Hebrews Lesson 90 May 31, 2007
NKJ Isaiah 40:7 The grass withers, the flower fades, Because the breath of the LORD
blows upon it; Surely the people are grass.
We are continuing our study in
Hebrews 7. However, we have had to take some digressions. The reason is because
of the last two verses of Hebrews 7.
Hebrews 7:9-10 are verses that are used in two really tough theological
debates or issues having to do with the origin of the soul, the transmission of
the soul, and the transmission of the sin nature. What is important is that
these ideas are fundamental to understanding the whole concept of justification
- but not just justification, the preceding concept of condemnation and the
transmission of Adam's original sin onto the human race. So the question we
addressed earlier in the first part of this digression had to do with how is
each human being’s soul created after the original creation and how is it
passed on? How does it go from one generation to another? We concluded that the
soul is created individually by God and given to each individual at the time of
birth.
The next question is, if that soul
comes from God and it is created perfect because when God creates He always
creates perfect – perfection. If He creates the soul perfect, then how
does it become corrupt and under condemnation? How does it receive the guilt of
Adam's original sin? So that question is answered in the next study.
This is related to the origin of the
soul. In the origin of the soul we saw that there were two ways theologians
have come to understand how the soul originates and is passed on. The first is
called Traducianism, which means that the soul is
passed on physically through the act of procreation. The other way is
creationism. God immediately creates and imparts each individual’s soul. There
are different views as to when it is imparted. Some would have it at
conception; others would have it as I taught, at the time of birth.
Now related to that is the issue of
the transmission of original sin. So you again have two views. One view is
called seminalism. As you can tell from the name seminal or seed that would be
the one that would be closely related to traducianism because it has to do with
a more physical passing on not only of the soul but also of human sin and the
guilt of sin. The other view is known as federalism. Federalism has to do with
the fact that Adam is the federal head of the human race, the representative of
the human race. Because he was there in our place, in our stead as our
representative, his guilt becomes our guilt. Now both of these are important to
understand - the transmission of the sin nature. But they also become very
important in understanding the dynamics of Christ’s work on the cross. You
always run into these verses like I Corinthians 15:22.
NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall
be made alive.
These concepts of “in Adam” and “in
Christ” are fundamentally based in how we understand these other doctrines. In fact
I have looked through some systematic theologies and they aren’t even
discussed. I have looked at others where they are discussed, but they say that
it is so abstract or difficult to understand.
“Let’s just get to the important and practical stuff of how we get
saved.”
Well, we are trying to understand
how we get saved – understand that God’s plan of salvation is not just
some simple waiving of the magic wand, but just as we have seen in our studies
on Sunday morning and other times that the effect of sin is so devastating and
widespread and so universal that the solution to sin has to also has to be very
complex, widespread and universal. It has to deal with all of these things so
we are just breaking it down in very fundamental categories.
We didn’t get very far last time. We
just introduced the issue talking about Adam’s original sin. This is the
starting point that Adam’s sin, being the first act of willful disobedience to
God by a human being in the Garden of Eden committed by Adam. It could not have
been committed by Eve because he is the designated head. He is the designated
head of the family. He is the head of the marriage. He is the head of the human
race in the garden. So it was his decision that was foundational and
fundamental, not her decision even though hers is the first sin. When we look
in passages like I Timothy 2:8-12 that talk about why women are not to have
authority or to teach men the Scriptures, it ultimately goes back to what
happens in the garden and that Eve was deceived. That is the reason. Paul
doesn’t come from some sort of Greek reason. He doesn’t come from a cultural
reason. He doesn’t argue from the culture of Rome or even the Judaistic culture of the Pharisees. He argues from the
order of creation and what happens at the fall. It just isn’t coincidental. So
we looked at Adam's original sin. How is this passed on, transmitted to every
one of us? How did we receive the guilt of Adam’s sin?
Some people say (and they have said
this many times in history), “That just doesn’t seem fair that God would send
us to hell because Adam messed up.”
There is a word there that I just
used and we have to be very careful with this word. That is the word fair. What
does the word fair mean? I can’t tell you how many times in church and over the
years I have heard people talk about God is fair. In a certain frame of
reference, using the term fair to describe God’s justice had legitimacy, but it
doesn’t have legitimacy in a post-modern non-absolute culture any more. Fair is
now defined as people having everything in equality. It is a very communistic
idea of fairness. It isn’t fair that one person works hard and makes millions
of dollars and another person also works hard, but they aren’t very well
educated and aren’t very well trained and they only make $40,000 to $50,000.
That just doesn’t seem fair. As soon as you use that word fair, what you have
done is you have imported a concept of value and absolute standards.
So when people often say, “That
doesn’t seem fair”; what they are really saying is, “I have a concept of how
God ought to operate.”
What you have just explained doesn’t
fit my concept of egalitarian fairness. So because your concept of God doesn’t
fit my concept of egalitarian fairness and socialistic equality of assets and
everything, then your God is a horrible evil God.
It is better to always use biblical
terminology and talk about the justice of God and the righteousness of God to
avoid getting sucked inadvertently to somebody’s post-modern concept of
fairness and equality. Adam’s original sin is our sin because Adam as our
representative (that is a federalistic idea). He is
designated our head. He is designated our representative so that his decision
is our decision. But he can be our representative because physically he is also
related to us.
The way I am going to teach this and
explain this is to show that both of these concepts are true. Unfortunately in
theology too often people end up saying that it is either this or that. I am
going to list all of my passages to substantiate my position of federal
headship.
Then the guy on the other side comes along and says, “Okay, I
have my passages to support seminalism.”
Well, they are both true because man
is composed of two aspects. He has a material and an immaterial aspect. He has
a physical body. In that physical body there is a transmission of the
corruption of sin that entered into the flesh. That is why we have these very
physical terms used to describe the sin nature - the body of sin in Romans 6,
the flesh throughout the New Testament. These are physical terms. So there is a
corruption that occurs that is in the flesh. So there is a physical
transmission of something. But, there is also a spiritual or a non-material
imputation of something.
We need to take some time and talk
about imputation. To even go into the subject of Adam's original sin you start
to open a can of wombs because you can’t just stop and briefly explain it. You
have to make sure that people understand what Adam's original sin was, how it
is transmitted, how it affects the human race, how it is imputed. Now you are
into the doctrine of imputation. You can’t talk about imputation without
talking about Romans 5:12-21.
Romans 5:12-21 is a mare’s nest of problems theologically and
exegetically. So we have to work our way through that. Somewhere when we come
out at the other end in July or early August and we will have a better
understanding of this whole doctrine of justification by faith because that is
based on imputation and that was the foundation of the reformation. That is
what makes Protestants historically Protestants – historically not in
terms of contemporary culture because contemporary culture is a mess. Most
denominations have fallen into 19th century subjective
liberalism.
So we started with Adam's original
sin. I went through a few points last time and I want to summarize this in 16
points. We didn’t get very far last time.
NKJ Genesis 2:17 "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."
That Hebrew there isn’t “dying you will die”. That doesn’t make sense if
you think about it in English. It doesn’t make sense in Hebrew. You have a qal
imperfect in conjunction with a qal infinitive absolute. It is a Hebrew idiom
meaning that something is certain. It is boldface, italics, underlined in upper
case. It is a statement of absolute certainty that something is going to
immediately happen.
NKJ John 4:24 "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must
worship in spirit and truth."
God is a spirit. So in spiritual death man has no capacity to orient
toward God. So his thinking is automatically oriented and attracted to a
material, physical universe. There is an affinity there. As a result he can’t
understand the things of the spirit of God and many other factors. So point number 3 is that the sin
nature is a corruption of the image of God which distorts the individual’s
orientation to God and supplies a capacity and orientation to rebellion toward
God. In Roman Catholic theology they use the term privation
which means you lose something. Something is no longer there. They view
sin as simply the loss of righteousness or holiness. That is an anemic view of
what happens in the fall because it is the loss of original righteousness. It
is not the acquisition of a nature that is corrupt and corrupting. So there is
not a tangible gaining of that which is evil. That is what the Scripture
teaches. We become corrupt. You don’t just lose something. We also acquire this
orientation to God that is hostile.
