Fides 18 N2 - Revista do Centro Presbiteriano Andrew Jumper

Ralph F. Boersema, Original Righteousness
With regard to purity of heart, approved status, and peace with God, the
dynamic of righteousness is not that of production, resulting in a commodity
that can be exchanged for something else of worth or that gives someone the
obligation to repay the righteousness produced. 4 Rather, righteousness is a
status and quality, received as a gift, a blessing that must be held fast (Job 2:9;
27:6; Hos 12:6).
Righteousness is simply about being morally good and doing what is
ethically right. When it is lost, the unrighteous one deserves punishment. When
the penalty has been paid the righteous status is restored. To remain innocent
everyone is called to keep the law, that is, to continue being good and doing
what is right. When he does, he deserves to live, enjoy freedom, be approved,
and be accepted. To subject him to anything less would be to treat him as unrighteous.
As just people, Adam and Eve enjoyed life, freedom, acceptance and
approval until their rebellion. Before the fall they were already greatly blessed
and their obedience did not merit more than these riches. There is no validity in
arguing that righteousness earns eternal life on the basis that unrighteousness
deserves death and obedience must have a corresponding reward. 5
3. original justification
By reason of the uprightness and holiness in which he was created, man
was able to meet all God’s perfect demands. Therefore, John Murray explains:
As long as man fulfilled these demands his integrity would have been maintained.
He would have continued righteous and holy. In this righteousness he would
be justified, that is, approved and accepted by God, and he would have life. 6
4 Cf., e.g., PHILLIPS, Richard. “The logic of God’s covenant with Adam was that obedience
produced righteousness, righteousness received justification, and justification received life.” “Covenant
Confusion”, in The Covenant: God’s Voluntary Condescension, Joseph A. Pipa, Jr. and C. N. Willborn.
Taylors, S.C.: Presbyterian Press, 2005, p. 113. Phillips reflects a common Reformed idea here. G. Vos
describes the late 16 th century view of Robert Rollock as follows: “In the covenant of works there is a
twofold righteousness—one on which it rests and another which it had to produce.” VOS, Geerhardus.
Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos. Phillipsburg:
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980, pp. 239-240. I think it is more accurate to say, “Righteousness
is expressed in obedience, producing righteous works and preserving life.” RFB
5 Cf. URSINUS, Zacharias. Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism. Phillipsburg, N.J.:
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., reprint of 1852 edition, p. 335, “And even if our works
were perfectly good, yet they could not merit eternal life, inasmuch as they are due from us. A reward
is due to evil works according to the order of justice; but but [sic] not unto good works, because we are
bound to do them as the creatures of God; but no one can bind God, on the other hand, by any works or
means to confer any benefit upon him. Evil works, again, in their very design oppose and injure God,
whilst good works add nothing to his felicity.”
6 MURRAY, John. “The Adamic Administration.” The Collected Writings of John Murray, vol. 2.
Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1996 reprint, p. 47.
102