I must hastily add. I hold to Jesus assuming sinful flesh not primarily for being my example, but primarily for being my Saviour. That's another topic, but it needed clarifying: Jesus as our Example is secondary at most in the reasons for taking our sinful humanity as his own.

Colin

This is am important point you're bringing up Colin.
I agree with you thoughts.

By way of clarifiaction, evil humans can tempt as well as evil angels, can they not?

Mike,

I think the subject of temptation deserves a thread of its own.

Before "temptation" 'leaves' us on this thread, reiterating the explanation of Lucifer's fall into sin given in Patriarchs and Prophets is useful. Generally we avoid it as disagreement with it is not always noted by the listeners, it being an unrighteous notion.

Lucifer was initially confused about his status next to the Son of God given the similarity of their appearances in his mind. This confusion gave rise to the thought of possibly perfect similarity, and the notion of equality was conceived...only to be countered by the Father's personal and then public counsel that his Son was divine and equal with himself, and Lucifer as a creature was quite obviously excluded from equality. Lucifer's iniquity was to disregard this counsel.

Following his imagination was Lucifer's problem when it clashed with God's truth. Even the conception of that notion mentioned above wasn't sinful until it was exposed as sinful when cherished against revealed truth.

For ourselves, even after getting to heaven, thoughts of selfishness may well arise, but the sin of harbouring those thoughts shall not rise a second time afresh in God's universe.

Clearly Lucifer was wrong on two counts - thinking he could be equal with God's Son, and insisting on that thought, but only the second point was sinful, given his knowledge at that point.

God's will for his universe is simply that errant thoughts are nipped in the bud for being errant, as selfish. So, temptation is possible without any evil angels or wicked humans...

Colin

What happens to our sinful flesh nature when are born again (the title of this thread)?

I believe it remains to tempt us, the same as it did before we were born again. But, as born again believers we are dead to sin, self, and Satan, and, in Christ, we are free to sin or not to sin, free to act out or not to act out the unholy suggestions generated by our sinful flesh nature.

Thanks Colin for bringing out the "imagination" side of things in your last post, as it compliments (makes up for what I am not covering in) the comments here in regards to "flesh".

On the topic of "sinful flesh nature"

The point about our understanding of “sinful flesh” or the more nebulous “sinful nature” is the division between flesh and spirit; the governmental position of these and the issue of sin, or the improper governing of these.

When God created man, He created him with physical and semi-physical capabilities as well as spiritual capabilities. To bring this to simple understanding of what is at stake in the transaction of sin, we need to understand where and what responsibility was placed by God.

Simply put if God wanted the responsibility to rest in the physical or semi-physical aspect, he could have easily done so. That is to say that if the matter of deciding whether something was or was not to be committed, lay in the physical nature, then God could have simply programmed the “flesh” so that when man would approach the forbidden tree, he would have been repulsed by let’s say the particular smell which his body chemistry would have been programmed to find repelling.

But such was not God’s design. God never designed man that he should live, being directed by the “flesh” regardless of the state it was in (pre-sin or post-sin). He did give man capabilities in the flesh, such as the five senses, etc. But these were only meant to be information communicators and not governing factors. Man was to be governed by the “word”. Thus God spoke to man and told him not to eat of the tree.

So what is it that transpired when man broke the governance of the “word”? He took it upon himself to listen to the flesh (he put his faith/ trust in his own physical senses). However God’s design was still in effect; and the word continues to be.

So the fallen nature has to do with our spirit being subject to the flesh by the wisdom of our faith trusting it. So the problem is not the flesh itself. The problem is our disposition to use it as source for governing. Hence the carnal mind. However the “word” is calling us to take our faith away from the body (flesh) and to place it in God where he designed it to be.

So simply put the problem is not in the flesh, but in the fact that we have subjected our spirit to it by faith. The gospel calls us to remove our faith from the “flesh” and to trust the “word”.

So that which is sinful, is not the flesh per say, but the “modus operandi” which has put the flesh as the governing source instead of the word. This has been done in our spirit by our will through faith. When one is born again, this “modus operandi” (state of faith) is ended and a new one established. Faith is removed from the flesh and placed in the “living word”.

So the “old sinful nature” “modus operandi” ceases to exist (crucified with Christ). The flesh remains, but that has never been the problem. The problem is and was its improper place in the order of governance which God never designed for it to have.

Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

[ November 06, 2005, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: John Boskovic ]

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.