Chapter 7
Outline: four paragraphs.
a) The key to interpretation: the two marriages, verses 1-6.
b) The function of the law as a marriage counsellor, verses 7-14.
c) The attacks of the first husband, verses 15-21.
d) The great inner conflict, verse 22-25.
Verse 1 – the lordship of the law. The Mosaic law not only is a marriage counsellor, but a tough one. It walks in and says you have a bad marriage. The law is the authority from God that says so. “Know ye not” – really, “How stupid are you?” The verb is not a verb of knowledge, it is a verb of ignorance. It begins with the disjunctive particle h), used in an interrogative sentence to introduce a rhetorical question. The particle relates to Romans 6:14 and it implies that the writer Paul is sceptical about Romans believers—that they are stupid as a general rule. Then the present active indicative of a)gnoew which means to be stupid. The purpose of Romans 7 is to take your stupidity about the inner conflict, take away all of the philosophical and psychological terms, the syndromes, the relationship to environment, the human viewpoint, and find out what that conflict really is. As long as you cherish any psychological human viewpoint with regard to the inner conflict after salvation you cherish irrational arrogant notions about your own self-importance. All of these things are to be dispelled. “Or are you stupid?” The descriptive present tense indicates what is now going on. Stupidity is now occurring. The active voice: believers in this case who are Jewish and influenced by the law, living in Rome, are fulfilling the action of the verb and taking Gentile believers along with them. The indicative mood: the interrogative indicative assumes that there is an actual fact which may be stated in answer to the question. The vocative plural is describing a condition that exists among believers—a)delfoj, “brethren, believers.” Picking up the concept of Romans 6:14 we now go to the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor. Remember that the disjunctive particle picks up the thread of this verse and develops true information regarding the old sin nature as the first husband under the teaching of the marriage counsellor. “Or are you stupid, brethren.”
1. The information of this chapter is related to the information of the previous chapter but with a different emphasis. In Romans 6 the emphasis is placed on positional truth, while in this chapter the emphasis lies with the battle between two husbands. As believers we all have an ex-husband, the old sin nature. As believers we have a new husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
2. Anticipating the key illustration of Romans 7:2-4, the woman, the believer, has died to her first husband through divorce. The death is divorce, the husband is still very much alive.
3. At salvation the believer through the baptism of the Spirit is no longer under the sovereignty of the old sin nature. Retroactive positional truth constitutes a divorce. Identification with Christ in His spiritual death is rejection of the first husband; identification with Christ in His physical death and burial is separation and divorce from the first husband.
4. Hence, the first husband, the old sin nature, is no longer is a state of marriage. The wife of the first marriage is the unbeliever and the wife of the second marriage is the believer. The second husband is the Lord Jesus Christ. The wife of the second husband: each one of us comes into the picture at this moment.
“for I speak to those who know the law” – he refers to the fact that they know the law but they do not understand the point. Not understanding the point they
do not really understand the law.
Translation: “For are you ignorant, brethren, (for I communicate to those who know the law,) that the [Mosaic] law lords it over mankind for as long a time as he lives.”
Verse 2 – “For the woman which hath an husband.” The word “hath” is not found in the original. The explanatory conjunctive particle gar, introducing the illustrative analogy which is the key to interpretation of Romans chapters 6,7,8. This is the analogy which is used throughout. Plus the nominative singular subject, h( gunh, “the woman,” but with the generic use of the definite article it denotes a distinctive class of woman, the married woman, the wife. Plus the appositional predicate nominative singular from the noun u(pandroj, meaning subject to a man, under the authority of man—“For the wife under the authority of her husband.”
1. Marriage has a system of authority. The man is the ruler over the woman.
2. If a woman is not willing to submit to the authority of a man she should not marry him.
3. No woman can achieve femininity or attractiveness when she has rejected the authority of her husband.
4. A woman who rejects such authority becomes a monster, but a woman under such authority is the most attractive of all of God’s creatures.
5. A woman has a greater influence under authority than when she exercises authority.
6. Therefore the difference between beauty and ugliness in a woman is found in that one word, “authority,” and how she handles it.
7. As responders women were never designed to be independent of authority.
8. No woman’s beauty is complete until she has accepted the authority of the man she loves.
“is bound by the law to her husband” – the perfect passive indicative of the verb dew means to bind or to tie, and is used here for binding by law and duty. The dramatic perfect tense describes a fact in a real and vivid way. In fact, the action is completed and we have the existing results, the state of marriage, emphasised. The passive voice: the wife, the subject, receives the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of absolute reality. The instrumental of means from nomoj is used for the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor, as per Deuteronomy 24:1-4. The dative singular indirect object from a)nhr refers to the husband—“has been bound to her husband by law.”
“so long as he liveth” – the articular present active participle of zaw. The definite article is used as a personal pronoun, translated “he.” The present tense is static for a doctrine taken for granted as a fact: the authority of the man in the divine institution of marriage. The active voice: the husband produces the action of the verb in the marital state. The participle is temporal, therefore it is translated “while he is living.” Living can refer to either physical life as opposed to death or marriage as opposed to divorce. Death is used for divorce as well as physical death.
1. The wife of the first marriage is the unbeliever, while the wife of the second marriage is the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. Throughout this passage the same principle accrues: the first husband, the old sin nature; second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. Marriage counsellor of the first marriage: Mosaic law; marriage counsellor of the second marriage: God the Holy Spirit.
2. In this phrase the wife is the unbeliever married to the old sin nature from birth.
3. The rulership of the old sin nature begins at birth with the imputation of Adam’s sin to the genetically formed old sin nature.
4. The Mosaic law is the marriage counsellor who advises the unbeliever of his status of spiritual death from birth.
5. Codex #1 of the Mosaic law points out the problem, while codex #2 presents the solution to the problem.
6. At salvation the believer is divorced from the first husband, the old sin nature, and married to a second.
7. The baptism of the Spirit and resultant retroactive positional truth provides the mechanics for the divorce analogy.
8. Three identifications are involved in the divorce analogy: a) identification with Christ in spiritual death is rejection of good and evil, the function of the old sin nature as the ruler of life. In the analogy, a woman, before she divorces a man rejects him in her soul; b) identification with Christ in physical death is separation from good and evil, the function of the old sin nature as the ruler of human life. In the divorce analogy, after a woman rejects a man the next stage is separation, tantamount to separation from the first husband; c) identification with Christ in His burial. This is divorce from the old sin nature. Divorce is comparable to death. The authority of the old sin nature, the first husband, has been abrogated, rendered nul and void by divorce. The believer wife has divorced the old sin nature, so the old sin nature is dead to the wife, the believer in Jesus Christ.
“but if the husband be dead” – the postpositive conjunctive particle de connects one clause to another where there is an antithesis. The contrast exists between the first and the second marriage. The conditional particle e)an introduces the 3rd class condition—“but if.” Plus the nominative singular subject o( a)nhr, which includes the generic use of the definite article representing man as a special class, i.e. the husband of a wife, and it is a reference to the old sin nature who after salvation is the ex-husband. Then the aorist active subjunctive of a)poqnhskw, used here not for physical death but for divorce. The aorist tense is a constative aorist which contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, and the action of the verb is the divorce from the first husband, the old sin nature. This divorce includes identification with Christ in His spiritual death or rejection of the husband, identification with Christ in His physical death or separation from the first husband, identification with Christ in His burial which is the actual divorce from the first husband, the old sin nature. The active voice: the first husband produces the action by being divorced by the baptism of the Spirit and resultant retroactive positional truth. The subjunctive mood is potential, and the potential concept is based upon whether an individual believes in the Lord Jesus Christ or not.
“she is loosed from the law of her husband” – the perfect passive indicative of the verb katargew, meaning to render nul and void, to cancel, to abrogate, to abolish, to wipe out, to set aside. Here it means to be released from a former association—“she has been released.” The perfect tense is completed action in the past and results continuing, the present result being union with Christ, a new husband. The passive voice: the wife receives the action of the verb, the first marriage is nul and void by divorce and therefore she is released by the law from her first husband, the old sin nature. The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of divorce and release from the first husband. Then the prepositional phrase a)po plus ablative of means of nomoj, and the ablative of source from the noun a)nhr—“she has been released by the law from her first husband.”
Translation: “For a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of the marriage.”
Verse 3 – how the illustrative principle does not work. (In verse 4: how the principle does work) “So then if while her husband liveth” – the inferential illative particle a)ra. It denotes a transition from one thing to another by natural sequence, and it also denotes logical inference. It can be translated “therefore” or “consequently.” It is followed by a redundancy to us, the inferential conjunction o)un, also translated: “therefore.” If it was translated literally it could be “Therefore, therefore” or “Consequently therefore.” Immediately we are struck with the fact that Paul is laughing. But he is also advancing the argument from the negative standpoint. The correct translation is “Therefore if.” The noun in the genitive case is the subject of a participle in the genitive case. This is the genitive absolute, it is not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence. The genitive singular of a)nhr is the subject of the participle, used for a noble person in contrast to an ordinary person who is a)nqrwpoj. Then a genitive present active participle from zaw. The retroactive progressive present denotes what has begun in the past and continues into the present time. She is married, doesn’t like it any more, and would like to get out from under the situation. The active voice: the husband produces the action of the verb by existing as the husband. This is a temporal participle translated “Therefore, if while her husband is living.”
What follows is not the way the illustration works. This is digression but there is a purpose for it. He is following their thinking.
1. Positionally the divorce is final—the divorce between the old sin nature and the unbeliever. Both the ex-husband is dead to the wife and the ex-wife is dead to the husband. Positionally we are dead to the old sin nature.
2. The death or divorce of the first marriage is comparable to retroactive positional truth, while the new marriage to Christ is comparable to current positional truth.
3. Salvation adjustment to the justice of God not only divorces the believer from the first husband, the old sin nature, but unites the believer to the new husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
4. At salvation the believer is positionally delivered from the power and sovereignty of the old sin nature through retroactive positional truth.
5. At salvation the believer becomes subject to the power and sovereignty of the Lord Jesus Christ through current positional truth. Therefore, at least theoretically, we are living to please our new husband. But our new husband has policies and they must be understood; they must be communicated and He has delegated authority which must be accepted before we can ever please the second husband.
6. The analogy of the context, then, is obvious. The believer is analogous to a married woman who prior to salvation has been under the authority of the first husband, the old sin nature. But now, after salvation, the believer is placed under the authority of the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
7. All of this positional. It does not become experiential until the believer cracks the maturity barrier. Maturity adjustment to the justice of God through maximum doctrine resident in the soul makes the believer’s experience equal to his experience, but experience never equals position until the maturity barrier is cracked.
“she be married to another man” – the aorist active infinitive of ginomai means to become. It is used here for the wife who has changed her nature to indicate entering a new condition. Hence it means to belong to another. This includes belonging to another mentally as well as physically. It does not imply marriage here, but intimate relationship with another man other than the husband. Translation: “she has become intimate.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it contemplates mental and physical intimacy in its entirety. Mental intimacy and spiritual intimacy with the old sin nature is involved and it is gathered up into one entirety. The active voice: the married woman produces the action of the verb with a man other than her husband and, by the analogy, with other than the Lord Jesus Christ. The subjunctive mood is potential, part of the 3rd class condition which qualifies the illustration with contingency, and implies here a future reference. Plus the instrumental of association, and we have the same noun, a)nhr, but here it is not used as the husband. A)nhr is used here for a man who is admired other than the husband. With it is an adjective in the instrumental singular of association—e(teroj, meaning another of a different kind. Translation: “she has become intimate with another man.” In the instrumental of association a second party must furnish the means of association. So the other man has made the proper noises and she has responded. Third class condition: maybe she will and maybe she won’t. One thing is sure. The congregation to whom this was originally addressed in Rome have already wandered into this area of thinking, so the genius of Paul wanders with them. The principle: When a sheep wanders from the flock you have to go out, or send the dog out, to get the sheep to wander back into the flock. You have to go out and get the sheep, it will not wander back of its own accord. So the audience has wandered into thinking, and Paul just takes a little short trip with them to bring them back in. The short trip is verse 3 in which he discusses the iffy possibilities of the situation.
“she shall be called an adultress” – the future active indicative of xrhmatizw, which indicates that Paul is minding his own business, not excortiating anyone. The KJV translator is suggesting kalew, which means to call, implying minding someone else’s business. Xrhmatizw does not mean to call anyone anything, and the verb should be translated “to classify”—“she shall be classified.” He is illustrating, not sticking his nose into anyone’s business. The future tense is a gnomic future for a statement fact which may be rightfully expected under these conditions, but a statement of fact which does not excortiate anyone. The active voice: the married woman who is unfaithful to her husband produces the action of the verb. However as noted in the title of this verse this is how the illustrative principle does not work in the analogy, but this presents a principle: you cannot learn doctrine while under subjectivity. The more hang-ups you have the more difficult it is to learn doctrine when doctrine crosses the sensitivity areas of your hang-ups. The indicative mood is declarative, expressing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Then the nominative of classification from moixalij—“adulteress.” Since the nominative is buy nature the classification case it is not unusual for this classification to remain in the nominative. This can also be called the independent nominative, and that is a grammatical paronomasia. “So then, if while her husband is living she has become intimate with another man she shall be classified as an adulteress.”
1. While this information is necessary for the analogy it is not the way the principle works out in the passage.
2. In retroactive positional truth the wife is divorced and/or dead to her first husband, the old sin nature.
“but if her husband be dead” – the postpositive conjunctive particle de sets up a contrast again; it joins two clauses that are antithetical, or where a contrast is intended. The contrast is between the principle which does not work and how the illustrative principle does work out. The conditional particle e)an introduces the protasis of a 3rd class condition, the condition of probability. With it a supposition from the viewpoint of probability. The subject is the nominative singular from a(nr with the definite article, and correctly translated “but if her husband.” Then the aorist active subjunctive of a)poqnhskw. This is the constative aorist contemplating the action of the verb in its entirety, and this use of the aorist refers to the momentary action at salvation where the divorce occurs. The active voice: the first husband produces the action of the verb by dying and/or being the object of divorce. The subjunctive mood is for a potential subjunctive in a 3rd class condition—“but if her husband has died [physical death or divorce].” This is analogous to the baptism of the Holy Spirit at salvation and resultant retroactive positional truth.
“she is free from the law” – present active indicative of e)imi for “she is.” The present tense is a static present for a condition or circumstance perpetually existing. He is dead after the divorce is final. It is finalised instantly at the moment of salvation. The active voice: the wife, analogous to the believer, produces the action. She is dead to her first husband. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the standpoint of dogmatic reality. Plus the predicate nominative feminine singular from the adjective e)leuqeroj, describing the result of divorce or death; it refers to freedom, having the connotation of being independent and not bound. In this case obviously from the husband, but also from the marriage counsellor. In the second marriage there is a new counsellor, the Holy Spirit. Then a)po plus the nominative from nomoj—“free from the law.” The definite article can be used here as a demonstrative pronoun—“from that law.”
“so that she is” – this is a result clause made up of an infinitive plus a definite article, tou e)ij. This is used for a conceived result that follows the nature of a case, or is assumed logically as a consequence. The infinitive is the present active infinitive of e)imi, “she is no adulteress.” The accusative singular of general reference for a subject of the infinitive, a)utoj is the intensive pronoun in the accusative case for the infinitive must have a subject. It is the feminine form of a)utoj and it should be translated “the same one,” the same one who was divorced from her husband. That same one may now have an intimacy with a man without being classified as adulterous. Plus the negative adverb mh which denies the idea that she could now be so classified. Then the present active infinitive of e)imi, the customary present plus the negative denotes what does not habitually occur. This classification is not possible and in this way Paul has taken his wandering mind congregation and brought them right back to the subject. The active voice: the wife does produce the action of the verb. The infinitive is conceived result which follows the nature of the case. It is assumed as the logical consequence from the previous illustration, verse 2. So she is not an adulteress, the accusative singular of moixalij.
“though she be married to another [man]” – the aorist active participle of the verb ginomai which means to become. The culminative aorist views the event in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results, namely current positional truth, marriage to the second husband immediately following the divorce. Thje active voice: the wife of the first husband now dead produces the action of the verb, being married to a second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a concessive participle, therefore translated “though she has become.” Then is added the word “married” to clarify the analogy, to e(teroj a)nhr, “another man,” the Lord Jesus Christ.
Translation: “So then if, while her husband is living, she has become intimate with another man, she shall be classified as an adulteress: but if her husband has died [or divorced] she is freed from that law; so that she is not an adulteress, though she has become married to another man.”
1. As far as the analogy is concerned the first husband, the old sin nature does not actually die. Death here is divorce.
2. This is the presentation of the illustrative principle, and noting the fact that their subjectivity intrudes people wander from the subject, and therefore this is not the working out of the principle at the beginning of the verse. This pattern must be understood for the interpretation of this verse.
3. Actually, it is the wife who dies/divorces the first husband at salvation.
4. The wife or the believer does or divorces through the principle of retroactive positional truth. While the wife dies to the first husband by divorcing him at salvation the husband, the old sin nature, does not die to the wife in the sense he wants her back, and therefore remains very active in trying to seduce her back to the first marriage.
5. Remember that good and evil is the function of the old sin nature as the ruler of human life.
6. By union with Christ in His spiritual death the believer or wife has positionally rejected good and evil, positionally separated from good and evil, positionally divorced good and evil; and therefore, by current positional truth has married the Lord Jesus Christ.
Verse 4 – how the principle does work out. “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ.” The conjunction w(ste is used to introduce an independent clause—“therefore,” followed by the indicative. Plus the vocative plural from a)delfoj, referring to all believers. It is a reminder that all of us as believers are in the same family, born into it in the same way. We were born again, but we were born again at different times. Furthermore, not all of us have had the same opportunities at the same time, nor have we used the same opportunities to take in doctrine. We cannot all be put in the same mould. With the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai and the nominative plural subject, su—“Therefore, my brethren, you also.” Plus the aorist active indicative of qanatow, meaning to put to death, but in the passive it means “made to die.” You were made to die, to be divorced from the first husband, the old sin nature positionally. The constative aorist gathers into one entirety the action of the verb. It contemplates the baptism of the Spirit and resultant retroactive positional truth in its entirety. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb through retroactive positional truth at the moment of salvation. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Next, instead of having the husband mentioned, we have instead the marriage counsellor. This is because when you go back to the marriage counsellor of the first marriage of the first marriage, the Mosaic law was perfect, it did a great job pointing out our problem and the solution—dative of reference singular from the noun nomoj, used for the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor. The definite article denotes a precious reference to the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor in Romans 6:14,15. Then dia plus the ablative of means from swma, used here for the physical body of our Lord in hypostatic union. Plus the generic use of the definite article emphasising the uniqueness of our Lord’s humanity from the virgin birth to resurrection, and the possessive genitive from Xristoj—“the body of the Christ.” This is a reference to Christ on the cross. The ablative of means is used because of origin involved. Married to Christ through current positional truth means and demands greater things from us. Therefore since the second marriage is so infinitely superior to the first it demands a higher and a greater marriage counsellor, that one being God the Holy Spirit.
“that ye should be married to another” – the preposition e)ij plus the infinitive to introduce a result clause, and with it is an articular infinitive. The articular infinitive is something that you learn only in Classical Greek. It must be remembered that there is a great distinction between the Koine Greek of the New Testament and the Koine Greek found in extra-biblical manuscripts of the time. Much of the New Testament Koine Greek is really Attic Greek, pure Classical Greek. The articular infinitive is actually Classical Greek idiom. We have an actual result here. Plus the accusative plural of general reference from the personal pronoun su which is used as the subject of the infinitive. The pronoun refers to all believers. Then the aorist active infinitive from the verb ginomai which means to become, but here means to become intimate, referring to intimacy in marriage. The aorist tense is a constative aorist for an instantaneous action at salvation. The instantaneous action is whereby God the Holy Spirit who enters us into union with Christ retroactively—the divorce from the first husband, the old sin nature—also enters us into union with Christ seated at the right hand of the Father. This is the second marriage where the Lord Jesus Christ becomes the groom and the Church becomes first of all the body of Christ, and then for an official marriage prior to the Second Advent we have the bride later on. The active voice: the believer produces the action of the verb at salvation through current positional truth. The infinitive is an infinitive of actual result. What this is saying in effect is that when you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ it is also tantamount to a marriage ceremony in which the bride says, “I do.” Translation: “with the result that you might become.” Then the dative of indirect object from the adjective e(teroj, which means another of a different kind, i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ who is totally different from the old sin nature. Identification with Christ in His resurrection, ascension and session is current positional truth and is tantamount to the second marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ. Often the dative of indirect object indicates the one in whose interest the baptism of the Spirit occurs, and it is to our advantage to have a relationship that no believer in the past ever had. We are royal family of God as a result. So through the baptism of the Holy Spirit the Lord Jesus Christ has a royal family for His battlefield royalty in the angelic conflict.
“even to him who is raised from the dead” – again, this emphasises current positional truth which starts with the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The articular aorist active participle from the verb e)geirw used for the literal, bodily resurrection of Christ. The definite article is used as a relative pronoun. The culminative aorist tense views the resurrection of Christ in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results: ascension, session, glorification, battlefield royalty. The passive voice: Christ received the action of the verb through two agencies. The resurrection of Christ was accomplished by God the Father—Colossians 2:12; 1 Timothy 1:10; 1 Peter 1:21. God the Holy Spirit was also involved—Acts 2:24; Romans 1:4; 8:11; 1 Peter 3:18. Both are mentioned as agents of resurrection because of this analogy in which Christ is the second husband and God the Holy Spirit is the marriage counsellor. The circumstantial participle means “even to him who has been raised up.” Then e)k plus the ablative plural from the adjective nekroj. The adjective is plural but it should be translated “dead.” You would ordinarily says “dead ones”—“who has been raised up from among dead ones.” That would be a correct description of resurrection because we do have here a literal, physical, bodily resurrection. But that really isn’t what it means because the adjective is used as a substantive. The definite article with nekroj, and that would be translated as an adjective “from among the dead ones.” However, here we do not have a definite article. This is what is called in a preposition phrase, anartharous construction. The noun is not preceded by the definite article. The absence of the definite article in a prepositional phrase changes the meaning of that adjective which is used as a substantive. It emphasises the qualitative aspects of nekroj, and there is not qualitative in the “dead ones” of nekroj but there is something qualitative about “deaths”—“from deaths,” resurrection from deaths, not dead ones. The correct translation: “to him who has been raised up from deaths”—spiritual and physical death. Christ died twice on the cross.
“that we should bring forth fruit unto God” – a purpose clause: the conjunction i(na introduces a final clause to denote aim, purpose objective. We have an objective here. We are married to another to produce. The human race is perpetuated by a relationship between a man and a woman, and this is called fruit or production. So in the old marriage we had children, now in the new marriage we have children. The children of the first marriage: sin, good, evil. Now we are married to Christ, the wife is the believer, the Holy Spirit is the marriage counsellor, and now new children are to be produced. This time maturity adjustment to the justice of God which glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ. But it is possible for the believer to go back to the old sin nature and produce sin, good, and evil. It doesn’t mean he is an unbeliever, it simply means that he is unfaithful to the second husband. Plus the aorist active subjunctive from the compound verb karpoforew [karoj = fruit; forew = to bear] – “in order that we might bear fruit.” Bearing fruit here: the children of the marriage in the analogy. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the advance to spiritual maturity in its entirety but it emphasises the viewpoint of existing results. The active voice: the believer produces the action of the verb through the daily function of GAP. The teaching of Bible doctrine is the Lord Jesus Christ making love to the believer. The believer can accept or reject that love. The Bible doctrine must become e)pignwsij before it means spiritual advance. This is the potential subjunctive implying a future reference qualified by the element of contingency. The contingency is based upon individual attitude toward Bible doctrine. Plus the dative of indirect object from qeoj emphasising the one in whose interest maturity adjustment is attained. It has the definite article to indicate in this case someone well known to the readers.
Translation: “Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die with reference to the law by the human body of the Christ; with the result that you might belong to another, to the one who has been raised up from deaths [spiritual and physical], in order that we might bear fruit to the God.”
1. The production of union with Christ in His resurrection is maturity adjustment to the justice of God which glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ.
2. This can only be accomplished through the daily function of GAP, i.e. perception of doctrine under the ministry of one’s right pastor.
3. Hence, Bible doctrine resident in the soul is the seed planted for the harvest of glorification of the Lord Jesus Christ. Bible doctrine resident in the soul is the means of glorifying the Lord Jesus Christ.
4. Doctrine resident in the soul is the seed which produces the harvest of glory to God and at the same time that ultimate in life: direct blessings from the justice of God toe the mature believer.
5. Note that this verse emphasises that the Mosaic law, while perfect in its proper function, is not the marriage counsellor for the second marriage.
6. The Holy Spirit is presented as the marriage counsellor for the second marriage in the middle of verse 6.
7. Therefore, death to the old husband or divorce from the first husband through retroactive positional truth also includes death or divorce to the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor of the first marriage.
Principle #2
1. The baptism of the Holy Spirit at salvation provides the analogy of divorce from the first husband and marriage to the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. This explains the phrase “by the human body of the Christ” in our translation.
2. This verse implies that divorce is death to the former mate in marriage.
3. Therefore to die with reference to the law means that the Mosaic law, the marriage counsellor for the first marriage, is no longer functional or operational. We go to a higher marriage counsellor.
4. In other words, the Mosaic law has fulfilled its function in providing information for the divorce from the first husband.
5. Codex #1 of the Mosaic law, the commandments, presents the problem of spiritual death in the first marriage.
6. The first marriage occurred at physical birth with two real imputations.
7. Retroactive positional truth is divorce from the first husband at salvation, while current positional truth is marriage to the second husband at salvation.
8. The purpose is stated at the end of the verse: “in order that we might bear fruit to the God.” No one bears fruit to God in status quo spiritual death. We have to be alive to God before we can bear fruit to God. This is accomplished through maximum doctrine resident in the soul resulting in maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
Verse 5 – we go back to review the production of the first marriage. “For when we were in the flesh,” a reference to the analogy to the first marriage, to being an unbeliever. The explanatory use for the conjunctive particle gar, “for”—and explanation is forthcoming, followed by the temporal particle o(te used as a temporal conjunction, plus the imperfect active indicative of the verb e)imi, the verb to be. The imperfect tense is a progressive imperfect for linear aktionsart in past time. This is also known as the imperfect of duration, indicating that in past time, from birth to salvation, the old sin nature was the husband, the absolute authority. The active voice: the believer produces the action of the verb under the sovereignty of the first husband, now divorced, the old sin nature. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the standpoint of reality. Then the prepositional phrase e)n plus the locative singular of sarc for the old sin nature—“For when we were in the flesh,” or better, “For while we were in the flesh [OSN].” This is a reference to the status quo of the unbeliever from birth, all the way to salvation. And if this status quo remains after salvation it becomes classified as carnality or reversionism. Carnality is sinning without rebound. The sovereignty of the old sin nature has been broken by the baptism of the Holy Spirit and subsequent retroactive positional truth. Hence, this phrase refers to the unbeliever’s status in life.
It is not the imputation of personal sins to the cross that is in view in retroactive positional truth, it is the rejection of good and evil, the other two trends of the old sin nature. When good and evil are rejected as the other two trends this is tantamount to the rejection of the first husband followed by the separation from the first husband, followed by divorce. This is the concept of retroactive positional truth.
“the motions of sins” – incorrectly translated. The nominative plural subject paqhma means sufferings, misfortunes, passions. The noun was used in the Greek to denote what befalls a man and has to be accepted by him. It really means impulse or trend, following an impulse or trend. With this is the possessive genitive plural from the noun a(martia, referring to personal sins which are categorised in three classifications: mental sins, verbal sins, and overt sins. So we translate: “the sinful impulses” or “the sinful trends.” The sinful impulses refer to the children of the first marriage. If you continue to function in good and evil then you are unfaithful to the second husband because the only children in the second marriage is the filling of the Holy Spirit + the consistent function of GAP = maturity adjustment to the justice of God. This means that the production that glorifies God are the blessings that the justice of God provides for the mature believer, blessings which are secure, blessings for which you have capacity.
How do we know the trend is sinful? Codex #1 defines sin in all of its categories; it makes it clear what personal sin is.
“which were by the law” – the nominative plural definite article used as a relative pronoun, “which,” the preposition dia plus the genitive of nomoj with the definite article: “which through the law.” The law is the marriage counsellor.
“did work in our members” – imperfect middle indicative of the verb e)nergew, which means to be operative or effective, or to be at work: “which through the law were effective,” i.e. we understood these things as sin because they were defined for us by the marriage counsellor. The progressive imperfect tense of duration denotes that occurred in the past up to the time of salvation, the divorce from the first husband. The middle voice is the dynamic middle which emphasises the part taken by the subject in the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the preposition e)n plus the locative plural from meloj, referring to the human body, and especially to the brain where these things are programmed; and the possessive genitive plural from the personal pronoun e)gw—“our.”