NKJ Hebrews 7:9 Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through
Abraham, so to speak,
Levi, not personally, but indirectly through his descendents….
We saw that the Greek there was really “in the manner of speaking.”
NKJ Hebrews 7:10 for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.
We have done the exegesis of this verse. This concept that he was in the
loins of his father when Melchizedek met him is a figure of speech. That is
what the Greek says. But historically this was taken to mean that Levi
personally, actually, truly, genuinely paid tithes to Melchizedek because he is
seminally present - body and soul - in Abraham, three
generation back. That is the only verse, the primary verse that they go
to.
NKJ Romans 5:15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the 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.
That is the free gift of salvation
or justification.
NKJ Romans 5:16 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.
Now how did that judgment on Adam that came from one offense resulting
in condemnation of the whole human race? You see Paul is making this comparison
between the way condemnation goes to the entire human race and the free gift of
justification goes to the entire human race. That is why I come back and say
that both. There is truth in both sides of this because Jesus Christ is our
representative on the cross. What qualifies Him in one sense to be there is
because He is a true human and is genetically linked to the entire human race.
So there is truth on both sides. You have to understand what elements apply to
each side.
NKJ Romans 5:17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through
the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of
righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
That is Adam's original sin.
It is talking about the offense and the judgment.
Now let me pause there a minute. In fact I had the question-discussion
with a pastor about this last week. The question comes up – is physical
death in the animal kingdom a result of man’s sin? Why is that important?
Because some people will come along and say, “Well, there was death before
Adam. It is in the fossils.” If you try to put any kind of life between Genesis
1:1 and 1:2 then you can have (which is what the old Earth gap view did and other
views – progressive evolution view, threshold evolution view some of
these other assimilationist views) will try to get an
old earth position. You will have millions or billions of years before Adam and
then finally Adam pops up on the scene. You just have spiritual death. That is
all that this is talking about – is spiritual death. So you can have
animals die. Now there is a difference between animals and plants because the
Hebrew word for animals’ life is nephesh hajah and
that is not the same to apply to the life of plants. So Adam could eat corn and
he is not killing it. I have read
some people who tried to argue that. “See those plant died when they ate it.
There was death.” Different words! You have to pay attention to the Hebrew
text. Death is a principle.
NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be
made alive.
We will look at that in a minute.
NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.
Death came by Adam. Death there is talking about physical death. It is
an anarthrous noun indicating death as an entity – not just the physical
death of man. This is death as an entity comes into creation as a result Adam’s
sin. Then of course we see the other elements of the curse that apply to the
animals as well.
NKJ Romans 5:17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more
those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will
reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
See he is not talking about animals per se here because why? It is not
the subject. His subject is talking about Christ’s death bringing salvation. So
he is talking about man. But the death that he is probably talking about here
is not physical; it is spiritual because he is talking about the penalty, the
condemnation. Now you have to be careful in some of the creationists’
literature. I have read a lot from guys in ICR, guys in Answers in Genesis and
they don’t get this straight on the difference between physical death and
spiritual death. They want to make physical death the penalty for sin. So you
have to be careful there and don’t get caught by that trap.
NKJ Romans 5:18 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.
That is Adam’s disobedience to God.
So our question is how did this happen?
NKJ Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made
sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.
That is the verse for the federal position talking about Adam as our
representative just as Christ is our representative.
12.
As with many
theological positions, these are often presented as either –or when it
may best be understood as a both-and. There are elements of both that are true.
Some aspects of man are physically and seminally present in Adam. There is a
physical connection that links us to Adam, but is also a physical connection
that connects links us to Christ. If you breakdown that physical connection
then you lose the physical connection to Christ and it messes up salvation.
But, there is also a spiritual dimension, an immaterial dimension that relates
to imputation of sin and imputation of righteousness.
13.
So in other
ways man is represented by both Adam and Christ. So
both are true.
14.
This allows for
Adam’s sin to be legally and actually our sin. It means that a physical
dimension related to sin is passed on genetically to every member of the human
race except for Christ because of the virgin birth.
15.
It also allows
for Christ’s death to be for the entire human race because He is related genetically
to the entire human race. It also allows for Him to represent us on the cross.
