← Back to sermon library

All right, you can turn to chapter 
6 in the Confession of Faith, of the fall of man, of sin, and 
of the punishment thereof. I'll read the chapter, and then 
we'll look at it in a bit of detail. So chapter 6, beginning 
in paragraph 1. Although God created man upright 
and perfect and gave him a righteous law, which had been unto life 
had he kept it, and threatened death upon the breach thereof, 
yet he did not long abide in this honor, Satan using the subtlety 
of the serpent to seduce Eve, then by her seducing Adam. who 
without any compulsion did willfully transgress the law of their creation, 
and the command given unto them in eating the forbidden fruit, 
which God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel, 
to permit, having purpose to order it to his own glory. Our 
first parents, by this sin, fell from their original righteousness 
in communion with God, and we in them, whereby death came upon 
all, all becoming dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the 
faculties and parts of soul and body. they being the root, and 
by God's appointment, standing in the room instead of all mankind. 
The guilt of the sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed 
to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation, 
being now conceived in sin, and by nature, children of wrath, 
the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, 
spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them 
free. from this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, 
disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined 
to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions. This corruption 
of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are 
regenerated. And although it be through Christ 
pardoned and mortified, yet both itself and the first motions 
thereof are truly and properly sin. Amen. Well, just a couple 
of comments in terms of the location of this chapter in the confession 
of faith. We know, as we have considered 
from previous weeks, that the confession starts with chapter 
1 of the Holy Scriptures, then moves on to God and the Holy 
Trinity, and then His decree. Remember, that's the eternal 
purpose of God. relative to all things outside 
of himself. So add extra or those works outside 
of God. So the decree sets the stage 
for all that follows in terms of God's dealings with man. And 
then after that you see creation and providence. we might at this 
point expect something concerning Christ. But the confession waits 
till chapter 8 to sort of set the stage for the work of the 
Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, the fact that 
there is redemption coming, which the confession announces in the 
chapter on the decree, the confession talks about predestination unto 
life, talks about reprobation, and then creation, providence, 
and then again it sets the stage in terms of chapter 6 and 7, 
and then it brings to full fruition the work of Christ the Mediator 
in terms of His redemptive work on behalf of the Father who sent 
Him. So chapter 6 basically answers the question, why the coming 
of the Lord Jesus Christ in His first advent? Chapter 7 sets 
the covenantal context for the work of the Redeemer. And then, 
as I said, chapter 8 deals in detail with the work of the Redeemer. So chapter 6 deals with the fall 
of man, sin, and of the punishment thereof. In Westminster's Shorter 
Catechism, the question is asked, what is sin? And the answer is, 
sin is any want or lack of conformity unto or transgression of the 
law of God. Now, they didn't make that up. 
1 John tells us that sin is lawlessness. It is a failure to comply with 
the word of God. There's the sin of omission, 
where we omit to do the good that we are called to do. That's 
the lack of conformity unto. And then there's the sin of commission, 
where we do those things that God prohibits. So there's both 
a positive and a negative way that we can sin against God. 
I don't mean positive in a positive way, but you get what I mean. 
We can do it by not doing what He commands. We can also do it 
by doing what He forbids or prohibits. And as we read through the Ten 
Commandments, we're supposed to make those inferences. When 
the commandment tells us, For instance, you shall not murder, 
we know conversely we should do everything we can to promote 
life. When the confession says you shall not commit adultery, 
we should conversely imply that we're supposed to protect the 
sanctity of marriage and conduct ourselves sexually in a way that 
God calls us unto. So when we come to this particular 
chapter, it first deals with the fall in the plan of God in 
paragraph 1, which we should accept, or expect rather. So 
chapter 3 of God's decree. The question comes, well if God 
decreed all things, and He's a good God, then why does the 
world look like such a mess? Well, the confession deals with 
that. But as well in the chapter on providence, we know that God 
is over all his creatures and all their actions, so we need 
to understand, and this chapter makes it clear, that even that 
first fall was orchestrated by God to accomplish his purpose, 
his perfect purpose. So we've got the fall and the 
plan of God in paragraph one, and then the result of the fall 
in paragraphs two to five. So we'll look at that in, in 
order here. So let's look first at the fall 
in the plan of God. Notice in paragraph 1, the general 
setting. So the context is the garden, 
and you can turn there to Genesis chapter 2. Genesis chapter 2, we see what 
theologians call a covenant of works. Now that phrase is absent 
from this paragraph, but the concept is present in this paragraph. When we follow through this paragraph, 
we see, did willfully transgress the law of their creation and 
the command given unto them in eating the forbidden fruit. So 
there is a Covenant of Works, and there have been those who 
have criticized the London Confession of Faith, the first and the second, 
and said, well, they didn't affirm the Covenant of Works. Well, 
that's not true. The Covenant of Works is here in Chapter 6, 
paragraph 1, but the Covenant of Works is also in Chapter 7, 
paragraphs 1 and 3, Chapter 19, paragraph 6, and then Chapter 
20, paragraph 1. So the argument basically goes, 
especially with the Second London Confession, that when the divines 
came to pen this confession, they just slavishly followed 
the Presbyterian confession, the Westminster. They just did 
exactly what those guys did. It really doesn't reflect the 
contours of particular Baptist theology. It absolutely positively 
does reflect the contours of particular Baptist theology. 
They followed that because it was a wonderful and clear statement 
concerning God's law, including the covenant of works. So they 
embraced it, they taught it, they understood it, and it undergirds 
many of the sections in our confession of faith. But with reference 
to the covenant of works, notice what we find there in Genesis 
chapter 2, specifically at verse 15. It says, Then the Lord God 
took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep 
it. And the Lord God commanded the 
man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat, 
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not 
eat. For in the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die." 
Now, there would be those who say, well, the word covenant's 
not here, so therefore there's no covenant present. Well, again, 
the language covenant doesn't need to be present as long as 
the concept of covenant is present. The word Trinity is not in the 
Bible from Genesis to Revelation, but the doctrine of the Trinity 
is there in full blazing glory. Same with the language in 2 Samuel 
7. It doesn't say covenant that God makes with David, but later 
revelations, Psalms 89 and 132, indicate that it was in fact 
a covenant. So the fact or the absence of the word covenant 
does not mean the absence of the concept of covenant. If everything 
necessary for covenant is present, then we rightly imply that there 
is a covenant. So basically we have the covenant 
elements, you have parties, God and man, you have promise, you 
have condition, and you have penalty attached to the breach 
of this particular law. And so the confession locates 
Adam and Eve in this garden setting and underscores the reality that 
God gave them a righteous law. God called them to a particular 
activity and as well threatened death upon the breach thereof. 
Now again, by way of inference, we can rightly conclude that 
this threat of death also necessitates the promise of life on the condition 
that Adam and Eve successfully obey. So again, we need to make 
sure that we understand what we're doing when we interpret 
scripture. The fact that God says, the day that you eat, dying 
you shall die, We rightly infer that the day that you don't eat, 
living you shall live. They would have been blessed. 
They would have been confirmed. They would have been given that 
eternal life that God had promised by way of covenant. So when we 
look at this first fall, it puts it in the context of creation, 
in the context of the original creation. And then note the particular 
description that we have. It says in paragraph one, yet 
he did not long abide in this honor. Satan using the subtlety 
of the serpent to seduce Eve, then by her seducing Adam, who 
without any compulsion did willfully transgress the law of their creation. So one of the other things we 
ought to observe is that the 17th century divines, our forefathers, 
in terms of the particular Baptist faith, took this section of scripture 
literally, They didn't just say, well, it's a fable, it's a myth, 
it's a story, it's just designed there to give us some religious 
instruction. There's no indication whatsoever 
that the divines thought that, that they looked at it as a religious 
metaphor. They basically trace out Genesis 
chapters 2 and 3 relative to this argument. How do we know 
that man sinned? Because the Bible tells us so. 
It underscores their original context, it underscores the covenant 
of works, and then it gets to chapter 3, paragraph 1, or I'm 
sorry, chapter 3, verse 1 in the scriptures, Now the serpent 
was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God 
had made. And he said to the woman, Has God indeed said, You 
shall not eat of every tree of the garden? So to argue for the 
fall of man, they go back to the original creation. They go 
back to Adam and Eve. They go back to where the Apostle 
Paul goes. And we ought to see that in that 
they accept what is written as, in fact, the word of the living 
God and authoritative for us. So the occasion of the fall was 
Satan, and again, if we're thinking in terms of the confession at 
large, we know that God is the first cause, but that doesn't 
mitigate the reality of second causes that we find in chapter 
5 of Divine Providence. So we see the instrumentality 
of the devil here, Satan using the subtlety of the serpent to 
seduce Eve. than by her seducing Adam, who, 
without any compulsion, did willfully transgress the law of their creation. God said, don't eat. If you eat, 
you will die. Dying, you will die. And that's 
precisely what we find that happens in Genesis chapters 2 and 3. 
So then notice what the confession goes on to say. All of this was 
consistent with his plan. Again, we're not dealing with 
random haphazard events in a chance environment. We're not dealing 
with blind fate. We're dealing with the God who's 
described to us in chapter 2. We're dealing with the God who 
has this authority to decree all things according to his own 
purpose and plan. We're dealing with the God who 
created the world and all things in it, and we're dealing with 
the God of chapter 5, who has this purpose and plan to work 
out His salvation in the lives of people. So this is what the 
Confession now says. It says, "...which God was pleased, 
according to His wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purpose 
to order it to His own glory." So when we consider it of divine 
providence, we recognize that there's bad things in this world. 
I mean, all we have to do is look outside. Well, we don't 
even have to look outside. If you know your own heart, you'll 
understand there's bad things in this world. It's not just 
the Middle East. It's not just Ukraine. It's not 
just Myanmar. It's not just Ottawa. It's not 
just Washington, DC. But you don't have to go far 
to find out the world is chaotic. You don't have to go far to find 
out that there's a lot of mess in the present evil age. In fact, 
that's what scriptures call it, the present evil age. Well, when 
we consider that, there are times when even the people of God are 
vexed, and they wonder, well, why are these bad things happening? Why is it the case that we have 
this altogether good God, and yet in many respects the world 
looks like a mess? And again, there have been those 
challengers in the history of the world that have proposed 
the basic syllogism, if God is good, or if God is powerful and 
good, then why is there evil that exists? And that hinders 
the people of God. They wonder, well, I don't know 
how to make heads or tails out of that. When we considered of 
divine providence, we looked at Asaph in Psalm 73. Asaph reveals 
to us this very real challenge in his own heart and life. He 
doesn't hide this. He, under the inspiration of 
the Holy Spirit, declares to us that axiomatic proposition 
at the very beginning. God is good to Israel, to such 
as fear him. And then he mentions, as for 
me, I nearly stumbled. When I looked at the wicked, 
I saw them abound. When I looked at the righteous, 
I saw them suffer. So he looks at the world about 
him, and he sees the chaos, the sin, the misery, and all the 
wretchedness, and he asks, or he's wrestling with this until 
he comes into the sanctuary. So the Bible and the confession 
following the Bible doesn't say there's really no evil out there. 
That's not really what you think it is. The Bible tells us there 
is evil out there, but God has ordained it even for His own 
glory. The classic examples in scripture, 
the Joseph narratives in the book of Genesis. You meant this 
for evil, but God overruled it for good. We've got Cyrus, king 
of Persia, raised up by God, called the Messiah of God to 
bring the heat to bear upon the Babylonians and to provide a 
context where Judah can return to her land. And then, of course, 
the greatest criminal activity in the history of man was the 
execution of the Lord Jesus Christ. Peter says on the day of Pentecost, 
this was the predetermined plan and purpose of God. The apostles 
praying recognize in Acts chapter 4 that Pontius Pilate and Herod 
did whatever God's hand had predetermined for them to do. So the confession 
doesn't shrink back, and I think that's very commendatory on the 
part of the confession. I would not want to subscribe 
a confession that apologized for God, or tried to defend God, 
or tried to iron out the wrinkles in God, or tried to say, well, 
you know, that's not really the case. No, the confession heads 
it, or faces it straight on, because the Bible faces it straight 
on. And the Bible affords to us the 
rationale behind the evil that exists. God is overruling even 
that which is disgusting to carry out his own purposes in Christ 
Jesus our Lord. Now the confession uses the language 
of permission here. If you go back to chapter five, 
we noticed in paragraph four, that not by a bare permission. And then over, oh no, that's 
the only other place. So how do we deal with that? Which God was pleased according 
to his wise and holy counsel to permit. Now, that language 
isn't bad. It's not wrong. It's not, you 
know, maybe the best. I don't know. I just, you know, 
it doesn't get God off the hook, if that's what we're looking 
for. If God permits something that he's able to stop, He's 
not, you know, somehow off the hook. Sometimes people try to 
get God off the hook. Well, you know, God allows this, 
or God permits that, almost as if to soften the blow, because 
it seems a bit odd to say even the wicked things that have happened 
are according to the plan and purpose of God that He's orchestrating 
to bring out His glory and the good of all of His people. We're 
a little bit hesitant to admit that sometimes, and so we pick 
language that seems a little bit more conciliatory, a little 
bit less harsh, Again, you know, he permitted or he allowed it. 
Well again, a God who allows certain things is still responsible 
for the things that he allows. A God who permits certain things 
is still responsible for the things that he permits. So again, 
I'm not sure exactly why the language permission here and 
not permission in 5.4, but I think Gordon Clark helps in terms of 
a bit of an explanation here. He's got a little commentary 
on the Westminster Confession of Faith that, for the most part, 
I think is really good. I think if you're interested 
in studying the Confession, There's good stuff on our Baptist Confession. 
James Renahan recently has produced probably the treatment on it 
that's in print right now. It goes to the original source. 
It goes to what they were thinking. He's an originalist, like you'd 
want in a constitutional scholar or lawyer. So that's probably 
the big daddy that I would recommend in terms of confession study. 
But the Presbyterians have done some good work, too. A. A. Hodge 
is very good on the Westminster. And so is Gordon Clark. It's 
more accessible, more at a popular level. And it's under the title, 
or it used to be, What Presbyterians, or What Do Presbyterians Believe? 
And again, it's just an exposition of the Westminster Confession. 
But he says here, most people would say that the word permit 
is a softer expression than the word ordain. Some would even 
say that permission hath put sin out of God's control. But 
we cannot permit anyone to suppose that chapter 6 contradicts chapters 
3 and 4, probably 5. I don't think he's, I may have 
written it wrong. Not being infallible, the men at Westminster may have 
fallen into some slight inconsistency somewhere, but it can hardly 
be maintained that they anywhere contradicted the doctrine of 
the divine decree. It is better to understand the 
word permit as a merely convenient linguistic expression. There's 
nothing wrong with that. We talk about anthropopathisms 
and anthropomorphisms, and we use the language in the manner 
of men. Well, those are linguistic expressions 
that help us to arrive at truth. Permit again is still God is 
responsible, even if it's just to bear permission, even if he 
just allows it. So I think his point is good. They're not upbraiding everything 
that chapter 3 says and everything that chapter 5 says. He goes 
on to say, it is better to understand that the word permit is merely 
a convenient linguistic expression. Indeed, permission as it is used 
in human affairs is inappropriate to the divine omnipotence and 
sovereignty. Of course, it is quite true to 
say that God permitted Adam to sin, but if by this we intend 
to deny that God foreordained Adam's sin, we are quite mistaken. 
God foreordained whatsoever comes to pass." Again, chapter 3 makes 
that evident, makes that clear, as does the Bible. You don't 
find scripture saying, where God, you know, musing, says, 
I just can't believe this creation has gotten out of control. No, 
He's decreed the beginning from the end. The prophet Isaiah tells 
us, Ephesians 111, whatsoever comes to pass. That's the language 
of Holy Scripture. So any questions or comments 
in terms of the fall and the plan of God in paragraph 1? before 
we go to the result of the fall. No? All right. Good. Excellent. So notice first, in terms of 
the result of the fall, the representative nature of Adam's sin. We talk 
about Christ being our representative. We talk about Christ being a 
public person. Well, Jesus is the last Adam. Adam was the first Adam. Israel 
was an Adam-like type as well. and Jesus is the last Adam. So 
notice what we see there in paragraph two, this representation. Our 
first parents by this sin fell from their original righteousness 
and communion with God and we in them. whereby death came upon 
all, all becoming dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the 
faculties and parts of soul and body." The Bible literally places 
the blame on Adam. It talks about Eve's sin in 1 
Timothy 2, she transgressed, and took the fruit in that prohibition 
against women teaching men in the context of the local church. 
But the onus is upon Adam as a public person and representative 
for all of his posterity. And here you can turn to the 
book of Romans. Romans chapter 5 makes this very 
clear that we're dealing with two men, or God deals with two 
men in the history of the world. Adam the first and Adam the last. and specifically at verses 18 
and 19. Notice in Romans 5, well, look 
back at Romans 5, 14. It says, nevertheless, death 
reigned from Adam to Moses. That's a dense piece from 12 
to 17. It does certainly bear on our 
discussion here, but not for right now. But one thing to notice 
in verse 14, nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even 
over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of 
the transgression of Adam, who is a type of him who was to come. Adam didn't become a type when 
Paul wrote that. Adam was a type in the garden. 
God always knew what was happening. God always knew what he was doing. God always established it in 
an order that was consistent with his eternal decree and purpose. 
So Adam doesn't become a type when Paul tells us that he was. He was always typical, he was 
always pointing forward, he was always someone that existed to 
prefigure the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Remember types 
in the Old Testament are persons, They could be events. They could 
be buildings, the temple, for instance, the tabernacle. They 
could be various things that prefigure and typify the coming 
of the Lord Jesus Christ. So the type is that announcement, 
and the antitype is in the place of, not in contrast to, but in 
the place of. So there is correspondence, but 
the type is not the antitype. We need to make sure we understand 
that. The type does what it's supposed to do to give us information 
about the antitype. the anti-type Christ comes and 
therefore he fulfills what was spoken prior. So we need to appreciate 
that Adam was a typical figure, a public person, a representative 
for his posterity. Now notice in verse 18, and this 
by the way is covenant or federal theology. Therefore, as through 
one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, 
even so through one man's righteous act the free gift came to all 
men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man's 
disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one man's obedience 
many will be made righteous. The language there made, it's 
probably better to understand it not in the realm of transformation. They're not going to get better. 
They're not going to be more godly. That is subsequent in 
terms of justification. We then go into the life of sanctification 
where we hopefully progress and where we hopefully become more 
and more like the Lord Jesus. But the being made here is constitutive. It's forensic. It is legal in 
nature. There's the doctrine of imputation 
that lay behind this. So in Adam all die, and in Christ 
all are made alive. They're constituted by God's 
grace, by God's justice. And then turn to 1 Corinthians 
chapter 15. Another passage that shows the public nature of Adam, 
the fact that he was our representative, and by the reality, or according 
to the reality that we have in here in our confession. And we 
in them, whereby death came upon all, all becoming dead in sin, 
and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and 
body. So then notice in 1 Corinthians 
15, specifically at verses 21 and 22. For since by man came 
death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all 
die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive." So you see, God 
deals with us in Adam or in the last Adam. People say, well, 
why doesn't he give that probation and test to everybody? Because 
he's God. He's infinitely wise and good, 
and this is the way he agreed to do it. So Adam stood for his 
posterity. Christ stands for his posterity. 
So public person, representation, that's covenant theology, and 
that's what the divines are speaking to here. But then back to paragraph 
two, notice what it says, all becoming dead in sin and wholly 
defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. What 
do we call that? Anybody know? Total depravity, that's right. 
Does total depravity mean we're all as bad as we could be? Are 
we all Pol Pot? Are we all Stalin? Are we all 
Hitler? No, we're not all as bad as we 
could be, but total depravity I think is well sort of explained 
here at the end of paragraph two. Wholly defiled in all the 
faculties and parts of soul and body. In other words, sin is 
a comprehensive problem. It's not just, you know, this, 
or it's not just that. We've got huge problems when 
it comes to sin. Even if we're not as bad as Pol 
Pot, even if we're not as bad as some of the wretches in history 
or in our own present evil age, we are still nevertheless affected 
by this first fall of Adam, and then that sets the stage for 
paragraph three, speaks concerning what we call the doctrine of 
original sin. Notice, they being the root, 
and by God's appointment, standing in the room instead of all mankind. Again, representation, public 
person, Adam. The guilt of the sin was imputed, 
and corrupted nature conveyed. to all their posterity descending 
from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and 
by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects 
of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, 
unless the Lord Jesus set them free." That's a great self-esteem 
building statement, isn't it? Boy, that makes everybody feel 
really good about themselves. I'm okay, you're okay. No, we're 
not okay. And all of us are in this big 
problem. But why do the divines do that? Well, when they trace back the 
doctrine of total depravity and total inability, they give it 
to us in all of its gross and gory details. Again, they're 
setting the stage for chapter 7, God's covenant. It's into 
this mass of corruption and disgustingness that God has purpose by way of 
covenant to rescue his people. And then in that context of covenant, 
who's the mediator? Who's the public person? Who's 
the representative? Who's going to undo what Adam 
did? Well, Christ the mediator in 
chapter 8. And then the application of the redemptive benefit that 
comes from our Lord Jesus Christ is elucidated or explained in 
the confession from that point onward. Not to the end, but certainly 
in that section, what we call the ordo salutis. So in order 
to understand and appreciate the glory of Christ the mediator, 
it's helpful for us to understand our origin, our corruption, our 
situation, and that's what the confession is doing. So they 
being the root, and again, by God's appointment, this isn't 
chance, this wasn't, you know, when Adam sinned, God said, oh 
wow, what am I gonna do now? Well, plan B, I'll have him be 
the representative. No, this was all purposed and 
planned by God in order to bring about His purpose to save us 
from our sins. So then it says, the guilt of 
the sin was imputed. You can turn to 2 Corinthians 
5. The scriptures speak of the doctrine 
of imputation. I've already alluded to that. 
The guilt of Adam's sin is imputed to us. But the righteousness 
of Christ is imputed to us. Those are two imputations, but 
then there's a third. And 2 Corinthians 5.21 deals 
with that. Notice, it says, for he, that's 
God the Father, made him, that's Jesus, God the Son, who knew 
no sin to be sin for us. Again, that doesn't mean he actually 
engaged in transgression. He was not made a sinner in the 
sense that he had lustful looks, or he reacted upon it, or he 
engaged in theft, or he went out and engaged in idolatry. He was constituted. He was made 
in the sense of declared. He was reckoned that way. So he made him who knew no sin 
to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God 
in Him. So our sin is imputed to the Savior, and His righteousness, 
or punished in the Savior by the Father, and then His righteousness 
is imputed to us. So that imputation of Adam's 
sin is corrected by the righteousness of the last Adam's work on behalf 
of his people. So He lives a perfect life in 
obedience to the Father, He dies as a sacrifice on the cross, 
and He's raised again the third day. We need the resurrection, 
we need the death, but we also need that life. We need the imputation 
of Christ's righteousness so that we can be accepted in Him, 
accepted in the Beloved. And so all of this background 
sets the stage for all that we find in terms of the work of 
the Lord Jesus Christ. So then notice back in the confession 
what it says in paragraph three, they being the root, by God's 
appointment, standing in the room instead of all mankind, 
the guilt of sin was imputed and corrupted nature conveyed 
to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation, 
being now conceived in sin by nature, children of wrath, the 
servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, 
spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them 
free. And again, that's not just, you know, theological, literary 
flight. This reflects what scripture 
says. Turn back to Psalm 51. Psalm 51, with reference to the 
language being conceived in sin. That sounds pretty hardcore, 
and it would be pretty hardcore on the part of men that didn't 
have any data, and they were just supposing that this was 
the way it was. Well, the data of scripture tells us that that 
is precisely what it is. Notice in Psalm 51. And remember, 
Psalm 51, the superscription tells us there, in verse 1, to 
the chief musician, a psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet 
went to him after he had gone into Bathsheba. We're all very 
mindful of that event. David commits the sin of adultery, 
then he covers it up by murder, conspiracy to murder. And so 
David now, in his repentance, has penned this psalm, a psalm 
that brings great comfort to the people of God because we 
see God's grace and His mercy and His kindness. But as he traces 
back his native depravity, notice where he traces it to in Psalm 
51.5. Behold, I was brought forth in 
iniquity and in sin my mother conceived me. Now, he's not saying 
the conjugal act between his mother and his father was sin. That's not what's in view here. 
It's not a necessary evil just to fill the earth. No, it's a 
blessing given by God. Nothing wrong with conjugal relationship 
in marriage. That's a blessing. David's not 
saying that. He's saying, in sin, my mother 
conceived me. In other words, as soon as David 
was David, By the way, he doesn't say, and in sin my mother conceived 
a mass of cells that would later evolve to become me. No, the 
moment David was conceived, David was David. And as David, he had 
inherited this original corruption. He had inherited this corrupt 
nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them 
by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin. Look over 
at Psalm 58. Babies are wonderful. Babies 
smell good, they're cuddly, they're soft, but babies are an atom, 
not but, I shouldn't say it like that, hold them at arm's length 
as a result, no, but understand their plight, and notice what 
we find here in Psalm 58. Psalm 58 at verse three, the 
wicked are estranged from the womb. They go astray as soon 
as they are born, speaking lies. Again, the Bible presents to 
us the problem of sin in its stark reality. It doesn't fake 
it. It doesn't try to explain it 
away. It doesn't say, well, you know, 
there's a whole philosophical... No, no, it tells us straight 
out. what the problem with mankind is. And again, that sets the 
stage for of God's covenant, of Christ the mediator. Notice 
as well though, the confession goes on to say, after being conceived 
in sin and by nature children of wrath. You can turn to the 
book of Ephesians. Ephesians chapter two, when Paul 
is highlighting the before picture in terms of our salvation, he 
shows us again in all of its vivid and gory detail what we 
look like. If we don't get Ephesians 2, 
1-3, we're not going to stand in awe of Ephesians 2, 4-10. If our problem is just a problem 
of being a little bit lame, or a little bit crippled, or a little 
bit hindered, or a little bit hurt, we're not going to appreciate 
the work of the Lord Jesus Christ as we ought to. But Ephesians 
2, 4-10 is truly amazing because of the reality of Ephesians 2, 
1-3. And that's what he says. Notice 
in verse 1, And you he made alive, who were dead in trespasses and 
sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this 
world, according to the prince and the power of the air, the 
spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience." And notice 
Paul isn't wagging his finger at the Ephesian Christians saying, 
you wretches. Notice Paul in verse 3, among 
whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lust of our 
flesh. In other words, the Apostle Paul understood what sin was. How would he not have? He penned 
Romans. He penned Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians. 
He knew this experientially in his own life. In Romans chapter 
7, when he's highlighting the goodness of God's law as it's 
used lawfully, he says, I would not have known my lust unless 
the law had said, you shall not covet. Paul includes himself 
in that group. 1 Timothy chapter 1, this is 
a faithful saying. It's worthy of all acceptation. 
that Christ Jesus came into the world to save what? Sinners. 
And then he says, of whom I am chief. So Paul's not saying this 
is a problem out there for you irreligious. This is a problem 
out there for you, you Gentiles. Remember in Romans chapter one, 
he starts with Gentiles in Romans 1, 18 to 32. But then what does he do? He 
turns the cannons against the Jews in chapter two. You're no 
better. You've got the oracles, you've 
got the law, and yet you continue to breach those, continue to 
transgress those, and then that brings him to Romans chapter 
three to maintain that all are guilty before God. And then he 
says, this isn't some new thing. I'm not preaching a new doctrine. 
He says, this is what the Old Testament says. And he brings 
together that litany of Old Testament scriptures that underscore man's 
depravity, man's inability, and the necessity for sovereign grace 
in his redemption and recovery. So notice in verse 3, among whom 
also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling 
the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature 
children of wrath, just as the others. There's a man by the 
name of John Gerstner, and John Gerstner was R.C. Sproul's mentor. He's no longer alive, neither 
is R.C. Sproul. I don't think as many 
people know who Gerstner was as they do who Sproul was. I 
mean, Sproul was you know, a comet, a rising star. He was a very 
good popularizer. Popularizer? What's the word? Popularizer? Popularizer. There, 
that's what Cam said, in terms of Calvinism and the Reformed 
faith. Well, Gershner was his mentor. And Gershner once made 
the observation, if you don't get the T in the tulip, none 
of the rest make sense. If you don't get the tea and 
the tulip, none of the rest makes sense. If you have a problem 
that man's just a little hindered, then why unconditional election? 
Why limited atonement? Why irresistible grace? Why perseverance 
of the saints and preservation by God? If you understand the 
nature of sin, then the gospel in all of its vivid glory and 
beauty and majesty makes perfect sense. If our problem is that 
we just need a little bit of help, then why the cross? Why? Paul says this in Galatians 2.21, 
if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in 
vain. If we can achieve this, if we 
can, with a little help, get to heaven, well then why the 
cross? Why the necessity for substitutionary 
atonement? Notice the confession speaks 
of being servants of sin. Well, does the Bible say that? 
Yes, they're simply telling us what scripture says. John chapter 
8, John chapter 8, Jesus' discourse there with the religious leaders 
specifically. John chapter 8 and verse 31, 
then Jesus said to those Jews who believed him, If you abide 
in my word, you are my disciples indeed. And you shall know the 
truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered him, 
we are Abraham's descendants, or seed, and have never been 
in bondage to anyone. How can you say you will be made 
free? Now that's patently false, just at the temporal level. Of 
course they had been servants. Of course they had been slaves. 
They were in Egypt. They were in Assyria. They were 
in Babylon. Now notice what Jesus says in 
verse 34. Jesus answered them, most assuredly 
I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. Again, 
when we see a society that has all the earmarks of, you know, 
unchecked sin and transgression, that's not liberty. We are not 
living in a free society. We're living in bondage and corruption, 
and there's every evidence that God has in fact given us up in 
light of Romans 1, 24, 26, and 28. When man continues in his 
rebellion. You know, the 1960s, especially 
in the United States, was a time of liberation, the sexual liberation, 
the sexual revolution. That's bondage, that's death, 
that's horror. And the fruits of it are coming 
out now in all of its gory detail. So this whole idea of servants 
of sin and then subjects of death, does the scriptures teach that, 
or do the scriptures teach that? Romans 6. I mean, all over the 
place we see it, but Romans chapter 6 very clearly, specifically 
in verse 23, a passage we're all familiar with. The wages 
of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ 
Jesus our Lord. So all of these things are the 
effects of the public man, Adam, being our representative, transgressing 
the law of God, and us now, covenantally and federally, dying in him. 
There is that conveyance of that nature to us, and that's what 
the scriptures tell us. And then, in case that wasn't 
enough to make you throw up your morning eggs and sausage, and 
all other misery, spiritual, temporal, and eternal. And I 
think if you get chapter 6, paragraph 3 down, it helps you to understand 
the world around you. I mean, again, the things that 
we see are chaotic. The things that we see are evil. 
The things that we see are wretched. But there is a theological rationale 
behind it. There is even a philosophical 
rationale behind it. We may not be able to explain 
everything. We may not be able to see all the puzzle pieces 
in place, but we trust in the fact that God does, and that 
He's working all things out, ultimately for His own glory, 
and for the good of those who love Him, and to those who are 
called according to His purpose. So Scripture gives us that rationale. I understand why the world hates 
it and rejects it and scoffs at it, but I've never quite understood 
why the Christian does. The Christian has the answers 
in Scripture. We just have to have the faith 
to appropriate it and trust in our God. We're not God. We don't 
know how to operate the world. We don't know how to govern all 
our creatures and all their actions, but God does. He's infinitely 
wise. He's everything that chapter 2 says concerning Him. So, in 
the final analysis, God's got this, and we rest content in 
that, and we rest in the knowledge of the fact that we can, in fact, 
be still and know that God is God, know that He will be exalted 
in the earth and among the nations. And that statement, Psalm 46, 
10, doesn't come in the You know, when you're sitting at home, 
you're in your back garden, the birds are singing, you've got 
a nice warm beverage, your wife is there, everybody's glowing 
and happy, hair is combed and teeth are brushed and the kids 
are frolicking. It comes in the context of disorder. It comes in the context of chaos. 
It comes in the context of natural phenomena. If the mountains be 
removed and fall into the sea, or the nations raging against 
one another, be still and know that I am God. In other words, 
He has sovereign control and authority over all things. The 
confession at paragraph 3 doesn't stop there. It doesn't leave 
us without hope. Paragraph 3, wonderful in terms 
of its description, hopeless in terms of its indictment, but 
hopeful with that last statement, unless the Lord Jesus set them 
free. So we've got the representative 
nature of Adam's sin, paragraph 2. the doctrine of original sin 
in paragraph 3. And now notice the effects of 
original sin in paragraphs 4 and 5. You've got the actual sins 
committed by sinners in paragraph 4. From this original corruption, 
this original sin, this nature or this imputation of Adam's 
sin to us, from this original corruption, whereby we are utterly 
indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly 
inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions. So 
I think it has well been said. I think it was probably sprawled. 
We are not sinners because we sin. We sin because we are sinners. In other words, we have this 
corrupt nature, and it's from that corrupt nature that all 
these actual transgressions proceed. So in Adam, all die. So we're 
dead in Adam. So what happens? We go estranged 
from the womb, speaking lies as soon as we are born. And that's 
the connection here. From this original corruption, 
whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to 
all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual 
transgressions. So what we find is the doctrine 
of total depravity. It's already been mentioned. 
Again, that doesn't mean we're all, you know, the worst that 
we could possibly be. I'm not suggesting we're the 
best we could possibly be, but total depravity doesn't mean 
we're as bad as we could be. That's what the language suggests, 
and at times people, Christians mainly, that are outside of the 
Reformed today, total depravity, what do you mean? I walked an 
old lady across the street today. How can you mean I'm totally 
depraved, or my neighbor does great things? Again, total depravity 
means every bit of us is affected by the fall. There's nothing 
outside of us or part of us that hasn't been affected by the fall. 
And incidentally, when we get to the chapter of God's free 
will in the Confession, it doesn't deny free will. That's a miscaricature 
of the Reformed tradition. Oh, you guys don't think there's 
free will. No, we do, but free will is not in a vacuum. It's free for Adam in the garden 
in a pre-fall situation. There's free will for us in a 
state of sin where that free will is conditioned by our deceitful 
and desperately wicked hearts. Then you've got free will in 
the state of grace, where we now can do good. And then you've got the free 
will in the state of glory, where it's only confirmed to do what's 
right. So there's not the case where we deny free will in the 
sense that you can be anything you want. No, you can't. If you don't have the mental 
equipment to be the, well, I guess you can. to be the prime minister. Yeah, that goes against that. 
But you can't necessarily be an astronaut if you're afraid 
of heights. You can't become a believer without divine aid, 
without divine grace. So the argument against free 
will is an Arminian or Pelagian free will. where the will is 
not so affected that it can't choose for Jesus. That's not 
what the scripture says. God makes us willing in the day 
of his power. Romans 9 16 says it does not depend upon him who 
wills or him who runs, but upon God who shows mercy. It's God 
who affects. It's God who changes the heart. 
It's God who causes us to be born again. And with that now, 
A new heart brings the ability to will for Jesus in terms of 
faith. So there is this doctrine of 
total depravity. I've got several passages listed 
here. I won't read them off. If you're 
interested, just email me and I can cut and paste. But just 
think about it. In Genesis, God looks at the 
earth. It's exceedingly corrupt and 
it's filled with violence. Post-flood, what happens? The 
intention of man's heart is only evil continually. Jeremiah 17, 
the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. Jeremiah the prophet, who can 
change his, you know, can the leopard change his spots or the 
Ethiopian change his skin? Then can you will to do good? 
No, without divine aid or without divine grace. So you've got these 
statements concerning total depravity, but the Bible also teaches total 
inability. And that has to do with the will. 
If you turn back to John 6. The basic argument in the Reformed 
tradition is that the will is conditioned by man's state. The will is conditioned by the 
heart of man. The will is not this autonomous 
thing that can do whatever it wants. It is in a continuum, 
either in the state of original righteousness, in the state of 
sin, in a state of grace, or in that state of glory. But notice 
in John 644, so we've got total depravity, we usually focus on 
that, man is sinful, all of his parts are affected, but we need 
to know that the corollary of total depravity is total inability. And so John 644 underscores that. No one can come to me, notice 
that, no one can. It's an impossibility. You can't. Unaided by God, unaided by divine 
grace, unaided by the Holy Spirit, no one can. No one is extensive 
and comprehensive. Not you, delicate snowflake. 
Not you, person that wasn't affected by it. No, in Adam all die. And 
as a result, unless in Christ we live, we're dead in our trespasses 
and sins and unable. So 644, no one can come to me 
unless the father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him 
up at the last day. Now, contrary to the Arminian 
sort of conjecture, it doesn't draw him kicking and screaming 
and flailing about. Oh, no, I don't want to come 
and be a recipient of sovereign grace. The drawing is based on 
God's work, changing the heart, renewing the mind, giving him 
faith and repentance so that he comes willingly. This is the 
emphasis in the Psalms. He makes men willing in the day 
of his power. But then notice as well, John 
6, 60, well, let's pick up at verse 60. John 6.60, therefore 
many of his disciples when they heard this said, this is a hard 
saying who can understand it. Talking about eating his flesh 
and drinking his blood, but as well talking about divine sovereignty 
and no one can come to him unless the father who sent him draws 
him. So notice, there's nothing new under the sun. You preach 
Calvinism or reform theology properly, you're always gonna 
get people saying, that's tough, that's harsh. That seems wrong. It seems a bit off. That doesn't 
seem right. So that's not new. And I think 
that in preaching or in witnessing, if we never hear these kinds 
of arguments, we're probably not preaching or witnessing properly. Paul says that, what shall we say? Is there unrighteousness 
with God in Romans 9? May it never be. Well, why do 
you think they ask that? Because Paul's concept of God's 
sovereignty might lead someone to believe that if he's orchestrated 
all things, even the wicked things that occur, well then maybe he's 
not righteous. Or in Romans 6, what shall we 
say then? Shall we continue in sin that 
grace may abound? May it never be. Why do you think he was asked 
that question? Because when he preaches the 
fullness of God's grace and justification by faith, what are wicked men 
inclined to do? Well, if it's just believe on 
Jesus, then that means we can go out and sin and sin and sin, 
and that'll just open up an opportunity for more of God's grace. Paul 
dealt with objections to his preaching, and Jesus did too. So notice in 660, this is a hard 
saying. Who can understand it? Now, Jesus 
doesn't do what would be perhaps a temptation for some. Yeah, 
they're not ready for this. I'm just going to talk about 
the weather or the favorite sports teams. I'm going to change direction 
because I don't want to offend these guys. Verse 61, when Jesus 
knew in himself that his disciples complained about this, and I 
think disciples is used broadly there, not as blood-bought children 
of God, but as those who at least for a time followed Jesus. When 
Jesus knew in himself that his disciples complained about this, 
he said to them, Does this offend you? What then, if you should 
see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? It is the Spirit 
who gives life, the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak 
to you are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you 
who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning 
who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. And 
He said, Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to 
Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father. Do you see 
that? He doubles down. He doesn't try 
to finagle his way out of it. Oh, I've created a religious 
enigma, so I've got to try to soften the blow. No, he doubles 
down with the blow to tell them what the problem is. Again, sometimes 
sinners need to be carpet bombed so they'll see the reason for 
the cross. And then over in Romans chapter 
8, you've got the twin concepts of depravity and inability. Romans 8, 7, because the carnal 
mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law 
of God. nor indeed can be." So we've 
got total depravity. It is not subject to the law 
of God. Total inability, nor indeed can be. So then those 
who are in the flesh, again, note the language, cannot please 
God. The language there, cannot please 
God, is redemptively. It's in terms of acceptance with 
God. If you are a neighbor to your 
neighbor, Is God happier if you help him cut his grass or you 
help an old lady walk across the street? Yeah, yeah. He doesn't 
want you to jump on her and kick her and that sort of thing. But 
the language here is in a redemptive context. Those who are in the 
flesh cannot please God. So then back to the confession, 
it deals with actual sins committed by sinners in paragraph 4, but 
it ends the chapter with the doctrine of remaining corruption. 
