Imputed Righteousness of Christ

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

David lamb: Rather, I believe the bible teaches it. 2 Corinthians 5.21:
21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
And Paul writes in Philippians 3.9 of being ....

...found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;

HP: It is believed by many that Christ imputes His righteousness to us, in that nothing we do has any effect upon our standing before God. Further more, it is said that it was imputed to us at the cross, Christ having paid for all past, present and future sins. It is denied that there are conditions to salvation, or for this imputation to have taken place. It reduces ‘our salvation experience’ to merely coming to the recognition that we, as one chosen to salvation, have really had our sins paid for two thousand years ago, but are we ever glad that today we come to the realization of our imputed inheritance.

David, if in fact you disagree with my assessment, just say so, and clarify for the list why it is that I have presented it in a wrong manner.


Now to the verse that DL posted as being evidence of the imputed righteousness of Christ.

2 Corinthians 5.21:21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

How does this verse establish the notion that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to man, especially in the sense the Baptist’s or Calvinist’s believe, in that it is imputed without conditions for all past present and future sin?

And the second verse quoted the same questions apply. :

Philippians 3.9 ...found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;

Again, how does this verse establish the notion that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to man, especially in the sense the Baptist’s or Calvinist’s believe, in that it is imputed without conditions for all past present and future sin?

 

[Eliyahu]

I believe our sins were imputed to Christ. But I am not sure whether we can say the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us. ( I rather doubt)

I believe that Christ redeemed us from our sins, not imputed his righteousness to us.

No redeeming from the sins means no righteousness.

It seems that there is much difference between Redemption and Imputation.

 

[EdSutton]

I believe our sins were imputed to Christ. But I am not sure whether we can say the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us. ( I rather doubt)

I believe that Christ redeemed us from our sins, not imputed his righteousness to us.

No redeeming from the sins means no righteousness.

It seems that there is much difference between Redemption and Imputation.

Romans 4
Abraham Justified by Faith
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[b] 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
David Celebrates the Same Truth
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”[c]
Abraham Justified Before Circumcision
9 Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised. (Rom. 4:1-12 - NKJV)

That is seven times in the passage, where "logizomai" (impute, or account) is used that I have emboldened. It is an 'accounting' term with the force of "mark it on the ledger".

Christ's own righteousness? It does not say that directly, as far as I can tell, although I could be mistaken, here, but coupled with II Cor. 5:21, as well as a couple of the verses I have emboldened words in, it appears that some sort of righteousness from God, or the righteousness of God is mysteriously, mystically and miraculously 'imputed".

And the last time, I checked, Jesus was and is still God, despite the ongoing efforts of the ACLU!

Ed

 

[Doubting Thomas]

HP, the two key words in both those verses you listed are "in Him". The righteousness of God is "imputed" (ie, "reckoned") to us only if we are in Christ. Being in Christ--"abiding", "remaining", "standing firm", etc--is contingent on our ongoing confession/repentence and faith which works through love.

 

[Andre]

I find the arguments of NT Wright on the subject of "imputed righteousness" to be interesting and worthy of consideration. He does not believe that Christs' righteousness is imputed to us and argues this as follows in the context of the first 4 chapters of Romans:

The divine "righteousness" (God's covenant faithfulness) is emphatically not the same as the "righteousness" that humans have when they are declared to be covenant members. That idea, despite its often invoking the "forensic" setting of the language, fails to understand what that forensic setting means. In the Hebrew lawcourt, the judge does not give, bestow, impute, or impart his own "righteousness" to the defendent. That would imply that the defendent was deemed to have conducted the case impartially, in accordance with the law, to have punished sin and upheld the defenseless innocent ones. "Justification", of course, means nothing like that. "Righteousness" is not a quality or substance that can thus be passed or transferred from the judge to the defendent. The righteousness of the judge is the judge's own character, status, and activity, demonstrated in doing these various things.

The "righteousness" of the defendents is the status they possess when the court has found in their favor. Nothing more, nothing less. When we translate these forensic categories back into their theological context, that of the covenant, the point remains fundamental: the divine covenant faithfulness is not the same as human covenant membership. The fact that the same word (Andre comment: a greek word whose font I do not know how to reproduce) is used for both ideas indicates their reciprocal relationship, not their identity.

 

[Eliyahu]

=EdSuttonThat is seven times in the passage, where "logizomai" (impute, or account) is used that I have emboldened. It is an 'accounting' term with the force of "mark it on the ledger".

Christ's own righteousness? It does not say that directly, as far as I can tell, although I could be mistaken, here, but coupled with II Cor. 5:21, as well as a couple of the verses I have emboldened words in, it appears that some sort of righteousness from God, or the righteousness of God is mysteriously, mystically and miraculously 'imputed".

And the last time, I checked, Jesus was and is still God, despite the ongoing efforts of the ACLU!

Ed

How can this be a proof that the Righteousness of Jesus was imputed to the Believers? I knew these verses when I posted mine.

Let's read them here:

Romans 4
Abraham Justified by Faith
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[b] 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
David Celebrates the Same Truth
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”[c]
Abraham Justified Before Circumcision
9 Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised. (Rom. 4:1-12 - NKJV)


What was accounted to become the Righteousness of Abraham?

His own Faith !

You may talk about the last sentence (Righteousness might be imputed to them also.)
The Righteousness meant here is the Righteousness from the Faith, believing in God (or Jesus Christ).
Believing and/or Faith becomes the Righteousness.

We may say " His own Faith" was imputed to be His own Rigtheousness in case of Abraham.

Our sins were imputed to Jesus Christ, because He was willing to take over them on HIs shoulder, and thereby we were REDEEMED from our sins.

I have not seen any verse saying " The Righteousness of Jesus was imputed to us or to believers"

 

[EdSutton]

How can this be a proof that the Righteousness of Jesus was imputed to the Believers? I knew these verses when I posted mine.

Let's read them here:

Romans 4
Abraham Justified by Faith
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[b] 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
David Celebrates the Same Truth
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”[c]
Abraham Justified Before Circumcision
9 Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised. (Rom. 4:1-12 - NKJV)


What was accounted to become the Righteousness of Abraham?

His own Faith !

You may talk about the last sentence (Righteousness might be imputed to them also.)
The Righteousness meant here is the Righteousness from the Faith, believing in God (or Jesus Christ).
Believing and/or Faith becomes the Righteousness.

We may say " His own Faith" was imputed to be His own Rigtheousness in case of Abraham.

Our sins were imputed to Jesus Christ, because He was willing to take over them on HIs shoulder, and thereby we were REDEEMED from our sins.

I have not seen any verse saying " The Righteousness of Jesus was imputed to us or to believers"

While I did not say that last sentence, directly, I did say righteousness is imputed, because verse 6 says so. And II Cor. 5:21 says 'Jesus was made our sin, so that "we might be made the righteousness of God, in Him."' So as opposed to letting us know you knew certain verses were in Scripture, why not explain exactly how we are made to become? (or into) "the righteousness of God in Him" (Christ), for me. please. It should be an interesting answer, which I do await.

And I know how to post in 'size 4' font, as well.

Ed.

 

[Eliyahu]

While I did not say that last sentence, directly, I did say righteousness is imputed, because verse 6 says so. And II Cor. 5:21 says 'Jesus was made our sin, so that "we might be made the righteousness of God, in Him."' So as opposed to letting us know you knew certain verses were in Scripture, why not explain exactly how we are made to become? (or into) "the righteousness of God in Him" (Christ), for me. please. It should be an interesting answer, which I do await.

And I know how to post in 'size 4' font, as well.

Ed.

1. The sins are imputed to Jesus Christ, but the Righteousness of Jesus was not imputed to the believers. The righteousness is achieved by Believing, Faith, Obedience to God.

2. Sins were imputed to Jesus Christ.

All the sins of this world, of the whole universe were imputed to Jesus.

1 John 2:
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world


Even the sins of Hitler, Stalin were imputed to Jesus Christ.

But the Righteousness of Jesus was imputed neither to Hitler nor to Stalin, because they didn't believe in Jesus.


3. Righteousness is obtained only by the Faith, Believing.

Romans 4:5
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Ro 4:6

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, ( This talks about the faith as well)



Ro 4:9Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
Rom 4:22
And therefore it(=Faith) was imputed to him for righteousness.



2Co 5:21 -For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him

Sin was imputed to Jesus, but the Righteousness is given to " WE" ( Believers in Jesus) because of the faith.


Heb 11:7
became heir of the righteousness which is by faith

( Bible quotes are from Crosswalk.com)

If you read the Bible verses related to the righteousness, you can confirm repeatedly that Righteousness is a matter of Faith, Believing, Obedience to God, Obedience to His commandments.

Sins were imputed to Jesus Christ, and all the sins of the unbelievers were imputed to Jesus as well.

Titus 2:
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

However, unbelievers have not received the righteousness, but only the believers obtained the righteousness by Faith, by Believing.

So, we can carefully notice that the Bible mention nowhere the righteousness of Jesus was imputed, but that the Faith is reckoned for or accounted for Righteousness.

Here are several posters who have diffculties in reading the smaller characters, having interests in this type of discussion. Of course they could magnify the letters by clikcing " increase font" on the top, but they still feel some inconvenience in that. That's why I often use font 4 size.

I can write in font size 2 as well:laugh:

 

[David Lamb]

HP: It is believed by many that Christ imputes His righteousness to us, in that nothing we do has any effect upon our standing before God. Further more, it is said that it was imputed to us at the cross, Christ having paid for all past, present and future sins. It is denied that there are conditions to salvation, or for this imputation to have taken place. It reduces ‘our salvation experience’ to merely coming to the recognition that we, as one chosen to salvation, have really had our sins paid for two thousand years ago, but are we ever glad that today we come to the realization of our imputed inheritance.

David, if in fact you disagree with my assessment, just say so, and clarify for the list why it is that I have presented it in a wrong manner.

I think your assessment is correct as far as it goes, but I feel it stops short. Yes, I firmly believe that Christ's perfect righteousness was imputed to me, and my sin to Him, and that that is how I am justified before God. But if the matter were to end there, we would be left with antinominism. If a person really thinks, "I'm saved, so I'll carry on sinning as much as I like - it won't make any difference", I would have my doubts as to whether that person really knew the Saviour. Of course, that sort of thinking is completely different to the saved sinner who falls back into sin, pleads for forgiveness, and thanks God that his salvation is still sure. I think of those lovely words written to Christians, in 1 John 1.8-9:

8 ¶ If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

I think Ephesians 2.8-10 may show what I mean:

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.​

So I would say that our salvation is not dependent upon our own righteousness, but we are saved that we should walk (conduct ourselves) in "good works".

Now to the verse that DL posted as being evidence of the imputed righteousness of Christ.
How does this verse establish the notion that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to man, especially in the sense the Baptist’s or Calvinist’s believe, in that it is imputed without conditions for all past present and future sin?

And the second verse quoted the same questions apply. :

Again, how does this verse establish the notion that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to man, especially in the sense the Baptist’s or Calvinist’s believe, in that it is imputed without conditions for all past present and future sin?

(The quoted verses don't appear when I preview this message, so I should say for clarity that HP is referring to 2 Corinthians 5.21 and Philippians 3.9)

The Philippians verse seems to me to clinch the matter. Paul says that he does not have his own righteousness, but rather the righteousness which is from God.

He certainly didn't sit back and rest on his laurels saying, "I've got God's perfect righteousness - why worry about sin?" He writes in Romans 7.18-19:

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.
19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice.​

But he also writes in 2 Timothy 2.22:

You must keep on fleeing from the evil impulses of youth, but ever strive for uprightness, faith, love, and peace, in association with those who call upon the Lord with pure hearts.​

And perhaps his most clear verses (yes, I know they weren't "verses" for him ) against antinomianism are Romans 6.1-2:

1 ¶ What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?
2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?​

I hope that makes my position a little clearer; I must confess to not being the world's greatest at putting down my thoughts in an orderly way.

One final point - you mentioned Calvinists and Baptists. Probably most Calvinists do believe in the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but by no means all Baptists do.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

David Lamb: One final point - you mentioned Calvinists and Baptists. Probably most Calvinists do believe in the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but by no means all Baptists do.

