# Romans 5:18



## cih1355 (Nov 26, 2004)

Romans 5:18 says, "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men."

Does the "all men" in the first half of this verse refer to everyone in Adam and the "all men" in the second half of this verse refer to everyone in Christ? Does the "all men" refer to two different groups of people?


----------



## ReformedWretch (Nov 26, 2004)

I wish I could answer this!

But I look forward to reading the replies of those who can and thus learning!


----------



## SteelYankee (Nov 26, 2004)

You asked about Romans 5:18, which says, "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men."

I think you've already answered your question. The common understanding of many is that the word "all" applies to "every single person without exception." If that is the case, let's re-read the verse:

Romans 5:18 would say, "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to [every single person who has ever lived - without exception], even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to [every single person who has ever lived - without exception]."

Doesn't make much sense, does it? However, if you use the understanding of all this in Adam and all those in Christ, it makes perfect sense.

Romans 5:18 does say, "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to [every single person in Adam], even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to [every single person in Christ]."


"All kinds of men" also works but it misses the meaning of the totality of condemnation. It fell on everyone.


----------



## Scot (Nov 26, 2004)

I Corinthians 15:22 should be looked at in the same light.

_For as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive._

The first "all" is an all-inclusive "all." The second "all" can only mean "all" of the elect or else we have a universal atonement which doesn't square with the rest of scripture.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 26, 2004)

You are correct to differentiate who, ultimately, the two references to "all men" refer. But remember also the context of this verse. It falls in the middle of one of the most profound discussions in Scripture regarding Federal (covenantal) theology. The main thing in view here is the headship of Adam on one side, in whom all humanity ("all men" _who were federated to him_) were condemned; and on the other side Christ, in whom the new humanity ("all men" _who are federated to him_) are justified.


----------



## just_grace (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by cih1355_
> Romans 5:18 says, "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men."
> 
> Does the "all men" in the first half of this verse refer to everyone in Adam and the "all men" in the second half of this verse refer to everyone in Christ? Does the "all men" refer to two different groups of people?



I think it just means what it say's... and that all of the human race suffer because of what happened in Eden.

And that IN Christ there is life.

Maybe someone would like to look into the meaning of the original 'ALL' and reply.

That's what I see without getting into theological debate.

David


----------



## Ianterrell (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by cih1355_
> ...



"...And that IN Christ there is life..."

Life for all men potentially? Or life for all men actually? Do you adhere to the doctrine of the Limited or Particular Atonement?


----------



## just_grace (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ianterrell_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by just_grace_
> ...



My answer is simply this and in accordance with the teaching of Christ and with my Apostle..Paul, because I am a Gentile saved by God's Grace... 

I was once not saved, now I am...I do not care that much about debating who is saved and who is not...that is God's domain not mine...all I do is tell people about 'The Way' thats all ..

I don't understand all this stuff with which a lot of people are pre-occupied with..."where do you stand" etc etc...

David


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> all I do is tell people about 'The Way' thats all ..
> 
> I don't understand all this stuff with which a lot of people are pre-occupied with..."where do you stand" etc etc...
> ...



And when they reply, "prove it," or "I need to dig deeper but I just don't understand," do you still remain aloof from "the things hard to be understood?"


----------



## Ianterrell (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Ianterrell_
> ...



How could you be interested in telling people about the way, but not care about "who is saved and who is not"? 

And why do you assume that someone asking a question is "pre-occupied" with some particular issue? It's frustrating when people who are interested in critical issues and ask questions are made to feel they are some how shifting the focus off of Jesus Christ! What a shame.


----------



## just_grace (Nov 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by just_grace_
> ...



Are you to say that every Christian has to be a theological expert or should we listen to Christ and that "if you do not become as a child you shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven

And has to prove it...  you have to be kidding.

David

[Edited on 11-27-2004 by just_grace]


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 27, 2004)

We are to have a child-like faith, not a childish faith. Christ exhorted us to pay attention to every detail of the law (which we can assume to mean more than, "Be good."). Peter said that there were things in Paul that are hard to be understood, that does not warrant that they are not worth studying. 

The author of Hebrews was pained greatly that is audience was not able to understand the meat of the word and had to settle for the milk.

No, I am not saying that we are to be theological experts, neither am I (or the rest of the board, for that matter) saying we should abandon all polite disagreement.


----------



## Ianterrell (Nov 27, 2004)

David,

You continue to erect false dilemnas. 

"Are you to say that every Christian has to be a theological expert or should we listen to Christ and that "if you do not become as a child you shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven"

David, Jacob asked you a question that you dodged with a logical fallacy. It's one thing to say you don't understand a lot of theology, its something totally other to chide people who do understand theology and DO care about it.


----------



## turmeric (Nov 27, 2004)

David, the people on this board love to debate. This is where they do it, I think, and they do it to clarify their ideas as much as for any other reason. I just stay out of the threads that aren't interesting to me, and stick my oar in when I feel like it. I don't think anyone means any harm here, if it gets too contentious a moderator usually gets out the hose and breaks up the dogfight. We are all still sinners.

Having said all that, the issue of limited atonement, or better, particular atonement is important. The issue, I think, is whether God's intentions were fulfilled by Christ's death, or whether rebellous humanity can frustrate God's intentions by refusing to believe. I come down on the side of particular atonemen. Sometime when you're in the mood for a long exhaustive discourse in 17th Century English on this subject; you can read John Owen's Death of Death in the Death of Christ.

In Christ


----------



## Ianterrell (Nov 27, 2004)

The Limited Atonement is especially important Meg! It is the very ground of our security in God's grace! It is the reason we call ourselves redeemed, and further it shows even more supremely the mercy of God that Christ procured redemption entirely for his beloved church.


----------



## Scot (Nov 27, 2004)

_just_grace wrote_



> all I do is tell people about 'The Way' thats all ..



But if you're telling them of a Christ that made a universal atonement, you're telling them a 'wrong way.' If Christ's atonement is merely potential then they must secure their own salvation by their works. This does away with your username "just grace."

I agree with Ian. The doctrine of Limited Atonement is especially important. I also would go along with Meg in recommending that you read Owen concerning the topic.



> We are to have a child-like faith, not a childish faith.





[Edited on 27-11-2004 by Scot]


----------



## andreas (Nov 27, 2004)

***I don't understand all this stuff with which a lot of people are pre-occupied with..."where do you stand" etc etc..***


."..and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh
you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear."1 Peter 3:15

andreas.

[Edited on 3-12-2004 by andreas]


----------

