Justin Taylor quotes a famous short dictionary article by J.I. Packer on justification:
“[God] reckons righteousness to them, not because he accounts them to have kept his law personally (which would be a false judgment), but because he accounts them to be united to one who kept it representatively (and that is a true judgment)”
—J. I. Packer, “Justification,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984], p. 596.
If you buy into the concept of "union" and "representation," then the notion of justification as resting on the imputed merit of Jesus Christ starts to fall apart.
4 comments:
As Justin Taylor buys into, or so I believe, imputed righteousness and he cites Packer approvingly, is what Justin thinks is the doctrine of imputed righteousness not the same as Packer's definition? If so, how do you see them as in conflict?
Mr Bird,
This sounds like a much stronger line than the one you took in SROG.
Matt
I agree, but also approve.
I read Roms 3 - classic biblical statement about the righteousness of God and see nothing about IAO.
If my memory serves me correctly NT Wright, when conversing with VanHoozer in Wheaton, conceded that "some" elements of double imputation may be present in the doctrine of "union with Christ". Could this possibly serve as a sort of rapprochement in the debate?
Post a Comment