Matthew Easter summarizes the back-and-forth of the arguments in the debate over pistis Christou. It’s a careful, judicious summary, and his conclusion seems irrefutable: The debate won’t be resolved by grammar alone, since “interpreters resort either intentionally or unintentionally to their larger models for reading Paul that are already in place” (42). Easter knows that there’s a necessary relation between whole and part, but he worries when the relationship goes unacknowledged. He quotes Thomas Schreiner’s comment that “[N]owhere is there any... Read more