He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the
just, even they both are abomination to the Lord. (Prov 17:15)
While
reading the Bible today as part of my daily scripture reading, I read this verse
in Proverbs. Perhaps it is due to God’s providence I would read this passage
today, it being “Reformation Day” (October 31), but this is a perfect
condemnation of the Protestant doctrine of justification: a blasphemous act of
legal fiction that makes God a liar and is nothing short of an “abomination” (תּוֹעֵבָה,
same Hebrew word used to describe homosexuality). Commenting on this verse, we
read the following in one scholarly source:
17:15 He who exonerates the guilty and he who condemns the
innocent— the Lord loathes them both.
This fundamental rule of judicial decisions is meant for
judges. It seems to be based on Deut 25:1: “If there is conflict between men
and they approach for judgment, then they [the judges] shall judge them. And
they shall exonerate the innocent and condemn the guilty [we hiṣdiqu ʾet haṣṣaddiq
we hiršiʿu ʾet harašaʿ].” The last sentence uses almost the same words as
this proverb. Hence the above translation of Prov 17:15a uses judicial terms.
Alternatively, one might render the line in broader moral terms: “He who
justifies the wicked [maṣdiq rašaʿ] and he who condemns the righteous [maršiaʿ
ṣaddiq], etc.” Then the proverb refers to whoever lies about someone’s
character, even outside court.
By either interpretation, duality is important: Not only is
the injustice to the innocent (an obvious wrong) loathsome to God, but also the
failure to punish the guilty, even though the latter is the lesser judicial
offense (Naḥmias) and might even seem merciful (Ehrlich).
This verse has a strong parallel in a Sumerian proverb from
the Old Babylonian period: The one who perverts justice, the one who loves an
unjust verdict, He is an abomination to Utu. (4Shamash, the sun god, overseer
of justice.) (trans. G. D. Young 1972: 132)
R. Yaron (1985) argues that this and some other “abomination”
proverbs are tristichs: “He who acquits the guilty / and he who condemns the
innocent—/ the Lord loathes them both.” But the criteria for the division are
unclear, and the first two stichs, each with two words, would be unusually short
for lines in Proverbs. (Michael V. Fox, Proverbs 10-31: A New Translation
with Introduction and Commentary [AYB 18B; New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2009], 632)
For articles
against the historic Protestant understanding of justification and imputation,
see, for e.g.:
Refuting Christina Darlington on the Nature of "Justification"
Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness
Full Refutation of the Protestant Interpretation of John 19:30,
