According to Kant, morality is based on the objective reality of justice. That is, if ultimate justice does not exist, people are free to do whatever they can get away with. Thus, for any genuine morality to exist, there must be a Just God who will ultimately bring about ultimate justice. And there is. Paul told the Athenians that God "will judge the world in righteousness" (Acts 17:31). Abraham was equally certain. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" (Gen 18:25). Absolutely. But ... we also know that God is merciful. Huh. Now we have a problem. You see, "mercy" is defined as not receiving the punishment you justly deserve. Mercy and justice are in opposition. Rationally, then, God can be either just or merciful, but not both. And, yet, we know He is. So how do we deal with this dichotomy?
This whole problem was managed by God when He sent His Son. "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom 5:8). We are sinners, justly deserving God's wrath (Rom 1:18-32), and God sent His Son to die for us. He didn't ignore justice; He fulfilled it. His Son was "a propitiation in His blood" (Rom 3:25) -- the appeasement of God's wrath -- allowing God to "be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Rom 3:26). In His death, Jesus "canceled out the certificate of debt ... having nailed it to the cross" (Col 2:14). Justice was met when the sinless Son of God paid the price for the sin of those who would come by faith. Justice ... and mercy.
Now, we are told we're supposed to forgive others (Matt 6:14-15; Luke 17:3-4). Isn't that an abrogation of justice? Aren't we suffering, then, from the same dichotomy God did? Paul wrote, "Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you" (Eph 4:32). Yes, we are to forgive, but how? "As God in Christ also has forgiven you." How did He do that? He met the demands of justice and passed the benefit of forgiveness on to us. In the same way, Scripture says, we can forgive not because we are eliminating justice, but because we understand that justice is not met by us, but by God. We are told, "'Vengeance is mine, I will repay,' says the Lord" (Rom 12:19). That is, we can set aside justice and forgive because we're leaving the justice in God's hands. We can forgive, not because the offense is too meager, but because we've been forgiven so much by God (Matt 18:21-35). We don't forgive to avoid justice. We forgive because we deserve punishment and Jesus took it, so we can pass on imposing penalties and allow God to handle it. God doesn't forgive by tossing out justice. Neither do we. We forgive by trusting God to do what's right.
6 comments:
Excellent post, well stated. Those who insist that YHWH could just forgive everyone are advocating for a God who isn't just, or a God that capriciously forgives some and not others. I am firmly convinced that any theology that allows someone like Hitler to escape justice has no place in a Christian worldview. If YHWH doesn't dispense justice to those who deserve it, then His mercy means nothing.
This is one of the doctrines that makes Christianity unique against all other religions. No other religion has a means of providing both justice and mercy in full effect. All other religions require that God abrogates His justice, either by flat out ignoring sin, or allowing some sort of grading curve, as long as your "good" deeds outweigh your bad deeds.
This was a helpful explanation. It occurs to me that one reason we should readily forgive others--without demanding justice as God is qualified to do--is that we are not all-knowing; therefore we could never be truly just or make completely fair judgments in this life, since we don’t have full knowledge of that which we are judging. Since we have limited understanding, deceitful hearts, and personal biases, as well, it’s best to leave the judging and justifying to God, indeed, and be relieved to be on the receiving end of God’s mercy, grace, and forgiveness. (I understand that this is the correct way to view Matt. 7:1-5 and similar verses in Romans chapter 14 and other places--i.e. the one we are judging might indeed be guilty of what we accuse them of, but we should leave it to God to make the ultimate rulings and dispense pardons and punishments as He sees fit. We certainly don’t need to worry that He will miss something if we don’t speak up!) (Of course, I am not talking about civil law or criminal justice matters here.)
Kant said that in order for morality to work, there had to be ultimate justice. In order for ultimate justice to exist, there had to be an ultimate Judge. This Judge would have to be Holy -- not guilty of any of the things He was judging. He'd have to be omniscient to know all the facts and omnipotent in order to carry out the sentence and ... lots of the attributes Scripture says God has. So, yes, we aren't the best ones to reliably dispense justice. However, God is not qualified to not demand justice; He does demand justice ... which is what Christ accomplished on the Cross. The price was paid, so He can be the justifier without violating justice.
Right. I was saying that God was qualified to be “demanding justice,” while we are not. Sorry if that was not clear.
I see it now. Thanks.
Post a Comment