Romans 5:18-19 - "All"

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Pastor Larry, Dec 29, 2001.

  1. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Imputation of Sin and Righteousness
    Romans 5:18-19

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Paul’s purpose is to draw the parallel between Adam and Christ, and show the security of righteousness in Christ. V. 18 completes the thought begun in v. 12 that was interrupted by a digression. V. 19 probably elaborates on v. 18, clarifying the same basic truth.

    The difference between v. 18 and v. 19

    1. The initiating acts of Adam and Christ: Transgression/Righteousness vs. disobedience/obedience – a “destiny determining action”—Moo; The first half of each verse focuses on the sin (v. 18, 12, 15,17); the second half focuses on the aspect of obedience. The contrast is the obedience of Christ (Phil 2:8).

    2. The results: condemnation/were made sinners vs. justification of life/will be made righteous. The emphasis is on the forensic nature of the word. To be “righteous” is to be judged acquitted, cleared. It is a legal term, not a moral one. The justification is that that results in life. It is not merely the restoration to neutrality, a state that never existed. (Man was never neutral toward God [Rom 3:10-17; Eph 2:1-3].)

    Death is not ascribed to the individual’s acts but to Adam’s; so righteousness is not ascribed to the individual’s acts but to Christ.

    Who will be made sinners? All who are in Adam (all humanity).

    Sin is not ascribed to simply imitating Adam’s acts (as Pelagius [c. 360-420]) taught. He denied original sin. He saw “sin basically as an outward act transgressing the law and regarded man as free to sin or desist from sin” (EDT, p. 1013). He would hold that people were sinners by imitating Adam (cf. Schreiner). He asserted that man cooperated with God in salvation. Grace was “purely an external aid provided by God, … the free will itself or the revelation of God’s law through reason, instructing us in what we should do and holding out to us eternal sanctions … This grace is offered equally to all … By merit alone men advance in holiness. God’s predestination operates according to the quality of the lives God foresees men will lead” (EDT, p. 834). For him sin was not inborn; it was the choice of man because of his surroundings that could theoretically be resisted. This was condemned in 431 at the council of Ephesus. His most famous opponent was Augustine, the bishop of Hippo, whom Pelagius met in 410 after fleeing from Rome.

    In contrast the biblical picture of sin is “not just a transgression of the law but a debilitating ongoing state of enmity with God” (EDT, p. 1012). If Pelagius’ view were correct, then “Paul could scarcely say that all people are condemned and destined to die by virtue of Adam’s sin if human being sin merely by imitating what Adam had done. … People would die solely because of their own sin, not Adam’s, and bringing Adam into the equation would be extraneous to the topic at hand” (Schreiner, p. 289).

    This is the doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s sin. Scripture teaches a federal headship vs. a seminal headship. We are sinners because Adam, as the head of the human race, sinned. We can be made righteous because Christ as the head of the human race (the second Adam) was righteous. Just as people are sinners in solidarity with Adam, so they become righteous in solidarity with Christ.

    Who will be made righteous?
    Universalism – Same all as in Adam. This would contradict Paul’s teaching elsewhere.

    Potential – Christ provided the basis for justification (Christ won the sentence of justification for all and it is now freely offered to all who will receive the gift [Moo’s explanation in rebuttal]). However, "justification" is never used of the atonement in Paul; it is always used of the status actually conferred on the individual. Furthermore, the point of the passage is that justification can be as sure as condemnation, some hardly compatible with “possibility.”

    Actual – “Paul’s point is not so much that the groups affected by Christ and Adam, respectively, are coextensive, but that Christ affects those who are his just as certainly as Adam does those who are his” (Moo, p. 343).

    The all who are made righteous are clearly qualified in the context by v. 17 (For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)

    Conclusion:
    The one is contrasted with the many.
    Sin and righteous are completely removed from human instrumentation.
    Just as sin is sure in Adam, so righteousness is sure in Christ.

    I post this to address the fallacy that the "all"s in v. 18 is not "all" without distinction. It is "all" who are in Adam (which is everyone) and "all" who are in Christ (which is those who are saved). To use this passage to argue for "available righteousness" through Christ is contrary to the words Paul uses (justification) and the argument Paul makes (just as sin is sure for those in Adam, so righteousness is sure for those who are in Christ). The point is the modus operandi -- namely imputation.
     
  2. S. Baptist

    S. Baptist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2001
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
    The Imputation of Sin and Righteousness
    Romans 5:18-19

    This is the doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s sin. Scripture teaches a federal headship vs. a seminal headship. We are sinners because Adam, as the head of the human race, sinned. We can be made righteous because Christ as the head of the human race (the second Adam) was righteous. Just as people are sinners in solidarity with Adam, so they become righteous in solidarity with Christ.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    God said the "SON" would not be held responsible for the sins of the "Father".

    Will "I" have to answer for "ADAM'S SIN", or just my "OWN SIN"???

    Think about it.

    What was the sin Adam committed???

    Was he given a "CHOICE"???
     
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Baptist:
    God said the "SON" would not be held responsible for the sins of the "Father".

    Will "I" have to answer for "ADAM'S SIN", or just my "OWN SIN"???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    I will go with the text on this one and say you are guilty because of Adam's sin. We sinned in Adam. As the federal head of the human race, we sinned in him. Therefore we are guilty because of his sin.

    One of the problems in this debate is that people such as you have their minds made up about what is fair and what is not and refuse to let Scripture be the final authority. The text says what it does. It is up to us to subject our beliefs to it.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What was the sin Adam committed???

    Was he given a "CHOICE"???
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The sin was eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It was the only thing he was responsible for. Was he give a "choice"? Sure.
     
  4. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    5,145
    Likes Received:
    25
    My opinion of "all" in the broad context of the book of Romans is not "all" the totality of the human race, but "all" without distinction of race or nationality. For example: 1:16 - everyone that believeth, whether Jew or Greek; 2:10 - every man whether Jew or Gentile; 3:9 - all under sin, both Jews and Gentiles; 3:29 - God is God of all, Jews and Gentiles; 10:11,12 - whosoever whether Jew or Greek; etc. In other words there is no difference whether one or the other, it is the same for "all" of these groups. This theme runs throughout Romans and must be given consideration. Then within that broad context, one must interpret the "all" in its immediate context as Pastor Larry has done in his first post with Romans 5 - all in Adam vs. all in Christ.
     
  5. Eric B

    Eric B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2001
    Messages:
    4,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    One of the big problems in the debate is that people assume Arminianism is exactly the same as Pelagianism, and then they don't even allow that all non-calvinists don't even follow Arminius. While Pelagius was definitely wrong, and some revivalist types like C. Finney said alot of the same things Pelagius did, most non-calvinists today don't believe that there is no sin carried over from Adam. But as always, it is in the interpretation of Biblical terms. We belive that we received a sin nature from Adam that causes us to sin, and that we cannot overcome/override/counter/ etc. through any works we do, but only through faith in the finished work of Christ. We don't simply "imitate" Adam, but this sin runs thoughout the very fabric of our being. The nature causes us to run from God and His ways, but does not mean that noone can ever respond. It's like the drug addict analogy that is often brought up. He can't fix his problem, but He can still call out for help. The Calvinists use this "in Adam" concept to try to justify their position that God punishes those who are in reality helpless to not have sinned, or to trepent of it. On another board, I even debated those who used this to claim that the stillborn, aborted, etc. are divided into "elect" and "reprobated to Hell", sin they "sinned in Adam". So as I say on my page, "But this is almost like God sees it as if our minds/souls were consciously present in Adam and made the choice for/with him? But does anyone remember consciously making this choice? No, but we shall be consciously punished for it! This would make sense in an Origenic framework which held that all men preexisted, and that all fell from this state except for Christ. But we can begin to see that this is basically putting man on God's level (as much as Arminianism is accused of that)! In other words, man is more than a frail creature born into time. an transcends our world of time just as God does, so he can be judged on his level.
    People forget that God "knows our frame; that we are dust" (Psalms 103:14)"
    Sin is both a nature, as well as individual acts. But the Bible is clear that it is these acts that condemn us:
    What Romans 5...doesn't distinguish "original sin" from sin as individual acts. We received from "one man", Adam our sin nature. This causes us to break God's law. The breaking of God's law then brings us death, but "one man", Christ brings us life. I don't see two sets of penalties: 1)one for "Adam's sin" apart from 2) our own sins. One leads to the other, so it is one penalty. Original sin is what causes actual sin. The Law we are condemned for violating condemns us for actual sins, (killing, lying, etc.). It does not say "Thou shalt not have a nature that makes you sin", it just says don't sin.
    One important scripture is Rev. 20:12,13, a picture of the actual judgement to Hell. Here, we clearly see that people are judged by their WORKS, not their condition. A lot of the problem is overgeneralization. We know we are not saved by works, but rather the condition of Righteousness imputed to us from Christ, so we also think people must not be condemned by works either, but rather the imputation of sin from Adam. But it is not that symmetrical. The Bible clearly says condemned by works; saved by grace."
     
  6. trueliberty

    trueliberty
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2001
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Post deleted due to apparent irrelevance to the topic.

    [ January 04, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     

Share This Page

Loading...