Sorry BF but you're whole writing about this is off the rails.
Romans 5:1 says we are justified through FAITH.
Not true.
Analogy time: A judge says to everyone who has committed a certain crime I'm going to give you a pardon if you show up and report to the court house. They do their part and show up. The judge does what he says he will do....pardons them. That may require him to sign his name on a document or whatever.
He wouldn't have done this if they didn't show up. So who did the pardoning? The one who came? Of course not! The judge who filled out and signed the forms. Nobody I mean nobody in reasonably minded culture would say I was a partner with the judge in bringing about the benefit.
The judge did it and all the praise and thanksgiving would go to him. One must however come or one must however believe in order to be justified but everyone understands how language works.....the judge did it all even though everyone knows it wouldn't have happened if they didn't do what the judge said they need to do.
Calvinistic thinking however twist the way words are reasonably meant to be understood and puts forth the extreme.
Here's my two cents on the topic. Interestingly enough, it combines elements of truth that both of you brought to light :
"Preserved by the Faith of Christ" :
Galatians 2:16,20,"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ [pistis Christou], even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ [pistis Christou], and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."...(vs.20)," I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God [pistis Christou], who loved me, and gave himself for me." (KJV)
The expression "faith of Christ" appears in Galatians in 2:16 (twice); 2:20 ('Son of God'); and 3:22. It appears elsewhere in Romans 3:22, Philippians 3:9, and Eph.3:12 ('faith of him').
The earlier standard of English Protestant translations, the KJV, translated the phrase as "faith of Christ," which was changed in most of the more modern English translations. The NET (New English Translation) Bible is a notable exception.
Over the last several decades, a lively debate has been taking place over the meaning of the phrase "faith of Christ" or "faith of Jesus Christ" in Paul’s writings. And because this debate is over whether the phrase "pistis Christou" means “faith in Christ or “the faith[fulness] of Christ”; it is commonly referred to as "the pistis Christou debate."
The debate becomes very important when we consider it's affects on how we present the gospel and understand salvation. The two principal ways this phrase is currently translated in the debate are Jesus Christ’s faith/faithfulness, or, faith in Jesus Christ. Thus, the person named can be either the doer (the subject) or the receiver (the object) of the action implied by the other noun—faith, in this case.
The issue at stake is whether these genitive constructions should be translated as objective genitives, “faith in Christ,” or as subjective genitives, “faith of Christ.” Consequently, if we take our phrase in the subjective sense, the meaning is the faith or faithfulness that Jesus Christ displays, while the objective sense is expressed as faith directed to Jesus Christ.
This kind of ambiguity is common in language, and we depend on something in the context or our experience to determine the correct meaning. For instance, when Paul says, “The love of Christ compels us” in 2 Corinthians 5:14 (NIV), does he mean our love for Christ (objective genitive), or Christ’s love for us (subjective genitive)? Although either possibility exists in both the Greek and the English, as it pertains to the subject at hand, the grammatical evidence appears to favor recognizing "pistis Christous" as a subjective genitive.
Two passages are critical for me in establishing a grammatical base for a subjective genitive reading. First, although arguments for and against subjective genitive readings have appealed to sources outside Paul’s writings and have been used to strengthen their arguments, the most significant passage must be Romans 4:16..."Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all."
Here Paul uses a genitive construction without a definite article, that can only be read as a subjective genitive. It is clearly Abraham’s faith that Paul refers to, not our faith in Abraham. This passage proves that Paul understood and used genitive constructions when he wanted to talk of the “faith of” an individual.
The second is found in Galatians 2:16..."knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by the faith of Jesus Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."
In addition to encouraging a faith in Christ - "even we have believed in Christ Jesus", this verse also includes two examples of pistis Christou. The context suggests to me that Paul is making a distinction between the roles of the faith of Christ and the believer’s faith in Christ in this passage. If he is not making this distinction, then the passage reads as follows: “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”
Although some disagree by asserting that the threefold reading of “faith in Christ” is for emphasis, the grammatical makeup of the verse strongly suggests to me that Paul is here distinguishing between the two critical requirements for justification before God. This is especially so due to the 'hina' clause that joins the two phrases: “we have have believed in Jesus Christ” and “we might be justified by "pistis Christou.” The Greek conjunction 'hina'
(in order that) shows that the second phrase is a consequence of the first, not just a restatement, requiring "the faith of Christ" as the correct rendering of "pistis Christou."
Those who gravitate toward a performance based acceptance before God have an extremely difficult time processing, and/or accepting "pistis Christous" as a subjective genitive; perhaps because this subjective genitive perspective provides yet another reminder as to why every believer can be assured of the reception of their heavenly inheritance by virtue of being "in Christ". It is a very compelling and eye-opening aspect of Paul’s theology because it emphasizes that salvation is rooted in God’s grace in Christ rather than our faith.
This is not to say that a person's faith in Christ isn't an essential component in salvation, but at the end of the day, it is Christ and His blood, rather than our faith, that provides the only sufficient ground of any person's salvation. The issue is not "either/or" but "both/and".. but first and foremost, we are to place our focus and trust in Christ's faith[fulness] rather than faith in our faith. Apart from this mindset we are at risk of turning the channel of faith into an act or a "work" that merits salvation. Perhaps another way of stating it would be...we are to place our faith in the faith/faithfulness of Christ, which without... "ye have believed in vain." - 1 Cor.15:2.
The issues involved in this discussion are complex. I am not attempting to undergo a thorough exegesis of all the many relevant texts, but rather to shed more light upon the issue. One of my goals is to demonstrate that reading 'the righteousness of God' as God's righteousness, and the 'faith of Christ' as Christ's faith/fulness is thoroughly consistent with the rightly cherished Protestant doctrine of 'justifcation by faith alone.'(primarily 'the imputed righteousness of Christ').
Romans 3:20-24,"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ [pistis Christou] unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:"
Philippians 3:9,"And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ ['pistis Christou'], the righteousness which is of God by faith:"
"The righteousness which is of God" can only be obtained by virtue of being in 'union with Christ' [being found 'in him']. This righteousness originates from God through the faith[fulness] of Christ, and is imputed to all those who do not trust in their righteousness (or moral acts) in order for their justification, but instead have believed in Christ's.
Those who trust in their moral actions and performance as the ground of their justification before God cannot be justified in the eyes of God , and consequently will never receive assurance that their sins have been forgiven (while, as long as) they remain in that mind-set. The enemy of our souls, Satan, doesn't want any person who imagines or considers themselves to be accepted in the eyes of God to know that they aren't; or, that they can and will receive the blessed assurance of their salvation, that is, the forgiveness of their sins, their acceptance before God, and a future Heavenly home by solely placing their trust in Christ's righteousness and not any of their own. Justification comes as a free gift by the grace of God through the redemption that is in Christ.
2 Corinthians 5:21,"For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."
Ephesians 3:12,"In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him [pistis Christou]."
So, do we place our faith in "being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:" (Romans 3:24)...or by our performance and best efforts?...the answer appears to be very obvious. If this be true, why would anyone suppose that they continue in a justified position on the ground of self performance or best efforts?
Some claim that a genuine believer may fall from, or forfeit, their justified position by failing to continue placing their faith in Christ. However, a believer's faith was never, at any time, the ground of their justification, it was the only appointed means to receive the free gift of salvation..."lest any man should boast."(Eph.2:9). Once a person commits to placing their sole confidence in Christ's atoning work for their salvation, their nature will undergo a radical transformation at the point of regeneration, resulting in a trusting, or faith, that will never totally or ultimately be extinguished.
2 Timothy 1:12,"For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."
Philippians 1:6,"Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:"
To read the expression 'pistis Christou' as a reference to Christ's faith[fulness] does not detract from the essentialness of the believer's faith; for everywhere Paul uses the phrase he juxtaposes another expression which unambiguously denotes a human response. However, to read it as the Christian's belief in Christ [faith in Christ] neglects important Pauline instruction concerning Christ's redemptive work.
There are certainly some who hold to 'the faith[fulness] of Christ' as being the best rendering of 'pistis Christou', yet hold differing positions which stand in serious conflict with the common Reformational confession of 'justification by faith alone.' Most prominently, N.T. Wright, for example, "The New Perspective on Paul", argues that Paul's justification language primarily refers to the divine declaration that a person belongs among the covenant people, that Paul does not affirm the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers, and that the final judgment will be passed 'on the basis of the entire life.'
Conclusions such as N.T. Wright's, and their theologically implications, certainly do constitute a significant revision of the Reformed doctrine of justification itself; a revision that I do not support.
Summary/Key Points :
(1) God’s grace as the source of the believer’s justification.
(2) The nature of justification as a judicial verdict, by which God grants to sinners a new righteous status, on the basis of Christ’s death.
(3) Faith, trust in Christ, as the sole instrument through which God’s grace of justification is received.
I agree with Murray Smith's (following) perspective on this issue :
"[The points listed above] are all clearly evident in Romans 3:21-26 [but most certainly not limited to those verses]. Nevertheless, the apostle’s emphasis in this crucial paragraph is first theological and Christo-centric : he affirms, first and foremost, that the gospel reveals and vindicates God’s own righteousness, manifested in Christ’s trusting obedience to the Father, even to the point of death, and that this work of Christ provides the only ground for the justification of all who believe.
Indeed, far from posing a threat to the long-cherished Reformed doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone, this understanding of Paul’s argument in Romans 3 provides it with deeper roots. For if the gospel reveals God’s own righteousness, it reveals nothing less than God’s commitment to act in accordance with his own name, the name which declares that he is ‘the Lord, the Lord, gracious and compassionate, abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness’. On this reading, Paul’s affirmation that justification comes from God’s free grace is not limited to the brief statement in Romans3:24 (‘by his grace as a gift’), but deeply anchored in the very name of God.
In the same way, if the gospel reveals that God’s righteousness has been manifested in Christ’s faith/fulness, ‘the blood’ which provides the ground for the sinner’s justification is no arbitrary sacrifice, but the culmination of the perfect trusting obedience of the true Adam, the son of David, whose sacrifice of himself fully satisfies God’s justice precisely because it was the one and only sacrifice offered in perfect faith."
