The following shows the common eisegesis (and blasphemous nonsense) that comes with any (esp. Reformed) Protestant work defending forensic justification:
Justification
is a legal term used to designate the acceptance of anyone as righteous in the
sight of God. Justification does not make a person righteous; it declares him
righteous. A wicked man may be justified (pronounced guiltless), and a just
(guiltless) person may be condemned, but they are abomination to the Lord
(Prov. 17:15). The sinner justified (declaratively) on the ground of the
impeccable Savior’s righteousness, but how is Christ justified? “And without
controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit…” (1 Tim. 3:16). . . . As wisdom is justified of all
her children (Luke 7:35), so the Son of God is declared just by all who have
received the revelation of heaven (Matt. 16:13-17). (W.E. Best, Studies in
the Person and Work of Jesus Christ [Houston, Tex.: W.E. Best Book
Missionary Trust, 1975], 79)
To see why Best et al., are wrong about
(1) imputation; (2) the instrument of justification; (3) the nature of
justification (including the meaning of δικαιοω in 1 Tim 3:16) as well as Luke 7 and the “justification”
of wisdom and its implications for δικαιοω elsewhere, see:
Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness
"Born of Water and of the Spirit": The Biblical Evidence for Baptismal Regeneration (for those who want a free PDF copy, drop me an email at ScripturalMormonismATgmailDOTcom)
Refuting Christina Darlington on the Nature of "Justification" (includes a discussion of 1 Tim 3:16 and Luke 7 and the "justification" of wisdom)
