Comparisons in Romans 5:15-21
5:15–17 Verses 15–21 contain six comparisons between Adam and the result of his sin and Jesus and the result of his redemptive work. Verses 15 and 17 follow the pattern, “If A, how much more B.” Verse 16 uses the negative form, “A is not like B.” Verses 18, 19, 21 follow the pattern, “Just as A, so also B.”
The paragraph opens with the assertion that “the gift is not like the trespass.”134 God’s act of grace was out of all proportion to the offense of Adam.135 Then comes the “If A, how much more B.” The conditional premise (accepted as true) is that “many died by the trespass 136 of the one man.” The Greek term translated “the many”137 should be taken in the inclusive sense of its Hebrew counterpart to mean “all” (who are, in fact, many). Adam’s sin led to the death of the entire human race. Since that is so, what should be said about the gift of God given freely in Jesus Christ? “How much more” indicates that its effect is vastly greater for all humans.138 “God’s grace is infinitely greater for good than Adam’s sin is for evil.”139 Although sin extends to all who are in Adam (and all are by birth), the grace of God transforms for eternity the life and destiny of all who are in Christ (and all who turn to him in faith are).
Although v. 15 shows that “the gift is not like the trespass,” v. 16 teaches that the result of “the gift … is not like the result of the [trespass].” The comparison takes the form of “A is not like B.” Adam’s one sin was followed by judgment and brought condemnation. The many trespasses (of all who stem from Adam) was followed by the gift that brought justification. “A” is the story of divine reconciliation through the obedience of the second man, Christ. “B” is the story of humankind’s fall from God’s favor through the disobedience of the first man, Adam. “A is not like B.” What people did was to rebel; what God did was to restore.
Verse 17 supplies the second “If A, how much more B.” “A” is the premise (accepted as true) that the reign of death was set into motion by the sin of the one man.140 Sin, with death as its consequence, entered the world through Adam (5:12). Since that is true, how much more will those receiving the abundant grace of God and his gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ (“B”).141 The future tense of the verb probably points to a time yet to come when believers will join with Jesus Christ in his reign (cf. 2 Tim 2:12; Rev 22:5). It is possible, however, to understand the reign as the present experience of believers who have already passed from death unto life (cf. John 5:24). If the sin of one man caused death to reign, the obedience of one man brings triumph over death to all who believe.
5:18–19 Paul returned to the comparison he began in v. 12 but never finished. His comparison takes the “Just as A, so also B” form. The contrasting elements are clearly set over against one another:
“One trespass”—“One act of righteousness”
“Condemnation”—“Justification”
“All men [in Adam]”—“All men [in Christ]”
Just as the one sin of Adam brought condemnation,142 so also did the one righteous act of Christ bring justification.143 Just as condemnation spread to all, so also is the divine acquittal offered to all. Paul did not intend to imply that the result of Christ’s atoning work automatically provided justification for all regardless of their willingness to accept it. Universal salvation is not taught in this text.144 Context indicates that Paul was comparing the fate of those who are in Adam (the position of all by virtue of their birth into the human race) and the blessings of those who are in Christ (the position of all who have responded in faith).
Paul’s final contrast was between the disobedience of Adam and the obedience of Christ (v. 19). By the disobedience of the first man the entire race was constituted sinners. But by the obedience 145 of the second man “the many will be made righteous.” As in v. 15 we are to understand “the many” in terms of all who are in Adam (everyone who is born into the human family) and all who are in Christ (everyone who has been born into the family of God by faith in Christ). The righteousness of which Paul spoke is a right standing before God (cf. 2 Cor 5:21). It is imputed by God as a result of faith. Righteousness as conduct (sanctification) is dealt with in chaps. 6–8. Growth in holiness is the proof that righteousness by faith has in fact been imputed. By definition, life is growth. Where there is no growth, there is no life.
5:20–21 If righteousness is by faith, it is reasonable to ask where law fits into the picture. After all, God gave the Israelites an extended code of legislation with the expectation that it would guide their life and conduct. The answer is that law was brought in so that the offense might increase.146 Law actually makes wrongdoing all the worse. Law was “slipped in” says Moffatt, “to aggravate the trespass.” 147 Later Paul would write that apart from the law we would not have known the nature of sin (Rom 7:7; cf. Gal 3:19). The law was never intended to provide salvation but to convince people of their need for it. Law increased sin. That is the sad story of humanity estranged from God. But where sin increased, “grace increased all the more” (v. 20). God lavished his grace upon us beyond all measure. His grace exceeded immeasurably the extent of human sin. Only by understanding the depths of human degradation can we hope to grasp, even in part, the surpassing wonder of divine forgiveness.
Grace “super-abounded”148 in that as the reign of sin brought death, the reign of grace brings a righteousness that issues in life eternal. Death is the fate of all who follow sin as master. Eternal life is the destiny of those whose allegiance is to Christ. A right standing before God is a gift offered freely by God to all who will respond in faith. It is life eternal. Death—eternal separation from God, who alone possesses life immortal—is the self-inflicted penalty for pursuing sin rather than accepting salvation.
Mounce, Robert H. Romans. Vol. 27. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995. Print. The New American Commentary.
Comments