In response to my article, Christ's Baptism is NOT imputed to the Believer, where I refuted Michael Flournoy on imputation and demonstrated the Bible affirms baptismal regeneration, I got the following "response"(?) from Dave Bartosiewicz, no doubt full of Christmas cheer . . .
I know in some circles this counts as a "response," but in the real world, where exegesis and integrity are taken seriously, Bartosiewicz fails. Who knows, someone might buy him an Exegesis 101 book for Christmas.
For those interested, here was my response to Dave:
Piper is wrong about the phrase in Gen 15:6 and Romans. See http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/10/does-genesis-156-prove-reformed.html for e.g.
Note that, according to Paul, it is not an alien righteousness that is credited to Abraham, but faith.
In Reformed theology, one is declared (not “made”) righteous based on the alien imputed righteousness of Jesus. However, the verse immediate after one of their favourite “proof-texts” (Rom 4:1-8) disproves this theory. In Rom 4:9 we read:
Ο μακαρισμὸς οὖν οὗτος ἐπὶ τὴν περιτομὴν ἢ καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκροβυστίαν; λέγομεν γάρ· ἐλογίσθη τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ἡ πίστις εἰς δικαιοσύνην
Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
The “blessedness” of Abraham (his “justification”) is not based on imputed righteousness, but Abraham’s faith. Indeed, based on the strict grammar of the Greek of this verse and Rom 4:5, 22 refute Reformed soteriology and its understanding of the “ground” of justification.
Note the following from Spicq:
Cf. Rom 4:5—“The one who has no works but who believes in the One who justifies (δικαιουντα) the ungodly, will have his faith counted as righteousness.” M.J. Legrange (on this verse) comments: “δικαιοω in the active cannot mean ‘forgive’: it has to be ‘declare just’ or ‘make just.’ That God should declare the ungodly righteous is a blasphemous proposition. But in addition, when would this declaration be made?” H.W. Heidland (TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 288-292) explains λογιζεσθαι: “Justification is not a fiction alongside the reality. If God counts faith as righteousness, man is wholly righteous in God’s eyes . . . He becomes a new creature through God’s λογιζεσθαι.” (Celsius Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament [trans. James D. Ernest; 3 vols.: Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994], 1:342 n. 88)
Much of the so-called "proof-texts" have been discussed in my responses to you, Dave. For a discussion of John 19:30, perhaps the proof-text for forensic atonement, see http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2016/07/why-latter-day-saints-cannot-believe.html
I know in some circles this counts as a "response," but in the real world, where exegesis and integrity are taken seriously, Bartosiewicz fails. Who knows, someone might buy him an Exegesis 101 book for Christmas.
For those interested, here was my response to Dave:
Piper is wrong about the phrase in Gen 15:6 and Romans. See http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/10/does-genesis-156-prove-reformed.html for e.g.
Note that, according to Paul, it is not an alien righteousness that is credited to Abraham, but faith.
In Reformed theology, one is declared (not “made”) righteous based on the alien imputed righteousness of Jesus. However, the verse immediate after one of their favourite “proof-texts” (Rom 4:1-8) disproves this theory. In Rom 4:9 we read:
Ο μακαρισμὸς οὖν οὗτος ἐπὶ τὴν περιτομὴν ἢ καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκροβυστίαν; λέγομεν γάρ· ἐλογίσθη τῷ Ἀβραὰμ ἡ πίστις εἰς δικαιοσύνην
Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
The “blessedness” of Abraham (his “justification”) is not based on imputed righteousness, but Abraham’s faith. Indeed, based on the strict grammar of the Greek of this verse and Rom 4:5, 22 refute Reformed soteriology and its understanding of the “ground” of justification.
Note the following from Spicq:
Cf. Rom 4:5—“The one who has no works but who believes in the One who justifies (δικαιουντα) the ungodly, will have his faith counted as righteousness.” M.J. Legrange (on this verse) comments: “δικαιοω in the active cannot mean ‘forgive’: it has to be ‘declare just’ or ‘make just.’ That God should declare the ungodly righteous is a blasphemous proposition. But in addition, when would this declaration be made?” H.W. Heidland (TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 288-292) explains λογιζεσθαι: “Justification is not a fiction alongside the reality. If God counts faith as righteousness, man is wholly righteous in God’s eyes . . . He becomes a new creature through God’s λογιζεσθαι.” (Celsius Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament [trans. James D. Ernest; 3 vols.: Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994], 1:342 n. 88)
Much of the so-called "proof-texts" have been discussed in my responses to you, Dave. For a discussion of John 19:30, perhaps the proof-text for forensic atonement, see http://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2016/07/why-latter-day-saints-cannot-believe.html