Self Righteousness

Post 345
enhanced links 12/27/2015 (thanks Mom!)

By now you should not need help making the direct link between the last Post about Cinderella in the kingdom of heaven and the preceding topic about rogue government personnel and treasonous conduct, though you may still need assistance to see how all this works into the Grand Tapestry. But in making the connection, the last Post created a very important question of distinction to be explored while looking for answers of clarification. How are we to deal with well-meaning zealous persons that nonetheless work earnestly to destroy what they think they are protecting and/or even enhancing?

…“For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.”… Romans 10:2-3.

How do we dare to criticize devout Christians who successfully cast out devils in Jesus name and/or devote their Christian lives to doing wonderfully good works in that great name? (Matthew 7:22), especially in the face of the fact that some of Jesus’ first disciples had trouble casting out some demons yet his criticism was only light and constructive (Matthew 17:19-20).

We have only just begun to bring back a long neglected remembrance regarding the importance of righteousness in God’s kingdom as distinct from getting there at all, and the question to answer now is; How do we distinguish worthy righteousness from its deceitful imitation of self righteousness? Note, in the above passage, that we are not speaking of the flagrantly un-righteous (*1), but making a distinction between two very earnest and zealous but different righteousnesses.
Remember that hidden third option principle we discussed many Posts back? (*2), well that comprehension is needed now. In this latter age we have been beguiled to see simplistically that there is either righteousness or unrighteousness, and we all know how easy it is to identify one from the other: “Joining UNICEF to save kids is righteous, and selling kids into human trafficking is unrighteous.” Pointing that finger of simplistic two-sided distinction is what automatically places us in the opposite camp from the accused; “That’s unrighteous, and I don’t do that.” So we assume by default that we are therefore righteous… and, by the inclusion of the root-word in each pro-distinction; it seems we are: Righteous and self-righteous vs. un-righteousness. Therefore, in the above Romans passage revealing that there is a further distinction to be made within the righteous category, let’s ask the questions it engenders:

• Who might it be that would have such zeal of God but not according to knowledge?
• Who could know of how important righteousness is, yet be wholly ignorant of what God’s righteousness looks like?
• What kind of a faithful person would go about establishing their own righteousness to fill the important need, because they have not submitted to God’s distinction of righteousness due to their ignorance?
Read the passage again and contemplate these questions before moving on.

Applying this concept question to our governing officials in Type: What kind of a faithful official would go about establishing their own laws to fill the important need, because they have not submitted to the Constitution’s Law?

Whoever “they” are in the above passage, their kind of zealous righteousness is identified as self-righteous. It’s a common word that we all use instinctively to describe a personality and conduct that quickly comes to mind at the breath of the word, yet we so easily fail to actually define specifically what we mean. What does self-righteous mean? It means exactly what the above passage says it means. Read it again.
In this light we begin to see that there are indeed two camps of righteousness, but the division is now different than we originally speculated: Righteous vs. unrighteous and self-righteous.

The reason why I initially left off the identity of those that Paul is referencing is because it allows our contemplations to extend to anyone that does this, rather than just those he specifically identifies. The moment that we discover “their” identity (which identity distinguishes them from us), our finger-pointing places us in the safe camp of two sides. So without identifying Paul’s target right away, we are free to see that there are very many self-proclaimed Christians today who fall fully into this category of very diligently and zealously motivated people going about establishing their own righteousness… and being called self-righteous behind their prudish backs by self-righteous people feeling more righteous because of their numerous diligent works of sacrifices and offerings of charity in liberty that is outside of the constraining rule of law (Isaiah 65:3-5). All these people comparing themselves with themselves have no knowledge of what God’s righteousness looks like, so they faithfully do what their heart dictates with their limited understanding; The blind leading the blind, seeming to seek out the ditch on purpose because of what they cannot see!

So since we now know that righteousness is very important to the kingdom, but only the right kind is counted worthy (Romans 4:3, Psalm 106:30-31, Romans 2:26); Is “their” righteousness sufficient to be counted compatible among the citizens of God’s kingdom? Let’s find out by reading the opening line of the above critical passage:

“Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved”… Romans 10:1.

Huh~ (a statement, not a question). Paul is talking about Israel. And he makes it clear that they are NOT saved. This is Israel we are talking about, you know; The blessed children of Abraham as distinct from “the other” of his children. These are those special people who were given the law of God to keep and protect for the world. God’s chosen people. I thought they had a shoe-in; they are guaranteed a seat in the kingdom. How are they not saved?
Well, Paul makes it clear that their lack of salvation and their quazi-righteousness are linked, they have failed to submit to the righteousness of God and instead have set up their own as the standard-- not as an alternate replacement, but as the original righteousness; “This IS God’s righteousness.” The point to note is why they are not saved.
So is salvation about faith, or about righteousness? Strangely the answer is; “Yes.”

