LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary
LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary
LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
26 <strong>LUTHERAN</strong> <strong>THEOLOGICAL</strong> <strong>REVIEW</strong> XII<br />
subjective interpretation point to parallel constructions of the form (pi,stij) +<br />
(a genitive other than Cristou/) that have a dominantly subjective quality,<br />
while those who prefer an objective interpretation rely upon parallels of (a<br />
noun other than pi,stij) + (Cristou/) to support their case.<br />
c) Grammatical issues: conclusion<br />
The standoff over the direction in which parallel constructions “push” the<br />
proper understanding of pi,stij Cristou/ epitomizes the entire grammatical<br />
debate. Neither side can score a decisive victory, for there is equal strength<br />
on both sides. Both camps can boast that, though falling back on one front,<br />
they are nonetheless advancing on the other.<br />
The grammatical part of the debate is thus a stalemate. As Ian Wallis puts<br />
it, following a careful examination of the evidence on both sides, “We may<br />
conclude with some confidence that the question of whether pi,stij Cristou/<br />
and its variants should be interpreted subjectively or objectively cannot be<br />
decided on grammatical grounds alone. Moreover, the evidence is<br />
sufficiently ambiguous that neither option carries the burden of proof; rather,<br />
the matter remains open and must be decided on contextual and theological<br />
grounds.” 23 To these we therefore now turn.<br />
4. CONTEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS<br />
Because the seven passages including some form of pi,stij Cristou/ are<br />
grouped by proximity into four clusters, it makes sense to examine each<br />
cluster in turn within its context. Because of the cumulative nature of the<br />
arguments employed, the “subjective” interpretations of pi,stij Cristou/ will<br />
be presented for each of these clusters seriatim, before responding to them<br />
all briefly (in section e, below) from an “objective” perspective.<br />
a) Romans 3:22, 26<br />
This section is clearly a “hinge” in Paul’s argument, a transition-point within<br />
the letter. Using the NRSV’s optional subjective reading, it may be<br />
translated as follows:<br />
21 But now (nuni. de,), apart from law, the righteousness of God has been<br />
disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, 22 the righteousness of<br />
God through the faith of Jesus Christ [dia. pi,stewj VIhsou/ Cristou/] for all<br />
who believe. For there is no distinction, 23 since all have sinned and fall short<br />
of the glory of God; 24 they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the<br />
23 Wallis 71-72.