On the Road to Emmaus » embodiment

Spirit and Flesh – Part 1

Richard — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 23:59:34 +0000

The Biblical discussion of the concepts of “flesh” and “spirit” are highly problematic for several reasons. “Flesh” is one of the grand enemies of the Christian, along with the “world” (another problematic term) and the “devil” (yet another problematic term…). Hence the Christian must “war against the flesh.” As long as this remains theoretical, no problems will surface. Difficulties appear, however, as soon as one seeks to locate this “flesh” and fight against it. What does Paul mean by “flesh?” The simplest answer is a vague approximation between “flesh” and either materiality or bodily existence. I once had someone, when explaining what “flesh” was, dramatically pinch and pull the skin on his arm to make explicitly concrete this vile affiliation with the body. Another thorny interpretation of “flesh” is to call it the “sinful nature” (as unfortunately the NIV and alas the TNIV translate the greek word sarx, literally “flesh”). The Bible NEVER explicitly speaks of a “sinful nature” (except in the NIV…). Nature means what is inherent and essential. If sin is thus inherent or essential to human existence, that would invalidate an original state of innocence (thus excluding a concept of a “fall”) and make an existence without sin in the age to come impossible. Sin is never part of the central, inviolable identity of human beings. As long as humans live on earth the stranglehold of sin can be broken and exposed as the alien obtrusion that it is. Albiet, I understand what people mean when they say “sinful nature” and would not deny the depraved state of humanity. Nevertheless, “sinful nature” IS NOT a biblical term and I believe it is not the best way to express the brokenness of humanity. This however, is well beside the point…

The crux of the issue is that the interpretation of flesh in correlation with bodily or essential human existence opens the door for quasi-gnosticism. Gnosticism in a nut shell is the ancient (and heretical) belief that (for simplicity’s sake) matter is inherently evil (has an evil/sinful nature) and spirit is good. The good spirits of people are trapped in wicked bodies and need to be released by an enlightened spirit messenger and by the acquisition of a higher knowledge (gnosis). Gnosticism was the PRIMARY heresy that the early church combated, precisely because from the beginning of the church it was the most destructive idea to authentic apostolic Christianity. This idea subtly continues in the church when we ascribe a bad or inferior status to the material world or specifically our bodies. This belief slowly, yet thoroughly deconstructs the meaning and power of apostolic doctrine in its belief of the goodness of God’s role as creator, his creation, the value of the life of the body and the renewal of the earth (check the tags “Gnosticism” and “new creation” for more on this).

This problem stems from a common approach to interpreting Paul, and the gospel in general, to first outline the “problem” for only then can the solution be understood. Rudolf Bultmann epitomized this view when he said, “after man-under-the-Law has been made to see his situation under it as that of the ‘miserable wretch’ groaning for deliverance from the ‘body of death’, he can then see the salvation-occurrence as salvation-bringing.” Thus we look first at the problem – the problem is the flesh – and then discern the solution – opposing, eliminating or escaping the flesh.

E.P. Sanders has suggested that for Paul, the dilemma is not self-evident, but the solution provided in the Gospel illuminates the dilemma. This line of thought can be fruitful for understanding the flesh-Spirit conflict. “Flesh” is not primarily seen as negative in itself. It is only in light of the solution provided in the gospel that “flesh” is then seen as negative.

