Unbelief Identified as Man’s Initial Sin

When we consider this sin and its commission comprehensively, it is evidently a fusion of all sins. This is not merely so because whoever transgresses in one commandment is guilty of all—every sin being an act of apostasy towards the lawgiver and a transgression of the law—but also because many specific sins are combined in this sin. If someone were to ask, “Which was the first sin?”, I respond that a particular sin may not have been first chronologically, but first in order of importance. Also, before the external deed manifested itself, a fusion of various sins had already occurred. Thus the initial sin is neither to be found in the external act, in the emotions, affections, and inclinations, nor in the will. In a perfect nature will and emotions are subject to the intellect, as they do not precede the intellect in their function but are a consequence of the same.

The initial sin must be sought in the intellect, which by deceptive reasoning was prompted to conclude that they would not die and that there was an inherent power in that tree to make them wise, a wisdom which they were permitted to desire without being guilty of sin. This tree bore the name of knowledge, which was desirable to them. It also bore the name good and evil, even though it was hidden from them as to what was comprehended in the word evil. The serpent makes use of this name as if great matters were concealed in these words. As the intellect focused on both the desirability of becoming wise, as well as the tree by which either as a means or as a cause this wisdom could be transmitted to them, the intense and lively awareness of the prohibition not to eat and the threat of death tended to diminish. The faculty of judgment, suggesting that it would be desirable to eat from this tree, aroused the inclination to acquire wisdom in this manner. Added to this was the fact that “… the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes” (Gen 3:6).

The deception of the intellect was not in consequence of the nature of the tree and its fruit, but due to the words of the serpent and the words of the woman to Adam. Thus, the issue at hand—namely, not to die, but to gain in wisdom by eating of this tree—was confirmed by faith, this being the act whereby one holds the words of someone else for truth. Therefore the first sin was faith in the serpent, believing that they would not die but instead gain wisdom. This act implied a disbelieving of God who had threatened death upon eating from this tree. Thus Eve by virtue of unbelief became disobedient, reached out, and ate. In doing so she believed the serpent and was thus deceived and beguiled, this sin being denominated as such in 1 Tim 2:14 and 2 Cor 11:3. In like manner she beguiled Adam. Therefore, the first sin was not pride, that is, to be equal with God, also not rebellion, disobedience, or an unwarranted appetite, but unbelief.

Adam’s Fall not due to Imperfection in His Nature

Question: How was it possible that a perfect person, who was entirely free from the principle of sin, could fall into sin?

Answer: Tell me first of all how it was possible that the angels, who had a higher degree of perfection, could have sinned? If you respond by saying that you know they have sinned, but not how they sinned, you have already answered your own question concerning Adam. The fact that Adam sinned is a certainty. That he was free from the least innate inclination towards sin is also certain, for 1) if that were not true, God would be designated as the author of sin; 2) such an innate inclination towards sin is inconsistent with being created perfectly and in the image of God; and 3) such an inclination is contrary to the tenth commandment.

Secondly, God created man as a rational creature, gifting him with intellect and a free will, thus enabling him to govern his actions and refrain from yielding to external temptations and guile. Instead, man permitted himself to be deceived in the manner stated earlier. Since we are now subject to it, let us be more concerned how we may be delivered from sin rather than how we became involved in it.

The fact that God from eternity foreknew the fall, decreeing that He would permit it to occur, is not only confirmed by the doctrines of His omniscience and decrees (chapter 5), but also by the fact that God from eternity has ordained a Redeemer for man, to deliver him from sin: the Lord Jesus Christ whom Peter calls the Lamb, “who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world” (1 Pet 1:20).

Question: Did Adam in sinning act independently from God, and did the fall therefore occur apart from the providence of God?

Answer: My answer is an emphatic “No.” We have dealt comprehensively with this matter in chapter 11. There we have shown that no creature can be independent from God, neither in its existence nor in its actions. We also confirmed that the cooperation of God controls man and activates him relative to each specific deed, while supporting and sustaining him in this. Thus God, as far as natural motion is concerned, energizes man’s intellect, will, and activities in a manner agreeable with his human nature, causing him to act by his free will. This will, though sustained, controlled, and governed by virtue of God’s cooperation, is itself the initiator and cause of his deeds. In sinning, man abuses all this, by not engaging himself in conformity to the law appointed him. Such was the case with Adam. God had given him sufficient strength to resist all temptation, but God did not prevent him from sinning. He could have done the latter, but was not obligated to do so. God did not withdraw this given strength from Adam, but permitted man to be active in the exercise of his freewill. Consequently the blame is man’s and not God’s. He who wishes to penetrate this matter with his puny, darkened understanding, summoning God before the bar of his intellect and judgment, to declare Him guilty and man innocent (which in all probability such a person would desire to do), attributing to man an innate inclination towards sin, or declaring him independent from God—such a person shall be rewarded for such audacity with great darkness and will fall victim to foolish and sinful notions about God. Therefore, I wish to advise you to acquiesce in what we have stated and to consider that the Lord’s thoughts and ways are not as ours. God’s ways are holy whether we understand them or not.

The Covenant of Works and its Obligations After the Fall

By sinning, man has broken that glorious covenant and has forfeited the promise. It is therefore now impossible for the law to justify him and to grant him the right to, and possession of, eternal life, “in that it was weak through the flesh …” (Rom 8:3).

Nevertheless this covenant remains in full force, obligating the entire human race (that is, all who have not been translated into the covenant of grace) to obedience and subjecting men to punishment, since the fulfillment of the promise continues to be contingent upon obedience. “This do, and thou shalt live.” Although man cannot obtain the promise since he does not fulfil the condition, the promise nevertheless remains part and parcel of this covenant.

First, this is evident by the fact that God by His very character obligates man to obedience, also that the creature is naturally obligated to obey, even if there were no covenant. God, however, created man in the covenant relationship, having embedded the knowledge and approbation of this covenant in his nature so that from the very first moment of his existence he never was outside of this covenant. Therefore the human nature remains under the original obligation towards this covenant.

Secondly, also among men, covenants remain in force even after the first transgression. A succession of kings and authorities will not merely recall the initial transgression of a covenant by others, but will also bring out how frequently the existing covenant has been transgressed. A woman, having committed adultery, remains in covenant with her husband and is not released from it. As often as she involves herself with someone else after the first commission of sin, so often she commits adultery and each time again breaks the covenant. This clearly proves that transgression of a covenant does not release the transgressor from the covenant relationship. Thus also the covenant of works remained in force after the transgression.

Thirdly, it is naturally understood by all men, and Scripture teaches likewise, that the law, the promise, the threatenings, and the acceptance of the covenant remain in force; therefore the covenant of works also remains in force. Every man knows that there is a God and is conscious of the law written in his heart. He judges this law to be good and concurs with his obligation to be obedient to it. He acknowledges that he shall be rewarded if he obeys and be punished if he disobeys, which is confirmed in Rom 2:14-15 and Rom 1:32. Since such a conditional law is in force, a covenant also is and remains in force. The sinner therefore continues to be obligated to this covenant, since he is a debtor to the entire law (Gal 5:3). “The law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth” (Rom 7:1). Therefore, as often as he transgresses the law, so often he transgresses the covenant.

However, when God permits man to exit this covenant of works and enter into the covenant of grace, he is no longer under obligation to that covenant. “For ye are not under the law, but under grace” (Rom 6:14). “For if the (first) husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband” (Rom 7:2). To the believer the law is no longer a condition of the covenant of works, but a most desirable rule of life. Thus, when he sins, he no longer breaks the covenant of works, as he is no longer obligated toward it. Rather, he sins against this most desirable rule of life which has been given to him in the covenant of grace. Such sin is not committed by the new man within, but by the flesh which remains in him. And although these sins themselves are worthy of punishment, believers shall not be subjected to punishment since the Surety has taken their sins upon Himself and has fully paid their debt.

