From: Noel Maddy (ncm@biostat.hfh.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 16 1998 - 17:00:31 EST
[delurking for a bit...]
Craig, you give four possibilities for the meaning of DIA PISTEWS IESOU
XRISTOU:
> B. PISTEWS XRISTOU = "Christ's faith"
>
> 1. XRISTOU = possess. gen. = faith which Christ possessed.
>
> 2. XRISTOU = subj. gen. = the faith displayed by Christ in all of His doings
>
> 3. XRISTOU = obj. gen. = the faith which has Christ as its object
>
> 4. XRISTOU = gen. of cause or origin = that faith which is from Christ
To me, the immeidate context (i.e., the following phrase) helps to
distinguish between these possibilities. Looking at the phrase in
question and the following phrase, we have:
DIKAIOSUNH DE QEOU DIA PISTEWS IHSOU XRISTOU
EIS PANTAS TOUS PISTEUONTAS
Possibilities 3 and 4 both seem a bit awkward to me in this immediate
context. Let's see if I can illustrate what I'm thinking...
[I'm using "belief" rather than "faith" because there's no verbal
cognate for "faith" in English]
3. "even the righteousness of God through belief in Jesus Christ unto
everyone who believes".
This seems awkward to me because there's an almost artificial
separation of the people believing and the object of the belief. The
object of the belief is in the first phrase without a subject, and the
subject of the belief is in the second phrase without an object. If
this were the meaning, I would expect Paul to combine the subject and
object of belief more clearly -- something like
DIKAIOSUNH DE QEOU DIA PISTEWS
EIS PANTAS TOUS PISTEUONTAS EIS IHSOU XRISTOU
even the righteousness of God through belief
unto everyone who believes in Jesus Christ
4. "even the righteousness of God through the belief that Jesus Christ
provides unto everyone that believes"
This seems awkward to me because the active party in the belief seems
to shift abruptly -- Christ provides the belief in the first phrase,
yet the righteous ness is given to the ones who believe, which seems to
focus on their action or participation in the faith. Why not something
like this, then?
DIKAIOSUNH DE QEOU DIA PISTEWS IHSOU XRISTOU
EIS PANTAS TOUS EXONTAS TOU PISTEWS
even the righteousness of God through belief from Jesus Christ
unto everyone who has this belief
[subtle difference, I know -- I'm not sure if I'm reading too much of a
difference between PISTIS and hO PISTEUWN, but it seems like PISTIS is
more of an attribute of the person, while hO PISTEUWN actively involves
the person in believing]
The other two possibilities given were the belief (faithfullness) which
Christ possesses, and the belief (faithfulness) which Christ
demonstrated through His actions. Both of these seem to make more
sense with the immediate context. In fact, the distinction between
them is a little blurry to me, since it's hard to refer to Christ's
attribute of faith (faithfulness) without referring to the actions
which demonstrate it to us.
This understanding also seems to flow better in the context. The first
phrase states that this righteousness was provided by the faithfulness
(or faithful actions) of Jesus Christ. The second phrase states that
this righteousness is given to everyone who believes (and the larger
context gives us the object of that belief). They'd be orthogonal
statements, then, rather than two somewhat intertwined sides of the
same statement.
These observations are more subjective than those provided by TOIS
STULOIS of the list, obviously. Do they make some sense, though?
--
-- 'Tis a poor sort of truth that needs *my* commitment. --
Noel Maddy <nmaddy1@biostat.hfh.edu>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:56 EDT