St. Louise de Marillac: Animator of the Confraternities of Charity
Thesis
1. THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION PRESENTED
FOR THE HINDU MIND-SET
A Thesis of the Professional Project
Presented to the Faculty of the
Grace Theological Seminary
Winona Lake, Indiana
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Ministry
Track: Intercultural Studies
by
Dale Sanders Doron
WINONA LAKE, INDIANA
DECEMBER, 2007
2.
3. CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
Statement ........................................................................................................................ 1
Attitudes ......................................................................................................................... 1
Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 4
Scope .............................................................................................................................. 4
Need ............................................................................................................................... 5
Development................................................................................................................... 6
THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION......................................................................... 8
Introductory Statements and Development of the Subject................................................ 8
Old Testament Roots: God’s Method of Salvation........................................................... 9
The Garden of Eden .................................................................................................... 9
God’s Covenants ....................................................................................................... 12
Christ-- The Lamb of God: God’s Provision for Salvation............................................. 14
The Coming of Christ............................................................................................ 14
The Question of Righteousness.............................................................................. 15
Paul’s Revelation: God’s Way of Salvation................................................................... 17
Introductory Statements............................................................................................. 18
Definitions ................................................................................................................ 19
Definition Compilation.............................................................................................. 21
Definition without the Mathematics........................................................................... 22
Elements of Emphasis ............................................................................................... 22
Hebrew and Greek Words ......................................................................................... 27
Two Major Aspects of Justification ........................................................................... 28
iii
4. The Great Solution: The Gift of God ......................................................................... 29
Paul’s Explanation of Justification in His Letter to the Romans................................. 30
The Theme Stated (Rom. 1:1-17)........................................................................... 31
Righteousness Needed (Rom. 1:18-3:20) ............................................................... 32
Righteousness of Christ Imputed (Rom. 3:21-5:21) ............................................... 33
Insights and Considerations Pertinent to the Understanding of the Doctrine of
Justification with Hinduism in Mind ............................................................................. 39
1. Transgression against God’s Standard of Righteousness ............................ 40
2. Self-help vs. God-help ............................................................................... 41
3. Reincarnation............................................................................................. 42
4. Finality ...................................................................................................... 43
An Overview of Justification by Faith........................................................................... 43
The Statement of Justification in its Basic Essence:....................................................... 44
The Gospel for All Nations ........................................................................................... 44
HINDUISM: THE HINDU MIND-SET ........................................................................ 46
A Brief Summary of the History of Hinduism ............................................................... 47
The Scriptures of Hinduism........................................................................................... 49
The Vedas ................................................................................................................. 50
Upanishads................................................................................................................ 52
Law of Manu............................................................................................................. 53
Mahabharata.............................................................................................................. 54
Ghagavad-Gita .......................................................................................................... 54
The Ramayana .......................................................................................................... 55
Major Teachings of Hinduism....................................................................................... 56
iv
5. The History of the Teachings of Hinduism ................................................................ 56
Brahman.................................................................................................................... 57
Atman ....................................................................................................................... 58
Maya......................................................................................................................... 59
Karma ....................................................................................................................... 60
Dharma ..................................................................................................................... 62
Samsara..................................................................................................................... 65
Moksha ..................................................................................................................... 73
Major Elements of Hindu Thought Considered in Presenting the Doctrine of Justification
..................................................................................................................................... 76
Brahman.................................................................................................................... 77
Emanation from Brahman ......................................................................................... 78
Desire to Return to Brahman ..................................................................................... 78
Dharma ..................................................................................................................... 79
Reincarnation ............................................................................................................ 80
Karma ....................................................................................................................... 81
Caste System............................................................................................................. 82
Inclusivism................................................................................................................ 83
Humanity .................................................................................................................. 83
The Statement of the Doctrine of Justification............................................................... 84
The Gospel Contextualized for the Hindu Mind-Set ...................................................... 84
APPROACHES FOR TEACHING THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION................ 86
Felt Need Approaches ................................................................................................... 86
Dharma Approach ..................................................................................................... 86
v
6. Setting................................................................................................................... 86
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 87
Application............................................................................................................ 87
Caste System Approach............................................................................................. 88
The Dalit Approach................................................................................................... 88
Setting................................................................................................................... 88
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 88
Application............................................................................................................ 89
The Higher Caste Approach ...................................................................................... 89
Setting................................................................................................................... 89
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 90
Application............................................................................................................ 90
Peace with God Approach ......................................................................................... 91
Setting................................................................................................................... 91
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 91
Application............................................................................................................ 91
Worship/Pleasing God Approach............................................................................... 92
Setting................................................................................................................... 92
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 92
Application............................................................................................................ 93
Theological Approaches................................................................................................ 93
Emanations from Brahman........................................................................................ 94
Setting................................................................................................................... 94
Bridge ................................................................................................................... 94
vi
8. EVALUATION .......................................................................................................... 104
The Evaluation of Rev. Joy John, Academic Dean of the Seminary ................. 104
THE WAY OF WORKS ............................................................................................. 115
Karma Marga.............................................................................................................. 115
Karma Yoga................................................................................................................ 115
Definition.................................................................................................................... 115
History........................................................................................................................ 116
Practice ....................................................................................................................... 118
THE WAY OF WISDOM........................................................................................... 119
Jnana Marga................................................................................................................ 119
Jnana Yoga ................................................................................................................. 119
Definition.................................................................................................................... 119
History........................................................................................................................ 120
Practice ....................................................................................................................... 120
The Sankhya System ........................................................................................... 122
The Yoga System ................................................................................................ 122
The Mimansa System .......................................................................................... 122
The Vaisheshika System...................................................................................... 123
The Nyaya System............................................................................................... 123
The Vedanta System............................................................................................ 123
THE WAY OF WORSHIP.......................................................................................... 125
Bhakti Marga .............................................................................................................. 125
Bhakti Yoga................................................................................................................ 125
Definition.................................................................................................................... 125
viii
10. ABSTRACT
Title: THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION PRESENTED FOR THE HINDU
MIND-SET
Author: Dale S. Doron
Degree: Doctor of Ministry
Date: Dec. 18, 2007
Adviser: Dr. Tom Stallter
The Purpose of this project is to bridge the great chasm between the spiritual
understanding and perception of the Hindu and the Biblical concepts of the doctrine of
justification by faith in Jesus Christ. The flow of the development of the subject begins
with recognizing the challenge of the Western mind-set of the difficulty in understanding
the concepts of Hinduism which molds so tightly the Hindu mind-set. The charge that
Christians often preach the gospel with out communicating much perceptible truth is the
foundation on which this project is built. The assumption is that in order to communicate
truth to any effective level the communicator must not only understand his own message
with great clarity he must also thoroughly understand the mind-set of the receptors of his
message. This is particularly important when the same spiritual terms appear in two
different religious systems such as Christianity and Hinduism but have different
meanings . Great effort has been taken to the define terms both in Christianity and in
Hinduism so the communicator can speak truth that is understood in the Hindu mind-set.
Chapter one explains the need for carefully understanding the teachings of Hinduism as it
forms a mind-set for the Hindu to interpret all spiritual truth. Chapter two analyzes the
doctrine of justification by faith with many of its implications of the works salvation of
Hinduism in contrast to a faith salvation of Christianity. Special attention is given to
Paul’s explanation of justification in Romans three. Chapter three details the history,
growth and main tenets of Hinduism. Also the major teachings of Hinduism that are
particularly troublesome for the Hindu to understand the faith based teaching of
justification are selected. These are given special attention in the next section. Chapter
four is a group of ten suggested approaches of presenting the truth of justification with
the Hindu mind-set clearly in the mind of the presenter. The first six are of a felt needs
nature. The last four are from a theological perspective. Chapter five is the summary and
response to the evaluation of the Indian faculty of the Evangelical Theological Seminary
near Bangalore South India. Chapter six is the conclusion and implications of the study.
Unless the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of the understanding of a Hindu, or any one else for
that mater, all human attempts to be clear, understandable, and persuasive will in the end
be futile. Knowing that only the Lord Himself can ultimately draw men unto Himself,
however, does not exempt us from striving to present a clear, understandable, and
persuasive presentation of the truth that alone can save men eternally.
x
11. INTRODUCTION
Statement
This study analyzes Hinduism to discover the heart of Hindu thought that keep
Hindus from understanding and accepting the biblical doctrine of justification. In that
regard, the doctrine of justification is analyzed and stated in its most essential terms.
Next, the elements of Hindu thought, which present barriers to understanding and
accepting the doctrine of justification, are identified and examined. Then, a statement of
the doctrine of justification is offered in a contextualized presentation for the Hindu.
Also, suggestions are presented of how that presentation may be approached most
effectively in teaching and preaching.
Attitudes
The writer has great apprehension and deep humility as he offers these
suggestions as a way to explain the heart of the Gospel, the doctrine of justification, to
those of a Hindu mind-set. He is initially and will continue to be open and receptive to
any insight or criticism that would make the goal of communicating the foundation of the
gospel to Hind more achievable us.
The writer’s sensitivity is generated from several sources. First is the vastness of
Hinduism. The acclaimed oldest religion of the world is the third largest. Hinduism’s
massive collection of scriptures and writings set forth and explain its origin, history,
sects, tenets, practices, and personalities. It is presumptive of anyone to attempt an
exhaustive survey, study and research of such an overwhelming amount of material in
order to speak with absolute authority on the Hindu mind-set.
1
12. 2
Second, and maybe most significant, is the historical record of those who have
come from the West with the gospel to India. They often have made glaring errors in
their naïve attempts to present the gospel clearly and persuasively to Hindus. Initially,
gospel carriers of the West have the timeless, universal message of redemption in Christ
in a Western wrapper.1 Effort was not exerted to extract the essential gospel from its
Western practice and its local forms.2 Nor was effort exerted to learn the forms and
shapes of Indian-Hindu thought patterns to “rewrap” and package this good news for
presentation to the people of India.3 The good news packaged in a Western style, not
distinguishing the message from its form, was often presented as God’s timeless message
to India.4 Many times it was insisted and even demanded that Christianity in India should
look the same as it does in the West.5 This egotistical, superior attitude not only is wrong,
1
Paul Gupta, Breaking Tradition to Accomplish Vision (Winona Lake, IN: BMH, 2006), 11, 12.
Lingenfelter details how missionaries have imported a Western style of training national leaders. He calls
this a “tragedy” because most nationals do not recognize how they imitate Western patterns and lose their
vision to equip leaders for church planting.
2
H. L. Richard, Following Christ in the Hindu Context (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library,
1998), 19, 20. In contrast to the normal, arrogant ways that Western missionaries usually behave,
understanding neither the culture of India nor the religion of Hinduism, N. V. Tilak’s conversion
experience was refreshingly different. He met a European missionary on a train who offered him a seat,
was extremely polite and gentle, discussed Indian poets and poetry, was familiar with Sanskrit literature
and slowly turned the conversation to Tilak’s opinion of Christianity.
3
Gupta, Breaking Tradition, 22. Gupta is emphatic that, though formal education and even
accreditation do have their place, they are “ill suited and cannot effectively equip evangelists, church
planters, and apostolic leaders for ministry.”
4
Richard, Following Christ, 51, 52. In a “most confidential” letter to a friend V.N. Talik
confessed, “I am really tired of Missions and Missionaries. These with their agents form an institution
which is day by day degenerating. They are guided by selfish motives; they are slaves to self-sufficiency,
pride and the world. Expecting those who join the flock and live in and for worldly motives, no other
person can do anything for their country as long as they depend on these petty lords and their satellites.
There is no end to their underhanded dealings; there is no end to their dependence on their flatterers…” To
the missionaries he said, “How long are you going to spoon-feed us? Let us stand on our own feet. Do not
interfere. Let us try. Let us battle the waves; let us die, but let us learn to swim.” This “missionary failing”
was captured in his poetic description. “You have set up for yourselves a kingdom of slaves; do not call it a
kingdom of God. We dance as puppets while you hold the strings; how long shall this buffoonery endure?”
5
B. V. Subbamma, New Patterns for Discipling Hindus (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library,
1970), 37, 38. This remains a prominent problem in India today. The pressure to leave one’s caste and
customs and accept the forms of a Christian church in another caste is described in detail by Subbamma.
2
13. 3
anti-biblical, and anti-gospel it is most offensive to the sensitive Hindu who is very much
in touch with the limitations of human perception and authority. “Good news carriers”
should have come originally in the spirit of humility and let the authority be seen and felt
in the message of the gospel and not in the messengers and their forms. Doubtless the
impact of the gospel on India would have been a great deal different from what it is
today.6
Third is the awareness that truth has not really been communicated until the
receptor genuinely understands what has been said.7 The writer is of deep conviction that
this area has been vastly overlooked, neglected, and grossly misunderstood by the bulk of
missionaries during the history of global missions.8 The meaning of a term in the mind of
She gives numerous illustrations of the same dynamic existing among Lutheran, Baptist, and national
Indian churches.
6
Ibid., 50, 51. Subbamma argues that when independence in India took place, the church was no
longer identified with foreigners, particularly the British. This was a barrier that kept many Indians from
coming to Christ. She predicts that the opportunity now exists for “tremendous growth.”
7
Eugene A. Nida, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1969),
1. Nida, in answering the question, “Is it a correct translation?” gives this explanation: “Correctness must
be determined by the extent to which the average reader for which a translation is intended will be likely to
understand (italics mine) it correctly.” The goal of all communication is that the receptor understands
correctly the message communicated.
Everett M. Rogers and Thomas M. Steinfatt, Intercultural Communication (Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press, Inc., 1999), 113. Rogers defines communication: “Communication is the process through
which participants create and share information with one another as they move toward reaching mutual
understanding” (italics mine).
David J. Hesselgrave, Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, l991), 40, 41. Hesselgrave follows the model of Aristotle of explaining communication
consisting of “three points of reference: the speaker, the speech, and the audience.” The speaker/source
must “encode” the message and the audience/respondent must then “decode” the message. Later, he
distinguishes between “inherited” meaning and “imparted” meaning, pp 65, 66. He explains that
words/symbols have no intrinsic meaning but only that which is imparted to them. Thus, for true
communication to take place, the imparted meaning of the speaker encoding the message and the receptor
decoding the imparted meaning must be similar for understanding to happen.
8
David Filbeck, Social Context and Proclamation (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 1985),
2, 3. Filbeck cites a number of examples where a proclamation of the gospel was given by a missionary but
because of previously held worldviews, the receptor did not understand the intent of the message at all and
arrived at a wrong conclusion.
3
14. 4
the speaker and in the mind of the receiver must have a large overlap of common
meaning before any serious communication can take place. The fear is that this may have
been a large area of failure in the past.9
Purpose
The purpose of this project is to state as clearly as possible the core concept of the
only way God has established for a man to become right with Him in such terms and
forms that Hindus will clearly understand the issues upon first hearing it. This is not to
say that a clear explanation will result in acceptance initially. It does, hopefully, preclude
any misunderstanding of what the real issues are for becoming right with God presently
and eternally.
Scope
The hope of the writer is to suggest to Indian Christians, pastors, teachers, or
professors some ways to present the doctrine of justification to unbelieving Hindus and to
explain this theological truth to new or untaught converts to Christianity.
It is also hoped that the suggestions of this project reflect serious thinking in the
right direction, grappling with the basic issues in understanding how to explain to a
Hindu the heart of the gospel, the doctrine of justification.
