Parent: JesusWordsOnly
James ' Reproof that Faith Without Endurance Saves (Jas. 1:12)
Paul is read by almost everyone today as saying that one is saved even if they do not endure in faith. Paul in (Rom. 10:11) says that anyone who "trusts in Him will never be put to shame." Charles Stanley says this trust is a singular moment in time. Paul's doctrine implies we do not have to have an enduring faith to be saved. Rather, we need only believe in a "singular moment in time" in our enduring Lord. (Stanley, Eternal Security, supra, at 80-81.)
(Jas. 1:12) reproves this teaching. He says to the contrary:
Blessed is the man that endureth temptation-, for when he hath
been approved, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord
promised to them that love him.
James was merely repeating Jesus' words. "He who endures to the end shall be saved." (Matt. 10:22). Jesus explained the lost ("withered away'Vdead) includes those who " believe for a while" but "in time of temptation fall away." (Luke 8:13). Elsewhere, breaking faith by disobedience means one is unsaved. John 3:36 ("He who keeps on believing has eternal life, but he who keeps on disobeying the son, the wrath of God continues to remain on him.")
- It is ironic but Paulunist historians recognize this contradiction, and use it to argue the Epistle of James was not written by James. "The farreaching differences in soteriology indicate that the author of the Letter of James cannot be identical with James the Lord's brother, who according to (Gal. 2).9 gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul and explicitly acknowledged his proclamation of the gospel among the Gentiles." (Udo Schnelle The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998) at 385-86.) However, this ignores Acts chapter 21 is after the events Paul mentions in Galatians 2:9. In Acts chapter 21, James still does not know Paul's doctrine on the Law. James asks and receives Paul's implicit reassurances that Paul is not teaching the Law's abrogation.
(Hab. 2:4:) What Does It Really Say?
How did Paul establish the contrary view to James? Besides his out-of-context quote of Psalm 32:1-2 and his mistaken view of (Gen. 15:6), Paul's faith alone doctrine had one other proof text. This came from Habakkuk. Paul claimed this passage establishes a one-time faith saves, without any endurance in faithful living to the Law. Paul was quoting (Hab. 2:4). Paul, however, quotes from the erroneous Septuagint translation. This led Paul to a completely erroneous interpretation. Paul in (Rom. 1:17) and (Gal. 3:11) states:
For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto
faith: as it is written [in (Hab. 2:4)], But the righteous shall
live by faith. ((Rom. 1:17)] But that no man is justified by the
law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live
by faith. (Gal.3:11 KJV)
Paul was apparently unaware that the Septuagint erred in its Greek translation of the Hebrew original. The key word in Habakkuk is not faith (i. e ., pistis in Greek), but faithfulness (i.e., emunah in Hebrew). Also, Paul omits a crucial word that appears both in the Septuagint and Hebrew: it is the word his before faithfulness . Both corrections overturn Paul's intended interpretation. The restoration of these missing pieces establish the opposite of what Paul was trying to prove.
H. Ray Dunning, Professor of Theology at Trevecca Nazarene College in Nashville, Tennessee, did a thorough study on emunah and pistis in (Hab. 2:4). Professor Dunning gently shows you they are diametrically different. The professor is certainly normative in his views. He does not show any sign of sympathy with my conclusions about Paul. Yet Professor Dunning is clearly showing that Paul erred in his understanding of Habakkuk 2:4. Here is the fruit of Professor Dunning's study:
The just shall live by his faith. The word rendered faith is the
Hebrew emunah, from a verb meaning originally "to be firm," and is
used in the Old Testament in the physical sense of steadfastness
(Smith, op. cit., p. 140). Thus the better rendering is
"faithfulness." Faith is a word for which, in the New Testament
active sense, the Hebrew has no equivalent -though the term
"believe" is derived from the same root as emunah. (IB, VI, 989). 37
Professor Dunning is explaining that there is a gap in translating faithfulness in Hebrew into Greek. The simple concept faith in Greek does not work. Thus, the noun emunah in Hebrew does not correspond properly to the word pistis in Greek, despite the Septuagint making this choice. The Hebrew text therefore means the just shall live by his faithfulness. What does faithfulness mean?
Professor Dunning gives many Biblical examples of emunah's meaning. He also does not shrink back from pointing out a meaning that disaffirms Paul's interpretation:
Emunah is the word used to describe the uplifted hands of Moses, which were steady (Exod. 17:12). It is also used of men in charge of money who "dealt faithfully" (II Kings 12:15). It is closely akin, if not identical, to the English idiomatic statement "Hold steady," implying that if one does not "bolt," the circumstances that surround him will alter. Lehrman's suggested meaning of the intention of this exhortation is good: "The righteous Israelite, who remains unswervingly loyal to the moral precepts, will endure, although he has to suffer for his principles; whereas the wicked, who enjoy a temporary ascendancy through their violation of right, are in the end overthrown and humbled." (Op. cit., p. 219).
- H. Ray Dunning, "The Divine Response, (Hab. 2:4)," Beacon Hitt Commentary' (Kansas City, Mo.: Beacon Hill Press, 1966) Vol. 5 at 277-78.
(Emphasis added.)
Emunah thus means faithfulness with its core meaning 'holding steady, holding firm, holding true to moral precepts.' This is why for James separating faith and faithfulness made no sense.
Professor Dunning goes on to explain that Paul was led into his erroneous interpretation by relying upon the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew into Greek. The Septuagint renders emunah with pistis. The professor is thereby making an excuse for Paul's misapplication. Professor Dunning states:
The Septuagint translated emunah by pistis (faith). It was this
translation which the New Testament writers made use of and thus
incorporated the vision of Habakkuk into the very heart of the
Christian preaching (kerygma).
Paul quotes this clause twice (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11) in support of his doctrine of justification by faith. By it he "intends that single act of faith by...the sinner secures forgiveness and justification."
Hence, Professor Dunning is saying Paul has a onetime faith in mind. This fits the Septuagint's choice of pistis. Yet, as the professor already explained, the meaning in Hebrew requires faithfulness, which means in context an "unswerving loyalty...to endure...."
Paul simply erred.
Thus, once more we see (Jas. 1:12), 17 is reproving Paul's entire notion that a one-time faith saves. Rather, it is the faith that endures times of temptation that will receive the "crown of life." James brushes aside Paul's contrary view with one quick jab.