quote:

---

III. The Destiny of Man and Anthropology

(a) The Destiny of Man

** For St. Paul, there is no such thing as normality for those who have not put on Christ.

** Paul calls on Christians to die to this world and the body of sin,[ 87 ] and even to suffer in the Gospel, according to the power of God.

** The relationship of the Divine Will to human wills is not one of juridical or hedonistic submission of the one to the other (as St. Augustine and the scholastics thought), but rather one of personal love. St. Paul claims that "we are co-workers of God."[ 92 ] Our relationship of love with God is such that in Christ there is now no longer need for law. "If ye be led by the Spirit ye are not under the law."[ 93 ] The members of the body of Christ are not called on to live on the level of impersonal ordinances, but are now expected to live according to the love of God as revealed in Christ, which needs no laws because it seeks not its own,[ 94 ] but strives to empty itself for others in the image of the love of Christ.[ 95 ]

** The love and justice of God have been revealed once and for all in Christ [ 96 ] by the destruction of the devil [ 97 ] and the deliverance of man from the body of death and sin,[ 98 ] so that man may actually become an imitator of God Himself, [ 99 ] Who has predestined His elect to become "conformed to the image of His Son,"[ 100 ] who did nothing to please Himself but suffered for others.[ 101 ] Christ died so that the living should no longer live unto themselves,[ 102 ] but should become perfect men, even "unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ."[ 103 ] Christians are no longer to live according to the rudiments of this world, as though living in this world,[ 104 ] but are to have the same mind as Christ,[ 105 ] so that in Christ they may become perfect.

** The destiny of man is not happiness and self-satisfaction,[ 108 ] but rather perfection in Christ. Man must become perfect, as God [ 109 ] and Christ are perfect.[ 110 ] such perfection can come only through the personalistic power of divine and selfless love,

** Man's body of humility will be transformed to become "conformed" to Christ's "body of glory."[ 115 ] man is destined to become, like Christ, perfect according to the body also. "He Who raised Christ from the dead shall bring to life also your mortal bodies by His Spirit which dwells in you."


(b) Anthropology of St. Paul

as we have said, for St. Paul, the law is good [ 122 ] and even spiritual.[ 123 ] According to the "inner man" this is obvious.[ 124 ] But in spite of the fact that he can possess the will to do good according to the law he cannot find the power to do the good [ 125 ] because he is "carnal and sold under sin."[ 126 ] If he himself, according to the "inner man," wants to do good but cannot, it is no longer he who does the evil, but sin that dwelleth in him.[ 127 ] . . .

It is misleading to try to interpret this section [ 130 ] of Paul according to a dualistic anthropology, which would make the term, sarkikos, refer only to the lower appetites of the body . . .

The flesh as such is not evil, but has become very much weakened by sin and the enmity which dwells in it.[ 144 ]

To understand St. Paul's anthropology, it is necessary to refer not to the dualistic anthropology of the Greek,s who made a clear cut distinction between soul and body, but rather to the Hebraic frame of references, in which sarx and psyche (flesh and soul) both denote the whole living person and not any part of him. . . .

Thus we find that, for St. Paul, to be sarkikos [ 151 ] and psychikos [ 152 ] means exactly the same thing. "Flesh and blood (sarx kai haima) cannot inherit the kingdom of God"[ 153 ] because corruption cannot inherit incorruption.[ 154 ] For this reason, a soma psychikon is "sown in corruption" and raised in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power."[ 155 ] "A soma psychikon is sown, and a soma pneumatikon is raised. There is a soma psychikon and there is a soma pneumatikon!"[ 156 ] Both the sarkikon and the psychikon and dominated by death and corruption and so cannot inherit the kingdom of life. This only the pneumatikon can do. "However, the pneumatikon is not first, but the psychikon, and afterward the pneumatikon. The first man is from the earth; earthy; the second man, the Lord, from heaven."[ 157 ] That the first man became eis psychen zosan (a living soul), for Paul, means exactly that he became psychikon, and therefore subject to corruption,[ 158 ] because "from the earth, earthy..."[ 159 ] Such expressions do not admit of any dualistic anthropology. A soma psychikon "from the earth, earthy," or a psyche zosa "from the earth, earthy," would lead to impossible confusion if interpreted from the viewpoint of a dualism which distinguishes between the body and soul, the lower and the higher, the material and the purely spiritual. What, then, would a psyche zosa be, which came from the earth and is earthy? In speaking of death, a dualist could never say that a soma psychikon is sown in corruption. He would rather have to say that the soul leaves the body, which alone is sown in corruption.

