The OT concept of faith is broader than the commonly held idea of faith. The commonly held idea is a a mental or cognitive assent to a belief.
The Hebrew word for "Emunah" is often better translated as Faithfulness of which the majority definition of "faith" is but a subset.
Thus in Hebraic thought, if you have faith, you act a certain way. And if you acted in a certain way, you are exhibiting faith.
This doesn't mean that the Hebraic view eliminated the cognitive assent since the idea of having the law written on your heart is clearly an allusion to an inward state, which should result in outward obedience.
Thus there is no clash between Paul and James regarding faith and works. They are both likely to be dealing with the corruption of the idea of emunah by an over-emphasis of the Greek understanding of faith.
E P Sanders argues that the widely held idea that 1st Century Rabbinic Judaism is based on a false premise of justification by works is incorrect. If true, then we have made a misjudgement that has far reaching consequences on our understanding of Pauline thought.
Instead of viewing Paul as the Hellenised Jew who reformed Judaism by recasting the mode by which justification is achieved, how would we view Paul's writings if we thought of him merely as a Rabbi who believed his Messiah had come?
No comments:
Post a Comment