“`html
body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, ‘Book Antiqua’, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 40px; }
h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; }
h2 { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 5px; margin-top: 30px; }
h3 { margin-top: 25px; }
blockquote { background-color: #f9f9f9; border-left: 5px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 5px; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
An Exegetical Analysis of Galatians 5:17: Textual Variants and Grammatical Function of the Final Clause
This exegetical study of Galatians 5:17 is based on a b-greek discussion from December 31, 1999. The initial contribution presented an article proposing an interpretation of Galatians 5:17 wherein a segment of the verse is read as an aside, specifically the clause stating: “For the flesh desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are opposed to one another.” The proposed reading suggests that the subsequent purpose clause (“so that you do not do what you want”) is directly linked to the opening statement of desire, with the intervening clause being parenthetical.
The central exegetical issues concern the precise wording of the conditional clause within the final ἵνα construction, specifically the variant between εαν and αν, and the grammatical function of this entire ἵνα clause—whether it expresses purpose, result, or perhaps an epexegetical explanation. Understanding these nuances is crucial for grasping Paul’s intent regarding the believer’s struggle against the flesh and the role of the Spirit.
ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός· ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται, ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἂν θέλητε ταῦτα ποιῆτε. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The SBLGNT (2010) text for Galatians 5:17 is identical to the Nestle 1904 edition, reading ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἂν θέλητε ταῦτα ποιῆτε. However, the discussion highlights a significant textual variant (εαν vs. αν) present in other manuscript traditions, which is addressed in the textual criticism section.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
The primary textual variant for Galatians 5:17 revolves around the conjunction in the final clause: ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἂν θέλητε ταῦτα ποιῆτε. The critical text (NA28, UBS5, SBLGNT, Nestle-Aland) consistently reads ἂν (an). This reading is strongly supported by a wide range of early and important manuscripts, including P46, א, B, C, D, F, G, P, Ψ, and the Byzantine tradition.
A significant minority of manuscripts, including A, D*, K, L, P, and some Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and patristic witnesses (e.g., Origen, Didymus, Basil, Chrysostom), present the variant ἐὰν (ean). Grammatically, both ἂν and ἐὰν (which is historically a contraction of εἰ + ἂν) function similarly with the subjunctive mood in Hellenistic Greek, often conveying an indefinite relative or conditional sense (‘whatever,’ ‘if ever’). While the meaning is largely synonymous in this context, the strong manuscript support for ἂν in the critical apparatus suggests it is the more probable original reading.
Lexical Notes
σάρξ (sarx): In Pauline theology, ‘flesh’ often refers not merely to the physical body but to human nature in its fallen state, alienated from God and oriented towards sin (BDAG, s.v. ‘σάρξ’; KITTEL, s.v. ‘σάρξ’). It represents the sphere of human existence without the controlling influence of the Spirit. In this context, it stands in direct opposition to the Spirit.
πνεῦμα (pneuma): ‘Spirit’ refers to the Holy Spirit, who indwells believers and empowers them to live according to God’s will. It is the divine principle that counters the desires of the flesh (BDAG, s.v. ‘πνεῦμα’; KITTEL, s.v. ‘πνεῦμα’).
ἐπιθυμέω (epithymeō): ‘To set one’s heart on, long for, desire.’ It can be used for both good and evil desires. Here, in conjunction with κατὰ (kata, ‘against’), it clearly denotes a hostile, unholy desire on the part of the flesh (BDAG, s.v. ‘ἐπιθυμέω’).
ἀντίκειμαι (antikeimai): ‘To be set against, oppose, be an adversary.’ This verb strongly emphasizes the inherent and active conflict between the flesh and the Spirit within the believer (BDAG, s.v. ‘ἀντίκειμαι’).
θέλω (thelō): ‘To wish, want, desire.’ In this context, it refers to the desires or intentions that arise from the individual’s will, which are prevented from full realization due to the internal conflict (BDAG, s.v. ‘θέλω’).
ποιέω (poieō): ‘To do, make, accomplish.’ Here, it refers to the active carrying out of the desires (BDAG, s.v. ‘ποιέω’).
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The primary exegetical debate surrounding the final clause, ἵνα μὴ ἃ ἂν θέλητε ταῦτα ποιῆτε, centers on whether ἵνα (hina) expresses purpose or result. Both functions are grammatically permissible for ἵνα + subjunctive in Hellenistic Greek.
If interpreted as a purpose clause, it would suggest that the opposition between flesh and Spirit exists for the purpose of preventing believers from carrying out their own desires. This implies a divine design in the internal struggle, ensuring that the believer does not succumb entirely to either extreme, thereby maintaining a state of dependency on God. This view can be problematic if it suggests God actively causes internal conflict to prevent good desires, though it might imply God’s method of spiritual discipline.
More commonly, especially in this context of inherent opposition, the ἵνα clause is understood as a result clause (often called an ‘actual result’ or ‘consecutive’ ἵνα). In this interpretation, the fierce opposition between the flesh and the Spirit results in the inability of the believer to fully accomplish whatever they might desire (whether those desires originate from the flesh or, paradoxically, even the Spirit, if impeded). The immediate rhetorical effect of this interpretation is to highlight the intensity and frustrating nature of the internal conflict. This aligns well with the preceding γὰρ (gar, ‘for’) clauses explaining the opposition.
The suggestion from the initial post regarding an ‘aside’ (“ταῦτα γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται”) is rhetorically plausible but not grammatically indicated by any specific markers in the Greek text itself. Ancient Greek often allows for parenthetical statements without explicit punctuation or conjunctions that would signal them as such. However, treating the clause as an aside would imply that the ἵνα clause directly specifies the purpose or result of the initial desires of the flesh and Spirit, without the mediating influence of their mutual opposition. While intriguing, the standard interpretation views the entire statement about mutual opposition as integral to the explanation of the ensuing clause.
The variant between ἃ ἂν θέλητε and ἃ ἐὰν θέλητε, while textually significant, carries little semantic difference in this context. Both constructions with the subjunctive express an indefinite condition or universal application: ‘whatever you may desire’ or ‘the things you might want.’ Hellenistic Greek often used ἐὰν interchangeably with ἂν in such clauses.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The exegetical analysis of Galatians 5:17 points to the critical importance of understanding the internal conflict between the flesh and the Spirit within the believer. The overwhelming textual evidence supports ἂν in the final clause, and the most coherent grammatical and rhetorical interpretation understands the ἵνα clause as expressing a consequence or result of this profound internal antagonism. Paul’s intent is to underscore that this constant struggle prevents the believer from consistently fulfilling all their desires, implicitly calling for reliance on the Spirit to guide one’s choices.
- “For the flesh desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are opposed to one another, with the result that you do not do the things you wish.”
This translation emphasizes the result of the internal conflict, highlighting that the believer’s will is hindered by the ongoing struggle.
- “For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; indeed, these are in direct opposition to one another, so that you cannot do whatever you want to do.”
This rendering slightly emphasizes the inability (“cannot do”) as a direct consequence, and clarifies “whatever you want” to capture the indefinite nature of ἃ ἂν θέλητε.
- “For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these stand in hostile opposition to each other, and therefore you do not carry out what you would otherwise choose.”
This version uses “and therefore” to explicitly mark the consecutive sense and ‘what you would otherwise choose’ to reflect the implied hindering of one’s desires due to the conflict.
“`