Righteousness, Justice, and Justification

Righteousness, Justice, and Justification

Introduction

In English usage, the term 'righteousness' is associated with the idea of individual moral rectitude. 'Justice', on the other hand, generally signifies a right social order, that is, the proper distribution of goods and honour, including retribution for evil. Thus the latter is often forensic, while the former is associated with personal ethics. Although such concepts are not foreign to the biblical authors, their concerns lie along other lines. The lexical distinction to which we are accustomed in English is absent from the Scriptures. The biblical terms often translated as 'righteousness' or 'justice' belong to a single word-group, that associated with the sΩd≈q root in Hebrew, or that based on the dik- root in Greek. Furthermore, the Hebrew usage, which influences that of the NT writers, tends to be relational and concrete; one is 'righteous' with respect to another human being or to God, in a particular kind of conduct, or in a particular 'contention' which has arisen (e.g. Deut. 6:25; Ps. 106:31; Is. 5:7; Ezek 3:20; Luke 1:6; Rom. 2:13; 1 Pet. 3:10–12). The sΩd≈q root does not signify a proper inward disposition, even though it may presuppose it (usually other terms, especially the adjective ys¥r, express this idea). On the other hand, while sΩd≈q terms often carry forensic overtones (i.e. 'justice' and 'justification'), they generally signify the outcome of a 'contention' or 'lawsuit,' rather than the act of judging or its content (e.g. Judg. 5:11; Ps. 40:10–11; Is. 51:6–8; cf. mis¥paœtΩ). Furthermore, the verbal forms denote the dispensing of justice in a positive sense: 'to give someone justice' is to vindicate them, to grant them salvation from injustice (e.g. Exod. 23:7; Deut. 25:1). Although in non-biblical Greek 'to do someone justice' had the sense of 'to punish someone', the NT authors adopt the Hebrew usage, which likewise appears in the Septuagint (e.g. Matt. 12:37; Gal. 2:16; Jas. 2:25; cf. dikeœ [punishment] Acts 28:4; 2 Thess. 1:9; Jude 7).

Biblical interpreters have long been concerned to describe the distinctiveness of biblical thought concerning righteousness over against the ancient Greek and Roman concepts, especially the idea of distributive justice. A comparison of these traditions is a task too large for this context. One fundamental difference lies in the centrality of the individual in Greek thought, where the question of conflict between individual duty and the demands of law has a prominence unparalleled in Scripture. Likewise, 'righteousness' is discussed among the Greeks as an inward virtue, in a way not found in the Bible. For the biblical writers, God is the source of all righteousness, both in his saving intervention in human affairs and in the requirements which he places upon the world. While human beings acknowledge God's 'righteousness' and 'justice' as it is revealed, they cannot judge it according to their standards when it is hidden. To do so would be to reverse the roles of Creator and created (see, e.g. Job 32:1–42:17; Is. 45:8–25; Rom. 9:14–24).

'Righteousness/Justice' As a Creational Concept

Since at least the end of the 19th century, interpreters have defined the biblical concept of 'righteousness' as 'covenant faithfulness'. God is thought to be 'righteous' in that he keeps his promises to save. Human beings, especially the people of Israel, are said to be 'righteous' in that they remain faithful to the covenant which God made with them. In this way, it is thought, one may account for the relational character of the biblical usage of righteousness language and its association with salvation. The definition seems, moreover, to be a useful tool for drawing together various strands of the biblical witness (e.g. N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, esp. pp. 95–111). However, it fails to account adequately for biblical language and thought. In the first place, it conflicts with the biblical understanding of a 'covenant'. 'Covenant' is associated regularly with more strictly legal terms; one 'keeps', 'remembers', 'establishes', 'breaks', transgresses', 'forsakes', 'despises', 'forgets' or 'profanes' a covenant, but one does not, in biblical idiom, act righteously or unrighteously with respect to it. Furthermore, 'covenants' establish and maintain 'familial' relations. The obligations of those 'in' a covenant are love and faithfulness, not merely a general rectitude (e.g. Hos. 6:6). A transgressor of a covenant may thus be pictured as a rebellious child or an unfaithful wife (e.g. Is. 1:2; Hos. 1:2). In other words, a 'covenant,' despite its obvious forensic dimension, has to do with a narrower set of relations than that of creation and 'righteousness'. The rare collocation of the terms 'righteousness' and 'covenant', despite their individual frequency, is one indication of this distinction in meaning. One might speak of 'faithfulness' as 'covenant righteousness', but one cannot properly speak of righteousness as 'covenant faithfulness'. On the infrequent occasions when 'righteousness' appears in association with 'covenant', it does not signify 'covenant faithfulness' (see Is. 42:6; 61:8–11; Hos. 2:16–20; Pss. 50:16; 111:1–10; Dan. 9:4–7; Neh. 9:32–33).

