Rid

The original meaning of ' rid ' is to rescue (Anglo-Sax. hreddan, cf. Dutch redden and Germ. retten), and this is its meaning in five of its six AV occurrences (Gn ST*, Ex 6«, Lv 26», Ps 82 144'- "). Cf . Gn 37^ Tind. ' When Reuben herde that, he went aboute to ryd him out of their handes and s&yde, let ns not kyll him ' ; Tind. Expos. 77, ' Because we be ever in such peril and cumbrance that we cannot rid ourselves out, we must daily and hourly cry to God for aid and succour' ; Jer 15=' Cov.

'And I will ryd the out of the hondes of the wicked, and delyver the out of the honde of Tirauntes.' In the remaining passage the meaning is clear out, drive out, Lv 26" ' I will rid evil beasts out of the land ' (RV ' cause evil beasts to cease out of the land '), wliich is the modern meanin". The process by wliich the word thus practically reversed its meaning (from rescue to destroy) may be illustrated from Spenser, FQ I. i.

36 — ' Unto their lodgings tlien hla guestes he riddea,' where the meaning is neutral, removes. Cf. also Lv 14" Cov. ' The preast shall comniaunde them to ryd all thinge out of tlie liouase,' and Udall, Erasmus' Paraph, i. 52, ' With these men the Pharisees consulted by what meanes they might ridde Jesus out of tlie waye.' J. Hastings. • Dillm. and Keil adopt intermediate riewa. Dillm. (p. 218) would not draw it N. o( the preaent road from BCr6t to Dama8c:ua ; Kei) takea it aa far N. aa Lebweh.

RIDDLE (nyp, from root nin lOxf. Eeb. Lex. compares Arab. l> r>- 'decline, turn aside, avoid,' hence perhaps riddle as indirect, obscure] ; verb denoiii. n;n 'to proijose an enigma'; nyn un 'to put forth a riddle,' Ezk 17=: hXXaivi-) /i, Trpi,3\rifia i Vulg. enigma, prohlcma, propoHtio) is closely re- lated in the OT to the pkovekb (";; p), which for the most part is represented in the LXX by irapo- /3o\^ — PARABLE. It has been suggested, indeed (Oort in Cheyne's Job and Solomon, p.

127), that some of the proverbs were originally cuireiit among the people as riddles, such as ' Wliat is worse than meeting a bear ? Meeting a fool in his folly ' (Pr 17'=) ; ' What is sweet at hrst, and then like gravel in the mouth? Bread of falsehood' ( Pi 20"). Like the proverb or the parable or the allegory, the riddle served a more serious and didactic purpose than we usually associate with the word. The didactic usage is found throughout the whole of the OT.

It is seen in Nu 12', wliere Jehovah chides Aaron and Miriam for their op- position to Moses, and says to the honour of the great Lawriver, ' Mouth to mouth speak I to him, plainly and not in riddles'' (m-nj). In Ps 49* the Psalmist says, ' I will incline mine ear to a parable ('?»'C^) : I wall propound my riddle ("ni'n) upon the harp,' and the subject of the psalm — the transi- toriness of godless |)rosperity and the blessedness of a hope in God — justities his ajiplication of the words.

In Ps 78= the same didactic purpose is manifest. The Psalmist proposes to set forth the early his- tory of Israel in parable and riddle for the instruc- tion of his own age and time : ' I will open my mouth in a parable (V;'cs) : I will utter riddles (niTn) from the olden time.'

This parabolic use of the history of Israel by tlie Psalmist is taken by the evangelist (Mt 13**- ^) as justifying the em- ployment of parables by Jesus to set fortli the kingdom of heaven : ' All these things spake Jesus in parables to the multitudes, that the word might be fullilled which was spoken by the prophet say- ing, " I wiU open my mouth in parables : I will declare things hidden from the foundation of the world,"' which last words are a variation from the LXX ' riddles from the beginning ' {Tpo^Xruxara aw' dpx'ls).

This didactic {lurpose attributed to the riddle is well illustrated in Pr 1' by its associa- tion with words of like purport : ' To understand a parable (V?), and an obscure saying (njc'i'C), the saj'ings (o'-ini) of the wise and their riddles (m-n).' In the Wisdom books of the Apocrypha it is per- haps natural to lind examples of the didactic usage. In Wis 8' it is said in praise of Wisdom : ' She understandeth subtleties of speeches and interpretations of riddles' (<rTpo(pa!

\lryuiv util \i/ireii alvifpLaTuiv) ; in Sir 39, ' it is said of the man who meditates in the law of the Most High, ' He will keep the discourse of the men of renown, and will enter in amid the subtleties of parables (iv arpoipais irapa^oXui').

He will seek out the hidden meaning of proverbs (dir6/tpu0o Trapoiiuuif), and be conversant in the riddles of parables ' (^c aiflyixaai Trapa/SoXuii'), these last words being inverted in 47", where Solomon is apostrophized as filling the earth with ' parables of riddles ' (ii> rapa^oXais alviy/iiTuii).

Tlie association of the riddle with the parable is found in Ezk 17', wliere the prophet is commanded ' to put forth a riddle (Ti-n -iin), anil utter a parable ' (Syp Stc, LXX Trapa^oXiic), — the saying being called a riddle because it requires interpretation, and a parable because of the comparison it contains of the kings of Babylon and Egypt to two great eagles, and of their treatment of Israel to the cropping of the cedar of Lebanon.

There are still two occurrences of the word ' riddle ' in the Pro- phets, where it is not so easy to say whether the didactic or the more special usage is exemplified.

KIDDLE RIDDLE 271 In Dn 8° the king of fierce countenance that is to arise, by whom Antiochus Epinhanes is meant, is creditea with the jrift of ' unaerstanding riddles' (nn'n pj'C) ; and in Hab 2* the propliet, speaking of the proud and ambitious man who seeks to make nations and peoples his o^^'n, asks, ' Shall not all these take up a parable (Sf?), and an obscure saving (•ij'^y). riddles (n'n'n), against him ?'

*rhe riddle in the more special sense of a puzzle to sharpen the wits, or a paradoxical question to stimulate interest, is found in the OT, and balks largely in the Talmud and later Jewish literature. With riddles the Jews have been wont from an early period in their history to display their intellectual ingenuity, or test the wisdom of tlie learned, or entertain festive occasions and hours of leisure. Deutsch [Literary Jicmains, p.

47), speakin" of the Haggailah of the Talmud, refers to the Filgrim's Progress, and says that Bunyan in his account of his o^vn book unknow- ingly describes the Uaggadab as accurately as can be — • WniiM'st thou divert th\-«elf from melancholy? Would'st thou he plcii^ant, yet he far from folly t Would'st thou read riddUs and their explanatioQ? Or else be drowned in contemplation ? O then come hither And lay this book, thy bead aud heart together.

The riddle is not, however, confined to Jewish literature. The riddle of the Sphinx is familiar from classical antiquity. It was a riddle that Tarquin the Proud acted when by striking off with a stall' the heads of the tallest poppies in his garden he gave Sextus the hint to put out of the way the chief citizens of captured Gabii. The riddle as an amusement at feasts and on convivial occasions among the Greeks and Romans is men- tioned in the pages of Athenajus and Aulus Gellius.

(See liochart, HUrozoieon, iii. 384). It was at his wedding feast that Samson pro- jK)sed the terms of his famous riddle (Jg 14). He /jave his Philistine friends seven days to lind it out, iiromising if they should be successful thirty fine linen wrappers and thirty gala dresses(v."; Moore's Commentary, p. 335), and requiring from them the same if they should be unsuccessful.

They accepted the terms, and Samson propounded his riddle — ' Out of the eater came something to eat, and out of the strong came something sweet ? ' How far a riddle was fair, the solution of which required a knowledge of incidents so special as Samson's encounter with the lion and its sequel, need not be discussed. Their deceit and the treachery of his wife put the Philistines in possession of the secret. ' What,' they asked, ' is sweeter than honey, and what is stronger than a lion?'

At once he saw he had been duped, and in a satirical vein he exclaimed, employing still the language of riddles : ' If ye had not ploughed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle.' Solomon with his high repute for wisdom in other things is credited also with skill in the solution of riddles. The Queen of Sheba on her visit to Jerusalem proved him with riddles (1 K 10" = 2 Cli 9').

And Solomon ' told her all her ques- tions, there was not anything hid from the King which he told her not' (1 K 10» = 2 Ch 9'). Josephus tells a similar tale of Hiram king of Tyre. Solomon and Hiram were on the most friendly terms. 'What cemented the friendship between them,' says Jos. {Ant. vill. v.

3), 'was the passion both had for wisdom ; for they sent riddles (irpo- ^XiJmoto) to one another, with a desire to have them solved ; and in these Solomon was superior to Hiram, as he was wiser in all other respects.' In aniitl.er passage of his writings the Jewish his- torian (c. Apion. i. 18.

17), records the testimony of Dius the historian of the Phcenicians, who says that Solomon when he was king at Jerusalem sent riddles (aiviftiara) for Hiram to guess, and desired that he would send others back for him V; find out, tlie condition being that he who failed should pay a fine to him who was successful. And as Hiram was unsuccessful, he had a large amount to pay.

At length lie found a man of Tyre, Abuemon by name, who was able to guess the riddles proposed by Solomon, and himself pro- pounded others which Solomon could not solve, thus recovering for his sovereign the money he had lost. None of these riddles have survived, and therefore we have no means of estimating their character as hard questions. There are to be found, however, in the Proverbs bearing the name of Solomon, sayings that appear to be of the nature of riddles.

The riddle of the insatiable things is one of these (Pr 30"- '"). 'The horse-leech (but see art. HORSE-LKECH) hath two daughters, crj'ing. Give, give. There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is enough.' What are these ? And the answer is, 'The grave, and the barren womb, the earth that is not filled with water, and the tire that saith not, It is enough.'

This is followed by the riddles of the four mysterious things (Pr SO"-'*), of the four intolerable things (Pr 30^-^), of the four little wise things (SO-^"-^), and of the four stately things (30=«-"). Riddle and inter- pretation alike exhibit precise observation of nature, and convey at the same time moral in- struction.

To the riddles of the OT fall, perhaps, to be added the words of the mysterious writing on the wall on the night of Belsliazzar's feast (Dn S'-^'"}, Mene, Men'e, Tekel, Uphar-sin (which see). The inscription is to be read according to recent authorities, ' A mina, a mina, a shekel and half minas.' Vv.'-"""'-, says Bevan (The Book of Daniel, p. 106), are plays upon the words of the inscrip- tion ; in v.*" the pla3- is a double one. 'Una — God hath numbered thy kingdom and finished it.

Shekel — thou hast been weighed in the balance and hast been found wanting. Half mina — thy king- dom hath been divided and given to the Medes and PersiaTis. The parable is one of the unique features of the teaching of Christ {rapajioXri in the .Synoptists ; «rapoi/i(o in St. John), but the riddle, except in so far as the evangelist Matthew justifies instruction by parables with a reference to Ps 78-, is not expressly mentioned. Only once in the NT is the riddle expres.

sly named, and in that instance (1 Co 13'-) the mention of it is obscured in EV. The meaning is — 'Now we see through a glass, in a riddle ' {iv ahlyfrnn), in contrast to the direct \'ision of spiritual realities, ' face to face.' In the Revela- tion of St. John there is a riddle which remains an enigma in spite of all attempts to solve it : ' He that hath understanding let him count the number of the beast ; for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred and sixty and six.'

Following the method known among the Jews as Gematria, by which a number is obtained from the numerical values of the letters of a name, it has been found that the Hehrew transliteration of Neron Cesar yields a total of GOG. Although adopted by many modern interjireters, this .solu- tion of the riddle has not attaini'd general accept- ance any more than others which have been pro- posed from a much earlier time (see Bengel, Gnomon, p. 1095 iX.

; Milligan, Baird Lectures on The Jtevelation of St. John, p. 321 IT., and art. Rkvei.atidn [Book of] above, p. 258). In the Taliinid and Rabbinical literature there is no lack of riddles. In fact the Jews exhibit a curiosa feliiitds in this department which is unique. ' A large number of famous sayings,' says Abrahams i72 RIDICULOUS RIGHTEOUSlSrESS IN OT (Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 386, 387), * are put in the form of riddles. NVlio is mighty ? Wlio IS a fool ? Who is happy ?

A whole class of popular plirases in the Talmud and Midrash are nothing more nor less than folkriddles, the chief exponents being women and children ; hut distin- guished Rahbis also utilized this language of wisdom. Ethical works of the Middle Ages abound in philosophical riddles. Riddles found their way into the prayer-book for the I'assover Eve. It goes without sayin", therefore, that many Hebrew riddles of the Middle Ages were serious intellectual exercises.'

To keep up atten- tion and to stimulate interest while the intricate subtleties of the law are being expounded, such an assertion as this would be announced — ' There was a woman in Egypt who brought forth at one birth "six hundred thousand men.'" The interpreta- tion follows : the woman was Jochebed, the mother of Moses, who was himself equal to the whole armed host of Israel who came out of Egynt.

Talmudic lore records a story of Rabbi Jeliuda, sage and saint, akin to that related of Tarquin the Proud. The emperor Antoninus Pius sent him a message to say the imperial exchequer was empty : how could it be replenished ? The Rabbi took the messenger into the garden and tore up the big radishes and planted young ones in their place. He did the same with the turnips and the lettuces. The emperor understood the hint ; he dismissed the old officials and put new in their place.

