Hello and welcome. In this article, we'll analyze Psalm 51:5 as it pertains to the fall and its consequences for humanity. More precisely, whether or not Psalm 51:5 demonstrates that one of the consequences of the fall is that from conception all humans receive the guilt of Adam's personal sin that he committed in the garden. This potential consequence is one of the distinctions of the original sin perspective of the fall. Our aim is to provide an in-depth analysis of these verses and present reasons why this passage does not teach distinctive points of original sin.
WHAT ARE THE POINTS OF CONTENTION?
1. Human mortality
2. Humanity having an inclination and predisposition to personal sin which inevitably leads to personal guilt
3. A fallen world with pain, suffering, and corruption
4. All humans from conception being held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin
We affirm consequences 1-3. This summarizes our view of the fall's consequences called ancestral sin. To see more about ancestral sin and why we affirm it, read our article here.
In addition to affirming consequences 1-3, the original sin perspective on the fall also affirms consequence 4. This is the primary point of contention. We don't believe potential consequence 4 is true. We don't believe mankind is guilty of Adam's sin from conception.
THE TEXT OF CONCERN AND COMMENTS FROM THE ORIGINAL SIN PERSPECTIVE
Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
The main focus and contention in Psalm 51:5 is over the meaning of statements about being shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin. Before we unpack this verse, its context, and more, let's look at some comments from the original sin perspective.
"They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation" - Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter VI, Section III
"They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of the sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free." - Second London Baptist Confession, Chapter VI, Section III
"Scripture says that we are born sinners and that we are by nature sinners Psalm 51:5 states that we all come into the world as sinners:" - Desiring God, What Is the Biblical Evidence for Original Sin?
“We disagree, however, and will prove that original sin exists from many scriptural testimonies…David also says, “Behold I am conceived in iniquities, and in sins my mother conceived me”. Nothing can be clearer than this testimony.” - Peter Martyr Vermigli, On Original Sin, p. 4
“And without doubt, David has respect to this same way of derivation of wickedness of heart, when he says (Ps. 51:5), "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." - Jonathan Edwards, The Great Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, p. 210
“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.’ (Psalm 51:5.) The Psalmist here confesses, bewails, and condemns himself for his natural corruption, as that which principally gave birth to the horrid sins with which he had been overtaken.” - John Wesley, The Doctrine of Original Sin, p. 234
“Thus have I considered a large number of texts, which testify of original sin, imputed and inherent. Some are more express than others, of which kind are Job 14:4; Psalm 51:5; 58:3; Romans 5:12, etc.; 1 Corinthians 15:22; Ephesians 2:3.” - John Wesley, The Doctrine of Original Sin, p. 238
In the Westminster and 1689 London Baptist Confession, Psalm 51:5 is listed as proof of Adam's guilt being imputed through "ordinary generation". Desiring God, a ministry of the prominent Calvinistic pastor John Piper sees Psalm 51:5 as saying that humans are born sinners. The "iniquity" and "sin" mentioned are interpreted as a reference to Adam's guilt which is transmitted through and received at physical conception. These three statements do a good job of summarizing the original sin perspective on the verse. This is the interpretation we'll be interacting with throughout this article. In addition, Psalm 51:5 is cited in various historical works that argue for original sin. It's one of the central prooftexts utilized.
INITIAL OBSERVATION QUESTIONS
There are quite a few questions and issues we need to resolve to properly address the text of Psalm 51:5. In no particular order, let's look at some of our preliminary points and questions before tackling the meaning and application of Psalm 51:5.
1. What is the context and situation surrounding this verse?
2. What is the context and backstory of David's lineage?
3. What interpretation of our spiritual condition from conception is most congruent with what the context is about?
4. Are there any themes in the Psalms and Old Testament that lend themselves to one interpretation over another?
These four points outline what we'll be working through in this article to answer the question of whether Psalm 51:5 teaches original sin.
THE CONTEXT AND SETTING OF PSALM 51:5
According to the superscription at the beginning of Psalm 51, the context is David's repentance concerning his adultery with Bathsheba.
"To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came unto him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba." - Superscription for Psalm 51
We find the background for this event in 2 Samuel 11-12. To properly understand Psalm 51, we must first understand the background context.
David's adultery and conception of child -
2Sa 11:1-5 And it came to pass, after the year was expired, at the time when kings go forth to battle, that David sent Joab, and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the children of Ammon, and besieged Rabbah. But David tarried still at Jerusalem. And it came to pass in an eveningtide, that David arose from off his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house: and from the roof he saw a woman washing herself; and the woman was very beautiful to look upon. And David sent and enquired after the woman. And one said, Is not this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite? And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came in unto him, and he lay with her; for she was purified from her uncleanness: and she returned unto her house. And the woman conceived, and sent and told David, and said, I am with child.
David calls for Bathsheba's husband Uriah -
2Sa 11:6-13 And David sent to Joab, saying, Send me Uriah the Hittite. And Joab sent Uriah to David. And when Uriah was come unto him, David demanded of him how Joab did, and how the people did, and how the war prospered. And David said to Uriah, Go down to thy house, and wash thy feet. And Uriah departed out of the king's house, and there followed him a mess of meat from the king. But Uriah slept at the door of the king's house with all the servants of his lord, and went not down to his house. And when they had told David, saying, Uriah went not down unto his house, David said unto Uriah, Camest thou not from thy journey? why then didst thou not go down unto thine house? And Uriah said unto David, The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in tents; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields; shall I then go into mine house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? as thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing. And David said to Uriah, Tarry here to day also, and to morrow I will let thee depart. So Uriah abode in Jerusalem that day, and the morrow. And when David had called him, he did eat and drink before him; and he made him drunk: and at even he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but went not down to his house.
David orchestrates Uriah's death and takes his wife -
2Sa 11:14-27 And it came to pass in the morning, that David wrote a letter to Joab, and sent it by the hand of Uriah. And he wrote in the letter, saying, Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten, and die. And it came to pass, when Joab observed the city, that he assigned Uriah unto a place where he knew that valiant men were. And the men of the city went out, and fought with Joab: and there fell some of the people of the servants of David; and Uriah the Hittite died also. Then Joab sent and told David all the things concerning the war; And charged the messenger, saying, When thou hast made an end of telling the matters of the war unto the king, And if so be that the king's wrath arise, and he say unto thee, Wherefore approached ye so nigh unto the city when ye did fight? knew ye not that they would shoot from the wall? Who smote Abimelech the son of Jerubbesheth? did not a woman cast a piece of a millstone upon him from the wall, that he died in Thebez? why went ye nigh the wall? then say thou, Thy servant Uriah the Hittite is dead also. So the messenger went, and came and shewed David all that Joab had sent him for. And the messenger said unto David, Surely the men prevailed against us, and came out unto us into the field, and we were upon them even unto the entering of the gate. And the shooters shot from off the wall upon thy servants; and some of the king's servants be dead, and thy servant Uriah the Hittite is dead also. Then David said unto the messenger, Thus shalt thou say unto Joab, Let not this thing displease thee, for the sword devoureth one as well as another: make thy battle more strong against the city, and overthrow it: and encourage thou him. And when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she mourned for her husband. And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the LORD.
Nathan is sent to David -
2Sa 12:1-4 And the LORD sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor. The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds: But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
David is rebuked -
2Sa 12:5-14 And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the LORD liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die: And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity. And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things. Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife. Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun. For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun. And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die. Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
David's child dies -
2Sa 12:15-19 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah's wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth. And the elders of his house arose, and went to him, to raise him up from the earth: but he would not, neither did he eat bread with them. And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead: for they said, Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spake unto him, and he would not hearken unto our voice: how will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead? But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead.
Aftermath of the child's death -
2Sa 12:20-23 Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat. Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread. And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live? But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.
We now have the background for Psalm 51:5. The background is David conceiving a child in adultery with Bathsheba. He then orchestrates the death of Bathsheba's husband and takes her as his wife. After this, the prophet Nathan rebukes him and David's child dies after being sick for seven days.
"To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came unto him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba." - Superscription for Psalm 51
We must be careful to not interpret Psalm 51:5 in a vacuum. The background of 2 Samuel 11-12 must be considered for our interpretation because David's transgression and conception of a child with Bathsheba sequentially precedes Psalm 51. This is what David has in mind when we get to Psalm 51. We should strive to interpret David's words congruently and thematically in line with what we see in the background.
DAVID'S OWN LINEAGE AND FAMILY HISTORY
David's own lineage is often neglected in conversations about Psalm 51:5. There are various details about David's own family history that can help us understand his mind and context when we get to Psalm 51.
1Ch 2:3-15 The sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah: which three were born unto him of the daughter of Shua the Canaanitess. And Er, the firstborn of Judah, was evil in the sight of the LORD; and he slew him. And Tamar his daughter in law bare him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five. The sons of Pharez; Hezron, and Hamul. And the sons of Zerah; Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara: five of them in all. And the sons of Carmi; Achar, the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the thing accursed. And the sons of Ethan; Azariah. The sons also of Hezron, that were born unto him; Jerahmeel, and Ram, and Chelubai. And Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the children of Judah; And Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat Boaz, And Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse, And Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimma the third, Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:
In 1 Chronicles, we're told about David's ancestry going back to Judah. Let's work backward from David's generation.
10th David, 9th Jesse, 8th Obed, 7th Boaz, 6th Salma, 5th Nahshon, 4th Amminadab, 3rd Ram, 2nd Hezron, and 1st Pharez. Concerning David's lineage and its relevance to Psalm 51:5, we want to dig further into Pharez.
1Ch 2:3-4 The sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah: which three were born unto him of the daughter of Shua the Canaanitess. And Er, the firstborn of Judah, was evil in the sight of the LORD; and he slew him. And Tamar his daughter in law bare him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five.
In 1 Chronicles, we're told Pharez was the son of Tamar and Judah. Let's go back to Genesis 38 where this happened.
The history of Pharez -
Gen 38:1-5 And it came to pass at that time, that Judah went down from his brethren, and turned in to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was Shuah; and he took her, and went in unto her. And she conceived, and bare a son; and he called his name Er. And she conceived again, and bare a son; and she called his name Onan. And she yet again conceived, and bare a son; and called his name Shelah: and he was at Chezib, when she bare him.
