918
JUSTIFICATION
JUSTIFICATION
ness by God is manifested by outward good for- tune ; just as His displeasuie is shown by outward calamity (Is 65"- », Mai 4- =, Ps ST'"- -" etc. ; cf. AVellhausen, IJG^p. 220, n. 1). In the later post- exilic literature, however, the idea that the right- eous is always rewarded and the wicked always punished in this life, is abandoned, and there ap- pears the conception that the final justification or condemnation takes place after death (Job 19-°- ^, Dn 122- ^). Tliis conception is henceforth pre- dominant, as in the Pharisaic theology, to which we now turn.
The Pharisaic conception of the relation of man to God was purely legal, and based upon the idea of the Law as a contract between God and man. The idea of grace which qualifies the legalism of the OT sinks altogetlier into the background. The Pharisaic doctrine implies that the Divine demands expressed in the Law can be satisfied, and that the fulfilment of tliem gives a claim to reward. It is tlie recognition of tliis claim that is now meant by 'justiJfication.' The conception is further canied out mto detail in that the Law is regarded atomi- cally as the sum of the commandments it contains (cf., however, Dt 6^"). Every act of obedience is entered by God in the heavenly books, as is also every act of transgression. The decision is accord- ing to the preponderance. If tlris is on the side of the good, the Divine sentence of justification fol- lows, which consists in the declaration that the man is righteous. The account is finally made up at death (Weber, Jiid. TheoL' 1897, p. 277 ft'.).
It wiU be apparent that the whole idea, both in the OT and still more distinctly in the Pliarisaic theology, is forensic. With this, a^ain, agrees the derivation of the group of teclmical terms used in the OT in connexion with the idea of justification iPlh •■'iJ'JS 'righteousness,' pns 'righteous,' pnsn 'justify'). This group lias almost universally a forensic sense. The words are so used secularly, and are therefore naturally applied with tliis meaning in religion (Smend, Alttest. Bcligionsficschichte-, 1899, p. 388 f.). In the LXX tlie equivalents are 5iKaio(ri5>'7/,, Skaios, 5iKai6a. On the constant foren- sic use of StKaibw in the LXX (OT and Apocr.), also in the pseudeirigraphic books, see Sanday-Headlam, 'Romans' in tkternat. Crit. Com. p. 31. In Tal- uiudic theology piy is replaced by noi ' innocence,' and p'^fT by n'lsi ; nz\ also appears for p'ls, but tlie latter is maintained in use along with it (Weber, p. 277f.).
It is finally to be observed that, both in the OT and in the Rabbinic theology, righteousness before God and justification, whether looked for from the Divine grace or on the ground of human merit, are religious ideas. Righteousness is not souglit for its o^vn sake, as a moralist might seek it, but always as the condition of acceptance with God, and the blessings which flow from this, in this world or tlie next. It is at this point tliat the Pauline concep- tion of justification by faith links itself on to the older theologies. What St. Paul has in view is always the question of acceptance with God, and his doctrine is the answer of his Christian experi- ence to a problem set in the terms of tlie Pharisaic theolo^.
2. The Pauline doctrine. — There is no doubt that St. Paul's idea of justification is essentially the same as the Pharisaic, and, like it, forensic. In the fundamental passage Ro S'""- the whole setting is forensic. Note the words iVa ttov <TT6/j.a <t>pa.yrj, VTr6di.K0! (v. 19); ipJinov airou (v.^). Mankiiul is arraigned before the judgment-l»r of God, and the justification which follows must be forensic. So in Ro 4^ ju.stification is connected with imputation, a distinctly legal conception : Xo7ifeTai = ' is reckoned,' )'.'■. in the heavenly account-books. See, further, Sanday-Headlam, I.e. p. 30, who decide on general
philological grounds that Slkuovv means to pro- nounce righteous : ' It has relation to a verdict pronounced by a jud^e. ... It cannot mean to make righteous.' So far, tlien, St. Paul is in agreement with the PhiiriMi-. liiil (he deeper insight of his conscience M i 1 1 imi :illo\v him to suppose that God can be satislii il wiili ;i nure preponderance of per- formance over lr;iiisi;ic>^ion. For him to attain righteousness by tlie works of the Law would involve the complete fulfilment of it. But this is impossible ; for all are sinners (Ro 3**). Hence St. Paul concludes that ' by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in God's sight ' (3f").
Here is the point where St. Paul introduces his doctrine, based on his own personal experience, of a new method of justification (3-"f-), of which the principle on Gotl's side is grace (xapis), i.e. the free unmerited love of God (3"), and on man's side faith (1" 4''). As proceeding from the Divine grace, justification by faith is totally o])]iosed to justifica- tion by works, which depends nii merit (1"*). Instead of attaining a righteousness \>\ In- omu etlorts, the believer submis-sively receives a i iL^liteiiUMicss which is wholly of God, and His gilt lO'^ M\ I'h S'^). This casts light upon the Pauline conception of faith. It is the method by which the grace of God is sub- jectively appropriated. In so far as the believer, instead of acting on his o^vn initiative, allows him- self to be determined by God (Ro 10'), faith is a sijecies of obedience ; thus St. Paul speaks of the obedience of faith (P). But as correlative to grace, or the free love of God, faith is psychologically trust, a believing ' on God ' (4^).