In his work edited work, Atonement Today, John Goldingay writes, “THERE IS A sense in which no Christian doctrine can be discussed in isolation from all others, for Christian belief is a coherent whole rather than an assembly of unconnected modules.”¹
What he’s saying here is that if you get one key portion of doctrine wrong, then you’re very likely to get another part of your doctrine wrong because (again), theology is a “coherent whole.” An example of this in my own life was evident to me a number of years ago when I was building a fence in my back yard. I had put up my posts and was coming back and putting up the horizontal two-by-fours along these posts. I was going to have two of these running the length of the fence before I came back and put the vertical boards on. And at first, I was extremely meticulous about this. I was setting a level on each board, making sure the bubble on the level was right in the middle, making sure that everything was set exactly right, etc. And of course it was taking a long time, but that’s okay because I’m known to be a bit anal sometimes.


Then, however, my dad and mom came to visit me, and my dad volunteered to help me build the fence. The problem was that my dad wasn’t quite thrilled with spending all day on this project so he encouraged me to stop testing every board with the level, measuring it out, etc. After all, he argued, if I get one board level, then I should be able to butt the end of the next piece of wood up against it, and that one would be level as well. And I could just keep that up.


Now, when he said that, I thought, “That makes good sense. Why am I being so anal?” But there were a number of things I wasn’t considering when I made that decision. One of them is what happens if the board is not level all the way across. That is, what if at the point I make the measurement to see if it’s level, it is, but then it is turns up or down at the end? Or, what if the end of the board isn’t cut perfectly even? Then when I butt up the next board against it, that board would be slanted up or down. Anyway, you can see where I am going. If there’s anything at all wrong with the first board in its design or makeup, then it’s going to negatively affect everything. And, well, long-story-short, I wish I could put up on a screen in front of you a picture of my fence because those boards ended up looking terrible as I went along, and I decided (against my better judgment) just to leave them. They are now there for whoever owns my home as a reminder of why it’s never a bad thing to be anal when you’re building.


But it’s also there to remind us that when we get a piece wrong in something that fits together with something else, then it’s going to negatively impact everything. And, since theology is a coherent whole, if we get one important piece of our theology wrong, then we’re likely to find problems in our thinking when we move from one doctrine to the other. In fact, ironically, the very book in which Goldingay points out theology being a coherent whole, Atonement Today, he ends up proving the point because he and the other writers in that book put forward a terribly unbiblical view of the atonement, and much of their problem lies in the fact that they have a terribly unbiblical understanding of the nature of God.


In fact, many theological errors are rooted in a bad understanding of one’s doctrine of God. For example, if you don’t think God knows the future decisions of his creatures, then you’ll not be able to talk about the doctrine of last things with great certainty. Or, if you don’t have a God who exercises meticulous providential control over his creation and his creatures, then you probably don’t hold that Scripture is inerrant because that understanding of the Bible is dependent upon a God who exercises his providence in a micro-managerial way. Similarly, in Goldingay’s case, if you don’t have a God who is holy and righteous (as the Bible defines these realities for us) and who personally inflicts wrath, then you’re not going to have a correct understanding of what was taking place when Jesus died on the cross.


Because so much is dependent on one’s doctrine of God, this is the reason that in this first semester of theological study in Sunday school, we spend time looking at what God is like. And this morning, I want us to look at God’s righteousness (or justice) and wrath.


Let’s first start with God’s righteousness.


God’s Righteousness


There are a number who understand God’s righteousness as his faithfulness to his covenant people that is shown most clearly when he forgives their sins. So, for example, Christopher Marshall writes,


God is “righteous” inasmuch as God fulfills the obligations he took upon himself to be Israel’s God. These included rescuing Israel in times of need, forgiving her sins, and defending the righteous of the poor and weak within Israel’s own borders. . . . The Divine King is righteous because he intervenes to save those who cannot save themselves, thus proving his faithfulness to covenant commitments. . . . God’s righteousness is characteristically associated in the Hebrew Scriptures with God’s love and grace . . . generosity, forgiveness, and liberation. God’s justice and God’s mercy stand, significantly, in parallel, not in opposition.²

