What does Paul mean by “in the flesh”?

Explanation:

Paul writes that while we were living in the flesh, we lived sinful lives. Likely what he means is that in our pre-conversion state, before we were united with Christ by faith, we lived sinful lives. We can detect that being in the flesh refers to the pre-conversion state because Paul uses this same terminology elsewhere to describe the pre-conversion state. In particular, in Galatians 5:24 he writes that those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh.³ This statement implies that those who do not belong to Christ have not crucified the flesh, which means that being in the flesh is a pre-conversion state. Likewise, when Paul refers to being in the flesh in Romans 7:5, he has in mind being in a pre-conversion state.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that belonging to Christ and crucifying the flesh do not imply that not belonging to Christ refers to a pre-conversion state. For even if it is the case that those who belong to Christ crucify the flesh, it does not follow that those who do not belong to Christ are in the flesh. Rather, we can conclude that belonging to Christ is a sufficient condition for crucifying the flesh, but not that it is a necessary condition. And if it is not a necessary condition, then it is possible for non-converts to also escape the flesh, which implies that being in the flesh is not a pre-conversion state.

Response to counterargument:

The argument here is not that Paul is setting down the necessary and sufficient conditions for how to escape the flesh in Galatians 5:24. Rather, the argument is that when Paul reflects on his pre-conversion state, he notices that he is in the flesh, but that those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh. Whether belonging to Christ is a necessary condition for escaping the flesh is not relevant. Rather, what is relevant is that from Paul’s perspective, before belonging to Christ the Galatians were in the flesh, but now they have crucified it. Likewise, in Romans 7:5 Paul reflects on his pre-conversion state by referring to it as, when they were in the flesh, they lived sinful lives.

Explanation:

We notice that in Romans 7:5 Paul describes the then situation of the believers in Rome, and then in Romans 7:6 he describes the now situation.⁴ Setting things up between the then and now helps us understand that through Romans 7:5–6, Paul has in mind the pre-conversion and post-conversion state of Christians. We can now apply this insight to what Paul means when he refers to being in the flesh. In particular, Paul refers to being in the flesh when he mentions the pre-conversion state of the Romans. For he refers to while we were living in the flesh the sinful passions produced fruit for death, denoting their pre-conversion state. Then in Romans 7:6 he describes the post-conversion state when believers are released from the law in order to serve in the new way of the Spirit. Thus, given that Paul contrasts the pre- and post-conversion states from Romans 7:5–6, being in the flesh refers to the pre-conversion state.

Counterargument:

One problem with this argument is that Paul does not say that believers are released from the flesh. That is, even if we grant that Romans 7:5 refers to the pre-conversion state and Romans 7:6 refers to the post-conversion state, Paul never says in Romans 7:6 that believers are freed from the flesh. Rather, he says that they are released from the law. Maybe what Paul has in mind is that in the pre-conversion state in the flesh, non-believers are aroused by the law, but in the post-conversion state in the flesh, believers are released from the law. Thus, believers are in the flesh in both the pre- and post-conversion state, but are released from the bondage of the law in the post-conversion state. Thus, being in the flesh is not pre-conversion.

 Response to counterargument:

 Paul’s choice of tense suggests that those in the post-conversion state are no longer in the flesh. For Paul uses the imperfect active tense of the verb to be to denote the state of being in the flesh. In particular, Paul writes, when we were in the flesh, where the verb is the imperfect active form of the verb to be. This is important because the imperfect active form points to an ongoing state in the past. In other words, Paul is saying that in the past when they were in the flesh in an ongoing state, their sinful passions were aroused. The implication is that they are no longer in that state. Thus, when Paul introduces the post-conversion state in Romans 7:6, it is implied that believers are no longer in the flesh.

The weakness of this view is that it does not take into account Paul’s other uses of the term flesh. As we will notice when we consider interpretation 2, Paul uses the term flesh on many occasions with a variety of meanings. Thus, we need to be careful to note the nuance of Paul’s use of flesh.

