RIGHTEOUSNESS
What is righteousness? this word is possibly one of the least understood and therefore most misused among words that some of us are familiar with from The Bible.
We tend to think of the word as describing a certain state of being. Someone who is ‘righteous’ is good, better than most, perhaps even more ‘religious’ than most and therefore more ‘saintly’. Some might think it is a state reached with much spiritual discipline and effort.
Others might understand the word to mean not something we can gain on our own, but a quality of being that can only be given by God.
So, what is it, really? Is there a consensus on a definition? Is righteousness different than righteous? My ancient Webster's New World Dictionary, College Edition, from 1968, has this definition: "1. The quality or condition of being righteous or just… 2. A righteous act, quality etc." If we then look just above that entry, at least in this dictionary, to see what ‘righteous’ means, we read the following "1. Acting in a just, upright manner; doing what is right; virtuous… 2. Morally right or justifiable…"
So, this appears to tell us that righteousness does refer to a state of being, or could we even say, a life lived, in which the individual so described lives in a just, upright manner, and does what is right. Of course, we can see that some of these words could lead to even more discussion, e.g. what is 'just' or ‘right’? This does though give us a general understanding of this word as it is used in our world, as we all have some concept of what is just and right.
This word comes to our vocabulary from religious language that goes back as far as humanity kept records of their religions. There are ancient Near Eastern and Middle Eastern religions, including that of the Greeks, that deal with this concept. However, no group gave it as much attention as the Hebrews, the Jews. To really look at this then, we, who belong to the Judeo-Christian tradition, ought obviously to examine the original Hebrew (and Greek, as some texts where written in Greek) texts of The Bible for this word.
Where we need to start then is with the Old Testament. When I really began studying the Bible in my college days, I was introduced to an Old Testament scholar named Gerhard von Rad. I believe he gives us a good explanation of this word, its origins, how it was understood and used. I will therefore be drawing heavily on his work for the rest of this essay.
He writes, and I quote from page 370 of his Old Testament Theology, Volume 1: "There is absolutely no concept in the Old Testament with so central significance for all the relationships of human life as that of righteousness. It is the standard not only for man's relationship to God, but also for his relationship to his fellows… indeed, it is even the standard for man's relationship to the animals and to his natural environment. Righteousness can be described without more ado as the highest value in life, that upon which all life rests when it is probably properly ordered."
Von Rad then explains that we have misunderstood this word because of our own Western presuppositions to refer to "a man's proper conduct over against an absolute ethical norm, a legality which derives its norm from the absolute idea of justice." He gives credit to C. Cramer, writing in a German publication in 1901, for introducing us to what he believes is a more proper understanding of the term. He writes on page 371 of his volume, that "ancient Israel did not in fact measure a line of conduct or an act by ideal norm, but by the specific relationship in which the partner had at the time to prove himself true." Quoting Cremer, he writes "every relationship brings with it certain claims upon conduct, and the satisfaction of these claims, which issue from the relationship and in which alone the relationship can persist, is described by our term righteousness." Cremer concludes that "Righteousness is out and out a term denoting relationship, and that it does this in the sense of referring to a real relationship between two parties… and not to the relationship of an object under consideration to an idea." This is a quoted from Cremer's writing of 1893, again in a German publication.
We then begin to understand that what happens in the relationship, what is acted out, defines righteousness. Von Rad goes on to say it "And over and (going on to page 372) above all these, there is a relationship which Yahweh had offered to Israel… Here to the same holds true - the just man is the one who measures up to the particular claims which this relationship lays upon him." He describes the use of the term is being "employed in a transferred sense, that is, with reference to the effects of Yahweh's faithfulness to the relationship…" Yahweh is the only perfectly righteous person, so only Yahweh, as the Creator, has the power to determine the righteousness of his created beings, mankind. But still, von Rad adds, (now on page 373) "Yahweh's righteousness was not a norm, but acts…" Israel always understood God as acting in history. When their teachers expressed religion at its finest, it was not a set of laws and presuppositions. Those concepts came to us from the Greeks, and have had a severely negative effect on our understanding of God and true religion. So much for "systematic theology." To truly understand the New Testament, we must also see it as salvation history, as New Testament scholars such as Oscar Cullman describe it.” The New Testament writers were really not trying to create a systematic body of knowledge as the basis for our faith. Our faith is based on relationships and the acts which occur within those relationships, as von Read himself further develops on this page when he writes "Nevertheless it cannot be held that this Old Testament concept of righteousness is specifically forensic, for it embraces the whole of Israelite life, wherever men found themselves in mutual relationships. And in particular, conduct loyal to relationship includes far more than mere correctness or (now page 374) legality, that is righteousness and our sense of the word. Such dependence upon one another demanded the showing of kindness, faithfulness, and, as circumstances arose, helpful compassion to the poor or the suffering." We can certainly see these connections when we read the laws of the Pentateuch, in the Psalms and also very much so, in the writings of The Prophets.
Ultimately, Israel came to understand that righteousness was something that originated with Yahweh. To be sure, obeying the laws, as they often are referred to, does allow humans to act righteously. At the same time, Yahweh's "commandments were not indeed any absolute law, but a kindly gift rendering life orderly."
I really like the way von Rad then describes this understanding at the top of page 375, it was "Israel's conviction that her whole community life was sustained by a constantly forthcoming righteousness which flowed over upon her" from Yahweh. This is a wonderfully poetic vision of God giving his righteousness to his people.
This understanding of righteousness as finally being only a gift from Yahweh, is something that is even more fully developed in the New Testament by writers such as Paul. He makes it clear that we cannot attain righteousness on our own, but that it is a gift of God. To use his clear language, we have “all sinned and come short of the glory of God,”(Romans 3:23), so it is impossible for us to attain righteousness by our own efforts. However, here we come to understand that what really makes humanity righteous is the saving act of Christ's sacrificial death. With this, if we believe this, it is possible for us to move from our imperfect state to one which God regards as perfect. Certainly, we know that we are still not perfect as long as we are alive in the Earth as we know it now. However, again, we understand further from the teachings of the New Testament, there will come a day when heaven and earth will be renewed, and with that our righteousness will become complete, pervasive, and eternal. We will have been restored to the state in which we were first created. What better news is there for mankind than that? It is simply up to us to decide whether we want to accept this gift or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment