LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary

More documents

Recommendations

Info

36 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII (pate,ra pa,ntwn tw/n pisteuo,ntwn). Romans 10:4-6 is similar: “Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for all who believe [dikaiosu,nhn panti. tw/| pisteu,onti] … . The righteousness that comes from faith [h` de. evk pi,stewj dikaiosu,nh] … .” And the third strong linkage is found in Galatians 3:8-9: “The scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith [evk pi,stewj dikaioi/ ta. e;qnh o` qeo.j] … Those who believe are blessed with Abraham who believed [oi` evk pi,stewj euvlogou/ntai su.n tw/| pistw/| VAbraa,m].” In each of these verses, then, what in the disputed passages has been something of a “missing link” between God’s righteousness and the believer’s own faith is clearly present, as shown by the double use of pi,stij and/or pisteu,w within the context of a discussion about dikaiosu,nh. 50 As Hultgren rightly says, One can understand the uneasiness this causes the interpreter who wants to guard against the unPauline notion that the faith of the believer is itself a good work, especially when the Hebraic tradition affirms the “faithfulness of God,” which Paul himself affirms (Rom 3:3). But the issue is not whether Paul, true to his Hebraic heritage, affirms the faithfulness of God. The question is whether in these seven instances Paul is thinking of “the faithfulness of Christ” or the faith-response of the believer which accepts righteousness from God over against trying to establish one’s own righteousness by works of the law. 51 Further pertinent to Romans 3 is Hultgren’s argument in support of the antithetical contrast between “law” and “faith” that supporters of the subjective interpretation reject (cf. the discussion of this issue in Galatians 2, above). “It is through the response of faith to the proclamation of Jesus Christ crucified that the believer beholds God’s righteousness, in light of which one’s own attempt at righteousness through works of the law is emptied of its significance and power.” 52 Even more, Hultgren points out, “It is only when the term pi,stij signifies the believer’s response to the gospel that the full significance of the contrast comes into the open.” 53 Unless “law” and “faith” are both understood to apply to the believer’s own situation, the contrast between them is blunted to the point of inconsequence. True, proponents of the subjective interpretation might counter that their proposed contrast between “the believer” and “Christ” is sharper than any 50 The same point is emphasized by James Dunn in his commentary on Gal. 2:16: “One would expect phrases using the verb to function as equivalent alternatives to phrases using the noun. This is just what we do find here … and in 3:6-9, 22 (as still more clearly throughout Rom. 4).” The Epistle to the Galatians, Black’s NT Commentaries (London: A & C Black, 1993) 139. 51 Hultgren 259. 52 Hultgren 260. 53 Hultgren 260.
CHAMBERS: PISTIS CRISTOU IN PAUL possible contrast Hultgren might imagine between “the believer doing ‘A’ (works of the law)” and “the believer doing ‘B’ (faith)”. Yet Hultgren has a point. Some, following Krister Stendahl, might challenge the assumption that salvation for Paul’s first-century Jewish audience could possibly revolve in so narrow an orbit around their own “introspective consciences”. 54 But the way in which Paul himself phrases the contrast here in Romans does at least seem to allow the possibility—if not require the certainty—that this in fact precisely what he has in mind. 55 ii) Galatians 2:16, 20 Here, too, Hultgren argues from the internal logic of 2:16 that pi,stij Cristou/ vIhsou/ must refer to the faith of the believer. 56 The hinge of his rather creative argument is the kai, in the centre of the verse. In 2:16a Paul speaks of what he and other Jews know—”that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.” Then in 2:16b he goes on to speak of what they accordingly do: “And [kai,] we have come to believe in Christ Jesus.” Justification, in other words, on this reading, involves both “knowing” and “doing”: knowing that one cannot justify oneself, and believing instead in God’s justification. Not only does this explanation diminish some of the redundancy within this verse that supporters of the subjective interpretation find so distressing (the double use of pi,stij, bracketing pisteu,w), but it also acknowledges the concurrently active and passive nature of justification: not doing works of the law (passive), but believing (active). A more substantial argument springing from internal considerations within Galatians 2:16 is mustered by James Voelz. 57 He begins by noting that authors sometimes assume meanings “under” the meanings which they actually express. Normally these assumed-but-unexpressed meanings are difficult to uncover; but sometimes (and this verse is a signal example) the unexpressed meaning can actually be detected through a “hint” of some kind in the context. In this case, Voelz attaches a great deal of significance to the presence of the verb pisteu,w right in the midst of the two pi,stij Cristou/ clauses: “A person is justified … dia. pi,stewj Cristou/, and we have come 54 Krister Stendahl, “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West”, in Paul Among Jews and Gentiles (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976) 78-96. 55 A superb defence of this classic Lutheran understanding of what is really at stake for Paul in Galatians and Romans—over against Stendahl and many other 20 th -century challengers who deny that Paul is really concerned about justification by grace through faith—is Stephen Westerholm’s Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988). 56 Hultgren 261. 57 James Voelz, What Does This Mean? (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1995) 193-94. 37
Page 1: LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW publish
Page 4 and 5: 4 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII S
Page 6 and 7: LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 8 and 9: 8 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII W
Page 10 and 11: 10 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
Page 86 and 87:
86 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 110:
show all

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?