Imputed righteousness means that we are declared to be in the right before God on the basis of the righteousness of Jesus Christ, which is given to us when we believe. Infused righteousness means that we are righteous before God because of our righteous behavior, because of the righteousness that transforms and changes us.Sola Fide, 26
we cannot expect the earliest Christians to have the same clarity on the issue of sola fide as the Reformers. The emphasis we find among them on topics like good works and merit lacks the clarity of the later discussions, but a sympathetic reading doesn't posit a contradiction between them and the Reformers. True faith results in good works, and the term "merit" in the early fathers may designate the reward given instead of being interpreted to say that one earns salvation.Sola Fide, 23
Justification is by faith alone, but it isn't a faith that is alone, for true faith produces good works. Still, good works are not the ground or cause of salvation; they are the fruit of one's faith. The perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed to believers, so that their righteousness is not inherent but is theirs because they are united to Jesus Christ. At the final judgment God will declare publicly what was already the case in the lives of believers, i.e., that they are righteous by faith, and their works will verify (but will not be the foundation of) that declaration.
What we typically call the moral norms of the law are fulfilled, at least in some measure, in the lives of believers. Nevertheless, they are not normative merely because they appear in the Mosaic covenant, for that covenant has passed away. It seems that they are normative because they express the character of God. We know that they still express God's will for believers because they are repeated as moral norms in the New Testament. It is not surprising that in the welter of the laws we find in the Old Testament (613 according to the rabbis) that some of those laws express transcendent moral principles. Still, the mistake we make is trying to carve up neatly the law into moral and nonmoral categories. Many of the so-called "ceremonial" laws have a moral dimension that cannot be jettisoned. They are not applicable to believers today because we live in a completely different cultural situation.
The distinction between the moral, ceremonial, and civil law is appealing and attractive. Even though it has some elements of truth, it does not sufficiently capture Paul's stance toward the law. As stated earlier, Paul argues that the entirety of the law has been set aside now that Christ has come.
Sometimes I wonder if egalitarians hope to triumph in the debate on the role of women by publishing book after book on the subject. Each work propounds a new thesis which explains why the traditional interpretation is flawed. Complementarians could easily give in from sheer exhaustion, thinking that so many books written by such a diversity of different authors could scarcely be wrong. Further, it is difficult to keep writing books promoting the complementarian view. Our view of the biblical text has not changed dramatically in the last twenty five years. Should we continue to write books that essentially promote traditional interpretations? Is the goal of publishing to write what is true or what is new? One of the dangers of evangelical publishing is the desire to say something novel. Our evangelical publishing houses could end up like those in Athens so long ago: 'Now all the Athenians and the strangers visiting there used to spend their time in nothing other than telling or hearing something new'(Acts 17:21, NASB).http://www.cbmw.org/Resources/Book-Reviews/Slaves-Women-and-Homosexuals-by-William-J-Webb-Review-by-Thomas-R-Schreiner