Adam-Christ Typology (2)
What about Adam’s federal or covenant headship? Adam sinned by eating the forbidden fruit. As our federal head, the first sin of the first man is reckoned or imputed to all whom he represented. Because all sinned in him, all are judged by God, and so are conceived and born in total depravity. That original sin brought spiritual death upon the human race. “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).
What about Jesus Christ’s federal or covenant headship? He obeyed God’s law all His life long. As the federal head of His elect, His perfect obedience is reckoned or imputed to all whom He represented. Christ’s righteousness is credited to us through faith and God justifies or declares us righteous on the basis of Christ’s righteousness reckoned to our account.
Romans 5:19 speaks of the results of the federal headship of both parties. With Adam, it is terribly negative: “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.” With Christ, it is amazingly positive: “so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
Do you see it, child of God? The Adam-Christ typology in Romans 5 is not about their persons or natures or their origin or order, as such. It is about their federal or covenant headship, for they are the two legal representatives of the human race: one for ill and one for good.
According to Romans 5:12-21, in what do all those in Adam share? Sin, condemnation and death! In what do all those who were in Adam but are now in Christ share? The forgiveness of sins, justification and eternal life!
This basic groundwork being laid, let us now consider the meaning of the phrase “much more” and the word “abounded” in Romans 5:15: “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.”
Some refer this abundance, this “much more” to the numbers of those saved, claiming that this teaches that the number of those who go to heaven is greater, even far greater, than those who perish in their sins.
There are basically three parties that use Romans 5:15 (and similar statements in the context) to argue that the number of the saved is far greater than that of the lost. The first group is the postmillennialists. They hold that in a future golden age immediately prior to the Lord’s second coming, the majority of the people on the planet will be genuine Christians. In this future golden age, true believers will be of such a high percentage of such a large population for so long that their number will surpass the far greater preponderance of unbelievers over the preceding millennia.
In the next issue of the News, we will begin with a consideration of the other two parties, before subjecting this idea to a biblical critique. Rev. Stewart
The Son, Not the Father, Crucified
For this issue of the News, we have another very perceptive and difficult question: “Why was God the Son, and not God the Father, incarnated and put to death on a cross? Is there something peculiar to God the Son that meant that He should go through these things for us?”
There was an old heresy, known by its opponents as Patripassionism, a name which indicates that, according to their false doctrine, the Father suffered on the cross. This error, also known as Sabellianism or Modalistic Monarchianism, denied any real difference between the three Persons of the Trinity. It taught that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just different ways in which God reveals Himself, and the believer perceives and knows the one God.
This heresy was especially opposed by the Latin church father, Tertullian, and was condemned as a denial of Scripture’s teaching that there is one God who subsists in three distinct Persons. The teaching of Scripture is summarized in the Athanasian Creed, “So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God” (15-16).
All this is to say that the notion that the Father suffered on the cross has been condemned as heresy throughout the history of the Christian church. This does not, however, explain why it was the Son who came in the likeness of sinful flesh, suffered and died for our sins, and rose again from the dead after three days.
The reader suggests the correct answer in his question: “Is there something peculiar to God the Son that meant that He should go through these things for us?” There is something in His being Son that meant He, not the Father or the Spirit, should be the One who was born in Bethlehem, and who suffered and died on the cross.
This is seen most clearly in His birth and coming in the likeness of our sinful flesh (though without sin). He is, also in our human nature, the Son of God, for He was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary. Thinking of the incarnation, it is inconceivable that the Father should have been born as the Son of God in our flesh. Eternally and timelessly begotten of the Father as the Second Person of the Trinity, it was in keeping with His being God the Son that He was born in the fullness of time and took our nature on Himself.
So it must also be with His saving work on the cross. It befitted the Son to offer Himself a sacrifice to the justice and righteousness of God on our behalf and in our nature. That the death of Christ on the cross was an act of perfect obedience suggests that it had to be the Son who did this work. We hasten to add, however, that, though Christ in our flesh was subject to the Father and came to do the Father’s will, in the Trinity the Son is not subordinate or inferior to the Father: “And in this Trinity none is before or after; none is greater or less. But the whole three persons are co-eternal and co-equal” (Athanasian Creed 25-26).
There are several portions of Scripture that support what we are saying here. The first is Proverbs 8:22-31. This important passage identifies Wisdom not as a thing but as a Person. Wisdom is the Son of God. When reading the passage it is difficult to say, “This is the Son as the Second Person of the Trinity” or “This is the Son incarnate.” Indeed, the two are inseparable. But Proverbs 8 gives us some insight, very moving and wonderful insight, into the relationship between Father and the Son. As Wisdom Himself says, “When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men” (29-31).
As the eternal Wisdom of God, He is the One in whom the wisdom of God is shown and expressed. Thus it was through Him that the worlds were created and through Him that God is revealed to men. Having come in the flesh, the eternal Wisdom of God was made known to men and made known in the wonder of God’s grace.
He is, as Son, the revelation of the Father’s goodness, mercy, lovingkindness, grace, yea, all the attributes of God. Because all these were revealed as never before at the cross, it had (reverently speaking) to be through Him that they were revealed.
Another passage is Hebrews 1:1-3. Here again it is difficult to say, “This refers to the Son incarnate and that to the Son as the eternal, only begotten of the Father,” for both are there. The passage shows that it befits the very character of the Son or Word that the Father speaks through Him, makes the worlds through Him, upholds all things through Him and through Him purges our sins. He is the brightness of the Father’s glory and His express image, as a good son ought to be.
Having revealed the Father’s glory in the creation of the universe, surely He must also be the One through whom a new world comes into being. As the One through whom the Father upholds all things, surely He must also be the One who in our flesh, suffering and crucified, upholds God’s faithfulness and covenant with men. As the express image of the Father, He must be the One through whom the mercy and grace of God are made known by His incarnation and death on the cross.
A third passage is Colossians 1:15-18: “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”
As with all these passages, we face a mystery and can only mumble a few inadequate words about the Godhead. Nevertheless, it seems to us that these verses in Colossians 1 are saying that the Son, as the image of the invisible God, is always the One through whom the Father reveals Himself, both as Creator and Saviour. That the passage is speaking especially of the Son incarnate is evident but is He completely different in His incarnation from what He is in His eternal relation to the Father as the Second Person of the Trinity? We do not see how it could be so.
There is a hint of this mystery also in the wonderful truth that our salvation includes our adoption as children of God. Who but the Son could make us children of God? Who but the first begotten could open a way for us into the presence, the fellowship and the love of the Father? Who but the eternal Son could make us forever the children of God? After all, He alone is the eternal and natural Son of God, and we are God’s adopted children, by grace, for His sake (Heidelberg Catechism, A. 33).
We are dealing here, moreover, with two great mysteries, the mystery of the Trinity and the mystery of the incarnation of our Saviour. These mysteries, though revealed, remain forever beyond our comprehension. What we say of them, therefore, must be said with care and without unbiblical speculation. We must not go beyond what is given us in the Word of God. That it was the Son who was born in Bethlehem and who died outside Jerusalem must fit with who He is as God the Son. All we have said comes down to this but further we dare not go.
Sensing in these things the mystery of the Deity, the incomprehensibility of God, we feel that we are speaking of things too high for us, things we sense only very dimly. We feel the force of the question of Zophar the Naamathite: “Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea” (Job 11:7-9).
We conclude this article with the prayer that, if we have said anything that detracts from the glory and majesty of God, that it be forgiven us. If we have gone beyond what we are able to say from Scripture about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, the great Three in One, we ask that our gracious Saviour pardon us.
We feel like Abraham, who declared in abject humility, “Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes” (Gen. 18:27). He was only speaking to God when he felt so utterly inadequate, while we have taken it upon ourselves to speak of Him, whose glory is above the heavens, who “is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen” (I Tim. 6:16). Rev. Ron Hanko
