Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both?

Posted By: Rick H

Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/18/11 04:40 PM

Lets start with describing both. Imputed righteousness is the concept that the "righteousness of Christ ... is imputed to true believers that is, treated as if it were theirs through faith. This acceptance is also referred to as justification. Thus this doctrine is practically synonymous with justification by faith. So thus, those who accept Christ have their sins covered by His righteosness and are justified.

Now in the process of sanctification, the heart and mind of the true belivers are changed by the Holy Spirit. This is where 'Imparted Righteousness' comes in. Imparted righteousness, is that gracious gift of God given at the moment of the 'new birth' when one accepts Christ, which enables a Christian disciple to strive for holiness and sanctification.

From the Wesleyan Arminianian background, Adventist get the belief that imparted righteousness works in tandem with imputed righteousness. Imputed righteousness is the righteousness of Jesus credited to the Christian, enabling the Christian to be justified; imparted righteousness is what God does in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit after justification, working in the Christian to enable and empower the process of sanctification (and, in Wesleyan thought, Christian perfection).


So my question is, which one did the thief on the cross get (and by extension what is there for us), or could it have been both, and if so, how?
Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/18/11 07:36 PM

Imputed and imparted righteousness are simultaneous realities for those who experience genuine, thorough rebirth. Both the Thief and Paul (two extremes) were justified and sanctified the instant they experienced rebirth. Both were reborn with all the fruits of the Spirit, all the righteous attributes of God's character. Not one was missing. The only difference between the two was the length of time each had to mature in the fruits of the Spirit after they experienced rebirth.

"When we live by faith on the Son of God, the fruits of the Spirit will be seen in our lives; not one will be missing. {DA 676.4} "All righteous attributes of character dwell in God as a perfect, harmonious whole, and every one who receives Christ as a personal Saviour is privileged to possess these attributes. {COL 330.2}

The idea that born-again believers are reborn with all or some of their sinful habits in tact and then gradually thereafter swap sinful traits of character for sinless ones does not harmonize with the biblical explanation and description of rebirth and growth in grace. However, the reality is, most people do not experience genuine, thorough rebirth in God's appointed way. Many, so many, are baptized and join the church before self is crucified.

"The minds of many are clouded with unbelief because those who unite with the church as the chosen of God do not reveal the virtues that are the fruits of the Spirit. Joining the church is not a sure evidence that a man has joined himself to Christ. The new birth is a rare experience in this age of the world. This is the reason why there are so many perplexities in the churches. Many, so many, who assume the name of Christ are unsanctified and unholy. They have been baptized, but they were buried alive. Self did not die, and therefore they did not rise to newness of life in Christ. Thousands who claim to be religious are not Christians. {12MR 51}
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/18/11 08:10 PM

Originally Posted By: MM
Imputed and imparted righteousness are simultaneous realities for those who experience genuine, thorough rebirth.


This is a good point.

If one looks at the writings of Jones and Waggoner, one can see the emphasis that justification involves a change of heart; it's not simply a book entry. To "justify" means "to make righteous," which involves the writing of the law in the heart and mind. Waggoner, in particular, repeatedly emphasized this.

In the SOP, she uses the term "imputed" at times to refer to a change of heart, sometime to refer more to the "book entry."
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/18/11 08:31 PM

Here's an example:

Quote:
He testifies that through his imputed righteousness the believing soul shall obey the commandments of God. {ST January 16, 1896, par. 7}
Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/19/11 09:51 PM

Quote:
To "justify" means "to make righteous," which involves the writing of the law in the heart and mind. Waggoner, in particular, repeatedly emphasized this.

This definition disturbs me. In my opinion, it should be avoided, because of its similarity with the Catholic view. By the way, is there any way in which the definition of "to make righteous" includes the concept of "to declare righteous"?
Posted By: Rick H

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/20/11 11:28 AM

Originally Posted By: Rosangela
Quote:
To "justify" means "to make righteous," which involves the writing of the law in the heart and mind. Waggoner, in particular, repeatedly emphasized this.

This definition disturbs me. In my opinion, it should be avoided, because of its similarity with the Catholic view. By the way, is there any way in which the definition of "to make righteous" includes the concept of "to declare righteous"?


I would have to agree, as the disciples were justified with all their faults and failures. So they were not 'made' righteous, it was definitely more of they were 'declared'. The thief on the cross was not made righteous when he showed his faith, he was still the same thief with all his failings, but by faith he was justified.
Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/20/11 09:26 PM

Rick!..., and Rosangela. grin

It's being made righteous. wink cool

Rick, you sound somewhat RC with at least your first line. Rosangela: RCism has "infused righteousness", obtained exclusively by participating in their 7(?) sacraments...Rather, to believe and be justified is being converted - daily, to experience the rebirth and new heart: imputed righteousness is not just 'declared', but is also experienced by receiving the HS, which is the mind of Christ which we have and by which we are righteous indeed, by faith.

Imparted righteousness can then only be handled by us and built into a Godly character, since we beforehand have the spiritual mind imputed, to live righteously, to live toward God: imputed righteousness is truly also "in us", receiving the mind of Christ. The new heart is the experience of justification which qualifies us for heaven, renewable & renewed daily by the faithful.

Our list of faults, etc, of character/personality do not prevent us being made righteous as we experience justification by faith, for they do not affect our spiritual awakening. Our mind is made righteous in practice, not our character (see below), at conversion of justification, so that living righteously may witness our conversion: reflecting Christ's character is evidence of our experience of justification and renewal of our minds.

Our Christian character is potentially all righteous at conversion - for Christ is our righteousness and we have him in us by his Spirit from then, but we tend not to realise and practise all Christlikeness immediately...Repenting of sinful traits step by step to develop Christian character does not mean we are either not fully qualified with Christ's imputed mind all the way along or his full character is not ours all the way.

It is mild but definite confusion to say justification is only "for us" but sanctification is in contrast "in us": it's true revival to recognise indeed both justification and sanctification as comprising the Gospel up to probation closing - some Adventists think only justification is "required" for salvation, but sorting out what each involves is indeed the preparation for revival and reformation, and more... grin cool

Also keeping clearly in mind that imparted righteousness is being fitted for heaven - the final generation indeed walking into heaven without seeing death, and is based on the qualification of imputed righteousness making us righteous, gives us the remnant message finishing the Reformation and preparing for Jesus' soon return. smile
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/20/11 11:50 PM

Originally Posted By: Rosangela
T:To "justify" means "to make righteous," which involves the writing of the law in the heart and mind. Waggoner, in particular, repeatedly emphasized this.

R:This definition disturbs me.In my opinion, it should be avoided, because of its similarity with the Catholic view.


Both Jones and Waggoner used this definition. It's easy to see the difference in their explanation and the Catholic explanation.

Quote:
By the way, is there any way in which the definition of "to make righteous" includes the concept of "to declare righteous"?


It does so implicitly, as explained here by Jones:

Quote:
In creating all things in the beginning, God set forth Christ to declare the word which should cause all things to exist. Christ did speak the word only, and all things were. And in redemption, which is creation over again, God set forth Christ to declare the word of righteousness. And when Christ speaks the word only, it is so. His word, whether in creating or in redeeming, is the same.

“The worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Once there were no worlds, nor was there any of the material which now composes the worlds. God set forth Christ to declare the word which should produce the worlds, and the very material of which they should be composed.

“He spake, and it was.” Before He spoke, there were no worlds; after He spoke, the worlds were there. Thus the word of God spoken by Jesus Christ is able to cause that to exist which has no existence before the word is spoken, and which, except for that word, never could have existence.

In this same way precisely it is in man’s life. In man’s life there is no righteousness. In man there is no righteousness from which righteousness can appear in his life. But God has set forth Christ to declare righteousness unto and upon man. Christ has spoken the word only, and in the darkened void of man’s life there is righteousness to everyone who will receive it. Where, before the word is received, there was neither righteousness nor anything which could possibly produce righteousness, after the word is received, there is perfect righteousness and the very Fountain from which it springs. The word of God received by faith–that is, the word of God expected to do what that word says and depended upon to do what it says–produces righteousness in the man and in the life where there never was any before; precisely as, in the original creation, the word of God produced worlds where there never were any worlds before. He has spoken, and it is so to everyone that believeth: that is, to every one that receiveth. The word itself produces it. (RH Jan. 17, 1899)
Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 12:07 AM

Quote:
Both Jones and Waggoner used this definition. It's easy to see the difference in their explanation and the Catholic explanation.

But should it be used if it gives a false impression to others?

Quote:
It does so implicitly, as explained here by Jones

I got the impression that "to declare righteous" includes the concept of "to make righteous," not the other way around. "He spake, and it was."
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 12:46 AM

Originally Posted By: Rosangela
T:Both Jones and Waggoner used this definition. It's easy to see the difference in their explanation and the Catholic explanation.

R:But should it be used if it gives a false impression to others?


I think we should be careful of any language we use, in terms of taking into account the background of the people we're talking to. So for a given person, "set right" might be a better choice than "make righteous," for example.

However, if there's time to explain what's meant, such as in the Jones quote I provided, or in the explanations of Waggoner, I don't think there would be a problem, as I think the explanations are very clear.

Quote:
T:It does so implicitly, as explained here by Jones

R:I got the impression that "to declare righteous" includes the concept of "to make righteous," not the other way around. "He spake, and it was."


They go together. The declaration of righteousness is how God makes the person righteous.
Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 01:26 AM

That isn't the problem... wink cool

God's word is creative, indeed, but..., how would God's judicial declaration of righteousness actually make us righteous: creating righteousness out of nothing, in us, isn't how it works, is it, since it is rebirth, receiving the presence of God himself to bring in righteousness, that makes us righteous by faith in the experience of justification. Basically, God does something to make us righteous, not say anything: giving us the Holy Spirit is an action, not a statement of truth.

Now...the confusion arises, for we teach that justification by faith is a declaration of righteousness "for us" and outside of us, while sanctification is the change "in us" of the Holy Spirit arriving and changing us. This contradicts any possibility of an inner renewal for justification - even if merely spoken by God, since justification is solely and exclusively outside of us - barring the Spirit's entrance into our consciousness.

Do we receive the Spirit of God of conversion when we are justified and qualified for heaven or only once we participate in sanctification? wink cool
Posted By: Rick H

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 12:20 PM

Ok, then if you go in that direction, explain how Peter after accepting Christ and being 'Justified' aka "made righteous", cut off another mans ear, denied Christ, argued with Paul, didnt accept Gentiles till the vision. Peter was not instantly "made righteous", it was "counted unto him" by faith, and the process of "Sanctification" began.....is how it seems to read from scripture.
Posted By: Rick H

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 03:31 PM

The thief on the cross thoughts and desires did not changed when he was justified, but his sentence was changed, becasue of his faith, he was pardoned for his life of sin and given eternal life.

Luke 23 (New International Version 1984, ©1984)
39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”

40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”

42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[f]”

43 Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”
Posted By: Rosangela

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 04:51 PM

Quote:
how would God's judicial declaration of righteousness actually make us righteous: creating righteousness out of nothing, in us, isn't how it works, is it, since it is rebirth, receiving the presence of God himself to bring in righteousness, that makes us righteous by faith in the experience of justification. Basically, God does something to make us righteous, not say anything: giving us the Holy Spirit is an action, not a statement of truth.

Justification is pardon. When, led by the Holy Spirit, you believe in God's love and forgiveness, in heaven God declares you forgiven and, on earth, God's love and forgiveness become real in your life, changing your heart. Both happen at the same time.

God's forgiveness is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from condemnation. It is not only forgiveness for sin, but reclaiming from sin. It is the outflow of redeeming love that transforms the heart. {MB 114.1}

Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 06:57 PM

Originally Posted By: Rosangela
Quote:
how would God's judicial declaration of righteousness actually make us righteous: creating righteousness out of nothing, in us, isn't how it works, is it, since it is rebirth, receiving the presence of God himself to bring in righteousness, that makes us righteous by faith in the experience of justification. Basically, God does something to make us righteous, not say anything: giving us the Holy Spirit is an action, not a statement of truth.

Justification is pardon. When, led by the Holy Spirit, you believe in God's love and forgiveness, in heaven God declares you forgiven and, on earth, God's love and forgiveness become real in your life, changing your heart. Both happen at the same time.

God's forgiveness is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from condemnation. It is not only forgiveness for sin, but reclaiming from sin. It is the outflow of redeeming love that transforms the heart. {MB 114.1}

So, we agree that justification includes a heart experience, indeed(?). smile

This renewal of the heart at the very beginning of the walk/life of faith - with that life's ups & downs..., enables a life of obedience to Christ's commandments, not so; otherwise, there is no renewal with which we may choose to obey, is there? Sanctification cannot be renewal of mind and transformation of character - two things at once: we obey because we are renewed, not both in one step even though they are linked as separate events, of course.

Since imputed righteousness qualifies us for heaven, how can pardon alone - without regeneration or receiving the Holy Spirit - qualify us for heaven in this life? wink cool
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 09:03 PM

Colin, regarding post 132825, are you disagreeing with what A. T. Jones wrote, or with how I interpreted what he wrote?
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/21/11 09:12 PM

Originally Posted By: Rosangela
Justification is pardon.


Or "forgiveness." Indeed, it is, which can be seen from Romans 5:1-7. Quoting verse 7:

Quote:
Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.


This is speaking of the blessing of justification by faith.

Quote:
When, led by the Holy Spirit, you believe in God's love and forgiveness, in heaven God declares you forgiven and, on earth, God's love and forgiveness become real in your life, changing your heart. Both happen at the same time.


Agreed. Justification, or pardon, isn't simply a book entry in heaven, but a tangible change in the persons heart and life.

Quote:
God's forgiveness is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from condemnation.


Right, and this is evident from the original meaning of the word "forgiveness" in Greek, which involves "bearing away." So the isn't merely forgiven in a technical sense, but actually born away.

Quote:
It is not only forgiveness for sin, but reclaiming from sin.


Which this is getting at.

Quote:
It is the outflow of redeeming love that transforms the heart. {MB 114.1}


This is a nice quote. Here's another dealing with this same concept:

Quote:
Notwithstanding our unworthiness, we are ever to bear in mind that there is One that can take away sin and save the sinner. Every sin acknowledged before God with a contrite heart, He will remove. {TM 92.2}
Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/22/11 01:21 AM

Originally Posted By: Tom
Colin, regarding post 132825, are you disagreeing with what A. T. Jones wrote, or with how I interpreted what he wrote?

Christ is Creator and Re-creator, but making believers righteous is far more than just saying so - even for God: giving us his Spirit. Dying to sin & self may be the declaration of righteousness of God.

The beginning of salvation for us isn't just pardon: it's death to self, for when Christ died for all, all died.
Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/22/11 01:28 AM

Originally Posted By: Rick H
Ok, then if you go in that direction, explain how Peter after accepting Christ and being 'Justified' aka "made righteous", cut off another mans ear, denied Christ, argued with Paul, didnt accept Gentiles till the vision. Peter was not instantly "made righteous", it was "counted unto him" by faith, and the process of "Sanctification" began.....is how it seems to read from scripture.

Peter confessed Christ as prompted by the Holy Spirit of the Father. We turn from the Spirit of Jesus when we sin, opting for the old covenant apart from God: doesn't change the reality of walking in the Spirit when we do. grin We have an advocate with the Father, and we are justified by the Spirit's presence whenever we repent and confess our sins.

The two covenants mean that each day we may and must choose between living with the Spirit or our own way, by our own will and strength - unsanctified will. Submitting to the Spirit is experiencing justification: what happens because of that submission is sanctification.
Posted By: Tom

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/22/11 04:35 AM

Quote:
T:Colin, regarding post 132825, are you disagreeing with what A. T. Jones wrote, or with how I interpreted what he wrote?

C:Christ is Creator and Re-creator, but making believers righteous is far more than just saying so - even for God:


This comment is making me think you didn't read the article.

Quote:
giving us his Spirit. Dying to sin & self may be the declaration of righteousness of God.

The beginning of salvation for us isn't just pardon: it's death to self, for when Christ died for all, all died.


I think you misunderstood what I said, and didn't read the article. The whole point, of both Jones and Waggoner, which I'm echoing, is that "making believers righteous is far more than just saying so - even for God."

So I think we're on the same page here, that you just misunderstood something.
Posted By: Rick H

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 04/23/11 03:14 AM

Originally Posted By: Colin
Originally Posted By: Rick H
Ok, then if you go in that direction, explain how Peter after accepting Christ and being 'Justified' aka "made righteous", cut off another mans ear, denied Christ, argued with Paul, didnt accept Gentiles till the vision. Peter was not instantly "made righteous", it was "counted unto him" by faith, and the process of "Sanctification" began.....is how it seems to read from scripture.

Peter confessed Christ as prompted by the Holy Spirit of the Father. We turn from the Spirit of Jesus when we sin, opting for the old covenant apart from God: doesn't change the reality of walking in the Spirit when we do. grin We have an advocate with the Father, and we are justified by the Spirit's presence whenever we repent and confess our sins.

The two covenants mean that each day we may and must choose between living with the Spirit or our own way, by our own will and strength - unsanctified will. Submitting to the Spirit is experiencing justification: what happens because of that submission is sanctification.


Ok, lets walk it through to see if we can come together on a understanding of the process...When sinners accept Christ and repent and confess, and usually they publically declare their acceptance of the pardon when they are baptized, they are Justified (Given Pardon) and their sins are remitted.
Mark 1:4
John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
re·mit·tedre·mit·ting
Definition of REMIT
2a : to release from the guilt or penalty of <remit sins>

Now as they go through their daily lives and fall into sin and temptation, they have to daily die to sin, and by faith their sins are covered by the righteousness of Christ. As we see in the following verse, we see the other side, as Jesus tells the Pharisees that they will die in their sin because of unbelief, they have no one to cover their sins with righteousness.

