Romans 5:12-14 "Therefore, as through one man sin
entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death
passed unto all men, for that all sinned for until the law
sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is
no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses,
even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of
Adam's transgression, who is a figure of him that was to
come."
Verse
12:
1. Through
what man did sin and death enter the world? The
answer is "Adam," as indicated in Verse 14.
The word means "man" in the generic sense,
but was also the name of the first of his kind, all of
whom were seminally a part of him.
2. Why is it
not said that sin and death entered by Eve, since she
took the initiative and led Adam to sin (Gen.3:6; 1
Tim.2:13-14)? A clue may be found in the fact
that all her posterity were yet in Adam's loins, and
that this was crucial to the results that followed.
3. Was the
death that passed to all men physical, or spiritual, or
both? Certainly physical (see 1 Cor. 15:20-22);
but those reaching the age of accountability also
sinned and thus died spiritually (Isa.59:2;
Rom.3:23).
4. How or why
did death pass to all men? Was it because they were
born outside of Eden, away from the tree of
life? Surely so. But that is not the point being
made by our text. It says that "death passed unto
all
men, for that all sinned" -- not
merely that they were born away from the tree of
life.
5. Did death
pass to all men by contagion of sin (after Adam had
children and as a result of their learning sin from him
and their mother)? Apparently not. According to
Verse 18, it was not the "sins" of parents
that were responsible, but "one trespass" --
evidently Adam's first, while the entire posterity of
him and Eve were in his loins and seminally a part of
him.
6. Did Adam's
posterity inherit his sinfulness and guilt, and in that
was sin and death passed to all men? Contrary to
popular notion, evidently not, for Jesus said:
"Suffer the little children to come unto me, and
forbid them not: for to such belongeth the kingdom of
God" (Luke 18:16); also, "Except ye turn, and
become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter
into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt.18:3).
None of the passages relied upon by those who teach
hereditary total depravity, actually do so. Consider
the following:
Job 14:14: "Who can bring forth a clean
thing out of an unclean? Not one."
This is used to teach that man born of woman cannot
himself be clean. But it poses a problem with reference to
Jesus, born of a woman, and nevertheless sinless. It led to
the manufacture of the doctrine of Immaculate Conception of
Mary, set forth December 8, 1854, by Pope Pius IX,
declaring "that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the
first instant of her conception, by a singular grace and
privilege of Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus
Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt
from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by
God, and therefore must be believed firmly and constantly
by all the faithful" (Ineffabilis Deus).
(Catholic Question
Box (1929), pp. 358-360).
"The scriptures nowhere teach this doctrine, but
Pius IX cites two passages, from which it may be inferred,
if they are considered in light of Catholic tradition. They
are: "I will put enmities between thee and the woman,
and thy seed and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and
thou shalt lie in wait for her heel' (Gen.3:15). ‘Hail,
full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou
among women" (Luke 1:28).'" (Ibid.)
Psalm 51:5: "Behold I was brought forth in
iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." This
describes the condition of David's mother at the time of
his conception and birth, and something of his environment
from birth, but does not say he inherited his mother's
sin.
It is significant the NIV renders the foregoing
passage as follows: "Surely I have been a sinner from
birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."
But this is commentary, not translation. It tells what the
translators (part of them) believed the writer meant, not
what he wrote.
Psalm 58:3>: "The wicked are estranged
from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born,
speaking lies." This does not say the wicked are
estranged "in" the womb, but rather
"from" the time they leave the womb. This is a
figure of speech called hyperbole, which is an exaggeration
not intended to deceive but to give emphasis -- in this
instance to suggest that they go astray exceedingly early
in life, but not before they are able to talk and speak
lies -- lies being falsehoods intended to deceive.
Eph.2:3: "Among whom we also all once lived
in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh
and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath,
even as the rest." The word phusis, here translated
"nature," does not necessarily refer to the
result of heredity and birth, but here means "a mode
of feeling and acting which by long habit has become
nature" (Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the
New Testament).
The use of any or all of the above scriptures, or any
others, to teach hereditary total depravity -- referring to
the total man, body, soul, and spirit -- overlooks or
ignores Heb.12:9, which reads: "Furthermore, we have
had the fathers (Plural) of our
flesh to chasten us, and we gave them reverence: shall we
not much rather be in subjection to the Father (singular) of
spirits, and live?" (The margin says, as does the King
James Version, "the Father of our Spirits.") This
indicates that we do not obtain our "spirits"
immediately from our earthly parents, as we do our bodies,
but rather they come to us immediately from God. That being
the case, to claim them to be depraved is equivalent to
attributing depravity to God, their immediate source, as he
is not for our bodies.
With neither contagion nor
inheritance being responsible for sin and death passing
from Adam to all mankind, what other possibility is
there? Or, is there any? Surely so.
Heb.7:9-10 reads as follows: "And so to say,
through
Abraham even Levi, who receiveth
tithes, hath paid
tithes: for he was yet in the loins of his father,
when Melchisedek met him." Just as surely, and in the
same manner, as Levi, the great grandson of Abraham, paid
tithes "through Abraham" because he was in the
loins of the latter when Melchisedek met him and received
tithes from him, all the posterity of Adam sinned through him
because they were in his loins he committed the fatal
"one trespass" that brought the sentence of
physical death.
Futhermore, only the physical bodies of Adam's posterity
were in his loins seminally, not their spirits (see
Heb.12:9, already noted). This means that only physical
death would be the consequences of being in the loins of
Adam when he sinned. Spiritual death of his posterity would
not be the result of such, but would result only from their
spirits becoming personally involved in sin.
Moreover, Levi did not inherit Abraham's
tithing, but, so to speak, paid tithes through
Abraham. By the same token, Adam's posterity did not
inherit his
sin, but sinned through him. And
that sin resulted in their physical death. "So death
passed unto all men, for that all
sinned."
Verses 13-14:
1.
How came
there to be sin in the world before there was law, if
it is not imputed where there is no law, and, according
to 4:15, "Where there is no law, neither is there
transgression"? Or was there law in some
sense, or to some degree? Surely so, but no law the
transgression of which could account for universal
death, as in the case of Adam's fatal "one
trespass."
The word here translated "until" is
achri, which
can also mean to the extent of. Thus translated, Verse
13 would read: "To the extent of law sin was in
the world." And that surely was the case between
Adam and Moses, through whom the Jews received their
justly treasured law from God, which was more detailed
than any given before, the violation of which caused
"trespass to abound: more than otherwise (Verse
20).* But even that law did not initiate the death
process and bring it upon the race. Its death penalty
for some sins, not all, only brought physical death
earlier and in a manner it would not have otherwise
occurred.
Consider the case of Cain (Gen.4:1-15; Heb.
11:14), of Lamech (Gen.4:23-24), of the antediluvians
(Gen.6:1-8); blood not to be eaten, and death penalty
for murder (Gen. 9:3-6), etc., etc.., between Adam and
Moses. To the extent there was law, and it was
violated, there was sin. But, again, there was no law
during that time whose violation could account for
universal death between Adam and Moses. Only the fatal
"one trespass" of Adam, and the sinning of
the race through him at that time because it was all in
his loins then, could so account.
2.
What difference was there
between Adam's sin and the sins of others between him
and Moses? The answer is not spelled out in
Verse 14. But at least two differences can be
distinguished in the scriptures at large: (1) Adam's
sin involved the entire race in its consequences,
throughout all generations, whereas no other sin ever
did regardless of how immense may have been the numbers
who did suffer its consequences. (2) Adam's sin was
against a "positive" divine law, whereas most
other sins were not, but were transgressions of
"moral" law.
