Imputed Sin vs Inherited Sin

[Eleanor]

However, sin is not inherited (Eze 18:20), Adam's nature is inherited (Eph 2:3). . .sin is imputed (Ro 5:17).

It glorifies the love/mercy of God in the redeemed and the justice of God in the damned.

How unsearchable are his judgments,
and his ways beyond finding out!
Who is wise enough that he should instruct God? (Isa 40:13)
And who has given to God that God should owe him? (Job 41:11)

(Ro 11:33-36)

Ez 18:20 is simply saying that a child is not condemned because of the sins of their parents but for their own sins.

Yes, sin is not inherited.

It is not related to the imputed sin of Adam.

Eze 18:20 is not about Adam. It is a general principle regarding the inheritance of sin, which applies to inheriting Adam's sin.
Sin is not inherited.

Our sinful nature is inherited.
Adam's sin is imputed.
Our own sin is incurred.

Romans 5:17 on the other hand is discussing the sin of Adam being imputed to all men as our federal head, causing all to be sinners by nature,

The imputed sin of Adam is not the cause of our inherited sinful nature, which nature leads us to personally incur sin.
The imputed sin of Adam is in addition to our inherited sinful nature, which leads us to personally incur sin.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Ezek 18:20 . .The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity
of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness
of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
him.

The Bible's codified laws are not retroactive (Deut 5:2-4, Gal 3:17)

I know that seems a bit strange but it's quite necessary because the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God doesn't list human sacrifice among the
Levitical offerings and it's illegal to add it.

● Deut 4:2 . .You shall not add anything to what I command you or take anything
away from it, but keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I enjoin upon
you.

● Deut 5:29-30 . . Be careful, then, to do as the Lord your God has commanded you.
Do not turn aside to the right or to the left: follow only the path that the Lord your
God has enjoined upon you

However. Jesus was designated, and scheduled, to die for the sins of the world
prior to the voice of God creating even a single atom for the current cosmos. (1Pet
1:18-21 & Rev 13:8) In other words: the cross was on track before the covenant
existed.
_

 

[Eleanor]

To me, the glory and grace to God through this imputed and inherited sin of Adam, is in the perfection and profound and deep wisdom of God, found in the purpose of it. The creation of a perfect home for man and animal alike, where God would dwell with us.
No one knows what took place in eternity before this world was created because we are not told, but it was not the beginning of everything for there is no beginning in God. We can only look at what God reveals to us about what he did when he created this world and created mankind to dwell in it and have dominion over it, under his dominion and according to his goodness. His image bearers.
We know that it had to have been his plan that man would fall and become a sinful being or that would not have happened. We know that when Adam did fall, a war was declared, (Gen 3:15) the outcome already known because ordained by God, and in place in eternity within the triune God. Father, Son, Holy Spirit, before our world was created. The Covenant of Redemption. And we know from scriptures such as Is.11 and Rev 21, what the goal is. A new heaven and a new earth, populated by the redeemed, made a new creation in Christ, no longer mortal and no longer corruptible because the evil one and all sinners are destroyed. The death that came through Adam is destroyed. The evil one, that serpent of old, is destroyed, no longer roaming the earth looking for who he can destroy.
This is the magnificence of federal headship----which btw we see not only in Adam and Christ, but in husband and wife in the garden, mandated for all, likened to Christ and his bride, the church----is in the symmetry and order and perfection of it. If there is no federal head of all mankind, as in Adam, there is chaos in redemption. And if there is no federal headship of Adam, there can be no federal headship of Christ as a substitute for mankind. The second has to supplant the first--- one like us, standing in our place to conquer the power of sin and death to condemn and kill.

We like to think it is all about us. And it is true that we are the beneficiaries and that he does this for us because he loves us with unfathomable love---the same love he has for the Son!! (John 17). But what Jesus is doing his for the glory of God, and he is not just redeeming a people. He is not just conquering the power of sin to condemn, for his people. That he did do on the cross, and sealed all his people by the Holy Spirit. But it is even more than that. He is destroying death and evil. (1 Cor 15). And coming to dwell among us again and forever.

Ro 9:22-23 tell us what all of it is about.

 

[Arial]

Eze 18:20 is not about Adam. It is a general principle regarding the inheritance of sin, which applies to inheriting Adam's sin.
Sin is not inherited.

Our sinful nature is inherited.
Adam's sin is imputed.
Our own sin is incurred.

Which is what I said. But Ez 18:20 is not a principle regarding the inheritance of sin. To say in the theological world that sin is inherited is not saying that we inherited our daddy's or mother's sins. Which is what Ez is dealing with. It is saying we are sinners by nature because Adam's sin (because of federal headship as ordained by God) becomes a part of his nature, and therefore our nature. We inherit it from him.

The imputed sin of Adam is not the cause of our inherited sinful nature, which nature leads us to personally incur sin.
The imputed sin of Adam is in addition to our inherited sinful nature, which leads us to personally incur sin.

Where did we inherit it from? What do you think that Adam's sin imputed to us means? What do you say the Doctrine of Original sin is? Federal headship is very important in even arriving at the Doctrine of Original sin---which refers to the result of Adam's sin, not the first sin. And it seems to me, that it is the idea of federal headship is why these discussions with you on the issue of imputed and inherited sin only lead to misunderstanding one another, and talking past one another, occur. Why it is you don't appear to be understanding what I say, and I cannot understand why you say what you say. They are almost the same, yet the debate keeps recurring. All it needs to be on the same page is the tiniest of tweeks, and at the same time, a major one on which a whole doctrine turns.

So I ask again, respectfully, is it a federal headship that you are not agreeing with? Many do, because "the Bible never uses that word". But the concept is there beginning with "In the beginning, God---" and comes up again in "have dominion over" (said to Adam), and again in one man, then one woman. It is in the heads of tribes, Moses, all the way to "Christ is head of the church----".

 

[Arial]

.
● Ezek 18:20 . .The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity
of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness
of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
him.

The Bible's codified laws are not retroactive (Deut 5:2-4, Gal 3:17)

I know that seems a bit strange but it's quite necessary because the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God doesn't list human sacrifice among the
Levitical offerings and it's illegal to add it.

● Deut 4:2 . .You shall not add anything to what I command you or take anything
away from it, but keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I enjoin upon
you.

● Deut 5:29-30 . . Be careful, then, to do as the Lord your God has commanded you.
Do not turn aside to the right or to the left: follow only the path that the Lord your
God has enjoined upon you

However. Jesus was designated, and scheduled, to die for the sins of the world
prior to the voice of God creating even a single atom for the current cosmos. (1Pet
1:18-21 & Rev 13:8) In other words: the cross was on track before the covenant
existed.
_

In what way is this related to the OP. There is a rule against attempting to derail a thread to serve one's own purposes in changing the subject of it. Just so you know.


4.3. Stay on topic and avoid derailing or hijacking the thread. When engaging in a discussion, keep responses relevant to the original post. Do not divert the conversation to unrelated matters, introduce personal grievances, or use the thread as an opportunity to push an unrelated agenda. Engaging in discussions with the intent to stir up controversy, bait others into arguments, or introduce unrelated topics just disrupts meaningful dialogue. Stay on topic and contribute in a way that adds value to the conversation, not detracts from it. If you have a different subject to discuss, start a new thread in the appropriate forum rather than disrupting an existing one

 

[Eleanor]

Which is what I said. But Ez 18:20 is not a principle regarding the inheritance of sin. To say in the theological world that sin is inherited

Then the theological world is not in agreement with Scripture in Eze 18:20.
Scripture presents Adam's sin as imputed (Ro 5:17), not as inherited, which would be contrary to Eze 18:20.
And it does so as part of the symmetry of imputation: imputation of Adam's sin as the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).

is not saying that we inherited our daddy's or mother's sins. Which is what Ez is dealing with.

And that includes our daddy Adam.

It is saying we are sinners by nature because Adam's sin (because of federal headship as ordained by God) becomes a part of his nature, and therefore our nature. We inherit it from him.

The act of the sin itself does not become a part of his nature.
The disposition to sin (resulting from the act of his sin in the Garden) becomes a part of his nature.

Where did we inherit it from? What do you think that Adam's sin imputed to us means? What do you say the Doctrine of Original sin is?

Adam's sin imputed to us is the "original" sin of which we are guilty.

Federal headship is very important in even arriving at the Doctrine of Original sin---which refers to the result of Adam's sin, not the first sin. And it seems to me, that it is the idea of federal headship is why these discussions with you on the issue of imputed and inherited sin only lead to misunderstanding one another, and talking past one another, occur. Why it is you don't appear to be understanding what I say, and I cannot understand why you say what you say. They are almost the same, yet the debate keeps recurring. All it needs to be on the same page is the tiniest of tweeks, and at the same time, a major one on which a whole doctrine turns.

My disagreement is from Scripture, not from theology.

So I ask again, respectfully, is it a federal headship that you are not agreeing with? Many do, because "the Bible never uses that word". But the concept is there beginning with "In the beginning, God---" and comes up again in "have dominion over" (said to Adam), and again in one man, then one woman. It is in the heads of tribes, Moses, all the way to "Christ is head of the church----".

 

[Arial]

Then the theological world is not in agreement with Scripture in Eze 18:20.

Or you are applying the passage to something it doesn't apply to. You do know I presume that there is an area of "Christianity" that applies that scripture in the way that you do in order to deny the Doctrine of Original Sin.

Scripture presents Adam's sin as imputed (Ro 5:17), not as inherited, which would be contrary to Eze 18:20.

I have never denied that Adam's sin is imputed to us. I have said so many times. And I have not said that our sins are imputed. I have only said the same thing your are saying "I think", that we inherit the sin nature from Adam, and it is this sin nature, (that became ours through inheritance. Like father, like son.) that is imputed to all mankind because God ordained the first man as the federal head of all men.

And it does so as part of the symmetry of imputation: imputation of Adam's sin as the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).

Right. Federal headship. It is also the reason Adams fall and our personal sins are imputed to Christ on the cross. Both had to be dealt with. It could be no other way.

And that includes our daddy Adam.

No it doesn't, other than that is where we get our nature from. Read the full chapter of Ez 18 and put the one sentence within its context. It also says the father will not be punished for the sons sins----among other things. It is also addressing a proverb that was being used and telling them to use it no more. "The father has eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth are set on edge."

The act of the sin itself does not become a part of his nature.
The disposition to sin (resulting from the act of his sin in the Garden) becomes a part of his nature.

Are you splitting hairs? When Adam sinned, he became a sinner. It only takes one. That is imputed to all his progeny by headship and is now a part of his nature. Therefore we inherit that same sinful nature. We sin because we are a sinful being.

Adam's sin imputed to us is the "original" sin of which we are guilty.

Original sin refers to the effect on all humanity due to Adam's sin.

From Got Questions:



The term original sin refers to Adam’s sin of disobedience in eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and its effects upon the rest of the human race. Original sin can be defined as “the moral corruption we possess as a consequence of Adam’s sin, resulting in a sinful disposition manifesting itself in habitually sinful behavior.” The doctrine of original sin focuses particularly on its effect on our internal nature and our standing before God. There are three main views that deal with that effect:

My disagreement is from Scripture, not from theology.

I wasn't asking about theology. I was asking about federal headship. Do you say it does not exist and pertains neither or Adam or Jesus?

 

[Odë:hgöd]

In what way is this related to the OP.

Conventional Christians understand Rom 5:12 to indicate
Adam's entire posterity are accounted joint principals with
him in the act of tasting the forbidden fruit. Opponents
sometimes quote Ezek 18:20 to prove that would never happen.

The addendum about Jesus down in the lower half of my
post is meant to be an FYI.
_

 

[Eleanor]

Or you are applying the passage to something it doesn't apply to. You do know I presume that there is an area of "Christianity" that applies that scripture in the way that you do in order to deny the Doctrine of Original Sin.

I have never denied that Adam's sin is imputed to us. I have said so many times. And I have not said that our sins are imputed. I have only said the same thing your are saying "I think", that we inherit the sin nature from Adam, and it is this sin nature, (that became ours through inheritance. Like father, like son.) that is imputed to all mankind because God ordained the first man as the federal head of all men.

"Inherited" and "imputed" are two different things. . .they are not interchangeable.

Inherited comes through natural birth. Our inherited fallen nature comes through natural birth and is continually passed on through natural birth, not through imputation.
Imputed is a legal transaction--to charge to one's account, to lay to one's charge; and does not require personal incurrment (one's doing the deed).
Christ's righteousness is imputed to us, it is not personally incurred (by our doing righteousness), nor inherited (through natural birth).

"Inherited" and "imputed" are two different things. . .one does not become the other through transmission.

Our sinful nature is inherited.
Adam's sin is imputed.
Our own sin is incurred (by performing it).

Right. Federal headship. It is also the reason Adams fall and our personal sins are imputed to Christ on the cross. Both had to be dealt with. It could be no other way.

No it doesn't, other than that is where we get our nature from. Read the full chapter of Ez 18 and put the one sentence within its context. It also says the father will not be punished for the sons sins----among other things.

That translates: inherit the father's sin thereby incurring its punishment.

It is also addressing a proverb that was being used and telling them to use it no more. "The father has eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth are set on edge."

Are you splitting hairs?

Only when the distinction among inherited, imputed and incurred are splitting hairs, which distinctions Scripture is careful to maintain.

When Adam sinned, he became a sinner. It only takes one. That is imputed to all his progeny by headship and is now a part of his nature. Therefore we inherit that same sinful nature. We sin because we are a sinful being.

Original sin refers to the effect on all humanity due to Adam's sin.

From Got Questions:



The term original sin refers to Adam’s sin of disobedience in eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and its effects upon the rest of the human race. Original sin can be defined as “the moral corruption we possess as a consequence of Adam’s sin, resulting in a sinful disposition manifesting itself in habitually sinful behavior.” The doctrine of original sin focuses particularly on its effect on our internal nature and our standing before God. There are three main views that deal with that effect:

I wasn't asking about theology. I was asking about federal headship. Do you say it does not exist and pertains neither or Adam or Jesus?

It is theology which sees the
unconditional covenant of Ge 15:9-21,
the conditional covenant of Gen 17, and
the conditional covenant of Ex 19-24
as one Covenant.

Scripture presents it as three.

 

[Arial]

"Inherited" and "imputed" are two different things. . .they are not interchangeable.

I am aware. I am not using them interchangeably.

That translates: inherit the father's sin thereby incurring its punishment.

"The father will not be punished for the sins of the son" translates "inherit the father's sin there by incurring its punishment?"

Only when the distinction among inherited, imputed and incurred are splitting hairs, which distinctions Scripture is careful to maintain.

Which I have been doing all along. I don't know why you think I am not.

It is theology which sees the
unconditional covenant of Ge 15:9-21,
the conditional covenant of Gen 17, and
the conditional covenant of Ex 19-24
as one Covenant.

Scripture presents it as three.

Why have you changed the subject to covenants? I guess I will get nothing on the questions I asked about federal headship.

I'm out. It is just repetitive arguing.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

Eve was first to taste the forbidden fruit; and when she did, nothing happened. She went right o
in the buff just as shameless as before. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that her sense of
decency underwent a change and she set to work cobbling together a make-shift apron to cover
her pelvic area.

FAQ: Why weren't the woman's eyes opened, and her moral perception altered,
when she tasted the forbidden fruit?

REPLY: It was apparently God's decision that if sin and death were to come into the
world, they would do so by means of the solo actions of one man working alone,
just as life and righteousness would come into the world by means of the solo
actions of one man working alone. (Rom 5:12-21, 1Cor 15:21-22)
_

 

[Eleanor]

I am aware. I am not using them interchangeably.

"The father will not be punished for the sins of the son" translates "inherit the father's sin there by incurring its punishment?"

Which I have been doing all along. I don't know why you think I am not.

Why have you changed the subject to covenants? I guess I will get nothing on the questions I asked about federal headship.

Is headship not from covenant theology?

I prefer the Biblical terminology. . .
1) in Adam (by nature), in Christ (by the Holy Spirit),
2) the first covenant (after Noah) being with Abraham, not Adam,
3) four covenants made with the people of God, rather than two
4) the New Covenant (fourth, remedy for sin) being the fulfillment of the Sinaitic covenant (third, revealing sin).

 

[Arial]

Is headship not from covenant theology?

I prefer the Biblical terminology. . .
1) in Adam (by nature), in Christ (by the Holy Spirit),
2) the first covenant (after Noah) being with Abraham, not Adam,
3) four covenants made with the people of God, rather than two
4) the New Covenant (fourth, remedy for sin) being the fulfillment of the Sinaitic covenant (third, revealing sin).

