Imputation and Counter-imputation

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.

2 Cor. 5:21

(The following sermon was preached by Dr Campbell at the Sunday morning communion service in Scalpay Free Church on 9 March 2003.)

This verse sets major biblical doctrines before us: the fact that at the cross of Calvary, Jesus was made sin in order that we might be made righteousness. Paul comes to these doctrines because he has found it necessary to speak about the ministry that God has given him: a ministry which was increasingly under attack since he first wrote to the Corinthian believers.

It is evident from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians that there were many things that needed to be corrected at Corinth: issues ranging from internal divisions, to lack of biblical church discipline, to misuse of spiritual gifts and of the Lord's supper. And it is also clear from the second letter that the Corinthians were willing to listen and learn, to reform and be renewed. Paul's counsels were accepted, and his letter had the desired effect of renewal among God's people.

But then Satan found another way in to Corinth, to inflict more damage on the work and witness of the Gospel there, by undermining Paul's authority and suggesting that he had no right and no authority to have written to them in such harsh terms in the first place. In a reformed church, Satan does damage by attacking the very notion of apostolic authority.

For that reason, much of the second letter is taken up with a defence of Paul's ministry. He has received it from the Lord, and therefore he will not give up (4:1). Indeed, in this chapter, he outlines three motives for his continuing work in the Gospel.

First, he says in verse 11, he preaches the Gospel and fulfills the ministry God has given him because he knows the terror of the Lord. He has seen into eternity, and he has caught a glimpse of judgement and beyond. He knows that there is such a thing as the wrath of theLamb, and that it stands ready to be poured out on all those who reject God. So his primary purpose in preaching is to show men that they can prepare for death, judgement and eternity, by trusting to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Secondly, he says in verse 14 that he is constrained by the love of Christ. If it is true that he has seen something of Christ's anger against sin, he has also tasted something of Christ's love for his people. And that love is displayed nowhere like it is displayed on the cross, where "one died for all", and where the great sacrifice for sin is offered.

Thirdly, he says that his ministry is motivated by the trust God has given him -- he has committed the word of reconciliation to preachers of the Gospel (verse 19). Paul's calling is to be faithful to that charge, and to be loyal to that trust; it is to preach no Gospel other than the Gospel committed to him, and to call on all men everywhere to be "reconciled to God".

It is at that point that Paul tells us that Jesus has been made sin for us: as an explanation for the fact that he, and all preachers of the Gospel, can stand "in Christ's place" and say to sinners "be reconciled to God". The words of our text speak of IMPUTATION -- our sins being imputed to Christ -- and of COUNTER-IMPUTATION -- Christ's righteousness being imputed to us; and these great doctrines stand guard over the free offer of the Gospel. The reason that we can call on all men everywhere to put their trust in Christ and to be reconciled to God is simply because of what has taken place at Calvary.

So here is the great doctrine of imputation, which I want to spend some time thinking about this morning. And according to our text, it is a two-sided doctrine, in which, first, some things are imputed to Jesus Christ, and secondly, as a consequence of this, some things are imputed to us. But the grammar of the verse makes it clear that there are three things true on both sides of this doctrine.

First, God is the agent on both sides of the doctrine of imputation.

What do I mean by this? Well, look at the emphasis of the verse: "HE has made him to be sin for us...". We could put the question this way: "Who made Jesus to be sin?" and, conversely, "Who makes us to be righteousness?" The answer to both questions is the same: it is the agency of God the Father that is brought to our attention here.

We did not make Christ to be sin. We crucified him, and joined our voices with those who were saying "Crucify him! Crucify him! We will not have this man to reign over us!". But on our part, the cross was a symbol of rejection, and of complete and utter dismissal. We crucified Jesus, but that act was a sign of our own sin and our own estrangement from God.

Nor did Christ make himself to be sin. He loved the church and willingly offered himself. He laid down his life in obedience to the will of the Father. He took our sins and removed the offence. But as to who made him to be sin, the emphasis falls firmly upon the action of the one who had sent him into the world. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself", according to verse 19. Even when Christ had to call out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me", God was in Christ, and working to the reconciling of sinners to himself.

And the same agency works on the other side of the doctrine. Who makes us the righteousness of God in him? Not ourselves, and not Jesus, but the God who did not spare his son, but delivered him up for us; the God who so loved the world that he gave the only-begotten that we might live. This is all the doing of the Lord, and it is wonderful in our eyes.

Secondly, Christ is the means on both sides of the doctrine of imputation.

Again, notice the emphasis of the verse: "He made HIM to be sin ... that we might be made the righteousness of God IN HIM". There is the same symmetry. What was done for us at Calvary could only be done in Jesus, and was in done in us by God's grace can only be done in Jesus.

There was no other agent through whom God could reconcile sinners to himself. Only Christ was without sin, and only a perfect, sinless Saviour could be a perfect sin-bearer. Sin could not be imputed to anyone who already had sins of his own to answer for. But the perfect, law-keeping Son of God, who stood "for us" at Calvary, was the one "who knew no sin", and the one therefore who alone was able to take the sins of others, and to be held accountable for them.

And, similarly, on the other side of the doctrine is the fact that it is only IN HIM that we can enjoy the blessing of reconciliation and peace with God. God cannot forgive the sins of those who are not in Christ, or justify, or adopt, or sanctify, or glorify any who do not believe in Jesus. But just as it is true that God was in Christ at Calvary, so it is true that we must be in Christ in order to receive the blessings that Calvary purchased. And this is Paul's great definition of what it is to be a Christian: "if any many is in Christ, he is a new creation..." (verse 17). If my sin is to be carried away, Christ is the only agent who is able to do this; and if I am to be accepted before God, Christ is the only agent whose righteousness can stand for me.

Thirdly, on both sides of the doctrine of imputation, the action is simple and complete.

Paul says "He MADE him to be sin ... that we might be MADE the righteousness of God..." Calvary is sufficient to take away sin; grace is sufficient to give new life in the soul. God's sovereign work requires no supplementing. Nothing more needs to be done for dealing with sin than that God should be in Christ; and nothing more is required for me to be accepted before God that that I should be in Christ.

Yet the simplicity of these actions cannot disguise the horror of the cross: its pain, its loneliness, its sheer scale of darkness is unfathomable. Who can understand the cost involved for the one who carried our sins there, that we might live? And what grace, and mercy, and love is this, that a salvation so complete and so free should be provided for us!

So, what is it that God did in Christ for us?

THE FIRST EMPHASIS IS ON THE IMPUTATION OF OUR SIN TO CHRIST: "He made him to be sin for us".

Some versions of the Bible (including the Gaelic version) translate this as "he made him to be a sin-offering for us", which was undoubtedly an integral element of the transaction. To translate it interpretatively in this way is an attempt to avoid two possible misinterpretations. First, Christ was not made a sinner. Never in his life had he transgressed God's commandment; and not at the point of his death could such a charge be raised against him. He upheld God's law and made it honourable; indeed, it was perfect obedience which resulted in his bearing the law's penalty. Imputation is the only doctrine which can satisfactorily explain why that should be: the reason he bears the penalty for law-breaking and yet at the same time be a law-keeper. Pilate said "I find no fault in this man". The thief said "This man has done nothing amiss". He was not a sinner.

Second, Christ was not made sinful. It is not simply that he could be held accountable for having committed no wrong deed; it was that the possibility of sinning was not there at all. Christ's sinlessness is not simply a statement about the way he lived his life, but about his freedom from the possibility of sin. We have to be very careful in speaking about the person of the Lord, and to avoid even the suggestion that he might have sinned. It was precisely because he was unlike us that he could die for us. Sin could only be imputed to him because in himself "he knew no sin".

But I believe the translation "sin-offering" is unnecessary, essentially because the same word for sin -- the Greek word hamartia -- is used in the verse already. Christ knew no sin,but was made what he did not know. By a sovereign, judicial action on the part of God, he was made to stand in the place of others, accountable for their sin and law-breaking. He carried the sins of his people in his own body to the tree, and he carried the sin that was so alien to both his practice and his inclination.

But what did it mean that sin was imputed to him? It meant, first, that our sin was reckoned to him in its nature. What is sin? Sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4). Indeed, sin cannot be imputed without law (Romans 5:13). What Jesus carried in his body on the tree was the actual law-breaking of those for whom he died. He carried this law-breaking in his own body, while himself remaining the holy, pure, undefiled lamb of God.

It meant, secondly, that our sin was reckoned to him in its penalty. Every sin deserves God's wrath and curse. God cannot remain unmoved by the sin of man. He cannot ignore it, or pretend it is not there. He can only punish it, and there is no plea of mitigation, no defence that might lesser the punishment. God's holy justice demands the vindication of his honour. And the death of Christ is nothing other than the claims of a righteous God being meted out on the person designated to answer for the law-breaking of others.

And it meant, thirdly, that our sin was reckoned to him in its effect. The wages of sin is death. If Christ were to be totally accountable for the sins of all of his people, death was unavoidable. And while it was a natural death, it was also a judicial death, as the sword of retributive justice -- the same sword which had from the beginning marked the impossibility of a sinner's return to Paradise -- was plunged into the soul of the Son of God. He died naturally, but he also died under sentence. But it was not merely the sentence of the Roman governor which sealed his fate. No -- Jesus was accountable to the highest tribunal of all, as the substitute stood before the Judge of all the earth, and was condemned to die.

