JTB.SDG
Puritan Board Junior
All,
This is loosely connected with Covenant Theology so I posted it here. I've got some thoughts on this but wanted to glean from the wisdom of other brothers as well, and especially if any of the older writers addressed this question.
First, some background: Romans 5 is the most important passage relating to the doctrine of IMPUTED sin, which is to be differentiated from both IMPARTED sin (our corrupt nature) as well as ACTUAL sins. From what I understand, it is the unquestioned heritage of reformed theologians, based primarily on Romans 5 (especially verse 12, tied in with vv18-19), that we (the human race) are not only condemned on account of Adam's imputed sin--but indeed, condemned SOLELY on account of Adam's imputed sin. Hodge deals with this extensively, and Bavinck and Vos, to mention a few, also echo the same truths. Part of the logic is that according to Rom.5:18, we are justified in Christ in the same way that we were condemned in Adam: namely, through imputation. Something that's been very important for Reformed theologians in the past is this correlation and its implications: if we are condemned because of our actual sins (Pelagianism), then we are justified because of our actual righteousness (heresy). So too, we can't say we're condemned on account of our inherent corruption, because the corollary truth would be that we're justified on account of our inherent/inward righteousness (also heresy). So, Reformed scholars have always, to my knowledge, been very careful with their wording, to say that we are condemned, actually, SOLELY, on account of the imputed sin of Adam, completely apart from any inward corruption or actual sins; because it fits the analogy: if we're condemned in Adam solely because of his imputed sin, then we're justified in Christ solely because of his imputed righteousness. Thanks for hanging with me...
So, the question: what to do with verses such as Romans 2:5-6, which tells us that the unrepentant are storing up for themselves wrath, for God will render to each one according to his deeds? Or in the gospels, where Jesus speaks of "greater condemnation"? IF we are condemned BOTH because of Adam's imputed sin AND because of our own actual sins, the parallel becomes that we are justified BOTH because of Christ's imputed righteousness AND because of our own actual righteousness. Which is obviously not true. OR, IF we say: Well, we can add to our condemnation in Adam by our actual sins, THEN the corollary truth is that we can also add to our justification by our actual righteousness. Not good.
The Two Questions: #1) Am I on base in my assessment of the Reformed view on this subject? #2) If so, how to deal with those kinds of Scriptures? Any thoughts? Thanks!
This is loosely connected with Covenant Theology so I posted it here. I've got some thoughts on this but wanted to glean from the wisdom of other brothers as well, and especially if any of the older writers addressed this question.
First, some background: Romans 5 is the most important passage relating to the doctrine of IMPUTED sin, which is to be differentiated from both IMPARTED sin (our corrupt nature) as well as ACTUAL sins. From what I understand, it is the unquestioned heritage of reformed theologians, based primarily on Romans 5 (especially verse 12, tied in with vv18-19), that we (the human race) are not only condemned on account of Adam's imputed sin--but indeed, condemned SOLELY on account of Adam's imputed sin. Hodge deals with this extensively, and Bavinck and Vos, to mention a few, also echo the same truths. Part of the logic is that according to Rom.5:18, we are justified in Christ in the same way that we were condemned in Adam: namely, through imputation. Something that's been very important for Reformed theologians in the past is this correlation and its implications: if we are condemned because of our actual sins (Pelagianism), then we are justified because of our actual righteousness (heresy). So too, we can't say we're condemned on account of our inherent corruption, because the corollary truth would be that we're justified on account of our inherent/inward righteousness (also heresy). So, Reformed scholars have always, to my knowledge, been very careful with their wording, to say that we are condemned, actually, SOLELY, on account of the imputed sin of Adam, completely apart from any inward corruption or actual sins; because it fits the analogy: if we're condemned in Adam solely because of his imputed sin, then we're justified in Christ solely because of his imputed righteousness. Thanks for hanging with me...
So, the question: what to do with verses such as Romans 2:5-6, which tells us that the unrepentant are storing up for themselves wrath, for God will render to each one according to his deeds? Or in the gospels, where Jesus speaks of "greater condemnation"? IF we are condemned BOTH because of Adam's imputed sin AND because of our own actual sins, the parallel becomes that we are justified BOTH because of Christ's imputed righteousness AND because of our own actual righteousness. Which is obviously not true. OR, IF we say: Well, we can add to our condemnation in Adam by our actual sins, THEN the corollary truth is that we can also add to our justification by our actual righteousness. Not good.
The Two Questions: #1) Am I on base in my assessment of the Reformed view on this subject? #2) If so, how to deal with those kinds of Scriptures? Any thoughts? Thanks!