Thread: Concerning Adam's Imputation to All Men

OK, if a person asks you,

You say I am going to hell because I am a sinner

And for my sins.

But I say my sins are a result of my sin nature. I now can do nothing but sin.

I never got a chance to start out innocent like Adam.

How is God fair and just in Making Adam My representative without me having a say in it or
without me ever having that chance? I am born a sinner human not an innocent.
I never had a chance? How can I be responsible for my sins, when He made me have Adam's fallen nature?

How can we best answer this and explain this issue of God being fair or just in imputing Adam's sin to him and not everyone getting their own chance.
They feel they are being punished for something they did not do.

First, Paul answers best by charging the asker of this question with audacity: "Who are you to question God?"

Second, we do see an amount of graciousness in Adam being "allowed" to be our head; 1.) If Adam fell, none of us would have done any differently; 2.) Special favors and advantages were given to Adam to keep him in obedience for the rest of us, which favors and privileges are not common to all men.

Third, is it not most just for the Creator to leave the head of his creation responsible for his people?

Because whatever God does, by virtue of the fact that HE does it, is fair, just, righteous, holy, and good.

Also, if you don't want to own up to Adam's imputed sin, and simply would like to be accountable for yours, you're neither allowed to have Christ's imputed righteousness, and must depend on yours.

How is God fair or just in making Christ my rep?

Originally Posted by Prufrock

First, Paul answers best by charging the asker of this question with audacity: "Who are you to question God?"

Second, we do see an amount of graciousness in Adam being "allowed" to be our head; 1.) If Adam fell, none of us would have done any differently; 2.) Special favors and advantages were given to Adam to keep him in obedience for the rest of us, which favors and privileges are not common to all men.

Third, is it not most just for the Creator to leave the head of his creation responsible for his people?

How do I know Adam did as good as I would have?
What special favors?

3rd, no I do not see why it is just for God to leave the 1st man as my rep. any more than the 3rd or all of us have our own chance.

If God was fair wouldn't He have to give me a fair chance, to sin or not from an innocent nature like Adam had?

Adam and Eve were created good and innocent of sin. They were not created perfect. Had they been created perfect they would have not sinned. Therefore, you would have been in the same situation as they were in...good and without sin yet not perfect and still needing that one Perfect One. You're chances there in the garden wouldn't have been any better than theirs and therefore they are your representative of what you would have done.

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

If God was fair wouldn't He have to give me a fair chance, to sin or not from an innocent nature like Adam had?

God defines fair, not you. So what He did was fair. Not what you'd like for him to do, or what your finite and petty idea of fairness is. Let God be true and every man a liar.

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

If God was fair wouldn't He...

Don, this statement makes me have to ask: are you raising these questions as honest inquiry for yourself, or are you playing Devil's advocate? Please tell.

Edit
I only ask because if Devil's Advocate, I have other things I need to be doing; if sincere, I would gladly take the time. Although, it seems many others are answering, so you're set either way!

Originally Posted by Prufrock

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

If God was fair wouldn't He...

Don, this statement makes me have to ask: are you raising these questions as honest questions for yourself, or are you playing Devil's advocate? Please tell.

No, no, Paul, he's just a "PeaceMaker," can't you tell by all of his peaceloving posts? They're always toward edification!

Seriously, though, I'm sure PM is playing Devil's Advocate . . . at least, from a Moderator's vantage point, he'd better be.

Originally Posted by sjonee

Adam and Eve were created good and innocent of sin. They were not created perfect. Had they been created perfect they would have not sinned. Therefore, you would have been in the same situation as they were in...good and without sin yet not perfect and still needing that one Perfect One. You're chances there in the garden wouldn't have been any better than theirs and therefore they are your representative of what you would have done.

A couple quibbles...

1) Eve is not a covenant head of humanity. Adam was.

2) The "therefore" oughtn't be there ... since Adam's covenant headship isn't dependent upon our chances in the garden. He is covenant head because God so ordained him to be.

