Adam-Christ Typology (1)
Adam is a type of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the express statement of Romans 5:14: Adam “is the figure [Greek tupos, i.e., type] of him [i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ] that was to come.” Adam is a type of Christ in God’s eternal decree and unchangeable purpose. Jehovah’s goal was never a perfect world in Adam; it was always the Lord Jesus and the glorified church in Him.
Next Romans 5 declares, “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” (15).
But what is the typology between Adam and the Lord Jesus? And what is it not? What are the comparisons between Adam and the Messiah? What are the similarities? What are the contrasts? What are the comparisons, similarities and contrasts between these two figures personally and between the various numbers in each? What exactly is spoken of in Romans 5:15 as being “much more” and abounding?
To answer these questions, we will consider this verse in the context of its chapter (Romans 5) and in the light of other pertinent Scriptures.
Though Adam is a type of Christ, there are stark differences between the two. Adam was created in the image of God; as the eternally begotten Son, Christ is the express image of God the Father. Adam was fully man but only man; Christ is both fully man and fully God. Adam was the first human being in time; Christ came into the world some 4,000 years later, though He is the firstborn of creation in God’s decree as the One who is pre-eminent in His eternal purpose (Col. 1:15, 18). Adam was formed from the dust of the earth; Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of a virgin.
According to I Corinthians 15:47, Adam was “of the earth, earthy” and Christ is “the Lord from heaven.” Adam was formed on day 6 of creation; Christ was circumcised on day 8 after His birth. Adam was innocent and upright at creation, yet capable of falling—and he fell; Christ was “holy, harmless, undefiled” and “separate from sinners” (Heb. 7:26)—and He could not fall.
So wherein is Adam a type of Christ? We have seen that it is not in their persons or natures or in their origins or order, as such. The Adam-Christ typology lies in their both being federal or covenant heads of humanity. This is taught in Romans 5 and I Corinthians 15.
But what is meant by a federal or covenant head? A covenant head is a legal and organic representative of humanity according to God’s appointment, in both His eternal counsel and His temporal providence.
Who is represented by and in each federal head? Adam is the head and representative of the whole human race: every human person, except Jesus Christ (who is a divine Person, the eternal Son of God, not a human person). Jesus Christ is the head and representative of the elect human race: each and every sheep and lamb, those for whom He died and those whom He regenerates. Rev. Stewart
Law and Gospel
I have had several more questions about Romans 7 in response to my articles on “Who Is the Man of Romans 7?” I thought it profitable to include these questions with my answers as another article in the News. These questions once again concern the law, a subject on which I have written quite a few articles. I understand, however, that these are matters concerning which many have questions, since I also struggled with these issues for many years.
This is the first question: “I just finished reading your series on the man in Romans 7 in the Covenant Reformed News. Very helpful; thank you for writing these articles. It is quite clear that the man has to be the regenerated child of God. My follow-up question is, specifically with a view to verse 7 of that chapter: Does the law serve this purpose also for unregenerate man? I understand that conviction of sin can only be produced by the Spirit’s work in a regenerated man. But it is the law which the Spirit uses to produce that, right? In other words, in evangelism we don’t start with the gospel; we start with the law to establish guilt? That seems to be the flow of the Heidelberg Catechism and its introduction of the law in Lord’s Day 2, recognizing, of course, that it was written as a catechism for those regenerated.”
My response to this question is:
(1) The law without the work of the Spirit through the gospel is powerless (Rom. 8:3). It cannot even convict anyone of sin by itself. Indeed, as Romans 7:8 says, the law only provokes me to “all manner of concupiscence” without the work of the Spirit. This is evident in the perversity of human nature, which is inclined always to do the opposite of what is commanded. God told Israel at Kadesh-barnea to enter Canaan and their response was, “We won’t!” God said then, “Okay, you are not going in but are going to wander in the wilderness for 40 years.” “Oh,” they said, “then we’re going in.” So it is always. The prohibition of liquor in the USA (1920-1933) is a case in point. Forbid something and the perverse human heart will want to do it more. The law, apart from the gospel, in the unregenerate only leads to more sin. That is also what Romans 7:5 means when it says that the motions or passions of sin are “by the law.”
(2) I mentioned the gospel since I do not believe the law can be, or ought to be, preached apart from the gospel. Exodus 20 introduces the law with a statement of the gospel, “I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (2). The questioner asked, “In other words, in evangelism we don’t start with the gospel; we start with the law to establish guilt?” My answer would be again that the law is powerless even to produce guilt apart from the work of the Spirit, and the Spirit works first and foremost through the gospel, and the law only a corollary of the gospel. Evangelism is not first of all the preaching of the law but is, by definition, the preaching of the gospel. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16; I Cor. 1:18-24).
(3) This means that to preach do’s and don’ts apart from the gospel is a useless endeavour even among the regenerate. Only the preaching of Christ can convict me, move me, work faith and repentance, and make me holy. I do not believe I even see clearly the exceeding sinfulness of my sin until I see what it did to Christ.
(4) As to the Heidelberg Catechism, it most certainly emphasizes the fact that I know my sin only out of the law, but even the Catechism does not begin with that but rather with the gospel truths of Q. & A. 1. It is a mirror for our misery but only for those who already know that they belong to a faithful Saviour. Otherwise, as James has it, “he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was” (1:24). An unregenerate man cannot even see himself in the mirror of God’s law because he is blind.
(5) All of this comes down to this: preach Christ and Him crucified, and when you are finished, preach more Christ and then more again. Indeed, never preach anything else. When there is sin that needs to be dealt with, preach Christ. Admonish, yes, but from the shadow of the cross. Preach holiness but only as a gift of grace in Christ. In missions, condemn the sins of the heathen and of the lost sheep, but always remember that admonition alone has not in 6,000 years changed a single heart or life. Do missions by evangelizing, that is, preaching salvation from sin through the blood of Christ.
To this, our questioner responded, “You’re right. I’m largely concerned with an evangelism/missions method here. I don’t have preaching the law all by itself in mind, though. Instead, I’m thinking along these lines: How does the concept of a ‘Saviour’ make sense to an unbeliever who has not had the law brought to him for the first time to point out to him what he needs to be saved from? As Romans 3:20 states, ‘by the law is the knowledge of sin.’ In other words, what is ‘good news’ without some comprehension of how ‘bad’ things are, the misery of mankind without Jesus, which is from the law of God as Lord’s Day 2 points out?”
My response is as follows:
Your question, “How does the concept of a ‘Saviour’ make sense to an unbeliever who has not had the law brought to him for the first time to point out to him what he needs to be saved from?” can be turned around. Thus I ask, “How does the concept of ‘sin’ make any sense to an unbeliever who has not had the gospel with its saving power brought to him for the first time to show him his sin?” That shows, I think, that salvation is not something mechanical, a matter of step-by-step changes, but is the creation of a new man in Christ: “For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast” (Ps. 33:9). This, to my mind, is something that must be remembered when dealing with any part of the order of salvation. Distinctions and an order are important, even necessary, in defence of the truth but salvation does not come like a mason laying brick on brick. It is rather like a spiritual whirlwind that blows away the old and puts something new in its place.
When we speak of regeneration in the wider and narrower sense, of faith both as bond and as an activity, of conversion both as an initial turning and as life-long process, of sanctification both as principle and as a daily reality, we are really just saying that salvation is one organic work of God who “calleth those things which be not as though they were” (Rom. 4:17). We must not lose sight of the whole of God’s gracious work by focusing too much on the parts.
On another note, I do not have any objection to saying that the Spirit uses the law to awaken the conscience. Indeed, if I understand Romans 2:15 and 7:5, 9 correctly, the “thunderings” of the law awaken even the consciences of unbelievers, though not graciously or to any profit, as do also the judgments of God on society and in creation. This only leads to the hardening and searing of the conscience in the unregenerate. I do not believe, however, that, when the Spirit awakens the conscience, in one of the elect, that He uses the law apart from the gospel or even leaves a person for many years under conviction of sin without any hope of eternal life, that is, under the law and without the gospel. Law and gospel function as one in the salvation of the sinner, both by way of giving the knowledge of sin and by way of displaying Christ in all His magnificence as the only way of salvation.
To put it another way, when the Spirit works true conviction of sin in the hearts of God’s elect, He is performing a work of grace, and grace is one and does not come in dribs and drabs, but in all its divine splendour, touching every part of man’s existence, transforming and making a saint out of a sinner. Grace is not given to awaken the conscience and give a true knowledge of sin, and then the rest of saving grace withheld, the grace that turns the heart to Christ. That is not to say that the work of making saints of sinners and a new creation out of the ruins of the old does not take a lifetime, that there is not spiritual growth in the life of a believer. Even conviction of sin grows, as does also one’s saving knowledge of Christ. It is only to say that God’s work of salvation is an organic whole and not a mechanical process.
That the conviction of sin is the gracious work of the Spirit needs to be emphasized. Never will a sinner see his sin as sin against God and mourn for his sin (and not just for its consequences) without having his eyes and heart opened. Having his eyes opened and seeing his sin, he will also realize that his case is hopeless except for God’s way of redemption and, by the same grace that opened his eyes to his lost condition, he will begin to seek Christ. In God’s mercy, no one has ever sought without finding or knocked without having the kingdom opened to him. Rev. Ron Hanko
