|
|
|
|
|
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2016
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,349
Posts56,545
Members992
| |
Most Online4,295
Yesterday at 09:40 PM
|
|
|
#16489
Sun Jul 25, 2004 3:08 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 199
Addict
|
OP
Addict
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 199 |
What's the difference? As I am thinking about it apropos of NT Wright, one (imputation) appears to be more "real" and factual, while the other (reckoning) would be more of what they call 'forensic', or legally understood. Is my understanding correct? Can someone elaborate on this or point me to a writing that illuminates this difference?
Stand Fast, Craigellachie!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,026 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,026 Likes: 274 |
Philip Eveson's articles in his series on "Jusification" are excellent. You might want to particularly look at this one: Is Wright, Right?. William Webster's article on "Justification" is also good on this matter of "imputation". See here: The Biblical Teaching of Justification.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif) simul iustus et peccator![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
118
guests, and
26
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
