question of imputation

[concretecamper]

I'm saying you are wrong.

What a surprise

 

[Mark Quayle]

@RandyPNW I can't tell if you wrote anything here. I'm guessing you did, but including as if it was a quote not only makes it not appear when replying to it, but is confusing, as it appears @tdidymas is responding to himself. You could select, copy, then paste it anew onto your 'reply' field, so that it appears without the extra 'quote' indicator, then erase the 'tdidymas' from the top. I'm indenting this paragraph to keep it separate from the below, which I pasted.​

​

Again, to the reader, the below is not my comments --please don't quote me as saying them.​

tdidymas said:

This is the teaching of the apostle Paul in Romans and elsewhere, so rejecting it is not an option.

Rom. 4:22 says that Abraham "believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness."

So this is the problem. Yes, Paul spoke of our being "credited" something. And yes it was Abraham's "belief" that allowed him to be viewed as "righteous." But I don't think the way the Doctrine of Imputation is used explains this in a rational way that aids in my understanding.

Again, what is being "imputed" to us is not a righteousness that Abraham did not have. Clearly, he was a righteous man! Rather, what was being "imputed" to him was an extension to his own righteousness a continuation of access to God's Righteousness--a continuation of Grace. His inadequacy did not prevent God from extending the invitation to continue access to His own Righteousness.

....ETC​

 

[fhansen]

Yes, our position with Christ in heaven is, as I see it, "in grace." We have legal standing with Christ who is in heaven. We are not in heaven with him, obviously, but we are with him positionally, or legally, because he sits there upholding the stand he took for us on the cross in forgiving us of our sins.

For me, it is not so much imputation of righteousness, which is not understandable for me, but God recognizing that He doesn't hold our imperfections against us, and sees, instead, an example of our operating together with Christ's righteousness within us, through the Spirit.

So I suppose it is a acceptable to state that Christ is imputing to us the righteousness of Christ because he acknowledges that his righteousness in us is being generated along with a dispensation of grace, to cover our imperfections. It may just be the semantics of the thing, but I can't actually see Christ's perfect righteousness, which is sinless, imputed to us in any practical sense because once it is in us, through the Spirit, it comes to be tainted with our flawed ways of handling it.

I think the best way to understand it is that we're forgiven of sin, and we're also made new creations with the gift of righteousness, the work of the Holy Spirit, that allows us to overcome future sin, which is also a role of God's grace. And in this God is very patient with us.

 

[RandyPNW]

@RandyPNW I can't tell if you wrote anything here. I'm guessing you did, but including as if it was a quote not only makes it not appear when replying to it, but is confusing, as it appears @tdidymas is responding to himself. You could select, copy, then paste it anew onto your 'reply' field, so that it appears without the extra 'quote' indicator, then erase the 'tdidymas' from the top. I'm indenting this paragraph to keep it separate from the below, which I pasted.​

Okay, I deleted my post. What's been happening is a tremendous amount of interruption this morning as I tried to approach this delicate subject, along with the regular problem I have posting things on this forum. On top of that I get all of these pop-ups. I'm really not surprised if I come up with something confusing. So rather than just try to fix it, I'll start over, and post what I said in a different structure. Stay tuned...

 

[RandyPNW]

tdidymas said:
This is the teaching of the apostle Paul in Romans and elsewhere, so rejecting it is not an option.

Rom. 4:22 says that Abraham "believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness."

Response:
So this is the problem. Yes, Paul spoke of our being "credited" something. And yes it was Abraham's "belief" that allowed him to be viewed as "righteous." But I don't think the way the Doctrine of Imputation is used explains this in a rational way that aids in my understanding.

Again, what is being "imputed" to us is not a righteousness that Abraham did not have. Clearly, he was a righteous man! Rather, what was being "imputed" to him was an extension to his own righteousness a continuation of access to God's Righteousness--a continuation of Grace. His inadequacy did not prevent God from extending the invitation to continue access to His own Righteousness.

That is, we do not have God's Flawless Righteousness imputed to us. Instead, we have imputed to us the continuing eligibility of our current access to God's Righteousness despite our own inadequacy.

Grace is our being afforded a right where we initially had no right. But that Grace was already being afforded to Abraham. He was not being given something that he did not already have. We do not have Flawless Righteousness, and that is not being "imputed" to us. But we do have a continuing access to God's Righteousness through Grace.

The way the Doctrine of Imputation is used indicates that God's Flawless Righteous is acting as a substitute for our own meritless "Faith." To imply that "Faith" has no merit, however, appears to be a contradiction. Why would God merit Righteousness to something that has no merit? Obviously, Faith did have merit in Abraham! Abraham obviously could not obtain Eternal Life on his own, but after the Cross he could obtain it by his Faith through Grace.

I think that those who use this so-called "Doctrine of Imputation" are positioning our Faith and God's Righteousness at opposite ends of the spectrum, whereas they are really one placed over the other like a transparency. Our Faith consists of genuine righteousness from God, but it is flawed. We are stilll credited with the right to continue access to God's Righteousness even though He is flawless and holy. This is Grace, and it has always functioned through Faith, even before Eternal Salvation.

Our Faith is itself a Work and a Virtue--it is just a flawed Work and a Virtue that normally is disqualified from continuing access to God without Grace. But God not only had Grace towards Abraham's Faith--he also planned, through Christ, to provide continuing access to Righteousness through Grace on demand and in unlimited supply. This is Eternal Life.

This is Salvation--the extension of our righteousness through Faith to embrace God's Righteousness for eternity through our reconstruction, even though it begins now, in our imperfection. Faith transcends and accesses God's Righteousness as well as His Salvation.

So through Abraham's Faith, God declared him righteous. If God had not declared him righteous, then how could Abraham be justified before the holy God?

Being justified means that we must be seen as righteous because God is just. Therefore, God "credited to Abraham righteousness" in the sense that God saw something that merited continuing justification (not, however Justification in the legal sense), and ultimately Salvation, although without being able to forgive himself.

Abraham had righteousness in his Faith. But he was unable to "forgive himself." That is Grace. Abraham could merit God's Righteousness by fulfilling God's standards for receiving it in his Faith. But he still could not "forgive himself." God had to credit him where his righteousness by Faith lacked.

It is not in simply "believing" that Christ would come to redeem Abraham that constituted what I'm calling "Biblical Faith." True Biblical Faith doesn't just believe but much more accepts the conditions of replacing our Carnality with God's Spirituality. We do not yet become perfect, but now, under the New Covenant, our access to Him by Grace has been extended indefinitely and in fact eternally. And through Christ's forgiveness we have Salvation.

True Biblical Faith begins with God's Righteousness and ends with the same--just more of it and unlimited access to it. And it ends with Salvation. "Faith" is a form of righteousness, but falls short, requiring God's forgiveness. That's what God is "imputing" to us, if we would want to use that word.

tdidymas said:
I think you have a problem with thinking that acceptance by God is merited by a choice made "to accept God's terms for redemption."

Response:
I don't see that as a problem--I see it as a necessity. If our acceptance of God's covenant terms is a problem, then there is no sense in God's asking us for it.

In other words, Biblical Faith is acceptance of the need for substituting God's Righteousness for our Carnality. But Abraham had that to start with--he just needed Christ's Redemption to extend it indefinitely and for eternity.

tdidymas said:
I see this as a problem, because the grace of God is unmerited. Unmerited grace means that justification is also unmerited. If God gives justification as a free gift, as is stated in Rom. 3:24, then justification is not merited by anything we do or choose to do.

Response:
There is clearly merit in our Faith because God is indicating that by declaring that He was pleased with Abraham's Faith! That is not the same thing as saying Abraham, by his Faith, "earned" Salvation.

The extension of his access to Righteousness by Grace could only occur by Christ's Forgiveness. It was not an "Imputation of something Abraham didn't have, namely Perfection." Rather, it was a crediting of the fact Abraham already had received access to God's Righteousness by Faith and would be allowed to extend that, indefinitely, into the future.

In other words, Abraham's credit would have run out. But God was going to continue to credit him until he could be given a permanent credit card. He was being credited initially by Grace because God saw value in his righteousness as it was occurring by Faith, namely by his acceptance of God's Righteousness over his own Carnality.

tdidymas said:
As clearly stated in Eph. 2:8-9, getting saved is not of ourselves, but is a gift of God. A gift is not merited by anything at all, or else it's not a gift. And in v. 5 he explains exactly how the gift is not merited by anything, saying "even while we were dead in trespasses and sins, God raised us up to life and seated us in the heavenly places in Christ - by grace are we saved."

Response:
When you say nothing merits Christ's Work of Eternal Forgiveness through the Cross I can agree with that. We merit God's Forgiveness by accepting the conditions for receiving it by repentance. But when you say that nothing merits God extending Grace to us, I cannot agree with that quite simply because God did that with Abraham well before Christ redeemed him! God said he accepted Abraham by the merit of his Faith!

tdidymas said:
So Paul says that grace is when God did something to us to create a born-again condition in our spirit, and according to James and Peter, it happened while hearing the gospel preached.

Response:
No, this is the problem. Jesus taught to Nicodemus the Rebirth well before Redemption was made available through the Cross! Jesus in fact said Nicodemus should've understood Rebirth under the Law, before Eternal Salvation was even available!

So the Grace Paul spoke of was Christ's Eternal Gift, and not simple access to God's Righteousness which all of the OT saints already enjoyed! Salvation is the extension of this original access by Grace to God's Righteousness.

Abraham and other OT saints already had access to God's Righteousness by Faith, and were viewed as Righteous by that Faith! They were already "reborn" through the conversion of their spirits to life in partnership with God's Spirit, which took place initially in Israel through the Law. But Rebirth is now intended to result in Eternal Life, well beyond simple access to God's Righteousness through Faith.

tdidymas said:
Faith itself is a gift from God. Whenever we are born of God, our heart is changed and renewed such that we are converted.

Response:
Faith is a gift, yes. But it is enabled from our creation as an option to believe in God's Word or not. We all have been given a conscience. And we can listen and respond to God's Word or not.

So mankind has always enjoyed potential access to God's Righteousness via Faith. Only those who have used that Faith have been viewed, by God, as Righteous. Righteousness is, I believe, defined by out willingness, through Faith, to accept the conditions for living out obedience to God's Word.

But this in itself is not Salvation. It is just God's way of seeing us as acting Righteous. To be saved we need to additionally accept God's Word that we require full acceptance of His Righteousness as a full substitute for our own Carnality.

We cannot do that perfectly, but we can certainly demonstrate it by yielding up our Carnal Independence and Turning to a life of partnership with the Lord. That is perfection, that is work, and that is a virtue that merits God justifiably extending His Grace to us even further, to include Eternal Life.

But this should not be confused with "forgiving ourselves," or with providing a Righteousness that leads to Eternal Life, which is something we can only receive. I'm just saying that in order to receive Eternal Life, we must do something--we must exercise Faith by repenting, by yielding up our independence for a partnership with God.

 

[RandyPNW]

I think the best way to understand it is that we're forgiven of sin, and we're also made new creations with the gift of righteousness, the work of the Holy Spirit, that allows us to overcome future sin, which is also a role of God's grace. And in this God is very patient with us.

Exactly. What I'm really getting at goes a bit deeper, but that is at the heart of it--forgiveness. We can't forgive ourselves, and we aren't forgiven by having God impute a flawless righteousness that we simply do not yet have.

What lies below the surface in this is something I've heard for many years. A duality is created between the Law and Grace. The Law is evil and is meant to show us we're sinners and can't do anything on our own. It is meant to show us that it is only in "believing" that we are saved.

But you and I both know that people can believe Jesus was the Messiah without actually following him! So Jesus taught his Gospel this way: Repent and believe the Good News!

The Law is not simply an evil instrument to show us our inadequacy, though it did show our inadequacy. It also showed us we can obey God by willfully choosing to obey His instructions and to repent of not following His instructions. We simply needed God's enablement, and this enablement comes via God's Word, which is available to all men.

So the Law showed Israel the way to righteousness, but it also showed them that it was a flawed righteousness--not an imputed perfect righteousness. And being that this righteousness was imperfect, it would've disqualified us from either access to God for righteousness or access to Eternal Life through repentance.

If we repent, as well as accept Christ as our true substitute, a perfect display in Christ of God's spiritual life for our carnal life, we can obtain Eternal Life. This is faith that saves, I believe.

