Imputed righteousness
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please discuss this issue on the talk page or replace this tag with a more specific message. This article has been tagged since November 2006. |
Imputed righteousness is a concept in Christian theology which promotes belief in the righteousness of Jesus Christ as being all that is necessary to share in God's grace. Those who trust in the promise that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross atones for their sins believe in this type of righteousness as opposed to imparted righteousness and sanctification. The teaching of imputed righteousness is a signature doctrine of the Lutheran and Reformed traditions of Christianity.[1]
Contents |
[edit] The case for imputed righteousness
Imputed righteousness is the Protestant solution to a "divine predicament." On the one hand, God is infinitely merciful, "not wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9). On the other, God is infinitely holy and just, which means that he cannot approve of or even look upon evil (Hab. 1:13), neither can he justify a wicked person (Prov. 17:15). Because the Bible describes all men as sinners and says that there are none who are righteous (Rom. 3:23, 10), these two "competing" traits in God's nature appear to put him in a dilemma. To use the words of the apostle Paul, how can God be "just and the justifier of those who believe (Rom. 3:26)?" Through this argument God cannot ignore or in any way overlook sin.
Protestants' answer to this dilemma is the imputed righteousness.[2] First of all, they note that the New Testament describes the method of man's salvation as the "righteousness of God" (Rom. 3:21, 22; 10:3; Phil. 3:9). They then note that this "righteousness" is more particularly that of the second member of the Trinity, Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Cor. 1:30). When they refer to the "imputed righteousness of Christ," they are referring to his life of sinlessness and perfect obedience to God's law on this earth. The need for a human life of perfect obedience to God's law was the reason, they claim, that Christ had to live as a human being for a certain period of time. Paul's statement in Rom. 4:6, that God "imputes righteousness apart from works," bolsters the fourth step in their argument that this righteousness of Christ is imputed to our accounts. By this terminology they mean that God legally credits the believer with the righteous acts that Christ performed while on this earth. This is not a "legal fiction," they argue just as adoption is not a legal fiction. Adoption legally constitutes a child the son or daughter of a person that is not that child's birth parent. Similarly, in marriage the married partners are considered one entity legally.[3] When a sinner believes in Christ, they are spiritually united with Christ, and that union makes it possible for God to credit believers with the righteousness of Christ without engaging in "legal fiction."[4]
[edit] Arguments against the doctrine of imputed righteousness
 |
Please help improve this article by expanding this section. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. Please remove this message once the section has been expanded. This article has been tagged since January 2007. |
[edit] Differing views about imputed righteousness
[edit] Lutheran view
A contemporary of Martin Luther, Melanchthon, stressed the classic Lutheran desire to distinguish carefully and properly between Law and Gospel. In doing so he emphasised that Law binds us, convicts us, and drives us, whilst the Gospel proclaims repentance, the promise of grace, eternal life, and proclaims our liberty in Christ.[5]
[edit] Reformed view
The Reformed Church generally does not try to distinguish between the law and gospel nor does it give as much prominence within their systematic theological formulations. Historically, they have been more open to the broader biblical language which the Lutheran Formula of Concord calls “correct” but not “proper".[6]
[edit] Roman Catholic view
Theologians consider this view to be the most one sided. That is, for Rome justification is forensic in that justification involves God's legal declaration. It is necessary in the eyes of this church for a legal declaration by god (and therefore the head of the church) to be made for someone to be justified.[7]
[edit] Footnotes
- ^ See James Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1997), pp. 296-298, for a discussion of this topic.
- ^ John Piper's Counted Righteous in Christ (Wheaton, IL:Crossway, 2002), provides a good example of this answer.
- ^ Buchanan, pp. 334-338.
- ^ Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), p. 971.
- ^ "A critical analysis of the writings of Luther Colleague and Co-worker, Prof. Philipp Melancthon", http://www.elcm.org/, 2007-03-30.
- ^ "Law and Gospel", The Works of John Frame and Vern Poythress, 2007-03-30.
- ^ "Imputed Righteousness: The Evangelical Doctrine", Spla Scriptura: A reformed theology source, 2007-03-30.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- Exposing the Errors of Imputed Righteousness: by Mike Desario
- Imputed Righteousness Defended by William Romaine, preached in London, 1759.
- The Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness by John Gill.
- The doctrine of Justification by Faith, through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ by John Owen.
- Imputed Righteousness: The Evangelical Doctrine by R. C. Sproul.
- Imputation (conservative Calvinist perspective)
