I am attempting to teach my students on the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. I have been preaching through Phil. 3:4-11 and I am beginning to see that they don’t understand the concept of imputation. Forgiveness is an easy concept; imputation is easy as well but just not understood. Here is a graph I believe may help teach them on what happens in justification and the difference between forgiveness of sin and imputation of righteousness.
What do you think of it? Is it biblically sound? If forgiveness is the removal or cancelling of sin, we are back to zero, not in the positive. We need to get into the positive for entrance into heaven. Only Christ’s righteousness, his obedience to God’s laws and death on the cross, give us the merit we need for entrance.
Thanks Andrew for this helpful illustration. I am stealing it! One suggestion: Instead of -2 and +2, have - and + in larger font size centered in their respective areas.
ReplyDeleteThanks Kyle. Do you mean - and + at the ends of the lines? Perhaps next to the infinity symbol?
ReplyDeleteCertainly this can just be drawn on a board but i am going to develop a better looking graphic. I plan to use it this Wed. and I may just put a blank number line on their handout and have them draw the lines themselves as i walk through it with them.
Haha. This uneducated bumpkin had forgotten what the infinity symbol looks like. Yeah, maybe by the infinity symbol. Either way, it is helpful.
ReplyDeleteme too
ReplyDeleteSome helpful words and ways to describe justification:
ReplyDeleteSin is REMITTED and we are RECKONED as righteous
Sin CANCELLED
Righteousness CREDITED
"...Christ's death became the basis of our PARDON and PERFECTION...May Christ be honored for his whole achievement in suffering and dying! Both the work of PARDONING our sin, and the work of PROVIDING our righteousness."
(Piper, The Passion of Jesus Christ, 41)
I'm finding difficulty tracking the discussion?
ReplyDeleteThe graph may suggest that there are steps of inheriting righteousness. You move from 0 to +1 to +2.
Moreover, it may be helpful for a clear definition of what you mean by imputation only because there are some in the Reformed tradition not defining the full meaning of the doctrine.
Is it obtaining Christ's righteousness (through his obedience) or you being declared righteous by your union with Christ? The two are different, but would help my understanding where you are coming from and the meaning behind the graph.
In the graph I intend to capture the two sides or ideas in the cross- forgiveness and imputed righteousness. They are simultaneous events but different actions in the one transaction. One removes and one reckons or, one cancels and one credits based on my union with Christ.
ReplyDeleteI don't intend to show "steps" but rather two phases (sorry that is time related) or two happenings in justification. The two different colors are simply to highlight the different features.
This graph may not make clear that I intend to say, we obtain righteous credit, through our union with Christ- that is, his righteousness which he obtained (or showed rather? he didn't get it) through his perfect keeping of the law and obedience. I failed, he succeeded. His righteousness and law-keeping is credited to me and so not only are my sins removed but righteousness is reckoned to me.
Highlighting these two ideas enables us to understand the cross better thus praise God more and see that God's righteous requirements were met through Christ.
I tried to spend a day muddling this over. The following are my thoughts on the project.
ReplyDelete1. I like the distinction you made over forgiveness and righteousness. Asking for forgiveness (in salvation) does not make you righteous.
2. I still am leery on the imputation of Christ's righteousness being applied to me because of his obedience to the law and God. Rather, I see it defined as a declaration of righteousness by displaying faith in Christ and being united in Christ..
3. I see this graph reflecting sanctification rather than Justification. The progressive steps towards righteousness and Christ-likeness.
4. I am still trying to see how the arrow entitled "the work of Christ on the cross" is functioning?
All in all, I absolutely love the idea of making "Visual Theology." It completely appeals to the senses. This is something I wish could devote some time to; it would aid the church, especially those not fully gifted on the comprehension of deeper theology or the developed discipline of long study.
However, all the other guys loved it, I'm still trying to get my hands around it to see and figure out the moving parts :). In the logical word, we like to call that "Arguementum ad populum :)
Please let us know how this worked for you once you use it. I'd like to hear the results from you sheep. Dr. Barrick mentioned one time, I guess under a "philosophy of teaching/instruction," that the more you appeal to all the senses the better you will be able to communicate. So good work, may we follow in this!!!!!
Thanks Andrew!!!!!
Shawn,
DeleteThank you for your thoughts. You are a deep thinker and I need your comments. Let me try to answer.
Regarding a few:
2. Why wouldn't the imputation of Christ's righteousness be based on Christ's obedience? He kept the law perfectly which I couldn't do.
Question: was I supposed to? This is a question i am still looking to answer. Some verses claim righteousness could not be gained by the law (Gal. 2:16) (and thus was never intended to?). Salvation came by faith (Rom. 4:5) in the OT.
While many theologians use the language of his obedience to the law. "His sacrifice satisfied God's righteous demands." Also, "Be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5:48)
It seems that you are saying, he is righteous and that is given to me, whereas I am saying, he completed the righteous requirements of the law that i couldn't keep in his incarnation and that is credited to me.
3. The arrows do not intend to denote progress but rather show the movement of my state from one place to the next. I certainly could put dots without lines but that may not be as clear.
In justification I went from one state to another by means of two occurrences, remission and then reckoning.
4. The large hollow arrow is intended to enclose and encompass the two acts forgiveness and imputation. This work is completed at the cross. His obedience and his exchange are given through or at the cross.
Tim Challies has come up with a number of visual theology charts that you can download for free. He put his 5th one out today: http://www.challies.com/resources/visual-theology-awaiting-the-messiah
George had some trouble commenting so i added his email to me here:
ReplyDelete"A suggestion: Maybe adding an orange dotted line (like ---------------->) on the positive side of the graph, extending your finite ‘Forgiveness’ line. Might sound technical, but Col. 2:13-14 came to mind, all of our sin(s) past-present-future being cancelled at the cross.
Also I think some students may read the wording of “Us counted righteous in Christ” in association with a numbered graph, and perhaps wonder what does ‘counting’/numbers have to do with any of this? I might re-word that with “Christ’s righteousness credited to us”, even though that messes up the symmetry a bit."
Thanks again AC, and much grace,
George Hyon
This is "groovy theology," and believe i have a firmer grasp because of it. Thank you Andrew! I think its clear as it is, George comments are helpful as well, The reality we face however is that almost all of our illustrations break down at some level, nevertheless the chart does convey clearly the juxtaposition of these doctrines. The chart will not teach everything, nor should it, but it does teach how these vital doctrines work together towards such a great salvation (Heb 2:1). We should use it to the extent that it illustrates the point we are making. Remember, its an illustration, not an exhaustive treatise.
ReplyDeleteThought you all would like Sproul's hi-tech graph :)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IapqqQ45Q4w
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteNOTE: The deleted comment above was a repeat of the one above.
DeleteNice! Thanks for the R.C. Sproul video. Helpful thoughts. I love the chalk too. I would use his "circles". I think the only shortcoming is that the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us is represented merely by a hollow circle that had the "chalk" of sin erased. In my mind, this only visually displays us back to zero (i.e. forgiveness, or as put well in R.C.'s words, "Maybe I’m not guilty but I haven’t done anything, I haven’t merited anything, whereby justice would give a reward."). It doesn't depict a gaining of positive righteousness. I think it could be improved if it was erased and then filled again but with a color.
I improved my original graphic from above and I will post it someday.
Thanks Gary
Great point on the empty circle. Well RC had hair in this video so maybe it was before their was different color chalk.
DeleteLooking forward to the new graph.
Thanks