If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Kroogz

Well-known member
Dec 5, 2023
1,524
719
113
that his agony in praying in the garden of Gethsemane may have illustrated a beginning of his process in dying.
IMO. This gets lost in our(mine TOO) selfishness. The Lord Jesus Christ was the epitome of selflessness. So why would He be agonizing over something About self?

IMO, The agony was about being the JUDGE over non-believers. He was going to have to judge the men who rejected Him. His true kinsmen according to the flesh(His true humanity)

That was Pauls sentiment to his Jewish brothers.

Rom 9:3~~For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my countrymen, my kinsmen according to the flesh,
 

sawdust

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2024
1,264
287
83
68
Australia
Even in the new heaven and the new earth man is not physically immortal, but has free access to the tree of life for healing that continuously imparts a form of maintained immortality.
Rev 22:2
In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
Rev 2:7
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
Rev 22:14
Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Yes, I think Adam would have died physically, if he had not kept eating from the tree of life to reboot his physical and genetic system as it aged.

Gen 3:22And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become (Qal perfective) as one of us, to know (qal infininitive construct) good and evil: and now, lest he keep on putting forth (Qal imperfect) his hand, and-take (Qal waw-consecutive) also of the tree of life, and keep on eating (Qal waw-consecutive), and keep on living (Qal waw-consecutive) into an age/indefinitely ('L-oLaM).

I do not believe babies' spirits or bodies are corrupted at conception and at birth due to the effects of Adam's sin per se. I believe that babies are born in the same innocent state as Adam was made in, with the same propensity to wear out physically that access to the tree of life healed, and with the same propensity to be corrupted spiritually by temptations and lies so as to distrust God.

The consequences of Adam's sin stated in Genesis have become the burden of every human being. Spiritual death, as many imagine it, was not mentioned as a consequence of Adam's sin. Prohibition from the tree of life was a consequence, leading to inevitable death. Having to work for food by the sweat of his brow was mentioned as a consequence. Pain in child-birth was mentioned as a consequence. Spiritual death was not mentioned as an automatic consequence upon all genetic descendants. God communicated with Cain and Cain understood God . Enoch walked with God. The idea that spiritual death was inherited by all Adam's descendants, that we are born non-spiritual, is not taught in scripture as far as I can see. it is a misunderstanding of scripture begun with Augustine, because of his ignorance of Greek and his relying upon a Latin translation of the Greek text of Romans 5:12, and then eisegeted back into other texts to twist those to post hoc justify agreeing with Augustine's error.
You forgot the most immediate consequence of Adam's sin and I believe the most important, nakedness. Adam had been stripped of something and I believe he had been stripped of his spirit that God gave. He became dead to God and he felt naked. His repentance and the shedding of blood (animal clothing) saw him born again (as in Jn.3:6).

We are going to have to disagree about Adam's physical need for the tree of life. God made it quite clear that death would result from the eating of a specific tree, not the lack of eating from another. We have creatures today who do not die (naturally) like the immortal jellyfish, so it is possible for God to make flesh to constantly renew and not die without the tree of life.

I never read Augustine, I wasn't raised in a Christian home I came to the conclusions I have based on reading the scriptures alone and trying to work out what they meant by being dead in our sins and what it meant to be born again.

God is moral and our soul which, is the essence of who we are made in the image and likeness of God, has moral capacity apart from being spiritual, so men can understand any moral aspect of God's law when the Lord confronts them with grace and truth (Jn.1:17 & Col.1:6). This is why the Spirit is in the world working to convince men of sin, righteousness and judgement (Jn.16:8). It is why men will be without excuse at the final judgement. You don't have to be spiritually alive to God to know enough of what you need to turn to Him and be saved.

Whether I see more than what is there in scripture or whether you are not seeing what is there, either way I shall keep us both in my prayers that it may be as Paul prayed.

Ephesians 1:18
the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,

in Christ
 

sawdust

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2024
1,264
287
83
68
Australia
If separation from God is such an awful terrifying experience, one could ask why all men are not experiencing this terror continually from birth, if they are conceived and born and live in this state until they put faith in Christ.
Because it's all they know. Try living in heaven a "million years" and then being separated and you'll find out how terrifying it is.
 

sawdust

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2024
1,264
287
83
68
Australia
Phl 3:21 Literal translation-

Who (ὃς ) shall be/keep on changing (μετασχηματίσει, future progressive) the body, (τὸ σῶμα) of the low estate of us (τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν) for it to be/keep on being (εἰς τὸ γενέσθαι αὐτὸ, present middle infinitive) conformed (σύμμορφον, adjective) in his glorious body (τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ), according to the working (κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν) of him to be/keep on being able (τοῦ δύνασθαι αὐτὸν, present middle infinitive) even (καὶ) to subdue (ὑποτάξαι, aorist infinitive) to himself (ἑαὐτῷ) all things (τὰ πάντα).

Paraphrase translation of the sense-

who shall keep on changing what was our vile body, so that it keeps on being conformed with His glorious body, according to the operation by which He keeps on being able even to subdue all things to Himself.

There is nothing here that supports a claim that our bodies will own immortality by the same mechanism that makes Jesus' body immortal. The Greek infinitive tenses indicate an ongoing process of being conformed, not a once for all time irreversible perfect conformity to Christ's body.
How does that work in comparison to the change happening in a twinkling of an eye? That would have to be a very long "eye twink". :)

And if Jesus' body is not being upheld by the power of God, then by what mechanism is His body gloriously immortal?
 

Kroogz

Well-known member
Dec 5, 2023
1,524
719
113
You forgot the most immediate consequence of Adam's sin and I believe the most important, nakedness. Adam had been stripped of something and I believe he had been stripped of his spirit that God gave. He became dead to God and he felt naked. His repentance and the shedding of blood (animal clothing) saw him born again (as in Jn.3:6).

We are going to have to disagree about Adam's physical need for the tree of life. God made it quite clear that death would result from the eating of a specific tree, not the lack of eating from another. We have creatures today who do not die (naturally) like the immortal jellyfish, so it is possible for God to make flesh to constantly renew and not die without the tree of life.

I never read Augustine, I wasn't raised in a Christian home I came to the conclusions I have based on reading the scriptures alone and trying to work out what they meant by being dead in our sins and what it meant to be born again.

God is moral and our soul which, is the essence of who we are made in the image and likeness of God, has moral capacity apart from being spiritual, so men can understand any moral aspect of God's law when the Lord confronts them with grace and truth (Jn.1:17 & Col.1:6). This is why the Spirit is in the world working to convince men of sin, righteousness and judgement (Jn.16:8). It is why men will be without excuse at the final judgement. You don't have to be spiritually alive to God to know enough of what you need to turn to Him and be saved.

Whether I see more than what is there in scripture or whether you are not seeing what is there, either way I shall keep us both in my prayers that it may be as Paul prayed.

Ephesians 1:18
the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,

in Christ
Another thread or discussion is....Why didn't they(Adam and Eve) run to the tree of life and eat? Why didn't Adam take Eve straight away to the tree of Life and make her eat? Because God doesn't leave His creation in the dark. Adam knew that if Eve or himself ate from the tree of life......They would live forever in sin.

Adam was not deceived. He made his own plan of salvation and it was the wrong plan. But God covered it!

Adam and Eve were not a couple of imbeciles in a nice little garden. They were without sin natures and taught by God face to face.....We don't give them or God enough credit.
 

sawdust

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2024
1,264
287
83
68
Australia
Another thread or discussion is....Why didn't they(Adam and Eve) run to the tree of life and eat? Why didn't Adam take Eve straight away to the tree of Life and make her eat? Because God doesn't leave His creation in the dark. Adam knew that if Eve or himself ate from the tree of life......They would live forever in sin.

Adam was not deceived. He made his own plan of salvation and it was the wrong plan. But God covered it!

Adam and Eve were not a couple of imbeciles in a nice little garden. They were without sin natures and taught by God face to face.....We don't give them or God enough credit.
Possibly, not something I wish to discuss here but I will say, if you have never experienced severe trauma, you may not be aware how it can render you seemingly senseless in the moment.
 

SaysWhat

Active member
Jan 17, 2024
426
82
28
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, on the basis of which (eph' hOi) all have sinned:
Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

If we assume that original sin is a thing, then Romans 5:13-14 would seem to be a lie. Original sin asserts that sin (the sin of Adam) is imputed to all, including those who lived between Adam and Moses. But Rom. 5:13-15 tells us that sin was not being imputed to anyone when there was no law, nevertheless all died when there was no law. So, the cause of their deaths cannot have been imputed sin, whether the sin of Adam or the sin/s of the person dying.
This text says that death for all Adam's progeny was imposed as a consequence of Adam's sin. It does not say Adam's sin was imputed to his progeny.

What does Paul mean by "had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's sin? He means that they had not knowingly broken a law specifically given to them by God. And there were many such sinners before the law: sinners who acted without faith in God, but did not know of the specific divine expectations they were transgressing against.
Adam is a type of Christ, in that the consequence of Adam's sin (death/mortality/limited life spans) was placed upon all his progeny without their being imputed with Adam's own sin; and the consequences of Jesus' righteousness, His resurrection from the dead , is placed on all His progeny (believers), or perhaps all His siblings (mankind) without His own righteousness being imputed to us/them.