In Genesis 38, Judah marries a woman named Shuah and has three sons; Er, Onan, and Shelah.
Gen 38:6-7 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar. And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
Er then marries Tamar. However, Er was wicked and died.
Gen 38:8-10 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.
Judah then tells his second son Onan to marry Tamar and give her children. Unfortunately, Onan refuses to give Tamar children and is killed.
Gen 38:11 Then said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father's house, till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren did. And Tamar went and dwelt in her father's house.
Judah tells Tamar to stay with her family until his third son Shelah is of age to marry her and give her children.
Gen 38:12-14 And in process of time the daughter of Shuah Judah's wife died; and Judah was comforted, and went up unto his sheepshearers to Timnath, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite. And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold thy father in law goeth up to Timnath to shear his sheep. And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a vail, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife.
Judah's wife died and goes to Timnath. Tamar is informed about this, changes her garments to be that of a harlot, and also goes to Timnath.
Gen 38:15-18 When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him.
Judah mistakes Tamar for a harlot and doesn't recognize her because of the change in her garments. Judah desires her and sleeps with her, and Tamar conceives a child by him.
Gen 38:19-23 And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not. Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place. And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place. And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her.
Tamar vanishes and Judah cannot find the woman he slept with.
Gen 38:24-26 And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. When she was brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff. And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
Sometime later, Judah finds out that Tamar is pregnant. He is still unaware that she's the woman he slept with. Tamar is accused of whoredom. Judah recognizes she's the woman he slept with. Judah and Tamar don't continue a physical relationship.
Gen 38:27-30 And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb. And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first. And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez. And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah.
Tamar then gives birth to twins, Pharez and Zarah. As shown earlier in 1 Chronicles 2, Pharez is one of David's ancestors. David is the 10th generation from Pharez. Based on the story in Genesis 38, we know Pharez was conceived illegitimately. He was a bastard as Judah was not married to Tamar. Judah unknowingly slept with Tamar thinking she was a harlot. What does the Old Testament say about illegitimate bastard children?
Deu 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
It's almost poetic that the Old Testament places a judgment up to 10 generations for bastards and David is the 10th generation descendant of a bastard. Like his ancestors, he repeated their sexual sins and also conceived a bastard child. We now know that the Old Testament points out sexual iniquity in David's ancestry, let's move closer now to David's own time of life and look at his immediate family.
David's family -
1Sa 17:12 Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehemjudah, whose name was Jesse; and he had eight sons: and the man went among men for an old man in the days of Saul.
1Ch 2:13-15 And Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimma the third, Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:
Rut 4:17 And the women her neighbours gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi; and they called his name Obed: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David.
Act 13:22 And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.
Both the Old and New Testaments repeatedly state that David is the son of Jesse. This much is clear. Our focus in the context of Psalm 51:5 is on the maternal side of David's family.
1Ch 2:15-16 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh: Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.
In the same passage of 1 Chronicles 2, we're told that David had two sisters, Zeruiah and Abigail. Who is their father?
2Sa 17:24-25 Then David came to Mahanaim. And Absalom passed over Jordan, he and all the men of Israel with him. And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother.
In 2 Samuel, we're told Abigail is the daughter of Nahash. We know this is the same Abigail from David's family because we're told that this Abigal is Zeruiah's sister and Zeruiah has a son named Joab. This perfectly matches the genealogy in 1 Chronicles 2.
1Sa 11:1 Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabeshgilead: and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash, Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee.
1Sa 12:12 And when ye saw that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, ye said unto me, Nay; but a king shall reign over us: when the LORD your God was your king.
Back in 1 Samuel, we're given more details about Nahash. He's an Ammonite king. How does all of this fit together? We know David and his sisters don't share the same father. David's father is explicitly said to be Jesse. For David to have sisters who don't share a father, they must share a mother. There's a handful of ways this scenario could have come about. We aren't given many details so piecing this together is not easy. The most straightforward explanation would be that David's mother was once with Nahash in some capacity. This would explain his parentage to David's sisters. After this, David's mother left Nahash for whatever reason. For David's mother to then enter a relationship with Jesse, he probably had a wife beforehand who had passed away at some point. So David's mother was Jesse's second wife. There are a few details that corroborate this explanation.
2Sa 10:1-2 And it came to pass after this, that the king of the children of Ammon died, and Hanun his son reigned in his stead. Then said David, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me. And David sent to comfort him by the hand of his servants for his father. And David's servants came into the land of the children of Ammon.
1Sa 16:5-11 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice. And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, Surely the LORD'S anointed is before him. But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart. Then Jesse called Abinadab, and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, Neither hath the LORD chosen this. Then Jesse made Shammah to pass by. And he said, Neither hath the LORD chosen this. Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither.
Psa 69:8-9 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children. For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.
The first corroborative detail is that in 2 Samuel, David mentions Nahash positively. Evidently, they had a relationship in some capacity in which Nahash showed kindness to him. This relationship and Nahash's treatment of David make sense if Nahash had a relationship with David's mother at one point. The second corroborative detail is back in 1 Samuel where we see a distinction in how Jesse treats David compared to his other sons. Samuel calls Jesse and all his sons to the sacrifice yet Jesse does not bring all his sons. He leaves out David and only includes him after Samuel has passed over all his other sons. On the surface, David's age is why Jesse does not bring him. This is true of course. However, we have additional explanatory power for Jesse's actions when we also consider that David was likely the product of his second marriage in contrast to his older sons. This further demonstrates why Jesse saw fit to leave David out and why we see such tension between David and his brothers. He is the product of a substantively different union than his brothers because they had different mothers. This also gives further context behind the alienation language David uses about his relationship with his brethren and siblings.
1Sa 17:28 And Eliab his eldest brother heard when he spake unto the men; and Eliab's anger was kindled against David, and he said, Why camest thou down hither? and with whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know thy pride, and the naughtiness of thine heart; for thou art come down that thou mightest see the battle.
We see this tension fleshed out in the next chapter of 1 Samuel where David's oldest brother conveys a sense of superiority over him and accuses David of pride for coming down to see the battle between the Philistines and Israelites. There is a sense in the narratives of David's youth that he is not seen as equal to his brothers. Based on what we can infer from his genealogy, this idea of distinct mothers and the second marriage of Jesse helps fill the background of what we see in David's youth.
If this is all true, and if David's mother did have a relationship with Nahash the Ammonite, are there any Old Testament texts that speak of Israelite relations with Ammonites? Let's take a look.
Deu 23:1-3 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:
1Ki 11:1-2 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites; Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
In the Old Testament, the Israelites are told to not have relations with the Ammonites. It is considered a sexual sin and in the surrounding context of other sexual sins in Deuteronomy 23. This command regarding the Ammonites is explicitly placed in a sexual context with Solomon in 1 Kings where he loved "strange women" including Ammonites. This event is recounted in Nehemiah.
Neh 13:1 On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever;
Neh 13:23-27 In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?
In Nehemiah 13, this action of an Israelite marrying an Ammonite is categorically defined as sin, a great evil, and transgression against God. This was not a trivial matter.
Psa 86:16 O turn unto me, and have mercy upon me; give thy strength unto thy servant, and save the son of thine handmaid.
Psa 116:16 O LORD, truly I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of thine handmaid: thou hast loosed my bonds.
Even though we aren't given many details about David's mother, it's evident that she was an Israelite and had a relationship with the Lord due to David's repeated mention of her being a handmaid of God.
Luk 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Mary uses the same language about her cousin Elisabeth.
Summarizing David's family history -
Genealogies and family histories are some of the most overlooked aspects of the Bible. David's mother and, by extension, his family history are two of the focuses of Psalm 51:5. After all, David explicitly mentions his mother in the verse. So what can we gather from David's family history? In David's genealogy, we see multiple episodes of adultery and sexual sins. David is the 10th generation of a bastard. Even extending down to his mother, she committed sexual transgressions through her relations with an Ammonite. This background of David's family is important to our understanding of Psalm 51:5 and should not be neglected.
CONCERNS WITH THE ORIGINAL SIN INTERPRETATION
We've unpacked the context, setting, and genealogical background for Psalm 51:5. Let's work through two concerns we have with the original sin interpretation.
1. It argues for specificity out of that which is unspecific
This is an overarching concern we have with various original sin prooftexts. Very few of them mention Adam and/or his sin in any capacity. Rather, Adam's guilt is assumed as the specific substance of what is meant in verses that mention sin, iniquity, transgression, etc. in various contexts. This is the case with Psalm 51:5. David does not use specific and precise language about what exactly "sin" and "iniquity" is. The sin and iniquity are not specified. Even so, advocates of original sin often take it for granted and assume that David is talking about Adam's guilt without giving consistent contextual reasoning. It's often just assumed that a young age and an unspecified sin mean Adam's guilt is in view.
Since David does not give precise details about the sin and iniquity he's referring to, we should allow that to play into how we interpret the text rather than trying to force specificity out of the unspecific. To further the dialogue, we challenge the original sin perspective to formulate contextual and thematic reasoning for their interpretation that Psalm 51:5 is about Adam's guilt rather than isolating the text. As we will soon find out, this interpretation does not stand alone and cannot be assumed. It must be argued for contextually.
2. Comparable sentence structures don't lend themselves to an interpretation of inherited guilt
By now we're well acquainted with the language of Psalm 51:5:
Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
As we pointed out in the first point, the text is unspecific about the details of the exact "iniquity" and "sin" in view. Yet, the original sin perspective takes this language to mean that humans are guilty of Adam's iniquity and sin from conception. However, if these words were substituted for various specific sins and we retained the same sentence structure, the common meaning would not be that this is about the transmission of guilt. Because the background context of Psalm 51 is David's own sexual iniquity, we will substitute various sexual sins in our comparable sentences. We aren't claiming these are specific sins David has in mind in Psalm 51:5, we are simply pointing out interpretative biases and inconsistencies through this exercise.
Example 1: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in fornication did my mother conceive me.
Example 2: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in rape did my mother conceive me.
Example 3: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in incest did my mother conceive me.
Example 4: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in adultery did my mother conceive me.
Example 5: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in lust did my mother conceive me.
These examples could also be flipped with the precise language in the first half and the imprecise in the second half, but this will suffice. In each of these examples, the common interpretation would not be that your mother's conceiving of you in these sins means you're guilty of them. A child conceived in rape is obviously not guilty of rape. A child conceived in fornication is not guilty of fornication. These are obvious and uncontroversial statements. This could also be shown from examples with scenarios that aren't about sexual actions. It is certain that being shaped and conceived in these sins informs the context and surrounding environment or cause of conception. But what is far from certain is that being conceived in these sins means the one conceived is guilty of them.
If being conceived in these specific sins doesn't mean the infant is guilty of them, why then should we assume that being conceived in an unspecified sin means the infant is guilty of that sin? This conclusion seems unwarranted unless 1. The unspecified sin can be specified in context and 2. If being conceived in that sin is normatively and contextually understood to convey guilt for the person who was conceived.
In light of comparable sentence structures and the unspecified nature of the sin David is talking about, we should be cautious to interpret the text as assigning a specified Adamic guilt to infants from conception.
3. The implication of David's mother being guilty of Adam's sin at conception
This concern stems from our prior concern where comparable sentence structure and language indicate the mother is a guilty subject and possessor of the sin in question. If the iniquity is the same as the sin in which David's mother conceived him, and this iniquity is Adam's guilt, then the grammar suggests David's mother bore Adam's guilt when she conceived him, as she is the subject of the second part of Psalm 51:5. This raises the question: If Adam's guilt is passed from parent to child, when and how are parents forgiven of it?
Psa 86:16 O turn unto me, and have mercy upon me; give thy strength unto thy servant, and save the son of thine handmaid.
Psa 116:16 O LORD, truly I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of thine handmaid: thou hast loosed my bonds.
What does David say about his mother's spiritual condition? He referred to his mother as the Lord's handmaid twice. He evidently did not doubt that she had faith and a relationship with God. This concern brings up further questions about the exact nature, substance, and function of Adam's guilt within the original sin framework that we don't have time to deal with here. Suffice it to say, as previously stated the grammar suggests David's mother is guilty or "in" whatever the sin in question is. If it's Adam's sin, she's "in" Adam's sin. If she's in Adam's sin, we would need additional explanations of how and when the forgiveness of this sin operates and why handmaids of the Lord carry it into adulthood.
ALLOWING THE BACKGROUND CONTEXT TO ILLUMINATE PSALM 51:5
We will now drill down on potential meanings of Psalm 51:5 that are grounded in and consistent with the background context we have gone over up to this point. Let's lay them out point by point through syllogisms. We will add additional comments when necessary.
Syllogism 1
P1. The surrounding context of Psalm 51 is David's sin with Bathsheba in 2 Samuel 11-12.
P2. Since David's child was conceived in adultery, it would be accurate and appropriate to say that the child was conceived in sin. Because we know the context, that sin was of course adultery.
P3. It was the child's parents who were comitting the sin in which he was conceived. They were the guilty party.
P4. The sin in which the child was conceived did not adversly affect his spiritual condition and fate upon death.
In light of David's comments after his child died 2 Samuel 12:23 about going to be with his child, it's commonly believed that David was speaking of a positive fate for his child in the afterlife in which David would eventually join.
“Thus David wept for his son who was about to die; he did not grieve for him when dead. He wept that he might not be snatched from him, but he ceased to weep when he was snatched away, for he knew that he was with Christ.” - Ambrose of Milan, Consolation on the death of Emperor Valentinian, 47.48
This interpretation can be seen explicitly as far back as Ambrose in the late 4th century when he says that David knew the child was with Christ.
C1. Therefore, if we intend to interpret the sin/iniquity of Psalm 51:5 in alignment with the sin/iniquity in the background context, we should conclude that whatever can be derived from this verse ultimately rests on the parents (David's mother in this instance) rather than the children. Furthermore, we should conclude that this sin/iniquity does not inherently alter the child's spiritual condition or fate for the worse.
How does this conclusion pose problems for the original sin interpretation? It poses problems because, in its historical and common articulation, original sin does inherently alter the spiritual condition and/or fate of newly conceived children. In the early 5th century, Middle Ages, and the magisterial reformers, possessing Adam's guilt was believed to be wholly sufficient in bringing wrath, spiritual condemnation, and damnation. To read more on this historically, check out our articles here and here. To put it all together, if the sin/iniquity in the background context did not inherently alter the child's spiritual condition or fate for the worse, and the sin/iniquity in Psalm 51:5 is taken in the same way, then it seems unlikely the sin/iniquity in question is Adam's guilt since Adam's guilt has been historically believed to do this.
Syllogism 2
P1. In the background of 2 Samuel 11-12, the relevant iniquity/sin David conceived his child in was adultery. It was a personal sin.
P2. Adam’s original sin guilt is not of signifance and not mentioned.
C1. Therefore, to be congruent with 2 Samuel 11-12, whatever iniquity/sin David’s mother conceived him in, was also not Adam’s original sin guilt, but instead some other unspecified personal sin.
This conclusion builds from our previous concern of the original sin perspective arguing for specificity out of that which is unspecific. The specific iniquity/sin surrounding conception in the background context of Psalm 51:5 is personal sin. With this in mind and Psalm 51:5 not specifying the iniquity/sin in question, why should we assume the author has a specific impersonal perpetually transmitted sin in mind? This is a completely different category and type of sin surrounding conception than what we see in the background context.
