The mind set on the flesh

[Neostarwcc]

Hammster is doing a fantastic job replying to this thread with Biblical statements but I wanted to make my own little snippet in here.

Like a oven can only be either hot or cold a person can only be dead or alive. Dead (flesh), alive (spirit). These are the only two states that a human can possibly be in and while in the flesh man cannot please God. Because those in the Flesh are against God. In fact, they want nothing to do with him. And before you say "wait Neo people try to live for God all the time. There are plenty of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists ...etc who all live Godly lives. Yes, you're right. But there are three main problems with this idea.

1. They don't want to follow the true God as he reveals himself in scripture.

2. Our righteousness is nothing but filthy rags compared to God's righteousness

3. Good works will never get us to heaven because we have our totally depraved sinful body and much of our good works come from selfishness rather than service to God.


When we discover who God is and what he has done, what I'm saying makes a lot of sense. This is why Jesus said to Nicodemus "you have to be born again to see the kingdom of God" because those in the Spirit are the very regenerated children of God. The spirit is life and salvation. It is impossible for one in the flesh to be saved because of this reason. That's why we need the Holy Spirit to regenerate our completely dead nature and why everyone born of God wants to spend time with God, wants to do what pleases him, hates and destroys their sin, and everything else that comes from regeneration.

Paul's main goal in his letter to the Romans was to teach the Romans these things.

 

[Hammster]

There is no specific name for a convicted believer in the Bible, I'll give you that. There is only in the flesh or in the Spirit. The convicted believer is still in the flesh. Why would the Bible have a specific name for it other than being in the flesh?

It shouldn’t. But you are treating it as a biblical category. I posted Romans 3:10ff and you said it was showing we were all sinner, but implied that there is another category called “convicted sinner”. I think Paul would have addressed that if there was.

The passages we have discussed describes convicted people.

And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
— Acts 16:29-30

Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?”
— Acts 2:37

What it doesn’t say is why and how. Faith comes by hearing. That’s the means that the Holy Spirit uses. So I can just as easily say that when they heard, the Spirit used that moment to regenerate them. It’s just as much in the text as your view.

He knows he should stop, but wants to keep living in sin until he is convicted. He doesn't understand he is under judgment. He does need to understand that to be willing to stop and be willing to turn to Christ.

That certainly doesn’t sound like any person Paul describes who is in the flesh.

“And now, brethren, I know that you acted in ignorance, just as your rulers did also. But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; and that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you,
— Acts 3:17-20

And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”
— Acts 10:42-43

Do you find somewhere in the NT where it says a person is forgiven before he has faith or that Christ death on the cross gives us (the elect) instant forgiveness? If not you have made a new category not found in Scripture.

I can show that the atonement actually accomplishes something, that sins are actually washed away.

 

[zoidar]

It shouldn’t. But you are treating it as a biblical category. I posted Romans 3:10ff and you said it was showing we were all sinner, but implied that there is another category called “convicted sinner”. I think Paul would have addressed that if there was.

I don't think Romans 3:10-19 has anything to do with if a person in the flesh can repent or if he needs to be convicted first or not, or if he needs to be in the Spirit to be able to repent. It's just not a text about that. I think Paul sums up the meaning of Romans 3:10-19 here:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
— Romans 3:23

All are sinners (Jews and Gentile) until they are righteous through faith.

even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
— Romans 3:22

What it doesn’t say is why and how. Faith comes by hearing. That’s the means that the Holy Spirit uses. So I can just as easily say that when they heard, the Spirit used that moment to regenerate them. It’s just as much in the text as your view.

I think we are done with those texts for now.

That certainly doesn’t sound like any person Paul describes who is in the flesh.

What I described is how it generally is for Gentiles. A Jew, like Paul, wanted to keep the law but couldn't. So there is a difference.

I can show that the atonement actually accomplishes something, that sins are actually washed away.

We all believe the atonement washes away sins, the question is when. So if you can show the atonement washes away sins of people the moment Jesus was crucifide, go ahead.

The Bible mentions two categories.

1. Those who haven't been redeemed and forgiven - The unsaved.

2. Those who have been redeemed and forgiven - The saved.

You seem to want to add a third category, which I don't see in the Bible.

3. Those who have been redeemed and forgiven - The not yet saved, the partially saved.

I think forgiveness of Christ does something actual to the person been forgiven. I don't believe we have all these people out on the streets stealing cars and robbing banks, who are forgiven through Christ. To me that doesn't make sense of the atonement.

 

[Hammster]

I don't think Romans 3:10-19 has anything to do with if a person in the flesh can repent or if he needs to be convicted first or not, or if he needs to be in the Spirit to be able to repent. It's just not a text about that. I think Paul sums up the meaning of Romans 3:10-19 here:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
— Romans 3:23

All are sinners (Jews and Gentile) until they are righteous through faith.

even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
— Romans 3:22

Maybe if you deconstruct the text you can come up with that. But the language is damning.

as it is written,
“There is none righteous, not even one;”
I think we can agree on the meaning of this one

“There is none who understands,”
This goes along with with:
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
— 1 Corinthians 2:14
So the natural man doesn’t understand because he cannot.

“There is none who seeks for God;”
You seem to think that there are.

“All have turned aside, together they have become useless;”
As a result of the Fall.

“There is none who does good,
There is not even one.”
Well, except for those who are convicted sinners, it would seem.

“Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving,”
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
“Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness”;
“Their feet are swift to shed blood,
Destruction and misery are in their paths,
And the path of peace they have not known.”
Not sounding like one who wants anything to do with God.
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
— Romans 3:10-18
And the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

And this is the person whom you think can just change and want to repent.

Romans 3:23 is the summation of all he’s written from Romans 1:18 up until that point. It’s his summation of both Gentiles and Jews. That whole section show how both Jews and Gentiles are sinful. 3:10-18 is just the overall description of them. He gives no wiggle room. You are creating wiggle room.

 

[zoidar]

Maybe if you deconstruct the text you can come up with that. But the language is damning.

as it is written,
“There is none righteous, not even one;”
I think we can agree on the meaning of this one

Yes, no one is righteous without faith.

“There is none who understands,”

I think Rom 1-3 deals with works of the law in relation to faith. I don't see it deal very thoroughly on the topic of repentance. It shows all are sinners, and the only way to be righteous is through faith. It does however describe how stubbornness against God's kindness leads to condemnation. To me that indicates you can repent if you don't resist the revelation of God. I don't know if I have to add it, my understanding is the resistance against God is broken through conviction.

Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
— Romans 2:4-5

This goes along with with:
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
— 1 Corinthians 2:14
So the natural man doesn’t understand because he cannot.

I will say somewhat the same thing about 1 Cor. The letter does not deal with repentance i.e. does not say how the natural man becomes a Spiritual man. I don't think we should read it like it does. The words repent or repentance is not even in the letter.

“There is none who seeks for God;”
You seem to think that there are.

“All have turned aside, together they have become useless;”
As a result of the Fall.

“There is none who does good,
There is not even one.”
Well, except for those who are convicted sinners, it would seem.

“Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving,”
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
“Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness”;
“Their feet are swift to shed blood,
Destruction and misery are in their paths,
And the path of peace they have not known.”
Not sounding like one who wants anything to do with God.
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
— Romans 3:10-18
And the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

And this is the person whom you think can just change and want to repent.

Not by himself, but through conviction by the Holy Spirit.

Romans 3:23 is the summation of all he’s written from Romans 1:18 up until that point. It’s his summation of both Gentiles and Jews. That whole section show how both Jews and Gentiles are sinful. 3:10-18 is just the overall description of them. He gives no wiggle room. You are creating wiggle room.

I agree it describes both Jews and Gentiles as sinful.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, no one is righteous without faith.

I think Rom 1-3 deals with works of the law in relation to faith. I don't see it deal very thoroughly on the topic of repentance. It shows all are sinners, and the only way to be righteous is through faith. It does however describe how stubbornness against God's kindness leads to condemnation. To me that indicates you can repent if you don't resist the revelation of God. I don't know if I have to add it, my understanding is the resistance against God is broken through conviction.

Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
— Romans 2:4-5

I will say somewhat the same thing about 1 Cor. The letter does not deal with repentance i.e. does not say how the natural man becomes a Spiritual man. I don't think we should read it like it does. The words repent or repentance is not even in the letter.

Not by himself, but through conviction by the Holy Spirit.

I agree it describes both Jews and Gentiles as sinful.

Since you seem to the utter sinfulness of man, even though Paul couldn’t be clearer, let me ask this. Do you think repentance is something good man does? Or do you see it as neutral?

 

[zoidar]

Since you seem to the utter sinfulness of man, even though Paul couldn’t be clearer, let me ask this. Do you think repentance is something good man does? Or do you see it as neutral?

No man is truly good until he has been born again, and even then, he is not completely good. Repentance is an act by the convicted man who realizes he needs forgiveness for having lived a life in sin. So, it's not a neutral act or something a good man does. It's rather an undeserving sinner admitting he deserves nothing from God and has nothing to give God, except his life. The sinner has realized his own sinfulness, which shows he is not at all good, far from it. He is admitting he has been unrighteous, evil if you like. Admitting this is of course a good thing, done by the convicted man. I can add, admitting you are evil, does not make you good.

 

[Hammster]

No man is truly good until he has been born again, and even then, he is not completely good. Repentance is an act by the convicted man who realizes he needs forgiveness for having lived a life in sin. So, it's not a neutral act or something a good man does. It's rather an undeserving sinner admitting he deserves nothing from God and has nothing to give God, except his life. The sinner has realized his own sinfulness, which shows he is not at all good, far from it. He is admitting he has been unrighteous, evil if you like. Admitting this is of course a good thing, done by the convicted man. I can add, admitting you are evil, does not make you good.

I’m not asking if it’s something a good man does. I’m asking if it’s a good thing that he does. Is the act itself good?

 

[zoidar]

I’m not asking if it’s something a good man does. I’m asking if it’s a good thing that he does. Is the act itself good?

Yes, and also pleasing to God.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, and also pleasing to God.

Then it’s safe to say that you believe that a bad tree can produce good fruit.

 

[zoidar]

Then it’s safe to say that you believe that a bad tree can produce good fruit.

A convicted man does not produce good fruits in the sense of fruits of the Spirit.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
— Galatians 5:22-23

In Matt 7:15-20 the bad tree refers to false prophets and that their fruit is bad is seen though their actions. Like the scribes and Pharisees, they taught one thing, then they did something else. I doubt Jesus refers to repentance as a good fruit in this passage.

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.
— Matthew 23:1-3

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.
— Matthew 7:15-20

I think good fruit is the result of repentance. That repentance is a good thing does not necessarily mean it's a good fruit in the Biblical context.

 

[Hammster]

A convicted man does not produce good fruits in the sense of fruits of the Spirit.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
— Galatians 5:22-23

In Matt 7:15-20 the bad tree refers to false prophets and that their fruit is bad is seen though their actions. Like the scribes and Pharisees, they taught one thing, then they did something else. I doubt Jesus refers to repentance as a good fruit in this passage.

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.
— Matthew 23:1-3

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.
— Matthew 7:15-20

I think good fruit is the result of repentance. That repentance is a good thing does not necessarily mean it's a good fruit in the Biblical context.

The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil.
— Matthew 12:35

The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.
— Luke 6:45

There’s no mention of an evil man having good treasure.

 

[zoidar]

The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil.
— Matthew 12:35

The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.
— Luke 6:45

There’s no mention of an evil man having good treasure.

For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.
— Luke 6:43-45

Do you think Jesus means a good tree only produces good fruit and a bad tree only produces bad fruit. Do you think a good man only brings forth what is good and the evil man only brings forth what is evil. I don't think you do. And again I doubt repentance is part of the fruit Jesus talks about.

“Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit. You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart. The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil. But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
— Matthew 12:33-37

Here fruit seems to be specifically about what we say. But I, for one believe even the most sanctified saint isn't completely free from sinning (bad fruit).

Some Christians seem to believe if an unbeliever can do any good thing that pleases God, then there is no real need of a savior. This is utterly untrue. In truth, it takes only one sin in your whole life to be guilty of eternal punishment (How many sins did it take for Adam?). That is something worth pondering.

 

[Hammster]

For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.
— Luke 6:43-45

Do you think Jesus means a good tree only produces good fruit and a bad tree only produces bad fruit.

Yes. I tend to believe what He says.

Do you think a good man only brings forth what is good and the evil man only brings forth what is evil. I don't think you do.

I believe that only a good man is capable of bringing forth good fruit and an evil man is only capable of bringing forth bad fruit.

And again I doubt repentance is part of the fruit Jesus talks about.

Of course not. Even though repentance is good, and despite what Jesus said, and despite all that Paul describes in Romans, you need to hold onto your idea that there’s a person who is a good reprobate.

“Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit. You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart. The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil. But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
— Matthew 12:33-37

Here fruit seems to be specifically about what we say. But I, for one believe even the most sanctified saint isn't completely free from sinning (bad fruit).

I have argued against that. That’s why John talks about pruning.

Some Christians seem to believe if an unbeliever can do any good thing that pleases God, then there is no real need of a savior.
This is utterly untrue. In truth, it takes only one sin in your whole life to be guilty of eternal punishment (How many sins did it take for Adam?). That is something worth pondering.

The unregenerate cannot do anything to please God because to please God, it must be done for His glory. That is why we need to be in Christ.

 

[zoidar]

Yes. I tend to believe what He says.

I believe that only a good man is capable of bringing forth good fruit and an evil man is only capable of bringing forth bad fruit.

How is that possible? Are you of the belief a born again person never sins?

Of course not. Even though repentance is good, and despite what Jesus said, and despite all that Paul describes in Romans, you need to hold onto your idea that there’s a person who is a good reprobate.

It's just we don't find in the NT anyone refer to repentance as being a work of the law. Why is that? If it was, wouldn't it be mentioned all over? Since it would be a very important teaching.

I have argued against that. That’s why John talks about pruning.

I'm very curious how you think. You believe a saint never sins?

The unregenerate cannot do anything to please God because to please God, it must be done for His glory. That is why we need to be in Christ.

Ok! Can you give me a verse that says this: "To please God it must be done to His glory"?

 

[Hammster]

How is that possible? Are you of the belief a born again person never sins?

Nope. I never said that.

It's just we don't find in the NT anyone refer to repentance as being a work of the law. Why is that? If it was, wouldn't it be mentioned over and over? Since it would be a very important teaching.

It doesn’t have to be a work of the law to be good. But it is good, and an evil man cannot be good…according to Jesus.

I'm very curious how you think. You believe a saint never sins?

I never said that. I think you are reading something into what I said.

Ok! Can you give me a verse that says this?

A verse that specifically says they? No. But I also can’t give you a verse that specifically speaks about the Trinity.

 

[zoidar]

Nope. I never said that.

I never said that. I think you are reading something into what I said.

How do you explain a regenerated believer produces only good fruit, yet still sins? Isn't sin bad fruit?

A verse that specifically says they? No. But I also can’t give you a verse that specifically speaks about the Trinity.

I could use the same argument when you say legal and moral guilt is not in the Bible. It's true, but it's an argument from silence.

 

[Hammster]

How do you explain a regenerated believer produces only good fruit, yet still sins? Isn't sin bad fruit?

I never said that’s that case.

I could use the same argument when you say legal and moral guilt is not in the Bible. It's true, but it's an argument from silence.

The Trinity isn’t an argument from silence. It’s just not one you get to with a single verse.

 

[zoidar]

The Trinity isn’t an argument from silence. It’s just not one you get to with a single verse.

That is true! Thanks for pointing that out! I was just about to change my post. I had the wrong understanding of what an argument from silence is. It would be more correct to say it's an implicit argument.

 

[zoidar]

I never said that’s that case.

What is it you think fruit is an metaphor of?

Karpos
1. fruit
a. the fruit of the trees, vines, of the fields
b. the fruit of one's loins, i.e. his progeny, his posterity
2. that which originates or comes from something, an effect, result
a. work, act, deed
b. advantage, profit, utility
c. praises, which are presented to God as a thank offering
d. to gather fruit (i.e. a reaped harvest) into life eternal (as into a granary), is used in fig. discourse of those who by their labours have fitted souls to obtain eternal life

Source: Strong's Greek: 2590 καρπός (karpos) - fruit