Westminster Theological Journal 55 (1993) 281-97. Copyright © 1993 by Westminster Theological Seminary, cited with permission. THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH IN THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS Part III: The Obedience of Christ and the Obedience of the Christian (continued) D. B. GARLINGTON(2) The Reign of Death from Adam to Moses. Having stated his thesis that universal sin and death are the effect of one man's disobedience, Paul, in vv. 13-14, seems compelled to defend what he has written. These verses commence the "B" section of our passage. Very noticeable, remarks Dunn, is the speed with which Paul's thought reverts to the law—a further indi-cation that it was the chief point of tension between Paul the Christian and the traditional emphases of Judaism.94 In particular, v. 12 appears, to the Jewish mind, to contain a puzzling proposition. Given Paul's consistent denial of the existence of the law before Sinai, how could there have been sin strictly speaking, since, presumably, there was no law according to which sin could be reckoned? Sin, after all, is disregard of the Torah. It is this which Paul now seeks to clarify.His explanation is a return to 4:15b, ou$ de> ou]k no<moj ou]de> parabasij, where these words are appended to the statement of the previous part of the verse, o[ ga>r no<moj o]rgh>n katerga<zetai. By claiming, in 5:12, that all have sinned, Paul has implied that they have rejected God's law and have, therefore, been the recipients of wrath (death). This, of course, raises a historical problem: if the law (of Moses) works wrath, and if sin is not reckoned apart from law, how could there have been sin and death before Sinai? For a sizable segment of Judaism anyway, the answer was obvious: the Torah has existed from the dawn of history, and the nations are exposed to wrath because they have spurned the eternal Torah. As early as Ben Sira this idea is in evidence: Abraham himself kept none other than the law (of Moses) during a time of testing (Sir 44:20). Afterward the author of Jubilees would make the same claim (24.11; cf. 23.10), as does Kidd. 4.4.95 Even more striking in Jubilees is the pre-existence of the law on "heavenly94 Dunn, Romans 1.274.95 See Garlington, Obedience, 38. 281282 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNALtablets,"96 "the eternal books always before the Lord'' (Jub. 39.7).97 The eternity of the law is likewise the conviction of Sir 24:9, 33; Bar 4:1; Wis 18:4; T. Naph. 3.1-2. The corresponding attitude toward the Gentiles is illustrat-ed by Ben Sira's assurance (Sir 12:6) that God hates sinners and will inflict punishment on the ungodly (a]segbei?j). To this may be added Sir 36:1-10, according to which the sage's fury was called forth by the desecration of the Jerusalem temple by Gentiles (48:18; 49:6; 50:4). The same hostility is vividly present in Jub. 22.16; Pss. Sol. 17.21-27.In rather stark contrast, Paul allows that there is an era prior to and distinguishable from that of the Torah (v. 13a). A law has been broken, but it is not the law of the Sinai covenant; it is, rather, some law in existence before the birth of Israel's nationhood, which effectively obliterates the distinction between the covenant people and the remainder of humanity; it is this law which exposes Israel's guilt and places her on a par with the nations, so that death reigned over all who lived from Adam to Moses (v. 14). Vv. 13-14, therefore, can plausibly be interpreted as the apostle's denial of a recognized tenet of Jewish theology: for him there was a period during which the Torah was not in existence.98 In turn, this would be a denial of the perspective of Sir 10:19, according to which the non-Jewish segment of the human race is unworthy of honor because it has transgressed the commandments. The Gentiles, in other words, are not worthy of death because they have violated the Torah.99Even without the aid of these historical documents, it is certain that Paul is classifying Israel with the Gentiles: before the law, the seed of Abraham died as well as the uncircumcised, because both were guilty of law-breaking. Paul thus appeals to the violation of this pre-Mosaic law as being a great leveler of mankind. In the words of 3:23, all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God: circumcision exempts no one from involvement in the effects of Adam's sin. It is just this universalism of sin that sets the stage for Paul's denomination of Adam as the "type of the coming one," inas-much as "the universal impact of his one act prefigures the universal im-pact of Christ's act":100 as Adam is ultimately responsible for the death of96 E.g., Jub. 16.29; 31.32; 32.10, 15, 21-26, 28; 33.10. See further R. Banks, Jesus and the Law in the Synoptic Tradition (SNTSMS 28; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975) 68-69; id., "The Eschatological Role of Law in Pre- and Post-Christian Jewish Thought," in Rec-onciliation and Hope: New Testament Essays on Atonement and Eschatology Presented to L. L. Morris on His 60th Birthday (ed. R. Banks; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 176.97 On the eternity of the law in Jewish literature, see Banks, Jesus and the Law, 67-85 (cf. pp. 49-64); id., "Law," 173-85; W. D. Davies, Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come(SBLMS 7; Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature, 1952) e.g., p. 84.98 The doctrine of the law's eternity later developed into the rabbinic Torah-ontology. See M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (London: SCM, 1974) 171-75.99 Contra E. Jüngel, "Das Gesetz zwischen Adam and Christus: Eine theologische Studie zu Röm 5, 12-21," ZTK 60 (1963) 50-57.100 Moo, Romans, 346. Cf. Cranfield, Romans 1.283.THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH 283Jew and Gentile, so Christ is ultimately credited with the restoration of both.101To summarize, the purpose of vv. 13-14 is twofold: (1) to clarify how on Paul's understanding of the law there could be sin and, consequently, death before Sinai; (2) to involve Israel in sin and death, thereby implying that the people of the law were no more immune to Adam's fall than the nations. His fundamental proposition is stated in v. 13b: a[marti<a de> ou]ke]llogei?tai, i.e., "is not entered into the ledger against" (Black), so as to hold one liable in judgment,102 mh> o@ntoj no<mou. By focusing on the nexus of sin and the law, he states what would have been perfectly acceptable