Faith in Jesus or the Faithfulness of Jesus?

My summary of Douglas A. Campbell's The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Romans and Galatians (with special reference to Romans 1:17 & 3:22)

Preamble:

I offer here a summary of a very important article on certain passages in Paul.  The issues go to the heart of how we interpret Christianity as a whole.  I will offer a few bracketed comments but it is mostly just a summary.  Let the reader decide the issues for him or herself.

The Basic Issue:

This article was written as a contribution to a debate concerning a certain genitive that appears in Paul: namely, pistis christou, which depending on how the genitive is interpreted yields two very different and far-reaching readings:

1. Faith in Jesus Christ.  This is how most evangelicals interpret the phrase.
2. Faithfulness of Jesus Christ.  This is how Campbell interprets the phrase.

The first reading places emphasis on human reaction, namely faith, which usually is glossed as 'belief'.

The second reading places emphasis on what Jesus did and has nothing to do with human belief.  Campbell thinks that the pistis christou debate can be resolved in part by looking at Romans 1:17 where the key issues are introduced.

Summary of Campbell's article:

 Romans 1:17a and 3:22

Campbell's basic argument in this section is that "faith" in Romans 1:17 and 3:22 discloses or reveals God's righteousness in instrumental terms and this is something that "faith in Jesus" cannot do but "faithfulness of Jesus" can. In other words, our faith is not the means by which God's righteousness is revealed but Jesus' faithful death on the cross is the means by which it is revealed.  Campbell begins with Romans 1:17.  The crux of this verse is the meaning of the prepositional series: "from faith to faith" [the NIV bungles this by its "by faith from first to last].  He presents four points that must be kept in mind:

1. Habakkuk 2:4 is cited in 1:17b and uses the same phrase ("by faith") that appears in 1:17a which suggests that they have the same meaning in both places.  This eliminates construing 1:17a in terms of God because that could not be the meaning in 1:17b (the Habakkuk quote).
2. That Habakkuk 2:4 underlies 1:17a and elsewhere in Paul is suggested by the occurrence of "by faith" in Romans and Galatians (21 times) but nowhere else, and it is in Romans and Galatians where Habakkuk 2:4 is quoted.
3. Galatians 2:16 uses two prepositions "by faith" and "through faith" without really any change in meaning of the phrases.  Therefore, since "through" involves the meaning of "by means of" then "by" likewise means "by means of", which is consistent with the meaning in Habakkuk 2:4.
4. Other instrumental phrases can be seen functioning in further parallels to "by faith" in certain passages.  See Philippians 3:9 for example.

Similarities between Romans 1:16-17 and 3:21-22:

• Both deploy "righteousness of God" as subject.  
• It is "revealed" in 1:17 and "manifested" in 3:22.  
• It is revealed "by faith" in 1:17 and manifested "through faith" in 3:22.  
• "To everyone with faith" in 1:16 is matched by "to the ones with faith" in 3:22
• Scripture is mentioned in both texts: quoted in 1:17 (Habakkuk 2:4) and the "law and the prophets" are referred to in 3:21.

Therefore, Campbell concludes that these two passages are sister texts and their association of faith with the means by which the righteousness of God is revealed/manifested cannot be explained by interpreting "faith" as our belief in Jesus.  Our faith affirms something already known as true, it responds to the gospel message, it does not reveal or manifest the gospel.

Campbell gives further evidence that the "faith" in question pertains to Jesus, that is, it means the faithfulness of Jesus:

• Pistis ("faith") in Greek can mean "belief", "trust" and "faithfulness".  Both Josephus and the LXX attest to the notion that pistis can mean "fidelity".
• Paul often refers to the story of Jesus' passion metonymically, that is, mentioning one element of a whole but meaning to evoke the whole.  "Obedience", "blood", "death", "cross/crucifixion" can all refer to the whole of the passion narrative.  Therefore, he can refer to Jesus' obedient death on the cross by mentioning only the "pistis of Jesus" (the faithfulness or fidelity of Jesus).
• "Fidelity" fits the martyrological themes in the passion of Jesus.  Other martyrologies explicitly mention "fidelity" (Maccabees 15:24; 16:22; 17:2).  Obedience also figures in martyrologies and Paul uses "obedience" as a summary of Jesus' saving activity in Romans 5:19 (see also Philippians 2:5-11 where humility and submission are also martyrological themes).
• Paul uses pistis- and obedience- word groups together where they mean the same thing.  This makes sense in Paul's social world where obedient clients are faithful and trustworthy and submissive and vice versa.  See Philippians 2:12 & 17; 2 Thess. 1:8-10; Romans 1:5 and 16:26. In Romans 10, a sequence of calling, believing, hearing, preaching, sending or proclaiming is then enumerated from verse 14 onward, followed by "but not all obeyed the good news" in verse 16.  Paul immediately quotes Isaiah 53:1 as if to explain the preceding: "Lord, who believed the report of us."  Therefore, pistis and obedience language go hand-in-hand.

