A series of articles in The Christadelphian by Henry Sulley in 1921 and 1922

The Christadelphian, August 1922, Henry Sulley

Appendix 1

“Sin in the Flesh (Rom 8:3)”

This phrase, shorn of its context, has come to express ideas subversive of the truth. When the apostle said that “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. 8:3), he did not mean that God condemned “sin” in the flesh as though sin was a something in the flesh, but that he condemned sinful flesh, for He sent His Son in “the likeness of sinful flesh” (i.e., in the same flesh (Heb. 2:14) in order to condemn sin. “Flesh” was crucified and put to death in Jesus so that all emotions to sin arising from it in him should nevermore arise. Now, when Adam sinned his flesh became “sinful flesh.” Its quality then was sinful, although beforetime very good. So after transgression, the emotions of sin became a law, or rule of action, in Adam. Thus he may be said to be “sin made flesh,” and the law of disobedience its principal attribute. This fleshly condition was transmitted to his posterity, who became incapable of themselves of manifesting any other quality. Hence we may say, “flesh is full of sin.” The results of its emotions are graphically described in the third chapter of Romans: “There is none righteous, no, not one” (verse 10). A statement fully endorsed by Jesus, who said, “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God” (Matt. 19:17).

On the other hand, “sinful flesh” presents a different aspect in different persons, no two of which are exactly alike. Although the righteousness of men is but as “filthy rags” (Isa. 64:6), yet those who “become dead indeed unto sin” (Rom. 6:11) present a very different picture of humanity from those who are “servants of sin” and “walk after the flesh,” or do not “live unto God” (Rom. 6:20: 8:10, 11). For instance, Enoch, who walked with God and did not die, presents a different likeness to Seth, who was born unto Adam in his own likeness, after his own image, and who died like his father (Gen. 5:3). Flesh under control by the operation of a higher impulse inculcated by the Word of God presents a different image to those who exhibit only the carnal mind. Man was created in the image of God—Elohim (Gen. 5:1). Before transgression there was perfect harmony between him and his Creator. The Elohim did the will of the Supreme, so before transgression did Adam and Eve. As already noted, this harmony did not continue—the image was broken and destroyed when they transgressed. Jesus, the second Adam, came to restore the image, so that harmony might exist between mankind and the Creator. In order to do this he was made of a woman in the likeness of sin’s flesh—the same flesh—but never during his probation did he act the part of a sinner, or exhibit a morally-defiled image such as is presented by other sons of Adam. Some will say that “he had sin in his flesh.” This is an unskilful way of stating his relationship to sin, and thus stumble many who rightly perceive that Jesus stood on the apex of moral rectitude (Heb. 7:26). According to the law of temptation (see James 1:14, 15, and previous article, pp. 534–536, Vol. lviii.) Jesus was absolutely free from any moral taint, because he always perceived the corrupting influence of any impulse contrary to the will of God. He was morally guileless, holy, harmless, and separate from sin, yet physically unclean and corruptible.

Now the temptation of Jesus was on this wise. Being driven into the wilderness by the Spirit which he had just received in fulness, after forty days he felt the pangs of hunger—quite a natural impulse of the flesh. The tempter suggested the use of his new-born power in order to turn stones into bread. “If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.” Here his knowledge of scripture enabled him to answer wisely, and reject the wiles of the adversary, for he was now mentally equipped by the Holy Spirit, which no doubt in his case, as in that of his disciples later, brought to their recollection all things which he had told them. Jesus, perceiving that life depended on something more important than food, and perceiving that he must exercise faith in God, he readily answered, “It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Luke 4:2, 4).

From this record, quite apart from the question who was the agent of temptation, it will be seen that the “devil” which tempted Jesus was in his flesh, because it is written that he partook of flesh and blood “that through death he might destroy that which had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14). We have already seen that until death no one is free from temptation to sin, which has the power of death in those who yield to its impulses. Natural impulse—or inclination to sin—is the devil which has to be destroyed. Therefore those who yield to temptation are of the devil. Hence Jesus said to the Jews, “Ye are from beneath; I am from above” (John 8:23), a statement more readily comprehended by his further definition, “Ye are of this world” (ibid), “Ye are of father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do” (ibid, verse 44). In saying that the Jews were of “father the devil”8 he not only recognised that he was generated from the stock of Adam, but also that human flesh with all its impulses contrary to the will of the Father is the devil. For in making this statement he could not be referring to his immediate parentage any more than he did to the immediate progenitor of the Jews to whom he was speaking, for it must be evident that in this case he referred to the original cause of sin, i.e., the desire to eat the pleasant fruit of the forbidden tree, which arose in Eve in consequence of the lying suggestion of the serpent, whom Jesus said was a liar and murderer from the beginning. Hence he said, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” “Ye do the deeds of your father” (ibid, verse 41). “I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father” (ibid, verse 38). “Ye are from beneath; I am from above” (ibid, verse 23).

The apostle James explains the source of the things which are from beneath when he says, “Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed” (James 1:14). He further explains the source of the things from above, saying, “Do not err, my beloved brethren. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures” (ibid, verses 16–18). We have already seen the source of those things which enabled Jesus to exhibit perfect knowledge and manifest perfect obedience to his Father’s precepts. Just as the disciples owe to the knowledge of the scriptures all their power to follow in the way of wisdom, so Jesus was completely and perfectly furnished for the same purpose and from the same source.

Further, we are told that the wisdom of man not only is “earthly, sensual and devilish,” but also that it is due to the “course of nature” (ibid, 3:15–16). It is “earthly” because Adam was formed from the dust of the ground (Gen. 2:7; 1 Cor. 15:46–48). It became sensual and devilish because at the suggestion of the serpent Adam and Eve gratified their natural inclination contrary to the command of God. The root of their action was the flesh; this in them had the power of death. The serpent, a beast of the field, caused Adam and Eve to cross over the line from obedience to disobedience. Since he caused their death, “he was a murderer from the beginning” (Gen. 3:4, 5; John 8:44). He was a liar, and the father of it. No supernatural agent was needed to make the serpent that. This was the beginning of transgression. The serpent’s subtle powers of observation were needed to put Adam and Eve to the test, and to manifest the frailty of human nature. The serpent uttered the first lie, “he was the father of it.” Well might Jesus describe the Scribes and Pharisees as serpents and vipers, casting their lies back into their face” (ibid, verse 55).

From the foregoing premises the following conclusions may be drawn:—

1.—The Devil, or Sin, which Jesus came to destroy by dying, is inherent in the flesh, which is “sinful.”

2.—“Sinful flesh” does not assume the same image in all the descendants of Adam. Some are like Cain, and the Scribes and Pharisees. Some are like Abel and Enoch.

3.—Jesus partook of this same flesh, but presented a perfect image of what man under the influence of that which comes from above should be. God sent His own Son in the “likeness of sinful flesh”—that is to say, there was no manifestation in him of the character of the old Adam, but an image of sinful flesh under perfect control. He was not a sinner.

4.—To speak of “sin in the flesh” as a something in the flesh called sin, and to say that “sin in the flesh has been inherited from Adam by his descendants, Jesus Christ included,” as the late J.T. Anderson did, is misleading and offensive. On the other hand, to teach as another does, that we have sin in the flesh only in the sense in which we have Christ in the flesh, is equally misleading. That is a very academic idea, and very untrue. When the apostle expressed the desire that Christ “may dwell in your hearts by faith,” he referred to faith or conviction which comes by the reception of evidence. That is quite different from the impulse which is natural to all men to follow their own bent and inclination. The testimony of the Apostle is emphatic on this point. “I find there a law, that when I would do good evil is present with me” (Rom. 7:21). He further describes this “law” as “in his members.” Again, when the apostle speaks of “Christ in you, the hope of glory,” he is referring to a hope begotten by belief in the word, which is not something natural to us, and becomes part of our mental attitude as the result of that which we have learnt; whereas no one needs to learn disobedience—it is inherent in our members. To deny this is to deny the truth. To deny that Jesus felt the same impulse when tempted to do that which was contrary to his Father’s will is to deny the truth and equal to denying that Jesus came in the flesh: “Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus came in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already is in the world” (1 John 4:3–4).

8 The italicised word is omitted, not forming part of the original.