-- CHAPTER IV: How great every man's sinfulness is in having the guilt of Adam's first transgression
manner sustaining the persons of multitudes of mankind, undertaking to be a common person, representing them to effect a 'common salvation,' as Jude terms it, for them, ver. 3, that whereas all of mankind, if they had their estate to cast in their own hands, would certainly man by man have perished. God, according to the same law, whereby man was thus even by the law of nature cast and condemned, by the very same law and the equity of it saved us in our
Mediator, who was 'made sin, that knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him,' 2 Cor. 5:21, without which all mankind would have perished, as Sodom and Gomorrah. But in this very way of grace comes a mighty remnant of them (take them first and last) to be saved by imputed righteousness, so as God hath turned justice into mercy. 'By grace we are saved' this very way.
Add to these, seventhly, that if all the creatures then upon the earth, and the earth itself was cursed for man's sake, as it is, Gen. 3:17,
'Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat it all the days of thy life;' and Rom. 8:20, 'For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope;' and if these creatures were not willingly subject to vanity, and if not only the creatures then alive, but ever after to this day, were thus accursed for man's sake, then much more justly is this sin, and the guilt and heavy punishment of it, derived to his posterity that came out of his loins, that have a nearer relation to him than those creatures had.
And lastly, if, Heb. 7:9, 10, Paul says he might truly say, that Levi and all his posterity paid tithes in Abraham, for that he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him, then may all Adam's posterity be as truly said to have committed sin in Adam, for that yet they were in his loins when he did eat the forbidden fruit.
CHAPTER IV:
How great every man's sinfulness is in having the guilt of Adam's first transgression imputed to him How far we are all guilty of his sin.—What the aggravations of Adam's first sin were.—Whether they also, as well as the sin, are charged upon us For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Moreover, the law entered, that the offence might abound: but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.—ROM. 5:19,
Before I come to what I mean to speak of out of these verses, I will briefly recapitulate what I delivered out of ver. 12 concerning the derivation of the guilt of Adam's first sin, and that corruption of nature following thereupon.
1. I shewed you that the conduit-pipe, or means and way of conveying both these, was only this, coming from him by natural generation; for to this condition the conveying of sin is limited; for otherwise Christ, who came from Adam, was his son, had his matter from him, should have sin propagated to him, as well as we. Yet,
2. Understanding this so as though it be the conduit-pipe, and means and condition to carry to all from him, yet not sufficient ground or full reason alone why it should; for then, why should not other parents, from whom we are thus naturally generated, as well as from him, convey their sin also, which God hath said should not be? Ezek.
18:20, 'The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.'
Therefore, 3, there is some further ground of this, which holds peculiarly in Adam, not in them, which is a covenant struck with him, he being the first man, the common cistern, or rather spring of human nature; such a like covenant (in respect of being a common head and fountain of derivation) as was made with Christ for those that should come of him by a second birth, the fifteenth verse telling us Adam was therein a type of Christ. By virtue of which covenant,
4. We were all one in him (as also Christ's members are in him), and that two ways, which in other parents holds not.
(1.) Representativè. As the tribes in the heads of them, or as one burgess in parliament represents all the borough, so did Adam all men, as Christ also all his members, therefore styled in 1 Cor. 15:47, the one, 'the first;' the other, 'the second man;' God looking upon all as severally represented in these two, as if there had been no more men in the world. As Christ was the head of his body, and they one man in him, so were all as one man in Adam, the type of Christ therein.
(2.) We were one in him, tanquam in primâ origine et radice, in the same sense that two whole nations are said to be in Jacob and Esau whilst in the womb, Gen. 25:23. Even as the root and the branches make one tree, so he the root, we the branches, one man; as Christ also is, John 15:1, Rom. 6:5.
By virtue of which union thus made by covenant, and that founded in nature, 5. It comes to pass that most justly, and by the right of all kind of law ordinarily in force with men, and the law of nature, both the guilt of his sin, and the corruption of his nature, should be derived unto us.
(1.) The guilt of his disobedience, by virtue of the first ways of our being one with him, is derived. For it is a law in force with us, and in all nations, that what a person representing doth, the persons represented are likewise said to do. It is also the law of nations and
nature, that if the head doth plot, or the tongue speak treason, the whole man is truly said to do it also. And,
(2.) The corruption of his nature is derived by virtue of the latter way of our being one with him, and that even by the general law of nature; for every root brings forth according to its kind, so Adam in his image, Gen. 5:3.
Only, 6, this covenant comes to be examined, whether justly struck and imposed or no? And for that I answered,
(1.) That God out of his sovereignty might make it, and impose it without injustice, especially man being innocent, whenas God imposed the like in the case of sinful Achan upon the whole nation of the Jews, Achan's sin becoming the sin of the whole camp: Joshua
7:1, 'But the children of Israel committed a trespass in the accursed thing: for Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took of the accursed thing: and the anger of the Lord was kindled against the children of Israel.' And this was by virtue of a covenant made with every one for them all: Joshua 6:18,
'And you, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it.'
(2.) Yet here is a further equity; for it is an equal condition, that if we should have received good from him if he obeyed, we should receive evil also if he disobeyed, especially when all the good itself was given by God himself, the maker of this covenant, and the obedience he required was due in itself. If a king should raise a favourite out of nothing, give him all his honours for himself upon condition of obedience, yet so as if he rebelled, not only he, but his house should perish, he dealt not only equally in this, but bountifully both with him and his.
And yet (3.) there was a farther conveniency in it, and a good provision made; for better it was that all our estates should be
ventured into a father's hands, the most perfect man that ever was to come, he himself being a venturer also; and so after a while of obedience (viz., after he had put our nature once out of his hands, as is probable), then all to be confirmed in grace, than for every man to be left to himself, and after many years' obedience left to a possibility of falling away by the least error and swerving.
7. And, lastly, if you think much that yourselves did not choose him that should thus stand for you, I answer you, (1.) That God made as good a choice as you could have done, took the best and perfectest of men. And (2.) I ask, Who chose Jesus Christ to be a covenant for his people? Why might not God choose in the one as well as the other?
And if you yet think it harsh that another's sin should thus be put upon you, I answer you, God offers the righteousness of another to be imputed to you, which you never performed; and lest all men should perish, hath ordained Christ to be in like manner a common person for multitudes of mankind; and Adam was his type herein.
You see how Adam's sin becomes all ours. We cannot deny the debt we inherit from him; God hath a bond, a covenant to shew for it at the latter day.
It is fit now we search what the debt is, how much it comes to, how far we are liable to pay it. Now the abounding greatness this sum swells to, the apostle intimates in this 20th verse, and shews us the arithmetic we must use to cast it up by, the law, which God taught man to this end, and brought this new art into the world, that man might by the rules thereof see the greatness and multitude of his sins: 'The law enters that the offence might abound.' Now in that he says the offence (τὸ παράπτωμα, that offence), though he means generally the sinfulness of man, yet especially, as by the coherence seems evidently to me, he points at that first sin of Adam which he had spoken so often of in the 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th verses under the same name. And having shewed how by that offence, and by that one only, which seems, and hath seemed to many, so small a matter, that God should condemn all the world for eating of an apple, as one
of the popes blasphemously said;—to prevent this, and to shew the end of the law also, he brings in these words in this sense, if we did but know what an aboundingly heinous and evil sin, even the least, is, and in particular what an abounding offence that was, we would not think so. Now that men might see it, and acknowledge, and be humbled under it, therefore God sent the law into the world, not to make sin to abound the more in itself, but to discover the abounding sinfulness of it, and of that particular offence as well as of others, as a glass that discovers spots and deformities in itself causeth none.
I design to shew what an abounding sin that one offence of Adam was, whereof we are all guilty.
In the inquiry now into old Adam's debt, three questions are to be discussed.
1. Whether only that offence be imputed, and no more, and why? For we would be charged with as few as we can, the guilt of the least circumstance in a sin being more than ever we shall be able to pay.
2. How far we are guilty of it, whether of all aggravations considerable in it?
3. How great the guilt of it was, as it extends to us? It 'abounds,' the text says; and this latter is the main thing in the text, the former makes but way for it.
1. For the first, we are guilty only of that first disobedience in eating of the forbidden fruit, and not of his other sins afterwards committed, though never so great or many. For still, in ver. 15, 16,
&c., it is called 'the offence,' 'the disobedience,' and in ver. 16, it is expressly said, that 'judgment came by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences to justification;' where by one he means not one man but one offence, as the opposition, many offences, in the next words shew; his scope being to shew the abounding of the gift of grace through and above Adam's sin. He compares not persons only, but things conveyed; but 'one offence' God lays to our charge, no
more; but in Christ 'abundance of righteousness' for many sins. But the guilt of one sin is conveyed by Adam, but through Christ there is a justification of us from multitude of offences. And so in ver. 17 also,
'For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.' And there is this demonstration to confirm it, for he could convey sin for no longer time than he stood a public person; and when that office and relation was laid down, then he became a private person again, and then sinned for himself alone. Now when the second covenant and promise of the second Adam was published, which was presently after the fall, then it is evident he was put out of office, for otherwise his faith in the promise must have been imputed also to his seed; now God says, Hab. 2:4, 'The just shall live by faith.'
And withal, mark the reason why he remained no longer a public person after the first sin accomplished; for the end of his being appointed thus a public person for us was but to cast our condition either into an estate of sin or righteousness, for our estate was laid as it were at the stake in him, and he was to cast the dice, as I may so say, either for the winning or losing of all; and though indeed, to have won all, many righteous throws were required, it may be, yet one bad throw lost the game as well as twenty, cast it which way it should go; and therefore God looked at no more, the covenant then ended. And if men think that unequal, being to cast but one bad throw, so to lose all, we must consider this too, that he had an inclination to what was good, none to evil, only a possibility or potentia remota. And to give another similitude: as he was made the fountain of natural life for us, 1 Cor. 15:45, &c., so also of our spiritual. Now for him to have conveyed natural life to us, it was necessary he should not live one or two days, but perform the continued actions of life, even till he should beget a seed, for had his natural life been extinguished before by one death, we had all died in him, one death would have been enough. So for the conveying our spiritual life, and preserving and continuing the life of grace to us, it was necessary he should go on in all the actions of righteousness and
obedience; but one sinful deadly blow of sin was enough to extinguish all, and so cause us to be born dead in sin, as we all are; so that it is clear, that though he should have stood longer as a public person if he had continued righteous, yet this ceased upon the first sin.
2. To the second question, how far we are guilty of it; I answer, that though the guilt of the whole act be imputed to us, and we counted sinners by it, as truly guilty of the whole act as he, yet not with so much guiltiness as doth arise to him himself, and his share who was the actor. Something there is that doth redound to Adam's person therein more than to us. For, (1.) There is a personal guiltiness, in that he did the fact, which is more than barely to have it imputed, and to be accounted to have done it; though we be as truly guilty of the whole act, yet the manner lessens the blame. There in ver. 14, speaking of children, who die only for the imputed guilt of that sin, and corruption of nature inherent, he speaks as diminutively of their guilt in comparison of his; 'for,' says he, 'death reigned over those who sinned not after the similitude of Adam's transgression,' though as truly guilty as he; for they died, yet not like to him, which is a diminution and a lessening, as it were; as if he had said, though they actually and personally did it not, or any other sin, sinned not like to him, yet they died. For example, to clear this by the second Adam, of whom this was a type, though we have his whole righteousness, active and passive, as truly accounted ours as it is his, yet it is said to be his, with this peculiar prerogative, that it is personally his, as light is the sun's, the stars but borrow it. So as in all things he retains a pre-eminence: Col. 1:18,
'And he is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.'
(2.) There is this difference, as in the manner, which makes it, as hath been said, a deeper guiltiness in him, so in this peculiar aggravation, that he may be said to be guilty of the overthrow of the
whole world by it, and this is peculiarly his; for none of us, though we be truly guilty of the act, yet not of this circumstance, can be said to be the overthrowers of the world, as he might. This also may be cleared from the former instance of the second Adam, for though a believer hath all Christ's righteousness communicated to him, and enjoys the fruits of it, yet this glory he gives to none, that they should be saviours of the world, that is his alone.
That distinction in logic, concerning the genus communicating its whole nature to the species, illustrates both these to scholars; for it is truly said that tota natura generis communicatur singulæ speciei, but not natura generica; it makes not the species a genus as itself.
3. Now the third thing follows, namely, what a great sin that first sin was, as the guilt of it is extended to us, that so we may be humbled under it.
In all great sins there are two things to be considered:
First, the substance; secondly, the circumstance of the act.
First, for the substance of the act, it hath inwards and outwards, an inside and an outside. There was an outward act committed, and inward acts as the principles of it.
The outward act seems small; as it hath usually been said, it was but the eating of an apple, stealing of a little fruit. Yet consider,
(1.) The smallness of the matter or thing forbidden often aggravates the offence. To dare to offend the great God in a small matter is not a small disobedience. I may allude in this to the speech of Naaman's servant to him: 2 Kings 5:13, 'And his servants came near and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee to do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash and be clean?' So in this case. If God had forbidden doing some great thing, should he be obeyed? how much more when he forbids so small a thing? Cogita (says Augustine)
quanta fuit iniquitas in peccando, cum tanta facilitas non peccandi.
He gave them leave to eat of all the trees in the garden, forbade them but that one, even by Eve's confession, Gen. 3:2, 3, 'And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: but of the fruit of the tree, which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.' Thus, Nathan aggravated David's sin: 2 Sam. 12:3, 4, 'But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.' He had many lambs of his own flock, and yet took that one of another's. Adam had fruit enough, yet these would not content him, but he must be tasting forbidden fruit.
(2.) Sin is to be measured by the law that is given; for sin being in the nature of it, transgressio legis, the more urgent or greater the law is, the greater the transgression. Now that some laws are greater than others, Christ implies, when he saith, Mat. 23:23, 'Woe unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.'
Now, of all laws this was the greatest given to Adam.
1st, It being given only as a trial and testimony of his obedience in all the rest, called therefore symbolicum præceptum, as being a profession of his subjection to God in all the rest; such as is doing homage by a vassal to the lord of the soil, which, though it consists in some petty small rite or acknowledgment, the neglect of which (though the least of all to perform), or denying to do it, is the loss of
what they hold of him, as being the breach and highest kind of more than other acts, and greater neglect in other things.
2dly, The more expressly the will of the lawgiver is manifested in a law, the greater the enforcement and obligation is to that law. Now,
God's will was more expressly manifest in that than any other written in his heart.
1. His will was more in it, in that there was no reason for it, but the will of the lawgiver only; stelit pro ratione voluntas. Other laws Adam might see a reason for; of this none but God's will trying his obedience.
2. More expressly, for none else were delivered vivâ voce but this, as being an especial charge above all the rest. Other instructions he had only written in his heart, but this was given by mouth as an especial charge.
3. None else so expressly threatened with death but it; yea, that other law had its sanction in that threatening given to this. So God's will appeared to be more in it, because backed with so severe a threatening, a sign he was more earnest in it.
Secondly, Let us look to the inside of Adam's sin. Now, though the laws of men examine not the inwards of an action, as not in murder, not how much or little malice or cruelty was in the fact, so it be proved by circumstances it was in any degree wilful murder; but the law of God looks most hereto. And so a sin, which for the outward act is small, may in regard of the inwards of it be a great one. As that act of the man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day, a small thing in appearance, to get a few sticks to make a fire; but he doing it in contempt of Moses, so as to put Moses into a strait, since if for so small a thing he executed or inflicted any punishment, he would have been thought a cruel governor by all the people; but, on the other side, if he should pass it by, he opened a way to have the Sabbath broken; so as it was done in high contempt both of God and Moses,
and this God took notice of especially. And it is in sins as in duties; a man then performs duties best when God is most sanctified in his heart. If you would know when you pray best, it is then when you sanctify God in your hearts most, with most sanctified apprehensions of him, his greatness, goodness, all-sufficiency, working a sense of what it is to offend him. So a man then sins most when he dishonours God most in his heart.
Now, then, for the inwards of this action, the sinful acts of his mind in it, they were principally ill opinions of God, which were the principles of it, which provoke most, and dishonour most. 1st, Ill opinions of a person provoke most, for we see men then most provoked when they see they are meanly or badly thought of: this incites, and inflames, and blows anger up to its height; and men are angry at ill words given them by other men, but so far as they are expressions of their evil opinions of them in their hearts. 2dly, And ill opinions of a person dishonour most, for all true honour lies in opinion: so much greater is the honour as the opinion is greater.
Honos therefore is said to be in honorante; and so on the contrary it is as to dishonour. And God is therefore then dishonoured most when we have dishonourable thoughts of him. Now, they were low and mean under-conceits of God that first crept into Adam's heart, and are necessarily to be supposed to have been the foundation of this sin in his heart.
1. He undervalued the Lord in his heart, ceasing to think him any longer to be the chiefest good. He would never have done it had he not thought he could better his condition without God, and better his condition by that means, by the virtue of an apple, whereby he should come better to know what was good and evil, than by keeping
God's command, which is only true wisdom; and so he thought to be as gods therein. The text expressly affirms this was the main motive, and is set down therefore last, which the woman had, Gen. 3:6. She thought it 'to be desired to make one wise,' which, but that the Scripture affirms, a man would scarcely have imagined, much less believed, of our first parents, for no wise man now would think an
apple to have, or that it could have, any virtue in it, such as to make a man wise. To better the temper of his body one might imagine it to have a virtue, but it was extra sphœram the capacity of such a creature to give wisdom to the mind. Besides, they might easily think that if it had any such virtue in it God had put it in, and then that all wisdom comes from him alone, as James says, chap. 1:5, 17, 'If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God,' &c. And, besides (which aggravates their sin), they had already tasted of the goodness and excellency of God, having had some communion with him. Now, then, to leave a certain infinite good now enjoyed, for so uncertain, so unlikely an one, this aggravates his sin above what is in our own sins now in our natural condition, for, alas, we never knew, or at least never tasted better; therefore, no wonder if we go after the creatures: but he knew and had tasted. And this aggravates in like manner a regenerate man's sin, because he hath had communion with God; and then to forsake him, and go after the creature, how sinful is it!
2. Another ill opinion they had of God was, that God was not faithful and true. God had said, 'Ye shall die the death;' the devil had said,
No; and to hear a creature affirm this confidently, and to be, and exist, and still to reason the case, they thought there might be something in it, and this staggered their faith. Now, to conceive thus of God of all other was the worst, foulest, and most dishonourable conceit; for is God 'such an one that he should lie' (saith Samuel, 1
Sam. 15:29), 'or as a man, to repent?' Nay, even men, who are all themselves but a lie and deceitful, yet value their truth and faithfulness as their greatest jewel; and though they acknowledge want of excellency other ways, yet they will say they are true, &c.
Therefore to call God's truth into question, was worse than undervaluing his other excellencies; yea, men that are profane will wipe off the disgrace of a lie given them with their dearest blood. And then add to this, their believing the devil, contradicting the Lord merely by his own authority, so as his word should sway more than
God's. This was greater than the prophet's sin in believing the old prophet (for which yet God slew him by a lion, 1 Kings 13), for the old