<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Christ&#8217;s Faith</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/the-christs-faith/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/the-christs-faith/</link>
	<description>Serving the joyful cultivation of the theological craft for the life of the church: inquiring honestly, deliberating wisely, acting faithfully</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2013 16:38:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kent Eilers</title>
		<link>http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/the-christs-faith/#comment-17867</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kent Eilers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/?p=3251#comment-17867</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am reading through NT Wright&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Justification&lt;/i&gt; with a group of students right now, and I noticed that he addresses it in chapters 4, 5, and 7.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am reading through NT Wright&#8217;s <i>Justification</i> with a group of students right now, and I noticed that he addresses it in chapters 4, 5, and 7.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Reitman</title>
		<link>http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/the-christs-faith/#comment-17858</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Reitman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:27:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/?p=3251#comment-17858</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Don&#039;t forget the non-Pauline &lt;i&gt;locus&lt;/i&gt; of James 2:1, where it is the only explicit mention of Christ in the entire epistle (besides the opening &quot;signature&quot;) and (in the eyes of some) the very introduction to the body of the epistle.

I see 3 viable choices:  &lt;i&gt;Subjective&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;objective&lt;/i&gt;,  and &lt;i&gt;attributive&lt;/i&gt; (or &quot;descriptive&quot;) genitive.  The latter choice would seem at first blush to flow most logically from the preceding passage, where James has just propounded his view of &quot;true religion&quot;--an attributive genitive would now seem to be establishing guidelines for how [not] to &quot;practice the Christian faith.&quot;

An &quot;objective genitive, on the other hand, would seem to set up James&#039; subsequent use of &quot;faith&quot; in the rest of chap. 2, where the faith of a given &quot;brother&quot; among those being addressed by James can actually be &quot;dead.&quot;  This could also be made to fit the preceding passage by reading &quot;&lt;i&gt;your&lt;/i&gt; faith in Christ&quot; for the articular &lt;i&gt;pistis&lt;/i&gt;.

A subjective genitive would put an entirely different spin on the passage, where it would seem that James is commanding his readers to be circumspect about how they &quot;appropriate&quot; the faithfulness of &lt;i&gt;Jesus&lt;/i&gt;, along the lines of what Bobby is saying with respect to TFT.  This would seem to have echoes of &quot;participation&quot; or &quot;union&quot; with Christ in &lt;i&gt;his&lt;/i&gt; faithfulness to the &quot;least of these&quot; among the brethren, but that reading of &lt;i&gt;pistis&lt;/i&gt; would almost certainly be entirely distinct from the subsequent mention of &quot;faith&quot; in the same chapter.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t forget the non-Pauline <i>locus</i> of James 2:1, where it is the only explicit mention of Christ in the entire epistle (besides the opening &#8220;signature&#8221;) and (in the eyes of some) the very introduction to the body of the epistle.</p>
<p>I see 3 viable choices:  <i>Subjective</i>, <i>objective</i>,  and <i>attributive</i> (or &#8220;descriptive&#8221;) genitive.  The latter choice would seem at first blush to flow most logically from the preceding passage, where James has just propounded his view of &#8220;true religion&#8221;&#8211;an attributive genitive would now seem to be establishing guidelines for how [not] to &#8220;practice the Christian faith.&#8221;</p>
<p>An &#8220;objective genitive, on the other hand, would seem to set up James&#8217; subsequent use of &#8220;faith&#8221; in the rest of chap. 2, where the faith of a given &#8220;brother&#8221; among those being addressed by James can actually be &#8220;dead.&#8221;  This could also be made to fit the preceding passage by reading &#8220;<i>your</i> faith in Christ&#8221; for the articular <i>pistis</i>.</p>
<p>A subjective genitive would put an entirely different spin on the passage, where it would seem that James is commanding his readers to be circumspect about how they &#8220;appropriate&#8221; the faithfulness of <i>Jesus</i>, along the lines of what Bobby is saying with respect to TFT.  This would seem to have echoes of &#8220;participation&#8221; or &#8220;union&#8221; with Christ in <i>his</i> faithfulness to the &#8220;least of these&#8221; among the brethren, but that reading of <i>pistis</i> would almost certainly be entirely distinct from the subsequent mention of &#8220;faith&#8221; in the same chapter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby Grow</title>
		<link>http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/the-christs-faith/#comment-17848</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bobby Grow]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 06:23:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theologyforum.wordpress.com/?p=3251#comment-17848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[TF Torrance has, even Dan Wallace seems to think its a subjective genetive at work in Gal 2:20; and I agree.

Here&#039;s a post highlighting how TFT thought of this, and how Dan Wallace approaches this (in a more guarded but curious way):

http://evangelicalcalvinist.com/2010/01/06/some-greek-the-faith-of-christ-in-galatians-220/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TF Torrance has, even Dan Wallace seems to think its a subjective genetive at work in Gal 2:20; and I agree.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a post highlighting how TFT thought of this, and how Dan Wallace approaches this (in a more guarded but curious way):</p>
<p><a href="http://evangelicalcalvinist.com/2010/01/06/some-greek-the-faith-of-christ-in-galatians-220/" rel="nofollow">http://evangelicalcalvinist.com/2010/01/06/some-greek-the-faith-of-christ-in-galatians-220/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
