From: "David Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Judy wrote: > Yes he had a flesh and blood body with the same limitations as the ones we have only he was not > "just like us" David. The difference is one of heart/holiness and God gave the Spirit without measure to Him (John 3:34) > We have nothing like that going on... and the Spirit quickens mortal bodies. I think we face here some differences in what our words mean. Let me say first that all the works of the flesh are not just limited to the flesh when a man yields to them. Obeying the flesh defiles the soul and defiles the spirit. Therefore, things like envy, murder, etc. can be works not just of the flesh, but of our soul and heart when we have given ourselves over to following the flesh. This is how I reconcile verses like Gal. 5:19 and James 1:14 which attribute these things to the flesh, with verses like Mat. 15:19 and 2 Cor. 7:1 which show evil to be something deeper within man. judyt: Yes I agree and this is why all three areas must be cleansed of filthiness, sanctification extends to the soul and spirit as well as the physical body. It seems to me that in your terminology, you use the word flesh not to refer to the physical body and behavior that might emanate from it, but as a metaphor to refer to all evil behavior regardless of its source. Therefore, when I say that Jesus had a flesh like ours, you think that I am saying that the sinfulness that characterizes men was a characteristic of Jesus. judyt: I see flesh as mankind as a unit or natural man. The unit that Gary and JD talk about. is not what I am saying. If you have tasted holiness and the deliverance from the power of sin within us, then you should have a good sense of the victory over the flesh that Jesus experienced. I believe that Jesus lived this victory all his life (unlike us) because he was unique, he was the Son of God, his spirit was strong from the beginning over the flesh, his mind was upon God from the very beginning, he was empowered with the Spirit without measure. judyt: I understand what you are saying David and yes I have experienced a measure of both. The reason I don't believe Jesus to be exactly the same as us goes back to the garden. It is my belief that when Adam chose to eat from the other tree (and these trees represent two kinds of wisdom) that another kingdom entered him bringing forth a different kind of fruit. I believe all sin to be rooted in fear. Fear that our needs will not be taken care of; control and all sorts of other phobias are rooted in fear; mankind as a whole is full of fear and it was envy rooted in fear that crucified Jesus. However, I see none of this residing in Him and at the end of his ministry right before he was arrested he said "the prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me" which is amazing since he has all kinds of strongholds in the rest of us. I see salvation as a walk of grace with progressive deliverance even though at the beginning we can say it is so by faith. As to Jesus experiencing temptation and every human affliction so that he understands our infirmities - I understand this as a combination of his physical human limitations along with the experience of the cross where the curse for every sin imaginable rested upon him alone for a period of time or until "It was finished!" Does this make any sense to you? I would be interested in your thoughts. >From my perspective, all of this gave him power over whatever desires of his flesh that would be contrary to God. Therefore, he became perfect through suffering, just like us. He experienced intense temptation, the greatest when he went to the cross and sweat drops of blood as his flesh cried out against the course he had taken but his spirit and soul kept the course, contrary to the desires of his flesh. Something else about terminology. I suspect that what you might call flesh, I would call soul. So when you hear me use the word flesh, your mind is thinking about his soul, and you cannot imagine Jesus with a wicked soul. judyt: No, when you say flesh I think of mankind or the whole man with a darkened spirit, a soul trained in unrighteousness and ungodliness, and a body wearing the curse of ungodly choices which is the condition of everyone outside of Christ and some who are in Him but have not yet learned how to walk and overcome by faith. I I certainly agree that Jesus did not have a wicked soul. Jesus was righteous and pure in every way. Much of my perspective from my terms comes from recognizing that when Paul said "flesh" he meant flesh, as in physical body. History helps me accept this because I understand the Greek mindset of those Paul wrote his letters to, the Platonic, mindset which drew a sharp dichotomy between the material and the spiritual, with the material world being that which is subject to corruption and change and evil, but the spiritual world that which is perfect and pure and the archetype for the material world. judyt: I didn't know all that - shows what a strong hold the adversary had on Plato - pure spirit indeed while he was busy using him to disciple Aristotle and deceive. Then the RCC/Augustine embraced Aristotle and the adversary had the ear of the reigning professing church. Biology helps me accept this because it is completely materialistic and almost all biologists deny any existence of soul and spirit. Biologists explain all behavior with only the perspective of the physical, namely, the flesh and genetics. I realize that you are likely to think that my studies and educational background put me at a disadvantage, perhaps polluting the way I read the Bible, but I sincerely tell you that I think just the opposite in this particular case. judyt: In most areas I don't have any problem at all with your understanding and so much of it is a real blessing. However, I wonder if this may not be your achilles heel because your discipline comes from something so ungodly and diverse. I was perusing a book about Aristotle which claimed that "prior to modern times the field of philosophy included hard science (physics, math, biology, physiology, meteorology, and astronomy) as well as social science (politics and psychology), humane studies (rhetoric, literature, religion) and a full range of philosophical topics (metaphysics, epistemology, lotic, ethics and so forth... so that more than a millenium later Aristotle was perceived among common folk as a "magus" or a cross between a sage and a magician. I'd say he was rooted in the wrong tree and that to try to understand scripture in the light of anything he wrote pointless. I think it has helped me tremendously to understand the issues Paul was raising with words like flesh, carnal, spirit, mind, etc. judyt: I wouldn't trust Plato/Aristotle or the Gk language to define truth for me. It is much safter to allow scripture to interpret scripture. which is what Luther who had also been trained in all those disciplines learned late in life. judyt Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
