← Back to sermon library

We can turn to chapter 6 in the 
confession if you don't have one raise your hand and one will 
be passed along to you. So chapter 6, after having dealt 
with the decree of God, creation, and providence, before the confession 
gets into the unfolding of redemption through our Lord Jesus Christ 
from chapter 7 and following, it first sets the stage in terms 
of man and our condition, our problem, and the sin we need 
to be saved from. So I'll read chapter 6 and then 
we'll look at it in detail. 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 
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. 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, as we consider 
this particular chapter, it definitely answers the question as to what's 
going on out there and what's going on in here. It affects 
everyone, whether you're a believer or an unbeliever. Our connection 
with Adam has brought miserable effects upon the creation. As 
we look at this particular chapter, again, it sets the stage for 
the redeeming work of our Lord Jesus Christ. He doesn't come 
to call the righteous, but he comes to call sinners to repentance. And so sinners are clearly addressed 
here in chapter 6. Essentially, you have the fall 
in the plan of God in paragraph 1. And then you have the result 
of the fall in paragraphs two to five. So we'll look at it 
in that order. Notice in the first place the 
general setting of the fall and the integrity of man at creation. And notice how the divines read 
or deal with the early chapters of Genesis. They don't treat 
them as myth. they don't treat them as fable, 
they don't treat them as religious story, rather they treat them 
as God-inspired truth, and they proceed accordingly. Now this 
is obviously under attack today, not just the doctrine of creation 
in terms of God's making all things out of nothing by the 
word of his power in the space of six days, and all very good, 
that's obviously been under attack for some time in the church. 
Oftentimes it's people in the church that have a problem with 
what the Bible says there. But now, increasingly, there 
is an attack upon the historicity of Adam and Eve. So theologians 
today tell us it really doesn't matter if there was an Adam and 
Eve, What matters is the religious story that's sort of embedded 
in the text. Well, if it doesn't matter that 
there was an Adam, then it doesn't matter that there was a Lord 
Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul connects those 
two men in a few places in the New Testament, teaching what 
we call covenant or federal theology. So Adam was a public representative 
of all men that would come after him. And as we look at the fall, 
we see the integrity of man at creation. Solomon says this in 
Ecclesiastes 7. He says that God made man upright, 
but they sought out many devices. And so it's that uprightness 
that the confession underscores in the first paragraph. Although 
God created man upright and perfect, that's man's original integrity. That is man before he departed 
from God and fell into transgression. Notice the contingency based 
on obedience. It says, he gave him a righteous 
law, which had been unto life, had he kept it, and threatened 
death upon the breach thereof. Are we being recorded here? Can I ask questions and people 
will hear that? What does this refer to, this giving him a righteous 
law which had been under life had he kept it and threatened 
death upon the breach thereof? What is that a reference to? 
Does anybody know? The covenant of works. That's 
a good observation. Many have suggested that the 
particular Baptist in the 1689 confession did not affirm the 
theological covenant known as the covenant of works. Nothing 
could be further from the truth. This is an obvious reference 
to the covenant of works. But elsewhere in the confession, 
you see it alluded to. Look at chapter 7 in paragraph 
1. Chapter 7, paragraph 1, the distance between God and the 
creature is so great that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience 
unto him as their creator, yet they could never have attained 
the reward of life but by some voluntary condescension on God's 
part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant. And then look at paragraph 3 
in the same chapter. Notice, this covenant is revealed 
in the gospel. This is the covenant of grace. 
First of all, to Adam and the promise of salvation by the seed 
of the woman, and afterward by father's steps until the full 
discovery thereof was completed in the New Testament. And it 
is founded in that eternal covenant transaction that was between 
the father and the son about the redemption of the elect. 
So you have this reference to the covenant of grace, and now 
you have this reference to this eternal covenant transaction 
between the father and the son. What do we call that? Does anybody 
know? The Covenant of Redemption. Now notice what the chapter goes 
on to say, and it is alone by the grace of this covenant that 
all of the posterity of fallen Adam that ever were saved did 
obtain life and blessed immortality. Man being now utterly incapable 
of acceptance with God upon those terms on which Adam stood in 
his state of innocency. So they're not calling it a covenant 
of works at the end there. It is certainly the covenant 
of works. Now, when we get to chapter 7 next time, we'll see 
why this is important. But typically, when persons deny 
a covenant of works in the Garden of Eden, they have problems with 
justification by faith. And I will try and show that 
when we get to chapter 7. But then notice in chapter 19, 
again, a reference to the covenant of works. Chapter 19, specifically 
at paragraph 6. Although true believers be not 
under the law as a covenant of works. And I would suggest that's 
the way you're supposed to understand Paul's statement in Romans 6 
when he says, we're not under law, we're under grace. Antinomians 
love that passage, so do dispensationalists, because they use it to try to 
jettison or get rid of the moral law of God. But that's not Paul's 
point in Romans 7 there, or Romans 6 there. He's talking about being 
under the law as a covenant of works, the way that the confession 
of faith says so here. And then look at chapter 20 in 
paragraph 1. the covenant of works being broken 
by sin and made unprofitable unto life. God was pleased to 
give forth the promise of Christ, the seed of the woman, as the 
means of calling the elect and be getting in them faith and 
repentance. So you've got three theological 
covenants. They're called the covenant of 
redemption. That is the intra-Trinitarian, pre-temporal transaction between 
the persons of the Godhead to save his people from their sins. 
You have the covenant of works, which was established by God 
in the garden in Genesis chapter 2. And again, more on that next 
time when we come to the confession in chapter 7. And then you have 
the covenant of grace. If you tamper with or you distort 
one of those, typically it affects your approach to justification 
by faith. Now, back to chapter 6. Notice 
we have the brevity in their original integrity. Theologians 
write about this. They ponder this. They meditate 
upon this. How long did they maintain this 
original integrity? Well, we don't know. But according 
to our confession here, it was a brief time. Notice, yet he 
did not long abide in this honor. So it wasn't as if he was, you 
know, 400 years old and then he took the fruit and then he 
fell into sin. The way the narrative reads, 
I would suggest it reads in the way that they interpret. Yet 
he did not long abide in this honor. Now it gets into from 
the general setting of the fall to the specific or particular 
description of the fall and the various parties involved. Notice 
in the first place in terms of the occasion. It says Satan using 
the subtlety of the serpent to seduce Eve. When you come to 
that particular narrative in Genesis chapter 3, you see everything 
turned over on its head. God made Adam, and then he made 
Eve to be his helper, and both of them were to exercise dominion 
over the created order. You get to Genesis chapter 3 
and you have a talking snake speaking to the woman who then 
gives the fruit to her man. So you see this inversion. You 
see an attack by the devil to completely turn on its head everything 
that the Lord God had intended. So Satan, using the subtlety 
of the serpent to seduce Eve, then by her seducing Adam, who 
without any compulsion, you've got to understand this, Adam 
willingly chose to rebel against God. That's why when we look 
at the very first statement in this paragraph, although God 
created man upright and perfect, had they asked me, I don't think 
I would have put perfect. To me, perfect implies immutability. And man was not immutable at 
the creation. I mean, he was upright, he had 
an original integrity, he had lots going on for him, but he 
was not immutable. He had, by God's creation and 
design, the ability in him to sin and rebel against God. And 
so we see, who without any compulsion did willfully transgress the 
law of their creation. That law of their creation is, 
having been made by God, being made in the image of God, there 
is certainly the law of God written on Adam's heart, but as well 
there was a positive statement concerning the tree of the knowledge 
of good and evil. God gave him a positive commandment. Remember, a positive commandment 
is not the same as a moral. The moral means that it's right. 
It's always right. It is a revelation. of who God 
is. But positive law comes at a time 
for a specific purpose. And in that instance, it's not 
wrong to eat fruit from trees, but it was wrong to eat from 
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. That's positive 
law. And so God gave Adam that law 
in addition to the law of creation, which was his image bearing and 
the fact that God's law was stamped on his heart. Read Edward Fisher, 
read some of the older divines. They will detail for you how 
Adam, in taking that fruit, sinned against God in every one of the 
Ten Commandments. Every one of the Ten Commandments 
was violated by Adam when he took that fruit and rebelled 
against God. Now notice the substance of this. Who, without any compulsion, 
did willfully transgress the law of their creation and the 
command given unto them in eating the forbidden fruit? Now notice, 
"...which God was pleased, according to His wise and holy counsel, 
to permit, having purpose to order it, to His own glory." 
So a couple of things about that statement. The fall did not happen 
apart from the decree and plan and purpose of God. Now, when 
we see that language, to permit, we've run into that question 
before. If you go back to chapter 3, 
we'll notice, with reference to God's decree, there's no permission. God has foreordained whatsoever 
comes to pass. His decree is comprehensive. 
His decree includes everything. When we looked at chapter 3, 
we considered preterition or reprobation. Does God actively 
damn the non-elect? Does God not only elect the elect 
unto salvation, but does he actively reprobate the unelect to damnation? That's the position I argued 
for. In the history of the church, 
there have been those who have taught preterition, that God actively 
elected the elect unto salvation, and the rest he just passed by. 
That almost seems like he wasn't as an active participant in that. And so in chapter three, that's 
kind of suggested a little bit. But then notice in chapter five, 
specifically with reference to the fall, in paragraph four, 
the almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness 
of God so far manifest themselves in his providence that his determinate 
counsel extends itself even to the first fall and all other 
sinful actions, both of angels and men, and that not by a bare 
permission. Now, when we come to this particular 
chapter and paragraph, it says that he did permit. I want to 
read a quote from Gordon Clark. Now, he's working with the Westminster 
Confession, but it's the same at this point. He says, most 
people would say that the word permit is a softer expression 
than the word ordain. I think that's correct, don't 
you? You hear permit, and it doesn't seem as hardcore as ordained. Does everybody agree? I think 
that, you know, we're just looking at the confession here. The Bible 
is obviously clear at this point. We're looking at how the divines, 
were they consistent or inconsistent? The best of men are meant at 
best at times. He says, 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, there's a little pun for Isaac 
from Gordon Clark, but we cannot permit anyone to suppose that 
chapter 6 contradicts chapters 3 and 4. 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. In other words, spoken in the 
manner of men. I think that's legit. 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. I think that's a helpful comment 
at this point. And the fact that they say, having 
purpose to order it to his own glory. When you read their chapter 
two and you read their chapter three, you cannot interpret that 
in a reactionary sort of a way. You cannot think that Adam did 
something that was off script, and as a result, God responds 
in a positive way to order it for his own glory. Now, the word 
permit here is legit, again, as a convenient linguistic expression. But it does not bring into contradiction 
what the divines say in chapter 3 concerning the decree. So we 
have the fall of man as the foundation or basis. Now, let's proceed 
to the result of the fall in paragraphs 2 to 5. In the first 
place, you'll see representation. Paragraph 2. Our first parents, 
by this sin, and I would just like to suggest here, the Bible 
doesn't link our original sin or our sinfulness in Adam to 
our first parents. It links us with Adam. Again, 
if they asked me, I would have said Adam. by this sin. Not to 
suggest that Eve was not complicit, not to suggest that Eve was not 
sinful, Paul tells us that in 1 Timothy chapter 2, it is the 
reason for the prohibition against a woman teaching or exercising 
authority over men in church. One, because God made Adam first. Two, because Eve was deceived 
and transgressed the law of God. So Eve is not let off in terms 
of her responsibility or culpability, but in terms of federal or covenant 
theology in Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15, Paul links us with Adam. So back to paragraph 2. Our first 
parents, by this said, 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. You can turn to 
Romans chapter 5, where you can see Paul develop this, where 
the apostle links Adam and Jesus, and that in a representative 
manner. So men are either in Adam or 
in Christ. There's two men by which God 
deals with humanity. Notice in Romans chapter 5, specifically 
at verse 12. Therefore, just as through one 
man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death 
spread, excuse me, to all men, because all sinned. For until 
the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there 
is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from 
Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according, 
now notice this language, to the likeness of the transgression 
of Adam, who is a type of him who was to come. You need to 
understand, Adam didn't become a type when Paul wrote Romans 
5. Adam was a type at the original creation. Adam was always pointing 
us forward to the Lord Jesus Christ. He goes on to say in 
verse 15, but the free gift is not like the offense. For if 
by one man's offense many died, much more the grace of God and 
the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded 
to many. And the gift is not like that 
which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which 
came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free 
gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. For 
if by one man's offense death reigned through the one, much 
more those who received abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness 
will reign in life through the one Jesus Christ." Now that is 
a very densely packed piece of theology that would take some 
time to unpack. But the basic idea is that you 
need to appreciate that Adam stood for his posterity, Jesus 
stands for his posterity. Notice in verse 18, 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. See the connection there. If 
you've got a problem with the covenant of works, it's probably 
going to bleed into the covenant of grace. Your understanding 
of Adam and the last Adam are inextricably connected. Verse 
19, for as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners. Now the 
making here, so also by one man's obedience many will be made righteous. The making isn't so much moral 
transformation. They became sinful wretches, 
though we did become sinful wretches. Just like the making us righteous 
at the end in terms of Christ doesn't mean moral transformation. The idea is imputation. You've 
probably heard that word in our church before, the idea of imputation. Christ's righteousness is imputed 
to us. It's received by faith alone. 
But Adam's sinfulness is imputed to us as well, because again, 
God dealt with humanity under the auspices of two federal heads. One was Adam, and the second 
is Christ. And so that connection in Romans 
5 is brought out here in chapter 6, paragraph 2. So, Adam by this 
sin fell from his original righteousness and communion with God. And we 
in them were by death came upon all, all becoming dead in sin 
and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and 
body. What do we call this doctrine? 
Wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. Does 
anybody know? Total depravity. Total depravity 
does not mean we're as bad as we could possibly be. Total depravity 
does not mean we're all Mao Zedong. Total depravity does not mean 
we're all Joseph Stalin. Total depravity does not mean 
we're any of those notorious figures in history that are known 
for their abject wickedness. Total there doesn't mean that 
we're as bad as we can possibly be. When you hear a blue-haired 
little old lady referred to as being totally depraved, persons 
get a little bit upset by that. But the doctrine teaches that 
the faculties, the mind, the heart, the will, the affections, 
everything totally in a man is affected by this fall into sin. There's nothing that is left 
untouched by the fall into sin. That'll be very obvious when 
we get to chapter nine, the doctrine of free will. Everybody wants 
to talk about free will, but nobody wants to talk about it 
in relationship to sin and depravity. And if we don't understand sin 
and depravity, we're going to mess up on the doctrine of free 
will. Again, the Confession holds together every step of the way. 
It is a systematic document presenting Christian doctrine. So, and wholly 
defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. So this is man's problem. We in Adam die. As a result, 
we have inherited this original sin. We, as a result, are totally 
depraved. Now notice in paragraph three, 
it speaks concerning the doctrine of original sin. They, being 
the root and by God's appointment, standing in the room instead 
of all mankind. There's your federal theology. 
There's your covenant theology. There's your representation. See, Adam was a public person. So was Jesus a public person. And when it comes to public persons, 
the ones they represent are affected by their conduct. Again, covenant 
or federal theology. So they stood in the room instead 
of all mankind, and as a result of this fall, the guilt of the 
sin was imputed." Now, persons will say, well, that's not fair. 
Well, God didn't ask you what you thought was fair. God purposed 
to deal with mankind federally or covenantally. He chose to 
deal with man with Adam and with Jesus Christ. And if it's not 
fair that Adam's sin is imputed to us, then it's certainly not 
fair that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us. So I would 
be very cautious about calling into question the integrity, 
the justice, and the righteousness of God Most High. So they stood 
in the stead of all mankind, the guilt of the sin was imputed, 
and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending 
from them by ordinary generation. Now the ordinary generation there 
is probably intended to preclude the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord 
Jesus Christ's generation was not ordinary. The Holy Spirit 
came upon Mary. That holy thing that was conceived 
in her womb came as a result of the power of the Holy Spirit. So he was not subject to that 
imputed sin of Ada. And so everyone else, however, 
never has there been another virgin-born child. There has 
not been others who have proceeded by an extraordinary generation. So all of us find ourselves in 
this particular position. All of us find ourselves in this 
particular state. So they stood in the room instead 
of all mankind, and therefore the guilt of the sin was imputed. 
Corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending 
from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin. And then notice, 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. So there's the bad news. I mean, 
that last statement is good news, unless the Lord Jesus set them 
free. But the confession is setting the stage for the redemptive 
work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Similar to what Paul does in 
Romans. In Romans chapter 1 to 3, what does he do? See, spend 
time on talking about how wonderful man is. Look at his accomplishments. 
Look at his artistic prowess. Look at his commerce. Look at 
the way that he has succeeded in this world. No, from chapter 
1 verse 18 to chapter 3 verse 19, the apostle sets forth the 
bad news. Brethren, there's no good news 
without the bad news first. That's why those who proclaim 
the gospel or some sort of a gospel that never deal with sin, never 
bring the law to bear upon the sinner, Never deal with the misery 
and the destructive tendencies involved in sinners. There's 
no appreciation for the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
Paul does not start his gospel presentation with the love of 
God is revealed. He starts with the wrath of God 
is revealed in Romans 1.18 before he gets to the righteousness 
of God revealed in Romans 3.21. So the confession does the same 
thing. When you read paragraph three 
here, it probably does help you to understand the various situations 
that go on not just in the world in terms of wickedness, not just 
in churches in terms of wickedness, not just in terms of families 
with reference to wickedness, but in terms of our own heart. 
That's our condition outside of Christ. And then later on, 
the Confession's going to highlight that there is nevertheless remaining 
corruption in the hearts of God's people. But this is the condition 
of mankind. This is why I don't think it's 
a legit response for Christians to say, I can't believe somebody 
did that. Why not? How could you not believe that? 
Man is in opposition to God. Man despises Yahweh. and is Christ. What we see in Psalm 2 is very 
typical of those fallen in Adam, where the kings and the rulers 
take their counsel together and they raise their fist against 
Yahweh and against his Christ, and they will not have that God 
to rule over them. So as we look at this, notice 
what it says concerning the life of a sinner, being now conceived 
in sin. Turn to Psalm 51. Psalm 51. I think at times Calvinists or 
Reformed people get a bad rap. Oh, you guys are always talking 
about sin and misery and wickedness and all that sort of a thing. 
