Now that you're not corrupting what I teach by labelling it as something else, but rather challenge it fairly, then I am more than glad to be corrected, if you do so by Scripture and reasonable argument.
So you believe that the word "justified" receives a broad brushed definition of "accounted as righteous" throughout all of scripture and you reject that it can also mean, "shown to be righteous?"
You've got it backwards. I've been confining justification to being made righteous and being righteous, which you call showing the righteousness of God, which Scripture calls being justified by works through faith, and not by faith alone.
I say accounted righteousness is imputed righteousness, which I have been arguing is God's desire and love for righteousness put into any man's heart, that believes Him and His word to be true.
But until the doing of it, the person has not been made righteous, nor is being righteous, no is justified by Christ: being something by thinking it alone, is the vanity of people with no character nor substance.
As Paul said of the charity promises of the churches of God to the poor saints at Jerusalem, now follow through
and do it:
Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have.
By purpose of desire and declaration of will, we are imputed the righteousness of our intent by faith, but until we do it, it is only intent by faith alone. And if the time of doing passes, and we do it not, then our faith is counted as dead. God sees no righteousness in vain promises of faith.
Faith alone Christians will acknowledge this simple truth among men, but not when it comes to God, because God to them is just a Spirit and not a real person to be accountable to, nor do they honor Jesus a real man to be doing as He did. By their own doctrine, the man Jesus is more of an idol to praise abundantly with their lips, but not a real man that they can actually be expected to live like and walk like, even as He lived and walked in the flesh.
Now of course, this act pronounced or declared God to be righteous. It did not make him righteous. The basis or ground for the pronouncement was the fact that God IS righteous. Notice that the NIV reads, "acknowledged that God's way was right.." The ESV reads, "they declared God just.." That is the "sense" in which God was "justified." He was shown to be righteous..
This of course is where we disagree, as I have with others in the game of semantics. No man is made righteous who is not being righteous, which is only by doing righteousness. This is what God says in Scripture, and makes it clear that by obedience, even as Jesus was made the Justifier, so by obedience are we made righteous:
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
I've told you this already: the one Scripture that speaks of being made righteous is with obedience.
Notice that the NIV reads, "acknowledged that God's way was right.." The ESV reads, "they declared God just.." That is the "sense" in which God was "justified." He was shown to be righteous..
His way of course being how to live, not just how to think. Jesus is the way. He is not just a thinker, but a doer. His new and living way was shown us, which as you say is the justification of showing the righteousness by doing it.
In regards to Romans 1:5, although Paul can speak of people’s initial response of choosing to believe the gospel as an act of obedience, in which he describes it as "obeying the gospel" (Romans 10:16; 1:16),
That's your words, not Scripture. You try to make acknowledging the truth to be obeying the truth, which of course is not accepted among serious adults. God is not just a Spirit, who does not expect the doing of something, in order to justify believing it.
Where there is no doing of it, there is only faith alone, which cannot justify any man with Christ.
Notice that Paul said they HAVE (already) received grace and apostleship FOR/UNTO obedience to the faith.
True, that is what faith and grace are for: obeying the truth of God's righteousness. Without the obeying, the faith and grace is ineffectual. Light is for seeing, but without seeing, the light is made of none effect by the willfully blind. So it is with the cross of Jesus. Without taking up our own cross, as He did His, His cross is made of none effect to us, no matter how much we say we believe and are saved and are justified by our own faith and grace alone.
In regards to 1 John 1:7, we see a distinction between children of God and children of the devil. read - Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; (children of God practice righteousness BECAUSE they are righteous and not in order to become righteous.) 8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.
And so we agree: only the doers of His righteousness are the righteous as He is righteous. And no man doing the sin of the devil is righteous, nor the righteousness of Christ, nor justified by Him.
We have a disagreement over definition of terms, but so long as the end result is the same, then to me it can be intellectually interesting, but not really important. So long as any believer knows we are not justified by our own faith alone, but are only justified by those works of faith being produce by the Spirit, then I have no disagreement at all.
All that remains of course, is the doing of it, not just agreeing and teaching it.
You seem to agree with the teaching that we are first justified by faith alone, and then 'fully' justified by works of faith. I don't agree with that, but so long as it is practiced, then the result is the same: being 'fully' justified by works of faith, and not by faith alone, which I suppose would be partially.
So long as justification does not permanently remain separated from works, as the classic OSAS faith aloners teach, then the result is the same.
OSAS faith aloners invent for themselves a foolish failsafe, to believe they are still justified only by what they think in their hearts, even if they are being children of the devil by what they do with their words and deeds.
And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.