light on the justice of God in bringing into existence a race inclined to sin by the fall of Adam. The inherited bias is still unexplained and the imputation of it is a riddle, or a wrong, to the natural understanding.? It is unjust to hold us guilty of the effect, if we are not first guilty of the cause.

C. It contradicts those passages of Scripture which refer the origin of human condemnation as well as of human depravity to the sin of our first parents and which represent universal death not as a matter of divine sovereignty but as a judicial infliction of penalty upon all men for the of the race in Adam ( <450516>Romans 5:16, 18). It moreover does violence to the Scripture in its unnatural interpretation of ?all sinned,? in <450512>Romans 5:12 ? words which imply the oneness of the race with Adam and the causative relation of Adam?s sin to our guilt.

Certain passages which Dr. H. B. Smith, System, 317, quotes from Edwards, as favoring the theory of Mediate Imputation, seem to us to favor quite a different view. See Edwards, 2:482 sq. ? ?The first existing of a corrupt disposition in their hearts is not to be looked upon as sin belonging to them distinct from their participation in Adam?s first sin. It is, as it were, the extended pollution of that sin through the whole tree, by virtue of the constituted union of the branches with the root. I am humbly of the opinion that, if any have supposed the children of Adam to come into the world with a double guilt, one the guilt of Adam?s sin, another the guilt arising from their having a corrupt heart, they have not so well considered the matter.? And afterwards: ?Derivation of evil disposition (or rather co-existence) is in consequence of the union,? but ?not properly a consequence of the imputation of his sin; nay, rather antecedent to it, as it was in Adam himself. The first depravity of heart, and the imputation of that sin, are both the consequences of that established union but yet in such order, that the evil disposition is first, and the charge of guilt consequent, as it was in the ease of Adam himself.?

Edwards quotes Stapfer: ?The Reformed divines do not hold immediate and mediate Imputation separately but always together.? And still further, 2:493 ? ?And therefore the sin of the apostasy is not theirs, merely because God imputes it to them but it is truly and properly theirs and on that ground God imputes it to them.? It seems to us that Dr. Smith mistakes the drift of these passages from Edwards and that, in making the identification with Adam primary and imputation of his sin secondary, they favor the theory of Adam?s Natural Headship rather than the theory of Mediate Imputation. Edwards regards the order as (1) apostasy, (2) depravity, and (3) guilt. In all three, Adam and we are, by divine

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment