Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 10 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Romans Commentary Chapters 1-8  /  Romans 5:13-21 Sin, Death, and the Promise of Eternal Life  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 10
Origen answers why Paul says sin entered through “one man” by appealing to genealogy and “natural order,” and Bercot adds Paul’s Adam/Christ contrast would be “unequal” if it were a couple versus one man; what does this reasoning reveal about how the apostles argued from cultural conventions (like tracing lineage through fathers), and how should that influence the way we interpret other passages where apostolic reasoning leans on social patterns?
Another way to ask: If Paul’s “one man” language uses cultural patterns like tracing family lines through fathers, what does that show about how the apostles argued? How should that affect how we read other Bible passages that depend on social customs?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, Origen and Bercot argue Paul’s wording follows the “natural order” of tracing succession through fathers and serves Paul’s rhetorical contrast between “one man” Adam and “one man” Jesus. That suggests apostolic arguments sometimes lean on accepted social conventions for clarity and analogy, so interpreters should notice when a point depends on cultural patterns rather than on assigning moral blame.

Support from Transcript:

  • Origen raises the objection: Eve sinned first, even the serpent before her, so why “through one man”?
  • His answer: Paul “adhered to the natural order of things” because he is discussing “succession of human generations.”
  • Origen: “the practice is not to ascribe family succession to woman, but to man,” and he cites Paul’s remarks in 1 Corinthians 11:8-12.
  • Bercot notes biblical patterns: genealogies are traced “through the Fathers,” and Luke traces Jesus’ lineage “back to Adam, not to Adam and Eve.”
  • Bercot adds a rhetorical reason: Romans 5 contrasts “one man, Adam, to one man, Jesus,” and “one couple to one man would be an unequal analogy.”
Discussion Follow-ups How do we tell the difference between a timeless doctrine and an argument that uses common social patterns? What other passages might require you to ask, “What convention is being assumed to make the point?”

Jumpstarter 10 of 10
Back Questions Done