Natural or Spiritual

Scripture often divides humans into two categories -- spiritual and fleshly. In 1 Corinthians 2 Paul says, "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God." (1 Cor 2:12). That's good, because, "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Cor 2:14). "Does not" and "not able to" are bad things when it comes to the things of God. I mean, we really need to accept and understand them, so being "natural" rather than "spiritual" puts us in a bad place. The only solution to 1 Corinthians 2:14 is 1 Corinthians 2:16 -- "we have the mind of Christ." That is, the only solution to "natural man" is to become something new, something beyond "natural." The only solution, in Jesus's terms, is to be "born again." (John 3:3, 5-6).

It begs the question, then. If we are either "natural" -- fleshly, "dead in sin" (Eph 2:1) -- or born again -- having the mind of Christ -- how do we know which we are? I mean, if we are the former we can't actually understand the latter, so how would we know we're not deceiving ourselves? If our hearts are deceitful and desperately wicked (Jer 17:9), how do we know if our hearts aren't deceiving us into thinking we're not deceived when we are? You can see the problem, right?

The Greek uses two words for the two categories. "Fleshly" is ψυχικός -- psychikos -- and "spiritual" is πνευματικός -- pneumatikos. That "ikos" at the end of both meas "led." So one refers to "led by the flesh" and the other refers to "led by the spirit." The Bible has much to say on the subject. For instance, "the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other." (Gal 5:17). Or "Those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit." (Rom 8:5). That second text goes on to say, "The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God." (Rom 8:7-8).

There are other clues as well. The primary indicator of one's spiritual condition, according to Jesus, is whether or not you love His people (John 13:35). On the other hand, "If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. (1 John 2:15). The author of Hebrews points to God's discipline as a test. "If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons." (Heb 12:8). That is, if you believe the Father does not discipline you, you should be seriously concerned about your spiritual condition. John writes, "No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God." (1 John 3:9). Like the earlier "does not" and "not able to" from 1 Cor 2:14, this text says that one who is born of God does not make a practice of sin because he cannot make a practice of sin. If you're not deeply concerned about your sin -- if you can shrug it off and keep going with it -- you might want to examine your condition.

Returning to the opening point, there is a key test here. If "natural man" does not and cannot accept the things of God, do I? Am I taking God's Word as it is written or am I picking and choosing? "God's Word isn't as reliable as you think it is" doesn't help. Either God is true or He is not. If He is true -- if He is who He says He is -- then His Word is as true and reliable as He is. If I am redefining and redlining, mythologizing and minimizing, modifying or dismissing God's Word as I see fit, it's a problem. If I am the ultimate determiner of what in God's Word is or is not true, that's a problem. Is God's Word changing me, or am I changing God's Word? If I claim to be true to God's Word without actually laying claim to all of God's Word as written, this is a problem. This means that I am dedicated to me rather than to the Spirit. These are clear signs of "flesh" versus "spiritual" -- psychikos versus pneumatikos.

Beyond that, of course, is the flow. First, is my understanding of Scripture consistent with Scripture? Not just a verse or a chapter, but the whole thing? Second, is my understanding consistent with history? The standard here is God -- the things of God. God doesn't change, so am I "in the flow"? Am I going along with what Paul referred to as "the tradition that you received from us" (2 Thess 3:6)? Am I standing on what Jude called "the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3)? Or am I finding new things? Am I establishing new traditions? Am I deviating from former doctrine because clearly they got it wrong all this time and I've determined a better way? The question in all of this is not the doctrine or the interpretation or the practice; the question is the constancy and faithfulness of God. Was He wrong in the past and we've finally figured out the truth? That belies a problem.

It really is a conundrum. We shouldn't take it lightly. If the natural human heart is deceived, how do I know I'm not? If the natural human cannot understand the things of God, how do I know I am? If it is necessary to test yourself and see if you're in the faith (2 Cor 13:5), am I doing it? Am I passing the test? I can't answer that for someone else. I must answer it for myself ... constantly aware of the possibility of blindness (2 Cor 4:4).