That being quibbled, you're right. Adam did just what we'd have done (though again that has no bearing on his being our head) and the choice to sin was one made by an innocent creature whose inclination was in fact good (yet he chose to sin, which was in his power to do).

Is God unjust? That seems to be the implication.

Don,

Assuming you are sincerely asking this for yourself, I would think it best to consider the nature of Adam's representation; we, being created like Adam, are truly represented by him (not just federally): that is, he represents what humanity does/would do apart from the preventing grace of God; just as we, being created in Christ (when we will be fully glorified) are represented more than just federally by Christ -- we will at the day be not able to sin, even as Christ.

What creed did you say accepted when you joined this board? I think you can not really be reformed and still ask questions like this.

What creed or confession do you accept?

Originally Posted by Spinningplates2

What creed did you say accepted when you joined this board? I think you can not really be reformed and still ask questions like this.

What creed or confession do you accept?

I am not sure that the question is a bad question. It is a good question. I am not so sure that any human is above being deceived or corrupted in his will as he stands alone. And that is the assumption that a man can and would do better than Adam the first man. That just seems a bit prideful.

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Originally Posted by sjonee

Adam and Eve were created good and innocent of sin. They were not created perfect. Had they been created perfect they would have not sinned. Therefore, you would have been in the same situation as they were in...good and without sin yet not perfect and still needing that one Perfect One. You're chances there in the garden wouldn't have been any better than theirs and therefore they are your representative of what you would have done.

A couple quibbles...

1) Eve is not a covenant head of humanity. Adam was.

2) The "therefore" oughtn't be there ... since Adam's covenant headship isn't dependent upon our chances in the garden. He is covenant head because God so ordained him to be.

That being quibbled, you're right. Adam did just what we'd have done (though again that has no bearing on his being our head) and the choice to sin was one made by an innocent creature whose inclination was in fact good (yet he chose to sin, which was in his power to do).

Sorry I'm just use to writing Adam and Eve...I didn't mean to make it sound like Eve was the covenant head. I was just trying to say that Peacemaker wouldn't have done any better that's why I used the word "chances". None of us should be crying about the fact that we didn't get our "Garden of Eden" chance and that it's unfair that we are born depraved. All of us would have fallen had we been Adam and Eve.

Originally Posted by Spinningplates2

What creed did you say accepted when you joined this board? I think you can not really be reformed and still ask questions like this.

What creed or confession do you accept?

Don's profile indicates that he holds to the Westminster Standards. I assume that Don is passing on questions to us that he has run across when talking with non-Calvinists.

Originally Posted by sjonee

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Originally Posted by sjonee

Adam and Eve were created good and innocent of sin. They were not created perfect. Had they been created perfect they would have not sinned. Therefore, you would have been in the same situation as they were in...good and without sin yet not perfect and still needing that one Perfect One. You're chances there in the garden wouldn't have been any better than theirs and therefore they are your representative of what you would have done.

A couple quibbles...

1) Eve is not a covenant head of humanity. Adam was.

2) The "therefore" oughtn't be there ... since Adam's covenant headship isn't dependent upon our chances in the garden. He is covenant head because God so ordained him to be.

That being quibbled, you're right. Adam did just what we'd have done (though again that has no bearing on his being our head) and the choice to sin was one made by an innocent creature whose inclination was in fact good (yet he chose to sin, which was in his power to do).

Sorry I'm just use to writing Adam and Eve...I didn't mean to make it sound like Eve was the covenant head. I was just trying to say that Peacemaker wouldn't have done any better that's why I used the word "chances". None of us should be crying about the fact that we didn't get our "Garden of Eden" chance and that it's unfair that we are born depraved. All of us would have fallen had we been Adam and Eve.

Understood, Sarah. I was just doing my Adminstrative duty, and making clear the confessional teaching The "when Adam and Eve sinned" language is pervasive, even in confessional churches, wherein Eve sort of gets this 'second covenant headship' status by default. Wasn't calling you on the carpet or anything

I am posing a question professing Christians ask when presented with doctrines of total depravity, Man's will, ability to sin or seek God, etc.

And non-Christians ask them also when you present these aspects of the gospel.

I have my own answers, but this came up on another thread and I was asked to start a new one to delve into it.

I want to know how others answer this when it comes up.

I believe Don is playing advocate, dont go chopping heads until he has been given the freedom to respond. Reading his previous posts give credibility to this...I least I hope.

Originally Posted by Skyler

Originally Posted by Spinningplates2

What creed did you say accepted when you joined this board? I think you can not really be reformed and still ask questions like this.

What creed or confession do you accept?

Don's profile indicates that he holds to the Westminster Standards. I assume that Don is passing on questions to us that he has run across when talking with non-Calvinists.

It would help if he were much more clear about this. There's little more prone to misunderstanding than hypotheticals that are posted as if they were real questions.

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

I am posing a question professing Christians ask when presented with doctrines of total depravity, Mans will, ability to sin or seek God, etc.

And non-Christians ask them also when you rpesnet these aspects of the gospel.

I have my own answers, but this came up on another thread and I was asked to start a new one to delve into it.

I want to know how others answer this when it comes up.

Then, please, Don... ask such questions clearly so that people know they are not your questions in fact, but are those people ask. Please be clear about why you are posting what you're posting.

Sorry, I thot you guys knew I didn't think you were telling me I was going to hell.

Will try to mention it is not hypothetical but for what purpose I am asking.

I'm thankful for this thread because I've been wrestling with some of the same questions. (Honestly wrestling.) I've been praying that God melt my heart about this issue and that I'd see His goodness and justice in it (which has been extremely difficult apart from His hand).

Thank you Paul for your post! It has been most helpful to see that if I were in the garden without sin nature, I would've done the same because God ordained it be so! I would've fallen apart from grace, just as Adam did.

God is infallible, and His decision to make Adam our representative head was an infallible one. He was the perfect representative for the human race. This is why I sinned in adam, for I am part of the human race. He is my representative.

I am guilty because God imputes Adam's sin to me.
Is it safe to also say, that I'm guilty, because in Adam's place apart from God's grace, I also would've sinned? I hope so. The thought gives me much comfort and peace.

I would be interested in hearing your answer to the question Don.

Originally Posted by blakerussell

I'm thankful for this thread because I've been wrestling with some of the same questions. (Honestly wrestling.) I've been praying that God melt my heart about this issue and that I'd see His goodness and justice in it (which has been extremely difficult apart from His hand).

Thank you Paul for your post! It has been most helpful to see that if I were in the garden without sin nature, I would've done the same because God ordained it be so! I would've fallen apart from grace, just as Adam did.

God is infallible, and His decision to make Adam our representative head was an infallible one. He was the perfect representative for the human race. This is why I sinned in adam, for I am part of the human race. He is my representative.

I am guilty because God imputes Adam's sin to me.
Is it safe to also say, that I'm guilty, because in Adam's place apart from God's grace, I also would've sinned? I hope so. The thought gives me much comfort and peace.

Well, yes and no. Surely you would have sinned if you were in Adam's place. However, that is in no sense a reason for you to be declared guilty. Your'e guilty because you are in fact guilty. If it gives you comfort and peace to know that you would surely have sinned - then that's great - the Word does that. Just don't go beyond that and argue that you are in fact guilty because of that hypothetical...

One of the ways the principle of covenant headship is helpful, actually is that it helps us make sense of our union with Christ. We're usually quite willing to accept the covenant headship of Christ, and accept his benefits passed to his covenant progeny... we should be, as Josh has written, equally willing to accept the covenant headship of Adam. This is the main point of Romans 5:12-21 where Paul draws this exact comparison. We are united under our covenant head Christ and his righteousness is imputed to us - just as the guilt of Adam is imputed to us as his covenant progeny.

Let me put it in a different light. You were conceived guilty - as soon as there was a "you", you were guilty because the cells from which you first were conceived were guilty cells - unclean cells. There is no way for the first "you" cell (or any subsequent cells which grew from that first "you" cell) to be made or declared clean without an act of God.

