The programmatic statement for Romans

Romans1:16-17 is said to be the programmatic statement for the book of Romans. It provides the primary direction for the rest of the letter.[1] Focusing on 1:17, this paper discusses what Paul have in mind by the phrase translated in the NIV as ‘by faith from first to last’ and how is this ‘just as it is written’ in Habakkuk2:4.

There have been many interpretations for ‘by faith from first to last’. Early church fathers such as Tertullian[2]^,[3] see it as “from the faith in the law to the faith in the gospel”. Origen and Theodoret[4] interpret it as “from faith in the prophets to faith in the gospel”. Chrysostom and Quarles[5] think it is “faith of Old Testament saints to the faith of New Testament believers”. Taylor and Kruse see it as describing “the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew then to the Gentile.”[6] Augustine[7]^,[8] believes it is “faith of the preacher and faith of the hearer”. Ambrosiaster, Barth and Dunn[9]^,[10] thinks the first “faith” refers to God’s faithfulness, and the second is the faith of the individual person, whereas Campbell[11] takes a Christocentric interpretation to the first “faith”. Aquinas interprets it as “from present faith to future faith” or “from faith in unseen realities to realities already possessed”.[12]

Calvin, Sanday, Headlam, and Lagrange[13]^,[14] believes it is a reference to the growth of faith in the individual. Moo[15] takes it as an idiom of emphasis, “by faith and faith alone”. Wardlaw[16] not only sees it as an idiom of emphasis but also a growth in the intensity of the ideal believer’s faith through habitual acts of faith. Lightfoot[17]^,[18] believes it is a thrust against Judaism, being righteousness that is both received by faith and has faith, not works, as its goal. Waetjen[19] interprets pistis as “trust” rather than “faith” and see the verse as “being justified out of the trust of Abraham, into the trust of Jesus Christ”.[20] I will focus on interpretations that translate pistis as “faith” and not look at interpretations that are incongruent with Paul’s normal usage of the word “faith”.[21] Since Romans1:16-17 serves as a programmatic statement and must fit with the key themes in the epistle, I will not look at the interpretations that do not fit the theme of Romans, such as Augustine and Aquinas.[22]

Campbell[23] sees two possible readings of Romans1:17a: the traditional anthropocentric reading, and the cosmic eschatological reading. In the anthropocentric reading, the saving righteousness of God is being revealed to individuals as they grasp it by faith. In the cosmic eschatological reading, the main point is the revelation of God’s eschatological saving righteousness by the gospel.[24] Campbell[25] believes this event is accomplished independently of the individual’s faith, and that to make the eschatological disclosure of God’s saving power conditional upon the believer’s faith would take the role of anthropocentric faith too far. On this basis, he rejects the anthropocentric reading.[26] With the cosmic eschatological reading, there is debate between a theocentric view versus a Christocentric view. Furthermore, there is debate on whether pistis is an objective (faith) or subjective (faithfulness) genitive.

Dunn[27] argues for a theocentric reference, where there is a play on the ambiguity of the word faith/faithfulness, in the sense “from God’s faithfulness to his covenant promises to man’s response of faith.” This links the concept of God’s righteousness with the quotation from Habakkuk. Furthermore, following a verb “reveal”, ‘from A’ is more naturally understood as denoting the source of the revelation, and ‘to A’ is that to which the revelation is directed. This reading is also consistent with a major theme in Romans: the faithfulness of God.[28] However, the biggest weakness of this reading is that it disagrees with the meaning of the Habakkuk verse. In the original Hebrew, Habakkuk2:4 is anthropocentric, as it instructs the righteous person how to face the apparent contradictions between God’s promises and what takes place in history.[29]

On the other hand, Moo and some other scholars[30]^,[31] believe that Paul appears to give the words of Habakkuk a different meaning because he Hebrew text and LXX have different constructions: the Hebrew reads “but the righteous, by his faith he will live”[32], while the LXX reads “the righteous by my faith/faithfulness will live”[33]. Paul omits the pronoun altogether in his quotation.[34]^,[35] While the traditional reading of Romans1-5 emphasises the necessity for humanity to believe in God and his Messiah for salvation[36], Käsemann[37] stirred the emphasis to the vindication of God. Zorn[38] believes that this emphasis on God means Paul is deliberately using the LXX of Habakkuk2:4 as “messianic”. I think the ambiguity about whose faith/faithfulness may even be Paul’s intention.

Campbell[39] points out that if the v17 is read as a parallelism, v17b would be talking about the faithfulness of God as well, and he cannot see any reason why “the faithfulness of God” should be repeated so many times. Campbell[40] believes a Christocentric reading resolves the Habakkuk2:4 original meaning debate because Christ had been fully human. He gives the following interpretation: “The eschatological saving righteousness of God is being revealed in the gospel by means of the faithfulness of Christ, with the goal of faithfulness in the Christian.” Campbell[41] suggests that Christ’s faithfulness is similar to the type of faith displayed by Abraham, because they both put their trust in God and displayed faithful, persevering allegiance to him. I disagree with Campbell’s hyper-Calvinist reading of the verse and believe an anthropocentric reading is still possible. Helisto points out that “no pre-Pauline Jewish writing cites Habakkuk2:4 in such a way that the citation can be understood messianically.”[42]

Furthermore, looking at the ‘from A to A’ formula in the LXX, Quarles[43] observes that the construction has a temporal sense and expresses duration, progression, or repetition. Using some examples from the TLG, the LXX and NT, Taylor[44] demonstrates that the first and second elements of the idiom denote the same thing. Therefore, Taylor believes that the ‘from A to A’ formula denotes a progression in faith. The progression is in the same faith so it is unlikely that the first reference is theological or Christological and the second reference is anthropological. Indeed, most commentators interpret the ek pisteōs as referring to the Christian believers.[45] Quarles[46] believes Chrysostom’s interpretation of is more accurate because it demonstrates a shift from one point in space or time to another point in space or time, and fits the theme of the book of Romans which emphasises the continuity of the old and New Testament faith.[47]

Taylor and Kruse head along a similar but slightly different path to Quarles. Taylor[48] looks at passages like Psalm98:2 and Isaiah51:4-8, which speak of the revelation of God’s righteousness for the salvation of Israel being witnessed by the nations, and thinks this idiom is not talking about personal or individual growth in faith. He believes that instead, it is referring to the mounting number of converts that Paul has seen in his ministry. Therefore, Taylor and Kruse[49] interpret the verse as “the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew then to the Gentile.” This interpretation fits well with the preceding verse as Romans16 makes a reference to the salvation for Jew and Gentile. It even fits well with Galatians as the Habakkuk2:4 quote in Galatians3:11 follows the reference to Gentile justification in Galatian3:8.[50]

Moo and Wardlaw[51] steer the interpretation in a different direction by placing rhetorical emphasis on salvation by faith alone. In Habakkuk, faith is the key to one’s relationship to God. In Romans1:17, faith refers to an intimate relationship with Christ, who is the object of faith.[52] From start to finish, from our conversion to our glorification, we experience God's saving righteousness through trusting in Jesus and not through the works of the law.[53] This interpretation is also consistent with the theme of Romans as Paul consistently links faith with righteousness and shows how “life” is the product of that righteousness in Romans1-8. However, Quarles observes that in Pauline literature, the ‘from A to A’ formula suggests a progression from a previous state to a new state. It does not appear to function as an idiom of emphasis.[54]

Wardlaw[55] is aware of Quarles’ position but believes one should not only look at the Greek but also the classical Hebrew text. Wardlaw looks at the Semitic idiom Romans1:17 derives from, and found a few verses in the Masoretic text using the same Semitic idiom: Number30:15, Jeremiah9:2 and Psalm84:4. He also looked at how they were translated into Aramaic and Greek, and found that these can also have a habitual, sequential or iterative meaning. Therefore he believes there is enough evidence to translate ‘from A to A’ as “by habitual acts of faith, the ideal believer’s faith grows in intensity through time.”[56] However, I think Wardlaw is stretching things too far, and as Quarles points out, “growing faith” does not seem to fit the theme of Romans since the book does not stress the growth of faith elsewhere.[57]

Most commentators seem to be able to derive good evidence to back their interpretations as well as fit their interpretations into a major theme in Romans. Paul might have left some room for ambiguity intentionally by omitting the pronoun in his quotation of Habakkuk2:7. However, I think Campbell and Wardlaw had to stretch quite far to gather evidence for their arguments. I believe the interpretation “first to the Jew then to the Gentile” meets the greatest number of ticks: it does not distort the original meaning of Habakkuk2:4, it is consistent with the theme of Romans, it fits the typical usage of the ‘from A to A’ formula in Pauline literature, and acts as an evidence of coherence[58] in Pauline literature as it agrees with both the verse preceding it as well as the content of Galatians3:8-11.

I believe the interpretation is: “first to the Jew then to the Gentile”. I believe this meaning is also consistent with the Abrahamic covenant in the Pentateuch, as I am in agreement with the scholars who believe that God’s principal desire is to bless all the families of the earth, and the promise of seed and land is subservient to this. In fact, the Sinaitic covenant tells us that the very reason why God is giving the promise of the seed and land is for Israel to serve as an example for/"light" to the nations so that all the nations can be blessed. For more details regarding the Pentateuch, see http://dryvonnewang.blogspot.com/2018/04/israel-and-nations.html

Bibliography:

Campbell, Douglas A. “Romans 1:17: A Crux Interpretum for the ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ Debate.” JBL 113 (1994): 268-285.

Clendenen, E Ray. “Salvation by faith or by faithfulness in the book of Habakkuk?” Bulletin for Biblical Research, 24 (2014): 505-513.

Dunn, James D. G. Roman 1-8. Dallas: Word Books, 1988.

Hunn, Debbie. “Pistis Christou in Galatians: the connection to Habakkuk 2:4.” Tyndale Bulletin, 63 (2012): 75-91.

Kruse, Colin G. Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Apollos: Nottingham, 2012.

Moo, Douglas J. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996.

Robertson, O. Palmer. “'The justified (by faith) shall live by his steadfast trust': Habakkuk 2:4.” Presbyterion, 9 (1983): 52-71.

Quarles, Charles L. “From Faith to Faith: A Fresh Examination of the Prepositional Series in Romans 1.17.” NovT 45 (2003): 2-21.

Taylor, John W. “From Faith to Faith: Romans 1.17 in the Light of Greek Idiom.” NTS 50 (2004): 337-348.

Wardlaw, Terrance Randall. “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17).” European Journal of Theology, 21(2012): 107-119.

Waetjen, Herman C. “The trust of Abraham and the trust of Jesus Christ: Romans 1:17.” Currents in Theology and Mission, 30 (2003): 446-454.

Zorn, Walter D. “The Messianic Use of Habbakuk 2:4a in Romans.” Stone-Campbell Journal, 1 (1998): 213-230

---

[1] James D. G. Dunn, Roman 1-8 (Dallas: Word Books, 1988), 46.

[2] Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Apollos: Nottingham, 2012), 75.

[3] Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 76.

[4] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[5] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[6] Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Apollos: Nottingham, 2012), 78.

[7] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[8] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 76.

[9] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[10] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 76.

[11] Douglas A. Campbell, “Romans 1:17: A Crux Interpretum for the ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ Debate,” JBL 113 (1994): 281.

[12] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[13] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[14] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 76.

[15] Terrance Randall Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” European Journal of Theology, 21(2012): 115

[16] Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” 117.

[17] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 76.

[18] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 76.

[19] Herman C. Waetjen, “The trust of Abraham and the trust of Jesus Christ: Romans 1:17,” Currents in Theology and Mission, 30 (2003): 450. The Greek term can mean “faith,” “trust,” or “belief”. To complicate the matter, the Hebrew term can mean “fidelity”.

[20] Waetjen, “The trust of Abraham,” 454.

[21] Charles L. Quarles, “From Faith to Faith: A Fresh Examination of the Prepositional Series in Romans 1.17,” NovT 45 (2003): 14-15. eg. Tertullian: Paul did not use the term “faith” to speak of dependence upon the Law for salvation. Paul expressed what Tertullian called “faith in the Law” using the terms “reliance” “confidence” or “boasting” but never “faith”.

[22] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 13-14. Quarles describes Augustine and Aquinas’ interpretations as not fitting the theme of Romans.

[23] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 271.

[24] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 272.

[25] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 273.

[26] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 276.

[27] Dunn, Roman 1-8, 48.

[28] Dunn, Roman 1-8, 44.

[29] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 77.

[30] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 77.

[31] E Ray Clendenen, “Salvation by faith or by faithfulness in the book of Habakkuk?” Bulletin for Biblical Research, 24 (2014): 505.

[32] O. Palmer Robertson, “'The justified (by faith) shall live by his steadfast trust': Habakkuk 2:4.” Presbyterion, 9 (1983): 63.

[33] Robertson, “'The justified (by faith) shall live by his steadfast trust',” 64.

[34] Robertson, “'The justified (by faith) shall live by his steadfast trust',” 69.

[35] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 77.

[36] Walter D. Zorn, “The Messianic Use of Habbakuk 2:4a in Romans,” Stone-Campbell Journal, 1 (1998): 217.

[37] Zorn, “The Messianic Use of Habbakuk 2:4a in Romans,” 219.

[38] Zorn, “The Messianic Use of Habbakuk 2:4a in Romans,” 230.

[39] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 280.

[40] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 281.

[41] Campbell, “Romans 1:17,” 280.

[42] Debbie Hunn, “Pistis Christou in Galatians: the connection to Habakkuk 2:4,” Tyndale Bulletin, 63 (2012): 89.

[43] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 9.

[44] John W. Taylor, “From Faith to Faith: Romans 1.17 in the Light of Greek Idiom,” NTS 50 (2004): 337-348.

[45] Zorn, “The Messianic Use of Habbakuk 2:4a in Romans,” 214.

[46] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 18.

[47] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 19.

[48] Taylor, “From Faith to Faith,” 337-348.

[49] Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 78.

[50] Hunn, “Pistis Christou in Galatians,” 89.

[51] Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” 115

[52] Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, 78.

[53] Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” 115

[54] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 13.

[55] Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” 114.

[56] Wardlaw, “A reappraisal of 'from faith to faith' (Romans 1:17),” 117.

[57] Quarles, “From Faith to Faith,” 13.

[58] Hunn, “Pistis Christou in Galatians,” 78.