“For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven” Matthew 5:20, (see also 23:13 for an shocking extension of this alarming pronouncement).

The topic here is righteousness as it relates to getting into heaven. So we discover that by use of the word exceed (G4052 superabound), Christ is not suggesting “just more of the same” but a righteousness G4119 surpassed. This confusing distinction only makes real sense when we understand that he is speaking of their kind of righteousness (G1343 equity (of character or act)) as distinct from a better, superior kind that multiplies the affect of the lesser (II Corinthians 9:9-11). So how is it that the Israelites, of all people, would not know of God’s kind of righteousness? I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that they were set up to fail by misdirection:

“For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them” Romans 10:5.

What did the Israelites have but the law of Moses? It’s what God dramatically gave them on the fiery mountain after leading them out of slavery in Egypt. It’s the only form of righteousness they knew. What hope could they have to comprehend another kind of righteousness when it eventually came?

“For Christ is the end (G5056 conclusion) of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth” Romans 10:4. -- But apparently not for anyone who doesn’t. For them; the completion of the law has not yet come, though it did. So they stick with the law, though by circumstance they cannot.

I drug this verse out of its order from the passage to draw attention to its point. The prophets foretold the Israelites of God’s Messiah that was still to come after the law, and the Typology that God gave them by “Moses in two parts (*3)" foretold of another kind to complete the work started by the former (Hebrews 7:11-12). The Israelites well knew of this coming Messiah and were looking for him, but they got hung up on the law and its righteousness of self-works-- self-righteousness-- in duty; a slave/servant mentality of doing as told without the passion of “want to” that gave the law validity. A blind obedience of following became duty, and duty eventually turned militant in the effort of holding the obedience to what they no longer wanted to do but were obligated to. The militancy became power, and power reinterpreted the law to get the best of both worlds: “YOUR kingdom MY way.” In their heart they want God’s kingdom, so that makes their unrighteous means righteous. Self-righteous.

Verse 4 follows verse 3 of Romans ten as its answer of explanation: They went about establishing their own righteousness of the familiar law because they rejected the new Christ of fulfilled righteousness who came after the work of the law had done its preparatory but incomplete work. Instead of a stepping-stone means the law became the end itself. They saw nothing coming after the law. There is no 8th day at the end of the week. So in zeal of God they rejected he who came to lead them beyond the law in a different kind of righteousness that did not destroy the law but surpassed it. Exceeded it. Completed it.

“But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven?... or, Who shall descend into the deep?... But what saith it? (The righteousness of faith says:) The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” Romans 10:6-10.

Again the marriage Typology; the influence of the heart to motivate and the mouth of action to declare the path chosen. I confess, this is a very full passage and hard to digest its full related meaning without chapters of explanation, so let’s just focus on the general topic at hand. Paul is not here talking to the unsaved Israelites but to those all-inclusive people who can understand the discussion by experience of accepting Jesus the Christ as the sum of completion. In this passage we see clearly that faith and law are not at all the same things and therefore their righteousness’ are not the same either: Unlike that of faith, the righteousness of the law does indeed ask; Who shall ascend into heaven? (intellectually questioning Jesus’ legitimacy), and, Who shall descend into the deep? (another intellectually doubting question of Christ Jesus). There are whole sections of the seminaries dedicated to researching and explaining these questions-- such as the virgin birth and the resurrection from the dead-- and establishing the authorized opinion on the matter that their students will then propagate to their parishioners as the official answer of the Church to the questions of doubt.
So why doesn’t the righteousness of faith ask such important questions? To be simplistic, it’s because it doesn’t care to drag up the complexities of doubts not felt. Faith is established in the heart and the result is righteousness born of love rather than intellect. Cinderella does not think to justify her conduct as unselfish because the unimpeachable state of her pure heart automatically justifies it on a level beyond intellectual scrutiny (I John 3:20-21, II Timothy 4:8, Colossians 2:16-18, etc.).

“For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness.” (repeated from above).

This kind of faith-full righteousness doesn’t do its work because it fears punishment or desires reward. It does it because of love. What are rules and laws of proper conduct to a love that has devoted obedient faith in the target of its devotion? No punishment can deter it and no reward can buy it, and no doubt can quench it!

“From the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” Luke 6:45.