A second aspect of the scope is the limitation of its intended use. The suggestions
are not given as a beginning point to present the gospel to a Hindu. Certainly there are
other points of contact with Hindus that are far better in appealing to their spiritual need
than to begin by explaining the doctrine of justification. The history of evangelism in
India and gifted evangelists could suggest much more effective ways of getting Hindus to
9
S. Devasagayam Ponraj, An Introduction to Missionary Anthropology (Chennai, India: Mission
Educational Books, 2004), 14, 15. I base my conclusion on the pandemic struggle that Indian missiologists
seem to be having today in attempting to identify an effective contextualized presentation of the gospel for
Indian cultures. Ponraj is just one of a number of Indian missiologists actively addressing this need.
4
15. 5
listen to the gospel and in drawing them to the Savior than giving a theological lecture on
the doctrine of justification.
However, somewhere in the process of a Hindu’s hunger for deliverance and his
thirst for righteousness or in the process of explaining how God’s plan works there will
arise the crucial need to explain the doctrine of justification. At that point, hopefully,
these suggestions will be most helpful.
Need
If there is one biblical truth that challenges and exposes the inadequacies of
Hinduism, it must be the doctrine of justification. Of course there are many areas of
Hinduism that do not coincide with revealed Biblical truth, but with respect to mankind’s
eternal relationship with his Creator, the doctrine of justification is highly significant. The
following are some of the salient reasons for its importance in knowing God personally,
intimately, and eternally.
1. It (the doctrine of justification) explains that man is created by God and separated
from Him not emanating from God.
2. It explains that man sinned against God, offending Him and breaking the original
relationship that existed between God and man, and for which man is accountable.
3. It explains that there is no way that man alone can repair the relationship that is
lost and be able to return to God even in all of his efforts in countless
reincarnations or innumerable rituals (works) performed.
4. It explains that the merciful God designed only one plan, not three ways of
deliverance (as Hinduism teaches), that man can be restored into relationship with
God immediately and eternally.
5
16. 6
5. It explains that God took the initiative, designed the plan, provided the Redeemer,
and designated the only acceptable path: faith in His Provision--Christ’s complete
payment for the offense of all mankind!
6. When a convert to Christ comes from the orientation of Hinduism, he will need to
experience a basic reorientation to the biblical truth of justification by faith.
Perhaps more than any other, the doctrine of justification by faith helps Hindus
understand the purpose of the incarnation of Christ.10
Development
The development of the paper follows.
Chapter One – Introduction
This section gives the purpose and explanation for the paper.
Chapter Two – The Theological Foundation
This section includes the theological statement of each aspect of the doctrine of
justification and what elements need to be emphasized. It shows that Scripture is the basis
for the doctrine. The doctrine of justification is viewed biblically and historically with an
emphasis on those aspects that will be troublesome for Hindus to understand or accept its
teachings.
Chapter Three – The Theoretical Foundations
In this section a brief history and development of Hinduism is given. Next, the
major teachings of Hinduism are stated. Then, some of the elements of Hinduism that
make it difficult for a Hindu to understand or accept the doctrine of the justification by
10
Right With God, ed. David A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 13. Carson
suggests that having brought up the question, “How shall anyone be right with God?”… presupposes that it
is desirable and possible to be right with this God.”
6
17. 7
faith are selected and explained. Finally, the contextualized presentation of the doctrine is
proposed.
Chapter Four – The Implementation
The plan of presenting the teaching or preaching of the doctrine of justification is
given. Several approaches are suggested as starting points that ultimately end with a
presentation of the doctrine. Some of these approaches reflect a felt need. Others are
more theological. They begin at the point where a Hindu is thinking or has been taught
concerning Hinduism.
Chapter Five - The Evaluation
The plan for evaluation has been the submitting of the project to the faculty
members of the Asian Christian Academy (graduate level seminary) of Hosur, Tamil
Nadu near Bangalore, India, for their evaluations of the accuracy of understanding the
Hindu mind-set and the potential effectiveness of presenting the contextualized
statement.
The writer’s evaluation will be based on the feedback from the ACA faculty.
Chapter Six – The Conclusion
7
18. CHAPTER 2
THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION
Introductory Statements and Development of the Subject
The doctrine of justification of the believer, through faith in Christ’s finished
work on the cross, is not just a few clever insights of the apostle Paul to be found in the
New Testament after the Gospels’ record of the life of Christ. Nor is justification an
addendum to the gospel of Christ as a pleasant afterthought or postscript to the biography
of a great religious martyr. Justification by faith in the cross work of Christ is the heart of
the Gospel.11 Indeed, there is ultimately no gospel, no good news, for the world if the
whole point of Christ’s great sacrifice was not to make men right with God and to make
peace with God.12 Otherwise, the only good news of Christ’s resurrection was that He
alone had conquered death for Himself. But what about the rest of humanity? No one else
could ever qualify to achieve what He, the sinless man, had achieved.
Emphatically, the teaching of the entire Bible is that to get right with God one
must be justified by faith in the completed substitutionary cross work of Christ, which
includes His death and His resurrection.13 Before stating this truth in its most essential
components, an attempt to show that justification by faith was introduced by God in the
Old Testament will be presented. Further, it will be shown that God never deviated from
His plan or purpose throughout all of human history. God’s designing and allowing the
11
Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 722.
12
Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Basic Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1986), 345.
13
Grudem, Systematic Theology, 729.
8
19. 9
crucifixion of Christ was the goal and heart of His plan of redemption for the entire race.
Thus justification is neither new nor added to God’s way of salvation but intrinsic from
the very beginning. In order to present the gospel to Hindus, or to any man, the doctrine
of justification must be communicated clearly and contextually. Men without hope need
to understand with deep comprehension the heart of the message of the gospel.
Old Testament Roots: God’s Method of Salvation
The purpose of God’s revelation of Himself to man is much more that just
imparting unknowable data about God’s attributes and His actions. His revelation is not
merely a giant answer book on all you always wanted to know about God but were afraid
to ask. The theme that seems to run through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation
addresses the relationship between God and man.
The Garden of Eden
The record begins with an announcement of God’s eternal preexistence and
almost immediately explains man’s non-preexistence by virtue of his creation by God.
This simple, clear but profound information establishes the facts concerning man’s
origin. He was created by and is separate from God, not an emanation from God, yet man
bears some image of or likeness to God, Gen. 1:26, 27.
The creation account also communicates that the relationship between God and
man was initially very good. This relationship apparently continued for an indefinite
period of time, Gen. 1:26, 31; 2:1-25. But it was not to remain that way. God had given
instructions for man’s behavior. He set boundaries and limitations and consequences
should these boundaries be transgressed.
9
20. 10
The Lord God commanded the man, “…from the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die”
Gen. 2:17.
Man’s willful, rebellious decision to disobey God’s instruction created a breech
between God and himself. That breech was serious and had eternal implications. From
that point men have been asking the question, “How can man be right with God?”
God actually gave the answer before man ever asked the question the first time,
Isa. 65:24. In the first statement of God’s justice He, also, included the first statement of
hope for re-establishing a relationship with Himself. “He shall bruise you on the head,
and you shall bruise him on the heel” Gen. 3:15. This bit of information is a reference to
Christ and the redemption that He was later to complete on the cross. On the cross Christ
accomplished the defeat of Satan, the defeat of his death grip on humanity, and the
release of the human race. Based on this most significant event of all human history, God
ultimately justifies all men who will put their faith in Christ’s substitute payment of their
penalty. God neither gives nor will He accept any other method for reconciliation with
Himself
This exclusiveness of God opposes the legion of suggestions, systems, and
methods of salvation and reconciliation (including Hinduism) that men throughout history
have invented. Only God has the right and authority to create and establish a method of
reconciliation. But His grace and compassion motivated Him to do it. Compared to men’s
attempts at reconciliation however, a glaring distinction blatantly stands out between
God’s plan and all the other plans of men’s inventions. God comes to man!
In the course of history the promise of God is repeated and expanded. The God who
intervenes with his word of promise also bridges the gulf by mighty acts of
deliverance. No Babel tower of man’s building can avail to join earth to heaven and
to determine where God should descend. God came down his own stairway at his
10
21. 11
own time to make Bethel the house of God, the gate of heaven (Gen. 11:4; 28:12-
17).14
“In the fullness of time God sent His Son” (italics mine) Gal. 4:4a.
