latest expository times

The latest issues of the Expository Times are now online for subscribers with abstracts for all: November 2007, Volume 119, No. 2 and December 2007, Volume 119, No. 3. The New Testament-related items of interest in these issues are mostly just book reviews, but still well worth looking into.

latest journal for the study of the new testament

The latest issue of JSNT is online for subscribers, with abstracts available for all: December 2007, Volume 30, No. 2. The entire issue is of interest, including such articles as "A Note on asphaleia (Luke 1.4)" by Rick Strelan, "The Rhetoric of pistis in Paul: Galatians 2.16, 3.22, Romans 3.22, and Philippians 3.9" by Barry Matlock, and "The Year of the Four Emperors and the Revelation of John: The 'pro-Neronian' Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and the Images and Colossus of Nero in Rome" by George van Kooten.

kiprusoff extended

Good news for Flames fans: Miikka Kiprusoff has been signed to a six-year contract extension. With both Kiprusoff and Jarome Iginla needing to be re-signed this year, I wasn't sure if the Flames could do it. But they have, with both key players still in the prime of their careers.

Now Kipper just needs to get his defencemen on track, the Flames need to find that consistency they missed all last season, and they'll be in good shape for an entertaining season and a run at the Stanley Cup...

evangelicalism today

Just as a favourite topic of Canadian conversation is "What is a Canadian?" so a favourite topic of evangelical conversation is "What is an Evangelical?" Touchstone has (virtually) gathered a few evangelicals together for just such a conversation, looking at the past, present, and future of evangelicalism - with some interesting and mixed results: Evangelicalism Today: A Symposium: Six Evangelicals Assess Their Movement. The six evangelicals are Russell Moore, Denny Burk, John Franke, D. G. Hart, Michael Horton, and David Lyle Jeffrey. (HT: DB)

latest scottish journal of theology

The latest issue of the Scottish Journal of Theology is online for subscribers with abstracts available for all: Volume 60, Issue 04, November 2007. There are a couple articles of interest for New Testament studies, including "Wright on the Resurrection" by Michael Welker.

latest review of biblical literature

The latest reviews in the RBL online include the following items of interest:

Karl Donfried. Who Owns the Bible?: Toward the Recovery of a Christian Hermeneutic.
Reviewed by J. R. Daniel Kirk

Richard Horsley, editor. Oral Performance, Popular Tradition, and Hidden Transcript in Q.
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden

Daniel N. Schowalter and Steven J. Friesen, editors. Urban Religion in Roman Corinth: Interdisciplinary Approaches.
Reviewed by Jonathan Reed

pistis christou: the "faithfulness of christ"

There are several places in Paul's letters where he uses the word pistis modified by a genitive Christou and/or Iesou (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16; 3:22; Phil 3:9). Traditionally this phrase has been translated as "faith in Jesus Christ," indicating the faith of the believer in Jesus Christ, with Christ as the object of the "faith." However, in recent years this traditional rendering has been challenged. Various scholars have followed the lead of Richard Hays in saying that a better translation is "faithfulness of Jesus Christ," indicating Christ's own faithfulness, with Christ as the subject of the "faithfulness." This is not an insignificant phrase: it occurs in some of the most theologically important passages in Paul's writings, expressing a crucial element of Paul's soteriology. There is a significant difference, for example, between saying "a person is not justified by works of the Law but through faith in Jesus Christ" and saying "a person is not justified by works of the Law but through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ" (Gal 2:16).

Over the past few years I have become tentatively convinced of the correctness of the subjective genitive rendering of pistis Christou (i.e. "the faithfulness of Christ"). The phrase "tentatively convinced" is somewhat oxymoronic, I know, but that best expresses my thoughts on a matter that demands a solution but for which a solution is not at all clearcut. Here are the key reasons why I have become "tentatively convinced" of this view, moving from basic lexical and grammatical factors through to more advanced exegetical ones.

