# Justified 'by' faith and 'by' blood



## KMK (Apr 12, 2007)

Rom 5:1 "Therefore being justified by (ek) faith..."

Rom 5:9 "...being now justified by (en) His blood..."

Can some of 'attic dwellers' help me out with the exegetical subtleties of these different Greek prepositions?


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Apr 13, 2007)

In the first verse, ek is taken to indicate the _means_. In the second verse, en is taken to indicate _instrumentality_. See the various ways both may be used below:

ek (takes the Genitive case noun): 
1. Source: out of, from 
2. Separation: away from, from 
3. Temporal: from, from [this point]...on 
4. Cause: because of 
5. Partitive (i.e., substituting for a partitive gen.): of 
6. *Means: by*, from 

en (takes the Dative case noun) 
1. Spatial/Sphere: in (and various other translations) 
2. Temporal: in, within, when, while, during 
3. Association (often close personal relationship): with 
4. Cause: because of 
5. *Instrumental: by*, with 
6. Reference/Respect: with respect to/with reference to 
7. Manner: with 
8. Thing Possessed: with (in the sense of which possesses) 
9. Standard (=Dative of Rule): according to the standard of 
10. As an equivalent for eis (with verbs of motion)


----------



## KMK (Apr 13, 2007)

Gomarus said:


> In the first verse, ek is taken to indicate the _means_. In the second verse, en is taken to indicate _instrumentality_. See the various ways both may be used below:
> 
> ek (takes the Genitive case noun):
> 1. Source: out of, from
> ...



Thank you for this. My confusion is the difference between 'ek' as a 'means' and 'en' as an 'instrument'. They both seems to mean the same thing.



> From Webster's:
> instrument: a *means* whereby something is achieved, performed, or furthered
> 
> means: something useful or helpful to a desired end
> ...



Also in Rom 3:25 Paul writes, "Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through (dia) faith in his blood..." I am sure Paul had a reason for using these different prepositions but the subtlety is lost on me.


----------



## KMK (Apr 13, 2007)

> Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words; pg. 1282:
> 
> A very important instance of the instrumental en is in Rom 3:25, where the R.V., "faith, by His blood," corrects the A.V., "faith in His blood." Christ is a propitiation, by means of His blood, i.e., His expiatory death. Faith is excercised in the living God, not in the blood, which provides the basis for faith.



So... could we say that faith in the living God is the 'origin' of our justification, and Christ's shed blood is the means/instrument by which the living God justifies us?

Faith in Christ's shed blood is not salvific in and of itself. Christ's blood is salvific when it is applied by the living God to the faithful.

Anyone? ....... Anyone?


----------



## MW (Apr 13, 2007)

It seems daft to speak of an instrumental "en" in Rom. 3:25. What would "faith by His blood" mean? Faith is not produced by the blood. Quite clearly His blood is the object of faith.

The clause must be seen as a unit. One cannot separate "dia tes pistews" from "proetheto." God hath set forth Christ "a propitiation through faith." It is not speaking of faith as a subsequent act whereby the propitiation is made one's own, but of an element which is integral to the very nature of propitiation.


----------



## KMK (Apr 13, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> It seems daft to speak of an instrumental "en" in Rom. 3:25. What would "faith by His blood" mean? Faith is not produced by the blood. Quite clearly His blood is the object of faith.
> 
> The clause must be seen as a unit. One cannot separate "dia tes pistews" from "proetheto." God hath set forth Christ "a propitiation through faith." It is not speaking of faith as a subsequent act whereby the propitiation is made one's own, but of an element which is integral to the very nature of propitiation.



In Vine's defence he does add that the comma in the R.V. is necessary so that it reads, "whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, by His blood." 

Thus the blood is the instrument of propitiation, not faith.

But the KJV makes the faith that is required for propitiation more specific. It is specifically faith in His blood.



> John Gill
> 
> "Faith in His blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the benefits of his propitiation..."



This is a subtle difference from the RV I am noticing. The interesting thing is that I cannot find anywhere in the RV of Romans that teaches faith in His blood specifically is the means for propitiation.


----------



## MW (Apr 14, 2007)

John Gill: "Faith in His blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the benefits of his propitiation..."

This is a sound theological abstraction, but it doesn't get to the heart of what the text is saying. "Through faith in His blood" is as closely tied to God's setting forth as the propitiation is. It is objective, not subjective.