Flesh in the Old Testament speaks of corporate humanity in their weakness and fragility. This was not seen as evil, but was understood as an inevitable reality of existence. All living beings came from the dust and to the dust they will return (Gen. 18:27; Ps 103:14; Eccles 12:7; cf. 1 Cor. 15:47). However, in the NT, particularly in Paul, “flesh” takes on an unprecedented and unequivocal negative meaning. Here it is not because of any kind of inherent evil nature of literal flesh, but rather because of a dramatic alteration in the situation previously described. Whereas formerly “flesh” described the negative but inevitable weakness that characterized human solidarity, the resurrection of Jesus has introduced a radical newness. The “inevitability” of the corruption and death of flesh is no longer such. Its overcoming has not only been envisaged but has in fact been actualized in and through the resurrection of Jesus. As resurrection and the Spirit functioned as synecdoches (a figure of speech in which a part is made to represent the whole or vice versa) for God’s entire eschatological restoration program, so “flesh” becomes a synecdoche for all that God is renewing, restoring and replacing. “Flesh” is the dangling vestage of all that is contrary to God’s future for the world. Thus, the “mindset of the flesh” is not an “attachment to earthly-things.” How could one not be attached to earthly things? Humans are quite literally “earthlings” (the word for human in Hebrew is derived from the word for earth/ground). The mindset-of-the-flesh is rather that motivational force which seeks to maintain the status quo of sin, death, disorder, estrangement, alienation, suffering, injustice and unrighteousness over and against God’s work of new creation.

It is common to discuss the contrast of flesh and Spirit in terms of anthropology. However, this is not possible. First of all, “Spirit,” in the fullest Pauline sense, is not a fundamental component of human being, if it can be called a component of human being at all. Rather it is a person of the Godhead. To speak of Spirit in human anthropology would be to dangerously blur the distinction between God and humans. Furthermore, “flesh,” in Pauline terminology, cannot even be called a fundamental constituent of human nature either. Though often equated with the physical body, Paul’s discussion of the flesh shows us that this cannot be the case. In Romans 8:9 he tells the believers “you are not in the flesh if the Spirit of God dwells in you.” What could this sentence possibly mean if the word “flesh” means the body or even “the body with regard to its sinfulness?” To push the physicality of “flesh” renders Paul as ludicrous in this statement. Rather, “flesh” is a sphere that individuals can be “in” or “out” of, and thus cannot be part of the “nature” of humans. Nature refers to the essential characteristics of an entity. If humans can be outside the realm of “flesh,” then flesh cannot be essential to them. Hence it is not part of their nature.

Altogether, neither “flesh” nor “spirit” can be used to discuss human nature in a fundamental way. This illuminates that for Paul these terms do not function primarily anthropologically, but rather eschatologically. It is recognized by many biblical scholars today, that a fully Biblical understanding of the Spirit cannot be gained apart from the larger context of eschatology. A neat scholastic schematic that would appropriate “flesh” to the doctrine of anthropology, the Spirit as a component of soteriology and eschatology to a theological appendix (if not appendage) will never grasp the symphonic nature of Pauline thought concerning these terms. Passages like Isaiah 11:2; 42:1; 61:1 show how Jewish Messianic concepts were strongly linked to the concept of the Spirit. Passages like Isaiah 4; 32:15; 44:3; Joel 2:28ff and Ezekiel 36-37 link the Spirit to the eschatological restoration of the people of God and God’s world. The Spirit who played a critical role in creation (Gen. 1:2; Job 33:4; Ps. 33:6; 104:29) will be mightily operative to recreate God’s precious yet disfigured world.

The disparaging way Paul speaks of “flesh” is not remotely Gnostic. It does not make a gradation of “spiritual” over “natural” or “soul” over “body.” Rather the flesh is that which corresponds to the age of Adam and participates in its death-drives. It is that which is in allegiance with everything contrary to God’s kingdom, God’s future for the world, where there will be no more death, no more mourning, no more cry and no more pain. Wars will cease to the ends of the earth. The broken-heart will be bound up, the captive will be set free, the afflicted will be comforted. The entire created order will be renewed as righteousness, peace, joy and love flood the earth in the knowledge of God. To war against the flesh is to oppose, live in contradiction with and confront everything that seeks perpetuate that which God’s kingdom eradicates. It means to embody by the power of the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead, first in our own lives and relationships, that which will be true universally in the age of come. It means to appropriate now the “already” of the Kingdom and to refuse accommodation to the “not yet,” despite its persistence. Though sin reigned in death, grace now reigns through righteousness leading to eternal life in the Messiah Jesus. We have been united with Him in his death and resurrection and even now the life force of the spring-time of all creation lies resident within us. To war against the flesh is not to despise our bodily, physical, emotional, relational, and exceedingly conflicted existence. Rather in the midst of the great conflict between a dying world which is passing away and a new world which is coming to birth in the midst of it, we are called to wholeheartedly embrace and love life as agents of new creation, to be the sphere in which the power of regeneration is made operative – for through us God will send forth his spirit and renew the face of the earth (Ps 104:31).