One might think that since at the very first sin the promises were cancelled and the punishment was meted out, the covenant of works can therefore no longer be in force. Our reply is as follows:

(1) Both promises and threatenings are inherent in the covenant, and it continues to retain them. Therefore, the covenant remains in force, since in reality the promises and the threatenings already constituted the covenant.

(2) Neither the promises nor the threatenings, considered independently, constitute the essential nature of the covenant, but rather the interdependent relationship of the covenant. And since this remains in force, the covenant remains in force.

(3) There are also degrees as far as reward and punishment are concerned. This already having been conceded, the covenant can remain in force.

(4) Man continues to be under obligation to delight himself in God, to believe in Him, to view Him as his highest good, and to seek Him in the way of obedience. No one wishing to be called a Christian would dare to deny this. Therefore, the covenant which obligates man to all this also remains in force.

The Misery of Man due to his Breach of Covenant

Numerous sinful and painful miseries have resulted from Adam and Eve’s breaking of this covenant.

First, man was immediately deprived of the image of God, the reformation of which begins in regeneration (Col 3:10; Eph 4:24). These texts confirm that this image was lost, which immediately manifested itself by the consciousness of shame.

Secondly, there was consciousness of shame. Due to the shame of their bodily nakedness, they did not dare to come nakedly into the presence of God (Gen 3:7,10). They were also ashamed of themselves and in each others presence. This is not indicative of impure lusts in these married persons, but their consciences made them aware that their members were too shameful to be seen. They therefore attempted to conceal them, finding no better and more appropriate means than the leaves of fig trees. These leaves probably were not as small as here and in Spain, but lengthwise reached from a man’s chin to his knees. Similar size leaves still grow today in Ceylon. These they attached to each other as best as they could, and girded themselves with them.

Thirdly, added to this was a terrified conscience. The Lord revealed Himself in the cool¹ of the day which arose at sunrise to moderate the heat—which especially occurs in many countries where it is hot. It is possible that at that time the Lord normally revealed Himself to Adam in a special manner, something with which he already was experientially acquainted. It is also possible that something extraordinary occurred, whereby Adam became aware of the Lord’s arrival. At any rate, Adam and Eve were now conscious of having committed sin; hence they also feared the punishment of sin. The presence of God, which previously rendered them such joy, now caused them to fear, so that they fled, hiding themselves among the nearest trees (Gen 3:8).

Fourthly, Adam manifested a sinful self-love by seeking to excuse himself, as well as his lovelessness by accusing his wife, Eve (Gen 3:12). Job spoke of this. “If I covered my transgressions as Adam, by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom” (Job 31:33). Eve also excused herself by stating that she had merely been deceived, blaming the serpent.

Fifthly, this was followed by 1) the sentencing of the serpent, which had been misused. “Thou art cursed above all cattle,” etc. (Gen 3:15), and 2) the sentencing of Satan who was the cause of the temptation: the seed of the woman “shall bruise thy head” (Gen 3:15). This was accomplished by Christ (Heb 2:14).

Sixthly, after the Lord had announced the covenant of grace to Adam and Eve by testifying of the seed of the woman (rather than of the man)—which is Christ, who would come to “destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8), who is “the fruit of (Mary’s) womb” (Luke 1:42) and who was “… made of a woman” (Gal 4:4)—it was the Lord’s will that man would always remain conscious of sin. Thus He announced to him the chastisement of miseries which would remain upon him and which for the unconverted would be punishment resulting in death.

(1) The special plagues with which particularly the female sex would be afflicted are: “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen 3:16).

(2) The special punishments which God imposed upon the male sex are as follows: “Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread” (Gen 3:17-19).

(3) The common punishment to which both the man and the woman would be subject was death. “For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Gen 3:19).

One might think: Not one word is mentioned here of eternal damnation; it appears that this was neither threatened nor merited. I reply: first, in the above we have shown that eternal damnation was threatened upon sin. We will subsequently show how it has been merited by all sins, and that upon death it shall be the portion of the unconverted. Secondly, the reason eternal damnation is not mentioned here is because the covenant of grace by virtue of the seed of the woman, which is Christ, was announced to Adam and Eve (vs. 15) prior to the announcements of the sorrows to which they would be subject (vss. 16-19). Adam and Eve therefore had already been delivered from condemnation, and the sorrows imposed upon them were as chastisements.

