₦airaland Forum

shdemidemi: http://biblehub.com/greek/4561.htm

[4561 /sárks ("flesh" is not always evil in Scripture. Indeed, it is used positively in relation to sexual intercourse in marriage (Eph 5:31) – as well as for the sinless human body of Jesus (Jn 1:14; 1 Jn 4:2,3). Indeed, flesh (what is physical) is necessary for the body to live out the faith the Lord works in (Gal 2:20).]

shdemidemi: [s]Jesus the Christ, our Lord and Savior, will be the One Who will be the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords of the world to come, in this inhabited earth that will be made again like the Garden of Eden. We also know He is higher than the angels, even though for the work of the cross, He became a little lower than the angels for a short while.

There was only one way that He could remove death from the human experience. What was it? He had to die. He HAD to die. He had to overcome death with death. Life is in the blood. So what had to happen? He had to shed it. And so it is His shed blood that became the very solution for redemption.[/s]

Philippians 2:5-8

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6. Who, (Christ Jesus) being in the form of God, (He never stopped being God) thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7. But (as God, He) made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8. And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

shdemidemi: My gosh!

I am sure you can do better. My request was for you to paste where you got your definition and not just any other site where it was defined.

MBA, where did you get your definition from?

I believe you lied here, if you didn't prove me wrong by telling me or pasting where you got your definition from.
The greek word for flesh is 'sarx' as used in John 1:14
'sarx' means the totality of all that is essential to manhood i.e spirit, soul and body.
If we replace the word flesh with spirit soul and body

Besides, the greek word for flesh as used in John 1 is 'Sarx' and it refers to "Carnal/Mortal/Adamic flesh" and nothing else.

—Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)
Probably from the base of G4563; flesh (as stripped of the skin), that is, (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit), or as the symbol of what is external, or as the means of kindred, or (by implication) human nature (with its frailties (physically or morally) and passions), or (specifically) a human being (as such):—carnal (-ly, + -ly minded), flesh ([-ly])

mbaemeka: Hebrews 2:9, 14, 16-18 AMP

But we are able to see Jesus, Who was ranked lower than the angels for a little while, crowned with glory and honor because of His having suffered death, in order that by the grace (unmerited favor) of God [to us sinners] He might experience death for every individual person.

Since, therefore, [these His] children share in flesh and blood [in the physical nature of human beings], He [Himself] in a similar manner partook of the same [nature] that by [going through] death He might bring to nought and make of no effect him who had the power of death–that is, the devil–

For, as we all know, He [Christ] did not take hold of angels [the fallen angels, to give them a helping and delivering hand], but He did take hold of [the fallen] descendants of Abraham [to reach out to them a helping and delivering hand]. [Isa. 41:8, 9.]

So it is evident that it was essential that He be made like His brethren in every respect, in order that He might become a merciful (sympathetic) and faithful High Priest in the things related to God, to make atonement and propitiation for the people's sins. For because He Himself [in His humanity] has suffered in being tempted (tested and tried), He is able [immediately] to run to the cry of (assist, relieve) those who are being tempted and tested and tried [and who therefore are being exposed to suffering].

Reiyvinn: Mbaemeka you really need to take it easy. I've read all your comments bro, you sound defensive and challenged. I'm not taking sides.... it's usually better to calm down before responding to a comment so that you get what the person is trying to say. More importantly, don't listen to rebut but listen to understand and if there are flaws, you refute. Reading the first line, scrolling down and then the last line won't help at all. It's not your ego that's at stake, no one really cares who "wins" an argument anyway..... Just saying....

shdemidemi: Guy, who do you think you are fooling here?

WHERE IS THE DEFINITION YOU GAVE IN LINE WITH JOHN 1

shdemidemi: teacher Mba

where in the bible did you come across sinful spirit?

shdemidemi: teacher Mba

where in the bible did you come across sinful spirit?

shdemidemi: Bro, a child has a dead spirit. Nothing like sinful spirit. Who taught you these much jargon?

The spirit is made alive when we accept God's condition for salvation.

A child is actually a sinner because of the flesh he/she inherited from his parents(Adam and Eve).

shdemidemi: No, you are the one sleeping. Notice how you refuse to answer any question even though everyone answer all of yours.

If the first Adam had a flesh that isn't corrupt at some point, why will the second Adam come with a sinful flesh?



Bible passage to back this submission.



That is exactly why He rose on the third day without seeing corruption.



You talk nonsense!

what you call evil spirit is the sin nature without God. A regenerated man is one whose dead spirit is made alive by God through faith. Your so called evil spirit is present even in every born again today. Jesus never had such. phew!




What makes you a sinner is the body you live in. If Jesus live in the same body as you, he automatically becomes a sinner.

Mary had nothing to add to Jesus.She was only a vessel Jesus used to come to life. God had taken the form of man even before He came as Jesus through Mary in the old testament.

The only way Jesus could have carried anything from Adam would have been if a man and a woman had to come together to give birth to Him. God circumvented nature by bringing Jesus in to the world His own way.

shdemidemi: Trustman was right when he said you hardly read through what others write. You rush to reply all for the sake of your ego that feels challenged. I won't go into a tiff with you over when what was written or why it was written; after all, you can't back whatever assertions you wrote there by scripture.
Where exactly did I make this your statement in my post? If you must challenge the post, at least stay within the confines of what was said.
This was what I said- . You rejected what I said only to reecho it by saying- John only explained to people why that Man that they saw, knew, and heard about was indeed GOD.
Guy, it isn't a competition o. Take it easy.
The books are filled with how righteous/good this man(Jesus) is but saw no need to tell us if he also carries the same 'disease'(sin nature) you and I inherited from Adam. ok
I believe you lied here, if you didn't prove me wrong by telling me or pasting where you got your definition from.
The greek word for flesh is 'sarx' as used in John 1:14
'sarx' means the totality of all that is essential to manhood i.e spirit, soul and body.
If we replace the word flesh with spirit soul and body, lets see how the statement reads-
14 And the Word was made spirit soul and body, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Where exactly will the adamic sinful nature come through?
I thought you said Jesus is God earlier, are you confused?
Is He still God the Son?
and please give me the verse you are referring to here.

trustman: You are not only stubborn, you are also arrogant and cunning. You are being mischievous and you end up placing that same label on others. 

If you claimed I made a statement then show it unless you are trying to pin on me what I did not say either to divert attention away from the real issues or put a label on me. 
I showed you yours didn't I?

Even a simple illustration now appears difficult for you or what?
If a man has Ebola that man's body is said to be - SICK or DISEASED. 
A body without it will be said to be - HEALTHY. 

The two have the same type of body - flesh - but are not quite FUNCTIONING the same. 

See these:
"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

"Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions."
- Romans 6:12

"For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin."
- Romans 7:14

"Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?"
- Romans 7: 24

What do these tell you about the 'flesh' of man? 
It is a body of sin (Romans 6:6) that needed to be dealt with by the work of Jesus.  Now, if you claim that that same Jesus had a body of sin then how does that qualify to deal with other people's sin?

Mbaemeka, a baby who has never committed any act of sin is as much a sinner before God as the adult who has committed a million sins. Why is that so? If you don't know ask. If you do, it should make things clearer for you. 

Jesus' body first had to be PERFECT in other for it to be a PERFECT SACRIFICE. It had to be sin-free for it to qualify to be an offering acceptable to God. Anything less would not have been suitable.

shdemidemi: Before Adam fell, did he have a corruptible flesh that could decay?

The body of Jesus could not decay, even when put in the grave. Is that the same kind of flesh you and I have?




