Originally posted by Saiph
Belief entails more than the rigid doctrine of sola fide. How God justifies us is more mysterious than just alien forensic righteousness placed upon us. I find the reformed idea to be an oversimplification.
Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
Jude 1:5
Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
Faith is existential throughout the Gospels and new testament record. It is lived out in spite of understanding, and seems to involve more of the human will than many reformed people I speak with will admit.
How does Wright's idea of righteousness actually contradict reformed theology ? I think it augments it.
Rom 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
Are we justified by Christ's works of the law ? Or was Christ justified before God because He perfectly obeyed them ? Is it the actual righteousness of Christ imputed to us and infused in us by the power of the Holy Spirit ? Note the following verse:
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it--
Rom 3:22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
Rom 3:25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
Rom 3:26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.
Rom 3:28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
Christ's work is applied for us first, and granted to us through the baptism of the Spirit.
Rom 16:25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages
Rom 16:26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith--
Rom 16:27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.
The righteousness of God is simply "the obedience of faith".
Mark,
The historic Reformed position is that the "righteousness of God" is the righteousness of Christ that is given to the believer (and this is true regardless of a double or single imputation scheme).
Wright's has redefined the "righteousness of God" to mean His covenantal faithfulness, which He imparts to us, and we are righteous through covenantal faithfulness. That is why Wright has no real doctrine of perseverance, because one can never really be sure whether one has enough covenantal faithfulness.
I believe that Wright does not follow the errors of many of the FV crowd in holding out the difficult route of covenantal faithfulness. Instead, for Wright, once you are in, you are in. That is why Wright calls for table fellowship with Rome. For Wright, the only real sin that can affect one's standing before God is to fail to be as inclusive as he is (and hence fall into the error that he says the Pharisees had - relying on "covenant badges" ).