Luke Timothy Johnson - Life Giving Spirit - Resurrection Life!

Life-Giving Spirit: The Ontological Implications of Resurrection

Luke Timothy JohnsonEmory University

LjohnOI em ory.edu

Close analysis o f Pauls language concerning the resurrection of Jesus in 1 Cor- inthians 15, and the hope for the future resurrection o f believers, shows the importance of the designation o f Christ as *Life-Giving Spirit, and leads to an appreciation o f the role o f the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers, for which the only appropriate language is ontological (existential) rather than histori cal or even moral. For Paul, the resurrection alters the very structure ofexis- tence, in a anew creation *

The resurrection is the foundation for all Christian confession and practice. The statement, Jesus is Lord (1 Cor 12:3) definitively distinguished the first believers from other Jews and continues to demarcate Christianity from all other religions. The confession has three essential parts: first, it states something about Jesus, a historical Jewish man o f the first century who was executed under Roman authority. Second, the implied verb is makes a declaration about a present situa- tion, rather than a past event: the confession concerns the status o f Jesus now. Third, it declares that the one who was crucified (a historical fact) is now Lord. That is, he fully participates in divine life and rule, since the term (kyrios) bears with it the full weight o f the divine name, following the Septuagints use o f to render the tetragrammaton.1

Two further preliminary observations should be made about this simple but all-important confession. Linguists term this a performative statement; that is, it does not merely state a fact potentially observable to all but declares a personal commitment to a reality that perhaps others cannot perceive.2 As Paul says in 1 Cor 8:6, although there are many so-called gods and lords in the world, for us there is but one Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, Paul insists that no one can make the performative utterance, Jesus is Lord except in or through the Holy Spirit ( , en pneumati hat; 1 Cor 12:3).

1As in Gen 2:4; Exod 3:15-16; 34:6; Ps 24:1; Isa 53:1.2 See J.L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words: The William James Lectures Delivered at Harvard

University in 1955 (ed. J.O. Umson; Oxford: Clarendon, 1962).

Stone-Campbell Journal 15 (Spring, 2012) 75-89

SC J15 (Spring, 2012): 75-89

The significance o f the title , moreover, is clarified by the NTs frequent use o f Psalm 110:1 (LXX 109:1) with reference to Jesus resurrection: The Lord () said to my Lord ( , kyri mou), sit at my right hand until I place your enemies beneath your feet.3 The Lordship o f Jesus, that is to say, the resurrection o f Jesus, is understood as royal exaltation: Jesus enters fully into the life and rule o f God. The confession Jesus is Lord is the resurrection confession, involv- ing or implicating both Jesus and the one who confesses.4

Jesus resurrection/exaltation is the starting point, the good news from God. Such good news, however, is both amazing and confusing in that a singular human being, to say nothing o f an executed criminal,5 should after his death enter into the life and power o f God. Small wonder then that almost from the start, even Christians have struggled to grasp the truth o f the gospel (Gal 2:14) in its fullness and have tended, in a variety o f ways, to slip away from the full paradox o f the resurrection faith.

Some have diminished the confessions power by making it exclusively about the believer: Jesus lives on in some spiritual fashion in the lives o f his followers through the memory o f his teaching or the imitation o f his acts or the continuation o f his prophetic program or even through a form o f self-knowledge that constitutes an elevation o f the individual psyche. But while the earliest Christian writings do attest to these postmortem presences o f Jesus, they are never identified with the resurrection presence.

Others, concerned that the subjective interpretation seems too subjective, seek to secure the objective character o f the resurrection by insisting that it was, on some level, a historical event. Jesus was not killed, someone else was. Or Jesus got really sick but then got better. Or more often, Jesus died but was resuscitated, proof o f which was found in the empty tomb and Easter appearances. Making the resurrec tion historical, that is, making it an event in time and space that can be empirically verified also falls short o f the confession that Jesus is Lord. In resuscitation, mortality is not transcended but deferred; it means simply continuing on the same plane o f empirical human existence rather than sharing in Gods rule o f the universe.6

Christians today are likewise unsteady in their grasp o f the central truth o f their existence, the reality that alone makes real everything they say and do in the name

3D.M. Hay, Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity (SBLMS 18; Nashville: Abingdon, 1973).

4For a discussion of the resurrection as the fundamental experience that generates the Christian movement, see L.T. Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament (id ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010) 95-107.

5 See M. Hengel, Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Cross (trans. J. Bowden; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977).

6For these options, see L.T. Johnson, Living Jesus: Learning the Heart of the Gospel (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999).

76

Luke Timothy Johnson: Lift-Giving Spirit

o f Jesus. Rather than being the ground and power o f every act o f preaching, the resurrection becomes a past event proclaimed once a year as part o f the liturgical cycle.7 Rather than being a celebration o f the greatest display o f Gods power to bring into being that which is not (Rom 4:17; 1 Cor 1:28), enabling use o f the language o f myth and mystery (1 Cor 2:1-5), the resurrection becomes an embarrassment that must be defended or explained away, using the very Enlightenment-based episte mological instruments that make its serious interpretation impossible.8

A key element in the present diminished appreciation for the resurrection among Christians to the extent that some seriously consider a reconstruction o f a historical Jesus to be an adequate norm for Christian identity9 is the lack o f an appropriate language. It is difficult to speak o f Holy Spirit with no phenom- enology.10 In a world that rejects the notion o f soul and in which intellectuals eschew talk about mind for brain chemistry, how can spirit be discussed in any meaningful way? H ow can spiritual body be addressed without first consid- ering the meaning o f embodied existence apart from the default Western image o f body derived from Descartes?11 The same conceptual/linguistic flattening affects the very reading o f the NT witness concerning the resurrection so that even when the text is plainly speaking o f something more than resuscitation, Christians insist on thinking it is speaking o f something historical.

This essay engages some difficult texts in Pauls first letter to the Corinthians, the first extended and explicit discussion o f the resurrection, dating from about 25 years after Jesus crucifixion,12 in order to show how Pauls language demands an ability to think and speak in ontological rather than exclusively historical terms.13

7See L.T. Johnson, Preaching the Resurrection, in The Living Gospel (ed. L.T. Johnson; New York: Continuum, 2004).

8 So, despite every effort to the contrary, N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003).

9 See especially L.T. Johnson, The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the HistoricalJesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996).

10The work of Karl Rahner has had a great influence on me; for an orientation, see the short entries by L.B. Puntel, Spirit, and K. Lehmann, Transcendence, Encyclopedia of Theology: the Concise Sacramentum Mundi (ed. K. Rahner; New York: Seabury, 1975) 1619-1621 and 1734-1742.

11See especially the important monograph by W.C. Placher, The Domestication ofTranscendence: How Modem Thinking about God Went Wrong (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1996).

12 For my position concerning the date, occasion, and argument of 1 Corinthians, see Johnson, WHtingsof the New Testament, 261-277. The date of this discussion is all the more important, when it is remembered that Paul here speaks of events within the communitys experience that had occurred some 15 years before the most plausible date for a narrative gospel.

13I speak of ontological in the looser philosophical sense, roughly equivalent to metaphysical, that is, thought engaged with questions of existence/being (esse), rather than with the study of individual existents or events; see A. Keller, Ontology, Encyclopedia of Theology, 1106-1110.

77

SC J15 (Springy 2012): 75-89

This essay begins with 1 Corinthians 15. Although Pauls statements concerning the resurrection come at the end o f the composition, they provide, like the truth o f the confession itself, the ground for everything he has said previously.14

Pa u l s A r g u m e n t in 1 C o r in t h ia n s I S 15

The first 11 verses o f Pauls discussion are a robust reminder to the Corinthians o f both dimensions o f the resurrection confession: as it concerns them and as it concerns Jesus. First, as it concerns them, the good news o f Christs death, burial, and resurrection is (en prtois) among the first things (or things o f first importance) that Paul proclaimed to them (15:3). They accepted this good news (15:1 ); they stand in it and are now being saved by it, if they indeed remain in it (15:2). Second, as it concerns Jesus, the Scriptures attest to his death and his resurrection on the third day (15:3-4). H e was seen as resurrected by many witnesses, some o f whom are still alive (15:5-6), and he was seen by Paul himself (15:8; see also 1 Cor 9:1), who has expended all his efforts on the basis o f this gift (15:10). Paul draws the two dimensions together when he declares in 15:11, whether then it was I or they (the other witnesses), so we preach and so you believe. The death (and burial) and resurrection o f Jesus are the bedrock o f the shared apostolic proclamation and o f shared Christian identity, what Paul calls earlier in the letter, fellowship with [Gods] son, Jesus Christ our Lord (1:9).

Paul next reasserts the centrality o f the resurrection against the claim, appar- ently made by some among his readers, that there is no resurrection o f the dead (15:12-19). It is not clear who made this declaration or what precisely they meant by it.16 Following Pauls logic in the subsequent argument, however, it seems safe to conclude it involved these peoples perception o f their own present and future. They saw no need for a resurrection o f the body because they were so impressed by the already o f Gods rule active among them. Paul begins his letter, in feet, with an acknowledgement o f being enriched with every kind o f knowledge and speech ( 1:4), and his discussion o f (ta pneum atika, spiritual powers) in 1:12-14 recognizes the existence o f such impressive displays o f speech and knowledge among them. If Pauls mockery o f them in 4:8 is read in this connection, then they saw

14See, for example, A.C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 1169.

15I offer my own reading of 1 Corinthians 15 in the following paragraphs. For analysis of specific issues, see especially R.F. Collins, First Corinthians (Sacra Pagina 7; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999) 525-584; G.D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 713-809; H. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians (trans. J.W. Leitch; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976) 248-293; and A.C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1169-1314.

