Corpus-Paul

[Licia Kuenning <Licia AT compuserve.com>]

Maybe the problem is that the terms "objective" and "subjective"
are being used as if they had one and only one commonly
understood definition--without anyone's spelling out what it is.

Here are some out of a dictionary, which may or may not be
what was meant:
   Objective:
        - being or belonging to the object or perception of thought
        - not affected by personal feelings or prejudice; based on
          facts; unbiased
        - intent upon, or dealing with things external to the mind
          rather than with thoughts or feelings
        - of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to
          something that is an object or part of an object
   Subjective:
        - existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject
          rather than to the object of thought
        - pertaining to or on the part of an individual; personal;
          individual
        - placing emphasis or reliance on one's own moods,
          attitudes, opinions, etc.
        - relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known
          in the mind as distinct from the thing in itself
        - relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind
          as distinguished from general or univeral experience

I note that the definitions under each head represent
overlapping but not identical concepts.  Maybe it would be
better to find other terms.

While we're on the subject of words--do we have a similar
problem with "physical"?  Is "physical" perhaps an
anachronism in this context (do we have a modern
concept of "physical" that didn't exist in Paul's time?).
The two kinds of body Paul speaks of are a body "of
soul" and a body "of spirit" (whatever those mean).

Licia Kuenning

Licia AT compuserve.com
kuenning-licia AT voicenet.com