“... Before Collins and Goff, Frey had followed up on a suggestion of Lange, and argued that some kind of negative notion of “flesh” is to be found in 4QInstruction, where the “spirit of flesh,” does not merely denote human frailty, as in the Hodayot, but an entity which is opposed to the “sons of heaven” (in 4Q416 1 10), to the elect addressees (in 4Q418 81 1–2), and to the “spiritual people” in the pericope we are now discussing. For Frey, the “fleshly spirit” denotes “sinful humanity,” as opposed to the elect or pious ones, but one may respond that in our pericope, the issue is not sin, but rather that the “fleshly spirit” suffers from ignorance. Since Frey followed Lange in assuming that the “people of spirit” were angelic, he did not really contrast “spirit” and “flesh” in our pericope. Goff combined Frey’s suggestion with Collins’ thesis of two types of humanities, by relating the two groups of the 4QInstruction pericope to Paul’s distinction between fleshly (σαρκίνοι) and spiritual (πνευματικοί) types of people, as in 1 Cor 3:1, as well as the distinction between ψυχικός and πνευματικός in 1 Cor 15:42–49. ...”