HP: Is Brother David’s assessment of some Baptists not believing in imputed righteousness correct? Is there a Baptist on the list that does not believe in it? I have been wrong before, but I have always thought that the imputed righteousness of Christ was a cardinal doctrine of Baptists/Calvinists. How do they avoid if in fact they believe that the past, present, and future sins of the elect are paid for at the cross, or do some Baptist not believe that either?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Eliyahu: I believe our sins were imputed to Christ. But I am not sure whether we can say the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us. ( I rather doubt)

I believe that Christ redeemed us from our sins, not imputed his righteousness to us.

No redeeming from the sins means no righteousness.

It seems that there is much difference between Redemption and Imputation.

HP: I am not picking on anyone here, but rather we are simply discussing the issue. If I ask a question, do not take it as if though I am accusing anyone, or acting as if though that person addressed believes any certain way. I am just asking to gain responses so as to better understand how to address this issue.

If our sins are imputed to Christ, was this accomplished once for all? Were the sins of the entire world imputed to Christ on the cross? Scripture indeed states that Christ died for the sins of the whole world does it not? Scripture states that He is the propitiation for not just our sins but for the sins of the entire world. This would seem to me to be an ongoing process in some sense would it not? Do you see any problems with the idea that if in fact only the sins of the elect were addressed on the cross, that we have a major discrepancy with other passages of Scripture? Do you find any problems with the literal payment theory as opposed to an atonement?

I agree that there is much difference between redemption and imputation. One satisfies the demand of the law in a general sense, in a sense that makes it 'possible' for all sins to be forgiven yet no sin in particular imputed. I see what happened on the cross as the ‘means by which’ redemption and the imputation of sins upon Christ is enabled or made possible, yet not specifically accomplished as to ones individuals sins until we repent and in faith believe, fulfilling the conditions of actual individual forgiveness.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Doubting Thomas: HP, the two key words in both those verses you listed are "in Him". The righteousness of God is "imputed" (ie, "reckoned") to us only if we are in Christ. Being in Christ--"abiding", "remaining", "standing firm", etc--is contingent on our ongoing confession/repentence and faith which works through love.

HP: An interesting observation DT indeed. Thank you for bringing that to our attention.

 

[Eliyahu]

Imputed Righteousness sounds like Invented Theology.

There is no statement in the Bible like that.

As I said, the Sins of Hitler and Stalin were imputed to Jesus Christ, but
the Righteousness of Jesus was not imputed to Hitler or to Stalin.

Why? Hitler and Stalin didn't believe in God! ( though Hitler was a devout Catholic !)

Why ? Sins and Righteousness are neither exactly opposite each other, nor 2 sides of one sheet. But the Righteousness is reckoned only when the human being believes in what Jesus had done at the Cross, when the person obey God.

Righteousness is absolutely a matter of Faith and Belief, not the matter of Imputation.

That's why we can find such statement nowhere in the Bible that the Righteousness is imputed from Jesus.

It is absolutely human invention of Rough and Tough Theology by wrong terminology.

You may succeed in such invention of theology for awhile, only with limited number of people, but it is not the everlasting truth.

 

[Eliyahu]

If our sins are imputed to Christ, was this accomplished once for all? Were the sins of the entire world imputed to Christ on the cross? Scripture indeed states that Christ died for the sins of the whole world does it not? Scripture states that He is the propitiation for not just our sins but for the sins of the entire world. This would seem to me to be an ongoing process in some sense would it not? Do you see any problems with the idea that if in fact only the sins of the elect were addressed on the cross, that we have a major discrepancy with other passages of Scripture? Do you find any problems with the literal payment theory as opposed to an atonement?

The advantage from this discussion is that we can define the terminologies more accurately. In that sense your OP is quite useful. What we have to be careful about is that we should not use the words roughly or by random shooting.
As I said, Jesus died for all, not only for us, but also for the whole world.
When Bible said Jesus has become the Propitiation for the world, it involves the Imputation of Sins. Propitiation and Redemption involves the Imputation of sins clearly. We are redeemed by the Blood of Christ because Jesus took away our sins. Therefore we can clearly connect the Imputation and Redemption though they are different.

However, Righteousness involves the Believing and Obeying all the time.
This means that the willingness of the recipient is important.
I don't like to talk about Predestination or Will of the human being etc. because it belongs to God only. After the end of our life, we may say that everything was foreknown and predestined by God, but while we live here, we just do our best and forget about all the other things. I have thought about this matter so much since my childhood, and the conclusion is that I should not waste the time for it.

Therefore, as we better stick to the Bible expression only, Righteousness is reckoned only when the people believe in God, and the Belief and Obedience are the pre-requisite for Righteousness.

The theory that the Righteousness is imputed from Jesus to human beings is found nowhere in the Bible.

Our sins were imputed to Jesus, and no sins are left with us ( of course our old man tries to smell the corruptness from time to time, but our belief is that our old man died at the Cross). Our sins were cleansed away.
So, the word, " Impute" is used when nothing is left with the original person.

However, if the righteousness of Jesus was imputed to us, then does Jesus have no righteousness and still remain as a sinner as he carried our sins? Such expression is found nowhere in the Bible! Was the Righteousness of Jesus cleansed away so that it may be carried forward to us? In case of Romans 4, the word " impute" is used as a synomym to " reckon"
But when you say " the righteousness of Jesus was imputed to us" it is used as I stated above.

The Great Truth of Christianity is that Sinners become Righteous by believing while God remains Righteous as well.( Rom 3:26)

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Eliyahu: The Great Truth of Christianity is that Sinners become Righteous by believing while God remains Righteous as well.( Rom 3:26)

HP: There is this verse, and many others as well, to consider in our understanding of righteousness. 1Jo 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

 

[Eliyahu]

This is a matter of accuracy in terminology and often there are tacitcs by Satan in misuse of the words, either they are paganism or legalism, or any human theory.

Simply you can see the difference.

The sins of Hitler were imputed to Jesus Christ.

But,

the Righteousness of Jesus was not imputed to Hitler.

Because it needs Believing, Faith, Obedience, which Hitler never showed, but the murderous hatred.

 

[mman]

Our sins were imputed to Jesus, and no sins are left with us ( of course our old man tries to smell the corruptness from time to time, but our belief is that our old man died at the Cross). Our sins were cleansed away.
So, the word, " Impute" is used when nothing is left with the original person.

I am trying to understand the basis for the above statement, especially that our "old man died at the cross".

In a sense, I can see that. The only place I know about that speaks of our old man dying is in Rom 6. We die, we are buried, and are resurrected. Baptism unites us with Christ's death (Rom 6:3-5) and therefore at baptism, "our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." -Rom 6:6.

I don't think that is what you are talking about, since you mentioned Hitler.

You brough up the old man, and I think that is right on track. Paul said, " But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.- Eph 4:20-24

The new man is created in true righteousness and it must be put on.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. - II Cor 5:17

In Christ, one is a new creation. Until one is in Christ, he is still "old".

And then, just a few verses later, "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." - II Cor 5:21

Where do we become the "righteousness of God"? In Him. In Christ. Therefore, the new man was created in true righteousness. How can God, who is a just God, create me, a sinner, in true righteousness? Because of the blood sacrifice which is the propitiation, that was shed for all of mankind. However, only those who are "in Christ" are created in true righteousness.

This all comes together beautifully at our faithful submission to baptism. At baptism, we are connected to the death of Christ (Rom 6:3-5). When we are raised, we are raised to walk in a new life (Rom 6:4). Baptism puts us into Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27) where we are created in true righteousness. At baptism, our sins are washed away (Acts 22:16), our sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38), we fulfil Jesus' instructions given in the great commission (Mark 16:16), we are saved and added to the church (I Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38, 41, 47) where salvation is found (II Tim 2:10, Eph 5:23).

Make no mistake, water has no power at all. The power is in the blood. The blood is the propitiation. Where did the blood flow? At Jesus death. How do we come in contact with His death? Rom 6 tells us plainly, it is though baptism. There is only one baptism (Eph 4:5) now. How does it work? I have no idea. I believe God when He said that we are baptized into Christ, into his death, and that we are raised to walk in a NEW life.

When you read Rom 6, how could anyone fail to see the significance of John 19:34 concerning Jesus' death, "But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.

Therefore, sins are forgiven when we come in contact with the blood. The blood was shed for all mankind, however, not all of mankind will come in contact with the blood. The blood continues to cleanse us as long as we walk in the light and have fellowship with God (I Jn 1:7).

The New Man was created in righteousness, after the old man was crucified, and we are raised to walk in newness of life. Only those who are in Christ are new creations.

 

[Eliyahu]

I am trying to understand the basis for the above statement, especially that our "old man died at the cross".

In a sense, I can see that. The only place I know about that speaks of our old man dying is in Rom 6. We die, we are buried, and are resurrected. Baptism unites us with Christ's death (Rom 6:3-5) and therefore at baptism, "our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." -Rom 6:6.

I don't think that is what you are talking about, since you mentioned Hitler.

You brough up the old man, and I think that is right on track. Paul said, " But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.- Eph 4:20-24

The new man is created in true righteousness and it must be put on.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. - II Cor 5:17

In Christ, one is a new creation. Until one is in Christ, he is still "old".

And then, just a few verses later, "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." - II Cor 5:21

Where do we become the "righteousness of God"? In Him. In Christ. Therefore, the new man was created in true righteousness. How can God, who is a just God, create me, a sinner, in true righteousness? Because of the blood sacrifice which is the propitiation, that was shed for all of mankind. However, only those who are "in Christ" are created in true righteousness.

This all comes together beautifully at our faithful submission to baptism. At baptism, we are connected to the death of Christ (Rom 6:3-5). When we are raised, we are raised to walk in a new life (Rom 6:4). Baptism puts us into Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27) where we are created in true righteousness. At baptism, our sins are washed away (Acts 22:16), our sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38), we fulfil Jesus' instructions given in the great commission (Mark 16:16), we are saved and added to the church (I Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38, 41, 47) where salvation is found (II Tim 2:10, Eph 5:23).

Make no mistake, water has no power at all. The power is in the blood. The blood is the propitiation. Where did the blood flow? At Jesus death. How do we come in contact with His death? Rom 6 tells us plainly, it is though baptism. There is only one baptism (Eph 4:5) now. How does it work? I have no idea. I believe God when He said that we are baptized into Christ, into his death, and that we are raised to walk in a NEW life.

When you read Rom 6, how could anyone fail to see the significance of John 19:34 concerning Jesus' death, "But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.

Therefore, sins are forgiven when we come in contact with the blood. The blood was shed for all mankind, however, not all of mankind will come in contact with the blood. The blood continues to cleanse us as long as we walk in the light and have fellowship with God (I Jn 1:7).

The New Man was created in righteousness, after the old man was crucified, and we are raised to walk in newness of life. Only those who are in Christ are new creations.

Yes. I had those verses in my mind when I mentioned about Old man.


Romans 6:6
Knowing this, that our oldman is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin


However, the Believers experience the bad odors from the corrupting body of the Old man while they live on this earth, until they meet the Lord. Therefore Paul confessed this in next chapter.

Romans 7:

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body Fof this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Therefore he warned us this

Gal 5:
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


Now he kindly advise us this:

Ephesians 4:22

That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts

Also, he commended us this as well

Col 3:9
Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the oldman with his deeds;

As I said repeatedly, the sins of Hitler was imputed to Jesus, but the righteousness of Jesus was not imputed to Hitler .
This means that the Sins and the Righteousness are not interchangeable in the sense of Imputation.


As for Romans 6, I hope you are not speaking about the Baptismal Regeneration which I believe is wrong.

We are new creatures in Jesus Christ.
The fact that we are in Christ didn't come true without believing.

Therefore when we read the Righteousness in Christ, it is also and always connected with Believing.

 

[mman]

Yes. I had those verses in my mind when I mentioned about Old man....

...As for Romans 6, I hope you are not speaking about the Baptismal Regeneration which I believe is wrong.

We are new creatures in Jesus Christ.
The fact that we are in Christ didn't come true without believing.

