3 Mar 2000

The Flesh

Submitted by theshovel
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friendPDF versionPDF version
With all the strange and inadequate attempts (even my own) to define this thing called “the flesh”, I have been left in confusion wondering if it is possible. Most of what I’ve learned are merely DESCRIPTIONS or VARIATIONS of the thing that don’t really tell me what it is! I have come to realize that “the flesh” is something that CANNOT be defined by describing it, but only by considering what it isn’t. For “the flesh” is “the empty thing” and it can only be understood in terms of what it was created to be. For its very existence was found in what used to be IN it. When God created man He said, “It is very good”. He was made in the “image” of God. This is not a reference to physical resemblance between man and God. It means that man was the visible representation of the invisible God. If you saw Adam and Eve in their original condition you would know what God was like, for they were created to “house” the Spirit of God (FYI - maybe no other people were there, but the rest of creation witnessed this miracle and now it waits in hope). But when the life of God was removed man became as useless as a watch that doesn’t work. BOTTOM LINE: The former creation made in the image of God is known simply by the empty shell that used to contain the miraculous life of God. The flesh, skin, blood and bones are not inherently evil; it is the emptiness that seeks for something else to fill it and to give it purpose and meaning. Our absurd attempts to define the thing only miss the most obvious reality about it: IT IS EMPTYSOMETHING IS MISSING, SOMETHING HAS BEEN LOST.
Related Content: 

Add new comment

Random Shovelquote: Former religious imaginations (view all shovelquotes)

My assumptions of what grace and life in Christ look like often reflect my former religious imaginations.   source