Critical Response to The Traditionalist Statement: Part 3 (Article 2)

By Mark W. Christy, PhD

This article is the third in a series designed to carefully consider the theological position against Calvinism taken by those who have signed what is called A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation (released in 2012). In short form, this document is commonly known as the Traditionalist Statement (TS) among Southern Baptists. Presently, comments will be made in response to Article 2 of the TS:

Article Two: The Sinfulness of Man

We affirm that, because of the fall of Adam, every person inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that every person who is capable of moral action will sin. Each person’s sin alone brings the wrath of a holy God, broken fellowship with Him, ever-worsening selfishness and destructiveness, death, and condemnation to an eternity in hell.

We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned. While no sinner is remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort, we deny that any sinner is saved apart from a free response to the Holy Spirit’s drawing through the Gospel.

Genesis 3:15-24; 6:5; Deuteronomy 1:39; Isaiah 6:5, 7:15-16;53:6; Jeremiah 17:5,9, 31:29-30; Ezekiel 18:19-20; Romans 1:18-32; 3:9-18, 5:12, 6:23; 7:9; Matthew 7:21-23; 1 Corinthians 1:18-25; 6:9-10;15:22; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Hebrews 9:27-28; Revelation 20:11-15

From the beginning, the first sentence offers an assessment of humanity’s sinfulness that could be easily understood to be semi-pelagian. While some framers might object to this label, being “inclined toward sin” and being completely in bondage to sin are mutually exclusive. The first phrase means one may sin, while second labels all person sinners even from the point of conception. This second position is the position held by both classical Arminians and Calvinists. Both sides affirm that the will is held in bondage due to the effects of Adam’s sin in a such a way that God’s saving grace is required for there to be any hope of release from bondage.

Unlike these positions in classical orthodoxy, the stance affirmed in Article 2 portrays God’s wrath as visited on people individually and exclusively when they sin and is not associated with their connection to Adam. In the Bible, the wrath of God is declared to be apportioned to all humanity in such a way that all humanity suffers from the wrath of God. Paul confirms five separate times in Romans 5 that God’s judgement, condemnation, and wrath came upon all people as the result of the sin of one man (12, 15, 17,18, 19). This truth, Paul argues, points to why One Man, Jesus Christ, can save people from their sin: “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” (Romans 5:18).[i]

In the denial of Article 2, the crafters of TS hope to preserve the freewill from the effects of the Fall. Nevertheless, the scriptural support they provide fails to add weight to their views. Before a responsible believer can hold to the idea that the freewill exists outside of the bondage caused by sin, one must first address the many Scriptures that seem to declare the alternative. For example, Jesus Himself says that salvation requires the God’s handiwork: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:44, cf. Rom 8:7-8). Clearly, a person’s coming to Jesus is dependent on God’s drawing as opposed to a person’s responding.

A further concern within the denial is the issue raised in regard to whether Adam’s guilt has been imputed to all of his descendants. In Romans 5:16, Paul connects the condemnation of all humanity with Adam’s one sin and the justification of all of those being saved with Christ’s one righteous act: “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.” John Macarthur, in support, writes, “The fact that Adam and Eve not only were actual historical figures but were the original human beings from whom all others have descended is absolutely critical to Paul’s argument here and is critical to the efficacy of the gospel of Jesus Christ. If a historical Adam did not represent all mankind in sinfulness, a historical Christ could not represent all mankind in righteousness. If all men did not fall with the first Adam, all men could not be saved by Christ, the second and last Adam.”[ii]

[i]All Scripture references are taken from NASB1995.

[ii]John Macarthur, Inheriting Adam’s Sin, Grace to You (November 5, 2020), Available at: https://www.gty.org/library/bibleqnas-library/QA0290/inheriting-adams-sin.