16For a survey of theories, see Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 7-15.

78

Luke Timothy Johnson: Life-Giving Spirit

themselves, in their present bodily condition, as already ruling, that is, already having fully entered into Gods kingdom and exercising authority within it.17

Pauls response in 15:13-19 has a powerful rhetorical structure, built on three conditional sentences (15:13,15:16, and 15:19). The first two are identical: If the dead are not raised, then neither is Christ raised, and are followed by but if Christ is not raised. In each case, the protosis is followed by three apodoses that deal not with Christ but with the state o f believers.

In 15:14, the set is the emptiness o f the proclamation, the emptiness o f their faith, and the preachers as false witnesses against God. In 15:17, it is the foolishness o f their faith, the continuation o f the condition o f sin, and the loss o f those who have already died in Christ.

The point o f stressing the resurrection o f Christ as the test-case for the truth o f the resurrection is that, without Jesus resurrection, the good news they received, in which they stand, and by which they are being saved (15:1-2) is total fantasy. The resurrection is not simply about Jesus but about them, their present wayofbeing in the world. Thus the force o f Pauls final conditional sentence in 15:19, If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, then we are the most pitiable o f humans. For Paul and all those who preach as he does, the resurrection o f Jesus is not about Jesus alone, it is not simply an event o f the past, it is an existential reality that at once determines their present existence and shapes their future hope.18

Having secured the link between Christs resurrection and their present condition, Paul turns to the future hope intimated by 15:19: their future is to go where Christ has already gone. He is the firstfruits o f those who have fallen asleep.19 Christ is as paradigmatic for humanitys elevation in life as the first human was paradigmatic for humanitys standing under death (15:21-22): in Christ all will be brought to life

17 You are already satisfied (, kekoresmenoi), you have already grown rich (, eploutsate), you have become kings (, ebasileusate) without us. Indeed, I

wish that you had become kings, so that we might also become kings with you (NAB), Pauls argument of chapter 15 is here contained in mce: the presence of resurrection power does not yet mean the full realization of Gods (baHleia, kingdom). They are like pretend-monarchs sitting onimaginary thrones.

18Using a term such as reality illustrates both the necessity and difficulty of using ontological Ian- guage. Christs resurrection as his exaltation to Gods presence is, for Paul, real in a way that tran- scends empirical categories and at the same time, it creates a new state of existence among humans still very much within empirical constraints. Yet neither aspect of this conviction can be adequatelyexpressed in historical terms.

rshit) in) 19Pauls use of (aparch) here and in 15:23 echoes the LXXs translation of passages such as Ex 23:19; Lev 2:12; 23:10; Num 15:20-21; 18:12; Deut 18:4; 26:2; 33:21. Whereas the offering of the sacrificial first-fruits represent the part for the whole, however, Pauls use here and in Rom 8:23; 11:16; 16:5 and 1 Cor 16:15 indicates that (aparch) means first of the whole, as is made clear in 15:23: Christ the first-fruits, then, at his coming, those who belong to

(.Christ (01 , hoi tou Chrtstou

79

SC J15 (Spring, 2012): 75-89

( , ptrntes zopoithsontai) .2 But by saying that each one will be brought to life in his own rank (15:23), Paul reminds those who think they already have the fullness o f resurrection that they are wrong. Indeed, not even the exalted Lord has yet reached (to telos) o f Gods plan (15:24). Christs dominion has yet to conquer all inimical powers and authorities or even the ultimate enemy o f death; when all that has been accomplished, then Christ will hand over rule to God, who will be, at the last, [] {[ta]panta enpan ; 15:2421.(28

During the course o f his argument, Pauls language has shifted from the his torical (what was preached to them /Jesus death and resurrection) and the experi ential (those who witnessed h im /the present faith and salvation o f the believers) to the mythological (the parousia o f Christ/his enthronement/his triumph over all enem ies/his handing over the kingdom to God). H ow could it not?22 The matters o f which Paul now speaks are not on the present empirical plane o f Paul and the Corinthians but on a future, cosmic plane, where the exalted Christ, spiritual powers, and God are the contenders. When Paul concludes with the statement, so that God might be all things in all things, however, his language becomes unavoidably metaphysical/ontological/existential. He makes a declaration concerning the invis ible but real cause o f all that exists with respect to all things (visible and invisible) that exist, in a relation (, en) suggesting immediate power and presence, or even identity: God being all that is with, or within all that is. The resurrection/exaltation o f Jesus as Lord, it appears, has consequences for the very structure o f reality.

After a series o f statements in 15:29-34 rhetorically connecting to the earlier objection to the reality o f the resurrection (15:12) and pointing forward to the arguments final moral exhortation (15:58),23 Paul returns to the mystery o f Christs (and their) future exaltation. H e responds to questions posed by an imag- ined interlocutor, How will the dead be raised? With what sort o f body do they come? (15:35). His first response is a dismissive, You fool!