With these two syllogisms in mind, we see at least two contextual reasons why we shouldn't assume that David has Adam's guilt in mind with Psalm 51:5. If we are to believe that this is in fact what he had in mind, we would need thematic and contextual reasons. It cannot be simply assumed because we see unspecified sin mentioned in proximity with infants of young age. So what did David mean to convey?
DAVID'S POINT IN PSALM 51:5
We’ve now looked at the context and setting of Psalm 51:5, David’s lineage and family history, concerns with the original sin perspective on this verse, and various inconsistencies that don’t lend themselves to that interpretation. Arguably, the most overlooked piece of context when considering Psalm 51:5 is the fact that David just experienced the death of a child that he had conceived in sin and brought forth that child in iniquity. It is a temptation of many to isolate Psalm 51:5 away from the context, away from David's own family history, and assert specificity of an Adamic sin where David leaves things unspecified. How can we interpret David's statement in Psalm 51:5 in congruence with what we know in the background of 2 Samuel 11-12 and everything else we've covered?
Psa 51:1-5 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest. Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Leading up to verse 5, David points out categorically personal sins six times. In verse 5, if we are meant to break from this category of sin and move to a category of a corporate, impersonal, and perpetually inherited Adamic sin we would need compelling contextual reasons for doing so.
It's probably safe to assume that David knows his own lineage. As we've covered previously, David is the 10th generation of a bastard and there's a judgment placed up to 10 generations for bastards in Deuteronomy 23:2. He also had half-sisters from a previous relationship that his mother had. This previous relationship is repeatedly labeled a sin in passages like Deuteronomy 23, 1 Kings 11, and Nehemiah 13. So there are at least two identifiable sins with potential ramifications for David in his lineage that are of the same category and type as the sin he committed with Bathsheba.
As we've previously touched on, in the context preceding Psalm 51 David had just conceived a child in the iniquity/sin of adultery. This was categorically a personal sin of David that did not negatively impact the spiritual condition and fate of the child.
In David's lament, his point is not to lament something categorically different than what we see in the prior context of Psalm 51 and 2 Samuel 11-12. Rather, David laments his repetition of the same category and type of sins that his ancestors had. In essence, the point of his lament is the following:
“There has been sexual iniquity and infidelity in my family line leading up to my conception. I have repeated this and am also guilty of sexual iniquity and infidelity with Bathsheba.”
Interestingly, David was the 10th generation of a bastard in his lineage. The genealogical judgment for bastards in Deuteronomy 23 would have ended with him. But David conceived another bastard repeating the sins of his ancestors. There's also the possibility that David's mother was still defiled and in iniquity from her prior sinful relationship with an Ammonite. In light of all this, we must remember that David does not specifically tell us what the sin/iniquity is. There are other things he could be referring to. However, with the details of his lineage in view, it seems congruent with the context of Psalm 51 to see David lamenting a generational repeating of a specific type of sin rather than lamenting being guilty of Adam's sin.
Now, the question becomes whether David's lineage and background context support this interpretation. Is such an interpretation to be expected in light of Old Testament themes? Would a lament of generational repeating sin be unexpected and out of place? Is this interpretation forced to avoid original sin?
THE THEME OF REPEATED GENERATIONAL SIN IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
1Ki 15:1-3 Now in the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam the son of Nebat reigned Abijam over Judah. Three years reigned he in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom. And he walked in all the sins of his father, which he had done before him: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father.
2Ki 17:14 Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God.
2Ch 30:7 And be not ye like your fathers, and like your brethren, which trespassed against the LORD God of their fathers, who therefore gave them up to desolation, as ye see.
Isa 65:6-7 Behold, it is written before me: I will not keep silence, but will recompense, even recompense into their bosom, Your iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together, saith the LORD, which have burned incense upon the mountains, and blasphemed me upon the hills: therefore will I measure their former work into their bosom.
Jer 11:10 They are turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers, which refused to hear my words; and they went after other gods to serve them: the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken my covenant which I made with their fathers.
Jer 16:11-13 Then shalt thou say unto them, Because your fathers have forsaken me, saith the LORD, and have walked after other gods, and have served them, and have worshipped them, and have forsaken me, and have not kept my law; And ye have done worse than your fathers; for, behold, ye walk every one after the imagination of his evil heart, that they may not hearken unto me: Therefore will I cast you out of this land into a land that ye know not, neither ye nor your fathers; and there shall ye serve other gods day and night; where I will not shew you favour.
Ezk 20:30 Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations?
Zec 1:4 Be ye not as your fathers, unto whom the former prophets have cried, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Turn ye now from your evil ways, and from your evil doings: but they did not hear, nor hearken unto me, saith the LORD.
Looking through the Old Testament, we have selected a sample of 8 passages where we see three themes related to repeated generational sin. 1. Admonitions to not repeat ancestors' sins (2 Chronicles 30:7, Zechariah 1:4) 2. Rebuke for repeating ancestors' sins (Isaiah 65:6-7, Jeremiah 16:11-13) 3. Other mentions of repeated generational sin (1 Kings 15:1-3, 2 Kings 17:14, Jeremiah 11:10, Ezekiel 20:30)
In light of these themes in the Old Testament between God and the prophets giving admonitions, rebukes, and mentions of repeated generational sin, it would not be out of place or unexpected to see poetic language from a biblical author lamenting their own repeating of generational sin. This is precisely what we believe David is doing in Psalm 51:5. Not only does David's lineage and background context support our interpretation, but the themes in the Old Testament of generational sin further justify why David's words not only could but arguably should be seen in this light.
RELEVANT THEMES IN THE PSALMS
We've now looked at David's lineage, background context, and the Old Testament theme of repeated generational sin which three things form the foundation of our interpretation of Psalm 51:5. The next thing we want to see is if any relevant themes in the Psalms themselves further bolster our understanding and/or weaken the original sin interpretation.
1. Repeated generational sin
Psa 78:5-8 For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children: That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children: That they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments: And might not be as their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation; a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose spirit was not stedfast with God.
Psa 78:56-57 Yet they tempted and provoked the most high God, and kept not his testimonies: But turned back, and dealt unfaithfully like their fathers: they were turned aside like a deceitful bow.
Psa 106:6 We have sinned with our fathers, we have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly.
Building on the theme we just covered in the Old Testament, we also see it in the Psalms. We're told in 78:5-8 that the coming generation was to not be as their fathers were. Further on, in 78:56-57 we're told that a generation became like their fathers. We're also told in 106:6 about unity in iniquity between one generation and another. This is not a transmission of a specific sin like original sin asserts, but the repeating of sin from one generation to another.
These verses, along with those previously mentioned, reinforce the theme of repeated disobedience and rebellion across generations. The Psalms and Old Testament often use these reflections to call the people to repentance or as an example urging them to break the cycle of sin and return to faithfulness to God. With this in mind, it would not be unsurprising to see a biblical author lamenting their own repeating of generational sin and continuing this cycle that is so often used as grounding for examples, admonitions, and rebukes.
2. Other texts on David's infancy
Psa 22:9-10 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.
Psa 71:5-6 For thou art my hope, O Lord GOD: thou art my trust from my youth. By thee have I been holden up from the womb: thou art he that took me out of my mother's bowels: my praise shall be continually of thee.
Psa 139:13-17 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them. How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
Remember, according to the original sin interpretation, in Psalm 51:5 David means to say that he was shapen and conceived in Adam's sin and is therefore guilty of Adam's sin from conception. According to historical and confessional sources promoting original sin, the result of possessing Adam's guilt is having spiritual condemnation and wrath from God. If David did intend to say he was guilty of Adam's sin from conception, it would bolster the original sin interpretation if we also saw David speaking of his infancy elsewhere in these terms which are believed to result from possessing Adam's guilt.
When we look at other texts on David's infancy, we find the opposite of what we would expect to see if David meant to convey original sin in Psalm 51:5. Rather than bleak language about being under God's wrath and spiritually condemned from the womb, David speaks positively about God's relationship towards him in his infancy. Because other texts about David's infancy seem to shed a positive light on God's dealings with him and don't clearly portray the distinctions of divine wrath and spiritual condemnation from conception which flow from the premise of inherited Adamic guilt, it seems increasingly likely that perhaps David did not mean to convey the inheritance of Adam's sin in Psalm 51:5.
CONSIDERING ADJACENT AND ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATIONS
Other interpretations that don't align with original sin and are compatible to varying degrees with our perspective deserve attention. Adam Harwood outlines the main alternative interpretation.
“Many scholars who comment on the meaning of Ps 51:5 refer to the sinfulness of humans from their origins but not their guilt.” - Harwood, The Spiritual Condition of Infants, p. 45
“most Bible interpreters do not read infant guilt into their exegesis of Psalm 51:5. Rather, they clarify that David was pointing to the pervasiveness of his sin, which reached to the earliest moments of his life, and he was condemning neither his mother nor sexual union as sinful.” - Harwood, Christian Theology, p. 463
Instead of seeing the sin and iniquity in Psalm 51:5 as a reference to an actual sin of some sort, this interpretation sees it as referencing the pervasiveness and/or general sinfulness of humans that extends back to our origins. Harwood points out that this interpretation tries to steer clear of an assignment of guilt while seeming to simultaneously affirm sinfulness.
What might be meant by this interpretation is that humans inherit the propensity and inclination to sin at conception which inevitably manifests through personal sins. This could be affirmed without affirming guilt if it's understood that this propensity only incurs guilt when paired with the actual use of the will toward actions. If this is what's meant, our main issue wouldn't be the proposition of humans inheriting the propensity and inclination to sin, that concept is just fine. Rather, our main issue is that this seems out of place with Psalm 51. The context behind Psalm 51 is actual sins. David goes on to mention his personal sins in the chapter. We then see a mention of unspecified sin and iniquity in verse 5. If David meant to just point out a propensity and inclination to sin as the root of these personal sins, the word choice in 51:5 seems improper. He could have used other words we see in the Old Testament like entice, tempt, or allure rather than the words iniquity and sin which convey actual moral fault or offence of some kind.
If on the other hand, this interpretation does mean an actual sin of some sort that was personally possessed by David but isn't Adam's sin, it would need to be explained how this sinfulness does not convey guilt unless the desired conclusion is to say that humans are guilty of personal sins from conception.
"Most likely, however, Psalm 51:5 merely refers to the fact that David was born into a sinful environment. We all are conceived in and brought forth into a sinful world. But we do not actually sin until we arrive at a stage of spiritual responsibility." - Christian Courier, Original Sin and a Misapplied Passage
This interpretation put forward by Wayne Jackson at the Christian Courier is perhaps most adjacent to our interpretation. We would see the idea of being born into a sinful world and environment as a logical entailment or conclusion of our interpretation but not as the very thing closest to what David meant to convey based on what we've gone over. It logically follows that if David was conceived and shaped from some specific sin, then the environment surrounding his birth was a sinful one. At the end of the day, this interpretation is essentially saying the same things as us, with a slightly different emphasis.
"According to various Jewish historical writings, David’s father and brothers thought that David’s mother, Nizbeth, had committed adultery and borne him out of wedlock...The truly guilty one was David’s father, Jesse, who, as a result of having Moabite blood (from Ruth) and due to some strange twists of Jewish law, believed that his marriage to Nizbeth was illegitimate and stopped having sexual relations with her to keep her from sinning. Yet he also feared that his seven sons were illegitimate, and so he had sought to gain a legitimate heir for himself by sleeping with his wife’s maidservant...Anyway, Nizbeth’s maidservant loved her mistress dearly, and so switched places with her before Jesse entered her bed, much like Leah and Rachel had switched places so many years before on Jacob’s wedding night. So Jesse ended up sleeping with his wife, even though he thought it was his wife’s servant. Nizbeth became pregnant, but never told her family how she had become pregnant, because she wanted to protect Jesse from public shame. The result, however, was that Jesse, their seven sons, and the entire community came to believe that Nizbeth was an adulterer. The town urged Jesse to stone his wife for adultery, but out of love for her, he refused, and several months later, David was born." - Redeeming God, Are People Born in Sin?
While the original sin interpretation goes in one direction asserting a sin with specificity, this interpretation goes in the other direction asserting a sin with specificity. One strength of our interpretation is that we aren't claiming to know the specific sin/iniquity David is referring to. We are just claiming the category it falls under due to the immediate context, background context, and David's own lineage. The error of both extremes is trying to assert specificity out of what David does not explicitly specify. In the biblical texts we have, he doesn't say the sin/iniquity is Adam's sin on one hand, but neither does he say it's adultery on the other. We should also be cautious of reading much later texts that try to fill in gaps of detail back into the biblical narrative. While we know from the biblical texts that David's mother had a previous relationship with an Ammonite and could have still been defiled or under judgment for that sin at the time of David's conception, there doesn't seem to be enough evidence to assert with specificity that adultery is what David was referring to. David doesn't go to great lengths and explain the sin/iniquity he's referring to with specificity, and neither do we. We just think Adam's sin can be ruled out as a possibility through context and background information.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
What makes analyzing Psalm 51:5 tougher than many other passages is its inherent place in a poetic book combined with a degree of vagueness surrounding the sin/iniquity mentioned. It's the characteristics and identity of that very sin/iniquity that is up for debate surrounding the question of whether the verse teaches original sin. In this article, we have sought to answer whether Psalm 51:5 teaches the distinct idea of original sin that all humans inherit and are guilty of Adam's sin from conception. In the process of answering this question, we have looked at the setting of Psalm 51:5, David's lineage, concerns with the original sin interpretation, syllogisms that disconfirm that interpretation, our perspective on David's point, themes in the Old Testament that align with our perspective, and more.
To summarize, our perspective is that in David's lament, his point is not to lament something categorically different than what we see in the prior context and background of Psalm 5. Rather, David laments his repetition of the same category and type of sins that his ancestors had. In essence, the point of his lament is the following:
“There has been sexual iniquity and infidelity in my family line leading up to my conception. I have repeated this and am also guilty of sexual iniquity and infidelity with Bathsheba.”
David is pointing out sin/iniquity surrounding his conception and he's lamenting a generational repeating of a specific type of sin rather than lamenting being guilty of Adam's sin. In the same way that his sin with Bathsheba was the surrounding context of his child's conception, there was sin surrounding the context of his own conception that is seemingly of the same category yet it remains unspecified. We are not trying to distance sin/iniquity from David's shaping and conception. That's simply what the text says. The issue is figuring out what David meant to convey and what the sin/iniquity is.
Other interpretations are adjacent to and aligned with our perspective which deserve attention and consideration. It is not a simple matter where either our interpretation is correct or original sin is true.
Where can the conversation go from here? As we've already noted in this article, the original sin perspective rarely if ever builds a contextual and thematic case for understanding the unspecified iniquity/sin as referring to Adam's sin. Instead, it is often just taken for granted that when combined with the context of a young age, any reference to sin is meant to convey Adam's guilt because they already affirm the doctrine and are looking for prooftexts to bolster it. Suppose the dialogue moves forward on Psalm 51:5. In that case, those who advocate for original sin should construct contextual arguments for why the verse should be seen as teaching their perspective and why the context and background better support their interpretation. It cannot be assumed and taken for granted as it often is in dialogue about original sin.
Thanks for reading. That concludes this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment