In this issue:
The Art of water-walking
David Clayton
One of the most unusual events which occurred in the experience of
the disciples of Jesus, took place one dark night on the sea of Galilee.
As they sat exposed and helpless in the boat they beheld through the
gloom a mysterious figure approaching them apparently walking on the
surface of the water. Their terrified cries brought the reassurance that
the eerie figure was none other than Jesus and their fear was replaced
by a sense of awe.
What happened next is not easy for me to understand. It is difficult
to follow the workings of Simon Peter’s mind. I cannot quite put myself
in his shoes and see myself making the same kind of request which he
made. But the record is plain. Upon hearing that it was Christ, he
instantly called out, “….Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on
the water.” (Matt 14:28).
Peter did not make this request in order that his faith might be
strengthened. The wording of his request makes it seem that he was
saying, “I am not sure that it is you, but if it is you, then tell me to
come and I will come.” If Peter had been uncertain of the identity of
the figure on the water would he have dared to venture out of the boat? I
don’t think so. He knew that it was Jesus and it was on that basis that
he made his request. What is more difficult to understand is, what was
his motive in asking? Was it simply that he wished to experience the
thrill of walking on water? Was he thinking of what a great story he
would have to tell his grandchildren? Was it that he was so anxious to
meet Jesus that he could not wait until He got into the boat? None of
these suggestions make much sense, but what is certain is that Jesus
immediately spoke one word. Without hesitating He said, “come.”
Jesus’ response is as puzzling as Peter’s request, but it was not
untypical of the way He operated. There rarely ever was a time when He
denied the request of any person no matter how unreasonable or
unrealistic it seemed. For example, when He was asked to turn water into
wine in Cana of Galilee, He complied, even when it seemed that it was
contrary to His plans. There was no apparent need to grant Peter’s
request. On the surface of it, it seems that Peter just wanted to get a
thrill, or to show off to the other disciples. Whatever the reason,
Jesus told him to come, and immediately Peter stepped out of the boat
and began to walk on the water.
It was as easy as breathing. Peter had never studied the theory and
practice of walking on water. He had never trained himself to walk
lightly, he had never discussed the mental and spiritual attitude or the
physical qualifications necessary to successful water-walking. His eyes
were fixed on Jesus and on the strength of that single word, spoken by
lips that could neither lie nor fail, he stepped out of the boat in
perfect peace and confidence. No human being will ever be able to
explain the mechanics of what happened. It is useless even to think
about it. Perhaps the sea suddenly became as solid as stone, or maybe
Peter became as light as a helium-filled balloon. Probably none of these
options is correct, but the plain fact of the matter was that he was
involved in doing something which was impossible, and he was doing it
with no effort.
What was the secret of Peter’s successful walk that night (for as
long as it lasted). What were the vital elements necessary in order that
walking on water could be successfully carried out and – let us not
forget – maintained.
First, there was the word of Jesus. That single word, “come,” was
backed up by the integrity of a life in which there was no shadow of
guile, no variableness nor shadow of turning. It was spoken by lips
which had never lied, nor ever been involved in idle jesting. There was
no question that the word carried the stamp of infallible truth and
authority.
Secondly, there was the presence and power of Christ. In Him was
power which had never failed to perform even the most seemingly
impossible tasks, even to the raising of the dead. In Him there was the
assurance of infallibility and omnipotence.
Thirdly, there was the faith of Peter. It was not bravado which
caused Peter to step out of the boat in the perfect confidence that he
would walk on water. It was not mere suspicion, or hope, or the thought
that it might be possible. With his eyes on Jesus there was not a
question in his mind as to what would happen when his feet touched the
surface of the water. When he found himself walking on the water, he was
not the least bit surprised. He had known exactly what would happen and
that was the reason why he had stepped out without a life jacket,
without a lifeline, and without asking any of the other disciples to
standby in case of an emergency.
We may not know exactly what thoughts went through the minds of
Peter and Jesus that night, but we can be confident that this remarkable
miracle has been recorded and preserved in order that we might learn
some vital lessons from it. Who knows, perhaps it is the very reason why
Jesus consented to Peter’s request. Jesus performed many miracles while
He was here and while not all of them were recorded, in each of those
of which the Bible speaks we can find vital truths and principles which
have powerful lessons to teach with respect to the Christian life and
how it is lived.
In Romans 1:16 the apostle Paul tells us,
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of
God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and
also to the Greek. (Rom 1:16)
In these miracles of Jesus we most often see the power of God
applied unto physical restoration. Paul says that the gospel is the same
power, but applied to salvation. In both cases it is the power of God.
There is no difference in the way that healing is applied in both cases,
only that in one case, the body is affected and in the other the soul,
the mind, the spirit is affected. Why should we believe that it is a
more difficult thing for God to heal the spirit than it is for Him to
heal the body? The truth is that the miracles of Jesus are full of
lessons which, properly understood will enable us to grasp the most
critical principles necessary to the healing of the soul.
So let us see what lessons we may glean from Peter’s extraordinary achievement.
The most obvious lesson is that the victorious Christian life is not
difficult. It is no more difficult than walking on water. Both tasks
are of course, humanly impossible. No amount of will-power,
concentration, dedication, or studiousness will enable a person to
perform either task for even one single second. Humanly speaking, they
are impossible, yet, both await only one thing, that is the faith of one
who simply believes the word of God. Faith in that word makes the
impossible not only possible, but easy and effortless.
Another lesson which we learn is that the accomplishment of the task
is entirely the work of Christ. What did Peter do to help Christ? What
did he do to prepare the way for the miracle? What did he do to prepare
himself to do the impossible? The answer is, he did absolutely nothing.
All he did was believe the word of Christ. That was all. When he
believed that word, he stepped out of the boat and into the world of the
impossible. The task was Christ’s, the preparation was Christ’s, He
took care of the physical difficulties. All Peter did was believe in Him
and in His word. Is the method of overcoming sin and living the
victorious life any different? Do we help Christ? Can we do anything at
all to make the work easier? No, all we need to do, all we can do, is
believe God that He has accomplished our salvation, our sanctification,
our righteousness in Jesus Christ.
Yet another lesson which is most vital, is the lesson of the need to
maintain our focus. Walking on water was not an event which transpired
and passed in a single moment. It required maintenance, not just for a
moment but for many steps over a period of time. Peter started out well,
but he did not maintain his focus. If his journey had been 10,000 miles
long and had taken him a year, would it have required anything
different along the journey than it had at the beginning. How different
was the walk than the start? There was not a bit of difference. The same
method by which he started was the method by which he continued. Did
the journey become more difficult? Was there a time when he had to
concentrate on the steps which he was taking? When he had to think about
the techniques of the task? Absolutely not!! All he had to do was
simply keep his eyes on Jesus and ignore all distractions. In that
relationship Peter did the impossible. In that relationship he
maintained the impossible. He only failed when he took his eyes off
Christ.
Is it the same for the Christian walk? It is interesting that the
Christian journey is often compared to a walk in the Bible. We are
admonished to “walk in the spirit,” to continue to walk in the Lord
Jesus as we have received Him etc. The emphasis is on the maintaining of
the original experience, the original focus. When we have faith in
Christ we have found the only method that is needed and that will ever
be needed to receive each and every blessing of God.
The fourth important lesson is the lesson of the need to avoid
distractions. This cannot be over emphasized. When Peter walked on
water, he was in effect a supernatural being. He did what mere humans
cannot do. With eyes on Christ, he entered the supernatural world and
exercised the powers of the world to come. But there were several
distractions which rivaled Christ for Peter’s attention that night.
(a) There was the majesty of the wind and the waves to be admired.
(b) There was the terror of the storm.
(c) There were the admiring, awe-struck disciples in the boat.
(d) There was the contemplation of the stories he would have to tell his grandchildren.
His task, his only task was to keep his eyes focused. He had no need
to learn the theory and practice of water-walking. All he had to do was
keep focused on Jesus and ignore the distractions, but in the face of
all that was going on, this was a challenge and it was one which he
failed to meet properly. He allowed his attention to be drawn from
Christ and immediately sank into the water. This is the same situation
which faces us today. Nothing can defeat us, we will not sin, we will
not be overcome by the enemy. We can do this as simply and easily as
Peter walked on water. The only condition is that we focus on Christ and
His word in faith, and that we keep our eyes focused on Him.
The question is often raised as to how a Christian may be absolutely
victorious over sin. The real question is, how can it be otherwise if
we truly have faith in Christ and His word? There is no failure in
Christ, only in man. When we trust in Him, He will do the job and He
will do it perfectly. We have only one thing to fear and that is, that
we may take our eyes off Him. There lies our great danger.
So, let us take heed. No matter how mountainous the waves are, no
matter how awesome the distractions, no matter how men may admire and
commend us, no matter how Satan attempts to intrude vain thoughts into
our minds, let us never permit ourselves to be distracted. He is our
hope, He is our life, He is our everything. Believing this and living by
it is our only safety. May God help us that we may learn the art of
walking on water. If we do not know how to do this, it is unlikely that
we will ever learn how to overcome sin.
The Issue of Original Sin
Over the centuries as we would
expect, sin has been discussed, examined and defined in many different
ways. Most Christians, including the protestant reformers and many of
the Adventist pioneers came to regard sin as being more than merely the
committing of wrong actions, but as including and perhaps especially
being, a ruling negative force in the nature of the carnal person. The
Catholic theologian Augustine referred to this inherent evil in man by
the term “Original sin,” and this term was adopted by the protestant
reformers who more or less accepted the idea of this inherent evil
inherited by man.
In examining the concept of “original sin,” I discovered that though
the reformers accepted the concept of original sin, yet their
understanding of some differed in some respects from the Roman Catholic
understanding and even from the understanding of other reformers. It is a
mistake to believe that the term “original sin” has the same meaning
regardless of who uses it. As best as I could discover, what all those
who hold, or held to it have in common, is the concept that human beings
are naturally depraved as a result of Adam’s sin and that this
depravity makes them from the moment of birth, condemned, unacceptable
to God and lost.
Some went further than this and concluded that man was not only
inherently evil as a result of Adam’s sin, but that he was also guilty
of Adam’s sin. This was especially evident in the Roman Catholic concept
of original sin and is apparently the root reason for some of their
strange practices and beliefs. For example, Roman Catholics baptize
(sprinkle) infants and believe that in this act they remove the stain of
original sin (referring to the guilt). This in their theology qualifies
the child for eternal life. The doctrine of original sin has also
gained notoriety because of the claim of the church of Rome that Mary,
the mother of Jesus was born without the stain of original sin. When
these two doctrines are associated with the term “original sin,” then it
is evident why this doctrine is viewed with great suspicion by many
Seventh-day Adventists and especially those who regard themselves as
“reformers.” However, while the term is not specifically used by the
early Adventists, the concept as it was held by many of the protestant
reformers was plainly taught and believed by many of the SDA pioneers
including A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner as well as Ellen White.
What is most interesting is the fact that Ellen White several times
wrote that men are born guilty because of what Adam did. The quotations
may be found in the article beginning on page 9 of this publication.
I am not qualified to say whether or not Ellen White was wrong or
right when she made those statements, but it certainly should make us
think. At the very least, we need to carefully re-examine what we
believe on this matter of sin.
What is Sin?
