Infused and Imparted–Esteemed among Humans, Abomination to God

That which is highly esteemed among humans is abomination in the sight of God. Luke 16:15

I often ask Calvinists about why they have not yet reformed from using the idea of “infused righteousness”.

I want to see the word “righteousness” in the Bible where it has the meaning of “infusion”. I am not asking to see the word “infusion”. I know it’s not there. But I want these Cavinists to show me some inner righteousness, which is not legal and imputed.

Many read Romans 6 with the assumption that it says that the Holy Spirit (or the church) unites us to Christ on the inside. The chapter does not say that, and we should not read it with that assumption.

It’s not enough to give a formal “I don’t deny that it also means the legal also”, if you then consistently look at texts and say “more than the forensic”, especially when the texts don’t mean anything other than the forensic. The legal death has effective inner consequences, but the consequences are not to be equated with the death or the righteousness.

Romans 6:20,21–”when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed. The end of those thing is death”

It is legal union with the death which has justified the elect and set them free. Before their justification, they may have already been ashamed of immorality. But they were not ashamed of their piety, their self-righteousness, or of their attempts to cooperate in the building of their own righteousness in attempts to gain assurance by a pattern of obedience to imperative. Now they count all that as trash (Philippians 3).

Christ’s righteousness is the merit of His work (His death). Christians are “servants of righteousness”. But it has not been demonstrated that “the righteousness” is both imputed and infused.

But Calvinists continue to talk like this: “I would say that the righteousness that is imputed to us in justification is the same righteousness that is also infused into us in our sanctification.”

Where does the Bible use the word “righteousness” in such a way that we should know that it means infused habits, imparted energies or “inside you” righteousness?

Many assume “if imputed, then also infused”, but if that were the case, then how could we from Scripture show any distinction between that righteousness which is “sanctification” and that righteousness which justifies? How could we avoid the path to Osiander?

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: imputation

Tags: , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

10 Comments on “Infused and Imparted–Esteemed among Humans, Abomination to God”

  1. Eileen Says:

    Great Post Mark……..thanks!

  2. MARK MCCULLEY Says:

    I am still waiting for any Bible verses which prove “infused righteousness”.

    Objection: God imputes this thing Christ purchased for the elect to the elect. I don’t deny that but If that’s the case, then I have to ask, where does Christ fit into that? Why don’t you talk more about Christ in your heart?

    mark:. Christ, besides being the earner who obtained all the blessings of salvation for the elect by His obedience, now does these two things. Christ both indwells (lives in) the justified and also intercedes (in heaven) for the elect.

    The indwelling—- Where faith is, Christ is. Luther was certainly correct about that truth, but it’s a mistake to locate the righteousness in the faith, or identify the righteousness with Christ’s life inside us (as Osiander did.)

    The work to earn righteousness for the elect was done outside of the elect. The righteousness which resulted and which is imputed is always outside of the elect. Bunyan explained: the righteousness is in heaven. The righteousness belongs not to us alone in our insides but to all the elect. The righteousness also belongs still to Christ.

    objection: Because if that is indeed the case, then to be blunt about it, we don’t even need Christ Himself anymore. He bought what we need, so now He can step back, go do whatever while God hands out what He purchased. Why would we have faith in Him? Our faith would be in what He purchased instead. How does that glorify Christ?

    mark: Of course Socinians who deny forensic justification often ask this, but I understand that you are not denying any forensic thing. You are only denying the only. You are merely deny the mere imputation. You want the forensic plus more, also Christ Himself the person living in you, but not only that, but let’s say it, Christ in us our righteousness.

    I agree that Christ the person is not a something to be imputed. I agree that the true Christ is given to live in the justified elect. We don’t need false alternatives, such as “HIM vs His work”. But we also need true antithesis. The “life of God inside the of the man” IS NOT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS.

    In By Faith Not By Sight, Richard Gaffin : “Typically in the Reformation tradition the hope of salvation is expressed in terms of Christ’s righteousness, especially as imputed to the believer…however, I have to wonder if ‘Christ in you’ is not more prominent as an expression of evangelical hope…” p110

    Gaffin wants to say that both the “in us” and the “outside us” combined are our hope. His hope “as well” is Christ’s life in us defined as the power to avoid sin despite our “incomplete progress, flawed by our continued sinning”.

    Instead of making a distinction between dead works (Hebrews 6:1,9:14) and “fruit for God” (Romans 7:4), Gaffin bases assurance partly on Christ’s life in us evidenced by our imperfect but habitual obedience.

    Gaffin takes Romans 2:13 to be describing Christians. The hope for future justification is not Christ’s death, resurrection, and intercession outside us ALONE. Gaffin cautions us to remember that the obedience (works, avoidance of sin) which he thinks factor into assurance come from God living in us. He gives grace the credit for our “breach with sin”.

    I agree that the gospel is not only about what Christ did outside of the elect for the elect. The gospel is also about the effectual call which results from election in Christ. One evidence of this effectual call is that the justified elect do not put their assurance in Christ’s life in us or even in what they call God’s effectual call.

  3. markmcculley Says:

    Calvin—The Fathers of Trent pretend that righteousness is twofold, as if we were justified partly by forgiveness of sins and partly by spiritual regeneration; or, to express their view in other words, as if our righteousness were composed partly of imputation, partly of quality. I maintain that it is one, and simple, and is wholly included in the gratuitous acceptance of God. I besides hold that it is without us, because we are righteous in Christ only. Let them produce evidence from Scripture, if they have any, to convince us of their doctrine. I, while I have the whole Scripture supporting me, will now be satisfied with this one reason, viz., that when mention is made of the righteousness of works, the law and the gospel place it in the perfect obedience of the law; and as that nowhere appears, they leave us no alternative but to flee to Christ alone, that we may be regarded as righteous in him, not being so in ourselves. (Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote)

  4. markmcculley Says:

    UVA first in the ACC basketball race, as of this moment. Anybody who can take out North Carolina is good in my book.

  5. markmcculley Says:

    Brain Gerrish, Grace and Gratitude, p 61—The familial imagery runs along side the forensic imagery, and finally supplants it. In the end, Christ saves us reconciles us, justifies us as God’s son who takes us for his brothers and sisters.

  6. markmcculley Says:

    Tianqi Wu —
    You can’t serve two masters. If imputed (grace), then not infused (works). If infused (works), then not imputed (grace).
    As long as you esteem what is infused in you, then you will think it is the “real deal”, and you will think imputed righteousness is merely a ticket to the race which you now run to become “really and personally” righteous.
    Roman Catholics too affirm “sola Gratia” and “solus Christus” – the perfect obedience of Christ was the infinite merit that purchased infused grace which causes sinners to become righteous.
    In this case, like the Roman Catholics, you don’t think “it’s finished” means the righteousness that God demands was done. You think it means the stage is set for men now to become righteous with the power of Holy Spirit. You don’t think the story of Christ is the ultimate point, but a prelude to your own story of running and persevering, which you think glorify God more than what Christ did back then.

  7. markmcculley Says:

    To get to the real question in the debate about impartation v imputation, we need to ask: what is transferred? Is guilt transferred to Christ, or is a corrupt “old nature” also transferred to Christ? (and if so, which comes first, and why does the second follow?)”….the theological tenor of scripture would be that Christ had the sin of the elect imputed to Him,not a transfer of a sinfullnature.The same as we are imputed His perfect righteousness,but have no righteousness imparted into us

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/union-is-not-the-indwelling-nature-and-made-sin-was-never-the-inward-nature/

  8. markmcculley Says:

    Hebrews 13: 15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

    I Peter 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”

    Romans 12 I appeal to you therefore, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.

  9. markmcculley Says:

    God imputes Christ’s righteousness
    faith does NOT impute Christ’s righteousness

    righteousness is imputed
    faith is NOT imputed

    God’s righteousness is Christ’s death
    God’s righteousness is NOT in us

    God’s righteousness is the external objective value of Christ’s death
    Christ’s righteousness is NOT imparted or infused

    God imputes Christ’s death to create effectual calling
    God does NOT effectually call in order to imputed Christ’s death

    God imputes Christ’s death to cause faith
    God does NOT impart faith in order to cause imputation

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/god-does-not-impute-faith/

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/if-its-faith-that-causes-you-to-be-united-to-christ-then-its-faith-that-causes-your-sins-to-be-imputed-to-christ/

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/faith-necessary-to-know-if-righteousness-has-been-imputed-to-us/

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/the-object-of-faith-is-imputed

    https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/faith-in-christs-death-not-faith-in-faith-or-the-working-of-faith/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: