Chapter # 5 Paragraph # 2 Study # 4
May 2, 2006
Lincolnton, N.C.

<218> Thesis: Adam was the "type" of Christ, but only in two "areas" of characteristics. Introduction: Last week we looked into Paul's argument that "humanity" is an integrated "whole" that cannot be destroyed by the sub-thesis of individuality. Individuality is a reality. But it is only such as a sub-thesis of the greater fact of the unity of humanity. Paul's argument is made theologically, historically, and judicially so that we can understand that when Adam sinned, we sinned. Now, it is a fact that the majority of humanity does not embrace this "unity" thesis and rebels -- sometimes rather violently -- to it. But, there is a very good reason for all of us to be very careful about such a reaction: Paul claims that Adam was a "type" of Christ. So, if we throw off our "unity" with Adam, it is highly likely that we will never get to any real kind of "unity" with Christ. That is a most dangerous possibility since there is no salvation apart from being "in Christ". This evening we are going to investigate Paul's claim that Adam was a "type" of Christ so that we may see as clearly as possible what he meant.