The Validity of Jesus’ Testimony
12 When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
13 The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”
14 Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. 15 You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. 16 But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. 17 In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid. 18 I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”
19 Then they asked him, “Where is your father?”
“You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20 He spoke these words while teaching in the temple area near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his time had not yet come.
21 Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.”
22 This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”
23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be,[a] you will indeed die in your sins.”

So those who are pardoned have to deal with the daily sin they come across or stumble or are snagged by evils snare. Those who believe are credited or covered by Christ righteousness for these, so righteousness is imputed to them, in the daily battle against Satans attacks.

im·put·edim·put·ing
Definition of IMPUTE
2: to credit to a person or a cause : attribute <our vices as well as our virtues have been imputed to bodily derangement


So the pardon is applied daily for the beliver. But now the believer has to die to sin and learn Christs righteousness, the Mind of Christ in them. They have to have their hearts and minds cleansed, so the Holy Spirit goes to do its work.

This is the imparted part of Christs righteousness, the sanctification which prepares us for eternal life with God.

Definition of IMPART
transitive verb
: to communicate the knowledge of : disclose <imparted my scheme to no one>
1 Corinthians 2:16
“For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

So we are pardoned for our sins, then Christs righteousness is imputted for our continuing battle with sin, and at the same time the knowledge of Christ righteousness is imparted, or brought into our mind and our passions/desires or heart are cleansed as sanctification happens within us.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 07/29/12 08:23 AM

It's good to come by time to time and enjoy the deep and heart lifting discussion here.

I agree with Rick H. explanation, but this seems against MM.

Imputed and imparted righteousness are simultaneous realities for those who experience genuine, thorough rebirth. Both the Thief and Paul (two extremes) were justified and sanctified the instant they experienced rebirth. Both were reborn with all the fruits of the Spirit, all the righteous. attributes of God's character. Not one was missing. The only difference between the two was the length of time each had to mature in the fruits of the Spirit after they experienced rebirth.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 07/30/12 08:51 AM

But isn't Imputed Righteousness of Christ alone through faith alone sufficient for us to be in heaven and eat the fruit of life?

If this is not sufficient, doesn't our effort to reach the goal of perfect sinless state in this sinful nature a "work" that adds to Christ finished work on the cross?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 07/30/12 10:24 AM

if imparted righteousness achieved from a joint operation between the Spirit and our will, does this not negate Christ's finished work on the cross? I mean, don't we have something to boast? Is it pure faith without our works to add on it?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 07/30/12 04:58 PM

The thief on the cross was an excellent example of Christ' imputed righteousness that qualify a sinner believer for heaven. Sinner pardoned and earn the right for eternal life. Why do we search for some thing like perfect sinless character, which negates Christ work on the cross in order to be qualified for eternal life? Aren't we all like this thief on the cross, having nothing to offer except faith? And isn't for this reason Christ die for us? For we can do nothing but sinning? But he has forgiven us of all our sins, and our imperfection was clothed with His righteousness. This what happened with the thief on the cross. And if was qualified for heaven, why don't we?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 07/31/12 02:51 PM

The free gift of grace is God that justify the ungodly freely, and gives them eternal life. What a believer must present and acknowledge is his faith in Christ till the end.

The reward for laboring a life time in self sacrifice through a joint operation between the Spirit and our will, to achieve a sinless perfect character in order to be qualify for heaven, is not a free gift but a reward indeed. Does the bible support this view?

All I know that justification for eternal life is a free gift and not of works, based on faith, not a reward.
Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/01/12 11:43 PM

James, good points. We cannot earn salvation. But we can certainly prevent it.
Posted By: Colin

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/05/12 02:50 AM

Justification by faith is our qualification for heaven.

Sanctification by faith is our fitness for heaven.

As RickH said, we receive them together, but the latter is a lifetime experience of character development rather than the instantaneous, perfect reality that the rebirth of justification is. Since sanctification is our preparation for heaven, it does not impinge on our qualification for heaven who is Christ alone.

Receiving the new mind of Christ, the rebirth of justification, is God and Christ indwelling us by their Spirit (Jn 14:23). Developing a Christlike character isn't a reward for us, but merely living out the truth of justification; thus, vindicating the truth of God in the great controversy. A Christlike character, perfectly righteous in God's own reckoning - not our own measurement, doesn't supplant our qualification in Jesus, who is in us by rebirth to qualify us, but is the ultimate proof that Jesus lives in us.

Imparted righteous is but the living experience of daily faith of a lifetime of the believer justification by faith in Jesus. Both are therefore essential to salvation.

Only the final generation will, in God's own good providence, experience perfect Christlikeness. The purpose is to end the great controversy in a full knowledge & practice of righteousness by faith. All saints of all time are qualified for heaven, but only the final generation will walk in to heaven without seeing death. Amen.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/05/12 12:39 PM

Originally Posted By: Colin
Justification by faith is our qualification for heaven.

Sanctification by faith is our fitness for heaven.

As RickH said, we receive them together, but the latter is a lifetime experience of character development rather than the instantaneous, perfect reality that the rebirth of justification is. Since sanctification is our preparation for heaven, it does not impinge on our qualification for heaven who is Christ alone.

Receiving the new mind of Christ, the rebirth of justification, is God and Christ indwelling us by their Spirit (Jn 14:23). Developing a Christlike character isn't a reward for us, but merely living out the truth of justification; thus, vindicating the truth of God in the great controversy. A Christlike character, perfectly righteous in God's own reckoning - not our own measurement, doesn't supplant our qualification in Jesus, who is in us by rebirth to qualify us, but is the ultimate proof that Jesus lives in us.

Imparted righteous is but the living experience of daily faith of a lifetime of the believer justification by faith in Jesus. Both are therefore essential to salvation.

Only the final generation will, in God's own good providence, experience perfect Christlikeness. The purpose is to end the great controversy in a full knowledge & practice of righteousness by faith. All saints of all time are qualified for heaven, but only the final generation will walk in to heaven without seeing death. Amen.



The Bible said to me that justification by faith is a free gift and having that, a believer has eternal life, which means "qualified for heaven."

Thief on the cross that was saved by his faith in Christ at the last moment, has ever a sanctified life? No, never!!

He was a miserable man, evil man accustomed to evil works all his lifetime.

If he was treated so, why for you and me is not the same and will be treated differently? What is the base of this teaching, if there is, if any, a discrimination to what happened to the thief and what will happen to us?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/08/12 06:43 PM

Originally Posted By: Colin
Justification by faith is our qualification for heaven.

Sanctification by faith is our fitness for heaven.

As RickH said, we receive them together, but the latter is a lifetime experience of character development rather than the instantaneous, perfect reality that the rebirth of justification is. Since sanctification is our preparation for heaven, it does not impinge on our qualification for heaven who is Christ alone.

Receiving the new mind of Christ, the rebirth of justification, is God and Christ indwelling us by their Spirit (Jn 14:23). Developing a Christlike character isn't a reward for us, but merely living out the truth of justification; thus, vindicating the truth of God in the great controversy. A Christlike character, perfectly righteous in God's own reckoning - not our own measurement, doesn't supplant our qualification in Jesus, who is in us by rebirth to qualify us, but is the ultimate proof that Jesus lives in us.

Imparted righteous is but the living experience of daily faith of a lifetime of the believer justification by faith in Jesus. Both are therefore essential to salvation.

Only the final generation will, in God's own good providence, experience perfect Christlikeness. The purpose is to end the great controversy in a full knowledge & practice of righteousness by faith. All saints of all time are qualified for heaven, but only the final generation will walk in to heaven without seeing death. Amen.



Then only the final generation who can reach a perfect sinless character, but it is also after they had been justified by their faith, for after the door of probation is closed, how can they sin?

Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. 11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

Therefore, a perfect sinless character could never be a prerequisite for justification to enter heaven and live eternally, for those end time believers pre Christ 2nd coming, can stop sinning and continue living righteously in holiness because God has closed the door of probation, it is not because they had reach that state beforehand.
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/16/12 10:24 PM

Originally Posted By: Colin
Only the final generation will, in God's own good providence, experience perfect Christlikeness.


Originally Posted By: James Saptenno

Then (it is) only the final generation who can reach a perfect sinless character, but it is also after they had been justified by their faith, for after the door of probation is closed, how can they sin?


I am sorry to have to say this Brother Colin and Brother James in such a pointed way, but you prove how little you are motivated by God by these statements.

What about Enoch? What about Elijah?

If you had the Holy Spirit prompting you to write these things you would not overlook these important men of Faith, God would not permit it because they are the FIGUREHEADS of the men to live in the last days.

You should take a step back and look at what you just did here. Men motivated by God do not insist that they are correct in something when they are not.

If Enoch could attain the perfect character of Christ, being only the seventh generation of Adam, then why is it not possible for every generation since? Every time a child is born they have the opportunity to become perfect in Christ. Every time Jesus has been manifested in the heart of a man of God, that man stands PERFECT in Jesus' name before the Father and there is no other way to be perfected!!!!

What about Moses before he sinned, did he not stand in the presence of GOD on the mount? Then again after he repented He was taken up by God to see till the end.

Or John the Revelator, the BELOVED of Christ Jesus, did he not stand before Christ and the Father in the SPIRIT and witness till the end of time under the direct supervision of Holy Angels? You DO NOT KNOW WHAT PERFECTION IS!

Do you know how to become perfect? Jesus said "be ye therefore PERFECT as your Father in heaven is perfect" MATT 5:48. Can you do it? Do you know how?

JESUS is perfect, the only one. His words have creative power in them and to believe every word from His mouth is FAITH, So when He says Be PERFECT, He is speaking the power to become like Him into existence, if you have faith that He will do it.

The fact that you both are addressing this issue without this knowledge is dubious to say the least.

If you are motivated by God you will correct these statements and not argue on the point. I have been prompted and will address other issues that need correcting later after you correct your statements.
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/16/12 10:29 PM

The reason the sin of Moses was so grievous was because he attained this perfection of Character then he fell to sin, just like Adam. That is why he did not enter the promised land when they entered, but he was still honored by God, buried with honor by angels because of his deeply felt repentance from his sin, and resurrected three days later like Jesus.
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/16/12 10:33 PM

"The confiding love and unselfish devotion manifested in the life and character of John present lessons of untold value to the Christian church. John did not naturally possess the loveliness of character that his later experience revealed. By nature he had serious defects. He was not only proud, self-assertive, and ambitious for honor, but impetuous, and resentful under injury. He and his brother were called “sons of thunder.” Evil temper, the desire for revenge, the spirit of criticism, were all in the beloved disciple. But beneath all this the divine Teacher discerned the ardent, sincere, loving heart. Jesus rebuked this self-seeking, disappointed his ambitions, tested his faith. But He revealed to him that for which his soul longed—the beauty of holiness, the transforming power of love. {AA 539.3}
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/16/12 10:34 PM

None need fail of attaining, in his sphere, to perfection of Christian character. By the sacrifice of Christ, provision has been made for the believer to receive all things that pertain to life and godliness. God calls upon us to reach the standard of perfection and places before us the example of Christ’s character. In His humanity, perfected by a life of constant resistance of evil, the Saviour showed that through co-operation with Divinity, human beings may in this life attain to perfection of character. This is God’s assurance to us that we, too, may obtain complete victory. {AA 531.2}

I could quote about one hundred verses like this in both scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy.
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/16/12 10:57 PM

"The leaven of truth works a change in the whole man, making the coarse refined, the rough gentle, the selfish generous. By it the impure are cleansed, washed in the blood of the Lamb. Through its life-giving power it brings all there is of mind and soul and strength into harmony with the divine life. Man with his human nature becomes a partaker of divinity. Christ is honored in excellence and perfection of character. As these changes are effected, angels break forth in rapturous song, and God and Christ rejoice over souls fashioned after the divine similitude. {COL 102.3}

This is why it is so important to make sure what you teach is TRUTH!!!
Posted By: APL