And so the lawfully necessary confession of the mouth that results in salvation by the publicly declared chosen path, is but a byproduct of what cannot be restrained in the heart: “I DO! a thousand times over, I do!” A slave/servant cannot adequately express such unbound passion to his lord, and so his righteousness is that of mere duty, even if he loves his master: Duty takes default precedence by law; “You did it because you had to.” (This important concept is the sum of why humanity is allowed to fail by experience of learning, but that is a topic to discuss at length later).
The Israelites are still the slaves/servants of God because they reject their liberating Messiah out of fear of the known dangers due to a lack of faith in he who desires to liberate them (Numbers 13:25-14:10). Being familiar and content to be servants on the safe-side rather than beloved friends on the dangerous side, they were content to continue following Moses through the wilderness to the end of their days, --servants who got what their un-servant-like rebelliousness in fear demanded--. So God agreed… with a long-range national plan in mind that doesn’t included many individuals. (Israel’s future guaranteed shoe-in salvation is national in nature; not personal, as is likewise the Church. THIS IS A CRITICAL CONCEPT TO GRASP). So while Moses indeed led them through the wilderness thereafter, God’s passion is with those whose faith breeds a spontaneous righteousness as a byproduct (II Corinthians 3:6+).

…“that I may win Christ, and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that (righteousness) which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith (G4102 persuasion):”… Philippians 3:9.
* * *

So now that we better comprehend Paul’s commended kind of righteousness born out of faith in love of God’s Son, let’s go back a verse and see what was on his mind that brought him to this point:

“Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ…” (Philippians 3:8)

OK wait. Paul declares that it was for Christ Jesus’ sake that he suffered the loss of all things? (and his list of “all things” is significant). Why didn’t that great loss distance his heart from the Lord in bitterness? Why would he instead, with cavalier disdain, joyfully fling away everything that was lost as if it were utterly insignificant and unwanted anyway?
It was because he saw that loss as the waste-byproduct of digestion for sustenance that led him to the intimate knowledge of the Messiah his Lord, and prepared his heart to be counted worthy of that Lord’s kingdom through the righteousness that is provided by God in the love called faith, as explanatory verse 9 stated. It is like the young woman who joyfully leaves her father and mother's home of her upbringing to cling to her new husband in his.

Is there any comparison between these two righteousness’? No! a thousand times, No!
So why would liberated Christians today, turn again to learn the legal righteousness found at the feet of the faith-less Scribes and Pharisees now calling themselves Rabbis of great learning? (“Everyone needs a Rabbi”). It’s because these Christians have lost their first love and therefore need an alternate guidance of G4102 persuasion faith to do what they no longer feel inclined to do but know they should:

“Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: and hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted” Revelation 2:1-3.

Wow, what a commendable list of righteous works! What a gloriously praiseworthy list of evidences of faithfulness and endurance! If only we could all be so commended! (Matthew 25:21 or 23). But now let’s get to the meat that this recognition by our Lord leads up to for comparison sake:

“Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love” Revelation 1:4.

Oh boy, I thought after the nevertheless he was really going to hit them with something serious! Lost first love?- that just comes with the familiarity of a long relationship; It’s nothing serious, they are still amazingly faithful, fulfilling the duties of their gender role, and that above criticism. So now that we know they are safe, let’s continue:

“Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first (G4413 foremost) works;…”

Hold on just a second; “Do the more important works?” These folks are filled to the brim with good and commendable works for the Lord, and very good and commendable works they are! They are very righteous works that no one, not even the Lord, denies has great value. So how are they to find the time or energy to do the foremost works as well? “Come to think of it; I don’t even remember what the foremost works are. Surely this can’t actually be too big a deal,” right? Let’s see:

…“or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent” Revelation 1:5b.

“Oh common! Seriously?! After all that I have given to this relationship...” right?

Can you feel their frustration with an ungrateful spouse and lord who can’t seem to see the great benefit they bring to the relationship and kingdom by their hard work of devotion? Can you relate?
We don’t even have to explore the details of the letter, like; What does the candlestick represent? or, Where does it go after it is removed? and, Where is it’s place in the first place? These are legal details that aren’t needed in order to feel the weight of his heartfelt unhappiness in the relationship.
If there is any of that old righteousness spawned of love in devoted faith in this my lord, then this last days church will eagerly go about finding the nature of those foremost works that he wants. But if that pure and unrestrainable righteousness has been completely replaced by the righteousness of duty in the law of wifery, then the bitterness of her diligent work being under-appreciated will make the problem worse, and thereby require the study of the letter of the law to root out the legitimacy of his complaint... if it's even wanted.
Adding “sandwiching verse 6” reconfirms that the numerous works listed on both sides of the complaint are indeed appreciated and commended, but they are different than the works that are really far more important, foremost, first. So is it the works that are really important to him or the motive that validates them? The question that may make discovery easier is; “Why and when did I stop doing the foremost works?” Let me help answer that question:
* * *

“And some (seed) fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. …
Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. …and that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection” Luke 8:7,11,14.

There is nothing inherently sinful about generic cares and riches and pleasures, they can simply be a healthy and necessary part of natural life. In fact the list of our Church’s commendation is one of commendable cares. But cares (G3308 distraction), like the deceitfulness of riches and (G1939 longing) pleasures, i.e. lusts (Mark 4:19), good or bad, can choke out the faith (persuasion), that springs from the word of God as seed, by overwhelming it through neglect of what gives faith life: the Spirit of the word as seed, called Faith. Such choking starvation by preoccupation with lesser things results in the needful works of love becoming duty without love. Without love, duty becomes the justifying focus as an end in itself. An unhappy end. A faithless end. An end not counted worth its effort.
To remind you that we are indeed still moving forward from the discussion of rogue governments, let me overlay its Type:
The overwhelming political duties of the daily seat chokes the original intent to keep to the standard of the office’s actual purpose. What is that standard? The Law (capital L meaning Constitutional values) to which we swore and oath to uphold, but which became neglected by the complexity of the daily effort. Choked by cares. And riches, and inappropriate desires.
It is my personal opinion of observation that we elect ignorant and unqualified persons to office, and instead of then quickly educating themselves to become qualified on the job, they are heaped to distraction by the overload of daily bureaucracy until they succumb to the “norm” of the job while never learning the tenor of the Law that should always remain their foremost focus. Their first works.
Ironically the Law is left behind neglected while they work diligently to occupy the seat of governance.
If in this Typology the Law is Righteousness, then this distracting bureaucracy is self-righteousness. Simply another, more pleasant form of un-righteousness. Lawlessness.
This corrupt result is not from a lack of good will or earnest desire. It’s wholly due to a state of ignorance herded by busyness through forced obligation of cares, riches, and pleasures that the job is supposedly demanding.
Christ is telling the Revelation last days Church that we are missing the whole point of the office that originally moved us to choose it in the first place. No good works, however important, should stand in the way of recovering that foremost perspective ASAP. So with the Governmental offices as the Type, America is falling today because lawmakers and bureaucrats have utterly forgotten that the Constitution is their primary concern and guideline.

The reason why this is foremostly important, while the other should not be neglected (Luke 11:42) is because, while the commendable works we do are indeed needful, the neglect of the Law by ignorance causes us to necessarily set up our own version of law in the effort. But we are not the Founders! we lack their deep faith and understanding. Our ignorant modern wisdom falls pathetically short of “good enough” to cross that line. In our diminished state of mind and comprehension today, we are wholly incapable of coming up with a replacement document that equals the proven supremacy of the U.S. Constitution for governing such a great nation of human liberty in abundant peace and prosperity. But the bureaucracy of the seat sitting in ignorance, demands by the deceitfulness of misdirection that we try. Our current national and local condition of legal depravity proves my point.

…“For I bear them record that they have a zeal of our Founders, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of our Founder’s Law, and going about to establish their own laws, have not submitted themselves unto the Law of our Founders.”… Romans 10:2-3 applied.

This generic state of political depravity through diligent though well-meaning ignorance opens the door to many various corruptions; whether through their own good intentions, or through those wily enemies who lead them intentionally to make bad choices by the complexity of deception. Ignorance of the Constitutional fence is simultaneously as destructive to this Christian nation as ignorance of the Biblical fence is to the kingdom of heaven. The one is simply the shadow of the other.

“And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John” Matthew 11:12-13.

There is a very useful value to the law and prophets to keep our liberated hearts tracking straight. The violence against the kingdom of heaven, after the law had passed, is done by the abuse of liberty that freed us from the oppression of the law. Abortion being just one temporal example, and the forced incorporation of so-called transgender (*4) another.
* * * * * * *

(*1) “But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed (i.e. put down like a rabid dog), speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; and shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time (i.e. broad daylight, before all, brazenly, unashamed).”… II Peter 2:12-13.

(*2) The third option principle can be found compiled in Posts 191, May 17, 2011, Blind Side (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011/05/blind-side.html) -through- Post 193, May 20, 2011, End of Book One (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011/05/end-of-book-one.html), and concluded as a simplistic description in application by the words:
“The Third Option:
A nation collectively bound to the calling that; God is supreme, is the nation that stands as an unmovable wall against the storms of tormented neighbors.” - Post 194, May 26, 2011, Peace (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2011/05/peace.html).

(*3) Moses in Two Parts, Post 246, May 23, 2012 (http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2012/05/moses-in-two-parts.html).

(*4) Transgender ruling CNN Nov 3, 2015 (http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/03/us/illinois-school-district-transgender-ruling/).
Do not let this topic derail the point of the Post, but along this line allow me to simply interject a few questions for contemplation: Since when is the Y-chromosome present or absent by choice or opinion or determination to be so? Are all the body's Y-chromosomes found only in the genitalia and so removed with the parts upon surgically becoming a girl? Do Estrogen injections eliminate the Y-chromosomes or just confuse them? If you put a dress on a baby boy does that make it a girl because it looks like a girl?
*