Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
GHansen

The likeness of sinful flesh

Recommended Posts

GHansen

The expression "sinful flesh" used in Romans 8:4 is a summary of human nature described in chapter 7.  Note the characteristics of sinful flesh:

"I am doing the very thing I hate" vs 15;

"I am no longer the one doing it [the thing I don't want to do] but sin that indwells me" vs 17;

"Nothing good dwells in me," "doing good is not present in me" vs 18;

"I practice the very evil I do not wish" vs. 19

“Indwelling sin does the thing I do not wish" vs 20

Evil is present in me" vs 21

"I am a prisoner of the law of sin in my members" vs. 23

This is the plight of fallen humanity, those born with sinful flesh. Jesus did not have any of these deficiencies, not for a second. That's the reason 

scripture inserts the term "likeness." Scripture does have a term for describing people with identical nature. The KJV translates the term "like passions" in Acts 14:15 and James 5:17. It's not used with reference to Christ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

TrevorL

Greetings GHansen,

You quote extensively from Romans 7 to define “sinful flesh”. Please note that this section is introduced by the following summary:

Romans 7:5–6 (KJV): 5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Please note the underlined above terms, and also the following also has a context:

Romans 8:1–3 (KJV): 1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

I suggest that the overall teaching of these sections need to be considered. Firstly the word translated “sinful” in “sinful flesh” is the same that is used twice more in Romans 8:3 and thus this can be translated as “sin’s flesh” or “flesh of sin”.

14 hours ago, GHansen said:

Jesus did not have any of these deficiencies, not for a second. That's the reason scripture inserts the term "likeness." Scripture does have a term for describing people with identical nature.

My understanding then is that Jesus came in the same flesh as us, the flesh that normally sins, but instead of succumbing to the “motions of sins”, that is the lusts of the flesh, he overcame these lusts and thus “condemned sin in the flesh”, that is he rendered these lusts of no effect within himself. My understanding of “likeness of sinful flesh” is that Jesus came in the same fallen nature that we possess with its lusts, but he did not sin, while all others who have this same flesh will or have sinned, thus it is universally known as “sin’s flesh”.

Jesus came in the same nature, the flesh, as ourselves:

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV): Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
24 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

You quote extensively from Romans 7 to define “sinful flesh”. Please note that this section is introduced by the following summary:

Your understanding is just that, your understanding. Thanks for sharing it. Sinful flesh sins. That's what it does. It's impossible for those with sinful flesh not to sin. That's what Paul spends a lot of time laying out in chapter 7. Sinful flesh sinning is inevitable to the point that he refers to the dynamic as the "law of sin and death."  Jesus was not a man of "like passions" with us. We can not compare ourselves to him like we can Elijah or like Paul compared himself to those who offered him obeisance. Jesus  was a man in the "likeness" of sinful flesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

2 hours ago, GHansen said:

Sinful flesh sins. That's what it does. It's impossible for those with sinful flesh not to sin.

A dictionary definition of sinful is “adjective; wicked and immoral; committing or characterized by the committing of sins”, and Jesus was not wicked and immoral. But he did possess the same nature as us, human nature, received from Adam through Mary, fallen human nature with the lusts of the flesh, and yet he always overcame the lusts of the flesh. The RV margin for “sinful flesh” has “flesh of sin” and a proper understanding of Romans 8:3 is either “Sin” as a metonymy or personification. Jesus is identified with his brethren, but as God was his father and Mary his mother he is unique as the Son of God at birth Luke 1:35, Matthew 1:20-21 and unique in the fullness of moral glory, of the Divine character of grace and truth that he revealed John 1:14.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again GHansen,

Kind regards Trevor,

 

Trevor, Typical of a partisan position based on poor understanding. Also known as hard shell Adventism i.e., can't be moved by even responsible interpretation.  Romans 7 is quite clear what sinful flesh is and the impact it has on those who possess it. It's plain in Romans that Jesus could not have had a flesh like ours or he would have been unable to resist sin. That's what sinful flesh is. You can run through your prooftexts but they don't "prove" that Jesus had a nature which was unable to resist sin. 

