What is meant by “the righteous shall live by his faith”?

Explanation:

The construction of the Hebrew clause the righteous will live by his faith/faithfulness leaves little room as to the meaning of Habakkuk 2:4. The subject is the righteous or the righteous person (צַדִּיק). The subject does the action of the verb, which is to live ִ(חְיֶֽה). What will the righteous person do? The righteous person will live. The verb to live is in the imperfect tense, and when the imperfect tense does not appear at the beginning of a sentence, the syntax suggests an action that is not yet complete.³ In other words, the righteous will continually live.

The noun אֱמוּנָה (faith/faithfulness/firmness/steadfastness) is modified by the preposition בֶּ (with/by/in) and ends with the pronominal suffix וֹ (his). Taken together, this noun can be translated by/with/in his faith/faithfulness. When we take the whole construction together, we get a literal translation to the effect of the righteous person will continuously live by his faith/faithfulness. In other words, the way a righteous person lives their life, as opposed to a person who is not upright (Habakkuk 2:4a), is by faith/faithfulness. Interestingly, one does not need to assume a definition of righteousness to make sense of the phrase, because there is a sense in which the phrase defines what righteousness is. Righteousness is when a person lives by faith/faithfully.

The noun אֱמוּנָה (faith/faithfulness/firmness/steadfastness) carries the sense of steadfastness or firmness. What does it mean to live faithfully? In the Israelite context, faithfulness has to do with putting one’s trust in God and his covenant promises.⁴ God promised the Israelites that if they obeyed his commands and loved God with all their heart, soul, and mind, things would go well for them (Deuteronomy 6:1–5; Deuteronomy 8:1–20). In the context of this passage, then, God is explaining to Habakkuk that the righteous person is the one who, even though he endures suffering and discouragement, continues to live faithfully in his covenant relationship with God. This entails trusting, loving, and believing in God at all times.⁵

Counterargument:

While it is true that the Israelites lived in a covenant relationship with God that was established through Moses, the faith/faithfulness of this passage should be defined in a narrower sense. What God wants Habakkuk to know is that the one who is righteous is the one who has faith in God’s vision that he is delivering to Habakkuk.⁶ We can draw this conclusion for two reasons. First, Habakkuk is essentially asking God why he allows good things to happen to evil people. Habakkuk is struggling with why injustice seems to go unpunished, and he wants to understand why God waits to punish the wicked. God begins his response in Habakkuk 1:5 by explaining that he is doing a work with the Chaldeans (Babylonians) that Habakkuk would not believe even if God told him. When we reach Habakkuk 2:3, God assures Habakkuk that although he does not see God’s plan, it surely is coming to pass, and Habakkuk must remain patient. The notion that Habakkuk does not understand the wisdom of God’s plan sets Habakkuk up for Habakkuk 2:4b, where God states that the righteous are those who live by faith/faithfulness. In other words, Habakkuk should trust in the vision that God reveals to him. God is using the Babylonians to do his will.

Our second piece of evidence for this view comes from the Septuagint. There we find the authors of the Septuagint have taken the noun faith/faithfulness, not to be that of the righteous one, but to be that of God. This is accomplished by the insertion of the personal pronoun μου (my): ὁ δὲ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεώς μου ζήσεται (The righteous one will live by my faith). The fact that the writers of the Septuagint took faith to be that of God rather than that of the righteous one seems to indicate that it is the faithfulness of God that matters. In other words, the righteous one is the person who lives by trusting in the faithfulness of God’s vision.

Response to counterargument:

The notion that God wants Habakkuk to trust based on the vision that God has a plan that is being fulfilled does not exclude taking the noun אֱמוּנָה (faith/faithfulness/firmness/steadfastness) in a broader sense such as trusting in the covenant relationship. Faithfulness toward God was part of Israelite theology. In Genesis 15:6 we read that Abraham believed (אָמַן), with the verb being from the same root as faith/faithful (אֱמוּנָה), and the Lord counted it to him as righteousness. Also, in Nehemiah 9:8 Nehemiah offers a short exposition of Abraham’s faithfulness, writing, You found his heart faithful. These occasions imply that when God tells Habakkuk that the righteous person is the one who lives by his faith, he is referring to a broader theology that Habakkuk would have been aware of.⁷ And if God is reminding Habakkuk in the broader sense to have faith, or remain faithful, this includes the narrower notion of trusting the content of the specific vision that God is revealing.

Explanation:

There are several places in the Old Testament where faith signifies something like a commitment to righteousness. For example, in 1 Samuel 26:1–25, Saul pursues David in order to kill him, but David finds out his plan and sneaks into Saul’s camp before taking his spear and water jug (1 Samuel 26:12). David then calls out to Abner the king’s guard and explains that he has Saul’s spear and had the opportunity to kill him (1 Samuel 26:16). Saul is awakened by the commotion and because David did not try to harm Saul, Saul agrees not to harm David (1 Samuel 26:21). Then David explains that the reason he did not kill Saul when he had the chance is that the Lord rewards everyone for their righteousness and faithfulness (1 Samuel 26:23). David’s point is that the righteous person lives by faithfulness, trusting in God’s provision. We find similar correlations between righteousness and justice in Psalm 33:4–5, Psalm 119:75, and Psalm 143:1.⁸

Counterargument:

There are different ways to conceive of what it means to be righteous. The notion that the way a righteous person lives is by faith/faithfulness is a specific claim about what it means to be righteous. It is also possible that to be righteous is to live by the law, or to be morally praiseworthy. The point is, while there might be a correlation between the terms righteous and faith/faithfulness in a variety of Bible passages, none of the above passages conveys the notion that the way to live as a righteous person is by faith/faithfulness.

Response to counterargument:

The above passages do not need to explicitly state that what it means to be righteous is to live faithfully. Rather, the point is that there is a significant correlation between righteousness and faith/faithfulness. Psalm 33:1–22 is a good example. There we read that all of God’s work is done in faithfulness and that he loves righteousness. While the psalmist does not state that the righteous person lives by faith/faithfulness, such a sentiment can easily be implied. Since God loves righteousness (Psalm 33:5), he also loves the righteous person (Habakkuk 2:4b). And since God himself does all of his deeds faithfully, Habakkuk should remain faithful toward the covenant that God established with Israel.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that the passage does not state specifically that faithfulness has to do with remaining faithful toward the covenant God established with Israel. In other words, there is no indication as to the object of faith/faithfulness. Faith/faithfulness is a flexible noun that can be applied to a variety of situations. For example, faithfulness could be used

1. in an instrumental sense to denote that if one is faithful in his work, one will have a better chance at success;

2. as a virtue, as in, the one who is faithful has a virtuous character because he is reliable;

3. to mean faithfulness toward God’s Word and his covenant promises.

This third usage carries a sense of trusting in God. Indeed, this usage is more comprehensive than the others because it seems to include them and more. It carries the sense of instrumentality because faithfulness toward God results in God’s protection and security. It also carries a sense of virtue because God is the greatest being, so the Israelites are obliged to show reliability in upholding the covenant. Still, faithfulness in the sense of trusting in God also carries a sense of relying on God more than oneself. Based on the context, there is a good reason to think that faithfulness in Habakkuk 2:4b has to do with trusting in God’s Word, but still, this must be inferred because the passage is simply not explicit on this.

Explanation:

God established a covenant with Israel and framed their relationship from a legal perspective. The notion is that right and wrong deeds were adjudicated by a judge and righteousness is when one falls on the right side of a sentence. The Israelites were bound to a covenant relationship with God that centred on a law that was dictated by God. Life and death hinged on God’s legal decisions regarding one’s status before him.¹⁰ This means that righteousness, for an Israelite, was understood in a forensic, not a moral sense. One could be declared righteousness by God, but from a moral perspective one was still a sinner and therefore guilty.¹¹

This means that a person cannot be righteous by his faith/faithfulness because one is only declared righteous by God from a judicial perspective. Faith/faithfulness in Habakkuk 2:4b does not describe what it means to be righteous, but rather the way that one continues to live, now that he has been justified. In other words, God has justified the sinner by establishing a covenant with him and declaring him righteous. If that person lives faithfully, that person will continue to receive the gift of life.¹²

Counterargument:

There is no indication from the passage that by righteous person God means the person who has been judicially declared righteous as opposed to the person who lives a certain way (faithfully). Added to this, we have good reason to think that the covenant that God established with Israel was not centred around laws dictated by God (although there were laws) but around being in a loving relationship with God. It might be the case that God gave laws to the Israelites to teach them the behaviour that was a necessary condition for being in a relationship with him, but behaviour alone was not a sufficient condition. If that were the case then a sinful person could be justified by God through works, but such a notion is counter to Christian theology (Romans 1:4–5). Rather, God’s intention was to establish a relationship.

We get a sense of this relationship in Exodus 20:6, where God states that he shows steadfast love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments. The keeping of the commandments is not God’s primary aim; rather, establishing a loving relationship is God’s aim, which entails keeping the commandments. We find a similar statement in Deuteronomy 6:5, where God explains that his desire for Israel is that they love him with all their heart, soul, and mind. Whether or not the Israelites were able to live up to God’s call to live by faith is not the point. The point is that God reveals what it means to be righteous, which is to live faithfully.

Response to counterargument:

How God established his covenant and held Israel to account was through the law. God gave to Israel not only the Ten Commandments but also a host of social and ceremonial laws, and these were used to enforce covenant faithfulness.¹³ God makes clear time and again that if the Israelites obey God’s commands, things will go well for them, but if they do not obey God’s commands, they will be cursed (Exodus 20:6).

Response to the response to counterargument:

While it is the case that the Israelites would be cursed if they disobeyed God’s covenant, the covenant is clearly established on the notion that God’s desire is to be in a loving relationship with Israel (Exodus 20:6). The blessings and curses of the covenant reflect the structure of other ancient Near Eastern treaties, so it should not surprise us that God frames the covenant through contextual categories, like blessings and curses, that were known to the Israelites.¹⁴ What is surprising is that, unlike other ancient Near East treaties, the reason for maintaining the covenant with God is so that you and your offspring may live, loving the Lord your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days (Deuteronomy 30:19–20).

Explanation:

The common placement of the verb in Hebrew grammar is at the beginning of a sentence or clause. In the case of Habakkuk 2:4b, we do not find this construction, but instead, we find the subject צַדִּיק (the righteous person) at the beginning of the sentence. In Hebrew, when the subject appears at the beginning of the sentence, it is sometimes followed by an independent clause that includes a retrospective suffix, and this is exactly what we find in Habakkuk 2:4b.¹⁵ The noun faith/faithful (בֶּאֱמוּנָתוֹ) ends with the third-person masculine singular pronominal suffix (his). The Hebrew author records the subject, the righteous person, and then reiterates the subject in a different manner. In this light, Habakkuk 2:4b is best translated as, The righteous person by his faithfulness will live.

When taken this way, it is clear that the righteous person is not righteous because he is faithful and therefore lives. Rather, the righteous person, by his faithfulness, receives life. The difference is not innocuous. In the first case, the righteous person is righteous on account of the fact that he lives faithfully. In the second case, the righteous person is declared righteous by God in a judicial sense, and that person receives the gift of life by living faithfully/by faith.

Counterargument:

While it is the case that the most common word order for Hebrew sentences is verb-subject-object, this is not a hard and fast rule. In fact, Hebrew word order is flexible, and there are many instances when the subject will appear before the verb.¹⁶ This means that we need to consider the context to help us decide on the correct word order for our translation. In the case of Habakkuk 2:4b, we have Habakkuk asking God why he remains silent when the wicked swallow up the righteous (צַדִּיק) (Habakkuk 1:13). God answers, explaining that the ones who are not upright (Babylonians) are filled with pride, but the righteous (or upright ones) live by faith/faithfulness. God cannot be saying that through faith the righteous person receives the gift of life because clearly, the prideful Babylonian is also alive. Still, while the Babylonian is alive, he is not upright, because he does not live by faithfulness. Instead, he lives by his own pride, and eventually he will come under God’s judgment (Habakkuk 2:8). On the contrary, the one who is upright (righteous) is upright because he lives by his faith/faithfulness.

