Corpus-Paul

["moon-ryul jung" <moon AT saint.soongsil.ac.kr>]

Mark,
thanks for your insightful answers. 
Let me play the role of your opponent trying to refute your claims, 
since that is how science proceeds, according to the famous philosopher of 
science, Karl Popper. Non-refuted propositions are regarded as truths.


> Translating 5:18 is a task in itself, with AGESTHE, "to bring" or "to 
> lead" in the passive, and, as Burton notes, this conditional clause 
> expresses a present particular supposition conveying a suggestion of 
> continuance of action in progress (Galatians, p. 303). He thus 
> translates as, "But if ye are continuing to be led by the Spirit, ye 
> are not under the Law." Note the plural "you," although Burton 
> interprets as though individual you's, instead of the group of 
> gentiles in their group plight. Paul  is appealing to their own 
> experience to corroborate his argument, as he had in 3:5, as your 
> note.
> 
> In this case the conclusions that you though might be drawn in terms 
> of "life in the flesh is somehow caused by the life under the Law" 
> are removed. It is not a question of whether one is under Law--a 
> Jewish person, that is--or under Spirit, for Paul as a Jewish person 
> considered himself to be both. It is the question you rightly note 
> underscores the entire letter, whether gentiles already in the Spirit 
> ("if we live [stand as righteous ones/justified] by the Spirit, if 
> they would "walk by the Spirit" (5:25), should also need to become 
> people of the Law, Jewish proselytes, thus under the Law.
> 

A good summary of your position. 

> No, Paul argues, and trying to be known "in the flesh"/"in human 
> terms," that is, by reputation as Jewish proselytes rather than 
> gentiles, will only engage these gentiles in the agonistic task of 
> seeking honor from one another in terms of human institutions of 
> differentiation according to the constraints of the present age 
> ("kosmos"), instead of being free to give honor to one another, their 
> own status apart from proselyte status already acquired and ensured 
> by Christ-association in this new creation community (of Israel and 
> the Nations as one worshipping the One God together), an expression 
> of the Spirit-life accompanying the manifestation of the dawning of 
> the age to come (cf. 3:28; 6:14-15). 

Another good point. 

>How's that for a sentence!

Yes, a long sentence. But it seems to reveal that your thought is quite 
well
integrated. 


> The desires of the flesh here are the desires that are driving the 
> gentile addressees to seek acceptance, the desire for human 
> acceptance, honor, goods, etc.; human competition for standing as the 
> undisputed righteous ones of God, the stuff of many a socio-religious 
> quarrel, in fact. These desires may not be wrong in and of 
> themselves, but they lead in the wrong direction, as this vice 
> catalogue stereotypically portrays them, when they motivate the 
> addressees against the direction that the Spirit has already made 
> manifest, their full membership already gained by way of Christ. To 
> seek full membership (in this case for undisputed acceptance, honor, 
> goods, etc.) by becoming proselytes is thus now, for themselves, to 
> deny that this has already been gained, or as Paul puts it to Peter, 
> to render gratuitous the meaning of the death of Christ (2:21; cf. 
> 3:1-5). If you read through the balance of ch. 5 and first 10 verses 
> of ch. 6 in this light, you will see that appeal runs along this 
> line, away from competitive evaluation of the other because of 
> assurance of status and ultimate victory assured by God.
> 

There seems to be two points that are potentially against this line of 
thinking, Gal 5:13 and the list of the works of the flesh in 5:19.

5:13: For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your 
freedom
as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of another.

It seems to imply that somehow the freedom Galatians got could be used
as an opportunity for the flesh. If that is so called the "freedom from
 the Law" in the context of "Law-free gospel", this verse makes a good 
sense.
One may think that Law-free people might misuse the freedom because they
do not have the laws guiding their behavior.  How did you avoid this 
interpretation?

The works of the flesh include fornication and drunkeness as well as 
strife, jealousy, envy, party spirit, dissension, enmity, anger (Yes,
many are related to competition and struggle for honor and human victory!)
 How would fornication  and drunkeness be related to Galatian's desire to
get accepted in the mainline Jewish community?
 
> The Law 
> actually helps reduce this conflict for Jewish people; that is why we 
> teach children rightness and seek to have them run with the right 
> crowd, for example, Jewish and Christian and Muslim and Hindu 
> parents, et al. If we thought that doing so would make them worse we 
> surely would not do so! Paul's language has been read as though a 
> psychological profile of an individual's plight, when the issue in 
> Galatians is very particular and about the status/non-status of a 
> group of gentiles in Christ vis-a-vis the normative status of the 
> interpretation of the present age within Jewish communities on this 
> issue.

Yes, that is true. I was also influenced by this psychological 
interpretation,
and it influenced greatly how I deal with my children. I wonder if I have
to de-influence(?) myself. 
 
   
> >
> >However, Roman 6:14 seems to be an obstacle to this reading:
> >
> >For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not udner the Law
> >but under grace.
> >
> >Here not being under the Law is the cause for sin's not having
> >dominion over the Romans. The life in the flesh is somehow caused by the 
> >life under the Law. > >If not being under the Law but under grace (through 
> >Christ) is the > >cause for sin's not being dominant, it implies that 
> >being under grace EMPOWERS people in a way that was not possible when they 
> >were
> >under the Law.
> >

If you do not agree with the above interpretation of Rom 6:14, 
how do you take Rom 6:14? It seems it is more difficult to handle than
Gal 5:18.   

> >Then, for Paul, "Those under the Law" are not simply the Jewish people,
> >the people of the Law, but those who were under the dominion of sin as
> >well.
> >
> 
According to your system, "being under the Law" would have
no problem if they are Jews. But if they are Gentile believers, 
it would cause all vices of the flesh. Why the difference?
In fact, that seems to the most difficult problem in your approach?


Sincerely
Moon

Moon R. Jung
Associate Professor
Sogang University,
Seoul, Korea