Rom
5:12 was the foundational text on which Augustine of Hippo (354-430 CE)
formulated his doctrine of “original sin.” In particular, Augustine highlighted
the prepositional phrase εφ’ ω in the final clause of Rom 5:12 as a
proof-text to make his case for “original sin.” Augustine interpreted ω as a masculine relative pronoun referring
back to “one man” in 5:12a: “death spread to all men in whom [Adam] all
sinned.” According to Augustine, the sin of Adam has been transmitted down to
all his descendants, therefore it is not necessarily the actual sin of each
individual, but instead Adam’s sin that automatically makes all human beings
sinners because “all sinned in Adam.” It has long been suggested,
however, that there is an error in Augustine’s interpretation in that he relied
on a faulty Latin translation: in quo omnes peccaverunt (“in whom [Adam]
all sinned”). Further, as Fitzmyer points out, treating ω as a masculine
pronoun referring to “one man” does not read smoothly as the distance between
the pronoun and the antecedent (“one man”) is too great. Augustine may have taken up this idea from 1
Cor 15:22, “in Adam all die” (εν τω ‘Αδαμ παντες αποθνησκουσιν), but as Fitzmyer suggests, if Paul meant to
say “it is Adam in whom all sinned,” he would have used the
prepositional phrase εν ω (lit. “in whom”), as in 1 Cor 15:22, instead
of εφ’ ω (lit. “on which” or possibly “on
whom”). (Chris W. Lee, Death Warning in the Garden of Eden [Forschungen
zum Alten Testament. 2. Reihe 115; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020], 163-64)
Most
modern scholars followed by major English translations, now take the
prepositional phrase εφ’ ω as functioning as a causal conjunction that
is somewhat equivalent to διστι
(“because”) or επι τουτο οτι (“for this reason that”); hence the
translation “death spread to all men because all sinned.” This causal
use of εφ’ ω could possibly yield an
interpretation that “death spread to all men” because of their own
personal sin; therefore the immediate problem with this interpretation is that
it seems to contradict what Paul emphatically asserts earlier in Rom 5:12, as
well as in later verses (5:13-21): that death entered because of the
transgression and disobedience of one man (δι’ ενος ανθρωπου). It must be noted, however, that even if
the causal use of εφ’ ω in 5:12d, which
stresses the individual sin of human beings, is
presumed, this does not need to preclude or lessen the stress of Paul’s main
idea, which emphatically attributes the entering of death as the
effect/consequence of Adam’s sin, as Paul clearly states in the main clause of
Rom 5:12ab. Further, with the causal use of εφ’ ω Paul may possibly be expressing
the idea that the deaths of all men can be ascribed to their own sins on the
premise that Adam’s sin brought about the condition in which are all destined
to sin. (Ibid., 164-65)
After discussing εφ’ ω in the Pauline epistles:
In
light of the other Pauline uses of εφ’ ω that can be explained as a relative clause
(exclusively in Phil 4:10), the third interpretative option for the
prepositional phrase εφ’ ω, which I suggest is a more likely option in
the case of Rom 5:12d, is taking the relative pronoun ω as neutral with its
antecedent being the entire idea of “sin and death entering the world and
spreading to all men” in the previous clause (5:12ab). If this interpretation
is assumed, the suggested translation of
the prepositional phrase εφ’ ω is “on the basis of which” or “under which
circumstances.” Not only does this make good sense contextually and
grammatically, but this usage also better reflects the presence of the relative
pronoun than the causal usage of εφ’ ω (“because”). The relative-pronoun
understanding of εφ’ ω would also certainly help to
avoid the misunderstanding that would have developed from the causal usage
(“because”), i.e., “one’s death is due to his own sin.” In the LXX, the phrase εφ’ ω appears twice (the Letter of
Jeremiah 1:58; Prov 21:22) and it is noteworthy that ω in these two occurrences is exclusively used
as a relative pronoun referring back to its antecedent: 1) “A wise person
attacked the strong cities and demolished the strongholds (το οχυρωμα)
on which (εφ’ ω) the impious trusted” (Prov
21:22); 2) “So it is better to be a king who displays his manliness or a
useful vessel in a house, which (εφ’ ω) the owner will use, then these fake gods .
. . “ The above Pauline and LXX examples suggest that it is acceptable, or
perhaps even commended to take εφ’ ω in Rom 5:12d to also mean “on which”
referring to the statements in the preceding clauses. (Ibid., 166-67)
What
is more important to note in each interpretation is that the subordinate clause
at the end of Rom 5:12, “all sinned,” does not counter Paul’s main point in the
logical sequence of Rom 5:12 that attests: death and its universal influence on
all humanity had its origin in Adam’s sin. The causality of Adam’s sin on the
death of all people, i.e., Paul’s stress on Adam’s act and role as the
instrument through which sin and death came into the world, has been so clearly
and emphatically expressed by Paul (both in Rom 5:12-21 and 1 Cor 15:21-22)
that it outweighs other possible meanings and the force of εφ’ ω that would suggest otherwise.
Therefore, based on Paul’s overwhelming linguistic and thematic references to
the entering/existence of death in relation to Adam’s disobedience to God’s
command, there is no reason to deny the correlation made by Paul between death
of all and Adam’s disobedience. In Paul’s own words, it is clear that both sin
and death entered the world through Adam’s transgression. (Ibid., 169)
