Previous and Other Pages of Article: Biblical Context
< BACK / 1 /
2 / 3 / 4
Mankind was physically connected to Adam
Augustine (The Realistic or Seminal View)
Augustine of Hippo (354-430) is regarded as one of the greatest church Fathers of the Catholic Church. By fusing philosophy with
theology, he taught with great clarity, and as a theologian, his theories inspired advances and greater understanding of Church
doctrine. In time his writings had great influence on the Western Roman Empire. The "Realistic/Seminal Theory," developed by
Tertullian, Augustine, and Anselm, was based on a realistic union between Adam and his descendants. They sought to understand the
solidarity and universality of Adam's sin in Romans 5:12.
Augustine's view of the Original Sin is largely responsible for the confusion of the definition of Original Sin. Up until
Augustine, the term "Original Sin" referred to the sinful nature of man. Augustine introduced the idea that "Original Sin" included
the penalty of committing a sin. In Augustine's view, when Adam committed his sin, all of mankind committed it with him.
How Augustine reads Romans 5:12
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread
to all men, in whom all sinned."
1. Based on his studies, Augustine felt strongly that the sin of Adam did not only directly affect himself, but
also all of mankind. And because the Greek prepositional phrase in Romans 5:12, eph ho, was translated as "in whom," Augustine
felt that this could only occur if everyone was literally (genetically) "in the loins of Adam." The guilt of Adam was justly charged,
because humanity was physically present when Adam committed the sin. In Adam's sin all people actually sinned.
The Greek prepositional phrase, eph ho, is made up of a preposition epi and a relative pronoun
ho. Depending on the immediate context and the case of the noun (or pronoun), the preposition epi can have several
different meanings.
The relative pronoun ho can be either masculine or neuter in gender. Based on the words "one man" as the
antecedent in the first clause, Augustine took the relative pronoun ho as masculine and gave the preposition eph the
meaning "in." Thus the prepositional phrase became, in lumbis Adami, which is "in the loins of Adam."
2. There was some biblical evidence to support this view in Hebrews 7:9-10.
"And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the
loins of his father when Melchizedek met him." (Hebrews 7:9-10)
This passage is where Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek because he was "in the body of his ancestor."
Problems with this interpretation
1. While in the making of the Latin Vulgate Bible, translating from Greek into Latin, Jerome mistranslated
Romans 5:12. Instead of saying "because all sinned," he said "in whom all sinned."
Thus, in explaining something that was not really found in the Text, Augustine's view generates more questions: a) how is it possible
that all of humanity be considered individually participating in the sin while "physically" in Adam? Or b) why aren't the subsequent
sins of Adam and our ancestors imputed on us as well?
2. A closer analysis of Hebrews 7:9-10 indicates that this
passage does not support the Realistic/Seminal view. The context of this passage is about the greatness of Melchizedek, who is
portrayed as one who received tithes from Abraham. The author of the epistle used a figure of speech to acknowledge that Levi, a
descendant of Abraham, did not literally pay tithes to Melchizedek.
3. The Realist / Seminal View disrupts the analogy between Adam and Christ. If there was a real physical connection
between Adam and humanity, why wasn't one present with Christ and humanity? Humanity was not physically in Christ when He was
crucified, yet justification was made available to man.
Mankind was not physically connected to Adam
Pelagianism (Example View)
Pelagius (354-418) was a monk from Britain and a contemporary to Augustine. He was a man of high moral character and disagreed
with orthodox theology. His theology said that man was basically good and had control of his own eternal destiny. He denied the
doctrine of Original Sin, and denied the necessity for the atoning sacrifice by Christ.
How Pelagius reads Romans 5:12
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread
to all men, because all do (or have) sinned."
1. The charge of the Original Sin was not imputed upon humanity. Man is only responsible for his own personal sins.
2. Introduced by the Original Sin, the corruption of Adam's human nature was not inherited by man. Each person is
born with a good and sin free nature with the same ability to choose whether to obey or disobey God as Adam.
3. Man has the ability and free will to be free of sin; salvation was possible through either the Old Testament
Law or New Testament Gospel.
Problems with this interpretation
1. The Greek phrase, εφ ω παντες ημαρτον,
found in Romans 5:12 rendered correctly reads "because all sinned." Pelagius'
interpretation of "because all do (or have) sinned" is an incorrect reading of the Greek text. Specifically it is inconsistent
with the aorist tense (form of the verb) of ημαρτον which, with its object, is simply "all sinned."
