[B-Greek] PEIRASMOS in James 1:13: Follow-up
Jonathan Robie
jonathan.robie at datadirect.com
Mon Aug 18 15:46:17 EDT 2003
At 01:49 PM 8/18/2003, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>The only point--or the chief point--that I intended to suggest is that the
>same
>"demonic" role of hH EPIQUMIA seems involved in both the Rom 7 and the Jas
>1 passages. I readily concede that in James there is no excuse allowed for
>blaming sin or sinfulness upon an external agent; but hH EPIQUMIA as an
>internal aspect of selfhood seems to be described as demonic.
This is very interesting - and as a result of this message, I think I am
beginning to see where differing assumptions are leading to different
conclusions.
I do think that Romans 7 clearly portrays our desires as beyond the control
of our will, and James 1 12-15 portrays desire as something that is not
identical to the self, and can entice the self and draw it away. But that
word 'demonic' goes beyond the text, and I am not sure I have a good enough
understanding of the culture to know how they thought of the relationship
between desire and the various parts of the self.
I remember reading Jung's Archetypes, hitting a statement that in the
modern West we each think of ourself as one rational, unified person, with
one will that is in harmony with our well-ordered desires, when nothing
could be more obviously false. He suggested that we can use archetypes as a
way of having conversations with the various parts of our self, gaining the
wisdom that each of the contradictory 'selves' has. This also reminds me in
a way of what is called faculty psychology, based on the notion of
independent processes, 'faculties', that may be divorced from our will or
conscience processing. My will is not involved in recognizing my
grandmother, and I can not trace a process that is involved. Some parts of
us have a life of their own.
At a purely experiential level, I do often experience my desires that way -
there are some things that I feel myself wanting even though I may not want
to want them, and decide not to pursue them, yet these desires are a part
of me, while still not a part of the me that I usually think is in charge.
Would a recipient of James or Romans have assumed these desires were
demonic? inspired by our fallen nature / flesh?
The James passage and the Romans passage both emphasize that these are OUR
desires, while also discussing them as though they are not motivated by our
will, and treating them as distinct from the desires we would choose. Are
their good references for the New Testament model of the self, desire, and
will that would be helpful for my understanding?
Jonathan
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list