One Pronoun That Split the Church: Habakkuk 2:4 and Martin Luther
The verse that led to the Reformation
“The just shall live by faith.”
Five words. One verse. The hinge upon which Martin Luther’s entire theological revolution turned.
But here’s what most Christians don’t know: the Hebrew and Greek versions of this verse say fundamentally different things. And the question of which reading is correct— his faith or my faith —goes to the very heart of the gospel itself.
Are we saved by our faith in God, or by God’s faithfulness to us?
Let’s dig into the text that changed the world.
The Textual Issue: Whose Faith?
Habakkuk 2:4b
Hebrew MT (Masoretic Text):
וְצַדִּיק בֶּאֱמוּנָתוֹ יִחְיֶה
Transliteration: ve-tzaddiq be’emunato yichyeh
Literal translation: “But the righteous by his faithfulness shall live”
The suffix -ו (-o) = “his”
Greek LXX (Septuagint):
ὁ δὲ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεώς μου ζήσεται
Transliteration: ho de dikaios ek pisteōs mou zēsetai
Literal translation: “But the righteous shall live by MY faith/faithfulness“
The word μου (mou) = “my” (first person, referring to God)
The difference? One tiny Hebrew letter.
In Hebrew, the difference between “his” and “my” is the difference between:
ו (vav) = “his” (third person masculine singular suffix)
י (yod) = “my” (first person singular suffix)
These two letters look remarkably similar in ancient Hebrew manuscripts, and scribes could easily confuse them. But the theological implications are huge.
What the Dead Sea Scrolls Say
The Habakkuk Commentary (1QpHab), one of the original seven Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in 1947, contains the oldest known interpretation of Habakkuk 2:4. Dating to the first century B.C., this scroll is remarkably close to the Masoretic Text.
Here’s what scholars found:
1QpHab preserves Habakkuk 2:4 with the suffix that matches the MT — “his faithfulness,” not “my faithfulness.”
However, the Qumran community interpreted this verse in a fascinating way. The pesher (commentary) on Habakkuk 2:4 states:
“This concerns all in the house of Judah who observe the Torah, who God has removed from the house of judgment on account of their hard labor and their faithfulness to the Teacher of Righteousness.“
Notice: even with a text that read “his faith,” the Qumran community understood it as faithfulness expressed through obedience rather than faith as mere intellectual assent or trust.
The Hebrew Word: Emunah
To understand the debate, we need to grasp what the Hebrew word אֱמוּנָה (emunah) actually means.
Emunah can mean:
Faith (trust in God)
Faithfulness (loyalty, steadfastness)
Reliability (trustworthiness)
The same word carries all these meanings. There is no separate Hebrew word for “faith” versus “faithfulness.” Context determines which nuance is intended.
In Habakkuk’s original context, emunah most naturally means faithfulness or steadfastness; the righteous person endures by remaining faithful to God amid suffering and injustice, trusting that God’s vision (Habakkuk 2:3) will come to pass.
The Jewish Publication Society translates Habakkuk 2:4 as:
“The righteous man is rewarded with life for his fidelity.“
This captures the Hebrew sense: the righteous live because they remain faithful. They don’t give up, they don’t abandon God, they wait for His deliverance.
How Did the LXX Get “My Faith”?
There are three main theories:
Theory 1: Different Hebrew Source Text
The Septuagint translators (3rd–2nd century B.C.) may have been working from a Hebrew manuscript that had י (yod, “my”) instead of ו (vav, “his”). This would be a simple scribal error, given how similar these letters appear.
However, the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t support this theory. The Qumran text from the 1st century B.C. reads “his faith,” which suggests the MT reading is very ancient.
Theory 2: Theological Interpretation
Some scholars suggest the LXX translators intentionally changed “his faith” to “my faith” to emphasize that salvation depends on God’s faithfulness, not human righteousness.
This fits the broader LXX tendency to make God the primary actor in salvation. The translators may have wanted to guard against any notion that human effort or merit could save.
Theory 3: Scribal Error in Transmission
It’s also possible that the LXX originally read “his faith” (matching the Hebrew), but a later Greek copyist accidentally changed it to “my faith.”
In fairness, however, this having been done accidentally is highly unlikely. The Greek word for “my” is μου while the word for “his” is αὐτοῦ. These two words clearly look almost nothing alike.
So it seems much more likely that if a mistake happened, rather than being isolated it created a textual variant where the Qumran community (and the later Masoretic Text) had one tradition and the other was translated into Greek.
Manuscript variants happen. We have more than enough evidence to support this. But here’s the thing: by the time Paul wrote Romans, the LXX reading “my faith” had been in circulation for at least 1-2 centuries, and Paul had access to both traditions.
Paul’s Use: A Middle Way?
Here’s where it gets really interesting.
Paul quotes Habakkuk 2:4 three times in the New Testament:
Romans 1:17 – “The righteous shall live by faith.”
Galatians 3:11 – “The righteous shall live by faith.”
Hebrews 10:38 (often attributed to Paul) – “My righteous one shall live by faith.”
Notice what Paul does: he drops the possessive pronoun entirely in Romans and Galatians!
He doesn’t say “his faith” (MT) or “my faith” (LXX). He just says “by faith.”
Why?
Some scholars, like James Dunn, suggest Paul is intentionally holding both meanings in tension:
God’s faithfulness makes salvation possible.
Our faith receives that salvation.
Paul may be saying: “The one who is maintained within or has been brought into the relationship with God by the outreach of God’s faithfulness to his own faith shall experience the fullness of life as he lives in the dependence of faith on the continuing faithfulness of God.”
In other words: salvation is by God’s faithfulness, received through our faith.
But other scholars, like Richard Hays, see Paul’s use in Galatians 3:11 as referring to Christ’s faithfulness:
“The Messiah [the Righteous One] will live by His own faithfulness.”
This reading makes Christ Himself the faithful one who lives and dies in obedience, securing salvation for us.
Martin Luther’s Tower Experience
Now we come to the moment that shook the Christian world.
Martin Luther, a young Augustinian monk, was tormented by guilt. He had entered the monastery seeking peace with God, but found none. He fasted. He prayed. He confessed his sins for hours. Nothing worked.
The problem? Luther believed that “the righteousness of God” meant God’s holy standard that condemns sinners.
In 1513, Luther began lecturing on the Psalms. When he came to Psalm 31:1— “In Your righteousness deliver me” —he was confused. How could God’s righteousness deliver him when it only condemned him?
Luther kept wrestling with this question as he studied Romans. And then, sometime between 1513 and 1518, while meditating in the tower of the Black Cloister in Wittenberg, Luther had his breakthrough.
Here’s how he described it later in life:
“I had greatly longed to understand Paul’s letter to the Romans, but a single word in chapter one stood in my way: ‘the righteousness of God.’ I hated that phrase because I understood it to mean the righteousness by which God is just and punishes unjust sinners.
“Night and day I pondered… until finally, by the mercy of God, I paid attention to the words: ‘The righteous shall live by faith.’ Then I grasped that the righteousness of God is that righteousness by which, through grace and sheer mercy, God justifies us through faith.
“I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise. The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning.”
Luther realized: God’s righteousness is not what condemns us, it’s what He gives to us as a gift.
We are saved not by achieving righteousness (infused grace that makes us gradually holy), but by receiving righteousness (the alien righteousness of Christ credited to us by faith alone).
This was sola fide— justification by faith alone —the doctrine that would ignite the Protestant Reformation.
The Reformation Hinge
On October 31, 1517, Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door in Wittenberg, protesting the sale of indulgences.
(If you’re unfamiliar, this is basically the practice in the medieval Catholic Church of the clergy accepting monetary payments in exchange for a certificate that allegedly reduced or cancelled the punishment for sins. You can read more about it HERE).
But the deeper issue wasn’t about indulgences but rather how sinners are saved.
The Roman Catholic Church taught infused grace: God puts grace into the sinner, enabling them to gradually become righteous through obedience and the sacraments. Salvation was a process of transformation.
Luther’s breakthrough shattered this. He proclaimed: Salvation is not infused; it’s imputed. God doesn’t make us righteous over time; He declares us righteous instantly, by faith in Christ.
This is what Luther called “alien righteousness.” That is, righteousness that comes from outside of us, from Christ alone. We are saved not by our own goodness, but by Christ’s perfect righteousness credited to our account.
And it all hinged on Habakkuk 2:4: “The just shall live by faith.”
The Catholic Response
The Council of Trent (1545–1563) condemned Luther’s doctrine. The Catholic Church insisted that:
Faith alone is not sufficient, good works are necessary.
Justification is both declaration and transformation.
The sacraments are essential to salvation.
Essentially, Rome said: You’re saved by faith in Christ, but you’re preserved by faithfulness and obedience.
The Reformers replied: No. Faith and works can’t both justify. Either Christ’s work is sufficient, or it’s not.
And so the Church split.
So Which Reading Is Correct?
Here’s where we land after examining all the evidence:
The Hebrew MT (”his faith”) is likely the original reading.
The Dead Sea Scrolls support it.
It fits the context of Habakkuk better (the righteous endure by remaining faithful).
The LXX’s “my faith” is likely a theological interpretation.
But the LXX reading (”my faith”) is theologically valid.
It emphasizes that salvation depends on God’s faithfulness, not ours.
It guards against works-righteousness.
It reflects a legitimate interpretation of the text’s deeper meaning.
Paul’s quotation drops the pronoun to embrace both.
Paul may be deliberately ambiguous, holding together:
God’s faithfulness makes salvation possible.
Our faith receives that salvation.
Or Paul may be pointing to Christ’s faithfulness as the ground of our justification.
I have to note, however, that this final possibility is one that I find exceedingly unlikely. Paul wrote several epistles that hammer away at multiple points about the faith of the believer being what justifies us. So I have to believe that it is theologically unsound to suggest that Christ’s faithfulness alone is all it requires. If that were true, then everyone would be saved, regardless of their faith (or lack thereof).
What Habakkuk Meant (and What Paul Understood)
In its original context, Habakkuk 2:4 is about faithfulness amid suffering. The righteous person doesn’t give up when injustice reigns. Rather, they trust God’s vision will come to pass (Habakkuk 2:3) and remain faithful.
But Paul saw something more.
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul recognized that Habakkuk 2:4 points forward to the gospel of justification by faith. Paul uses this verse to argue:
Romans 1:17 – The gospel reveals God’s righteousness through faith.
Galatians 3:11 – No one is justified by the law; only by faith.
Paul isn’t twisting Habakkuk. He’s seeing the fuller meaning that God always intended. The righteous live by faith. Not by works, not by law, but by trusting in God’s faithfulness revealed in Christ.
The Church Fathers
Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD)
Justin quotes Habakkuk 2:4 in his Dialogue with Trypho, arguing that the verse proves salvation comes through faith in Christ, not through the Mosaic law.
Tertullian (c. 200 AD)
Tertullian uses Habakkuk 2:4 to argue against the Gnostics, insisting that salvation is by faith, not by secret knowledge.
Augustine (c. 400 AD)
Augustine, in his debates with Pelagius, repeatedly appeals to Habakkuk 2:4 to show that righteousness comes from God, not from human effort.
Jewish Interpretation
After the rise of Christianity, Jewish interpreters were careful not to read Habakkuk 2:4 as referring to faith in a messianic sense.
Instead, they emphasized:
Faithfulness to the Torah (obedience to God’s commands)
Trust in God’s ultimate justice
Patient endurance while waiting for deliverance
Rashi (11th century) interpreted Habakkuk 2:4 as referring to those who remain faithful to God’s covenant amid persecution.
The Targum (Aramaic paraphrase) explicitly avoids the word “faith,” rendering the verse as emphasizing righteous deeds and Torah observance.
If you’ve found this enlightening or helpful or even challenging, please share it with a friend who loves Scripture as much as you do.
The Beauty of Both Readings
Here’s the stunning thing: both the MT and LXX point to the same glorious truth.
MT (”his faith”): The righteous live because they trust God. Salvation is by faith.
LXX (”my faith”): The righteous live because God is faithful. Salvation is by grace.
Paul’s gospel: The righteous live by faith in the faithfulness of God revealed in Jesus Christ.
We are saved by grace (God’s faithfulness), through faith (our trust in Him), in Christ (the faithful one who lived, died, and rose for us).
It’s not either/or. It’s both/and.
God is faithful. Christ is faithful. And we are called to respond in faith.
Why This Matters for You
If you’re trusting in your own faithfulness to save you, stop.
If you’re trying to earn God’s favor by your obedience, stop.
If you’re looking at your wavering, inconsistent, struggling faith and wondering if it’s enough, look to Christ.
The just shall live by faith. Not by achieving perfection. Not by never stumbling. Not by white-knuckling your way through life.
By faith. By trusting that God is faithful. By resting in the righteousness of Christ, not your own.
That’s the gospel. That’s what Martin Luther discovered in that tower. That’s what split the Church and saved the world.
What’s Next?
Next time, we’re diving into one of the strangest and most debated passages in all of Scripture: Genesis 6 and the Nephilim—the sons of God, the daughters of men, and the mysterious offspring that resulted.
Were they fallen angels? Were they the godly line of Seth? And what does the Septuagint say that the Masoretic Text doesn’t?
It’s going to be wild. Don’t miss it.
What are your thoughts? Do you lean toward “his faith” or “my faith”—or do you see Paul’s wisdom in holding both together? Let me know in the comments.
The LXX Scrolls is free to read and always will be. If this work has been worth something to you, there are a few ways to say so:
Buy the ebooks. Completed teaching series are available as polished ebooks under the Two Witnesses, One Truth series. Buying through Curios will support this work most directly but they’re also available on Amazon (and elsewhere) if you’re loyal to a particular ereader.
Become a supporter. A monthly or annual pledge through Substack helps me to bring the Septuagint to those who never knew they needed it.
Send a one-time tip. If this post has blessed you and you want to express that directly, you can Buy Me a Coffee.
Thank you for being part of this journey, your support makes this work possible.
© 2025 LXX Scrolls. All rights reserved.