Christians die because of Adam, not for their own sins. Christ died for their sins and rose again for their justification. When they are justified they are BOTH declared and deemed to be righteous by God. AS RIGHTEOUS AS GOD HIMSELF. AND AS RIGHTEOUS AS CHRIST HIMSELF. And that is why even Christians stumble at the doctrine of imputed righteousness. It is totally foreign to human minds and human logic.
Why do so many oppose imputed righteousness?
- Thread starter Enoch111
- 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!
Now you are certainly the expert on what I believe.
Fact is, you are not me and so you cannot speak for me as concerning what I believe and don't believe.
It's like me saying, you don't believe that Jesus is God.
I think that if you are even born again, you do believe that Jesus is God; and my saying that you don't would be presumptuous to say the least.
But now, I'm saying it (you don't believe in the Deity of Christ); because of Proverbs 26:4-5. I don't want you to be wise in your own eyes; that would be a worse thing than my becoming like you for a moment of time.
That is not what I say.
That would appear to be the principle that we find in Deuteronomy 24:16 and other passages. I would qualify the statement by saying that every man dies for his own sins whether Adam's sin is imputed to him or not; but that he will not die for his sins if Christ's righteousness be imputed to him; so that therefore his own sin will not be imputed to him; neither Adam's.
Deuteronomy 24:16 and other passages would seem to teach otherwise.
And this is a practical and imparted righteousness according to 1 John 3:7. It is those who do righteousness that are counted righteous, even as He is righteous. And in Romans 5:19 people are made righteous through the obedience of one (not just counted as righteous). And in Matthew 5:6 those who hunger and thirst after righteousness are filled with righteousness (not just applied to them on their outside, as in, covered; but filled with righteousness, as in, the righteousness is on the inside of them to the fullest extent possible: see also Ephesians 3:19-20).
This is what Christ provided for us on the Cross (see Romans 5:5; Romans 8:4).
People are missing it, thinking that Christ only died to pay the penalty for their sins. The reality is, He did so much more. He died to give us the Holy Ghost; through whom we are enabled to walk in freedom from and victory over the power of sin.
Last edited:
Um, I think what was meant was that our physical deaths are because we sin, not because another sinned. But the substitutionare aspect of Jesus' death, while still allowing that we die according to the flesh, means that we live according to the spirit.
Imputation gives us righteousness, and that in our new creation, while in the flesh, the flesh is dead, and will die.
Much love!
You simply do not understand imputed righteousness. It is not IMPARTED righteousness and you will not find that in Scripture. John is reminding Christians that the children of God do not continue to sin habitually. And if anyone does so, he is not really a child of God.
Hi Enoch,
Curious, what do you make of this place?
Ephesians 2
20 But ye have not so learned Christ;
21 If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:
22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
Your thought on what this bolded part means?
Much love!
Please note what I have bolded in red. That is telling us that the new creature in Christ also has the old Adamic nature dwelling side-by-side with his new nature. And every Christian must CONSCIOUSLY reject ("that ye put off") the promptings of the old nature, and CONSCIOUSLY walk ("that ye put on") in the Spirit according to the new nature. And that is what verse 24 is saying. Walking in the Spirit means practical righteousness and true holiness. See Galatians 5.
And about this . . .
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
What do you suppose this says about the nature of the new man?
Much love!
It is indeed in scripture, as I have already shown.
Mat 5:6, Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Rom 5:19, For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
1Jo 3:7, Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
You appear to have just contradicted yourself here. First you say that righteousness isn't imparted; and then you speak of a practical righteousness that comes through walking in the Spirit.
Is not practical righteousness imparted rather than merely imputed?
I see it as being like putting off an old set of clothing completely so that you aren't wearing it any more; and then putting on a new set of clothing. You would therefore have nothing more to do with that old set of clothing; unless you put off the new set of clothing and put the old set back on: and that would take a deliberate action.
Indeed I am the expert on what you believe. You keep proving it. Quit trying to change the subject.
That is exactly what you said. And now you want to 'qualify' that because it is what you said. Worse, it is what you believe. You cannot deny the imputation of Adams sin and then somehow accept the imputation of Christ's righteousness and and at the same time call it 'imparted'. You deny the whole doctrine of imputation. You love your works and rewards so you can glory in them. Yes, what a fine Christian you are.
Why did you ignore (Lev. 16). Come on....?
Stranger
It would be wise to not try and say what another meant, when they are being evasive and in error about what they are saying.
Imputation gave us Adam's sin. Imputation gave Christ Adams sin and ours as a result. Imputation gave us Christ's righteousness.
Save your love for another. I don't believe you mean it.
Stranger
Let them correct me if I'm mistaken. But I find no evasion, just a clear answer.
This would be the part we disagree on, mostly. I still keep on open mind on this one, but the way the Scripture read to me, we die because we sinned, and not because another sinned. But we sin because another sinned.
It's not about what you believe about me. I express myself not solely for your benefit.
But the fact is, I truly do want the very best for you. Whether you think so or not.
Much love!
Why not?
Also, I do not see imputation and impartation as being the exact same thing.
While I do not believe that we die for Adam's sin, I do believe that we do not die because of Christ's imputed righteousness. And therefore I only deny part of the doctrine of imputation as you see it; and not the whole.
I could do as you do and point the finger. Let's try it...
You do not want to repent of some sin in your life and therefore you reject the fact that God requires practical righteousness of you.
I believe this warrants an "ouch!"
You would be wise to take some of your own advice.
So cynical, aren't you...
That's how I see it too.
Last edited:
I do, in fact, understand imputed righteousness.
But I don't think that you understand how imputed righteousness can be a reality while imparted righteousness is also a reality.
I honestly was not ignoring that scripture, I must have missed your reference to it. Because that scripture does not seem to be any kind of threat to my theology.
Because I do not see how the two goats in that passage show that we die for Adam's sin.
For I do not deny the imputed righteousness of Christ and therefore you are not going to find me arguing against it.
If you believe that Leviticus 16 shows that clearly, then I would be interested in a more concise teaching concerning this.
After all, we are here to edify one another.
Last edited:
Think of what you said. You said, "we die because we sinned". You said, "we sin because another sinned".
You want to admit the imputation of sin, but not the imputation of death. Both are imputed at the same time to the human race. (Rom. 5:12)
Stranger
Because you are creating a false doctrine. You come saying you believe in imputation, then distort and twist it so much that it isn't imputation. You turn that, which is necessary for God's salvation to be of grace, into law. You cannot hold to part of the doctrine of imputation and reject the other. Paul is using the imputation of Adams sin to explain the imputation of Christ's righteousness. (Rom. 5:14) "...who is the figure of him that was to come."
You are the answer to the title of this thread, "Why do so many oppose imputed righteousness". Because it takes away from their self-effort.
You deny all of the doctrine of imputation. You deny the imputation of Adam's sin and twist the imputation of Christ's righteousness. You have already admitted that the imputation of Christ's righteousness does not get you to Heaven. I have showed you in (Lev. 16) how that you cannot separate Christ's sacrifice and imputation. Both are part of the same work. Both the sacrificial goat and scape goat were part of the same work.
What would God have done if the Levitical high priest only brought one goat before God? Then as he approached God he started explaining to Him why we don't really need the scape goat. I personally don't think the high priest would have lived very long. That is what you are doing in trying to use Christ's sacrifice to disprove imputation.
I said early on that the doctrine of imputation does not negate the doctrine of sanctification. No matter how far one goes in their experience here of sanctification, their righteousness is still as filthy rags before God. Abraham did good works and was obedient at times. And before man this always looks good. But his good works could never contribute to imputed righteousness. (Rom. 4:2)
Stranger
(Lev. 16) shows how you cannot separate imputation from Christ's sacrifice. Which is what you are trying to do when you say we don't go to Heaven because of the imputation of Christ's righteousness.
Yes, you deny the imputation of Christ's righteousnes just as you do the imputation of Adams sin.
Stranger
@Stranger,
Since you are misrepresenting me in so many ways; and because I also believe that I need to at this point believe that all of my own righteousnesses are as filthy rags (in spite of Revelation 19:8 (kjv)): I am not going to continue this conversation with you.
I bow out.
I do not say that I am convinced of your pov; but I am not going to argue against it any further.
I will continue to believe what the scripture says in 1 John 3:7, Romans 5:19, and Matthew 5:6.
I believe that the apostles used great plainness of speech in what they wrote (2 Corinthians 3:12 (kjv)); and it is clear to me that the verses referenced above speak of imparted and practical righteousness; while they also are not in denial of imputed righteousness.
Since you yourself admit that the doctrine of sanctification is not negated by imputation, I'm not certain what your beef is.
Because all I'm saying is that sanctification comes as the result of imputation.
In imputation God declares the ungodly person to be righteous (Romans 4:5); and it is impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6:18, Titus 1:2). So God calls those things which be not as though they are, thus creating a new reality (Romans 4:17) of that which He has declared; that the person who was one moment before ungodly, is now righteous...in reality...and this means, in the practical and in the imparted sense.
Through the obedience of one shall many be made righteous (Romans 5:19).
Those who hunger and thirst after righteousness will be filled (Matthew 5:6).
Those who do righteousness are righteous even as He is righteous (1 John 3:7).
Since you are misrepresenting me in so many ways; and because I also believe that I need to at this point believe that all of my own righteousnesses are as filthy rags (in spite of Revelation 19:8 (kjv)): I am not going to continue this conversation with you.
I bow out.
I do not say that I am convinced of your pov; but I am not going to argue against it any further.
I will continue to believe what the scripture says in 1 John 3:7, Romans 5:19, and Matthew 5:6.
I believe that the apostles used great plainness of speech in what they wrote (2 Corinthians 3:12 (kjv)); and it is clear to me that the verses referenced above speak of imparted and practical righteousness; while they also are not in denial of imputed righteousness.
Since you yourself admit that the doctrine of sanctification is not negated by imputation, I'm not certain what your beef is.
Because all I'm saying is that sanctification comes as the result of imputation.
In imputation God declares the ungodly person to be righteous (Romans 4:5); and it is impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6:18, Titus 1:2). So God calls those things which be not as though they are, thus creating a new reality (Romans 4:17) of that which He has declared; that the person who was one moment before ungodly, is now righteous...in reality...and this means, in the practical and in the imparted sense.
Through the obedience of one shall many be made righteous (Romans 5:19).
Those who hunger and thirst after righteousness will be filled (Matthew 5:6).
Those who do righteousness are righteous even as He is righteous (1 John 3:7).
I am unwatching this thread.
@marks can take up the cause of attempting to convince you of the truth if he so desires; but I expect that he will get similar treatment from you if he does.
I consider that we will know them by their fruits.
We don't gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles.
So then, since there is no harvest to be reaped here (and God has also told me not to sow among thorns, Jeremiah 4:3-4) I will let my statements stand as the truth and leave it to others to sift out the differing opinions that are presented here.
@marks can take up the cause of attempting to convince you of the truth if he so desires; but I expect that he will get similar treatment from you if he does.
I consider that we will know them by their fruits.
We don't gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles.
So then, since there is no harvest to be reaped here (and God has also told me not to sow among thorns, Jeremiah 4:3-4) I will let my statements stand as the truth and leave it to others to sift out the differing opinions that are presented here.
. . . and through faith in Him we have access into this grace in which we stand . . .
I wonder what people think this means?
Standing makes me think of Ephesians 6, I think I know what "stand" means here. Secure in salvation, covered by righteousness, secure in truth, walking in peace, untouchable, and living by the Word of God, in intimacy with Him.
Sound pretty good? I'd say, yes. Sound like fertile ground for sin? I'd say, no.
This makes me think of something else too, Ephesians 2, we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, that God ordained beforehand that we should walk in them.
I'm thinking that standing in that way leads to walking in this way.
I'm thinking that there is a reason we've been created "patterned after God in righteousness and true holiness". Maybe so we can live in righteousness?
Much love!
Similar threads
