The Sinful Flesh of the Son of God

7/28/2019 The Sinful Flesh of the Son of God

1/18

The Sinful Flesh of the

Son of God (Rom 8:3):A Key Image of Pauline Theology

VINCENT P. BRANICK

Department of Religious Studies

University of Dayton

Dayton, O H 45469-0001

CONTEMPORARY CHRISTOLOGY HAS SHOWN great interest in the humanity

of Jesus: his limits, his ignorance, his weaknessas seen through historicalcriticism of the gospels. For the most part, however, theology takes as its

unquestioned presupposition the general NT insistence on Jesus as sinless.1

By working from this presupposition in an exclusive manner, however,

theology neglects a dialectic within the NT and overlooks one of the key

elements of Pauline christology and soteriology.2 Critical exegesis, on the

otherhand, requires accepting the relative autonomy of each biblical author

and reading each in the context of his own conceptual system.

Paul in fact gives us a picture of Christ that insists on his involvement

with sin. As he introduces his most profound thoughts on salvation from sin

1 Pet 2 22, Heb 4 15, 7 26, 1 John 3 5 See also Matt 4 1-14, John 8 46, Acts 3 14 The

tradition of a sinless Messiah appears also in Pss Sol 17 41 and Judah 24 12 By exception D Bonhoeffer spoke of Jesus "involved in the predicament of the whole

flesh He is man as we are, he is tempted on all sides as we are, indeed far more dangerously

than we are In his flesh, too, was the law that is contrary to God's will He was not the perfectly

good man " Christ the Center (New York Harper & Row, 1966) 122 Similarly Barth wrote

of an essential yet scandalous ambiguity about Jesus, the lack of any clear and unambiguousevidence concerning his sinlessness, see his The Epistle to the Romans (London Oxford Univer

i 1933) 297 98 I hi D B h l f i h f d


2/18

THE SINFUL FLESH OF THE SON OF GOD (ROM 8:3) 247

through Christ, Paul declares, "God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh

( ) and for sin condemned sin in the flesh"

(Rom 8:3). This is not an isolated text. It parallels Paul's identification of

Jesus with "sin" in 2 Cor 5:21 and with the "curse" in Gal 3:13, as well as

Paul's description of the crucifixion in Col 2:14 as the nailing to the cross of

the debt that stood against us. Unfortunately these are among the most

difficult texts in the NT.

The discussion of these texts is rendered doubly difficult by an almost

instantaneous reaction of the reader to harmonize them with the rest of the

NT and thus safeguard the general thrust of christology through the cen

turies. Our task, however, is to read Paul through Paul's eyes and thus better

understand his sense of redemption. In our attempt to probe Paul's understanding of "the sinful flesh" of Christ, we will focus first on Rom 8:3,

particularly its vocabulary and (Part I), then on Paul's

descriptions of the earthly Jesus (Part II), and finally on Paul's general view

of sin and redemption (Part III).

I. Rom 8:3

We turn first to Rom 8:3 to look at the function and structure of this

verse and then at the key words.

A. Function and Structure

Verse 3 is governed by the principal thesis proposed by Paul in 1:

. Verse 2 explains:

. Verse 3 in turn gives the basis ()

for 2. It begins with an anacoluthon: ,

. . . . This half verse thus situates the root of thetrouble in "the flesh," not the Law. Verses 3b and 4 then describe in effect how

God does the impossible:

,

-

. Walking according to the Spirit ( 4) shows the

nature of the fulfillment of the Law. On the other hand, flesh in these verses

as well as in the next three appears more and more clearly as a demonic,

cosmic force, directly opposed to God.The statement about God sending his Son (vv 3b-4) appears as a modified

f l hi h P l i d3

Th f l i G l 4 4 "G d hi


3/18

248 THE CATHOLIC BIBLICAL QUARTERLY | 47, 1985

son, born of a woman, born under the Law, in order that he might redeem

those under the Law.. . ."We find the same formula also in 1 John 4:9: "God

sent his only Son into the world in order that we might live through him." In

extended form it appears in John 3:16-17: "God . . . gave his only Son in

orderthat all who believe in him might not perish but have eternal life. God

sent the Son into the world . . . in order that the world might be saved

through him."4

In all these instances we hear ofGod ( ) sending the Son ( )

followed by a purpose clause () expressing salvation in one form or

another. Paul describes the resulting salvation as fulfillment of the

of the Law or as a redemption. Even more striking and typically Pauline, as

we see from the comparison with John, is the way Paul develops the sendingconcept with the idea of contamination or subjugation of the Son to the

forces of the aeon.5

The language is that of paradox.6

Through this degrada

tion unto death come salvation and life.

B. Vocabulary

The language of Rom 8:3-4 is difficult. The sense of these verses, how

ever, depends greatly on two words: and .

1. . Paul speaks of Christ being sent of sinfulflesh, translated usually as "in the likeness of" (RSV, NAB). For the under

standing of this word in particular, the theological positions of the com

mentators frequently play an influential role. Concerned with the sinlessness

ofChrist, commentators see the word expressing a difference between Christ

and real sinful flesh, where expresses likeness in contrast to iden

tity. Thus for C. H. Dodd, Paul here is saying, "Christ never was a slave or a

prisoner, but as man He was exposed to the assaults of sin. He, the Son of

God, was sent in the guise of sinful flesh.. . . Christ then came in all the gloryof true humanity, in the guise of that flesh which in Adam is sinful."

7

J. Schneider, in his article on the word in TDNT, states: "The [in

this passage] thus indicates two things, first the likeness in appearance, and

secondly the distinction in essence. . . . Paul is showing that for all the

1963) 110, von der Osten-Sacken, Romer 8 als Beispielpaulinischer Soteriologie (FRLANT

112, Gottingen Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 144-454

The formula apparentlystems from wisdom traditions See esp Wis 9 10, 9 17, Philo,On Husbandry 51

5To understand the negative signification which this expression has for Paul in Gal 4 4


4/18


similarity between Christ's physical bodyand that of men there is an essen

tial difference between Christ and men. . . . He became man without enteringthe nexus of human sin."

8For Lagrange, "The likeness of the flesh of sin is

our flesh, but without the sin."9 Schlier concludes here that Paul is speakingabout "a sinful flesh . . . which for the Son was not a sinful flesh."

10The

motive for this interpretation by these commentators is always similar. Christ

was sinless, as we know from the rest of the NT; hence, Paul could not be

affirming any real sinfulness about Jesus.11

In his lengthyarticle examining the use of in the LXX and in

Paul, Ugo Vanni clearly points out that the fundamental and constant signifi

cation of the Greekword is "the perceptible expression of a reality."12

In the

LXX the expression and the realitymay be distinct from each other, e.g., themodel or pattern of a tool ( ) and the tool to be forged

(Sir 38:28). The expression and the reality may also be identical, e.g., in

Ezekiel's "vision of the expression of the gloryof the Lord (

)" (Ezek 2:1). Obviously it is the glory that is seen, although the expresses the direct object of the vision. Likewise 1 Mace 3:48

describes the Gentiles consulting of their idols. The seem

ingly pleonastic use of in these texts stresses the perception or

appearance of the reality itself. In fact, as Vanni concludes, never

supposes any grade of resemblance or approximation between expression

and the realityexpressed.13

Several times in the LXX, expresses the

veryarchitectonic model of some reality(4 Kgs 16:10; Josh 22:28; Sir 38:28).

8J. Schneider, "," TDNT5 (1968) 196.

9Saint Paul. ptre aux Romains (EBib; Paris: Gabalda, 1916) 193.

10 Der Rmerbrief (Freiburg: Herder, 1977) 241. For similar interpretations, see E. DeWitt Burton, Spirit, Soul andFlesh (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1918) 195 n. 2; S. Lyonnet,

Exegesis epistulae ad Romanos, Cap. V ad VIII(Rome: Biblical Institute, 1966) 161; M. H.Scharlemann, "In the Likeness of Sinful Flesh," CTM 32 (1961) 136; P. von der Osten-Sacken,Rmer 8, 230 n. 10; E. Ksemann, Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980)207; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans(ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1975) 1. 380 and n. 1; C. H. Dodd, Romans, 119-20; W. Sandayand A. C. Headlam, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC;2d ed.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1925) 193; T. Zahn, Der Brief des Paulus an die Rmer (3d ed.;Leipzig: Deichen, 1925) 382; J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1963) 280. Thus also Ambrosiaster, Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Aquinas,

Calvin, and Bengel.11

Except for J. Weiss, Das Urchristentum (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1917)376-77, none of the major commentators see Paul expressing docetism here. See E. Pagels, TheGnostic Paul. Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 33, for the


5/18


For this reason the LXX never speaks of a ofGod, even to forbid

its making. The making of an of God is roundly prohibited, but

the very thought of a of God is absurd. The is the ade

quate expression.

In Paul the term conserves its value as "the adequate and perceptible

expression of some reality" (Rom 1:23; 5:14; 6:5; 8:3; Phil 2:7).14

In Phil 2:7

the term again describes Christ, this time .

The sense of the word in Rom 8:3, therefore, by no means marks a

distinction or a difference between Christ and sinful flesh. If Christ comes

of sinful flesh, he comes as the full expression ofthat sinful flesh.

He manifests it for what it is. Sinful flesh is fully visible in the flesh of Christ.15

2. . In Rom 8:3 the manifestation of Christ of which Paul

speaks is .16

The literature on the Pauline notion of is

voluminous.17

We can agree with H. Schlier about this Pauline concept: "It is

difficult to say, that is, almost impossible to grasp with one concept what

sarx is."18

J. D. G. Dunn, in his article on Rom 1:3-4, seems to give us the

most valid approach to as Paul uses it. Dunn insists on two things:

first, that has a whole gamut of meanings, from a more or less simple

designation of physical, earthly existence to a thoroughly negative descrip-

1 4Ibid , 468

1 5This sense of as "perceptible expression" ties into Paul's repeated description

of the crucifixion and the redemption as a form of manifestation The redemption is accom

plished in Christ Jesus "whom God put forward (ov ) as an expiation to manifest

( ') his justice" (Rom 3 25-26) Before the Galatians' eyes (' ) Jesus

Christ "was exhibited crucified ( )" (Gal 3 1) Nailing the debt against

us to the cross, God "made a public show in openness ( )" (Col 2 14-15)

With a surprisingly Johannine twist, Paul thus sees the pre-paschal humanity of Christ and thecrosswhich he always keeps togetheras the great manifestation of God, first ofGod's justice

but also of the negativity of sin1 6

For this expression see 1 QS 11 9, 1 QM 4 3, 12 121 7

See E Brandenburger, Fleisch und Geist Paulus und die dualistische Weisheit

(WMANT 29, Neukirchen-Vluyn Neukirchener V, 1968), R G Bratcher, "The meaning of

sarx ('flesh') in Paul's letters," BT29 (1978) 212-18, E Burton, Spirit, E J Cooper, "Sarx and

Sin in Pauline Theology," LTP29 ('973) 243-55, J D G Dunn, "JesusFlesh and Spirit An

Exposition of Romans 3-4," JTS24 (1973) 40-63, R Jewett, Paul's Anthropological Terms A

Study of Their Use in Conflict Settings (Leiden Brill, 1971), esp pp 49-166, R J Karris,

"Flesh, Spirit, and Body in Paul," Bible Today 70 (1974) 1451-56, E Lohmeyer, "Sunde, Fleisch

und Tod," ZNW 29 (1930) 1-59, J Robinson, The Body A Study in Pauline Theology

(Philadelphia Westminster, 1977) 11-33, A Sand, Der Begriff "Fleisch" in den paulinischen


6/18


tion of human perversity.19

Secondly, the more or less identifiable meaningswithin the whole gamut influence each other and echcreach other.

20Thus, on

the one hand, the designation of Christ indicates first of all

Christ's earthly life, his descent from David, but at the same time echoes anegative aspect about Jesus before his resurrection. On the other hand, themore specifically Pauline descriptions of the flesh as the source ofevil worksin Gal 5:19-21 continue to evoke physical earthly existence, symbolized bythe soft, vulnerable tissue of the human body. As for many of Paul's concepts, the meaning of involves a simultaneous interpntration or overlay of meanings. Because of this overlay, nowhere in Paul do we find a purely

neutral sense of, one without some theologically charged echo.21

Two identifiable meanings or nuances of are of particular interestfor our understanding of Rom 8:3. The first meaning is that of solidarity. Asfor the OT,

22 for Paul expresses kinship and unity with other human

beings, whether this relationship be based on race (Rom 9:3; 11:14; probably4:1), sex (1 Cor 6:16; cf. Eph 5:31), or worldly order (Phlm 16; Col 3:22; cf.Eph 6:5). Exactly the opposite from being a principle of individuation, "flesh"for Paul is a basis of union and participation with others.

23The "sinful flesh"

of Christ thus expresses the solidarity of Christ with humanity.

The second meaning or nuance of important for our understanding of Rom 8:3 is that of a power or power sphere. For Paul is a realityin which people exist (Rom 7:5; 8:8); it makes demands and places others inits debt (Rom 8:12); it strives against spirit (Gal 5:17), has and (Gal 5:16,24), involves its own (Rom 13:14). Man sows init and receives a harvest from it (Gal 6:8); it has works (Gal 5:19) andfunctions as a criterion for being, living, thinking, and acting (Rom 8:4,5,13;2 Cor 1:17; 5:16; 10:2,3). "In the flesh" parallels "in Christ" and "in theSpirit" and expresses a similar type of relationship.

24When Paul speaks of

Christ's "sinful flesh," he is thus pointing to a dimension which is more"cosmic" than ethical, expressing especially the situation of Christ.

Commentators continue to discuss the literary origins of this notion offlesh. This is not the typical Hellenistic concept of body or flesh as the tomb

1 9J. D. G. Dunn, "Flesh and Spirit," 44-46; likewise J. A. T. Robinson, The Body, 17-26;

R. G. Bratcher, "sarje," 213-18.2 0

J. D. G. Dunn, "Flesh and Spirit," 48.2 1

E. Brandenburger, Fleisch und Geist, 44.2 2This sense of , translating the Hebrew, bsr, is unparalleled in Greek literature.

See E Burton Spirit 69 70 156 For examples in the OT see Gen 2:23 24; 29:14; 37:27;


7/18


of the soul, nor is it the OT view of flesh as the person himself. Close parallelsto Paul appear in Qumran.

25Brandenburger, however, describes parallels in

Philo and suggests a dualistic wisdom tradition behind Paul.26 We can prob

ably best understand Paul as standing in the confluence of the OT notion ofbasaras weakness, proneness to sin, and of the apocalyptic notion of an evilaeon in which humanityexists and which explains the enormity and powerof sin. In apocalyptic imagery, a person or a personal aspect may representor manifest an aeonic force. In this way, Paul can view at once as ahuman mode of existence and as a cosmic, demonic force.

27

The intensity of the anti-God aspect of in Romans 8 is clear: ( 6). . . .

, , ( 7).This is the sinful flesh of which Christ is the full manifestation. This is thesinful flesh that unites him with humanity in its sinfulness.

II. 2 Cor 5:21 and the Pre-paschal Christ

The difficulty with this understanding of these expressions, even withinthe Pauline context, the difficulty which leads most commentators to throw

up their hands as in the face of ineffable paradox, is the description of Christin 2 Cor 5:21 as , as "not knowing sin."

28Commen

tators almost unanimously see this expression as referring to the earthly lifeof Jesus.

29Rejecting the position of H. Windisch, who saw here a description

of the prexistent Son,30 the vast majority of commentators base their position on theological grounds. For P. Hughes, only as sinless "is Jesus qualified

25 1 QH 1 21-23,3 24-26,4 29-31, 12 24-26, 13 14-16, 1QM4 3, 12 11-12, 1 QS 11 9 Butsee E Brandenburgern discussion of these parallels, Fleisch und Geist, 86-106, also J D G

Dunn, "Flesh and Spirit," 61-62, G Kuhn, "New Light on Temptation, Sin and Flesh in the

New Testament," The Scrolls and the New Testament (ed Stendahl, New York Harper and

Row, 1957) 101-72 6

Fleisch und Geist, 123-2212 7 Thus R Jewett, Anthropological Terms, 113-16 J D G Dunn's objection to E

Schweizern position, therefore, is not convincing Schweizer insists that m Paul represents

a "sphere of influence" ("," 126-28) Dunn objects that it indicates a "mode of being "

Rather, in Paul's symbolic mentality, where one image suggests another, the personal and the

cosmic seem to interpenetrate2 8 The expression has parallels in Rom 7 7-8 and in rabbinic literature, see Str-B 3 5202 9 Thus Allo R Bultmann C Barrett Hughes and R Strachen


8/18


to effect an atonement for Man as man."31 "It is only as sinless that Christ

can bear the sins of others," states Barrett as he ties this concept into the

current belief of Judaism that the merits of the righteous could be used forthe benefit of the sinful.32 In this way, as Strachen states, Paul would be

"safeguarding the character of Jesus . . . the complete moral supremacy and

spotless purity of Him who knew temptation, but never yielded."33

Does this description of Christ not knowing sin, however, so clearly

refer to the earthly Jesus? If with Windisch, we relate this text to Rom 8:3,

the description would seem to depict Christ before he was sent as an expres

sion of sinful flesh. Moreover, one wonders if the concern to safeguard the

"moral supremacy and spotless purity" of Christ is not reading into the text anotion of sin different from that of Paul.

Those who would see here a description of the earthly Jesus read the

second phrase of the verse, "God made him to be sin" as referring to the

crucifixion. Yet Paul never separates the crucifixion from the incarnation.

For Paul, Christmas is the dawn of Good Friday. The separation of Christ's

death from his becoming man, moreover, leads to a kind of four-fold schema

of Jesus' career: (1) a prexistence in the form of God, (2) a sinless incarna

tion and earthly career, (3) a becoming "sin" and "curse" in the crucifixion,

and (4) a vindication in the resurrection. In effect, however, Paul's christol

ogy falls into only three phases: Christ prexistent, Christ according to the

flesh, and Christ according to the Spirit by the resurrection.

We are thus led to examine Paul's understanding of Christ, the incar

nate Christ before his resurrection, and to look particularly at those state

ments of Paul about Christ which seem to speak positively about his earthly

career. The texts cited to demonstrate Paul's continuity with the NT theme of

Jesus' sinlessness are Phil 2:5-8; Rom 5:18-19; 15:2-3; and 2 Cor 8:9. To this

list we might with M. Hooker and J. Dunn add the texts where Jesus is

described as Son of God, since the term was used in Jewish thought for those

who were righteous and acknowledged by God as such.34

31 P. E. Hughes, Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerd

mans, 1962)212.32 A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (HNTC; New York: Harper &

Row, 1973) 180.33 The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (MNTC; London: Hodder & Stoughton,


9/18


In Phil 2:5-8 Christ Jesus' mentalityofselfless humilityand obedience is

presented as a model for the Philippians. This humility and obedience is

moreoverthe cause of divine recompense (, 9). We note, however, thatthis paradigmatic picture of Christ involves his prexistence, not just his

earthly career. Paul begins by presenting Christ existing in the form of God,

who then empties himself by "taking on the form of a slave, being born in the

likeness of men." It is this shift from divine status to slave status that Paul

presents as a model of humility. Even the description of Jesus' obedience

unto death, which clearly alludes to his earthly career, cannot be isolated

from this broader picture.

This obedience appears again in Rom 5:19, where it redounds to the

justification of humanity. Again this obedience certainly describes the earthly

Jesus. Rom 15:3, presenting Christ as a model for the Romans, refers to him

in a global way, not pleasing himself, but accepting the reproaches directed

to others. In both texts the crucifixion is on Paul's mind, but so is the whole

kensis of the Son becoming man.

2 Cor 8:9 describes Christ Jesus again as a model, who "being rich

became poor for us." This text, however, clearly refers to the prexistent one,

described as rich. Paul never refers to the earthly Jesus in this way.

The texts thus far are clear about the obedience of Christ before his

resurrection. This is the characteristic attitude of Jesus. Paul mentions it

twice with emphasis. In Christ this attitude becomes the occasion for God's

acquitting justice to be exercised (Rom 5:9) and is the attitude epitomizing

Jesus' acceptance of death (Phil 2:8). For Paul obedience often seems to be

synonymous with faith (cf. Rom 1:5; 10:16; 15:18; 16:29; and probably 16:19).

It is the act especially of a slave (Rom 6:16). Beyond this attitude, however,

Paul says little specifically about the positive attitudes and qualities of Christ

.We turn now to the important text of 2 Cor 5:21. Given the three part

structure of Paul's christology, we would expect 21a likewise to be an

expression ofthe prexistent one. A look at the structure of the whole verse

confirms this expectation.

From its position in the text, the verse appears somewhat as a for

mula. J. F. Collange notes its weak link with the preceding development, a

certain rhythm to the verse itself, and its function here as a kind of "seal

(Phil 1:19) seems weak In this association of the Spirit with Christ nothing appears to indicate


10/18


at the end of the letter."35

E. Ksemann suggests a fragment of a Judeo-

Christian tradition.36

As a possible formula 2 Cor 5:21 parallels in structure other statementsof Paul and clarifies those other statements. The verse itself is composed of a

participial phrase, , a main clause in the aorist, , and a purpose clause, . The same pattern describes the structure of

2 Cor 8:9, a participial phrase, the aorist main clause, and the clause.The corresponding parts of these texts can be illustrated by the followingstructural diagram:

2 Cor 5:21

,

2 Cor 8:9 ' ,

.

Phil 2:6-11 . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . .

In 2 Cor 8:9 and Phil 2:6 the participial phrase clearly describes Christ'sprexistence. Thus we are led to see the participial phrase in 2 Cor 5:21

likewise as describing Christ's prexistence, not his earthly career.37 Whether

in simple formula or in extended hymnic form, all three texts thus seem toexpress a faith in the kenotic incarnation of a glorious prexistent one and

the positive results intended from that kensis. The Corinthian texts expressthe positive results for humanity. The Philippian text expresses the positive

result for Christ.

Concerning the second part of the verse of 2 Cor 5:21,

, we note simplythat the commentators are almost unani-

3 5Enigme de la deuxime ptre de Paul aux Corinthiens. tude exgtique de 2 Cor

2:14-7:4 (SNTSMS 18; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1972) 275.


11/18


mous in taking the word in its full sense as "sin."3 8

Since P. Bach-mann's commentary early in the century,

39most now reject the reading,

popular with many of the Fathers,

40

and more recently proposed by L. Sa-bourin,41 which sees in here a translation of the Hebrew, hattJt, as"sin offering." The principal reasons against this reading are summarized by

Collange: (1) would not have two different meanings in this singlesentence; (2) does not have the sense of "sin offering" in the rest ofPaul or the entire NT; (3) the antithesis / arguesagainst this sense; and (4) the parallel in Gal 3:13 does not admit ofany such ambiguity.

42

If this analysis of 2 Cor 5:21 is correct, then, again we see Paul veryreticent about holding up the earthly Jesus as a symbol and model of goodness.43 Rather, the earthly life of Jesus, telescoped into the crucifixion, isplaced under the rubric of "sin."

Whether Paul intends the title "Son of God" to express Jesus as therighteous, innocent man of the Spirit, as Dunn and Hookersuggest, is notclear.

44The background for this title in Paul seems to be more the story of

Isaac in Genesis than the description of the innocent, persecuted one inWisdom. This title is consistently associated with Jesus' death (Rom 5:10;

8:32) and seems to reflect again the motif of Christ's obedience at the handsof his Father. It is precisely as Son that Jesus is sent as an expression of sinfulflesh and born under the Law (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4). By his use of the "God-sending-Son" formula, Paul in fact associates this title with the "sin" which

is Christ.

III. Sin, Death, and Redemption

Our difficulty with the Pauline picture of Jesus still remains and stemsprincipally from our ethical understanding of sin. For our theological per

spective, we see sin as an action of the created person contradicting the law

and love of God. We ask if such sin could be said of Christ, the incarnate

3 8Thus F. Fallon, C. K. Barrett, A. Plummer, E.-B. Alio, F. Filson, P. Hughes, and

H. Windisch.3 9

Derzweite Brief des Paulusan die Korinther (Leipzig: Deichen, 1909).4 0

Ambrose, Augustine, Ambrosiaster, and Cyril of Alexandria.4 1

Rdemption sacrificielle. Une enqute exgtique (Bruges: Descle de Brouwer, 1961);


12/18

THE SINFULFLESH OF THE SON OF GOD (ROM 8:3) 257

Son of God, and we conclude with the rest of the NT that Jesus was

absolutely sinless.

Yet H. Ridderbos insists, "In approaching the Pauline doctrine of sin,we must not orient ourselves in the first place to the individual and personal,

but to the redemptive-historical and collective points of view."45

For Paul sin

is not first of all an individual act or condition. It is rather the supra-

individual mode of existence in which one shares.46

Our understanding of

Paul's kenotic christology ofJesus' sinful flesh thus requires an understand

ing of Paul's notion of sin as more than ethical and personal.

Paul stands in the apocalyptic current involving an intense pessimism

about this world.47

Sin, Paul admits, comes into the world through human

failing (Rom 5:12).48 But given its "entrance," sin for Paul takes on aeonic

dimensions. With death it becomes an enslaving power.49

Sin becomes an

alien power residing within the individual, denying him command of his own

actions (Rom 7:17,20). All things are shut up "under sin" (Gal 3:22), with its

"leaders" and "wisdom" (1 Cor 2:6), even its own "god" (2 Cor 4:4). Death,

which enters the world with sin (Rom 5:12), is the place where sin reigns in a

special way (Rom 5:21).

"Death," "flesh," "this aeon" are the images Paul uses to describe the

supra-personal, objective, almost palpable reality ofsin. Sin does affect theindividual, just as "flesh" is always seen in relationship to the individual. The

individual must likewise undergo his or her own death. But flesh, sin, and

death are more than the individual's personal problems. They reflect and are

part of a cosmic or aeonic perversion. For Paul, the individual is affected as

being part of this perversion.

When we look more carefully at the connection Paul makes between sin

and death, we obtain a more precise idea ofthe universality of sin and how it

can be applied to Christ. As A. Feuillet points out, "Death for Paul is morethan physical death. Death has a double sense, physical and spiritual. Physi

cal death itselfis a sign of and is inseparable from spiritual death."50

"Death,"

4 5Paul. An Outline ofHis Theology(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) 91.

4 6Thus H. Ridderbos, Paul, 93; see also E. J. Cooper, "Sarx and Sin," 245-48.

