Is Adam our Federal Head?

 “Theology” is obviously driven by translation. In the following translation you will see that I chose to translate ἁμαρτία, κόσμον and θάνατος in ways that I believe more accurately reflect what Paul wrote to the Romans. Remembering that Rome was equivalent to our own hyper-political and corrupt Washington, D. C., those three words would have been understood as “legal technicalities.”


•  ἁμαρτία hamartia—failure

•  κόσμον kosmon—world-order [either legalities and/or customs]

• • θάνατος thanatos—death penalty pronounced by a judge

Romans 5:12 because of this, as it were, because of one human, the failure, in regards to the world order, came before the court, and because of the failure, the death-penalty also in this manner to all humanity, the death penalty, went abroad, upon this thing, everyone has failed. JWET

This verse, as can be seen does not speak of a “federal head” or even a “corporate head.” But as a result of Adam and Eve the world-order that had been established by God was disrupted. The miscreants were judged and pronounced guilty. Following the judgment came the penalty phase where “death” was pronounced. Therefore it can be seen that anyone who “fails” is under the death penalty. This is validated by Scripture itself—each person will judged for what they do—Romans 2:6.  As a final thought, Theology also influences translation.

Legalism

The issue is the difference between salvation and faithfulness.

Once a person is condemned as a sinner–he has sinned–he falls under the penalty of the law which is the death penalty. How are they then saved from that penalty?

The answer is that it is only by the grace of God–the favor of God–that we are saved. The condition of that grace being extended is by the “pistis” “assurance of good faith” that the supplicant makes to the court of God.

If we had been completely faithful in the beginning, there would have been no need for grace or favor of God. We would not have needed a Savior. However, as St. Paul states, “none has lived up to God’s expectations of faithfulness.” Therefore we need a savior.

Having sinned we cannot “unsin” ourselves by good works. We remain under the original death penalty until it is taken care of.

God taking care of the penalty by His grace–takes our pledge of fealty–faithfulness–to Him as a guarantee. If we fail in our faithfulness to His expectation again, “I would that you sin not,” we are once again in danger of coming under the penalty. Jesus told the woman in adultery to go and stop sinning unless another bad thing comes on her.

Our faithfulness in keeping God’s expectation is wrongly call salvation by works. Once we have had our position with God reestablished (saved), we are expected to keep the King’s law.

No salvation by works, just faithfully keeping the will of God after His mercy is given to us.

Joe

Romans 2:21-24

…the one declaring not to steal, you are stealing.  ²²The one saying not to worship idolatrously you are worshipping idolatrously, the one feeling a loathing towards those images you are stealing sacred property.  ²³ In that law you are boasting, because of the illusion of the Law of God, you are disfranchising.  ²⁴For because of you the name of God is slandered by the peoples…^{Romans 2:21-24 JWET}  

Aristotle deals with the same issue 400 years before Paul in Rhetoric …But since a man, while admitting the fact, 
often denies the description of the charge or the point on which it turns—for instance, admits that he took something, but did not steal it; that he was the first to strike, but committed no outrage; that he had relations, but did not commit adultery, with a woman; or that he stole something but was not guilty of sacrilege, since the object in question was not consecrated…

Burning the Koran

The advantage of commenting this far down the line is that I get to synthesize and remark on what has been said. 

1.     I want to ask what would have been communicated if a Koran had been burned. 

2.     And secondly, what has been communicated now that it wasn’t burned by Pastor?

It would have shown that Pastor and his congregation had a power over and a contempt for the Koran and the Muslim people.  In some circles this is called a “power encounter.”  In his mind this would have demonstrated the ascendancy of Christianity and the U.S. bill of rights and the inferiority of Sharia Law and Islam.  

The answer to the second question should now be evident.  Sharia Law and Islam have won the encounter and Christianity along with the bill of rights has been shown to be weak and morally inferior.

From the Western prospective this might not be obvious.  But Islam defined the confrontation in such a way that with either outcome they had a “recruiting tool.”  

• If the Koran was burned it would be a tool to show that the “infidels” were waging war on Islam.  
• When it wasn’t burned, it proved the divine favor of Allah and validated the call to “jihad.”

