Theological Term of the Week

double imputation

The doctrinal teaching that in justification, there is a two-way transfer: The believer’s sin is credited to Christ and Christ’s righteousness is credited to the believer.

• From scripture:
  

  For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:21)
  

• From The London Baptist Confession, 1689, Chapter 11, Justification, Sections 1 and 3:
  

  Those whom God effectually calls He also freely justifies, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting them as righteous, not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone. They are not justified because God reckons as their righteousness either their faith, their believing, or any other act of evangelical obedience. They are justified wholly and solely because God imputes to them Christ’s righteousness. He imputes to them Christ’s active obedience to the whole law and His passive obedience in death. They receive Christ’s righteousness by faith, and rest on Him. They do not possess or produce this faith themselves, it is the gift of God.

Learn more

1. Theopedia: Double Imputation
2. Tom Ascol: Imputation: The Sinner’s Only Hope
3. Here at Rebecca Writes: Christ’s Active and Passive Obedience and Our Justification
4. Albert N. Martin: Romans 5:12-21 - Justification: Double Imputation (mp3)
5. R. C. Sproul: Double Imputation (video)
6. John Piper: Counted Righteous In Christ (pdf of the whole book)

Related terms:

• active obedience of Christ
• imputation
• justification
• passive obedience of Christ

The term double imputation was suggested by Jen of joythruChrist. 

 

Have you come across a theological term that you don’t understand and that you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Theological Term of the Week

docetism

The heretical teaching that Christ only appeared to be human, but that he was not really human, since he did not have a real human body.

• From the Apostle John:
  

  By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. (1 John 4:2-3)
  
  For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 1:7)
  

• From The Definition of Chalcedon (451)

  Following, then, the holy fathers, we unite in teaching all men to confess the one and only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. This selfsame one is perfect both in deity and in humanness; this selfsame one is also actually God and actually man, with a rational soul and a body. He is of the same reality as God as far as his deity is concerned and of the same reality as we ourselves as far as his humanness is concerned; thus like us in all respects, sin only excepted. Before time began he was begotten of the Father, in respect of his deity, and now in these “last days,” for us and behalf of our salvation, this selfsame one was born of Mary the virgin, who is God-bearer in respect of his humanness.
  
  We also teach that we apprehend this one and only Christ-Son, Lord, only-begotten — in two natures; and we do this without confusing the two natures, without transmuting one nature into the other, without dividing them into two separate categories, without con- trasting them according to area or function. The distinctiveness of each nature is not nullified by the union. Instead, the “properties” of each nature are conserved and both natures concur in one “person” and in one reality . They are not divided or cut into two persons, but are together the one and only and only-begotten Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus have the prophets of old testified; thus the Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us; thus the Symbol of Fathers has handed down to us.

• From Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century A.D., with an Account of the Principal Sects and Heresies.

  St. Jerome scarcely exaggerates when he says (adv. Lucif. 23): “While the apostles were still surviving, while Christ’s blood was still fresh in Judea, the Lord’s body was asserted to be but a phantasm.” Apart from N.T. passages, e.g. Eph. ii. 9, Heb. ii. 14, which confute this assertion, but do not bear clear marks of having been written with a controversial purpose, it appears from I. John iv. 2, II. John 7, that when these epistles were written there were teachers, stigmatised by the writer as prompted by the spirit of Antichrist, who denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh, a form of expression implying a Docetic theory. Those who held that evil resulted from the inherent fault of matter found it impossible to believe that the Saviour could be Himself under the dominion of that evil from which He came to deliver men, and they therefore rejected the Church’s doctrine of a real union of the divine and human natures in the person of our Lord….
  

Learn more

1. Truth for Today: Docetism
2. Theopedia: Docetism
3. Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry: Docetism
4. Basic Theology.org: Docetism
5. Justin Holcomb: Know Your Heretics: Docetism
6. Greg Johnson: Human, Body and Soul.
7. Here at Rebecca Writes: Quiz on Jesus as a human being.

Related terms:

• humanity of Christ
• hypostatic union

The term docetism was suggested by Leslie of Lux Venit, who writes that she is reminded of

a sermon I heard in which the pastor preached that Jesus’ blood was not human blood, but completely divine….I’ve heard this particular teaching is called Doceticism, but I don’t know why or what all it entails..

Have you come across a theological term that you don’t understand and that you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Theological Term of the Week

 

panentheism

A belief system which views the universe as contained within God, yet God is also greater than the universe, extending beyond it. It is different from pantheism, which views God and the material universe as identical, and also different from biblical theism, which views God as present everywhere in the universe, sustaining everything in the universe, without the universe being a part of God.

 

• From the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 2, Section 2. (A biblical Christian view of the relationship between God and the universe.)
  

  God hath all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself; and is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them: he is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open and manifest; his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature; so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain.

• From Panentheism—Part One by Norman Geisler.
  
  
  

  Rather than viewing God as the infinite, unchanging sovereign Creator of the world who brought it into existence, panentheist think of God as a finite, changing, director of world affairs who works in cooperation with the world in order to achieve greater perfection in his nature.
  
  Theism views God’s relation to the world as a painter to a painting. The painter exists independently of the painting; he brought the painting into existence, and yet his mind is expressed in the painting. By contrast, the panentheist views God’s relation to the world the way a mind is related to a body. Indeed, they believe the world is God’s “body”…. [L]ike some modern materialist who believe the mind is dependent on the brain, panentheists believe God is dependent on the world. Yet there is a reciprocal dependence, a sense in which the world is dependent on God.
  

Learn more

1. Norman Geisler:  Panentheism—Part One and Part Two
2. What is panentheism? from GodQuestions.org

The term panentheism was suggested by threegirldad, who says that panentheism is “another age-old heresy that is running rampant of late.”  Tune in next week for another age-old heresy that ain’t dead yet.

 

Have you come across a theological term that you don’t understand and that you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.