I visit my mother in hospice every morning.\u00a0 When she still spoke to me she asked me to pray that she could \u201cget out of here.\u201d\u00a0 I told her I didn\u2019t think that I could care for her at her home.\u00a0 She said that wasn\u2019t what she meant.\u00a0 I didn\u2019t answer her.\u00a0 Later that same visit she sang:<\/p>\n
I am the resurrection and the life,<\/em><\/p>\n
He that believeth in me tho’ He were deade,<\/em><\/p>\n
Yet shall He live,<\/em><\/p>\n
Yet shall he live,<\/em><\/p>\n
And whosoever liveth and believeth in me<\/em><\/p>\n
shall never, never die.[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I recalled the context of these words: Lazarus, Martha\u2019s brother, had died (John 11:21-27 NET):<\/p>\n
Martha[2]<\/sup><\/em><\/a> said to Jesus, \u201cLord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.[3]<\/sup><\/a><\/em> \u00a0But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will grant you.\u201d<\/p>\n
Jesus replied, \u201cYour brother will come back to life again.\u201d<\/p>\n
Martha[4]<\/sup><\/a><\/em> said, \u201cI\u00a0know\u00a0that\u00a0he will\u00a0come back to life again in the resurrection at the last day.\u201d<\/p>\n
Jesus said to her, \u201cI am the resurrection and the life. \u00a0The one who believes in me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in me will never die. \u00a0Do you believe this?\u201d<\/p>\n
She replied,\u00a0\u201cYes, Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who comes into the world.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I\u2019ve understood Martha\u2019s answer to Jesus\u2019 question as a very diplomatic and reverent, \u201cNo.\u201d \u00a0Granted, Jesus had used the subjunctive of emphatic negation<\/a> \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u1f71\u03bd\u1fc3<\/a>, will never die<\/em> (NET), shall never die<\/em> (KJV). \u00a0She had most likely washed and prepared Lazarus\u2019 body. \u00a0She probably supervised his burial four days earlier. \u00a0Jesus was talking crazy talk.\u00a0 It had its impact on me.<\/p>\n
From then on I have believed everyday that she who lives and believes in Jesus will never die. \u00a0And everyday I pray that my mother can be absent from the body, and<\/em>…present with the Lord<\/em>.[5]<\/sup><\/a> \u00a0Almost everyday since, she has been quietly absent from her body and, I trust, present with the Lord. \u00a0She sings hymns and choruses aloud from time to time.<\/p>\n
Once she woke and wanted to sit up to sketch. \u00a0She used to sketch all of the time, any time she sat down. \u00a0But she drifted off again before I could find a pencil or paper.\u00a0 Another time I asked her if she really wanted to sketch.\u00a0 She told me where her sketch pad and pencils were at home.\u00a0 She has them now.<\/p>\n
Mostly, I read while I sit with her. \u00a0A friend asked me to read \u201cFrom Dawn to Decadence: 1500 to the Present, 500 Years of Western Cultural Life\u201d by Jacques Barzun<\/a>.\u00a0 My friend lent me his own copy to seal the deal. \u00a0It\u2019s 800 pages but I\u2019m working my way through it slowly.<\/p>\n
Considering the development of prose Mr. Barzun wrote:[6]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
One 17C[entury] creation that was neither Baroque nor a pretended imitation of the ancients was its prose….<\/em><\/p>\n
The modern languages took a much longer time to develop a prose worthy of the name than to find poetic meters that suited their idiom….In early modern times [writers] were hampered by their virtually native mastery of Latin: it spoiled the vernacular syntax. Thanks to its case endings, Latin leaves the writer free to throw the makings of his sentence into one spot or another without changing the sense. That cannot be done when meaning depends on the right sequence and right linking of words.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I\u2019ve heard, and seen to a certain extent, a similar assessment of Greek. \u00a0But I find it difficult to believe.\u00a0 \u00a0Todd Engstrom\u2018s article on Academia.edu<\/a>\u2014\u201cA Prepositional Phrase’s Contribution to the \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 Debate in Romans 3:28\u201d\u2014caught my ear.<\/p>\n
We will focus on the placement of the prepositional phrase \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 <\/em>(\u201capart from works of law\u201d) in Romans 3:28. \u00a0How does it contribute to the \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 (\u201cfaith of Christ\u201d) debate? \u00a0By having the prepositional phrase \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 (\u201capart from works of law\u201d) modify the noun \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 (\u201cman\u201d), it bolsters the subjective genitive interpretation of \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 (\u201cfaithfulness of Christ\u201d).[7]<\/sup><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Generally, I avoid academic arguments these days. \u00a0As Jesus\u2019 understanding of eternal life<\/em> (John 17:3<\/a>) has taken root and grown in me the desire to judge others\u2019 \u201ceternal destination\u201d by their verbiage has weakened. But a paper about Greek word placement contributing to the meaning of the text was irresistible. Mr. Engstrom continued:<\/p>\n
When we place the prepositional phrase \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 (\u201capart from works of law\u201d) to modify the noun \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 (\u201cman\u201d), we get \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 (\u201ca man apart from works of law\u201d). \u00a0Since \u201cworks of law\u201d refers to the works required by the Law, we can interpret this as \u201ca man apart from the deeds required by the Law.\u201d[8]<\/sup><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
So Mr. Engstrom\u2019s English translation of Romans 3:28 became, \u201cFor<\/a> we consider a man apart from works required by the law to be declared righteous by faithfulness [Table<\/a>].\u201d[9]<\/sup><\/a> \u00a0All in all I have no problem with this translation. \u00a0The word faithfulness<\/em> would have bothered me in the past.<\/p>\n
When I thought faithfulness<\/em> was my efforts to obey my parents, the rules of my religion, the teaching of Jesus, the laws of my city, county, state or nation, the law of God and, finally, Paul\u2019s definition of love<\/a> recast as rules<\/a> for me to obey, it would have bothered me a lot. \u00a0Mr. Engstrom was very careful, however, to stress that this is Christ\u2019s faithfulness.\u00a0 And now I know that faithfulness <\/em>(\u03c0\u1f77\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2<\/a>) is one aspect<\/a> of the fruit of the Spirit.<\/p>\n
Mr. Engstrom, however, didn\u2019t mean exactly what his English translation said:<\/p>\n
Who is this man apart from the deeds required by the Law? \u00a0He is a Gentile.[10]<\/sup><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I\u2019ll translate that back into Greek: \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u1f79\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u1f77\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (\u201cFor we consider a Gentile to be declared righteous by faithfulness\u201d).\u00a0 It\u2019s true enough. \u00a0But would it have gnawed at me as \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u1f79\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 (apart from the works of the law<\/em>) had done?\u00a0 Or would I have remained more content with my act<\/a>?\u00a0 If \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u1f79\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 is removed from Romans 3:28, my go to verse would become Galatians 2:16.<\/p>\n
Mr. Engstrom had reworked that one, too, in a different paper.<\/p>\n
With the adjectival use of \u1f10\u03be \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, Paul\u2019s thesis actually reads:<\/em><\/p>\n
15 We are Jews by nature and not Gentile sinners; 16 knowing that a man from works of law is not declared righteous, except through the faith of Jesus Christ, and we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be declared righteous from the faith of Christ and not from works of the law, because out of the works of the law every flesh will not be declared righteous.[11]<\/sup><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Here even I could see that he had done a pretty good job of unraveling \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd<\/a> \u03bc\u1f74<\/a> (except<\/em>; literally: \u201cif not\u201d).\u00a0 The translators of both the NET and KJV [Table<\/a>] have rendered \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 but<\/em>. \u00a0I thought my knowledge of Greek was insufficient to understand it, which it was: I thought that linking a prepositional phrase to the word it followed was verboten<\/a> <\/em>in Greek, at least unnecessary.<\/p>\n
This time, however, I didn\u2019t want to translate \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u1f79\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 (\u201ca man from works of law\u201d) a Jew<\/em>.\u00a0 Perhaps the categories Jew <\/em>and Gentile <\/em>were fixed and more watertight in the first century than they are today, perhaps not.\u00a0 But I am a Gentile who grew up in a Christian home and a Christian church and became \u201ca man from works of law.\u201d\u00a0 God\u2019s law was about the last law I came to, but Paul\u2019s insistence that God\u2019s law<\/a> could not make me righteous eventually made me suspicious of all the other laws and rules I lived by. \u00a0It prompted me to seek out the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all<\/a> who believe <\/em>[Table<\/a>].[12]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
So how\u2019s that going?\u00a0 Better.\u00a0 Of course, if I measured my performance against some absolute standard\u2014all Jesus, all of the time; I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me<\/em>[13]<\/sup><\/a>\u2014I\u2019d probably conclude that I suck at this.\u00a0 But as I wrote that, it occurred to me that I may have objective <\/em>and subjective <\/em>reversed.<\/p>\n
I first wrote \u201cobjective standard\u201d; \u201cabsolute standard\u201d was an edit.\u00a0 What I was thinking of originally as objective <\/em>was my impression of the time spent alone with God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 One guess who is the weak link in that chain.\u00a0 I\u2019ve tried to talk about this with someone who knows me.\u00a0 I rejected her response out of hand and haven\u2019t spoken of it since, because she began to tell me how wonderful I am.<\/p>\n
I took that as a psychological attempt to make me feel better about myself.\u00a0 I don\u2019t want to feel better about myself.\u00a0 I want to become the righteousness of God<\/em>.[14]<\/sup><\/a> \u00a0Of course, if I actually perceived that I had become the righteousness of God<\/em> I would feel much better about myself, and that, knowing me, would become the biggest stumbling block of all.\u00a0 The Greek reads: \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f7d\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u1f7b\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 (\u201cbecome the righteousness of God in Him\u201d).<\/p>\n
If I take my friend\u2019s assessment as more objective <\/em>than mine, however, I must confess that outwardly at least more of Christ shows through me than all the sin I see in me alone with God, subjectively<\/em>.\u00a0 For God achieved what the law could not do because it was weakened through the flesh. \u00a0By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous requirement of the law may be fulfilled <\/em>(\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc7<\/a>, a form of \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9<\/a>) in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit<\/em>.[15]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
But I say, live by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desires of the flesh<\/em>.[16]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness<\/a>, and self-control. \u00a0Against such things there is no law <\/em>[Table<\/a>].[17]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Love does no wrong to a neighbor. \u00a0Therefore love is the fulfillment <\/em>(\u03c0\u03bb\u1f75\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1<\/a>) of the law<\/em>.[18]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. \u00a0I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill <\/em>(\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9<\/a>, another form of \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9<\/a>) them<\/em>.[19]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n
Tables comparing John 11:21<\/a> and 11:24<\/a> in the NET and KJV follow.<\/p>\n