There was a problem with this post, in which Part 1 was still here instead of Part 2. That problem has been corrected. Here is Part 2…
If we can only be righteous based on the righteousness of Christ being imputed to us (or some say “transferred” to us), what then of Abraham who did not have the benefit of Christ’s righteousness? This alone is how we can know that imputed righteousness is incorrect. We can also know it is incorrect because Christ Himself had an obligation to follow the moral law. Therefore, His righteousness could only be applied to His own account and not be paid to the accounts of others.
Some will interject here that Abraham believed in the future Christ. This is not wrong, however, Christ was not yet righteous, therefore, Abraham could not have been made righteous by something that had not yet happened. Christ was only righteous when He was on earth.
At this point, I probably have some readers upset with me. Well, then, let’s see what the Scriptures say.
Genesis 15:6, “Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.” What was reckoned to Abraham? Was Christ’s righteousness reckoned?
Romans 4:1-8, “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? ‘ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.’ Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: ‘BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.’”
Romans 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.” By what are we justified? Is it Christ’s righteousness?
James 2:14-26, “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,’ and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. But someone may well say, ‘You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.’ You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,’ and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.”
Let’s stop and make several important observations:
1. This word “imputed” is sometimes used in various versions/translations of the Bible. It means to reckon, count, compute, or account. The word does not mean transfer or transferred. This idea of transferring, as some define imputed righteousness, is not found in the Bible, and the whole tenor of the discussion changes if we use the word “transfer”. From a legal and an accounting concept, “imputed” only means that something is credited to my account.
2. What is reckoned or imputed? Righteousness is not imputed to us, and none of the verses quoted above remotely come close to aiding the idea that righteousness is imputed. It is only faith which is imputed to us as our act of righteousness. Genesis 15:6 says “it” was reckoned. Romans 4:6 explains that “faith” is reckoned. Were the Scriptures inspired by the Holy Spirit? If yes, then we accept the Romans 4:6 interpretation of Genesis 15:6. Faith is imputed as righteousness. Righteousness cannot be imputed as righteousness. This is absurd.
When we examine Genesis 15:6 closely, the “it” ties back to Abraham’s belief, which we understand to be faith. Genesis 15 and Romans 4 agree on this point. Faith is reckoned or imputed. Nowhere do we find in Scripture that Christ’s righteousness is imputed as righteousness. Rather, these two verses are plainly clear that faith is imputed as righteousness. This is critically important to notice, and we must get this right if our theology is to be correct.
The whole idea of substitutionary atonement is that the one taking the penalty for our sin did not sin, and no punishment was due to the substitute’s account. Thus, no defect was to be found in the substitute, which explains why the substitute was to be spotless and without defect. Leviticus 1:3, Deuteronomy 17:1, Hebrews 9:14, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15 The substitute can only serve as a substitute if no defect is found in the substitute.
3. Is justification distinct from maintaining righteousness or sanctification? This is an important question, for Romans 3:28 plainly says that we are justified by faith. We must note well the context of Romans 3 and 4. Paul is defining and describing the method of justification. That is, he is distinguishing justification as by faith rather than works of the law. His audience is primarily Jews who continued to hold to the law as the primary means of justification. Thus, Paul had to go back into the Old Testament to teach righteousness by faith apart from the law. Abraham’s righteousness came before obedience to the law, so any marks or signs of our righteousness (the law) were given only after the righteousness was obtained. Justification begins by faith, and this is rooted in the Old Testament.
4. Can a dead faith justify? This is the argument of James who plainly teaches that there must be faith plus a fulfillment of that faith. By works, James is not referring to works of the law or obedience to the law. Rather, he is referring to outward action, fruit, or evidence of an inward belief. James makes an extremely important statement in verse 24, which is that we are not justified by faith alone. Faith must initially be the sole actor in justification, however, the argument in James is that there must be fruit springing from that faith. Our outward action must be consistent with our inward faith. So, I ask again, can a dead faith justify?
In what did Abraham have faith? Abraham believed God. Then, when God required action, Abraham obeyed and did what God required. These are the works to which James refers. A living faith, once justified, earnestly seeks to obey God, imitate Christ, and live a righteous life before God. This is the fruit. A living faith produces works consistent with repentance and righteousness. Galatians 5:19-26
So, why was imputed righteousness introduced in the first place? It was a reforming reaction to the works-based salvation which had become the predominant teaching in the Roman Catholic Church. Imputed righteousness has its origins in faith alone (sola fide), meaning we are justified by faith alone and not by anything we can do of ourselves. However, as noted in James, sola fide is not Biblical.
Like this post? Subscribe to stay up to date on new posts.