1

LECTURE 10: ANTHROPOLOGY AND HARMARTIOLOGY:

I. Views of Creation of Humanity:
A. Atheistic Evolution:
1. An undirected and random process over time:
In Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, he spells out the tenets of
atheistic macro-evolution: “(1) Variation results in some offspring
being superior to their parents. (2) A struggle for existence
eliminates the weaker, less fit varieties. (3) A process of natural
selection is constantly at work by which the fittest survive. (4)
Through heredity, new and better qualities produced by variation
are passed on and gradually accumulated. (5) New species come into
existence by this method, after the passage of sufficient time.”21

a. No God
b. No providence
c. No superintendence
d. No ontological objective universal standard of morality
e. No transcendent or ultimate accountability

1. Atheistic evolution faces formidable challenges in

four areas: philosophical argumentation, evidences,
the existential, and divine experiences:
a. Specified complexity in design
b. Irreducible complexity in design
c. Cosmological Argument
d. Moral Law Argument
e. Teleological Argument
f. Argument from Joy
g. Innate Idea Argument
f. Religious Need Argument
g. Divine Encounters with G-d
h. Existential fulfillment in G-d
i. Reformed Epistemology (properly basic)
j. Argument from objective beauty
k. Bonafide Miracles (e.g., answered prayer)
l. Can one actually prove a universal negative?

2
2. S. Maxwell Coder and George F. Howe, The Bible, Science, and Creation (Chicago: Moody, 1965), 60–61.
1
Enns, Paul P., The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago, Ill. : Moody Press, 1997, c1989, S. 301
 2

B. Theistic Evolution:

1. Theistic evolution is the teaching that plants, animals, and man

gradually evolved from lower forms, but that God supervised the
process.”3

2. Tendency to accept the findings of science;

3. Seek to harmonize evolutionary hypothesis with the Bible;

4. Theistic evolution is rejected by both strict evolutionists and

scientific creationists alike.

5. Commonly ascribed problems with this view:

a. Adam was not a historical person;

b. Analogy between Adam and Jesus Christ is mistaken in

Romans 5:12;

c. This view requires a poetic or allegorical approach in

interpreting Genesis 1:1–2:4;

d. This view implies that humanity is derived from a non-

human ancestor which cannot be reconciled with the explicit
statement of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7.2

C. Progressive Creationism: Also called the day-age theory, this view rejects a literal
six day creation in favor of understanding days of creation as age (typically viewed
as equivalent to geological ages) and not twenty-four hours. This view is based in
part on Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8.

1. Progressive creationism is a more serious attempt to reconcile the Bible

with science.

2. They harmonizes the antiquity of the earth according to the teaching of

science while at the same time believe in the direct creation of man and
general species in consideration of Genesis 1-

3. They reject macro-evolution will accept micro-evolution within species.

4. Commonly ascribed problems with this view:

a. Exodus 20:10–11 draws an analogy between a person working six

days and resting on the seventh and God creating six days and
resting on the seventh. The analogy demands twenty-four hour days.

3
3. C. Richard Culp, Remember Thy Creator (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), p. 148.
2
Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, 302.
 3

b. This view also demands the reality of death before the entry of
Original Sin (The Fall of Man) because it involves a long period of
time. However, Genesis indicates there was no death until Adam
sinned.3

D. Gap Theory: This view places a long period of time between Genesis 1:1 and
Genesis 1:2. This view not only is an accommodation to science, but can allow
proponents of the gap theory to embrace a 24 hour day creation view.

1. There was an original creation. But as a result of Lucifer’s rebellion, the

earth became “chaos.”

2. The “formless and void” in Genesis 1:2 is described by gap theorists as a

chaotic earth that G-d has judged.

3. This gap can allow millions of years to take place.

4. Commonly ascribed problems with this view:

a. Grammar and literary analysis does not allow for a gap.

1. Verse one is an independent clause.

2. Verse two is composed of three circumstantial clauses,

explaining the condition of the earth when God began to
create, and it is connected to verse 3.9 Thus, there is no break
between verses 1 and 2.

3. This view depends on “formless and void” meaning evil or

the result of a judgment; however, its usages in Job 26:7 and
Isaiah 45:18 do not suggest such a claim.

