Dueteronomy 30:6

fltom

Well-known member
Tom, like I have said before, debating with you gives me a headache. Take your blinders off and try to understand what Paul is saying here. If you deny that Adam guilt (sin) is imputed, then you also deny that Christ's righteousness is imputed as well, follow??? This is the emphatic affirmation Paul is making in Romans 5:15-19, notice how many times hammers home this point! Paul contrasts the two Adams here, by One Act of disobedience and One Act of Obedience, if you fail to see this point Paul is making, then you will fall into Pelagianism, no way around it that pitfall!


Which means that salvation can be attain by self-righteousness, in other words humans can achieve perfection without Grace! Which is not biblical and has been condemned by the early church.

The Pelagian exegesis destroys the force of the analogy which Paul institutes in this passage as a WHOLE. The doctrine Paul is illustrating by appeal to the analogy of the condemnation and death proceeding from Adam is the doctrine that men are justified by the free grace of God on the basis of the righteousness and obedience of Christ. What Paul has been controverting (refuting)in the earlier part of the epistle is that men are justified by their own works (This is the Pelagian part you have been missing)!!! He is establishing the truth that men are justified and attain to life by what another has done, the One-Man Jesus Christ (Gospel)!

Understand now??? If not, you're lost, sorry bro!
Deal with your false claim of Pelagianism

I have quoted 14 sources that refute you claim of Pelagianism

more than half Calvinist but you won't deal with that

Acknowledge that and then I will deal with Romans

But you need to get out of your echo chamber if you think Non Calvinist do not have a way to exejete Rom 5 consistent with their theology
 

fltom

Well-known member
Yes, it does! Read, Romans 5:15-19, these passages that I keep quoting, and you keep avoiding!
I did

and when you deal with your false claim of Pelagianism i will share it with you

For the moment your slander needs to be addressed first
 

fltom

Well-known member
So, theologians are your authority, now??? So, much for Scripture, right???
LOL

Where did you get your claim of Pelagianism

It wasn't from scripture

It wasn't from common sources

Multiple Calvinists refute your claim

but you won't deal with it

So you imagine it ok to misrepresent another and you have no responsibility to prove your point

and/or acknowledge your error when the evidence was presented

Sorry it does not work that way
 

Ladodgers6

Well-known member
You thanked me for the scripture, and the answer was there.
I thanked you because we are discussing Scripture, finally!
Are you sure you read it? it says BECAUSE all sinned.
Yes, I read it and I'm glad you brought it up. Their sins are not like the One Sin of Adam's, because through his sin, it sanctioned God's judgement upon the whole human race. The sins that follow from the human race is now from their sinful nature. Look here at verse, 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam. There's a difference Seth, I am challenging the idea that Adam's guilt was not imputed and affirming that it was. Because verses 15-19, Paul emphatically affirms that God's judgement came through One Man & One Sin, and this is undeniable and irrefutable.
And maybe the issue here is which meaning of death are we talking about?
The second death in the lake of fire
The death by which we leave our bodies
Spiritual death
Metaphoric death that is the end of something.

What are you thinking?
Adam represented the whole race in the Graden Temple, when he fell, we fell with him in Union (Solidarity). Just like believers are in Union with Christ, this is why Paul's makes the parallel comparisons in 15-19.
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
Not so fast, Doug, you are a sneaking devil :devilish:, why not post the whole thought of Murray? "It is quite impossible to construe this emphasis upon the one sin of the one man as equivalent to the actual personal sin of countless individuals. It is indisputable, therefore, that Paul regards the universality of condemnation and death as grounded upon and proceeding from the one trespass of the one-man Adam. And the Pelagian insistence that death and condemnation find their ground solely in the personal voluntary sin of the individuals of the human race cannot be harmonized with this sustain witness of the Apostle Paul."

