As a throwback to a previous discussion we had, however…
I would still like to persuade you that the concept of “active obedience imputation” is simply not in the Bible, and is dishonoring to Christ.
(I’m not saying that you or anyone who teaches this error is meaning to dishonor Christ, of course).
You said, “…Because Jesus lived a perfect life, He was deemed a righteous Man.”
He did indeed live a perfect life, but this *demonstrated* His intrinsic inherent righteousness.
The Father didn’t “deem” Him righteous because he lived obedient to the Law.
The Father *knew* Jesus was righteous, before the incarnation, during the incarnation, and every moment after the incarnation. Jesus could be nothing else.
If His perfect obedient life was the thing that made Him “deemed” righteous, two questions emerge:
1. How many days or years were required before He was deemed righteous? Eight days, twelve years, thirty-three years?
If thirty-three years (the most agreed-upon view of His age at death), what if, God forbid, He had lived thirty-five years and broken God’s Law?
Absurd. He was the spotless lamb the moment He was born.
Which when pointed out sometimes prompts the sarcastic question, “Well, if that’s the case, He could have just been crucified as a baby and accomplished the same thing!”
Such silliness hardly deserves a response for those who teach that God is sovereign, and therefore chose the age and very moment for the crucifixion.
But the second question prompted by the error that He was deemed righteous by His perfect life is…
2. When was He NOT righteous? (I speak as a madman, to paraphrase Paul).
Of course He was never NOT righteous.
And therefore His perfect life is not the basis on which He was “deemed” righteous.
Finally,
The righteousness which is imputed to the believer is not the lifetime obedience of Christ. No Scripture even hints at that.
Yes, when Jesus was baptized, He said that it was to “fulfill all righteousness”, but…
1. To fulfill righteousness means to do that which righteousness (which He already had) calls for. He obeyed the Father, which is only natural for a righteous One.
2. His baptism was not even part of the Mosaic Law. It was simply something that He knew was asked of Him, probably in identifying with sinners.
I close by saying this, as a 5-point Calvinist:
There is NO Scripture which teaches that the “perfect life” or “active obedience” had anything to do with His righteousness, except to DEMONSTRATE it.
You may ask, “Why do all these Reformed teachers keep teaching the ‘Active Obedience Imputation’ then?”
Without judging anyone’s heart, I honestly believe it’s a man-made tradition, bordering on cultic, which “makes the Word of God of none effect” (at least in regard to that issue).
Q. So, if the righteousness which is imputed to believers is NOT the lifetime obedience of Jesus, what IS the righteousness which is imputed?
A. It’s the INHERENT, INTRINSIC righteousness of Jesus which He always had and never did not have, which was merely DEMONSTRATED by His perfect obedience.
Great video Les! I am encouraged with what God has been and is doing in your life bro. I am honored to be a part of this ministry even though I am so far away geographically and haven’t been contributing as much as I would like… (which I aim to change!)
Praise God for His amazing grace in all of our lives!
Les Lanphere
Sep 9th, 2010
@Terry, you know it’s funny, I actually had your words in the back of my mind when I wrote the script.
Since I know your argument (and I still need to come to a solid conclusion) I was trying to leave it more ambiguous than I normally would.
I was trying to say something like “Jesus lived righteously AS A MAN”… the thing we can’t/fail to do AS HUMANS. Not necessarily that he was proving anything to God, but being obedient in the flesh.
Sinless FLESH had to be crushed on the cross in order for the spotless lamb to to be a worthy atonement. Not that he earned it, but that he was actually innocent. Perhaps ‘deemed’ was a poor word choice.
…but then that doesn’t really deal with imputed righteousness at all.
Again I’ve been a bit lazy in not solidifying my ground for imputed righteousness, so I really need to do that.
Maybe you could help by giving me your Biblical exposition. Show me the texts.
I thought it was my imagination that you seemed to be leaving it somewhat “ambiguous”
But that’s good, under the circumstances. Your Berean attitude is good.
I always say that I’m willing to re-examine even the most fundamental of doctrines, provided the re-examination is by the Word of God. (Somebody wanna look at the deity of Christ or the Virgin Birth, or salvation by grace through faith? Let’s rumble…but only by sola scriptura…that’s my only ground rule.)
Anyway, in one sense it’s a big subject, but in another sense it’s as simple as Romans 5:18 —
“So then as through ONE transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through ONE act of righteousness [what can that ONE act possibly be but the cross?] there resulted justification of life to all men.”
Thus it wasn’t a lifetime of obedient living, but a single act that provided for our being declared righteous.
When Paul said he was not ashamed of the gospel, he pointed out “for in it is revealed the righteousness OF GOD”. This indicates that the righteousness of Jesus [the Man] is synonymous with the righteousness of God [likely Father, Son and Holy Spirit].
And why not? What was there in the virgin-born sinless Jesus that could be even slightly unrighteous? He was of the seed of the woman, divinely planted by God, not tainted with Adam’s sin.
The spotless Lamb.
Again, 2 Corinthians 5:21 speaks of the “righteousness OF GOD”, thereby making it synonymous with (or at least equal with) the righteousness of the Man Jesus:
“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might be become the righteousness OF GOD in Him [Jesus].”
His righteousness was thus intrinsic and inherent, and that’s the righteousness that was imputed to us by faith.
If you click on Chapter 11 “Justification” and then click on the red “[2]” for the scriptural proofs for the preceding statement (”imputing THE OBEDIENCE and satisfaction of Christ”)…
…you will see that the verses never even mention the obedience of Christ.
The verses do prove justification by faith, and imputation of righteousness, but no indication at all is made of the so-called “active obedience” of Christ.
Thus the prime source of the tradition passed the tradition down for almost 400 years, with readers typically just accepting the WCF clause at face value, assuming that the “scriptural proofs” really did “prove” the clause.
I find that fascinating.
Deidre
Dec 12th, 2010
Great message…but when are you posting more episodes?
William
Sep 8th, 2010
YES! Regenerated is all about preaching the gospel! Thank you Jesus for your grace in saving and keeping us!
elise (sola5girl)
Sep 8th, 2010
Well done. Looking forward to future episodes.
Kaye Barfield
Sep 8th, 2010
This is excellent! Good job Les.
Chad Tyler
Sep 8th, 2010
Great job on the video. Please email me more when you get them up. To God be all the glory
Terry Rayburn
Sep 8th, 2010
Good overall, Les.
You have the makings of a very fine teacher.
As a throwback to a previous discussion we had, however…
I would still like to persuade you that the concept of “active obedience imputation” is simply not in the Bible, and is dishonoring to Christ.
(I’m not saying that you or anyone who teaches this error is meaning to dishonor Christ, of course).
You said, “…Because Jesus lived a perfect life, He was deemed a righteous Man.”
He did indeed live a perfect life, but this *demonstrated* His intrinsic inherent righteousness.
The Father didn’t “deem” Him righteous because he lived obedient to the Law.
The Father *knew* Jesus was righteous, before the incarnation, during the incarnation, and every moment after the incarnation. Jesus could be nothing else.
If His perfect obedient life was the thing that made Him “deemed” righteous, two questions emerge:
1. How many days or years were required before He was deemed righteous? Eight days, twelve years, thirty-three years?
If thirty-three years (the most agreed-upon view of His age at death), what if, God forbid, He had lived thirty-five years and broken God’s Law?
Absurd. He was the spotless lamb the moment He was born.
Which when pointed out sometimes prompts the sarcastic question, “Well, if that’s the case, He could have just been crucified as a baby and accomplished the same thing!”
Such silliness hardly deserves a response for those who teach that God is sovereign, and therefore chose the age and very moment for the crucifixion.
But the second question prompted by the error that He was deemed righteous by His perfect life is…
2. When was He NOT righteous? (I speak as a madman, to paraphrase Paul).
Of course He was never NOT righteous.
And therefore His perfect life is not the basis on which He was “deemed” righteous.
Finally,
The righteousness which is imputed to the believer is not the lifetime obedience of Christ. No Scripture even hints at that.
Yes, when Jesus was baptized, He said that it was to “fulfill all righteousness”, but…
1. To fulfill righteousness means to do that which righteousness (which He already had) calls for. He obeyed the Father, which is only natural for a righteous One.
2. His baptism was not even part of the Mosaic Law. It was simply something that He knew was asked of Him, probably in identifying with sinners.
I close by saying this, as a 5-point Calvinist:
There is NO Scripture which teaches that the “perfect life” or “active obedience” had anything to do with His righteousness, except to DEMONSTRATE it.
You may ask, “Why do all these Reformed teachers keep teaching the ‘Active Obedience Imputation’ then?”
Without judging anyone’s heart, I honestly believe it’s a man-made tradition, bordering on cultic, which “makes the Word of God of none effect” (at least in regard to that issue).
Q. So, if the righteousness which is imputed to believers is NOT the lifetime obedience of Jesus, what IS the righteousness which is imputed?
A. It’s the INHERENT, INTRINSIC righteousness of Jesus which He always had and never did not have, which was merely DEMONSTRATED by His perfect obedience.
Blessings,
Terry
Roger Servin
Sep 8th, 2010
Great video Les! I am encouraged with what God has been and is doing in your life bro. I am honored to be a part of this ministry even though I am so far away geographically and haven’t been contributing as much as I would like… (which I aim to change!)
Praise God for His amazing grace in all of our lives!
Les Lanphere
Sep 9th, 2010
@Terry, you know it’s funny, I actually had your words in the back of my mind when I wrote the script.
Since I know your argument (and I still need to come to a solid conclusion) I was trying to leave it more ambiguous than I normally would.
I was trying to say something like “Jesus lived righteously AS A MAN”… the thing we can’t/fail to do AS HUMANS. Not necessarily that he was proving anything to God, but being obedient in the flesh.
Sinless FLESH had to be crushed on the cross in order for the spotless lamb to to be a worthy atonement. Not that he earned it, but that he was actually innocent. Perhaps ‘deemed’ was a poor word choice.
…but then that doesn’t really deal with imputed righteousness at all.
Again I’ve been a bit lazy in not solidifying my ground for imputed righteousness, so I really need to do that.
Maybe you could help by giving me your Biblical exposition. Show me the texts.
Terry Rayburn
Sep 9th, 2010
I thought it was my imagination that you seemed to be leaving it somewhat “ambiguous”
But that’s good, under the circumstances. Your Berean attitude is good.
I always say that I’m willing to re-examine even the most fundamental of doctrines, provided the re-examination is by the Word of God. (Somebody wanna look at the deity of Christ or the Virgin Birth, or salvation by grace through faith? Let’s rumble…but only by sola scriptura…that’s my only ground rule.)
Anyway, in one sense it’s a big subject, but in another sense it’s as simple as Romans 5:18 —
“So then as through ONE transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through ONE act of righteousness [what can that ONE act possibly be but the cross?] there resulted justification of life to all men.”
Thus it wasn’t a lifetime of obedient living, but a single act that provided for our being declared righteous.
When Paul said he was not ashamed of the gospel, he pointed out “for in it is revealed the righteousness OF GOD”. This indicates that the righteousness of Jesus [the Man] is synonymous with the righteousness of God [likely Father, Son and Holy Spirit].
And why not? What was there in the virgin-born sinless Jesus that could be even slightly unrighteous? He was of the seed of the woman, divinely planted by God, not tainted with Adam’s sin.
The spotless Lamb.
Again, 2 Corinthians 5:21 speaks of the “righteousness OF GOD”, thereby making it synonymous with (or at least equal with) the righteousness of the Man Jesus:
“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might be become the righteousness OF GOD in Him [Jesus].”
His righteousness was thus intrinsic and inherent, and that’s the righteousness that was imputed to us by faith.
Praise to Him.
Terry Rayburn
Sep 9th, 2010
By the way, a historical note:
The main source for the Active Obedience Imputation “tradition” is the Westminster Confession of Faith.
What’s interesting is to examine the WCF text “with Scriptural proofs”, under the section “Justification”.
As of this writing you can go here.
If you click on Chapter 11 “Justification” and then click on the red “[2]” for the scriptural proofs for the preceding statement (”imputing THE OBEDIENCE and satisfaction of Christ”)…
…you will see that the verses never even mention the obedience of Christ.
The verses do prove justification by faith, and imputation of righteousness, but no indication at all is made of the so-called “active obedience” of Christ.
Thus the prime source of the tradition passed the tradition down for almost 400 years, with readers typically just accepting the WCF clause at face value, assuming that the “scriptural proofs” really did “prove” the clause.
I find that fascinating.
Deidre
Dec 12th, 2010
Great message…but when are you posting more episodes?