In biblical thought, 'righteousness' is simultaneously moral and creational, having to do with God's re-establishing 'right order' in the fallen world which he has made, an order which includes a right relationship between the world and its Creator (e.g. Is. 45:8, 23; Pss. 85:4–13; 98:1–9). The creational basis of the biblical understanding of 'righteousness' and 'justice' brings with it the notion of universal norms, such as the requirement that various implements of commerce (balances, weights, measures) be 'righteous' (e.g. Lev. 19:35–36; Ezek. 45:9–12). Likewise, the contrast between 'the righteous' and 'the wicked' has a universal application (e.g. Gen. 18:23; Exod. 23:7; Ezek. 33:12; Ps. 11:4–5). Noah and Job are named as righteous, even though they are not Israelites (Gen. 7:1; Ezek. 14:14, 20; cf. Heb. 11:4–7). Rulers establish 'righteousness' by means of the wisdom which has ordered creation (Prov. 8:15–16, 22–31). The biblical hope for justice embraces the salvation of the entire earth, a hope which comes to include an expectation of a coming Messiah (Pss. 72:1–19; 103:6; Is. 9:6; Jer. 9:23–24; Matt. 6:33; Acts 17:31). The close link between 'righteousness' and 'creation' is especially prominent in the various passages in which the establishment of righteousness is envisaged as the renewal of the created order and its elements (e.g. Is. 45:8; Pss. 89:1–14; 98:1–9; on this topic see H. H. Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung). The occasional instances in which 'righteousness' appears in a cultic context also very likely reflect a creational background, since cultic ritual represents the created order (e.g. Pss. 11:5–7; 118:19–20; Deut. 33:19).

'Righteousness/Justice' As a Forensic Concept

The biblical concept of righteousness/justice is closely joined to that of the 'ruling and judging' by which 'right order' is re-established in creation. In the ancient world, the legislative and executive aspects of ruling were bound together with, and indeed often derived from, the judicial role of the king or leader. This connection may be seen from the biblical descriptions of the 'judges' who act on God's behalf in Israel (e.g. Judg. 2:16–18; 4:4–10). Kings in Israel, like the judges before them, were to mediate God's rule in the world, 'to effect just judgment and righteousness' (aœseéaœh mis¥paœtΩ u®sΩ§d≈aœqa®; 2 Sam. 8:15; Jer. 22:3; Ps. 72:1–4; cf. Is. 9:6). The basic vehicle for the administration of justice was the 'contention' or 'lawsuit' (K. W. Whitelam, The Just King). We need not enter into a discussion concerning the distinction between these two forms of dispute (see, with some qualifications, P. Bovati, Re-establishing Justice). It suffices to note that both have to do with the establishment of rights, and both are envisaged as two-party affairs; in rendering judgment, the king or another authority was to intervene in favour of the one in the right (e.g. Lev. 19:15; Deut. 16:20; Jer. 22:3). This essentially two-party judicial form is also found in the NT, despite the introduction of Greco-Roman procedures (see, e.g. Luke 18:1–8; Rom. 8:33–34; Acts 18:12–17).

A considerable portion of the biblical 'righteousness' language appears in the context of such 'contentions' and is therefore related to particular verdicts. When, for example, in the book of Genesis Judah says of Tamar, 'She is righteous, rather than I', he has in view his contention with her, not a general assessment of her character. Her way of becoming pregnant, deceptive though it was, conformed to the norm for preserving the familial line of her deceased husband; she was pregnant by Judah himself (Gen. 38:1–26; cf. Deut. 25:5–10). Judah's behaviour is called 'unjust' in that he had intercourse with Tamar incognito, supposing her to be a prostitute, and yet was prepared to execute judgment on his daughter-in-law for 'playing the whore' (Gen. 38:15, 24). Many interpreters wrongly exclude the idea of a norm from the biblical understanding of righteousness, by speaking of it as 'relational' and not 'normative'. It is more accurate to say that the biblical concepts often involve the idea of justice in application, i.e. a norm or standard expressed in a particular relationship (e.g. Deut. 6:20–25; Ps. 7:6–11; 1 Sam. 26:23; cf. H. Cremer, Rechtfertigungslehre). In other contexts, where 'righteousness' is joined to such ideas as 'truth' and 'uprightness', it is clear that the idea of a standard or norm is included in the concept (e.g. 1 Kgs. 3:6; Is. 45:19; 48:1; Ps. 119:142).

We may further observe that the feminine noun sΩ§d≈aœqa® (as opposed to its abstract masculine counterpart, sΩed≈eq) is generally concrete, signifying either a vindicating action on behalf of the one who has been judged in the right, or the deeds which warrant the claim to justification (on the former see, e.g. Is. 5:23, 2 Sam. 19:28; on the latter, Gen. 30:33; Deut. 9:4–5). Consequently, the psalmist appeals to God to 'answer in his righteousness' by defending him against his adversary, even as he asks God not to enter into contention with him, since 'no one living shall be justified before you' (Ps. 143:2). The profound tension between the hope for God's vindicating help over against an adversary and God's implicit contention with the psalmist is allowed to stand; it finds its resolution only in the NT. We find a further example of remarkable boldness in Psalm 51, where the psalmist asks for deliverance from guilt and from the punishment which God justly visits upon him (Ps. 51:1–19). This deliverance will involve a new creation (Ps. 51:10). The tension between God's contention with the psalmist and his contention for the psalmist reaches its peak here; the writer expects the resolution to come from God himself.

It is of fundamental significance that the biblical writers regularly attribute the re-establishment of righteousness to God alone (e.g. Is. 45:24; 54:14–17; Jer. 23:6). The psalmists appeal to God to effect justice on their behalf or to grant 'his righteousness' to the king as his intermediary (Pss. 72:1–3; 24:5; 37:6). They await, expect and finally celebrate 'the righteousness of God', that is, his saving judgment in their cause (e.g. Pss. 31:2; 40:9–10; 71:15; 89:14–18; 143:11). They know that 'human wrath does not effect the righteousness of God' (Jas. 1:19–20, author's translation). The concreteness of the biblical language noted above, is evident here: where the feminine noun sΩ§d≈aœqa® ('righteousness') is used the phrase 'God's righteousness' generally signifies his saving vindication of the oppressed (see also, e.g. Ps. 5:8; 71:2; Is. 51:6–8). Moreover, in accordance with its basis in a theology of creation, the biblical hope for 'righteousness' embraces the rectifying of the whole created order: 'Shower, O heavens, from above, and let the skies rain down righteousness; let the earth open, that salvation may spring up, and let it cause righteousness to sprout up also; I the LORD have created it' (Is. 45:8; NRSV). This is the theme which Paul takes up when he announces that the righteousness of God has been revealed in the gospel (Ps. 98:2; Rom. 1:17). It is also reflected in the Johannine promise that God is 'faithful and righteous to forgive our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness' (1 John 1:8–9). The holy love of God comes to perfection in rectifying sinners.

Since the biblical usage of 'righteousness' is so strongly oriented towards the hope of God's saving justice, it is understandable that the presence of the concept of retributive justice in the Scriptures has been contested. Nevertheless, whenever a contention is resolved, one party suffers retribution for the evil which it has done, even as the other is vindicated. And in fact, a punitive 'righteousness of God' does appear in Scripture, mostly in the form of 'doxologies of judgment' in which those with whom God has been in contention admit his justice and their defeat: 'Yahweh is righteous, I and my people are the guilty ones' (Exod. 9:27; see also Lam. 1:18; 2 Chr. 12:1–6; Neh. 9:33; Dan. 9:7). Such confessions are also concrete admissions of guilt in the face of the punishment which God has meted out for particular failures. In other contexts, too, where a retributive righteousness is predicated of God, his ruling and judging activity is in view (Pss. 7:10–11; 11:5–7; Is. 1:27; 5:15–16; 10:22; 28:17; Dan. 9:16). The biblical writers treat the topic of 'righteousness' in the context of God's action, and not as an abstract idea.

'Justification' In Biblical Thought

In the light of the preceding considerations, the widespread claim that the biblical authors make no distinction between 'being declared righteous' and 'being made righteous' is to be rejected (e.g. E. Käsemann, New Testament Questions of Today, pp. 168–182). The rendering of biblical references to God's righteousness as 'salvation' is likewise unsatisfactory. In the various passages in question, the biblical writers speak of 'applied justice', the vindicating acts of God which in each instance presuppose that a verdict has been given. Such intervention represents not merely 'salvation', but God's 'saving justice' (e.g. Ps. 98:1–18; cf. Rom. 1:17).

According to the witness of the NT, this 'saving justice' of God has been decisively manifested in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. It is in this sense that Paul speaks of the 'righteousness of God' in the opening section of Romans, and at various other points in his letters (Rom. 1:17; 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:21). The new creation, in which righteousness dwells, has come into being in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17–21; 2 Pet. 3:13). Those who belong to Christ have died with him to sin and death, and now live to God and to righteousness (Rom. 6:17–18). His resurrection, like his death, took place 'for us' (Rom. 4:25; 3:24). In Christ, the kingdom of God, which consists in righteousness, eschatological peace, and joy, has entered the present, fallen and unjust world (Rom. 14:17; Gal. 1:3–4). The 'higher righteousness' of the kingdom of God which Jesus taught his disciples to seek is present in Jesus himself: formerly in his earthly presence, and now as it is distributed to people of faith through his resurrection (Matt. 5:10–11, 20; 6:33; 1 Cor. 1:30; 6:11; 2 Cor. 3:9; 5:21; Rom. 10:3; 1 Pet. 2:24). Participation in Christ and his righteousness thrusts one into the present 'contention' between God and the world (Rom. 8:18–39). In the fallen world, this new righteousness is under constant attack, not only from without, but also from within the believer, in whom 'the flesh' (the fallen person) persists even though it has been conquered (Rom. 8:12–14; Gal. 5:16–17). Only at the resurrection from the dead does Christ's vindication for us fully become his vindication in us (1 Cor. 15:50–58).

This understanding of justification appears especially in Paul's letters, but also is present also in other NT writings. It presupposes a 'contention' between God and the fallen world, as to whether or not the true God is in fact God, a theme which runs through the OT, but comes to special prominence in the latter chapters of Isaiah (see, e.g. Is. 41:1–29; cf. John 12:31; 16:8; Acts 17:31; Rev. 19:11). This 'lawsuit', which will be resolved at the final judgment, has also come proleptically to its conclusion in the resurrection of the crucified Christ. As the Righteous One sent by God, he was oppressed and afflicted, robbed of justice by unrighteous humanity (Acts 3:14; 22:14; 1 Pet. 3:18). Yet, although his death was the work of fallen humanity, it was simultaneously the work of God, who sent him as a 'propitiatory sacrifice' for sin (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2). In obedience to the will of God he willingly accepted the cross, and 'gave himself up for our sins' (Mark 10:45; Gal. 1:4; 2:20). In him God passed judgment upon fallen humanity, effecting the condemnation of 'sin in the flesh' in his death (Rom. 8:3). In raising Christ, God 'gave him justice', vindicating him over against the world (Acts 3:14–15; 1 Pet. 2:23; 3:18; 1 Tim. 3:16). With the resurrection, the exchange between fallen humanity and his Son is complete: 'he made him who knew no sin to be sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in him' (2 Cor. 5:21). The justifying action of God in Christ is twofold; in him God is justified in his contention with the sinner, and yet the sinner is justified. God is thus both 'just(ified) and justifier of the one who believes in Jesus' (Rom. 3:26).

God's dealings with the world in Christ were anticipated by the experience of Israel, which more than once in its history was 'reduced to nothing' in order that God might bring it salvation (e.g. Hab. 2:4; Is. 6:9–13; 7:9; see H. G. Reventlow, Rechtfertigung im Horizont des Alten Testaments [Munich, 1971]). Paul sees this pattern being worked out in Israel's present rejection of the gospel, which will be followed by the salvation of eschatological Israel (Rom. 9:1–11:36). God's dealings with Israel correspond to his work in Christ.

The justification of the fallen human being therefore takes place only in conjunction with condemnation (Rom. 4:25; 8:3). The 'ministry of righteousness, life and the Spirit' proceeds from the 'ministry of condemnation and death' (2 Cor. 3:4–11). In this way, the work of the gospel fulfils the work of the law (2 Cor. 3:12–18). According to Paul, the law serves the divine purpose by pronouncing sentence upon fallen humanity (Rom. 7:13; 8:3–4). One can achieve only an outward conformity to its demands (Phil. 3:6; Rom. 7:7–13). To seek one's righteousness in the law is to ignore the work of God in Christ, who is the 'goal of the law' (Rom. 10:4). Here Paul's gospel corresponds to the message of Jesus, who 'did not come to call the righteous, but sinners' (Mark 2:17). To ignore this Jesus is to deny the true state of one's own heart and life, to hide behind a semblance of piety (Matt. 23:28; Luke 18:9–14).

Within the biblical witness, the righteousness 'reckoned' to faith appears as an extraordinary gift of God. It is contrary to expectations: first, it sets aside the standard of conduct which is usually regarded as 'righteousness' (Gen. 15:6; cf. 6:9; Ps. 106:31; Deut. 6:25); secondly, it grants the blessing associated with justification in the form of a promise, which always stands in stark contrast to outward appearances (Rom. 4:18–25; Hab. 2:4). In both respects 'righteousness' and its resultant vindication spring from the word of God itself, which out of nothing brings life and blessing into existence (Rom. 4:17; Heb. 11:7). Those to whom the promises of God are given are called to the obedience of believing (Heb. 11:8; Rom. 1:5). In that they trust God and his word to them against all appearances, they acknowledge God as truly God (Rom. 4:20; cf. 1:23; 3:23; Is. 45:22–25). The 'righteousness' reckoned to faith is therefore (paradoxically) utterly gratuitous, yet the recompense for obedience to the first and highest commandment.

The declarations of Paul and James on justification may be reconciled along these lines. James characterizes the divine declaration of Abraham's righteousness as a prophetic utterance of Scripture, which was later fulfilled (Jas. 2:23; Gen. 15:6). It had its counterpart in Abraham's faith, which superintended his works and found its perfection in them (Jas. 2:22; see T. Laato in TrinJ 18). Abraham's vindication at his testing, when 'he offered up Isaac, his son' was the echo of the divine word already spoken. Likewise, the harlot Rahab's treatment of the 'messengers' sent to her implicitly echoes the divine promise of the land to Israel (Jas. 2:25). Paul's announcement of justification by faith apart from the works of the law is a denial of the security of the fallen human being before 

God on the basis of works (Rom. 3:27–31). He does not thereby exclude a final judgment according to works, which will reveal the secrets of the heart, and the 'work' (singular) of each person (Rom. 2:7, 16; 2 Cor. 5:10). Faith, which makes the crucified and risen Christ present within the sinner, is active in love (Gal. 2:20; 5:6). Christ's vindication for us has its counterpart in Christ's vindication within us at the final judgment (2 Cor. 13:5; Rom. 8:10–11). For Paul, final justification is therefore a mere echo of the justifying work of God in Christ, which is received by faith. Neither he nor James speaks of an increase of justification. Nor do they speak of a justification by faith and works. Rather, they both recognize that justifying faith in Christ necessarily has its own works.

See also: JESUS CHRIST.

Bibliography

P. Bovati, Re-establishing Justice: Legal Terms, Concepts and Procedures in the Hebrew Bible (ET, Sheffield, 1994); D. A. Carson (ed.), Right with God: Justification in the Bible and the World (Grand Rapids and Carlisle, 1992); H. Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre im Zusammenhange iherer geschichtlichen Voraussetzungen (Gütersloh, 1900); R. B. Hays, 'Justification', in ABD 3, pp. 1129–1133; E. Käsemann, New Testament Questions of Today (ET, Philadelphia and London, 1969), pp. 168–182; T. Laato, 'Justification according to James: a comparison with Paul', TJ 18, 1997, pp. 43–84; J. Reumann, Righteousness in the New Testament: 'Justification' in the United States Lutheran-Roman Catholic Dialogue (Philadelphia, 1982); H. G. Reventlow, Rechtfertigung im Horizont des Alten Testaments (Münich, 1971); H. H. Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung: Hintergrund und Geschichte des alttestamentlichen Gerechtigkeitsbegriffes (Tübingen, 1968); idem, 'Rechtfertigung als Schöpfungsgeschehen', in J. Friedrich, W. Pöhlmann and P. Stuhlmacher (eds.), Rechtfertigung: Festschrift für Ernst Käsemann (Tübingen and Göttingen, 1976); M. A. Seifrid, Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme (Leiden, 1992); idem, 'Righteousness language in the Hebrew Scriptures and early Judaism: linguistic considerations critical to the interpretation of Paul', in D. A. Carson (ed.), Paul and Variegated Judaism, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids and Tübingen, forthcoming); idem, Christ Our Righteousness: Paul's Theology of Justification (Grand Rapids and Leicester, 2000); P. Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (Göttingen, 21966); idem, Reconciliation, Law, and Righteousness: Essays in Biblical Theology (Philadelphia, 1986); idem, Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Grundlegung; Von Jesus zu Paulus (Göttingen, 1992); K. W. Whitelam, The Just King: Monarchial Judicial Authority in Ancient Israel (Sheffield, 1979); N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said (Oxford and Grand Rapids, 1997).

M. A. SEIFRID