Justified

Theologians get into great disagreement of the words derived from the Greek root “dikio, dikaio”. Sometimes they are translated as righteous, righteousness and other times as justified, justification. This sometimes creates confusion about what the cross has achieved.

Some theologians claim that the blood of Jesus has made us righteous. They say that Jesus righteous has been imputed to us. I believe that is misleading. It is Jesus blood that has been imputed to us. We are guilty not righteous. Jesus blood has paid the penalty that the prosecutor demanded for our guilt.

We do not have a good word for our situation once we have trusted in the cross. “Justified” is a better word than “righteous”, but it is not quite right. We claim that we are justified in doing something, if the result was good. That is not what the cross does.

The blood of Jesus does not make us innocent, because our sin is real, but our guilt no longer counts. It has been fully dealt with and does not count against us. We have a clean slate before the judge. That is what Paul meant when he said we are justified by faith/allegiance to Jesus.

Just Judge

According to Paul, the cross has a legal effect in a heavenly court. (The clever people use the word forensic to describe it). Understanding the different characters in the court is important.

The father is the judge. His role is to decide if people brought before him are guilty or innocent, and if they are guilty what the penalty should be. A judge does not lay charges or make accusations.

The Holy Spirit is the “paraclete”, the one who stands in the court beside the person accused and assists them to bring their defence. He does not make accusations either.

Jesus said that he does not accuse (John 5:45; 12:47).

We are the ones appearing in the court. If it were up to God, there would be no accusations brought against us.

As well as being judge, God is also our father. We have all rebelled against him more than once. We have offended him many times, but that is not unusual. Children offend their father all the time. They often rebel against them or lie to them. Provided his children admit mistakes, a father is happy to forgive his children. He will often forgive his children, even if they do not admit their mistakes.

The problem in the heavenly court is that there is also an accuser. The name Satan means accuser. He accuses us before our judge. He can call the people who we have sinned against as witnesses, because they will probably be criticising us on earth.

The accuser says that it would be unfair if God forgave us, because he will not forgive him. However, Satan and his mates have not admitted their mistakes, so God cannot forgive them, although he is like a father to them. The spiritual powers of evil persist in holding power over God’s children who have wandered away from their father. He has power over God’s people, so he cannot just ignore him.

The accuser demands blood, because the penalty for disobedience is death. The spiritual powers of evil demand blood as the price for allowing the people they control to be redeemed and set free.

God is a just judge, who he has to be fair to everyone, so he has to listen to the accusations and demands of the accuser. He would have to declare all humans guilty and acknowledge that the penalty the accuser demands is correct, but Jesus steps up in the court before the judge and says,

These people belong to me. I shed my blood and died on their behalf. I am not guilty of any sin, so my blood counts for anyone who claims it.

The accusations of the accuser are defeated, because although we are guilty, the penalty that the accuser demands has already been paid. That gives us a “clean slate” before the judge of the heavenly court. The spiritual powers accusing us are defeated.

The other bit of good news is that once the penalty for our disobedience has been accepted by God, the rights of the spiritual powers of evil to dominate us are broken. We are declared righteous and redeemed from the power of evil at the same time.

Justification for War - Syria

I really dislike war on principle, but I acknowledge that there are a few situations where war is justified. The Bible provides principles that clarify the rare circumstances when war is justified. I describe these principles in detail in Defence and War.

The major weakness with these biblical principles is that they are rarely applied seriously, even by Christians. Most of the wars throughout history that have been supported by Christians would not be justified, if the biblical principles were applied correctly.

1. Defence
The first principle is that war is only justified for the defence of a local community. The people from several communities might join together to impose and external enemy, but the decision to join the battle must be made within the local community. People cannot be conscripted into fighting a war, by a greater political power.

This principle of defence only rules out pre-emptive strikes against nations that might be a threat in the future. It prevents political leaders from acting as judge of the nations, and punishing nations that do not comply with their stands of behaviour.

2. Last Resort
War should always be the last resort. Before starting a war, civil leaders should try every means possible to obtain peace (Deut 20:10). Until every possible means of obtaining peace is exhausted, war is not justified.

3. Benefits Exceed the Cost
War is only justified, if the benefits of the desired objective clearly outweigh the potential cost of the war. If the cost exceeds the benefit it is better to sue for peace (Luke 14:31-32).

This is a killer principle. As the cost of most wars are horrendous, so very few wars pass this test. Counting the cost of war is not just a matter of estimating how many soldiers will be lost. The full cost of the war should be counted. The cost for the families of those who die is enormous. For the soldiers who survive the cost can also be high. Many will have injuries that blight their lives. Worse still, war has a desensitising effect on its participants, and good men can be drawn into doing great evil. They will have to live with their consciences. The value of one life is significant. The value of several thousand lives is immense. War is also a waste of economic resources, so when the full cost is counted, very few wars can offer benefits that justify their cost. The more I read the history of war, the harder I find it to think of a situation serious enough to justify the enormous costs of war.

Defence is rarely a practical option. Enemies with weaker military forces are unlikely to attack. (Some radical religious or political groups may be foolish enough to attack a stronger nation, but this will also be rare). The enemies that do threaten us will generally have an overwhelming superiority of forces, so an attempt at defence would be pointless. This means that there will be very few situations where a nation can defend itself against attack. War is justified if we are attacked by an army that is weaker than ours. If invaded by a stronger army, we would be better to surrender and sue for peace.

Conduct of War
The Bible also gives principles that should govern the way that war is conducted. Attacks on civilians are forbidden. Those engaged in war also are prohibited from attacking and damaging the land (Deut 20:19-20). The land belongs to God, so humans must not attack it.

This rules out total war in which an entire nation and its economy is a valid war target. Nuclear weapons do not meet this standard. Most missile and bombing attacks do not comply, because the harm civilians and the land.

Syria
The proposed war on Syria fails all these principles.

1. The war is not for defence. Syria is not that to the United States. God is still the Judge of the Nations. He has not delegated responsibility for judging Syria to Obama Barack.

2. Opportunities still exist for negotiating a solution. We are not yet at the last resort.

3. What can be accomplished by bombing Syria is very uncertain. It could well make the situation far worse. Such uncertain benefits do not outweigh the cost in human lives of a bombing attack.

4. The planned attack will use weapons that do not comply with the biblical principles governing the conduct of war.