Of all the feedback I received from readers of my first version of this book, there has been nothing as overtly helpful to so many people as what I explain in this chapter. It is, I believe, one of the largest theological puzzle pieces missing in the church today, and without it, the power of the gospel seems to remain largely inaccessible to many people.
Up to this point, I have argued that Christians do not actually desire to sin, although they still feel these desires, which occur in the flesh. So now, what is the flesh, and why is it still hanging around? What am I, and how am I different than my flesh? Without a clear answer to these questions, I don't think most Christians are able to properly dissociate from their flesh and identify with Christ, which results in a relatively powerless gospel. All the more reason that Satan has kept us from seeing it.
As a fair warning, some may feel that this chapter is unnecessarily dense, which I understand, but my experience has convinced me that there is a great need for the level of depth in which I cover this topic. Those who do not relate to this need are probably just not aware of the various opposing beliefs that exist in Christian circles different than their own. All that to say, it is actually a very simple message that some of you will be able to digest very quickly, at which point you may decide to skip all the additional explanation and just move on. Otherwise, I will do my best to address as many theological concerns as I can and, as always, give you a firm biblical foundation to stand on.
I also recognize that these teachings may be unfairly or preemptively dismissed, as I have personally experienced time and again. It is important to be cautious of those who are too quick to reject uncommon perspectives. There is a spirit of fear and control at work, even in the highest ranks of the church, which resists ideas that diverge from established traditions or familiar voices. Therefore, I encourage you to thoughtfully examine the evidence I'm presenting, using your discernment, your Bible, the Spirit, the church, and the faith that God has given you. I trust that if you do that, you will eventually come to the same conclusions and be blessed by it, for he has given us the Spirit as a teacher to bring us into unity. Much like many of the arguments I have made so far, I think you will see that I do not stretch or bend the scriptures to try to make a point that is not already quite plain.
Flesh and Spirit
In the most basic sense, humans are composed of two parts — spirit and flesh. (I will address another popular idea later in the chapter, which says that humans are composed of three parts.) Biblically speaking, these two parts refer to the immaterial and material parts of us, respectively. This is not necessarily to say that the two are separable — for each part needs the other to make us the way God intended us to be — but distinguishable.
In the Bible, a person's spirit is the innermost part of the person, sometimes referred to as the "heart" or the "soul." This is what makes you you, just as the Spirit of the Lord is the Lord (see 2 Corinthians 3:17). Therefore, Christ and the Christian are one spirit (see 1 Corinthians 6:17). It is here that my true will, my true character, and my true emotions reside. Most importantly for our discussion, this is the “I” that loves God, that repents and believes, or otherwise, the “I” that rejects God and willingly goes after the passions of the flesh.
This is what gets most of the negative attention in the church today. In other words, if I feel empty and depressed, then I determine that "I" am empty and depressed (in spirit). If I feel angry or hurt, then "I" must be angry or hurt. If I feel anxious and worried, then "I" need a cocktail. If I have certain sexual preferences, they are what "I" prefer. If I continue to struggle with an addiction, then "I" am an addict. If I feel a compulsion toward something, then "I" must want it. If I said something that I should not have said or did something I should not have done, then "I" am at fault. If I lack the discipline to pray, then "I" do not love God enough. Etc. The general assumption is that the corruption, the fallen nature, the sin, etc., are a part of me, but they are actually a part of the flesh. As the wise Master said to his disciple, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41; Mark 14:38, my italics).
With that out of the way, the concept of “flesh” deserves greater attention here, as it is a more nuanced and misunderstood word.
What exactly is the flesh? Let us start with its most rudimentary meaning. Flesh (Greek: sarx) is literally the soft tissue of the body. When you clean a fish, you separate its flesh from its bones. As such, "flesh" is also the term used for all living creatures on earth (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 15:39). Regarding humans, flesh describes the type of body we are in. Hence, the phrase "body of flesh" that we see in Colossians 1:22 and 2:11. This flesh-body is earthly, carnal, and mortal, as compared to the body that we will receive when we are resurrected, which will be heavenly, spiritual, and immortal (see 1 Corinthians 15:44), though still material.
As we saw in Romans 7, Paul uses the terms flesh, members, and body interchangeably, which is especially clear when we examine what he associates with each of them. Of the flesh, he says that sin dwells within it (7:17, cf. 7:5, 7:14), that "nothing good" dwells in it (7:18), and that with it, he serves the law of sin (7:25). Of the members, he says they contain a law of sin that wages war against him (7:23). And of the body, he describes it as a "body of death" from which he needs deliverance (7:24). It takes no scholar to realize that, in each of these instances, he is referring to the same thing. That thing is the earthly, material body of flesh that we were all born into.
Additionally, given that “flesh” is the term used for all living creatures, it carries with it the connotation of that which is “animal” in nature as opposed to godly in nature. Thus, it is no surprise that obedience to the passions of the flesh is what the Bible calls sin. In other words, it is not okay for us to be “like irrational animals, creatures of instinct…” (2 Peter 2:12; cf. Jude 10), obeying every impulse as animals do, with no regard for spiritual things. But since our bodies are earthly, it is only natural that they are enticed by the things of this earth, desiring what is temporal, for they are passing away and will not benefit from eternal pursuits. In this way, "the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God" (Romans 8:7), for God calls us to eternal pursuits.
Now, in the same way that animals have bodily desires and impulses apart from any sort of morally conscious and immaterial spirit, so do we. This is important because it shows us that our material body has an immaterial component to it. This makes a lot of sense if you consider that chief among our organs is the brain, in which a wide spectrum of thoughts and feelings occur, both positive and negative. In this way, the flesh has a mind of its own.
To be clear, I am not concerned with benign bodily impulses, like needing to drink water, sleep, or use the bathroom. Nor am I concerned with bodily pleasure, like enjoying good food, the warmth of the sun, or intimacy with my wife. Within the confines of righteousness, we are free to enjoy everything in the Lord. I should not need to say this, but unfortunately, some people will get caught up in vain discussions about how these things relate to the subject at hand, though they simply do not.
What we are concerned with here are the desires and feelings that are contradictory to the character of God, which we might recognize as temptation. Along with things like lust, hunger, anxiety, depression, and addiction, the brain is also capable of such things as pride, fear, anger, greed, jealousy, and resentment. This being the case, it is quite easy to mistake this “mind” of the flesh with one’s true thoughts and feelings — believing that because one feels it, it is how one truly feels, or because one desires it, it is what one desires, etc. This can be true but is not necessarily true. In actuality, all sorts of things occur in our brains that make us think all sorts of thoughts and feel all sorts of feelings, but they have nothing to do with who we really are, what we actually believe, or what we truly want.
I would assume that we all have experienced this many times, whether we have recognized it or not. Think of an occasion when you were genuinely convicted of sin; you repented and determined to do right; you had every intent and desire to move forward in righteousness; and then, in no time at all, you were again tempted to do the very thing which you had just turned away from. And then, after giving in to the temptation, you felt the exact same grief and conviction as you did before. What is going on here? Do you hate the sin or love the sin? Which is proof of what your spirit truly desires — the sin or the conviction that follows it? According to scripture, it is the latter. Assuming a sincerely repentant heart, it was not you who desired to sin, but your flesh.
The desires of the flesh may appear to be a part of you, but if you confess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, then you must not confuse them with you. As I noted above, this is what Christians have done all their lives, but please hear me now. It must stop. It is, quite literally, spiritual suicide. You are not your flesh, and your flesh is not always an expression of your spirit or will. If you are going to walk fully in the victory that Jesus has won for you, you must be able to distinguish between your spirit and your flesh, between you and your body.
Why This Isn't Gnosticism
Let me pause here and briefly address the most common contention I have faced with this teaching. In the early church, one of the most prevalent heresies — derived from a belief system called "Gnosticism" — was that the material world (including the physical body) is bad and the immaterial (or spiritual) is good. There are many reasons that this view is dangerous and unbiblical, but among them are that it denies the goodness of God's creation, it led to the belief that Jesus never actually came in the flesh (i.e., a physical body), and it contradicts our Christian hope of bodily resurrection. Let it be known that these are all legitimate concerns that I share with my Christian brethren and that my teaching (and, more importantly, Paul's teaching) should not be confused with any of this. But having misunderstood what I believe, or worse, having misrepresented it, people have labeled me a false teacher and a heretic. They hear me teach about the body of flesh being the source of our sinful passions, and they immediately associate me with Gnosticism.
