THE INTERPLAY OF PAULINE PNEUMATOLOGY AND ETHICS: A COMPARISON OF THE VIEWS OF GORDON FEE AND FRIEDRICH HORN

Abstract

This study is about the current debates on how the Holy Spirit effects ethical transformation in the believer. Thus, the study deals with not only pneumatology or ethics but also the interrelations between the two. Apostle Paul on theological discourse dealt extensively on this issue. The interplay between the Holy Spirit and ethics in the thought of Paul is a debatable issue in theological discourse. This debate can be traced back to the debate in German scholarship in the 1870’and 1880’s relating to the apostle’s understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit. Among the numerous works that emerged, Gunkel’s thesis appears to be the most influential. Gunkel’s assertion on the Spirit in the thought of Paul is the principle of Christian religious-moral life and the author of all Christian action. He maintains that, for Paul, the role of the Spirit in the ethical transformation of the believer is in contrast to human action because the entire conduct of the Christian is attributed to the activity of the Spirit. Gunkel argues that, as far as Paul’s ethics is concerned, the Spirit exerts so overwhelming superhuman ethical power that it renders human involvement virtually void. This assertion, however, has not gone without criticism. Scholars like Gordon Fee and Volker Raben have raised contra opinion to Gunkel’s argument and have advocated that there is human involvement in the ethical transformation of the believer. To Fee, the Spirit bears fruits in the believer life, which offers the believer the urge to practice righteousness and holiness. Regardless of these, counter argument, Friedrich Horn sides with the assertion of Gunkel, and raises series of argument worth considering in comparison to the views of Fee. In an attempt to contribute to the scholarly conversation on Paul’s pneumatology and ethics, this study will examine the views of Gordon Fee and Friedrich Horn to ascertain where they converge and diverge in this discourse.