Chapter III
How sin is derived from Adam to all mankind. ~-What sin it is which is pro
pagated by the first man to his posterity. Whether original sin consists only in a corruption of nature, or also in the guilt of Adam s first sin imputed to
us. The imputation of that sin proved. Adam, a public person represent
ing us. By what law he came to be so. The justice and equity of God s
imputing the first sin of Adam to us all.
Now there are but two ways to pass sin to another: the one is by way of
example, as Jeroboam is said to have caused Israel to sin, and as Eve caused Adam ; or else participatione culpa, by partaking of the sin of another. Now by the first way this sin is not derived, for besides that Adam being dead 4600 years ago, the force of this example reacheth not to us, nor to the multitudes of ages past ; that this was the way of deriving it, is not intended in the text, for then not Adam the first man, but Eve and the
devil, should have been assigned as those by whose offence sin entered into the world, in that they were the first in the transgression, and also be cause then children (as the 14th verse of the 12th chapter of the Romans
affirms) should not be guilty, as yet that verse affirms they are, in that they die. Now God exerciseth no punishment where there is no fault ; also the
apostle intends a comparison of Adam with Christ, that sin comes by Adam, as righteousness by Christ. Now Christ conveys not righteousness to all by example, for many persons saved by him lived afore him, as all under the Old Testament, as likewise infants. This indeed, as is likely, was the way by which the most of the angels fell, whom Satan as a head drew into the
10 AN UNREGENERATE MAN*S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
faction with him, and those whom his example prevailed not with did stand,
and do still, which no man doth, but all have sinned. Now concerning the second way how we should come to be partakers of Adam s sin, the Scriptures elsewhere tell us it was by propagation natural or generation, as David: Ps. li. 5, Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and
in sin did my mother conceive me. I will not earnestly contend that this way is directly expressed in this text, which yet Augustine pressed from the word entering into the world, as a lues or contagion, and so passing and
piercing through, or invading the whole world as it were by stealth ; but
this may justly be argued for it from the text, that even infant children are
* who sinned not after the similitude of Adam s transgression, that is, personally; which shews this to be the way of conveying this sin, for to them there can be no other. And why else were such children circumcised and now baptized, both being sacraments of remission of sin and sanctification ? Col. ii. 11-13,
affirmed here to die upon the account of that first sin s entrance,
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ ; buried with him in baptism, wherein also you are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And
you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he
quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. And in deed this to be the way, other scriptures plainly affirm, not only that instance
of David (though enough, for what could David have done before his con
ception that he should be conceived in sin ? and there is the same case of
* Whatsoever is born of the
all), but Christ plainly affirms it, John iii. 6,
flesh is flesh, that is, what is^born of fleshly generation. The first birth (for he opposeth it to the second birth) is flesh, that is, sinful ; for flesh he
opposeth to that grace which in the second birth the Spirit works, called
spirit there ; and so Paul, Ephes. ii. 3, We are all the children of wrath
by nature. By nature, is there in part meant the natural course of pro
pagating our nature, namely, generation, and conception, and propagation natural ; and so Aristotle useth the word puff/g. Now, if we be the
* children of wrath by virtue of our natural birth, then,
first, children of sin thereby ; for God is not angry with us but for sin. And hence it is that because natural conception, by that ordinary law of gene
ration, is the way of conveying sin, that therefore all men, all and every one, are corrupted; for to be sure all are born as from him, he being the first man, and having committed that sin ere he begat any. And why was it that
Christ, though the son of Adam, Luke iii. 38, as having the matter of his
body from him, yet was without sin, and born an holy one ? How came he
to be free and exempted, but because he was conceived not by natural propa gation from a man, but by the overshadowing of the Most High ? Luke
i. 35, And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee : there
fore also that holy thing, which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son
of God. So that this remains the only means why men are sinful, that they are propagated from Adam after the natural manner of all flesh ; the ground whereof you have hereafter.
The third question and demand will be, What sin it is that is propagated and entered upon the world, and of which all men, as soon as they are made men by conception or birth, are guilty, by that one man s offence ?
To make way for the answer of which we must know that all sins are re duced unto two branches : 1, that which consists in the guilt of some act of
sin done and perpetrated ; or, 2, an inherent corruption in the heart con-
CflAP. III.] IN RESPECT OP SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 11
tracted by that guilt. Now it is certain, that whether every man had had
this original sin or not, that yet upon any act of sinning committed by any man, there doth and should have entered in that man a depravation of
nature ; for by sinning a man is made the servant of iniquity unto iniquity. Rom. vi. 19, I speak after the manner of men, because of the infirmity of
your flesh : for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now yield your members servants to
righteousness, unto holiness. Which comes to pass not upon that mistaken
ground that an habit follows upon acts in a philosophical way ; for then it must be that many reiterated acts produce such an inclination, and so not
any one act of sin ; but depravation followeth by way of curse and forfeit
ure, even of the spirit of all inherent holiness, because man s having of it did hold of a covenant of works, of which more hereafter. Now therefore
according unto this, Adam sinning, there were two things befell him : 1, an
everlasting guilt of that act committed, binding him over to death; 2, a for
feiture of the Holy Ghost in him, and so of the image of God in holiness, and so by consequence the contrary depravation of his nature. Now Adam
having contracted by his first sin both these to himself, if the question be, which of these two, or whether not both of these are the sin that entered, and is propagated by birth to all men ?
The answer is, Both of them.
First, The guilt of that very act of disobedience, which was lately spoken
of, so as we all are accounted guilty of it as he, and as truly as if we had had a hand in it ; and that (besides what is to follow) appears plainly out of Rom. v. 12. For, first, it is said, that all have sinned ; secondly, the 16th and 18th verses clear it, for they say, that by the offence of that man, judgment (that is, the guilt of that offence, whereby they were judged guilty as well as he) came on them all to condemn them. Now God could not condemn them for that act, unless he did in justice judge them guilty of it. And whereas it is said here, they sinned, the very text viewed and compared cleareth its own intendment. A person may be said to have sinned, or to have done a thing two ways : 1, when one actually and personally doth it
himself; and so we did not sin that sin, but Adam only ; for in ver. 14, it
is said of infants that they sinned not after the similitude of his transgres
sion, that is, in their own persons ; yet, 2, one maybe said to have sinned
in another. And look as the text gives that part of the distinction, that they sinned, not personally as Adam did, so it appositely sets out this other
Ip , in whom all have sinned, speaking of Adam ; for that may be when one actually himself doth it not ; as what a whole body doth, a member of the same body may be said to do ; and so the word here, they sinned, is to be understood, that is, they are to be accounted sinners, as the word is in
1 Kings i. 21, That I and my son Solomon shall be counted offenders
(Heb., sinners), upon what ground you shall hear afterwards ; and besides, I must speak presently to this very point again.
The second thing conveyed is, a corruption of nature, which is a sin that
is inherent, remaining and residing in us, and conveyed to us from him, as
a leprosy is from the parent to the child, so as it may be said to be in them. Of this Job speaks, chap. xv. 14,
* What is man, that he should be clean? and he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous ? And in the 16th
verse of that chapter, he calls man filthy and abominable, drinking in sin
as water. In which place you see, that, first, there is a want of righteous ness, which once he was made in ; secondly, a contrary uncleanness or
proneness to sin, and therefore he calls him filthy or greedy of sinning ; and,
thirdly, this is conveyed by his natural propagation by man and woman; for
12 AN UNREGENER.VTE MAN S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
it is inserted, that is born of a woman. So that now you are to conceive thus of it : that Adam committing that act of disobedience, his nature was
thereby first in himself for ever denied by it. We often see that one blow
or fall strikes a man s members out of joint, so as of themselves they ever remain so, and so did that fall of his, though but one act of sin. If there
fore we also be proved guilty of that act in him, then by the like reason also must that nature we receive from him by natural propagation be tainted with sin, as his was by virtue of that act ; so as it must first be supposed that we are guilty of that act, as the ground and reason why our nature is thus infected, that being a consequent thereof, and in part a punishment of
it, and so as indeed it could not have been inflicted on our natures as a sin, unless we be first found guilty of that act of sin itself.
Now, because this is questioned by some divines, I shall come next to speak unto this great and main proposal, namely,
Whether original sin doth consist only in a corruption and defilement of
nature, and want of that first created righteousness ? Or, whether not also
in the guilt of that first act of sin and disobedience of Adam s, by way of
imputation derived down unto us, and that as the ground of that corruption propagated ?
That the corruption conveyed is the whole of original sin, and not at all
the guilt of that first disobedience as imputed to us, is maintained by some, but usually (if not generally) by such as withal deny the imputation of
Christ s righteousness also. And indeed the occasion why they have denied
the imputation of Adam s sin, hath been for the sake of their other opinion, that we are not justified by Christ s righteousness as imputed, but only for
Christ s sake, and for his righteousness. For they see that if they should hold the imputation of Adam s first actual disobedience, that then they might as well assent unto the imputation of Christ s righteousness and obedience, Adam being Christ s type.
The point therefore to be proved now is not, that the corruption is con
veyed, but that the guilt of the act of his first sin is also derived down to us.
I shall endeavour it out of this scripture, in Rom. v. 12, 13, &c. (Of the
conveyance of the corruption itself I shall after speak.) Now the proof of this is made up of these particulars laid together.
1. Let the general order of the apostle s discourse in this epistle about about man s sinfulness be considered. In the two first chapters, he had shewn how, in respect of actual sins and a state of wrath, first, the Gentiles,
chap, i., secondly, the Jews, chap ii., are all involved; and then, chap, iii., he speaks of both together, Jew and Gentile, laying open that inbred and
general corruption of nature, concluding that all are unrighteous, and fallen
short of the glory of God. Now, then, in this fifth chapter, he proceeds to shew the source and spring of this corruption, viz., Adam s first sin : By one man sin entered into the world. So then, having fully treated of the
corruption afore, he here orderly next treats of the consequence of the guilt of the act, which is the ground of that corruption.
2. The sin of that one man which he treats of in this chapter was, the act
of sinning, and not so much the corruption of nature in him, which also
befell himself, for he termeth it a transgression, ver. 14; an offence, ver. 15-17 ; and says, that he sinned, ver. 16; and a disobedience, ver. 19; and
ver. 17, termeth it, that one offence.
3. When he says, Sin entered into the world by that one man, he by sin means one and the same sin, which by him as the author was first brought into the world, the guilt whereof accrued to himself as the perpetrator of it, and to his posterity ; so as in that word, sin entered into the world, him-
CHAP. III.] IN RESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 13
self first is to be understood as one of, yea, the head of, this world of man kind which sin entered upon ; and he speaks of the first entrance of sin, therefore of that sin which was first begun in himself, and that is evidently the guilt of the act here spoken of, and therefore the same sin or guilt is to be understood, which is said that it goes on and is derived to the rest of mankind. And if otherwise it be understood, then, whilst Adam s sin is
spoken of, and that as begun in him, one kind of sin, namely, the guilt of the act, but when the sin of the rest of mankind, then another kind of sin,
viz., the corruption of nature, should be variously intended, which is not uniform to the apostle s scope.
4. He thereupon says, that death passed upon all, this sin having first entered upon all ; that is, death as the effect and punishment of that act of sin thus spoken of; and the connection of these two sayings is with an emphasis,
and so death passed. Every word is emphatical to this purpose
: 1, passed, as a sentence upon a crime foregoing ; and therefore, 2, he adds, %a/ ovrtic, and so, which words are causal, or assigning a reason why death and the sentence of death passed upon all, even because sin, and that sin of Adam had entered first upon all. And look as death seized on Adam for the act which he did, so still likewise the same sentence on us all for the same act. Now we find that unto that act of disobedience it was that death was threat ened : Gen. ii. 17, That day thou eatest thou shalt die. And look as it
is one and the same death that seizeth on both Adam and us, so the guilt of one and the same sin entered on both.
5. And to that end he might be understood both to hold forth that sin of
his to have been the cause of death, and also how sin, and what sin it was he intended, in saying it entered upon the world by that man, he further
indigitates it and repeats it, in that (saith he) in whom all have sinned ; and this fully resolves us.
For, first, if no more had been said of all men, than that they sinned,
q/uagrov, it imports an act of sinning ; he says not, made sinful, but have sinned ; therefore his intention is to speak them guilty of that act of his
first sin, of which he manifestly speaks of afore and after. And further, seeing that many of them whom death reigned over were infant children, as well as others (for experience sheweth death reigneth over them also), and
they are part of this world, which sin is said to have entered into, and that
they are not guilty of any act of their own in themselves, therefore guilty they must be supposed of that act (if of any at all), viz., the first sin and dis obedience of Adam (which he, you see, is discoursing of), nor of any other can they be supposed guilty in common together with all men else ; so then
put but all and have sinned together, it must be the guilt of his first sin that is intended ; and then the manner of involving children in that guilt can be no otherwise than by imputation, for of personal sin in themselves they are not guilty.
6. Further, to clear this, take the words that follow : ver. 14, Death
reigned, saith he even over them that sinned not after the similitude of Adam s transgression.
1st, That reigning attributed unto death upon sin s entrance hath, as Pareus observeth upon the words, a respect to those violent prerogative extraordinary judgments which were (long before Moses) executed, as the
flood on the old world, and on Sodom and Gomorrah, &c., in which children and infants were involved as well as those of riper years.
And then, 2dly, those other words, even over them that sinned not
after the similitude of Adam s transgression, is a designing, by a peri
phrasis, infant children, and their case and condition, as those that death
14 AN UNREGENERATE MAN S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
reigneth over, as well as others, though they had never actually or person
ally sinned, or in like manner as Adam had done. Now, besides other con
siderations, if only inherent corruption were the sin that had been intended, upon which it is that death had passed on all, and as that wherein infants, as well as those of riper years, are in common and alike involved, then the
apostle had put no difference between Adam and them ; for concerning that
sin it might be said of infants that they have inherent corruption in their
persons, after the similitude that Adam had it in his person ; for it is ex
pressly said of it, Gen. v. 3, that Adam begat a son in his own image or
likeness. And those (with whom in this point I have now to do) all grant that same corruption to have been the punishment of that first act of Adam s, as well in Adam himself as in us, and so in all these respects bearing the very similitude of that sinful corruption that was in Adam ; but
it is not so in respect of the guilt of that first act ; we are not sinners in
respect thereof after the similitude of Adam s transgression therein. So
then, having first said that all had sinned, and yet of some of that all, namely infants, that they sinned not after the similitude of Adam s trans
gression, it is an explication or correction that they are to be understood to have sinned, not in their own persons, as Adam did, but that only by way of imputation it is yet reckoned to them, which is the only way whereby it can be imagined they should be said to have sinned therein.
And 7. After he had thus connected these two, the first man s sin and
death, as cause and effect, he plainly sends us to that first curse directed
against that very fact, That day thou eatest (which was the first sin) thou
shalt die the death. And this the scope of his ensuing argumentation
clearly shews that his meaning is, that death (then threatened) had, accord
ing to the tenor of that threatening upon that man s first sin, seized on all the world. His words that follow are these: ver. 13, 14, For until the law sin was in the world : but sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. He lays his foundation of arguing thus : children and all men die, and death is but for some sin, and all sin must have some law it is committed against ; now, what law should that be, says he ? He removes any kind of sins forbidden in Moses s law, or contained therein, to have been the cause of that death of mankind, yea, of children ; and yet it must be a sin against some law that was in the world, which must be the cause of that death ; for sin is not imputed where there is no law. Now what law is it (that was no part of Moses s law, nor contained therein) against which all, even children, should be supposed to have sinned, and by virtue of which death should pass upon them and all, but that which was given to Adam, over and above any other command that is in Moses s law, which
so expressly threateneth death in it ? That law which he first sinned
against, namely, in eating the forbidden fruit; and therefore it must be the
sin against that law which brought in death upon the world, in which law or command this curse was in terminis, and expressly annexed, that day thou
eatest thou shalt die. It is certain, then, that it must be by virtue of this law that children die, or by none, for they died when Moses s law was not
yet given ; so then, when you read that even children died afore Moses as
well as others, you know what curse and what law to attribute it unto, even
to the first law, and that first curse given to Adam, that day thou eatest, thou shalt die. *
* Faius, the Geneva preacher, together with Calvin, in his comment on these
words, resolves the apostle s argument thus : Si est transgressio in infantibus, est
CHAP. III.] IN RESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 15
8. If it prove that the words, ver. 12, are to be read thus, In whom all have sinned, then the matter is plain that the guilt of that his first act is
the sin conveyed by imputation, and that we sinned in him. But those that
are opposite to this great truth catch hold of this, that the words should be
* in whom ; and so our translators were pleased to read, although in the margin they also vary it, and say
read, in that all have sinned, and not
* in whom, as knowing that this latter might stand as well as the former. Now yet,
1st, If it be in that all have sinned, as taking e<p> , in that, as a causal
particle, yet still it implies that all have sinned, and were guilty of an act of
sinning, as was argued.
2dly, Know that Pelagius was the first who brought up that other inter
pretation, in that, or for that all have sinned. But Augustine, and all the
fathers but Theodoret, say, in whom, as meaning Adam, spoken of in the words before.
3dly, The apostle s speech seems an hyperbaton ; for whereas the apostle in the beginning of the verse had said, As by one man sin entered, and then should in the next sentence have repeated those words, by one man, and so have gone on to have said, that thus or so death passed on all men by that one man, he omits the insertion of it there because of making a repetition,
yet so as in this his close he emphatically brings it in, and with more advan
tage, in adding this as the reason or ground thereof, in whom all have sinned ; and so that
"xf cf comes in fully referring to that one man, and to
that his sin, as by whom he had said sin entered into the world, and death
with it, as the reason of both.*
Then, 4thly, compare this sense given but with that speech, 1 Cor. xv. 22, in Adam all die, this place, Rom. v. 12, in whom all have sinned, and
they are parallel ; for look, as he plainly there affirms, that in Adam, as a common person, all did die, the same he affirms here of his sin, the cause of
death, in whom all sinned. If, therefore, in the one place we are said to
die in him as the consequent of that first sin (and actually in him we did not
die when he died, for we are alive long after him), then much more it may be judged that the apostle intended to say here that we sinned in him then, when with the same breath he is proving that death entered upon all men
upon the entrance of his first sin, so that the one place doth interpret the
other. And although this here is put last in order of sentences, in whom all have sinned, yet it is supposed first in order of causation, thus, in whom all
having sinned, death hath by that passed on all ; that is, all died in him, because they all sinned in him ; for the law given him had said, That day thou eatest thou shalt die. For these words there, in Adam all die, do
refer evidently to that curse in Gen. ii. 17, That day thou eatest thou
shalt die the death, even that very same curse and law which in the seventh consideration I shewed Paul pointed us unto. And if it were that
by that law it came to pass they then died in Adam, then they must be con
sidered in Adam when that was spoken unto him ; and so this must have
been, by the apostle s application and interpretation of it, God s intention, that when he said, thou shalt die, that he included all mankind as con
sidered in him when he spake it of and unto him. To conclude this, consider but this further parallel of these two places, 1 Cor. xv., and this Rom. v.
legis alicujus transgressio ; non est transgressio legis actualia prohibentis, ergo est
transgressio legis alterius. Lex autem ilia nulla alia est prseter earn quae violata est ab Adamo, qua scilicet prohibitus est Adamus Eden de fructu. Faius in locum. * See Cornelius a Lapide in loc.
16 AN UNREGENERATE MAN S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
1. Adam is in both held forth as Christ s type, as I have in another dis course proved ;* so in the Romans expressly, ver. 14,
* Nevertheless death
reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the
similitude of Adam s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. Arid as expressly, 1 Cor. xv. 45,
* And so it is written, The first man, Adam, was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
And 2. Adam and Christ are held forth as public persons in both. First, in that 1 Cor. xv. 45, where he is therefore called the first man, not in respect of existence, but representation ; for in what respect is Christ there called the second man, and Adam the first man, but in the same sense that Christ is termed the second ? For they are set together as type and antitype, other wise Cain was in order the first after Adam. So, then, it is spoken in respect of his representing all mankind; and so it is of Adam here in this Rom. v., for all along the emphasis is put upon this one man : ver. 19, it is said, by the sin of one man, not one sin; and ver. 12, by one man sin entered. I
ask, seeing Eve sinned, and sinned first, was first in the transgression, why was it not her sin ? yea, and she was a root of propagation as well as Adam, why by that one man, Adam, and not Eve ? No reason can be given but because Adam was the public person that represented us, and not she ; so also why are not other parents as well ? so why not Adam afterwards, but only in his
first sin committed ? Yet let me add this, that Christ and Adam are made
public persons in a differing respect in these two places
: in 1 Cor. xv.
