What Is Justification? | Stephen Westerholm

How is a person made right with a holy God? Join Kirk E. Miller and New Testament scholar Stephen Westerholm for an in-depth discussion on the vital doctrine of justification. They explore the biblical basis for justification, including primary Old and New Testament passages, key terms like “works of the law,” and various interpretations old and new, such as the New Perspective on Paul.

Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and more.

Start a 30-day free trial of Logos

Episode guest: Stephen Westerholm

Stephen Westerholm (ThD, Lund University) taught New Testament and early Christianity at McMaster University from 1984 to 2017. Since 2017, he has been Professor Emeritus of early Christianity at McMaster University.

He has a forthcoming commentary on Romans in Eerdmans Illuminations Commentary series.

Episode synopsis:

What is justification? A basic definition

In everyday speech, “justification” often means offering explanation or making excuses for behavior. In Scripture and theology, the doctrine of justification is God declaring a person righteous (or innocent).

As Stephen explains, justification is a legal concept, involving law-court imagery. For instance, in the Old Testament, judges are to justify (acquit) the innocent and condemn the guilty, placing justification and condemnation as opposite judicial acts. Likewise, Paul frequently contrasts justification with its alternative, condemnation (see Rom 5:16–19).

Thus, justification is God’s judicial acquittal, his verdict of righteousness over a person standing before him.

2 paths of righteousness: the law or faith

How then is one justified, reckoned righteous, before God? Paul presents two “paths” of righteousness in Romans 9:30–10:13:

1. Righteousness based on the law: the principle that the one who does these things will live by them (drawing from Lev 18:5).
2. Righteousness based on faith: a righteousness grounded not in what humans do, but in what God has already done in Christ, which humans receive by faith.

Likewise, in Philippians 3:9, Paul contrasts his former pursuit of righteousness based on the law (his own righteousness) with the righteousness “from God” and “on the basis of faith.” So too in Galatians 3:10–12, Paul contrasts the principle of faith (“the righteous shall live by faith”) with the law’s distinct principle (“the one who does these things will live by them”).

The need for an extraordinary path to righteousness

This righteousness via the law reflects what Stephen calls the basic moral order of the universe. This is not unique to Israel’s experience under the law (see Paul’s language of “doing good” in Rom 2:7, which speaks to something more foundational than adherence to any particular law). Rather, it’s the bedrock moral logic of God’s judgment—both of the Jew and the gentile. Even the Old Testament assumes gentile moral responsibility (e.g., Abraham expects to find righteous people within Sodom; the prophets indict the nations). Human beings are moral creatures. Doing good leads to life, doing evil leads to condemnation (Rom 2:5–12).

Yet none of us have actually fulfilled this ordinary path of righteousness. As Paul concludes his argument, “No one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin” (Rom 3:20).

This sets up the need for what Stephen calls God’s “extraordinary path to righteousness.” The ordinary path would be: Do the good God commands and be righteous. But since humanity has not done this, God introduces another way: justification based on the death of Christ and by means of faith.

In this way, justification is achieved “apart from the law” (humans failed to obey God’s law), yet the law and the prophets (i.e., the Old Testament) bear witness to it (Rom 3:21). That is, Scripture points forward to this extraordinary provision even as it names the unmet moral standard that made it necessary.

How Christ’s atoning death renders us righteous

But how exactly does Christ’s death achieve our justification?

Scripture insists that judges must not acquit the guilty (e.g., Prov 17:15). Yet Paul proclaims that God “justifies the ungodly” (Rom 4:5). How can God declare guilty sinners righteous without compromising his justice?

The answer is Christ’s atoning death. Christ bears the sins that would otherwise condemn us. God can righteously declare the unrighteous as righteous because their condemnation is not ignored but dealt with through Christ’s death (Rom 3:21–26).

God can righteously declare the unrighteous as righteous because their condemnation is not ignored but dealt with through Christ’s death.

Justification, then, is not a description of a person’s internal transformation (though transformation will necessarily follow). Rather, justification is a legal verdict, a declaration, achieved by Christ’s death. Justification, then, is wholly by God’s grace.

Use Logos’s Factbook to launch your study on topics like justification. Start a free trial!

Is justification a uniquely Pauline doctrine?

According to Stephen, a fully developed and articulated doctrine of justification is distinctively Pauline. We find it particularly in Romans and Galatians. Yet Stephen contends that all of its elements, or “steps,” can be found elsewhere in Scripture, including the Old Testament. These are:

1. Human moral accountability and the expectation to do good
2. The widespread nature of sin and failure to do good
3. God’s righteousness and judgment against sin
4. Thus, the need for divine mercy and forgiveness

For instance, Paul does not see himself as inventing the doctrine of justification. Rather, he roots it in the Old Testament’s own teaching, citing texts like Genesis 15:6, Psalm 32:1–2, and Habakkuk 2:4 (see Rom 1:16–17; 4:1–8; Gal 3:6–14).

Is justification covenantal inclusion?

Romans and Galatians both raise the topic of justification within the context of the relationship between Jew and gentile in the church. Thus, according to some, justification is primarily concerned with covenant inclusion and the equality of Jew and gentile.

Stephen considers Paul’s argument in Galatians. Since the Jews are God’s covenant people, false teachers taught that gentiles must also become Jews, i.e., receive circumcision, if they are to become members of the covenant and heirs of its promises. Faith in Jesus as Messiah is well and good, but it’s insufficient. God’s law is still God’s law.

But according to Paul, gentiles do not become members of the people of God by means of the law, e.g., circumcision. That pathway cannot save, because everyone who depends on the works of the law is cursed (Gal 3:10, 12). The law pronounces a curse on those who fail to keep it, and we are all unable to keep it. But Christ died precisely to redeem us from that curse (3:14). Thus, the blessings of Abraham come to the gentiles by faith, not the law (Gal 3:15).

Yet, importantly, this is as much the means of justification for Jews as it is for gentiles. Paul, speaking of himself and Peter (both Jews), says,

We who are Jews … have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified. (Gal 2:15–16; emphasis added)

Thus, it is a mistake to reduce justification by faith to merely “how gentiles are admitted to the people of God,” although it certainly addresses this.

Justification amidst Second Temple Judaism and covenantal nomism

Kirk asks how much our interpretation of Paul’s teaching on justification should be shaped by our understanding of Second Temple Judaism and what some call “covenantal nomism.” Namely, some contend that Judaism in the first century was not a legalistic, works-based approach to God but one based fundamentally on God’s grace. If so, does this call into question traditional interpretations of justification by faith as a polemic against Jews attempting to earn righteousness through the law?

Studying Second Temple Judaism can certainly provide depth to our understanding of the New Testament. Paul’s writings on justification are contextual, reflecting his situation. Nonetheless, according to Stephen, Paul’s doctrine of justification doesn’t target a problem unique to first-century Judaism. It addresses universal human nature: The universal problem of sin and need for Christ.

Moreover, while Second Temple Jews clearly held to God’s grace, Paul’s understanding of grace was quite different.

What is meant by “works of the law”?

Adherents of the New Perspective on Paul often see “works of the law” referring specifically to covenant boundary markers (circumcision, dietary laws) as opposed to adhering to the law as a means of works righteousness.

The immediate situation in the Galatian context involves circumcision. But, as Stephen observes, Paul uses “works of the law” and “law” interchangeably throughout the book (e.g., Gal 2:16, 21), and the fundamental principle of the law is that those who do these things, i.e., the works that the law demands, shall live by them. Likewise, in Romans 2:7 and 13, Paul parallels those who do the law with those described as “doing good,” since the law spells out the good that’s required of human beings. Thus, Paul can speak of being justified by “the law,” “the works of the law,” or “doing good” and mean essentially the same things in all cases.

“Works of the law” is not simply a matter of boundary markers, since justification apart from “works of the law” applies as much to Jews as it does to gentiles. For instance, Romans 4:6 speaks of David being justified apart from works even though he was circumcised, which would make no sense if such “works” referred to a boundary marker like circumcision.

Stephen also points out that when Romans 2 critiques Jews for failing to observe the law, it does not indict them for neglecting boundary markers but for violating the law’s moral demands (e.g., do not steal, do not commit adultery; see Rom 2:21–24).

What is “the righteousness of God”?

Kirk mentions debates over the meaning of Paul’s phrase “the righteousness of God.” Does it refer to an attribute of God (God’s righteousness), a gift of righteousness from God (alien, foreign, or imputed righteousness), or the righteous activity of God in keeping covenant and saving his people?

Stephen answers: all of the above, depending on context.

• In some places, God’s righteousness is clearly God’s own attribute (e.g., Rom 3:5, 25). This righteousness includes his covenant faithfulness to keep his promises.
• At other times, “the righteousness of God” may mean the gift of righteousness to those who are not righteous in themselves (Rom 1:17; 3:21–22; cf. Rom 5:17; Phil 3:9).
• Stephen, however, takes “the righteousness of God” in Romans 1:17 and 3:21–22 to mean God’s ordained path to righteousness for sinners—the path of faith—as in Romans 10:3 (cf. 10:6).

Justified “by faith in Christ” or “by the faithfulness of Christ”?

When Paul says we are justified πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (“faith of Jesus”), should this be understood as an objective genitive, i.e., “faith in Jesus,” or a subjective genitive, i.e., “the faithfulness of Jesus” (or both)?

Regardless of where we land, both are true theologically: Justification depends on Christ’s obedient faithfulness to his mission, and it also requires the believer’s faith in Christ.

Nonetheless, Stephen opts for the objective reading (“faith in Christ”), given the emphasis Paul clearly places on the faith of the believer in the context of justification. Faith is repeatedly that of the believer. For instance:

• “We also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ” (Gal 2:16; emphasis added).
• “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness” (Rom 4:3; emphasis added).
• “It will be counted to us who believe in him” (Rom 4:24; emphasis added).
• “For with the heart one believes and is justified” (Rom 10:10; emphasis added).

Future justification and judgment according to works?

Some speak of justification in two stages: an initial justification by grace through faith, and a final justification—at the last judgment—according to works. This is a serious attempt to integrate texts that speak of judgment according to works (such as Rom 2) with texts that emphasize justification by grace.

However, Stephen disagrees, arguing that Paul nowhere distinguishes two stages of justification and even affirms that in the end believers will be justified by faith (e.g., Phil 3:9; Gal 5:5; Rom 3:30).

How then should we handle those texts that do indeed speak of a judgment according to works? Protestants would historically affirm that we are neither saved by works nor without works. Faith alone saves, but the faith that saves is never alone. Along with justification comes the gift of the Spirit. We are given the Spirit in order to bear the fruit of the Spirit in order to live by the Spirit. So, justification even in the end will be by faith, but that faith expresses itself in love (Gal 5:6). Works are not the ground of justification, but the necessary expression of it.

We are neither saved by works nor without works. Works are not the ground of justification, but the necessary expression of it.

Stephen, however, takes the judgment by works in Romans 2:6–13 to speak, not of the works that necessarily accompany faith, but of the ordinary, fundamental path to righteousness—doing good, doing what God demands in his law. This path is closed to sinners (and such are we all; Rom 3:19–20), so that God reveals, for sinful humankind, the path to righteousness by faith (see “But now” in Rom 3:21).

Regarding James 2:14–26, Stephen clarifies that when James speaks of faith, he means something far less than what Paul means by it. James seems to have the idea of mere intellectual assent in view. Paul also agrees with James in seeing works as a necessary accompaniment of true saving faith.

Why justification matters

If we will all eventually stand before God, then few questions are more personal and urgent than, “How can I be justified in his sight?” The doctrine of justification addresses that question directly.

As we seek to apply the doctrine, we should avoid misusing justification to justify sin: “If I’m saved by grace, then I can live however I want.” Paul clearly rejects this logic, insisting that continuing in sin is slavery to sin, leading to eternal death (Rom 6:1–23). We should also avoid restricting the gospel merely to justification, losing sight of God’s cosmic purpose to redeem creation.

Yet justification is absolutely crucial. Jesus proclaimed the dawning of God’s kingdom. But entrance to that kingdom requires new birth and true righteousness, a need that justification meets.

Stephen Westerholm’s suggested resources

Related content

• Justification by Faith: Debates Old and New
• The Shape of Justification
• What Was the Protestant Reformation—& Why Does It Matter? | Joel Beeke
• 5 Reformation Doctrines That Still Transform the Church
• What Is the Gospel? A Surprisingly Contested Question