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