Talk about creating a strawman to fight against. Now, you believe that Condemnation & Death fell upon the human race through their personal sins. But Adam and Eve had not conceived a child before their act of sin. Therefore, God's judgment passed to all through Man-One & One-Sin! This is Paul's affirmation and why your view is Pelagian. Romans 5:15-19 is a refutation of the Pelagian view and is explicit and undeniable.

So, you agree that we are imputed with Adam's sin & guilt? Or is comprehensive a politician's term?

Merry Christmas, LA,

1) My limited quote is not an attempt to circumvent anything or cherry pick something that seems to support me. That said, the larger quote doesn't change the point of my quotation. Murray says that only Adam, the individual man, sinned, not the rest of us, thus he wrote, "It is quite impossible to construe this emphasis upon the one sin of the one man as equivalent to the actual personal sin of countless individuals." That this is "indisputable" is why Paul writes that of the consequences of sin upon "the many", are solely because of the sinful act of "one man"-- not many within one man, but "one" individual, solitary male person!

Pelagian theology denies that we are not born depraved, that we are born perfect as Adam was in the beginning, and every baby has the potential of not necessarily sinning. I do not hold to this in any way. We are born totally depraved, before we can do any good or bad! As you've cited, I was "born in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalm 51:5), and this means that we are naturally unholy before God, even before we actually sin as individuals, which leads to my next point;

2) The dynamic between God and man has multiple aspects to its whole. When we filter everything through just one aspect, it becomes a one dimensional paper doll cutout argument. This is what I see you doing.

You are basing your argument on a purely legal plane of argument. You ask "But why Doug if they personally did not sin? Why did God punish the innocent in your view? Only the guilty can be punished, correct, according to you, and Tom." This is a legal approach to the issue, and in itself, is a correct question to ask, but it is not just a legal issue, it is also a relational issue. We are separated from God's presence and family (the majority of the gospel is built on a relational plane of understanding: Father, Son, children of God, brothers and sisters etc) and are not under his authority personally. You and I are not born as a member of the "family" of God, then then you are still condemned and doomed, even before you actually sin.

If a baby dies, for example, it hasn't sinned, but aside from the grace of God, it is not a member of the family of God. This is why I used a spiritual "genetics" analogy; humans are not spiritually born with the family genes, and thus, not characteristics of the family line. We won't grow up to look like Jesus because our spiritual genetics have been corrupted by sin, and created, if you will, another species of being that is incompatible with God.

If we are then born into a relational separation, and the "genetics" of our being are contrary to the nature of God, then we are an enemy before we ever actually sin, and are condemned just the same as if we had actually sinned against God. Thus, we do not have to be "guilty" of sinful acts to be condemned to death. That is precisely why "death reigned from Adam to Moses", even though there was no law by which to adjudicate guilt.





It's a judgment of a curse, condemnation & separation issue.

But why Doug if they personally did not sin? Why did God punish the innocent in your view? Only the guilty can be punished, correct, according to you, and Tom.

I beg to differ, because Adam is our representative as is Christ for believers. This is the point you either avoid or just can't see. Paul's affirmation of the parallel between the two Adam's and their One Act is explicit to our solidarity or union with either Adam. In other words, we are either in the first Adam or the Last Adam, there's no, in between. Sorry Doug, but you're way off on this one. Why hold to a Pelagian view on this point is beyond me.

Psalm 51:

1Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
2Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!

3For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
4Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
5Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.

6Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being,
and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.

May the peace proclaimed by the heavenly hosts
to shepherds outside of Bethlehem's keep
be yours in abundance, above that of most
and may pillows of Grace guard your sleep!

And when you arise to find Christmas morn
has dawned in all its splendid array
remember it's only because Christ was born
that any could smile and joyfully say
Merry Christmas!


Doug
 
Last edited:

Sethproton

Well-known member
I thanked you because we are discussing Scripture, finally!