Many of the riddles that thus delighted the Jewish fancy seem trivial enough. For example : ' The fish is roasted with his brother, is placed in his father, is eaten with his son, and thereafter is helped down with his father,' where his ' brother ' is the salt which comes like himself from the sea, his ' father ' is the water from which he is taken, and his ' son ' the sauce in which he is served ! Riddles whose solution depends upon the numerical values of the Hebrew letters are common.

' Take 30 from 30 and the remainder is 60.' The ex- planation is that 30=DT'?i? : remove S, whose numerical value is 30, and the remainder is c-iV = 60. The letters of the Hebrew alphabet have also a lingual meaning, and a good example of a riddle whose solution depends upon such a mean- ing is the following : ' There was a she mule in ray house : I opened the door and she became a heifer.' To be solved thus : From the Hebrew for ' she- mule ' .

tt;5 take away the letter n {Daleth = door) and there remains n-jB ' heifer.' Plays ujion words scarcely come under the scope of tills article. They are found most abundantly in the Prophets and in the rhetorical passages of Job, but they occur also with considerable fre- quency in the Proverbs, and they are to be met with, though rarely, in the Psalms. In those plays upon proper names which are found in the etymological explanations of the name of the law- giver of Israel (Ex S'" ; cf. Jos. c.

Apion. i. 31), of the name of Samuel (1 S l-*), and many more, the Talmud is said to be especially rich. (Upon ' Paronomasia in the OT,' see Casanowicz, JBL (1891), pp. 105-167). LiTERATORS.— For the usage ot the Hebrew word JTl'n see Oxf, U'.b. hex. i.v.\ Delitzsch, Zur Geschichte der Jiidwchen Pnesie : Cheyne, Joh and Soloim.n ; Toy, Proverbs.

On Biblical and Tahnudic riddles— Hamburger's JiE ; Low, Die Leberut- alter; Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle ^ei\ Wiinsche, Die Jldtltsclwritsheit bei den Hebrdem. T. NlCOL. RIDICULOUS Only Sir 34'»' He that sacriliceth of a thing wrongfully gotten, his offering is ridicu- lous.' The meaning is active, derisive, mocking (Gr. wpoatpopi luixuK-qnivri, RV ' his offering is made in mocki^ry '). Cf. Shaks. Love's Labour's Lost, iii.

78, ' The heaving of my lungs provokes me to ndiculous smiling.' RIGHTEOUSNESS in OT.— The idea of Right- eousness is one of the most complex and difficult of the ruling ideas of the OT. The subject may be introduced by one or two statements of a general nature. (I) Rijjhteousness in the OT ii strictly a personal attribute. There are a few instances where the word is used of things, but these are undoubtedly secondary (see below, p. 274*).

So also are the eases where it is applied to a social aggregate like the people of Israel ; these arise either through personihcation of the community, or through the virtues of representa- tive individuals being conceived as leavening the mass. (2) The personal relations indicated by the term are of three kinds : forensic, ethical, and religious. Righteousness, e.g.

, may denote [a) a forensic right, as wlien Judah says of Tama«, 'she has been in t/ie right against me' (Gn 3S'^') ; or (6) a moral state, as Gn 6 'Noah was a right- eous, blameless man in his generation ' ; or (c) a direct relation between man and God, as in Gn 15 ' Abraham believed J", and he counted it to hira ioT righteousness.'

But under each of these heads the notion breaks up into a j;reat variety of dis- tinct applications, while the hgurative extensions of {a) into the spheres of (6) and (c) create subtle distinctions which at times defy classification. (3) It may be remarked that the history of the idea in the OT exhibits a development in almost ex- actly the opposite direction to that observed in the case of Holiness.

Holiness (which see) is prima- rily a religious term, which gradually acquires ethical content under the influence of the reve- lation of God as a Being of perfect moral purity. Righteousness, on the contrary, belongs in the first instance to the region of moral ideas, and be- comes a technical term of religion by a process whose outlines can be traced in the OT. — It will be convenient in the present art.

to treat the subject under three main divisions, correspond- ing broadly to three stages in this development ; viz. (i.) The meanings of Righteousness in ordi- nary popular speech ; (ii.) the conception of Right- eousness in the pre-exilic prophets (Amos to Jere- miah); and (iii.) the theological developments of the idea, chiefly in exilic and post-exilic writings. The Hebrew words expressing the idea of Righteousness are the follo%ving derivatives of the root pl)i : — 1. The adj.

p")s ; LXX iimtuM, etc; EV 'righteous,' mor rarely ' just,' etc. 2. The abstract nouns .ii3'is and pnx, which appear to be prac- tically interchangeable ; LXX iijuciorvvfi, etc ; EV ' rigbteout- nes?,' more rarely 'justice,' etc. [The Aram, .nij"!^ appears in Dn 4']. The verbal forms are much less freqtiently used, viz.: — 8. The Qal piy (22 times in MT) ; LXX S.i^nt ij.oe/, liiuuni (pass.), etc.; EV 'be righteous,' 'be Justified,' ' be just,' etc 4.

The Hiphil p'^^n (12 times, always in a declarative sens except Is 63", Dn 123) ; LXX J,««i.D., etc.; EV 'justify,' etc. 6. The Piel p^s (5 times, with the sense ' make out to be in the right,' or 'make to appear in the right'); LXX Iim^!; etc.; EV 'justify.' 8. The Hithpael (refl.) P'V^^fn (On 44l«); LXX tiMoimt (pass.); EV 'clear ourselves.' 7. The Niphal pisi (Dn S", of the Temple); LXX MtiStLfilur (pass.) ; EV ' be cleansed.' The C.rvek and English torm.

s given above represent only the prevalent usage ot LXX and EV respectively. With regard to the latter, it may be said that the words 'righteous' and 'righteousness' cover approximately the uses of pns in the OT. Out of some 620 instances where the Heb. root appears, about 400 are rendered in AV by 'righteous,' 'righteousness,' or 'righteously.' In over 100 cases 'just,' 'justice,' 'justify' are employed, sometimes appropriately enough, but at other times quite arbitrarily (cf. e.g.

On «» with "', or Am 2' with 513). There are, besides, a few miscellaneous renderings, which it would serve no useful purpose to tabulate. On the other side, ' righteous ' stands for If'; (' upright ') in Nu 2310, job 4^ 23', Ps 107«, Ft 2' 333 149 1619 2S1» (similarly the adv. Ps 67 99"'). KV has rectified some of those anomalies : for instance, exoep in Nu 2311', ' righteous,' etc., never are used except for some form of pnx.

The usage of the LXX is marked by somewliat greater diversity, as was to be expected from the variety oJ righteous>:ess m ox RIGHTEOUSXKSS IN OT 273 circ-uautances in which the different book8 were translated. In the j;reat majority of cases, however, the Ileb. terms are rt'prest-nttd by )i*xi«< and the coioiate wonls, although other rendering's are frequent, as ectuf^wrti^ Ka.tia.pttt ^trtti, tigiir.t, Mfirtt, Uut, itar.tiAgiint (the last two are instructive). And, conversely, 3ts«u«(, etc.

, are used for such words as ly';, 'p; (' innocent '), ijn (' kindneaa 'X njK (' truth," ' fidelity '), tsff p ('judicial decision,' 'judf^ent'), etc. A certain freedom of tlans!;i(ion is, no doubt, permissible in view of the e.xtreme VDniatiiity of the Heb. notion, and its association with numer- otls parulielij>ms ; and these Heb. synonyms have naturally to be ttJien into account in forming conclusions regarding the OT idea of righteousness. Cf. liatch, Essayt in Bw. Gr. 49. i.

Righteousness in Common Life.— In the earliest liistoriual literature — the documents J and E of the Hex., and the oldest sources of the 15ks. of Samuel and Kings — the words for ' righteous- ness 'occur, not very frequently, but in connexions which convey a pretty complete idea of what they meant in everyday life. Here the most prominent aspect of the notion la the forensic, although this by no means excludes an ethical and religious reference.

In early Israel, law, morality, and religion were closely identitied, all three restin" larjjely on traditional custom or being embodied in it. Morality consisted in confoniiity to the conventional usages of the society to wliicli a man belonged (Gn 26», 2 S 13" etc.) ; the administration of ju.-.tice was the enforcement in individual cases of the acknowledged rules of social order ; and, again, these rules were invested with religious sanctions as expressing the will of J".

Thus a man's legal rights were a measure of the morality of his conduct, and at the same time all rights existing between men were also rights before .1''. When it is sjiid that the forensic clement pre- jionderates, what is meant is that questions of right and wTong were habitually regarded from a legal point of view as matters to be settled by a judge, and that this point of view is empliasized m the wonls derived from pia. This, indeed, is characteristic of the Heb.

conception of rig^hteous- nets in all its developments : whether it be a moral quality or a religious status, it is a])t to be looked on as in itself controvertible and incom- plete until it has been confirmed by what is e'luivalent to a judicial sentence. Now, within the forensic sphere we can distinguish three aspects of righteousness which are of fundamental importance for the subsequent history of the idea ; and these may be illustrated from almost any period of the language.

(I) Kighteousness means, in the first instance, being in the right in a particular ca.se. Of the two parties in a controversy, the one who has the right on his side is designated as p'li.i, and the one in the wrong as vyi.n : Dt 2.5' ' If there be a guarrel between men, and they bring it to the ]nd''nieiit-seat, and (the judges) judge them, they shall justify the p-'s ana condemn the IVl' ; cf. ie'». Ex 23'- », Is S^ 29=', Pr 17"> IS"- " 24-< etc.

Siruilai ly, a person accused or suspected of wrong- doing is PIS if he is innocent and IVT if guilty (Gn 20, 2 S 4", 2 K 10», I'r 17=»). It makes, of course, no difl'erence whether the case is actuall}- submitted to a judge or not ; all (lui^stions of right and wrong are conceived as capable ideally of being so settled, and the intrinsic merits of the dispute are described by the same terms ; see Ex Vi" (' J" is in the riqht, and I and my jieoplo are in the wrornt ') ; 1 S 24", 1 K 8^ (cf.

Kx 2"). Thus "i'll' (.^7 in this sense appears to be later) denotes the light or innocence ol an incriminateil person, his claim to justification, the validity of his iilea (2 S 19^ •26-=', Neh 2»). In these cases righteous- ne.s.s is an inherent quality, not depending on the decision of the judge, but at the most demaniLing • The fem. of the adj. pn^ Is nowhere used ; In the only mttancc where the right of a woman Is concerned the simple »«rb la employed ; Gn S3»> CJjjij nji)). vou IV.

— 18 recognition by him. And although the conception is essentially forensic, it is obviously one to which ethical ideas readily attach themselves. Riglit- eousness comes to mean unimpeachaljle moral con- dnct (Gn SO*'— a dillieult case) ; and in this sense it may be predicated of a man's whole life, the righteous man being one who is blameless before an ideal tribunal ; see 1 K '2^- 3^ (in 7', 6» (P) IS-o"-, Dt 9''-«, La 4'" etc.

In this application a relijjioua reference is probably always included, the ideal tribunal being that of God. Legal phraseolog}' is naturally transferred to the case of mere d'-f'tite : Job 112 ;j3l2 ; here to ' jii.stify ' means virtually to admit the force of one's arguments (27»).

With this may be connected the use of the words to cx^iress correctness in pre- diction (Is 4126), or truthfulness in spuech (Is 46'8- '^ GJ', Ps 52», Pr 8"* 12' IG'3) ; although other explanations are here possible (see below, p. 274). (2) Righteousness, however, has a second sense, which is [jiirely forensic ; it means the legal status established by a pulilic judgment in one^s favour : Is S^ ' take awaj- the rigliteousness of the righteous from him ' (cf. lO^).

Examples of this kind are rare in allusions to secular juri.sprndence ; but the dis- tinction plays a very mijiortant part, as we shall see, where forensic analogies are transferred to men's standing before Go(i ; and it could hardly be drawn so clearlv there unless it had some basis in ordinary judicial administration.* (3) Lastly, righteousness is the quality expected of the judrje in the exercise of liis office.

His fiindamental duty is to 'justify' (pni:n = ' declare in the right ') him who is in the right, and to condemn (i"v'-;n) him who is in the wrung (Dt 25', 2S 1.5^ etc.); and, if the circumstances require it, to inflict punishment on the wrong-doer (Dt 25'; cf. 2S 12'" etc.) In this he is said to manifest pn>- (Dt I'« IG'"-", Lv 19'», Is lD-i> 1G»), or in a com- nion phrase to execute nij-i^i tiEfp.

t The tenijita- tions to which a judge was mainly exposed being bribery and ' respect of persons,' his righteousness consists essentially in his rising superior to such influences and deciding each case with ab.solute im])artiality on its merits. Stress, howevei, is naturally laid on the duty of redres.sing the -vNTongs of the jioor and defenceless ; hence judicial righteousness is frequently equivalent to deliver- ance or protection.

This idea lies, indeed, in the verb osp itself, which means not only to judge, but also to vindicate or defend (1 S 24", Is 1" etc.) The forensic sense of righteousness illustrated above appears to be fundamental in Ileb., and goes back to a remote period in Semitic antiquity. It is found in a phrase closely corresponding to OT usage in one of the Tel cl-Amama tablets (l.'^^th or 14th cent. B.C.), where Abdhiba of Jerusalem sa.vs, sa-du-uk ana ia-a.

