The Fidelity of Christ

Last updated on: December 19, 2008 at 8:57 am by James F. McGrath

The Fidelity of Christ 2008-12-19T08:57:00-05:00 James F. McGrath

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I was tempted to give this post a title something like “Nevertheless Even So Yet Again At Least Once More Pistis Christou”. But then I thought I might need that title for this post’s sequel.

Since there are many readers of this blog whose background is not in Biblical studies, I should say by way of introduction that there is a debate among scholars about whether a phrase used in Paul’s letters, usually rendered in English translations as “faith in Christ”, might not be better translated as “the faithfulness of Christ” or “the faith of Christ” or something along those lines. The phrase in Greek, πιστις Χριστου (pistis christou), is the two words “faith(fulness)” and “Christ” with the latter in the genitive. It is grammatically possible for the phrase to mean either “faith(fulness) of Christ” or “faith in Christ”, and it is partly because grammatical considerations along cannot settle the matter that discussions of the topic have been at once so interesting and so inconclusive.

There have been recent posts on the subject by NT Wrong, Ken Schenck, Mike Aubrey, Doug Chaplin, Loren Rosson, J. K. Gayle and David Ker.

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 as “the faithfulness of Christ” is not implausible. I am still uncertain as to whether I think it is the best rendering of the phrase.

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 “faith in Christ”. This argument cuts both ways, since the context regularly features “faith in Christ” explicitly, and this context could be appealed to as evidence that the phrase in the genitive is merely a stylistic variation.

Let’s consider the classic example in Romans 3:21-26:

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— 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)

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 “righteousness of God” is said to explicitly to be “a righteousness from (i.e. imputed to humans by) God” rather than God’s 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’s righteousness being revealed through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. If it is revealed “through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe”, there is a redundancy that could have been eliminated by merely having written “the righteousness of God revealed to all who believe in Jesus Christ” using a preposition rather than a genitive.

Earlier in Romans, in 1:17 (which the NIV translates, not unsurprisingly, as “righteousness that is by faith from first to last”), Paul uses a phrase that might be more literally rendered “from faith to faith”, and given the range of meanings of pistis the phrase could equally be translated “from (God’s/Christ’s) faithfulness to (human beings’) faith(fulness)”.

We are well before the time of Chalcedon and its formulation about Christ’s two natures. But is it possible that might have regarded Jesus as the expression of two fidelities: God’s 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’s writings, such as Philippians 2:6-11 and Romans 5.

There is no doubt that Paul talks about faith in Christ. The question is whether Paul also speaks about the faith(fulness) of Christ. He certainly talks about the significance of Jesus’ obedience, so here too there is no doubt that this theme was of some importance to Paul.

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’s how the NIV of the passage quoted above (from Romans 3) might be translated differently:

But now, apart from Torah, God’s justice has been made known, a justice to which the Torah and the Prophets testify. God’s 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’s faithfulness.

It is perhaps the influence of a particular Protestant understanding of the atonement that makes the translation “faithfulness of Christ” seem implausible. Yet although some today emphasize that “Christ did it all” and “All you need to do is believe”, Paul’s own outlook is very different. He emphasized being in Christ and dying with Christ. Christ’s faithfulness, for Paul, wasn’t something that merely brought about an objective change in an external state of affairs. As Paul puts it, “one died for all, with the result that all died” (2 Corinthians 5:14). One was faithful so as to bring about the fidelity of many. The notion that Jesus died (or was faithful) instead of us is hard to reconcile with Paul’s own statements.

I’m not calling this post “Part 1” but I have a funny feeling there may need to be a “Part 2” at some point in the future…

Uncategorized

Previous Post

December 18, 2008

The Religious Case Against Belief

Next Post

December 19, 2008 Scary Solstice

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz