Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The natural man versus a saint


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Wouldn’t your enemy then include those who fight against reason itself and promulgate bad ideas?

Nah my heart's too big and all I really want to do is hug you and your kind.  Your bad ideas will leak out in time.  

Pogi says:

Quote

A disbeliever wanting a seat at the hermeneutics table as a literalist!  That is funny!  I think it is safe to say that as a disbeliever, your interpretation of scripture is moot. 

I see.  That is the type of divisiveness I'm speaking about.  Thanks for making it clear.  of course any person can comment on the meaning of the text.  To put certain people in camps suggesting anything they say or think is moot, well that's just divisiveness most likely inherently a part of religion.  

Edited by stemelbow
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

What enemy should I be fighting?  

Your own pride, greed, hate, selfishness, etc.,  as the scriptures teach.  

Edited by pogi
Posted
27 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Nah my heart's too big and all I really want to do is hug you and your kind.  Your bad ideas will leak out in time.  

I doubt it. My pact with the Unseelie Court doesn’t allow for that kind of leakage.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I see.  That is the type of divisiveness I'm speaking about.  Thanks for making it clear.  of course any person can comment on the meaning of the text.  To put certain people in camps suggesting anything they say or think is moot, well that's just divisiveness most likely inherently a part of religion.  

Yes, I suppose one must be divisive in separating the rubies from the rubbish (I am speaking of ideas and interpretations).  That is our mission.  It appears you have the same mission - to seek that which is edifying and separate it from that which is not.  Even though you are doing the exact same thing from a different angle, we are the only divisive ones, right?    

It is clear that your disdain for the scriptures and religion in general bias your judgment and skew your interpretation.  You are like a disbeliever in the law and antagonist towards it, trying to interpret and practice law - you don't see a conflict there?   

 

 

Edited by pogi
Posted
2 hours ago, Jared Livesey said:

Mosiah 3

17 And moreover I say unto you

that there shall be no other name given nor no other way nor means

whereby salvation can come unto the children of men,

only in and through the name of Christ the Lord Omnipotent.

18 For behold, he judgeth and his judgment is just.

And the infant perisheth not that dieth in his infancy,

but men drinketh damnation to their own souls

except they humble themselves and become as little children

and believeth that salvation was and is and is to come

in and through the atoning blood of Christ the Lord Omnipotent.

 

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God

and has been from the fall of Adam and will be forever and ever

but if he yieldeth to the enticings of the Holy Spirit

and putteth off the natural man

and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord

and becometh as a child,

submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love,

willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him,

even as a child doth submit to his father.

=====

Questions:

  1. If A is an enemy to B, does this imply B is an enemy to A?
  2. Do we believe our enemies or do we instead regard their words with doubt and disbelief?
  3. Do we freely do what our enemies ask of us or do we only obey under compulsory means?
  4. What does it mean to humble oneself?
  5. What does it mean to become as a little child?
  6. What does it mean to be submissive?
  7. What does it mean to be meek?
  8. What does it mean to be humble?
  9. What does it mean to be patient?
  10. What does it mean to be full of love?
  11. What are examples of things which the Lord sees fit to inflict upon us?
  12. In what manner does a small child submit to his father?

Bonus:  If we aren't one of those things in v. 19 lines 5 through 9, are we any of those things?

1. It might imply that to some, typically A, but not necessarily to B.

2. It depends.

3. It depends.

4-10, each has same answer: seek and apply the pure love of Christ to one’s discipleship (learning and following His example and voice).

11. Anything we consider to be a trial or tribulation for ourselves, or any sacrifice we are called upon to relieve others’ suffering. I think the term "inflict" is used to convey that we may not immediately recognize the experience as something that glorifies God by advancing our salvation.

12. Small children allow their fathers to care for them without resistance.

Bonus: It is possible to be any of those things at various stages of perfection. Each is mutually supportive of advancing the development of the others.

Posted
2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I see.  That is the type of divisiveness I'm speaking about.  Thanks for making it clear.  of course any person can comment on the meaning of the text.  To put certain people in camps suggesting anything they say or think is moot, well that's just divisiveness most likely inherently a part of religion.

Meh

When you have heard it for a hundred times one is tempted to no longer respond.

Posted
3 hours ago, Jared Livesey said:

 

  1. If A is an enemy to B, does this imply B is an enemy to A?
  2. Do we believe our enemies or do we instead regard their words with doubt and disbelief?
  3. Do we freely do what our enemies ask of us or do we only obey under compulsory means?
  4. What does it mean to humble oneself?
  5. What does it mean to become as a little child?
  6. What does it mean to be submissive?
  7. What does it mean to be meek?
  8. What does it mean to be humble?
  9. What does it mean to be patient?
  10. What does it mean to be full of love?
  11. What are examples of things which the Lord sees fit to inflict upon us?
  12. In what manner does a small child submit to his father?

Keep in mind that the "natural man" is not a person , per se.  The natural man represents all of the unholy lusts and attributes that we should "put off".  It is like saying "greed is the enemy to God".  There is no tangible physical enemy.  The passage is referring to an inner conflict and self-mastery through submission to the spirit.  What these things mean is a personal journey that we all must take, and I think the answers are individualized for us.  The process of seeking answers through prayer and meditation is the seed of all of these attributes and the beginnings of true discipleship.  The discipline being seeking to understand and yield to the will of the Father out of love for Him.   

Posted
20 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Why is it that you make the assertion the inheritors of the terrestrial kingdom “refuse to accept the gospel Jesus Christ“ when Doctrine and Covenants 76 clearly says otherwise?

72 Behold, these are they who died without law;
73 And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh;
74 Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, BUT AFTERWARDS RECEIVED IT. (Doctrine and Covenants 76)

Do not refine too much on any of these verses.  It is very clear that anyone who accepts the Gospel will enter into the Celestial Kingdom.  The Spirit World is very much an extension of our mortal life here on Earth and repentance is allowed.

Posted
1 hour ago, mrmarklin said:

Do not refine too much on any of these verses.  It is very clear that anyone who accepts the Gospel will enter into the Celestial Kingdom.  The Spirit World is very much an extension of our mortal life here on Earth and repentance is allowed.

And if you read my second post you’ll realize I agree with you and beat you to the point.

Posted
19 hours ago, pogi said:

Keep in mind that the "natural man" is not a person , per se.  The natural man represents all of the unholy lusts and attributes that we should "put off".  It is like saying "greed is the enemy to God".  There is no tangible physical enemy.  The passage is referring to an inner conflict and self-mastery through submission to the spirit.  What these things mean is a personal journey that we all must take, and I think the answers are individualized for us.  The process of seeking answers through prayer and meditation is the seed of all of these attributes and the beginnings of true discipleship.  The discipline being seeking to understand and yield to the will of the Father out of love for Him.   

In the spirit of *fun with semantics* : "the natural man is an enemy to God" is like saying,"the greedy man is an enemy to God." Both are tangible and physical persons in mortality and the resurrection. We put off the natural man by becoming a saint, or a holy man, through the atonement of Christ the Lord. We are putting off actual bad (and good and better) choices, behaviors and attributes and replacing them with the best ones. Of course, all the divers ways and means whereby we may be natural cannot be numbered, any more I suppose, than those whereby we may be as Christ.

Posted
On 10/13/2020 at 6:17 PM, telnetd said:

Mosiah 3:19 says "For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of 
Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy 
Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement 
of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full 
of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon 
him, even as a child doth submit to his father
".

The Plan of Salvation guide defines the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants.

Terrestrial kingdom - People who refuse to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ but who 
live honorable lives will receive a place in the terrestrial kingdom.

Telestial kingdom - Those who continue in their sins and do not repent will receive a 
place in the telestial kingdom.

Does this mean the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants remain the enemies of God
because they did not yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit since they did not
endure to the end?

Gale

We would probably use the word "rebel" rather than the word "enemy" and even then we would probably only say "rebel to some degree" rather than being totally a rebel, like Satan and those who follow him to perdition.

Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, CV75 said:

In the spirit of *fun with semantics* : "the natural man is an enemy to God" is like saying,"the greedy man is an enemy to God." Both are tangible and physical persons in mortality and the resurrection.

I don't agree with this part.  The greedy man is not necessarily an enemy to God.  There could be very many aspects and attributes of that individual that are holy (saintly) and righteous.  It is the greed that is the enemy, not necessarily the more complex and holistic man. That is why I don't think the passage is talking about a man as much as it is talking about the natural carnal tendencies of man.  If it was actually talking about a physical person, then "putting off" the natural man (that "tangible and physical person") would be quite the feat.  By becoming a "new man", are we actually getting a new tangible and physical body?  Nope.  The scripture is not talking about a person.  That wouldn't make sense and is too black and white. 

52 minutes ago, CV75 said:

We put off the natural man by becoming a saint, or a holy man, through the atonement of Christ the Lord. We are putting off actual bad (and good and better) choices, behaviors and attributes and replacing them with the best ones. Of course, all the divers ways and means whereby we may be natural cannot be numbered, any more I suppose, than those whereby we may be as Christ.

Now this I agree with.  The natural man we are putting off is not a "tangible and physical person", but it is "choices, behaviors and attributes".  

Maybe I am misunderstanding the first part, because you seem to be saying two different things here.  It appears that you first suggest the "natural man" is a tangible and physical person, but then you seem to suggest that it is actually choices, behaviors, and attributes, which are not tangible.   

Edited by pogi
Posted
32 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't agree with this part.  The greedy man is not necessarily an enemy to God.  There could be very many aspects and attributes of that individual that are holy (saintly) and righteous.  It is the greed that is the enemy, not necessarily the more complex and holistic man. That is why I don't think the passage is talking about a man as much as it is talking about the natural carnal tendencies of man.  If it was actually talking about a physical person, then "putting off" the natural man (that "tangible and physical person") would be quite the feat.  By becoming a "new man", are we actually getting a new tangible and physical body?  Nope.  The scripture is not talking about a person.  That wouldn't make sense and is too black and white. 

Now this I agree with.  The natural man we are putting off is not a "tangible and physical person", but it is "choices, behaviors and attributes".  

Maybe I am misunderstanding the first part, because you seem to be saying two different things here.  It appears that you first suggest the "natural man" is a tangible and physical person, but then you seem to suggest that it is actually choices, behaviors, and attributes, which are not tangible.   

Tangible and physical people are carrying out choices, behaviors, and attributes that I consider to be tangible and physical (hence the semantics). I think we can add to that their thoughts and desires, and even include their spirits. Our resurrected bodies are quickened by the glory which corresponds to our spirit's level of perfection, or our level of reception or rejection of God's grace (D&C 88:27-32). The spirit and body, connected (separably or inseparably) are a tangible entity.

Posted (edited)
On 10/14/2020 at 1:33 PM, pogi said:

Your own pride, greed, hate, selfishness, etc.,  as the scriptures teach.  

My enemies should be my own emotions?  I don't know about that.  But I do agree it's best to try and temper, be circumspect about how you are behaving and reacting.  

 

Quote

Yes, I suppose one must be divisive in separating the rubies from the rubbish (I am speaking of ideas and interpretations).  That is our mission.  It appears you have the same mission - to seek that which is edifying and separate it from that which is not.  Even though you are doing the exact same thing from a different angle, we are the only divisive ones, right?    

It is clear that your disdain for the scriptures and religion in general bias your judgment and skew your interpretation.  You are like a disbeliever in the law and antagonist towards it, trying to interpret and practice law - you don't see a conflict there?   

I'm not following ya on this.  I'm not like a disbeliever in the law.  I don't like bad ideas and say so.  The scriptures present many bad ideas.  Religion in general presents many bad ideas.  Many of these bad ideas are taken on faith, or bad evidence and they happen to really impact all of us.  

Edited by stemelbow
Posted
16 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Tangible and physical people are carrying out choices, behaviors, and attributes that I consider to be tangible and physical (hence the semantics). I think we can add to that their thoughts and desires, and even include their spirits. Our resurrected bodies are quickened by the glory which corresponds to our spirit's level of perfection, or our level of reception or rejection of God's grace (D&C 88:27-32). The spirit and body, connected (separably or inseparably) are a tangible entity.

So, are you saying that the man or the choice is the enemy?  It sounded like you were calling the greedy "man" the enemy.  But I think that is too simplistic to narrowly define the complexity of a holistic man as greedy and therefore an enemy to God.   I wouldn't consider lust a tangible or physical thing.  I also wouldn't consider anyone who lusts an enemy to God necessarily.  God called many people "friends" while on earth.  I am sure that all of them yielded to the natural man on occasion - yet he called them "friends" and not enemies.  I have never met a saint that was 100% free of the natural man.   It would be wrong to call all sinners an enemy to God, because putting off the natural man is not a one and done thing.  Same with becoming a saint. 

Posted
On 10/14/2020 at 1:59 PM, The Nehor said:

I doubt it. My pact with the Unseelie Court doesn’t allow for that kind of leakage.

Unfortunately for you, the leakage I speak of us unstoppable.  You'll see.  

Posted
On 10/13/2020 at 9:45 PM, teddyaware said:

Why is it that you make the assertion the inheritors of the terrestrial kingdom “refuse to accept the gospel Jesus Christ“ when Doctrine and Covenants 76 clearly says otherwise?

72 Behold, these are they who died without law;
73 And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh;
74 Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, BUT AFTERWARDS RECEIVED IT. (Doctrine and Covenants 76)

I am confused by other teachings.

The Plan of Salvation

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/ldsorg/content/english/manual/missionary/pdf/36950_the-plan-of-salvation-eng.pdf

Page 12 - Death will not change your personality or your desire for good or evil. If you choose 
to follow Christ during your life on earth, you will be at peace in the spirit world and will 
rest from your cares. Those who choose not to follow Jesus Christ and do not repent will be 
unhappy.

Page 14

Terrestrial kingdom - People who refuse to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ but who live 
honorable lives will receive a place in the terrestrial kingdom.

Telestial kingdom - Those who continue in their sins and do not repent will receive a place 
in the telestial kingdom.

Then we have this other passage.

Mosiah 2:38-39. "Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to 
God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his 
own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his 
breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame 
ascendeth up forever and ever. And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that 
man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment
".

Gale

Posted
13 minutes ago, telnetd said:

I am confused by other teachings.

The Plan of Salvation

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/ldsorg/content/english/manual/missionary/pdf/36950_the-plan-of-salvation-eng.pdf

Page 12 - Death will not change your personality or your desire for good or evil. If you choose 
to follow Christ during your life on earth, you will be at peace in the spirit world and will 
rest from your cares. Those who choose not to follow Jesus Christ and do not repent will be 
unhappy.

Page 14

Terrestrial kingdom - People who refuse to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ but who live 
honorable lives will receive a place in the terrestrial kingdom.

Telestial kingdom - Those who continue in their sins and do not repent will receive a place 
in the telestial kingdom.

Then we have this other passage.

Mosiah 2:38-39. "Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to 
God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his 
own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his 
breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame 
ascendeth up forever and ever. And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that 
man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment
".

Gale

Which teachings confuse you, and what is it about them that you don't understand?

Posted
17 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Unfortunately for you, the leakage I speak of us unstoppable.  You'll see.  

Oooh, I hate unstoppable leakage like that.

Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

My enemies should be my own emotions?  I don't know about that.  But I do agree it's best to try and temper, be circumspect about how you are behaving and reacting.  

I am saying that our choices (not our emotions) can be a display of enmity towards God.  "My will and not thine be done". 

Quote

 

The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowmen. Enmity means “hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition.” It is the power by which Satan wishes to reign over us.

Pride is essentially competitive in nature. We pit our will against God’s. When we direct our pride toward God, it is in the spirit of “my will and not thine be done.” As Paul said, they “seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s.” (Philip. 2:21.)

Our will in competition to God’s will allows desires, appetites, and passions to go unbridled. (See Alma 38:12; 3 Ne. 12:30.)

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1989/04/beware-of-pride?lang=eng

 

I don't think you need to make an enemy of your own emotions.  Emotions are not the problem.  The question is, are you going to let your emotions bridle you, or are you going to bridle your emotions?  Emotions are critical learning tools in eternal progression.  We need them.  We should embrace them and accept them and learn from them.  They are not your enemy.  But if you let them, they can lead to your downfall.  They are like fire.  They can be incredibly useful and helpful, or they can burn you.  It is your choice. 

56 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I don't like bad ideas and say so.  The scriptures present many bad ideas.  Religion in general presents many bad ideas.  Many of these bad ideas are taken on faith, or bad evidence and they happen to really impact all of us.  

 So how are you any different the scriptures in that regard?  You are criticizing the scriptures for being divisive for simply distinguishing bad ideas/choices from good ideas.  They are no more divisive then you - just in different ways.

Edited by pogi
Posted
2 hours ago, pogi said:

So, are you saying that the man or the choice is the enemy?  It sounded like you were calling the greedy "man" the enemy.  But I think that is too simplistic to narrowly define the complexity of a holistic man as greedy and therefore an enemy to God.   I wouldn't consider lust a tangible or physical thing.  I also wouldn't consider anyone who lusts an enemy to God necessarily.  God called many people "friends" while on earth.  I am sure that all of them yielded to the natural man on occasion - yet he called them "friends" and not enemies.  I have never met a saint that was 100% free of the natural man.   It would be wrong to call all sinners an enemy to God, because putting off the natural man is not a one and done thing.  Same with becoming a saint. 

I’m saying the man who makes the bad choice is the enemy. The man is most fundamentally a spirit, which in mortality becomes a living soul, possessing a body and chooses and acts for better or worse.

All of the sins and their opposing good virtues and deeds (you mentioned lust and I’ll mention charity) are produced in the mind and manifest in the body neurophysically, and are expressed further as they get acted upon. You also referred to "tendencies" which are tangible and physical characteristics or behaviors. So I'm saying the "natural man" refers to the person and not the choices ("enticings" from the verse; the devil entices too) he is given to act upon.

Posted
8 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I’m saying the man who makes the bad choice is the enemy. The man is most fundamentally a spirit, which in mortality becomes a living soul, possessing a body and chooses and acts for better or worse.

All of the sins and their opposing good virtues and deeds (you mentioned lust and I’ll mention charity) are produced in the mind and manifest in the body neurophysically, and are expressed further as they get acted upon. You also referred to "tendencies" which are tangible and physical characteristics or behaviors. So I'm saying the "natural man" refers to the person and not the choices ("enticings" from the verse; the devil entices too) he is given to act upon.

I disagree with this.  One can't "put off" his own flesh and spirit.  He can put off natural "enticings" and yield to spiritual "enticings", however.

We all make bad choices.  Are all saints the enemy of God?

Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, pogi said:

I disagree with this.  One can't "put off" his own flesh and spirit.  He can put off natural "enticings" and yield to spiritual "enticings", however.

We all make bad choices.  Are all saints the enemy of God?

I think the natural man can "deny himself" by repenting. By taking the scripture personally, the natural man is the person, not the product of the person.

We can repent when we recognize the natural man that we are (in the ways that we are, to the degree that we are), and find hope when we recognize the saint that we are, in the ways and the degree that we are.

"... the anatural bman ...yields to the enticings of the fHoly Spirit, and gputteth off the hnatural man and becometh a isaint..."

Edited by CV75
Posted
3 hours ago, telnetd said:

I am confused by other teachings.

The Plan of Salvation

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/ldsorg/content/english/manual/missionary/pdf/36950_the-plan-of-salvation-eng.pdf

Page 12 - Death will not change your personality or your desire for good or evil. If you choose 
to follow Christ during your life on earth, you will be at peace in the spirit world and will 
rest from your cares. Those who choose not to follow Jesus Christ and do not repent will be 
unhappy.

Page 14

Terrestrial kingdom - People who refuse to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ but who live 
honorable lives will receive a place in the terrestrial kingdom.

Telestial kingdom - Those who continue in their sins and do not repent will receive a place 
in the telestial kingdom.

Then we have this other passage.

Mosiah 2:38-39. "Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to 
God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his 
own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his 
breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame 
ascendeth up forever and ever. And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that 
man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment
".

Gale

All incorrect. The reason why you are confused is because the individuals who wrote those things are also confused or fail to understand their own scriptures. Carefully read and ponder Doctrine and Covenants 138 for the last scriptural word (so far) on the subject. If you don’t carefully read and ponder 138, please don’t bother to get back to me because all the answers you’re seeking are found in that profound and glorious portion of scripture.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...