The question of what sin is, is
not merely an academic one, but is of great practical importance and one
which has critical implications for those who desire to be free from
its power and dominion. Our approach to the question of how to overcome
sin will be determined by our understanding of what sin is. Do we need
to prove that? It seems that this is a self-evident fact and needs no
further explanation. If I am dealing with impurities on the outside,
then I need soap, if in the stomach, then I need a purgative, if in the
nature, then I need something more than either of those. Do we see the
point? So it is important that we define sin properly if we are ever to
overcome it completely. If we do not understand the true nature of sin,
then obviously we will always be using the wrong method in an attempt to
get rid of it. The record of the history of God’s people would indicate
that for the most part they have had a wrong understanding of the true
nature of sin.
The most fundamental question in this respect is this: Is sin an
action or is it a state? To rephrase it, is sin something we do, or is
it more accurately described as what we are?
If sin is an action, then obviously the approach to overcoming sin
would focus mainly on the task of putting an end to those actions which
are sinful. However, if sin is a state, or what we are, then the only
way to overcome it is to somehow escape from our sinful state or to
change from what we are to something, else. This is the important fact.
Our definition of sin will determine how we approach this issue and that
is of vital importance. One method is doomed to failure, the other is
God’s method and the only way to success.
Sin’s Definition
The most well-known definition of sin and the one which is most often used is found in 1 John 3:4. It says,
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4)
On the surface of it this text seems to be pretty straightforward. It
seems to indicate that sin occurs when we transgress the law or when we
disobey it. This would indicate that sin is an action. However It is
interesting to note that most translations of the Bible render this text
differently than the King James Version.
Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. (NRSV)
Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. (NKJV)
Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. (NIV)
Every one that doeth sin doeth also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness. (ASV)
In all these translations, sin is not defined as an action, but rather
as a noun. They all say, “sin is lawlessness, making sin a state or a
condition rather than an action. The original Greek rendering of the
text justifies this translation.
There is no doubt that some will object strongly to this idea that sin
is more than an action. If we are to accept such a concept, then surely
we need stronger biblical evidence than this. Is there such evidence?
There is in fact, an abundance of such evidence.
Sin is mentioned in several other places in the New Testament and in
such a way that it seems that it is being defined. For example we have 1
John 5:17 and Romans 14:23. They say,
All unrighteousness is sin …. (1 John 5:17)
…. whatsoever is not of faith is sin. (Rom 14:23)
The second text is particularly interesting because it shows us that
it is possible to sin even in the midst of the most pious duties if the
motivation for these actions is not faith. There we have a suggestion
that sin may be more than our actions and may be something that goes far
deeper than simply the act of disobedience. But isn’t this exactly what
Jesus said? What is His meaning in the following verses?
(Mat 5:27-28) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou
shalt not commit adultery: (28) But I say unto you, That whosoever
looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her
already in his heart.
Jesus makes it plain that sin has to do with more than merely the
outward actions, it has to do with the motives and the intents of the
heart. Transgression of the law lies not only in the outward
disobedience, but in the state of mind which cherishes and breeds that
outward disobedience.
So then we see that the law condemns not just our actions but also our
motives and intentions. This is because the righteousness required by
the law goes much further than our behaviour. The law, being God’s law
and therefore being as righteous as God Himself, cannot be satisfied
with any degree of righteousness which is less than that of God
Himself!! This leads us to a further question; if the law condemns not
just our actions but also our motives, does it also condemn the nature
which invokes or breeds those motives and actions? Let me make the
question clear:
Nature is Critical
Our actions begin with our thoughts, motives and intents. Therefore if
these are wrong, then our actions are bound to be wrong. But what is it
that leads to wrong thoughts, motives and intents? Again, we have a
very plain answer from Jesus Himself:
(Mat 12:33-35) Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else
make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by
his fruit. (34) O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak
good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
(35) A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth
good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth
evil things.
According to Jesus, the reason why a man does evil things is because
he is an evil man. Likewise the reason why a man does good things is
because he is a good man. The reason for the kind of fruit which a tree
bears is the kind of tree it is. The only way to ensure that the fruit
is good is to change the kind of tree, or the nature of the tree. Is
this what Jesus is saying? It is very difficult to escape His meaning.
Therefore, a man has evil motives, intents and thoughts only because he
is an evil man.
Now if the law condemns a man for evil deeds and for evil thoughts,
does it also condemn him for being an evil man? Does the law of God,
demanding the very righteousness of God, excuse a man whose very nature
makes him only capable of evil thoughts and actions? Jesus referred to
these people as a “generation of vipers,” or, in other words, “the
children of snakes.” Was He being poetic or abusive, or was there some
deep-seated truth in His words? The fact is, He was stating a
fundamental truth. It was the same truth which He declared when He said,
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will
do …” (John 8:44). It was the truth that the problem with these people
was their nature, the life that was in them. They were the children of
Satan, the seed of vipers and therefore could not do better. Before they
could improve they first of all had to have their nature changed. They
needed to be born again.
Let us consider something else. Jesus taught that only God is good
(Mat 19:17). Yet in the verse quoted earlier, Jesus says that the “good
man brings good things out of the good treasure of the heart.” If God
alone is good, how is it that Jesus refers to men as being good?
Obviously, they are good only because they have become one with God so
that He is living in them. That is the reason why they are able to bring
good things out of the heart because the good God dwells there. The law
can find no fault with such men because to do this, it would have to
find fault with God Himself.
More than action
Now this idea that sin is primarily a state rather than actions is
taught many places in the Bible and not just in the verses above. In
Romans chapters 5, 6 and 7, the apostle Paul refers to sin in a way that
makes it clear that sin is more than mere actions. Let us look at a few
examples:
(Rom 5:19) For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners …
Here we see that one man committed the act, one man performed the
action, one man disobeyed. However, by that one action, many became
sinners. How did they become sinners? The meaning is obvious. They
became sinners as a kind of being, as a certain kind of creature which
was fully committed to sin, which was in harmony with sin by nature.
