Faith of Christ

For Paul, the world’s problem is the problem of wrath. God is holy and righteous, and His wrath is revealed from heaven against the ungodliness of men. Jews and Greeks both stand condemned before Him (Romans 1:18-3:19). Jews who were supposed to be the solution have become a central part of the problem.

The good news is that God overcomes wrath, and overcomes wrath in righteousness. The righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel, a righteousness that triumphs over sin and wrath. And the righteous God triumphs by revealing a righteousness “apart from Torah,” yet one that is anticipated and witnessed by Torah and prophets (3:21).

It’s the righteousness of God revealed in the pistis tou Christou (3:22) the faith of Jesus Christ. How does that work? Is Paul saying that the righteousness of God is revealed by the faith that we place in Christ? Or by Christ’s own faith? In Romans 3, the latter is the better option.

First, the structure of Romans 3 lends itself to this interpretation. Through the chapter, there is a chiasm of phrases modified by tou theou , “of God”:

A. Faith(fulness) of God, 3:3

B. Righteousness of God, 3:5

C. Truth of God, 3:7

B’. Righteousness of God, 3:21-22 (2x)

Each of these is a reference to an “attribute” of God revealed in His actions toward the world in Christ. None of them describes our response to God’s actions. And the structure sets us up to expect another reference to the faith(fulness) of God in an A’. Instead we get:

A’. Pistis tou Christou , “faith of Christ,” 3:22

Thus, structurally, “faith of Christ” matches the “faith of God” at the beginning of the chapter. That suggests that “Christ” is in a subjective genitive; He is the subject of the faith, not the object.

Second, the context is not about the “application” of redemption, but about its “accomplishment” (the quotation marks indicate my suspicion that Paul didn’t think in these categories; he commonly mixes the two, speaking of Christian experience in terms of co-crucifixion and co-resurrection). The issue is Israel’s failure, and the consequences of that failure for the fulfillment of God’s promises to bless the Gentiles. That’s the problem that needs to be taken care of, and it’s the problem that is unraveled by the revelation of righteousness apart from Law through the faith of Christ.

Third, the subjective genitive makes better theological sense. How has God revealed His righteousness? It is not in the fact that we believe. God demonstrates His righteousness by what He does in His Son, by triumphing over sin and death and wrath in the cross. God’s work in Christ is the solution to Israel’s unfaithfulness, and the world’s; our faith is a response to God’s work in Christ, but our faith is not itself the solution to the problem.

Finally, 3:21-22 seems somewhat redundant if pistis tou christou is taken as an objective genitive: “Apart from law the righteousness of God has been manifested . . . through our believing in Jesus Christ for all those who believe in Jesus Christ.” It’s possible to make sense of that: God’s righteousness is manifested through our faith, and precisely to those who have faith. But Paul’s sentence is much less convoluted if the genitive is taken as a subjective one: God’s righteousness is manifested through the faithful work of Jesus, and that faithful work is appropriated by those who believe in Him.