Adam in the nt

Adam U twice mentioned in tlie NT in a merely historical fashion ; in Jude v.", where we read of ' Enoch the seventh from A.,' and in Lk 3^, where the genealogy of Jesus is traced up to him, and A. himself is ' the son of God.' The extension of the gt^nealojry beyond David or Abraham (as in Mt) is no doubt due to the imiver- salist sjinpathy of the Pauline evangelist.

There are two other pa-vsages in which reference is made to the OT story of the first man, witii a \'ievf to regulating certain questions about the relations of men and women, esp. in public worship. The first is 1 Co 11"'-, the other 1 Ti 2"'-. The use made of A.

in these pa-ssages may strike a modem reader as not very conclusive ; it has the form rather than the power of what may have suggested it — the similar use of part of the OT stmy by Jesus to establish the true law of marriage (Mt 19-"-, comp. On 2*<). Much more significant than these almost inci- dental references is the place occupied by A. in the theology of St. Paul (lio 5', -', 1 Co 15,, "■'»). The apostle institutes a formal comparison and contra-st between A. and Christ. ' As in A.

all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.' ' As V)y one man sin entered into the world, and death bv sin, and so death pa.ssed upon all men, for that all sinned ' : so, thou''h the sentence is not formally completed (Ko 5'"), righteousness entered into the world by one man, and life by righteousness. ' The first man is of the earth, earthy ; the second man is of heaven. . And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.' In some sense A.

and Christ answer to each other; each is the head of humanitj-, the one to its condemnation and death, the other to its justification and life. Vet it would be a mistake to |)Ut what St. Paul says about A. on a footing with what he says about Christ. He has experience to go ujion \n the case of Christ; his gospel concerning 11 im has a certainty and scope of its own quite independent of the harmony he finds in some jioints between the mode of man s re- dem|ition and that of his ruin.

( )f the two passages referred to aliove, it may be said that the one in Ro deals directly with the work of A. and of Chri.st, and its ellects upon men ; the one in I Co, with tlie nature of A. and of Christ, as related re- spectively to the actual and the ideal condition of man. All we are told of A. is that he sinned {irapiirTufui, Ko 5", implies the fall), and that his sin involved the world in death.

In such a state- ment there is obviously a link wanting to an ethical interjiretation : is it supplied in the dilhcult words i<p' i} irdi'Tfs fiiiapTov — in that all (have) sinned ? That this aorist may (grammatically considered) be a collective historical aorist, summing up the aggre- gate evil deeds of men, is undoubted (liurton, N.T. Moods and Tenses, § b'l) ; but to take it so, and make finaprov refer merely to the personal sins of men, is to dissolve the connexion with A.

on which the apostle's argument depends. To say, again, that all men die because involved in the guilt of A.'s sin (Omnes prmtrunt, Adumo jicccimte, Bengel), is still to leave the moral link amissing. To say that all die because of inherited depravity, whl<h seems the only other po.ssible suggestion, is to oiler a physical rather than a moral connexion, though one which ni.'iy be assented to and appro- priated by the individual, and in that waj' become moral, ft seems probable that St.

Paul, although he is not explicit on the (Kiint, wouM have accepted thit view ; what he is concerned with is the solidarity or moral unity of the human race, and for this there is unuoubtedly a physical basis. Heredity is the modern name for the organic connexion of the generations ; and as the fact was familiar to the apostle, it is natural to suppose that he found in it the connecting link between the personal sin and doom of A. and that of his whole posterity. A.

, in other words, was to him not only the type, but the ancestor, of men as sinners ; it is in A. — or because of A. in us — that we are lost men. But A. is a ' type of him that is to come.' This idea (see Weiss, Romans, p. 243 n.) is found also in the Rabbins (Quemadmodum homo primus fuit primus in peccato, sic Messias erit ultimus ad auferendum peccatum penitus : and again, Adamus postremus est Messias). He is a type only in the sense that alike from A.

and Christ a pervasive influence should proceed, ex- tending to the whole human race. We are what A. was and became, in virtue of our vital relation to him ; we are to become what Christ was and became, in virtue of a vital relation to Him. This is the side of the subject treated in 1 Co 15. It can hardly be said to throw light on man's original state, or on the apostle's conception of it. The first A.

, in virtue oi our connexion with whom we are what we are before we become Christians, was a living soul, p.sychical rather than spiritual, made of the dust of the ground — in other words, he was man as nature presents him to our experience ; the last A., 6 iirovpavios, whose image we shall fully bear when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, was and is life-giving spirit.

It is too much to say, in face of Ro 5'- and tlie whole sense of the NT, that man's mortality is here traced, not to Adam's act, but to his nature. His act is not specially in view here any more than Christ's redeemmg acts, and his nature is indeed conceived as weak, and liable to temptation; but it is not less capable of immortality than of death ; and it is the sin of our first father to which death as a doom is invariably referred by St. Paul. LlTBRATCTRE.

— Copioufl discussions of all the questions involved may i)€ found (not to mention commentaries) in lleysclilac, S.T, 'J'hrologi/, ii. p. 4811.; Bruce, St. I'miTg Conception 0/ Chrit- tianiti/, e. vii. ; Weiss, Lehrlnich der. Ililil. Theol. det S'.T. i 67. For Jewish points of connexion with St. Paul's teacbinfr, see Weber, 2}U Lehren de$ TcUmxid, ca xv.-xvii. J. Dennev. ADAM City (DIN 'red').— In the Jordan 'Valley, ' far off' from Jencho, and beside Zarethan. The latter (.

see ZaketHAN) appears to have been near the centre of the valley (see Jos :i"'), and the usual site for Adam is at the present ruined bridge (built in the 13tli cent. A.D. ) at the Ddmieh ford, called Jisr ed-Dilmieh, about halfway up the Jordan Valley. The Jordan lieing narrow, with high banks, might have been dammed up in this vicinity by an extensive fall of the cliff. ISI(T\o\. ii. sh. xv. C. K. CONDEU.