There has
been for a very long time debate about the meaning of δικαιοω, especially in “salvation”
contexts in the LXX and Greek NT. While there is no question that the verb can,
and indeed does, have a declarative meaning, even in some soteriological
contexts, there is also a transformative
dimension of the term, too (e.g., see where the verb “to constitute” [καθιστημι]
is coupled with the adjective deriving from this verb, δικαιος; for a discussion on Rom 5:19, see this post).
Phillip Schaff, author of the impressive
8-vol. History of the Christian Church,
while often defending the Reformed understanding of soteriology and other
issues, eventually admits the fact that –οω verbs in Greek have a transformative, not
only a mere declarative, sense behind them, in vol. 7, p. 104
n. 139, states (italics in original; comment in square brackets my own for
clarification):
Modern exegesis has justified this [declarative] view
of δικαιόω and δικαίωσις, according to Hellenistic usage, although etymologically
the verb may mean to make just, i.e.,
to sanctify, in accordance with verbs in όω (e.g. δηλόω φανερόω, τυφλόω,(i.to make manifest, etc.)
In his seminal 3-volume Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, Celsus Spicq quotes M.J.
LaGrange's article in Revue Biblique, "La Justification Selon Paul
[1914:121]) stating, "First, we should note that verbs in οω mean to make
whatever the root indicates. Thus δικαιοω would properly mean 'make
just.'"
A study of these verbs Schaff references
supports this admission. The word δηλοω appears seven times in the epistles,
always denoting a recognition of an actual manifestation (1 Cor 1:11; 3:13; Col
1:18; Heb 9:8; 12:27; 1 Pet 1:11; 2 Pet 1:14); φανεροω appears fifty times in the Greek NT, denoting
the same (e.g., 1 Cor 4:5; 1 Tim 3:16); τυφοω appears
three times in the NT, always denoting actual blindness (John 14:40; 2 Cor 4:4;
1 John 2:11).
Another
verb, among many, one could add to Schaff’s lit that also supports this meaning
is the verb τυφοω, meaning “to be puffed up”—it is used three times in the NT, and always
refers, not merely to the declared state of a person, but their intrinsic qualities, too (1 Tim 3:15;
6:4; 2 Tim 3:4).
In both
soteriological and non-soteriological contexts, -οω verbs do not have a mere
declarative sense; only by engaging in special pleading can one claim that such
is the case when δικαιοω is used in
soteriological contexts. This is just another piece of evidence against various Protestant understandings of Sola Fide and the forensic nature of justification.
(For previous discussions of the transformative dimension behind δικαιοω, see this post and this post).
(For previous discussions of the transformative dimension behind δικαιοω, see this post and this post).
