Skip to content

Course 5 · Lesson 7.4

A worked example from the New Testament

11 minute read

Lessons in this course

Course 5 outline

Module 1: What the Languages Are and What This Course Can Do

  1. The languages of the Bible: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek
  2. What an introduction can and cannot do: no fluency, and why
  3. Biblical Hebrew in brief: history, script and sound
  4. Koine Greek in brief: history, script and sound

Module 2: Hebrew Fundamentals

  1. The Hebrew alphabet, reading right to left, and the vowel points
  2. Roots, nouns, gender, number and the construct chain
  3. Hebrew verbs: perfect, imperfect and the seven stems in outline
  4. A core Hebrew vocabulary and how to learn it

Module 3: Greek Fundamentals

  1. The Greek alphabet, accents and breathing marks
  2. Nouns, cases and the definite article
  3. Greek verbs: tense, aspect, voice and mood in outline
  4. A core Greek vocabulary and how to learn it

Module 4: The Texts: Masoretic, Septuagint and New Testament Manuscripts

  1. The Masoretic Text and the codices that preserve it
  2. The Septuagint and where translators consult it
  3. Greek New Testament manuscripts and printed editions
  4. How variants are recorded in footnotes and critical editions

Module 5: How Translations Are Made

  1. Formal and dynamic equivalence, and the middle positions
  2. Who translates: committees, churches and traditions of translation
  3. Hard cases: idioms, word play, gender and untranslatable words
  4. Reading a translation’s preface to learn its principles

Module 6: Tools for the Reader

  1. Interlinear Bibles: what they show and what they hide
  2. Lexicons and concordances: how to read an entry
  3. How to do a word study, step by step
  4. Common word study errors and how to avoid them

Module 7: Evaluating Translation Differences

  1. Locating the Hebrew or Greek words behind a verse
  2. Types of translation differences: text, grammar, word meaning and style
  3. A worked example from the Old Testament
  4. A worked example from the New Testament
  5. Knowing your limits, and when to ask a specialist

All courses

Program / Course 5: Biblical Languages / Lesson 7.4

What you will learn

  • Apply the procedure of the module to one New Testament phrase, pistis Iesou Christou in Romans 3:22.
  • Locate the Greek words, check the text, and identify the grammatical question.
  • State the main arguments for each reading as their defenders would state them.
  • Write a conclusion that separates what can be learned from the tools from what needs a specialist.

The big idea

In Romans 3:22 the King James Version says the righteousness of God is by faith of Jesus Christ. The Greek phrase behind faith of Jesus Christ can mean faith in Jesus Christ or the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. The words are the same in either case. The difference is in how a genitive is read, and scholars have argued about it for decades. The example shows the full procedure, and it shows that a clear grasp of an open question is a real achievement.

Key terms

Objective genitive
A genitive that names the object of the action implied by the noun. Faith of Christ in this sense means faith directed toward Christ.
Subjective genitive
A genitive that names the one who performs the action. Faith of Christ in this sense means faith or faithfulness that Christ has.
Pistis
A Greek noun that can mean trust, belief, faithfulness or what is believed.
Justification
A word for being put right with God. Traditions understand its nature and means differently.
Redundancy argument
The argument that a reading is unlikely because it would repeat what the text already says nearby.
Parallel construction
A phrase in the same author that has the same grammatical form and can show how he uses it.

Background

Romans is a letter of Paul to the Christians in Rome, and the third chapter is part of its central argument about how people are put right with God. In verse 22, Paul writes about the righteousness of God that comes through pistis Iesou Christou. The phrase appears, with small differences, in several places in Paul: Galatians 2:16, Galatians 3:22, Philippians 3:9 and Romans 3:26.

The question of how to read it is sometimes called the pistis Christou debate. It became prominent in scholarship from the later twentieth century, and it continues. It is a suitable example because the evidence is available to a student, the difference is clearly grammatical and the positions are held by serious scholars of many traditions.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: Locate the words and the text

The Greek of the phrase is dikaiosyne de theou dia pisteos Iesou Christou eis pantas tous pisteuontas. An interlinear gives roughly: righteousness but of God through faith of Jesus Christ to all the believing ones. The word pisteos is the genitive of pistis, and Iesou Christou is also in the genitive. A reverse interlinear shows that the English of in faith of Jesus Christ stands for the genitive case and has no separate word in Greek.

As to the text, there is a small variant at the end of the verse, since some manuscripts add and upon all. This does not bear on the phrase under study. The phrase itself is not disputed in the manuscripts, so the difference is not a textual one.

Step 2: Compare the translations

The King James Version reads by faith of Jesus Christ, which preserves the ambiguity of the Greek genitive in English. Many modern translations, including the New International Version, the English Standard Version and several Catholic translations, read faith in Jesus Christ, and several give the faithfulness reading in a footnote. A few put the faithfulness reading in the text instead. A student should check the note in each edition.

Sorting by type: the difference is one of grammar, with a lexical element, because the sense of pistis, faith or faithfulness, bears on the choice.

Step 3: The arguments for faith in Christ

Defenders of the objective reading, faith in Christ, make these points. This has been the dominant reading in the church and in the commentaries from the early centuries, and it fits the many places in Paul where believers are said to have faith in Christ, using other constructions, as in Galatians 2:16, where Paul speaks of believing in Jesus Christ. The verse goes on to say to all them that believe, so that the faith of believers is already in view. And the contrast Paul draws between faith and works of the law suggests that faith is the human response.

Those who hold this reading also note that the faithfulness reading was little discussed before the modern period, and that the long agreement of translators and commentators counts as evidence.

Step 4: The arguments for the faithfulness of Christ

Defenders of the subjective reading, the faithfulness of Christ, make these points. The phrase has no article and no preposition, and the same construction with a person’s name in the genitive, as in the faith of Abraham in Romans 4:12 and 4:16, speaks of the faith that Abraham had. By that pattern, the faith of Christ would be Christ’s own faith or faithfulness. The reading avoids the repetition of faith in Christ and believers who believe in the same verse. It also fits Paul’s emphasis on Christ’s obedience, in Romans 5:19 and Philippians 2:8, as the ground of salvation. Scholars who hold this position include Richard Hays, who published an influential study in the 1980s, and others.

Those who hold this reading reply to the traditional view that the Greek construction is truly open and that the long history of the objective reading does not by itself decide a grammatical question. Both positions have been held by Protestant, Catholic and other scholars, and the argument is not a simple division between traditions.

Step 5: What depends on it, and a conclusion

Does the difference change the Christian teaching on salvation? Many scholars on both sides say it does not remove the role of faith in Paul’s letters, since Paul speaks of believers’ faith in Christ elsewhere in clear terms, for instance in Galatians 2:16 and Romans 10:9. Others note that the faithfulness reading shifts the emphasis toward what Christ has done. The churches have different understandings of how people are justified, which come from the whole of Scripture and tradition and not from one phrase.

A conclusion in the student’s own words might be: The difference in Romans 3:22 is one of grammar. The Greek words are the same, and the genitive allows both readings. Strong scholars defend each. The long tradition favors faith in Christ, and a number of modern scholars favor the faithfulness of Christ. The writer cannot decide between them without reading Greek and the technical literature, and recommends that a specialist be consulted. The doctrine of salvation in the traditions does not rest on this phrase alone.

  1. Do the translations follow the same Greek text for the phrase?
  2. What are the two readings of the genitive?
  3. Which arguments depend on parallels in Paul, and which on the context?
  4. How do the translations I have mark the alternative?
  5. What difference would each reading make to the sentence, and what would it not change?
  6. What do I need to know that I do not yet know?

Examples

A parallel phrase

In Romans 4:16, Paul speaks of the faith of Abraham. All agree that this means the faith that Abraham had. A defender of the subjective reading uses this to argue for the same pattern in Romans 3:22. A defender of the objective reading replies that Abraham is not a divine object of faith and the cases differ.

A footnote in a study Bible

A study Bible prints faith in Jesus Christ and places in the footnote Or the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. The note shows the reader that the grammar is open and that the translators chose one reading.

A student’s table

A student makes a table listing six translations, their reading and their note. She sees that most have faith in, a few have faith of with a note and several give the alternative. She records the pattern and moves to the commentaries.

Different perspectives

Catholic

Catholic translations and commentaries have mostly read faith in Jesus Christ, and the Church teaches that justification is a gift received through faith and baptism and living in charity. Catholic scholars take part in the current debate, and some have found the faithfulness reading attractive.

Orthodox

Orthodox commentary on Romans draws on the Greek fathers, who wrote in Greek and read Paul in the light of the church’s faith. Orthodox translations and commentaries have generally read faith in Christ, while also stressing Christ’s obedience. Orthodox teaching on salvation as union with God does not rely on a single verse.

Protestant

Protestant tradition has stressed justification by faith, and most Protestant commentators read faith in Christ. Some Protestant scholars have defended the faithfulness reading and hold that it strengthens the Reformation emphasis on Christ’s work. Others see it as a danger to the emphasis on faith.

Scholarly

The debate is active. Grammarians and New Testament scholars have published many studies, and a number of leading scholars hold each view. Some propose that Paul may intend both senses at once. No consensus has emerged.

Why it matters

The example shows that a tool-using beginner can state a disputed question accurately and fairly. It also shows that a translation choice may carry weight in the life of a church, and that the right response to an open grammatical question is to see it clearly and to weigh the arguments, without claiming a certainty the evidence does not give.

Common misunderstandings

Misunderstanding: The faithfulness reading is a recent attempt to change Paul’s message.

Correction: It is a recent proposal by scholars who hold that it fits the Greek and Paul’s thought. Many of them hold that justification comes through faith, and they would not claim to change Paul’s message.

Misunderstanding: The faith in Christ reading is an old mistake.

Correction: It is the long standing reading of the church and is defended by able scholars with real arguments.

Misunderstanding: One reading is Catholic and the other Protestant.

Correction: Scholars of both traditions hold both views. The debate does not follow denominational lines.

Misunderstanding: A student who has read this lesson can decide the question.

Correction: The lesson lets a student state the question and the arguments. Deciding it requires Greek and the full technical literature.

Knowledge check

What is the grammatical question in Romans 3:22?

The Greek phrase pistis Iesou Christou has a genitive, Iesou Christou, that can be objective, faith in Jesus Christ, or subjective, the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. The words are the same in both readings. The difference lies in how the genitive relation is understood, so the difference is one of grammar, not text.

Give one argument for each reading.

For faith in Christ: this has been the dominant reading since the early church, and the verse already speaks of believers, so the faith of believers is in view. For the faithfulness of Christ: the same genitive construction with a person’s name, as in the faith of Abraham, normally names the faith that person has.

Does the choice remove the role of faith from Paul’s argument?

Most scholars say it does not. Paul speaks of believers’ faith in Christ in other places, such as Galatians 2:16 and Romans 10:9. The faithfulness reading adds an emphasis on Christ’s own obedience. The doctrines of the churches rest on the whole of Scripture and tradition and not on this phrase alone.

What should a student’s conclusion about the verse include?

A statement that the difference is grammatical and that both readings are defended by able scholars, a summary of the main arguments and a note on what depends on it. It should also say that the writer cannot decide without reading Greek and the technical literature, and that a specialist should be consulted.

Think it through

  1. How does it feel to hold a question open without resolving it?
  2. What would you say to a friend who is sure that one reading is the only one?
  3. Why might a translation committee put one reading in the text and the other in a note?
  4. What does the example teach about the way translations can affect a church’s teaching?

Independent assignment

Your own New Testament example

In your own notebook, write 600 to 900 words. Choose a different New Testament passage where translations differ in a way you can see, such as John 1:1, Romans 9:5 or 1 Timothy 3:2. Follow the five steps: locate the words and text, compare at least five translations, sort the differences by type, state the strongest arguments for each reading as their defenders would, and write a conclusion with a statement of limits. Do not send this to anyone.

Further study