Journal: Journal of Dispensational Theology
Volume: JODT 24:68 (Spring 2020)
Article: An Exegetical Analysis Of Romans 5:12–21: Implications For Theories Of Imputation
Author: Daniel M. Starcevich

JODT 24:68 (Spring 2020) p. 51

An Exegetical Analysis Of Romans 5:12–21:
Implications For Theories Of Imputation

Daniel M. Starcevich

* Daniel M. Starcevich, M.S., Th.M., Ph.D., advising professor, Tyndale Theological Seminary; associate pastor, Mountain View Bible Fellowship, Estes Park, Colorado

The passage under examination in this study is central to understanding the doctrine of the imputation of sin. Chafer commented, “The scope of the doctrine of imputation controversy centers upon the one most theological context in the Bible—Romans 5:12–21. . . . The worthy student of theology will spend much time on this portion of the Scriptures.1“ Ryrie similarly identified Romans 5:12–21 as the fundamental passage in discussing the imputation of Adam’s sin.2

The crucial question addressed by the doctrine of imputation is for what sin has Christ died? Did He die for his own sin? Did He die for the personal sins of men? Did He die for the seminal participation of mankind in the sin of Adam? Did He die for the representative participation of mankind in the sin of Adam? The answer to this question will have impact upon the nature of the gospel itself. For example, if Jesus died only for his own sin then how can the gospel be good news for any sinner? Likewise, if Jesus died for personal sins then does the gospel allow one to continue sinning? The range of controversy around the doctrine alluded to by Chafer is illustrated by the seven theories of imputation which are discussed and summarized in Table 1 (pp. 52–53).

JODT 24:68 (Spring 2020) p. 52

Table 1. Theories of Imputation