• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Romans 7:8-10

Arial

Admin
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2023
Messages
7,192
Reaction score
6,193
Points
175
Faith
Christian/Reformed
Country
US
Politics
conservative
"But sin, seizing and opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead."
Casually read, this passage can be, and has been, used to deny original sin, and/or claim that sins were not judged or people condemned before the Law was given to Moses and Israel. At the very least it can produce a bit of a paradox. So out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT to produce analysis of it from Reformed theologians. The following is all the work of AI form Chat, but it is interesting.


Romans 7:8–10 is a crucial passage in Paul’s discussion of the law, sin, and death. Reformed theologians have long reflected on these verses, especially in relation to total depravity, the role of the law, and spiritual death. Here's the passage (ESV):

Romans 7:8–10 (ESV): 8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead.
9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.
10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me.

Key Themes in Reformed Analysis

1.​

Reformed theologians, such as John Calvin, stress that the law is good, but sin corrupts its use:

John Calvin (Commentary on Romans 7:8):
“The law is not the cause of sin, but rather sin, taking occasion by the law, is stirred up and excited. For our depraved nature cannot bear to be restrained; the very prohibition kindles the desire.”
Calvin argues that the law reveals and provokes sin—not because the law is evil, but because human nature is corrupt.

2.​

Robert Haldane, another Reformed commentator, connects this passage to the doctrine of total depravity:

Robert Haldane (Exposition of Romans):
“The Apostle is here describing the operation of the law on the unregenerate heart. Sin, he says, wrought in him all manner of concupiscence. This is the effect of the law on man in his natural state—it stirs up, instead of subduing, sinful desires.”
Haldane sees the law as functioning to expose and even incite sin in the unconverted, showcasing the depth of man’s depravity.

3.​

Reformed theologians have debated Paul's meaning in verse 9 ("I was once alive apart from the law..."). Many, like Charles Hodge, argue Paul is speaking representatively or experientially—not literally.

Charles Hodge (Commentary on Romans):
“This is commonly understood to refer to his own experience, and the transition from a state of self-righteous security to a conviction of sin and condemnation... He seemed to himself to be alive, i.e., safe and good, until the law in its spiritual power flashed upon his conscience.”
Hodge interprets this as Paul's personal awakening to the law’s true demands, which shattered his sense of moral sufficiency.

4.​

Thomas Schreiner (modern Reformed Baptist scholar) in his Romans commentary underscores that the law reveals sin and condemns:

Thomas Schreiner (Romans, BECNT):
“The law does not cause death by itself; rather, sin uses the law to deceive and kill. The promise of life through the law (v. 10) is nullified by sin’s power.”
Schreiner maintains that the commandment was meant to give life (as in Leviticus 18:5), but in practice, it exposes and intensifies sin in fallen humanity.


Summary of Reformed Perspective

  • The law is holy (cf. v.12), but it cannot save due to human sin.
  • Sin is empowered by the law in the unregenerate, exposing total depravity.
  • "Alive apart from the law" likely refers to a false sense of spiritual safety before conviction.
  • The law’s intended life-giving purpose is thwarted by sin, leading to death.
 
"But sin, seizing and opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead."
Casually read, this passage can be, and has been, used to deny original sin, and/or claim that sins were not judged or people condemned before the Law was given to Moses and Israel. At the very least it can produce a bit of a paradox. So out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT to produce analysis of it from Reformed theologians. The following is all the work of AI form Chat, but it is interesting.
Romans 7:8–10 is a crucial passage in Paul’s discussion of the law, sin, and death. Reformed theologians have long reflected on these verses, especially in relation to total depravity, the role of the law, and spiritual death. Here's the passage (ESV):

Key Themes in Reformed Analysis

1. Reformed theologians, such as John Calvin, stress that the law is good, but sin corrupts its use:​

Calvin argues that the law reveals and provokes sin—not because the law is evil, but because human nature is corrupt.

The law was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), not to save.

2. Robert Haldane, another Reformed commentator, connects this passage to the doctrine of total depravity:

Haldane sees the law as functioning to expose and even incite sin in the unconverted, showcasing the depth of man’s depravity.

3. Reformed theologians have debated Paul's meaning in verse 9 ("I was once alive apart from the law..."). Many, like Charles Hodge, argue Paul is speaking representatively or experientially—not literally.

Hodge interprets this as Paul's personal awakening to the law’s true demands, which shattered his sense of moral sufficiency.

4. Thomas Schreiner (modern Reformed Baptist scholar) in his Romans commentary underscores that the law reveals sin and condemns:​


Schreiner maintains that the commandment was meant to give life (as in Leviticus 18:5), but in practice, it exposes and intensifies sin in fallen humanity.


Summary of Reformed Perspective

  • The law is holy (cf. v.12), but it cannot save due to human sin.
  • Sin is empowered by the law in the unregenerate, exposing total depravity.
  • "Alive apart from the law" likely refers to a false sense of spiritual safety before conviction.
  • The law’s intended life-giving purpose is thwarted by sin, leading to death.
The law was not given for eternal life, which has always been by faith (Ge 15:5-6).
The law was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20).
 
Last edited:
The law was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), not to save.




The law was not given for eternal life, which has always been by faith (Ge 15:5-6).
The law was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20).
If I am not mistaken, I believe that is what is said in the quotes.
 
If I am not mistaken, I believe that is what is said in the quotes.
It states "the law's intended life-giving purpose."

I understand that to mean the law was intended to give eternal-life.

The law was given neither for eternal life nor natural life, right?
It was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), for eternal life is, and always has been, by faith (Ge 15:5-6).

Am I missing something (which would not be surprising)?
 
Last edited:
It states "the law's intended life-giving purpose."

I understand that to mean the law was intended to give eternal-life.

The law was given neither for eternal life nor natural life, right?
It was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), for eternal life is, and always has been, by faith (Ge 15:5-6).

Am I missing something (which would not be surprising)?
Definitely the summary, and even the out of context quotes (major problem with AI) could be taken as you did. The Law was not intended to give eternal life as Chat GPT says, but what is in it, since it is from God, is life giving. It teaches what sin is, and condemns for disobedience. And it was Jesus' perfect obedience to it, spirit and letter, that qualified him to substitute himself in our place, and he is the life giver through that perfect obedience and his substitutionary atonement, making propitiation for our sins. The Law itself was not given for eternal life but to point the way to the one who gives eternal life, and how it will be done. By the shedding of blood and substitution, and a perfect sacrifice, and through faith in the Savior. No one could be saved by the Law.

My purpose was to deal mainly with the statement Paul made that before the law came he was alive, and when the law came it killed him. As though before the Law, even though all were sinners, God did not count it against them. Which of course would be a contradiction to, the consequences of sin being death, for all die.
 
A portion from Calvin's commentary on Romans 7:7

For coveting I had not known, etc. This is then an explanation of the former sentence, by which he proves that ignorance of sin, of which he had spoken, consisted in this -- that he perceived not his own coveting. And he designedly referred to this one kind of sin, in which hypocrisy especially prevails, which has ever connected with itself supine self-indulgence and false assurance. For men are never so destitute of judgment, but that they retain a distinction in external works; nay, they are constrained even to condemn wicked counsels and sinister purposes: and this they cannot do, without ascribing to a right object its own praise. But coveting is more hidden and lies deeper; hence no account is made of it, as long as men judge according to their perceptions of what is outward. He does not indeed boast that he was free from it; but he so flattered himself, that he did not think that this sin was lurking in his heart. For though for a time he was deceived, and believed not that righteousness would be violated by coveting, he yet, at length, understood that he was a sinner, when he saw that coveting, from which no one is free, was prohibited by the law.

Augustine says, that Paul included in this expression the whole law; which, when rightly understood, is true: for when Moses had stated the things from which we must abstain, that we may not wrong our neighbor, he subjoined this prohibition as to coveting, which must be referred to all the things previously forbidden. There is no doubt but that he had in the former precepts condemned all the evil desires which our hearts conceive; but there is much difference between a deliberate purpose, and the desires by which we are tempted. God then, in this last command, requires so much integrity from us, that no vicious lust is to move us to evil, even when no consent succeeds. Hence it was, that I have said, that Paul here ascends higher than where the understanding of men can carry them. But civil laws do indeed declare, that intentions and not issues are to be punished. Philosophers also, with greater refinement, place vices as well as virtues in the soul. But God, by this precept, goes deeper and notices coveting, which is more hidden than the will; and this is not deemed a vice. It was pardoned not only by philosophers, but at this day the Papists fiercely contend, that it is no sin in the regenerate. [211] But Paul says, that he had found out his guilt from this hidden disease: it hence follows, that all those who labor under it, are by no means free from guilt, except God pardons their sin. We ought, at the same time, to remember the difference between evil lustings or covetings which gain consent, and the lusting which tempts and moves our hearts, but stops in the midst of its course.

[211] As an instance of the frivolous and puerile mode of reasoning adopted by the Papists, the following may be adduced: quoting James 1:15, "When lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death," they reason thus: -- "Lust is not simply a sin, for it brings it forth; and when it is sin, it is not mortal sin, for it afterwards brings forth death. "Taking advantage of a metaphor, they apply it strictly and literally, without considering that the Apostle is only exhibiting the rise, progress, and termination -- of what? of sin no doubt. The like produces its like. If lust were not sinful, it could not generate what is sinful. Such childish and profane reasoning is an outrage both on common sense and on religion. -- Ed.

 
Definitely the summary, and even the out of context quotes (major problem with AI) could be taken as you did. The Law was not intended to give eternal life as Chat GPT says, but what is in it, since it is from God, is life giving. It teaches what sin is, and condemns for disobedience. And it was Jesus' perfect obedience to it, spirit and letter, that qualified him to substitute himself in our place, and he is the life giver through that perfect obedience and his substitutionary atonement, making propitiation for our sins. The Law itself was not given for eternal life but to point the way to the one who gives eternal life, and how it will be done. By the shedding of blood and substitution, and a perfect sacrifice, and through faith in the Savior. No one could be saved by the Law.

My purpose was to deal mainly with the statement Paul made that before the law came he was alive, and when the law came it killed him. As though before the Law, even though all were sinners, God did not count it against them. Which of course would be a contradiction to, the consequences of sin being death, for all die.
But the Law was in force when Paul was born, he was not alive before it came.
Would that be Paul was "alive" (Ro 7:9) in his understanding before he realized the law condemned him to "death."

Does Law mean the Decalogue, or also the Levitical ceremonial laws, for it was the ceremonial laws that presented sacrifice for atonement?

What is meant by the law being life-giving? If obeyed it made for a good human life? For it did not give eternal life, nor was it given to do so.
It was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20). Only the Holy Spirit, not law keeping, gives eternal life (Jn 3:3-5).
 
Last edited:
Definitely the summary, and even the out of context quotes (major problem with AI) could be taken as you did. The Law was not intended to give eternal life as Chat GPT says, but what is in it, since it is from God, is life giving. It teaches what sin is, and condemns for disobedience. And it was Jesus' perfect obedience to it, spirit and letter, that qualified him to substitute himself in our place, and he is the life giver through that perfect obedience and his substitutionary atonement, making propitiation for our sins. The Law itself was not given for eternal life but to point the way to the one who gives eternal life, and how it will be done. By the shedding of blood and substitution, and a perfect sacrifice, and through faith in the Savior. No one could be saved by the Law.

My purpose was to deal mainly with the statement Paul made that before the law came he was alive, and when the law came it killed him. As though before the Law, even though all were sinners, God did not count it against them. Which of course would be a contradiction to, the consequences of sin being death, for all die.

While your OP doesn't quote Hodge exactly properly I don't think, I do enjoy this analysis by him;

"PAUL, having shown that we must be delivered from the law, in order to our justification (chapters 3, 4.,) and that this freedom was no less necessary in order to sanctification (chap. 6, chap. 7:1–6,) comes now to explain more fully than he had previously done, what are the use and effect of the law. This is the object of the residue of this chapter. The apostle shows, first, vs. 7–13, that the law produces conviction of sin, agreeably to his declaration in chap. 3:20; and, secondly, vs. 14–25, that it enlightens the believer's conscience, but cannot destroy the dominion of sin. This section, therefore, may be advantageously divided into two parts. Paul introduces the subject, as is usual with him, by means of an idea intimately associated with the preceding discussion.

He had been insisting on the necessity ofdeliverance from the law. Why? Because it is evil? No; but because it cannot produce holiness. It can produce only the knowledge and the sense of sin; which are the constituents of genuine conviction. These two effects are attributed to the operation of the law, in vs. 7, 8. These ideas are amplified in vs. 9–11. The inference is drawn in ver. 12, that the law is good; and in ver. 13, that the evil which it incidentally produces is to be attributed to sin, the exceeding turpitude of which becomes thus the more apparent." ..

.
As you rightly stated the law of God is not evil, it provides order and shape for the communities we live in and provides a framework for general peace between man and God and man and man.

Of course the written law cannot make us into creature's of righteousness, so our flesh rebels against it. All the written law can do is make us cognizant of the depth of our depravity and our utter dependency upon God to save us. Our flesh runs for cover I think from anything related to it that's truthful.

What the written law cannot do, the law of the indwelling Holy Spirit is able to do, The indwelling Holy Spirit can not only make us cognizant of our sinfulness, but is also able to effect our sanctification which will ultimately lead to our glorification in Christ Jesus.

This is the alive part.

This was a great set up for the thread, and it gives everyone a chance to look at the different aspects and consider it..
 
Last edited:
But the Law was in force when Paul was born, he was not alive before it came...

I talk about existing from the foundation of the world plenty - it doesn't mean I was physically and consciously present at the foundation.

My time spent in Scripture has changed the way I speak about things in time. I often find myself speaking of past, present and future as all being in the present tense when speaking about Biblical concepts.

I think the mindset somehow comes from reading Scripture, it gives us a non linear sense of time, or at least you become non linear in the way of thinking and speaking.

I hadn't noticed, do you do this? How do you speak about things like election?

Does Law mean the Decalogue, or also the Levitical ceremonial laws, for it was the ceremonial laws that presented sacrifice for atonement?
I believe Paul refers to the Decalogue here. It's the main set of laws that carried curses for breaking.

Deuteronomy 28:15-68

What is meant by the law being life-giving? If obeyed it made for a good human life?

See my other post, post 8 I believ. .

It was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20). Only the Holy Spirit, not law keeping, gives eternal life (Jn 3:3-5).

Amen and Amen! But we still keep the law.
 
Last edited:
But the Law was in force when Paul was born, he was not alive before it came.
Would that be Paul was "alive" (Ro 7:9) in his understanding before he realized the law condemned him to "death."
Paul is not making personal reference to himself there, I don't think, but is emphasizing how the law makes us aware of sin, and convicts of sin. Another possibility is that when the moral and righteous aspects of the law are seen, as Jesus was constantly pointing out, we see just how far we have come short, and always will. One considers themselves alive until that is seen. Just like a non-believer considers themselves alive, when in reality they are dead in their trespasses. Even in the Jews thought that keeping the letter of the law and being the ones who were given the law and the oracles, to be what saved them. It is Paul who in Eph compares dead and alive, dead being without saving faith and alive with saving faith. Those without saving faith do not know they are "dead" but are convinced they are alive.
Does Law mean the Decalogue, or also the Levitical ceremonial laws, for it was the ceremonial laws that presented sacrifice for atonement?
The Decalogue, although the Jews were required to keep the ceremonies too but that no longer applies, since they were the shadow and Christ is the real. But also, not just the written Decalogue but all that is implicit in it.
What is meant by the law being life-giving? If obeyed it made for a good human life? For it did not give eternal life, nor was it given to do so.
It was given to reveal sin (Ro 3:20). Only the Holy Spirit, not law keeping, gives eternal life (Jn 3:3-5).
It wasn't given just to reveal sin. It was also given to teach what righteousness is, and how mankind is to conduct his affairs as his creatures who were given dominion over the creation. It expands the Decalogue into details that cover every area of our life. In this it is wisdom, the wisdom of God. I do not know what ChatGPT means by "live-giving", but no it was never intended to give eternal life. It can't, because it cannot be perfectly obeyed. All men are sinners. Conversely, it had to be perfectly obeyed because it was given, and that would give eternal life. As we see in Jesus. Perfect righteousness for eternal life.
 
"But sin, seizing and opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead."
Casually read, this passage can be, and has been, used to deny original sin, and/or claim that sins were not judged or people condemned before the Law was given to Moses and Israel. At the very least it can produce a bit of a paradox. So out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT to produce analysis of it from Reformed theologians. The following is all the work of AI form Chat, but it is interesting.


Romans 7:8–10 is a crucial passage in Paul’s discussion of the law, sin, and death. Reformed theologians have long reflected on these verses, especially in relation to total depravity, the role of the law, and spiritual death. Here's the passage (ESV):



Key Themes in Reformed Analysis

1.​

Reformed theologians, such as John Calvin, stress that the law is good, but sin corrupts its use:


Calvin argues that the law reveals and provokes sin—not because the law is evil, but because human nature is corrupt.

2.​

Robert Haldane, another Reformed commentator, connects this passage to the doctrine of total depravity:


Haldane sees the law as functioning to expose and even incite sin in the unconverted, showcasing the depth of man’s depravity.

3.​

Reformed theologians have debated Paul's meaning in verse 9 ("I was once alive apart from the law..."). Many, like Charles Hodge, argue Paul is speaking representatively or experientially—not literally.


Hodge interprets this as Paul's personal awakening to the law’s true demands, which shattered his sense of moral sufficiency.

4.​

Thomas Schreiner (modern Reformed Baptist scholar) in his Romans commentary underscores that the law reveals sin and condemns:


Schreiner maintains that the commandment was meant to give life (as in Leviticus 18:5), but in practice, it exposes and intensifies sin in fallen humanity.


Summary of Reformed Perspective

  • The law is holy (cf. v.12), but it cannot save due to human sin.
  • Sin is empowered by the law in the unregenerate, exposing total depravity.
  • "Alive apart from the law" likely refers to a false sense of spiritual safety before conviction.
  • The law’s intended life-giving purpose is thwarted by sin, leading to death.
Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God. For example, in Romans 7:21-8:2, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God and served it with his mind, but contrasted it with the law of sin, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which we are freed from by the Law of the Spirit. The Law of God leads us to do what is godly, righteous, and good (Romans 7:22) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). It would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. Likewise, it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:6 as if Paul delighted in being held captive to sin, but rather it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive and and as being free from by the Law of the Spirit.

In Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful, but how we know what sin is, and when our sin is revealed, then that causes sin to decrease, but the law of sin is sinful and causes sin to increase (Romans 5:20). So in regard to Romans 7:8-10, "the commandment" refers to the Law of God while "the law" refers to the law of sin. The law of sin seizes the opportunity through the Law of God to cause sin to increase. Without the law of sin causing sin to increase, then we would simply obey the Law of God, so sin lies dead apart from the law of sin. Paul was once alive part from the law of sin, but when the Law of God came the law sin came alive and he died. In Romans 7:12-13, Paul said that the Law of God is good and that it was not that which was good that brought death to him, but rather it was the law of sin producing death in him through that which was good.
 
While your OP doesn't quote Hodge exactly properly I don't think, I do enjoy this analysis by him;
As you rightly stated the law of God is not evil, it provides order and shape for the communities we live in and provides a framework for general peace between man and God and man and man.
Of course the written law cannot make us into creature's of righteousness, so our flesh rebels against it. All the written law can do is make us cognizant of the depth of our depravity and our utter dependency upon God to save us. Our flesh runs for cover I think from anything related to it that's truthful.
What the written law cannot do, the law of the indwelling Holy Spirit is able to do,
But the Law that is said to be life-giving here is the Decalogue.

What is "the law of the Holy Spirit?"
Paul is not making personal reference to himself there, I don't think, but is emphasizing how the law makes us aware of sin, and convicts of sin. Another possibility is that when the moral and righteous aspects of the law are seen, as Jesus was constantly pointing out, we see just how far we have come short, and always will. One considers themselves alive until that is seen. Just like a non-believer considers themselves alive, when in reality they are dead in their trespasses. Even in the Jews thought that keeping the letter of the law and being the ones who were given the law and the oracles, to be what saved them. It is Paul who in Eph compares dead and alive, dead being without saving faith and alive with saving faith. Those without saving faith do not know they are "dead" but are convinced they are alive.
The Decalogue, although the Jews were required to keep the ceremonies too but that no longer applies, since they were the shadow and Christ is the real. But also, not just the written Decalogue but all that is implicit in it.
It wasn't given just to reveal sin. It was also given to teach what righteousness is, and how mankind is to conduct his affairs as his creatures who were given dominion over the creation. It expands the Decalogue into details that cover every area of our life. In this it is wisdom, the wisdom of God. I do not know what ChatGPT means by "live-giving", but no it was never intended to give eternal life. It can't, because it cannot be perfectly obeyed. All men are sinners. Conversely, it had to be perfectly obeyed because it was given, and that would give eternal life. As we see in Jesus. Perfect righteousness for eternal life.
Agreed. . .great!

Answers my question.
The indwelling Holy Spirit can not only make us cognizant of our sinfulness, but is also able to effect our sanctification which will ultimately lead to our glorification in Christ Jesus.
This is the alive part.
This was a great set up for the thread, and it gives everyone a chance to look at the different aspects and consider it..
 
Last edited:
Agreed. . .great!

Hmmm. It's life itself perhaps, at least for us? I would call it deeply deeply associated with life.

Law is the revealed will of God for man.

If He never revealed His will would we know Him at all?
 
Last edited:
Hmmm. It's life itself perhaps, at least for us? I would call it deeply deeply associated with life.

Law is the revealed will of God for man.

If He never revealed His will would we know Him?
What specifically do you mean by the law of the Holy Spirit?

Is not all God's law of the Holy Spirit?
 
What specifically do you mean by the law of the Holy Spirit?

Is not all God's law of the Holy Spirit?


Spirit indwelling.

Like when you read the Bible and are shown a sin and convicted to change something about yourself.
 
Definitely the summary, and even the out of context quotes (major problem with AI) could be taken as you did. The Law was not intended to give eternal life as Chat GPT says, but what is in it, since it is from God, is life giving. It teaches what sin is, and condemns for disobedience. And it was Jesus' perfect obedience to it, spirit and letter, that qualified him to substitute himself in our place, and he is the life giver through that perfect obedience and his substitutionary atonement, making propitiation for our sins. The Law itself was not given for eternal life but to point the way to the one who gives eternal life, and how it will be done. By the shedding of blood and substitution, and a perfect sacrifice, and through faith in the Savior. No one could be saved by the Law.

My purpose was to deal mainly with the statement Paul made that before the law came he was alive, and when the law came it killed him. As though before the Law, even though all were sinners, God did not count it against them. Which of course would be a contradiction to, the consequences of sin being death, for all die.
Keeping in mind that all were sinners (Ro 5:12-13) before the Law because of Adam's sin imputed to them (Ro 5:17, 18-19, 12-16)--which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness--not sinners because of any sin charged to them when there was no law.
 
Last edited:
Keeping in mind that all were sinners (Ro 5:12-13) before the Law because of Adam's sin imputed to them (Ro 5:17, 18-19, 12-16)--which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness--not sinners because of any sin charged to them when there was no law.
That sounds like you are saying that none were condemned as sinners before the written legal code of the Mosaic Law.

The law of God, apart from the legal code has always existed. Our duty as created beings made in his image and likeness, and given dominion over his creation to rule over it. The judgement for disobedience is pronounced in Gen 2:15-17.
 
That sounds like you are saying that none were condemned as sinners before the written legal code of the Mosaic Law.
All were, and are, condemned sinners by the sin of Adam imputed to them (Ro 5:17, 12-16, 18-19-->paralleled to imputed righteousness).
v.12 - the sin in the world was from one man, in this way death came to all men because all sinned (by imputation),
v. 13 - where there is no law, there is no sin and no death,
v. 14 - yet death reigned (by imputation of sin) between Adam and Moses when there was no law--pattern (imputation) for Christ's righteousness,
v. 15-16 - contrasting parallel of imputations of Adam's sin and Christ's justification,
v. 17 - Adam's sin is imputed (Ro 5:12, 14), death reigned through one man, (imputed) righteousness reigns through one man.
The law of God, apart from the legal code has always existed. Our duty as created beings made in his image and likeness, and given dominion over his creation to rule over it. The judgement for disobedience is pronounced in Gen 2:15-17.
I am presenting the NT texts on the matter.
 
Last edited:
All were, and are, condemned sinners by the sin of Adam imputed to them (Ro 5:17, 12-16, 18-19-->paralleled to imputed righteousness).
v.12 - the sin in the world was from one man, in this way death came to all men because all sinned (by imputation),
v. 13 - where there is no law, there is no sin and no death,
v. 14 - yet death reigned (by imputation of sin) between Adam and Moses when there was no law--pattern (imputation) for Christ's righteousness,
v. 15-16 - contrasting parallel of imputations of Adam's sin and Christ's justification,
v. 17 - Adam's sin is imputed (Ro 5:12, 14), death reigned through one man, (imputed) righteousness reigns through one man.

I am presenting the NT texts on the matter.
However, all humans commit sins against God. They are still sins against God even if they do not know they are sins. The sin of Adam is not imputed to man in the same sense as our sins are imputed to Christ.

Since Christ's righteousness is imputed to us in a legal sense (justification), so is the imputation of our sin to Christ on the cross, a legal imputation.

The sin of Adam being imputed to humans is also legal in that it is legally (by God) accounted to all of humanity. Federal headship. (Adam acted as a representative for all human beings in the covenant God made with him. Federal comes from the Latin foedus meaning covenant. His actions were on behalf of the entire human race.

The legal imputation of Adam's sin to us makes us actual sinners.

The legal imputation of our sins to Christ on the cross, does not make him actually a sinner, because he is standing as our substitute to undo what Adam did, for the believer. He is the federal (covenant head/mediator) of the Covenant of Redemption/grace. And his righteousness is imputed to us in a legal sense now and in the future also in a real sense.
 
However, all humans commit sins against God. They are still sins against God even if they do not know they are sins. The sin of Adam is not imputed to man in the same sense as our sins are imputed to Christ.
Adam's sin is imputed to us (Ro 5:17) is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for Christ's righteousness imputed to us (Ro 1:17, 4:5, 13, 3:21, 9:30, 10:6, Gal 3:16, Php 3:9), right?
Since Christ's righteousness is imputed to us in a legal sense (justification), so is the imputation of our sin to Christ on the cross, a legal imputation
Imputation is ascribing to/charging to one's person/account.
The NT does not use the word impute in reference to Christ's sin offering.
The NT limits "imputed" to Adam's sin charged to us and Christ's righteousness ascribed/credited to us.

My friend can have a fine owing up at the Courthouse.
My paying the fine for him does not require my personal involvement in (imputation of) his law-breaking.
I am involved only in its punishment.
The sin of Adam being imputed to humans is also legal in that it is legally (by God) accounted to all of humanity. Federal headship. (Adam acted as a representative for all human beings in the covenant God made with him. Federal comes from the Latin foedus meaning covenant. His actions were on behalf of the entire human race.

The legal imputation of Adam's sin to us makes us actual sinners.

The legal imputation of our sins to Christ on the cross, does not make him actually a sinner, because he is standing as our substitute to undo what Adam did, for the believer. He is the federal (covenant head/mediator) of the Covenant of Redemption/grace. And his righteousness is imputed to us in a legal sense now and in the future also in a real sense.
 
Back
Top