21.7 Does Romans 5:12-21 Teach Universal Justification?
A. Leroy Moore; Feb, 2001 (Edit 02-18-07)
Topics:
Three universal, forensic or legal justification views
KJV Mistranslates Verse 18 -- Not Verse 12
Literary Enclosures Control the Meaning
Romans 3 Provides the Key
Chapters 1-4 Provide Terms and Concepts for 5:12-21
Reign of Sin and Death vs Reign of Righteousness and Life
Universal Reconciliation Precedes Personal Justification by Faith
"All" in 5:18 = Apex of Chapters 1-16
Flesh vs Spirit and "All" Who Believe Continue Through Chapter 16
Summary and Conclusions
Three universal, forensic or legal justification views
Three universal, forensic or legal justification views have emerged within Adventism in the last few decades. None, however, teaches universalism, as the term may suggest. My purpose is to examine Rom 5:12-21, the text on which all three are based, to see if it does teach some kind of universal, legal justification at the cross. But first, I briefly identify the three views.
In 1972 Desmond Ford completed a PhD degree at Manchester University under world renowned, F F Bruce, whose Plymouth Brethren theology is based on the doctrine of original sin (Adam's guilt imputed to all descendants) and universal, legal justification at the cross. With Plymouth Brethren, Ford equates legal justification with the gospel, which he restricts to what happened at the cross. Thus he denies that it includes the Holy Spirit's sanctifying work in the heart.
With Plymouth Brethren, Ford logically precluded any future judgment by declaring that justification covers future sins as well as past and present. For years he denied this charge that he repudiated our sanctuary-judgment message, insisting that he still believed in Christ's Most Holy Place ministry. But on Oct 27, 1979 he formally proclaimed the Plymouth Brethren doctrine that the only judgment of believers took place in 31 AD. Openly repudiating the investigative judgment, he declared that Daniel 8:14 had nothing to do with 1844.
Meanwhile, seeing in legal justification at the cross a vital principle of E J Waggoner's justification by faith, Robert Wieland sought to free it from Ford's error, by introducing two essential phases of justification: (a) legal justification of the entire race at the cross, which becomes savingly effective only by (b) personal justification by faith. Yet, many saw in his use of the term, universal legal justification at the cross, merely a variation of Ford's doctrine. That he also used the term, "original sin," seemed to confirm this. Despite fundamental differences, some could only see in Bob's view a more subtle and thus more dangerous form of Ford's heresy.
Arnold Wallenkampf (Wally) also supported universal justification in his book, Justification (1988). Avoiding the term, "original sin," that caused Wieland to be identified as a closet Fordite, he added temporary before the term, "universal justification." By "temporary universal legal justification at the cross" he restates the key to Bob's view, that the cross gives to all a probationary time to claim the justifying provision of Christ, who died as Substitute for all and now ministers in the sanctuary as Surety of salvation for all who receive Him by faith. Bob, however, avoids terms such as "provision." It is not mere provision, he insists. Universal justification is already and actually ours and must only be acknowledged by faith. It is not something to seek.
All three legal justification views hold that Christ has already paid for our sins, satisfying every requirement of the law, thus removing fear and alienation that guilt imposes and permitting us to come boldly to the throne of grace to claim a righteousness already acquired for us. Moreover, all three also seek to combat the universal, human instinct to claim merit.
Lastly, all three use KJV's translation of Romans 5:18 as a key to interpret the rest of Romans 5:12-21 – not one verse of which suggests universal justification, except a limited "all," the "all who believe." Note how their interpretations rest on added nouns and verbs (see italics):
"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life" (Romans 5:18; KJV).
Other Bible and spirit of prophecy passages are seen to support universal condemnation on account of Adam's sin, as counteracted by universal justification, such as, "He was wounded for our transgressions" (Isaiah 53:5) and "Christ has taken the guilt of the race ..." (COL 169). But evidences drawn from virtually every verse in Romans 5 deny a universal justification teaching.
I thus urge a more biblical way to proclaim the valid principles of God's more abundant grace. Yet, as I do, I must affirm the legal principle underlying the two-phase views, that in His life and death Christ re-united the alienated race to God by paying its entire sin debt. This we need only claim by faith. Two issues are: Did God impute guilt to humanity? and, Is the second clause properly translated in the past tense, as something universally accomplished at the cross?
KJV Mistranslates Verse 18 – Not Verse 12
Rather than KJV's translation of 5:18, that contradicts the principle by which Paul introduces the entire death in Adam versus life m Christ passage, I propose verse 12 as the key:
"As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that [eph ho] all sinned" (5:12, KJV).
Far from treating universal sin as a legal status in Adam, it is here declared the result of universal sinning. Wieland, however, explains eph ho as an exclamation of horror, ie, "so death passed to all men! [Oh Horrors]! All sinned"! This, however, only makes the cause unknown, yet still leaves the implication of universal sinning as causing the effect (death).
Meanwhile, Greek scholars affirm the cause and effect interpretation of eph ho. All scholarly translations I have examined treat it as cause and effect, just as KJV does. NKJV, NASB, NIV, and NRSV render it, "because all sinned." Among translations with other causative expressions are: Coneybeare, NEB, Gdspd, and Montgomery. In his Greek Interlinear, J. P. Green, Sr, translates it, "death passed to all men inasmuch as all sinned."
More important than definitions and expert opinions is the text in context. Verse 18 is peculiar. For no predicate verbs show action and tense. These are conveyed, rather, by the double preposition, eis:
"Therefore as by the offense of one [eis] judgment came upon all men [eis] to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [eis] the free gift came upon all men [eis] unto justification of life" (Romans 5:18; all italics added by KJV).
Failing to recognize the eis function and erroneously inserting in italics the nouns and verbs assumed to be missing, KJV obscures the cause and effect principle by which verse 12 introduces the entire passage. Compare Green's Greek translation with KJV and its added words:
So then as through one offense (it was) toward all men to condemnation, so also by one accomplished righteousness toward all men to justification of life (5:18; Green; I interline his translations of the double eis; toward ... to).
Properly translated, verse 18 thus harmonizes with 5:12; for the double eis indicates that sin moves toward all men to universal condemnation. All do receive it, thus "all [have] sinned." Christ's righteousness also moves "toward all men to justification of life"; but "all" do not receive this gift by faith; thus it only comes "upon all them that believe" (3:22).
Nor, by its very nature, is "justification of life" only legal. The cross removes sin's debt and "temporarily" cancels the death penalty, but does not itself give "life." Only Christ, by His ministry, typified by the earthly sanctuary, gives life. The cross does stimulate and enable choice to receive life by the exercise of faith. But we must choose "justification of life" by uniting with Christ, source of all righteousness and life (1 John 5:11-13). "In Him" we receive the covenant which provides both forgiveness and principles of the law of life written in mind and heart.
Literary Enclosures Control the Meaning
To understand, we must honor Paul's literary enclosures. Verse 18 is enclosed within two parallel verses (17 & 19) which means that it also parallels them. Their verbs and tenses thus assure the function and tense of eis. This device requires harmony between the enclosed and the enclosure passages. Note the parallel structure in the three individually unique verses:
"For if by the offense of the one death reigned [past] by the one, much more those who are receiving the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall rule in life [future] by the One, Jesus Christ (17).
"So then as through one offense (it was) toward all men to condemnation [past], so also by one accomplished righteousness toward all men to justification of life [future] (18).
"For as through the one man's disobedience the many were constituted sinners [past], so also by the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous [future]" (Romans 5:19).
All three state the same two-fold, negative-positive principle. Yet, each provides a concept not stated by the others that applies to all. Verse 18 contributes "justification of life." Verse 17 declares who are justified, "those who are receiving the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness," who "shall rule in life [future] by the One." Verse 19 adds how, "by the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous." Nothing in any of the three suggests justification at the cross. "Justification of life requires personal interaction in which we receive His life. "He who has the Son has life. He who has not the Son has not life" (1 John 5:11-12).
In the first clause of both enclosure verses the universal "all sinned" is in past tense. Thus the enclosed clause (verse 18) must be past tense. By contrast, the tense in the second clause of each is future. This requires a future tense in verse 18 – not past, at the cross. Justification always moves "toward" all men "to" justification of life." But it becomes effective only for those "receiving the abundance of grace" (17) For it comes only "upon all who believe" (Romans 3:22).