Yes, I read it and I'm glad you brought it up. Their sins are not like the One Sin of Adam's, because through his sin, it sanctioned God's judgement upon the whole human race. The sins that follow from the human race is now from their sinful nature. Look here at verse, 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam. There's a difference Seth, I am challenging the idea that Adam's guilt was not imputed and affirming that it was. Because verses 15-19, Paul emphatically affirms that God's judgement came through One Man & One Sin, and this is undeniable and irrefutable.

Adam represented the whole race in the Graden Temple, when he fell, we fell with him in Union (Solidarity). Just like believers are in Union with Christ, this is why Paul's makes the parallel comparisons in 15-19.
Agreed, the rest of us did not sin the same transgression as Adam, but scripture is clear that death spread to all, because all sinned.
I can change my mind on this if shown scripture because I know how standard this thought is in almost every thread of Christianity.
But what I need is the scriptures that state we are guilty because of Adam, even if we do not sin. I would ike to see the scriptures that teach guilt without sin, and that we are guilty in the womb
 

Ladodgers6

Well-known member
Agreed, the rest of us did not sin the same transgression as Adam, but scripture is clear that death spread to all, because all sinned.
The reason there is a difference from Adam's imputed guilt and our personal sins, is because condemnation & death came through One-Man's sin, that is plain & simple. And as a result of Adam & Eve being exiled and cursed, his progeny is now formed in sin from the womb (Psalm 51), and are children of wrath (Eph. 2). But, to return to the original topic, Adam's guilt that is imputed to us, results in condemnation & death before we even sin personally!
I can change my mind on this if shown scripture because I know how standard this thought is in almost every thread of Christianity.
But what I need is the scriptures that state we are guilty because of Adam, even if we do not sin. I would ike to see the scriptures that teach guilt without sin, and that we are guilty in the womb
Paul is crystal clear in Romans 5:15-19, that the two representatives are the federals heads that is what Paul is pointing out for us. I see I keep answering your guy's questions, and my get unanswered. Can this be a fair back and forth exchange?

But here I will answer your question. I believe I have pointed this out several times already. Adam & Eve did not have any children prior to the Fall, but still their sentence of guilty and punishment was passed on to us, and sin are counted where there is no law. But yet death still reigned! Paul is pointing out emphatically that the curse to whom was given to Adam & Eve is upon us all! But how can that be if we did not break God's law in the Garden personally? This is the part, to which you quoted to me that the father sins do not pass on to the children, correct? But here we have Adam's sin (guilt) being imputed to his progeny!

You can disagree if you like, but this is plain & simple, and Paul hammers this home in verses 15-19.

Some common synonyms of guilty are blamable, blameworthy, and culpable. While all these words mean "deserving reproach or punishment," guilty implies responsibility for or consciousness of crime, sin, or at the least, grace error or misdoing.

My question for you is to explain, why Paul emphasizing the One-Man & One-Sin, with the One-Man & One Act of Righteousness?

A hint: verses 15-19 is about imputation.
 

Ladodgers6

Well-known member
Merry Christmas, LA,

1) My limited quote is not an attempt to circumvent anything or cherry pick something that seems to support me. That said, the larger quote doesn't change the point of my quotation. Murray says that only Adam, the individual man, sinned, not the rest of us, thus he wrote, "It is quite impossible to construe this emphasis upon the one sin of the one man as equivalent to the actual personal sin of countless individuals." That this is "indisputable" is why Paul writes that of the consequences of sin upon "the many", are solely because of the sinful act of "one man"-- not many within one man, but "one" individual, solitary male person!

Pelagian theology denies that we are not born depraved, that we are born perfect as Adam was in the beginning, and every baby has the potential of not necessarily sinning. I do not hold to this in any way. We are born totally depraved, before we can do any good or bad! As you've cited, I was "born in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalm 51:5), and this means that we are naturally unholy before God, even before we actually sin as individuals, which leads to my next point;

2) The dynamic between God and man has multiple aspects to its whole. When we filter everything through just one aspect, it becomes a one dimensional paper doll cutout argument. This is what I see you doing.