So both sides are true. There is physical connection and a federal
representation.
Now what underlies these last 6 or 7
points is the doctrine of imputation. So before we can go any further we have
to make sure we understand the whole doctrine of imputation. These 15 points
that I gave you are simply a summary of where we are going with all of this. We
have to go through the passages related to this. The first thing we have to do
is understand imputations. There are 6 imputations in the Scripture. That is
twice as many as Lewis Sperry Chafer saw.
What is interesting is some of you
heard 7 imputations or you were taught 6 imputations or different kinds of
imputations - real imputations and judicial imputations. That terminology as
far as I can see came out of Lewis Sperry Chafer. Chafer had only three
imputations though. He clearly talked about judicial imputations and real
imputations. The reason I discovered was when I went up to Preston City Bible
Church back some 9 years ago and I received their doctrinal questionnaire. They
asked on the questionnaire to explain the difference between real and judicial
imputations. That terminology is not unfamiliar to most of you and most of you
can probably answer that question. But they had thrown away somewhere between
60 and 100 doctrinal questionnaires returned to them from seminary graduates
who couldn’t even answer that question. And part of that reason is that there is
no other systematic theology other than Lewis Sperry Chafer that makes a
distinction between judicial and real imputations. It is a very important
distinction. But now that most seminaries don’t - or Dallas Seminary doesn’t
specifically require students to read Chaffer’s Systematic Theology – nobody that
graduates from Dallas can answer that question unless they have been under the
teaching of a few people who still understand these important
distinctions.
There are two different kinds of
imputations – real and judicial.
Before we get to that we have to understand what an imputation is.
Definition: Impute means to attribute
something to someone, to ascribe something to someone. It seems to involve the
attribution or reckoning of something intangible or abstract rather than
concrete and substantive.
In other words if I reached into my
pocket and pulled out a $20 bill and gave you a $20 bill,
that is a substantive transaction. But if I were to impute that to your
account, then that would be more along the lines of – let’s say you go
get a mortgage account. You want to buy a house. You don’t have credit. You
don’t have the money in the bank to do that so you are going to ask somebody to
cosign for the loan. So the bank is going to look at their credit and how much
money is in their account. Their credit is imputed to you. Do you receive
anything substantive? No! That is why impute isn’t a good word for the
transmission, creation, and impartation of human life because imputation means
to reckon something to someone. Reckon is an English word that we don’t use a
whole lot unless you are from the Ozarks or maybe Appalachia or East Texas and
you “reckon” something is true. Some of you know what I mean because you have
been to those parts of the country. Reckon means to calculate. It means to be
of the opinion, or it means to regard something in a specified way. This is an
abstract concept. It isn’t something concrete. It’s not the giving of something
concrete to someone else. At life we are given something – a soul. So
that is not an imputation; it is an impartation.
Impute simply means to credit
something, ascribe something or attribute something to someone that they do not
already have.
The word is used in a financial
sense in Philemon 1:17-18 where Paul is talking to Philemon about Onesimus and
says…
NKJ Philemon 1:17 If then you count me as a partner, receive him as you would me.
NKJ Philemon 1:18 But if he has wronged you or owes anything, put that
on my account.
“I will pay his debt.”
So it is used there as an accounting
term which is its origin. There are two different Greek words used for imputing
in the New Testament.
It is from the Greek word ellogeo
meaning to charge with a financial obligation or to charge something to the
account of someone. It is used in Romans 5:13, the passage context we read
earlier.
The other word is logizomai.
Logizomai is a word used 41 times in the New Testament. It
has to do with thinking. It is from the root noun logos. It has to do with reasoning or
logic. It has to do with counting. It was an accounting term as well - to count
something up mentally, to occupy yourself with reckonings or calculations or to
determine by a mathematical process, to reckon or calculate, to give careful
thought to a matter, to think, to consider, or to ponder. It has the ideal of
thinking about somebody in a certain way. So when God imputes righteousness to
you, He thinks of you now as righteous. That is what that means. You have been
credited with that in an accounting term so that you now have a positive
balance on the ledger instead of a negative balance. The problem is your
account is still empty. God is looking at Christ’s bank account. That is enough
to give you that positive balance. That is where we get this idea of imputation.
