GRACE DISTINCTIONS #10

HERE IS THE LAST INSTALLMENT IN THIS SERIES ON GRACE:

GRACE DISTINCTIONS #10– by Jack Cottrell

X. LAW’S COMMANDS SATISFIED, or LAW’S PENALTY SATISFIED? The issue here is this: of all that Jesus did while he was on earth, exactly what part of that is transferred (imputed) to us as “the righteousness of God”? Here we must distinguish between Jesus’s satisfaction of the law’s COMMANDS, and his satisfaction of its PENALTY. We have described righteousness (as used in the context of grace) as satisfaction of the requirements of the law. We have said that God the Son as Jesus of Nazareth “acted out” this righteousness for us. I.e., he satisfied the requirements of the law for us, and this is given to us as a gift and counted as our own.

The question is, in what ways did Jesus “satisfy the requirements of the law,” and how was this transferred to us? There is considerable confusion and misunderstanding here, so we must spell it out carefully.

Jesus satisfied the requirements of the law in two distinct ways. First, he was sinless, i.e., he perfectly obeyed all the COMMANDS of the law under which he lived as a human being (mainly the Law of Moses). This is called his active obedience or active righteousness. Many believe that this “righteousness of God” is transferred (imputed) to believing sinners as the basis for their justification before God. Jesus’s record of perfect obedience is transferred to our account, and God counts it as ours and considers us to be righteous. This is a very widespread belief.

This, however, is WRONG. For one thing, the perfect obedience of Jesus was no more than he, the man, already owed to God as a human being living under the law code of the Mosaic Law. He had nothing “left over,” so to speak, to share with anyone else. (This is a conclusion based on Luke 17:7-10.) Even as a perfect human being Jesus was an “unprofitable servant.”

Another reason why it is wrong to think that Jesus’ perfect obedience is the “righteousness of God” imputed to sinners is that the Bible says (Rom. 5:18) that “one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.” ONE ACT of righteousness! This would be not his perfect life, but his CRUCIFIXION, the one act in which Jesus was satisfying the requirement of the law FOR PENALTY for the entire human race! This is called Jesus’s passive obedience or passive righteousness—and THIS IS ALL THE RIGHTEOUSNESS WE NEED for justification before God!

It is this passive righteousness alone that is the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel, and the righteousness of God that is imputed to sinners and on the basis of which God justifies us. Because Jesus on the cross submitted himself to the infinite wrath of God in our place, when this “one act” is applied to us, we are justified. The meaning of justification is this: God as Judge looks at us and declares, “No penalty for you!” (See Rom. 8:1.) That is all we need for justification.

Jesus did indeed satisfy the law’s commands perfectly, and also the law’s eternal penalty. But he did the former for himself, to maintain his own righteousness. Then as a perfect man as well as the infinite God incarnate, he satisfied the law’s eternal penalty in our place, as our substitute, thus enabling the righteous God to justify us while maintaining his own righteousness (Rom. 3:26; 2 Cor. 5:21).

Comments

GRACE DISTINCTIONS #10 — 4 Comments

  1. The definition you cite is accurate up to a point. “To impute” means to put down to someone’s account, either as a credit or as a debit. The problem with your definition is in the words “what properly belongs there.” This is too vague. When we understand that it is God who is acting as the accountant or bookkeeper, then he will determine what “belongs” where. When God imputes our sin to the account of Christ, it “belongs” there because God has so determined to do it this way. When he imputes Christ’s righteousness to our account, ditto. The main point is to see that forgiveness, i.e., justification, is the result of such an act of objective imputation rather than being some kind of subjective change in the heart or life of the sinner.

  2. Brother Jack, I’m having trouble with the definition of the term Impute. Looks like it is an accounting term that basically means to put down to your account what properly belongs there. I haven’t found a lexicon that defines Impute to mean transfer. Please help!!