Abstract
This article, and its companion “Ethics and the Spirit in Paul (1): Religious-Ethical Empowerment through Infusion-Transformation?”, deal with the question of how, according to Paul, the Holy Spirit enables religious ethical life. The first essay challenges the “infusion-transformation” approach to Pauline pneumatology which builds on a Stoic concept of the Spirit as a material substance that transforms the substance of its recipients in order to enable ethical behaviour. This article argues that in Paul (as well as in a significant number of texts from early Judaism) the Spirit transforms and empowers people for ethical living primarily through initiating and sustaining an intimate relationship with the divine and with the community of faith.
In the first article of this two-part treatment of the question of how the Spirit enables ethical life in the Pauline epistles, I have discussed what I have called the “infusion-transformation” approach. According to this view, the Spirit brings about ethical life predominantly by means of the ontologically transforming effect of its physical nature. In the relational approach which I describe in this article, however, I suggest that the Spirit effects ethical life predominantly by means of intimate relationships created by the Spirit with God (’Aββα), Jesus and fellow believers. My central thesis is that it is primarily through deeper knowledge of, and an intimate relationship with, God, Jesus Christ and with the community of faith that people are transformed and empowered by the Spirit for religious-ethical life. 1
4. Prolegomena to a Relational Approach to the Ethical Work of the Spirit in Paul
The difference between infusion-transformation and my relational approach to the work of the Spirit in Paul can be illustrated with the following two diagrams:
Diagram 1 is a sketch of the infusion-transformation approach. The (material) πνυ̑μα is infused into the person, namely into her interior or “inner being” (ψυχή/καρδία/νους/πνυ̑μα/ϵ́σωἄνθρωπος etc.), symbolized by the inner circle (the line is broken because the person in her totality is a psychosomatic unity [symbolized by the outer circle, the somatic boundary]). Ethical life is the outflow of this transformation, and it proves itself (also) in the face of the opposing σάρξ (although this is not explicitly discussed by the proponents of infusion-transformation). The proponents of infusion-transformation are not very clear whether further change or empowering is to be expected after the person has been changed through the πνυ̑μα-substance at baptism. The (ethical) significance of further impartation of πνυ̑μα-substance at the Eucharist is not explicitly spelled out. It therefore seems justified to call this model “static.”
The ‘infusion-transformation model’: ‘static’ transformation.
The relational model that is suggested by my study is a dynamic one, and hence more complex:
Diagram 2 depicts the believer as influenced by relationships. At the outset, this is marked by the transferal of the believer into the sphere of influence of the Spirit (ϵ̓ν πνϵύματι, indicated by the large hatched circle). The consequence is a different, more remote relation to σάρξ and a new relationship to πνυ̑μα. 2 The first part (‘a’) of the model covers the aspect of transformation. In 2 Corinthians 3:18 Paul describes (ethical) transformation as the result of the Spirit’s relational work (cf. section 6 below). In the diagram this is symbolized by the big round arrow ‘a’: the transforming power is drawn from the believer’s Spirit-created relationships to θϵός (ἀββα ὁ πατήρ), Χριστός, and fellow believers. These intimate relationships are signified by the two converse arrows which are initiated by πνυ̑μα. As 2 Corinthians 3:18 speaks about transformation, round arrow ‘a’ is targeted at the inner being of the believer. However, the force of Paul’s phrase ἀπὸ δόξης ϵἰς δόξαν is taken into account, so that transformation is comprehended as “gradual” or “dynamic.” The second big round arrow (‘b’) represents those passages in Paul (e.g. Rom. 8:12–17; 1:11–12) which do not specify that the Spirit’s relational work transforms believers but which imply empowering for religious-ethical life. Round arrow ‘b’ is hence not aimed at the core of the person. However, the core of the person does not remain unaffected in the process of empowering because the change of the believer’s relationship to God, Christ, and fellow believers has transforming effects on the person (identity etc.). This is indicated by the fact that the arrow that leads from πνυ̑μα to God et alii takes its route through the core of the believer. The result of these intimate relationships is that the believer is strengthened and empowered.
The ‘relational model’: dynamic transformation (a) and empowering (b).
