Did Adam Repent?

[D. Paul]

I am reading a booklet on the Trinity and in it, the author makes the statement "...after Adam repented.."

Was Adam granted repentance as we know it? Interesting.

Is the actual act of repenting spoken of for many of Biblical people? Did Peter repent after denying our Lord? Is there a record of Paul repenting? Did Solomon? Please do not hear what I am not saying, I am not saying repentance is optional.. What I am saying is recording the saints repentance seems to be optional.

Hmmmm.......
Alright, then.

At any rate, when we repent, we turn away from the known sin, yet often must live out the consequences. From Adam's point of view the consequences were

 

[Pergamum]

Also note that Adam's sons knew how to give proper sacrifice to the Lord (though Cain transgressed this), and perhaps learned this sacrificial system from their father.

Hmmmm. I am not all sure we know that. Heb. 11:4 attributes the superiority of Abel's offering to his faith, not the offering itself.

"By faith Abel offered to God . . ."

An offering made apart from faith, is worthless. Faith is the context and teaching of Hebrews 11:4. Abel is the first listed as being a man of faith. God Himself testifies of Abel's "righteousness," which means Abel was indeed saved by faith in God's promises.



My "thank you" was in response to this statement.

TT, I would add that the seed of the Woman was a spiritual, not physical lineage. Adam could have been of the seed of the Woman, though not descended from her. For that matter, Adam could be in Christ and not in Adam!

???

Eve is the mother of all the human race; the spiritual Seed promised her was the Christ. The latter part of your statement does not compute with me . . . sorry.

Either way, it is significant to me that God clothes both Adam and Eve at the end of chapter 3, in effect antoning for their sins with the blood on an innocent animal.

God provided A&E with temporal atonement; however the blood of the animals did not accomplish remission of their sin. God made this provision in order to allow for A&E to produce all of humanity as decreed and commanded. (Genesis 1:28)

The sin of Adam did not, nor could not thwart the will and purposes of God.

It is true that Abel offered with faith.

But, this does not negate that there is a high probability that the manifestation of Cain's lack of faith included offering the wrong thing, especially since the example of Adam and Eve was that they first tried to cover their nakedness with leaves, and God covered them with dead flesh, and Genesis sees fit to mention the different substance of the sacrifices as well.

It is mentioned by Scripture, so it is of some importance - even if of a secondary importance or as an external manifestation of Cain's lack of internal faith.

 

[TeachingTulip]

A.W. Pink regarding this subject:

PART TWO: THE ADAMIC COVENANT

 

[Prufrock]

Ronda,

Unless I remember very incorrectly, the work from Pink which you have linked is on an unrelated topic: it pertains to the prefall covenant of works made with Adam as a federal head and has no bearing on post-fall faith in the promise. Unless, of course, there is a specific section from that chapter which you are attempting to highlight.

 

[TeachingTulip]

Ronda,

Unless I remember very incorrectly, the work from Pink which you have linked is on an unrelated topic: it pertains to the prefall covenant of works made with Adam as a federal head and has no bearing on post-fall faith in the promise. Unless, of course, there is a specific section from that chapter which you are attempting to highlight.

In direct answer to the OP, Pink held the view that Adam did not evidence repentance:

"Contrary to the prevailing idea, I believe that Adam was eternally lost. He is mentioned only once again in Genesis, where we read: “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness” (5:3). He is solemnly missing from the witnesses of faith in Hebrews 11! He is uniformly presented in the New Testament as the fountainhead of death, as Christ is of life (Rom. 5:12 19; 1 Cor. 15:22)."

A.W. Pink; Part Two Adamic Covenant


(The linked article gives Pink's thorough basis for this stated opinion and conclusion.)

 

[Prufrock]

Thanks for clarifying why you linked that! I used the search function to find the section you quoted. It is, at least, certainly worth noting that he admits right at the start that he is teaching "Contrary to the prevailing idea."

 

[Prufrock]

(The linked article gives Pink's thorough basis for this stated opinion and conclusion.)

In the section in which I found the sentence you quoted, it is in fact the only statement he makes in the near proximity on the topic of Adam's repentance or lack thereof. I'm assuming there is more, since you mentioned his thorough basis; I would like to read it, if you would point me to where in the article I might find it. A phrase to do a search for would be great. Thanks!

 

[TeachingTulip]

(The linked article gives Pink's thorough basis for this stated opinion and conclusion.)

In the section in which I found the sentence you quoted, it is in fact the only statement he makes in the near proximity on the topic of Adam's repentance or lack thereof. I'm assuming there is more, since you mentioned his thorough basis; I would like to read it, if you would point me to where in the article I might find it. A phrase to do a search for would be great. Thanks!

Pink's argument is a whole piece; primarily having to do with the ordained federal headships of the two Adams under the two covenants; which in my opinion is deserving of an entire read for anyone truly interested in the truth of the matter.

 

[kevin.carroll]

But, this does not negate that there is a high probability that the manifestation of Cain's lack of faith included offering the wrong thing, especially since the example of Adam and Eve was that they first tried to cover their nakedness with leaves, and God covered them with dead flesh, and Genesis sees fit to mention the different substance of the sacrifices as well.

It is mentioned by Scripture, so it is of some importance - even if of a secondary importance or as an external manifestation of Cain's lack of internal faith.

Not a "high probability," but a possibility. All we can know for sure is what the text says. Since, as I pointed out, both types of sacrifices were acceptable under the Levitical system, you simply do not have a firm leg to stand on here.

 

[Prufrock]

(The linked article gives Pink's thorough basis for this stated opinion and conclusion.)

In the section in which I found the sentence you quoted, it is in fact the only statement he makes in the near proximity on the topic of Adam's repentance or lack thereof. I'm assuming there is more, since you mentioned his thorough basis; I would like to read it, if you would point me to where in the article I might find it. A phrase to do a search for would be great. Thanks!

Pink's argument is a whole piece; primarily having to do with the ordained federal headships of the two Adams under the two covenants; which in my opinion is deserving of an entire read for anyone truly interested in the truth of the matter.

Perhaps you are simply infinitely more astute than I am (which is a real possibility!) but I fail to see what bearing Adam's federal headship under the covenant of works could possibly have upon forgiveness he could have subsequently received in the Covenant of Grace. Nor do I know of anyone else who has made the connection; nor does that seem integral at all to what Pink is saying.

Either way, I will now respectfully withdraw from the thread, as I simply do not have the time to keep up on it.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

In my opinion, when the text reads:

4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, ...
5:4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were ...​

I am inclined to read into Adam's marital relations--coming as they did on the heels of Cain's attack on the human race--
1) intent to concieve
2) an act of faith

I do not see any rationale to separating Eve's act of naming her son from Adam's inclusion in the matter. Someone had to pass faith along to the next generation, and supposing it was Eve alone strikes me as giving the Devil just a little more than's he's due for success.

 

[TeachingTulip]

In the section in which I found the sentence you quoted, it is in fact the only statement he makes in the near proximity on the topic of Adam's repentance or lack thereof. I'm assuming there is more, since you mentioned his thorough basis; I would like to read it, if you would point me to where in the article I might find it. A phrase to do a search for would be great. Thanks!

Pink's argument is a whole piece; primarily having to do with the ordained federal headships of the two Adams under the two covenants; which in my opinion is deserving of an entire read for anyone truly interested in the truth of the matter.

I fail to see what bearing Adam's federal headship under the covenant of works could possibly have upon forgiveness he could have subsequently received in the Covenant of Grace.

The doctrine of federal headship teaches us that Adam is head of the entire human race, and the last “Adam” Jesus Christ is head of His elect church.

When Jesus Christ was crucified and died, due to His representation of all those given to Him by the Father, these are said to have also died to sin. When Christ resurrected from the grave, it is taught that His people were also raised to new life:

“Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection . . . Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him.” Romans 6:4,5,8


Just as Adam’s disobedience and sin under the covenant of works was the legal basis for God to impute sin to all of Adam’s descendants, so was the last Adam’s righteousness the basis for the elect to be imputed with righteousness and made fit to be reconciled with God according to the Covenant of Grace.

When Adam failed, we all failed, for Adam was our earthly federal head.

When Jesus Christ achieved victory over sin, death, and the devil, all Christians are assured His victory is theirs’, because He is their spiritual federal head.

So consider this: If Adam had repented and exhibited faith in the promise God made to Satan and Eve (Genesis 3:15), and had received pardon of his sin and given grace by God unto salvation, then the entire human race would have benefited from that grace, since Adam represented us all. Every human represented in Adam would have been made recipients of God’s forgiving grace, according to the doctrine of representation under Federal Headship. If Adam was brought under the Covenant of Grace in the garden, then all his descendents would be born under that Covenant of Grace, because Adam is federal head of all mankind. This would be the necessary evidence that Adam indeed repented of his sins before God, and placed his faith in the promised Savior.

But that is not reality or the teaching of Holy Scripture, is it?

All men, born in the flesh from Adam, are born sinners, still obligated before God under the Covenant of Works, and remain under the condemnation of that Law and consignment to death . . .unless and until they receive the benefits of the new Covenant of Grace by faith in Jesus Christ.

So the point is, how can the federal head of all sinful men, be rescued by faith in the promised Savior, but his unborn descendants come into the world totally depraved and corrupted under the Covenant of Works and in need of a Savior?

If righteousness and pardon was Adam’s, while still living as federal head of the human race, then God’s grace and saving pardon should be universally expected by all men.

(And then there goes the Scriptural doctrines of Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement!)

“Direful and dreadful as was the outcome of the Adamic covenant, yet we may, with awe, perceive and admire the divine wisdom in the same. Had God permitted and enabled Adam to stand, all his posterity had been eternally happy. Adam had then been in a very real sense their savior, and while enjoying everlasting bliss, all his posterity would have exclaimed, “For all this we are indebted to our first parent.” Ali, what anointed eye can fail to discern that that would have been far too great a glory for any finite creature to have borne. Only the last Adam was entitled to and capable of sustaining such an honor. Thus, the first man, who was of the earth, earthy, must fall, so as to make way for the second man, who is “the Lord from heaven.” A.W. Pink, Part Two: The Adamic Covenant

(Underlined emphasis, mine.)

