Here are two verses that seem to say contradictory things about our sinful nature:
1. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, (Col 2:11)
2. So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin. (Rm 7:25b)
Do you see the problem? In the first verse Paul says our sinful nature has been circumcised by Christ. His sinful nature is gone. But in the second verse he admits that he still has a sinful nature, one that keeps him enslaved to sin. So which is it? Do we have a sinful nature or don’t we? Better read some more scriptures:
3. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. (Gal 5:24)
Oh good, our sinful nature has gone. That’s a relief.
4. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature. (Rm 13:14)
Huh? How could I gratify the desires of my sinful nature? I thought I didn’t have one anymore? Guess I still do.
5. For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. (Rm 7:5)
Now Paul’s saying it’s in our past again. We were controlled. So we’re not controlled by our sinful nature anymore right? So it’s gone right?
6. Hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord. (1 Co 5:5)
Okay, now I’m really confused. This man, who “calls himself a brother,” still has a sinful nature. His sinful nature wasn’t circumcised by Jesus but is now about to be destroyed by Satan so he can be saved. But why would the devil want to destroy someone’s sinful nature? And why would Satan want to help someone get saved?
Isn’t this a little confusing?
There is a simple explanation for these puzzling scriptures – they are all poor translations found exclusively in the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible.
What’s going on at the Zondervan factory?
Now I love the NIV – it’s one of my favorite English Bibles – but its translators really tied themselves in knots when it came to writing about our so-called sinful nature. Do we have a sinful nature? We don’t. Second Peter 1:4 says we are partakers of His divine nature. In truth, the sinful nature versus new nature debate is barely mentioned in the Bible. To say you got a new nature when you were born again is like saying you got a new steering wheel when you bought a car. It’s true, but it’s only part of a larger story. When you were born again you didn’t just get a new nature, but a whole new life. You used to be dead but now you’re alive (Col 2:11). You used to be one kind of creature but now you’re another (2 Co 5:17).
So what’s going on with these six verses above? Not only are they contradictory but some of them seem to say we have something (a sinful nature) that we clearly do not have. In five of these verses (no.s 2-6), Paul is actually talking about our flesh (sarx in Greek). The word “flesh” refers to our physical bodies or our sensual nature. It’s that part of us that we would describe as natural as opposed to spiritual. Our bodies and our natural senses were given to us by God; we need them to live. Theologians who say that our flesh is inherently evil might as well say that Jesus was evil. Afterall, Jesus was the Living Word made flesh (Jn 1:14). True, Jesus wasn’t born under the curse of sin and death like we were. But He had all the same appetites we have and He was tempted in every way. He had the full flesh experience yet remained without sin (Heb 4:15).
Everything God made is good and that includes the flesh. The problems come when we walk after the flesh, when we choose to live in the inferior realm of the flesh rather than the superior realm of the spirit. The sinner has no choice in this matter – he remains in the flesh and the flesh is all he knows. But we who have been born of the spirit can choose. We can walk after the old way of the flesh or we can walk after the new way of the spirit (Rm 8:5). This is why the Bible exhorts those of us who are in the spirit to walk in the spirit (Gal 5:25). It’s saying “renew your mind and choose!” Put off the old and put on the new. There are chapters and chapters that explain this new way of life for us (e.g., Eph 4, Col 3). To choose the way of the flesh is to be, what the King Jimmy writers call, “carnal-minded.” Carnal-mindedness, for the born again spirit-filled believer, is a choice not a condition and it’s a choice that runs contrary to our new nature.
Verse 1 in the list above is a little different. In this verse the words “sinful nature” do not refer to the flesh but the “body of sin” or the “body of the sins of the flesh” that Jesus cut off you. Paul is basically saying that you were a slave to sin but you’re not anymore (see Rm 6:6). Even the NIV is perfectly clear about this: You have been “freed from sin;” “You have been set free from sin;” “You have been set free from sin” (Rm 6:7,18,22). This is wonderful news. When you were in the flesh you weren’t free to choose but now that you’re in the spirit you are!
So why do I still sin?
From time to time you’re going to sin and when you do you may wonder why you did it. If you read certain passages in the NIV you might conclude that it’s because you still possess a sinful nature. You may think that you’re hard-wired to sin and that you need to die to self. But that’s simply not true! You died already. You are not a saint with a sinful nature any more than you are a reformed sinner. Read what the Bible says about you. You are a completely new creation with new desires. We sin because we sometimes choose to walk by sight and not by faith (Rm 14:23). We may do it out of habit. We may do it out of ignorance. But when we set our minds on inferior earthly things and indulge the lusts of the flesh we are acting out of character. We are acting hypocritically by pretending to be someone we are not.
This is an important truth because so many Christians are striving to arrive at where they already are. They’re trying to improve themselves through self-denial and, in doing so, are walking hard after the flesh. They do not do what they want to do so they try harder. But they are only adding fuel to the fire. You cannot fight flesh with flesh.
The new New International Version
Perhaps in view of these issues, the good people at Zondervan recently announced an important change to the 2011 version of the NIV Bible. On page 8 of its Notes from the Committee on Bible Translation, they said, “Most occurrences of ‘sinful nature’ have become ‘flesh.’” In other words, the NIV translators have decided to use the same English word for sarx found in the King James Version and nearly every other English Bible. This is a good change and it’s already in effect. For example, if you look up Romans 13:14 on the latest version of the NIV hosted at Bible Gateway, you will find that it now says this:
“Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.”
But old habits die hard. Take a look at the screenshot of this verse (right) and you will see an interesting footnote. In the note the translators qualify their change by saying:
“In contexts like this, the Greek word for flesh (sarx) refers to the sinful state of human beings, often presented as a power in opposition to the Spirit.”
So we’ve gone from having a sinful nature to living in a sinful state. Big improvement. My earlier point bears repeating: If the flesh is inherently sinful then Jesus was sinful, but it isn’t and He wasn’t. Read the verse above again and you will see that the problem is not the flesh, but thinking about how to gratify the desires of the flesh. See that? Most of our problems originate with our unrenewed thinking, not our corruptible flesh. Jesus had all the same desires of the flesh that you and I have, yet He never sinned. Now Christ is our life (Col 3:4). This means we have the same nature as Jesus. We also inhabit the same sort of flesh that Jesus had. Consequently, we can live the same victorious life as Jesus. How? Certainly not by trying harder in the flesh. No, we live the life we’re called to by renewing our minds and learning to walk after the spirit.
___
Related posts:
- The test of your gospel
- Romans 7: The flesh test
- How to walk after the flesh in 20 easy lessons
- Want to be a transparent sinner? Then reveal what’s really inside
Your explanation is the only thing that truly makes sense in light of context and the bigger picture. Well written. This is probably one of the most difficult issues for most believers to grasp, including pastors, and yet it seems so simple when you do grasp it finally. It eluded me for a long time, and in some ways I’m only beginning to understand it, but at the same time it seems so clear.
Comment by Brandon — September 4, 2011 @ 1:34 pm |
Very well done.
I just read another article and enjoyed it also “Romans 2:13 – Justified by the Law?” and wonder if the reference to our nature needs to be changed to our flesh. See following quote from the Romans 2:13 article.
“Why is failure the inevitable consequence of trying to do the right thing? Because it’s in our nature to screw up!”
Thanks
Comment by Scribe — September 5, 2011 @ 5:28 pm |
Thanks Scribe – you are sharp-eyed indeed. I never really liked that Romans 2:13 post – it just doesn’t zing – and I have revised the sentence you flagged above. I’m actually in the middle of a huge study of what the Bible says about sinful nature and one of the lessons I’m learning is the need to distinguish between nature that is inherited and nature that is learned (eg: that has become second nature to me). If you happen upon any other posts where I discuss sinful nature when I should probably be referring to flesh, please let me know. Thanks!
Comment by Paul Ellis — September 5, 2011 @ 5:52 pm |
Excellent Paul. Not only have you clarified some issues on the “flesh” vs “sin nature” that needed to be clarified…but you have given me a subject to bring up at home group tonight
Comment by Steve Hackman — September 7, 2011 @ 11:02 am |
Thanks Paul. This is so important in my mind as it really clarifies for me ‘what died’ when it says past tense …. I died. The problem I’m now having is not with what you teach on your blog, although I may see some things slightly differently. It’s finding people who agree with me. Since, I believe the spirit started showing me the gospel of grace I’ve had heated conversations with christian relatives and my church leader, who I respect, but find it extremely difficult to discuss these things with, people get so defensive and act like the guardians of truth. I just find that every church I go to preaches a mixture of law and grace …. I get labeled a heretic and it’s driving me nuts. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Comment by Jason — September 12, 2011 @ 9:08 am |
Hi Jason,
Some people you’re going to have to love right past your differences. For instance, I sometimes click the like button on FB posts for no reason other than I like the person who wrote it – they’re a brother or sister. I might think they’re a little confused but life would be pretty awful if we turned every point of disagreement into a battleground. We’re all on a journey and we all have blind spots. I look back on my own walk at how gracious certain grace-people were to me even as I was confused and didn’t know it. That has left an impression as great as their theology. If Jesus could be a friend of sinners then we at least can be friends of saints. Love covers a multitude of shortcomings.
If you have been given some kind of platform, then preach the undiluted truth seasoned with wisdom from above. If you’re labeled a heretic then rejoice because this is the same label that was pushed onto Jesus.
Comment by Paul Ellis — September 13, 2011 @ 11:51 am |
We are not all saints but! Truth can divide, but it separates the false from true, and speaking the truth in love is important, just because we lovey everyone doesn’t mean we can’t defend the truth and contend for the faith, lest sheep go astray
Comment by Sandy — March 23, 2012 @ 3:19 am
I have been comparing the different versions, and in the NKJ it says sinful nature, but down the bottom of the page, it says flesh. So the problem is not limited to the NIV? The more I look, the more confused I am getting. I know ( as I was taught over 20 yrs ago ) that we do not have a sinful nature) but it is still so confusing with all the different version saying different things. AND over 14 different meanings to the Greek word sarx… how do I teach this??
Comment by Tracy — November 22, 2011 @ 12:12 pm |
Tracy, the issue as I see it is flesh vs spirit. It’s walking by sight (flesh) or walking by faith (spirit). As believers, we can choose. Ideally we should walk according to the spirit but there are times when we don’t. The Galatians are a prime example. The issue for them was not law vs grace – that was merely the battleground – but that they who had begun in the spirit were trying to finish the job in the flesh. More here and here.
Comment by Paul Ellis — November 22, 2011 @ 5:22 pm |
Hi Paul,
I agree that Jesus also had a flesh or physical body, but I personally think Jesus had a perfect body that Adam had before falling into sin. After Adam sinned, he no longer has the perfect body but a degenerated body with many deformed faculties that tempts a man to sin. Unfortunately we have inherited the deformed body from Adam. If this is not evident, just consider lust. The sin of lust is exactly to fulfill the bodily need for sex which is triggered by the hormones in our body. Psychobiology even tells us that mental states such as anger or envy correlate to the active firing of neurons different parts of our brain. When we sin, we are indeed obeying the desires of the body. It is the body that tempts us to sin. With the physical body we have, we are inclined to sin because the body always tempts us to do so. I do agree with you that we have the choice not to sin, but I differ from you in thinking where the source of the sin is.
I also don’t see the need to make a sharp distinction between “sinful natuer” and “flesh”, for the flesh IS the source of sinful desires. Whether you call it the sinful nature or flesh doesn’t matter. It is A PART OF US that tempts us to sin. Perhaps we can’t say it’s the “cause of sin”, because as you said earlier we have a choice to conform or decline. People who think we have a sinful nature also don’t think we have an excuse for sinning, because we have a chioce to either conform or decline. so it seems like the debate of whether we have a sinful nature is really a semantic one.
I also take issue with your saying that non-christians don’t have the choice to rebel against sin. I have met non-Christians or “sinners” who realize that they have thoughts that are immoral and they could resist it by their will power. Perhaps you could argue that Christians can do better with the help of the Holy Spirit. But the fact is that non-Christians also have a choice not to sin when they realized that their thoughts do not conform to the “law of the heart” that God has put in every person.
I have one more concern to be mentioned: If we don’t have a sinful nature in us, then how could we sin? According to you, we sin because we choose to walk according to the flesh. But how could we choose to walk in the flesh if the flesh is not part of us? I guess according to you, we walk in the flesh because we walk in the flesh. The choice is completely arbitrary. If it is arbitrary, then how are we responsible for sinning or praiseworthy for worshiping God?
Comment by doubter — November 27, 2011 @ 7:24 pm |
Hi Mark, I did not say sinners were incapable of resisting sin – the success of dieters is testimony to the resolve of some. I said those in the flesh were incapable of doing anything other than walking in the flesh. A sinner can’t walk in the spirit because they haven’t been born of the spirit. I disagree with your implied view that Jesus had bodily advantages over the rest us. Hebrews 4:15 said he “has been tempted in every way, just as we are.” Why do Christians sometimes sin? Most of the time it’s either habit or ignorance.
Comment by Paul Ellis — November 27, 2011 @ 7:51 pm |
I don’t think sinning is caused by ignorance. Lacking knowledge regarding what is sinful implies we’re not responsible for sinning: if I don’t know what actions are sinful, why is it my fault when I sin? But this is not that important I guess.
I read your comment again and spotted something that I’m really uncomfortable with. You wrote ” Everything God made is good and that includes the flesh. The problems come when we walk after the flesh, when we choose to live bin the inferior realm of the flesh rather than the superior realm of the spirit”.
You also wrote “True, Jesus wasn’t born under the curse of sin and death like we were. But He had all the same appetites we have and He was tempted in every way. He had the full flesh experience yet remained without sin (Heb 4:15).”
The flesh is good, but Jesus was tempted by the flesh to sin. In what sense is the flesh good if it tempts us to sin? This brings back to my earlier point that many times we sin because we are tempted by the body’s natural desires (think about the hormone example).
The proponents of “sinful nature” theory also think that the sinful nature is the same thing as bodily desires. It seems like you and the sinful nature theorists are actually having a verbal and not substantial disagreement. What you consider as the body you call it “flesh” and your opponents just call it the “sinful nature”. Once you guys come into agreement regarding definitions the disagreement will disappear.
Comment by mark — December 9, 2011 @ 7:29 pm
I wouldn’t confuse the flesh with the Tempter. And I have in mind both meanings of the word flesh – natural body and natural life. Both come from God and He is not the Author of evil. You can be tempted to sin by lots of good things. The law is a prime example. Paul said it was good AND it inflamed sin (Rom 7:13, 5:20). The strength of sin (bad) is the law (good) (1 Cor 15:56). None of our God-given desires are evil. That we can indulge them for evil ends is a separate matter.
Comment by Paul Ellis — December 12, 2011 @ 6:03 pm
Hi Paul, Welcome back from your Holiday.
Does my understanding go along with your teachings?
Habits & ignorance of the truth of God cause for stumbling but our physical bodies are vehicles for learning & they follow the mind. If we yield to the Spirit and abide in the Christ Mind, the body experiences the things of the Spirit (Love, Peace, Harmony, Wholeness) But if we yield to the carnal mind, the things of the world, our bodies will follow and experience the things of the world ( Sin, Fear, discord, sickness etc.)
It comes down to where you seat your mind. What you yield to and abide in.
Comment by CT — December 13, 2011 @ 6:39 am |
My teachings only have value if they line up with what the Bible says. We don’t have two minds but we can direct our mind in two different directions. Paul said fix your eyes on Jesus and set your mind on things above (Col 3).
Comment by Paul Ellis — December 14, 2011 @ 7:10 am |
Much of my teachings come from an unpublished minister born in the 1800′s so my wording may not go along w/ the phrases and wording many use today but I think you respect the teachings of Andrew Wommack as lining up with the Bible. A. Wommack speaks of two minds under Col 3:10, one being the physical mind and the other being the mind of our born again spirit which A. Wommack says has the Mind of Christ (under I Cor 14:14).
Comment by CT — December 18, 2011 @ 8:02 am |
Amen!
Comment by Sandy — March 23, 2012 @ 3:05 am |
The publisher of the NIV bible and the Satanic Bible are the same? Found out from my friend, Carl
Comment by tacticianjenro — January 1, 2012 @ 10:13 am |
The NIV is published by Zondervan. Anton Lavey’s Satanic Bible is published by a company called Avon. Both Zondervan and Avon are owned by HarperCollins (which is owned by NewsCorp, if you’re interested). So the two publishers share a parent but it’s not accurate to say that the publisher of the NIV is the same as the publisher of the Satanic Bible. I’m sure the folks at Zondervan would have a fit if you did.
Comment by Paul Ellis — January 2, 2012 @ 7:12 pm |
thank you for clearing this up it helps to relate bible truths ex. new creation, remove heart of stone thanks andy
Comment by andy bradice — February 9, 2012 @ 11:54 am |
Paul, not that it matters but I believe just the opposite that we still have the sin nature. I grew up in a very legalistic church and struggled with why I continued to sin. The summary of my struggle was that maybe I was not really saved. The only thing that set me free and gave me assurance of eternal life was understanding the same thing that Paul understood in Rom 7. I realized it was sin living in me and it will be that way until I am glorified. Believing the way you do I can not see how you believe that Paul was a Christian when discribing himself in Rom. 7. The way I believe set me free from the bondage I was in. Please take my statement with love because we are both brothers but just as you say the way you believe is the truth, I believe the way I believe is the truth because this truth set me free and is settled in my mind. God Bless Paul
How long will this conflict take place within us? As long as we live in these unredeemed bodies! You and I will not be free from the influence of sin in our flesh until the Lord Jesus returns and gives us new bodies to go with the new identities we have received—but in the meantime we can grow in grace! Bob George “People to People Ministries”.
Comment by Paul — February 27, 2012 @ 12:26 pm |
Hi Paul,
No dramas – we’re all learning. Though I would point out that the sin that Paul was referring to was a noun and most definitely not him. He writes of “its lusts” (6:12), being “slaves of sin” (6:17, 20), sin “deceived me and killed me” (7:11), and said I’m not doing it but sin (7:20). Sin is something separate and seductive. The good news is don’t have to obey it any more. That’s a freedom that the unsaved don’t enjoy. They have no choice – whatever is not of faith is sin.
The Bible says we’re new creatures. I’m not disputing your experience – we have all learned to sin and we have some unlearning to do.
Comment by Paul Ellis — February 27, 2012 @ 2:52 pm |
Never trust the NIV, any modern version taken from the different manuscripts to what the KJV was taken is spurious! Read up on research into modern versions.
Comment by Sandy — March 23, 2012 @ 3:00 am |
The NIV does have translation problems, but so does the KJV. There isn’t just “one” KJV either. There have been many many “updated” versions of the KJV over the last 400 years. No translation is 100% reliable, but many of the “problems” in various translations are in the realm of spelling and grammar issues (which can sometimes effect meaning). People have to learn how to understand context, both within the text and within the culture of the audience the author was writing to. Responsible Bible study consults multiple translations and looks at Greek / Hebrew root wording and may even study historical context information to have the best understanding. There is no single translation to “bind and rule them all”. :) The only reliable text is the original Greek and Hebrew, but even to understand that, you have to know the historical and cultural context of the audience it was written to.
Comment by Brandon — March 25, 2012 @ 2:52 am |