Gospel Gleanings, “…especially the parchments”
Volume 22, Number 9
March 4, 2007
Nature vs. Conduct
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the
things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed
can be. 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. (Romans 8:5-9)
A major debate exists among behavioral
scientists regarding the question of “nature versus
nurture.” One view holds that each individual is
born with a strong predisposition toward certain
personality traits that follow the person through
life. The other view holds that nurture, a sensitive
and caring environment, can mold the child much
like an expert potter can mold a piece of clay. In
human behavior reality likely falls somewhere
between these two views. A child is born with
certain personality predispositions, but a nurturing
environment, especially through the formative
years of childhood and youth, will have a
significant impact on the child. Probably the
dominant view holds to “nurture” over “nature.”
It should not be a surprise then to observe that
the dominant view of theology in our culture is
man-centered, teaching that a sinful individual
who has no interest in God can be molded into a
conscientious believer by merely exposing the
person to a nurturing spiritual gospel environment.
Interestingly the study of Christian apologetics,
the study of explaining and defending one’s faith,
divides along rather parallel lines. One school of
apologetics holds to the “evidential” view, the idea
that we may convert any human being to
Christianity merely by showing the person the
convincing and compelling evidence of the facts of
Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. The other
school, the “presuppositional” view, holds that
God must first work grace into the person before
he/she will be interested in the gospel or the facts
of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Again, I
offer a hybrid view of apologetics that falls
between these two polarized views. Without
question, the first spiritual work, the saving work
of regeneration or new birth, must be performed
by God in the individual. Following that work of
grace, the New Testament model of the gospel
follows the evidentiary model with “…many
infallible proofs….” (Acts 1:3)
Our study passage provides a compelling
insight into these questions, especially in terms of
the first work in the individual that changes his/her
nature from primary identity with the family of
Adam to a primary identity with the family of God.
For they that are after the flesh do mind the
things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit
the things of the Spirit. Based on the verses that
follow, I believe that Paul here is defining two
distinct natures within the human family. One
“family” or group of humans only possess a
human or “flesh” nature. The other “family,” or
group, still possesses their human nature, but
they also possess a new, spiritual nature. They
now have a nature that is “after the Spirit.” Paul
uses these two family identities to predict a certain
disposition. A person who possesses only the
flesh nature will only “mind” the things of their
flesh nature. A person who also possesses the
regenerated spiritual nature will also “mind” the
things of the Spirit of God. The word “mind” here
is translated from a first century Greek word that
refers to one’s mental disposition and related
interests.
In the next sentence Paul reinforces this point.
For to be carnally minded is death; but to be
spiritually minded is life and peace. Notice that in
both instances Paul refers to “being,” not merely
to external and observable conduct.
He is
referring to the deepest inner nature of two
classes of humanity.
From the external,
environmental, racial, and cultural perspective the
variety of humans is almost endless. However,
from the spiritual perspective of “being,” there are
only two classes of people. One class is born
only of their human parents; their state of “being”
is carnal, and their energies are devoted to their
carnal interests. The other class is born of their
human parents, but they are also born of God;
they possess a spiritual nature as well as their
human nature, and that spiritual nature explains
their interest in spiritual things.
Because the carnal mind is enmity against
God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither
indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh
cannot please God.
Paul makes—for the
dominant contemporary theological mindset—a
startling observation. Not only do those who are
not born of God work to avoid any kind of spiritual
affinity toward God, they in fact cannot do so.
They lack the intrinsic ability to do so!
This principle strikes at the root of most
theological systems of our time and their mancentric view of salvation. Regardless of their
recipe that mixes grace and human action, works,
or disposition, most of these ideas require that
man take the first step in his new birth. Even
some who pay lip service to the doctrines of grace
and claim to believe in salvation all of divine grace
will find a way to integrate some form of human
mindset, human will, or activity into the first work
that effects the new birth. They must hear and
believe the gospel, or they must “have faith,” or
they must not only “have faith,” but they must
prove by their subsequent life that they look to
Jesus, not only as their Savior but also as their
Lord. In all of these hybrid systems of belief the
individual must in some way do something, or
believe something, or change his/her mindset for
the new birth to occur.
