INDICATIVE AND IMPERATIVE:

THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS

by WILLIAM D. DENNISON
INTRODUCTION
I
N OUR day, the evangelical community is experiencing concern over
the discipline of ethics. This concern is justified because it is becoming
apparent that the ethical problems which have permeated secular society
are also increasingly becoming the ethical problems of the evangelical
community. Therefore, the evangelical community, especially those
within it who labor in the areas of theology, philosophy, psychology,
and sociology have found themselves struggling to answer the ethical
problems which confront us. This is understandable since many of the
ethical problems which we are facing are extremely complex. However,
it seems to this writer that there is little reflection in these areas upon the
hermeneutical structural issue of methodology, i.e., What is the structure
of Biblical ethics?; or, at least as far as the perspective of this article is
concerned, What is the structure of Pauline ethics?
1
The nature of such
questions probes much deeper than merely the Biblical application of
ethical directives, i.e., principles for daily living. What is at stake is a
balanced foundational structure of ethics for the new covenant com-
munity. It is my concern that the evangelical community reflect fruitfully
upon recent New Testament interpretation about the basic structure of
Pauline ethics. If the basic structure and balance is to be found in the in-
dicative and the imperative (where recent interpretation believes it is),
then we must ask. Are we Pauline in the basic structure of our ethical for-
mulations and are we employing this structure in our everyday walk in
Christ?
*We too often see in the approaches taken (also, I might add, in pastoral counseling) a
hermeneutic that views its task to be little more than a direct application of biblical injunc-
tions (Old Testament as well as New) to man's contemporary ethical questions and prob-
lems rather than first discerning the structure of ethics which is presented in the Bible.
55
56
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Our comments thus far necessitate proceeding in two directions: 1) to
demonstrate by a brief historical survey that recent New Testament in-
terpretation has indeed discovered that the indicative and the imperative
is the basic structure of Pauline ethics;
2
and 2) to show the basic formula-
tion and content of this structure in the writings of Paul himself.
BRIEF HISTORICAL SURVEY
In this century New Testament interpretation has focused upon
eschatology as a central motif in the theology of Saint Paul.
3
It is inter-
esting to note that corresponding with this development has been an in-
terest in the "ethics" of Paul per se as a separate topic of investigation.
New Testament interpreters have become very interested in under-
standing the relationship of Paul's ethics to his eschatological
framework.
4
Assuming Paul's eschatological framework, they have
2
It will be apparent that in our brief historical survey of Pauline interpretation we will
not focus exclusively upon evangelical interpretation. This is due to the fact that we are
surveying two grammatical terms that have historically come to distinguish the Pauline
structure of ethics. Though the terms have arisen from liberal interpretation, it does not
follow that these terms and their theological content are themselves liberal. The terms
merely state the structure of Paul's ethics. As a matter of fact, what we will soon discover is
that Paul's content, which is most essential to his structure, is totally in alignment with the
evangelical faith.
3
This position can be found in three well-known critical scholars: Albert Schweitzer,
Paul and His Interpreters (London: A. & C. Black, 1912); C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic
Preaching and Its Developments (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1936); and Rudolf Bult-
mann, "History and Eschatology in the New Testament," New Testament Studies, I (1954),
pp. 5-16. This position was held as early as 1911 in the evangelical community by the out-
standing exegete, Geerhardus Vos, in his article "The Pauline Eschatology and Chiliasm,"
The Princeton Theological Review, IX (January, 1911), pp. 26-60; cf. also his works on
"The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," Biblical and
Theological Studies (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912), pp. 211-259 and The
Pauline Eschatology (Princeton: The Princeton University Press, 1930), pp. 1-41.
4
This can be demonstrated in chapter three of Vos's The Pauline Eschatology which is en-
titled, 'The Religious and Ethical Motivation of Paul's Eschatology." Though Vos did not
use the two grammatical termsindicative and imperativeto distinguish Paul's ethical
structure, one cannot read him without realizing that the theological content of those terms
was taught in a proper balance by him. We hope to make this evident in the next section.
Also in the context of ethics and eschatology one may consult D. H. Wendland, "Ethik und
Eschatologie in der Theologie des Paulus," Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 41 (1930), pp.
757-7S3, 793-811; and J. H. Burtness, Eschatology and Ethics in the Pauline Epistles: A
Study of Six Current Interpretations [Schweitzer, Dodd, Barth, Nygren, Bultmann,
Cullmannl (Princeton: Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation at Princeton Theological
Seminary, 1958).
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS
57
realized that the Pauline construction of the indicative and the im-
perative plays a fundamental role in the structure of his eschatological
ethics. Therefore, a discussion of the relationship of the indicative and
the imperative has become a focal point for most serious deliberations
concerning Pauline ethics. It is in light of this development and his own
exegesis that Herman Ridderbos defines what is meant by these two
grammatical terms in Paul's theology.
What is meant is that the new life in its moral manifestation is at one
time proclaimed and posited as the fruit of the redemptive work of
God in Christ through the Holy Spiritthe indicative; elsewhere,
however, it is put with no less force as a categorical demandthe im-
perative.
5
This sentiment summarizes the Pauline structure as it has been
understood since the late 19th century.
The work of Paul Wernle, Der Christ and die Sunde bei Paulus (1897),
is very important in the formulation of the relationship between the in-
dicative and the imperative. Basically, he understood that relationship as
a tension or contradiction. He states that the indicative is expressed in
Paul by speaking of the Holy Spirit as the power which takes man from
this world order and transfers him into a higher world order. However,
concerning the imperative, he says that the Spirit is a high, divine poten-
tiality in man in which the Christian himself participates in the road to
victory.
6
Wernle concludes that we have "an ethic of miracle and an ethic
of will here quite abruptly merged into one another."
7
By the designation
of a double-ethic and the use of such language as "abruptly merged,"
Wernle is content to understand that there was a tension or contradiction
between the two moods without making any serious attempt to see how
they are fused together in the life of Paul. At this time, this represented a
radical conclusion. Before Wernle, H. Fr. Th. L. Ernesti
8
and Hermann
'Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, tr. John Richard DeWitt (Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975), p. 253. For the use of the indicative
and the imperative in Greek grammatical structure see Ernest DeWitt Burton, Syntax of the
Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, Latest reprint
1973), pp. 6, 7, 80.
'For support of this understanding of Wernle see Victor Paul Furnish, Theology and
Ethics in Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968), p. 247.
7
Paul Wernle, Der Christ und die Sunde bei Paulus (Freiburg i. . und Leipzig:
Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung von J. C. B. Mohr, 1897), p. 89.
*Die Ethik des Aposteh Paulus in ihren Grundzugen dargestellt (Gottingen: Vanden-
hoeck und Ruprechts Verlag, 1880), pp. 25, 105.
58 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
von Soden
9
spoke of the new life as a "spontaneous" result of an "in-
terpntration" (Ernesti) or "fusion" (von Soden) of the power of God
and man's will.
