XIII

THEORIES OF "IMPUTATION"

THOSE theologians who teach that the subjection to a curse because of sin was directly transferred to our Redeemer and that his propitiatory sufferings took place as a legal consequence of that transfer, distinguish their view as the doctrine of Immediate Imputation-that is, of the immediate crediting of our Savior with the guilt of the world, or at least with that of his people.

They associate with this doctrine another, which asserts that the present fallen condition of our race is a penal infliction visited upon it in punishment of the apostasy of our first parent. In order to express themselves exactly they say that the ground of the condemnation of the race was the "Immediate Imputation" to it of Adam's guilt, and they oppose this explanation to that of those who believe that mankind were not condemned because of Adam's sin but have inherited a perverted nature from their first father and are then condemned because of their

own iniquities. This last theory has been named the doctrine of "Mediate Imputation.'

Had we to choose between these two positions respecting our fall in Adam we would prefer the former-that of the immediate imputation of his guilt. The Scriptures support the view that all of us were sentenced to an estate of sin and misery on account of the sin of our first parents and before any of us had been guilty of actual transgression. This is denied by those who hold to "mediate imputation," since they say that we are not condemned on account of Adam's sin but only on account of our own. They have scarcely any right to use the word imputation as they do.

THE RECORD OF "THE FALL" IN GENESIS

As a matter of fact, all of us before we could become guilty by actual transgression are born sinners into a world of sin and misery. If there be a justifying ground for this arrangement it cannot be anything which we have done; it must be something else; and the Scriptures indicate that it was Adam's Sin. Their doctrine on this subject is to be learned principally from the third chapter of Genesis and from the fifth chapter of Romans.

The Mosaic account of the Fall must have been a tradition handed down-possibly in writing

by Adam to the patriarchs. It does not directly assert that the human family participated in the condemnation of their first parents. It may even be that Adam at the time of the temptation was ignorant as to whether he was to have any posterity or not. Eve so far had been his companion and helpmeet, but had not become the mother of any children. According to the narrative in Genesis God had made abstinence from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil a test of obedience, but Adam and his wife, under the influence of a powerful tempter, disregarded the divine command, and thereupon were expelled from Eden and sentenced to lives of labor and suffering, which were to terminate in bodily death. For God said, "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." The implication is that if they had not sinned they would not have suffered and died, but, it may be, would have been translated to a heavenly country after a period of probation.

Nevertheless, while no mention is made of Adam's posterity, the evils to which our first parents were condemned are evidently imposed on their children, and it is a fair inference that the Almighty, in saying "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," intended not only that Adam should die but also that the

sentence of death should pass upon the children of Adam because of his transgression.

This is what we mean when we say that Adam was the "representative" of his race and that he acted not only for himself but also for his posterity. And by "death" in this connection we are to understand that condition of immediate evil and of exposure to further evil which was the consequence of Adam's fall.

PAUL'S EXPLANATION OF THE FALL

As already intimated, the understanding of the Apostle Paul on this subject is given in the fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. He is speaking of the satisfaction for our sins which Christ made for us on the cross. In order to illustrate his view of this atonement he contrasts the justification (or deliverance from condemnation) which believers have through the sacrifice on Calvary with the sentence of death which passed upon mankind by reason of Adam's transgression. He says:

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

even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life-[that is, unto the justification which results in life].

In this statement the clause "for that all have

sinned" would be better rendered "in whom all sinned (or became guilty)," the "past" and not the "perfect" tense of the verb being used by the Apostle.

The relative phrase "in whom" is preferable to the conjunctive phrase "for that." In the first place it is a natural translation of the Greek (εp'), tho the English "in" does not exactly give the force of the Greek preposition (έлi). This latter signifies "on" rather than "in," and might be rendered "on account of." So, strictly speaking, the clause means "On account of whom all became guilty" (or subject to a penalty by reason of sin). In the second place the personal rendering “in whom" (on account of whom) is supported by a parallel use of language in First Corinthians (15:22). This asserts that "As in Adam all die so in Christ shall all be made alive." In other words, all whom Adam represented became subject to death while all whom Christ represents are made partakers of life.

These statements of Paul in the two epistles set forth the same truth with but a slight difference in their modes of conception. In Romans we are taught that Adam furnished the ground of our condemnation; in Corinthians that he was the cause or means of it. For New Testament writers often use the preposition in (ev) He