|
CLAUSE
5
“V- That Adam
broke this law, and was adjudged unworthy
of immortality, and sentenced to return
to the ground from whence he was taken -
a sentence which defiled and became a physical
law of his being, and was transmitted to
all his posterity. - Gen 3:15-19,22,23;
2Cor 1:9; Rom 7:24; 2Cor 5:2-4; Rom 7:18-23;
Gal 5:16-17; Rom 6:12; 7:21; Jno 3:6; Rom
5:12; 1Cor 15:22; Ps 51:5; Job 14:4
For one reason or
another, this Clause of our Statement of
Faith has arguably been the object of more
controversy than any other, in the history
of Christadelphia. It presents to us certain
key principles, vital doctrines for us to
understand and accept in order to recognise
both the extent of the problem of sin and
death; and also the solution provided in
Christ Jesus. It describes the great and
catastrophic effect which Adam’s offence
had, both for himself, and for his progeny
- and being an explicit definition of the
effect of Adam’s sin, it therefore has a
direct bearing on the principles of the
Atonement, the principles whereby those
effects might ultimately be removed. An
understanding of the problem goes hand in
hand with an understanding of the solution,
for if we misunderstand particular aspects
of the problem, then we will need to modify
our understanding of the solution to meet
all the requirements of the case. And similarly,
if we misunderstand the principles and purpose
of the sacrifice of Christ, this affects
our understanding of the problem it was
designed to solve. So it is, that this clause
has quite naturally fallen into controversy;
for many, if not all the false doctrines
which some have sought to introduce to the
brotherhood have a bearing on the Atonement
in some way or another - and therefore involve
a misunderstanding of the underlying principles
involved with it. Significantly, in the
present writers’ experience, every controversy
he has encountered relating to this clause
has, either directly, or indirectly been
caused by those who seek to present a position
on the Atonement which is different to the
“traditional” Christadelphian teaching (and
the clear Biblical teaching) which has remained
such for over 150 years.
THE
SENTENCE OF DEATH
The Genesis account
describes the sentence pronounced against
Adam, subsequent to his transgression of
Divine Law:
“Because thou hast
hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and
hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded
thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:
cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow
shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy
life; thorns and thistles shall it bring
forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb
of the field; in the sweat of thy face shalt
thou eat bread, till thou return unto the
ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for
dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou
return” (Gen 3:17-19).
In these words, we
find that there are two aspects to the curse
against Adam; the cursing of the ground,
necessitating additional labour for man
to eat bread; and the condemnation of Adam
himself, necessitating his eventual death
after a lifetime of toil and travail. It
is this latter aspect which the BASF is
concerned with, the fact that because of
Adam’s offence, he was condemned to return
to the grave. In the simple terms of Genesis,
Adam was to return to the dust, from whence
he came.
There are those who
claim that the consequence of Adam’s sin
is a kind of “legal condemnation” of eternal
death, which passes to all his descendants
- and that therefore unless a believer has
this “legal condemnation” removed by Baptism
into Christ, he cannot be raised by God
to Judgement. According to this position
of things, the Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus
is seen as a kind of substitutionary affair,
whereby he - as the innocent - suffers the
legal penalty due to the guilty. He bears
it instead of them, thus allowing them to
go free. But apart from the inherent injustice
of this concept (an innocent man being punished
for the sins of another); it is entirely
foreign to Scripture. We do not read in
the Genesis account of any kind of “legal
condemnation”, other than the simple declaration
that as a consequence of breaking the Law
of God, Adam would be condemned to dissolve
into dust. That is, the process of Mortality
would begin - with all that it entails and
dying, Adam would surely die. This is the
simple, easy to understand teaching of the
Inspired Word.
Again, in the passage
which we have often had occasion to cite
in this series, Romans Chapter 5, the Apostle
describes how that sentence of death affects
the progeny of Adam - not the imputation
of a “legal” sentence in the sense of a
piece of legislation which condemned Adam’s
seed for his sin - but the physical inheritance
of sin and death: “by one man sin entered
into the world (of men and women- CAM) and
death by sin; and so death passed upon all
men, for that all have sinned” (Rom 5:12).
Here, the Greek for “upon” can also be rendered
“into”, as it is 573 times elsewhere. By
the offence of one man, sin entered into
the “world” of men and women - so death
also “passed into all men”. This makes it
clear that it is not so much the event of
death being spoken of, rather it is the
process of death, or “mortality”, passing
into all of Adam’s seed by heredity. But
notice the order here - sin entered first,
then death. The one is a corollary of the
other. We inherit death, because being descended
from Adam, we bodily partake of the physical
substance of his nature - and that is a
sinful, dying, nature. Death passes into
all men - not that it is a distinct, physical
substance which can by examined under a
microscope - rather it is an inherent principle
of decay, found in the nature of all Adam’s
progeny, which inevitably leads all to the
grave. As the BASF expresses it, the sentence
of death “became a physical law ... and
was transmitted to all his (Adam’s) posterity”.
THE
INHERITANCE OF A SINFUL NATURE
There are those who
reason that, because we die as a direct
consequence of what Adam did, we are in
some way being held accountable for his
sin; we bear the punishment for it. But
such is not the teaching of the Inspired
Word. Human nature itself is condemned to
the grave, not as an individual judgement
upon those whose misfortune it is to bear
it (although they do become worthy of death
when they transgress), but because it is
also inherently sinful, and full of rebelliousness
against the Creator - and He cannot permit
such to live indefinitely. As we have shown
in previous studies, when Adam transgressed,
he developed within him a new disposition
of thought - his mind became carnal, and
therefore at enmity with that of his Maker
(cp Rom 8:7). Once transgression had taken
place, sin had entered into the world, and
it became part of man’s natural instinct
to continue to transgress, rather than to
seek after the things of the Spirit. And
because we physically partake of the substance
of Adam’s flesh by being descended from
him, we also inherit the primary instincts
of that flesh - to seek it’s own pleasure.
So it is, that Sin is the overriding law
of our being. As the inspired Apostle spoke
of his own experience: “I see another law
in my members, warring against the law of
my mind, and bringing me into captivity
to the law of sin which is in my members”
(Rom 7:23). He also speaks of Sin as physically
residing in him: “if then I do that which
I would not, I consent to unto the law that
it is good. Now then it is no more I that
do it, but sin that dwelleth in me” (Rom
7:17).
One of our critics
claims that the term Sin can only be used
in the sense of transgression, citing 1Jno
3:4 to “prove” his point. But if this is
so, how are we to understand these inspired
words of Paul? Did he have specific acts
of transgression dwelling within him? Such
would be absurd, for he uses the term Sin
with reference to that which was within
him which induced him to transgress - clearly
the natural propensity of his nature. But
the same critic also falsely claims - and
quite openly in a publication he is circulating
- that we teach Sin to be a physical substance
“injected” by God into human nature at the
fall!!! We mention this by way of illustration
of the lengths to which some will go to
discredit those who uphold Bible Truth.
Only by grossly distorting our teachings
beyond recognition, can he set them at variance
with the Oracles of God. All who have read
our works will know that we have never,
at any time taught, or believed such a thing
(see “The
TRUTH Concerning the Death and Resurrection
of Jesus Christ”, and “The
Defilement of Human Nature, and it’s Cleansing
in Christ”.
Rather, we believe
the simple, straightforward teaching of
Scripture that within human nature there
naturally “dwelleth no good thing” (Rom
7:18), only inherent desires to transgress,
styled by the Apostle, “the motions of sins”
which “work in our members to bring forth
fruit unto death” (Rom 7:5). Not a physical
substance, any more than the “death” we
inherit is a physical substance; but the
built in urges of human flesh to satisfy
its cravings in ways which dishonour it’s
Maker, derived in the first instance from
the reasoning of the Serpent, adopted by
Eve and her Husband, which then became the
predominant instinct of Man.
This being so, Sin
in scripture, is used to speak of acts of
transgression; but also that which produces
those acts, the natural bias of the flesh
towards evil - as witnessed by the words
of the Apostle we have cited. By the same
principle as the “death” which passes “into
all men” is so called (i.e. in terms of
it’s end result - a manner of speaking known
as “metonymy”), so the “law” of our being
which produces transgression is spoken of
as Sin, or “sin in the flesh” (Rom 8:3)
in Scripture - a natural, carnal mode of
thought which induces it’s possessors into
sin. So Paul collectively refers to these
two aspects as “the law of sin and death”
(Rom 8:2), from which we can be freed in
Christ. These are the dominating features
of all human kind - all men are both sinful,
and deathful, by nature. But notice the
order here. First there is sin, secondly
there is death, which is the Lord’s judgement
upon it. This is why babies, who have done
not transgressed (Rom 9:11) sometimes die;
not because they are being punished for
another’s wrongdoing, but because it is
their misfortune to inherit a sinful nature
which is under the condemnation of death.
God cannot permit human nature, in it’s
present sinful and rebellious condition
to survive perpetually. As we shall see
in our later studies, an important principle
displayed in the Sacrifice of our Lord,
was a declaration that human nature is rightly
under the condemnation of death - even in
the case of one who was without transgression.
Yet because of his sinlessness, the Grave
could not hold him, and he was raised the
third day.
DEFILEMENT
The BASF also speaks
of the sentence of death as being defiling,
for speaking of Adam it states that it is
“a sentence which defiled and became a physical
law of his being ...”. In what sense than,
can it be said that death is defiling? The
answer to this question is found when we
recognise that this language of the defiling
nature of death is taken from the Law, and
it’s ordinances of fictional uncleanness.
Death was regarded as being a major source
of defilement, which needed special purification
by the use of “the water of separation”:
“He that toucheth the dead body of any man
shall be unclean seven days. He shall purify
himself with it (i.e. The water of separation)
on the third day, and on the seventh day
he shall be clean: but if he purify not
himself the third day, then the seventh
day he shall not be clean. Whosoever toucheth
the dead body of any man that is dead, and
purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle
of Yahweh; and that soul shall be cut off
from Israel: because the water of separation
was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be
unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him”
(Num 19:11-13).
