Reddit mentions of Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul's Soteriology

Haha, the reason I didn't give a reason for Sproul being wrong is that I don't think he is. I think if you look at the usages of dikaioo and the Hebrew equivalent phrases, the Protestant understanding of what they connote is born out. But, as was pointed out elsewhere (I think by you actually), for myself as a Protestant, the Bible is the beginning and ending of my understanding of justification (or, at least, that's the goal!), so usages within it dictate what is meant by the word itself. Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox are totally legitimate in their own right to say that the intra-textual usages aren't the whole story, and that's fine. We just differ on a core issue about interpretation, and so talking about the results of differing methods ends up being rather fruitless, so I tried to explain the differences in methodology instead of saying whether I agree or disagree.

By that first paragraph, I was only trying to say that, strictly speaking, dikaioo doesn't really mean either one or the other. It won't work to include either 'make righteous' or 'declare righteous' in its strict semantic range because they aren't included. They are connotations and not denotations. We don't really have an English equivalent, so it's difficult to translate without those connotations, and that's why it's such a difficult issue to debate.

Lastly, I just want to point out that Paul can speak legally about justification while also talking about new creation. Many, many Protestants hold the two ideas together, because they go together. Herman Ridderbos (Dutch Reformed), for example, finds that the center of Paul's theology is the resurrection of Jesus. So new creation is a huge part of that, but so is justification, because righteousness imputed could be seen as being part of the new creation. Several others connect both concepts to union with Christ and so it all fits nicely together. You might want to read Herman Bavinck (particularly Vol. 2) if you want to hear it from a Protestant who you might be able to stomach a little better. Another good idea would be to read Richard Gaffin's dissertation to get more at the specific issues. If you go to a Protestant church, the best idea would probably be to avoid using the phrase 'legal fiction.' If your pastor hears it, he or she may get upset and it would cause more trouble than it's worth. Instead, the best thing would probably be to talk more about EO than about agreeing with Catholicism. Most Protestants will immediately shut you out if you mention agreeing with it, and it sounds like you're more in tune with EO than Catholicism anyway.