Justification, but how? By Infusion or Imputation?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 апр 2022
- How are we justified? What does the Bible say? Does God make us righteous and then acquit us or are we to hope for another's righteousness in ours place?
Today we'll look at the Scriptural case for the Lutheran and evangelic understanding of justification, we'll dialogue with Rome's reading of Romans chapter 3 and 4, and we'll see whether "imputed righteousness" is a mere legal fiction or whether it has some real grounding in reality!
The Militant Chemnitst
Love this. The parallel to Romans 2:26 and something being reckoned that really isn't the case (uncircumcision as circumcision) is really powerful, first time I'm hearing it. Great stuff!
yes.. it's a great example and proof of the concept of infusion / interior transformation.
@@contrasedevacantism6811 except there is no change apart from status here. That's not infusion.
@@TheOtherPaul You can only come to that conclusion if you don't read contextually. Romans 2:29 is a clear reference to Ezek 36:25-27; i.e., an inward change.
@@contrasedevacantism6811 apart from sharing some words, I cannot see a specific allusion to the Ezekiel passage here. Either way, this doesnt deal with the fact that a certain status is being given to one who is not themselves in that status (i.e. the uncircumcised are circumcised).
@@TheOtherPaul the passage has nothing to do with "status" but the fact that they have experienced a conversion of heart, which places one ontologoically on the same plane as someone who is circumcised, which symbolically represents a circumcision of heart.
Good work I apreciate that you mentioned the fact that Abrahams justification in ch15 takes place not at the beginning but in the middle of his believing life. This disproves the Roman Catholic view of initial justification by faith and final justification by works, and also disproves the Reformed view of Justification as a past event with the law replacing the gospel as the main focus in the belivers life.
The Militant Gerhardtist
This is excellent. Thank you.
The Militant Lutheranist
Keep up the great content! Do you perhaps have a blog or a facebook page on which we can follow content as well?
Thanks for your kind words! I do have a Danish blog and podcast, but those are hardly available to English speakers. If, God willing, the channel grows I'll make a FB group and/or a Discord server :)
Great content. Audio could be louder
Do you have the full image used as the thumbnail for this video? :) I appreciate your channel a lot
Thanks! Yes I do, I made the picture myself. Do you use twitter? I could send it to you if you'd like
@@truthuntogodliness I found it from your twitter shortly after this comment! I so appreciate these videos
It seems like the Roman Catholic belief is confusing justification with sanctification. Protestants say good works are the fruit of a true conversion. I am confused at their voew of good works.
2 Cor 5:21 is favourite verses to support (double) imputation. The verse says "he [God] made him [Christ] to be sin who knew no sin". In Hebrew the same one word is used for both sin and sin offering. In Lev. 16 one of the two goats was chosen to be sin offering. The chosen goat was sacrificed to atone the sins of all Israelites but their sins were not imputed on that goat. They were imputed on the second goat, who was released in the wilderness and was not sacrificed. The first goat prefigured Christ who died to atone the sins of all of us. The first goat became sin offering (again, the same word used for sin).
According to imputation (1) Christ is legally declared as sinner, while He remained sinless, as our sins imputed to Him. (2) we are legally declared righteous, while we remain sinner - how can we become righteousness of God if we are not righteous?
See my reply to the comment above regarding the union of faith, God bless
@@truthuntogodliness Scripture says in 2 Peter 1:4 that through Christ we become partakers of divine nature. The Greek term is theosis and I think that is what Luther meant with union of faith. Being in heaven is not just simply moving to a better place where there is no sorrow, no pain, no death, no sickness etc. What we are talking (and your video) is NOT union of faith but, in the words of the Reformers, how to be right with God. Is it a declaration that we are legally righteous while we are NOT, as according to the Reformers or is it declaration that we are righteous because we are made righteous through Christ (Rom. 5:19) as taught by the Catholic Church? I understand that you, as a Lutheran, cited 2 Cor 5:21 to defend what Luther taught and I show you that the verse does not support double imputation.
@@truthuntogodliness justification is for scholars. No one is required to be a scholar to get heaven, and that makes it sinful to break the Church because of justification disagreements.
Imputation implies that Christ' righteousness through faith alone is credited to us as alien or external righteousness. At the same time, our sins, past and future, are credited to Christ, who bore them on the cross. Luther wrote: "His righteousness is ours, our sin is His", (Lectures on Galatians 1-4, Chapter 1-4. English translation from Luther’s Works, Vol. 26, page 233). How do you reconcile Luther's teaching with what Ezek. 18:20 says: "the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself".
