the same time they are not relevant today (in terms of theology)?

The other complaint against me is that I only rely on Biblical Theology. My point is Biblical Theology should come first, as a foundation. From there we move forward.

 

[Iconoclast]

This is not true. I see your misunderstanding, and although I have corrected it several times you may have inadvertently glossed over those posts.

I stand by what I have repeatedly posted - we can benefit from reading books by men like Owen (I posted The Valley of Vision, a collection of Puritian poems, is outstanding). But John Owen is not relevant today (in terms of theology, with the exception of historic theology in regards to Puritianism).

The truth is God's Word, which is always relevant. How a man interpreted and applied God's Word a few centuries ago is not theologically relevant.

A decade is generally the standard for relevance. I expanded this to two decades to give a broader range, but generally 10 years is the standard. The key is that the writing be privy to contemporary issues.

Pick up a newspaper that is 50 years old and read the opinion section. The truths behind the opinions remain true (truth does not change) but the opinions themselves are not relevant.

Does that help you understand what I mean by we can benefit from reading Puritian writings, but at the same time they are not relevant today (in terms of theology)?

The other complaint against me is that I only rely on Biblical Theology. My point is Biblical Theology should come first, as a foundation. From there we move forward.

You have your own opinions,and you are welcome to them.
They are dead wrong.They are not defensible.Your idea of this mythical 10 year rule is a fabrication.
Thomas Watson,John Brown, Richard Sibbes,John Owen, etc. Are miles ahead of most contemporary writers.
The good contemporary writers feed on these brothers who went before us.
Start a new thread on your ten year rule.Perhaps others will support your novel idea.
You repeating a partial verse and saying well there it is, that explains it...does not get it done.

 

[JonC]

You have your own opinions,and you are welcome to them.
They are dead wrong.They are not defensible.Your idea of this mythical 10 year rule is a fabrication.
Thomas Watson,John Brown, Richard Sibbes,John Owen, etc. Are miles ahead of most contemporary writers.
The good contemporary writers feed on these brothers who went before us.
Start a new thread on your ten year rule.Perhaps others will support your novel idea.
You repeating a partial verse and saying well there it is, that explains it...does not get it done.

No, again you misunderstood my post brother.

In theology (and any research) the theologian uses sources that are within 10 years. It is not my rule, but standard practice to ensure theological development is current.

The idea is not novel (as any college graduate, regardless of discipline, can painfully attest).

I am not interested in discussing the standard. I only mentioned it in passing because it emphasizes the importance to rely on contemporary research as applying antiquated sources can be very problematic.

More to the point - if one cannot understand Scripture without reading Owen then one simply does not understand Scripture. They only hold a borrowed faith.

The proper way is to read Scripture, prayerfully, without commentary and form an opinion. Consider what the passage means in its own context (not 17th century Puritanism). What are the similarities and differences between the original audience and ourselves? What are the principles taught? What was the passage itself communicating?

After that is worked out then consider the beliefs of other men - not to adopt their views but to understand then, the context in which those men wrote, their worldviews and ideologies, etc. Then weigh what they have written against Scripture. Consider their points against your own.

But don't reach back a few centuries to apply their understanding to your situation.

You have criticized my use of Biblical Theology, but I do believe that is where we must begin.

Ask yourself how you like up with the passage. Are you setting your mind on the flesh, which is death (insulting, strife, etc.) or on the Spirit, which is life (kindness, love, gentleness, patience)?

First things have to come first. Afterwards consider the opinions of men.

 

[JonC]

Back to the topic of the OP.

What does "For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace" mean?

Romans 8:1–16 : 1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.
6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,
7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.
10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.
12 So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh—
13 for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

Is the meaning not evident in the passage?

For examples of what it means to have a mind set on the flesh and set on the Spirit can we not simply turn to Scripture?

What is left? Application.

How do we apply these verses to our lives, to our interactions with one another?

And what does this application - i.e., our behavior with one another - tell us about where our mind is set?

 

[JonC]

Thomas Watson,John Brown, Richard Sibbes,John Owen, etc. Are miles ahead of most contemporary writers.

Do you believe God stopped gifting teachers and preachers to the churches?

