THE FAITHFULNESS OF CHRIST by Charlie Albright

Introduction One of the most debated topics within then this section of Philippians is the translation of found in verse 9. The phrase can either be translated as an objective

genitive, faith in Christ or as a subjective genitive, the faithfulness of Christ.1 The weight of this question has to deal with what Paul was mentioning as the means of providing Gods righteousness in these cases. Was Paul speaking to the persons faith of the believer as the mean by which the believer then receives the righteousness of God? Or does Paul desire to speak to Christs faithfulness that demonstrated the righteousness of God?2 It is important to note, though, that ones acceptance of one usage is not a denial of the other one as part of ones reading of Paul.3 The question is to what is the most probable meaning of the genitive construction where Paul used it.

Subjective Genitive
1

A good summary of the history of this debate that spans continents can be found in James D. G. Dunn, One More, I Y, The Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers, ed. Eugene H. Lovering, Jr (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press), 730-731.
2

Richard B. Hays, I and Pauline Christology: What Is at Stake? The Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers, ed. Eugene H. Lovering, Jr (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press), 715. Although, different scholars would find different emphases with the subjective rendering.
3

Moises Silva states these things when writing about Galatians 2-3. Moises Silva, Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians, Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume II-The Paradoxes of Paul, ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. OOrien, and Mark A Seifrid (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004), 227-228. But it applies to the entire debate as well.

The phrase or can be found in Romams 3:22, Galatians 2:16 (twice); 3:22, Eph 3:12 and Philippians 3:9. It is in these verses that the debate swells to whether Paul was referring to the faith the believer places in Christ or the faithfulness of Christ. Scholars put forth several arguments as to why the construction should be translated subjectively. When Paul uses the genitive after the word it refers to the faith of the person being referred to. The phrase is used 24 times in Paul and In all cases the phrase refers to the faith of the individual, never faith in the individual.4 Thus, it would be inconsistent to make the verse found in Romans, Galatians, and Philippians translate a different way. Then there is the charge of redundancy in Romans 3:22. If the objective genitive is used then Paul is redundant in saying how the righteousness of God is give to the believer. The verse reads, The righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe, (Rom 3:22). Luke Timothy Johnson posses the question, Why should Paul add eis pantas tous pisteuontas, if he has just said, through faith in Jesus Christ?5 If we were, instead, to take the genitive subjectively then there would be no redundancy. Other arguments for the subjective reading are the context of Romans 3:22. A reference to the believers faith seems out of place. Hays explains, The emphasis of the whole passage is on Gods action in putting forward Jesus Messiah who enacts the faith-obedience that

George Howard, On the Faith of Christ, Harvard Theological Review 60 (1967): 459-460.
5

Luke Timothy Johnson, Rom 3:21-26 and the Faith of Jesus The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44

(1982): 79.

Israel failed to render, who thereby glorifies God as faithless human creatures had failed to do.6 Thus it seems out of place to interject a statement about the faith of the believer when the passage seems to speak about the faithfulness of the Savior. Then Hays also asks the question, What would it mean to say that Gods justice has been made manifest through out act of believing in Jesus Christ.7 If the genitive is in the objective then the righteousness of God is displayed in the believers faith. This seems out of place where on the other hand Christs faithfulness makes a better manifestation of Gods righteousness.8 Reasons such as these have convinced many scholars that the usage of should be understood as subjective. Thus, in Philippians 3:9 Paul is saying that the righteousness of God is manifested through the faithfulness of Christ. The apostle is asserting that the righteousness he possesses is based on Christs faithful obedience to the Fatherclear proof that Pauls right relationship with God comes through sheer grace.9

Objective Genitive We will now look at the arguments for the objective understanding of the genitive. Many scholars still hold to the traditional understanding of genitive for these reasons. One can find uses of the genitive where it is objective. It is not as if the objective use of the genitive with the verses are an unheard of thing. In Mark 11:22 we
6

Hays, I and Pauline Christology, 721.

7

Ibid.
8

When interpreting the passage in Galatians Longenecker defends the subjective use there by referring to the context and the seemingly normal usage of the phrase. Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary, vol 41, ed. by David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1990), 87-88.
9

Peter T. OBrien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Commentary, ed. by I Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 399-400.

read, . The genitive construction has to be taken as a genitive here. One can also find examples in Acts 3:16 and 2 Thessalonians 2:13. Two very important examples come within the same context of passages. In Philippians 3:8 the genitive construction has to be read as an objective genitive. Thus,

there is no grammatical reason for ruling out [an objective] reading in Philippians 3:9.10 The second example is Galatians 2:16 where Paul makes the statement, . This is immediately after giving us the construction. Silva comments, Paul in effect exegetes the construction [ ].11 The only charge that can be brought against this fact is the charge of redundancy.12 But here redundancy cannot be understood. Just because Paul uses to different terms to refer to the same action in no way means he is being redundant.13 Thus, with this usage we have an exact usage of the genitive as an objective genitive with . Added to the above argument, there is never a clear reference to the faith of Christ by Paul while Christians belief is a clear theme. Through out many writings in the New Testament faith is understood as an action by the believer directed towards God.14 While on the other hand,
1 10

Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul: Apostle of Gods Glory in Christ (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 213.
1 11

Silva, Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians, 232. Ronald Fung remarks, the fact that the clause we too have put our faith in Jesus Christ, following immediately upon the present phrase though faith in Christ Jesus, puts is beyond reasonable doubt that Cristou Iesou is to be construed as objective genitive. Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Gordon D. Fee (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988), 115. See also, F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Commentary, ed. by I Howard Marshall and W. Ward Gasque (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982), 139. Longenecker makes no mention of this problem in his commentary. Longenecker, Galatians, 88.
1 12

It should be noted that the charge of redundancy is already a weak charge. What is the problem with Paul wanting to repeat himself for emphasis?
1 13

Silva provides an excellent example, Take the following statement: when I heard that one could purchase the car at a special price, I decided to buy it. Who would argue buy cannot mean the same as purchase because that would make the sentence redundant, and that therefore buy must have a different meaning? Ibid.
14

we cannot find even one unambiguous reference to the that belongs to Christ.15 Therefore, it would have been much more natural for the readers to understand the genitive as referring to faith acted by the believers in Christ, rather than the faith of Christ. This is exactly how it seemed to be when looking at the Greek Fathers. From the writings of the Greek Fathers we can clearly see that they could understand the genitive as objective. Roy Harrisville makes this observation from his studies in the Greek Fathers about this issue, When employing the formulation, there is no clear and unambiguous indication of any subjective understanding. The contexts in which the phrase is found admit of no such interpretation. On the other hand, there is clear evidence in both Greek and Latin authors of an understanding of the phrase in an objective sense.16 This is important in two areas. The first is that it shows the objective genitive can be naturally read in these situations. And second, that those closest to the Greek of Paul read these texts as objective. When weighted against one another the objective genitive seems to come out as the most probable reading of the construction. The clinching point is the fact that it is the obvious reading in Galatians 2:16. When coupled with the other arguments it answers the objections and shows why it fits in the writings of Paul.
o

Silva gives a list of examples. Silva, Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians, 230-231
1 15

Ibid., 231.
1 16

Roy A. Harrisville III, I Y:Witness of the Fathers, Novum Testamentum 36, 3 (1994): 241.