According to imputation we are both justified (legally declared righteous based on alien righteousness of Christ) and sinner at the same time. How do you reconcile it with what Ezek. 33:12 says " the righteous shall not be able to live by his righteousness when he sins".
Faith is counted to Abraham for righteousness in Gen 15:6. But in Psalms 106:31 what is counted (the same Hebrew verb as in Gen. 15:6) to Phinehas for righteousness is not faith, as it is stated in verse 30 (in more detail in Num 25). In Hebrew the word for righteousness also means almsgiving. Prov. 10:2 says "righteousness delivers from death". 1 John 3:7 says "he who does what is right is righteous". Paul wrote in Rom. 5:19 that through Christ we are made righteous because apart from Him we can do nothing (John 15:5). When we die in righteous state, and stand before God for judgment, we will be declared righteous because we are indeed made righteous through Christ. In contrast imputation makes God declare us righteous while we are not righteous.
The phrase "justified by faith" appears four times in NT (Rom. 3:28, 5:1; Gal. 2:16, 3:24). The one in Rom. 3:28 is in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense. Both tenses do not indicate a completed justification by faith. If Scripture teaches faith alone justification, then Paul would write the phrase "justified by faith" is Greek passive perfect tense.
Thanks for your comment! Did you watch the video though? Quite a few, though not all, of your points were addressed:)
@@truthuntogodliness yes I did watch 95% of it. The questions I raised are not addressed in the video
In the video above, and the one before and after it, (it is after all a three part series) I deal at length with the “Legal fiction/external righteous only reductionism” argument. This objection fails insofar as it doesn’t take into account the unio mystica, that is the union of faith between believer and Christ which Holy Scripture explains with the marriage analogy, where the believer is so united with Christ that whatever is his also becomes the believers. Luther describes it like this,
”The third incomparable benefit of faith is that it unites the soul with Christ as a bride is united with her bridegroom. By this mystery, as the Apostle teaches, Christ and the soul become one flesh [Eph. 5:31-32]. And if they are one flesh and there is between them a true marriage-indeed the most perfect of all marriages, since human marriages are but poor examples of this one true marriage-it follows that everything they have they hold in common, the good as well as the evil. Accordingly the believing soul can boast of and glory in whatever Christ has as though it were its own, and whatever the soul has Christ claims as his own. Let us compare these and we shall see inestimable benefits. Christ is full of grace, life, and salvation. The soul is full of sins, death, and damnation. Now let faith come between them and sins, death, and damnation will be Christ’s, while grace, life, and salvation will be the soul’s; for if Christ is a bridegroom, he must take upon himself the things which are his bride’s and bestow upon her the things that are his. If he gives her his body and very self, how shall he not give her all that is his? And if he takes the body of the bride, how shall he not take all that is hers?”
The passage you raise from Ezekiel then, can easily be answered - though I take its scope/point of reference to concern primarily with the normative judgement of God, i.e. God will judge all men on the last day according to their works.
Then you also raise 33:12, which is somewhat surprising as we both hold unto a version of the non-imputation of sins to the believer. E.g. Rome teaches that the eternal punishment due to venial sins are not imputed to the believer but only temporal punishment, and Lutherans hold that no punishment is imputed to the believer, because we have died with Christ (Rom 6 and the first half of Rom 7) and are therefore free from the curse of the law, as the Law has no power to condemn anymore
That was already quite a bit. Concerning your final comments regarding faith I will simply point to the video, where I go over that concept. If you want to deal more with the issue of whether the cause of our justification is our inner righteousness or Christ’s imputed righteousness, then that is something I deal with in the following video
God bless
@@truthuntogodliness Ezekiel 18:20 says "the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself". Imputation of the Reformers implies that we have Christ' righteousness as alien/external righteousness and it does not make us righteous. At the same time our sins are imputed on or credited to Christ, who remains sinless, and He bore them on the cross two thousand years ago. In contrast Exek. 18:20 says that both righteousness and wickedness are not transferrable.
Luther interpreted 1 John 5:16-17 to mean that believers commit venial (non-deadly) sins and even those sins are imputed or credited to Christ. The SAME sins become deadly (mortal) ones to non-believers. In Luther's own words:
Therefore it is a pernicious error when the sophists distinguish among sins on the basis of the substance of the deed rather than on the basis of the persons. A believer’s sin is the same sin and sin just as great as that of the unbeliever. To the believer, however, it is forgiven and not imputed, while to the unbeliever it is retained and imputed. To the former it is venial; to the latter it is mortal. This is not because of a difference between the sins, as though the believer’s sin were smaller and the unbeliever’s larger, but because of a difference between the persons. (Luther's Works, Vol. 27, page 76)
The Catholic Church rejects imputation. When we sin, either deadly or non-deadly ones, grace will FIRST move and enables us to repent. If we freely cooperate (synergism) with that grace, our sins are forgiven through Sacrament of Penance. Luther rejected synergism and favoured monergism. The Church does teach that deadly sins carry eternal punishment, which are graciously cancelled through Sacrament of Penance. On the other hand, venial sins, carry temporal punishment, which the believers must undergo, either in their life or through purgatory. It is our punishment - God does not impute them to us, as you wrote. In contrast Luther taught that your sins (including punishment) are credited or imputed to Christ, who bore (was punished for) our sins. Catholics do believe that Christ died for our sins, but He willingly offer Himself for our atonement. Without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Heb. 9:22). According to the Reformers, Christ became legally a sinner as your sins are credited to Him, while being sinless - therefore God legally punished Him on the cross for our sins, instead of us.
The point I raise with Ezekiel 33:12 is the verse contradicts what Luther taught that we are righteous and sinner at the same time. In Luther's own words: "Thus a Christian man is righteous and a sinner at same time, holy and profane, an enemy of God and a child of God" (Luther's Works, Vol. 26, page 232)
@@justfromcatholic Ezekiel 18 isn't an argument against the Lutheran understanding unless one doesn't understand it. Ezekiel is talking about how things normatively are. You are reading an absolute nature into the passage which simply isn't found there. When Emperor Constantin was baptism shortly before his death, he was in no way a saint, yet he was absolved of all his prior sins and all his prior wickedness in baptism and when he died shortly after, none of his wickedness was counted against him nor was be judged on it. It was all forgiven and removed as Christ had atoned for it.
When the believer is baptized into Christ then Christ's righteousness becomes the believer's in an analogous manner to how a prince's castle will also becomes a peasant women's castle if the prince chose to marry her. And our wickedness is absolved and thus done away with. If you think Ezekiel 18 is at odds with the Lutheran understanding of imputation, then you have not yet understood it
Of cause Rome, too, believes in imputation. You can literally still get an indulgence which is nothing but the imputation of merit from the treasury of merit.
Christ bore our sins and took upon himself the guilt which was due to us so that by he suffering it we might go free. This is taught by Scripture and the fathers, as Saint Chrysostom writes,
"But he did not say this: but mentioned that which is far greater than this. What then is this? Him that knew no sin, he says, Him that was righteousness itself , He made sin,that is suffered as a sinner to be condemned, as one cursed to die. For cursed is he that hangs on a tree. For to die thus was far greater than to die; and this he also elsewhere implying, says, Becoming obedient unto death, yea the death of the cross. For this thing carried with it not only punishment, but also disgrace. Reflect therefore how great things He bestowed on you. For a great thing indeed it were for even a sinner to die for any one whatever; but when He who undergoes this both is righteous and dies for sinners; and not dies only, but even as one cursed; and not as cursed [dies] only, but thereby freely bestows upon us those great goods which we never looked for (...) And that you may learn what a thing it is, consider this which I say. If one that was himself a king, beholding a robber and malefactor under punishment, gave his well-beloved son, his only-begotten and true, to be slain; and transferred the death and the guilt as well, from him to his son, (who was himself of no such character,) that he might both save the condemned man and clear him from his evil reputation" - 2 Corinthians, Homily XI
This is literally the Lutheran position.
Of cause we are all still sinners. You pray God daily for the forgiveness of sins in Our Father because you sin habitually and daily. Your own sanctity is deficient and lacking, you have to struggle daily with concupiscence and mortify the flesh. Of cause you are a sinner. To deny this is wilful ignorance. But, and that is the glory of the gospel, you are a forgiven sinner, 1 Timothy 1:15, "This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief."
Am the chief. Present tense. Not past, not aorist, present tense.
I love discussing Imputation, but due to space limits, I’ll focus just on 2Cor5.21 and Logizomai. First, the consensus among the Church Fathers on “made sin” is to quote Rom8.3 which says “God sent His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh,” so the Incarnation is what is meant by Jesus being “made sin,” that is taking on a frail humanity like ours that is subject to suffering and death (see multiple patristic quotes below). The Conservative Protestant translations ESV and NASB also cross reference 2Cor5.21 to Rom8.3, and so does Calvin on Justification in Institutes 3.11.9. So the Protestant side is very wrong to presume imputation here, when the terminology isn’t there nor does logic or Scripture interprets Scripture suggest it. See my second comment for Abraham and Gen15/Rom4 and Logizomai.
Below is six church fathers explain "made sin" as incarnation in Rom8.3
>>Augustine: "on account of the likeness of sinful flesh in which He came, He was called sin" (Enchiridion, Ch41)
>>Augustine: "For God made Christ Himself to be sin for us, on account of the likeness of sinful flesh, that we may be made the righteousness of God in Him." (Commentary on Psalm 119, Ain, Section 122)
>>Gregory Nyssa: "He made Him to be sin for us, Who knew no sin,” giving once more the name of “sin” to the flesh." (Against Eunomius, Book 6, Section 1)
>>Gregory of Nazianzen: "And so the passage, The Word was made Flesh, seems to me to be equivalent to that in which it is said that He was made sin." (Letter To Cledonius [Epistle CI])
>>Hilary: “To condemn sin through sin in the flesh, He Who knew no sin was Himself made sin; that is, by means of the flesh to condemn sin in the flesh, He became flesh on our behalf but knew not flesh” (On the Trinity, Book 10, Section 47)
>>Ambrose: “Christ is said to have been made, but of a woman; that is, He was “made” as regards his birth from a Virgin … He Who in his flesh bore our flesh, in His body bore our infirmities and our curses … So it is written elsewhere: Who knew no sin, but was made sin for us” (Against Auxentius, Section 25)
>>Pope Leo the Great: "When the evangelist says, “The Word became flesh and dwelt in us,” and the Apostle, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself,” it was shown that the Only-begotten of the Most High Father entered on such a union with human humility, that, when He took the substance of our flesh and soul, He remained one and the same Son of God." (Sermon LXIII.1)
More at Nick's Catholic Blog. All sources online for free.
@@Nick-rb1dc Hello Nick! Thanks a lot for your comments. I really appreciate polite, thorough and content rich criticism. Due to the length and substance of your comments, I think a short video reply to them would be preferable than me writing out a couple of pages of text.
Also, are you the author/Nick of Nick's Catholic Blog?
God bless
@@truthuntogodliness yes, I write those posts.
@@Nick-rb1dc Do you have an email I can reach you on?:)
Second comment, you avoided the context of Rom4 and Gen15 regarding “faith credited as righteousness,” yet context is key for exegesis and how Logizomai is used. Rom 4.18-22 is routinely avoided, yet Paul explains 15.6 for us there. You said multiple times Abraham was a regenerate very obedient person. So it’s highly unlikely Abraham was inwardly sinful yet regarded by God as righteous. Using the Catholic principle of “Scripture interprets Scripture,” consider Nehemiah 9.8 which references Genesis 15.6, saying: “You are the Lord, who chose Abram and brought him out of Ur. >> You found his heart faithful before you, and made with him the covenant
The term Logizomai appears 100 times in the OT and 40 times in the NT, so a genuine look at the facts requires an actual survey of the term, not merely zero in on Rom 2.26, since that implies agenda driven study of Scripture instead of letting the evidence speak. The Hebrew/Greek term for Reckon never involves transferring or seeing something contrary to reality. In Rom 2.26, the point is that a Gentile who keeps the law (i.e. a regenerate Christian) will be granted the status of “circumcised” (i.e. covenant keeper) like Abraham was uncircumcised yet obeyed God, because keeping the law is understood as the EQUIVALENT of being circumcised. The point is not that God is going to randomly grant someone the status of circumcised. The term Logizomai is about making a correct mental evaluation, wherein something can hold the equivalent value of another. And in fact, Paul says such people are indeed circumcised in the heart by the Holy Spirit in 2.29, so God is indeed reckoning them as circumcised even though it is inward (the more important) and lacks the outward ceremony. I have a lot of articles on Imputation and Penal Substitution and such on “Nick’s Catholic Blog” that covers topics practically nobody else covers.
Justification by infusion, as baptism makes us perfect, as does Purgatory! We are not declared perfect, but MADE PERFECT, by God's grace working through us! If a Christian dies angry with others, he will not be declared righteous, but made righteous after death, by first having that anger removed before entering into the beatific vision! Indeed, we shall each be judged as we have judged others and we shall each be held accountable for every careless word we have uttered, as we shall also receive punishment for the BAD we have done in the body after death, as we must all strive for that holiness without which no one shall see the Lord! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink