Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

[Rufus]

You must be busy. In & out of here.

The natural man in 1Cor2 is used in contrast to the mature/spiritual Christian who is the only one who can understand the deep things of God Paul is talking about. Not even the "babes in Christ" can understand these things. This is not talking about the basics of the Gospel nor God Consciousness. Here's the work.

And here's more you've fallen behind in. And here

Scripture only please.

Really? The "natural man" is not the man in Adam? But the "spiritual man" is in Christ? Interestingly enough, the NIV renders "natural man" as "The man without the Spirit". "Natural" in the NT refers to men who are earthly, unspiritual, devoid of the Spirit (1Cor 15:44, 46; Jas 3:15; Jude 19.

The AMP version renders this verse:

1 Cor 2:14
14 But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.
AMP

The TEV paraphrase renders the passage:

1 Cor 2:14
14 Whoever does not have the Spirit cannot receive the gifts that come from God's Spirit. Such a person really does not understand them; they are nonsense to him, because their value can be judged only on a spiritual basis.
TEV

And the TLB reads:

1 Cor 2:14-15
14 But the man who isn't a Christian can't understand and can't accept these thoughts from God, which the Holy Spirit teaches us. They sound foolish to him because only those who have the Holy Spirit within them can understand what the Holy Spirit means. Others just can't take it in. 15 But the spiritual man has insight into everything, and that bothers and baffles the man of the world, who can't understand him at all.
TLB

How can the "natural man" understand truth when the god of this world has blinded the minds of such people (2Cor 4:4)? When the whole [unregenerate] world is under the evil one's power (1Jn 5:19)!?

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

That's your story, and you're sticking with it.

That's the Bible example and I am sticking with the Bible, not your personal doctrine that is found nowhere in the Bible

 

[Rufus]

You can make it say anything you want. That's part of the beauty of Scripture. It allows us to run amok and be a pain to one another!

It means what the phrase - a command - plainly says, Listen Up! Hear This! If you prefer Understand This! you're taking it a bit afield, but I've already said I could go there (but under caution) but it's still a command to do what He says, so He expected them to do what He commanded. At times we can see the good students asking for explanations and the Good Teacher explaining Himself. This is not a difficult phrase.

A question is not a command! A question doesn't even imply an imperative. When someone asks, "Do you hear me", he's really asking, "Do you understand me?" Do you get it? Do you comprehend. etc.?

 

[studier]

A question is not a command! A question doesn't even imply an imperative. When someone asks, "Do you hear me", he's really asking, "Do you understand me?" Do you get it? Do you comprehend. etc.?

Settle down.

There is no question in the phrase which is repeated several times, so I'm not sure what your point is. Maybe we're talking past one another.

It's a straight address to those who hear followed by the command, hear! That's about as succinct as it can be stated.

 

[Rufus]

Because sin nature does not desire God but free will is a choice to override the sin natures desire.

But there is no such animal as an autonomous free will. Not even God Almighty has such a fanciful animal! The will of man is powerless to change his essence; just as God is powerless to change his! Both scripture (Jer 13:23) and the Law of Identity support my premise.

Also, the will is moved by our desires. The will does not operate in a vacuum, apart from all the other faculties which are corrupt by sin. Your theory contradicts Paul's assertion that there is NO GOOD thing in man's flesh (sin nature, cp Rom 7:18). But your theory clearly implies that's man's will is good enough to "override the sin nature..."

Don't you know that man is in bondage to sin? What do you think the Exodus narrative is teaching? Since the ancient Hebrews were in bondage, then what makes you think the antitypes aren't in bondage as well?

 

[studier]

Really? The "natural man" is not the man in Adam? But the "spiritual man" is in Christ? Interestingly enough, the NIV renders "natural man" as "The man without the Spirit". "Natural" in the NT refers to men who are earthly, unspiritual, devoid of the Spirit (1Cor 15:44, 46; Jas 3:15; Jude 19.

Yes, the natural man is in Adam. And the spiritual man in context is a mature Christian. And the context is not about the basic Gospel content.

I've explained it and am happy to discuss it point by point if you're having trouble seeing the context. It's quite clear.

Thanks for all the translations. I think you know by now that I generally look at the Greek and peruse several English translations to see what they're doing with the Greek.

 

[Rufus]

Settle down.

There is no question in the phrase which is repeated several times, so I'm not sure what your point is. Maybe we're talking past one another.

It's a straight address to those who hear followed by the command, hear! That's about as succinct as it can be stated.

I'm saying that what you think the question in the text implies is in error, notwithstanding what the text goes on to say.

 

[Rufus]

Yes, the natural man is in Adam. And the spiritual man in context is a mature Christian. And the context is not about the basic Gospel content.

I've explain it pretty well and am happy to discuss it point by point if you're having trouble seeing the context. It's quite clear.

Thanks for all the translations. I think you know by now that I generally look at the Greek and peruse several English translations to see what they're doing with the Greek.

I thought you said the "natural man" was an immature believer? Also, a "spiritual man" can be a babe in Christ or a mature Christian. The minimum requirement for a "spiritual man" in this NC age is that he be indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

 

[studier]

I'm saying that what you think the question in the text implies is in error, notwithstanding what the text goes on to say.

Please clarify. Paste the text or whatever you're looking at.

 

[Cameron143]

That's the Bible example and I am sticking with the Bible, not your personal doctrine that is found nowhere in the Bible

Just curious. Lazarus dead in the tomb. Did he hear and then was alive, or was he given life and then heard?

 

[studier]

I thought you said the "natural man" was an immature believer? Also, a "spiritual man" can be a babe in Christ or a mature Christian. The minimum requirement for a "spiritual man" in this NC age is that he be indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

You've misunderstood me.

• The natural man is the unbeliever.
• The infant (babe) in Christ has the Spirit but is still fleshly and cannot be talked to as spiritual - the infant can only handle milk
• The spiritual is the mature - the spiritual/mature can be taught the meat of Scripture - "the deep things of God"

In Gal6:1-2 Paul speaks to the spiritual (the mature) and they are the one who can do what's commanded and fulfill Christ's Law.

In Hebrews 5:12-13 the writer makes a similar contrast between the infant and the mature (same Greek words Paul uses) and explains the difference between them. Both he and Paul rebuke the infants they're dealing with.

End of the story:

• Both Paul and Hebrews identify the mature and the infant.
• Paul refers to the mature as "spiritual" and the infants as carnal/fleshly (but I hope we agree that both have the Spirit).
  • Spiritual is more specialized here than just being in Christ in Spirit

 

[studier]

Just curious. Lazarus dead in the tomb. Did he hear and then was alive, or was he given life and then heard?

Good question, albeit loaded.

I wonder, what would Cameron say...

Argument from silence.

So, to contrast what you may say:

Maybe that's why it's called sleep. Asleep > hear the Voice > awaken.

Maybe the same with death: dead > hear the voice > life.

And, is anybody truly dead as far as God knows and sees reality:

NKJ Luke 16:22-23 "So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.​

NKJ Matthew 17:1-3 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves; 2 and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light. 3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.​

NKJ 1 Sam 28:15 Now Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" And Saul answered, "I am deeply distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God has departed from me and does not answer me anymore, neither by prophets nor by dreams. Therefore I have called you, that you may reveal to me what I should do."​

​

NKJ 1 Thess 4:16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.​

​

Do we truly think we understand death? Even in physical death it seems the dead can see and hear and even show up here and there according to the Text. So, why not in spiritual death which at least has us walking around in this realm with faculties?

 

[PaulThomson]

No one said God coerced them. What they have said is God enabled them. The choice is still theirs, but who can resist the wooing of God?

Paul's answer to a similar question was, "who are you, O man, to contradict God?"

God bemoans the fact that he tried to woo Israel and many resisted His wooing. Now you are contradicting what God said, and asserting a human devised theological claim that says the opposite.

Ez.16:8-21

8 “When I passed by you again and saw you, behold, you were at the age for love, and I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness; I made my vow to you and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Lord God, and you became mine. 9 Then I bathed you with water and washed off your blood from you and I anointed you with oil. 10 I clothed you also with embroidered cloth and shod you with fine leather. I wrapped you in fine linen and covered you with silk. 11 And I adorned you with ornaments and put bracelets on your wrists and a chain on your neck. 12 And I put a ring on your nose and earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. 13 Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your clothing was of fine linen and silk and embroidered cloth. You ate fine flour and honey and oil. You grew exceedingly beautiful and advanced to royalty. 14 And your renown went forth among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through the splendor that I had bestowed on you, declares the Lord God.
15 “But you trusted in your beauty and played the whore because of your renown and lavished your whorings on any passerby; your beauty4 became his. 16 You took some of your garments and made for yourself colorful shrines, and on them played the whore. The like has never been, nor ever shall be.5 17 You also took your beautiful jewels of my gold and of my silver, which I had given you, and zmade for yourself images of men, and with them played the whore. 18 And you took your embroidered garments to cover them, aand set my oil and my incense before them. 19 Also my bread that I gave you—I fed you with fine flour and oil and honey—you set before them for a pleasing aroma; and so it was, declares the Lord God. 20 And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter 21 that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?

