sin in the flesh

[Iymus]

Heb 2:14 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;
Heb 2:15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Why is the writer telling us that Jesus took part of the same flesh and blood as the children (of God)?

1. I believe this is explained in the next two verses.

Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Is it not so that sin might be destroyed and death conquered?

is it not sin that has the power of death? The wages of sin is death.

2. Penalty or Wages of Sin seem destroyed for those that repent and not commit a sin unto death.

1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

Luk 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Now look what Paul says, because he says the same thing as the writer to the Hebrews:

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 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:
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Both writers want to drive home the importance of Jesus being of the same flesh as us so that sin and death might be conquered. The flesh we share is called "flesh of sin" and has in it sin. Which Paul says is "sin in the flesh"

3. To my knowledge death is conquered for the repentant thru the wages or penalties of Sin being paid for, and us having a mediator or advocate between man and God.

Sin is the inclination and act of our own desires which transgresses law and obedience.

A woman has a nature or inclination to bring forth children from her womb but if she is not acted upon she won't.

We have an inclination to Sin but if our temptation or lust is not acted upon then I don't see how we can bare the fruit of sin or sin be fertilized.

4. Notice the temptation and desires that lead up to sin.

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

5. In any case when it comes to the mechanics of sin, it seems that James broke the process down clearly.

Jas 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Jas 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
Jas 1:16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Is "sin in the flesh" the same as "lust in the flesh"?

I think it is, but I welcome anyone who can explain that it isn't.

There is no such thing as "sin", not in the sense that it has been presented in orthodoxy. The phrase itself , "sin in the flesh" refers to ignorance (not knowing) of exactly what the "flesh" is and why it exist in the first place. In other words, it is the "flesh" ( material reality ) itself that causes us to be in ignorance of who we are and thereby causes us to err in our ways.

 

[oldbadger]

Adultery is sin. What is adultery but to have sex with someone other than your spouse. Is it not the flesh that desires the pleasure of sex?

Nope. It's a breach of marriage contract to commit adultery.
A work colleague of mine and his wife enjoyed adultery on a regular basis...... they were swingers. And they were totally open and honest with each other.

But all creatures are drawn to sex. It's nature.

 

[oldbadger]

Adultery or Sin is the action of a desire or lust. Desires or temptations are generally not considered sin unless acted upon.

Jesus said differently to that.

Jesus was far more aggressive about hypocritical thoughts, you know.

 

[oldbadger]

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 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:
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

It was impossible for the law to save the Jews because the law was made weak by the flesh.

All Pauline rambling.
Nothing from Jesus like that.

 

[BilliardsBall]

and what is "in the flesh"?

Try using English less than 400 years out of date.

Try being kind and/or reading the Bible for five seconds or more before stepping in.

 

[Iymus]

Jesus said differently to that.

Reference???

All Pauline rambling.
Nothing from Jesus like that.

Not necessarily. At least I dont think so. However fine line between encouragement and destruction. In context the words of Paul seem as encouragement. However out of context there is some that easily seems like leading one down a path of destruction.

2Pe 3:15 KJV And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 3:16 KJV As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

 

[nPeace]

I cannot oppose you here. (

Oh. Good for you.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Oh. Good for you.

Doesn’t mean I won’t keep trying.

 

[LightofTruth]

Anyway, it seems my fears were well founded. From the subsequent posts on this thread it looks as if @LightofTruth does indeed think, quite wrongly, that these verses are all about sex, ignoring all the illuminating discussion that has gone before.

I think I'll leave them to it.....

It is a misconception to think that all desires of the flesh relate to sex.

 

[LightofTruth]

Just consulted the Torah "Exo 20:17". Perhaps keep on looking at a woman with lust leads to coveting. Perhaps this is a reminder of what happened to David when he kept on looking at the wife of another and the actions that ensued.

Perhaps for those who are intentionally looking at pornographic imagery or going to brothels in our modern day which leads towards such behavior.

In any case intentional lust or temptation does not seem the same as non intentional lust or temptation.

Exo 20:17 KJV Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ***, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

What if you mortify or suppress lust by not acting on it; is that lust still sin?

Rom 8:13 KJV For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Col 3:5 KJV Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
Col 3:6 KJV For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:

It just seems disingenuous when someone says lust can be considered sin with no context. The Jews knowing the law perhaps unlike us would have the context. But just my opinion.

If there is no law than there is no sin. We would simply be as the rest of God's creatures going about only to satisfy the desire of our flesh not knowing or caring about any laws.
But when law comes in then we become knowledgeable of what is not good.
And when the law says "thou shall not covet" it is as Paul says that with that law he knows what LUST is.
The point that Paul is making is the same as James. LUST is where SIN begins.
If Adam did not have lust in his flesh than he could not have sinned.
Adam desired the fruit and ate of it. What he did was allow his flesh to control his better judgment.
So, the lust of the flesh became sin in the flesh.

 

[oldbadger]

Reference???

Jesus had a whole different message to Paul's!
Jesus focused upon Love and understanding, but his very first message as shown by words and actions was 'Mercy and not sacrifice'!
Both Jesus and the Baptist were offering Peace of Mind through Redemption by Immersion and at No Cost!

Previously, northern province folks who sought peace of mind through redemption had a very very undertaking in order to gain that. Leaving their work. A long journey of risk via the East bank to Jericho and thence towards Jerusalem. Loaded charges for every bed, board and service that they needed on the way and there. A rip off exchange system at the Temple to convert their coinage to Temple currency. Rip off sacrifice charges and if they had bought their own lambs these got condemned! Pressure to give to the offertory horns. A fee to use the confectories. Total Temple corruption!
So they offered redemption and peace of mind for nothing! Of course, Temple Takings crashed, which is why Antipas was ordered to break it all up and arrest the Baptist.

And then within a very short time Paul has spun all this into this religion, which is why so many Christians feed on Paul's words rather than the simple messages of Jesus.

Easy.

 

[nPeace]

Doesn’t mean I won’t keep trying.

That's the spirit!
I wish someone here would, but no one seems to even want to try.
The Bible nowhere, nor at any time, presents lust in a positive way. Every kind of lust is sin.
The Bible encourages us to control the desires of the eyes, and flesh, which does not originate with God... and is passing away. 1 John 2:15-17

We sin in word, thought, and deed.
It would be a mistake to think that only actions are sin.
Our thoughts are exposed to God, every minute of every day.
(Genesis 6:5) Consequently, Jehovah saw that man’s wickedness was great on the earth and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time.
(Matthew 9:4) Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said: “Why are you thinking wicked things in your hearts?

So it's good to remember to do as the righteous man Job did... even for ourselves - (Job 1:5) “Maybe my sons have sinned and have cursed God in their heart.” That is what Job would always do.

We have the example of Ananias, whom Paul chastised with the words... "Why have you thought up such a deed as this in your heart? You have lied, not to men, but to God.” (Acts 5:1-6)

The OP's argument is supported with this text...
(Ephesians 2:3) Yes, among them we all at one time conducted ourselves in harmony with the desires of our flesh, carrying out the will of the flesh and of our thoughts, and we were naturally children of wrath just as the rest. . .
Are the desires, and will of our flesh, and of our thoughts sin? Yes, but there are different sins, and levels of sin.

 

[LightofTruth]

Jesus had a whole different message to Paul's!
Jesus focused upon Love and understanding, but his very first message as shown by words and actions was 'Mercy and not sacrifice'!
Both Jesus and the Baptist were offering Peace of Mind through Redemption by Immersion and at No Cost!

Previously, northern province folks who sought peace of mind through redemption had a very very undertaking in order to gain that. Leaving their work. A long journey of risk via the East bank to Jericho and thence towards Jerusalem. Loaded charges for every bed, board and service that they needed on the way and there. A rip off exchange system at the Temple to convert their coinage to Temple currency. Rip off sacrifice charges and if they had bought their own lambs these got condemned! Pressure to give to the offertory horns. A fee to use the confectories. Total Temple corruption!
So they offered redemption and peace of mind for nothing! Of course, Temple Takings crashed, which is why Antipas was ordered to break it all up and arrest the Baptist.

And then within a very short time Paul has spun all this into this religion, which is why so many Christians feed on Paul's words rather than the simple messages of Jesus.

Easy.

Many people believe Paul to be an inspired by God apostle. I'm one of them.
Instead of trying to conflict the things Paul taught with those of Jesus, I try to find the similarities in order see the complete picture in harmony.
For example: Paul says of those who walk according to the flesh as "Children of disobedience" .
And Jesus says the same thing when he says, "You are of your Father, the devil, and the lust of your Father you will do"

 

[Iymus]

If there is no law than there is no sin.

Under the impression that specifically breaking the law or being disobedient is sin and that God is not a God of lawlessness.

Also under the impression that even though Eve lusted if she had not eaten the fruit mankind would know no sin.

 

[oldbadger]

Many people believe Paul to be an inspired by God apostle. I'm one of them.

Sure. Many Churches are founded on Paul's teachings. I can acknowledge your belief.

Instead of trying to conflict the things Paul taught with those of Jesus, I try to find the similarities in order see the complete picture in harmony.

OK. But I just research objectively and let my findings come to me..... I don't try to push joints that I don't think fit.

For example: Paul says of those who walk according to the flesh as "Children of disobedience" .
And Jesus says the same thing when he says, "You are of your Father, the devil, and the lust of your Father you will do"

Ah ha! That is different! Greed, hatred, bigotry, crimes, human carelessness, pride, arrogance........ these are the human failings that Jesus speaks of, he does not linger or loiter in the area of sex too much, in fact his main mention of 'flesh' is all about when a man and woman become one person. They 'join together', which he clearly saw as a beautiful condition. Paul saw it differently, as a necessary means for the production of offspring to increase a church. To Paul, sex was weakness, and sadly his ideas have ruined the happiness of couples in sexual partnership over the centuries and millenia.

That is why I push back against Paul........ he brought such institutions as the inquisition in to being, imo.

 

[LightofTruth]

Under the impression that specifically breaking the law or being disobedient is sin and that God is not a God of lawlessness.

Also under the impression that even though Eve lusted if she had not eaten the fruit mankind would know no sin.

God created food for the body as something to be desired to look upon and to eat. Man, at his creation, would have already saw the food as desirable for the flesh.
When God introduced a command not to eat of a certain tree, He made the desire of the flesh to be limited. It was limited only that which was not forbidden.
When Eve lusted or desired that which was forbidden, then it means Eve coveted the fruit.
Paul says, "I had not known lust except the law says "thou shall not covet".
God did not specifically tell Adam not to covet the tree, but that's what Adam and Eve did.
That shows that the sin of covetousness was present in their flesh before they ate of the fruit.

 

[LightofTruth]

Let's compare what Jesus said about looking upon a woman to lust (covet) her with that which happen in the garden with Adam and Eve.
It's one thing to simply look at a woman but quite another to covet her. If a man knew himself to begin to covet the woman than the best thing he could do would be to run away and get out of eye sight from her. To find a way of escape from himself.
But that's not what Adam and Eve did. They allowed their lust to get the upper hand to the point where God's command (law) became weak by the flesh. And the result was transgression of the law of God.
If Adam had known the power of sin in the flesh, he would have found a way to escape the temptation of the flesh.
Adam could have said what Jesus said when his flesh was tempted. "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God".

 

[nPeace]

@LightofTruth just logged on to say... BOOM!

 

[metis]

Since being sexually attracted to someone is really basic biology, I tend to believe that the scriptural use of the word "lust" must refer to something beyond that attraction, quite possibly plotting to have sexual relations outside of marriage.