In God’s plan of justification by faith in His work, God takes the initiative of
creating the plan and its terms, providing the only acceptable substitute, and setting the
time and the means. Thus He receives all the glory from start to finish for it is all of Him.
Man only responds. Man gets no glory, cannot boast, has no basis for self-pride. The plan
is for all. There are no exceptions, substitutes, or mixing plans or alterations for anyone
for any reason. “God is just and the justifier of all who believe,” Rom. 3:26.
But in this seed promise of salvation (Gen. 3:15) initiated by God there is a
“suspended” sentence.
Human history is set under a suspended sentence, but a sentence that awaits a time
of judgment and of final restoration….Just as God is the judge whose verdict is
final and just, so God is the Savior, the only one who can provide deliverance from
the penalty of his own judgment. The great theme of the Old Testament is that
‘salvation is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9).15
God gave many indications that His final judgment was pending. Though scattered
randomly through Scripture, taken together, these indications are a solemn reminder that
God is still in charge and has not forgotten His word of judgment. The following are
some examples.
• God’s immediate judgment fell on Adam and Eve. (Gen. 3:13-24)
• All mankind dies physically. (Rom. 5:14)
• A whole generation of mankind died in the flood of Noah’s day. (Gen. 7:21,
22)
14
Carson, Right with God, 24.
15
Ibid., 24.
11
22. 12
• Sodom and Gomorrah burned to the ground. (Gen. 19:24, 25)
• Israel spent 70 years in captivity. (Jer. 25:11, 12)
• The temple in Jerusalem was burned and the stones scattered in 70 AD. (Matt.
24:2)
• World empires have been judged and destroyed according to the prophetic
Word of God. (Dan. 7:1-28; 8:1-27)16
In contrast to God’s keeping His word with regard to His promise of judgment, God
also has kept His word with regard to restoring man to relationship with Himself. He
demonstrates throughout the Old Testament that the restoration process does not depend
on man’s wisdom or effort but on His grace and choice.
“God chooses not Cain, but Abel; not Ishmael but Isaac; not Esau, but Jacob; not
Reuben, but Judah; not Eliab but David; not Amnon, but Solomon.”17
God is the initiator and pursuer of the restoration process. It is based on His
compassion, His grace, and His plan.
God’s Covenants
God sprinkles His covenants down through history. Each one gives insight into
God’s character of longsuffering with the human race. God’s patience and forbearance
explain why his final judgment has not yet fallen in human history, Rom. 2:4. God had as
His goal the restoration of the entire race (though not necessarily each individual in the
race). But He chose to accomplish that through One man. That One would come through
a certain individual, even Abraham, Gen. 12:1-3. Thus, God makes a covenant with
Abraham, Gen. 17:1-21. From Abraham comes the nation of Israel. God’s choice of
16
Ibid., 24.
17
Ibid., 25.
12
23. 13
Israel was not because of anything good in them but because of His own goodness,
namely the promise that He made to Abraham and His desire to bless the nation, Jer.
29:11.
At this point in Israel’s history God introduces His law and another covenant, the
Mosaic covenant, Exod. 19:1-8. The Ten Commandments are the heart of the statement
of His law. On the surface one might quickly conclude that God was giving His people a
behavioral plan to earn their way back to God and to keep in relationship with Him.
However, nothing could be further from God’s intent for His law. God set forth His
standard of acceptance. But the fact is no one could possibly meet that standard. But even
if one could, there would still remain the sin nature that would continue to produce sin as
long as the individual existed. Nothing in the law was designed to give a new nature. That
sin nature would remain, disqualifying anyone from establishing an eternal, restored
relationship with God.
To fellowship with God requires cleanness and purity. The sacrificial system of
the law provided and dictated how that could be accomplished temporarily. Complying
with that system one could offer his worship acceptably to God. But it is to be noted that
this temporary relationship was not a permanent one and would have to be repeated as
often as sin was committed. Something remained unchanged in the heart of the
worshipper that was deep and part of his being that had not been corrected. He needed a
new heart.
The law served several purposes in God’s economy. It obviously declared God’s
standard of righteousness. It served to teach that no man could produce his own
righteousness by keeping the law. Probably the highest achievement of the law was to
bring men to Christ. Only He, of all men, could and did keep the law. The righteousness
13
24. 14
which Christ produced in keeping the law, God made available by imputation to all who
believe in Christ.
Again God took the initiative and promised to give a new heart, Ezek. 36:26. Now
a new covenant can be established with Israel that will be kept, Jer. 31:31-34. Upon this
basis an eternal relationship can be built. To get right with God something right
(righteousness) had to be done for man. He was totally unable to do anything pure
enough, clean enough, or holy enough that would be acceptable to God. A righteousness
needed to be produced on man’s side for the basis of a relationship to be established or
sustained with a righteous God.
Christ-- The Lamb of God: God’s Provision for Salvation
The Coming of Christ
In the final analysis, of all the events of Christ’s human life and experiences, the
primary purpose of His coming to earth stands out loud and clear. He declared, “I came
that they might have life and have it abundantly,” John. 10:10. He explained His active
initiative of the process, “For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which
was lost,” Luke. 19:10. This simple but profound statement says it all. He came on a
mission…. “to seek the lost”…with an intended goal…“to save them.” The means to
accomplish His purpose was clearly articulated by John the Baptist.. Said John, “Behold,
the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” John. 1:29. At that point no one
but the Savior Himself had any clue that the accomplishment of that prophetic statement
meant the cross for Him.
Jesus was focused on His agenda to carry out His purpose. He made a special
effort to explain His actions and intents along the way. Christ knew what He was doing
14
25. 15
and He was in complete control of His life. What, to an observer, may have seemed like
the whims of human response to Christ and His claims were carefully orchestrated by
God the Father. These responses to Christ, which ultimately resulted in His death,
accomplished the provision of salvation and provided the means to get right with God.
The Question of Righteousness
1. At the very outset of Jesus’ public ministry He prevailed over John’s resistance
to baptize Him with the explanation that His baptism was necessary to fulfill all
righteousness, Matt. 3:15. Though theologians have haggled for centuries over the
precise meaning of what Jesus meant by that statement, one thing is crystal clear. Jesus
linked His ministry to righteousness, being right with God. All that He would do from the
first day of His public ministry would be tightly tied to righteousness.
2. In fact when, later in His ministry, Jesus was talking to the chief priests and
elders in the temple, He reminded them of righteousness as it was linked to John’s
ministry. “For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe
him,” Matt. 21:32.
3. Jesus recognized and instructed those who lacked righteousness and knew their
deficiency. Those who longed to possess righteousness were exactly in line for that gift.
He confirmed, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness for they shall
be satisfied,”( italics mine) Matt. 5:7. The profoundness of this statement verified what
He was about to accomplish with His life and sacrifice. Not only was righteousness
needed, but it would be provided by the Father’s perfect provision of His Son. However,
it would take the apostle Peter on the Day of Pentecost to explain the significance of
God’s control. Peter detailed the sovereign control of God over those events,
15
26. 16
Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by
God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in
your midst, just as you yourselves know, this Man, delivered over by the
predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands
of godless men and put Him to death. But God raised Him up again, putting an end
to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power (Acts
2:22-24).
Peter expounded the sovereign control of God again to the crowd that watched
him heal a man on the way to the temple. This time he highlighted the righteousness of
Christ’s life.
Men of Israel, why are you amazed at this, or why do you gaze at us, as if by our
own power or piety we had made him walk? The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob,
the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus, the one whom you delivered
and disowned in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him. But
you disowned the Holy and Righteous One (italics mine) and asked for a murderer
to be granted to you, but put to death the Prince of life, the one whom God raised
from the dead, a fact to which we are witnesses (Acts 3:12-15).
4. Jesus constantly focused on righteousness, reminding the people that God’s
standard of righteousness was higher than anything they had observed in their experience,
especially that demonstrated by the scribes and Pharisees. Repeatedly He warned,
For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of
the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven
(Matt. 5:20).
5. In fact, Christ emphasized righteousness in his ministry. His very instruction
suggested that there were three aspects of the people’s perspective on righteousness that
needed correcting. First, they had not made righteousness their priority for He said, “Seek
first,” implying this had not been their priority.
Second, their commitment to righteousness was lacking, for He said, “Seek…”
The imperative tense and the strong action word “seek” suggest they had not been putting
effort toward the pursuit of righteousness.
16
27. 17
Third, the most significant and most important aspect of Jesus’ instruction is in
the phrase “His righteousness.” Jesus was not telling the people to produce their own
righteousness. That is very significant. Jesus knew their righteousness was not good
enough, not acceptable. The scribes and the Pharisees were doing their best and their best
was not enough. In fact, no man’s righteousness is enough or acceptable to God. Jesus
plainly, clearly, emphatically instructed the people to seek God’s righteousness. This kind
of focused seeking implies that having found God’s righteousness, there might exist some
hope for them. Hope that God would give to them some of His righteousness which alone
is acceptable to Him. God might be pleased in His grace to do that for them. Christ puts
emphasis on being headed in the right direction and having the right attitude. Getting off
to the right start and on the right road, God would lead them in the way. In fact, He had
given them the law as a school master to lead them to Christ. He would surprise them in
their pursuit by giving (imputing) righteousness to them, the righteousness Christ had
prepared for them.
Paul’s Revelation: God’s Way of Salvation
“Jesus, Thy Blood and Righteousness”
Jesus, Thy blood and righteousness,
My beauty are,
My glorious dress;
‘Midst flaming worlds,
in these arrayed,
With joy shall I lift up my head.
Bold shall I stand in Thy great day,
For who aught to my charge shall lay?
Fully absolved through these I am,
17
28. 18
From sin and fear,
From guilt and shame.
Lord, I believe Thy precious blood,
Which at the mercy seat of God
Forever doth for sinners plead,
For me, e’en for my soul, was shed.
Lord, I believe were sinners more
Than sands upon the ocean shore,
Thou hast for all a ransom paid,
For all a full atonement made.
Text: Nicolaus L. Zinzendorf; Translation by John Wesley18
Introductory Statements
A right understanding of justification is absolutely crucial to the whole Christian
faith. Once Martin Luther realized the truth of justification by faith alone, he
became a Christian and overflowed with the new-found joy of the gospel.19
Thus far, the primary and consistent truth of God’s justifying men by faith alone
in His plan has been seen in the Old Testament and in the focus of Christ’s becoming a
man and coming to the earth. Now, the focus will be on the apostle Paul who of all
Scripture writers best explains the ramifications of the doctrine of justification by faith.
He explains, illustrates, and defends the doctrine in its final and fullest form. Though he
mentions the truth in his epistles to a number of the churches he started, he develops the
theme in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. Two aspects of this teaching make
up the core of the truth. One is God’s subtracting sin and its guilt from the believer, based
on Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice for man. The other is God’s declaring the believer
righteous, based on His placing Christ’s righteousness on the believer’s account. These
two aspects will be considered more closely in the unfolding of Paul’s statements of the
18
The Hymnal for Worship and Celebration, ed. Tom Fettke (Waco, TX: Word Music, 1986), 193.
19
Grudem, Systematic Theology. 722.
18
29. 19
events of justification.
Definitions
A number of definitions are given to get a full feeling of all that is involved in the
doctrine of justification. Authors emphasize different aspects. An important point is
sometimes missing in some definitions.
Justification is an instantaneous legal act of God in which he (1) thinks of our sins
as forgiven and Christ’s righteousness as belonging to us, and (2) declares us to be
righteous in his sight.20
By justification we mean that act of God by which, on account of Christ, to Whom
the sinner united by faith, He declares that sinner to be no longer under
condemnation, but to have a standing of righteousness before him.21
To be justified means to be declared righteous. Because of our position in Christ,
whereby Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us, God declares us righteous because
we are clothed with righteousness.22
To justify means to declare righteous. Both the Hebrew (sadaq) and the Greek
(dikaioo) words mean to announce or pronounce a favorable verdict, to declare
righteous. The concept does not mean to make righteous, but to announce
righteousness. It is a courtroom concept, so that to justify is to give a verdict of
righteous.23
Justification is there declared to be an act of God, accomplished by one single
divine volition, completed by one single act in each instance. It is declared also to
be an act, a forensic act; that is, an act of a Judge, not an act of God as Sovereign.24
Paul’s thesis is that God justifies sinners on a just ground, namely, that the claims
of God’s law upon them have been fully satisfied. The law has not been altered, or
suspended, or flouted for their justification, but fulfilled by Jesus Christ….On the
20
Ibid., 723.
21
Emery H. Bancroft, Elemental Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960),
215.
22
Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications,
1995), 203.
23
Ryrie, Basic Theology. 343.
24
A.A. Hodge, Evangelical Theology (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976), 295.
19
30. 20
ground of Christ’s obedience, God does not impute sin, but imputes righteousness
to sinners who believe, (Rom. 4:2-8; 5:19).25
In the New Testament, justification is the declarative act of God by which, on the
basis of the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning death, he pronounces believers to have
fulfilled all of the requirements of the law which pertain to them. Justification is a
forensic act imputing the righteousness of Christ to the believer; it is not an actual
infusing of holiness into the individual. It is a matter of declaring the person
righteous, as a judge does in acquitting the accused.26
Justification is the act of God whereby He acquits the gospel believer of the divine
verdict of condemnation and declares him to be righteous.27
Imputed righteousness is the ground of justification. God declares the one justified
forever whom He sees in Christ. It is an equitable decree since the justified one is
clothed in the righteousness of God. Justification is not a fiction or a state of
feeling; it is rather an immutable reckoning in the mind of God.28
Justification may be defined as that act of God whereby He declares righteous him
who believes on Christ.29
A man is said to be justified in the sight of God when in the judgment of God he is
deemed righteous, and is accepted on account of his righteousness….Thus we
simply interpret justification, as the acceptance with which God receives us into his
favor as if we were righteous; and we say that this justification consists in the
forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.30
Taken collectively these definitions contain the following twenty-five elements in
defining the doctrine of justification. The number following each element refers to the
25
George J. Zemek, A Biblical Theology of The Doctrines of Sovereign Grace (Little Rock, AR:
B.T.D.S.G., 2004), 171, 172.
26
Millard J. Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine, ed. L. Arnold Hustad (Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 1992), 318.
27
Floyd H. Barackman, Practical Christian Theology (Bible School Park, NY: Practical Press,
1981), 267.
28
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Major Bible Themes, ed. John F. Walvoord (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1974), 200.
29
Henry Clarence Thiessen, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology (Chicago, IL: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973), 362.
30
John Calvin, Institutes of The Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Edinburgh, England:
T and T Clark, 1869), 37, 38.
20
31. 21
number of times that particular element is specifically cited in the collection of
definitions.
Definition Compilation
Justification is the single (4)
Immutable (1)
Eternal (1)
forensic, legal (4)
decree (1)
(an act) of God (11)
Who is acting as judge (1)
whereby a sinner (3)
under just condemnation (2)
who by faith in Christ’s (4)
atoning death (1)
comes to be in Christ (2)
and has his sins forgiven (2)
and is thus declared by God (14)
announced (Hebrew and Greek words) (1)
righteous (4)
by virtue of imputing Christ’s righteousness to him (6)
not made righteous or infused with holiness (2)
but acquitted (2)
as accused (1)
because the demands of the law (3)
21
32. 22
have now been satisfied (1).
Definition without the Mathematics
Justification is the single, immutable, eternal, forensic, legal decree (an act) of
God. God is Judge whereby a sinner under just condemnation, who by faith in Christ’s
atoning death comes to be in Christ. He has his sins forgiven and is declared righteous by
God by virtue of imputing Christ’s righteousness to him, not made righteous or infused
with holiness, but acquitted as accused because the demands of the law have now been
satisfied.
