Finding the Faith -- the Problem of the Missing Word

The most conservative approach to Biblical interpretation is to begin with grammatical-historical exegesis of the Text in its original languages, as affirmed by the Chicago Declaration on Biblical Inerrancy. 

 

This method, first, assumes the logic of linguistic analysis.  In the case of Pauline theology, for instance, the pastoral epistles refer to the Faith and so we can logically assume the local epistles would refer to the Faith, too, because the same man, Paul, out of his singular mind, wrote both kinds of letters.  Yet, there are several key places where the definite article describing the Faith is missing in English translations, though it can be inferred from the original Greek.  Given that there is a chance that faith would sometimes need the definite article and sometimes not, in the logical form of x or not x, we must exercise judgment about when to include the definite article in translation and when to exclude it.  That dilemma introduces the second conservative principle of grammatico-historical exegesis, which is the larger salvation-historical context that Paul is interpreting to his readers.  He is contrasting the rise of Christianity superseding Judaism, not individuals finding salvation on their own in easy-believe-ism.

In other words, it is not conservative to follow a dogmatic system based on a few misunderstood proof texts.  It is conservative to follow what the Bible actually says.

 

According to this conservative approach Romans 3:22 is a place where the use of the article needs attention.  Paul refers to the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe (RSV).  Notice that there are two references to faith in the same verse, faith and believe.  Both are translated from the Greek root word for faith, which is pistis.  But why does pistis occur twice in the same sentence?  Here and in three other places Paul seems to be redundant, saying that salvation is by faith in Christ—for those that believe in Christ:

 

We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, yet who know that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, because by works of the law shall no one be justified. –Galatians 2:15-16

 

The scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. –Galatians 3:22 RSV

For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith. –Philippians 3:8-9

If salvation is by faith in Christ can it not be assumed that one would have to believe in him?  So, why did Paul repeat himself?  In the Galatians 2 passage above one might argue that Paul emphasizes that we ourselves believed, even we to make the point about who believed rather than the faith act itself.  But in that passage, again, he refers three times to pistis, which seems gratuitously redundant.  One might apply to the emphasis on who believes but that leaves two to explain.

 

In all four passages above from the local epistles of Paul we have seemingly redundant references to faith/believing.

 

But it isn’t repetition.  It’s poor translation that makes it seem wordy, following a bad interpretive tradition that comes through the Latin Vulgate.  Latin does not have definite articles at all.  Therefore, versions that follow the Vulgate sometimes clumsily drop definite articles in the translation and sometimes insert them, willy nilly, where they do not occur in the original.

 

In Romans 3:22, for instance, righteousness of God is not accompanied by the article in the original Greek text.  From the perspective of linguistic analysis that makes sense.  Paul would not have included the article because he had in mind the transition in salvation history between two forms of righteousness that God ordained: the old covenant inaugurated through Moses and the new one in Christ.  In Paul’s mind there are two dispensations, the old and the new, which is why the Bible is divided between Old and New Testaments.  The old is made old by the appearance of the new, which is now the righteousness that God requires.  But in contrasting the two, Paul must think of two and so would not involve the article.  Romans 3:22 should read, therefore, a righteousness of God through the Faith of Jesus Christ for those that believe it.

 

Likewise, Galatians 2:15-16 is more accurately translated, reflecting the article that appears in the original text, We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, yet who know that a man is not justified by the Works of the Law but through the Faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by the Faith of Christ, and not by the Works of the Law, because by Works of the Law shall no one be justified.

 

Galatians 3:22 should say, that what was promised through the Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe it, repeating the exact thought pattern in linguistic analysis that we find in Romans 3:22.

 

Philippians 3:9 should be translated, one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness of God based on the Faith.

 

The Geneva Bible of 1560 accurately translates these verses by using the definite article as the Apostle originally intended.

 

In the historical, grammatical, and literary context in which Paul spoke, wrote, and ministered, then, all taken together in conservative rendition, and confirmed by linguistic analysis, his meaning becomes clear and should be reflected in our soteriology:  we are saved by the Faith of Jesus Christ, Christianity, the religious system Jesus instituted, the new covenant in his blood, if and when we believe it, obey it, and practice it.