The Second Helvetic Confession ‑ Chapter 8
Of Man's Fall, Sin and the Cause of Sin
The Fall of Man. In the
beginning, man was made according to the image of God, in righteousness and true
holiness, good and upright. But when at the instigation of the serpent and by
his own fault he abandoned goodness and righteousness, he became subject to sin,
death and various calamities. And what he became by the fall, that is, subject
to sin, death and various calamities, so are all those who have descended from
him.
<The Aoriginal@
sin, whereby all mankind became guilty is the sin of Adam.
The Reformed have favored a so-called Afederal@
scheme for the most part. The term
federal relatively new in the history of the church, but the concept is in
Scripture. Adam stood before God
not only as the first man, but as the representative of all that followed. God declared that the son was not required to pay for the
sins of the father with the phrase the children can no longer say the fathers
ate sour grapes and our teeth are set on edge.
In other words God has said that is not what is happening. Each man is
responsible for his own sins. Yet
the Law says that the inequities of the father are passed on to the children for
several generations. The Jewish
peoples, even in the time of Christ thought this was the case and that all bad
things happening in birth were because of the sins of the parents.
Witness the question of Christ’s own disciples when they asked whose
sin is this man being punished for, the father or mother?
First and foremost, there is no contradiction in the Holy
Writ, God is truth and consistent, immutable.
Where contradiction exists, it is the error of the created and his finite
ability, not in God. God and His
Word are one. Not in the sense of
trying to add a fourth person to the Trinity, but Scripture equates Christ with
this Word (John 1). To
systematically deal with this introduction to original sin and its affect on all
of mankind consider:
1.
The Biblical definition of sin is transgression of God’s law; end of
definition. God gave Adam a very
simple Law-Word, ADo
not eat.@ all
agree that Adam did what God said not to do and thus sinned against God.
Christ said the man was not being punished for the sin of father or
mother, but had been born this way just for this day of Christ, and to prove the
power of Christ (God) for His glory. The
Jews had it wrong! Infants were not
born with infirmities because their parents sinned.
The Law said that the inequities of the father were Avisited@
upon the children, not that the children were being punished as a legal act so
to speak of God. We see this
pragmatically in the abuses within a family continuing for several generations. Substance and physical abuse have been proven
trans-generational. No
contradiction here, but a pointer to the value of the covenant family of God,
where God is loved and His laws obeyed. Not
punishment, but the continuation of the natural world without intervention to
turn on the light of God and dispel the darkness.
Hold to the thought then that all sin is against God and the
transgression of His Law/Word.
2.
Sin being the transgression of God’s Law, and all after Adam not having
been involved with Adam in the sin, how did Adam’s sin taint all mankind?
The first point would be that of imputation.
David writes blessed is he whom God does not impute sin to.
So while we might assign a legalistic or formal sense to sin, the guilt
is laid to the charge of man by imputation of his sin.
This is most consistent, for by the imputation of the righteousness of
Christ man is healed, not by taking part in the righteousness with Christ.
3.
This then in the legal sense or forensic brings us to the so-called
federal scheme of things. Adam was
the legal representative of all mankind to follow.
An example would be when a nation declares war on another nation.
Is the war with the head of that nation, or the whole nation?
So while the leaders of all parties declared the war, it involves all
that are their subjects. Adam also fits the whole concept of head of family bearing
the responsibility for the whole family after them. Head of household (eldest living male) played an important
part in the social and legal life of God’s people from the beginning.
Adam’s sin was then imputed to all (as the first created man and all
others being offspring of this original) because Adam was the head of the
covenant family of God and legally the representative of all, even those of
future generations. The
understanding of this principle of head of household (federal representative)
was well understood among the Jews. So much so that Paul said that all had tithed in Abraham,
when Abraham tithed to Melchizedek. Great
emphasis has been placed on the sin nature of man, rather than man’s actual
guilt in Adam. Man’s sin nature
is the result of man’s sin in Adam, not his guilt in Adam. Nothing else explains why it is written in the Bible that man
is conceived and born in sin. Because
a man and woman who are covenant breakers have a child, does not mean that child
is guilty as a covenant breaker, unless we argue with God and say that God does
hold the next generation responsible. So
there is a dual sense of man’s guilt in Adam, that of imputation affecting the
nature of all mankind, and of guilt because of each person’s own sinful
actions, that will flow from their nature without the direct intervention of God
in the rebirth of that individual from above.
Being in sin by nature (guilty in Adam) by itself does not explain being
conceived in sin. Thus the argument of actual sin as opposed to the sin nature
of man is birthed. This will
develop more clearly in the following paragraphs. >
Sin. By sin we understand
that innate corruption of man which has been derived or propagated in us all
from our first parents, by which we, immersed in perverse desires and averse to
all good are inclined to all evil. Full of all wickedness, distrust, contempt
and hatred of God, we are unable to do or even to think anything good of
ourselves. Moreover, even as we grow older, so by wicked thoughts, words and
deeds committed against God's law, we bring forth corrupt fruit worthy of an
evil tree (Matt. 12:33 ff.). For this reason by our own deserts, being subject
to the wrath of God, we are liable to just punishment, so that all of us would
have been cast away by God if Christ, the Deliverer, had not brought us back.
<The clear context here must be that of covenant, and in
Adam all have broken the covenant and deserve the wrath of God.
Being cast into the outer darkness, with the curse of God upon them, the
first child was born to Adam and Eve. Conceived
and born in sin! Natural
propagation will insure this iniquity is visited on all future generations, now
both by the sinful nature, and of their own doing.
In understanding the commandment, it might perhaps help to understand
that the inequity of the father (outside God and covenant breaker) is perhaps
best-translated characteristic for purposes of clarity.
The world has an old proverb, like father, like son.
Bullinger here has given the how of his use of sin, this is not contrary
to Scripture, but helps us understand Scripture. The simplistic definition that
sin is the transgression of the Law is contained in this understanding of
man’s sinful nature. Man then
stands guilty by covenant status and his own evil doings. All mankind is dead
and without hope, unless God in His limitless mercy opens man’s eyes and gives
light and that life is through the Son. Hold
tight to the nature of the covenant here. It
is impossible to understand original sin and its imputation to all outside a
covenant relationship between God and man, beginning with Adam.
Adam broke the covenant; there is now none within the covenant.
Read any contract among men and you find a statement to the effect that
any violation voids the whole contract, but that the injured party has the right
to Aoverlook@
or continue the contract. Not an
exact fit with God’s covenant, but close enough to begin to see how this
covenant thing works. Adam broke
the covenant; none are left in covenant with God.
Adam has been labeled covenant breaker.
God in grace can forgive the infraction and continue the covenant, or God
can Atransfer@
the rights under the covenant. An
example from the world today would be a contract (covenant) of purchase that an
individual broke. The injured party
could pass along all previous benefits to another person, such as assuming
payments on a previous purchase contract without having to pay additional loan
origination fees, or begin paying at a higher debt load, the injured party not
of necessity having to pass along any equity acquired by the original signer of
the contract. So we are seeing then
the results of the default in the original covenant, and there being no
legitimate claim by any person to assume the equity from the original contract.
Grace abounds with God!
We might consider here another statement of later
confessions whereby the covenant was said to have been made with Christ in
behalf of the elect. Not faulty,
and an infralapsarian statement assumed by the Synod of Dort in several places,
because of sin, could be seen here which would have the covenant made with man,
and its conditions assumed by Christ post fall. Of course the supra-lapsarian would see the covenant assumed
by Christ pre-creation or at least pre-fall.
But that is a debate for another place.
Here we only need understand Adam sinned, it affected the whole nature of
the created and resulted of all being outside the covenant as covenant breakers.
>
Death. By death we
understand not only bodily death, which all of us must once suffer on account of
sins, but also eternal punishment due to our sins and corruption. For the
apostle says: We were dead through trespasses and sins . . . and were by nature
children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, who is rich in mercy . . .
even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with
Christ (Eph. 2:1 ff.). Also: As sin came into the world through one man and
death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned (Rom.
5:12).
<Would man have lived forever if Adam had not sinned?
Seems a foolish question with no answer.
But it is a question we have at least a clear implication from the Bible
to use to say this is a clear maybe. God
removed Adam from the garden less Adam ate of the tree of life and lived
forever. Was this a reference to eternal life spiritually, or
physically? There are many places
for endless argument here. Bullinger
rightly defines it as both spiritual and physical death entering at this point
in the creation epic. What God has
reserved for His own mystery should be left with God. The Scripture is clear and
the Helvetic correctly says both enter through sin.
To cavil over minute details of no pragmatic value in deed or
understanding is quite useless.
Original Sin. We therefore
acknowledge that there is original sin in all men.
<Here is a short statement,
the argument for the conclusion having already established in the paragraph
above. >
Actual Sins. We acknowledge
that all other sins which arise from it are called and truly are sins, no matter
by what name they may be called, whether mortal, venial or that which is said to
be the sin against the Holy Spirit which is never forgiven (Mark 3:29; I John
5:16). We also confess that sins are not equal; although they arise from the
same fountain of corruption and unbelief, some are more serious than others. As
the Lord said, it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for the city that
rejects the word of the Gospel (Matt. 10:14 f.; 11:20 ff.).
