“Well that settles it. Catholics don’t know what their own theology means on any significant level.”
The correct answer is I never said “we actually become as holy as Christ...” nor did I even imply it, or suggest it, or even hint at it. Still, Protestant anti-Catholics have to fall back on their only strategy: http://www.newmanreader.org/works/england/lecture4.html
“The correct answer is I never said “we actually become as holy as Christ...” “
In that event, will you go ahead and answer my questions?:
How am I lying? If the infusion of Christ’s holiness or righteousness in us, does not actually make us Holy or righteous, then what is it for then? I’m not putting words into your mouth. I’m asking you to be consistent with the meaning of words.
What does it mean to be “holy?” or to be “righteous”? God is described as Holy. God is perfect. Therefore, why is it that the “holiness” of man is something that is not also perfect?
And why does Christ say that no one is good, except for Him?
Luk_18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
And what does it mean when Paul declares that none are actually righteous?
The only logical conclusion is that we are not righteous, but are considered righteous because of our faith in the sight of God. In fact, none of our good works are even our own, but are given to us directly by God who is the true author of them. Therefore man has no merits at all, but is utterly sinful in the sight of God, and are blessed to have the actual merits of Christ alone whose perfection is imputed onto us.
Therefore, Christ’s righteousness is not infused in us. It is imputed onto us, exactly as the scripture says:
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Can you respond to this? Or is this too hard to respond to?