The Christian: one nature or two?

[ticker]

Are you sure?

Positive

 

[Stinker]

People that become true believers have had God's light shined in their conscience. Satan had previously had the person's entire conscience to himself and had it entirely darkened so that the person could not see that he/she was not alone in their daily decision making. After the person's coming to the kind of faith commanded in the New Testament (conversion) they are now more aware of Satan's manipulation of their carnal nature and are more able to keep it under subjection.

 

[AngelusSax]

One.

You can't even have "two natures" of something....it's a contradiction in terms.

"Nature" by definition is somethings' essence...its core make-up.

Nothing could be"two of" anything......LEAST of all Christ (...whose divine nature we happen to share ).

Peace

By that logic, Christ could NOT have been both man and God.

 

[ticker]

By that logic, Christ could NOT have been both man and God.

?

We're talking about something not being able to be 2 things by nature.

What does Christ being man (...on top of being God) have to do with His nature? Being a man isn't ones' nature....a man has a nature though (....either a sinful nature or a righteous nature).

....feel free to disagree with me if you wish though.

 

[AngelusSax]

We're talking about something not being able to be 2 things by nature.

What does Christ being man (...on top of being God) have to do His nature? Being a man isn't ones' nature....a man has a nature though (....either a sinful nature or a righteous nature).

....feel free to disagree with me if you wish though.

Ah, so you are making a distinction between essence, or substance, and nature. I see. In that case, one could argue that man has only one nature, and that is a nature of rejecting God. We do that by nature.

God acts against our nature, sending Christ, and interrupts us eternally. We are given a 2nd nature, but that nature is Christ's. Our flesh, however, still remains. If it were not so, if the Old Adam were to be completely annihilated, we would be perfect. But none of us are.

Our righteous nature, then, isn't our nature at all. It is Christ's nature. It is the dominant nature for a Christian, of course (or should be), but we still war in ourselves.

The Old Adam may die in our Baptism unto the Lord, but he is still there, stinking up the joint, so to speak. That's what a rotting corpse does. We are all of us simul isutus et peccator, simultaneously saint and sinner. We, ourselves, are sinners, but we are saints by God's decree and God's righteousness in us.

And if one is to think they no longer have a sinful nature, but only the righteous nature, let them ask themselves: When was the last time they went a day, a week, a year, or (if they have lived long enough) a decade without committing even one sin?

 

[sunlover1]

Probably a reason that story wasn't in the Holy Bible.

But it's a good analogy. at least i have found it to be true 'often' in my life.
Not always but often... I will feed my flesh or feed my spirit and the one
that is the better fed will become stronger.
However, I've also noticed that God can work in me and through me even
when I've neglected to die to the flesh.
He is GOOD!!

Nope. What we ARE is a Saint....what we sometimes DO is sin. Big difference.

Peace

That's because our flesh isnt saved.
I agree with you that our new nature is to seek after God, but I will
have to look at what Scripture says to make sure.
ttyl.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

To answer the OP:

I am a christian with one, big Holy Spirit infused nature that is stuck(for now until my Lord comes) in the mire of the flesh.

 

[ticker]

Ah, so you are making a distinction between essence, or substance, and nature. I see. In that case, one could argue that man has only one nature, and that is a nature of rejecting God. We do that by nature.

God acts against our nature, sending Christ, and interrupts us eternally. We are given a 2nd nature, but that nature is Christ's. Our flesh, however, still remains. If it were not so, if the Old Adam were to be completely annihilated, we would be perfect. But none of us are.

Our righteous nature, then, isn't our nature at all. It is Christ's nature. It is the dominant nature for a Christian, of course (or should be), but we still war in ourselves.

The Old Adam may die in our Baptism unto the Lord, but he is still there, stinking up the joint, so to speak. That's what a rotting corpse does. We are all of us simul isutus et peccator, simultaneously saint and sinner. We, ourselves, are sinners, but we are saints by God's decree and God's righteousness in us.

And if one is to think they no longer have a sinful nature, but only the righteous nature, let them ask themselves: When was the last time they went a day, a week, a year, or (if they have lived long enough) a decade without committing even one sin?

.....meh. You're close.

As I showed earlier, a closer examination of Paul's words (....including the parts about indwelling sin) says it all.

Just so I don't repeat myself...

Paul actually says sin is in the members of his flesh...going on to point out that it's IN him, but NOT him.

Paul isn't talking about a struggle between new and old...he's talking about a struggle between who he IS (good) and what he sometimes DOES (bad). Notice how many times he's saying it's GOOD that he really wants to do (...that's because of who he IS), but then adds it's no longer HIM who does the bad that he doesn't wanna do.......it's something that's IN him (indwelling sin), but NOT him.

Peace

 

[AngelusSax]

Well that is your interpretation of that passage. It is not everyone's including much of traditional Christianity. "It is no longer I that lives but Christ that lives within me" would indicate that the sin nature IS still what he has, but that Christ lives in him, overcoming that nature still in there somewhere.

 

[ticker]

But it's a good analogy. at least i have found it to be true 'often' in my life.
Not always but often... I will feed my flesh or feed my spirit and the one
that is the better fed will become stronger.
However, I've also noticed that God can work in me and through me even
when I've neglected to die to the flesh.
He is GOOD!!

...problem I find with it is that how it reads leads to Christians falsely thinking that what they ARE is good and bad (which just isn't biblical)...and completely does away with the notion of something dying and coming back anew (our being crucified, being born again, and becoming new creations....all very biblical ). If we don't believe that, and don't start attributing our sinful ways strictly to our flesh, then we'll always fall victim to unnecessary feelings of self-condemnation and inadequacy (falsely believing we ARE...even in part..."bad").

That's because our flesh isnt saved.
I agree with you that our new nature is to seek after God, but I will
have to look at what Scripture says to make sure.
ttyl.

Cool. Here's one to start...

- "...and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. "



God bless

 

[AngelusSax]

Here's a web-site explaining Simul Iusutus Et Peccator, probably better and more effectively than I can:

Simul Iustus et Peccator

 

[simonthezealot]

To answer the OP:

I am a christian with one, big Holy Spirit infused nature that is stuck(for now until my Lord comes) in the mire of the flesh.

Like a clean foot in a dirty sock...The sock is NOT part of the foot but it can sure make the foot have a stench.

 

[ticker]

Well that is your interpretation of that passage.

Yep...one that actually makes perfect sense too!

It is not everyone's including much of traditional Christianity.

Well, you're absolutely right, friend. Unfortunately the large majority of Christians don't know the victory-giving Gospel you're getting pointed towards here...and just keep on being fooled by age-long religious lies of the enemy. Sad.

"It is no longer I that lives but Christ that lives within me" would indicate that the sin nature IS still what he has,

...no. Don't you know the Bible tells us we have "crucified the sinful nature"? Again, what he still has is sin IN the "members of his flesh"....("nature" being a different thing all together).

but that Christ lives in him, overcoming that nature still in there somewhere.

...just overcoming? Actually, it died with Christ....that's the whole point of His work on the cross. The old self isn't "stinking up the joint", friend....Christ wouldn't dwell alongside our sinful and unrighteous Ademic self "in there somewhere". Instead, His work on the cross has made it so "the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are". i.e. There's nothing "unholy" about us anymore.....(sorry to break it to ya )

Just because you might not feel holy, or don't comprehend how you can have one, righteous nature and still sin (...as I/Paul plainly explain it to you), it doesn't mean you should simply refuse to accept the Gospel in a way you might not have seen before.

If you refuse to believe the truth, then it'll never set you free.

Peace bro

 

[ticker]

Here's a web-site explaining Simul Iusutus Et Peccator, probably better and more effectively than I can:

Simul Iustus et Peccator

Yep...seems he essentially believes what we ARE is both righteous and sinful at the same time.

Completely contrary to the Gospel, but....whatever.

 

[AngelusSax]

Yep...seems he essentially believes what we ARE is both righteous and sinful at the same time.

Completely contrary to the Gospel, but....whatever.

Perhaps to your understanding of it, but....whatever.

 

[AngelusSax]

...just overcoming? Actually, it died with Christ....that's the whole point of His work on the cross. The old self isn't "stinking up the joint", friend....Christ wouldn't dwell alongside our sinful and unrighteous Ademic self "in there somewhere". Instead, His work on the cross has made it so "the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are". i.e. There's nothing "unholy" about us anymore.....(sorry to break it to ya )

Just because you might not feel holy, or don't comprehend how you can have one, righteous nature and still sin (...as I/Paul plainly explain it to you), it doesn't mean you should simply refuse to accept the Gospel in a way you might not have seen before.

So I should assume you never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever sin?

If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, my friend. And that is in the New Testament, after conversion to Christ.

...no. Don't you know the Bible tells us we have "crucified the sinful nature"? Again, what he still has is sin IN the "members of his flesh"....("nature" being a different thing all together).

So... just his arm sinned, but he didn't sin? Is that what it means? Because that seems to be where you're going with this.

Just because you might not feel holy, or don't comprehend how you can have one, righteous nature and still sin (...as I/Paul plainly explain it to you), it doesn't mean you should simply refuse to accept the Gospel in a way you might not have seen before.

If you refuse to believe the truth, then it'll never set you free.

