In his influential 1867 book, The Doctrine of Justification, Reformed theologian James Buchanan cited Lev 17:3-4 and Deut 25:1 as evidence of forensic justification, and that such Old Testament texts and concepts informed the apostle Paul’s understanding of the nature of this central doctrine. Such an approach is rather common in Reformed Protestant works on the topic of justification—James White, a modern Reformed apologist, has cited these texts in favour of forensic justification, as understood by Calvinism in The Roman Catholic Controversy (1996) and The God Who Justifies: The Doctrine of Justification (2001; the subtitle is a “shout-out” of sorts to Buchanan’s book—much of his arguments mirror those of Buchanan). However, the appeals to these two texts are fatal to Reformed pretensions to reflect “biblical Christianity.”
To be sure, both texts are judicial in context; however, there are some fatal flaws into reading into these two passages the concept of (1) forensic justification and tied into such (2) imputed righteousness.
Firstly, both texts are not soteriological in context, but more “secular.” To read into these court-room scenes soteriological meaning, and then to read such a view into Paul’s letters, such as Romans and Galatians, strains exegetical credulity. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, note what the texts say (and also, do not say):
What man soever there be of the house of Israel, that killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that killeth it out of the camp. And bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer an offering unto the Lord before the tabernacle of the Lord; blood shall be imputed unto that man; he hath shed blood; and that man shall be cut off from among his people. (Lev 17:3-4)
If there be a controversy between men, and they came unto judgement, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked. (Deut 25:1)
In both these scenes, the individuals in question are declared either guilty (in the case of Lev 17:3-4, of blood-guiltiness) or righteous, not because of an imputation of an alien righteousness (“legal fiction”); instead, the declaration of being either blood-guilty or righteous (innocent) is based on an intrinsic reality within the individual! This is a refutation of Reformed theology, not evidence thereof!
Furthermore, the predominant meaning of the term “imputed” in the KJV of Lev 17:4 is not actually the Hebrew verb “to impute.” “Imputation” means seeing in someone something that is not intrinsically there that must be given to the person from an alien source. Instead, the predominant meaning of the underlying Hebrew term חשׁב (LXX: λογιζομαι) denotes a declaration based on an intrinsic reality It is sometimes translated as “reckoned,” “credited,” “accounted,” and other like-terms. This can be seen, for instance, where the term is used elsewhere in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, such as Lev 25:27, 31, 50, 52; 27:18, 23; Deut 2:11, 20.
For a thorough study of λογιζομαιι in the Greek New Testament, see this article by Catholic apologist, Ben Douglass, “Reply to James White on Romans 4 and Justification." Indeed, if one does a careful study of the Hebrew and Greek terms, one realises that it predominately refers to what is something is thinking as a mental representation of the reality they are witnessing. Hence, the evidence shows that the terms should be understood of what is recognised or understood intrinsically of a person/thing that a mere "covering" or "imputation" of an external righteousness.
In conclusion, an appeal to Lev 17:3-4 and Deut 25:1, instead of being Old Testament support for Calvinism’s understanding of Justification, it is another nail in the coffin of Reformed theology.