“The prince of this world cometh but he has nothing in me.” Sinful flesh, by definition has sin which dwells in it 。

"Not my will but thine be done" Sinful flesh does not allow its possessor to do what it wills.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
6 hours ago, GHansen said:

“The prince of this world cometh but he has nothing in me.” Sinful flesh, by definition has sin which dwells in it 。

"nothing" actually does NOT refer to "sinful flesh"  (must be a partisan in the room)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

10 hours ago, GHansen said:

It's plain in Romans that Jesus could not have had a flesh like ours or he would have been unable to resist sin.

You seem to be suggesting that Jesus had a different nature to us, but the Scriptures teach that Jesus had the same nature as us, but as the Son of God by birth and education he was specially strengthened to fulfil God’s purpose with him, and to overcome sin in the very nature that normally sins:

Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself.

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV): Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

1 John 4:1-3 (KJV): 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world..

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

An additional comment on Romans 7 and 8. Romans 7 speaks of the inability of man simply under the Law to obey the Law. The example given is the 10th Commandment:

Romans 7:7–11 (KJV): 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. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence (ESV: all kinds of coveting). For without the law sin was dead. 9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

This is also our experience in all kinds of sins and bad habits. Our human nature seems powerless to overcome some of these sins.

But the following gives the sense of success when we follow after our Lord Jesus Christ:

Romans 8:1–3 (KJV): 1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Jesus was successful where those under the Law failed and we often fail. We participate in Jesus’ success when we identify with his death and resurrection and then walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh. He was successful because he was full of the Divine character, he was full of grace and truth, not just a knowledge of the Law.

An example of overcoming persistent sins or bad habits is given in the following:

Ephesians 4:22–24,28 (KJV): 22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation (or, way of life)  the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; 23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.

We are instructed to put off the old man and put on the new man. One example that Paul gives is a person who has descended into the bad habit or sin of thieving. He is to cease, but to break the habit it is not just trying to obey a Law, but a replacement process, where he learns to use the same fingers that previously stole, but now used in labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, and a deliberate exercise to give some of what has been produced to those that are in need.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 4:34 AM, TrevorL said:

Greetings again GHansen,

You seem to be suggesting that Jesus had a different nature to us, but the Scriptures teach that Jesus had the same nature as us, but as the Son of God by birth and education he was specially strengthened to fulfil God’s purpose with him, and to overcome sin in the very nature that normally sins:

Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself.

Hebrews 2:14 (KJV): Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

1 John 4:1-3 (KJV): 1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world..

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Trevor,   I don't mean to "suggest" anything. I'm stating without apology or qualification that Jesus did not have a sinful, fallen nature. Paul's description of sinful flesh in Romans 7 makes it obvious that Jesus could not have had that kind of flesh because people with that kind of flesh i.e., humanity, can not resist  sin. The text doesn't say Jesus had sinful flesh, it says he was in the likeness of sinful flesh. Before you skate away to another passage in another book by another author, you really ought to see how the term "likeness" is used in the rest of Romans. It's used in chapter 6 to compare baptism to the death and resurrection of Christ, obviously metaphorical. It's used in chapter one to compare a graven image to the thing it represents. That's the main way the word is used throughout Scripture. It's often used in Ezekiel and Revelation to describe items seen in vision.  Philippians 2 does say Jesus was made in the "likeness" of men. It's just another way of saying Jesus was in the "likeness" of sinful flesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

54 minutes ago, GHansen said:

I'm stating without apology or qualification that Jesus did not have a sinful, fallen nature.

I appreciate your comments but I believe that the whole flow of Romans 7 and 8 indicates that Jesus overcame in the same flesh and he never sinned. I dislike the use of the translation "sinful" and prefer "sin's flesh", using metonymy or personification.  I suggest that where it states that God through Jesus “condemned sin in the flesh” indicates that Jesus overcame the lusts of the flesh and rendered them of no effect. Romans 8:3 states that it was “the flesh”, and therefore there are not two types of flesh, that of humanity, and a different type of human flesh possessed by Jesus. Without jumping all over the place as you caution, nevertheless Mary was Jesus’ mother and we inherit from our parents Luke 1:34-35. I do not believe in the immaculate conception. In my other post on covetousness, an additional thought is how Jesus responded in the wilderness when he was hungry after 40 days and was tempted to turn the stone into bread. There is a greater power than the lusts of the flesh to overcome sin otherwise we cannot walk in newness of life and have the victory suggested in Romans 8:2 “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus”. Jesus is the ultimate example of victory over the flesh.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen

"I appreciate your comments but I believe that the whole flow of Romans 7 and 8 indicates that Jesus overcame in the same flesh and he never sinned. "

Would you agree that the term "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:4 is referring to the condition of human beings detailed in chapter 7?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

14 hours ago, GHansen said:

Would you agree that the term "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:4 is referring to the condition of human beings detailed in chapter 7?

I am not willing to endorse your faulty logic here, based on a faulty or incomplete syllogism. Jesus never came under the dominion of Sin, as did Paul in his youth and beyond when he encountered the Law “Thou shalt not covet” which awoke in him all manner of coveting. When Paul, in the same nature as he possessed in Romans 7 was confronted by Christ he put off the old man and put on the new man. He started to cease from the works of the flesh and started to develop the fruits of the Spirit. He was no longer under the dominion of King Sin, as he had changed his allegiance and was now a Servant of God and His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Like Jesus he now crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts.

Galatians 5:22–24 (KJV): 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Galatians 2:20 (KJV): I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again GHansen,

"I am not willing to endorse your faulty logic here, based on a faulty or incomplete syllogism. 

Kind regards Trevor"

Simple question: Do you believe that the expression "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:4 refers to the flesh which has the law of sin and death working in it, is unable to do the good that it would, is able to will but unable to perform, etc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

15 minutes ago, GHansen said:

Simple question: Do you believe that the expression "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:4 refers to the flesh which has the law of sin and death working in it, is unable to do the good that it would, is able to will but unable to perform, etc.

Your question is attempting to impose your logic on Romans 8:4 in order to exclude Jesus from this expression, while ignoring the flow from Romans 7 to Romans 8. You have also ignored and have not answered most of what I have already posted. Jesus came in the flesh, the same nature as ourselves. Sin and its lusts never reigned over Jesus, but all others have failed and do fail on occasions.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
10 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again GHansen,

Your question is attempting to impose your logic on Romans 8:4 in order to exclude Jesus from this expression, while ignoring the flow from Romans 7 to Romans 8. You have also ignored and have not answered most of what I have already posted. Jesus came in the flesh, the same nature as ourselves. Sin and its lusts never reigned over Jesus, but all others have failed and do fail on occasions.

 

 

Kind regards Trevor

 

 

Fair question I asked.  Where did the expression "sinful flesh" come from? Paul didn't just introduce it for no reason or without a foundation. He's obviously summarizing what he said in chapter 7. Without thinking about the ramifications of such an admission but simply looking at the expression in its context, doesn't responsible Biblical interpretation require the admission that "sinful flesh" summarizes the condition described in chapter 7?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
3 hours ago, GHansen said:

Fair question I asked.  Where did the expression "sinful flesh" come from? Paul didn't just introduce it for no reason or without a foundation. He's obviously summarizing

what exactly is it thats so "obvious" to us?  What if we believe as does scripture show us clearly there are over 350 uses of the word "sinful flesh" in the Bible, depending on what version one has. I think some just want to argue with people. The CONTEXT of the phrase "sinful flesh"  is much different than your take. Your theory is just utterly wrong.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
4 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

what exactly is it thats so "obvious" to us? 

What should be obvious is that the expression "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:3 refers to the flesh he has just described in Romans 7. Chapter 7:5 clarifies this flesh as flesh which has passions through the law. That would be obvious to anyone who actually knows how to comprehend written English.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, GHansen said:

That would be obvious to anyone who actually knows how to comprehend written English.

so says the guy who didnt read my last post and respond to the most important point.

5 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

What if we believe as does scripture show us clearly there are over 350 uses of the word "sinful flesh" in the Bible, depending on what version one has.

"Sinful flesh" is much wider in scope than your scripture-whipping hooliganism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

6 hours ago, GHansen said:

What should be obvious is that the expression "sinful flesh" in Romans 8:3 refers to the flesh he has just described in Romans 7. Chapter 7:5 clarifies this flesh as flesh which has passions through the law. That would be obvious to anyone who actually knows how to comprehend written English.

I can agree in part, that “sinful flesh” or “sin’s flesh” has in the experience of Paul reacted to the 10th Commandment by producing all kinds of coveting. Yes, there is a connection between "sinful flesh" or "sin's flesh" and Romans 7. We experience the same failure at times, possibly not as a direct result of a Law, but because of wrong choices, and past bad habits that make the pathway to sin easier. These three categories could summarise “sin’s flesh”, where pride, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes dominate our way of life. If we stay in this environment, then we stay under the law of sin and death, in that our sins will result in our death, not only our death by inheritance from Adam, but also death by rejection at the Judgement Seat when Christ returns.

 

When we come to Christ, we have changed masters, and we come under a new environment, the law of the Spirit of life. We still die the death inherited from Adam, but pass into a status, if we are found worthy at the Judgement Seat, where we will not suffer the Second Death, but will be rewarded eternal life in the Kingdom. The expression "the Law of the Spirit of life" is a remarkable encouraging expression and could and should be considered and expanded in all its details.

 

Now the flesh that Paul and we possess is the same flesh before and after our conversion. Historically it can still be called “sin’s flesh”, and also called in a way “sin’s flesh” when we lapse, which can be often but the old habits should be broken and less often or nearly completely forsaken in our struggle against sin. I have a struggle in some areas, but have been helped in other areas. In my younger years I was a compulsive gambler, and eventually left this behind, but even then I had three short lapses, and need to deliberately avoid to this day certain gambling environments such as pubs and clubs and other occasions and opportunities. I will not describe my other and present struggles against sin, but need to use replacement therapy in some areas as per Ephesians 4 and other changes of thinking and environments, and a godly environment governed by the meditation on the Word of God is essential.

 

We have the example of Paul after his conversion, and he says that we should follow his example, even as he follows Christ 1 Corinthians 11:1. He was no longer in the environment of Romans 7, but still possessed the same flesh that he had in Romans 7. The flow of thought that I am trying to establish is that Jesus possessed the same flesh as Paul and that we possess, but he never allowed the passions of sin to have dominance, but overcame the lusts of the flesh in the very arena in which with all others brought failure. Jesus condemned “sin” (that is these passions of sins) in the flesh, that is the same type of flesh that we possess. Jesus was a specially prepared vessel, through birth and education, and he was sent to overcome sin and all of its effects. He was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
7 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

so says the guy who didnt read my last post and respond to the most important point.

"Sinful flesh" is much wider in scope than your scripture-whipping hooliganism

There is no "important point" in your post. The expression "sinful flesh" is used 1 time in Scripture, Romans 8:3. The Greek expression doesn't not appear in the LXX or any other NT passage or the Apocrypha. The English expression is only found one time, Romans 8:3 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
4 hours ago, TrevorL said:

I can agree in part, that “sinful flesh” or “sin’s flesh” has in the experience of Paul reacted to the 10th Commandment by producing all kinds of coveting.

Trevor, The best way to break down citadels of falsehood is one passage at a time. Again, you are all over the place, skating here, skating there, always across the surface of the texts. Any sensible person who studies Romans 8:3 in the context of chapter 7, upon which 8:3 is based, is going to realize that sinful flesh would have rendered it impossible for Christ to not sin. That's why it says he was in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. "Likeness" is a significant qualifier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

On 5/12/2019 at 11:03 AM, GHansen said:

The best way to break down citadels of falsehood is one passage at a time. Again, you are all over the place, skating here, skating there, always across the surface of the texts. Any sensible person who studies Romans 8:3 in the context of chapter 7, upon which 8:3 is based, is going to realize that sinful flesh would have rendered it impossible for Christ to not sin. That's why it says he was in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. "Likeness" is a significant qualifier

I accept in part what you have stated, that I have tried to explain Romans 8:3 by looking at other passages. If as you say we should stay with Romans 8:3, then I have not yet seen your explanation of ALL of this verse. You have spoken about “sinful flesh” and “the likeness of sinful flesh”.

Possibly you would like to consider the rest of Romans 8:3.

