[XTalk] Christ after the flesh
- dhindley@... wrote:
> robert m schacht <bobschach-@...> wrote:Does this verse really say that Paul has no concern for the Historical Jesus?
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:58:55 -0700 dhindley@... writes:
> > > ... Just like the Pauline
> > > epistle that says that whatever Jesus was in the flesh is of no
> > > concern to him (Paul or his interpolator), so operated the authors
> > > the Gospels.
> > > Dave Hindley
> > Dave,
> > Could you please tell us which epistle, and the chapter and verse?
> RSV 2 Corinthians 5:16b "... even though we once regarded Christ
> from a human point of view [KATA SARKA], we regard him thus no longer."
> My apologies! Jon Peter asked the exact same thing off-list last night.
> I tried looking up the exact verse prior to submitting the post, but
> did a concordance search of the RSV looking under the word "flesh" and
> never found what I wanted.
> I just could not remember the RSV wording. And then it was late at
> night ... etc. I knew it was there because I recalled using it in a
> post submitted to an online service thread a year ago.
> This is, BTW, one of the pasages that I would relegate to an
> interpolator of the Pauline epistles.
Given one of Paul's uses of SARX isn't it possible that what he is asserting
here is that he no longer thinks, as he certainly once did (and in so doing
persecuted the church), of the Messiah as having to be a warrior?
It is a long way from KATA SARKA (according to (the) "flesh") which modifies
a way of thinking about something (i.e., the nature of Messiahship) to not
being concerned about what the historical Jesus was like.
Jeffrey B. Gibson
7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
Chicago, Illinois 60626