Romans 5:18

Therefore In Romans 5:18-19 the argument, from Romans 5:12, is summed up as to its main substance; namely, the parallel of Adam and Christ; the illustration of the work of Christ by Adam's position in respect of his descendants and the effect on them of his sin.

as by the offence of one Better, as by one offence, as in marg. E. V. The Gr. is elliptical here. We may supply "the result was," in each part of the verse; as through one offence the result was, unto all men, to condemnation; so through one righteous act the result was, unto all men, to justification of life. The word rendered here righteous act is the same as that rendered "acquittal" in the note on Romans 5:16, q.v. Its strict original meaning is a thing righteously done. Its usual actual meaning is an ordinance of justice. But in one N. T. passage at least it appears to mean a righteous actor course of acts. (Revelation 19:8, "the righteousnessesof the saints.") It thus is possible to interpret it in one place here as an ordinance of acquittal, in the other as the great act of righteousness(which becomes also, as it were, a statuteof righteousness,) done by the Redeemer for His brethren. Such a change of reference is not alien to St Paul's style. If, however, the interpretation righteous ordinanceshould seem more necessary than it seems to us, it would fairly suit the context. Christ's obedience is (as suggested just above) viewed thus as the embodied ordinance, or institute, of Justification. This last, on the whole, is Meyer's explanation.

all men … all men What is the reference of these words in the two cases respectively? In the first, certainly, all mankindis meant. Every man, not in theory only but fact, incurred sentence of death in Adam. In the second case also, many commentators, (e.g. Meyer,) hold that all mankind is intended: not that all actually receive justification, but that all are within the scope of Christ's work. Without entering on the profound question of the Divine Intentions, and merely seeking for St Paul's special thought here, we prefer to take the second "all men" with a limit, as meaning "all who are connected with the Second Adam;" all "His brethren." For through this whole context St Paul is dealing with results and facts, not with abstract theory. From the dreadful fact of the result of death from the Fall he reasons to the results of Christ's work; and the parallel would be most imperfect (and such as precisely to contradictthe "much more" of Romans 5:15; Romans 5:17,) if while in the one case condemnation was a fact and act, Justification should be only a possibility in the other. If Adam brings death in facton all concerned, Christ must bring life in facton all concerned also. Again, a limitation is suggested by the whole reasoning of the Epistle, and specially by Romans 8:30, where the justified are identical with the "foreknown" and "glorified," in the plain sense of the passage. The use of "all men" with this change of reference is fairly illustrated by 1 Corinthians 15:22-23. For through that whole ch. the Resurrection of the Churchis the sole subject; and 1 Corinthians 15:23 explicitly refers to "them that are Christ's:" and yet, when the parallel of Adam and Christ is in view, the word "all" is equally used there in both cases. See for other illustrations, though less exact, John 12:32; Titus 2:11.

The view of Christ as the Head of all Mankindis, to say the least, far less distinct in Scripture than that of Christ as the Head of justified Mankind, the true Church. Bearing this in mind, a difference of reference here will surely seem more natural than a sameness which can only be explained by admitting profound differences along with it.

justification of life i.e. which confers, and results in, life; both by reversal of the sentence of death, and (as in Romans 5:17) by the gift of the life of glory in consequence.