As I continue to research Habakkuk 2:4 from my last post, St Jerome's explanation of 'the righteous will live by faith', I am even more disappointed to see how little attention it gets within Protestant-Catholic discussions. It seems to me that a lot of exegetical credibility is hanging on the meaning of "the righteous man will live by faith," particularly whether it actually is 'plainly' teaching Justification by Faith Alone (as Protestants since Luther have alleged). In this post, I want to take a more careful look at Hab 2:4, because I think this verse is actually quite devastating to the Protestant side, and might well explain why Protestant scholars do not take a careful look at it when it comes to them "proving" Sola Fide from Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, and Hebrews 10:38.
The first important detail to consider is that the Hebrew term "faith" in Hab 2:4 is not the Hebrew term for 'believe', but rather means steadfastness, remaining firm, and thus frequently rendered "faithfulness". In fact, this Hebrew term is often used in reference to God's faithfulness (e.g. Ps 36:5; 40:10; 89:1; 100:5; 119:90; Lam 3:23), which obviously cannot mean God's exercises faith (which is illogical). Even major Protestant translations like the NIV and NET render it as "faithfulness". Furthermore, the Reformed ESV and NASB both the term "faith" in the verse but have a footnote that says "or faithfulness". So there is really no controversy even among Protestants that this Hebrew term most accurately means "faithfulness" - it's just that Protestant scholars don't really like bring it up when discussing Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11 - likely because it causes considerable problems for 'faith alone'. The very notion of faithfulness suggests holding firm over a period of time. The term perseverance comes to mind. The idea is that you can turn to sin during this period, fall away, and thus fail to attain the blessing. That's hardly the same idea as being saved (permanently) the moment you believe in Jesus.
The Hebrew accents forbid the union "the just by faith," though, of course, no one can be just, righteous, without faith. The passage may be emphasized by rendering, "As to the just, through his faith he shall live."So, as with my prior Jerome post, it is important to emphasize that Habakkuk is not talking becoming righteous or attaining righteousness, but rather that the man in question is already righteous. This is another severe problem for the Protestant side, for it substantially undermines their entire position of Christ's Righteousness being imputed to us by faith. Once you become aware that Habakkuk is not saying "righteous by faith," you begin to see how frequently Protestants fall prey to this very error! Consider these big name Protestants putting an erroneous spin on "live by faith," including improperly substituting "righteousness" where Hab 2:4 uses the term "righteous":
- R.C Sproul: As Luther would stop short and say, “What does this mean, that there’s
this righteousness that is by faith, and from faith to faith? What does
it mean that the righteous shall live by faith?” Which again as I said
was the thematic verse for the whole exposition of the gospel that Paul
sets forth here in the book of Romans. And so, the lights came on for
Luther. And he began to understand that what Paul was speaking of here
was a righteousness that God was making available to those
who would receive it passively, not those who would achieve it actively,
but that would receive it by faith. (Justification By Faith Alone: Martin Luther & Romans 1:17)
- Got Questions?: Habakkuk 2:4 is quoted three times in the New Testament. Paul quotes it in Romans 1:17,
emphasizing the idea that righteousness by faith is for both Jews and
Gentiles: “For in the gospel a righteousness of God is revealed from
faith to faith, just as it is written, ‘The righteous will live by
faith.’” (Comments on Hab 2:4)
- John Calvin: Quoting this place in Romans 1:17, he says that the righteousness of God is in the gospel revealed from faith to faith, and then adds, “As it is written, The just shall live by faith.” Paul very rightly connects these things together that righteousness is made known in the Gospel—and that it comes to us by faith only; for he there contends that men cannot obtain righteousness by the law, or by the works of the law; it follows that it is revealed in the Gospel alone: how does he prove this? By the testimony of the Prophet Habakkuk—“If by faith the just lives, then he is just by faith; if he is just by faith, then he is not so by the works of the law.” (Commentary on Hab 2:4)
While it is certainly understandable that these Protestants made this error of thinking righteousness comes by faith, the fact is Habakkuk is saying "living" comes by faith (to the already righteous man), and that the term "righteous" is not technically the same as "righteousness". You might be able to argue that Paul is saying 'righteousness comes by faith' either here or elsewhere, but for our purposes we must stop and take a little more care than to boldly assert "righteousness comes by faith" when in reality it is "life comes by faith".
The third important detail to consider is that when you read Old Testament quotations in the New Testament, you must read the OT quotation in context. When you read the text in context, you realize nowhere in Habakkuk is it suggested that nobody is righteous. In fact, there are various passages that distinguish between those living righteously versus those living sinfully. Habakkuk himself was certainly not considered unrighteous before God! The very text in question clearly contrasts prideful sinners to those of God's humble servants: "Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith." So the Protestant assumption that this verse teaches "we cannot do good so must turn to faith alone" is just bogus. Indeed, even the language of "soul" and "not upright within him" doesn't sound like Imputation will solve the matter, since Imputation only operates on the outside, not within the soul. So that's strike 2 against Protestant assumptions. On top of that, Hebrews 10:32-39 explicitly quotes Habakkuk 2:4, applying it to Christians, and saying they must "do the will of God," endure sufferings, and not fall away (i.e. persevere) if they want to be saved. So there's no way Paul meant this as a faith alone nor a "once saved always saved" text. That's strike 3 for outrageous Protestant assumptions. The Protestant side, as often is the case, must presume and project Traditions of Men onto the Sacred Scriptures.
Finally, we must realize that Paul was not merely lifting a few words of a random book, but rather had a much more impressive argument to make, appealing to a prophetic book. (Anyone can lift a few words from a sentence, but that's not an argument nor is it convincing.) Thankfully, Habakkuk is only 3 pages long, so it's not hard to read it and get some feel for what it's about. The book begins by saying:
O Lord, how long shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? Or cry to you “Violence!” and you will not save? Why do you make me see iniquity, and why do you idly look at wrong? For the wicked surround the righteous; so justice goes forth perverted. (1:1-4)In response to this complaint by the Servant of God having to suffer injustice, God says He will raise up a world super-power (Babylonians) to come and destroy the wicked nations, including the sinful Israelite nation. This passage sounds a lot like Jesus on the Cross, crying out to the Father against the violence, hence "the wicked surround the righteous".
And the Lord answered me: "Write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so he may run who reads it. 3 For still the vision awaits its appointed time; it hastens to the end—it will not lie. If it seems slow, wait for it; it will surely come; it will not delay. 4 Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith. 5 “Moreover, wine is a traitor, an arrogant man who is never at rest. His greed is as wide as Sheol; like death he has never enough. He gathers for himself all nations and collects as his own all peoples. 6 Shall not all these take up their taunt against him, with scoffing and riddles for him, and say..." (2:1-6)God makes a prophecy of a Day of Judgment that will come, writing it down so that those who obey it can "run" for the hills. Sounds like Jesus telling the faithful to "run" when they see the signs of God's Judgment coming, recorded in Matthew 23. Jesus says to remain steadfast, don't lose heart, for it is in His own wise timeframe to avenge (Rom 12:19). What better candidate for "the righteous will live by his faithfulness" could there be than Jesus Christ? After all this time and suffering, God made sure to resurrect Jesus, causing Him to live because of His faithfulness. This fits with Romans 1, wherein Paul says:
1 the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead . . .It seems to me that Paul is not so much randomly bringing up a proof text for Salvation by Faith Alone, but rather Paul is more concerned about vindicating God, showing that the Holy Scriptures did indeed point to the Resurrection of Jesus. The phrase "righteous shall live by faith" most certainly must primarily refer to the 3 pages of Habakkuk, wherein we see the threefold theme of (1) God allowing the wicked to run around for a while, but (2) God rescues the righteous, and (3) God will punish the evil doers.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written [by his prophets in the holy Scriptures], “The righteous shall live by faith.”[Habakkuk 2] 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
In the time of Habakkuk, if we assume Habakkuk wrote prior to or during the Babylonians, then the upcoming doom of the world super-power Babylon is when God sends in a mighty force, the Persians to conquer them. Thus, this is a foreshadowing of when God sends in the Romans to wipe out Jerusalem for killing the Righteous One, Jesus. As it is foretold in Revelation when "Babylon" (Jerusalem) would be torn down in 70AD (Rev 14:8; 18:2).
Now, of course we can see Christians also fitting the lesson of Habakkuk, being that we are 'little Christs', and thus will endure similar things in our own life. Thus Habakkuk concludes by saying what God will do for us: "You went out for the salvation of your people, for the salvation of your anointed [anointed=Christian]." (3:13)
In conclusion, hopefully this reflection will help others to appreciate both the Minor Prophets as well as the Epistle to the Romans. It is my hope that people will no longer tolerate shallow, sloppy reading of texts, particularly ones in which Protestants love to appeal to against Catholicism. This is why I always caution Catholics to not simply accept what a Protestant says about a verse, since often times they are projecting erroneous ideas onto the verse. So by agreeing with them too early on, without doing your own reflection, is to give them too much credibility.
6 comments:
Wow, that makes a lot of sense too. The Minor Prophets don't get much attention(i confess i algo tend to ignore they :( ), so it is understandable that people would not discuss this barely quoted verse more offen. I really like these posts where you look up some protestant-favorite verses and tries to see if their common interpretation holds up. God knows how much verses like 1 Timothy 2:5 gets abused by the more parrot-like protestants!
I also think that another problem here is one of translation. On the original language or even on my own this verse can't be read to mean that faith creates righteousness, but in the translations that people like Luther and Calvin used you could read it that way. That shows the importance of theologians being capable of understanding Scripture in the original language. No wonder that the greek-speaking orientals never created something like protestantism.
Agreed. We tend to ignore the Minor Prophets so much that we fail to even think they could be important at all. But imagine if every Minor Prophet had a mind-blowing revelation about Jesus, and yet we were too lazy or oblivious to even see it.
The only reason Paul could appeal to an obscure prophet is if there was a big lesson to be learned. Nothing in the context of 1:16-17 has anything to do with "faith versus works," and in fact Paul's bigger concern is getting people to recognize Jesus is the Messiah. If people don't see that Jesus is the Messiah and that the "Righteousness of God" has definitively been revealed to the world, then it makes little sense to focus on the mechanics of how a person is saved rather than the basis/reason of our Salvation.
I think in Rom 1:16 when Paul says "from faith to faith," this is a Hebrew idiom meaning divine revelation has progressed over time, from Genesis to Moses to David to the Prophets, and in Paul's own time from the OT until the NT, where it has reached it's fullness.
As I've been thinking of this more, I think the key idea is that backdrop of Habakkuk is about the Babylonians are coming to destroy Israel for breaking the Mosaic Covenant, which naturally means Works of the Law aren't going to save them. They need some other means of salvation.
So given that they are in a hopeless situation, why is God suddenly telling Habakkuk that someone can live the good life by being faithful? That's fascinating. There is no more land of Judah, so how can there be "life"? The prophecy must be pointing to something more than the comfortable earthly life, and the faithfulness must be something more than fidelity to Moses. Thus, the cryptic 2:4 can only be understood in light of further reflection.
The other lesson here is that the Jews are in a similar predicament, facing another destruction for again breaking God's Law in the Death of Christ.
That is a interesting take on Habakkuk, but i think that the more jewish interpretation is that Jerusalem will be destroyed and eventually will be rebuild, so the justs have to endure the bad days with faith. This fits with what the other prophets where saying about Jerusalem before and right after its destruction.
But your point about they needing another means of salvation made me think on a doubt on my mind: the Mosaic Law never promises eternal life, so how can it be part of Judaism? It is a bit pointless to follow all the commandments to get a comfortable life if on the end even the gentiles, that don't follow Moses, will have a part on the World to Come, which is way better that what the Law promises. I need to study Judaism better someday, what i read never touched that...
Bro, stay tuned for Part 3 coming up today. I think the latest reflection ties it all together, with help from you and others.
The LXX. gives, Ὁ δὲ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεώς μου ζήσεται. that is "by my faithfulness shall live."
Post a Comment