----------



## etexas (Apr 14, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> It seems daft to speak of an instrumental "en" in Rom. 3:25. What would "faith by His blood" mean? Faith is not produced by the blood. Quite clearly His blood is the object of faith.
> 
> The clause must be seen as a unit. One cannot separate "dia tes pistews" from "proetheto." God hath set forth Christ "a propitiation through faith." It is not speaking of faith as a subsequent act whereby the propitiation is made one's own, but of an element which is integral to the very nature of propitiation.


Well put! Amen.


----------



## KMK (Apr 14, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> John Gill: "Faith in His blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the benefits of his propitiation..."
> 
> This is a sound theological abstraction, but it doesn't get to the heart of what the text is saying. "Through faith in His blood" is as closely tied to God's setting forth as the propitiation is. It is objective, not subjective.



"Whom God set forth through faith in His blood, a propitiation..."??????

The 'setting forth' is by means of 'faith in His blood'?

Excuse my ignorance. If you feel like you are suffering a fool gladly, it is because you are.


----------



## MW (Apr 15, 2007)

KMK said:


> "Whom God set forth through faith in His blood, a propitiation..."??????
> 
> The 'setting forth' is by means of 'faith in His blood'?



Shedd (Commentary in loc.) conveys the idea well: "the whole clause is an adjunct of protheto: God sets forth Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice, by means of (dia) the believer's faith in this sacrifice, and this faith rests on (en) the blood, or death, of the sacrifice (Luther, Calvin, Beza, Olshausen, Tholuck, Hodge). This is the most natural interpretation... The thought of the writer is, that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is completely set forth and exhibited, only when it is effectually applied by the Holy Spirit, and appropriated by faith. The full virtue of the atonement is not understood except by a believer."

The clause taken as a whole is a strong rebuttal of the universal atonement theory as it shows that God has only set forth Christ to be a propitiation through faith. The death of Christ cannot be regarded as effecting anything apart from faith in the death of Christ.


----------



## JM (Apr 15, 2007)

Belgic Confession:
Article 22
Therefore we justly say with Paul, that we are justified by faith alone, or by faith apart from works. However, to speak more clearly, we do not mean that faith itself justifies us, FOR IT IS ONLY AN INSTRUMENT WITH WHICH WE EMBRACE Christ our righteousness. But Jesus Christ, imputing to us all His merits, and so many holy works which He has done for us and in our stead, is our righteousness. And _faith is an instrument_ that keeps us in communion with Him in all His benefits, which, when they become ours, are more than sufficient to acquit us of our sins.

First London Baptist Confession:
Article 28
THOSE that have union with Christ, are justified from all their sins by the blood of Christ, which justification is a gracious and full acquittance of a guilty sinner from all sin, by God, through the satisfaction that Christ hath made by His death for all their sins, and this applied *(in manifestation of it)* through faith.
1 John 1:7; Heb.10:14, 9:26; 2 Cor.5:19; Rom.3:23; Acts 13:38,39; Rom.5:1, 3:25,30.


----------



## KMK (Apr 16, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> Shedd (Commentary in loc.) conveys the idea well: "the whole clause is an adjunct of protheto: God sets forth Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice, by means of (dia) the believer's faith in this sacrifice, and this faith rests on (en) the blood, or death, of the sacrifice (Luther, Calvin, Beza, Olshausen, Tholuck, Hodge). This is the most natural interpretation... The thought of the writer is, that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is completely set forth and exhibited, only when it is effectually applied by the Holy Spirit, and appropriated by faith. The full virtue of the atonement is not understood except by a believer."





> John Calvin: I prefer thus literally to retain the language of Paul; for it seems indeed to me that he intended, by one single sentence, to declare that God is propitious to us as soon as we have our trust resting on the blood of Christ; for by faith we come to the possession of this benefit.



This has been hard for me to wrap my mind around because I have always understood this verse to be along the lines of Poole:



> Poole: Whom God hath set forth; i.e. God the Father hath proposed this Jesus, in the eternal counsel, and covenant of redemption; or in the types and shadows of the old tabernacle; and *hath now at last shown him openly to the world.*



This is very interesting because most of the modern expositors that I have read, in addition to the modern translations, see it differently.



> F.F. Bruce: Note the more accurate puncuation in RV, 'whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, by his blood'; the two phrases 'through faith' and 'in his blood' are independently epexegetic of 'propitiation'.


----------