10
Wernle had divorced himself from such interpretation
by merely observing an "intermingling" between two separate ethical
concepts which contradicted each other. It is quite probable that the
reason Wernle did not attempt a fusion in this aspect of Paul's thought
was because he described Paul's theology as "enthusiastic." In other
words, when one becomes a Christian, sin is no longer a factor in one's
life, i.e., he or she becomes sinless. Thus the imperative commands of the
will are viewed as contradictions to the indicative's miracle of
sinlessness. Wernle's double-ethic presented New Testament interpreters
in the field of Pauline ethics with a problem: What is the relationship be-
tween these contradictory concepts of the indicative and the imperative?
Hermann Jacoby
11
rejected Wernle's "enthusiastic" interpretation of
Paul. Jacoby stated that the imperative is used by Paul as exhortation for
man to accomplish in fact what God's grace had accomplished in princi-
ple (indicative). He wrote that Paul viewed the new life in Christ as a
work of God and man, grounded in what God does (indicative), brought
about by what man does when guided by the Spirit (imperative).^Chris-
tians are engaged in an "ethical process" in which during their Christian
life, they "actually become what they are in principle."
13
Jacoby did not
understand Paul's structure as two separate concepts which were con-
tradictory; instead there was a dialectical distinction of "principle" (in-
dicative) and "actuality" (imperative) existing only within the one ethical
framework of the believer's "communion with God."
14
In this framework
Jacoby thought that he had overcome the non-fusion contradictory for-
mulation of Wernle by understanding the two moods dialectically.
Jacoby's understanding of "principle" (indicative) is nothing more than
an abstract concept of God's grace which the believer can never in fact
realize or experience unless he brings it into actualization (imperative) by
9
"Die Ethik des Paulus," Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, II (1892), p. 145.
"Cf. Furnish, op. cit., p. 245.
ll
Neutestamentliche Ethik (Knigsberg i. Pr.: Verlag von Thomas und Oppermann,
1899).
"Furnish, op. cit., p. 250.
"Jacoby, op. cit., pp. 316-317.
"Ibid., p. 291.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS 59
the Holy Spirit's abiding presence in his life. Thus the nineteenth century
ends with a dialectical interpretation of the relationship of the indicative
and the imperative in Pauline literature. Also at this time, no one stated
that this relationship was the basic structure of Pauline ethics. It was
merely one rubric under Paul's total ethical picture.
Both the dialectical interpretation of the indicative and the imperative,
and the understanding that they were an aspect of Paul's total ethical
presentation continued into the first quarter of the twentieth century.
However, in 1924 Rudolf Bultmann wrote an article in which he focused
upon the theological aspect of Paul's ethics.
15
In an attempt to grasp the
structure of Paul's theological ethics, Bultmann described the indicative
and the imperative as the basic structure of Pauline ethics. Thus this arti-
cle marked the turning-point in the history of interpretation concerning
the basic formula of Paul's theological ethics. No longer was the in-
dicative and the imperative a mere aspect of Paul's ethics, but as of 1924
it had been formulated as the key in understanding the totality of his
ethics.
16
From this time forward Pauline exegetes would either reject,
reformulate, or accept Bultmann's interpretation.
17
15
"Das Problem der Ethik bei Paulus," Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft,
XXIII (1924), pp. 123-140.
"Thomas C. Oden, Radical Obedience: The Ethics of Rudolf Bultmann (Philadelphia:
The Westminster Press, 1964), pp. 94-95, says the following concerning Bultmann's con-
tribution: ". . . the way in which Bultmann relates these two dimensions of the Christian
proclamation, a dialectic that doubtless constitutes one of his most constructive contribu-
tions to ethics." Concerning both the distinct contribution of Bultmann to the structure and
formulation of these two moods Jack T. Sanders, Ethics in the New Testament: Change and
Development (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), p. 48n., writes that "this relationship of
imperative to indicative seems first to have been seen by Rudolf Bultmann."
17
It is safe to conclude that those who reject the indicative and the imperative as the most
basic structure of Pauline ethics are those who have ignored it or have failed to ask and
struggle with the ethical structure of Paul's theology. Typical examples are: Paul Ramsey,
Basic Christian Ethics (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1950) and L. H. Marshall, The
Challenge of New Testament Ethics (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1947). Most ex-
egetes have attempted to reformulate Bultmann's understanding in both content and struc-
ture. Concerning structure, they will acknowledge the two moods; however, they will em-
phasize the one or the other as the more basic key. For example, emphasizing the indicative
was Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, tr. William Montgomery (Lon-
don: A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1931), pp. 293ff., while Hans Windisch, "Das Problem des
paulinischen imperatives," Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, XXIII (1924),
pp. 265ff., stressed the imperative. There are those who agree with Bultmann's balanced
conclusion of the basic structure of Paul's ethics but in many instances will not agree with
Bultmann's dialectical understanding nor how he formulates its content. Falling into this
60
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Bultmann opposed those who stated that there was a logical contradic-
tion between the indicative and the imperative. The imperative is
grounded in the believer's justification and is "derived from" the in-
dicative. His later writings declare that the two moods are "hidden"
within one anotherthey cannot be separated because they form an "in-
ternal unity."
18
Thus he was not sympathetic to Wernle's formulation of
a contradictory double-ethic. Furnish correctly summarizes Bultmann's
argument against Wernle as follows:
Against Wernle, Bultmann argues that Paul does not hold
righteousness or "sinlessness" to involve a change in the "moral quali-
ty" of man or to be something perceptible in his life. As an "occur-
rence" of grace, justification is only perceptible to faith and can only
be believed.
19
However, we must exercise extreme caution when we read that
Bultmann interpreted the indicative and the imperative as "hidden within
one another" or expressing an "internal unity" between each other. The
caution is warranted because this is to be understood dialectically and
existentially as two different sides of the same coin. For Bultmann the
dialectic means "die Einsicht in die Geschichtlichkeit des menschlichen
Seins" (the insight into the true historicality of human existence).
20
In this
category are such liberal theologians as Furnish, op. cit., pp. 224-227; Oden, op. cit., pp.
94-140; Robert C. Tannehill, Dying and Rising with Christ: A Study in Pauline Theology
(Berlin: Verlag Alfred Topelmann, 1967), pp. 77ff.; the evangelical exegetes George Elton
Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1975), pp. 524-525, and Herman Ridderbos, op. cit., pp. 253-258. This by no
means includes all the names that could be placed in these categories.
"Rudolf Bultmann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr,
1948-1953), p. 428.
"Furnish, op. cit., p. 263. Bultmann, The Old and New Man in the Letters of Paul, tr.
Keith R. Crim (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1967), p. 11, also writes the following
concerning Wernle's double-ethic: "Sinlessness would have to be taken as a postulate, with
the result that the imperatives directly contradict the indicatives, and alongside an ethic of
miracle there now appears an ethic of will. This seems to me to be the primary mistake of
this interpretation, since Paul bases the imperatives on the fact of justification, deriving
them from the indicatives."
20
Rudolf Bultmann, "De Bedeuntung der 'dialiktischen Theologie' fur die neutestament-
liche Wissenschaft (1928)," Glauben und Verstehen (Tubingen: Verlag J. C. B. Mohr,
1954), I, p. l i a. Cf. also Robert D. Knudsen, "Rudolf Bultmann," Creative Minds in Con-
temporary Theology, ed. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1969), p. 139.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS
61
case the New Testament kerygma seems to state that the new creation is
an accomplished factindicating a state of existence (indicative) while
on the other hand the imperative assumes that the Christian existence is
not an accomplished fact. Thus the way this paradox is brought together
dialectically is in Geschichte, which refers to "a level of true occurrence,
a decisive time or time of decision."
21
It is in the realm of Geschichte that
man's existence is truly and concretely historical. It is the realm beyond
the subject-object relationshipit is existential. It is here that man is
"always involved in projecting his possibilities in terms of a particular
understanding of himself and his world."
22
What man finds himself to be
depends only on his decisions in which he can gain or lose himself.
23
For
the Christian the decision is to believe in the once-for-all event of Jesus
Christ. One can only be related to this event in faith
(decision). The Christ-event is not open for neutral historical investiga-
tion; it is only for faith. The Christ-event is not merely belief in the
crucifixion of Christ (which Bultmann does believe actually happened in
history), but also belief in the resurrection of Christ (which is not an ac-
tual historical occurrence). The Christ-event (death and resurrection) has
kerygmatic significance for man's salvation only in the sense that it is for
faith. Knudsen comments:
For faith the kerygma is that Jesus has died and is risen again.
"Knudsen, "Rudolf Bultmann," p. 139. Knudsen also points out that "Geschichte can be
understood only by distinguishing it carefully from both the particular event (on a certain
calendar date) of ordinary history and the timeless principle or meaning which is supposed
to be above history."
"Ibid.
"Knudsen (ibid., p. 140) summarizes Bultmann's concept of being and Geschichte; "In
true history, one does not set his world, himself, and the other as objects over against
himself as a subject. In the spirit of Martin Heidegger, Bultmann seeks to go beyond this
distinction of subject and object. Heidegger has said that the very possibility of making this
distinction is dependent upon something more fundamental, one's being-in-the-world. In
brief, I do not have my being, which I then relate to my world; my being is itself being-in-
the-world. I do not exist as an isolated self, which is then related to the other; my being is
being-for-the-other. Bultmann has applied this existential thinking to his theology. At the
heart of his criticism of generalizing thought is the idea that I am not related to myself as to
something outside of myself, for example, an ideal to be attained for a true explanation or
understanding of myself; only in relation to what is absolutely and completely concrete-
historical, even as my being is also exhaustively concrete-historical." Knudsen discusses
Heidegger's concept of being which influenced Bultmann more extensively in "Roots of the
New Theology," Scripture and Confession, ed. John H. Skilton (N.P: Presbyterian and
Reformed Publishing Company, 1973), pp. 260-268.
62
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Bultmann is certain that it is an actual historical occurrence that Jesus
was crucified. He is just as sure that Jesus did not rise actually from the
dead. In the kerygma there is the intertwining of the historical and the
unhistorical. They are both present in what is the object of faith.
24
In returning to Bultmann's formulation of the indicative and the im-
perative, these moods can only be "hidden within one another" or have
an "internal unity" in the realm of Geschichte, in which the being of man
believes in the Christ-event for his own human existence. The indicative
is the Christian, who as a new creature existentially believes in the
Christ-event and therefore the verdict of justification is already
(eschatologically) given in his human existence. For Bultmann, the in-
dicative can only be realized or laid hold of in the Christian's experience
by the imperative, i.e., man's daily existential decision to walk in the
obedience of God by faith in the Christ-event. There is no possibility
within Bultmann's formulation that the actual historical death and resur-
rection of Christ can be part of the experience of the Christian believer.
Therefore, we must exhibit extreme caution with respect to Bultmann's
concept of "hiddenness" or "internal unity" because it is dialectically and
existentially formulated.
The relationship of Jacoby, i.e., "become what you are in principle,"
Bultmann understands as being too idealistic. Bultmann's perceptive
analysis sees that Jacoby's concept of "principle" (indicative) is merely an
"idea" of the perfect man which must be realized in the endless ethical
progress of "actualization" (imperative).
25
Bultmann writes, "In this
idealistic sense the transcendence of 'perfection' is conceived as the
'idea's' transcendence, and man's relation to it is regarded (Stoically ex-
pressed) as a 'progressing' or a 'tending' toward it."
26
However,
Bultmann declared that the concept of the indicative found in Paul's
writings indicated an actual state of existence by faith (not a "principle").
The believer's new creation is an accomplished fact in which the old man
has actually passed away having been justified in what Bultmann calls
the Christ-event (crucifixion and resurrection believed by faith). Man
was actually justified and therefore through grace by faith walks by obe-
dience; the indicative is the foundation for the imperative.
27
Thus he
"Knudsen, "Rudolf Bultmann," p. 142.
25
Cf. Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, tr. Kendrick Grobel (New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1951), I, p. 332.
"Ibid.
27
Ibid, p. 333.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS 63
defends the phrase "become what you are," but he does not defend
Jacoby's idealistic formulation of "become what you are in principle."
Though Bultmann denounced a logical contradiction between these
moods, he understood their relationship to be an antinomy.
28
Confusion
arises when Bultmann defines a true antinomy as "statements that con-
tradict each other but still belong together, statements that arise out of a
common situation and as a result are intimately related."
29
Why does the
term "contradict" appear when he has stated that he opposes a logical
contradictory interpretation of the indicative and the imperative? Since
the evangelical community does not define its concepts with such com-
plexity, it makes it extremely difficult to penetrate the understanding of
such existential-dialectical definitions. However, on the basis of what we
have said thus far, we can at least make some observations concerning
Bultmann's definition of antinomy. We recall that Jacoby rebelled
against the two contradictory ethical concepts of Wernle by stating that
there was a dialectical relationship of the two moods under one ethical
concept of "communion with God." Therefore, Bultmann in agreement
with Jacoby, understands a logical contradiction as that which sets up
two distinct premises which are not unified but are distinctively con-
tradictory to each other. In the case of Wernle, this would mean that
Paul has set up two distinct ethics which have no unity. For Bultmann, a
true contradiction, i.e., an antinomy understood dialectically, can and
does exist only within one unified ethical formulation as Jacoby had
stated. In the case of Bultmann, the key unifying theological content
within the dialectical indicative and imperative is eschatological justifica-
tion. He writes:
It is the concrete, empirical man who is justified, whose sins are
forgiven. Consequently, the relationship of the one justified to the
other world is not something that exists apart from or alongside his
concrete actions and fate. The concrete man who acts and suffers [im-
perative] is also the one who is justified [indicative], and his actions
and his fate have taken on a new significance.
30
Thus we must understand that Bultmann makes a distinction between a
logical contradiction and a true contradiction. He feels that the latter is
"Bultmann, The Old and New Man in the Letters of Paul, pp. 7-8. Also cf. Bultmann,
"Das Problem der Ethik bei Paulus," p. 123.
"Bultmann, The Old and New Man in the Letters of Paul, pp. 7-8.
30
Ibid., p. 25.
64
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
legitimate as long as it is contained within one unified rubric of
eschatological justification conceived dialectically.