Well, the biblical authors certainly talk about it a lot as well, 
because the biblical authors understand that if you don't 
know your sin, you'll never see your need for the Redeemer. Notice 
in Psalm 51. Specifically at verse 5, Behold 
I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived 
me. That is not a reference to sexuality, 
or to the marriage bed, or to the conjugal union as being sinful. It is blessed of God, it's ordained 
by God, and it is good in the eye of God. But he says, I, David, 
was brought forth in iniquity. And in sin, my mother conceived 
me. Notice as well the anti-abortion 
nature of this. And in sin, my mother conceived 
a lump of mass, cells. No, she conceived me. The moment 
I came to be, I was me. But the emphasis is on that native 
depravity. It is that connection to Adam. 
Look over at Psalm 58. Psalm 58, the same sort of an 
emphasis. So that when we read in the confession, 
being now conceived in sin, they're not being hyperbolic. They're 
not making this up to sort of make an impact on our psyche. 
Notice in Psalm 58, 3, the wicked are estranged from the womb, 
they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies. Their 
poison is like the poison of a serpent. They're like the deaf 
cobra that stops its ear, which will not heed the voice of charmers, 
charming ever so skillfully." Now brethren, if there's one 
takeaway from this emphasis on the sinfulness of man, you ought 
to appreciate the sovereignty of God. In other words, when 
you go to evangelize, if you're trusting in somebody like this 
to choose for Jesus, you're on a fool's errand. If you think 
that somebody that is described like this, which is all of us 
connected to Adam before we taste of God's grace, if you think 
that person, unaided by the power and the presence of the Holy 
Spirit, is going to raise his hand for Jesus, you've got another 
thing coming. The reason why chapters 8 and 
following are in the Confession is because of what we have, or 
chapters 7 and following are in the Confession. It's because 
of this situation that man is faced with. If it wasn't the 
fact that we were, as described in this paragraph, then why the 
necessity for the life of Jesus? Why the necessity for the death 
of Jesus and the resurrection of Jesus? If we're just a little 
bit off because of our sinful connection to Adam, well, then 
we just need to be a little bit more on. And that's up to us, 
or perhaps is in our wheelhouse to affect. But when you look 
at what we find, again, the wicked are estranged from the womb. 
They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies. Was 
it Gershner or Sproul that called them vipers and diapers? I mean, 
that's a great description. Again, nobody wants to look at 
that smell good little thing that they're holding in their 
arm and think about depravity, sin, rebellion, and wickedness, 
but they are vipers and diapers. I guarantee you, new parent, 
you don't have to teach your child no. You don't have to teach 
your child mine. You don't have to teach your 
child how to be selfish. It's already there. They're already 
good at that sort of thing. You have to teach them to share. 
You have to teach them not to lie. I had this recently. One 
of my children said with reference to his children, man, they lie. And I kind of smiled in my face 
and in my heart because I've known that experientially, in 
large part due to that particular child himself. So it's kind of 
an intriguing thing. Psalm 58 is what man needs to 
hear. Again, people don't like to think 
about wickedness and sin and depravity, but until they do, 
they'll never appreciate righteousness and redemption and grace from 
God Most High. Notice when it goes on to say, 
after being conceived and said, and then by nature children of 
wrath. Turn to Ephesians 2. Ephesians 
chapter 2, where these emphases are brought out Typically in 
redemptive contexts in order to show us the glory of redemption 
through our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice in Ephesians 2 verse 1, 
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 of the power of the air, the spirit who now works 
in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all." Notice, 
the apostle Paul is not saying, you miserable wretches, you horrible 
people. It is, you know, Paul is distant. 
No, he includes himself in the same lot. 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." You see, Paul has no 
qualms with setting forth the problem that man faces. You're 
lifeless, you're helpless, and you're hopeless. Apart from Jesus 
Christ, that's your condition, that's your lot. Notice that 
the confession moving from being conceived in sin, by nature children 
of wrath, then goes on to say the servants of sin. You can 
turn to John 8. John chapter 8, where Jesus underscores 
and highlights this reality with the religious leaders of his 
day. John chapter 8. Look at 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 and have never been in bondage to anyone. 
Is that accurate? No, how is it not accurate? Exodus 
and their present condition under Roman subjugation. These were 
fools. We are Abraham's descendants 
that have never been in bondage to anyone. Again, the specific 
reference is spiritual bondage, but they weren't even sharp enough 
to understand that they were under the Roman Empire at that 
particular time. So how can you say you will be 
made free? Jesus answered them, most assuredly 
I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. And a slave does not abide in 
the house forever, but a son abides forever. Therefore, if 
the son makes you free, you shall be free indeed. Again, in redemptive 
context. Typically, the persons that are 
in redemptive context highlight the sin that the sinner needs 
redeeming from. And this idea of being subjects 
of death as the confession goes on. Romans chapter 6, the wages 
of sin is what? It's death. Death is unnatural. Death is as a result of sin in 
the world. The last enemy to be vanquished 
is death according to 1 Corinthians chapter 15 and verse 28. So after 
highlighting that, it then goes on to give this comprehensive 
statement, and all other miseries, your problems in life, are not 
because of your government, they can be helped by that, but your 
problems in life are not because of your parents, they're not 
because of your children, your problems are always associated 
with sin, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, 
unless the Lord Jesus set them free. So that's the doctrine 
of original sin, but then notice the effects of original sin. You see, we start from the garden 
and then we hone in, according to the confession, in terms of 
the problem of sin that man has, that man faces. Now notice the 
effects of original sin. Paragraph 4 underscores our actual 
sin. In other words, original sin, 
and it's not minimizing that original sin is not sin, but 
it's saying that we're not sinners because we sin. We sin because 
we're sinners. There's a difference there. We're 
not sinners because we sin, we sin because we're sinners. That's 
the connection between paragraphs 3 and 4. because of original 
sin, because of what Adam does, because of our covenantal solidarity 
with Adam, because Paul says in Romans 5 and in 1 Corinthians 
15 that in Adam all die, as a result of that, that's the foundation 
or the principle from which our actual sins proceed. And that's 
paragraph 4. Notice, 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. Now that's going to differ from 
person to person to person. Your sins may not be my sins. 
My sins may not be your sins. I mean there's probably overlap 
as industrious as sinners are. I don't think we're the most 
imaginative lot, so for the most part there's a lot of overlap. 
But there are a whole host of ways for men women, boys and 
girls to sin in this world. Some sin in crack addictions 
and visiting prostitutes and that sort of thing. But some 
sin in self-righteousness and pride and religious arrogance. 
Somehow we think the latter category is somehow better than the previous 
category. And yet, in the ministry of our 
Lord Jesus, he tells us that publicans and prostitutes are 
entering into the kingdom of God before the self-righteous 
Pharisees. So this idea that we can imbibe 
that somehow my sins are better than your sins, it really does 
reflect how sinful we actually are. So from this original corruption, 
whereby we are utterly indisposed. Don't miss that language. Don't 
miss these concepts. Because they're necessary to 
understand what happens when God comes to save us. If we were 
not utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, 
and wholly inclined to all evil, there might be hope for us in 
our free will. There might be a decision down 
there where we would choose for Jesus. But total depravity is 
a reality. And when we come to understand 
that, there is a corollary doctrine that is also very important that 
we understand as well. What's connected to total depravity? Does anybody know? Total inability. It's not just that we are wicked, 
but there's a cannot that makes us or prohibits us from coming 
to the Savior. You're probably still open to 
Romans, the book of Romans. Look at Romans 8, 7. Romans 8, 
7. because the carnal mind is enmity 
against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, total depravity, 
nor indeed can be. Total inability. So a corollary 
of total depravity is total inability. And so one of the reasons why 
the confession brings this out, one of the reasons why the Bible 
brings this out, is to underscore, to highlight, to demonstrate 
the absolute dependence upon the sovereignty of God. It should 
cause us to reflect upon Jesus' encounter with Nicodemus in John 
chapter 3 and say, praise God from whom all blessings flow. 
Praise God that He sends the Spirit to make sinners alive 
such that they can look up to the Lord Jesus, who was raised 
on that cross, to believe in Him and to have everlasting life. And then turn to John 6. John 
6 is another statement concerning total inability. So again, a 
corollary with total depravity. Look at John 6, specifically 
at verse 43. Jesus therefore answered and 
said to them, do not murmur among yourselves. No one can come to 
me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise 
him up at the last day. Why are there Arminians? Why 
are there Pelagians? Why is there anybody out there 
who confesses to be a Bible-believing Christian who thinks that man, 
apart from the Spirit, has it in himself to choose for Jesus? How can that be in the face of 
such powerful statements like we find here? Look at John 6, 
63. Well, verse 60. Therefore many of his disciples, 
when they heard this, said, this is a hard saying, who can understand 
it? I think this puzzles people because the word disciples is 
used, but I would suggest disciples has a broader and a narrow meaning. Broader, those who, at least 
for a time, followed Jesus. Why did they follow Jesus for 
a time in John 6? Because he gave them food. He 
gave them bread to eat. He filled their stomachs. It 
wasn't until he started preaching Reformed theology that they got 
upset and murmured and grumbled and complained. See, if he was 
just a welfare dispenser, if he was just handing out food, 
if he was just operating soup kitchens, nobody would have a 
problem with Jesus. But when he talks about the absolute 
sovereignty of God, when he talks about no man can come to me unless 
the Father who sent me draws him, when he starts talking about 
that, that's what enrages, that's what incenses, and that's what 
upsets people. And that's what happens here 
in verse 68. This is a hard saying. Who can understand it? When Jesus 
knew it 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." Intriguing, 
isn't it? They complain about his teaching 
on divine sovereignty. Notice what he doesn't do. Okay, 
I'm going to be an Arminian or a Pelagian. He rams sovereignty 
back down their throats, brethren. He does it graciously because 
he's Jesus, but he does it nevertheless. He doesn't say, well, I know 
that offends you, so I'm not going to say it. I know that 
offends you, so I'm not going to teach it. I know that offends 
you, so I'm not going to deal with it. That's not Jesus' tact, 
and that needs to be the mindset of everybody who preaches the 
Bible. There are things that make people unhappy when it comes 
to the Scripture. That's too bad. That doesn't 
mean the man of God is off the hook from preaching what it is 
that makes people unhappy. So the doctrine of total depravity 
and the doctrine of total inability, we see that's the mess we find 
ourselves in according to paragraph four. So 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, the things that you and I do on a regular basis 
that by God's grace we confess our sins and we receive forgiveness 
and mercy and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanses us from 
all sin. Now notice finally with reference 
to the doctrine of remaining corruption. Paragraph 5. This 
corruption of nature during this life does remain in those that 
are regenerated. Just the reality. So what does 
this mean? There's no Christian perfectionism. Wesley was wrong. The Wesleyan 
holiness movement is wrong. The idea that we will achieve 
sinless perfection on this side of heaven is wrong. It is an 
unbiblical thought. Romans 7, 13 to 25, and Galatians 
5, 17, is the biblical foundation for the doctrine of remaining 
corruption. Now, it's not the experiential 
or practical foundation for the doctrine of remaining corruption. 
That's the person you look at every morning when you shave 
your face and you look in the mirror. It is experiential in 
those that are regenerate that we still sin, right? I think 
everybody could nod along with that proposition. I don't know 
that any of you have gotten to that point. Well, I haven't seen 
it yet. Good on you. I hope that you make it to the 
end. But for the rest of us, the moment we confess saving 
faith in Jesus Christ, we find this principle remaining in us. It's not as developed and theologically 
sort of defined for us experientially in terms of Romans 7 and Galatians 
5, but as we grow, as we learn, as we live, as we move and have 
our being, we understand 1 John 1, 9, if we confess our sins, 
he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us 
from all unrighteousness. John's speaking to believers 
in that particular passage. And so when it comes to this 
corruption of nature during this life, it does remain in those 
that are regenerated. There's still remaining corruption. And then notice, and although 
it be through Christ pardoned and mortified. That's good news, 
isn't it? He doesn't pay for some of our 
sins. And this is where you need to 
understand very well and very carefully the doctrine of justification 
by faith alone. When Jesus saves us from our 
sins, when he forgives us of our sins, he forgives us of all 
of our sin. So I would suggest that in 1 
John 1.9, if you confess your sins, He is faithful and just 
to forgive us of our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 
I don't take that in terms of the maintenance of your justification. I take that in terms of the happiness 
of your enjoyment of sanctification. In other words, Christ has dealt 
with your sin. There's no, you know, on the 
final day, well, you know, Jesus paid for 95% of the sin, but, 
you know, that last 5% was enough to land you in hell. No, the 
blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanses us from all sin. But 
back to the confession. So although it be through Christ 
pardoned and mortified, yet both itself and the first motions 
thereof are truly and properly sin. So you can't sort of deny 
it. You can't say, well, I'm not 
a sinner because Jesus cleansed me from all my sin. That's an 
antinomian tenet, and that's rampant. I think there's a small 
group of people, but there are people that hold that, that our 
justification is in Jesus, and so is our sanctification in Jesus. And it's an odd sort of a hyper-Calvinistic, 
antinomian combination that almost yields a Wesleyan perfectionism. 
