Understanding Romans 8:5-9

[Iconoclast]

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

VAN...here is a hint...
Unable means unable......it does not mean sometimes able...it means unable

unable does not mean the unregenerate can receive the milk
it means they are unable

you say;

But men of flesh, unregenerate men, can understand the milk of the gospel, obviously they can set their minds on godly things.

God says they are UNABLE......I will believe God on this one:thumbs:

 

[Van]

Calvinism rewrites the meaning of words, so unable means unable at any time. So when I travel to Catalina Island and am unable to see land, that means I was unable before I left the shore and after I arrived on the island. This is the sort of twaddle offered in defense of Calvinism. Words have meaning and the inspired Word is corrupted by those who redefine their meaning to fit their agenda.

 

[percho]

Paul: O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

IMHO The gift of the Holy Spirit puts us in Christ a position which makes us heirs, not inheritors.

Matt. 1:20 Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived (being generated) in her is of the Holy Spirit.

We by the Spirit of God are in Christ, in the Spirit, being generated.

In whom ye also, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ in you, the body dead because of sin; but the Spirit life because of righteousness.
But (And) if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

The moment that happens you will be regenerated and will inherit and enter the kingdom of God.

That person being generated in Mary above, Jesus died for you and me, said the following in context of a conversation he had with the rich young ruler concerning inheriting eternal life, "And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Did that person Jesus laying dead in the tomb have to be regenerated?

 

[Forest]

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.

I told you in another thread that you would have to stretch some scriptures to great lengths to harmonise with your doctrine, and you just stretched some in these comments. It's plain and simple, If you do not have the indwelling Spirit you cannot descern spiritural things, they are foolishness to you, yes, even the milk of the word which has to be spiritually descerned.

 

[Forest]

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

Wrong, there is no scriptual proof to back up your statement.

 

[Forest]

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.

We all were "DEAD" (spiritually dead) until we are quickened by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The born again person then has two natures, the flesh and the Spirit, and these two natures war against each other as Paul explains, but the natural man only has one nature so he cannot descern anything of a spiritual nature, not even the milk of the word.

 

[Forest]

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

Give me your scripture that says the unregenerate can understand the milk of the word. I can't find it saying that.

 

[Forest]

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.

I think that you have a missconception of who are saved and who are not. Most salvation scriptures are not refering to eternal salvation, but to timely salvations.

 

[Van]

Is that not beside the point? You say the natural man cannot understand spiritual things, such as the gospel. But the passage you cited 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches the natural man cannot understand spiritual things discerned with the aid of the Spirit, for they are not indwelt, but the natural man can understand the milk of the gospel. Therefore your premise is unbiblical

 

[jbh28]

[sarcasm]God isn't holy all the time. It says God is holy. some people add that God is holy all the time. But this extrapolation is not actually in the text.[/sarcasm]


Unable means unable. It doesn't say unable some of the time. If it says unable, it means exactly that. Praise God for saving unable people!

 

[Van]

Hi Forest, I did not stretch scripture, Calvinism extrapolates scripture beyond its contextual basis. Unable means unable at that point in time and does not address past and future abilities. Even if you are unable to comprehend that truth, it does not suggest that someday you will not comprehend it.

It is plain and simple, if you do not have the indwelling of the Spirit you cannot understand spiritual things. But is that some spiritual things or all spiritual things? The text does not say. For you and Calvinism to claim it refers to all spiritual things, is an unwarranted extrapolation in light of 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

Saying that 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 does not say Paul spoke to the babes in Christ as if they were men of flesh, because they could not understand meat, but could understand milk is to deny the obvious.

 

[Van]

Ah, we have Jbh28 posting adsurdity again, with the premise when anything is said, it applies at all times. Mark 2:4, NASB says unable applies to the situation at hand and may not apply at other times. Ditto for Luke 1:20. And on and on. Calvinism uses shuck and jive to make a muddle of truth.

 

[jbh28]

Ah, we have Jbh28 posting [snip] again, with the premise when anything is said, it applies at all times. Mark 2:4, NASB says unable applies to the situation at hand and may not apply at other times. Ditto for Luke 1:20. And on and on. Calvinism uses shuck and jive to make a muddle of truth.

unable means unable. As you are unable to understand that unable means unable. no ability. It doesn't mean some of the time as you like to add to it. anyway, back to ignore you go....


ah......

 

[DaChaser1]

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.

pretty simple!

Apostle paul showing us that we can chose to either live in our fleshly natures, and reap bad harvest, who chose to live in/by the HS empowering us, and in that way fulfill the law and reap a spiritual harvest!

 

[Van]

Once again if we set our minds on the things of the flesh, fleshly desires, ungodly desires, we are unable to please God. This verse does not address if we set our minds on godly desires, what the outcome will be. However, other verses throughout the Bible teach we can seek God and trust in Christ. Therefore, this verse must be understood to be say when our minds are set on fleshly desires, we are unable to please God.

Apostle Paul showing us that we can chose to either live in our fleshly natures, and reap bad harvest, who chose to live in/by the HS empowering us, and in that way fulfill the law and reap a spiritual harvest!

More deflection and avoidance! Who does the "we" refer to? Born again believers? Or unregenerates? or both. Notice in the Calvinists "simplied" view, the passage only addresses born again folks, sidestepping the contentious issue presented.

Do you hear the music? Runaway.

 

[Forest]

Hi Forest, I did not stretch scripture, Calvinism extrapolates scripture beyond its contextual basis. Unable means unable at that point in time and does not address past and future abilities. Even if you are unable to comprehend that truth, it does not suggest that someday you will not comprehend it.

It is plain and simple, if you do not have the indwelling of the Spirit you cannot understand spiritual things. But is that some spiritual things or all spiritual things? The text does not say. For you and Calvinism to claim it refers to all spiritual things, is an unwarranted extrapolation in light of 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

Saying that 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 does not say Paul spoke to the babes in Christ as if they were men of flesh, because they could not understand meat, but could understand milk is to deny the obvious.

The elect after they have been quickened to spiritual life, do still carry the baggage of their flesh, they have two natures dewling inside of them. Paul explains this by the warfare going on inside of us. The natural man who hasen't been quickened has only one nature and that is the natural nature, so, yes, the born again person can be wicked and fleshly at times. 1 Cor 3:3 is talking about people who are born of the Spirit but lack a knowledge of the meat of the gospel. The natural man, void of the Spirit, cannot understand even the milk of the word because even the milk of the word has to be spiritually descerned.

 

[Iconoclast]

van...this is what you really meant to post!

Van...we get it now...you post in a novel code...we now can translate it..here is the translation of what you really meant to post.

Folks, Calvinism is a true doctrine, and it is obvious if you just read scripture. I 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 many credible arguments have been offered to refute my view.

I was charged with not addressing Romans 8:7-8, but I quoted it and explained it away. guilty as charged #1.

I contradict myself. charge #2

I willfully pervert scripture. charge #3

In baseball, three strikes and you are out.

Hi Forest, I did stretch scripture, I very often extrapolate scripture beyond its contextual basis. Like When I said this! Unable means unable at that point in time and does not address past and future abilities. Even if you are unable to comprehend that truth, it does not suggest that someday you will not comprehend it.

It is plain and simple, if you do not have the indwelling of the Spirit you cannot understand spiritual things. But is that some spiritual things or all spiritual things? most people understand it as written...except me.
The text does not say. For you and Calvinism to claim it refers to all spiritual things, is exactly correct! of 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

most of my posts are shuck and jive, twaddle and fiddlesticks....folks.

I am going to make myself a hot chocolate a read a portion from Calvins Institues now....:wavey::wavey: Tulip is the truth:thumbs:

 

[quantumfaith]

Van...we get it now...you post in a novel code...we now can translate it..here is the translation of what you really meant to post.




Hi Forest, I did stretch scripture, I very often extrapolate scripture beyond its contextual basis. Like When I said this! Unable means unable at that point in time and does not address past and future abilities. Even if you are unable to comprehend that truth, it does not suggest that someday you will not comprehend it.

It is plain and simple, if you do not have the indwelling of the Spirit you cannot understand spiritual things. But is that some spiritual things or all spiritual things? most people understand it as written...except me.
The text does not say. For you and Calvinism to claim it refers to all spiritual things, is exactly correct! of 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

most of my posts are shuck and jive, twaddle and fiddlesticks....folks.

I am going to make myself a hot chocolate a read a portion from Calvins Institues now....:wavey::wavey: Tulip is the truth:thumbs:

Now, Now Icon,

I take "issue" with this. You know

"I am the way, the truth and the life..." (Jesus)

Tulip is but a systematized interpreted version of "truth". Now on to my coffee, "Newmans Own" keurig.

 

[Van]

Hi Forest, Paul spoke to the babes in Christ as men of flesh. Now why would Paul do that if men of flesh could not understand. Your view makes no sense.

So by the numbers, your assertion that people are made alive before they are put spiritually in Christ has absolutely no support in scripture, but instead scripture says we are made alive, quickened when we are together with Christ. Strike One

The natural man can understand the milk of the gospel, so he can set his mind sometimes on spiritual things. Romans 9:30-33 has men seeking God by works or by faith, but both are seeking God. The Rich young ruler was seeking God. Total Spiritual inability is unbiblcial, a fiction of man. Strke Two

Read Romans 11 and ask yourself why did God need to harden the hearts of the unbelieving Jews if they were unable to receive the truth?
Answer, total spiritual inability is inconsistent with scripture, because if it were true, no hardening would have been necessary. Strike three.

 

[Van]

Misrepresenting the views of others creates an environment that hinders the serious study of God's word.