Among many definitions that the flesh can have, it is also known as the seat of sin in man or the unregenerate state of man. Could you possibly say these elements can be associated with Jesus?

shdemidemi: My friend, In the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke we have what we call the Synoptic Gospels, and they deal primarily with His humanity side of everything. In other words, Matthew depicts Him as King Who would one day rule on David's throne as a human King. He came up through the genealogy of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and down that royal family of David.
In Mark He's depicted as the Servant, and everything that He does shows His willingness to be a Servant, and again from His human side.
Then Luke depicts Him as the Son of Man
Then John comes along and depicts Him as the Son of God in His Deity. You will find that a lot of the things that are covered in the Synoptic Gospels are not mentioned in John.
Now, none of the synoptic gospel books mentioned a word of his flesh as sinful. Do you know why? Because it wasn't.

vooks: mbaemeko is contradicting himself right here

Look at your contradictions


https://www.nairaland.com/1892195/truth-behind-christ-embassy-healing/23#26560543


Which is quite unfortunate and borders on the stupid for this; a sacrifice even if it was unblemished will get cuts as it is sacrificed. You can't reject a sacrifice as blemished out of the cuts (read stripes) it incurred while it was being sacrificed.

SO Jesus bruises did not make his flesh blemished. We may stretch it further and claim that since Jesus died on the cross, the sacrifice was already dead and as such unfit

trustman: One of your shortcomings is being too quick to respond.
I have said this at different times.
Instead of carefully looking to understand issue you rush to answer because you feel you must have the last say.
Show me where i made this statement quoted by you:
The following actually shows your little understanding of Christ's work and ministry:
On this your post:
Can you answer one question: 'Was Adam's flesh before the fall the same in its entirety as the flesh you have today, Mbaemeka?
Answer directly and lets see who is ignorant.
This again shows your flawed reasoning:
The situation i presented was of one WITHOUT something.
Therefore your presentation should have read: Mr B is a righteous man and he has a flesh called T minus old sin nature.
And your conclusion would be:
Therefore Both men DO NOT have the EXACT SAME FLESH as they have different natures.
Is it clearer now?

trustman: I showed you that Jesus regarded his flesh as very IMPORTANT. Whereas you said not good enough.

Maybe i should try to make it easy for you. Can you say a body (flesh) with ebola is the same as one without ebola? The same body, yes; but different in some way?
In the same way can a body with sin nature be the same as one WITHOUT the sin nature?
Can it be any easier?

So when you say "Jesus had the EXACT SAME FLESH with other men" again what do you mean?
If one has sin nature and the other DOES NOT HAVE sin nature can they be EXACT?
Is that so hard to see?

Romans 8:3 NLT

The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins.

donnie: Bros I must commend you... Not Just for the way you have fulfiled that scripture "rightly dividing the word of truth", with consitency in the delivey of the gospel message; but for your patience. Like Stephen, they cannot withstand the wisdom by which you speak. I tell you, i have been on nairaland long enough to know that many of these folks oppose you, not because they think they know better, but because in your attempt to explain, they might learn a few things from you. Reminds me of my early days on NL.
Keep it up brother. One luv!

donnie:

shdemidemi: James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted by evil and He Himself tempted no man. Looking at the statement it seem contradictory, knowing that God tempted and tried Abraham-

Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,


and God was Himself tried by evil utterances from the children of Israel. God wrath immediately befell them. 1 cor 10:9


James was actually referring to the righteousness nature of God, which is different from dual nature that exist in man. Every believer has the nature of evil which is also known as the sinful nature or the old man/adamic nature and the nature of righteousness/ the new man made present as a result of the new birth.

These two natures are present in every christian. The bible say they are in constant war to control a believer.
Gal 5
17 The sinful nature wants to do evil, which is just the opposite of what the Spirit wants. And the Spirit gives us desires that are the opposite of what the sinful nature desires. These two forces are constantly fighting each other, so you are not free to carry out your good intentions. 18 But when you are directed by the Spirit, you are not under obligation to the law of Moses

These sort of war isn't present in God nor in Christ. He has just one nature and that is the righteousness nature.

