To be counted righteous, Christ's righteousness has to be imputed on us. If so, why then was Cornelius said to be righteous in Acts 10:22 yet he was yet to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior?
Could there be another way righteousness is worked? If so, how is it yet it is only through Christ that we are counted righteous? Could Cornelius have been a special case?
Clarify
•
Share
•
Report
•
Asked November 10 2014
•
Jeremiah Kaaya
Supporter
For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.
Jack Gutknecht
This "acceptance" is God's providential grace to draw a person toward the Gospel, not God's judicial declaration that they are eternally saved. This righteousness does not cancel sin, pay its penalty, or clothe the sinner in Christ's perfection.
Could Cornelius have been a special case?
No. He is not a loophole in the doctrine of justification. Rather, he is the perfect biblical example of how God prepares a humble heart to receive the only righteousness that saves: the righteousness of Christ, received through faith alone.
In short:
Cornelius was morally righteous (a devout, good man).
Cornelius was not yet salvifically righteous (justified before God) until he believed in Jesus.
His story is the bridge that proves the Gospel is for all, and that everyone--even the most devout person--still needs Christ to be counted truly righteous before a holy God.