Is Man Born Good, Bad, Or Neutral (Original Sin)
No one calls a newborn depraved at a baby shower. But Scripture traces every grave ever dug back to one man, one tree, and one bite.
Are we born good, bad, or somewhere in between? Few doctrines are more contested — or less liked — than original sin. In this exposition of Romans 5:12–19, Dr. Toby Holt argues that Scripture is not ambiguous here; it is as clear on this doctrine as on any it teaches. The problem, he says, is not that God has been unclear, but that we are not inclined to like what He says.
Dr. Holt begins with the three answers Christians have historically given about a newborn's moral condition: born righteous, born morally neutral — a clean slate — or born already bent toward sin, the answer David gives when he confesses, “in sin my mother conceived me” (Psalm 51:5, NKJV). He then retells the ancient collision between Augustine and Pelagius: Pelagius insisted Adam merely left the race a bad example, while Augustine taught that Adam's sin changed human nature itself, and that changed nature passed to every one of his descendants.
From there the sermon walks Paul's argument. Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin; Adam stood in the garden as our federal head, our covenant representative, so that his fall — like a man plunging from a cliff before his children were ever born — carried his whole posterity down with him. Then Dr. Holt presses the great irony: those who protest the imputation of Adam's guilt rarely protest the imputation of Christ's righteousness, yet the entire gospel stands on the same principle. One man's disobedience made many sinners; one Man's obedience makes many righteous.
Listeners will come away understanding why the condition of sin precedes the act of sinning, why getting the fall wrong distorts everything downstream in the doctrine of salvation, and why, on the Day of Judgment, imputation will be either the most comforting word in the world or the most condemning. Every person stands marked by one of two names — Adam or Christ.
Select a chapter to play the audio from that moment, or “Read” to jump to that part of the transcript below.
Questions This Sermon Answers
Original sin is the biblical teaching that Adam's first sin did not occur in a vacuum: it became the root of all other sins, and its consequences extend to every man, woman, and child descended from him. Human beings are therefore not born innocent or morally neutral but with a fallen nature already inclined toward sin — affected, as Dr. Holt puts it, from the ground up. The doctrine rests on passages like Romans 5:12–19 and Psalm 51:5, where David confesses he was sinful from conception. Original sin does not mean people are as evil as they could possibly be; it means sin has corrupted human nature itself, so that the condition of sin precedes every act of sinning.
Romans 5:12 reads, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (NKJV). Paul is teaching that Adam's sin in the garden introduced both sin and death into human experience, and that its consequences were not confined to Adam. Death spread to the whole race because in Adam all sinned — he acted as humanity's representative, so his guilt and its penalty passed to his descendants. The verse launches Paul's extended comparison between Adam and Christ that runs through Romans 5:12–19: as condemnation came through one man, justification comes through another.
Christians have historically given three answers: children are born righteous and only become sinners later; children are born as blank slates, morally neutral until they choose; or children come into the world already predisposed toward sin. Scripture supports the third. David says in Psalm 51:5 that he was brought forth in iniquity and conceived in sin, and Paul teaches in Romans 5 that death — sin's penalty — reigns over all people from birth. Dr. Holt observes that even infants display self-will and anger long before anyone teaches them, and that children die, which Scripture treats as the wage of sin. We are not sinners because we sin; we sin because we are born sinners.
In the late fourth and early fifth centuries, Pelagius rejected Augustine's teaching that Adam's fall corrupted human nature. Pelagius held that Adam's sin harmed Adam alone and merely left the rest of humanity a bad example to imitate. Augustine answered that when Adam ate from the forbidden tree, his nature itself changed — his spiritual DNA, as Dr. Holt puts it — and that changed nature passed to all his descendants, leaving every person subject to sin and death. The church sided with Augustine, and the Reformed tradition follows him: Romans 5:19 says many were “made sinners” by one man's disobedience — the language of nature and standing, not of example.
Imputation is the crediting or reckoning of one person's act — its guilt or its righteousness — to another's account. Romans 5 teaches a double imputation: Adam's sin was imputed to all whom he represented, bringing condemnation and death, and Christ's obedience is imputed to all who believe, bringing justification and life. Dr. Holt calls imputation one of the two most important terms in Christianity, alongside propitiation, because the gospel itself depends on it: when believers stand before God, they are clothed in a righteousness belonging to someone else — the perfect obedience of Jesus Christ, credited to them through faith.
Federal headship — Reformed theologians call the concept federalism — is the teaching that Adam acted in the Garden of Eden as the appointed representative of the entire human race. His obedience or disobedience under the covenant of works would determine not just his own destiny but that of all his posterity, the way a man's fall from a cliff would end the future of every descendant he might have had. When Adam sinned, the consequences — guilt, corruption, and death — were therefore reckoned to all he represented. The same representative principle underlies salvation: Christ is the federal head of His people, and His obedience is counted as theirs.