It's a strange sort of mix that goes together in terms of some 
of these people. Now again, there's not huge swaths 
of these kinds of people, but there is this idea that, well, 
whatever we do as a believer, it's not sin. No, the confession 
makes this qualification. that it is sin, and it does affect 
your comfortable dependence upon God, the enjoyment of your father's 
pleasure, and your life of sanctification. And so the qualification concerning 
remaining corruption is that it is still truly and properly 
sin. And so this paragraph does a 
few things for us in this chapter, and we'll close here. In the 
first place, it protects us, or it should protect us, from 
this concept of perfectionism. Again, this idea, this unbiblical 
notion or idea that we can achieve perfectionism or perfection on 
this side of glory. Again, I mentioned Charles Wesley, 
some of the others that were involved in this. Their names 
escape me. Methodism, not all Methodism, but there was this 
sort of bent or this idea of perfectionism on the part of 
some professing Christians. Well, the divines in 1677 and 
then 1689 understood rightly there's no perfectionism. But as well, I hope this paragraph 
protects us from Phariseeism. From Phariseeism. I think that 
at times we can be very hard on our fellows. We can be very 
hard on our brothers and sisters in Jesus. We have a very well 
and appreciated doctrine of remaining corruption as it applies to ourselves. But we don't have that as it 
applies to others. I can't believe sister so-and-so 
did this. Why not? Why can't you believe 
that? Why can't you believe that sister 
so-and-so, even though redeemed by Christ, even though washed 
in the blood of Jesus, has the same remaining corruption that 
you have? Why can't you believe that? So 
this particular paragraph protects us from perfectionism, and it 
should, hopefully, protect us from Pharisaism and this judgmental 
attitude that puts ourselves as the standard and says to others, 
well, if you're not at my place, you're not holy like me, then 
you're just a lazy, horrible slob. That's not the way to live 
the Christian life. But the other thing that I hope 
that it does is that it should encourage us, not encourage us 
to go out and sin, but it does encourage us that there is remaining 
corruption in the lives of God's people. Again, not so that, okay, 
hey, this is built into the system, what a wonderful design, God 
loves to forgive sin, I love to sin, it's a blessed sort of 
a situation. That's not the way we're supposed 
to treat it. But we are to understand that there is in us this principle 
The good that I wish to do, I don't do. The wickedness I don't want 
to do, I find myself doing. There have been attempts by theologians 
to put Romans 7 as Paul prior to conversion. It's a noble and 
a valiant attempt, but I disagree wholeheartedly. It is Paul as 
a believer. It is Paul as a Christian man. 
And it's not some sort of a higher life thing. There's those in 
the higher life, if you don't know what that means, good for 
you. But it's somewhat connected to that perfectionism movement. 
But some in the higher life say, oh, you know, Romans 6 and Romans 
7 is the agony that the apostle faces, and then Romans 8 is his 
triumph and victory as he's ascended that particular ladder. bad reading 
of Romans 6 to 8. That's not a good exegetically 
astute reading of the Apostle Paul and what he's attempting 
to do in Romans 6 to 8. The Paul of Romans 7 is the Paul 
of Romans 8. He's the Paul of Galatians 5, 
and we with him have that principle remaining in us that the confession 
doesn't shy away from, make sure you understand that it's still 
truly and properly sin, but to realize that this is the condition, 
even of regenerate persons, until they land safely in heaven, where 
there is no sin, no unrighteousness, and no wickedness. Well, let's 
pray. Our Father, we thank you for 
this subject matter, because it does so rightly describe not 
only ourselves, but the world in which we live. And we know 
that you made man upright, but he sought out many devices, and 
those devices are obvious. I pray, God, that as we move 
into the confession in terms of covenant, and the mediator, 
and the redemptive benefit, we will see what Christ accomplished. 
in terms of the salvation of guilty and vile and helpless 
sinners. And we rejoice in Your powerful 
grace. It truly is amazing. And we give 
praise to You for having blessed us so richly. And we pray through 
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Any questions or comments 
about anything in chapter 6? Anyone? Yes. You mentioned federal theology. Well, federal is another way 
of saying covenant theology, and basically I'll say come next 
time we have confession study because I will deal with it then. 
The next chapter is of God's covenant. But basically covenant 
theology is what distinguishes Reformed 
Christians from just about every other Christian. And basically, 
the idea is that God works covenantally. Those three theological covenants 
of redemption, of works, of grace, are helpful and necessary to 
understand God's redemptive plan. One man has described it as the 
central architecture architecture of the Bible. So it's kind of 
the skeleton that the flesh and the blood is on. But basically, 
you have representation. So Adam represented posterity. 
Jesus represents his posterity. So they function covenantally 
or federally in the place of their people. So when Adam sins, 
we and Adam die. When Christ does what Christ 
does, in him we live. And so it's the idea that God 
has purpose to deal with humanity based on those two men. So that's 
probably the quickest. But again, in two weeks' time, 
the Lord willing, we'll deal with chapter 7. We may spend 
a couple of sessions there, because covenant is very important when 
it comes to not just understanding the Bible, but it also helps 
us to understand other distinctives that we as Reformed or particular 
Baptists hold to. It's covenant that drives our 
understanding of baptism. It's covenant that drives our 
understanding of worship. It's covenant that drives our 
understanding of Sabbatarianism. It's covenant that is sort of 
the power behind much of our ecclesiology. So there is big 
connection between chapter 7 and what follows. Just like in a 
paedo-baptist scheme, it's covenant that dictates or informs how 
they baptize. So there's some emphases that 
you know, a little bit under the surface that you can see 
and hopefully appreciate from a theological point of view. 
All right. Oh, it's only 9.05.