The Justice of God. 2

1. The NATURE of God's justice.

In seeking to arrive at a true conception thereof, we need to be very much on our guard against carnalizing the same, degrading the Divine majesty by drawing analogies from that which appertains to the human realm. In human affairs, justice is simply the giving to everyone his due. But such a rule cannot possibly be applied to the Most High God, for the simple reason that He owes His creatures nothing. It cannot be too strongly insisted upon in this day of fleshly arrogance and spiritual ignorance, that there is a vast difference between God's government over His rational creatures and that of an earthly prince over his subjects—and that consequently our notion of justice with regard to the latter cannot be lawfully applied to the former. It is failure at this very point which has resulted in the most wild and irreverent postulates in connection with the justice of God, whereby He has been brought down to the level of His creatures.

A secular ruler is set up for the good of his subjects, this being the principal end of his constitution. The people are not formed for him—but he for them, therefore the administration of justice is a common and public right, whereby he is entrusted with the supreme rule for them. The bare statement of this obvious fact is at once sufficient to show the infinite distance which separates between the King of kings and His administration —and any secular ruler and his government. God does not exist for the well-being of His creatures—but is independent and self-sufficient: for His pleasure they are and were created (Rev. 4:11). Consequently He owes them nothing, nor can they profit Him anything. Therefore it necessarily follows that He could not be said to wrong His creatures, had it so pleased Him to ordain an economy in which no provision was made for the infliction of punishment upon offenders according to their demerits: that was something which must be determined solely by His own sovereign pleasure.

Absolutely considered, God's justice is the universal rectitude of His nature, for antecedent to all the acts of His will respecting the government of His creatures the glorious and incomprehensible God was essentially and intrinsically righteous in Himself. Divine justice may also be considered relatively, that is, with regard to its exercise in the superintendence and government of rational creatures. It is with the latter the Scriptures are chiefly concerned, that is, with how God acts under the economy which He has instituted. Yet here and there the Sacred Pages give us a glimpse of what God was in Himself prior to His work of creation and taking upon Himself the office of Ruler and Judge. Those glimpses enable us to gain some idea of what Deity is in Himself, considered apart from all His works and workings. Here, too, yes, here particularly, we need to be doubly on our guard, lest we be guilty of "limiting the Holy One" by circumscribing His actions beyond that which Holy Writ warrants.

It is one thing to say that God cannot act contrary to His own perfections—it is quite another thing to affirm that God must exercise those perfections. We need to use the greatest possible caution in saying what God cannot do. God cannot give His glory to another (Isaiah 42:8), for to do so would be to admit a rival. God cannot look with approbation upon evil (Hab. 1:12) for to do so would sully His holiness. God cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:6), for then He would be unfaithful. God cannot lie (Titus 1:2), for He is without variableness or shadow of turning. But to declare that His justice obliges God to inflict punishment on sinners, and that He cannot pardon without an atonement, is to daringly assert that which Scripture nowhere teaches. That He "will by no means clear the guilty" (Exo. 34: 7) warrants no man in saying that He "can by no means clear the guilty."

It should be pointed out, that a thing may be just in a twofold sense: negatively, as that which justice does not disapprove of; and positively, as that which justice does require. And it is a question of vast importance if we are to have right conceptions of the absolute independence of God—to consider whether His will to punish sinners antecedently to His purpose to introduce the economy in which such now obtains—was just in the former sense only or also in the latter. Whose rights had God violated—had He willed otherwise than He did? Certainly not the creature's, for He owed them nothing. Nor His own, had He been pleased to forego them. God rules now according to the constitution which He has made—yet none can show—for Scripture contains not the slightest hint thereon—that this constitution was the necessary effect and was obliged by His justice.

God was pleased to place His creatures under law—law which was accompanied and enforced by sanctions, promising the reward of life to the obedient and denouncing the penalty of death upon the disobedient—and as the Administrator of that law He is morally obligated to execute its terms. But to insist that a regime wherein sin must be punished, or that He was limited to the appointing of a Substitute unto Death if the guilty were to go free—strikes this writer as little (if any) short of blasphemy. Against this it has often been objected that the words of the Redeemer, "If it be possible let this cup pass from Me," prove that there was no other way in which His people could be saved except by His drinking that cup. We answer, the reason why it was impossible that the Savior should be spared that awful cup—was not because the hands of Omniscience were fettered—but because the veracity of God must fulfill His own declarations to that very end.

It would be just as unwarrantable and wrong for us to say that the great God could not create this world any other way than He has. Or that His nature obligated Him to make it just as He did, is to insist that no alternative was left to Him—than to place it under the system of government which He has instituted, wherein virtue is rewarded, sin is punished, His grace illustriously displayed, His holiness and justice magnified by means of the satisfaction rendered to Him by His incarnate Son. God's wisdom is no more limited than is His power, and to argue that any one of the Divine perfections—be it holiness or justice—placed a restriction upon the contrivances of God's wisdom, is presumption of the worst kind. The Divineomniscience is as truly regulated by God's sovereign will—as is His omnipotence. All we are justified in saying, is that the economy which God has appointed is the one which He deemed best and most glorifying unto Himself.

Under the economy which God has instituted, He has determined the manner and the extent in which His perfections shall be exercised and displayed. For example, He has determined the several offices which each Person in the Godhead shall respectively hold, and this He did freely of His own sovereign pleasure. He has determined the number of creatures He shall bring into existence, the length of their earthly life, and what shall be their eternal destiny; and in this, too, He acted without any restraint. He determined to give us a written revelation from Himself, concerning which He alone decided how much or how little of His everlasting counsels should be revealed, and in which He has made certain promises that He has pledged Himself to fulfill. Certainly He was under no obligation to make any promises at all—but having made them—His veracity and His faithfulness require Him to make them good. Thus, the only limitations which the Almighty has placed upon Himself in His dealings with His creatures—are those which His own imperial will saw fit to impose.

Now under the constitution or economy which it has pleased God to institute in the superintendence or government of His rational creatures, His justice is known among men by different names according to the different objects which it is immediately conversant. Does the Most High, for instance, enact laws for His creatures? then His moral rectitude appears in these laws as equity. They are not cruel—but "holy, just and good" (Romans 7:12), framed for our well-being. How thankful we should be for such a law. Has God condescended to express Himself in promises? then His rectitude therein is seen as fidelity, for He is immutably faithful in making good every one of them. Has He denounced punishment upon all disobedience? then in the execution of His threats, God's rectitude appears in His absolute veracity. Does He administer those laws both with respect to reward and punishment, with strict impartiality, so that He is no respecter of persons? then His rectitude appears as glorious righteousness.

It will thus be seen that His absolute justice expresses what God is in Himself, the moral rectitude of His nature; whereas His relative justice considers Him as standing in relation to His creatures. The one pertains to Him in His private character, the other in His public character. It is in His assumption and discharge of His office of Ruler and Judge the latter is exercised. As the Sovereign of the universe He maintains the rights of His throne and order among His subjects. Because of the moral rectitude of His nature, when He enacts laws—they are equitable, when He makesdeclarations—they are true, when He expresses Himself in promises—they are faithful, and when He declares threats against disobedience—they are righteous and inexorable. As the "foundation of justice" God is to be revered: as the King of kings He is to be submitted unto. He cannot be injured by us, nor does He suffer by our disobedience—but He will assuredly avenge it and vindicate His name.

Next Part The Justice of God. 3

Back to Arthur Pink