Believing Into Christ based on God crediting your faith as righteousness

[Brightfame52]

More gibberish, more demonstration the poster just wants to obfuscate. In his deflection does he say what the Father does, or provide the basis for the Father's action?

Believing Into Christ based on God (the Father) crediting your faith as righteousness is truth​

Then what you saying, God Justifies you based on your righteousness. You sure you want to go that route ?

 

[Van]

Then what you saying, God Justifies you based on your righteousness. You sure you want to go that route ?

Why is it that Calvinists cannot address what scripture says, but must misrepresent the biblical presentations I post?

Does God justify a sinner based of their righteousness? Nope.

What I actually said:

Believing Into Christ based on God (the Father) crediting your faith as righteousness is truth​

Questions:

1) Does crediting your faith as righteousness make a person righteous? Nope, but it acknowledges the person's faith meets God's purpose.

2) What action does God take based on crediting a person's faith as righteousness? God positionally sanctifies the person by setting them apart in Christ. Thus if a person's faith is credited and then God transfers the person into Christ, they have believed into Him.

3) What is the issue, that Calvinists deny the lost can come to have faith which God would credit as Righteousness? You bet.

 

[Van]

But John wasn't inspired to write the phrase, "believes into Him." English wasn't even around then. The Greek word he used which you say should be translated into English as "into" was eis, which most English versions translate as "in."

Again, I asked for the Father's basis for transferring an individual into Christ, and this poster changes the subject. These posters are enemies of the truth.

Here is is contended that the meaning of John's phrase, originally written in Greek, does not mean, when literally translated into English, "believes into Him."

Let consider three phrases, in (en) Him, on (epi) Him, and into (eis) Him. He wants to change into Him to read the same as in Him, nullifying the use of into. Unsound nonsense. In should be translated in, on translated on, and into translated into.

Translators should not hide positional sanctification for the reader.