God's Character
The Nature of Justice
Who is God?
That's a question that has boggled and busied mankind for millennia.
What is God? What's he like? What does he want? Why does he do what
he does? Why is there evil in the world if God is good? Questions,
questions, questions. And not all of the answers are forthcoming.
Luckily for us, the Bible lays out many of the things we need to
know about God right in front of us.
The Bible tells us that God is good, holy, righteous, just, gracious
and loving (among other things – he has other attributes, but these
are the ones most relevant to this discussion). No true Christian
will contradict any of these traits of God's.
The Bible tells us that God is holy, which basically affirms, proves
and supports his goodness. No conflict there. The Bible tells us that
God is good, which kind of sums up his character and motives in
itself. The Bible tells us that God is righteous, which tells us not
only is God a moral entity, but that he is morally good and upright.
The Bible tells us that God is just, and loving, and gracious. And
this is where the conflict begins.
Calvinism defines Justice as “each receiving according to his
merits,” and Grace as “someone not getting something bad that
they deserve.” In Calvinism's definitions, it admits that this
makes Grace and Justice incompatible. What's worse is that Calvinism
admits that God doesn't always give each according to his merits –
making him not completely just, really. So, modern Calvinists use the
concept of “non-justice.” Non-justice, Calvinism says, is when
God does something that isn't just, but isn't unjust either. Grace,
it says, falls under this category. (Deuteronomy 32:4, among other passages, tell us that God is just in all of his ways. One of the most serious problems presented for the concept of non-justice lies in verses like Deuteronomy 32:4.)
[NOTE: I know that not all Calvinists agree on every single tenet of doctrine, and that not every Calvinist will feel properly represented by the concept of non-justice. If anyone feels I am misrepresenting their doctrine in its description here (though not the refutation), please feel free to let me know in a comment, and I'll gladly hear you out.]
But does Justice itself really leave any room for such a concept? Is
there any righteousness outside of justice? Can God even express such
contradictory attributes?
But
let's concede “non-justice” for a moment. Even then, we still
have God ignoring his own just
character whenever it suits his fancy – in other words, God is only
just most
of the time, not always. Calvinism says that when God executes
justice, he sends people to Hell (for something he ultimately caused,
but that's already been covered). So when he spares people, he makes
an exception in his just character. But also, justice is unloving in
Calvinism. When God executes love, he spares the Elect and ignores
justice. Calvinism sees beauty in this – the God that throws
everything else aside to save his people. So the God of Calvinism is
loving to some, and just to others – but he can't be both for both
sets of people. The Calvinist definitions leave no room for it.
In order for God to be both loving and just toward the same group of
people, as the Bible plainly teaches*, we must seek a definition that
fits this model. And I believe good theology has done just that.
*[The Bible teaches that God is perfectly loving and perfectly just.]
Justice is to be defined as obeying and/or enforcing law. A just man
is one who obeys law, and a just judge is one who both obeys and
enforces it. “Justice is served” when a punishment demanded by
law, for violation of law, is meted to the offender
according to the requirements made by law. Justice punishes
evil according to law.
[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/justice <> Full Definition C]
If justice seeks to destroy, and love seeks to build, how can they
be compatible?
The
answer lies in a final question: Why do we have Justice in the first
place?
We
have justice because of love. Justice is basically a set of laws designed, not simply to combat evil, but to protect the
people that we love –
that often involves combating evil, but that's not all that Justice
entails. Justice is not incompatible with love – in fact, love
requires and conceives justice. Love that will not protect is no love
at all, and justice is that protection.
But
the question remains, as to whether it is truly just for God to show
grace to us. Calvinism would say no, it's not just. But again, that
leaves us with a God that picks and chooses when he wants
to be just, and when he feels like doing something outside his own
rules. If the expression of God's grace lies plainly within the bounds of Justice, however, then it would be just for him to offer Grace to us. It depends upon one's definition of Justice, and more importantly, upon God's definition of justice.
The
most disturbing question that is raised by this concept is this: If
God were going to operate outside of justice in order to save us,
relying solely on the allegedly unmeritorious systems of grace, why
do we see an atoning death on our behalf? If God were ignoring the
rules of his own character, couldn't he just bypass the atonement
bit, the part that Jesus was so nervous about? If God could just
bypass things like this, if he could save us without justice, without
rules, then why did he let himself be tortured to death for us? If
God were willing to save us without justice, then it follows that he
would probably be willing to save us without payment – it
completely nullifies the cross. If God saved his Elect with no regard
at all for justice, then Jesus died for nothing. If God ignored
justice, then there was no need whatsoever for such atonement – but we know that because of God's just character, he
refused to save us without satisfying justice. Justice
demands payment for sins, and he paid the price. Now that justice has
been served, and love thus fulfilled, love is free to save by grace
through faith.
Justice proceeds from love. If God justly saves via atonement of
crimes because he loves the criminal, then justice is entirely
compatible with this salvation. The concept of non-justice is not
only ridiculous, but also completely redundant. Justice does not mean merits – it means law.
In summation, Calvinism claims that God is perfectly just, perfectly
righteous, perfectly gracious and perfectly loving, but the essence
of Calvinism tells us that God is kind-of-just, kind-of-righteous,
kind-of-gracious and kind-of-loving, and maybe not at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment