Imputed Righteousness???
- Thread starter Aussie52
- Start date
-
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.
Pilgrim you have manufactured a false little story of what actually transpired. You are the one who actually posted to me regarding my reply to an different person. If you are at peace within yourself while offering false flattery to others to disguise how you have tired to manipulate the actual conversation, then I can only reiterate that an honest discussion with you is hard to come by.
My post 81 where I responded to NewLifeinChrist is what you took exception to it seems and you rendered a lengthy response to me as it seems you think it is your civic duty to correct everyone. You don't discuss; you post numerous scriptures that you indicate contradict a person, in this case me, and attempt to 'prove' a lack of understanding on the part of the person you respond to and again, in this case, me.
The op was questioning the term 'imputed righteousness' and my post 81 was on track with that op. I again responded to NewLifein Christ in post 86 and clarified I now had a better understanding of what he was saying and I agreed with what he had said.
Then you come along in your post 91 addressed to me and appear to correct a view, which I DO NOT EVEN HAVE, and go on about how we do not have freedom to sin. So, in my post 119 I responded to your post to me as follows:
I did not understand how you would possibly assume I was somehow condoning sin if I agreed that Christ is our righteousness and He alone is actually righteous. Don't you see the false assumption you have come to in this exchange which YOU actually engineered?
I address this mistaken understanding of yours in following posts; each one of which you ignored and you continued on with your
original lack of comprehension.
When a person, ANY person anywhere, at any time and in any place makes a statement and another person comes along and ignores what is actually said and then develops a different rendition of what was actually said, it can only be taken to understand that the 2nd person lacks understanding and or comprehension OR they deliberately, for some reason, wish to create error about the character or beliefs of the first person. I'm not getting into that. Your motives are between you and your Creator.
You have diverted the op and presented a false picture of the exchange we actually had. For the record, when I asked you why you tried to make it seem I take sin lightly by listing verses declaring the evils of sin, this is what you said:
Post 118
your response in post 119
And after that, you actually had plenty to say. I don't find it funny. I don't appreciate your false narrative about me either since YOU actually posted to me and not the other way around. You are responsible for what you post and what you say as we all are. I, am not responsible for you continuing to make it seem I was after you when it was the other way around.
You should be careful to respond to what people actually say and not in a way that seems to change what they said and then continue with a false narrative. I would hope that would be everyone's aim here; be honest and exchange posts in a way that illustrates honest discussion. Posting reams of scripture is something anyone can do and in this case you posted reams of unrelated scripture to what I wrote. You are free to post whatever you want of course but you should do so without twisting what another says.
My post 81 where I responded to NewLifeinChrist is what you took exception to it seems and you rendered a lengthy response to me as it seems you think it is your civic duty to correct everyone. You don't discuss; you post numerous scriptures that you indicate contradict a person, in this case me, and attempt to 'prove' a lack of understanding on the part of the person you respond to and again, in this case, me.
The op was questioning the term 'imputed righteousness' and my post 81 was on track with that op. I again responded to NewLifein Christ in post 86 and clarified I now had a better understanding of what he was saying and I agreed with what he had said.
Then you come along in your post 91 addressed to me and appear to correct a view, which I DO NOT EVEN HAVE, and go on about how we do not have freedom to sin. So, in my post 119 I responded to your post to me as follows:
I did not understand how you would possibly assume I was somehow condoning sin if I agreed that Christ is our righteousness and He alone is actually righteous. Don't you see the false assumption you have come to in this exchange which YOU actually engineered?
I address this mistaken understanding of yours in following posts; each one of which you ignored and you continued on with your
original lack of comprehension.
When a person, ANY person anywhere, at any time and in any place makes a statement and another person comes along and ignores what is actually said and then develops a different rendition of what was actually said, it can only be taken to understand that the 2nd person lacks understanding and or comprehension OR they deliberately, for some reason, wish to create error about the character or beliefs of the first person. I'm not getting into that. Your motives are between you and your Creator.
You have diverted the op and presented a false picture of the exchange we actually had. For the record, when I asked you why you tried to make it seem I take sin lightly by listing verses declaring the evils of sin, this is what you said:
Post 118
your response in post 119
And after that, you actually had plenty to say. I don't find it funny. I don't appreciate your false narrative about me either since YOU actually posted to me and not the other way around. You are responsible for what you post and what you say as we all are. I, am not responsible for you continuing to make it seem I was after you when it was the other way around.
You should be careful to respond to what people actually say and not in a way that seems to change what they said and then continue with a false narrative. I would hope that would be everyone's aim here; be honest and exchange posts in a way that illustrates honest discussion. Posting reams of scripture is something anyone can do and in this case you posted reams of unrelated scripture to what I wrote. You are free to post whatever you want of course but you should do so without twisting what another says.
verb (used with object) (Dictionary.com)
imputed, imputing.
This transfer of righteousness (does not mean we are now sinless, it means we have the righteousness of Christ, not our own righteousness) is achieved through our trust in Him and not through anything we do other than by faith accept His death as our own.
This is not to be confused, as it seems some do, with believing we are free to sin. That is a bogus accusation and dismissal of what is really said regarding imputed righteousness.
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. II Cor. 5:21
God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. I Cor. 1: 28-30
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Romans 3:21-24
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ! Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. Romans 5: 17-19
So yes, IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS is absolutely a biblical term and without it, not one of us could stand before God who demands we meet His requirements. We can only do so through Christ who is our righteousness.
imputed, imputing.
- to attribute or ascribe:
The children imputed magical powers to the old woman. - to attribute or ascribe (something discreditable), as to a person.
- Law. to ascribe to or charge (a person) with an act or quality because of the conduct of another over whom one has control or for whose acts or conduct one is responsible.
- Theology. to attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as derived from another.
This transfer of righteousness (does not mean we are now sinless, it means we have the righteousness of Christ, not our own righteousness) is achieved through our trust in Him and not through anything we do other than by faith accept His death as our own.
This is not to be confused, as it seems some do, with believing we are free to sin. That is a bogus accusation and dismissal of what is really said regarding imputed righteousness.
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. II Cor. 5:21
God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. I Cor. 1: 28-30
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Romans 3:21-24
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ! Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. Romans 5: 17-19
So yes, IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS is absolutely a biblical term and without it, not one of us could stand before God who demands we meet His requirements. We can only do so through Christ who is our righteousness.
Matthew 7:17-18, Luke 6:4a and from John 15:4-5 ~ Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. Just as no branch can bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine, neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in Me. I am the vine and you are the branches. Apart from Me you can do nothing.
The thread is about a biblical truth that is denied by the op and those who like the op. Behavior was not the topic. Actually, Jesus is the topic as He is the One from whom we are given righteousness that we do not have and cannot attain. If that is misunderstood, than it seems a person may strive all their life to obtain what is unobtainable.
It is also without merit that a person should then somehow understand that to mean we have freedom to sin. We do not. We have freedom in Christ. We do not have to bear false guilt or fall under false accusations. Sanctification is another process in this life but the op was not about that either.
It is also without merit that a person should then somehow understand that to mean we have freedom to sin. We do not. We have freedom in Christ. We do not have to bear false guilt or fall under false accusations. Sanctification is another process in this life but the op was not about that either.
Ocean and Pilgrim, the way to resolve the dispute and be unified IMO is for both of you to agree with what I proposed:
"understand that IR (because of spiritual oneness with Jesus via receiving His HS at conversion) is one truth, but it is also true or biblical teaching that apostasy is possible (and souls may shipwreck their faith if they do not persevere in cooperating with GW regarding moral/godly behavior with the goal of actual perfection Paul cited in PHP 2:12 & 3:12)."
Do you not agree that if y'two agreed with this suggestion (amend as needed if I missed a key point) then y'2 would essentially agree with each other and we could move on to quarrel about another topic? Who wants to go first? On your mark, get set, forgive! :^)
"understand that IR (because of spiritual oneness with Jesus via receiving His HS at conversion) is one truth, but it is also true or biblical teaching that apostasy is possible (and souls may shipwreck their faith if they do not persevere in cooperating with GW regarding moral/godly behavior with the goal of actual perfection Paul cited in PHP 2:12 & 3:12)."
Do you not agree that if y'two agreed with this suggestion (amend as needed if I missed a key point) then y'2 would essentially agree with each other and we could move on to quarrel about another topic? Who wants to go first? On your mark, get set, forgive! :^)
Agreeing with error would set a very bad precedent. Interesting that you ignore the actual op and decide to meddle instead. Why do you insist in wanting to develop the false assumption I have no understanding of what it means to follow Christ? We cannot work for our own righteousness and are entirely forever and eternally grateful that we do not have to.
Let me put it to you another way. It would not be groovy to agree with you either.
Let me put it to you another way. It would not be groovy to agree with you either.
Why was the part in parentheses (amend as needed if I missed a key point) not in your reply?!
It is difficult enough to communicate without such glitches. As you can see, I thought I might not have understood something sufficiently and invited you to amend my suggestion as needed.
So now that you understand that, would you like to do so--not for my sake so much as to prepare the way for amending your relationship with pilgrim, if he will agree.
If he amends the suggestion differently, then at least we all will have clear understanding of what we ought to agree to disagree about.
(BTW, I liked the way you put it another way :^)
It is difficult enough to communicate without such glitches. As you can see, I thought I might not have understood something sufficiently and invited you to amend my suggestion as needed.
So now that you understand that, would you like to do so--not for my sake so much as to prepare the way for amending your relationship with pilgrim, if he will agree.
If he amends the suggestion differently, then at least we all will have clear understanding of what we ought to agree to disagree about.
(BTW, I liked the way you put it another way :^)