Romans 5:17–6:2

Paul says that death reigned, not that it is now reigning. Those who understand the limits of the law—what the future judgment of God will be—have been delivered from its control. Death reigned, because without the revelation of the law there was no fear of God on earth. But the higher meaning is that, since death reigned from Adam to Moses over those who sinned according to the transgression of Adam, how much more will grace reign by the abundance of God's gift of life through the one Jesus Christ. For if death reigned, why should grace not reign even more, since it has justified far more people than the number over whom death reigned?

"Much more will those reign" pertains to eternal life; "those who receive the abundance of grace" pertains to the forgiveness of many sins.

Concurring with these statements, Paul, speaking to the Romans, declares: "Much more they who receive abundance of grace and righteousness for [eternal] life, shall reign by one, Christ Jesus." It follows from this, that he knew nothing of that Christ who flew away from Jesus; nor did he of the Saviour above, whom they hold to be impassible. For if, in truth, the one suffered, and the other remained incapable of suffering, and the one was born, but the other descended upon him who was born, and left him gain, it is not one, but two, that are shown forth.

What he says, amounts to this nearly. What armed death against the world? The one man's eating from the tree only. If then death attained so great power from one offence, when it is found that certain received a grace and righteousness out of all proportion to that sin, how shall they still be liable to death? And for this cause, he does not here say "grace," but "superabundance of grace." For it was not as much as we must have to do away the sin only, that we received of His grace, but even far more. For we were at once freed from punishment, and put off all iniquity, and were also born again from above and rose again with the old man buried, and were redeemed, justified, led up to adoption, sanctified, made brothers of the Only-begotten, and joint heirs and of one Body with Him, and counted for His Flesh, and even as a Body with the Head, so were we united unto Him! All these things then Paul calls a "superabundance" of grace, showing that what we received was not a medicine only to countervail the wound, but even health, and comeliness, and honor, and glory and dignities far transcending our natural state.

Not only will death cease to reign in those who receive the abundance of grace, but two additional benefits will be given to them. First, Christ will reign in them by his life, and second, they will reign along with Christ. …It must be noted that Paul speaks of the abundance of grace, because it is not possible for someone who has received only one grace, i.e., who has pleased God in only one thing, to enter the kingdom of heaven.… Grace is multiplied and abounds if our conversation is always seasoned with salt and our work is done with the grace of humility and simplicity, and if all that we do is done to the glory of God.

Righteousness is given through baptism and is not gained by merit.

Paul shows just how superior grace is to sin, because while death, which came into the world by the sin of Adam, held full sway, the enjoyment of the gift of grace through Christ has been given to us, through which we shall be raised from the dead and in righteousness cease to sin. But we have not yet received it fully; it does not yet hold full sway. We are still waiting for the life to come, even though we now enjoy it in part.

If because one man ate from the forbidden tree, death came to reign, then how much more shall we, who have received the abundance and surplus of grace and have been justified, live and reign "through the one Jesus Christ," whose brethren we are, with whom we have been joined into one body, with whom we have been united as a body with its head. For we received not a simple or uniform good, so that there would still remain for us the possibility of doubting regarding the future: our blessings are the fruit of abundant grace. Imagine that someone has incurred a great debt and is cast into prison together with his wife and children, and then is not only freed from the prison and the debt, but also receives ten thousand talents, is brought into the royal palace, is deemed worthy of high honor, and becomes a son of the king. Exactly so it has happened with us.

Then when he says, for if by one man's offense, he proves what he has said, namely, that Christ's grace passes from many sins to justice. First, he proves this from something later; second, from something earlier, at for as by the disobedience. In regard to the first it should be noted that in the foregoing comparison the Apostle does not posit things that correspond, i.e., things of the same class. For on the side of sin he posits condemnation, which pertains to punishment, while on the side of grace he posits justification, which does not pertain to reward but to the state of merit. Consequently, in stating that sin brings condemnation the Apostle intends to show that grace brings justification. He uses this argument: As the condemnation of death proceeds from the first parent's sin, so the kingdom of life proceeds from Christ's grace. For these two correspond uniformly, but no one can attain to the kingdom of life save by justice. Therefore, men are justified by Christ's grace. First, he lays down the premises; second, he draws the conclusion, at therefore, as by the offense. He states the first premise when he says, for if by one man's offense death reigned through one, because it was stated above: as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death (Rom 5:12), much more will men reign in life, namely, eternal life, through one, Jesus Christ, who says: I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly (John 10:10), by sharing in the eternity of life, the abundance being designated here by reigning. Hence, it is stated in Revelation that they will reign with Christ a thousand years, i.e., eternally (Rev 20:24). The minor premise is presented in the words, they who receive abundance of grace and of the gift and of justice. As if to say: men cannot attain to the kingdom of life except by receiving this. Here Christ's grace is referred to the remission of sin, which no merits can anticipate and, therefore, is due entirely to grace: if it is from works, it is no longer by grace (Rom 11:6). Gift refers to the gifts of grace by which men are advanced in blessings: he gave gifts with royal liberality (Esth 2:18). Justice refers to upright actions: whom God made our justice (1 Cor 1:30).

Paul does not mean by this that because one man sinned everybody else had to pay the price for it even though they had not committed the sin, for that would be unjust. Rather he says that from its beginning in Adam humanity derived both its existence and its sinfulness.

Some people think that because the condemnation was universal, the acquittal will also be universal. But this is not so, because not everyone believes.

Here Paul returns to his original argument, interrupted [from verse 12].

No one is born without the intervention of carnal concupiscence, which is inherited from the first man, who is Adam, and no one is reborn without the intervention of spiritual grace, which is given by the second man, who is Christ.

God wants all those to whom grace comes through the righteousness of the One unto justification of life to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

What has Adam's guilt got to do with us? Why are we held responsible for his sin when we were not even born when he committed it? Did not God say: "The parents will not die for the children, nor the children for the parents, but the soul which has sinned, it shall die." How then shall we defend this doctrine? The soul, I say, which has sinned, it shall die. We have become sinners because of Adam's disobedience in the following manner.… After he fell into sin and surrendered to corruption, impure lusts invaded the nature of his flesh, and at the same time the evil law of our members was born. For our nature contracted the disease of sin because of the disobedience of one man, that is, Adam, and thus many became sinners. This was not because they sinned along with Adam, because they did not then exist, but because they had the same nature as Adam, which fell under the law of sin. Thus, just as human nature acquired the weakness of corruption in Adam because of disobedience, and evil desires invaded it, so the same nature was later set free by Christ, who was obedient to God the Father and did not commit sin.

What was Adam's sin? Disobedience. What was Christ's righteousness? Obedience, by which he obeyed the Father in his incarnation and in his suffering for mankind, as the apostle says: "Being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross." Thus obedience overcame disobedience and the worse was condemned by the better.

I know certain men for whom the king of Nineveh, (who is the last to hear the proclamation and who descends from his throne, and forgoes the ornaments of his former vices and dressed in sackcloth sits on the ground, he is not content with his own conversion, preaches penitence to others with his leaders, saying, "let the men and beasts, big and small of size, be tortured by hunger, let them put on sackcloth, condemn their former sins and betake themselves without reservation to penitence!) is the symbol of the devil, who at the end of the world, (because no spiritual creature that is made reasoning by God will perish), will descend from his pride and do penitence and will be restored to his former position. To support this opinion they use this example of Daniel in which Nebuchadnezzar after seven years of penitence is returned to his former reign. [Dan. 4:24, 29, 33] But because this idea is not in the Holy Scripture and since it completely destroys the fear of God, (for men will slide easily into vices if they believe that even the devil, the creator of wickedness and the source of all sins, can be saved if he does penitence), we must eradicate this from our spirits. Let us remember though that the sinners in the Gospel are sent to the eternal fire [Mt. 25:41], which is prepared for the devil and his angels, about whom is said, "their worm will not die and their fire will not be extinguished" [Is. 66:24]... Moreover if all spiritual creatures are equal and if they raise themselves up by their virtues to heaven, or by their vices take themselves to the depths, then after a long circuit and infinite centuries, if all are returned to their original state with the same worthiness to all conflicting, what difference will there be between the virgin and the prostitute? What distinction will there be between the mother of the Lord and (it is wicked to say) the victims of public pleasures? Will Gabriel be like the devil? Will the apostles be as demons? Will the prophets be as pseudoprophets? Martyrs as their persecutors? Imagine all that you will, increase by two-fold the years and the time, take infinite time for torture: if the end for all is the same, all the past is then nothing, for what is of importance to us is not what we are at any given moment, but what we will be forever more.

And he insists again upon it, showing that the second was greater than the first, he wants again here also further confirmation of these. For, before, he had said that if one man's sin slew all, much more will the grace of One have the power to save. After that he shows that it was not that sin only that was done away by the grace, but all the rest too, and that it was not that the sins were done away only, but that righteousness was given. And Christ did not merely do the same amount of good that Adam did of harm, but far more and greater good.

Death reigned, but so also grace reigned through justification.

Therefore, says the apostle, concluding his thought, just as through the transgression of one man (what he called sin above, he now calls transgression, meaning Adam's sin) all people were subjected to a curse, so also through the justification of the one Christ, grace was poured out upon all people, giving them both justification instead of sin, and life instead of death.

Then when he says, therefore as by the offense, he draws the intended conclusion which states the same thing as stated earlier, namely, that as by the offense of one man, Adam, the divine judgment led all men born of him according to the flesh to the condemnation of death, so also by the justice of one, namely, Christ, divine grace passed unto all men, to justification of life, that is, the grace that leads to life. But this seems false, since not all men are justified by Christ, although all men die through Adam. To answer this it must be noted that just as all men born according to the flesh from Adam incur condemnation through his sin, so all men who are reborn spiritually through Christ obtain the justification of life, because, as stated in John: unless one is born of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5). Although it can be said that Christ's justification passes on to justify all men in the sense that it is capable of doing so, de facto it passes only to believers. Hence, it is said: he is the savior of all men, especially of those who believe (1 Tim 4:10). From what is said here we should gather that as no one dies except through Adam's sin, so no one is justified except through Christ's justice; and this is brought about through faith in him: the justice of God, by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all that believe in him (Rom 3:22). But the men who believe in him are not only those who lived after his Incarnation but even those who lived before. For as we believe in him as one who was born and suffered, so they believed in him as one who would be born and suffer. Hence, our faith and theirs is the same: having the same spirit of faith . . . we too believe and so we speak (2 Cor 4:13). Thus it is that the grace of Christ redounds to the justification of many by appeal to something later, namely to the reign of life.

Many sinned by following Adam, but not all. Likewise, many are justified by faith in Christ, but not all.

This is the figure of the future Adam.

For as by the disobedience of the one man who was originally moulded from virgin soil, the many were made sinners, and forfeited life; so was it necessary that, by the obedience of one man, who was originally born from a virgin, many should be justified and receive salvation. Thus, then, was the Word of God made man, as also Moses says: "God, true are His works." But if, not having been made flesh, He did appear as if flesh, His work was not a true one. But what He did appear, that He also was: God recapitulated in Himself the ancient formation of man, that He might kill sin, deprive death of its power, and vivify man; and therefore His works are true.

For as by one man's disobedience sin entered, and death obtained [a place] through sin; so also by the obedience of one man, righteousness having been introduced, shall cause life to fructify in those persons who in times past were dead. And as the protoplast himself Adam, had his substance from untilled and as yet virgin soil ("for God had not yet sent rain, and man had not tilled the ground"), and was formed by the hand of God, that is, by the Word of God, for "all things were made by Him," and the Lord took dust from the earth and formed man; so did He who is the Word, recapitulating Adam in Himself, rightly receive a birth, enabling Him to gather up Adam [into Himself], from Mary, who was as yet a virgin. If, then, the first Adam had a man for his father, and was born of human seed, it were reasonable to say that the second Adam was begotten of Joseph. But if the former was taken from the dust, and God was his Maker, it was incumbent that the latter also, making a recapitulation in Himself, should be formed as man by God, to have an analogy with the former as respects His origin. Why, then, did not God again take dust, but wrought so that the formation should be made of Mary? It was that there might not be another formation called into being, nor any other which should [require to] be saved, but that the very same formation should be summed up [in Christ as had existed in Adam], the analogy having been preserved.

What he says seems indeed to involve no small question: but if any one attends to it diligently, this too will admit of an easy solution. What then is the question? It is the saying that through the offence of one many were made sinners. For the fact that when he had sinned and become mortal, those who were of him should be so also, is nothing unlikely. But how would it follow that from his disobedience another would become a sinner? For at this rate a man of this sort will not even deserve punishment, if, that is, it was not from his own self that he became a sinner. What then does the word "sinners" mean here? To me it seems to mean liable to punishment and condemned to death. Now that by Adam's death we all became mortals, he had shown clearly and at large. But the question now is, for what purpose was this done? But this he does not go on to add: for it contributed nothing to his present object.

We are so far from taking any harm from this death and condemnation, if we be sober-minded, that we are the gainers even by having become mortal, first, because it is not an immortal body in which we sin; secondly, because we get numberless grounds for being religious. For to be moderate, and to be temperate, and to be subdued, and to keep ourselves clear of all wickedness, is what death by its presence and by its being expected persuades us to. But following with these, or rather even before these, it hath introduced other greater blessings besides. For it is from hence that the crowns of the martyrs come, and the rewards of the Apostles.

Why does Paul say that many were made sinners and not that all were when it is clear that all have sinned, as he has just said himself? It is one thing to sin and another to be a sinner. A sinner is someone who, as a result of much sinning, has got into the habit and, I would dare say, the enjoyment of it. In the same way, a righteous person is not someone who has done one or two acts of righteousness but rather someone who has become accustomed to acting righteously and has righteousness in him by habit.

Just as by the example of Adam's disobedience many sinned, so many are also justified by Christ's obedience. Great therefore is the crime of disobedience, which kills so many.

Notice that when Paul talks about sin and righteousness he uses the word many, for not everyone sinned before the coming of the law, nor has everyone who has received grace been justified—for "many are called, but few are chosen." But when he talks about the death and resurrection of the body, he uses the word all.

Note that Paul says "many" and "not all," for we find some among the ancients who did not sin, e.g., Abel, Enoch, Melchizedek, the patriarchs and those who succeeded in keeping the law. On the other hand, after the coming of grace, there were many who continued to embrace an unrighteous and wicked life.

Here, it would seem, there is a repetition; but in reality there is none. Above he said (Rom. 5:18): "as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation, so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification," and now he explains what the transgression of the one consisted of, and says that it was disobedience, through which many were made sinners, that is, subject to punishment and condemned to death; he also explains what the righteousness of the One, that is, of Christ, consists of, and says that it is obedience even unto death, and the death of the cross, through which obedience death was destroyed and we were freed from condemnation to it.

Then when he says, for as by the disobedience, the Apostle proves the same thing from something prior. For causes are similar to their effects. But the disobedience of the first parent, which bears the character of injustice, made men sinners and unrighteous. Therefore, the obedience of Christ, which bears the character of justice, made them righteous. And this is what he stated previously, namely, that grace proceeds forth into all men to justification. But there seems to be a problem about the statement that by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners, i.e., all who are born from his seed. For his first sin seems to have been pride rather than disobedience, as is stated in Sirach: the beginning of every sin is pride (Sir 10:13). In answer it must be noted that the same writer says in Sirach, the beginning of pride makes men separate themselves from God (Sir 10:21), because the first step of pride consists in a man's not willing to be subject to God's precepts, which pertains to disobedience. Hence, man's first sin seems to have been disobedience, not as far as the outward action was concerned but in regard to the inner movement of pride, by which he wills to go against the divine command. Hence, the Lord reproves his disobedience: because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'you shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground (Gen 3:17). On the other hand, Christ's obedience consisted in accepting death for our salvation in accordance with the Father's command: he became obedient unto death (Phil 2:8). This, of course, does not contradict the statement that Christ died out of love for us (Eph 5:2), because the obedience proceeded from the love he had for the Father and for us. And one should note that by obedience and disobedience he proves that through one man we were made sinners and through one man we were justified, because legal justice, which is the ensemble of all virtues, is recognizable in observing the precepts of the law, which pertains to the notion of obedience. But legal injustice, which is the ensemble of all wickedness, is recognizable in transgressing the precepts of the law, which pertains to the notion of disobedience. Consequently, it is fittingly stated that by obedience men were made just and by disobedience sinners.

Wherefore, seeing that wickedness had increased, that innocence had decayed, that there was no one that did good, no, not one; the Lord came in order to form anew, nay to augment, the grace of nature; that where sin had abounded, grace might much more abound.

Sin abounded by the Law because by the Law is the knowledge of sin, and thus it began to be injurious to me to know that which through infirmity I could not avoid; it is good to foreknow in order to avoid, but if I cannot avoid, to have known was injurious. Thus the effect of the Law was changed to me into its opposite, yet by the very increase of sin it became useful to me, because I was humbled. Wherefore David also said, It is good for me that I have been humbled.

An objector might say: "If the law merely served to increase sin, it should never have been given. If there was less sin before the law came, there was no need of the law." Obviously the law was necessary to show that sins, which many thought they could get away with, actually counted before God and so that people might know what they ought to avoid.How could the law have increased sin, when it warns people not to sin?… The law began to show an abundance of sins, and the more it forbade them the more people committed them. That is why it is said that the law was given so that sin might increase.… In order to nullify the pride of Satan, who rejoiced in his victory over man, the just and merciful God decreed that his Son would come to forgive every sin, so that there would be more happiness from the gift of grace than there had been sorrow from the coming of sin.… Therefore grace abounded more than sin.

By this Paul has clearly indicated that the Jews did not know by what dispensation the law had been given. It was not given in order to bring life, for grace brings life through faith, but the law was given to show with what great and tight chains those who thought they could fulfill all righteousness in their own strength were bound. So sin abounded, both because desire grew more ardent in the light of the prohibition and because the crime of trespass affected those who sinned against the law. Whoever considers the second of the four states of man will understand this.

Prohibition increased lust. It made it unconquered so that transgression might be added, which did not exist without the law, although there was sin.

Grace means that good works are now performed by those who had earlier done evil; it does not make them continue in evil in the belief that good will be given to them in return.

The law entered in so that the many-sided nature of the fall of those who were under the law might be made clear. Nobody could ever be made righteous because of the weakness of human nature. Rather, everyone condemned themselves by their own crimes of transgression. The law came as the revealer of our common weakness, so that the human race would appear even more clearly to need the aid of the medicine of Christ.

Paul does not mean that the law increased the incidence of sin but rather that once it was given it uncovered sin and showed that it was more widespread than people had thought.

All therefore speak falsely who disallow his (Adam's) salvation, shutting themselves out from life for ever, in that they do not believe that the sheep which had perished has been found. For if it has not been found, the whole human race is still held in a state of perdition. False, therefore, is that, man who first started this idea, or rather, this ignorance and blindness-Tatian. As I have already indicated, this man entangled himself with all the heretics. This dogma, however, has been invented by himself, in order that, by introducing something new, independently of the rest, and by speaking vanity, he might acquire for himself hearers void of faith, affecting to be esteemed a teacher, and endeavouring from time to time to employ sayings of this kind often [made use of] by Paul: "In Adam we all die;" ignorant, however, that "where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Since this, then, has been clearly shown, let all his disciples be put to shame, and let them wrangle about Adam, as if some great gain were to accrue to them if he be not saved; when they profit nothing more [by that], even as the serpent also did not profit when persuading man [to sin], except to this effect, that he proved him a transgressor, obtaining man as the first-fruits of his own apostasy. But he did not know God's power. Thus also do those who disallow Adam's salvation gain nothing, except this, that they render themselves heretics and apostates from the truth, and show themselves patrons of the serpent and of death.

Since then he had shown that the world was condemned from Adam, but from Christ was saved and freed from condemnation, he now seasonably enters upon the discussion of the Law, here again undermining the high notions of it. For it was so far from doing any good, he means, or from being any way helpful, but the disorder was only increased by its having come in. But the particle "that" again does not assign the cause, but the result. For the purpose of its being given was not "in order that" it might abound, for it was given to diminish and destroy the offence. But it resulted the opposite way, not owing to the nature of the Law, but owing to the listlessness of those who received it. But why did he not say the Law was given, but "the Law entered by the way?" It was to show that the need of it was temporary, and not absolute or imperative. And this he says also to the Galatians, showing the very same thing another way. "For before faith came," he says, "we were kept under the Law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." And so it was not for itself, but for another, that it kept the flock. For since the Jews were somewhat gross-minded, and enervated, and indifferent to the gifts themselves, this was why the Law was given, that it might convict them the more, and clearly teach them their own condition, and by increasing the accusation might the more repress them.

"But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound."

He does not say did abound, but "did much more abound." For it was not remission from punishment only that He gave us, but that from sins, and life also. As if any were not merely to free a man with a fever from his disease, but to give him also beauty, and strength, and rank; or again, were not to give one an hungered nourishment only, but were to put him in possession of great riches, and were to set him in the highest authority. And how did sin abound? some will say. The Law gave countless commands. Now since they transgressed them all, transgression became more abundant. Do you see what a great difference there is between grace and the Law? For the one became an addition to the condemnation, but the other, a further abundance of gifts.

What Paul means here is that after the natural law had already been established—the law which he calls the law of the mind, which assents to the law of God—another law arose, the law of our members, which promotes the lusts of the flesh and leads men captive, inclining them to desire and excesses, so that sin may abound in them.…Grace abounded all the more, because not only does it absolve us from the sins which we have already committed, it protects us against sinning in the future.

The amount of sin has been revealed so that the greatness of grace might be known and so that we might pay back a corresponding debt of love.

With what God? Him whose enemies we have never, in any dispensation, been? Or Him against whom we have rebelled, both in relation to His written law and His law of nature? Now, as peace is only possible towards Him with whom there once was war, we shall be both justified by Him, and to Him also will belong the Christ, in whom we are justified by faith, and through whom alone God's enemies can ever be reduced to peace. "Moreover," says he, "the law entered, that the offence might abound." And wherefore this? "In order," he says, "that (where sin abounded), grace might much more abound.

And wherefore this? "In order," he says, "that (where sin abounded), grace might much more abound." Whose grace, if not of that God from whom also came the law? Unless it be, forsooth, that the Creator intercalated His law for the mere purpose of producing some employment for the grace of a rival god, an enemy to Himself (I had almost said, a god unknown to Him), "that as sin had" in His own dispensation "reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto (eternal) life by Jesus Christ," His own antagonist! For this (I suppose it was, that) the law of the Creator had "concluded all under sin," and had brought in "all the world as guilty (before God)," and had "stopped every mouth," so that none could glory through it, in order that grace might be maintained to the glory of the Christ, not of the Creator, but of Marcion! I may here anticipate a remark about the substance of Christ, in the prospect of a question which will now turn up.

Else how unworthy it were of God to bring only a moiety of man to salvation-and almost less than that; whereas the munificence of princes of this world always claims for itself the merit of a plenary grace! Then must the devil be understood to be stronger for injuring man, ruining him wholly? and must God have the character of comparative weakness, since He does not relieve and help man in his entire state? The apostle, however, suggests that "where sin abounded, there has grace much more abounded." How, in fact, can he be regarded as saved, who can at the same time be said to be lost-lost, that is, in the flesh, but saved as to his soul? Unless, indeed, their argument now makes it necessary that the soul should be placed in a "lost" condition, that it may be susceptible of salvation, on the ground that is properly saved which has been lost.

Now, if the dominion of death operates only in the dissolution of the flesh, in like manner death's contrary, life, ought to produce the contrary effect, even the restoration of the flesh; so that, just as death had swallowed it up in its strength, it also, after this mortal was swallowed up of immortality, may hear the challenge pronounced against it: "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? " For in this way "grace shall there much more abound, where sin once abounded." In this way also "shall strength be made perfect in weakness," -saving what is lost, reviving what is dead, healing what is stricken, curing what is faint, redeeming what is lost, freeing what is enslaved, recalling what has strayed, raising what is fallen; and this from earth to heaven, where, as the apostle teaches the Philippians, "we have our citizenship, from whence also we look for our Saviour Jesus Christ, who shall change our body of humiliation, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body" -of course after the resurrection, because Christ Himself was not glorified before He suffered.

Paul says that "the law came in" because he wants to show that God did not leave earlier generations destitute of his providence. But he also gave the law to the Jews, so that by their zeal and dedication to godliness they could act as a light to the other nations.

After having proved that in Adam all were condemned, and in Christ saved, someone could probably have doubted and objected: what then was the law doing for so many years, if Christ justified us? "The law," he answers, "came in," that is, it was given for a time; it was not the chief and most essential need. And when it "came in," transgression was multiplied. For it gave many commandments; but all these commandments people transgressed, which is why transgression was multiplied. The particle "moreover" indicates the consequence. The law was given for the diminishment and destruction of sin, but the opposite resulted, not because of the nature of the law, but because of the negligence of people. But whereas through the law sin multiplied, through Christ the grace of God appeared superabundantly, not only freeing us from sins, but also justifying and making us heavenly and adopting us to God. Therefore he did not say "abound," but "superabound," showing by this its great abundance.