Many object, as Pelagius did, that no one should be held responsible for what someone else did. Dr. Holt answers with the irony at the heart of Romans 5: the very people who resent Adam's imputed guilt gladly receive Christ's imputed righteousness — yet both operate on the same representative principle. The entire Christian faith rests on standing before God marked by the work of someone other than ourselves. If one Man's obedience can save us — and the gospel says it does — then one man's disobedience can condemn us. Rejecting the first imputation while claiming the second is not an option Paul leaves open; and honest self-examination confirms we would have done no better than Adam.
The Westminster Shorter Catechism (Q. 16) teaches that the covenant was made with Adam not only for himself but for his posterity, so that all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him and fell with him in his first transgression. The Westminster Confession of Faith (chapter 6) adds that the guilt of this first sin was imputed to Adam's descendants and a corrupted nature conveyed to them, from which all actual sins proceed. This is precisely the federal, imputational reading of Romans 5:12–19 that Dr. Holt preaches: original sin is both inherited guilt and inherited corruption, and it leaves every person in need of a Savior.
John Murray, longtime professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary, wrote a focused study titled The Imputation of Adam's Sin and treated Romans 5:12–19 at length in his commentary on Romans. Murray defends the same reading Dr. Holt preaches here: the union between Adam and his posterity is representative, so that Adam's one trespass is directly imputed to those he headed — a conclusion Murray grounds in Paul's repeated insistence that condemnation came through the one man. Far from being an embarrassment, Murray argued, this reading safeguards the gospel, since Paul's parallel makes the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers the gracious mirror of Adam's imputed sin.
Paul calls Adam “a type of Him who was to come” (Romans 5:14, NKJV) — a pattern pointing forward to Christ. Both men acted as covenant representatives whose one decisive act determined the destiny of all their people, but the parallel runs in reverse. Adam faced a single temptation in a garden of plenty and fell; Christ endured repeated temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4) and obeyed perfectly, all the way to the cross. So where Adam's offense brought judgment and condemnation to all he represented, Christ's righteous act brings justification of life to all who are His (Romans 5:18–19). Every person, Dr. Holt concludes, stands related to God through one of these two men — the question is which one.
1. The Condition of Sin Precedes the Action of Sinning
Dr. Holt opens with the question every parent has silently answered while looking into a crib: is this child good, neutral, or fallen? Scripture's answer is the third. Paul's language in Romans 5:19 — many were “made sinners” by one man's disobedience — speaks to ontology, to what human beings are by nature, not merely to a bad example they later imitate. We do not become sinners the first time we sin; we sin because we are already sinners. David confesses as much in Psalm 51:5, tracing his sin back to conception. Dr. Holt drives the point home with an illustration he borrows from the preacher Paul Washer: an infant denied a glittering watch will rage to seize it, and if that infant had the strength of a grown man, the tantrum would turn violent. That, in miniature, is what Reformed theology means by original sin and total depravity — not that every person is as evil as possible, but that sin has affected human nature from the ground up, from conception forward. Get this wrong, Dr. Holt warns, and nearly every other part of the doctrine of salvation goes wrong with it.
2. Adam Was Our Federal Head in the Garden
Reformed theology calls it federalism: Adam stood in Eden as the covenant representative of the whole human race. His right standing with God rested on what theologians call the covenant of works — obedience to the single command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Dr. Holt pictures a young man standing at a cliff's edge: if he falls, every child and grandchild he might ever have had falls with him, their future bound up in his one step. So it was with Adam. When he ate, death entered, and death spread to all men — which is why every person sins, why every person dies, and why creation itself now groans under earthquakes, pandemics, and decay. The Westminster Standards confess this same federal reading of Romans 5: the covenant was made with Adam not for himself only but for his posterity. One sin threw the entire created realm into chaos — teaching two things at once: sin is that serious, and God is that holy.
3. Imputation Cuts Both Ways — and the Gospel Depends on It
Imputation — the crediting of one man's act to another's account — is, Dr. Holt argues, one of the two most important words in all of Christianity, alongside propitiation. Adam's legacy, imputed to his race, is summed up in a single word: death. But here is the irony the sermon presses home: people who resent being held accountable for Adam's sin rarely object to being saved by Christ's obedience — yet both rest on exactly the same representative principle. The entire Christian faith is built on the claim that one Man's sacrifice saves, that through faith His righteousness is granted to believers, that when God's children stand before Him they wear a robe of righteousness that is not their own. Reformed theology calls it an alien righteousness. To reject imputation in Adam's case is to saw off the branch the gospel sits on. Paul will not allow the split: the judgment from one offense brought condemnation, but the free gift brings justification — one man's sin condemns, and one Man's righteousness saves.
4. Christ Is the Second Adam Who Obeyed Where the First Adam Fell
Paul calls Adam “a type of Him who was to come” (Romans 5:14, NKJV). Both Adams acted as covenant heads whose one decisive act determined the destiny of all their people — but the parallel runs in reverse. The first Adam faced a single temptation in a garden of abundance and fell almost at once. The last Adam endured repeated temptation from the same serpent in a barren wilderness (Matthew 4) and did not fall. Where Adam's offense brought judgment resulting in condemnation for all he represented, Christ's one righteous act brings the free gift resulting in justification of life (Romans 5:18). Dr. Holt closes with the choice the passage forces: every human being is inexorably tied to one of two men, and spiritually speaking every forehead is already marked with one of two names — Adam or Christ. On the Day of Judgment, imputation will be either the most comforting word in the world or the most condemning. The sermon ends where Paul's argument lands: turn to Christ and live.
About The Speaker: Dr. Toby Holt serves as the third President of New Geneva Theological Seminary (Colorado Springs, CO), founded 1993. An expository preacher with over 1.9 million sermon downloads on SermonAudio.com, Dr. Holt brings over 17 years of pastoral experience to his verse-by-verse Bible teaching. New Geneva offers fully online, Westminster Confessional theological education — M.Div., Th.M., D.Min., and other degrees.
Summary. Preaching from Romans 5:12–19, Dr. Toby Holt asks whether human beings come into the world good, morally neutral, or already fallen, and shows that Scripture answers plainly with the doctrine of original sin. He traces the historic dispute between Augustine and Pelagius, demonstrating that Adam's sin did more than set a bad example — it changed human nature and brought death to all his descendants. Dr. Holt explains Adam's role as our federal head under the covenant of works and unfolds the doctrine of imputation: the same representative principle by which Adam's guilt condemns us is the principle by which Christ's righteousness saves all who believe. As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous — and every person finally stands before God marked either by Adam or by Christ.
Original Sin: Good, Bad, or Neutral
Well, here's the thing. I don't think that Scripture has been unclear on this in the least. As we'll see in a few moments, I think Scripture is as clear on this doctrine as it is on any doctrine of which it speaks. The problem we have is that we're not inclined to like what it says. You've probably heard of the term Original Sin, but what does it mean? Do we come into this world with a sinful nature, or are we born innocent? The Apostle Paul taught on this topic repeatedly. Join us as we study his words from Romans 5.
Upon an infant's birth, upon an individual's birth, a child's birth, a baby's birth, would you say that the individual, the baby, the child comes into this world good, neutral, or depraved? In other do babies and children come into this world with any sort of moral condition previously affixed, previously applied? And if so, what is that condition? Well, it may or may not surprise you to know that this is a topic with a lot of dispute.
In the history of the church, this has been a topic that there's been a great deal of contention over from the first few councils on through. Not everyone has agreed to what the answer to that question is. See, when Christians or theologians look at this, when they consider a child, maybe a child that's been born or maybe even a child in the womb, when they consider a small child, many have concluded that such a child, as they look at it, such a child is wondrous and innocent and perfect and righteous and all of these things right from get-go.
That initially the child's perfect. It's after the fact that the child does something wrong and thereafter becomes a sinner. That's one school of thought. Others would say, well, a child is not necessarily perfect when a child is born. It's not necessarily righteous when a child is born, but it's definitely not wicked either. Definitely not depraved. What some folks would say is that such a child, when a child comes into this world, is born in a state of moral neutrality, a free agent, a clean slate.
And again, it's only after the fact, through the child's own volition later on, that the child may sin and become a sinner. Now, the third school of thought echoes what David said. Psalm 51, in sin my mother conceived me. The third school of thought is this, that children come into this world already predisposed towards sin. In a sense, every child comes into this world already tainted and marked and affected with a sinful DNA, a sinful nature.
Now, the fact that not everyone agrees, whether perhaps even in this room, not everyone necessarily agrees on these things. And the fact that certainly across all the churches and all the church history that not everyone has seen eye to eye on this, that might leave you and I to think, well, this must be one of those things that Scripture really doesn't talk about.
Continue reading the full transcript 33-minute read · 8 sections · every section links back to the audio
The Question of Human Nature
The fact that there's so much disagreement over this might lead you and I to think that, well, it must be an area that's ambiguous in Scripture, that God just simply hasn't given us any real clear answers, and therefore we're entitled and able to figure things out on our own. We might think Scripture really doesn't speak to the matter because there's so much debate about it. Well, here's the thing. I don't think that Scripture has been unclear on this in the least.
I don't think Scripture has been unclear on this in the slightest, as we'll see in a few moments. I think Scripture is as clear on this doctrine as it is on any doctrine of which it speaks. It's as clear on this matter as it is on anything. The problem we have is that we're not inclined to like what it says. I believe the truth is that man comes into this world in the condition of what is called Original Sin.
Affected from the ground up. But the reason that is so hard for us to warm to is because it is so undesirable a conclusion. you and I have all held a cute, wonderful babe in your arms, right? You look down on one of the firstborn, oh, it's so wonderful, how cute. You see something that looks unspoiled, untainted. You see something that's innocent. Of course, one temper tantrum later, you're no different. Nevertheless, we're inclined to look at babies in the crib and say, oh, this is perfection, this is righteous, this is good.
It's only later the child's going to get soiled, but initially they come in so wonderful and so innocent and so pure. And yet, in sin my mother conceived me, David said. And yet, Scripture speaks of a topic that we call Original Sin or total depravity. Now, if you go to a baby shower, that's not words you'll want to bandy about. You won't be the most popular person at the shower. And yeah, the reality, theologically speaking, if we're being honest with this text, if we're being honest with Scripture, the reality is that we come to this world with a problem.
We come in with a sinful nature. We might not like it. We might even tend to deny it. But in order to deny it, you also have to deny Romans 5. You also have to deny what God's Word overtly declares, as we will see in a moment. If you would, please look with me at page 3 of your bulletin, I believe. I'm going to reread verse 12, then we'll work our way through the rest of the passage as time permits. Romans 5, verse 12, says this. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, thus death spread to all men, because all sinned. Back in the fourth century, there was a man named Augustine, a wonderful man, a wonderful theologian named augustine, a man who's been championed about by the church for centuries. He was the dominant theologian of his age. Now, Augustine, although he was the dominant theologian of his age, that didn't mean everyone agreed with him. There was one guy in particular, one guy who, along with His followers, rejected much of Augustine's teachings. His name was Pelagius. Pelagius.
Now, Pelagius and Augustine, again, they were not buddies. They didn't hang out. They weren't together on much or anything. They had different views on a lot of topics. But the principal area that Augustine and Pelagius disagreed on is today's topic, roman 5's topic, that deals with the matters of Original Sin. Now, before we continue any further, what is Original Sin? We can say it, we can think of it, we've heard it in times past, but what is it?
What are we talking about when we use the term Original Sin? Well, in one sense, it's not terribly hard to figure out. In one sense, Original Sin suggests that at some time in the past, there must have been a first sin. At some time there was a first sin that occurred the Original Sin and yet an understanding of the doctrine of Original Sin suggests that that sin that first one became the root of all other sins that sin didn't just occur in a vacuum but it became the root of all other sins and all the hurt and depravity and death that we see outside these doors that there was a first sin that was the root of all other sins and furthermore there was a first sin whose consequences have extended not just to the guy who committed it, but to every last man, woman, and child.
That's the doctrine of Original Sin. And in a sense, without using that exact term, it's what Paul's talking about in verse 12. He says, therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, just as through one man sin entered, he's talking about the Original Sin, just through one man sin entered the world, death, death spread to all men because all sinned. One man sinned. The consequences of that sin was death. That death has been applied to every last man and woman child since the first man. Adam's saying that because one man sinned, the consequences of that sin are imputed to all men. Now remember that Word imputed because it's going to be the most important word that we are going to talk about in this morning's text. Now, who was? Who was the first man? Who was the man who sinned who was it Adam okay now what did he do well Adam as you remember as the story goes he was in the garden and he ate from the one tree that he'd been told not to eat see Adam had been given dominion Adam and Eve our first parents had been given dominion of creation dominion of the garden they could name the animals and the fish and the floor and the fauna all these things they were in charge what a great opportunity they had free reign of the garden God just set them loose
Romans 5 and Adam's Fall
and said, enjoy. And yet God told them something else. He said, enjoy all that, but there is one thing. There's one tree. See the tree in the middle of the garden? The tree of the knowledge of good and evil? That tree, that tree you shall not eat of. For the moment that you do so, you shall die. This was the first man, and as the story goes, as Scripture tells us, Adam did the one thing he wasn't supposed to do. Adam and Eve, they ate. They ate of the tree. And as a result of eating of the tree, sin, death, and the consequences thereof entered the picture.
Now, let's think back to Augustine and Pelagius for a moment. Augustine and Pelagius, they both would have agreed to the statement that Adam sinned. These men, for all that they disagreed about, they would have agreed that Adam sinned. They would have said, Adam done messed up. They would have agreed about that, but they would have disagreed over the effect that sin had. They would have disagreed of the effect and the consequences of sin.
You see, Pelagius thought that, okay, Adam's sin, well, naughty, naughty Adam, he shouldn't have done that. And so Adam will pay the consequences for his own sin. That Adam's consequences were solely reserved for Adam for the sin that he solely did. But he would say that there's no effect that passes on from that point. Pelagius would have said that all Adam did was give us a bad example. That there's no ramifications to you and I beyond that.
That he set a bad example, an example that we all seem to be following. But Augustine said something entirely different. Augustine said that when Adam sinned, when he ate from the tree, the one tree that he was not to do, when he ate from this tree, it changed his nature. It changed what you might call his spiritual DNA. The ontology of Adam became different. His nature and the nature of his progeny, which includes you and I, also became different.
And it became different in this regard, that we are now all subject to sin and death. That there were consequences, not just to Adam, but to all the ancestors of Adam. To the point that every man, woman, and child bears the scarlet mark of a decision of sin committed so long ago. Now, at face value, again, some of us, we don't like that. And the reason why is because it's no fun to be held accountable for something that someone else did.
It's no fun to be held accountable, to be held responsible, to stand before God marked by the choices of another man. And yet, you know what the irony is? That's exactly what the Gospel is. Standing before God marked by the work, the righteousness of someone other than ourselves. And we'll see that in a moment. All right, let's look at verses 12 through 14. Verse 12. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin.
Again, this is unambiguous. It's not hidden in the dust jacket of Scripture. It is right here, and you'll see Paul will say the same thing in a manifold ways across all his epistles. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned. For until the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed where there is no law.
Again, imputed is going to be a key word. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even though over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who didn't necessarily all eat from the apple, so to speak. Adam, who was a type of him who was to come.
Sin and Death Enter Through One Man
If you would, that again, that is a dense piece of text. Let me use an anecdote to help unpack it. If you would, imagine a man, a man standing on a cliff. Imagine he's a young man. He's standing on a cliff. He's a young man. Maybe he's been recently married. He's looking out down below. There's, you know, the rocks down below in the valley. But he looks out at the horizon, everything's so bright, he's got to wear shades.
Things are looking good for this guy as he is standing on the cliff. Now, theoretically, as bright a future as this man has, He could go on, and he might, through his wife, they might have children in the years yet before. They might have children, they might have grandchildren, even further down the road. Generations after the fact, it's possible this one man would become the seed by which there might be even a great multitude.
However, however, in that moment, as the man stands on the cliff, in that moment as he stands on the cliff this much is for sure if that man at that moment was to trip or slip or fall down to the rocks below be dashed upon the rocks in that moment the future of all those potential children and grandchildren would end with him that would be the end in a sense what we're saying is that such a man such a man is representative through his actions and choices of the fate and future and fortune of a progeny that does not yet exist in which he does not even yet know. In a sense, their future is bound to his choice or his action in that moment. It's in a sense the same is true with the man that we know as Adam. See, when Adam sinned, it was the spiritual equivalent of diving off the cliff. It was the spiritual equivalent of being dashed upon the rocks. Why? Because death entered in. The effect of that one decision would haunt and mark Adam, but it would also haunt and mark his progeny, all those descendants and ancestors and children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren and like thereafter. Now, in Reformed theology, we call this concept federalism. We say that Adam is our federal head. He's our representative in the garden. He is our federal head in the garden in the sense he represented all of us, which is proven out by the fact that we're affected by his choices thereafter. Now, is federalism fair? Is this fair that you and I are marked by the sin of someone other than ourselves, especially someone so long ago? Is that fair? Well, at some level, at some level, you know, we think, well, no, I don't want to be marked by the sin of someone else. Someone else blew it. Why is it on me? Why do I pay the price because someone else did that?
We don't like that. We don't think we should be condemned, consigned to death because of some choice someone else made, as if we would have done anything different. But we don't like that. We don't think it's fair. Pelagius, remember Augustine of Pelagius? Pelagius didn't think it was fair. He said, this is nonsense. This is silly. Why am I held responsible for something someone else did? He couldn't get past that stumbling block. It didn't matter what Scripture said, Scripture says it clearly. Scripture does not hide it. Again, it's not in the dust jacket or an annex of the book. It is clear here. It's clear. And yet, Pelagius, he didn't like it, and so he rejected it. How much good theology gets set aside because people just don't like it? A lot. A lot. And I think that's true with this. But again, there's a great irony here. There's a tremendous irony. The irony is this. The people who reject, who get upset about having Adam as our federal head, as our representative in the garden. Those who get upset at the idea that Adam's sin is imputed down to us. None of those same people gets upset over the imputation of Jesus Christ's righteousness thereafter. Everyone hates the first, but we tend to love and accept and long for the second. The entire Christian faith is built upon the idea that one man's sacrifice saved us. We call it the Gospel. We say we have a problem. We are sinners and the wages of sin is death. We recognize that problem. We need a Savior. We need someone to reconcile us with God. The entire Christian faith is based on this premise that through faith in Christ, His righteousness is granted to us. His works are imputed to us. That when we stand before God, we wear His white robe. That is something everyone tends to accept, to nod their head to and say, yes, amen.
We see that as good.
Christ the Second Adam
The Christian faith is based on the idea that one man's sacrifice saves us. So why in the world should it be a stretch for anyone to see that one man's sin could also condemn us? Paul says exactly this. One man's sin condemns, but one man's righteousness saves. Your future, whether you like it or not, whether you desire it or not, is predicated on a relationship with one of two guys, Adam or Jesus.
Your forehead, spiritually speaking, is tattooed with one of those names even now. Which is it? All right, let's look at verses 15 through 17 to consider that further. Verse 15, but the free gift is not like the offense. In other words, the gift that we get through the Gospel is much better than what happened. It's much stronger and much more significant. The free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense, this is Adam.
For if by one man's offense, many died. He did something wrong, sin entered in, death came with it, and all of us are therefore marked under that same end. And the fact that we have gray hair and joints that don't work and the like is evidence and proof of that enough. 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.
And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from the one offense resulted in condemnation. But, but, the free gift which comes from many offenses resulted in justification. For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more of those who receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the one Jesus Christ. Your forehead is marked by one of two names, Adam or Christ.
The first Adam or the second. Now a few moments ago we said that one of the most important doctrines in all of Christianity is the doctrine of imputation. For some of us who might not have spent more than five minutes ever thinking about that word, but I tell you it is the most important term. One of the, probably the two most important terms in all of Christianity. I think propitiation is the other one.
And yet imputation is very significant. Now imputation, what does it suggest? Imputation suggests that one man's works or actions or deeds or consequences, that one man's actions can be applied to you. Imputation is this idea that one man's credits, spiritually speaking, can be placed upon another. What Adam passed down, what he imputed to you and me and everyone in this room, everyone in the world around us, can be summed up in one word.
Death. That's the legacy of Adam. That's the legacy, if you look at Paul's letters. Through one man's offense, many died. This is the legacy of the first man. He broke the one law that he was told not to break. The one thing God told them not to do, and as a result of this, more people died than just him. Sin and death spread. We come into this world marked by the consequences that befell Adam.
Now this is imputation in its worst possible form. But, immediately after explaining that, Paul adds this encouraging thought in verse 15. He says that although the one man's offense brought death, although that's true. Paul again, he doesn't sugarcoat it. Although he says through one man we died, through one man's offense brought death, he says the good news of the Gospel is this, that through another man, a better man, a second Adam, through this man's gift, we have been given life. One man's gift was death, or one man's legacy is death, the other man's gift is life. For by the one man's offense, death reigned through the one, Adam, much more those who receive abundance of grace, and the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ.
Now, I think that you and I are probably, if I was to ask us to define some terms, if I was to say, all right, let's talk about sin. If I was to say, give me an example of sin, I think we would, in no time at all, we'd be able to write down a whole list. If we were asked to explain or define sin, we'd get that. Why? Because we are very accomplished sinners.
This is something we know a lot about, and so if we were asked to talk about it, we probably could. However, what if the word was not sin?
Why Original Sin Matters
What if the word was righteousness? What if it was righteousness? If someone asked you right now, explain righteousness to me, what would you say? You know, as a side note, in Christian circles, I have a lot of folks who talk to me about how they're growing spiritually. They want to be more spiritual and the like. You ever hear that phrase? People talk about spirituality. I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. They talk about spirituality very seldom, if ever, has anyone ever come to me and asked me, how do I become more righteous?
People want to become more spiritual. But righteousness, we don't know what to do with. So what is righteousness? Well, when Adam was first created, when he was in the garden, He had a perfectly right standing with God. Adam was blameless, absolutely blameless. He had a close relationship with God. He was in the garden, which is a type of heaven. He was what you'd call righteous. He was blameless in the eyes of God.
That is a hint of sin, scandal, or iniquity. However, his ability to remain in that condition was based on his fulfillment of something that the theologians call the covenant of works. Specifically, there was one work, one thing that he was told not to do. God said, okay, this is the covenant of works. It's based, his right standing with God is based on his fulfillment of this covenant, of doing what the covenant required of him, which was not to eat of the one tree.
And yet, the first time the serpent slithers in, which was more cunning than all the beasts of the field, the first moment of temptation, first Eve and then Adam, they fell. The covenant, his ability to stand with God, to stand in God's presence, His righteousness hinged on one simple thing, obedience to this one law that God had given him. And if he had done so, if he'd kept that law, if he'd done what he was supposed to do, everything would have gone along swimmingly, so to speak.
But again, we see that he didn't. Genesis 3 tells us that in time, it was potentially in fairly short order, but in time, Adam chose the fruit. He chose disobedience over obedience, and as a result, sin entered him. And it stayed. And its scarlet tendrils spread. Its scarlet tendrils spread, and everything changed. It wasn't just Adam and Eve, the consequences of them. The whole created realm, you could say, fell, which is why all of creation now groans for redemption.
That's why now there's pandemics. That's why now there's earthquakes and hurricanes and all the other things that we don't like in the world around us as a result of the fall. The fall's consequences. One sin was that bad. Oh, my stars. When we think of our sins, remember this. One sin, which was functionally eating a piece of fruit, was enough to throw the entire universe, the entire created realm into chaos. Sin is that bad and God is that holy.
Those are two things we can learn from the fall. Now, you can reject this idea that the fall had implications and consequences that you and I are under today. You can reject it because you don't want it, you don't like it, and the like. You can reject it. And yet, if you do, you have tough questions that you have to answer. If sin weren't natural to us, as some think it's not, as Pelagius didn't believe, if sin wasn't natural to us, if it wasn't part of our DNA even coming to the world, if sin isn't natural to us, then why are we all sinners?
Why is every last man, woman, and child a sinner? If death doesn't reign as it did from the moment Adam ate, if death isn't natural to our condition, then tell me, why do all die? There's a Baptist preacher, his name is Paul Washer. Some of you might be familiar with him. He uses a specific antidote, a specific example that I've always really appreciated in order to teach this point, this point of what we call Original Sin, this point that man has been affected from the womb, from the point of conception forward, in order to demonstrate to people that we are affected through the fall, He uses this antidote.
What he does is, he talks about a watch. He says, all right, if you take off a watch, and let's say you were to approach a baby in a crib, and you take that watch and you dangle it over the child. Well, the child's going to look at that watch and be entertained, mesmerized, maybe even reach out and touch it.
Pastoral Application
You know, it sparkles, it's shiny. And for a little while, you're having a good time, too. You're dangling it, ooh, coochie-coo. You know, you're having a great time with the baby and the light, and the baby's playing with it and so forth. Well, then what happens? Well, because you're an adult, you get bored of dangling watches. And before too long, you say, well, that's enough. That's enough. Good times had by all.
And you take your watch, and you slide it back on the wrist. Now, as you do so, and as it clicks shut, the child realizes what's going on. You've taken something away. You've taken that watch away, and the child reaches out to it. Perhaps he even tries to claw at your wrist a little bit, try to get that. And you say, oh, no, no, no, no. Playtime is over, and they keep trying to get the watch.
Why? Because they want it. It's shiny, and it's sparkly. They like it. They've been entertained by it. And when you take it away, a child will often, maybe not always, but is often going to get angry, upset, cry, temper tantrum. Reach out. You took something away that the child wanted. Try to rip right off your hand. If you leave your hand extended, we'll try to rip the watch right off your wrist in order to make it their own.
Well, this pastor, he suggests this. He says that if in that moment when the child is having a temper tantrum, trying to rip the watch off your hand, if in that moment the child had the strength of a full-grown man who would knock you off or rip off your arm to get to that watch. That, that is Original Sin. That is total depravity. That's this picture that we come into this world.
We come into this world predisposed to doing that which we ought not. If sin isn't natural to an infant's nature, then why do we even infant sin? And those of us who have been parents know that they do. If sin isn't natural, why do even children sin? If it wasn't natural, if death isn't natural, then why do children die, even in the womb, if it's not a natural part of our condition?
The answer, the hard answer and the convicting answer, is what Paul's been saying all along, at least in today's text. He says that the reason children sin, the reason you sin, the reason I sin, is because we're sinners. The condition, the condition of sin precedes the action of sinning. Understand that the condition of sin precedes and anticipates the action of sinning. It's not the other way around. And if you miss that, if you get that wrong, you will get almost every other part of soteriology wrong as well.
There's another pastor who once put it this way. He said, if you're wrong about the fall, you'll be wrong about it all. Let's build on that point by looking at our final verses, verses 18 and 19. Verse 18. Therefore, so he's coming to a conclusion. Therefore, as through one man's offense, that man is Adam. As through one man's offense, judgment came to all men. Not just to him, not just to some, not just to the naughty people, but to all men, resulting in condemnation.
Even so, through one man's righteous act. And it's capital M if you're reading the New King James. Through one man's righteous act, the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one man's obedience many will be made righteous. If you have that in front of you, if you're making notes in your Bible, the word that circles the word made.
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners. This is not to say that through one man's disobedience many saw a bad example that they later on followed. It says something different. It says through one man's disobedience many were made sinners. This speaks to ontology. This speaks to their nature. This speaks to how they're formed. Speaks to babies coming out of the womb in this way. Now, we've talked a bit about Adam.
Let's look to wrap up with our remaining time by talking about Christ. See, Adam, Adam's legacy, again, it's sin and death. I'm sure he was a perfectly sweet man in a lot of regards, and yet his legacy to us is heartbreaking. It's heartbreaking because it's law-breaking. Adam broke the laws of one greater than himself, and yet the legacy of Christ, which he gives to us, our heritage that we receive from Christ through faith is that of his obedience.
Paul says, one man was disobedient, we pay the price. But through faith, through faith, in Christ's obedience, we are made as righteous as he was. There's an imputation we don't like, the imputation of Adam.
Christ, Grace, and the Closing Exhortation
There's an imputation we desperately need, and that of Christ's own righteousness. You know, Adam, as you think back, I don't know how long it took him to sin. But we know this, that it appears the devil slithered in. The devil was more cunning than all the beasts of the field he comes in. And it doesn't seem like it took long. He threw out one temptation to Eve and subsequently to Adam. He said, if you eat the fruit, everything isn't going to go so bad.
God is hiding from you something that you really would benefit from. He said, hath God said, did God really say you couldn't eat from this tree? He says, actually, if you do, if you try it out, you'll find that the fruit is good. Oh, it's something else. You'll also find that by eating it, you'll become like God. You'll know good and evil. Now that sounded appealing. To have an evil, well, this sounds great.
You mean God's been holding back? Whoa, mind blown, give me the fruit. Partake it with this idea that they can know everything God knows. That was the temptation. They could be like God. That's the root of all temptation, but that was the case there. So one point of temptation slithers in, whispers a few words in their ears, and the next thing you know, they gave in, apparently, immediately thereafter. Jesus, different outcome.
Jesus tempted repeatedly. Remember Matthew 4 is tempted out in the wilderness on multiple points. He's tempted multiple times by the same serpent, by the same devil. He's tempted and yet, whereas Adam was disobedient, Christ was not. Christ was obedient. He did what he was called to do. And this idea of imputation, again, it has a negative context by which Adam's sin is imputed to us, but imputation is also wonderful because Christ's obedience, his righteousness is granted to we who believe.
So when you and I stand before God, in one sense you could say, well, I'm a sinner in God's eyes. Well, in a sense that's true. You have sinned. And yet when God looks at you as his child, he sees you clad in what's sometimes called an alien righteousness. A white robe of righteousness belonging to someone else that's been granted to you. You don't like the imputation of Adam. I get it.
I don't like it either. But I love the imputation of Jesus Christ in his white robe. But both are true. Both are in the book. And yet it's the imputation of Christ that lingers gracefully over us this morning. Alright, again, in wrapping up this morning, all men, as we've said, are inexorably tied to one of two men, Adam or Jesus. You can pretend it's otherwise. You can pretend that your life hasn't been affected by the sins of Adam any more so than the sins of your parents or grandparents or the like.
Pretending won't make it so. On the Day of Judgment, Scripture declares to us that our relationship hinges on either the first Adam or the second Adam. A relationship with God the Father hinges on a relationship either to Adam or to Christ. So the question this morning for you and I is, which one is it going to be? Which one is it going to be? I hope and trust and pray that we've already come to terms with this at some time in the past.
Perhaps not everyone in the sound of my voice has. So the question is, which one is it going to be? Which legacy do you want? When you stand before God on that day, whose imputation do you want to be marked by? That of Adam, whose legacy is death, or that of Christ, whose legacy is righteousness? On the day of judgment, the word imputation, I tell you, it will either be the most comforting word or thought in your mind at that moment, or it will be the most damning.
Some of us, again, we haven't spent more than five minutes in our life thinking about that word imputation, but I guarantee you at that moment, whether it's the word or the principle behind it, at that moment on the day of judgment, it will be either the most comforting word in the world or the most condemning. We will either continue before God's eyes to bear the scarlet stain of Adam's imputed guilt, which we have added to immeasurably through our own sins, or we will stand before God clad in the white robe of his son's own righteousness.
Which one? Which one do you want? Which one are you wearing now? If you haven't already, today is the day. Turn to Christ and live. Let's pray.
More in The Book Of Romans
Continue the verse-by-verse series.
