Righteousness is one of those words used in church that are very common, but rarely understood on a practical level. It's one I struggle with understanding at a point of daily application. The understanding I do have is from my interpretation of things I read in Scripture. But while Scripture uses the word, it is not really defined. One exception of note is in Genesis 15:6 where Abram believes Yahweh's promise and that belief is reckoned to him as righteousness. This is used by Paul a lot in basing salvation on faith instead of rules. That Paul bases salvation on that credit to Abram means that righteousness and salvation are closely linked if not inseparable terms.
But what does righteousness mean? The way the word used in the Christian Scriptures was used in the culture at that era; it referred to a quality of adhering to a set of standards or societal norms in a very acceptable and pleasing way. Such a person had a quality that was exactly as it should be in their social setting. So when Paul uses the word, it he has to qualify it with either law or of God; usually of God or Jesus. What this means is that, in the Christian Scriptures, righteousness refers to the quality of conforming to a set of practices, attitudes, and perspectives. For a follower of Jesus, this "set" is His "set" of practices, attitudes, and perspectives. So, a righteous person in the sense used in the Christian Scriptures conforms to the practices, attitudes, and perspectives of Jesus. That is a tall requirement, and that is what Chambers says is impossible without this righteousness being imparted internally by Jesus Himself. I agree with him there.
Righteousness in the Hebrew Scriptures righteousness is closely linked to leading or ruling. The king of Salem, Melchizedek, was more likely a title meaning "king of righteousness" than a birth name. The latter part of his name, zedek, is the Hebrew word for "righteousness". The priest who eventually assumed control of worship under King David, Zadok, has half the name of Melchizedek. He was priest in Jerusalem when David took the city, and was able to retain his position. By that time the king of that city-state had the position of "priest" and "king" separated into two people. Zadok got to stay and keep doing what he had been doing, which is apparently, leading the worship of Yahweh. The implication in these two characters, Melchizedek and Zadok, is that they also lived righteousness, recognizable to others as conforming to Yahweh's righteousness. What is also remarkable is that neither one would have been living out that righteousness in the traditions set down in the Law of Moses. Paul's definition stands even in the Old Testament, even apart from his favorite example in Abram.
So, where does this understanding lead me in practical terms? What does righteousness look like for me? Can I truly live out the behaviors, attitudes, and perspectives of Jesus? No, and yes. I cannot, and do not expect to live out such a righteousness myself. It is not in my ability to do so. This is where one of the facets of the life lived in relationship to my Master comes into the forefront. What provision my Master made on my behalf was to impart His righteousness to me. Again, I sort of get lost in what that means, but my understanding (limited understanding) is that this happens through the agency of His Spirit, living within me; the One Coming Along Side to Help, the "Paraclete" of John's Gospel and letters. Without the Spirit of my Master I would have no possible way to live out this righteousness of my Master.
Ok, so I have the Spirit of my Master within me, but how does that make it possible for me to live out these behaviors, attitudes, and perspectives? Through submission to the Spirit of my Master, I can experience on a moment-by-moment basis the righteousness of my Master. I don't mean fulfillment of that righteousness, but the experience of it. I am not the one doing anything but submitting to the transformation carried out by my Master. The resulting change is witnessed by others in that observable righteousness conforming to my Master's righteousness. This means that when I am confronted by my environment with something negative, I submit to my Master's perspective rather than my own. When I meet or see someone, and the experience is not pleasing, I submit to His perspective, rather than rely on my own. At the point of response, I submit. I don't want to do what my boss wants, but instead of rebelling against my boss, I submit to my Master.
It really is that simple and that difficult. In fact, it is so difficult that I really stink at it. It takes practice, and practice will enable the practice to become easier. The righteousness of my Master is the end result of my moment-by-moment submission to my Master. It is a strange concept. It also takes intimate familiarity with the Scriptures inspired and preserved by my Master. I won't really know what perspective I'm submitting to without this intimate familiarity. And I'm going to need a lot of help from other followers of my Master. Without the shared familiarity of Scripture, I will never really understand it. It has been my consistent experience that my Master never gives anyone the whole picture, but requires interdependence upon others to gain any sort of clarity on Him, His Scripture, and His Character.
So, today, I will go to church to find that interdependent familiarity with Scripture and my Master. What will I learn today?
No comments:
Post a Comment