On the top of p. 222 in the WTJ, Garcia says some really good things.  But he seems to be forgetting the distinction between a theological qualm and an exegetical one (though I  imagine he could say the same of those he is criticizing).  The bottom line is, does logizomai mean “impute” or not?  The answer is that if “impute” is a synonym for “reckon” or “ascribe” then, yes, it is fine.  But if one wants “impute” to be inherently transitive–a transfer term–then it is missing.  And we ought to develop a theology that at least allows itself to be expressed in the Bible’s terminology rather than our own.

It is  hard for me to see how Garcia can do justice to this without doing an exegetical paper rather than a theological inquiry about Christology.  So far he seems quite aware of these issues (and I’m sure he is), but his readers may not be.