Federalism vs. seminalism—which view is correct?

Response

Federalism and seminalism are two theories related to original sin and how Adam’s sin ultimately impacts the rest of the human race. Neither term is found in Scripture but has been coined to elucidate the biblical data.

Federalism views Adam as the representative head of all humanity. When Adam sinned, he did so not only for himself but as the representative (federal head) of all humanity. His decision was binding on all people of all time. Similarly, leaders of a government may engage in agreements with other nations, and those agreements are binding on all citizens, even if they had no direct input on the agreement and may be unaware of it. Adam sinned, thereby making himself and everyone he represented a sinner. Adam’s guilt (not just his sinful nature) is attributed to every human being.

Seminalism regards Adam’s sin as something that corrupted the human nature he passed on to his descendants, as the entire human race was genetically present in Adam. Adam’s guilt is not transmitted to his children, but his sinful inclinations are. His children, with their corrupted nature, willingly participate in Adam’s rebellion at the first opportunity and are therefore accountable for their own sin.

Both federalism and seminalism are within Christian orthodoxy. Both perspectives affirm the biblical teachings of original sin and total depravity. Both sides would wholeheartedly concur that, apart from Christ, people are spiritually dead «And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; », (Ephesians 2:1).

Seminalists typically refer to Hebrews 7:4–10 for validation. The author of Hebrews uses an incident in Abraham’s life to illustrate that the priesthood of Melchizedek surpasses that of Levi because Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek. How could Levi have feasibly paid tithes to

Melchizedek met Abraham before Levi was born. According to Hebrews, “when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, it was as if Levi were also paying tithes,” as Levi was “genetically present” within Abraham. This concept resembles seminalism, suggesting that the entire human race was “genetically present” within Adam at the time of his sin. However, drawing a theological conclusion about seminalism from Hebrews 7 is problematic because the writer clarifies in verse 9 that Levi’s payment of tithes was figurative. The writer uses this analogy to make a specific point understood by Jewish readers. Misinterpreting this analogy can lead us astray, as it is more emotional and rhetorical than biological. Hebrews 7:4–10 does not directly discuss seminalism or federalism; these concepts must be explored elsewhere.

Federalists support their position with Romans 5, where Adam represents fallen, condemned humanity, and Christ represents forgiven and renewed humanity. The crucial question for sinners is who will act as their representative before God.

However, a closer look at Romans 5 reveals that the federalist perspective is imposed on the passage rather than derived from it. Verse 12 states, “Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.” Federalists argue that the Greek word for “sinned” in the aorist tense in the phrase “because all sinned” refers to a single past instance—the moment Adam sinned. They claim that when Adam sinned, we all sinned. Yet, this interpretation of the aorist tense is incorrect. The aorist is used to express an action without emphasizing the tense.ny interpretation resting on the use of the aorist tense is on shaky ground because the interpreter is highlighting something that the writer chose to downplay by using the aorist tense. Romans 5:12 straightforwardly states that, through Adam, sin and then death spread to all people because all sinned (a truth evident to anyone with basic biblical knowledge and keen observation). The verse does not specify when or where all sinned—it merely presents an undeniable fact, emphasizing how death (not sin) extended to all.

Additional support for the federalist viewpoint is sought in the subsequent two verses (Romans 5:13-14): “For until the Law, sin was in the world, but sin is not counted when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses.” Once again, the main focus appears to be on death, rather than sin, although sin and death are closely connected. The federalist interpretation of the above verses suggests that there was no law from Adam to Moses, yet people still perished—and their deaths must have been a consequence of Adam’s sin. However, a more accurate interpretation of the text indicates that Paul is asserting that, even though the Mosaic Law was not given until Sinai, there must have been some form of divine law in effect because sin is not counted in the absence of law. It is evident that people were still committing sins, as demonstrated by the fact that people continued to die from Adam to Moses. The key point of the passage is that people transgressed some kind of law, even though they did not violate the Law of Moses. Depending on how the text is understood, the implications are nearly opposite. Either people died because they transgressed another law (seminalist), or they perished due to Adam’s sin, despite not personally sinning (federalist). The federalist interpretation appears problematic in light of the flood and the universal guilt outlined in Romans 1–2 without reference to the Law of Moses.

Lastly, the federaliSt points to 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, which states, “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” Here federalists see that representation is the issue. All who are represented by Adam are under condemnation, but all who are represented by Christ are redeemed. However, this is not an affirmation of the federalist position regarding original sin or anything that happened in the Garden of Eden. It simply describes the current situation. Furthermore, the passage also assumes that those who are represented by Christ have made a conscious decision to have Him represent them.

In conclusion, the passage that seminalists use to support their position really does not address the issue. Likewise, the passages that federalists use to support their position do not directly touch on the issue. The debate between federalism and seminalism has been ongoing for many years, and it is not realistic to imagine that this brief article will settle it. In the final analysis, Scripture condemns all people for their actual sin. However, humanity’s problem is not only individual acts of sin, but also a nature that is wholly steeped in sin. Individual sins are simply the result of a sin nature that we inherited from Adam. Paul goes to great lengths in Romans 1 and 2 to make the case that all people are guilty before God because they have broken the law as it has been revealed to them. He does not charge them with Adam’s sin. Therefore, it seems that the most natural reading of Scripture would lead one closer to the seminalist position.