There have been recent<\/a> posts<\/a> on the subject<\/a> by NT Wrong<\/a>, Ken Schenck<\/a>, Mike Aubrey<\/a>, Doug Chaplin<\/a>, Loren Rosson<\/a>, J. K. Gayle<\/a> and David Ker<\/a>.<\/p>\n Rather than try to engage the various arguments found in these other blog posts, and most likely do justice to none of them, let me simply present the best short case I can for why I think an understanding of pistis Christou<\/em> as \u201cthe faithfulness of Christ\u201d is not implausible. I am still uncertain as to whether I think it is the best rendering of the phrase.<\/p>\n First, there is a lot of repetition and redundancy if one renders both the expression with the preposition and the expression in the genitive as \u201cfaith in Christ\u201d. This argument cuts both ways, since the context regularly features \u201cfaith in<\/em> Christ\u201d explicitly, and this context could be appealed to as evidence that the phrase in the genitive is merely a stylistic variation.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s consider the classic example in Romans 3<\/a>:21-26:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished\u2014 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. (NIV<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It is interesting to note the interpretative decision the New International Version (quoted above) makes regarding another potentially ambiguous genitive in the passage. In good Protestant fashion, the \u201crighteousness of God\u201d is said to explicitly to be \u201ca righteousness from (i.e. imputed to humans by) God\u201d rather than God\u2019s own justice\/righteousness as a divine attribute. If one thinks the latter might be what Paul had in mind, however, then one can certainly envision Paul talking about God\u2019s righteousness being revealed through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. If it is revealed \u201cthrough faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe\u201d, there is a redundancy that could have been eliminated by merely having written \u201cthe righteousness of God revealed to all who believe in Jesus Christ\u201d using a preposition rather than a genitive.<\/p>\n Earlier in Romans, in 1:17 (which the NIV translates, not unsurprisingly, as \u201crighteousness that is by faith from first to last\u201d), Paul uses a phrase that might be more literally rendered \u201cfrom faith to faith\u201d, and given the range of meanings of pistis<\/em> the phrase could equally be translated \u201cfrom (God\u2019s\/Christ\u2019s) faithfulness to (human beings\u2019) faith(fulness)\u201d.<\/p>\n We are well before the time of Chalcedon and its formulation about Christ\u2019s two natures. But is it possible that might have regarded Jesus as the expression of two fidelities<\/em>: God\u2019s faithfulness expressed in sending and not sparing his only Son, and human faithfulness in obedience where Adam had once disobeyed? This would tie in nicely with themes found elsewhere in Paul\u2019s writings, such as Philippians 2:6-11<\/a> and Romans 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n There is no doubt that Paul talks about faith in Christ. The question is whether Paul also speaks about the faith(fulness) of<\/em> Christ. He certainly talks about the significance of Jesus\u2019 obedience, so here too there is no doubt that this theme was of some importance to Paul.<\/p>\n Why, then, should this question of translation matter? Ultimately, the one real contribution that it might potentially make is to tell us whether Paul is really as repetitive and redundant in the way he expresses himself as some who are not fans of his writings believe, or whether perhaps, translated differently, some who are not big fans might find themselves appreciating his letters in new ways. Here\u2019s how the NIV of the passage quoted above (from Romans 3) might be translated differently:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n But now, apart from Torah, God\u2019s justice has been made known, a justice to which the Torah and the Prophets testify. God\u2019s justice, through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, [comes] to all who believe. For there is no distinction: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him, through his faithfulness, as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished. He did so to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be [both] just and the justifier of those who are of Christ\u2019s faithfulness. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/tracker\/7622297540113836091-1426362379010269915?l=exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com\")
<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"