Given Pauls assumptions, the question appears foolish on two counts. First, it seems to assume that the dead who are raised will have empirical bodies like those

20The same verb, (zopoioun), recurs decisively in 15:45.21The MSS evidence for the inclusion or exdusion of the definite article is well split, making the pre-

cise rendering of the phrase even more problematic. The avoidance of ontological language among scholars is illustrated by Fees agreement with C.K. Barrett that the words are to be understood sote- riologically, not metaphysically, Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 760.

22Pauls language in 15:24*28 is mythic in the proper sense: it has a narrative form (this will happen, then that will happen). God and Gods agent are actors; death and sin are personified as cosmic enemies; and none of the statements is even potentially verifiable.

23Paul poses two Why? questions based on practice: Why does the community practice baptism for the dead if the dead are not raised? (15:29); Why does Paul endure dangers rather than simply pursue pleasure, if mortal life is all there is? (15:30-32). He concludes by exhorting them to virtue rather than be influenced by the bad morals of those who are ignorant of God (15:33-34).


o f the presently alive Corinthians. Perhaps this is for some o f them, as it is for many present-day skeptics, a major stumbling block to a wholehearted acceptance o f future resurrection. Besides sounding a bit like the classic horror movie, The Night o f the Living Dead, the misconception o f a steady increase o f material bodies simply leaves no room. A simple coming back to empirical life is not good news for the earth or for the ones awakened. Second, the question is also foolish because no more than any other human on this side o f mortality, Paul was scarcely in a position to describe what sort o f body the resurrected might possess or be possessed of.

But Paul does have a way o f getting at the question that will also address the arrogant assumptions o f those Corinthian believers who consider themselves already to rule. Paul can argue for the future resurrection o f all by drawing an analogy between it and the resurrection o f Jesus, since he has already intrinsically linked the two. What does not work analogously is the status o f Christ as Lord or his exaltation to Gods right hand. But on the question o f the kind o f body again, an inescapably ontological queryPaul can offer some analogies.

H e prepares them for his central analogy by drawing them into observations o f the natural world (as they understand it). Seeds that are sown must die before they come back to life, and when they do, God gives the bare seed that was sown a proper body ( , idion soma, or body o f its own) as he wills (15:363 8).24 He reminds them o f the different kinds o f flesh (, sarx) to be observed in humans as distinct from birds and beasts and fish (15:39), and o f the qualitative differences between the bodies (, somata; 15:40) on the earth and those in the heavens. Here, Paul introduces the term glory or radiance (, doxa) to distinguish the heavenly bodiesthe sun, moon starsfrom the earthly; indeed, he says stars differ from stars in their radiance/glory (15:41).25

The effect o f these comparisons is to emphasize two points. The first is that while there is some continuity between what is sown and what is raised, there is even greater discontinuity. The second is that God can surprise with new bodies, and his range o f inventiveness with respect to bodies is displayed not only on the earthly level, the diverse meanings o f flesh when applied to animals and humans, but on the heavenly level, where radiance/glory defines the meaning o f body.

With the transition, Thus also it is with the resurrection o f the dead in 15:42, Paul turns to his main analogy between the resurrection o f Christ and the future state o f the resurrected dead. The adverb thus (, houts) suggests

24This is not really an argument from nature in the scientific sense, because Paul inserts Gods will directly into the choice of the plants body ( . . . , theos didsin... kaths thelsen; 15:38).

25Elsewhere, Paul uses primarily with respect to God (see Rom 1:23; 2:7; 3:7; 4:20; 5:2; 6:4; 1 Cor 11:7; 2 Cor 3:8-10,18; Phil 2:11; 1 Tim 1:11; 3:16) and the human future with God (Rom 8:18 21; 9:23; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27).

81

SC J15 (spring, 2012): 75-89

that the same two points made by his earlier analogies (continuity/discontinuity; Gods range o f creativity with respect to bodies) carry over as well to this prime example. He begins with three dramatic contrasts that not only echo his earlier comparisons but also reflect language that he used earlier in the letter when speaking o f Gods surprising creation o f the Corinthian community.26 The body is sown in corruption but is raised in incorruptibility, sown in dishonor but raised in glory/ radiance, sown in weakness but raised in strength. These three sets anticipate the fourth, for Pauls language clearly points to the contrast between the merely material, which is always corruptible, weak, and liable to shame, and the more-than- merely material, a body that shares in incorruption, glory and strength.

The fourth contrast is between the (psychikos) and the (pnm m atikos). Both terms are more obscure than those preceding them, but if Paul is consistent in his contrast, then must align with the merely material or empirical, that is, always corruptible, subject to dishonor, and weak. By the same logic, must align with the strength, incorruptibility, and radiance o f the more-than-merely material, or the super-empirical.

Paul insists on the seriousness o f this last, most important contrast by adding, if there is a (psychikos soma), there is also a (pneumatos sma) (15:45).27 All these disjunctions contrast the kinds o f flesh or bodies with which the Corinthians and Christians today are familiar, bodies that are fleshly, corruptible, liable to dishonor and weakness, with bodies with which they are unfamiliar, unless they think o f those far-off bodies o f the sun, moon, and stars and think o f them as radiant, incorruptible, and strong because they partake o f . By using the term (sma pmumaton)y however, Paul pushes the Corinthiansand modern Christiansbeyond the range o f the empirical and verifiable to the realm o f the ontological and nonverifiable. A spiritual body is at the very least oxymoronic. Within contemporary cosmology, the two terms do not seem to go together.

But Pauls next statements make dear that his speaking o f a spiritual body is not language he has stumbled into. Rather, it is where his entire argument has been

26In 1 Cor 1:20-28, Paul opposes foolishness and wisdom, strength and weakness, glory and shame, and uses for Gods election language that which echoes creation itself: God chose , , ta me onta bina to onta katarys).

27This disjunction also appears earlier in Pauls distinction between persons in the Corinthian community: the (psychikos anthrpos) does not receive the things of the spirit of God ( , ta tou pneumatos tou theou\ 1 Cor 2:14), For discussion, see B.A. Pearson, The Pneumatikos-Psychikos Terminology in 1 Corinthians: A Study in the Theology of the Corinthian Opponents of Paul and Its Relation to Gnosticism (SBLDS 12; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1973). Notice that this distinction corresponds to that between (sarkinois, 4*fleshly) and in 1 Cor 3:1: I was not able to speak to you as spiritual people but as fleshly. The Corinthians engaging in rivalry are fleshly, that is, all too human. Paul again contrasts fleshly and spiritual with respect to the collection in Rom 15:27.


heading, as he shows immediately by supporting it with a scriptural citation from LXX Gen 2:7, which he reads retrospectively from the perspective o f the resurrection. The text o f Genesis has, The Lord God formed man out o f the clay o f the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath o f life, and so man became a living being. Paul quotes only the last line, (eis psychn zsan). As earlier, the term psychic, refers here to ordinary human existence. Paul has this term characterize . . . (ho protos. . . Adam) in order to set up the typology (employed also in Romans 5:12-21) between the first and new creations.28

The first Adam became a living being because Gods breath animated the clay from which he was formed. But Paul contrasts the first human (a paradigm for all humans) with the one he calls , {ho eschatos A dam y the last Adam), who became (eispneum a zopoioun> 15:45). The phrase is important not simply because it opposes and , but because the adjective , life-giving can be applied properly only to God.29 The contrast between Adam and Christ, then, is between natural life and resurrection life. But in the case o f Christ, resurrection means exaltation into the presence and power o f God, since God alone is the giver o f life.

Paul drives home his point in 15:46-48: the was not first (with respect to humans) but the ; the first human was drawn from clay, while the second (Christ) was from heaven. And as before, he makes the connection between the paradigmatic human and those in his image30: as with the earthly one, so with those who are earthly; as with the heavenly one, so with those who are heavenly. If humans have borne the image o f the one made from clay, so do they now also bear the image o f the one from heaven. Once more: although followers o f Christ have not reached the state o f being life-giving like the exalted Jesus, they do par- ticipate somehow in his imageand Paul suggests that the medium o f this partid- pation, both for the future and the present, has to do specifically with .

281 have already pointed to Pauls use of creation language concerning the election of the Corinthians in 1:28. The reality brought into being through the resurrection of Jesus is understood by Paul as a new creation, See above all 2 Cor 5:17: If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; the old things have passed away; behold, they have become new (, miM)\ see also Gal 6:15, and the startling statements in Rom 4:17-25: Abraham believed in the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being what does not exist ( , episteusen theou ton zopotountos tow nekrous kai kalountos ta m onta hs onta\ 4:17); God brought life to the womb of Sarah, although Abraham was as good as dead and Sarahs womb was dead (4:19); God raised Jesus our Lord from the dead (4:24).

29See LXX 2 Kgs 5:7; Neh 9:6; Job 36:6; Ps 70:20; As pointed out in the previous note, Paul uses the verb for Gods creating power in Rom 4:17 and specifically with reference to the future resurrection in Rom 8:11, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life (, zopoisei) also to our mortal bodies. In Gal 3:21, he denies this life-giving ability to the Law, and in 2 Cor 3:6, he declares, for the letter kills, but the spirit gives life ( , to de pneuma zopoioei).

30For Pauls use of (eikon\ see Rom 1:23; 8:29; 1 Cor 11:7; 2 Cor 3:18; 4:4; Col 1:15; 3:10.

83

SC J15 (Spring, 2012): 75-89

Paul closes his argument in 1 Corinthians 15 not with exposition but exhortation. H e turns to the behavioral correlates o f standing in the good news o f Christs resurrection. The message is simple: they must change. Full participation in Gods rule is not available to flesh and blood, that is, ordinary human existence, much less such an existence defined precisely by flesh. The corruptible that is the mortalcannot without change inherit immortality (15:50). Whether believers die before the coming o f Christ or not, all will necessarily be changed (15:51). The dead will rise (, aphthartoi, incorruptible) and we will be changed (15:52): this corruptible being will be clothed with incorruptibility and this mortal being will be clothed with immortality (15:53).

The process o f this ontological transformation through the (pneuma), however, begins already in this mortal, empirical existence that believers share. They simultaneously bear both the image o f Adam and Christ. It is entirely legitimate to read in this connection a passage from Pauls second letter to the Corinthians, which serves as a virtual commentary on the argument Paul makes in 1 Corinthians 15: Now the Lord is the Spirit ( , ho de kyrios to pneum a estin), and where the Spirit o f the Lord is, there is freedom. And all o f us, gazing with unveiled face on the glory o f the Lord, are being transformed into the same image ( , tn autn eikona metamorphoumetha), from glory to glory, as from the Lord, who is spirit ( , apo kyriou pneumatos) (2 Cor 3:17-18). Reading the passages from the two Corinthian letters side by side, it seems evident that Paul sees the process o f ontological trans formation as already at work through the resurrection spirit that defines the resurrected Jesus as life-giving spirit.

For Paul in 1 Corinthians, however, such ontological change demands a moral change. He speaks o f death as the last enemy conquered by resurrection in the end- time, but insists that the sting o f death is sin (15:56). He declares that if the resurrection is not real, then the Corinthians are still in their sins (5:17), and he says o f those who live as though there were no future resurrection (Let us eat, and drink, for tomorrow we shall die) that they are self-deceived, and their influence is dan- gerous: bad company corrupts (, phtheirousin) good morals (1 Cor 15:33).31 He admonishes them, Become sober righteously and stop sinning. For some o f you do not know God (15:34). Such insistence on moral change extends throughout the letter (see especially 14:20). But 1 Corinthians 15 provides the eschatological-ontological assumptions underlying Pauls moral exhortations and makes o f them something much more than mere moralism.

This essay has shown how Paul refers to the exalted Lord Jesus as Life-Giving Spirit ( ) and o f the future bodies o f the resurrected believers

31The choice of corrupt (, phtheirousin) in the present context cannot be accidental (see 15:42,50).

84

Luke Timothy Johnson: Lift-Giving Spirit

as spiritual bodies ( . It is appropriate, then, to pursue the question o f the ontological implications o f the resurrection by inquiring into the role o f the throughout 1 Corinthians.

T h e F u n c t io n s o f t h e H oly Sp ir it

Since Paul nowhere defines , we are required to learn how he understands it from the terms he uses in association with it and by the functions he assigns to it. The eschatological discourse o f chapter fifteen has linked to the incorruptible rather than the corruptible, to the immortal rather than the mortal, to strength rather than weakness, to glory rather than shame; it has been described as life-giving. That discussion, in short, connects to the divine rather than to ordinary human existence.

Earlier parts o f Pauls composition, however, demonstrate that he confuses the issue slightly by speaking with some frequency o f not as an eschatological, divine reality but as a presenttime dimension o f ordinary human psychology. Thus, Paul can speak o f being holy both in body and spirit (1 Cor 7:34) or o f having his spirit refreshed (1 Cor 16:18) or o f someones spirit praying when speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:14) or o f an excommunicated man having lois flesh destroyed so that his might be saved (1 Cor 5:5). When he says he will come to the community in a spirit o f mildness, he refers to his own human disposition (1 Cor 4:21).

Even some o f these statements, though, suggest that Paul understands the human spirit to have characteristics that correspond to Gods spirit. Thus, in 1 Cor 2:11, he speaks o f the human spirit in terms o f a power o f introspection: among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit o f the person that is within ( , et m to pneumct tou anthrpou to en a u to i)^ And in 5:3, Paul tells his readers that although he is absent in body he is present in spirit ( , par de toi pneum ati), suggesting that even at the level o f human psychology, is not confined by space or the individual body. The same passage, indeed, describes a gathering o f the community in which, Paul says, I am with you in spirit with the power o f the Lord Jesus (5:4).32

Most o f the time in 1 Corinthians, however, Pauls language o f refers to the Holy Spirit (6:19; 12:3) or the Spirit from God (2:11-12; 2:14; 3:16; 6:11; 7:40; 12:3), even in cases where he omits such specific qualification. At least three aspects o f such usage require attention in relation to the ontological implications o f resurrection.

32 The passage reads, [] (en t onomati tou kyriou hrnn Isou symchthentn hymn kai tou mou pneunmtossyn t dynami tou kyriou hrnn Isou).

