Scripture proves scripture. I do not rely upon other men's commentaries. They are why we have so many divisions in understanding the meaning of the scriptures.
Okay, I'm not a "commentary writer," but I'll say it (does that count?
Scripture proves scripture. I do not rely upon other men's commentaries. They are why we have so many divisions in understanding the meaning of the scriptures.
Eph 2:1 harmonizes with 1 Cor 2:14, in that, the natural man is still dead (spiritually) in sins at the time he is quickened. By him being spiritually dead, he could not discern the things of the spirit in order to make a spiritual decision. Spiritual decision making only comes after you are born spiritually. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is given given at the time of the quickening, and spiritual faith is a fruit of the Holy Spirit.
I dunno... I mean, I pasted the list and it appeared to me to be as I had said (used in that way [those ways], in these 21x occurrences of that exact word...). Seems so to me. But I'm no expert. = DI would call this explanation, "grasping at straws", "desperate". to make the scriptures fit your theory.
I agree that he's not saying they are unsaved . I'm saying he refers to them as fleshy . The fleshy man cannot understand the things Paul can speak to the mature . I would see the term ' spiritual referring to Mature and not a term that means 'a person who has the Holy Spirit . Inspite of some translations doing this .I think you are saying that Paul was speaking to believers/saved persons, here, (I agree) but note that he is saying this to them:
"1 And I, brothers, was not able to speak to you as to spiritual, but as fleshly—as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food, for not yet were you able. In fact, now you are still not able, 3 for you are still fleshly. [...] are you not fleshly, and are walking according to man?"
[...that is, as unsaved men do... i.e. the natural man, before salvation; he's not saying they ARE "natural [/unsaved] man," he's saying they are WALKING "according to man"]
Okay, I'm not a "commentary writer," but I'll say it (does that count?)... Esau found no "change of mind" in Isaac (what's done was done).
I agree that he's not saying they are unsaved . I'm saying he refers to them as fleshy . The fleshy man cannot understand the things Paul can speak to the mature . I would see the term ' spiritual referring to Mature and not a term that means 'a person who has the Holy Spirit . Inspite of some translations doing this .
I agree that he's not saying they are unsaved . I'm saying he refers to them as fleshy . The fleshy man cannot understand the things Paul can speak to the mature . I would see the term ' spiritual referring to Mature and not a term that means 'a person who has the Holy Spirit . Inspite of some translations doing this .
TDW: Esau found no "change of mind" in Isaac (what's done was done).
Yes .The Holy Spirit did not perform his work of repenting in Esau Esau so no value in the things not seen .
Without that faith of Christ's labor of love working in any man. . no one could please God . Faith empowers one to believe. God. Without it we can do nothing.
The one whose "mind" *I* was referring to (to which Esau "sought") was Isaac's mind.
Esau "found no place of 'change-of-mind'" in Isaac's [mind], "though with tears having earnestly sought it."
[which would look like this: E: "please, please, please, Pop, [*sob sob*] please change your mind and thus change this outcome." Pop: "Um, nope."... "for a place of 'change-of-mind [/repentance=change-of-mind]' he found not, although with tears having earnestly sought it" (in Isaac--[Esau sought] Isaac's 'change-of-mind')]