Bipartite or Tripartite Nature of Man?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Sheepdawg

If one reads those quoted passages carefully, one notices a peculiar conundrum. On the one hand, the Lord states emphatically that "sin" emanates from the 'heart'; but on the other hand, the apostle Paul explains that "sin" actually resides in the 'flesh'. Now, which one to accept?

Surely, the terms 'the flesh' and 'the heart' cannot be taken as freely interchangeable synonyms. Perhaps, what Paul meant to imply was that 'his heart' was encased in 'his flesh' and so, in a manner of speaking, the sin in his heart, technically, was located in his flesh. But he himself would seem to dispute such a shallow explanation because further on in that same chapter he quite unmistakably makes the distinction between the physical and the non-physical when he states, "..I see another 'law in my members' warring against the 'law of my mind'.." (Romans 7:23).

Perhaps this "conundrum" exists only because you want it to exist. Lets rewind from Romans 7 back to chapter 3 where Paul references several Psalms in his discussion of sin:
“Their throat is an open tomb;
With their tongues they have practiced deceit”;
“The poison of asps is under their lips”;
“Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”

What Paul quotes in Rom 3 represents the same theme that Jesus spoke about- "But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man". In other words, Paul was on the same page as Jesus. Yes, Paul emphasized sin dwelling in the flesh, but there is no evidence to suggest that Paul felt that sin only resides in the flesh. I agree with what Ohio said regarding Paul's use of the word members in Rom 7:23. All evidence that I can see suggests that Paul's view of the flesh was broader than just understanding it to be his physical body.