The Doctrine of Imputation (Romans

[@monicashuart-ls1hw]

We need to learn more about both deaths, physical and spiritual

[@randysawyer7935]

So good ❤ love this sermon

[@reformedcatholic457]

"The word imputation comes directly from the Latin. It is an accounting term; it means “to apply to one’s account.” Expenses are debited and income is credited. The old King James word is “reckon.” In theological terms, we speak of a double imputation that takes place in justification. This double imputation is taught in texts such as 2 Corinthians 5:21, where Paul says plainly, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” Here we read that our sin is imputed to Christ. We are the offending party. He is guiltless. He perfectly kept the law. Yet, on the cross, God poured out His wrath on Christ. Why? Because our sin was imputed to Christ. Christ took upon Himself our sin. Our great debit was put on His account. Christ paid the horrific penalty as the cup of God’s wrath was poured out upon Him. There is also a second imputation. Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us. He not only takes our debit, but we also get His credit. Christ paid the penalty we could never satisfy, but He also kept the law perfectly, which we can’t do either. Consequently, God credits to us His righteousness. We stand before God clothed in Christ’s righteousness. We can actually say that we are saved by works-not at all by our works, but instead by Christ’s works, His perfect obedience, on our behalf. One theologian said that two of the most beautiful words in the Bible are for us. Jesus lived and died-and rose again-for us. All of His work was done on our behalf." Taken from the article below. Doctrine of imputation ligonier statement of Christology. www.ligonier.org/blog/doctrine-imputation-ligonier-statement-christology/

[@leepicker67]

There are THREE imputations. Your are correct on the TWO that you mentioned, but you neglected the third application: that being that God IMPUTES the guilt and consequences of Adam's sin to us by decree. The decree is DYNAMIC not static. I certainly affirm the federal headship of Adam e.g. when Adam sinned, I sinned. What was the consequence to Adam? He DIED spiritually, but not physically at the moment he sinned. He LOST his holiness. That "holiness" was not a single attribute BUT that holiness was over EVERY attribute of his nature. If we look to the Shorter Catechism of the Westminster Confession, Answer 4, to Question 4, "What is God?" we read: "God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth." Those are his "attributes" which describe His "nature." The three adjectives of "infinite, eternal, and unchangeable" are EXCLUSIVE to the Trinity. When God created Adam in "His image", Adam was endowed with the SAME attributes e.g. being, wisdom, power, holiness, goodness, justice and truth. I believe that "holiness" should more properly be included with the adjectives rather than being with the attributes. Only the Trinity has intrinsic holiness. Thus, the Trinity and ONLY the Trinity is holy in being, holy in wisdom, holy in power, holy in goodness, holy in justice and holy in truth. When Adam sinned, his "nature" became "corrupted" because he no longer had holiness. I believe is is a misnomer to say that we inherit a "sin nature" through natural generation. I think what we inherit through natural generation is a nature devoid of holiness which then "corrupts" the attributes of our human nature. It is decreed by God that it be so. That doesn't mean He corrupts your nature, He just allows it to proceed to be corrupted because holiness has been lost. There has been much controversy raised against the "imputation" of Adam's sin to his posterity. "It's not FAIR!;" "It's not just, that I should be held to account for and punished for a sin that Adam committed;" are usually the cry. God DECREED it to be so!! You can argue with Him about it when you see Him. IF you don't think it APPLIES to YOU, then how do you explain the fact that someday YOU WILL DIE? The human nature of Jesus had EXACTLY the same six attributes that his mother was endowed with by natural generation because she was true human being, BUT his human nature was HOLY. Adam was holy before he sinned. The uninstructed often ask: "How is it that Jesus did not inherit a "sin nature" or "corrupt nature" from his mother?" The answer usually given is that the "human" Jesus didn't have a human father." I suppose that is an answer, HOWEVER, Jesus is declared to have had a true human nature. Here's MY answer. The DECREE to allow that human nature of Jesus to be subject to "corruption" was "suspended" by the Father because His human nature was HOLY. I say "suspended" because, in fact, everyone's sin was "imputed" to him and his human nature DID die? So even Jesus didn't totally escape the imposition of the decree. For those of you concerned about "fairness" and "justice" with regard to the imputation of Adam's sin to mankind, how was it either "fair" of "just" that the sins of the whole world were imputed to Jesus; the perfect man who NEVER sinned? How is it "fair" or "just" that he should die? In conclusion, if it is unfair and unjust that Adam's sin be imputed to YOUR account. How's is it "fair" or "just" that the righteousness of Jesus be imputed to YOUR account?

[@lequitahartfield2886]

Well said .

[@randyhunter6625]

Excellent!

[@DanielParvin1]

Praise God for imputing the sins of his people to Jesus and for imputing Jesus’ perfect righteousness to his people by grace alone and through faith alone!

[@TheGospelAssociates]

I agree with you Dr. RC

[@lawrencestanley8989]

John Murray has a great book on this topic entitled, "The Imputation of Adam's Sin." It should be required reading for everyone in the "Church of Christ," and for every "Leightonist."

[@Jacob5297]

Articulus is the Latin word for Joint as in knee joint. If our knee joint is injured we cannot stand. So it is with the Article of faith that determines whether the ekklesia will stand or fall...Sola fide...As Luther said at the Diet of Worms.... Here I stand.

[@MK-wh1pi]

If you have Sproul's latest commentary on Romans, see chapter 18: "Imputation". The chapter undoubtedly comes from this message.

[@Rich-vp4ih]

Where can one find the document "The Celebration of the Gospel? (18:40 min)

[@barbaraleonard7759]

I believe in the idea of original sin being corporate in its nature. We were in Adam before he fell just as we were in him after he fell. He was the progenitor of the human race as created by God. God said that if you eat it you will surely die and we know the consequence of sin is death. To believe that our spirits are immortal and were in Adam before he fell is not biblical. The genetics of us were in Adam not the spirit of us. Don’t be philosophical about this point. Study the Bible. There is no immortality of the soul. Only when we are resurrected will we become sin free.

[@salvinobarbera3526]

I totally agree. An excellent explanation on this verse and Ps 51 is given by Dr. Michael Heier.

[@thebookofrevelationreveale4722]

“And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham BELIEVED God, and it was IMPUTED unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.” ‭‭James‬ ‭2:23‬ ‭KJV‬‬ “Even the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD which is BY FAITH of Jesus Christ unto all AND UPON ALL them that BELIEVE for there is no difference:” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:22‬ ‭ “For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the GIFT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭5:17‬ ‭KJV‬‬ “For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience OF ONE shall many be MADE RIGHTEOUS. ‭‭Romans‬ ‭5:19‬ ‭KJV‬‬ “For they being ignorant of GODS righteousness, and going about to establish THEIR OWN righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness OF GOD .” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:3‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[@savoirfaire6181]

This is highly philosophical stuff from an obvious mover and shaker within the modern power structures of religious tradition.... However, I'm not familiar with most of these ideas being taught in the Bible itself. He's turning everything into technical language that wouldn't be familiar to the Apostle. The doctrine of the old and new man is outlined here by Paul in Rom. 5. It's simply put that what Adam did as the original man, Jesus more than "undid" as the new man. Simple enough, assuming that we understand that Jesus was a man who came to do that very thing (1Jn. 3:8) The precise mechanism of how the reversal works is not indicated by Paul as of yet in Romans 5, but it seems to demand suffering and perseverance, (vs. 3) and to directly change people's behavior in the process (vs. 19). So it is apparent that one is looking for a mechanism that produces outward changes. The boiled down idea is that if a sin can corrupt and bring death, then an act of righteousness can make righteous and bring life. If one were to trace this around in Paul, then this ties in the "in Christ" ideas, and specifically "with" Christ's death and resurrection, which immediately follow in the next several chapters. Union with Christ and New Creation stuff, which is so prominent in Paul. Paul apparently didn't have such a pervasive idea about imputation as is outlined in Sproul's message, however, he did use the term "imputation" in vs. 13-14 to describe that humans die even when they are not aware and thus responsible for their personal offenses against God, as such. That makes perfect sense with what we know from Genesis: People died because they didn't have access to the tree of life, not because they ate pork or married their sister. There's not much mystery there to unpack. Access to the tree was taken away as a consequence of Adam's sin and later, the flood. There are not two types of guilt in the Bible, one personal and the other "original." Ezekiel 18 makes it clear that people are guilty only for their own sins, not that of their parents. Further, it says that people who live righteous lives will live and those who live wicked lives will die. That's what Romans 2, 6 and 8 say as well, which are all in the immediate context of Rom. 5. Yet it is also clear that we suffer the consequences of our ancestor's sins, and we know that from experience as well as the Bible.... That's just a part of life. When God created man, he created him as someone who bore responsibility. Romans 6 goes on to make clearwhat it means have the old man crucified and be raised with the new man. Thus to partake of the benefits of the act or righteousness that Romans 5 described. It results in a change in bodily behavior that leads to eternal life 6:22. We follow the Spirit and suffer with Christ so that we won't die, but will live and be raised with him (Rom. 8). So our union with Christ is apparently both imitative and Spiritual in nature. Spiritual union has to do with mindset, and of course where our mind is set, our feet will soon follow. Beautiful and simple ideas, but very different from what I'm hearing from popular teachers like this one. Biblical Christianity is always something that must be sought in the Bible, not among the philosophers.

[@Ggeg0000]

have you listened to the video? have you read Romans 5? You said: Paul apparently didn't have such a pervasive idea about imputation as is outlined in Sproul's message, however, he did use the term "imputation" in vs. 13-14 to describe that humans die even when they are not aware and thus responsible for their personal offenses against God, 15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for (AB)many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For (AC)the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but THE FREE GIFT FOLLOWING MANY TRESPASSES BROUGHT JUSTIFICATION. 17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the FREE GIFT OF RIGHTEOUSNESS reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. 18 Therefore, as one trespass[f] led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness[g] leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, SO BY THE ONE MAN'S OBEDIENCE THE MANY WILL BE MADE RIGHTEOUS. So, We are justified by the free gift of righteousness

[@TayloringSwiftly]

Lovely. Was musing over this today and met upon your "discourse" . Thank you.

[@chrisstevens1156]

thank you... good thoughts

[@savoirfaire6181]

​@@Ggeg0000 Yes and yes. I don't remember all those CAPS in the text, however. Don't confuse your pre-conceived theology for what Paul is actually saying. Paul was not a 16th Century French Lawyer and has little to do with that way of thinking.

[@isaachinojosa9863]

Are you saying that salvation is based on works?

[@brianhyde5900]

As human beings we are fallible and vulnerable. This is because we are evolving in consciousness. Like children, we get things "right" and we get things "wrong". God has children -- us. God knows we get things wrong and has allowed for that just like we do with OUR children. We would not be children, otherwise. So the idea that God imputes our wrongs to us as "sins" imo, is simply not true, no more than it's true t...hat we impute our children's wrongs to them as "sins". How could God impute wrong to beings who have yet to evolve to that place where they realize what they are doing IS wrong? How could God impute wrong to beings who are themselves the arbiter of what is wrong, as they are persuaded? It's a matter of conscience. What may be wrong for you, may not be wrong for me. No man is another man's conscience. God is not our conscience---we are. God is not a force of law; God is a constraint of Love. Love convicts and brings about change, by its virtue of its own attraction. Indeed, Love is the greatest attraction for change there is. Law condemns, but cannot bring change; on the contrary it repulses. Moreover, Love keeps no record of wrong. If our humanity were fully evolved, it would be infallible and doing wrong would not even be a consideration. Within our human sphere, however, our fallibility notwithstanding, there are consequences for our actions. But WE, as self-accountable stewards of our lives, are SELF-accountable. It's an unwritten law that we reap what we sow. And if for some reason it appears that we, or others are not, rest assured those consequences do remain, but because we are all self-accountable, imo our own Spirit will deal with the consequences in the afterlife, but there it will be within Love and without ego. In the meantime, secular criminal law deals with criminal offences, for criminal offences are imputed under secular criminal law. Otherwise, making mistakes is how we humans learn. It's all part of our natural development within the evolution of consciousness.