I may be wrong but I do not believe headship is unique to covenant theology. And covenant theology is more than just a listing of the covenants. It is a framework for scripture interpretation, based on the fact that in Scripture, God shows himself to be a God who instigates a relationship with people through covenant. It is a relationship.

Federal headship simply states that the head of all humanity is Adam. That means he is the representative of all mankind. As Adam is, so are all the rest of the human race.That is the imputation. Adam's sin imputed to us. Adam became a sinner. Sin becomes a part of his nature (he has knowledge of not only good after the fall, but also evil as do all his descendants). We inherit that nature from him. We are said scripturally to be in Adam.

Jesus is the federal head of the redeemed. He is the representative of all those he died for. He does this by having the sin of Adam and our sins imputed to him so that he can take their just punishment in our place, for us. In the new birth of the Spirit, (as opposed to the first birth in Adam) we are taken out of Adam and placed in Christ. Moved from one federal head to the other federal head. Christ undoes what Adam did for his people.

 

[Eleanor]

I may be wrong but I do not believe headship is unique to covenant theology. And covenant theology is more than just a listing of the covenants. It is a framework for scripture interpretation, based on the fact that in Scripture, God shows himself to be a God who instigates a relationship with people through covenant. It is a relationship.

And God has no such relationship with all mankind, only with his called-out people.
Scripture presents the first of those with his called-out assembly in Abraham.
Scripture presents covenants as made with the called-out people of God, not with all mankind in Adam.

Federal headship simply states that the head of all humanity is Adam. That means he is the representative of all mankind. As Adam is, so are all the rest of the human race.That is the imputation.

However, "as Adam is, so are all the rest of the human race" is fallen nature. . .through inheritance, not by imputation.
Only Adam's sin is by imputation (Ro 5:17), for sin is not inherited (Eze 18:20).

Adam's sin imputed to us. Adam became a sinner. Sin becomes a part of his nature (he has knowledge of not only good after the fall, but also evil as do all his descendants). We inherit that nature from him. We are said scripturally to be in Adam.

Jesus is the federal head of the redeemed. He is the representative of all those he died for. He does this by having the sin of Adam and our sins imputed to him so that he can take their just punishment in our place, for us. In the new birth of the Spirit, (as opposed to the first birth in Adam) we are taken out of Adam and placed in Christ. Moved from one federal head to the other federal head. Christ undoes what Adam did for his people.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

We inherit that nature from him.

I heartily disagree!

The thing is; Eve was already fully constructed with material taken from Adam's
body prior to his tasting the forbidden fruit so it was impossible for him to pass the
consequences of his tasting to Eve by means of heredity.

FAQ: From who did Eve obtain the fallen nature if not from Adam?

REPLY: Well obviously from the Serpent, a.k.a. the Devil and Satan (Rev 12:9) He's the
source of the fallen nature (Heb 2:14) viz: Adam's conduct with the forbidden fruit
brought the fallen nature on us, but we haven't been the culprit passing it around.

* I really have to hand it to the Serpent; he's very good at shifting blame away from
himself. For quite a few years now it's been traditional to believe fathers propagate the
fallen nature when it's been the Serpent all along.

How he has managed to deceive so many people for so long a time I don't know, but
what's really ironic about it is that there are people behind pulpits, and chairing whole
Sunday school departments, helping him do it as unsuspecting accomplices; which
goes to show that if an idea is repeated often enough, widely enough, and loud enough
by people held in high enough esteem; pretty soon it's accepted by the masses as fact
without thought or question. (the Asch Conformity Phenomenon)

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong;
Gives it a superficial appearance of being right.
(Thomas Paine)
_

 

[Arial]

The thing is; Eve was already fully constructed with material taken from Adam's
body prior to his tasting the forbidden fruit so it was impossible for him to pass the
consequences of his tasting to Eve by means of heredity.

Nobody said he passed it to Eve through heredity. All their progeny inherit it as part of our nature from Adam. Even animal inherit the nature of their parents. Cats produce cats, with cat natures not dogs with a dog nature or a cat natures..

FAQ: From who did Eve obtain the fallen nature if not from Adam?

