Opus 2026-422: Missing the Point

As I have shared before, I am seeking to understand the seeming contradiction between Paul and David when it comes to the law.  I think a lot of the problem is that people misunderstand what Paul means when he talks about the law, but that’s not what I’m looking at today.  What I’m looking at today, comes to me and is summarized in this verse,

Galatians 2:16 (KJV) Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Do you know where I’m going?  You need to look at this also in the NASB.  The NASB translates this in a way that most translations put it.  As much as it hurts me to say it the KJV gets it more accurately here.  Take a look at these two translations and see if you can pick out where I’m going with the differences.

Galatians 2:16 (NASB95) nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Notice that the King James does not say “faith in Jesus Christ” it says “faith of Jesus Christ”.  That is not a misprint and it is not insignificant.  It reflects what the Greek says.  I know none of us were paying attention when we went through grammar, but these are both in the generative case which marks possession not direction.

When Paul says that we are not justified by the works of the law he is correct.  We are justified by the faith of Jesus.  You can take that to mean one of two things.  First, it can mean the faith that Jesus has in us.  Secondly, and I think this is more the point, you can translate this with faithfulness rather than believe or confidence.  That is a perfectly legitimate way to translate the Greek word.  Put that together, and you have a theological statement that is valid, it was the faithfulness of Jesus, in going to the cross and interceding for us, that gives us a hope of salvation.

The modern translations transpose this to us having faith in Jesus.  To be fair, there are places where that is the correct understanding.  This does not do away with the importance of faith, our faith, and the process that leads to salvation.  What this does is it points out the relationship of the works of the law and faith.  Notice that twice in this verse Paul points out that we are not saved, or justified, by works.  The point that we miss is that we never have been saved by works.  This is not a new doctrine.  This is not a new thought.  This is taking the old traditions of the rabbis and what Judaism had become, leaving them behind and going back to what the Bible actually teaches.

The purpose of the law was not to save people for eternity.  The purpose of the law was to mold a people, a nation, to provide the structure for the coming of the Messiah.  Although there are indications in the Old Testament of eternal life, the main emphasis of the promises to Abraham has to do with the land, not eternity.
    
I am in contact with people who take two extremes.  One rejects Paul.  The other puts Jesus below Paul.  Neither one is correct.  It is all the same God and the same truth.

homo unius libri