In other words, what about the believer? Is the believer, after 
he believes, immediately confirmed in righteousness? Is the believer, 
after he believes, in a state wherein he cannot sin? You know 
as well as I do the answer to that question. No, it doesn't 
mean that at all. Well, does the Bible teach that? 
Yes, the Bible teaches that, and the divines hit on that. 
Notice in paragraph five, this corruption of nature during this 
life doth remain in those that are regenerated. That's why we 
call it remaining corruption. It's not reigning. It's not ruling, 
it's rather remaining. There's a distinction. The unconverted 
has reigning sin. The converted has remaining sin. We just sang it. Prone to wander, 
prone to leave the God that we love. So the confession here 
is doing something that the Bible does. This corruption of nature 
during this life doth remain in those that are regenerated. 
And although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both 
itself and the first motions thereof are truly and properly 
sin. So the confession wants to make 
sure that you understand that though Christ is atoned for your 
sins, it's not okay for you to sin. Sanctification necessarily 
follows justification. You're accepted in the Beloved 
because of his finished work, because of his life of righteousness, 
but that doesn't condone or do away with the fact that in terms 
of your filial relationship with God, in terms of his fatherly 
pleasure or displeasure, you, by grace and by the presence 
and power of the Holy Spirit, ought to pursue holiness. You 
ought to perfect holiness in the fear of God according to 
2 Corinthians 7.1. Pursue holiness without which 
no man will see the Lord. Hebrews 12.14. So it's not mitigating 
the reality of remaining sin and the fact that it does bring 
several hindrances. It does bring displeasure. It does bring earthly sorrows. 
It does bring consequences. That's the grim reality. And 
David, king of Israel, is a great reminder of that, as is the apostle 
Peter in the New Testament. Both men were walking with God. 
Both men were righteous. Both men are holy. Both men had 
known the imputed righteousness of Jesus and the forgiveness 
of sins. And yet both men sin against God in a particular way 
that brought consequences vis-a-vis in the house of David. I mean, 
God announces that, He atones for His sin, but there's going 
to be a sword that does not depart from your home. There's an effect 
for that, or a consequence for that particular sin. Same with 
Peter. And so the confession ends there 
in order, I think, to cause us to reflect and to cause us to 
be encouraged that we're not alone. Paul pens this, Romans 
7, 13 to 25. You can read that on your own. 
Galatians 5, 17, the accounts of David, the account of Peter. 
It's an encouragement in the sense that, yeah, we should be 
a lot holier, but this is somewhat normal. There is remaining corruption. 
And again, I'm not saying this so you go out and sin. I'm not 
suggesting that at all. But I remember when I first got 
converted, perhaps this was your experience. You had a friend 
that led you to the Savior, and that friend seemed way holier 
than you were. And you were wondering, this 
doesn't seem right. I'm a believer now, and yet I 
still got all these problems. Well, again, the comfort of a 
Roman 7 and a Galatians 5 is the comfort theologically, the 
comfort and the reality that Christ has atoned for your sins. 
The emphasis is still seek by God's grace and by the Spirit 
to put to death those things. And I think as well, this is 
a helpful preventative to the doctrine of Pharisaism. We need 
to understand, we're very charitable with ourselves in the doctrine 
of remaining corruption. We're not as charitable with 
our fellows in the doctrine of remaining corruption. Well, you 
know, I've got this remaining corruption. I don't always do 
what I'm supposed to do. Well, neither does your wife. Neither 
does your husband. Neither does your friend. I can't 
believe you sinned against me. You really can't believe she 
sinned against you? Really? You really can't believe 
he sinned against you? You really can't believe there's 
still these foibles, these problems, these challenges? You can't believe 
that there's a continuum in terms of sanctification? We're not 
to be Pharisees. We're not to be those guys that 
parade through the churches and bring our weight to bear upon 
each and every one of them, and they don't measure up. We need 
to understand that justification is a one-time act by a gracious 
God, and sanctification is progress. And there are times in the Christian 
life that there are ebbs and there are flows. There are valleys 
and there are summits. Not as many summits as we would 
like, but there are those challenges. So, if we're going to be charitable 
to ourselves and find some degree of encouragement in a Roman 7 
and a Galatians 5. Again, not so that we may sin, 
that grace may abound, but the fact that this is a reality experienced 
by God's people. Let us be charitable to our fellows. 
Let us be kind and loving to our brothers and sisters. And 
let us not demand a pound of flesh for every infraction that 
they engage, all the while indulging ourselves because of the doctrine 
of remaining corruption. It affects all of us. And we 
need to be gracious one to another and understand that this corruption 
of nature during this life doth remain in those that are regenerated. 
And although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both 
itself and the first motions thereof are truly and properly 
sinned." So I guess I'm saying we should never be surprised. 
We shouldn't condone it, obviously. But, you know, honey, I can't 
believe you sinned against me. I just can't believe it. Again, 
really? You can't believe it? Do you 
know your own heart? Do you know your own proneness 
to wander? Do you know your own proneness to leave the God that you love? 
We need to extend charity and grace and love. Well, let us 
pray. Father in heaven, thank you for this time and study. 
Thank you for the word of God and the fact that our confession 
basically follows that rule, that standard, that infallible 
guide. We thank you for the Lord's Day. We thank you for the prospect 
of corporate worship. We pray that you would bless 
our time as we worship and may it be in spirit and truth. And 
may you fill our brother Ryan with the Holy Spirit and cause 
us as well to know his presence and power that we may receive 
with glad hearts your word. And we pray this through Jesus 
Christ our Lord. Amen.