Elements of Emphasis
Of the 25 elements or aspects identified in this definition, nine have been chosen.
They are chosen because their importance to the basic concept of justification and
because of their relevance to communicating this truth to the Hindu way of thinking. In
chapter 3, we will discuss in depth these and other aspects of justification as it relates to
Hinduism. The purpose here is only to show the link and the importance of the focus.
Those nine aspects of justification are:
1. It is God. God takes the initiative and creates an acceptable way to restore
man.31 Initially and ultimately God is pursuing man, not the reverse. All religions,
including Hinduism, present man’s attempts to placate and to pursue God. Their
attempts are always on their own terms and by their own methods. The total
concept of justification is just the opposite.
2. It is a forensic, legal act. This is a court case. God has a required standard of
behavior.32 He gave consequences should that standard be violated.33 God now
31
Ryrie, Basic Theology, 344.
32
Thiessen, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, 324.
22
33. 23
sits as Judge.34 He is righteous. He demands righteousness.35 The accused is
charged with unrighteousness which carries the death penalty. Will the guilty be
condemned or acquitted? How? Why? There is but one judgment with no reviews
and no second chances. Hinduism lacks the perspective of a broken divine
standard and judgment. Also, Hinduism suggests, by virtue of its teaching of
unlimited reincarnations, that if you don’t get it right this time there is always
another opportunity.
3. Justification is declared, announced. The pronouncement of the Righteous
Judge is always right and final! He makes a value judgment and He has His
reason.36 In fact, he wants men to know Who is that reason. His Son made the
payment on our behalf. His Son, our substitute. His righteousness, our sin. His
death, our life. His pain, our peace. His efforts, not ours. All religions, Hinduism
included, suggest that our efforts will win favor with God and somehow make us
acceptable again, or merged back into the essence of God. The presence and
magnitude of our sin are either forgotten, or minimized or not recognized at all. 37
4. It is by faith in Christ…The Biblical distinction between faith in Christ as
compared to faith in a guru, a prophet, a religious leader, or a holy man is
enormous. In Hinduism, one is free to mix and blend the instructions and insights
of others. One is even encouraged to mix and blend instructions. Not so with faith
in Christ. He claims to be the only way. He alone is pure, holy, and acceptable to
33
Grudem, Systematic Theology, 723.
34
Ryrie, Basic Theology, 343.
35
Ibid., 344.
36
Ibid., 345.
37
Barackman, Practical Christian Theology, 268.
23
34. 24
God. He is the only way to God. One cannot mix or blend the impurities of the
things or people of the world that are under condemnation with the purity and
holiness of Christ. This exclusiveness of Christ, as the only way with no mixtures
and excluding all others, is the hardest truth in Christianity for Hindus to
understand and accept. For the Hindu, this is arrogance at its worst, lacking the
humility of understanding the reality of human limitations. How can man know it
all? How can he know absolutely the final answer without doubt, particularly
when spiritual matters are being addressed?
5. It is in Christ. Faith in Christ results in a union with Christ that is best
explained in the New Testament as being “in Christ” (a doctrine not addressed in
this paper). This relationship with His Son is precisely what allows God to be
holy and just and compassionate in light of our guilt and pending eternal
judgment. In fact, in union with Christ, i.e. in Christ, the Father now can treat us
as He does His guiltless, holy, righteous Son! Hindus continue to struggle with
their dharma (duty) which is endless, ultimately undefined and having no absolute
standard of measure to know if one has totally satisfied the requirement or not.
6. Justification is because of Christ’s righteousness. Jesus, the second member of
the trinity, possesses the eternal attribute of righteousness. Anything he does is an
act of righteousness.38 It is pure. It is holy. It is right. When He became a man and
began to perform acts and deeds on the earth, each one was righteous. He always
did what pleased His Father, Jn. 8:29. His life was pure, perfect. He became the
spotless Lamb of God. Therefore He could become a sacrifice, the first perfect
sacrifice ever offered. This One could, because of His purity and His deity, offer
38
Ibid.
24
35. 25
an adequate sacrifice for all mankind. A deeper truth is here. How could one man
stand in the place of all men? The explanation of how another single individual,
Adam, could cause the death of all men helps us understand how that concept
worked with Christ. This concept will be examined more closely later in this
chapter. Hindus, along with many others, cling to their attempts to please and
placate god. They think they have God figured out and attempt to get to Him by
their own inventions of worship and service. Few, if any, have taken the time or
effort to ask what way God will accept. Does He already have a way in place that
will enable one to get right with Him? The answer is an emphatic “Yes!” The way
is Christ’s righteousness imputed to our account.
7. It is imputed. Christ’s righteousness is a gift given to each one who believes,
who will receive what He did for him.39 The transaction is awesome to behold.
The perfect, sinless, pure One is willing to suffer the pains of death for others (all
the race). They have no hope, no possible way of escaping the certain eternal
sentence of hell’s torment and eternal separation from God. God then is willing to
accept His Son’s perfect sacrifice, not just for one but for all mankind, thus
paying their penalty and erasing their sin and impurity. Though cleansed,
however, they are still without righteousness. Again, God accepts His Son’s
perfect, pure record of righteousness and puts that on the now clean but empty
account of the ones who by faith are “in Christ.” God accepts no other way. He
did all the creating and making. He has the right to be absolute and exclusive! He
shall receive all the glory for He has done it all, from planning, to providing to
pursuing, to declaring the repentant, believing sinner righteous in His sight!
39
Ibid., 269.
25
36. 26
Hindus work hard, even a whole lifetime, to produce a righteousness that will not
meet the perfect, pure, holy standard that God has set. But the good news is that
God has already provided a way that allows His standard to be met in His Son.
His provision is available to all through the imputation of Christ’s righteousness,
to all who will offer only His work and not theirs to God.
8. Justification is not being made righteous. The one who carefully reflects on the
exactness of what God did may raise the point: All this was done on behalf of the
believer. But it was not done to the nature of the sinner-believer. That is true.
God’s acts of declaring righteous and making righteous are two distinct activities
of God. The second, making an individual righteous, is not within the scope of
this paper to discuss at length. Hindus put an emphasis on the right performance
of a deed with little or no understanding of the need of a character that produces
only righteousness. They see the act as a requirement to be learned and performed
as a duty. The new nature that God produces in a believer is the outflow of His
life and character in His children, not the demand of rituals or the duties to family
and society.
9. It is immutable. God’s decrees, pronouncements, and declarations are eternal,
immutable, and unchangeable. He never gives His word then retracts it. He never
promises what He cannot keep. He always knows what is ahead so He is able to
keep His word. In short He planned that all future sinful acts of men would be
adequately covered by the payment of His Son forever.40 Thus His declaration is
eternally permanent. All who come to Christ, Hindus included, can rest secure in
God’s declaration of justification.
40
Ibid.
26
37. 27
Hebrew and Greek Words
The best way to understand the concept of righteousness and the act of declaring
one righteous is to look at the basic words used in the Old Testament and the New
Testament. The concept is based on these terms and their meanings. The Hebrew and
Greek terms, righteous and righteousness, appear approximately 545 times in the Bible.41
They are used in various ways with regard to God and man.
The main Hebrew word is qdc. The word means, “rightness or righteousness.”42
It refers to what is right, just, normal; rightness, justness in weights,
measurements, government, causes, speech, ethical issues, and controversy.43 The term
precludes a norm, a standard or a law by which the action is compared and measured.44
Then judgment is passed based on its acceptance.45
The main Greek word is dikaiosunh. The word means, “uprightness, justice as a
characteristic of a judge, or as required of men by God in a moral or religious sense.”46
The New Testament word gets much of its meaning from the Old Testament word usage
and meaning. The focus of this paper is on Paul’s use of the term.
