Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


Even the Demons Believe (James 2:19)

24 Comments

Almost every single time I write a post on my blog or on Facebook about how we receive eternal life from God by faith ALONE, someone  brings up James 2:19 and says “But even the demons believe!”

In this current series of posts on faith, I have previously taught about James 2:14-26 with a focus on the concept of “dead faith.” But in this final post on faith, I wanted to focus in on this famous verse of James 2:19, and show why people who quote it do not understand what James is saying.

(Note: ALL of these posts on faith are drawn from my book, What is Faith? So if you want them all in one place, along with an extended discussion about the nature of faith and how to know you believe, just get the book.)

Let me give you an example from Twitter… By the way, I dislike Twitter Debates. It is impossible to discuss anything tangible on Twitter.

demons believe James 2:19
This picture is ironic in so many ways. It misquotes the text in several ways to reinforce a misapplication of the text itself. But this is what often happens with James 2:19.

Here is some of what we said on Twitter:

Note that I didn’t tweet the same thing to him over and over and over… he responded multiple times to one of my tweets, and I don’t know how to get rid of that when embedding a Tweet into WordPress… if anybody knows how, let me know!

So what does James 2:19 mean?

Here is what I was trying to say on Twitter, which didn’t get stated very clearly at all:

People believe millions of things. I believe that this chair I am sitting in will hold me up. I believe that the earth orbits around the sun. I believe that my children love me. I believe that coffee is a delicious beverage which helps me wake up in the morning.

But none of these beliefs, even though they are correct, will give me eternal life by believing them.

The same holds true when it comes to beliefs about God and Jesus Christ. I can believe a lot of things about God and Jesus. I believe that God exists. I believe that God consists of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I believe that God created all things, that He is holy, righteous,  loving, and good. Regarding Jesus, I believe that Jesus was God in the flesh, that He was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, died on the cross, and rose again from the dead. I could go on and on.

But guess what? Just as believing that the earth orbits around the sun does not give me eternal life, so also, none of the beliefs I have just stated in the previous paragraph will give me eternal life by believing them. 

The Bible is pretty clear that to receive eternal life, you don’t just need to believe. You have to believe in the right person for the right thing, namely, you have to believe in Jesus for eternal life (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47).

Eternal life is not given if I believe in Moses for eternal life. Nor is it given if I believe in Jesus for infinite wealth.

If I believe in Moses for eternal life, I am believing the wrong person for the right thing, but if I believe in Jesus for infinite wealth, I am believing the right person for the wrong thing.

According to Scripture, we must believe in Jesus for everlasting life.

So, what do demons believe?

Believe it or not (ha ha!), demons are probably more correct in their theology than most humans. Though I cannot be certain, I assume that demons believe that God exists as the Trinity, and that God is holy, righteous, and good, and that Jesus was God incarnate, born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, died on the cross, and rose again from the dead.

believe in GodIn fact, demons probably know more about God than we do. Demons probably have better theology than many Christians. That is, demons probably believe more accurate truths about God than many Christians do.

The problem with demons, however, isn’t in what they know about God, or in what they believe. Their problem is that they don’t like what they know about God and believe that they can rebel against God and win (this is where their beliefs are wrong).

When it comes to the book of James, and James 2 specifically, lots of people quote James 2:19 out of context. They hear a pastor, professor, teacher, blogger, or evangelist say that to receive eternal life, all you need to do is believe in Jesus for it, and the objector says, “That’s not true! Even the demons believe!”

Right.

Of course demons believe. Humans believe things. Demons believe things. Even  animals believe things. We have three cats. When I get up in the morning, one or two of them is always there in the kitchen, looking at me, expecting me to either feed them, or let them outside to do their business. They believe that I am the one who can make these things happen for them.

But so what? Do cats have eternal life because they believe in me for food and that I can open the door? Of course not! So also, demons believe many things, but they don’t get eternal life simply because they believe.

When it comes to receiving eternal life, it is not simple belief that matters, but believing in the right person for the right thing.

So yes, demons believe. But the real question is “What do demons believe?”

More specifically, what is James 2:19 talking about? What is the argument? What is the point?

James 2, Faith, Works, Demons, and Abraham

Below is a super brief synopsis of how to understand James 2:14-26.

James is writing to believers. 

First, James is not writing an evangelist pamphlet telling people how to receive eternal life. He is writing to believers about how to live as followers of Jesus and function within the church. 

Many scholars and pastors have noted the numerous parallels between the book of James and the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7. Just as the Sermon on the Mount is the discipleship manual of Jesus, so also the book of James is a reworking of the discipleship manual for Christians under the pastoral care of James.

He is not telling these believers how to receive eternal life, but is writing to them based on the assumption that they already have eternal life, but need some advice on how to look and live like Jesus in the world.

James 2:14-26 deals with living a profitable Christian life.

The issue in James 2:14-26 is not about gaining or proving that one has eternal life, but rather, living as a profitable servant of Jesus Christ. James mentions profit several times (cf. James 2:14, 16) and the opposite of profit–being dead or useless (James 2:17, 20, 26).

The “profit” he is talking about, of course, is not monetary gain, but living as an energized, successful, fully-committed, faithful, generous, loving, caring follower of Jesus Christ. None of us want to live useless lives, but profitable lives that are useful to God and His rule and reign on earth.

In James 2:14-26 we are told how.

Don’t just pray and believe God; Do Something!

The main point of James 2:14-26 is that believing God can do something is good, but if we really believe God can do something, we will personally seek to be part of the solution.

Specifically, if you see someone who is hungry or without clothes, it is okay if you tell them you are going to pray for them, or if you believe that God can provide for them. But more than just pray for them, and more than just believe that God will give them food and clothes, why don’t you actually be an answer to your own prayers and your own faith, and give them food and clothes!?

That is what James is saying: “Don’t just believe; Do something!”

This is why people get so upset at Christians when we are faced with a troubling situation, or a dire need, and our only response is, “I’ll pray for you!” or “My thoughts and prayers are with you!”

When people are homeless, jobless, hungry, sick, dying, struggling, they don’t need thoughts and prayers. They need Christians do actually do something. This is exactly the point that James is making as well.

James is saying, “When someone is in need … don’t just believe that God can provide for them … YOU provide for them. Don’t just tell them you’ll pray for them …. Instead, you provide for them.”

Do you see? The “believing” (or faith) of James 2:14-26 has nothing whatsoever to do with eternal life. The person is believing that God can give food and clothing to the hungry and the naked. There is nothing here about believing in Jesus for eternal life, and you do not get eternal life by believing that God can clothe and feed someone. Nor do you get eternal life by giving people clothes and food.

Again, eternal life is given to those who believe in Jesus for it.

Now, if James had stopped writing at James 2:16, there never would have been the misunderstanding about the relationship between faith and works in this passage. Everybody would have immediately recognized that James wants us to do more than just pray for people and state our belief that God can help them. We should actually do something for those in need. This point of James is pretty clear in James 2:14-16.

But he goes on to write James 2:17-26, and this is where all the problems with this passage enter. In the rest of this passage, I am not going to work though the entire passage in detail, but just provide a few of the highlights, and point you to the text of a sermon I preached on James 2 several years ago, and I also have a shorter version in Podcast episode 124 when I discussed James 2:14-26.

But here is the main argument of James 2:17-26.

1. Faith Without Works is Dead

The word “dead” does not mean nonexistent, but useless, unproductive, unprofitable. Someone may still have faith, but if that faith is not put into action, it is not doing anybody any good. It does not help those who are hungry and without clothes, and it does not help the person who has the faith. Since the context of this passage is about profitable faith, then “dead” faith is unprofitable faith.

So we must never say “Dead faith is no faith” for that is absolutely not true. Dead faith exists, it is just unproductive and unprofitable.

2. The Objector States His Opinion in James 2:18-19

Someone does not agree with what James is saying, and begins to state an objection in James 2:18. On this, every Bible translation agrees. Where Bible translations do not agree is where the objection ends. If you compare Bible translations on where they put the second set of quotation marks, you will see that they are all over the place.

However, Greek did not have quotation marks, and so authors used other methods to show where the objection ends and the refutation begins. They indicated this by calling the objection foolish (cf. 1 Cor 15:35-36; Rom 9:19-20). In this way, the objector in James 2 is saying everything in James 2:18-19. (See my article on “Epistolary Diatribe.”)

Therefore, the statement “even the demons believe, and tremble” is NOT from James, and is NOT in support of his argument, but is from someone who does not like what James is saying, and is objecting to the point James is making.

In other words, when we quote James 2:19, “even the demons believe” we are siding not with James, but taking the side of someone who disagrees with James.

The basic point of the objector is that he believes there is no connection between faith and works. James says that if we have faith, we should do something with it to live profitable and useful lives. The objector says,

That’s rubbish. The two are not connected at all. Take the cardinal theological belief of Judaism as an example: the belief that God is One. The demons believe this, but  it doesn’t affect their behavior. All they do is shudder, but beyond this, this still rebel against God.” So their faith does nothing for them.

Note, by the way, that faith in Jesus for eternal life is NOT what demons believe.

Sure, we can assume that demons believe that if people believe in Jesus for eternal life then those people will receive eternal life, but the demons themselves cannot believe in Jesus for eternal life, because eternal life has not been offered to them by Jesus.

But this is not the belief of demons that James is writing about. The only thing demons believe in this context is that God is One, which is the central and most important belief in Judaism.

The Masterful Refutation by James

In the rest of the passage (James 2:20-26), James refutes what this objector said.

He notes that the objector used the most important belief in Judaism, so James says “Oh yeah? Two can play that game,” and to prove his point he uses the most important figure in Judaism: Abraham, the father of faith.

Faith of AbrahamAnd he uses a particular event in the life of Abraham to prove that Abraham’s faith led him to obey God and perform certain actions, which in turn, allowed people to recognize that Abraham was truly God’s friend.

It is important to note that the event James is referring to takes place in Genesis 22, many years after the initial faith of Abraham in Genesis 15.

Whenever Paul refers to the faith of Abraham, he is referring to Genesis 15, when Abram was declared righteous by God. But James is referring to the events in Genesis 22, when Abraham was declared righteous by men, that is, they saw what Abraham did, and said, “Wow. He truly does believe in the God he claims to serve, and look what happened as a result! He truly is the friend of God!”

James then goes on with the knock-out punch. He has proven his point with the Forefather of Faith, Abraham, so he now takes the opposite extreme and shows how his point applies to the foreign, sinful, prostitute Rahab.

Rahab also believed something about God, and when the spies came to her, she acted on what she believed to deliver and rescue them. If she had just believed in God and done nothing, she still would have had the faith, but it would have done nothing to deliver her, her family, or the two spies. But because she acted on her faith, her faith became profitable.

James has proved his case and proved the objector wrong. If all you do with faith is believe, that is well and good, and it is still faith, but to truly be profitable, effective, energizing, and helpful in your own life and in the lives of others around us, you must act on what you believe (James 2:26).

This is the meaning of James 2.

Eternal Life IS received by Faith ALONE in Jesus Christ ALONE

So don’t let anyone tell you that faith is not enough when it comes to receiving eternal life. Of course it is! Jesus Himself promises it! 

But when it comes to helping others, and getting rid of sin in our lives, and clothing the naked, feeding the hungry (James 2:14-26), taking care of orphans and widows (James 1:27), controlling our tongue (James 3:1-12), etc., etc., etc., just believing that God can take care of these situations is not enough.

Faith is the beginning, but in all these areas where God calls us to get involved, we must do more than just pray; we must do more than just believe. We must do something!

What do you think of this explanation of James 2:14-26, and especially the statement in James 2:19 about the faith of demons? Does it help this passage make more sense to you?

Does it help it fit better with what we read in the teachings of Jesus and the writings of Paul? Has it cleared up in your own mind some of the confusion around the role of faith and works?

Let me know in the comments below, and if you want more clarification, get my book, What is Faith?

The Gospel DictionaryUnderstanding the Gospel requires us to properly understand the key words and terms of the Gospel. Take my course, "The Gospel Dictionary" to learn about the 52 key words of the Gospel, and hundreds of Bible passages that use these words.

This course costs $297, but when you join the Discipleship group, you can to take the entire course for free.

What is dead faith? (James 2:14-26)

7 Comments

When James writes about dead faith in James 2:14-26, many people think he is referring to faith that does not exist. But this is not the message of James. What is dead faith? It is useless faith. It is faith that does exist, but is not accomplishing what God wants or desires for it. Despite what many teach, dead faith is NOT non-existent faith any more than a dead body is a non-existent body.

I have written elsewhere on James 2:14-26 and the often-heard statement that “even the demons believe” (James 2:16). This passage is also discussed in my book, What is Faith?

To properly understand James 2:14-26, it is also important to understand three key terms in the passage.

Three Key Terms in James 2:14-26

what is dead faith James 2:14-26The three terms are faith, save, and dead. These three key terms in James 2:14-26 help bring clarity to this much-debated text.

The word faith is defined as the belief, conviction, or persuasion that something is true (see Faith).

The word save is defined as “deliver” (see Salvation). It does NOT refer to gaining forgiveness of sins so we can escape hell and go to heaven when we die. It instead refers to some sort of deliverance, usually from some sort of temporal calamity, such as sickness, enemies, physical death, etc.

And the word dead means to be separated from the life, purpose, or goal which God planned or intended (see Death).

With these three terms in mind, the troublesome text of James 2:14-26 becomes much clearer.

The Context of James 2:14-26

The context of James 2 also helps us understand what James is saying.

The immediately preceding context is that the church is showing favoritism to some of the wealthier members. The rich receive more attention and better seats at fellowship meals than do the poor (James 2:1-13).

Following this, James continues to address how the poor and needy in the church are treated. James says that when it comes to helping the poor and needy in their community, faith is not enough. It is not enough to tell someone that you believe God can clothe them and provide for their needs. It is not enough to promise someone that you will pray for them.

Such faith in God, while real and genuine, does absolutely nothing to clothe the poor or feed the hungry (James 2:15-16).

What good is it, James asks, if you tell the poor that you believe God will clothe them, and you tell the hungry that you have faith in God to feed them, but you yourself don’t do anything to feed or clothe them?

Will your faith do anything to feed or clothe the poor and hungry? No, it won’t.

faith without works is dead James 2:26If you are genuinely concerned about the poor and hungry in your midst, it is fine to believe that God can do something about it, if you also believe that God is going to do something about it through you.

Faith, by itself, is worthless when it comes to helping the poor.

Note that James is not saying anything whatsoever about faith in Jesus for eternal life.

This is not the point of this passage. He is talking about how our faith in God to feed the hungry and clothe the poor should lead us to feed the hungry and clothe the poor.

If you believe God can meet these needs, but you yourself do nothing to meet them, then your faith is dead and worthless. This does not mean that your faith does not exist. It does exist. But your faith is separated from its intended purpose.

God wants our faith in Him to spur us to step out and do things that turn our faith into action.

When we pray for something, God then wants us to seek to become the answer to our own prayers.

When we tell God that we believe He can do something, He turns to us and says that He will do it through us if we step out in faith and let Him. Faith in God is not us “letting go and letting God” but is us “stepping up and taking action” trusting that God will work in and through us to accomplish His work in this world.

what is dead faith James 2:14-26

So what is DEAD faith in James 2:16, 26?

So the word dead in James 2:16, 26 is a symbolic way of referring to faith that is not accompanied or empowered by works.

Dead faith is real faith. It does exist.

But dead faith is nothing more than faith that is by itself (James 2:17). All James is saying is that if the Christian life is going to be powerful and effective, both faith and works are needed. To save our relationship with other Christians and to accomplish God’s work in this world, both faith and works are needed (See Dillow, Reign of the Servant Kings, 187-194; Zane Hodges, Dead Faith: What is it? (Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1987); John Hart, “How to Energize Our Faith: Reconsidering the Meaning of James 2:14-26,” JOTGES (Spring, 1999).

At the end of this section, James illustrates this point by equating faith and works with the body and the spirit (James 2:26). Just as a body without the spirit is dead, so also, faith without works is dead.

dead faith James 2:14-26When a person’s spirit leaves their body, does this mean that the body does not exist, or that it never existed? No, of course not. The body is still there, even after the spirit departs. But the body is no longer accomplishing the purpose and goal which God intended for it.

So also with faith and works. If a person has faith, but they do not have works, this does not mean that their faith does not exist, or that it never existed. No, the faith is still there, even though the works are not.

But in such a situation, faith is not accomplishing the purpose and goal which God intended for it. The faith is dead. The absence of works is not allowing the faith to carry out God’s plan and purposes in the world. This is the meaning of James 2:14-26.

James 2:14-26 has nothing to do with eternal life

I cannot emphasize enough that James 2 has nothing whatsoever to do with the gaining, keeping, or proving of eternal life.

James 2:14-26 is not teaching that if a person fails to have good works, then this proves that they do not have eternal life. The question of eternal life is not in view at all.

Instead, James is telling us that rather than just pray for someone, or bless someone, or tell someone that God can provide for their needs, it is we who should answer our own prayers, seek to be a blessing to them, and provide for the needs out of our own pocket or pantry.

dead faith is useless faithOnly in this way does our faith get put into practice and fulfill the plans and goals of God.

So what is dead faith? Dead faith is NOT non-existent faith. Dead faith very much exists.

People who have dead faith truly do have actual and real faith. But their faith is inactive and useless. It is not accomplishing what God wants their faith to accomplish in this life.

So do you believe God can help others? Great! Now go out and do something about it, and actually help those whom God places in your life.

The Gospel DictionaryUnderstanding the Gospel requires us to properly understand the key words and terms of the Gospel. Take my course, "The Gospel Dictionary" to learn about the 52 key words of the Gospel, and hundreds of Bible passages that use these words.

This course costs $297, but when you join the Discipleship group, you can to take the entire course for free.

You can also get a copy of my book, What is Faith? on Amazon.

Epistolary Diatribe in the Letters of Paul (No, really! It’s Interesting. I promise!)

12 Comments

Epistolary Diatribe in Letters of PaulWhat a blog post title! Epistolary Diatribe … what???

But have no fear … it’s not as scary as it sounds. This article will really help you understand the letters of Paul. I promise.

Let me begin by asking you a question … If you had no quote marks, how would you indicate in a book or letter that you were quoting someone? Well, you would probably just state the quote anyway, and then use words like “said” to tell you reader you are quoting something.

Here’s an example:

Gary said I love elephants.

But notice that without quote marks, the sentence loses clarity.

It could be understood this way:

Gary said, “I love elephants.”

Or this way:

Gary said [that] I [Jeremy] love elephants.

Do you see? Without quote marks, one sentence can have at least two different meanings.

But it gets trickier than that. What if I am writing a dialogue between two or more people, and I now have to record what each person says … still without quote marks.

Here is an example:

Gary said I love elephants.
Tom said I love them too.
But I said both of them are wrong.

So you see? What EXACTLY was said is a little vague, but the context gives you some idea of what Gary, Tom, and I were talking about.

Ah, but now watch this …. if I quote someone without any quote marks, and if I don’t use the word “said” or even tell you who said it, I can almost guarantee you will know who said it and what they said:

That’s one small step for a man; one giant leap for mankind.

Do you know who said that and the context in which it was said? Of course you do (I hope). I didn’t have to use quote marks, and I didn’t have to use the word “said.” You automatically knew. (And yes, I quoted it correctly … according to the man who said it.)

Now, take the little bit you’ve learned here about quote marks and easily-recognized quotations and think back to the days of the early church when Paul was writing letters to the various churches he had planted. Many times, Paul wrote these letters to correct and refute some of the false ideas and teachings that were being taught within the various churches.

But guess what? There were no quote marks in Koine Greek (the language Paul used to write his letters).

So what did he do?

Well, he used a style of writing which was quite common for other letter writers in his day, which modern scholars have labeled “Epistolary Diatribe.” This is a fancy way of saying “A letter written to correct the wrong ideas of someone else.” And since this method of writing letters to refute others was quite common, people quickly and easily recognized it when it was happening in a letter.

Dialogue in Pauls lettersThis is especially true when we recognize that trained “readers” often “performed” the dialogue portions of the letters to a listening audience … many of whom could not read.

Some of the distinguishing marks of Epistolary Diatribe are as follows:

  • Famous quotes from the letters, writings, teachings of the person being refuted
  • The word “say” or “said” might be used (e.g., “You have heard it said,” Or “But someone will say.”)
  • A refutation begun with an adversative conjunction (e.g., “But” or “Of course not!”)
  • A gentle mocking, or name-calling, or the person being refuted (e.g., “Who are you, Oh man?” or “Oh foolish man!”)

These four clear signs are not always present, and so it is sometimes difficult to know whether a certain verse is Paul’s idea or a quote from someone Paul is refuting, but there are several very clear examples of this sort of “Epistolary Diatribe” going on in the New Testament.

Below are three clear examples (and yes, I know the last one is not from Paul, but it still gives a good example):

Clear Examples of Epistolary Diatribe

Romans 9:19-20

In this passage, Paul introduces the person who is objecting to Paul’s words by saying “You will say to me then.”

After this, Paul quotes what this objector is saying: “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?”

Paul begins his response in the typical way, by using an adversative conjunction followed by a gentle name-calling of the person. Paul says, “But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?”

From this, we see that Paul thinks that God has set up the world in a way that God’s will can be resisted. The objector disagrees and says that nobody can resist God’s will. Paul responds with a bit of irony, telling the objector, “By saying nobody can resist God’s will when God has said that people can resist His will, you are resisting God’s will.” It’s a brilliant move by Paul. I write more about this in my book, The Re-Justification of God, which looks at Romans 9.

1 Corinthians 15:35-36

Paul’s letter to the Corinthians is full of Epistolary Diatribe, especially since he is responding to a letter they wrote to him. So he quotes some of their letter, or what he heard that some people were teaching in Corinth, and then he responds to it.

In Paul’s discussion about the resurrection, he introduces the quote from another teacher by writing, “But someone will say.”

Then Paul quotes what they are saying, “How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?” In other words, the objector says that the idea of a resurrection is foolish unless we understand how it works and what our new bodies will be like.

Paul then sets out to refute this objection with a little gentle name-calling. He introduces his refutation with the words “Foolish one” and then goes on to explain more about the resurrection.

Note that the adversative conjunction was missing, but it was still quite obvious that Paul was engaging in dialogue with this other teacher.

James 2:18-20

It is not just Paul that uses Epistolary Diatribe. As mentioned earlier, this form of writing was very common. James, the brother of Jesus, uses it as well in his letter.

A clear example is found in James 2:18-20. In fact, recognizing Epistolary Diatribe in James 2 helps clear up a lot of the confusion surrounding James 2 and the role of faith and works in the life of the believer.

James is writing about the relationship between faith and works, and he introduces the objection by someone else in the normal way. He writes, “But someone will say.” And then James goes on to quote this ideas of this person who is objecting.

The interesting thing about this is that few Bible translations understand where the quote from this imaginary objector ends. If you consult some of the various Bible translations, you will see that in English, the end quote is inserted at different places in different translations.

The NKJV puts the end quote half-way through verse 18. The NAS puts the end quote at the end of James 2:18. But when we understand the signs of Epistolary Diatribe, we recognize that the quote of the objector goes all the way through verses 18 and 19. How do we know this?

Because James 2:20 has the adversative conjunction and then the gentle, derogatory name-calling. James indicates that he is now refuting the objector when he writes, “But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?”

When we realize that James 2:19 and what it says about the faith of demons is not the ideas of James, but the ideas of someone who disagrees with James, this helps our overall understanding of the passage. I wrote more about this in my article “Even the demons believe” and have also taught about it in my study on James 2:14-26.

So those are just three clear examples of Epistolary Diatribe in the New Testament. There are several other clear examples, but I just wanted to point these out.

Now, there are many, many other passages in the Bible that likely contain Epistolary Diatribe.

Other Possible Epistolary Diatribe Passages

The problem with several of these other possible passages that contain Epistolary Diatribe is that they don’t always contain all four of the markers that I mentioned above. They might only contain one or two. Or none.

But again, what we have to recognize is that while it might be difficult for us to discern when Epistolary Diatribe is taking place, it was not difficult for the original audience.

They likely would have had someone play-act the dialogue out for them, with the reader using different voices, or maybe different hand gestures to indicate when a different person was talking. Also, they would have quickly and easily recognized the ideas and quotes from the teacher that Paul was refuting in his letter.

What if I wrote a letter to you which said this:

Sometimes I look at everything going on in the world, and I am afraid for the future. We must remember, however, that we have nothing to fear, but fear itself. And besides, God loves us, and perfect love casts out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. Nevertheless, although I know this to be true, I am still afraid sometimes. So when I am afraid, I remind myself of two things. First, I say “No fear!” and then I also say “Fear not!”

There were four intentional quotes from other sources in that paragraph. The first was from Franklin D. Roosevelt, the second from 1 John 4:18, the second was the old marketing slogan from the 80’s and 90’s, and the final quote came from Isaiah 41:10.

It is possible you picked up on all of them, though maybe you only recognized one or two. Now, if I had changed my voice in all the quotes, you would have recognized that I was quoting someone else, even if you didn’t know the source of the quote.

This, I believe, is exactly what was happening in the early church as the letters of Paul circulated around and were read in the various churches.

So here are a few possibilities of where this is happening.

Romans 1:18-32

Paul’s letter to the Romans almost certainly includes numerous Epistolary Diatribes in which Paul quotes and then refutes a prominent teacher in Rome.

Paul signing a letter amenuensisRomans 1:18-32 is sort of the introduction to what this other teacher was saying. Therefore, much of what we read in Romans 1:18-32 is not Paul’s ideas, but the ideas of someone that Paul wants to refute.

This is extremely significant, for it is only here in Romans that wrath is clearly attributed to God. Also, it is here that we read about God handing people over to their sin.

And all of these ideas do not come from Paul, but rather from a legalistic teacher whom Paul sets out to refute in his letter to the Romans.

And indeed, in Romans 2:1, we do have the clear sign that Paul picks back up with his own ideas to refute the ideas he just quoted. He does a little gentle name-calling and sets out to refute what he just quoted. “Therefore you are inexcusable, Oh man, whoever you are who judge…”

To read more on this, here are two articles which lay this out more:

Do you read Romans like an Arian?

A Rending of Romans 1:1-4:3 in Dialogue Form

This way of reading really helps bring clarity to Paul’s argument in Romans and his theology as a whole.

Romans 3:1-9, 27-31

Another sign that Paul is using Epistolary Diatribe in Romans in found in Romans 3:1-9, and 27-31. There is a back-and-forth dialogue that seems quite obvious and natural in the letter.

When we rightly discern which ideas are Paul’s and which ideas belong to the legalistic religious teacher Paul is refuting, the entire text makes much more sense.

Read the two articles linked to above for more help on this.

1 Corinthians 6:12-14

As with Romans, the book of 1 Corinthians is full of Epistolary Diatribe. With almost every new topic Paul addresses, he first quotes what was being taught in Corinth, or what they wrote to him in a letter, and then he sets out to answer their question or refute what they are doing and teaching.

Here is how to read 1 Corinthians 6:12-14 in light of this:

Corinth: All things are lawful for me.

Paul: But all things are not helpful.

Corinth: All things are lawful for me.

Paul: But I will not be brought under the power of any.

Corinth: Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods.

Paul: But God will destroy both it and them.

Paul: (Extrapolating out to sexual immorality from this point about the stomach and food) Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God both raised up the Lord and will also raise us up by His power.

1 Corinthians 7:1-2

We can do something exactly similar in 1 Corinthians 7:1-2.

Paul: Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me [and I quote]:

Corinthian Letter: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”

Paul cautions against this: Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

Do you see? In this way, it is not Paul who is saying that it is good for a man to not touch a woman. It is the Corinthians who were saying this, and Paul is cautioning them against such practices. He goes on to explain why in the following verses.

I could go on and on. There are numerous other examples of Epistolary Diatribe in Scripture. For an exhaustive (it’s also an exhausting read … and a workout to even lift) explanation of this technique in Paul’s letters, get The Deliverance of God by Douglas Campbell. It’s an expensive book, and I don’t recommend that everyone read it, because of how technical it is, but he does provide a very good explanation and defense of Epistolary Diatribe.

Why am I bringing this up?

I had an on-stage 5-minute discussion with Greg Boyd at his ReKnew conference last September, and in my closing comment, I hinted at my belief that something else is going on in Romans 1 than what Greg Boyd thinks is going on. My discussion with Greg Boyd begins at about the 20:00 mark.

Romans 1:24 says that God gave people up, or handed them over, to their vile passions and depraved hearts. Greg Boyd thinks that this is Paul’s own idea. I think that since this idea does not at all reflect what we see in Jesus, or even what we see elsewhere in the writings of Paul, that we must conclude that something else is going on in the text.

And what is that something else? It is Epistolary Diatribe.

Romans 1:24 and the surrounding verses are not the ideas of Paul, but the ideas of a legalistic law-based religious teacher in Rome, whom Paul is quotes so that he can then refute him.

There are extensive clues all over in Romans 1-3 that this is happening, and I think that this approach helps make sense of these opening chapters of Romans in light of everything else in this letter.

So I have mentioned it to Greg, and I have mentioned it to you, but let me say it again: I do not believe that God hands us over to sin and Satan. He does not deliver us up to the destroyer. He does not withdraw His protective hand. He does not “Release the Kraken!” to have its way with us.

As we see in Jesus Christ from first to last … God always forgives, only loves, and will never, ever, ever leave us or forsake us, but will be with us, even unto the end of the age.

Shotgun Hermeneutics is not a Proper Bible Study Method

43 Comments

Hermeneutical PrinciplesThere is a tendency in many Christian circles to think that if a particular theological viewpoint can quote a lot of Scripture, it must be right.

For example, in a recent book defending The Five Points of Calvinism (by David Steele and Curtis Thomas), the authors seem to think that if they just quote Scripture, they have proved their point. For each of the five points, they provide a theological explanation for the point, and then “prove” it by citing numerous pages of Scriptural proof-texts, without ever attempting an explanation of any of those texts.

I recently listened to a debate from several years ago between Bob Wilkin and James White. James White used almost his entire opening statement to simply read Bible verses. The implication was that to prove Calvinism, all you have to do is read the Bible, and anybody is not a Calvinist, hasn’t read Scripture.

Shotgun Hermeneutics

I call this shotgun hermeneutics. Those who use this tactic try to “blow you away” by the sheer number of verses they can quote which they feel proves their point.

When you try to explain one or two of them to show that you are aware of these passages but have a different understanding, they will focus on all the other passages they quoted which you did not explain.

Shotgun Hermeneutics

A Sample Conversation

In my discussions, the dialogue generally goes like this:

Calvinist: My view is right because of Passages A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J. If you would simply read and believe the Bible, you would agree with what God said.

Me: I have read and studied the Bible, and am aware of all of those passages you just quoted. I simply understand them in a different way. Let’s take the first one as an example. (I then proceed to explain Passage A.)

Calvinist: Well, that’s certainly a creative way to understand Passage A. But we know your interpretation is wrong, because of Passage B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J.

Me: I wasn’t trying to explain those passages, but again, I am aware of them, and all of them can be understood in a similar way as Passage A.

Calvinist: No, they can’t, because no one I’ve ever read has ever understood them that way. Here is what Piper, MacArthur, Sproul, and Calvin had to say about those passages. (They then proceed to quote their favorite authors.)

Me: But those are all Calvinistic authors. Of course they will agree with your interpretation.

Calvinist: Are you smarter or more godly than they are?

Me: No, of course not, but I do think…

Calvinist: Then since they all agree on what those passages mean, and there are so many passages that teach Calvinism, Calvinism is the truth. After all, what about Passages K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, and T?

Me: Yep. Those are all in the Bible.

Calvinist: Hah! I knew you would be silenced by the logic of my system and the irrefutable evidence of my many Scriptural proofs. To God be the glory!

Me: Well, I’m not really silenced, nor am I convinced …

Calvinist: That’s because you’re a depraved heretic.

Me: Oookaay … I gotta go. See ya later.

Calvinist: I’ll be praying for your soul that you would repent from your darkness and be brought into the light!

Theology Discussions

If you have ever tried to discuss theology with someone who holds strongly to a particular system of theology, you know that this is how many of these discussions go.

Recently, I have noticed this shotgun hermeneutics tactic being used by some who disagree with me on various other issues.

In their own blogs and in their comments on this blog, they seem to imply that I have not read the Bible, and that if I did, I would see the truth of their position. They argue that when they quote Scripture at me, I am silenced by the weight of Biblical evidence.

Yet when I attempt explanations of one or two passages they quoted, they say that my interpretation cannot be correct because of so many other Biblical passages which say something different, and furthermore, nobody they have ever read holds to my interpretation.

Then I get called a heretic.

A Proposal for Theological Debate

Shotgun hermeneutics and name calling is no way to proceed in theological discussion.

Shotgun hermeneutics isn’t even a proper method of hermeneutics. It’s actually a form of proof texting where dozens of passages are ripped out of context in order to prove a theological point.

So in order to really get somewhere in theological debate, the two sides must agree to discuss one passage at a time, and stick to it, camp upon it, walk around it, and work through it. Hopefully, you can both arrive at two or three possible interpretations of that one passage.

Only then can the two sides go to a second passage.

The same thing is done with passages A-Z.

Only when this entire process is complete can the two sides go back and reconsider all the evidence, in which any contradicting interpretations are discarded, and hopefully, only one possible interpretation remains.

Though this usually doesn’t happen, at least then you will understand each other rather than thinking the other side has never actually read the Bible.
Hermeneutics

My Exodus from Calvinism

The systematic verse-by-verse approach is what I used about 15 years ago to leave Calvinism.

In the early 1990’s, I was a five-point, hyper-Calvinist, Lordship Salvationist. Then, a good friend challenged my thinking on James 2:14-26. I camped on that passage for a few months. I saw that my friend’s interpretation was one possible understanding. However, I wanted to reject that view because “there are so many other passages that contradicted this understanding of James 2:14-26.”

In our conversations, my friend told me this: “Yes, it might be that my understanding of James 2:14-26 is wrong. That’s one option. Or maybe you are wrong in your understanding not just of James 2:14-26, but also in your understanding of all those others passages as well. How are you going to figure out which view makes the most sense? There is only one way: You need to study each passage individually.”

So that’s what I did. It took me about ten years, at the end of which time, every single point of Calvinism had fallen for me.

However, I still read books and articles by Calvinists and those who disagree with my views. Why? Because if I am wrong in my understanding of a particular passage, I want to know. I hope you do too.

So don’t practice shotgun hermeneutics. Such a practice is not beneficial since all it does is take aim at other people’s heads in an effort to blow them away.

And by the way, if you want to see some of the fruits of my labor from that 10-year study of various Bible passages, I am laying it all out for you in several of my online courses. The first course is done. It is titled “The Gospel According to Scripture.” I’m teaching and recording the second course right now. It is titled “The Gospel Dictionary.” A third course will come later, titled “Tough Texts on the Gospel.”

To take these courses, you need to be part of the RedeemingGod.com discipleship group. Go here to learn more and join us today.

God is Redeeming Scripture, Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: , , , , , ,

Advertisement

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!