Sect. 2. — Adam’s Fall.
Sect. 2. — Adam’s Fall.
Nom. But it seems that Adam did not continue in that holy and happy estate.
Evan. No indeed; for he disobeyed God’s express command in eating the forbidden fruit, and so he became guilty of the breach of the covenant.
Nom. But, sir, how could Adam, who had his understanding so sound, and his will so free to choose good, be so disobedient to God’s express command?
Evan. Though he and his will were both good, yet they were mutually good; so that he might stand or fall at his own election or choice.
Nom. But why then did the Lord not create him immutable? Or, why did he not over-rule him in that action, so that he might not have eaten the forbidden fruit?
Evan. The reason why the Lord did not create him immutable, was because he would be obeyed out of judgment and free choice, and not by fatal necessity and absolute determination; and with this, let me tell you, it was not reasonable to restrain God on this point, to make man such that he would not or could not sin at all; for it was at God’s choice to create man how he pleased. But why he did not uphold him with strength of steadfast continuance; that rests hidden in God’s secret council. Nevertheless, we may certainly conclude that Adam’s state was such that it served to remove all excuse from him; for he received so much, that of his own will he wrought his own destruction; because this act of his was a wilful transgression of a law, under the precepts of which he was most justly created; and under the malediction of which he was just as necessarily and righteously subject if he transgressed. For just as being God’s creature meant he was subject to God’s will, so being God’s prisoner, he was as justly subject to his wrath. That was made more just by how much more the precept was just, the obedience easier, the transgression more reasonable, and the punishment more certain.