Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Flesh and Spirit

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Elli Elliott" <elli AT kci.net>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Flesh and Spirit
  • Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 09:20:05 -0600


Bob, you wrote:
> I am not surprised at Dr Elliott's claim though I think it is too stark to
> hold up the whole creative force of our language.

I confess I'm not precisely sure what you mean by this, but the appearance
of reductionism may come from summarizing the argument in a couple of
paragraphs. Paul attaches a huge complex of loyalties, behaviors, social
positions, etc. into in the layers of his dichotomy.

>The force of the
> circumcision metaphor of the crucifixion and the sign of the covenant
itself
> would support her claim to a non-trivial extent - but I cannot imagine the
> whole of the male member being condemned.

Keep in mind that the issue is not so much the penis itself as ritual action
upon it as a means of ritual entry into a life guided by it. Paul is not
condemning the penis or male sexual organs. In fact he is against that
"condemnation" in the act of ritual castration (involving the cutting of
precisely what we do not know). The contrast is a matter of focus and the
ritual action which incorporates a person into one mode of living and
loyalty or another (by the Spirit, loyal to and ruled by Christ vs. by the
"Flesh", loyal to and ruled by the Law/Mountain Mother).

>Such might be read into a phrase
> 'life guided by the flesh (as a known circumlocution understandable to
both
> Jew and Greek)'. Is it possible to be whole as a man in the context of
such
> a condemnation? For even after our baptism, though dead with Christ, we
> still retain our form.

I think the issue for Paul is wholeness. I argue that he counterposes the
crucifixion to circumcision/castration as a more comprehensive treatment of
the flesh -- and it occurs to me from your question that it is precisely the
wholeness of it that is freeing. The death with Christ is wholly
transforming, not just an action to mark the "Flesh."

>Besides, women are also of the flesh or of the
> spirit - unless this is a modern reading only.

I have focused on the letter to the Galatians where, frankly, there are no
women actually in view as part of the implied audience. The issue of
circumcision does not apply to them directly. The metaphors with which the
audience is called to identify refer to male sons. ("No male and female" in
3:28 is probably about androgyny.) Our interpretation applies this to
women, and there may have been some women in the Galatian churches, but it
does not appear that Paul has any women in mind in writing his letter.

> Part of this question came up for me from reading the Horsley seminar
> notes - which I am way behind on. The issue (dialogue with Ray Pickett)
> seemed to be that Paul could not escape his tradition's (understandable)
> opposition to idolatry and porneia. I immediately thought of the Acts 15
> prohibitions (minimal comfort level) in contrast to Paul's apparent
> reputation as almost without rules (whoa Paul - that's too much) in parts
of
> Corinthians (nothing is forbidden) - and I wondered at the choice of flesh
> and spirit as metaphor and what its appeal would be to the gentiles -
> especially Greeks - who, it was implied, would have learned their morality
> from philosophy rather than pagan religious practice.

Again, I'm looking at Galatians and not Romans (yet). I've assumed that
pagan religious practice is a big part of the mix although Greek
philosophical influence can hardly be discounted. Paul's negative portrayal
of the Mother of the Gods could indicate a community of people who have
considered themselves in some way too "sophisticated" for that, and this may
show Greek influence. (It could also be recent converts who would be most
antagonistic to the "religion" they came from, like Mexican Catholic
converts to evangelical Protestant groups are particularly disparaging of
the Virgin of Guadalupe.) The development of the flesh-spirit contrast in
the context of Galatians, however, indicates that the vocabulary is closely
connected to the circumcision controversy.

More words... Be glad I'm out of time!


Elli

Elli Elliott
(The Rev. Susan M. Elliott, Ph.D.)
Pastor, Zion United Church of Christ, Sterling, Colorado
Pastor, Immanuel Congregational United Church of Christ, Brush, Colorado
Ph.D., New Testament and Early Christianity, Loyola University Chicago
elli AT kci.net






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page