N.T. Wright and Justification

[DaveXR650]

@kyredneck. You are the one who tried to say you only get your beliefs from scripture. The fact is you don't. You get information from other sources. I would have more respect for you if you had been reading Wright or someone, but still, it is more than scripture. Relax. We all do that. But as I thought, your constant attempt to diagnose my emotional state really just indicates your own, doesn't it. That's why the all capitals responses.

Try again to actually engage what I said above.

 

[kyredneck]

You are the one who tried to say you only get your beliefs from scripture. The fact is you don't. You get information from other sources.

Egad. The final authority with me and any other student of the word is scripture, not Owen or Wright or any other commentary or confession. Sermons, articles, internet posts, commentaries, etc, will always direct a Beroean's thoughts back to scripture.

3 For what saith the scripture?.....Ro 4

11 Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so. Acts 17

 

[DaveXR650]

Ky. I agree with you. I even agree with the idea that a Christian life of pursuing holiness and attempting to do good works is essential. The theological problems occur as to how this fits with justification. Back in post 18 I listed the take on it that Traill had. He came from a reformed point of view and had been accused of being antinomian. Yet he believed that we should use the Law as a "rule of life" after we are saved. A lot of modern reformed writers call it legalistic to say the Law is a rule of life. I take it from your posts on James that you at least go so far as to say the Law is a rule of life. I go that far too. I would like to know your actual opinion on that without some insult thrown in along with it.

 

[kyredneck]

I take it from your posts on James that you at least go so far as to say the Law is a rule of life.

I suspect I hold to the same 'narrow view of the law' held by the [devout/true] Jews that @JonC alluded to earlier.

 

[Van]

Obviously N. T. Wright is wrong.

Justification refers to God making a sinner righteous. God does not declare the person righteous but makes the person righteous by the "washing of regeneration." Romans 5:19, Titus 3:5.

The mistaken view comes from sinners self declaring themselves righteous, or with God examining someone and finding them righreous or unrighteous. However, for a sinner to become righteous requires the washing of regeneration. Otherwise Christ death did not provide the sacrifice required for justification.

Note the OT Saints gained approval by faith, but that did not allow them to enter heaven. They had to wait to be made perfect by the washing of regeneration.

Both views presented by the OP are unstudied and unbiblical.

How do unholy sinners, from conception undergo the washing of regeneration? God credits their faith as righteousness and transfers them into the kingdom of His beloved Son

Consider these analysis question:
1) Why did Christ die if God had chosen to declare rather than make sinners righteous?
2) What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?
3) What is the circumcision of Christ?

I believe individuals receive justification (reconciled to God) when God transfers their human spirit into the Body of Christ and they undergo the washing of regeneration.

Romans 4 does not say Abraham was made righteous, it says his faith was credited as righteousness.

"but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness”

 

[JonC]

Obviously N. T. Wright is wrong.

Justification refers to God making a sinner righteous. God does not declare the person righteous but makes the person righteous by the "washing of regeneration." Romans 5:19, Titus 3:5.

The mistaken view comes from sinners self declaring themselves righteous, or with God examining someone and finding them righreous or unrighteous. However, for a sinner to become righteous requires the washing of regeneration. Otherwise Christ death did not provide the sacrifice required for justification.

Note the OT Saints gained approval by faith, but that did not allow them to enter heaven. They had to wait to be made perfect by the washing of regeneration.

Both views presented by the OP are unstudied and unbiblical.

How do unholy sinners, from conception undergo the washing of regeneration? God credits their faith as righteousness and transfers them into the kingdom of His beloved Son

Consider these analysis question:
1) Why did Christ die if God had chosen to declare rather than make sinners righteous?
2) What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?
3) What is the circumcision of Christ?

I believe individuals receive justification (reconciled to God) when God transfers their human spirit into the Body of Christ and they undergo the washing of regeneration.

Romans 4 does not say Abraham was made righteous, it says his faith was credited as righteousness.

But the passages you provide don't support your statement.

Consider:

Romans 5:18–19 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Wright did not deny that justification is a result of Christ (that through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men) or that through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.

And this verse is speaking of salvation, not justification.

Wright did not reject that He saved us according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.


The distinction Wright was making was between justification and salvation (claiming that the Reformers broadened the meaning of justification to be salvation and made Paul's use of justification essentially meaningless).

 

[Van]

But the passages you provide don't support your statement.

Consider:

Romans 5:18–19 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Wright did not deny that justification is a result of Christ (that through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men) or that through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.

And this verse is speaking of salvation, not justification.

Wright did not reject that He saved us according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.


The distinction Wright was making was between justification and salvation (claiming that the Reformers broadened the meaning of justification to be salvation and made Paul's use of justification essentially meaningless).

1) Your passages do not support your claims.
2) Did I say Wright denied justification is a result of Christ? Nope
3) I did say we were made righteous, not declared righteous.
4) To be saved requires being justified. The washing of regeneration indicates an action removing what God held against us.
5) Did I say Wright denied God saved us by the washing of regeneration? Nope
6) Please answer question 2, "What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

P.S. Humans declare themselves righteous to no effect, and God finds people made righteous to be righteous and declares that they were found to be righteous. The idea God transforms a person from unholiness to holiness by declaration is false unstudied nonsense.

 

[JonC]

1) Your passages do not support your claims.
2) Did I say Wright denied justification is a result of Christ? Nope
3) I did say we were made righteous, not declared righteous.
4) To be saved requires being justified. The washing of regeneration indicates an action removing what God held against us.
5) Did I say Wright denied God saved us by the washing of regeneration? Nope
6) Please answer question 2, "What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

P.S. Humans declare themselves righteous to no effect, and God finds people made righteous to be righteous and declares that they were found to be righteous. The idea God transforms a person from unholiness to holiness by declaration is false unstudied nonsense.

The washing refers to forgiveness. The verse itself speaks of our salvation - our "rebirth" or being forgiven and born of the Spirit.

I do not know why you bring it up here, as we are talking about justification.

 

[37818]

Galatians 2;16, ". . . Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. . . ."

Romams 3:20, ". . . Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. . . ."

 

[Piper]

1) Your passages do not support your claims.
2) Did I say Wright denied justification is a result of Christ? Nope
3) I did say we were made righteous, not declared righteous.
4) To be saved requires being justified. The washing of regeneration indicates an action removing what God held against us.
5) Did I say Wright denied God saved us by the washing of regeneration? Nope
6) Please answer question 2, "What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

P.S. Humans declare themselves righteous to no effect, and God finds people made righteous to be righteous and declares that they were found to be righteous. The idea God transforms a person from unholiness to holiness by declaration is false unstudied nonsense.

I believe it is a metaphor for our sins being forgiven.

 

[Van]

The washing refers to forgiveness. The verse itself speaks of our salvation - our "rebirth" or being forgiven and born of the Spirit.

I do not know why you bring it up here, as we are talking about justification.

The washing refers to removal.

The washing of regeneration indicates an action removing what God held against us.

"What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

JonC, you claimed washing of regeneration simply means "forgiving" (which is wrong) but you did not say why washing is necessary if God simply chose to declare people forgiven and righteous. Obviously there would be no need for the "circumcision of Christ or the washing of regeneration if we could have simply been "declared" righteous.

 

[Van]

I believe it is a metaphor for our sins being forgiven.

The washing of regeneration refers to being spiritually born anew, resulting in being made spiritually alive together with Christ, thus what God held against us as "unholiness" has been removed, by the "circumcision of Christ."

Colossians 2:11-13 NET
In him you also were circumcised - not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshly body, that is, through the circumcision done by Christ.

Having been buried with him in [spiritual] baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead.

And even though you were dead in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he nevertheless made you alive with him, having forgiven all your transgressions.​

 

[JonC]

The washing refers to removal.

"What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

JonC, you claimed washing of regeneration simply means "forgiving" (which is wrong) but you did not why washing is necessary if God simply chose to declare people forgiven and righteous. Obviously there would be no need for the "circumcision of Christ or the washing of regeneration if we could have simply been "declared" righteous.

In the OT the washing means forgiveness, and when coupled with renewing by the Spirit I believe it means forgiveness and being made a new being.

Your mistake is you are lumping forgiveness, regeneration, renewing, etc. in with justification and pretending that Wright rejects the other aspects of salvation.

 

[Piper]

The washing of regeneration refers to being spiritually born anew, resulting in being made spiritually alive together with Christ, thus what God held against us as "unholiness" has been removed, by the "circumcision of Christ."

Colossians 2:11-13 NET
In him you also were circumcised - not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshly body, that is, through the circumcision done by Christ.

Having been buried with him in [spiritual] baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead.

And even though you were dead in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he nevertheless made you alive with him, having forgiven all your transgressions.​

I know you are opposing Imputed Righteousness in any way you can. It won't work.

We are declared Righteous. We are being sanctified progressively, and will not be perfectly free from the stain of sin until we see him or he returns.

 

[Van]

In the OT the washing means forgiveness, and when coupled with renewing by the Spirit I believe it means forgiveness and being made a new being.

Your mistake is you are lumping forgiveness, regeneration, renewing, etc. in with justification and pretending that Wright rejects the other aspects of salvation.

Please, please, please stop with your failed attempts to read my mind.

I do not "pretend" Wright rejects aspects of salvation.

Please answer the question.

"What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

 

[Van]

I know you are opposing Imputed Righteousness in any way you can. It won't work.

We are declared Righteous. We are being sanctified progressively, and will not be perfectly free from the stain of sin until we see him or he returns.

LOL, we are undergoing "progressive sanctification." No one said otherwise. Why obfuscate with non-germane nonsense?

We have been made "perfect" and able to be united with God, thus absent any "unholiness." This is rather basic.

Imputed Righteousness is false doctrine not found in scripture. We undergo the washing of regeneration, the circumcision of Christ.

Colossians 1:22
yet He has now reconciled you in His body of flesh through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach— ​

 

[DaveXR650]

"What does the washing of regeneration accomplish if God simply declares people righteous?"

That's a good point but such a declaration is in the first place, by God himself, and secondly, it's based on an actual thing that happened, that God chose to accept as the reason for the declaration.

Some people say that God doesn't simply declare one righteous. But if, like Wright says, God "declares" you now in the covenant or if you are declared to be regenerated or "infused" with righteousness as the Catholics say - in all those cases, if the declaration is before you have actually done anything then isn't it still a matter of "declaration" no matter how you look at it?

And if it is true that it really IS based on something you have to do then is not the charge correct that in reality you saved yourself? Or at least that God is waiting to see what you will do and judging is on the result of what it is you do.

 

[Piper]

LOL, we are undergoing "progressive sanctification." No one said otherwise. Why obfuscate with non-germane nonsense?

We have been made "perfect" and able to be united with God, thus absent any "unholiness." This is rather basic.

Imputed Righteousness is false doctrine not found in scripture. We undergo the washing of regeneration, the circumcision of Christ.

Colossians 1:22
yet He has now reconciled you in His body of flesh through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach— ​

Brother, you are so far off base. Imputed Righteousness is well supported by Scripture. It is held by millions of solid, reliable theologians. I can defend it, but nothing I say or do will convince you. For you to say it is "False doctrine" is ignorant and self-righteous and reveals the small minded Fundamentalist kind of thinking that I despise.

 

[Van]

That's a good point but such a declaration is in the first place, by God himself, and secondly, it's based on an actual thing that happened, that God chose to accept as the reason for the declaration.

Some people say that God doesn't simply declare one righteous. But if, like Wright says, God "declares" you now in the covenant or if you are declared to be regenerated or "infused" with righteousness as the Catholics say - in all those cases, if the declaration is before you have actually done anything then isn't it still a matter of "declaration" no matter how you look at it?

And if it is true that it really IS based on something you have to do then is not the charge correct that in reality you saved yourself? Or at least that God is waiting to see what you will do and judging is on the result of what it is you do.

Thanks for attempting to address the actual issue!!

The issue is not whether we do something to become righteous, God alone makes us righteous.

The issue is whether God "declares"us righteous, or "makes" us righteous. Once made righteous, of course we can be declared to be righteous. The issue is how does God make us righteous. How does God remove what He had against us, that "body of flesh." His sacrifice on the cross provides the means of reconciliation, His sacrifice for our sin burden, and that is how the "washing of regeneration" and the "circumcision of Christ" is accomplished.

 

[Van]

Brother, you are so far off base. Imputed Righteousness is well supported by Scripture. It is held by millions of solid, reliable theologians. I can defend it, but nothing I say or do will convince you. For you to say it is "False doctrine" is ignorant and self-righteous and reveals the small minded Fundamentalist kind of thinking that I despise.

LOL, you are so far off base....
Lots of people can hold errant views.
You cannot defend your view from scripture, but as above, you can post fallacious argumentation.

The idea God transforms a person from unholiness to holiness by declaration is false unstudied nonsense. How does God remove what He had against us, that "body of flesh." Christ's sacrifice on the cross provides the means of reconciliation, His sacrifice for our sin burden, and that is how the "washing of regeneration" and the "circumcision of Christ" accomplishes the removal of our sin burden, what God holds against us.