Recently I was listening to Justin Peters’ discernment video on why Todd White should step down as a pastor. I frequently listen to Peters as I respect his vital ministry of calling out those who would impugn Christ through false teaching or shameful and ungodly practices. I don’t know much about Todd White but Peters’ rebuke seems well-placed and quite compelling.
Nevertheless, during the video I was disturbed to hear Peters explain the meaning of 2 Corinthians 5:21 by appealing to a doctrine commonly referred to as double-imputation. According to Ligonier Ministries double imputation is a “twofold transaction” where “our sin is imputed to Jesus. [And] His righteousness is imputed to [us].” Todd White used a hyper-literal apprehension of 2 Corinthians 5:21 to equate Christ with the worst type of sins (an egregious error which many Bible commentators have committed). In seeking to correct White’s misuse of the passage, Peters appeals to the doctrine of imputation. Once upon a time, I too espoused imputation. I did so because esteemed Christian leaders led the way and also because I had never critically looked into its implications.
Peters has rightly directed his ire toward Todd White for the unfathomable impiety of saying deplorable things such as: “Jesus became child pornography.” However, by Peters arguing that our sins were imputed to Christ (an action which requires Christ to become an epic sinner) how is his position any less sacrilegious?
The following dialogue is between myself and another YouTube viewer who, siding with Peters, questioned my critique of Peters’ explanation.