REPLY: Well obviously from the Serpent, a.k.a. the Devil and Satan (Rev 12:9) He's the
source of the fallen nature (Heb 2:14) viz: Adam's conduct with the forbidden fruit
brought the fallen nature on us, but we haven't been the culprit passing it around.

Satan is the source of the deception that resulted in Eve's being deceived. He is not the source of Eve's nature. The fallen nature of Eve is not what is being discussed in this thread. What is actually being discussed is the glory brought to God in the perfection of his plan of redemption being plaid out, beginning with one man and one woman. The federal headship of Adam that paves the way for the federal headship of Christ.

* I really have to hand it to the Serpent; he's very good at shifting blame away from
himself. For quite a few years now it's been traditional to believe fathers propagate the
fallen nature when it's been the Serpent all along.

Satan is not the topic or interest of the OP.

 

[Eleanor]

I heartily disagree!

And you are heartily wrong!

The thing is; Eve was already fully constructed with material taken from Adam's
body prior to his tasting the forbidden fruit so it was impossible for him to pass the
consequences of his tasting to Eve by means of heredity.

FAQ: From who did Eve obtain the fallen nature if not from Adam?

She obtained it the same way Adam did, through disobedience of eating the fruit.

REPLY: Well obviously from the Serpent,
a.k.a. the Devil and Satan (Rev 12:9) He's the
source of the fallen nature (Heb 2:14) viz: Adam's conduct with the forbidden fruit
brought the fallen nature on us, but we haven't been the culprit passing it around.

Satan is in no position to himself affect/alter the nature of man.
That is the result of God's penalty on man's own choice to sin.

* I really have to hand it to the Serpent; he's very good at shifting blame away from
himself. For quite a few years now it's been traditional to believe fathers propagate the
fallen nature when it's been the Serpent all along.

The fallen nature is "propagated" by human natural generation, not by Satan.
Spirits do not generate beings.

How he has managed to deceive so many people for so long a time I don't know,

Who's deceived?

but
what's really ironic about it is that there are people behind pulpits, and chairing whole
Sunday school departments, helping him do it as unsuspecting accomplices; which
goes to show that if an idea is repeated often enough, widely enough, and loud enough
by people held in high enough esteem; pretty soon it's accepted by the masses as fact
without thought or question. (the Asch Conformity Phenomenon)

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong;
Gives it a superficial appearance of being right.
(Thomas Paine)
_

 

[Arial]

And God has no such relationship with all mankind, only with his called-out people.

Yes! I know! I did not say otherwise. The Bible in its completeness is the story of redemption as it plays out in history.

And God has no such relationship with all mankind, only with his called-out people.
Scripture presents the first of those with his called-out assembly in Abraham.
Scripture presents covenants as made with the called-out people of God, not with all mankind in Adam.

He also relates to the creation itself convantly. He is a covenant God. But that is a different subject entirely.

However, "as Adam is, so are all the rest of the human race" is fallen nature. . .through inheritance, not by imputation.
Only Adam's sin is by imputation (Ro 5:17), for sin is not inherited (Eze 18:20).

I simply cannot get you to understand what I am saying. I know this, because you argue against it my presenting something I never said and avoiding altogether what I did say. I don't say that as an accusation, but as a fact. That will only result in the same repetitive argument against, and again. And I have great respect and fondness for you, therefore no interest in arguing endlessly over the matter with you.

 

[Eleanor]

Yes! I know! I did not say otherwise. The Bible in its completeness is the story of redemption as it plays out in history.

He also relates to the creation itself convantly. He is a covenant God. But that is a different subject entirely.

Yes, in the covenant with Noah, his descendants and every living thing on earth; i.e., all that is under man's jurisdiction.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

All their progeny inherit it as part of our nature from Adam.

Eve was constructed with material taken from Adam's body prior to his tasting the
forbidden fruit. In other words: she inherited his innocent nature rather than his
fallen nature.

Also: the Bible says that all human life descends from the first man. (Acts 17:26)
Seeing as how Eve was constructed with material taken from Adam's body, then she
obviously counts as one of his descendants, and thus as his progeny.

The fallen nature of Eve is not what is being discussed in this thread.

It was essential to bring Eve into this discussion; because if true that she got the fallen
nature from someone other than Adam, then we have to question whether others
have been getting it from someone other than Adam.
_