Re: Romans 7:22 KATA TON ESW ANQRWPON
Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Sun, 23 Feb 1997 14:53:54 -0600
At 2:18 PM -0600 2/23/97, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>At 08:22 AM 2/23/97 -0600, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>
>>This is the whole matter of Pauline psychology which I have found most
>>admirably expounded in a section entitled "Pauline Anthropology" of Rudolf
>>Bultmann's old-but-still-very-good _New Testament Theology_. He says that
>>hO ESW ANQRWPOS is equivalent to the PNEUMA of a person--the knowing,
>>deciding, determining subjective part of selfhood which one might well call
>>the "I" in distinction from the SWMA which is the external self or
>>objective self--the "me" of selfhood which one's "I" may contemplate (and
>>discern going its own way contrary to the will of the PNEUMA) and which is
>>discernible by other persons. When the SWMA is alienated from the PNEUMA as
>>a consequence of sin, Paul refers to is at SARX or SWMA THS hAMARTIAS or
>>the like.
>
>Interesting! But I'm still not clear on this with respect to this passage.
>
>>At 5:58 AM -0600 2/23/97, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>>>Roma 7:22 (GNT) sunhdomai gar tw nomw tou qeou kata ton esw anqrwpon
>
>OK, actually Paul wrote that...sometimes my mailer gives me too much
>credit ;->
>
>>>In this passage, Paul talks about hH OIKOUSA EN EMOI hAMARTIA in contrast to
>>>TON ESW ANQRWPON, and seems to be treating them as two different "persons"
>>>within him.
>>>
>>>Is it fair to say that KATA means "in accordance with" here, so that there
>>>is an EGW here which is separate from TON ESW ANQRWPON, and which chooses
>>>between them?
>
>If KATA were used the same way that it is used in Luke 2:22 hOTE EPLHSQHSAN
>hAI hHMERAI TOU KAQARISMOU AUTWN KATA TON NOMON MWU:SEUS, then I would
>translate "I agree with the law of God, in accordance with my inner man",
>and the inner man would be distinct from the EGW who agrees.
>
>If KATA were used in the same way as it is in Romans 1:3 TOU GENOMENOU EK
>SPERMATOS DAVID KATA SARKA, then I would translate "I agree with the law of
>God in my inner man", and the EGW would be the same as the inner man.
>
>Is there a linguistic reason to prefer one interpretation over the other?
I think so:the KATA in the Rom 7 passage is clarifying an acc. of
specification (actually it is doing that in Lk 2:22 also, but there it is
indicating the basis or criterion by which the number of days is
calculated. In 1:3 the assertion is that Jesus is descended from David in
terms of physical descent.
My own view is that KATA TON ESW ANQRWPON means KATA TO PNEUMA MOU: within
the evaluating understanding wishing self, there is consent to the Law's
demands.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/