 

[fhansen]

tdidymas said:
This is the teaching of the apostle Paul in Romans and elsewhere, so rejecting it is not an option.

Rom. 4:22 says that Abraham "believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness."

Response:
So this is the problem. Yes, Paul spoke of our being "credited" something. And yes it was Abraham's "belief" that allowed him to be viewed as "righteous." But I don't think the way the Doctrine of Imputation is used explains this in a rational way that aids in my understanding.

Again, what is being "imputed" to us is not a righteousness that Abraham did not have. Clearly, he was a righteous man! Rather, what was being "imputed" to him was an extension to his own righteousness a continuation of access to God's Righteousness--a continuation of Grace. His inadequacy did not prevent God from extending the invitation to continue access to His own Righteousness.

That is, we do not have God's Flawless Righteousness imputed to us. Instead, we have imputed to us the continuing eligibility of our current access to God's Righteousness despite our own inadequacy.

Grace is our being afforded a right where we initially had no right. But that Grace was already being afforded to Abraham. He was not being given something that he did not already have. We do not have Flawless Righteousness, and that is not being "imputed" to us. But we do have a continuing access to God's Righteousness through Grace.

The way the Doctrine of Imputation is used indicates that God's Flawless Righteous is acting as a substitute for our own meritless "Faith." To imply that "Faith" has no merit, however, appears to be a contradiction. Why would God merit Righteousness to something that has no merit? Obviously, Faith did have merit in Abraham! Abraham obviously could not obtain Eternal Life on his own, but after the Cross he could obtain it by his Faith through Grace.

I think that those who use this so-called "Doctrine of Imputation" are positioning our Faith and God's Righteousness at opposite ends of the spectrum, whereas they are really one placed over the other like a transparency. Our Faith consists of genuine righteousness from God, but it is flawed. We are stilll credited with the right to continue access to God's Righteousness even though He is flawless and holy. This is Grace, and it has always functioned through Faith, even before Eternal Salvation.

Our Faith is itself a Work and a Virtue--it is just a flawed Work and a Virtue that normally is disqualified from continuing access to God without Grace. But God not only had Grace towards Abraham's Faith--he also planned, through Christ, to provide continuing access to Righteousness through Grace on demand and in unlimited supply. This is Eternal Life.

This is Salvation--the extension of our righteousness through Faith to embrace God's Righteousness for eternity through our reconstruction, even though it begins now, in our imperfection. Faith transcends and accesses God's Righteousness as well as His Salvation.

So through Abraham's Faith, God declared him righteous. If God had not declared him righteous, then how could Abraham be justified before the holy God?

Being justified means that we must be seen as righteous because God is just. Therefore, God "credited to Abraham righteousness" in the sense that God saw something that merited continuing justification (not, however Justification in the legal sense), and ultimately Salvation, although without being able to forgive himself.

Abraham had righteousness in his Faith. But he was unable to "forgive himself." That is Grace. Abraham could merit God's Righteousness by fulfilling God's standards for receiving it in his Faith. But he still could not "forgive himself." God had to credit him where his righteousness by Faith lacked.

It is not in simply "believing" that Christ would come to redeem Abraham that constituted what I'm calling "Biblical Faith." True Biblical Faith doesn't just believe but much more accepts the conditions of replacing our Carnality with God's Spirituality. We do not yet become perfect, but now, under the New Covenant, our access to Him by Grace has been extended indefinitely and in fact eternally. And through Christ's forgiveness we have Salvation.

True Biblical Faith begins with God's Righteousness and ends with the same--just more of it and unlimited access to it. And it ends with Salvation. "Faith" is a form of righteousness, but falls short, requiring God's forgiveness. That's what God is "imputing" to us, if we would want to use that word.

And this is true. Abraham's faith was first of all credited to him as righteousness because that faith itself, is righteous, the most right first act a man can make, in fact, as it places him back into right stead and realtionship with God, as he was created to be-and away from the alienation from God that Adam intiated and that mere attempts at obeying the law cannot resolve. We don't become just by simply acting justly IOW. Reconciliation and subsequent union with God is the answer to man's dilemma. And so this faith pleases God immensely as it's the best thing for us; it makes us 'His people' (Jer 31:33). From there He can do His work in us, as we remain faithful, as we pick up our cross and follow daily.

 

[RandyPNW]

And this is true. Abraham's faith was first of all credited to him as righteousness because that faith itself, is righteous, the most right first act a man can make, in fact, as it places him back into right stead and realtionship with God, as he was created to be-and away from the alienation from God that Adam intiated and that mere attempts at obeying the law cannot resolve. We don't become just by simply acting justly IOW. Reconciliation and subsequent union with God is the answer to man's dilemma. And so this faith pleases God immensely as it's the best thing for us; it makes us 'His people' (Jer 31:33). From there He can do His work in us, as we remain faithful, as we pick up our cross and follow daily.

Yes, thank you very much. Beneath the surface I've been annoyed by the dualism in Christian Theology, a dualism that sets Grace against the Law. I've argued for years that the Law, though it pointed out that Israel's righteousness fell short, was still intended to be righteousness and obedience.

Israel could in fact keep the Law. They just could not keep the Law in such a way as to merit Eternal Life, ie through perfection.

And so, the only real way we merit anything with God is through His Grace. Whether through the Law of Israel in the past, or through the New Covenant today, we are given access to God's Word and to His Righteousness by Grace.

We don't deserve it, and yet He forgives us. We have always had access to His Word and therefore to Righteousness. But we've always been disqualified by our record of imperfection and by our Sin Nature.

So the Law was meant to be obeyed, and the Gospel today should be obeyed. But both in the past and now, our obedience has fallen short due to our imperfection and Sin Nature. We must rely upon Grace to maintain not just access to God's Word and Righteousness but also access to Salvation and Eternal Life. We obtain all of these things by Grace.

So Faith is the start of obedience, when we acknowledge the authority of God's Word and determine to obey it. That is living by our conscience. Faith accepts God as the sufficiency and source for our obedience to His Word.

But beyond just Faith for Righteousness is Faith for Salvation, which requires we acknowledge that Christ alone produced the perfect, sinless standard of obedience. Perfection is not imputed to us--rather, we accept that Jesus was perfect and gave us his spirituality even in our imperfection.

Sinless righteousness is not imputed to us, though I can accept how most Christians would mean this. What I believe is actually imputed to us is the merit of our flawed righteousness, which stamds as an acknowledgement of Christ as our source and substitute.

In acknowledging Christ as our source of Righteousness and Salvation we live by his Word of Righteousness. And so, his spirituality comes to be resident in us even in our imperfection, through Grace, giving us what merit we need to be accepted for Salvation.

Christ alone is perfect Righteousness. But we can draw upon that Righteousness in the form of a spirituality that does not require perfection and sinlessness from us. We only need to choose for Repentance. Access to God's Word and obedience to that Word has already come with our creation, having been made in God's Image. We only need to choose to obey. That is the beginnning of Salvation.

 

[fhansen]

Yes, thank you very much. Beneath the surface I've been annoyed by the dualism in Christian Theology, a dualism that sets Grace against the Law. I've argued for years that the Law, though it pointed out that Israel's righteousness fell short, was still intended to be righteousness and obedience.

Israel could in fact keep the Law. They just could not keep the Law in such a way as to merit Eternal Life, ie through perfection.

And so, the only real way we merit anything with God is through His Grace. Whether through the Law of Israel in the past, or through the New Covenant today, we are given access to God's Word and to His Righteousness by Grace.

We don't deserve it, and yet He forgives us. We have always had access to His Word and therefore to Righteousness. But we've always been disqualified by our record of imperfection and by our Sin Nature.

So the Law was meant to be obeyed, and the Gospel today should be obeyed. But both in the past and now, our obedience has fallen short due to our imperfection and Sin Nature. We must rely upon Grace to maintain not just access to God's Word and Righteousness but also access to Salvation and Eternal Life. We obtain all of these things by Grace.

So Faith is the start of obedience, when we acknowledge the authority of God's Word and determine to obey it. That is living by our conscience. Faith accepts God as the sufficiency and source for our obedience to His Word.

But beyond just Faith for Righteousness is Faith for Salvation, which requires we acknowledge that Christ alone produced the perfect, sinless standard of obedience. Perfection is not imputed to us--rather, we accept that Jesus was perfect and gave us his spirituality even in our imperfection.

Sinless righteousness is not imputed to us, though I can accept how most Christians would mean this. What I believe is actually imputed to us is the merit of our flawed righteousness, which stamds as an acknowledgement of Christ as our source and substitute.

In acknowledging Christ as our source of Righteousness and Salvation we live by his Word of Righteousness. And so, his spirituality comes to be resident in us even in our imperfection, through Grace, giving us what merit we need to be accepted for Salvation.

Christ alone is perfect Righteousness. But we can draw upon that Righteousness in the form of a spirituality that does not require perfection and sinlessness from us. We only need to choose for Repentance. Access to God's Word and obedience to that Word has already come with our creation, having been made in God's Image. We only need to choose to obey. That is the beginnning of Salvation.

Alright. I belive that confusion comes in because the gift of God to us is more than forgivness of sin and imputaion of righteousness, but it's actually the free gift of righteousness as well that produces authentic obedience, "...the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith" (Phil 3:9). It's a righteousness, apart from the law, that the law and prophets testify to but cannot accomplish (Rom 3:21). It's a rigtheousness that we're to become slaves to as slavery to sin results in death (Rom 6:20-22).

"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!" Rom 5:17

The basis of the new covenant-and the main difference between it and the old-is communion with God. And the basis of that connection is faith. Without that vital union which must come first we already exist in a state of injustice, disorder, regardless of what we do. "Apart from Me you can do nothing." John 15:5

 

[RandyPNW]

Phil 3.7 But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith. 10 I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead.

Paul is here speaking of his own Carnality and record of righteousness, which isn't really righteous at all. The Righteousness of Faith existed, according to Paul, even in the time of Abraham, well before Christ's atonement. So Paul had not been living by the Righteousness of Faith.

Righteousness did come through the Law, but not a righteousness that could obtain Eternal Life. To do that access to God's Righteousness had to be perfect, and God was the only one who had that. So the Law, which pointed out the flawed record of human obedience, disqualified man from eternal life apart from the gift of God.

Paul is therefore talking about a Righteousness from God that came to exist apart from the Law without saying that the Law itself was unrighteous. This Perfect Righteousness displayed by Christ qualified him as a representation of God Himself, who alone could forgive sin. The Law only temporarily remediated Sin. Christ's forgiveness brought final redemption for Man.

But Christ's Perfect Righteousness cannot be said to be imputed to us. It belongs strictly to Christ, who qualified him as our mediator. We are credited to be sons of God even though we would otherwise be disqualified. We are not credited with Christ's perfection, in my understanding.

Paul didn't just rely on Christ to be virtuous for him. Rather, he chose to give up his own Carnal Lifestyle for a Spiritual lifestyle patterned after Christ and deriving its spirituality from Christ.

Rom 6.15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! 16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

Sufficiency from God to be virtuous and to obey God's Word existed from the beginning when God made us in His own Image. We've always had access to His Word in order to obey it. His virtue has always been made available to us through Faith, which is the positive choice to rely on God's Word for our guidance.

Communion with God and righteousness both existed under the Law. Faith existed under the Law and before it. But Faith now is expressed in a Righteousness superior to the righteousness of the Law, which God never expected to justify us, because the Law pointed out our sins and never provided a permanent atonement. We now have access to a Word from God that provides permanent atonement, through Christ's Work, and we can derive from him that eternal forgiveness we need in order to be righteous and have our righteousness accepted for all eternity.

 

[fhansen]

Paul is therefore talking about a Righteousness from God that came to exist apart from the Law without saying that the Law itself was unrighteous.

Yes!

Communion with God and righteousness both existed under the Law.

It's different under the new covenant, however. While there were figures in the Old Testament whom God used who certainly prefigured our right realtionship with Him, Jesus came in the "fullness of time" to effect that initimate communion by reconciling all humanity with God. The door is open now to something that we apparently weren't ready for prior to that. Man can now eat from the Tree of Life.

Reconciliation isn't a one-way street, only allowing God to accept sinful man. It works both ways, God always loved man truth be known, but now man can finally come to truly know, and then to love, Him. And righteousness will flow from that vital relationship, as sap through the Vine.

 

[RandyPNW]

Yes!

It's different under the new covenant, however. While there were figures in the Old Testament whom God used who certainly prefigured our right realtionship with Him, Jesus came in the "fullness of time" to effect that initimate communion by reconciling all humanity with God. The door is open now to something that we apparently weren't ready for prior to that. Man can now eat from the Tree of Life.

Reconciliation isn't a one-way street, only allowing God to accept sinful man. It works both ways, God always loved man truth be known, but now man can finally come to truly know, and then to love, Him. And righteousness will flow from that vital relationship, as sap through the Vine.

Yes, God did follow a process. I don't think it was that Man changed really but that God chose to follow a path that has allowed Man to play a progressive role in the path to redemption. We don't provide the final atonement, but we certainly must recognize it and choose it when it is here! Thank you.

 

[tdidymas]

RandyPNW said:
So this is the problem. Yes, Paul spoke of our being "credited" something. And yes it was Abraham's "belief" that allowed him to be viewed as "righteous." But I don't think the way the Doctrine of Imputation is used explains this in a rational way that aids in my understanding.

Again, what is being "imputed" to us is not a righteousness that Abraham did not have. Clearly, he was a righteous man! Rather, what was being "imputed" to him was an extension to his own righteousness a continuation of access to God's Righteousness--a continuation of Grace. His inadequacy did not prevent God from extending the invitation to continue access to His own Righteousness.

A problem I think you have here is that you think Abraham was righteous in his own right, and what righteousness that was imputed to him was added to his own righteousness. This is the problem with that idea: though he appears righteous in the eyes of men, it has no bearing on his acceptance with God. From God's viewpoint, all men are in the same boat of unrighteousness, as Rom. 3:10-18 declares. There Paul describes every human being prior to their regeneration. "There is none righteous..." So the righteousness that was imputed to Abraham through his faith was something he absolutely needed to be justified with God. And it is the same with everyone. Apart from Christ's righteousness imputed to us by God through our faith in Christ, we have zero standing with God. This is why "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

RandyPNW said:
That is, we do not have God's Flawless Righteousness imputed to us. Instead, we have imputed to us the continuing eligibility of our current access to God's Righteousness despite our own inadequacy.

(Truncated)

Our Faith is itself a Work and a Virtue--it is just a flawed Work and a Virtue that normally is disqualified from continuing access to God without Grace. But God not only had Grace towards Abraham's Faith--he also planned, through Christ, to provide continuing access to Righteousness through Grace on demand and in unlimited supply. This is Eternal Life.

This is Salvation--the extension of our righteousness through Faith to embrace God's Righteousness for eternity through our reconstruction, even though it begins now, in our imperfection. Faith transcends and accesses God's Righteousness as well as His Salvation.

Now I see where you are coming from. I consider all this Catholic mumbo-jumbo. I think it's the reason you aren't understanding the significance of God imputing righteousness to us. Your explanation here lacks a belief in Original Sin, which results in the fact that man in his natural state is not able to understand or accept the gospel of Christ, which Paul states explicitly in 1 Cor. 2:14.

RandyPNW said:
Being justified means that we must be seen as righteous because God is just. Therefore, God "credited to Abraham righteousness" in the sense that God saw something that merited continuing justification (not, however Justification in the legal sense), and ultimately Salvation, although without being able to forgive himself.

Abraham had righteousness in his Faith. But he was unable to "forgive himself." That is Grace. Abraham could merit God's Righteousness by fulfilling God's standards for receiving it in his Faith. But he still could not "forgive himself." God had to credit him where his righteousness by Faith lacked.

It is not in simply "believing" that Christ would come to redeem Abraham that constituted what I'm calling "Biblical Faith." True Biblical Faith doesn't just believe but much more accepts the conditions of replacing our Carnality with God's Spirituality. We do not yet become perfect, but now, under the New Covenant, our access to Him by Grace has been extended indefinitely and in fact eternally. And through Christ's forgiveness we have Salvation.

True Biblical Faith begins with God's Righteousness and ends with the same--just more of it and unlimited access to it. And it ends with Salvation. "Faith" is a form of righteousness, but falls short, requiring God's forgiveness. That's what God is "imputing" to us, if we would want to use that word.


Response:
I don't see that as a problem--I see it as a necessity. If our acceptance of God's covenant terms is a problem, then there is no sense in God's asking us for it.

In other words, Biblical Faith is acceptance of the need for substituting God's Righteousness for our Carnality. But Abraham had that to start with--he just needed Christ's Redemption to extend it indefinitely and for eternity.

More of the same

RandyPNW said:
Response:
There is clearly merit in our Faith because God is indicating that by declaring that He was pleased with Abraham's Faith! That is not the same thing as saying Abraham, by his Faith, "earned" Salvation.

The extension of his access to Righteousness by Grace could only occur by Christ's Forgiveness. It was not an "Imputation of something Abraham didn't have, namely Perfection." Rather, it was a crediting of the fact Abraham already had received access to God's Righteousness by Faith and would be allowed to extend that, indefinitely, into the future.

(Truncated)


But this should not be confused with "forgiving ourselves," or with providing a Righteousness that leads to Eternal Life, which is something we can only receive. I'm just saying that in order to receive Eternal Life, we must do something--we must exercise Faith by repenting, by yielding up our independence for a partnership with God.

It is obvious to me that we are not on the same page, and we are certainly not reading the same Bible. I have made some attempt to answer your question, but you keep rejecting it, although I have shown you the clear teaching of scripture. So, this is where our paths diverge, and I'll let you go your way.

 

[RandyPNW]

A problem I think you have here is that you think Abraham was righteous in his own right, and what righteousness that was imputed to him was added to his own righteousness. This is the problem with that idea: though he appears righteous in the eyes of men, it has no bearing on his acceptance with God. From God's viewpoint, all men are in the same boat of unrighteousness, as Rom. 3:10-18 declares. There Paul describes every human being prior to their regeneration. "There is none righteous..." So the righteousness that was imputed to Abraham through his faith was something he absolutely needed to be justified with God. And it is the same with everyone. Apart from Christ's righteousness imputed to us by God through our faith in Christ, we have zero standing with God. This is why "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."




Now I see where you are coming from. I consider all this Catholic mumbo-jumbo. I think it's the reason you aren't understanding the significance of God imputing righteousness to us. Your explanation here lacks a belief in Original Sin, which results in the fact that man in his natural state is not able to understand or accept the gospel of Christ, which Paul states explicitly in 1 Cor. 2:14.



More of the same



It is obvious to me that we are not on the same page, and we are certainly not reading the same Bible. I have made some attempt to answer your question, but you keep rejecting it, although I have shown you the clear teaching of scripture. So, this is where our paths diverge, and I'll let you go your way.

One reason my answers are somewhat convoluted and even hard for me to read is that anytime I take time with an answer I'm unable to send. Then I have to start all over again, with pop ups all over the place--sometimes, if I'm quick enough crafting my post, I can send. Otherwise, not.

I will try to craft an answer in advance in order to post it and send it quickly. But this will take more time than normal. Thanks for your understanding.

I do post on a couple of other forums, and do not have this problem. But I do like this forum and will try to persevere.

 

[RandyPNW]

A problem I think you have here is that you think Abraham was righteous in his own right, and what righteousness that was imputed to him was added to his own righteousness. This is the problem with that idea: though he appears righteous in the eyes of men, it has no bearing on his acceptance with God. From God's viewpoint, all men are in the same boat of unrighteousness, as Rom. 3:10-18 declares. There Paul describes every human being prior to their regeneration. "There is none righteous..." So the righteousness that was imputed to Abraham through his faith was something he absolutely needed to be justified with God. And it is the same with everyone. Apart from Christ's righteousness imputed to us by God through our faith in Christ, we have zero standing with God. This is why "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

TD:
A problem I think you have here is that you think Abraham was righteous in his own right, and what righteousness that was imputed to him was added to his own righteousness.

My Comment:
No, I don't use the word "imputation" at all with respect to perfect righteousness. That doesn't make sense because we never have perfect righteousness, whether real or imputed to us in God's imagination.

What is added to our flawed display of God's Righteousness is further access to it, despite our sins. That is Grace. And because of the Gospel, we have added to our flawed righteousness eternal access to God's Righteousness.

Along with eternal access to God's Righteousness we are given a New Birth that cannot be taken away from us. It is not spoken of so much under the Old Covenant because though they could live by the Spirit and experience a kind of "New Birth," it could not really be explained as such until a real "Birth" had taken place. Once someone is born under the New Covenant, it cannot be undone.

And that's what Christ accomplished. He gave us a New Birth replete with a citizenship in Heaven that can never be taken away.

TD:
This is the problem with that idea: though he appears righteous in the eyes of men, it has no bearing on his acceptance with God. From God's viewpoint, all men are in the same boat of unrighteousness, as Rom. 3:10-18 declares. There Paul describes every human being prior to their regeneration. "There is none righteous..."

My Comment:
Paul is using an extreme example of universal wickedness on a particular occasion in a particular context to prove how vulnerable a whole society can be. And by extension this means that all men have a sin nature and are vulnerable to temptation.

But Paul did not mean to say all men are despicably wicked. On the contraire. Abraham was not viewed as despicably wicked by God. He was viewed as righteous in his faith. That's what the Bible teaches.

TD:
So the righteousness that was imputed to Abraham through his faith was something he absolutely needed to be justified with God. And it is the same with everyone. Apart from Christ's righteousness imputed to us by God through our faith in Christ, we have zero standing with God. This is why "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

My Comment:
I think you are woefully mistaken, with all due respect. A display of meritless Faith on our part can hardly explain how God sees that as "righteousness?" If all men are despicably wicked without Faith, how on earth can they not be seen as better men when they have Faith and obey God like Abraham did?

So, you say that God has a different pair of glasses on by which He sees us all as terribly sinful, but then adjusts His shades to view us as "righteous?" That sounds absurd to me, and isn't anything I could sign off on.

I prefer to believe that exercising Faith Abraham opened the door to reveal righteousness within him on the basis that he is actively responding to God's Word to his heart. This righteousness displayed and described as "Faith" is what God sees as "righteousness."

And God therefore opens the door to his future in His eternal Kingdom, through the redemption that Christ brought when he laid down his life for sinners as an atonement.

 

[tdidymas]

TD:
A problem I think you have here is that you think Abraham was righteous in his own right, and what righteousness that was imputed to him was added to his own righteousness.

My Comment:
No, I don't use the word "imputation" at all with respect to perfect righteousness. That doesn't make sense because we never have perfect righteousness, whether real or imputed to us in God's imagination.

What is added to our flawed display of God's Righteousness is further access to it, despite our sins. That is Grace. And because of the Gospel, we have added to our flawed righteousness eternal access to God's Righteousness.

Along with eternal access to God's Righteousness we are given a New Birth that cannot be taken away from us. It is not spoken of so much under the Old Covenant because though they could live by the Spirit and experience a kind of "New Birth," it could not really be explained as such until a real "Birth" had taken place. Once someone is born under the New Covenant, it cannot be undone.

And that's what Christ accomplished. He gave us a New Birth replete with a citizenship in Heaven that can never be taken away.

TD:
This is the problem with that idea: though he appears righteous in the eyes of men, it has no bearing on his acceptance with God. From God's viewpoint, all men are in the same boat of unrighteousness, as Rom. 3:10-18 declares. There Paul describes every human being prior to their regeneration. "There is none righteous..."

My Comment:
Paul is using an extreme example of universal wickedness on a particular occasion in a particular context to prove how vulnerable a whole society can be. And by extension this means that all men have a sin nature and are vulnerable to temptation.

But Paul did not mean to say all men are despicably wicked. On the contraire. Abraham was not viewed as despicably wicked by God. He was viewed as righteous in his faith. That's what the Bible teaches.

TD:
So the righteousness that was imputed to Abraham through his faith was something he absolutely needed to be justified with God. And it is the same with everyone. Apart from Christ's righteousness imputed to us by God through our faith in Christ, we have zero standing with God. This is why "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

My Comment:
I think you are woefully mistaken, with all due respect. A display of meritless Faith on our part can hardly explain how God sees that as "righteousness?" If all men are despicably wicked without Faith, how on earth can they not be seen as better men when they have Faith and obey God like Abraham did?

So, you say that God has a different pair of glasses on by which He sees us all as terribly sinful, but then adjusts His shades to view us as "righteous?" That sounds absurd to me, and isn't anything I could sign off on.

I prefer to believe that exercising Faith Abraham opened the door to reveal righteousness within him on the basis that he is actively responding to God's Word to his heart. This righteousness displayed and described as "Faith" is what God sees as "righteousness."

And God therefore opens the door to his future in His eternal Kingdom, through the redemption that Christ brought when he laid down his life for sinners as an atonement.

Concerning your statement:

A display of meritless Faith on our part can hardly explain how God sees that as "righteousness?"

The Bible I read identifies who belongs to Christ by the term "faith," and the righteousness of God is imputed to him. It doesn't mean that God sees a man's faith as righteousness.

It appears to me from this and your past posts that you think faith is a work from man that merits a favorable response from God. I disagree with this idea. I know Catholic teaching enough to know this idea is inherent to Catholicism, and why they have a whole system of doctrine around what is called "the treasury of merits." And since you believe all that (I assume), thus your statement that God sees us with different "glasses" sounds absurd to you.

But I challenge you in this: does God see you differently if He forgives your sins, as opposed to when He was not forgiving your sins? Was there a time in your life when you were not a believer and not born of God? After your conversion, did you notice that the Holy Spirit was speaking comfort, as opposed to condemnation before conversion? Does this not tell you that after conversion God has changed His attitude toward you? If you can answer "yes" to these questions, then why does God seeing you differently in Christ so absurd to you?

Secondly, if faith is a work of man that incurs favorable response from God, then doesn't the man who has faith have something to boast about?

 

[RandyPNW]

Concerning your statement:

The Bible I read identifies who belongs to Christ by the term "faith," and the righteousness of God is imputed to him. It doesn't mean that God sees a man's faith as righteousness.

It appears to me from this and your past posts that you think faith is a work from man that merits a favorable response from God. I disagree with this idea. I know Catholic teaching enough to know this idea is inherent to Catholicism, and why they have a whole system of doctrine around what is called "the treasury of merits." And since you believe all that (I assume), thus your statement that God sees us with different "glasses" sounds absurd to you.

But I challenge you in this: does God see you differently if He forgives your sins, as opposed to when He was not forgiving your sins? Was there a time in your life when you were not a believer and not born of God? After your conversion, did you notice that the Holy Spirit was speaking comfort, as opposed to condemnation before conversion? Does this not tell you that after conversion God has changed His attitude toward you? If you can answer "yes" to these questions, then why does God seeing you differently in Christ so absurd to you?

Secondly, if faith is a work of man that incurs favorable response from God, then doesn't the man who has faith have something to boast about?

I was raised a Lutheran, and that's about as anti-Catholic, theologically, as one can be. However, I'm not anti-Catholic and actually agree more with their sense of Faith + Works than any Protestant I know.

I don't, as a Protestant, believe that Works aid Christ in providing an atonement for our sins. But I do believe that Works merit something with God in the sense that it expresses our Faith, which God sees as "righteousness." But you know this...

Since I was raised in church, and have prayed/talked with God virtually every day of my life I don't know when I became Born Again, from birth or when I got filled with the Spirit at around my 17th birthday? I never knew how powerful and intimate the Holy Spirit could be until I walked away, feeling bored and separate from my generation. I ended up in trouble as an adolescent and ultimately responded to God, who wanted "all of me," and not just "good works."

I read in the Bible where it said, "I give my Spirit to those who obey Me," and I was instantly filled with the Spirit. I hadn't known what that was until that moment. But I felt God's good pleasure at that moment of my life.

So yes, I had known what it was like for God to be unhappy with me, when I was backsliding from my walk in righteousness. And I knew the difference when He was pleased with my obedience, to give my all, and separate myself from this godless generation.

So I do find it absurd to think God continues to see me as "despicably wicked," and only "righteous" in the sense that I believe Jesus is the Christ and died as an atonement for my sin. That can be purely liturgical, and cold repetition of standard beliefs. What makes it real is when we allow our Faith to distinguish between living spiritually for Christ and living carnally for ourselves.

When Faith is expressed as Works done by assent to the Word of God within us, God is pleased. Those Works are not Carnal efforts at self-justification, though when they become that God dismisses them as fruitless and an attempt to cover up our sins.

 

[tdidymas]

I was raised a Lutheran, and that's about as anti-Catholic, theologically, as one can be. However, I'm not anti-Catholic and actually agree more with their sense of Faith + Works than any Protestant I know.

No, Lutheranism has doctrines that are much closer to Catholicism than you think. Examples: the Missouri Synod teaches baptismal regeneration and a type of transubstantiation (called 'consubstantiation'), in addition to the idea that a born-again Christian can lose his justification and be lost forever. These are all taught by the RCC. The idea of faith + works yields salvation is another traditional idea in the RCC that is unbiblical. The idea implies that the grace of God is merited by one's efforts, and the RCC teaches that prolifically with their set of "treasury of merit" dogmas.

I don't, as a Protestant, believe that Works aid Christ in providing an atonement for our sins. But I do believe that Works merit something with God in the sense that it expresses our Faith, which God sees as "righteousness." But you know this...

I don't know any such thing. The way I read Eph. 2:8-10 and elsewhere, faith is the vehicle (or method) by which God supernaturally imputes and infuses His righteousness in the individual who believes the Gospel of Christ. It doesn't mean God sees the faith as righteousness. The way I read scripture, God sees the righteousness of Christ in all His elect, and those who are His elect are identified by their faith. God works His works in those whom He has chosen for adoption (Eph. 1:5, John 6:29, Phil. 2:13). The way we can know that we are His elect is the fact that we believe in Christ (1 Jn. 5:1), and produce the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22, 2 Pet. 1:8). It seems to me that only one who reads with the bias of works added to faith for salvation can read into the text that "God sees faith as righteousness."

Since I was raised in church, and have prayed/talked with God virtually every day of my life I don't know when I became Born Again, from birth or when I got filled with the Spirit at around my 17th birthday? I never knew how powerful and intimate the Holy Spirit could be until I walked away, feeling bored and separate from my generation. I ended up in trouble as an adolescent and ultimately responded to God, who wanted "all of me," and not just "good works."

I read in the Bible where it said, "I give my Spirit to those who obey Me," and I was instantly filled with the Spirit. I hadn't known what that was until that moment. But I felt God's good pleasure at that moment of my life.

So yes, I had known what it was like for God to be unhappy with me, when I was backsliding from my walk in righteousness. And I knew the difference when He was pleased with my obedience, to give my all, and separate myself from this godless generation.

So I do find it absurd to think God continues to see me as "despicably wicked," and only "righteous" in the sense that I believe Jesus is the Christ and died as an atonement for my sin. That can be purely liturgical, and cold repetition of standard beliefs. What makes it real is when we allow our Faith to distinguish between living spiritually for Christ and living carnally for ourselves.

When Faith is expressed as Works done by assent to the Word of God within us, God is pleased. Those Works are not Carnal efforts at self-justification, though when they become that God dismisses them as fruitless and an attempt to cover up our sins.

Your last statement tells me that you think faith is merely a mental exercise, and that works must be added to it for God to be pleased. This is what you think, isn't it?

If so, then you're making the same mistake that was made at the council of Trent, where they condemned anyone who claims that we are justified by faith alone. Biblical faith is not a mere mental exercise - that's the culture's definition, and the devil's definition. The faith described in the NT is of the heart, and is a trust in Christ to the extent that one is willing to obey what He said to do. This is not "faith + works." It is a kind of faith wherein God produces the fruit of the Spirit in a person.

I understand that the Council of Trent was opposing potential antinomians, but they went about it in the wrong way. They should have accepted the NT description of faith, and then agreed with Luther and the reformers on what real faith is.

Real faith is defined by this command in Prov. 3:5-6: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will direct your paths."

 

[RandyPNW]

No, Lutheranism has doctrines that are much closer to Catholicism than you think. Examples: the Missouri Synod teaches baptismal regeneration and a type of transubstantiation (called 'consubstantiation'), in addition to the idea that a born-again Christian can lose his justification and be lost forever. These are all taught by the RCC. The idea of faith + works yields salvation is another traditional idea in the RCC that is unbiblical. The idea implies that the grace of God is merited by one's efforts, and the RCC teaches that prolifically with their set of "treasury of merit" dogmas.

You're going to teach me, a Lutheran from birth Christian, what Lutheran's believe? Yes, there is obviously going to be some crossover from the RCC to Lutheranism since Luther was a Catholic originally! Where else is he going to get his beliefs from other than from his Catholic background as viewed from his position as a reformed theologian.

But I'm not a Lutheran anymore in terms of where I go to church. I disagree with Luther on the matter of the "Bondage of the Will." I also disagree with Consubstantiation. But I do see the need to "keep the 10 Commandments" in the "moral" sense, though not in the "Justification" sense.

I don't know any such thing. The way I read Eph. 2:8-10 and elsewhere, faith is the vehicle (or method) by which God supernaturally imputes and infuses His righteousness in the individual who believes the Gospel of Christ.

You surprise me. Most Evangelicals view Christians Works as the product of Faith, as post-generative. I guess I don't know what you believe? When you say Righteous is both "imputed" and "infused," you seem to be confusing to separate concepts, namely "imputation" and "impartation."

I'll have to get back--to much interference here.

It doesn't mean God sees the faith as righteousness. The way I read scripture, God sees the righteousness of Christ in all His elect, and those who are His elect are identified by their faith. God works His works in those whom He has chosen for adoption (Eph. 1:5, John 6:29, Phil. 2:13). The way we can know that we are His elect is the fact that we believe in Christ (1 Jn. 5:1), and produce the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22, 2 Pet. 1:8). It seems to me that only one who reads with the bias of works added to faith for salvation can read into the text that "God sees faith as righteousness."

Your last statement tells me that you think faith is merely a mental exercise, and that works must be added to it for God to be pleased. This is what you think, isn't it?

If so, then you're making the same mistake that was made at the council of Trent, where they condemned anyone who claims that we are justified by faith alone. Biblical faith is not a mere mental exercise - that's the culture's definition, and the devil's definition. The faith described in the NT is of the heart, and is a trust in Christ to the extent that one is willing to obey what He said to do. This is not "faith + works." It is a kind of faith wherein God produces the fruit of the Spirit in a person.

I understand that the Council of Trent was opposing potential antinomians, but they went about it in the wrong way. They should have accepted the NT description of faith, and then agreed with Luther and the reformers on what real faith is.

Real faith is defined by this command in Prov. 3:5-6: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will direct your paths."

 

[RandyPNW]

I don't know any such thing. The way I read Eph. 2:8-10 and elsewhere, faith is the vehicle (or method) by which God supernaturally imputes and infuses His righteousness in the individual who believes the Gospel of Christ. It doesn't mean God sees the faith as righteousness.

God doesn't see Faith as Righteousness, you say?

Romans 4.5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Here, Paul says quite clearly that God does, in fact, see Faith as Righteousness! So you wish to prove against something that the Bible teaches?

Paul is talking about a specific kind of "work"--a work that attempts self-justification. Such a person who is attempting to do self-justifying work is not trusting Christ for his justification.

But the one who acknowledges that he cannot justify himself, by removing the record of his sins, and by removing his own sin nature, can choose to trust in Christ's Justification, which is his atoning sacrifice. In that way one can be justified as one who is righteous and forgiven for his sins.

This is how I understand God seeing Abraham's Faith as Righteousness. A person repents of going his own way, without God, and as such, turns to God and to His Righteousness. And then, the Faith thus demonstrated reveals itself in the form of Righteousness that God accepts as enough for Him to apply Christ's atonement to.

Heb 11.17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.

God doesn't demand perfection of us--just the Righteousness of Faith. I suppose we just don't agree on the matter of Faith being Righteousness in God's eyes, even though it is a flawed Righteousness. I think you believe God either sees it as a Perfect Righteousness, imputed to him, or as neutral--not being a form of Righteousness at all?

Your last statement tells me that you think faith is merely a mental exercise, and that works must be added to it for God to be pleased. This is what you think, isn't it?

No, you're putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that is the wrong kind of "belief"--merely believing Jesus died for our sins, etc. You can recite the creeds, and it doesn't mean you live out what you're saying you believe.

True Faith is a willful conversion from Carnality to Sspirituality. That's what I've said. It is Repentance, just like Jesus said, "Repent because the Kingdom is near."

So you don't believe God sees Faith as Righteousness. And you don't believe in Repentance. What do you believe? Surely, you would not characterize your beliefs in this way?