The Spirit of the Resurrection

Richard — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:47:14 +0000

Following my last post concerning Pentecost, I want to spend some of this season following Pentecost offering meditations on the Holy Spirit. Specifically, the direction I want to go is developing a spirituality and an understanding of life in the Spirit that accords with the primary event of Christian faith, the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. In such we will explore the interconnection between the life in the Spirit with our relationship to the earth, our bodies and other humans.

“…inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories (e.g., the resurrection and ascension).” 1 Peter 1:10

Romans 8:11 – “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.”

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ (1 Peter 1.10). In Romans 8, Paul calls it the “Spirit of him who raised Christ Jesus from the dead.” The Spirit of God is the Spirit of the Resurrection. The work of the Spirit is profoundly and essentially linked to eschatological movement towards the final resurrection, the triumph of life and the defeat of death. This emphasizes the significance and permanence of our physical bodies.

Matthew 19:28 – “Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world (the regeneration), when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

Titus 3:4-7 – “But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”

The Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of the resurrection, is the power of the new creation, the being who infuses new life into that which has grown fragile, frail and approaching annihilation. The Spirit hails the dawn of the eschatological age, the recreation of all things and the gift of eternal vitality.

Ephesians 1.19-20 – “[that you may know] what is the immeasurable greatness of his power towards us who believe, according to the working of his great power. God put this power to work in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places.”

In this passage, Paul identifies the power of the Spirit at work in us, as a power at work in the body, manifesting the triumph of life over death. The primary signs of the apostles validating this testimony of Jesus were again power at work in the body, in healings, creative miracles and resuscitations (cf. Acts 3.16, etc.). Furthermore many of the climactic descriptions of God’s redemptive work in humans are descriptions of the resurrection, in which God’s power is at work in the human body.

Philippians 3.21 – “[he] will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body”

Romans 8.23-24 – “…and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved.”

1 Corinthians 15.51-54 – “Listen, I will tell you a mystery! We will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When this perishable body puts on imperishability, and this mortal body puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will be fulfilled: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” “Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death is your sting.”

1 Corinthians 15.16-19 – “For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised. If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have died in Christ have perished (are lost). If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.”

Understanding this should convince us that there is nothing inherently wrong with the physical world and bodily life. Nothing in the world God created caused our alienation and provoked the groan of all creation. None of the groan we feel is from our essential existence in the world, but rather from our broken existence in the world. The world is good. The world has been broken, but full freedom is coming.

This should free us to rejoice in the present. The Spirit’s nearness does not causes us to despise the world but join in God’s profound love of it (cf. John 3.16). As Jurgen Moltmann has said, “God’s blessing enhances vitality and does not quench the joy of living. The nearness of God makes this mortal life worth loving, not something to be despised.” In the Spirit of the Resurrection we participate now in the renewal of life and rejoice in the vitality and passion for life He gives.

