Introduction
Salvation involves more than forgiveness for sins. It is nothing less than redeemed man's restoration to that dignity ("glory and honor") that he possessed at creation as one who was made in the image of God. As believers, we will again be like God in every way that men can share His likeness. We will then be the perfected people of God. Christ's work of redemption is the work of restoring the glory of God's image in men and women whom God has chosen from the fallen sons of Adam. Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, so we must bear the image of the heavenly. He accomplishes this redeeming work, not by patching up the old creation, but by establishing a new creation. He comes not to redeem the race of Adam, but to create in Himself one new man, a new peculiar race. For this reason, Paul exhorts believers to "put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness" (Eph 4:24).
The plight into which sinners have fallen cannot be remedied apart from the coming of the second man, who is the Lord from heaven. To accomplish this redemptive restoration, it was necessary for Christ to share our likeness- "Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity . . ." (Heb 2:14). Concerning the necessity of the incarnation the author of Hebrews writes, "For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, . . ."(2:17). He comes not only as the Son of God; He also comes as the "Son of man," the Son of God incarnate. Only through incarnation could He suffer and die, and only through suffering and dying could He raise His people to glory.
Our purpose in this booklet is to explore the relationship between the Old and New Creations, and the two men (Adams) who stand as their divinely ordained representatives. In doing so, we will also examine the relationship between these two creations and the Covenants with which they are associated. We will first survey some of the New Testament passages that are pertinent to this subject. Then, we will draw several theological deductions from our biblical investigation.
AN EXPOSITION OF PERTINENT PASSAGES
I Corinthians 15:20-23, 45-49
1 Corinthians 15:20-23
In I Cor 15:20-23, Paul maintains that there is a unity between Christ's resurrection and the future resurrection of believers in Him. In the preceding verses, he has plainly established a link between the reality of Christ's resurrection and that of the resurrection in general. There were some in Corinth who were denying the reality of the resurrection of the dead (v. 12). Paul argues that the resurrection of the dead must be a reality, unless the Christian Church has been deceitful, on the one hand, in the propagation of its message and, on the other hand, deceived in its reception of this message. This follows from the fact that Paul and others had proclaimed that Christ, a true man, is risen from the dead. If, then, there is no resurrection of men from the dead, the news that God has raised Christ from the dead must be false testimony. Paul then enumerates the dire and dreadful consequences that would follow if such an unwarranted supposition were true. He writes,
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? "If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. "And if Christ has not been raised, out preaching is useless, and so is your faith. "More than that, we are found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. "For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men (I Cor 15:12-19).
In verse twenty, Paul changes the entire picture with two little words, "But now." If Christ has not risen from the dead then our situation is hopeless. Yet, the truth that He has risen from the dead, fills us with confidence that we shall inherit, at our resurrection, all that God has promised us. Paul writes,
20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man . 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. "But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him (I Cor 15:20-23).
At this point, Paul's argument takes on a new dimension. He has argued that since Christ, a true human being, has risen from the dead, such a phenomenon as resurrection must be a reality. In these verses, he argues that the resurrection of Christ and the resurrection of His people are inseparably united. It is not merely that we are to consider the one event (the resurrection of believers) feasible since the other (Christ's resurrection) is a reality. In fact, Paul does not view these as two events at all, but as two stages of the same event. He makes this clear when he refers to Christ as the "firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep." The word "firstfruits" (aparche) occurs only six times in the Pauline Epistles. Twice it refers to the first of the harvest of converts from a particular region (Rom 16:5, (of Asia); I Cor 16:15, (of Achaia)). One time Paul uses it to refer to Israel's Patriarchs (Rom 11:16). Once paul uses it concerning the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:23). Finally, Paul uses the term to refer to Christ, the firstfruits of the resurrection. In all these occurrences, the reference is to a token that is organically united to the whole. Paul's usage of this term harks back to the feast of firstfruits in Israel's worship (Exo 23:19; Lev 23: 10; Num 15:20ff; 18:8; Deut 18:4; 26:2,10). At this feast, the people of Israel brought the first part of the harvest to offer in thanksgiving to Jehovah. They made this offering in grateful acknowledgment that God had given them the whole harvest. For this reason, we should understand the term as one that expresses more than a temporal significance.
The word is not simply an indication of temporal priority. Rather it brings into view Christ's resurrection as the firstfruits of the resurrection-harvest, the initial portion of the whole. His resurrection is the representative beginning of the resurrection of believers. In other words, the term seems deliberately chosen to make evident the organic connection between the two resurrections. In the context. Paul's 'thesis' over against his opponents is that the resurrection of Jesus has the bodily resurrection of 'those who sleep' as its necessary consequence. His resurrection is not simply a guarantee; it is a pledge in the sense that is the actual beginning of the general event. In fact, on the basis of this verse it can be said that Paul views the two resurrections not so much as two events but as two episodes of the same event.1
Clearly, the resurrection about which Paul writes belongs to the last days, the eschaton. It is an event that signals the dawn of the New Creation. In much the same way, the OT promise that the Spirit would be poured out belonged to the age of the Messiah. If that resurrection has begun, and if God has given the Spirit, the New Creation must have dawned; the age of the Messiah must have come. This does not mean that all has been fulfilled! That which has been inaugurated has yet to be consummated. Our corruptible or mortal bodies have not yet been resurrected or changed as they will be when Christ returns. We have not yet been placed as sons [adopted] and entered into our inheritance as we will when we see Him. Yet, in both cases God has already given us the token of our final resuffection/redemption, adoption, glorification, inheritance. He has given the Holy Spirit as the pledge of our final adoption. He has raised Christ from the dead as the pledge of our bodily resurrection. There is a connection in Paul's mind between Christ's being installed as powerful Son of God at His resurrection (Rom 1:4)2 and the son-placing (adoption) of New Covenant believers (Gal 4:5). In both cases, "son-placing" results from Christ's successful completion of His God-given work. In both cases, the evidence of "son-placing" (in the case of Jesus, His investiture with sovereign power as the incarnate Son of God-Acts 2:32-33) is the sending of the Holy Spirit (Gal 4:6). The blessings of the New Covenant, of which the Holy Spirit is the "firstfruits" (Rom 8:23), now flow to believing Jews and Gentiles from the hand of the risen, exalted Christ. It is important that we realize that He grants these blessings not merely as God the Son, but as the last Adam,3 the incarnate Son of God. Paul's point (I Cor 15:2) is that just as death came through man, so the resurrection of the dead also comes through man. He writes, "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man" (v.21). In each case, a man acts as the representative of other men. The solidaric union that exists between these two men and those whom they represent, determines the destiny of the latter. It is because of the one sin of Adam that all die. It is because of the obedience of the one man, the Christ, that all will be resurrected. "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive" (v. 22) Adam's death because of sin was a pledge, a guarantee, that all mankind in him would die. Since Paul uses the same word "all" (pantes) for those who die and those who are resurrected, must we assume that the referents are the same in both cases. Are the "all" who die the same people as the "all" who shall be made alive? In verse 23, Paul leaves no doubt concerning the answer to this question. He writes, "But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him" (v.23). Those who die are those who belong to Adam- "in Adam all die." Those who will be resurrected are all who belong to Christ- "in Christ all will be made alive."
I Corinthians 15:45-49
It is not our purpose, at this point, to give an extended exposition of these verses.4 Instead, we want to focus on Paul's assertion that Christ is the "last Adam" who represents a new, spiritual creation. It is very important that we understand Paul's teaching here. If we fail to understand this theme, we will never rightly understand Pauline theology. Concerning the significance of these verses, John Murray wrote,
In I Corinthians 15:22, 45-49 Paul provides us with what is one of the most striking and significant rubrics in all of Scripture. He comprehends God's dealings with men under the twofold headship of the two Adams. There is none before Adam; he is the first man. There is none between Adam and Christ, for Christ is the second man. There is none after Christ; he is the last Adam (vss. 45-47). Adam and Christ sustain unique relations to men. And that history and destiny are determined by these relationships is demonstrated by verse 22: 'As in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive'. All who die die in Adam; all who are made alive are made alive in Christ. In view of this comprehensive philosophy of human history and destiny and in view of the pivotal and determinative roles of the first and last Adam, we must posit constitutive ordination on God's part to these unique relationships. And since the analogy instituted between Adam and Christ is so conspicuous, it is surely necessary to assume that the kind of relationship which Adam sustains to men is after the pattern of the relationship which Christ sustains to men.5
There are three important elements of this statement that we want to consider here: 1. "God deals with men under the twofold headship of the two Adams," 2. This is a relationship that God has constituted, and 3. All of history is comprehended in relation to these two men and the creations they represent.
The Headship of the Two Adams
The redemptive-historical approach does not minimize the reality that believers personally and individually enjoy the blessings that accrue from the redemptive work of Christ.
"Our dying, being buried, and being resurrected with Christ are experiences that transfer us from the old era to the new. But the transition from Old era to new, although applied to individuals at their conversion, has been accomplished through the redemptive work of Christ on Good Friday and Easter. Paul's syn [with] refers to a redemptive-historical "witness" whose locus is both [italics mine] the cross and resurrection of Christ, where the "shift" in eras took place historically, and [italics mine] the conversion of every believer, when this "shift" becomes applicable to the individual."6
Yet, the focus of this approach is not the individual's experience, but God's accomplishment of redemption in Christ. Clearly, in Paul's Epistles, in his theological thought, all of redemptive history consists of God's dealings with two representative men, two Adams. All others are what they are in God's sight because of their relationship to one of these two men. A person is either in Adam or in Christ, whom Paul designated as the "last Adam" (I Cor 15:45). Accordingly, as we shall see, every person belongs to one of two spheres or realms. They belong either to the Old Creation (this world, this present age) in Adam or the New Creation in Christ. When Paul writes about the "New Creation" (2 Cor 5:17, Gal 5:15), he is not talking about something that God does in the believer, but about the realm into which the believer has been transferred in Christ.
Instead of seeing Adam under a "covenant of works" and then trying to squeeze everything else into the "covenant of grace," it seems better to use the more biblical concept of representative headship. In reality, all mankind, in Adam as a representative head, already stand condemned because of his disobedience (See below Rom 5:12-19). But, even apart from the imputation of Adam's sin, it would be impossible for the sons of fallen Adam to get to heaven without perfect conformity to the revealed will of God. Unless they bear the unsullied image of God, He cannot and will not accept them into His holy presence. He cannot smile on sinners as long as they continue to fall short of His glory (Rom 3:23).
The Covenant that God made with Israel is the zenith of His self-revelation in the Old Testament Scriptures. The history that precedes the inauguration of the Old Covenant is written in anticipation of God's establishment of Israel as a great nation. The history that follows, describes Israel's sad failure under the Old Covenant. If the Law proves anything it is that law cannot fix the problem. All that the Law can do is to demonstrate the hopelessness of the situation apart from the grace of God.
The major purpose of the law was to establish, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that no child of Adam could enter the presence of a holy God and see that God's face in peace based on personal works of righteousness. If any child of Adam would be justified by the law, then he must keep the law perfectly, continually, and inwardly; a task not one of the descendants of Adam has either the inclination or the ability to perform. Do you see how this differs from saying that "Moses was teaching that the way to heaven is by keeping the Ten Commandments?" What Moses was saying is that if sinners "in Adam" expect to get to heaven through the law covenant, they will do so only through perfect obedience to that law.
On the other hand, the New Covenant which fulfills the covenants of promise is established with all those, but only those, who are "in Christ," the last Adam. They, too, can get to heaven only through perfect obedience to the law. For this reason, it was necessary that Christ, their head and representative, be made of woman, under the curse God placed on all creation when the first Adam fell. It was also necessary that He be made under the law that He might, on behalf of His people, obey it in all of its intricate detail. Then, under the penal sanctions of that law, He suffered the curse of the law that His sinful people had merited through disobedience to its precepts. In this way, He complied not only with God's righteous standard revealed in nature but also with that standard, revealed in a stricter way, in the Old Covenant. It is the "faithfulness of Christ" in fulfilling every demand of the old covenant as a covenant of works, as the representative of His people, that provided the sole ground of their acceptance in God's presence.
By Divine Constitution
The Nature of the Union
Theologians continue to be divided over the issue of the nature of the union that exists between Adam and his descendants. Generally, they hold one of two views.
Those who hold the "realistic view" believe that "human nature was specifically and numerically one in Adam" so that when Adam sinned, the whole race actually sinned in his one act of disobedience. According to this view, Adam was not the representative of the race; he was the race. Each individual (yet unindividualized) in the race was present and sinned in Adam when he, the entire race in one man, sinned.7
Those who hold the "representative view" believe that God appointed Adam to act as the representative head of the entire race. Those who hold this position do not deny that Adam is the natural as well as the representative head of the race. Nor do they deny that there is a union of nature between Adam and the race he represents. Thus, they along with the proponents of the realistic view, maintain that human nature has been corrupted in Adam and that this corruption is communicated to Adam's posterity by ordinary generation. The crux of the issue is not the existence of a union such as that proposed by the proponents of seminal union, but whether the existence of such a union is sufficient to explain the imputation of Adam's sin to all his descendants.
I would contend, based on Paul's teaching in Romans 5:12-19, that the only sufficient explanation of the imputation of Adam's sin is that God has ordained Adam as the representative of the entire Old Creation. It is important for us to understand that the link that exists between the two Adams and those whom they represent is a divinely constituted relationship. It is a union that goes beyond the mere natural connection that obtains because of ordinary generation. John Murray wrote,
And since the analogy instituted between Adam and Christ is so conspicuous, it is necessary to assume that the kind of relationship which Adam sustains to men is after the pattern of the relationship which Christ sustains to men. To put the case conversely, surely the kind of relationship that Christ sustains to men is after the pattern which Adam sustains to men (cf. Rom. 5:14). But if all that we posit in the case of Adam is simply his natural headship of parenthood, we do not have the kind of relationship that would provide the pattern for the headship of Christ. Hence the analogy would require some community of relationship which the natural headship of Adam does not provide."8
As we shall see, it is in this divinely ordained representative capacity that Adam prefigures Christ, the divinely ordained head of the New Creation. God imputed Adam's one act of disobedience to all his descendants apart from their personal involvement in his transgression. In the same way, He imputes the righteousness of Christ, the last Adam, to all the members of the New Creation apart from (in fact, in the total absence of) their personal righteousness.
The Nature of the Imputation
Though we do not wish to spend a great deal of time on this question, we need, at least, to consider briefly the nature of the imputation of Adam's sin. Was that imputation "mediate" or "immediate?" Does God impute guilt to us as sinners because we have received a corrupt nature through our solidarity with Adam, or does He impute it to us immediately, apart from any consideration of hereditary corruption? The issue is not whether sinners, in solidarity with Adam, receive both the imputation of his guilt and the hereditary corruption of his nature. The Scriptures make it clear that Adam's descendants are both guilty and depraved as a result of his first transgression. Instead, the issue is whether the guilt of Adam's first sin is mediated through our inheritance of his sinful corruption, or received by immediate imputation.
A proper understanding of Paul's argument in Romans 5:12-19 is essential for resolving this question. In this passage, Paul makes it plain that there is a typical correspondence between Adam and Christ. That parallel centers in the representative capacities of these two men. If we argue that the guilt of Adam's first sin is mediated through inherited corruption, we must concede that Christ's righteousness is imputed, not directly through faith, but mediately through our reception of his righteous nature. This would contradict everything that the Apostle has been laboring to prove. According to the consistent testimony of the New Testament Scriptures, God declares us righteous in His sight, not because we have received a righteous nature from Christ, but because He has credited our account with Christ's righteousness. We are not justified because we have become godly and righteous. God justifies the ungodly (Rom 4:5). God imputes Christ's righteousness to ungodly sinners through faith alone and in the absence of any personal righteousness. The parallel demands that we consider the imputation of Adam's sin to have been immediate as well.
Two Adams - Two Creations
To understand Pauline literature, it is necessary to grasp Paul's redemptive-historical viewpoint. Paul viewed the human condition in terms of realms, spheres, or eras. Every human being, according to Pauline theology, belongs to one of two realms. This is even true in the case of Christ's incarnate existence (Rom 1:3-4).9 A person is either "in Adam" or "in Christ." As long as that person is in Adam, he belongs to the Old Creation of which Adam is the representative head. When by, the grace of God, he is united to Christ in saving faith, he enters a new realm. He belongs to a new humanity, a New Creation of which Christ is the representative head. As long as he is part of the Old Creation, he is under condemnation (Rom 3:9-20). He is under the reign of sin and death (Rom 5:14,17,2 1). He lives under a regime characterized by weakness and inability (Rom 1:3;7:14-24; 8:3).
When, by grace, God transfers anyone from the Old Creation in Adam to the New Creation in Christ, He frees him at once from condemnation. The realm in which he now lives is characterized by justification (Rom 3:21; 5:18; 8: 1). He is declared righteous in God's presence because he is in Christ who has been declared righteous in God's presence. Yet, Paul insists that the believer's union with Christ impacts more than his standing in God's sight. It also effects the believer's freedom from the sin, death, and the law. It is important to notice that Paul associated the law (the Old Covenant) with the weakness, sin, death, and condemnation of the Old Creation, not with the power, righteousness, life, and justification of the New Creation.
This understanding of Paul's redemptive-historical approach is relevant to his discussion of the believer's resurrection due to the link between Christ's resurrection and His inauguration of the New Creation.
The resurrection of Jesus has more than personal significance. Verse 45 in its immediate context brings into view not only an organic connection with the resurrection of believers but also considerations cosmic in scope. Resurrection is here nothing less than the counterpart of creation. The resurrection of Christ is the beginning of the new and final world-order, an order described as spiritual and heavenly. It is the dawn of the new creation, the start of the eschatological age. In terms of the conceptual framework with which Paul views the whole of history, it is the commencement of the 'age to come.'10
In verse 46, Paul refers not to the bodies of these two representative men, but to the two creations that they represent. Commenting on this verse, Geerhardus Vos wrote,
Whatever may be the reason that Paul here momentarily departs from his parallel structure, the contrast is not blunted but continued in significantly more general terms, and 'Psychical' and 'spiritual' now describe two comprehensive states of affairs, two orders of existence contrasted temporally. The one follows upon the other and together they encompass the whole of history. Verse 46 is a compressed overview of history. As the era of the first Adam, the Psychical order is the preeschatological aeon, the incomplete, transitory, provisional world-age. As the era of the last Adam, the pneumatic order is the eschatological aeon, the complete, definitive, and final world-age.11
Romans 5:12-8:30
This entire section of Paul's Epistle to the Romans has one overarching theme. That theme is the absolute certainty of the believer's final glorification (conformity to the image of the last Adam, the incarnate Son of God).
In the first four chapters he has argued persuasively that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is the sinner's only hope of justification before God. He has shown that all are rebels who will invariably suppress God's truth whenever and however they are confronted with it (Rom 1:18-2:29). All, both Jews and Gentiles, are guilty before God (Rom 3:9-20). Apart from accounting God faithful to fulfill His promises of salvation, sinners in every age remain under God's just condemnation. In every age, sinners must seek justification before God through faith alone, apart from the works of the law. In Chapter five he takes up the glorious theme of the believer's confident assurance of glory (see 5:2). Based on the believer's union with Christ, Paul maintains that this hope12 of glory will not be disappointed. According to Paul's teaching in this chapter, the believer enjoys three blessings that insure his final glorification as a result of his union with Christ. He has a new relationship with God (5:1-11); he has a new representative before God (5:12-19); and he is under a new reign (5:20-21).
Two Representatives - Romans 5:12-19.
Paul's main point in this passage is that the believer's assurance of full salvation (eschatological justification and glorification) is based on the work of Christ, his representative, just as his condemnation was based on Adam's one representative13 act of disobedience.
In verse 12 he introduces a comparison between the first Adam and the last Adam that he does not resume until verse 18. Though he does not mention him by name in verse 12, there can be no doubt that he refers to Adam when he writes, "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death by sin. . . ." He makes this quite clear in verse 14 when he identifies Adam as "the typos of the coming one." Of course, when he uses the phrase "the coming one," he refers to Christ, the last Adam.
But, in what sense is there a typical correspondence between Adam and Christ? As we shall see, there are more points at which they are dissimilar than those in which they correspond to each other. Paul's statement concerning the typical correspondence between Adam and Christ occurs in conjunction with his parenthetical explanation for the universality of death in the absence of codified law (Rom 5:13-14). In these verses Paul argues that the effects of Adam's sin (including the imputation of Adam's guilt) must be universal because death (total death, physical, spiritual, and eternal) is universal. This is true even concerning those who were not guilty of sinning in the same way that Adam sinned, i.e., against a clearly revealed law of God (v. 14).14 Those who lived and committed sinful acts from Adam's time to Moses' time, that is, the time God gave the Old Covenant, were not counted as worthy of death [sin was not imputed to them]. This was so because they had not deliberately transgressed a clearly revealed boundary as Adam had. Paul argues that they died, not because they had personally broken a commandment, but because Adam had broken a commandment. God has imputed Adam's transgression to all who belong to the Old Creation. In other words, the one (Adam) acted as the representative of the many (all mankind in him). It is in this capacity that Adam stood as a type of Christ. Adam and Christ are alike in that they both stand as representative heads of their respective races. Adam represents all who are in him, the Old Creation. Christ represents all who are in Him, the New Creation.
In verses 15-17 Paul shows that though there is a typical correspondence between Adam and Christ, the parallel does not extend to the nature of their two acts and their consequences. The nature of their respective actions was vastly different. Adam succumbed to temptation and disobeyed God in the best of circumstances. Christ, on the other hand, steadfastly resisted and overcame temptation in the worst of circumstances. Adam disobeyed God and sinned. Christ obeyed His Father and acted righteously. Adam and Christ are also different in that the consequences of their actions differ in degree. Thus, Paul tells us that "the gift [Christ's gracious act] is not like the trespass" (5:15). Christ's work, since it is a work of grace, is more powerful than Adam's. Adam's trespass brought death to the (his) race. How much more [certainly] does the gift that flows from grace overflow to the many (v. 15).
Paul also tells us that there is a difference in the number of sins concerned (v. 16). One sin brought condemnation, but the free gift followed many trespasses. Finally, he argues that the consequences of their two acts differ as to their character. Adam's sin brought condemnation and death; Christ's obedience brought justification and life (v. 16).
Having summarized, in verse 17, the contrasts between these two representative men Paul is ready to resume the comparison that he began in verse 12. In verse 18a he restates the first clause of the comparison. "Consequently, just as the result of one trespass [or the trespass of the one man was condemnation for all men,. . . ." Then he completes the comparison in 18b. ". . so also [even so] the result of one act of righteousness [or the righteous act of the one man] was justification that brings life for all men." The phrase "upon all men unto justification of life" (AV), has occasioned a great deal of confusion and controversy. Some, taking a high view of the work of Christ, have posited the view that God will ultimately justify all people. Yet, the clear testimony of Scripture is that God will not justify everyone. Most will perish under the wrath and curse of God. Others, assuming that the phrase "all men" in 18b must include every member of Adam's race (the "all men" of 18a), have concluded that it is the offer of justification to all men that Paul has in mind. In their view, the sacrificial obedience of Christ makes it possible for God to justify sinners on the condition that they believe and repent. According to their position, the death of Christ makes the salvation of all men hypothetically possible, but does not secure the justification of any. Yet, we cannot consider the justification of which Paul writes potential or merely possible any more than we can consider the condemnation of all men in Adam to be merely potential or possible.
Are we left, then, with only two alternatives? Must we conclude either that Christ's obedience unto death will result in the justification of all without exception or that God only intended to make justification possible, not actually to justify anyone?
We need to seek the answer to this question considering Paul's view of the two creations and their respective heads. Adam and Christ are alike in that they both stand as representative heads of their respective races. Adam represents the Old Creation (all humanity in him). Christ, the last Adam, represents the New Creation (all believers in Him). Just as Adam's one act of disobedience secured the condemnation of all in him, even so Christ's one act of obedience actually secured the justification of all in Him. In his excellent commentary on Romans 1-8, Douglas Moo has responded to the idea that Paul is thinking merely about an offer of justification for all. He suggests three reasons why this cannot be the case:
. . . Paul always uses the dikaio- language of the status actually conferred on the individual, never of the atonement won on the cross itself (cf. particularly the careful distinctions in Rom. 3:21-26). Second, it is doubtful if eis can be taken to indicate an offer made to all people; certainly in the parallel in the first part of the verse, the condemnation actually embraces all people. But, perhaps the biggest objection to this view is that it misses the point for which Paul is arguing in this passage [italics mine]. This point is that there can be an assurance of justification and life, on the one side, that is just as strong and certain as the assurance of condemnation on the other. Paul wants to show, not how Christ has made available righteousness and life for all, but how Christ has secured [italics his] the benefits of that righteousness for all who belong to Him.15
The justified believer in Christ is certain to be glorified because his salvation does not in any way depend on his obedience to God. It depends totally on the obedience of Christ, his representative.
Two Reigns - Romans 5:20-21; 6:14.
The plight into which the first Adam had plunged the race was serious enough. Because of Adam's first sin, God condemned every member of the Old Creation to everlasting death. Now Paul tells us that another ingredient entered the mix that compounded the problem exponentially. Paul writes, "Now the law was added [came along side the state of things already existing] so that the trespass might increase" (5:20a). This is certainly not what one might have expected if he believed that the law (in this case the Mosaic Covenant, the ten commandments) is the instrument of sanctification. Would we not expect Paul to say that the law came in along side the grace of God to diminish the effects of sin and its bondage? Yet, Paul does not identify the law as part of the solution but as part of the problem. Its intent and its consequent effect was not to diminish sin and its bondage but to cause it to increase. It did so in the following ways. First, it established a clearly defined boundary. Before the entrance of the Old Covenant, there were many sins committed and punished, but only one act of trespass or transgression. Adam's offspring who lived between the time of Adam's first sin and the giving of the law at Sinai did not sin in the same way that Adam had sinned (Rom 5:14), i.e., against a clearly revealed commandment of God. But, when the law entered, sin took on a new character. Now it was an act of transgression against codified law. No longer was there only one transgression or trespass (Adam's) for which God condemned Adam's offspring. The trespasses increased in number. Before the law there was one trespass; now there are many trespasses. Finally, the trespass increased in that the law stirred sinful passions in the hearts of depraved rebels, causing them to bring forth fruit unto death (Rom 7:5). The law will never fix the problem. It only makes it worse.
It is at this point that Paul introduces the idea that a new reign has been established. He writes, "But where sin increased, grace increased all the more. . . ."(5:20b). It was in the very place, the very situation in which the trespass had increased that grace takes the field and wins the victory. Where was it that the trespass increased? The answer is clear! It was in the Old Creation, under the Old Covenant. It was not in the pristine world of eternity that Jesus was put to the test but in a world polluted by sin and ungodliness. It was in the arena of time, during the period of his earthly sojourn, that Jesus was scrutinized. Nor was He tested as one who possessed superhuman strength. The phrase, "in the days of His flesh," (Heb 5:7) emphasizes the condition of weakness that characterizes the human condition into which Jesus entered fully at His incarnation. The Old Creation, under Adam, is characterized by weakness. It was into that creation that He was born. It was in that creation He was tested. It was in that creation He died. Since He was truly human, His existence on earth was, necessarily, a dependent existence. When He became a man, He voluntarily laid aside the independent use of His Divine attributes. When He was tested, He was tested as a man who was fully dependent on God.
It was not simply as a true human being that He was tested; He was tested as a man under the Old Covenant. We must not forget that He lived His entire life on earth under the Old Covenant.16 In Galatians 4:4, Paul writes, "But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, made of woman, made under the law,17 to redeem those who were under the law . . . ." Christ was born under the old covenant that, through His faithfulness to that covenant, He might fulfill it and redeem His people from it. In the very place that sin reigned unto death over all Adam's posterity, grace has triumphed and reigns supreme.
Sin continues to reign over Adam's fallen race as a cruel taskmaster. Death continues to reap its harvest on the field of the Old Creation. But, believers in Christ are under a new reign. Paul writes, "For sin shall not be your master, for you are not under law," but under grace" (Rom 6:14).
Two Realms- Romans 6: 1-11; 8:1-9.
Romans 6: 1- 11
In Romans 6:1, Paul raises the following objection, "What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?" It is impossible to know whether this objection was one that had been brought against his teaching or one that he raises for didactic reasons. In any case, it gives us a good indication of the freeness with which Paul preached the gospel of justification through faith. Some would say that the message that Paul preached was a dangerous one. This message of justification through faith alone, apart from the works of the law, continually exposed him to the charge of being an "antinomian."18 Perhaps his critics were thinking, How can believers possibly be induced to live holy lives if we tell them that their justification before God has nothing to do with their obedience? If we teach them that the superabounding grace of God is more than sufficient to forgive all their sins, they will surely begin to sin with reckless abandon. If we allow them to begin to enjoy a sense of confidence in approaching God, it will certainly cause them to become careless about sanctification and fall into sin. It is just this sort of thinking that has littered the landscape of many churches with bruised and battered saints. This, of course, is totally contrary to Pauline thought. The consistent testimony of Scripture is that it is grace not guilt that must motivate God's people to walk in holiness. Why should I want to obey God? It is, in the words of Horatio Spafford, because
My sin-0 the bliss of this glorious thought!-
My sin, not in part, but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross and I bear it no more;
Praise the Lord, Praise the Lord, 0 my soul!
Paul's answer to such a suggestion was a strong negative retort- m` genoito- (may such a thing never happen, perish the thought). There is no room at all for such a thought in Paul's theology. As far as he is concerned, such a thing is impossible. Why so? Because he understands that the believer's union with Christ effects more than his standing before God. It also guarantees his victory over sin's reigning power. We must never be guilty of confusing justification and sanctification. This is the error of the legalist. Yet, we must never be guilty of separating justification and sanctification. This is the error of the Antinomian. The salvation bringing grace of God teaches us to deny ungodliness (Titus 2:11). Our union with Christ not only delivers us from the guilt and condemnation of sin; it also delivers us from sin's reigning power.
"How is it possible," Paul asks, "for us who died to sin, to go on living in it?" In what sense have we died to sin? We have not died to the possibility of committing acts of sin, have we? What, then, does Paul mean when he says that "we died to sin"? He means that, because we are united to Christ, our living head, we are finished with the reign and realm of sin. This is true because we are in Him who entered into that realm, was subject to its laws, and came under the dominion of death. Yet, He doesn't live there anymore. Paul writes, "Because we know this that Christ being raised from the dead, dies no longer, death no longer has the mastery over him." The good news is that, since we are united to Him, we don't live there any more either. Those who are in Christ have experienced a realm transfer. Though we continue to live in the Old Creation, we now belong to the New Creation. Adam no longer represented us. Christ, the last Adam, now stands at the head of the New Creation as our representative head. The Old Creation and the Old Covenant belong together. The law does not come to the aid of grace, but to aid of sin (Rom 5:20a; I Cor 15:56). In Galatians 4:3 Paul refers to the Old Covenant (the law) as "the elemental principles of the world (The Old Creation)." The New Creation and the New Covenant also belong together. New Covenant Theology stresses the vast superiority of the New Covenant over the Old Covenant that it has replaced. It insists that the New Covenant that Jesus has ratified is infinitely better than the Old Covenant, just as the fulfillment is superior to the type to which it corresponds.
The Old Covenant and the Old Creation with which Paul linked it (Rom 5:20) were characterized by weakness, bondage, and inability to please God (Rom 8:3). Paul often characterized the Old Creation as a realm that is characterized by flesh.19 Implicit in his use of this term is the idea that the Old Creation is a realm that is marked by the weakness and bondage of the fallen human condition. The New Creation and the New Covenant that Paul associates with it are characterized by the ministry of the Spirit. Thus, it is a realm that is distinguished by power and freedom from the dominion of sin (Rom 6:14). Paul assures us that "our old man has been crucified with Him that the body of sin might be rendered inoperative, so that we should no longer serve sin." It is fallacious to assume that when Paul wrote about the "old man" and the "new man," he referred to parts or natures of a person. Instead, he used these terms to refer to the man as a whole in relation to the corporate structure to which he belongs. The "old man" is what we were "in Adam." It is the man of the Old Creation, who lives under the tyrannical reign of sin and death. John Stott has written, "What was crucified with Christ, was not a part of me called my old nature, but the whole of me as I was before I was converted."20
The effect of this crucifixion is that the body of sin had been rendered inoperative. Douglas Moo defines what Paul means by "body of sin" this way, "[It] is not just my physical body, but myself in all my sin- prone faculties."21 What, then, does Paul mean when he says "that the body of sin has been rendered inoperative, so that we should no longer serve sin?" He means that our old relationship with Adam and with the Old Creation has come to a decisive end. As believers, we are finished, forever, with the realm of sin's power and the attending reign of death. We are no longer bound to obey sin's commands. We have been set free from its dominion and have been transferred to a new realm.
Paul's point is that the real, though forensic, inclusion of the believer with Christ in His crucifixion means that our solidarity with, and dominance by, Adam, through whom we are bound to the nexus of sin and death, has ended. And the purpose of this was that the body as a helpless tool of sin might he definitively defeated . . .'that we should no longer serve sin."'22
Paul's argument in this passage rests on the fact of the believer's union with Christ. Believers have finished with the Old Creation because Christ, their representative head has finished with it. Since death no longer has dominion over Him, it no longer has dominion over those in Him.
Romans 8:1-9
In Romans 8:1-9, Paul contrasts life in the realm of the flesh with life in the realm of the Spirit. His argument rests on the truth that, in Christ, the believer has been transferred from the Old Creation to the New. He no longer lives in that realm that is marked by the weakness of the flesh. He now lives in that realm that is characterized by the Spirit's enablement. Therefore, he is to live accordingly. That is, he must walk according to the Spirit, not according to the flesh.
When Paul talks about "the flesh," he is not referring to the sinful nature." He refers, instead, to the environment into which sinners are born in Adam. "Flesh" is that which characterizes the realm or age to which man, in Adam, belongs. "It has what is best described as an atmospheric quality. The term refers to the sphere of human existence, man's environment, the natural, earthly order with all that is characteristic of human life and necessary for it maintenance."23 If we insist on translating sarx, "sinful nature" every time it occurs in Pauline literature, we will almost certainly miss Paul's meaning. For example, the NIV translates Rom 8:8-9, "Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature, but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you." Yet, Paul, in this context, is plainly alluding to the realm transfer that he describes in Rom 5:12-8:17. It would be better to translate it as follows, "Those who belong to the realm that is characterized by the flesh (weakness, suffering, death, futility, mere humanness) cannot please God. You, however, no longer belong to the natural, earthly order, but to the realm that is characterized by the Holy Spirit's management. . . ." What Paul is saying is "Those who are in Adam cannot please God, but you, as evidenced by the Spirit's indwelling, are no longer part of that realm. You are in Christ." Paul's message is that believers are no longer the helpless servants of sin. We are no longer unable to bring sacrifices that are pleasing to God (see Rom 12:1; Phil 4:18; Heb 13:16; 1 Pet 2:5). "They that are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit.. . ." (Rom 8:8-9).
Two Rulers (Masters)- Romans 6:16-22.
In Romans 6:16, Paul begins to respond to a supposed objection to his assertion that as New Covenant believers, we are not under law, but under grace (v. 14). "Well, then," says the objector, "shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace?"(v. 15). Again Paul answers, "m` genoito- By no means!" The believer's freedom from the dominion of the law does not render him autonomous. He has simply been handed over from one master to another. He was a slave of sin; now he is a slave to righteousness and to God (v. 18-22).
Once we understand Paul's redemptive-historical perspective it becomes clear that when he writes about "freedom from the law," he does not have in mind freedom from righteousness. In fact, he makes it clear that it is impossible for us to live a righteous life unless we are free from the law. According to Paul, the believer has been handed over from one master to another (Rom 6:17). The believer cannot serve both masters at the same time. Paul writes,
Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey-whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted (Rom 6:16).
A person is either under that "form (mold) of teaching" that is found in the law (Rom 2:20), or he is under that new "form (mold) of teaching" to which all believers have been entrusted.
Two Rules (Canons of Behavior) - Romans 6:17; 7:5-6.
The New Covenant believer is also subjected to an objective standard of righteousness. They have been handed over to a new "form (mold) of teaching." If he is in Christ, he now renders hearty obedience to that new (covenant) mold24 according to which he is being conformed to the image of God's incarnate Son (Rom 8:29). He is not "adrift, without a definitive objective standard by which to judge righteousness."25 He is not at the mercy of "unsafe, subjective impulses [that] begin to direct moral thinking."26 He is led by the Spirit to obey the righteous standard revealed in the Scriptures.
In Romans 7:6 Paul writes,
But now, by dying to what once bound us [the law]. we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
Though the Christian is free from the covenant written on tables of stone, the law, he is not lawless. We are not free from all law, but we are free from the Mosaic Covenant as a whole.
In I Cor 9:20-21, Paul argued that he was able to act "as without law to those who are without law" because he himself was "not under the law." This raises some important questions. Is the word nomos (law) used in different senses in the Scriptures? If not, it would seem that we would have to conclude that Paul was claiming to be free from law absolutely. Of course, that cannot be the case since he plainly states in verse 21 that he is "not without the law of God. From what law, then, was Paul free? It seems to me that the answer has to be that he was free from the Mosaic law as a covenant. Still, he is under Christ's law (I Cor 9:2 1).
Two Results - Romans 5:21; 6:16,20-23; 7:4-6: 8:6,11-13,17-30.
Different Destinations
Finally, Paul tells us that lives lived in these two creations have very different results. In the Old Creation, sin reigns unto death. In the New Creation, grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life (see Rom 5:21; 6:16). The wages of sin (life lived according to the principles of the Old Creation) is death (Rom 6:23a). But, the free gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 6:23b). In Romans 8:6, 11-13, Paul also follows these two lifestyles to the end. Those who continue to live according to the Old Creation will perish in their sins. But, those who are led and enabled by the Spirit to put to death the deeds of the body will live eternally.
Different Ways of Life
Paul not only exposes the final results of life in these two realms, he also discusses the immediate consequences. Life lived in the Old Creation is a life of weakness, fear, frustration, and guilt. This condition was epitomized in Israel's experience hypo nomon, under law.
Under that covenant, believers and unbelievers alike lived life in the "oldness of the letter" (Rom 7:6). Consequently, they were unable, through that covenant, to bring forth fruit unto God. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews describes this inability in terms of the law's failure to produce complete worship and worshippers (Heb 7:18-19; 9:9; 10: 1). But, as heirs of the New Covenant, we serve God in the "newness of the Spirit" (Rom 7:6). We draw near to God with a true heart in full assurance of faith (Heb 10:22). By the enabling of the Spirit, we bring forth fruit unto God (Rom 7:4). We are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.
It is beyond the scope of this study to engage in a detailed exposition of Romans 7:14-25.27 Still, I would like to make a few observations about that passage that may be helpful to those who want to understand it as Paul intended.
First, it is impossible to answer all the questions raised by this passage in such a way that everyone will be satisfied. Even the most careful exegete, having done his best to honestly deal with this portion of Paul's argument, will wish that Paul had explained himself more fully. This is, by all accounts, a very difficult passage to deal with.
Second, the most common point of controversy concerning this passage has been whether the "I" (ego) is converted or unconverted. Yet, this is not the most important consideration. The issue Paul is considering is the purpose, function, and effect of the law, the Mosaic covenant. In verse six he has drawn a redemptive-historical contrast between the barrenness of living in "the oldness of the letter"28and the fruitfulness of living in "the newness of the Spirit." In the latter half of this chapter he is describing what it was like to live under the old covenant. Then, in chapter eight, he describes life in the Spirit, under the new covenant. His point is that the person under the old covenant, whether unconverted or converted, lacked the enabling to be and do what God's law required. Such empowerment only comes through the gospel, by the Spirit (Rom 8:3-4).
Third, we are not denying that true Christians continue to struggle with temptation. In chapter eight of this epistle, Paul describes the believer's experience as one in which he groans to be delivered from his present conflict with remaining sin. He is not yet all that he will be when Jesus returns in glory. The flesh continues to lust against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh (Gal 5:17). Yet, the person Paul describes here is not merely a person in conflict with remaining sin. The man of Romans seven, the "I" (ego) is defeated every time he is confronted with sin's temptation. Every time, wishes to do good, evil rears its ugly head and defeats him. He joyfully agrees with the law, finding it holy, just, and good. In comparison to its holy standard, he loathes himself and acknowledges that he is fleshly, having been sold into bondage to sin's power. Yet, that law that is so effective in pointing out his flaws and faults is powerless to do anything about them. If Paul intended to describe the experience of a true Christian, a spiritual man, then what he writes here totally contradicts his teaching in chapter six. He wrote, "For sin shall not lord it over you, for you are not under law but under grace" (6:14). He described the believer's servitude to sin in the past tense. Though he was barren when he was the bond servant of sin, he now has his fruit unto sanctification. Yet, the man of Romans seven is clearly led captive by sin.
Such teaching would not only contradict Paul's plain statements here and in other of his epistles; it would also contradict the teaching of the New Testament Scriptures as a whole.
Finally, we have argued, that the new covenant believer is not under the old covenant as a standard of behavior. Assuming that we are correct, it would be totally inconsistent for Paul judge himself using that outmoded covenant as a standard. Yet, since his purpose in this context is to consider the purpose, function and effects of the law as Mosaic covenant, we would be forced to conclude that he is doing exactly that. Further, we would be bound to subject ourselves to that standard as the gage of our progress in sanctification
It seems that what Paul is doing in Romans seven, 14-25 is describing his experience, in solidarity with the nation of Israel, under the old covenant. As he does so, he stands on new covenant ground and describes that experience from a new covenant perspective. He intends to show that the law, though effective in revealing his carnal failures could do nothing to remedy them. Only Christ in the gospel can rescue him from his wretched existence.