 

[JesusFan]

Note that scripture teaches fallen people can understand the attributes of God, thus some spiritual things can be understood by fallen people.

Unsaved can see God in the natural creation, but cannot understand special revelation of scriptures unless illuminated by the Holy Spirit to do such!

 

[JesusFan]

Do you believe God stopped gifting teachers and preachers to the churches?

Do you believe what they wrote is no longer for today?

 

[JonC]

Do you believe what they wrote is no longer for today?

I believe that God gives us preachers and teachers.

The problem with going back to men like John Wesley, John Owen, and Charles Finney in order to use their books as "teachers" is that you end up usurping God (you make yourself your own teacher).

Those men cannot address contemporary issues (as they died centuries ago).

Take John Owen. I like reading his works but much of his writings we're in opposition to persecutions of the Presbyterian Church, reforming Church of England doctrine, and in opposition to the Quakers. He was influenced by his environment.

And to be clear, Puritian doctrine is not without its own theological problems and baggage.

So why look to a problematic theology to tell us what Scripture means when we have the Scriptures?

But to answer your question, yes. Owen wrote for his contemporaries just as Calvin wrote for his, and John MacArthur writes for his.

This does not mean we cannot learn by reading their books.

That said, Christians first need to mature and then consider what other people believed. If Romans 8:6 does not make sense to a believer then the believer needs to stay in God's Word longer before looking to books for an explanation.

 

[JonC]

@JesusFan ,

Let me ask you :


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


Does the verse above make sense to you (consider the whole passage)?

Do you need a 400 year old book to explain what the passage means?

 

[Iconoclast]

Moving forward:

This whole rule is grounded on that of our Savior, Matthew 6:31,33,34

"Take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow."

When we have done all we can, when we have made the best of them we are able, all earthly things, as unto our interest in them, amount to no more but what we eat, what we drink, and wherewith we are clothed. About these things our Savior forbids us to take any thought, not absolutely, but with a double limitation; as, —

First, That we take no such thought about them as should carry along with it a disquietude of mind, through a distrust of the fatherly care and providence of God. This is the design of the context.

Secondly, No thought that, for constancy and engagement of spirit, should be like unto those which we ought to have about spiritual things. "Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness,"
Let that be the principal thing in your thoughts and consciences. We may therefore conclude that at least they must hold an exceeding proportion with them. Let a man industriously engaged in the way of his calling try himself by this rule every evening. Let him consider what have been his thoughts about his earthly occasions and what about spiritual things, and thereon ask of himself whether he be spiritually minded or no. Be not deceived; "as a man thiaketh, so is he." And if we account it a strange thing that our thoughts should be more exercised about spiritual things than about the affairs of our callings, we must not think it strange if, when we come to the trial, we cannot find that we have either "life" or "peace."

Moreover, it is known how often, when we are engaged in spiritual duties, other thoughts will interpose, and impose themselves on our minds. Those which are about men’s secular concernments will do so. The world will frequently make an inroad on the way to heaven, to disturb the passengers and wayfaring men.

(2.) There are a multitude of thoughts in the minds of men which are vain, useless, and altogether unprofitable.

These ordinarily, through a dangerous mistake, are looked on as not sinful, because, as it is supposed, the matter of them is not so; and therefore men rather shake them off for their folly than their guilt.
But they arise from a corrupt fountain, and woefully pollute both the mind and conscience. Wherever there are "vain thoughts," there is sin, Jeremiah 4:14. Such are those numberless imaginations whereby men fancy themselves to be what they are not, to do what they do not, to enjoy what they enjoy not, to dispose of themselves and others at their pleasure.

That our nature is liable unto such a pernicious folly, which some of tenacious fancies have turned into madness, we are beholding alone to our cursed apostasy from God, and the vanity that possessed our minds thereon.

(3.) There are thoughts that are formally evil; they are so in their own nature, being corrupt contrivances to fulfill the desires of the flesh in the lusts thereof. These also will attempt the minds of believers. But they are always looked on as professed enemies to the soul, and are watched against. I shall not, therefore, make any comparison between them and spiritual thoughts, for they abound only in them that are carnally minded.

 

[JesusFan]

@JesusFan ,

Let me ask you :


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


Does the verse above make sense to you (consider the whole passage)?

Do you need a 400 year old book to explain what the passage means?

Can a Calvin or a Hodge or a Spurgeon still speak truth to us even after died, did the lord gift them to understand His work as teachers and expositors and theologians?

 

[Iconoclast]

If we are spiritually minded, if thoughts of spiritual things do abound in us, they will ordinarily, and that with constancy, possess these seasons, look upon them as those which are their due, which belong unto them; for they are expressly assigned unto them in the way of rule, expressed in examples and commands. See Psalm 16:7,8;
I will bless the Lord who has given me counsel;
My heart also instructs me in the night seasons.
8 I have set the Lord always before me;
Because He is at my right hand I shall not be moved.


Most professors are convinced that it is their duty to pray morning and evening, and it is to be wished that they were all found in the practice of it; but if ordinarily they judge themselves in the performance of that duty to be discharged from any farther exercise of spiritual thoughts, applying them unto things worldly, useless, or vain, they can make no pretense to be spiritually minded.

And it must be observed (which will be found to be true), that if the seasons which are as it were due unto such meditations be taken from them, they will be the worst employed of all the minutes of our lives. Vain and foolish thoughts, corrupt imaginations, will make a common haunt unto the minds of men in them, and habituate themselves unto an expectation of entertainment, whence they will grow importunate for admission. Hence, with many, those precious moments of time which might greatly influence their souls unto life and peace, if they were indeed spiritually minded, make the greatest provision for their trouble, sorrow, and confusion; for the vain and
evil thoughts which some persons do accustom themselves unto in such seasons are, or ought to be, a burden upon their consciences more than they can bear. That which providence tenders unto their good is turned into a snare; and God doth righteously leave them unto the fruits of their own folly who so despise his gracious provision for their good. If we cannot afford unto God our spare time, it is evident that indeed we can afford nothing at all. Micah 2:1, "They devise iniquity upon their beds," — the season proper for holy contemplation they make use of to fill their minds with wicked imaginations; "and when the morning is light they practice it," walking all day on all occasions suitably unto their devices and imaginations of the night. Many will have cause to complain unto eternity of those leisure times, which might have been improved for their advantage unto eternal blessedness.

 

[Iconoclast]

3. Consider how we are affected with our disappointments about these seasons. Have we by negligence, by temptations, have we by occasional diversions or affairs of life, been taken off from thoughts of God, of Christ, of heavenly things, when we ought to have been engaged in them?

how are we affected with a view hereof? A carnal mind is well enough satisfied with the omission of any duty, so it have the pretense of a necessary occasion. If it hath lost a temporal advantage through attendance unto a spiritual duty, it will deeply reflect upon itself, and, it may be, like the duty the worse afterward.
But a gracious soul, one that is truly spiritually minded, will mourn under a review of such omissions, and by every one of them is stirred up unto more watchfulness for the future. "Alas," will it say, "how little have I been with Christ this day!
how much time hath passed me without a thought of him! How foolish was I to be wanting to such or such an opportunity!

I am in arrears unto myself, and have no rest until I be satisfied.
I say, if indeed we are spiritually minded, we will duly and carefully call over the consideration of those times and seasons wherein we ought to have exercised ourselves in spiritual thoughts, and if we have lost them, or any of them, mourn over our own negligence. But if we can omit and lose such seasons or opportunities from time to time without regret or self-reflection, it is to be feared that we wax worse and worse. Way will be made hereby for farther omissions, until we grow wholly cold about them.

 

[JonC]

Can a Calvin or a Hodge or a Spurgeon still speak truth to us even after died, did the lord gift them to understand His work as teachers and expositors and theologians?

No. They cannot speak at all. We read their works. And we can gain from what we read (we can also mislead ourselves).

God gifted John Owen, John Wesley, and Charles Finney as teachers in the past. But God still gives teachers. God is immutable.

 

[Iconoclast]

CHAPTER V. The objects of spiritual thoughts, or what they are conversant about, evidencing them in whom they are to be spiritually minded —
Rules directing unto steadiness in the contemplation of heavenly things —

Motives to fix our thoughts with steadiness in them.