Therefore when we read the Righteousness in Christ, it is also and always connected with Believing.

Thanks. Let me see if I understand your position. Today, there is no such thing as obtaining the forgiveness of sins, that is a past event and everyone's sins have already been forgiven, even before they are committed.

Today, people should only seek the "Righteousness of Jesus" being imputed, since their sins have already been imputed to Jesus.

Is that a fair assessment of your position?

As for the baptismal regeneration, I am not sure I understand your meaning. If you mean the regeneration that occurs during baptism (the old man is crucified, baptism into death, raised to walk in a new life) then it seems you are at odds with Paul.

If you refer to some magical power in the water that somehow cleanses one of sins, the same way it cleanses people of dirt, then no, I don't believe that either.

Only God can cleanse sins and cure leprosy. Water can do neither, yet God chooses to use water in the curing of leprosy, as He did in Naaman's case, or to put one INTO Christ as is described in Rom 6. God, though the ages, has used the illogical to achieve His purpose. It is the ultimate in faith. Whether, march around a walled city, look upon a brass snake, take trumpets and pitchers with candles, go to the edge of the Red sea instead of straight across to the promised land, build an ark, reduce your army size, or wash and be clean, God's instructions don't have to make sense. To receive the promise, they must be kept.

 

[Eliyahu]

Thanks. Let me see if I understand your position. Today, there is no such thing as obtaining the forgiveness of sins, that is a past event and everyone's sins have already been forgiven, even before they are committed.

Very much correct ! I like " even before they are committed"

Today, people should only seek the "Righteousness of Jesus" being imputed, since their sins have already been imputed to Jesus.

In that sense, we better rather be careful with " seek" because it needs only " Believing"

Is that a fair assessment of your position?

OK, but as I mentioned, I am not sure it is the right term to say " impute" because Imputation of sins were from us to Jesus by God.
Imputation of Righteousness is not from Jesus to us, but our Belief is imputed to be our Righteousness by God. In this sentence, 'Impute' meant Reckon.

As for the baptismal regeneration, I am not sure I understand your meaning. If you mean the regeneration that occurs during baptism (the old man is crucified, baptism into death, raised to walk in a new life) then it seems you are at odds with Paul.

Baptismal Regeneration is believed by many denomination ( Calvin, RCC, Church of Christ, etc.) except Baptists and Brethren, Methodists etc.

Baptismal Regeneration means that one can be born again at the time of Water Baptism, which is absolutely wrong and has been dealt with on this board several times.
It means that 1 second before the Water Baptism, the person was not born again, but 1 second after the Water Baptism, he or she was born again. This means that the Holy Spirit enters when the person is immersed into the water.
What Paul said in Ro 6 is that someone is born again by Water( the Word of God which has the cleansing power) and the Holy Spirit, then such person is baptized in the water so that such Bornagain fact is declared formally. Therefore Water Baptism is one thing and the Born again by Holy Spirit is another. Cornelius was baptized in the water after he received the Holy Spirit. The more problem with the Baptismal Regeneration is that they are actually confessing that they baptise the unbelievers, then the unbelievers become the believers, which claims the magic power of water !

If you refer to some magical power in the water that somehow cleanses one of sins, the same way it cleanses people of dirt, then no, I don't believe that either.

Then you are denying Baptismal Regeneration, which is good.

Only God can cleanse sins and cure leprosy. Water can do neither, yet God chooses to use water in the curing of leprosy, as He did in Naaman's case, or to put one INTO Christ as is described in Rom 6. God, though the ages, has used the illogical to achieve His purpose. It is the ultimate in faith. Whether, march around a walled city, look upon a brass snake, take trumpets and pitchers with candles, go to the edge of the Red sea instead of straight across to the promised land, build an ark, reduce your army size, or wash and be clean, God's instructions don't have to make sense. To receive the promise, they must be kept.

OK.

Our righteousness is based on our Repentance and Believing what God did thru His Son Jesus. Though Jesus is the King of Righteousness, our faith, our believing is absolutely necessary for the Righteousness.

When Abraham became Righteous, it was because he believed in God. So, the believing is the most important factor for the Righteousness.