Featured 1 Corinthans 6:17

In 1 Corinthians 6:17, kollomenos is generally thought to be in the middle rather than passive voice. Hence, 'join oneself to.'

 

1 Corinthians 6:17 But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with Him in spirit. (biblehub.com)

New International Version
But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

New Living Translation
But the person who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with him.

English Standard Version
But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Berean Standard Bible
But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with Him in spirit.

Berean Literal Bible
But the one being joined to the Lord is one spirit.

King James Bible
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

New King James Version
But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

New American Standard Bible
But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

NASB 1995
But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

NASB 1977
But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

Legacy Standard Bible
But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

Amplified Bible
But the one who is united and joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

Christian Standard Bible
But anyone joined to the Lord is one spirit with him.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
But anyone joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

American Standard Version
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
But whoever cleaves to our Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Contemporary English Version
But anyone who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit with him.

Douay-Rheims Bible
But he who is joined to the Lord, is one spirit.

English Revised Version
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
However, the person who unites himself with the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Good News Translation
But he who joins himself to the Lord becomes spiritually one with him.

International Standard Version
But the person who unites himself with the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

Literal Standard Version
And he who is joined to the LORD is one spirit;

Majority Standard Bible
But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with Him in spirit.

New American Bible
But whoever is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

NET Bible
But the one united with the Lord is one spirit with him.

New Revised Standard Version
But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.

New Heart English Bible
But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit.

Webster's Bible Translation
But he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit.

Weymouth New Testament
But he who is in union with the Master is one with Him in spirit.

World English Bible
But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit.

Young's Literal Translation
And he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit;

 

Young's Literal Translation
And he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit;

 

Simon Kistemaker in his commentary on 1 Cor 6:17 (Baker Books (2002).
"'But the one who cleaves to the Lord is one spirit with him.'
The verse parallels the first part of the preceding verse: 'the one who cleaves to a prostitute in one body with her.' The verb 'to cleave,' used in both verses, actually means to be glued to someone. The relationship is as close as two pieces of glass lying on top of one another; it is impossible to lift the one piece from the other because the air pressure glues them together. .........
A believer becomes united with the Lord through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. ....... Paul uses the present middle participle....."

Peter Naylor, in his commentary (Evangelical Press, 1996).
"Possibly recalling the command of Deuteronomy 10:20 for Israel to be joined to Jehovah, Paul insists that the believer 'Who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.' He has entered into an intimate relationship with the Lord Jesus, and the Spirit of Christ dwells in him. In the words of Romans 8:9-10, 'You are not in the flesh but in the Spirit ... Christ is in you. "

A sinner cleaves, or joins himself to a prostitute (1 Cor. 6:16) willingly, drawn by his own sinful nature. We come to Christ willingly (eg. Psalms 110:3; Matthew 11:28), but we only come because we are drawn, made willing, by God (John 6:44; 1 Corinthians 2:14). Your insistence that kollomenos is passive is the result of your incorrect understanding of the way of salvation, which is, of course, what this thread is about. If kollomenos is passive in 1 Cor. 6:17, it must surely also be passive in the preceding verse.

 

The point of the OP seems to focus on the question of whether or not a person "joins himself" to the Lord (implying the one joining himself is taking an active role in his own salvation, which the OP seems to reject (as do I)), and whether salvation is an individual process.

On the former, you say ...

... yet, seem to make one's joining to a prostitute identical in the process of salvation. Can you, without quotes from commentaries (for the sake of brevity), expand your views on these two issues?


God bless.

 

I think the last paragraph of my post was pretty clear. But maybe looking at Luke 6:43-45 will help:
"For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh."
Men's hearts, by nature are inclined to evil (Genesis 8:21). So if a man is given that way, he will, of his own free will, join himself to a prostitute. In Corinth this was very common. There were apparently 1,000 prostitutes kept in the temple of Aphrodite for the use of her devotees. But when a man is born again by the Spirit of God, he freely rejects that sort of behaviour and of his own free will joins himself spiritually to the Lord. That seems to me to be what Paul is saying

I absolutely do not want to get involved in a debate over Calvinism and Arminianism. That was one reason that I have absented myself from this board for several months. My only reason for entering this discussion was to make a point against what I have described as @Van's incorrect understanding of the way of salvation. That point has now been made.

 

I thought so, too, I was just hoping for a clearer statement.

And this should make us consider the above passage as inconsistent with the context of the question. Because, in this passage, we have a good man contrasted to the evil, the good tree contrasted with the corrupt. In regards to salvation, there are no good trees or men, as your last reference states (Gen.8:21). The context in the former recognizes man in his natural condition (a necessity, seeing that no man was regenerate prior to Pentecost) and the reference to good and evil speaks of that which is within man's natural ability. Rather than good in a context of the righteousness of God.

This would include all natural men. Yet the will of man also allows for a man to reject the prostitute. Because he does so, he still does not enter into a category of righteousness that is demanded in a salvific context.

It is not of man's own free will that he is brought under conviction of sin, righteousness, and judgment. This is wholly the work of Holy God. It is a reaction, not a choice. My own understanding of Paul (and other writers) is that regeneration is a result of, not man's free will to choose to join himself to God, but to choose not to reject the conviction God brings him/her under.

And understand, I am not trying to be flippant, or offensive, this is an issue I greatly desire to discuss, and over the years, while we do not agree on certain issues, I do appreciate the fact that you have obviously spent much time in study, and I count you as one of the more prepared defenders of your views.

I just have to ask, is there not a distinction we can draw between being drawn of God (His active work) and a man "joining himself to God (his active work)?"

Regeneration is the result of a man being baptized into Christ, and the eternal indwelling of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. What role does man have that he can attribute to himself the spiritual work through which he is saved?

I understand fully. This is why I just come around for a little while at a time myself.

I guess if you feel you have made a point that denies his position as valid concerning his understanding of salvation, okay. Every time I come on here, I am disappointed by the attitude of brothers and sisters in Christ, and their lack of interest in serious, friendly conversation. There are some great discussions, and we can each help each other to better understand the points we disagree on.

So a final question: do you think natural man can understand the Gospel apart from God giving them the ability to understand?


God bless.

 

Thank you for your kind words, in the light of which I feel I should answer your post. However, if you want to continue the discussion, it would be better to do so on another thread so as not to trespass on that of @Van.

Time is my enemy at present. My church is going through a period of blessing, praise God, and quite a few new people have joined us which is putting strain on the elders of whom I am one. At the moment, our Pastor is on holiday, our assistant Pastor's wife has just given birth to their fourth child and our other elder is dealing with his late father's estate, which leaves me!

The good man, in the context of Luke 6:45, is one who has been born from above.

Some sinners are driven by sex, others by money, others by anger, pride, drink, drugs and so forth. Because a man is not an adulterer, a homosexual or a thief, that does not make him good.

Here then, is where we disagree. The Natural man is unable to please God (Romans 8:8), not because God has prevented him from so doing, but because he prefers sin to righteousness (John 3:19) and freely follows the dictates of his unregenerate heart. The new birth affects people at the level of their disposition. The man who was previously disposed to drink copious amounts of alcohol, watch on-line pornography, now is disposed to go to church and live for God. He still has free will, but his desires have been changed. I do not believe that a man is able to refuse the new birth, any more than you or I could refuse our first birth. The natural man will always refuse the Gospel (1 Corinthians 2:14).
And understand, I am not trying to be flippant, or offensive, this is an issue I greatly desire to discuss, and over the years, while we do not agree on certain issues, I do appreciate the fact that you have obviously spent much time in study, and I count you as one of the more prepared defenders of your views. [/QUOTE]
I appreciate that. I have always found you to be a courteous opponent

God does not repent for us, nor believe for us; those things we must do in order to be saved (Mark 1:15). But we only do them when God opens our heart to receive the Gospel (Acts of the Apostles 16:14).
I am conscious of repeating the same proof texts that I have used time and again on this forum. I have no confidence that you will be convinced by them by me trotting them out one more time. I have no doubt at all that you are born of the Spirit, and we can be brothers in Christ while not agreeing on every point.

None at all. Psalms 115:1.

@Van's position is neither Arminian nor Calvinist; it is his own concoction. He believes that Christ has saved all men by His death upon the cross, but then God rejects many because their faith is not 'righteous.'

 

Why do I always think of a pill bottle when I see that?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I understand completely. I was asked to bring this past weekend's message due to my Pastor's voice being affected by allergies (we are assuming, he hasn't seen the right Doctor yet (please pray for him)). It is a blessing to be called into that service, but—it carries a certain weight. I don't know about you, but I always feel unworthy of the honor, and there's a sense of relief after speaking.

We will pray for you. I am quite sure you are up to it.

This is one of the few things I think we might be in disagreement about. While I do not discount an application to the revelation of the Mystery of Christ in the teachings of Christ, I have to keep in view that Christ was teaching men under the Law, and within the framework of the revelation that had been provided to men. So, initially, the meaning would be within that context. At the very least, when we give both applications, we are still forced to acknowledge there are two. Meaning, within the framework of the revelation of the Old Testament, the good and evil would have specific application to the abilities men are born with. We can't discount this application, because this is the only one His audience could have possibly understood.

Where I would have a problem imposing a lost/eternally redeemed (regenerate) context into this teaching would be it doesn't fit a realistic understanding of the new man. There is an absolute quality to the Lord's teaching, whereas, with the new man, there is very much the potential for evil.

There just seems to be more of a temporal/natural context, and this fits better with the revelation His audience would have understood the teaching through. The Law established a good/bad mindset in many ways.

And again, we see that there must be a distinction between our standing before God and our daily conversation. One that is born again can commit adultery. Porn itself brings about that guilt. But that doesn't mean he loses his standing which was given him/her by God at salvation.

But I agree with the statement as a whole.

Agreed. But I thought we were discussing the issue more from a perspective of God's ministry in the unbeliever's life.

Natural man had no ability to please God apart from God's intervention. Romans 2 speaks of the Gentile that keeps God's Law and that those who do the Law are justified (and of course that would be temporal justification as contrasted with Justification based on Christ's Work), but it takes us back to the fact that before they did so, God wrote that Law on their hearts. Thus we attribute the righteousness they accomplish to God's intervention. I think that is Paul's point here ...

Romans 7

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

I take a slightly different view: regeneration deals directly with men concerning the "life" they have. We can break down man's existence into two basic parts: spirit and flesh (I am dichotomous). He has life. Yet, he is dead. Not spiritually, but because he does not have the life of God. When we are reconciled to God we receive that life.

John 6:53
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Dead.

And that is the condition of every person born into this world. A walking cemetery of unbelievers separated from God.

In Ezekiel 36:25-27, God promised a new heart, a new spirit, and that He would put His Spirit within us. The new spirit (which I see as man's "disposition" in that passage, rather than his personal spirit) is part and parcel with the entirety of the fulfillment of that promise (which is the promise I believe Christ speaks of in Acts 1:4-5). But it is His indwelling that provides the life referred to when we see eternal/everlasting life mentioned. God sent His Son that men might have life. His life. We receive that life when we are indwelt on an eternal basis.

So I see a concurrent event in which repentance, belief, and faith can no more be separated from regeneration than the indwelling can be separated from our baptism into Christ. We are in Him, and He in us.

And, keep in mind this is more just a discussion than an attempt to present my views.


Continued...

 

Yet not everyone who is born again may experience the blessing of the removal of drugs and alcohol in their lives as I did. Nor would I assume that no regenerate man could slip up and find himself getting stoned or high again.

I would suggest refusal of the New Birth is part and parcel of rejection of Christ. It is in that rejection that man exercises his inherent ability. But again, this follows the Ministry of the Comforter. Before that rejection, God has opened their understanding of truth. I can pinpoint the precise time of this ministry in my life, at least, when it came to a head. The reality of Hell and the remedy for that looming judgment had me terrified, shaking, and sweating. Ten men could not have kept me from going forward to ask God's forgiveness. Within that ministry was repentance, belief, faith (and I'm sure you're familiar with belief and faith's close ties).

If that were true—no man would be saved. All are natural men. I was a natural man prior to receiving the truth. I do not consider myself to have been born again prior to repentance, belief, and faith. I still knew I had to come before God, and I did that.

And I you.

Agreed, but He does make it possible that we can. This is called a gift:

Acts 11:18
King James Version

18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Acts 5:31
Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

2 Timothy 2:25
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

Which brings us back to this: why does a man join himself to Christ? Because he has made the decision? I would agree men do decide, truly, however, the ability to do so follows God's intervention. The conclusion I draw, then, is that the natural man, of his own will, ability, intellect, or anything else that be in the nature (or disposition) he is born with—can never be saved. He cannot understand the Gospel, he cannot know truth. And when I say know, I mean more in the sense of biblical knowledge. For example, we both know childbirth is painful, but we'll never know as women do.

I agree with that, but then, I also believe He does this for those who reject. In order for men to be justly charged with rejecting the Gospel, it would mean they would actually have to understand it, right? This is why we seldom prosecute those who are mentally incapacitated for a crime. The natural man is in one sense, legally insane. This is why Hebrews 10:26-29 warns that those who reject the Gospel will be held to a higher standard of judgment: the ones that rejected Moses Law (the Covenant of Law) were not openly rejecting Christ as those who come under the Comforter's ministry do.

Agreed. And it's nice to have an actual discussion once in a while. That still happens from time to time on a Christian Doctrinal Discussion Forum, lol.

Agreed.

There are some unique aspects to be found, lol.

That is unfortunate.

This last quote ended up within quotes, so I will just copy and paste:

Me: So a final question: do you think natural man can understand the Gospel apart from God giving them the ability to understand?

You: It is not a question of 'ability.' It is a question of will (John 5:40; Psalms 110:3).

The will would require the ability. I would agree that unbelievers willfully reject the truth, because that is a natural response. In John 5, we are dealing within the framework of the Age of Law and the revelation men were provided with. In Luke 16 the Lord, in His teaching, makes it clear that the Law and the Prophets were sufficient to keep a man from everlasting torment. That is not precisely the case in our own age. The general acceptance of God has been replaced with specific faith in Christ (and His Work). Consider that no man in prior Ages had an ability to place specific faith in Christ. They had no ability. Nothing in their nature allowed for that to take place. So too, natural man has no ability to weigh in on something they are blind to. You, for example, have no ability to make an informed statement about the Plant Men on Planet Miraclegrow. Why? Because before now, you never heard of them (because I just made it up is another reason, lol).

And again, I think it important to make a distinction between the Ages and the revelation found within them. Abraham cannot be found in violation with the Covenant of Law, for example, because it wasn't established in his day. And like the teaching of good and evil men, we can see elements of the Gospel, there is a difference between veiled revelation and unveiled.

Okay, sorry for the length, and good luck with your fellowship. I am sure God has equipped you sufficiently for the tasks before you, and that you will not disappoint.


God bless.