^{page 321 note 1} Gaston, L., Paul and the Torah (Vancouver, 1987) 12.Google Scholar

^{page 321 note 2} An attempt to settle the matter of the basis of grammatical arguments was made by Hultgren, A. J., ‘The Pistis Christou Formulation in Paul’, NT 22 (1980) 248–63Google Scholar, who argued for the traditional interpretation. Other scholars, however, have not been persuaded; see, e.g., Johnson, L. T., ‘Rom 3:21–26 and the Faith of Jesus’, CBQ 44 (1982) 77–90Google Scholar; Williams, S. K., ‘Again Pistis Christou’, CBQ 49 (1987) 431–7.Google Scholar

^{page 321 note 3} One of the most notable expositions of the ‘subjective-genitive’ interpretation, and one which is based on exegesis of the text, is that by Vallotton, Pierre, in Le Christ et la Foi (Geneva, 1960).Google Scholar His analysis has been strangely ignored in recent discussions of the issue.

^{page 322 note 1} Howard, G., ‘The “Faith of Christ”’, ExpTim 85 (1974) 213Google Scholar, argues that the Vulgate, Syriac and Sahidic Coptic all support the interpretation which takes the phrase to mean ‘Christ's faith’, but their evidence appears to be inconclusive.

^{page 322 note 2} Howard, George, ‘On the “Faith of Christ”’, HTR 60 (1967) 459–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 322 note 3} Betz, H. D., Galatians (Hermeneia: Philadelphia, 1979) 117 f.Google Scholar

^{page 322 note 4} Moule, C. F. D., ‘The Biblical Conception of “Faith”’, ExpTim 68 (1957) 157Google Scholar; see also 222. It is only fair to point out that this argument is backed up by others regarding Paul's use of πίστις and πιστεύειν εἱς elsewhere.

^{page 323 note 1} See C. F. D. Moule, loc. cit., who argues from the fact that the verb πιστεύειν is used with Christ as object, that the same must be true of the noun also.

^{page 323 note 2} Käsemann, E., ‘Kritische Analyse von Phil. 2.5–11’, in ZThK 47 (1950) 313–60Google Scholar (= Exegetische Versuche und Besinnungen 1 [Göttingen⁵, 1967] 51–95); E.Tr. in JThCh 5 (1968) 45–88.Google Scholar

^{page 324 note 1} This contrast is in fact clearly set out in the ‘faithful saying’ of 2 Tim 2. 13.

^{page 324 note 2} The adjective ἔπιστος is used in Paul only in the specific sense of those who do not believe in Christ: Cor 6.6; 7. 12–15;10. 27; 14. 22–4; 2 Cor 4. 4; 6. 14 f.; 1 Tim 5. 8; Tit 1. 15. ‘Aπιστία occurs in Rom 3. 3 and 11. 20, where it refers to the Jews' failure to believe the gospel, and in 4. 20, where Abraham is the model of faith. The verb is found in Rom 3. 3 and 2 Tim 2. 13.

^{page 324 note 3} An eighth passage may be added to our list if we accept the reading of P46 in Gal 3. 26, which concludes: διά πίστεως Χριστοû.

^{page 326 note 1} Faith, Abraham's faith, may thus be thought of as rebellion and disobedience, Adam's rebellion and disobedience, in reverse.’ Barrett, C. K., From First Adam to Last (London, 1962) 36.Google Scholar

^{page 326 note 2} The precise meaning of the phrase άξ άκο is extremely problematical. See Hays, R. B., The Faith of Christ (Chico, 1983) 143–9.Google Scholar

^{page 327 note 1} The problems of interpreting this verse are well-known, since the quotation pronounces a curse only on those who fail to keep the Law. Could the words ύπò κατάραν perhaps mean ‘under the threat of a curse’? I owe this suggestion to Chris Stanley, a graduate student at Duke University, who points out that Paul apparently deliberately avoids applying the term άπικατάρατος to those who rely on the Law. See also Lagrange, M.-J., Saint Paul: Épître aux Galates (Paris, 2nd ed., 1925) 69.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 1} Since the Law fails to provide either righteousness or life, Paul's argument does nothing to solve the ambiguity in this sentence: perhaps it is intentional.

