corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: "Doug C" <archy AT clara.co.uk>
- To: "'Corpus-paul'" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: RE: Flesh and Spirit
- Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 20:04:09 +0100
I've always felt that this language, which occurs most in letters whose
context includes Jew and Gentile issues, that the most obvious
background to the choice is that the Jewish covenant is made (literally)
in the flesh (of the foreskin) whereas the new covenant is made in the
Spirit, so it is natural to ask the Galatians by what means they
received the Spirit.
Obviously, Paul deploys the language in ways that broaden the semantic
field beyond this, but I am of the view that this does not negate the
basic comparison. In other contexts, esp. 1 Cor 15 he employs a
different anthropology, and I would disagree with those who make flesh
and spirit fundamental concepts of Paul's theological anthropology.
But I'd be interested to hear other views.
Doug
fatherdoug AT faithtofaith.net
-
Flesh and Spirit,
Bob MacDonald, 04/27/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Doug C, 04/27/2002
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Mark D. Nanos, 04/29/2002
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Doug C, 04/29/2002
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Elli Elliott, 04/29/2002
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Bob MacDonald, 04/30/2002
- RE: Flesh and Spirit, Elli Elliott, 04/30/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.