While I have developed this model on the basis of the exegesis presented in section 6 (below), it is worth noting that modern psychological research is nevertheless in agreement with the results of my investigation. 3 Moreover, this new model is firmly rooted within Pauline theology. For one thing, relationships are central in the writings of Paul and in the tradition on which he draws. Moreover, Paul’s epistles amply evidence that the apostle comprehended intimate and loving relationships to be empowering. 4
What are (some of) the philosophical, theological and anthropological presuppositions of my model? With regard to the supposed opposition of a substance-ontological or a relational concept of the work of the Spirit in Paul’s ethics, I build on Dunn’s insight regarding the effects of justification-sanctification according to Paul. He explains that “the basic idea assumed by Paul was of a relationship in which God acts on behalf of his human partner, first in calling Israel into and then in sustaining Israel in its covenant with him… The covenant God counts the covenant partner as still in partnership, despite the latter’s continued failure. But the covenant partner could hardly fail to be transformed by a living relationship with the life-giving God.” 5 Applying this insight to the debated ontological frameworks of ethical renewal (by the Spirit) means to appreciate that the dominance of the (covenant) relationship of God with his people in Paul’s thinking rules out the “relational-as-opposed-to-ontological” approach to Paul’s theology and anthropology that is evidenced by D.S. Dockery and others. 6 Paul’s thinking rather encompasses both these aspects, and they are well captured by the concept of transforming relationships. With respect to Paul’s anthropology, this means that Paul understands people as being in and being influenced by relationships, but without giving up the notion of the individual.
I intend to demonstrate that the relational aspect of the ethical work of the Spirit has thus far been underestimated. I hence argue that the relational model suggested in second part of this study provides the key to understanding how the Spirit enables believers for religious-ethical life according to Paul.
5. Religious-Ethical Empowerment by the Relational Work of the Spirit: A Selective Discussion of Paul’s Context
The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that there is adequate material in Paul’s religious context against which my relational model of the ethically empowering work of the Spirit can be read. Accordingly, this section does not unravel every possible factor of (the Spirit’s) ethical empowering in the various strands of Greco-Roman and early Jewish literature. Rather, I will uncover traces in Paul’s Jewish-Hellenistic matrix of my focal theory which submits that it is typically through facilitating deeper knowledge of God and an intimate relationship with him and with the community of faith that the Spirit empowers people for religious-ethical living.
A brief look at the relevant literature shows that there is ample evidence in the Hebrew Bible and early Judaism that an intimate relationship with God (including deeper understanding of him and his deeds) and with the community of faith was comprehended as transforming and empowering for religious-ethical living. In particular, one can observe that the three topoi Spirit, closeness to God/the community of faith, and ethics were comprehended in Judaism as being dependent on one another. For example, in Sirach 39.5–8 people who devote themselves to the study of the law of the Most High are described as seeking an intimate relationship with him. God gives them the S/spirit of understanding that facilitates further closeness to God (e.g. giving thanks to the Lord in prayer). The consequence is that they “will glory in the law of the Lord’s covenant.”
We focus on three strands of early Jewish literature which evidence that the work of the Spirit, an intimate relationship to the divine, and ethical enabling were not only loosely related but also causally linked in Paul’s context. The first author is Philo of Alexandria. Philo is at heart a theologian for whom the intimate experience of the “One Who Is” is of paramount importance. As an exegete Philo is doing a theology of experience in which he searches for pathways to the transforming experience of the presence of God. For example, when he interprets Deuteronomy 30:20, Philo emphasizes the love of God and the empowering effects of what we may call a mystical union with God (Poster. C. 12–13; cf. Leg. Gai. 4–5). More specifically, however, Philo provides evidence that the two focal aspects of the Spirit’s work – the creation of intimacy with God and the empowering for ethics – are interconnected in his thinking. For instance, De Gigantibus 54–55 suggests that it is in the close proximity to God that the divine Spirit is active