@Windwalker; I do believe that people who are believers in the God of The bible have the spirit with-in them; and they have been born again I believe. But with out the Lord Jesus Christ: people are still spiritually dead because of not being born again; I believe.
If they were truly spiritually dead, then they could not produce good fruit. Yet they do. Where does it come from? You quoted the verse I was going to quote, so I'll just use that here myself as well.
"You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit."
To break that apart a little, please note it says you will know them by their fruits. Not, by their doctrines and beliefs. Many Christians like to judge the salvation of others, be they fellow Christians or the rest of humanity, by the things they believe in. Yet, nowhere do you find that in Jesus' teaching here. The criteria is the fruit of their hearts manifest in actions. That's it. That's how you can assess whether someone is spiritual dead, spiritually awakened, or somewhere in between. By their fruits, not by their conformity with religious doctrines and beliefs.
Secondly, because of this, when we see someone produce good fruit, we know that they are not an evil tree, or "spiritually dead", as you put it. Jesus even said that an evil tree cannot produce good fruit. Yet, that is what some Christians want people to believe, that good people of other religions are lost, unsaved, an evil tree. But they are still producing good fruit, which according to Jesus they could not do if they were evil.
Can you explain that? How are they producing good fruit, if they aren't a person converted to the Christian religion itself per se? Where is that good fruit coming from? Could it be they are in fact a good tree, as Jesus taught us, despite not be a member of the "right religion"? Could bearing good fruit have nothing at all to do with joining the "right religion"?
I disagree with you saying that Good comes from us naturally. Because we only have one nature; Human fleshly nature (Which comes from our heart and is mentioned in the the original topic posted); until a person is born again and the spiritual nature becomes part of them I believe.
No, we have a dual nature, according to scripture. Didn't Paul express that struggle within himself with the will to do good, but the impulse to ignore that and do bad? "That which I would not do, that thing I do. And that which I would do, that I do not?" Where is the will to do good coming from, if the tree is rotten to the core?
A history lesson here may be of help to your perspective on these matters. The "fallen nature" of man doctrine took root in Christianity through Augustine in the 4th and 5th century AD. Not all Christian leader of that time thought like Augustine did, who was riddled with guilt from his childhood over sexual impulses he experienced. Pelagius who was an equal of Augustine, for instance, believed that people were inherently good, and that Jesus came to teach us how to awaken that in us to its fullest potentials. (for your reference:
The Battle of the Will, Part 1: Pelagius and Augustine - The Gospel Coalition)
Both Augustine and Pelagius were interpreting from the same scriptures, and each bringing their own experiences and perspectives into those interpretations. It does not teach the doctrines of either explicitly in scripture, but they are later understandings based upon their readings of scripture. It is not proper or correct to say, "The Bible teaches the doctrine of original sin". It does not.
That is an interpretation from scripture by later theologians, which contradicts what other theologians interpreted from the same scripture at the same time. One can claim, "well, that other guy was
wrong. They both can't be right". But I find that perspective far too narrow and out of touch with the actual complexities and nuances of both scripture itself, and hermeneutics in general. Expectations of black and white answers, are naive to say the least.
You may disagree with me as well; but that is my stance when it comes to the perspective view of Christianity.
Just to be clear here, this is your perspective of what the Christian perspective is. I have a view of what the Christian perspective is that is not the same as yours. There are many perspectives from Christians on what the Christian perspective is.
Personally, I think there is no such thing as the "Christian perspective", as Christianity is not a monovocal entity, unless you believe in an infallible central authority who speaks for all Christians, on the level of the Pope for instance? You can claim the Bible is that central authority, but whose interpretation of the Bible is to be considered infallible here? Can you identify that figure?
Jesus Christ says this to his disciples on the mount of Olives.
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
A believer can be told from an unbeliever by what is presented from and by their heart.
Amen and amen. This is a passage I use to support that Christianity is not an exclusivist religion, and that the true test is fruits, not beliefs. For instance, January 6. You have Christians who violently entered the Capitol building in an act of insurrection against the legitimately elected government, and stood in the Senate chambers praying in Jesus' name, thanking him and the Father, and the Spirit, for the goodness of their actions.
"By their fruits you shall know them", clearly means something. The words were right, they did their deeds in "Jesus' name", but their deeds were evil. "A good tree cannot produce bad fruit," said the Lord.
The fruits a believer will bear is fruits of love; by and through faith - Goodness, faithfulnes, forbearance, gentleness, self-control, kindness, peace, joy.
Amen again. And all who do this, are children of God, according to the teachings of Jesus. "For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." All of these are the will of the Father. All who do these, are producing good fruit, from a good tree. Nothing in there whatsoever about beliefs and doctrines.
Galatians 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
Absolutely. This you see in humans from all over the world, in all religions, who are doing the will of the Father, in however they understand the Divine. They are good trees, producing good fruits, and by those fruits you will know them.
Not by their claims of religious exclusiveness.
According to the Christian perspective; we do not condemn or judge the unbeliever however we are to have love for them; but that doesn't mean we have to agree with everything they present as the truth because there are things that are questionable. I believe.
Again, "the Christian perspective" is multifaceted. I certainly am presenting a Christian perspective here, which a great many Christians both believe and teach. You find yourself at the moment at odds with that perspective coming from your perspective. But I agree, we are not to judge someone as an "unbeliever", if we are looking at them as being either a "believer or unbeliever" if the criteria is
belief.
Better to see them as either fruit-bearing, or baren, or simply not yet in season. Not believer or unbeliever. There are more than a few who "believe" in God and Jesus, yet bear either no fruit, or bad fruit. So belief is not central. Wouldn't you agree with that?