Imputed Righteousness: What’s It All About?

Imputation Of Righteousness

By: Daniel Merritt, Ph.D., Th.D. | June 14, 2022

The following is a response given to a question submitted to Bellator Christi. If you have a question that you would like to ask our team, please submit them at https://bellatorchristi.com/submit-a-question-to-bellator-christi/, and your question may be featured on a future article and/or podcast.

Question:

“What is the righteousness of Christ that is imputed to us? Is it a) the righteousness of his obedience to the law of Moses b) the righteousness of his obedience to the moral law c) the righteousness of his divine nature d) the sinlessness of his human nature e) the sinlessness of his divine nature f) something else I’m thinking it is a combination of d) (the sinlessness of his human nature) and e) (the sinlessness of his divine nature) but not the other options. Although I am not sure.” –Anonymous.

Answer:

The doctrine of imputed righteousness is one of the key doctrines of the Christian faith. This doctrine is synonymous with justification by faith.  Of imputed righteousness or justification by faith, the great Reformer Martin Luther stated, “If the article of justification is lost, all Christian doctrine is lost at the same time. When the article of justification has fallen, everything has fallen.” [1] In defining imputed righteousness, this writer defines it as meaning that God in Christ has done everything necessary for the sinner to have right standing, without condemnation, before a holy and perfect God; and when a person places their faith in Christ that which God in Christ did on behalf of the sinner is counted as if the sinner did it themselves.  Luther writes of imputed righteousness, “In short, the term ‘to be justified’ means that a man is considered righteous…[that] because [Christ’s] imputation is greater than our impurity.” [2] Because man is a sinner by nature and choice, he needs the righteousness of Christ imputed (counted) to him because he has no righteousness of his own and in no way can merit the righteousness which will allow him to stand before a holy God without condemnation.

Four Verses Indicating the Centrality of Christ’s Imputation of Righteousness

More than a few verses could be quoted, but four will suffice to reveal the centrality of the truth of imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the sinner on the basis of faith.  Romans 4:5 reads, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” Romans 4:6 testifies, “Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works.” Second Corinthians 5:21, states, “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” First Peter 2:24 writes, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”

More than a few biblical students have asked the question, “What is the righteousness of Christ that is imputed to us?” Is that which is imputed to us:

  1. a) the righteousness of his obedience to the law of Moses
  2. b) the righteousness of his obedience to the moral law
  3. c) the righteousness of his divine nature
  4. d) the sinlessness of his human nature
  5. e) the sinlessness of his divine nature
  6. f) something else

While there are theologians who like to major on one aspect of imputation mentioned above, let it be stated, this writer contends the glorious doctrine of Christ’s righteousness being imputed to the sinner is of such infinite vastness, to grasp the full orb of all which imputation means transcends our finite minds. It would be easier to put all the oceans of the world into a bottle than to try to contain the imputed righteousness of Christ to one aspect of its enormity truth.  The believer may not be able to grasp all that imputed righteousness entails, but one can eternally rejoice that Christ’s imputed righteousness means that God in Christ did everything necessary for one to stand before a holy God without condemnation. It means the believing sinner’s position before the holy Father has been declared to be the same as Christ!!

Imputation and Moral Commandments

With that being said, it must be understood that God is holy and the only way man can stand without condemnation before Him is he must present to God holiness complying with His nature. Since man is born a sinner, man is unable to comply with God’s holy demands. Since God is holy, that which doesn’t comply with his holiness cannot enter into fellowship with him. Theologians such as P.T. Forsyth see God’s Holy Law as God expressing His nature in moral commandments, and since man can’t render the perfect obedience which God requires, and since the moral law “cannot be treated as less than inviolate and eternal, it cannot be denied or simply annulled unless He seems false to Himself.” [3] Christ, in complying in obedience with the perfect and holy Law of God, did for man what he could never do for himself. In Christ, the demands of God and the obedience of Man meet, as in Christ we see the perfect righteousness of his divine nature and the sinlessness of his human nature. Forsyth writes, “Atonement is substitutionary, else it is none…[Christ’s obedience] was not simply on our behalf, but in our stead.” [4] Forsyth placed more emphases on Christ satisfying the holiness of God than satisfying His justice. While he by no means dismissed God’s punitive justice, he saw atonement as “made by obedience rather than suffering,” though it was suffering that gives atonement “its value.” [5]   In Forsyth, our imputation is the result of Christ’s perfect obedience to the holy, perfect, moral Law of God (Matthew 5:21–47). Christ’s perfect obedience is counted as our own.

Imputation and the Confessions of Faith

While Forsyth taught that what is imputed to man is the perfect obedience of Christ (who was both human and divine) to the moral, holy Law of God; seeking to express Luther’s thoughts on imputed righteousness, the Formula of Concord (1577), a Lutheran confession, stated that the righteousness of faith or imputed righteousness, consists in “the sole merit, complete obedience, bitter suffering, death and resurrection of our Lord Christ alone, whose obedience is reckoned to us for righteousness.” [6] Later, the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), expressing the view of most Protestants, declares that believers are justified by God, “not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their person as righteous, not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone…by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them.” [7] Christ not only was perfect in his obedience, which was on behalf of man, He satisfied on the cross the justice of God which man justly deserves, and whereby the believing sinner is declared righteous.