4 7This pessimism is found particularly in the Essene movement; see the radical insistence

on general human sinfulness in 1 QU 16:11; 1 QS 11; CD 1.4 8

4 Ezra 7:116-26 and 2 Apoc. Bar. 54:15-19 likewise trace the sinfulness of humanity

back to Adam.4 9

Paul describes both sin and death as active with such verbs as (Rom 6:14


13/18


Feuillet continues, "for the Apostle is first of all a spiritual state, a deviation

from God provoked by the revolt from mankind's origins."51

Rom 5:12-14 makes an explicit connection between death and sin in itsuniversality. This text is written in diatribe structure, where Paul debates

with an imaginary interlocutor. In 12 Paul makes his basic assertion:

*

, ,

' . Paul stresses the correspondence between death affect

ing allhuman beings and allhaving sinned. Even the chiasm of 12,

. . . . . . . . . , stresses the exact correspondence

between sin and death, whether in the particular case of Adam or for all

human beings. The dialogue then begins in 13. Paul makes a statement

(13a), an objection is heard (13b), and Paul answers the objection (14). The

pattern appears in the succession of the particles . . . . . . .52

The

statement of Paul in 13a is meant to develop the assertion in 12:

. The objection arises: -

. The answer of Paul to this objection is important for

our discussion about Christ and sin but unfortunately involves a grammati

cal obscurity. Verse 14 reads: '

', .

Most commentators read ' as

modifying , i.e., as meaning "not sinning as did Adam," viz.,

transgressing the Law. Problems arise with this interpretation. (1) This is an

unusual sense of with the dative. For the sense of "as" or "like" we would

expect with the accusative. (2) It involves a sudden reversal of Paul's

thought. Up to this point he has been stressing the influence of Adam on

present sin. (3) Paul does not otherwise talk about the of Adamas a breaking of the Law. Indeed for Paul the Law came only 430 years after

Abraham (Gal 3:17).

Thus, it seems more correct to read this phrase as modifying "death

ruled."53

with the dative here would carry the usual meaning of "on the

basis of."54

Here, then, Paul is insisting on how Adam has influenced the

universality of sin. Death rules from Adam to Moses on the basis of the

', the concrete perceptible expression of

5 1Ibid., 289 n. 1.


14/18


Adam's transgression. This is Paul's explanation of how all have sinned even

when there was no law to break. The expression,

' thus forms a parallel and a basis for the phrase in 12,' . Both phrases explain why death affects all human

beings. As answering the objection, "Sin cannot be taken into account where

there is no law," 14 thus basicallystates that it can be taken into account

wherever death rules. And death rules by the concrete expression of Adam's

sin, presumably, mortal, sinful flesh. Those over whom death rules can be

said to have sinned ( ), even those who in another sense have

not sinned ( ), e.g., those who lived before the Law.

Vanni paraphrases Paul's thought in this way: "If all die, all sin. They did not

sin in the specific sense prevalent in the Jewish world (viz., a transgression of

the Law).. . . They sinned by a more generic sin, but one not for all that less

real, as the real raging of death demonstrates."55

In the following chapter of Romans, writing about Christ, Paul states

that death no longer rules over him ( ,

Rom 6:9). In effect he is saying that death did at one point rule over Christ.

He is now raised from the dead and will never die again. But prior to his

death and resurrection, Christ was under the reign of death and therefore

underthe reign of sin. If death rules over him, then he too could be classedwith the universality of sinners. Hence, Paul can continue in Rom 6:10,

, , , . The dative of

both and is a dative of interest (dativus commodi).S6

The second

dative ( ) is clear from the context; the first ( ) follows from

the parallelism of the verse. Paul is making the point that Jesus was really

subject to the power of sin and died "for its sake," "under its claim." Paul

does not flinch with this breathtaking statement because he can say it hap

pened (aorist) once and for all, and Jesus now lives (present) "for the sake ofGod," "under the claim of God."57

It is the resurrection, then, that makes palatable the image of Christ as

an expression of sinful flesh or as sin itself. The resurrection is the full

transformation of the body of Christ, a transformation from , ,

, to , , (1 Cor 15:42-43). The resurrection is

the transformation of Christ from being to being

(1 Cor 1:30). The resurrection is in effect Christ's

own redemption from sin.


15/18


In Christ Jesus and specifically in his "body of flesh" God's redemption

and reconciliation take place.58

God is the active agent in this redemption

and reconciliation. It is God who reconciles the world to himself in Christ(2 Cor5:18-19). It is God who sends his Son for our redemption (Gal 4:4).

Christ here is not so much the agent of redemption but rather the place of

redemption because he himself was redeemed from the curse and subjection

to the Law.59

Thus Paul can insist, "If Christ has not been raised your faith is

futile, and you are still in your sins" (1 Cor 15:17).

This concept ofredemption, where Jesus functions as the primary bene

ficiary, does not render him totallypassive in this divine reconciliation. Paul

insists, as we have seen, on the obedience of Christ as a key aspect ofredemption (Rom 5:19). But the image of Jesus somehow meriting the redemp

tion by the goodness of his life is not a real component of Paul's theology.

