Tag Archives: double imputation

•

Ponderings courtesy of C. Michael Patton.

Double Imputation means that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us.

imputed: To pass into one's account.  I can think I have $10,000 in my account, but until it's imputed to my account, it's in my imagination.

If the doctrine of "Double Imputation" meant that my sin is imputed to Christ and His righteousness is imputed to me, I'd be good.

But "Double Imputation" means that Christ's righteousness is imputed to me...and so is the sin of Adam.

I am not only guilty of my sin...I'm "accounted guilty" for eating the fruit in the garden.

I know a person who looks at a certain doctrine and "just can't believe that." and I'm in the same boat here.  I try to "get it" and just can't.

I'm going to cite Patten's article, and respond with my thoughts...

Most particularly, the doctrine of imputation is being questioned. This is quit understandable.

It's important to MY thoughts that I make the distinction that it's not "imputation" - it's "DOUBLE imputation I struggle with.

Perhaps John Calvin defines Original Sin most concisely as “The deprivation of a nature formerly good and pure.” More specifically, from a Reformed Evangelical perspective, it refers to the fall of humanity from its original state of innocence and purity to a state of corruption and guilt (distinguished later). It is the cause of man’s translation from a state of unbroken communion before God to one of spiritual death and condemnation.

I'm in full agreement.  Because of Adam, sin entered into the world and we are all sinners - in our own right.  We are sinners, and it's because of our nature that we inherited from Adam.

We inherit the nature, not the sin.

Patten refers to Romans 5:18 and says

Romans 5:18 states that the transgression of Adam resulted in our condemnation. So then, we are not only destined to die physically because of Adam’s sin, but we are also condemned to eternal death.

But he doesn't quote it, or verse 19.

Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousnessleads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners

The "for" at the beginning is there for a reason.

Because of Adam's sin we were MADE SINNERS - it doesn't say we were made guilty of Adam's sin.

At the end of the day, I just don't see it.

We inherit the nature, not the sin.  Maybe someday I'll be able to buy into the doctrine.  But not this day.

• 2 Comments

•

Even infants, who have no personal sin of their own, suffer pain and death. Now the Scriptures uniformly represent suffering and death as the wages of sin. It would be unjust for God to execute the penalty on those who are not guilty. Since the penalty falls on infants, they must be guilty; and since they have not personally committed sin, they must be guilty of Adam's sin.

("Reformed Doctrine of Predistination" by Lorraine Boettner)

I've never seen "imputed sin" in Scripture, but I'm starting to see how they get there.

The "wages of sin is death" - did that mean spiritual death, or temporal death? (Note: there is a whole different topic of whether or not physical death was on earth before the fall)

anyway, if human beings did not die on earth before the fall, and the wages of sin is (including) temporal death, we are suffering the wages of Adam's sin.

If a Just God would not punish a person (save Jesus, who voluntarily stood in our place) for the sin of another, does this logic place the guilt of Adam's sin on us, since we are paying the penalty?