A common assumption among readers of Rom 5:12–21 is that Paul’s soteriology and Christology require a historical Adam as the effects of his transgression are needed first to explain the latter need for the contrasting redemption in Christ. This article challenges this axiom by tracing how Paul appropriates the character of Adam within its ancient Adamic tradition and discusses how Paul conforms his rhetoric with a Christological understanding that does not entirely rest on Adam’s historicity. Whilst this study does not aim to advocate for or against a historical Adam, I argue that the removal of Adam’s historicity does not necessarily disrupt (1) the symbolic and representational function of Adam, (2) Paul’s depiction of sin and death as existential realities, and (3) Paul’s view on Christ’s redemptive role. This proposed reading invites theological reflection on sin’s dual nature as cosmic power and personal accountability, and intensifies rather than diminishes the cosmic scope of Christ’s redemptive work.
Edward S. Wong (Sat,) studied this question.