But " flesh" does not alwaj's denote sinfulness (see Rom. i, 3 ; ix, 5; 1 Tim. iii, 16; John i, 14). Ihe flesh, in Christ, was not sinful ; God sent him only "in the likeness of sinful flesh" («• ufiotionari aapKoc: cifjap- n'of, Rom. viii, 3). This sinless flesh, as the organ of the Word of life, contains the divine life, which is com- municated to men also living in the flesh, to redeem them from the death of sin, and to make them partak. ers of everlasting life (John vi, 51).
We see, then, that the meaning of the word flesh was, on the one hand, gradually extended from a phj'-s- ical to a metaphysical, and finally to an ethical sense. In the ethical use in the N. T., moreover, of the term " flesh," we do not find the idea of essential sin as ly- ing in the flesh. Flesh in itself is neither liad nor sin- ful. It is the living body, the casket of the soul, con- taining within itself the interior and exterior organism of the senses, which, by its union with the spirit, con- ceives ideas, sensations, desires, and contains the so- called faculties of the soul with their divers functions. In the normal state, its whole activitj' is governed by the spirit, and in so far as the latter remains in unison with God from whom it proceeds, it is in turn govern- ed by him. But sin, which disturbs this unison of the spirit with God, alters also the power of the spirit over the body. The ego oversteps the bounds of the divine life, moves no longer in harmony with the divine spir- it, and, being no longer supported bj'the divine power, gradually becomes earthly and worldly, and all its functions partake of this character. The spirit en- deavors, it is true, to bring the flesh under subjection to the hit;her laws, but does not succeed. It may, un- der the form of conscience, succeed in regaining some ground, but not in bringing back the state of abnega- tion and of detachment from the world. It is only through an immediate action on the part of God that the original relation of the flesh to the spirit is re- stored, the lost power regained, and the flesh brought back to its normal condition (A nd ike Wen-d was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth, John i, 14).
I'he original source of sin in man is neither to be found in the spirit, the organ of God's revelation with- in us, nor in the flesh, which is in turn the physical or- gan of the spirit. According to Scripture, it is the heart, the centre of our personality, in which all the influences, both godly and ungodly, meet — in which the choice between them is made. If the heart then gives entrance to sin, permits anj' doubt of God's truth, any mistrust of his love and kindness, and thus lowers him to put selfm his place (Gen. iii), the union between God and man ceases; the inner man loses his energy to govern the (japl ; the flesh starts up in opposition to the divine commands in its feelings and its desires. It asserts its independence. Self is made the centre. Hence hatred, strife, desire for worldly superiority.
FLESH AND BLOOD
595
FLETCHER
creatin'T envy, and giving rise to all the "lusts of the liesh." That both selfishness and sensualism have tlieir seat in the crap^, and that the actions of men are guided by one or the other, is clearl}' shown in the enumeration given by the apostle of the works of the flesh (Gal. V, 19), which are clearly the effects of self- ishness and of sinful passions ; and that the word rtesh, as used by Paul, is intended to signify both, is j)roved by the apostle's warning (Gal. v, 13) not to use Christian liberty for " an occasion to the flesh," i. e. to satisfy the desires of the flesh, adding to it the recom- mendation ''but bij love serve one another.'" Whichever of the two is then especially alluded to when the Scrip- tures, and especially St. Paul, speak of the nature, the life, or the works of the flesh, the context will show. Sometimes both are equally active, sometimes the one only to the exclusion of the other. This is the only way in which we can arrive at a true appreciation of the meaning in each case. Those interpreters who, in view of the substitution of crap? for UMjia and fisXi], consider it as meaning exclusively the bodily, sinful side of human nature, fall into the errors of the Mani- chteans. See Tholuck, Erneute Untersuchunff it, oup^ als Quelle d. Silnde (Theol. Stud. u. Kritiken, 1855, 3) ; Stirm, i. d. Tub. Zeitschr. 1831 (ii. d. n. t. Anthropol.) ; Neander, Planting and Training, vol. ii ; Kling, in Her- zog, lieal-Encyklopddie, from which this article is con- densed ; Campbell, On Four Gospels, diss, i, § 2.
Flesh and blood. An expression emploj'ed by our Lord to denote (after an Oriental figure) " his Spirit," represented by his flesh and blood, as these again are by the sacramental bread and wine (Eden). See Eucharist.
Flesh-hook (sbt^, mazleg', and I'i^^l^, mizla- gah'), an instrument used in the sacrificial services (1 Sam. ii, 13, 14 ; Exod. xxvii, 3 ; xxxviii, 3 ; Numb, iv, 14 ; 1 Chron. xxviii, 17 ; 2 Chron. iv, 10), probablj' a many-pronged fork, bent backward to draw away the flesh. Tlie priests required such an instrument that, if the flesh burnt too quickl}', they might draw it out, and again throw it into the flame or upon the coals. The implement in 1 Sam. ii, 13, 14 (where the