After showing that through the gift of grace sin is removed, which entered this world through Adam, the Apostle now shows that through Christ's grace is taken away the sin that increased when the law came. Concerning this he does two things. First, he mentions the increase of sin through the law; second, the absolution of sin through Christ's grace, at and where sin abounded. First, therefore, he says: it has been stated that through the obedience of one man many are made just. However, it was not the law that could achieve this; rather, the law entered in that sin might abound. Two problems arise from these statements of the Apostle. First, from the statement that the law entered in, i.e., entered secretly, after original and actual sin or after the natural law, as the Gloss says. For the law did not come in secretly but was given openly, in accord with John: I have not spoken in secret (John 18:20). The answer is that although the legislation had been given openly, the mysteries of the law were hidden, especially in regard to God's intention in promulgating the law, which would point out sin without healing it: for who has known the mind of the Lord? (Rom 11:34). It can also be said that the law entered, i.e., entered into the middle, so to speak, between man's sin and the gift of Christ's grace, each of which he had said above passed from one to many. The second problem arises from the statement that the law came in that sin might abound. For this would seem to make increase of sin the purpose of the law; consequently, the law would be evil, because a thing whose purpose is evil is itself evil. But this is contrary to the statement in 1 Timothy: we know that the law is good (1 Tim 1:8). A Gloss answers this in three ways. First, that the word that should be taken as indicating not a causal connection but a mere sequence. For the law was not given in order that sins might increase; rather, the law, as far as in it lay, forbade sin: I have laid up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you (Ps 119:11). But, once the law was given, increase of sin followed in two ways. In one way, as to the number of sins. For although the law pointed out sin, it did not take away desire for sin. Indeed, when someone is forbidden what he desires, he burns with a stronger desire for it, as a torrent flows with greater force against an obstacle erected against it and finally breaks it. There can be three reasons for this. First, because when something is subject to a man's power he does not consider it anything great, whereas he perceives a thing beyond his power as great. But a prohibition against something desired puts that thing, as it were, beyond man's power; consequently, the desire for it increases as long as it is prohibited. The second reason is that internal affections, when they are kept within and permitted no outlet, burn the more strongly within. This is clear in sorrow and anger which, when they are kept within, continually increase; but if they are given any kind of release outwardly, their vigor is dissipated. But a prohibition, since it threatens a penalty, compels man not to give outward expression to his desire, so that, being kept within, it burns more vigorously. The third reason is that anything not forbidden is regarded as something possible to do any time it pleases us; therefore, even when the opportunity is present, we often avoid doing it. But when something is forbidden, we see it as something we may not always have; therefore, when the opportunity arises to obtain it without fear of punishment, we are readier to seize it. These, then are the reasons why in the face of the law, which forbade acts of concupiscence and yet did not mitigate that concupiscence, the concupiscence itself leads men more feverishly toward sin. Hence, it is said, this is Jerusalem; I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. She wickedly rebelled against my ordinances more than the nations (Ezek 5:5). But according to this it seems that every human law, which of course does not confer grace to lessen concupiscence, would make sin increase. However, that seems to be against the lawgiver's intention, because his aim is to make the citizen good, as the Philosopher says. The answer is that the intention of human law is one thing and that of divine law another. For human law is subject to human judgment, which is concerned with external acts; but the divine law is subject to divine judgment, which is concerned with the inward movement of the heart, as is said, man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart (1 Sam 16:7). Accordingly, human law achieves its aim when by means of prohibitions and threats of punishment it prevents external sinful acts, even though the inward concupiscence increases more. But as far as the divine law is concerned, it imputes as sin even the inward evil desires, which increase when the law forbids them without destroying them. Yet it should be noted, as the Philosopher says, that although a legal prohibition restrains the ill disposed from outward sins by the fear of punishment, it nevertheless guides the well disposed through love of virtue. Now that good disposition is present to a certain extent by nature, although its perfection is achieved only by grace. Consequently, even after the old law had been given, sin did not increase in all but in the majority. But some, guided by the law's prohibitions and further strengthened by grace, reached the heights of virtue: let us now praise glorious men . . . men great in virtue (Sir 44:1). Second, with the coming of the law sin abounded as far as the weight of guilt was concerned. For sin was more grievous when it became a transgression not only of the law of nature but also of the written law. Hence it was said above that where there is no law, neither is there transgression (Rom 4:15). A second answer is that the word that can be taken causally but in the sense that the Apostle is speaking of sin's increase as far as our knowledge of it is concerned. As if to say: law entered in that sin might abound, i.e., that sin might be more abundantly known, according to the manner of speaking whereby something is said to come to pass when it is recognized. Hence, he said above that by the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom 3:20). The third answer also takes that in a causal sense, but not as meaning that increase of sin is the goal of the law's entering in, but what results from sin's increase, namely, man's humiliation. For after the law came in, sin abounded, as was said in the first explanation. The consequence of this increase of sin was that man, recognizing his weakness, was humbled. For the proud man, presuming on his own strength, said: there is no lack of doers, but of commanders, in accord with Exodus, all that the Lord has spoken we will do and will be obedient (Exod 24:7). But when, after the law had been given, the number of sins increased, men recognized how weak they were in observing the law: man is weak and short-lived, with little understanding of judgment and laws (Wis 9:5). Therefore, God's intention in giving the law is not aimed at increasing sin but at man's humility, for the sake of which he permitted sin to abound. Accordingly, because this purpose was hidden, he says that the law entered in secretly. Since we are dealing with the law and the end of the law, two things propose themselves for consideration. First, the number of senses of the word 'law'; second, what is the end of the law. In regard to the first it should be noted that 'law,' taken one way, names the entire scripture of the Old Testament; for example, John says, it is to fulfill the word that is written in the law, that now they have sin and hated both me and my Father (John 15:25), when this was written in a psalm (Ps 24:19). But sometimes the 'law' refers to the five books of Moses, in accord with Deuteronomy, Moses commanded us a law (Deut 33:4). Third, the precepts of the Decalogue are called the 'law': I will give you the tables of stone, with the law and commandment, which I have written for their instruction (Exod 24:12). Fourth, the entire content of the ceremonial precepts is called the 'law,' as in Hebrews, since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come (Heb 10:1). Fifth, any definite ceremonial precept is called a 'law,' as in Leviticus: this is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings (Lev 7:11). But in this section of the epistle, the Apostle takes 'law' in a general way, i.e., as referring to the total doctrine of the Mosaic law, namely, the moral and ceremonial precepts, because through the ceremonies of the law grace was not given to help man fulfill the precepts and to reduce concupiscences. In regard to the end of the law it should be noted that among the Jewish people, as among every people, there were three kinds of men: the obstinate, i.e., sinners and rebels, the proficient, and the perfect. With respect to the obstinate the law was given as a scourge both as to the moral precepts to whose observance they were compelled by threats of punishment, as is evident from Leviticus 2, and as to the ceremonial precepts, which were multiplied to prevent them from cultivating alien gods: with a strong hand and outstretched arm, and with anger poured out I will rule over you (Ezek 20:34). For the proficient, who are called the ordinary people, the law was a pedagogue: the law was our pedagogue in Christ (Gal 3:24). It was so with respect to the ceremonial precepts, by which they were restrained in divine worship, and with respect to the moral precepts, by which they were advanced toward justice. For the perfect the law regarding ceremonies was a sign: I gave them my sabbaths, as a sign between me and them, that they might know that I the Lord sanctify them (Ezek 20:12); the law regarding morals acted as a consolation, as expressed below: I am delighted with the law of God (Rom 7:22). Then when he says, where sin abounded, he shows how increase of sin was taken away by grace. First, he sets out that grace abounded; second, the effect of abounding grace, at that as sin has reigned. First, therefore, he says: it has been stated that with the coming of the law sin abounded. But this was no obstacle to the divine plan for the salvation of the Jews and of the whole human race, because where sin abounded, namely, in the human race and especially among the Jews, grace did more abound, namely, the grace of Christ forgiving sins: God is powerful to make every grace abound in you (2 Cor 9:8). Two reasons can be given for what is said here. One is based on the effect of grace. For just as the enormity of a disease is not cured except by a strong and effective medicine, so an abundant grace was required to heal the abundance of sins: many sins are forgiven her, for she has loved much (Luke 7:47). The other reason is based on the attitude of the sinner. Some, realizing the enormity of their sins, give way to despair and contempt: when wickedness comes, contempt comes also (Prov 18:3); others by the help of divine grace are humbled when they consider their sins and so obtain a greater grace: their infirmities were multiplied; afterwards they made haste (Ps 16:4).

Sin reigned when it saw that it was driving sinners into death, in which it rejoiced, in much the same way as grace will reign in those who obey God.

This he says to show that the latter ranks as a king, the former, death, as a soldier, being marshalled under the latter, and armed by it. If then the latter (i.e. sin) armed death, it is plain enough that the righteousness destructive hereof, which by grace was introduced, not only disarms death, but even destroys it, and undoes entirely the dominion thereof, in that it is the greatest of the two, as being brought in not by man and the devil, but by God and grace, and leading our life unto a goodlier estate, and to blessings unlimited. For of it there will never be any end (to give you a view of its superiority from this also). For the other cast us out of our present life, but grace, when it came, gave us not the present life, but the immortal and eternal one. But for all these things Christ is our voucher. Doubt not then for thy life if thou hast righteousness, for righteousness is greater than life as being mother of it.

Paul shows that there are two kingdoms in man. In one of these, sin has taken control and leads to death. In the other, grace reigns through righteousness and leads to life. For it is grace which expels and ejects sin from its kingdom, i.e., from our members.

Just as the reign of sin was established through contempt for the law, so also the reign of grace is established through the forgiveness of many sinners and thereafter through the doing of righteousness without ceasing.

" Whose grace, if not of that God from whom also came the law? Unless it be, forsooth, that the Creator intercalated His law for the mere purpose of producing some employment for the grace of a rival god, an enemy to Himself (I had almost said, a god unknown to Him), "that as sin had" in His own dispensation "reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto (eternal) life by Jesus Christ," His own antagonist! For this (I suppose it was, that) the law of the Creator had "concluded all under sin," and had brought in "all the world as guilty (before God)," and had "stopped every mouth," so that none could glory through it, in order that grace might be maintained to the glory of the Christ, not of the Creator, but of Marcion! I may here anticipate a remark about the substance of Christ, in the prospect of a question which will now turn up.

" By a figure we die in our baptism, but in a reality we rise again in the flesh, even as Christ did, "that, as sin has reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness unto life eternal, through Jesus Christ our Lord." But how so, unless equally in the flesh? For where the death is, there too must be the life after the death, because also the life was first there, where the death subsequently was.

Paul says that just as sin once ruled us even against our will, because we were so used to it, so now our zeal for God reigns and will reign in us forever. Since we have been made worthy of eternal life through the resurrection and live in true and certain righteousness, we shall no longer be receptive to sin.

Having said that grace appeared superabundantly, the apostle, lest we be faithless, shows that such a manifestation of it corresponds to its purpose, and says: sin was the king, and death was the soldier armed by it. If sin reigned over us, having death as a kind of soldier, then all the more will grace reign in us, which imparts righteousness that destroys sin, and together with the destruction of sin also destroys death, and after the latter, justification. Thus, justification put to death the king, sin, and together with it death, and finally, eternal life was introduced.

Then when he says that as sin has reigned to death, he shows the effect of abundant grace, an effect that corresponds by way of opposition to that of sin. That as sin, introduced by the first man and abounding through the law, has reigned, i.e., obtained complete dominion over men, and this until it brought them to death both temporal and eternal: the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23), so also grace, i.e., God's grace, might reign, i.e., rule entirely in us, by justice, which it produces in us: they are justified by his grace (Rom 3:24). And this until it brings us unto life everlasting: the free gift of God is eternal life (Rom 6:23). And all of this is through Jesus Christ our Lord, who is the giver of grace: grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17). He is justice: whom God made our justice (1 Cor 1:30); and he is the giver of eternal life: I give them eternal life (John 10:28).

The believer who returns to his former way of life rejects the kingdom of God's grace and returns to sin, i.e., to the pattern of his previous life. For we have received mercy for two reasons: first, that the kingdom of the devil might be removed, and second, that the rule of God might be proclaimed to the ignorant, for it was by this means that we came to desire this dignity.

Offences must come, but woe to those by whom they come; sins do cause grace to abound, but we must not make that an excuse for continuing to sin.

The other set were accused of saying, 'Faith is all that matters. Consequently, if you have faith, it doesn't matter what you do. Sin away, my lad, and have a good time and Christ will see that it makes no difference in the end.' The answer to that nonsense is that, if what you call your 'faith' in Christ does not involve taking the slightest notice of what He says, then it is not Faith at all—not faith or trust in Him, but only intellectual acceptance of some theory about Him.

He is again turning off to exhortation, yet introducing it not directly, lest he should seem to many to be irksome and vexing, but as if it rose out of the doctrines. For if, even so diversifying his address, he was afraid of their being offended at what he said, and therefore said, "I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort," much more would he have seemed to them, had he not done so, to be too harsh. Since then he showed the greatness of the grace by the greatness of the sins it healed, and owing to this it seemed in the eyes of the unthinking to be an encouragement to sin (for if the reason, they would say, why greater grace was shown, was because we had done great sins, let us not give over sinning, that grace may be more displayed still), now that they might not say this or suspect it, see how he turns the objection back again. First he does it by his deprecation. "God forbid." And this he is in the habit of doing at things confessed on all hands to be absurd. And then he lays down an irrefragable argument.

This is a rhetorical question which arises from what Paul said [in Romans 5:20] above.… He answers it in the next verse, saying that those in whom grace abounds have died to sin. It is clear that someone who has died to sin cannot remain a sinner.

Paul is speaking here of those whom faith found in sin, not of us believers, who have died to sin in order to live for grace.

For in that He died to sin, He died once for all; but in that He liveth, to God He liveth. Thus, too, repute ye yourselves dead indeed to sin, but living to God through Christ Jesus." Therefore, Christ being once for all dead, none who, subsequently to Christ, has died, can live again to sin, and especially to so heinous a sin.

