The Scriptural Definition of Righteousness

image_pdfimage_print

Since where we begin frequently determines whether we come to a correct understanding or not, we will begin where an equivalence is drawn between words we do know and understand, and words we wish to understand.
While a passage containing an equivalence exists for the word “righteousness,” it is not conclusive in providing a full understanding of the meaning. Rather, it only provides one element involved in the definition of righteousness. Since this situation exists, there are several passages of Scripture we must examine to obtain the actual definition of righteousness. From the totality of the passages which define the term, we should then be able to determine, based upon that definition, which thoughts and behaviors are righteous and which are not.

Though there are many places where we could begin in Scripture, we will begin where the equivalence exists between the words “righteousness” and “equity.” That passage is found in Psalms where we are given the coming reign of Christ for our consideration:

Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity. (Psalms 98:9)

Lest we get taken away by the use of the three different words of “earth,” “world,” and “people” for what the LORD God will judge, we must remember that the LORD is not going to judge the grass, trees and animals, but man only. What the verse is declaring to us is that there is no land, no region or place where He will not judge on this earth, but the entirety of it will be under His jurisdiction. If we understand this, we should be able to perceive that, as He judges the entirety of the world with righteousness, every person will be judged with equity.

By stating Psalm 98:9 this way, the LORD drew an equivalence between the words “righteousness” and “equity,” making them equal in meaning, at least in the area of judgment. But as mentioned earlier, the verse in Psalms is not the only reference in which righteousness is defined. In the following passage from Hebrews, the LORD delineates two things He deems in opposition one to the other:

But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (Hebrews 1:8-9)

Note here that the LORD God expresses strong feelings for righteousness (Thou hast loved righteousness) and equally strong feelings against iniquity (hated iniquity). By juxtaposing the two and expressing feelings which are in direct opposition (positive for righteousness and negative for iniquity), He is in as much defining righteousness and iniquity as opposites.

However, we must go further and examine what was preserved through the work and ministry of the prophet Ezekiel. During Ezekiel’s ministry the LORD God plainly showed Judah what was wrong with what they were doing and why He judged them the way He did. In so doing, Ezekiel records for everyone who cares to observe and consider, an explanation of what righteousness and its opposite, which is iniquity, consist of:

Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal? When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die. Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. (Ezekiel 18:25-30)

And again in Ezekiel 33:

Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth. When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it. Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right; If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live. Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal: but as for them, their way is not equal. When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall even die thereby. But if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby. Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways. (Ezekiel 33:12-20)

It is abundantly clear throughout Scripture that the LORD God states He is righteous. Those statements will not be repeated here, as evidence for this is without question. However, the LORD merely making the assertion does not prove it to man, who He is asking to trust in Him for salvation and the totality of the individual’s life. So it is that through the prophet Ezekiel, the LORD begins to provide the evidence, and the means to evaluate that evidence. In the above passage from Ezekiel 33, we find the operative phrase as to why the LORD God states that He is righteous:

“are not my ways equal?”

He follows this question with a blunt assessment of why Israel is not righteous by contrasting the above question with another question that draws an immediate distinction:

“are not your ways unequal?”

In so doing He sets forth the reason Israel was to be judged and destroyed if it failed to repent. But in this He also defines for us the central tenet of the quality of righteousness. However, for us to correctly understand righteousness, we must understand other concepts, beginning with what is meant by a person’s “way.” We must also understand what iniquity is and how it differs from both transgression and sin.

The “way”
In the above passages from Ezekiel, it is clear that the problem lies in the “way” of an individual, and whether that “way” is equal or unequal. To the end of understanding the significance of the “way,” and why the LORD God compared and contrasted “are not my ways equal?”with “are not your ways unequal,” we must examine the following definitions for the word “way.” It is needful that we pay particular attention to senses 3, 4a, 5a, 7 and 9, as we find them applicable to both the LORD God and man. The LORD’s use of the word in the plural, and the specific definitions which relate to aspects of both His being and ours bear directly upon our understanding:

Way – noun \?wa-\ ((“Way.” Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/way.))
1a: a thoroughfare for travel or transportation from place to place
b: an opening for passage <this door is the only way out of the room>
2: the course traveled from one place to another: ROUTE <asked the way to the museum>
3a: a course (as a series of actions or sequence of events) leading in a direction or toward an objective <led the way to eventual open heart operations — Current Biography>
b(1): a course of action <took the easy way out> (2) : opportunity, capability, or fact of doing as one pleases <always manages to get her own way>
c: a possible decision, action, or outcome: POSSIBILITY <they were rude — no two ways about it>
4a: manner or method of doing or happening; <admired her way of thinking> also : method of accomplishing : MEANS <that’s the way to do it>
b: FEATURE, RESPECT <in no way resembles her mother>
c: a usually specified degree of participation in an activity or enterprise <active in real estate in a small way>
5a: characteristic, regular, or habitual manner or mode of being, behaving, or happening <knows nothing of the ways of women>
b: ability to get along well or perform well
6: the length of a course : DISTANCE <has come a long way in her studies> <still have a way to go>
7: movement or progress along a course <worked her way up the corporate ladder>
8a: DIRECTION <is coming this way>
b: PARTICIPANT — usually used in combination <three-way discussion>
9: state of affairs: CONDITION, STATE <that’s the way things are>
10a plural but sometimes sing in constr: an inclined structure upon which a ship is built or supported in launching
b plural : the guiding surfaces on the bed of a machine along which a table or carriage moves
11: CATEGORY, KIND —usually used in the phrase in the way of <doesn’t require much in the way of expensive equipment —Forbes>
12: motion or speed of a ship or boat through the water

Understanding that one’s “ways” encompass more than the mere outward actions is essential here. The “ways” the LORD refers to here are the ground and bottom of the heart, the subsequent thoughts and intents which spring from that ground, and the outworking of those thoughts and intents. It also includes the process of thinking as well. Although everyone may see or perceive the same information, how any particular individual perceives that information is dependent upon what they know about the world around them. Additionally, how that information is processed and the conclusions drawn from that, lead to intents, thoughts and actions. This whole process is inclusive of the “way” of the individual.

Hence the “way” includes the process of reasoning. This process is roughly defined as the taking of information, applying significance (or weight) to that information, then determining, in accordance with how that information is perceived to “fit” in the existence of the individual, what thoughts or actions should follow. If any part of this process is unequal to the reality which actually exists (weighting, fitting and successive actions), then the outcome of those logical operations and how they are applied, which are used to arrive at a conclusion, is also unequal. Logic dictates that if any part of the process of arriving at an outcome is unequal, then the end result of that process will be unequal as well.

It is imperative to remember that we, that is all of us individually, suffer from the limitation of having to reason or figure things out. This is due to the simple fact that we do not know all things which could be known. In fact, we actually know very little of what could be known. Hence, we have to gather information and “think” about that information. Thus, in the gathering of information and subsequent processing of that information, there exists ample opportunity to be unequal to the reality which actually exists, particularly in the realm of the spiritual. In contrast, this situation does not exist with the LORD God. We would do well to remember that the LORD God is omniscient, which is “all-knowing” and thus does not “think” as man thinks. The LORD God does not have to “figure things out” as we do. Rather, He already knows and understands all the ramifications of that knowledge. Moreover, He knows that He knows all things. This knowledge precludes thinking as we understand it.

A comparison of ways
We note in the passages in Ezekiel that the disagreement is over the issue of “ways,” and whose “ways” are “equal” and whose “ways” are “not equal” or unequal. In this disagreement the LORD states that His ways are equal, and thus righteous, and that Israel’s ways are “not equal” and that “iniquity” would be their ruin. For our understanding, the operative statements that concern us are the following:

Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.

In the above passage the LORD compares the “way” of the LORD with the “way” of Israel. Finding fault with them, the LORD declares that He will judge the “ways” of Israel. Here He also explicitly warns that a failure to turn from those “ways” will allow iniquity to be their ruin. By making this comparison, the LORD draws an antithesis or oppositional equivalence between His ways which are “equal” and Israel’s which are “not equal,” which He then refers to as “iniquity.” Thus the contrast is between how the LORD God is, and subsequently does what He does, and Israel, which exists because of the LORD’s promise to Abraham, and how it chooses to be – despite that blessing, and despite repeated warnings to not persist in this “way.”

The relationship of these elements becomes clearer when we extract certain phrases and examine them. There is an appositional, contrasting relationship of the LORD’s ways and Israel’s ways. The declaration of judgment of Israel’s way, and finally summing up Israel’s situation with a call to repentance, else iniquity would be the ruin of them, plainly demonstrate that iniquity is the property, or attribute of being unequal in one’s ways:

  • “are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal
  • I will judge you, . . ., every one according to his ways
  • turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.”

Though the definitions of the words “righteous,” and “righteousness” never mentioned being equal, or equal in one’s ways, the source or root, which is the etymology of the word “iniquity,” is expressly concerned with equality. In examining how iniquity is defined, we see that it is referred to as having a lack of righteousness, or it is wickedness, injustice. It is also called a “wicked act; sin.” Those definitions would seem to take us right back to the problems existent with the way righteousness is defined. However, when we observe the etymology of the word, it supports exactly what the Scripture describes in Ezekiel, and is in direct opposition to how the Scripture describes righteousness. Note that the Latin etymology of the word is expressly a conjunction of two Latin words “in” (meaning “not”) and “aequus” (meaning “equal”).

Iniquity iniquity [ɪˈnɪkwɪtɪ] n pl -ties ((“Iniquity.” CollinsDictionary.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/iniquity))
1. lack of justice or righteousness; wickedness; injustice
2. a wicked act; sin
[from Latin ini-quita-s, from ini-quus unfair, from in-1 + aequus even, level; see equal]
iniquitous adj
iniquitously adv
iniquitousness n
in·iq·ui·ty (-nkw-t) n. pl. in·iq·ui·ties ((“Iniquity.” ahdictionary.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=iniquity&submit.x=69&submit.y=29))
1. Gross immorality or injustice; wickedness.
2. A grossly immoral act; a sin.
[Middle English iniquite, from Old French, from Latin inquits, from inquus, unjust, harmful : in-, not; see in-1 + aequus, equal.]
iniquus ((“iniquus.” wikionary.org. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/iniquus))
Latin
Etymology: in- (“not”) +? aequus (“equal, even, fair”)
Pronunciation: (Classical) IPA(key): /i?ni?.k^(w)us/
Adjective: ini-quus m (feminine ini-qua, neuter ini-quum); first/second declension
1. unjust, unfair
2. uneven
3. unfavourable, disadvantageous
4. unkind, hostile
5. unsuitable

The difference between “iniquity,” “transgression,” and “sin”
If we understand the foregoing explanation about iniquity, we arrive at the place where many raise question over the issue of iniquity and transgression, and the relationship between the two. It is clear and unmistakable in Ezekiel 33, that both iniquity and transgression are included in the LORD’s warning to Israel:

“turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.”

Which raises the question:

Isn’t it the transgression which is unequal, and not iniquity?

Or, framed differently:

Isn’t it that iniquity and transgression have meanings so closely related that you are splitting hairs and engaging in argument simply for the sake of doing so?

In fact, that was a view expressed concerning the distinction made between the words “iniquity,” “transgression,” and “sin” when conversing with a gentleman via email:

“While you have made a difference between sin, transgression, and iniquity, I attempted to keep it more simple; and while we could “split hairs” over their interrelated meanings, that was never my purpose.” ((Personal communication via email over the issue of the origin of sin. Emphasis mine.))

However common the man’s view is held in religious circles, it is not supported by Scripture or by reason. Unless you believe the LORD likes being redundant, or that the penmen or translators of the Scripture liked and added redundancy, then it stands to reason that there is some genuine distinction and difference between “iniquity,” “transgression,” and “sin,” and the words really cannot be used interchangeably.

In the following passage from Exodus, where the LORD God proclaims Himself before Moses, it is clear from the structure of the LORD’s statement that a difference exists between “iniquity,” “transgression,” and “sin:”

And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. (Exodus 34:6-7)

It is not reasonable to say that it is “splitting hairs over interrelated meanings” when the LORD God Himself, in declaring what he will and won’t forgive, draws a distinction between “iniquity,” “transgression,” and “sin.” Quite obviously, there is a significant enough difference between the three that the LORD God, who is not known for wasting words, delineates between them. It is up to us then, utilizing the information given us in His word, to be willing to see what the difference is.

To that end, let us examine briefly what the LORD told Jeremiah in chapter 33:

And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. (Jeremiah 33:8)

We see that the above verse consists of two major clauses, separated by a semi-colon. In the first clause, ending with a comma is the first phrase, which states “And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity,” which is then continued through the employment of the word “whereby” at the beginning of the second phrase. The second major clause begins similarly to the first with “and I will pardon all their iniquities,” and is also continued through the use of the word “whereby” in both phrases which follow. To understand what is done here, it is essential to understand the word “whereby:”

where·by (hwâr-b, wâr-) conj. ((“Whereby.” ahdictionary.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=whereby&submit.x=49&submit.y=24))
In accordance with which; by or through which.
whereby (w???ba?) pron ((“Whereby.” CollinsDictionary.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/whereby?))
1. by or because of which: the means whereby he took his life.
adv
2. how? by what means?: whereby does he recognize me?.
where•by (^(h)w??r?ba?, w??r-) conj.
1. by what or by which; under the terms of which.
adv.
2. Obs. by what? how? [1150–1200]

In the preceding definition, there are two possible senses which fit contextually. However, the correct usage, given the example above, would be the pronoun usage of the word. The given meaning of that usage is “by or because of which” yielding the following rewritten verse:

And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, because of which they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, because of which they have sinned, and because of which they have transgressed against me.

Thus, in using the word “whereby,” which means “by or because of which,” ((Though we could use “by which” in the place of “whereby,” it is clearer, though the meaning is the same, to use “because of which.” Hence, “because of which” is used here.)) the LORD God is imparting to us the understanding that transgression and sin come about as a result of iniquity. Since we know that iniquity, transgression and sin are three entirely different words, and we know that sin is already defined as “missing the mark.” However, transgression is defined as “The exceeding of due bounds or limits,” as we can see in the following definition: ((We define “transgression” this way because it is the “whereby” in how we “miss the mark.” It is logically out of order to say we “missed the mark” then went “out of the bound.” Rather, we go “out of the bound,” and because we did so, we “missed the mark.”))

trans·gres·sion ((“Transgression.” thefreedictionary.com. Accessed December 24, 2014. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/transgression. Quoting the American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2011 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.))
(tra(ns-gre(sh??n, tra(nz-) n.
1. A violation of a law, principle, or duty.
2. The exceeding of due bounds or limits.
3. A relative rise in sea level resulting in deposition of marine strata over terrestrial strata.

Which can also be stated as “going beyond or crossing the bounds or limits,” leaving us with the clear conclusion that the inequality the LORD speaks of in Ezekiel 18 and 33 is not transgression or sin. Rather, it is iniquity that is defined in both passages as ‘inequality,’ or being “not equal” in one’s ways.

Unlike the idea the gentleman holds that any differences in iniquity, transgression, and sin are minor and the meanings of the three words are interrelated, the Scripture defines them as part of a “cause and effect” relationship. What is demonstrated in the verse from Jeremiah 33 is that “iniquity,” which is the property or attribute of being unequal in one’s ways, is the cause (“because of which”) of transgression and sin. Relationally, iniquity causes transgression. Since transgression is crossing the bound, it is inherent in that action of crossing the boundary, that one has missed the mark (which is sin). Though we are tempted to say that sin and transgression are synonymous, we must remember that the law is not particularly a target, and neither is it particularly a set of boundaries. Rather, the law consists of parameters (conditions) which define its extent and applicability. It is important to keep this distinction as the LORD God is careful throughout His word to maintain it.

Thus, if one is unequal in one’s ways, it should be of no surprise that one’s perception and cogitations would also be unequal to the reality which is. If one misperceives and also errs in the processes of thinking, it should be of no surprise also that crossing the bound is going to happen at some point in time. When that crossing the bound happens, one will have missed the mark simply because perception and cognitive processes were distorted. Hence, though intentions are to perform that which is good, the intended end is not achieved, as the means by which to arrive at that end is misunderstood through misperception, distorted logic, and flawed logic processes. In fact, even the end we think we want to arrive at is frequently not clearly perceived or understood.

Though we might wish that this absolves us of responsibility for our intents, thoughts, decisions and subsequent actions, it does not for a couple of reasons. Beginning from Adam, who knowingly violated the commandment with regard to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and extending unto us this day, we are cognizant of the fact that we misperceive, misunderstand and err in our interactions in this world. That knowledge, and our willful failure to address it in any meaningful manner, places the burden of guilt squarely upon each of us individually. Moreover, since man obtained the knowledge of good and evil, which is the understanding of why one thing is righteous and another unrighteous, we are aware of when our thoughts and intents and any resulting words and behaviors are unequal. Though we may not perceive it perfectly, we perceive it well enough to be assured that what we are thinking and/or doing is indeed unrighteous.

In returning to the point at hand, which is the relationship between iniquity, transgression and sin, we would do well to remember that being unequal in our ways is the root cause of all transgressions we commit. It is those transgressions that immediately result in missing the mark, (which is sin) and are counted against us. However, lest we think that if we do not transgress and thus do not sin, that we are somehow guiltless, we are reminded in Scripture that the LORD God cannot have iniquity in His presence:

Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? we shall not die. O LORD, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty God, thou hast established them for correction. Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he? (Habakkuk 1:12-13)

In disagreement with this, there are those who would have us believe that sin is the problem instead of focusing on the inherent iniquity. The following example from a synopsis of the book “Don’t Blame God! A Biblical Answer to the Problem of Evil, Sin, and Suffering” demonstrates this quite adequately:

“The sub-title of this 210-page book is “A Biblical Answer to the Problem of Evil, Sin, and Suffering.”
It addresses what is probably the number one question most people have about God: If He is a loving God, why is there such rampant human suffering?
This book shows biblically that God is not at all to blame, that the cause of all suffering is sin, and it shows whose sin. ((Emphasis mine. Unfortunately, I don’t see how the book is going to help anyone, as it completely misses the point and assigns the cause of all problems to the wrong source. However, this should be of no surprise as the gentleman that emailed me (a different fellow from the author of the book), who thought there was little difference between iniquity, transgression, and sin, has over 40 years in the ministry, and cannot see the difference between the three.)) It shows why Jesus Christ is the fulcrum of history in this regard, and resolves the seemingly apparent contradiction between the nature of the Old Testament God and that of the New Testament God, which, of course are the same changeless God.” ((“Don’t Blame God! A Biblical Answer to the Problem of Evil, Sin, and Suffering.” truthortradition.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.truthortradition.com/articles/dont-blame-god-a-biblical-answer-to-the-problem-of-evil-sin-and-suffering))

And again from a lesson delivered at Common Ground Church:

“First, sin doesn’t discriminate. It has hit everyone. We don’t even have to do anything to be affected by it. Because Adam sinned, and we are all descended from him, we all have received his fallen nature. Adam’s sin impacted everyone. Even if a person had never committed a sinful act, everyone is guilty because our spiritual makeup is flawed.
Because of Adam’s sin, we all have an inborn selfishness that automatically rebels against God and his righteous laws. ((Emphasis mine. Here he is so close, yet so far away. What he is describing is the property or attribute of iniquity, yet he does not realize it.)) Paul calls our condition “sarx”, or being “in the flesh”. The New Living Translation translates this word as “sinful nature”. Paul isn’t referring to flesh and blood. There is nothing evil about muscle, tendons, and bones. We shouldn’t misunderstand him to be saying there is something inherently evil about the body.” ((“Romans, Week 2- Themes: Sin…”Sin is the Problem.”” cgnaz.org. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://cgnaz.org/september-16-2012-sermon-by-kevin/))

But the above is not what we are told in Habakkuk, and neither is it what we are told in a number of other passages of Scripture. Nevertheless, there is a passage that some may grasp upon as proof that sin is the core problem. The following passage from Romans, chapter 7 speaks to the problem of sin and its effects:

For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. (Romans 7:14-17)

Here we should understand that, unlike Jeremiah 33:8, there is no cause and effect relationship defined wherein sin is stated to cause iniquity and vice versa. Were it so, we could say the two were interchangeable. Rather, the cause and effect relationship defined here is of inward propensity to outward action. The inward propensity, which dwells in the flesh, is sin. The “sin” which is spoken of here, in its underlying Greek word, is the following:

hamartia: a sin, failure ((“harmartia.” biblehub.com. Accessed December 5, 2014. http://biblehub.com/greek/266.htm))
Original Word: ἁμαρτία, ας, ἡ
Definition: prop: missing the mark; hence: (a) guilt, sin, (b) a fault, failure (in an ethical sense), sinful deed.

While this causes the flesh to do that which the apostle hates and has difficulty controlling, it speaks nothing about the deeper problem of iniquity, which is the cause of the inward propensity to miss the mark. This puts us at the issue of why we missed the mark in the first place. There is a root cause for why we have a propensity for missing the mark, and we would do well to focus on it instead.

In returning to that root cause of our problem, the following passages demonstrate that there is a considerable focus on iniquity in Scripture. Moreover, that focus addresses iniquity as a fundamental problem that is in direct opposition to righteousness, and not as another aspect of sin and/or transgression:

But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. (Hebrews 1:8-9)

For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee. The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity. (Psalms 5:4-5)

Interestingly enough, never once in the Scripture does the LORD God say He hates sinners or hates sin. ((Now this is true for the King James Version. Who knows what is in all other versions which purport to be Scripture. It is worth remembering that if Satan can get us focused on the outward sin, we will miss the greater issue of our inward iniquity, and never address it.)) Now this can be explained two ways. But first, we must understand that all sin, by its nature, is unequal or iniquity. All transgression, by its nature, is also unequal or iniquity. Hence, all sin and transgression fall under the auspices of iniquity, and are iniquity by their very nature. Therefore, to refer to sin and transgression as iniquity is entirely correct, but can be confusing. However, not all iniquity is transgression and/or sin. In understanding this, we might use the example of not being able to work calculus. In other words, we are not equal to, or up to doing calculus. We have iniquity with regard to calculus. Nevertheless, if we never attempt to work a calculus problem, and indeed never encounter one, we have not transgressed and subsequently sinned with regard to calculus. Why? Because we never engaged the the action in which our iniquity would cause us to fall short and sin. Nevertheless, our iniquity remains, it simply has not had opportunity to manifest itself in the symptoms of transgression and sin.

Thus it may be that the LORD God is referring to the “workers of iniquity” as all sinners, but that is an extrapolation of the phrase “all workers of iniquity” to cover “all sinners” which cannot be supported by the balance of Scripture. What we find in Romans 5 is a statement that relates to us the LORD God’s love for all His creation, even the wicked who hate Him:

For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:7-8)

Which is reinforced in Ezekiel 33, verse 11, in which the LORD God states plainly:

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Ezekiel 33:11)

Therefore, by the direct contradiction of these passages, the concept that the “workers of iniquity” are all sinners cannot stand. Rather, it must mean a certain set or class of sinners which have pushed the point to the extreme in opposition to the LORD. Without going off topic, we can gain some insight into who that might be by examining the following passages of Scripture:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! ((It may seem pointless to direct attention to this most obvious point, but it is needful nonetheless: It is inherent in being a hypocrite, that one works iniquity.)) for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. (Matthew 23:25-28)

And again in John 8:44:

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (John 8:44)

And yet again from Matthew 12, verses 24-32:

But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (Matthew 12:24-32)

Lest we think this class of persons, the workers of iniquity, died out with the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day, we ought to remember that the referencing of them in Psalm 5 was long before the Pharisees existed. Without doubt, they exist today.

In returning to the point at hand, what this does show us is that iniquity is of particular interest to the LORD God, as it is how His creatures go “off the rails” or ‘leave their estate’ as it were. That is shown in the fall of Lucifer in Ezekiel 28:

Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. (Ezekiel 28:15)

It was not sin that was Lucifer’s problem, but iniquity. All Lucifer did was compare himself to the LORD on the throne, and think he was better than the LORD whom he was created to glorify. ((There is yet an entire discussion as to how the first sin occurred that could be brought up here. However, we would likely never reach the point which we wish to reach in this appendix, which addresses the issue of righteousness and what it is. Rather, the issue of the origin of sin is left to Appendix B: The Origin of Sin, in which the fall of Lucifer is discussed more fully.)) Sin is also not the stated reason why the Lord Jesus said that “the love of many shall wax cold.” Rather, it is the much more insidious iniquity:

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. (Matthew 24:12)

Iniquity is insidious, as it is being unequal in our “ways.” Which is to say that it is so much a part of us, and we are so accustomed to it, that we virtually never notice how our iniquitous thinking and behavior are negatively affecting those around us. Whether we like it or not, not a one of us is far from those the LORD God condemns so vigorously in II Peter:

But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbad the madness of the prophet. (II Peter 2:12-16)

It was iniquity that was Balaam’s problem, and it is the problem of those the LORD is condemning. It was also the problem of one Simon that Peter had to rebuke when he wanted to misappropriate the gift of the Holy Ghost:

Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. (Acts 8:21-23)

Where Peter speaks of the “bond of iniquity,” he is referring to the fact that Simon is held in iniquity and unable to escape iniquity by his own ability. However, this does not apply to just Simon. Rather, because of the very nature of iniquity and the distortion of everything about a person once they have become unequal in their ways, it is impossible for them to escape that bondage by their own efforts.

Why? Because of misperception, flawed thinking and thought processes. As referenced earlier, if our vision and perception are distorted, and our thinking is also distorted, how can any of us ever expect, of our own distorted and faulty abilities, to escape the cage of being unequal? How can any of us perceive accurately what we must do, if our vision and perception are not functioning correctly to perceive what actually is?

This is why the LORD states in Jeremiah 33 that He, and He alone will cleanse Israel from their iniquity. However, that cleansing is not limited to Israel, as all mankind are shapen in iniquity. Iniquity is the condition in which every person is formed in the womb, and we have no power in and of ourselves to cleanse ourselves from it. Rather, that takes place through the salvation which is in the Lord Jesus Christ and Him alone.

And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. (Jeremiah 33:8)

In comprehending the above passage, there are two separate issues the LORD God addresses:

  1. The iniquity inherent in the individual.
  2. The sin which results from that iniquity – which is the cognizant thought, or outward action.

As an aid to our understanding we must comprehend that both iniquity and the resultant sin must be swept away for the individual to be completely clean. Simply taking care of one and ignoring the other will still render one guilty before the LORD. It is imperative that two things occur before we are held guiltless:

  1. Have the cause of our going astray removed – which is the iniquity.
  2. The transgressions and sins accounted for and payment made for those violations of the Person of the LORD God, clearing the debt the individual owes.

It would appear from a number of passages of Scripture that sin is the problem. However, to believe this is true is no different than believing that the runny nose is the actual problem in a person who has allergies or a cold. Rather, like the runny nose, sin is the symptom and iniquity is the real problem. Iniquity is the root cause of transgression and sin. To claim that sin is the real problem is also like answering as to why you missed a target you were aiming at with the statement “Because I missed the target.” Sin is defined as missing the mark, but there is a reason for missing the mark. That reason is found in Ezekiel, chapters 18 and 33 – and it is the quality of being unequal in our ways.

Lastly, we should understand that we, as the race of man, are driven toward an end that will arrive whether we like it or not. That end is the destruction of all good and order in society and the subsequent rise to preeminence of wickedness and evil – simply because of iniquity:

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. (II Thessalonians 2:7)

We must understand: Even as we would work an equation in math, so it is with the passage of time and the outworking of all things with man. Once an inequality is introduced in the equation, it makes the equation unequal and the outcome in error. If we do not realize what we have done, we will arrive at an answer that we think is right, but is completely wrong. Moreover, the longer and more complex the equation, the greater the inequality in the equation becomes. In short, inequality begets more inequality. As time passes, and actions are performed which are unequal to what is, then iniquity grows. If we multiply that by every person on the earth, and none of us actually realize the inequalities we introduce into the working of all things, we can surely see how the mystery of iniquity works – without our really perceiving or understanding it.

The LORD God is equal in all His ways
In contrast to the way man is in his present state, the LORD God sets forth that He is equal in all His ways, and thus righteous. We could, as many have, simply accept the LORD’s claim and let it go, leaving unanswered certain questions which the LORD God seems to have given us a way to answer.

If we recall that the LORD God identified equity as the essential part of righteousness along with specifying that a person must have this characteristic or attribute of equity in his “ways,” then we can understand that He put before man the means by which man can make an informed determination about the righteousness of God within the limitations of man’s existence. Let us recall that the “way” of someone is how they are habitually, which is how they think and act as a matter of course. We need also to remember that being equal as a state of existence is absolute. That is, for one to be “equal,” then one must be equal in all their ways (that is, everything that they are as an individual). One cannot be equal in one thing, and be unequal in another, and be considered righteous or without inequality. For one to have equity, that is, being equal as an attribute of their being, that person must be completely consistent and uniform throughout.

Therefore, righteousness is the property of being equal in all one’s ways, and iniquity is the property of being unequal in any of one’s ways. It is of necessity true that if righteousness requires for all ways to be equal, that being (or becoming) unequal in any of one’s ways means that one has iniquity. Moreover, like the math equation, being unequal in one part spreads to every other part — and that inequality grows.

In the following passages, the LORD God testifies to man what He is about and what His end for man is. Understanding this is essential for us to come to some definitive conclusion about the character, nature and Person of the LORD God so that we may trust Him and His plan and purpose for man, which He accomplishes in Christ Jesus:

The LORD reigneth; let the people tremble: he sitteth between the cherubims; let the earth be moved. The LORD is great in Zion; and he is high above all the people. Let them praise thy great and terrible name; for it is holy. The king’s strength also loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity, thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob. (Psalms 99:1-4)

And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD; And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked. (Isaiah 11:1-4)

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6)

Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. (John 18:37)

It is imperative for us to come to the understanding that the Old Testament is there for us to see and evaluate man’s thinking and subsequent behavior, and consequences for that thinking and behavior. In practical examples, the Old Testament records events, the thoughts and actions of the individuals that precipitated them, and the LORD God’s interaction with His creatures in those events.

One of the things we must be assured of is the LORD God’s ability to maintain His own righteousness. This is an issue for us, as we cannot maintain righteousness for any period of time at all. Moreover, we are asked by the LORD to place our full, unreserved trust and confidence in the way He has chosen to justify man before Himself, absolve man of his guilt for sin, and cleanse man of all iniquity. If there exists any shred of doubt on our part about the actions and intentions of the LORD God, then we will not trust in any meaningful way. We must be assured that once purchased by the LORD God through the Lord Jesus Christ and His work, we will not be “let go,” abandoned, or denied in the judgment.

It is essential that we understand the LORD God is well able to maintain His righteousness, which is the equality of all His ways in and of Himself.

Without realizing it, most individuals, including Christians, pass by the LORD God’s omniscience (which is the knowing of all things), without so much as a second thought as to what that really means. This is not merely having all knowledge (which we typically think of as mere information) but includes all understanding of that information and all wisdom to properly apply that information. We must understand that having knowledge, which is information of one sort or another, is not enough, but the significance of that information must be known. This is called understanding. Moreover, individually, we must also know how to apply the information to everything that concerns us. This is called wisdom. The Scripture is express that the LORD God’s understanding is infinite. We should note that it does not use the word “complete,” which could be construed as limiting, but specifically states His understanding is infinite. This relates to us that His understanding extends with no end, which should convey to us the fullness of omniscience.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite. (Psalm 147:5)

We should grasp that understanding is in itself a kind of knowledge. It does not simply pertain to raw information, but addresses the significance of that information. This is to say that He knows what that information means and how it relates to everything else. In sum, it is information about information. Understanding is essential to wisdom. Without understanding there is simply no way to determine the weight or significance of one thing versus another and whether something is to be of concern, can be ignored, or is of lesser significance.

Hence, we are led to wisdom, which is essential for the construct of things. Wisdom in itself is a kind of knowledge. It is the knowledge of how information is to be applied and how it will work out as things interact. Without it, it would have been impossible for the LORD God to create anything that worked. And yet, so wise is the LORD in His creation that even in a corrupted state, it still is a wonder to behold and works quite well.

To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Psalm 136:5)

The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens. (Proverbs 3:19)

Thus, when we say the LORD God is omniscient, in practical terms, that means the LORD God knows all that exists, knows all the significance of everything, and is able to properly weight that information and thus apply it properly and correctly to every situation that exists or could exist, for all eternity.

In sum, the LORD God knows all things, and all possible out-workings of those things and their interaction with all other things, for all time and eternity. Moreover, He knows that He knows all things which are, and knows that He knows all out-workings that are and will be. Additionally, the LORD God knows there is nothing else to know that can be known.

Without this knowledge and understanding, maintaining His righteousness would be impossible as He must know the actual end, and all other possible ends of everything that is or could be. For it to be otherwise, there exists the possibility of an action made by the LORD God ending up unequal in its end. This would yield unrighteousness, which the LORD God declares is impossible with Him.

A love for righteousness
We should understand that omniscience is not enough to maintain righteousness. It is not sufficient to merely have all knowledge so that in all workings accomplished, the end of all is known. Rather, one must also love equity or equality:

Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright. (Psalm 11:4-7)

We must assuredly understand the following:

Without a love for righteousness, there is no motivator to be righteous, though one may know all things which exist and all actions which could occur, and the outworking of them all.

By the testimony of His word, the LORD God delights in equity in all things and in all His ways. It is His greatest pleasure to see things which are equal, balanced and true. Whether that equity, which is righteousness, is from the things He makes directly or from His creatures, it is a delight to His soul to behold them. Without this love for equity, righteousness and truth, which is in and of Himself, there exists no possibility of maintaining His righteousness.

Hence, this leads us to two questions:

Do we see righteousness in the things the LORD God created, even though they are in their present state corrupted by our iniquity?

Do we perceive righteousness in the interaction of the LORD God with His creatures: the angels, the devils, and man?

Before we answer those questions, we must remember that we, as fallen creatures given to iniquity, are attempting to ascertain and understand the actions of the LORD God as He deals with creatures which (as all recorded history proves) are wicked, uncaring and self-centered. This is of great difficulty, and entirely dependent upon the honesty of each individual heart and the intellectual honesty of the mind. Moreover, much of what we are attempting to understand is spiritual, which cannot be seen and is not easily perceived. This leaves man very little to work with in determining anything about the righteousness of the LORD God.

However, there are some things which we can perceive and understand, which should be obvious to all. Here we turn to the only testable environment we have available – the physical. Because of the system the LORD God has set up, there are some simple “tests” which can be performed by anyone possessing an honest heart and mind. Contrary to the thoughts of some, one does not have to be born again, that is, in Christ, to perceive and understand this. The reason for this is the LORD’s desire that man come to trust Him freely and of his own volition.

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion – Table of Contents Appendix A: Righteousness – Table of Contents Righteousness in Application

A Different Analysis

image_pdfimage_print

For a concept that was taken from Scripture, the commonly understood and accepted definition bears little resemblance to what the Scripture defines as righteousness. On the surface, it would seem that the religious scholars and leaders of the past did indeed get it right, but that is only from a surface reading of the usage of the word. It is clear from the flawed logic and unverifiable posits resulting from such superficial analyses, that depending on the surface reading of how “righteousness” is used for our understanding of its meaning, these analyses are wholly inadequate for conveying an accurate concept and understanding.

Instead of examining solely on usage, words must be examined in their relationship to other words. ((This is commonly called “context” which is (or was) commonly taught in high school English grammar classes. However, in religious studies, the context in which words are used is frequently thrown out in favor of any other method which yields the result most in line with the established doctrine of the particular school, church, or denomination.)) Since we do not employ ancient Hebrew or Koine Greek as common languages in modern society, we must examine the context in which the translated word is used, and must further examine the origin of the English word and its meaning in its source language. Though this is a process that is often time-consuming, it yields a clearer understanding of the idea and concept being conveyed.

Though we must necessarily depend upon the translators of the Scripture with this method, there is recourse through checking contextual usage in one passage against contextual usage of the same word in another passage. With the aid of a solid unabridged dictionary and an unabridged thesaurus, insuring that context is correctly understood, it is possible to determine whether a particular translation of the Scripture is accurate and whether the translators were adequate to the task at hand.

Though it may seem advantageous to learn ancient Hebrew or Koine Greek, there are dangers inherent in this route as well. We seem to forget that, by and large, we only know what we are taught. Without some independent verification, it is impossible to know whether you are being taught the correct meanings, implications and inferences of the words in another language. Moreover, simple omission of word meanings and cultural usage (dialect usage and colloquialisms) is easily done, and not always with the intent to deceive. In this case, inadequate source materials and ignorance of the instructor are sufficient to deny the student proper understanding.

In sum, correctly determining what a proper understanding of any doctrine or concept in Scripture is involves considerable time, intellectual honesty and legitimate work. However, since one’s eternal destiny may well be determined by the understanding of a particular doctrine and the decisions made as a result of understanding that doctrine, it is well worth the effort to be sure and certain.

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion – Table of Contents Appendix A: Righteousness – Table of Contents The Scriptural Definition of Righteousness

Righteousness as Commonly Understood is in Error

image_pdfimage_print

Considering that the LORD God is a God of order, wisdom, understanding and judgment, it would be strange if He chose to define righteousness, which is one of His central qualities, in such unreasonable, circular terms as we are given above. Rather, like the physical world He created, it would be easier to believe that righteousness is absolute and objectively testable. After all, if we are to be held to a standard, and that standard is of the LORD God, the Creator of all things, it would hold to reason that the standard by which we all are measured would be unchangeable, objective, and visible so that we may know where we are in relation to it.

Instead, what we are led to believe by the teaching, commonly accepted definitions, and examples given by those who claim to know is much like the following statement given by one gentleman in his attempt to explain that God is righteous, and that we can know He is righteous:

“We know that God is perfectly holy, and that whatsoever He does determines what is good; and that God Himself cannot sin.”

The error of this thinking lies in the fact that this is pure circular logic. What makes the statement above circular logic is the following phrase “whatsoever He does determines what is good” which is to say, without any other factor or qualification, if “God” does it, it must be right. While that is true when we address the LORD God, the I AM, that is likely not true for the “God” who we do not know, and are only guessing at his person, character, and nature. Without realizing it, the gentleman gave witness that if “God” determines something is good, then it is good, regardless of any other factor – even if it is iniquity. This is obviously not the kind of thinking the LORD God wants people to engage in, as He makes clear in His word that man is to both reason and prove what is and what is not true:

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. (Isaiah 1:18)

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (I Thessalonians 5:21)

It ought to be clear that what John Piper and many others conceive as righteousness is not what the LORD God is testifying to in His word. On the strength of the two passages above, and the many others which speak of the LORD God as a God of equity, truth and judgment, we can categorically state that these gentlemen must be mistaken. There is no reasoning in circular logic, blind belief, believing without any evidence whatsoever, or “if God does it, it must be righteous.” Rather, those are the thoughts and ideas of the unreasoning and superstitious, and are more akin to witchcraft than the true faith granted by the LORD God to anyone who hears and considers His word. Many of those who claim Christ seem to forget that the LORD is well able to hold to a published standard of righteousness ((It does seem to escape many that the LORD God is righteousness, just like it seems to escape them that He is love.)) and incurs no harm when He sets forth a standard which His creatures are able to perceive and evaluate.

There are reasons why men don’t want to perceive this standard, but prefer to cling to the circular logic espoused in virtually all of Christendom and/or the “in accordance with Divine law” idea. One of these reasons is the belief in the heart that man has a hope and prayer of being righteous outside of Christ. ((How much of “Christendom” holds to the idea that grace itself is not sufficient, either for salvation or to maintain salvation? Even though the Scriptures repeatedly make it crystal clear that the grace of Christ alone is effective for salvation, completely without works, men still insist on adding to that grace their own works. Somewhere between 95% and 98% of all who claim Christ do so on the basis of something other than the grace of Christ alone.)) In sum, the common ideas about righteousness promote works religion and self-justification. After all, multitudes claim that they are moral and ethical, and that they follow the Divine law or the Ten Commandments, which (as they claim) proves them “righteous.” However, when righteousness is perceived as an absolute, verifiable and testable standard, that which is commonly put forth as righteousness, which is entirely circular and subjective, fails in comparison. When we actually define righteousness accurately, it becomes crystal clear that we can never, of our own efforts, become righteous.

By way of understanding the weakness of righteousness as it is commonly taught and understood, we would do well to ask the following questions of ourselves and consider the answers:

  1. How do you know God is perfectly holy?
    1. After all, if you are going to make the statement, shouldn’t you have some concrete, solid basis upon which to make it? Mere assertion that “the Bible says so” is not going to work.
  2. What standard or test did you use to determine that?
    1. Using circular logic or self-justifying statements is not a standard. If it is, then mere opinions are elevated to facts, simply because we assert them.
  3. What differentiates “God” as you perceive him from Allah?
    1. If you cannot determine what the LORD God’s righteousness consists of, how can you determine where Allah’s righteousness is in any way different?
  4. How do you know God “cannot sin?”
    1. Sin is defined as “missing the mark.” If there is no objective, concrete, testable standard, how can you ever determine when you have “missed the mark?” Subjective, self-justifying standards, and opinion-based standards constantly change. Hence, where the mark or the boundary is, can and does change constantly. Hence, what may be “missing the mark” today, may be dead on-target tomorrow.
  5. Again, what test did you use to determine that “whatsoever God does is righteous?”
    1. Without some sort of objective standard, is there any way to find a conclusive, affirmative answer to any or all the previous questions?

It should be clear by this point that righteousness as it is commonly understood engenders more questions than answers, generates more angst than comfort, and generally leaves the individual at an uncomfortable loose end. It simply leaves us with an “I don’t know” for an answer.

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion – Table of Contents Appendix A: Righteousness – Table of Contents A Different Analysis

Ideas of “Righteousness,” Briefly Stated

image_pdfimage_print

The explanations of righteousness given in the examples presented in this section are not exhaustive of every way that theologians, pastors, preachers and religious teachers attempt to explain righteousness and what it means to man. Rather, it is the majority teaching of the fundamentals of righteousness as it is understood today. Though it is tedious to examine the definitions of the various words, it is nonetheless essential for our understanding. If we are to understand where we are, we have to know what the teachers of the doctrine understand and what they impart to those who are taught by them.

In beginning, we examine the dictionaries before all else, as they record how words are commonly used in a language. Since we are a generation that does not know a time when there were no dictionaries, it is imperative that we understand: Dictionaries come about as a written record of the employment of words in a language. Thus, word entries in a dictionary come about after words are used in certain senses by a significant portion of the population. Logically, this reveals the understanding of a society concerning certain concepts. Of concern here is the concept of righteousness and what English speakers conceive as constituting righteousness.

The following definitions are the easily available definitions one can find anywhere. It is important to use them, rather than some archaic or esoteric definition that only few would know or understand, as the bulk of society will understand a concept by the generally accepted and commonly used definitions, rather than the esoteric. The Wikipedia entry also reflects the common understanding of the subject. There are also two examples excerpted from religious teachers which reflect how they attempt to teach about righteousness. Finally, there is a passage from the King James version and the Strong’s Concordance word references and definitions for that passage.

These should give a reasonable understanding of how righteousness is viewed in modern English-speaking society.

The basic dictionary definitions ((Regarding this particular subject, even the vaunted Oxford English Dictionary on a Historical Basis does not do any better than these basic definitions.))

righ·teous (adjective \’ri-ch?s\) ((“Righteous.” Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/righteous.))
1: acting in accord with divine or moral law: free from guilt or sin
2 a: morally right or justifiable <righteous decision>
b: arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality <righteous indignation>
mor·al (adjective\ˈmȯr-əl, ˈmär-\)) ((“Moral.” Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral.))
1 a: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior: ethical  <moral judgments>
b: expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <moral poem>
c: conforming to a standard of right behavior
d: sanctioned by or operative on one’s conscience or ethical judgment <moral obligation>
e: capable of right and wrong action <moral agent>
2: probable though not proved: virtual <moral certainty>
3: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect <moral victory> <moral support>
eth·i·caladjective \ˈe-thi-kəl\) ((“Ethical.” Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethical.))
1: of or relating to ethics <ethical theories>
2: involving or expressing moral approval or disapproval <ethical judgments>
3: conforming to accepted standards of conduct <ethicalbehavior>
4of a drug:  restricted to sale only on a doctor’s prescription
Righteousness ((“Righteous.” Merriam-Webster.com. Accessed September 1, 2014. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/righteous.))
1: acting in accord with divine or moral law: free from guilt or sin
2a: morally right or justifiable <righteous decision>
b: arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality <righteous indignation>

From Wikipedia ((“Righteousness.” Wikipedia.com. Accessed August 28, 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteousness))
Righteousness (also called rectitude) is an important theological concept in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism (Dharma), and Zoroastrianism. It is an attribute that implies that a person’s actions are justified, and can have the connotation that the person has been “judged” or “reckoned” as leading a life that is pleasing to the god/s portrayed in these belief systems.
William Tyndale (Bible translator into English in 1526) remodelled the word after an earlier word rihtwis, which would have yielded modern English *rightwise or *rightways. He used it to translate the Hebrew root צדקים (TzDYQ), tzedek, which appears more than five hundred times in the Hebrew Bible, and the Greek word δίκαιος (dikaios), which appears more than two hundred times in the New Testament.

Hebrew definition
The Hebrew word for righteousness is tseh’-dek, tzedek, Gesenius’s Strong’s Concordance:6664—righteous, integrity, equity, justice, straightness. The root of tseh’-dek is tsaw-dak’, Gesenius’s Strong:6663—upright, just, straight, innocent, true, sincere. It is best understood as the product of upright, moral action in accordance with some form of divine plan.[citation needed]

One teacher’s explanation ((“What is Righteousness?” Word of Faith blog. Accessed August 25, 2014. http://word-faith.blogspot.com/2009/05/righteousness.html))
What is righteousness? That question has baffled scholars and intellectuals for decades. Some men came up with many religious exercises so that they could become righteous according to their standards. Others clung to one verse in the Bible that they took out of context. People want to jump all over Romans 3:10 and say, “There is none righteous, no, not one.” But you have to understand this in context. In Romans 3:9 Paul is talking about Jews and Greeks that are under sin. After this passage, in Romans 3:19, he talks about these people being under the law. So then, those that are just under the law are not righteous. What we do see though, is a man who was under that law, was counted as righteous. James 2:23 says, “‘Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ And he was called the friend of God.” So then, even though Abraham was under the law, he believed God, and because he believed God, God treated him like he was righteous, even though he wasn’t.

Now, to fully understand what this means, we need to define righteous. Righteousness is defined as without guilt or sin. We could also define it as right standing with God. So even though Abraham was under the law, and was not able to obtain this righteousness, because he believed God, God treated him like he was righteous.

The Meaning of God’s Righteousness – John Piper ((““The Freedom and Justice of God in Unconditional Election” 01/12/2002, John Piper.” desiringGod.org. Accessed March 24, 2014. http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/the-freedom-and-justice-of-god-in-unconditional-election))
That is the first key to understanding the argument of Romans 9:15 – the context of the quote from Exodus 33:19. Now the second key is the meaning of God’s righteousness. What does Paul mean by righteousness, when he says, “There is no unrighteousness with God”? If I had time I would love to develop a long argument from the Old Testament, and from Paul’s use of the “righteousness of God,” to show you where I get the answer to that question. But all I have time for is to give you my conclusion and say that I will come back in three weeks with support for it.

God’s righteousness is essentially his unswerving allegiance to his own name and his own glory. God is righteous to the degree that he upholds and displays the honor of his name. He is righteous when he values most what is most valuable, and what is most valuable is his own glory. Therefore God’s justice, his righteousness, consists most fundamentally in doing what is consistent with the esteem and demonstration of his name, his glory. God would be unrighteous if he did not uphold and display his glory as infinitely valuable.

Usages and definitions in a single passage. Definitions from Strong’s Concordance

Praise ye the LORD. Blessed is the man that feareth the LORD, that delighteth greatly in his commandments. His seed shall be mighty upon earth: the generation of the upright shall be blessed. Wealth and riches shall be in his house: and his righteousness endureth for ever. Unto the upright there ariseth light in the darkness: he is gracious, and full of compassion, and righteous. (Psalm 112:1-4) ((The Holy Bible : King James Version., electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version., Ps 112:1-4 (Bellingham WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1995).))

English: “upright” ((Strong, James. The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible : Showing Every Word of the Test (sic) of the Common English Version of the Canonical Books, and Every Occurence(sic) of Each Word in Regular Order., H3477. Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.))
3477 yashar { yaw-shawr’} from 3474; TWOT – 930a; adj
AV – right 53, upright 42, righteous 9, straight 3, convenient 2, Jasher 2, equity 1, just 1, meet 1, meetest 1, upright ones 1, uprightly 1, uprightness 1, well 1; 119
GK – 3838 { יָשָׁר } & 3839 { יָשָׁר }
1) straight, upright, correct, right
1a) straight, level
1b) right, pleasing, correct
1c) straightforward, just, upright, fitting, proper
1d) uprightness, righteous, upright
1e) that which is upright (subst)
English: “righteous”
6662 tsaddiyq { tsad-deek’} from 6663; TWOT – 1879c; adj ((Ibid.H6662))
AV – righteous 162, just 42, righteous man 1, lawful 1; 206
GK – 7404 { צַדִּיק }
1) just, lawful, righteous
1a) just, righteous (in government)
1b) just, right (in one’s cause)
1c) just, righteous (in conduct and character)
1d) righteous (as justified and vindicated by God)
1e) right, correct, lawful
English: “righteousness”
6666 ts^edaqah { tsed-aw-kaw’} ((Ibid. H6666))
from 6663; TWOT – 1879b; n f AV – righteousness 128, justice 15, right 9, righteous acts 3, moderately 1, righteously 1; 157
GK – 7407 { צְדָקָה }
1) justice, righteousness
1a) righteousness (in government)
1a1) of judge, ruler, king
1a2) of law
1a3) of Davidic king Messiah
1b) righteousness (of God’s attribute)
1c) righteousness (in a case or cause)
1d) righteousness, truthfulness
1e) righteousness (as ethically right)
1f) righteousness (as vindicated), justification, salvation
1f1) of God
1f2) prosperity (of people)
1g)  righteous acts

In examining the given examples, the desire is for the reader’s understanding that I am not being flippant, but making a point when I state:

Considering the fore-going, we might actually get further if we played “Ring Around the Rosie.”

The reason for the comment is this:

With the exception of the explanations addressing a “divine plan” or “divine law,” all the above is circular.

Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, in the above actually puts forth a measurable, objective standard for what righteousness is. If we note, righteousness is defined as being moral and/or ethical. Moral and ethical are defined as “conforming to a standard of right behavior” or “conforming to accepted standards of conduct,” where “right behavior” and “accepted standards” are defined as “morally right or justifiable.”

If we abandon the circular logic of the definitions and elect “in accordance with divine law” or the “divine plan,” we fare no better. Electing the route of “in accordance with Divine law,” leaves us with the problems of determining the “divine law” or “divine plan,” which may or may not be knowable and/or understandable. Moreover, which version of events constitutes the “divine plan” and which set of commandments coming from which “God” constitute the “divine law?” Electing this route, we are left with John Piper’s convoluted idea of God’s righteousness (which is essentially self-worship), the “whatever God says, that is right” idea, or “being without guilt or sin,” (whatever that means) depending upon whoever is interpreting whatever passage they think applies. Surely we can see that we get nowhere going this route, and therefore effectively remain at square one.

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion – Table of Contents Appendix A: Righteousness – Table of Contents Righteousness as Commonly Understood is in Error

Appendix A: Righteousness

image_pdfimage_print

Copyright 2014, This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Creative Commons License

Appendix in PDF format: Appendix A: RighteousnessPDF Icon

Introduction

If there were ever a subject of Scripture that is obscured as to what it actually is, righteousness has to be it. As the evidence demonstrates, the commonly held ideas of righteousness, and what being righteous consists of, are convoluted, subjective, and frequently circular. This is not good considering that every person is going to be judged against the standard of righteousness. How can we possibly know where we stand with respect to righteousness, and being righteous, if we cannot concretely and objectively understand how the standard is defined? Moreover, the common belief is that a difference and distinction exists between God’s righteousness and man’s righteousness. Though the general understanding is that we are measured against the standard of God’s righteousness, it is not understood why that actually is. The common belief is that we are measured against God’s righteousness simply because He is the Creator and judge, and for little to no other reason. Though there is an acceptance that we cannot measure up to that standard, the belief is that we might be able to measure up to man’s standard of righteousness. Does this seem right? Does this seem to comport with righteousness? Moreover, how can we possibly evaluate and know if any thought, behavior or event is righteous if we have no definitive, objective and testable standard for what righteousness is? Nor is it likely we will ever know, based upon the commonly held “definitions” and ideas of righteousness.

Because these questions exist, merely knowing that we must be “right” or “upright” (which is to say that we must be moral, ethical and have integrity) ((As is clear from the definitions, being moral, ethical and having integrity are also subjective as they are defined as being “right, upright, or in conformance to moral standards.”)) is simply not sufficient. Rather, we must know what “right” is and why it consists of certain thoughts and behaviors, as opposed to different thoughts and behaviors. Having an objective standard is utterly necessary as societies, and generations within those societies tend to define standards of right thought and behavior differently. Because societies are this way, man’s understanding of what the LORD God is requiring of him, and whether or not it is attainable outside the salvation Christ offers, differs according to time and place. Though men examine the Scriptures, they examine them with the bias of their society and their upbringing. When the examination of what righteousness is and how it is attained occurs under this influence, even though the Scripture is used, the examination is not objective, but tainted, thus the understanding of righteousness is skewed.

Without doubt having a skewed understanding of righteousness is harmful and a hindrance. However, this situation comes about as a result of misconstrued passages in Scripture. Whether it is from improperly defined words or improper emphasis on certain senses of words or the ignoring of certain senses, it is inconsequential to the fact that, ultimately, there is a misunderstanding of what righteousness is. The existence of misconstructions and erroneous emphasis on certain definitions is perceptible in the examples presented, where definitions of righteousness are given, and explanations offered to justify its meaning and significance.

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion – Table of Contents Introduction to the Appendices Ideas of “Righteousness” Briefly Stated

 

The Scriptural Case Against Abortion

image_pdfimage_print

Copyright 2014, This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Creative Commons License

  • Introduction
  • The Straw Man Argument
  • The Judgment of the LORD and the Destruction of Children
  • The Pro-Choice Argument
  • The Case Against Abortion
  • Introduction to the Appendices
  • Appendix A: Righteousness
  • Appendix B: The Origin of Sin
  • Appendix C: “In the image of God, made he man…”
  • Appendix D: The Fall of Man
  • Appendix E: The Error of “Original Sin”
  • Appendix F: “Against Thee, Thee Only, Have I Sinned….”
  • Appendix G: How the LORD God deals with man
  • Appendix H: The Death Penalty: Scriptural or Not?
  • Appendix I: Where Do Children Go When They Die?
  • Appendix J: Salvation

The Origin of Sin – briefly stated

image_pdfimage_print

While doing research on what various Christian denominations and groups believe about the origin of sin, I ran across the following article “Where Did Sin Come From?” which explored the question of the origin of sin. The summation of the article did not answer the question at all, but left the reader with the following questions:

To answer our question, ‘Where did sin come from?’, we make the following conclusions:

1. Although Lucifer spawned the first sin, he was not the creator of the concept of sin.
2. The concept of sin has always been known to the all-knowing God.
3. Sin exists because—either it is a created concept of God brought about by God’s decrees, or, it has always co-existed as the eternal antithesis of everything that God is.
4. Sin could only experientially exist because, although God cannot sin, He made creatures who could.

I could not bear it, and emailed the webmaster with the following question:

Who wrote this nonsense? Give me a name please.

And listed the questions above. I then finished with the following statement:

This evidences a complete and total lack of understanding. Whoever wrote this, missed the mark.

The gentleman who wrote it answered back, and was gracious (considering my initial contact email) and stated that I had contested, but gave no reasons for disagreement. Moreover, he would be glad to address my concerns.

Fair enough. After all, had he been less than gracious, I would have deserved it. I thanked him for being gracious, and sent the following reply:


Sin has a cause, and that is transgression, which is brought about because of iniquity:

And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. (Jeremiah 33:8)

Iniquity leads to transgression, which immediately results in sin.

Iniquity is the property of being unequal in any of one’s ways:

Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?  (Ezekiel 18:29-31)

When the LORD states that the ways of the people of Israel are unequal, and He then calls them to turn so iniquity will not be their ruin, He is defining what iniquity is. To help in our understanding, we can use the analogy of a math equation (which is an equality):

In thinking about equations: If we introduce into it any element that makes it unequal, what are our chances of making it equal if we don’t realize what we did? What are our chances of actually realizing we introduced an inequality? Moreover, if our understanding is not accurate because we perceive the equation wrongly (unequally — that is, not as it actually is), what are our chances of self-correction?

When a mistake is made working an equation, generally the person does not realize they erred, else they stop immediately and correct the error. However, the divergence with righteousness and iniquity here is that once a thought exists, it cannot be unthought or taken back. Since it is that the LORD judges the thoughts of the heart, once Lucifer had that one thought of being more glorious that the LORD on the throne, he committed an iniquity. Due to the very nature of inequality, he could not go back, nor find his way back.Because of this iniquity, pride arose, and Satan viewed himself to be better than the LORD God in numerous ways. Hence, he rebelled.

Now to look at righteousness: Being righteous is being equal in all one’s ways (which only the LORD God is):

Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.  (Psalms 98:9)

Here, like in Ezekiel, the LORD defines another term. Only in this case, it is righteousness. Putting the two together: Righteousness is the property of being equal in ALL one’s ways, and iniquity is the property of being unequal in ANY of one’s ways. It is of necessity true that if righteousness requires for all ways to be equal, that being (or becoming) unequal in any of one’s ways, means that one has iniquity. Moreover, like the math equation, being unequal in one part, spreads to every other part — and it grows.

Once one cannot perceive correctly because of being unequal (iniquity), the determination of what is the right thing to do is clouded and misperceived. It is easy to see then how we can transgress the bounds if we have difficulty perceiving where the bounds are. As soon as we transgress, we have missed the mark (sinned).

Briefly, to answer the final points you put forth in the article:

To answer our question, ‘Where did sin come from?’, we make the following conclusions: [My answers are in square brackets — italics for the web]

1. Although Lucifer spawned the first sin, he was not the creator of the concept of sin. [There is no “concept of sin.” Sin is not a concept. Rather, is a direct result of transgression (which is exceeding the bounds – thus missing the mark), which is brought about because of iniquity. Satan exercised iniquity because he thought in his heart that he was better than the LORD sitting on the throne he was covering (the descriptions of both the LORD and Satan are in the Scriptures, and that difference is significant). The “problem” is that the LORD gave both angels and men freewill and the ability to judge, but they were not given omniscience. Hence, perception and understanding were limited. Satan lost sight of who created him and gave him all that he had. To man, Satan is beyond genius. But he lost sight of the fact that he was GIVEN that. Just like his beauty and musical ability, his intelligence was given him by the LORD God. However, once he lost sight of that, it was a mere thought of the heart to become unequal – which slipped him into iniquity. Now Satan can never return from that, but only gets more and more unequal over time.]

2. The concept of sin has always been known to the all-knowing God. [No, the fact that creatures with free-will and the ability to judge, yet not having omniscience would have the potential to slip into iniquity, was known to the LORD God. Nevertheless, He chose to create them that way, and would deal with the consequences. The LORD God already knew what those consequences were, but He desired to create beings that would love Him of their own volition. The very nature of free-will, combined with the ability to judge, creates a situation in which the potential for iniquity exists. However, for love to be genuine, the will must be free, and to actually choose freely, one must be able to judge independently – that is, of oneself, given the facts to make a determination.]

3. Sin exists because—either it is a created concept of God brought about by God’s decrees, or, it has always co-existed as the eternal antithesis of everything that God is. [This is a false choice. We are to choose between the LORD God being the ultimate author of sin, or the core of Taoism? This is expressly man’s view, which lacks understanding of iniquity and righteousness.]

4. Sin could only experientially exist because, although God cannot sin, He made creatures who could. [Here you are closest to being right, but answer no questions. You would have to explain what you mean by “He made creatures who could.” How, and in what way?]

You are getting the essence of the doctrine. This is by no means extensive in addressing the ramifications of iniquity. But, it should briefly explain where sin came from. Of course, if you are of Calvinist or Reformed persuasion, you will likely reject everything I say.

In Christ,

Paul W. Davis

Why and How is the LORD God Able to Maintain His Righteousness

image_pdfimage_print

Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. (Ezekiel 18:29-30)

Why is it that the LORD God is able to maintain His righteousness, or the equality of all His ways in and of Himself.

To begin with, the LORD God is omniscient, that is, He knows all things. This is not merely having all knowledge, (which we typically think of as mere information) but includes all understanding of that information, and all wisdom to properly apply that information.

We must understand that having knowledge, which is information, is not merely enough, but one must know the significance of that information, which is understanding. One must also know how to apply the information to everything that concerns them. The ability to properly apply the information and understanding one has, is called wisdom. The Scripture is express that the LORD God’s understanding is infinite, which of necessity, means that His knowledge is infinite, or omniscient.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite. (Psalm 147:5)

Understanding in itself is a kind of knowledge. It does not simply deal with information, but deals with the significance of that information: that is what that information means and how it relates to everything else. Understanding is essential to wisdom, for without understanding, there is simply no way to determine the weight, or significance of one thing versus another: whether something is to be of concern, or whether it can be ignored, or is of lesser significance.

Hence, we are led to wisdom, which is essential for the construct of things. Wisdom in itself is a kind of knowledge. It is the knowledge of how information is to be applied and how it will work out as things interact. Without it, it would have been impossible for the LORD God to create anything that worked. And yet, so wise is the LORD in His creation that even in a corrupted state, it still is a wonder to behold and works quite well.

To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever. (Psalm 136:5)

The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens. (Proverbs 3:19)

Thus, when we say the LORD God is omniscient, it, in practical terms, means that the LORD God knows all that exists, and knows all the significance of everything, and is able to properly weight that information and thus apply it properly and correctly to every situation that exists or could exist, for all eternity.

In sum, the LORD God knows all things, and all out-workings that are and can be of those things and their interaction with all other things, for all time and eternity. Moreover, He knows that He knows all things which are, and knows that He knows all out-workings that are and will be. Additionally, the LORD God knows there is nothing else to know that can be known.

Without this knowledge and understanding, maintaining His righteousness would be impossible as He must know the end, and possible ends of everything that is or could be. Else, there exists the possibility of any action made by the LORD God that would be unequal in its end. This would yield unrighteousness, which is impossible with the LORD God.

But ominscience is not enough to maintain righteousness. It is not sufficient to merely have all knowledge so that in all workings accomplished, the end of all is known. Rather, one must also love equity or equality:

Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD’S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup. For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright. (Psalm 11:4-7)

(Here I speak as a man, from man’s perspective): Without a love for righteousness, there is no motivator to be righteous, though one may know all things which are, or could be, and the outworking of them all,

The LORD God delights in equity in all things, and in all His ways. It is His greatest pleasure to see things which are equal, balanced and true. Whether that equity, which is righteousness, is from the things He makes directly, or from His creatures, it is a delight to His soul to behold them.

Without this love for equity, righteousness and truth, which is in and of Himself, coupled with His omniscience, which is in and of Himself, righteousness would not be maintained.

This post updated and expanded — 07/21/2014

An Open Letter to Matthew Vines

image_pdfimage_print

Please note that all Scripture references are King James Version, 1769 Edition

Mr. Vines,

It quite plainly appears that you think you have a case for seriously contending that Scripturally there is nothing wrong with sodomy and “long-term” same gender physical relations. You also believe you have proved that someone can be a sodomite and be a genuine, Bible-believing Christian as well. I would like to address those issues with you, and point out to you that you have been less that honest in your interpretation of what the Scripture states.

But before addressing those issues, I would posit to you that perhaps attempting to overthrow 4000+ years of Scriptural teaching is likely not a good idea. Perhaps the arrogance and ignorance of youth is at play here, but that really doesn’t matter. You are an “adult” and you should know better. I read the transcript of your presentation, and it amounts to a screed (that is all I can properly call it). I state that about this presentation where you spoke at a Methodist church in Kansas, as the transcript is full of illogic and supposition, half-truth and some outright lies. What was presented contains such understanding as the following:

“The second problem that has already presented itself with the traditional interpretation comes from the opening chapters of Genesis, from the account of the creation of Adam and Eve. This story is often cited to argue against the blessing of same-sex unions: in the beginning, God created a man and a woman, and two men or two women would be a deviation from that design. But this biblical story deserves closer attention. In the first two chapters of Genesis, God creates the heavens and the earth, plants, animals, man, and everything in the earth. And He declares everything in creation to be either good or very good – except for one thing. In Genesis 2:18, God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” And yes, the suitable helper or partner that God makes for Adam is Eve, a woman. And a woman is a suitable partner for the vast majority of men – for straight men. But for gay men, that isn’t the case. For them, a woman is not a suitable partner. And in all of the ways that a woman is a suitable partner for straight men—for gay men, it’s another gay man who is a suitable partner. And the same is true for lesbian women. For them, it is another lesbian woman who is a suitable partner. But the necessary consequence of the traditional teaching on homosexuality is that, even though gay people have suitable partners, they must reject them, and they must live alone for their whole lives, without a spouse or a family of their own. We are now declaring good the very first thing in Scripture that God declared not good: for the man to be forced to be alone. And the fruit that this teaching has borne has been deeply wounding and destructive.”

“This is a major problem. By holding to the traditional interpretation, we are now contradicting the Bible’s own teachings: the Bible teaches that it is not good for the man to be forced to be alone, and yet now, we are teaching that it is.”

So you believe that when it teaches in Genesis, chapter 2, verses 18-24 that it is “not good for man to be alone,” it is actually the teaching of ‘not having someone to share a life with?’ Moreover, you assert that the “traditional interpretation” creates a conflict in Scripture because “gay people” are forced to be alone contrary to what the LORD stated when He made man.

The Creation of Man
While you focus on the aspect of woman being an help meet, (proper) for man, and then argue that this is not true for sodomites – you do so totally and willfully ignoring actual issues in the passage. While the traditional interpretation of the passage is correct, and that is what you are arguing against, traditional teaching about the passage never really gets to the “why” of it all.

It comes across that your thinking is as follows: After the LORD God made man, He suddenly realized that man really shouldn’t be alone. After all, that is tantamount to what you argue. Consider the following passages and the bearing they have on the situation on earth, after Adam is created, but before Eve is brought out of Adam:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. (Revelation 13:8)

And again:

…(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.(Romans 4:17)

So when did the Lord Jesus Christ die on the cross? In the minds of men it was 2000 years ago. But not in the heart and mind of the LORD God. In the heart and mind of the LORD God, Christ died on the cross in eternity past. Just as Abraham has always been the father of many nations – even before Abram was ever conceived. You should notice that “be not” is future tense, and “as though they were.” is past tense. By this, the LORD God made plain that His view is not the same as ours, and there are no surprises for Him.

So, what does this have to do with “an help meet” for Adam? Perhaps the following will enlighten the situation somewhat:

Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.(Matthew 22:28-30)

So, what is the great distinction between man and angels other than angels are soul and spirit, and man is soul, spirit and body? Perhaps you should consider that all the angels were created all at the same time? Should you not also consider that the angels do not procreate – that they do not produce offspring? It is quite plain in Scripture that there are no successive generations of angels. Hence, marriage is neither necessary nor appropriate for angels – they are genderless.

But it is not so with man. Rather, man is unique. Whereas animals are spirit and body (as everything is spiritually driven), [Hebrews 1:1-3; Luke 19:38-40; Ecclesiastes 3:21 – KJV, please] and angels are soul and spirit, man is made in the similitude of God and is a tri-unity of parts to make a whole (The LORD God is a tri-unity of Persons, yet one God – which is far beyond what man is or can be.) Howsoever, not to get off point, man has a component that is like the animals in that he is physical and hence, like the animals, must reproduce in successive generations.

Of course, you should now realize that the LORD God knew all this in eternity past.

Since it is patently obvious that angels are strictly spiritual and cannot manifest physically unless the LORD God commands them and enables them to do so, it is impossible for angels to be an “help meet” for man. Hence, that leaves the animals, which are physical. But, is any animal really a suitable companion and help proper for man? After all, man is made in the image and likeness of God in five identifiable aspects:

  1. Man is a tri-unity of parts: Soul, spirit and body. The LORD God is a tri-unity of Persons: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost (Though there are orders of magnitude difference here, the pattern is the same.)
  2. Man has Free-will.
  3. Man has the innate ability to Judge.
  4. Man is Creative. Man creates out of that which already exists (ex-aliquid (which is out of something or pro-creation)) (the LORD God does it ex-nihlo (out of nothing) – again orders of magnitude difference, but the same pattern – a shadow of the power of the LORD)
  5. Man has the moral imperatives: Grace, Mercy, Compassion, Forgiveness and Love

This gives rise to several questions about why an animal was not chosen as an help proper for man:

1. Which of the animals have any of these readily identifiable aspects?

  • a. Which animal has free-will? (this is best illustrated by the animal’s ability to defy its instinct and act differently from the expected, normal response.) (I do know you will point to the rare cases of supposed “same gender” behavior among animals to justify your behavior and say it is “normal” while ignoring the fact that animals are driven expressly by hormones and instinct.)
  • b. Which animal has the ability to discern what something is, not just what it appears to be?
  • c. Which animal is creative? Where are the inventions of animals?
  • d. Which animal has and expresses the moral imperatives?

2. Hence, what species of animal would prove a suitable and proper help for Adam?

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. (Genesis 2:18-20)

It is apparent that no animal was created on the same order as man. Though physically, man shares some common traits with all other living things, the order in which those things are arranged makes all the difference. After all, helium and lead share all the same particles in their respective atoms, but I don’t think you want to have trace amounts of lead in your lungs, whereas you breathe in trace amounts of helium daily with no discernable harm. Moreover, in its normal state lead is a very heavy metal, while helium is a very light gas. They are radically different in physical characteristics, but made of the very same particles, just differently arranged.

That understanding comprehended, we must consider that for man to exist beyond the person of Adam himself, two things must happen:

  1. There must be a means of reproduction, of successive generations.
  2. That help must be proper for Adam, that is, complementary to him.

Hence, no animal was or is, suitable. Now, it is manifest that Adam, of himself, cannot produce successive generations. Moreover, the law of procreation is to bring forth “after their kind,” meaning only of the same species:

And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:24-25)

This ‘order of things’ is ordained of the LORD God for the reproduction of the species, originally to populate the earth, and after the fall, to have successive generations. Physically, this is the only way it can be. Hence, by this design, there exists a male and female of each higher order of species. This is amply illustrated when the LORD commanded Noah to build the ark for the preservation of life during the Deluge.

And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. (Genesis 6:19-20)

Thus, it is quite apparent that only another of the race of man, yet able to produce offspring with Adam, is necessary, as it is part of our physical design. Moreover, this “help meet” (help ‘proper’) must be complementary to Adam. This the LORD God knew in eternity past. Yet, the LORD did this exercise with Adam for two distinct and clear purposes:

  1. To demonstrate to all, that though man shares a basic commonality with the animals, man is not an animal, but is far beyond the animals, being made in the image of God. ((There is a curiosity here. It pertains to the whole issue of using animals to justify human behavior, seeing that animals are not made in the image of God, but man is. Why is it that those promoting same-gender relationships cannot use reason to understand that man’s iniquity and sin have adversely affected the animals as well? Just as man cannot reproduce using same-gender relations, neither can the animals. The instances of such in nature are not endemic to any species and are prejudicial to the continuance of the species, just as it is with man.))
  2. Adam has dominion over the earth. It is his. Hence, his first act of dominion is to name all creatures under his dominion. This is a basic right and prerogative of kingship.

Nonetheless, man is also subject to the limitations of the physical, and must fill the earth with his kind, and like the animals, produce successive generations. After the Fall, this becomes critical to the survival of the species of man, as Adam’s generation will pass (death being introduced by the transgression of Adam), as will all successive generations. If no offspring are produced for only one generation, the species ceases to exist. Thus, the LORD God performs an act of procreation, that is, producing out of an existing kind. The following passage provides the detail of the event for our understanding of the order of things, that is, how they are to be.

And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Genesis 2:21-24)

Here we plainly see that the woman was formed out of the man, and thus shares all characteristics of being made in the image of God, being made out of a portion of the man. Genetically, this difference is expressed in that males have a Y chromosome, and females do not. Moreover, the woman being made out of the man, is not the dominant individual, though she shares many characteristics which would allow her to become dominant. To this, the Scriptures speak expressly:

For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (I Corinthians 11:8-10)

And again:

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. (I Timothy 2:12-14)

Hence, the woman fulfills several vital and important roles in the order of things, being formed expressly for the purpose of assisting Adam in the administration of the earth. Hence, this basic understanding also grasped, we should then understand the import of the command given to Adam by the LORD God:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:27-28)

Now, I have to ask, seeing the LORD God repeated this same command to Noah and his family:

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. (Genesis 9:1)

How precisely do sodomites (same-gender intimate relations) fulfill the command of the LORD God to “be fruitful and multiply?”

Moreover, though the LORD God could have brought another male out of Adam, He didn’t. Why is that, seeing He knew that man would fall into iniquity and sin?

Doesn’t this give rise to questions about turning over the order of things the LORD God set in place? Yes, I have read what you claim – that the Fall changed everything:

“But not only are they all negative, from the traditional viewpoint, they gain broader meaning and coherence from the opening chapters of Genesis, in which God creates Adam and Eve, male and female. That was the original creation – before the fall, before sin entered the world. That was the way that things were supposed to be. And so according to this view, if someone is gay, then their sexual orientation is a sign of the fall, a sign of human fallenness and brokenness.

While you do not expressly state this in the above quote, you clarify what you mean later on in your presentation:

“But that is not what we are talking about. Gay people have a natural, permanent orientation toward those of the same sex; it’s not something that they choose, and it’s not something that they can change. They aren’t abandoning or rejecting heterosexuality—that’s never an option for them to begin with.”

Strange you should make that argument, seeing that it is manifestly impossible for procreation between those of the same gender to take place, either pre- or post-Fall. Even among the animals it does not happen that an entire species turns to same gender procreation. Since the LORD God reiterated the command to Noah and his sons after the Deluge, it is very apparent this command and decided order of things did not change with the Fall, but remained consistent and constant. Therefore, I will submit to you that what you claim as “natural” is actually an elective. There are an number of individuals who abandoned “same-sex orientation” when they were actually born-again in Christ, the testimony of one of which can be found here:

TESTIMONY FROM AN EX-GAY[1]

This counters your argument in its entirety. Howsoever, what you interpret as ‘natural and normal’ is manifestly impossible for fulfilling the continuing command of the LORD God to “be fruitful and multiply.” But I will remind you that “the natural man receiveth not the things of God…” (I Corinthians 2:14) and that the normal, default end of man is an eternity of suffering in Hell.

Nevertheless, when you argue that the LORD God is okay with you and others like you being engaged in sodomy, and that this ‘way you are’ is fine with Him, you are inasmuch as claiming that what you and others like you engage in is righteous:

“Being different is no crime. Being gay is not a sin. And for a gay person to desire and pursue love and marriage and family is no more selfish or sinful than when a straight person desires and pursues the very same things.”

Hence, due to your argument, we need to look to the Scripture where the LORD God makes plain that He loves righteousness:

Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

Righteousness is defined in Scripture as the quality of being equal in all one’s ways, as we find in Ezekiel 18:

Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal? When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die. Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. (Ezekiel 18:25-30)

And again in Ezekiel 33:

Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal: but as for them, their way is not equal. When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall even die thereby. But if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby. Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways. (Ezekiel 33:17-20)

Note that the LORD God was accused of being unequal in His ways, and He countered that the people of Israel were indeed unequal in their ways. Moreover, the LORD would judge the people of Israel according to their ways (hence judging Israel itself), and He set forth that iniquity would be their ruin. By the close and immediate association of terms, it is clear that the quality of iniquity consists of being unequal in one’s ways. Note here that the LORD does not state “doings” but “ways” which is the driver of “doing.” In sum, the LORD is examining the motivation of the heart, not what someone does outwardly:

But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.(I Samuel 16:7)

These things being the case, it is proper to ask you:

If everyone did what you are doing, what would be the result for the race of man?

If what you are doing is righteous, and springs from a righteous heart, then everyone ought to be able to do what you are doing with no ill effects to any individual, or the race of man as a whole.

Consider: If everyone engaged in same gender relationships, and this is equally valid as relations between a man and a woman, then men and men, and women and women exclusively ought to bring no harm to the race of man. After all, if it is righteous and equal, then everyone ought to be able to do it – and the next generation would come into being just like the current generation has.

But that won’t happen, will it?

No, you choose rather to focus on the “suitable partner” aspect of the passage, ignoring what criteria might make up that “suitable partner” for Adam:

“And a woman is a suitable partner for the vast majority of men – for straight men. But for gay men, that isn’t the case. For them, a woman is not a suitable partner. And in all of the ways that a woman is a suitable partner for straight men—for gay men, it’s another gay man who is a suitable partner. And the same is true for lesbian women. For them, it is another lesbian woman who is a suitable partner.”

You also ignore a whole lot of other teaching contained in the passage as well. This is what makes what you have done fraudulent. There is much more teaching in the passage, particularly concerning the issue of a man and woman becoming “one flesh” in the eyes of the LORD, which is the integration of what was separated before the fall (Why did the LORD not make another man out of Adam – though He could have easily done so?). I will not get into in those other teachings this letter, but suffice to say, they will not support your supposition either.

Leviticus 18:22
You practiced intellectual dishonesty throughout your presentation, with one of the clearest examples being your interpretation of Leviticus 18:22:

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

You explained the application of the verse with the following:

“In the Gospels, Jesus describes himself as the fulfillment of the Law, and in Romans 10:4, Paul writes “Christ is the end of the law.” Hebrews 8:13 states that the old covenant is now “obsolete,” because Christ is the basis of the new covenant, freeing Christians from the system of the Old Law, most of which was specific to the ancient Israelites, to their community and their unique worship practices. Christians have always regarded the Book of Leviticus, in particular, as being inapplicable to them in light of Christ’s fulfillment of the law. So while it is true that Leviticus prohibits male same-sex relations, it also prohibits a vast array of other behaviors, activities, and foods that Christians have never regarded as being prohibited for them. For example, chapter 11 of Leviticus forbids the eating of pork, shrimp, and lobster, which the church does not consider to be a sin. Chapter 19 forbids planting two kinds of seed in the same field; wearing clothing woven of two types of material; and cutting the hair at the sides of one’s head. Christians have never regarded any of these things to be sinful behaviors, because Christ’s death on the cross liberated Christians from what Paul called the “yoke of slavery.” We are not subject to the Old Law.”

And you continue in the following paragraph further justifying your interpretation:

“There are three main arguments that are made for this position. The first is the verses’ immediate context: Leviticus 18 and 20 also prohibit adultery, incest, and bestiality, all of which continue to be regarded as sinful, and so homosexuality should be as well. But just 3 verses away from the prohibition of male same-sex relations, in 18:19, sexual relations during a woman’s menstrual period are also prohibited, and this, too, is called an “abomination” at the chapter’s close. But this is not regarded as sinful behavior by Christians; rather, it’s seen as a limited matter of ceremonial cleanliness for the ancient Israelites.”

Allow me to address the first thing you mention, which is the fact that the book of Leviticus is a book largely dedicated to the ceremonial law. However, the scope of Leviticus is not limited to only the ceremonial law, but does address issues outside the covenant in places. One of those places is indeed chapter 18. For the sake of clarity, we need to examine the issue of what is an abomination with one passage immediately following another:

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination. Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you. And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, And the vulture, and the kite after his kind; Every raven after his kind; And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you(Leviticus 11:9-20)

If you will note, in 18:22 the phrase ‘it is abomination.” is used. But distinctively, in chapter 11 of Leviticus, the phrases “an abomination unto you” and “ye shall have in abomination” are used, with one time “are an abomination” being used clearly in the context of the children of Israel. What this plainly demonstrates is a difference in the scope of the commandment. While the words “unto you” clearly restrict the scope of the commandment, they are reinforced by the phrase “ye shall have in.” which limits applicability to the children of Israel. Conversely, verse 22 of chapter 18 has no such restricting or qualifying language attached to the statement “it is abomination.”

Hence, Leviticus 18:22, properly interpreted, is open-ended and unrestricted in its application. It applies to everyone, whether Jew or Gentile, regardless of time in history. We can find confirmation of this being the proper interpretation just a couple of verses further on in the chapter where it is plainly stated:

Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;) That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you. (Leviticus 18:24-28)

If it is, as you argue, that this proscription on behavior applies only to the children of Israel in the covenant, then please explain who the people were that the LORD God was casting out of the land so Israel could possess it? Please explain how the Canaanites defiled the land, if it is as you say, that these proscriptions only apply in the covenant, when the Canaanites are clearly Gentiles and not in covenant with the LORD?

I will submit to you that the LORD God held then, and still holds today, that sodomy is abomination. The reason for that assertion lies the previous evidence given and in the following two verses:

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)

And:

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. (Hebrews 13:8)

Moreover, you also claim the following as justification for your reasoning:

“in 18:19, sexual relations during a woman’s menstrual period are also prohibited, and this, too, is called an “abomination” at the chapter’s close. But this is not regarded as sinful behavior by Christians;”

I will remind you of the following passage from Acts, which is extracted from a letter the Apostles wrote to the churches addressing the issue of the Law and its relationship to salvation:

For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. (Acts 15:28-29)

Which came from their understanding of the covenant the LORD God made with Noah, which is still in force and effect:

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.(Genesis 9:1-4)

In your “interpretation” of things, you apparently have forgotten that what “other Christians” think is meaningless. Rather, what matters is what the LORD God states. He has plainly stated that profaning the blood is an offense to Him. Whether one eats blood, or lies with a woman in menses, the blood is being profaned and it is sin. Remember, that command fell under the auspices of “For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;” in Leviticus, chapter 18.

Conclusion
It occurs to me that you have fallen for the lies of both the Devil and your own deceitful heart. You would do well to heed the implicit message of the following passage of Scripture:

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings. (Jeremiah 17:9-10)

It is implicit in the above passage that our hearts lie to us. This is reinforced by the following from Proverbs:

He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool: but whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered. (Proverb 28:26)

You would also do well to understand that Satan is very good at putting thoughts into the minds of men, even those who truly belong to the Lord Jesus Christ:

From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. (Matthew 16:21-23)

And again:

And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. (Luke 9:52-55)

Now, if Satan can adversely affect the minds of the apostles, and it is written that he takes the lost at his will:

And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. (II Timothy 2:24-26)

Perhaps you should consider why it is that you think the way you do, and “feel” the way you do. How do you know what thoughts are yours? How do you know that what you feel is truly the way that it is?

I find it interesting that you have expended much effort to justify your position “biblically” and think you really need to do this. It reminds me of the following incident from Acts:

And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour. (Acts 16:16-18)

Being a liar from the beginning, and the father of lies, Satan does not have a problem using someone to promote a false Christianity, and getting people to believe the LORD approves of those things which are an abomination to Him.

So I must ask: Where precisely do you stand? I really think you had better seriously consider where you are, because you are not standing in a good place.

In Christ,

Paul W. Davis

How Very Rich, How Very Ignorant

image_pdfimage_print

Today, the New York Times ran an article about one Michael Bloomberg, former mayor of New York City and a very wealthy man. Unfortunately, Mr. Bloomberg has decided that he can play nanny to everyone and decide for them what is best for them. To that end, Mr. Bloomberg opposes firearms ownership, the use of tobacco, and the consumption of certain foods, holding that all are bad for the rest of us.

In the final paragraph of this puff piece, Mr. Bloomberg had this to say about the end of his efforts:

But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”

Let it never be said that Michael Bloomberg runs short on pride. However that may be, Mr. Bloomberg missed the standard by which one gains entrance into heaven:

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6)

The reason it is by the Lord Jesus Christ and Him alone, is because He, and He alone meets the standard of righteousness the Father demands. Hence, through the Lord Jesus Christ and His work of redemption, salvation is, always has been, and ever will be by grace, and grace alone:

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

And again:

Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. (Romans 11:5-6)

Thus, the Scripture is quite plain that you will do it by grace and grace alone, as works and grace are mutually exclusive. But, it is quite evident Mr. Bloomberg has chosen works for his justification before the LORD God, which is to his condemnation:

And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:11-15)

Moreover, poor Michael misses the boat altogether in that he thinks being wealthy and powerful are what might qualify him in the first place. However, had he read the following, he would have known the LORD God has no use for him in his present state:

For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. (I Corinthians 1:26-29)

And he compounds his error in that he stated “I am telling you if there is a God,…” which is a blatant insult to the LORD God, and shows how very far away Mr. Bloomberg is from ever pleasing the LORD:

Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

Pray for the poor man. He needs all the help he can get. He is wretched, naked, poor and blind, and doesn’t even realize it.

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mark 8:36)

Translate »