Response to counterargument:

When God reveals to Habakkuk that the righteous one through his faith will receive life, God means more than mere physical survival. In Scripture, life is often characterized as living in a full covenant relationship with God.¹⁷ For example, in Deuteronomy 1:8 God exhorts the Israelites to obey his commands on the promise that if they do, they will both live and increase. In Deuteronomy 16:20 this sentiment is reiterated when God states that those who follow justice will both live and possess the land. And in Leviticus 18:5 we read that the person who obeys God’s commands will live by doing so. In other words, the gift of life, which the one who has been declared judicially righteous receives, is not the simple fact of being alive, but being alive in the fullest sense. This fullest sense of life can only be enjoyed through trusting in God.¹⁸

Possible weakness:

There are two weaknesses in this view. First, it assumes that Israel characterized the covenant with God solely in a legal sense. But it is not clear that the Israelites only thought of the covenant relationship with God in legal terms, although that theme was present. God made clear that his desire was to be in a loving relationship with Israel on multiple occasions (Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 6:5).

The second weakness is that this view risks characterizing the covenant relationship of God with Israel through a human perspective rather than a divine perspective. Even if Israel ultimately misunderstood this about God, the revelation we have through Moses reveals the covenant that God established, not the Israelites' interpretation of that covenant. A similar argument applies to our text. Whether or not Habakkuk understood God in a forensic sense is not relevant, because Habakkuk is recording a revelation directly from God. The revelation reiterates the covenant theology of Moses, which has to do with being faithful to God from the motivation of a loving heart. In summary, to suggest that Habakkuk 2:4b has to do with a forensic understanding of God’s covenant with Israel is to understand the covenant from a human’s perspective rather than God’s, but since this is a revelation from God, such an understanding is a mistake.

Explanation:

Habakkuk asks God to explain why the righteous suffer at the hands of the Babylonians. God responded by telling Habakkuk to record the vision. Next, God implies that the vision is trustworthy and reliable by explaining that it will come to pass at just the right time. The sentiment that the vision is trustworthy can help us get at the meaning of Habakkuk 2:4b. Even if the timing of the vision seems slow, God tells Habakkuk to wait. In other words, the appropriate human response to the trustworthiness of the vision is to believe it and live in a way that reflects that faith.²⁰ The one who is not upright will not believe the vision (Habakkuk 2:4a), but the righteous person will believe it and will live.

Counterargument:

The only way to make sense of this interpretation is if we take the soul in Habakkuk 2:4a to refer to the one who does not believe the words of the vision. The notion is that God is delineating the unrighteous from the righteous based on their intention to uphold the vision. This is possible, but it does not seem to fit the context. Habakkuk is asking God why the violent men of Babylon, who are not upright, can get away with oppressing the righteous (Habakkuk 1:13). God responds with an oracle against Babylon, so it only makes sense that when God refers to the prideful soul who is not upright (Habakkuk 2:4a), he is referring to Babylon. The reason for this is that God will go on to describe people who are arrogant (Habakkuk 2:5), who gather nations for themselves (Habakkuk 2:5), who plunder many nations (Habakkuk 2:8), and who build towns with blood (Habakkuk 2:12). Further, Habakkuk will respond to the vision by stating that he will wait quietly for the day of trouble to come upon the people who invade Israel (Habakkuk 3:16). When taken together, the likely candidate for the prideful soul who is not upright is Babylon. Contrast this with the righteous, who live not by pride, but by faithfulness toward God (Habakkuk 2:4b).

Possible weakness:

The problem with this view is that it seems to ignore the overall theme of the prophecy. Habakkuk asks God why the wicked seem to go unpunished. God explains that the wicked will be punished, and the prophecy concludes with Habakkuk’s praising God for his provision and submitting to wait quietly for the Lord’s judgment (Habakkuk 3:16). All of this implies that the person who lives by faith in Habakkuk 2:4b is to be contrasted with characteristics of the prideful nation that will be judged. God is not asking the Israelites to live by the trustworthiness of the vision (although such a request is implied) but is explaining the difference between the righteous and those who are not upright.