Explanation:

To understand what Paul means by in the flesh it is important to notice the various ways in which he uses the term σάρξ (flesh). Sometimes Paul uses the term σάρξ to denote the purely physical (2 Corinthians 4:11; Galatians 4:14; Colossians 2:1). Other times he uses it to denote human weakness (Romans 7:18; Romans 8:3). On still other occasions, it denotes opposition to God (Romans 8:8–9; Philemon 1:16).⁷ What we notice from all of these uses is that the term σάρξ has to do with both the physicality and moral culpability of humans.⁸ We also notice that the context of each passage determines the level of physicality or moral culpability Paul means to highlight. Thus, in the case of Romans 7:5, we must use the context, along with the various ways Paul uses the term σάρξ, to determine his meaning. When we do, we notice that σάρξ likely has to do with being in the flesh as in succumbing to the temptations of this world due to the weakness of the human condition.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that if being in the flesh is a combination of the physical and the moral, then there would never be a way to escape the flesh in this life. For in this life, it is always the case that we are physical. This is a problem because in Romans 7:5 Paul refers to being in the flesh where the verb to be is in the imperfect active indicative, and the imperfective active indicative indicates an ongoing state in the past. In other words, Paul is referring to a time in the past when we were in the flesh. Of course, that we were in the flesh in the past implies that we are no longer in the flesh now, but this is ruled out if being in the flesh is related to being physical, because even believers remain physical in this life.

Response to counterargument:

By highlighting the physical and moral nature of humans with the term σάρξ (flesh), Paul is not referring to strict physicality. Rather, he is saying that being in the flesh has to do with weakness and temptation. Of course, we never escape being in the flesh, but there is a difference between being in the flesh but fighting the sinful impulse and being in the flesh while succumbing to the temptations of the flesh. What Paul has in mind in Romans 7:5 when he refers to being in the flesh is easily succumbing to the temptations of the flesh.⁹

Explanation:

Paul writes in Romans 7:5 that when we were in the flesh, we lived sinful lives. We can understand what he means by noticing that in Romans 6:19 he explains that he is speaking to the Romans in human terms because of their limitations. In other words, because humans have weak and natural limitations, Paul has to speak to the Romans in humans terms that they can understand.¹⁰ It is important to notice that he refers to the weakness of the Romans because we know that Paul uses the term σάρξ (flesh) to refer to the bodily existence (1 Corinthians 15:50), which is closely associated with the fact that humans are weak and have natural limitations.

In fact, likely Paul has a combination of the weakness of the flesh and bodily existence in mind when he refers to being in the flesh in Romans 7:5.¹¹ The notion is that as bodily humans we have many temptations, and because we are weak, we often succumb to these temptations. When we live in the flesh we allow the weakness of our humanity to overcome us so that we live sinful lives.

Counterargument:

Paul contrasts σάρξ (flesh) with πνεῦμα (Spirit) in Romans 7:6. And we know that the Spirit is the Holy Spirit, which means the Holy Spirit is like a power that reigns over believers. Of course, if the Holy Spirit is a power that reigns over believers, and this is in contrast to being in the flesh, then “flesh is likely also a power that used to reign over believers.¹² And if being in the flesh is succumbing to a power that used to reign over believers, then being in the flesh cannot be succumbing to the temptations of this world through our bodily existence.

Response to counterargument:

Unfortunately for this counterargument, there is no direct contrast between being in the flesh and living in the new way of the Spirit that justifies treating the flesh as a power that rules over believers. The fact is Paul never uses the term σάρξ (flesh) in the sense of a ruling power. Rather, σάρξ has to do with human existence in the flesh, and especially in weakness and sometimes opposition to God.¹³ Since there is no direct correlation between the Spirit as a ruling power and the flesh as a ruling power, this counterargument does not go through.

One weakness of this view is that Paul has been arguing that there is an old way and a new way. The old way was governed by the law and led to condemnation, for all have sinned, while the new way has to do with union with Christ and living under grace by the Spirit. Thus, we expect Paul’s reflections on living in the flesh and living by the Spirit to align with this motif about the old and new way, which suggests pre-conversion and post-conversion rather than living a physical existence in weakness that might succumb to temptation.