All of these hybrid views contradict the New
Testament teaching that our salvation is in some
ways similar to God’s creation of the material
universe. Thus most of these folks in fact hold to
some form of “spiritual evolution” in which the
fallen—or in most of these systems, not so
fallen—sinner merely organizes and effectively
uses what already exists within. New Testament
teaching affirms that the material universe was
“…made of things which do not appear.”
(Hebrews 11:3) In other words God created the
material universe out of nothing as opposed to
merely reforming and organizing pre-existing
matter. If matter had no existence prior to divine
creation, and if our eternal salvation is equated in
Scripture with divine creation, how do we explain
the requirement in these errant views of salvation
that the sinner must either take the first step or in
some way cooperate with God to effect his/her
spiritual creation? What role could non-existent
matter possibly have had in its formation?
Likewise what role can a fallen, sinful, “after the
flesh,” “…carnally minded” sinner have in his
spiritual creation? (As only two examples, notice
the parallel that Paul draws between the natural
and the spiritual creation in 2 Corinthians 5:17 and
Ephesians 2:10)
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if
so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. What
makes the difference? What single truth identifies
one person as “in the flesh” and another person
as “in the Spirit”? Is it how they act? Or is it the
fact of the indwelling Spirit of God? Paul rejects
the superficial, external criteria and comes down
decisively for the fact of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Paul also puts equal emphasis on the other
side of this question. Now if any man have not
the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. Whether
Paul considers the “spiritually minded” or the
“carnally minded” person, the presence or
absence of the indwelling Holy Spirit is the single
deciding factor in his teaching.
Primarily—at least among Baptists—with the
appearance of Andrew Fuller and his hybrid “low
Calvinism,” many folks, even Baptists, have
abandoned Paul’s simple criteria and have
embraced the superficial and external behavior of
individuals for their judgment as to whether a
person is born again or not. Instead of holding to
the historical Baptist view of God’s persevering in
His grace to preserve His elect so that none shall
fall finally away and spend eternity in eternal
separation from God, they substitute the external,
man-centric view that emphasizes preservation in
their own perseverance!
A contemporary
equivalent to Fuller’s Cal-Minian teaching that
mixes divine grace and human contribution is
Norman Geisler’s Chosen But Free, a book in
which Geisler claims to be “Reformed,” but he
interprets every passage that he explains in the
book in a wholly Arminian perspective.
Factually one human being, however well
informed in Biblical teaching, cannot finally and
decisively discern the presence or absence of the
indwelling Holy Spirit in another individual. The
current emphasis on this claimed ability among
those who give lip service to the doctrines of
grace manifests similar arrogance to the Arminian
response to the person that the Arminain believing
person cannot convince to embrace his/her views,
“There is only one difference between you and
me. My sins are forgiven; yours are not.” Chuck
Swindoll makes an interesting observation that
touches this point. We will all be surprised when
we get to heaven. Some of us will be surprised to
discover that folks whom we expected to be there
are not there, while others will be surprised to
discover that folks whom they didn’t expect to see
there are in fact there. The decisive issue of who
will be in heaven is not based on external human
conduct, but on the work of God within, in Paul’s
teaching in this passage, the grace of God that
changed the nature, the “being” of the individual
from “carnally minded” to “spiritually minded.” We
should be quite happy—not to mention quite
content—with the truth that God alone changes
human hearts from carnal to spiritual, and He
alone possesses the ability to know what lies
within each human heart. (John 2:24-25) Why
not leave eternal judgment with God where it
belongs?
Little Zion Primitive Baptist Church
16434 Woodruff
Bellflower, California
Worship service each Sunday
Joseph R. Holder
10:30 A. M.
Pastor