The Genitive

The genitive is the case most often translated with of. Its commonest endings are -ου and -ων in the second declension (θεοῦ, of God; λόγων, of words), -ης or -ας and -ων in the first (δόξης, of glory), and -ος or -εως in the third (πνεύματος, of spirit; πίστεως, of faith). The article in the genitive is τοῦ, τῆς, τοῦ in the singular and τῶν in the plural. Where you see one of those articles, you are almost certainly looking at a genitive.

The genitive has two quite different jobs, and it helps to separate them early. One job is to follow certain prepositions. ἐκ, out of, ἀπό, from, ἀντί, instead of, always take the genitive, and διά, ὑπέρ and others take it in one of their senses. A genitive after a preposition gets its meaning mostly from the preposition, and lesson 5 deals with those. The other job, the one this lesson is about, is to hang one noun on another: δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ (dikaiosynē theou, righteousness of God), δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ (doxēs tou theou, of the glory of God, Romans 3:23). Here the genitive says that the second noun limits or defines the first. It does not say how.

English of is just as vague, and you already know it. The love of God can mean God's love for us or our love for God. A picture of my father can be a picture he owns, one he painted, or one that shows him. The words do not tell you; the situation does. Greek genitives work the same way, and translation into modern English often forces a decision that the Greek and the older English left open. The King James Version, which uses of very freely, often preserves an ambiguity that a modern version has resolved. That is not always a merit in the older version, but it is worth knowing which renderings are decisions.

Grammarians name the relationships a genitive can express. Possession: in Matthew 6:9 τὸ ὄνομά σου (to onoma sou, the name of you), Your name. Source or origin: what something comes from. Description: a quality, as a body of sin means a sinful body. Apposition, where the genitive names the thing itself: in Romans 4:11 σημεῖον ἔλαβεν περιτομῆς (sēmeion elaben peritomēs, a sign he received of circumcision), which the BSB renders 'the sign of circumcision': the sign which is circumcision. Partitive, a part of a whole. And two that matter more than all the rest for preaching, the subjective and the objective genitive, which the next section explains.

These names are useful and they are labels, not discoveries. Daniel Wallace's Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (1996) lists more than thirty uses of the genitive, and a reader who has learned them can ask a better set of questions of a verse. But the Greek on the page says only genitive. When a commentary says this is a genitive of source, it is reporting the writer's judgment of the context, not reading a label off the word, and you are entitled to ask what in the context supports it. Romans 11:33, which you worked in the inquiry, shows how quickly a chain of genitives opens several honest readings.

When the first noun names an action or an attitude, such as love, faith, hope, knowledge or fear, the genitive can name either the one who does it or the one it is done to. If the genitive names the doer, it is called subjective, because that noun would be the subject of the matching verb. If it names the one acted on, it is called objective, because that noun would be the object. Turn the phrase into a sentence and you can hear the difference. The love of Christ, subjective: Christ loves us. The love of Christ, objective: we love Christ.

Each kind is plain in some verses. Romans 8:35 asks 'Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?', ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ Χριστοῦ (apo tēs agapēs tou Christou), and the list of troubles that follows, with 8:39's 'the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord', makes it Christ's love for us: subjective. Mark 11:22, Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ (Echete pistin theou), is Jesus telling the disciples 'Have faith in God': objective, since God is the one trusted. Romans 3:3, τὴν πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ (tēn pistin tou theou), is 'God's faithfulness': subjective, and notice that πίστις there means faithfulness, not faith, because God does not trust; God keeps faith. The word πίστις covers both trust and trustworthiness, as English faith once did in the phrase keeping faith.

Other verses can be read both ways. 2 Corinthians 5:14 says ἡ γὰρ ἀγάπη τοῦ Χριστοῦ συνέχει ἡμᾶς (hē gar agapē tou Christou synechei hēmas), which the BSB renders 'For Christ's love compels us', a subjective reading. A smaller number of interpreters hear our love for Christ in it, and some have argued that Paul means both at once. Wallace calls a genitive meant to carry both senses a plenary genitive. It is a real possibility, and also an easy way of avoiding a decision, so a reader who chooses it should be able to say why the context wants both.

Now the anchor verse, and its first genitive. δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, the righteousness of God, appears in Romans 1:17, 3:21 and 3:22, and has been argued over since the Reformation. Martin Luther came to read it as the righteousness God gives, a gift that counts before God, which makes θεοῦ a genitive of source; Philippians 3:9 supports that, since there Paul writes explicitly τὴν ἐκ θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην (tēn ek theou dikaiosynēn), 'the righteousness from God', with the preposition from. Ernst Käsemann, in a famous 1961 lecture, argued that it is above all God's own saving power in action, putting the world right, which makes θεοῦ subjective; Romans 3:5 and 3:25-26 support that, since they speak of God's righteousness as something God demonstrates. N. T. Wright has argued for God's own faithfulness to his covenant. Many interpreters now hold that Paul's phrase includes both God's action and the status God gives.

Look at what the BSB has done. In 3:21 it prints 'the righteousness of God', keeping the of. In 3:22 it prints 'this righteousness from God', choosing the source reading for the same Greek at the start of the very next verse. That is a defensible decision, and it is a decision. A student who reads only the English would never know that 3:21 and 3:22 have the same genitive, or that the translator chose differently in each. A student with a phone and this lesson does.

The phrase in 3:22 is διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (dia pisteōs Iēsou Christou): through faith, then Jesus Christ in the genitive. The same kind of phrase, often shortened to its Greek name pistis Christou, appears in the verses you collected in the inquiry. Grammatically, Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ can be objective, faith in Jesus Christ, or subjective, the faith or faithfulness of Jesus Christ. The BSB and the large majority of English translations read it as objective. Among scholars the objective reading has been defended by James D. G. Dunn, by Moisés Silva and by R. Barry Matlock, among many others. Here is their case at full strength.

First, Paul explains the phrase himself. In Galatians 2:16 he writes that a man is justified διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, and then, in the same sentence, καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν (kai hēmeis eis Christon Iēsoun episteusamen), 'we, too, have believed in Christ Jesus'. The noun is followed at once by the verb, and the verb has Christ as its object. On this reading Paul is telling the reader exactly what he means: the faith in question is the faith by which we believe in Christ.

Second, the argument around these phrases is about believing. Romans 4 and Galatians 3 are built on Genesis 15:6, which Paul quotes in Romans 4:3: 'Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness'. And Paul's whole point is that righteousness comes to those who believe as Abraham did, not to those who rely on works of the law. Human trust answering God's promise is the theme of the chapters. A phrase about Christ's own faithfulness would be a change of subject at exactly the point where Paul is pressing the believer's faith.

Third, nowhere outside the disputed phrases does Paul clearly speak of Jesus believing or of the πίστις of Jesus as his faithfulness. He speaks often of Christ's obedience and love, but never with the verb πιστεύω with Christ as its subject. Fourth, the objective genitive with πίστις is perfectly good Greek: Mark 11:22 shows it plainly. Fifth, the repetition in Romans 3:22, faith in Christ to all who believe, is not idle. Paul repeats faith because his argument is that faith, not law-keeping, is the way, and the words to all are what the second phrase adds, since there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. Readers on this side also point out that Greek-speaking interpreters of the early church do not appear to have heard these phrases as a reference to Christ's own faithfulness, though the other side reads that evidence differently.

What is at stake for this side is not only a grammar point. On the objective reading these texts say, again and again, that God's righteousness is received by trusting Christ, and the Reformation's preaching of justification by faith is anchored in them. Dunn, it should be noted, held this reading while being one of the founders of the new perspective on Paul, so it is not a party badge. It is, its defenders argue, simply what Paul's sentences say.

The subjective reading takes Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ as the one whose πίστις is meant: through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, his trusting obedience to the Father to the point of death. It was argued in modern form by Richard B. Hays in The Faith of Jesus Christ (1983, second edition 2002), and has been defended by Morna Hooker, by Luke Timothy Johnson, by Douglas Campbell and by N. T. Wright, among many others. Among translations the NET Bible renders Romans 3:22 'through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ', and the King James Version's 'by faith of Jesus Christ' leaves the question open. Here is their case at full strength.

First, Paul's own pattern with this construction. When Paul puts a person in the genitive after πίστις elsewhere, the person is the one who has it. Romans 3:3 is τὴν πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ, God's faithfulness, in the same chapter as the anchor verse. Romans 4:16 is ἐκ πίστεως Ἀβραάμ (ek pisteōs Abraam), 'the faith of Abraham', with no article, exactly like πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, and nobody reads it as faith in Abraham. Romans 4:12 speaks of 'the faith that our father Abraham had'. On this reading the burden of proof lies on whoever says the same construction means something different when the name is Jesus.

Second, redundancy. Read objectively, Romans 3:22 says righteousness comes through faith in Christ to all who believe, saying faith twice; Galatians 2:16 says faith in Christ three times in one sentence. Read subjectively, each phrase does its own work: God's righteousness comes through what Christ faithfully did, and it reaches all who believe. The verb in Galatians 2:16, we have believed in Christ Jesus, then names our response to his faithfulness rather than repeating the noun.

Third, the subject of Romans 3:21-26 is what God has done in Christ. God has revealed his righteousness, God presented Christ as an atoning sacrifice (3:25), God demonstrates his justice. A phrase about Christ's own faithfulness fits that story, and Paul tells it elsewhere in those terms: Romans 5:19 says that 'through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous', and Philippians 2:8 that Christ 'became obedient to death'. Fourth, Galatians 3:23 and 3:25 speak of faith as something that came at a point in history: 'Before this faith came' and 'Now that faith has come'. Human believing did not first arrive with Christ, since Abraham believed; but Christ's faithfulness did. Hays argued that Galatians 3 rests on a story about Christ, and that these phrases are where the story shows through.

What is at stake for this side is also more than grammar. On the subjective reading, salvation rests first on Christ's faithfulness rather than on the strength of our believing, which its defenders hear as a deeply pastoral word to anxious believers who worry whether their faith is enough. Wright held this reading while sharing much of the new perspective with Dunn, so it too is not a party badge. Its defenders insist that it does not remove the believer's faith from Paul, since every one of these verses also mentions those who believe. It puts that faith second, as a response.

Each side has answers to the other. To the redundancy argument, the objective side replies that emphasis by repetition is normal in Paul, and that the pile of faith words in Galatians 2:16 is the point of the sentence, not a flaw in it. To Galatians 2:16's we have believed in Christ, the subjective side replies that this is exactly the human response Paul adds after naming Christ's faithfulness, so the verb confirms that Paul has both in view rather than proving the noun means the same. To the claim that Paul nowhere says Jesus believed, the subjective side replies that obedience to death is what faithfulness means and Paul says that often. To Romans 4:16, the objective side replies that Abraham is in the genitive there because he is being held up as the model believer, which is a different situation from a genitive naming the one in whom believers trust.

The article has been argued over too. Arland Hultgren argued in 1980 that when Paul means a subjective genitive with πίστις he tends to use the article, as in τὴν πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ, and that the anarthrous pistis Christou phrases therefore lean objective. The subjective side answers with Romans 4:16, which has no article and is plainly subjective. A student can check both claims on a phone in five minutes, which is a good reminder that this debate, unlike many, is open to anyone with the free tools.

Some scholars have proposed a third reading: a genitive of source or of union, faith that comes from Christ or the faith that belongs to those who are in Christ, sometimes called Christ-faith, leaving the phrase deliberately broad. Others suspect that the choice between the two main readings is less sharp than the debate suggests, since Paul plainly believes both that Christ was faithful and that believers must trust him. The best single place to see the scholars argue it out is the 1991 exchange between Hays and Dunn, published in Pauline Theology, volume 4 (1997), and the collection edited by Michael Bird and Preston Sprinkle, The Faith of Jesus Christ (2009), which prints both sides.

Here is what is settled and what is not. Settled, by the plain words of these same verses: God's righteousness is received by those who believe, to all who believe in Romans 3:22, and Christ was obedient to death on our behalf. No reading of the genitive removes either truth from Paul. Not settled: whether these particular phrases point mainly to our faith in Christ or to Christ's faithfulness for us. Serious scholars who confess the same gospel divide here, and the division does not follow the usual party lines.

So in the pulpit, preach Romans 3:22 as the BSB has it if you are persuaded of that reading, and say once, simply, that the Greek can also be read as the faithfulness of Jesus Christ and that both truths are in Paul. If you are persuaded of the other reading, say the reverse. What you should not do is say that the Greek clearly means either one, because the genitive does not say, and your congregation deserves to know where the text is firm and where it is open.

Return to the capstone page you have been building on your chosen passage. You have marked the cases and the articles. Today you work only on the genitives, and you take the first step in the kind of judgment the capstone will ask of you.

First, on your phone, check every word you marked G in your case map against STEP Bible or Blue Letter Bible, and correct any you got wrong. Then separate them into two groups: genitives that follow a preposition, which you will deal with in lesson 5, and genitives that hang on another noun. Draw an arrow from each of the second group to the noun it qualifies.

Second, for each genitive that hangs on a noun, write the phrase out as an English sentence in two ways if you can, as the lesson did with the love of Christ: once with the genitive noun as the doer and once as the one done to. If only one sentence makes sense, write only one. If both make sense, put a star beside it.

Third, for each starred phrase, compare three translations on your phone, the BSB, the King James Version and one other you can read, and write down which reading each chose. Then write one line on what in the context would decide it, and one line on how sure you are. A starred genitive with an honest note on it is worth more in your capstone than any number of confident ones without.