|
|
INTRODUCTION:No
sketch of Pauline theology would be adequate without a discussion of Paul’s
ethical teaching. All his letters not only teach fundamental truths about the
Christ-event but also exhort Christians to upright ethical conduct.It was not
in a vacuum that he formulated his theology and ethics. The immediate factors
that prompted him to formulate such ethics are always vital for understanding
his ethics. This would undoubtedly raise a query whether he was intending a strict ethical
teaching or a mere ad hoc moral
conduct and how he tackled with the ‘New Life’ that is ‘In Christ’ and ‘For
Christ’ i.e., the indicative and the imperative of his thought. This paper
deals with such issues analyzing the major ethical texts and themes of the undisputed
Pauline epistles. It also gives glimpses on the recent interpretations of
Paul’s ethics in the appendix.
1. MEANING OF ETHICS
The word ethic is
derived from Greek word Ethicaor Ethos which meanscustoms or habits that
are approved by a particular culture.[1]Ethical
concerns occupy a central position throughout the Bible with respect to the
actions of individuals as well as the whole community. To some extend this is
presented in terms of general and absolute norms and in other places it can be
discerned in the actions of people and the customs of the society. So, the term is applied to the
special consideration of the nature, forms, principles and goals- the“right” or
“good” conduct. Therefore, ethics aims to give a systematic account of our
judgments about conduct, in so far as these estimate it from the standpoint of
right or wrong, good or bad.[2]Brian S.
Rosnercomments in shorton Paul’s ethics as- When we speak of Paul’s
ethics we simply have in mind ‘his ways which are in Christ’ (1 Cor. 4:17); his
‘instructions as to how one ought to walk and please God” (1 Thess. 4:1); ‘that
pattern of teaching’ to which he committed the early Christians (Rom 6:17).[3]
2. MOTIFS OF PAULINE
ETHICS
Though the equivalent of the term ethics is not found
in the later NT writings – or in the Gospels or in the Pauline epistles and
also there might not be a proper ethical teachings in Pauline writings in
modern sense; but as a missionary pastor and theologian, when he wrote letters
to his planted church, there are some exhortations to meet the need of the
church. So, some ethical teachings of Paul may be drawn from his letters to the
church.Let us look first the main motifs of Pauline ethical teaching. We shall
consider Johannes Weiss’ propositions cited by AnugrahaBehera, consisting of four motifs of
Pauline Ethics.
2.1.
The Eschatological Motif:Paul
believed that there would be a Parousia and judgment of the world (I Thess.
1:10; Rom. 2:8). The believers, unlike the non- believers will be saved on that
day (Rom. 5:10), but for those who have lapsed in their faith there will be
death and judgment (Rom. 8:13). So, he gives a general warning, “Do
not err, God is not mocked.” The aim of ethics, according to Paul, was to
appear blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ (I Cor. 1:8, Phil. 1:10, I
Thess. 3:13; 5:23; Col1:2) and “to walk
worthy of God who has called you in his kingdom and to his glory” (I Thess.
2:12).
2.2.
The Holiness Motif:
The Christian must live a holy and clean life since his/her true home is in
heaven (Phil. 3: 20). Paul also emphasizes that the Lord is with us now. We no
longer belong to ourselves (I Cor. 6: 19) but our bodies and souls are Christ’s
(I Cor. 3:23). God has called us to sanctification (I Thess. 4: 3; Rom. 6:
19-22). This requires self-discipline and preservation.
2.3.
The Fellowship Motif:Pauline
ethics are not only for individual benefit or individual salvation but the
whole aim is to establish a loving, caring brotherhood (I Cor. 12:4-14; Rom.
12:3ff.); “Let all things be done into edifying” (I Cor. 14:26); the members
must serve the body, must serve one another (Rom. 12:5; I Cor. 12:21-27). In
the matter of eating meat offered to idols, he instructs that the Christian
must use his or her freedom, a freedom to eat and drink in such a way that the
other member of the fellowship should not be offended (I Cor. 6:12). In all
things love must abound (I Cor. 13).
2.4. The Personality
Motif: Paul
believed that a Christian must cultivate a Christian personality which will not
only glorify Christ but also attract the people of other faiths towards Christ.
A Christian is free person in Christ but this is not unrestrained liberty (I
Cor.6: 12; 10:23). The ideal Christian personality is the expression of “love, joy,
peace, long-suffering, goodness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control”.
Christians should be outward examples of exalted and good breeding with decent
and dignified manners (I Thess. 4: 12; I Cor. 7: 35; Rom.13; I Cor. 14:40).
Paul urging of disciplines and order proves his abilities as an excellent
practical organizer.[4]
3. SOURCES OF PAULINE
ETHICS
Taking 1 Thessalonians 4:1-12,
Rosner infers that Paul’s ethics arises from Biblical/Jewish milieu and is
clear from the certain terms and motifs in the passage and certain
exhortations. Several features which indicate Jewish character of Paul’s
instruction can be seen as follows:
i)Certain use of words which
recalls the Hebrew rabbinic technical terms like paralambavnw´´¨ andperipatevow´ (v. 1-2) to denote proper conduct
ii) Correct behavior is set in contrast to
that of the heathen who do not know God (v. 4), a motif which has ample Jewish
precedence (e.g. Wis. 13-14)
iii) The notion of God’s will as a source of
guidance is a major motif in early Jewish writings
iv) The use of ‘brother’ to refer to members
of the community was common among Jews of Paul’s day (1&2 Macc. and many
rabbinic texts; cf. Exod. 2:11; Deut. 3:18)
v) The sanctification motif in verse 3,4,7 is
a Biblical one with a long history
vi) Allusions and
antecedent directly from the Jewish Scripture like verses 6 & 8 from Psalm
94:1 & 1 Sam. 8:7 respectively.
The
main exhortations of the passage also appear to have Biblical/Jewish origin. In
4:3b-6a Paul issues a call to sexual holiness and the refusal to greedily cheat
one’s brother. Not only are both unchastity and greed prominent vices in Paul’s
Bible, the two frequently
appear in tandem in early Jewish moral teaching which was built upon the
Biblical witness. The call to an even greater abundance of brotherly love in
verses 9-10 is an instruction that ultimately finds its roots in Leviticus
19:18, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (cf. Rom 13:9; Gal. 5:14).[5]
On the other
hand, Victor Paul Furnish contends that the Old Testament is not a
source for his ethical teaching in that it provides him rules, aphorisms,
maxims and proverbs.[6]
Rather it is a source for his ethical teaching that it provides him with a perspective
from which he interprets the whole event of God’s act in Christ, and the
concomitant and consequent claim God makes on the believer.[7]
He also detects some formal and material relationships between Paul’s ethics
and ethical materials of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha and the
Rabbinic Judaism─ that of Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, I Enoch and the
Testaments of the XII Patriarchs, and that of the two tractates Derek ’EretzRabba and Derek ’EretzZuta respectively. But he
infers that these particular materials did not exert the same kind of influence
upon the apostle’s concrete ethical instruction as the more established books
of the Old Testament. He also notices that Pauline phrases, metaphors and terms
are frequent and familiar in the Hellenistic circles as represented by
the broad and pervasive movement of Stoicism.[8]
It is true, he concludes, that Paul is materially dependent on Hellenistic
sources but are secondary to the fact of his conversion to Christianity. He
winds up his discussion stating that the ultimate source of Paul’s ethics is
the very teachings of Lord Jesus Christ. He writes always as an apostle, as a
man in Christ. The sayings which he cites are regarded and described as “words
of the Lord.” It is of the Lord that Paul is an apostle, and it is in the
perspective of the whole redemptive event of Christ that this apostle frames
his ethical exhortations.[9]
4. MAJOR ETHICAL TEXTS
4.1.1
Thessalonians 4:1-12:1 Thessalonians 4:1-12 is an ethical
exhortation which, introduced by inferential conjunction ou|n – “therefore” presents the encouragement and instruction
Paul would have liked to have delivered in person. The section consists of
general exhortation to ethical progress (v. 1-2), a call to sexual holiness (v.
3-8) and instructions concerning brotherly love and the quiet life (v. 9-12).
Rosner quotes Raymond F. Collins describing these verses as “the most ancient
documented example of early Christian moral parenesis.”[10]
4.2. Romans 12:Romans
12 is an ethic based on righteousness through faith including a new basis of
forbearance within a diverse community. The passage begins witha respond
appropriately to the ‘mercies of God’ that requires a living sacrifice of
bodily service that is not ‘conformed to this world’ (Rom 12:1-2).[11]
Here, Paul’s concern is the social reality of the believers with focus on the
relationship between the Roman congregations and the surrounding community and
civic authorities. The small groups of believers were confronted with the
political reality that they lived in the imperial capital and were endangered,
vulnerable to the central government’s suspicions and clubs and societies and
not least to further imperial rulings against Jews.[12]
Paul presents love as the primary
principle of all conduct, and it is intended to cover the whole of the
following passage (Rom 12:9). This kind of assertions must have been
particularly meaningful for Jews living in Diaspora, as aliens living under a
foreign power, and often as slaves and disposed. As a whole, Paul does not make an attempt to
distinguish ethical behavior within
the church as different from the without.[13]
4.2. 1 Corinthians 6-7;
13:Paul’s principal comments on court case, marriage and divorce
occur in I Corinthians 6-7; 13. Jerome Murphy refers to Paul’s beginningof 1
Corinthians 6 with condemning practice of going to pagan court (6:1-8) andif
Christian were seen to solve the problems without recourse to lawyers, it would
be a living demonstration of the power of the gospel.[14]
Paul continued regarding some people who continued resort to slaves or
prostitutes for sexual release and pleasure. Such self-indulgence quickly
become a form of slavery (6:12 ),
that is a slavery to flesh and once again to lust. Anything which weakened or
compromised that should not even be contemplated by believers (6:15 -20).[15]
In chapter 7, Paul talks about marriage, celibacy and widowhood along
with slavery and civic freedom. The principle that governs his view of them is
“Let each one walk in the lot that the Lord has assigned to him and in which
God has called him” (7:17). Pauline ethic concerning slaves is also found in 1
Corinthians 7: 17-24. In Paul’s mind, one’s social class is insignificant
because the present age is temporary and will soon pass away. He considered the
personal status of believers, he gives priority to maintaining relationship
with Christ.[16]
In chapter
13, Paul inserted a hymn of love while discussing the spiritual gift. It is
meant to be the way of life for any Christian, the norm and guide for the
exercise of all gifts. And this ‘love’ is not natural human love, but Paul is
talking of a kind of love that a human being can only express and share when he
or she has been touched by God’s grace and enabled by God’s Spirit.[17]
Freedom in Christ compels us to be slaves to one other in love; not an
opportunity for selfishness (1 Cor 9:19 cf. Gal 5:13–14). Love is not a
replacement of the Law, but a new motivation, understanding and power for
meeting and surpassing its moral demands.[18]
4.3. Ephesians:Raymond
E. Brown divides the main body of the Ephesians into two main parts –the
indicative section (2:1-3:21) and the imperative or paraenetic section
(4:1-6:20).[19]The
Indicative section begins with the richness of God’s mercy and love that
converts sinners into saints, the spiritually dead into spiritually alive, and
now saved by faith, which is a gift of God (2:1-10). Paul teaches that we are
God’s handiwork created in Jesus Christ for the good works that God has
prepared beforehand (2:10 ).
And this gift reaches Jews and gentiles as well. This doctrinal section is
concluded with a doxology (3:20 -21).In
the Imperative section, Paul begins with living a life worthy of God’s calling
(4:1). And he talked about seven manifestations of oneness in Christ, the unity
of the congregation, and he mentions diversity of gifts for the building up of
the church – apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers (4:7-12).
Gentiles were told that they live no longer in dark ignorance and they cannot
live in the uncleanness and lusts of their former life (4:17 -24).[20]
In chapter 5:21-6:9, the major
ethical theme in Ephesian is found, in which the way of Christian life in terms
of a household code for three pairs – wives and husbands, children and fathers,
slaves and masters is seen. Most scholars describes this passages as “table of
Household duties,” or family Codes.[21]
4.4. Colossians:The
ethical teaching dominant in this epistle is the Household Code (Col 3:18-4:1).
Lincoln and Wedderburnput it as ‘Domestic Code.’[22]The
Household concept is consisted of members of the immediate family and typically
extended to include slaves, freedman, servants and laborers, and sometimes even
business associate and tenants. In principle, the householder had full
authority over the members of the household.Some secular writings of Aristotle
and Philo also have similar teachings that address the household members with
ethical teaching in Hellenistic society.[23]
5.