It is one action in the past tense: all sinned through one man. Because of this, there is no reference to sins subsequent to Adam.
2. Within the context of Romans 5:12,
ημαρτον cannot refer to the personal sins of men. Paul's argument and logic was to first establish
that Adam's sin, not our own, was the cause of death. Within the context of Romans 5:12-19,
it is stated no less than five times that only one sin caused death to all of mankind.
3. Verses 13 and 14 indicate that Adam's sin was very unique. While personal sins were not counted when there was
no Law, people still died.
4. If Pelagius believes that Adam's sin is his own without any consequence to humanity, it destroys Paul's analogy
between Adam and Christ (see v. 12 "just as" and v. 18 "so then"). Paul's illustration of justification by Christ is lost without the
reference to the condemnation of humanity for the sin of Adam.
Although a great moral reformer, Pelgius was declared a heretic, and his views and teachings were condemned; he and his followers
were excommunicated.
Semi-Pelagianism
The term Semi - Pelagian first appeared in Melanchthon's Formula of Concord (1577). It refers to a doctrine that followed the
excommunication of Pelagius. The rejection of Pelagius did not mean the total acceptance of Augustine's views. Augustine's view of
Imputed Sin meant that salvation could not be earned, and no one could be saved without the special gift of Divine grace. Semi-Pelagians
felt that this was wrong, because it destroyed the freedom of man's will and responsibility; they believed man had some role in
salvation, and that his unaided will performed the initial act of faith.
How Semi-Pelagians read Romans 5:12
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread
to all men, because all sinned."
1. Imputed Sin does not exist. Man is not legally responsible for Adam's sin.
2. Adam was not completely corrupted with the commission of his sin. Because all things created by God are good,
human nature is neither good nor bad, nor dead to sin, but merely sick. He was depraved physically and mentally, but not volitionally.
Evil can exist temporarily like a parasitic element inside of man. Thus, Adam did not have a truly sinful human nature but rather, a
moral weakness and inclination for evil, and this pollution is passed from father to son.
3. Man has the ability to counteract the effect of this inherited depravity and cooperate with the Spirit of God
in regeneration. If some are not born again, it must be due to the failure of the human will to cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
Problems with this interpretation.
1. The Semi-Pelagians' view of death is only physical; it does not explain the spiritual death seen with the
expulsion of Adam and Eve from God's presence.
2. The Greek verb tense of "all sinned," is unmistakably clear: there was one singular event of one sin that took
place and was attributed to all. The design of the verb is incompatible with any plural or reference to the personal sins of men.
3. Verses 13 and 14 substantiates the statement of verse 12, and do not prove that all men personally sin but
exactly the opposite.
4. In the analogy between Adam and Christ, 1) Adam and Christ are direct causes of sin and redemption, and 2)
spiritual death (the separation of man from God) is contrasted with redemption (the reunion of man with God). If the Semi-Pelegian
view is accepted, the analogy breaks down since 1) man, not Adam, is emphasized as being responsible for his own sin, and 2) physical
death (the separation of body and soul) is emphasized as the contrast to redemption.
The debates about sin and grace were heated. Proponents included John Cassian (360-435), Hilary of Arles, Vincent of Lerins, and
Faustus of Riez. Augustine argued against Semi-Pelagianism until his death with his work Grace and Free Will and Rebuke
and Grace. The debates continued well after Augustine's death.
While the Eastern Orthodox Church accepted it, the Roman Catholic Church condemned the movement in the Council of Orange and
Valence (529). Semi - Pelagianism eventually died out; however, the debate of the human will over the grace of God in the initial
work of salvation continues to this day.
Arminianism
Once a strong advocate of Dutch Reformed theology, Jacob Arminius (1560-1609) became disillusioned with certain aspects of
Calvinism. Consequently he developed some modification, which after his death, was systematically developed further and published
in five articles called Arminian Articles of Remonstrance (1610).
He did not agree with Calvinism's view of the total depravity of man's nature and total sovereignty of God where man had no free
will. Arminius felt that man has a role in determining his own destiny.
How Arminius reads Romans 5:12
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread
to all men, because all sinned."
1. The clause in Romans 5:12, "because all sinned," means that
all people suffer the consequences of Adam's sin only when personally consenting to their evil inclinations and committing a sinful
act. Man is only liable for sins committed personally, consciously, and volitionally.
2. Arminius did not believe in Imputed Sin. Man inherits the tendency to commit evil, but this corrupt nature is
not sin and thus is not charged to one's account.
3. Because of his corrupt nature, man does not have the ability to attain righteousness; however, the corruption
passed down from Adam is only physical and intellectual and not volitional. Thus man has the will to initiate and cooperate with the
Holy Spirit in achieving justification.
Problems with this interpretation.
1. The Greek aorist tense (form of the verb) of ημαρτον, with its object, is
simply "all sinned." It is one event in the past tense: all sinned through one man. Because of this, there is no reference to sins
subsequent to Adam.
2. Within the context of Romans 5:12,
ημαρτον cannot refer to the personal sins of men. Paul's argument and logic was to first establish
that Adam's sin, not our own, was the cause of death. Within the context of Romans 5:12-19,
it is stated no less than five times that only one sin caused death to all of mankind.
3. The Arminian view of death is only physical; it does not explain the spiritual death seen with the expulsion of
Adam and Eve from God's presence.
4. It is inconsistent with the parallelism drawn between Adam and Christ in the passage for many reasons among them:
if we are condemned by inherent corruption, are we justified by inherent righteousness?
At the Synod of Dort in 1619, the five articles of Remonstrance was rejected and condemned. But this theological view did not end
and continues perhaps as the most popular view in Christianity today.
Also known as the Theory of Condemnation for Depravity, the Mediate Imputation View was developed by Josua Placeus (1596-1655).
Placeus originally denied all imputation of Adam's guilt. But when facing condemnation and censure by the Synod of the French Reformed
Church in 1644, he altered his view.
Placeus could not accept the Federal view that man was immediately imputed for Adam's sin at the moment of birth. He held that no
one was guilty of Adam's sin; rather, it was the corrupt human nature that was inherited. Therefore, because man is depraved by human
nature, exhibits the same disobedient attitude, and commits the same sinful acts as Adam, God is just in punishing man. This became
known as the "mediate and subsequent" imputation of sin. Many theologians at the time felt that Placeus' distinction was an
over-refinement that was unnecessary and explained nothing; it was Arminianism in disguise.
John Wesley (1703-1791) and later Arminians would further develop this view with the following explanation:
1) God creates the soul perfect and not depraved.
2) The new physical body is corrupt from the inheritance of Adam's sin.
3) When the body and soul is joined, the soul is corrupted.
Mankind was represented by Adam
Federal View (Immediate Imputation)
This theory, also called the Theory of Condemnation by Covenant and the Immediate Imputation Theory, originated with Johannes
Cocceius (1603-1669), professor at Leyden, and more fully elaborated by Turrentin (1623-1687). This view holds that God made Adam
the representative of the human race and because he was our legally constituted representative, his sin was legally imputed to us.
The Federal View is considered immediate imputation, because Adam's sin is immediately the basis for the condemnation of mankind
and which results in a corrupt nature that is eventually passed down. In contrast, the Arminian View considers Adam's sin as the basis
for a corrupt nature and which results in condemnation; the imputation of sin is mediate.
How the Federal View reads Romans 5:12
"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread
to all men, because all sinned."
This view considers the whole scope of the passage and best reflects Paul's logic and analogy.
1. All are spiritually and physically dead because of one sin.
2. All are spiritually and physically dead because one sinned.
3. With imputed sin, the analogy of Adam and Jesus is consistent and most easily understood.
Problems with this interpretation
1. There is no biblical evidence that Adam was authorized by mankind to be its representative or to make a
covenant agreeing to any conditions. What does this say about God's justice?
2. If God created all things that are good, how can man be created in a depraved state already a sinner? This
would mean that God is the author of sin.
The analogy of Adam and Jesus Christ illustrate the biblical principle of imputation. Angels who sin have no such representative
in salvation. While the doctrine of Imputed Sin may be hard to reconcile with its implications of being born with sin, one must
consider the possibility that it may be a consequence of just judgment.
Previous and Other Pages of Article: Biblical Context
< BACK / 1 /
2 / 3 /
4