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

I would be interested in hearing your answer to the question Don.

which one ?
-------------------
And Blake something else you may find helpful to consider is what Josh said.

Had it not be just for God to make Adam our 1st head, then He could not have been as just to make Christ our 2nd head.

So even if it does not sit well with our human fleshly sense of justice for Adam to be our head, Praise God it was because as you are sure, had you had a chance, you would no doubt have eventually sinned too and then you would be going to hell with no hope.

So praise God for his sense of Justice which exceeds our understanding.

Also not Rom 9

Pauls says God made us and could do anything with us. We never deserved to have a chance anyway.
Who says it is just for us to have a chance?

We are a creature. God made us for His purpose.
We have no right to reply or question Him

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

I would be interested in hearing your answer to the question Don.

which one ?
-------------------
And Blake something else you may find helpful to consider is what Josh said.

Had it not be just for God to make Adam our 1st head, then He could not have been as just to make Christ our 2nd head.

So even if it does not sit well with our human fleshly sense of justice for Adam to be our head, Praise God it was because as you are sure, had you had a chance, you would no doubt have eventually sinned too and then you would be going to hell with no hope.

So praise God for his sense of Justice which exceeds our understanding.

Also not Rom 9

Pauls says God made us and could do anything with us. We never deserved to have a chance anyway.
Who says it is just for us to have a chance?

We are a creature. God made us for His purpose.
We have no right to reply or question Him

Strangely enough, (and I'm guessing it be only by God's grace) these truths and considerations give me comfort. I only hope it is not fleeting. I've wrestled with this very thing (for the past month in fact) and it has been a thorn in my side. So much so, that I was concerned I had never even truly come to Christ because I've had so much trouble with the following doctrine.

God is gracious!

Just thought we ought to have this passage in the conversation.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(Rom 5:12)

(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
(Rom 5:13)

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.
(Rom 5:14)

But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
(Rom 5:15)

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.
(Rom 5:16)

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.)
(Rom 5:17)

Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
(Rom 5:18)

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
(Rom 5:19)

Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
(Rom 5:20)

That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Rom 5:21)

Am man hearing a sermon on this commented, I didn't like the pastor saying, by one man, instead of saying by one act.

I didn't get what his problem was?

How does the transmission of guilt happen? God infallibly made it so that Adam was humanity's representative in the garden. When He fell, all of his posterity were made sinners... or made guilty.

Does this transmission happen by imputation? Did God righteously judge all of humanity as guilty with Adam's sin?

I'm just trying to get a better grasp on this subject. I've not gone deep into it until recently.

Originally Posted by blakerussell

How does the transmission of guilt happen? God infallibly made it so that Adam was humanity's representative in the garden. When He fell, all of his posterity were made sinners... or made guilty.

Does this transmission happen by imputation? Did God righteously judge all of humanity as guilty with Adam's sin?

I'm just trying to get a better grasp on this subject. I've not gone deep into it until recently.

Well, Jesus evidently wasn't judged as guilty with Adam's sin. I think there has been some suggestion in the history of the church that original sin is passed on by the father. This would explain why Jesus--whose Father was divine and sinless--did not have original sin.

Originally Posted by blakerussell

How does the transmission of guilt happen? God infallibly made it so that Adam was humanity's representative in the garden. When He fell, all of his posterity were made sinners... or made guilty.

Does this transmission happen by imputation? Did God righteously judge all of humanity as guilty with Adam's sin?

I'm just trying to get a better grasp on this subject. I've not gone deep into it until recently.

Hi Blake -

If you have access to either Hodge's systematic theology, or Robert Reymond's newer one, I believe both deal with the various options on transmission. I or someone else can summarise the discussion you'd find there, if you don't have access to them.

Todd

There is a good short book called the Imputation of Adam's sin, a little hard to read but not bad if you want to get clear on this subject.

Imputation of Adams Sin price comparison

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

There is a good short book called the Imputation of Adam's sin, a little hard to read but not bad if you want to get clear on this subject.

Imputation of Adams Sin price comparison

Yes, this is a VERY nice, and concise treatment by John Murray.

Originally Posted by toddpedlar

Originally Posted by blakerussell

How does the transmission of guilt happen? God infallibly made it so that Adam was humanity's representative in the garden. When He fell, all of his posterity were made sinners... or made guilty.

Does this transmission happen by imputation? Did God righteously judge all of humanity as guilty with Adam's sin?

I'm just trying to get a better grasp on this subject. I've not gone deep into it until recently.

Hi Blake -

If you have access to either Hodge's systematic theology, or Robert Reymond's newer one, I believe both deal with the various options on transmission. I or someone else can summarise the discussion you'd find there, if you don't have access to them.

Todd

Originally Posted by PeaceMaker

There is a good short book called the Imputation of Adam's sin, a little hard to read but not bad if you want to get clear on this subject.

Imputation of Adams Sin price comparison

I do have Reymonds Sys theo actually, but I'm not sure if it's the newer one. It happens to be the second edition. Berkhoff's is the only other full systematic I own.

Also, I've looked into getting that book, but I hear it's quite the difficult read. Seeing as how I don't know any latin either, I'm sure I'd have a real fun time with that one!

Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter 6:
Of the Fall of Man,
of Sin, and
of the Punishment Thereof
6:1 Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty and temptation of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit (Gen_3:13; 2Co_11:3). This their sin God was pleased, according to His wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to His own glory (Rom_11:32).
6:2 By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God (Gen_3:6-8; Ecc_7:29; Rom_3:23), and so became dead in sin (Gen_2:17; Eph_2:1), and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body (Gen_6:5; Jer_17:9; Rom_3:10-19; Tit_1:15).
6:3 They being the root of all mankind (Gen_1:27, Gen_1:28; Gen_2:16, Gen_2:17; Act_17:26; Rom_5:12, Rom_5:15-19; 1Co_15:21, 1Co_15:22, 1Co_15:45, 1Co_15:49), the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation (Gen_5:3; Job_14:4; Job_15:14; Psa_51:5).
6:4 From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good (Rom_5:6; Rom_7:18; Rom_8:7; Col_1:21), and wholly inclined to all evil (Gen_6:5; Gen_8:21; Rom_3:10-12), do proceed all actual transgressions (Mat_15:19; Eph_2:2, Eph_2:3; Jam_1:14, Jam_1:15).
6:5 This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated (Pro_20:9; Ecc_7:20; Rom_7:14, Rom_7:17, Rom_7:18, Rom_7:23; Jam_3:2; 1Jo_1:8, 1Jo_1:10); and although it be, through Christ, pardoned and mortified, yet both itself and all the motions thereof are truly and properly sin (Rom_7:5, Rom_7:7, Rom_7:8, Rom_7:25; Gal_5:17).
6:6 Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto (1Jo_3:4), doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner (Rom_2:15; Rom_3:9, Rom_3:19); whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God (Eph_2:3), and curse of the law (Gal_3:10), and so made subject to death (Rom_6:23), with all miseries spiritual (Eph_4:18), temporal (Lam_3:39; Rom_8:20), and eternal (Mat_25:41; 2Th_1:9).

London Baptist Confession of Faith chapter 6

Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, And of the Punishment Thereof

1. Although God created man upright and perfect, and gave him a righteous law, which had been unto life had he kept it, and threatened death upon the breach thereof, yet he did not long abide in this honour; Satan using the subtlety of the serpent to subdue Eve, then by her seducing Adam, who, without any compulsion, did willfully transgress the law of their creation, and the command given unto them, in eating the forbidden fruit, which God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
( Genesis 2:16, 17; Genesis 3:12,13; 2 Corinthians 11:3 )

2. Our first parents, by this sin, fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and we in them whereby death came upon all: all becoming dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.
( Romans 3:23; Romans 5:12, etc; Titus 1:15; Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-19 )

3. They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of the sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free.
( Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22, 45, 49; Psalms 51:5; Job 14:4; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 6:20 Romans 5:12; Hebrews 2:14, 15; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 )

4. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
( Romans 8:7; Colossians 1:21; James 1:14, 15; Matthew 15:19 )

5. The corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and the first motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
( Romans 7:18,23; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8; Romans 7:23-25; Galatians 5:17 )

Westminster Catechism

Q. 21. Did man continue in that estate wherein God at first created him?

A. Our first parents being left to the freedom of their own will, through the temptation of Satan, transgressed the commandment of God in eating the forbidden fruit; and thereby fell from the estate of innocency wherein they were created.[88]

Q. 22. Did all mankind fall in that first transgression?

A. The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation,[89] sinned in him, and fell with him in that first transgression.[90]

Q. 23. Into what estate did the fall bring mankind?

A. The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and misery.[91]

Q. 24. What is sin?

A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.[92]

Q. 25. Wherein consisteth the sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell?

A. The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell, consisteth in the guilt of Adam's first sin,[93] the want of that righteousness wherein he was created, and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite unto all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to all evil, and that continually;[94] which is commonly called original sin, and from which do proceed all actual transgressions.[95]

Q. 26. How is original sin conveyed from our first parents unto their posterity?

A. 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.[96]

Q. 27. What misery did the fall bring upon mankind?

A. The fall brought upon mankind the loss of communion with God,[97] his displeasure and curse; so as we are by nature children of wrath,[98] bond slaves to Satan,[99] and justly liable to all punishments in this world, and that which is to come.[100]

In a simplistic sense, It is like a legal or accounting term. Like Propitiation. Debt paid, done deal. No bal owing.

So God imputed on our account sin.
This may be separate than our fallen nature which we got too.
So whether separate or one is an accounting of the fallen nature in us, we are legally counted sinful.
So in the same way, though we are not physical descendants og Christ, his life and suffering were accounted to our account.

The Cov of Works
Says God gave Adam a test that would determine the outcome for the whole race.
So when he failed it is placed on all of us.

I think if this is our minimal understanding it is adequate.

Now the sin nature affects us such that all we do is unacceptable by God, and is of no spiritual good, it is tainted with out self and sin. It is so damaging we won't seek God, we are always selfish to some extent even when we do outward kindness. It was not of pure motives only for god so it is sin.

So we are guilty for both our actual sins and our sin by nature.

When Adam fell we were all put out of the Garden and could not go back in. We must go to Christ to have imputed righteousness out on our account and the infinite suffering payment for sin on our account.

Verses in Rom show what the limits of the nature are. We can do no good. We do not seek God.


We are no longer born neutral humans, we are sinner humans by nature at birth. Just as a bird has the nature of a bird and a fish the nature of a fish, so our will is not totally free, but free within the limits of our nature.

so we do not need to argue the technical whether it was by natural fleshly generation or just legal pronouncement, like it was with Christ.
Point is it is clear, we have a sin nature, and we sin anyway, and were we Adam, we would have eventually.

When we start with the assumption we have rights or should have rights, like the right to be treated justly or fairly we may struggle because of our false view of man.

Rom 9 clearly tells us we have no rights, God can do with what He made as He wishes.

When we start with a proper view of man, it is all mercy. It is all grace.

Praise God I am able to be included federally with Adam so I can be included federally with Christ.
This way His righteousness can be applied to me and his payment for sin can be as well.

Christ is my only hope.

Adam did just what we'd have done

I didn't read all the replies. But my pastor preached on this just this past Sunday. He used the illustration of who wants to be a millionaire, and Adam uses his lifeline to poll the audience, and every single person in the audience hollers out "eat the fruit".

In answer to your questions, as I understand that previous to the fall Adam was:
Able not to sin and
Able to sin
This is accepted in Reformed theology.
There is the fourfold state of man the first before the fall which he had ability to sin or not to sin.