 

[py3ak]

So consider this: If Adam had repented and exhibited faith in the promise God made to Satan and Eve (Genesis 3:15), and had received pardon of his sin and given grace by God unto salvation, then the entire human race would have benefited from that grace, since Adam represented us all. Every human represented in Adam would have been made recipients of God’s forgiving grace, according to the doctrine of representation under Federal Headship. If Adam was brought under the Covenant of Grace in the garden, then all his descendents would be born under that Covenant of Grace, because Adam is federal head of all mankind. This would be the necessary evidence that Adam indeed repented of his sins before God, and placed his faith in the promised Savior.

But that is not reality or the teaching of Holy Scripture, is it?

The difficulty with this position is that it ignores the standard Reformed teaching that after the Fall Adam no longer functioned as a public person. John Brown of Haddington is as good a person as any to quote on the matter. Speaking of how by the one offence of Adam the covenant of works was broken in different respects he says:

IV. The representation in the covenant was dissolved, and every particular person of mankind fell bound for himself. Adam, being now dead in law, and under the begun reign of spiritual death, was no longer fit to continue the head and representative of others, in a covenant which was originally ordained unto life. Moreover, the displacing him from his covenant headship was necessary, that the covenant of grace might be immediately administered, and that he and Eve, with their seed, might have the most early, and the most unhampered access to it.

(Systematic Theology (Compendious View, etc.), p.210 of RHB edition.)

 

[TeachingTulip]

So consider this: If Adam had repented and exhibited faith in the promise God made to Satan and Eve (Genesis 3:15), and had received pardon of his sin and given grace by God unto salvation, then the entire human race would have benefited from that grace, since Adam represented us all. Every human represented in Adam would have been made recipients of God’s forgiving grace, according to the doctrine of representation under Federal Headship. If Adam was brought under the Covenant of Grace in the garden, then all his descendents would be born under that Covenant of Grace, because Adam is federal head of all mankind. This would be the necessary evidence that Adam indeed repented of his sins before God, and placed his faith in the promised Savior.

But that is not reality or the teaching of Holy Scripture, is it?

The difficulty with this position is that it ignores the standard Reformed teaching that after the Fall Adam no longer functioned as a public person. John Brown of Haddington is as good a person as any to quote on the matter. Speaking of how by the one offence of Adam the covenant of works was broken in different respects he says:

IV. The representation in the covenant was dissolved, and every particular person of mankind fell bound for himself. Adam, being now dead in law, and under the begun reign of spiritual death, was no longer fit to continue the head and representative of others, in a covenant which was originally ordained unto life. Moreover, the displacing him from his covenant headship was necessary, that the covenant of grace might be immediately administered, and that he and Eve, with their seed, might have the most early, and the most unhampered access to it.

(Systematic Theology (Compendious View, etc.), p.210 of RHB edition.)

So on what legal basis is Adam's sin then imputed to all men?

 

[py3ak]

That he was their representative until the Fall. If he had continued to be their representative afterward, then every needless swat on Abel's bottom, every over indulgence of Cain's selfishness, and every flare of baseless irritation at Eve would also be imputed to us. Having obtained the cursing of all humanity descended from him by ordinary generation, he obtained also his own deposition from his position.

 

[MW]

So consider this: If Adam had repented and exhibited faith in the promise God made to Satan and Eve (Genesis 3:15), and had received pardon of his sin and given grace by God unto salvation, then the entire human race would have benefited from that grace, since Adam represented us all.

Adam only represented us all in the covenant of works, not in the covenant of grace. Adam is a representee in the covenant of grace, of which Christ alone is the Head.

 

[Amazing Grace]

Is not the fact that God alone provided a sacrifice for A & E enough for us to determine they were forgiven? "And the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them." The prophet Isaiah wrote in Isaiah 61:10,

I will rejoice greatly in the Lord,My soul will exult in my God;For He has clothed me with garments of salvation,He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness,
As a bridegroom decks himself with a garland,And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

The skin that God covered Adam and Eve represent a type of imputed righteousness provided by Him in which they could stand in His holy presence. This is a shadow of what God provided for us in the imputation of His righteousness through Jesus Christ. Behind those garments, that God made for Adam and Eve has been sacrifice and death. There was a substitutionary death. God must always provide adequate covering for man to stand before Him clothed in righteousness. And without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. I will disagree with Pink that Adam is reprobate. If we read the account of Adam looking for repentance, we end up going the way of some Moral Example atonement where repentance makes Gods sacrifice effectual. God saves first and foremost for His namesake alone.

psalm 106 clearly shows how God works.

6We have sinned with our fathers, we have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly.

7Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt; they remembered not the multitude of thy mercies; but provoked him at the sea, even at the Red sea.

8Nevertheless he saved them for his name's sake, that he might make his mighty power to be known.

9He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up: so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness.

10And he saved them from the hand of him that hated them, and redeemed them from the hand of the enemy.

11And the waters covered their enemies: there was not one of them left.

12Then believed they his words; they sang his praise.