Thus not "all" but the "many" willing to receive it "shall be constituted righteous" (19) and "shall rule in life" (17). By justification we enter the spiritual rule of the kingdom of grace; but only by the judgment (Daniel 7:26-27) do we reign in the kingdom of glory (cf Hebrews 11:39-40).
Paul's use of eis ... eis instead of verbs is part of a pattern. Each of the three verses depends for completion on the other two, just as they do on it. Verse 19 confirms the verbal eis function of verse 18 even as it repeats the concept but changes "all" (Jews/Gentiles) back to the "many" of verse 17, those "receiving the gift of life" by faith. The tense clearly lies in Verses 17 ("shall rule") and 19 ("by the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous").
The claim that "many" is a Hebrew idiom meaning "all" is grammatically sound. But it disrupts the continuous theme – "all" Jews & Gentiles who believe. Moreover, the future tense in verses 17 and 19 denies past universal justification at the cross and testifies to personal justification by a faith that enrolls believers in the kingdom of righteousness. (More on this below.)
Romans 3 Provides the Key
Romans 3 initiates the two-fold "all" theme that climaxes in Romans 5:12-21. The "all sinned" in 5:12 is introduced in 3:9-12: "For we have charged both Jews and Greeks all (with) being under sin. ... All have gone out of the way." "All" here clearly means all Jews as well as all Gentiles. This is universal of all humanity, in that all human beings (except Christ) have sinned.
Paul then introduces the limited "all" of 5:18 that, identified as both all and many, dominates the entire epistle: "a righteousness of God through (the) faith of Jesus Christ toward [eis] all and upon [epi] all those believing; for there is no difference" (3:22), whether Jew or Gentile.
Eis ... epi indicates that while God's righteousness comes to (eis) all, it only comes upon (epi) "all those believing." This confirms both the enclosure principle and the eis ... eis in 5:18 ("toward all to justification of life"). This justification cannot refer to past justification at the cross. Note again the context: a continuing present experience of relating and receiving that is to result in future rule:
". . . for the judgment (was) of one to [eis] condemnation, but the free gift (is) of many offenses to [eis] justification. For if by the offense of one death reigned by the one, much more those who are receiving the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall rule in life by the One, Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:16-17).
This same justification is identified as "justification of life" in the next verse (18). Note how its eis clause integrates with the present, moving to the future, tense in verse 17. This rules out past justification at the cross. Verse 19, which parallels all three preceding verses (16-18), confirms this by a restoration in the future tense--not in AD 31:
So then, as through one offense (it was) toward [eis] all men to [eis] condemnation, so also by one accomplished righteousness toward [eis] all men to [eis] justification of life. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous . . . (Romans 5:18-19; Green).
Note the bolded logical connectives. "So then" means that verse 18 continues the logic of verse 17, where justification is "receiving ... grace." Indeed, verses 18 & 19 repeat the two, two-fold statements in 16-17. Nor is "many" here an idiom for all mankind; for "justification of life" is qualified as "the many [who] shall be constituted righteous." Thus it is only "all who believe."
Chapters 1 - 4 Provide Terms and Concepts for 5:12-21
Meanwhile, verses 13 & 14, that follow the universal "all sinned" in 12, form a bridge to the "many" in the rest of Romans 5, who believe and are justified. Though there was no written law from Adam to Moses and sin is not charged when there is no law, yet, universal death (sin's penalty) continued during that time. Thus, the universal reality of sin existed before the law was proclaimed, a theme dominating Chapters 1 & 2 that point up the universal corruption (Jews & Gentiles alike) and thus universal need for divine grace.
The universal, concludes by declaring that circumcision becomes uncircumcision to those who violate the law; whereas Gentiles who have not the law but obey the law of nature are considered circumcised. This prepares us for the paradox that though there was no written law from Adam to Moses, the revelation of God in nature left even Gentiles without excuse (Rom 1:18-32). All are judged according to available knowledge, which starts with revelation written in nature (and interpreted by the Spirit (2:29; 8:1-11).
The Jews, set apart by God and blessed by many prophets, added to their greater privilege and responsibility, hypocritical judgment on less guilty Gentiles. Chapter 2 concludes, "he is not a Jew that (is one) outwardly, nor (is) circumcision that outwardly in flesh; but he (is) a Jew that [is one] inwardly, and circumcision [is] of heart, in spirit, and not in letter" (2:28-29).
This is the context in which Paul declares "all" guilty, as he prepares to proclaim universal justification for "all" who believe--both Jews and Gentiles (3:22). Verse 29 then repeats from Chapter 2 that God justifies the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised, a concept that dominates Chapter 4, with its intense Abraham the father of "all" who believe emphasis.
Without interruption, Chapter five continues: "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we [Jews & Gentiles] have peace toward God through our Lord Jesus Christ, . . ." (5:1-2). Nor is there is a signal of change from "justification by faith." to legal justification. In contrast to past justification at the cross, the focus on justifying the ungodly in verses 3 to 11 sharpens to "now," as it introduces verses 12-21: "being now justified" and "now received the reconciliation" (9-11).
From chapter one, the focus is on universal corruption (Jew and Gentile) and justification for all who choose to accept God's gift by faith. Nowhere is it implied that Adam's guilt was either legally imputed to the whole human race or offset by universal, legal justification at the cross. The consistent focus is universal, personal guilt offset by universal provisions for justification by faith in claiming Christ's merits.
Reign of Sin & Death Vs Reign of Righteousness & Life
Unfortunately, the universal, legal justification theory overrides the special 5:12-21 focus:
personal transfer from the reign of sin to the reign of righteousness for "all" who "receive the gift of righteousness" (Jews and Gentiles; 5:17). But KJV not only interrupts the pervasive "all," Jew/Gentile; it obscures a new, governments in conflict theme – a "reign" of sin and death versus a "reign" of grace and righteousness. Not legal justification at the cross, but universal personal involvement in this conflict is the controlling issue, while reception of "the gift of righteousness" by "all who believe" is the solution.
But death reigned from Adam until Moses, even on those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a type of the coming (One) [cf vs 15 & 16] For if by the offense of the one death reigned by the one, much more those who are receiving the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall rule in life by the One, Jesus Christ. So then, as through one offense (it was) toward all men to condemnation, so also by one accomplished righteousness toward all men to justification of life. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the One the many shall be constituted righteous [see verse 20] That as sin ruled in death, so also grace might rule through righteousness to everlasting life, through Jesus Christ our Lord (5:14, 17-19, 21; Green; emphasis added here and elsewhere.)
Two ruling powers are thus portrayed: one of sin resulting in death; and one of righteousness, provided by grace and received by faith. Satan usurped Adam's righteous government and enslaved the entire human race by control of the will. But in "the fullness of time" the second Adam came to reclaim the lost dominion. Exposing the usurper's deception, He established His own right to rule and revealed His power to free Satan's captives. His righteous life and substitutional death conquered sin – sovereign principle in Satan's kingdom, canceled humanity's sin debt, and defeated death. Now He offers "justification of life" as a free gift to all (of whatever race) who choose to enter the restored kingdom of "life through Jesus Christ."
Every chapter in Romans contributes to the causative eph ho in 5:12 that establishes the universal reign of sin and death resulting from natural man's universal bondage to sin via an enslaved will. Verses 13-21 proclaim the restored reign of righteousness to "all" who believe.
Thus, cause and effect based on choice to believe, rather than universally imputed sin and legally declared justification, dominates the passage. Adam chose to surrender his kingdom to a master who enslaves all by controlling the will. Christ chose to redeem the entire race, restoring to His kingdom "all" who choose to believe in Him as Substitute and Surety. Meanwhile the cross did care for our sin debt and a gift of faith instilled by it frees us from bondage to Satan's kingdom and enables our choice, entitling us, moreover, to share His throne (Rev 3:21).
Universal Reconciliation Precedes Personal Justification by Faith
While there is no suggestion of universal justification at the cross, Christ did legally reconcile the human race by bearing the guilt of the world and paying its penalty. Thus, while probation lasts, He can justly declare that He charges none with guilt until the judgment and urge all to freely receive in simple faith His "justification of life" (5:9-10, 18), by which He assures our passage through the judgment without indictment, to be awarded a place in Christ's kingdom.
God alone could initiate reconciliation. For we all not only have a weakened corrupt nature, but, because of willfulness and guilt resulting in self-defense, we instinctively hide from Him as did Adam and Eve. Sacrificing Himself for His "ungodly" (5:6) "enemies" (5:10), He reconciled the world. Satisfying justice and removing all necessity for divine enmity, He demonstrated His longing to personally reconcile and justify all. Thus, His amnesty permits the most degraded sinner to come boldly and without fear to the throne of grace to obtain mercy (Heb 4:16).
This vital principle underlies the concepts of both Wieland and Wallenkampf. Only the cross's infinite revelation of His love, proving God holds nothing against us, can remove our enmity and defense against Him. Having reconciled the race, He "now" seeks to reconcile us personally, removing our enmity by "justification of life" (3:25-26).
Scripture never calls the universal, corporate reconciliation justification, which is always personal and by faith. Yet, though the term, universal legal justification is inaccurate, I appreciate the principle its proponents espouse: "God was in Christ reconciling the whole world unto Himself, not imputing (charging) their trespasses to them" (2 Cor. 5:14-21). Because "not imputing their trespasses" is involved in justification some see this as proof of legal justification. Yet Scripture does not treat it that way and we need to use Scripture terms as Scripture does.
With Bob and Wally, however, I urge that, before our knowledge or response and while still enemies, we "were reconciled" corporately at the cross. In grasping this great truth, which they call universal justification at the cross, we boldly, and joyfully claim what is ours by faith. Thus we allow Him to remove our enmity and reconcile us personally in "justification of life."
All who "now [gratefully] receive personal reconciliation" (margin) "shall be saved by His life" (5:10-11), as in process of healing we learn ever more fully to deny self-centered impulses. (See Col 1:20-22).
"All" in 5:18 = Apex of Chapters 1-16
As we have seen, the "all sinned" in 5:12, covert in Chapters 1 and 2, becomes overt in 3:12. The "all" who receive "justification of life" in 5:18, is introduced in 3:22 – all who believe, Jews & Gentiles with no distinction. This two-fold theme, with a primary focus on the "all" of justification by faith, continues throughout Romans, but climaxes in 5:12-21, the justification apex of Romans, which introduces the governments in conflict theme that climaxes in Chapter 8. Both "all" and governments in conflict themes continue, however, to the end of Romans.
Six of seven verses from 5:15 to 21, repeat the two-fold "all" – universal death as a result of one man's sin, met by universal justification to all who believe and claim the righteousness of One Man. Moreover, this "all" theme with conflict of governments that characterizes 5:12-21 continues in Chapter 6 via baptism. Paul announces that we die to the rule of sin and death and are resurrected to the Spirit's rule of life. But, the believer, having both an old and a new nature must choose continually between two masters. To be free from the tyranny of the flesh (6:16) he must consistently reject "the reign of sin" in his "mortal body" (6:12).
Chapter 7 amplifies this by the analogy of marriage to the old man. Death to the old man (flesh) must precede marriage to Christ (justification & baptism). Whether Jew or Gentile, there are only two classes: slaves to the flesh; and those who by faith, transfer to the kingdom of grace and are free to rule over the flesh by motivation and empowerment of the Spirit (Rom 7 & 8).
Chapter 8 climaxes the weak flesh in the governments in conflict theme of 5:14-21. Christ came in our weak flesh to repudiate its rule of sin by condemning "sin in the flesh" (8:3). The essence of this climactic statement is introduced in 1:3-4. Before describing the hopelessness according to the flesh, first of Gentiles and then of Jews, Paul prepares us for his universal theme of no difference between Jew and Gentile by introducing Jesus according to the flesh (the same flesh of all humanity), and, in contrast, His resurrection according to the Spirit (1:3-4).
But to prepare us for this grand climax to the flesh versus Spirit theme (as imbedded in the governments in conflict theme that underlies the "all sinned" vs "all who believe" theme, Paul first identifies the weakness of his own flesh (7:14-25) and then announces:
For the law (being) powerless in that it was weak through the flesh, God having sent His Son in (the) likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (8:3-4).
The incarnation thus climaxes the governments in conflict theme and provides a new climax for "all" – the limited all, Jews and Gentiles who choose to believe despite "weakness according to the flesh." Yet even this second climax does not end the pervasive "all" theme.
Chapters 9-11 expand Chapter 4. True Jews are not born of the flesh but by the Spirit through faith. These three chapters climax in 11:26-32 that begins, "And so all Israel will be saved," and concludes with a two-fold "all": "For God shut up all in disobedience, that he might show mercy to all." Thus, not only is "all" (Jews & Greeks) a key from Chapter 1 to 11, but 5:12-21 comes in the middle, with the cause and effect, double eis of 5:18 forming its center!
Flesh Vs Spirit & "All" Who Believe Continue Through Chapter 16
Yet, the Jew-Gentile theme, with "all" as its central principle, continues even in the five, application chapters. Chapter 12:1-2 continues the flesh versus Spirit theme introduced in Romans 5:14-21, that dominates Chapters 6-8. Warning against walking according to the flesh, Chapter 13 concludes: "But put on the Lord Jesus Christ and do not take thought for the lusts of the flesh." Chapter 14 warns not to harm the "weak in the faith" by eating before them food from the markets that may have been dedicated to idols, thus wounding their "weak" conscience, threatening to make them guilty before the judgment that pervades Chapters 1 and 2.
Continuing the discussion of caring for our weak brothers, Chapter 15 contains an amazing ten references to Gentiles and a number of allusions to issues such as, "circumcision" and "all the peoples"! Paul concludes his epistle by a final focus on the same "all" theme––Jews and Gentiles, in referring to "obedience of faith to all the nations [Gentiles]" (16:26)!
Summary & Conclusion
Chapter 1 introduces the flesh Vs Spirit war underlying the conflict of governments theme that dominates Romans. Chapters 1 & 2 prepare for the introduction of two kinds of "all." A universal "all" (3:9-12) relates to the flesh--"all sinned." And a limited "all" relates to the Spirit––all who believe are justified (3:22-26). These climax in Rom 5:12-21. Verse 12 proclaims the universality of sin (all flesh) while verse 18, referring to the second "all," announces that "justification of life" moves "toward" all assuring salvation to all who believe.
Concluding the passage and transitioning to Chapter 6, verse 21 declares : "that as sin ruled in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to everlasting life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." And Chapter 6 prepares for the flesh versus spirit climax of 7 & 8, followed by the three chapters that climax the Jew/Gentile theme declaring all believers Israelites. This two-fold "all" (unlimited & limited) and a governments in conflict theme was the solar plexus of the Minneapolis conflict over Gal 3-4, where conflict between governments of sin (flesh) and grace (Spirit) was fiercely debated.
This Minneapolis principle implies the advisability of setting aside the term, universal, legal justification, and uniting to proclaim the biblical term, "reconciliation." If the term, "universal justification" is used, it should at least be preceded by the adverb, "temporary." Though it would seem best to limit our use of justification to its biblical use in relation to faith.
In conclusion, we note the telescoping of themes in Romans, with each theme introducing another that is implicit within it, and that another, with each continuing as emphasis shifts to another. Thus Chapter 1 introduces the corruption of Gentiles theme, who have no excuse in the judgment, there introduced. Chapter 2 repeats this in relation to the Jews, but with a vastly intensified focus on the judgment, in light of their greater light. Of five specific references to divine judgment besides implicit references, some focus on "Jew first and also Gentile." These relate to reward as well as to punishment.
Chapter three makes explicit the two-fold "all," Jew and Gentile, theme that pervades Chapter 4 and climaxes in 5:18. And that entire passage (5:12-21) introduces a dominions in conflict theme that itself involves a flesh versus Spirit theme. The focus then shifts back to the "all" Jews and Gentiles in Chapters 9 to 11. Moreover, all these themes reappear in the last five chapters.
To these themes must be added the intense focus upon the gospel and judgment in Chapters 1 and 2, which encompasses all the other themes. In relation to all the themes, gospel is the head of the coin and judgment the tail. But it is only one coin which we generally speak of as gospel, but the climax of the gospel is the final judgment.
Judgment is specific but once in the Gentile chapter (1), where gospel is mentioned four times. The reverse is true in the Jewish responsibility chapter (2). Gospel is mentioned specifically but once, while divine judgment is explicit four times. In both the valence of judgment is negative, because the focus is on human corruption, which Chapter 3 continues by placing "all" in a single category of universal corruption, to expose the universal need of the gospel that prepares us for eternal justification, rather than the condemnation deserved, in the judgment.
In view of the uniformity of a telescoping set of themes in which there is not one declaration or even implication of universal forensic judgment, I urge those who may still believe "universal legal justification by faith" is an important term, to at least avoid basing it on Romans 5:12-21, which can only obscure Paul's "all" and his governments in conflict theme.