Cuarta Etapa 1992 ––

At this juncture, a key point of clarification needs to be made about the precise nature o the bel e er’s part c pat on. We ha e ust argued or an ntegrat on o the Pauline conceptions of faith and participation in Christ such that they are seen as two sides of the same coin. The conclusion is that participatory faith depicts the human mode of existence for those justified in Christ. However, Galatians 2:20 has been used, along with the se en πίστις ιστ phrases, to defend the notion that believers participate specifically in the faith of hr st. In Mart n’s nterpretat on o Galat ans 2:19-20, he understands this co-cruc x on to ean that the old “I” has not been merely renewed but replaced by the risen Christ himself. This eradication of the old “I” eans that the nd dual now l es n a d erent sphere “the a th o hr st.”743

De Boer likewise demarcates the faith that Paul speaks of in Galatians 2:20 to be hr st’s own and not that of Paul or the paradigmatic believer whom Paul

represents.744

While Martyn and de Boer more or less assume this interpretation, Richard Hays offers some attempt to provide exegetical support. He argues that in Galatians 2:20 “Paul s pro ocat el den ng h s own role as the act ng ‘sub ect’ o h s own l e and cla ng that he has been supplanted n th s capac t b hr st.” B th s Ha s eans: “‘the a th o the on o God’ s now the go ern ng power n Paul’s

ex stence.”745 We have already argued extensively for the objective genitive reading, but let us scrutinise these claims a bit further in this context.

In support of his construal, Hays compares Galatians 2:20 to Romans 5:15 to display a similar syntactical structure:

Rom 5:15 ἐν χά ιτι τῇ τ ἑνὸς ἀνθ ώπ υ Ἰησ ιστ . Gal 2:20 ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τ υἱ τ θε

Both verses employ the preposition ἐν ollowed b a noun χά ις or πίστις and a gen t e clause. Ha s a ers that t would “ne er occur to an one to translate τ ἑνὸς ἀνθ ώπ υ Ἰησ ιστ here as an ob ect e gen t e.”746 For Hays, the only real d erence s that the phrase s a od er o χά ις nstead o πίστις n Galat ans 2:20.

743 _{Martyn, Galatians, 258.}

744 _{De Boer more specificall takes th s to ean hr st’s a th ul death (Galatians, 162).} 745 _{Hays, Faith of Jesus Christ, 154.}

192 Yet th s “onl d erence” s not erel a atter o lex cal d erentiation, replacing one noun with another. One would expect the two words to function differently because χά ις s not a erbal noun l ke πίστις s. Add t onall we note that Paul roots χά ις essent all and una b guousl n the act t o God. Thus Paul can offer an opening blessing and a closing benediction of grace from God, the theme that brackets and grounds the whole letter (1:3; 6:18). Paul is thoroughly and primarily concerned w th the g t o God n hr st and w th God’s call ng o bel e ers nto this realm of grace (Gal 1:6, 15; 2:9, 21; 5:4). Our exegetical survey of πίστις on the other hand has revealed it to be primarily an anthropological characteristic of those who respond to the call o grace. As has been de onstrated πίστις s the ch e descr pt on or the hu an ode o ex stence or those “ n hr st.”

Hays purports to find support for his claim that the Son of God is the acting sub ect o the “ a th” not onl n the preced ng cla but also n the ollow ng participial modifier: τ υἱ τ θε τ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ πα αδόντ ς ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲ ἐμ . He asserts that “the whole context portra s hr st as the act e agent and Paul as the nstru ent through wh ch and/or or who hr st’s act t co es to express on.”747 Further ore Ha s asserts that the “unrelent ng e phas s on the pr or t o hr st’s (or God’s) willing and doing over any human will or action is the theolog cal ke note o the whole letter.”748 _{At this point, Hays makes a couple of}

debatable moves. First, Hays seems to conflate Christological priority with the idea of Christ as agent. Secondly, the role of Christ as an active agent in the two participial phrases does not necessarily mean the same idea ought to be read implicitly into Paul’s use o πίστις. As we ha e repeatedl seen Paul clearl portra s the hu an mode of existence as one of dependence upon the efficacious activity of God in Christ. To simply demonstrate the priority of the divine agent does not support a reading that eliminates human agency. Rather, Paul seeks to communicate very specifically how the human relates to the Christ-event—that is, in the mode of faith. In both self-negating and self-involving dependence, the believer now participates in the very Christ-event by faith.

Hays finds additional support for this reading in his observation of the threefold repetition of the conjunct on δέ n erse 20. He argues that each should be treated as connect es wh le po nt ng out that the nal δέ n 2:20b s t p call

747 _{Hays, Faith of Jesus Christ, 155.} 748 _{Hays, Faith of Jesus Christ, 155.}

193 translated in an adversative sense. Hays suggests that if Paul had intended a dialectical correction to the first half of the verse, he would have more likely employed the strong adversative, ἀλλά. Thus the nal δέ should be read as a cont nuat on o the thought that lows ro ιστῷ συνεσταύ ωμαι (Gal 2:19b).749 However, rather than a simple continuation or a strong adversat e t would see that the nal δέ clause introduces clarification and amplification to the ideas immediately preceding. If we look back on the flow of thought from verses 19-20, we do see a continuative line of logic, with each point building upon the preceding clause. Paul explicates his death to the Law (v.19a) with his profound declaration of co-crucifixion with Christ (v.19b). Yet the logic of this short clause is expounded in verse 20 so that co-crucifixion is ore expl c tl stated: “ t s not I who l e ( .20a) but hr st l es n e ( .20b).” Clearly, Paul does not mean to suggest that he has literally, physically died. Thus he clar es the or er “h perbol c” state ent that he s “no longer l ng” n the next clause: “and the l e that I now l e n the lesh I l e n a th n the on o God” (v.20c). There the notions of faith and participation in Christ are fully integrated. Yet, not in the way that Martyn, de Boer, and Hays suggest. The idea of participating specifically in the faith(fulness) of Christ seems to be entirely read into the text and in fact obfuscates both that which is truly efficacious, that is, the Christ-event itself, and the essential place of human dependence on that efficacious gift of grace.

Rather than conveying the idea o part c pat ng n hr st’s a th t s best to understand that human faith is the mode of existence that appropriates this new life in Christ; faith is participation in Christ, who determines and resources the newly revivified life. The continuous experience of the Christ-event becomes the power in the bel e er’s l e.