The other day I mentioned the importance of hearing the Adam-Christ juxtaposition through the Epistle to the Romans and not just in 5.12-21 where it is made most explicit (see comments on 8.2 here). If we keep Adam-Christ in view as we read the epistle we are more likely to notice nuance that will impact our understanding of the message. The first important passage where the reader should be aware of Adam’s “presence” is 1.18-25. This is what Morna Hooker says (From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul, 77-78):
“…the sequence of events outlined in Rom. 1 reminds us of the story of Adam as it is told in Gen. 1-3. Of Adam it is supremely true that God manifest to him that which can be known of him (v. 19); that from the creation onwards, God’s attributes were clearly discernible to him in the things which had been made, and that he was thus without excuse (v. 20). Adam, above and before all men, knew and allowed his heart to be darkened (v. 20). Adam’s fall was the result of his desire to be as God, to attain knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3.5), so that, claiming to be wise, he in fact became a fool (v. 21). Thus he not only failed to give glory to God but, according to rabbinic tradition, himself lost the glory of God which was reflected on his face (v. 23). In believing the serpent’s lie that his action would not lead to death (Gen. 3.4) he turned his back on the truth of God, and he obeyed, and thus gave his allegiance to a creature, the serpent, rather than to the creator (v. 25).”
In v. 25 τῷ ψεύδει (“the lie”) seems to indicate that this is referring to a particular lie due to the definite article. If Hooker is right in hearing a Pauline exposition on Adam in these verses then it is very likely that “the lie” is that of the serpent in Gen. 3.4 just as she observes. This would not be odd since it is not the only Genesis-echoes in this passage. The statement φθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πετεινῶν καὶ τετραπόδων καὶ ἑρπετῶν derives its creational-categories from the LXX of Gen. 1.20-27 where humans are placed in relation to the created order. So not only does Paul see humanity as reenacting Adam’s failure to subdue creation when he obeyed the voice of the serpent, but he sees all humans as following Adam into what is essentially the root of idolatry—forsaking the glory of God in order to worship the creation instead. For Adam this took place when he obeyed the serpent; for Adam’s descendents it takes place when we make idols out of created things.
the archives near Emmaus 
Great quote Brian. I have thought about this passage in the same way. One thing that I wrestle with often, in the back of my mind, is how Paul understood “Adam”. I think that he is clearly re-telling the story of early Genesis here; speaking of creation, the fall, and the results of the fall on subsequent humanity. On the one hand, I’m not sure that He is universalizing this narrative, in the sense that what he is saying is equally true of every human, but rather, showing a degenerating progression that begins with Adam, and continues to worsen as time goes on, so that some of the things such as “His invisible attributes, eternal power, and divine nature”, aren’t quite as “clear” as the revelation of God, through His image bearers, becomes less and less “clear” over time. On the other hand, it does seem as though Adam is representative of mankind (and maybe even more particularly, in Paul’s argument, Gentiles; with a surprise for the Jews hidden in it) in the sense that Paul is using pronouns like “they” and speaking of “mankind”, in a way that places the community in the role of Adam in this re-telling. I’m not sure if what I am saying makes sense at all…but if it does, and you have an opinion, I would love to hear your thoughts.
@Brian: It would seem to me that the Apostle Paul uses Adam as an archtype. I would assume that this means he thought of Adam as a real person, but I don’t know if his argument demands that Adam was real. For Paul it does appear, as you seem to note, that there is not a one-for-one analogy with Adam and his descendants, but rather that all humans reenact the Adam story in their own way. In 1.18-32 while vv. 18-25 seem to have Adam in the background, the rest of the sins listed indicate that others replay Adam’s fall in their own lives through various means. Likewise, in 5.14 Paul makes sure to note that sins impact hits even those who have not sinned “in the likeness” of Adam’s sin.
In chapters 2 and 3 I see Paul showing the Jews that they are in Adam just like the Gentiles.
Hey Brian. I like your guys’ blog. I just wanted to comment that the use of the definite article here does not necessarily mean that it ought to be translated “the lie”. Definite articles commonly follow prepositions without necessarily giving the noun which they accompany definiteness.
@Ray: Thanks for pointing that out, I would have overlooked it (I am not much of a grammarian)! I do think Hooker’s overall insight (one shared by Dunn, whom I will quote tomorrow) that Adam is in view here leads me to think that whatever referent this mention of the lie is aiming toward it most likely has the serpent in view.
Come by more often!
Brian,
I think you are correct in placing some importance on the article. Koine Greek prefers that the article be elided when following a preposition. Of course, there are times when such a general observation will be violated, in which case the constituents need to be reevaluated and the general rule must then be honed to reflect the phenomenon (i.e., Apollonius’ Canon). In this case, I would probably see the article here functioning in a very similar way the Hebrew Determination often functions, namely, it is present in the mind of the speaker. In which case, it could be an illusion to the Genesis Narrative. However, I think this requires a very close examination, and top down exegesis, that is to say, it would very unconvincing to me to argue from the article to an echo. I would rather see broader theological leitmotivs demonstrated, then look at how the syntax might support such an argument (or present defeaters). Syntax is only part of Semiotics, and is often circumstantial to any argument.
James,
Thanks. That’s a much better worded and fuller version of what I was trying to say. 🙂
@James: I know the burden of proof will be on those who hear an echo where there does not seem to be any obvious indicators. In part, this is one of the goals of my thesis. I intend on showing that Genesis-motifs undergird most of what Paul says throughout the epistle (I’d add Isaiah, but that study has been done as well and it would make my own too broad). So you are correct that the article itself does little for the argument, but piece by piece I hope to display how 5.12-21 is not only not the only direct Adam-Christ juxtaposition but merely the most obvious of an theme that goes from the front to the back of the epistle.
A thing to keep in mind when appealing to LXX connotations (i.e., “echoes”) is to make sure you examine several of the LXX databases. Rahlfs LXX isn’t nearly as extensive as Cambridge, or even more so Göttingen. The reason I say this is because Paul may be using a LXX text different than that of Rahlfs. By the way, you can get all of these in Accordance Bible Software. ☺
Accordance is Mac only, right? I currently don’t have a Mac.
You can run Accordance in an Emulator. I’ve never tried it, so I don’t know how well it works. Accordance is written for Mac platforms. I switched to Macs years ago, and I’ve been very pleased with them. I switched primarily because of Accordance, and secondarily for the simplicity the Mac has for research and writing. After having used Logos for about three years, I quickly realized that if I wanted to original language research and exegesis, Accordance is the way to go.
@James: I used to have a Mac, but when it died I got a cheap PC. It has Logos and Bibleworks on it.