The righteousness of God

[percho]

1 Corinthians 15:20
But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.

1 Corinthians 16:15
Now I urge you, brethren (you know the household of Stephanas, that they were the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves for ministry to the saints)

I believe James was written to who it says it was written to, the twelve tribes scattered. I also believe the tribes of Judah, Levi and Benjamin scattered among the nations (Ezek 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions.) were practicing the religion handed from Sini and the other tribes (Ezek 37:16 then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions.) were practicing whatever beliefs the peoples they were among were practicing. Hosea 8:8,9 Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among the Gentiles as a vessel wherein is no pleasure. For they are gone up to Assyria, a wild ass alone by himself: Ephraim hath hired lovers.

James is writing to these peoples.

Acts 15:8 “So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us,
Acts 15:14 “Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name.

16 ‘After this ---- After what? After taking out a people for his name
I will return
And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;
I will rebuild its ruins,
And I will set it up;

Why? V 17
So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD,
Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
Says the LORD who does all these things.’[fn]

How many people preach that Christ is returning in order that mankind might seek him?

What is the purpose for the Kingdom of Christ? ---- To send people to Hell? 1000 years?

Matt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

 

[Yeshua1]

Right, from the book of 2 Cal. 2:4 Which reads "born anew believers have the same moral perfection as Jesus."

Folks, they just make it up to prevent actual discussion of biblical doctrine.

To the father, being nowein Christ means that we have to God now the same law keeping perfection as Jesus had! That is why he can freely justify is as now being found in the Beloved!

 

[Yeshua1]

No offense, but I would appreciate hearing from posters themselves rather than third parties speculating about what they might think or putting words in their mouths.

So you would see a real distinction between Justification and redemption?

 

[Aaron]

a. I did not "conflate" God crediting our faith as righteousness with individuals being transferred from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Beloved Son, Colossians 1:13. Two separate actions of God, the second one being accomplished on the basis of the first one.

Then your OP needs a serious rewrite.

b. Next, I did not say the crediting is a synonym for salvation.

That's right. You said it was metonymy.


It's funny that when your feet get held to the fire you start denying you said the very things you said.

 

[Tsalagi]

As I said, the biblical view is very different from the view you have been taught.

This is an unkind presumption, since (a) you assume my views are merely derivative from the teaching of others and (b) that they are unbiblical simply because they differ from yours. I invite you to identify any of my posts that lack pertinent scriptural citations.

a. I did not "conflate" God crediting our faith as righteousness with individuals being transferred from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Beloved Son, Colossians 1:13. Two separate actions of God, the second one being accomplished on the basis of the first one.

On this we agree; and if the action of justification is separate from the action of redemption, it would be a conflation to refer to the provision of righteousness to us as redemptive work. Yet your statement was that the righteousness of God is a metonymy "referring to God's redemptive work that provides righteousness of those of His choosing." Providing righteousness is not redemption or redemptive work; the biblical term for that is justification. Justification is "through" redemption, redemption being a necessary precondition for justification in the same way that buying an old car is necessary before painting and restoring it; painting it is not part of the purchasing, if you see what I'm getting at. Paul teaches that God's righteousness is the gift we receive from God through redemption and thus logically after redemption (Romans 3:24, Ephesians 1:7). The forgiveness of sins is obviously necessary prior to our being treated or viewed by God as righteous. Perhaps you have observed that the consistent biblical phrase is "justified by faith" (Romans 3:1, 5:8, Galatians 3:24, etc.) not "redeemed by faith." One can be redeemed without being justified (2 Peter 2:1), but one cannot be justified without being redeemed.

b. Next, I did not say the crediting is a synonym for salvation. Two separate actions of God. Genesis 15:6 supports my view, Abraham believed God and "it" (his faith) was credited to him as righteousness. Exactly my view. Abraham's salvation is not in view. Hebrews 11:2 Abraham gained "approval" (chosen for salvation) by faith. He had to wait, like all Old Covenant Saints to be made perfect. No one said Abraham believed the gospel. And nowhere in Genesis 12 does scripture suggest Abraham's salvation was "manifested" because God made promises to him.

Your statements appear contradictory. You said "when God credits our faith as righteousness, He places us into Christ spiritually, were we are "made" not declared righteous." Being placed into Christ is salvation, is it not? In your view, was Abraham "saved" at the point he believed God's promise about the number of his descendants in Genesis 15:6? In your view is Abraham's faith and obedience in Genesis 12 not a manifestation of his salvation?

As for Hebrews 11:2, the elders (πρεσβύτεροι) there received by faith God's testimony to them about things hoped for and not seen. I am unable to find the notion of being "approved" or "chosen for salvation" in that context, particularly in the light of Hebrews 11:39 where the same description is used of the same individuals. The "receiving of testimony" is something done by the recipients of testimony, it is not presented as an act of approval on the part of God.

c. Colossians 1:13-14:

For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.​

Thus your claim being transferred into Christ does not equate with redemption is unbiblical.

Sorry, but this is a bit like quoting Romans 8:28-30 and alleging that to note foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification, and glorification as separate things is unbiblical. To extend my earlier analogy, paying for the car is separate and distinct from relocating it from the former owner's property to my own.

d. I did not claim to know what you have been taught, I said it was different from the biblical view presented in this thread. You have confirmed this fact because you have not said you agree with the view. To suggest I have treated you inappropriately is to change the subject from the biblical view to me. That dog will not hunt .

How else should I understand "I know this is all different from what you have been taught" and "the biblical view is very different from the view you have been taught"? If you do not claim to know what I have been taught, how can you presume to label what I was taught unbiblical? This type of comment is unnecessarily personal and dismissive, as is the implication that I am merely regurgitating past teaching from others and not my own understanding as the fruit of personal study.

 

[Yeshua1]

This is an unkind presumption, since (a) you assume my views are merely derivative from the teaching of others and (b) that they are unbiblical simply because they differ from yours. I invite you to identify any of my posts that lack pertinent scriptural citations.


On this we agree; and if the action of justification is separate from the action of redemption, it would be a conflation to refer to the provision of righteousness to us as redemptive work. Yet your statement was that the righteousness of God is a metonymy "referring to God's redemptive work that provides righteousness of those of His choosing." Providing righteousness is not redemption or redemptive work; the biblical term for that is justification. Justification is "through" redemption, redemption being a necessary precondition for justification in the same way that buying an old car is necessary before painting and restoring it; painting it is not part of the purchasing, if you see what I'm getting at. Paul teaches that God's righteousness is the gift we receive from God through redemption and thus logically after redemption (Romans 3:24, Ephesians 1:7). The forgiveness of sins is obviously necessary prior to our being treated or viewed by God as righteous. Perhaps you have observed that the consistent biblical phrase is "justified by faith" (Romans 3:1, 5:8, Galatians 3:24, etc.) not "redeemed by faith." One can be redeemed without being justified (2 Peter 2:1), but one cannot be justified without being redeemed.


Your statements appear contradictory. You said "when God credits our faith as righteousness, He places us into Christ spiritually, were we are "made" not declared righteous." Being placed into Christ is salvation, is it not? In your view, was Abraham "saved" at the point he believed God's promise about the number of his descendants in Genesis 15:6? In your view is Abraham's faith and obedience in Genesis 12 not a manifestation of his salvation?

As for Hebrews 11:2, the elders (πρεσβύτεροι) there received by faith God's testimony to them about things hoped for and not seen. I am unable to find the notion of being "approved" or "chosen for salvation" in that context, particularly in the light of Hebrews 11:39 where the same description is used of the same individuals. The "receiving of testimony" is something done by the recipients of testimony, it is not presented as an act of approval on the part of God.



Sorry, but this is a bit like quoting Romans 8:28-30 and alleging that to note foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification, and glorification as separate things is unbiblical. To extend my earlier analogy, paying for the car is separate and distinct from relocating it from the former owner's property to my own.



How else should I understand "I know this is all different from what you have been taught" and "the biblical view is very different from the view you have been taught"? If you do not claim to know what I have been taught, how can you presume to label what I was taught unbiblical? This type of comment is unnecessarily personal and dismissive, as is the implication that I am merely regurgitating past teaching from others and not my own understanding as the fruit of personal study.

Jesus redeemed and purchased us back to the Father by the blood of His sacrificial death upon Calvary!

 

[Van]

To the father, being nowein Christ means that we have to God now the same law keeping perfection as Jesus had! That is why he can freely justify is as now being found in the Beloved!

Y1, you can make up your beliefs to your hearts content, just do not claim they are biblical.

 

[Van]

Then your OP needs a serious rewrite.
That's right. You said it was metonymy.
It's funny that when your feet get held to the fire you start denying you said the very things you said.

This all Calvinism has folks, obfuscation and slander.

 

[Yeshua1]

Y1, you can make up your beliefs to your hearts content, just do not claim they are biblical.

We do not have imputed to us then the Moral perfection of Jesus?

 

[Van]

This is an unkind presumption, since (a) you assume my views are merely derivative from the teaching of others and (b) that they are unbiblical simply because they differ from yours. I invite you to identify any of my posts that lack pertinent scriptural citations.

