(Continued from page 150.)

Chapter IV.

The Fall of Adam and its Results

In turning to the record of Adam's fall from his first estate, we are first arrested by the presence of an intruder in the happy home of man. The account of this intruder is given thus:"Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made" (Gen. 3:i). Was this intruder a mere serpent ? Weighing the evidences we must answer, No. He appears in the form of an irrational creature, but this stranger seeking an interview with man is plainly a moral being, not a mere serpent which has no power of speech nor the capacity for moral or spiritual things. We must recognize therefore in this particular serpent a moral personality-a spirit-being.

In the light of later scriptures there is no difficulty in identifying the spirit which, under the permission of God, usurped the serpent to gain access to and have communication with man. Ezekiel 28:11-19 describes for us a spirit-creature of wonderful beauties, glories and powers, and tells us how, without temptation from without, the thought of pride arose from within. Thus he fell from his first estate, abandoned dwelling in God, and became a sinful spirit. It was then he ceased-to abide in the truth and became the father of lies and a murderer (John 8:44). It was then he became "the devil and Satan." Rev. 12:9 identifies this fallen spirit with "the old serpent," the intruder in the garden of Eden.

Let us note that the devil's usurpation of the serpent was not a Satanic incarnation, but rather a possession. Spirits have not the power to become beasts or men, but may take possession of them if God permits. We need not hesitate to say that the serpent was a real serpent, one of the many '' beasts of the field which the Lord God had made." Satan, in his enmity to God and determination to thwart His purpose, took possession of the serpent to hide his personality, probably, to disarm Adam of suspicion as to his spirit-being.* *In the demoniac of Gadara (Luke 8:27-33) we have a striking example of the identification of the demons with the man, who speak as one. When cast out of the man they enter and act in the swine.- [Ed.*

A further consideration of the record will furnish ample evidence that this intruder is an enemy of God. His very first utterance is a question about God-a question suggesting an evil view of the character of God. His next is a flat denial of the word of God, and this is 'followed with a reason why God's command should not be obeyed. In all this, a strong animosity towards God is plainly manifest. In the light of later revelation we may add it shows determined opposition to the purpose of God. It is quite possible, and I think more than probable, that before the £all of this highest and greatest of created spirit-beings, God had intimated His purpose to raise up from among His moral creatures One to occupy His eternal throne. It would seem from the passage in Ezekiel already referred to, that the very angel especially appointed to safeguard the throne of God, coveted it. Pride of his perfections originated within him a purpose to seize upon the throne, and to crush any other claimant. We cannot read the record of Satan's efforts as recorded in the Scriptures without being convinced that from the beginning down through the ages he has been searching for the indicated Ruler.

To us now as we read Gen. 3:1-5, it is easy to see the intruder in the garden of Eden had designs on a possibly appointed Heir to divine sovereignty. How far Adam might have discerned the animus and purpose of his visitor is quite a different matter; but it is evident he could not have mistaken the serpent's voice for the voice of God with which he was familiar (see Gen. i:28-30; 2:16, 17). Again, Adam had the wisdom to discern the characteristic natures of the animals and to correctly name them (Gen. 2:19). It would' thus seem clear that he must have recognized the presence of a supernatural being, for a serpent speaking and reasoning as a rational being was contrary to its nature. Animosity against God was also manifest, an attack on God's character was clearly apparent.

There is no need to dwell on the distinction between the woman's responsibility and that of the man. If, through being deceived, she was first in transgression, took the lead in it, it was on her part a violation of her subordinate position under the man a violation she voluntarily made. She deliberately ranged herself with the intruder. She had no excuse for being deceived; no necessity of being beguiled. Her position as in subjection to Adam was her protection against this. To have maintained the place God had put her in would have preserved her from the serpent's subtilty.

But if Adam was not deceived, he followed the woman-did it deliberately. He willed to follow the woman in transgression. Between maintaining his own God-given position of headship over the woman, and following her in disobedience, he freely chose the latter.

Now to realize the nature of this tragic event we must remind ourselves that Adam possessed a moral nature. God had constituted, him a moral being-a being capable of moral acts. We must also remember that God had intimated to him his privilege to learn the distinction between good and evil, but in fellowship with God, not through practical experience of, not by participating in, evil. Against this he was solemnly warned. He was told what he would forfeit by taking part in sin. It is after this that the intruder presents himself with, so to speak, a cup containing moral poison which he offers to Adam; and, alas! persuades him to drink of it.

In voluntarily taking this poison, Adam misses the end for which he was created. He was a being specially designed to glorify God in a way no other creature could; but, in yielding of his own will to the tempter's advice to disobey God, he failed to fulfil that design. He came short of glorifying God. In missing the moral purpose God had in view in his creation with the endowment of moral capacities, he also missed the privileges which God had connected with the fulfilment of this moral end. He missed the right to continue in the conditional immortality in which he had been created -an immortality in which the material body was to share with the soul in a state of immortal life, in which the body would be suited to participate in the highest functions of the immaterial spirit. But in saying that by his act of disobedience Adam missed the end for which the Creator had designed him, is not fully describing it; it is only one feature of it. By this act he also trespassed on the moral conduct which his Creator and Benefactor had imposed upon him. The missing of his end, we may call failure; as going beyond the rule to which he was to be subject, it is transgression. If he failed in the accomplishment of his responsibilities, of fulfilling his duty to God, it is also true that he went beyond what he was authorized to do. This aspect of his act was a transgression. We find it so spoken of in Scripture (Rom. 5:14; i Tim. 2:14).

Adam's disobedience had also the character of a defection from God. He stood in certain moral relationships to God-some of which are permanent. Having been created a moral being, the likeness of God is upon him whether in obedience or disobedience, though sin has sadly defaced that image. In his sinless condition, God looked upon him with complacency, and Adam was happy in this intimacy and fellowship with God practically realized. But when he drank of Satan's cup, the harmonious conditions in which he stood with God were violently broken. It was apostasy-turning away from the truth.

This disobedience had also the character of rebellion. It was a deliberate rejection of God's authority, the refusal of God's will; it was taking sides with one in open rebellion against God. This was revolt-against truth, against law, against God. It was not inability to withstand a superior force, but a wilful surrender of right and of obedience to His Benefactor who had clearly laid the issues before him. By disobeying he voluntarily set up his own will against the will of God, refusing Him as the dictator of his future, to be his own master. As this was not an act of ignorance, nor of weakness, it was iniquity, and rebellion. In his deliberate disobedience Adam was violating known relations to His Creator. In this light the iniquitous character of Adam's disobedience is very manifest.

Looking at the act as having these characteristics we can only regard it as a tragic event-a great moral catastrophe. It was an act in which Adam dishonored both God and himself; it was abandoning uprightness and purity, and deliberately choosing to be in a sinful state! What a fall ! What a fatal choice!-thus to turn the back on the Giver of all the good possessed, to be independent of Him to acquire a practical experience of evil ! It was deliberate self-destruction!

If Adam's disobedience was of such a nature as I have described, how abhorrent to God, to whom in the purity of His nature, in the absolute perfection of His holiness, in whom is no admixture of darkness, it was impossible to recognize sin, or have fellowship with a sinful, rebellious creature! Go 1 cannot concede to sin the right to be; its existence and presence in His universe must be as an outrage to Him. He must necessarily condemn the sinner. C. Crain

(To be continued.)