There was a tremendous
seriousness about defilement by death under
the Law; if a man did not cleanse himself
in the appointed way, he would be “cut off”
from his people, and therefore from the
Tabernacle Worship (cp Num 9:6-10). He would
be regarded as “unclean”, an uncleanness
which would remain with him indefinitely
- for the rest of his life, and all for
simply touching a dead body, a bone, or
a grave, or even touching the tent in which
a person had died (Num 19:14-16), or anything
else which had become unclean by contact
with death (Lev 22:4). With Bro Robert Roberts,
we may well ask, “Why should death merely
as death be apparently treated with such
abhorrence, and be made the subject of such
stringent measures of purification?” (The
Law of Moses, p 263). The answer lies in
the fact that death came “by sin” - it is
“the wages of sin” (Rom 6:23), and it’s
very presence is a standing testimony to
the rebellion of man against his Maker.
So Bro Roberts answered the question: “so
far as man is concerned, death is the result
of sin, and not the necessary quality of
the nature with which he was endowed in
the first instance. This truth enables us
to understand the peculiar detestation of
death expressed by the ordinances we are
considering. The presence of death - the
touch of death - means the presence of sin,
and sin is the awful thing that fools make
a mock at: the crime of insubordination
against the wish, will, or law of the Eternal
Author and Proprietor of Creation” (Law
of Moses, p 264).
Death then, is regarded
as being defiling because it’s very existence
in man was brought about by sin - and the
presence of a dead human body was proof
that the just “wages” had been paid for
an individual’s rebellion against God. And
human nature itself, being under the condemnation
of death because of the sinful impulses
which reside in it, can also be regarded
as being in a sense “unclean”; that is,
possessing a defilement which the BASF teaches
passed to all Adam’s seed. Or in the words
of Job: “Man that is born of woman is of
few days, and full of trouble ... who can
bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not
one.” (Job 14:1,4).
The physical substance
of our being then, is rightly described
in Scripture as being “unclean”, for it
is both sinful and mortal - in that order.
But in the course of the many debates which
have arisen regarding so-called “clean flesh”
theories and the like, some seem to forget
that the terms “defilement” and “uncleanness”
are not literal descriptions of the human
body being physically contaminated, or dirty.
The laws of “uncleanness” under the Mosaic
system, and it’s rites of purification did
not relate to literal filth which could
be washed off in water, but spoke of what
Bro Roberts called a “fictional uncleanness”,
to teach spiritual lessons. They are figurative
terms, used in Scripture to illustrate how
the Creator views the state of His fallen
Creation. Death as we have seen, is only
defiling in as much as it stands as a testimony
to the natural rebelliousness of man. Man
brought the defilement of death upon himself
by rebelling against his Maker - a principle
plainly attested by the fact that the second
major source of defilement under the Law
was the committing of sin (Cp Lev 16:16,19;
18:24-30, Num 5; 2Chron 29:16; Ezra 9:11,
Is 24:5; 64:6, Ezek 20:7,18,43 etc). The
sentence which the Lord inflicted upon Man
reflects, and proclaims both the fact of
disobedience, and the existence of “the
law of sin” in his members, which induces
that disobedience. Wherever the signs of
mortality can be found in man, they testify
to the fact of his sinful, rebellious nature.
For Adam, mortality, and all the suffering
it involved was a standing reminder to him,
and all his seed that he had become rebellious
against his God - it marked him out before
God to be a defiled sinner. And all who
have emerged from his loins bodily partake
of the physical substance of his make-up
- which includes the cause of transgression,
namely the diabolos, or devil - and are
therefore also sinful, dying creatures,
naturally “unclean” before the Creator,
and in need of cleansing by the Sacrifice
of His Providing. These are the simple Truths
of Scripture, which we would do well to
accept without the burden of controversy.
The last 3 clauses
of the BASF which we have been considering
outline the nature, and extent of the problem
of sin and death. They describe the things
which necessitated the appearance of the
Lord Jesus Christ to provide a hope of redemption,
by speaking of both the origin of man himself,
his condition before the fall, and the origin
of “law of sin and death” which came into
being by his offence. And as we said earlier,
these principles really form the foundation
of our understanding of the Sacrifice of
Christ. In many debates regarding the Atonement,
various points are argued regarding the
efficacy of that Sacrifice and the redeeming
principles it manifested, but it appears
to be seldom recognised that the very foundation
for all these things lay in the simplicity
of the Genesis account, and Paul’s inspired
commentary on it. When faced with any of
the “alternative views” we are presented
with concerning the Atonement; if we trace
the reasoning back far enough, we invariably
find that the root of the problem arises
from a misconception of what took place,
way back in Eden. But having understood
these things, as outlined in Scripture and
summarised in the BASF, we then find ourselves
in a position to consider more fully the
redeeming work of our Lord; and this we
shall do, if the Lord will, in our subsequent
studies.
Chris
Maddocks
|
