The flesh in the Christian...

[cyberjosh]

Stranger broached the following subject in another thread, and I thought it better suited to make a new thread. I commented on how the terminology of the cross is infact very accurate and adequate to our spiritual transformation, even up to the detail that a person crucified does not die immediately, and similaly that though the flesh is doomed to be destroyed (crucified) it is still alive to allow us to sin. Stranger wrote:

Hi cyber,

You touch upon a theme that I have long been concerned with. In the above passage you are referring to Jesus being crucified on the cross taking some time to die. In your comment I see a reservation to actually pronounce the flesh dead. Sure it took Jesus 3 or 4 hours to die - but it was a confirmed death on the cross. I know the you know this and believe it. But I want to stress that it was Jesus who died and was buried - that is what you do with a dead person.

Now it is specifically the words " for even when crucified you are still alive for a while, thus when the Bible says our flesh is crucified it explains how the flesh is still alive in a sense to still cause us to sin." This is an example of considering our flesh alive and making an excuse or attempting to explain why we sin. Sure we walk after the flesh but it is not because the flesh is alive - remember it was Jesus' flesh that died and was buried'. So we come to 'our being crucified with Christ in His death, and buried with Christ in His burial and raised with Christ in His resurrection. This is the baptism spoken of in Romans 6:1 -4. It has to do with being in Christ. We are no longer in Adam. Can we still live as though we were in Adam? Yes. But we can also live in Christ as we are intended to. Does our living in Adam mean that the flesh is alive?

The point I am making is that the flesh cannot survive crucifiction. Paul knew this and therefore wrote that we are to consider ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.' Failure to do this is NOT because the flesh somehow can survive Jesus' crucifiction and burial or resurrection for that matter - it clearly cannot - but that we are mistaken and live as though our flesh was alive and well. So from this perspective it is possible to walk in the flesh and live carnal, improverished lives.

Well first let me comment on this part:

"This is an example of considering our flesh alive and making an excuse or attempting to explain why we sin. Sure we walk after the flesh but it is not because the flesh is alive - remember it was Jesus' flesh that died and was buried'."

No, actually I was making no excuse, only acknowledging the source. James wasn't making an excuse when he wrote, "Each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin" (James 1:14). This is a literal sequence and source for sin. When we sin we cannot blame it on Satan as many would like to do. It was the comedian Flip Wilson not God who said "The Devil made me do it!". Each man is tempted and sins when he is carried away (dragged away) to carry out evil desires of the heart which have not been submitted to God. Now Satan does make a subtle appearance here as the role of the enticer, but he only exploits the desires we already have and the provision we have allowed for the flesh. Because the flesh is still active (though no longer our nature) in us if we let it.

This is why it is a prominent theme that we should not fall into the weakness of the flesh and its lusts (a consistant term in the NT). Paul said in Romans, "make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts" (Romans 13:14). And we see how Satan takes advantage of that provision (meaning we give leeway for it to influence our soul - the last battle ground in the Christian) when Paul also says, "Do not give the devil a foothold" (Ephesians 4:27). Where does the Devil put his foot in a matter in which we sin? In the niche of provision we gave to the flesh.

Paul also details the constant war in the soul of the Christian between his new nature (in the Spirit) and the old corrupt nature (the flesh) that tries to take control again: "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please" (Galatians 5:16-17). This shows a very active battle in the Christian, and it is a constant choice each day to walk in the Spirit or in the flesh, even though our nature is new and pure in Christ. If we acted only in accordance with our new inner nature (oh God I long for the day! "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?" - Romans 7:24) then we would be perfect in action, thought, and deed. But there is a very active battle "so that you man not do the things you please" sometimes, because of the enticement of the lust of the flesh (which I have fallen into many times before - and indeed all of us have). Paul details this even more explicitly in Romans 7:

"For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.
But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.
So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.
For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.
But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me." (Romans 7:15-20)

Recently actually I have been recovering from a battle with Satan in tempting me in a very disturbing manner which tests me to the limit, and that verse came to mind - that got me through by commiting myself to God and acknowledging it in my trial to deliver me from the weakness and wickedness of my flesh - which says (rearranging it) "in my flesh... dwells nothing good". Satan made me realize this very quickly because he tempted me with things I did not seek after, and even brought the enticements to me, and it was very aggravating. I realized that if I tried to overcome it myself that I would fail, because the flesh is so weak that it would only succumb when tempted. That is why the flesh is characterized as lusting all throughout Scripture. It constantly lusts against God's Holy Spirit in us. But thank God and Jesus Christ that his Spirit is more powerful than the flesh, and that He can deliver us out of trials as we experience them - because he will not allow us to be tempted above what we are able to endure!

"And He has said to me [hallelujah!], "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness " Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me." (2 Corinthians 12:9)

"Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" (Romans 7:24-25)

Amen and Amen!

~Josh

 

[Drew]

Paul also details the constant war in the soul of the Christian between his new nature (in the Spirit) and the old corrupt nature (the flesh) that tries to take control again: "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please" (Galatians 5:16-17). This shows a very active battle in the Christian, and it is a constant choice each day to walk in the Spirit or in the flesh, even though our nature is new and pure in Christ.

I agree with this but wonder how to make sense of Paul's apparent claim that the flesh is indeed dead. Aren't we forced to accept that, as you say, we are in a state where a new nature and an old nature are warring within us? How do we make sense of this in light of Paul's occasional statements that make it sound like the old nature should be dead and buried?

With respect to the Romans 7 text: I am now of the position that this material is not a description of either the struggles of the Christian prior to conversion or indeed after conversion. I have become persuaded by arguments from NT Wright that this is an analysis of the state of the Jew living under Torah, seen from the perspective of a Christian.

Here is some of the material at issue:

"14We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to doâ€â€this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to Godâ€â€through Jesus Christ our Lord! "

I just can't see how this can be describing the position of a Christian. For one, Paul claims to be sold as a slave to sin. I understand that we are released from this slavery as Christians. We still sin, but it does not seem accurate to characterize a Christian as a slave to sin. Second, in verse 25 Paul seems to be appealing for a rescue from this state. This really only makes sense to me if Paul is describing a pre-Christian state - once we are a Christian we have already been rescued.

So why do I think Paul is talking about Jews under Torah rather than his own personal pre-Christian perspective (I suggest it is not without precedent for Paul to use "I" to refer to national Israel)? Good question - perhaps if and when I can present a decent answer, I will post again.

 

[stranger]

Hi Cyber,
Perhaps it is best to start with Romans 7 since you quote from it:

1Do you not know, brothersâ€â€for I am speaking to men who know the lawâ€â€that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives? 2For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. 3So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man.
4So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. 5For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Let's see the example developed by Paul:
v1-3
while the husband is alive she is bound to him
when the husband dies she is free to marry another.
If she marries another while her husband is alive she is an adulteress.

What follows in chapter 7 could be called adulteress Christian living in the sense that marriage conveys a bond that can only be broken by the death of the husband. Notice that the death of the woman is not used to free the husband. To appreciate the depth of the analogy let us assume the role of the woman as we proceed into the chapter.

Being under the law is like a woman being married to a husband who still lives. What then is the husband who still lives? - I suggest that it is the flesh or the old nature in Adam or simply being under the law. This is where I have spent the majority but not all of my Christian life. I would suggest that despite claims to the contrary it is also where most if not all the Christians I have ever met live in this body of death bearing fruit befitting death. But there is worse to come - trying to live according to the Spirit while belonging to another (i.e under the law) is like a woman who remarries though her former husband is still alive. For this reason I use the provocation title 'adulterous Christian living' to reflect somethng worse than living after the flesh.

4So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God.

So now we have the means - dying to the law through the body of Christ, that we might belong to another breaknig the adulterous relationship of a living former husband and bearing fruit to God. 'Adulterous' is the closest word I can think of that describes the admixture of Spirit and flesh. What I am trying to say is that this is not the deliverance Paul prays for but the struggle that preceeds it.

In v5 and v6 Paul summaries the two conflicting norms for the Christian life:

5For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death.

6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Cyber, which of these two verses is the norm that Paul subscribes to? I am not asking which verse better conveys the universal experience of believers.

 

[stranger]

Drew wrote:

I agree with this but wonder how to make sense of Paul's apparent claim that the flesh is indeed dead. Aren't we forced to accept that, as you say, we are in a state where a new nature and an old nature are warring within us? How do we make sense of this in light of Paul's occasional statements that make it sound like the old nature should be dead and buried?

Yes it should and is dead and buried - because that is what happened to Jesus - He is the one who died and was buried and we died and were buried with Him as per Romans 6 :1-4. So I ask: is the old nature dead or does it have the appearance of being very much alive though it is dead?

With respect to the Romans 7 text: I am now of the position that this material is not a description of either the struggles of the Christian prior to conversion or indeed after conversion. I have become persuaded by arguments from NT Wright that this is an analysis of the state of the Jew living under Torah, seen from the perspective of a Christian.

It is possible from the hard evidence that the majority of Romans chapter 7 refers to unbelievers ie Jews and not Christians. To be charitable and even recognising that some Christians had not even heard of the Holy Spirit in one place in the NT - the chapter may refer to believers who for one reason, though Christians, bore fruit that suggested otherwise. I say this to be charitable since Paul does seem to talk about his own experience as a Jew.

Here is some of the material at issue:

"14We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to doâ€â€this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to Godâ€â€through Jesus Christ our Lord! "

I just can't see how this can be describing the position of a Christian. For one, Paul claims to be sold as a slave to sin. I understand that we are released from this slavery as Christians. We still sin, but it does not seem accurate to characterize a Christian as a slave to sin. Second, in verse 25 Paul seems to be appealing for a rescue from this state. This really only makes sense to me if Paul is describing a pre-Christian state - once we are a Christian we have already been rescued.

Fair comment.

So why do I think Paul is talking about Jews under Torah rather than his own personal pre-Christian perspective (I suggest it is not without precedent for Paul to use "I" to refer to national Israel)? Good question - perhaps if and when I can present a decent answer, I will post again.

Chapters 9 to 11 certainly do. Does the personal pronoun 'I' ever refer to a nation?

 

[cyberjosh]

I agree with this but wonder how to make sense of Paul's apparent claim that the flesh is indeed dead. Aren't we forced to accept that, as you say, we are in a state where a new nature and an old nature are warring within us? How do we make sense of this in light of Paul's occasional statements that make it sound like the old nature should be dead and buried?

The NT is full of what atheists would call "contradictions" but what a believer acknowledges as "theological tension". Paul has a "now...but not yet" paradigm and view on salvation, eternal life, glory, righteousness, and on almost every other issue. And similarly Paul says in one place, "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts" (Galatians 5:24) and yet in another place tells the Christian, "You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds; and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness." (Ephesians 4:22-24).

So in one place it's already done, and in another we should be doing it, taking off and putting on. I think this tention ultimately details the slight difference between our positional state before God and our practical & progressive sanctification before God. And also like looking at our personal glory, righteousness, and salvation we have a measure of it now but it will be realized in full in the end. But unless we say the Bible contradicts itself we must always acknowledge that there is "theological tension" all throughout the NT.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[stranger]

Cybershark wrote:

Well first let me comment on this part:

"This is an example of considering our flesh alive and making an excuse or attempting to explain why we sin. Sure we walk after the flesh but it is not because the flesh is alive - remember it was Jesus' flesh that died and was buried'."

No, actually I was making no excuse, only acknowledging the source. James wasn't making an excuse when he wrote, "Each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin" (James 1:14). This is a literal sequence and source for sin. . . . Each man is tempted and sins when he is carried away (dragged away) to carry out evil desires of the heart which have not been submitted to God. Now Satan does make a subtle appearance here as the role of the enticer, but he only exploits the desires we already have and the provision we have allowed for the flesh. Because the flesh is still active (though no longer our nature) in us if we let it.

I chose the word 'excuse', but it is not as good as 'provision' or 'making provision for the flesh'. While the evil desires arise out of our uncrucified heart, they do not so much arise out of our flesh but rather out of the flesh that we partake of, i.e. Adam's. For this reason there is no category 'in Cybershark' or 'in stranger' but only 'in Adam' or 'in Christ.' On this basis to preserve the distinction that we are called to be 'in Christ' we are to consider ourselves dead to sin or simply consider that the flesh is dead. No other alternative fulfills that to which we are called. Other alternatives invariably make provision for the flesh the most popular of which is to believe that physical death will also be the death of the old nature. I am calling that making provision for the flesh.

Where this goes all wrong - is that Christians can make provision for the flesh and thereby live internally and externally as if they were 'in Adam.' This raises a multitude of issues as you would be aware of. . . Since I don't see how we can be 'in Adam AND in Christ' but simply 'in Christ' the issue of walking in The Spirit in a manner worthy of our calling concerns sanctification. On one occassion Paul delivered a man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh - which is a difficult saying.

This is why it is a prominent theme that we should not fall into the weakness of the flesh and its lusts (a consistant term in the NT). Paul said in Romans, "make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts" (Romans 13:14). And we see how Satan takes advantage of that provision (meaning we give leeway for it to influence our soul - the last battle ground in the Christian) when Paul also says, "Do not give the devil a foothold" (Ephesians 4:27). Where does the Devil put his foot in a matter in which we sin? In the niche of provision we gave to the flesh.

OK. There are so many and varied illustration in the NT that depict the spirituality of the Christian, whether they be in the flesh or in the Spirit. My gut feeling is that Christians today remain in the flesh despite claims and protests to the contrary. This is not to say that is where they/we should be.

 

[cyberjosh]

Stranger,

I don't think we have that much difference in our views except you seem to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that your flesh is either alive or dead, and we are created a perfect new man wholely (soul and body) & immediately. I do believe the inner man is kept perfect in Jesus but if we indeed acted in accordance with it all the time (which is to be our goal - but nonetheless a goal) we would never make a mistake. It is something that has to be worked from the inside out. Sanctification has to flow outward from our spirit to our soul and body. And in the realm of the soul and manifesting in the body is the realm where the flesh still has its influence if you let it.

This is because according to the inward man we are becoming more and more like Jesus each day while the flesh gets worse and worse each day. Thus it isn't this "flash-flash instantaneous" eternal death for the flesh and eternal life for our spirit thing, otherwise there would be no reason for us to live any longer here, we should just go straight to heaven with God. Eternal life is given to us in a measure now but it will be only fully realized and embraced in the hereafter, yet while we yet live the flesh is still with us to test us but is dying more each day (or it should be if we obey Romans 8:13 and put it to death each day by the Spirit).

"Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day." (2 Corinthians 4:16)

"Lay aside the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful lusts." (Ephesians 4:22)

Thus we see it is an ongoing process for both the old and new man, the new "being renewed" each day while the old man is "being corrupted" each day (which you are hopefully putting to death - Romans 8:13). And I can witness to how much worse the flesh gets over time, especially in the Christian. Once I thought to myself after a particular awakening to the exceeding sinfulness of my flesh, "I would make the worst atheist, I would be so reprobate that I'd put reprobates to shame." That's because I think the flesh acts more vehemently and adversly to the Christian than it does in the unregenerate, for the same reason a scared wounded animal who is going to die is usually at its most vicious at that point. So Paul wasn't joking when he used the strong language that the flesh "lusts against the Spirit" (Galatians 5:17).

I hope this clears up this issue a little bit for you.

God Bless,

~Josh