Before the word “gospel” appeared in the New Testament, the term was already in use throughout the Roman world. It signified the victory of a new king whose reign ushered in a time of peace.

One famous archeological example of this is found in the Priene Calendar Inscription, which calls Emperor Augustus both savior and god. A decade before the birth of Jesus, this monument celebrated the emperor’s birthday as “the beginning of the good news (gospel) for the world.”

The message of good news announced a change in the world. If the change was positive, then what existed before wasn’t. People received the news as good because they understood why the situation before this news was bad. Augustus ended a bloody conflict. Therefore, the Romans understood his reign as “gospel.”

When the New Testament authors used “gospel” to describe the message of Jesus, they were aware of the political overtones. Emperors may bring peace for a time by killing their enemies, but Jesus offered eternal salvation through His death and resurrection. Jesus’ victory is good news for all people, in all places, for all time!

For Christ’s message to be received, people would need to understand why it is good news. From the beginning, Christians have declared that Jesus died on the cross to save people from their sins (1 Peter 3:18). However, we cannot assume everyone is aware of the horror of sin or their need for a Savior because of it.

If people don’t see sin as the problem, they won’t appreciate the gospel as the solution. Without a sense of our helplessness in light of sin, the gospel won’t be received for what it is. People may respond to the gospel as an offer of the good things we can achieve on our own (wealth, status, etc.) rather than the promise of that which only God can give.

Fundamental Truth No. 4, “The Fall of Man,” lays out the bad news. It explains humanity’s need for salvation. This truth initially referred to the good news as well under the title “Man, His Fall and Redemption.” It was rewritten as “The Fall of Man” in 1961. (“Man” in both Fundamental Truths No. 4 and No. 5 refers to humanity, following the rules of English grammar from another time.)

“The Fall of Man” can be summarized in three points: God created humanity without sin, humans choose to sin, and the consequence of sin is “separation from God.”

Unpacking those points requires a dive into the meaning of the Fall itself. Why is it called the Fall? What was the nature of the first sin? How did that sin impact the rest of humanity? What does it mean to be a human being created by God?

God’s Good Creation

Article 4 offers the only line in the Statement of Fundamental Truths (SFT) on the specific creation of humanity. The SFT does not provide a detailed doctrine of creation. (For more on that topic, see the AG position paper on the “Doctrine of Creation.”) What the SFT does emphasize is the goodness of our creation in the image of God.

God did not make sinners. As the SFT notes, God created humanity “good and upright,” according to His image (Genesis 1:26–31).

What does it mean for humanity to bear God’s image? One popular view highlights our intellectual and moral qualities, such as the ability to reason and exercise free will.

Another theory focuses on our capacity for community, noting that when God created humanity in His image, He made them “male and female” (Genesis 1:27). Healthy relationships reflect the image of a relational God.

Still others argue humanity best reflects God in our calling to care for creation. We represent the authority of God as caregivers for all life.

The Assemblies of God has not settled on one meaning for the image of God. However, we can say the following:

1. Humanity reflects something that is also true of God. Our dignity and value come from our creation in God’s image. At the same time, being in God’s image means we only reflect God, and are not meant to replace God. Attempts to put ourselves in place of God fail spectacularly in Scripture, beginning with the Fall.

2. People remain in the image of God even after the Fall. Genesis 9:6 and James 3:9 maintain our ongoing value as God’s image bearers, a status with implications for how we treat one another.

Sin is not a reflection
of our humanity but
a corruption of it,
leading us away from
the God we were
created to reflect.

3. Human identity as God’s image goes hand in hand with our call to oversee creation. At creation, God commissioned “male and female” to be fruitful and multiply so they could fill the earth and take charge of it (Genesis 1:27–28). Adam and Eve had a specific calling to cultivate and protect God’s garden (Genesis 2:15).

4. Jesus reveals the image of God as a human being. Jesus demonstrates what it means to be human incarnationally, relationally, eschatologically, and vocationally.

