Imputed and Original Sin
Definition
The doctrine of imputation teaches that while Adam’s sin is imputed to us because he is our natural federal head, God imputes or accredits the righteousness and suffering of Jesus to those who are in him and, conversely, imputes the sins of those redeemed to Christ.
Summary
The doctrine of imputation teaches that while Adam’s sin is imputed to us because he is our natural federal head, God imputes or accredits the righteousness and suffering of Jesus to those who are in him and, conversely, imputes the sins of the redeemed to Christ. Imputation is based on Old Testament sacrificial structures seen in places such as the Day of Atonement, where the sins of the people are transferred to a scapegoat. The prophets Jeremiah and Isaiah provide even clearer foundations for the doctrine, upon which the NT authors build. The apostle Paul provides the bulk of the NT teaching on imputation, clarifying three ways in which imputation functions: (1) Adam’s sin imputed to all of humanity; (2) the Christian’s sin imputed to Christ; and (3) Christ’s righteousness imputed to Christians. The latter two of these imputations Martin Luther famously called the “glorious exchange,” our sin for Christ’s righteousness. Such truth is a balm to the Christian who fears standing in the presence of a holy God wearing nothing but sin-stained garments.
Articles
Moral Agency and an At-Home Humility Test
Six questions to ask yourself.
Parents, Tell Your Kids They Are Sinners
When we don’t teach our kids about sin, we are actually making it difficult for them to become Christians.
Book Reviews
Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin
Evangelical scholars spanning several disciplines have delivered a robust restatement of the historicity of Adam.
Heresy Does Not Happen Overnight
While the scriptural terms 'heresy' and 'blasphemy' are rarely used today, Giberson has moved into the realm where these sober descriptors find warrant.
Does the Bible Teach an Age of Accountability?
We shouldn’t judge ‘normal cases’ (e.g., adults who never hear the gospel) on the basis of ‘extraordinary cases’ (e.g., the death of an infant).
Future of Justification 8: Imputation
Anyone who has done a cursory reading of John Piper and N.T. Wright knows that a major area of disagreement will come up regarding the “imputation of Christ’s righteousness.” I’ve already shown how Piper believes Wright’s definition of righteousness to be too minimal. Piper sees another major flaw in Wright’s set-up of the law-court scene where justification takes place: Wright fails to take into account the omniscience of the Judge (73). For Piper, God is unjust if he (knowing the guilt of the defendant) rules in the sinner’s favor (74) without something to uphold to the standard of justice. N.T. Wright treats “reckoning righteousness apart from...
