Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER SIX (Lesson I)

Verses 1-2: So do you think we should continue sinning so that God will give us more and more grace? Of course not! Our old sinful life ended. It’s dead. So how can we continue living in sin?

The Apostle Paul now formulates a buffer against any misinformed response to his teaching that since the law was given in order to show us that we were sinning and in need of a Savior, that the more sin there was, the more grace there would be in order to cover such sins and lead more people to salvation. So the question then becomes, should we continue sinning so that more and more grace can be made available? That would be like someone saying today that because the President of the United States has the power to offer pardons, we should all become criminals so that He will have more and more pardons to give out.

Paul covered this same subject in his letter to the Galatians: “My brothers and sisters, God chose you to be free. But don’t use your freedom as an excuse to do what pleases your sinful selves.”¹ The Apostle Peter came to the same conclusion: “Live like free people, but don’t use your freedom as an excuse to do evil.”² Even the Apostle Jude, in his letter, touches on this topic: “They have used the grace of our God in the wrong way – to do sinful things.”³ So Paul was speaking about a spiritual malady already existing that infected believers in his day.

As an example, we can go back to Joseph in the Old Testament to see how he was tempted to misuse the grace of God that delivered him from a pit into which his brothers threw him, and then sold him into Egyptian slavery. He ended up in the house of a wealthy Egyptian whose wife tempted him to commit adultery.⁴ But Joseph refused to make such a compromise, and God rewarded him. The wise Psalmist who wrote the longest psalm made this point: “I gain understanding from your instructions, so I hate anything that leads people the wrong way.”⁵ That’s why Paul answers his own question by saying what a ridiculous idea it was to conclude that more sin is good because it results in more grace.

Martin Luther sees this chapter as the Apostle Paul’s effort to show that true believers have no interest in continuing in sin. Even though, earlier, Paul stated that where sin abounds God’s grace abounds, even more, this was not an attempt to excuse sin but to glorify divine grace.⁶ In his commentary, Luther quotes Augustine who said: “This grace, indeed, appeared more obvious and manifest in his [Paul’s] case, inasmuch as, while he was pursuing such vehement measures of persecution against the Church of God as made him worthy of the greatest punishment, he found mercy instead of condemnation, and instead of punishment obtained grace. Very properly, therefore, does he lift voice and hand in defense of grace, and care not for the envy either of those who understood not a subject too profound and difficult for them, or of those who perversely misinterpreted his own sound words.”⁷

John Calvin believes that Paul’s statement here is in response to those who imagine that righteousness by grace can be given by God without the need then to walk in the newness of life. This, says Calvin, is shamefully tearing Christ apart because it does not make sense to say that the best opportunity for grace to be displayed is for people to continue bound in sin. So Paul’s intent is to disprove such nonsense.⁸

John Bengel gives his introduction to this chapter: “Up until now Paul treated the past and the present: now he proceeds to treat the future; and the forms of expression are suited to those, which immediately precedes, while he speaks respecting the ‘abundance of grace.’ In this passage, the continuing in sin is set before us. In other words, going back into sin which has been overcome. The man, who has obtained grace, may turn here or there, but must always turn his back to sin.”⁹

Adam Clarke surmises that such thinking could have come from a newly converted Gentile. He says: “Having as yet received but little instruction, he is just brought out of his heathen state to believe in Christ Jesus. From the manner in which God had magnified His mercy, in blotting out his sin [based] simply on his believing on Christ, that, supposing even if he gave way to the evil propensities of his own heart, his transgressions could do him no hurt now that he was in God’s favor. And we need not wonder that a Gentile, just emerging from the deepest darkness, might entertain such thoughts as these; when we find that eighteen centuries after this, persons have appeared in the most Christian countries in Europe, not merely asking such a question, but defending the doctrine with all their might; and asserting in the most unqualified manner, ‘that believers were under no obligation to keep the moral law of God; that Christ had kept it for them; that His keeping it was imputed to them; and that God, who had exacted it from Him, who was their surety and representative, would not exact it from them, inasmuch as it would be injustice to require two payments for one debt.‘¹⁰”¹¹

Robert Haldane sees it this way: “Many expound this objection as coming from a Jew, and imagine a sort of dialogue between him and the Apostle. For this, there is no basis of fact for such supposition that dialogue in different parts of this Epistle gives life and interest to that argument. There is no necessity for the introduction of an objector. It is quite sufficient for the writer to state the objection in his own words.” Haldane then goes on to say: “Paul, in his usual manner, and on similar occasions, strongly rejects such circumstances as the question in the first verse supposes, which implies the absolute incongruity of the assumption that Christians will be emboldened to continue in sin, by the knowledge of their being freely justified. On the very grounds on which this objection rests, Paul shows that this is impossible.”¹²

Jewish writer David Stein notes: “These verses, reiterating what was said at 3:5–8, introduce the theme of Chapters 6–8 and are Paul’s answer to all who accuse the New Testament of offering ‘cheap grace.’ He is more radical than those who merely exhort us to subdue our sinful impulses; for he asserts that by virtue of being united with the Messiah our old self and its sinful inclinations have actually died.”¹³ Stein then points out that since dead people don’t sin, therefore, those who are dead to temptation and misbehaving should also be dead to sin.

Albert Barnes weighs in on this subject as follows: “The objection refers to what the Apostle had said in 5:20. What shall we say to such a sentiment as that where sin abounded grace did much more abound? If sin has been the occasion of grace and favor, should we not continue in it, and commit as much as possible, in order that grace might abound? This objection the Apostle proceeds to answer. He shows that the consequence does not follow, and proves that the doctrine of justification does not lead to it.”¹⁴

H. A. Ironside asks: “’How shall we who have died to sin live any longer therein?’ In what sense did we die to sin? If actually dead to it we would not be concerned about either the question or its answer. That which perplexes us is the fact that while we hate sin we find within ourselves a tendency to yield to it. But we are said to have died to it. How and where?”¹⁵ Ironside asks these questions because while it would seem that we should be dead to sin, why, then, does our mind and body come alive again so quickly when sin is present? Let’s imagine this another way: when sin shows up, shouldn’t at least play dead until it goes away? But we know it doesn’t work that way. James said we are to resist the devil, not act as if he isn’t there.¹⁶ Yet Paul is not finished with his argument, so we must read on.

Charles Hodge rightly points out that Paul poses this question for the purpose of using it as a mode of presenting an objection. He intends to show that the consequence of the abundance of grace does not justify the increase of sin to show off its power and glory.¹⁷ And for Frederic Godet, he follows the same theme: “The meaning of this question: What shall we say then? can only be this: What consequence shall we draw from the preceding? Only the Apostle’s object is not to draw a true consequence from the previous teaching, but merely to reject a false conclusion which might be deduced by a person still a stranger to the experience of justifying faith. It need not, therefore, be concluded from this that the Apostle is now passing from the principle to its consequences.”¹⁸

Charles Spurgeon makes it a target in his sermon: “It is one of the vilest suggestions of Satan that could possibly come to men. If the sinfulness of man has really given an opportunity for the display of divine mercy, then the devil’s logic would be, ‘Let us commit more sin, that there may be more room for grace to work.’ But Christians have learned their reasoning in another school, and to such diabolical arguments they answer in the words of the Apostle – see verse 2.”¹⁹

Then Charles Ellicott gives a doctrinal exposition: “In previous chapters, Paul dealt with one of the two great root-ideas, ‘justification by faith;’ he now passes to the second, ‘union with Christ.’ The one might be described as the judicial, the other as the mystical theory of salvation. The connecting-link which unites them is faith. Faith in Christ, and especially in the death of Christ, is the instrument of justification… It involves an actual identification with the Redeemer Himself. This, no doubt, is mystical language. When strictly compared with the facts of the religious consciousness, it must be admitted that all such terms as union, oneness, fellowship, identification pass into the domain of metaphor. They are taken to express the highest conceivable degree of attachment and devotion. In this sense, they are now consecrated by the use of centuries, and any other phrases substituted for them, though gaining perhaps somewhat in precision, would only seem poor and cold.”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

SUMMARY OF CHAPTER FIVE

There are a lot of things that Paul discusses in this chapter. He starts out describing the peace and joy that comes to everyone who is reconciled to God. To know that the threat of the punishment for Adam’s sin is removed at the very moment we become one with Christ, is joy unspeakable. And it is all brought about by our unhindered access to God’s grace. So instead of living in fear death and spending eternity without God, we rejoice in the hope of being with God in all His glory for eternity.

But as we know in this world, sometimes what we hope for does not come true, and it leaves us sad and disappointed. But Paul says this hope will never disappoint us. That’s because it’s not dependent upon our ability to make it happen. It rests on the work that Christ Jesus did for us on the cross, and what God did through Him for us by raising Him from death. And since Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, what He did in the past and is doing today in our lives will last for eternity. That’s why God imprinted His love for us so deeply in our hearts with the stamp of the Holy Spirit, that’s what we hold onto even when things look bleak and troublesome. So when troubles come our way, it doesn’t make us lose our way. We stand steadfast in our faith because God’s Holy Spirit standing right beside us as our Comforter.

This then sets up the formula of, “how much more.” Paul uses this five times throughout the chapter. He introduces the corollary, or sequence, that if one thing can be proven true, then what follows will also be true. In fact, Paul says that if we are impressed by what was proven true, how much more will we be amazed by what follows. He begins by pointing out that seldom will one person will die for another just because they are law abiding and upright, and even rarer will someone will die for a person who is really good and kind to all those around them. However, Christ died for us while we were prisoners of sin because of our war against Him. So once we realize what He did for us while we were still sinners, now that we stand justified before God, how much more (v. 9) will God give us that blessed assurance that the wrath for Adam’s sin will never touch us.

Then Paul points out the second sequence by saying, that once Christ freed us from the prison of sin, we were then reconciled to God. So instead of remaining enemies, we became His sons and daughters. And once we became aware that we were now friends with God, how much more (v. 10) can we be assured that because Christ died in our place, God will make sure that we are free to enjoy eternal life. All we have to do is look back and remember that God put His guarantee on this by raising His Son Jesus from death. Therefore, if we are in Christ, and He is in us, we too will rise from death to live with Him forever.

Then Paul begins to talk about what started it all. One man, Adam, disobeyed God’s orders not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and so the death sentence was read to Adam, Eve, their children, and their children’s children, etc., right down to this very day. So the fact that we all live with a death sentence over our heads is not our fault, but Adam’s. But God refused to throw away His creation as damaged goods. Rather, He sent His Son as a second Adam to undo the bad that the first Adam did with the good that He came to do. So says Paul, if so much evil entered the world through one man’s, Adam, selfishness, how much more (v. 15) will God gift of grace enter the world through one Man’s, Christ, selflessness.

So we see that as a result of Adam’s sin, judgment was ordered and the death penalty imposed, taking away the life God had intended for all humanity. But God did not leave mankind in such a state of despair. That’s why He sent His Son with a gift to replace that which was lost. That one act by Adam that brought such carnage to humankind was voided by that one act of Christ to remove the stigma of condemnation and replaced it with the seal of justification. So says Paul, if the sin of this one man, Adam, caused death to be king over all, how much more (v. 17) will those who accept God’s gift of forgiveness and acquittal through one man, Jesus Christ, become are kings of life.

Paul goes on to explain. Yes, Adam’s sinfulness ended up punishing all mankind so that all would die, but Christ’s sinlessness caused those who desire to become right with God can live. The picture is clear, Adam caused many to be sinners because he disobeyed God, but Christ caused many to be made acceptable to God because He obeyed. But God wanted the whole world to see how this took place. He sent the Law so that everyone would be able to understand what right and wrong was and thereby become aware of how much they were failing Him. Consequently, says Paul, if sin permeated all of mankind, how much more (v. 20) will God’s grace be made available to all mankind. In other words, the more we see our sins waiting to condemn us, the more we should see God’s abounding grace waiting to forgive us.

Based on all of this, Paul tells believers not to be surprised when painful trials come their way. Don’t get discouraged because something you don’t understand is happening to you. Instead, rejoice that you are not alone. The One who suffered for you will suffer with you in your circumstances. And just as He was victorious through His sufferings, you will be more than a conqueror when His glory is revealed in your final victory.

The Apostle Paul was using this line of thinking in order to convince us of the surety of our salvation. If mankind could have found a way to get to heaven on their own, and some religions teach this, they would have no need for a Savior. But every gate they tried to enter was locked securely. There was only one gate that opened into the kingdom of God. That Gate was Jesus Christ. And the entry through this gate could not be bought, bargained for, earned, or merited. It was a gift from God. Because we were all condemned through that one sin of the one man, Adam, God made it possible for us to be saved through that one sacrifice of the one man, Jesus Christ. Not because we deserved it, but because of His endless grace and mercy. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

* * * *

Thank God for all of you who’ve dedicated yourselves to learn more about God by reading more of His Word. May He bless you richly for your commitment to His will for your life. Our lessons on Chapter Six will begin Wednesday. God bless you is my prayer.

I read this anonymous quote, and it really made sense to me: “Do not dwell on the past. Your history cannot be erased, but your future has yet to be written, so make the most of what is going to happen instead of worrying about what you cannot change.” I don’t know who wrote it, but I suspect they may have gotten their inspiration from the prophet Isaiah who said: “Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past.”¹

That doesn’t mean that we should not remind ourselves where we came from, or recall mistakes we made, so we don’t do the same thing again. But it does mean that we should not let strings to the past keep us from moving forward. Attachments to people, places, or things that are now behind us and can serve no purpose in what our future holds.

In my own life, I was one week away from becoming an FBI agent at the age of 20, but my mom didn’t tell me until twenty years later that the officer came back with the offer just two days after I left to go live with my oldest sister so I could get a job. After I had enlisted in the Army, I missed one question that kept me from qualifying for Officer Training School, which would have resulted in my staying in the military much longer. I sent my doctoral dissertation to a well-known Christian publisher for publication. They liked it but requested that I rewrite it because it was too technical for the average reader. It took me long enough to compose it the way it was, I just didn’t have the time (This was before computers when all I had was an electric typewriter). Who knows what that may have led to.

But did I wonder and wrestle over what might have been to the point that it kept me from going through the doors that God did open? No! I thank God for what He did allow me to do and accomplish for His honor and glory. In fact, if someone would have told me years ago what I would be doing today at my age, I may have asked God back then to take me to heaven early.

So am I glad for what He is doing in my life, especially what I can do for others? Absolutely! In fact, I would not be where I am today if God had not kept me from hitting all those targets I missed. Don’t let the things of the past tie you to what might have been. So dream and ask God to help you become what He wants you to be and stop having nightmares over what might have been. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING

I read this story years ago; used it in some of my teaching lessons and sermons as an illustration. But when I read this version it had a different ending. So even if you’ve heard it before, read it again, it may give you new insight on how, just like sugar, helping too much can be a bad thing.

A man working in his garden spotted the cocoon of a butterfly. One day, a small opening appeared. He kept looking, hoping the butterfly would soon appear. Several hours went by as he watched it struggled to force its body through that little hole. Then, it seemed to stop trying. It appeared as if it had gotten as far as it could and it could go no further.

So the man decided to help the butterfly. He took a pair of scissors and snipped off the remaining bit of the cocoon. After awhile, the butterfly finally emerged, but it had a swollen body and small, shriveled wings. The man watched the butterfly, expecting at any moment the wings would spread and expand to be able to support the body, which would contract in time.

Neither of these things happened! In fact, the butterfly spent the rest of the day crawling around on the ground with a swollen body and shriveled wings. It never was able to fly. What the man, in his kindness and haste, did not understand was that the restricting cocoon and the struggle required for the butterfly to get through the tiny opening were God’s way of forcing fluid from the body of the butterfly into its wings so that it would be ready for flight once it achieved its freedom from the cocoon.

Sometimes struggles are exactly what we need in our lives too. If God allowed us to go through our lives without any obstacles, we would not be as strong as what we need to be in order to cope with the world we live in. So instead of thinking that God doesn’t care, think of it this way:

I asked for strength, and God gave me difficulties to make me strong.
I asked for wisdom, and God gave me problems to solve.
I asked for prosperity, and God gave me brain and brawn to work.
I asked for courage, and God gave me danger to overcome.
I asked for love, and God gave me troubled people to help.
I asked for favors, and God gave me opportunities.
I received nothing I asked for, but everything I needed!

This is what the Apostle Paul was also saying to the Roman believers (See Romans 5:3-5). Difficulties in life can either be stepping stones or stumbling blocks. We can either see them as obstacles or opportunities. The great lady who coped with being blind like a champion, Helen Keller, once said: “Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired and success achieved.” – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XIX)

John Calvin adds that Paul was not interested in arguing against all the opposing views to righteousness as man’s gift from God instead of man’s gift to God. Says Calvin: “Paul adds the word grace, that he might more deeply imprint this truth on the memory – that the result is to be ascribed, not to our merit, but to the kindness of God.”¹ And Charles Hodge was inspired to say: “We should open our hearts to the large prospects of purity and blessedness presented in the Gospel; the victory of grace over sin and death, which is to be consummated in the triumph of true faith, and in the eternal salvation of those multitudes out of every tribe and kindred, which no man can number.”²

Calvin continues: “The absolute and universal influence of sin is figured by the empire of a monarch exercising authority in uncontrolled sovereignty. But now grace reigns. There was nothing in men to merit salvation or to recommend them in any measure to God. Grace, therefore, reigns in their salvation which is wholly and entirely a free favor [from God]. Sin is said to reign unto, or in, death. This shows that death was, in every human being, the effect of sin. The way in which death manifested its universal reign over the human race, was in causing their death. This most fully proves that infants [were born] sinners. If sin ruled in causing death to its subjects, then all who died are the subjects of sin. Death to the human race is in every instance the effect of the dominion of sin. But if sin did reign, grace [now] reigns. If the former reigned in death, the latter reigns in life; yes, it reigns unto eternal life.”

Robert Haldane had a thought on how this verse sums up all that was said before. He writes: “In this 21st verse the doctrine of the whole preceding context, of the salvation of believers, is summed up in a manner most beautiful and striking. Having exhibited in a strong light the righteousness of God,³ the Apostle returns to it in this chapter; having contrasted Christ and Adam, he brings out his conclusion in this verse by contrasting the reigns of sin and grace. Sin had an absolute sway over all the descendants of Adam. There was nothing good about them, or in any of them. Sin existed and predominated in every human soul. Therefore, it is said: sin reigned.”

Robert Haldane asks: How, then, does grace reign unto life? He answers by saying the following: “Is it by a gratuitous pardon? Doubtless, it is. But it is not by forgiving the sinner in an arbitrary way, with respect to the punishment due to sin. Forgiveness is indeed entirely gratuitous; but if it cost believers nothing, it cost much for their Salvation. Grace reigns through righteousness. – How beautifully this fulfills the prophetic declaration of Psalm 85:10-13. Grace did not, could not, deliver the lawful captives without paying the ransom. It did not trample on justice or evade its demands. It reigns by providing a Savior to suffer along with the guilty. By the death of Jesus Christ, full compensation was made to the law and justice of God. ”⁴

Albert Barnes writes the following summary on what Paul said here: “This chapter is a most precious portion of divine revelation. It brings into view the amazing evils which have resulted from the apostasy [of mankind]. The Apostle does not attempt to deny or excuse those evils; he admits to them fully; admits to them in their deepest, widest, most melancholy extent, just as the physician admits the extent and ravages of the disease which he hopes to cure. At the same time, Christianity is not responsible for those evils. It did not introduce them. It finds them in existence, as a matter of sober and somber fact, pertaining to all the [human] race. Christianity is no more answerable for the introduction and extent of sin than the science of medicine is responsible for the introduction and extent of disease. Like that science, it finds a state of wide-spread evils in existence; and like that science, it is strictly a remedial system. And whether true or false, still the evils of sin exist, just as the evils of disease exist.”

Barnes goes on to say that the fact about universal sin remains a fact. And then he gives another fact: “Christianity proposes a remedy; and it is permitted to the Christian to rejoice that that remedy is ample to meet all the evils; that it is just suited to recover our alienated world; and that it is destined yet to raise the race up to life, and peace, and heaven. In the provisions of that strategy we may and should triumph; on the same principle as we may rejoice in the triumph of medicine over disease, so may we triumph in the ascendancy of the Christian plan over all the evils of the fall. And while Christians thus rejoice, the infidel, the freethinker, the pagan, and the scoffer shall contend with these evils which their systems cannot alleviate or remove, and sink under the chilly reign of sin and death; just as people pant, and struggle, and expire under the visitations of disease because they will not apply the proper remedies of medicine, but choose rather to leave themselves to its unchecked ravages, or to use all the panacea of quackery in a vain attempt to arrest evils which are coming upon them.”⁵

H. A. Ironside offers clarity on the subject Paul has written about here that begins with verse 12 and concludes with verse 21. He states: “The intervening passage (verses 13-17) is parenthetical, or explanatory… Sin was in the world dominating man from Adam’s fall even before the law was given by Moses, but sin did not as yet have the distinct character of transgression until a legal code was given to man, which he consciously violated. Therefore, apart from law, sin was not imputed. Nevertheless, that it was there and to be reckoned with, is manifested in that ‘by sin came death’ and death reigned as a despotic monarch over all men from Adam to Moses, save as God interfered in the case of Enoch, who was translated that he should not see death. Even where there was no willful sin, as in the case of infants and irresponsible persons, death reigned, thus proving that they were part of a fallen race in union with Adam’s sin and actually possessing Adam’s fallen nature. He who was originally created in the image and likeness of God defaced that image by sin and lost the divine likeness, and we read that ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image.’⁶ This is characteristic of all the race of which he is the head. ‘In Adam, all die.’”⁷

Then Charles Spurgeon uses his oratorical talent to frame it this way: “Just as sin has reigned, and with despotic and irresistible power has ground its subjects in the very dust, and then cast them into the flames, so does grace with irresistible goodness, constrain the chosen multitude to yield obedience, and thus prepares them for eternal bliss. See, it lifts up the beggar from the dunghill and makes him sit among princes.⁸ Mark its shining course, and behold it blessing the sons of man wherever it stretches out its silver scepter, chasing away the misery of night, and giving the gladsomeness of Gospel day[light]; sending back the monsters of discord and of cruelty to the dens from which they once escaped, and bidding the angels of mercy to keep perpetual watch and ward over the sons of Adam who have given themselves up to its sway of the kingdom of grace.”⁹

Jewish theologian David Stern has a lengthy exegesis on verses 12-21, including several theories on the doctrine of Original Sin, which is worthy of reading if you can get a copy of his commentary. But his introductory remarks gives us a good sense of what he sees in Paul’s writings here. He begins with this: “This is one of the great theological passages in the Bible; but because upon it Christians have erected the doctrine of original sin, it is for Jewish people one of the most problematic. Pivotal in Chapters 1–8 of Romans, it looks backward to 3:21–5:11, where God’s means of considering people righteous (first mentioned at 1:17) through Yeshua is proclaimed, and forward to 6:1–8:39, where Paul elaborates the consequences for the individual believer of what Yeshua has accomplished.”

Stern continues: “The purpose of these ten verses in their context is not to teach about the origin of human sin but to give assurance that the Messiah has truly redeemed us human beings from bondage to sin by paying its full penalty on our behalf. Paul makes his case by developing the parallel between the effects on mankind of Adam and of Yeshua (vv. 12, 14, 18–19, 21), while stressing that what Yeshua accomplished by His obedience to God was far greater and better than what Adam wreaked by his disobedience (vv. 15–17) and simultaneously dispelling any suspicion that focusing on these two men minimizes the importance of the Torah (13–14a, 20). But the whole argument is built on a premise which Paul assumes can be taken for granted, as axiomatic, namely, that it was the one man Adam who brought sin and death upon all humanity.”¹⁰

Stern then says this that will help us understand why Jesus had such trouble convincing the Jews that they needed salvation, and the only salvation that God the Father had approved was the one He came to explain and give His life to pay for it. Stern then adds this: “Before assessing the doctrine of original sin, we must see what it actually says. Otherwise we will find ourselves dealing with oversimplified abstractions — ‘Judaism says man is a sinner because he sins, Christianity [says] that man sins because he is a sinner,” “Judaism is less concerned with where sin comes from than struggling against it,’ ‘Christianity alone regards sin as fatal; Judaism takes it for a minor illness”¹¹

Not only did our Lord have problems trying to get this point across in His day, and all the Apostles fought an uphill battle trying to convince both Jews and Gentiles that this was the one and only way to salvation, but we have this same problem today. People don’t want to hear that they can’t do it on their own or with the help of some rite, ritual, sacrament, or ceremony. If it were not the case that Jesus is the one and only door to salvation and heaven, He would have never made this promise: “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.”¹² It was true back then, it is true now, and it will be true until Jesus comes again.

The end of Chapter Five

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XVIII)

In one of his letters, early church scholar Ambrose wrote this: “Sin abounded by the Law because by the Law is the knowledge of sin, and thus it began to be injurious to me to know that which through weakness I could not avoid; it is good to foreknow in order to avoid, but if I cannot avoid, to have known it was injurious. Thus the effect of the Law was changed to me into its opposite, yet by the very increase of sin, it became useful to me, because I was humbled. Wherefore David also said, It is good for me that I have been humbled. For by my humiliation I have broken those bonds of that ancient transgression, whereby Adam and Eve had bound the whole line of their posterity. Hence too the Lord came in obedience that He might loose the knot of disobedience and of man’s transgression. And so, as by disobedience sin entered, so by obedience sin was remitted.”¹

Then, Augustine shared his understanding of what Paul was writing here: “By this Paul has clearly indicated that the Jews did not know by what dispensation the law had been given. It was not given in order to bring life, for grace brings life through faith, but the law was given to show with what great and tight chains those who thought they could fulfill all righteousness in their own strength were bound. So sin abounded, both because desire grew more ardent in the light of the prohibition and because the crime of trespass affected those who sinned against the law.”²

“The Way” reformist John Calvin saw this was as follows: “After sin has held men sunk in ruin, grace then comes to their help: for he teaches us, that the abundance of grace becomes for this reason more illustrious. — that while sin is overflowing, it pours itself forth so exuberantly, that it not only overcomes the flood of sin but wholly absorbs it.”³ Then Adam Clarke notes: “Without this rule of right, sin can only be known in a sort of general way; the innumerable deviations from positive righteousness can only be known by the application of the righteous statutes of which the law is composed. And it was necessary that this law should be given, that the true nature of sin might be seen, and that men might be the better prepared to receive the Gospel.”⁴

On the subject of sin being such an evil thing, Robert Haldane says that it was overcome by God’s amazing grace: “This was another effect of the entrance of the law, that as, by the clear light it imparts, sin would abound in all its extent and enormity, so grace might be exhibited as abounding above sin. The grace of God, dispensed from His throne, not only pardons the most numerous and most heinous sins but also confers eternal life upon him who has sinned. It restores him to communion with God, which by transgression had been forfeited, re-establishing it not only in a far higher degree but in a manner so permanent as never again to be interrupted.”⁵

In his sermon on this subject, Charles Spurgeon said: “It was the practical result of the giving of the law that men became greater sinners than they were before, and it was the design of the law that they should see themselves to be greater sinners than before. The law is the looking-glass in which we see our spots, but it is not the basin in which we wash them away. The law has a provoking power, for such is – the perversity of our nature that, no sooner do we hear the command, ‘You shall not do so-and-so,’ than at once we want to do it. Our nature is very much like quicklime. Throw cold water upon it, and straightway it generates heat; acting, as it were, against the nature of that which is thrown on it. So, the more God says to a man, ‘You will,’ the more the man says, ‘I will not;’ and the more God says to him, ‘You will not,’ the more man resolves that he will. ‘The law entered, that the offence might abound.’ It reveals the depravity and disobedience of human nature, and lays us low before God as convicted criminals.”⁶

F. F. Bruce speaks here about the intrusion of the Law: “The verb ‘came in’ is literally rendered ‘came in beside’ (‘intruded into this process’); it is used in Galatians 2:4 of the ‘false brethren’ who ‘slipped in’ or ‘infiltrated’ (pareiserchomai) as spies into the Apostolic company. The sense of verse 20 reproduces that of Galatians 3:19: ‘Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions (‘to make wrongdoing a legal offence’), till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made.’ Law increased the trespass by providing opportunities for violating a multiplicity of specific commandments; there may be the further suggestion that it ‘also increases sin in the sense that it makes men sin more.’ In any case, both epistles imply that the law of Moses is a parenthetic dispensation in the course of God’s dealings with the human race.”⁷

Verse 21: Sin once ruled over us by its power of death. But God gave us more of His grace so that grace could rule over us with eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, by making us right with Him.