• The word pistis can mean either "faith" or "faithfulness." No one would dispute this. Both renderings are found in the standard lexicons and are reflected in the relevant primary sources. Modern English in its Western intellectual heritage tends to separate these ideas in its word usage. "Faith" typically emphasizes an inner disposition toward something or someone, whether as acknowledgment of the truth of an idea (cf. "belief") or as reliance upon a person in some way (cf. "trust"). "Faithfulness" typically emphasizes a personal quality expressed in a characteristic set of outward actions (cf. "fidelity," "reliability," "trustworthiness"). While "faith" can have outward manifestations, the focus is on the inner disposition; while "faithfulness" speaks of an inner quality, this is only as expressed in characteristic outward actions. But the Greek word pistis can mean either of these - or perhaps even both simultaneously.
  


• A genitive noun modifying a verbal head noun can be either objective (semantically the object of the action implicit in the head noun) or subjective (semantically the subject of the action implicit in the head noun). Once again, no one would dispute this. The standard Greek grammars all acknowledge such objective and subjective genitives, and pistis is certainly such a "verbal noun," a noun that is related to a verb (pisteuō) and carries the verbal idea within it even as it functions as a noun. Thus, in light of this and the previous point, it is perfectly possible for pistis Christou to be rendered either "faith in Christ" (objective genitive) or "faithfulness of Christ" (subjective genitive). General usage and specific context - not basic lexical meaning or grammar - must decide between these options in each instance.
  


• The broader usage of pistis modified by a personal genitive noun in early Christian literature is somewhat mixed, but in my view slightly favours the subjective genitive view ("faithfulness of Christ"). Sometimes such constructions are clearly subjective genitives (e.g. "faithfulness of God" in Rom 3:3); sometimes such constructions are clearly objective genitives (e.g. "faith in God" in Mark 11:22). For me, what tips the balance in favour of the subjective genitive view is its usage by Paul: several clear, undisputed uses of this sort of construction in Paul's writings are subjective genitives, even appearing in the surrounding contexts of the disputed pistis Christou uses (e.g. "God's faithfulness" in Rom 3:3; "Abraham's faith" in Rom 4:12, 16). Furthermore, in terms of broader usage it's worth noting that Paul often uses other sorts of constructions to refer to believers' faith, especially the verb pisteuō, occasionally with an epi phrase to indicate the object of faith (e.g. Rom 4:5, 24).
  


• The specific contexts of each of Paul's pistis Christou phrases include ideas which could support either the subjective or objective genitive view, but in my view these contexts slightly favour the subjective genitive view ("faithfulness of Christ"). Let's take Romans 3 as an example. In apparent support of the objective genitive view ("faith in Christ"), Romans 3:22 describes the righteousness of God as for all "believers" (tous pisteuontas), indicating the faith which characterizes all who receive this divine righteousness, and the explanatory expansion of Romans 4 highlights Abraham's faith in God as in some sense paradigmatic for believers' faith. However, in apparent support of the subjective genitive view ("faithfulness of Christ"), the death of Christ is immediately referenced in 3:24-25, and the death and resurrection of Christ is the focus of Paul's concluding summary statement in 4:24-25. Thus, both Christ's faithfulness expressed in his suffering and death and the believer's faith in God who raised Christ from the dead are important features of the broader context, and thus both have a prima facie case for being the referent of pistis Iesou Christou in 3:22.
  
  But two points push me toward the subjective genitive view. First, apart from these disputed phrases the only clear object of believers' faith in this broader context is not Christ, but God the Father who raised Jesus from the dead. Second, the foundational statement of 3:21-22, which declares that this now-revealed "righteousness of God" is through pistis Iesou Christou, is then apparently expanded in 3:24-26, which states that Christ's atoning sacrifice in his public, bloody death is the demonstration of God's righteousness. In other words, the idea of Christ's faithfulness expressed in his suffering and death is not only present in the passage, but could be understood as a parallel expansion of the compact phrase pistis Iesou Christou. In general terms, the same sorts of factors are also at play in the Galatians and Philippians passages (cf. Gal 2:20-21; Phil 3:10-11); thus, either the subjective or objective genitive view can make good sense in each of these passages, but I see the subjective genitive view as the more compelling.
  
  One further thought on these uses in their contexts, for what it may be worth: It seems to me that this subjective genitive view removes some apparent redundancies in some of these passages. Perhaps the most noticeable is in Galatians 3:22 (but cf. also Rom 3:22 and Gal 2:16). If the phrase pistis Iesou Christou means that the promise is "by faith in Jesus Christ," it would seem to make superfluous the additional phrase "given to those who believe." If, however, the phrase means "the faithfulness of Jesus Christ," there is no apparent redundancy: the Abrahamic promise is both "by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ" and "given to those who believe."

It is for these sorts of reasons that I am "tentatively convinced" of the subjective genitive understanding of these phrases, that they refer to the "faithfulness of Jesus Christ." The matter is certainly not clearcut, but I think a better case can be made for this view than for the objective genitive view.

This issue clearly has some significant theological implications, and so it has inevitably caused quite a stir in many quarters. In some discussions there have been accusations (implicit if not explicit) of the other side placing the theological cart before the exegetical horse, when it seems to me to be just as obvious that the accuser has not seen the log in his own eye. In the midst of all this, it must be emphasized that this issue is first and foremost a historical-exegetical issue before it is a theological issue; that is, it is a matter of determining what Paul meant before it is a matter of determining the significance for Christian theology today. (The very same point can and must be made for another hot dispute today not unrelated to this one, that of the "new perspective on Paul.")

What are the theological implications of this issue? It strikes me that the implications are both as profound in some respects as some have made them out to be, yet not as profound in other respects as they are often thought. Some discussion gives the impression that we are dealing with a stark "either/or": either Paul is saying we are justified by our faith, or Paul is saying we are justified by Christ's faithfulness. But this dichotomy is a false one. Even the cursory discussion above has highlighted the reality that both elements are present in the "mechanics" of justification according to Paul, regardless of the specific referent of the phrase pistis Christou. No subjective genitive proponent could rightly claim that Paul did not expect a human response of faith in God, anymore than any objective genitive proponent would assert that Christ's faithfulness in his suffering and death is irrelevant to justification.

However, the difference between these views in the understanding of these specific verses is profound, and has some potentially profound implications for the exegesis of larger sections and other passages in Paul's writings. For example, take the contrast between "works (of the Law)" and "faith (in Christ)/faithfulness (of Christ)." If the objective genitive view ("faith in Christ") is correct, then the primary contrast Paul is making could be between human actions prescribed by the Torah ("works of the Law") and the human response of faith in Christ ("faith in Christ"). However, if the subjective genitive view ("faithfulness of Christ") is correct, then the primary contrast Paul is making could be between human actions prescribed by the Torah ("works of the Law") and the divine action of God in Christ ("faithfulness of Christ"). Granted, in either view the contrast is likely more complex than this, but this still illustrates my point: while one's position on this issue won't necessarily radically change one's soteriology - both Christ's faithfulness and our faith are still vital elements - it may well change the relative emphases one gives to these elements, and it will likely affect one's interpretation of broader sections and specific motifs in Paul's writings.

Final note: If you're anywhere near San Diego on November 16, be sure to head over to the Convention Center to hear the SBL session on this issue. That session is one major reason why I'm grieving the fact I can't be there this year...

philip harland biblioblogger of the month

Fellow Canadian Philip Harland, author of the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean blog and Assistant Professor at York University, is blogger of the month at Biblioblogs.com. You can read the interview with him here: Blogger of the Month for October 2007.

dr. daddy

In a previous post I gave a brief report on my viva which took place last week in England. I'm very pleased with how it went and with the result. I've begun work on my revisions and I anticipate finishing those up soon. Thanks again to all who have passed on congratulations through comments or emails or in person.

All those congratulations are nice to receive, but I must confess my favourite reaction came from my youngest son Matthew, just after I came off the plane in Calgary last Friday. I crouched down to give him a big hug, and after squeezing me tight he looked me in the eye and asked, "Did you win?"

At first I wasn't sure what he meant, but then it clicked. "Yeah, Matthew, I passed my big test."

He gave me a huge smile, then asked, "So now you're Dr. Daddy?"

That's a good title. I think I'll get that put on my business cards.

latest review of biblical literature

The latest New Testament-related reviews in RBL online include the following items of interest:

William Arnal. The Symbolic Jesus: Historical Scholarship, Judaism and the Construction of Contemporary Identity.
Reviewed by Milton Moreland

Richard Cassidy. Four Times Peter: Portrayals of Peter in the Four Gospels and at Philippi.
Reviewed by Timothy Wiarda

James H. Charlesworth, editor. Jesus and Archaeology.
Reviewed by Jonathan Reed

Jürgen Zangenberg and Michael Labahn, editors. Christians as a Religious Minority in a Multicultural City: Modes of Interaction and Identity Formation in Early Imperial Rome.
Reviewed by Jonathan Reed

latest novum testamentum

The latest issue of Novum Testamentum is now online for subscribers, with abstracts available for all: Volume 49, Number 4, 2007. Articles include "Nomen est omen: Warum der gekreuzigte Jesus wohl auch unter Anspielung auf seinen Namen verspottet wurde" by Boris Paschke, "Reading Luke 12:13-34 as an Elaboration of a Chreia: How Hermogenes of Tarsus Sheds Light on Luke's Gospel" by Omas Stegman, and "Hebrews and the End of the Exodus" by Matthew Thiessen.

and we're back...

My viva went well, and I anticipate being able to finish up the corrections very quickly and thus to have completed my PhD (of course, pending final approval of the corrections and, officially, pending conferral of the degree at graduation). It's difficult to believe that this phase of my life is over! It's been a wonderful but arduous process for me and my family, and I certainly feel like we've earned this degree together.

My wife, youngest daughter, and I also had a terrific time in England during this past week. We got to see some very good friends we had made during our year there, along with a few places that had become special to us. When we arrived at Heathrow and our friends picked us up, it felt as if we had never left, everything seemed so normal.

But now we're home, and it's back to real life...

and we're off...

With, D-Day just around the corner, my wife and youngest daughter and I are off to England today. Blogging will be light to non-existent over the next week or so. If you're just itching to read some "stuff of earth" while I'm gone, check out the Selected Series and Selected Posts in the sidebar (if you're accessing this through a reader, you'll have to actually go to the main page here - I know, I know, terribly inconvenient...).

popular myths of evangelicals: the bible is "the word of god"

For other posts in this series, see here.

Okay, so the title is deliberately provocative. I'm quite happy to affirm the evangelical notion of the Scriptures as "the written word of God." But there are some common evangelical ideas related to this that I find problematic, such as the exclusivity with which evangelicals use the phrase "word of God" in reference to Scripture. Ironically, such ideas fail to take seriously what Scripture itself says.

Even a superficial reading of Scripture should be enough to recognize that phrases like "the word of God" or "the word of the Lord" are rarely used in the biblical writings to refer to previously written Scripture either in whole or in part. To sum up the various threads of biblical usage somewhat simplistically, the predominant use of the phrases "word of God" and "word of the Lord" in the Old Testament is in reference to orally proclaimed prophetic oracles (e.g. Jer 1:2), while their predominant use in the New Testament is in reference to the orally proclaimed message of the gospel (e.g. 1 Thess 2:13). In fact, although these sorts of phrases are certainly not exclusively used in these ways, these uses are so predominant that they should probably be the default understanding of the phrases unless the context demands otherwise. This oral understanding of such "word" phrases should not be surprising given the predominantly oral cultures in which the biblical authors lived. Indeed, the biblical "word" language more generally typically retains some strong connection with oral speech, such that even the occasional use of "word" in reference to written statements normally refers to that which was originally spoken and subsequently written down, or that which was written in order to be subsequently spoken orally.

In light of these and other observations on the biblical "word" language, let me summarize the way I understand the connections between "Scripture" and "the word of God":

• Scripture is the written word of God. There are enough biblical uses of "word of God/the Lord" language in reference to previously written Scripture to warrant this idea (note especially the occasional biblical use of this "word" language in reference to the Torah or a particular command in the Torah, e.g. Matt 15:6). But even beyond this basic observation, this concept makes good theological sense. If by the phrase "word of God" we mean "God's message" or even more fully "God's revelatory-communicative act," then the "God-breathed" Scripture that witnesses to the salvific action of God in Christ and reveals God's will (2 Tim 3:15-17) is surely a "word of God."
• Scripture is not the only "word of God." Scripture itself points to other "revelatory-communicative acts of God," including those noted above: the prophetic "word of God," the specific oracles given by God through his prophets to ancient Israel; and the apostolic "word of God," the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ, crucified and risen, God's salvific message to the world. Whenever and wherever this gospel is orally proclaimed, the "word of God" is preached.
• Scripture is not the ultimate "word of God." This place is reserved for Christ himself - as the living, final "word of God," he is the ultimate "revelatory-communicative act of God" (John 1:1-18; Heb 1:1-2). Scripture's role as "word of God" is that of witness, not telos or goal (John 5:39-40; 1 Cor 15:3-5). The written word of God (inspired Scripture) is a witness, in concert with the Spirit and the Church, to the spoken word of God (the gospel of Jesus Christ) and the living word of God (Jesus Christ himself), and it is in him that all the facets of life and salvation find their source and telos.

latest currents in biblical research

The latest Currents in Biblical Research is now online for those with subscription access, abstracts available for all: October 2007, Volume 6, No. 1. This issue includes "James the Just in History and Tradition: Perspectives of Past and Present Scholarship (Part II)" by Matti Myllykoski, and "Can Hebrews be Structured? An Assessment of Eight Approaches" by Barry C. Joslin.

happy thanksgiving!

Happy Canadian Thanksgiving to all who wander by this weekend! Canadian Thanksgiving has its own unique history apart from its American counterpart, as more directly a harvest festival. It was finally set as a perpetual holiday in a proclamation of Parliament in 1957: the second Monday of October is to be set aside as "a day of general thanksgiving to Almighty God for the blessings with which the people of Canada have been favoured." (See here and here for more.)

The picture to the right is of our kids playing "Ring Around the Rosie" in our yard, surrounded by the bright reds and yellows of fall.

a little satire is good for the eyes

While it may be true that a steady diet of satire can be bad for the soul - feeding an unhealthy, persistent cynicism - a little satire can be good for the heart in bringing some laughter, and even better for the eyes in bringing some clarity to our view of others and ourselves. Satire has a long and significant history in human thought and literature, and is even found within Scripture itself (just read some of the Hebrew Prophets' satirical denunciations of the idolatry around them).

All this is merely a preamble to the main point of the post, which is to say that it's been too long since I have pointed to LarkNews.com, a satirical Christian "news" site. If you are a Christian (particularly an evangelical), and you want to see contemporary western Christianity (and possibly yourself) a little more clearly in all its feebles and foibles, be sure to check out LarkNews.com. Some recent articles to whet your appetite: "Mini-church acts mega" - "Emergent leaders call for 'missional re-understanding of Jesus-followership and Christ-focus imbued with passionate creativity and emotional authenticity,' whatever that means" - "Woman stitches 'prayer cloth wardrobe'" - "Businessman uses intercessors to boost bottom line"...

popular myths of evangelicals: the eschaton = the "pre-trib rapture"

For other posts in this series, see here.

Pre-tribulational premillennialism is (in a nutshell) the idea that Christ will return first for his Church in a secret "rapture," snatching believers from the earth before the outpouring of God's wrath on the earth during a specific period of "tribulation," after which Christ will return again with his Church to establish the "millennial kingdom" of Revelation 20 on earth. Because this idea is normally part of a larger hermeneutical and theological system, I'm not going to attempt to dismantle it in this short blog post. However, that's not really my intention here anyway; rather, I'm more concerned about the exclusivity with which many evangelicals view this idea, such that many evangelicals are ignorant of any other eschatological view, and even such that any other eschatological view (if known) is often deemed to be beyond the pale of doctrinal orthodoxy.

