The Relationship of Jewish and Gentile Believers to the Law Between A.D. 30 and 70 in the Scripture

184 XptaTov'IriaoOv in 2: 16, and the same can be said in 3:22 of the substantival participle Tote; mmEuoumv (without the object specified). More importantly, what is gained is a balanced emphasis upon not only the human act of believing but also upon the object of that belief, the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. 115 Longenecker argues: Paul uses n(anc;'IriaoO XptaToO in his writings to signal the basis for the Christian gospel: that its objective basis is the perfect response of obedience that Jesus rendered to God the Father, both actively in his life and passively in his death. Thus in three places by the use of n(anc;'IriaoO XptaToO Paul balances out nicely the objective basis for Christian faith ('the faith/faithfulness of Jesus Christ') and mankind's necessary subjective response ('by faith'): Rom 3:22 ... Gal 3:22 ... Phil 3:9. 11 6 115 Hooker states "But to take n(anc; Xp taToO as a reference to Christ's own faith/faithfulness is in fact in no way to neglect the faith of the believer; and to take it of the believer's faith in Christ may emphasize that faith at the expense of stating what Christ has done," Ibid., 322. 116 Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary 41 (Dallas: Word Books, 1990), 87. Cf. also his article "The Obedience of Christ," Reconciliation and Hope (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 142-52, in which he discusses the theology of the obedience and faithfulness of Jesus. Arguing that the Hebrew 'emunah meant both "faithfulness" and "faith" he says that "it is therefore likely that in certain instances in his letters the phra e n (aTEwc; 'Iriaou XptaTou should be understood as 'the faithfulness of Jesus Chri t " , the God– man. And if this be true, it means that Paul thought of the believer's justification, righteou - ness and access before God as based upon Christ's perfect obedience during hi earthly life . . as well has his sacrifice on the cross," Ibid . , 146. Cf. also Hays who argues "It is in fact arguable that Paul's entire discu ion make much better sense if he is interpreted as presupposing that Je u Chri t, like Abraham, i justified EK n (aTEwc; and that we, as a con equence , are ju tified in him (cf. Gal 2: 17, 8t mw0fjvm lv XptaTQ) , a a result of hi faith(fullne ) . Thi kind of repre entative-chri tology i clearly pre ent el ewhere in the T , e p ial- ly in Hebrew , which depict Je u a Tov TJl<; n (aTEwc; dpxri yo ai TEAEtwT~ 'IriaoO (Heb 12:2). Likewi e, ph 3: 11 -12 (a very intere ting te t for our pr ent purp p ak f ' hri t Je u our Lord , l ~ lxoµEv T~v nappri a (av Kai npoaaywy~ l n no1817a t ta TJl<; n(aT we; mhoO.' he R V tran late 8ta TJl<; n(aT we; mhoO a ' thr ugh ur f ith in him.' ur ly, howev r , thi i a very trained tran lati n; th m r n tural r nd ring ul e 'through hi fai th(fulln ), nd th m aning w uld b th t h ar 'in' Chri t J u h ace d ult f hri t ' ithful uti n f d ' t rn 1 purp , p rtra d a th d TJY 'c;, th r pr na t d , in h d tin th d tin l Il ul uld mt nd th hrt t' fh