Comments on: Galatians 5:24 http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-524/ by Dr. Grant C. Richison Thu, 24 May 2012 18:49:14 +0000 hourly 1 By: Grant http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-524/comment-page-1/#comment-115479 Grant Tue, 04 Oct 2011 02:37:55 +0000 http://versebyversecommentary.com/2000/05/19/galatians-524/#comment-115479 Thomas, I see that you are into Christian fiction, my editor of this site is a fiction writer. Note her site: http://www.debelkink.com/ Thomas, I see that you are into Christian fiction, my editor of this site is a fiction writer. Note her site: http://www.debelkink.com/

]]> By: Grant http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-524/comment-page-1/#comment-115478 Grant Tue, 04 Oct 2011 02:31:16 +0000 http://versebyversecommentary.com/2000/05/19/galatians-524/#comment-115478 Thomas, thanks for your excellent comment. In this site I try to keep things more on the simple side and do not use Greek or Hebrew (even Aramaic!) :) There are places where there is no choice but to use original languages. One countervailing problem with my interpretation above is the active voice, which would imply that it is the believer who does the crucifying. However, the aorist indicative should be translated "have crucified," much like the perfect Greek tense. This would have taken too much explanation where I am trying to keep the studies pity. Note my study on Galatians 2:20 Thomas, thanks for your excellent comment. In this site I try to keep things more on the simple side and do not use Greek or Hebrew (even Aramaic!) :) There are places where there is no choice but to use original languages.
One countervailing problem with my interpretation above is the active voice, which would imply that it is the believer who does the crucifying. However, the aorist indicative should be translated “have crucified,” much like the perfect Greek tense. This would have taken too much explanation where I am trying to keep the studies pity.
Note my study on Galatians 2:20

]]> By: Thomas C. Booher http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-524/comment-page-1/#comment-115471 Thomas C. Booher Sat, 01 Oct 2011 13:17:17 +0000 http://versebyversecommentary.com/2000/05/19/galatians-524/#comment-115471 The point is well made here that the crucifixion is not what the believer is doing, but what Christ has done. If it were to mean that every believer has crucified his flesh, as an action of his own, it would be troubling: it would imply very strongly that the Christian has killed his flesh and therefore no longer sins. A professing Christian who sees that he still sins could not believe his profession is in accordance with saving faith... he is sinning. How can he claim and be assured that he is a Christian if a Christian has crucified his flesh, i.e., has put to death his flesh as an accomplished fact, not something he is working on or trying to do. If the Christian's crucifying of his own flesh were an accomplished fact, there is no room for continuing sin, because it would require a continuing crucifying of the flesh (something he supposedly has already accomplished). I wish the comments here would have done two things that I think would have made them more helpful: (1) The meaning and impact of the use of the aorist indicative in the verb 'crucified' is not connected as tightly with the once-for-allness of the Christian's crucifixion in Christ. There is a connection made here but I think it could be stronger. (2) In supporting (1) above, it would be helpful to show how the references to Romans 6 and Galatians 2:20 complement the meaning of this text; especially Romans 6 where Paul exhorts the believer to no longer let sin reign in his body and to present his body as an instrument of righteousness. Those two emphases would help the reader to understand how his crucifixion in Christ is worked out in practice. Having said all that, I understand there is a need for brevity, and I do appreciate your clarifying for the reader that the crucifixion Paul speaks of is not something the reader himself is doing but something that has already been done in Christ. The point is well made here that the crucifixion is not what the believer is doing, but what Christ has done. If it were to mean that every believer has crucified his flesh, as an action of his own, it would be troubling: it would imply very strongly that the Christian has killed his flesh and therefore no longer sins. A professing Christian who sees that he still sins could not believe his profession is in accordance with saving faith… he is sinning. How can he claim and be assured that he is a Christian if a Christian has crucified his flesh, i.e., has put to death his flesh as an accomplished fact, not something he is working on or trying to do. If the Christian’s crucifying of his own flesh were an accomplished fact, there is no room for continuing sin, because it would require a continuing crucifying of the flesh (something he supposedly has already accomplished).

I wish the comments here would have done two things that I think would have made them more helpful:

(1) The meaning and impact of the use of the aorist indicative in the verb ‘crucified’ is not connected as tightly with the once-for-allness of the Christian’s crucifixion in Christ. There is a connection made here but I think it could be stronger.
(2) In supporting (1) above, it would be helpful to show how the references to Romans 6 and Galatians 2:20 complement the meaning of this text; especially Romans 6 where Paul exhorts the believer to no longer let sin reign in his body and to present his body as an instrument of righteousness.

Those two emphases would help the reader to understand how his crucifixion in Christ is worked out in practice.

Having said all that, I understand there is a need for brevity, and I do appreciate your clarifying for the reader that the crucifixion Paul speaks of is not something the reader himself is doing but something that has already been done in Christ.

]]>