Do We STILL Need To Crucify The Flesh, or was It Done In Cross Already?

All the arguments in the world for a sin nature in a believer are simply in vain. There is no scripture that teaches such and in fact scripture teaches contrary to that. The teaching comes from men who do not want to take full responsibility for their sins. They are trying to claim that God has left them with a battle so strong they cannot live above sin when the bible clearly refutes that.
1 Co 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

We do not have two natures. We are those who "once were" (1 Cor 6)those, but now we are washed.

 

I really wasn't responding to you, but to the thread. I'm sorry if it came across as an attack. :wavey:

 

Certainly not! I just don't agree with your interpretation of the Word of God.

 

Robert, thanks for the clarification.

 

Since your post is lengthy I will deal with it this evening. Suffice to say I disagree with your exegesis.

 

I understand you do not agree, but my point was to try and get you to see that you are letting your résumé and your experience enter into how you interpret. Just forget everything and see what the bible says without feelings. The bible never teaches we have two natures.

 

Romans 7:14-23 14 For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.

Paul mentions the flesh (sarka), or fleshly members (melos), four times in the cited passage. He also mentions the mind (nous) once. All told there are five references either to the fleshly body or the mind. Paul begins this didactic passage with a dichotomy between the spiritual and the flesh (v. 14). To play to your argument, Paul does use the word "dwell" or "indwell" (enoikeo, oikeo ) twice. So, how do we put this all together and make sense of it? Verse 23 is a key verse to unpacking the preceding eight verses. Paul saw a different law at work in his mind that was fighting against the work of the Spirit. This law was the mind that is tainted (or trained) by sin and is made manifest by our physical deeds. This is what the reference to "members" means.

When we sin our mind records it. Like a hard drive on a computer our mind retains our sins. It plays back both the pain and pleasure of sin. As we desire to serve God out of our new nature, the old man rears his ugly head and tries to block the way. This is not another spiritual nature but a fleshly nature (c.f. Paul's reference to the flesh/members/mind).

You've hit the nail on the head when you mentioned the flesh. This makes my point in regards to the Romans 7 passage. The flesh is not a spiritual nature. It does not compete with the resident Holy Spirit of God.

2 Corinthians 5 is an abridged version of 1 Corinthians 15; a polemic on the resurrection. Verse 17 is telling us we are not just physical creatures, we are now spiritual creatures. And not just any spiritual creature; we are children of God (implied, not stated specifically in the text). Indeed, in verse 1 Paul references the resurrection. The resurrection is possible because of what; the flesh or the Spirit? The Spirit! The flesh is dying and already dead. Dying in that this earthly tent is decaying each day. Dead in that we are already dead to sin and alive to God in Christ. If we retained a spiritual old nature then we really could not be alive in Christ.

Friend, what is a stark admission; the fact that I wrote that we must repent daily? Notice I did not write that we must ask for forgiveness daily. We are forgiven for all time. Repentance is a constant turning from sin. I sin every day. When I recognize my sin, confess it, and turn from it I am displaying repentance. That repentance is only possible because of the new nature. The reason I have to repent is because of the war that is waged in my mind and sin that is exhibited through my members.

 

To add to this great post:thumbs:, if there was only one nature, then there would be no warfare, and thus, making Apostle Paul out to be a liar. Our flesh wars against our soul, because the flesh wants to please "self", but the soul of the one who has been born again/born from above, wants to please God. When the flesh rises up, the soul, through the working of the Holy Ghost, brings it back into subjection.

If we only had one nature-I am referring to CHRISTians only here-then we would live a life of sinless perfection. As long as we live in this flesh, we will struggle with sin. When we get that new body likened unto Jesus' most glorious body, our "outer man" and "inner man" will be in complete harmony with each other.....making us completely perfect.

 

But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? (Romans 7:23-24)
--Another law in my members. That means there are two. One is sinful; the other is spiritual.
If Paul didn't have a sin nature that he warred against continually why would he cry out in the end, "O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me..." One nature was continually warring against the other. The whole chapter is about warfare of one nature against the other. He does what he does not want to do. He doesn't do what he wants to do.

But you do take pleasure in sin, as you just admitted. You take pleasure in sin because of your sin nature. If you had only one nature you would never ever take pleasure in sin. That would be an impossibility for the Holy Spirit does not take pleasure in sin; the sin nature takes pleasure in sin. Thus you have a sin nature.

That old man is the sin nature.

semantics!

The flesh is the old nature; the sin nature. They are synonymous.
"I die daily." Paul had to put the flesh, the old sin nature to death every day.

The implication is yours. It is called eisigesis. You don't take into consideration the context. You avoid it. This is a proof-text you use without understanding.

Even here you are missing the boat on the essential teaching of Christ.
Now we have an earthly body which is temporary. Someday we will have a heavenly body which is permanent.

You sin because you enjoy it. You sin because you have a sin nature. The Holy Spirit does not sin. Please don't put your sin on the Holy Spirit.

The war is the old nature against the new nature; or the sin nature against the new nature. Either way you still have a sinful old nature.

 

DHK,

I laid out my case and I'm quite satisfied to let it stand on its merits.

Peace.