* Such as is the first man earthy, such
47, 48, in respect of qualifications,
are they that are earthy of him. But here in the Romans in respect of acts, or what the one and the other did, and therefore the sin of this one man is made the sin of all in him, as the obedience of the other is made the righteous ness of all in him ; as the one for justification of life, so the other for con demnation of death, in whom all have sinned, and in whom all died. And indeed it is the law of all nations that the acts of a public person are accounted
theirs whom they personate ; the heads of the people of Israel sacrificed for a murder in the name of the nation, the females were circumcised in the males.
Lastly, The scope of Paul in this chapter is to set Christ out by the illus
tration of Adam his type, in respect of his conveying the righteousness of
justification; so ver. 16-18 expressly, And not as it was by one that
sinned, so is the gift ; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 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.
Therefore, as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condem
nation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men
unto justification of life. And his conveying sanctification to us is made a new and distinct business from this, which upon occasion of this he enters
upon, chap. vi. ver. 15 to 20, and this we argue against the papists. Novv
therefore, if Adam s t}^pe in respect of conveying sin be brought to set out
Christ s justifying of us by his righteousness, then the imputation or charg
ing of Adam s disobedience, and so the guilt of the act, mustibe intended, or
it had not served Paul s purpose ; for if Paul should have intended how Adam conveyed the sin of corruption of nature to us, to set forth how Christ
conveys righteousness to justify us, it would have been foreign to his design, for these are things heterogeneal and of differing nature, and no way parallel. But the apostle s words in Rom. v. 19 are express, that in one and the same parallel respect it is that we are made sinners in Adam and righteous * See the Discourse of the Creatures, and the Condition of their State by Creation, chaps, viii. and ix. in Vol. II. of his Works.
CHAP. III.] IN KESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 17
in Christ, for as by one man s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. And the word xarg.
oradriffav and xara<rra0^<rovra/, made righteous and made sinners, there used, is
a word noting an act of forensical or outward authority, applied therefore to
the constituting of elders : Acts vi. 3, Wherefore, brethren, look you out
among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom ye may appoint over this business. Karaffr^a^sv, the word is. And
so Titus i. 3, But hath in due time manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our
Saviour. *
Karaffr^ffr.g is the word there too. And so the justification of us by Christ s righteousness is an act of power, as when a king makes a man a noble man by patent, constituting him such ; and thus it is that Adam s sin makes
us*by nature s letters patents sinful, even by deriving down the guilt of that
* The judgment was by one to condemnation ; that the judgment or sentence charging the crime, the guilt of the fact upon us, redounds to our condemnation. And so much for this
act, which, in Rom. v. 16, is thus expressed,
great point.
The next query may be, How and by what law Adam came to be a public person representing us? For it will be objected that there only it holds, that
the act of a public person is reckoned or imputed, when he is chosen by the consent of those to whom it is imputed, which Adam was not by any of us. To which I answer,
First, Adam being, as was said, Christ s type, I might ask, How came
Christ to be a public person ? and who chose him to be so ? To be sure, he was not chosen by any of us believers ; and yet it is said, that sin is not im
puted to us, because Christ was made sin for us. By God s choice, and his own undertaking, 2 Cor. v. 21, Christ was appointed by God, and that by virtue of a covenant made with him for all believers, that what he did should be theirs : Isa. xlix. 1-8,
* Listen. isles, unto me ; and hearken, ye people, from far : The Lord hath called me from the womb ; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. And he hath made my mouth
like a sharp sword ; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft ; in his quiver hath he hid me ; and said unto me, Thou
art my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified. Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain ; yet
surely -my judgment is with the Lord, and my work with my* God. And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to
bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be
glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength. And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel ; I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the Lord, that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he
shall choose thee. Why may it not satisfy us, then, that by the like reason God should choose Adam, being the first that was created, as perfect as ever
any after could have been, as the first man, the chief? And so God made as good a choice in it as men could have done for themselves. And further, who being to be the father of all the rest, had the law of nature, as well as that of love and conscience (which parents have generally towards their chil-
Qu. Titus i. 5, For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest ordain, &c.? ED. VOL. X. B
18 AN UNREGENERATE MAN S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
dren s good as to their own), to poise and oblige him unto faithfulness, to whom God gave a law which did concern and bind his posterity in him as
well as himself, and this covenant was expressly told him and made with him : 1. That he should be able to multiply and fill the earth : Gen. i. 28, And God blessed them : and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it ; and have dominion over the fish of
the sea, and over the fowls of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And, 2, that, standing obedient, he should convey the same blessed estate to that his seed, and therefore that same which God
speaks, Gen. i. 26, Let us make man according to our image, is expounded by Solomon, Eccles. vii. 29, of all men in him, God made man righteous, but they, &c. He speaks generally of all in the one and in the other. And
therefore also, Gen. i. 28, he bids him multiply, and have dominion over all ; that is, his seed as well as he should have the same privilege. Yet so, 3, as that if he disobeyed God, his seed should die as well as he; so that, That day thou eatest thou shalt die, was understood by him, and spoken to him, as representing all, for it is so opened as the primitive intent of it
in 1 Cor. xv. 22, Tor as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. All are said there to die in him, which could not have been
unless they had first all lived in him.
But, secondly, to clear this the more, there are three ways by which it may be conceived or understood, that he was made a public person.
1. By the absolute prerogative of God, resolving it wholly into his own
secret ordination and appointment of him so to be. Thus some. But this
cuts the knot indeed, but unties it not ; and I dare not wholly put it on that
account. The covenant with Adam, both for himself and us, was the cove nant of nature, as I have shewn : and it were hard to say, that in such a covenant he should use his prerogative alone ; and in some respects this was
higher (if we suppose it such) than that with Christ, with whom he dealt
distinctly, fully making known to him all things that concerned that covenant, which he also voluntarily undertook for to his Father, as in that place cited
in Isaiah, and also here appears.
2. A second way, therefore, is when it is by a covenant, and that so as
though God s will to have it so, that he should represent us, was the main
foundation it should be resolved into ; yet so as withal God should plainly utter this, and declare it aforehand to him, as he did to Christ in that place of Isaiah, I will give thee for a covenant to the Gentiles, &c. Now, there
is no such record of this, more than what hath been mentioned in the for mer answer, now extant I know of, whereby God declared he would consti
tute him such, or laid it explicitly upon him, otherwise than in those parti culars which yet I confess by just and like reason do infer it, so as I would not wholly put it upon that account neither ; for we read not of God s say
ing this to him in distinct words, nor of his accepting or undertaking so to
be, namely, a public person, that if he sinned his posterity should sin in him. Therefore,
3. I should think it to be mixed of the two latter, both that God made him and appointed him to be a public person, as 1 Cor. xv. 45 (see my
exposition on those words*), yet not so out of mere will, but that it also had
for its foundation so natural and so necessary a ground, as it was rather a
natural than a voluntary thing. And necessary it was he should be so
appointed, if the law of nature were attainted. And to assert this, I am
induced, among other grounds, by that which, in handling the state of Adam
in innocency, I thenf pursued. That his covenant was a natural covenant, * In the Discourse of the Creatures, chaps, viii. ix., in vol. ii. of his works, f Ibid.
CHAP. III.] IN RESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 19
and such as according to the law of his creation was due and requisite, and founded upon, and consonant to the principles of nature, and therefore I
judge this law concerning the propagation of man s nature to his posterity to be such, and that God did not put forth his prerogative in giving forth
this alone ; but that it being a part of his covenant by the law of nature, it was therefore so well known to him, by the light and law of nature, that he needed not have it given him by word of mouth ; though in those fore-men
tioned charters, common to him and his posterity, of having dominion over
the creatures, and begetting in his likeness or kind, it was sufficiently held forth ; and so as that threatening was to be understood in the same manner by him,
That day thou eatest thou shalt die, wherein all mankind are not only meant, but expressed by the same law that they are in those words, sub due the earth : Gen. i. 28, And God blessed them : and God said unto
them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it ; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth ; which are spoken to Adam immediately, and yet meant of his posterity. And it is certain that, in
respect of conveying all that which was good, he was a common person ; as
in that of conveying a lordship over the creatures, a covenant of life to them,
&c., and by the same reason he was a common person to convey sin too. And truly those words, that we are said to be children of wrath by nature, I understand not only (though so too) by birth, but even to extend to this
sense, by the law of nature. See my exposition on those words.* Now, the natural necessity upon which this designation of him to be a
public person was made is this : God had, as author of nature, made this the law of nature, that man should beget in his own image or likeness. Look what it should prove to be either through his standing or falling afore he
puts this nature out of his hands ; and this law is in their kind common to
beasts. So, then, in this first man the whole nature of man being reposited, as a common receptacle or cistern of it, from whence it was to flow to others, therefore what befalls this nature in him by any action of his, that nature is so to be propagated from him, God s ordinance in the law of nature being, that all should be made of one blood, which could not have been said of any other man than of him (no, not of Noah, because of the mixture of mar
riages afore with the posterity of Cain). And thus, also, man s condition
differed from that of the angels, of whom each stood as single persons by themselves, being all and each of them created by God, immediately, as even Adam, the first man, himself was. But all men universally by the law of nature were to receive their nature from him in his likeness ; that is, if he stood and obeyed, then the image of holiness had been conveyed, as it was at
first created ; if he fell by sin, then seeing he should thereby corrupt that
nature, and that that corruption of nature was also to be his sin in relation
to, and as the consequent of, that act of sin that caused it, therefore, if the law of nature were ever fulfilled so as to convey his own image as sinful
(suppose he should sin), so as it should be reckoned sin in his children, as
it was in himself, this could not take place, but they must be guilty of that
act that caused it, so far as it cast it, as well as himself. If indeed any way could have been supposed how he might have been bereft of that holiness he was created in, without a precedaneous act of sinning as the cause, then indeed we might have said that privation of holiness should not have been reckoned sin either to himself nor his posterity in that case. This corrup tion of nature, or want of original righteousness, in such case would not have been, nor could not have been accounted a sin, (a punishment it might),
* In Comment, on Ephes., Part ii. [Vol. II. of this Edition of his "Works. ED.]
20 AN UNREGENERATE MAN S GUILTINESS B-Li ORE GOD, [BOOK I.
but it comes only to be a sin as it referreth to, and is connected with, the
guilt of an act of sin that caused that corruption of nature. If, therefore, that corruption became truly and properly a sin in them as well as in him
(and else it hath not iheformale of his image), he must necessarily be con
stituted a public person, representing them even in respect of that act of sin, which should thus first infect and pollute their nature in him, or else the law of nature will not in this respect have its due effect ; for that which makes it a sin is not the want of it simply, but as relating to a forfeiture and
losing of it by some act those are first guilty of who lose it. Hence, there
fore (I repeat the force of my reason again), if he will convey this image
acquired by his sin as sinful, there must be a guilt of that act of his sin which was the cause of it, and therefore he must be a public person in that
first act of sin ; so as without this, as the case stood, the law of nature could not have had its course. See more of this in my sermons on Ephes. ii. 3,
* Children of wrath by nature. Two objections clog this.
1. Assertion. Why should not, for the same reason, his actual righteous ness be conveyed ?
I answer, There is a differing reason : for his acts of righteousness they were only means of preserving holiness in him, as causes without which he should else lose it (for omission would have lost it as well as commission),
yet he had it not given him at first from acts of righteousness, but by crea
tion and free donation. But this sinful image, considered as sinful, was to come in wholly and merely from a sinful act, as the sole efficient or merito
rious cause of it ; and that was it alone could bereave him of it, and which
alone could make the want of that righteousness to be sin.
2. The second objection is, Why was not Adam, in others of his sins
(which also corrupted his nature), a public person, to convey the guilt of them with that corruption, as well as this first, seeing the law of nature is
to beget in his image ? Yea, why are not other parents public persons also,
seeing this law to beget in their likeness is theirs as well as Adam s ?
Ans. 1. It was the first act of sin in Adam that first cast his condition, that is, himself and all his posterity, into that utter privation of all righteous ness, which was equally, for the substance of it (if I may use such an expres sion of sin), to be communicated to all mankind; and as in the being of man
it is in the integral substantial image, not the gradual, that the law of nature
seizeth on, as to beget an entire whole man, not of such a stature, &c., so
it is in corruption the integral body of sin, the integral substance of that
corruption, which is equally to be derived to all, was at first cast and caused
by that first act of his, and therefore upon that he ceaseth to be a public person, for there was wrought in him therebj
7 an utter privation of all right eousness. It was a privation total and integral, that had all sin it ; and,
therefore, though he by other acts might afterwards corrupt himself more by
degrees, yet the law of nature for begetting in his likeness extends not to
degrees in any kind, but mterjralitas, a wholeness of parts ; as to beget a whole man, a soul that hath all faculties, a body that hath all members ; but the degrees of abilities or stature, that is not in the common law of nature ; for else Seth should have been more corrupted than Cain, and the
latter children of a wicked man than the elder ; and that is a strong argu ment that it is not by mere propagation, but as conveying with it the guilt of the first sin.
And, 2, for other parents ; though they are means to derive down this
image from him, yet they are not public persons ; nor was it necessary, for
the condition of all Adam s acts being cast by that first act, and a total
CHAP. III.] IN RESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 21
entire privation of all righteousness, as the common standard of all men s
original sinfulness, being cast by Adam and his first act of sinning, there needed not such constituting other parents as public persons, but only as
bare instruments by generation (which is but the channel of it) to convey it down. For the full scope and extent of the law of nature to convey the whole image of sin, for the substantial and integral parts of it, was by his
sin enough attained ; and therefore himself ceased upon it to be a public
person, and other parents are never put into that office. And the scope of
the law of nature is not to convey more or less degrees of sinning, according to the degrees of corruption in the parents that beget, as it is not to begat children as great or wise as themselves.
The^next thing to be spoken unto is the justice and equity of the imputa tion of this first act of sin unto us by God.
The difference of this our first parent, and that of other parents, why he, and not they, were singled out to represent us, and stand for us, having spoken to, even now in answer to an objection, and also afore ; and so
supposing the justness of that difference,^! shall now come to the clearing of the justness of this imputation of his first sin to us, and the corruption of it.
Now for this general ground which the text holds out, that he was that one man, as hath been shewn, as no father else is said to be. There are
several ways by which a multitude are reckoned as one man, as included in one other man that stands for them.
First,. One that is head of many ; and Adam was the first head and father
of mankind. Now the elders and first heads of any tribe did still appear as
public persons in the stead of the rest, as our knights in parliament do for a shire, and for kingdoms or nations, only they are chosen by the multitude
they represent ; but by the law of nature, the first had that privilege by nature, and so all the rest of that tribe were looked at as one man, in that man that represented them. And this holds good to this day in nations, namely, that some one represents a multitude, and stands for a whole cor
poration in matters of greatest moment : what such an one passeth, they are
said to enact. It is Aristotle s maxim, Quod facit princeps civitatis, id tota
facit civitas. Now in this sense all mankind were (upon the principles we have given) but as one man in this one man ; and therefore the Scripture puts it upon this first man Adam, as from whom we receive the image which was in him, and by him left in our nature : 1 Cor. xv. 47-49,
* The first man is of the earth, earthy ; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As
is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy ; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. And he was
also thereto ordained and made by God in his first creation to represent us ; and so what this the head did, is reckoned to us the parts and members of him. His will was voluntas totins generis knmani ; his will was the will of us all, as the will of the head or chief is of the whole corporation. The
Scripture declareth him the first man, to have all men in him ; why else is
Christ termed the last man ? and so all sinned in him, as in that one man. And this justly derives the second.
Secondly, We were all as one man in him, tanquam in origine ; so the buds or branches are one with the root, and receive their tincture or kind from it ; and also may be reckoned to be in it long before they sprout forth. Rebekah
having two sons in her womb, is said to have two nations, which were to
spring out of each of them, as the respective roots of them : Gen. xxv. 23, And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two man-
22 AN UNEEGENERATE MAN S GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, [BOOK I.
ner of people shall be separated from thy bowels. This is spoken of them
long aiore these nations came forth out from them. And Adam was the root
of all the world, and had the whole of man s nature in him, tanquam in ori-
cjine ; and was, as all other things, even as plants, to bring forth in their
kinds, so he in his kind. We were all made of one blood : Acts xvii. 26, And hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face
of the earth. And if that blood were tainted in him, the law of nature and
nations justifies this attainder ; and if the apostle Paul makes use of a law
of nature, in the case of God s election by grace, to say, If the root be
holy, so are the branches, Kom. xi. 16 (God having, in his ordinations of
grace, often taken in the rules and ordinary laws of nature, as I have else where shewn*), this maxim must needs justly hold much more here. If the
root be sinful and corrupted, so are the branches ; and therefore it is, Gen.
v. 3, remarkably said of Adam, when fallen, he begat his son in his own
likeness ; and so, 1 Cor. xv. 47-49, he calls Adam the earthy man, of whom are all earthy men ; and as he is (says he) such are they for qualities as well as for substance ; and by that common law is that which the apostle there adds,
* We have borne the image of the earthy man ; which, though spoken in respect of the substance of flesh and blood, yet when fallen, it holds good by the same common law to both substance of our nature and
qualities of our nature ; and because that generation is the means by which we spring out of this root, therefore this is the means of propagation. And
therefore, though Adam s nature personally was afterwards sanctified, and co are many of his sons, that beget children, as Abraham, &c., yet all are
ciill begotten in Adam s sinful image, because a man begets not his like in
person, but in the common nature ; and the common nature of man, whilst betrusted as in common for us, in him and with him, having been in him
corrupted, therefore, though in his own person his nature was afterwards
sanctified again, and in others also ; yet men beget their like corruption of
nature, as a grain cast into the ground without chaff comes up with chaff, for that it is the common nature of it to do so ; and a man circumcised
begets a son with uncircumcision, because it is according to the common nature of all to be born so ; so it is here.
I further add, thirdly, Suppose that a king should raise up a man out of
nothing, to a great and noble condition, which he also gave him not for his own person only, but for his seed for ever, might he not make this covenant with him, that if he ever turned traitor, he should forfeit all for himself, and
his posterity likewise to be made slaves ? And would not this law justly take hold of them, though they were rot born then ? Yes, God will justify his proceedings by this course in the world generally in all kingdoms, which shews it is the law of nature, and there is a justice in it, for the law makes the blood of a nobleman a traitor, tainted till restored ; it is all the world
over, it was so in other ages also. Therefore also Esther, a godly woman, made a request that not Hainan only, who was advanced by the king, but that
his sons also, should be hanged, and they were so, Esther ix. 12-14.
Fourthly, It is an equal rule, that by the same law, by virtue of which one may come to receive good freely, he should upon the same terms
receive the contrary evil deservedly upon offending ; as Job said, Shall we
receive good from God, and not evil ? Job ii. 10 ; so say I. Shouldst thou have received the fruit of Adam s obedience in having an holy image con
veyed to thee, if thou hadstf stood ; and shouldst thou not have received the contrary if he fell through the guilt of his sin ? If God had made the
* In the Discourse of Election, book v.. cap. vii., in vol. ii. of his works. [Vol. IX. of this Edition. ED.] t Qu. he had ? Er>.
CHAP. IV.] IN RESPECT OF SIN AND PUNISHMENT. 23
law only to have received evil upon his offending, who could have found
fault ? Much less when he put him into an estate which would have proved so happy for us if he had not offended ?
Again, fifthly, it was equal, for it was indeed the best way ; for else all men should have stood on their own bottom, and after never so long stand
ing have been subject to have fallen, and so by the poll every man might have fallen off from God ; whereas this is put upon one man s obedience, who was as good as any of them.
Sixthly, If this course yet seem severity, then consider the goodness of God making use of the same rule for the salvation of multitudes of mankind, in ordaining Christ in our nature, a second Adam; in like manner sustain
ing the persons of multitudes of mankind, undertaking to be a common
* common salvation, as Jude terms it, for them, ver. 3, that whereas all of mankind, if they had their estate to
person, representing them to effect a
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. v. 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.
1 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. iii. 17,
* Cursed is the ground for thy sake ; in sorrow shalt thou eat it all the days of thy life ; and Rom. viii. 20, For the creature was made subject to vanity, not will
ingly, 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 crea
tures 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. vii. 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.