Double imputation?

[Homer]

How do you explain this?

Romans 2:26-27, New American Standard Bible (NASB)

26. So if the uncircumcised man (gentile) keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27. And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?

Paul anticipates that gentiles (at least some) can keep the law in an uncircumcised condition. But that would be literally impossible because circumcision is required by the law. So Paul must mean the moral requirements, not the ceremonial requirements. And if the gentile keeps these requirements he is regarded (credited, imputed) as a circumcised Jew, though he is not. God knows he is not.

And it is important to note that according to Jewish belief, no circumcised person would go to hell:
Rabbi Menachim, commentary on the Book of Moses: Our Rabbins have said that no circumcised man will see hell."
Medrasch Tillin: "God swore to Abraham that no one who was circumcised should be sent to hell."

It seems to me Paul is saying rather clearly that the uncircumcised is credited or accounted as being a justified or righteous Jew, though he is not. I see "imputed" as meaning the same thing.

[dwilkins]

How do you explain this?

Romans 2:26-27, New American Standard Bible (NASB)

26. So if the uncircumcised man (gentile) keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27. And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?

Paul anticipates that gentiles (at least some) can keep the law in an uncircumcised condition. But that would be literally impossible because circumcision is required by the law. So Paul must mean the moral requirements, not the ceremonial requirements. And if the gentile keeps these requirements he is regarded (credited, imputed) as a circumcised Jew, though he is not. God knows he is not.

And it is important to note that according to Jewish belief, no circumcised person would go to hell:
Rabbi Menachim, commentary on the Book of Moses: Our Rabbins have said that no circumcised man will see hell."
Medrasch Tillin: "God swore to Abraham that no one who was circumcised should be sent to hell."

It seems to me Paul is saying rather clearly that the uncircumcised is credited or accounted as being a justified or righteous Jew, though he is not. I see "imputed" as meaning the same thing.

I'm not saying that every case of a dikaiosune related word has to be "justification" (though I think that Paidon argued that they all have to be righteousness). Obviously, there is some actual morality at work in some of what Paul is teaching. I'm saying that I think Wright is correct that they should be translated justification more often than they generally are and that this would change how we see the mechanics of imputation.

Doug

[dwilkins]

Of which words do you judge I have made up the meaning? δικαιοσυνη (dikaiosunā)? The word occurs 85 times in the New Testament. I have stated that the word means "righteousness". How many times does the New King James Version translate it as "righteousness"? 85 times. Have the translators of the NKJV "made up" the meaning of the word? Indeed, I haven't been able to find ANY translation which renders the word as "justification" for any of these 85 occurrences. Do you know of one which does?

Or is it some other word of which I have "made up the meaning"? Please be specific.

I thought that I was clear that we are talking about dikaios derivative words. dikaiosune is the one that we run into the most often (more than 85 times, BTW), so I referred to that specifically. However, there are a number of related words. They all seem to have a similar dynamic in combining righteousness and either justice or justification. I have listed the three most important ones below. The references are from the KJV. My point is that I think that the theological presuppositions of the translators have taken us down a path that is not necessary. One thing is clear, justification is not synonymous with sanctification.

G1342
δίκαιος
dikaios
dik'-ah-yos
From G1349; equitable (in character or act); by implication innocent, holy (absolutely or relatively): - just, meet, right (-eous).

G1343
δικαιοσύνη
dikaiosunē
dik-ah-yos-oo'-nay
From G1342; equity (of character or act); specifically (Christian) justification: - righteousness.

G1344
δικαιόω
dikaioō
dik-ah-yo'-o
From G1342; to render (that is, show or regard as) just or innocent: - free, justify (-ier), be righteous.

G1342
δίκαιος
dikaios
Total KJV Occurrences: 81
righteous, 41
Mat_9:13, Mat_10:41 (3), Mat_13:17, Mat_13:43, Mat_23:28-29 (2), Mat_23:35 (2), Mat_25:37, Mat_25:46, Mar_2:17, Luk_1:6, Luk_5:32, Luk_18:9, Luk_23:47, Joh_17:24-25 (2), Rom_3:10, Rom_5:7, Rom_5:19, 2Th_1:5-6 (2), 1Ti_1:9, 2Ti_4:8, Heb_11:4, Jam_5:16, 1Pe_3:12, 1Pe_4:18, 2Pe_2:8 (2), 1Jo_2:1, 1Jo_2:29, 1Jo_3:7 (2), 1Jo_3:12, Rev_16:5, Rev_16:7, Rev_19:2, Rev_22:11
just, 33
Mat_1:19, Mat_5:45, Mat_13:49, Mat_27:19, Mat_27:24, Mar_6:20, Luk_1:17, Luk_2:25, Luk_14:14, Luk_15:7, Luk_20:20, Luk_23:50, Joh_5:30, Act_3:14, Act_7:52, Act_10:22, Act_24:14-15 (2), Rom_1:17, Rom_2:13, Rom_3:26, Rom_7:12, Gal_3:11, Phi_4:8, Col_4:1, Tit_1:8, Heb_10:38, Heb_12:23, Jam_5:6, 1Pe_3:18, 2Pe_2:7, 1Jo_1:9, Rev_15:3
right, 5
Mat_20:3-4 (2), Mat_20:7, Luk_12:57, Act_4:19, Eph_6:1
meet, 2
Phi_1:7, 2Pe_1:13


G1343
δικαιοσύνη
dikaiosunē
Total KJV Occurrences: 93
righteousness, 91
Mat_3:15, Mat_5:6, Mat_5:20 (2), Mat_6:33, Mat_21:32, Luk_1:75, Joh_16:8, Joh_16:10, Act_10:35, Act_13:10, Act_17:31, Act_24:25, Rom_1:17, Rom_3:5, Rom_3:21-22 (2), Rom_3:25-26 (2), Rom_4:3, Rom_4:5-6 (2), Rom_4:9, Rom_4:11 (2), Rom_4:13, Rom_4:22, Rom_5:17, Rom_5:21, Rom_6:13, Rom_6:16, Rom_6:18-20 (3), Rom_8:10, Rom_9:28, Rom_9:30-31 (5), Rom_10:3-6 (6), Rom_10:10, Rom_14:17, 1Co_1:30, 2Co_3:9, 2Co_5:21, 2Co_6:7, 2Co_6:14, 2Co_9:9-10 (2), 2Co_11:15, Gal_2:21, Gal_3:6, Gal_3:21, Gal_5:5, Eph_4:24, Eph_5:9, Eph_6:14, Phi_1:11, Phi_3:6, Phi_3:9 (2), 1Ti_6:11, 2Ti_2:22, 2Ti_3:16, 2Ti_4:8, Tit_3:5, Heb_1:9, Heb_5:13, Heb_7:2, Heb_11:7, Heb_11:33, Heb_12:11, Jam_1:20, Jam_2:23, Jam_3:18, 1Pe_2:24, 2Pe_1:1, 2Pe_2:5, 2Pe_2:21, 2Pe_3:13, 1Jo_2:29, 1Jo_3:7, 1Jo_3:10, Rev_19:11
righteousness’, 2
Mat_5:10, 1Pe_3:14

G1344
δικαιόω
dikaioō
Total KJV Occurrences: 40
justified, 31
Mat_11:19, Mat_12:37, Luk_7:29, Luk_7:35, Luk_18:14, Act_13:39 (2), Rom_2:13, Rom_3:4, Rom_3:20, Rom_3:24, Rom_3:28, Rom_4:2, Rom_5:1, Rom_5:9, Rom_8:30 (2), 1Co_4:4, 1Co_6:11, Gal_2:16-17 (4), Gal_3:11, Gal_3:24, Gal_5:4, 1Ti_3:16, Tit_3:7, Jam_2:21, Jam_2:24-25 (2)
justify, 4
Luk_10:29, Luk_16:15, Rom_3:30, Gal_3:8
justifieth, 2
Rom_4:5, Rom_8:33
freed, 1
Rom_6:7
justifier, 1
Rom_3:26
righteous, 1
Rev_22:11

[Homer]

Hi Doug,

One thing is clear, justification is not synonymous with sanctification.

We've got no disagreement there. You are either justified or not, but sanctification comes by degrees, no?

[dwilkins]

Hi Doug,

One thing is clear, justification is not synonymous with sanctification.

We've got no disagreement there. You are either justified or not, but sanctification comes by degrees, no?

My comment about the parallel of justification and sanctification was aimed at Paidon's comment, "The New Testament seems to use "justification" and "sanctification" (sometimes translated as "holiness") interchangeably." I can't see how that would be true.

As far as the timing of justification goes, there is some debate about how that's supposed to be worked out. There is a sense in which people are justified when they believe. But, there is also the reality that their final justification happens at the final judgment, when God sets one group on one side and another group on the other. Some have tried to work this out by saying that the justification in life is really just you being marked out as someone who will be justified in the future. That's a trickier topic. Similarly, you are set apart (or sanctified) the moment you believe, but you set yourself apart from unbelievers as you go through life acting holy. That will by definition be a matter of degrees. Again, this is not something that is easy to categorize.

Doug

[Paidion]

THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION

2Thess 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth,

Rom 5:18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

Let's see. SALVATION THROUGH SANCTIFICATION. I don't know any of those who believe in imputed righteousness, who also believe salvation comes through sanctification. They all believe it comes as a result of justification (which they imagine to be something thrust upon them or accounted to them when they "accept Christ" or "trust in His finished work" or some other such method of "being saved".

JUSTIFICATION OF LIFE What could "justification of life" mean from the point of view of the believers in imputed righteousness? However sanctification of life is precisely the result of the magnificent sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This is the very purpose of Christ's death:

I Peter 2:24 He himself endured our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

II Corinthians 5:15 And he died for all, that those who live might live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.

Romans 14:9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

Titus 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.

Heb 9:26 ...he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

[jaydam]

Maybe this has no impact, but as I'm studying 1 John 1:9 I have to consider:

Does God truly just forgive us our sin?

Or does God displace our punishment to a holy whipping boy, Jesus?

Is he forgiving us, only because he can take out his holy anger on his son? Is that really forgiveness then?

In my mind, how sin is dealt with would speak a lot into the consideration of being justified or made righteous, imputed to be or declared to be.

[Paidion]

Much of it is similar to my own thinking, JAYDAM.

Though the Greek word ἀφιημι (aphiāmi) sometimes means "forgive", it more frequently means "leave" or "forsake" as in:

... and immediately they left the boat and their father, and followed Him. (Matt 4:22 )

It makes perfect sense that the redemption we have through His blood is for the forsaking of sin in keeping with His enabling grace as described in Titus 2.

In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forsaking of sins, according to the riches of His grace. (Eph 1:7 )

This is the grace that TRAINS us to overcome sin, and does not merely "cover up the sin by a robe or righteousness"

For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all people, training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and to live sensible, righteous, and devout lives in the present age...

It's a grace that redeems us from ALL lawlessness:

...expecting the blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness...

It's a grace that purifies God's people and makes them zealous for doing good:

... and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good works.

Paul urges Titus to declare this grace, to encourage and reprove thereby. (I can see why reproof is needed by some who think doing good works is an attempt to "earn" one's salvation and who think good works are unnecessary)

Declare these things; encourage and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you. Titus 2:11-15

"Let no one disregard you." Don't let anyone ignore you when you teach the true meaning of grace—enabling grace.

ἀφιημι also sometimes means "send away". This may be the meaning (rather than "forgiven"in the passage you are studying).

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just (in the sense of being fair) to send away our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)

I think God is much more interested in delivering us from our sin than in merely forgiving us. To be saved from sin is to be delivered from sin. The very meaning of "salvation" is "deliverance". The meaning of "Jesus" is "Saviour" which means "Deliverer".

The very idea that God punished his holy Son instead of the sinners who need correction, and then because of this punishment regards (counts) sinners as righteous even though they are not... that these sinners can continue in their sin, but that God is blinded to that fact, because of a "robe of righteousness" that they now wear, so that when He looks upon them, He no longer sees their sin but Christ's righteousness, even though they continue in sin having no requirement from God to repent of it (have a change of heart and mind regarding it), having no need to forake the sin since they have been "forgiven" of their sins, past, present, and future, is perhaps the most demonic scheme ever invented by man to overthrow the wonderful salvation FROM sin which was provided by God through Christ for His magnificent sacrifice on our behalf.

[Homer]

Paidion,

You wrote:

The very idea that God punished his holy Son instead of the sinners who need correction, and then because of this punishment regards (counts) sinners as righteous even though they are not... that these sinners can continue in their sin, but that God is blinded to that fact, because of a "robe of righteousness" that they now wear, so that when He looks upon them, He no longer sees their sin but Christ's righteousness, even though they continue in sin having no requirement from God to repent of it (have a change of heart and mind regarding it), having no need to forake the sin since they have been "forgiven" of their sins, past, present, and future, is perhaps the most demonic scheme ever invented by man to overthrow the wonderful salvation FROM sin which was provided by God through Christ for His magnificent sacrifice on our behalf.

Who that posts here do you think believes this?

[jaydam]

G1342
δίκαιος
dikaios
dik'-ah-yos
From G1349; equitable (in character or act); by implication innocent, holy (absolutely or relatively): - just, meet, right (-eous).

G1343
δικαιοσύνη
dikaiosunē
dik-ah-yos-oo'-nay
From G1342; equity (of character or act); specifically (Christian) justification: - righteousness.

G1344
δικαιόω
dikaioō
dik-ah-yo'-o
From G1342; to render (that is, show or regard as) just or innocent: - free, justify (-ier), be righteous.

I did a word study, and something it gives me that I do not see in your definitions is "to be put right with" - it seems this is critical because this does not imply innocence or equitable character as much as a relational standing.

It seems for God to declare me morally perfect or truly innocent seems to deny the truth, as I believe was stated earlier, but for God to declare me in right standing with him does not deny the reality of my guilt and imperfection.