Talk:Imparted righteousness

From Theopedia

Righteous Principle

Good stuff, but I have no idea what the difference is between "righteous principle" and "righteousness". Let's be sure to make the introduction understandable to the laymen. Grace and peace! -Aaronshaf 12:56, 7 Sep 2005 (EDT)

These words were imported from the Wikipedia article, so some clarification may certainly be in order. As I see it, imparted righteousness is not only a problematic phrase, but is unbiblical terminology used to describe a notion which is best explained in other ways. For example, what happens to man's nature in regeneration? What is the real basis for subsequent sanctification? My off-the-cuff answer: the indwelling Spirit and a "renewed" nature. It may indeed be appropriate to describe regeneration as God renewing our nature by implanting a "righteous principle" -- which is what I believe is intended by the words in question. Imparted righteousness is only valid if understood in this way. Your thoughts?? Gomarus 13:28, 7 Sep 2005 (EDT)

I think that IMPARTED RIGHTEOUSNESS is a good term. It may be misused by others but that should not discount it. It describes II Cor 3:18 and II Peter 1:4. Christians are gradually being conformed to His image, which is much more than a principle, it is substance. — unsigned comment by Dlgroves (talk • contribs)