Jesus came as the Logos of God in human flesh (John 1:14), taking on our full humanity. His death on our behalf both proves God’s love for us and exemplifies our love for one another (John 15:9–13; Romans 5:8; Ephesians 5:2; 1 John 4:7–10).

Rising from the dead, Jesus revealed God’s intended destiny for all humanity (1 Corinthians 15:20–21). Jesus ascended to God’s right hand as the Lord over heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18; 1 Peter 3:22). Whatever it means to be created in God’s image, Jesus fulfills it.

Jesus also experienced temptation as we do. Yet He never sinned (Hebrews 4:15).

If Jesus can be fully human without sin, then sin is not part of our human nature by God’s design. Sin is not a reflection of our humanity but a corruption of it, leading us away from the God we were created to reflect.

We do not sin because we are humans created in God’s image. We sin because we are fallen. But what does this mean?

Fallout From the Fall

It was during the first four centuries of the Church that the phrase “the Fall” emerged as a description of humanity’s earliest sin. Jesus used this language in Luke 10:18 to describe Satan’s eviction from heaven.

Some applied the language of the Fall to the Genesis narrative from Adam to Noah, highlighting how damaged humans damaged creation (Genesis 6:5,11–12). Most commonly, however, the Fall describes humanity’s eviction from the Garden of Eden.

Did we lose something more in the Fall than access to the Garden?

For some early Christians, the Fall was a loss of a state of human perfection, while others saw it only as a loss of innocence.

Many interpreted the Fall as a change in the created human orientation toward God. From that time on, natural human inclination bent toward the things of this world rather than God.

The Fall could also represent the loss of God’s trust in the stewards of His creation. God intends people to care for creation in community as equal bearers of His image. The Fall damaged our relationships with one another, creation, and God. Adam turned against Eve when God confronted him (Genesis 3:12). Their work for creation, in both farming and family, became more laborious (verses 16–19).

There were multiple consequences from the Fall, but none so significant as separation from God. By choosing to believe the serpent over God, Adam and Eve decided they could determine good and evil for themselves. With that choice, they were already separating their will from God’s will.

After Adam and Eve experienced shame for the first time, they desired even more of a separation from God. At the first opportunity to spend time with God, Adam and Eve hid instead. By separating from their Creator and the Giver of all life, Adam and Eve turned away from life. Separation from God invites death.

As the next chapters of Genesis illustrate, fallen humans filled the world with corruption and violence (Genesis 6:11). When people reject God’s authority, they damage their calling and ability to care for and cultivate all God created.

That death would be the result of sin illustrates the severity of transgressing God’s commands. Sin affects our relationships with God, one another, and creation. We no longer desire and trust God as we should, and we no longer love and serve one another or take responsibility for the rest of creation as we should. Sin mars the world God created. If sin is so horrible, why would anyone choose to sin?

Nature of Sin

There has been some debate regarding the nature of the first sin Adam and Eve committed. Candidates for that first sin include coveting (they desired what should not belong to them), doubt or disbelief (they trusted the serpent over God), and pride (they desired to be like God).

Others have argued the first transgression came from several temptations. For example, Millard Erickson compares Genesis 3:6 to 1 John 2:16 (“the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life”). Erickson argues that the first act of disobedience arose from the desire to have (the fruit was “pleasing to the eye”), the desire to do (it was “good for food”), and the desire to be (eating it was “desirable for gaining wisdom”) what went against God’s command (Genesis 2:17; 3:6). In other words, Adam and Eve disobeyed for the same reasons we do.

When people reject God’s authority, they damage their calling and ability to care
for and cultivate all
God created.

One assumption in this centuries-long discussion was that identifying the first sin would provide insight into the nature of sin itself. The word “sin” is the English translation of numerous Hebrew and Greek words in Scripture, with meanings that include “missing the mark,” “perversion,” “rebellion,” “lawlessness,” “transgression,” “injustice,” and “ungodliness.”

“Sin” may describe a moral failure, revolt against God, or a state of evil itself. It can refer to any behavior that fails to meet God’s standards, violates His commands, or damages His creation. Because sin always wrongs or fails God in some way, resolving the problem necessitates His forgiveness.

Burdens, stains and debts are among the biblical metaphors for sin, and they shape our imagery regarding forgiveness. If sin is a weight one bears, then forgiveness is a lifting of that burden, sometimes by transferring it to another (Leviticus 16:22; Isaiah 53:11). Sin as a stain leads to a description of forgiveness as washing or cleansing (Isaiah 1:18; Jeremiah 2:22; Zechariah 13:1). The resolution for sin as a debt involves redemption, payment or cancellation (Psalm 130:8; Matthew 6:12; 18:21–35; Luke 7:41–48; Colossians 2:13–14; Titus 2:14).

The impact of sin goes beyond individuals. Sin may also weigh down, stain, or infect institutions and cultures. Sinners may collectively tolerate and even justify a shared sin.

Throughout history, institutions, cultures, and nations have quietly assumed and openly embraced racism, violence, sexual immorality, pride, and greed, building their institutions and practices around the injustices that come with those evils.

What is abhorrent to God may seem normal to those who cannot see past their cultural biases. As a result, to borrow a phrase from Cornelius Plantinga Jr., what is “not the way it’s supposed to be” becomes just the way it is. In such environments, participation in certain sins might seem as natural as breathing or as easy as flowing with the cultural current.

Living within a sinful culture is not a sufficient explanation for the universality of human sin, however, because sinful cultures come from sinful people. Human beings are seemingly born with an inclination or propensity to sin, something we sometimes call a “sin nature.” Why is this so?

Original Sin

How do we explain the universality of human sin without blaming God for creating flawed human beings? On the one hand, if sin is a violation of God’s will, how could God be responsible for creating sinners? On the other hand, if God is not responsible, why is sin a ubiquitous human predicament?

Not everyone has agreed on the universal nature of sin. The early Christian teacher Pelagius taught that any person could live sinlessly. Church leaders rejected this view. In response, they developed the doctrine of original sin to account for the universality of human sin (Romans 3:23) without laying that blame at the feet of God.

This doctrine explains why and how the first human disobedience in Genesis 3 impacted the rest of humanity. However, there are various theories of original sin across Christian traditions.

These theories differ in how they describe the connection between our sinfulness and the first sin of Adam and Eve, including the extent of that link. There are various interpretations of Paul’s discourse on Jesus and Adam in Romans 5:12–21 — which, along with Genesis 3, is a primary text for understanding original sin.

Most recently, some Christians have argued that the story of the Fall is symbolic, not historical, providing a picture of human failure. However, this does not explain why all people sin. It also raises questions about Paul’s treatment of Adam as historical in Romans 5.

One view associated with Eastern Orthodoxy offered an environmental explanation for how the first sin damaged humanity, based on one way of translating Romans 5:12: “death came to all people, for which reason all sinned.” The transgression of Adam and Eve means humanity now lives in a world governed by death. And since humans cannot have everything they might want in one short life, they violate moral boundaries somewhere. According to this view, then, mortality leads to immorality.

Another Christian tradition explained our corruption biologically. If Adam and Eve were the parents of all humanity, then all human life was present at the first sin. The inclination to sin passed from Adam and Eve to every child thereafter.

Some Protestants reject the idea of a biological cause for moral corruption but argue that Adam and Eve acted as representatives of humanity, which led to every person being born with a sin nature.

Additional debate within both Protestantism and Catholicism occurred over the extent of original sin. Did we inherit both guilt and corruption from Adam and Eve, or just a sinful inclination? If we are guilty of sin from birth, we need God’s forgiveness from the womb. (This concern accounts for the widespread practice of infant baptism among Catholics and some Protestants.)

The Assemblies of God has traditionally followed an understanding of original sin that sees humanity’s fall in terms of universal corruption (understood in a representative sense) but rejects the idea of universal guilt from birth. We do not baptize infants, nor do we warn of damnation for anyone incapable of making moral choices.

Preaching against sin
is only half the job. The
reason we talk about
the bad news is so we
can explain the good
news of Jesus.

“The Fall of Man” does not go into this kind of detail, however. Fundamental Truth No. 4 emphasizes human culpability for sin as a “voluntary transgression” and not the original intention of God. The result of such transgression is “not only physical death but also spiritual death, which is separation from God.” This explains why we need salvation, setting the stage for a proclamation of good news.

Pastoral Practice

Much of pastoral leadership revolves around evangelism, discipleship and worship. In evangelism, we confront sin. Through discipleship, we help people resist sin. And in worship, we celebrate God’s grace over sin. If we want to lead people fully into that life of grace, we cannot ignore the topic of sin.

In declaring the gospel, we may have to reintroduce people to the horror of sin. Some people believe we sin only when we fail to live up to our self-imposed standards. The mark we miss is the target we created for ourselves. In this view, there is no universal standard for right and wrong. Our gospel proclamation must address and correct this.

The gospel is not a self-help guide to living up to our self-image. It is God’s way of bringing us back to His calling as His image. People need to know God will judge them according to His standards, not human measures.

One way to emphasize this is by highlighting the common recognition that our world is not OK. Those who are not comfortable or familiar with the notion of sin still recognize injustice (another biblical word we sometimes translate as “sin”). If we begin with the wrongs of the world people can see, we may help them recognize the wrong in themselves that calls for God’s grace.

While some church leaders have not taken sin seriously enough, others have gone to the opposite extreme, labeling everything sinful. This dilutes the horror of sin. Everything nonbelievers do or enjoy is not automatically a sin. God sends gifts to the righteous and unrighteous alike (Matthew 5:45).

Preaching against sin is only half the job. The reason we talk about the bad news is so we can explain the good news of Jesus.

The testimony of the gospel is that wherever sin increases, grace increases even more (Romans 5:20). We preach against sin so we can preach in favor of grace. No preaching is complete without pointing to the forgiveness and life Jesus offers.

Worship becomes our opportunity to celebrate God’s grace as a community. The church understands sin and grace not only from sermons but also from songs, testimonies, prayers, ordinances and more. When we celebrate the gift of God in Christ, we are declaring God’s power over sin and death.

As pastors, we oversee the gathering of believers. We can set the tone for that gathering as a celebration of what the gospel is all about. If our songs, testimonies, and other activities focus only on those things we could do for ourselves, our worship is less a celebration of the gospel and more a celebration of ourselves.

God has saved us from sin and death, and that is worth celebrating!

Discipleship can involve a variety of pastoral practices, including mentorship, equipping and counseling. It also includes evangelism, which is the beginning of personal discipleship, and worship, the expression of discipleship in community.

A lifelong process of discipleship helps believers develop and mature, “attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13). This entails living a life free from the bondage of sin.

Disciples need to know victory over sin is possible. While we may never live free of temptation, we can be free from a life of habitual sins — transgressions a person returns to again and again. We can also be free from any desire to live a double life hidden from others.

We must create an atmosphere of acceptable vulnerability where people feel safe revealing their struggles. Christians should never be embarrassed to admit to struggling with sin. After all, their fight is proof that they haven’t given up.

Any church culture that encourages hiding behind a veneer of spirituality to feel accepted is an environment that is hostile to disciple making. Church should be a space where Christians can experience freedom, rather than shame that causes them to conceal their weaknesses.

If Christians do not feel the liberty to admit their struggles in our congregations, how can we expect sinners to freely repent of their sins? God calls the Church to be a school for sinners and a family for the forgiven. It must not feel like a platform for the perfect.

Fundamental Truth No. 4 is necessary for explaining the gospel, but it is not enough without the message of the gospel. If our only message is the horror of sin, then all we have to offer is death.

Sin brings condemnation. But as the apostle Paul said, “Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! … Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 7:25; 8:1).

This article appears in the Summer 2023 issue of Influence magazine.