Romans 8:3 (KJV): For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

My assessment of your claims is that Jesus could not have come in sinful flesh, otherwise he would have also failed in the same way as Paul failed when he encountered the 10th Commandment.

Now look at the first part of Romans 8:3 (KJV): “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh”. There are two factors here. The first is the failure of the Law, and in the example given in Romans 7:7, it is the 10th Commandment that failed to achieve obedience. There is nothing much wrong with the Law itself, rather it is perfect and complete in itself, but the weakness became apparent when trying to gain conformity through the flesh.

The next phrase to be considered is “God sending his own Son” and this seems to be in contrast with the failure of the Law. Where the Law failed, God working in and through His Son was successful. Now we have discussed “the likeness of sinful flesh” and have had a difference of opinion on this, so at the moment we will put this on hold except to quote what you have stated in the following:

On 5/12/2019 at 9:49 AM, GHansen said:

The expression "sinful flesh" is used 1 time in Scripture, Romans 8:3. The Greek expression doesn't not appear in the LXX or any other NT passage or the Apocrypha. The English expression is only found one time, Romans 8:3 

Yes, “sinful flesh” occurs only once in our English translation, but this is based on the translation of two words “sin” and “flesh” which both occur again in this verse, so the phrase “sinful flesh” is not really unique. The Greek word S#266 hamartia is translated in the KJV as sin 172 times and sinful once. Thus the word sin occurs 14 times in the section of Romans 7, while sin occurs two more times in Romans 8:3, and the flesh also occurs two more times in Romans 8:3.

Looking at the next phrase “and for sin”, I understand this to represent that what God was to accomplish was to remedy all the problems associated with sin, actual transgressions and sins, but also for everything associated with sin, the cause and effects of sin. We have examples how Jesus dealt with some of these, such as healing the leper, and his treatment of the events around the woman taking in adultery. Compare the failure of the Law to correct these problems.

I have already commented on “condemned sin in the flesh”, but a few more aspects. I believe that where Jesus actually condemned sin is in the same flesh that had problems, the flesh that has resident within it the lusts of the flesh. Jesus rendered on no effect the lusts within his own flesh.

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
26 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again GHansen,

Yes, “sinful flesh” occurs only once in our English translation, but this is based on the translation of two words “sin” and “flesh” which both occur again in this verse, so the phrase “sinful flesh” is not really unique. The Greek word S#266 hamartia is translated in the KJV as sin 172 times and sinful once. Thus the word sin occurs 14 times in the section of Romans 7, while sin occurs two more times in Romans 8:3, and the flesh also occurs two more times in Romans 8:3.

Kind regards Trevor

Not sure of your point here. Whether it is Greek or English, "sinful flesh" occurs one time in Scripture. Whether the word "sinful" appears 250 times or 172 times, it is used to qualify "flesh" just once, in the entire Bible. And even that is qualified by the word "likeness." Jesus appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh. Since there is another word translated as "like passions" which is used to compare the nature of one man with another and that word is never used to compare fallen humanity with Christ, I do consider the expression "likeness of sinful flesh" significant.

 

I agree that we need to reads beyond Romans 8:3 to understand the full context of the expression "likeness of sinful flesh".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TrevorL

Greetings again GHansen,

1 hour ago, GHansen said:

I do consider the expression "likeness of sinful flesh" significant.

I appreciate your comments, but not sure if you agree on most or any of what I stated concerning the rest of Romans 8:3. Now throughout this thread you have more or less stated that Jesus did not come in “sinful flesh”, but “in the likeness of sinful flesh”. As you seem to suggest that this is different to “sinful flesh”, could you please give a description of “the likeness of sinful flesh”, in other words what was Jesus like during his ministry? I will let you use your own description, but perhaps you could answer, did he have within Him the lusts of the flesh? To what extent was Jesus different to us as far as his flesh was concerned, as we most possibly agree that Jesus came in "the flesh"?

Kind regards Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GHansen
On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 3:01 PM, TrevorL said:

"in other words what was Jesus like during his ministry?"

When I think of Jesus, I think of the Savior who fasted 40 days but performed a miracle to feed thousands who had been without food for a much briefer time i.e., he expected a lot more of Himself than he did of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...