But nowhere have I said that our bodies are inherently evil. Our bodies are not evil; rather, their desires are manipulated by evil to deceive us into sin. This does not contradict the idea that they were also created good and redeemed in Christ. We can recognize that sinful passions occur/exist within the body while simultaneously believing that our bodies are ultimately tools given to us to carry out God's righteous will, thus making them inherently good. Nowhere is this juxtaposition more clear than in the following verses:
"Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness." (Romans 6:12-13)
In the first verse, it is worth clarifying that according to Greek grammar, the “its” in the latter phrase refers to the “mortal body." Therefore, it would be accurately translated like this: “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey your body’s passions.” This clearly substantiates my claim that sinful passions exist/occur within the body. But despite this, we see in the very next verse that we are to think of our "members" (or flesh-body) as instruments for righteousness, which they truly are. Thus, according to Paul's definition here, we sin when we obey the passions of the mortal body. We are not supposed to be subservient to our bodies but to have control over them so they would be in full service to God.
The Gnostics also believed that our bodies are like prisons that we need to escape. But this is incorrect (see 2 Corinthians 5:4). Our bodies are like temples that need to be cleansed and re-appropriated to their original purpose. It is no coincidence that after Jesus cleansed the temple, he compared the temple to his own body (see John 2:19-21), which would be destroyed and raised up again. This act was highly prophetic, pointing toward the true spiritual temple, which is us and our bodies.
Why is it that Jesus, the righteous Son of God, was able to be tempted (just like we are) while he was on the earth? And why is it that, since his resurrection, he can no longer be tempted? The former is because he put on a body of flesh, and the latter is because he put off the body of flesh, being raised in a spiritual body. This is how we, too, will never be tempted again in eternity. Nowhere does scripture suggest that we await new hearts, for we already have them. But our hope is for new bodies (see Romans 8:23), just like Jesus's, where there is nothing corrupt in our material nature to wage war against our souls (see 1 Peter 2:11).
A deep fear of Gnosticism, I believe, is what has caused the mass confusion in our church today regarding the flesh. As is often the case, the Devil uses heresy not only to make people believe one lie — that material existence is evil — but then to distort the truth that is being defended, creating another lie entirely — that there is nothing corrupt in our material nature, and evil is only in our hearts. In other words, we have tried so hard to preserve the theology of the goodness of our bodies that we have blinded ourselves to the corruption within them. Any association of "bad" with "physical" is immediately given the Gnostic-heresy label, so we're left with only one place for the bad to exist — in the spirit, meaning in the truest part of us. Although the flesh is fundamentally external and material, we have been forced to internalize and spiritualize it. What better way for Satan to distort the gospel than to convince believers that sinful desire is still a product of their wicked hearts, despite God's work of regeneration.
Unfortunately, for all the reasons mentioned above, I think there will still be many Christians who vehemently disagree with my teaching that the term "flesh" refers to the body. And as a result, they will continue to produce confusion among God's people regarding the gospel and our newness in Christ. But the fact is, if anyone is uncomfortable with the idea that the body is the source of sinful passions, even if they overlook everything I've said about the flesh so far, they still have to deal with all the scriptures that relate sin to the members (Greek: melos) and the body (Greek: soma), not just the flesh. Regarding these two terms, there is simply no argument for them meaning anything other than what we all know they mean. The body refers to the physical body, and members refer explicitly to parts of the body (like eyes, tongue, arms, and legs), sometimes being translated simply as body parts. Besides the verses we've already covered which contain these terms, here are some others:
"We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin." (Romans 6:6, my italics)
"But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness." (Romans 8:10, my italics)
"For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live." (Romans 8:13, my italics)
"Put to death therefore [your members that are on the earth]: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry." (Colossians 3:5, my italics)
"What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war [in your members]?" (James 4:1, my italics)
Notice how, in those last two verses, the translators of the ESV do not translate it as "members," although they should. Instead, they simply translate it as "Put to death what is earthly in you," and, "Is it not that your passions are at war within you?" which only highlights the confusion we have in the church today. These scriptures do not say that sinful passions are in you but in your body parts. That's a big difference!
Earthly Distinctions
We have discovered that the flesh is associated with sinful passions, but in addition to this, the term "flesh" can refer to almost anything about ourselves that is exclusive to our lives on earth. For our flesh bodies are what make us "earthly," and they tether us to this realm. These earthly distinctions include race, nationality, sex, social status, education, personality traits, etc. You can see all of these and more in the following verses:
"For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female [sex], for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:27-28)
"For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh—though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church…" (Philippians 3:3-6)
"Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all." (Colossians 3:11)
See how Paul contrasts the old distinctions of the flesh with the new reality of (and unity we have in) Christ. Though he does not use the word "flesh" in all of these verses, it is the subject of what he is talking about. It is the "old man" that we have put off (see Colossians 3:9, cf. 2:11), with all its earthly distinctions. And the reason this matters so much is that it directly relates to our ability to identify with Christ (or put on Christ), as we are instructed to do to grow. For we cannot identify with Christ and identify with the flesh at the same time.
In 2 Corinthians 5:16, Paul writes, "Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer." What does he mean, then, that we once regarded Christ according to the flesh? Does he mean that we, including his own disciples, regarded him as a sinner? Not at all. He means that we regarded him according to earthly distinctions: as a man born of Mary, from the town of Nazareth, a Jew of the tribe of Judah, a carpenter, etc. But we can no longer regard him according to these earthly distinctions because he is not of this earth. The fact that he was born of Mary was only true in the flesh, whereas, in the spirit, he is born of God. The fact that he was from Nazareth was only true in the flesh. But in the spirit, he is from heaven. The fact that he was a carpenter was only true in the flesh. But in the spirit, he is most certainly not a carpenter (though he is the builder of a spiritual house).
So then, anyone who is one with Christ is also no longer defined by any earthly distinctions (see 2 Corinthians 5:17). For in Christ, we are not in the flesh but in the Spirit (see Romans 8:12).
Therefore, am I an American? In the flesh, yes, but I am not to think that way, for I now live by the Spirit, who is not American. My nationality is not a part of my true identity, for it is only related to my life on this earth and is thereby temporary. In the spirit, in truth, in Christ, I am a citizen of heaven (see Philippians 3:20). "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). My fellow citizens — the citizens of my home country — are not those born in America, but those born in heaven. Only by renewing my mind this way will I discover its effects on how I live and relate to my earthly country.
In the same way, my family on this earth — while I love them deeply — are only my family according to the flesh. They are not my true family unless they are born again, in which case they are my brothers and sisters in Christ. Jesus says as much in the following passage:
"While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, 'Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?' And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, 'Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.'” (Matthew 12:46–50)
We share an earthly father with our earthly siblings, but those relationships are passing away along with this earth and, therefore, are not as important. We will only be in eternity with our brothers and sisters who share the same heavenly Father, the same spiritual blood. This is the Christ-reality that we are called to put on by faith. For if we do not renew our minds in such a way, then we will continue to be subject to all sorts of corruption, from which God has saved us.
Using this example of family, if we think of our earthly family as the "most real" family that we have, we will inevitably seek to preserve these relationships even when they require us to compromise our faith, neglect our brothers and sisters in Christ, etc. This is a matter of priority in our lives, which begins with deciding which reality is more true and more important — the carnal reality (which is destined for destruction) or the spiritual reality (which remains forever).
This is why Jesus said, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). While the Bible clearly instructs us to love and take care of our own earthly families (see 1 Timothy 5:8), this cannot be a priority over doing the will of God, which requires that we love our spiritual family above all things. The first or primary reality — the Truth that sets us free — is that our true brothers and sisters are those born of God, just like us. If we start there in our minds, thinking spiritually like God, we will be transformed by it, and we will learn how to properly manage each kind of relationship in our lives, those in heaven and on earth.
One more example of a flesh distinction, which I find to be quite insightful, is that of introversion and extroversion. A lot of people, including Christians, identify rather strongly as either introverts or extroverts. It has become something they hold true about themselves, almost to the point of saying, "God made me this way, and it is good."
But let me present you with one simple question: Is Christ an introvert or an extrovert? No, he is love. We should easily recognize that it is quite foolish to call him either, for he is spirit, and these distinctions are not spiritual. Therefore, if you are going to put on Christ, you cannot put on introversion or extroversion. You must put on love, wherein you will find that both introversion and extroversion become completely irrelevant.
Love may compel someone to pursue and engage with people, and love may compel someone to be away from people, alone with God. Jesus did both while in the flesh, and in doing so, he was not revealing the introversion and extroversion of God but the love of God. One thing we know, then, is that whether or not his own flesh was inclined to introversion or extroversion (and I am sure that it was, just like all of us), he disregarded the flesh and walked by the Spirit, in love. Therefore, learn to love, and you will realize that these labels are irrelevant at best and demonic at worst, requiring you to walk under the dominion of the flesh and preventing you from stepping into your new life in Christ.
The immediate applications here are quite endless when you realize how much we, as a church, have succumbed to setting our minds on the flesh. In Christ, we are not male or female. In Christ, we are not Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, or Presbyterian. In Christ, we are not white or black or Latino or Asian. In Christ, we are not richer or poorer than one another. We are not more famous or more popular than one another. In Christ, we are one. We discover who we truly are in him, not in the flesh.
Flesh and the Law
Lastly, "flesh" sometimes carries the connotation of human doing, effort, or works of the law. Paul tells the Philippians to “put no confidence in the flesh” (Philippians 3:3), meaning that they should put no confidence in their works with regard to their salvation. Here, confidence in the flesh is to believe one has “a righteousness of [one’s] own that comes from the law” (3:9), which is contrasted with “the righteousness from God that depends on faith” (3:9). In another letter, to the Galatians, he says, “Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:3). His point is that they were saved by the power of God (a gift they received through faith), but now they have reverted to trusting in their own efforts (flesh) for spiritual growth.
Another helpful example can be found in Galatians 4 when Paul uses the story of Abraham’s two sons — Ishmael and Isaac — to allegorically make this point. In case you don't remember, after God promised Abraham (Abram) a son through Sarah (Sarai), years passed without any pregnancy. So, presumedly growing weary, and with his wife's go-ahead, Abraham had a child with his servant, Hagar, instead. That child was Ishmael. Only years later, when Sarah was 90 years old, did she finally give birth to a son, and his name was Isaac. He was the true son that God promised, and his conception/birth is regarded as a miracle due to his mother's age.
But back to the point: Paul says that Ishmael was born “according to the flesh,” and Isaac was born “according to the Spirit” (Galatians 4:29). Obviously, Isaac was born in the flesh just like Ishmael (for he was still a normal human), but Ishmael was born according to the flesh, which means that his birth was accomplished by human will and effort to bring about God’s promise. Contrarily, Isaac was born according to the Spirit, which means he was born by God’s doing through faith.
Thus, this is part of the inherent meaning when Paul speaks about those who “live according to the flesh” (Romans 8:5, my italics). In other words, living according to the flesh does not necessarily mean that we are setting our minds on disobedience but that we are operating under the law, relying on our own efforts and not on the grace of God. That is to say, we can earnestly strive to obey God (to realize his promises) while still living "according to the flesh." We will simply fail at what we are trying to do because of the “law of sin that dwells in [our] members [i.e. flesh]” (Romans 7:23).
Flesh or False Self?
At this point, I'd like to address a couple of common misconceptions. There are many Christians who speak of the flesh as the "false self." In this understanding, the flesh is conveyed as immaterial (even spiritual) and akin to yourself. It is a person and a will rather than the bodily nature in which the person resides. And therefore, in this paradigm, every believer has two selves dueling inside of them — one sinful and one righteous.
The most basic problem we should recognize in this view is that it completely contradicts the inherent meaning of flesh, which we discussed in great detail above. Again, this soft tissue that we call "flesh" does produce immaterial thoughts and feelings, which is usually where the confusion lies. But in the same way that we do not conflate the software in a computer with the user of a computer, neither should we conflate the thoughts and feelings of the flesh with the person inside the body of flesh. The software (flesh-mind) runs on the hardware (flesh-body), both of which we would rightly call the "computer" (flesh), and not to be confused with the "user" (person/spirit) who just interacts with it.
Next, we run into a very practical problem. If the flesh and the spirit are two “selves” — one good, one bad — that you must choose between in any given moment, then there must be a third self to make the choice, which is intuitively ridiculous. Otherwise, which self do you hold responsible for your actions? Say, for example, you do something you are not proud of. You later are convicted and desire to repent. In an effort to grow, you think back to the occasion and investigate how you allowed the sin to occur. According to this "false self" paradigm, the old/false self is responsible for all sin, and the new/true self is responsible for all righteousness. So first, you think to blame the false self. But if you have any integrity whatsoever, you cannot really blame him; he is a sinner just doing his job. And he is not really you, anyway. He is the old, false you. So you have no choice but to blame your new and true self since he is the one who is always supposed to do right. It is his job to kill off the old self, and he failed.
But wait, I thought that all sin came from the old self and all righteousness from the new self? Then how did the new self allow the sin in the first place? By definition, he could not have (or else he does not appear to be very new). You are now back to blaming the old self, and it starts all over.
It is quite a maddening process! And once you finally realize through logic that there must be a third self who truly makes the choices, you see that these other two selves are really just different expressions of you. There is not actually a true you and a false you; there is only one real you. There is not actually an old you and a new you; there is only one current you. Thus, you are an ever-changing mixture of old and new, good and evil, righteous and sinful, free and captive, dead and resurrected — however impossible and paradoxical that may seem. This is the only logical conclusion of the dueling-selves theology. And it is altogether contradictory to the amazing gospel of Jesus Christ, which says that the one you has been made completely new.
I imagine speaking to the Apostles in heaven and saying, “Hey, when you wrote ‘flesh,’ did you actually mean flesh?” Or “When you said ‘body' and 'members,' did you really mean body and members?” Stifled by such an obvious question, they would simply say, “Yeah, that is what I meant. How else could I have said it?”
Oh, how the Devil has twisted the simple meaning of the biblical text! Read it like a child, and you will see that it means exactly what it says. As you are beginning to see now, this is not a matter of mere semantics or personal opinion. In the New Testament epistles, sin is consistently portrayed as obedience to the passions/desires of the flesh, the members, and the body, not the self, the heart, or the spirit. All that to say, this slight distortion of the term “flesh” has made the original apostolic message nearly incomprehensible. For if we go on thinking that the flesh, with its thoughts and desires, is a part of ourselves, it renders us incapable of identifying with Christ.
Body, Soul, and Spirit
In this chapter, I have presented a paradigm for the make-up of a human that consists of two parts — body/flesh and soul/spirit. It seems clear to me that there is a strong biblical precedent for this (see, for example, Matthew 26:41; Mark 14:38; 1 Corinthians 5:5; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 2:11; and James 2:26). But you should be aware that there exists another very popular paradigm for the make-up of a human, which consists of three parts — body, soul, and spirit. This paradigm is most obviously seen in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and then revealed less obviously in a small handful of other New Testament verses: Hebrews 4:12; 1 Corinthians 2:14-15; 15:44; and Jude 19. Quite honestly, I do not believe that entering the depths of that debate would be fruitful here, but nor do I think it is necessary. I only want to point out a problem with how the three-part view is typically understood and provide a solution that will reconcile both paradigms. I feel strongly that both are biblical.
If you insist that we are made of three parts — body, soul, and spirit — then I must address the most fundamental flaw with how it is usually portrayed or understood. The "soul," in this theology, is nearly always said to consist of a person's mind, will, and emotions. Everything a person thinks, desires, and feels occurs within the soul. But we should see now that this doesn't adequately explain our condition. Why? Because some thoughts and feelings are our own, and other thoughts and feelings are not our own. The former exist within the spirit and the latter in the flesh, so to place them all in the "soul," as if they come from the same place, is a mistake that leads us back to the same problem as before, where we are just a mixture of both good and evil.
Think about it. Your spirit — just like the Spirit of God with whom you are joined — has to have a mind, a will, and emotions. For God, who is spirit, has all these things. And these must be truly yours, for your spirit is the thing that is most truly you. What is your soul, then? It is the mind, will, and emotions of the flesh. It is the immaterial aspect of the flesh, whereas the body is the material aspect of the flesh. Interestingly enough, the Greek word psyche is the word we translate as "soul." In today's world, we still call this flesh-mind the psyche, and the study of it is what the field of psychology is devoted to. (Psychology, then, despite studying the mind, still operates only in the realm of the flesh and, therefore, can only provide solutions for the flesh, not the spirit.)
Today, many Christians agree, doctrinally, that we are one with Christ and that our true identity is in him. But because of their wrong understanding about the soul — as the seat of all one's thoughts and feelings — they cannot disassociate themselves from the thoughts and feelings of the flesh. And because they cannot do that, they cannot, on any real level, identify with Christ, especially in the midst of temptation or in the aftermath of sin. Therefore, this subtle difference in belief is not trivial but of the utmost importance in walking by faith.
But with the understanding I've provided here, where (body + soul = flesh) we can easily see how these two seemingly different paradigms can co-exist.
flesh + spirit
(body + soul) + spirit
The two paradigms are the same, except that one provides an additional breakdown of flesh into its material and immaterial components.
Just keep in mind that if you use the term "soul" exclusively for the mind of the flesh, it will only work in some cases. It will not work in verses like 1 Peter 2:11: "[A]bstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul." In this case, Peter uses "soul" in the same way as Paul uses "spirit" — as the truest part of you, which the flesh is opposed to (cf. Galatians 5:17).
Or consider Jesus' teaching in Matthew 10:28: "[D]o not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Again, Jesus uses the two-part paradigm here, where "soul" is used interchangeably with "spirit" to convey the immaterial you that goes on after your body is dead.
Temptation
"Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am being tempted by God,' for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire." (James 1:13-14)
Of all the scriptures that seem to contradict the idea that believers don't actually desire to sin, this one in James is at the top of the list (understandably so). That being the case, I would like to help us all see why it does not contradict any of our previous conclusions.
As we can see in this verse, it says that temptation — i.e., the feeling that we want to do something sinful — is the product of our own desires. No doubt, this appears to conflict with what we found in Romans 7, for example, which says that these sinful desires are not what we truly want. For clarity on this issue, we must examine the incarnation — i.e., Jesus' life in the flesh. For, despite being the righteous Son of God, in whom there is/was no sin, he was still tempted "in every respect… as we are" (Hebrews 4:15).
Some people have imagined that Jesus' temptations were only "external" forces, outside himself, but never something he actually felt that he wanted to do. When he was tempted in the desert, for instance, they would say that the temptation was the Devil acting upon Jesus as an external force, but not that Jesus felt any real persuasion or desire within himself to listen to the Devil. I would argue quite strongly that this betrays everything we know about the nature of temptation.
If I heard a voice in my head (or outside my head, for that matter) that told me to kill my family, I would not call this "temptation." I may call it bizarre. I may call it demonic. But I would not call it tempting, for there is nothing within me, not even within my flesh, that desires to kill my family. Although for someone else, it could be tempting, for me, it simply is not. As James points out in this passage, temptation is when "one is lured and enticed by his own desire." So, when the Devil tempted Jesus in the desert, if Jesus was not lured and enticed by his own desire, then he was never actually tempted.
This leads us to a very important observation. If Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, then according to both James' definition and our own experience of what it is like to be tempted, Jesus must have experienced a real desire to sin. And now, let us pair this with another teaching of Jesus:
"But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.” (Matthew 15:18–20)
Here, Jesus reveals that a person is only defiled by evil thoughts that come from the heart. This means that if Jesus never sinned, then he never had an evil thought flow from his heart, and yet, he did feel evil desires and experience evil thoughts. Right here, we have another biblical precedent for the fact that not all desires exist within the heart. Is it not clear, then, that the sinful desires that tempted Jesus were the result of him being in a body of flesh? The passage from James above says that God cannot be tempted. Well, Jesus is God, and he was tempted. How is that possible? Because God, for a short time in history, became flesh (see Romans 8:3). And why is he tempted no longer? Because he is no longer in a body of flesh but a spiritual body.
Thus, in all this, we can see that being lured and enticed by our own desires, as James describes it, is only another way of saying that we are lured and enticed by the desires of our flesh, which is our own body. This is no different than in the garden of Gethsemane when Jesus prays: "Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done" (Luke 22:42). One could ask: What was Jesus' true will here? Was it to avoid the suffering of the cross, or was it to obey the Father's will? Can't we see that both wills exist? And isn't it plain which one was truly Jesus' will? Thy will be done.
I can’t wait til book comes out so I can really study all that is being written here. !!!
I like the context that the Spirit now in me is a baby and redeems my soul or producea new mindsets, new willingness, and new emotions.
All good stuff.