You are basing your argument on a purely legal plane of argument. You ask "But why Doug if they personally did not sin? Why did God punish the innocent in your view? Only the guilty can be punished, correct, according to you, and Tom." This is a legal approach to the issue, and in itself, is a correct question to ask, but it is not just a legal issue, it is also a relational issue. We are separated from God's presence and family (the majority of the gospel is built on a relational plane of understanding: Father, Son, children of God, brothers and sisters etc) and are not under his authority personally. You and I are not born as a member of the "family" of God, then then you are still condemned and doomed, even before you actually sin.

If a baby dies, for example, it hasn't sinned, but aside from the grace of God, it is not a member of the family of God. This is why I used a spiritual "genetics" analogy; humans are not spiritually born with the family genes, and thus, not characteristics of the family line. We won't grow up to look like Jesus because our spiritual genetics have been corrupted by sin, and created, if you will, another species of being that is incompatible with God.

If we are then born into a relational separation, and the "genetics" of our being are contrary to the nature of God, then we are an enemy before we ever actually sin, and are condemned just the same as if we had actually sinned against God. Thus, we do not have to be "guilty" of sinful acts to be condemned to death. That is precisely why "death reigned from Adam to Moses", even though there was no law by which to adjudicate guilt.







May the peace proclaimed by the heavenly hosts
to shepherds outside of Bethlehem's keep
be yours in abundance, above that of most
and may pillows of Grace guard your sleep!

And when you arise to find Christmas morn
has dawned in all its splendid array
remember it's only because Christ was born
that any could smile and joyfully say
Merry Christmas!


Doug
Merry Christmas to you and yours Doug! I'll reply to this to later, going to enjoy some time with the FAM! But I'll leave you with this:

A Choice Selection of Hymns and Spiritual Songs for the use of the Baptist Church and all lovers of song page 19

 

Sethproton

Well-known member
The reason there is a difference from Adam's imputed guilt and our personal sins, is because condemnation & death came through One-Man's sin, that is plain & simple. And as a result of Adam & Eve being exiled and cursed, his progeny is now formed in sin from the womb (Psalm 51), and are children of wrath (Eph. 2). But, to return to the original topic, Adam's guilt that is imputed to us, results in condemnation & death before we even sin personally!

Paul is crystal clear in Romans 5:15-19, that the two representatives are the federals heads that is what Paul is pointing out for us. I see I keep answering your guy's questions, and my get unanswered. Can this be a fair back and forth exchange?

But here I will answer your question. I believe I have pointed this out several times already. Adam & Eve did not have any children prior to the Fall, but still their sentence of guilty and punishment was passed on to us, and sin are counted where there is no law. But yet death still reigned! Paul is pointing out emphatically that the curse to whom was given to Adam & Eve is upon us all! But how can that be if we did not break God's law in the Garden personally? This is the part, to which you quoted to me that the father sins do not pass on to the children, correct? But here we have Adam's sin (guilt) being imputed to his progeny!

You can disagree if you like, but this is plain & simple, and Paul hammers this home in verses 15-19.

Some common synonyms of guilty are blamable, blameworthy, and culpable. While all these words mean "deserving reproach or punishment," guilty implies responsibility for or consciousness of crime, sin, or at the least, grace error or misdoing.

My question for you is to explain, why Paul emphasizing the One-Man & One-Sin, with the One-Man & One Act of Righteousness?

A hint: verses 15-19 is about imputation.
Saying that condemnation and guilt entered thru one man's sin means that is where it first appeared. It does not mean that it was applied to all humans. Or can you find a single verse that says we are held guilty for Adam's sin? You claim that Sethwas counted guilty of Adam's sin. Where do you read that?
when it comes to the interpretation of Rom 5:15-19, being a calvinist will definately color the way you see it. Since you see that the righteousness of Christ overtakes those who are chosen without their permission or request, then you will see the same about Adam's sin. People become sinners without any personal choice.
in verses 13 and 14 despite the fact that sin was not imputed to them since there was no law yet, there was still death. But that would mean each person's sin brought death, not that Adam's sin brought individual death,

So for your specific question, why does Paul emphasize "one man"? One reason is because Adam was a type of Christ. He demonstrated/embodied a truth about Jesus, that God's plan could come to earth thru one man, whether it be death or life,

That is the start of that discussion
 

fltom

Well-known member
The reason there is a difference from Adam's imputed guilt and our personal sins, is because condemnation & death came through One-Man's sin, that is plain & simple. And as a result of Adam & Eve being exiled and cursed, his progeny is now formed in sin from the womb (Psalm 51), and are children of wrath (Eph. 2). But, to return to the original topic, Adam's guilt that is imputed to us, results in condemnation & death before we even sin personally!

Paul is crystal clear in Romans 5:15-19, that the two representatives are the federals heads that is what Paul is pointing out for us. I see I keep answering your guy's questions, and my get unanswered. Can this be a fair back and forth exchange?
Condemnation came through one's man sin upon all men for death - physical death along with eternal consequences in that Adam's sin brought with it as a consequence physical death and an inherited a corrupt nature which assured all would sin

Physical death was first of all a consequence. As a result of that sin Adam was banished from the garden and the tree of life
thus all mankund lost that access and without it all die


Kel considering the various forms of death - physical, spiritual and eternal - the second death puts it this way

Physical death was introduced because of Adam’s sin and he brought it upon all his posterity. But it only came upon all men as condemnation because of their own sin, which immediately loaded physical death with eternal implications. Physical death came upon all men before they sinned. But the second death, and physical death as it relates to this eternal consideration, came upon all men because all sinned. And Adam’s choice, which brought about the circumstances that have become the occasion of temptation to which all men have freely chosen to submit, has resulted in death (eternal) coming upon all men, because all sinned.


Thus we would see Romans 5 to read as follows: Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin. Physical death yes, but also physical death as it relates to the eternal death. In this way physical death as it relates to eternal death came upon all men, because these circumstances have resulted in all men following Adam’s example and sinning as well, bringing upon themselves the spiritual implications of the physical death they inherited from Adam

This all of course is assuming that Romans5 is referring to physical death. It may in fact only refer to spiritual death. It may be saying simply that Adam died spiritually when he sinned and that spiritual death came into the world through his act, but that because of the circumstances Adam's sin brought upon his posterity such spiritual death came upon all men because they also sinned and became spiritually dead. In this case Paul is merely showing that Adam's choice brought about the circumstances where all have chosen like Adam and become dead in sin, as he had.
Death Came To All Men Because All Sinned by Kel Good
 

fltom

Well-known member
Tom, like I have said before, debating with you gives me a headache. Take your blinders off and try to understand what Paul is saying here. If you deny that Adam guilt (sin) is imputed, then you also deny that Christ's righteousness is imputed as well, follow???
Wake up and take your blinders off

What is imputed for righteous is one's faith

Romans 4:3-5 (KJV)
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

You cannot support a faulty conclusion with a faulty premise

Rom 5 is addressed here


and you were already refuted on the false charge of Pelagianism by your own Calvinist peers

Incessant repetition, avoiding facts, and rebuttal does not make your case

You are in error
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Saying that condemnation and guilt entered thru one man's sin means that is where it first appeared. It does not mean that it was applied to all humans.

Show us one human (other than Jesus) to whom it was not applied.
THAT is the point!
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
"I was not judged guilty when Adam sinned."

Where does the BIBLE teach that, seth?

You always demand WE have Bible verses to support our claims, but you apparently NEVER need to have them.
Why is that, seth?
Why the blatant double standard?
 

fltom

Well-known member
Show us one human (other than Jesus) to whom it was not applied.
THAT is the point!
Only if you assume guilt

Ezek. 18:1 ¶ The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying,
Ezek. 18:2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge?
Ezek. 18:3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel.
Ezek. 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezek. 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.
Ezek. 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

2Kings 14:6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Deut. 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2Chr. 25:4 But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.

Jer. 31:29 In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.
Jer. 31:30 But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.
 

fltom

Well-known member
Here's Scripture, let's see if you reply to it???

"By the trespass of the ONE the many died" (vs. 15); "the judgement was from ONE unto condemnation" (vs. 16); "by the trespass of the ONE death reigned through the ONE" (vs. 17); "through ONE trespass judgment came UPON ALL men unto condemnation" (vs. 18); "through the disobedience of the ONE-MAN the many were constituted sinners" (vs. 19).

We might think that Paul has needlessly repeated himself, but it is a repetition which establishes beyond dispute that Paul regards CONDEMNATION & DEATH as having passed on to all men by the ONE TRESPASS of the ONE-MAN Adam!

So, will you reply to Scripture?????????????
Lest you think you are wise in your own eyes

Condemnation came through one's man sin upon all men for death - physical death along with eternal consequences in that Adam's sin brought with it as a consequence physical death and an inherited a corrupt nature which assured all would sin

Physical death was first of all a consequence. As a result of that sin Adam was banished from the garden and the tree of life
thus all mankund lost that access and without it all die


Kel considering the various forms of death - physical, spiritual and eternal - the second death puts it this way

Physical death was introduced because of Adam’s sin and he brought it upon all his posterity. But it only came upon all men as condemnation because of their own sin, which immediately loaded physical death with eternal implications. Physical death came upon all men before they sinned. But the second death, and physical death as it relates to this eternal consideration, came upon all men because all sinned. And Adam’s choice, which brought about the circumstances that have become the occasion of temptation to which all men have freely chosen to submit, has resulted in death (eternal) coming upon all men, because all sinned.


Thus we would see Romans 5 to read as follows: Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin. Physical death yes, but also physical death as it relates to the eternal death. In this way physical death as it relates to eternal death came upon all men, because these circumstances have resulted in all men following Adam’s example and sinning as well, bringing upon themselves the spiritual implications of the physical death they inherited from Adam

Death Came To All Men Because All Sinned by Kel Good

BTW we already know you could not deal with the 14 writers who clearly show your claim of Pelagianism was false

You were clearly lacking in knowledge and truth in this regard
 

fltom

Well-known member
You really are full of yourself, aren't you?
You find it incapable to believe you could EVER be wrong in your understanding of ANYTHING.
And anyone who "dares" disagree with you must be ignorant, right?


A.T. Robertson, a Greek scholar (which is a skill YOU don't have):
"And so death passed unto all men (kai houtōs eis pantas anthrōpous diēlthen). Note use of dierchomai rather than eiserchomai, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By “death” in Gen. 2:17; 3:19 physical death is meant, but in verses 17, 21 eternal death is Paul’s idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul.
That really does not help you at all

Physical death results in eternal death for that all sin

It is personal sin that loads physical death with condemnation and eternal death

Robertson was a Calvinist his comments are as reflective of that fact as much as his Greek expertise

This work while also believing in the same view however admits

The general truth he teaches here is that there is a real unity of the human race, on the one hand in sin and death, on the other in righteousness and life; in the former aspect the race is summed up in Adam; in the latter, in Christ. It is a distinction, apparently, between the two, that the unity in Adam is natural, having a physical basis in the organic connection of all men through all generations; whereas the unity in Christ is spiritual, being dependent upon faith. Yet this distinction is not specially in view in the passage, which rather treats Adam and Christ in an objective way, the transition (morally) from Adam's doom to that of man being only mediated by the words πάντες ἥμαρτον in Romans 5:12, and the connection between Christ and the new humanity by οἱ τὴν περισσείαν τῆς χάριτος λαμβάνοντες in vet. 17.
Expositor's Greek Testament, The - Volume 2.

that view is not in the passage

and the connection between Adam's sin and man's ultimate doom comes from the fact all have sinned
 
Top