Justice of God

If God loves judgment, why don’t we?

That’s the question we’ve been exploring.

One way to answer this is to remember the pain that judgment has caused us. Think back and ask yourself, “When did I feel judged?” If you’ve been around on planet earth for a while you shouldn’t struggle to come up with a few memories. Unpleasant ones, no doubt.

Now ask yourself another question: “When did someone come to my aid while I was being judged?” Perhaps someone intervened while the school bully was having a dig at you. Or a colleague spoke up in a meeting where you were unfairly accused. Or a witness’ testimony exonerated you in a court case. I’m sure you get the point.

The type of judgment that God loves has to do with the second scenario, not the first. You may not think of the one who advocated on your behalf as “judging you”, but that is in fact exactly what they did. The difference is that their judgment—their discernment of the situation and your role in it—was just, whereas the person who treated you unfairly was not.

That is what mishpat is intended to accomplish: judgment that is just, a verdict that sets things right. This is why modern translators often translate it as justice instead of judgment. However, as pointed out in the previous post, whilst “justice” captures the relational fairness of mishpat, it obscures the  act of judging itself—the internal resolve and verdict that informs the doing of justice.

Unjust judgment is not the mishpat that God loves. God does not love statutes and decrees that are issued by unjust people to enrich or glorify themselves. He hates injustice. This is clear throughout Scripture, especially in the prophets. “Woe to those who enact unjust statutes and issue oppressive decrees,” Isaiah wrote (Isaiah 10:1). He does not use mishpat in this sentence. The following verse, however, uses mishpat for the rights or justice of the poor that those decrees violate.

In Daniel 6 we find multiple references to a royal decree, but no mention of mishpat. The reason is that Daniel 6 is written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. The decree (esar) was issued so that “anyone who prays to any god or human being during the next thirty days, except to you, Your Majesty, shall be thrown into the lions’ den”. No justice here.

Interestingly, the Septuagint uses different Greek terms in Daniel 6. The decree itself is called a horismos, but the law of the Medes and Persians, which makes the decree irrevocable, is called a dogma. This is significant when we consider the recurring use of krisis in the Septuagint to translate mishpat, and its use in the New Testament to convey the idea of judgment and justice.[1] It appears that the biblical tradition invites us to distinguish between judgment concerned with justice and decrees whose authority derives from the power of those who issue them.

The difference between krisis and dogma is aptly illustrated by a Greek word search of the New Testament. Dogma is used in Luke 2:1 and Acts 17:7 to refer to decrees of Caesar. It is also used in Ephesians 2:15, “…having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances (dogmasin)…”, and Colossians 2:14, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances (dogmasin) that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

The semantic range of dogma includes an opinion or belief,  a philosophical doctrine, a  decision or judgment, and an authoritative public decree or ordinance. As such, it conveys what has been decided or established, whereas the biblical concept of mishpat and its Greek equivalent krisis raises the question of justice.

This does not mean that dogma is always void of justice. As noted, it is used to refer to the ordinances of the Mosaic Law. Similarly, it is used in Acts 16:4 where we read, ” And as they went through the cities, they delivered to them the decrees (dogmata) to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem.”

However, and this is essential to note, whereas the weight of dogma resides in the authority of the person or institution issuing the decree (King Darius, Caesar, Moses, the Jerusalem Council), the weight of mishpat resides in the presence and recognition of justice.

The distinction is paramount, for it suggests that the purpose of judgment is not merely to establish rules that external authorities must enforce. When people recognize and embody the justice those rules are intended to serve, they become capable of discerning what justice requires without needing a decree for every situation.

It also tells us why God loves mishpat. It is not because he delights in issuing decrees and ordinances, but because of what mishpat accomplishes in human relationships.

Mishpat can pre-empt dogma. It can do what dogma aims to do, only better.

Here we are touching on the fulfilment of the Law. More about that in posts to come.

---

[1] Psalm 89:14 is a case in point. Here we find the famous pairing of tsedeq (צֶדֶק) and mishpat (מִשְׁפָּט). The KJV translates the verse as “Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne.” The Septuagint renders these with δικαιοσύνη (dikaiosynē) and κρίσις (krisis) respectively. This is a recurring pattern throughout the Septuagint, except for a few verses where mishpat is translated with dikaiosyne. (E.g., Isaiah 61:8).  Unlike modern translations, this is the exception and not the rule.