This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Genesis 1-4” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, September 13, 1992.

Let us hear the word of God. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, so 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. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s offense. who is a type of him who was to come.

But the free gift is not like the transgression, for if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ abound to the many. And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned.

For on the one hand, the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand, the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. For if by the transgression of the one death reign through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the one Jesus Christ. So then, as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the one the many will be made righteous.

The law came in that the transgression might increase. But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Then, turning back to Genesis chapter 3, this is Genesis chapter 3. We are reading from verse 6 through verse 12.

When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate, and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened. and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the spirit of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. And the Lord God called to the man and said to him, And he said, I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid myself. And he said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree at which I commanded you not to eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.

Let’s pray together. Our Father, we pray for that spirit that is found in your Son and also evidences itself in your servants who are set before us positively in your word, those who are able to make your cause, your your righteousness, your justice, their own.

Our God, we ask for your mercies that we might in fact stand as those who have seen beyond ourselves to the greatness of our God and the excellency of Jesus Christ. So build your church and her ministry. And so build, Lord, congregations where the other is on the mind of the people. O Father, encourage us so that we would exhaust ourselves in our service, so that we would give ourselves to the doing of good. We pray these things in Jesus’ name, and Lord ask you for your blessing as we look into your word for our benefit.

Amen. We have some unfinished business yet with the story of the fall. We have dealt fairly extensively with the question of the order of things, as that order appears in the opening chapters of Genesis and specifically in this third chapter. We have looked at that matter of order in the creation. and what it means for the woman, and especially what now has come to the woman with respect to her responsibility in the fall. Later on in the history of redemption, we do hear the Apostle Paul speaking about her responsibility along these lines.

1 Timothy 2.14. And it was not Adam who was deceived, writes Paul, but the woman being quite deceived fell into transgression. So yes, we speak then about the woman’s responsibility in the fall, seeing that responsibility in relationship to this question of order in the creation. and the ordering of authority with respect to the family of man.

However, we also have these other statements that come to us later in the history of redemption, again from the Apostle Paul, as he states emphatically in Romans 5 verse 12, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through and so death spread to all men because all sinned.”

And moving on from that verse to the fifteenth verse of the fifth chapter, “…by the transgression of the one, by whom is meant, of course, Adam, the man the many died.” And further, in verse seventeen of that same chapter, “…by the transgression of the one again, The one in view is Adam, the man. Death reigned through the one, that is, through Adam. And again, in verse 19, through the one man’s disobedience, no question as to who that is, through the one man’s disobedience, the many were made sinners. to another place in Paul’s writings, 1 Corinthians 15 verse 21, where Paul says, by a man, no question as to who that is, by a man came death. Verse 22, following on from that point, in Adam, here he is specifically named, in Adam all die.

So it is clear, is it not, regardless of the woman, regardless of her role in the fall, regardless of the guilt that she herself must bear, the weight of the fall, if not the fall in its full implications, rests squarely upon Adam’s shoulder. In the final analysis, the transgression is specifically, pointedly his. Sin, its consequences, the implications of it. Sin, its condemnation, and the consequence, death, are visited upon subsequent humanity because of Adam, not because of Eve. But isn’t this an unfair? Isn’t this where we neo-chauvinists jump in with our cries of injustice? Isn’t this plainly, blatantly unjust?

It was the woman who sinned first. Shouldn’t she be the one to carry the burden? Shouldn’t the load, the blame, be hers and hers alone? Well, some say in light of their views of social justice that she has been made to carry the load entirely. The Bible says, however, that while there are clear consequences for her in her sin, still she remains short of that final culpability for the condition that has overtaken humanity.

I’m surprised at this point by the attitude of some feminists. I would think, by the tone of their rhetoric, that they should be clamoring for full credit for the fall. Why should Adam get all the credit? We’ve thought about it first. But seriously, it is not a matter of what one sex or the other wants to claim or deny, it is a matter of what the Word of God says. And the word of God says that the fall at its root and its consequence lies clearly at the feet of Adam. We ask again, why is this? Why should the guilt be his? And why should it be that from him specifically that guilt flow to all humanity? The obvious answer comes to us once more by way of creation’s order.

That order involves what we call headship. Now, you must understand something about the biblical notion of headship. It is not a particularly democratic idea. Rather, it is a covenant reality. For humanity, according to the Bible, is covenantally defined, and this means in part that humanity is viewed corporately. Humanity is viewed in terms of respective heads, respective authorities, representatives in whom the body under them finds identity. Humanity is covenantally defined. And this means in part that humanity is viewed corporately in terms of respective heads, headships, in terms of representatives in whom the bodies under them find identity.

Now there are a number of examples of this truth in scripture. Abraham, in time, takes on covenantal dimension. He becomes a figure who is corporately defined himself, one who is identified with the body, the people who are beneath him or under him or flow forth from him. Moses also is looked upon in terms of covenantal headship. In fact, we are told by Paul and 1 Corinthians that the children of Israel were actually baptized into Moses and into the sea. There is that corporate identity for Moses, the relationship between him and the body to which he is bound.

Covenantally, David is also defined. He has headship with regard to the kingdom. The multiple kings of Israel and Judah, for good or ill, are viewed similarly. The nations round about Israel are treated covenantally, seen in light of their corporate heads, who have responsibility and authority over them.

Communities, and most particularly congregations, are seen as those bound up in their leaders, in their representative heads. or a microcosm of the covenantal structure and its headship principle is operative in them. This is an indisputable fact that lies clearly upon the pages of Scripture, upon the face of Revelation.

You cannot deny it without running counter to the spirit and the intention of God’s Word. and the nature, the structure of reality itself. That’s the way things are. You might not like it, but that’s the way things are. You might rebel against it, but that’s the way things are, by God’s design. And truly, whether you’re willing to admit it or not, for our good.

This is not to say that those who are under a particular headship are not personally responsible for their own behavior. Though Eve was under the headship of Adam, she was in fact responsible for her behavior. So also the children of Israel, though under the headship of Moses, they were responsible for their behavior. Those in the kingdom under David, yes, they are responsible also. You in the church of Jesus Christ are responsible under your heads, yes, and within your families you are responsible for your behavior. even though there is a head in your family.

But while there is this individual responsibility under the headship principle, nevertheless, the burden for the direction and decisions of the people finally comes to rest upon the one in the divine ordering of things, who has the primacy, the office, and that position of covenantal headship.

In the garden, Adam himself has that primacy, he has the office, he has the covenantal headship. Thus, when blame is meted out for the fall, despite the fact that he was first deceived, Adam is the one who is ultimately accountable. Now, having said that, it is necessary for us to say more. For there is more to Adam’s guilt than that which is set before us through a consideration of the formal ordering of things. You see, guilt falls upon Adam specifically and pointedly because he, as covenantal head, had the opportunity to do something about Eve’s transgression. I’ll repeat that.

Job falls specifically and pointedly upon Adam because he, as covenantal head, had the opportunity to do something about Eve’s transgression. Did you ever wonder why the fall is not treated in the Bible as a fait accompli at the point at which Eve sinned? Why was that not the fall? There, in that act, Where was Eve’s sin not enough to cast humanity into darkness and set it under the sentence of death? Because Adam, you see, the covenant head, even though Eve had sinned, was still in a position to do something about it.

Now what was Adam to do? Well, I’ve been collecting a few opinions. Some have suggested that indeed the fall was a fait accompli, not because Eve had sinned, but because Adam had failed to instruct his wife properly prior to the approach of the serpent. How do you buy that? There are an infinite number of problems with that suggestion. I will not begin to list them for you tonight. I will list only one.

This obviously suggests to us that the fall occurred at a point prior to the temptation and prior to the eating of the forbidden fruit. And that is plainly contrary to the clear record of Scripture. Now, this is not to say that instruction and repentance weren’t appropriate in the situation. Surely Adam, as covenant head, should have approached Eve to instruct her with respect to her sin into which she had followed, into which she had fallen.

And he should have led her to repentance for that sin. This he did not do. There is no evidence that he attempted to instruct her. There is no evidence that he attempted to lead her in repentance. Instead, he willingly joined her in her sin. In fact, he knew what that sin was and sought for what it was. who have offered another suggestion as to what Adam should have done. They suggest to us that Adam should have executed Eve. Now, it’s not that Eve wasn’t worthy of execution. She was. as any sinner is. But to suggest such a thing is to presume that Adam had a right, which is not evident that he had.

We know from later texts that God himself had the right, the right only to take life. So, it seems as if this suggestion flies in the face of what we know from subsequent revelation, that Adam did not have the right to take the life of his wife. But further, this suggestion flies in the face of what we know about covenantal headship as it is exhibited by God himself.

For in his covenantal headship over his creatures, he tenders his own life for the life of sinners. As is proved in the second Adam, what is even proved by the activity of God here in the garden subsequent to the fall. What is proved is that the first Adam, in seeing what his wife had become, in seeing what she had become by what she had done, Besides instructing her and leading her in repentance, her husband should have approached the Lord on her behalf. And in keeping with the covenantal headship that is in God himself, this first Adam should have offered his own life for her out of his great love for her and his great love for the God that he loved. In this covenantal bond between Adam and Eve, We have a picture of the bond that exists between the covenantal head and that body that belongs to the covenantal head. In fact, we have a picture of the relationship that is existent between God and his people, later on explicated in the relationship between Christ and the church.

Adam should have given his life for her or for those bound to him, those under his covenantal headship. So then we see that Adam’s guilt is not simply because he is the covenantal head, And in the ordering of things, he has failed to act in keeping with the structure that God has designed, but rather because he has failed to act for the salvation of his wife.

And in failing to do so, he is guilty of a self-conscious rejection of the one who is head over him. His action is nothing but the supreme act of self-interest, selfishness, and self-glorification. In the light of the obedience of our covenantal head, Jesus Christ, We are enabled to see the monumental character of the offense. We are able to see the dimensions of the transgression of Adam, who rightly bears the weight of the fault. We do rejoice, do we not, that our covenantal head, the Lord Jesus Christ, has fully compensated for the failure of that original covenantal head.

Let us pray. Our Father, if there is then to be expression of covenantal headship within the Church today, may it be like unto what we find in Christ Jesus. May we glory in his obedience and in his life-giving sacrifice. May we have in him the source of strength and a source truly of obedience with respect to all of your demands. May it please you, Lord, to continue to work in us so that the very life of our Savior is seen in us more and more clearly. This we ask in faith.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.