&i tii-6um amiluti Ka-ii-*l am fnnoccnf with respect to tiie Kashi' (/i/yj V. 306 f.) That a similar usage prevailed in Aramaic and Phujnician is shown by the inscriptions in both languages (see Lidzbarski, Ilaiulbuch di^r nnrd^ein. Kpigrai'hik, p. ;iG7). The forensic conception of righteousness appears, therefore, to be characteristic of the northern group of Semitic dialects. In Arabic, on the other hand, the root has no forensic • It may here be pointed out that it is doubtful If the adj.

pns bears this sense of outward Justillcation even in the religious sphere (Kautzsch). It seems confined to the inherent character on which a legal right is hosed, but not to include the status which results from a vindication of that right. In other wordn. it is used of the pwily as rntitled to Divine justification, but not as actually junUju'd. Kautz-sch thinks there are exceptions in is 4(Mf6 and 24-27 ; but tiiat is not quite clear.

Zee 9^ would be a cose in point if the meaning is to be determined by the following epithet Vv'i] {^ vimUcated and victorious'; O. A. Smith, Tv'flve Prophets, ii. 460). On some doubtful oases in the Psalms, see below, p. 278. t This expression was jjrobably used originally of Judicial action (2 S «'», Jer 22" 23'>, ICzk 4.'ii'). but wa.s extended to moral conduct in general (Gn 18'", Ezk !»■ tw-'^l, and very often). In Dt 1' etc.

(above) pnv is partly the personal virtue of the Judge, partly the objective right which la the result of his Just action ; the won! appears first in Ilosea and Isaiah. It Is possible that this Judicial sense of rigliteousness (3) is less prniiltive than that desc^rilied under (1). At least the coses are few where the adj. is applied to a human judge (though often to God as the Supreme Judge of men). 2 S '2.

S3 la a clear example ; on Zee O* see the last note ; other possible cases are Jer 23^, Ezk 234S. 274 RIGHTEOUSNESS IX OT RIGHT KOUSXESS IX OT Associations. The verb fada^a means to speak the truth ; taddaka, to attribute truth to a speaker, to accept or homolo- gate his statement ; sadJit^ is one who is habitually veracious, and ^(i<i. A: a true or sincere friend.

All these uses embody tiie ethical idea of truslicorthxness or genuineness; and a reflexion of this moral sense is probably to be recoj;rnized in some peculiar subsidiary applications, as when the verb is employed of eyes and ears that faithfully perform their functions, or oi earnestness or steadiness in battle ' as opposed to a false show of bravery,' or of the desperate running of a hunted animal (see Lane, Lf-n'cm).

Saddk, the marriage gift from husband to wife, was originally a pled^'e of friendship ; and even the much discussed ruinh istuii: Sossibly means a tmsty lance, and not a straight or sound or ard lance (Wellhausen, GGiV, 1893, p. 434), though Nbldeke considers that in this case the meaning * straight 'is certain (Fiinfildallnqiit, 2, p. 40).

It has commonly been held that the varied senses of righteous- ness can be reduced to the single idea of ' conformity to a norm,' resting ultimately on the physical analogy of strai{jhtness. But the notion of ' conformity to a norm ' could hardly be primitive ; and, even if all the uses of p1^ could be brought under it, it woiild not thereb.v be proved to be fundamental, since all legd and ethical terms necessarily imply a reference to a norm.

It is indeed very doubtful if straightness be the concept originally expressed by the root. Certainly, nothing of the kind can be inferred from the cases in the OT where the word is used of materi.al objects. Jiist balances, weights, etc. (Lv 19'5. 36, Dt 255, Job 31^, Ezk 4510), are simply such balances, etc., as justice demands (cf. Am S^), just as sacrifices of rightemisness {\)t 333, Ps 45 5119) are sacrifices rightly offered.

The phrases pat/ts nf righteousness (Ps 233) and gates o/ righteousness (IIS'S) are so obviously figurative that they do not fall to be considered here at all. The evidence from Arabic is equally inconclusive. Here the discussion has turned largely on the use of sad^ as an epithet of the lance (see above)- It happens, however, to be applied in particular to the knots of the lance reed (of. sadk 'ul-kxiub, Muall.

Antara, 48), where, if the word describes anj- physical quaUty at all, it must be hardness ; unless, indeed, kab be understood as a section of the reed between two knots (Nbldeke, i6.) On the whole, perhaps, the idea of hardness best accounts for the ^higher developments of the idea both in Arabic and Hebrew.

The transition from hardness to trustworthiness is easy and natural, while the same analogy in the legal sphere might denote unimpeachableness of conduct on the part of a suitor, or steadfastness of character on the part of the judge. But these speculations are of little account ; the meanings of right- eousness in OT have to be ascertained from usage, and the fundamental usages appear to be those stated in the preceding paragraphs. ii. RiGHTEOtJSNESS IN THE PROPHETS.

— AltllOUgh the prophets were the great champions and ex- ponents of righteousness in Israel, it is not easy to say precisely in what respect their teaching marks an advance on the current notions examined in the last section. In their use of terms they adhere closely to the common forms of speech : the ?•"»• is still the man whose cause is just, and n^']^ and Pji- continue to be used of forensic right or judicial rectitude.

Nevertheless it is clear that the whole idea is elevated to a higher plane in the teaching of the prophets, and actjuires a signilicance at once more ethical and more universal. The difference of standpoint is partly to he explained by the state of things which the prophets saw aroiind them. By the 8th cent, the old constietudinary morality had broken down under the pressure of far-reaching economic changes which had ati'ected disastrously the life of the people.

Large numbers of Israelites bad been disposse.ssed of their holdings, and in con- sequence deprived of their civil and religious rights; the poor were defrauded and ground down by the rich, and even the forms of law had been turned into a powerful engine of oppression. In face of a situation like this, it is evident that the prophetic ideal of righteousness must rest on deeper founda- tions than mere use and wont. It rests, in fact, on the ethical character of J".

What is distinctive of the prophets is the conviction that social righteous- ness is the necessary and inexorable demand of J"'8 moral nature. So intense is this conviction that the idea of abstract right seems to stand out before their minds as an objective reality, a power that may be resisted but can never be defeated. 'Never before,' says Wellhausen, 'had this boen proclaimed with such tremendous emphasis.

Mor- ality is that through which alone all things subsist, the sole reality in the world. It is no postulate, no idea, it is at once necessity andfact,— the most living, personal energy, — Jahwe, the God of Forces.'* This is most clearly to be seen in Amos, the lather of written prophecy; but all the propliets move on the lines laid down by him, and mean by righteousness substantially what he means, althongli they may not give it the same central position which it occu- pies in his book.

It may suliice to note the following points. (1) The prophets are concerned in the tirst instance with that exercise of righteousness o« which the well-being of the community- most de- pends, the public ndministration of justice. Amoa demands that right (sff'?) be set up in the gate (5"); that right roll down like waters, and righteous- ness like a perennial stream (5-*) ; and complains bitterly of those who turn righteousness to worm- wood, i.e.

turn the fount of justice into a source of wrong and misery (5' 6'"). Isaiah and Micah hurl their invectives against the ruling classes for their perversion of justice and legalized plunder of the poor (Is 1" 3'«- 5'^ 10"-, Mic -I^-^- S'-'-"'-), and Jeremiah denounces the rapacity and misgovem- ment of the kings (22'3- •» 23"- ; cf. Ezk Zi^«-). Cf. further, Hos 10>-, Is 1=' 5', Jer 2-?' etc.

A well- governed State, repressing all wTong and violence, and securing to the meanest his rights as a mem- ber of J"'s kingdom, is the embodiment of the prophetic ideal of righteousness. At the same time, the spirit which ought to preside at the seat of judgment is conceived as a principle pervading the whole life of the nation, and regulating the relations of its different members and classes.

Civic righteousness is perhaps more a function of the community, a sound and normal condition of the body politic, than a rule of individual conduct ; although the latter is, of course, in- cluded (Hos 10'-, Jer 4'-). (2) In their conception of wliat constitutes righteousness, the prophets are not dependent on a ^^Titteu code,t and stiD less on the technicalities of legal procedure.

Their appeal is to the moral sense, the instinctive per- ception of what is due to others, the recognition of the inherent rights of human personality. The idea is far broader than what we usually mean by right or justice ; it includes a large-hearted con- struction of the claims of humanity ; it is, as has been said, the humanitarian virtue par excellence.^ And this is true not only in private relations, but also in the sphere of juilicial action.

The righteous- ness of the judge appears pre-eminently in his vin- dication of the widow, the orphan, and the stranger, the oppressed and defenceless classes generally (Is 1" etc.) In Amos the p'ls is always the poor man, with no influence at his back, who must therefore look to the judge to maintain his rights. This feature might be considered accidental, arising from the injustice to which the poor were sub- jected at that time.

But it is important, never- theless, as exhibiting an aspect of the Heb. idea of judicial righteousness which is apt to be overlooked by us. It denotes not merelv the neutral impartial attitude of mind which decides fairly between rival interests, but a positive energy on the side of right, a readiness to protect and succour tliose who have no belli in themselves.

(3) Righteousness in this ethical sense is not only rooted in the moral instincts of human nature, but is a reflexion of the character of J". It is what He requires of men, what He has looked for in vain from Israel (Is 5'), that in which He delights, which He seeks to pro- duce on earth (Jer 9^). The inflexibility of this Divine demand for social righteousness is one or the most impressive things in prophecy. Ritual serWce is as nothing in J"'3 sight ; He despises and hates • Itr. u. jad.

Geich.' 109. t The idea of righteousness as obedience to the written law of God, which bulks so largely in the later writings, appears in Dt 6» ; cf. 24". Zeph 23. t Cf. the combination of .Iji't with ion (■ Unctneis ') In Ho< 1012 Jer »a. RIGHTEOUSNESS IX OT RIGUTEOUSXESS IX OT 275 it when offered by men of immoral life. But the claims of rifj;liteousnes3are absolute, and the nation that will not yield to them, thou<;h it be the chosen people of Israel itself, must perish.

Further, this righteousness, being based at once on the nature of man and the nature of God, is universal in its ran^e. It ha-s its witness in the human conscience everywhere (Am 3°), and determines the destiny of other nations as well as of Israel (I' 2* etc.) It is, in short, the moral order of the universe, and the supreme law of J"'s operations in history.

(4) As the lack of righteousness is the cause of Israel's destruction, so the presence of it is a constant feature of the Messianic salvation to which the prophets look forward. 'A king shall reign in righteousness, and princes decree justice' (Is 32"). The Messiah's kingdom shall be established in righteousness (9'), and He shall judge the poor in righteousness (IP"), etc. Cf. Jer 22"* 23" 33", Hos ?"(?) Is 1=« 32"'- 33» etc.

(5) Kighteousness as a personal attribute of J" is not named by the proi)hets so frequently as one might expect. The atlj. p'^s is not used in this sense till a compara- tively late period (Zeph 3', Jer 12'). Amos never mentions the righteousness of J", though the image of the plumb-line in 7''* shows that the conception was in his mind (cf. Is 28"). Isaiah speaks of a judgment 'overflowing with righteousness' (10, ), and of the Holy God as 'sanctifying himself by righteousness' (5"), i.e.

showing Himself to be God through the exercise of judicial righteousness. The idea is common to aU the prophets. From the special circumstances in which their work was carried on, they dwell chiefly (if not exclusive!}') on the punitire side of the Divine righteousness, the side whicli it presents to the guilt of Israel (Hos 6° 10, Ilab 1'-). Itighteousne.

ss, in short, is here equivalent to retribution, althougli retri- bution is not regarded as an end in itself, but only as a step in the carrying out of a redemptive purpose. The.se appear to be the chief features of the idea of righteousness which is characteristic of the pre- exilic prophets.

It is not yet to be called strictly a religious conception, inasmuch as its human side consists of moral qualities displayed by men in their relations to one another, and the righteous- ness of men before God is an idea hardly repre- sented in the luojihcts. But it makes the religious development possible, and some anticipations of that development in the prophetic writings will have to be considered under the next head. iii. Righteousness in tiie Si'Iieue of Re- ligion.

— 'We come now to consider the ditrerent forms as.sumed by the idea of righteousness as expressing relations existing immediately between God and man. These are based on the mono- theistic principle, interi)reted by the help of the forensic categories described above (under i.) J" is the supreme Ruler and Judge of the universe, and His judgments are seen in history or provi- dence, liut the ordinary course of providence could not always be accepted as the final expres- sion of the mind of the .

Judge ; it is usually in some great crisis, some decisive interposition of J' felt to be impending, that the ultimate verdict is looked for. Meanwhile nations and men are on their trial, they are severally in the right or in the wrong before God, and in the final day of reckoniu" the issues will be made clear, and the just ill- of the Divine government fully vin<licated.

Altliinigh all the elements of this cimception are present in prc-exilic prophecy, the special applica- tions of it now to be dealt with belong mostly to a later period, and are the result of certain currents of thought which come to the surface in the age of • Rend KS' -nsz 'EE^DI. the Exile. There are three things to be looked at: the righteousness of Israel ; the righteousness of the individual ; and the righteousness of God. 1. TUE Righteousness of /.9/(.-iJiv..— The ques- tion of I.

srael's right against other nations is one little considered bj' the earlier prophets. It was doubtless a factor in the jiopular religion, revealing itself in that eager longing for the day of J" which Amos rebukes (.')"') From that point of \'ie\v it was a matter of cour.se that J" should maintain the cause and right of His peo])le, and moral ccinsiderations hardlj- entered into the feeling. The projihets, on the other h.

ind, were too much concerned to impress on Israel a sense of its utter unrighteousness before God to pay much heed to the violation of right involved m its subjection to nations morally worse than itself. In the 7th cent., however, partly as a consequence of the Deuteronomic reformation, the idea of a righteous Israel begins to exert an influence on prophetic thought (cf. I)t G^).

The first prophet to treat the matter expressly from this point of view is Habakkuk (the idea is latent in Nalium), who uses the technical terms p'ls and yj'-i to designate Israel and its heathen oppressors respectively (14.13. ^f 2' : see the Comm.), and appeals to J" to redress the WTon^s suH'ercd by His people. But it was the F.xile tliat brought the question to the front in the prophetic interpretation of history.

The Divine sentence had gone forth confirming the moral verdict of the prophets on the nation's past, and the more spiritual part of the people acknow- ledged the just judgment of God in what had be- fallen them (La 1"). But there still remained the promi.se of a glorious future, in which the righteous- ness of J" would be dlsjd.ayed not less than in the judgment now past.

Israel, therefore, has a right which, though obscured for the jiresent, is recog- nized by J", and will be vindicated by Him in due time. ^Vherein does this righteousness of Israel consist ? Dcutero-Isainh. — The answer to this question is given bj' the writer of Is 40-55 in a manner which went far to fi.x the sense of righteousness for .all subsequent theology.

The prophet looks to his people's restoration from exile as a final disclosure of the righteousness both of Israel and of J", and an event fraught with the most blessed conse- <iuen('es for humanity. That Israel h.is been, and is, in the wrong before God is explicitly acknow- ledged in the ironical challenge of 43'-''' (' that thou maycst be in the right'), and is implied in many passages besides.

But its sin has been forgiven, the punishment endured has been adequate (40^), and, in spite of the unprcparedness of the people, J" lirings near His salvation (4U'' 51" .52'"); the hidden riglit of Israel, which exists amidst all its unwortliincss and shortcoming, is about to be made manifest. And here, in accordance with forensic usage, the idea of righteousness is resolved into two perfectly distinct conceptions. On the one hand it denotes the inherent riglit of Israel's cau.

se at the liar of the Divine judgment (as in i. (1)); and on the "I her hand the external viii<lication of that right through a judicial intervention of J" (i. (2)). In the latter sense righteousness means justification (54'''- " 45'- "), nnil is jiractically equivalent to salvation, the deliverance of the pcojilc being regarded as the execution of a Divine sentence in its favour.

The idea of the inherent righteousness of Israel, however, is more <liHicult, and several elements appear to enter into it. (a) Israel is in the right, first of all, as having .■suffered UTonr) at the hands of the world-power. The triumph of Babylon has been the triumph of brute • In 412. where it is staid of Cyrus that ' right meets him at every step, pix bears tlie sense of rinht vindicated on the field of battle, i.e. 'victor>' ' (see tlie Comni.)

276 RIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT RIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT force over helpless innocence (47' 52^''), and a viola- tion of the moral order of the world. On this ground alone Israel has a plea before the Judge of all the earth, it has a right (us?.-) which does not escape the notice of J"(4U-''; cf. Mic 7"). (6) Righteousness includes, in the second place, a way of life in accordance with the law of God.

Of the better part of the people it is said that they follow after righteousness (51') or know righteousness (51'), just as it is said of another section that they are far from righteousness (46'-).* Similarly, in 53" it is said of J'"s righteous Servant that by his knowledge he shall make many righteous, i.e.

bring them to a moral condition conforming to the Divine will, (r) There is, perhaps, yet another element to be taken into account : Israel is in the right in virtue of its being identified with the cause of J", the only true God. Israel is J"'s witness. His client in the gieat controversy be- tween the true religion and idolatry. His ser\-ant and His messenger whom He has sent (43"'- " 44^ 418. 9 42'* etc. ).

As the organ of J"'8 self-revelation, the nation represents the cause that must ulti- mately triumph, and is therefore essentially in the right. This vocation of Israel is described as per- fectly realized in the ideal Servant of the Lord (49^), whom J" has called in righteousness (42") and appointed for a light of the Gentiles, that His salvation might be to the ends of the earth (49" ; cf. 42'- ■•).

The Servant's confidence that he shall be justified (SO- 49'') rests on the conscious- ness of his election, and the unique relation which he holds to the redemptive purpose of J". The same distinction between inherent and external righteous- ness is met with in chs. 56-66, which are assigrned by some scholars to a later date. Thus in the sense of justification (s.ilv.ition, prosperity, etc.) the nouns occur in bQ^^ 588 Ji99 61^ lyt. 621*. (cf.

4318, possibly an interpolated passage in the earlier part). Of inherent right, the adj. is used in 671 60^ ; the substantives in 66i» 582 64^'. ; the aspect most prominent appears to be obedience to the law. — The idea of civic right- eousness in the sense of the pre-exilic prophets appears in 69" n.

The sense of Israel's right against the nations appears like- wise in other post-exilic writings, particularly in the Psalter, where the antithesis of 'righteous' and 'wicked* sometimes denotes Israel and the heathen respectively ; cf. Ps 710 145 31I8 331 526f- 7510 94-1 97111. 11S15. 20 etc. etc.

But here it is no longer possible to separate between the national and individual references of the idea of righteousness : and it is therefore better to deal with the subject after we have considered — 2. The Riobteo usness of tbe L\di vidh-a l.— That individual righteousness was an idea familiar in early times to the Israelites, is sufficiently clear from such passages as 1 S 26=^, 1 K S^-, Is S'"- " (?if genuine), etc.t It may be true that the individual wa.

s hardly felt to possess an independ- ent religious status before God. His life and his interests were seen to be merged in those of his family or the community (IS 3" etc.) ; and it was perhaps not expected that his outward fortunes should correspond exactly with his moral condition.

At all events, there is no evidence that the inequal- ities of providence in this sphere pressed severely on religious thought till towards the Exile, when a growing sense of jiersonal right begins to assert itself (Dt 24'«, 2 K 14'). In the remarkable pro- plietic experience of Jeremiah, religion appears to resolve itself into a personal relation of the indi- vidual soul to God.

And it is noteworthy that immediately he is confronted bj' the gravest pro- blem of Jewish theolooy, — Why is it that the man who is right with Goa has to sulfer alHiction and • Many commentators take the word in these passages in the •ense of outward justitlcation. But the panillelism in 51~ (' in whose heart is my law') stronjcly (avoum the more ethical meaning, and this ought in fairness to rule the interpretation of 511. 46'- is more doubtful. t On an Aramaic inscription of the 7th cent. B.

c. (Nerab it 2) the following words are put into the mouth of a de&d priest ; ' For my righteousness before him, he (the god) gave me a good name »nd lengtliened my daj-s' (UoSmann, ZA, ISM, p. 221 f.X injustice in the ■world? ' Too righteous art tliou, O J", for me to contend with thee; yet of judg- ments would I .-^peak with thee : Wherefore is tlit way of the wicked prosperous?' etc. (12'). kzekid.

— Besides tlie general tendency of thought referred to in the last paragraph, there were two special reasons for the rapid growth of individual- ism in the exilic and post-exilic ages. One was the dissolution of the State, in consequence of which the principle of collective retribution was oeces- sarily suspended, and each man became directly accountable to God for his own sins (Jer SI*"-, Ezk 18-"'').

But another and more permanent cause was the introduction of the written Law as the basis of religion. The Law makes its appeal in the first instance to the individual conscience, and, although the aim of the Deuteronomic covenant was to make of Israel a righteous nation through obedience to the Divine wul (Dt 6'°), its immediate effect was only to set up a standard of righteous- ness which served as a test of the individual's relation to God.

The influence of these two facts is very apparent in the conception of righteousness which meets us in the Bk. of Ezekiel. Except in a few instances ( 16°"- 23" 45"-) the words 'righteous' and ' righteousness ' are there used solely to denote the religious condition of individual persons in the sight of God (S-"- 13" 14'^- =» 18"- 2P'- 33'=»-). Sometimes even the plu. nipi?

is employed of the separate virtues or good deeds, which when ii>teg- rated make up the religious character (3-" IS-* 33'; cf. Is 33"> 64°). In form the idea is purely legal, consisting in obedience to the precepts of the written Law; its content, as given in 18°"' 33" etc., is mainly but not exclusively ethical.

And to thi'i conception of righteousness there is attached a rigorous theory of individual retribution; accord- ing as a man's state is when the judgment over- takes him, so will his destiny be : the righteous shall live, and the wicked shall die. Book of Job. — Ezekiel's doctrine of retribution was formulated with express reference to the final judgment which determines whether a man is to be admitted into the perfect kingdom of God or excluded from it.

When the principle was ex- tended to the ordinary course of providence, it was found to be contradicted at many points by experi- ence. Hence arose the most serious stumbling- block to the faith of OT believers — the inequalities, the seeming injustice, of God's providential deal- ings with men. This problem emerges in many forms (see Hab l-"*- 1^ Is 53, Mai 3"- •», Ps 37. 39. 49. 73, etc.), but nowhere is it treated with such Senetration and such intensity of feeling as in the k. of Job.

Job, a typically pious man, acknow- IwlgL'd to be such by the Almighty and the Satan, as well as by his fellow-men, is suddenly visited by a series of calamities which, on the current view of providence, could onlj- be explained as the punish- ment due to heinous sins. This view is upheld, in the discussion which ensues, bj' the three friends, and is partly shared by Job liimself. His mind is dominated by the thought of God as his adversary in a law.

suit ; or rather his chief com- plaint is that the Almighty constitutes Himself both accuser and judge, while there is no umpire who can lay his hand upon them both (9 '-"■). He feels himself to be the victim of an accusation brought against him by an all-powerful antagonist ; and his contention is that the accusation is un- just— that he is in the right and God in the wrong in this unequal quarrel.

This, of course, as the other disputants are quick to point out (8 34" 36»37'40"), is to impugn the judicial righteous- ness of God ; and such a position is to them simply inconceivable. ' How can a man be in the right against God?' they ask (4' 5' 25) ; and Job retorts with bitter irony, ' How indeed ! seeing He is th« RIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT EIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT 271 Omnipotent against mIioiu there is no redress' (9-).

Thus to the friemls tlie question at issue is tlie righteousness of Job, whicli they ultimately deny ; nhile to Job himself it is the righteousness of God in His providential dealings with men : 'he condemns God that he himself may be in the right' (40*, cf. 34').

Although he is forced to acknowledge that God has pronounced him guilty, he is nevertlieless perfectly sure of his own right- eousness (27'), by which he means in the first instance his 'just cause against God' (35-), his innocence of the unknown transgressions laid to his charge by his irresistible opponent. ' I am innocent — in the right' is his constant cry (9-"'' 13"* 34' etc. ). But behind this formal and purely forensic sense of righteousness there lies a deeper question, viz.

What constitutes the righteousness of a man before God, or what entitles him to a sentence of justitication in the shape of temporal prosperity ? On that point there does not appear to be any fundamental diil'erence between Job and his friends. Righteousness means morality com- bined with piety — loyal and wholehearted obedi- ence to the will of God.

Observance of the written Law is obviously excluded by the conditions of the poem ; but it is assumea that God's will is known, and that a man may so fulfil it as to be righteous. Job is a man perfect and upright, fearin" God and shunning evil (I'etc.)

That his outer life had been morally correct was known to all the world ; what wat known to himself alone and God was that there had been no hypoc- risy or secret infidelity in his heart (29'-"'- 31'-'') ; his morality had been ins|iired by religion, by reverence, and perfect allegiance to his Creator.

On that point the testimony of his conscience is c't-'ar and unwavering; and it is the undoubted teiiching of the book that this p'oa of Job's is valid, and that the real problem lies where Job's argument places it, in the mystery of the Divine government.

We are not here concerned with the solution which the author intends to suggest, but it can hardly consist, as some have thought, in the undermining of Job's consciousness of innocence, and his being convicted of a subtle kind of sin in the shape of suif-righteousness.

It is rather to be looked for in the remarkable distinction which the patriarch is led to draw between the God of Providence who condemns and persecutes hira, and the God to whom his heart bears witness, who is even now his friend, and must yet appear as his avenger, though it be after his death {16'», ' lO*"-"). Job 13 enabled in some degree to maintain his fellowship with God apart from outward tokens of His favour, sust.

aincd only by the witness of his conscience, and the nascent hope of seeing Him as He is, in another state of being. It has already been pointed out that in this book the terms for rij,'hleounneefl are employed of being in the riqht in aivu- Dicnl ; cf. 112 27» 322 3;ilJ. 3'J. Note also the occasional use of p-Ti in the sense of external Juetiflcation( = pro8perity),8«2fl" (?) SSWStf'. Proverhn nvtl Errlr.'iiattf/i.

— In the two remain- ing canonical IJohhmah books the conception of righteousness is as distinctly individualistic as in Job or Ezekicl. A very common theme in the Proverbs is the contrast between the ' righteous ' (p"?s— sing, or plu.) and the ' wicked ' (yv'^).* Here the righti'ous do not form a party (as often in the Psalms) ; t hey are a dnss, comprising all who follow the moral ideal taught by the wise men.

All men, in short, are divided by the Proverbial ists into good and bad, and 'righteous' is simply one of the coiiinionest designations of the good part of • Si-e3.'''in;<a»«. (11 times), n"">»'i i2» 7. 10. iiM.so I'js. o. 2a 1410. :-j 150. IB a 2112. is 2-JlO'. 2S26 28>- !>■ » 292- '• !»■ in. There ore man.v other contrast, as »inn«r l;ya, rril-doeri 21», foiilt Ki'^' eu;. ; and many synonym, as mum 8» 11™ saw, oood 22", uvriiiU 2iis ct« mankind.

It follows that the idea of righteous- ness presented in the book is essentially ethical, though no doubt w itli a strong dash of utilitarian- ism, the virtues chiefly insisted on being those which experience shows to be necessary for the welfare of society, and therefore most immediately beneficial to the individual who practises them. At the same time the moral system has a religious background. The written Law is the supremo standard of morality or righteousness.

Moreover, one of the chief objects of the writers is to incul- cate the doctrine of individual retribution in the ordinary course of Divine providence. However the fact may be explained, the difficulties surround- ing this question are ignored in the Proverbs, and the law of retribution is regarded as fully mani- fested in the present life : ' The righteous shall be requited in the earth, much more the wicked and the sinner' (IP').

Hence the idea of righteous- ness a{)pear8 to have lost the eschatological refer- ence whicli it frequently has in other parts of OT, and (what is more remarkable) it has all but lost the sense of outward justification, such as we meet with occasionally even in the Bk. of Job. Although it is constantly asserted that righteous- ness is the way to honour, weiilth, prosperity, etc., it does not seem ever to be idcntifed with these external tokens of God's approval except in 21-"' 8".

In Ecclesiastes the same conception of right- eousness as the supreme moral category prevails ; cf. 3" 7^' S" 9'" ^. The sayings most characteristic of the author are these two : ' Be not righteous overmuch ' (7'"), and ' There is not a righteous man upon the earth that doeth good and sinneth not' (7-°). The latter is perhaps the only passage in OT where righteousness is treated as equivalent to sinlessness ; the former exhibits a reaction against the casuistries of Pharisaic legalism.

The vacilla- tion of the book on the subject of retribution (con- trast 7" S" 9= with 3" 9' etc.) raises diflicult critical questions which need not be considered here.* The Psalms. — It is very difficult to analyze and classify the varied aspects of human rigliteou.sness presented in the Psalter. For one thing, it is im- possible (as was said above) to draw a sharp line of division between the righteousness of the nation and that of the individual.

The point of view most characteristic of the Psalms is intermediate between these two. In a large number of pas- sages the distinction of p"!5 and IV'"; is applied to twopartieswithin the community ; the 'righteous' being the religious party who have regard to the Covenant, and the 'wicked' the godless and wealthy anti-theocratic party who set religion and morality at dolianco.

t Here the idea of righteousness is partly national, since the ' right- eous' represent the tnie ideal Israel; partly indi- vidual, inasmuch as the party is formed by those members of the nation who accept the Law as their rule of life. In some cases, indeed, it is difficult to say whether the contrast intended be one within the nation or between the nation and the rest of the world.

The ungodly in Israel are animated by the same spirit as the heathen that know not God, and conversely the qualities of the righteous are the same whether the predicate be extended to the people as a whole or restricted to a portion of it. With regard to the conception of righteousness imiilied by this contrast, tlie following points have to be noted, (a) The conflict of parties is, first of all, a conflict of religious first principles.

The righteous are distinguished by their faith in the • Both in Proverbs and Ecclosiofites there are roforcm-cs to the public administration of Justice, where of course the idia of riBhtcouanera has the ordinary loitnl nppliciktions : cf. Pr 17" 2* 1(3. n 24'-" 2.''-». S'O 1012 2r)» 31", Kc 3l» 6». t Cf. 1' 612 ua- » 82" 8417. •-■0. 22 37 pa4l. f 622 0410 0928 «!• 112« 14013 1416 etc. 7S RIGHTEOUSXESS IN OT RIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT moral govenimont of the universe.

They trust in J" (16' '26' 22"), and consciously identify them- selves with His cause in the world ; they stake their existence on the conviction that ' there is a God that judj,'eth in the earth ' (58"), and that ' in the end judgment must be given for righteousness' (94'° Wellhausen). The wicked, on the contrary, are practical atheists.

They deny, not perhaps the existence of God, but His providential action (14' 53'), and acknowledge no higher authority than their own lawless wills (12' 59' 64^ 94'). Thus the Di\ ine decision in their favour for which the Psalmists pray wUl be the vindication of that view of the world to which they have committed them- selves— the proof that they are in t/ie right in the fundamental beliefs on which their life is based.

(6) The sphere in which the contrast is wrought out is that of personal and social morality ; hence there is a constant reference, tacit or expressed, to the moral character of the suppliants. They are those who practise righteousness and justice (106'' 119'-') ; they appeal to their integrity (7 25-'41'-) ; they claim to be upright, or upright of heart (.32" 33' 37" 64'° 97" 140'^), and innocent (94-') ; to have clean hands and a pure heart (18-"- -■ 24*) ; cf. 17"''" 26"''-.

On the other hand, the wicked are cruel, unjust, deceitful, bloody-minded, adulterous, avari- cious, etc. ; men who, with no fear of God before their eyes, trample every social obligation under their feet. (c) Another element in the Psalmists' sense of righteousness is the fact that they sutler wrong at the hands of their enemies (7' 10- 22"f- 31'» 69=« lig" 125^ 143^ etc.)

The outrages perpetrated by the heathen nations on Israel, and by the rich upon the poor within Israel, are a violation of the moral order of the world which cannot pass unpunished under the just govern- ment of J" ; the oppressed are, ipso facto, in the right against their oppressors, (rf) Lastly (as in Ueutero-Isaiah and elsewhere), righteousness bears tlie sense of Justijication thiow^h the judicial inter- position of J ", usually in the form of a restoration of temporal prosperity.

So in 24' ' he shall receive blessing from J", and righteousness from the God of his salvation' (cf. 17" 35" 37" 1123- » etc.); in 23'' ' paths of righteousness ' means ' paths of pro- sperity ' (118'" 132»).t NoAv, while all these elements may enter more or less into the Psalmists' consciousness of being in the right, — that consciousness on which they base their expectation (or explain their experience) of deliverance (4' 7" 17' IS'-*- =< etc.),— they are not of equal importance.

The second (6) far outweighs the others. Kighteousness is in the main an ethical word, describing the condition of those whose lives are governed by regard for the moral law. To the question in what sense morality con- stitutes righteousness before God, the Psalms, of course, furnish no direct answer. The chief con- sideration, no doubt, is that obedience to the ■written Law was the condition of acceptance with J" under the Covenant.

This thought is often expressed {\Vi"'- 78' 99' 103i« 105« WQ pass., etc.), and may be presumed to be always in the mind of the writers. At the same time it is to be observed that only the ethical (as opposed to the ceremonial) elements of the Law enter into the conception of righteousness, a fact which shows that the inlluence of the prophets still lives in the devotional poetry of Judaism. Nor is there anything in the Psalms • Ris:hteousness in jud^ient ifl emphasized, e.g.

, in the portraits of the king, 46' 722 (o(. 68' Wl-'- 99 etc.) In 72= 8510. 11. IS the word possibly meana the ideal state of a well- ordered commonwealtb, brin^g peace and prosperity in its train (cf. Is 468). t As was remarked above, p'^s (the adj.) does not appear to have this sense ; it refers to the inherent state or character of those who are in the right, whether it has been manifested by external proTidenlial act or not. llSi»-*> are hardly txceptiona.

that can properly be called self-righteousness or legalism in a Pharisaic sense, i.e. the Psalmists do not think of their good works as giving them an absolute title to justification. They do not (like Job) maintain their right against God — ' in thy sight shall no man living be in the right,' 143'^ — thej' are ever conscious of defect and sin cleaving to all they do; and merely plead the steadfast direction of tlieir will towards the ethical ideal as evidence of their fidelity to J".

Kighteousness, in fact, is a relative term, meaning in the right aa against some other, not absolute moral perfection ill the sight of God. In 106^', where a single good action is said to be ' counted ' for righteousness, the word has doubtless a sense approaching to merit (cf. Gn 15^) ; but here the Pauline maxim has to he borne in mind that the ' reckoning' of a reward is of grace, not of debt (Ro 4'').

It is a manifestation of grace on the part of J" that He renders to a man according to his works (62''-'). This is not the place to examine the moral ideal of the Psalmists in detail (see ETHICS) ; it is in all important features the common property of post- exilic Judaism, and it has its centre in the indi- vidual life. Only one point needs to be adverted to, in order to guard against a possible misconcep- tion.

It is found that in connexion with the idea of righteousness considerable emphasis is laid on the humane virtues. In 112* ' righteous ' and ' mer- ciful ' occur together in the description of the God- fearing man ; in v.'' of the same Psalm charity to the poor is mentioned as a condition of righteous- ness ; in 37^' 112^-" the righteous is characterized bj' willingness to lend and to give.

* Now, it is a well-known fact that in later times righteousness acquired the special sense of mercy or even alms- giving (see below), and it might he supposed that in the passages just cited we have the first indica- tion of that important change of meaning. It ia very doubtful if this view be correct. In reality, the phenomenon in question is little different from a feature we have already remarked in the pro- phetic conception of righteousness. To say that the righteous man is merciful, etc.

, is not the same thing as to identify righteousness and mercy ; all that is meant is that mercifulness is one feature of the ideal righteous character ; and any stress laid on such virtues in particular passages is amply explained by the prominence assigned to them in the moral code of Judaism. Some additional illustrations of the various kinds of human righteousness may here be given from the later writings of l.»T.

— In Mai 3W the two parties in the restored community are dis- tinguished as the ' righteous' and the ' nicked' respectively (aa in Psalms). — In 320 righteousness means jwitiJu:aH<yn througli a return of prosperity ; as also Jl 2'^ : ' the early rain m Uiktn oS )u«(t/i<:atio7i'(.iB'i5i^,— less probably, in )u»l mea«4«) ; Dn 92* ('everlasting righteousness'). —In Is24i6'2t)2p^s is a predicate of the nation of Israel ; in 26', perhaps of the theocratic parly.

— In 20^ the idea seems to be that when J" rouses Himself to the exercise of Ilis judicial functions, the inhabitants of the xvorld will learn what true piety is.— Is (145, Dn 9'i exi>ress a sense of the worthlessness of the works of right€0usne88(nlp-y) performed by the people ; the consciousness of being in the right (oftn so powerful in the Psalms) cannot maintain itself in the face of pro- longed national misfortune. Dn 8'* (?■];.

■:) is a peculiar case : the cleansingof the sanctuary is considered asa^'^wtfiTicafio", a vindi- cation of its rights against the heathen who had profaned iU 3. TUB RlGnTEOUSXESS OF GOV.— In the OT righteousness is never predicated of any other deity than J", the God of Israel, t It appears to be regarded • The same combination is met with in Proverbs (cf. 12'0 21«' 29'), and perhaps in Job (■291''). t In Ps &S. 82 many commentators And the unfamiliar idea expressed th.

at the government of the world has been delegated bv J" to inferior, semi-divine beings, the gods of the heathen. To the unrighteous judgment of tliesc subordinate deities is ascribed the perversion of right which prevails on earth. II this view were correct (which is doubtful), it would certainly show that righteousness was expected of a 1 beings to whom Divine honours were paid ; but such a re| ceseutatioo hardly contlicts with the statement made above.

KIGHTEOUSXESS IN OT RIGHTEOUSNESS IX OT 279 not as a natural attribute inseparable from the very notion of Godhead, but as one wliioh J " alone has proved Himself to possess in the positive reve- lation of Himself throujj'h the history of Israel (see Is'lS""-). The idea has its roots in the fundamental institutions of the Hebrew religion.

From the time of Moses, J" was regarded as the fountain of right in Israel, the King and Judge of His people, dispensing justice continuously through His ac- credited representatives (Dt 1").* The develop- ment of the idea is due chiefly to influences ema- nating from the prophets.

It belongs to their view of J "as an ethical I'erson haWng an independent character of His own, in contrast with the gods of the heathen, who were conceived even by their worshippers as arbitrary and capricious "bein>'s, subject to incalculable "humours and swaj'ed by self-interest. The righteousness of J" is the stead- fastness of His character, to be seen, first of all, in His inllexible determination to puni.sh Israel for its .sins (Is 28" etc.)

It comes to light in the moral order of the universe, which is just J" Himself operating in histor5' in a way that answers to the sense of right which He has implanted in human nature. In Zeph 3' His moral rule is described as having the constanej- and uniformity of the natural law that brings in tlie dawn : ' J" is righteous in the midst of her; he doeth no iniquity; mornin"; by morning he bringeth his judgment to light, Dothinj; is missing' (cf.

IIos 6° 'my judgment goeth torth as the light '). In a similar and nearly contemporary passage we read : ' The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are judgment; a (.Tod of faithfulness and without iniquity ; righteous and upright is he' (Dt 32'). This prophetic conception of the Divine righteous- ness receives a remarkable expansion in the hands of DeuteroLsaiali.

The most suggestive passage is 45'""-' ' Not in secret have I spoken, in a place of the land of darkness ; I have not said to the seed of Jacob, Seek lue in the waste. I, J", speak righteousness, proclaim uprightness ... A right- eous God and a Saviour (i-yioi p^s Vx) there is not e.\cept me' (cf. v." ' rigliteousness is gone forth from my mouth, — a word that shall not return'; and 63' ' I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save ').

Here two things are to be noted : first, that righteousness is a feature not merely of J"'s judicial action, but of His whole manner of reveal- ing Him.self in history ; and, secondly, tliat beyond the universal moral order of the world it embraces a redemptive purpose, which, however, is ultimately coextensive with the destiny of mankind.

Tlie fundamental thought would seem to be the trust- worthiness and self-consistency of J"'s character, — Hie being ever true to His own nature and purpose, — and along with that His straightforwardness in the revelation of that purpose to Israel.

In the same profound ethical sense tlie words are used in 41'° 42 45" : the upholding of Israel, the election of the ideal servant, and the raising up of Cyrus, are all moments in one comprehensive purpose of salvation which J", in virtue of His rigliteousness, steadily pursues to its glorious issue. t Elsewhere than in • Aipxpressionii of the righteous will of J", the precepts of the Iaw are iiometinies spoken of aa themselves 'righteous (Dt i», P» 19», and olten in Ps 119).

So in Dt 3310, and perhaps elsewhere (Ps 6» 11(>« etc.), the righteousness of J" means that which He requires of man, or that which la prescribc<l in the Iviw. Some writers have thought it strange that this Divine altribut« is nowhere mentioned in the Pent, in connexion with the Mosaic legislation, which, from one point of view, might •eem the most signal exhihition of J"'s righteousness in the whole history of Israel.

The explanation probably lies in the essentially prophetic character of the conception referred to in the text above, liy the prophets the term is applied not to the legi.«latlvc activity of J", but to His dealings in providince. I Of. also 4'22i "J" waa pleased, for his righteousness' sake, to magnifv revelation,' etc. Uss signiflcjint, but still notoworthv. »«< IM 43», where the terms are applied to predict'ons aa verified by the event.

Deutero-Isaiah, this precise sense of righteousnesa is rarely met with in OT (see Zee 8', Nch 9', and those passages in the Psalms where righteousness is parallel to faithfulness). Its indirect influence, however, has been very great, as appears from the remarkable way in wliich the Psalmists emphasize the gracious aspect of the attribute (see below).

The teaching of Deutero-Isaiah on this subject stands some- what ap;irt from the rest of the OT, and represents a standpoint hardly reached by subsequent writers. Righteousness appears to be conceived as a moral attribute expressing what J"'8 character is in itself, apart from Uis legal relations with men ; and it is dithcult to trace a connexion between this view of righteousness and the commoner forensic conceptions about to be considered.

Smend describes it as ' die Zuverhissigkeit mit der er sich als der Heifer Israels beweist '{/ie^.-ye*"cA.- 394 ; cf. 1st ed. 4-1 If.), and seems to derive it from the idea of J"'s being in the right in His controversy with Israel (see (a) below). Dahnan treats it simply as a manifestation of judicial righteous- nes.< on the part of Uod ((6) below).

Were it not hazardous to depart (rum the forensic usage which is so prevalent in Hebrew, one mi;:ht be tempted to suppose that we have here to do with an independent development of the notion parallel to what ia found in Arabic. For the most part, however, the idea of Divine righteousness is based on legal analogies applied to the relation between J" on tlie one hand and Israel or mankind on the other.

Here, again, there are two cases to be distinguished, (a) Not infrequently, in the prophets and elsewhere, J" appears as the plaintiff' in a \e''al action, pressing His suit against Israel, and calling for the judgment of .an ideal tribunal (Is 1'* 43-', Mic G^ etc.) When in this connexion the word ' righteous ' is emploj'ed of J", it denotes that He is in ike Wg'/iY and His adversary in the wrong in the controversy between them. The adj.

has this sense in the mouth of Pharaoh, Ex 9-'' ('J" is in the right,' etc.) It is so u.sed also in the following passages, where the righteousness of J" is acknowledged lu the punishment of Israel's sin: La l'«, Ezr 'J'», Neh 9-^, 2 Ch 12«, Du 9". Similarly, niji? in Dn 9'- '«, mpys in 1 S 12', Mic 6» ; and the verb in Ps 51 ('that thou mayest be in the right in thy sentence'). By an extension of meaning parallel to what we have alre.

idy noted in the secular sphere, this sense of rigliteousness might readily pass over into that of ethical perfection ; and there are a few instances where the word is possibly to be so understood ; cf. again Zeph 3', Dt 32*, Zee 8^ ; also Neh 9', Ps 145' etc.

(i) The prevalent conception of the OT is that in which J" is represented not as one of the parties in a lawsuit, but as the supreme Judge, who sits enthroned above the confusion and strife of the world, and dispenses absolute justice in the end to all Uis creatures. Uighteousness, accordhigly, is pre-eminently the jxidicinl attribute of God ; it is that which pertains to Him as ' the Judge of all the earth ' (Gn 18^).

J " is a righteous Judge (Jer 11">, Ps 7") ; judges the world in righteousness (Ps 98 90'^ OS") ; He sits on a throne jmlging right- eousness (9'') ; rigliteousness is the foun<l;ition of Uis throne (89'-' 97-') ; cf. 11' 36» 4S'» SU" 71'» 97" UP etc. Hence the word ma}- be expected to have the same range of meaning as the ordinary OT concep- tion of judicial righteousness, wliich we have seen to be a somewh.at wider idea than its modem equivalent, (o) It includes of course, hr.

st of all, the cardinal virtues of the judge: e.q. love of right (Jer \)'^, Ps II' 33= 9!H) ; rigorous iilipartiality in the distribution of punislinunt or reward (Job 8' 36' 37^) ; and unerring recognition of men's true moral condition (Jer 11-" '20'-, Ps 7": cf. Is 11» of the Messiah).t Its action is naturally two-sided : •n'ip-l>- in Jg 6", Ps 11' :03ii is probably dilTerent ( = man|. festAtions of judiciAl righteousness. In a sense favourable to Israel).

t ' Die gottliche Zedakah 1st dielenige Cesinnung, welche In Ihrer BeUiiitigung den wahren, d. i. sittlichen Werth Oder Unwerth einer Personlichkeit (o<ler einer Gemelnscha/t) In absolut richtiger Weiso anerkennt (Diestel, J DTK, VS6&Q, V. 179). 280 EIGHTEOUSNESS IN OT RIGHTEOUSNFSS IN OT towards the wicked it is vengeance (Jer 11" 20", Is 59'«'-, Ps 129-' etc.)

, while for the righteous it means vindication and deliverance; and usually the two sides of the idea will be displayed in the same act of judgment, the deliverance of the righteous being ell'ected through the destruction of the wicked. (/3) But frequently the second is so emphasized that the other is almost or quite left out of view ; and this tendency is so pronounced as almost to bring about a transformation of the whole idea of Diiine righteousness.

Thus in virtue of His righteousness J" establishes the righteous (Ps 7"), and jjleads the cause of His people (Slic 7*) j He answers their praj-er by terrible things in righteousness {Ps 65'), etc. So in the many places where the righteousness of God is referred to as an object of praise (Ps 7" 22»' 35=8 40>» 51" 71'"- '» SO" 145'), it is not the abstract justice of J"'s dealings that calls forth adoration, but His proved readiness to help and bless His people.

This aspect of right- eousness may be defined as the j'ustt/i/ing activity of God. (7) Once more, the name righteousness is given to the act of justification in which the Divine attribute is manifested, and to its external conse- quences as seen in the lot of the justified. In other words, righteousness is synonymous with salvation {is 461^ 515.6.8 59i6t.^ Ps 4011J 5116 7J151.

t)82 etc )_ This objective righteousness is spoken of indiffer- ently as that of God the Justiher, or of men the justified * (cf. Ps IIP ^^'ith 112^, and see the passages cited above amongst the illustrations of human righteousness). It should be added that in many cases the context hardly determines whether it be the subjective attribute in the Divine mind or the outward embodiment of it in providence which is to be understood.

It is evident that the OT writers know nothing of the sharp contrast often drawn by theologians between the righteousness and the mercy of God. Kighteousness and saving activit}', so far from being opposed to each other, are harmonious prin- ciples of action in the Divine nature ; J" is a right- eous God and a Saviour (Is 45-').

Accordingly, the Psalmists constantly appeal to the righteousness of God, not only for judgment (22-'2 So, ), but for deliverance (31' 71- 143"), for quickening (5), for the answer to prayer (143'), etc. Again, right- eousness is frequently associated with other attri- butes expressing the gracious attitude of J" to His people, e.g. mercy or grace {icn Ps 36" '" 89''' 103" 145"), faithfulness (n-x, .i:ex Zee 8', Ps 36" 40"' 8S'2 89l-'96'^ lig'"-'*' '143'), c'ompns.

nnn (]i:r 116'), goodness (145'), etc. These parallelisms are not to be pressed so far as to identify righteousness with grace or faithfulness ; all that is implied is that in J"'s providential action various attributes meet, so that the same act may from dillerent points of view be regarded as an exercise of righteousness, or of faithfulness, or of mercy. Still they suiBce to show that in the mind of the WTiters there was no sense of opposition between righteousness and grace in God.

How far their idea is from mere retributive justice, — the constant et perpetua voluntas suum cuique tribuendi, — appears with almost startling force from the singular wish of Ps 69-'' that the wicked may not come into .I"'s righteousness {i.e. have no share in His justifying activity), or the not less remarkable prayer of 143'- ^ ' Answer me in thy righteousness. And enter not into judgment with tliy servant : for in thy sight shall none living be in the right.'

+ Nay _ • ' Gottes Gerechtigkeit hat einen mehr ursiichlichen, aktiven, die menschliche einen melir sckundaren und receptiven Char- ftkter, jiine ist eine Kraft, dicse ein Zustand' (Duhni on I's 112). t Here ' enter into jndg-ment ' apparently means to appear .as the accuser in a legal process (Wellhausen). The I'salmist does not shrink from the jnd^'nient of God, in which His .

lijlf Is operative, luit only from a contro\-ersy with the Aliuijj;iity, like that io -vhich Job so recklessly engaged. more, the principle of retiibution is in Ps 62" expressly deduced not from the righteousness of God, but from His grace : ' to thee belongeth grace : for thou requitest each man according to his works ' ; here the meaning must be that it is an act of condescending grace on the part of God to take cognizance of the diilerences in haman conduct.

On the other Land, however, these examples do not justify certain extreme theories that have sometimes been built upon them. They do not, e.g., warrant the definition of righteousness as God's fidelity to the Covenant (Kautzsch, Riehm, etc.) No doubt, faithfulness to covenant obliga- tions is a part of the ethical righteousness of J' when once a covenant has been established ; but there is nothing to suggest that the attribute comes into play only with the covenant relation, or tha'.

its sphere of exercise is confined to the maintenanca of tlie Covenant with Israel. Again, it is a.; exaggeration to deny that retribution is an ele ment of the Divine righteousness. This has been done by Diestel and Kitschl, who hold that the righteousness of God has a positive reference only to the purpose of salvation, and that retribution has merely an accidental connexion with it in so far as the punishment of the wicked may be neces- sary for the establishing of the righteous.

The distinction here attempted to be drawn is illusory. The punishment of sin is directly connected 'w-ith the Divine righteousness in such passages as Is 5'* 1023 2817, Ps 711 506_ 1 K 8^2 etc.; and if this does not more fiequently occur, the reasonable explana- tion is that the matter was too self-evident to require to be insisted on.

But the mistake of both these theories, as of others that might be men- tioned, is that they tend to dissociate an OT idea from the historic institutions in which it was incorporated in Hebrew thou^jht, and try to recon- struct it on the unsafe foundation of an abstract definition. The language of the OT is not scho- lastic but practical ; its writers do not analyze and expound ideas, but express in vivid popular speech the spiritual truths by which their religious life was sustained.

That the Divine righteousness was mainly conceived by them as a judicial attribute is beyond dispute, and they must be presumed to include under it all that the term would imply if used of a human judge, — the punishment ot the guilty as well as the vindication of the innocent.

The prominence which is given to the latter aspect of the notion is certainlj' a fact of the utmost significance for theolo":y, but it involves no de- parture from the analogy of secular justice as administered in ancient Israel.

If it be considered that the Psalmists and other writers were accus- tomed to look on a judge as the natural protector and patron of the oppressed, and, further, that they were always confident in the substantial justica of their own cause before God, there need be no difficulty in recognizing the es.sentially judicial character of their conception of the Divine right- eousness, although to tueir minds it presents on the whole the aspect of grace. Another point may be referred to.

The OT does not appear to teach a justification of sinners as such. In Protestant theology, according to Ritsohl, justification is a synthetic judgment of God, expressing, that is, His resolve, for the sake of Jesus Christ, to treat as righteous those who have no righteousness in themselves. Assumin" that to be a correct statement 'of the evangelicd doctrine, we have merely to observe that the OT does not proceed quite so far.

It rather leads us to think of justification as an analytic judgment, a ileclaration of righteousness by God in favour of such as are inherently in the right. Those who are justified are, in fact, sinful men, — though EIGHTEOUSXESS IN OT RIGHTEOUSNESS IN NT 281 never, of course, ' wicked ' (D'l'jn), — but still, in the relative sense in which the word is used, they are the 'righteous'; and it is qud righteous, not gud sinners, that they are objects of the justifying decree of God.

It is true that in the actual ex- perience of OT believers this order of ideas is generally reversed. The consciousness of being in the right is seldom strong enough to be long main- tained in the absence of the outward marks of God's approval in the shape of temporal good fortune ; the case of .lob is quite exceptional.

