“In the flesh”: Recovering the lost grammar of Paul in Galatians in light of echos in Hebrews

[Bernard Muller]

to Kunigunde Kreuzerin,

The minor reading concerns the temptation (πειρασμόν) not the flesh. It's "your" or "my" temptation, but always "my" flesh.

Thank you. But that's not I read (and obviously be missled) in gryan's thesis:

"Become as I, since I also [have become] as you, brothers, I beg you. You have done me no
wrong, but you know that it was because of [your] fleshly weakness that I first preached to you,
and [you know that it was because of] your temptation IN MY FLESH (καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν
ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου) that you did not count as nothing or despise [me], but you received me, as an
angel of God, as Christ Jesus. Where therefore is your blessedness? For I bear witness that if
possible you would have gouged out your eyes and given them to me.”

And I missed on what gryan posted:

τὸν πειρασμόν μου Ψ Chrys pesh hark 1611 Byz; C, P46
τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν 1739, A,  33, B, D* F G d b ×vg

"your" or "you" makes more sense and is supported by the earliest codexes (A, B, D).

As for the RSV "and though my condition [flesh] was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus."

By the way, πειρασμὸν can be translated by trial:
Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

πειρασμός, πειρασμοῦ, ὁ (πειράζω, which see), the Sept. for מַסָּה, an experiment, attempt, trial, proving; (Vulg. tentatio);

Cordially, Bernard

[gryan]

As for the RSV "and though my condition [flesh] was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus."

By the way, πειρασμὸν can be translated by trial:
Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

πειρασμός, πειρασμοῦ, ὁ (πειράζω, which see), the Sept. for מַסָּה, an experiment, attempt, trial, proving; (Vulg. tentatio);

Gal 4:12-15 My proposed alternative grammar in translation

"Become as I, since I also [have become] as you, brothers, I beg you.
You have done me no wrong, but
you know that it was because of [your] fleshly weakness
(Gal 4:13a δι’ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς/Rom 6:19a διὰ τὴν ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν)
that I first preached to you,
and
[you know that it was because of] your temptation IN MY FLESH
(καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου )
that you did not count as nothing or despise [me], but you received me, as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus. Where therefore is your blessedness? For I bear witness that if possible you would have gouged out your eyes and given them to me.”


My decision to translate πειρασμὸν as "temptation" (Cf. Gal 6:1 and 1 Cor 10:13) is contextual.

In the context of the proposed syntax--where the two accusative nouns "weakness", ἀσθένειαν and "temptation", πειρασμὸν are governed by a single pronoun "because of" διὰ--"weakness" and "temptation" combine to form a single idea of moral suffering characteristic not of law observant Jews, such as Paul once was. The moral plight of the Galatians is characteristic of God-fearing Gentiles who know enough of the law to feel guilty for their kind of "fleshly weakness" when faced with their kind of moral "temptation". The phrase τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου ("your temptation in my flesh") refers to a pivotal time in the past when Paul the Jew, zealous for the law became like a Gentile sinner--he was tempted just like one of them in his flesh. His identification with the Gentile moral plight was formative for his becoming apostle to the Gentiles. And the Galatians received him "as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus" precisely because he had become like them, in temptation like theirs, and so also was able to help those who were tempted.

In taking a seat with these receptive Galatians, and welcoming Paul as he were the one who sent him--as Jesus--we are able to "see" Jesus as the author of Hebrews imagined him "in the days of his flesh":

Heb 2:18
"For because he himself has suffered, having been tempted (πειρασθείς), he is able to help those who are being tempted (πειρασθείς)."

Heb 4:15
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses (ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ἡμῶν), but we have one who was tempted (πεπειρασμένον) in every way that we are, yet was without sin.

Am I not making sense? Are you not able to "see" what I "see"?

[davidmartin]

Is Paul equating moral temptation with the temptation to return to the law? he might then see circumcision as a form of temptation
Paul falls back on the Spirit very much in Galatians to make his point's work. He isn't just taking them away from temptation he's giving them something, the Spirit of God. "He therefore who supplies the Spirit to you, and works miracles among you" He's talking of himself?

[gryan]

Is Paul equating moral temptation with the temptation to return to the law? he might then see circumcision as a form of temptation

Paul presents two distinct paths, both of which would have aimed at living a morally upright life (I think Paul's opponents would have agreed that the vices Paul labels "works of the flesh" ought to be avoided!):

One path is under the heading "works of the law"/"circumcision". Notably, in Philo, and I suspect also thought of Paul and his opponents, "circumcision of the of the foreskin of the flesh" would have been a symbolic of "the excision of excessive and superfluous pleasure" (Spec. laws 1.1-11).

The other path is under the heading "hearing of faith"/"spirit"/"crucifixion of the flesh with its passions and desires" (crucifixion being an alternative symbolic "excision of excessive and superfluous pleasure").

In the phrase, "your temptation in my flesh", I think the basic meaning is parallel to the "temptation" described later in epistle:

Gal 6:1
"Brothers, if someone is caught in a trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him with a spirit of gentleness. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted."

I think "your temptation" in 4:14 likewise refers to being "tempted" to "trespass" (Cf Heb 4:14, tempted to sin).

Where does temptation to trespass come from? I think Paul "knew" the Galatians were (like "addicts" of AA) very conscious of "fleshly desire" (Gal 5:16, and Rom 7, Cf the book of James, which is like Hebrews, I think is interacting with the Epistle to the Galatians in the exposition on temptation of desire).

Being conscious of having unsatisfied desires is a source of the suffering that Paul speaks of when he says, in Gal 3:4, "You have suffered a lot in vain, if it is in vain" (ie They had indeed suffered a lot and their suffering was, in his view, not in vain).

Paul's problem with "works of the law" as a path was that "not all flesh will [or all flesh will not] be made righteous by works of the law.(Gal 2:16)" Not everyone is going to become Jewish! Paul's focus was on "all flesh" (πᾶσα σάρξ), thus he wrote: "I have become all things to all [flesh?] so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings. (1 Cor 9:22b-23 τοῖς πᾶσιν γέγονα πάντα, ἵνα πάντως τινὰς σώσω, Cf Heb 2:9, Jesus tasted death "for all" ὑπὲρ παντὸς)."

The picture of the initial reception of Paul by the Galatians is complicated by the fact that he was indeed circumcised, and quite capable of fitting into law observant Jewish society and they were not. I think they were god-fearing Gentiles who admired the Jewish moral life (I'm influenced here by Stowers, Rereading Romans, where Jews are described as models of moral strength as over against Gentile "weakness").

Paul's unique persuasive force depicted in the phrase "your temptation in my flesh" comes from him, as a Jew, a model of moral uprightness, admitting to experiencing temptation of fleshly desire like theirs. I think Paul's sympathy for their weaknesses (Gal 4:13/Heb 4:15) would have contributed to their sense of "having been known" by God (γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ Gal 4:9, Cf Heb 4:13, "all things are naked and laid bare to God's eyes")

Paul's opponents were like Paul in that they were circumcised, but they were unlike him in the path they advocated. Both paths proposed a way of dealing with "temptation of fleshly desire", Paul was appealing to the Galatians by distinguishing his path from theirs and by reminding them of how they had received the Spirit--it was by "hearing of faith" and not by the path of "works of the law." He was saying that the suffering they were experiencing as a result of walking in the spirit/Spirit--and not carrying out fleshly desires--was not in vain. By participation in the faithfulness of Christ--in the "now" and "in the flesh"--they were being made perfect/complete/mature (Gal 3:3, Cf Heb 6:1 "press on to perfection" and 6:12 "imitate those who through faithfulness and patience inherit what has been promised.")

Your thoughts?

[Ben C. Smith]

The picture of the initial reception of Paul by the Galatians is complicated by the fact that he was indeed circumcised, and quite capable of fitting into law observant Jewish society and they were not. I think they were god-fearing Gentiles who admired the Jewish moral life (I'm influenced here by Stowers, Rereading Romans, where Jews are described as models of moral strength as over against Gentile "weakness").

Good choice. Possibly the book which wielded the most influence over my reading of Pauline theology. And it was Stowers who introduced me to the work of Richard B. Hays, whom you have also mentioned.

[gryan]

The picture of the initial reception of Paul by the Galatians is complicated by the fact that he was indeed circumcised, and quite capable of fitting into law observant Jewish society and they were not. I think they were god-fearing Gentiles who admired the Jewish moral life (I'm influenced here by Stowers, Rereading Romans, where Jews are described as models of moral strength as over against Gentile "weakness").

Good choice. Possibly the book which wielded the most influence over my reading of Pauline theology. And it was Stowers who introduced me to the work of Richard B. Hays, whom you have also mentioned.

Glad to know that!

Before you I've encountered only a few people who have said they had read Stowers, and none who said he wielded the most influence on their reading of Pauline theology. In my imaginary group of best possible evaluators for my thesis, Stowers is probably on top. Hays is up there too, along with Douglas Campbell and Francis Watson and Ben Witherington and EP Sanders.

Would they "see" what I am seeing? With a project like mine, where I am looking at a whole pattern of grammatical changes, all of them surprisingly, theologically awkwardly connected with Hebrews as a reception of Galatians, I come up against the problem of whether such big name scholars would have the, I don't know, courage or recklessness to go public in support of the idea that is so DIFFERENT.

In Romans, between 6:19 ("because of your fleshly weakness") and 8:3 (God did what the law, weakened by the flesh could not do, by sending his son in the likeness of sinful flesh...) there is a passage that is verbally, and meaningfully parallel to "your temptation in my flesh" as I understand it: Paul is speaking in first person--Stowers, a person in character speech, taking the role of a Gentile sinner--saying, among other things, "there is nothing good in me, that is in my flesh".

Then Paul goes on to say something seemingly contrary to my reading of Gal 2:20. In Galatians, Paul can speak of living an ongoing life "in the flesh" directly after saying "it is not I but Christ living in me". In Romans 8:9 however, when Paul says, "You do not exist in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if the Spirit dwells in you", he does not follow it with something paradoxically affirming life in the flesh--something like "The life you live in the flesh, you live in faith...". Later, however, he does say "the Spirit helps us in our weakness" (Rom 8:26). So life in "weakness"--seemingly by implication "in the flesh" also--does go on.

It is that kind of close reading of Romans that has been necessary to explore the plausibility of my rereading of Galatians.

Your thoughts on this project?

[Ben C. Smith]

Your thoughts on this project?

Well, I cannot say I am convinced, but I am glad you offered the set of readings you do. Honestly, though, I have also had my attention drawn elsewhere lately, and have thus not given your thesis as much attention as it deserves. I can say that probably the two main points I find hardest to accept, at least so far, are (A) your reading of Galatians 3.3 ("by" or "in" the flesh) and (B) your proposed reception in the Epistle to the Hebrews (I have zero problem with Hebrews knowing Galatians; I just mean your reading of what Hebrews means with possible relation to Galatians). I fear that is all I can give you at this time. But, again, I am very glad you have presented the thesis. Much to consider.

[gryan]

I can say that probably the two main points I find hardest to accept, at least so far, are (A) your reading of Galatians 3.3 ("by" or "in" the flesh) and (B) your proposed reception in the Epistle to the Hebrews (I have zero problem with Hebrews knowing Galatians...

Gal 2:20
ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί, ἐν πίστει ζῶ
τῇ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ.

Gal 3:3
ἐναρξάμενοι Πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε

Gal 2:20
And the life I now live in the flesh, in the faith I live
that of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself on behalf of me.

Gal 3:3
Having begun in the Spirit, now in the flesh you are being made perfect.

I interpret Gal 3:3 as a word of encouragement to the "unperceptive" rather than as a sarcastic question to the "foolish."

The key to understanding the "faithfulness of Christ" interpretation of 2:20 is imitation of Christ. Readers are expected to hear "Become as I" (Gal 4:14) to mean "Become imitators of me as I also am an imitator of Christ" (1 Cor 10:1).

It is by imitation or participation, that the sense of "now... in the flesh" in 2:20 is identical to the sense of the very same words--"now in the flesh"-- in 3:3. Likewise, "being made perfect" (3:3) is, by participation, a life lived in "faithfulness--that of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me" (2:20). This is what Paul intends for the "brothers" to experience fully when he says: "I am in labor pains again until Christ is formed in you" (4:19).

The ideal of both imitating the faithfulness of leaders and pressing on toward perfection is echoed in Hebrews (Heb 6:1 "press on to perfection" and 6:12 "imitate those who through faithfulness and patience inherit what has been promised.") And, in Hebrews, the faithfulness of Jesus "in the days of his flesh" is the ultimate model for the "faithfulness" that is supposed to be imitated.

It would be amazing to me if my interpretation of "now in the flesh you are being made perfect" as a word of encouragement is really absent in the entire history of interpretation of Galatians. But as far as I know, from Jerome and the earliest interpreters to the modern time, it is indeed absent. If this is not so, I'd like to know about it.

Thoughts?

[Ben C. Smith]

I can say that probably the two main points I find hardest to accept, at least so far, are (A) your reading of Galatians 3.3 ("by" or "in" the flesh) and (B) your proposed reception in the Epistle to the Hebrews (I have zero problem with Hebrews knowing Galatians...

Gal 2:20
ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκί, ἐν πίστει ζῶ
τῇ τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ.

Gal 3:3
ἐναρξάμενοι Πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε

Gal 2:20
And the life I now live in the flesh, in the faith I live
that of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself on behalf of me.

Gal 3:3
Having begun in the Spirit, now in the flesh you are being made perfect.

I interpret Gal 3:3 as a word of encouragement to the "unperceptive" rather than as a sarcastic question to the "foolish."

The key to understanding the "faithfulness of Christ" interpretation of 2:20 is imitation of Christ. Readers are expected to hear "Become as I" (Gal 4:14) to mean "Become imitators of me as I also am an imitator of Christ" (1 Cor 10:1).

It is by imitation or participation, that the sense of "now... in the flesh" in 2:20 is identical to the sense of the very same words--"now in the flesh"-- in 3:3. Likewise, "being made perfect" (3:3) is, by participation, a life lived in "faithfulness--that of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me" (2:20). This is what Paul intends for the "brothers" to experience fully when he says: "I am in labor pains again until Christ is formed in you" (4:19).

The ideal of both imitating the faithfulness of leaders and pressing on toward perfection is echoed in Hebrews (Heb 6:1 "press on to perfection" and 6:12 "imitate those who through faithfulness and patience inherit what has been promised.") And, in Hebrews, the faithfulness of Jesus "in the days of his flesh" is the ultimate model for the "faithfulness" that is supposed to be imitated.

It would be amazing to me if my interpretation of "now in the flesh you are being made perfect" as a word of encouragement is really absent in the entire history of interpretation of Galatians. But as far as I know, from Jerome and the earliest interpreters to the modern time, it is indeed absent. If this is not so, I'd like to know about it.

Thoughts?

I would not compare Galatians 3.3 with Galatians 2.20 in that way. Rather, I would regard the σαρκί as standing parallel with the πνεύματι in 3.3, both datives indicating the means or instrument by which the verbs are being accomplished. The ἐν σαρκι of 2.20 looks a lot more like the ἐν σαρκι of Philippians 1.22 or 2 Corinthians 10.3, as indicating the simple fact that we are still creatures made of flesh (though not for long, according to 1 Corinthians 15). So I would read σαρκί in opposition to πνεύματι in 3.3, just as those two concepts stand in opposition in so many other Pauline verses. The Galatians, having begun by means of the spirit, are now seeking to finish up by means of the flesh, quite literally in this case, since circumcision is, for Paul, paradigmatic of relying on the flesh. Thus, the flesh symbolizing circumcision is but an instance, a subcategory, of the flesh being the stuff of which humans are made (until transformed into something still corporeal but no longer made of flesh). One can find a somewhat similar use of the term σάρξ in the Wisdom of Sirach (refer, say, to 14.18 as the general usage and to 44.20 as the more specific usage pertaining to circumcision).

[gryan]

... I would regard the σαρκί as standing parallel with the πνεύματι in 3.3, both datives indicating the means or instrument by which the verbs are being accomplished. The ἐν σαρκι of 2.20 looks a lot more like the ἐν σαρκι of Philippians 1.22 or 2 Corinthians 10.3, as indicating the simple fact that we are still creatures made of flesh (though not for long, according to 1 Corinthians 15). So I would read σαρκί in opposition to πνεύματι in 3.3, just as those two concepts stand in opposition in so many other Pauline verses. The Galatians, having begun by means of the spirit, are now seeking to finish up by means of the flesh, quite literally in this case, since circumcision is, for Paul, paradigmatic of relying on the flesh. Thus, the flesh symbolizing circumcision is but an instance, a subcategory, of the flesh being the stuff of which humans are made (until transformed into something still corporeal but no longer made of flesh).

This excellent argument (above) is supported by the weight of tradition, and since there is nothing wrong with it as such, I will not try to refute it head on, as it were.

Gal 3:3
ἐναρξάμενοι Πνεύματι νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε

Gal 5:7
...Πνεύματι περιπατεῖτε καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ τελέσητε.

Gal 3:3
Having begun in the Spirit now in the flesh you are being made perfect.

Gal 5:7
Walk in the Spirit and you will not carry out fleshly desire

Since I am experimenting with reading Paul's "now in the (sphere of the mortal) flesh you are being made perfect" as a word of encouragement to the "unperceptive" Galatians, I am finding a meaningful connection with another of Paul's words of encouragement: "you will not carry out fleshly desire." Somber as it sounds, this is good news for converts trying to kick bad habits. The meaningful connection is this: Being made perfect in the sphere of the flesh entails not carrying out fleshly desire. The result is a particular form of "suffering"--the painful awareness that:

"...the flesh desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. For these are opposed to one another in order that you should not do those things you might wish" (ie "works of the flesh").

So there is indeed a Pauline opposition of Spirit and flesh, but it is this very opposition that is operative in the process of "being made perfect"--not doing what you might wish--in the sphere of the "flesh."

-----------------------
Ben, I'm thrilled to know about the Wisdom of Sirach usages. I had not seen them before! I find this verse is particularly apropos:

44:20
He observed the Most High’s command,
and entered into a covenant with him;
ὃς συνετήρησεν νόμον ὑψίστου καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν διαθήκῃ μετ’ αὐτοῦ
In his own flesh he incised the ordinance,
and when tested was found loyal
ἐν σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ ἔστησεν διαθήκην καὶ ἐν πειρασμῷ εὑρέθη πιστός

This symbolic, covenantal incision is made in the sphere of the mortal flesh. In Paul's discourse, there are two paths for his Gentile converts: the path of his opponents ie "circumcision of the flesh", and the path of Christ which has an analogous symbol, i,e."crucifixtion of the flesh with its passions and desires." When Paul gives his encouraging word to unperceptive Galatians that their suffering is not in vain, he is talking about pressing forward toward the goal at the far side of symbolic participation in Christ's "crucifixion"-- participation in Christ's "resurrection" in the "now," and "in the flesh" ie becoming "flesh of Christ."
-------------
In his commentary on Gal 5:24 Jerome wrote: "...if our bodies are members of Christ, then our flesh is the flesh of Christ... but it takes no small effort to live in the present age in such a way that the life of Jesus is revealed in our flesh right now."

So, as far as I can tell, the Pauline opposition of Spirit and flesh does not rule out my rereading; in fact, it supports it. But that claim may not be persuasive.

Your thoughts?