Observations on John iii. 6. in connexion with some other passages in the New Testament.
Those words of Christ, giving a reason to Nicodemus, why we must be born again, John iii. 6. “That which is born of the flesh, is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit,” have not without good reason been produced by divines, as a proof of the doctrine of original sin: supposing, that by flesh here is meant the human nature in a debased and corrupt state. Yet Dr. T. (p. 144) thus explains these words, that which is born of the flesh, is flesh; “that which is born by natural descent and propagation, is a man consisting of body and soul, or the mere constitution and powers of a man in their natural state.” But the constant use of these terms, flesh and spirit, in other parts of the New Testament, when thus set in opposition, and the latter said to be produced by the Spirit of God, as here—and when expressive of the same thing, which Christ is here speaking of to Nicodemus, viz. the requisite qualifications to salvation—will fully vindicate the sense, of our divines. Thus in the 7th and 8th chapters of Romans, where these terms flesh and spirit (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩ and ⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) are abundantly repeated, and set in opposition, as here. So Rom. vii. 14. The law is (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) spiritual, but I am (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) carnal, sold under sin. He cannot only mean, “I am a man consisting of body and soul, and having the powers of a man.“ Rom. vii. 18. “I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing.” He does not mean to condemn his frame, as consisting of body and soul; and to assert, that in his human constitution, with the powers of a man, dwells no good thing. And when he says in the last verse of the chapter, “With the mind, I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh, the law of sin;” he cannot mean, ”I myself serve the law of God; but with my innocent human constitution, as having the powers of a man, I serve the law of sin.” And when he says in the next words, the beginning of the 8th chapter, “there is no condemnation to them,—that walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit;” and Rom. viii. 4., “The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh;” he cannot mean, “there is no condemnation to them that walk not according to the powers of a man,“ &c. And when he says (Rom. viii. 5, 6.) “They that are after the flesh, do mind the things of the flesh; and to be carnally minded is death;” he does not intend, “they that are according to the human constitution, and the powers of a man, do mind the things of the human constitution and powers; and to mind these is death.” And when he says, (Rom. viii. 7, 8.) “The carnal (or fleshly) mind is enmity against God, and is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be: so that they that are in the flesh, cannot please God;” he cannot mean, that to mind the things which are agreeable to “the powers and constitution of a man,“ who as our author says, is constituted or made right, is enmity against God; and that a mind which is agreeable to this right human constitution, as God hath made it, is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be; and that they who are according to such a constitution, cannot please God. And when it is said, Rom. viii. 9. “Ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit;” the apostle cannot mean, “ye are not in the human nature, as constituted of body and soul, and with the powers of a man.” It is most manifest, that by the flesh here the apostle means a nature that is corrupt, of an evil tendency, and directly opposite to the law and holy nature of God; so that to walk according to it, and to have a mind so conformed, is to be an utter enemy to God and his law; in a state of perfect inconsistency with subjection to God, and of being pleasing to him; and in a sure and infallible tendency to death, and utter destruction. And it is plain, that here by walking after, or according to, the flesh, is meant the same thing as walking according to a corrupt and sinful nature; and to walk according to the spirit, is to walk according to a holy and divine nature, or principle: and to be carnally minded, is the same as being viciously and corruptly minded; and to be spiritually minded, is to be of a virtuous and holy disposition.
When Christ says,John iii. 6.“That which is born of the flesh, is flesh,“ he represents the flesh not merely as a quality; for it would be incongruous to speak of a quality as a thing born. Therefore man, as in his whole nature corrupt, is called flesh; which is agreeable to other scripture representations, where the corrupt nature is called the old man, the body of sin, and the body of death. Agreeable to this are those representations in the 7th and 8th chapters of Romans. There, flesh is figuratively represented as a person, according to the apostle’s manner. This is observed by Mr. Locke, and after him by Dr. T. who takes notice, that the apostle, in the 6th and 7th of Romans, represents sin as a person; and that he figuratively distinguishes in himself two persons, speaking of flesh as his person. For I know that in ME*, that is, in my* flesh, dwelleth no good thing. And it may be observed, that in the 8th chapter he still continues this representation, speaking of the flesh as a person. Accordingly, in the Rom. viii. 6, 7 , he speaks of the mind of the flesh ⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) and of the mind of the spirit (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) as if the flesh and spirit were two opposite persons, each having a mind contrary to that of the other. Dr. T. interprets this mind of the flesh, and mind of the spirit, as though the flesh and the spirit were the different objects, about which the mind is conversant. But this is plainly beside the apostle’s meaning; who speaks of the flesh and spirit as the subjects in which the mind is; and in a sense the agents, but not the objects, about which it acts. We have the same phrase again. Rom. viii. 27.“He that searcheth the hearts, knoweth what is the mind of the spirit“ (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩). The mind of the spiritual nature in the saints is the same with the mind of the Spirit of God himself, who imparts and actuates that spiritual nature; and here the spirit is the subject and agent; but not the object. The same apostle, in a similar manner, uses the word (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) mind. Col. ii. 18.“Vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind (⟨Greek/Hebrew text missing in source⟩) by the mind of his flesh.” And this agent so often called flesh, represented by the apostle as altogether evil, without any good thing dwelling in it, or belonging to it—yea perfectly contrary to God and his law, and tending only to death and ruin, and directly opposite to the spirit—is what Christ speaks of to Nicodemus as born in the first birth, and furnishing a reason why there is a necessity of a new birth, in order to a better production.