So we have two judicial imputations.
Now a judicial imputation takes
place when there is no affinity or attraction between what is imputed and the
person to whom it is imputed. What is being imputed is not antecedently
possessed by the person who is receiving the imputation. For example,
when our personal sins are imputed to Christ on the cross,
that is a judicial imputation because Christ knew no sin. He had never
sinned. He had not committed any personal sins. He did not receive a sin nature
from Adam. He didn’t receive the imputation of any sin until that time period
on the cross when He was judicially judged for our sins. We see this in II
Corinthians 5:21.
NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him.
Jesus does not become sin for us in
the same way that you and I become sinful because it is not a decision on His
part. He just receives the punishment. He is given the judicial punishment for
the sin that we have committed. That is the first type of judicial
imputation.
The second type of judicial
imputation is the imputation of Christ’s perfect righteousness to us. We have
the righteousness and justice of God in heaven looking at us in our negative
righteousness.
NKJ Isaiah 64:6 But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like
filthy rags; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have
taken us away.
At the cross Christ is perfectly
righteous; but our unrighteousness, our sin is imputed to Him. When we trust
Christ, His perfect righteousness is then imputed to us. Now we still have our
lousy righteousness. You are still immoral. You still commit sin. You are still
a sinner. You aren’t any better 5 minutes after you were saved than you were 5
minutes before you were saved. But legally, forensically you are now righteous
because you have been covered with the righteousness of Christ. That is that
picture in Zechariah 3 when Satan comes and judges Joshua the High Priest
because he is unworthy to be high priest and so God has him strip off his
clothes and He clothes him with a white robe. That is that picture of putting
on perfect righteousness.
So we are saved not because of
anything we have ever done, but because we possess that perfect righteousness
of Christ. That is what makes the difference between a Catholic and a Protestant.
Catholics think that justification is a process like sanctification. The only
way you can know if you are justified is if you are doing enough good deeds to
receive enough merit from the treasury of Christ so that when you die you don’t
end up in purgatory. But you can end up in heaven. The question is – how
much is enough?
“Well, we don’t know.”
So you can never know if you are
saved. It is a process. It sounds like lordship salvation, doesn’t it? Gee!
So we are declared righteous. That
is called forensic justification.
That is what Luther stood his ground
on at the Council of Worms when he said, “Here I stand. I can do no
other.”
That was it. That was the benchmark
of the Protestant Reformation.
So we have two judicial imputations
– personal sins to Christ on the cross and perfect righteousness of
Christ to the believer at the point of salvation.
But, there are four real
imputations. This has to do with that which is imputed is in agreement, has
affinity with or is in harmony with the target of the imputation.
We are about out of time. I will cover
them very briefly.
The first is Adam's original sin
transmitted to the sin nature. Adam's original sin is imputed to the physically
transmitted corrupt nature at the point of birth. That renders us guilty of
Adam's original sin. You see the sin nature is transmitted physically. That is
seminalism. Adam's original sin is imputed to us. That is federalism.
Second eternal life is imputed to
the human spirit, to the soul, at the instant of faith alone in Christ alone.
At that instant we receive God’s life and we have eternal life.
Third our blessings in time are
imputed to us because of our perfect righteousness. Because we possess perfect
righteousness, God is free to bless us. So, blessings in time are imputed to
perfect righteousness.
Fourth blessings in eternity are
ours also because we possess that perfect righteousness, not ever because of
what we do. It is not because you pray - you read your Bible, memorize
Scripture, or witness to 20 people every week. That is not why God blesses you.
You do those things as a result of spiritual growth. As a result of spiritual
growth God will distribute blessings He has already decided to give you. If you
don’t grow, He is not going to distribute the blessings because you don’t have
the capacity to handle the blessing. So don’t get in the trap of thinking God
blessed me this week because I went to church or I studied my Bible. That is
not the cause-effect. That is works. Okay?
That takes us through our basic
introduction. Now when I come back from Israel we will go a few steps further
in this and take some time in Romans 5 to sort of parse that out and see how
federalism and seminalism work together.
Let’s bow our heads in closing prayer.