Jesus the Messiah has Come in the Flesh

Richard — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:57:46 +0000

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus the Messiah has come in the flesh is from God; 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the anti-messiah, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.” 1 John 4:1-3

These words from the apostle John are very strange to us. He seems to be establishing a litmus test to aid in discernment of whether or not something was of God. If evangelical Christians were in charge of writing this section of John we would probably have written that every spirit that does not confess that Jesus is divine is not from God. Something is Christian if it maintains Jesus’ status as fully God. Though true, this is not what John is emphasizing in this passage. In our zeal to defend the divinity of Jesus, which we should, at times we have lost sight of the significance of Jesus’ humanity. To John, the spirit that does not confess Jesus as fully human is not from God and is indeed the spirit of anti-messiah. This type of speech makes no sense for modern Christians who have too neatly split their constitution into a body and a soul, the soul being that which is obviously more important. I’ve spoken to many people who simply cannot identify with their bodies and insist that the “I,” “me,” or “self” is the soul living “inside” the body. Once establishing this type of strict dualism one is only a small step from denigrating the role of the body to an extreme. If the soul is the real me, if I am in essence a spirit-being, then my body is simply a shell that in actuality hinders the life of my soul. Salvation then becomes freedom from bodily, physical existence – a freedom from the earth to heaven. This type of logic is what John calls the “spirit of anti-messiah” and is commonly associated with the heresy called gnosticism. Biblical Christianity always asserts that “I” am the cojoining of body and soul. My body is not a possession of mine as if it were external to me. I do not “have” a body, I am a body.

Antichrist is a commonly misunderstood term. Modern use of the prefix “anti” means “opposed to” or “against.” However, this is not what the prefix meant in first century Koine Greek. Rather it means more along the lines of “instead of.” It implies not the idea of fierce opposition but substitution. The spirit of antichrist is not necessarily vociferously against Jesus but attempts to furnish a replacement Messiah. The Jesus without his physical body is not the Messiah. Even common language can be confusing. The term “incarnation” literally means in-fleshed. This can give the impression that Jesus is the “soul” and he went into a body.

This is not what the Bible says however. John 1:14 tells us that “the Word became flesh.” Jesus did enter a human, he became a human. He did not get a body, he became a body. A cursory reading of Colossians 2:9 could also be easily distorted: “For in Him (Jesus) all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form.” The fullness of deity does not dwell in a body, but in bodily form, in other words the fulness of deity exists as a body. Again in Philippians 2, Paul says Jesus was “made in human likeness.” Jesus became something rather than merely indwelling a body. This is also affirmed by the historic creeds of the church. The Nicene creed proclaims that “by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became human.” Note the wording carefully: Jesus himself, not simply his body was born of the Virgin Mary. He himself became human.

The spirit of antichrist is that which does not confess (or denies) that Jesus has indeed come as a full human being. As George McDonald has said, in doing so Jesus has “forever hallowed the flesh.” The Athanasian creed (ca. 5th century) confesses that by the incarnation humanity was taken up into God’s own God-hood. In other words, the human body itself has been given an indescribable dignity beyond recognition. One would think that creation in the image of God was enough to afford respect to humanity, but furthermore has God glorified us in taking our own form into the divine fellowship of the Trinity. The spirit of antichrist seeks to replace this view of Jesus and its requisite view of humanity and the human body. The spirit of antichrist sees the human body as something so full of indignity that the divine cannot possibly take it on. Full blown forms will assert Jesus’ body to be an illusion while more insipid forms will see the body as simply a shell for the soul of divinity. The Spirit of God brings a radically different message of a God who does not scorn the flesh but draws near in the fullest manner possible, being made like us in every way (Hebrews 2:17) and thus declaring that human flesh is indeed worthy of partaking of the divine.

The implications of this are tremendous, and to them I will turn in a later post…

He Set My Feet on a Rock

Richard — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 01:37:51 +0000

I had a peculiar, yet remarkable experience the other day performing the most simple of actions – shifting my body weight from resting on my heels to the balls of my feet. Modern culture tells us the way to stand is stomach (and rear) in, chest out, shoulders back. This normally happens with locked knees and the weight resting on the heels of the feet. One notable observation of this posture is that while seeming dignified it is absolutely rigid and quite lifeless. That is because when one stands like that the body actually naturally slumps and a tense rigidity is required to hold the body upright. Spontaneous action and true gracefulness are near impossible with stiffness. It’s inherent inflexibility may do well at achieving marked out goals, but at what cost?

Oddly enough, the with the opposite posture (stomach out, pelvis back, knees slightly bent, weight on balls of feet), one stands up straight naturally, without tensing the body. The other day, as I was doing a couple of stretching exercises, getting my weight to rest on the balls of my feet, I suddenly had a strange stronger-than-usual sense that my feet were firmly on the ground. I began to sob as the following quote from C.S. Lewis’ Perelandra ran through my head: “Be comforted…It is no doing of yours…Be comforted small one, in your smallness. He [God] lays no merit on you. Receive and be glad. Have no fear, lest your shoulders be bearing the weight of the world. Look! It is beneath your head and carries you.”

The first posture of rigidity is that of holding one’s self up, of bearing the weight of the world on one’s own shoulders. The latter posture is that of being grounded, standing securely on terra firma, allowing it to hold you. Being a historical over-achiever (which is by no means undiluted joy I assure you) I know the pressure of bearing the weight of the world on my shoulders. This self-sufficiency, rooted in a lack of trust (of God and others), draws enormous affirmation and acclaim from others because of the apparent achievements. Yet at what cost are these achievements made? Can one ever feel secure when holding themselves up? Can one ever give and receive love while burdened with the weight of the world? Remember that the posture of self-sufficiency naturally slumps without a counter-active stringent stiffness to hold the body up. One reason why the self-sufficient person is full of anxiety is because they are intuitively aware that if they fail to hold firm, they will slump and their true (natural) state of indignity will be revealed, in other words, if they fail to maintain an unyielding high level of performance continually, all will crash: the internal barrenness, fear, loneliness and uncertainty will be revealed. The slump that their posture naturally produces will be seen as it is.

Scripture seems at least metaphorically to refer to this “grounding:”

Ps. 27:5 – For in the day of trouble
he will keep me safe in his dwelling;
he will hide me in the shelter of his tabernacle
and set me high upon a rock.

Ps. 40:2 – He lifted me out of the slimy pit,
out of the mud and mire;
he set my feet on a rock
and gave me a firm place to stand.

The Insanity of Our Time

Richard — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 01:03:50 +0000

Narcissim: Denial of the True Self is a fascinating book by Alexander Lowen, a leading psychoanalyst discussing the problem of narcissism. Though commonly thought of as simply the dilemma of an over-inflated ego in which one loves themselves excessively, Lowen contends that narcissism is rooted in emotional numbness. The narcissist does not love themselves excessively, they can hardly love, if at all. This emotional numbness is a defense against overwhelming experiences in life that if expressed appropriately would seem that one is going crazy. When our experiences do not correspond to how we perceive reality we feel disoriented and eventually like we are going crazy. One way of coping with overwhelming experiences is to deaden the body and sedate all emotion.

Over this lack of feeling, the narcissist constructs an image to present to the world. This image is not in accordance with the individual’s true self, which is mired in unexpressed sadness and anger. Since the sense of self is not rooted in the actual self, it is remarkably unstable and is constantly needing the praise and affirmation of others, hence the commonly perceived symptoms of narcissism related to the over-inflated ego. This image projection however, does not show one who loves themselves too much, but one who in fact has rejected their true self in favor of an image that is sane, collected, sophisticated, appreciated and affirmed. Narcissism lies not in self-love or self-acceptance, but rather in self-rejection.

One of the most insightful sections of the book was the final chapter in which Lowen critiques modern culture in a chapter he calls “the insanity of our time.” He claims that many fear expressing their emotions lest they seem, become or go insane. If insanity can be defined as not being in touch with reality, there is little more insane than not being in touch with one’s own emotions. To be emotionally numb is to not be fully alive. It is actually a form of insanity.

