Faith being credited as righteousness? Part deux

[Van]

[Snipped] The biblical theology says we are made righteous, and we become the righteousness of God in Him. Pay no attention to the smoke and smears of the advocates of the nameless doctrine.

The mythology of the nameless doctrine has been exposed. And so on cue, we get smoke and smears.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Yes, the theology of SG, having no support whatsoever from scripture is depraved. The biblical theology says we are made righteous, and we become the righteousness of God in Him. Pay no attention to the smoke and smears of the advocates of the nameless doctrine.

The mythology of the nameless doctrine has been exposed. And so on cue, we get smoke and smears.

Your own smoke and mirrors was in your claiming in one thread Romans 9 is not soteriological in order to make a point, then in another thread you claim it is soteriolgical to make another falsified point. That my friend is hypocrisy and a false and inconsistent hermeneutic on your part.

I really wish that you would have your understanding enlightened, and, that you would own up to your inconsistent theology and hermeneutic that you've been called on.

Frankly, you're in grave error. You see it, you've been called on it, yet you've not owned yourself for it.

 

[Internet Theologian]

There you have it folks.

One depraved theology...

From what I've witnessed from Van's take on Scripture is that God is mitigated and man's ability is exalted beyond the true revelation of God's Word.

 

[rsr]

Did I ever say the only evidence I will accept is "the righteousness of Christ?" Nope. Why misrepresent my view, if truth is on your side?

I think I have made a reasonable inference, given your statements. It is possible that I'm wrong.

I provided quotes from two different dictionaries in support of my view. Read Romans 4:22, did God really impute righteousness from Abraham's faith. Impute is a mistranslation.

This is getting tiresome. Your examples all say the same thing: Impute is the same thing as reckoned is the same as counted. Your disagreement is not with imputed as such, but that it is the righteousness of Christ that is imputed.

I do not deny where our righteousness comes from. Yet another slander

I have not slandered you at any point, but I understand that you like to claim to be a victim while doing the same thing to others. I did not say that you denied it, I said that you seemed to be overlooking it. I am simply trying to come to terms with your doctrine. Faith is not righteousness; it becomes righteousness only by the obedience of Christ.

Did I say our faith which provides our access to God's grace was in pumpkin pancakes? No of course not. Of course our faith, our love, our devotion is toward Jesus.

Don't recall mentioning pumpkin pancakes. I'll look for it.

 

[rsr]

Folks, I have snipped several comments. Please avoid making it a food fight; stick to the issues and not the person and stop the name calling. I have shut down the threads before, for the same reason, and I have no compunction against doing it again if the protagonists don't behave.

 

[SovereignGrace]

The biblical theology says we are made righteous, and we become the righteousness of God in Him.

And you flatly denied that Christ's righteousness is imputed unto us. The way the Christ died was our sins were imputed unto Him, and God dealt with Him just it had been you or I. The same way Christ was reckoned as a sinner(yet He knew no sin but became sin) is the same way we are made righteous in God's sight, via imputation of Christ's righteousness. You can't have it both ways, Van.

Pay no attention to the smoke and smears of the advocates of the nameless doctrine.

Poor you...you and your persecution complex.

The mythology of the nameless doctrine has been exposed. And so on cue, we get smoke and smears.

Well let's see here...

You deny the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us...strike one
You say God chose Jacob over Esau due to their characteristics...strike two
You say that the unregenerate can will themselves saved...strike three
You say ppl in Matthew 23:13 were thwarted entrance into heaven, even though they tried really hard...strike four
You say ppl can seek God...strike five
You say the unregenerate can understand the sincere milk of the gospel...strike six

That's a double play...you're out twice...

 

[Van]

Ready for the smear,

Your own smoke and mirrors was in your claiming in one thread Romans 9 is not soteriological in order to make a point, then in another thread you claim it is soteriolgical to make another falsified point. That my friend is hypocrisy and a false and inconsistent hermeneutic on your part.

No quote will be forthcoming to support this slander. Anyone who pays attention to these references to posts supposedly made in the past, but conveniently without a specific reference for verification, is naive.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Ready for the smear,
No quote will be forthcoming to support this slander. Anyone who pays attention to these references to posts supposed made in the past, but conveniently without a specific reference for verification, is naive.

You're fibbing, no one has slandered you and what I stated is true. In the now closed thread of 'Defend Tassi? Defend White'? your argument was that Romans 9 is not soteriological and you went on to mock White tying it into the golden chain of redemption.

Since that time in your own thread, you claimed it is soteriological to try to force it to defend your position.

See, that is the thing, you have an inconsistent theology and you twist the Word of God to fit what you believe. According to your practice, the Word says one thing one day to support Van, and then the opposite the other, to support Van. It's a shameful practice to be frank.

 

[Van]

I think I have made a reasonable inference, given your statements. It is possible that I'm wrong.

What statements? Its a smear.

This is getting tiresome. Your examples all say the same thing: Impute is the same thing as reckoned is the same as counted. Your disagreement is not with imputed as such, but that it is the righteousness of Christ that is imputed.

Both my examples "bolded) the significant difference. Impute is a mistranslation, as clearly indicated at Romans 4:22. The claim that there is no difference is an argument from incredulity, which is a logical fallacy. Again no verse, properly translated even says impute. It is a KJV mistranslation, not found in the NASB, LEB, Ask yourself this folks, if they mean the same thing, why not drop impute and go with credit, or reckon, or count? Too funny indeed.

I have not slandered you at any point, but I understand that you like to claim to be a victim while doing the same thing to others. I did not say that you denied it, I said that you seemed to be overlooking it. I am simply trying to come to terms with your doctrine. Faith is not righteousness; it becomes righteousness only by the obedience of Christ./quote] Yet another slander. Again no quote will be forthcoming where I indicated our righteousness does not come from the washing of regeneration, the circumcision of Christ, our rebirth in Christ, etc, etc. Total smear.

They smear then deny its a smear. Smoke to cover the smear.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Where is the 'old' button? Please, bring it back.

 

[Van]

Lets consider the falsehoods the nameless doctrine advocates use to slander me.

You deny the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us...strike one Scripture says we become the righteousness of God in Him. We are made righteous.

You say God chose Jacob over Esau due to their characteristics...strike two Scripture says (Romans 9:11-12) that God chose the younger so that the older would serve the younger.

You say that the unregenerate can will themselves saved...strike three Material false statement. Scripture (Romans 9:16) says men can will to be saved, but to no avail.

You say ppl in Matthew 23:13 were thwarted entrance into heaven, even though they tried really hard...strike four Scripture says they were entering the kingdom until blocked by false teachers.

You say ppl can seek God...strike five Scripture says some people, some of the time seek God, such as the men of Matthew 23:13.

You say the unregenerate can understand the sincere milk of the gospel...strike six Scripture says men of flesh (unregenerate) can understand spiritual milk, 1 Corinthians 3:1-3.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Where is the 'old' button? Please, bring it back.

We need a 'broken record' emoji...

 

[Van]

You're fibbing, no one has slandered you and what I stated is true. In the now closed thread of 'Defend Tassi? Defend White'? your argument was that Romans 9 is not soteriological and you went on to mock White tying it into the golden chain of redemption.

Since that time in your own thread, you claimed it is soteriological to try to force it to defend your position.

See, that is the thing, you have an inconsistent theology and you twist the Word of God to fit what you believe. According to your practice, the Word says one thing one day to support Van, and then the opposite the other, to support Van. It's a shameful practice to be frank.

Again, no quote will be forthcoming. Slander, smear and then the smoke of denial. Anything to change the subject from the bogus doctrines of ....

 

[Internet Theologian]

Again, no quote will be forthcoming. Slander, smear and then the smoke of denial. Anything to change the subject from the bogus doctrines of ....

I'd say I'm surprised at your denial of what you know you stated, and were called on, but I'm not the least bit surprised.

 

[Yeshua1]

Again, no quote will be forthcoming. Slander, smear and then the smoke of denial. Anything to change the subject from the bogus doctrines of ....

By what merit then do we ever get saved?
By our faith, or does God credit to us what Jesus did on the Cross in our stead as the basis of salvation?

And you still have just to say yes/no to if we are clothed by God in robes of Jesus, imputed His own rightousness or not?