The external justification, therefore, as a rule comes first in the thought of OT ^mters ; and from it they derive the assurance that they are in- lierently riglilcous before God. And as the with- drawal of outward prosperity is a proof of sin in the righteous, so the act of justilioation is equiva- lent to the pardon of sin ; cf. Job o3'^, where the conversion ol a sinner under the chastening hand of the Almighty is said to be followed by the restoration of his righteousness.

Thus the teach- ing of the OT may be said to culminate in the thought of righteousness as a gift of God, an idea appearing most clearly perhaps in Ps 24° 69^, Is 4gi3 515. » 5(ji_ £ij tiigse passages we find the nearest approximation to what we mean by ' im- puted ' righteousness. The idea of the righteous- ness of one person being imputed to another is, it need hardly be said, entirely foreign to the OT.

In late Hebrew the word npi:i underwent a remarkable change of meaning, for a full account of which the reader is referred to the valuatjle treatise of Dalman cited below (under Literature). A few points may here be noted. (1) Id the sphere of private morals r\p~i)i became almost equivalent to the OT "ipn ; i.e. it denoted any exercise of benevolence which goes beyond a man's legal obligations.

Obviously, this is a development of the humanitarian aspect of the idea which we have seen to be prominent in the prophets and tlie Hagiographa, and it reaches its climax in the sense of altu^'jirinij (see lit Ol). Dalman considers that the word had this sense in the Aramaic dialect before its a<loption by the JoA"8, but this is hardly proved by the examples he adduces (p. 13).

It is not necessary to take the original n;;iy in Dn 4^^^ OS anything else than right li\ ing ; and tile occurrence of the 'ater sense in the Targ, ((In Ib'i*) is no sure evidence of an independent Aramaic development. It seems more natural to suppose that the usiige of the Targ. registere a change which the idea had undergone in the religious thought of later Judaism. (2) !n the judicial sphere .ipiii has ceased to be a properly Judicial attribute.

It U a consideration which comes in to moderate the operation of strict Justice ({'"n), so that the ques- tion is actually raised, and answered with much ingenuity, how, in accordance with OT injunctions, :\p'\'i is to be exercised in Judgment.* This, of course, applies equally to the Divine righteouaiiuss and to that of a human judge. Here, again, wo have the one-sided exaggeration oi a single element in the old Hebrew notion of Judicial righteousness.

Originally it included both the exercise of impartial Justice and a readiness to espouse the cause of the opi>ressed. Eventually — jcirtly through the parallel development in the sphere of private morals, and partly, as Dalman observes (p. 18), from a more developed sense of formal right — the two ideas proved to be incompatible, and the name T\p-\:i was appropriated to that which, strictly speaking, haa nothing to do with a Judge's fun<;tions at all.

The question arises, To what time can these changes, or the lieginnings of them, be trace<l back? Here the evidence of the LXJC is of importance. Where the reference is to righteous- nen manifested by God to man, npi:£ is not infrequently rendered by iUriJ^ri>^ (Dt 625 2413, Ps 24 (23) » 33 (32) » 103 (102)«, Is V" 2si' 6910, Dn 918) or Uut (Is ."iC). For human righteousness we have only Ixi«< in Ezk 18'^- 22 and iAit:ft6ffv*«,f ( = almB) in Dn 4".

On the other hand, inninriti, stands for Tcn in (in 1919 20la 2123 242' 321O, Ex 16ia 34', Pr 2028, is U3'. Tlie'se facts indioate a tendency to confuse the ideas of r^p'i'i and ion, though they do not show it to be far advanced ; sumething must be allowed for the didlculty of rendering in another language the peculiar shades of meaning assumed by the Hebrew term.— In ^he original Hebrew of IJcn .Sira, the later sense of npis appears (3" 830 [cf.

I>r 16«J 71" 40"), alongside of the more general OT sense (123 iei4 4413 61)) : some passages are ambiguous (40" etc.)— Since the OT probably contains •Some of Dalman's tUufltrations are very striking (p. bt.y B.g. it is said that ft judge exercises righteousness when ho pays out of his own pocket the One he has imposed on a poor writings of more recent date than the Greek translation of the Pent., or even the age of Ben .Sira (c. 200 B.C.)

, it would not be surprising if in some parts of the Oanon the idea of righteousness were found to have undergone the transforma- tions just described. Yet, as has been already said, it is doubtful if this is the case. The OT emphasizes humanity or mercy as an element in the ethical ideal ; but it is this etliical ideal itself, and not any particular virtue, which is described by tlie term righteou.»ines3.

So a;;ain in the admini- stration of justice ; righteousness, with whatever latitude of meaning, is always an attribute proper to the judge, never a foreign influence brought in to modify judicial action. Tliero is no foundation in OT for the rabbinical maxim, ' Where judg- ment is there is no room for ::pTS, and where r\pi^ is there is DO judgment' (Dalman, p. 6). LiTERATUBE.

— Diestel, * Die Idee der Oerechtigkeit, vorziig- Uch im XT' (JDTh, IstiO, 173-253) ; Ortloph, ' Ueber den Begrifl von p'Vi und den wurzelverwaudten Wortern im 2teD Theil des Pr. Jes.' (Xeitschr. fur die ges. luih. Th. u. E. 1S60, 401- 4'2i5) ; Eautzsch, Ueber die Derivate des Starmnes pis, etc. (ISSl); Orelli, 'Einige ATliche Pramisse zur NT VersohnunM- lehre : II. Die Oerechtigkeit Gottes ' {Ztschr, Jur Kirchl. \Vu8. u. K, Leben, 1884, 73 ff.)

; Koenig, ' Essai sur revolution de I'idi^ede justice chez les prophetes 116breux ' {Annales du Mlts6e GuiiiK't, 1804, 121-148); Dalman, Die richtertiche (Jerechtinkeit im A T (1897). The OT Theologies of Oehler 8 (1891), 176 £f., 285 ff. ; Schultz* (ISsU), 420 fl., 640 a.; Kiehm (1S89), 270 fit., 2S3ff. ; Dillmann (1^95), 270ff.,435t.; Bennett (1896), 103, 173; Marti, Geschichte der lurael, ketiffion (1897), 134 ff., 170 ; Smend, Lehrbitch der AT lieliffionsijesclt.

i (1893), 410-423, 2(1899), 388-394 (the best statement); Hitschl, RechtJertMjumj u, VersOhnuw/'^, ii. 102ft"., 205 fl.; G. A. Smith, Imiali (Expositor's Bible), ii. (1600) 214 ff.; W. R. Smith, Prophets'', 71 f., 389. J. SKINNER. RIGHTEOUSNESS in NT.— Tlie words denotina ' rigliteous ' and ' righteousness ' in NT, dlKaios and diKaioavi'ii, primarily signify what is conformable to an ideal or standard, agreement with what ought to be.

Tliese terms naturally take their colour from the system of morals in connexion with wliich they are used. Rijjhteousness will be a very noble or a very coraraon|)lace virtue, accord- ing to the standards by whicli men measure char- acter and conduct. Accordingly we find that, in profane Greek, righteousness is chietly a social virtue. Usage and custom prescribe the standard of righteousness and measure its elevation. In NT, however, righteousness is, above all tliing.

s, a religious word ; it is riglitness according to the Divine standard ; it is conformity to the will and nature of God Himself. Since, therefore, the character of (iod is conceived in NT teaching as absolute moral jierfection, righteousness in men becomes a name for that disposition and method of life which accord with God's holy will ; in short, righteousness is Godlikuriess. The adjective ouaiot occurs with nearly equal frequency in the Synoptic Gosjiels and in the Pauline Ejjistles.

The noun oiKaioavvri occurs seven times in Matthew, once in I.uke, and not at all in Mark, and is more frequently used by St. Paul than hy all the other NT writers combined. In studying the NT concept of righteousness it will be convenient to begin witli tlie Sjnoptic Gospels, with special reference to tlie teaching of Jesus, then to consider the Pauline usage, and finally to notice that of otlier NT writers. We shall thus be led to a general estimate of tlie NT doctrine.

(A) KlGIITKOUSNESS IN THE SYNOPTIC Go.SI'ELS. — We may here take as our startiii'-point that saying of Jesus to His iiisci]iles: 'Except ynur righteou.sness shall exceed the rigliteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven' (Mt 5**). The righteousness which He required was in some essential respect hi'dier than that which was current in the life and ideals of the Jewish people of His time.

We must therefore hrielly describe the popular Jewish idea of righteousness. That idea grew out of the current conception of God and of His revelation. Righteousness was thought to consist in obedience to commandments, and the nature of the Divine commands was viewed quite 282 KIGUTEOUSNESS IN NT KIGHTEOUSNFSS IN NT Buperficially.

The rich youn;^ man who came to Jesus asking wliat he sliuuld do to inherit eternal life, is an illustration of the view which the Jews took of the commaudments (Mt 19""^-). He said that he had kept them all. His conception evidently was tliat to refrain from the outward sins which they forbade — stealing, lying, Sahbath- breaking, and the like — was to keep the command- ments.

Only a superficial conception of the im- port and bearing of the commandments could have permitted him to make the claim that he had kept them all from his youth. The same faulty notion of cne real moral requirements of the law lay at ths root of the pride and self-rigliteousness of the Pharisees. They were able to think themselves rigliteous only because they measured themselves by an imperfect standard, an inadequate idea of the high demands which the law made upon the inner life.

Religion was conceived as a legal alfair, and therefore righteousness consisted prima- rily in the observance of all the rites and cere- monies prescribed in the law, and in refraining from all the acts which the law forbade. Righteousness was thus placed too much in externals and too little in the state of the heart. It exaggerated the ritual features of religion, and overlooked its deeper spiritual requirements upon conduct and life.

Either of two results might flow from this extemalism in religion — results which would be equally detrimental to a healthy religious life. On the one hand, if one supposed himself to have done all that was required, he would easily fall a prey to spiritual pride, for had he not achieved this lofty height ot goodness by his own exertions? On the other hand, if a man felt that he had failed to do the Divine will and to win acceptance with God, he would naturally become hopeless and despondent.

We accordingly find that the religious life of the Jewish people, to a great extent, oscillated between self-righteous- ness and despair. Jesus must therefore have demanded something vastly superior to this ob- servance of ritual, this conformity to command- ments and prohibitions, when He said, ' Seek ye first God's kingdom and righteousness ' (Mt 6^). What then is that truerighteousness, thatSiKaioo-i/xT; 9eoD, which Christ requires and fosters in the lives of His disciples !

This question can best be answered by appeal to the Sermon on the Mount, a collection of the sayings of Jesus, some of which were uttered on various occasions. They are grouped together as illustrating chiefly the nature and demands of ' God's kingdom and righteous- ness.' In the 'beatitudes are described the qualities which fit men for the kingdom of God — the characteristics which constitute true righteous- ness.

They are such as spiritual poverty, a sense of one's weakness and sin ; meekness, merciful- ness, purity, and peacemaking. They are quali- ties which stand opposed to pride, presumption, and selfishness. They are, above all, qualities of tLe inner life. They describe what a man is in the secret springs of his motives and dispositions (Mt 5'-»). The true righteousness is a heroic virtue.

It is founded in strong convictions of truth and duty, and is willing to sutler, if need be, for the truth (Mt 510-13) xhe truly righteous, the sons of the king- dom, have a saving, illuminating power. They are the world's 'salt' and 'light.' 'They preserve the world from moral corruption, and they shed abroad upon men the light of love and helpfulness (Mt 5"'"). Again, the true righteousness is not a destructive, but a constructive principle.

The righteousness of Christ's kingdom will not break with the past. It will conserve all that was true and good in OT religion, and build upon it. It requires that the earlier and imperfect system of Judaism should not be rejected, but fulfilled. Iti true ideal content is to be develo|iud out of the limited and pro\ isional form in wliicli it had been apprehendea in earlier times, into its destined universality and spirituality.

The Divine law which has been revealed is to be observed and taught in its essential spiritual content, and not merely in its outer form, and thus the righteous- ness of the sons of the kingdom will 'exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees' (Mt 5"-»). Then follow several Illustrations of the true righteousness. The law prohibiting murder had commonly been taken merely as a prohibition of an overt act. Not to kill another was to obey it.

But Jesus places right and wrong, not in overt acts, but in inner motives. He who cherishes murder and hate — the passions from whicli murder springs — is, morally speaking, a murderer. P'rom hate murder would spring were there no outward constraint preventing it. But he who would com- mit an overt act of sin but for an outward re- straint, has really committed it in his heart already (Mt S-'"-"). The same principle holds good respecting sensual passion.

The impure thought, the carnal desire, is itself, in God's sight, the act of adultery. Every etl'ort must be made, every necessary self-denial endured, by those who would be truly righteous, to break the power of evil thought and to exclude impurity from the heart (Mto-''-'-). Three further illustrations are given. The first concerns truthfulness. The Jews had been accustomed to make a fictitious distinction be- tween oaths taken in J"'s name, which they had regarded as sacred, and other oath.

s, \\hich they had felt at liberty to violate. Jesus discounten- ances not only this false distinction, but all such profane appeals to sacred names or objects. Those who confirm their assertions and promises by such oaths thereby betray the fact that their simple word is not regarded as binding, and thus show themselves not to be really truthful. The simple assertion should be enough. The honest man's word is as good as his most solemn oath.