Neither the psyche nor the pneuma is the intellectual part of man. To quote I Corinthians 2:11 (tis gar oiden anthropon ta tou anthropou ei me to pneuma tou anthropou to en auto?) or I Thessalonians 5:23 (Autos o Theos tea eirenes hagiasai hymas holoteleis, kai holokleron hymon to pneuma kai he psyche kai to soma amemptos en te parousia toy K.H.I.X. teretheie) does not prove otherwise. One cannot take these expressions in isolation from the rest of Paul's writings for the sake of trying to make him speak the language of even a Thomistic dualist, as is done, for example, by F. Prat in La Theologie de s.Paul, t.2, pp. 62-63. Elsewhere, in speaking against the practise of certain individuals' praying publicly in unknown tongues, St. Paul says, "If I pray in an unknown tongue my pnuema prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the pneuma and I will pray with the mind also."[ 160 ] Here a sharp distinction is made between the pneuma and the nous (mind). Therefore, for St. Paul, the realm of pneuma does not belong within the category of human understanding. It is of another dimension.

In order to express the idea of intellect or understanding all four evangelists use the word, kardia (heart).[ 161 ] The word, nous (mind), is used only once by St. Luke.[ 162 ] In contrast, St. Paul makes use of both kardia [ 163 ] and nous [ 164 ] to denote the faculty of intelligence. Nous, however, cannot be taken for any such thing as the intellectual faculties of an immaterial soul. Nous is rather synonymous with kardia, which in turn is synonymous with the eso anthropon.

The Holy Spirit is sent by God into the kardia, [ 165 ] or into the eso anthropon, [ 166 ] that Christ may dwell in the kardia.[ 167 ] The kardia and the eso anthropon are the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit. Man delights in the law of God according to the eso anthropon, but there is another law in his members which wars against he law of the nous.[ 168 ] Here the nous is clearly synonymous with the eso anthropon, which in turn is the kardia, the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit and Christ.[ 169 ]

To walk in the vanity of the nous, with the dianoia darkened, being alienated from the life of God through ignorance, is a result of the "hardening of the heart--dia ten perosin test kardias."[ 170 ] It is the heart which is the seat of man's free will, and it is here where man by his own choice either becomes blinded [ 171 ] and hardened,[ 172 ] or else enlightened in his understanding of the hope, glory, and power in Christ.[ 173 ] It is in the heart where the secrets of men are kept,[ 174 ] and it is Christ "Who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of the heart."[ 175 ]

It would be absurd to interpret St. Paul's use of the expressions, eso anthropon and nous, according to a dualistic anthropology by ignoring his use of the word, kardia, which is in perfect accord with the New Testament and Old Testament writers. By using such words as nous and eso anthropon, Paul is certainly introducing new terminology, foreign to traditional Hebraic usage, but he is definitely not introducing any new anthropology based on Hellenistic dualism. St. Paul never refers to either psyche or pneuma as faculties of human intelligence. His anthropology is Hebraic and not Hellenistic.

In both the Old and New Testaments, one finds the expression, to pneuma tes zoes (the spirit of life), but never to pneuma zon (the living spirit).[ 176 ] Also, one finds psyche zosa (the living soul), but never psyche tes zoes (the soul of life).[ 177 ] This is due to the fact that the psyche, or sarx, lives only by participation, while the pneuma is itself the principle of life given to man as a gift from God,[ 178 ] "Who alone hath immortality."[ 179 ] God gives man of His Own uncreated life without destroying the freedom of human personality. Thus, man is not an intellectual form fashioned according to a predetermined essence or universal idea of man whose destiny is to become conformed to a state of mechanical contentment in the presence of God whereby his will become sterile and immobile in a state of complete self-satisfaction and happiness (e.g., according to the Neo-platonic teaching of St. Augustine and the Roman scholastics in general concerning human destiny). The personality of man does not consist of an immaterial intellectual soul which has life of itself and uses the body simply as a dwelling place. The sarx, or psyche, is the total man, and the kardia is the center of intelligence where the will has complete independence of choice to become either hardened to truth or receptive to divine enlightenment from without. The pneuma of man is not the center of human personality, nor is it that faculty which rules the actions of men, but rather it is the spark of divine life given to man as his principle of life. Thus, man can live according to the pneuma tes zoes or according to the law of the flesh, which is death and corruption. The very personality of man, therefore, although created by God Himself, remains outside of the essence of God,a nd therefore completely free either to reject the act of creation, for which he was not consulted, or to accept the creative love of God by living according to the pneuma, given to him for this purpose by God.