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/17/12 03:01 AM

Originally Posted By: jamesonofthunder
The reason the sin of Moses was so grievous was because he attained this perfection of Character then he fell to sin, just like Adam. That is why he did not enter the promised land when they entered, but he was still honored by God, buried with honor by angels because of his deeply felt repentance from his sin, and resurrected three days later like Jesus.
The reason Moses' sin was so grievous, was because it misrepresent the character of God.
Originally Posted By: EGW
Moses smote it twice with the rod, after exclaiming impatiently, "Hear now, ye rebels, must we fetch you water out of this rock?" {ST, September 30, 1880 par. 3}
Here Moses sinned. He did not ascribe to God the power and glory, and therefore did not magnify him before the people. The Lord, in his infinite mercy, caused the waters to flow, but this did not prove that Moses was right in thus mingling his own spirit with the work of God. Moses here gave unmistakable evidence before the erring, rebellious congregation, that he had lost his patience and self-control. To those who indulge in passion, and fretfulness, this may seem a light matter, but with God it was a grievous offense. It gave the people occasion to question whether his past course had been under the direction of God, and to palliate their own sins. {ST, September 30, 1880 par. 4}
This language was not that which God had put into his mouth, but was spoken from irritated feeling. "Hear now, ye rebels;" this was all true, but the truth, even, should not be spoken to gratify passion or impatience. When God bids Moses charge home upon murmuring Israel their rebellion, the words will be painful to himself, and hard for them to bear; yet God will sustain his servant in the declaration of the most severe and unpalatable truth. But when men take it upon themselves to speak words that scar and wound, God's Spirit is grieved, and great harm is done. The rash act of Moses in smiting the rock, and that rash speech, were an exhibition of human passion, not a holy indignation because God had been dishonored. {ST, September 30, 1880 par. 5}
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/17/12 08:56 PM

Originally Posted By: me
The reason the sin of Moses was so grievous was because he attained this perfection of Character then he fell to sin just like Adam (fell to sin while in the perfect character of Christ).


You make it sound as if what you just said and the quote from Signs of the times disagrees with what I wrote, but it is the exact same thing I said. The true context of what she said in your quote is that the sin of Moses was after he had attained the perfection of character of Christ. How does this contradict what I wrote?

You need to pray brother.

Moses was a representative of Christ, just like Adam, a representative of HIS perfect character. So when he fell to Sin he misrepresented the character of God. It doesn't matter WHAT the sin was, it only matters that it occurred AFTER he had become the representative of Christ. Do you get it "brother"?

This is the same thing that I wrote put into different words.

I cannot believe you cannot see this, so you must be doing this just to be contradictory.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/18/12 10:05 AM

Originally Posted By: jamesonofthunder
Originally Posted By: Colin
Only the final generation will, in God's own good providence, experience perfect Christlikeness.


Originally Posted By: James Saptenno

Then (it is) only the final generation who can reach a perfect sinless character, but it is also after they had been justified by their faith, for after the door of probation is closed, how can they sin?


I am sorry to have to say this Brother Colin and Brother James in such a pointed way, but you prove how little you are motivated by God by these statements.

What about Enoch? What about Elijah?

If you had the Holy Spirit prompting you to write these things you would not overlook these important men of Faith, God would not permit it because they are the FIGUREHEADS of the men to live in the last days.

You should take a step back and look at what you just did here. Men motivated by God do not insist that they are correct in something when they are not.

If Enoch could attain the perfect character of Christ, being only the seventh generation of Adam, then why is it not possible for every generation since? Every time a child is born they have the opportunity to become perfect in Christ. Every time Jesus has been manifested in the heart of a man of God, that man stands PERFECT in Jesus' name before the Father and there is no other way to be perfected!!!!

What about Moses before he sinned, did he not stand in the presence of GOD on the mount? Then again after he repented He was taken up by God to see till the end.

Or John the Revelator, the BELOVED of Christ Jesus, did he not stand before Christ and the Father in the SPIRIT and witness till the end of time under the direct supervision of Holy Angels? You DO NOT KNOW WHAT PERFECTION IS!

Do you know how to become perfect? Jesus said "be ye therefore PERFECT as your Father in heaven is perfect" MATT 5:48. Can you do it? Do you know how?

JESUS is perfect, the only one. His words have creative power in them and to believe every word from His mouth is FAITH, So when He says Be PERFECT, He is speaking the power to become like Him into existence, if you have faith that He will do it.

The fact that you both are addressing this issue without this knowledge is dubious to say the least.

If you are motivated by God you will correct these statements and not argue on the point. I have been prompted and will address other issues that need correcting later after you correct your statements.


Seems you are exaggerating this issue.

My statement is concerning a state of life which is perfect and sinless ever since a believer put his faith in Christ.

This I do not believe!

This state might be reach one day, if you successfully maintain a life by faith, without sinning.

But there is no guarantee, for you are human, sinners falling short of the glory of God.

Therefore, Christ is your mediator, when you sin, he will present his holly blood to the Father for washing your sins.

As long he is a mediator of men, there is no guarantee a man might reach perfect sinless state, do you understand? otherwise the believers has no need for a Mediator. Live without sinning or die when you sin.

Therefore, this perfect sinless state is not a TARGET a believer MUST achieve. Never! Moreover a PREREQUISITE to enter heaven and live eternally, this is really against the bible.

Do you still need Christ as your Mediator? Do you still need Christ and His blood to cleanse your sins? If yes, then STOP forcing the idea of perfect sinless state is Christian target and a must as a prerequisite to enter heaven and live eternally.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/18/12 10:15 AM

Was Enoch and Elijah perfect and sinless? If yes, they don't need Christ, they don't need a Savior.

So little was told about Enoch, do you think for the 300 years he live by faith he didn't do a single sin?

The bible said, all men has sinned and fall short of the glory of God. This is for Enoch and Elijah too.

So, they were all justified by their faith! Sinners justified by their faith!

Has they reach the righteous state within self and stand before God in their own righteousness that permitted them to be taken lively into heaven? Or do they stand in Christ righteousness by faith?
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/18/12 09:55 PM

Originally Posted By: James Saptenno
Was Enoch and Elijah perfect and sinless? If yes, they don't need Christ, they don't need a Savior.


Come on brother, where did you get that out of what I wrote? The fact that you don't seem to understand what I was saying means you do not have the same inspiration.

I never, NEVER said they don't need a savior, in fact, the fact that you surmised this is so ludicrous to me I am questioning your motivation again.

OF COURSE THEY HAD A SAVIOR! They had Jesus.

Are you one of those preachers that says the old testament believers did not have Christ?

Gen 5:24 "Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him." This is the state of Christs righteousness that is in perfect harmony with the will of the Father which is available to every generation. Even Adam's son Able had his sacrifice accepted by fire from heaven. Few have reached this level of submission to the will of the father.

If faith is total dependence upon the words that God has given us, either directly or Holy Spirit illuminated scripture, then we better have also the full unadulterated comprehension of His truth, which only comes through the indwelling of the Spirit of God, the Spirit of truth.

Through Holy Spirit led faith, Enoch walked through the eastern gate that Adam was escorted out of; the gate that Adam also set up the first altar in front of. Fire would come through the heavens and consume that sacrifice every time he was in harmony with the will of God, if there was something he did not follow through with, he left his sacrifice on the altar and went to finish God's work. This is complete submission to the will of the Father which is being in His presence.

I do agree that just before Jesus comes again, it is prophesied that the people of God will receive the latter rain and they will see more and experience things that are very similar to what Christ went through, and this will grant them rewards in heaven that no one else will be given. They get to follow Jesus forever. This is the 144,000.

So there is an advancement of the knowledge of Christ, till the very end. But that does not mean that the people who experienced Christ in the old testament were not standing perfect in the name of Christ before the Father. In fact it seems to me that it would be more faithful for those who lived before Christ, since they had to believe He was going to come before before the evidence was fulfilled.

Before the flood there was no excuse not to believe because the gate could be seen by human eyes, the glory of God spilled out of that gate guarded by a mighty angel. The angel was told to let Enoch pass, because he had done everything God wanted Him to. He ran the race and passed through the finish line, the Eastern Gate.

The eastern gate of earthly Jerusalem is a scale model of the heavenly, and this is the place Jesus chose as His favorite spot to pray and talk with His Father. It is also where He was 'cut off' from the Father and sweat blood, dying the second death for the believers. This happened in Gethsemane, outside the Golden or Eastern Gate across the brook Kidron in the valey of the Shadow of Death, also known as the Valley of Jehoshaphat and the Kidron, Cedron or Kedron Valley.

Do a word search on these and see many things. The gate is our goal and there is only one way through.

Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/19/12 02:45 PM

Originally Posted By: jamesonofthunder
Originally Posted By: James Saptenno
Was Enoch and Elijah perfect and sinless? If yes, they don't need Christ, they don't need a Savior.


I never, NEVER said they don't need a savior, in fact, the fact that you surmised this is so ludicrous to me I am questioning your motivation again.

OF COURSE THEY HAD A SAVIOR! They had Jesus.


Then the question remain:
Has they reach the righteous state within self and stand before God in their own righteousness that permitted them to be taken lively into heaven? Or do they stand in Christ righteousness by faith?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/19/12 03:04 PM

If they were perfect same as Jesus was perfect, and if they never sinned, the law will justify them to live, same as Jesus never sinned and had been justified by the law to live.

Romans 10:5
21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law: that “the man who doeth those things shall live by them.”

Galatians 3:12
21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
12 And the law is not of faith, but “The man who doeth them shall live in them.”

They didn't need a Savior, same as Jesus didn't need a Savior.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/19/12 03:06 PM

Romans 2:13
21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
For it is not the hearers of the law who are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/19/12 05:53 PM

Of course they sinned before being perfected. They stand perfected in the Righteousness of Christ, not perfect in themselves.

I don't know, maybe your comprehension of the English language is putting a barrier between us, but I am starting to think you are here to be a distraction!

Then you go and quote Romans 2:13 here and on the other thread you talk about people in Indonesia being too legalistic and say they are wrong for believing faith + works gets you to heaven, contradicting yourself in the matter of minutes. Doesn't sound inspired to me.
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/20/12 09:16 AM

Originally Posted By: jamesonofthunder
Of course they sinned before being perfected. They stand perfected in the Righteousness of Christ, not perfect in themselves.

I don't know, maybe your comprehension of the English language is putting a barrier between us, but I am starting to think you are here to be a distraction!

Then you go and quote Romans 2:13 here and on the other thread you talk about people in Indonesia being too legalistic and say they are wrong for believing faith + works gets you to heaven, contradicting yourself in the matter of minutes. Doesn't sound inspired to me.


Are you self a believer in "faith + work" will get you to heaven and have eternal life?
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/20/12 05:49 PM

I'm going to call you brother, OK? Brother James, FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD!

James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

But I can tell by the way you are presenting this that you have no idea what WORKS are.

Let me illustrate please.

If you say you love your wife, yet sleep with other women, don't your works prove that you're a liar? Can you love someone and betray them?

The works of Judas proved he was a liar. he manipulated the Lord for his own will.

Even though Peter sinned and denied his Lord, his later works of repentance proved he loved the Lord.

Both had sinned but one had the fruit of true repentance.

Now let me ask you, was this a work? Did Peter have to get on his knees and say "I am so sorry Father"? Since nothing good comes from mortal man, then repentance is from God also, which means, if God is motivating you to do something you are working in His Spirit which is motivating you to do it.

If you do not see this as a work then you do not know what works is. But that is the beginning work of repentance, once you are forgiven God leads us to more works.

Paul said in one sentence in 1 Corinthians 4:12 "and we labor, working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure;"

Then in a few sentences later he said in 1 Corinthians 9:6 "Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?"

So which is it, did Paul 'work'? Of course he did, in 1 Corinthians 9:1 he said "Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?

This is the kind of work that faith brings brother. Do not confuse working for God with working to try and save ourselves. True works are motivated by the Holy Spirit in faith. Works are NOT trying to earn salvation by keeping the law of God. This is the error that so many in our church have fallen to. But is it right to do away with the correct works to be free of the false works?
Posted By: James Saptenno

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/21/12 09:05 AM

Originally Posted By: jamesonofthunder
I'm going to call you brother, OK? Brother James, FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD!