MAJOR ETHICAL THEMES OF PAUL
5.1.Dual Polarity of Christian
Life:Christians have been justified by grace through faith in
Christ Jesus (Rom3:24-25) so that they are no longer “under law, but under
grace” (Rom 6:15). On the other hand even they still have to be delivered “from
the present wicked world” (Gal. 1:14; cf. 1 Cor. 7:26, 29-31). You must “not be
conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mental
attitude so that you may assess the will of God-what is good, pleasing to him
and perfect” (Rom 12:2). Paul still tells the Christian who has experienced the
effects of the Christ-event: “Work out your own salvation in fear and trembling”
(Phil 2:12c); “for we must all appear before Christ’s judgment-seat so that
each one may receive good or evil for what one has done in the body” (2 Cor.
5:10). Yet Paul knows that “God is the one working in you, both to will and to
work for his good pleasure” (Phil 2:13). The Christian, then, lives a life of
dual polarity.[24]
The dual polarity that
characterizes Christian life is the reason why Paul insists that the Christian
energized by the Spirit of God (Rom 8:14) can no longer sin or live a life
bound by a merely natural, earthly
horizon. One is no longer psychikos, “material,”
but pneumatikos, “spiritual”; one
must fasten, then, one’s gaze on the horizon of the Spirit that comes from God
(1 Cor. 2:11). This dual polarity also explains Christian freedom, in which
Paul’s Galatian converts are exhorted to stand firm (5:1): freedom from the
law, freedom from sin and death, freedom from the self (Rom 6:7-11, 14;
7:24-8:2), But Paul vigorously rejects the idea that Christians should
blatantly sin in order to give God more scope for his mercy and gracious
justification (Rom 6:1; cf. 3:5-8).[25]
5.2. Conscience:Conscience
is thecapacity to judge one’s actions either in retrospect (asright and wrong)
or in prospect (as a guide for properactivity). Paul’s word for it is syneidêsis(Latcon-scientia). The claim that it was derived by Paul from Stoic
philosophy is debatable; more likely it is from the popular Hellenistic
philosophy of his day. Initially syneidêsisdenoted
“consciousness” (of human activity in general); eventually it was applied to
consciousness of moral aspects. Three passages are particularly important: (1)
Rom 2:14-15, where Paul recognizes
that by means of “conscience” Gentiles perform some of the prescriptions of the
Mosaic law and are thus a “law” unto themselves. (2) 1 Cor 8:7-12, where Paul
calls upon the Christian to respect the weak conscience of a fellow Christian
troubled about eating food
consecrated to idols. (3) 1 Cor 10:23-29, where Paul discusses a similar
problem. In 2 Cor 1:12 Paul relates the conscience to the problem of boasting;
in Rom 8:16; 9:1 he relates it to the gift of the Spirit. Paul’s teaching on
the subject has often been compared to that in later rabbinic texts about the yêserhära and yêserhatrôb, “evil impulse” and “good impulse.[26]
Rudolf Schnackenburg contends that Paul, being influenced by Stoic thinking,
has in mind that everyone possesses a faculty of making moral judgments and a
conscience and it is decisive for determining the moral quality of an act.
There is only one judgment of conscience and it is determined by the individual
him/herself. After all, with admonitions Paul was training Christian
consciences, that is, trying to make Christians clear-sighted and aware of true
moral values. This is clearly shown by his continual demand that they examine
themselves (1 Cor. 11:28; 2 Cor. 13:5; Gal. 6:4) or seek the will of God (Rom.
12:2; Eph. 5:10).[27]
5.3. Baptism and Ethics:Romans
6:1-14 is filled with appeals for life consonant with participation in the
redemption of Christ that lies at the heart of baptism. For instance, we find
verses that talk of dying to sin and by baptism having new life ─ ‘How can we
who died to sin go on living in it?... We were buried with him by baptism to
death... that we might walk in newness of life.... Our old self was crucified with
him that we might no longer be enslaved to sin.... You also must consider
yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.’ This appeal is most
extensively developed in Colossians 2:20-3:13. Therein the fact that the
believer died and rose in Christ is not only a motive for Christ-like living,
but a basis to work out the baptismal pattern of dying to sin and rising to
righteousness. This led G. Bornkamm to affirm that in Paul’s writings, “baptism
is the appropriation of the new life, and the new life is the appropriation of
baptism.” To give substance to this principle the primitive church construed a
system of ethics which is reflected in the practical sections of many of the NT
letters, not least in Paul’s writings. To this tradition Paul refers at times,
notably Romans 6:17: “Thanks be to God that although you once were slaves of
sin, you became obedient from the heart to the pattern of teaching to which
you were entrusted”. From this it is clear that the believers addressed
were instructed in the elements of Christian living that follow from baptism (1
Thess 4:1-7; 2 Thess 3:6, 11-13).[28]
5.4.
Pauline Eschatology and Ethics:It is sometimes suggested that an
overemphasis on eschatological matters undermines the need for a strong ethical
code for living in the present. Contrary to many popular assumptions about the
detachment alleged to be inherent within eschatological teaching, Paul’s
letters demonstrate a close connection between eschatology and ethical
exhortation. This is evident within the earliest of his letters- those written
to the church at Thessalonica where Paul confronts a misguided understanding
about work which is based upon an erroneous view of the imminent return of
Christ. Similarly, the ethical exhortations contained in Romans 12-13 are
wholly conditioned by an eschatological perspective.[29]
The same observation can be made about 2 Corinthians 5:1-10. Indeed, it is
possible to see the whole of Paul’s ethical teaching as providing instruction
about how the Christian is to live in the interval between the death and
resurrection of Jesus Christ and his future parousia. L. J. Kreitzercites the rightly
said evocative phrase of Sampey that Paul’s moral teaching involves teaching
the Christian about walking “between the times.”[30]
Paul’s ethics are strongly
influenced by the tension implicit in the belief that the coming new age is
present already (Rom 13:11-12), yet only partially. The expectation creates
moral seriousness (Rom 13:13-14). The eschatological teaching of 1 Thessalonians
4:13— 5:11 is placed in the middle of the ethical sections of the letter so
that 1 Thessalonians 5:12 smoothly resumes the thought of 1 Thessalonians 4:12.
The eschatological reserve means that while voicing a powerful expression of
Christian freedom (1 Cor 3:21-22), Paul also warns that the eschatological time
is not yet: ‘judge not before the final judgment’ (1 Cor 4:5).[31]
5.5. Grace Corresponding to Grace:Righteousness does
not make its appearance as the consequence of a life lived for God, except marginally,
as in Galatians 5:5. It is the presupposition, as a gift in salvation. God’s
grace empowers the new being created in salvation. “Grace reigns through
righteousness for eternal life” (Rom 5:21). God works through the will and
actions of believers for God’s own purpose (Phil 2:12-13). God’s gift creates
the integral response of a whole person, whose conduct (Gal 6:4) and fruit (Gal
5:22) are described in the singular. God’s grace is a power within the
believers reproducing its own character. The letter to the Ephesians admonishes
them to be imitators of God and “gracious to each other just as God in Christ
was gracious” to them (Eph 4:32). Their conduct is to be loving because its
foundation is the love expressed in Christ’s sacrifice (Eph 4:32— 5:2). Paul
expresses the relationship organically: since the indicative is union with
Christ in baptism, they are bidden to live the life of the risen Christ himself
(Rom 6:5-12).[32]
The immeasurable inequality between
the recipients of Christ’s gift and Christ, who sacrificially gave himself for
them, should make the believers gracious to those who are poor. God is the
actor. Giving to the poor is prompted by God's grace (2 Cor 8:6-7), which
enables believers to give even beyond their ability (2 Cor 8:1-4). God's
abundant grace provides ample means for every good action; the poor will thank
God for the surpassing grace in the givers (2 Cor 9:8, 13-14).[33]
5.6. Social Ethic as well as Community Ethic:In 2
Corinthians 8-9 Paul’s social concern is limited to the church; thus his ethic
of sharing is a community ethic, not a social ethic. The collection was
directed to the poor of the saints (2 Cor 8:4; Rom 15:26). The givers
indeed will be praised for “their liberality of sharing to them and to all”(2
Cor 9:13; cf. Gal 6:10).Indication of a more universal reference is found in
other texts which apply to non-believers. In Galatians 6:10. Paul concludes his
discussion of giving with the admonition, “Do good to all people (pros
pantos), but especially to the household of faith. “Doing good” (ergazesthai
to agathon) is terminology for kindly concrete acts of helping
others.Loving service to needy non-believers is also evident in Romans
12:13-14. Paul enjoins hospitality in its literal sense of love for or care of
strangers (philoxenia), here meaning non-believers since it contrasts
the immediately preceding injunction of sharing with fellow Christians (“saints”)
and the following stipulation of love to one’s enemies.Since Paul does enjoin
loving care to non-believers, the more ambiguous references of doing concrete
acts of good “for each other and for all” (1 Thess 3:12; 5:15; cf. 2 Cor 9:13)
can be understood as pointing beyond and outside the church (cf. Phil 4:5; 2
Tim 2:24; Tit 3:2, 8).[34]
5.7. An Ethic of Love:Love
is the specific pattern of life by which grace forms the new reality of the
believer. The supernatural infusion of love through the Holy Spirit produces
the character upon which eschatological hope about the final judgment of God is
built (Rom 5:3-5). Love is the first fruit of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:22).When
love is actualized, the other demands of God are fulfilled. Freedom in Christ
is not an opportunity for selfishness, but compels us to be slaves to one other
in love (Gal 5:13-14; 1 Cor. 9:19). The fulfillment of the Law then is not its
termination but the full expression of its principles, purpose and motivation.Love
thus is not a replacement of the Law, but a new motivation, understanding and power
for meeting and surpassing its moral demands. The combination is crucial.
Obedient deeds of great justice and self-sacrifice which lack the motivation
and attitude of love are empty (1 Cor. 13:3; cf. Ps 112:9 LXX).[35]
5.8.
Universalizing the Moral Conflict:Evil exists in the order of
society (kosmos, “world”) and exerts an influence upon the individual
(Eph 2:1; cf. Rom 12:2). This evil order is comprehensive in society, including
necessary economic relationships (1 Cor 7:31), social stratification (1 Cor
1:27-28), status distinctions based on religion (Gal 6:14-15) and its own
wisdom (1 Cor 1:20).The universal dimensions of evil are even clearer in view
of the fallen angelic powers which, particularly in the later Pauline letters,
are perceived to control the social order (Principalities and Powers).
Individual sins are patterned not only by the social order but also by “the
ruler of the domain of the air” (Eph 2:2). “Our battle is not with flesh and
blood, but with the rulers, the authorities, the rulers of this [world’s] order
of darkness” (Eph 6:12). The background for these supernatural “principalities
and powers” (cf. 1 Enoch 61:10; 2 Enoch 20:1) is to be found in
the universal care of angels over the creation (Deut 32:8; 2 Enoch 19:2-5;
Jub. 4:15) who are now fallen.
The Pauline understanding of
structural evil gives a societal, cosmic and universal dimension to evil. The
struggle against evil, grounded in Christ’s conquest of these powers (Col 2:15;
cf. 1:13-16), then deals with factors in the very fiber of social existence.
Despite this conquest, for Paul the victory will not be completed by Christ
until the end of history (1 Cor 15:24). In Ephesians the church is pivotal in
the struggle against the powers of evil (Eph 3:10; 5:11).Despite the influence
of Hellenistic moral philosophy, Paul’s view of the cosmos and history give a
different cast to his ethical perspective. On one hand for Paul evil deeply
penetrates the created order; on the other hand he anticipates final victory
based on the present redemptive work of Christ.[36]
5.9. Sexuality and Sexual
Ethic:1 Thessalonians 4:1-8 suggests that his basic teaching to
a community of new converts covered sexual behavior. This was in the context of
the Greco-Roman world where various forms of sexual license were common. Paul
now reminds the Christians at Thessalonica that God’s will for their
sanctification required abstinence, from porneia(1 Thess 4:3, “sexual
immorality”). This Greek word and its cognates as used by Paul denote any kind
of illegitimate—extramarital and unnatural—sexual intercourse or
relationship.The inclusion of idolaters among the different sexual offenders (1
Cor. 6:9) indicates the gravity of their sinfulness. Foremost among “the acts
of the sinful nature”are “porneia”, impurity and debauchery” (Gal 5:19;
cf. 1 Cor 10:8). It was chiefly in the disordered sexual vices of the Gentile
world that Paul discerned God’s judgment on the godless (Rom 1:18-27).[37]
5.9.1. Sex, Self and Christ:For
Paul sexual intercourse is not on a par with the satisfying of other natural
appetites like eating.Sexual intercourse is uniquely expressive of our whole
being. “All other sins a person commits are outside his body, but he who sins
sexually sins against his own body” (1 Cor 6:18). S. C. Mott quotes Whiteley
stating that for Paul, there is clearly something wrong in having both an
intimate relationship with Christ as a member of his body and also a
relationship which is intimate in another. When Paul declares porneiato
be uniquely a sin against our own body (1 Cor 6:18), he is not referring merely
to the misuse of our sexual organs, he may be picking up a notion advanced by
some Libertine Corinthians, that nothing one does sexually or physically can
touch the inner citadel of the soul. (Such sentiments are found among later
Christian gnostics.) For Paul sexual activity embodies the whole person, sinful
union with a prostitute—or adultery or other extramarital
intercourse—desecrates a Christian’s bodily union with Christ.[38]
He goes on further saying that it is the peculiar dignity of the one-flesh
union of heterosexual marriage, on the other hand, that not only is it quite
compatible with spiritual union with the Lord (1 Cor 6:17), but also it
expresses the mystērion(“mystery”) of the union between Christ and his church
(Eph 5:31-32; 2 Cor 11:2).The teaching this evokes from Paul is concerned
solely with marriage and sexual relations within marriage.[39]
5.9.2. Sex in Marriage:Marriage
(i.e., monogamy) is needed and right because porneiaas an outlet for
sexuality is intolerable (1 Cor 7:2). The implication is clear: the satisfying
of sexual desires is not wrong, and marriage is its appointed setting.Moreover,
sex is not a dispensable dimension of marriage; like responsible loveand
respect (cf. above on Eph 5), it is one of the mutual obligations of husband to
wife and wife to husband (1 Cor 7:3). Sex within marriage must exemplify what
Paul teaches later in 1 Corinthians: “In the Lord, however, woman is not
independent of man, nor is man independent of woman” (1 Cor 11:11).[40]
5.9.3. A Place for Abstinence:From
the perspective established by Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:2-5, the issue is“when,
if ever, is abstinence from sex within marriage right?” Paul sets out three
criteria: (1) mutual consent, (2) for a limited time only, and (3) for
religious purposes. The teaching of this chapter so far obviously disallows an
understanding of sexual intercourse as intended solely for procreation. Even if
artificial means of contraception are not in view, the accent falls
unambiguously on sexual relations as expressive of selfless mutuality between
married partners, of their belonging in the Lord to each other, not to him/herself.It
is important to record that Paul is not ranking celibacy/virginity above
marriage on some absolute scale. He is asserting that the sexless life is “good”
only for those endowed with God’s charisma, in the face of clamor at
Corinth to make it a universal rule, with Paul’s own example perhaps cited in
its favor (1 Cor 7:29-35). It seems to be assumed that marriage-and-sex is “good”
for all others— who apparently need no charisma.[41]
5.10.Society, State, and
Slavery:Paul recognizes differences both in human and in
Christian society. “By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, Jews or
Greeks, slaves or free; and all were made to drink of the same Spirit” (1 Cor
12:13; cf. Gal 3:28). Yet he can also say, “Let each one walk in the lot to
which the Lord has assigned him…; everyone should remain in the state in which
one was called” (1 Cor 7:17-20). For Paul’s basic attitude is expressed in 1
Cor 9:19-23: “I have become all things to all that I may save some.” Hence he
reckons with Jews and Greeks, slaves and free, men and women, rich and poor,
married and celibate, the weak in conviction and the strong, those material and
those spiritual in Christian society.
Paul is also aware that the Christian must live in civil and political
society that is not wholly oriented to the same goals as the Christian
community. Christians may in reality be citizens of another, a heavenly, “commonwealth”
(Phil 3:20), but they do have obligations of another sort in this earthly life.
Paul treats these in Rom 13:1-7, and indirectly in 1 Corinthians 6:.1-8; 2:6-8.
In it Paul recognizes that Christians must “subject themselves to the
authorities.” Christians are to recognize their place in the structure of human
society. Paul’s motivating reasons are mainly three: (i) eschatological (the
danger of facing “judgment” [13:2] and “wrath”[13:5]); (ii) the dictate of “conscience”
itself (13:5); and (iii)”the (common) good” (13:4). For the same reasons Paul
insists that Christians must not only “pay taxes” and “revenue” (13:6-7a), but
accord the authorities “honor” and “respect” (13:7b). In evaluation, Fitzmyer
opines that Paul’s teaching is limited; and even his reference to “the (common)
good” (13:4a) can scarcely be invoked in defense of civil disobedience.[42]
Assessing the ‘slavery’ in 1
Corinthians 7:21-22, Fitzmyer holds that Paul did not seek to change the social
system in which he lived. This is undoubtedly the reason why he returns the
runaway slave Onesimus to his master Philemon (Phlm 8-20). Yet in the latter
passage we may detect what he really thinks about the matter; for he sends
Onesimus back as “more than a slave, as a ‘brother’” (16), i.e., suggesting
that Philemon recognize him as a fellow Christian, and possibly even hinting
that he should emancipate him (though the latter is far from certain). Paul was
in this instance more concerned with interiorizing the existing social
situation than with changing it, realizing that even a slave in civil society
could have freedom in Christ Jesus (Gal 3:28). (Cf. Col 3:22-4:1; Eph. 6:5-9.)[43]
5.11. Marriage and
Divorce:Regarding marriage, he recommends monogamous marriage,
with its mutual rights and obligations, because ‘there is so much immorality’
(7:2) and because ‘it is better to marry than to burn with passion (7:9b). He
expresses absolute prohibition of divorce which he claimed the charge form God.
He said that the wife should not separate from her husband; his formulation is
already adapted to a Greco-Roman setting, where divorce instituted by a woman
was possible. But Paul can tolerate separation or divorce when there is mixed
marriage between Christian and non-Christian, who cannot live in peace; but
this is not from the Lord (7:15 ).[44]
6. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
INDICATIVE (Theology) AND IMPERATIVE (Ethics)
There is close link between theology and ethics in Pauline thought. The
indicative means the new life in its moral manifestation is at one time
proclaimed and posited as the fruits of the redemptive work of God in Christ
through the Holy Spirit. It includes the death and resurrection of Christ in
which the believers have died to sin. But the imperative concerns how believers
should live.[45]
In other words, Indicative is the new life in Christ through the cross.
Imperative is the new life that has to be continually manifested and worked out
by the believer. M. Stephen quotes C.H Dodd identifying Indicative as the
religious or theological element from the imperative as the ethical element.[46]
Indicative involves faith, worship, and salvation. Imperative includes conduct,
moral judgments. He further cites Bultmann saying there seems to be an inner
unity between indicative and imperative which is reflected in love.[47]
Traditionally, the relationship between the indicative and imperative is
understood as the theological expositions followed by the practical application
as some of the letters of Paul can be divided in this way. For example, there
are transitions from Romans 11 to 12, Galatians 4 to 5, and from Colossians 2
to 3. But, James D. G. Dunn argues that this dichotomy that theology followed
by application is misleading. As Paul was pastor and theologian, his theology
was a living theology, a practical theology through and through. The
application is inherent in the exposition itself.[48]
This kind of passages can be found implicitly in Romans 1-2 and 4 and
explicitly in Romans 6 and 8. And even in 1 Corinthians 15.[49]In
this relationship of indicative and imperative, Herman Ridderbos stresses on
the importance of indicative. The imperative rests on the indicative and that
this order is not reversible. But this does not mean that the indicative
vindicates a given situation that exists apart from the imperative and which
only needs to be brought into action by the imperative.J. Christian Baker opines
that for Paul, the indicative-imperative scheme has an apocalyptic-cosmic
thrust. The imperative does not primarily answer the question “How will I be
saved?” but rather “How are the anti-divine powers of the world to be met in my
redemptive activity in Christ for the sake of the world?”[50]For
Paul, Dunn concludes, to live a life of obedience is by the grace of God. But God’s grace can work in us when we live
according to God’s will. Every
imperative is a demand to actualize the indicative.There is no faith without
absolute obedience in Christ.[51]
EVALUATION & CONCLUSION: To a great extent, we can say
that Paul’s ethics was determined by his personal background and experience ─Judaism,
the general moral climate, moral problems of his congregation and his Jewish
legalistic self-justification and his justification by God granted to him on
the ground of faith in Jesus Christ- all helped to give shape his ethical
teaching. He did not create a new Christian ideal or a new Christian ethic, he
simply passed on to others what he had received. His ethical interest was,
however, purely practical but unsystematic in nature. He regarded religion and
ethics as indissolubly joined, that a true religion was always accompanied by a
high ethic and that a high ethic can be inspired and sustained by religion.There
is a close link between theology and ethics in Pauline perspective. His ethics
is Christo-centric and he is envisioning a universal community through Jesus
Christ. He gives importance to both indicative and imperative in his writings.
Thus, Paul’s exhortation to live an ethical life is decisive when it is seen as
real worship to God in day-to-day life. To get better enlightened, let us consider various analyses
of scholars-
Furnish assertively
infers that it is necessary to reduce the idea of ‘Pauline ethics’ to mean only
Paul’s ethical concern and his ad hoc exhortations
and instructions. He does not reflect critically and systematically upon the
problems of ethics, and that his exhortations and admonitions are directed to
specific situations; thus, his concern for practical conduct of Christians is
inseparably related to the central themes of his preaching. Therefore, the
study of Paul’s ethic is the study of the theological convictions which
underlie Paul’s concrete exhortations and instructions, and the way those
convictions shape his responses to practical questions of concuct.[52]For
M. Stephen, Paul was contextual in his approach that is he was not very
deontological. There is a teleological and contextual thrust in Paul. Love
plays a crucial role in Paul. His was an ethics based on what is responsible,
fitting and loving in the concrete situation.[53]WilliMarxen,
after analyzing the ethics of Paul, concludes that Paul’s ethics is an
impossible possibility and at the same time a possible impossibility. We must
not resolve this tension. From time to time however it may be necessary to
emphasize different aspects. To summarize briefly we can say that genuine
Christian ethics is the worship of God in everyday life.[54]
APPENDIX
RECENT
INTERPRETERS OF PAUL’S ETHICS(Victor
Paul Furnish, Theology & Ethics in Paul,
Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968; reprinted edition, 1988, 243-279)
The
earliest discussion of Paul’s ethics in the 19th Century is found in
the third section of Immanuel Berger’s
book VersucheinermoralischenEinleitung
ins Neu Testament fur Religionslhrer und denkende Christen (1798), in which
he discussed various Pauline statements and exhortations relevant to the moral
life.
19th
century
H.L Ernesti: After Berger, the first critical study of Pauline
Ethics was done by H.L Ernesti in his monograph which was written in 1868. His
starting point was that human beings were called to a status of righteousness
before God; to an obedience of God’s will which is the absolute and
unconditional norm of Christian morality. He emphasizes the freedom of
Christian in ethical conduct because of the gift of spirit. He argues that Paul
views God’s will as having both a “general” and a “special” content, which
involve the general purpose or goal of life and concrete tasks and duties of
Christian life. Even after his conversion Paul continues to regard the law as
the revelation of God’s special will. The distinctiveness of Paul’s ethics lies
in the fundamentally new idea of freedom and the identification of this as a
gift of Spirit, the principle of the Christian ethical life and that in which
the Christian lives. He also identifies difference between formally work done
in obedience to the law and those which are done as a result of the new birth,
that substantially and essentially they belong to different categories. The
first are done out of fear in order to avoid harmful consequences, but the
others keep on as “necessary expressions” of the life, “out of the life of God
in us,” the love of God which we bear.
Hermann Von Soden: He identifies freedom in the Spirit as the
essential aspect of Paul’s ethical ideal, and speaks of a ‘fusion’ of God’s
power with human personality, through which morality issues forwards freely of
itself. Thus, the power for moral life is not in human but in God, by whose
mercy human is called to a new life and a walking worthily of God who calls
him. God’s character is the motive, His Spirit the power, and His will the norm
for all ethical action. The Christian is thus moved to ethical action from
“within,” not from something “outside” himself.
Paul Wernle: He maintains that Pauline theology as a whole is
best described as “enthusiast,” governed by an overriding expectation of the
imminent Parousia. He says the Pauline piety is above all a walking in the
Spirit, therefore restiveness, an enthusiasm, an intermingling of the future
and present. Since sin is a phenomenon of this world, the Christian in entirely
freed from sin and the law becomes simply redundant; the inspirited does it of
his own agreement. For Paul the Spirit does not work freely but is bound
“inwardly” to faith and “outwardly” to the word, the church, and the
sacraments. Man must help the Spirit by restraining the lusts and the passion,
by work and discipline.
Hermann Jacoby: He rejects the view of Wernle that the description
of Paul as an enthusiast and the attendant assertion to the view that the
Christian’s life is totally free from sin. But he acknowledges that for Paul
the Christian's life manifests the divine victory over sin. Jacoby stresses the
importance of Paul’s doctrine of the Spirit and he wishes to describe Paul’s
ethics as “an ethic of choice,” from enthusiasm. Paul regarded Jesus as having
set the old law aside by fulfilling it, but in its place the law of Spirit
exercises its own rule. The exalted Christ himself governs within each
individual Christian and within the corporate life of the community as the
ethically enlivening principle through the Spirit. Hence, the Christian
fulfills the law of God as the law of Christ (1 Cor9:21 ).
20th
century
Alfred Junker: He ignores the questions of possible non-Christian
sources of Paul’s teachings, and does not deal adequately with the way Paul
applies them in concrete situations. He claims that Paul sees the Christian’s
new life as resultant from a “wedding” of God’s Spirit with man’s whereby the
tyrannous power of the flesh is broken, man’s God-related powers are
“mobilized” from action, and his mind, conscience, and heart are inwardly
renewed. However Junker also emphasizes on the possibility of sin in the Christian's
life. Paul is aware of the moral defects of the Christian churches; he speaks
of a war within the Christian between flesh and spirit; and he presupposes and
encourages ‘development,” “growth,” and “progress” in the Christian life. When
Paul speaks of the Christian life as sinless, it is due to Paul’s need in his
apologetic to emphasize the radical break in the life of the one who has been
converted and baptized, and to his conviction that Christ had decisively broken
the power of Satan. Man’s ethical task is to help God’s power attain its full
effect to his life and to confirm by his own actions what God has already made
for him. This means that the Christian must be continually admonished and
stimulated to ethical action and that he must be given certain moral directives
for the conduct of his life.
Albert Schweitzer: He suggests a free discussion of Pauline ethics
from the doctrine of justification and rather emphasizes the controlling place
of eschatology in Paul’s ethic and believes that this eschatological basis
gives Paul’s ethical principles and advice a temporary, “interim” character.
So, the ideal of Pauline ethic is to live with the eyes fixed upon eternity,
while standing firmly upon the solid ground of reality. He further comments
that Paul’s ethics is theologically grounded on the “mysticism” in which the
Christians share the dying and rising of Christ. Being “in Christ”, the
Christians possess the Spirit of Christ as the life principle of the
supernatural state of existence on which he has now entered. So, ethics is a
natural function of the redeemed state and it is the necessary outward
expression of the translation from the earthly world to the super-earthly,
which has already taken place in the being in-Christ.
Martin Dibelius: He discusses the application of form-historical
methods and insists that the first task is to determine the origin and form of
Paul’s moral teaching. In his view, the eschatological expectation of the
earliest church precluded the development of any peculiar Christian ethic. But
as their hopes faded and Christians were confronted with an extended pilgrimage
in the world, the need for ethical directives became apparent. So, Jesus’
sayings which had presupposed a much simpler cultural situation were no longer
sufficient for guidance in the complex Hellenistic society. Then, the church
turned to the Hellenistic world itself, and borrowed from the ethical
traditions of Hellenistic Judaism and contemporary popular philosophy for the
practical direction of its own life in the world. However, Dibelius adds, they
are not formulated for special churches and concrete cases, but for the general
requirement of earliest Christendom. And it does not bear essential
relationship to his theological point of view.
Rudolf Bultmann: He opposes the view that there is a logical
contradiction between the apostle’s indicative and imperative statements
stating that the imperative is grounded precisely in the fact of justification
and is derived from the indicative: “because the Christian is freed from sin
through justification, he ought to wage war against sin.” For Bultmann, the
righteousness is eschatological phenomenon, not moral concept, that Paul
regards it as otherworldly phenomenon. But it does not depend upon human
accomplishment, moral or otherwise, but solely on the event of God’s grace. He
also contends that faith is an act of obedience, and human ethical acts do not
bring about righteousness; they are rather the expressions of the radical
obedience to which humans are called: putting his whole being at the disposal
of God. For Paul this obedience has no special content, and the moral conduct
of believers differs from that of the unbeliever only in that it has the
character of obedience.
Morton Scott Enslin: He emphasizes the indissolubility unity of morals
and religion in Paul, but his study presupposes distinctions between practical
morality and theoretic ethics on the one hand, and religion and theological
doctrine on the other. Enslin can be characterized as emphasizing sociological
against a theological origin and context of Paul’s ethical teaching. He
believes that it was Paul’s heritage as a moral Jew, his pre-Christian-self,
which enabled him to see the importance of morality in spite of the logical
implications of his own doctrine. He also opines the ultimate ideal for
Christian conduct is anything which promotes true fellowship with the Lord –
which means also “with the brethren.”
C.H. Dodd: He makes a systematic distinction between preaching
and teaching within the New Testament. The distinction between preaching and
teaching corresponds to that between theology and ethics or gospel and law. A
new has dawned (realized eschatology), and Paul is the promulgator of its new
law, a Christian pattern for conduct to which a Christian obliged to conform
the new law of Christ.
Rudolf Schnackenburg: He emphasizes on the eschatological dimension of
Paul’s ethic in his works which its English translation published in 1962. He suggests that Christian shares in God’s
gift of salvation through baptism and thus receives the divine life that will
be revealed in its plentitude only at the last day. So Christian is called upon
to struggle against the world’s evil powers which have not yet submitted to the
rule of God. Therefore, Pauline ethic is seen to have two crucial points, such
as the redemption already given in us by God impelling us towards the
sanctification of our way of living, and the salvation we have not yet attained
demanding the exertion of all our own powers if we are to achieve it. Then, his
solution of the problem of indicative and imperative is to speak of the need
for the Christian after his baptism, to “co-operate with the grace of God.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Behera, Anugraha. From
Law to Grace, 2nd Edition. Kolkata: Sourjya Printers, [2007],
2009.
Beker, J. Christiaan. Paul The Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.
Brown, Raymond E. An
Introduction to the New Testament. Bangalore: Theological Publication in
India, 2000.
Dunn, James D.G. The
Theology of Paul: The Apostle. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1998.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. “Pauline Theology,” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited
by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Roland R. Murphy. Bangalore:
Theological Publications in India, 1999.
Furnish, Paul. The
Moral teaching of Paul: Selected Issues, 2nd Edition. Nashville:
Abingdon Press, [1979], 1989.
Furnish, Victor Paul. Theology & Ethics in Paul. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968;
reprinted edition, 1988.
James, Emmanuel E. Ethics:
A Biblical Perspective. Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 1992.
Jewett, Robert. “Romans,” in The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul, edited by James D.G. Dunn.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Lincoln Andrew T. and A.J.M. Weddburn, The Theology of Later Pauline Letters.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Mott, S.C. “Ethics,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited by Gerald, F. Hawthorne,
Ralph P. Martin and Daniel G. Reid. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity
Press, 1998.
Murray, G. R.
Beasley. “Baptism” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne & Ralph P. Martin. Database by Wordsearch
Corp, 2006.
O’Connor, Jerome Murphy. “1 and 2 Corinthians,” in The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul, edited
by James D.G. Dunn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Ridderbos, Herman. Paul:
An Outline of His Theology, translated by John Richard De Witt. London:
SPCK, 1977.
Rosner, Brian S. “Seven Questions for Paul’s Ethics”
in Understanding Paul’s Ethics,
edited by Brian S. Rosner. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.
Rosner, Brian S. “That Pattern of Teaching: Issues and
Essays in Pauline Ethics’’ in Understanding
Paul’s Ethics, edited by Brian S. Rosner. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1995.
Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Moral Teaching of The New Testament. Londom: Burns & Oates,
1975.
Schrage, Wolfgang. The
Ethics of the New Testament, translated by David E. Green. Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1990.
Schreiner, Thomas R. Paul: Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ. Secunderabad: OM Books,
2003.
Stephen, M. Introducing
Christian Ethics. New Delhi: ISPCK, 2003.
Towner, P.H. “Household and Household Code,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited
by Gerald, F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin and Daniel G. Reid. Downers Grove,
Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1998.
Witherington III, C. Ben. Conflict & Community
in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Michigan: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.
NOTES
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[1]
Emmanuel E. James, Ethics: A Biblical
Perspective (Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 1992), 3.
[2]Victor
Paul Furnish, Theology & Ethics in
Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968; reprinted edition, 1988), 209.
[3]
Brian S. Rosner, “That Pattern of Teaching: Issues and Essays in Pauline
Ethics’’ in Understanding Paul’s Ethics,
edited by Brian S. Rosner (Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), 4.
[4]AnugrahaBehera,
From Law to Grace, 2nd
Edition (Kolkata: Sourjya Printers, [2007], 2009), 253.
[5]Brian
S. Rosner, “Seven Questions for Paul’s Ethics” in Understanding Paul’s Ethics op. cit., 351-353.
[6]In his examination, Furnish finds that
slightly more than forty percent of the scriptural texts Paul employs in
ethical contexts are drawn from the Torah. The remainders come, almost equally,
from the prophets, the Psalms and the Proverbs.
[7]Victor
Paul Furnish, Theology & Ethics in
Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968; reprinted edition, 1988), 42-43.
[8]Examples
can be drawn from his metaphors of life as warfare, an athletic competition;
the concept of ‘spending’ and ‘being spent’ for others, disregard for the
external circumstances of one’s life, the concept of conscience, etc.
[9]Victor
Paul Furnish, Theology & Ethics in
Paul, op., cit. 67.
[10]Brian
S. Rosner, “Seven Questions for Paul’s Ethics” op., cit. 350.
[11]
Robert Jewett, “Romans,” in The Cambridge
Companion to St. Paul, edited by James D.G. Dunn (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2003),
102.
[12]Wolfgang
Schrage, The Ethics of the New Testament,
translated by David E. Green (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1990), 186.
[13]James
D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul: The
Apostle (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1998), 675-678.
[14]
Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, “1 and 2 Corinthians,” in The Cambridge Companion to St. Paul, edited by James D.G. Dunn (Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press, 2003), 77.
[15]James
D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul: The
Apostle, op., cit.692.
[16]
Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul: Apostle of
God’s Glory in Christ (Secunderabad: OM Books, 2003), 432.
[17]
C. Ben Witherington III, Conflict & Community in Corinth
[18]
S.C. Mott, “Ethics,” in Dictionary of
Paul and His Letters, edited by Gerald, F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin and
Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 271.
[19]
Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the
New Testament (Bangalore :
Theological Publication in India ,
2000), 622-623.
[20]
Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the
New Testament, 623.
[21]
Paul Furnish, The Moral teaching of Paul:
Selected Issues, 2ndEdition (Nashville: Abingdon Press, [1979],
1989), 89.
[22]Andrew
T. Lincoln and A.J.M. Weddburn, The
theology of Later Pauline Letters (New York: Cambridge University Press,
1993), 56.
[23]
P.H. Towner, “Household and Household Code,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited by Gerald, F. Hawthorne,
Ralph P. Martin and Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity
Press, 1998), 417.
[24]Joseph
A. Fitzmyer, “Pauline Theology,” in The
New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A.
Fitzmyer, Roland R. Murphy (Bangalore: Theological Publications in India,
1999), 1412.
[25]Joseph
A. Fitzmyer, “Pauline Theology,” op., cit. 1413.
[26]Ibid.,
1414.
[27]
Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Moral Teaching
of The New Testament (Londom: Burns & Oates, 1975), 290-296.
[28]G. R. Beasley Murray, “Baptism” in Dictionary
of Paul and his LettersEdited
by Gerald F. Hawthorne &Ralph P. Martin (Database by Wordsearch Corp,
2006), 132.
[29]The
passage begins with an appeal that the believer not be “conformed to this world
but be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Rom 12:2), and concludes with
an extended paragraph warning of the approaching day of Christ (Rom 13:11-14).
[30]L.
J. Kreitzer, “Eschatology” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, op., cit.434.
[31]
S. C. Mott, “Ethics” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, op., cit. 444.
[32]Ibid.,440.
[33]S.
C. Mott, “Ethics” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, op., cit.441.
[34]Ibid.,441.
[35]Ibid.,442.
[36]S.
C. Mott, “Ethics” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, op., cit. 447.
[37]Ibid.,1335.
[38]Ibid.,1335.
[39]Ibid.,1336.
[40]S.
C. Mott, “Ethics” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, op., cit.1336-1337.
[41]Ibid.,1338.
[42]
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “Pauline Theology,” op., cit. 1415.
[43]Ibid.,1416.
[44]Ibid.,1415.
[45]
Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His
Theology, translated by John Richard De Witt (London: SPCK, 1977), 253.
[46]
M. Stephen, Introducing Christian Ethics(New Delhi : ISPCK, 2003),
68-69.
[47]Ibid.,
69.
[48]
James D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul:
The Apostle,op., cit. 626.
[49]James
D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul: The
Apostle, op., cit. 627.
[50]
J. ChristiaanBeker, Paul The Apostle: The
Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984)
278.
[51]
James D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul:
The Apostle, op., cit. 630.
[52]Victor
Paul Furnish, Theology & Ethics in
Paul, op., cit. 211-212.
[53] M.
Stephan, Introducing Christian Ethics, p 69
[54]WilliMarxsen,
New Testament foundations for Christian Ethics
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 224.
No comments:
Post a Comment