"The mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the spirit is life and peace."[ 180 ] Those who live according to the flesh shall die.[ 181 ] Those who mortify the deeds of the flesh by the spirit shall live.[ 182 ] The spirit of man, however, deprived of union with the vivifying spirit of God, is hopelessly weak against the flesh dominated by death and corruption [ 183 ]--"Who shall deliver me from the body of this death."[ 184 ] And, "the law of the pneumatos tes zoes (spirit of life) in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death."[ 185 ] Only those whose spirit has been renewed [ 186 ] by union with the Spirit of God [ 187 ] can fight the desires of the flesh. Only those who are given the Spirit of God and hear Its voice in the life of the body of Christ are able to fight against sin. "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God."[ 188 ]

Although the spirit of man is the principle of life given to him by God, it can still partake of the filthiness of fleshly works. For this reason, it is necessary for Christians to guard against the corruption not only of the flesh, but of the spirit, also.[ 189 ] The union of man's spirit with the Spirit of God in baptism is no magical guarantee against the possibility of their separation. To become again enslaved tot he works of the flesh may very well lead to exclusion from the body of Christ.[ 190 ] The Spirit of God is given to man that Christ may dwell in the heart.[ 191 ] "Now if any an have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of His."[ 192 ] To have the Spirit of God dwelling in the body is to be, also, a member of the body of Christ. To be deprived of the one is to be cut off from the other. It is impossible to be in communion with only part of God. Communion with Christ through the Spirit is communion with the whole Godhead. Exclusion from the One Person is exclusion from all Three Persons.

"The works of the flesh are manifest..."[ 193 ] "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.[ 194 ] Such people are enslaved to the power of death and corruption in the flesh. They must be saved from the "Body of this death."[ 195 ] On the other hand, those who have been buried with Christ through baptism have died to the body of sin and are living unto Christ.[ 196 ] They are no longer living according to the desires of flesh, but of the spirit. "The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance--against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts."[ 197 ]

It is clear that, for St. Paul, the union of man's spirit with the Spirit of God in the life of love within the body of Christ is life and salvation. On the other hand, to live according tot he desires of the flesh, dominated by the powers of death and corruption, means death--"For the mind of the flesh is death."[ 198 ] St. Paul is dealing throughout his epistles with the categories of life and death. God is life. The devil holds the reins of death and corruption. Unity with God in the Spirit, through the body of Christ in the life of love, is life and brings salvation and perfection. Separation of man's spirit from the divine life in the body of Christ is slavery to the powers of death and corruption used by the devil to destroy the works of God. The life of the spirit is unity and love. The life according to the flesh is disunity and dissolution in death and corruption.

It is absolutely necessary to grasp the essential spirit of St. Paul's usage of the words, sarx, psyche, and pneuma, in order to avoid the widespread confusion that dominates the field of inquiry into Pauline theology. St. Paul is never speaking in terms of immaterial rational souls in contrast to material bodies. Sarx and psyche are synonymous and comprise, together with the pneuma, the total man. To live according to the pneuma is not to live a life according to the lower half of man. On the contrary, to live according to the sarx, or psyche, is to live according to the law of death. To live according to the spirit is to live according to the law of life and love.

Those who are sarkikoi cannot live according to their original destiny of selfless love for God and neighbor, because they are dominated by the power of death and corruption. "the sting of death is sin."[ 199 ] Sin reigned in death.[ 200 ] Death is the last enemy to be destroyed.[ 201 ] So long as man lives according tot he law of death, in the flesh, he cannot please God [ 202 ] because he does not live according to the law of life and love. "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God for it is not subject to the law of God, neither can it be."[ 203 ] In order to live according to his original destiny, man must be liberated from "the body of this death."[ 204 ] This liberation from the power of death and corruption has come from God, Who sent His own Son "in the likeness of sinful flesh" to deliver man "from the law of sin and death."[ 205 ] But, although the power of death and sin has thus been destroyed by the death and resurrection of Christ, participation in this victory can come only through dying to this world with Christ in the waters of baptism.[ 206 ] It is only by dying in baptism and then continuously dying to the rudiments and ways of the world that the members of the body of Christ can become perfect as God is perfect.

The importance that St. Paul attributes to dying to the rudiments of this world in order to live according to the "spirit of life" cannot be exaggerated. To try to pass off his insistence on complete self-denial for salvation as a product of eschatological enthusiasts is to miss completely the very basis of the New Testament message. If the destruction of the devil, death and corruption is salvation and the only condition for life according to man's original destiny, then the means of passing from the realm of death and its consequences to the realm of life, in the victory of Christ over death, must be taken very seriously. For Paul, the way from death to life is communion with the death and life of Christ in baptism and a continuous life of live within the body of Christ. This new life of love within the body of Christ, however, must be accompanied by a continuous death to the ways of this world, which is dominated by the law of death and corruption in the hands of the devil. Participation in the victory over death does not come simply by having a magical faith and a general sentiment of vague love for humanity (Luther). Full membership int he body of Christ can come only by dying in the waters of baptism with Christ, and living according to the law of the "spirit of life." Catechumens and penitents certainly had faith, but they either had not yet passed through death, in baptism, to the new life, or else, once having died to the flesh in baptism, they failed to remain steadfast and allowed the power of death and corruption to regain its dominance over the "spirit of life."

---

quote:

---

The sufficient condition is that a person yeild to it (not resist it).

---

quote:

---

2) If all other choices are freely chosen without God's foreknowledge, is this not true of salvation making salvation essentially “up to us”?

---

What do you mean by "salvation"? Is it the justification for our sins -- the shed blood for the Lamb of God? Is it through Jesus Christ, the way, the truth, and the life? Does it include God's calling to us? Does it involve God's supernatural regeneration through the Holy Spirit? None of this is "up to us."

However, if you mean, "How do we receive salvation?" Then, yes, it is up to us to say "yes" to God. Interestingly this is not something the Calvinist objects to, if you qualify it with the observation that God enables us to say "yes." What the Calvinist objects to is that we can say, "No" to God. Think about it.

Here's an observation, though. Calvinism claims that God does NOT choose us by his foreknowledge. It is predestination, not foreknowledge, that is at the heart of why some are saved under the Calvinist view. The wording of (2) suggests an Arminian position.

Terry writes:

quote:

---

3) If God so determines the phenomenological world such that only one choice is effectively possible, and OV allows this (admits it), does this make the (only?) major difference between traditional theology and OV the belief in EDF?

---

If there is only one choice, then it is not a choice at all. To have a choice, you must be able to choose one option at the exclusion of another. To be "determined", then the outcome must be settled, as with the case in the Calvinist view.

That said, the Bible does not give any examples where God forces people to act outside their character. In the case of Peter denying Christ, all that was required is to have Peter be asked about his relationship to Jesus three times. Under the conditions, all God would have to do is raise the question in people's mind, and they would willingly ask it -- out of their own curiosity, not compulsion. It need not even be that intrusive. A vague recognition -- as scripture suggests was the case -- is all that is necessary.

Terry asks:

quote:

---

4) If God does intervene occasionally in this world to limit our choice set, on what grounds does OV contend he does not (ever or even regularly) do it as regards salvation?

---

I personally think scripture teaches that God is always intervening for our salvation. The central theme in the Bible, and a primary implication of the Great Commission, is the redemption of mankind. This is one of the reasons why the Calvinistic idea of limited atonement is so baffling to me. If the following verse is true...

This is right and is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1 Tim. 2:3-4 (NRSVA)

...and God's grace is really irresistible as Calvinism says, then all will be saved. Yet we know that all are not saved. This must mean that God's grace can be resisted, because scripture cannot be false.

Terry:

quote:

---

Yet several people here seem to think that people can and do experience Godly interventions and still refuse Him.

---

I would be one of them.

Terry:

quote:

---

I’m not sure if they believe that everyone experiences such an intervention.

---

I do not think anyone can say to what extent "everyone" experiences God. Scripture only shows us examples of some that say "yes" to God and some that say "No" to God. It tells us that God rewards those who diligently seek him (Heb 11:6). Paul used the idol to the "unknown God" as a way of acknowledging that some seek Him that they do not know.

Terry asks:

quote:

---

Finally, for those who concur with Dr. Boyd, do you not agree that these statements

quote:

---

Let it be agreed that we cannot save ourselves.

---

and

quote:

---

The sufficient condition is that a person yield to it (not resist it).

---

have already been ‘asked and answered’ of Calvin (et. al) as a contradiction?

---

Keep in mind, one does not have to be an Open Theist to disagree with Calvin (et al). I will answer your question as someone who is NOT a Calvinist.
No, the questions have not been "answered". Calvin, et al, have attempted to answer them, and admittedly believe they have indeed proven it as a contradiction. However, they have done so with philosophic argument, not with the whole of scripture. This is why there are still Arminians or Open Theist disagreeing with their conclusions.

Terry says:

quote:

---

Moreover, that such a view gives (partial) credit for salvation to humans which is unacceptable philosophically and scripturally to those who believe in ‘God alone’?

---

Arminianism or the OV does not give "credit for salvation" to humans. That is an inference made by Calvinist, not a claim by Arminian or Open Theist.

Yours in Christ,
Winghead


"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)