4. This view also draws a distinction between the Hebrew verb

bara (Gen. 1:1), suggesting it means creation ex nihilo (out of
nothing), whereas asa (Gen. 1:7, 16, 25, etc.) means a
refashioning. However, if we closely examine these two
verbs, we discovered that they are used interchangeably; asa
does not mean to refashion.10

5. In sum, it is critiqued that the gap theory is not built on

exegesis but is rather an attempt to reconcile the Bible with
the views of science.4

E. Creationism: Literal twenty-four-hour days or fiat creation:

3
Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, 302
9
9. Bruce K. Waltke, Creation and Chaos (Portland: Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1974), 31.
10
Fields, Unformed and Unfilled, 51–74.
4
Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, 302.
 4

1. Creationists believe God directly and instantaneously created in

twenty-four hour days is also called fiat creation—God created
directly and instantaneously:

a. (1) God is an absolutely perfect Being

b. (2) An absolutely perfect Being cannot produce an imperfect
creation.
c. (3) Therefore, the original creation God made was perfect. An
absolutely perfect Being cannot produce an imperfect
Creation

2. Macro evolution and theistic evolution are both rejected by

creationists.

3. They contend that creation took place in six twenty-four days:

a. Hebrew word “yom” for “day” combined with a number

always designates a twenty-four hour day.

b. The phrase “evening and morning” Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31
strengthens the idea of a twenty-four creation.

c. Analogy to the command for man to labor in six days and rest
on seventh contributes to seeing a “day” as a “day.”

4. Historical creation of Adam and Eve by God. Scriptural support

creationists use include:

a. Genesis 1:27, 2:7, 5:1,

b. Deuteronomy 4:32.
c. Matthew 19:4.

6. Creationists argue for male and female genders (Genesis 1:27).

7. “Morning and Evening” repeated phrase emphasizes a “day” as a

“day.”

8. Creationists contend humans possess a soul and thus are created for
eternity (Gen. 2:7).

9. Being made in the “image of God” implies creation, not macro-

evolution.5

10. Adam and Eve were created with complete innocence and lived in
environment with no sin, thus were directly created by God.

a. See also Ecclesiastes 7:29: “God made mankind upright.”

5
Ibid., 303
 5

11. “Upright” (cf. “yashar” in Hebrew) means “straightness,”

\
“uprightness,” “honesty,” or “integrity.”
Intelligent Design Movement is not a
movement that is cloaked in
12. This work is also used in connection with “righteous” in
Creationism. Rather, going all the
way back to Plato and Aristotle, Deuteronomy 32:4, “blameless,” in Job 1:1, and “pure” in Job
proponents of Intelligent Design 8:6.
asserts that certain features of the
universe and of living things are best 13. Upshot is that “yashar” denotes both the absence of evil and
explained by an intelligent cause, not
an undirected process such as natural the presence of good.
selection.
14. God created Adam and Eve with “free will.” This accounts for
Thus, intelligent design is an effort to
empirically “detect” whether the
the origin of evil since evil is “the corruption of something
“apparent design” in nature good. According to Augustine’s Free will defense theory, evil
acknowledged by virtually all arose out of the abuse of free will. It is good to be free. But
biologists is either genuine design with the gift of free will, comes the possibility of evil.
(the product of an intelligent cause)
or simply the product of an
undirected process such as natural 15. Two types of Creationists:
selection acting on random
variations. a. Young earth Creationism
Intelligent design is distinct from
b. Old-Earth Creationism
creationism in that intelligent design
only attempts to explain the 16. In sum, whether old-earth or young-earth creationists,
arrangement of materials within an creationists affirm the following positions:
already given world; it does not offer
an account regarding the nature and
purpose of God nor a theological a. The existence of an infinite-personal perfect God;
doctrine of creation. b. Creation of the universe was ex nihilo (out of nothing);
c. Every living thing was specifically created by God;
Basic argument of Intelligent
Design:
d. Adam and Eve are historical persons directly created
by God; they were special creation of God.
1. We can often recognize the effects e. Genesis account of creation (1-2) is historical, not
of design in nature and cosmos.
allegorical or mythological.
2. The physical marks of design are f. Creation is purposed to glorify God.
visible in aspects of biology and g. While creationists disagree about the timing of
cosmology. creation, they all agree on the fact of creation as
3. We have no good explanation for stated in Genesis 1-2.
the foundation of life that doesn’t
involve intelligence. 17. Commonly ascribed problems:
4. In the absence of any convincing-
non-design explanation, we are a. Have to accept Genesis 1-2 as historical, factual, literal
justified in thinking that real accounts.
intelligent design was involved in life.

Intelligent design is a scientific, b. Contradicts theories like Darwinian Evolution

empirical alternative to naturalistic
macroevolution and is one that is free c. Neglects the possibility that “seven days” is a literary
from biblical and religious language.
frame on which the story of creation is draped.

d. Does not cohere with present understanding of

geological ages.
 6

e. The authority of Scripture is favored over authorities

of science.

It might be helpful to consider creationism alongside two other worldviews: materialism

and pantheism.6

CATEGORY THEISM MATERIALISM PANTHEISM

1. Source of Creation: Creator No Creator Creator within
beyond nature
nature

2. Method of Creation: Out of nothing Out of something Out of God

(ex nihilo) (ex material) (ex Deo)

3. Duration of Creation Temporal Eternal Eternal

4. Relation of Creator and Creature Creator and No real Creator No real creation
creation
(really
different)

5. God’s Control Unlimited Limited or Limited

non-existent

II. What does it mean to be made in the “Image of God?”

A. G-d created humanity in His image (Genesis 1:26-27):
1. Image of G-d is reflected in personality: intellect, will, emotion,
reasoning, creativity, etc. Image = content.
2. Image of G-d is reflected in function: stewardship of God’s creation.
3. Image of G-d is reflected in community/interpersonal relationships.
In some since we reflect G-d’s image in terms of interpersonal
relationships, “Let us make man in our image, according to our
likeness.”
4. Image of G-d is reflected in representation: “Let us make man as our
image.”
a. Hebrew grammar: Preposition “in” can be equally translated
as “as.”
b. Near Eastern archeology: In ancient times an emperor might
command statues of himself to be placed in remote parts of
his empire. These symbols would declare that these areas
were under his power and reign. Likewise, God placed

6
Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology in One Volume (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 211), 626.
 7

humankind as living symbols of Himself on earth to

represent His reign.
c. Thus, we represent G-d’s interests in all that we are and all
that we do; we are His living representatives.
5. Image of G-d is holistic (all of the above). We commit the fallacy of
reductionism by reducing God’s image to only one. Rather, we are to
reflect God’s image is likened to multi-faceted diamond. Perhaps the
representation view is the basis for all the others since it requires all
those elements-which can all be exegetically defended.
III. Three Views on Origin of Soul:
A. Preexistence:
1. From eternity (Plato): Souls are uncreated: Just like Plato argued for
a world of eternal forms (ideas), there are eternal souls that exist by
virtue of the World Soul-which animates all things. At conception
these souls enter the woman’s womb and become incarnate in
human flesh.
a. Problems:
(1) No biblical support;
(2) Lacks scientific evidence: Scientific evidence points to
human life beginning at conception.
(3) Cosmological Kalam argument: An infinite number of
moments is impossible.
2. Before the world (Church father Origen): souls are created by God,
existing before birth. Unlike Plato’s views, this view states that souls
were created by God from eternity.
B. Creation View of Soul: Soul is directly created by God:7
1. Five different views of Creationism:
a. Creation of the soul at conception: Psalm 51:5; Matt. 1:20.
Most Christians who embrace the creationist theory of the
soul contend that that God creates the soul at the moment of
conception: Psalm 51:5; Matt. 1:20.
1. Scientific evidence: Human life (soul) begins at
conception realizing that the fertilized human ovum
is 100% human (not genetic information is added
from the point of conception until death; all physical
characteristics for life are contained in the genetic