Objection: There is no proof that Adam and Eve were saved by Christ. The very opposite appears to be true in Heb 11:4, where Abel is presented as the first believer, as well as in Matt 23:35 where he is presented as the first righteous man.

Answer: First, Abel is indeed mentioned in these texts, but not as the first righteous man, neither as the first believer. Thus, Adam is no more excluded there than when Abraham is called the father of the faithful—as if that were to exclude all believers before him. Secondly, in these texts Abel is placed in contrast to the ungodly, since there is reference to the superiority of his sacrifice over Cain’s and he was the first martyr. Thirdly, that Adam believed in the promised seed is proven

(1) by virtue of the established covenant which could not exist without there being a partaker of this covenant. If Adam had not been a partaker of this covenant, it would have been without a partaker until Abel and Seth, who was born 130 years after Adam’s creation. When God established a covenant with Abraham, he was himself included. Would God establish the covenant of grace, referring to the seed of the woman which would bruise the head of the serpent, and not include Adam and Eve in this covenant? Would this covenant then not be efficacious for so many years in the absence of partakers of this covenant? Would God have made announcement to Adam and Eve concerning the covenant of grace, and then have excluded them from it?

(2) It is evident from the enmity between man and the serpent, for wherever there is enmity with the devil there is peace with God.

(3) Eve immediately focused upon the promise after she bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten a man from the Lord” (Gen 4:1).

(4) Add to this the godly upbringing and faithful instruction of Adam’s children, which was the means whereby Abel received faith.

The Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace

Having established the covenant of grace with Adam and Eve, and having imposed upon them as chastisements the various trials and tribulations of this life as well as temporal death, the Lord clothed them with better garments than those made of fig leaves, namely, coats of skins. Prior to the fall Adam killed no animals. Not meat, but herb-bearing seed and the fruit of a tree yielding seed was given to him for meat. I cannot tell you where these skins came from. We do not read that they came from sacrificed animals, and it is of no profit to know this. It was God who made coats of skins for them, clothing them in order to cover and warm them. In doing so, however, He sharply rebuked them concerning the breach of the covenant of works and their objective in transgressing it, by saying, “Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil” (Gen 3:22).

Whereas the covenant of works had been broken and rendered impotent so that felicity was no longer to be obtained by it, and the covenant of grace had replaced this covenant for believers, God did not want Adam to yearn for the covenant of works or its sacrament, the tree of life, as this covenant was no longer efficacious. Rather, the Lord wanted them to turn from this covenant, putting all their hope and seeking all their comfort in the promised seed of the woman. “Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life … lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” (Gen 3:23-24,22).

We have already shown that there was no efficacy in the tree of life to preserve life eternally. It no longer served a function as a sacrament of the covenant of works since the promise no longer could be obtained by way of this broken covenant. Why then was the way to the tree of life barred so that Adam would not approach it to eat of it? It is possible that the devil had given Eve a wrong impression concerning this tree of life, or that afterwards the devil might convince man that if he were to eat of the tree of life, he would not die—doing all of this to draw man away from the covenant of grace and to direct him by renewal to the covenant of works as the way in which felicity was to be sought. It is also possible that Adam himself would have such inclinations by having a wrong objective and impression in view. From this God wished to keep him and therefore not only forbade him to eat of this tree, but also prevented him from coming to this tree.

Thus the covenant of works has been broken and it would be to the advantage of God’s children to look away from this covenant. How much yearning there still is for the covenant of works! This becomes evident both in the manifestation of unbelief when falling into sin—as if sin would nullify all the promises and as if one must find something within himself before coming to Christ—and by secretly resting in our own works, being more encouraged when things go reasonably well. Therefore one must make Christ in the covenant of grace the foundation for all rest and comfort and seek holiness from Him as a principal element of salvation.

Footnotes

1. In Dutch: “de wind des daags,” that is, the breeze of the day. ↩