Judy wrote: > Scripture says that 'IT IS DEATH'; Actually, it does not say that the carnal mind is death. It says to be carnally minded is death, and the word "is" does not exist in the original text. So the text can be read as leading to death.
The next verse says that the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. This simply summarizes how the flesh is not subject to God's law, which was explained in more detail in the previous chapter, Romans 7. In other words, using modern terms, we can say that our natural brains are not subject to the law of God. The instinctive behaviors that arise from the brain are expected to be selfish and contrary to love, contrary to God's law. Judy wrote: > I think our problem is in part that I speak of the > spiritual and you translate it and respond to the > natural. Well, if you are calling the "carnal mind" something spiritual, then yes, that is our problem. The word "carnal" means physical as opposed spiritual. The entire Romans 7 chapter deals with conveying the Greek concept of a dual nature to man, that which is physical and that which is spiritual. Man has a physical side and a spiritual side. The physical side of man is referenced by words like "flesh" and "carnal." The spiritual side of man is spoken about by the word "spirit." Judy wrote: > The brain in and of itself is amoral. Nobel Laureate > Sir John Eccles describes the human brain as a machine > that a ghost can operate. In fact the late Eccles was > convinced that there is compelling evidence to support > the traditional religious belief in the existence of a > nonphysical soul and/or spirit - and that this is the > "ghost" which actually operates the human brain and > through it the body. We don't understand very much about the brain and the spirit, but I would say that the natural man functions using his natural physical brain. That is why he does not understand the things of the spirit. The spiritual man, on the other hand, has his spirit impact upon his brain, and can thereby perceive and deduce things that other men cannot. I think it is very dangerous to say that the brain is amoral. Paul spends quite a bit of time showing how the flesh and physical mind cannot be subject unto God. He uses some pretty strong language. The best evidence that he is right is that everybody dies and must be resurrected. If the body was amoral, it would not need to be transformed. We would simply step into immortality with our mortal bodies of flesh and blood. Scripture is clear that we cannot do that, and Paul tries to give us some reasons why in Romans 7 & 8. Note also that in studies of animal behavior, it is doubtful that animals exhibit altruistic behavior. We know that animals are without the influence of the Spirit of Christ and so we might assume that their behavior is governed strictly by their physical brains without the spirit. So if animals always instinctively choose that which is selfish, contrary to love of God and love of others, then this goes along with Paul's teaching that for humans, we act contrary to the spirit when we are natural and follow our physical nature. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
