Not By Works

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,402
113
I agree with your post but I believe the power of the message is relayed through the messanger.

We only have to look at the message bringer Jesus himself and how he lived the message.

The message means nothing of the messanger is not living it.

We look at the way Jesus lived.
I would disagree....the power is in the message and has nothing to do with the messenger and or the delivery/motive.....I cite the following scriptures at the end of this post....and the reason Paul rejoiced is because the power is in the message, not the messenger. And this is exactly why God can use imperfect men to preach his perfect message! Without a doubt we are to let CHRIST shine through so as to give a reason for one to ASK why we have this hope and to glorify our Heavenly Father....yet at the end of the day-->Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God <--the power is in the message

Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
oh dear, you just can't make this 'stuff' up, but then again,
maybe some can!!! - and as we can so clearly see, they are
'making this stuff up' for their own agenda...

may God have mercy upon those who choose the identity of the 'adversary' -
they will eventually 'fall & fail' in their agenda, it's scriptural...
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
oh dear, you just can't make this 'stuff' up, but then again,
maybe some can!!! - and as we can so clearly see, they are
'making this stuff up' for their own agenda...

may God have mercy upon those who choose the identity of the 'adversary' -
they will eventually 'fall & fail' in their agenda, it's scriptural...
Can you speak more clearly... to whom is this directed?

I mean if you are going to take a stand on something at least be transparent about it.
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
EH,
we are simply saying, as is evident, 'if the shoe fits, wear it'...
come on EH, your 'role-playing' is becoming more evident,
word by word, thread by thread, head by head',,, -
try giving yourself a 'break', take some 'down time' and reflect...
hugs...
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
EH,
we are simply saying, as is evident, 'if the shoe fits, wear it'...
come on EH, your 'role-playing' is becoming more evident,
word by word, thread by thread, head by head',,, -
try giving yourself a 'break', take some 'down time' and reflect...
hugs...
role playing?
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,475
13,419
113
58
I was recently in a discussion with someone on a different Christian forum who relentlessly attacks the doctrine of "imputed righteousness." (Romans 4:2-9) He made these statements below:

The Bible never says that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to anyone! This false doctrine has resulted in Gnostic myths being incorporated into the once pure doctrine of Christianity. There is no mystical transfer of character or sin from one person to another. The transfer of someone else's merit is not only a logical impossibility, it is a Scriptural impossibility. It is mysticism, pure and simple. The statement, imputed righteousness of Christ" is nowhere to be found in Scripture. To understand "imputed" as "counted" of "reckoned" as righteous fits in naturally everywhere. There is no need to force an unstated mysticism upon this word when the Scriptures never endorse it.

Gnostic myths? Transfer of character? Mysticism? What is this guy talking about? o_O I also hear some double speak in his argument.

To impute is to charge or credit to one's account in the sense of reckoning. People who attack the doctrine of "imputed righteousness" typically promote salvation by works and/or sinless perfection. This guy happens to promote both.
 

WithinReason

Active member
Feb 21, 2020
929
136
43
the doctrine of "imputed righteousness" typically promote salvation by works and/or sinless perfection. This guy happens to promote both.
There is a world of difference between "imputed righteousness" and "imparted righteousness". A sinner needs both to be saved.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,475
13,419
113
58
There is a world of difference between "imputed righteousness" and "imparted righteousness". A sinner needs both to be saved.
Feel free to explain your position. I've heard Roman Catholics basically disregard "imputed righteousness for "imparted righteousness" and the end result is salvation by works.
 

BillG

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2017
9,025
4,444
113
@mailmandan, what is the difference between the two? They sound similar.
I'm sure @mailmandan will correct me if I'm wrong.

This is how I see it.

Imputed is the righteousness of Christ is imputed (attributed) to us as a result of faith.
Therefore we are accepted by God as a result of our faith, justified.

Therefore justified by faith alone. Declared not guilty based on what Jesus has done for us.

Imparted

2 Peter 1:4
4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Basically is sanctification, it doesn't save us because even our best efforts cannot save us. If it could then imputed righteousness would not be needed.

But sanctification is growing in Jesus bearing fruit, basically wanting to be the people that God has set us apart to do.

That is why we have the Holy Spirit in us.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
Nothing wrong with your answer Bill...


www.gotquestions.org. Has some more info.

What is impartation?

Question: "What is impartation? What does it mean that righteousness is imparted to all who receive Christ as Savior?"

Answer:
The word impart means “to give, convey, or grant.” Impartation, then, is the act of giving or granting something. In the Bible spiritual gifts are imparted (Romans 1:11); wisdom is imparted (Proverbs 29:15); the message of the gospel is imparted (1 Thessalonians 2:8); and material goods are imparted (Ephesians 4:28; 1 Timothy 6:18). Some translations use the word share as a replacement for impart. The Bible never speaks of the impartation of righteousness.

Most evangelicals speak of righteousness as being imputed, rather than imparted. To impute is to credit something to the account of another. Imputation of righteousness is clearly taught in passages such as Romans 4:3, which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (cf. Galatians 3:6; Romans 4:22). The “credit” or “reckoning” that Abraham received was an imputation. Imputation is thus linked to the act of justification. The moment a person is born again, the righteousness of Christ is imputed to that sinner’s account. The doctrine of double imputation says that, at the same time, the sinner’s sin is imputed to Christ’s account.

Roman Catholics speak of infused righteousness, which should not be confused with impartation or imputation. Infused righteousness, in Catholic theology, is that which comes gradually to the believer through obedience, confession, penance, and the other sacraments. There is no biblical basis for the idea of infused righteousness, which contradicts the scriptural teaching that justification comes through faith alone and not through the channel of works (Romans 3:28).

Imparted righteousness is a term used mostly in Wesleyan and Methodist circles to explain sanctification. Impartation is seen as separate from imputation, although the two work in conjunction. According to Wesley’s theology, we are justified when Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us; after that, we begin to be sanctified when God’s righteousness is imparted to us through the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, empowering us to live in a holy manner. According to some in the Wesleyan tradition, this imparted righteousness can lead to sinless perfection.

Possible biblical support for the idea of imparted righteousness comes from 2 Corinthians 3:18, “And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit,” and 2 Peter 1:4, which speaks of how we “participate in the divine nature.” The idea is that imputed righteousness changes our standing before God, and imparted righteousness changes our nature even as we live in the flesh. The new nature that wars against the flesh (Roman 7:14–25) is the result of imparted righteousness, granted to us by God.

In the final analysis, the Bible clearly teaches imputed righteousness, but the doctrine of imparted righteousness is not so clear. At salvation, believers in Jesus Christ receive a new nature—which loves righteousness and produces good works—but to say they receive righteousness itself is stretching the point.​
 

BillG

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2017
9,025
4,444
113
Nothing wrong with your answer Bill...


www.gotquestions.org. Has some more info.

What is impartation?

Question: "What is impartation? What does it mean that righteousness is imparted to all who receive Christ as Savior?"

Answer:
The word impart means “to give, convey, or grant.” Impartation, then, is the act of giving or granting something. In the Bible spiritual gifts are imparted (Romans 1:11); wisdom is imparted (Proverbs 29:15); the message of the gospel is imparted (1 Thessalonians 2:8); and material goods are imparted (Ephesians 4:28; 1 Timothy 6:18). Some translations use the word share as a replacement for impart. The Bible never speaks of the impartation of righteousness.

Most evangelicals speak of righteousness as being imputed, rather than imparted. To impute is to credit something to the account of another. Imputation of righteousness is clearly taught in passages such as Romans 4:3, which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness” (cf. Galatians 3:6; Romans 4:22). The “credit” or “reckoning” that Abraham received was an imputation. Imputation is thus linked to the act of justification. The moment a person is born again, the righteousness of Christ is imputed to that sinner’s account. The doctrine of double imputation says that, at the same time, the sinner’s sin is imputed to Christ’s account.

Roman Catholics speak of infused righteousness, which should not be confused with impartation or imputation. Infused righteousness, in Catholic theology, is that which comes gradually to the believer through obedience, confession, penance, and the other sacraments. There is no biblical basis for the idea of infused righteousness, which contradicts the scriptural teaching that justification comes through faith alone and not through the channel of works (Romans 3:28).

Imparted righteousness is a term used mostly in Wesleyan and Methodist circles to explain sanctification. Impartation is seen as separate from imputation, although the two work in conjunction. According to Wesley’s theology, we are justified when Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us; after that, we begin to be sanctified when God’s righteousness is imparted to us through the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, empowering us to live in a holy manner. According to some in the Wesleyan tradition, this imparted righteousness can lead to sinless perfection.

Possible biblical support for the idea of imparted righteousness comes from 2 Corinthians 3:18, “And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit,” and 2 Peter 1:4, which speaks of how we “participate in the divine nature.” The idea is that imputed righteousness changes our standing before God, and imparted righteousness changes our nature even as we live in the flesh. The new nature that wars against the flesh (Roman 7:14–25) is the result of imparted righteousness, granted to us by God.

In the final analysis, the Bible clearly teaches imputed righteousness, but the doctrine of imparted righteousness is not so clear. At salvation, believers in Jesus Christ receive a new nature—which loves righteousness and produces good works—but to say they receive righteousness itself is stretching the point.​
Phew.

My understanding based on my studies seems ok then?
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,402
113
Feel free to explain your position. I've heard Roman Catholics basically disregard "imputed righteousness for "imparted righteousness" and the end result is salvation by works.
The imputed righteousness of Christ by faith is all one needs......end of story!
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,475
13,419
113
58
@mailmandan, what is the difference between the two? They sound similar.
Imputed righteousness is when the righteousness of God is credited to the believer's account when they place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and God imputes righteousness "apart from works." (Romans 4:2-11; Galatians 3:6; Philippians 3:9)

Imparted righteousness (which we don't see the specific word "imparted" righteousness in scripture) pertains to enabling a Christian to strive for holiness in the process of ongoing sanctification. Wesley’s doctrine (Methodism) is one of increasing righteousness in the process of Christian growth from new birth to death. Wesley taught that imparted righteousness and imputed righteousness work together to make a Christian holy. He also taught that imputed righteousness does not fully justify and through imparted righteousness a faithful Christian can attain sinless perfection in their lifetime.

Roman Catholic theology teaches that our righteousness is based on the sacramental infusion of grace (infused righteousness). Thus, righteousness is imparted through the sacraments. Catholicism rejects imputed righteousness as legal fiction, since they rely heavily on works for salvation.
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
I was recently in a discussion with someone on a different Christian forum who relentlessly attacks the doctrine of "imputed righteousness." (Romans 4:2-9) He made these statements below:

The Bible never says that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to anyone! This false doctrine has resulted in Gnostic myths being incorporated into the once pure doctrine of Christianity. There is no mystical transfer of character or sin from one person to another. The transfer of someone else's merit is not only a logical impossibility, it is a Scriptural impossibility. It is mysticism, pure and simple. The statement, imputed righteousness of Christ" is nowhere to be found in Scripture. To understand "imputed" as "counted" of "reckoned" as righteous fits in naturally everywhere. There is no need to force an unstated mysticism upon this word when the Scriptures never endorse it.

Gnostic myths? Transfer of character? Mysticism? What is this guy talking about? o_O I also hear some double speak in his argument.

To impute is to charge or credit to one's account in the sense of reckoning. People who attack the doctrine of "imputed righteousness" typically promote salvation by works and/or sinless perfection. This guy happens to promote both.
Reminds me of a person that used to post on CC a few years back, I think his moniker was "HeRose" or something like that and he argued the EXACT same thing.

Since he is not on CC anymore... makes me wonder.:unsure:
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,137
29,452
113
Reminds me of a person that used to post on CC a few years back, I think his moniker was "HeRose" or something like that and he argued the EXACT same thing.

Since he is not on CC anymore... makes me wonder.:unsure:
HeRoseFromTheDead has not posted for 2 years now. I do not recall him teaching that,
really, though I know some disagreed with his stance :unsure: I always liked him :)
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
HeRoseFromTheDead has not posted for 2 years now. I do not recall him teaching that,
really, though I know some disagreed with his stance :unsure: I always liked him :)

Well, maybe not exactly .... yet he seemed to deny the new nature as gnostic and always promoted a losable salvation.

The problem I see with Christ becoming sin (which is just a horrid, unworkable idea IMO), is that doctrines with gnostic tendencies leverage that to teach that since he became sin, we have become the righteousness of GOD. That's simply not true. We are becoming the righteousness of GOD.

But if we look at Christ having become a sin offering in which our disobedience was imputed to him, then it follows more consistently that his righteousness was imputed to us. Not an actual exchange of substance so to speak, but an exchange of imputations.
Your opinion on this matter reflects gnostic dualism - flesh is bad, spirit is good.
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
I was recently in a discussion with someone on a different Christian forum who relentlessly attacks the doctrine of "imputed righteousness." (Romans 4:2-9) He made these statements below:

The Bible never says that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to anyone! This false doctrine has resulted in Gnostic myths being incorporated into the once pure doctrine of Christianity. There is no mystical transfer of character or sin from one person to another. The transfer of someone else's merit is not only a logical impossibility, it is a Scriptural impossibility. It is mysticism, pure and simple. The statement, imputed righteousness of Christ" is nowhere to be found in Scripture. To understand "imputed" as "counted" of "reckoned" as righteous fits in naturally everywhere. There is no need to force an unstated mysticism upon this word when the Scriptures never endorse it.

Gnostic myths? Transfer of character? Mysticism? What is this guy talking about? o_O I also hear some double speak in his argument.

To impute is to charge or credit to one's account in the sense of reckoning. People who attack the doctrine of "imputed righteousness" typically promote salvation by works and/or sinless perfection. This guy happens to promote both.

Also there is a preacher Jesse Morrell, very anti-OSAS, he seems to have a strong following, often states gnostic beliefs infiltrated the

church in the first century or something like that, I have noticed he has become quite high profile, there are many that promote his teachings on the message boards etc.,

The battle seems to be heating up exponentially between the simple true Gospel and a myriad of false dogmas.
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
EH,
you might want to learn how to 'back-off' and discern where others need to learn -
and not be so judgmental but realize that we all are on His different highways presented
before us according to His calling for us and us alone -
we must learn to accept and discern the level of just where our 'brothers and sisters' are,
in their particular space of there journey...
we simply have to learn how to understand and discern where THEY ARE -
that's why Paul said, 'I have become all things to all men'...
in other words;
Paul could RELATE ON ANY LEVEL, from 'hillbilly to PHD -
and always in a manner of Godly Love...