Now the Jewish leaders in the Roman church are given a declaration by Paul of how the sentence of death over Adam’s descendants, and their alienation from God, was removed by the issuance of grace to all of those who came into the family of God Jesus because He brought them back into fellowship with Him. This was part of John’s gospel where he makes a similar statement: “That is, the law was given to us through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”⁸

In this narrative, Paul may be drawing more from his Jewish learning than on any new revelation. They also taught about the power over mankind of what they call “Evil Inclination or Evil Impulse.” In one place we read: “If in the future when they will be engaged in mourning and the Evil Inclination will have no power over them.”⁹ They go on to discuss the matter, and whether knowingly or unknowingly, they talk about how the death of Messiah the son of Joseph,¹⁰ brought an end to the Evil Inclination, and this should not be a reason for mourning but of rejoicing, because the power of Evil Inclination has come to an end.¹¹

And in a collection of the teachings of the Jewish fathers by Rabbi Nathan we find it said that the Evil Impulse is king over man’s two hundred and forty-eight limbs. When he goes off to some good deed, all his limbs begin to drag. For the Evil Impulse within man is monarch over his two hundred and forty-eight limbs, while the Good Impulse is like a captive in prison, as it is said, “True, he rose from prison to be king; yet, while ruling, he became poor.”¹² That is to say, the Good impulse.¹³ So in his own way, Paul shows that the Evil Impulse came from Adam while the Good Impulse came from Christ. They cannot exist in the same heart and mind with mutual cooperation because they are diametrically opposed to one another. Therefore, one will gain control over the other.

As a result of receiving such unmerited grace, Paul tells Titus to inform his congregation on how they should conduct themselves as believers, and to do so in everything they do, so that they can prove that the teaching of God our Savior is good. That is the way we should live because God’s grace has come. That grace can save everyone.¹⁴ Not only that, but the writer of Hebrews adds this: “With Jesus as our high priest, we can feel free to come before God’s throne where there is grace. There we receive mercy and kindness to help us when we need it.”¹⁵ And the Apostle Peter is also struck by the power and benefits of grace, especially during times of trial and hardship. He writes: “Yes, you will suffer for a short time. But after that, God will make everything right. He will make you strong. He will support you and keep you from falling. He is the God who gives all grace. He chose you to share in his glory in Christ. That glory will continue forever.”¹⁶

We see an excellent example in Abraham’s faith being tested by his willing sacrifice of his only son, Isaac. Faith by itself would have been insufficient. He would have been comfortable to stay at home with his faith, not wanting to risk the loss of his only legitimate son. However, to have done so would have left any proof of how real his faith really was up in the air. But his walking up Mt. Moriah with Isaac as the intended sacrifice, was only made possible because of his faith they would walk back down together. Abraham’s faith in the unseen was wonderfully augmented by his unhesitating response to God’s call. So we can see that real faith then, is more than just believing, it is acting with confidence on what we believe.

A number of early church scholars weigh in on explaining what Paul is talking about here. For instance, Origen speaks about the two kingdoms: “Paul shows that there are two kingdoms in man. In one of these, sin has taken control and leads to death. In the other, grace, reigns through righteousness and leads to life. For it is grace which expels and ejects sin from its kingdom, i.e., from our members.”¹⁷ Then, Ambrosiaster writes: “Sin reigned when it saw that it was driving sinners into death, in which it rejoiced, in much the same way as grace will reign in those who obey God.”¹⁸

A contemporary scholar of Ambrosiaster’s explains how believers should no longer be receptive to sin: “Paul says that just as sin once ruled us even against our will, because we were so used to it, so now our zeal for God reigns and will reign in us forever. Since we have been made worthy of eternal life through the resurrection and live in true and certain righteousness, we shall no longer be receptive to sin.”¹⁹ And Pelagius sees this as the beginning of the reign of grace. He writes: “Just as the reign of sin was established through contempt for the law, so also the reign of grace is established through the forgiveness of many sinners and thereafter through the doing of righteousness without ceasing.”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XVII)

Charles Spurgeon framed his response to Adam’s blunder this way: “Adam’s fall was terribly effectual, it has brought death upon the human race age after age. But Christ’s death is wonderfully effectual, for on behalf of all those for whom He died His atonement so prevailed as to put their sins away forever.”¹ Frederic Godet states: there is nothing more desperate in appearance than this great historical fact of the reign of death, and yet it is this very fact which becomes in the eyes of the Apostle a principle of the most powerful encouragement and the most glorious hope. For this terrible reign of death, established on the weak foundation of a single sin and a single sinner may serve as a measure to establish the greater certainty of the reign of life which comes to light among the justified by their freely accepted gift of God through Christ.²

Verse 18: So that one sin of Adam placed the death sentence on all people. But in the same way, Christ did something so good that it makes all people so right with God that they can experience what it really means to live free.

Paul now lays another layer in building his platform of comparing one man’s debilitating effect on humanity and another man’s delivering effect on those who believe in His liberating power. This time, he focuses on the judgment that brought the death sentence on all who were born of Adam, and the eternal life that comes to those born again through Jesus Christ. Paul shared this same message with the Corinthians: “Death comes to people because of what one man did. But now there is resurrection from death because of another man. I mean that in Adam all of us die. And in the same way, in Christ, all of us will be made alive again.”³

Early church Patriarch Cyril of Alexandria gives this explanation of how the human race contracted the disease of sin. He writes: “What has Adam’s guilt got to do with us? Why are we held responsible for his sin when we were not even born when he committed it? Did not God say: ‘The parents will not die for the children, nor the children for the parents, but the soul which has sinned, it shall die?’⁴ How then shall we defend this doctrine? The soul, I say, which has sinned, it shall die. We have become sinners because of Adam’s disobedience in the following manner… After he fell into sin and surrendered to corruption, impure lusts invaded the nature of his flesh, and at the same time, the evil law of our members was born. For our nature contracted the disease of sin because of the disobedience of one man, that is, Adam, and thus many became sinners. This was not because they sinned along with Adam because they did not then exist, but because they had the same nature as Adam, which fell under the law of sin. Thus, just as human nature acquired the weakness of corruption in Adam because of disobedience, and evil desires invaded it, so the same nature was later set free by Christ, who was obedient to God the Father and did not commit sin.”⁵

Here Robert Haldane gives his explanation: “Therefore, or wherefore, then. — There are two words in the original: the one word signifies wherefore, the other signifies then, or consequently. It states the result of what was said. By the offense of one, or by one offense. — Both of these are equally true, but the latter appears to be the design of the Apostle, as the word ‘one’ lacks the article. There is nothing in the original corresponding to the terms judgment and free gift, but they are rightly supplied by an omission from verse 16. Condemnation. — Here it is expressly asserted that all men are condemned in the first offense. Infants, then, are included. If they are condemned, they cannot be innocent — they must be sinners; for condemnation would not have come upon them for a sin that is not theirs. The whole human race came under the condemnation of death in all its extent — spiritual, temporal, and eternal. Even so, — that is, in the same manner. By the righteousness of one, or rather, by one righteousness.”⁶ Haldane is not saying that innocent children die as sinners, but because of sin.

