Greater Riches than the Treasures in Egypt (7)

by Charles H. Welch

No.7. The basic meaning of righteousness.

We have seen that although salvation is by grace through faith and is not of works, that nevertheless the most exacting claim of even-handed justice has been met. We now continue our study in this fundamental of our faith to discover how this righteousness in which we stand, this righteousness which Christ has been made unto us, becomes our own. 

The word which will form the focus of our investigation must be the word ‘justify’. Our first concern must be to discover the primitive meaning of the term as expressed in the Hebrew and Greek equivalents. While we can say ‘glory’ and ‘glorify’ we cannot say ‘righteous’ and ‘righteously’. Nor can we accept the word ‘rectify’ for that today has shades of meaning that do not fit the case. The English borrows from the Anglo-Saxon riht for one word, and from the Latin jus for the other, and their common origin is demonstrated by an appeal to the Greek original. 

Joseph is said to be a ‘just’ man, and the adjective employed is dikaios (Matt. i. 19). The same Greek word appears in Matt. ix. 13 where it is translated ‘righteous’. So in John v. 30 we read “My judgment is just” and in John vii. 24 “Judge righteous judgment”. So the adverb dikaios is translated ‘justly’ in I Thess. ii. 10 and ‘righteously’ in Titus ii. 12. Dikaioo is generally translated “be righteous” as in Rev. xxii. 11. Dikaioma is rendered ‘justification’ in Rom. v. 16 and ‘righteousness’ in Rom. v. 18. The same interchangeability is true of the renderings of the Hebrew equivalent tsedaqah, tsedeq, tsadaq and tsaddiq. 

The Hebrew word tsadaq ‘righteous’ is derived from a root that means ‘straight’, ‘balanced’, ‘equivalent’, which meaning is expanded but not exceeded in the law ‘an eye for an eye’, and is set forth in the figure of the weights and balances, or the plumb-line, both of which figures are employed by the inspired writers of holy Scripture. The usage of the word tsadaq can be illustrated by the following passage: 

“If there be a controversy between men, and they came unto judgment, that the judges may judge them: then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked” (Deut. xxv. 1). 

But “they shall condemn the wicked” is literally “they shall make him wicked”, which, by a recognized figure, means, ‘to declare’ him to be so. The truth of this statement can be tested by turning to Gen. xli. 12, 13. The Egyptian butler who had been cast into prison together with the baker, had had his dream interpreted by Joseph. The baker’s dream also foretold his execution, but the butler’s dream foretold his restoration. Upon learning that Pharaoh had been troubled by a dream, the meaning of which none could declare, the butler remembered his faults, and told Pharaoh of Joseph, saying “So it was; me he restored unto mine office, and him he hanged” (Gen. xli. 13). If we take this literally then Joseph the prisoner, was also Joseph the hangman, which we know is not only absurd but untrue. 

Under the heading Metonymy, Dr. E. W. Bullinger, in his book Figures of Speech used in the Bible, devotes 69 pages to examples and this figure is used in Gen. xli. 13. 

“The Subject (i.e. the thing or action) for that which is connected with it (i.e. the Adjunct), we have the ‘Verb’.”

“Where the ‘action’ is put for the ‘declaration’ concerning it; or where what is said to be done is put for what is declared, or permitted, or foretold as to be done.” 

“Me he restored (i.e. declared that I should be restored) unto mine office, and him he hanged (i.e. declared that he should be hanged).” 

Justification does not impart righteousness, any more than condemnation imparts wickedness, justification is a declaration, it simply declares a person righteous, without in any case telling us how or where the righteousness in which he stands is obtained. Justification looks on the balances. It sees 1 pound on one scale and 16 ounces on the other. It is not concerned who provided the 16 ounces. That is the concern of Grace, Mercy and Love. 

There can be no possibility of introducing the idea of transfusing righteousness in the following non-doctrinal occurrences of ‘justify’. 

“For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned” (Matt. xii. 37). 

“But he willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?” (Luke x. 29). 

“Ye are they which justify yourselves before men” (Luke xvi. 15). 

Righteousness and justification have been called ‘forensic’ terms, a word derived from the Roman Forum, where the law-courts were held. This law-court atmosphere pervades the teaching on the subject of both of O.T and N.T. 

(1) God is looked upon as a Judge (Rom. viii. 33). 

(2) The person to be justified is ‘guilty’, exposed to ‘judgment’ and without ‘plea’ (Rom. i. 32; iii. 19). 

(3) There are three accusers (a) The Law (John v. 45); (b) Conscience (Rom. ii. 15); (c) Satan (Zech. iii. 2; Rev. xii. 10). 

(4) The charge has been drawn up in legal handwriting (Col. ii. 14). 

It is, however, important to remember that while this atmosphere of the law-court is a fact, the procedure and circumstances of our justification are alike unknown to the law of Moses or to any human court. 

“When a man is tried before an earthly tribunal he must either be condemned or acquitted; if he be condemned, he may be pardoned, but he cannot be justified, if he be acquitted, he may be justified, but he cannot stand in the need of pardon” (Scott, Essays). 

In the gospel, our justification is always connected with forgiveness, and implies that we are guilty. God is said to ‘justify the ungodly’, which, in any other court, is both impossible and illegal. 

Continuing therefore our list of ‘forensic’ terms, we note that: 

(5) The gospel provides the guilty man with an all-sufficient plea (Rom. iii. 23-25). 
(6) The Lord Himself is the Advocate (I John ii. 1, 2), and occupies the place of the accuser at ‘the right hand’ (Rom. viii. 34; Zech. iii. 1). 
(7) The sentence passed upon all believers is one of complete remission, justification and acceptance, together with a title to life and inheritance (Rom. viii. 1, 33, 34; II Cor. v. 21). 

Justification includes the following: 

(1) The remission of sins, viewed as a debt. 
(2) The pardon by a sovereign of a condemned criminal, whose offence is blotted out from his book. 
(3) The “covering by cancellation” which is the essence of the meaning of O.T. word Atonement (see articles in various issues of The Berean Expositor and in the doctrinal Alphabetical Analysis). 
(4) The imputation of a righteousness of God through the faith of, and through faith in Jesus Christ. 

Dewar, in his Elements, says: 

“Our justification is not by a righteousness performed, but a righteousness received.” 

“Justification changes our state; sanctification changes our nature.” 

The grounds of our justification in the gospel are: 

(1) We are justified by His (Christ’s) blood, through redemption (Rom. v. 9; iii. 24). 
(2) We are justified freely, by grace (Rom. iii. 24; Titus iii. 7). 
(3) We are justified by faith (Acts xiii. 39; Rom. iii. 28). 
(4) Negatively: no flesh can be justified by the deeds of the law or by works of any kind (Rom. iii. 20; iii. 28; iv. 2; Gal. ii. 16; iii. 11; v. 4). 

If we inquire what is the source of this act of justification, the answer is grace, free unmerited grace. 

If we inquire as to what is the meritorious cause of such an act; the answer is the Redemptive and Atoning sacrifice of Christ. 

If we inquire as to how this righteousness become ours, the answer is twofold (1) by faith and (2) by imputation. 

This subdivision of the subject is for the inquirer’s benefit, but we must beware of intruding these subdivisions too far into the realm of doctrine. As Scott, in his Essays says: 

“Justification may therefore be ascribed, either to the source, to the meritorious cause, or to the recipient thereof, even as (to use a familiar illustration) a drowning person may be said to be saved either by a man on the bank of the river, or by the rope thrown out to him, or by the hand laying hold on the rope.” 

In our next article we must consider more closely the receiving end of justification, ‘faith’ and ‘imputation’, but let us not befog our clear conception of salvation by arguing concerning the distinctive merits of ‘the man’, ‘the rope’, or ‘the hand’, for we shall assuredly drown if either of the three is missing. 

The following attempt to visualize the meaning of the word “justified” is primarily for young people, but the writer believes that many who are advanced in the faith will appreciate the suggestion here offered. It is not original, and has been in use for some time. 

Take a strip of paper, say two or three inches in width and about eighteen inches long. On this paper write the words:

JUST AS IF I HAD NEVER DONE IT 

Now fold the paper back at the word “just” and before the word “if”, so as to bring together the syllables “JUSTIF”. Repeat the process until only the word “JUSTIFIED” is visible. After explaining the meaning of the word, and how the sinner is justified by grace, extend the slip of paper, until the whole sentence is revealed. God treats the sinner, for Christ’s sake, as though he were righteous, but he made Him, the Righteous One, to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. 

-------------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 42, page 106).

---------------------