Conclusion

As one can see, found in Forsyth and two Confessions of Faith, one finds elements of being imputed to the believing sinner being intertwined with:  a) the righteousness of his obedience to the law of Moses; b) the righteousness of his obedience to the moral law; c) the righteousness of his divine nature; and, d) the sinlessness of his human nature. Once again, this writer contends that imputed righteousness is of such infinite, divine immensity it transcends anyone aspect upon which one may focus. Stating earlier, it would be easier to put all the oceans of the world into a bottle than to try to contain the imputed righteousness of Christ to one aspect of its vastness. Upon this the believer can rest, by faith in the finished work of the Son of God all that is necessary for us to stand before God without condemnation is imputed to us, and we are declared to be as sinless as Jesus is sinless!!! What amazing grace! One can never be righteous by their own efforts, but by faith in Christ His righteousness is counted to our account. It is not our obedience or sacrifice, but it is Christ’s obedience and sacrifice on our behalf, in our place, that God counts it to our account!! By grace beyond our comprehension, we have been declared to have standing before our holy Father like that of Christ. O, what a Savior!!

Blessings,

Dr. Dan

About the Author

Daniel Merritt is no stranger to Bellator Christi. He has been featured as a guest contributor on the website for many articles, including one of his biggest hits, “Voltaire’s Prediction: Truth or Myth,” before joining Bellator Christi as a regular contributor. Dr. Merritt received both a Ph.D. and a Th.D. and has studied theology, philosophy, and biblical studies at North-Western Theological Seminary, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Campbell University. Dr. Merritt has published such books as Writings on the Ground and Dealing Effectively with Church Conflict. Merritt serves as the Director of Missions for the Surry Baptist Association after serving numerous churches in northwestern North Carolina. He also teaches and directs the Seminary Extension of the Southern Baptist Convention in the Mount Airy, NC area. In his spare time, Merritt serves as a track coach, training the next generation of runners.

 

NOTES

[1] Ewald M. Plass, comp. What Luther Says: An Anthology, 3 Vols. (St. Lous: Concordia Publishing House, 1959), 2:703-4.

[2] Martin Luther, “The Disputation Concerning Justification,” Career of the Reformer, IV. ed. Lewis W Spite. Luther’s Works, 54 vols., (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House,1955-1975), 34:166-69.

[3] P.T. Forsyth, The Atonement in Modern Religious Thought, (New York: Whittaker, 1901), 83.

[4] Forsyth, The Person and Place of Jesus Christ, (London: Independent Press, 1948), 336.

[5] Forsyth, The Atonement in Modern Religious Thought, 67.

[6] The Formula of Concord, 1577.

[7] The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647.

 

Copyright, 2022. Bellator Christi.

bchilton77

Brian G. Chilton is the founder of Bellator Christi Ministries and the co-host of the Bellator Christi Podcast. Dr. Chilton earned a Ph.D. in the Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University (with high distinction), a M.Div. in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his B.S. in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); earned a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University, and completed Unit 1 of Clinical Pastoral Education at Wake Forest University's School of Medicine. Dr. Chilton is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society. In his spare time, he enjoys reading, working out in his home gym, and watching football. He has served in pastoral ministry for over 20 years and serves as a clinical chaplain.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

2 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
barry
barry
2 years ago

“The doctrine of imputed righteousness is one of the key doctrines of the Christian faith.”

——–But by logical necessity it cannot have been true or applicable back before Jesus was crucified, when he was yet telling people how to get saved. At that time, getting saved required one’s righteousness (Matthew 5:20) to be actual personal conformity to the Law (see v. 19). Apparently, Matthew thinks the risen Christ wants future Gentile believers to believe the doctrines Jesus taught before he was crucified. 28:20. Jesus before he was crucified did not teach the doctrine of imputed righteousness..and yet he apparently still taught a true gospel. And in light of 28:20, he apparently didn’t think his death and resurrection required updating any of his pre-crucifixion teachings. Thus in light of 28:20, what Jesus taught about actual conformity to the law in 5:19-20 applies with full force to post-crucifixion Gentile converts.

A great scandal in Christian scholarship is the question of to what degree the pre-crucifixion teachings of Jesus “still apply” to post-crucifixion church. Plenty of dispensationalists insist that salvation during Jesus’ life was earned by good works, and this legalistic system was removed when Jesus’ death changed the covenant. Doesn’t matter if that theory is wrong, it is most certainly reasonable enough. As an atheist, I don’t ascribe to biblical inerrancy, I agree with most Christian scholars that inerrancy is false doctrine, therefore, there is no intellectual constraint on me to read Matthew only through the lens of other NT authors. I can understand him reasonably well without needing to make sure my interpretation harmonizes with something in Ephesians. I’m not saying your view is either wrong or unreasonable, I’m only saying my view is reasonable. Reasonableness doesn’t slice and dice the brutal way that “accuracy” does. Two people can possibly be equally reasonable even while their disagreement over one single fact is in progress. Christians apparently agree, because they usually don’t castigate each other for holding different interpretations of certain biblical doctrines. And reasonableness isn’t dictated by what fundamentalist Protestant Trinitarians believe.

trackback

[…] Source: Imputed Righteousness: What’s It All About? […]

2
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x