It is interesting to me to see
two schools of theological thought going at it, like the federal and seminal headship viewpoints, where both are using the same verses to support their case. It is nothing novel and
both opposing schools of thought cannot be right on who is to blame for sin. It was an early-on experience for me when I was dumber than a box
of rocks biblically and theologically; some may declare they see no progression in my theology. Anyway, I marveled and was frustrated as a new
believer in Christ on how two well-respected, God-fearing, Spirit-led scholars could disagree on a verse of Scripture. Both
couldn’t possibly be Spirit-led and at odds with one another?
Somebody is right, and the other
one is not, regardless of their credentials, and we could theoretically
entertain the thought that both might be wrong?! On the last alternative, we
need to exercise caution. Sure, it is like that in every field of endeavor, but
both schools of thought, federal and seminal, make a special claim, without
articulating it, to be in Christ led by the Spirit and interpreting the
biblical data correctly! One is contextual, and the other is obviously biblically
incorrect. Each side appeals to biblical authority, chased by supporting
verses, but both arrive at a different conclusion.
Which view is right then? Well,
therein is the rub. Federals will always be federal; seminals will always be
seminal, and the undecided (dare I say, independents) will fail to cast their
lot or succumb to the less problematic of the two views. Both schools will
continue to thrive just like Calvinism and Arminianism. Why are these divergent
schools not settled on their differences, reaching a common ground after
centuries? Alas, it will require graduation into heaven to where all the
heavenly citizens are in agreement about everything. It will only be in
eternity when “School’s out forever,” and disagreements are finally laid to
rest.
This is why the
historical/grammatical approach to biblical interpretation is quintessential,
but even that will not help if the Holy Spirit is not living within the heart
of an interpreter. I readily grasp the conservative and liberal outcomes, but
bias can be blind among evangelicals. We all have ‘em; hopefully, all of our
ducks are aligned with Scripture. One of the unapologetic prejudices I have is
the central and cornerstone belief that the Word of God is the supreme
authority in all matters of faith and practice. Such a philosophical and
theological position drives the lost and the liberal to derogatorily describe
people like me as a Bible-thumper. If you do not recognize the authority of
Scripture and disregard or ridicule it, or disrespect the Word of God by
meddling, tampering, or modifying it to conform to a worldview alien to the
teaching of Scripture, there can be no fear of God within the heart in my
estimation. If you lean toward being fearless, beware (cf. Gal 1:9; Rev 22:18, 19)!
What emerges is the question,
“Who am I to say about this or that if two schools of thought housing highly
educated guys and gals in their field can’t agree?” Do I play it safe and side
with the majority of the scholastically inclined or avoid altogether taking a
side, provided there are no other alternatives to the two opposing views? All
one can do in these situations is an attempt to understand each view, compare
Scripture with Scripture, pray, and choose to take a position or not. If the Holy Spirit does not illumine us, sometimes He allows time for the spiritual maturation process to unfold to be receptive to the truth, but there are mysteries on this side of eternity that remain impregnable
to the discovery of their meaning. Even the best search engines cannot find any
secret passages leading to a better understanding of the truth unless God wills
it.
Patience, if you hadn't noticed, is not a virtue among
the impulsive; the got-to-have-it-now believers are always clamoring for quick
resolutions and terse statements to complex issues. It’s called naïveté,
laziness, or just plain foolishness! The only
person who was wiser than most before God granted him the gift of wisdom was
David’s son, Solomon, heir to the throne of Israel. Many have a storehouse of
knowledge but lack wisdom. You see; you can possess all the Bible knowledge
and still be unwise, but you cannot have wisdom without knowledge, but God
granted Solomon both.
Now the coup de grâce in all of
this is that willful ignorance is pandemic among many claiming to be a
Christian in spite of having access to more biblical information and
explanation than at any time in human history. How a person arrives at a position
of apostasy can be debated, but unbelief is still considered rejection because the results
are the same whatever terminology we use (cf. Jn 3:18, 36; Rom 1:18; Eph 5:6;
Col 3:6).
The peculiar thing about federal
headship and seminal headship is that they are so similar in sharing biblical
facts surrounding original sin but in the final analysis, they diverge and are remarried
by physical death (Rom 5:12). Both agree that when we spurt out of the womb we
are babies with a sin nature (Psa 51:5), and being sinners is not the result of
sinning but sinning because we are
sinners. Because we have a sinful nature we will die physically (Rom 5:12),
but we are also spiritually separated from God (Rom 6:23). If a person dies
being spiritually separated from God, he or she will experience eternal
separation from God in hell and ultimately in the lake of fire; this is a
dreadful thought! This is what God’s offer of salvation addresses – “should not
perish” (Jn 3:16). Perish means eternal death. Why would a sane person opt for
eternal death over eternal life? It reveals the power of deception (2 Cor 4:4).
We were all born with an “It’s
all about me” attitude and have been struggling to wean from that fleshly
addictive pacifier most of our life; some go through a lifetime and are buried
with one still invisibly hanging around their neck; this is not a Bema-friendly
way for a believer to leave this world – being all about the ego this side of
eternity. A few years ago, I was at the graveyard in Bonita Springs, Florida to
visit the burial site of my grandparents on my mother’s side. While I was there
I came across an epitaph that read, “He did it his way.” What immediately came
to mind was Frank Sinatra’s song, “My Way,” but also Prov 14:12, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is
the way of death.”
The two passages germane to this
discussion on whether Adam was representing his posterity as our federal head
or participating with his posterity as our seminal head in the rebellion of God’s
one and only prohibition in the Garden of Eden are Rom 5:12-21 and Heb 7:7-9, 10.
Who is to blame for being born a sinner? Let’s take a quick look at Rom 3:23
for starters,
“For all have sinned and fall
short of the glory of God” (NKJV).
A better translation is “for all
sinned and are falling short of the glory of God.”
Let’s go even nerdier; “For all
sinned (Gk, aorist [past] tense, not
perfect tense “all have sinned”) and are falling short (Gk, present tense) of
the glory of God.”
After Adam sinned in the Garden,
he continually fell short of the glory of God, but it didn’t stop there. Paul
declared that all sinned (past tense) and are continually falling short
(present tense) of the glory of God, taking us right up to the present hour.
It was remarkable to Frederic Louis Godet (1812-1900, a Swiss Protestant theologian)
that in Romans 3:23 “a past tense should be used for the verb sin, and a
present tense for universal consequent result.” In other words, we have a
completed act (the original sin) that contained continual residual effects. It
is focused on a particular act of completion at the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil (past tense) and continually fans out in its expression (present
tense) – local (a completed act) to universal locations (an ongoing event).
Some would object to such an intense singularity of focus, but again the aorist
tense is employed by the Holy Spirit through the Apostle – “all sinned.”
The resultant problem with “all
sinned” in Rom 3:23 is not only is the human race falling short of the glory of
God, but also they are dying and will die; this is the predicted outcome of
God’s warning to Adam, “… in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die” (Gn
2:2:17b; Rom 5:12; Gn 5:5, “and he died”). The same clause is seen in Rom 5:12,
“all sinned.” Listen again to what Godet said concerning “all sinned” in Rom
5:12, “As we all know, the aorist is a
statement of past fact, not of present condition or fact; neither does it have
the force of the perfect,--that is, of the finishing of prolonged action.” This
“all sinned” is traced back to the Garden scene.
Here
is what’s interesting; prior to the stronghold passage of Federal headship in Rom
5:12-21, Paul talks about individual sins and transgressions, revealing every
man and woman are falling short of the glory of God, individually. When we get
to Romans 5:12 and following, we find a concentration of the primary
numeral, “one” (Gk, heis, G1520) occurring 12x with 8 of those times referring to Adam
being representative of all!
Here the focus in chapter five
is not on the individual of what we each have done but on the one trespass of
Adam affecting his posterity by his actions. Since we are all connected to
Adam, we are not seen as involved in the rebellion by the federal view but in
its consequences, because Adam represented you and me and everybody else as our
federal head of the entire human race.
This appears as an open and
closed case for federal headship. Unlike Adam who became a sinner because he
sinned, as our federal head his posterity will sin because they
are sinners. From a human point of view, the undeniable proof of inherent sin is physical death (Rom 5:12; cf.
Psa 51:5). Only the physically dead without Christ are thoroughly convinced of
the reality of spiritual death (Rom 6:23). I believe it by faith, but the lost
dead feel the reality of separation from God…. I cannot begin to imagine the
horror of eternal separation from God, the onus of paying the penalty of sin
when Christ had already paid it in full on the cross! The rich man in hell is a
glimpse of the lost dead being thoroughly convinced of their utter lostness (Lk
16:22-31).
Whether
we choose the representative view of Adam as our federal head or participating
individually in Adam as our seminal head on explaining why we are sinners, the
conclusion is that sin is viewed as a completed fact (Rom 3:23 and Rom 5:12)
that made its entrance into the world in the Garden through Adam; we are
connected to Adam since he is the father of the human race, and we are all
falling short of the glory of God and are in a state of dying and will die one
day, barring the rapture. These are the shareable truths between the two schools.
The difference is who is to blame: Adam or mankind in Adam?
Often
an illustration of federal headship is used in connection with the President of
the United States. His words and actions are viewed by the world as
representing the will of the American people. Such a notion chills me; I have
been sorely misrepresented! According
to the federal viewpoint, Adam got us into a war with God (cf. usage of “enemies,”
Rom 5:10; Php 3:18; Col 1:21); presidents of the past have gotten us, the American
people, into a war, just or not. It makes sense, but it leaves me feeling more
like a victim than a volunteer, particularly when I did not vote into office a
certain president.
The federal headship view arouses a visceral response off
the record later in the series. For if you think about it, there are only two
choices here in this being a sinner by birth; either Adam got us into a war of
his own making, or we got ourselves into it in Adam. There is no neutrality,
and as it is often said, “It is what it is.” So let's talk seminal headship next time. <><
%20MG%20t-bkgrd%2060x44%20png.png){kind=small}
%20sunflower%2045x63%20png.png){kind=small}