<Much time has already been spent here because we live
in a different age and even the laity seems to demand more explanation and the
intimate detail of how we come to have certain beliefs or doctrines in the
church, and how they fit the Scripture. At
this point I believe it has been shown sufficiently (if weakly or poorly place
the fault here, not with the Bible) that all have original sin and do actually
sin as a result of a sinful nature. So the Helvetic stands justified in this paragraph for
this generation as well as that of its time when statements from authority
figures in the church were more apt to be accepted by the laity without
question. >
The Sects. We therefore
condemn all who have taught contrary to this, especially Pelagius and all the
Pelagians, together with the Jovinians who, with the Stoics, regard all sins as
equal. In this whole matter we agree with St. Augustine who derived and defended
his view from Holy Scriptures. Moreover, we condemn Florinus and Blastus,
against whom Irenaeus wrote, and all who make God the author of sin.
< In
a time where most with any previous Christian training paid great respect to the
fathers of the church, Bullinger speaks boldly and directly by name to the
errors that unfortunately continue to this day.
That it is at least by the permissive will of God is a cop out, and plays
into the hand of the heretics who say God is the author of sin, which the Bible
clearly teaches is otherwise. God
is sovereign, but for reasons of His own purpose alone decided to leave freedom
of will to the created, even the elect. This
in no way lays sin at the feet of God so to speak.
To do otherwise would infringe upon the glory of God, and it was for that
purpose alone God created all things. So
it is true God could have stopped Adam, but that would have stopped the glory
returned to God in people who loved and obeyed Him, yet had the ability to do
otherwise. >
God Is Not the Author of Sin,
and How Far He Is Said to Harden. It is expressly written: Thou art not a
God who delights in wickedness. Thou hatest all evildoers. Thou destroyest those
who speak lies (Psa. 5:4 ff.). And again: When the devil lies, he speaks
according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies (John
8:44). Moreover, there is enough sinfulness and corruption in us that it is not
necessary for God to infuse into us a new or still greater perversity. When,
therefore, it is said in Scripture that God hardens, blinds and delivers up to a
reprobate mind, it is to be understood that God does it by a just judgment as a
just Judge and Avenger. Finally, as often as God in Scripture is said or seems
to do something evil, it is not thereby said that man does not do evil, but that
God permits it and does not prevent it, according to his just judgment, who
could prevent it if he wished, or because he turns man's evil into good, as he
did in the case of Joseph's brethren, or because he governs sins lest they break
out and rage more than is appropriate. St. Augustine writes in his Enchiridion:
"What happens contrary to his will occurs, in a wonderful and ineffable
way, not apart from his will. For it would not happen if he did not allow it.
And yet he does not allow it unwillingly but willingly. But he who is good would
not permit evil to be done, unless, being omnipotent, he could bring good out of
evil." Thus wrote Augustine.
<Note this is another endless loop where by faith man
accepts God’s own Word. Augustine
here gives the whole of the matter in a few words.
With a thought to the purpose of all creation, and how man is to glorify
God (by loving and obeying God) we need only add the conclusion of Paul that
indeed all things work for good to those who love the Lord.
Only the awesome, living God who is the Sovereign of all has the power or
would dare to allow evil, because He can control the end from the beginning.
>
Curious Questions. Other
questions, such as whether God willed Adam to fall, or why he did not prevent
the fall, and similar questions, we reckon among curious questions (unless
perchance the wickedness of heretics or of other churlish men compels us also to
explain them out of the Word of God, as the godly teachers of the Church have
frequently done), knowing that the Lord forbade man to eat of the forbidden
fruit and punished his transgression. We also know that what things are done are
not evil with respect to the providence, will, and power of God, but in respect
of Satan and our will opposing the will of God.
<For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
All are conceived and born in sin. Contrast
the Gospel C
God so love the world He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believed in
Him should have eternal life, to the covenant breakers living in the darkness of
their own sins and original sinful nature C
...those who believe not are condemned already. What need is there to cavil about curious questions then.
Bullinger and the fathers before him answered the challenge and pointed
to the truth of all ages, the Bible as the answer.
Dare man of this corrupt age think he can do it better?
We might also pause a moment here to note that by original
sin, and this sinful nature there acquired by man, every faculty of man was
afflicted. That is all volition of
man, body, soul, and spirit, or for the modern, the intellect of man were
afflicted and placed under the curse and in darkness.
Some point to the perfect wisdom of Adam, yet the Bible speaks of another
as the wisest man to ever live. That
man, Solomon, summed the human experience up this way, Let
us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments:
for this is the whole duty of man. {Let:
or, The end of the matter, even all that hath been heard, is} God
shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be
good, or whether it be evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 AV). >
