Righteousness by Faith

[Ted Oplinger]

Gerry - does 1 John 2:1 count? I do not see a qualifier there that says "may not sin, unless you don't see it possible in your experience".

[joeb]

Quote:

It is my hope this thread eventually moves to the point of contrasting our willingness to believe sinful flesh an unbeatable foe, versus our willingness to believe in the power of Christ to effect imparted righteousness as His practical demonstration the flesh really is a beaten foe and dead. Let's agree to save remarks about that until this thread develops more fully.

This is where I want to go too, but I wanted to make sure we were all talking about the same thing when we used the terminology. As we all come from very disparate backgrounds it's very easy to think we all mean the same things by the same words when that isn't always the case. That leads to all kinds of difficulties in communication.

[joeb]

I guess my next question for the thread is either justification or sanctification given in limited quantities? Is God stingy with imparted righteousness and generous with imputed righteousness? That's kind of the feeling I get from some people when this subject is discussed.

[joeb]

As I understand things...I'd have to steer away from man's definitions a bit. I'm not sure if this is an agree or a disagree...

In the light of Romans 5:1-19, 2 Corinthians 5:14, 15, and Galatians 2:20, I would understand both imputed and imparted aspects of righteousness are indeed ours, if I read these verses in the light of each other correctly.

If we are crucified with Christ on the cross, in the similitude of the type of Adam who sinned, and all humans share in a resurrection to life because of being included into Himself in the resurrection, after the similitude of the type of Adam who sinned...by logical extension, Christ was also the anti-type of Adam while He walked on earth - meaning we are as much "in Christ" as He walked about in complete righteousness, as we are "in Christ" at His death and in His resurrection.

That would mean our imputed righteousness is indeed ours as we are in Christ; imparted righteousness is indeed ours as Christ develops and unfolds that righteousness in our day-to-day lives in the here and now.

If "imputed righteousness" is not really ours, how can God tell us we are all justified into life by the blood of Christ (Romans 5:18)?

If we reckon imputed righteousness as a "credit to account" - ours but not really, how would we also avoid the inevitable charge of "celestial bookkeeping"?

In some manner, imputed righteousness must also really belong to us, if I reason this correctly...

Blessings,

I'm curious about your first sentence.

Words have meanings. That's why we use specific words to communicate specific ideas. If the dictionary definitions of imputed and imparted aren't sufficient to understand the two types of righteousness covered by righteousness by faith, then how are we supposed to understand them? Why were those terms used in the first place? God tells us scripture isn't by any private interpretation. To me that says I need to use common dictionary definitions of the words in the Bible and SOP to understand His messages to me, otherwise I can easily end up way out in the weeds in my understanding.

As to imputed righteousness.... I see it as placed on our account as the Bible says we are to wear the robe of Christ's righteousness to cover our nakedness (Rev 3:18). Thus I am seen as something different than what I am. I can never match Christ's sinless life but when the Father sees me He sees Christ's life as long as I am fully surrendered to Him.

As to the charge of "celestial bookkeeping", well, I don't see that as a problem for me, or for you. If the devil can't complain, and has to finally admit that God is just, then the charge is totally bogus and is nothing other than a smokescreen he throws up as a distraction.

[joeb]

Can a slave miss the mark or fall short of a perfect 10 while carrying his Master's wishes?

But what is the converted person a slave to? Doesn't Paul say the uncoverted person is a slave to sin, and the converted person a slave to righteousness?

[joeb]

Imparted righteousness - what was mine in theory (imputed righteousness), it now becomes mine in practice. Like the son imitating his father, he begins to mimic his mannerisms. But he does it imperfectly, just as the moon never perfectly reflects the light of the sun. The closer we come to Christ, the better we reflect His glory.

[skyblue888]

Am I the only one who is not able to read everything that is posted? What used to be the left is now on the right.

[joeb]

Am I the only one who is not able to read everything that is posted? What used to be the left is now on the right.

I'm able to see all the posts, unlike you, but yes, the ads, shoutbox, etc... have been moved by Stan to the left side of the page.

There's a thread on this in the Natter Matters forum.

[Gerr]

But what is the converted person a slave to? Doesn't Paul say the uncoverted person is a slave to sin, and the converted person a slave to righteousness?

ESV | ýRo 6:18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

As a slave to righteousness, does the believer ever miss or come short of the mark of perfect righteousness? And if he does, is he a lost person?

[Gerr]

Well, let's look at that. This is Christ's perfect righteousness, His character that is becoming yours by faith. He is sharing it with you according to your faith. That means it is yours in practice. Take a look at some of the quotes I've given you before, and maybe one or two new ones.

Yes, to some degree His righteousness is mine in practice. But do I reflect His perfect righteousness perfectly? Does the love I practice fully measure up to the love and righteousness that He has reckoned into my account? IMO, NOT in this lifetime.

A reflected image will never be the exact image of the original. While Christ was the "exact imprint of His (God's) nature, we are only reflectors of His righteousness.

Quote:

All true obedience comes from the heart. It was heart work with Christ. And if we consent, He will so identify Himself with our thoughts and aims, so blend our hearts and minds into conformity to His will, that when obeying Him we shall be but carrying out our own impulses. The will, refined and sanctified, will find its highest delight in doing His service. When we know God as it is our privilege to know Him, our life will be a life of continual obedience. Through an appreciation of the character of Christ, through communion with God, sin will become hateful to us.

The only way that God can bring sinful man into heaven is to shed his sinful body, because even with Christ and the Spirit within, this flesh is so corrupt that God asks, "Can a leopard change his spots?" "Can anyone bring clean out of an unclean? Yes, He can forgive and blot out sin, but He can never take our present flesh & blood into heaven.

Let me quote Paul again, "All have sinned and fall short (present tense) of God's glory." Or as EGW says, "The closer you come to Jesus, the more faulty you will appear in your own eyes; for your vision will be clearer, and your imperfections will be seen in broad and distinct contrast to His perfect nature. This is evidence that Satan's delusions have lost their

65

power; that the vivifying influence of the Spirit of God is arousing you. {SC 64.2}

Quote:

As Christ lived the law in humanity, so we may do if we will take hold of the Strong for strength. But we are not to place the responsibility of our duty upon others, and wait for them to tell us what to do. We cannot depend for counsel upon humanity. The Lord will teach us our duty just as willingly as He will teach somebody else. If we come to Him in faith, He will speak His mysteries to us personally. Our hearts will often burn within us as One draws nigh to commune with us as

He did with Enoch. Those who decide to do nothing in any line that will displease God, will know, after presenting their case before Him, just what course to pursue. And they will receive not only wisdom, but strength. Power for obedience, for service, will be imparted to them, as Christ has

promised. Whatever was given to Christ—the “all things” to supply the need of fallen men—was given to Him as the head and representative of humanity. And “whatsoever we ask, we receive of Him, because we keep His commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.” 1 John 3:22. DofA p. 668 [/q

Notice that the first sentence says we are to "accept" Christ's character, not struggle along to develop it on our own through God's power. This is self-righteousness. Paul says the same thing Ellen White said here: "Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus". The thought is the same. We are to allow Christ's mind and character into our lives. Think deeply on what it really means to "let" and "accept" Christ's mind and character as our own. Is that your perception of imparted righteousness?

Accepting Christ's character and God putting it into our account is imputed. I've already stated before that imparted righteousness is putting into practice the righteousness that God Has put into my account although I have not done one righteous act. The point I'm trying make is that in the process of putting this righteousness into practice,am I 100% successful? Am I fully hitting the mark? I say that as long as we're in this sinful flesh - NOT!!!

[Johann]

Interesting and helpful discussion, where nothing but WORDS are used. How can these be defined, and how important is this definition?

In the Scandinavian languages we have but one word for "just" and "righteous", which means that justification and righteousness by faith is defined by the same words. Will the lack of this one word keep Scandinavians who do not know English out of heaven?

How about the lack of other definitions? Is mere faith sufficient?

[Gerr]

That's an interesting of information, Johann, about the Scandinavian words. I am not a Greek scholar, but I can see that the Greek is similar to your language in having the same root word for just & righteous.

Is mere faith sufficient? According to James, faith that doesn't work is dead.

[Ted Oplinger]

Interesting and helpful discussion, where nothing but WORDS are used. How can these be defined, and how important is this definition?

In the Scandinavian languages we have but one word for "just" and "righteous", which means that justification and righteousness by faith is defined by the same words. Will the lack of this one word keep Scandinavians who do not know English out of heaven?

How about the lack of other definitions? Is mere faith sufficient?

No need to fear about the language issue keeping Scandinavians out of heaven. Revelation 5:9 says by Christ's blood purchases people "...from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation."

I think the the bold words cover the Scandinavians in total.

Blessings,

[Ted Oplinger]

That's an interesting of information, Johann, about the Scandinavian words. I am not a Greek scholar, but I can see that the Greek is similar to your language in having the same root word for just & righteous.

Is mere faith sufficient? According to James, faith that doesn't work is dead.

According to Jesus, faith grasps hold of the power in God's Word, to do precisely what it says, and to do what is impossible for man: to bring into existence that which did not exist prior.

The implications of that upon justification and righteousness are far-reaching.

Blessings,

[joeb]

Yes, to some degree His righteousness is mine in practice. But do I reflect His perfect righteousness perfectly? Does the love I practice fully measure up to the love and righteousness that He has reckoned into my account? IMO, NOT in this lifetime.

A reflected image will never be the exact image of the original. While Christ was the "exact imprint of His (God's) nature, we are only reflectors of His righteousness.

[joeb]

Interesting and helpful discussion, where nothing but WORDS are used. How can these be defined, and how important is this definition?

In the Scandinavian languages we have but one word for "just" and "righteous", which means that justification and righteousness by faith is defined by the same words. Will the lack of this one word keep Scandinavians who do not know English out of heaven?

How about the lack of other definitions? Is mere faith sufficient?

Johann,

Of course faith is sufficient. This is all about how God purifies and justifies us by faith. If we really studied the Bible as we should, and believed the promises in God's word, this conversation would be unnecessary. The term itself is only used in one place in the Bible, but it's taught everywhere in the Bible.

It's as simple as Galations 5:16, 22.

The condensed version is: Walk in the Spirit and you won't fulfill the lusts of the flesh. And, the fruit of the Spirit is such that there is no law against any of it.

Right there is righteousness by faith in a nutshell. If we only believed God we would be showing the world who He is by our lives rather than having this discussion.

I'm pretty sure these two texts convey the same message in Swedish as they do in English. :)

[Johann]

After accepting this message of total righteousness here and now, a young worker "confessed" he no longer had to pray the Lord's Prayer because he had stopped sinning. Had he reached to goal?

[joeb]

After accepting this message of total righteousness here and now, a young worker "confessed" he no longer had to pray the Lord's Prayer because he had stopped sinning. Had he reached to goal?

LOL. Why not try a serious post? If you have something to discuss, why not try that rather than putting up a straw man argument.

[joeb]

After accepting this message of total righteousness here and now, a young worker "confessed" he no longer had to pray the Lord's Prayer because he had stopped sinning. Had he reached to goal?

After thinking about this for a little while it came to me that what you have accused me of is almost exactly what the Jews said to Paul. They said grace enabled sinning because becoming right with God by faith was too "easy". As far as I'm concerned you have placed me in good company. Thank you.

[Gerr]

According to Jesus, faith grasps hold of the power in God's Word, to do precisely what it says, and to do what is impossible for man: to bring into existence that which did not exist prior.

The implications of that upon justification and righteousness are far-reaching.

Blessings,

So are you saying that a sanctified Ted no longer misses the mark each and every moment of the day?

[Gerr]

The Law requires a perfect righteousness - it makes no differentiation between fractions of sin. That is why perfect imputed righteousness must indeed be ours in Christ, while imparted righteousness demonstrates Christ is indeed making the imputed a reality in our lives.

Let me put the question another way which I can't seem to get across.

On day one at the moment a sinner believes, he receives the righteousness of Christ 100%, although he has not done one righteous act. At that same moment he is also sanctified, but that is just the beginning of a lifetime journey. He takes his first spiritual baby steps. Do his first baby steps match the perfect steps of Jesus?

Originally Posted By: ted

Can that be the reason why John later writes the child of God does not sin? That there is a sin not leading unto death? Because it takes both imputed (in Christ) and imparted (in life) to be truly ours for us to stand in the sight of a Holy God?

Ok, we may be getting somewhere with discussion. In 1 Jn 3, the apostle is talking about a willful/practiced sin. A believer cannot keep on doing this and still remain in good graces. Willful transgressions will place a believer back under the condemnation of the law unless it's repented off and forsaken.

What then is this sin that is "not unto death" that John is talking about in chap 5? I believe it is the inadvertent sins due to the limitations of the sinful flesh. I don't see how God can condemn anyone for inadvertent breaking of the law, after all, the repentant sinner is now under grace. The law can no longer reach him because the law/judge now sees the perfect righteousness of Christ that has been imputed to him. This will ALWAYS be the sinner's TITLE, the besis for his right to lay claim to heaven. But that title is not truly his unless it results in the believing sinner accept the impartation of that same righteousness into his daily life.

Please, note, that sanctification is the proof of justification, not the other way around, just as works is the proof of faith.

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: Ted Oplinger

According to Jesus, faith grasps hold of the power in God's Word, to do precisely what it says, and to do what is impossible for man: to bring into existence that which did not exist prior.

The implications of that upon justification and righteousness are far-reaching.

Blessings,

So are you saying that a sanctified Ted no longer misses the mark each and every moment of the day?

Oy, Gerry! I just KNEW you were waiting with that one! Glad you did not disappoint!

This is the precise hang-up that occurs every time Paul's concept of righteousness by faith (Romans 3, 5, and 6) is discussed!

To state unequivocally the power of God within those words is reachable to the weakest of sinners to have them stand of complete righteousness in the sight of a holy God, the grace of God being sufficient for all needs, this invites scorn as impossible perfection. The Catholic argument of "legal fiction" comes to mind here - claiming perfect righteousness while all that is seen is an imperfect person making mistakes.

To say otherwise buys the argument of the devil - the flesh is an unbeatable foe that not even God can beat, so the sinner is simply stuck sinning, to the devil's delicious delight, all the rest of the days.

The argument is present as thus, Gerry. We both know that, as we both read and participated in past threads on this subject. It is always portrayed as this choice.

As this thread develops, Gerry, I'd like to explore the aspect that this subject has been framed historically in a false choice between what is seen as impossible to experience in man's eye, and the "logical" alternative in buying the devil's argument. This leads to the inevitable "cheap grace" as its logical conclusion.

Does faith grasp both the imputed and imparted aspects of righteousness to declare a person truly righteous in God's eyes, though they still walk around in our flesh?

On this subject, the Catholics DO have a truth to say about righteousness: God cannot lie! For God to declare you righteous, you must be righteous!

They say a sinner must go through a life of works and rites to infuse grace, add their faith, and at the end, you are righteous, and God is then able to legally declare the sinner righteous. To an extant, most of Christendom follows some similar recipe of grace, obedience and faith to describe "righteousness by faith".

The Bible says God gives His Word the power to do the very thing He speaks (Isaiah 55:11); hence, if He declares you righteous, His Word must have the power to create that righteousness, make it yours, and make you righteous with it - apart from works (According to Paul).

There has got to be a way we as redeemed sinners can realize the Word of God and accord each other as righteous in Christ without the "legal fiction" - and without having to battle that which I am beginning to think are false choice arguments.

Blessings,

[BobRyan]

Can a slave miss the mark or fall short of a perfect 10 while carrying his Master's wishes?

It is possible for him to come short of his mission - but on the other hand it is also possible for him to do exactly as his master has asked.

Free will - being what it is.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Quote:

It is my hope this thread eventually moves to the point of contrasting our willingness to believe sinful flesh an unbeatable foe, versus our willingness to believe in the power of Christ to effect imparted righteousness as His practical demonstration the flesh really is a beaten foe and dead. Let's agree to save remarks about that until this thread develops more fully.

This is where I want to go too, but I wanted to make sure we were all talking about the same thing when we used the terminology. As we all come from very disparate backgrounds it's very easy to think we all mean the same things by the same words when that isn't always the case. That leads to all kinds of difficulties in communication.

In 1Cor 10 and in Romans 6 - Paul makes it clear that sin is not master over us - and John makes the case in 1John 3:4-14 that we should not be among those who insist that we must sin as we must sin no matter the benefits of the Christian Gospel.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

It is one thing to claim that I have the ability to choose to drive the speed limit -- it is another to claim that I always choose to do it.

And should I get a ticket - I cannot plead the case that I was forced to speed by my sinful nature and could not help myself.

in Christ,

Bob