The
Westminster Confession of Faith affirms: “[Adam and Eve] being the root of all
mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and
corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary
generation…. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed,
disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do
proceed all actual transgressions” (6:3-4).1
A
Biblical Response:
There
is no question that all humans have been adversely affected by sin (Gen.
3:16-19; Rom. 5:12), but the guilt of sin is not hereditary. Otherwise Jesus Christ, a biological descendent of Adam (Luke 3:23-38),
would have inherited the guilt of Adam’s sin through his mother; but Jesus was
without sin (1 Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5). “The soul who sins shall die. The son
shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the
son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the
wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself” (Ezek. 18:20; cf. 28:15). Accountable persons become sinners when they succumb to temptation and violate the divine will (Jas. 1:14-15; 1 John 3:4).2
Often
used as a proof-text by those with a Calvinistic perspective is Eph. 2:1-3,
wherein the pre-Christian state is described as, “by nature children of wrath”
(v. 3). However, the context shows that being spiritually dead is the
consequence of “trespasses and sins, in which you once walked” [not inherited]. Accordingly, the Greek term phusis, rendered “nature” here, is not
necessarily indicative of something innate but rather “a mode of feeling and
acting which by long habit has become nature” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon 660). Prior to their conversion to Christ,
the Ephesians were deserving of God’s wrath because of their habitual practice
of sin.
Psalm
51:5 is rendered in the NIV: “Surely I was sinful at birth,
sinful from the time my mother conceived me.” But other standard English
versions do not convey this Calvinistic slant: “Behold, I was brought
forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me” (ESV, N/ASV, N/KJV, RSV,
etc.). As with all poetic literature, dramatic language should not be
literalized or stretched beyond its original intent. Whether this statement
depicts the sinful environment in which David was born (cf. 14:1-4; 17:9-12;
73:12-14; etc.)3 or employs hyperbolic imagery (cf. 22:9-10; 58:3;
71:5-6; Job 31:18) as an expression of deep remorse for his overwhelming
sinfulness, at least one thing is certain. Throughout Psalm 51 David
consistently takes personal responsibility for his own transgressions (vv. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 14). See also 38:18; 58:3;
Isa. 53:6; etc.
Since “all
have sinned” (Rom. 3:10-12, 23; 5:12), would this not include infants and young
children? The consistent focus of Romans is not a universal evaluation and
indictment of each individual person, regardless of age, mental capacity, and
culpability. The “all” (guilty of sin) is contextually qualified, and at the
very least we know that Jesus is not included (2 Cor.
5:21; Heb. 4:15). The overarching theme of Romans is that Jews
and Gentiles stand before God on the same footing. Gentiles sin and are thus
condemned (1:18-32), but they are not the only ones; Jews are also guilty
before God (2:1-5). Whether Jew or Gentile, the obedient receive divine favor
and the disobedient face God’s wrath (2:6-16); there is no partiality with God
(2:11). All have sinned (3:10-12, 23; 5:12) = both Jews and Gentiles (3:9, 19),
not just the one to the exclusion of the other. Moreover, “all” (both Jews and
Gentiles) have equal access to God through Christ and are accepted by him on
the same terms (3:29-30; 4:16, 24; 5:18; etc.).
Death is the consequence of sin (Rom. 5:12), and seeing that infants are
subject to death, does this not prove they are guilty of sin? It is important
to note the fundamental difference between physical death, to which all mortals are amenable
(1 Cor. 15:21-22; Heb. 9:27; Jas. 2:26), and spiritual death, which is the
consequence of personal sin (Isa. 59:1-2; Rom. 6:23; Rev. 20:14). This
distinction is crucial to understanding the otherwise perplexing words of Jesus
in John 11:25-26 and of Paul in Romans 5:12-21. We all die physically because
of Adam’s sin, but each accountable person is responsible for the sins he/she
commits (cf. Rom. 14:12; 1 John 3:4) – leading to spiritual death – and is
therefore in need of the spiritual life that only Jesus can provide (cf. Eph.
2:1-10).
Infants and young children are not evil (Deut. 1:39; Matt. 18:1-5;
19:13-14; Luke 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 14:20). In Mark 9:33-37
Jesus teaches his disciples an important lesson about meekness and humility by
taking a small child in his arms and saying, “Whoever receives one of these
children in my name receives me; and whoever receives me, not only receives me
but the one having sent me.” Then in Mark 10:13-16 the Lord seizes another
opportunity to impart a similar object lesson. Upset by the disciples
having rebuked certain ones for bringing young children to be blessed by him,
Jesus says, “Let the children come to me, and do not prevent them, for of such
is the kingdom of God. Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom
of God as a child, by no means will enter into it.” The Lord obviously
considers children to be the epitome of humility,
eagerness to learn, receptivity, trust, innocence, and spiritual purity.
--Kevin L. Moore
Endnotes:
1 The Confession of Faith: the Larger and Shorter Catechisms (London:
Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 1962): 39-40. The Westminster Confession
of Faith was approved by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1646
and ratified by Parliament in 1649 and 1690. The ideas of original sin, total
depravity, and predestination can be traced as far back as Augustine of Hippo (354-430), revived and popularized by John Calvin (1509-1564) and others during the early
Protestant Reformation Movement. Today a number of Protestant denominations advocate a form of this view as a tenet of Reformed Theology.
2 Age of accountability? See
Deut. 1:39; Neh. 8:2-3; 10:28; Num. 14:29-31; Isa. 7:15-16; John 9:21, 23; cf. Ezek.
18:20; 28:15; Eccl. 7:29; 1 John 3:4; 1 Cor. 13:11; Luke 2:40-52.
3 When foreign Jews on the Day of Pentecost made reference to
“our own language in which we were born” (Acts 2:8), their cultural environment
is clearly in view, and surely no one would interpret this as articulate
babies!
Addendum:
What about Job 14:4, “Who
can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? There is not one”? In this section of the book, in his extreme misery,
Job speaks of the way things appear to him, comparable to the observations of
his friends Eliphaz (15:14) and Bildad (25:4). Note how very negative and
despondent Job is throughout this section; his hazy perception even sees a tree
as better off than a human (vv. 7-10)! But Job’s perspective is comparatively
limited in contrast to how God views things (38:1–41:34). If Job’s observation
in v. 4 were a divine affirmation of inherent sin, then Jesus, who was also
“born of woman,” would necessarily be included. But Jesus was without sin (1
Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5). The “no one” of v. 4 is simply Job’s reference to his
fellow human beings, but God can certainly bring what is clean from the unclean
(31:15). Job recognized that his view of the world was incomplete, while God’s
view is perfect (25:14; 28:12-13, 20-28; 42:1-6), and Job later confessed, “I
have uttered what I did not understand” (42:3a).
Related Posts: Age of Accountability, One of the Worst Things About Hell, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance of the Saints, "You were perfect in all your ways ..." (Ezek 28 15)
Related articles: Wes McAdams' Infant Baptism, Dave Miller's Flaws in Calvinism, Psalm 22:9
Image
credit: http://www.trbimg.com/img-52d5af84/turbine/la-dd-please-dont-bring-your-crying-baby-to-my-restaurant-20140114
