Once again, here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:
24Now, those of Christ crucify the flesh together with its
passions and lusts. 25If we are living by [the] Spirit, let us also
be ordering ourselves by the Spirit. 26Let us not be becoming
conceited, provoking one another and envying one another.
I’m not sure if Paul is here sort of “wrapping up” his
thoughts on flesh vs. Spirit, or just adding more instruction. The same goes
for all of chapter 6, as I look ahead. Perhaps after I’ve studied to the end of
the book I can look back and see the flow of logic.
Regardless, after such a clear dissertation on the works of
the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit, Paul makes this statement, “Now, those of Christ crucify the
flesh together with its passions and lusts.” As usual, this one little
verse is packed with instruction. We live in a world where there is the flesh
and there is the Spirit. What makes believers (“those of Christ”) different? It should be this maxim, that they characteristically crucify the flesh.
Let me explain where this is coming from: There is an
exegetical point that requires discussion at this point. Many translations will
read something like, “those of Christ have crucified the flesh…,”
pointing to as it were a past completed action. I believe the best translation of the Greek
words here is to simply say they “crucify the flesh.”
What is at issue here is the poor abused Greek aorist. The
word translated “crucify” or “have crucified” is an aorist active indicative
verb. Aorist is the “tense.” First of all, unfortunately, when we think of
“tense” our consuming concern is time. In English our tenses are all past,
present, future, past perfect, etc. – all concerned almost exclusively with
time. Such was not the case with Greek. Their tenses were far more concerned
with what theologians call “aktionsart” or “type of action.” Their aorist could
have a past-time element, but it was more specifically their “default” tense,
just to express the way things are. Dana & Mantey state that this is “the
basal, unmodified force of the aorist tense,” describing an action “simply as occurring,
without reference to the question of progress ... it may regard the action in
its entirety.” They would refer to this basic use of the
aorist as “constative” or “gnomic.” I will refer to my choice as gnomic.
But what about time? The one place in Greek where time was
most likely to be expressed is in the indicative mood, which is the case here.
This aorist here is, in fact, indicative, and so could very well be expressing
“past” time. That is why many choose to add the time element “have crucified;”
and, I might add, grammatically speaking, that is a perfectly legitimate
translation. But, on the other hand, it isn’t both. It can’t be both past and
gnomic. This is the business of exegesis, to try to decide which it is and then
offer to others the reasoning behind our conclusion.
Here is one of those cases, where, once again, my old maxim
comes to play, the familiar, “If the plain sense makes good sense, why make any
other sense?” The issue here is that all words and grammar have semantic range.
They have a basic meaning, and then they have what I’ll call peripheral
meanings. A very simple example in English is the word “to see.” Its basic
meaning of course is to look with the eyes and observe something. But it can
also have a more metaphorical meaning of understanding, as when someone exclaims,
“Oh, I see!” When translating the Bible I try to stick to the most basic
meanings of words, unless the context justifies choosing peripheral meanings.
To me, to choose peripheral meanings, without defensible support from the text
and context, is to leave the business of translation and to enter the world of
interpretation. Sometimes we have to do that, but, for an exegete, I think it
is important to realize when I’m doing it.
That is why here, I will choose the gnomic sense of the
aorist, as D&M describes it “the most basal sense of the aorist” and
translate it “those of Christ crucify the
flesh...” Now, it is of course true that believers “have crucified” the
flesh. Once again, that is a perfectly legitimate translation and it is also
perfectly true. My issue is simply to ask, “But is that what it means here, in
this specific text?” And although that is possible, I think not. I think Paul
is wanting to express that it is characteristically true of believers that they
crucify their flesh. It is characteristically true that they fight against its
evil, that they try to let the Spirit rule instead.
I suppose here is my rub: To simply say (in this context)
that believers have crucified the flesh, gives me the immediate impression that
the battle should be over, Sounds like the battle is won. There is a sense in
which that is true, that we have in fact died to the old man, yet the very
thesis of the book of Galatians is that the battle goes on. The question before
us is not whether the battle is won or not. The question is how to fight? Do we
fight the flesh with law or do we fight it with grace? The fact is that the
battle is real and present and on-going. Everyone knows that, senses it, sees
it happening. The question is how will we fight? The very natural, seemingly
logical human answer is that we need law. We need rules to make us righteous.
But Paul says clearly in Col 2:23, “Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their
self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the
body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence (the flesh).” Rules do not address the real problem. That’s why they’ve never
worked and never will.
That is the point here. True believers
don’t just expect rules to make them better. They “crucify the flesh.” They put
it to death. And they do it characteristically – not perfectly, not necessarily
consistently, perhaps not even very successfully, but it is the business they
are constantly about. In a sense, what he is saying is that we don’t tinker around with the problem, we go
for the jugular! We don’t content
ourselves with a few external improvements, we want a change that comes from
our hearts. Can we say that is the most basic difference between “religion” and
truly following Christ? “Religion” is very happy to embrace some rules that
make me feel spiritual. True Christ followers cannot be happy with anything so
superficial. Only real heart change satisfies their longing to be righteous. I
need to know that I’m different, that
the very core of my being has changed.
That is why he adds, “with its passions and
lusts.” That, we recognize, is the problem. The problem is something going on
very deeply inside of us. It is our wanter.
Our wanter is broken. We are dealing
with “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.” At
the very core of our being, we should want what God wants, but we don’t. We
want what we want. And when we want
it, none of us are above murder, lying, or stealing to get it – whatever it
takes! We’ll even feign religion (Pharisees) and pretend to be loving and kind,
if that seems like it will get us what we want. “Passions and lusts” are
exactly that – very strong impulses that move us to think and speak and act, to
do whatever it takes to get what we want.
True believers will realize that is the
problem. That is where the battle must be fought – at the root. And it again
isn’t about tinkering – the flesh, those “passions and lusts,” must be crucified, put to death, extinguished.
I need to see myself that what God wants is
what is truly best until I want it
too. I need to see that my own evil passions and desires are in reality
self-destructive while God’s passions and desires mean life itself. And how can
this possibly happen? How can I possibly “see” what I’m blind to? How can I
change the very essence of what I want?
It happens in the heart of true Christ-followers because “If the Spirit of Him that
raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He that raised up Christ from the
dead shall also give life to your mortal body, through His Sprit that dwells in
you” (Romans 8:11).
God help me to never ever ever again think
I’m satisfied when I’ve tinkered around with righteousness. May I be keenly
aware of my passions and lusts. May it be true that I characteristically “crucify
the flesh” and go for the jugular.
No comments:
Post a Comment