Double Imputation vs Infusion

[smp501]

Hi! Today at the PCA church I sometimes go to the preacher spoke about the doctrine of double imputation, where our sins are imputed on Christ and Christ’s righteousness on us. From what I’ve read imputation is one of the bigger disagreements between the RCC and Protestants. I’ve tried to do some research, but I’m getting some mixed results from google. Can somebody point me in the right direction as to how to respond to double imputation? Thank you!

 

[Trebor135]

Hi! Today at the PCA church I sometimes go to the preacher spoke about the doctrine of double imputation, where our sins are imputed on Christ and Christ’s righteousness on us. From what I’ve read imputation is one of the bigger disagreements between the RCC and Protestants. I’ve tried to do some research, but I’m getting some mixed results from google. Can somebody point me in the right direction as to how to respond to double imputation? Thank you!

Apologist Ben Douglass has an excellent Catholic response entitled “Credited with Righteousness: James White versus the Bible” to the Protestant doctrine of double imputation. I hope you find it beneficial.

 

[smp501]

That is exactly what I needed. Thank you very much!

 

[pablope]

Hi! Today at the PCA church I sometimes go to the preacher spoke about the doctrine of double imputation, where our sins are imputed on Christ and Christ’s righteousness on us. From what I’ve read imputation is one of the bigger disagreements between the RCC and Protestants. I’ve tried to do some research, but I’m getting some mixed results from google. Can somebody point me in the right direction as to how to respond to double imputation? Thank you!

Check this out too…

vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/infused-righteousness-versus-imputed-righteousness-which-one-entitles-us-to-enter-heaven/

 

[CompSciGuy]

Apologist Ben Douglass has an excellent Catholic response entitled “Credited with Righteousness: James White versus the Bible” to the Protestant doctrine of double imputation. I hope you find it beneficial.

It is a very long article so I didn’t read all of it… but I didn’t find his exegesis concerning the word “logizomai” to be convincing at all… and this is from a Catholic perspective. Even if his understanding of the word “logizomai” is correct, in the context of the verses discussed the Protestant understanding could still logically stand.

I think the best argument against this understanding of God’s grace simply lies in other verses of scripture.

 

[Trebor135]

It is a very long article so I didn’t read all of it… but I didn’t find his exegesis concerning the word “logizomai” to be convincing at all… and this is from a Catholic perspective. Even if his understanding of the word “logizomai” is correct, in the context of the verses discussed the Protestant understanding could still logically stand.

I see what you’re saying. But I’d like to hear your feedback if or when you’ve gotten the chance to read the whole article–your opinion of the case made by Douglass may change.

I think the best argument against this understanding of God’s grace simply lies in other verses of scripture.

But those opposing double imputation have to deal with the strongest-seeming passages Protestants can present in the doctrine’s defense. What are those other passages that you think decisively demolish double imputation? (All this alliteration was unintended )