Romans study #3

Romans #3                                                                          08/10/12

Campbell gives us a starting point at Romans 1:17 in which Paul quotes scripture for the first time in the letter. “For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith, as it is written “the one who is righteous will live by faith”. This is from Habakkuk 2:1-4: 

“I will stand at my watch post, and station myself on the rampart; I will keep watch to see what he will say to me, and what he will answer concerning my complaint. Then the Lord answered me and said: write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so that a runner may read it. For there is still a vision for the appointed time; it speaks of the end, and does not lie. If it seems to tarry, wait for it; it will surely come, it will not delay. Look at the proud! Their spirit is not right in them, but the righteous live by their faith”.

In the Greek version of the Old Testament the word for faith is “pistis”. It can mean either faith or faithfulness.  In the context of the passage in Habakkuk the translation of faithfulness seems to fit much better. The passage is about waiting, hanging on for the appointed time.

Campbell argues that pistis in Romans 1:17 should be translated as “faithfulness”. This changes its meaning. It no longer has a contractual sense but instead refers to deliverance through Jesus’ faithfulness. Faith needs an object, something we choose to believe in. Faithfulness is a condition, a way of being. Looking at the whole of v. 17 we see "in (the gospel) the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith...” Faith alone, our response or acceptance of something, cannot reveal anything. Only Jesus, his gospel and faithfulness, can reveal something. Even semantically, therefore the translation of pistis as faithfulness makes more sense. It is only faithfulness, and specifically Jesus’ faithfulness as the righteous one, that can reveal God’s action in the world.

Chapter 5, the beginning of Paul’s gospel, is divided into two sections. The first part is vv 1-11. It is written in the Rabbinic style which can make it somewhat hard for modern readers. It begins “Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand; and we boast in our hope of sharing the glory of God.” (V1-2).  If understood in legal justification terms this reads as though even though we are guilty we got off on a technicality! All we have to do is accept the deal God has worked out for us in Jesus. Campbell argues for a different interpretation. Campbell replaces the words “justified” with “delivered” or “rescued,” and pistis as “faithfulness”. In chapter 4:3 Paul quotes the scriptures: “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”. Righteousness here means deliverance by God. It is not a legal thing, rather it is relational. The context is asserting the unilateral, gift-character of what God does. Abraham is brought to a completely different place with God through an unconditional relationship of trust. Ultimately this grace is for all, the circumcised and uncircumcised alike, as was promised to Abraham.

By understanding pistis as “faithfulness” the meaning of the Romans text changes from humanity being saved through our personal faith or belief in Jesus into our deliverance through Christ’s faithfulness. This seems to make more sense. Justification through faith would make it dependent on our act – our decision to accept or reject belief. Deliverance through Christ’s faithfulness is an act solely of divine grace for the whole of humanity.

In 5:1 Paul says “Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” and later in verse 9 Paul says “Much more surely then, now that we have been justified by his blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath of God”.

According to Campbell these are literary doublets – different ways of saying the same thing. How can we be justified both by the blood of Jesus and our own faith? It does not seem to make sense. Rather Paul refers here to the faithfulness and blood of Jesus. Both terms are in fact metonyms for Christ's cross and passion. For Paul, Jesus was everything and the translation of pistis as Jesus’ “faithfulness” rather than our human faith seems to fit much better. 

The Greek word for wrath (orge) can be translated as “violence” giving it a more contemporary sense. The word appears in a particular way in the first three chapters of Romans much of which Campbell ascribes to the “Teacher”. In these chapters he talks of the wrath of God. From Chapter 4 onwards (in the part of Romans that Campbell ascribes as Paul’s response to the “Teacher”) it is just “the wrath”. Most translations of the New Testament continue to add “of God” even though it is not present in the Greek. (There is no “of God” in 1 Thesalonians 2:16 either – yet most translations add it in.) Paul divorces wrath from God. “The wrath” when disassociated from God becomes the violence of the world, the human systems in which we live. Wrath is understood as a human, historical phenomenon. Chapters 5 -8 are Paul’s Gospel. In them Paul describes God’s unilateral eruptive love in the world that changes how it is to be human. His deliverance is unconditional. This is no wrathful God. Paul is arguing against the Teacher’s message.