19. Innocence Is not Holiness
Innocence Is not Holiness
Proceeding with our inquiry, it must be remembered, as already intimated, that Adam and Eve had no positive moral characters of their own, as long as they remained in the state of innocence in which God created them. Innocence they had, and in that state they were upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29), for God could have created them in no other way. But holiness of personal character they had not, for they had experienced neither good nor evil (Genesis 3:5; Genesis 3:22), and so were in a state of simple innocence, with a positive character of their own still to achieve. Having no positive holiness of their own, therefore, they could not go very far into an understanding and appreciation of God’s holy character, neither could they give any adequate response to His holy love, for the capacity to respond to holiness from a holy character of their own was not yet theirs. As Dr. Fairbairn has said, “Moral perfection can be attained, but cannot be created; God can make a being capable of moral action, but not a being with all the fruits of moral action garnered within him.” The forbidding of the fruit to them was thus for the very necessary purpose of bringing them out of their state of innocence into such positive characters of their own, as would give them adequate capacity to respond to God’s holiness and love, that thus they might be able to understand, desire and enjoy Him forever.
Innocence is simply the absence of sin, while holiness is the achievement of a personal character that is not only without sin, but also a positive personal possession acquired by one’s own responsible moral decision against sin. Innocence is a capacity for either sin or righteousness, waiting to be possessed by either, but still occupied by neither.
There is a teaching that man was created holy, but this is not borne out either by God’s Word or by logic. By scripture we learn that man was created “upright” (Ecclesiastes 7:29), which would mean, without any moral leaning, one way or the other, and would thus be a condition best described by the word “innocence.” From no scripture can it be inferred that man was created holy. By logic, also, since it is obvious that man is a finite being, we know that moral progress in some direction is inescapable. So we cannot assume that man was created in such a state that no moral progress is conceivable. We must distinguish, therefore, between the possibility in capacity and the possession in character of holiness, just as we do in fact distinguish in the same way regarding unholiness. For holiness is a state of perfection, and progress in perfection is impossible.
Again, man was created without any experiential knowledge of either good or evil (Genesis 3:5; Genesis 3:22). Good incarnated in a character by a deliberate choice is holiness, just as evil thus incarnated is unholiness, and so Adam and Eve possessed neither in their creation.
Moreover, holiness loathes the darkness of iniquity, just as unholiness hates the light of righteousness (John 3:19-20), the reaction of each toward its opposite being definite and positive. We know that Adam and Eve were not created with an aversion in either direction, and so we must conclude that they were neither holy nor unholy in their creation, but simply in a state of innocence, with the capacity for either.
Such a condition is thus a perfect setting for them to achieve a character all their own. For it can be accomplished by a deliberate moral choice on their own responsibility, and the single prohibition God gave them offered the opportunity for such a choice.