Westminster Larger Catechism # 26
Commentary by Dr. Chuck Baynard
Q26. How is original sin conveyed from our first parents unto
their posterity?
Answer: Original sin is conveyed from our first parents unto
their posterity by natural generation, so as all that proceed
from them in that way are conceived and born in sin.
References: Ps. 51:5; John 14:4; Job 15:14 (WCF VI.1-6; LC
21-29; SC 13-19)
This is an area where I believe we need the fullness of the
Westminster standards to grasp. Thus the standards have been
added to the reference line above. I suggest that the reader stop
here and read these completely before continuing in this
commentary.
Here I most humbly beg to differ with the Divines. Note this
isn’t the standard reformed view, but I have arrived here
with much thought, research and prayer. What I present is not
outside the reformed tradition either. As mentioned in this
series previously, there are two methods for the transfer of
original sin recognized; "natural generation" and
"the federal theme." On first reading it appears the
Divines have chosen to identify and set natural generation as the
standard. However, in the confession proper VI.3 the Divines
state this original sin was imputed to all.
Imputation is a very key word in this discourse in my opinion.
I believe we find Scriptural support for there being two men to
whom God did not impute sin. First was Adam who was created
without the guilt of original sin, and the sin was from his own
hand, not imputed to him. In Psalm 32:2 David speaks of the man
to whom God does not impute sin and within whose spirit is no
guile. I believe this is a messianic passage and none except
Christ fit this description, including Adam, who did attempt to
hide from God after his sin. This Psalm begins with what we will
recognize as the normal scheme of things in God’s
forgiveness of the transgression, and the "covering" of
that sin. To which we see the contrast then of the Messiah who
will know no sin, original or otherwise. We find this verse
repeated in Romans 4:8. In the Romans passage the Greek word for
impute is an interesting choice (logizomai). This Greek word
deals with reality, not supposition and being after the fact of
the ascension of our Lord would make sense in that the fullness
of revelation has now been made manifest whereby the connection
between Psalm 32:2 and this portion of Paul’s letter to the
Romans explains the Old Testament passage. I believe this
connection justifies the determination that the Psalm refers to
Christ and not man in general with regards to imputation.
Why so much concern with the method that original sin belongs
to all mankind? There are many, but the two most important in my
mind are: Only if man is conceived and born in sin, deserving of
the wrath of God is the justice of God upheld in the view of His
creation (not that such is required, but why seek controversy
where God has revealed the truth). Being already condemned, the
second petal is shown to be necessary that any might be saved.
The second deals with the sinlessness of Christ. If the sin was
through normal generation only, it becomes metaphysical to
explain how Christ was born of a woman, made under the law, and
did not suffer this same sinful nature.
From Scripture we know Christ was without sin, original, or in
the flesh (Heb. 4:15; Heb. 9:28). We must then use Scripture to
interpret Scripture and show how this can be truth. While it is
perfectly true that we will not fully understand God, and His
saying Christ was without sin is sufficient, I do not believe
this is such a place where God left us to walk by faith alone.
I then find several things that would move the federal theme
to the top of the apologetics for this question. First let us
consider that Adam was different than all of his posterity in
that he was created, not by normal generation. Even in creation,
Adam was not of immediate creation by the power of God’s
word alone, but formed of the dust. Adam was free from this
sinful nature in his creation. There are Scriptural grounds that
Adam was the "federal" representative of all his
posterity. Thus the passing of his sin through natural generation
would be consistent with Scripture, but not in the bloodline, but
because of imputation. We see a similar circumstance when in the
New Testament it is pointed out that Levi paid tithes in Abraham,
referring to Abraham’s tithing to the Priest of the most
high God. The legal debts of the father were passed to his
posterity. Some have pointed to the male side being that through
which such transfer is made, and since Christ did not have an
earthly father he did not receive then the nature of sin since
His was not of "natural generation." While this may be
true, it is weak in that through the years much has been made of
the bloodline through Mary, and Christ is called of the house of
David. We are on the right track here, but I think if we hold to
the natural generation theme alone we do err. I find in the birth
of Christ parallels with the creation of Adam, in that as Adam
was created by a different process than the rest of creation, so
Christ was born by a different process than all before or after
Him. This is hinted at early in the fall when God speaks of the
"seed" of the woman, when no such exists in nature. The
virgin birth will be foretold by the prophets and fulfilled in
Christ. Thus the last Adam is as unique as the first in the
method whereby God chose to bring both forth into life. Both are
identified as the representative of all their people, in Adam all
of mankind, in Christ those whom the Father has given Him. Here
we see the glimmer of the third petal as it emerges from the
revelation of the Scriptures, in that Christ did not represent
all mankind, but the elect, those born spiritually as He was.
It is this dual nature of the elect (flesh and spiritual) I
believe David spoke in Psalm 32, and as God did not impute sin to
Adam, but allowed him to sin by his own hand, likewise God did
not impute sin to Christ the man, who did not sin in the flesh
and thereby as the representative of His posterity (the elect)
God imputed the righteousness of Him without sin. Thus we find
the Divines rightly pointing out that the redeemed continue to
bear the sinful flesh during this life (VI.5). It is only the
"born again" (spiritually speaking now) as explained by
Christ in John 3 who receive the covering of this sinful nature
by His atonement, and the imputation of His righteousness.
The Divines rightly point out that Adam was a "public
person" and thus represented all his posterity in his sin
deserving of the wrath of God, and thereby conceived and born in
sin. The Divines in the confession VIII.1 name Christ as the heir
and head of all things and in VIII.4 state that Christ willingly
took these offices, thereby it is clear that Christ was also a
"public person" and had a posterity to whom His
righteousness could be imputed in the same manner Adam’s
sinfulness was imputed to all mankind born by natural generation.
I believe this distinction of how original sin is imputed to
mankind, with the one exception of Christ is needed to hold to
the sinlessness of Christ, lest we all stand condemned without a
savior. I also believe that the federal theme is the preferred
apologetic to explain this imputation of sin. This is an
important area, and one I believe most of us will be called upon
to answer at times if we are about the work of the Lord and
sharing Jesus Christ. It would do all a service then to take the
time to study this issue in depth. I would refer the reader to
"Systematic Theology" by Louis Berkhof. This work
should be available in most church and even public libraries.
Berkhof spends several pages in this book (237-243) dealing with
the transmission of sin alone. Overall he spends some 45 pages
dealing with sin (pp 219-264). Thus in this limited work, I dare
not claim to have covered all. This was also true of the Divines
who were by the nature of their document limited even further,
and had to be most judicial in their choice of words.
Concerning the TULIP, we continue to see petals one, two, and
three, with four then existing of necessity, and five though not
here in view also a necessity in that man carries into the
covenant relationship with God his sinful nature. Thus once more
we see the beauty of this heavenly flower as the truth of God,
and man’s only hope to climb those celestial stairs, whereby
our Lord said, the day would come when man would see angels
descending and ascending on the Son of Man (John 1:51).
Dr. Chuck Baynard -- November 1997
