Romans 4:5 and the Meaning of Dikaioō and Logizomai

The subject of this article is the meaning of two Greek words, δικαιοω (pronounced, “di-kai-o-ō”) and λογιζομαι (pronounced, “lo-giz-o-mai”). Both of these words are used to describe how a sinner is made right with God in Paul’s epistle to the Romans, most notably at 4:5, “But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies (τὸν δικαιοῦντα, from dikaioō) the ungodly, his faith is accounted (λογίζεται, from logizomai) for righteousness.” The dispute over the doctrine of justification that the church has been engaged in since the time of the Reformation should be brought back to the examination of the meaning of the words used by the writers of Scripture to describe justification. Chemnitz makes this point as follows: “In order that we can establish what the word ‘to justify’ properly means in the doctrine of the Gospel, we shall show how this word was used in common, ordinary speech (emphasis mine)”[i] The source of our doctrine should firstly and primarily be the simple and regular meaning of the words used in the original language of Scripture, which in this case is Greek. After defining the common and ordinary meaning of dikaioō and logizomai (these English transliterations of the Greek words will be used for the rest of this article), I will examine a few verses where the words in question are used that not only suggest the definitions given from the lexicons and Lutheran theologians I refer to, but in fact necessitate those definitions. This, I believe, will enable us to come to the proper understanding of how a sinner is made right in the sight of God—i.e., how he is justified.

The meaning of dikaioō in Liddell-Scott’s Greek English Lexicon is given as follows: to “set right,” “hold or deem right, claim or demand as a right,” “pronounce judgment,” “do a man right or justice,” chastise, punish,” “pass sentence on,” “pronounce and treat as righteous, justify, vindicate.”[ii] This idea of pronouncing judgment and treating someone as righteous is often associated with legal proceedings in the context of a court.[iii] The meaning of dikaioō in Fredrick William Danker’s Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature is consistent with the meanings given above from Liddell-Scott’s lexicon; the definitions given there are as follows: “to take up a legal cause, show justice, do justice, take up a cause,” “to render a favorable verdict, vindicate,” “to cause someone to be released from personal or institutional claims that are no longer to be considered pertinent or valid, make free/pure,” “to demonstrate to be morally right, prove to be right.”[iv]

Martin Chemnitz gives his definitions of dikaioō consistently with the definitions listed from the lexicons above: “In the common Greek language the word dikaioō is simply a forensic or declarative word having two meanings. (1) It means to evaluate or pronounce something to be righteous, not in the sense of one’s private opinion but in the way that those who hold a public office make a pronouncement… (2) The term means ‘to inflict punishment’ (kolazein), not in the way private individuals punish but as when a person is punished by a legal decision after a case has been judged.”[v] Johann Gerhard as well makes this point in defining the term dikaioō, “In the New Testament,” which will be where all the verses examined later will be found, “there is hardly any meaning for the word dikaioun (variant form of dikaioō) which does not correspond to some usage in the Old Testament.”[vi] Gerhard states the corresponding Hebrew term in the Old Testament is used to “mean two things: ‘to punish’ and ‘to consider just.’”[vii]

These definitions given of dikaioō are not agreed upon by all Christian traditions. Roman Catholics will define dikaioō as necessarily involving an intrinsic change in the one being justified/vindicated. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, when it defines what being justified/vindicated specifically is, makes clear that it involves an intrinsic change in the object. “Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just (emphasis mine) by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life.”[viii] Ludwig Ott goes into more detail when he defines what it means to be justified, that “it is a true eradication of sin”[ix], and that “it is a supernatural sanctifying and renewal of the inner man,”[x] and that it is “a rebirth from God, that is, as a generation of anew, supernatural life in the former sinner.”[xi] Ott, in commenting how classical Protestants have defined justification, gives this clear and often made critique, “It would be incompatible with the veracity and the sanctity of God that he should declare the sinner to be justified, if he remains in reality sinful.”[xii]

In summary, the dispute is over whether dikaioō means to pronounce just in a public and/or forensic sense, or to intrinsically change the object in order to make it just. The lexicons and Lutheran theologians I cited side with the former. Now, the definition being advocated for by the lexicons and Lutheran theologians above will be shown in the usage of the word dikaioō in Scripture.

Matthew 11:19 (NKJV) states, “the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look, a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ But wisdom is justified (dikaioō) by her children.” This use of dikaioō would make little sense if we take the Roman Catholic meaning of justification and apply it to the justification of wisdom. Is wisdom herself in need of being intrinsically changed so that she may become just? Jesus’ point is not that wisdom is intrinsically made just by her children, as if she was not intrinsically just beforehand, but rather, wisdom is publicly shown and declared to be just by her children. 

Luke 7:29 states, “And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John.” The context of this statement by Luke is that the authority of John the Baptist is being doubted. Jesus begins with his vindication of John the Baptist and his baptism at verse 24 of this chapter, stating in verse 26 that John is “more than a prophet,” and in verse 28 that “among those born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist.” The people who were baptized by John “justified (dikaioō) God” in verse 29 as a result of Jesus’ words because they were baptized by a real and true prophet who then pointed them to the real and true Messiah. With regard to the use of dikaioō here, are we to say that those who heard Jesus, to use Ott’s definition of justification above, performed a “supernatural and sanctifying renewal”[xiii] on God Himself? Are the people here intrinsically making God just? Of course not. These people are, as the lexicons and Lutheran theologians say above, pronouncing and declaring God to be just.

For our last use of dikaioō to be examined, 1 Timothy 3:16 states, “God was manifested in the flesh, justified (dikaioō) in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory.” In context, this text is referring to Jesus Christ and giving a summary of His life and ministry, though obviously not listing every detail that could be given. The important statement for our examination here is that God, who is Jesus Christ in this context, was justified (dikaioō). At first glance, one could possibly interpret this use of dikaioō as in fact referring to an inward sanctifying renewal, in light of the fact that Jesus Christ bore our sins for us on the cross. Wouldn’t this suggest a real and true inward purifying of Christ from our sins took place? This cannot be the proper interpretation from either the classical Protestant or the Roman Catholic perspective, because both of our churches reject the idea that Christ became intrinsically sinful with our sins on the cross, which precludes the necessity of an intrinsic purification. He truly bore our sins, but He did not become intrinsically sinful by them. The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes this clear, “Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned. But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin.”[xiv] Christ does not intrinsically become our sin; He assumes us and our wayward sinful state and dies in our place. The Scriptures make clear that Christ, even in His shedding of blood, remains intrinsically “a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19). On that point, there is no disagreement between the Roman Catholic and classical Protestant churches. Therefore, we must not understand dikaioō at 1 Timothy 3:16 to be referring to an intrinsic sanctifying renewal of Christ; Christ is perfectly and intrinsically pure in His Person as the eternal Son of God. The definition of dikaioō given by the lexicons and Lutheran theologians above is the proper understanding of the word, that the Spirit publicly shows and pronounces Christ to be just and right, most notably in His resurrection and ascension to the right hand of God.

With these three examples, we see that the word dikaioō does not refer to an intrinsic sanctifying renewal of the object. If it did, we would have wisdom, Jesus Christ, and God Himself, all being intrinsically sanctified and renewed in the Scriptures. The fact is that the common and ordinary usage of the term dikaioō does not bear out how Roman Catholics have defined the concept; it bears out how classical Protestants have defined the concept.

Turning now to the term logizomai, which is intimately tied into the concept of justification for Paul in his epistle to the Romans, the meaning of logizomai in Liddell-Scott’s Greek English Lexicon is given as follows: “prop. of numerical calculation, count, reckon,” to “calculate roughly, not by rule, but off-hand,” to “set down to one’s account.”[xv] These are the definitions given when referring to numbers; however, the lexicon states when the word is used, “without reference to numbers,” it means to “take into account, calculate, consider,” to “reckon, consider that…”[xvi] The meaning of logizomai in Fredrick William Danker’s Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature is again consistent with the meanings already given: “to determine by mathematical process, reckon, calculate,” “as a result of a calculation evaluate, estimate, look upon as, consider,” “to give careful thought to a matter, think (about), consider, ponder, let one’s mind dwell on,” “to hold a view about someth., think, believe, be of the opinion.”[xvii] If we recall Ott’s critique of the Protestant understanding of justification given earlier, that “it would be incompatible with the veracity and the sanctity of God that he should declare the sinner to be justified, if he remains in reality sinful,” we can test his critique in Scripture’s use of the word logizomai to see if God is only able to declare something to be what it intrinsically is.

Romans 2:26 says, “Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted (logizomai) as circumcision?” The context of this verse is Paul’s argument that circumcision does not itself make you a true and faithful Jew, as Paul concludes towards the end of chapter 2, “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter” (Romans 2:28-29). Then, is it ”incompatible with the veracity and sanctity of God” that He should account, reckon, logizomai, an uncircumcised person as being circumcised, i.e., a keeper of His law, when physically he is not? God will account the man who is uncircumcised as a circumcised member of His covenant people, though physically he is not, if he keeps His law. The praise of this reality “is not from men but from God.” (Romans 2:29) It is, of course, not incompatible with the veracity and sanctity of God to do this at all. It is perfectly within the character of God to reckon and consider anyone to be His covenant people, even if that person lacks the covenant sign of circumcision.

In connection with the previous point, Romans 9:6-8 says, “But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham, but, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called.’ That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted (logizomai) as the seed.” Paul in Romans 9 argues that only specific children of Abraham are truly his seed, and of those who are Abraham’s true seed, not all of them are physically and intrinsically Abraham’s seed. Paul gives the example of Isaac being the only one of Abraham’s children being counted (logizomai) by God as Abraham’s seed, although Abraham had another son, Ishmael. Ishmael is intrinsically Abraham’s seed, but God does not count him to be such, since he is not a son of the promise. This is a crucial point because God’s action of counting people as the seed of Abraham who intrinsically are not, and not counting all of Abraham’s seed as true offspring who are intrinsically his offspring, is Paul’s argument for God considering the gentiles to be His people later in Romans 9, “As he says also in Hosea: ‘I will call them My people, who were not My people, and her beloved, who was not beloved” (verse 25). Everyone who believes in Jesus Christ is one of the innumerable descendants of Abraham due to God’s reckoning them so, regardless of whether they are intrinsically a descendant of Abraham. That is not against the veracity and sanctity of God; that is the gospel. You do not have to intrinsically be what God is counting you to be in order for you to be counted as such. You do not have to be physically circumcised in order to be counted (logizomai) a member of God’s covenant people. You do not have to be a physical son of Abraham in order to be counted (logizomai) as a son of Abraham by faith. The meaning of the word logizomi bears the following statement out; you do not have to be intrinsically righteous before God in order to be counted (logizomai) as righteous by God in the Gospel.

Applying the meaning of dikaioō and logizomai that we have seen from the usages of those words in Scripture to Romans 4:5, the doctrine of justification is seen clearly, “But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies (dikaioō) the ungodly, his faith is accounted (logizomai) for righteousness.” If we allow, as Chemnitz says, the common and ordinary meaning of these words to inform us of our understanding of the text, we can only conclude that God declares/pronounces as righteous the one who is intrinsically ungodly, and that the faith of the ungodly one is accounted to him as righteousness, even though to be intrinsically righteous in the sight of God, far more than faith is necessary. Continuing to Romans 4:6, it is stated that “God imputes (logizomai) righteousness apart from works.” The one who receives this imputation of righteousness, in context, is the one who is intrinsically ungodly and sinful, “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute (logizomai) sin.” (Romans 4:7-8) The blessed man of Romans 4 is the one who is intrinsically sinful, but God takes no account of it. He does not reckon it against him. He forgives and covers it. This is the proper understanding of justification as informed by the common and ordinary meaning of the words in the text.

[i] Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici Part II-III, 2008, trans. J. A. O. Preus (Saint Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House), 880.

[ii] Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, eds. Sir Henry Stuart Jones, Roderick McKenzie, rev. eds. A Greek-English Lexicon With a Revised Supplement, 9th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press), s.v. δικαιοσύνη.

[iii] Ibid.  

[iv] Bauer, Walter, Fredrick William Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, eds. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. 2000 (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press) s.v. δικαιοω.

[v] Ibid. Martin Chemnitz, Loci Theologici Part II-III .

[vi] Johann Gerhard, Theological Commonplace XIX: On Justification Through Faith, trans. Richard J. Dindia, ed. Joshua J. Hayes, Heath R. Curtis, general ed. Benjamin T. G. Mayes (Saint Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House), 13.

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] The Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Section 1992.

[ix] Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 2018, trans. Patrick Lynch, Ph.D, ed. James Canon Bastible, D.D (Baronius Press), 269.

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Ibid., 270.

[xii] Ibid.

[xiii] See reference 10.

[xiv] The Catholic Church, The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Section 603.

[xv] Ibid. Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. λογ-εια.

[xvi] Ibid.

[xvii] Ibid. Bauer, Walter, William Fredrick Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, s. v. λογιζομαι.

Jordon Staudenheimer is a pre-seminary student at Concordia Saint Paul University. He is studying to become a pastor in the LCMS.