The starting-point for an understanding of what Paul means by the dikaiosunh qeou
is provided by legal righteousness. According to Rom. 9:30 the Law is a nomos
dikaiosumhs because it demands righteousness. Paul has a strong forensic use of
41
Edward W. Goodrick and John R. Kohlenberger III, The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1999), 959, 960.
42
Grudem, Systematic Theology, 724.
43
Francis Brown, S.R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of The Old
Testament (Glasgow, Scotland: Oxford University Press, 1907), 842, 842.
44
Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine, 318.
45
Ryrie, Basic Theology, 343.
46
William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of The New Testament
(Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1957).
27
38. 28
justification. Forensically does not mean “as if” he were righteous, since the
sovereign sentence of God is genuinely pronounced. Nor does it mean that moral
rectitude (character) is attained. What it does mean is that the man who has
dikaiosunh is right before God.47
Two Major Aspects of Justification
Among a number of very important facets of the doctrine of justification, two
seem to be the focal point in the need for justification.
One is the sin problem that man has, which makes him hopelessly guilty before
God.48 Man has never been able to deal with his sin record and the guilt it has caused
him.49 The record is indelible, irremovable, and unpayable. He cannot reduce it, change
it, alter it, or escape it. Three phases continue to drive nails into his eternal coffin. He
inherited some of it, he personally has produced some of it, and he helplessly continues to
generate more of it. He is doomed by what he didn’t do, by what he has done and by what
he continues to do, but can’t stop doing it. His debt and doom grow daily without any
hope or insight to change his condition or nature. Over the history of his race he has
attempted many ways to escape the justice hanging over his head, to ease the ache of his
soul, and to remake the nature of his being but all have desperately failed. There is no
peace with God. His soul knows only constant pain. And his nature only continues to
produce lawlessness and rebellion. His sin problem is literally and eternally killing him.
He has no hope.
The second major aspect is his need for righteousness. Everything man does is
tainted with sin and impurity. He just can’t meet God’s high standard of absolute
47
Theological Dictionary of The New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley
(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1964), Vol. II, 202, 204.
48
Barackman, Practical Christian Theology, 268.
49
Addison H. Leitch, Interpreting Basic Theology (Great Neck, NY: Channel Press, Inc., 1961),
99.
28
39. 29
holiness. By men’s standards some may pass. But by God’s standards “there is none
righteous, not even one.” Rom. 3:10.
These two major needs are the focus of the doctrine of justification. Man’s record
of guilt and his inability to change his nature have left him in a pending state of eternal
judgment. The doctrine of justification changes all of that and more! Hindus need to be
confronted with these facts and the explanation of the remedy. They may be totally
unaware of their condition and this desperate situation. This lack of awareness certainly is
because of a lack of information. Also, they have been focused on their dharma (duty),
not realizing that all their efforts are totally incapable of changing their condition or
future.
The Great Solution: The Gift of God
Not until one understands the seriousness of the condition can he totally
appreciate the enormity of the solution. People often do not even recognize a solution
until they realize what the real problem is. An old adage states, “You have to get a man
lost before you can get him saved.”
The sentence of death is upon the whole human race. God’s compassion has
caused the exercise of his abundant grace to supply the gift of His Son’s sufficient work.
He has produced righteousness enough for us all. Again let it be noted that God has taken
the initiative, devised the plan, provided the cure, and extended the offer to the entire
race.50 No amount of human effort and no blend of human works will be acceptable
alongside God’s single, holy provision. God’s supply is in the righteousness of His Son
Jesus Christ. This provision is applicable only to “those who receive the abundance of
grace and of the gift of righteousness through the One, Jesus Christ,” Rom. 5:17. Hindus
50
Grudem, Systematic Theology, 729.
29
40. 30
will begin to realize the enormity of the provision only when they begin to understand the
seriousness of their spiritual condition.
Paul’s Explanation of Justification in His Letter to the Romans
This deeper explanation of justification is given for the following reasons. First,
the need to understand the essence of justification in its basic concepts .This involves
stripping away any of its historical cultural trappings picked up along the way in Europe
and in the West. These trappings would impede understanding for Eastern thinking
patterns, namely the Hindu mind-set.
Second is the need to be alert for aspects of the doctrine of justification that
particularly must be emphasized or highlighted for the Hindu in light of his
misunderstanding of reality. Hindus are unaware of having transgressed God’s standard,
indeed that God even has a standard of expected behavior. They, as well as all people, are
guilty of not having measured up to God’s standard.
Third, one must work systematically through Paul’s presentation of the doctrine
of justification to answer the logical questions of why, what, and how such a radical
answer is the final solution to man’s universal question: How can man be right with God?
Though Paul referenced the teaching of justification to almost all the churches he
planted, his most serious explanations are given in his letters to the Galatians and to the
Romans. The letter to the Galatians targets particularly the attack by Jews who insisted
that keeping the law together with of what Christ had accomplished on the cross were
also necessary. “Yes, Christ’s sacrifice was necessary initially,” they argued, “but law-
keeping was necessary to continue to stay right with God.” Paul’s argues not only is that
what Christ did was not only sufficient initially and throughout their lives and for final
judgment but that to add anything to what He had done was indeed another gospel and
30
41. 31
should come under God’s curse, Gal. 1:8.
Paul’s purpose in writing of justification to the Roman believers, however, is
much broader. Here he explains the whole concept of justification with great detail to
teach the total truth of justification and particularly its centrality to the Gospel. Without
justification there is ultimately no good news for man. That is to say, if Christ died and
rose again only to prove His power over death, what benefit does that offer for the rest of
the human race? They are not righteous. They are still guilty of sin. Paul shows that
God’s method of justification is the only divinely certified way back to God.
The Theme Stated (Rom. 1:1-17)
From the moment of man’s creation he has been in need of righteousness to
continue a relationship with his Creator. Man was created perfect and pure. But God
wanted to establish a continuing relationship with man based on his responsive obedience
to Him, thus creating righteousness in man. Up to that point man was pure, clean but
without righteousness, i.e. doing right acts, measuring up to God’s standard of conduct.
Theologians refer to this state or condition as unconfirmed holiness. He was pure but
untested.
Tested. The “test” is the key event and pivotal point in man’s relationship to his
Creator. When the test was given, man failed to produce righteousness. Severe
consequences requested from that failure. Man’s failure separated him from God,
including death physically and spiritually. His failure caused an eternal separation,
including death and torment that he had no ability to reverse. He was in desperate need of
outside help.
Enters the gospel. Paul shows that in the gospel revealed the righteousness of
God, Rom. 1:16, 17. All men, including Hindus, have striven to produce their own
31
42. 32
righteousness in order to be reinstated with God. Paul’s revelation is that it is only God’s
righteousness that is acceptable, and that righteousness has been made available.51
Righteousness Needed (Rom. 1:18-3:20)
The availability of God’s righteousness stands out even more greatly when
contrasted with His wrath against unrighteousness, (1:18-27). God reveals His wrath, but
He reveals His righteousness,
Paul describes the enormity and universality of God’s judgment from three
perspectives. First is the insistent spiraling down of mankind against the attempts of God
to halt man’s downward direction. On three different occasions God finally gave
mankind over to their rebellious desires (1:24, 26, and 28). Righteousness is needed
because of man’s universal rebellion against God’s restraint.
Second, righteousness is needed because those who judge others for unrighteous
deeds are no better off themselves. They are guilty of the same things. Understanding
transgression and criticizing others for their sin does not exempt one of his guilt. Thus, he
needs righteousness from some source other than himself (2:1-17).
Third, righteousness is needed by those who do not follow and obey the law of
God. Having the law does not exempt one. Doing the law does. But no one is able to do
the law completely, producing righteousness acceptable to God. All fall short, all are
guilty (3:10, 23; 2:18-3:30).
Hindus must be informed of the guilt of the world, theirs included, and that God’s
wrath is definite and pending. Therefore, they and all mankind are in desperate need of a
righteousness that is acceptable to God. That righteousness is not to be found among any
of the attempts of the human race or among any of the religious systems of the world,
51
Thiessen, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, 325.
