THE CATACOMBS
You are here: Home
> Catacombs > Articles
On Translating "Faith" or "Faithfulness"
I am puzzled about the ISV
renderings of "faithfulness of" in the following verses, and would like to
know why they are not rendered "faith of" like in King James, Darby and the
latest Apostolic Bible Polyglot (English-Greek interlinear Septuagint and
Greek New Testament)? Romans 3:22, 3:26, Galatians 2:16, 2:20,
3:22; Philippians 3:9, Revelation 14:12. It does appear to me that "faith
of" would be richer in meaning, as it is inclusive of "faithfulness of" but
not vice-versa.
In our view,
the appropriate question to ask isn't why are these verses not rendered
"faith of" like the translations you've cited, but why don't they render the
verses like we do? Do note, won't you please, that the alternative rendering
does occur as a footnote in each verse of the ISV! Our view is that
"faithfulness of" fits the context of each of these verses better than does
"faith in", though we admit that "faith in" is a legitimate alternate
rendering. (That's why we put it in the footnotes.) Please note, though,
that by giving the Gk. text the benefit of the doubt as to whose impetus is
at work (i.e., does our faith bring these things about or does his
faithfulness bring them about?), we think rendering the text to put the
impetus on God rather than man is consistent with the larger message of the
Pauline epistles. And that's why the alternative rendering is relegated to
footnote status..
On the rendering
of the "faithfulness of" phrase, I fully agree with you that we should
translate the text to put the impetus on God rather than man. Therefore, I
do not advocate the rendering into "faith in". Instead, my concern is
whether it is the faith, or the faithfulness, of Jesus, that establishes
God's salvation towards us who believe? I agree that Christ was faithful to
do nothing out of Himself but only the Father's will, as John's Gospel amply
demonstrates. But then, is it not His faith in God that comes first and
which then engenders His faithfulness towards God?
We do not see
the distinction as relevant in the practical world of sinners who need
salvation. The high priest did his once-a-year work outside of the view of
the congregation in the Holy of Holies. Nobody saw him do it. They took it
by faith that it had happened.
Further, if we emphasize the faithfulness of Jesus, would we run the risk of
stressing "salvation = faith + works" at the expense of proclaiming a living
faith that bears the fruit of good works?
No, we
wouldn't, except if the works were those of Christ, which the sinless son of
Man alone could have done. The book of Hebrews deals with this to some
extent, I do believe.
|
