One of the books I have been reading for pleasure lately is one by John Piper, Counted Righteous In Christ. The title caught my eye, so I opened up to see how Piper would organize the work. To my surprise, he spends most of the book arguing against a well known New Testament theologian who says that:
So in this book, Piper goes through the NT in a very detailed exegetical fashion and proves (very solidly) that this claim by Gundry is false. It is a short book, but a very important one in understanding this assault on the historic (and biblical) view of the atonement.
The doctrine of imputation is not even biblical. Still less it is 'essential' to the Gospel.He goes on to (boldly) note:
I join the growing number of biblical theologians, evangelical and non-evangelical alike, who deny that Paul or any other New Testament author speaks of a righteousness of Christ (whatever it might include or exclude) that is imputed to believing sinners, and find instead a doctrine of God's righteousness as his salvific activity in a covenantal framework, not in terms of an imputation of Christ's righteousness in a bookkeeping framework.Well, I disagree with Mr. Gundry very firmly because I believe that the Scriptures do, in fact, teach that believers are imputed an external righteousness. That is, our righteousness comes outside of ourselves. Specifically, I believe the righteousness with which believers are credited is that of Jesus Christ.
So in this book, Piper goes through the NT in a very detailed exegetical fashion and proves (very solidly) that this claim by Gundry is false. It is a short book, but a very important one in understanding this assault on the historic (and biblical) view of the atonement.