A Glorious Future
Finally, in Romans 8: 17-30, Paul assures God's blood-bought but suffering children that the New Creation that Jesus inaugurated at His first coming will soon be consummated. When Christ, the king of the New Creation, is revealed, every groan will be turned to rejoicing, every tear will be wiped away, and we shall be revealed as sons of God, fully conformed to the image of the firstborn (the prototype of the New Creation) Son.
1. Gaffin, Richard. Resurrection and Redemption. (Phillipsburg,N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1987), pp. 3.
2. Rom 1:4 describes the entrance of the incarnate Son into a state of exaltation and glory. He became the Son of God in power (powerful Son of God). As John Murray has written, "The apostle is dealing with some particular event in the history of the Son of God incarnate by which He was instated in a position of sovereignty and invested with power, an event which in respect of investiture with power surpassed everything that could previously be ascribed to him in his incarnate state" (Murray 1971, 10). Paul does not say that He was constituted "Son of God" by the resurrection. He says that He was constituted "Son of God in power." As Murray has written, "This addition makes all the difference" (ibid). Christ was certainly the powerful Son of God prior to His incarnation. At His resurrection, He became the powerful Son of God incarnate. For a fuller treatment of this subject, see Murray, Epistle to the Romans. pp. 5-12. and Gaffin. Resurrection and Redemption. pp. 98-114).
3. Cf. the phrase Son of Man in the Gospels. See also Dan 7:9-14, esp.13-14.
4. For a fuller treatment of I Cor 15:45ff. see Gaffin, Resurrection and Redemption. pp. 78-92.
5. John Murray, The Imputation of Adam's Sin. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1959), p. 39.
6. Douglas Moo, Romans 1-8, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991), pp. 381-2.
7. See Wm. G.T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology. Vol- 11 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, n.d.), p.30. and A.H. Strong, Svstematic Theology. Vol. 11 (Philadelphia: 1907), pp. 619ff.
8. Murray, The Imputation of Adam's Sin, pp. 39-40. See Murray's work for a fuller treatment of this issue. Also see Gary Long, "Adam: Mankind's Representative Head," Unpublished manuscript, Sovereign Grace Ministries, Colorado Springs, CO.
9. Romans 1:3-4, should be viewed, not as setting forth two natures in the person of Christ, the human and the divine, but as describing "two successive phases in Christ's history, implying two successive modes of incarnate existence" (Gaffin 1987,112). It is a contrast between Christ's humiliation and exaltation. In both cases, the Son of God (In Rom 1:3, the phrase "His Son" is an ontological designation concerning Christ's essential oneness with the Father), became something that He was not before. He became the incarnate Son of God-"born of the seed of David" (Rom 1:3). This stage of His incarnate existence was characterized by weakness, dependence, and, indeed, all that is intrinsic to the human condition. It was in Paul's words, "according to the flesh." It was into the old creation, the Adamic order, that he came. It was in the old order that he lived. It was under the old covenant that He died.
10. Gaffin, Resurrection and Redemption, pp. 89-90.
11.GeerhardusVos, "Eschatology and the Spirit," p. 231.
12. Elpis [hope] in the NT refers to the believer's favorable and confident expectation of receiving that which God has promised.
13.Paul's use of the words "the one" and "the many" throughout these verses makes it clear that he understands both the first and the last Adam to have acted in a representative capacity. "The one" stands in the place of and acts on the behalf of "the many."
14. When Paul uses the word parabasis, he always does so in reference to the transgression of an explicitly revealed and clearly defined law of God.
15. Douglas Moo, The Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary - Romans 1-8, ed. Kenneth Barker, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991), P. 356.
16. It is possible that the clause "those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death" refers not to people in general, but to the Israelites under the old covenant. The chapter began with a description of the severity of the word spoken by angels, i.e., the old covenant that engenders bondage. It was largely the fear of death that kept rebellious Israel in bounds. This view seems even more plausible when we consider that this clause is connected causally with the following verse. "For ... He laid hold of the seed of Abraham." Though this idea is too speculative to merit dogmatism, it is, nevertheless, worthy of consideration.
17. Every time Paul uses the phrase hupo nomon, (under law), he does so in reference to Israel's uneasy confinement under the Old Covenant.
18. If, then, we are not open to the same charge whenever we preach the gospel of justification through faith alone, our message must be different from that of the great apostle to the Gentiles. Dr. Lloyd-Jones wrote, "The true preaching of the gospel of salvation by grace alone always leads to the possibility of this charge [antinomianism] being brought against it. There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand it and misinterpret it to mean that it really amounts to this, that because you are saved by grace alone it does not matter at all what you do; you can go on sinning as much as you like because it will redound all the more to the glory of grace. That is a very good test of gospel preaching. If my preaching and presentation of the gospel of salvation does not expose it to that misunderstanding, then it is not the gospel" (Lloyd-Jones, Romans, p. 8).
19. Dr. Gaffin has described the most prominent usage of the term "flesh" in Paul's letters as having "an atmospheric quality." He wrote, "The term refers to the sphere of human existence, man's environment, the natural, earthly order with all that is characteristic of human life and necessary for its maintenance. It brings into view a comprehensive state of affairs, a world order." Gaffin, Resurrection and Redemption, p. 107.
20. John R.W. Stott,Men Made New:An Exposition of Romans 5-8, (London: lnter-Varsity Press, 1966), p .45.
21. Moo, Romans, p. 393.
22. Ibid.
23. Gaffin, Resurrection and Redemption, p. 107.
24. Douglas Moo, commenting on the phrase "that form of doctrine to which you have been delivered," has written, "In these verses [Phil 3:17; 1 Thess 1:7; 2 Thess 3:9; 1 Tim 4:12; Titus 2:7], typos includes the active connotation of a pattern that "molds" others. Similarly, in this verse, it is likely that typos includes the idea that the Christian didache "molds" and "forms" those who have been handed over to it." Douglas Moo, Romans 1-8. Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991), p. 418.
25. Walter Chantry, God's Righteous Kingdom. (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1980), pp. 80-8 1.
26. Ibid.
27. See Moo, Romans, pp. 448-499, for and excellent and thorough treatment of the problems that this passage presents.
28. Paul uses the term "letter"(grammatos) in contrast to "Spirit" to refer to the law, the old covenant.