#83. Romans 3:21 – The Righteousness Attested, Part 1 (Justification Series, Part VI)

Part III: Our Justification, Confirmed

Yet now, apart from law, a righteousness of God is manifest (being attested by the law and the prophets)…

Characteristic Four: It Is Attested

Whenever I am sharing the evangel with a new, unsuspecting person, I often skip the parenthetical statement which we are looking at in today’s study.

I know, I know. It’s so mean, right? Why are you skipping a portion of God’s word, you dullard?

Well, for one – ouch. Thanks, hypothetical meanie.

And for two – it is not that this statement is “less” important by any means. If God’s righteousness were not attested by the law and the prophets, then Paul’s message would rather be an abrupt tonal shift, and would lack foundation.

We must make an important distinction, first, between manifest and attest. The root stem of “manifest” is appear, while the root stem of “attest” is witness. These are, indeed, two different terms, and should be treated as such. The “law” and “the prophets” bear witness to the righteousness of God. There are no shortage of verses to demonstrate this point, and we will cite a small handful from both. Yet the law and the prophets do not provide for us a manifestation of this righteousness. Such a burden belongs solely to the crucifixion of Christ.

The distinction here is quite clear, and can only be obscured if, say, you have spent your entire life believing that God’s righteousness is “manifest” in His divine judgments, or perhaps His mercy. And, true as it may be that His judgments and mercy are just, we surely should not go above God’s word. God does not proclaim that His righteousness is manifest in any other way for us to grasp except the cross. All of His judgments, and all of His mercies point in some measure at the cross, and would be invalid if not for the cross, since the cross alone faces sin itself head on, in full measure.

When we read this parentheses, I cannot help but look back at Romans 1:2, where we read that the “evangel of God” was “promised beforehand through the prophets in the holy scriptures.” This, too, is precise word use: not that Paul’s evangel was revealed beforehand, but promised to be given beforehand. Similarly, Paul says, later in Romans 15:4, that “whatever was written before, was written for this teaching of ours, that through the endurance and the consolation of the scriptures we may have expectation.” Again, it is not that what was written before was this teaching of Paul’s, but was written in preparation for it.

The Fun Technicals

The word “attest” is matureo. It appears 76 times in the New Testament, almost half of which are found in John’s account. This is one of those rare cases where a second Greek word, dokimos, is occasionally translated “attest” in the New Testament as well. On its surface, this is a frustrating dynamic, and appears to lack harmony. As with any other alleged discrepancy, however, a simple word study dispels all problems.

Indeed, observing matureo in its every use reveals that it is better translated testify, in various ways. It is only when the word matureo is written as an active verb participle (that is, a verbal adjective, in the active state,) that it is translated as attested.

In contrast, the word dokimos is most often translated as “qualified,” and is only translated attested in two places: Romans 14:8, and 16:10. Now, the headstrong side of me persists that we could translate both passages here as qualified also. Romans 16:10, for example, is written in the accusative case, singular. This is the same inflection as in 2 Tim. 2:15, where Paul writes, “endeavor to present yourself qualified.” There is no good reason, then, that Rom. 16:10 cannot say “Greet Appelles, qualified in Christ.”

There is no good reason that Rom. 14:8, similarly, cannot say “For he who in this is slaving for Christ is well pleasing to God and qualified by men.” Personally, I am confused as to the purpose for “attested” in both cases, since “attested” is a proper verb participle for matureo. I believe this to be in error, and would insist that the concordant crew rectify, or at least provide a darned good idiomatic explanation, as to why these two words should be translated the same way.

Anyway, the root stem of matureo is “WITNESS.” This should be in line with “promised” beforehand, or written “for” us. The righteousness of God as displayed in Romans, as the premise for our justification, is witnessed to in the Old Testament, but not manifested in the Old Testament. God is methodical, and would reveal that which could not be logically (or even emotionally) conveyed to us until the right demonstration could be made.

The argument I’ve received from most churchgoers is that manifest and attest are magically interchangeable, because they read the Old Testament once and they recognized that God is just because they’ve read Exodus (thankfully, these folk don’t call me “dullard”… until they become Instagram keyboard warriors, that is!) This must be the case for many of the arguments they make to hold water. Few admit to it, for this concedes that they are changing the word of a just God. Yet when this discrepancy is pointed out to them, suddenly “manifest” and “attest” must be blended! Such error discounts God’s methodology, and has no place here.

The righteousness of God being witnessed in the Old Testament points forward to Paul’s message; the passages which witness to His righteousness are, in great part, meant to be reread upon realizing the manifestation of God’s righteousness through His Son’s faith. We will meditate further on this distinction at the end of this study.

Our Agenda

It would be too much to do a comprehensive study of attestations of God’s righteousness; such a prospect is too much to ask, and would kill the already-slow momentum of this study. To be fair, proof of this attestation will be given throughout chapter 4, in relating Abraham’s faith to Paul’s message for us today. As most know, Abraham’s journey occurs early in Genesis anyway. Paul’s point (as we will show) is to practically demonstrate how we are meant to understand the Old Testament in light of his message – thus a deep meditation on this is simply not necessary at present.  (Besides… you could turn to almost any page in the Old Testament for a discussion or practical consideration of the righteousness of God during any plot point.)

In other words, this is exactly what it looks like: a parenthetical statement given partway through the message. It is important to note that it is in line with other Old Testament passages, but it is not imperative to understand in its entirety (since we could speculate that Paul knows his audience has not scrutinized the Old Testament so carefully.)

Nevertheless, we will look into a few passages which do attest, or witness, to the fact that God is righteous. It is not that these passages immediately prove the righteousness of God. Surely, we can commend the faith of any who believe this righteousness, even if they do not understand what the righteousness is (and how could they, if they have not understood the gravity of the crucifixion?)

The Law

The law (that is, Genesis to Deuteronomy,) are filled to the brim with types of God’s righteousness. The swiftest example, beyond the judgment of Adam and Eve, is God’s response to Adam and Eve upon inflicting the penalty of death upon all humanity.

Adam sinned. When he realized his wrongdoing, he responded by tying fig leaves around his privates, since he realized he was naked. This, of course, solved nothing, and I speculate only added to his embarrassment when God said, “Who told you that you are naked unless you have eaten from the only tree that I instructed you by no means to eat from it?” (Gen. 3:11.) Upon inflicting respective penalties upon the serpent, the woman, and the man, God made for Adam and his wife tunics of skin and clothed them (Gen. 3:21.)

Such tunics were made via a sacrifice. Something was killed in order to create the material necessary to mask their shame and guilt. These did not “solve” the issue of their sin, of course, but they were necessary, and thus righteous of God to do so. He had to produce a covering through which he could maintain relations with mankind in their new enslavement to sin. It is only with this imposed barrier that we could appreciate the depths of His love; that is, His mercy toward we who have unknowingly disobeyed and thus offended Him.

This is an example given at the forefront of the Book. The event itself was necessary, and given as a means to educate us by way of a series of illustrations, on various related topics. Another, in the early chapters of Exodus, concerns us with Pharoah’s testimony to Moses – Ex. 9:27–

Pharoah sent for Moses and for Aaron and said to them: I have sinned this time. Yahweh is the righteous One, and I and my people are the wicked.

This is the first explicit notice of God’s righteousness in the Hebrew scriptures. It is a surprising one, since the one proclaiming it is not a “righteous” or even “faithful” individual, but the one with whom Yahweh was at war! The enemy of God is the first to proclaim His righteousness, upon feeling a small taste of His power, and in recognition of His agenda to free slaves.

Of course, power is not all there is to God’s righteousness (hence Pharoah continually flip-flopped as to whether or not he should let the Israelites go.) But even a temporary acknowledgement of the righteousness of God is still surprising, especially in light of Rom. 1:18-3:20.

Yet another clear example of Yahweh’s righteousness witnessed to in the law is found in one of the songs of Moses, given in Deuteronomy 32. Most of this song concerns God’s relationship with Israel, in their early stages. Though God is promised to them, even as a fiancée is promised to a fiancé, Israel is not yet ready to be qualified as a righteous complement, and is, even to this day, in dire need of correction from and by their significant Other. Thus the song begins with the righteousness of God, as a supplementary reminder to Israel just Who they are following these laws for. Here is Deut. 32:4–

The Rock – flawless are His deeds, For all His ways are right judgment. The El of faithfulness and without iniquity; Just and upright is He.

Thankfully, of course, Yahweh knew of this poor state of affairs for Israel; hence, throughout Exodus 25-31, He gave Moses explicit and careful instruction on a few particulars, namely, the ark of the covenant which would be built, the tent of appointment, from the colors and fabric of its walls to the very direction in which the tent needed to be pointed, the altar on which sacrifices would be made, the lamps surrounding the tent, the anointing oil for the lamps, and the role and dress for the priesthood.

Each one of these aspects of God’s method of traveling with His (then) unjust nation reflects true characteristics of righteousness. Yet the most intricate and notable aspect is the “holy of holies,” a room in the back of the tent of appointment divided by a curtain, set apart from the rest of the tent. This special room was reserved for the chief priest, who would enter and commune with Yahweh directly. No other could enter, or they would be put to death.

It may be objected that Moses’ testimony, while not the “basis” on which God is just, can still be construed as proof that Moses could perceive some manifestation of God’s righteousness, though Christ had not yet been crucified. Yet in all of these examples, righteousness is not solely understood through the basis of a righteous action, but more-so with the respective unrighteous actions and dispositions of Moses, Pharoah, Egypt, and Israel. Though each of their respective parties face different aspects of unrighteousness (as all parties are different kinds of vessels, whether honorable or dishonorable, through which unrighteousness is being shown,) all of them were unjust in some way, and recognized, in measure, that a contrast to themselves was therefore just.

This Contrast is Yahweh.

It is not that these illustrations prove the righteousness of Yahweh.

The testimony of Moses or Pharoah does not prove Him just.

The instructions for the temple does not prove Him just.

God’s sacrificial act for Adam and Eve in sending them away from Eden  does not prove Him just.

None of these actions vindicate every other action called “just,” either. In fact, we could argue that these are the very actions in dire need of vindication through a demonstrably righteous depiction of Himself!

This is taken to its greatest extent with the cross; the greatest example of depravity, against the greatest example of Innocence. The law’s examples do not manifest God’s righteousness, but give comparative illustrations to the facts. Jesus Christ’s faith manifests what Moses’ testimony and belief could not (being itself tainted with unbelief, which debarred him from entering their promised land.) Jesus Himself is the living Antitype on which the tent of appointment was based. Jesus’ faith endured through afflictions, and was not hardened in light of turmoil. And, while it is easy to say these things, they still do not compare to the depths to which they are true.

- GerudoKing