James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

But I can tell by the way you are presenting this that you have no idea what WORKS are.

Let me illustrate please.

If you say you love your wife, yet sleep with other women, don't your works prove that you're a liar? Can you love someone and betray them?

The works of Judas proved he was a liar. he manipulated the Lord for his own will.

Even though Peter sinned and denied his Lord, his later works of repentance proved he loved the Lord.

Both had sinned but one had the fruit of true repentance.

Now let me ask you, was this a work? Did Peter have to get on his knees and say "I am so sorry Father"? Since nothing good comes from mortal man, then repentance is from God also, which means, if God is motivating you to do something you are working in His Spirit which is motivating you to do it.

If you do not see this as a work then you do not know what works is. But that is the beginning work of repentance, once you are forgiven God leads us to more works.

Paul said in one sentence in 1 Corinthians 4:12 "and we labor, working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure;"

Then in a few sentences later he said in 1 Corinthians 9:6 "Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?"

So which is it, did Paul 'work'? Of course he did, in 1 Corinthians 9:1 he said "Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?

This is the kind of work that faith brings brother. Do not confuse working for God with working to try and save ourselves. True works are motivated by the Holy Spirit in faith. Works are NOT trying to earn salvation by keeping the law of God. This is the error that so many in our church have fallen to. But is it right to do away with the correct works to be free of the false works?


So, you confirm that Faith + works that saved you?
Posted By: jamesonofthunder

Re: Imputed Righteousness or Imparted Righteousness? Or both? - 08/21/12 11:12 PM

Let everyone that reads this know, and it is shown by the record that I am in love with the truth. She crieth in the streets and I run after her because she leads me to the groom.

Jeremiah 5:1
English Standard Version (ESV)
Jerusalem Refused to Repent

5 Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem,
look and take note!
Search her squares to see
if you can find a man,
one who does justice
and seeks truth,
that I may pardon her.

Proverbs 24:7
English Standard Version (ESV)
7 Wisdom is too high for a fool;
in the gate he does not open his mouth.

This is the Golden Eastern Gate of Jerusalem where judgment was pronounced, symbolic of the Eastern Gate of the Garden of Eden from which Adam was escorted out of.

I have been given visions of this place of meeting and 'brothers' mock me for repeating it. I love, but have not been loved within the church but by only those who receive the Spirit of truth in devoted love. They seem to come out of no where for brilliant moments in time.

They are my brothers, and God brings them to my side when I need them or they need me or for amazing glorious Sabbaths in worship. To this BROTHERHOOD I offer my life, because of my pledge to Christ Jesus, my savior through Baptism.

If you have ever been here, at the gate, the place of meeting, you receive true forgiveness and true wisdom beyond what others have seen or experienced. This is the spot Jesus took your sins upon His head and died spiritually while physically still alive in Gethsemane. In the exact position of the altar Adam erected outside the gate. The same place the Red heifer was sacrificed. God has shown me this in vision, and it was the most experiential gift I have ever had in the Spirit of forgiveness. Then I found all the biblical and Spirit of Prophecy support as a sign that the vision was from the true God, and still very few will even take the time and pray about it.

The persecution is harder when I am weak and angry, but it is there nonetheless, and this is not on my head.

I truly fear for those who have not experienced watching their sins put on the head of Jesus in the garden. This IS the weapon against sin. The place where the olives where 'beaten' and 'pressed' to make to oil for the Holy Place lamps. This is the place of meeting with God, at the Gate. The Father shows you His love by sending His Son to take your place in being 'Cut off' from Him, and it causes us to hate sin. Jesus shows you His love by accepting your sins upon His record in heaven, so He experiences the hell you would have experienced if you did not repent and was resurrected outside the New Jerusalem in the second death.

Those who are outside at the second resurrection, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, will experience shame and pain equal to their sins in proportion, and they begin to sweat blood as they realize they have been deceived and it is too late. This is the second death and the fires that rain upon them are merciful in extinguishing their pain.

My vision was seeing the moment of Jesus taking all of our sins on, but particularly what my sins were as seen through His eyes. He saw mine and I saw His perspective and the shame was healthy because, He showed me it is not too late for me to let them go.

In the days of the first temple, with the Shekinah Glory of God above the Ark of the Covenant, On the day of atonement, when the priests opened the veil into the Most Holy Place, the glory of the Shekinah presence filled the inner chamber of the Holy Place like an Output coupler in a laser, and that glory shot out the open gate to the east like a shaft of light down the bridge of the Red Heifer and spotlighted the altar of the Red heifer on the top of Mt Olives like a sign to look there.

The top of mount of Olives is where Jesus in human form ascended to heaven. So this shaft of light is symbolic of the not of the earth source of power that connects us to heaven through what happened outside the camp to the east. This is where Jesus died the second death, in Gethsemane, at the foot of the mount, directly between the eastern gate and top of mt olives in the deep ravine called the Kidron Valley or what is also known as the Valley of Jehoshaphat.

Joel 3:9 Proclaim this among the nations:
Consecrate for war;
stir up the mighty men.
Let all the men of war draw near;
let them come up.
10 Beat your plowshares into swords,
and your pruning hooks into spears;
let the weak say, “I am a warrior.”
11 Hasten and come,
all you surrounding nations,
and gather yourselves there.
Bring down your warriors, O Lord.
12 Let the nations stir themselves up
and come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat;
for there I will sit to judge
all the surrounding nations.
13 Put in the sickle,
for the harvest is ripe.
Go in, tread,
for the winepress is full.
The vats overflow,
for their evil is great.
14 Multitudes, multitudes,
in the valley of decision!
For the day of the Lord is near
in the valley of decision.
15 The sun and the moon are darkened,
and the stars withdraw their shining.
16 The Lord roars from Zion,
and utters his voice from Jerusalem,
and the heavens and the earth quake.
But the Lord is a refuge to his people,
a stronghold to the people of Israel.

This is an end time later rain prophecy, will you seek this in truth?
© 2024 Maritime 2nd Advent Christian Believers OnLine Forums Consisting Mainly of Both Members & Friends of the SDA (Seventh-day Adventist) Church