Original sin

===Second Temple Judaism===
[[File:0 Venise, 'La Chute d'Adam et Ève' - Palais des Doges (2).JPG|thumb|right|''The Fall of Adam and Eve'', by [[Antonio Rizzo (architect)|Antonio Rizzo]], 1476]] 

The first writings to discuss the first sin at the hands of Adam and Eve were early Jewish texts in the [[Second Temple Period]]. In these writings, there is no notion that sin is inherent to an individual or that it is transmitted upon conception. Instead, Adam is more largely seen as a heroic figure and the first patriarch. Demeaning discussions of the beginnings of sin draw greater attention to the stories of [[Cain]] or the sons of God mentioned in [[Genesis 6]].{{cn|date=April 2022}}

Despite the lack of a notion of original sin, by the 1st century, a number of texts did discuss the roles of Adam and Eve as the first to have committed sin. [[Wisdom of Solomon]] states that "God created man for incorruption{{nbsp}}[...] but death entered the world by the envy of the devil" (2:23–24).<ref>{{bibleverse|Wisdom of Solomon|2:23–24}}</ref> [[Ecclesiasticus]] describes that "Sin began with a woman, and we must all die because of her" (25:24).<ref>{{bibleverse|Ecclesiasticus|25:24}}</ref>{{efn|name=mcfar}} While this translation suggests a doctrine of original sin, it has also been criticized on precisely those grounds. The notion of the hereditary transmission of sin from Adam was rejected by both [[4 Ezra]] and [[2 Baruch]] in favor of individual responsibility for sin. Despite describing death as having come to all men through Adam, these texts also held to the notion that it is still the individual that is ultimately responsible for committing his own sin and that it is the individual's sin, rather than the sin of Adam and Eve, that God condemns in a person.{{sfn|Toews|2013|pp=26–32}} [[Ian A. McFarland|Ian McFarland]] argues that it is the context of this Judaism through which Paul's discussions on the fall of Adam are to be better understood.{{efn|name=mcfar}}