Broad brush statements like this are easy to deliver, but I would like to see you get through the Psalter only and still paint such a picture! Not all, but much of the time when we offer praise, thanksgiving, or requests to God, we do so with our lips. Is this unprofitable? Clothes that cover the naked and food given to the destitute are sewn and grown by human hands. Are these unprofitable? Or what about Genesis 2:24, Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Is this joining also unprofitable? Or Genesis 2:7, And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. Was God's gift of life to the first human a bad thing and also unprofitable? Am I arguing with the son of God himself? Not at all.John chapter 6, “… the flesh profits nothing”
Where in the Bible does the flesh ‘ever’ profit anything?
It’s the same thing through out the entire Bible; man sins over and over and over and over and over, God saves them again, again, again and again. The flesh profits nothing,..
Nobody in this thread is saying the flesh and the spirit are the same thing. The flesh was designed by God to receive its sustenance, not produce it. It's this reception of spirit or breath that enables us to breathe, and hence be alive. When we stop receiving that breath, we die and our flesh corrupts. Jesus was not affirming the flesh to be useless, not at all. The flesh profits nothing to give life, for God made it to receive spirit and thereby be counted as alive.
I think a living, breathing human is what Paul has in mind when he tells us to "walk in the spirit", not a 'disembodied' ghost that hovers close enough to utilize the brain of the 'dead corpse' you seem to picture. Paul generally uses "the flesh" as a picture for that which is corrupted and corruptible of humanity in Adam. To walk according to the flesh is to live according to that old reality of being in Adam of whom we received the condemnation, when we were as Jesus put it, "dead". This picture then 'is' of a dead human, one who is not breathing but rather is a composting corpse. This I think, is a big difference between what you imagine we are saying, and what we are actually saying. Again, Paul's pictures are not a dead corpse and a ghost, but a dead corpse and a resurrected living human.
You seem to be trying to interpret a monist conception of the human body with the same definitions you already have within your substance dualist conception. If this is so, you will never see what we are saying, let alone agree with a monist. That is like trying to mix oil and water. I'm not trying to convince you that a monist conception of flesh is right. I am now primarily only seeking to show you that it is not defined through your paradigm. And then that you'll stop approaching this subject as if this is all wild and crazy stuff found anywhere but within the Scriptures. Of course I think the idea of the person within the person is nonsense and wish you didn't believe such a thing, but I'll settle for a concession that this stuff can actually be found in the Scriptures if one connected the dots differently than you. It seems only after this will our discussion of who is connecting those dots correctly be of any use.
Brother, that is not at all what Paul encouraged us with. It is not in losing this body that will end the suffering in it, but rather by the redemption of our body, (Romans 8) when the sons of God are revealed and he shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body (Phillipians 3:21). So yes, our flesh will be saved, and we will behold the King of Glory with glorified eyes of flesh.Technically the spirit is saved from all this, but the flesh is not. The flesh will die under the penalty of sin. And until we loose this body we will suffer in it,
Grace and peace to you John.