The Meaning of the Word "Carnal"

First, let us revisit the actual posted definition in question:

""[Carnal] refers to the flesh as opposed to the pneuma, "spirit," and denotes, in an ethical sense, mere human nature, the lower side of man as apart from the Divine influence, and therefore estranged from God and prone to sin; whatever in the soul is weak and tends toward ungodliness "

The idea of flesh fits in perfectly here.

The ISBE describes this verse as: "those that pertain to the body in contrast to spiritual things," and it fits perfectly. The main definition doesn't contradict it.

"Carnal commandment" here refers to genealogical descent. This new priest was not born morally depraved.

This is a different carnal - it comes from sarx, not sarkikos. In this case, "carnal" is, indeed, used in a different manner. Sarkikos, however, still follows the definition.

The word "carnal" here is different, so I'll concede that point (so you can't say that I've never done that). However, the definition provided from the ISBE specifically applies to sarkikos.

So, do you have the verse that says that anything that isn't spiritual is carnal? Inquiring minds are waiting!

 

Not specifically. But I have the one that says, "Anything that is not of faith is sin".

 

And how would you apply it in the context of Romans 14?

 

No, I don't think you're missing it. In fact, you nailed it clearly in many fewer words that either Mark or I:

What else needs to be said?

 

Perhaps the issue here pertains to the use of the word "carnal" with "Christian"?

Some speak of "carnal Christians" as those Christians who still live in a morally depraved way (when actually they are probably not Christians at all). Whereas Paul simply uses that term of Christians (in Corinth) who concentrated on a speakers' appearance and way with words (overconcern with physical things).

Is that the issue here?

Tim

 

I think this whole debate started when Mark accused youth ministry of using carnal means, implying that the use of carnal things in youth ministry was wrong and against the NT. Mark said "It introduces youthful flippancy and carnal activities into what should be the most holy and reverent gathering of all." Scott replied with "While many activities have pizza and have fun, youth ministry is designed to point completely and solely upon Jesus Christ. There are no carnal activities!"

That started a big debate about what "carnal" means. The general connotation of "carnal" is certainly negative and in fact the word is used that way in Scripture often (though not exclusively). It is entirely possible to have youth ministry without carnal means (in this sense). At the same time, carnal can be more generic or neutral. It is difficult if not impossible to have youth ministry without these means. Herein was the problem.

Mark's emphasis led Scott and myself (who disagree philosophically) to believe that Mark used the word "carnal" in a negative sense. This was indicated by Scott's comments: "Carnal means relating to the physical or sexual appetites. Romans 8:6-7 says that the carnal mind is at emnity with God." Mark showed the breakdown in communications with this response: "Carnal means "fleshly." It means anything that isn't spiritual - baseball, basketball, ski trips, Disney trips, etc. etc. It may be the case that your youth ministry doesn't involve any carnal activities. If so you are the exception, not the rule." Clearly they are talking about two different things.

Scott cited ISBE in support which Mark lambasted claiming he burned his because it was bad. Too bad Mark burned it. If he hadn't, he would know that ISBE agrees with him (and Scott both). ISBE defines carnal also as: ""Minister unto them in carnal things," those that pertain to the body in contrast to spiritual things (Rom 15:27; 1 Cor 9:11)."

In the bottom line, carnal activities are certainly appropriate for church body, or a group within the church. We just had one this evening when we gathered downstairs for some carnal ice cream and toppings.


This whole issue was a very simple one of definitions.

 

THanks for summing it up well, Pastor Larry. I don't think we disagree as much as we agree when it all boils down to it. I think it would be best if I merely set Mark on "ignore" for awhile. He really does get me down when I consider just how many people who claim the name of Christ act the way he does. It's quite sad, really. I am thankful that I am personally surrounded with people who act the opposite way of Mark. I don't think I'd enjoy the Christian life very much with hyper-fundamentalish company.