Show Bible Commentary For A Bible Verse

Click here to show/hide instructions.

Selected Verse: Romans 5:14 - King James

Verse	Translation	Text
Ro 5:14	King James	Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Summary Of Commentaries Associated With The Selected Verse

Open All | Close All Open All | Close All

A Commentary, Critical, Practical, and Explanatory on the Old and New Testaments, by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown [1882]
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression--But who are they?--a much contested question. Infants (say some), who being guiltless of actual sin, may be said not to have sinned in the way that Adam did [AUGUSTINE, BEZA, HODGE]. But why should infants be specially connected with the period "from Adam to Moses," since they die alike in every period? And if the apostle meant to express here the death of infants, why has he done it so enigmatically? Besides, the death of infants is comprehended in the universal mortality on account of the first sin, so emphatically expressed in Rom 5:12; what need then to specify it here? and why, if not necessary, should we presume it to be meant here, unless the language unmistakably point to it--which it certainly does not? The meaning then must be, that "death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not, like Adam, transgressed against a positive commandment, threatening death to the disobedient." (So most interpreters). In this case, the particle "even," instead of specifying one particular class of those who lived "from Adam to Moses" (as the other interpretation supposes), merely explains what it was that made the case of those who died from Adam to Moses worthy of special notice--namely, that "though unlike Adam and all since Moses, those who lived between the two had no positive threatening of death for transgression, nevertheless, death reigned even over them." who is the figure--or, "a type." of him that was to come--Christ. "This clause is inserted on the first mention of the name "Adam," the one man of whom he is speaking, to recall the purpose for which he is treating of him, as the figure of Christ" [ALFORD]. The point of analogy intended here is plainly the public character which both sustained, neither of the two being regarded in the divine procedure towards men as mere individual men, but both alike as representative men. (Some take the proper supplement here to be "Him [that is] to come"; understanding the apostle to speak from his own time, and to refer to Christ's second coming [FRITZSCHE, DE WETTE, ALFORD]. But this is unnatural, since the analogy of the second Adam to the first has been in full development ever since "God exalted Him to be a Prince and a Saviour," and it will only remain to be consummated at His second coming. The simple meaning is, as nearly all interpreters agree, that Adam is a type of Him who was to come after him in the same public character, and so to be "the second Adam").

A Commentary, Critical, Practical, and Explanatory on the Old and New Testaments, by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown [1882]

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression--But who are they?--a much contested question. Infants (say some), who being guiltless of actual sin, may be said not to have sinned in the way that Adam did [AUGUSTINE, BEZA, HODGE]. But why should infants be specially connected with the period "from Adam to Moses," since they die alike in every period? And if the apostle meant to express here the death of infants, why has he done it so enigmatically? Besides, the death of infants is comprehended in the universal mortality on account of the first sin, so emphatically expressed in Rom 5:12; what need then to specify it here? and why, if not necessary, should we presume it to be meant here, unless the language unmistakably point to it--which it certainly does not? The meaning then must be, that "death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not, like Adam, transgressed against a positive commandment, threatening death to the disobedient." (So most interpreters). In this case, the particle "even," instead of specifying one particular class of those who lived "from Adam to Moses" (as the other interpretation supposes), merely explains what it was that made the case of those who died from Adam to Moses worthy of special notice--namely, that "though unlike Adam and all since Moses, those who lived between the two had no positive threatening of death for transgression, nevertheless, death reigned even over them."

who is the figure--or, "a type."

of him that was to come--Christ. "This clause is inserted on the first mention of the name "Adam," the one man of whom he is speaking, to recall the purpose for which he is treating of him, as the figure of Christ" [ALFORD]. The point of analogy intended here is plainly the public character which both sustained, neither of the two being regarded in the divine procedure towards men as mere individual men, but both alike as representative men. (Some take the proper supplement here to be "Him [that is] to come"; understanding the apostle to speak from his own time, and to refer to Christ's second coming [FRITZSCHE, DE WETTE, ALFORD]. But this is unnatural, since the analogy of the second Adam to the first has been in full development ever since "God exalted Him to be a Prince and a Saviour," and it will only remain to be consummated at His second coming. The simple meaning is, as nearly all interpreters agree, that Adam is a type of Him who was to come after him in the same public character, and so to be "the second Adam").

Notes on the Bible, by Albert Barnes, [1834]
Nevertheless - Notwithstanding that sin is not imputed where there is no law, yet death reigned. Death reigned - People died; they were under the dominion of death in its various melancholy influences. The expression "death reigned" is one that is very striking. It is a representation of death as a monarch; having dominion over all that period, and overall those generations. Under his dark and withering reign people sank down to the grave. We have a similar expression when we represent death as "the king of terrors." It is a striking and affecting personification, for. (1) His reign is absolute. He strikes down whom he pleases, and when he pleases. (2) there is no escape. All must bow to his sceptre, and be humbled beneath his hand, (3) it is universal. Old and young alike are the subjects of his gloomy empire. (4) It would be an eternal reign if itwere not for the gospel. It would shed unmitigated woes upon the earth; and the silent tread of this terrific king would produce only desolation and tears forever. From Adam to Moses - From the time when God gave one revealed law to Adam, to the time when another revealed Law was given to Moses. This was a period of 2500 years; no inconsiderable portion of the history of the world. Whether people were regarded and treated as sinners then, was a very material inquiry in the argument of the apostle. The fact that they died is alleged by him as full proof that they were sinners; and that sin had therefore scattered extensive and appalling woes among people. Even over them - Over all those generations. The point or emphasis of the remark here is, that it reigned over those that had sinned under a different economy from that of Adam. This was what rendered it so remarkable; and which showed that the withering curse of sin had been felt in all dispensations, and in all times. After the similitude ... - In the same way; in like manner. The expression "after the similitude" is an Hebraism, denoting in like manner, or as. The difference between their case and that of Adam was plainly that Adam had a revealed and positive law. They had not. They had only the law of nature, or of tradition. The giving of a law to Adam, and again to the world by Moses, were two great epochs between which no such event had occurred. The race wandered without revelation. The difference contemplated is not that Adam was an actual sinner, and that they had sinned only by imputation. For, (1) The expression "to sin by imputation" is unintelligible, and conveys no idea. (2) The apostle makes no such distinction, and conveys no such idea. (3) His very object is different. It is to show that they were actual sinners; that they transgressed law; and the proof of this is that they died. (4) It is utterly absurd to suppose that people from the time of Adam to Moses were sinners only by imputation. All history is against it; nor is there the slightest ground of plausibility in such a supposition. Of Adam's transgression - When he broke a plain, positive revealed law. This transgression was the open violation of a positive precept; theirs the violation of the laws communicated in a different way; by tradition, reason, conscience, etc. Many commentators have supposed that infants are particularly referred to here. Augustine first suggested this, and he has been followed by many others. But probably in the whole compass of the expositions of the Bible, there is not to be found a more unnatural and forced construction than this. For, (1) The apostle makes no mention of infants. He does not in the remotest form allude to them by name, or give any intimation that he had reference to them. (2) the scope of his argument is against it. Did infants only die? Were they the only persons that lived in this long period? His argument is complete without supposing that he referred to them. The question in regard to this long interval was, whether people were sinners? Yes, says the apostle. They died. Death reigned; and this proves that they were sinners. If it should be said that the death of infants would prove that they were sinners also, I answer, (a) That this was an inference which the apostle does not draw, and for which he is not responsible. It is not affirmed by him. (b) If it did refer to infants, what would it prove? Not that the sin of Adam was imputed, but that they were personally guilty, and transgressors. For this is the only point to which the argument tends. The apostle here says not one word about imputation. He does not even refer to infants by name; nor does he here introduce at all the doctrine of imputation. All this is mere philosophy introduced to explain difficulties; but whether true or false, whether the theory explains or embarrasses the subject, it is not needful here to inquire. (3) the very expression here is against the supposition that infants are intended. One form of the doctrine of imputation as held by Edwards, Starter, etc. has been that there was a constituted oneness or personal identity between Adam and his posterity; and that his sin was regarded as truly and properly theirs; and they as personally blameworthy or ill-deserving for it, in the same manner as a man at 40 is answerable for his crime committed at 20. If this doctrine be true, then it is certain that they not only had "sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," but had committed the very identical sin, and that they were answerable for it as their own. But this doctrine is now abandoned by all or nearly all who profess to be Calvinists; and as the apostle expressly says that they had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, it cannot be intended here. (4) the same explanation of the passage is given by interpreters who nevertheless held to the doctrine of imputation. Thus, Calvin says on this passage, "Although this passage is understood commonly of infants, who, being guilty of no actual sin, perish by original depravity, yet I prefer that it should be interpreted generally of those who have not the Law. For this sentiment is connected with the preceding words, where it is said that sin is not imputed where there is no law. For they had not sinned according to the similitude of Adam's transgression, because they had not as he had the will of God revealed. For the Lord forbid Adam to touch the fruit (of the tree) of the knowledge of good and evil; but to them he gave no command but the testimony of conscience." Calvin, however, supposes that infants are included in the "universal catalogue" here referred to. Turretine also remarks that the discussion here pertains to all the adults between Adam and Moses. Indeed, it is perfectly manifest that the apostle here has no particular reference to infants; nor would it have ever been supposed, but for the purpose of giving support to the mere philosophy of a theological system. (According to our author, the disputed clause in Rom 5:14, "even over them," etc., is to be understood of those who had not sinned against "a revealed or positive law." Many eminent critics have explained the phrase in the same way, and yet arrived at a very different conclusion from that stated in the commentary, namely, that people die simply on account of actual or personal sin. - Bloomfield Crit. Dig. vol. v. p. 520. There are, however, very strong objections against this interpretation. 1. It is not consistent with the scope of the passage. The apostle had asserted in Rom 5:12, that all die in consequence of the sin of the one man (see the supplementary note). And in Rom 5:13-14 proceeds to prove his position thus: People universally die; they must, therefore, have transgressed some law; not the Law of Moses, for people died before that was in being. Death absolutely reigned between Adam and Moses, even over them who had not broken a revealed law. therefore, people have died, in consequence of the sin of the one man. But in this chain of reasoning there is a link awanting. The conclusion does not follow; for though the persons in question had not broken a positive law, they had yet broken the law of nature, written on the heart, and might, therefore, have been condemned on account of a breach of it, Rom 2:12. But if we explain the clause under discussion, of infants who have not personally sinned like Adam against any law whatever, we ascend at once to the conclusion, that all die on account of Adam's sin. 2. The particle "even," καί kai seems to intimate, that a new class different from that before mentioned, or at all events a subdivision of it, is now to be introduced. None of all the multitudes that lived between Adam and Moses, had sinned against a positive or revealed law. To avoid an unmeaningful tautology therefore, some other sense must be attached to the clause. It is vain to affirm that the particle "even" simply lays "emphasis" on the fact, that they die who had not sinned against a positive law, since were we to admit this forced construction, we should still ask, to what purpose is the emphasis? The fact to which it is supposed to draw attention, as has been noticed already, falls short of proving the apostle's point. 3. Moreover, since "the similitude," etc. is quite a general expression containing no particular intimation in itself, as to that, in which the likeness consists, we are just as much at liberty to find the resemblance in personal transgression, as others, in transgression against revealed laws. To sin personally is to sin like Adam. Nay, the resemblance in this case is complete; in the other view it is imperfect, scarcely deserving to be called a resemblance at all. For they who have no revealed law, may yet be said to sin like Adam in some very important respects. They sin wilfully and presumptuously against the law written in their hearts, in spite of the remonstrances of conscience, etc. The only difference in fact, lies in the mode or manner of revelation. But if we suppose the likeness to lie in personal sin, we can find a class who have not sinned like Adam in any way whatever. And why this class should be supposed omitted, in an argument to prove that all people die in consequence of Adam's sin, it is difficult to conceive. What though infants are not "alluded to by name?" No one has ever asserted it. Had this been the case, there could have been no dispute on the point. To say, however, that the apostle "does not give any intimation that he had reference to infants," is just a begging of the question, a taking for granted what requires to be proved. Perhaps, as Edwards suggests, "such might be the state of language among Jews and Christians at that day, that the apostle might have no phrase more aptly to express this meaning. The manner in which the epithets personal and actual, are used and applied now in this case, is probably of later date, and more modern use," p. 312, Orig. Sin. The learned author of this commentary objects further, to the opinion that infants who have not sinned personally are embraced in the clause under discussion; that "to sin by imputation is unintelligible, and conveys no idea." It is his own language, and he alone is responsible for it. He tells us also, that "it is utterly absurd, to suppose that people, from the time of Adam to Moses, were sinners only by imputation." No one ever supposed so, nor does the view, to which he objects, at all involve any such consequence. Again he affirms, "that the scope of the apostle's argument is against the application of the clause to infants;" and asks, for what purpose we cannot divine: "Did infants only die?" The answer is obvious. No! Death reigned over all who lived from Adam to Moses, even over that class who had not sinned personally. As to the true scope of the passage, and the view that is most consonant to it, enough has been said already.) Who is the figure - τύπος tupos. "Type." This word occurs sixteen times in the New Testament, Joh 20:25 (twice); Act 7:43-44; Act 23:25; Rom 5:14; Rom 6:17; Co1 10:6, Co1 10:11; Phi 3:17; Th1 1:7; Th2 3:9; Ti1 4:12; Tit 2:7; Heb 8:5; Pe1 5:3. It properly means, (1) Any impression, note, or mark, which is made by percussion, or in any way, Joh 20:25, "the print (type) of the nails." (2) an effigy or image which is made or formed by any rule; a model, pattern. Act 7:43, "ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch and the star of your god Remphan, figures (types) which ye had made." Act 7:44, "that he should make it (the tabernacle) according to the fashion (type) which he had seen," Heb 8:5. (3) a brief argument, or summary, Act 23:25. (4) a rule of doctrine, or a law or form of doctrine, Rom 6:17. (5) an example or model to be imitated; an example of what we ought to be, Phi 3:17; Th1 1:7; Th2 3:9; Ti1 4:12; Tit 2:7; Pe1 5:3; or an example which is to be avoided, an example to warn us, Co1 10:6, Co1 10:11. In this place it is evidently applied to the Messiah. The expression "he who was to come" is often used to denote the Messiah. As applied to him, it means that there was in some respects a similarity between the results of the conduct of Adam and the effects of the work of Christ. It does not mean that Adam was constituted or appointed a type of Christ, which would convey no intelligible idea; but that a resemblance may be traced between the effects of Adam's conduct and the work of Christ. It does not mean that the person of Adam was typical of Christ; but that between the results of his conduct and the work of Christ, there may be instituted a comparison, there may be traced some resemblance. What that is, is stated in the following verses. It is mainly by way of contrast that the comparison is instituted, and may be stated as consisting in the following points of resemblance or contrast. (1) Contrast. (a) By the crime of one, many are dead; by the work of the other, grace will much more abound, Rom 5:15. (b) In regard to the acts of the two. In the case of Adam, one offence led on the train of woes; in the case of Christ, his work led to the remission of many offences, Rom 5:16. (c) In regard to the effects. Death reigned by the one; but life much more over the other. (2) Resemblance. By the disobedience of one, many were made sinners; by the obedience of the other, many shall be made righteous, Rom 5:18-19. It is clear, therefore, that the comparison which is instituted is rather by way of antithesis or contrast, than by direct resemblance. "The main design is to show that greater benefits have resulted from the work of Christ, than evils from the fall of Adam." A comparison is also instituted between Adam and Christ in Co1 15:22, Co1 15:45. The reason is, that Adam was the first of the race; he was the fountain, the head, the father; and the consequences of that first act could be seen everywhere. By a divine constitution the race was so connected with him, that it was made certain that, if he fell, all would come into the world with a nature depraved, and subject to calamity and death, and would be treated as if fallen, and his sin would thus spread crime, and woe, and death everywhere. The evil effects of the apostasy were everywhere seen; and the object of the apostle was to show that the plan of salvation was adapted to meet and more than counterveil the evil effects of the fall. He argued on great and acknowledged facts - that Adam was the first sinner, and that from him, as a fountain, sin and death had flowed through the world. Since the consequences of that sin had been so disastrous and widespread, his design is to show that from the Messiah effects had flowed more beneficent than the former were ruinous. "In him the tribes of Adam boast. More blessings than their father lost." Watts.