and experienced as a guide “in every journey of righteousness.” In this connection, it appears that the intimacy of worship not only leads (by means of the Spirit) to ethics in a narrow sense, but also encompasses an empowering for ministry (teaching divine truths). The study of numerous further passages (e.g. Leg. All. 1.38–39; Op. Mund. 144; Quaest. in Exod. 2.29; Vit. Mos. 2.69) leads to the conclusion that Philo’s writings give strong confirmation that the connection of the divine Spirit with an intimate relationship to God and with ethical life had a clear place in Paul’s context. In some texts it remains open whether Philo had a defined concept of how these three aspects of our model were related sequentially. Nevertheless, the better part of the Philonic material evidences unequivocal parallels to the ideas that we find in Paul, particularly in 2 Corinthians 3:18. 7
In Philo, knowing God has a cognitive-noetic and an existential-mystical aspect (e.g. in Leg. All. 1.38; Praem. Poen. 43–46). As a person draws near to God, she will know God better cognitively, in that she will gain a deeper insight into who God is and what he wants, and existentially, in that she experiences a kind of “I-Thou”-encounter with the divine (“knowing and being known,” cf. Poster. C. 12–13). While in Philo both aspects of knowing God appear to receive equal weight (perhaps with a slight leaning towards the mystical), the cognitive side comes more to the fore in Dead Sea Scrolls. The writings of the Qumran community provide ample evidence for the individual elements of my focal theory: a) the Spirit relates believers closer to God through wisdom and understanding (e.g. 1QHa 5.24–27; 17.32; 1QS 3.6–9; 4.20–23); ethical empowering results from such intimate knowledge of God (e.g. 1QS 11.3–7, 16–18; 1Q28b 4.25–28; CD-A 13.7–10); and b) Spirit-prompted encounters and existential interaction with God (e.g. 4Q504 frags. 1–2 col. 5.15–16; frag. 6.6–17; 1QHa 8.14–15; 17.29–34) and with fellow members of the community (e.g. CD-B 20.17–18; 1QHa 23 bottom 9–15; CD-A 2.12–13) provide religious-ethical empowerment. Most significantly, these elements are conceptually linked in a number of Qumran psalms. For example, in 1QHa 6.12–14 we see how the gift of the Holy Spirit leads to a deeper understanding of who God is. That this deeper understanding of God equals an intimate relationship with God is suggested by the way in which the prayer continues: the believer “approaches [God]” more closely. The consequence of this Spirit-created intimacy is ethical: the closer the believer comes to God (and the community 8 ), the more he is filled with zeal against (the men of) deceit. These and further texts of the Hodayot (e.g. 1QHa 8.19–20; 20.11–14) provide strong support for our relational model of the ethical work of the Spirit. Through relating believers intimately to God (by providing cognitive and existential knowledge) and the community, the Spirit transforms and empowers them to live according to God’s precepts.
A third strand of early Jewish texts relating to our focal theory are the traditions based on Ezekiel 36:25–28 (and 11:19–20; 37:6, 14). A significant number of early Jewish texts have been influenced by this passage. 9 For example, in Jubilees 1.23–25 the relational effect of the renewal is portrayed with still greater intensity than in Ezekiel (“their souls will cleave to me,” “I shall be a father to them, and they will be sons to me,” “I shall love them,” etc.). Next to verse 24, where doing God’s commandments is presented as parallel to being close to God (cleaving to him with one’s soul), the ethical impact of this intimate relationship comes most clearly to the fore in verse 28: “And the Lord will appear to the eyes of all, and all shall know that I am the God of Israel and the Father of all the children of Jacob… And Zion and Jerusalem shall be holy.” The passage thus supports my thesis (cf. T. Jud. 24.2–3). We can conclude that Ezekiel 36–37 was not only an important witness to the ethical work of the Spirit in the Hebrew Bible, but that it also had a broad influence on early Jewish texts on the Spirit. These Jewish texts interpret and develop Ezekiel 36–37 in a way that supplies further evidence for the strong presence of the notion of ethical empowering by means of Spirit-created relationships in Paul’s context.
Although Paul may not have directly used Philo, the DSS or some of the traditions based on Ezekiel 36 as sources for his epistles, they nonetheless function as intertexts, forming part of the horizon of interpretation of Paul and his readers. My analysis of the different strands of Judaism 10 thus significantly strengthens the probability of my focal theory: Paul was part of a milieu in which the ethical work of the Spirit was often implicitly or explicitly linked to deeper knowledge of and an intimate relationship with God and with the community of faith.
6. Religious-Ethical Empowerment by the Relational Work of the Spirit in Paul
1. Introduction
This section provides more detailed exegetical grounding from Paul’s epistles for my focal theory. By way of introduction, I want to draw attention to the fact that the transferal by the Spirit into a new relationship with God, Christ and the Christian community is not merely a transforming event in the converts’ lives at the occasion of their entry into the salvific realm. Rather, while scholarship has often focused on this initial transferal as the prime aspect of the Spirit’s enabling of religious-ethical life according to Paul (cf. the infusion-transformation approach), it is my contention that the Spirit continually transforms and empowers believers for ethical conduct by enlivening and even intensifying these intimate relationships. Accordingly, the two following sub-sections demonstrate how people are transformed (6.2.) and empowered (6.3.) 11 for religious-ethical living by the Spirit’s provision of deeper knowledge of God (and Christ) and an intimate relationship with him. The final sub-section (6.4.) then elucidates the communal nature of the empowering work of the Spirit by delineating how believers draw strength for ethical living from Spirit-shaped close relationships with fellow believers.
2. Transformation
When we investigate ethical transformation by the Spirit in Paul, our attention should naturally be drawn to 2 Corinthians 3:18 because there the apostle explicitly says that believers are by the Spirit transformed “into the same image” as they behold the glory of the Lord. Our discussion is guided by two questions: 1) How is the transformation achieved?, and 2) What is the result of the transformation?
The transformation described in 3:18 happens first of all by means of an “unveiled face.” The “unveiled face” is connected with the “beholding of the glory of the Lord” via a dative which suggests that “beholding” is achieved by way or means of “unveiling.” A structural analysis of 3:7–4:6 indicates that the unveiling of the face has two aspects: one is the cognitive aspect of unveiling deeper understanding of the gospel (which is relational, as is indicated in 4:4), and the other aspect is one of personal closeness and immediacy which is suggested by the unveiling of the face (with the consequent personal encounter of Moses/the glory of the Lord).
Special attention needs to be paid to the second and major means of transformation, the “beholding as in a mirror.” It can be understood in three different ways. The first two are identical with the two aspects of the “unveiled face”: beholding as deeper understanding of the gospel (and hence of Christ), and as a personal encounter (with Christ). Both options can be endorsed, but a third one is preferable, namely beholding as contemplation, because it encompasses the first two options (mental and visual beholding). Next to this advantage, it also lends itself to the ancient concept of “transformation through contemplation.” In 2 Corinthians 3:18 this idea is not only derived from Hellenistic sources (as is usually argued) but more centrally from the Sinai-narrative and its reception in early Judaism. Further, “transformation through contemplation” has a basis in the tradition elucidated in section 5, as both Philo and the DSS testify that the Spirit draws people to contemplate God, which results in transformation.
The third factor describing how people are transformed is indicated by the phrase καθάπϵρ ἀπὸ κυρίου πνϵύματος. In this way Paul makes clear that it is the Spirit who transforms believers relationally through beholding the glory of the Lord with an unveiled face.
Finally, I argue against F. Back that the result of transformation in 2 Corinthians 3:18 has an ethical nature. 12 The aim of the transformation is indicated by the phrase “into the same image,” that is, the image of Christ (cf. 4:4). In 2 Corinthians and in the parallel texts Colossians 3:10, Ephesians 4:24, Romans 8:29 and Galatians 4:19 (cf. Rom. 12:2), being transformed into the image of Christ means taking on Christ’s character. 13 Living like Christ, however, has an overt ethical dimension. Hence, believers are portrayed in 2 Corinthians 3:18 as being ethically transformed by the relational work of the Spirit.
3. Empowering
The third part of the present section deals with ethical empowering through a spirit-shaped filial relationship with God. Apart from a number of further passages, our focus is here on Romans 8:12–17. Verse 13 has the most explicit ethical admonition of this “high point of Paul’s theology of the Spirit,” 14 relating the Spirit instrumentally to an implicit imperative of a protasis: “if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” However, the question arises whether Paul gives any indication how the Spirit can function as an instrument for this ethical action. While Fee answers this question negatively, 15 a detailed analysis of the passage will show that it is the Spirit-shaped 16 experience of being adopted by God as a loving Father that empowers the Roman Christians to put to death the works of the body.
First of all, we need to pay attention to the broader issues dealt with in and around Romans 8. This is necessary, not least because a number of scholars have overemphasized either the focus on the individual or (less frequently) the corporate identity of the implied readers of the text. However, while it is important for the exegesis of Romans 8:12–17 not to lose sight of Paul’s corporate perspective epitomized in the reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles, it is also evident that what Paul says likewise applies to the individual, focusing in verses 12–17 on the relationships of the believers to ἀββα ὁ πατήρ and to fellow ἀδϵλϕοί.
Second, we should have a look at how religious-ethical life is established in verses 12–14 and how this part is syntactically linked to the rest of the passage. The syntactical structure of 8:12–17 indicates that the Spirit-shaped relationship with God as Father (vv. 14–16) empowers the ethical action described in verse 13. Verse 14 is linked to verse 13 via γάρ, which suggests that verse 14 provides a foundation or further explanation of verse 13. The putting to death of the works of the body by the Spirit (v. 13b) is a matter of being led, directed, impelled and controlled by the Spirit (v. 14). While this argumentative structure at first sight appears to allow for the interpretation that it merely functions to stress the believers’ duty to kill the works of the body because they are children of God, 17 a closer look favours the new reading put forward in my analysis. For one thing, the verse that most explicitly links sonship and ethics (i.e. v. 14) explains that the religious-ethical action (ἄγονται) which is the mark of sonship is bestowed upon believers by the Spirit (πνϵύματι θϵου̑ ἄγονται). The fact that ἄγονται is in the passive voice indicates that it is primarily a gift rather than a duty. Furthermore, the Spirit provides the empowering for the ethical action required in verse 13 by means of (γάρ) the Spirit-created intimate relationship to God expressed in verses 15–17. Moreover, this reading is also supported by the fact that Paul regularly associates the motif of human sonship of God with privileges (vv. 14–17, 29; Gal. 4:5–7, etc.), not with duties.
Third, it is significant to see how in verses 15–16 Paul continues the thought from verses 12–14. He explains to the Romans that they have not received the spirit of slavery and consequent fear but they have received the Spirit of “adoption as sons.” In a similar manner as slavery is contrasted with sonship, “fear” has a counterpart in the loving relationship (cf. 8:35, 37, 39) expressed in the cry “Abba, Father” that is the consequence of the presence of the Spirit. The “Spirit of adoption” thus brings about adoption as sons (“you received the Spirit of adoption”) and provides further affirmation (in the continuous ϵ̓ν ᾡ̑ κράζομϵν· αββα ὁ πατήρ [v. 15], and the Spirit’s “bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God” [v. 16]). “Adoption as sons” is therefore not only a metaphor relating to the beginning (and end) of Christian life, but it characterizes the very essence of Christian existence. This new identity as children of God, and the loving relationship to ἀββα ὁ πατήρ determines the self-understanding, being and acting of the community of believers in Rome.
In order to find further support for my characterization of the nature and effects of sonship (and fatherhood), it is instructive to investigate the characteristics of adoption and sonship in Paul and his context more closely. For instance, in Jubilees 1:23–25 the giving of the S/spirit is connected to an intensification of the eschatological community’s relationship to God (“their souls will cleave to me”) and to religious-ethical living (doing God’s commandments). A filial relationship is established (“I shall be a father to them, and they will be sons to me”) which is characterized by love (“I shall love them”). It seems that this text – together with Testament of Judah 24.2–3 which, like Jubilees 1.23–25, 18 draws on the tradition of Ezekiel 36:25–28 – is most clearly echoed in the Pauline text under investigation because it not only depicts sonship as a loving, identity-forming relationship to God in the way illustrated by further sample passages, but it also relates this empowering experience to the Spirit and to ethical living. A similar picture emerges when one looks more generally at adoption and sonship in Paul (particularly in Rom. 8). This shows that the aspects of love, nurture and intimacy of the divine-human father-son relationship uncovered in Paul’s context also apply to Paul’s concept of Spirit-worked sonship of God.
Finally, our passage also gives evidence of the communal nature of the Spirit-shaped filial relationship with God. This shared experience reinforces existentially the corporate identity as children of God upon the members of the community, although it cannot be played off against the notion of the individual. Each member is taken beyond herself and becomes part of a (fictive) kin group of brothers and sisters (Rom. 8:12, 16–17, 29). The communal experience of the Spirit-inspired “Abba”-prayer in public worship draws the believers closer to the Father as well as to one another as brothers and sisters. Both aspects enforce the formative and empowering character of the religious-ethical work of the Spirit in Romans 8:12–17.
My analysis of Romans 8:12–17 (and parallel passages like Gal. 4:1–7; Eph. 3:16–19) thus leads to the conclusion that – contrary to Fee’s judgment – Paul clearly indicates how the Spirit empowers people to put to death the works of the body: believers draw strength and motivation from the new identity, the intimacy and the corporate dimension of the Spirit-shaped filial relationship with God, epitomized in the Spirit-inspired prayer “Abba, dearest Father.”
4. Empowering in Community
Throughout this study I have pointed out that my relational model of ethical enabling by the Spirit in Paul builds on the empowering nature of the Spirit-worked intimate relationships to the divine and to the community of faith. In this final part of section 6, I want to focus on this “sociological” aspect of the Spirit’s empowering for religious-ethical life which has been largely ignored by previous discussions of Spirit and ethics in Paul.
We begin by looking at the way in which believers are “built up” by the gifts of the Spirit. In Romans 1:11–12 Paul expresses how he longs for mutual participation in each other’s spiritual life which would result in the encouragement of both the Romans and him. This dynamic is spelled out in more detail in 1 Corinthians 12–14. For Paul, the cooperation and togetherness in the church that develops through exercising spiritual gifts implies that every member of the community is “edified,” that is, she is strengthened and empowered for religious-ethical life (12:7; see the parallel in 10:23-24; cf. Eph. 4:11–14). Paul admonishes the Corinthians that they should give space to prophecy as this builds up others within the community (vv. 4–5, 12). Paul is thus aware of the empowerment and building up of people that is the result of the Spirit’s work in the dynamics of interpersonal relationships. People are influenced by what others say, so that Spirit-inspired speech can convict a person that enters the church and encourage a reaction that can be characterized as “religious-ethical” (“that person will bow down before God and worship him, declaring, ‘God is really among you,’” vv. 23–25). In this context it is of particular interest that the Spirit shapes the actual structure of the individual interpersonal interactions within the community. Paul says that “if there is no one to interpret, let them [i.e. those who speak in tongues] be silent in church and speak to themselves and to God” (v. 28). The Spirit is thus able to inspire greater sensitivity to others in the community. People need to listen to one another in order to be built up (cf. vv. 29–30). Again, the result of this Spirit-inspired dynamic is that “all may learn and all be encouraged” (v. 31).
The Spirit thus strengthens people through the intra-communal interactions inspired by the gifts of the Spirit. Moreover, also Paul’s employment of the concept of κοινωνία πνϵύματος is relevant when we look at religious-ethical empowering by the Spirit in Paul. I maintain that Paul’s usage of this locution in 2 Corinthians 13:13 suggests that for the apostle, Christian fellowship grows out of common participation in the Spirit. The believers’ experience of the Spirit is one in which others share and which provides the bond of mutual understanding and sympathy. 19 Against this background of interpretation I take Paul’s strategy of employing the concept of “participation in the Spirit” in his argumentation in Philippians 2:1–2 and the significance that he attributes to it in his wish for the Corinthians (2 Cor. 13:13) as further support for my relational model of the Spirit’s empowering for ethics.
Therefore, we can conclude that Paul not only believes the Spirit to facilitate an intimate relationship with the divine in order to transform (esp. 2 Cor. 3:18) and empower (Rom. 8:12–17 et al.) people for religious-ethical life. Rather, also the way in which the Spirit shapes the community through spiritual gifts and through common participation in the Spirit strengthens believers for ethical conduct.
7. Conclusion
In these two articles, which are based on my monograph The Holy Spirit and Ethics in Paul, I have dealt with the question of how in Paul the Holy Spirit enables religious-ethical life. The first essay has challenged the “infusion-transformation” approach to Pauline pneumatology which builds on a Stoic concept of the Spirit as a material substance that transforms the substance of its recipients in order to enable ethical behaviour. The second article has argued that in Paul (as well as in a significant number of texts from early Judaism) the Spirit transforms and empowers people for ethical living primarily through initiating and sustaining an intimate relationship with the divine and with the community of faith. In this concluding section I seek to draw out some implications for further studies: generally, with regard to the study of early Judaism, and with regard to Pauline theology (generally, with regard to pneumatology, and with regard to ethics).
One of the general implications of the results of this study derives from my investigation of Spirit-metaphors. In the context of my discussion of 1QHa 15, I have applied the insights of current linguistic studies on metaphors to the figurative language of the Spirit as being “poured out.” The interpretative model that I designed in this context was utilized throughout this study (esp. in the exegesis of 1 Cor. 12:13). The result of this analysis of Spirit-metaphors significantly contributes to my thesis that both early Jewish and Pauline texts do not give evidence of a physical concept of the Spirit. This finding is important for future studies that may look at early Jewish and early Christian pneumatology from different perspectives to our own (e.g. cosmology or theology).
In respect to the implications for further studies on Paul and his views of the Spirit, my study is in agreement with the fundamental point of the book Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, edited by Troels Engberg-Pedersen (2001). With regard to our topic, this means that it is an oversimplification to try to connect Paul to either a “Hellenistic-materialistic” or to a “Jewish-immaterialistic” pneumatology. However, it is likewise a false dichotomy when one forces a division between either a Stoic or a Platonic reading of πνυ̑μα in Paul, as Engberg-Pedersen appears to do. 20 Engberg-Pedersen does not reckon with a third option, which is that Paul did not follow the agendas of either of these philosophical schools. Paul does not inquire into the (im/material) nature of πνυ̑μα. The closest Paul comes to this interest in ontology is when, upon the question of the Corinthians, he discusses the nature of the resurrection body (1 Cor. 15:35–54). However, it is the resurrection body that is in focus, not the nature of πνυ̑μα. It is therefore misleading to make this the starting point not only of one’s conception of Pauline pneumatology but also of Paul’s theology in general. 21
I have indicated in section 4 that my relational perspective on Paul’s theology is able to combine a number of lines of thought that have thus far often been understood as opposite lines of Paul’s theology. From the perspective of Paul’s ethics, one of these areas is the debated issue of Paul’s ethical “indicative and imperative. 22 ” Although my relational approach to the ethical work of the Spirit in Paul naturally focuses on the Spirit and not on the work of the believer, the being and doing of the believer has a clear place in this model. The Spirit draws believers closer to God and to the faith-community – both initially at conversion-initiation and continuously in the course of Christian life. However, it is the believer who is transformed and empowered in the course of this process. Accordingly, it is not the Spirit who lives ethically within the believer. Paul does not present the believer as needing to “tune in” to the ethical conduct of the Spirit at the core of the person’s being. 23 Rather, the Spirit enables ethical living by drawing believers into the loving and empowering presence of the divine and of the community of faith. The moral character and the ethical actions are those of the believer, but they are lived within these loving relationships and can to a large extent be regarded as an outflow of the continual experience of love (cf. Rom. 5:5; 15:30; Eph. 3:16–19).
There is no automatism implied in the approach to the ethical work of the Spirit proposed in this study. When Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 3:18 that “we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one glory to another” and ascribes this transformation to the Spirit, he neither raises nor answers the question why some of the members of his churches appear to be less transformed into the image of Christ than others. However, a potential answer to this question could be the recognition that it is possible to resist the relational work of the Spirit. That is, resisting the love of God and of Christ and defying the encouragement that can be experienced in the church (see 1 Cor. 12:7; Phil. 2:1–3; etc.) means missing out on the ethically transforming and empowering work of the Spirit. Formulated positively: As believers let themselves be drawn by the Spirit into the transforming and empowering relationships with God and the community of faith and then live according to the values set forth by Paul’s gospel, the depth of their relationship to God and others will increase. Believers are thus further empowered as they put Paul’s ethical imperatives (which are, in fact, aimed at deepening their relationships to God and others) into practice.
Footnotes
1
I provide detailed definitions of all the central terms used in this study (such as ethics, substance, infusion-transformation, relationship, empowering, and transformation) in the monograph that these two articles summarize: Rabens, Spirit, 15–20, 123–26.
2
However, this view is centred on a relationship to the Spirit as a person. While it is possible to speak of the Spirit in Paul as having “personal traits,” Paul does not hold a developed concept of the Spirit as a person (cf. V. Rabens, “The Development of Pauline Pneumatology: A Response to F.W. Horn,” BZ 43 (1999), 177–78). It is methodologically unwise to build one’s model of the Spirit’s enabling of religious-ethical life in Paul on a particular concept of the ontology of the Spirit. Rather, I build on the actual effects which are attributed to the Spirit in Paul.
3
See, e.g., R.A. Hinde, Towards Understanding Relationships; EMSP 18 (London: Academic Press, 1979), 4, 14, 273, 326; J. Bowlby, A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development (New York: Basic Books, 1988), pp. 119–36; H. LaFollette, Personal Relationships: Love, Identity, and Morality (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), pp. 89–90, 197–99, 207–209; L. Stecher, Die Wirkung sozialer Beziehungen: Empirische Ergebnisse zur Bedeutung sozialen Kapitals für die Entwicklung von Kindern und Jugendlichen (München: Juventa, 2001), pp. 249–50; P.R. Shaver and M. Mikulincer, “Attachment Theory, Individual Psychodynamics, and Relationship Functioning,” in A.L. Vangelisti and D. Perlman (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 251–71.
4
Cf. Rabens, Spirit, 133–38.
5
J.D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998), 344.
6
D.S. Dockery, “New Nature and Old Nature,” DPL, 628; followed by J.M. Howard, Paul, the Community, and Progressive Sanctification: An Exploration into Community-Based Transformation within Pauline Theology; SBL 90 (New York: Lang, 2007), 81 n.61. Cf. J. Buchegger, Erneuerung des Menschen: Exegetische Studien zu Paulus; TANZ 40 (Tübingen: Francke, 2003), 295.
7
On the latter, see the more detailed discussion in V. Rabens, “Pneuma and the Beholding of God – Reading Paul in the Context of Philonic Mystical Traditions,” in J. Frey and J.R. Levison (eds.), Historical Contexts of the Early Christian Notion of the Spirit; Ekstasis (Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 2014), forthcoming.
8
R.W. Kvalvaag, “The Spirit in Human Beings in Some Qumran Non-Biblical Texts,” in F.H. Cryer and T.L. Thompson (eds.), Qumran between the Old and New Testaments; JSOTSup 290 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 173, 166–67 n.26, argues that the verb שגַנׇ in “Thou hast drawn me near to the understanding” is a terminus technicus for entrance into the Qumran community. If this is indeed implied by the author, a further relational dimension is added: not only is the relationship of the individual to God intensified by the Spirit, but also that to the believers around him.
9
1QS 4.20–21; Ezek[Tg] 36.25–27; Midr. Ps. 14.6; 73.4; Num. R. 9.49; Deut. R. 6.14; Ber. 32; et al.
10
For a discussion of Greco-Roman traditions in this context, see Rabens, Spirit, 167–69.
11
On the differentiation of transformation from empowering, see section 4 above.
12
F. Back, Verwandlung durch Offenbarung bei Paulus: Eine religionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Untersuchung zu 2 Kor 2,14–4,6; WUNT II/153 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 153–54.
13
Cf. Rabens, Spirit, 198–202.
14
Thus Dunn, Theology, 423, on Rom. 8.
15
Fee, Presence, 559, n.254.
16
“Spirit-shaped” is used with the meaning “modelled by the Spirit,” not “modelled on the Spirit.”
17
Thus e.g. T.J. Burke, Adopted into God’s Family: Exploring a Pauline Metaphor; NSBT 22 (Downers Grove: IVP, 2006), 147, 175.
18
On the interpretation of these two texts, see more fully Rabens, Spirit, 164–67.
19
On the experiential dimension of the work of the Spirit, see further V. Rabens, “Power from In Between: The Relational Experience of the Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts in Paul’s Churches,” in I.H. Marshall, V. Rabens and C. Bennema (eds.), The Spirit and Christ in the New Testament and Christian Theology: Essays in Honor of Max Turner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 138–55.
20
See Engberg-Pedersen, Cosmology, 16–19.
21
Pace Engberg-Pedersen, Cosmology, 14.
22
On this issue, see more fully, V. Rabens, “‘Indicative and Imperative’ as Substructure of Paul’s Theology-and-Ethics in Galatians?,” in N.T. Wright, M.W. Elliott, and S.J. Hafemann (eds.), Galatians and Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014), forthcoming.
23
Pace T.J. Deidun, New Covenant Morality in Paul; AnBib 89 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981), 79–81, 243.