The Slavery of Death: Part 4, On Sarx and Soma

What follows are some notes on Paul's anthropology, with a particular focus on Paul's use of the words sarx and soma. The notes are based on James Dunn's The Theology of Paul the Apostle.



If we want to analyze the relationship between sin and death one of the things we need to do is get our heads around St. Paul's anthropology, his view of human personhood. And two of the most important terms in Paul's anthropological lexicon are soma and sarx.



To start, the word soma. Of the two terms under consideration soma is by far the less controversial and contested. This is largely due to the fact that soma seems to have a fairly uniform and consistent meaning in Paul, and among the ancients generally. For the most part soma is best translated as "body." For example, for Homer soma always refers to a dead body or corpse. And in Paul soma often has that straightforward connotation. However, as Dunn points out, soma often has a larger, more abstract meaning, more akin to the notion of "embodiment." Dunn states (p. 56) that soma "denotes the person embodied in a particular environment." And it's through this embodiment that we come into relationship/contact with one other. For example, in Romans 12.1-13.14 Paul describes how the Christian community is to relate to itself. And the word soma regulates how we understand these relationships: presenting our bodies as living sacrifices in Christ we, though many, form one body, with each member belonging to all the others. In short, Christian life and ethics is embodied, physically and socially. And all in all, Paul sees this embodiment as a good thing. Paul, we could say, has a positive view of "the body" (soma).



But things are bit different when we turn to the second term--sarx. Sarx doesn't seem to be a good thing and the meaning of sarx is hotly contested. Which is unfortunate as sarx is one of Paul's most important anthropological terms. So if we want to get a handle of the relationship between sin and death we need to wrestle with the interpretation of sarx. As we'll see, the three--sin, death, and sarx--are intimately related.



Sarx occurs 91 times in Paul's letters, 26 times in the book of Romans. Generally, sarx is translated as "flesh." But sarx is also translated as "human limitation," "natural limitation," "weakness of the flesh," "the weakness of our natural selves," "the weakness of our human nature," "the weakness of our sinful nature," "sinful nature," "fleshly desires," and "sinful flesh."



You get the idea. Where soma--the body, embodiment--is good and its meaning straightforward, sarx is bad and its meaning is much more obscure, allowing for a variety of interpretive choices.



But what's the difference? Isn't the body (soma) made of flesh (sarx)?



Dunn tries to tease apart the meaning of sarx by placing its uses by Paul along a continuum, from neutral to very bad. Sometimes sarx seems to function a lot like soma, as a morally neutral observation that we are physical creatures. Some of the time sarx seems to refer to moral "weakness." And sometimes sarx seems to be a ontological force akin to the Devil. Here's a sketch of Dunn's continuum with textual examples (pp. 64-65); note how sarx starts off neutral then takes on a darker and darker meanings as we go along:

1. Sarx as a morally neutral reference to the body:

Romans 11.14: "in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people [sarx] to envy and save some of them."



2. Sarx as weakness or limitation with no moral connotation:

Romans 6.19: "I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations [sarx]."



3. Sarx as weakness or limitation with a moral connotation:

Romans 3.20: "Therefore no one [sarx] will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin."



4. Sarx as the sphere/location/domain/realm of sin:

Romans 7.5: "For when we were in the realm of the flesh [sarx], the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death."



5. Sarx as a morally destructive force, opposed to the Spirit (pneuma):

Romans 8.6: "The mind governed by the flesh [sarx] is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace."



6. Sarx as source of moral corruption and hostility to God:

Romans 8.7: "The mind governed by the flesh [sarx] is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so."

The struggle, obviously, is to find a common thread that might link all these uses of sarx, from a morally neutral reference to the body to a force warring within us in hostility to God. More, how does sarx relate to soma?



On that particular question 1 Cor. 15.35-50 seems diagnostic. Here Paul suggests that the heavenly existence will have soma, embodiment. The change is from a "natural body [soma]" to a "spiritual body [soma]." Again, Paul seems to have a high view of embodiment. We aren't going to be floating around in heaven as disembodied spirits. We'll have a soma.