James 1:13 was referring to an inward temptation within God that will propel Him to respond to evil desires. He is also saying God isn't the reason why men are susceptible to the sinful nature today.

trustman: Is the issue now the NUMBER of Bible passages given?
You asked for my understanding of Romans 8:3 and I did, giving you portions of scripture to buttress my position.
And now you come up with: “I take it that like some other people that have been trolling on this thread, you get your own definitions of biblical truths from the dictionary.”
What language are you using in communicating with me? IGBO?
Like I have said EARLIER words have meanings. No one therefore has the right to decide what a word means.
The koine Greek used for the NT, for example, is a very exact language so when people say in that language ‘go forward’, it cannot mean something else.
So when you say sinful means ‘susceptible to sin’ that is a TWISTING of the definition of the word SINFUL. Is there a dictionary for the English language? What do you use it for?
HUMILITY makes for teachability. You do not seem to me to be humble enough to ADMIT your error. Instead you are making it your strong point to evade issues in whatever way you can. You may drop in another person’s name in someone else’s post hoping to bring in that person’s position into controversy and shift focus from you. You also deliberately engage in what I have described as underhand tactic. This way you cannot LEARN.
Instead of just admitting that you were wrong in stating that Jesus had a SINFUL FLESH what you now doing is to attempt to reframe your position. Sinful is sinful. Sinful means has sin in one form or the other. When you made that initial statement did you talk about Paul’s construction of the sentence? What is the Greek construct of the sentence? Tell us clearly.
For your information ‘the flesh he had was SUSCEPTIBLE to sin’ IS NOT the same as ‘SINFUL FLESH’. You cannot convince a good O level English student on this.
Let me ask you this: ‘Was Adam’s flesh sinful flesh before the fall?’
Just the simple admission of ‘I’m wrong on this’ is taking you such a long time to do.
Maybe it will be ‘negative confession’ and you must always be ‘positive’ even in the face of losing face.
Like I’ve pointed before now also, you just think you must answer every post about you.
In the process you don’t even take time to critically look at what your ‘opponents’ post. Your adrenalin just wants to rush into responding. Maybe you assume Mbaemeka MUST have the last say.

shdemidemi: He has always been an adversary.. God had stepped into the devil's world to liberate those kept captive. The devil offered God what in truth belongs to him- the world. What was God's response- 'Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God'

Jesus quoted from exodus 17 where He was tempted at Massah.

No normal man could have resisted such temptation.. After 30 days of no food, who would turn down bread? He had no iniquity in him, whether he be tested or not.

OLAADEGBU: You can see from the reference below that the body of our Lord Jesus Christ was a special creation that has not been formed by the normal process of genetic inheritance. God formed His human body with the same Power and Wisdom by which He had formed the universe.

James 1:13 KJV

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:

shdemidemi: You must really be feeling smart with your forte at evading questions.

What bible told you God cannot be tempted by the 'devil'? Just give an humble answer and not a derogatory question.



Please check your greek translation... The definition of perfect as used in that verse is there. Thanks

trustman: If you did not bother to read the post why send me on a wild goose chase?

shdemidemi: What bible told you God cannot be tempted by the 'devil'?



Mba ...


Perfect(teleioo in greek) as used here does not mean he was imperfect at anytime, no wonder you could not give a straight answer on when he was not perfect.

Perfection here speaks of the completeness of christ's earthly course.

check and come back.

shdemidemi: You keep running from pillar to post my friend.. were you not the same person that claimed to know about theophany and not christophany? 7n an attempt to separate the two. You swerve from your position every time you are cornered.
If Jesus is God, how can he then house himself in a sinful flesh that was a result from the fall of man from God's glory?
If there is a part of scripture you are confused about, why don't you ask instead of writing too many things without substance.
..