They did not become sinners because they themselves sinned, but rather
because one man sinned. To follow the illustration of Jesus above, they
became evil trees and consequently could only bring forth evil fruit.
They were evil trees not because they brought forth evil fruit, but
because they were born that way.
(Rom 6:6-7) Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that
the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve
sin. (7) For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Here Paul speaks of the “body of sin.” What does he mean by this?
Notice he says that this body must be destroyed in order that “we should
not serve sin.” He implies that this is the only way that we can escape
from the service of sin and in fact he says it very clearly later on in
chapter 8 when he says, “they that are in the flesh cannot please God.”
(Rom. 8:8). The only way to please God and to escape the dominion of
sin is to escape from the “flesh” or the “body of sin.” Now if a man
cannot please God, can he satisfy the requirements of the law? If God is
displeased with such a person, can the law be pleased with him.
Obviously the law finds fault with such a person even before he performs
one wrong act and condemns him for his state of lawlessness which makes
it impossible for him to do good.
(Rom 7:19-20) For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I
would not, that I do. (20) Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I
that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
This is a striking passage. Here Paul personifies sin and describes it
as a king. Why was Paul doing evil? Why did he find it impossible to do
good? Did he want to do good? He did. Did he desire to stop doing evil?
He did. So why did he find both of those things impossible to do? It
was because “king sin” was reigning (Rom. 5:21) in his body. There was a
power, inherent in his sinful nature which enslaved him and bound him
to the way of evil. This power he referred to as “sin that dwelleth in
me.”
Now if we limit the definition of sin to the transgression of the law,
how can we understand this passage? The obvious thing to do is broaden
our definition of sin. We must conclude that sin is more than simply the
act of transgressing the law, or, alternatively, if we limit the
definition of sin to the transgression of the law, then we must conclude
that we transgress the law merely by being born with a sinful nature,
because in that state, the law condemns us to death. In either case, the
real issue we have to deal with is our nature, rather than our actions.
There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.
Henry David Thoreau
What makes men sinners?
What makes a person a sinner?
This is a most important question. As we have said before, we cannot
properly approach the issue of victory over sin unless we understand
what we are up against.
Let us approach this question honestly, with sincere and humble
hearts. I am not expecting you to believe what David Clayton says, I am
not asking you to believe what the Adventist pioneers said, but the
Bible is another matter altogether. If you will not believe what the
Bible says, then your honesty really has to be questioned.
A friend of mine is always careful to make a distinction between
eisegesis and exegesis. The Online dictionary defines both words in the
following way:
eisegesis – personal interpretation of a text (especially of the Bible) using your own ideas.
exegesis – “to draw the meaning out of” a given text. Exegesis may be
contrasted with eisegesis, which means to read one’s own interpretation
into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the
text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.
In seeking to answer this question of what makes a person a sinner, we
are going to be very careful to do two things. One, to use the Bible, a
source with which no Christian may argue, and two, to be very careful
to apply the rules of exegesis rather than eisegesis.
Before proceeding let me say this: The word sinner in its most basic
meaning as we have come to understand it, signifies one who is
committing sin, or one who has committed sin (sin – er). Many of us
would insist that a person cannot be classified as a sinner unless he
has personally participated in an act of sin. Can it be correct to
describe a person as a sinner just because the person was born in a
sinful condition and before the person has committed even one sinful
act? Perhaps it is just a matter of how we define words but the
important question is, what does the Bible say? Are we safe in using the
definitions and the wording of the Bible? It seems to me that since we
are speaking of a biblical issue, it is only reasonable that we look to
the Bible to determine which words are proper to use. Sure, we are
sinners because we transgress the law – because we commit acts of sin.
But can we honestly say that this is the only condition under which the
Bible describes us as sinners? Let us apply the principles of proper
exegesis and see if we can arrive at an honest answer.
We must be born again
Most of us have no problem with the idea that children are born with a
“fallen, sinful nature.” That is too obvious to deny and besides, the
term “sinful nature” does not sound too awful and we often limit it only
to what we inherited on the bodily, physical level. But what about the
words, “depraved,” “corrupt” and “evil?” Are these words too terrible to
stamp upon an innocent child? The question is, are they a true
description of the child’s state? Is not this the natural condition of
every single person outside of Christ from the very moment of birth? In
denying this do we deny the word of God and the reality of our
experience? But let us go further. What about the words, “hopeless,”
“condemned,” “lost?” Surely this cannot be the state of a newborn child
who has never himself committed a sinful act!
To understand this issue properly, we must look at mankind as it would
be outside of Christ’s work and influence. If the punishment for man’s
sin had not been immediately placed upon Christ, how long would Adam
have lived after eating of the forbidden fruit? He would not have lived
another day. His probation would have been closed and all of us would
have perished in Him. In other words, his condemnation included us. But
even though Adam was granted a life of probation and consequently was
able to father children, what legacy did he pass on to those children?
In what condition were they born? Were they born with Adam’s original
heritage when he was created, or were they born with the heritage of the
fallen Adam? Furthermore, were they born with only a fallen physical
nature or were they also spiritually fallen at birth?
Jesus declared that no man can see the kingdom of God except he is
born again of the spirit (John 3:3,5). Let us not ignore these
Scriptures. Without this new birth, what is the natural state of all
men? The truth is, without this new birth, all men are hopeless, lost,
condemned. If, as Jesus said, such persons cannot see the kingdom of
heaven then can we deny that all such are lost and condemned to eternal
death?
There is often a debate about whether or not babies will be saved but
the fact is, even the newborn babies cannot be saved unless their
natures are renewed by God’s spirit. As they come from the womb they are
naturally depraved and unfit to live. Of course, it is true that Jesus
died for all men. The price has been paid for all and so, in the case of
babies who die incapable of choosing, it seems reasonable to suppose
that rather than being lost, they will be renewed by God’s spirit in the
resurrection and will be saved. The blood of Christ is stronger than
the heritage of Adam, and Christ paid the price for all.
However, when they are of the age where they can make conscious
choices, the conditions change. Now, none can be saved who do not choose
for themselves. Only on the basis of choosing Christ can their
condition (state) be changed from sinful, corrupt, depraved, helpless,
hopeless, condemned and lost, to a condition of being, righteous, holy,
clean, justified, redeemed and saved.
The entry of sin
The most controversial passage in the Bible with regards to this
question is Romans Chapter 5 verses 12-19. It is this passage which we
will examine as we seek to learn what the biblical teaching on this
question is.
(Rom 5:12) 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:
By one man sin entered into the world: The first part of this verse
presents no difficulties. One man sinned and by his action in disobeying
God and partaking of the forbidden fruit, sin gained an entrance into
the world. It is interesting to note that although Satan was present in
the world, this did not give sin an entrance into the world. This
entrance of sin into the world, then, must refer to the entrance of sin
into human history and is not suggesting that Satan was not here before
Adam transgressed. This entry of sin was entirely on the basis of Adam’s
transgression. Why does it emphasize Adam’s transgression (one man)
rather than Eve’s? It does this because Adam was the one who was the
head of the human race. All things had been put under him, not Eve.
While her actions involved only herself, his actions involved the
destiny of the entire human race and indeed the destiny of the whole
world (including the mindless creation).
Death entered by sin: Death was introduced, found an entry into human
history by way of sin. Therefore sin is the cause of death.
Death passed upon all men For that all have sinned: Notice, the fact
that death passed upon all men is only because all men sinned, since
man’s sin is the cause of his death. This is the interesting part of the
verse and indeed it is the part which has been the subject of many
controversies over the centuries. The question is, what does Paul mean
by saying, “all have sinned?” This phrase may be interpreted in two
ways.
(a) It could mean that all sinned, in a similar way to how Adam
sinned, that is, all men copied or imitated Adam in committing sin as he
did, or
(b) it could mean that all sinned, when Adam sinned. In other words,
that Adam’s sin was passed on to all men, that is to say that one man
sinned and by way of his single action, all of us were made sinners.
Which of these two views is correct?
It is a plain fact that all die because all sinned. That is
indisputable (on the basis of Paul’s statements). It must be equally
plain then that if there should arise a person who had not sinned, then
such a person would not die. Sin in us is the reason why all men die.
Jesus was the only human who had no sin. He could not have died except
for the fact that He was dying in our place. Sin and death had no right
and no place in Him except as He was “made sin” for us. Has there ever
been any other human who was without sin?
Sinners by copying Adam?
If we become sinners only by imitating Adam, that is, by choosing to
sin like Adam did, then we must ask the question, why then do babies
die? Babies cannot commit sin. They have no knowledge of law, or right
and wrong, therefore they cannot transgress. Transgression requires
conscious decision to disobey and even in the case of adults, God
declares that, “where no law is, there is no transgression.” (Rom
4:15). If death comes upon us only because we sin, and babies cannot
commit sin, then the question is, “why do babies die? When did they
sin?” If we say that the verse means that we sinned similarly to Adam,
then we have a dilemma because babies cannot sin as Adam did. They
cannot consciously disobey, yet they still die, some of them just a few
minutes after birth.
Made Sinners by Adam’s sin?
If we take the second meaning of the phrase however, which is that
when Adam sinned, all his descendants sinned in him, or became sinners
by his action, then the verse makes perfect sense. In the light of that
understanding we can see that all men (including babies) die, because
all men (including babies) are sinners irrespective of whether or not
they commit sin. We sinned when Adam sinned because we were in him when
he sinned. We became sinners not in the sense that we personally
committed sins, but sinners in that we became a certain kind of being
who were inherently evil, unable to do good, fit only to be destroyed
and therefore condemned to death. A careful examination of the verse and
indeed of the whole chapter of Romans 5, especially verses 12-19, will
reveal that this is what Paul intended to say.
(Rom 5:13) For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
In the next two verses, Paul is proving his point that all men die
because of Adam’s sin (and that therefore all men are sinners because of
Adam’s sin). It is important to Paul’s argument and therefore it is
important that we understand this point. Why is this so? Because only as
we understand this can we get the full implications of what Jesus did
for us, how He did it and the true meaning of justification by faith.
This is the only reason why Paul is taking all this trouble to explain
what Adam did and how it affected us.
When Paul says, “until the law,” what point in time is he speaking
about? He identifies a certain section of this world’s history and he
says that at that time, sin was in the world. He refers to that time by
the phrase, “until the law.” What does he mean when he says, “until the
law?” He means that there was a time when the law (as given on mount
Sinai) was not yet declared unto mankind. During this time, apparently,
the knowledge of God’s law was limited and there were people, perhaps
many people who did not have any clear idea of how God defined right and
wrong. Now in a situation like this, where there is no law, how does
God deal with man in terms of sin? Paul gives us a plain answer: He says
sin is not imputed (is not charged to a person, he is not regarded as
guilty) when there is no law. So, although sin was in the world (men
were sinning), this sin was not being imputed to them (God did not
regard them as guilty of sin) because there was no law to let them know
right from wrong.
(Rom 5:14) 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.
In spite of the fact that sin was not imputed to men (they were not
regarded as guilty in the eyes of God) because the law was not yet
proclaimed and they were ignorant of it, yet, they were dying. Death was
reigning. Why were they dying? What caused death to rule over all men
during this period. Now we may say Adam and Eve died because they
disobeyed the command to not eat the fruit. We may also say that people
after the time of Moses (the giving of the law) die because they disobey
the ten commandments, but between Adam and Moses, during the time when
there is no recorded law given by God, why did men die? Why did death
reign over men during that period even though they had not sinned in the
same way as Adam (that is, they did not sin in deliberate disobedience
to a specific command of God as Adam did)? Since they did not
deliberately transgress the revealed laws of God, and yet they were
dying (death reigned over them), then the only conclusion to be reached
is that Adam’s sin is the reason why they died. Adam’s sin and not their
own was the reason why death reigned over them. That is the point Paul
is making and this is the way he reasons it out and proves it in these
three verses.
When we understand this, then we have no difficulty in getting his point in verses 18 and 19 of the same chapter.
(Rom 5:18-19) 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. (19) For as by one
man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one
shall many be made righteous.
Adam killed all the human race. All men were condemned by the offence
of one. In our personal absence, without any input on our part, we were
made sinners, condemned and killed by Adam. This became our reality as
soon as we were born.
In the same way, Jesus brought life to the human race. All men are
justified by the righteousness of one. In our personal absence, without
any input on our part, we were made righteous, justified and made alive
by Christ. This becomes our reality as soon as we are born again. All
that remains is for us to receive the reality through faith. By simply
believing the declaration of God that He has done all these things for
us in His Son. This is true justification by faith.
Kay-kay Arrives
The long wait is finally over. For Karleen and Howard it must have seemed like forever but finally she has arrived. October 30 was the joyous day when Kay-kay (Karshena Karleen) Williams first saw the light of day. When she finally arrived it was as much a thrill for the enraptured parents as it was a relief for she weighed 9.5 pounds at birth and Karleen had been feeling every ounce of those pounds in the days leading up to her birth. Thank God, the delivery was a safe one and all is well. However, Howard and Karleen are brand new at the business of parenting and your continued prayers will be appreciated.
Be A Berean
It is possible that this issue of our newsletter will stir a great deal of discussion and perhaps even dissent. It is not our desire to disturb God’s people and to create controversy. However, it is our heartfelt and sincere conviction that the proper understanding of the issues discussed here is critical, and will determine the nature of our Christian experience. Therefore we are opening up these questions, and presenting these thoughts, and ideas that you may read, think and pray about them. My plea is that we read carefully but also with an open and honest heart. We believe that if you read in this spirit, you will see the truth in what we have presented here. May our Father bless you.
Comments from the Pioneers
E.J. Waggoner
We get this lesson in the fifth chapter of Romans: “For as by one
man’s disobedience [what was the result?] many were made sinners.” By
whose sin were many made sinners? – Adam’s. Then we come into the world
sinful, don’t we? The inheritance we get from our parents, – their
characteristics, their tendencies, their evil traits, – you can see in
any child. You can see the father in the child again, and all the evils
that his parents committed, not only father and mother, but grandfather
and grandmother for generations back. All the evil that they did for
generations stamped that impress upon them, and that evil has stamped
its impress upon us. We need not argue that. We know it. We all
recognize that fact, because it has been discouraging, I doubt not, to
many of us; and we have often taken it perhaps as an excuse for a
failing, saying, “I inherited it.” We say, “I cannot change this,
because it is a part of my nature. I inherited it from my father or my
grandfather.” Take the tendency to drink. It is handed down through
generations. It comes often from generations back, but it surely shows
itself. Now these things are not fictitious: they are ourselves, aren’t
they? They are a part of our being, – they make us what we are: and we
cannot change that. We know that we do not have to try to do these
evils. They come out spontaneously.
Now take the whole verse. We have no difficulty with the first part, and if we accept the conclusion, we shall be happy:-
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Verse 19.
How is it that by the disobedience of one we have been made sinners? –
We have inherited it. And now, by the offer of one in the flesh, we are
to be made righteous in the same way. We have the contrast. Just as we
came to be poor, fallen, sinful creatures, even so we shall be made
righteous. What is righteousness? – Doing right. Then many shall do
right; that is clear. And how will many do right? – By the obedience of
One. Well, then, if I am made righteous by his obedience, if I do right
by his obedience, where does he obey? – In me. What am I doing? –
Letting him, submitting to the righteousness of God. (EJ Waggoner –
General Conference Bulletin, 1897 – par. 6-9)
So Adam died, and because of that, every man born into the world is a
sinner, and the sentence of death is passed upon him. Judgment has
passed upon all men to condemnation, and there is not a man in this
world but has been under the condemnation of death. The only way that he
can get free from that condemnation and that death is through Christ,
who died for him and who, in His own body, bore our sins upon the
cross. He bore the penalty of the law, and suffered the condemnation of
the law for us, not for Himself, for He was sinless.
“As by one man sin entered into the world and death by sin . . . even so
by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto
justification of life.” What is the free gift? It is the free gift by
grace and it appertaineth unto many. The work of Adam plunged man into
sin; the work of Christ brings men out of sin. One man’s single offense
plunged many into many offenses, but the one man’s obedience gathers the
many offenses of many men and brings them out from beneath the
condemnation of those offenses. (EJ Waggoner – 1891 General Conference
Lectures No. 9)
A. T. Jones
The question is, Does the second Adam’s righteousness embrace as many
as does the first Adam’s sin? Look closely. Without our consent at all,
without our having anything to do with it, we were all included in the
first Adam; we were there. All the human race were in the first
Adam. What that first Adam—what that first man, did meant us; it
involved us. That which the first Adam did brought us into sin, and the
end of sin is death, and that touches every one of us and involves every
one of us.
Jesus Christ, the second man, took our sinful nature. He touched us
“in all points.” He became we and died the death. And so in Him and by
that every man that has ever lived upon the earth and was involved in
the first Adam is involved in this and will live again. There will be a
resurrection of the dead, both of the just and of the unjust. Every soul
shall live again by the second Adam from the death that came by the
first Adam. – A.T. Jones General Conference Bulletin 1895 – Sermon 14
J.N. Andrews
“The offense” spoken of in these verses is thus seen to be the
transgression of Adam, which made sinners of all the human race. Before
the second Adam comes to die, the law must enter, to show the greatness
of the first Adam’s transgression. (J.N. Andrews – Why the law when it
entered, came only to the Hebrews – par. 13)
Ellen G. White
We have reason for ceaseless gratitude to God that Christ, by his
perfect obedience, has won back the heaven that Adam lost through
disobedience. Adam sinned, and the children of Adam share his guilt and
its consequences; but Jesus bore the guilt of Adam, and all the children
of Adam that will flee to Christ, the second Adam, may escape the
penalty of transgression. Jesus regained heaven for man by bearing the
test that Adam failed to endure; for he obeyed the law perfectly, and
all who have a right conception of the plan of redemption will see that
they cannot be saved while in transgression of God’s holy precepts. They
must cease to transgress the law, and lay hold on the promises of God
that are available for us through the merits of Christ. {ST, May 19,
1890 par. 8}
The mother who follows on to know the Lord will teach her children to
follow in her footsteps. The promise is to fathers, mothers and their
children. (Acts 2:39) These dear children received from Adam an
inheritance of disobedience, of guilt and death. The Lord has given to
the world Jesus Christ, and His work was to restore to the world the
moral image of God in man, and to reshape the character. {13MR 14.1}
Parents have a more serious charge than they imagine. The inheritance
of children is that of sin. Sin has separated them from God. Jesus gave
His life that He might unite the broken links to God. As related to the
first Adam, men receive from him nothing but guilt and the sentence of
death. But Christ steps in and passes over the ground where Adam fell,
enduring every test in man’s behalf. He redeems Adam’s disgraceful
failure and fall by coming forth from the trial untarnished. This places
man on vantage ground with God. It places him where through accepting
Christ as His Saviour, he becomes a partaker of the divine nature. Thus
he becomes connected with God and Christ. Christ’s perfect example and
the grace of God are given him to enable him to train his sons and
daughters to be sons and daughters of God. {9MR 236.1}
The Nature of Sin
In addition to having a proper and
realistic definition of sin, we also need to have a proper
understanding of the nature of sin.
The Bible makes it clear that man is a sinner by inheritance. The
Adventist pioneers including Ellen White support this fact. A question
remains, however, just how was this sinfulness was passed on from Adam
to his descendants. Was “sin in the flesh” the presence of something
transferred to us in our genes or was it the result of something which
was taken from us because of Adam’s sin? Does sin in the flesh reside
only in the genes, limited to the degeneracy of flesh and blood, or does
it impact also upon the mind and the spirit? Is man depraved simply
because his literal flesh is weak or is he inherently evil in his
spiritual makeup?
It seems evident that this sinful corruption includes more than merely the physical makeup of man for the following reasons:
a. The Bible says that all men were made sinners by Adam’s sin (Rom
5:12,19). If this status was only on the basis of man’s physical
degeneracy, then it would mean that Jesus was also a sinner since he
partook of man’s physical heritage, being “made of the seed of David
according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3),” having taken upon him “the seed of
Abraham (Heb. 2:16),” having been made “in the likeness of sinful flesh
(Rom. 8:3).” But since Jesus was not a sinner, then it cannot be the
flesh which we inherit which makes us sinners.
b. When we are born again we lose the status of sinners. We are no
more condemned and in fact sin has lost its power over us (Rom. 5:1;
6:14). However, we still exist in the same physical bodies. There is no
change to the literal bodies. Therefore, it is clear that the change
which takes us from being sinners to saints is not a bodily change.
c. Paul says that we should be transformed by the renewing of the mind
(Rom. 12:2). This makes it clear that the real problem and the seat of
sin, is the mind and not the body.
If we can understand what happened when Adam and Eve sinned, then we will have a better understanding of the nature of sin.
When Adam disobeyed God and partook of the forbidden fruit, what
happened to him? What happened to change him from being a perfect man to
a lost sinner? God had told him that in the day that he should eat of
the fruit, in that day he should die. What did God mean by that and was
the sentence carried out that day? We tend to think that God changed His
mind or that the provision made by Christ cancelled God’s decree, but
in actual fact, God’s decree was in a sense carried out that very day.
Let us notice two things which happened.
First of all, Adam became immediately aware of the fact that he was
naked and became afraid of God. His relationship to God changed.
Secondly, he immediately began to degenerate physically. His life force
began to run down and eventually ran out when he was nine hundred and
thirty years old.
But it is the spiritual change which took place in Adam which is of
most interest to us. The Bible describes man in his natural state as
being dead.
(Eph 2:1) And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins:
(Eph 2:5) Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
(Col 2:13) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of
your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all
trespasses;
Alienated from the life of God, sold under sin, the slave to evil
nature, habits and desires, man is spiritually dead. The question is,
how and when did man get into that condition? From what we have seen
already, this is the natural inheritance which we receive from Adam.
When he sinned, he died a spiritual death and this is a part of the
legacy which he passes on to his descendants. But what is this spiritual
death? Is there some way that we can describe it more fully?
God alone is good
Let us take note of an indisputable truth. God alone is good. This is
what Jesus taught and if we can understand and appreciate the
significance of this, most of our difficulties with this question will
be over. It stands to reason that if God alone is good, then all that is
outside of Him is evil or sinful. The only way in which any creature in
the universe may ever become good is if he is united to God, or has the
life of God within Him. Does this make sense? If this is not true, then
it would mean that anywhere we see anyone who is good, then we would
have a right to believe that that person is God. But since there is only
one God and He alone is good, wherever we see good, then we know that
God is dwelling within that individual, not that that person is God.
Now the Bible testifies that when God created the world, everything
was “very good.” This included Adam. In this sinless, “good,” state, it
is obvious that Adam had the spirit of God dwelling within him and this
was manifested in the perfect love, joy, peace, etc. (Gal. 5:22,23)
which were manifested in his life. When he disobeyed God an immediate
change was apparent. His peace was gone, his love was marred, he
immediately began to accuse his wife, his joy was gone, he became afraid
and unhappy. This can only be because the spirit of God had departed
from him. In effect, Adam became spiritually dead and this happened to
him immediately. He did in fact die that very day, just as God had
warned him would happen. While physical death came upon him slowly,
spiritual death was immediate.
Adam’s subsequent sinful state was not as a result of his degenerate,
dying body, (sinful body)but rather, because he was spiritually dead
(sinful spirit or mind), cut off from the life of God.
We should note that Paul sometimes refers to the source of our problem
as being “sinful flesh,” “the body of sin,”or other similar terms.
However, the context of his statements make it plain that he is speaking
not of the biological flesh, but rather of the fleshly or carnal mind
(Rom. 8:7) which is the real source of our sinfulness.
Of course, we believe that Adam subsequently repented and was restored
to God’s favour (through Christ), but the disadvantages which he had
introduced upon himself and into the world now made it difficult to
maintain that relationship with God where righteousness was his
lifestyle. What had been his natural way of existence could now only be
maintained by faith the maintaining of which required a constant battle
with distractions and the deceptions and distortions of the devil.
This then is the legacy which Adam has passed on to his descendants
and this is the real source of sin. It is the fact that we are born
without the spirit of God, in a condition of spiritual death where the
only option available to us (until we are born again), is the option to
commit sin continually.
The natural instinct of one who is completely forsaken is the instinct
to defend self. When Adam was the favoured child of God he was
perfectly secure. His food was provided in abundance, he had no fear, no
insecurities, he had no need to think of himself. Even though Eve was
the only other person alive, all his energies were outwardly directed.
He lived only for God and his fellow man (woman). However, when he
rebelled against God, suddenly all his security was removed. His
covering was gone, he had lost his home, he had lost God’s presence and
favour, he lost his assurance of life and suddenly he was scared for
himself. Without the spirit of God that was all he could do. Suddenly
his energies were directed to his own survival, to his own well-being.
He became selfish and was ready to accuse even the very wife with whom
he had been prepared to die a few moments before.
There will never be a time that the absence of God’s spirit will not
bring self-centeredness. When God’s spirit is absent, there is no option
available except self-centeredness (the need to protect, to justify, to
exalt, to defend, to take care of self). It was the evident focus of
fallen Lucifer, it was the first instinct of Adam and Eve after they
fell. When we understand this it becomes evident that the root, the
source of sin is ultimately self-centeredness and that it is this
quality inherent in the nature of the man outside of God which makes him
a sinner.
Some imagine that if Satan were destroyed our sinning would come to an
end. This is wrong, wrong, wrong. By far the greater percentage of sins
which people commit are not directly attributable to Satan at all, but
to their own sinful nature. Satan may tempt and annoy us, but even
though he is the first being who opened the door for the entrance of sin
into the universe, he is not the only one who has found that door.
Sin’s Door
God could have so established life
in the universe that sin could never have entered. There is no sin in
God and as long as His spirit dwells in all His intelligent creation, it
is impossible for sin to arise because sin and God cannot co-exist. God
could have ordained that no one could ever have taken the option of
separating from Him, but then, He would have had to destroy free-will
and to do that would have been to remove true freedom. Intelligent
beings would have been no more than mindless robots, even if they did
not know it.
Free-will is the door through which sin was able to find an entrance
into the universe. God gave us free-will and with that, He left a way
open by which it was possible for sin to become a reality. There was
always the possibility that someone would think, “what if I choose to
turn away from God, what then?” As it turns out, someone did and the
result is the mayhem which we have been experiencing for the past six
thousand years.
Does this have any relevance to the Christian’s experience? If when we
come to Christ sin is truly dead, then why is there the very real
possibility that it can come back to life again, and sometimes does,
even in the lives of those who are truly set free in Christ (Gal.
2:18,19)?
Let us remember what sin is. As we have seen it is in essence simply
the condition which arises with the absence of God. It is that other
side which manifests itself whenever the presence of God is withdrawn.
Without God there is no escaping it, it can be compared to darkness.
Darkness does not exist in itself as a substantive reality. It is merely
the absence of light. Wherever light is absent, it finds an opening and
becomes a reality. It is so with sin. As long as God’s spirit exists in
all intelligent beings, sin can never find an opening to enter the
universe, but when by the choice of any intelligent being, God is
rejected, immediately sin will appear.
There will never be a time when free-will, will be taken away,
therefore there will never be a time when men will not have the option
of committing sin. Even in eternity God will not remove the power of
choice. No matter how long we have been in Christ, with self (sin) put
to death, if we should step outside by unbelief, even in the years of
eternity, immediately, all that would remain is sin (self). If this is
to be true in flawless eternity, how much more now, while we still exist
in this sinful environment.
We cannot sin while we abide in Christ (1 John 3:6,9). In this state
we are perfect, sinless, victorious, free. But if by our carelessness or
choice we lose our place in Him by unbelief, then immediately sin comes
back to life. If anyone, (thinking he is now so good that he can never
fall again) should choose to act independently of God, immediately he
would return to sin. Immediately sin would come back to life, because,
“there is none good but one, that is God.” We shall be good for all
eternity only because by our willing choice, we shall remain united to
God, the good one.
Open Face is published bi-monthly and is sent free to all who desire to receive it.
David Clayton: Editor and Publisher
P. O. Box 23 Knockpatrick
Manchester, Jamaica W.I.
Phone: (876) 904-7392
email: david@restorationministry.com