The reason for the persistence of the "pre-trib rapture" idea is both easy and difficult to discern. Originating in 19th century British Darbyism, the idea gained a foothold in North American fundagelicalism through its association with many prominent Fundamentalists of the early 20th century, becoming part of the package of conservative Christian doctrine in contrast to the liberalism of the day. Since then, there has arguably been more publicity for this distinctive fundagelical idea than for any other, from the bestselling Scofield Bible of the past to the bestselling Left Behind books of the present. But in spite of all this its continued existence is difficult to fathom, given that evangelical New Testament scholarship by and large abandoned the idea years ago, or at least abandoned its claim to be the only possible interpretation of the biblical witness. Yet, at a popular level, it continues to survive and even thrive within North American evangelicalism.

It seems to me that the two points I made regarding a popular evangelical myth related to the beginning (see "creation" = "creationism") apply equally well in general terms to this popular evangelical myth related to the end. First, any evangelical interpreter of the relevant eschatological biblical texts must take seriously the fact that other evangelicals - evangelical in both faith and life - read these texts differently. The only passage that provides a direct witness to a "rapture" (1 Thess 4:13-18) is not interpreted by most evangelical scholars within a pre-tribulational framework. The passage gives no account of what happens after this "catching up in the clouds" - an event that is not very secret, by the way, with victory trumpets blaring and herald angels shouting - and the follow-up passages to this one (1 Thess 5:1-11; 2 Thess 2:1-12) would seem to suggest that Paul believed this event, this "gathering" of believers at the return of Christ, will happen after a time of tribulation and not before. Other eschatological passages either provide not even a hint of a secret "rapture" (e.g. Revelation), or the hints that are sometimes discerned are almost always interpreted differently by evangelical and other scholars (e.g. Matt 24:40-41). Again, these observations are not intended primarily to persuade "pre-trib rapture" believers to think otherwise, but rather to emphasize that the relevant passages are interpreted differently by many if not most evangelical scholars. Indeed, the four main historic eschatological views of Christianity - historic premillennialism, amillennialism, postmillennialism, and dispensational premillennialism - all find representation within current evangelical scholarship.

Second, like the biblical witness to creation, the consistent themes and most significant emphases throughout the diversity of biblical eschatological texts relate much more to the "who" and the "why" of the eschaton than to the "when" and the "how." The "who" can be seen in the consistent New Testament emphasis on Christ's role as God's eschatological agent, the one through whom God brings about the complete fulfillment of his promises. It is in Christ alone that all the facets of salvation will find their fulfillment at the eschaton; thus, his parousia or royal arrival is the hub around which all eschatological events spin. The "who" can also be seen in the repeated biblical emphasis on the vindication and blessing of God's people, and conversely the condemnation and destruction of all God's enemies, the last of whom is death itself. At the eschaton, the true people of God will be revealed just as Christ will be revealed, sharing in his eternal glory. These realities point to the "why" of the eschaton: it is the time when all that is wrong in creation and humanity will be made right, when all the threads of salvation in Christ will be woven together. These recurrent eschatological themes of faithfulness, righteousness, justice, and vindication are vitally connected to the eschatological events most consistently presented in Scripture spinning around the hub of Christ's return: the resurrection of the dead, the judgment of all people, and the blessed life of God's people in the coming age.

It is for these reasons that the early Church showed much wisdom in advocating a minimalist eschatological position in its universal creeds, affirming 1) the personal return of Christ, 2) the bodily resurrection of the dead, 3) the final universal judgment, and 4) everlasting life in the age to come - but not outlining a particular view on the "when" and the "how" of all this. North American evangelicals today would do well to follow the wisdom of this doctrinal humility.

Image: Rembrandt, The Supper at Emmaus (Olga's Gallery)

alan bandy blogger of the month

Somehow I missed highlighting this last month (sorry, Alan). Alan Bandy, author of the Café Apocalypsis blog, was blogger of the month in September at Biblioblogs.com: Blogger of the Month for September 2007. Be sure to check out his interview if you haven't already.

latest biblical studies carnival

The latest edition of the Carnival is up at Tim Bulkeley's SansBlogue: Biblical Studies Carnival XXII. Check it out for some of the best in biblical studies blogging in September 2007.