I am not able to comment on the mental acuity of Pastor, but I’m sure he had no idea that this would garner such attention.  I do think that he was used as a dupe.  My proof?  This past week in East Lansing, Michigan a Koran was burnt and thrown into the yard of an Islamic center.  Where is the worldwide Muslim outrage?  It doesn’t suit their purposes.  For the moment they have gained what they want.  They caused the “Great Satan” to back down.  This coup will be exploited, have no doubt.

In my years of living in a predominantly Islamic country in West Africa, I have seen that a “radical Islamist” is easily created from “nominal Muslims” through intimidation.  Even the most casual practitioner becomes violent when threatened in some way by the a radical Muslim extremists promising to harm them or their families.

However, take a Christian acting radically and the casual practitioner of Christianity will turn on him and eat him for lunch.  

The Politics of Biblical Submission

Is it possible that “political expediency” dictates our understanding of God’s instructions concerning submission?

            Submission implies an authority to which you must submit.  If you are the one in authority it is a prerequisite that someone is submitted to you.  After all, “A leader without any followers is just a guy taking a walk.”^Unknown   A leader is someone who: Goes before, Makes the hard decisions, Takes things in hand, Has his eye on the situation.  All of these snippets remind me of another quote, “…the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”^Serpent 

            But you say, “Doesn’t the Bible teach that we are to submit to the authority that God has put over us?” 

• A side note: What is learned in Church about “authority/submission” directly depends upon the translation of the Bible and thus indirectly upon the translation committee’s theology, politics and culture.

Our effort will be to examine several passages and how they relate to  “biblical authority and submission.”

Case study #1

            In this examination of Holy Scripture we will attempt to examine the Master’s command concerning submission to “worldly” authority.

^{1Peter 2:13}Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, ¹⁴or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. ¹⁵For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.
^NIV

Or a better translation:

            ^{1 Peter 2:13}You must be associated with every human establishment for the sake of the Lord, whether with a king as being elevated ¹⁴ or with leaders, as for His sake they being sent, avenging those doing ill but praising ones exerting beneficent influence. ¹⁵That in this way it is the will of God, exerting beneficent influence to restrain the ignorance of those thoughtless men. ^JWET

            It is important to set the context as Peter’s letter.  He begins by identifying the recipients as those who belong to God-the Master of all.  God has given to us a “new birth” (1:3) through His pleasure as Monarch.  This mercy is based on Christ’s resurrection from the dead.  Therefore as “sons” we have both obligations and privileges.

            Another part of this context is the “Roman World.”   The “father” or paterfamilias held a position both cultural and legal in Roman society that has no equivalent in Western societies.   There was only one “father of the family” per “gens” or what might be called a clan.

The paterfamilias had the “power-authority” over the family.  He was head of all slaves, servants and members of the extended family.  This power was a near absolute authority over those in his gens and he was also responsible for the good order of the family and liable for the wrongs the family members committed. 

In the context of 1 Peter, the “sons of God” only were submitted to God and not to any other paterfamilias!  But the permission to associate with other “families” was permitted for the purpose of the Paterfamilias. 

^{1 Peter 1:16}…for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."^NIV  What some might misconstrue as an injunction against any association with the ungodly, is explained by 1 Peter 2:13-15 JWET.  Be holy but be associated with those of other gens in order to influence for your Paterfamilias-God.

Are there any examples of this concept in the Old Testament?  The answer is yes.

1.     Daniel

a.     Nebuchadnezzar

b.     Belshazzar

c.     Darius

2.     Esther

a.     Ahasuerus

Daniel was successful with two out of three kings in influencing them for the good.  We know that he did not submit when it was contrary to his Paterfamilias-God.  Esther also influenced the king for the salvation of her people.

Is there anything detrimental in teaching that we are to submit to the rulers of this world? 

1.     The answer is definitely. 

a.     The harm is a “confusion” of allegiance.  I am “always” submitted to my paterfamilias never to another. 

b.     I am hindered in my influence of the “political” system when I think that I am to submit to it instead of associating with it for God's purpose. 

It is time to associate to influence for “good.”  Think about it.

We will deal with “women submit to men” in another place.