Are carnal Christian’s saved?

[Stewardofthemystery]

7 hours ago, AdHoc said:

I judge that we agree on many points. Just towards the end I was not sure of your point. So I'll give my understanding and you can judge whether we are close or not.

God's Law is truly valid for the Jew alone. But it is a very good indicator or measuring stick because God's moral law dwells in the heart and conscience of the Gentile (Rom.2:15). The term "FREE from the law of sin and death" means that another Law gives one freedom, It does not mean that the previous Law is abolished. The "jail-master" is ever present, but the prisoner has furlough. An aeroplane is free from the Law of gravity, but gravity has not gone away. So it is with the Christian. The flesh, which harbors the Law of sin and death is ever present.

This discussion has a natural ending place. It addresses the question, can one be sinless. On first reading 1st John 3:8-10 we may convinced that this is possible.

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

But John 3:6 changes everything. That which is born of God is ONLY the human spirit. It pointedly says that the flesh still has its ORIGIN in the flesh. So, as long as the christian lives, he/she carries the flesh, and the flesh is a battle zone. If I am led by the the Spirit in my human spirit, I can lift up above the Law of sin. the minute I do not watch, I can slip back into the flesh. The formula for an aeroplane's LIFT is dependent on about 4 to 5 factors. While the pilot adheres to all of them, he is FREE from the LAW of gravity. But gravity is ever present and the second the pilot disregards, or ignores one of those factors, Gravity takes over and contact with the ground is guaranteed.

Thus, both scriptures are true. Freedom from sin is available, but likelihood of sin is ever present. This is illustrated nicely in Romans 7. Of all the Laws which one could use to illustrate the point, the Holy Spirit used "Covetousness". Many of us keep the other commands, but who is free from seeking or desiring to have what another has. It only needs a twinge of lusting after another man's gift in the Church and you are guilty. Just the second glance at another man's wife, or car, or even his watch. The man who does not covet is basically brain dead.

The word carnal, or being in “the flesh” denotes the “sin nature”in mankind that is at “enmity”against the Spirit of God.

Jesus came to remove that enmity in us by putting it “to death”in us through His death and ressurection.  
 

If one is truly born again of the Spirit they are no longer “ in the flesh” as Paul said, and they are no longer  “under that law of sin and death” as Paul also said.

So yes being “made free” from sin by the Son of God is available for those who believe, or else why would Jesus, the apostles, and Paul preach of being “made free from sin”as in Romans 6.

But I can agree with what you said here “Thus, both scriptures are true. Freedom from sin is available, but likelihood of sin is ever present”

I can agree with this because of the prophecy of the falling away from the faith.

 

[Stewardofthemystery]

5 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

Your question is a contradiction. You are ONLY a Christian if you are born again. If you really mean a carnal born again believer, then yes, a carnal believer is still saved. 

There are believers who are not yet born again of the Holy Spirit, they are the ones who are yet carnal.  They have been water baptised by men, but they have not been baptised by the Holy Spirit by God.  That is the difference, as shown here…

Acts 19:1-6

King James Version

19 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.”

[JimmyB]

11 hours ago, Michael37 said:

You're not a carnivore, then, never mind all the other words in our vocabulary, like incarnation.

I said that the adjective "carnal" isn't in my preferred translations, so your response is off-topic and meaningless. If you prefer 17th century Englyshe okay but I don't.  One of the reasons is the use of words that nobody uses any more.

A "carnal" Christian is a derogatory term, meaning the speaker/writer is superior.  Try "washing the feet" of a "carnal" Christian instead of claiming superiority.

[JimmyB]

8 hours ago, Solus Christus said:

Carnal means of the flesh, like temporal means of the material world. Its from a higher English. 
 

Higher English?  You're joking.  Read my previous post.

[AdHoc]

14 hours ago, JimmyB said:

I don't see the world "carnal" in the Bible.  I consider it a derogatory fundamentalist term, another way of saying "holier than thou".  In First Corinthians 9:22 Paul is describing keeping control of his body, not putting himself above other Christians.

"To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some." NIV

The same principle applies in verse 27, "No, I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize."

It does not mean to be ruled and controlled by the sinful nature, i.e., "the flesh".  It means keeping fit physically.

Your reply is read and noted.

[AdHoc]

13 hours ago, Solus Christus said:

Carnal Christians I think will likely be the saved by fire crowd, “If anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” (1 Corinthians 3:15). Meaning all their fruit and works are loss, but they are saved by the grace of Jesus through faith. 

Exactly. A boy is born to a king. He is royal. As firstborn he is the heir to the throne. As son he is heir to some of the wealth. As heir apparent certain fame and privileges are his. But he is a rebellious boy and prone to bunk classes. He takes drugs, drive a car without a license and drives it under the influence.

His father - the king, deems him unfit to rule the country. He is disowned as heir apparent and half his entitlement is removed by his father. By his father's mercy he escapes a term in jail.

The question is;
Is he saved from jail? Is he still son of the father? Will he inherit the throne and vast wealth?

The answer is;
He is still a son. That cannot be undone
The king is still his father. That cannot be undone
Will he still live in the palace. No! He is found unfit in behavior
Will he sit on his father's throne one day? NO! He  was found unfit
Will he become wealthy? NO! His father halved his inheritance
Will he receive a jail term? No. His father decrees against that

That is, he is SAVED the consequences of his behavior, but loses his STEWARDSHIP / INHERITANCE.

[JimmyB]

46 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

Your reply is read and noted.

And your reply is also read and noted/

[AdHoc]

7 hours ago, Stewardofthemystery said:

The word carnal, or being in “the flesh” denotes the “sin nature”in mankind that is at “enmity”against the Spirit of God.

Jesus came to remove that enmity in us by putting it “to death”in us through His death and ressurection.  
 

If one is truly born again of the Spirit they are no longer “ in the flesh” as Paul said, and they are no longer  “under that law of sin and death” as Paul also said.

So yes being “made free” from sin by the Son of God is available for those who believe, or else why would Jesus, the apostles, and Paul preach of being “made free from sin”as in Romans 6.

But I can agree with what you said here “Thus, both scriptures are true. Freedom from sin is available, but likelihood of sin is ever present”

I can agree with this because of the prophecy of the falling away from the faith.

 

Okay. I'll skip the theological treatise and ask you a question. In Galatians Chapter 2 we read that Paul accused Peter - a no small accusation;

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter ... (v.14)

Scholars are undecided about the date of writing of Galatians, but the earliest estimates are around 47 AD. Most agree on 55 - 57 AD. Even if we take the first one, Peter had been a Christian for about 21 years.

How then does Peter not walk, "uprightly according to the Truth of the gospel" if he is free from sin and/or free from the sin-nature?

[AdHoc]

2 hours ago, JimmyB said:

I said that the adjective "carnal" isn't in my preferred translations, so your response is off-topic and meaningless. If you prefer 17th century Englyshe okay but I don't.  One of the reasons is the use of words that nobody uses any more.

A "carnal" Christian is a derogatory term, meaning the speaker/writer is superior.  Try "washing the feet" of a "carnal" Christian instead of claiming superiority.

 

2 hours ago, JimmyB said:

Higher English?  You're joking.  Read my previous post.

For those who are "sensitive" to the language used by the Holy Spirit and for those who refuse other good translations because they are not modern enough, here is Vine of "carnal",

1. sarkikos (σαρκικός, 4559), from sarx, “flesh,” signifies (a) “having the nature of flesh,” i.e., sensual, controlled by animal appetites, governed by human nature, instead of by the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 3:3 (for v. 1, see below; same mss. have it in v. 4); having its seat in the animal nature, or excited by it, 1 Pet. 2:11, “fleshly”; or as the equivalent of “human,” with the added idea of weakness, figuratively of the weapons of spiritual warfare, “of the flesh” (KJV, “carnal”), 2 Cor. 10:4; or with the idea of unspirituality, of human wisdom,“fleshly,” 2 Cor. 1:12; (b) “pertaining to the flesh” (i.e., the body), Rom. 15:27; 1 Cor. 9:11.¶

Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., & White, W., Jr. (1996). Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Vol. 2, p. 89). Nashville, TN: T. Nelson.

Old English, new English - I guess we'll have to accept "derogatory" descriptions from our God. Consider this; The Holy Spirit says that squabbling among ourselves is a sign that we are carnal. Shall we squabble over Old English today?

[Stewardofthemystery]

34 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

Okay. I'll skip the theological treatise and ask you a question. In Galatians Chapter 2 we read that Paul accused Peter - a no small accusation;

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter ... (v.14)

Scholars are undecided about the date of writing of Galatians, but the earliest estimates are around 47 AD. Most agree on 55 - 57 AD. Even if we take the first one, Peter had been a Christian for about 21 years.

How then does Peter not walk, "uprightly according to the Truth of the gospel" if he is free from sin and/or free from the sin-nature?

Peter was actually following “the letter of the law” that the Jews were not to have fellowship with the uncircumcised Gentiles. But Peter was not following “the spirit of the law”as Paul explained below…

Galatians 2:11-16

King James Version

11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

I think Peter was more worried about what the Jews thought of him hanging around the uncircumcised Gentiles because of “the letter of the law.”
 

Paul understood what the “sign” of circumcision meant by the Holy Spirit, not so sure if Peter fully understood this or not at the time.  
 

But even we today are warned not to have fellowship with the “uncircumcised in heart and mind,”that is to say with “unbelievers.”

So even though Peter was actually following the letter of the law, he perhaps did not fully understand or follow the spirit of the law concerning what it truly meant to be “circumcised” by the Holy Spirit.

 

Edited July 25, 2023 by Stewardofthemystery