So how do others deal with Romans 5:13-15?
How can the entire world population their babies included die except for Noah and his family?.
 

Kroogz

Well-known member
Dec 5, 2023
1,524
719
113
Possibly, not something I wish to discuss here but I will say, if you have never experienced severe trauma, you may not be aware how it can render you seemingly senseless in the moment.
Agree. The plan of Adam was well thought out and had sincere and sensible motives though. Just not the right motives. So it's difficult for me to say "trauma."

You have some solid doctrine and it has been a pleasure reading your insights. Maybe in the future we can expand on the above thoughts.(y)
 
Mar 8, 2025
55
11
8
…7No, we speak of the mysterious and hidden wisdom of God, which He destined for our glory before time began. 8None of the rulers of this age understood it. For if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
(1 Corinthians 2:7-8)

So your belief that those who crucified Jesus was referring to that small company of Roman soldiers rather that the RULERS OF THIS AGE. That is a grandiose title for a small company who had no real comprehension of what they were doing or whom they were doing it TO
 

Kroogz

Well-known member
Dec 5, 2023
1,524
719
113
…7No, we speak of the mysterious and hidden wisdom of God, which He destined for our glory before time began. 8None of the rulers of this age understood it. For if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
(1 Corinthians 2:7-8)

So your belief that those who crucified Jesus was referring to that small company of Roman soldiers rather that the RULERS OF THIS AGE. That is a grandiose title for a small company who had no real comprehension of what they were doing or whom they were doing it TO
The question is not "who" crucified the Lord Jesus Christ...We ALL did.

We crucified Him, no doubt. But no created being killed Him. He Willing took His last breath and died for us. No created being could kill Him. He could have hung on that cross to this day if He wanted or needed to. He willingly died for us when it was finished. No created being could kill the Lord Jesus Christ.

He died(on His own volition) for us. He wasn't killed by some created being.......It's the key to our salvation and NEVER perishing.
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
4,276
722
113
Not one created entity killed the Lord Jesus Christ. We all crucified Him..... He willingly took His last breath and gave up His Spirit. He Died for us. He was not killed for us.

He was pierced by our transgressions!
How does that work in comparison to the change happening in a twinkling of an eye? That would have to be a very long "eye twink". :)

And if Jesus' body is not being upheld by the power of God, then by what mechanism is His body gloriously immortal?
That is what he missed.... And, as a result? Ran with a subjection notion.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
7,538
2,305
113
IMO. This gets lost in our(mine TOO) selfishness. The Lord Jesus Christ was the epitome of selflessness. So why would He be agonizing over something About self?

IMO, The agony was about being the JUDGE over non-believers. He was going to have to judge the men who rejected Him. His true kinsmen according to the flesh(His true humanity)

That was Pauls sentiment to his Jewish brothers.

Rom 9:3~~For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my countrymen, my kinsmen according to the flesh,
I can see that, that none of His suffering was for Himself, and I can even see that in His every triumphant moment throughout His ordeal, such as in stumbling and regaining His footing, taking the next step toward His cross...expressing His character of mercy and grace all along the way...
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
4,234
577
113
Keep this in mind...

John 19:30 -
When did Jesus proclaim Tetelestai? IT IS FINISHED! PAID IN FULL!

Our salvation from sin was finished BEFORE he died physically!

Perhaps @PaulThomson will provide us with the Greek tense to show us that when Jesus said 'Tetelestai', that Jesus was saying that it was finished already, and was to continue to be finished for forever.



Grace and peace .........
Jhn 19:28 After this (Μετὰ τοῦτο), Jesus knowing ( εἰδὼς ὁ Ἰησοῦς) that (ὅτι) all things (πάντα) now (ἤδη) have finished (τετέλεσται), in order that (ἵνα) might be fulfilled (τελειωθῇ) the scripture (ἡ γραφή), saith (λέγει), I am thirsty (Διψῶ).
Jhn 19:29 A vessel (σκεῦος) therefore (οὖν) there was sitting (ἔκειτο) full of vinegar (ὄξους μεστόν): so they filled (οἱ δὲ, πλήσαντες) a sponge (σπόγγον) with vinegar (ὄξους), and in hyssop (καὶ ὑσσώπῳ) they put (περιθέντες) it, and put it toward (προσήνεγκαν) in his mouth (αὐτοῦ τῷ στόματι).
Jhn 19:30 When (ὅτε) therefore (οὖν) received the vinegar (ἔλαβεν τὸ ὄξος) Jesus (ὁ Ἰησοῦς), he said (εἶπεν), It has finished or it has been finishing (Τετέλεσται): and he bowed (καὶ κλίνας) the head (τὴν κεφαλὴν), and gave up ( παρέδωκεν) the ghost (τὸ πνεῦμα).

I am not convinced that tetelestai is in fact a passive perfect "it has been finished". The indicator of passive voice is an infix of either
-thE- or occasionally only -E-; the perfect passive third person singular of teleO would be tetelesthai , however we see here Tetelestai, hence I believe the correct designation of this verb should be perfect active indicative 3rd person singular: either it has finished or it has been finishing.

See this page linked below. I did a search on "Does the passive always have a theta in koine greek."

https://www.google.com/search?q=doe...Hhy4&sclient=gws-wiz-serp&safe=active&ssui=on

So, if we look at your verse in context, it is the end of a series of verses linked by "therefore"s (oun).

Verse 28 says that Jesus already knew that "all things have finished" or "have been finishing" (tetelestai). What has been finishing. Perhaps all the things that Jesus had told his disciples would happen to the son of man have been coming to an end. If "tetelestai" means what you claim it means, what do you say it was that had already ended in verse 28?

Mar 10:33
Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:
Mar 10:34
And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Or, all the things prophesied in scripture about the Messiah's sufferings have been finishing.

Next, in verse 29 we have the first "therefore, oun". Why was a vessel of vinegar there? Because some prophecy re Messiah's sufferings needed vinegar to be there, in order to complete everything written of Him in the law and the prophets. Because everything was heading toward completion, and to reach completion Jesus needed to drink some vinegar / some fruit of the vine, God had made sure there was some vinegar present. They put some vinegar on a sponge inserted in a branch of hyssop and raised it toward and into Jesus' lips.

Then, in verse 30 we read that therefore, in order that what was in the process of coming to an end would come to a complete end, Jesus received the vinegar and then said, "Tetelestai", the same word as in v. 28. In other words, Jesus said, "It has been coming to an end". What has been coming to an end? The ministry Jesus had been sent to fulfil including all the details prophesied in the Law and Prophets.

So, I think we can see that your interpretation of tetelestai in v. 30 fails when applied to tetelestai in v. 28; but my interpretation iof tetelestai in v. 30 also works when applied to verse 28. So, which of our interpretations is consistent and reasonable?
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
4,234
577
113
You forgot the most immediate consequence of Adam's sin and I believe the most important, nakedness. Adam had been stripped of something and I believe he had been stripped of his spirit that God gave. He became dead to God and he felt naked. His repentance and the shedding of blood (animal clothing) saw him born again (as in Jn.3:6).
I think a fairer description of the immediate consequence would be shame, rather than nakedness. They were already naked, just not ashamed. The covering lessened his shame.

We are going to have to disagree about Adam's physical need for the tree of life. God made it quite clear that death would result from the eating of a specific tree, not the lack of eating from another. We have creatures today who do not die (naturally) like the immortal jellyfish, so it is possible for God to make flesh to constantly renew and not die without the tree of life.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. If immortality was conditional upon eating regularly from the tree of life, then effecting the sentence of mortality could be done by prohibiting access to the tree of life. God does not have to specifically say how death would ensue for Him to honestly state that death would ensue, and for death to ensue via closing off access to the tree of life that was rejuvenating humans of the wear and tear to their bodies by use.

I never read Augustine, I wasn't raised in a Christian home I came to the conclusions I have based on reading the scriptures alone and trying to work out what they meant by being dead in our sins and what it meant to be born again.
Many of the translators you are relying on have had their theology shaped by Augustine and have translated Romans 5:12 according to Augustine's error, and so you are getting it from Augustine via the translations and commentaries you are reading, even if not directly from him.

God is moral and our soul which, is the essence of who we are made in the image and likeness of God, has moral capacity apart from being spiritual, so men can understand any moral aspect of God's law when the Lord confronts them with grace and truth (Jn.1:17 & Col.1:6). This is why the Spirit is in the world working to convince men of sin, righteousness and judgement (Jn.16:8). It is why men will be without excuse at the final judgement. You don't have to be spiritually alive to God to know enough of what you need to turn to Him and be saved.
No argument from me there. But that does not mean our theology will be perfect.
 
Oct 29, 2023
4,234
577
113
How does that work in comparison to the change happening in a twinkling of an eye? That would have to be a very long "eye twink". :)

And if Jesus' body is not being upheld by the power of God, then by what mechanism is His body gloriously immortal?
The quantum change would happen in the twinkling of an eye, but the new form would be being maintained over millennia through continual access to the tree of life.
 
Oct 29, 2023
4,234
577
113
Another thread or discussion is....Why didn't they(Adam and Eve) run to the tree of life and eat? Why didn't Adam take Eve straight away to the tree of Life and make her eat? Because God doesn't leave His creation in the dark. Adam knew that if Eve or himself ate from the tree of life......They would live forever in sin.

Adam was not deceived. He made his own plan of salvation and it was the wrong plan. But God covered it!

Adam and Eve were not a couple of imbeciles in a nice little garden. They were without sin natures and taught by God face to face.....We don't give them or God enough credit.
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he keep on putting forth his hand, and keep on taking also of the tree of life, and keep on eating, and keep on living for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Because God did not say,
"Now lest he put forth his hand one time and take of the tree of life one time, and eat of the tree of life one time and so keep on living forever."

If Adam had run to the tree of life and ate, it would not have given him perpetual immortality by eating one fruit.
 

Kroogz

Well-known member
Dec 5, 2023
1,524
719
113
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he keep on putting forth his hand, and keep on taking also of the tree of life, and keep on eating, and keep on living for ever:
New International Version
And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

New Living Translation
Then the LORD God said, “Look, the human beings have become like us, knowing both good and evil. What if they reach out, take fruit from the tree of life, and eat it? Then they will live forever!”

English Standard Version
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—”

Berean Standard Bible
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil. And now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...”

King James Bible
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

New King James Version
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—

New American Standard Bible
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out with his hand, and take fruit also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—

NASB 1995
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever “—
 
Mar 8, 2025
55
11
8
The question is not "who" crucified the Lord Jesus Christ...We ALL did.

We crucified Him, no doubt. But no created being killed Him. He Willing took His last breath and died for us. No created being could kill Him. He could have hung on that cross to this day if He wanted or needed to. He willingly died for us when it was finished. No created being could kill the Lord Jesus Christ.

He died(on His own volition) for us. He wasn't killed by some created being.......It's the key to our salvation and NEVER perishing.
MY question was
The question is not "who" crucified the Lord Jesus Christ...We ALL did.

We crucified Him, no doubt. But no created being killed Him. He Willing took His last breath and died for us. No created being could kill Him. He could have hung on that cross to this day if He wanted or needed to. He willingly died for us when it was finished. No created being could kill the Lord Jesus Christ. He died(on His own volition) for us. He wasn't killed by some created being.......It's the key to our salvation and NEVER perishing.
He COULD have "hung on the cross to this day" but, that would not have completed the plan of redemption. The Father's plan required the death of Jesus and that He died in that particular way - by crucufixion. He could have willed it not to happen but it had to be that way. He had surrendered to the death on the cross while He was still praying in the Garden.

We might think that is an ignominious way to die but the secret blueprint of God's plan was:
6Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7but EMPTIED HIMSELF,
taking the FORM OF A SERVANT, being made in human likeness. 8And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself
and became OBEDIENT TO DEATH—even death on a cross.
(Philippians 2:6-8)
 
Oct 29, 2023
4,234
577
113
New International Version
And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

New Living Translation
Then the LORD God said, “Look, the human beings have become like us, knowing both good and evil. What if they reach out, take fruit from the tree of life, and eat it? Then they will live forever!”

English Standard Version
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—”

Berean Standard Bible
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil. And now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...”

King James Bible
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

New King James Version
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—

New American Standard Bible
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out with his hand, and take fruit also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—

NASB 1995
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever “—
Which is why I have given up relying on English translations and I now consult the Hebrew and Greek directly.
 

sawdust

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2024
1,264
287
83
68
Australia
I think a fairer description of the immediate consequence would be shame, rather than nakedness. They were already naked, just not ashamed. The covering lessened his shame.
A rose by any other name ... call it naked, shame whatever, the fact remains the most immediate consequence of their sin put them "offside" with themselves, each other and with God.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. If immortality was conditional upon eating regularly from the tree of life, then effecting the sentence of mortality could be done by prohibiting access to the tree of life. God does not have to specifically say how death would ensue for Him to honestly state that death would ensue, and for death to ensue via closing off access to the tree of life that was rejuvenating humans of the wear and tear to their bodies by use.
There is no evidence to say the tree was necessary for Adam's continued existence prior to sinning. But God did say how death would enter and it wasn't from not eating.

Many of the translators you are relying on have had their theology shaped by Augustine and have translated Romans 5:12 according to Augustine's error, and so you are getting it from Augustine via the translations and commentaries you are reading, even if not directly from him.
I wouldn't be too quick to assume how I was shaped. :)