To Paul, being perfected in collective identity was a poor substitute to being made free in Christ. In the following passage, Paul makes an allegorical interpretation of the story of Hagar and Sarah. One of the sons are described as the son according to the σάρξ, and the other as the son of promise (4.21-30). The peculiar perspective in Paul’s account of the story is that the only persecution that occurs in the text is the persecution against Hagar and her son, not as commonly assumed against Sarah and her son.1 Moreover, the common scenario would rather be that those with prominent positions within established constructs of collective identity would persecute those who had none, namely the slaves and the servants, and others of lesser social
…show more content…
“For you, brothers and sisters, were called to liberty; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the σάρξ but through love be servants of one another” (5.13). Thus, the opposite to ‘opportunities for the σάρξ’ is depicted as love, which is a relational term. In parallel to the ‘opportinities for the σάρξ’ stands the accusation that if they “bite and devour one another take heed that you are not consumed by one another” (5.15). This perspective is relational in its worst sense. Traditional interpretation has assumed that the following account of the problems with the σάρξ is related to intrapsychic drives. In keeping with the monosemous approach depicted above, we will test an interpersonal, or indeed inter-collective approach to Paul’s discussion. Paul emphasizes that if they are ‘led by the spirit’, they will not give in to what ‘people demand’ from them. The phrase ‘desires of the flesh’ triggers associations to modern and post-Freudian assumptions about human drives, but we leave these assumptions aside for the moment. Paul speaks about desires of the σάρξ, and the desire that has been discussed nearly throughout the letter is the ‘other’ preachers’s desire that the male Christ-believers must be circumcised and otherwise follow the codes for ingroup inclustion and exgroup exclusion. Paul even suggests that the collective identity craves against the Spirit, and …show more content…
“Restore such one in a spirit of gentleness” (6.1). Thus, they must not take the occasion to boast in their own superiority, when someone fails. Burdens must be carried collectively (6.2). On the other hand, success must be carried individually and perhaps secretly, that is, they must seek approval in the group but bear their own load (6.3-5). The one who places his or her value in ingroup beloning will be corrupted.
To summarize, this interpretation of σάρξ has important bearing on ecclesiology. The church must not become a new collective identity which considers the markers of identity more important than the symbol in which they share. Since the symbol in which they share is the crucified Christ, the relative status of various groups within the church is enmity against the Spirit, a sort of sarcasm. The collective identities are transient and inessential, while the fruits of the Spirit are of true
“For you, brothers and sisters, were called to liberty; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the σάρξ but through love be servants of one another” (5.13). Thus, the opposite to ‘opportunities for the σάρξ’ is depicted as love, which is a relational term. In parallel to the ‘opportinities for the σάρξ’ stands the accusation that if they “bite and devour one another take heed that you are not consumed by one another” (5.15). This perspective is relational in its worst sense. Traditional interpretation has assumed that the following account of the problems with the σάρξ is related to intrapsychic drives. In keeping with the monosemous approach depicted above, we will test an interpersonal, or indeed inter-collective approach to Paul’s discussion. Paul emphasizes that if they are ‘led by the spirit’, they will not give in to what ‘people demand’ from them. The phrase ‘desires of the flesh’ triggers associations to modern and post-Freudian assumptions about human drives, but we leave these assumptions aside for the moment. Paul speaks about desires of the σάρξ, and the desire that has been discussed nearly throughout the letter is the ‘other’ preachers’s desire that the male Christ-believers must be circumcised and otherwise follow the codes for ingroup inclustion and exgroup exclusion. Paul even suggests that the collective identity craves against the Spirit, and …show more content…
“Restore such one in a spirit of gentleness” (6.1). Thus, they must not take the occasion to boast in their own superiority, when someone fails. Burdens must be carried collectively (6.2). On the other hand, success must be carried individually and perhaps secretly, that is, they must seek approval in the group but bear their own load (6.3-5). The one who places his or her value in ingroup beloning will be corrupted.
To summarize, this interpretation of σάρξ has important bearing on ecclesiology. The church must not become a new collective identity which considers the markers of identity more important than the symbol in which they share. Since the symbol in which they share is the crucified Christ, the relative status of various groups within the church is enmity against the Spirit, a sort of sarcasm. The collective identities are transient and inessential, while the fruits of the Spirit are of true