From the Epistle reading:
the inner man
ton esw
anyrwpon
2. The anthropological term
o esw anyrwpov in
Rom. 7:22 alternating with egw
(v. 17f., 20) and nouv
(v. 23, 25), also related to kardia,
suneidhsiv
(2:15) and pneuma
(1:9), denotes the spiritual side of man, or man himself in so far as he
enjoys self-awareness, as he thinks and wills and feels. As such, as
the subject of the power of moral judgment, he is accessible to the divine
revelation, can be conditioned by it and is open to its claim
(sunhdomai tw nomw tou yeou kata ton esw anyrwpon);
yet the contradictory practical conduct which is determined by sin brings
out the plight of man in the dualism of his existence. The term bears
an even stronger religious content in 2 Cor. 4:16. Here Paul, proved
to be an apostle by suffering, distinguishes in himself the
exw anyrwpov, the man determined by God, the
"Christ coming into being in Christians" (Gal. 2:20; 4:19), who is a
kainh ktisiv (2 Cor. 5:17) and who experiences
daily renewal in virtue of the divine gift of the
arrabwn tou pneumatov (2 Cor. 5:5). In the petition in Eph.
3:16...the term is also to be understood of man as the object of God's
working or of the place in man at which the power of the Spirit meets and
determines him. As used by Paul, the word always carries with it a
suggestion, like the parallel in 1 Peter 3:4, of something which is
concealed, and which works in concealment, in the innermost part of man.
Materially
what Paul calls the inner man corresponds to the bl
(®kardia)
of the Old
Testament, and there are formal parallels in the sayings of Jesus in Mk.
7:21 and Luke 11:39, cf, Mt. 23:8...But the expression
o egw anyrwpon
and the antitheses
o esw anyrwpov - o exw anyrwpov
are of non-biblical origin.
They derive from a terminology of Hellenistic mysticism and Gnosticism
disseminated by Platonic philosophy. Nevertheless, even though
Paul adopts the language, he uses it to express his Christian
anthropology with its soteriological and eschatological orientation.
Johannes Belm
