Imputation is based on the Old Testament
- Thread starter Episkopos
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
<sigh>
1st, I don’t know if he misused a word as you say. It could be that he used the word properly and you are in need of humility and correcting.
2nd, I reject your claim that the validity of his point hinges on the use of a particular word.
3rd, he has a valid point, conveyed over several paragraphs.
4th, you attempted to COMPLETELY reframe the point I made to make it seem like IF Mike mis-used a word, it means that you are NOT self-centered.
5th, you doubled down on your self-centeredness by first ignoring everything he said. Then, when I called you on it, you invented this ‘he used a word wrong’ ploy.
6th, I can re-iterate why this is self-centered IF you think it will help. However, I’ve already pointed it out to you 3 times.
7th, the speck in Mike’s eye and my eye are too tempting to elaborate on. Yet, what is in your eye seems to need no detailed analysis.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
You do realize Mike’s critique has NOTHING to do with you reverting to foreign language, right?
Romans 4:6-8 KJV@marks said.
Imputing IS to recognize something true or else is based on a religious lie...or as the bible calls it..fables.
6) Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7) Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8) Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
Is there anyone to whom the Lord does not impute sin? In your view?
Much love!
@marks said.
Imputing IS to recognize something true or else is based on a religious lie...or as the bible calls it..fables.
Read again . . .
Romans 2:25-27 KJV
25) For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
26) Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27) And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
"His uncircumcision is reckoned for circumcision." This is a fable? No, that's not the right way to look at this.
Much love!
I don't have a problem with looking at the other languages myself, said Mark.
Much love!
Do you believe that all have sinned? What is missing here is God's mercy. God forgives sin...He banishes sin so that a person's slate becomes clean.
A baby is a wonderful creation. But left to themselves they would become filthy. So then diaper changes are needed. When the baby is clean and powdered....they become nice smelling., So then those clean babies would not have a smelly diaper IMPUTED to them. They have become clean.
The issue is how God uses His mercy to clean some...and leave others in their filth.
Now we come to religious sins...iniquity. Blessed is the one on whom God does not impute iniquity. That means that religious fables create a situation whereby wrath is stored up for later. Those same religious ones are the ones who haggle over how righteous they are at the present time. Pharisees argue with others over their own righteousness. A Publican on the other hand sees himself as sinful and of no use to God.
Which one is justified?
Well, the Pharisee says he is the Publican....because it sounds better. And the Publican sees himself as the Pharisee.
So there is a flip going on.
And the kind of sin that is not imputed to the righteous...is the lying, the religious dissimulation, guile, with which the wicked seek to hide their true condition. So these add sin to sin.
God forgives ONE layer of sin...but not 2.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Perhaps but who are you to separate the sheep from the goats, the wheat from the tares?
@marks and I have had our disagreements but I take him as devout, who loves God, submits to Jesus and immerses himself in the Bible as much as any of us. I've never seen a post from him where he puts his ego above others. YMMV.
Good one Mike!I don't have a problem with looking at the other languages myself, said Mark.
Much love!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Who the heck is this Mike guy, anyway?I don't have a problem with looking at the other languages myself, said Mark.
Much love!
And as you know, I speak English. I am Groot.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Getting back to imputing; we don't credit the container for the flavor of the wine.
A old Jewish prayer at grace is, "Praise God, King of the Universe, who brings forth the fruit of the vine." We might do other things, like till the soil and reap the harvest, but only God brings forth the fruit of the vine.
A old Jewish prayer at grace is, "Praise God, King of the Universe, who brings forth the fruit of the vine." We might do other things, like till the soil and reap the harvest, but only God brings forth the fruit of the vine.
Philippians 3:4-11 KJV
4) Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5) Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6) Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7) But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8) Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10) That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11) If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
Not our own "righteousness", which is counted as poo. What we need is God's righteousness, which we can never Never attain to on our own, Only that God may impute His righteousness to us, as demontrated in Abraham, the model of our faith.
Much love!
4) Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5) Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6) Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7) But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8) Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10) That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11) If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
Not our own "righteousness", which is counted as poo. What we need is God's righteousness, which we can never Never attain to on our own, Only that God may impute His righteousness to us, as demontrated in Abraham, the model of our faith.
Much love!
Romans 4:20-24 KJV
20) He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21) And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22) And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23) Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24) But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
If we believe . . .
Much love!
20) He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21) And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22) And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23) Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24) But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
If we believe . . .
Much love!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Even you must see how your tactics undermine conversation. Perhaps you do not actually want a back and forth conversation on a forum. Perhaps you just want an echo chamber.
God must have got it wrong when he said iron sharpens iron; it must be Episkopos sharpens iron.
Why do you ask?
Seriously though . . .
If you understand that all men have sinned (excepting Jesus), then when God imputes righteousness to someone, it is in spite of their unrighteousness.
Being forgiven of sin doesn't mean that the sin never happened, nor does it mean that the one forgiven didn't actually commit that sin.
Righteousness is imputed to those who are unrighteous due to sin, because they believe in Jesus. Into Jesus. The righteousness of the Law includes sacrifice to cover sins, however, the righteousness of God is absolute, requiring no covering, because we have been born again, a new creation, righteous and holy.
Sinners are declared righteous in justification, and sinners are made righteous in rebirth. And then comes training in righteousness. Training, growth, and maturity.
Much love!
Last edited:
God imputes righteousness when people act righteousness, IN SPITE of any other failings they might have had.
God imputes righteousness when He sees righteousness. That doesn't mean they never sin. There is no righteous person in the world that never sins. That is the biblical witness. But having sinned doesn't mean we can NEVER get it right...on a human righteousness level.
The danger is trying to make a religious formula that sees God imputing righteousness on unrighteousness...which is what I believe you are trying to do. Why...because of a religious disposition that has thrown out common reasoning. Jesus used reason to have people compare the value of things. I find that to be religious today, you have to throw out a basic common reasoning...the kind that Jesus appealed to.
That's why God forgives us.
No. Belief doesn't cover unrighteousness. Faith in God is righteous...but people can go the wrong way with that...if people become religious and throw out common reasoning...adding sin to sin. God will forgive one level of sin....for the righteous...but not the second level of sin...for the hypocrites. Misrepresenting God is not covered by forgiveness UNLESS one repents.
As a start. But then we are led into the desert to be tried and tested...to see if we will get religious...or remain humble.
Justification IS to be declared righteous....there is no religious status with God. You are using mumbo-jumbo religious speak here. And you are speaking here of an endless walk in the wilderness. No high calling there.
That sentence seems quite bizarre to me…
Are you saying sort of…when God says a man has done a good thing, has done a right thing, it doesn’t mean the man is holy and never does some wrong things too?
The testing proves the truth of the matter. Either you have new life or you don't. Testing shows which is true.
About all this "getting religious", or however we describe it, I suppose you are thinking of those who fail the test, not having a genuine faith, not actually reborn. The reborn, testing offers the proof of that fact.
Peter gives a detailed paragraph expaining this. Paul also. We can go deeper into that if you like.
I'm curious, what "religious formula" do you think I'm concocting?
Are you familiar with Reflective Listening? Also called Active Listening? Care to play? I'm curious whether you are able to accurately and fairly articulate my view on this point. Are you?
I think it's important to understand someone's view in order to properly discuss it, do you agree?
Much love!