In the same line, M. Hooker has shown that the of Rom 5:18

refers, not to Christ's "righteousness" by which all are saved, but to God's

"acquittal" exercised on Christ by which all are saved.60

The stress of Paul in

this key text of Romans is again on the grace of the Father. "Condemnation

follows one transgression, but grace follows many transgressions unto acquit

tal" (5:16). "Thus as through one transgression, condemnation comes to allmen, so also through one acquittal, justice of life comes to all men" (5:18).

The thought is so simple it seems wrong. God looks down on great sinfulness

and exercises his gracious acquittal. All this could take place because one

representative of sinful humanity stood in accepting obedience (5:19).

Conclusion

It is not possible here to investigate the sources of Paul's idea of theredeemer in sinful flesh. Some parallels can be found in the gnostic language

ofthe redeemed redeemer, for instance in the story ofthe young prince in the

5 8See A. Feuillet, "Incorporation," 290: "'Le corps de chair' du Fils de Dieu est ainsi le

lieu o s'accomplit la rconciliation parfaite des hommes avec Dieu"; P. von der Osten-Sacken,

Rmer 8, 230: "Die Erlsung hat ihren Ort 'in Jesus Christus,' weil Gott in ihm urbildlich die

Erlsung vollzogen hat."59 C. F. D. Moule points out how the NT reflects a shift, rooted in the OT figures, from

seeing Jesus as the one who receives vindication from God after being rejected to seeing Jesus as


16/18

THE SINFULFLESH OF THE SON OF GOD (ROM 8:3) 261

Hymn of the Pearl.61

Such relatively late parallels suggest the possibility of

earlier traditions existing at the time ofPaul. In general, however, the theme

of the redeemed redeemer is difficult to pin down.62

J. Hoad, on the other

hand, points to some literary parallels of Paul's imagery in Isa 53:9b-ll. 63

Such a connection with Deutero-Isaiah could tie into the general develop

ment of servant christology in the NT.

Yet a purely literary background would not seem to have been enough to

warrant the daring picture that Paul draws of the earthly Jesus. In the last

analysis, the most plausible source of Paul's image of Christ lies in the

Jesus traditions Paul received, traditions we can reconstruct from the Synop

tic gospels.

Through the theological overlays ofthe gospels, we do get a picture ofaJesus who ate and drankwith sinners, who could qualify legally as a sinner

for his transgressions of the letter of the Law, who as son of Mary was a

scandal to his kinsmen, so common did his origins and life seem. Above all

we see a Jesus who began his ministry by undergoing the rite of baptism.64

The beloved Son ofthe Father appears first of all in this ritual for sinners. He

was not like the recognized pure and pious people of his day.

Paul expresses and develops his faith in these scandalous traditions by

describing Christ coming as an expression of sinful flesh. By choosing the

word "flesh," Paul evokes Christ's solidarity with sinful humanity. He was

one ofus, even in our sinfulness. He was our very flesh.

Reconciliation of the Pauline understanding with the rest of the NT

hinges on the understanding of and in Paul. As related to

Christ, the terms express above all the objective, larger-than-human, the

corrupting, anti-God power-sphere of unredeemed existence. This objective

power-sphere for Paul certainly involves the individual but perhaps also

provides enough of a distance from a direct and immediate involvement of

personal responsibility that he can apply these terms to Christ. This cosmicsense of and thus leaves room for the affirmation of Christ as

sinless in an ethical, personal sense.

6 1See Acts of Thomas in W. Foester, Gnosis. A Selection of Gnostic Texts (2 vols;

Oxford: Clarendon, 1972-74). 1.356-57.6 2

See the reservations of W. Foester, Gnosis, 1.17.6 3

"Some New Testament References to Isaiah 53," ExpTim 63 (1957) 254-55.6 4

The dialogue in Matt 3:14-15 indicates an early Christian uneasiness with the baptismof Jesus. See also Matt 8:17, where the Servant's pattern of bearing iniquities (Isa 53:11) is

softened to mean curing ills In addition early Christian difficulty with the baptism of Jesus


17/18


Yet the Pauline picture of Christ warns us against a glib reading of the

NT description of Jesus. As Karl Barth writes, "We stumble when we sup

pose that we can treat of Him, speak and hear of Himwithout being

scandalized."65 The earthly Jesus did not appear as the paradigm of human

virtue. He appeared as a sinner. Paul understood this. If contemporary chris

tology intends to be biblical, it will have to wrestle as did Paul with the sinful

flesh of God's Son.

65 Romans, 280.


18/18

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal

typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

The Sinful Flesh of the Son of God

Documents

Transcript of The Sinful Flesh of the Son of God