One of Dabney’s answers to the charge that imputation is unjust is tat “God forbids imputation of capital guilt by human magistrates,” but “He customarily claims the exercise of it in His own government.” The difference he explains by saying “Human magistrates are themselves under law, in common with those they rule; God is above law, and His will is law.”
God’s government is not man’s. And yet, this answer to the objection is deeply unsatisfying. After all, the cross is supposed to be the revelation of God’s justice. If that’s so, then it has to be identifiable as justice . Dabney’s argument makes this impossible. We just have to accept that the atonement is just, which makes it something much less than a revelation of the righteousness of God.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
How the State Failed Noelia Castillo
On March 26, Noelia Castillo, a twenty-five-year-old Spanish woman, was killed by her doctors at her own…
The Mind’s Profane and Sacred Loves
The teachers you have make all the difference in your life. That they happened to come into…
