Sometimes Justification is thought and taught in terms of "double imputation". I have even usually thought this way until this question came to mind. Double imputation is the idea that Jesus' righteousness is imputed to believers (they get his righteous record credited to their account) and believers righteousness is imputed to Jesus (he gets the sin of sinners credited to his account and pays for it). On the whole, I think this is fine. But I wonder if it's imprecise.
The Westminster Confession of Faith puts it like this:
That in justification, God has "...[imputed] the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them..." (WCF 11.1).
That is to say, that the righteousness of Jesus and the death of Jesus has been imputed to believers. So, in the eyes of God, believers have in their account:
What's the deal?
The Westminster Confession of Faith puts it like this:
That in justification, God has "...[imputed] the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them..." (WCF 11.1).
That is to say, that the righteousness of Jesus and the death of Jesus has been imputed to believers. So, in the eyes of God, believers have in their account:
- A perfectly righteous record. This merits for them heaven.
- A death that atones for their sin.
What's the deal?