as parts of persons rather than modes of existence has muddled Paul’s historical emphasis and contributed to an existential and dehistoricizing understanding of the apostle.4 What we have apparently failed to understand is that Paul seems to have inherited the term σάρξ (“flesh”) from his Judaistic opponents, turned it on its head, and begun to use it against them. Any understanding of the σάρξ/πνεῦμα conflict in Galatians must recognize at a foundational level that this terminology grew out of