But Paul then goes on to state that "flesh [sarx] and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." In short, embodiment (soma) will be a part of heaven but sarx will not. Sarx is left behind.



So what is sarx? What links all the disparate usages?



Following Dunn, it seems that sarx is expressing some quality about soma. The problem isn't soma per se, but the sarx-like qualities it manifests.



So what is this quality? Whatever it is, it seems clear that, at times, it can be described in a morally neutral, blandly empirical manner. And yet, this quality can also be described as the location and theater of sin. More, this quality can be antagonistic to the pull of the Spirit.



So what quality can capture all this? Dunn's assessment, and I agree, is that sarx is describing the mortal aspect of soma. Sarx is describing our biological contingency, our mortal and animal nature. And this conclusion seems to be supported by 1 Cor. 15.35-50. Soma can inherit the kingdom of God but sarx cannot. Why? Because "the perishable cannot inherit the imperishable." What is left behind is "perishability." In heaven perishability--sarx--is exchanged for imperishablity. In this the soma becomes "immortal," "spiritual," "imperishable," it has shed and left sarx behind.



This understanding seems to cover all the diverse uses of sarx. On the one hand, the fact that we are biologically contingent creatures is simply an empirical fact. Sarx can be described, thus, in morally neutral, even scientific terms. More, biological contingency is also the source of our "animal nature," our carnal cravings and impulses. This is generally what is called to mind when we render sarx as "flesh." So Dunn summarizes (p. 66):

Sarx denotes "what we might describe as human mortality. It is the continuum of human mortality, the person characterized and conditioned by human frailty, which gives sarx its spectrum of meaning and which provides the link between Paul's different use of the term.

With this understanding in hand we can proceed to analyze how sin and death affect sarx. Specifically, we can see how sarx can become enslaved to death and is the theatre of sin. As biological creatures we are driven by our instincts for self-preservation. And given that pleasure and pain regulates this instinct we become selfish and hedonistic. In short, we become sinful. Animalistic as it were. Further, given that self-preservation is the ethic of sarx we can see how we can become enslaved to death. Mortality fears push and pull on sarx, manipulating our animal instincts for survival and self-preservation. In all this we see how sarx drives us toward sin and is in bondage to the fear of death.



This is why translating sarx as "sinful nature" is misleading. It is not that sarx is inherently evil and sinful. Sarx is, rather, weak, finite, perishable, and vulnerable. And it's this weakness that makes sarx vulnerable to selfish instincts. Biological vulnerability isn't inherently "bad," but it reliably produces sin. Biological contingency produces a mode of living, what Paul calls kata sarka ("according to the flesh"), that is driven by biological/animal appetites, cravings and desires. Dunn again (p. 78):

Our fleshness attests to our frailty and weakness as mere humans, the inescapableness of our death, our dependencies on satisfaction of appetite and desire, our vulnerability to manipulation of the appetites and desires.

This analysis brings us back to Hebrews 2.14-15:

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

Why does the fear of death hold us in slavery? Because of sarx. Being "flesh" the Devil, who holds the power of death, can use death to draw sarx into sin. And given that we are sarx we are defenseless to this power. Death has power over sarx. And the Devil holds the power of death. And using death, the Devil keeps drawing sarx into sin and rebellion.



With this understanding now in hand we get a clearer picture about what is going on in Christus Victor. As sarx, as biologically contingent animals, we are drawn into sin by the fear of death. This dynamic is a form of slavery that, as sarx, we cannot escape. We need an "outside intervention" as it were. Someone to liberate us from this trap, the sarx-death-sin dynamic where our carnal cravings, driven by the instincts of self-preservation, lead us into sin.



In light of this bondage, salvation comes to us when Christ "breaks the power of him who holds the power of death." Free from the fear of death we can live a resurrection life, freed from the sarx-death-sin dynamic to live life according to the Spirit. Read Romans 5-8 for more on this.

Romans 7.21-25a

So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!