85

SC J15 (Springy 2012): 75-89

(1) Paul closely associates with Jesus, not the Jesus o f human history, but the Jesus who is (kyrios). Most dramatically, Paul makes the Spirit the basis for the confession o f Jesus as Lord: Nobody speaking by the spirit o f God ( , en pneum ati theou) says, Cursed be Jesusthat is, sees Jesus simply as a false messiah cursed by Godand nobody is able to say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit ( , en pneum ati h agio) (12:3). Similarly, when speaking o f the Corinthians transition from their former vice to a state o f being cleansed, made holy, and made righteous (6:11), Paul combines the instru- mentality o f the name o f the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit o f our God. This Spirit o f God is thus closely linked to the risen Jesus as Lord.

(2) The Spirit also mediates the presence o f Jesus as risen Lord to believers. After declaring the intimate unity that results from sexual relationsthe one who clings/adheres to a prostitute becomes one body, for it says, the two become one fleshPaul makes this remarkable statement about another form o f intense intimacy: And the one who cleaves/adheres to the Lord is one (we must sup- ply with him) (6:16-17). Note how this pneumatic unity has somatic implications for believers, a theme pursued later in this essay. N ote, for now, another text pointing to the spirit as mediator o f presence: For by means o f one spirit we have all been baptized into one body, whether Jews or Hellenes, whether slaves or free, and we have all been made to drink the one spirit (1 Cor 12:13).

(3) Paul sees the Spirits relation to humans as a form o f intimacy or even inte- riority. The Corinthians have received the Spirit that comes from God (2:12), the Spirit that penetrates the deep things o f God in the way that a persons own spirit examines the self (2:10), so that they can know the gifts given them by God. The Corinthians are to discern spiritual things ( , ta pneum atika) spir- itually () because they are spiritual people () who have been taught by the Spirit ( , didaktoispneumatos, 2:12-13). Or at least, that is the ideal if they are mature (, teleiois).

In fact, Paul regards them as immature, as babes, as fleshly and as psychic, because their competitive behavior shows them to not get what the Spirit is about (3:1-4; see 2:14). He needs to remind them repeatedly about the ontological implications o f resurrection. D o you not know that you (plural) are Gods sanctuary and that the Spirit o f God dwells in/am ong you ( , oikei en hymin> 3:16). This is something they should know but they act as though they did not, so he warns them, If any one destroy/corrupt (, phtherei) Gods sane- tuary, God will destroy this one (3:17). He tells them again in his discussion o f sexual immorality, Or do you not know that your (plural) body is the sanctuary o f the Holy Spirit within/am ong you, which you have from God, and you are not your own? (6:19).

These three aspects are closely interconnected. If Paul uses spirit-language for the designation o f Jesus as Lord, and for the intimate presence o f Jesus to believ

Luke Timothy Johnson: Life-Givin/ Spirit

ers, this has implications for other places in this letter where Paul speaks o f Christians being in Christ (11 times) and in the Lord (9 times). Just as he can speak o f drinking the one spirit and o f the Spirit dwelling in them, so he can speak o f them being in Christ and in the Lord. The manner suggests a sharing or communication at the level o f being, rather than at the level o f shared phys- ical space or a sphere o f moral influence. The conclusion that seems to be demand- ed by the way in which Paul uses language in 1 Corinthians is that the mutual indwelling o f the risen Lord Jesus, the Spirit, and the Corinthians is, at the very least, a mutual influence at the level o f energy, power, and presence.

Such an impression is not diminished with respect to the functions Paul ascribes to the Spirit. Thus, in 1:5-6, he thanks God for the enrichment o f the Corinthians in speech and knowledge, just as the witness o f Christ was confirmed among you. But in 2:4, he speaks o f his kerygma as accompanied not by convincing words o f wisdom but by the demonstration o f the Spirit and o f power, so that the faith o f the Corinthians might be based not in the wisdom o f humans but in the power that comes from God (2:5). The powerful demonstration o f the Spirit is precisely the way the witness o f Christ was confirmed/established among them.

Similarly, in 2:10, Paul speaks o f the Spirit as the one who has revealed the mysteries otherwise unknowable to humans. Paul and his associates speak with words taught by the Spirit rather than those taught by human wisdom (2:13). The contrast here is between mere human capacity and the empowerment given by the Spirit. Paul is taught the words to say by the Spirit; the Spirits power confirms his proclamation. He works in an energy field that comes from the risen Lord in whose name he speaks (see 1:2,10; 5:4; 6:11), and the energy field is the Spirit.

N ot only does the Holy Spirit empower the words o f the Apostle so that he can declare, I think that I too have the Spirit o f God (1 Cor 7:40), but he also lifts and transforms the words o f the community as it engages in worship. The Spirit bestows and energizes all the gifts within the community. PauPs explicit elabora- tion o f this truth in 1 Cor 12:4-11 falls between two statements concerning the spirit described above. The first, in 12:3, declares that only in the Holy Spirit is it possible to declare that Jesus is Lord. The second, in 12:13, states that Paul and his readers have all drunk o f the one spirit, and have been baptized in one spirit into one body. Between these statements, which intimately link the power o f the Spirit both to Jesus and to the community, falls PauPs declarations concerning the spiritual gifts (ta charismata, ta pneum atika) given to the community.

