Vol 01 - The Parenthesis in Rom_5:1-21

The Parenthesis inRomans 5:1-21

Romans 5:12-21.-Though I cannot but dissent from those who consider this a difficult passage, it is plain that it is often misunderstood, as it is certainly momentous in its bearings.

First, I am of opinion that the parenthesis is rightly marked so as to help the sense, 13-17 inclusively being one of those full and instructive digressions so characteristic of St. Paul.

Next, be it observed, that the apostle traces sin up to its source, beyond the Jew or the law. "By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all sinned." Sin was theirs through one; besides, all sinned too. It was not the law of which the Jews boasted which brought in sin; for it existed anterior to the Sinai covenant. And, though sin was not put to account, or imputed to man in God’s government of the world before the law, still death reigned, the proof and wages of sin, even over those who did not transgress a known commandment like Adam (or like the Jews after the law was given). That is, while in the nature of things there might not be transgression between the two points of Adam and Moses, there was sin,* and God marked His sense of it, for death reigned.

(*In 1 John 3:4 the true force beyond a doubt is, " sin is lawlessness," and not "transgression of the law," which is a different phrase and idea. Man was corrupt and violent before the law; under the law he despised and rebelled against the authority of God. Transgression is always sin; but sin embraces much more than transgression, being the genus of which transgression is the species.)

Now, if Adam were confessedly typical of the Messiah who was to come, should not the free gift be as the offense? For if by the offense of the one the many (the mass connected with him, who in this case were all mankind) died, much more did the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man Jesus Christ, abound unto the many. And shall not, as by one that sinned, be the gift? For the judgment was of one [thing] to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses to justification. For if by the offense of the one, death reigned by the one; much more shall those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness, reign in life by the one, Jesus Christ. This closes the parenthesis, nor could reasoning be more compressed in itself, or more conclusive to a Jew. For he, of all men, could not deny the sorrowful facts of Genesis, or the universal ruin entailed by Adam’s sin. The principle then is conceded. From the beginning God had recognized something more than mere individualism. If the first and earthy man had sent down to all his family sin and death, why should not the second man, the Lord from heaven, transmit to His family righteousness and life? Verse 15 compares the persons or heads; verse 16 contrasts the things, or the judgment grounded on a single act with the state of accomplished righteousness (διχαίωμα) in spite of many offenses; and verse 17 presents the crowning result, the evident propriety that, if by the offense of one death reigned, how much rather should the last Adam’s family reign in life through their glorious head.

Then, we have the general thread resumed with light and force derived from the parenthesis, and this in the most abstract way possible. "Therefore, then (in allusion to the intervening verses, but in direct reference to verse 12), as [it was] by one offense unto all men to condemnation; so also [is it] by one accomplished righteousness unto all to justification of life. For as by the disobedience’ of the one man the many were constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one shall the many be constituted righteous." That is, verse 18 gives us the pure and simple tendency of Adam’s offense on the one hand, and of Christ’s righteousness on the other. The direction of the one, as of the other, was towards all men. But verse 19 adds the very important information that, whatever might be the scope of action in either case, the actual and definitive effect was a different matter. All men were not left in their ruin, nor were all, in result, delivered through Christ. Hence the change from πάντες, to οἱ τολλοί, for it is mere ignorance to take them as equipollent. In certain circumstances they may mean the same persons, but the terms are invariably distinct in themselves. Thus, in verse 18, where "all" occurs, we have the universal aspect of the act, whether of Adam or of Christ; but in verse 19, where the positive application is treated of, we get " the many " who are in fact affected thereby. But law did come: why it entered, and, as it were by the way, the apostle answers in verse 20. It was that (not sin, but) "the offense might abound." God forbid that anything God gave should be said to create evil! Sin being already there, the law came to bring out its real character as directly violating God’s command when He gives one. "But where sin abounded, grace superabounded, in order that, as sin reigned in death, so also might grace reign, through righteousness, to eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." May I just say in closing, that the authorized version is clearly wrong in twice rendering εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους "upon all men "? In such a sentence it ought to be, " unto or towards all men." The distinction of εἰς and ἐπί strikingly appears in Romans 3:22; where we have, first, the universal tendency of God’s righteousness, by faith of Jesus Christ, and then, the actual application of it to all those who believe. This is accurately given in our Bible, "unto all," the first and general presentation, putting all under responsibility; and then, " upon all them that believe," the special portion of all such as believe; but the distinction is lost in the same version of chap. 5.