In this sermon, the preacher discusses the prevalence of warfare and vileness in the world, which he believes is a reflection of the fallen nature of humanity. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the ontological problem of human relations, which includes anger, retribution, and condemnation. The preacher suggests that the sin of man has cosmic consequences and that both salvation and sin have implications beyond individual actions. He also highlights the division and violence that arose in the human family after the fall, leading to a wickedness that corrupted the earth. The sermon draws from various passages in Genesis to support these points.

O Lord, O God, do Thou grant that we may be instructed by Thy Spirit so as rightly to assess and confess our utterly undone and hopeless position, that we may marvel more and more at the riches of Thy grace and appropriate that provision which resides in its fullness in Christ Jesus, so that if Christ is ours, all things are ours. To the glory of Thy name, through Christ our Saviour. Amen. Now our dealing with the consequence of this war that came to the present, in God's relation to man, I had just mentioned that, that not only is to man, God's relation to mankind, now in connection with the immutability of God, necessary to remember that God is immutable in His being, in His character, in His inter-divine relations, immutable in being, inter-divine relations and purposes, but God does. And particularly is that true with reference to His being, in His character and in His perfection, that He did change. Change arises from the fault, the sin of man in this rupture, eloquently in the early chapters of Genesis. When you read Genesis 3, you will notice the change of tone after Genesis 3-9. Tone, t-o-n-e, tone after Genesis 3-9. Before that, there is everywhere the tokens of favour, complacency and harmony. And now, an aspect of the divine character appears that is entirely new in divine human relations. Now you discuss the notes of recruitment, of anger, of retribution, of constant condemnation, of which there isn't the least suggestion in the earlier narratives, God's relation to man. You will notice it. And to the woman He said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy contempt. In pain thou shalt. To the man He said, Cursed is the ground for thy sake. In the sweat of thy feet shall there be bread, till thou return to the ground. For dust thou art, dust thou shalt return. And then, finally, therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out expulsion, expulsion of the tokens of God's complacency, His delight, His favour and of divine human comfort. So we must always take this into account, that sin not only makes a difference in man's attitude to God, but it makes a difference in God's attitude to man. And because there is that change in God's attitude to man, a radical change of relationship, our sins have separated between us and our God. And you know the scripture has a very expressive way of dealing with this question, speaks about the light of God's countenance, the light of God's countenance, His favour, His delight, His good pleasure. Now again, before this quest, the quest at the beginning, at the close of the hour yesterday, that this culture of relationship by which we are separating from God must never be dissociated from the attitude of heart and mind on the part of the soul. The attitude, what we might call the subject, the attitude on the part of the soul. And our conception of the living God is distorted and very dishonouring to him. We do not recognize why, why, in God, in the ignition of God, that it is an attitude, a disposition of this pleasure, and that the separation, the objective separation, is the result of that radical change in the attitude of God to man. Now third, under this we have cosmic revolution, cosmic revolution. That is revolution in the creation of cosmos. Now sin, we must remember, is an event in the heart and mind and will of man that belongs of course to the subjective realm of man's heart and mind and will. Sin is not physical disturbance or physical maladjustment. Sin, as I pointed out yesterday, is a movement in the realm of the human spirit. But, although it belongs to the subjective realm of man's attitude, man's heart and mind and will, nevertheless, radically affects the physical one. Radically affects that which is metaphysically diverse, namely the material, the physical, and that consequence is also emblazoned with that consequence. The curse upon Adam begins. Cursed is the crow. The cosmic implications of more than the curse upon Adam. Of course, in the New Testament, we have the commentary in much broader proportion. First of all, Genesis 3.17, and then the epistle of Paul to Romans chapter 8. Before creation of Rome, the creation itself was not willingly, but by reason of. And you see that in Genesis, this curse is spoken of in terms of the act. The act upon which, because it is a vow, we find that this extends all of the created order. All of the created order. Creation. And because of this, and because of the relationship that man sustains through the covenant, sustains through Christ, will not be consummated. Fruity. Will not come to its final fruity. Until the creation itself. The liberty of the glory of the church. And of course, in all eternity according to our new heavens. And a new earth. Now, this is great proportion. Significant for the creation. Was the sin of man. And how significant for redemption. Redemption. Salvation from sin. Because just as sin itself has its cosmic consequence. Well, you see how, after the pattern which you find in Genesis, how eloquently these interrelationships. I know it's true what I said, but I don't regret it. Therefore, revolution in the human family. Pardon me. I've dropped my voice. It's my fault. But, in any case, this is revolution in the human family. Not only upon Adam and Eve. It brought not only... And that means this is the creation. It brought a revolution. Family revolution. Another index to the corporate. The corporate implications. Because it has affected mankind organically and corporately. Hence, you see, in the immediate sequel to Genesis 3. In the immediate sequel. In the unfolding history of mankind. You have the catalog of sins. Which are indicative of the division. Entering into even family. These men receive the catalog of sins. You then read your malice, clearly in the case of Cain. And the malice, homicide, polygamy in the family of Cain. Violence. And so, after a long time, of course, as far as history is concerned. But very soon, in the record, you read. The wickedness of man was great. The earth was filled with violence. All flesh had corrupted its way. All flesh had corrupted its way from here. And perhaps, from the standpoint of this particular caption. The prevalence of warfare, of violence, is perhaps the most eloquent description. And then, finally, 5. We have revolution, if you will. But disintegration in man's own constitution. You remember how that is stressed in Genesis 5. With the record of the longevity. Always followed by the formula. Except in the case of Enoch. And he died. So you see, the early chapters of Genesis. Remind us of the principles of which we hold a subsequent biblical revelation. The importance in this respect of the latter part of Genesis 3, Genesis 4, Genesis 5, and Genesis 6. Parallel to the importance which must be attached to Genesis 1 and 2 in like manner. So that's that then. Now 3. Under the fall of man. In fact, I think the consequence is 3. Problems arise from the fall of man. Now, first of all, we have the ontological. The ontological problem. Now, what is the problem here? It is simply the problem of the divine. At least basically. But basically. Divine causality in relation to... I didn't say the divine causality in itself. The divine causality in relation to sense. Causality in relation to question. Well, there are two diseases that must be maintained. Well, there are two diseases that must be maintained. That God foreordained the fall of our first parents. It was rendered certain of occurrence. It was rendered certain of occurrence. After all, the certainty of all future events resides in the foreordination of God. That's right. The certainty of all future events resides in the foreordination of God. And not only did the divine foreordination ensure the certainty of the fall of man, the certainty of it as respects occurrence, not only did it ensure the certainty of the occurrence, but the fall of man occurred in the realm of God's all-controlling providence. His all-controlling providence. And therefore, the fall did not occur outside the sphere of God's foreordination and providence. Now, we are not expressly told that in connection with the fall. We're not told that in Genesis 3. But the arch crime of human history occurred in the bliss and foreknowledge of God. 2.23. Or perhaps 4.27. The determinate terms of the foreknowledge of God. The Scripture's stronger terms than those which occur in that text with reference to the determinate decree of God. The determinate. And if that is true, respecting the arch crime of Christ, it is also true of all. And of course, the evidence establishing the all-inclusiveness of God's indeterminate will and of His providence, then there is hope that the fact you would have dealt in 5.1.2, systematic theology. Therefore, getting away from that fact, according to the teaching of the second proposition, that Christ is not the author of sin. Not the author of sin. That means that for sin are sinful. For sin are sinful as violation of God's commandment. Man alone, and He alone. I repeat. For sin are sinful as violation of the commandment of God. Man alone is responsible, and He alone is the agent of execution. And hence, the responsibility for the act as sinful and as guilty. The responsibility of the act as sinful and as involving guilt. I should have said rather than guilty, as involving guilt. Christ did this with our first parents, and with them entirely. Now here it is necessary to get that rather clearly in mind. It is necessary to keep in view the relationship of these two propositions, the one to the other. It was God alone who foreordained the sin of Adam, and it was in God's providence that it was accomplished, or at least that it occurred. And of course, as far as foreordination and providence are concerned, God alone is the agent. He alone. Foreordination is God's, providence is God's. We do not speak of man's providence, of Satan's providence. God alone is God's providence. But within this most divine decree, that is foreordination, within this sphere of divine decree and providence, man's agency and responsibilities were real. They were not, such as agency and responsibility, were not abrogated, suspended, or curtailed by the foreordination and providence of God. That is to say, God's foreordination determined the act of this complex affair. The foreordination determined the act. It was accomplished in God's providence, but neither the foreordination nor the providence acted so as to deprive man of his freedom, responsibility, and agency. God's foreordination determined the act. The act was accomplished in God's providence, but neither the foreordination nor the providence acted to deprive man of his freedom, responsibility, and agency. Now don't, please don't take notes for a minute. I would go further than that. Not only was man's freedom, responsibility, and agency fully conserved, fully preserved, fully maintained, fully exercised within the sphere of God's foreordination and providence, but also developing that knowledge is simply because there was the divine foreordination, the all-controlling providence of God that man took without any impairment of his freedom, responsibility, and agency. But that's not the point now, so I don't want to burden the consideration with it. It's simply that the foreordination and providence of God did not act so as to deprive man of his freedom, responsibility, and agency. Now there is the problem. There is the problem that we cannot solve namely how it can be that from the standpoint of the divine decree and providence there is absolute certainty of occurrence, absolute certainty of occurrence, and yet from the standpoint of human responsibility, no interference, no interference with your impairment of his freedom and agency. In the providence of God, these two things are correlative. These two facts are correlative, certainty and freedom of occurrence. These two facts are correlative, and they're perfectly coherent within the foreordination and providence of God. But we are not able so to analyze the interrelationship. And we are not able so to analyze the interrelationship that we shall understand how they perfectly cohere and do not in any way impair the reality of the whole fact, or the reality of either fact. In the world of actuality now, before the bell swings, I think I can point to the difficulty, the problem, not to bring perplexity into our mind, but nevertheless to have the actual situation clearly in focus in our mind. Something occurs by the decreed will of God that is in direct contradiction with his revealed will. Something occurs by the decreed will that is in direct contradiction with his revealed will. That is to say that God decreed his will, what he preceptively forbid, personifies the decree of God in reference to the first sin, personifies the decree of God, and it would say, this will assuredly come to pass. Personifies the precept of God, it would say, this thou shalt not neglect. It applies to all things, wherever. It applies to all things, and in everything. In the realm of God, in the all-inclusive realm of God's power. The problem is not different from what it is all along the line of history. Probably more acutely felt, it is more acutely felt, because here we have the absolutely unique phenomenon, the unique event in humanity, the origin of sin. Now, the second problem, the psychogenic. And I believe, from past experience with Mr. Seminary, that this gives far more occasion for question than even the ontological. Because I think it is rather easy for, that was Mr. Seminary, to recognize the all-pervadedness of God's full ordination, the all-inclusiveness of his providence, and at the same time, responsibility of man for his sin. This question, I notice that there are always, always arising a connection with it, and all sorts of people, I'm not blaming anybody for entertaining, what is it, in a practically holy being, how could sin originate? Well, firstly, since they were created holy, and that's why the physical complex in which they had given themselves, was one of obedience and constitutive order. How could there be the transition from holiness to God? Well, as we noted yesterday, the cursed thing of God was seen from, and God prevailing through that, through attention. Therefore, that one disposition into the very, what is the modern and religious religion, how could it be? How could sin have any logic in the holy being? I can't answer the question. The third, we call dispensational problem, the dispensational problem, that has nothing to do with dispensationalism, but with this question, why did God foreordain the fall of mankind? Well, we'll stop there for the minute.