Romans 5 and original sin?

[jdbear]

Is Paul teaching that all of mankind is born with original sin because of our first parent? Personally, I don't believe so.

 

[Knee V]

He says nothing of the sort. However, if you've been trained to read "original sin" into Scripture, then it's easy to think Paul is saying that.

 

[jdbear]

Hey knee-v. We're on the same page. It was hard for me to change the way I think after years of being taught the doctrine of original sin.

 

[jdbear]

The penalty for sin is death. We die because we commit sin, not because sin is inherited from Adam.

Romans 5:12
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.

The Bible plainly tells us Gods people developed a false notion that children were responsible for the sin committed by their father:

The word of the Lord came to me again: “What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As I live, says the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sins shall die. Eze.18:1-4

The proverb above is still used by Christians, contrary to Gods own instruction.

 

[jdbear]

Romans 5:13-14
Sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam...

Proponents of original sin claim "sin is not imputed" means God doesn't hold people responsible for committing sin if there is no law, so those who lived between Adam and Moses died because of inherited sin, but Romans 2 defeats this error:

Romans 2:14-15
When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them.

Paul is clearly teaching that people are guilty or innocent based on what they know to be wrong or right.

Romans 5:13-14 means people were committing sins (sin was in the world), even though it wasn't called sin (sin is not counted where there is no law.) People from Adam to Moses died without law (without direct command from God) unlike the transgression of Adam.

 

[Knee V]

The penalty for sin is death. We die because we commit sin, not because sin is inherited from Adam.

Romans 5:12
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.

The Bible plainly tells us Gods people developed a false notion that children were responsible for the sin committed by their father:

The word of the Lord came to me again: “What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As I live, says the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sins shall die. Eze.18:1-4

The proverb above is still used by Christians, contrary to Gods own instruction.

Although I would disagree with using the word "penalty". That, too, is an example of reading into the text what is not there.

 

[jdbear]

knee-v said,
Although I would disagree with using the word "penalty". That, too, is an example of reading into the text what is not there.

I don't think it is. A penalty is a consequence for an action. Death is the consequence for sin.

 

[Knee V]

I don't think it is. A penalty is a consequence for an action. Death is the consequence for sin.

I agree that death is the consequence. I suppose that I understand the word "penalty" much differently. As I understand "penalty", a penalty only comes when someone deliberately inflicts it on someone. For example, if I steal someone's car, I don't go to jail until someone puts me there, as jail is the penalty for stealing a car. But if I jump off a bridge I will hit the ground no matter what, as falling to the ground is the natural consequence of jumping. Thus death is the consequence of sin, but it is not something that God has to deliberately inflict on us; it just happens.

Perhaps you don't agree?

 

[jdbear]

knee-v said,
I agree that death is the consequence. I suppose that I understand the word "penalty" much differently. As I understand "penalty", a penalty only comes when someone deliberately inflicts it on someone. For example, if I steal someone's car, I don't go to jail until someone puts me there, as jail is the penalty for stealing a car. But if I jump off a bridge I will hit the ground no matter what, as falling to the ground is the natural consequence of jumping. Thus death is the consequence of sin, but it is not something that God has to deliberately inflict on us; it just happens.

Perhaps you don't agree?

I respectfully disagree, as death is the natural consequence of sin and seems to be something God deliberately imposes.

Romans 5:12 says death spread to all because all sinned. The knowledge of good and evil (equal to law) is what Adam passed to us, not inherited sin.

 

[jerusalem]

This is an interesting discussion. I agree that we are not responsible for the sin of Adam, as we read in Scripture, but we are affected by the consequences.

In the Genesis account of creation, Adam was able to live forever by reason of the tree of life of which he could eat (Gen.3:22-24). Nevertheless, Adam’s ‘immortality’, was contingent on his obedience. The moment he sinned, the provision of the tree of life was taken away. Thus, the first man through sin became subject to death, as God had warned. Adam’s punishment, therefore, when he was removed from the garden and the vital food that could have sustained him, was that he lost the grace to live forever. He was thereafter destined to die according to that mortal nature with which he was created. That man should suffer death – according to his mortality – became the lot of all because of man’s choice to sin. Nevertheless, even though all men are appointed to die in body as a result of the judgment on Adam because of sin, God did not leave man without hope. Instead of the former tree of life in the garden, man is now invited to receive of Jesus – the ‘true vine’ (John 15:1), and His children are those who abide in Him, bearing fruit of righteousness in obedience to His commands.

As a result of Adam’s sin, therefore, all mankind became subject to death, under the same judgment (Rom.5:18). Mortal death of the body became man’s lot, just as it is the lot of all earthly creatures. Man was created to live if he chose to obey (the law of God) or die if he chose to sin. In the beginning, man chose death. In symbolic terms, Adam’s removal from the garden was also symbolic of his being removed from God’s presence. Through sin, therefore, man was condemned to suffer mortal death. – We can read that a second and final death will occur when God will judge the wicked. (But this is perhaps a little off topic!)

J

 

[holyrokker]

This is an interesting discussion. I agree that we are not responsible for the sin of Adam, as we read in Scripture, but we are affected by the consequences.

In the Genesis account of creation, Adam was able to live forever by reason of the tree of life of which he could eat (Gen.3:22-24). Nevertheless, Adam’s ‘immortality’, was contingent on his obedience. The moment he sinned, the provision of the tree of life was taken away. Thus, the first man through sin became subject to death, as God had warned. Adam’s punishment, therefore, when he was removed from the garden and the vital food that could have sustained him, was that he lost the grace to live forever. He was thereafter destined to die according to that mortal nature with which he was created. That man should suffer death – according to his mortality – became the lot of all because of man’s choice to sin. Nevertheless, even though all men are appointed to die in body as a result of the judgment on Adam because of sin, God did not leave man without hope. Instead of the former tree of life in the garden, man is now invited to receive of Jesus – the ‘true vine’ (John 15:1), and His children are those who abide in Him, bearing fruit of righteousness in obedience to His commands.

As a result of Adam’s sin, therefore, all mankind became subject to death, under the same judgment (Rom.5:18). Mortal death of the body became man’s lot, just as it is the lot of all earthly creatures. Man was created to live if he chose to obey (the law of God) or die if he chose to sin. In the beginning, man chose death. In symbolic terms, Adam’s removal from the garden was also symbolic of his being removed from God’s presence. Through sin, therefore, man was condemned to suffer mortal death. – We can read that a second and final death will occur when God will judge the wicked. (But this is perhaps a little off topic!)

J

I don't think it's off topic. Do you think it is fair to summarize what you've stated here by saying that humanity "inherits" mortality from Adam?

 

[jdbear]

jerusalem said,
As a result of Adam’s sin, therefore, all mankind became subject to death, under the same judgment (Rom.5:18). Mortal death of the body became man’s lot, just as it is the lot of all earthly creatures.

And here is another proof that defeats original sin:

Romans 5:18
"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

Paul is using an opposite but equal example of Adams sin contrasted against Jesus gift. If viewed the way proponents of inherited sin see it, Jesus atonement would have to be applied to every sinner in a manner that would erase their sins, the same way Adams transgression made them sinful, but it doesn't. Therefore, original sin cannot be true.

Jerusalem said,
We can read that a second and final death will occur when God will judge the wicked. (But this is perhaps a little off topic!)

Not off topic, but the problem then might become God judging mankind twice for the same offences.

 

[jerusalem]

I don't think it's off topic. Do you think it is fair to summarize what you've stated here by saying that humanity "inherits" mortality from Adam?

Just a short reply for now, because its rather late where I am.

Man was created with a mortal nature. This came from God, but along with that nature man was given the conditional grace to live forever. This was also the view of early Church fathers, such as Irenaeus, Augustine and Athanasius. Adam fell from that grace and the consequences are felt by all mankind.

J

 

[jerusalem]

And here is another proof that defeats original sin:

Romans 5:18
"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

Paul is using an opposite but equal example of Adams sin contrasted against Jesus gift. If viewed the way proponents of inherited sin see it, Jesus atonement would have to be applied to every sinner in a manner that would erase their sins, the same way Adams transgression made them sinful, but it doesn't. Therefore, original sin cannot be true.


Not off topic, but the problem then might become God judging mankind twice for the same offences.

It is written in Hebrews 9:27: ‘It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment’ (NKJ). The New English Bible has it: ‘It is the lot of men to die once, and after death comes judgment.’ – Judgment follows death. The first death is not the final judgment of God for our sins. It is simply that to which mortal man is appointed. It is not the second death of which we read in Matthew: ‘And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [Gr. Gehenna]’ (Mat.10:28, NKJ). In Revelation, it is written: ‘Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power …’ (Rev.20:4, NKJ). ‘The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death’ (Rev.20:13-14, NKJ). Clearly Jesus did not pay this penalty.

Man became appointed to die according to his mortality when denied everlasting life because of sin. This, as said, was the judgment that came upon Adam and all mankind. It was to this corruption of death that man was made liable.

In discussing "original sin" and its consequences, it is also necessary to consider the 'origin of the soul' and whether or not man is born with a sinful nature. Aside from Scripture, experience itself tells us that man has a sinful nature, without exception. If we inherit a sinful nature, can this be indicated through scientific investigation? - Research into whether or not traits of character and personality are inherited have revealed surprising results that would appear to suggest that these traits are not just the results of social conditioning. There is scientific evidence to believe that traits can be passed on 'genetically'. (If you wish to read some of the findings, see the sub-heading: "Is the sinful nature in man inheritable?")

Back to Scripture: We can argue that the responsibility for the actual act of the first sin belonged to Adam, but that doesn't mean that the nature of mankind was not affected as a result.

‘For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous’ (Rom5:19, NKJ).

This verse (note "many" - not all) would appear to support the view that man inherits a sinful nature – a nature corrupted by and tending to sin. As a Christian, one should realize that man was not created this way, but acquired a corrupted nature as a result of acting sinfully – against God and against his innate conscience. David, in one of his psalms, wrote: ‘Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me’ (Ps.51:5, NKJ). As a prayer of repentance, ‘hyperbole’ here would seem out of place. The obvious reading implies a confession of sinfulness of nature from birth. In another psalm, we find: ‘The wicked are estranged from the womb; these who speak lies go astray from birth’ (Ps.58:3, NASV). Now, of course, although one might perhaps claim the use of hyperbole in this verse – babies can’t speak lies from birth – the wickedness of nature implied would seem affirmed by medical research concluding that psychopaths are born with a nature inclining them to this disposition.

Regards,

J

 

[jdbear]

Jerusalem said,

It is written in Hebrews 9:27: ‘It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment’ (NKJ). The New English Bible has it: ‘It is the lot of men to die once, and after death comes judgment.’ – Judgment follows death. The first death is not the final judgment of God for our sins. It is simply that to which mortal man is appointed. It is not the second death of which we read in Matthew: ‘And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [Gr. Gehenna]’ (Mat.10:28, NKJ). In Revelation, it is written: ‘Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power …’ (Rev.20:4, NKJ). ‘The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death’ (Rev.20:13-14, NKJ). Clearly Jesus did not pay this penalty.
Man became appointed to die according to his mortality when denied everlasting life because of sin. This, as said, was the judgment that came upon Adam and all mankind. It was to this corruption of death that man was made liable.
It's a given that judgement comes after death, but since the penalty for sin is death, death should be the end of it. Why a 2nd death?
In discussing "original sin" and its consequences, it is also necessary to consider the 'origin of the soul' and whether or not man is born with a sinful nature. Aside from Scripture, experience itself tells us that man has a sinful nature, without exception.
If we inherit a sinful nature, can this be indicated through scientific investigation? - Research into whether or not traits of character and personality are inherited have revealed surprising results that would appear to suggest that these traits are not just the results of social conditioning. There is scientific evidence to believe that traits can be passed on 'genetically'. (If you wish to read some of the findings, see the sub-heading: "Is the sinful nature in man inheritable?")
Back to Scripture: We can argue that the responsibility for the actual act of the first sin belonged to Adam, but that doesn't mean that the nature of mankind was not affected as a result.
‘For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous’ (Rom5:19, NKJ).
This verse (note "many" - not all) would appear to support the view that man inherits a sinful nature – a nature corrupted by and tending to sin. As a Christian, one should realize that man was not created this way, but acquired a corrupted nature as a result of acting sinfully – against God and against his innate conscience. David, in one of his psalms, wrote: ‘Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me’ (Ps.51:5, NKJ). As a prayer of repentance, ‘hyperbole’ here would seem out of place. The obvious reading implies a confession of sinfulness of nature from birth. In another psalm, we find: ‘The wicked are estranged from the womb; these who speak lies go astray from birth’ (Ps.58:3, NASV). Now, of course, although one might perhaps claim the use of hyperbole in this verse – babies can’t speak lies from birth – the wickedness of nature implied would seem affirmed by medical research concluding that psychopaths are born with a nature inclining them to this disposition.
Regards,
J

Don't agree with any of this, as sin is a matter of knowledge. It's learned:
sin is the transgression of the law. 1 Jn.3:4
to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. Ja.4:17

Ideas aren't passed through genetics.

 

[Clare73]

The penalty for sin is death. We die because we commit sin, not because sin is inherited from Adam.

Romans 5:12
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.

Thanks, jd, for the invite to your thread.

But Ro 5:12 has to be understood in terms of the whole context of Ro 5:12-21.
It's not an easy text, and will take some verbage to exegete.

Let's begin first of all with the wages of sin is death (Ro 6:23), all death is caused by sin.
And all sin is trangression of the law (1Jn 3:4), which is lawlessness.

Then secondly, the Bible teaches that we are born spiritually dead (Ge 2:17; Eph 2:1; Col 2:13) in unbelief and condemned to damnation (Jn 3:18b-19, 36).

And thirdly, spiritual death does not mean man's spirit is dead, rather it means it no longer has Holy Spirit life, or eternal life, which Adam lost when he rebelled.

With these Biblical facts in mind, we can now move to Ro 5:12-21, where the Bible establishes our personal responsibility for this condemnation into which we are born. . .with two illustrations to show that unregenerate man is responsible for the sin of Adam's transgression.

1) In vv. 12-14, the Bible shows that even those from Adam to Moses, who were not guilty of the sin of transgression (because there was no law to transgress, Ro 4:15, 5:13), died anyway (v.14)--proof that God held them all guilty ("all sinned," v.12)
of the sin ("sin was in the world," v.13) of Adam's transgression,
because that was the only sin of transgression in the world that could cause them to be guilty of death (Ro 6:23).

Now this is the first Biblical fact with which you must reckon. . .why all men died when sin, which is the only cause of death, was not taken into account (5:13).
(The law of God which Adam transgressed was, "Thou shalt not eat of it.")
Moving on, in vv. 15-16, the Bible contrasts, and then

2) in vv. 17-19, the Bible parallels the trespass of Adam and the righteousness of Jesus Christ, to show the Biblical principle which is involved.
Note that in v. 18, the Bible states that we are all condemned by Adam's trespass, just as we are made righteous by Christ's obedience.

Christ was a second Adam (v.14; 1Co 15:45), meaning that our interest (involvement) in the two of them is of the same nature (1Co 15:22).
In one man we were made sinners, just as in one man we are made righteous.
The Bible is drawing clear parallelisms of imputation in vv. 18-19, so that the last half of each verse gives the true meaning of the first half of each verse.
In neither half of the parallel does the outcome (guilt, righteousness) have anything to do with what mankind did, or our involvement would not be of the same nature and the parallelism would be destroyed.

The clear meaning is that Adam's guilt is imputed to us, just as (in the same way) Christ's righteousness is imputed to us, which is the Biblical principle of imputation the Bible reveals here.

This is the second Biblical fact with which you must reckon. . . both mankind's guilt and righteousness have nothing to do with their behavior or their actions.

So the Bible teaches that unregenerate mankind is morally responsible for (guilty of) the sentence of condemnation into which he is born because of the guilt of Adam which is imputed to him.

1) In anticipation of your presenting an OT text to set Scripture against itself, I recommend a better hermeneutic, which understands the OT in the light of the NT, and reconciles them.

Are you able to do that?

2) And if you do not believe that Adam's sin is imputued to all mankind, then you must do more than just express your disagreement, you must show exegetically that Ro 5:12-21 does not purport what is presented above.

3) And in anticipation of your question regarding all vs. many (5:18), in context of the whole counsel of God, all has several meanings in Scripture.
a) all men without exception,
b) all Gentiles only,
c) all Jews only,
d) all believers only,
e) all non-believers only.
The whole counsel God shows d) to be its meaning in Ro 5:18.

Addendum:

However, there is more to understand regarding original sin.

Because it raises the thorny question, if man did not personally incur the sin of Adam, how can God justly hold man morally responsbile for that sin?
The analogy of the Anthropos family business is helpful here.
As long as the Anthropos son of future generations, who successively inherits the family business (not a corp, partnership, LLC etc.), keeps up the family business, he is personally responsible for the debts of that business, even though he did not personally incur those debts.
The prinicple here is that personal responsbility for debt does not require that the debt be personally incurred.

That legal priniple is also a Biblical principle.
Because man is the son of Adam, keeping up the family businss of Adam (sin), he is responsible for the debt of Adam, even though he did not personally incur that debt.

We have an example of that principle in Lk 11:48-51, where Jesus holds the present generation of Jewish doctors of (experts in) the law responsible for all the blood of the prophets shed by their forefathers from the beginning of the world;
because in rejecting and murdering Christ (Ac 7:51-52), the Prophet whom Moses said was to come (Dt 18:18; Jn 1:21, 6:14, 12:49; Ac 3:22-23),
they were keeping up their forefathers' business of rejecting amd murdering God's prophets and were, therefore, liable for all the debts (sins) of their forefathers' business of murder (v.51).

So, in the same way as Jesus held the Jewish doctors of the law responsible/guilty of the sin of their forefathers, even though they did not personally incur their sin,
so unregenerate man is responsible/guilty for the sin of Adam, even though he did not personally incur his sin (Ro 1:32).

So Biblically, as well as in our legal system, there is no injustice in God holding unregenerate mankind morally responsbile for the sin of Adam which he did not personally incur.

 

[holyrokker]

Then secondly, the Bible teaches that we are born spiritually dead (Ge 2:17; Eph 2:1; Col 2:13) in unbelief and condemned to damnation (Jn 3:18b-19, 36).

You made a very long post, but want to respond to just this portion.

John 3:6-7

Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’

This is not the same as born "spiritually dead". For something to be dead, it is necessary for it to have had life previously. A dead tree is one that had previously been living.
A person who has never been born isn't "dead", simple non-existent.

In John 3, Jesus is talking about two births: flesh and spirit. Just as someone needs a physical birth to be considered a living being, the same person needs to be born of the Spirit to be considered a spiritially living being.


James 1:14-15 says

But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

This doesn't portray an inborn sin or an inborn guilt. It demonstrates that we pursue our own natural desires.

Going back to the words of Jesus in John 3, since we are not born spiritually at the same moment as our physical birth, it is only natural that we would follow our physical desires. This is not the result of a condemnation passed down to us from Adam.

The result of Adam's sin upon humanity is that we are born of the flesh. This leads us to being lured and enticed by our own natural desires, which brings about sin.

Sin is a result of our own actions, long before we are even cognitively aware of good and evil.

 

[Clare73]

Then secondly, the Bible teaches that we are born spiritually dead (Ge 2:17; Eph 2:1; Col 2:13) in unbelief and condemned to damnation (Jn 3:18b-19, 36).

You made a very long post, but want to respond to just this portion.

John 3:6-7

This is not the same as born "spiritually dead". . . A person who has never been born isn't "dead", simple non-existent.

In John 3, Jesus is talking about two births: flesh and spirit. Just as someone needs a physical birth to be considered a living being, the same person needs to be born of the Spirit to be considered a spiritially living being.

Thanks, holyrokker,

Yes, Ro 5:12-21 is not an easy text, and requires detailed exegesis to understand correctly in consistency with the rest of Scripture.

Okay, first of all, Eph 2:1 and Col 2:13 state that we are dead in sin,
and Jn 3:18 states that we are condemned already, while Jn 3:36 states that God's wrath remains on us.
Then Ro 5:12-21 shows that we are born with, and guilty of, the sin of Adam.

And secondly, we, must understand spiritual death as it is used in the NT.

It is loss of Holy Spirit life, loss of eternal life.

It is not death of one's spirit.

Adam and Eve were the only ones to experience spiritual death, loss of Holy Spirit life, loss of eternal life.

Everyone else is now born without Holy Spirit life, without eternal life, in spiritual death.

But their human spirits are not dead, they just do not possess Holy Spirit life, eternal life.

In light of its NT meaning and usage, it does not present the problem you state.

James 1:14-15 says

This doesn't portray an inborn sin or an inborn guilt. It demonstrates that we pursue our own natural desires.

All true, but has no bearing on the sin in which Ro 5:12-21 reveals that we are born.

We are both born in sin, as well as pursue our natural sinful desires as the result of the sin in which we are born.

It's not either/or, it's both/and.

 

[holyrokker]

Thanks, holyrokker,

Yes, Ro 5:12-21 is not an easy text, and requires detailed exegesis to understand correctly in consistency with the rest of Scripture.

Okay, first of all, Eph 2:1 and Col 2:13 state that we are dead in sin,
and Jn 3:18 states that we are condemned already, while Jn 3:36 states that God's wrath remains on us.
Then Ro 5:12-21 shows that we are born with, and guilty of, the sin of Adam.

And secondly, we, must misunderstand spiritual death as it is used in the NT.

It is loss of Holy Spirit life, loss of eternal life.

It is not death of one's spirit.

Adam and Eve were the only ones to experience spiritual death, loss of Holy Spirit life, loss of eternal life.

Everyone else is now born without Holy Spirit life, without eternal life, in spiritual death.

But their human spirits are not dead, they just do not possess Holy Spirit life, eternal life.

In light of its NT meaning and usage, it does not present the problem you state.


All true, but has no bearing on the sin in which Ro 5:12-21 reveals that we are born.

We are both born in sin, as well as pursue our natural sinful desires as the result of the sin in which we are born.

It's not either/or, it's both/and.

Colossians 2:13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

Neither of these say that we are born in that condition.

Again; John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

It says nothing about being born under God's wrath. In fact, it clearly states that the one who does not obey is the one under God's wrath.

Ephesias 2:1-3 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

This, again, is not a case for the doctrine of inherited sin or condemnation. The condemnation is for "the trespasses and sins in which you once walked." The condemnation is not for "the trespasses and sins into which you were born."

The phrase "by nature children of wrath" likewise is not a case for being born sinful, nor born under Adam's condemnation. The context is about how we lived before Christ, not the state into which we were born.

It is a Hebraic expression, not to be taken literally. It's similar to when Jesus called James and John "sons of thunder". It's a description of character.

And so, back to Romans 5:12-21. There is nothing in the text itself, nor in the greater context of Romans, that allows for the inferrence of inherited sin. The notion comes from outside the text. The doctrine must first be presumed true, then inferred into the text.

 

[Clare73]

2) in vv. 17-19, the Bible parallels the trespass of Adam and the righteousness of Jesus Christ, to show the Biblical principle which is involved.
Note that in v. 18, the Bible states that we are all condemned by Adam's trespass, just as we are made righteous by Christ's obedience.

Christ was a second Adam (v.14; 1Co 15:45), meaning that our interest (involvement) in the two of them is of the same nature (1Co 15:22).
In one man we were made sinners (condemned), just as in one man we are made righteous.
The Bible is drawing clear parallelisms of imputation in vv. 18-19, so that the last half of each verse gives the true meaning of the first half of each verse.
In neither half of the parallel does the outcome (guilt, righteousness) have anything to do with what mankind did, or our involvement would not be of the same nature and the parallelism would be destroyed.

The clear meaning is that Adam's guilt is imputed to us, just as (in the same way) Christ's righteousness is imputed to us, which is the Biblical principle of imputation the Bible reveals here.

This is the second Biblical fact with which you must reckon. . . both mankind's guilt and righteousness have nothing to do with their behavior or their actions.

So the Bible teaches that unregenerate mankind is morally responsible for (guilty of) the sentence of condemnation into which he is born because of the guilt of Adam which is imputed to him.

1) In anticipation of your presenting an OT text to set Scripture against itself, I recommend a better hermeneutic, which understands the OT in the light of the NT, and reconciles them.

Are you able to do that?

2) And if you do not believe that Adam's sin is imputued to all mankind, then you must do more than just express your disagreement, you must show exegetically that Ro 5:12-21 does not purport what is presented above.

And so, back to Romans 5:12-21. There is nothing in the text itself, nor in the greater context of Romans,
that allows for the inferrence of inherited sin. The
notion comes from outside the text. The doctrine must first be presumed true,
then inferred into the text.

Ro 5:19 - "For just as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were made sinners. . ."

All men are made sinners through the disobedience of Adam, not through their own disobedience, which simply adds to it.

And let me remind you of 1) and 2) above, and how you must proceed if you want to show the NT does not present inherited guilt of Adam's sin.

You must begin by demonstrating your assertions that

1) v. 18 does not allow for inheriting Adam's guilt and sin,

2) the notion comes from outside the text, and

3) the notion is inferred into the text.

Posturing is not exegesis.