Commentators point of wiew on All and Many in Romans 5

Several commentators discuss the distinction between « many » and « all » in Romans 5:15-19 and the theological interpretation of the effects of Adam’s Sin versus the salvation offered in Christ. Here are some of the major theologians and exegetes who have addressed this passage and this particular point:

1. John Stott – The Message of Romans

John Stott, in his commentary on Romans, explores the effects of Adam’s Sin and the gift of Grace through Christ, emphasizing how Paul uses the contrast between « many » and « all » to demonstrate the universal scope of sin and death, and the accessibility of salvation for all, while noting that it becomes effective only for those who believe. Stott insists that « many » in the context of Grace is a broad invitation but depends on the individual response of Faith.

2. Douglas Moo – The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT)

Douglas Moo, in his detailed commentary on Romans, analyzes this distinction in depth, explaining that the universality of condemnation through Adam does not guarantee the automatic universality of Justification through Christ. Moo discusses how Paul uses « many » and « all » to demonstrate the sufficient power of grace while affirming that Justification applies only to those who receive Christ by Faith. Moo also examines the theological nuance between condemnation, which is inherited, and justification, which is actively received.

3. Thomas Schreiner – Romans (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament)

Thomas Schreiner, in his exegetical commentary, emphasizes that the distinction between « many » and « all » is crucial for understanding Paul’s doctrine of original sin and justification. Schreiner argues that while Adam’s sin led to universal condemnation, justification depends on the acceptance of grace. He also discusses how the use of « many » for the effects of grace highlights the conditional aspect of salvation, based on faith.

4. Charles Hodge – Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans

Charles Hodge, a 19th-century Reformed theologian, extensively addresses this issue in his commentary on Romans, noting that the contrast between « many » and « all » is intentional. Hodge argues that « all » refers to the universality of sin and condemnation through Adam, while « many » refers to the power of grace, which is sufficient for all but applied only to believers. He explores how grace is broadly available but remains specific to those who have faith.

5. N.T. Wright – Paul for Everyone: Romans Part 1

N.T. Wright, in his pastoral commentary, addresses this passage by explaining that Paul uses a rhetorical technique to highlight the scope of God’s grace and mercy in Christ. Wright mentions that the use of « many » and « all » is deliberate to show the universal availability of salvation while specifying that only an undetermined number will respond in faith.

6. Cranfield – A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC)

C.E.B. Cranfield, in his academic commentary on Romans, notes the subtlety in Paul’s choice of « many » and « all, » highlighting the representative nature of Adam for all humanity and of Christ for all believers. Cranfield explains that « all » refers to the universal extent of condemnation, while « many » evokes Redemption that conditionally applies to believers.

Summary of Perspectives

These commentators agree that the distinction between « many » and « all » is intentional and serves to differentiate the universal condemnation through Adam from the justification available in Christ. Condemnation is universal and inevitable without Christ, while grace and justification are powerful enough to save all but become effective only for those who accept by faith.
These perspectives can provide you with complementary approaches to delve deeper into Romans 5:15-19, depending on the theological insights each author offers.