Imputed righteousness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity Portal

Imputed righteousness is a concept in Christian theology which proposes that righteousness of Jesus Christ satisfies all criteria necessary to share in God's grace. Those who trust in the promise that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross atones for their sins believe in this type of righteousness as opposed to imparted righteousness and sanctification. The teaching of imputed righteousness is a signature doctrine of the Lutheran and Reformed traditions of Christianity.[1]

Contents

[edit] The case for imputed righteousness

Imputed righteousness is the Christian doctrine that a sinner being declared righteous by God is declared such purely by God's grace, without any merit or personal worthiness. On the one hand, God is infinitely merciful, "not wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9). On the other, God is infinitely holy and just, which means that he cannot approve of or even look upon evil (Habakkuk 1:13), neither can he justify a wicked person (Book of Proverbs 17:15). Because the Bible describes all men as sinners and says that there are none who are righteous (Epistle to the Romans 3:23, 10) this is a classic theological tension. To use the words of the apostle Paul, how can God be "just and the justifier of those who believe (Rom. 3:26)?" Through this argument God cannot ignore or in any way overlook sin.

Adherents' say that God the Father resolves this problem by sending His Son to lead a perfect life and sacrifice himself for the sake of all people. Then the sins of the wicked person are cast onto Christ, who is a perfect sacrifice.[2] First of all, they note that the New Testament describes the method of man's salvation as the "righteousness of God" (Rom. 3:21, 22; 10:3; Philippians 3:9). They then note that this imputed righteousness is particularly that of the second member of the Trinity, Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Corinthians 1:30). When they refer to the "imputed righteousness of Christ," they are referring to his life of sinlessness and perfect obedience to God's law on this earth, usually called his active obedience. The need for a human life of perfect obedience to God's law was the reason that Christ, who is God, had to become incarnate (take on human flesh) and live as a human being. Paul's statement in Romans 4:6, that God "imputes righteousness apart from works," bolsters the fourth step in the argument that this righteousness of Christ is imputed to our accounts. By this terminology they mean that God legally credits the believer with the righteous acts that Christ performed while on this earth. Luther uses the language of a "fortunate exchange" to describe this, borrowed from Saint Paul's imagery in Colossians 3. Christ trades his "garments," holiness, righteousness, being blessed by God the Father, in exchange for human sin. This is really Good News for sinners - Christ takes our sin and believers receive his blessed condition and righteousness.

This righteousness of Christ and its relationship to the recipient can also be likened to adoption. Adoption legally constitutes a child the son or daughter of a person that is not that child's birth parent. Similarly, in marriage the married partners are considered one entity legally.[3] When a sinner believes in Christ, they are spiritually united with Christ, and that union makes it possible for God to credit believers with the righteousness of Christ without engaging in "legal fiction."[4]

[edit] Arguments against the doctrine of imputed righteousness

Some Christians, most notably of the Roman Catholic tradition, believe that righteousness is only really imputed when they obey God, and this will not be complete until the Second Coming of Christ. This stands in opposition to the Protestant doctrine of imputed righteousness, which teaches Christ's righteousness as a present reality - hence the word "saint" being used to define the whole Christian church on earth.

The disagreement is not really over whether there is imputed righteousenss, but when it occurs. Those who disagree with the doctrine of imputed righteousness disagree on the following grounds. They contend the typical Protestant understanding of the Greek word DIKAIOO[citation needed], usually translated "justify" is "declared righteous" to be in error. Hence they say Christians are "declared righteous by faith". Those standing against a Lutheran understanding of imputed righteousness contend this is an error supported only by misunderstanding three Greek roots. The argument goes as follows: The Greek word DIKAIOO means "to do justice" "to have justice done" (Thayer's Lexicon) or "to satisfy justice". The 1968 Supplement of Liddell Scott and Jones also includes the definition, "brought to justice"; The noun means "justice". The Greek word PISTIS[citation needed] means "faithfulness" (BDAG, definition 1A), and the verb "faithfully trust". NOMOS[citation needed] means a "norm" (BDAG, def. 1).

Using this interpretation of the Greek, the doctrine of "justified by faith" = "declared righteous by our faith" falls apart. The argument against imputed righteousness in the here-and-now is that the Gospel shows "justice is done by Christ's faithfulness" in doing the work of atonement on the cross.

It should be noted that those who hold to the doctrine of imputed righteousness do not agree with the hermeneutical moves made above. The doctrine of imputed righteousness is at the center of the rift in the visible church between many different denominations.

[edit] Differing views about imputed righteousness

[edit] Lutheran view

Philipp Melanchthon, a contemporary of Martin Luther, stressed the classic Lutheran desire to distinguish carefully and properly between Law and Gospel. In doing so he emphasised that Law binds us, convicts us, and drives us, whilst the Gospel proclaims repentance, the promise of grace, eternal life, and proclaims our liberty in Christ.[5]

[edit] Reformed view

The Reformed and Presbyterian churches have generally followed the Lutherans on the importance of distinguishing the law and the gospel.[6] Articulated in terms of Covenant Theology, law and gospel have been associated with the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace, respectively. Historically, they have been more open to the broader biblical language which the Lutheran Formula of Concord calls “correct” but not “proper". Recently, some prominent theologians have disputed the centrality of the law-gospel distinction in the Reformed tradtition.[7]

[edit] Roman Catholic view

"The Catholic idea maintains that the formal cause of justification does not consist in an exterior imputation of the justice of Christ, but in a real, interior sanctification effected by grace, which abounds in the soul and makes it permanently holy before God. Although the sinner is justified by the justice of Christ, inasmuch as the Redeemer has merited for him the grace of justification (causa meritoria), nevertheless he is formally justified and made holy by his own personal justice and holiness (causa formalis)."[8] Although internal and proper to the one justified, this justice and holiness are still understood as a gift of grace through the Holy Spirit rather than something earned or acquired independently of God's salvific work. Put starkly, the Roman Catholic Church rejects the teaching of imputed righteousness as being a present reality. This is at the very center of the disagreements between the Roman Catholic Church, Protestants and Lutherans and remains the primary sticking point to a unification of these denominations to this day.

Many who hold to the doctrine of imputed righteousness reject the Roman Catholic teaching of gratia infusa (infused grace) because Lutheran and Calvinist anthropology has no room for the Roman Catholic concept of a "spark of goodness," that is to say that the image of God is completely lost as a result of the Fall into sin. The necessity of imputed righteousness stems precisely from there being nothing internal onto which God's grace can be fused. Something altogether more radical must be done to make a sinner righteous - the sinful nature must be killed and made a new creation be made by God.

[edit] Footnotes

  1. ^ See James Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1997), pp. 296-298, for a discussion of this topic.
  2. ^ John Piper's Counted Righteous in Christ (Wheaton, IL:Crossway, 2002), provides a good example of this answer.
  3. ^ Buchanan, pp. 334-338.
  4. ^ Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), p. 971.
  5. ^ "A critical analysis of the writings of Luther Colleague and Co-worker, Prof. Philipp Melancthon", http://www.elcm.org/, 2007-03-30. 
  6. ^ "Classical Covenant Theology", R. Scott Clark's Articles, 2007-05-16. 
  7. ^ "Law and Gospel", The Works of John Frame and Vern Poythress, 2007-03-30. 
  8. ^ "Sanctifying Grace", The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913. 

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

  • [1] (Lutheran perspective - for imputed righteousness)