<\/p>
Paul\u2019s argument in Romans 5:12-14 seems to be this: <\/p>\n
1. Through one man, death entered the world, and death spread. <\/p>\n
2. Yet, sin is not imputed where there is no law. That is, sin is not liable to punishment when there is no law. This is a basic principle of legality, it would appear. Certain human actons are not liable to punishment, though they may be morally evil, until a law is promulgated forbidding the action. <\/p>\n
3. Implicitly, Paul raises the question: How then was there death in the world between Adam and Moses, before the Law was introduced? Why were people being held accountable ?Ehow was sin being imputed ?Ewhen there was no law? <\/p>\n
4. Implicitly, the answer must be that everyone between Adam and Moses who died was suffering the consequences of Adam\u2019s own sin. There was a law for Adam, and therefore his sin did leave him liable to punishment, and that punishment spread to those who come from him. <\/p>\n
5. Rom 5:14 then offers proof that Adam\u2019s sin is imputed, that his sin makes him liable to punishment, and also makes even those who did not sin against law liable to the curse of death. <\/p>\n
6. This part of the argument sets background for Paul\u2019s main discussion, which is about Christ\u2019s reversal of Adam\u2019s sin. <\/p>\n
If this is correct, Paul does teach the imputation of Adam\u2019s sin. \u201cImputation\u201d here doesn\u2019t appear to mean precisely what it means in traditional Reformed theology. Paul\u2019s concern is with how God treats actual sins ?Ewhen a law is present, actual sins are \u201cimputed.\u201d Adam\u2019s sin is \u201cimputed\u201d in the sense that it renders him liable to the curse of death; and because of Adam\u2019s position as the head of the human race, others suffer the consequences of his sin as well. Adam cuts off humanity from God, and therefore from life, and this alienation (the \u201cspread of death\u201d in v 12) leads to universal sin. Paul does not appear to be saying that in God\u2019s register book, \u201cAdam\u2019s sin\u201d can be found in the ledger of MY sins. Also, this way of understanding the argument avoids the contortions of Murray\u2019s interpretation that I critiqued in an earlier post. <\/p>\n
But how is it just for people between Adam and Moses to suffer the curse of death if they are not held guilty of Adam\u2019s sin? This seems to force us back to a more traditional understanding of \u201cimputation,\u201d and that may well be the right answer. Imputation in this traditional sense would then be a \u201cgood and necessary consequence\u201d of Paul\u2019s argument rather than an explicit teaching. But it may also be that this can be explained simply in terms of Adam\u2019s position as the first man and as a covenant representative. For instance, Abel was not allowed to return to the garden, but this was not because he was directly held guilty of Adam\u2019s sin. Perhaps it was simply because his father had made a terrible error and God cast him out of the garden, and that God determined that no one would return until a perfect sacrifice had been offered, until \u201cdying you shall die\u201d had been carried out on an innocent substitute. (Abel was still born in sin, since he was born under the curse and born to parents who were alienated from God.) <\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Paul\u2019s argument in Romans 5:12-14 seems to be this: 1. Through one man, death entered the world, and death spread. 2. Yet, sin is not imputed where there is no law. That is, sin is not liable to punishment when there is no law. This is a basic principle of legality, it would appear. Certain […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3021,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-747","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bible-nt-romans"],"yoast_head":"\n