How is sin emergent?

One of the most exciting books I have encountered recently is
The Emergence of Sin: The Cosmic Tyrant in Romans by Matthew Croasmun.
It is based on the Yale Ph.D. of the author.
[At US$75 the book is rather expensive! Fortunately, I could read an electronic version through the UQ library].
I have a longstanding interest in how the concept of emergence is relevant to the dialogue between science and theology.

My son made me aware of the book, through a podcast from the Bible Project [who make cool videos summarising books of the Bible] with the author.  The podcast is an excellent introduction to the book.

What is sin? How should it be defined? A simple and common definition is something like ``sins are individual acts which involve disobeying God's commandments". Another is that ``sin is part of the human condition: our intrinsic disposition to do what we want rather than what God wants". But, is sin also something even greater, a cosmic force?
Corruption is sin. But, is corruption just the choices of individuals or is it something larger, a social force in some societies that carries people along and is something far greater than just small decisions by individuals? This is the idea of structural sin, that is particularly highlighted in liberation theologies. What does the Bible actually say?

Paul's Epistle to the Romans is one of the great treatises on sin (and redemption through Christ). Croasmun focuses on the puzzles presented by Chapters 6-8,

In Romans 5–8, Sin struts on the stage of the text like a personal being. The “data” are clear on this point. The noun ἁμαρτία (sin) is used as the subject of an active verb no fewer than eleven times in this brief passage. To summarize the familiar language, in these chapters, ἁμαρτία exercises dominion (5:21, 6:12), seizes opportunities to produce covetousness and kill (7:8, 11), revives (7:9), and acts in place of the human agent in whom it dwells (7:17, 20). The noun ἁμαρτία is deployed in personal terms in these chapters. This is not disputed. The question is, rather, whether this constitutes literary “personification,” or whether we have instead what we might describe as “person identification.”

I like the discussion of racism (chapter 3) as an example of the questions explored. There is a famous mathematical model for racial segregation that is relevant. Even a small amount of individual prejudice can lead to segregated communities and amplification of inequitable access to resources (education, medical, security, networking, …) and increase prejudice because people have little day to day contact with the ``other’’. Small individual choices that may not be considered sinful can lead to unjust social structures that facilitate sin.