Notes on the Bible, by Albert Barnes, [1834]

Nevertheless - Notwithstanding that sin is not imputed where there is no law, yet death reigned.

Death reigned - People died; they were under the dominion of death in its various melancholy influences. The expression "death reigned" is one that is very striking. It is a representation of death as a monarch; having dominion over all that period, and overall those generations. Under his dark and withering reign people sank down to the grave. We have a similar expression when we represent death as "the king of terrors." It is a striking and affecting personification, for.

(1) His reign is absolute. He strikes down whom he pleases, and when he pleases.

(2) there is no escape. All must bow to his sceptre, and be humbled beneath his hand,

(3) it is universal. Old and young alike are the subjects of his gloomy empire.

(4) It would be an eternal reign if itwere not for the gospel.

It would shed unmitigated woes upon the earth; and the silent tread of this terrific king would produce only desolation and tears forever.

From Adam to Moses - From the time when God gave one revealed law to Adam, to the time when another revealed Law was given to Moses. This was a period of 2500 years; no inconsiderable portion of the history of the world. Whether people were regarded and treated as sinners then, was a very material inquiry in the argument of the apostle. The fact that they died is alleged by him as full proof that they were sinners; and that sin had therefore scattered extensive and appalling woes among people.

Even over them - Over all those generations. The point or emphasis of the remark here is, that it reigned over those that had sinned under a different economy from that of Adam. This was what rendered it so remarkable; and which showed that the withering curse of sin had been felt in all dispensations, and in all times.

After the similitude ... - In the same way; in like manner. The expression "after the similitude" is an Hebraism, denoting in like manner, or as. The difference between their case and that of Adam was plainly that Adam had a revealed and positive law. They had not. They had only the law of nature, or of tradition. The giving of a law to Adam, and again to the world by Moses, were two great epochs between which no such event had occurred. The race wandered without revelation. The difference contemplated is not that Adam was an actual sinner, and that they had sinned only by imputation. For,

(1) The expression "to sin by imputation" is unintelligible, and conveys no idea.

(2) The apostle makes no such distinction, and conveys no such idea.

(3) His very object is different. It is to show that they were actual sinners; that they transgressed law; and the proof of this is that they died.

(4) It is utterly absurd to suppose that people from the time of Adam to Moses were sinners only by imputation. All history is against it; nor is there the slightest ground of plausibility in such a supposition.

Of Adam's transgression - When he broke a plain, positive revealed law. This transgression was the open violation of a positive precept; theirs the violation of the laws communicated in a different way; by tradition, reason, conscience, etc. Many commentators have supposed that infants are particularly referred to here. Augustine first suggested this, and he has been followed by many others. But probably in the whole compass of the expositions of the Bible, there is not to be found a more unnatural and forced construction than this. For,

(1) The apostle makes no mention of infants. He does not in the remotest form allude to them by name, or give any intimation that he had reference to them.

(2) the scope of his argument is against it. Did infants only die? Were they the only persons that lived in this long period? His argument is complete without supposing that he referred to them. The question in regard to this long interval was, whether people were sinners? Yes, says the apostle. They died. Death reigned; and this proves that they were sinners. If it should be said that the death of infants would prove that they were sinners also, I answer,

(a) That this was an inference which the apostle does not draw, and for which he is not responsible. It is not affirmed by him.

(b) If it did refer to infants, what would it prove? Not that the sin of Adam was imputed, but that they were personally guilty, and transgressors. For this is the only point to which the argument tends.

The apostle here says not one word about imputation. He does not even refer to infants by name; nor does he here introduce at all the doctrine of imputation. All this is mere philosophy introduced to explain difficulties; but whether true or false, whether the theory explains or embarrasses the subject, it is not needful here to inquire.