7
Geisler, Systematic Theology, 711-720.
 8

code at conception; sex is determined at moment of

conception.
b. Creation of the soul at implantation;
c. Creation of the soul after implantation (Aquinas):
d. Creation of the soul at animation;
e. Creation of the soul at birth (Charles Hodge):
1. Genesis 2:7: “Breath of life”
2. Human life is designated from point of birth: Gen.
5:1ff.
Problems with this last view:
a) Adam was a direct creation.
b) “Breath” in Gen. 2:7 denotes of “life” indicated
that life begins when God gave human life, not
simply because Adam began breathing.
c) Other animals breathe but are not people.
Thus, “breath” in and of itself does not make
Adam human.
d) Problem that loss of breath means loss of
humanness. But Scripture states that humans
continue to exist after they stop breathing:
Phil. 1:23; 2 Cor. 5:6-8; Rev. 6:9.
e) Life begins at conception: Psalm 51:5; Matt.
1:20.
2. Traducian View: Soul is created indirectly through parents: Soul and
body are generated by father and mother:
a. “Traducian” comes from the Latin tradux, meaning “branch
of vine.” Thus, every human person is a branch off his
parents.
b. Arguments in favor:
1. Creation was completed on sixth day: Genesis 2:2;
Deuteronomy 4:32; Matthew 13:35.
2. God is at rest and has not created since: Heb. 4:4.
3. Scientific evidence for how an individual human life
(soul is clear: Sperm and ovum from parents and is
first conceived in womb as a fully individual person.
 9

4. Creationists cannot adequately explain the

inheritance of original sin.
5. Lack of agreement among creationists weakens their
argument for direct creation of the soul.
Three Views Regarding Origin of the Soul
Preexistence: Creationism: Traducianism:

Time of Creation: From Eternity (Plato) 1. At conception; Originally in Adam,

2. At implantation; instrumentally through
3. After implantation; parents:
4. At animation;
5. At birth

God’s Role: None (Plato) He directly creates He indirectly creates

each soul body and soul through
parents.

Parent’s Role: No role in the creation Occasional cause of the Instrumental cause of
of the soul; Efficient soul; Efficient cause of both soul and body
cause of the body the body

Nature of Man: Each person is a soul; Each person is a soul; Each person is a unity
Each person has a Each person has a of soul/body.
body. body.

Nature of Human Soul: Simple/Indivisible Simple/Indivisible Unified (regenerable)

(unregenerable) (unregenerable)

Image of God: In soul only In soul only In soul and body

Immortality: Soul only Soul only Soul and body

Christian Proponents: Justin Martyr, Origen, Thomas Aquinas, W. G. T. Shedd, Later

and Early Augustine Charles Hodge. Augustine, Lewis. S.
Chafer

Source: Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology In One Volume (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2011),
716.
 10

IV. Composition of nonmaterial aspect of humanity: Are the soul and spirit distinct
or are they the same? Three views: Dichotomy, Trichotomy, and Multifaceted:

A. Dichotomy: Each person is composed of two parts, namely, body and soul:

1. Greek word, “dicha” which means “two.”

2. “Temno” means “to cut.”
3. The nonmaterial part of man possesses one substance, namely, soul
and spirit, which have different functions.
4. Support:
a. Genesis 2:7: God formed man from the dust of the ground,
breathed life into him, and he became a living soul (cf. Job
27:3).
b. Words, “soul” and “spirit” are used interchangeably:
may be used interchangeably:
1. Genesis 41:8 cf. Psalm 42:6;
2. Hebrews 12:23 cf. Revelation 6:9.
3. Matthew 10:28, 1 Cor. 5:3, and 3 John 2: Body and
soul (or spirit) are used to constitute the entire
person.
5. Supporters include Augustine, Anselm, and Western Church.

B. Trichotomy:
1. Greek word, “tricha, which means “three.”
2. Temno, “to cut.”
3. A person is a three-part being, consisting of body, soul, and spirit.
4. The soul and spirit are said to be different in both essence and
function:
5. Body = world-conscious;
6. Soul = self-conscious (e.g., imagination, memory, and
understanding);
7. Spirit = higher power (e.g., reason, conscience, and will):
8. Support:
a. 1 Thessalonians: Apostle Paul emphasizes the three-part
view in desiring the sanctification of the entire person;
b. Hebrews 4:12: A distinction between soul and spirit.
c. 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:4: natural (fleshly), carnal (soulish),
and spiritual (spiritual).
9. Supports include Greek and Alexandrian Church Fathers (e.g.,
Origen) and Eastern Church:

C. Multi-Faceted View: The other two views commit the fallacy of

reductionism because there are a number of other terms that have bearing
upon the non-material nature of each human in addition to soul and spirit.
Paul Enns describes these additional aspects the following way:

Heart: The heart describes the intellectual (Matt. 15:19–20) as well

as the volitional part of man (Rom. 10:9–10; Heb. 4:7). Conscience:
God has placed within man a conscience as a witness. The conscience
is affected by the Fall and may be seared and unreliable (1 Tim. 4:2);
 11

nonetheless, it can convict the unbeliever (Rom. 2:15). In the

believer it may be weak and overly scrupulous (1 Cor. 8:7, 10, 12).
Mind: The unbeliever’s mind is depraved (Rom. 1:28), blinded by
Satan (2 Cor. 4:4), and darkened and futile (Eph. 4:17–18). In the
believer there is a renewed mind (Rom. 12:2) that enables him to
love God (Matt. 22:37). Will: The unbeliever has a will that desires to
follow the dictates of the flesh (Eph. 2:2–3), whereas the believer has
the ability to desire to do God’s will (Rom. 6:12–13). At conversion,
the believer is given a new nature that enables him to love God with
all his heart, mind, and will.8

V. How to define Sin?

A. Sin is a transgression of the law of God. The Greek word parabasis means
overstepping, transgression. God gave the Mosaic law to heighten man’s
understanding of His standard and the seriousness of transgressing that
standard ( Rom. 4:15 ). Thereafter, when God said, “You shall not bear false
witness,” a lie was seen to be what it is: an overstepping or transgression of
the law of God (cf. Rom. 2:23; 5:14 ; Gal. 3:19 ).

B. Sin is a failure to conform to the standard of God. The Greek word

hamartia means “miss the mark,” “every departure from the way of
righteousness.” Thus, it means that all people have missed the mark of God’s
standard and continue to fall short of that standard ( Rom. 3:23 ). This
involves both sins of commission as well as omission. Failure to do what is
right is also sin ( Rom. 14:23 ).

C. Sin is a principle within man. Sin is not only an act but also a principle that
dwells in man. Paul refers to the struggle with the sin principle within (
Rom. 7:14 , 17–25 ); all people have this sin nature ( Gal. 3:22 ). Hebrews
3:13 refers to it “as the power that deceives men and leads them to
destruction.” Jesus also refers to sin as a “condition or characteristic
quality”( John 9:41 ; 15:24 ; 19:11 )

D. Sin is rebellion against God. Another Greek word for sin is anomia , which
means “lawlessness” ( 1 John 3:4 ) and can be described as a “frame of
mind.” It denotes lawless deeds ( Titus 2:14 ) and is a sign of the last days,
meaning “without law or restraint” ( Matt. 24:12 ).

E. Sin is wrongful acts toward God and man. Romans 1:18 refers to
“ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.” Ungodliness refers to man’s
failure to obey God and keep the commandments related to Him ( Exod.
20:1–11 ); unrighteousness is seen in man’s failure to live righteously
toward his fellow man ( Exod. 20:12–17 ).9

V. Original Sin:

8
Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, 306.
9
Ibid., 310.
 12

A. Definition. Original sin may be defined as the sinful state and condition in
which every person is born. It is so designated because:

1. It is derived from the original root of the human race (Adam),

2. It is present in the life of every individual from the time of his birth, and
3. It is the inward root of all the actual sins that defile the life of man.

Simply stated original sin refers to the corruption of our whole nature.

B. Reformed Tradition:

1. Humanity is totally depraved. As Charles Ryrie states:

Total depravity does not mean that everyone is as thoroughly depraved in his actions as he
could possibly be, nor that everyone will indulge in every form of sin, nor that a person
cannot appreciate and even do acts of goodness; but it does mean that the corruption of sin
extends to all men and to all parts of all men so that there is nothing within the natural man
that can give him merit in God’s sight [Survey of Bible Doctrine, 111].

2. Humanity has an innate sin nature. Like Ryrie states, “The sin nature is
the capacity to do all those things (good or bad) that can in no way
commend us to God [Idem].” In fact, every aspect of the human person is
involved:

a. intellect ( 2 Cor. 4:4 );

b. conscience ( 1 Tim. 4:2 );

c. will ( Rom. 1:28 );

d. heart ( Eph. 4:18 );

e. and the total being ( Rom. 1:18–3:20 ).

V. Views on Imputation: Romans 5:12:10

A. Definition: The word imputation comes from the Latin word imputare, meaning “to
reckon,” “to charge to one’s account.” Imputation is interrelated to the problem of
how sin is charged to every person. The biblical basis for imputation is Romans
5:12. This passage explains that sin entered the world through Adam. The
interpretation of that verse determines one’s view of imputation.

B. Four Major Views: Historically, there have been four major views of how sin is
imputed to the human race.

1. Pelagian view.

10
Ibid., 310-313.
 13

a. Pelagius was a British monk born about A.D. 370.

b. Modern Unitarians continue his basic scheme of doctrine.

c. Pelagius taught that God created every soul directly.

d. Every soul therefore was innocent and unstained.

e. No created soul had any direct relation to the sin of Adam; the only
significance of Adam’s sin upon humanity was the bad example.

f. Adam did not affect all human race with his act of disobedience.

g. No sin of Adam was imputed to the human race.

h. Only those acts of sin that people themselves committed were imputed to
them.

i. Humans die because Adam sinned but because of the law of nature. Adam
would have died even if he had not sinned.

j. Pelagius and his doctrines were condemned at the Council of Carthage in A.D.
418.

2. Arminian view.

a. The Arminian view is similar to semi-Pelagianism and is representative in

the Methodist church, Wesleyans, Pentecostals, and others. Jacobus
Arminius (1560–1609) was a Dutch theologian from which the view gets its
name.

b. Arminius taught that man was not considered guilty because of Adam’s sin.
When people would voluntarily and purposefully choose to sin even though
they had power to live righteously—then, and only then, would God impute
sin to them and count them guilty.

c. Although man does not possess original righteousness because of Adam’s

sin, Augustus Strong writes, “God bestows upon each individual from the
first dawn of consciousness a special influence of the Holy Spirit, which is
sufficient to counteract the effect of the inherited depravity and to make
obedience possible, provided the human will cooperates, which it still has
power to do” [Systematic Theology, 601].

d. Therefore, Arminius recognized an effect from Adam’s sin but not in the
sense of total depravity; through divine enablement man could still make
righteous choices.
 14

e. Romans 5:12 is not understood as all humanity suffering the effect of Adam’s
sin and death; but rather because of the individual agreement with Adam’s
act is sin imputed to the individual.

3. Federal view:

a. Originally propounded by Cocceius (1603–1669) and is a commonly held

position in Reformed theology. Proponents include Charles Hodge; J. Oliver
Buswell, Jr.; and Louis Berkhof.

b. This view is called the federal view because Adam is seen as the federal head
or representative of the entire human race.

c. As a result of Adam’s sin, since he was the representative of the human race,
his sin plunged the entire human race into suffering and death.

d. Through the one sin of Adam, sin and death are imputed to all humanity
because all humanity was represented in Adam.

e. Charles Hodge defines the view: “in virtue of the union, federal and natural,
between Adam and his posterity, his sin, although not their act, is so
imputed to them that it is the judicial ground of the penalty threatened
against him coming also upon them [Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, 2:
192-93].”

4. Augustinian view. This view is named after Augustine ( A.D. 354–430) and has
advocated by John Calvin, Martin Luther, W. G. T. Shedd, and Augustus Strong.

a. This view teaches that the statement “all sinned” in Romans 5:12 suggests
that all humanity was a participant in Adam’s sin.

b. Just as Levi (although not yet born) paid tithes to Melchizedek through
Abraham in that Levi was “seminally present” in Abraham ( Heb. 7:9–10 ), in
a similar way, all humanity was “seminally present” in Adam when Adam
sinned and therefore all humanity participated in the sin.

c. Therefore, the sin of Adam and the resultant death is charged to all
humanity because all humanity is guilty. God holds all humanity guilty
because all humanity is guilty.
 15

4 VIEWS OF THE IMPUTATION OF SIN

Views Romans 5:12 Adam Humanity Modern

Adherents
Pelagian People incur Sin affected No one affected Unitarians

View death when they Adam alone. by Adam’s sin.

sin after Adam’s

example.
Arminian All people Adam sinned and Depravity is not Methodists

View consent to partially affected total; people Wesleyans

Adam’s sin—then humanity received corrupt Pentecostals

sin is imputed nature from Holiness groups

Adam but not

guilt or culpability.
Federal Sin is imputed to Adam alone Depravity is total; Presbyterians

View humanity because sinned but human sin and guilt are Others holding to

of Adam’s sin. race affected imputed. Covenant theology.

Augustinian Sin is imputed to Humanity sinned Depravity is total; Reformers

View humanity because in Adam. sin and guilt are Later Calvinists

of Adam’s sin. imputed.