^{page 331 note 1} Barrett, C. K., Freedom and Obligation (London, 1985) 27.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 1} Commentators tend to take the μοû as an objective genitive on the basis that ‘there is no reference to Christ in the context’ (Vincent, M. R., ICC Commentary [Edinburgh, 1897] 116Google Scholar; similar views are expressed in many more recent commentaries), but this is to ignore the wider context of the passage. In a short note in ExpTim 5 (1894) 287Google Scholar, W. F. M'Michael argued for the meaning ‘fellow imitators with me … of Christ’ on the basis that similar compounds of σύν are never used in the New Testament with an objective genitive denoting a person. See also Bengel, J. A., Gnomon Novi Testamenti (3rd edn.London, 1862)Google Scholar in loc.; Friedrich, G., Der Brief an die Philipper N.T.D. (Tübingen/Göttingen, 1962)Google Scholar in loc.; Glover, T. R., Paul of Tarsus (London, 1925) 179.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 1} In spite of the criticisms of Barr, James, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford, 1961) 167 ff.Google Scholar, the links traced by W. C. van Unnik, ‘Reisepläne und Amen-Sagen’, 215–34 in Studia Paulina in honorem J. de Zwaan, ed. Sevenster, J. N. and van Unnik, W. C. (Haarlem, 1953)Google Scholar are persuasive. See also Young, F., ‘Note on 2 Corinthians 1:17b’ in JTS n.s. 37 (1986) 404–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Her suggested translation of v. 17b runs: ‘Or do I make plans at the human level so that yes being yes and no being no rests in my hands?’

^{page 334 note 2} Paul uses the perfect, γέγονεν.

^{page 335 note 1} Hanson, A. T., Jesus Christ and the Old Testament (London, 1965) 145–7.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 1} The Greek word πίστις has a wide range of meaning which certainly includes both ‘faith’ and ‘faithfulness’. This is in no way denied by J. Barr (op. cit. p. 202), whose devastating attack (pp. 161–205) on the linguistic arguments of Herbert and Torrance played an important part in the reaction against their interpretation of πίστις Χριστοû. See below, p. 340.

^{page 336 note 2} So, too, Gal 3. 26, according to the reading of P46.

^{page 336 note 3} P46 B D^* G it^{d g} Marius Victorinus Pelagius here read άν πίστει… τοû ΘεοṺ καû ΧριστοṺ. This is rejected as the original reading by Metzger, Bruce M., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New York, 1975, p. 593)Google Scholar, on the basis that ‘Paul nowhere else speaks of God as the object of a Christian's faith.’ But if the genitives are subjective, this objection does not apply. Paul's life is then said to be based on the faithfulness of God and Christ.

^{page 337 note 1} Nor, of course is there any reference here to the faith of Christ – a fact which C. H. Cosgrove regards as decisive evidence against the ‘subjective’ interpretation, since ‘in the one context where the apostle does focus specifically on Jesus' death as righteousness-producing obedience, he speaks of Jesus' hypakoē, not his pistis' (‘Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection’, JBL 106 [1987] 665Google Scholar, n. 32). But the use of ύπακοή here is explained by the context, which demands a reference to obedience, in contrast to Adam's disobedience.

^{page 338 note 1} Hooker, M. D., ‘Interchange in Christ’, JTS n.s. 22 (1971) 349–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Interchange and Atonement’, BJRL 60 (1978) 462–81Google Scholar; ‘Interchange and Suffering’, in Suffering and Martyrdom in the New Testament, ed. by Horbury, W. and McNeil, B. (Cambridge, 1981) 70–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Interchange in Christ and Ethics’, JSNT 25 (1985) 3–17.Google Scholar

^{page 339 note 1} Bultmann, R., Theology of the New Testament, 1 (E.Tr. London, 1952) 314Google Scholar: ‘Paul understands faith primarily as obedience.’

^{page 339 note 2} A further interesting parallel to this notion of sharing in what Christ is may perhaps be seen in the use of the word ύπομονή. In 2 Thess 3. 5, we find a reference to the ‘steadfastness of Christ’; Paul's prayer for the Thessalonians suggests that this steadfastness is to be imparted to them. In Rom 15. 4, the steadfastness which the Romans are to display derives from God, and their lives are to be lived κατά Χριστόν. The reference to ύπομονή and the encouragement of the scriptures in v. 4 appears to refer back to the example of Christ himself (v. 3), which was in accordance with the scriptures; cf. Michel, O., Der Brief an die Römer (Göttingen, 1966 ³)Google Scholar in loc. Finally, in 2 Cor 1. 6, Paul speaks about the steadfastness with which the Corinthians endure sufferings – the sufferings which he has just explained (vv. 5–6) are the sufferings of Christ himself.

^{page 340 note 1} ‘One Aspect of the Biblical Conception of Faith’, ExpTim 68 (1957) 111–14Google Scholar; see also 221 f. The issue had been raised two years earlier in an article by Hebert, A. G. entitled ‘“Faithfulness” and “Faith”’ (Theology 58 [1955] 373–9)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, to which Torrance several times refers. Because Hebert correlated the difference between these two interpretations of πίστις with a distinction between ‘Hebrew’ and ‘Greek’ meanings, he opened himself to a devastating attack on his linguistic approach by J. Barr, op. cit., 161–205, an attack which stifled discussion of the theological issues for several years.

^{page 340 note 2} Op. cit.

^{page 340 note 3} Williams, Sam K., ‘Again Pistis Christou’, CBQ 49 (1987) 431–7.Google Scholar

^{page 341 note 1} Paulus (2nd ed., Tübingen, 1925) 127Google Scholar; Paul (2nd ed., London, 1926) 163.Google Scholar