A Christological reading of Habakkuk 2:4 in Romans 1:17b

Campbell marshals seven arguments that Habakkuk 2:4 is to be interpreted Christologically:

"The righteousness of God is being revealed through it [the gospel] by means of fidelity [Jesus'] for fidelity [our], as it is written, 'The righteous one [Jesus], by means of fidelity [obedient death on a cross], will live [resurrected].'"

1. the arthrous [using "the"] construction to denote Christ is consistent with Paul's use elsewhere: the Son, the Christ, the one, the one having died.
2. "The righteous one" is a Christological title elsewhere in the New Testament: Acts 7:52; 22:14; James 5:6 and Matthew 27:19
3. In Hebrews 10:37-39, which quotes Habakkuk 2:3-4 is reasonably interpreted messianically.  The LXX of Habakkuk 2:3-4 opens up the possibility of a messianic reading.  "The coming one" and "the righteous one" are in parallel and would easily be taken to refer to Jesus.
4. The Wisdom of Solomon, which perhaps is alluded to in the opening chapter of Romans, mentions a righteous man who suffers and is then granted life by God.
5. If Paul draws the key phrase "by faith" from Habakkuk 2:4 and uses it programmatically elsewhere this would explain why he drops the pronoun "my' because the pronoun would have no or the wrong antecedent.
6. Messianic reading of Habakkuk 2:4 fulfills what Paul sets in motion in Romans 1:2-4.  He says the Jesus event fulfills scripture and this is precisely what happens by citing Habakkuk 2:4.  This is all the more important when it is noted that Paul mentions "resurrection" in 1:4, and that the "will live" alludes to resurrection[!]
7. That Paul could interpret scripture messianically is not in dispute: see 2 Cor. 1:20 and 4:4-6

Campbell thinks this evidence is compelling in arguing for the messianic reading of Habakkuk 2:4 in which case "by faith" means "by the faithfulness of".

"To all the ones believing (or being of the faithfulness of Jesus)" in Romans 3:22

Campbell next discusses the end phrase of Romans 3:22: "to all the ones believing (or being faithful, trusting etc.)".  He discusses three aspects of this verse:

1. The meaning of "all" which refers the he Jew/gentile issue.
2. The participle "believing" or "being faithful" and its mode.  The word play that unfolds in these texts creates two important possibilities for interpreting faith's modality: a) the faith of the Christian echoes the fidelity of Christ himself in some sense.  They copy the faithful Christ, or b) they possess faith because they participate in Christ.  Paul's use of pistis-language is informed by scriptural intertexts: Isaiah 28:16b, Genesis 15:6
3. Implicit object of the believing or faithfulness is God not Jesus.  He presents three reasons: a) intertextual: it is God in the texts Paul quote.  It is rare in Paul where Jesus is the object of faith-terminology.  b) God occurs about 150 times in Romans, 44 before 3:22; he is the object of faith in 4:3, 17, 20, 10:9 largely because God is the object in the intertexts (Genesis 15:6, Isaiah 28:16b etc.). c) syntactical.  the object of Jesus's fidelity is God.  Therefore we have: "The righteousness of God has been disclosed through the fidelity of Christ [in God] for those who trust [in God]."

 

 

   

The importance of Romans 8:34

Preamble:

That the resurrection is a key for Paul can be proved by looking at one verse (among many!), namely, Romans 8:34.

Romans 8:34:

Who is the one condemning?  Christ Jesus the one having died, but rather having been raised, who is also at the right hand of God, who also intercedes on behalf of us.

The "but rather" in Greek is used to supplement or even correct what has preceded.  Paul is saying that Jesus resurrection is a more key factor in what he is going to say.  This is brought out even more clearly when we compare Romans 8:31-39, which contains our verse in question, and Romans 5:1-11, and especially 5:9-10.

Links between Romans 5:1-11 and 8:31-39:

There are common themes in these two sections, which probably should not surprise us since chapters 5-8 forms a rather distinct unit within Romans.  Here are some of the commonality:

• Just: 5:1,9  ----------- 8:33
• Suffering 5:3 -------------- 8:35-37
• God's love 5:5,8 ------------------ 8:35,39
• death 5:6,8,10 ----------------------- 8:34
• saved from wrath  5:9 ----------------- 8:34
• resurrection 5:10 --------------------- 8:34
• 'for us' 5:5-6 ----------------------------8:31,32,34

These common themes are instructive because in 5:9-10 Paul uses language very similar to 8:34.

Romans 5:9-10:

By much then rather having been justified now by the blood of him will we be saved through him from the wrath; for if enemies being we were reconciled to God through the death of the Son of him by much rather having been reconciled will we be saved by the life of him.

The present reality enjoyed by the death of Jesus is the lesser and the future enjoyed by the resurrection of Jesus is the greater.  This trades on the death/life theme.  If Jesus' death does things, then his resurrected life does better thing (or things made more sure).  The same Greek word used in 8:34 for "rather" is used here.

Theological upshot:

Jesus' resurrection is the key to Romans.  The small correction made in 8:34 is very telling.  Without the resurrection we have no enthronement and without the enthronement we do not have Jesus as our intercessor.