Christ's body became the arena in which this great judicial drama was played. His dock was the cross; his God his judge. John Owen reminds us that every time Jesus called his Father God, he was addressing him in covenant terms. And it is as the covenant Mediator that God deals with him: as one accountable for others, regarded as guilty, and condemned because he stood in the place of others.

As the Scottish theologian Hugh Martin puts it, when divine justice and divine wrath together went through the world looking for sin, in order to effect retribution and to exact vengeance, to mete out the penalty due for sin and to vindicate the glory of God, they found Christ, and poured out on him all that was required to satisfy the justice of God. For in Christ, the incarnation of the Son had also become the incarnation of sin. Now sin was made flesh and dwelt among us. And God's justice and anger found him at Calvary, and God could not spare the Son.

It is impossible to understand the cross in any other way. Christ does not save us by moral example or persuasion; nor does he save us alone by his life, with all its selfless and self-denying deeds. He saves by the death he died on the cross; and the death of the cross was of such a nature that he, the just one, took the place of his own people, the unjust, in order to bring us to God. The price of that reconcilation was his death; he delivers us from going down to the pit of hell by giving his life as a ransom (Job 33:24; Mark 10:45).

In other words, what was imputed to him as the last Adam was exactly what was imputed to us from the first. That is the imputation lying behind the words of our text -- that Adam's sin, guilt and corruption were imputed to us because of the covenant solidarity between us and the first Adam. And the only way in which our sin could be effectively dealt with, and ourselves spared the punishment, was if that same sin could be imputed to another, standing in the same relationship to us and to God. The one Person in whom this could be achieved was Jesus Christ. The human race is saved on exactly the same basis as that upon which it was constituted at first: through a covenant mediator.

THE SECOND EMPHASIS IS ON THE COUNTER-IMPUTATION OF CHRIST'S RIGHTEOUSNESS TO US: "that we might be made the righteousness of God in him".

If all this is true -- that Jesus takes our place as our substitute at Calvary, experiencing death in order to save us -- then there is a necessary consequence. He does not die at Calvary without reason, and he does not die there without effect. The reason for the cross is that sin might be carried away and dealt with finally and definitively; the effect of the cross is that righteousness is obtained, which is sufficient for our standing before God.

Just as our sins are imputed to Jesus, his righteousness is imputed to us. Some people ask: are these actions equal to each other? It is very clearly the case that the second, reflex action -- that of counter-imputation -- is dependent upon the first. Unless Christ was made sin for us, we could not be made the righteousness of God in him. If there is asymmetry, it is because the counter-imputation is conditional on the imputation itself.

Yet I would wish to argue a perfect symmetry here. The imputations mirror one another perfectly: the same judge, and the same judicial action is required in both cases. Our standing before God reflects his from the point of view that as God dealt with him on the basis of what others had done, so he deals with us on the basis of what another has done.

And the nature of the imputation, therefore is the same. Christ's righteousness is reckoned to us in its nature, just as our sin was to him. Righteousness is the opposite of sin: it is the condition of law-keeping, the state of obedience. Christ's law-keeping is the basis of our standing before God. In Jesus, we are reckoned by God never to have broken his law at all. There is none righteous -- that is the universal condemnation. But this does not mean that there is no righteousness for us. All that God's righteousness requires him to require is made over to us in Jesus Christ.

And, as sin was reckoned to Christ in its guilt, Christ's righteousness is reckoned to us in its power to acquit. There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). The law has been upheld. God's anger has been turned away from us (Isaiah 12:1) and another has paid our price.

And as sin led to death, so righteousness leads to life, and is reckoned to us in its effect, just as sin was imputed to Christ. Grace now reigns through righteousness unto eternal life (Romans 5:21). There is access to the tree of life once more, not because God has ignored or bypassed the activity of the flaming sword, but because he has taken the sword and slain Jesus with it.

So on this side of the action we can say that just as divine justice and wrath looked for sin and found Christ, so divine justice and love look for perfection in order to reward it with life in all its fulness. And where does it find it? In us, if we are in union with Christ. It is impossible that we should pay a penalty for sin if Jesus has offered himself. Death as a penalty is required only once. And if he has been once offered up as a sacrifice, then there remains no more offering for sin:

If thou my pardon hast secured
And freely in my room endured
The whole of wrath divine;
Payment God cannot twice demand
First, at my bleeding Surety's hand,
And then again at mine.

It cannot be that the God who is pleased with Christ will ask for a second death as penalty for sin. One is sufficient. Now God's people are free. They stand before God on the basis of a finished work and an unbroken law. Justice is satisfied. Righteousness is vindicated. There is, at last, a place of safety for fallen man.

Let us pray.

ŠIain D. Campbell 2003