This applies not only individually but also culturally. Our culture as a whole is entirely over-stimulated. Whether it be television, radio, stereo, i-pod, billboards, etc. the stream of images and sounds is incessant. Add to that the hurried pace of our lives and the insanity is building. Since it is truly impossible to respond to all of these images and sounds, the only way to deal with such over-stimulation is to deaden one’s feelings. When that happens, we need further, stronger stimulation to feel anything at all. So we make the volume louder, beat the drums harder, play the music faster, flash the images more quickly, speak only in sound-bites, keep the activities rolling, etc. Is it any wonder why so many people are incredibly bored yet inundated with more entertainment than ever in history? Is it thus any wonder why our society compulsively throws itself into a boundary-less sexual expression as if one more orgasm can jolt one out of emotional numbness? Is it any wonder why even in the church, studies show that a majority of men are involved with pornography in a desperate attempt to feel something?

The church plays the game little differently than the rest of society. “People can’t listen very long, give them sound-bites,” they say. The music is getting increasingly louder, stronger, harder and faster. The pace is getting more and more frenetic. But this time, it is not just the ideal of societal advancement, God is behind it. It is no different in the seeker sensitive movement, where everything has to move quickly to keep people’s interest, or in the prophetic movement, where everything has to be so intense to maintain people’s passion. There is less and less time and ability to feel, be still, to read books, enjoy art or relate to another person non-pragmatically, much less to have deep prayer.

One of the most misused writers in the Christian tradition is John of the Cross. His fateful phrase “Dark Night of the Soul” is often applied haphazardly to whenever the pace slows down enough and stimulation decreases so that the “sense of the presence of God” has vanished from an individuals’ experience. Somehow the intensity must be ramped up, the pace quickened, the images made more vivid so that feeling can return. Over-stimulation is never the way for feeling to return. John speaks of the spiritual journey not as merely an increase of intensity, but an increase in sensitivity. When the sensitivity increases, the intensity will likewise increase automatically. The period of dryness that John speaks of is when feelings so subtle and so profound begin to graciously infuse the soul and one cannot even feel them. If one was in such a state and was to play the modern over-stimulation game, nothing at all would be gained. One’s sensitivity would actually continue to decrease and greater stimuli would increasingly be required for one to feel anything at all. Take hearing for example. If one wanted to hear something clearly, they could turn up the volume. Yet the more one turns up the volume, at a point, hearing will begin to be lost. When this happens the intensity has to be increased to replicate the same level of experience previously. Though the analogy breaks down here (as there is no way to reverse hearing damage), if one’s sensitivity were to increase, one could have the same level of experience even at a lesser intensity, and the same level of intensity as before would produce a greater level of experience.

Remarkably, those who have written on “deep prayer” throughout the centuries of church history, traditionally called “mystics”, generally describe this prayer as not having increasing activity and freneticism, but increasing stillness. It is often called the “prayer of quiet.” At this point “discursive prayer” ceases and one moves into sheer enjoyment of pleasures so very subtle and sublime. It is not our activity or words that matter here but simply the gentle current of love flowing from the deep within us. Jesus said in John 7:38 that whoever believes in him, that out of the deepest place within, rivers of life would begin to flow. These are pleasures more subtle but more superior than anything else in existence. However, their sublimity often evades us in the modern sea of stimulation. Let us forsake the insanity that fosters the deadness of our bodies and emotions. Let us again grow comfortable with stillness, quietness, silence and sublimity. Let us dare to believe that John of the Cross and Jesus were right. Let us not pursue stimulation, but increasing sensitivity; not mere doing, but rather resting in being; not simply operating by logic, but living and breathing, by giving and receiving unfailing love.

On the Road to Emmaus » embodiment

Spirit and Flesh – Part 1

Related posts

The Spirit of the Resurrection

Related posts

Jesus the Messiah has Come in the Flesh

Related posts

He Set My Feet on a Rock

Related posts

The Insanity of Our Time

Related posts