32
43. 33
including Hinduism.
Righteousness of Christ Imputed (Rom. 3:21-5:21)
Paul makes the great announcement about the availability of God’s righteousness
to mankind. This is vital for Hindus to understand. The imputation of Christ’s
righteousness is the only method available by which man can return to God. For this to
happen, an understanding of the issues and the significance of the divine provision is
prerequisite. In Romans 1:17 Paul said God’s righteousness was “revealed”. In Romans
3:21 Paul said God’s righteousness was “manifested.” First it is uncovered and then it is
explained. He makes several helpful statements about God’s righteousness.
1. This righteousness is separate from the law.52 The implication is that
any attempt to keep the law, even if it were successful, would not be
adequate. Why? Because performing a current requirement has no power
to erase past sins. Law-keeping at its best can only establish one’s record
from this point forward.53 But even that gave little hope, for Jews for
centuries had attempted to keep the law. No one had succeeded yet. This
was good news that righteousness apart from the law might have some
future. (See Rom. 3:21.)
2. This righteousness was not a total surprise for it had been announced by
the law itself and by the prophets.54 This righteousness had exposure in the
Old Testament. God’s righteous character had been displayed on
52
Bancroft, Elemental Theology, 217.
53
Hodge, Evangelical Theology, 295.
54
Bancroft , 216.
33
44. 34
numerous occasions. Others had been declared righteous apart from doing
any law-works. The Messiah had been identified as “My Righteous
Servant,” Isa. 53:11. See Rom. 3:21.
3. This righteousness was to be possessed by means of faith not by an
achievement of works or any other effort on the part of man.55 The
reception channel was faith, not doing.56 Through the ages a few seemed
to have understood.57 But the bulk of the human race did not understand.
Though it was not new it was being revealed that this is the way, the only
way, man could achieve an acceptable righteousness -- through faith.58
(See Rom.3:22.)
4. This righteousness was in Christ.59 That was new. Never before had
anyone understood that the only acceptable righteousness to God (right
acts in response to His standard) was the righteousness which Christ had
performed.60 (See Rom. 3:22.)
5. This righteousness was available to all who would believe.61 No
distinctions were made, for all had sinned and were equally in need of this
righteousness. This righteousness was adequate for all. No one’s need
exceeded the quantity that was available in Christ. In fact, the degree of
55
Ibid., 218.
56
Zemek, A Biblical Theology, 171.
57
Chafer, Major Bible Themes, 199, 200.
58
Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine, 320, 321.
59
Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, 203.
60
Chafer, Major Bible Themes, 199.
61
Zemek, A Biblical Theology, 218.
34
45. 35
guiltiness of individuals is not even addressed. (See Rom. 3:22, 23.)
6. This offer of righteousness resulted in a state of justification. Once the
righteousness produced by Christ was made available and a person
availed himself of it by faith in Christ, he was justified.62 God declared
him righteous.63 This was God’s act, not man’s. Man’s character did not
change, but his position and relationship to God did change based on what
God declared64 (3:24)
7. This righteousness was a gift. Gifts are gifts! A gift cannot be earned
or paid for.65 It does not require prior qualification. Anything within the
recipient that smacks of merit disqualifies the item exchanged as a true
gift. Otherwise, it becomes something given in exchange for merit,
achievement, or wage. A gift is a gift! This gift of righteousness is totally
undeserved and unearned. No one qualified for it by means of anything he
may have done to deserve it (See Rom. 3:24).
8. This righteousness-gift was motivated by God’s grace.66 The
compassionate, loving heart of God motivated the grace of God to provide
this righteousness for the human race. God was not compelled to deliver
man. But His grace moved Him to provide a plan that would not violate
His justice or His holiness and yet would totally restore man at all levels.
His plan would pay the debt for the entire race. His plan would impute
62
Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, 203.
63
Grudem, Systematic Theology, 724.
64
Chafer, Major Bible Themes, 200.
65
Ibid., 203.
66
Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, 203.
35
46. 36
righteousness to everyone who would believe in Christ. His plan would
restore His relationship with individuals and the race as a whole. His plan
would be eternally irrevocable.67 His plan would ultimately conclude with
a nature in man with confirmed righteousness and the ability to perform
righteously for all eternity. His grace generated all that and more.
Amazing grace! (See Rom. 3:24).
9. This righteousness provided a propitiation to God’s wrath. God did not
change the severity of His sentence. Nor did He settle for anything less
than what He demanded. His demands were totally met. He was
completely satisfied.68 He was pleased. He was at peace with mankind.69
Justice had been served.70 Judgment had been extracted (See Rom. 3:25).
10. This righteousness had been produced publicly. God put His Son on
public display for all to see. At the crucifixion, no one, except the Savior,
had a clue of what was happening. Eternal redemption was being provided
for the entire human race. No one understood what was happening. Now
for hundreds of years, man has been able to look back and relive that day
with all of its significance, understanding deeply and in detail what God
did with His Son on the cross. Righteousness was provided publicly. 71
(See Rom. 3:25).
67
Bancroft, Elemental Theology, 219.
68
Chafer, Major Bible Themes, 197, 198.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid.
71
Bancroft, Elemental Theology., 218-220.
36
47. 37
11. This righteousness was provided through the blood of Christ.72 Christ
gave His life and died in man’s place.73 Two important issues were part of
Christ’s provision of righteousness. One, he offered a perfect life of
obedience and herein lay the righteousness that man needed. Second, that
perfect sinless life is what the Father so desired from the entire human
race. Just obedience. In fact, just loving the Father, to the point of obeying
His will, was the total passion of His Son. No wonder the Father has
predestined all to be conformed to the image of His Son, the obedient One.
He became the spotless Lamb of God that could be offered for all. His
blood was shed publicly, recorded eternally, discussed, explained,
preached, and appreciated continuously. In His blood is demonstrated His
righteousness (Rom. 3:25).
12. This righteousness was demonstrated. First, this righteousness was
revealed apokaluptetai (1:18). Then it was manifested pefanerwtai (3:21).
Now it is demonstrated endeixin (3:25, 26). Each statement has in it an
aspect of showing mankind the righteousness of God. First, it is
uncovered, to be aware of its existence. Second, it is displayed, to be seen
and observed. Finally, it is explained, to be understood. The public display
of the propitiation was made so men could see that the demands of God
for the penalty of man’s sin had been satisfied. The payment was made by
Christ and accepted by the Father. This was a demonstration to behold, to
go on record, to be studied, to be proclaimed (to Hindus).
72
Ibid.,218.
73
Grudem, Systematic Theology,727.
37
48. 38
13. This righteousness came in response to God’s forbearance. From
Adam’s sin until Calvary’s dark hour the pending judgment of God’s final
eternal stroke against man’s sin had waited. But why? Why had God not
immediately, on each man for each sin, extracted the exact penalty? Why
had He waited? He waited for that hour on the cross when His Son would
scream in victory, “It is finished!” God could wait and did wait until His
Son had paid the debt for the human race in full. His forbearance, driven
by His grace, fueled by His love, wrapped in his compassion, caused Him
to wait. That patience of God had to be demonstrated for man to see the
longsuffering of God until Jesus came and died for Hindus and for all
(Rom. 3:26).
14. This righteousness was a just act by a just Judge.74 This public
demonstration would let the whole world see God is just in every aspect.
1) He had not forgotten his promise of judgment on sin. Time had not
changed His mind or His Word.75 He could be trusted for the bad as well
as for the good. 2) He had not tampered with the sentence. Sin required
the death penalty. Sin got the death penalty. 3) He had targeted man as the
offender and debtor. He targeted Man as the payer of the debt. 4) His
justice had been vindicated. 5) His holiness had been unspotted. He
remained pure and holy in sentencing one for all.
Further, God was seen as Judge. He presided over Calvary’s
offering. He brought the offering of His own Son, the spotless “Lamb of
74
Zemek, A Biblical Theology, 170,171.
75
Erickson, Introducing Christian Doctrine, 318, 319.
38