Be absolutely truthful, says Jesus, and the meaning and occasion of these irreverent oaths in common use will completely disappear (Mt 5^'^). The next Ulustration respects revenge. The OT civil law of retaliation — which, at best, was a rude kind of justice incident to an undeveloped ethical code — was commonly construed as a permission to take private revenge. This disposition to do the oH'ender an injury like that which he has done, Jesus discountenances. Better suffer injustice.

He says, than resort to revenge, which springs from hate, and is wholly incompatible with love (Mt 3'^-"). The third illustration deals with the contrast of love and hate. From the OT maxim, ' Tliou shalt love thy neighbour,' many had drawn the inference, 'Thou shalt hate thine enemy.' Then, by making 'neighbour' mean ' friend,' it was easy to find in the maxim a justifi- cation for hatred towards personal enemies. This inference Jesus utterly repudiates.

The right- eousness of the kingdom recjuires that we should love all men ; that we should seek the good even of our enemies. We may not hate even those who injure us. The gospel has no place for hatred, because it is essentiaJly un-Godlike. God hates no one ; He blesses all, even the wicked. So must the man do who possesses God's righteousness. Love is the essential principle of moral perfection, and hatred is the opposite of love.

This lova which finds its perfect exemplification in the character and action of God is the law of the Christian life. The Christian ideal is complete- ness of love ; conformity to the moral complete- RIGHTEOUSXESS IX XT KlGllTEOUSXESS IX XT 283 ness of God'8 own perfectly loving character (Mt Tlie next group of passages illustrates liow men are to 'do their righteousness.' The first illustra- tion is drawn from alms-giving. Benoticence is not to be o.stentatious.

Tliose who give alms to lie seen of men must do so from sellish motives. Thej', indeed, obtain their appropriate reward, but it is not the Divine approval (Mt 6'"''). The next example is prayer. A false righteou.sne.ss leads men to ])erlorm their devotions in public that they nuiy create the impression that they are unusually pious. The true inner righteousness dictates that men pray in secret.

Nor is prayer to be based on the idea that God is a reluctant Giver whose favour is to be won by the wearisome repetition of the same wish or cry. God is, on the conlrarj", a willing Giver who knows all our wants in advance, and onlj- desires that we be willing to receive His mercies. A simple sincere request is therefore enough. Then follows the model prayer illustrating the true spirit, as well as the simple form of prayer (Mt 0^''°).

Jesus then shows that fasting performed with a mere semblance of humility and sorrow is no part of true righteousness, but that it may be such when practised unostentatiously from real inward con- trition (Mt e'"-'*). Then follows a series of striking contrasts between the worldly and selfish epiiit and supreme concern for the spiritual life. Tlie latter must be placed first, and must sub- ordinate to itself all other interests. Every life must have one main direction.

There can be but one supreme choice. That should be made central in life which Ls truly central. Other things, so far as needful, Gud will supply. Seek, then, first His kingdom, and His rigiiteousness ; and all those things shall be added unto you (Mt 6'"'). It is not necessary for our present purpose to follow this series of saj'ings further. It illustrates, better than isolated u.

ses of the words ' righteous ' and ' righteousness' could do, the real content of Jesus' doctrine of righteousness as the Synoptic tradition has preserved it. It does not, indeed, yield us any formal definition of righteousness, but it shows us what righteousness is by exhibiting its characteristics and by showing how it expresses itself in human conduct. It leaves no doubt that the righteousness of the kingdom is essentially liodlike character.

If it is not precisely identical with love, it is, at any rate, absolutely inseparable from it. Love is the completeness (rtXfiorjjs) of God, and the completeness of character in men con.sists in love. Righteousness appears to be con- ceived of as the dill'erent kinds of right action which have their spring in love. IJightcousness is never presented in our sources as a mere juilicial jirin- ciple in contrast to mercy or grace.

It is right conduct and right character, both of which are RTounded in love. Nor does the word bear the semi-formal sense in which we shall find it em- ployed by St. Paul. It is not thought of under the form of a status or relation ; it is used rather in the sini]ile ethical sense, to inclmle the qualities of a character which is accei)table to God. Hi) UlCJHTKOUSNESS IN THE WitlTINOS OF ST. Paul. — In several instances the phrase SiKaioji'i'r) 0(ou is used to denote an attribute of God.

In Ro 3' St. Paul asks the rhetorical (juestion : ' But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness of God, what shall we say '! ' The context shows that the ' righteousness of God ' here means essentially the same as the faithfulness or truthfulness of God (cf. vv.»- *). His righteousness is His faithful- ness to His own nature and promises. If men are antrue to Him, their falseness will but set His righteousness in the stronger relief. Again, in 3"- " St.

Paul speaks of the IrSeiiit TJjt dmcuoaunis auTov wliich God has made in the death of Christ, and which should prevent men from supposing that because God treated leniently the sins of men in past times. He is indillerent to sin or lightly regards it. Here, then, SiKaiocuyri 6eoO must denote that self-respecting quality of holiness in God, that reaction of His nature against sin, which must find expression in condemnation of it.

Righteousness in this sense is the reaction of God's holy nature against sin which expresses itself in the Divine wrath (dpyij d(oO). In the prevailing use of the word by St. Paul, however, righteousness means the state of accept- ance witli God into wliich one enters by faith.

Tliis is its meaning in Ro 1" ' For therein (in the gospel) is revealed a righteousness of God by faith unto faith ; as it is WTitten, But the rigliteous shall live by faith ' ; also in Ro 3-'- ~ ' But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the pro- phets ; even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe.'

We cannot accept the view of some, that in these pas- sages also ' the righteousness of God ' refers to the cliaracter of God, although we grant that between the idea of righteousness as an attribute of God and righteousness as a gift of God, a state of acceptance with God into wliicli God introduces one, there is an essential connexion (cf. Sanday-Headlam on Ro 1"). The righteousness which God confers has its ground in the righteousness of God.

The state of acceptance into which the believer is represented as inducted is a state of fellowship and hannony with God. The conditions of being accounted righteous are such as God's perfect character pre- scribes. These conditions may be summed up in the woTd/aith. Now faith is, in St. Pauls view, a personal relation with God mediated tlirough Christ. It involves by its very nature sjiiritual union with God, obedience to His will, and increas- ing likeness of character to Him.

There is thus a close connexion between the righteous character of God and the righteous statii>,' \i hich He reckons as belonging to believers on condition of faith. But, formally considered, they are quite difl'erent. The meaning of SiKaioavprj now under considera- tion explains the meaning of justification (Siraiwiris), and of the reckoning of faitli for rigiiteousness (Ro 4).

To J list if 1/ means in Pauline phraseology, to regard and treat one as righteous j to confer the gift of righteousness : in other words, to declare one accepted with God. Tliis judgment of justifica- tion God pronounces upon condition of faith. The phrase 'to reckon faith for righteousness' is a periplirasis for 'to justify.' To declare righteous upon condition of faitli, means the same as to reckon faith for righteousness.

In both cases the meaning, expressed in a somewhat formal and legal way, is simply this : that faith is the necessary con- dition of a gracious salvation. Salvation is a free gift; faith is its humble and thankful acceptance. §t. Paul is fond of conceiving this process of salvation in forensic forms of thought, and of intcrpretinjr it by judicial analogies. This tendency is due to Ids OT and Rabbinic training. None the less does he lay stress upon its ethical and spiritual signilicance.

If justification is a ' forensic act,' there corresponds to it and is involved in it a spiritual renewal. If righteousness is a gift or a state, it is also a character. It is an inward state as well as an outward one. It would be a great mistake to repre- sent St. Paul's doctrine of salvation as luedomi- nantly legal or forensic.

He has indeed brought over from his Jewish training the legal conception of righteousness as an acquittal before God and of justification as the decree of acquittal, but his intenselv ethical principles of grace and faith put quite a diU'erent content into tuese thought-forme 284 RIGHTEOUSNESS IN NT RIMjMON from what they have in Jewish theology. Essen- tially, St.

Paul is far more of a mystic than of a legalist, though he still speaks, to some extent, the language of legalism in wliich he had heen horn and trained. Cf. Thackeray, Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Jewish Thought, 87 ft'. The question arises : If faith is reckoned for righteousness, is it hecause faith is synonymous with righteousness or a substitute for it ? Faith is not righteousness in the sense of being so inherently excellent that it may be regarded as equivalent to righteousness.

The power and value of faith are in its object. Faith is f^Teat because it allies man with God. Faith is union with Christ, and this union involves and guarantees increasing Christ- likeness, and Christlikeness is righteousness. The imputation of faith for righteousness involves a gracious treatment of man on the part of God ; it is an anticipatory declaration of what the grace of God will increasingly realize in those who in faith open their lives to the power of the Divine life.

Justification means an entire forgiveness and an increasing attainment of righteousness. (C) Righteousness in the Johannine Writ- ings.— In one passage only in the Fourth Gospel is the word Sixaios applied to God : ' O righteous Father, the world knew thee not, but I knew thee' (l"''^). The idea of God's righteousness here appears to be that it is the quality which prevents Him from passingthe same judgment upon Christ's disciples which He passes upon the sinful world.

Upon this equitableness of God, Jesus bases His con- fidence in asking that special blessings be conferred upon His disciples. The thought is similar in 17", wliere the Father is designated as S.yioi. As the One who is absolutely good, — wholly separate from all that is sinful and WTong, — God is besought to guard from e^nl those \\ hom He lias given to His !son.

In both these cases the righteousness or holiness of God is conceived of, not as a forensic or retributive quality, but as God's ovm moral self, consistency, His faithfulness to His own equity. In 1 Jn (1' 2^) God is described as Jkaios, and, in both cases, in a sense closely akin to that which we have found in the Gospel. ' If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous (Tna-ris Kal Skoios) to forgive us our sins' (V).

The correlation of the word Si/caios with the word Tricrris, as well as the entire context, shows that righteousness here is that quality of God which would certainly lead Him to forgive those who repent. It wotild be inconsistent in God — contrary alike to His pro- mises and to His nature — not to forgive the peni- tent, and to exert upon his life the purifying in- fluences of His grace.

In the remaining passage (2-^), the term ' righteous ' has a broader meaning, and designates the moral perfection of God in general, as the type and ideal of all goodness in man : ' If ye know that he (God) is righteous, ye know that every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.' Since God is essentially righteous, those who are begotten of Him must also be righteous.

A similar thought is presented in 3', but in the reverse order : ' He that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he (Christ) is righteous.' As against the Gnostic over-emphasis of knowledge, the apostle insists that the mere intellectual possession of truth is not enough. Truth, or righteousness, is not merely something to be known, but something to bo done (1° 3-'). The man is righteous who walks in the truth as his native element (2 Jn *, 3 .

In "• ') ; in whom the truth dwells, controlling and guiding him (Jn 8", 1 Jn 2') ; who belongs to the truth and draws from it the strength and inspiration of his life (Jn 18", 1 Jn 2»' 3'»). Doctrine and life are in- separable. {D) Righteousness in other >T "Writings., There is nothing characteristically dillerent in th« conception of righteousness in the minor types of NT teaching from what we have already tound.

The word is almost alwaj's used in the practical, religious sense of the good life which Christ in the gospel requires and imparts. Both James and Hebrews allude to righteousness in the sense of a gift of God on condition of faith (Ja 2=», He 11'), but both these Epistles generally speak of it aa that good life which the Christian loves and seeks.

In the Petrine Epistles righteousness is the holy life in contrast to sin, as in 1 P 2^ ' that we, hav- ing died unto sins, might live unto righteousness.' In Revelation righteousness is predicated of the judgment (19", cf. IS''), and is said to be 'done' (cf. 1 Jn) by those who are righteous in the world to come (22").

From this sketch it appears that the NT presents the idea of righteousness mainly in two ways : (1) as a quality of God's nature and action, and (2) as the cnaracter which God requires of man. The first of these ideas is the logical basis of the second. "What God requires is grounded in what God is. What, now, is the actual content of that Divine righteousness which is the test and measure of all good life in men ? What is the ethical nature of God? St.

John replies that it is love, and the whole NT conception of God agrees with this answer. Righteousness is an activity or aspect of love. When it is used to denote more especially the law and penalty side of God's nature, it is the self- respecting, self-preservative aspect of holy love — love as it appears in forbidding all sin and en- joining conformity to the perfect standard of uprightness. Righteousness is an element of love, ^^ ithout which love would be mere benevolence or good-nature.

But since love is eternally holy, and is a consuming fire to all sin, justice and judgment are the foundation of God's throne. In the NT, righteousness is sometimes used more comprehen- sively to denote the equity or uprightness of God in general. His correspondence to what He ought to be ; sometimes more narrowly to denote the judicial aspect of His nature and action. In the latter sense it may be defined as the self-respect of perfect love. LiTERATURB.

— The NT idea of righteousness is more or less fully discussed in all Commentaries and Biblical Theolo^es, The Pauline doctrine is carefully considered in Meyer and Sanday-Ueadiam on Rouiaiis, and in Morison on Uamaiis Third. The general subject receives attention in the ST Theologies of Baur, Weiss, Beyschlag, Bovon, and Holtzmann, and special aspects of it in Wendt's Teaching of Jemui, Bruce's Kinodom of God, and St. Pmd's Conception of Chrvitianitjj, and Stevens* raxdiiie Theology.

A careful study of the words will be found in Oremer's Bib.-Theol. Lex. of HT Greek. G. B. Stevens.