Now, what’s key in this is that there’s no such recognition in this view of an aspect of what is called “retributive justice,” that is an understanding that evil cannot simply be overlooked but must be punished. Mark Baker thinks this is an understanding of justice that doesn’t come from the Bible but from a Western legal system. Therefore, he writes,


Through the lens of a Western legal system, anyone is just who meets the standard of the law. But a Hebraic understanding of justice is more relational: anyone is
just who keeps one’s covenants and commitments to others. Hence, we could say
that God is considered just not because of meeting a standard that says a penalty is required [i.e., retributive justice], but because God is faithful to his covenantal promise to provide salvation to Israel and through Israel to the world.³


So, I hope you’re beginning to see the picture. These individuals would say that when we think of God being righteous, we often think of the fact that he is committed in his own character and nature to punish sin. Therefore, God’s righteousness, in large measure, stands as an obstacle to showing mercy. But, they tell us, no, we’re getting it all wrong. Divine righteousness doesn’t have this commitment to punish sin. Rather, righteousness is best understood as God’s commitment to show love, mercy, and forgiveness. Far from being what might stand in the way of forgiving sinners, righteousness is that characteristic in God’s nature that drives him to show mercy. And where we’ve gone wrong is in incorporating an understanding of righteousness or justice that we’ve seen in our own Western legal system onto God whereas if we read our Bibles, we would see that this idea of retributive justice (or retributive punishment) is nowhere to be found and is most certainly not as aspect of God’s righteousness.


Therefore, what I want to do this morning is examine that. After all, if they’re right, we’ve got to rethink our understanding of the atonement, probably denying that Jesus pays the penalty poured out by God for our sins in order that God might show his justice, right? So, let’s look at it.


A Biblical Examination of Divine Righteousness


First, it is helpful for us to recognize that there is teaching and expectation in the Bible for God to act in accord with justice or righteousness. The biblical plotline does not progress very far before the reader is told that God is the righteous judge over all things. In Genesis 18, God comes to Abraham to inform him that he will destroy Sodom. Therefore, Abraham intercedes for the city, asking the Lord not to destroy its inhabitants if there are righteous people in it, for he is taken back by the thought that the Lord might “sweep away the righteous with the wicked” (Gen 18:23). Ultimately, Abraham declares, “Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (Gen 18:25).


Now, it’s important for us to recognize two things here. The first is exactly what we’ve said, namely, God lets us know that he will indeed act in accord with what is just and right. Abraham asks this question knowing the answer that God will always do what is just. But, second, we need to recognize that righteousness or justice is not some kind of standard that exists separate from God. God is not meeting some kind of external standard that exists in the world called “justice.” Rather, God is righteous. He is just. And because this is his character and nature, he will always act in accord with who he is. And because he is always righteous, he always acts righteously – when he judges, forgives, shows mercy, provides care, or condemns. He is always acting in righteousness.


We could also note that “righteousness” would surely include God’s covenant faithfulness and showing mercy when he says he will. It is obviously unrighteous to make a covenant and not be faithful to it. Our problem is not that righteousness does not include faithfulness and showing mercy, of course it does. In fact, in Deuteronomy 10:17-18, we see clearly that righteousness is shown in caring for the poor and helpless. There, we read, “For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe. He executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing.” Clearly, righteousness is what is on display as God cares for the orphan and widow. Righteousness demands that we acknowledge this element if we are to understand it correctly. But righteousness cannot be understood merely in these terms (especially with no retributive category).


So, look for example at Exodus 34:6-7. Exodus 32-34 forms the context for these verses as the Israelites had formed the golden calf (Exod 32:6-7), the Lord had declared to Moses that he would consume them (Exod 32:7-10), and Moses had interceded for the people before God (Exod 32:30-35). The Lord ultimately responds to Moses’ prayer, allowing the people to continue and ultimately allowing his presence to dwell in their midst. In the midst of this dialogue between Moses and the Lord, however, Moses asks the Lord to reveal his ways and show his glory (Exod 33:13, 18), and the Lord responds, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name, ‘The Lord’” (Exod 33:19). Paul House helpfully explains the nature of Moses’ request:


In 34:1-5 Yahweh accedes to this intercessory request. He will forgive the people. He will not destroy them and start over with Moses. But why does he do so? On what basis does he forgive, punish or seemingly do nothing? The answers to these questions are crucial, since they indicate the bases upon which the Israel-Yahweh relationship, which is likely to be marred by sin in the future, may be restored. It also gets to the heart of how Israel may understand how Yahweh acts. Is he unstable? Is he capricious? Or are there some bedrock qualities to his character?⁴


This is the setting, then, for these two important verses, and it is here that God reveals to his people the nature of his character and his name.


As the Lord reveals himself to Moses in these verses, he proclaims, “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin.” To this point, no one would hesitate to affirm that these aspects of God’s character are the clear revelation of his very nature. However, the Lord continues, showing a fuller understanding of his nature and ways, as he declares, “. . . but who will by no means clear the guilty.”

According to these verses, there is a two-fold aspect to God’s nature. God is both merciful and righteousness. God’s people have been beneficiaries of his mercy and compassion, but they must not think he is one who turns a blind eye to sin.
They must know that for him to treat as innocent those who are guilty would be a violation of his own name and nature. Such an action would destroy the foundation upon which he had formed his people. This is what God reveals to his people as he declares himself to be one who will by no means clear the guilty. God’s own people must understand that their hope for justification cannot rest in the thought that he might decide to ignore or overlook their guilt.

This commitment within God whereby he refuses to acquit the guilty but pours out on them the punishment they deserve is precisely what is meant by God’s retributive justice. Therefore, though God’s righteousness is manifested in his faithfulness to his covenant promises, to limit divine justice to this while excluding the notion of retribution is to ignore the very self-disclosure of God to his people in Exodus 34:6-7.


A similar note is seen as God commands those acting as judges to imitate his own righteous judgment. He demands of them that they acquit the innocent and condemn the guilty. Deuteronomy 25:1-2 reads,


If there is a dispute between men and they come into a court and the judges decide between them, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty, then if the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with a number of stripes in proportion to his offense.


If retribution were a notion deserving of mockery, it is hard to imagine that the Lord would refuse to allow his judges to acquit the guilty. One might respond by suggesting that though God commands them to condemn and punish the guilty, he would be honored by the action of a judge who saw beyond the demands of the Mosaic code and reflected God’s heart by forgiving and acquitting one who should be condemned. Proverbs 17:15 quickly removes that option, however. There, the Lord declares, “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.” Therefore, just as the Lord demands that the righteous one is justified, so he demands that the guilty one is condemned. And anyone who would dare justify the ungodly man can know in no uncertain terms that his action is detested by God.


Furthermore, note how the New Testament depicts God’s wrathful judgment as being a demonstration of righteousness. One of the clearest pictures of retributive justice is seen in 2 Thessalonians 1:5-9. There, Paul writes,


This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering—since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.


Thus, God’s righteous judgment involves inflicting punishment and vengeance on those “who do not obey the gospel,” and God considers it to be just as he repays them according to their wicked acts. Similarly, in Romans 2:5-8, Paul declares,


But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.


In this text, it is again God’s righteous judgment that will result in his meting out punishment on those who are guilty, and the punishment is according to what each has merited.

Finally, there are several texts in the book of Revelation in which the author makes clear that God’s judgment of the wicked is retributive, as the guilty receive the punishment they deserve. A sampling of these texts reveals the consistent refrain that God’s judgments are just and righteous as he metes out punishment according to what each has merited.

And I heard the angel in charge of the waters say, “Just are you, O Holy One,
who is and who was, for you brought these judgments. For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and you have given them blood to drink. It is what they deserve!” And I heard the altar saying, “Yes, Lord God the Almighty, true and just are your judgments.” (Rev 16:5-7)


After this I heard what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, crying out, “Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for his judgments are true and just; for he has judged the great prostitute who corrupted the earth with her immorality, and has avenged on her the blood of his servants.” Once more they cried out, “Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up forever and ever.” (Rev 19:1-3)


And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (Rev 20:12-15)


Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone
for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. . . . I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy
of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in
this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy,
God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are
described in this book. (Rev 22:12-13, 18-19)


Therefore, though the biblical witness does nothing to remove the notion that divine righteousness is manifested in God’s faithfulness to his covenant commitments, nor does it allow one to reduce divine justice to entail God’s covenant faithfulness alone. Rather, the Bible demands a fuller understanding of righteousness, including a retributive aspect whereby God inflicts punishment upon those who stand guilty before him in accord with his very nature.


God’s Righteousness and Salvation?


The biblical portrait of God and his governance of the world is one in which God is judge of all things and rules justly over creation. He rules justly not because he is constrained by something outside of himself but because in all things and at all times God acts in accord with his righteous character and name. As one who is just and righteous, he will always do what is just and right. One aspect of this justice is demonstrated in the commitment not to clear the guilty but to pour out his wrath on them as their deserved punishment. To do otherwise would be to violate God’s own name. Furthermore, to compound the issue, the Bible does not present only a few men as guilty and therefore justly under the wrath of the God. Rather, Paul argues in Romans 1:18-3:20 that every man without exception is sinful, guilty, and justly under God’s wrath. Indeed, all individuals are born into such a state that they are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph 2:3).


Therefore, in examining the biblical portrait of God and his governance of the world, one finds that the necessity of removing the verdict of condemnation from men is matched with the seeming impossibility of doing so. Because God is the righteous and just judge over a world full of guilty and condemned people, the question is not why God might find it difficult to forgive “but how he finds it possible to do so at all.”⁵ If God declares that his justice is displayed in not acquitting the guilty but in meting out on them the punishment they deserve, how is God able to justify anyone as the judge of all the earth and still remain just? It is he, after all, who declares that the one who justifies the wicked is an abomination (Prov 17:15). As one considers God’s loving and merciful desire to justify the guilty, the question Abraham asked demands repeating: “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” This question can only be answered by looking to the cross.


Romans 3:21-26


“How is it possible for the righteous God to declare the unrighteous to be righteous without either compromising his righteousness or condoning their unrighteousness?”⁶ The only answer is the atonement provided through Jesus Christ, and the only understanding of the atonement that answers how it is that God can remain just and yet justify his people is penal substitution, which is clearly taught in multiple places, but none clearer than in Romans 3:21-26.


Though both opponents and proponents of penal substitution agree that God sent his Son to the cross because of his love for his people, the cross is not (and could not have been) a triumph of God’s love over his justice. God cannot decide to judge in a manner that is not “just” and “right” according to the standards he declared. Therefore, one must understand the nature of the atonement as providing a means of forgiveness for God’s people while satisfying God’s just demands to punish sin. That is, if God is to justify man, he must make a way for his wrathful punishment to be appeased so as to remain just. This is precisely what penal substitution claims. But, what’s most important is the Scripture, so let’s turn to Romans 3:21-26.


In these verses, Paul writes,


God put [Christ] forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Rom 3:25-26).


By this, believers have traditionally understood Paul to mean that God sent his Son into the world to die on the cross, bearing God’s wrath toward sinners. By doing this, God revealed that he had not simply overlooked sin but was punishing the guilty in the person of his Son—in accord with his righteous nature. The reason such a demonstration of righteousness was necessary is because by leaving sinners unpunished, God was seemingly acting contrary to his self-revelation as one who will by no means clear the guilty (Exod 34:7) and congruent to the very action he considers an abomination (i.e., justifying the wicked (Prov 17:15)). Therefore, God demonstrated his righteousness by putting forth his Son as a propitiatory sacrifice (whereby his wrath was appeased) so that it might be clear that he is indeed the righteous judge who does what is right. At the same time, however, because Christ bore the penalty for sinners, God is able to pardon those who have faith in his Son. Thus, through one act of the atoning work of Christ, God is able to be both just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus Christ.


This is the glory of the gospel, but we will only see it if we have a proper understanding of God’s righteousness. Amen.