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: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 16:48:17 -0000
Mark Nanos writes;
> However, even in Galatians there are other usages of this flesh/spirit
> language that do not have to do with circumcision per se, and the
contrast
> he brings to mind for his addressees thereby.
I don't disagree with this at all. What I was answering, I thought, was
the question of the origin of Paul's choice of terms, not the way he
developed the language in other usage.
However, I am not entirely convinced of the view that it is simply about
> understanding of flesh/spirit as "human conventions for identifying
the
> 'in-crowd'" versus "confession of faith in Christ for identifying the
> 'in-crowd'" gets at the heart of Paul's usage of this language.
I am not clear that Paul ever reaches complete consistency in his view
of the Law, but I don't feel he ever quite reduces it to "human
conventions" while he is clear that it relates to the flesh. I think the
relationship of the terms flesh and spirit is fairly fluid in Paul, and
their meaning is not to be derived simply from their opposition, but
also from their context.
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.