Chapter 5
Outline
Introduction: Four results of justification, verses 1-5.
Under the term “Much more”:
The much more of justification, verses 6-9.
The much more of reconciliation, verse 10-12.
The parenthetical much mores, verse 13-17.
The much more of grace, verses 18-21.
Verse 1 – “Therefore being justified by faith” – the postpositive conjunctive particle o)un denotes that which is introduced is the conclusion of the preceding context, namely Romans chapter three and four. Plus the aorist passive participle of dikaiow, meaning to make righteous or to justify or to vindicate. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it refers to a momentary action, namely salvation adjustment to the justice of God and resultant imputed righteousness followed by justification. All of this occurred in a moment of time. This is the basis for all blessing. The passive voice: the believer at the moment of faith in Christ receives the action of the verb, the imputation of divine righteousness which is recognised. The participle is circumstantial. Corrected translation: “Therefore having been justified.” The action of the aorist participle precedes the action of the main verb. The main verb is next, it is the verb to have. Next is a preposition, e)k plus the ablative of means singular from pistij. The ablative is very important here. The word e)k usually means “from” because it always takes the ablative case. But there is also an instrumental ablative called the ablative of means. The ablative of means always is used when the origin or the source is stated or implied. Here the origin or source of salvation is pistij in the singular—just one time you believe in Jesus Christ. In this prepositional phrase we notice the absence of the definite article. This emphasises the fact that only faith can save, hence this is the unique use of the noun. It emphasises that there is no merit in faith, the merit is in the object of faith. “Therefore having been justified by faith” is directly related to the last paragraph of the last chapter.
“we have peace with God” – we do not have peace with God. Peace in the sense of reconciliation in Ephesians 2 is instantaneous and one of the 36 things we receive at salvation, but that is not the peace we have here: e)irhnh e)xwmen. The KJV translates the word e)xwmen as though it had an omicron instead of an omega. Why is that so important? The omega indicates the subjunctive mood, and that is what we actually have in the text. The omicron would indicate the indicative mood, and if this word had an omicron there, which is doesn’t, then we could translate it “we have peace.” But it cannot be translated that way because it has an omega, and it is “let us have peace.” Notice that “peace” comes first and it is emphasised because it comes first. It is the accusative singular direct object from the noun e)irhnh, which can be translated “peace,” but that is very superficial. It does mean peace, but it also means harmony, health, welfare, and also prosperity. The noun e)irhnh does not primarily connote a relationship between several people or an attitude but it connotes a state, therefore a status quo describes the connotation. That is, the state of peace, a state of harmony, a state of prosperity, a state of health, a state of blessing. For the believer life can be an interlude of blessing from the justice of God, and that is the idea we have here. It is not “let us have peace,” it is “let us have prosperity and security.” Since we already have eternal security it refers, then, to prosperity. Caesar’s e)irhnh was security. The Latin pax is an exact equivalent. The equivalent in the Hebrew is shalom. In Ephesians 2:14-17 we have spiritual prosperity at the moment of salvation where peace there means reconciliation, the removal of the barrier between man and God. Then we have the accusative singular direct object of the verb e)xw, and this verb is the real problem. The present tense is a tendencial present used for an action which is purposed or attempted though not actually taking place at the moment. When Paul wrote this it was not something they had at the moment but it was a potential because they had been justified by faith. It is God’s intention after justification by faith to bless each believer. The active voice: it is intended that all believers produce the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood is an hortatory subjunctive in which the writer exhorts the reader to join him in a course of action.
“with God” – this is said to be real prosperity because it is proj plus the accusative singular of the definite article plus the accusative of qeoj: “face to face with the God.” When you receive +R from God you have the cup into which God pours blessing. That is your potential. Then as you take in doctrine through the daily function of GAP you develop capacity, and when you have maximum doctrine in the soul you have reality of blessing because reality equals maturity adjustment to the justice of God. Capacity is the issue, and the issue therefore is Bible doctrine.
“through our Lord Jesus Christ” is dia plus the genitive of Kurioj, indicating the Lordship of Christ or His deity, plus I)hsouj, the title of the humanity of Christ relating it to the cross—saviour, and Xristoj for the anointed one or the King. Jesus Christ is the means of our salvation adjustment to the justice of God and occupation with Christ is the first blessing we receive after cracking the maturity barrier.
Translation: “Therefore being justified by faith, let us have prosperity face to face with the God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Verse 2 – a second result of justification: security. “By whom also we have access by faith” – the prepositional phrase dia plus the genitive of the relative pronoun o(j should be translated “through whom.” This is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. Then the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai which is translated “also,” followed by the perfect active indicative of the verb e)xw which means to have and to hold, and in the perfect tense “we have had.” The intensive perfect recognises the completion of salvation adjustment to the justice of God at the moment we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, and it puts emphasis on the existing results of that justification which is eventually mature adjustment. We have the potential for blessing which is the imputation of divine righteousness plus the capacity for blessing which is doctrine resident in the soul, and this equals the reality of blessing from the justice of God. But in addition to blessing we have something which is even more fundamental. Blessing is a result of something but the fundamental concept is security. Behind all of this is the perfect security provided by God. The active voice: the believer produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact related to salvation adjustment to the justice of God. Then the accusative singular direct object from the noun prosagwgh which is compounded from the preposition proj, meaning face to face with, and a)gw which means to bring or to lead. To bring face to face with means access, approach, admission into the presence of. It has the connotation of approaching something greater than you are—approaching God or coming into the presence of someone who is greater. The intensive perfect from e)xw emphasises the fact that salvation adjustment to the justice of God is an accomplished fact, and as a result of that we now have access into the presence of someone who is infinitely greater than we are. “Through whom also we have obtained that access.” The definite article is used as a demonstrative pronoun, emphasising the fact that we have an access which is the source of our security. Our security is not in the possession of materialistic things or having power in this life. Whatever is structured for human security is not our security.
“by faith into this grace” – the instrumental singular from pistij indicates the way of salvation. Faith is the non-meritorious system of perception; the object of faith has the merit. It is the Lord Jesus Christ in whom we believe for salvation. With that salvation comes access into the presence of God always, and the access is the basis of security. Plus the prepositional phrase, e)ij plus the accusative singular of xarij—“into grace,” or “into this grace” because there is also another demonstrative.
“wherein we stand” gives us the final connotation for our security, e)n plus the locative of the relative pronoun o(j—“in which.” Plus the perfect active indicative of the verb i(sthmi which means to stand. This introduces the concept of our security which is both temporal and eternal. The perfect tense indicates that we stand in the past with the result that we keep on standing forever. The active voice: the believer produces the action, he has perfect security[1]. The declarative mood is for a dogmatic statement of fact in which we stand in the past with the result that we keep on standing forever.
“and rejoice in the hope of the glory of God” – the conjunctive kai is used here to introduce a result which comes from that which precedes. It is translated “and so.” Plus the present middle subjunctive of the verb kauxaomai. This is a deponent verb, active in meaning. It does not mean to rejoice. Instead it means to boast, to glory, to pride one’s self in or about a person, a thing, an organisation. Hence to have esprit décor, which means enthusiasm and devotion or honour for a group, or in this case a person. In this case the group is the Trinity. Esprit décor also means a common spirit pervading the members of a group, and members of the royal family of God are related to the Trinity and therefore should share the esprit of the Trinity. As a result of eternal security given to us at the moment of salvation we are called upon to have certain attitudes in the Christian life. When you have security it should change your attitude in life. To know that you have security eliminates a lot of negative attitudes in the spiritual life in our relationship with the Lord. We never have a fear of failure or that we can lose our salvation—“and so let us boast.” The present tense is a perfective present, it denotes the continuation of existing results. This boasting confidence or esprit decor has comes to exist in the past with the result that an understanding of the integrity of God and comprehension of eternal security has resulted, and this is now emphasised as a present reality. The middle voice is an indirect middle which emphasises the agent, the mature believer, as producing the action. The active voice is also possible here because it is a deponent verb stresses the action. We have, then, a believer who has because of understanding eternal security and knows that he stands permanently in relationship to the integrity of God, has developed esprit décor as a result. This doctrine resident in the soul is absolutely necessary for cracking the maturity barrier. The subjunctive mood is hortatory in which the apostle Paul exhorts the rest of the royal family of God to join him in a course of action. He invites all believers to participate with him in an attitude which can only come from Bible doctrine, and attitude which is described as demonstrating esprit décor.
Next is a prepositional phrase, e)pi plus the locative from e)lpij which means hope—“in hope.” The hope is a prospect or expectation is related to the integrity of God. In effect, hope is the integrity of God and whatever the integrity of God promises. This becomes hope in the absolute sense. Hence, to boast in hope, to glory in hope, it the first stage of occupation with the person of Christ where the integrity of God comes into sharp focus. The believer’s temporal and eternal security from the integrity of God provides all the logistical support necessary to advance top the high ground of maturity. The result of this security of logistical grace is the actual cracking of the maturity barrier where the believer can have esprit décor in the hope, the glory, the integrity of God.
“of the glory of God” – this is an appositional genitive in which you cut the “of” off. We have the appositional genitive of the noun doca which is correctly translated “glory,” though that needs some amplification. Then the possessive genitive from qeoj—glory belongs to qeoj. Here is the glory of God, referring to the integrity of God.
Translation: “Through whom also we have obtained that access by means of faith into this grace in which we stand, and so let us boast in hope the glory of the God.”
1. The concept of boasting or glorying in hope, the glory or integrity of God, demands amplification. Two words must be understood: hope; glory[2].
2. Boasting or glorying is never commanded toward self. That is a sign of arrogance. But directed toward God it is a part of the progress of the spiritual life.
3. Our boasting in the integrity of God is total lack of arrogance and freedom from ingratitude which so frequently is related to human blessings.
4. Human ingratitude is all too frequent, yet it is sometimes provoked by the arrogance of the benefactor. God gives from perfection.
5. Once we understand the integrity of God ingratitude is not a problem. In our relationship with the integrity of God ingratitude does not exist, only gratitude as a mental attitude and thanksgiving as the expression of that mental attitude. Our gratitude, then, is increased in proportion to the doctrine we have resident in our souls.
6. Therefore boasting in God is that gratitude which comes from maximum doctrine resident in the soul.
7. Boasting in God is that expression of gratitude which manifests capacity for blessing from the justice of God.
8. This same capacity is a blessing in times of adversity. Cf. verse 3.
Now the third result of justification—which is really an introduction to the 5th chapter of Romans—is pressure. One of the great results of justification is added
pressure in life, a pressure that never entirely leaves but a pressure which is mitigated by the blessings from thje justice of God when we crack the maturity barrier. Verses 3 & 4 are devoted to this result.
Verse 3 – “And not
only so, but we glory in tribulations also.” It begins with o)u
monon de. The first word, o)u is the objective negative denying the reality of an alleged fact. Plus the adverb monon used as a part of an ellipsis with supplementation of what immediately precedes. The particle de is used idiomatically here to form the translation—“And not only this.” There is no demonstrative pronoun but when you put these three words together you have an idiom, and to correctly translate it does not mean to literally translate it. The word “this” comes from the supplementation concept of the adverb. That is, we do not boast in hope, the glory or the integrity of God alone, but we also boast in something else. It comes with an adversative conjunction a)lla—“but,” and with it the adjunctive use of kai—“but also.” Now we have a repetition of the verb, the present middle subjunctive of the verb kauxaomai which means to boast, to glory, to pride one’s self in a thing or about a person, to demonstrate esprit décor. The present tense is a perfective present denoting the continuation of existing results from maturity adjustment to the justice of God, but in a different direction this time—in the direction of pressure, adversity, sufferings. The middle voice is the indirect middle, emphasising the agent (the mature believer) as producing the action of the verb. The maturity adjustment to the justice of God includes the principle of glorying or boasting, or demonstrating esprit décor in time of adversity. Doctrine resident in the soul which attains maturity adjustment to the justice of God at the same time is used for the demonstration of esprit décor in time of adversity. The subjunctive mood is hortatory in which the writer, the apostle Paul, exhorts the readers (us today) to join him in a course of action—the demonstration of esprit décor in the pressures, the tragedies, the heartaches, the adversities. Then the prepositional phrase, e)n plus the locative qliyij which means pressures, afflictions, distressing circumstances, trials, oppressions, persecution[3]. “And not only this, but also let us boast [demonstrate esprit décor] in pressures.”
1. There are two areas of great pressure in the life of every believer.
2. The first area is just prior to cracking the maturity barrier.
3. Inasmuch as we grow spiritually from doctrine resident in the soul the doctrine must develop muscle. And so we grow spiritually also from pressure and a certain amount of adversity is necessary for our spiritual advance to the high ground of maturity. That explains the pressure prior to the maturity barrier.
4. There is a second area in super-grace B.
5. The principle: Every spiritual advance is tested by adversity.
“knowing that tribulation worketh patience” – the nominative masculine plural of the
present active participle from the verb form o)ida, a perfect tense used as a present tense. It means to know something about someone, to know something about something, to come to know, to understand. The present tense is a perfective present denoting the continuation of existing results of maximum doctrine resident in the soul of the one who has made mature adjustment to the justice of God. The active voice: the mature believer produces the action of the verb through the doctrine resident in his soul. The participle is circumstantial. The nominative plural of the participle refers to those believers who have attained maturity adjustment to the justice of God. The conjunction which follows, o(ti, is used after verbs of cognisance. It gives the content of that perception. Plus the nominative singular definite article which is used as a demonstrative pronoun to indicate a specific affliction, trial, pressure, adversity, or some sort of distressing circumstance. The nominative singular subject qliyij means pressure, affliction, persecution, mental distress, etc.—“that pressure.” Plus the present middle indicative from katergazomai which means to achieve, to produce, to create, bring about, prepare someone for something. The customary present tense denotes what habitually occurs to a mature believer. The middle voice: this is a deponent verb and therefore is active in meaning, and pressure, persecution, oppression, trial, afflictions, distressing circumstances produce the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for an unqualified statement of fact. “Patience” here in the KJV is not patience. This is the accusative singular direct object of the noun u(pomonh. The word can mean patience but that is a rare meaning. It means endurance, fortitude, steadfastness (honourable courage). Here we have an active connotation of a noun, and while “patience” in the English language connotes a passive attitude in the Greek it has an active attitude. It means courageous endurance, that which defies evil, honourable courage. It means here courage under pressure. It also is used for heroism in the face of bodily chastisement or physical torture. U(pomonh is the basic attitude of the mature believer. He has courage and integrity under pressure. U(pomonh, by the way, has two directions. One is toward God. It means courage, honour and integrity from resident doctrine to depends upon divine solutions while using divine viewpoint in life. It is also directed toward man and toward the world where, again, it connotes honour, courage, integrity under pressure, persecution, oppression, adversity.
Translation: “And not only this, but also let us boast in adversities: knowing that that pressure [persecution, oppression, trial, affliction, distressing circumstances] brings about one for courage, honour, integrity in the pressures of life.”
Maximum doctrine resident in the soul + adversity = courage, honour, integrity under pressure.
1. It takes pressure, suffering, adversity, testing, distressing circumstances, to utilise the integrity of God in developing that courage, honour and integrity. All of the little sufferings prepare the believer for the big one.
2. The justice of God must provide for every believer who is growing, undeserved suffering, both as a part of our advance to maturity and then as maturity as a total appreciation of the integrity of God.
3. The objective is hope—as seen in the next verse.
4. Under great adversity Bible doctrine resident in the soul of the mature believer not only produces the courage, the honour, the integrity under pressure, but while it is doing so it intensifies hope which is occupation with the person of Christ. Cf. 1 Peter 1:6,7.
Verse 4 – “And patience, experience.” The connective conjunctive particle de plus the nominative singular subject u(pomonh, plus the implication of the repetition of the verb from the previous verse. It isn’t here but the elliptical form demands its use—the insertion of the present middle indicative of katergazomai meaning to bring about. The present tense is a customary present, denoting what habitually occurs when the mature believer faces pressure, adversity, trial, suffering. Again, the deponent verb connotation: courage, honour, integrity under pressure. U(pomonh produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative for unqualified statement of fact. Plus the accusative singular direct object from the Greek substantive dokimh. It means the quality of being improved, hence the character of integrity. Translated “proven character” or “demonstrated integrity.”
“and experience, hope” – the postpositive conjunctive particle de connecting the two clauses in a sequence of cause and effect. Plus the nominative singular subject dokimh. This would ordinarily be an adjective but the Greeks used adjectives for substantives. It means proven character or demonstrated integrity. Plus the accusative singular direct object from the noun e)lpij, meaning hope[4] in the sense of blessing from divine integrity. Remember that e)lpij also means prospect, expectation, therefore the connotation of direct blessing from the justice of God as a result of maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
Translation: “And courage under pressure brings about proven character [demonstrated integrity]; and proven character brings about hope [blessing from the justice of God].”
Verse 5 – “And hope maketh not ashamed” is a mistranslation. It begins with the connective use of the postpositive conjunctive particle de, plus the nominative singular subject with the definite article, e)lpij. The definite article is used to indicate a previous reference in the context and is referring to the same hope, the hope that has to do with the integrity of God and resultant blessings from the justice of God. Plus the present active indicative of verb kateisxunw plus the negative o)u. It means to put to shame, to dishonour, to disgrace, to disappoint; and with the negative it means “never disappoints.” The present tense is a static present representing a condition which perpetually exists and is taken for granted as a fact. With the strong negative o)u it means that there is no way that the integrity of God can ever disappoint. The active voice: hope or the integrity of God produces the action: never disappointing. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. “And the hope [integrity of God] never disappoints.”
1. So great is the integrity of God, so perfect, so stabilised in its immutability, so powerful from its omnipotence, that it is impossible to be disappointed in any relationship you have with the integrity of God.
2. Therefore when disappointment comes it is when the believer fails, or his friends fail, or his loved ones fail; but God cannot fail.
3. Under grace man cannot do anything or perform anything by which he could be disappointed in himself. Under grace man does not depend on man, so he is not disappointed when man fails and turns against him.
4. Under grace the believer depends upon the integrity of God which is the source of all blessing and no disappointment.
5. The righteousness of God is satisfied with the righteousness of God imputed to the believer at the moment of salvation.
6. The righteousness of God demands blessing for the believer; the justice of God provides what righteousness demands.
7. In carnality and reversionism the righteousness of God demands punishment which the justice of God administers.
8. When the believer is in fellowship under the ministry of the Spirit and positive toward doctrine, as demonstrated by the daily function of GAP, then the righteousness of God demands blessing from the justice of God. The justice of God administers what the righteousness of God demands.
9. Righteousness is the principle of divine integrity while justice is the function of divine integrity.
10. Therefore either the believer adjusts to the justice of God or the justice of God will adjust to him.
11. This is the difference between blessing and cursing from the justice of God.
12. Adjusting to the justice of God after salvation demands not only rebound but also the daily function of GAP.
13. The justice of God adjusts to the believer in discipline and punishment when the believer fails to utilise the rebound technique and when he rejects or resists the teaching of the Word.
14. Therefore the believer in carnality or reversionism is disappointed in himself, his friends and loved ones, is disappointed in life and frustrated by life.
15. But the believer who is positive toward doctrine and advancing toward maturity, or the believer who has attained maturity adjustment to the justice of God, is never disappointed in his relationship with the integrity of God, and is never vulnerable to disappointment when friends and loved ones fail.
The justice of God never provides blessing without first of all providing the capacity for that blessing. With capacity from doctrine resident in the soul the blessing can never disappoint. No blessing in life can be a disappointment because the capacity comes first. Therefore occupation with the source removes the disappointment. Both capacity for blessing and occupation with Christ have the same source: maximum doctrine resident in the soul.
“because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts” – the love of God is disseminated everywhere in our right lobes, if we have the doctrine. It is the doctrine that makes this possible. “Because” is a causal conjunction, o(ti. Then the nominative singular subject of the a)gaph which here is category #1 love directed toward God— the objective genitive from qeoj. It is a mental love strictly, it has no emotion connected with it. “Because the love for the God”—occupation with Christ as a result of maturity adjustment to the justice of God. Plus the perfect passive indicative of e)kxew—“has been poured out,” means saturation of doctrine, the daily function of GAP. The perfect tense is a dramatic perfect, it is the rhetorical use of the intensive perfect, the action has been completed, the results are found in the daily function of GAP. The passive voice: love for God receives the action of the verb. The subject is love for God and it receives the action of having been poured out. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of the believer’s love for God being poured out; e)n plus the locative of kardia—the right lobe is the place where e)pignwsij doctrine is stored. It is the place of spiritual growth, the place where we become aware of the integrity of God and have an awe and respect for it, and where it turns to hope, the first stage of occupation with Christ or awareness of the integrity of God through resident doctrine. Love is a gradual process directed toward God. “And the hope [relationship with the integrity of God] never disappoints because the love for the God has been poured out in our right lobes.”
“by the Holy Ghost which is given to us” – dia plus the genitive of pneuma and a(gioj, correctly translated “though [or by] the Holy Spirit.” The third person of the Trinity teaches us doctrine. When the doctrine goes into our hearts the Holy Spirit converts it into e)pignwsij. The same Holy Spirit who converted that doctrine into cognisance in our souls converts it into love going out through the launching pad. Love resides in the heart or in the soul; love is expressed from the heart or the soul through the launching pad. It goes in doctrine and comes out love, and both ways it is the ministry of God the Holy Spirit. Then comes the genitive singular from the definite article used as a relative pronoun, plus the aorist passive participle of didomi. This is a constative aorist referring to a momentary action in past time, the moment of salvation adjustment to the justice of God. God the Holy Spirit came to dwell inside of us. The passive voice: the indwelling Holy Spirit received at the moment of salvation is the concept. The participle is circumstantial. Plus the dative plural indirect object from the personal pronoun e)gw. The dative of indirect object indicates believers in whose interest the giving of the Spirit occurred at the moment of salvation.
Translation: “And the hope never disappoints; because the love for God has been poured out by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”
This verse emphasises the ministry of the Holy Spirit related to our thinking, the ministry of the Holy Spirit in perception of Bible doctrine, the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the application of our thinking to life, assessing through reality and applying the Word of God, superimposing the reality of God over the reality in life. For this is the stability in life when the reality of God’s Word (divine viewpoint) is superimposed upon the reality of life. John 14:26, we have a helper to teach us all things and cause us to remember.
Verse 6 – the much more of justification deals with the subject of salvation, but it doesn’t isolate salvation as a separate entity but it relates it to the function of the Christian way of life and/or phase two of the plan of God. Literally this passage says from the Greek, “Yet for Christ, we being weak, yet at the right time on behalf of ungodly ones he died.” Notice that the word “yet” occurs twice. This is a key to understanding this verse in its proper context. It begins with e)ti gar in the Greek, and it is followed by Xristoj. The postpositive conjunctive particle gar is used as a strong affirmation of a self-evident conclusion. Therefore it should be inferential and the inferential gar is generally translated in the English by the words “In fact.” The adverb of time e)ti, means “yet.” Then the nominative singular subject Xristoj—“Christ.” The absence of the definite article emphasises the qualitative aspect of the proper noun, the unique person of the universe is mentioned as the subject. Jesus Christ is the God-Man, therefore He is absolutely different from anyone else in the universe. “Yet in fact Christ.”
In contrast to Christ, the next phrase is “we being weak”—this is a genitive absolute. A genitive absolute includes a noun, a participle, and often a pronoun, all in the genitive case. They are not grammatically connected to the rest of the sentence. In thought they are related but grammatically they are unrelated. The purpose is to emphasise a situation: “we being weak.” The present active participle of e)imi is in the genitive case, it is a retroactive progressive present tense denoting what has begun in the past and continues through the present time—“we keep on being.” The active voice: mankind produces the action. This is a temporal participle which is translated “while we were.” Plus the possessive genitive plural of the personal pronoun e)gw which is translated “we were weak.” The personal pronoun emphasises the fact that if we are ever going to understand what grace is all about and haven’t understood it through the cross we aren’t going to understand it in the Christian way of life. “We” is extremely emphasised here to the point of where we must understand and accept this truth before we advance any further. We are weak. In the sight of God we are helpless, hopeless, useless, and are totally unable to solve our own problems. So we have the genitive plural of a)sqenhj—“weak, powerless.” It is a reference to lack of inherent or acquired assets with which to enter into a relationship with the integrity of God. There is no plan or system of self-righteousness by which we can impress God. In status quo unbeliever we are under spiritual death and have no relationship with the integrity of God.
The second word here to describe us, “ungodly,” is a)sebhj. It means godless, impious. It is a technical term for unbelieving humanity, emphasising spiritual death or no relationship with the integrity of God. In verse 8 we are also called a(martwloj—“sinners,” and adjective used as a substantive and it emphasises man’s failure to conform with the perfect righteousness of God. It presents the problem of God’s integrity where relationship with us is concerned, for the integrity of God is made up of His righteousness and His justice. There is no way that perfect God can have a relationship with sinful man. In verse 10 we have the fourth description of man—“enemies,” e)xqroj. It emphasises a varier between man and God, a barrier which can only be removed under the principle of reconciliation.
“Yet in fact, Christ, while we were weak.” Then we have a repetition of the adverb e)ti. It emphasises not what we are but what Christ did for us. So it is repeated, “yet he.” Then the verb is taken from the end of the verse because here is where the verb comes in with the subject “he” [Christ], the aorist active indicative of the verb a)poqnhskw. It emphasises the intensity of our Lord’s spiritual death on the cross. It is used with the substitutionary preposition u(per and therefore it refers to His spiritual death. The aorist tense of a)poqnhskw is a constative aorist, it gathers into one entirety the three hours on the cross when all of our sins were poured out upon Christ and when the justice of God was judging our sins. This judgment included Christ not only bearing our sins but it included everything necessary for salvation. The active voice: Christ produced the action of the verb by being judged in place of us. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. Next comes “in due time”—the preposition kata plus the accusative of xairoj, an idiom meaning at the right time. God’s timing is always perfect, so this was the right time.
1. The judgment of Christ for our sins on the cross occurred exactly at the right time in history.
2. God is perfect, therefore His timing is perfect.
3. God is never early or late, He is always right on time.
4. God’s time in the only time; God’s timing is the best time.
5. Man is imperfect; man’s timing is imperfect. The only way to be on God’s time is to adjust to the justice of God so that time is related to the integrity of God.
“for the ungodly” – the preposition u(per plus the ablative of a)sebhj. Since u(per plus the ablative is substitutionary it can be translated at least four ways: “for the sake of the ungodly”; “in behalf of the ungodly”; “instead of the ungodly”; “in place of the ungodly.”
Translation: “Yet in fact, Christ, while we were weak, yet he died at the right time in place of the ungodly.” The connotation is substitutionary atonement.
Verses 7 & 8, the analogy of motivation. Verse 7 – human motivation in physical death; verse 8—divine motivation in spiritual death. This is a representative analogy rather than an exact analogy. Human motivation in physical death for another in verse 7 is compared to divine motivation in spiritual death for the entire human race in verse 8.
Verse 7 – “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die.” The first word is an adverb of function, molij. It indicates that it can be done and it has been done but it is rare. It should be translated, “Only rarely.” Plus the explanatory postpositive conjunctive particle gar, plus the substitutionary prepositional phrase u(per plus the ablative of dikaioj used here for human righteousness, human integrity or human honour. It should be translated “in behalf of a righteous person.” The subject is the nominative singular of tij, an indefinite pronoun which is really definite because it represents a category but not referring to any one individual or person. Plus the future middle indicative of a)poqnhskw. The predictive future anticipates or predicts an event which is expected to occur at some time in future time—someone will give his life for someone else. The middle voice is a permissive middle representing the agent as voluntarily yielding himself to the results of the action. The indicative mood is a potential indicative of obligation or impulse. For a person of integrity people are often willing to die. However, Christ was not dying for those who had integrity, He was dying for those who are called weak and hopeless, and called sinners. Christ had the integrity in dying for us.
“yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die” – the inferential use of the postpositive gar, translated “indeed.” The inferential use of gar expresses a self-evident conclusion. We have another self-evident prepositional phrase. This time u(per plus the ablative of a)gaqoj, an adjective used as a substantive and it means “a good person.” Then the adverb of probability, taxa, translated “probably.” Plus the indefinite pronoun again, referring to a category, “someone.” Plus the ascensive kai, “even.” Plus the present active subjunctive of tolmaw which means “to be brave enough.” Two verbs here: tolmaw and a)poqnhskw. Tolmaw is in the present active subjunctive. The iterative present describes what recurs at certain intervals, hence the present tense of repeated action. It doesn’t happen all the time but it does occur. The active voice: category brave person produces the action. The subjunctive mood is potential. Then the aorist active infinitive of a)poqnhskw. The constative aorist refers to a momentary action. Or it can be a dramatic aorist which states a present reality with the certitude of a past event and indicates that whenever a person gives his life for someone else it is an honourable, dramatic thing historically. The active voice: the brave person produces the action. The infinitive is the infinitive of conceived result. It is assumed as a consequence of nobility or courage.
Translation: “For only rarely someone may die in behalf of a righteous person; indeed in behalf of a good person someone might even be brave enough to die.”
1. The first clause, “rarely someone may die in behalf of a righteous person,” emphasises the person who is delivered by the death of another; while the second clause, “someone might even be brave enough to die,” emphasises the person who dies for another.
2. A righteous person is sometimes delivered by the death of another, while a courageous person will be brave enough to die for someone else.
3. In human sacrifice for another only two things can be emphasised: the character of the person who is delivered and the character of the person who delivers/dies.
4. Maximum human sacrifice entails forfeiting one’s life to deliver another.
5. Therefore there can never be an exact or real analogy between someone giving his life to deliver another and the work of Christ on the cross. It is not a real analogy, it is a representative analogy.
6. Only a representative analogy is possible. In the sacrifice on the cross for sinners only the character of Christ is emphasised.
7. Those delivered through salvation have no character, no righteousness of their own, and no attributes in the sight of God.
8. This anticipates the completion of the analogy in the next verse.
Verse 8 – the completion of the analogy. “But God commendeth his love toward us” begins with the postpositive conjunctive particle de, emphasising a contrast between divine motivation in this verse and human motivation in the previous verse. The subject is the nominative o( qeoj—“the God.” Plus the present active indicative of the verb sunisthmi—it means here to display or to demonstrate. The retroactive progressive present denotes what has begun in the past and continues into the present time. The love of God is still demonstrated through the work of Christ on the cross. The active voice: God produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. Then the object of the verb in the accusative singular of a)gaph. Plus the reflexive pronoun e(autou which refers the action expressed by the verb back to its own subject.
The manner in which God expresses His own love toward us is now expressed in terms of the cross. The cross demonstrates the dying love but the cross is not the point of divine love, the cross is the point of divine justice.
“in that while we were yet sinners” – a second genitive absolute, and we have the same combination, o(ti e)ti. The causal use of the conjunction o(ti, and then we find this absolute made up of a noun, a pronoun and a participle, all in the genitive case, none of which is grammatically connected with the rest of the passage. There is the present active participle of e)imi, a temporal participle and therefore translated “while we were.” This is a retroactive progressive present denoting something in the past continuing into the present time. The active voice: mankind produces the action. Plus a genitive plural from the adjective a(martwlon—“in that while we were still [or, yet] sinners.”
“Christ died for us” – a demonstration of divine love expressed through the function of the justice of God at the cross. The nominative subject from the proper noun Xristoj. The absence of the definite article emphasises the high quality of the person. Plus the aorist active indicative of the verb a)poqnhskw, used for the spiritual death of Christ on the cross; “for us” is u(per plus h(mwn, a preposition of substitution plus the ablative of e)gw, and it means “in behalf of us.” The aorist tense of a)poqnhskw is a constative aorist, it gathers into one entirety approximately three hours of the cross. The active voice: Christ then produced the action of spiritual death. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of an absolute fact.
Translation: “But the God demonstrates his own love to us, in that, while we were still sinners, Christ died instead of us.”
Verse 9 – “Much more then” is the dative singular from the adjective poluj. When a dative singular adjective poluj is used with comparative adverb mallon it intensifies the concept to a greater degree—“much more,” plus the inferential transitional conjunction o)un—“therefore.” It denotes that what is introduced at this point is an inference from what precedes. This phrase means that we have a conclusion from the principle of justification, and we have a conclusion regarding the consequence of justification.
A fortiori is simply a logical argument which says that if the greater benefit has been given the less will not be withheld. That is the principle of these much mores. If Christ died for His enemies, and He did, He will surely deliver His friends, and He does. If the justice of God judged our sins in Christ, now that we are in Christ the justice can do something wonderful.
1. We have an a fortiori presentation. If the greater benefit has been given the less will not be withheld.
2. If Christ died for His enemies He will deliver His friends.
3. We go from the greater blessing from the justice of God to the less.
1. “Much more therefore” is a conclusion from the principle of justification to the consequence of justification.
2. This is a conclusion from doctrine of the incredible to doctrine which is self-evident.
3. The conclusion is intensified by the fact of antithesis. The incredible came when we were enemies; the self-evident comes to us as royal family of God. As enemies we were justified by His blood; as royal family we are preserved from His wrath.
4. This is generally the conclusion which is approaching the subject from the greater to the less.
5. However, this is a fortiori which argues that if the greater benefit has been given the less will not be withheld. A fortiori is Latin which means “with stronger reason.”
6. If Christ died for His enemies it follows that He will deliver His friends.
7. Or, as stated in this verse, If we were justified by the blood of Christ, it follows a fortiori that we will be delivered from the last judgment.
8. If the greater benefit has been given the less will not be withheld.
9. A fortiori can be summarised throughout the chapter as follows: If God can do the greater, it follows a fortiori that God can do the less. In other words, the less is not more difficult than the greater.
The greater is the salvation work of God. This is an accomplished fact. The less is God providing your needs in time and God blessing you with maximum blessings in time.
“being now justified by his blood” – the aorist passive participle of dikaiow. It means to declare righteous, to vindicate, to justify. But here it means to declare perfect righteousness. This is a constative aorist, it gathers up into one entirety salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ and it adds the principle of imputation of divine righteousness and resultant justification. The reason that God can bless us at all is because the justice of God sees us with God’s righteousness and says we are vindicated. We are never vindicated because of self-righteousness. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb. He receives the righteousness of God and then God vindicates him. Justification is a legal pronouncement. This is a circumstantial participle that takes us back to the moment of salvation adjustment to the justice of God. With this is the temporal adverb nun—“now”; “having now been justified.”[5] Then the prepositional phrase e)n plus the instrumental singular of a(ima—“by blood,” and the genitive singular of the intensive pronoun a)utoj used as a personal pronoun—“by his blood.” Principle: Perfection can only bless perfection, and perfection can only judge imperfection. Therefore the justice of God condemns sins and it blesses perfection. But since there is no perfection in the human race God had to provide it, and that is what happened at the moment we made salvation adjustment to the justice of God. How was it possible for us to get that righteousness which God imputed? How can the justice of God give us the righteousness of God by simply believing in Christ? The answer is “blood”—“justified by his blood.”[6] This is how perfect justice can gives us perfect righteousness so that we have the potential for all divine blessing.
“we shall be saved from wrath through him” – the future passive indicative from the verb swzw means here to deliver. In fact, it always means to deliver. It can be a spiritual delivery; it can be a physical delivery. Here it is a physical delivery from the lake of fire. The future tense is predictive, it predicts a future event which has not yet occurred. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb—deliverance from the lake of fire. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. No one who has believed in Christ will ever even come close to the lake of fire which is described in the prepositional phrase a)po plus the ablative of o)rgh which means punishment, wrath, and refers to the punishment which comes from the justice of God or the last judgment. Then dia plus the genitive of a)utoj—“through him.”
Translation: “Much more then because we have now been declared righteous by His blood, we will be saved through Him from God’s wrath.”
Verse 10 – the a fortiori of reconciliation. The protasis: “For if, when we were enemies” – the conditional particle e)i introduces the protasis of a first class condition, a supposition from the viewpoint of reality. With it is the postpositive conjunctive particle gar used as an explanatory conjunction—“for if.” Plus the present active indicative of e)imi. This is the present tense of duration, it denotes what has begin in the past and continues into the present time where the unbeliever is concerned. The active voice: the unbeliever produces the action. The participle is temporal. Plus the predicate nominative of e)xqroj—“enemies.” The unbeliever is the enemy of God; he is hostile. Sin makes him hostile; having the old sin nature makes him hostile. It is “while we were enemies” – temporal participle.
“we were reconciled” – aorist passive indicative of the verb katallassw. It means to change to hostile parties into a state of peace or reconciliation. It is derived from the preposition kata and the verb a)llassw which means to change; kata means in the direction of something. Kata plus a)llassw means to change toward someone. Man’s spiritual death from his sinfulness is the hostility with God which is changed by reconciliation. The righteousness of God rejects man’s sinfulness, the justice of God condemns man’s sinfulness, and a hostility exists. This is a culminative aorist tense, it views salvation adjustment to the justice of God in its entirety but it emphasises one of the existing results. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb at the moment of faith in Christ. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine.
“to God” – the dative of reference from the proper noun qeoj. With the definite article this refers to someone we should know and understand. As the dative of indirect object it emphasises God as the one in whose interest reconciliation is performed. We were reconciled to the God, the dative is always directional.
“by the death of his Son” – dia plus the ablative of means from qanatoj is “by means of the death.” Qanatoj is used here for spiritual death, Christ being judged for our sins by the integrity of God. The instrumental case expresses impersonal means. The ablative case is used to express means where the origin or the source is implied. Christ is the source of reconciliation. Plus the genitive of relationship of u(ioj, and with it the possessive genitive from the intensive pronoun a)utoj—“his Son.”
1. One of the salvation functions of the spiritual death of Christ on the cross was reconciliation. And God could not find in the human race in thousands of years of history one person who was qualified to step out of the box of sin and go to the cross. Help had to come from heaven.
2. In spiritual death on the cross the sins of the world were poured out on Christ and the justice of God judged those sins.
3. Reconciliation emphasises the function of divine integrity toward mankind in salvation, just as propitiation emphasises satisfaction of integrity in salvation.
4. So far we have had just the protasis of a first class condition. Certain conclusions will be drawn from this protasis. The protasis develops a fortiori: the greatest thing was done at the cross—reconciliation.[7]
The apodosis, the conclusion based on the protasis: “much more” is the dative singular from the adjective poluj plus the comparative adverb mallon. This
becomes an idiom meaning “to a greater degree,” and is translated “much more.”
“being reconciled” – aorist passive participle from katalassw, and is translated “having been reconciled.” The culminative aorist tense views salvation adjustment to the justice of God in its entirety but emphasises the existing result, namely reconciliation. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb at the moment he believes in Christ. This is circumstantial participle.
“we shall be saved by his life” – future passive indicative of the verb swzw which means to deliver. The future tense is a predictive future, it prophesies ultimate sanctification as occurring in eternity. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb, namely a resurrection body minus the old sin nature and human good. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus e)n plus the locative of zwh. The instrumental, the dative, and the locative all have the same suffix, the same form. So it becomes a matter of interpretation. Sometimes, rather than “by his life” it is “in his life.” It is having a resurrection body like His resurrection body, for zwh refers here to the resurrection body—“we shall be delivered in his life.”
Translation: “For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by means of the death of his Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be delivered in his life.”
Verse 11 – the temporal implication of the much more of reconciliation. “And not only so, but we joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” This is temporal, it has to do with time. This has to do with happiness, prosperity and blessing in time. It begins with a negative plus an adverb, o)u plus monon, plus the postpositive conjunctive particle de, should be translated “And not only this.” It is an idiom. Not only do we have something in eternity but we have something in time. These three words are very important. It is an idiom which means that something that precedes has been stated as an absolute, as a perfect blessing, but it is not the only one. The fact that the believer is going to have a resurrection body is not the only blessing in life—there is something first!
“but we also also” – the adversative conjunction a)lla plus the adjunctive use of kai, is “but also.” Also there is blessing for the believer in time; there is prosperity in time; “joy” – the nominative plural, present middle participle of kauxaomia, which means to boast, to glory, to have esprit décor. In other words, to have a spirit pervading the core of mature believers. Not only this, but we also have esprit décor because we are not left on this earth to grind out some system of suffering. We are left here to attain maturity adjustment to the justice of God, and from that attainment to have what is extremely important: a prosperity which only the justice of God can give us but which glorifies God, not us. The present tense is a customary present, it denotes what habitually occurs among mature believers, those who have a total relationship with the integrity of God. The middle voice: it is a deponent verb which is middle in form but active in meaning. The mature believer produces the action. Only the mature believer has a Holy Spirit esprit décor. The participle is circumstantial for anyone who reaches this point.
“in God” – e)n plus the locative of the proper noun qeoj, plus the definite article which doesn’t emphasise anything but it is used with the proper noun to show us that the person involved is unique and it is someone with whom the readers are familiar.
“through our Lord Jesus Christ” – the preposition dia plus the genitive of kurioj, I)hsouj and Xristoj, plus the possessive genitive plural from the personal pronoun e)gw. This should be translated, “And not only this, but also we have esprit décor in God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
1. Esprit décor in God is synonymous with occupation with the person of Jesus Christ. Occupation with Christ is the first characteristic of maturity adjustment to the justice of God. It refers to cracking the maturity barrier.
2. Our Lord Jesus Christ is mentioned as the only saviour, the one bearing our sins and being judged for them by the integrity of God.
3. Reconciliation is teamwork between God the Father judging our sins at the cross and Jesus Christ bearing our sins or being judged for our sins on the cross.
4. Reconciliation involves both the bearing of our sins by Christ and the judgment of those sins by the Father.
5. Therefore we have esprit décor in God [the Father] and our Lord Jesus Christ.
“by whom we have now received the atonement” – incorrectly translated. The preposition dia plus the genitive from the relative pronoun o(j—“Through whom.” The problem is in the accusative singular direct object from the noun katallagh, mistranslated “atonement” with the definite article to denote previous reference in verse 10. It should be “Through whom we have now received the reconciliation.” There is no reference to atonement here. Reconciliation is totally the work of God. It is God who removes the barrier between God and man, and specifically it is the function of the integrity of God and the work of the Son of God on the cross. The verb is the aorist active indicative from lambanw. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it refers to a momentary action—salvation. Reconciliation was instantaneous and is permanently received when we believe in Christ. The active voice: at the moment of salvation mankind becomes involved in the action of the verb, he receives reconciliation. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of Bible doctrine, one on which a fortiori will be built.
Translation: “And not only this, but also we glory in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.”
1. Salvation adjustment to the justice of God does not depend on who and what man is. Always it depends on who and what God is.
2. Since our point of contact is the justice of God all facets of salvation are related to the integrity of God.
3. The more we understand the integrity of God the greater becomes our esprit décor.
4. To understand the integrity of God demands maximum doctrine resident in the soul. This can only occur through the daily function of GAP.
5. Therefore learning doctrine is the only way of boasting or glorying in God—demonstrating esprit décor.
6. In human modus operandi the function of the mind often depends on the state of health in the body.
7. But in the spiritual realm the antithesis is true. It is doctrine resident in the soul that determines everything else in life for the believer.
Verse 12 – the necessity for reconciliation. We have here the principle of God’s justice imputing to us Adam’s original sin, rather than God’s justice imputing to us our personal sins. When Christ was on the cross this is the first and only time in all of history that all personal sins in the human race were actually imputed, and they were imputed to the one who had no sin, the Lord Jesus Christ. This imputation made it possible for God to judge those sins.
“Wherefore also” – the preposition dia plus the accusative neuter singular from the demonstrative o(utoj means “For this reason.” It is a prepositional phrase which is used in order to go back to what precedes and to draw an inference from it.
“as by one man’s sin” – the comparative adverb w(ster used in the protasis of a comparative clause, “just as.” Then the prepositional phrase, dia plus the genitive of the numeral e(ij plus anqrwpoj—“through one man.” The one man is Adam. The justice of God deals with Adam in such a way that the justice of God reserved our personal sins for the cross, and our salvation as well as Adam’s. Plus the nominative singular a(martia with the definite article. With the definite article it means “the sin” and it does not refer to personal sins, nor to the old sin nature; it refers here to the original sin of Adam. Twice we see a(martia in this verse, once for the original sin of Adam and once for the principle of personal sin. “For this reason, just as through one man the sin”—a reference to Adam’s original sin when he took the fruit from the woman.
“entered into the world” – the aorist active indicative from the compound verb e)iserxomai means to enter into. The aorist tense is a constative aorist which refers to a momentary action, that instant of time when man switched from the love of God as his point of reference to the justice of God by eating of the forbidden fruit taken from the hand of the woman. The active voice: sin produced the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the prepositional phrase e)ij plus the accusative of kosmoj, referring to the world as restored by the Holy Spirit in 6 days. This is the cosmos which had been restored for man’s occupancy. This is not the Kosmoj which Satan rules, that came after the original sin.
Principle
1. Sin was in existence in the angelic race long before Adam, but sin entered the restored planet earth through the negative volition of the man and the woman in the fall.
2. The relationship was temporal because innocent man did not possess the righteousness of God. The love of God was the point of reference in the garden. Man came from the hand of God as a perfect creature with the potentiality of becoming imperfect—free will. After his fall he came under the integrity of God—righteousness and justice. Note that the love of God could not restrain the fall, but the integrity of God acts as a tremendous restraint on man. Until man had something permanent, like the righteousness of God and eternal life, it was going to be a temporal relationship. The relationship was perfect but it did not have permanence. We have a relationship and permanence—eternal security. The capacity for perfect environment was provided through doctrine resident in the soul; Jesus Christ taught every evening.
The word a(martia is in the singular, and in the singular a(martia can be used three ways: for Adam’s original sin in the garden; for the old sin nature; for the principle of personal sin (sing.), not sins (pl). The original sin also gave the nature to sin. When Adam made the decision to sin it was a trend in his soul. We were born with a trend; Adam acquired it. The first time Adam sinned he started a trend, and that trend comes down to us in our personal sin.
“and death by sin” – the conjunction kai is used to introduce a result which comes from something that precedes, so we translate it “and so.” Then o( qanatoj which is used here for spiritual death. Plus the preposition dia with the noun a(martia with the definite article—“and so the death [spiritual death] through the sin [of Adam & the trend thereafter].” So sin in the singular combines two of our concepts of a(martia, the original sin plus the trend that was developed at the same time. Translation: “For this reason, just as through one man [Adam] the sin [nature] entered into the world, and so the death [spiritual] through the sin [nature].”
1. Spiritual death is lack of relationship with the integrity of God—cut off from the divine attributes.
2. Spiritual death is the antagonism of the integrity of God toward mankind.
3. Spiritual death is divine righteousness rejecting both the principle of the old sin nature [the trend] as well as the function.
4. Righteousness demands righteousness. Spiritual death is the justice of God judging, condemning the old sin nature, its function and personal sin.
5. Justice demands justice. The justice of God executes what the righteousness of God demands.
6. Spiritual death is an impassable barrier between God and man established by the integrity of God at the time of the original sin.
7. Spiritual death is an impassable barrier perpetuated in human history, a barrier which can only be removed by the integrity of God.
8. The removal of the barrier demands both the function of the justice of God in removing our sins when Christ was carrying them on the cross, and the imputation of divine righteousness to anyone in the human race who will believe in Christ.
“so death passed upon all men” – the connective use of the conjunction kai plus the correlative conjunction o(utoj—“and so.” Plus the nominative singular
subject of qanatoj—spiritual death, never physical death in this passage. Plus aorist active indicative from the verb dierxomai [dia = through; e)rxomai = to go], to go through, to pass through, and it comes to mean to spread—“so death spread.” This is spiritual death spreading. The aorist tense is a gnomic aorist for a fact of doctrine so fixed in its certainty as to be absolutely axiomatic. The active voice: spiritual death produces the action of the verb spreading through the whole human race. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. Plus another prepositional phrase, e)ij plus the accusative plural of paj and a)nqrwpoj—“to all men.”
1. Spiritual death is perpetuated through physical birth. We are born physically alive and spiritually dead.
2. At the moment of human life the human race is also spiritually dead—no relationship with the integrity of God, no possibility of blessing from the justice of God.
3. The barrier is so great that man cannot move it, break through it, climb over it, tunnel under it.
4. The justice of God put that barrier there so that the barrier could be removed by the justice of God.
5. An act of judgment from the justice of God put the barrier there, and an act of judgment from the justice of God must remove the barrier.
6. Such was the judgment of our sins on the cross. The justice of God judged our sins on the cross; the justice of God judged what the justice of Goid had condemned.
7. Adam’s sin was a corrupting principle which transmitted itself to the entire human race.
“for that all have sinned” – the preposition e)pi plus the relative pronoun o(j is “on
account of which” and translated in its correct connotation “because.” Plus the nominative masculine plural subject from the adjective paj, referring to the entire human race. Plus the aorist active indicative of the verb a(martanw.
1. The constative aorist [of a(martanw]contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety.
2. The constative aorist gathers into one entirety the entire human race. Hence, when Adam sinned we all sinned.
3. Adam is the seminal head of the human race, we were all in Adam when Adam sinned.
4. Illustration: Just as Levi was seminally in Abraham when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, so the entire human race was in Adam when Adam sinned.
5. One decision involves a lot of people. Adam made one decision, it involved the entire human race.
The active voice: the human race seminally in Adam produces the action of the verb. The decision that Adam made would have been our decision, we would not have done it any differently. The indicative mood is declarative, it represents the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Adam, when he disobeyed, made a decision for the entire human race. Now each member of the human race must make a decision regarding another tree: the cross. One man’s decision places all of us under spiritual death, but our own decision of faith in Christ provides us an eternal relationship with God and we have something better than Adam lost.
Translation: “For this reason, just as through one man [Adam] the sin [nature] entered into the world, and the death [spiritual] through the sin [nature]; consequently the death [spiritual] spread to all men, because all sinned [the moment Adam sinned].”
1. The reason we are born with an old sin nature and under spiritual death is because we would have done what Adam did.
2. In this sense Adam is a better man than any of us.
3. If he failed, we would have failed. He did fail and the justice of God involves all of us.
4. We are under the justice of God and that same justice provides blessing where the curse and condemnation of sin existed in the human race.
Verse 13 – “For until the law sin was in the world.” The explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar, and with it an adverb used as an improper preposition—a)xri. The object of the adverb is the genitive of nomoj—“law.” It is translated literally, “For until the law [was given].” The verb is implied by the nature of the syntax. The subject is the nominative singular of a(martia. Then the perfect active indicative of the verb e)imi, meaning to be, to exist, sometimes even to come to be. The imperfect tense is the imperfect of duration, it contemplates the process of sin as having gone on in the past up to the time denoted by the context, but without any necessary inference as to whether or not the process has been completed. The active voice: the sinfulness of man produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine. “For until the law sin was in the world.” This means that the principle of sin continued from the fall of Adam to the time of Moses, and that every person who ever lived committed personal sins during that time. With or without the Mosaic law sins have always been committed. In other words, the Mosaic law is not a restrainer of sin, it is a declarer or a communicator of sin. It defines sin for us but it doesn’t restrain us from sin. It defines sin and relates it to its penalty. Personal sin is the principle of doing things that are sinful, and then it is the practice of doing those things. So that sin in the singular always deals with the principle. Sin in the plural (sins) is the practice.
“in the world” – e)n plus the locative of kosmoj. The principle of sin was there, the
function and practice of sin was there, and the law didn’t hinder it. Furthermore, people were saved, and the law didn’t provide it. With or without the Mosaic law all of us were born spiritually dead.
The imputation of Adam’s sin is the basis of our condemnation. Therefore by the justice of God imputing the sin of Adam to us and giving us spiritual death He could bring us out of the pit of spiritual death by taking our personal sins, unjudged by the justice of God, and putting them on the cross so that the justice of God can judge our personal sins and we get out of the jamb. This is perfect justice.
1. Personal sin existed in the world from Adam to Moses but personal sin was not the basis for condemnation from the justice of God.
2. The basis for condemnation from the justice of God is the imputation of Adam’s sin plus the receiving Adam’s trend toward sin (the old sin nature). All sinners commit sin from the status of spiritual death.
3. Our personal sins are the manifestation of spiritual death, but they are not the cause of spiritual death.
“but sin is not imputed when there is no law” – the nominative singular subject from a(martia. The singular gives us three possibilities: imputed sin, the old sin nature, or the principle of personal sin. Here we have the principle of personal sin. The negative o)u plus the present passive indicative of e)llogew which means to impute. The historical present tense views the past event with the vividness of a present occurrence, giving it great emphasis. The passive voice: personal sins receive the action of the verb—non-imputation. Our personal sins are not imputed to us. Sin in the singular can also refer to personal sin but it does not refer to personal sin as individual sins but as personal sin as a principle. The indicative mood is declarative viewing the action of the verb from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the genitive absolute composed of nomoj in the genitive as the subject plus the present active temporal participle e)imi. There is also a negative and it should read, when the law did not exist.”
Translation: “For until the law the sin nature was in the world, and imputed sin was in the world: but personal sin was not imputed when the law did not exist.”
1. This verse emphasises the fact that all the human race sinned when Adam sinned.
2. The basis for man’s condemnation from the justice of God is the imputation of Adam’s sin, as well as the possession at birth of the old sin nature or Adam’s trend to sin.
3. Therefore we are born spiritually dead as a judgment from the justice of God.
4. Imputed sin and inherent sin is the basis for our condemnation rather than personal sins.
5. While personal sin existed in the human race from Adam to Moses it was never the basis for condemnation.
6. Adam’s sin was imputed to the human race.
7. The personal sins of the human race are never imputed to the individual but all are imputed to Christ on the cross.
8. At the cross personal sins—past, present, and future—were imputed to Christ and then judged by the justice of God as grace provision for our salvation.
9. Condemnation came to the human race at birth through the imputation of Adam’s sin and the possession of Adam’s sin nature.
10. All members of the human race, except the humanity of Christ, are born spiritually dead—Ephesians 2:1,5. We arrived at spiritual death without committing a personal sin.
1. Spiritual death, condemnation from the justice of God, was not because of personal sins but because Adam sinned.
2. The imputation of sin is the doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s sin to the human race, an act of the justice of God following the trial in the garden.
3. It is not the imputation of personal sin to the human race.
4. In other words, personal sin is not the issue in salvation. Cf. Romans 5:12.
5. It is imperative to understand that personal sin is never imputed until the cross.
6. On the cross Christ not only bore our sins as a result of imputation but was judged for our sins as the means of salvation.
7. In other words, the justice of God judged Adam’s sin in the garden and our sins on the cross.
8. So Adam’s sin was imputed to us at birth with resultant spiritual death. We acquired the old sin nature which also results in spiritual death. All personal sins were imputed[8] to Christ so that we could be born again as justified and possessors of eternal life.
Verse 14 – “Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses.” Death had to reign from Adam to Moses because the sin of Adam was imputed to every member of the human race at the point of physical birth. This verse begins with the adversative conjunction a)lla used to set up a comparison between two clauses. Sin was not imputed where there is no law, nevertheless there is still the penalty of sin. The Mosaic law was given at the time of Moses. From Adam to Moses, as thereafter, spiritual death reigned because of the imputation of Adam’s sin to each person at the point of physical birth. Then the aorist active indicative of the verb basileuw, meaning to rule or to reign. The constative aorist tense gathers up into one entirety the fact that spiritual death applies to the entire human race from Adam to Moses. It actually applies all of the way through history. The active voice: o( qanatoj, spiritual death, produces the action of the verb. Spiritual death rules in the human race, and it refers to the fact that spiritual death is the penalty of Adam’s sin and we are all under spiritual death. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of fact. With this is a prepositional phrase a)po plus the proper noun A)dam, and then an improper preposition mexri plus Mwsusewj—“until Moses.”
1. Since Adam’s sin was imputed to the human race, the human race receives condemnation from the justice of God, namely spiritual death.
2. In spite of the absence of the divine norm, the Mosaic law which defines personal sin, personal sin was not the issue in spiritual death.
3. Spiritual death, condemnation from the justice of God, comes from the imputation of Adam’s sin, not from personal sins.
4. Therefore, the Mosaic law which defines personal sin in the light of the essence of God is not the issue in the condemnation of mankind as was emphasised by the Judaisers and legalistic Jews.
5. Death rules because every member of the human race received by direct imputation Adam’s sin, and at the same time at physical birth received an old sin nature.
6. Personal sin was never imputed until the cross, and at that time it was imputed for the purpose of judgment from the justice of God.
7. Every member of the human race from Adam to Moses was under the penalty of sin which is spiritual death.
8. Such condemnation from the justice of God was based on imputed and inherent, but not personal, sin.
9. Personal sin is a fact in every person in the human race, but personal sin was not the basis for condemnation.
10. Adam’s sin is the basis for condemnation for Adam is the federal head of the human race.
11. Spiritual death is the ruler of the human race.
12. The universal rule of spiritual death implies the universal rule of imputed and inherent sin.
“even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression” –
some person will say they sinned in different ways, so is that fair? This will answer that question. The conjunctive particle kai is used as an ascensive adverb, meaning “even.” Then the prepositional phrase e)pi plus the accusative plural from the definite article, and then e)pi plus the accusative having a directional concept for sin—“even over those.” The definite article is used as a demonstrative pronoun. Then the negative plus the aorist active participle of a(martanw. This is a constative aorist, it contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. The active voice: people living between Adam and Moses produce the action. The participle is circumstantial—“who have not sinned.” The phrase “after the similitude of Adams’ transgression” – e)pi plus the locative of o(moiwma, which means “likeness” or “in the likeness.” Plus the possessive genitive of parabasij which means “transgression.” So, “even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression [original sin].”
1. Adam’s sin was negative volition, direct disobedience to the command of God, regarding the prohibition of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God set up a test for man in his perfection. The test was for his volition which was free.
2. One thing man did not need in the garden was garden was to understand good and evil, the policy of Satan.
3. While many members of the human race do not have the duplicate, the exact sin that Adam had, we do have the facsimile and the justice of God recognises the facsimile under the principle of guilt. In other words, everyone does not express sin in the same way.
4. All are just as guilty and under the penalty of sin (spiritual death) because of the imputed sin of Adam and because of the old sin nature.
5. Therefore the entire human race was in Adam when Adam sinned.
6. Condemnation does not originate from personal sin but from imputed or inherent sin.
7. Personal sin is the result of spiritual death rather than the means of spiritual death in the human race.
8. Personal sin is the direct result of being born with the imputation of Adam’s sin plus the old sin nature. All personal sin comes directly from the old sin nature.
9. Not only sin but good and evil emanate from the old sin nature.
10. Sin, good, and evil however, are not the basis for spiritual death. They are the result of spiritual death.
11. Between Adam and Moses personal sins were not imputed for condemnation though personal sins existed in abundance.
12. Imputed and inherent sin is the basis for condemnation, never personal sin.
“who is the figure of him that was to come” – the nominative singular relative pronoun o(j which has as its antecedent Adam. Plus the present active indicative of the verb e)imi. This is a dramatic present tense, a past event is viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: Jesus Christ as the last Adam is the one who is destined to come. Adam keeps on being the type rather than the figure. The word for figure is a predicate nominative from tupoj, and with the present active indicative of e)imi we have “who keeps on being a type.” The static present establishes forever the fact that there is a typology. Adam is the type, Christ is the antitype. The reason for this typology is the fact that Adam was created perfect from the hand of God, whereas Christ was born perfect by the grace of God. So we have only two people in all of history who were perfect at their beginning. The beginning of the first Adam was creation, whereas the last Adam was born perfect. Thus the static present to indicate that this will always be a type and antitype. The present active participle of mellw is a little misleading here, it means to be about to be, to be on the point of, and also to be destined. It denotes an action that necessarily follows a divine decree. Corrected translation: “who is a type of him [Christ] who was destined to come.” Notice the past tense, “was destined.” Even though it is a present tense it is a historical present and it can be translated with the past tense. The participle is circumstantial referring to the first advent of Christ.
Translation: “Nevertheless the spiritual death rule from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a type of him [Christ] who was destined to come.”
1. Adam is a type of Christ from the standpoint of federal headship of the human race.
2. Only two men in human history, Adam and Christ, are federal heads. Adam is the federal head of mankind and Christ is the federal head from the new birth.
3. The first Adam was created perfect and sinned, bringing condemnation to the human race. The author of sin is Adam.
4. The last Adam was perfect and was judged for our sins on the cross, bringing salvation to the human race.
Notice that neither the first Adam nor the last Adam started with an old sin nature. Both were minus anything related to sin; both had free will. The choice of the first Adam was negative, putting the human race under sin; the choice of the last Adam was positive, putting the human race in the category of salvation. The first Adam, then, acquired the old sin nature or the trend to sin through his own original sin. The last Adam was impeccable and never had an old sin nature, even though He was tempted far beyond anyone else who has ever lived. Because of the impeccability of Jesus Christ He was qualified to go to the cross as the last Adam and be judged for our sins. There was no imputation of our personal sins until the cross, and then they were imputed to Christ on the cross and judged by the justice of God. Therefore we have type and antitype. Adam is the author of spiritual death; the last Adam is the author of eternal life—1 Corinthians 15:22, 45.
Verse 15 – the a fortiori of capacity for blessing, hence the a fortiori for blessing in time. “But not as the offence, so also is the free gift.” The adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast. It is emphasising here the difference between the first and the last Adams, between the type and the antitype; in other words, between Adam and Christ. Then the strong negative o)u used with the indicative to deny the reality of an alleged fact, plus the comparative particle o(j with this negative, indicating the manner in which something does not proceed. Then the nominative singular subject paraptwma which is used technically for Adam’s original sin and correctly translated “transgression.” It is used with the definite article as a demonstrative pronoun and can be translated “But not as that transgression [the original sin of Adam].” The adverb o(utoj refers to what precedes in setting up a set of comparative clauses. Plus the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai—“also,” plus the predicate nominative of the noun xarisma which means a grace gift, or a gracious gift. It refers to the salvation work of Jesus Christ on the cross being judged for our sins. In other words, a contrast is being set up between the first and the last Adam. “But not as that transgression [the original sin of Adam], so also is that gracious gift [the work of Christ on the cross].”
1. As noted in the previous verse Christ as the antitype to Adam’s type is impeccable, perfect in His humanity, not a sinner.
2. Christ did not have a sin nature, did not have the imputation of Adam’s sin, did not have any personal sin, in contrast to the first Adam.
3. The typology of the two Adam’s, then, can only be carried a certain distance. It cannot be carried into their persons because as persons they were quite different. Adam was unique because he was created perfect and fell. Christ was unique because He is the God-Man and remained in His humanity impeccable. So there has to be some basis for setting up type and antitype. The answer is simple. Each one is a federal head of the human race.
4. Adam is the federal head of the human race through physical birth, while Christ is the federal head of the human race through spiritual birth.
5. This is why we must be born again to have an eternal relationship with the integrity of God.
6. Here the analogy ends and the contrast begins. The first Adam brought condemnation on the entire human race, while the last Adam brings salvation to the human race.
7. Because the of first Adam the justice of God condemns man, but because of the last Adam the justice of God is free to provide blessing for man—beginning at salvation through imputed righteousness and justification.
8. Therefore, while the human race is born in Adam the human race is born again in Christ. The noun paraptwma refers to the judgment from the justice of God on Adam and therefore on the human race. The words paraptwma, belonging to the first Adam, and xarisma, which belongs to the last Adam, are set up in contrast.
The concept
1. That blessing from the justice of God, i.e. the imputation of divine righteousness and resultant justification, is potential for blessing in time that means great reward in eternity.
2. Remember that the point of reference for the human race is the integrity of God—righteousness and justice.
3. Righteousness demands righteousness and justice demands justice. When God works on our behalf it is because these things have been fulfilled.
4. Justice executes what righteousness demands.
5. Therefore our point of contact is always the justice of God. We are never going to be given anything from God which compromises His character, but we are going to be given wonderful things which glorify His person. Everything depends upon our potential, and our potential depends upon the doctrinal content of our soul.
6. The justice of God gives us the righteousness of God at the moment of salvation, the point of faith in Christ.
7. As a result the highway for blessing is open. From justice to righteousness is the highway through which all of these blessings come to us.
8. All blessing from God originates with divine justice and terminates with divine righteousness imputed.
9. Divine justice can only bless divine righteousness.
10. This is the potential principle for all blessing from God. All blessing from God to the born again believer must be related also to the potential principle—the fact that we have God’s righteousness. But He will never give us anything unless we have the capacity, and therefore capacity becomes a big issue. Principle: If God provided the greater in justification it follows a fortiori that He will provide the less in temporal blessing from the justice of God. Furthermore, the provision of temporal blessing glorifies God, and for any born again believer to have any of the blessings of life in the devil’s world it is glorifying to God.
“For if through the offence of one many be dead” – the conditional particle e)i
introduces the protasis of a first class condition, a supposition from the viewpoint of reality. This protasis forms the basis for the a fortiori of capacity for blessing. With this conjunctive particle is the postpositive conjunction gar which expresses an explanation. Then the instrumental singular of paraptwma, meaning transgression, is technical and specific here for the sin of Adam. The instrumental here with the definite article expresses the means to indicate a demonstrative pronoun. The definite article, by the way, is almost always used as a demonstrative pronoun in the Attic Greek, which Paul uses here. The demonstrative calls attention with special emphasis to a designated object, i.e. the fall of man, the original sin of Adam. “For if by that transgression [Adam’s original sin].” Plus the possessive genitive singular from the definite article carrying the full force of a demonstrative pronoun, as per Attic Greek. With it is the genitive of the adjective numeral e(ij, showing that one person determined the course of the human race at a certain point in history. It refers to Adam and it is translated “of that one.” Plus the nominative masculine plural from the adjective poluj, used as a substantive to include the entire human race. The only exception was the virgin birth. The aorist active indicative of the verb a)poqnhskw, died.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it gathers into one entirety the implication of Adam’s sin to everyone born into the human race. The active voice: the human race produces the action of the verb at the instant of physical birth. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine, namely the universality of spiritual death in the human race.
“much more the grace of God” – the dative singular adjective poluj – “much,” and the comparative adverb mallon – “more.” This is actually an idiom of greater degree and “much more” is used to introduce a fortiori logic. If the greater function of the justice of God has occurred the less will not be withheld. Principle: God provides more in grace than man had in innocence before the fall. God provides more in the imputation of divine righteousness than He did in the garden where no righteousness had been imputed.
“and the gift by grace” – the word for “gift” here is dwrea. The word xarisma always indicates the ability related to the gift; dwrea has an entirely different connotation. This is the nominative subject dwrea referring to the incarnation, the hypostatic union, impeccability, followed by the justice of God judging our sins when they were imputed to Christ on the cross. It also includes redemption, reconciliation, propitiation, for these are the greater which have been given while the less becomes imputation and justification. The gift is the uniqueness of the person of Christ—“much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace, by the one man, Jesus Christ.” The words “the gift by the grace” is e)n plus the instrumental of xarij. We not only have grace as a principle but grace as a means of providing. So we have the principle of grace and the action of grace combined to put this together. Next the ablative of source from e(ij – “one,” and the noun a)nqrwpoj – man: “by the one man,” and then “Jesus Christ.”
Principle: If God did the most for us when we were spiritually dead in Adam He can only do much more than the most for us now that we possess divine righteousness and resultant justification. That is because when the most was done for us we were related to the wrong man—Adam. But now we are related to the right man—Jesus Christ.
“hath abounded unto many” – e)ij plus the accusative plural from the definite article, plus the accusative plural of poluj. The only qualification is instant adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ. It should be translated “to the many.” That is, the many who believe. The verb means to increase or superabundant. It is the aorist active indicative of the verb perisseuw. It is used in a transitive sense. It means to make over rich, to provide in superabundance, to increase beyond imagination. We can translate it, “has provided superabundance for the many” or “has provided over-richness for the many.” The many are the believers. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the work of Christ on the cross in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. The existing results are three fold: a) the potential which comes at salvation, the imputation of divine righteousness and resultant justification; b) the capacity, the provision of Bible doctrine; c) the reality is maturity adjustment to the justice of God resulting in superabundance of blessing. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb. He has provided superabundance for the many who believe. The indicative mood is declarative viewing the action of the verb from the viewpoint of reality.
Translation: “But not as that trangression [Adam’s original sin], so also is that gracious gift [the work of Christ]. For if by the transgression of [that] one [Adam] the many died [spiritual death], much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, by the one man, Jesus Christ, who has provided superabundance for the many [who believe].”
1. The believer in Christ through salvation adjustment to the justice of God has been placed in a greater position than that which was lost by Adam in the garden.
2. God provides more in grace adjustment to the justice of God than man ever possessed originally in the garden.
3. The gift of grace, Jesus Christ, provides the a fortiori link.
4. The justice of God did the most in judging our sins when Christ was carrying them on the cross.
5. If the justice of God did the greater at the cross it follows a fortiori that the justice of God can do the less—temporal and eternal blessing for the mature believer.
6. The sin of the first Adam results in the condemnation of the human race.
7. But now the grace gift of God provides more for the many than was lost originally.
8. The work of Christ on the cross provided man with more than Adam had before the fall.
9. Hence, the believer is not restored to the status of Adam before the fall, he is restored to something far greater than Adam ever had.
10. This constitutes a double a fortiori. If God can do the greater at salvation He can do the less after salvation. If God can do less after salvation He can do greater than less again and again and again.
11. So salvation adjustment to the justice of God, which is less than the work of Christ, becomes greater once more through maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
Verse 16 – “And not as it was by the one that sinned.” It begins with the emphatic use of the conjunction kai—“In fact,” the objective negative adverb o)u, denying the reality of an alleged fact, plus the comparative particle o(j, plus the preposition dia with the genitive for the adjective numeral e(ij, plus a)nqrwpoj which is implied but not given—“In fact, not like through one [Adam].” Plus the aorist active participle of the verb a(martanw—“who sinned.” The aorist tense is the constative aorist and it refers to a momentary action in past time, i.e. the original sin of Adam. The active voice: Adam produced the action. The participle is circumstantial.
“so is the gift” – the word for gift is the nominative subject dwrema and it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as the last Adam. “In fact, the gift is not like the one who sinned.” The gift is the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, the last Adam is not like the first Adam. Therefore the intention of this verse is to provide the a fortiori factor for the parenthetical much more.
“for the judgment was by one to condemnation” – the postpositive conjunctive particle gar is used in an explanatory sense, plus the affirmative particle men which usually works with an other particle, de—Classical Greek, “for on the one hand; on the other hand.” This is called the correlative use of the affirmative particle, it sets up a contrast between the gift, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the first Adam. Plus another subject in the nominative singular krima which usually means action or the function of a judge, but here it means a judicial verdict—“for on the one hand the judicial verdict came by one transgression resulting in condemnation.” In other words, the judicial function of the justice of God produced the verdict. The verdict came as the result of one transgression and it led to the condemnation of the entire human race. We have e)k plus the ablative from e(ij again—“by one [transgression].” The ablative of means is used here when the expression of means is accompanied by the implication of origin or source. We have the origin or the source of our condemnation, Adam’s sin. Plus e)ij with the accusative of the noun katakrima—“punishment” or “doom.” Actually condemnation was in the verdict, therefore katakrima means carrying out the sentence of punishment—“resulting in condemnation.”
1. It means, first of all, from one to many. From one transgression [Adam’s sin] to many condemnations. From one transgression many spiritual deaths.
2. The gift which is the saving work of Christ on the cross is the means of establishing a fortiori in this section.
3. The gift resulted in many transgressions or sins being judged for one justification.
4. The first Adam committed one sin and the entire human race came under condemnation because of that one sin.
5. The last Adam was judged for all sins and the entire human race is eligible for justification. This sets up a fortiori in the context.
6. This is a restatement with amplification of Romans 5:12. All sinned when Adam sinned.
7. But because of one man’s work on the cross the entire human race is eligible for justification.
8. From one comes many sins, from many sins comes one justification.
“but the free gift is of many offences unto justification” – the adversative conjunction de, “but on the other hand,” is used with the previous affirmative particle men. Plus the nominative singular subject xarisma—“gracious gift,” referring to the saving work of Christ on the cross, bearing our sins and being judged for them by the justice of God. Plus the nominative neuter singular of the definite article which is used as a demonstrative pronoun to place special emphasis on the one act of Christ being judged for our sins. That is why we can call it “that gracious gift.” Then the prepositional phrase e)k plus the ablative plural of poluj—“by [or, because of] many [transgressions].”
“unto justification” – the preposition e)ij plus the accusative dikaiwma which means a statute, and ordinance or commandment: “resulting in condemnation.” The condemnation is spiritual death. It was Paul who so exploited the word dikaiwma that new meanings were derived from it. In the plural it denotes commandments or statutes, but Paul was one of the first people in history to use dikaiwma in the singular, and he used it in the singular to emphasise to the Gentiles that there is a divine order to be embraced, not a series of commandments to keep. The Jews had given the impression that you had to keep a series of commandments, and by switching this to the singular he showed that there is one divine order to be embraced. The word dikaiwma means a right act, the fulfilment of a legal requirement. And from this came another meaning: a sentence of justification. From this comes the meaning in our context: a judicial act of justification. So this is translated, “resulting in a judicial act of justification.”
Translation: “In fact the gift [Jesus Christ] is not like what occurred through one who sinned: for on the one hand the judicial verdict came by one transgression resulting in condemnation [spiritual death], but on the other hand that gracious gift [incarnation and work of Christ] was given because of many transgressions, resulting in one judicial act of justification.”
Principle #1
1. The integrity of God is composed of righteousness and justice. Righteousness is the principle of divine integrity, justice is the function of divine integrity.
2. What the righteousness of God demands the justice of God executes.
3. Man’s point of contact is the justice of God.
4. The justice of God is the source of both blessing and cursing. However, cursing precedes blessing.
5. The original sin of Adam was Satan’s challenge to the justice of God. Could the justice of God replaced the love of God in God’s relationship with man, and could the justice of God bless mankind? Man’s point of contact with God in the perfect environment of the garden was the love of God. The love of God did not prevent the original fall, but once the fall occurred the point of reference changes from love to justice.
6. The justice of God was never the issue with man until man sinned.
7. In the garden of Eden man’s point of reference was the love of God. The absence of sin in the garden made it possible for the love of God to be Adam’s point of contact.
8. But when Adam sinned the point of contact changed from the love of God to the justice of God.
9. The one sin of Adam changed the entire structure of God’s relationship to man.
10. One sin and divine love was phased out as the point of reference for mankind.
11. One sin and the justice of God became the point of reference to condemn. Not only that one sin but all mankind in that one sin. Adam’s sin was imputed to all mankind by the justice of God at the point of physical birth. By so doing our personal sins are reserved for the cross and the means of salvation.
12. Innocence was the period of human history when the love of God was the point of reference for mankind.
13. The original sin of Adam changed the point of reference from the love of God to the justice of God.
14. The garden was the place of God’s love but justice placed man in sin under spiritual death and total separation from the love of God. That is why man was expelled from the garden.
15. All functions of God after the original sin must be related to the justice of God—condemnation of one man, condemnation of all mankind, salvation provision for all mankind in the gracious gift of Jesus Christ, the justice of God judging all sins while Christ was bearing them on the cross.
16. From all these condemnation functions from the justice of God came the blessing functions of the justice of God. Divine justice is the source of blessing and cursing.
1. The justice of God functions in the direction of the first and last Adam to provide for us blessing for our point of contact or point of reference.
2. At the time man’s fall the function of the justice of God was judgment on Adam and condemnation on the human race, the seed of Adam.
3. From the source of one man’s sin condemnation from the justice of God came upon the entire human race. We are not condemned because of the sins we commit, we are condemned to spiritual death because of the sin that Adam committed.
4. The mechanics of this condemnation is twofold: a) Direct condemnation through the imputation of Adam’s sin; b) Indirect condemnation through the perpetuation of the old sin nature.
5. Furthermore, from man’s old sin nature comes man’s personal sins which are also condemned by the justice of God.
6. For the justice of God must execute what the righteousness of God demands, and the righteousness of God demands the condemnation of all personal sins in the human race.
7. Therefore the “gracious gift.”
8. Since man is born spiritually dead because of imputed and inherent sin the accumulation of personal sins in the human race were not judged between Adam and Moses, nor at any other time until the cross.
9. Then all sin, past, present and future, including those committed in the Millennium, were poured out on Christ at Golgotha and judged by the justice of God.
10. From the source of one act of sin comes condemnation from the justice of God.
11. From the judgment of many sins comes one act of justification from the justice of God.
1. Justification and condemnation are two functions from the same source: the justice of God.
2. The human race is condemned for one sins but salvation is provided for all sins.
3. If one man’s sin brings condemnation to the human race—and it does—much more one man’s being judged on the cross brings justification to the human race—and it does.
4. One transgression condemned man in the garden.
5. Many transgressions were condemned in Christ on the cross.
6. The key to the garden is one transgression; the key to the cross is many transgressions.
7. The justice of God judged one transgression in the garden bringing condemnation to the human race.
8. The justice of God judged many transgressions on the cross bringing salvation/justification to the human race.
9. Therefore justification is much more than condemnation because justification deals with all the sins of the world, while condemnation dealt with only one sin—the original sin—in the world.
10. This explains the a fortiori logic in the parenthetical much mores.
11. Justification is the greater work of God. The justice of God judged one sin at the fall of man, but all sins at the cross.
12. If God provided the greater in justification, it follows a fortiori that God can provide the less of capacity for blessing from the justice of God and the reality of blessing from the justice of God.
13. Verse 16 explains the a fortiori of both verses 15 & 17 where we have much more.
14. In verse 15, if the justice of God provided the greater in justification it follows a fortiori that the justice of God can provide the less—capacity for blessing.
15. In verse 17, if the justice of God provided the greater in justification it follows a fortiori that the justice of God can provides the less—reality of blessing.
1. “Much more” sets up a fortiori logic.
2. In this context much more refers to the fact that the greater is justification, while the less is both capacity for blessing and the reality of it.
3. Providing capacity for blessing and the reality of blessing from the justice of God is nothing compared to providing justification.
4. If one man’s sin led to condemnation of mankind and mankind since that one sin multiplies sins into billions ad infenitum, then it follows that justification is the greater blessing and prosperity in time is the less.
5. If God gave the greater He will not withhold the less.
Verse 17 – the a fortiori of eternal blessing from the justice of God. Blessing doesn’t
stop in time for those who crack the maturity barrier, it has an eternal future that staggers the imagination. “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one” – it begins with the conditional particle e)i which with the indicative introduces the protasis of a fist class condition. Plus the explanatory use of the postpositive conjunctive particle gar, it explains a fortiori logic relating to our future eternal blessing. Plus the instrumental of means from the definite article with the instrumental of paraptwma, the word for transgression, but it refers to Adam’s sin. Plus the possessive genitive of the definite article with the possessive genitive of the numeral e(ij. Adjectives in the Greek are often used as substantives and the meaning changes slightly. E(ij here refers to Adam. Then comes the subject, o( qanatoj, used when one death is going to be differentiated from another, but when you have both deaths of Christ you have an adjective, mekroj in the plural. In the plural it becomes mekroi and it means deaths, usually with the preposition e)k—“from deaths,” used in resurrection. It becomes a noun. So o( qanatoj refers to spiritual death here. So we have the nominative singular translated “the deaths.” “For if by the transgression of the one the death [the condition into which we were born, spiritual death].” Death “ruled” – the aorist active indicative of basileuw which means to rule, to reign. This is a culminative aorist tense, it views spiritual death from the justice of God in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results—because everyone is born spiritually dead spiritual death rules in the human race. The active voice: spiritual death produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of the first class condition. Plus the prepositional phrase, dia with the definite article and the genitive of the numeral adjective e(ij used as a substantive. Dia plus the genitive means “through”; dia plus the accusative means “because of.” So it is “death ruled through the one [the first Adam],” and it did.
Principle
1. One man’s transgression in the garden resulted in the justice of God condemning the human race with spiritual death.
2. Remember that man’s point of reference in the garden was the love of God, not the justice of God.
3. The love of God makes no provision for sin, that which conflicts with the function of the justice of God.
4. Furthermore, the justice of God cannot make provision for sin in salvation until the justice of God first condemns sin.
5. Therefore the justice of God had no relationship with man in the garden until man sinned.
6. Then man entered into a relationship with the justice of God. It was a relationship of condemnation—spiritual death.
7. The principle: Justice condemns before justice blesses.
8. Condemnation precedes salvation/justification.
9. Spiritual death rules in the human race through the fall of Adam. Satan is the ruler of this world but the ruler in mankind is spiritual death.
10. This was the function of the justice of God. What Christ did to overcome this is “the most.”
11. If God has done the most for us in justification it follows a fortiori that He can do the less in eternity.
“much more” – the dative singular from the adjective poluj is used idiomatically because we have a comparative adverb mallon. In other words, the greater has already been accomplished.
1. Here is the beginning of a fortiori logic—with stronger reason, to a greater degree.
2. If the greater function of the justice of God has occurred the less will not be withheld.
3. If God can do the greater it follows a fortiori that God can also accomplish the less.
4. If God did the just thing in condemning Adam and the human race, it follows a fortiori that God can do the less in rewarding from His justice blessing in time, blessing in eternity.
5. If a weak cause [the sin of Adam] passively committed by the human race while seminally in Adam has brought spiritual death, much more certainly will a strong cause [the imputation and justification received at salvation] provide the a fortiori for eternal blessing.
6. If we have received the greater in imputation and justification it follows a fortiori that God’s justice will not hold back the less: blessing in time, eternal blessing and reward for the mature believer.
7. If God did the most for us in time [great blessing for the mature believer] He will only do much more than the most in eternity.
“they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness” – the greatest problem with this is a misplaced prepositional phrase or two. For example, there is the prepositional phrase e)n plus the locative of zwh. The problem is that it modifies the verb lambanw, not the verb basileuw. Basileuw means to rule, lambanw means to receive. It should be translated, “much more they who receive in life,” a very important change. In the KJV the prepositional phrase is attached to the wrong verb. In the English of the KJV it says, “they shall reign in life.” That is incorrect, it should be “they who receive in life.”
“which receive” – the articular present active participle of the verb lambanw. The definite article is used as a relative pronoun referring to the believer who not only attains salvation adjustment to the justice of God and resultant righteousness but also attains maturity adjustment to the justice of God. The present tense is a customary present tense. This always happens to everyone who cracks the maturity barrier and/or attains maturity adjustment to the justice of God. The active voice of the participle: the subject produces the action of the verb, and the subject is the person who first of all attains salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Then over a period of time he develops a capacity, rebounding and taking in doctrine, and attains maturity adjustment to the justice of God. So it is the believer who attains that maturity adjustment who produces the action of this participle. The participle is circumstantial with the customary present indicating the reality of the fact that in every generation there are those who crack the maturity barrier and who receive directly from the justice of God the most fantastic blessing.
Next is e)n plus the locative of zwh used for the function of life. Zwh almost always refers to the function of life, but there is a synonym, bioj, which is used for the pattern of life or the manner of life. So far: “much more they who receive in life.” Note: That is in life.
“the abundance of grace” – with the accusative singular direct object is the definite article and with it a noun, the accusative singular direct object from perisseia. It means abundance or surplus. Plus the genitive singular of xarij. When the believer cracks the maturity barrier he has a surplus of grace in the sense of unusual blessing—“the surplus of grace.” This is a reference to those direct blessings from the justice of God to those who crack the maturity barrier. Remember: Divine justice can only bless perfect righteousness. Blessing from the justice of God must go in the direction of perfection, it condemns anything less than perfection.
1. The integrity of God is composed of divine righteousness and justice. Justice is the guardian of the attributes of God as well as the believer’s contact with God.
2. There must be no compromise in the function of the attributes of God. Hence, righteousness demands righteousness and justice demands justice.
3. To avoid compromise and inconsistency a principle of doctrine becomes axiomatic: Divine justice can only bless divine righteousness.
4. Righteousness is the principle of divine integrity; justice is the function of divine integrity.
5. God cannot accept anything less than perfect righteousness and God cannot bless anything less than perfect righteousness.
6. Therefore the justice of God, the source of all direct blessing from God, is free to provide such blessing where perfect righteousness resides.
7. Hence, the imputation of divine righteousness is absolutely necessary for any blessing from the justice of God.
8. God loves His own integrity composed of His righteousness and justice.
9. Therefore what righteousness rejects justice condemns. What righteousness accepts or approves divine justice blesses.
10. This fulfils the principle: the justice of God administers what the righteousness of God demands.
11. At the moment of faith in Christ mankind receives the imputation of divine righteousness and resultant justification.
12. God recognises His righteousness wherever it resides.
13. Justification is simply God recognising the imputation of divine righteousness at the moment of faith in Christ.
14. Justification precedes all other blessings from God.
15. Therefore righteousness imputed and resultant justification is the primary potential for all blessing from the justice of God.
16. While righteousness imputed is the potential, doctrine perceived through the function of GAP is the capacity for blessing as well as the reality.
“and the gift of righteousness” – the connective use of kai, plus the objective genitive singular from dwrea which means gift or bounty. Plus the descriptive genitive singular from the definite article and the descriptive genitive singular of dikaiosunh. That is God’s righteousness, the basis for receiving all this blessing.
1. If the justice of God provided in life the greater, namely the gift of righteousness and direct blessing from the justice of God to the mature believer, it follows a fortiori that He can do the less which is reward in eternity.
2. If God can bless the mature believer in phase two or time it follows that He can reward and bless the same believer in eternity.
3. The more difficult is blessing from the justice of God in time (than in eternity). In eternity there is no opposition from Satan, from the old sin nature, from false doctrine, etc.
4. The easier is the blessing for the mature believer in eternity. That is why we have this phrase, “shall reign by one, Jesus Christ.”
“shall reign by one” – future active indicative of basileuw, meaning to reign or to rule. The future tense is a predictive future, it indicates an event which is expected to occur in the future—eternity, Revelation 20:6. The active voice: believers who have attained maturity adjustment to the justice of God in time produce the action of the verb in eternity. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine. The preposition dia with the genitive of the definite article, the genitive of the adjective numeral e(ij used as a noun or a substantive—“through the one.” Then, so that there will be no doubt as to who that one is, the genitive of apposition I)hsouj Xristoj, “Jesus Christ.”
Translation: “For if by the transgression of the one [Adam’s original sin] the [spiritual] death ruled through the one [Adam, and it did]; much more they who receive in life the surplus of grace [blessing from maturity adjustment], and the gift of righteousness, they shall reign through the one, Jesus Christ.”
Imputation must
have direction
a) At human birth
b) At the birth of Christ
c) At the new birth
1. Human birth consists of physical life and spiritual death occurring simultaneously. There is no life in the blastocyst, in the embryo, or the foetus. As long as these are in the womb there is no life. There is reflex motility, movement, but there is no life. No one has life until it is imputed. Life begins when the foetus emerges from the womb and God gives to that foetus neshamah, spark of life or breath of life.
2. God cannot impute life without that life having a place to go. In other words, God does not impute life to a blade of grass or to a stone, or to a piece of bread. The home or the direction of human life is the soul. So God imputes to the format soul of the foetus when it emerges life. All imputations must have a home. The home of human life is the soul, therefore God imputes life to the soul.
3. The old sin nature is not a part of that home, though it influences the soul in all of its trends. An accurate and Biblical name for the old sin nature is “Adam’s trend.” Adam’s trends are three: toward sin, toward good, toward evil. While the old sin nature influences the soul it is not a part of the soul.
4. The old sin nature [also, Adam’s trend, the body of corruption, contamination] is the ruler of mankind, every person who enters the world. Satan is the ruler of this world but the old sin nature is the ruler of people.
5. At birth the justice of God imputes Adam’s original sin to its home—the old sin nature. Imputation must have direction.
6. The home for the imputation of Adam’s sin is the old sin nature. Without the old sin nature the justice of God could not impute Adam’s sin to us at birth. Without having an old sin nature, and therefore the imputation of Adam’s sin to us, our personal sins would have to be imputed to us and Christ would have died in vain. It isn’t that way but these are the implications. If Adam’s sin cannot be imputed to us our personal sins cannot be imputed to Christ at the cross.
7. The old sin nature is acquired genetically, while Adam’s sin is acquired by imputation. Through imputation and genetics when we are born we are a facsimile of Adam after he sinned. After the fall he immediately had, besides spiritual death, and old sin nature. And through direct imputation and through the function of genetics the moment we are born we are duplicates of Adam. We combine Adam’s original sin with Adam’s trend.
8. The old sin nature is transmitted through 23 male chromosomes which fertilise the female ovum. A cell has 46, and 23 is obviously half. When cells split through mitosis there are 46 chromosomes in each, but when a cell has half—23 chromosomes—the process is called meiosis. The meiosis by which the female ovum has a similar 23 chromosomes is known as polar body, a genetic process by which corruption or contamination of chromosomes is thrown off in the ovum is preparation for its fertility. In other words, before the female ovum comes through the fallopian tubes it is prepared by a process so that a woman has a unique trend. Every cell in the body of the male is contaminated, the old sin nature is in every one. The reason we have different kinds of sins is because we have different trends. The genes combine in different ways so that you have red hair or black hair, for example. Polar body in any text book on genetics is the virgin birth, and most people who study and ridicule the virgin birth actually have it in every text book where it discusses polar body. The woman is unique, she has one cell that is free from the old sin nature or Adam’s trend, and that is the one cell which through the function of polar body throws off the genetic impurities until there are 23 chromosomes in that ovum to be fertilised and they are pure, free from the old sin nature. The woman is a carrier of the old sin nature but she cannot transmit it. The man is the transmitter of the old sin nature.
9. The justice of God imputes Adam’s sin to Adam’s trend, resulting is instant spiritual death. Romans 5:12. The imputation of Adam’s sin + Adam’s trend = spiritual death. (Spiritual death is not separation from God, that is an over-simplification.) Spiritual death is the imputation of Adam’s trend to the old sin nature.
10. In other words, imputation must have a direction. When God imputes the spark of human life to the soul He also imputes the sin of Adam to the old sin nature. So at birth there are two homes. At the point at which God imputes human life to the soul the justice of God imputes simultaneously Adam’s sin to the old sin nature. The result is obvious: we have both physical life and spiritual death.
11. Therefore by these two imputations every member of the human race is a facsimile of Adam after he sinned. His original sin plus his old sin nature is spiritual death, not the sins he commits afterward. The cross is the issue with personal sins.
12. Spiritual death is Adam’s original sin united with Adam’s trend and given to us at birth. Personal sin is not the basis of spiritual death but one of the three manifestations of spiritual death, the other two being good and evil.
At the birth of
Christ
1. All cells in the human race are contaminated by the old sin nature. One exception: through meiosis and the function of polar body the 23 chromosomes of the ovum are uncontaminated and are free from Adam’s trend.
2. While the woman is a carrier of the old sin nature she cannot transmit the old sin nature genetically.
3. Only the male can transmit the old sin nature with the 23 chromosomes obtained by meiosis, used to fertilise the ovum.
4. The virgin Mary was a carrier of the old sin nature. Mary was born with the imputation of Adam’s sin. But she possessed periodically that one pure cell. That ovum was fertilised by the Holy Spirit.
5. At the birth of Christ there was no imputation of Adam’s sin. This is because imputation must have a home, a direction; and genetically there was no home there.
6. The pregnancy, parthogensis: The Holy Spirit provided 23 perfect chromosomes which fertilise the 23 chromosomes in the ovum of Mary.
7. Adam’s sin could not be imputed to Christ because there was no home, no direction, no old sin nature. Christ had to have an old sin nature formed genetically from those 23 male chromosomes for the imputation of Adam’s sin, and they were not there. So for this one time only in history the justice of God could not impute Adam’s sin to a person at birth—male child, the Lord Jesus.
8. Because Adam deliberately sinned and the woman was deceived in the original sin in the fall of mankind, the woman is a carrier but only the man can transmit the old sin nature. While both the man and the woman were in the transgression there is difference in their approach. The woman was deceived but she did it. The man knew what he was doing and deliberately sinned.
9. The woman is a carrier of the old sin nature, she cannot transmit it. The old sin nature contaminates every cell in her body, she has a body of corruption. The one exception is the ovum prepared for fertilisation through the function of polar body.
10. Because of parthogenesis [virgin birth] there was no genetic formation of the old sin nature, no imputation of Adam’s sin, and no spiritual death at birth of Christ. So at birth Christ did not have an old sin nature and therefore Adam’s sin could not be imputed. Therefore Christ was the only person in His humanity ever born without spiritual death, because spiritual death is not separation from God, spiritual death is the imputation of Adam’s sin plus Adam’s trend.
11. When God the Father gave life to the soul of Christ divine justice did not imputed Adam’s sin—no direction, no home, no old sin nature.
12. Christ then lived a perfect life, resisting all temptation. Only through personal sin could Christ have acquired the old sin nature.
13. Therefore when Christ was on the cross all sins in the human race were imputed to Him and judged by the justice of God. This is the basis of salvation adjustment to the justice of God by faith in Jesus Christ.
1. At the moment of salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ God’s perfect righteousness is imputed to the believer so that blessing from the justice of God can have a home, a direction. All imputations have to have a home or direction.
2. Divine justice can only bless perfect righteousness. At the moment of salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ God’s perfect righteousness is imputed to the believer so that blessing from the justice of God can have a home.
3. Therefore blessing from the justice of God has a home—the imputation of God’s righteousness, i.e. justification.
4. However, blessing from the justice of God remains potential until the believer attains capacity for blessing through maximum doctrine resident in the soul.
_________________________
1. Spiritual death is Adam’s original sin united with Adam’s trend at birth. At birth we are born physically alive because of the imputation of life to the soul, but at the same time the imputation of Adam’s sin to the old sin nature gives us spiritual death.
2. Obviously then, spiritual death entered the world through Adam’s original sin.
3. Spiritual death is the imputation of Adam’s sin to Adam’s old sin nature or Adam’s trend. In other words, Adam’s original sin is combined with Adam’s trend to produce the facsimile of Adam after the fall and/or spiritual death.
4. Imputation must have a direction for the justice of God to function.
5. At physical birth the justice of God imputes Adam’s sin to Adam’s trend resulting in instant spiritual death.
6. At physical birth life has a home in the soul while the imputation of Adam’s sin has a home in the old sin nature.
7. Therefore by the imputation of life and at the same time the imputation of Adam’s sin at birth the human race is a facsimile of Adam after he sinned.
8. Spiritual death is Adam’s original sin united with Adam’s trend at birth.
Adam and Eve were not putting on clothes because they were naked, they
were covering their bodies of corruption. This is a trend. Every cell is corrupted by the old sin nature genetically. It is the entrance of the sin of Adam into the world that led to two factors. a) Satan becoming the ruler of this world; b) The old sin nature rules through spiritual death. The old sin nature is the sovereign of life.
Question: If Adam had not sinned, would he have had eternal life? The answer is no. If Adam had not sinned at this time he would still be on a daily contract with God. His contact is renewed for another day when at sundown he passes up the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Had he not sinned he would still not have had eternal life, he would merely go on day by day with perfect environment which could only continue as long as he rejected the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Good and evil is the enemy of perfect environment. It is the policy of Satan that inevitably destroys good environment. It was something that Adam did not need in the garden, his provision was perfect, and it was from the love of God, therefore no grace. Two things were missing from the garden: the function of the grace of God and the justice of God as the point of reference. These two are greater factors than existed in the garden. As long as the love of God was the point of reference and the source of Adam’s perfect environment, the source of his perfection, there was no place for either the justice of God or the grace of God. These are the two factors that add up to the first a fortiori of divine blessing. Adam had no security in the garden, he had to behave a day at a time. We have a security, for our behaviour is not even an issue—at least in this subject.
In the garden the love of God provided everything perfectly for Adam. Both Adam
and the woman were perfect persons and they lived in perfect environment provided through the love of God—a perfect age, a perfect epoch. Two things were missing because they were not necessary at that time: the justice of God and grace. There was no need for grace as the policy of the justice of God in blessing. There was one issue, and that was a divine prohibition regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Good and evil at the present time is the policy of Satan as the ruler of this world and the function of the old sin nature as the sovereign of human life. This is important because by combining a function and a policy together you have the counterfeit of the integrity of God. Righteousness is the principle of divine integrity and justice is the function of divine integrity. Policy and function is Satan’s attempt to duplicate the integrity of God. All of this was a test for perfect volition. Perfect volition only becomes imperfect volition by the disobedience to the divine prohibition. And there was a day by day contract. In answer to the question, Could Adam and the woman have eternal life in the garden? the answer is no. As long as they refrain from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil they could have one day at a time. It is impossible to have eternal life without the function of the justice of God as the source in the essence of God and the policy of the essence of God in blessing, which is grace. The woman’s sin could not be imputed to the human race because it was a transgression of ignorance. A transgression of ignorance cannot be used as a real imputation. Immediately the man and the woman sinned they came under a new system. No longer would the love of God be the point of reference or the point of contact for the human race, it goes to something which can provide greater, and that is the justice of God. So the justice of God goes immediately into action and it has two functions: cursing and blessing.
The fourth paragraph in chapter 5 (verses 18-21) is the grace factor related to the justice of God. Remember, there was no grace in the garden. Grace could
only be operational when man is undeserving. In the garden man was not undeserving, man was perfect. Therefore the grace factor only operates with the justice factor. What do we have to do to be undeserving? Sin is not the correct answer. All we have to do is have the justice of God condemning us, then we are qualified for grace. Grace always follows the principle that cursing is turned to blessing. Cursing comes first because those who are candidates for grace are undeserving.
Verse 18 – the antithetical functions of divine justice. The justice of God is the source of condemnation, cursing and blessing. “Therefore” – a)ra o)un. A)ra is an inferential illative participle, never used at the beginning of a clause and therefore it indicates that this is the conclusion of verse 12. There is a parenthesis beginning in verse 13 and terminating with verse 17. A)ra closes a parenthesis. (There are half a dozen illative particle that start a parenthesis, or certain other principles such as a clause beginning with i(na.) The word o)un is an inferential particle denoting that what it introduces is the result of an inference from verse 12 with logical help from the parenthesis. This is translated “So therefore,” and it must be connected with verse 12.
“as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation” – the relative adverb w(j is used as a comparative particle indicating the manner in which something proceeds. The preposition dia plus the genitive of the adjective numeral e(ij, plus paraptwma for “transgression”—“So therefore as through one transgression”—Adam’s original sin. Then there has to be a verb—e)llogew which means to impute—because we are dealing with ellipsis. We have e(ij plus paj plus the accusative plural from the noun a)nqrwpoj—“to all mankind.” Plus another prepositional phrase, e)ij plus the accusative singular from katakrima, which means a result of imputation. When you have a judicial imputation you are judged. Katakrima is the judgment—“resulting in condemnation.” “So therefore as through one transgression [Adam’s original sin] imputed to all mankind resulting in condemnation.” Condemnation is a reference to physical birth.
Principle
1. Human birth consists of physical life and spiritual death occurring simultaneously.
2. Life begins when the foetus emerges from the womb and God imputes human life to the divinely prepared home, the soul. This is a real imputation since God prepared that home for human life. The soul is later corrupted by the old sin nature. The old sin nature is not in the soul but it corrupts the soul.
3. All real imputations have a home, a place to go, a direction. A real imputation involves receiving what is antecedently one’s own. The reason it is antecedently one’s own is because there is a home for it.
4. This is in contrast to judicial imputation which does not have a home and receives what is not antecedently its own. So a judicial imputation emphasises the fact that the origin is the justice of God. There is no home, no target. So when an imputation comes from the justice of God and there is no home then God must judge the area where there is no home, or the person involved.
5. God prepared the soul as the home for human life, but He did not prepare the old sin nature.
6. The old sin nature is not a part of the soul and it is not from God. It is genetically formed.
7. While the old sin nature influences the soul it is not a part of the soul.
8. The source of the old sin nature is Adam’s original sin at the fall.
9. Adam received the old sin nature as a result of his original transgression and spiritual death.
10. At the fall Satan became the ruler of the world and the old sin nature became the sovereign of human life ruling through physical death.
11. At physical birth the justice of God imputes Adam’s original sin to its genetically formed home. This is a real imputation.
12. So that in the human race spiritual death or the condemnation of this verse is the imputation of Adam’s sin to Adam’s trend, forming immediately at life Adam’s facsimile.
13. Spiritual death is a combination of Adam’s sin and Adam’s old sin nature.
14. The old sin nature is acquired genetically, while Adam’s sin is acquired by imputation.
15. The Old sin nature is transmitted through the 23 male chromosomes which fertilise the female ovum.
16. The meiosis by which the female ovum has a pure 23 chromosomes is known as polar body, a genetic process by which corruption or the contaminated chromosomes in the woman are thrown off in preparation for fertilisation. The impurity is transmitted by the man who sinned in cognisance in contrast to the woman’s original sin which was ignorance.
17. At birth the justice of God imputes Adam’s sin to Adam’s sin nature.
Principle #2
1.
The condemnation is spiritual death. Spiritual death comes through the
imputation of Adam’s sin to Adam’s nature.
2. This is known as spiritual death or condemnation.
3. Therefore while God imputes life to the soul simultaneously the justice of God imputes Adam’s sin to the sin nature. This is the condemnation of spiritual death. Our relationship with God at physical birth is spiritual death. Our relationship with God at the new birth is justification.
4. Life has a home in man’s soul, while Adam’s sin has a home in the genetically-formed old sin nature.
5. Mankind is under the condemnation of spiritual death or the imputation of Adam’s sin to Adam’s trend. We are born condemned; we are born again justified.
“even so by the righteousness of one” – the correlative adverb o(utoj refers to what
precedes, plus the adjunctive use of kai: “so also.” We have seen condemnation, so let’s see justification. Then a prepositional phrase dia plus the genitive of an adjective and a noun, e(ij and dikaiwma, the numeral “one” and the judicial act of “condemnation.” In verse 16 it was used for the result of the work of Christ on the cross, but here it emphasises the imputation of all personal sins in history to the Lord Jesus Christ. So fare we have “so also through one sentence of condemnation”—a judicial act of justice whereby the justice of God judged all personal sins on the cross.
1. All cells in the human race are contaminated by the old sin nature, with one exception. All chromosomes in those cells are contaminated, with one exception.
2. Through meiosis and the function of polar body a female ovum being prepared for fertilisation 23 contaminated chromosomes are thrown off but the 23 remaining chromosomes are free from Adam’s trend. Therefore the ovum prepared for fertilisation is uncontaminated. It has no old sin nature.
3. The woman is a carrier of the old sin nature but she cannot transmit it.
4. The woman is a carrier of the old sin nature but the ovum prepared for fertilisation is the exception to this contamination.
5. Therefore in copulation and resultant pregnancy 23 male chromosomes used to fertilise the ovum genetically transmit the old sin nature.
6. The virgin Mary was spiritually dead and a carrier of the old sin nature.
7. However, in parthogenesis she possessed that one pure cell fertilised by the Holy Spirit.
8. As a result God the Father could not impute to the Lord Jesus at birth Adam’s original sin. There was no male involved in copulation. It was a virgin pregnancy followed by a virgin birth. Therefore Christ was born a facsimile of Adam before the fall.
“the free gift upon all men unto justification of life” – literally this means “to all mankind resulting in justification of life.
“upon all men” – e)ij plus the accusative plural from the adjective paj and a)nqrwpoj, “to all mankind.” This phrase takes propitiation, the Godward side, and reconciliation, the manward side, and glues them together with the concept of atonement.
“unto justification” – e)ij plus the accusative singular from dikaiwsij, “resulting in justification,” plus the adverbial genitive of time from zwh plus the definite article, “in this life.” The genitive of time does not signify a point of time or duration of time, it rather indicates a distinction of time. Hence, the genitive of time refers to this life rather than eternity. Salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in Christ and resultant justification must occur now. Cf. 2 Corinthians 6:2. “God’s righteousness was imputed” is inserted into the ellipsis from the context.
Translation: “So therefore as through one transgression [Adam’s original sin] imputed to all mankind resulting in condemnation, so also through one sentence of condemnation [imputation of personal sins to Christ on the cross] God’s righteousness was imputed to all mankind resulting in the justification in this life.”
Verse 19 – the antithetical decision of the two Adams. We have a conditional clause with a protasis and an apodosis. This presents the two decisions of history in a dramatic way. The protasis is a first class condition so the supposition is from the viewpoint of reality. We take the reality of Adam’s negative decision and see how God has added to that decision—first of all, condemnation which puts man out of the garden, but from that condemnation comes the function of grace. From the function of grace comes something far greater than the perfect environment of the garden enjoyed by perfect persons. What is better than perfect environment? Cracking the maturity barrier and receiving blessing from the justice of God. The protasis here deals with the first Adam’s decision whereas the apodosis which makes inference from the protasis gives us the decision of the second or last Adam.
“For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners” – the postpositive conjunctive particle gar is used in an explanatory sense, and the comparative adverb w(sper: “For as.” Then a prepositional phrase, dia plus the genitive of parakoh which means disobedience, but it means a certain kind of disobedience. This is used primarily for female disobedience. It means actually, not willing to hear, therefore disobedient. It is a feminine word. Next is an ablative of means from the numeral e(ij plus the noun a(nqrwpoj, which means “mankind.” The ablative of means is used when the expression of means is accompanied by the implication of its origin or source. The feminine noun indicates something else: that Adam also rejected authority. Man is feminine when he rejects authority.
1. This is a reference to the original sin of Adam in the garden.
2. Note the character of the original sin—disobedience to the authority of God.
3. God was the authority as creator and the provider of perfect environment. The perfect reference for provision was the love of God.
4. Neither justice nor grace was involved in the pristine perfection of the garden of Eden.
5. Adam’s original sin changed all that and man’s point of reference became the justice of God.
6. The first function of divine justice was condemnation, for righteousness demands righteousness and justice demands justice. The justice of God executes what righteousness demands.
7. Adam’s original sin resulted in both immediate spiritual death and the immediate acquisition of the old sin nature. The old sin nature originated from Adam’s disobedience. The old sin nature is a rejection of authority.
8. Adam’s perfect body became a body of corruption and the flesh was contaminated by Adam’s trend known as “the old man” or “the old sin nature.”
9. Adam’s sin nature was perpetuated at physical birth through genetics.
10.
The genetically formed old sin nature is the home for the imputation of Adam’s
original sin to each member of the human race at birth—a real imputation.
11. A real imputation rather than a judicial imputation. A real imputation involves the justice of God attributing what is antecedently one’s own, while a judicial imputation does not have a home, a target, a direction in the sense of ascribing to one what is antecedently his own.
12. Spiritual death is the combination of Adam’s original sin with Adam’s trend by means of a real imputation.
13. There are several results of spiritual death: a) the old sin nature becomes the sovereign of the human race/human life, ruling through spiritual death; b) man’s modus vivendi follows the trend of Adam’s sin toward good, toward evil, as well as toward sin; c) Satan became the ruler of this world.
“many were made sinners” – the nominative plural subject from the adjective poluj
used as a substantive, a noun with the definite article, and refers to the entire human race with the exception of the Lord Jesus Christ. Plus the predicate nominative plural from a(martwloj, an adjective used as a substantive meaning “sinful ones.” It is a reference to the possession of the old sin nature transmitted by copulation. Plus an aorist passive indicative from the verb kaqisthmi which does not take an accusative case object. This is a compound verb [kata = the preposition ‘down’; isthmi = the verb to stand] meaning to stand down, to set down, to put in place. But in the passive voice here it means to appoint—“the many [human race] were appointed sinful ones.” We are not sinful ones by sinning, we are sinful ones by appointment. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it gathers into one entirety the action of the verb. It takes the occurrence which is the imputation of Adam’s sin to each member of the human race at birth and regardless of the duration of history it gathers every birth into this entirety. There are two imputations in this aorist tense: the imputation of human life to the soul; the imputation of Adam’s original sin to the old sin nature, and that is condemnation. So that when we are born we are born as facsimiles of Adam after the fall. The passive voice: mankind at birth receives the action of the verb. This is called in this passage an appointment. Life is an appointment with death. At the moment of physical life we have an appointment with spiritual death. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine, the imputation of Adam’s sin at the point of physical birth resulting in “sinfulness.” The appointment to a state of sinfulness is the actual imputation of Adam’s sin to its genetic home, the old sin nature at birth.
“so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous” – the object of the verb is the nominative plural of dikaioj, an adjective used as a substantive and it means “righteous ones.” It is a predicate nominative because katisthmi takes the nominative case rather than the accusative for its object. It describes every believer as a righteous one.
1. Dikaioj refers here to the imputation of divine righteousness at salvation.
2. Justification means potential for blessing from the justice of God. These are the temporal blessings that glorify God.
3. There is a pipeline of blessing from the justice of God. On one end is justice and on the other end imputed righteousness.
4. All blessing from the justice of God flows through the grace pipeline. Justice is the origin and imputed righteousness is the recipient.
5. Divine justice can only bless divine righteousness. This is a judicial imputation.
6.
The encapsulation of grace in the grace pipeline provides more for man in the
devil’s world than Adam lost in the fall and subsequent expulsion from the
garden.
Translation: “For as through one man’s disobedience [Adam’s] the many [human race] were appointed sinful [the OSN ruling human life through spiritual death], so also through one man’s obedience [Christ] the many shall be appointed righteous [imputation of divine righteousness and subsequent justification].”
Verse 20 – the grace factor since the fall. The first sentence of this verse deals with the Mosaic law as an instrument of condemnation. Remember that you have to be condemned before you are a candidate for grace. “Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound” – “moreover” is the postpositive conjunctive particle de used as a transitional particle and translated “now.” Then the word nomoj, nominative singular subject, is the word “law” and is minus the definite article to emphasise the qualitative aspect of the noun. Since the law came from God the law is perfect. There is nothing wrong with the law,[9] but like anything that comes from God it can be distorted.
The verb here is not “entered.” This is the aorist active indicative of pareiserxomai. E)iserxomai does mean to enter but pareiserxomai does not. It is a dramatic word which means to enter the stage in the role of a minor actor to play a minor part. So the law is a minor actor playing a minor part in life. “Now the law came in as a minor actor to play a minor role,” or we can just simply translate “Now the law came in as a side issue.” The aorist tense is a dramatic aorist, it states a present reality with the certitude of a past event. This idiom is a device for emphasis and it states what has just been realised from the preceding passage. We saw that spiritual death existed all of the way from the fall of Adam to the giving of the law at the time of Moses. All of that time personal sins were not imputed, and yet everyone was condemned because Adam’s original sin in the fall was imputed to the old sin nature at the point of physical birth producing spiritual death with physical life. Now, from Moses to Christ, the law is there but personal sins are still not the basis for spiritual death. One sin is the basis for spiritual death and all personal sins were collected and became the judicial imputation of sin at the cross. This is a middle voice here but it is a deponent verb, hence middle in form but active in meaning. The Mosaic law produces the action of the verb, it enters history as a minor actor playing a minor role, namely the augmentation and condemnation from the imputation of Adam’s sin to its genetic home. The Mosaic law is an augmentation and that is the end of it right there as far as its role in connection with spiritual death.
“that the offence might abound” – the conjunction i(na introduces the final clause which gives a purpose, aim, goal, objective. Plus the nominative singular subject paraptwma, technical in this section for Adam’s original sin. The verb is the aorist active subjunctive of pleonazw which means to be present in abundance, to have more than is necessary. It also means, as here, to be augmented, to enlarge, to increase—“in order that the transgression of Adam might be augmented [enlarged].” The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it refers to a fact or action extended over a period of time in human history. The constative aorist gathers into one entirety this function of the Mosaic law. So from the time the law was given until the end of time it acts in a minor role. The active voice: Adam’s original sin produces the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood is a potential subjunctive which is qualified by the element of contingency. In other words, the potential depends on the proper use of the Mosaic law.
Principle
1. Paul who is the human author under the ministry of the Holy Spirit draws an analogy from Greek drama to describe the purpose and place of the law in the plan of God.
2. The law is analogous to an actor who enters the stage to play a minor role.
3. The law reveals condemnation in terms of the existence of the old sin nature.
4. This anticipates Romans 7:7 where Paul states that he was not even aware of the existence of the old sin nature apart from the tenth commandment.
5. While the law is a minor actor on the stage of life Paul recognises its true function and purpose--Romans 7:12
6. The Mosaic law also reveals the person and work of Christ, therefore the law receives an Oscar for the best supporting actor in history.
7. The imputation of Adam’s sin which produced the condemnation of spiritual death is augmented through the law’s revelation of personal sin.
8. Personal sin is not a means of spiritual death but the result of spiritual death, even the manifestation of spiritual death.
9. The transgression of Adam is imputed to the human race at birth for the condemnation of spiritual death.
10. As a result of spiritual death Adam’s transgression is augmented by our personal sins. Augmentation leads to cognisance.
11. These personal sins are the results of spiritual death, but not the means.
12. Augmentation: our personal sins are not imputed to us but are reserved for the judicial imputation to Christ on the cross.
13. Summary: Adam’s transgression is our spiritual death through a real imputation at birth, but the augmentation of personal sins is our salvation through a judicial imputation at the cross.
14. The imputation of Adam’s sin at birth is a real imputation because it has a home, the genetically formed old sin nature.
15. The imputation of our personal sins to Christ is judicial because Christ did not have an old sin nature, nor any personal sin.
16. Therefore the imputation and judgment of our personal sins on the cross is the basis for eternal salvation and justification.
17. The mosaic law enters history as a minor actor to distinguish between Adam’s original sin as the basis for our condemnation and personal sin as the basis for our salvation.
18. In other words, spiritual death is the real imputation of Adam’s sin to mankind at birth while salvation is the judicial imputation of our personal sins to Christ on the cross. Inasmuch as our personal sins were never imputed to us, they were reserved. One sin, Adam’s original sin, was imputed to us at the point of birth.
19. The Mosaic law demonstrates that we are spiritually dead at birth through defining personal sins in terms of the result of spiritual death.
20. Not only does the Mosaic law define the old sin nature as a part of spiritual death and resultant condemnation, but at the same time the Mosaic law defines personal sins as the increase or the augmentation of Adam’s original sin.
21. The imputation of Adam’s sin condemns but the imputation of the augmentation [all personal sins] to Christ provides salvation and resultant justification.
“But where sin abounded” – the adverb of place, o(u used to indicate a circumstance, not an actual place. Plus the postpositive conjunctive particle de which sets up a contrast between the increase of Adam’s sin through personal sins or the augmentation and the super increase of grace. In other words, grace is always greater than any historical augmentation spiritual death. Spiritual death occurs at birth; personal sins are merely a manifestation of spiritual death, an augmentation. No augmentation of personal sins is ever greater than the grace of God. Then comes a nominative singular subject a(martia, used here for personal sin in contrast to paraptwma, Adam’s original sin. “But where personal sin” is a better translation; “abounded” – the verb of augmentation, the aorist active indicative of pleonazw, used here to connote the increase of personal sins through the sovereignty of the old sin nature in life. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the imputation of Adam’s sin to the old sin nature at birth, resulting in spiritual death, but it regards it here from the viewpoint of its existing results—personal sins. The active voice: personal sin produces the action of the verb by increasing as history continues. The indicative mood is declarative which views the action of the views the action of the verb from the viewpoint of historical reality, the increase of personal sins throughout human history. Translation: “But where personal sin increased [overflowed in great abundance], grace did much more abound.”
“grace did much more abound” – nominative singular subject with the definite article, h( xarij. The definite article is used here to indicate a principle familiar to the readers. Plus the aorist active indicative of the verb u(perpleonazw [u(per = over and above; pleonazw = increase] which means to increase in greater abundance, to superabound—“grace increased in superabundance.” Grace is always ahead of personal sin. The aorist tense is the culminative aorist, it views the superabundant supply of grace in its entirety but emphasises it from the viewpoint of existing results, namely the imputation of all personal sins to Christ on the cross resulting in salvation. The active voice: grace produces the action of the verb in superabounding or increasing in superabundance.
Translation: “Now the law came in as a minor actor to play a minor role, in order that the transgression of Adam might be augmented [enlarged]. But where personal sin increased [overflowed in great abundance], grace increased in superabundance.”
1. Personal sin is the augmentation of spiritual death.
2. Spiritual death is the combination of Adam’s original sin imputed to its genetic home, the old sin nature.
3. The old sin nature becomes the sovereign of human life ruling through spiritual death.
4. One of the three trends of the old sin nature is personal sin.
5. The law came in as a minor actor to define personal sin as an augmentation to spiritual death. Adam’s personal sin is multiplied many times in history through the function of the old sin nature.
6. But while Adam’s original sin has been parlayed into many personal sins they are more than covered by grace.
7. This is because personal sin was never imputed to the sinner. Instead, personal sin was imputed to Christ on the cross.
8. The judicial imputation of personal sins to Christ on the cross indicates that the increase of sins is more than matched by the super-increase of grace.
9. Man cannot create a problem which God cannot solve/has not solved.
10. The justice of God which condemns us is the same justice of God which blesses us.
11. The grace factor is the difference. Man’s volition brought sin but God’s sovereignty brought grace.
12. The reality of sin means the greater reality of grace.
Verse 21 – the triumphs of the grace factor. This verse is set up with a protasis and
an apodosis. In the protasis we have the rulership of the old sin nature; in the apodosis we have the ruler ship of grace. “That as sin hath reigned unto death” – the conjunction i(na introduces a final clause used to indicate divine purpose. God’s purpose, plan, goal is stated, i.e. the communication of the temporal objective of the justice of God toward the believer is stated in the comparative sentence. Then the comparative conjunction w(sper introduces the protasis. A comparative clause introduces analogous thought for the purpose of elucidating or emphasising the thought expressed in the principle clause. The principle clause is the last sentence of the previous verse. This comparative clause is designed to emphasise the triumph of the grace factor as the policy of the justice of God. Next is the nominative singular subject a(martia for the old sin nature or Adam’s trend, plus the generic use of the definite article which comprehends the old sin nature as a category and separates it from all other categories of sin, such as personal sins or Adam’s original sin. So this begins, “In order that just as the sin nature.”
Then the aorist active indicative of the verb baslieuw, meaning to rule or to reign. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the imputation of Adam’s sin to its genetic home, the old sin nature at birth and resultant spiritual death in its entirety. The active voice: the old sin nature produces the action of the verb by ruling human life through spiritual death. The indicative mood is declarative viewing the action of the verb from the viewpoint of reality. The old sin nature is the reality as the ruler of human life. The means by which the OSN rules: e)n plus the locative singular of the definite article and the locative singular of qanatoj, used here for spiritual death—“That just as the sin nature[10] has ruled in the sphere of spiritual death.”
Now the apodosis: “even so might grace reign through righteousness” begins with the adverb o(utoj which introduces the apodosis of comparison, plus the adjunctive kai, “also,” and translated “so also.” Then the nominative subject xarij—“grace,” plus the subject with the generic use of the definite article which contemplates grace as a category separate from all other categories of modus operandi. With this we supply a genitive “of God.” Plus the aorist active subjunctive of basileuw. This is a constative aorist, it gathers into one entirety the rule of the grace of God instead of the rule of the old sin nature in the life of a mature believer. Maturity adjustment to the justice of God substitutes the rule of the old sin nature, and the substitution is the grace of God. Adam’s sin nature ruled through spiritual death but the grace of God rules through the imputation of God’s righteousness and a result from that which is maturity. All believers have the imputed righteousness of God but few believers crack the maturity barrier. Note that both rulerships come through imputation. The active voice of the verb: grace produces the action of the verb, beginning with the primary potential for blessing which is the imputation of divine righteousness. The subjunctive mood is potential, it implies a future reference—maturity adjustment to the justice of God. The fulfilment of the potential depends on the individual believer’s attitude toward Bible doctrine—“so also the grace of God might rule.”
“through righteousness” – dia plus the genitive singular of dikaiosunh, the judicial imputation of divine righteousness to the believer at salvation. Imputed righteousness is the recipient of grace blessing.
“unto eternal life” – incorrect. This is e)ij plus the accusative singular from the adjective a)iwnioj and zwh, “eternal life,” but e)ij plus the accusative means “because of.” When God gives us something in time He intends for it to be permanent and therefore to be carried over into eternity. The person who cracks the matuiry barrier in time has phenomenal blessing in time, but he has even greater blessing from that in eternity. Blessing in time for the mature believer is parlayed into blessing in eternity for that same mature believer. Imputed righteousness is the potential, and the potential has to be realised. The only way that the potential can be realised is to give something to believers at salvation that was never given in the garden, something that makes it permanent: eternal life. There was no eternal life in the garden or even the potentiality of eternal life.
“by Jesus Christ our Lord” – dia plus the genitive of I)hsouj Xristoj kurioj and e)gw. Dia plus the genitive of I)hsouj Xristoj means “through Jesus Christ.” However, the genitive of kurioj and the genitive of e)gw are possessive genitives—“our Lord.” He is Lord the moment a person believes in Christ—“our Lord,” no matter who that believer is. E)gw is genitive plural—all believers; anyone who has the imputation of divine righteousness also has the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Translation: “But just as the sin nature has ruled in the sphere of spiritual death, so also the grace of God might rule through imputed righteousness because of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
1. The Lordship of Christ is accomplished through two judicial imputations: the imputation of all personal sins to Christ on the cross and the imputation of God’s righteousness at salvation.
2. Since Christ is the object of the first judicial imputation it follows that Christ is the means of receiving the second judicial imputation, i.e. righteousness.
3. Through the imputation of Adam’s sin to its genetically formed home, the OSN, man is spiritually dead. This is a real imputation in contrast to a judicial one. Through the imputation of these sins to Christ on the cross we not only receive God’s righteousness and eternal life but He is Lord.
[1] See the Doctrine of Eternal Security.
[2] See the Doctrine of Glory.
[3] See the Doctrine of Suffering.
[4] See the Doctrine of Hope.
[5] See the Doctrine of Justification.
[6] See the Doctrine of the Blood.
[7] See the Doctrine of Reconciliation.
[8] See the Doctrine of Imputation.
[9] See the Doctrine of the Mosaic law.
[10] See the Doctrine of the Sin Nature.