And, it may be, we may be useful unto many herein, by helping them to fix their minds, which are apt to rove into all uncertainty: for this is befallen us, through the disorder and weakness of the faculties of our souls, that sometimes what the mind guides, leads, and directs unto, in things spiritual and heavenly, our wills and affections, through their depravation and corruption, will not comply withal, and so the good designings of the mind are lost; sometimes what the will and affections are inclined unto and ready for, the mind, through its weakness and inconstancy, cannot lead them to the accomplishment of.
So to will is present with us, but how to perform that will we know not. So many are barren in this duty because they know not what to fix upon, nor how to exercise their thoughts when they have chosen a subject for their meditations.
So many are barren in this duty because they know not what to fix upon, nor how to exercise their thoughts when they have chosen a subject for their meditations. Hence they spend their time in fruitless desires that they could use their thoughts unto more purpose, rather than make any progress in the duty itself. They tire themselves, not because they are not willing to go, but because they cannot find their way. Wherefore, both these things shall be spoken unto, both what are the proper objects of our spiritual thoughts, and how we may be steady in our contemplation of them. And I shall unto this purpose first give some general rules, and then some particular instances in way of direction: —

 

[agedman]

@Iconoclast
Is there a reason you are posting excerpts without citations?

Also, are those excerpts relevant to Romans 8:6?

 

[Iconoclast]

1. Observe the especial calls of providence, and apply your minds unto thoughts of the duties required in them and by them. There is a voice in all signal dispensations of providence:
"The LORD’s voice crieth unto the city, and the man of wisdom shall see thy name: hear ye the rod, and who hath appointed it," Micah 6:9.

There is a call, a cry in every rod of God, in every chastising providence, and therein [he] makes a declaration of his name, his holiness, his power, his greatness. This every wise, substantial man will labor to discern, and so comply with the call.

God is greatly provoked when it is otherwise: "LORD, when thy hand is lifted up, they will not see: but they shall see, and be ashamed," Isaiah 26:11.

If, therefore, we would apply ourselves unto our present duty, we are wisely to consider what is the voice of God in his present providential dispensations in the world. Hearken not unto any who would give another interpretation of them, but that they are plain declarations of his displeasure and indignation against the sins of men. Is not his wrath in them revealed from heaven against the ungodliness of men, especially such as retain the truth in unrighteousness, or false, hypocritical professors of the gospel?

Doth he not also signally declare the uncertainty and instability of earthly enjoyments, from life itself to a shoe-latchet? as also how vain and foolish it is to adhere inordinately unto them?

 

[Iconoclast]

@Iconoclast
Is there a reason you are posting excerpts without citations?

Also, are those excerpts relevant to Romans 8:6?

Earlier I posted a link to the whole work, a free ebook in pdf file.

I am skimming through and highlighting some helpful illustations for any would would like to work through it.

The original work is called;
The Grace and Duty of being Spiritually minded.
The whole work is about one verse;
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

He focused on this one crucial verse in reference to it being both a Grace as it is a God given ability, but also a duty as we are called to a Holy life of service.
He is beginning to lay it out, first by defining it, then by showing..what are carnally minded thoughts, what are spiritually minded thoughts.
He searches scripture to biblically demonstrate these things.

Later on he lists the causes and the cure. What helps, what hinders.

This is not about the book of Romans, It is not an exposition of Romans 8.
Some off topic posts are trying to divert it off the main focus.

 

[agedman]

Earlier I posted a link to the whole work, a free ebook in pdf file.

I am skimming through and highlighting some helpful illustations for any would would like to work through it.

The original work is called;
The Grace and Duty of being Spiritually minded.
The whole work is about one verse;
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

He focused on this one crucial verse in reference to it being both a Grace as it is a God given ability, but also a duty as we are called to a Holy life of service.
He is beginning to lay it out, first by defining it, then by showing..what are carnally minded thoughts, what are spiritually minded thoughts.
He searches scripture to biblically demonstrate these things.

Later on he lists the causes and the cure. What helps, what hinders.

This is not about the book of Romans, It is not an exposition of Romans 8.
Some off topic posts are trying to divert it off the main focus.

I thought so. You are right about diversions. But isn't that typical of the BB?