The expression "positive" and
"moral" have been coined by theologians to
differentiate between commands that rest simply upon
the authority of God himself, so far as can be
perceived by man, and those that also rest upon the
principle of rightness and wrongs in the very nature of
things. Thus laws against murder, lying, stealing, and
such like, are "moral." But the command to
Nana to dip seven times in the river Jordan if he would
have his leprosy healed (2 Kings 5:10) was
"positive"; so was the command to Israel to
march around the walls of Jericho in order that they
fall (Josh.6:2-5); and likewise the command to Abraham
to sacrifice Isaac as a burnt-offering unto God
(Gen.22:1-2), which would have been wrong within itself
except upon the authority of God.
Adam and Eve had no inherent need to eat of the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil. But, so far as it is
known, it would not have been wrong or injurious to eat
of it if God had not prohibited it. Its existence and
God's command not to eat of it, appeared to be
arbitrary. It therefore became a test of recognition
of, and obedience to, divine authority in a way it
would not have been if it had been inherently
injurious, as the serpent appeared to demonstrate that
it was not. All "positive" commands are
chiefly tests of the spirit of loyalty and obedience.
That accounts for their oftentimes seeming to involve
consequences far transcending their apparent intrinsic
importance, as in the stoning of a man for picking up
sticks on the Sabbath day (Num.15:32-36), or the
striking of Uzzah with death for touching the ark of
the covenant (2 Sam.6:6-7), which was lawful only for a
priest; or the healing of Naaman when he dipped, or the
falling of the walls of Jericho when they had been
marched around the prescribed number of times.
The following are some renderings of Verse 14, that
constitute commentaries and indicate various ways it
has been understood, some correct and maybe others
not:
Jerusalem
Bible: ". . . yet death reigned from Adam
to Moses, even though their sin, unlike that of Adam
was not a
matter of breaking a law."
Twentieth
Century New Testament: " . . . even over
them whose sin was not a breach of law, as
Adam's was."
Goodspeed: " .
. . even over those who had not sinned as Adam had,
in face of an
express command."
Williams: " . . . even over those who had not
sinned in the way Adam had, against a positive
command."
3. What is
the significance of Adam's being "a figure of him
that was to come"? It is this, that he was
a type (Gr. tupos) of Christ in
some respects -- but some of them opposites, as
indicated in Verses 15-21. And this is exceedingly
important to understanding a basic principle involved
in both our human predicament and the divine scheme of
human redemption.
Adam and Christ each bears a relation to the entire
human race that no other persons ever have or will.
Adam was its federal head, physically. The entire race
springs from him, and experiences the physical
consequences of his first sin because of its physical
solidarity with him. Christ is the rightful head of
the entire race (see 1 Cor.11:3), spiritually, and the
actual
head of all who respond to him in faith and come into
spiritual solidarity with him -- seeking even to
imitate his character. Consequently, as we have borne
the likeness of Adam in time, so shall we bear the
likeness of Christ in eternity to come, if we are his
(see 1 Cor.15:45-49; 1 John 3:2; Phil. 3:20-21; Rom.
8:28-29).
Christ, a member of the Godhead from all eternity past
(John 1:1-3,14), became a man in order to die and
redeem man from sin, overcoming death in his own person
and in behalf of all mankind (Heb.2:9,14-18; 1
Cor.15:20-22; Rev.1:8; John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15). His
coming was to undo ultimately all the ruin wrought by
Adam, and more -- to undo unconditionally the
physical ruin wrought by Adam (achieving the
resurrection of the dead; and freeing creation from its
bondage to decay, Rom.8:21); and further, to undo
conditionally the
awful spiritual ruin wrought by the personally
committed trespasses of men since Adam's fateful sin,
in behalf of all who turn to God in faith and loyalty
(giving them in the end eternal life),
These are tremendous considerations, exceedingly
important to understanding the remaining verses (15-21)
of the chapter.
"Even Abraham, living some centuries before the Law
of Moses, was under a measure of law. God said of him:
"Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my
commandments, my statutes, and my laws" (Genesis
26:5). This pretty well confirms the rendering of
achri in
Romans 5:14 as "to the extent of" being
correct.