Good evening. This final installment of the Anthropology series functions as a brief wrap-up and review, adding a few “miscellaneous” terms that can be handled more quickly than earlier major studies (for example, heart and mind). The aim is to consolidate what has been learned and to highlight why these anthropological distinctions matter doctrinally and practically.
Nature: the contrast between the unsaved and the saved
The lesson first addresses nature as the “result” of the various components and functions previously examined. Scripture distinguishes human nature before and after salvation.
Ephesians 2:1–7 is used to show the believer’s former state: once “dead in trespasses and sins,” living under the course of this world, and described as being “by nature children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3). The passage then pivots to God’s mercy and the believer being made alive together with Christ, stressing divine grace and positional realities (Ephesians 2:4–7).
A contrast is drawn with 2 Peter 1:1–4, where believers are said to become “partakers of the divine nature” through God’s promises, having escaped the world’s corruption through lust (2 Peter 1:4). The point is that salvation is not merely a future change (destination) but includes a present change in what has occurred in the believer, even though believers may fail to live consistently with that provision.
Phroneō: frame of mind and reflective thinking
The lesson then shifts to phronēō (and related forms), described as a term not for a “part” of the human constitution but for what a person is doing with the mind—one’s frame of mind, reflective thinking, and practical orientation. This is presented as especially important for living out truth rather than merely understanding definitions.
Key examples are surveyed:
Luke 8:26–39 (the Gerasene demoniac): after deliverance, the man is described as being in his “right mind,” highlighting a restored, sound frame of mind in contrast to prior disorder.
Matthew 16:21–23: Peter rebukes Jesus for predicting His death and resurrection; Jesus confronts Peter for not having his mind oriented toward God’s interests but toward human concerns—an example of how a wrong frame of mind produces wrong action.
Colossians 3:1–4: the exhortation to set one’s mind on things above is emphasized as a call to sustained, reflective orientation, grounded in positional truth (“you died,” and your life is hidden with Christ in God). The lesson notes that older English renderings can obscure the sense by using language such as “set your affection,” when the focus is cognition and orientation rather than emotion.
Philippians 3:15–21; Philippians 2:2; Philippians 4:2: repeated appeals for believers to be “like-minded” and to “mind the same thing,” contrasted with those whose mindset is set on earthly things. Even among believers, disunity and misalignment can require correction (as in the appeal to specific individuals in Philippians 4:2).
A brief conceptual distinction is also referenced: reflective “mindset” is presented as the bridge between understanding principles and applying them, because it involves turning truth over in the mind until it becomes operational in daily judgment and conduct.
Romans 8 and “carnal” versus “spiritual”
The lesson then ties mindset to present-tense Christian living by turning to Romans 8:
Romans 8:1–7 is used to contrast those who “mind the things of the flesh” with those who “mind the things of the Spirit.” The results are sharply contrasted: the fleshly frame of mind leads toward death, whereas the Spirit-oriented frame of mind leads toward life and peace (Romans 8:5–6).
The instructor notes a textual issue in Romans 8:1, explaining why some editions include an added phrase and why the sentence is treated as complete without it; the doctrinal emphasis is that condemnation is absent for those in Christ Jesus.
1 Corinthians 3:1–3 is then used to show how carnality (pertaining to the flesh) is evidenced behaviorally—envy, strife, and divisions—demonstrating that mindset is not theoretical but produces observable outcomes.
Why anthropology matters: doctrinal clarity, spiritual growth, and precision of Scripture
The concluding section explains why the course spent so much time defining terms and distinctions (body, soul, spirit; mind and heart; how these relate).
Clarity about how humans operate: Scripture does not treat the immaterial life as an indistinguishable “blob.” Distinguishing soul and spirit helps interpret passages with greater precision.
Doctrinal impact on salvation categories: Understanding human constitution helps clarify past, present, and future aspects of salvation, including what is meant by “what part” of the person is involved in each aspect.
Explaining spiritual vs. carnal fluctuation in believers: These distinctions help explain how a believer can be spiritual at one time and carnal at another, and how that relates to mental and volitional function.
How believers interact with God: Worship and communion with God are framed as proceeding from the believer’s regenerated spirit, shaping how one approaches Christian life beyond emotionalism or superstition.
Discernment in spiritual conflict: The course argues that distinguishing spirit and soul assists in diagnosing the source of certain pressures—whether the appeal is directed toward the soul through sense-oriented or emotional avenues, or toward the spirit through lines of reasoning—thereby supporting more accurate spiritual self-assessment.
A model of scriptural precision: Finally, the study is presented as an illustration of how carefully Scripture employs its terms. Rather than loose interchangeability, the Holy Spirit uses words with intention, and careful attention to those choices improves interpretation and application.
In sum, this concluding lesson reinforces that anthropology is not merely definitional; it is meant to produce practical discernment—especially through a disciplined, Spirit-oriented frame of mind—and to strengthen doctrinal clarity by respecting the precision of biblical terminology.
