04_Biblica_Aletti_Layout 1 08/07/13 12:56 Pagina 402 402 JEAN-NOËL ALETTI (α) ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυµεῖ κατὰ 15 τοῦ πνεύµατος, (β) τὸ δὲ πνεῦµα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός, (γ) ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται, (δ) ἵνα µὴ ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε ταῦτα ποιῆτε. raises important soteriological and anthropological questions. Three readings are possible: in the first two, (δ) can be connected with (γ), but in the third, (δ) can also be related to (α), in which case (β) and (γ) form an incidental clause. But even if (δ) does depend upon (γ), two possible readings exist. For the first, the flesh/Spirit antagonism would result in the paralysis of the believer: “for 16 these (things) 17 are opposed to one another so that (ἵνα) 18 you cannot do the things that you would” 19. The verse has often been understood as describ- J.L. MARTYN, Galatians (AB 33; New York 1998) 493, rightly notes 15 that only here is the verb epithymeô with kata and the genitive encountered and asks if there could not be an influence of Aramaic syntax. The Greek conjunction gar in v. 17α and 17γ is each time explicative 16 and not causal. Cf. A.M. BUSCEMI, Lettera ai Galati (Studium Biblicum Fran- ciscanum. Analecta 63; Jerusalem 2004) 551. The neuter demonstrative pronoun tauta in v. 17γ clearly designates the 17 flesh and the Spirit. As a consequence of their having different genders in Greek (flesh = feminine; Spirit = neuter), the pronoun must be neuter. This neuter pronoun does not allow concluding that Paul is making the flesh and the Spirit impersonal entities. With good reason, BUSCEMI, Galati, 552, op- poses H.D. BETZ, Galatians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, PA 1979) 279, for whom “[t]he neuter tauta (these things) identifies flesh and Spirit as imper- sonal forces acting within man and waging war against each other”. Undoubt- edly, it would be better to translate it with “powers/forces” rather than “things”. In that case, the ἵνα would be consecutive. 18 The King James Translation. According to Dunn, in order for the verse 19 to make sense, it is necessary for the hina to be final (telic) and not consec- utive. But “[t]his fact forbids taking ha ean thelēte as referring to the things which one naturally, by the flesh, desires, and understanding the clause as an expression of the beneficent result of walking by the Spirit.” He adds: “The final clause is to be understood not as expressing the purpose of God … (for neither is the subject of the sentence a word referring to God, nor is the thought thus yielded a Pauline thought), nor of the flesh alone, nor of the Spirit alone, but as the purpose of both flesh and Spirit, in the sense that the flesh opposes the Spirit that men may not do what they will in accordance with the mind of the Spirit, and the Spirit opposes the flesh that they may not do what they will after the flesh. Does the man choose evil, the Spirit opposes him; does he choose good, the flesh hinders him”. DUNN, Galatians, 297. © Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati