Here I am not going to discuss about the imputation or infusion of righteousness of Christ. Theologians made theology very confusing and some of the terms make things more complicated. In a nutshell, the Reformed believe that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to saints.

What I’d like to focus on is Christ’s righteousness. Those who hold immovable child-like faith do not need to be explained about this. But for the sake of the new visible church, I write this so that she is well-equipped to defend herself.

Earlier I wrote that I came across Romans 3:11-18 and the passage attracted me when I was 6. For a six-year-old, verse 10 and 11 were a mystery.

There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. (Rom 3: 10-11)

I asked myself then: What is righteousness? Only in 2017, I started to understand the word. What I came to know in 2017 was that only God is righteous. When I understood the word, I was surprised to find out people define righteousness in many different ways. In churches, people often connect this word to God’s Laws and doing good deeds in the sight of the world.

Some may say that my understanding is the same as others. But there is a big difference. Even though one appears to live a pious life and does many good deeds in the sight of the world, God may see him/her as unrighteous. For example, the notorious heretic, Arius, was a church leader and was very popular among people because of his pious life. But he did not know God. He denied Trinity. He was the opponent of Athanasius, who was a true prophet.

To explain the difference, I need to write about the Holy Spirit. But I’d like to focus on the kind of righteousness that Christ had. Christ, as the son of God and also as the son of Man who received the Holy Spirit, had the same righteousness as the Father. But while His righteousness came from the Father, theologians explained that the righteousness of Christ imputed to saints is different from God’s righteousness, and that righteousness came from Christ’s works – active and passive obedience. This is very confusing and does not make much sense.

Even Calvin made this confusing. If I understood his writings well, he understood that one is righteous when he/she keeps the Law perfectly. And it appears that he separated Christ’s two natures when he explained about His temptations and sufferings. But I think he was merely explaining a particular passage at a time instead of understanding the entire Bible. He mentioned not to speculate on Adam’s fall but the reason why Adam fell is crucial in understanding Christ. But Calvin was careful not to go beyond what was written. Covenant theologians still struggle to prove that Calvin’s theology supports the active obedience of Christ and the Covenant Theology.

Calvin talks about the righteousness of Christ imputed to saints in his institute Book 2, Chapter 17. Unlike the Covenant theologians who emphasize on the Law, Calvin focuses on Christ’s suffering on the cross when explaining His righteousness according to Romans 5:12-21. Paul relates Christ’s righteousness to the death on the cross. Christ Himself explains that righteousness is related His returning to the Father (John 16:10). And Calvin admits that Christ’s righteousness is not from Himself but from the Father.

“Therefore, when we treat of the merit of Christ, we do not place the beginning in him, but we ascend to the ordination of God as the primary cause, because of his mere good pleasure he appointed a Mediator to purchase salvation for us. Hence the merit of Christ is inconsiderately opposed to the mercy of God.” (The Institute 2.17.1)

For a better understanding, you may read the entire chapter. But I’d recommend not to read theology books. The Reformers in the 16th century relied heavily on Paul’s letters to explain justification of saints and made speculative theories. What Paul tried to do was to explain God’s mysteries in a way a new believer could understand. Bringing human philosophies (especially Greek philosophies) into Paul’s letter is leading the opposite direction that Paul tried to show. Peter warned us a long time ago to be careful when interpreting what Paul said.

He (Paul) writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. (2 Peter 3:16)

It is crucial to understand the entire Bible to understand Christ’s righteousness imputed to saints. “Christ did everything!” We hear this a lot in churches. But it is actually, “The Father did everything!” And this Christ also says in John 5:19:

So Jesus answered them by saying, “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself [of His own accord], unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever things the Father does, the Son [in His turn] also does in the same way.

While theologians and ministers say we are saved by Christ’s merit, they treat His merit as His own. And they bring Adam to the table and say Christ did what Adam could not. Combined with the doctrine of Free Will, they emphasize the excellence of the will of a man called Jesus. Thus, they limit Christ as a mere man. It is not surprising that the original doctrine of the active obedience of Christ by Anselm of Canterbury tells us that Christ had to keep the law to qualify Himself. In other words, Christ had to work not to become like Adam. This is a heretical teaching.

Christ’s righteousness imputed to saints is the King’s righteousness not just a mere uprightness that Adam had. Adam was naked but saints are clothed with Christ.

But now the righteousness of God has been clearly revealed [independently and completely] apart from the Law, though it is [actually] confirmed by the Law and the [words and writings of the] Prophets. (Romans 3:21)

God did not change His plans in response to men’s actions. The message written in the OT is the same as in the NT.

For all of you who were baptized into Christ [into a spiritual union with the Christ, the Anointed] have clothed yourselves with Christ [that is, you have taken on His characteristics and values] (Galatians 3:27)

Paul himself opposes the Covenant Theology because he does not see Adam and Christ in a parallel way. Christ is from above and Adam is from dust (1 Corinthians 15:47).  

Unconditional perfect obedience was required of Adam because he was God’s slave. Adam was not given knowledge of God as it was given to His Son. The Son’s (and also the adopted children’s) relationship with the Father are shown in these verses:

He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he will be a son to Me; when he does wrong, I will discipline him with a rod of men and with strokes of sons of mankind, but My favor shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from you. Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever. (2 Samuel 7:13-16)

In conclusion, saints are clothed with God’s righteousness. This is the Father’s will. We are not merely going back to Adam’s position before the fall. Adam’s fall was necessary because God trains His people as silver is purified. The result is the Kingdom.