 

[Van]

Hi Yeshua1, I supported my position with scripture. Unless you can cite scripture that differs from the verses I have cited, it is pointless for you to post. Denial of scripture is not something Christians are supposed to do.

Does God credit our faith as righteousness? Yes - Romans 4:4-5, 23-24.
Does God choose us for salvation through faith in the truth? Yes - 2 Thessalonians 2:13
Can men of flesh understand spiritual milk? Yes 1 Corinthians 3:1-3.

Do we by our faith merit salvation? Nope - all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags.
Does any verse say God credits us with Christ's righteousness? Waiting for those claiming this to provide scripture. Scripture does say we are made righteous. Scripture says we become the righteousness of God in Him. Think about it, were we credited with righteousness, or were we made righteous?

Expect more change of subject.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Hi Yeshua1, I supported my position with scripture. Unless you can cite scripture that differs from the verses I have cited, it is pointless for you to post. Denial of scripture is not something Christians are supposed to do.

Does God credit our faith as righteousness? Yes - Romans 4:4-5, 23-24.
Does God choose us for salvation through faith in the truth? Yes - 2 Thessalonians 2:13
Can men of flesh understand spiritual milk? Yes 1 Corinthians 3:1-3.

Do we by our faith merit salvation? Nope - all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags.
Does any verse say God credits us with Christ's righteousness? Waiting for those claiming this to provide scripture. Scripture does say we are made righteous. Scripture says we become the righteousness of God in Him. Think about it, were we credited with righteousness, or were we made righteous?

Expect more change of subject.

It's always about what man does and not what God does in your schema.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Since someone won't listen to us, maybe he will Adam Clarke and his commentary on Romans 4:5...

Introduction

Abraham was justified by faith, and not by the works of the law; for his faith was imputed to him for righteousness. Romans 4:1-5. David also bears testimony to the same doctrine, Romans 4:6-8. Abraham, the father of the Jewish race, was justified by faith, even before he was circumcised; therefore salvation must be of the Gentiles as well as the Jews, Romans 4:9-12. And the promise that all the nations of the earth should be blessed in him, was made to him while he was in an uncircumcised state; and, therefore, if salvation were of the Jews alone, the law, that was given after the promise, would make the promise of no effect, Romans 4:13-17. Description of Abraham's faith, and its effects, Romans 4:18-22. This account is left on record for our salvation, that we might believe on Christ, who was delivered for our offenses, and raised again for our justification, Romans 4:23-25.


But to him that worketh not - Which was the case with Abraham, for he was called when he was ungodly, i.e. an idolater; and, on his believing, was freely justified: and, as all men have sinned, none can be justified by works; and, therefore, justification, if it take place at all, must take place in behalf of the ungodly, forasmuch as all mankind are such. Now, as Abraham's state and mode in which he was justified, are the plan and rule according to which God purposes to save men; and as his state was ungodly, and the mode of his justification was by faith in the goodness and mercy of God; and this is precisely the state of Jews and Gentiles at present; there can be no other mode of justification than by faith in that Christ who is Abraham's seed, and in whom, according to the promise, all the nations of the earth are to be blessed.

It is necessary to observe here, in order to prevent confusion and misapprehension, that although the verb δικαιοω has a variety of senses in the New Testament, yet here it is to be taken as implying the pardon of sin; receiving a person into the favor of God. See these different acceptations cited in the note on Romans 1:17; (note), and particularly under No. 7. It is also necessary to observe, that our translators render the verb λογιζομαι differently in different parts of this chapter. It is rendered counted, Romans 4:3, Romans 4:5; reckoned, Romans 4:4, Romans 4:9, Romans 4:10; imputed, Romans 4:6, Romans 4:8, Romans 4:11, Romans 4:22-24. Reckoned is probably the best sense in all these places.

So, as Adam Clarke stated it, Abraham was 'reckoned' righteous, which is the same as being imputed righteousness.

 

[Internet Theologian]

It's always about what man does and not what God does in your schema.

Yep. According to Van even God's foreknowledge isn't supernatural. The diminution of God continues on in his false doctrine.

 

[rsr]

I have no expectations that this thread can be recovered but only that it continue to a rehash of the same arguments and vituperations. So it is closed.