Historically people have focussed on the existence of God de facto, rather than the righteousness God exhibits. This tendency seems to go back to the Greek philosophers who did not think any god was particularly righteous. It is a tendency stemming from lack of belief. Persuasion that the God we associate with the teachings of Jesus Christ is righteous is something supposed to develop with Christian faith, but it seems to have been lacking among many people over the centuries despite their being called ‘Christian’. This lack of ascribing of righteous character to God is also seen in how people have come to think of Jesus, the Son. It is seen more as de facto, less as de jure. In other words, the Son, in this lack of faith, is regarded as simply existing as the Son as a matter of fact, rather than as a matter of the worthiness of his character in the eyes of the Father. It seems to me to go back to the Ancient Greek philosophical thinking of no god being righteous, but simply existing. In the true faith of which first followers of Jesus were persuaded, the Father is believed to be righteous, and the Son is deemed by God to be worthy to be called His Son, in a righteous sense of this worthiness. This faith can seem to be in conflict with traditional forms of Christianity that have developed over the centuries. That does not mean the faith is wrong, but rather that traditional Christian doctrines have developed over the centuries out of not just responses to Christian original preaching but also out of existing Ancient Greek philosophical thinking. As the apostle Paul put it, the philosophers knew not God. They philosophically built on concepts of the existence of gods, and in some of their thinking, an existence of an ultimate God, but adopted a strategy of thinking in which they deliberately did not assume any god to be particularly righteous. There are signs, it seems to me, that this kind of thinking influenced the growth of dogma traditions within Christianity, down to this day. It might be why Christians enthusiastic about theological frameworks such as Trinitarianism have adopted a view of the Son as simply existing as the Son forever (de facto), alongside a Father who simply exists forever (de facto), rather than emphasising his worthiness of Sonship (de jure) in the eyes of a righteous Father. It is a lack of persuasion. It then manifests in lack of understanding that to be children of this righteous Father, we must be righteous too, worthy of this righteous Father. We find in John 8, that Jesus teaches the faith that God is righteous such that to be His children we must be righteous too, and this comes from belief in Jesus the Son who is accepted by the Father as worthy of Sonship, and in following his teachings persistently in order to become worthy children of God. It is then not simply de facto sonship, but de jure sonship, and this is by faith.
Note: For a critique of this analysis, see https://chatgpt.com/share/69feeec9-a2cc-83eb-a16a-dbfb20263b75