In Bultmann we have not escaped a dialectical interpretation of the in-
dicative and the imperative as he placed it into the depths of existential
thought. However, his formulation is a somewhat better statement than
those previous to him, and most significantly, he sees that the basic
structure of Pauline ethics is found in a balanced and unified under-
standing of the two grammatical moods.
Hans Windisch's article "Das Problem des paulinischen Imperatives"
was written in response to Bultmann. Windisch was concerned that
Bultmann had overlooked the sacramental perspective in Paul as the key
to his ethics. In particular. Windisch accused Bultmann of neglecting
baptism. According to Windisch, Paul's imperative may be described as,
"what has become real in the invisible sphere of the divine activity" must
be made visible in the earthly sphere.
31
Thus baptism teaches the idea
that there has been a qualitative change in the one baptized, and this is
experienced in a visible form by the Christian community. The one bap-
tized has completely broken with the old man and is now the new man.
By being baptized, imperatively speaking, one has made visible what
was invisible. Windisch does not agree that justification is the key to
Paul's ethical content; instead the key is found in the sacraments. He also
stresses the point of view that the Christian community is controlled by
the ethical imperatives expressed in the sacramental perspective. Win-
disch's stress of the imperative in a sacramental context has regressed
from Bultmann's statement of Paul's balanced formulation of the in-
dicative and the imperative.
However, in 1939 the balanced formulation that Bultmann had
presented reemerged in a lecture given by Gnther Bornkamm in Halle
and Knigsberg, Prussia.
32
Focusing on Romans 6, Bornkamm seems to
have seriously considered both arguments of Windisch and Bultmann in
stating his position concerning the indicative and the imperative. It is ap-
parent that the sacrament of baptism is foundational in his interpretation
pf the two moods. However, Bornkamm, unlike Windisch, will not
allow the imperative to be the exclusive manner in which to understand
"Windisch, op. cit., p. 271.
"This lecture is entitled, "Taufe und neues Leben bei Paulus" (Baptism and New Life in
Paul) and is published in Theologische Blatter, XVIII (1939), pp. 234-242. It appears in
English in Early Christian Experience, tr. Paul L. Hammer (New York: Harper and Row
Publishers, 1969), pp. 71-86.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS 65
the sacrament. He declares that both moods are in solidarity with one
another.
33
Though it is evident that Bornkamm agreed with Windisch concerning
the lack of emphasis that Bultmann displayed about the sacrament,
Bornkamm nevertheless agreed with Bultmann in his balanced formula-
tion of the grammatical moods. Bornkamm then attempted to go beyond
Bultmann by defining an antinomy as an "apparent contradiction."
34
His
lecture is an attempt to resolve the apparent contradiction in Paul's
thought. He believes that the entire section of Romans 6:1-11 is a rejec-
tion of the "pseudo-dialectical" thesis set up in 6:1. According to Born-
kamm, the question which faces us from the outset in Romans 6 is: "does
not the indicative take away the impact of the imperative?; does not the
imperative limit the certainty and the validity of the indicative?"
35
The
answer from Bornkamm's lecture is "no" to each question. As mention-
ed, they are in solidarity with each other. The believer's life by virtue of
what has happened in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (in-
dicative) is a life of "service in the new being of the Spirit" (imperative).
36
Bornkamm describes the new conduct of the believer as being "already
included with the being; it is the release of a life open to God."
37
It is at
this point that we see the importance of baptism, because "the hidden-
ness of the new life is the basis for the necessity of the doctrine of baptism
itself and the basis for the impact of the imperative...; all the im-
peratives of Paul have their basis in what has happened to us through
Christ in baptismand all imperatives, which are to be obediently laid
hold on here and now, can be summarized in the words: 'seek the things
that are above' (Col. 3:1)."
38
It is in a correct understanding of Paul's
doctrine of baptism that the antinomy or apparent contradiction of the
two moods is resolved according to Bornkamm.
"Ibid., p. 71 (English version): ".. .The question becomes important in that both in-
dicative and imperative are solidly related to each other. The indicative establishes the im-
perative, and the imperative follows from the indicative with an absolute unconditional
necessity."
"Ibid., pp. 71-72.
35
Ibid., p. 71.
36
Ibid., p. 80.
37
Ibid., p. 80.
3e
Ibid., pp. 81, 82, 84. One should notice that Bornkamm continues Bultmann's concept
of hiddenness.
66 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Bornkamm went beyond Bultmann with respect to one other point.
Like Bultmann, Bornkamm was alarmed with the idealistic interpretation
of Paul's grammatical structure: "become what you are in principle."
However, Bornkamm was not entirely satisfied with the phrase in which
Bultmann found comfort: "become what you are." Bornkamm rather
labeled the concept "once-now."
39
The "once" refers to what has happen-
ed to the believer in the "decision" of the death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ as it is sealed to us in baptism (indicative), while the ""now" is the
present activity of God in the life of the believereffecting the fruits of
the new life sealed to us in baptism (imperative). Bornkamm's new
phrase is not to be seen as a radical departure from Bultmann; rather it
should be understood as Bornkamm's own term from his study of Paul.
It follows from his own interpretation and his own critical presupposi-
tions. He is not destroying Bultmann, but he is building upon him.
Bornkamm continues the interpretation that the basic structure of
Pauline ethics is the indicative and the imperative. In light of the writings
of both Bultmann and Windisch in 1924, Bornkamm has a more mature,
unified, and developed understanding of the relationship of the two
moods. Though there is much insight into Romans 6 in his lecture, the
evangelical must realize that Bornkamm uses such terms as "decision,
Christ-event, faith, kerygma, etc." in the critical sense. Hence, he must
be read perceptively.
Twenty-three years following Bultmann's article, the indicative and
the imperative remained the simplified way of speaking of Paul's ethical
structure. This is demonstrated and expressed in the work by the French
theologian Maurice Goguel.
40
However, though Goguel saw that the two
moods were the basic structure of Paul's ethics, his formulation of their
relationship was a regression to the period preceding Bultmann. He uses
the language of Jacoby, i.e., "principle" and "reality" to distinguish the
indicative and the imperative respectively. He even speaks, as did Wer-
nle, of "two ethics side by side which are not in perfect harmony with
each other."
41
He understands them as an ethic of law and judgment ex-
pressed by the indicative. They come together only by the imperative
"interpenetrating" the indicative within "the inner man." As we observed
"Ibid., p. 83.
*The Primitive Church, tr. H. C. Snape (New York: The MacMillian Company, 1964;
French edition, 1947), pp. 425ff.
"Ibid., p. 446.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE QF PAULINE ETHICS
67
above, the concept of interpenetrating belonged to Ernesti. Goguel's ex-
egetical interpretation does not help the historical development of these
two moods. It seems that Bultmann, Bornkamm, and others have not
even been dealt with seriously by him. The only point at which Goguel
seems to express any familiarity with Bultmann is his observation that
the grammatical moods are the basic structure of Pauline ethics.
42
This,
however, is significant for our purpose here since we set out to
demonstrate in this section that twentieth century New Testament inter-
pretation came to recognize that these two grammatical terms are the
basic structure of Pauline ethics.
This continues to the present day.
43
As a matter of fact, in 1968, when
Victor Paul Furnish wrote his work entitled Theology and Ethics in Paul,
he realized that the crucial problem in interpreting the Pauline ethic was
the relation of the indicative and the imperative.
44
He also was interested
in understanding the structure of Pauline ethics in terms of these two
moods. In his formulation, however, he was critical of his predecessors
in basically two areas. First, he does not see how the Pauline ethic can be
equated with any clearly definable ethical theory or moral code, for ex-
ample, "ethic of gratitude," "telos-ethic," "sacramental," "pneumatic,"
"charismatic," "eshcatological," or "christological ethic." According to
Furnish, "Any study of the ethic of Paul must acknowledge that multiple
theological motifs have left their mark upon that ethic. If one seeks to
analyze the structure of Paul's ethic in terms of its absolutely fundamen-
tal components, then the following formulation can perhaps be defend-
ed: radically conceived, the Pauline ethic is compounded of the apostle's
theological, eschatological, and christological convictions. These are the
three inseparably related root-motifs of his preaching, and thus, also, of
his ethic."
45
Thus Furnish is opposed to any reduction of Paul's ethic to
one theological aspect. In the second place, he does not understand the
"Ibid., p. 426.
"To list a few in chronological order: cf. Erich Dinkier, "Zum Problem der Ethik bei
Paulus," Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, 49 (1952), pp. 170ff.; Ernst Kasemann, "Zum
Thema der unchristlichen Apokalyptik," Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, 59 (1962),
pp. 282ff.; Tannehill, op. cit., pp. 77ff.; J. Blank, Schriftauslegung in Theorie und Praxis
(Mu: Kosel, 1969), pp. 144-157; and Darrell J. Doughty, "The Presence and Future of
Salvation in Corinth," Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, LXVI (1975), pp.
85ff.
"Furnish, op. cit., p. 9.
"Ibid., pp. 212-213.
68
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
imperative to be "based upon" or "proceeds out of" the indicative, even
within its "internal unified" relationship (Bultmann, et. al.). Instead, the
Pauline "concept of grace [indicative] is inclusive of the Pauline concept
of obedience [imperative]," or, to put it in another way, "obedience is
constitutive of the new life."
46
Therefore, as far as the critical scholars are
concerned, Furnish's language has only intensified the unity of the in-
dicative and imperative.
PAUL'S BASIC FORMULATION AND CONTENT
It is our immediate concern to discuss an evangelical interpretation of
the content of Paul's ethical construction of the indicative and the im-
perative and their relationship to each other. We shall also attempt in
this section to dissolve the dialectical interpretation which the liberal
critics have given to these moods.
It must first be understood that Christ's death and resurrection are fun-
damental to the indicative, i.e., those who are in Christ have died to sin
(Rom. 6:2,5) and now live unto righteousness.
47
If this point is not com-
prehended, then we as Christians have lost the ethical dynamic which is
so central to Paul's soteriology. With regard to the crucifixion, Paul
teaches that Christ died to bear the sins of His peopleputting their sins
to death upon the cross. Concerning the resurrection. Vos points out that
Paul views "the resurrection of Christ as the beginning of the general
resurrection of the saints."
48
This means that the believer, by virtue of
Christ's resurrection, lives already in his earthly existence as a resur-
rected creature (Eph. 2:6), waiting for the day of resurrection when he
will pass from mortality into immortality (I Cor. 15:53).
49
In light of
Romans 6:10, John Murray provides an excellent summarizing statement
of what happens to the believer by virtue of Christ's death and resurrec-
tion: "The believer died to sin because he died with Christ, and he lives in
newness of life because he rose with Christ."
50
The indicative in Romans
"Ibid., pp. 225-226.
"Ridderbos, Paul, p.254
4e
Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit, " p. 213.
"Probably the clearest exposition and development of Vos's formulation of Pauline
soteriology, especialy the resurrection, is found in the Th. D. thesis of the evangelical New
Testament exegete Richard Birch Gaff in, Jr., The Centrality of the Resurrection: A Study in
Paul's Soteriology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978), pp. 33-143.
50
John Murray, Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974, 5th printing), pp. 205-206.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS
69
6 is directed to stimulate human responsibility and activity; "Let not sin
therefore reign in your mortal body. . . and do not present your members
any longer as weapons of unrighteousness in the service of sin" (6:12,13).
We can say that the indicative of death to sin implies the imperative of
death to sin (cf. also Col. 3:3ff.). For Paul, the connection between these
two elements is deliberate. Romans 6 states very clearly that Paul
understands exhortations to be directly related to the basic soteriological
conception of Christ's death and resurrectionthey cannot be divided.
51
For Paul, those who have died and risen with Christ (indicative) are pro-
vided with the "great urgent reason" to put to death an earthly life style
(imperative), i.e., the deeds of the flesh.
52
This also applies to Paul's remarks on life in and by the Spirit and the
new life as a creation of God. Ridderbos's exposition of these aspects is
excellent:
On the one hand it can be said of that life in the manner of the in-
dicative: "the law of the Spirit of life has made you free in Christ Jesus
from the law of sin and of death" (Rom. 8:2,9); on the other hand in
the manner of the imperative, which subsequently seems to make the
first categorical redemptive pronouncement conditional: "so then,
brethern, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh: for if
you live after the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you put to
death the deeds of the body, you shall live" (vs. 12,13). The im-
perative thus is founded on the indicative ("therefore" vs. 12). But the
succession of the imperative is also a condition ("if" vs. 13) for that
which has first been categorically posited with the indicative. . . . So
far as the pronouncements are concerned that have reference to the
new life as a creation of God, here again we find the duality. At one
time it is said of the new man that he has been created in Christ (Eph.
2:15; 4:24), and exists in him (Gal. 3:28); then again, that those who
are in Christ "have" (active) put off the old man and "have" put on the
new man (Eph. 4:21ff; Col. 3:9ff).
53
"Tannehill, op. cit., p. 81. Ridderbos (Paul, p. 254) concludes: "The redemptive in-
dicative of dying rising with Christ is not to be separated from the imperative of the strug-
gle against sin."
"Ridderbos, Paul, p. 254.
"Ibid. A question may arise when we see the word "duality" appear in this quotation. Is
Ridderbos using it to mean dialectic? We believe there is no indication within this context to
suggest a dialectical interpretation of the word "duality" as Ridderbos uses the term. He is
merely stating two distinct concepts and how they relate to each other.
70
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
The principle of the indicative and the imperative in Pauline
theology as it relates to the Spirit of God in the believer is also found
in Geerhardus Vos. Vos begins by connecting the Spirit of God to the
resurrection of Christ in order to demonstrate to the believer that God
by raising Christ from the dead brings resurrection to the believer.
54
The strength of Vos's argument appears in Romans 8:11: "If the Spirit
of God who raised Jesus dwells in you (believer), then God will make
the indwelling Spirit accomplish for you what he did for Jesus in the
latter's resurrection."
55
Therefore, the Spirit projects itself into the pre-
sent state of the believer, being in union with him, bringing the
believer in his present existence into resurrection-glory with Christ.
This is the indicative concept, i.e., the Spirit is in union with the
believer so that by His power the believer experiences in his own life
the actual historical death and resurrection of Christ.
Vos continues with a discussion of the association of the Spirit and
righteousness as it is connected with believers.
56
At this point the prin-
ciple of the indicative and the imperative is clearly attested. The
association of the Spirit and righteousness is "on the one hand that of
a seal attesting justification as an accomplished fact [indicative], on
the other hand that of the normal fruit of righteousness
54
Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," p. 225. Vos
also discusses the present state of the believer in the context of his use of the term "semi-
eschatological." A very good discussion of this appears in his article "Joy" in the Dictionary
of the Apostolic Church, ed. James Hastings, I (1915), pp. 654-55.
One can find some further insight into Paul's understanding of the work of the Holy
Spirit by inquiring into the work by Neill Q. Hamilton entitled The Holy Spirit and
Eschatology in Paul (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd LTD., 1957). We mention this work
because Hamilton here acknowledges his own gratitude for the work of Vos in this area (cf.
pp. 1, 13). There is no doubt that Vos's work and Hamilton's compliment each other in
many ways. However, one must not fail to realize that Hamilton wishes to make a vital
contribution to the area of the Holy Spirit and Eschatology in the theology of Paul (p. 2).
This vital contribution comes from the critical eschatological scheme of his teacher, Oscar
Cullmann. Hamilton understands that the Christocentric work of the Holy Spirit bridges
the dialectic of the believer's situation, i.e., the dialectic of the present and futurethe
already fulfilled and not yet fulfilled (pp. 26-27). For Hamilton, ethics for the Christian
believer must be seen within this context (p. 39). Vos never allowed for such a dialectical
understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit in the eschatological scheme. Instead, he saw
that the Holy Spirit eliminated such an interpretation. We shall see this as we continue.
"Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," p. 226.
S6
Ibid., pp. 236ff.
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS
71
[imperative]."
57
In Titus 3:5,6 Vos notes that "the gift of the Holy
Spirit proves the connecting link between justification [indicative] and
renewal [imperative], being the effect of the former and the source of
the latter (cf. also I Cor. 6:11).
58
In the concept of renewal, Paul
associates "walking by the Spirit" with the believer (Gal. 5:16). In the
eschatological age of salvation, i.e., the final age of salvation in which
Paul and we ourselves live, the "Spirit of life" is the new principle and
norm which sets us free from sin and determines the walk of the Chris-
tian (Rom. 8:2). This is because the believer lives by the Spirit (the
Spirit is in union with himindicative), and therefore he can be re-
quired and exhorted to walk by the Spirit (imperativeGal. 5:25).
59
In Pauline theology, according to Vos, the Spirit of God is the one
who unifies in the believer the principles of the indicative and the im-
perative. This is very important in understanding that the Pauline
structure of ethics is non-dialectical.
We have seen that the indicative is grounded in the death and resurrec-
tion of Jesus Christ which places the believer in union with Christ. Colos-
sians 3:1-4 describes the resurrection life in Jesus Christ in terms of the in-
dicative and the imperative. The believer's resurrection is referred to in
the indicative (sungerthte-aorist passive indicative). It is something
which is already enjoyed because of our union with Christ's actual
historical resurrection through faith as a present experience by the
believer (Col. 2:12). Interwoven with this is the imperative, i.e., "seek
the things that are above" {zteite-present active imperative). The
reference to the things that are above can only have reference to the
57
Ibid., p. 237.
Ibid.
"Ibid., p. 239. Ridderbos (Paul, pp. 270-271) makes a further observation: "It is in close
connection with this that we are to understand the pronouncements that speak of the
'perfection' and 'blamelessness' of the life set at liberty by the Spirit. In so doing, as regards
the concept 'perfect/ one must be very much on his guard against an exclusively moral in-
terpretation and in general against the idea of a quantitative state of moral perfection
flawless in all its parts. The perfection of believers refers above all to the totalitarian
character of the fullness of redemption in Christ. Here again, however, there is a clear cor-
respondence of the usage of indicative and imperative. One meets with the former in those
passages in which participation in the fullness of Christ is the prominent idea of 'perfect'
and 'perfection' (cf., e.g., I Cor. 2:6; Phil 3:15; Col. 1:28; 4:12). To this idea then is joined
the thought of the maturity and adulthood of the Christian life as the full working through
and unfolding of the salvation given in Christ, with respect to the provisional and temporal
(I Cor. 14:20; Eph. 4:13) as well as to the definitive and eternal (I Cor. 13:10; phil 3:15)."
72
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
ascension and resurrection life, where Christ sits at the right hand of
God (cf. also Eph. l:18ff.) Therefore, the resurrection life is a present
active matter of something being attained in which the believer sub-
mits his thinking and willing (cf. also Rom. 12:1,2). In the Pauline
epistles, the common notion of the resurrection life has in view both a
possession and a goal, i.e., seek after, set your mind upon, what you
already have. Grammatically this is supported by "since" (indicative)
you have the resurrection life, "then" (imperative) seek the resurrec-
tion life. Paul's ethical structure of the indicative and the imperative
can be summarized by this statement: "Become what you are in
Christ." This statement is not to be understood in an idealistic way,
60
but in the manner in which Paul understood believers to participate in
the actual historical death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ
by grace through faith. The imperative expresses a lifestyle which is
grounded upon the indicative. Doing the works of righteousness (im-
perative) is a witness and testimony by the believer to the covenant
community and to the world of the actual historical death, resurrec-
tion, and ascension of Jesus Christ (indicative). The imperative
describes to the believer the kingdom way of life which he has by vir-
tue of his union with Christ,
61
because in reality the believer is a
citizen of heaven even in this present life (Phil. 3:20). Therefore, a prop-
er balance between the indicative and the imperative must always be
maintained! The two are inseparable and irreversible. They are in-
separable because the indicative without the imperative makes Paul
and the believer a mystic.
62
Also, the imperative without the in-
dicative makes Paul and the believer a moralist.
63
It is irreversible
"Furnish (op. cit., p. 225) makes this observation even from his critical standpoint.
Therefore it seems that the idealistic interpretation of Jacoby has finally evaporated in
critical exegesis.
"For further reference to the discussion of ethics and union with Christ, see John
Murray, Principles and Conduct, pp. 203ff, and his work Redemption Accomplished and
Applied (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1973,5th reprinting), pp.
161-173. One should also consult Morton Scott Enslin, The Ethics of Paul (New York:
Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1930), pp. 63ff.
62
A mystical view is expressed by Heinrich Weinel, Biblische Theologie des Neuen
Testaments (Tubingen: Verlag von J.C.B. Mohr, 1911); (Philidelphia: Muhlenberg Press,
1950), pp. 152ff; Alfred Wikenhauser, Pauline Mysticism: Christ in the Mystical Teaching
of St. Paul (New York: Herder and Herder, 1960), pp. 149ff.
"Some scholars have felt this view is found in Charles Harold Dodd, "The Ethics of the
Pauline Epistles," The Evolution of Ethics, ed. . H. Sneath (New York: Yale University
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS 73
because the indicative is foundational for the imperative. Paul never
writes in the imperative without first writing in the indicative.
When this proper balance is maintained, the structure of Pauline ethics
points the believer to the fact that he is living between the first and sec-
ond coming of Christ, a fact which is central to Paul. The indicative and
imperative are altogether determined by the "present redemptive-
historical situation/'
64
i.e., the eschatological situation of living in the
"already" and the "not yet." The indicative brings into focus all that con-
sists in the "already" which the believer has in the historical fulfillment of
the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is a total redemption of the
believer including both justification (Rom. 5:16) and the concept of
definitive sanctification
65
(Rom. 6:2-6; I Cor. 1:2; 6:11; Phil. 3:15). The
imperative is the scope of all that is "not yet," walking in obedience to
the demands and commands of the kingdom life by doing the deeds of
righteousness until the Righteous One comes again to consummate His
kingdom. There is a real struggle for the believer as he lives in a mortal
body in this "present evil age" (Gal. 1:4). However, even as Paul states in
Philippians 3:8-11, all suffering in the mortal body is grounded upon
Christ's resurrection glory which we shall behold in the "age to come."
Therefore, the imperative expresses the total redemption of the believer
because it is first grounded in the indicative and, secondly, through the
Spirit of God the believer is obedient by rebelling against sin in the pro-
cess of sanctification which reflects its definitive starting point.
66
This is
kingdom living!
In all this, we can see that the Pauline conception of the indicative and
Press, 1927), pp. 293ff. A moralistic interpretation is found in Heinrich Julius Holtzmann,
Lehrbuch der Neutestamentlichen Theologie (Tubingen: Verlag von J.C.. Mohr, 1911),
pp. 163ff, and also in Windisch, op. cit. Helmut Thielicke, Theological Ethics, ed. William
H. Lazareth (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966) I, pp. 82-3, speaks of the seriousness of
isolating the indicative or the imperative.
"Ridderbos, Paul, p. 257.
65
See the article by John Murray, "Definitive Sanctification," Calvin Theological Journal,
II (April, 1967), pp. 5-21.
**John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1965) II, pp. 109-110, writes: 'The basis and spring of sanctification are union
with Christ, more especially union with him in the virtue of his death and the power of his
resurrection (cf. Rom. 6:2-6; 7:4-6). It is by this union with Christ that the breach with sin
in its power and defilement was effected (cf. Rom. 6:14) and newness of life in the efficacy
of Jesus' resurrection inaugurated (cf. Rom. 6:4; 10,11). Believers walk not after the flesh
but after the Spirit (cf. 8:4). And not only is there this virtue in the death and resurrection
74 CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
the imperative is not dialecticaleither in the form of a contradition or
an antiomy. Instead, there is a union, continuity, and intimacy in the
actual redemptive-historical work of God which can be further expressed
in the following way:
. . . Because God works and has worked, therefore man must and can
work. For God works in him what is necessary for his (human) work-
ing. The working of man, therefore, takes place "according to the
working of Christ, which works in him in power" (Col. 1:29; Eph.
3:20); the good works they do have been prepared by God "that they
should walk in them" (Eph. 2:10), and the good work that God has
begun in them he will carry on (Phil. 1:6). What the man manifests in
the new life, what he works or exhibits in the fruit of the Spirit and
good works, he works out of and by the strength of God, out of the
power of the Spirit and by virtue of his belonging to Christ.
67
If we go one step further, Paul's eschatological conception of the Spirit of
God associated with the believer is even more enlightening. In this
regard, Vos's understanding of this is most challenging. First, Vos
declares that in II Corinthians 5:5 the "present Spirit is an anticipation of
the future Spirit."
68
Secondly, there is an association in the ethical sphere
of the Spirit with life so that the eschatological future is carried back into
the present.
69
Thus we are now living in the "age to come" by virtue of
the living Spirit of God.
70
Vos writes that "the conclusion, therefore, is
of Christ, but since union with Christ is permanent, there is also the virtue that constantly
emanates from Christ and is the dynamic in the growth unto hol i ness. . . . This illustrates
what is characteristic of Paul's teaching, that ethics must rest upon the foundation of
redemptive accomplishment. More specifically stated it is that ethics springs from union
with Christ and therefore from participation of the virtue belonging to him and exercised
by him as the crucified, risen, and ascended Redeemer. Ethics consonant with the high call-
ing of God in Christ is itself part of the application of redemption; it belongs to sanctifica-
tion."
67
Ridderbos, Paul, p. 255.
68
Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," p. 241.
69
Ibid.
70
Herman Ridderbos, When the Time Had Fully Come: Studies in New Testament
Theology (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957), p. 52, puts it in
the following manner: "This being in the Spirit is not a mystical, but an eschatological,
redemptive-historical category. It means: you are no longer in the power of the old aeon;
you have passed into the new one, you are under a different authority. This is the indicative
of redemption, the proclamation of the new state of life, and it can be followed by the im-
perative: If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit."
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS 75
fully warranted that the Spirit as a living attestation of the state of
righteousness in the believer has this significance, because he is in princi-
ple the foundation of the blessedness of the world to come."
71
If we keep in mind what Ridderbos has said, this writer believes that
this Biblical interpretation by Vos leaves no room for a dialectic in Paul's
conception. This is because it brings the actual historical future into the
actual historical present and vice versa. There is a continuity in the
theology of Paul for the new covenant community of the full
eschatological age of redemption. The taste of life in immortality is
realized in the experience of the present mortal life of the believer by vir-
tue of Christ's actual death and resurrection. The believers' present mor-
tal life actually testifies to the fact of a life that reflects immortality. It is
his possession here and now because of what Christ has accomplished.
Therefore, the union of the indicative and the imperative cannot be
dialectical and distinctively existential as Bultmann understood, because
the Holy Spirit brings to bear upon believers a new covenant con-
sciousness which is eschatologically conceived in the actual redemptive-
historical work of God the Father through His SonJesus Christ.
Eschatologically speaking, the Holy Spirit brings the covenant communi-
ty consciously into union with Christ (indicative); the same Spirit per-
forms and secures in us conscious works of righteousness (imperative) so
that we are holy and blameless before the throne of a holy and just
71
Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," pp. 237-238.
If one is interested in the writings of Vos he should consult the bibliography compiled by
James T. Dennison, Jr. in The Westminster Theological Journal, XXXVIII (Spring, 1976),
pp. 350-367. The statement that Vos makes above is also brought out by George Eldon
Ladd, "Eschatology and the Unity of New Testament Theology," The Expository Times, 68
(1956-1957), p. 273. He writes: ".. .The conclusion emerges that according to this New
Testament perspective, the future has created the present. From an ordinary point of view,
we are inclined to say that the present determines and gives assurance of the future. Because
of what Christ has done, we have assurance that the future is His also. This insight is not to
be denied; it is profoundly true. But beside it may be placed another insight: the future has
made possible the present. The kingdom of God is eschatological; it belongs to the age to
come, and in that age will it achieve full consummation. But the future kingdom has
entered into the present to modify and influence its character. Eternal life, justification, the
life of the Spirit, all are future and eschatological. The Biblical perspective is one of un-
broken hope. However, these future blessings have, in part yet in reality, entered into the
present. The future has in a sense become present without losing its character as futurity.
This modified eschatological structure provides an approach to the basic unity of New
Testament theology."
76
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
God.
72
For how can a believer be in union with Christ and live according
to the commands of Satan? He cannot, because the Spirit governs his
whole existence.
We could say that there would be a contradiction or antinomy in the
evangelical formulation if the imperative was to be understood as works
done apart from the Spirit of God, i.e., by our own autonomy,
meritoriously securing salvation. However, such a concept is absent in
the theology of Paul because by our abandonment of any good work in
ourselves we rely solely upon the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ to
work in us by the power of His Spirit. What removes the contradiction
or antinomy within evangelical theology, which the liberal critics failed
to grasp, is the eschatological and theocentric conception of the Holy
Spirit, who unifies the indicative and the imperative by bringing the
fullness of life upon the believer through the actual historical-redemptive
work of God.
73
72
At this time it is important to mention that the relationship of the indicative and the im-
perative is by no means distinctive of Paul's structure of covenant ethics. Paul did not
make-up something new for the structure of Christian ethics. Instead, the indicative and the
imperative is the basic structure of the whole of Biblical ethics, whether under the rubric of
the old covenant or the new covenant. For its use in the teachings of Christ see Herman
Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, tr. H. de Jongste (Philadelphia: The Presbyterian
and Reformed Publishing Company, 1969), pp. 241-255. In the Old Testament, i.e., under
the old covenant, let it suffice for us to give one example of their relationship. In the giving
of the law at Mt. Sinai, the ten commandments are prefaced by the indicativeI am
Jehovah thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage,"
therefore, "you shall have no other gods before me," etc. (imperativesEx. 20:3ff; Deut.
5:7ff.). The preface (indicative) expresses the salvation of God's people in which He
brought His people into union with Himself. Because of that union they are to act as God's
people by walking in the obedience of His commandments (imperatives). One would also
find a study of Deuteronomy chapter seven fruitful in understanding the indicative and im-
perative in an old covenant context. Paul's structure of these two grammatical moods is
nothing new to the covenant consciousness in the people of God. What is new for Paul and
for us is the historical-redemptive period in which we live. In this period we reflect upon the
full meaning of the person and work of Jesus Christ in the fullness of time and what that
means for the new covenant community concerning ethics. It is for this reason that this arti-
cle focuses upon Paul. However, I believe that a case can be built for the fact that the basic
ethical structure of the whole Bible is the indicative and the imperative. Cf. Oscar
Cullmann, Salvation in History (London: SCM Press LTD, 1967), p. 329, when he writes in
the section on "Salvation History and Ethics" the following: "In the Bible, an ethical im-
perative always follows from an (or thel) indicative." Cullmann recognizes that these two
grammatical moods are found throughout the Bible.
73
Bultmann cannot endorse this point since he states that a mythological conception of
the Spirit was presupposed by Paul's understanding of the Spirit. In "Man Between the
THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF PAULINE ETHICS
77
We have suggested above that the imperative includes within its
framework that which the evangelical attributes to human responsibility.
Human responsibility can only be fulfilled in a biblical way if one sub-
mits himself to the power and strength of the Holy Spirit and not to the
works of the flesh. Conflict and strife arise when the covenant communi-
ty and the believer submit themselves to the latter by not walking in the
Spirit. This is evident, for example, in the divisions within the Corin-
thian Church (I Cor. 1:12). By stating that one is of Paul, or of Apollos,
or of Cephas, or of Christthey had divided the crucified Christ (1:13).
These divisions do not come from the Spirit of God but from the spirit of
man. It is interesting that Paul reminds them how the Spirit of God
manifests Himself to them (2:10-16). It is also interesting to note how
Paul admonishes them by employing the indicative and the imperative
structure. He opens the letter with the content of the indicative (1:1-9),
then he admonishes them in imperative language (l:10ff).
74
Therefore, he
approaches them as true Christians in spite of everything he finds wrong
with them (cf. 1:18; 1:30). But they must be reminded that they are to
walk according to the Spirit. If they submit to the Spirit, it will bring
about an end to the divisions and strife in their situation. Our human
Time According to the New Testament," Existence and Faith: Shorter Writings of Rudolf
Bultmann, tr. Schubert M. Ogden (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1960), pp. 257-258, he
writes: "In mythological thinking, the Spirit is represented as a mysterious, so to say,
magic-working power. Its miraculous effects, the so-called charismata, are in the popular
view special deeds of power and abnormal psychic phenomena. Paul does not at all deny
this view; but for the charismata of the first rank are the gifts of brotherly service in the
edification of the community; and the Spirit especially signifies for him the power and the
norm of the moral life. This does not mean that the Spirit is thereby denied its character as
something miraculous. Rather, for Paul, a morally pure life is itself a miraclea miracle
that is given to the baptized as those who are crucified and dead with Christ and thereby
freed from their pasts. And just as the Spirit is the power, so also is he the norm of the new
life."
74
F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 32, makes an excellent observation:
"These opening verses (4-9) form the basis for subsequent admonitions. Christians can only
be admonished successfully after God has made them true Christians. But he who was
made a Christian must walk according to his vocation." Ladd, A Theology of the New
Testament, p. 544, writes: "As such, Christ has become its (Church in Corinth) sanctifica-
tion (I Cor. 1:30; 6:11) as well as its redemption. Paul's challenge to his churches was that
they should realize in life and conduct what was already theirs in Christ. Because they were
the saints of God, they were to live holy lives." One can also find a helpful discussion in
Richard N. Longenecker, Paul: Apostle of Liberty (New York: Harper and Row,
Publishers, 1964), pp. 170-180.
78
CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
responsibility to God is only fulfilled if we submit our daily walk to His
Spirit (Rom. 12:1,2,; Gal. 5:25). It is nothing that we do in and of
ourselves to merit salvation, but it is grounded solely upon the imputa-
tion of the obedience and satisfaction of Jesus Christ.
75
The imperative
must always be viewed in this light.
It is important that the evangelical community focus upon a balanced,
unified, and intimate formulation of the indicative and the imperative. If
we are going to have a distinctive biblical approach to ethics concerning
the complex ethical problems of our period in redemptive-history, then it
is imperative that we adopt and proceed with the methodology of Paul.
An unbalanced methodology which applies itself abstractly to the ethical
situation can only lead to pietistic mysticism or to legalistic moralism in
the evangelical community. There is no doubt that the issue is basically
hermeneutical. The question is whether we are going to probe the ethical
structure of Paul's thought and realize, as Vos did, that a redemptive-
historical hermeneutical methodology exposes Paul's structure without
abstracting the basic character of the Scriptures. If we allow for such an
approach, then our theological task is guarded against any critical for-
mulation and any evangelical view which does not discover Paul's
unified view. It is absolutely necessary for us to discover, understand,
and expand upon Paul's dynamic for ethicsthe indicative and the im-
perative grounded completely in Jesus Christ and made effectual in the
new covenant community by the work of the Holy Spirit!
Westminster Confession of Faith, XI. 1.
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.