I have been set free. I refuse to accept false teaching that then turns things around and makes a mockery of the Gospel by proclaiming that I am now righteous without any tendency toward sin whatsoever (which is the result of your teaching), which then means that if I am good, I've obeyed well and I'm a good boy, but if I sin, then I have failed and I must not have been made righteous enough by Christ (again, this is what your teaching logically leads to).

In essence, it's headed toward works theology, and something tells me you are unaware of that.

If our sinful nature (or Original Sin, what-have-you) is killed off as you seem to be saying it is, then no Christian would ever sin. Since they do, we can deduce that Original sin is still with us. It is dead to Christ, because Christ takes our sin upon himself and gives us His righteousness. But even Paul said "I die daily". You seem to think "I died once and that's all it ever took".

 

[ticker]

So I should assume you never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever sin?

....the fact that you've asked such a question here is really making me wonder if you've given any serious thought to a single word that I (...or the apostle Paul) have written.

What gives???

If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, my friend. And that is in the New Testament, after conversion to Christ.

Oops...wrong again I'm afraid. That verse is referring to a non-Christian actually (...the passage being addressed to both believers and non-believers). It's an oft-misunderstood and misused passage that legalists carelessly use to try and further their religious agenda in claiming righteousness is something to be gained (...as opposed to something we already have), when really all it's doing is describing non-believers by things they might say/do (...comparing them to believers).

It says, "God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie...". Yeah....that would be a non-Christian. Christians DON'T walk in the darkness...we have God, and walk in the light. Someone who walks in the darkness and claims to have fellowship WOULD be a liar....he'd be a non-Christian.

It says, "...we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us". But Christians DO have the truth in them. Again...comparing a non-believer (...who hasn't believed unto the truth), to a believer.

It says, "If we claim we have not sinned...". Again....not talking about Christians. Christians HAVE claimed they have sinned (...that's how we got saved, through repentance). Just like in the verse you gave, it's talking about non-believers. A non-believer WOULD be deceiving themselves by saying they have no sin.


It's becoming apparent that you're unfortunately reading/interpreting your Bible through a skewed lens...wanting it to fit your interpretation of the falsities that believing we're unholy will lead to. And even though I plainly show you time and again how the scripture you're leaving out in the verses you (mis)quote is directly contradicting what you're saying, you seem to just want to maintain you're right.

Oh well....

So... just his arm sinned, but he didn't sin? Is that what it means? Because that seems to be where you're going with this.

Indwelling sin in the members of one's flesh isn't a specific/physical thing. You could liken it to our soul (...mind, will, and emotions) as much as you would to our physical body. We got a new Spirit at salvation, not a new soul (...hence our continued imperfect thoughts/behaviours/feelings), or not yet a perfected body.

I have been set free. I refuse to accept false teaching that then turns things around and makes a mockery of the Gospel by proclaiming that I am now righteous without any tendency toward sin whatsoever (which is the result of your teaching), which then means that if I am good, I've obeyed well and I'm a good boy, but if I sin, then I have failed and I must not have been made righteous enough by Christ (again, this is what your teaching logically leads to).

??????????

In essence, it's headed toward works theology, and something tells me you are unaware of that.

Ummmmmmm.......no.

If our sinful nature (or Original Sin, what-have-you) is killed off as you seem to be saying it is, then no Christian would ever sin.

Wow....you really like to beat that drum.

I have a feeling I gave you the explanation of that somewhere. Oh well...nevermind. Might as well just ignore that whole members of the flesh/sin is IN me but NOT me/not practicing the GOOD that I WANT stuff Paul keeps talking about. I mean, what could he could POSSIBLY be saying of any importance in verses like these???...

"For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh".


Face it.....you're good (...it's your flesh that isn't). Sorry.

Since they do, we can deduce that Original sin is still with us. It is dead to Christ, because Christ takes our sin upon himself and gives us His righteousness. But even Paul said "I die daily". You seem to think "I died once and that's all it ever took".

We do indeed die daily...to our old man traits pervading our soul/body. But we don't continue to die to who we are (...considering it's Christ who is our life now.....we're dead).

Peace

 

[DD2008]

This is possibly the best sermon I have ever heard on this subject:

YouTube - Being What You Are [Regeneration] (Paul Washer)

 

[the particular baptist]

This is possibly the best sermon I have ever heard on this subject:

YouTube - Being What You Are [Regeneration] (Paul Washer)

Amen brother

 

[ticker]

This is possibly the best sermon I have ever heard on this subject:

YouTube - Being What You Are [Regeneration] (Paul Washer)

Oh, how I wish many a people on this board would just take an hour out of the religious tripe they pointlessly and endlessly argue about and dare listen to the plain and life-breathed truth of this Gospel.

Thank you!