This justification requires no transfer or imputation of anything. It does not force us to reify “righteousness” into something that can be shuffled around in heavenly accounting books

So wrote Rich Lusk. I defended him here (and perhaps expressed a different way of speaking of the issues). I kept Rich’s name out of it because I was keeping his critic’s name out (and I kept his name out because I thought more highly of him than the quality of his public sermon. And somehow the impulse to not use names spread to Rich. Besides, I occasionally still dream of theology as about truth without the spirit of party besetting it at every side, so I wanted to try to keep personal references to a minimum.

The thing about Rich is that, as a theologian and as a man, he is a major treasure for the Church. If you live in Birmingham you should try to get some benefit from his ministry there. For the rest of us, his church resource site is a treasure trove.