Verse 19: One man disobeyed God, and many became sinners. But in the same way, one man obeyed God, and many will be made right.

Paul lays down one more stratum of proof to show how one bad example led all mankind away from the truth, but how another man’s good example open the door for everyone to follow Him to the truth. After all, Jesus did say: “I am the way, the truth, and the life. The only way to the Father is through me.”⁷ And this was not because Jesus was the first to do this, but that He is the only one who can do it. Paul told the Corinthians: “God made this sinless man be a sin offering on our behalf, so that in union with Him we might fully share in God’s righteousness.”⁸

In a passage of Chrysostom’s sermon on this text, we read his interpretation of how this affects a true believer: “How does it follow that from Adam’s disobedience someone else would become a sinner? For surely, if this were so, such a sinner would not deserve punishment, since his sins would not be his own fault. What then does the word sinners mean here? To me, it seems to mean liable for punishment and condemned to death. Why was this done? Paul does not say because it was not necessary for his argument.… But if you want to know what I think, I would say this: Far from being harmed or condemned, if we think straight, we will see that we have benefited by becoming mortal, first because it is not an immortal body in which we sin, and second because we have countless reasons for living a religious life. For to be moderate, temperate, subdued, and separated from wickedness is what death, by its presence and the fact that we expect it to come persuades us to do. But following on these or even before these, mortality has brought many other blessings besides. For it has made possible the crown of martyrdom… In fact, neither death nor the devil himself can do anything to harm us. Immortality is waiting for us, and after being chastened for a little while we shall enjoy the blessings to come without fear.⁹ This present life is a kind of school, where we are under instruction by means of disease, suffering, temptations, and poverty, as well as other apparent evils, in order to be made fit to receive the blessings of the world to come.”¹⁰

John Bengel has several interesting things to say by beginning with a question, how could the understanding or the will of an upright man have been capable of receiving injury, or of committing an offence? The answer: That understanding and the will simultaneously give way through carelessness. We cannot think of anything else previously existing in man besides carelessness. It illustrates the initial step of a city being taken because of a failure on the part of the guards on watch to be vigilant. Adam was seduced through carelessness and laziness of mind.

Bengel goes on to say that it is one thing for a man to be considered righteous, but it is another thing to be justified. Righteousness must exist as the basis and foundation for justification. We have both the one and the other from Christ, for both the merit of Christ’s satisfaction for sin imputed to man, who himself was unrighteous, obtains the merit by which he is justified.¹¹ This is not something mankind obtains on his own, it only comes through Christ.

Robert Haldane has an interesting way to express his opinion here on what Paul is saying: “So by the obedience of one shall the many be made righteous. — Only a part of mankind is included in that covenant of which Christ is the surety. In consequence of Adam being the covenant-head of all mankind, all are involved in his condemnation; but Christ is not the head of all mankind, but of the Church, and to all but the Church He will say, ‘I never knew you.’ So, — that is, in this way, not in like manner. — It is not in a manner that has merely some likeness, but it is in the very same manner. For although there is a contrast in the things, the one being disobedience, and the other obedience, yet there is a perfect identity in the manner.”¹² In using the term “Church,” Haldane is not referring to any one church here on earth, but the Body of Christ.

Charles Spurgeon remarked in one of his sermons that the wonderful doctrine of “the Gospel of Christ.” was being rejected in his day by people who called it simple, as well as other derogatory terms. But he saw what Paul said in the simplest of terms was this: “As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous.”¹³ And Charles Ellicott sees the word “obedience” to be the key here. He writes: “This term is chosen in contradistinction to the disobedience of Adam. The obedience of Christ was an element in the atonement.¹⁴ But if we interpret St. Paul by himself, we must not see in it the sole element to the exclusion of the ‘redemptive sacrifice.‘¹⁵”¹⁶

Verse 20: The law was brought in so that more people would sin the way Adam did. But even though sin increased, God’s grace increased even greater.

After Paul clearly establishes his dual concept of the first Adam bringing sin and death into God’s creation and countered with the second Adam bringing righteousness and everlasting life to rectify the first Adam’s mistake, he now makes a bold statement. He infers that the law was given to Moses so that sin could be codified and thereby result in more and more of Adam’s descendants sinning the same way he did. So how could this help the situation? Paul says that by so doing God verified beyond any doubt that all mankind could not save themselves because they were hopelessly enslaved by sin. That it would take a special act of God’s grace to rescue them. And the real miracle was that this then proved how great and sufficient God’s grace proved to be.

Paul expressed this same truth to the Corinthians, but in a different form. He wrote: “The old agreement that brought death, written with words on stone, came with God’s glory… So surely the new agreement that comes from the life-giving Spirit has even more glory. This is what I mean: That old agreement judged people guilty of sin, but it had glory. So surely the new agreement that makes people right with God has much greater glory. That old agreement had glory. But it really loses its glory when it is compared to the much greater glory of the new agreement. If the agreement that was brought to an end came with glory, then the agreement that never ends has much greater glory.”¹⁷

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XV)

Scottish theologian Robert Haldane makes this comment about sin and the law: “It is true that there is no sin where there is no law, and that where no law is transgressed there is no death, yet we see that death reigned from Adam to Moses, as well as from Moses to the present time. The conclusion from this is self-evident, and, therefore, the Apostle leaves his readers to draw [this conclusion], – namely, that the human race has always been under law, and have universally been transgressors.”¹ Notwithstanding the obvious, Haldane states that even in Paul’s day there were those who disagreed with the premise that sin preceded the giving of the law. But he points out that this is erroneous thinking. He says there is no strong or striking difference, and, therefore, no contrast between the different methods of promulgating a law, whether a law is made known by being written on the heart or on tablets of stone, it is to the person to whom it comes a matter over which they have no control. This is where the saying is applied: “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

Albert Barnes picks up from where he started on the subject of how sin was not imputed to those who had no law to violate, yet the penalty of death was still imposed on them. In other words, just like Adam, who initiated the plague of sin which results in death and suffered the consequences, so people who did not sin also suffer the same penalty. Why? Barnes asks: “The difference between their case and that of Adam is plain, Adam had a revealed and positive law, and they did not. They had only the law of nature, or of tradition.”² However, since Adam’s sin passed the penalty of death onto all his descendants, they suffered regardless of the fact they had no written law. Although through Noah, God revealed some guidelines, failure to live up to those laws was not the reason they died, it was predetermined because of Adam. God knew this was not fair, that’s why He had already planned to send His Son to undo Adam’s sin so that mankind could once again live eternally.

Jewish scholar David Stein makes this comment: “The Torah came into the picture so that the offense would proliferate (v. 20) — see 3:20, 4:15 and 7:7–25 on this function of the Torah, which non-Messianic Judaism tends to minimize. Where sin proliferated, grace proliferated even more — see 6:1ff. for prophylaxis against misusing this idea to justify sin. Before assessing the doctrine of original sin, we must see what it actually says. Otherwise we will find ourselves dealing with oversimplified abstractions — ‘Judaism says man is a sinner because he sins, Christianity [says] that man sins because he is a sinner,’ ‘Judaism is less concerned with where sin comes from than struggling against it,’ ‘Christianity alone regards sin as fatal; Judaism takes it for a minor illness.’”³

Verse 15: But God’s free gift is not like Adam’s sin. If many people died because of one man’s sin, how much more will be God’s gift by grace through that one man, Jesus Christ, be spread among so many.

Now, the Apostle Paul makes a clear distinction between Adam’s contribution to the human condition and that of Christ’s. Although Adam was made in the image of God in man, Christ was God in man. Jesus did not hesitate to tell Philip: “Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father too.”⁴ That’s why Paul could declare to the Colossians: “He is the visible image of the invisible God. He is supreme over all creation.”⁵

But, Paul also wanted the Jewish leaders in the church at Rome to know that none of this should seem too unnatural for them to understand. After all, did not God say to Isaiah: “My thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not my ways.”⁶ Adam’s sin led to a death sentence upon all mankind, but by the grace of God, Christ’s gift to mankind is eternal life to as many as believe that His death is the payment to satisfy the penalty for their sin. And it was done in the most remarkable way. The writer of Hebrews says: “For a short time Jesus was made lower than the angels, but now we see Him wearing a crown of glory and honor because He suffered and died. Because of God’s grace, Jesus died for everyone.”⁷ This is why it would be foolish to substitute anyone else as the object of our prayers for forgiveness and salvation that Jesus Christ, the One who died and rose again.

Reformer John Calvin makes this point: “Grace means the free goodness of God or gratuitous love, of which He has given us a proof in Christ, that He might relieve our misery: and gift is the fruit of this mercy, and has come to us, even the reconciliation by which we have obtained life and salvation, righteousness, newness of life, and every other blessing.”⁸ Calvin goes on to decry what he calls the absurd teaching on grace in the Catholic seminaries of his day, calling it nothing but a quality infused into the hearts of mankind through the sacraments. Calvin says we must understand that grace is in God, and what is in us is the effect of that grace. He finishes by saying that the Father has made Him the fountain out of whose fullness all must draw. And this teaches us, that not even the least drop of life can be found outside of Christ, — that there is no other remedy for our spiritual poverty and moral needs than what He conveys to us from His own abundance.⁹

John Bengel states that Paul (more than the other apostles, who had seen Him before His passion) gladly and purposely calls Jesus man, in this His work, as man for man.¹⁰ Can the human nature of Christ be excluded from the office of Mediator? No! When Paul in this verse calls Christ man, he does not give that appellation to Adam; and Romans 5:19, where he gives it to Adam, he does not bestow it upon Christ.¹¹ Why? The reason is doubtless this, both Adam and Christ do not affect who and what we are as humans on the same level. Adam rendered himself unworthy of the name of man because of his failure in the Garden. At the same time, it is scarcely sufficient to think of Christ as only man because of His obedience to the Father. Moreover, Christ is generally thought of as Divine when it comes to His taking us back to God;¹² He is mostly considered human when referred to as coming to save us, and the protection which He affords us, against our enemies.¹³ Bengel makes the point that no mention is made here by Paul of the Mother of God; and if her conception was necessarily immaculate, she must have had no father, but only a mother, like Him, to whom she gave birth.¹⁴

Robert Haldane has this to say on the comparison between Adam and Christ: “There is a likeness between the sin of Adam and the gift of righteousness by Christ. But, as in most instances with regard to types, the antitype surpasses the type; and while in some respects the type furnishes a likeness, in others it may be very dissimilar. The sin of Adam involved all his posterity in guilt and ruin, as they were all created in him as their head, and consequently in him are guilty by his disobedience. This was a shadow of the gift of righteousness by grace. All Christ’s seed were created in Him,¹⁵ and are righteous by His obedience. But while the one was a type of the other in this respect, there is a great dissimilarity both as to the degree of the evil and of the blessing. The evil brought death, but the blessing not only recovered from ruin but abounded to unspeakable happiness.”¹⁶

Verse 16: Adam sinned one time and was judged guilty. But the gift of God is different. His free gift came after many sins, and it makes people right with Him.

Paul continues his comparison between Adam and Jesus and focuses on how God’s grace increased through Christ. After the Garden of Eden couple disobeyed God and ate of the forbidden tree, it was deemed a sin because it violated God’s command. When the Most High came down to talk with them and noticed that they were hiding, only to be told by Adam that they didn’t want Him to see them naked.¹⁷ But God did not say, “Oh, it’s alright! That’s your first mistake, so I’ll give you another chance.” No! After just one sin, the dream of paradise came to a painful and embarrassing end. This “one ends all” concept was then placed in the law. We see this in the Apostle James’ explanation to his readers: “You might follow all of God’s law. But if you fail to obey only one command, you are guilty of breaking all the commands in that law.”¹⁸

Paul is more or less trying to convince the Jewish leaders of the church in Rome of their foolishness in suggesting that as believers in Christ they still must continue living under the law. Couldn’t they see that God’s grace is higher, deeper, longer, wider and more powerful than the law? This was not a case of God changing His mind, we find such grace already expressed in Isaiah: “’Come now,’ says Adonai, ‘let’s talk this over together. Even if your sins are like scarlet, they will be white as snow; even if they are red as crimson, they will be like wool.’”¹⁹

Jesus also evinced such compassion while having a meal at Simon the Pharisee’s house, after a known prostitute came and anointed Jesus’ feet with expensive perfume and dried them with her hair. The self-righteous Pharisees objected vigorously, but Jesus had this message of grace for them: “I tell you, her sins are many, but they will be forgiven. This is clear because she showed great love. People who are forgiven only a little will love only a little.”²⁰ So, God’s grace is not cheap or given indiscriminately, but extended to all those who love God and accept Jesus the Christ as their Lord and Savior. No matter how many the sins may be that need forgiving, there will be sufficient grace to cover them all.

Early church scholar Theodore reiterates his earlier point: “There is one great difference between Adam’s sin and God’s gift in Christ. Adam’s sin brought punishment on all those who came after him, and so they died. But the free gift is different. For not only did it take effect in the case of those who came afterward; it also took away the sins of those who had gone before. It is therefore much greater because where sin harmed those who came after, grace rescued not only those who came after but those who had transgressed before as well.”²¹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER FIVE (Lesson XIV)

Albert Barnes comments on the fact that until the law came, it was difficult to define sin since sin is failing to keep the law. Says Barnes: “This is a self-evident proposition, for sin is a violation of law; and if there is no law, there can be no wrong. Assuming this as a self-evident proposition, the connection is, that there must have been a law of some kind; a ‘law written on their hearts,’ since sin was in the world, and people could not be charged with sin, or treated as sinners unless there was some law. The passage here states a great and important principle that people will not be held to be guilty unless there is a law which binds them of which they are apprised, and which they voluntarily transgress. This verse, therefore, meets an objection that might be started from what had been said in Romans 4:15. The Apostle had affirmed that ‘where no law is there is no transgression.’ He here stated that all were sinners.”¹

There is a longstanding tradition among the Jews that Noah was given seven laws by which he and his family were to live, and became known as the Noahic Laws. They were:

          Do not deny God.

          Do not blaspheme God.

          Do not murder.

          Do not engage in illicit sexual relations.

          Do not steal.

          Do not eat from a live animal.

          Establish a legal system to ensure obedience to these laws.

We find some of these promulgated in Genesis Chapter 9. They were also included in the Book of Jubilees 7:20-28. It is also believed that these were referred to by the Council in Jerusalem that met with Paul.² Also, in the Babylonian Talmud, they are also enumerated.³ So it is clear, that the descendants of Noah knew God had established laws for living righteously long before they were given to Moses. After Noah’s son Shem migrated to what would be come known as Mesopotamia, this is where Abraham was born and grew up some 400 years later. It was here that several kings arose and began to rule over the Shemites, later to be better known as Semites. Their laws given by the God they worshiped were developed and written for all to hear and learn right from wrong.⁴ So Paul was right, before the laws given to Moses some became the law of Israel some 430 years later, people already knew what God approved of what He did not.

Charles Hodge makes this distinction that just as we are justified by the righteousness of Christ as something outside ourselves, so we are condemned for the sin of Adam as something outside ourselves. So it makes even clearer the compassion of God on mankind having been betrayed by Adam in the garden by sending His Son to be faithful to His calling and thereby saved from the destruction that resulted from Adam’s sin.⁵

F. F. Bruce comments on the effect of sin on humanity: “Once sin gained an entrance into the human family, death followed. The sentence on Adam, ‘From the day you eat of it you’re destined to die,’⁶ was executed on his descendants, even though, until the law was given, there was no positive commandment for them to break as there had been for Adam. Yet sin was all-pervasive, and mortal in its effect, even in the absence of any positive commandment with a penalty attached. Sin manifests itself in the form of specific transgressions when there are specific commandments to be transgressed. Later Jewish tradition regarded the seven commandments [given] to Noah in Genesis 9:1–7 as binding on all the Gentiles. Paul makes no reference to them. But the oldest form of the tradition recognized that six of them were already creation ordinances (the only new one being the ban on eating flesh with blood in it); and in Paul’s eyes it was in disobedience to the creation ordinances that the death-deserving ungodliness of the pagan world consisted.⁷”⁸

Verse 14: But from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, everyone was condemned to die. Adam died because he sinned by not obeying God’s command. But even those who did not sin that same way had to die. That one man, Adam, was a type of Christ, the one who was coming in the future.

Now that Paul makes his point about the presence of sin, he proceeds to show why what Cain and the people of Sodom did was considered sinful, even though there was no published law against it. And the main reason was that God’s punishment for sin was death, and death has been present in the world since Adam.⁹ This truth led the writer of Hebrews to say: “Every person has an appointment with death.”¹⁰ So, even without sin being clearly documented in the lives of many of those who died, nevertheless, they suffered the penalty of sin, death, including those innocent Hebrew infants who were thrown into the Nile for no reason.¹¹

Paul ends this verse by saying that Adam served as a type that was a sign of a second Adam to come who would reverse all the wrong that Adam did by doing the right that God intended for Adam to do. In other words, Adam was disobedient, Christ was obedient; Adam sinned, Christ was sinless; Adam brought death, Christ brought life.

One of the earliest church scholars gives his interpretation of what Paul is saying here: “Paul called Adam ‘the type of the one who was to come’ because the Word, the Maker of all things, had formed beforehand for Himself the future dispensation of the human race, in union with the Son of God. God predestined that the first man should be of an animal nature with this in view, that he might be saved in the spiritual nature. For since the Word had preexistence as a saving being, it was necessary that what might be saved should also be called into existence, in order that the being who saves should not exist in vain.”¹²

Then Diodore, the Bishop of Paul’s hometown of Tarsus, makes this point: “Adam was a type of Christ not with respect to his sin or his righteousness – in this respect the two men were opposites – but with respect to the effects of what he did. For just as Adam’s sin spread to all men, so Christ’s life also spread to all men. Adam was also a type of Christ in another respect. For just as he was the head of Eve, in that he was her husband, so also Christ, being its bridegroom, is the head of the church.”¹³

John Calvin says on this subject: “But in saying that Adam bore a resemblance to Christ, there is nothing inappropriate; for some likeness often appears in things wholly contrary. As then we are all lost through Adam’s sin, so we are restored through Christ’s righteousness: hence he calls Adam not inaptly the type of Christ. But observe, that Adam is not, said to be the type of sin, nor Christ the type of righteousness, as though they led the way only by their example, but that the one is contrasted with the other.”¹⁴

John Bengel makes the point that just as Adam, when he transgressed the law, died, in like manner also they died who did not transgress, or rather, who did not sin. This is the conclusion: That men died before the law was given is a thing which befell them on account of the similitude of Adam’s transgression. Because the ground on which they stood, and on which Adam stood, [their footing and that of Adam] was one and the same: – they died on account of another guilt, not on account of that, which they themselves had contracted, namely, the guilt which had been contracted by Adam. In fact, the death of many is ascribed directly to the fall of one person.¹⁵ Thus it is not denied, that death is the wages of any sin whatever, but it is proved, that the primary cause of death was the first sin. It is this fact, which has brought us to destruction.¹⁶

Bengel then goes on to say that just as that man [Adam] has become the source of death, which was brought in by the eating of the forbidden fruit, to those descended from him, although they had not eaten of the fruit of that tree, so also Christ has become the provider of righteousness to those belonging to Him, although they have not performed what is righteous; and this righteousness He has freely bestowed upon us all by the cross; therefore IN EVERY DIRECTION AND ON ALL OCCASIONS he maintains this One thing, and perpetually brings it into view. We may further add; as the sin of Adam, independently of the sins, which we afterwards committed, brought death upon us, so the righteousness of Christ, independently of good works, which are afterwards performed by us, procures for us life; nevertheless, as every sin receives its appropriate punishment, so every good action receives a suitable reward.¹⁷

Adam Clarke renders his thoughts this way: “Through him [Adam], as its spring and fountain, sin became diffused through the world, so that every human comes into the world with sinful propensities: for by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all people.¹⁸ Through Christ, as its spring and fountain, righteousness becomes diffused through the earth; so that every human is made partaker of a principle of grace and truth; for He is the true light that lights every one that comes into the world.¹⁹”²⁰

William Blake, English poet, painter, and visual artistry pioneer (1757–1827), wrote this proverb in one of his books: “The eagle never lost so much time as when he submitted to learn from the crow.”¹

The lesson is elementary. The eagle is much stronger, can fly higher, and is considered a more advanced species in the bird world. Trying to copy the habits of a crow would lessen its ability to find food and defend itself against predators.

In the spiritual world, we see a comparison. The prophet Isaiah said that those who wait upon the Lord will be renewed in strength so they can fly as high as an eagle.² So it seems just as inadvisable for a child of God to seek counsel on how to cope with life’s moral and ethical challenges from people who have never been born again and are spiritually dead inside. So why do we see so many Christians today imitating the lifestyle habits and moral attitudes of the world? God has given believers the Holy Spirit to be their guide and comforter to take them higher.

The Apostle Paul put it quite succinctly: “Be not conformed to this world: but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”³ You were reborn to fly like an eagle toward the heavens.⁴ Don’t try to imitate the world, so you feel like you belong more down here than you do up there.⁵ – Dr. Robert R Seyda