Many scholars consider Paul’s letter to the church in Rome to be his greatest doctrinal treatise. It is no wonder that Trinitarians search its pages for proof of the dual natures of Christ and, by implication, the doctrine of the Trinity. One passage that is often presented as textual evidence is found in chapter 1:

Romans 1:1-4 (NASB) Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, ² which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, ³ concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, ⁴ who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord…

The purported evidence centers on verses three and four:

who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh

who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness

These two clauses are understood by many to be either a pre-Pauline creedal confession or possibly a portion of a hymn concerning God’s Son.[1]  Others view them as Paul’s summation of an existing creedal statement, noting that a similar theme appears in his letters to Timothy (1 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Timothy 2:8). Regardless of whether the phrases predate the apostle or originated with him, Trinitarians say the juxtaposing of the phrases convey Paul’s belief that Jesus possessed two natures, one human and one divine. In other words, his human nature is thought to be depicted by the phrase “according to the flesh,” while a supposed divine nature is represented by the words “Son of God…according to the Spirit of holiness.”

Translating vs Interpretating Romans 1:3-4 

The Amplified Bible puts its full weight behind the notion that these verses refer to a dual-natured Jesus when it freely adds its interpretation to the Biblical text: 

Romans 1:3-4 (Amplified Bible) [the good news] regarding His Son, who, as to the flesh [His human nature], was born a descendant of David [to fulfill the covenant promises], 4 and [as to His divine nature] according to the Spirit of holiness was openly designated to be the Son of God with power [in a triumphant and miraculous way] by His resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. (emphasis added)

At one time, the NIV Bible added a similar interpretation to verse 3:

Regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David.[2] (emphasis added)

A more recent version of the NIV has rightly amended the translation to downplay its bias.[3] 

Some Bible commentators undergird these and other translations by explaining Paul’s language to mean the Messiah has two natures.  For example, Bension writes in his commentary on Romans, “Both the natures of our Lord are here mentioned; but the human is mentioned first, because the divine was not manifested in its full evidence till [sic] after his resurrection.”[4] 

Coffman joins the chorus with his interpretation of the passage:

The dual nature of Christ, both his divinity and humanity, are affirmed by Paul in this passage. As for the body that Jesus took when he decided to enter our earth life, it was descended through David, as attested by the genealogies of both Matthew and Luke, the very first verse of the New Testament hailing him as “the Son of David.” However, it was only the humanity of Jesus that descended through David. In his totality, Christ descended from no man but was co-existent with the Father… [verse 4] is the antithesis of the preceding verse, that dealing with the human nature of Christ, and this with his heavenly nature.[5]

In another often-sourced commentary, the author states that according to the flesh refers to Jesus’ human nature, “implying, of course, that He had another nature, of which the apostle immediately proceeds to speak.”[6] The author clarifies by saying that if:

“according to the flesh” means here, “in His human nature,” this uncommon expression [according to the spirit of holiness] must mean “in His other nature,” which we have seen to be that “of the Son of God”—an eternal, uncreated nature.[7]

Interestingly, the author admits that, “One is apt to wonder that if this being the meaning, it was not expressed more simply.”[8] Indeed, Paul could have plainly expressed a belief in a dual nature Christology if he had embraced such a position. But he did not. Instead, Paul considered the belief that a god could become a man an abhorrent theology, and he strongly refuted it when he preached against it in the city of Lystra in Acts 14. Paul did not hold to a dual nature Christology because the doctrine developed during the second to fourth centuries among those who had converted from Greek philosophy to Christianity.

While previous scholarship interpreted Paul’s parallel statements as evidence of Christ’s so-called two natures, more recent scholarship provides a more objective view. New Testament scholar Douglas Moo notes that the “[dual-natured] interpretation has some supporters, but their numbers are dwindling.”[9] 

For example, instead of referring to a dual-natured Christ, theologian Ernst Kasemann says the two phrases speak to the two stages of Jesus’ ministry:

The one described in earthly terms as the messianic king is destined for appointment and enthronement as Son of God and thus follows a course which is divided into two stages by the Resurrection […]. It can be seen that this understanding has been constantly obscured by the influence of the doctrine of the two natures and the consequent reference to Jesus’ two modes of existence […] the formula does not presuppose the preexistence and divine sonship of the earthly Jesus.[10]

If the phrases son of David according to the flesh and Son of God according to the spirit of holiness are not references to a dual-natured Messiah, what was Paul communicating to his first century audience? An examination of these phrases in light of the context of Romans 1 and other Pauline passages will help us arrive at a proper understanding of their meaning and the apostle’s theology and Christology.

Is According to the Flesh Proof of a Dual Nature?

Paul’s use of the word flesh (Greek: sarx) reflects the various meanings found elsewhere in Scripture. For example, the word denotes one’s literal physical flesh, that is, the human body.[11]  It also can refer to humanity in general.[12]  Moreover, in the Bible, flesh is used to describe man’s frailty and vulnerability to sin.[13] 

The phrase according to the flesh, occurs eighteen times in the NASB New Testament, eight of which appear in Romans. Without exception, the phrase is used to describe things or desires that pertain to temporal flesh. This is in contrast to things or desires that pertain to the spirit, i.e., the realm of God. Four times, Paul uses according to the flesh to indicate one’s ancestry. Such is the case in the text we are considering:

Romans 1:3b (NASB) concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh (emphasis added)

Contrary to those who believe in the deity of Christ, according to the flesh is not a unique expression used to describe a supposedly incarnational being. The apostle uses the same phrase to indicate his own lineage. Unquestionably, Paul and Jesus share a common Israelite ancestry that is according to the flesh:

Romans 9:3-5 (NASB) For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my countrymen, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and daughters, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the Law, the temple service, and the promises; 5 whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever.[14] Amen. (emphasis added)

In yet another occurrence in Romans, the apostle uses according to the flesh to describe the Jews’ ancestry, this time, tracing it back to Father Abraham:

Romans 4:1 (NASB) What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? (emphasis added)

Thus, if according to the flesh indicates that Jesus preexisted before he became flesh, then so did Abraham, Paul, the Jews, and believers since the phrase is used to describe these people as well.  But surely, no one would defend such an interpretation.

Paul’s use of according to the flesh in Romans 1 is not a unique description intended to explain the human lineage of the supposed God-man.  To be sure, nowhere in Scripture does according to the flesh describe or imply an incarnational state, nor is it used to delineate between theorized dual natures. In this case, it is simply descriptive of one’s historical roots. First century Jews would have readily identified Paul’s remarks as providing evidence that Jesus fulfilled God’s promise for the Messiah to be a descendant of David.[15]  

Is Spirit of Holiness Proof of a Divine Nature?

While many may agree that the use of according to the flesh does not in and of itself support the post-Biblical doctrine of a dual-natured Christ, they insist that when coupled with the phrase Son of God…according to the Spirit of holiness, it strongly supports a God-man Christology. But does this phrase indicate Jesus has a divine nature?

Many unsuspecting Bible readers interpret the title Son of God to be the equivalent of God the Son, a title that never appears in Scripture. In addition to Jesus, the term son of God is used of Israel, angels, kings, and Christians. What differentiates Jesus from other sons of God is that he is said to be the only begotten Son of God.  He is the only one chosen and anointed by God to be the Messiah. To this end, Son of God is synonymous with Messiah, Christ, and King of Israel.  For example:

John 1:47-51 (NASB) Jesus saw Nathanael coming to Him, and *said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!” ⁴⁸ Nathanael *said to Him, “How do You know me?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” ⁴⁹ Nathanael answered Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.” (emphasis added)

 Luke 4:40-41 (NASB) While the sun was setting, all those who had any who were sick with various diseases brought them to Him; and laying His hands on each one of them, He was healing them. ⁴¹  Demons also were coming out of many, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But rebuking them, He would not allow them to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ. (emphasis added)

Those living in the first century would never have understood Son of God to mean that Jesus was himself deity. Biblical scholar N. T. Wright agrees:

“Messiah”, or “Christ’, does not mean ‘the/a divine one”. It is very misleading to use the words as shorthands [sic] for the divine name or being of Jesus. It is comparatively easy to argue that Jesus (like several other first-century Jews) believed he was the Messiah. It is much harder, and a very different thing, to argue that he thought he was in some sense identified with Israel’s God. In this context, the phrase ‘son of God’ is systematically misleading because in pre- and non-Christian Judaism its primary referent is either Israel or the Messiah, and it retains these meanings in early Christianity…[16]

Theology professor Douglas McCready concurs:

While some have used the title Son of God to denote Jesus’ deity, neither the Judaism nor the paganism of Jesus’ day understood the title in this way. Neither did the early church.[17]

To understand Son of God to mean Jesus has a divine nature is a position that cannot be supported Biblically. (See Son of God, Proof of Jesus’ Deity for more on this topic.)

With regard to the phrase Spirit of holiness, a survey reveals Romans 1:4 to be the only time it is used in Scripture. However, to gain clarity, we can look to other passages where a similar phrase, according to the Spirit, is used by Paul.  For instance:

Romans 8:4-5 (NASB) so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. ⁵ For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. (emphasis added)

In this and other passages,[18] according to the Spirit is simply a reference to the Holy Spirit, that is, the Spirit of God.  Paul never uses the word Spirit or the phrase according to the Spirit to reference Jesus’ supposed divine nature. But rather, it is a synonym for the Holy Spirit.[19] 

New Testament scholar Thomas Schreiner agrees. He writes in his commentary on Romans:

Nowhere does the phrase denote the divine nature of Jesus. It is more likely that we have a reference here to the Holy Spirit…. The contrast then is not between the two natures of Jesus but between the flesh and the Holy Spirit.[20]

New Testament scholar James D.G. Dunn writes that the Spirit of holiness “…would almost certainly be understood by Paul and the first Century Christians as denoting the Holy Spirit, [that is,] the Spirit characterized by holiness, [or one who is a] partaker of God’s holiness…”[21]

Another author echoes this view by pointing out:

Spirit of Holiness is another name of the Holy Spirit. It is likely that it reflects an underlying Hebrew expression for the Holy Spirit that uses the noun (holiness) rather than the adjective (holy).[22] 

The context of Romans 1:4 further supports this understanding.  It reveals that Paul’s use of Spirit of holiness is not in reference to a divine nature but rather to Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, a miracle that served to prove the man from Nazareth was the Messiah.[23]

Paul’s Purpose

Paul’s juxtaposing of the flesh and the spirit in Romans 1:3-4 is not unique. To be sure, the contrasting of the two elements is a major theme in Romans.[24] Thus, Paul’s use of the terms is not intended to depict a theorized God-man. Rather, the apostle uses the phrases to emphasize the transition Jesus made when God raised him from the dead. The Messiah went from being a descendant or son of David to the Son of God in power.

Theologian Colin Kruse, in his commentary on Romans, writes, “Some have taken [the pairing of according to the flesh and according to the Spirit] to distinguish the human and divine natures of Christ, that is, his humanity and his deity, but this is unlikely.”  Kruse, like Kasemann, sees it as a reference to how Jesus is to be understood before and after his resurrection.[25]  

Moreover, New Testament scholar Ben Witherington writes:

[Spirit of holiness] is not about what Christ is according to his divine nature but about what happened to Jesus at the resurrection when God’s Spirit raised him from the dead and designated or marked him out as Son of God in power….The unusual phrase Spirit of holiness…refers to the effect of the Holy Spirit on Jesus—Jesus enters an entirely sanctified or glorified condition when he is raised from the dead by the Spirit.[26]

Paul’s Christology

Paul’s Christology, as stated in Romans, must also be examined if we are to properly understand the meaning of according to the flesh and according to the Spirit.  We need look no further than his introductory remarks in chapter 1 to discover who he believes Jesus is.  Twice in Romans 1, the apostle clearly distinguishes between God, who he says is the Father, and Jesus, who he believes is the Christ.[27]

Romans 1:7 (NASB) to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (emphasis added)

Romans 1:8 (NASB) First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world. (emphasis added)

Paul’s God is not Paul’s Christ. Rather, the apostle thanked his God through Jesus who is the Christ, not that he thanked God who is the Christ. The same theology and Christology are also seen, among other places, in First Timothy:

1 Timothy 1:2 and 2:5 (NASB) To Timothy, my true son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord…For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus. (emphasis added)

For Paul, there is one God.  Jesus is not the one God, but rather, he is the man whom the one God anointed to mediate between this singular God and humanity. That Jesus is not the one God is also seen in the last chapter of Romans as well. 

Romans 16:27 (NASB) to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen. (emphasis added)

Most remarkably, Paul writes to the church in Rome, not that Jesus is God but that Jesus has a God:

Romans 15:5-6 (NASB) Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another, according to Christ Jesus, so that with one purpose and one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (emphasis added)

To interpret according to the flesh and according to the Spirit of holiness to mean that Paul believed Jesus to be a God-man is to ignore the context of Romans and his Christology as stated in the rest of his epistles.

Conclusion

Contrary to what some Trinitarians believe, the contrasting phrases found in Romans 1:3-4 do not indicate, nor imply, a theorized dual-natured Jesus as evidenced by Paul’s use of the same or similar phrases in his other writings.  What’s more, the context of Romans chapter 1 and 16, coupled with Paul’s theology and Christology elsewhere in the New Testament, demonstrates that the Christ of Paul was not the God of Paul.

Instead, Paul’s purpose in Romans 1:3-4 was to instruct the church at Rome that Jesus is the fulfillment of God’s promise to raise up a descendant of David to be the Messiah. Jesus’ resurrection from the dead was God’s powerful way to demonstrate that the man Jesus is God’s exalted Son.

[1] Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Baker Academic, 2018.

[2] New International Version (NIV), Zondervan, 1984, 

[3] New International Version (NIV), Zondervan,  2011, 

[4] Benson Commentary of Old and New Testaments, Romans 1:3-4, StudyLight.org 

[5] James Burton Coffman, Romans, Coffman’s Commentaries on the Bible, StudyLight.org

[6] Romans 1, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, Biblehub.com

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Douglas J. Moo, The Challenge for the Translator, appearing in The Challenge of Bible Translation: Communicating God’s Word to the World, Zondervan, 2003, page. 374.

[10] Ernst Kasemann, Commentary on Romans, William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, 1980, page 11-12.

[11] 1 Corinthians 15:39; 2 Corinthians 12:7.

[12] Romans 3:20 KJV; Galatians 2:16.

[13] 1 Peter 1:24; Romans 7:14-20.

[14] Some believe the phrase “who is over all God blessed forever” in verse 5 is in reference to Jesus. This theory is specifically addressed in this article. 

[15] For example, see 2 Samuel 7:12-13, 16; Psalms 89:3-4, 19-37, 49; 132:11-12.

[16] N.T. Wright, “Jesus’ Self-Understanding” NTWrightPage – blog post accessed on 4-15-19.

[17] Douglas McCready, He Came Down From Heaven, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), p. 56.

[18] according to the Spirit occurs four times in Scripture: Romans 1:4, 8:4 and 5, Galatians 4:29.

[19] See 1 Thessalonians 4:8; Ephesians 4:30.

[20] Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 1998, page 43.

[21] James D.G. Dunn, 38 A World Biblical Commentary, Thomas Nelson, 1988, page 15.

[22] Spirit of Holiness, Names For God, accessed 11/23/23 

[23] Acts 17:31.

[24] For example, see Romans chapters 6-8.

[25] Colin Kruse, Paul’s Letters to the Romans, Pillar New Testament Commentary, Wm. B. Eerdman’s, Grand Rapids, MI, 2012, page 42.

[26] Ben Witherington III and Darlene Hyatt,  Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, Wm B Eerdman’s Publishing, Grans Rapids, 2004, page 32.

[27] God made Jesus both Lord and Christ. Acts 2:22-23, 36.