On this we agree; and if the action of justification is separate from the action of redemption, it would be a conflation to refer to the provision of righteousness to us as redemptive work. Yet your statement was that the righteousness of God is a metonymy "referring to God's redemptive work that provides righteousness of those of His choosing." Providing righteousness is not redemption or redemptive work; the biblical term for that is justification. Justification is "through" redemption, redemption being a necessary precondition for justification in the same way that buying an old car is necessary before painting and restoring it; painting it is not part of the purchasing, if you see what I'm getting at. Paul teaches that God's righteousness is the gift we receive from God through redemption and thus logically after redemption (Romans 3:24, Ephesians 1:7). The forgiveness of sins is obviously necessary prior to our being treated or viewed by God as righteous. Perhaps you have observed that the consistent biblical phrase is "justified by faith" (Romans 3:1, 5:8, Galatians 3:24, etc.) not "redeemed by faith." One can be redeemed without being justified (2 Peter 2:1), but one cannot be justified without being redeemed.

Your statements appear contradictory. You said "when God credits our faith as righteousness, He places us into Christ spiritually, were we are "made" not declared righteous." Being placed into Christ is salvation, is it not? In your view, was Abraham "saved" at the point he believed God's promise about the number of his descendants in Genesis 15:6? In your view is Abraham's faith and obedience in Genesis 12 not a manifestation of his salvation?

As for Hebrews 11:2, the elders (πρεσβύτεροι) there received by faith God's testimony to them about things hoped for and not seen. I am unable to find the notion of being "approved" or "chosen for salvation" in that context, particularly in the light of Hebrews 11:39 where the same description is used of the same individuals. The "receiving of testimony" is something done by the recipients of testimony, it is not presented as an act of approval on the part of God.

Sorry, but this is a bit like quoting Romans 8:28-30 and alleging that to note foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification, and glorification as separate things is unbiblical. To extend my earlier analogy, paying for the car is separate and distinct from relocating it from the former owner's property to my own.

How else should I understand "I know this is all different from what you have been taught" and "the biblical view is very different from the view you have been taught"? If you do not claim to know what I have been taught, how can you presume to label what I was taught unbiblical? This type of comment is unnecessarily personal and dismissive, as is the implication that I am merely regurgitating past teaching from others and not my own understanding as the fruit of personal study.

a) If you want to find fault with me, have at it. It shows your views are unbiblical.

b) Views are unbiblical because they differ from scripture, not me.

c) Redemption includes both the transfer out of the realm of darkness, a realm from which we are rescued, and the release from the condemnation of our sin, i.e. our justification, our being forgiven, our being made righteous. Thus redemption includes being placed in Christ, and undergoing the washing of regeneration.

d) Romans 3:24 fully supports this view. We are justified, made righteous by means of the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.

e) Note that Ephesians 1:7 actually states the biblical view I presented.

f) Next you refer to be ransomed, bought, purchased (2 Peter 2:1) as being redeemed. Your mistaken understanding of redeemed as been addressed before. It is not simply the paying of the ransom, but refers to he release effected on the basis of the payment made. If you want to go in circles, no need for me to post.

g) And I already addressed that Abraham was not saved, made perfect, when he gained approval by faith. Again if you want to go in circles, no need for me to post.

h) Ditto for manifestation of salvation in Genesis 12, I already addressed your claim.

i) Next, you claim you cannot find being approved in the context of Hebrews 11.2. The NASB and several others translate the word meaning good report as approval. Some other us "commended." It is hard to find what you want un-found.

j) Lastly you return to fault finding. That dog will not hunt

Now in my post I rebutted your view of Colossians 1:13, but here you skip it. Why not actually discuss what I present, rather than post taint so concerning things I did not say?

 

[Van]

We do not have imputed to us then the Moral perfection of Jesus?

What does scripture say? Mine says we are made righteous, Romans 5:19. I not find "imputed to us the moral perfection of Jesus."

 

[Yeshua1]

What does scripture say? Mine says we are made righteous, Romans 5:19. I not find "imputed to us the moral perfection of Jesus."

Are we justified due to what we do then or by what Jesus already has done?

 

[Van]

Are we justified due to what we do then or by what Jesus already has done?

Asked and answered probably a dozen times.

 

[Tsalagi]

So you would see a real distinction between Justification and redemption?

Absolutely; I have endeavored to point out the difference elsewhere in this thread. Paying the price (redemption) is not the same as viewing/treating/declaring/crediting the redeemed as righteous (justification). An analogy would be purchasing a distressed property (R), then investing my own capital in it to "perfect" it so I can dwell in it (J).

 

[Van]

Absolutely; I have endeavored to point out the difference elsewhere in this thread. Paying the price (redemption) is not the same as viewing/treating/declaring/crediting the redeemed as righteous (justification). An analogy would be purchasing a distressed property (R), then investing my own capital in it to "perfect" it so I can dwell in it (J).

Disinformation on display, paying the price is not redemption, it is ransom. Paying the ransom is not the same as transferring a person from the realm of darkness into Christ where the individual is made, not declared righteous.

Here is a post from another thread that is on point:

One of the reasons, some think "redeemed" refers to paying the redemption price, rather than to the effected release accomplished because of that payment, is some translations render a word that means "purchase or buy" as "redeem."

For example, "agorazo" (G59) means "purchase" or "to be in the market to do business." In several verses, (listed below) the word is used to refer to the "purchase" with His blood, Christ accomplished on the cross. This refers to the payment or ransom paid, however some translations mistranslate the word as "redeem."

Here are the verses and the versions rendering purchase as redeem:
1 Corinthians 6:20 WNT
1 Corinthians 7:23 WNT
2 Peter 2:1 GNT, WNT
Revelation 5:9 KJV, NKJV, HCSB, NHEB, AFV, ABPE, KJ2000, AKJV, D-RB, WBT, and YLT
Revelation 14:3 NIV, NLT, ESV, BSB, BLB, KJV, NKJV, CSB, CEV, GNT, ISV, NET, NHEB, AFV, ABPE, KJ2000, AKJV, WBT,
WNT, and WEB
Revelation 14:4 ESV, BSB, BLB, KJV, NKJV, CSB, CEV, GNT, HCSB, ISV, NET, NHEB, ABPE, KJ2000, AKJV, WBT, WNT, and WEB.

This clearly demonstrates that sometimes translators are too helpful with the message. Clearly the 144,000 in Revelation 14:3 had been "redeemed" out of the earth, but the text simply says there were bought or purchased. However only eight versions went with the actual meaning, the rest helped out providing corruption and confusion.

 

[Aaron]

Absolutely; I have endeavored to point out the difference elsewhere in this thread. Paying the price (redemption) is not the same as viewing/treating/declaring/crediting the redeemed as righteous (justification). An analogy would be purchasing a distressed property (R), then investing my own capital in it to "perfect" it so I can dwell in it (J).

You give Van too much credit.

The best way to show a difference in the works of Christ is to go to the law and see what was prescribed for forgiveness of sin, release of guilt (trespass), to please God (sweet savour), etc, and we do indeed see stark distinctions in the sin, trespass and sweet savour offerings. These were distinctions well-known by the NT writers, and is reflected in their teachings of the work of Christ, which is what the law of sacrifice was foreshadowing.

Van has an idea in his head, and no amount of reasoned exposition will dislodge it.

Anyway. Merry Christmas.

 

[Aaron]

You give Van too much credit.

The best way to show a difference in the works of Christ is to go to the law and see what was prescribed for forgiveness of sin, release of guilt (trespass), to please God (sweet savour), etc, and we do indeed see stark distinctions in the sin, trespass and sweet savour offerings. These were distinctions well-known by the NT writers, and is reflected in their teachings of the work of Christ, which is what the law of sacrifice was foreshadowing.

Van has an idea in his head, and no amount of reasoned exposition will dislodge it.

Anyway. Merry Christmas.

Van, in the interest of time, I will go ahead and post your response to my post:

You unbiblical, Calvinist snip! I never said there was no difference in redemption and justification, just that they're the same thing!

 

[Yeshua1]

Absolutely; I have endeavored to point out the difference elsewhere in this thread. Paying the price (redemption) is not the same as viewing/treating/declaring/crediting the redeemed as righteous (justification). An analogy would be purchasing a distressed property (R), then investing my own capital in it to "perfect" it so I can dwell in it (J).

Justification is God getting us now as the "paid property" purchased by death of Christ!

 

[Yeshua1]

Van, in the interest of time, I will go ahead and post your response to my post:

You unbiblical, Calvinist heretic! I never said there was no difference in redemption and justification, just that they're the same thing!

Ah, love among the brethren!

 

[Yeshua1]

You give Van too much credit.

The best way to show a difference in the works of Christ is to go to the law and see what was prescribed for forgiveness of sin, release of guilt (trespass), to please God (sweet savour), etc, and we do indeed see stark distinctions in the sin, trespass and sweet savour offerings. These were distinctions well-known by the NT writers, and is reflected in their teachings of the work of Christ, which is what the law of sacrifice was foreshadowing.

Van has an idea in his head, and no amount of reasoned exposition will dislodge it.

Anyway. Merry Christmas.

Really want to read his Systematic Theology and personal translation!