The flesh destroys relationships by turning people we should love into rivals, obstacles, or instruments of our own desires. Sometimes the damage comes through an unmistakable betrayal. Often it begins with a cherished grievance, a jealous comparison, or an insistence that everyone recognize our importance. Galatians 5:19-21 names these quieter sins alongside the more visible offenses people readily condemn. Paul wants Christians to recognize that a quarrelsome church and a resentful household need repentance just as surely as a life of public immorality does. The location of a sin does not determine its seriousness before God.
The first article examined what Paul means by the flesh and considered sexual sin, false worship, and uncontrolled indulgence. This article concentrates on the extended cluster of sins that directly attacks human fellowship. The Greek terms help us distinguish attitudes that overlap without being identical. Those distinctions matter because vague confessions can leave the particular wrongdoing untouched. A person who admits to “relationship problems” may still refuse to acknowledge the envy or intimidation contributing to them. Scripture gives us clearer language so that we can take responsibility and pursue the good of those we have harmed.
Paul Is Addressing a Community That Can Hurt Itself
Paul places his list between a call to serve one another in love and a warning against provoking and envying one another (Galatians 5:13, 26). That setting makes relationships central to the passage. His language of biting and devouring presents conflict as a form of mutual destruction. The image does not imply that every participant bears equal blame for every dispute. It does show that a community can damage itself when its members give room to fleshly desires. Winning an argument may accomplish very little if the manner of winning helps destroy the fellowship it was supposed to serve.
This danger applies to genuine believers. In 1 Corinthians 3:1-3, Paul addresses the Corinthians as brothers and as immature people in Christ while rebuking their jealousy and strife. Their conduct contradicts their position, and that contradiction requires correction. It does not justify the conclusion that everyone who acts selfishly has never believed the gospel. Neither does their Christian identity make their selfishness acceptable. The proper question is how those who belong to Christ should now respond to what His Word exposes.
Hostility and Quarrelling Turn Neighbors Into Enemies
Hostility treats another person as an enemy to be resisted. The Greek plural echthrai (ἔχθραι), translated “hatred” in the KJV, refers to enmities or hostilities. Its singular form appears in Ephesians 2:14-16, where Christ’s reconciling work overcomes the hostility dividing Jew and Gentile. In Galatians, the term identifies antagonism that opposes the love believers owe one another. Hostility can speak loudly, but it can also express itself through deliberate exclusion, malicious interpretation, or satisfaction at another person’s humiliation. These are practical illustrations of the attitude, not additional meanings hidden within the Greek word. A heart intent on another person’s defeat is already moving away from the command to seek that person’s good.
Quarrelling makes contention a way of relating. Eris (ἔρις), rendered “variance” in the KJV, means strife or discord; the Textus Receptus uses the plural ereis here. First Corinthians 1:11 uses this word for the contentions reported among the Corinthians. A disagreement becomes fleshly contention when people pursue victory through accusation, distortion, or an unwillingness to listen to truth. The problem is not that an important subject has been discussed vigorously. It is that the discussion has become an opportunity to attack or dominate. Paul’s Greek vocabulary in Galatians 5:20 identifies hostility and strife separately because the inward antagonism and the outward quarrel deserve attention.
In a household, hostility can make every ordinary request sound like an insult. In a church, it can make a harmless mistake seem like evidence of deliberate wrongdoing. Those examples should lead first to self-examination, because we cannot see another person’s motives with certainty. Proverbs 18:13 warns against answering before hearing, and verse 17 reminds us that an initial account may need examination. Listening carefully may confirm a serious concern or correct a mistaken interpretation. Either result serves truth better than a quarrel fueled by assumptions.
Jealousy and Envy Make Another Person’s Good Feel Threatening
Jealous rivalry resents a perceived threat to our position or advantage. The KJV’s “emulations” translates zēloi (ζῆλοι), while critical texts generally read the singular zēlos (ζῆλος). The word can describe honorable zeal in another context, as in John 2:17, and Paul speaks of godly jealousy in 2 Corinthians 11:2. Here its placement among the works of the flesh identifies the sinful sense: resentful rivalry. The distinction comes from context, as Thayer’s entry for zēlos explains. Strong concern is therefore not automatically sinful jealousy, and a husband’s or wife’s legitimate concern about marital faithfulness should not be dismissed with that label. Paul condemns the rivalry that makes personal importance more precious than another person’s good.
Envy resents the good another person possesses or receives. Phthonoi (φθόνοι), the plural of phthonos, is translated “envyings.” Titus 3:3 places envy alongside malice and mutual hatred in its description of life before salvation. Jealousy and envy overlap, so we should avoid pretending that English definitions establish an absolute boundary between them. A useful practical distinction is that jealous rivalry often feels threatened by another person’s standing, while envy begrudges that person’s advantage. These emphases fit the terms without exhausting their possible uses. The lexical entry for phthonos supports the central meaning of envy, rather than a neutral desire to improve one’s circumstances.
Envy may appear when someone else receives an opportunity we hoped to receive. Instead of rejoicing, we search for reasons the person did not deserve it. We may call this discernment while quietly hoping the opportunity ends in failure. First Corinthians 12:26 gives the church a different pattern: when one member is honored, the others rejoice. That response does not require pretending that favoritism or injustice never happens. It requires refusing to make another person’s legitimate blessing an offense against ourselves.
Comparison can also corrupt a family without anyone openly announcing a rivalry. A parent may measure one child against another, siblings may compete for recognition, or spouses may keep an unspoken record of who receives more appreciation. These circumstances do not prove that every disappointment is envy. They do invite us to ask whether gratitude and love have been displaced by resentment. James 3:14-16 connects bitter jealousy and selfish ambition with disorder and evil practice. The damage begins in the heart, but it rarely stays there.
Outbursts of Anger Make Others Carry the Cost of Our Desires
Rage erupts when anger is allowed to govern conduct. Thymoi (θυμοί), translated “wrath,” is the plural of thymos and in this list refers to angry outbursts or fits of rage. The word’s broader usage can include wrath in other settings, but here Paul is plainly describing sinful human conduct. Second Corinthians 12:20 places the same term among the disorders Paul fears finding in a congregation. Shouting, threats, and furious accusations are recognizable ways this sin may appear. A naturally forceful personality does not remove the responsibility to speak and act under God’s authority. Nor should a calm exterior excuse other forms of malice, which the surrounding list also condemns.
Scripture distinguishes the existence of anger from permission to sin. Ephesians 4:26-27 warns against sinful anger and against giving the devil an opportunity, while Mark 3:5 records Jesus’ righteous anger and grief at hardened hearts. Jesus’ perfect response cannot be used to justify our impatience whenever our preferences are challenged. We must ask what we are defending, whether our judgment is true, and whether our response obeys God’s commands. Anger over real evil may call for firm action. It never gives us unrestricted permission to insult, threaten, or take revenge.
An angry person may sincerely regret an outburst after the immediate pressure passes. The people who endured it may still be uncertain whether the next disagreement will produce the same response. Repentance therefore needs to address the conduct and its effects, rather than demand that others forget the incident immediately. Blaming fatigue, stress, or someone else’s tone leaves personal responsibility unresolved. Such pressures may help explain the circumstances in which temptation intensified, but they do not excuse the choice to intimidate. Love takes seriously the fear and injury our behavior may have caused.
Selfish Ambition Turns Service Into a Contest
Selfish ambition pursues personal advantage through rivalry. Eritheiai (ἐριθεῖαι), translated “strife” in the KJV, is distinct from the word rendered “variance” earlier in the list. Modern translations commonly use “selfish ambition” or “rivalries” to express its self-seeking and partisan character. Thayer’s entry describes the drive to put oneself forward and the associated party spirit. Philippians 2:3 directly opposes this attitude with humility and regard for others. There is no need to build a sermon on a speculative derivation when the New Testament usage is clear. The sin consists in seeking our own advancement at the expense of the obedience and love God requires.
Desiring to serve well, develop a skill, or accept greater responsibility is not automatically selfish ambition. The difference becomes clearer when someone else receives recognition or when doing right costs us influence. A servant can support a sound decision even when someone else proposed it. A rival may undermine the same decision because its success would increase another person’s standing. Philippians 1:15-17 shows that even preaching Christ can become entangled with envy and selfish rivalry. A religious activity does not purify every motive behind it.
This warning is especially searching when a person has become accustomed to being needed. Help can turn into control if others are expected to express loyalty in exchange for it. Advice can become a demand that every decision pass through the adviser. These examples are pastoral applications, not reasons to suspect everyone who serves energetically. The question is whether service remains directed toward another person’s good when gratitude, dependence, or public credit decreases. Christ’s humility in Philippians 2:5-8 supplies the pattern for service that does not grasp at personal advantage.
Dissensions and Factions Divide What Love Should Protect
Dissensions create division within a community. Dichostasiai (διχοστασίαι), translated “seditions,” refers here to divisions or dissensions. The modern political sense of sedition can mislead readers, since Paul is addressing conduct that fractures fellowship. Romans 16:17 uses the same noun when warning about divisions contrary to apostolic teaching. The word does not mean that every difference of judgment is rebellion. It identifies a rupture that must be evaluated in relation to God’s truth. Recruiting others into a grievance, circulating selective accounts, and making cooperation depend on personal allegiance can all contribute to such division.
Factions organize fellowship around a divisive party spirit. Haireseis (αἱρέσεις), translated “heresies,” can refer to sects or parties, as its use in Acts 5:17 and 15:5 shows. In Galatians 5:20, “factions” communicates the immediate concern well, while 2 Peter 2:1 shows that the word can also describe destructive doctrinal departures. Thayer’s discussion of hairesis distinguishes these contextual uses. We should therefore neither restrict Paul’s term to a formal theological error nor empty it of its connection with divisive beliefs and loyalties. A congregation can fracture around a personality or preference as well as around false teaching. The unifying question is whether allegiance to a party has displaced obedience to Christ and love for His people.
Christian unity must remain grounded in truth. Galatians 1:8-9 rejects a different gospel, and Romans 16:17 tells believers to avoid those who produce divisions contrary to the doctrine they received. Correcting false doctrine or refusing to cooperate with wrongdoing is not automatically the fleshly division condemned here. Sometimes the demand for apparent harmony becomes a way of protecting error. At the same time, a sound doctrinal position does not excuse dishonesty, contempt, or the desire to humiliate an opponent. Second Timothy 2:24–26 joins clear correction with patience and gentleness.
Church members need to distinguish a sincere question from a determined effort to gather a faction. They also need to distinguish a confused believer from someone persistently promoting destructive error. Those judgments require evidence, patient listening, and the application of Scripture. Personal annoyance is not enough to establish that someone is divisive, and disagreement with a leader is not proof of rebellion. Conversely, charm and repeated appeals to love do not make false teaching harmless. Faithful shepherding protects both the truth being taught and the people being taught.
Murder Shows How Far Contempt for Another Person Can Go
Murder destroys the life of someone made in God’s image. The KJV includes phonoi (φόνοι), “murders,” in Galatians 5:21, reflecting the Textus Receptus reading discussed in Part 1. Standard modern critical Greek texts omit the word here, but its meaning and its condemnation elsewhere are not in dispute. Matthew 15:19 lists murders among the evils proceeding from the heart, and Genesis 9:6 connects the seriousness of taking human life with humanity’s creation in God’s image. First John 3:12 points to Cain’s murder of his brother as the opposite of brotherly love. Scripture thus makes us face both the outward act and the hatred that opposes another person’s good. The textual difference in Galatians does not provide an escape from either concern.
Jesus similarly addresses sinful anger and contempt when expounding the command against murder (Matthew 5:21-22). His teaching reveals that merely avoiding homicide does not fulfill the obligation to love one’s neighbor. It does not mean an angry thought and an act of murder have identical earthly consequences. Nor does it predict that every jealous person will eventually commit physical violence. The connection concerns the heart’s moral direction and God’s authority over both inward and outward conduct. We should confront contempt while it is being cultivated instead of congratulating ourselves that it has not yet produced the worst imaginable result.
Naming the Damage Is the Beginning of Taking Responsibility
These sins overlap in practice, even though their distinctions remain useful. Envy may fuel selfish ambition, selfish ambition may gather a faction, and a faction may justify hostility toward anyone who questions it. Sexual betrayal and drunkenness, considered in Part 1, can deepen the injuries within the same relationships. Paul does not give this sequence as a fixed process, and we should not turn it into a formula for diagnosing every conflict. It is a practical illustration of how one cherished sin can make room for others. Honest examination asks what we are doing, what we are defending, and who is being harmed.
Sin also damages fellowship with God and the credibility of Christian witness. Ephesians 4:30 warns believers against grieving the Holy Spirit in the midst of instructions about speech, anger, and kindness. The same verse says they are sealed unto the day of redemption, holding together their security and the seriousness of their conduct. Jesus identifies love among His disciples as a public mark of their discipleship (John 13:35). A church that excuses cruelty while speaking about grace obscures that testimony. Forgiveness in Christ gives no reason to dismiss the people injured by our behavior.
Pursuing peace includes recognizing the limits of our responsibility. Romans 12:18 commands us to do what lies within us, while acknowledging that peace does not always depend on one person alone. Someone who has been mistreated should not be pressured to accept blame for another person’s threats or abuse. Biblical peacemaking does not require remaining in immediate danger, concealing wrongdoing, or granting automatic trust. Love can require protective boundaries, appropriate outside help, and truthful accountability. Those measures can serve a righteous peace rather than the appearance of harmony.
The most useful response to this passage begins with a specific acknowledgment before God. We can name the envy behind a criticism, the selfishness behind a rivalry, or the anger behind a threatening word. Where we have harmed others, we can acknowledge that harm without making our apology depend on their response. We can also accept the patient work of rebuilding trust rather than demanding instant relief from consequences. None of these actions buys forgiveness, but each belongs to the obedience grace calls us to pursue. The final article will explain how that response rests in Christ’s finished work and continues through repentance and walking by the Spirit.
Go on to Overcoming the Works of the Flesh: Grace, Repentance, and Walking by the Spirit or return to the Index.