Romans 5:14 Komentář

The apostle, having made good his point, and fully proved justification by faith, in this chapter proceeds in the explication, illustration, and application of that truth. I. He shows the fruits of justification (Rom 5:1-5). II. He shows the fountain and foundation of justification in the death of Jesus Christ, which he discourses of at large in the rest of the chapter.

INTRODUCTION TO ROMANS 5 The Apostle having clearly stated, and fully proved the doctrine of justification by the righteousness of faith, proceeds to observe the comfortable fruits and effects of this great blessing, known and enjoyed by the believer; as also the source and spring of it, the love of God, which appears in the death of Christ, in the room and stead of his people, which is the foundation on which it stands; and likewise gives an illustration of this benefit, by comparing the two heads, Adam and Christ, together. The first fruit and effect of justification, as a benefit perceived and enjoyed by faith, is peace with God through Christ, Rom 5:1. The next is access through the Mediator to the throne of grace, where justified ones stand with a holy boldness and confidence, and the third is a cheerful hope of eternal glory, Rom 5:2, yea, such not only have joy in the hope of what is to come, but glory even in present afflictions; which prevents an objection that might be made to the above mentioned fruits and effects of justification, taken from the tribulations which saints are exercised with: and what occasions glorying even in these, is the sanctified use, or happy produce of afflictions, these being the means of exercising and increasing patience; by means of which a larger experience of divine things is gained; and through that, hope is confirmed, and all influenced by a plenteous discovery of the love of God to the soul, by the Spirit, Rom 5:4, an instance of which love is given, Rom 5:6, in Christ's dying for men; which love is enhanced by the character and condition of the persons for whom Christ died, being ungodly, and without strength; and by the time of it, being due time: then follows a further illustration of this love, by comparing it with what instances of love are to be found among men, Rom 5:7, by which it appears to be unparalleled; since scarcely for a righteous man, peradventure for a good man, one would die, yet no man dies for the ungodly, as Christ did: hence as his, so his Father's love is highly commended, by giving him up to death for persons while in such a state and condition, and under such a character, Rom 5:8, and justification now springing from this love, and being founded on the death of Christ, hence follow a security from wrath to come, Rom 5:9, a certainty of salvation, Rom 5:10, which is strongly argued from the different characters those Christ died for bear, before and after reconciliation, and from the death to the life of Christ, Rom 5:10, and also a rejoicing and glorying: in God through Christ, full expiation being made by his blood for sin, and this received by faith, Rom 5:11, and then the apostle proceeds to compare the two heads, Adam and Christ, together; the design of which is to show the largeness and freeness of the love and grace of God; how righteousness for justification comes by Christ; and how the persons, before described as sinners and ungodly, came to be in such a condition; and that is through the sin of the first man, in whom they all were, and in whom they all sinned and died, Rom 5:12, wherefore there must be a law before the law of Moses, or there could have been no sin, Rom 5:13, but that sin was in being, and was reckoned and imputed to the posterity of Adam, is clear from this single instance, death's power even over infants, from the times of Adam to Moses, Rom 5:14 who therefore must be a public head, representing all his posterity; so that they were involved in the guilt of his sin, which brought death upon them; and in this he was a type of Christ, as is asserted in the same verse; that so as Adam was but one, and by one sin of his conveyed death to all his seed; so Christ, the Mediator, is but one, and by his one obedience conveys righteousness and, life to all his seed: and yet in some things there is a dissimilitude; sin and death, through the first man, are conveyed in a natural way to his offspring, but righteousness and life from Christ in a way of grace, Rom 5:15, It was one offence of Adam's, which brought condemnation and death upon all his posterity; but the righteousness of Christ is not only a justification of his seed from that one offence, but from all others, Rom 5:16, the one is unto death, the other unto life; and greater is the efficacy in the one to quicken, than in the other to kill, Rom 5:17, where a repetition is made of what is said in Rom 5:15, with an explanation, and the similitude between the two heads is clearly expressed, Rom 5:18, where condemnation on account of the sin of Adam, and justification through the righteousness of Christ, are opposed to each other; and both as extending to the whole of their several respective offspring, condemnation through Adam's offence to all his natural seed, and justification of life through Christ's righteousness to all his spiritual seed; which is still more fitly and clearly expressed in Rom 5:19, where the way and manner in which the one become sinners, and the other righteous, is plainly directed to; that it is, by the imputation of Adam's disobedience to the one, and by the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the other: in Rom 5:20, an objection is obviated, which might be formed thus; if justification is by the grace of God, and through the obedience and righteousness of Christ, then the law is of no use; what purpose does that serve? what occasion was there for its entrance? The apostle replies, that though justification is not by it, yet a good end is answered by its entrance; for hereby sin is more known to be what it is, both original and actual; and the grace of God appears more abundant in justification from it, and in the pardon of it; and this grace is further illustrated in Rom 5:21, by comparing sin and grace together, and the different effects of their empire over the sons of men; the one reigning unto death, the other reigning through righteousness to eternal life by Christ.

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,.... Though the law of Moses was not yet given, death exerted itself, and extended its dominion over all the sons and daughters of Adam, during the interval between Adam and Moses; which clearly shows that sin was in the world, and that there must be a law in being, which that was a transgression of: death is represented as a king, as sin and Satan sometimes are; and indeed, death reigns by sin, and Satan both by sin and death; their empires rise, stand, and fall together. So Bildad calls death "the king of terrors", Job 18:14; and a very formidable and powerful king he is; his dominion is very large, his power uncontrollable, and the dread of him very great, especially to Christless sinners. The Jews say (b), that at the resurrection the world will be renewed, and will not be as at the first, when , "death reigned in the world"; referring to the same period of time the apostle here does. The subjects of his government were not only adult persons, who had been guilty of many actual transgressions, but he reigned even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. This does not exclude the dominion of death over such who had sinned after the likeness of Adam, but rather confirms its power over them; nor does it intend adult Gentiles, who did not sin in the same manner, nor against the same law, as Adam did; but it designs infants, not yet guilty of actual sin; and therefore since death reigns over them, who only holds and exercises his dominion by virtue of sin, it follows, that they must have original sin in them; the guilt of Adam's transgression must be imputed to them, and the corruption of nature, from him, derived unto them, or it could not reign over them. A child of a year old, the Jewish doctors (c) say, has not tasted the taste of sin, that is, has not committed actual sin; and observe (d), that young children die on account of the sins of their parents: but the true reason of their dying is here suggested by the apostle; which is the transgression of Adam: who is the figure of him that was to come; meaning, either his posterity that were to come out of his loins, whose figure, type, and representative he was; or rather Christ, who is sometimes called , "he that was to come"; and the Arabic version reads the words thus, "who was a type of Adam that was expected"; that is, of Christ the second Adam, that was expected to come, according to the promise and prophecy: of him the first Adam was a type, in his human nature, in the formation and quality of it; as the first Adam was made by God of the virgin earth, the second Adam was born of a virgin; as the first, so the second Adam was pure, holy, upright, and wise; in his office, as Lord of the world, head of the woman, priest in his house, and prophet to his posterity; in his marriage with Eve, a figure of the church; but in nothing more clearly than in his being a covenant head to all his offspring: and this is what the apostle chiefly designs, since he runs the parallel between them on this account in the following verses; showing, that as the one conveyed sin and death to all his seed, so the other communicates righteousness and life to all that belong to him. So the Jews say (e), that by Adam is intimated the righteous branch, the Messiah; and that , "the secret of Adam is the secret of the Messiah". (b) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 96. 1. (c) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 22. 2. (d) Massecheth Calah, fol. 17. 2. (e) R. Abraham Seba, Tzeror Hammor, fol. 2. 3. & 3. 1.

For it was incumbent upon the Mediator between God and men, by His relationship to both, to bring both to friendship and concord, and present man to God, while He revealed God to man. For, in what way could we be partaken of the adoption of sons, unless we had received from Him through the Son that fellowship which refers to Himself, unless His Word, having been made flesh, had entered into communion with us? Wherefore also He passed through every stage of life, restoring to all communion with God. Those, therefore, who assert that He appeared putatively, and was neither born in the flesh nor truly made man, are as yet under the old condemnation, holding out patronage to sin; for, by their showing, death has not been vanquished, which "reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression."

But the law coming, which was given by Moses, and testifying of sin that it is a sinner, did truly take away his (death’s) kingdom, showing that he was no king, but a robber; and it revealed him as a murderer. It laid, however, a weighty burden upon man, who had sin in himself, showing that he was liable to death. For as the law was spiritual, it merely made sin to stand out in relief, but did not destroy it. For sin had no dominion over the spirit, but over man. For it behoved Him who was to destroy sin, and redeem man under the power of death, that He should Himself be made that very same thing which he was, that is, man; who had been drawn by sin into bondage, but was held by death, so that sin should be destroyed by man, and man should go forth from death.

Wherefore Luke points out that the pedigree which traces the generation of our Lord back to Adam contains seventy-two generations, connecting the end with the beginning, and implying that it is He who has summed up in Himself all nations dispersed from Adam downwards, and all languages and generations of men, together with Adam himself. Hence also was Adam himself termed by Paul “the figure of Him that was to come,” because the Word, the Maker of all things, had formed beforehand for Himself the future dispensation of the human race, connected with the Son of God; God having predestined that the first man should be of an animal nature, with this view, that he might be saved by the spiritual One. For inasmuch as He had a pre-existence 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.

When, therefore, according to these (heretics), the entire world and super-mundane entities were finished, and (when) nothing exists labouring under deficiency, there still remains in the (conglomeration of) all germs the third Sonship, which had been left behind in the Seed to confer benefits and receive them. And it must needs be that the Sonship which had been left behind ought likewise to be revealed and reinstated above. And His place should be above the Conterminous Spirit, near the refined and imitative Sonship and the Non-Existent One. But this would be in accordance with what has been written, he says: "And the creation itself groaneth together, and travaileth in pain together, waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God." Now, we who are spiritual are sons, he says, who have been left here to arrange, and mould, and rectify, and complete the souls which, according to nature, are so constituted as to continue in this quarter of the universe. "Sin, then, reigned from Adam unto Moses," as it has been written. For the Great Archon exercised dominion and possesses an empire with limits extending as far as the firmament. And He imagines Himself alone to be God, and that there exists nothing above Him, for (the reason that) all things have been guarded by unrevealed Siope. This, he says, is the mystery which has not been made known to former generations; but in those days the Great Archon, the Ogdoad, was King and Lord, as it seemed, of the universe. But (in reality) the Hebdomad was king and lord of this quarter of the universe, and the Ogdoad is Arrhetus, whereas the Hebdomad is Rhetus. This, he says, is the Archon of the Hebdomad, who has spoken to Moses, and says: "I am the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and I have not manifested unto them the name of God" (for so they wish that it had been written)-that is, the God, Arrhetus, Archon of the Ogdoad. All the prophets, therefore, who were before the Saviour uttered their predictions, he says, from this source (of inspiration). Since, therefore, it was requisite, he says, that we should be revealed as the children of God, in expectation of whose manifestation, he says, the creation habitually groans and travails in pain, the Gospel came into the world, and passed through every Principality, and Power, and Dominion, and every Name that is named. And (the Gospel) came in reality, though nothing descended from above; nor did the blessed Sonship retire from that Inconceivable, and Blessed, (and) Non-Existent God. Nay, (far from it;) for as Indian naphtha, when lighted merely from a considerably long distance, nevertheless attracts fire (towards it), so from below, from the formlessness of the conglomeration (of all germs), the powers pass upwards as far as the Sonship. For, according to the illustration of the Indian naphtha, the Son of the Great Archon of the Ogdoad, as if he were some (sort of) naphtha, apprehends and seizes conceptions from the Blessed Sonship, whose place of habitation is situated after that of the Conterminous (Spirit). For the power of the Sonship which is in the midst of the Holy Spirit, (that is,) in, the midst of the (Conterminous) Spirit, shares the flowing and rushing thoughts of the Sonship with the Son of the Great Archon.

It seems to me that Paul’s description of death and its power may be compared to the entry of a tyrant who wants to usurp the authority of the legitimate ruler and after seizing the entrance to the kingdom by the treachery of the gatekeeper then tries to get public opinion on his side. To a great extent he succeeds in this and can therefore claim that the kingdom belongs to him. It was during the rule of this tyrant that Moses, a leader chosen by the legitimate ruler, was sent to the occupied peoples in order to revoke the laws of the civil administration and teach them to follow the laws of the true king.… This leader did all he could to deliver at least some people from the control of sin and death, and in the end he managed to form a nation composed of those who chose to associate with him. At the command of the king, he instituted sacrifices which were to be offered with a certain solemnity, as was only fitting, and by which their sins would be forgiven. And so at last a part of the human race began to be set free from the rule of sin and death.…Many manuscripts read that death reigned over even those whose sin was not like that of Adam. If this reading is correct, then it may be said that it refers to that death which has kept souls in hell, and we would understand that even the saints have passed away because of this law of death, even though they were not subject to the law of sin. Therefore it may be said that Christ descended into hell not only in order to show that he could not be held by death but also that he might liberate those who found themselves there not because of the sin of transgression but merely because of their mortal condition.… What did Paul mean when he said that Adam was a type of the one who was to come? Was he speaking of some future man who had not yet come when he was writing, or was he thinking about Christ, who would have been in the future from Adam’s point of view but was already in the past when Paul was writing? I do not know how Adam can be regarded as a type of Christ, unless it is by contrast.… I think it is better to say that Paul understood Adam as a type of Christ’s second coming. Thus just as death has taken control of this age because of the one Adam, and the entire human race has been subjected to mortality, so in the coming age life will reign through Christ, and the entire human race will be blessed with immortality.

But the females to be preserved alive. For the devil, ruling

How did it reign? "After the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come." Now this is why Adam is a type of Christ. How a type? it will be said. Why in that, as the former became to those who were sprung from him, although they had not eaten of the tree, the cause of that death which by his eating was introduced; thus also did Christ become to those sprung from Him, even though they had not wrought righteousness, the Provider of that righteousness which through His Cross He graciously bestowed on us all. For this reason, at every turn he keeps to the "one," and is continually bringing it before us, when he says, "As by one man sin entered into the world"-and, "If through the offence of one many be dead:" and, "Not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift;" and, "The judgment was by one to condemnation:" and again, "If by one (or, the one) man's offence death reigned by one;" and "Therefore as by the offence of one." And again, "As by one man's disobedience many (or, the many) were made sinners." And so he letteth not go of the one, that when the Jew says to thee, How came it, that by the well-doing of this one Person, Christ, the world was saved? thou mightest be able to say to him, How by the disobedience of this one person, Adam, came it to be condemned?

In the transgression of Adam we have all through sin been cast out of paradise. The apostle teaches that even in us who were to come later Adam had fallen. In Christ therefore, in the heavenly Adam, we believe that we who through the sin of the first Adam have fallen from paradise now through the righteousness of the second Adam are to return to paradise.

This can be understood in two ways: either “in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, death reigned,” or (as surely it must be read) “death reigned over even those who did not sin in the likeness of Adam’s transgression but sinned before the law was given.” Thus those who received the law may be understood to have sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, because Adam also sinned after having received a law to obey…. Adam is the type of the one who was to come but in reverse, for as death came through Adam, so life came through our Lord.

Adam is the type of Christ but in reverse, because the good done by Christ to the regenerated is greater than the harm done by Adam to his descendants.

Paul said this in order to contradict those who thought that the Genesis story of the fall applied to nobody but Adam himself. For here he says that all have sinned, even if not exactly in the same way as Adam, and that the Genesis account applies to all men.

Although sin was not imputed before the law of Moses was given, death nevertheless reigned in the supremacy of its own seizure of power, knowing those who were bound to it. Therefore death reigned in the security of its dominion both over those who for a time escaped punishment and over those who suffered punishment for their evil deeds. Death claimed everyone as its own, because whoever sins is the servant of sin. Imagining they would get away with it, people sinned all the more and were more prone to wrongdoing because the world abetted it as if it were legal. Because of all this Satan rejoiced, knowing that he was secure in his possession of man, who because of Adam’s sin had been abandoned by God. Thus it was that death reigned.Some Greek manuscripts say that death reigned even in those who had not sinned in the way that Adam had. If this is true, it is because Satan’s jealousy was such that death, that is, dissolution, held sway over even those who did not sin.… Here there is a textual difference between the Latin version and some of the Greek manuscripts. The Latin says that death reigned over those whose sins were like the sin of Adam, but some Greek manuscripts say that death reigned even over those whose sins were not like Adam’s. Which of the two readings is the correct one? What has happened is that somebody who could not win his argument altered the words of the text in order to make them say what he wanted them to say, so that not argument but textual authority would determine the issue. However, it is known that there were Latin-speakers who translated ancient Greek manuscripts which preserved an uncorrupted version from earlier times. But once these problems were raised by heretics and schismatics who were upsetting the harmony of the church, many things were altered so that the biblical text might conform to what people wanted. Thus even the Greeks have different readings in their manuscripts. I consider the correct reading to be the one which reason, history and authority all retain. For the reading of the modern Latin manuscripts is also found in Tertullian, Victorinus and Cyprian. Thus it was in Judea that the destruction of the kingdom of death began, since God was made known in Judea. But now death is being destroyed daily in every nation, since many who once were sons of the devil have become sons of God. Therefore, death did not reign in everyone but only in those who sinned in the same way that Adam had sinned. Adam was the type of the one who was to come, because even then God had secretly decided to redeem Adam’s sin through the one Christ, as it says in John’s Apocalypse: “The Lamb of God which was slain before the foundation of the world.”

Paul’s meaning is that, although Moses was a righteous and admirable man, the death sentence promulgated upon Adam reached him as well, and also those who came after, even though neither he nor they copied the sin of Adam in disobediently eating of the tree.

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.

This may mean that as long as there was no one who distinguished between the righteous and the unrighteous, death imagined that it was Lord over all. Or else it may mean that death reigned not only over those who, like Adam, broke a commandment—like the sons of Noah who were ordered not to eat the life in the blood or the sons of Abraham, on whom circumcision was imposed—but over those who, lacking the commandment, showed contempt for the law of nature. Adam was a type of Christ either because he was made by God without sexual intercourse, just as Christ was born of a virgin by the aid of the Holy Spirit, or he was an antithetical type, that is, as Adam was the source of sin so Christ is the source of righteousness.

Death came to all men not because they committed the same sin as Adam but because they sinned.… Death is not just the punishment for one particular sin; it is the punishment for every sin.

"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses," that is, until the giving of the law. Therefore, there was a sin through which death reigned: if there had been no sin that sustained death, it would not have reigned. Since it has been demonstrated that sin from transgression of the law did not yet exist, it remains that it was the sin of Adam through which death reigned even over those who did not sin directly (for those who did not receive the law and did not transgress it are not called sinners), but sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression and became partakers of the fall of their forefather, who is a type of Christ. For just as the ancient Adam made all guilty of his fall, even though they did not fall, so also Christ justified all, even though they did nothing for which they should be justified. This is why he is "a type of the one to come," that is, of Christ.

Then he deals with death, saying: although sins were not imputed before the law, yet death, i.e., spiritual, i.e., sin or eternal damnation, of which it is written: the death of the wicked is very evil (Ps 34:21), reigned, i.e., exercised its power over men, by bringing them to damnation, from Adam through whom sin entered the world, unto Moses, under whom the law was given: the law was given through Moses (John 1:17), not only over those who sinned actually, but even over them also who have not sinned, after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who sinned actually: but like Adam they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me (Hos 6:7), because even the children incurred damnation. Under this sense it is also possible to understand bodily death, through which is shown the presence of sin, even when it was not imputed. As if to say: sin indeed was not imputed before the law, but we know that it existed, because death reigned, i.e., bodily, first by bringing suffering, such as hunger, thirst and sickness, and finally by destroying life, even over them who have not sinned, after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, i.e., even over children who committed no actual sins, because even they suffered bodily death before and after the law: what man can live and never see death? (Ps 89:48). Ambrose explained these words in another way, namely, of actual sin only, and of the Mosaic law. According to him these words were written to explain that sin entered this world through the first parent and passed on to everyone. For until the law, i.e., before the law of Moses, sin was in the world, namely, actual sin. For men sinned against the law of nature in manifold ways. Hence, it is said: the men of Sodom were the wickedest (Gen 13:13). But sin was not imputed, when the law was not, not as though it was not imputed as something to be punished by men, since there are records of men being punished for sin before the time of the law (Gen 39–40); but it was not considered as something to be punished by God. For at that time men did not believe that God would punish or reward men's actions: he walks about the poles of heaven, nor does he consider our things (Job 22:14). But after the law was given by God, it was recognized that sins are imputed by God for punishment and not only by men. Consequently, because men did not believe that they would be punished by God for their sins, they sinned freely and without restraint, whenever they did not fear human judgment. Hence he adds: But death, i.e., sin, reigned, i.e., exercised its power in every way, from Adam unto Moses excluded. For when the law was given through Moses, it began to weaken the reign of sin, inculcating fear of divine judgment: oh, that they had such a mind as this always, to fear me and keep my commandments (Deut 5:28). Sin reigned, I say, until Moses, not over all, but over them who have sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam. For Ambrose says that not is not found in the ancient manuscripts; hence, he believes it was added by corrupters. Adam, indeed, believed the devil's promise more than God's threat, as is clear in Genesis 3; in a way, then, he preferred the devil to God. Therefore, idolaters sin in the likeness of Adam's sin, because they abandon the worship of God to venerate the devil. Over such, therefore, death, i.e., sin, reigned completely, because it possessed them entirely. But there were true worshippers of God before the law; yet even if they sinned, sin did not reign over them, because it did not separate them totally from God. Rather, they sinned under God, i.e., under faith in the one God, if they sinned mortally, or under the charity of God, if they sinned venially. From both these interpretations a third can be obtained which seems more in accord with the Apostle's intention. For he had said that by one man sin entered into this world (Rom 5:12); but because sin is a transgression of the divine law, it might seem that this would not be true during the time before the law, especially since he had stated: for where there is no law, neither is there transgression (Rom 4:15). Consequently, one might suppose that sin entered the world not through a man but through the law. To exclude this he says, until the law, i.e., the time before the law, sin was in the world, both original and actual, but it was not recognized as something to be punished by God. And this is what he adds, but sin was not imputed, namely, as something against God, when the law, i.e., the divinely given law, was not. For there were certain persons, as the Philosopher says, who believed that nothing is just by nature and, consequently, nothing unjust, but only because there is a human law. According to this, a sin was not imputed as being contrary to God, especially original sin, since it was not known. But the error of this opinion is shown by the effect, because bodily death reigned from Adam, through whom original sin entered the world, until Moses, under whom the law was given. Consequently, since death is the effect of sin, especially original, it is clear that before the law there was original sin in the world. But lest anyone suppose that they died on account of actual sins, he excludes this, when he says that it reigned even over them who have not sinned by their own act, namely, children and the just who did not sin mortally, but did sin in the first man, as has been stated. Therefore, he adds, after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, inasmuch as they contracted the likeness of that sin through their origin along with the likeness of nature. As if to say: the fact that they died without personal sin shows that the likeness of Adam's sin had been spread in them in virtue of origin. And this is what the Apostle intends to convey, namely, that original sin entered the world through Adam. Then when he says, who is a figure of him, he explains the likeness which was understood in the adverb, as (Rom 5:12). Hence he says, who, namely, Adam, was a figure of the one who was to come, i.e., of Christ, although in an opposite way. For just as sin and death entered the world through Adam, so justice and life entered through Christ: the first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven (1 Cor 15:47). There are other likenesses between Christ and Adam, namely, that just as Adam's body was formed without intercourse, so Christ's body from the Virgin. Again, just as the woman was taken from the side of the sleeping Adam, so from the side of the sleeping Christ flowed blood and water (John 19:34), which signify the sacraments by which the Church was formed.

Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses - This supposes, as Dr. Taylor very properly observes: - 1. That sin was in the world from Adam to Moses. 2. That law was not in the world from Adam to Moses during the space of about 2500 years; for, after Adam's transgression, that law was abrogated; and, from that time, men were either under the general covenant of grace given to Adam or Noah, or under that which was specially made with Abraham. 3. That, therefore, the sins committed were not imputed unto them to death, for they did not sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression; that is, they did not, like him, transgress a law, or rule of action, to which death, as the penalty, was annexed. And yet - 4. Death reigned over mankind during the period between Adam and Moses; therefore men did not die for their own transgressions, but in consequence of Adam's one transgression. Who is the figure of him that was to come - Adam was the figure, τυπος, the type, pattern, or resemblance of him who was to come; i.e. of the Messiah. The correspondence between them appears in the following particulars: - 1. Through him, as its spring and fountain, sin became diffused through the world, so that every man 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 men, Rom 5:12. Through Christ, as its spring and fountain, righteousness becomes diffused through the earth; so that every man is made partaker of a principle of grace and truth; for he is the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world, Joh 1:9. 2. As in Adam all die; so in Christ shall all be made alive, Co1 15:22. For, since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, Co1 15:21. 3. As in or through Adam guilt came upon all men, so, through Christ, the free gift comes upon all men unto justification of life, Rom 5:18. These alone seem to be the instances in which a similitude exists between Adam and Christ.

THE BLESSED EFFECTS OF JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. (Rom 5:1-11) Therefore being--"having been." justified by faith, we have peace with God, &c.--If we are to be guided by manuscript authority, the true reading here, beyond doubt, is, "Let us have peace"; a reading, however, which most reject, because they think it unnatural to exhort men to have what it belongs to God to give, because the apostle is not here giving exhortations, but stating matters of fact. But as it seems hazardous to set aside the decisive testimony of manuscripts, as to what the apostle did write, in favor of what we merely think he ought to have written, let us pause and ask--If it be the privilege of the justified to "have peace with God," why might not the apostle begin his enumeration of the fruits of justification by calling on believers to "realize" this peace as belonged to them, or cherish the joyful consciousness of it as their own? And if this is what he has done, it would not be necessary to continue in the same style, and the other fruits of justification might be set down, simply as matters of fact. This "peace" is first a change in God's relation to us; and next, as the consequence of this, a change on our part towards Him. God, on the one hand, has "reconciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ" (Co2 5:18); and we, on the other hand, setting our seal to this, "are reconciled to God" (Co2 5:20). The "propitiation" is the meeting-place; there the controversy on both sides terminates in an honorable and eternal "peace."

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression--But who are they?--a much contested question. Infants (say some), who being guiltless of actual sin, may be said not to have sinned in the way that Adam did [AUGUSTINE, BEZA, HODGE]. But why should infants be specially connected with the period "from Adam to Moses," since they die alike in every period? And if the apostle meant to express here the death of infants, why has he done it so enigmatically? Besides, the death of infants is comprehended in the universal mortality on account of the first sin, so emphatically expressed in Rom 5:12; what need then to specify it here? and why, if not necessary, should we presume it to be meant here, unless the language unmistakably point to it--which it certainly does not? The meaning then must be, that "death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not, like Adam, transgressed against a positive commandment, threatening death to the disobedient." (So most interpreters). In this case, the particle "even," instead of specifying one particular class of those who lived "from Adam to Moses" (as the other interpretation supposes), merely explains what it was that made the case of those who died from Adam to Moses worthy of special notice--namely, that "though unlike Adam and all since Moses, those who lived between the two had no positive threatening of death for transgression, nevertheless, death reigned even over them." who is the figure--or, "a type." of him that was to come--Christ. "This clause is inserted on the first mention of the name "Adam," the one man of whom he is speaking, to recall the purpose for which he is treating of him, as the figure of Christ" [ALFORD]. The point of analogy intended here is plainly the public character which both sustained, neither of the two being regarded in the divine procedure towards men as mere individual men, but both alike as representative men. (Some take the proper supplement here to be "Him [that is] to come"; understanding the apostle to speak from his own time, and to refer to Christ's second coming [FRITZSCHE, DE WETTE, ALFORD]. But this is unnatural, since the analogy of the second Adam to the first has been in full development ever since "God exalted Him to be a Prince and a Saviour," and it will only remain to be consummated at His second coming. The simple meaning is, as nearly all interpreters agree, that Adam is a type of Him who was to come after him in the same public character, and so to be "the second Adam").