The Apostle said that where sin abounded, grace appeared superabundantly. As a result, someone might reason: let us then not cease sinning, so that grace may appear more abundantly. The Apostle refutes such reasoning by expressing himself negatively: "God forbid," as he usually expresses himself about something that is, by common admission, utterly absurd.

After showing that it is through Christ's grace that we are freed from the sin of our first parent and from that which abounded by reason of the law, the Apostle now shows that Christ's grace gives us the power to resist further sin. In regard to this he does two things: first, he raises a question suggested by the foregoing; second, he answers it, at God forbid! For we that are dead.

Above he had said that where sin abounded, grace did more abound (Rom 5:20). This could be misinterpreted by supposing that an increase of sin causes grace to abound all the more. That is why he asks: what shall we say, then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? One would have to say, yes, if increase of sin were the cause and not merely the occasion of grace abounding. Hence he had stated above: as we are slandered and as some affirm that we say, let us do evil that there may come good (Rom 3:8). Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive? (Jer 12:1).

To sin is to live to sin, and not to sin is to live to God. Therefore, when the grace of God through Christ and through faith came upon us, we began by the spiritual rebirth of baptism to live to God, and we died to sin, which is the devil. This is what dying to sin means: to be set free from sin and to become a servant of God. Therefore, having died to sin, let us not go back to our earlier evils, lest by living once again to sin and dying to God we should incur the penalty from which we have escaped.

Here Paul makes the point that past sins have been forgiven and that in this pardon grace so superabounded that earlier sins were remitted as well. Thus whoever tries to increase sin in order to feel an increase of grace does not understand that he is behaving in such a way that grace can do nothing in him. For the work of grace is that we should die to sin.

Nothing shorter or better could be said. For what more useful gift does the grace of God confer on us than to make us die to sin?

Likewise also Paul in the Epistle to the Romans writes: "We who are dead to sin, how shall we any longer live in it? Because our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed," down to the words, "do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin."

Carnal people and unbelievers may live like this, but we are totally incapable of it because we have a new life, having died to sin once for all.

What does "we are dead" mean? Does it mean that as for that, and as far as it goes, we have all received the sentence of death? or, that we became dead to it by believing and being enlightened. This is what one should rather say, since the sequel makes this clearly right. But what is becoming dead to it? The not obeying it in anything any more. For this baptism effected once for all, it made us dead to it. But this must of our own earnestness thenceforth continually be maintained, so that, although sin issue countless commands to us, we may never again obey it, but abide unmovable as a dead man doth. And indeed he elsewhere saith that sin itself is dead. But there he sets that down as wishing to show that virtue is easy, But here, as he earnestly desires to rouse the hearer, he puts the death on his side. Next, since what was said was obscure, he again explains, using what he had said also in the way of reproof.

In order for this point to be clearer, let us inquire as to what it means to live to sin and what it means to die to sin. Just as living for God means living according to God's will, so living for sin means living according to sin's will, as the apostle says [in verse 12] below. To live to sin therefore, means to obey the desires of sin.… To die to sin is the opposite of this; it means refusing to obey the desires of sin.… If someone dies to sin, it is through repentance that he dies.Note how carefully Paul has weighed his words when he says: "Can we still live in sin?" To go on in this way means to continue something without interruption. If someone does this it is clear that he has never been converted to Christ. But it sometimes happens not that someone continues in sin but that after having broken with it he goes back to his vomit and becomes most unfortunate, since after having rejected the rule of sin and death and accepted the rule of life and righteousness he returns to the control of sin and death. This is what the apostle calls the shipwreck of faith. However, although someone may continue in sin, although he may persist in the rule and power of death, nevertheless I do not consider that this rule of death is eternal in the same way that the rule of life and of righteousness is eternal, particularly as I hear the apostle telling me that death is the last enemy which must be destroyed. For if the eternity of death were analogous to the eternity of life, then death would not be opposed to life but its equal. One eternal is not contrary to another eternal but identical with it. But it is certain that death is contrary to life, and therefore it is certain that if life is eternal, death cannot be eternal as well. For this reason, the resurrection of the dead is necessary. For when the death of the soul, which is the last enemy, is destroyed, then this common death which we have described as the shadow of that one will of necessity be abolished. Then there will be room for the resurrection of the dead, when the rule of death is destroyed along with death itself.

Paul wants the baptized person to be steadfast and virtually perfect.

Then he provides proof: since we died to sin, became dead to it through baptism, so that we should no longer obey it, how then can we still live in it, have an inclination toward it, and obey it? From this we learn that through baptism every believer truly dies to sin, but through his own negligence he "resurrects" himself and immediately comes alive to it, as soon as he unites with it. On the contrary, the diligent person always preserves this deadness in himself and, whatever sin may command him, does not obey it, like a dead man.

Then when he says God forbid, he answers the question. First, he states why we should not continue in sin; second, he ends with an exhortation, at let not sin therefore reign (Rom 6:12). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows why we should not continue in sin; second, he shows that we have the power not to continue in sin, at knowing this (Rom 6:6). In regard to the first he presents the following argument: if we are dead to sin, we ought not live in sin. But we are dead to sin. Therefore, we ought not live in sin. Therefore, in regard to this he does four things. First, he states the conditional proposition; second, he proves the antecedent, at know you not; third, he concludes the consequent, at that as Christ is risen; fourth, he proves that the consequent necessarily follows, at for if we have been planted.

First, therefore, he says, God forbid that we to continue in sin that grace may abound, because God has not given anyone permission to sin (Sir 15:20). And the reasoning is this: for we that are dead to sin, inasmuch as sin has been put to death in us, how shall we live any longer therein? For it is not the natural order of things to return from death to life: they are dead, they will not live (Isa 25:14); I had bathed my feet, how could I soil them? (Song 5:3).