This well-known passage offers three points that are particularly pertinent. First, and most obviously, all the manifestations o f the Spirit ( , h i phanersis tou pneumatos, 12:7) and gifts (, chatis- m atn, 12:4) o f which Paul speaks serve to elevate human existence through the exercise o f powers not ordinarily available to them. Some are notably exceptional to normal human experience, such as the gifts o f healing and the performance o f

87

SC J15 (Spring, 2012): 75-89

wonders, prophecy, tongues, the discernment o f spirits and the interpretation o f tongues (12:9-10). Others appear as a heightened expression o f more ordinary human capacities: words o f wisdom, words o f knowledge, even faith (12:8-9). But all are elevations o f human ability through the spirits power.

Second, Paul here speaks o f the Spirit in distinctly personal terms. In 12:11, he declares that the Spirit gifts each one as he wills. The Spirit is not simply an impersonal energy, but freely chooses in the manner o f God (1:28). The rhythmic assertions o f 12:4-6 also assert the personal character o f the Spirit: There are a variety o f gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are a variety o f ministries, but the same Lord; and there are a variety o f activities, but it is the same God who activates them all in every way ( , ta punta en ) Scattered references are concentrated here in a single affirmation: God, the Lord Jesus, and the Spirit join in providing the elevation o f human capacities.

Third, Paul insists in 12:7 that the manifestation o f the Spirit to each individual is (pros to symphcron, for the common good) a theme that he will develop explicidy in his discussion o f tongues and prophecy in chapter 14, and is stated as a fundamental principle in 1 Cor 6:12, 7:35,10:23 and 33.

C o n c l u s io n

Observations concerning Pauls discussion o f the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, and his use o f spirit-language throughout that composition, lead to five con- elusions and two questions.

Conclusions

(1) The resurrection is, for Paul (and those who preach as he did) more than a historical event o f the past concerning Jesus. It is an eschatological reality that affects believers in the present and anticipates the character o f their future existence in which God will be all things in all things.

(2) The exalted Lord Jesus is life-giving Spirit and the source o f the power that touches and transforms the Corinthians. The confession o f Jesus as Lord and the possession o f the Holy Spirit are correlative and mutually defining realities.

(3) The Holy Spirit that examines the deep things o f God and is the medium o f the risen Lords presence to the Corinthians is also the medium o f an intense and mutual indwelling among God and humans: the Corinthians have drunk the one Spirit, and the Spirit dwells in them. They are in the spirit, and in Christ and in the Lord. The consistent use o f such locative prepositions connotes a deep and inter- subjective relationship.

33The use of the same phrase for the distribution of gifts in the community and for the final eschatological victory of God in 15:28 cannot be accidental.


(4) The presence o f the Holy Spirit among and within the Corinthians is the basis for the process o f their personal and social transformation. Once sinners, they are now made clean, made holy, made righteous (6:11); the Spirit from the Lord has empowered them to know, speak, and perform in ways not available to, and not grasped by, the merely natural man.

(5) The resurrection, therefore, initiates what Paul elsewhere calls a new ere- ation (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15) and indeed a new humanity (Col 3:9-10; Eph 4:24) based on the last Adam who became Life-Giving Spirit. N ot a forgive- ness o f sins from the outside is here meant, but an ontological change in the struc- tures o f human existence.

(QuestionsSuch conclusions, in turn, raise important questions, two o f which form a

transition to a study o f the Body in Question: the Social Consequences o f the Res- urrection in 1 Corinthians.34

(1) If the end-point (, telos) o f the new creation is a spiritual body ( , soma pneum atikon ), what are the implications here and now, in the perdurance o f the empirical body, for the understanding and use o f the body? H ow does the ontology o f resurrection require a reconsideration o f body? H ow seriously should we take Pauls calling the Corinthian assembly Christs body ( , sma Chnstou)?

(2) If, as Paul states, we must all be changed, how does the process o f moral growth work for the transformation o f the individual and social self?35 Or, to put it another way, how can living according to the mind o f Christ (1 Cor 2:16) direct Christs body to its proper goal (, telos)>sCj

34An essay with this title will appear shortly in a scholarly festschrift.35See the effort to follow this line of thought in Romans, in L.T. Johnson, Transformation of the

Mind and Moral Discernment in Paul, in Early Christianity and Classical Culture: Comparative Studies in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe (ed. J.T. Fitzgerald et al,; NovTSupp 110; Leiden: Brill, 2003) 215 236.

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(sV 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 ajournai 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.

Documents

Luke Timothy Johnson - Life Giving Spirit - Resurrection Life!