Why Hypothetical Scenarios Matter in Theology

Biblical theology is not built on speculation, but it does rely on counterfactual reasoning to clarify causality. Scripture itself frequently invites such reasoning by presenting claims that exclude certain possibilities. When Scripture states that sin entered humanity “through one man,” it implicitly denies other pathways. Those denials must be examined, not ignored.

This chapter explores paths not taken—not to rewrite the biblical narrative, but to test its internal logic. If sin truly progresses through man and not woman, that claim must hold under alternative generational arrangements. If it fails under those conditions, the thesis collapses.

The question guiding this chapter is simple but decisive:

What combinations of sinlessness and sinfulness would—or would not—produce fallen offspring?

The Unchosen Option: Complete Re-Creation

The most straightforward solution to the fall would have been annihilation followed by re-creation. God could have allowed Adam and Eve to die without offspring and restarted humanity entirely, free from sin. Consider that God was so mad with both of them, that he created a second generation of humans, sinless in every way, and recreated the world again, letting the first Adam and first Eve to die naturally. But that never did happen.

This option is never pursued.

Its absence is instructive. Scripture consistently portrays God as working through history rather than discarding it. Redemption is not achieved by erasure, but by intervention. The continuity of humanity matters. God chooses to work through what’s is available.

• Sin is not eliminated by deletion.
• It is addressed by interruption.

Scenario One: A Sinless Woman, a Fallen Man

Consider a hypothetical in which God creates a second woman, untouched by deception and unmarked by sin, and gives her to Adam after the fall.

In this arrangement:

• The woman is sinless.
• The man is sinful.

The union produces children.

Would these children be sinless?

If sin were transmitted through the woman, this scenario would resolve the fall. A sinless womb would neutralize sinful inheritance. Yet Scripture never suggests this possibility. In fact, the logic of Scripture consistently denies it.

A fallen man, even when paired with a sinless woman, would still transmit death. The presence of a sinless woman does not arrest the progression of sin.

This hypothetical exposes a critical truth: the woman’s moral state does not determine the inheritance of sin.

Scenario Two: A Sinless Man, a Fallen Woman

Now reverse the arrangement. Imagine a man who remains sinless, paired with a woman who has been deceived and has sinned.

In this case:

• The woman is sinful.
• The man is sinless.
• The union produces children.

Would these children inherit sin?

According to the internal logic of Scripture, they would not.

This scenario is never explicitly narrated in Genesis, but it is implicitly validated later in history. Its coherence depends on a single theological claim: sin is not transmitted through the woman.

If sin were transmitted maternally, this arrangement would be impossible. The woman’s sin would contaminate the offspring regardless of the man’s condition. Scripture never suggests such inevitability.

This asymmetry is decisive.

Why This Case “Never Arises” in Genesis

The Genesis narrative never presents a sinless man paired with a sinful woman producing children because Adam sins before any such generation can occur. Eve’s deception precedes Adam’s transgression, but conception does not occur until after both have fallen.

This sequence matters.

It prevents the demonstration of this principle in the early narrative, but it does not negate the principle itself. Instead, it preserves it for a later, singular event.

Scenario Three: Eve Never Confesses, Adam Never Eats

This scenario is the most revealing and the most unsettling.

Suppose Eve eats the fruit in deception and does not inform Adam. Suppose Adam remains obedient and sinless. Suppose they conceive children during this interval.

Under these conditions:

• The woman is sinful.
• The man is sinless.
• The children would be conceived without fallen seed.

According to the thesis of this book, such children would be sinless, despite being borne by a sinful woman.

This scenario clarifies a crucial distinction: The woman’s sin does not automatically become the child’s condition.

• Sin requires progression.
• Progression requires a fallen man.

Why This Scenario Is Theologically Essential

This hypothetical accomplishes what no doctrinal assertion alone can do. It isolates variables.

It shows that:

• Sin in the woman does not necessitate sin in the child.
• The woman’s body is not the source of corruption.
• The determining factor is the condition of the man’s seed.

Without this scenario, the virgin birth could be dismissed as a one-off miracle without explanatory value. With it, the virgin birth becomes a confirmatory event, not an anomaly.

The Replication of This Principle in History

This “unrealized” Genesis scenario occurs exactly once in human history.

• A woman, born in sin – Mary the Mother of Jesus
• A conception without fallen male seed, through the Holy Spirit, and the spotless seed from above.
• A child is born without sin.

This is not coincidence.
It is fulfillment.

The virgin birth does not introduce a new rule. It reveals the old one.

Why This Does Not Exalt Women as Sinless Beings

It is critical to state what this argument does not claim.

• It does not assert that women are morally superior.
• It does not deny women’s participation in sin.
• It does not redefine righteousness along gender lines.

It asserts something narrower and more precise: women are not the agents through whom sin becomes generational.

This is a functional claim, not a moral one.

Why Theology Has Avoided This Chapter

This line of reasoning has been largely ignored for two reasons.

• First, it disrupts simplistic readings of equality that confuse sameness with symmetry. Scripture affirms equal value without affirming identical function.
• Second, it reframes Eve not as the origin of humanity’s corruption, but as the first bearer of a fallen condition she did not create. This challenges centuries of interpretive inertia.

Yet avoidance does not equal refutation.

The Logical Threshold of the Book

At this point, the reader must decide whether the internal logic of Scripture is coherent or contradictory.

• If sin is transmitted through both parents equally, the virgin birth explains nothing.
• If sin is transmitted through the woman, Mary must be sinless.
• If sin is transmitted through the man, everything aligns.

This chapter is the threshold.

Everything that follows—Mary, Christ, redemption, rebirth—depends on which pathway one accepts.

Preparing for the Mother

Having tested every alternative, the narrative now turns to the one historical case where sin’s progression is decisively interrupted.

Not by destroying humanity.
Not by erasing woman.
But by removing fallen seed.

The next chapter examines Mary—not sentimentally, but structurally.