(3) the very expression here is against the supposition that infants are intended. One form of the doctrine of imputation as held by Edwards, Starter, etc. has been that there was a constituted oneness or personal identity between Adam and his posterity; and that his sin was regarded as truly and properly theirs; and they as personally blameworthy or ill-deserving for it, in the same manner as a man at 40 is answerable for his crime committed at 20. If this doctrine be true, then it is certain that they not only had "sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," but had committed the very identical sin, and that they were answerable for it as their own. But this doctrine is now abandoned by all or nearly all who profess to be Calvinists; and as the apostle expressly says that they had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, it cannot be intended here.

(4) the same explanation of the passage is given by interpreters who nevertheless held to the doctrine of imputation. Thus, Calvin says on this passage, "Although this passage is understood commonly of infants, who, being guilty of no actual sin, perish by original depravity, yet I prefer that it should be interpreted generally of those who have not the Law. For this sentiment is connected with the preceding words, where it is said that sin is not imputed where there is no law. For they had not sinned according to the similitude of Adam's transgression, because they had not as he had the will of God revealed. For the Lord forbid Adam to touch the fruit (of the tree) of the knowledge of good and evil; but to them he gave no command but the testimony of conscience." Calvin, however, supposes that infants are included in the "universal catalogue" here referred to. Turretine also remarks that the discussion here pertains to all the adults between Adam and Moses. Indeed, it is perfectly manifest that the apostle here has no particular reference to infants; nor would it have ever been supposed, but for the purpose of giving support to the mere philosophy of a theological system.

(According to our author, the disputed clause in Rom 5:14, "even over them," etc., is to be understood of those who had not sinned against "a revealed or positive law." Many eminent critics have explained the phrase in the same way, and yet arrived at a very different conclusion from that stated in the commentary, namely, that people die simply on account of actual or personal sin. - Bloomfield Crit. Dig. vol. v. p. 520. There are, however, very strong objections against this interpretation.

1. It is not consistent with the scope of the passage. The apostle had asserted in Rom 5:12, that all die in consequence of the sin of the one man (see the supplementary note). And in Rom 5:13-14 proceeds to prove his position thus: People universally die; they must, therefore, have transgressed some law; not the Law of Moses, for people died before that was in being. Death absolutely reigned between Adam and Moses, even over them who had not broken a revealed law. therefore, people have died, in consequence of the sin of the one man. But in this chain of reasoning there is a link awanting. The conclusion does not follow; for though the persons in question had not broken a positive law, they had yet broken the law of nature, written on the heart, and might, therefore, have been condemned on account of a breach of it, Rom 2:12. But if we explain the clause under discussion, of infants who have not personally sinned like Adam against any law whatever, we ascend at once to the conclusion, that all die on account of Adam's sin.

2. The particle "even," καί kai seems to intimate, that a new class different from that before mentioned, or at all events a subdivision of it, is now to be introduced. None of all the multitudes that lived between Adam and Moses, had sinned against a positive or revealed law. To avoid an unmeaningful tautology therefore, some other sense must be attached to the clause. It is vain to affirm that the particle "even" simply lays "emphasis" on the fact, that they die who had not sinned against a positive law, since were we to admit this forced construction, we should still ask, to what purpose is the emphasis? The fact to which it is supposed to draw attention, as has been noticed already, falls short of proving the apostle's point.

3. Moreover, since "the similitude," etc. is quite a general expression containing no particular intimation in itself, as to that, in which the likeness consists, we are just as much at liberty to find the resemblance in personal transgression, as others, in transgression against revealed laws. To sin personally is to sin like Adam. Nay, the resemblance in this case is complete; in the other view it is imperfect, scarcely deserving to be called a resemblance at all. For they who have no revealed law, may yet be said to sin like Adam in some very important respects. They sin wilfully and presumptuously against the law written in their hearts, in spite of the remonstrances of conscience, etc. The only difference in fact, lies in the mode or manner of revelation. But if we suppose the likeness to lie in personal sin, we can find a class who have not sinned like Adam in any way whatever. And why this class should be supposed omitted, in an argument to prove that all people die in consequence of Adam's sin, it is difficult to conceive.

What though infants are not "alluded to by name?" No one has ever asserted it. Had this been the case, there could have been no dispute on the point. To say, however, that the apostle "does not give any intimation that he had reference to infants," is just a begging of the question, a taking for granted what requires to be proved. Perhaps, as Edwards suggests, "such might be the state of language among Jews and Christians at that day, that the apostle might have no phrase more aptly to express this meaning. The manner in which the epithets personal and actual, are used and applied now in this case, is probably of later date, and more modern use," p. 312, Orig. Sin.

The learned author of this commentary objects further, to the opinion that infants who have not sinned personally are embraced in the clause under discussion; that "to sin by imputation is unintelligible, and conveys no idea." It is his own language, and he alone is responsible for it. He tells us also, that "it is utterly absurd, to suppose that people, from the time of Adam to Moses, were sinners only by imputation." No one ever supposed so, nor does the view, to which he objects, at all involve any such consequence. Again he affirms, "that the scope of the apostle's argument is against the application of the clause to infants;" and asks, for what purpose we cannot divine: "Did infants only die?" The answer is obvious. No! Death reigned over all who lived from Adam to Moses, even over that class who had not sinned personally. As to the true scope of the passage, and the view that is most consonant to it, enough has been said already.)

Who is the figure - τύπος tupos. "Type." This word occurs sixteen times in the New Testament, Joh 20:25 (twice); Act 7:43-44; Act 23:25; Rom 5:14; Rom 6:17; Co1 10:6, Co1 10:11; Phi 3:17; Th1 1:7; Th2 3:9; Ti1 4:12; Tit 2:7; Heb 8:5; Pe1 5:3. It properly means,

(1) Any impression, note, or mark, which is made by percussion, or in any way, Joh 20:25, "the print (type) of the nails."

(2) an effigy or image which is made or formed by any rule; a model, pattern. Act 7:43, "ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch and the star of your god Remphan, figures (types) which ye had made." Act 7:44, "that he should make it (the tabernacle) according to the fashion (type) which he had seen," Heb 8:5.

(3) a brief argument, or summary, Act 23:25.

(4) a rule of doctrine, or a law or form of doctrine, Rom 6:17.

(5) an example or model to be imitated; an example of what we ought to be, Phi 3:17; Th1 1:7; Th2 3:9; Ti1 4:12; Tit 2:7; Pe1 5:3; or an example which is to be avoided, an example to warn us, Co1 10:6, Co1 10:11.

In this place it is evidently applied to the Messiah. The expression "he who was to come" is often used to denote the Messiah. As applied to him, it means that there was in some respects a similarity between the results of the conduct of Adam and the effects of the work of Christ. It does not mean that Adam was constituted or appointed a type of Christ, which would convey no intelligible idea; but that a resemblance may be traced between the effects of Adam's conduct and the work of Christ. It does not mean that the person of Adam was typical of Christ; but that between the results of his conduct and the work of Christ, there may be instituted a comparison, there may be traced some resemblance. What that is, is stated in the following verses. It is mainly by way of contrast that the comparison is instituted, and may be stated as consisting in the following points of resemblance or contrast.

(1) Contrast.

(a) By the crime of one, many are dead; by the work of the other, grace will much more abound, Rom 5:15.

(b) In regard to the acts of the two. In the case of Adam, one offence led on the train of woes; in the case of Christ, his work led to the remission of many offences, Rom 5:16.

(c) In regard to the effects. Death reigned by the one; but life much more over the other.

(2) Resemblance. By the disobedience of one, many were made sinners; by the obedience of the other, many shall be made righteous, Rom 5:18-19. It is clear, therefore, that the comparison which is instituted is rather by way of antithesis or contrast, than by direct resemblance. "The main design is to show that greater benefits have resulted from the work of Christ, than evils from the fall of Adam." A comparison is also instituted between Adam and Christ in Co1 15:22, Co1 15:45. The reason is, that Adam was the first of the race; he was the fountain, the head, the father; and the consequences of that first act could be seen everywhere. By a divine constitution the race was so connected with him, that it was made certain that, if he fell, all would come into the world with a nature depraved, and subject to calamity and death, and would be treated as if fallen, and his sin would thus spread crime, and woe, and death everywhere. The evil effects of the apostasy were everywhere seen; and the object of the apostle was to show that the plan of salvation was adapted to meet and more than counterveil the evil effects of the fall. He argued on great and acknowledged facts - that Adam was the first sinner, and that from him, as a fountain, sin and death had flowed through the world. Since the consequences of that sin had been so disastrous and widespread, his design is to show that from the Messiah effects had flowed more beneficent than the former were ruinous.

"In him the tribes of Adam boast.

More blessings than their father lost."

Watts.

The Scofield Bible Commentary, by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, [1917]
Adam to Moses Broadly, the contrast is: Adam: sin, death; Christ: righteousness, life. Adam drew down into his ruin the old creation (Rom 8:19-22) of which he was lord and head. Christ brings into moral unity with God, and into eternal life, the new creation of which he is Lord and Head. (Eph 1:22); (Eph 1:23). Even the animal and material creation, cursed for man's sake, (Gen 3:17) will be delivered by Christ. (Isa 11:6-9); (Rom 8:19-22).

Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, by John Wesley [1754-65]
Death reigned - And how vast is his kingdom! Scarce can we find any king who has as many subjects, as are the kings whom he hath conquered. Even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression - Even over infants who had never sinned, as Adam did, in their own persons; and over others who had not, like him, sinned against an express law. Who is the figure of him that was to come - Each of them being a public person, and a federal head of mankind. The one, the fountain of sin and death to mankind by his offence; the other, of righteousness and life by his free gift. Thus far the apostle shows the agreement between the first and second Adam: afterward he shows the differences between them. The agreement may be summed up thus: As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so by one man righteousness entered into the world, and life by righteousness. As death passed upon all men, in that all had sinned; so life passed upon all men, (who are in the second Adam by faith,) in that all are justified. And as death through the sin of the first Adam reigned even over them who had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression; so through the righteousness of Christ, even those who have not obeyed, after the likeness of his obedience, shall reign in life. We may add, As the sin of Adam, without the sins which we afterwards committed, brought us death ; so the righteousness of Christ, without the good works which we afterwards perform, brings us life: although still every good, as well as evil, work, will receive its due reward.

Adam Clarke Commentary on the Whole Bible - Published 1810-1826
Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses - This supposes, as Dr. Taylor very properly observes: - 1. That sin was in the world from Adam to Moses. 2. That law was not in the world from Adam to Moses during the space of about 2500 years; for, after Adam's transgression, that law was abrogated; and, from that time, men were either under the general covenant of grace given to Adam or Noah, or under that which was specially made with Abraham. 3. That, therefore, the sins committed were not imputed unto them to death, for they did not sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression; that is, they did not, like him, transgress a law, or rule of action, to which death, as the penalty, was annexed. And yet - 4. Death reigned over mankind during the period between Adam and Moses; therefore men did not die for their own transgressions, but in consequence of Adam's one transgression. Who is the figure of him that was to come - Adam was the figure, τυπος, the type, pattern, or resemblance of him who was to come; i.e. of the Messiah. The correspondence between them appears in the following particulars: - 1. Through him, as its spring and fountain, sin became diffused through the world, so that every man comes into the world with sinful propensities: for by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, Rom 5:12. Through Christ, as its spring and fountain, righteousness becomes diffused through the earth; so that every man is made partaker of a principle of grace and truth; for he is the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world, Joh 1:9. 2. As in Adam all die; so in Christ shall all be made alive, Co1 15:22. For, since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, Co1 15:21. 3. As in or through Adam guilt came upon all men, so, through Christ, the free gift comes upon all men unto justification of life, Rom 5:18. These alone seem to be the instances in which a similitude exists between Adam and Christ.

Top

¹² Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

⁴⁵ And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

²² For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

¹⁸ Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
¹⁹ For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

¹⁶ And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

¹⁵ But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

¹¹ Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

⁶ Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

³ Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

⁷ In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,

¹² Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.

⁹ Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us.

⁷ So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.

¹⁷ Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

¹⁷ But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

²⁵ And he wrote a letter after this manner:

⁵ Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

⁴⁴ Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.

⁴³ Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.

²⁵ The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.