 

[PaulThomson]

This is your interjection into the passage. Jesus isn't talking about Jews in the past. The prophecy was fulfilled in His time on earth. He clearly says He is doing so because they cannot know the mysteries of the kingdom, while others have been given the ability to know.
As He explains the parable, He goes on to state that those who hear and understand are the ones who bear fruit. These are the ones who it has been given to know.
Jesus did fine making the adversaries walk away of their own all the time without the use of parables. A whole group dropped stones and walked away. He silenced the lawyer who questioned Him. He silenced the Pharisees all the time. He didn't need parables to do so. He simply used wisdom, and spoke as one having authority.

He clearly says He is doing so because they cannot know the mysteries of the kingdom, while others have been given the ability to know.

Please, post the text of the scripture that clearly says, "They cannot know the mysteries of the kingdom, while others have been given the ability to know."

You asked earlier -
Cameron143 said:
Didn't Jesus speak in parables so some would not understand?

If Jesus spoke in parables so they would not understand His teaching, what was His purpose in preaching plainly before He started to use parables? Surely it was so that they could understand, and they rejected what they had understood Him to be saying, because it had not fit with their own opinions on spiritual things.

 

[Rosemaryx]

It just get stranger and stranger around here...

This is so true...Some of the things spoken on here are quiet shocking...xox...

 

[PaulThomson]

What choice did you make while you were dead and God made you alive?

Was that a rape of your will? Really?????

Can you please define "dead" as you believe the Bible defines it, with your scriptural evidence for your definitions. I think you using that term without definition and evidence for that definition might be unnecessarily perpetuating the unresolved to and fro.

I would define dead as
1. physical death = without breath, heart-beat and consciousness. Mt. 2:19, 20; 9:18, 24; 10:8,; 11:5; 14:2; 17:9
2. also used with the sense that someone is experiencing alienation by guilt and shame and distrust from God or someone else. Mt. 8:22; Lu. 15:32; Ac. 10:42(?)
"Dead to" = alienated from, unfeeling toward the thing one is "dead to". Rom. 6:2, 7, 11, 13; 7:4, 6, 8; 1 Cor. 15:29; Gal. 2:19; Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13; 3:3; 1 Tim. 5:6; 2 Tim. 2:11, 4:1, Heb. 9:14; Jas. 2:20, 26; 1 Pet. 2:24; Rev. 3:1

 

[PaulThomson]

No. Faith is a response to what God says. They looked at the serpent because they believed what God said. Looking wasn't salvation. Looking was evidence they believed what God said.
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Word of God produces hearing.
Hearing produces faith.
Faith believes, and then responds.

Repentance is not something one does after believing. Repentance is what one does in response to hearing (akuO) God speak. It is turning away from what one has been trusting in and turning toward Jesus Christ and God to listen/pay attention (akuO) to Him, so that one can believe what one hears. Jesus and John said, "Repent and believe" not "Believe and repent."

 

[PaulThomson]

Sure. No one rejects what they understand. Simplistic ideology not accepted.

Open Text. Prove your case with Scripture if you are able. It's pretty easy to find some to discuss.

I would say that fools reject what they understand. (Rom. 1) Men understood the deity and power of God but rejected the knowledge,

 

[PaulThomson]

At

More scripture...Matthew 13:10-17...it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven...but to them it is not given...
At any rate, you will put some spin on this. There are some people it is just not edifying to chat with. Blessings.

At the beginning of Jesus ministry, it was given in plain speech in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere, but many understood it and refused to accept it. After that Jesus spoke in parables, so that those rejectors would not understand.

It was in this second case that Jesus said, "it is being given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom... but to them it is not being given."
There is no reason to assume this was always the case in Jesus' ministry.

 

[PaulThomson]

So now trying to establish Biblical truth is being fixated is it? Wow. Do you use that word to describe yourself also, or are you just one of those run of the mill hypocrites that we come across here all the time? By the way, the idea of kidnapping has been dealt with extensively in the past ... perhaps you missed that also. Unfortunately it all arises out of people being unable to accept that God made them alive while they were dead, which is exactly what Scripture says, but that gets twisted and denied this way and that 6 ways to Sunday. And yes, called being kidnapped against one's will, and rape, ridiculously enough.

I'm looking forward to your definitions of "dead", and "dead to" and the biblical texts tht support your definitions.