The doctrine of imputation is hypocritical

Ripheus27

Holeless fox
Dec 23, 2012
1,707
69
✟15,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.
 

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
...the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us....

I don't think this is portrayed in Pilgrim's Progress nor in any other true Literature from believers immersed in Jesus' Name following Him living His Life.

It was a long time ago though that I read Pilrim's Progress - can you quote from it specifically where you think it says that,
or from any other true Christian writing ?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hazelelponi
Upvote 0

dreadnought

Lip service isn't really service.
Supporter
Aug 4, 2012
7,730
3,466
71
Reno, Nevada
✟313,356.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Methodist
Marital Status
Celibate
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.
We'll all have to repent before we can walk into heaven.
 
Upvote 0

Ripheus27

Holeless fox
Dec 23, 2012
1,707
69
✟15,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
It's what the doctrine of imputation is. Christ's works are imputed to us. That by itself means said to be ours. Logic leads me to understand that this makes imputation out to be salvation by our own works regardless of what the doctrine hereof was made up to explain. As for where in TPP, it's in the dialogue with Ignorance or in the second book, when the children are being catechized (IIRC).
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,875
USA
✟580,110.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Here's the beauty in Imputation. God imputed Adam's sin to us. Then God Imputed our sin to Christ. And then Imputed Christ's righteousness to us. All according to Romans 5. But look how we made out. Jesus is God, so we now have the infinite righteousness of God worthy of all the blessings only God deserves!!
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
It looks like that's not what anyone else says - only you and no one else posted this or said this anywhere. (bolded in quote and underlined)

So again, can you show (I think a quote is needed for clarity) that ANYONE ELSE has said this ?

It's what the doctrine of imputation is. Christ's works are imputed to us. That by itself means said to be ours. Logic leads me to understand that this makes imputation out to be salvation by our own works regardless of what the doctrine hereof was made up to explain. As for where in TPP, it's in the dialogue with Ignorance or in the second book, when the children are being catechized (IIRC).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hazelelponi
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.
Imputation of what onto whom by whom?
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.

.
Are you able to demonstrate those Works of Jesus which are Imputed to us, and thereby save us?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ripheus27

Holeless fox
Dec 23, 2012
1,707
69
✟15,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
It looks like that's not what anyone else says - only you and no one else posted this or said this anywhere. (bolded in quote and underlined)

So again, can you show (I think a quote is needed for clarity) that ANYONE ELSE has said this ?

I posted what I posted on the assumption that those who know of the doctrine of imputed righteousness would be the likeliest to reply. It looks like I was terribly wrong...

.
Are you able to demonstrate those Works of Jesus which are Imputed to us, and thereby save us?

Well, I can't demonstrate a falsehood.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Notice that you said imputed works, earlier. NOT imputed righteousness.

See?

There is A LOT OF DIFFERENCE.

Yes, it seems you were apparently terribly wrong.... no worries though, it can be corrected.

I posted what I posted on the assumption that those who know of the doctrine of imputed righteousness would be the likeliest to reply. It looks like I was terribly wrong...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hazelelponi
Upvote 0

Ripheus27

Holeless fox
Dec 23, 2012
1,707
69
✟15,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Notice that you said imputed works, earlier. NOT imputed righteousness.

See?

There is A LOT OF DIFFERENCE.

*Growls*

CHRISTIAN: Therefore this faith is deceitful, even such as will leave thee under wrath in the day of God Almighty: for true justifying faith puts the soul, as sensible of its lost condition by the law, upon flying for refuge unto Christ’s righteousness; (which righteousness of his is not an act of grace by which he maketh, for justification, thy obedience accepted with God, but his personal obedience to the law, in doing and suffering for us what that required at our hands)...

IGNORANCE: What! would you have us trust to what Christ in his own person has done without us?

... and...

Great-heart. With all my heart; but first I must premise that he of
whom we are now about to speak is one that has not his fellow. He has two
Natures in one Person, plain to be distinguished, impossible to be divided.
Unto each of these Natures a Righteousness belongeth, and each Righteousness
is essential to that Nature; so that one may as easily cause the Nature to be
extinct, as to separate its Justice or Righteousness from it. Of these
Righteousness therefore we are not made partakers, so as that they, or any of
them, should be put upon us that we might be made just, and live thereby.
Besides these there is a Righteousness which this Person has, as these two
Natures are joined in one. And this is not the Righteousness of the Godhead,
as distinguished from the Manhood; nor the Righteousness of the Manhood, as
distinguished from the Godhead; but a Righteousness which standeth in the
union of both Natures, and may properly be called, the Righteousness that is
essential to his being prepared of God to the capacity of the Mediatory Office
which he was to be intrusted with. If he parts with his first Righteousness,
he parts with his Godhead; if he parts with his second Righteousness, he parts
with the purity of his Manhood; if he parts with this third, he parts with
that perfection that capacitates him to the Office of Mediation. He has
therefore another Righteousness, which standeth in performance, or obedience
to a revealed will, and that is that he puts upon Sinners, and that by which
their sins are covered. Wherefore he saith, as by one man's disobedience many
were made Sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made Righteous.


Chris. But are the other Righteousnesses of no use to us?


Great-heart. Yes, for though they are essential to his Natures and
Office, and so cannot be communicated unto another, yet it is by virtue of
them that the Righteousness that justifies is for that purpose efficacious.
The Righteousness of his Godhead gives virtue to his Obedience; the
Righteousness of his Manhood giveth capability to his obedience to justify;
and the Righteousness that standeth in the union of these two Natures to his
Office, giveth authority to that Righteousness to do the work for which it is
ordained.


So then here is a Righteousness that Christ as God has no need of, for he
is God without it; here is a Righteousness that Christ as Man has no need of
to make him so, for he is perfect Man without it; again, here is a
Righteousness that Christ as God-man has no need of, for he is perfectly so
without it. Here then is a Righteousness that Christ, as God, as Man, as God -
man, has no need of, with reference to himself, and therefore he can spare it;
a justifying Righteousness that he for himself wanteth not, and therefore he
giveth it away; hence 'tis called the gift of Righteousness. This
Righteousness, since Christ Jesus the Lord has made himself under the Law,
must be given away: for the Law doth not only bind him that is under it to do
justly, but to use Charity. Wherefore he must, he ought by the Law, if he hath
two Coats, to give one to him that hath none. Now our Lord indeed hath two
Coats, one for himself, and one to spare; wherefore he freely bestows one upon
those that have none. And thus Christiana, and Mercy, and the rest of you that
are here, doth your pardon come by deed, or by the work of another man. Your
Lord Christ is he that has worked, and has given away what he wrought for to
the next poor beggar he meets.


But again, in order to pardon by deed, there must something be paid to
God as a price, as well as something prepared to cover us withal. Sin has
delivered us up to the just curse of a righteous Law; now from this curse we
must be justified by way of redemption, a price being paid for the harms we
have done; and this is by the Blood of your Lord, who came and stood in your
place and stead, and died your death for your transgressions. Thus has he
ransomed you from your transgressions by Blood, and covered your polluted and
deformed souls with Righteousness. For the sake of which God passeth by you,
and will not hurt you when he comes to judge the World.

Do not waste my time with word-games, unless you find it pleasing to speak so disrespectfully of the question of our salvation.
 
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
27,246
45,333
67
✟2,915,768.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.
Hi Ripheus, just to be clear before I comment further, you think that the idea of imputation is "profane", whether that be the Father crediting His Son's righteousness to our accounts or, on the other hand, His crediting of our sinfulness to His Son's account?

Thanks!

--David

2 Corinthians 5
21 ..He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Hazelelponi
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟107,193.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Among other places, the claim shows up in The Pilgrim's Progress. At least, the doctrine of imputation as such shows up there. No one else seems to have ever realized what this doctrine actually entails, though.

The Pilgrim's Progress is a fictional work by John Bunyan, it is not meant to be taken literally, it is meant to be an allegory.

For a better view of the doctrine of imputation, read the following by Bunyan:

JUSTIFICATION BY AN IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS

JUSTIFICATION is to be diversly taken in the Scripture. Sometimes it is taken for the justification of persons; sometimes for the justification of actions; and sometimes for the justification of the person and action too.

It is taken for the justification of persons, and that, as to justification with God; or, as to justification with men.

As to justification with God; that is, when a man stands clear, quit, free, or, in a saved condition before him, in the approbation of his holy law.

As to justification with men; that is, when a man stands clear and quit from just ground of reprehension with them.

Justification also is to be taken with reference to actions; and that may be when they are considered, as flowing from true faith; or, because the act done fulfils some transient law.

As actions flow from faith, so they are justified, because done before God in, and made complete through, the perfections of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 13:15; Revelation 8:1–4).

As by the doing of the act some transient law is fulfilled; as when Jehu executed judgment upon the house of Ahab. ‘Thou hast done well,’ said God to him, ‘in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart’ (2 Kings 10:30). As to such acts, God may or may not look at the qualification of those that do them; and it is clear that he had not respect to any good that was in Jehu in the justifying of this action; nor could he; for Jehu stuck close yet to the sins of Jeroboam, but ‘took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord God of Israel’ (2 Kings 10:29, 31).

I might hence also show you that a man may be justified even then when his action is condemned; also that a man may be in a state of condemnation when his action may be justified. But with these distinctions I will not take up time, my intention being to treat of justification as it sets a man free or quit from sin, the curse and condemnation of the law in the sight of God, in order to eternal salvation.

And that I may with the more clearness handle this point before you, I will lay down and speak to this

PROPOSITION

THAT THERE IS NO OTHER WAY FOR SINNERS TO BE JUSTIFIED FROM THE CURSE OF THE LAW IN THE SIGHT OF GOD, THAN BY THE IMPUTATION OF THAT RIGHTEOUSNESS LONG AGO PERFORMED BY, AND STILL RESIDING WITH, THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.

The terms of this proposition are easy; yet if it will help, I will speak a word or two for explication. First. By a sinner, I mean one that has transgressed the law; ‘for sin is the transgression of the law’ (1 John 3:4). Second. By the curse of the law, I mean that sentence, judgment, or condemnation which the law pronounceth against the transgressor (Galatians 3:10). Third. By justifying righteousness, I mean that which stands in the doing and suffering of Christ when he was in the world (Romans 5:19). Fourth. By the residing of this righteousness in Christ’s person, I mean it still abides with him as to the action, though the benefit is bestowed upon those that are his. Fifth. By the imputation of it to us, I mean God’s making of it ours by an act of his grace, that we by it might be secured from the curse of the law. Sixth. When I say there is no other way to be justified. I cast away TO THAT END the law, and all the works of the law as done by us.

Thus I have opened the terms of the proposition.

First and Second. Now the two first-to wit, what sin and the curse is-stand clear in all men’s sight, unless they be atheists or desperately heretical. I shall, therefore, in few words, clear the other four.

Third. Therefore justifying righteousness is the doing and suffering of Christ when he was in the world. This is clear, because we are said to be ‘justified by his obedience,’ by his obedience to the law (Romans 5:19). Hence he is said again to be the end of the law for that very thing-‘Christ is the end of the law for righteousness,’ &c. (Romans 10:4). The end, what is that? Why, the requirement or demand of the law. But what are they? Why, righteousness, perfect righteousness (Galatians 3:10). Perfect righteousness, what to do? That the soul concerned might stand spotless in the sight of God (Revelation 1:5). Now this lies only in the doings and sufferings of Christ; for ‘by his obedience many are made righteous’; wherefore as to this, Christ is the end of the law, that being found in that obedience, that becomes to us sufficient for our justification. Hence we are said to be made righteous by his obedience; yea, and to be washed, purged, and justified by his blood (Hebrews 9:14; Romans 5:18, 19).

Fourth. That this righteousness still resides in and with the person of Christ, even then when we stand just before God thereby, is clear, for that we are said, when justified, to be justified ‘in him.’ ‘In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified.’ And again, ‘Surely, shall one say, In the Lord have I righteousness,’ &c. (Isaiah 45:24, 25). And again, ‘But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us—righteousness’ (1 Corinthians 1:30).

Mark, the righteousness is still ‘in him,’ not ‘in us,’ even then when we are made partakers of the benefit of it; even as the wing and feathers still abide in the hen when the chickens are covered, kept, and warmed thereby.

For as my doings, though my children are fed and clothed thereby, are still my doings, not theirs; so the righteousness wherewith we stand just before God from the curse, still resides in Christ, not in us. Our sins, when laid upon Christ, were yet personally ours, not his; so his righteousness, when put upon us, is yet personally his, not ours. What is it, then? Why, ‘he was made to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him’ (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Fifth. It is, therefore, of a justifying virtue, only by imputation, or as God reckoneth it to us; even as our sins made the Lord Jesus a sinner-nay, ‘sin,’ by God’s reckoning of them to him.

It is absolutely necessary that this be known of us; for if the understanding be muddy as to this, it is impossible that such should be sound in the faith; also in temptation, that man will be at a loss that looketh for a righteousness for justification in himself, when it is to be found nowhere but in Jesus Christ. The apostle, who was his craftsmaster as to this, was always ‘looking to Jesus,’ that he ‘might be found in him,’ knowing that nowhere else could peace or safety be had (Philippians 3:6–9). And, indeed, this is one of the greatest mysteries in the world; namely, that a righteousness that resides with a person in heaven should justify me, a sinner, on earth!

Sixth. Therefore the law and the works thereof, as to this, must by us be cast away; not only because they here are useless, but also they being retained are a hindrance. That they are useless is evident, for that salvation comes by another name (Acts 4:12). And that they are a hindrance, it is clear; for the very adhering to the law, though it be but a little, or in a little part, prevents justification by the righteousness of Christ (Romans 9:31, 32).

What shall I say? As to this, the moral law is rejected, the ceremonial law is rejected, and man’s righteousness is rejected, for that they are here both weak and unprofitable (Romans 8:2, 3; Galatians 3:21; Hebrews 10:1–12). Now if all these and their works as to our justification, are rejected, where, but in Christ, is righteousness to be found?

Thus much, therefore, for the explication of the proposition-namely, that there is no other way for sinners to be justified from the curse of the law in the sight of God, than by the imputation of that righteousness long ago performed by, and still residing with, the person of Jesus Christ."
John Bunyan however did not invent the doctrine of imputed righteousness, see HERE for a history.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Well, I can't demonstrate a falsehood.

.
I don't quite understand, you start a thread saying that The Doctrine of Imputation is Hypocritical, but you aren't able to come up with anything that you are saying is Hypocritical.

What is it then your argument is based upon, your personal belief without any cause?

I'm not saying I disagree with you, I'm saying I don't know what it is your particularly against, other than it is a Doctrine.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This doctrine implies the opposite of what it is used for. Its purpose is to have it so that we are not saved by our own works. However, it would have things this way on the grounds that the works of Christ are made out to be ours. That is, God makes it out that His Son's works are our works, which thereby save us. This is quite unseemly, I believe, if not outright profane.
Perhaps a proper definition of imputation is in order:

Imputation "is used to designate any action or word or thing as reckoned to a person. Thus in doctrinal language (1) the sin of Adam is imputed to all his descendants, i.e., it is reckoned as theirs, and they are dealt with therefore as guilty; (2) the righteousness of Christ is imputed to them that believe in him, or so attributed to them as to be considered their own; and (3) our sins are imputed to Christ, i.e., he assumed our 'law-place,' undertook to answer the demands of justice for our sins. In all these cases the nature of imputation is the same (Rom. 5:12-19; comp. Philemon 1:18, 19)." [1]

Imputation is distinct from impartation and infusion. The Greek verb for imputation, logizomai is used more than 40 times in the New Testament. It used ten times in Romans chapter 4—sometimes called the "imputation chapter." In the King James Version, logizomai is translated 'counted' (Rom 4:3, 5), 'reckoned' (Rom 4:4, 10), and 'imputed' (Rom 4:6, 8, 11, 22, 23, 24).

https://www.theopedia.com/imputation
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

I'm back
Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,210
8,688
55
USA
✟676,606.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Can you give me the verse for that statement

Romans 3:21-25

Specifically:

“But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe, for there is no distinction;"
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Romans 3:21-25

Specifically:

“But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe, for there is no distinction;"

.
Thank you, but what I am looking for is, "the righteousness of Christ is imputed to them that believe in him,"
 
Upvote 0