“to bring forth fruit unto death” – e)ij used in order to indicate a result clause, plus the accusative of the definite article with the articular infinitive, aorist active infinitive of the verb karpoforew – to bear fruit or to produce, resulting in the production of fruit. The constative aorist gathers up into one entirety the rulership of the old sin nature over the life of the individual from physical birth to the new birth. The active voice: the trends of the old sin nature produce the action of the verb. The infinitive is the infinitive of actual result. Plus the instrumental of association singular from qanatoj, used here for spiritual death.
Translation: “For while were in the flesh [OSN], the sinful trends which through the law were effective in our members, resulting in the production of fruit associated with spiritual death.”
1. Obviously this is a reference to the past, prior to salvation which through the two imputations at physical birth we became spiritually dead and therefore related to the old sin nature.
2. The two real imputations which occurred at physical birth combined to produce the status quo of the first marriage.
3. The result of spiritual death was not only the sovereign rule of the old sin nature over life, but the function of its trends.
4. In this passage the old sin nature’s trend toward sin is the one emphasised because this trend was solved at the cross.
5. The Mosaic law demonstrates these personal sins as sin—Romans 3:20; 1 Timothy 1:9,10.
Verse 6 – “But now we are delivered from the law” begins with the postpositive conjunctive particle de, used to connect two clauses where a contrast is intended. First clause: production of the first marriage; second clause: production of the second marriage. The adverb of time nuni refers to the fact that we are now in the second marriage—“now,” referring to salvation adjustment to the justice of God and current positional truth by which we became married to the Lord Jesus Christ. The verb is the aorist passive indicative of katargew, which means to be ineffective, powerless, to abolish. In the passive voice it means to be released from an association with something. “But now we have been released.” It is a verb of divorce. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist which views the baptism of the Spirit at salvation in its entirety, it views it here from existing results, namely the release from the first husband and release from the marriage counsellor. The Mosaic law is not the marriage counsellor of the second marriage. When you divorced the first husband by believing in Christ you left the law behind. Then the prepositional phrase a)po plus the ablative of nomoj—“But now we have been released from the law.”
1. The Mosaic law was the marriage counsellor of the first marriage between mankind and the old sin nature.
2. The first marriage existed from birth to regeneration.
3. The divorce is based on salvation adjustment to the justice of God, i.e. faith in Christ.
4. The divorce part in salvation is retroactive positional truth. The believer has rejected, separated and divorced the old sin nature.
5. Remember that good and evil is the function of the first husband, the old sin nature. God and evil is used as the principle.
6. The Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor taught the fact of the old sin nature and the function of the old sin nature’s trends.
7. The law counselled that mankind has a bad marriage in relationship to the old sin nature.
8. The law also points to the solution, revealing salvation—Levitical offerings, the various articles of furniture in the tabernacle, the holy days, the modus operandi of the Levitical priesthood.
9. Once mankind has believed in Christ the law can do nothing further as a marriage counsellor since the believer is married to Christ through the baptism of the Spirit and current positional truth.
10. Therefore, the believer has been released from the law as the marriage counsellor of the first marriage—Romans10:4.
“that being dead wherein we were held” – there is no word for “that” in the original, or any grammatical construction that demands it. There is simply the aorist
active participle from the verb a)poqnhskw. The aorist is a constative aorist which gathers up into one entirety the baptism of the Holy Spirit at salvation, referring to that momentary action when we believe in Christ. The active voice: the believer produces the action of the verb a salvation through retroactive positional truth. This verb “to die” refers to divorce, not physical death—“by having died” or “through having died,” an instrumental participle which indicates the means by which the action of the verb is accomplished. Then e)n plus the instrumental from the relative pronoun o(j, translated “by which.” Plus the imperfect passive indicative of the verb katexw which means to be suppressed or to be bound—“through having died to that by which we were suppressed.” This is a reference to the first marriage.
“that we should serve in newness of spirit” – the conjunction w(ste introduces the dependent purpose clause, and should be “for the purpose of.” Plus the present active infinitive of douleuw which means to be a slave and therefore to be under authority. The infinitive has as its subject the accusative plural from the personal pronoun e)gw, and this is called the accusative of general reference, translated “we.” It serves as the subject of the infinitive and it changes the translation, “so that we might serve as slaves.” The customary present tense denotes what may reasonably be expected to occur in the second marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the will of the second husband, the policy of the second husband, that the wife, the believer, crack the maturity barrier and receive from the justice of God those blessings of paragraph SG2 which glorify God and bring blessing to. When we understand this principle we cling to the divine viewpoint and we recognise that if God doesn’t promote us we are not promoted; if God doesn’t prosper us we are not prospered. The active voice: each one of us as believers. The infinitive is the infinitive of intended result, when the result is indicated as fulfilling a deliberate objective—“so that we might serve.” Plus e)n plus the locative of kainothj, “in newness,” newness in the sense of something incorruptible. The law can even be corrupted by human distortion, but the Holy Spirit is God and He is incorruptible. So there is the principle of corruptibility neutralising the effectiveness of the Mosaic law; but you cannot corrupt God. Then the ablative of means singular from pneuma, and this is anartharous indicating the quality of the incorruptibility. This ablative expresses means when source is indicated. Translation: “that we might serve in a new marriage by means of [Holy] Spirit.” God the Holy Spirit will give the information to make a positive decision when it should be positive, a negative decision when it should be negative, provided that God the Holy Spirit has taken the information into your soul—Bible doctrine. God the Holy Spirit only uses doctrine. But the marriage counsellor does not go where He is not wanted, and every time we commit a sin without rebound, and when we become involved in good and evil, then we are grieving and quenching the Spirit; we are not controlled by the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the marriage counsellor for the new marriage to Christ. Hence, the Holy Spirit through doctrine provides the motivation, the inspiration, and the reality of our relationship to the Lord.
“and not in the oldness of the letter” – the connective use of the conjunction kai and the negative adverb o)u, “and not.” We are all through with the old marriage counsellor. Then the locative singular of palaiothj, used Hebraistically as an adjective—“and not in the old marriage.” The ablative of means is from gramma—“by the letter,” referring to the Mosaic law.
Translation: “But now we have been released from the law as a marriage counsellor, through having died to that by which we were bound [1st marriage to the OSN]; that we might serve in a new marriage by the Spirit, not in the old marriage by the letter.”
Verses 7-14: The function of the Mosaic law as a marriage counsellor. Some unusual things about the law and how it functioned as a marriage counsellor. There is nothing wrong with the law, even though people have distorted it into a system of legalism.
Verses 7, 8, the function of the law in exposing the old sin nature. All of the genius of the unbeliever cannot discover the old sin nature with its trends toward sin, good, and evil. Only the revelation from God provides the information. And revelation from God in God’s Word, specifically the Mosaic law, reveals the old sin nature as the sovereign of human life ruling through spiritual death. Satan is the sovereign of this world but the old sin nature is the sovereign of human life. Mankind is blind to the status quo of the first marriage apart from the function of and ministry of the Mosaic law. Specifically, then, the Mosaic law is the marriage counsellor indicating a bad first marriage and presenting the solution related to the Lord Jesus Christ.
Verse 7 – “What shall we say then?” The nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun tij, and an inferential postpositive conjunctive particle o)un, used here for an inferential formula idiom. Plus the future active indicative of the verb legw which means to say or to speak. The future tense is a deliberative future, and a deliberative future starts us on a Greek debater’s idiom. Questions of uncertainty are always expressed by the future indicative. Such questions may be real, asking for information, as here, or they may be rhetorical taking the place of a direct assertion. The active voice: Paul uses the rhetorical debater’s idiom to refute a distortion that there is something wrong with the law. The indicative mood is an interrogative indicative in which the indicative assumes that there is an actual fact which may be stated and answered to the debater’s idiom. The rhetorical question in the Greek (not in the English) debater’s technique to introduce the a false assumption, a false inference, from the previous paragraph regarding the function of the Mosaic law as a marriage counsellor of the first marriage. Literally, the phrase is translated, “Therefore what shall we say?” But this is an idiom and you do not translate idioms literally. The idiom actually means, “Therefore to what conclusion are we forced?” Doctrinal teaching forces conclusions, leads to correct inference, and there is always the danger of distorting the correct inference. So no comes the false conclusion, an erroneous inference from the previous paragraph. The false conclusion is the erroneous assumption that the Mosaic law is no good.
“Is the law sin?” This is a rhetorical question stating a false conclusion in order to set it up as a straw man and knock it down. The nominative singular subject nomoj refers to the Mosaic law. The definite article denotes a previous reference, it may be used to point out an object the identity of which has been previously defined in the context. Plus the predicate nominative singular subject a(martia, translated “Is the law sin?” The question represents the believer’s failure to rightly divide the Word of truth, and it also indicates a certain prejudice to dispense with the law as having no value of any kind. The predicate nominative a(martia refers to the principle of sin here and not the sin nature. The law is a gift from God; it is designed by God, an instrument created by God.
“God forbid” – mh genoito. Literally, “Let it not be.” The word for “God” is qeoj, and it is not there in the original. The negative mh denies the idea. Genoito is the aorist active indicative of ginomai. The gnomic aorist is for the certainty of refuting a false allegation. The active voice: the assumption is false. Hence, a false assumption always produces false action. If you don’t think right, you don’t do right. “Let it not be” is an idiom meaning “Emphatically not.”
1. In Romans chapter 6 the writer, the apostle Paul, communicates the fact of retroactive positional truth, namely that the believer is dead to the old sin nature (death is tantamount to divorce). When a divorce occurs between two people they are dead to each other for time and eternity. In Romans 7:1-6 Paul emphasised the believer’s death to the Mosaic law. This is a part of the divorce. Once the advice of the Mosaic law is followed, namely to believe in Jesus Christ, then the divorce has occurred and also there is death to the marriage counsellor.
2. Since both the Mosaic law and the old sin nature are placed in the same category of being dead to the believer a misconception on the part of some has arisen. Paul, in dealing with this misconception, is going to teach some doctrine.
3. Many of the believers in Rome to whom this was originally addressed erroneously assumed that the Mosaic law is evil because it is associated with the old sin nature, failing to pick up the point that it exposes the old sin nature. They assumed that since the old sin nature is evil, and since the law is placed in the same category as the old sin nature connected with the marriage, that the law also is evil.
4. Therefore Paul demonstrates that the law is not evil and not in any way related to the sin nature, except to expose it and to give a solution. Principle: That which exposes or reveals sin is not sin. That which reveals human good is not evil, and that which reveals evil is not evil. In other words, in demonstrating a hopeless marriage the marriage counsellor is not sinful or evil in doing so.
“Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law” – “Nay” is the adversative conjunction a)lla which sets up a contrast between two clauses, and is translated “On the contrary.” Then the aorist active of the verb ginwskw plus the negative o)u. In this phrase Paul is saying there was a time when he was ignorant. All of us were in a state of ignorance. “On the contrary I was not cognisant.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist contemplating the action in its entirety. It takes the occurrence of Paul’s ignorance of the old sin nature and regardless of the duration of that ignorance it gathers it up into one entirety. He could not understand the sin nature until he had some doctrine, the gospel, and the principle being that God the Holy Spirit takes gospel information and makes it real in our souls so that we can believe in Christ. We don’t have to understand the old sin nature for salvation but some time after salvation we discover it. So the constative aorist is used to cover the area of ignorance. The active voice: Paul as the human author produces the action of the verb by learning something. In doing so he is representing us at various stages of growth. The indicative mood is declarative for the fact that we have the reality that Paul worked this out on his own, whereas we have to be taught. The accusative singular direct object of the verb with the definite article refers to what he was ignorant of. Not sin as personal sin but the sin nature—a(martia—as the source of sin, as well as good and evil. The word “but” doesn’t occur here, it is e)i mh, a Greek idiom which means “except.” Plus the prepositional phrase, dia plus the genitive of nomoj, referring to the Mosaic law.
“for I had not known lust” – lust is a system of thought that comes from the body. The OSN is in the body and the brain has programmed all of us to lust, to want something that is forbidden. This is the postpositive conjunctive particle gar used as an explanatory conjunction. It is translated in this case “for instance” because with it is the enclitic particle te. Then the pluperfect active indicative from o)ida is used as an imperfect, so we deal with it as an imperfect rather than a pluperfect. It is the imperfect of duration, indicating ignorance in the past up to the time denoted by the context. The fact that the process in the past time was completed is the implication of the pluperfect used as an imperfect. The active voice: Paul produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative, representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the accusative singular direct object from the noun e)piqumia, with the generic use of the definite article representing a category—the lust pattern of the old sin nature. Lust must have a source, and the source of lust, the old sin nature, is in the body, not the soul.
“except the law had said” – the nominative singular of nomoj with the definite article which indicates previous reference, plus the imperfect active indicative of legw referring to the 10th commandment: “except the law says.” The imperfect tense is the imperfect of duration. The active voice: the law produces the action as the marriage counsellor. The indicative mood: it is a dogmatic reality, a dogmatic statement of fact. The tenth commandment as literally translated from Exodus 20:17. “You shall not lust for your neighbour’s house; you shall not lust for your neighbour’s wife, or his male servant, or his female slave, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything else that belongs to your neighbour.” The tenth commandment not only deals with the subject of lust but it emphasises the importance of human freedom in terms of property, privacy, and modus vivendi. In other words, you have a right to your privacy, your property, to a way of life that suits you.
“Thou shalt not covet” – the negative o)uk which denies the reality of the alleged fact, used here as a negative of prohibition with the future active indicative of e)piqumew which means to lust. This is an imperative future tense in which the future tense expresses a command. The active voice: the reader of the law produces the action. The indicative mood is potential.
Translation: “Therefore to what conclusion are we forced? Is the law sin? Definitely not. On the contrary, I was not cognisant of the sin nature, except through the law: for instance, I did not understand the lust pattern, except the law kept on saying, You will not lust.”
1. Lust implies origin or source. It isn’t the origin or source, it implies an origin or a source.
2. Since lust is prohibited by the 10th commandment the obvious conclusion is that trends of the old sin nature are to be restrained or inhibited.
3. The first nine commandments in the Decalogue are obviously overt, while the 10th commandment obviously is the missing link between the source [OSN] and the actual sin or function of sin, good, evil.
4. The genetically formed old sin nature constantly has desires which are inordinate. The old sin nature throws out impulses. Some of them are directed toward good, some toward evil, some toward sin.
5. The old sin nature desires what belongs to others, whether people, property, possessions, authority, power, recognition, or approbation.
6. Having discovered lust through the law, the marriage counsellor, Paul became cognisant of the first marriage to the old sin nature. He became aware of the fact that it occurred at birth.
7. Lust is the link between sin and its origin, the old sin nature.
8. Lust is the link between human good and its origin, the old sin nature.
9. Lust is the link between evil and its origin, the old sin nature.
Verse 8 – “But sin, taking occasion by the commandments.” The postpositive conjunctive particle de is used to connect two clauses where some contrast is intended. There is a contrast here and so it is translated as an adversative conjunction, “But.” Plus the nominative singular subject from a(martia, referring to the old sin nature, with the definite article to denote a previous reference. This is, again, a reference to the old sin nature as the sovereign of human life ruling through spiritual death. Then the aorist active participle from the verb lambanw which means to take or to grasp. The aorist tense is a dramatic aorist which states the present reality with the certitude of a past event. Obviously this is an idiom and it is an idiom device for emphasis. It is used for a state which has just been realised, or a result which has just been accomplished or on the point of being accomplished. The active voice: the sin nature produces the action of the verb. The participle is circumstantial. With this is the object of the participle, the accusative singular direct object of a)formh. It means the starting point, the base of operation for an expedition. It also connotes the resources which are needed to carry out an undertaking and therefore it is often translated “capital.” Generally the word connotes an occasion, a pretext, or an opportunity for something. “But the sin nature, having taken the opportunity.” Plus the prepositional phrase dia with the genitive of e)ntolh—“through the commandment.” It refers to the tenth commandment.[1]
“wrought in me all manner of concupiscence” – the aorist middle indicative of katergazomai means to achieve, to accomplish, to bring about, produce, create. We translate “produced in me.” But the sin nature, having grasped the opportunity through the commandment, produced in me.” In other words, first of all you see the commandment that you are not supposed to lust. Then the next thing you do is go out of your own free will and you lust. So there is the grasping of the opportunity. The aorist tense is the culminative aorist viewing the function of the old sin nature in its entirety but emphasising the existing results of the lust. The middle voice: deponent verb, middle in form but active in meaning. The old sin nature produces the action. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the prepositional phrase for “in me,” e)n plus the locative singular of e)gw. Paul is using himself as a representative. This was his experience in the past but he is now a mature believer under the ministry of the Spirit writing these things, using himself as the representative. He is personalising the doctrine. Before we knew that commandment we lusted—before cognisance. Now, after cognisance we still lust, only now we know what we are doing. We did it before because we wanted to; we do it now because we want to. But we know what we are doing now and we know that there is something inside of us producing this. Paul is presenting the battle of the two husbands. Lust is the missing link between all sin, but it is not just sin, it also applies to good and evil. Lust is the motivator of the volition to follow the old sin nature. Next we have the accusative feminine singular from the adjective paj, plus e)piqumia—“every category of lust.” “But the sin nature, having grasped the opportunity through the commandment [10th commandment], produced in me every category of lust.”
1. The old sin nature used the prohibition of the 10th commandment to assert its authority over mankind through sponsoring disobedience to the 10th commandment. All corruption comes from this principle.
2. The law as a marriage counsellor says to mankind, Do not lust. But the first husband, the old sin nature says, Lust in every category.
3. The law, by prohibiting lust, was a good marriage counsellor.
4. The husband, the old sin nature, by demanding lust was an evil husband ruling through spiritual death.
5. Every category of lust refers to the trends of the first husband, the old sin nature. Lust in the trend toward sin includes covetousness, lasciviousness, sanguinary lust, hence killer lust.
6. Lust in the trend toward good and evil includes approbation lust, power lust, immolation to a guilt complex.
7. The old sin nature indwells the body, being genetically formed in the cell structure of the human body, including the brain.
8. The old sin nature is aggressive and belligerent, and the law commands to cease and desist from lust.
9. Using the 10th commandment as an opportunity to flaunt its sovereignty over life the old sin nature produces in the human being every category of lust.
10. Therefore, the old sin nature uses the 10th commandment to exercise its authority over human life through the function of lust.
11. The sin nature is the first husband impregnating mankind with lust. The law in the 10th commandment says, You will not lust. The old sin nature says, You will lust. The Mosaic law defines the relationship with the old sin nature as a bad marriage, a marriage which has resulted in spiritual death from the moment of birth.[2]
“For without the law sin was dead” – the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar, plus the adverb xwrij used as an improper preposition, followed by the genitive singular from nomoj. Translation: “For apart from the law.” Then the phrase a(martia nekroj—“sin was dead”; a(martia in the singular referring to the old sin nature, the first husband from birth through the real imputation of Adam’s original sin to the genetically formed old sin nature. There is an affinity between Adam’s sin and the sin nature. Adam’s original transgression of cognisance is the origin of the old sin nature and the basis for its transmission in the perpetuation of the human race. With this is the present active indicative from e)imi supplied, and then the predicate nominative feminine singular from the adjective nekroj, used here in the sense of being unknown. It does not mean death here, it means unknown. Death is used literally for physical death, but death is used figuratively for retroactive positional truth or divorce. Death is used for carnality, and death is now used for ignorance. What you do not know you are dead to.
1. You cannot solve a problem until you are aware that there is a problem.
2. The sin nature was dead in the sense of being unknown as a problem.
3. The Mosaic law and the 10th commandment caused mankind to become cognisant of the problem of the old sin nature and spiritual death.
4. Paul discovered that his spiritual death came from within him, not from any sin he was committing. The OSN resided in his body from birth.
5. Overt sin and the trend toward sin is the result of having the old sin nature, not the means.
6. The old sin nature, not the Mosaic law, is the culprit.
Translation: “But the sin nature, having seized the opportunity through the commandment, produced in me every category of lust. For apart from the law the sin nature is dead [unknown].”
1. Paul, like all of us, acquired the old sin nature at birth.
2. Paul, however, was ignorant of the marriage or the presence of the old sin nature until the law revealed it.
3. When Paul’s ignorance was dispelled by the law he became aware of the residence of the old sin nature and the resultant problem of spiritual death.
4. You cannot solve a problem until you are aware of that problem.
5. The two real imputations at physical birth are unknown to all of us when we are born and for a long time thereafter.
6. Ignorance must be replaced with cognisance. This can only occur in two categories: #1, the communication of the Mosaic law to the unbeliever; #2, the communication of pertinent Bible doctrine to the believer, understood through the teaching ministry of God the Holy Spirit.
7. This is why the Mosaic law is the marriage counsellor of the first marriage and the Holy Spirit is the marriage counsellor of the second marriage.
8. Both marriage counsellors are perfect. One marriage counsellor is from God, the other is God.
9. The law is limited to counselling the first marriage because its content deals with the old sin nature, its function of lust, its trends toward sin, good and evil. Also, the law presents the solution. The law presents the gospel as the solution to spiritual death of the first marriage.
Verse 9 – “For I was alive without the law once.” The postpositive conjunctive particle de is used as a transitional particle here. With it is the nominative singular personal pronoun e)gw, meaning “I,” and it is in the proleptic position which gives it very strong emphasis, plus the imperfect active indicative of the verb zaw—“Now I live.” The imperfect tense is the imperfect of duration which contemplates the process of having gone on in the past up to the time denoted by the context, but without any necessary inference as to whether or not the process is completed. In other words, for Paul he understands, for others who are learning, not yet. This is strong linear aktionsart in past time but as yet no meaning is conveyed. The active voice: the human writer, Paul, uses himself as the illustration. The indicative mod is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of absolute reality. Then an adverb used as an improper preposition, xwrij plus the genitive, and the object of the preposition, nomoj—“apart from the law.” This is followed by the enclitic particle of time, pote, referring to some time in the past. It can be translated “formerly” or “once,” or better, “at one time.” Translation: “Now at one time I lived apart from the law.” That means to live under the tyranny of the first husband, to live under spiritual death, to be ruled by the old sin nature as the sovereign of human life, and not having any awareness of the problem until the Mosaic law presented it.
1. This is a reference to the Mosaic law in the role of the marriage counsellor of the first marriage. Paul, the human author, knew the law backwards and forwards.
2. The marriage which produced spiritual death occurred through the real imputation of Adam’s original sin to the genetically formed old sin nature. To discover the existence of the old sin nature in Paul’s day was quite a problem because the New Testament canon was not yet written. While the Old Testament canon does teach the old sin nature (David taught it in Psalm 51) it is very difficult for the unbeliever to understand the existence of the old sin nature and many other things related to spiritual phenomena. So when the 10th commandment came into focus—“Thou shalt not lust”—that is how Paul went from his personal sins to the lust behind them, to the source of that lust which was the old sin nature.
3. While spiritually dead from this imputation mankind is not aware of the fact.
4. Paul was aware of his life from the real imputation of life but he was ignorant of spiritual death or the second imputation that occurred at birth.
5. “Apart from the law” refers to the fact that awareness of the first husband, the old sin nature, did not exist until Paul read and understood the implication of the 10th commandment.
6. This also explains the true meaning of the adjective substantive nekroj, the word “dead” [unknown] which is the last word of the previous verse. Apart from the law the old sin nature is unknown. If you don’t understand something you are dead to it.
“but when the commandment came” – the enclitic particle de again, used to connect this clause with the previous one, and there is a contrast implied, therefore translated “but.” Now follows a genitive absolute in which there is a genitive noun or pronoun form with the participle and the genitive is the subject of the participle, and it is not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence. It does not have to jibe with the cases of other words in the sentence. In the genitive absolute it starts out with the genitive singular from e)ntolh, the word for commandment. While it is in the genitive case it is the subject of the participle. The definite article denotes a previous reference to the 10th commandment. Plus the aorist active participle of e)rxomai, which means to come. The aorist tense is a dramatic aorist, it states the present reality with the certitude of a past event. This is an idiom, a device for emphasis, often used for a state which has just been realised or the result of what has been accomplished. The active voice: the 10th commandment produces the action of the verb. The participle is temporal and therefore is translated “but when the tenth commandment came,” i.e. came into my consciousness and became e)pignwsij.
“sin revived, and I died” – the nominative singular subject from a(martia for the sin nature or the principle of sin, plus the generic use of the definite article to set up the old sin nature as a category—“the sin nature.” The word “revived” is a bad translation. This is the aorist active indicative of a)nezaw [a)na = again; zaw = to live], come to mean to come to life again, to become alive, to spring into life, to wake up, to come back to life. It also means to take on fresh life or fresh energy and it means to become invigorated—“the sin nature became invigorated.” In other words, the discovery of the existence of the old sin nature doesn’t stop sin. The sin nature became invigorated or became much more active. The compound a)nezaw is not found in either Classical Greek or in the Septuagint. In Revelation 20:5 a)nazaw is used for resurrection from the dead, as well as for the resurrection of Christ in Revelation 14:9. So the word was not coined by Paul. The real meaning in this context is invigoration, not resurrection. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety, including cognisance of the 10th commandment, awareness of the lust pattern, cognisance of the origin of lust, the old sin nature, and therefore awareness of the bad marriage and therefore involved in it more than ever. The active voice: the first husband, the old sin nature produces the action of the verb—invigoration of activation. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Once you become aware of the first husband the activity is speeded up.
1. All human beings pass through a state of innocence based on ignorance.
2. This passage teaches that innocence is a state of ignorance, while death or guilt is a state of cognisance.
3. Man in the garden was not ignorant, and perfect. He was not innocent, however. Innocence implies ignorance and man in the garden was not ignorant of God, of the prohibition, of what God had provided, of the contract he had with God—a day at a time. He was not innocent but he was perfect. Man outside the garden under the lordship of the old sin nature from birth may be innocent because he is not aware of the real imputation, but he is also not perfect.
4. However, cognisance of the 10th commandment leads to awareness of the source of lust, the old sin nature.
5. Awareness of the sin nature activates and invigorates the old sin nature in the sphere of lust.
6. This activation and invigoration causes mankind to realise that he has a problem—the existence of a bad marriage under the status quo of spiritual death.
7. Mankind’s marriage to the old sin nature is spiritual death from birth.
8. Therefore the law acts as a marriage counsellor, teaching both the bad marriage and the solution in salvation adjustment to the justice of God.
9. Lust, taught in the 10th commandment, is the link between the source [OSN] and the action of the OSN in sin, good, and evil.
10. By understanding lust one begins to understand the existence of the OSN and mankind’s status—spiritual death.
11. Awareness of the function of the old sin nature results in awareness of spiritual death.
“and I died” – the connective use of the postpositive conjunctive particle de, and the nominative singular personal pronoun e)gw which refers to Paul, the human
author, who states the experience of every person in the human race. Therefore he is acting as a representative of the human race as he writes. Plus the aorist active indicative of a)poqnhskw. The culminative aorist views the event in its entirety—cognisance of the 10th commandment—but regards it from the viewpoint of the results—awareness of spiritual death, awareness of condemnation from birth. When he said “I died” he is actually saying “I realised I was dead.” He was dead all the time spiritually; now he is aware of it. The active voice: Paul, the human writer, uses himself to represent the human race. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Paul became aware of the true state of things. The Mosaic law had fulfilled its function as the marriage counsellor making Paul aware of the true state of spiritual death under the old sin nature.
Translation: “Now at one time I lived apart from the law: but when the tenth commandment came, the sin nature was activated and invigorated, and I realised I was spiritually dead.”
1. You have to understand that you have a problem before you can reach a solution. Awareness of the problem leads to cognisance of the solution.
2. The Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor made Paul aware of the problem so that he could accept the solution, namely salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.
3. Like all of us Paul was spiritually dead from birth. That is the problem. The imputation of human life to the soul was accompanied by the imputation of Adam’s original sin to the genetically formed old sin nature.
4. There is no correct solution until the problem is understood.
5. Paul did not become dead when he understood the 10th commandment, he became aware of spiritual death which had existed from birth.
6. Again, this emphasises the Mosaic law as the marriage counsellor of the first marriage, bringing cognisance of the problem and pointing to the solution.
7. There’s nothing wrong with the marriage counsellor, the law is perfect.
8. Everything is wrong with the first husband, the old sin nature, and the spiritual death this marriage his marriage to mankind produces.
9. Cognisance, then, of the 10th commandment caused Paul to become aware of the fact that spiritual death originated from within himself rather than through some overt act of sin or good or evil.
10. Only one sin condemns us from birth: Adam’s original sin imputed to the genetically formed old sin nature.
11. Hence the old sin nature is the real culprit.
12. The Mosaic dispelled Paul’s ignorance regarding the first husband and resultant spiritual death. Therefore, awareness of the problem precedes awareness of the correct solution taught on Codex #2 of the Mosaic law.
Verse 10 – “And the commandment, which was ordained to life.” The connective kai and the nominative singular of the subject e)ntolh with the definite
article used as a demonstrative pronoun to call attention with special emphasis to Codex #2—“And that commandment.” Codex #1 demonstrates condemnation. It tells us about human life being imputed at birth to the soul, about Adam’s original sin being imputed to the old sin nature. Then Codex #1 takes the manifestations of that OSN—trends toward sin, toward good, and toward evil. It sets up prohibitions against these things because sin, good and evil are not only against God but they are also destructive of freedom which must be the environment for evangelism. So when sins are mentioned in the ten commandments they are sins all right but they are mentioned in connection with the subject, they destroy freedom. Next is the nominative singular feminine from the relative pronoun o(j, translated “which.” Then an insertion at this point. The elliptical style of this verse demands the communication or revelation verb, such as deiknumi, and so we translate “And that commandment which points.” Plus the prepositional phrase, the object of the pointing, e)ij plus the accusative of zwh—“to life,” eternal life from Codex #2. This is a reference to the Levitical offerings which portray Christ bearing our sins on the cross, a judicial imputation from God. All of our personal sins were collected and imputed to Christ on the cross and then judged. Or the holy days: “Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us.” Or the tabernacle and its various articles of furniture and the modus operandi of the Levitical priesthood. All of these things taught various aspects of the work of Christ on the cross—redemption, reconciliation, propitiation, imputation, justification.
“I found to be unto death” – the aorist passive indicative of e(uriskw which means to discover, to recognise, to find. It is used for an intellectual discovery based on reflection, observation, examination or investigation. We translate, “the same was discovered.” The aorist tense is a constative aorist for an action extended over a period of time. The action is the studying of the Mosaic law gathered up into one entirety: everything in Codex #1 dealing with the problem, everything in Codex #2 dealing with the solution. It was studied over a period of time until it fell in place. The passive voice: the subject receives the action of the verb. The apostle Paul received the action of the verb through diligent study of Codex #2. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the word moi which is the instrumental of agency from the personal pronoun e)gw, and it should be translated “by me.” Again, we have to insert deiknumi because we have e)ij as the preposition of pointing plus the accusative singular of qanatoj—the spiritual death of Codex #1. Plus the attributive use of the intensive pronoun a)utoj, translated here “the same.” This is from the nominative, not the dative case, and it refers to the Mosaic law.
Translation: “And that commandment, which points to [eternal] life, the same was discovered by me, pointing to death [Codex #1].”
Verse 11 – “For sin, taking occasion by the commandment.” This begins with the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar and the nominative singular subject a(martia, the sin nature, referring to the first husband. “Taking occasion by the commandment” is, again, having grasped or having seized the opportunity. This is the aorist active participle from the verb lambanw, meaning to grasp or to seize. This is a dramatic aorist tense which states a present reality with the certitude of a past event. This idiom is a device for emphasis and is used for a state which has just been realised, a result which has just been accomplished or on the point of being accomplished. The active voice: the sin nature produces the action of the verb. The participle is circumstantial. With this is the accusative singular direct object from the noun a)formh, which means the starting point, the base of operations for an expedition. It also connotes the resources needed to carry out an undertaking, hence it is used quite frequently in the ancient Greek for capital. “For the sin nature, having seized the opportunity.” The word for capital is also the word for opportunity in the Greek. Inside of each one of us is the old sin nature which never loses its aggressiveness until the day that we are separated from it by physical death or the possibility of the Rapture. What was the opportunity? Learning what the sin nature was. Learning about lust—“by the commandment,” the preposition dia plus the genitive of e)ntolh, correctly translated “through the commandment.” This is a reference to Codex #1 which has taught us about lust as the connecting link between the old sin nature and its function: sin, good, and evil. The commandment here refers to the 10th commandment, “You will not lust.”
1. The old sin used the prohibition, You will not lust, to assert its authority over mankind through sponsoring disobedience, sponsoring revolt against the tenth commandment.
2. The law as a marriage counsellor to mankind, You will not lust.
3. But the first husband, the old sin nature counters, Lust in every category.
4. The Mosaic law by prohibiting lust is a good marriage counsellor, it did its job properly.
5. The first husband by demanding lust was a terrible husband, ruling through spiritual death. Every category of lust refers to the first husband, the trends of the old sin nature.
6. For example, the trend toward sin. Lust in this area includes covetousness, lasciviousness, killer lust, the get even syndrome, or I have to prove myself syndrome.
7. For example, the trend toward good and evil. Lust includes approbation lust, power lust, immolation lust to assuage the guilt complex.
8. The OSN indwells the body, being genetically formed in the cell structure, including the brain which is programmed for human viewpoint until it is reprogrammed.
9. The OSN is belligerent and aggressive when the Mosaic law commands to cease and desist from lust.
When you do something in ignorance there is no corruption because you are doing something that is wrong, nevertheless you are ignorant and it is not a corrupting principle. But once you know that you shouldn’t then you not only do that which is wrong but you have added corruption to it. Illustration: You see a sign: Don’t step on the grass. It immediately arouses the corruption in you and you deliberately step on the grass. This is a symptom of being corrupted, and you are corrupted by your own power, authority, to do something that is forbidden. So once you understand the issue and you do it anyway you are now being corrupted in that issue, and corrupted away from the true principles of authority. So to do it when you know it is worse because of the rejection of authority. So using the 10th commandment as an opportunity to flaunt human sovereignty over life the old sin nature produces in the human being every category of lust, and it matures into sin, good, and evil. Hence, the OSN uses the 10th commandment to exercise its authority in human life, and it succeeds thereby destroying those principles which kleep us and protect us under establishment authority.
“deceived me” – the aorist active indicative of e)capataw means to deceive or to cheat. It was used for the serpent’s deception in the garden—2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:14. The constative aorist contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. The active voice: the old sin nature inside of each one of us not only deceives us but keeps us out of normal establishment blessing in life. We consider what we do more important than the authority which forbids it. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. With this is the accusative singular direct object from the personal pronoun e)gw—“me.”
1. The deception includes the fact that marriage to the sin nature from physical birth means spiritual death to God.
2. Before man can be alive to God he must be dead or divorced from the old sin nature who still is in us and very much alive.
3. This is accomplished at salvation through the baptism of the Holy Spirit and retroactive positional truth.
4. Man is deceived by the old sin nature’s trends toward good and evil into the delusion that the old sin nature can actually produce what is pleasing to God.
5. Hence, the old sin nature whose function is good and evil deludes the human race into thinking that lust and gratification of that lust is justifiable.
6. This is the foundation for every system of good and evil, including socialism, the welfare state, communism, plus all of the Marxist theories.
7. While man thinks that he is accomplishing the greater good for the greater number he is in reality creating evil to satisfy his lust pattern and to serve Satan as the ruler of this world.
8. This religious rationalism is the basis for the terrible evils which have come into existence in contemporary history.
9. Human good is a deception, a delusion, a rationalisation, the function of the lust pattern of the old sin nature.
The tenth commandment keeps on warning, You will not lust. But the old sin nature counters: Lust is justifiable to provide a new world order. Even the thought
of a new world order is a system of lust in the field of good and evil. The new world order of socialism, Marxism, communism, is inspired by Satan himself as the ruler of this world and is desirable modus operandi for the old sin nature as the ruler of human life.
“and by it slew me” – the connective use of the conjunction kai, and the prepositional phrase dia plus the genitive of the intensive pronoun a)utoj: “and through the same.” This is the attributive use of the intensive pronoun, i.e. through the same tenth commandment. Plus the aorist active indicative from the verb a)pokteinw, which means to kill a sacrifice, used for depriving a person of either natural life or spiritual life. Here it means to destroy and to annihilate. The aorist tense is a constative aorist and it gathers together into one entirety the function of the old sin nature in breaking through the authority of the Mosaic law to set up a rationalisation. The old sin nature misrepresents spiritual death as hopeless and without solution, and that is the greatest issue in history. Man always thinks there is a solution to everything apart from God, for that is the delusion set up by the old sin nature. The active voice: the old sin nature distorting the 10th commandment, rejecting divine authority, continues to rule through spiritual death. The OSN is the corrupting power in life. The indicative mood is the reality of the old sin nature ruling through spiritual death from physical birth. The sovereignty over human life is established as a false authority through the imputation of Adam’s sin to the genetically formed old sin nature. This authority operates as the evil authority in contrast to divine authority.
1. The old sin nature misrepresents spiritual death as hopeless without solution.
2. The old sin nature represents the justice of God as the enemy of the human race, when in reality the justice of God is the only source of blessing for the human race through first, condemnation, and then blessing through grace.
3. Condemnation must precede justification and salvation. Without condemnation from the justice of God there can be no justification from the justice of God.
4. Condemnation is necessary for the construction of the grace pipeline at salvation.
5. There was no grace in the human race until first there was condemnation.
6. So the first husband, the OSN, uses the Mosaic law to distort the truth about God and keep the wife, the human race, under its sovereignty.
7. Remember that the old sin nature is the sovereign of human life ruling through spiritual death.
Translation: “For the sin nature, having grasped the opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through the same [10th commandment] killed
me.”
Verse 12 – the law is not the culprit. “Wherefore the law is holy.” The conjunction w(sti introduces an independent clause and an inference from the previous clause, therefore it is translated “Therefore.” The Attic Greek affirmative particle men follows. It is used as an emphatic conjunction, translated “In fact therefore.” Then the subject, the nominative singular of nomoj, the Mosaic law, the marriage counsellor of the first marriage. A better translation: “As a matter of fact, therefore, the law.” Then the verb to be understood, and the predicate nominative singular of a(gioj, “holy.” That which reveals the existence of the old sin nature is not sin itself.
“and the commandment” – the adjunctive use of the conjunction kai should be translated “also.” Then the nominative singular subject e)ntolh, used for Codex #1 and specifically the 10th commandment of Exodus 20:17. This is a reference to the manner in which Paul discovered the existence of the old sin nature.
Then comes three predicate nominatives, translated “holy, and just, and good.” The first, a(gioj again, has a slightly different meaning. It emphasises the fact that the law and the 10th commandment originates from God. God is perfect, therefore the law is perfect. The law has been set aside by God in order to fulfil a definite objective. It is not a panacea, it is designed for a specialised objective. The use of the word “holy” the second time refers to the fact that it is perfect within the framework of its designed function. Then a predicate nominative singular from dikaioj, meaning justice as a characteristic of a judge, or righteousness. It means perfect justice. So we have the fact that the commandment is holy and perfect justice, i.e. the commandment is fair, the law is fair. The Mosaic law is a system of integrity. The law comes from God. God is integrity, and whatever comes from God reflects that integrity but it reflects that integrity in a limited scale. The purpose of a flashlight is not to throw light in all directions. The law has a limited purpose and you cannot use it for all directions when it is only designed to go in one direction. One of those directions is perfect justice, and our understanding of the Mosaic law makes us realise our lack of God’s righteousness, perfect justice and integrity. Next is the predicate nominative from a)gaqoj, which is good of intrinsic value, the good, the absolute good. These are three characteristics of the 10th commandment as a part of the Mosaic law. These characteristics not only apply to the 10th commandment but they apply to the entire law.
Translation: “As a matter of fact, therefore, the law is holy, also the commandment [10th] is holy, and perfect justice, and absolute good.”
Principle
1. This verse concludes that the law is not the culprit. The law is the marriage counsellor of the first marriage.
2. There is nothing wrong with the marriage counsellor in pointing out a bad marriage.
3. In fact, the law does a perfect job both in stating the problem and in pointing out the solution—Codex #2.
4. Because the law as a marriage counsellor points out the problem of spiritual death it does not follow that the law is the sponsorer of spiritual death. It is not the law who is condemning, it is God who is condemning. The law is His instrument of condemnation.
5. Because the law as a marriage counsellor points out that the first husband is sinful it does not follow that the law is sinful.
6. In fact, man is sinful because he possesses the sin nature from birth. Man is spiritually dead because Adam’s sin is imputed to that sin nature.
7. It is the first husband, the old sin nature, that is sinful, not the Mosaic law functioning as the marriage counsellor.
8. Man is sinful because he possesses the old sin nature, not because the law says he is sinful—Romans 3:20.
9. The law is not sinful because it exposes the old sin nature, or personal sin. The law fulfils its purpose perfectly in revealing both the problem and the solution.
Verse 13 – the true ministry of the law as a marriage counsellor. “Was then that which is good made death unto me?” The inferential conjunction o)un denotes the introduction of the inference. It is generally translated “therefore.” The nominative neuter singular of the adjective a)gaqoj, picking it up from the end of the last verse: the law is absolute or intrinsic good. Then the dative singular indirect object from the personal pronoun e)gw, indicating the one in whose interest the Mosaic law acts as a marriage counsellor—the unbeliever married to the old sin nature. “Therefore the good to me.” The Mosaic law is good to us because it shows us we have a problem as an unbeliever. It is good to us in that it points out to us that we are in the status quo of spiritual death, the marriage to the old sin nature. Next is the aorist active indicative of ginomai, translated “did it become.” This is a constative aorist tense, it gathers into one entirety the action of the verb. The active voice: the question elating to the Mosaic law produces the action. The indicative mood is the interrogative indicative in which the viewpoint of reality is implied by a fact enquired about. Plus the predicate nominative singular qanatoj for spiritual death. “Therefore the good to me, did it become death?”
A)gaqoj refers to the function of the Mosaic law as a marriage counsellor in the first marriage. A)gaqoj is the good, the intrinsic good. The Mosaic law reveals the problem of spiritual death in the marriage to the old sin nature at birth, plus the solution in the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross. The rhetorical question, “Therefore the good to me, did it become death?” is designed to reflect the thinking of those who distort the teaching of the apostle Paul. The rhetorical question is a debater’s technique for anticipating and refuting the erroneous conclusions made from listening to this teaching. The word qanatoj refers to spiritual death here which is the status quo of the first marriage to the old sin nature at birth. Obviously then, the intrinsic good in the Mosaic law did not become death to mankind. Something that is intrinsically good cannot suddenly become something that is evil. Good can be turned into evil but not intrinsic good. The function of the Mosaic law is to reveal the problem and to reveal the solution.
“God forbid” – mh genoito. The aorist tense is a gnomic aorist for the certainty of refuting the false allegation. The active voice: the assumption is false, hence the false assumption produces the action of the verb of being rejected. The optative is a voluntative optative for the expression of a negative wish. Literally, “May it not come to pass,” comes to be a Greek idiom which means “Definitely not” or “Emphatically not.” The emphatic denial of the debater’s question is actually a teaching device handling a misconception by the communication of correct doctrine.
“But sin, that it might appear sin” – the issue which refutes the erroneous conception. The adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast between the two clauses. Plus the nominative singular subject which is the old sin nature, the real culprit, a(martia in the singular, plus the definite article to denote a previous reference in the context—“But the sin nature.” Then the conjunction i(na for a final clause which has an aim, a goal, a purpose or objective. Plus the aorist passive subjunctive of fanhrow, meaning to demonstrate, to show, or to reveal. The aorist is a culminative aorist viewing the exposure of the sin nature in its entirety but regarding it from the viewpoint of existing results. The OSN has to be exposed. The existing results: adjustment to the justice of God—first, salvation, then rebound, and eventually maturity adjustment to the justice of God which is the purpose for continuing us, keeping us in this life. We are here for that final objective. The passive voice of fanhrow: the subject receives the action of the verb, exposure for what it is, sinfulness of the culprit. The subjunctive mood is a potential subjunctive used with the purpose or the objective conjunction to denote a future reference qualified by the element of contingency. “But the sin nature, in order that it might be revealed.” Then an independent nominative, the same word, a(martia. This time it has a slightly different meaning because it is describing itself for what it is—“as sin.”
Next in the Greek is the phrase dia tou a)gaqou, translated “through the [intrinsic] good.” The good with the definite article refers to the function of the Mosaic law which exposes the old sin nature as sinful. In other words, the good exposes the bad but the good is not bad because it exposes the bad as bad.
“working death in me” – the present middle participle of katergazomai, which means to achieve, to accomplish, to produce, to bring about, to prepare someone for something. Here it means to work out, to do that from which something results, to make something already in existence a reality—“making spiritual death a reality to me.” The present tense of duration denotes what has begun in the past—revelation from the Mosaic law—and continues into the present time. The law keeps telling the human race it has a problem—the old sin nature, spiritual death. The law also presents the solution in Codex #2 through the work of Christ. The middle voice of the deponent verb is translated like an active voice. The Mosaic law produces the action of the verb, this is the function of the marriage counsellor to analyse the problem and communicate the solution. The participle is circumstantial and translated as a finite verb for clarification. “Therefore the good to me, did it become spiritual death? Definitely not. But the sin nature, in order that it might be exposed through the good made spiritual death a reality to me.” “To me” is the dative singular indirect object from the personal pronoun e)gw.
“that sin” – i(na and the nominative singular subject a(martia for the old sin nature: “in order that the sin nature.”
“by the commandment might become exceeding sinful” – the aorist active subjunctive of ginomai, meaning to become. This is a dramatic aorist used for stating a present reality with the certitude of a past event. In other words, an idiom which is a device for emphasis in the Greek. It is commonly used for a status quo which has just been revealed, namely spiritual death is the result of the marriage to the first husband, the old sin nature. The active voice: the old sin nature produces the action of the verb. The subjunctive mood is the potential subjunctive with i(na implying purpose qualified by the element of contingency. Plus the prepositional phrase kata plus the accusative of u(perbolh which means extreme. It is translated literally, “according to the extreme,” meaning “utterly.” Then once more a different word for the predicate nominative, an adjective a(martwloj which means “sinful.” Utter sinfulness of the old sin nature is revealed by the Mosaic law. Then dia plus the ablative of e)ntolh—“by the commandment,” a reference again to the 10th commandment. This is the ablative of means, used in this prepositional phrase because the origin of the means is implied.
Translation: “Therefore the good [Mosaic law] to me, did it become spiritual death? Definitely not. But the sin nature, in order that it might be exposed through the good made spiritual death a reality to me; in order that the sin nature might become utterly sinful by the commandment.”
Summary
1. Personal sin does not condemn the human race.
2. Only one sin condemns the human race: Adam’s original transgression in the garden.
3. This original sin of Adam is imputed to each one of us at birth.
4. Here a contrast begins. Human life is imputed to its home, the divinely-prepared soul, while Adam’s original sin is imputed to its genetically-prepared home, the old sin nature.
5. Personal sin, such as lust sins, is the result of having the old sin nature, but not the means of condemnation from the justice of God.
6. Personal sin is a manifestation of the old sin nature’s sovereignty over human life, but not the means of condemnation from the justice of God.
7. Therefore the true ministry of the Mosaic law, Codex #1, is to reveal the existence of the old sin nature through the perfect norms and standards of God stated in Codex #1.
8. Therefore there is nothing wrong with the marriage counsellor, the Mosaic law which is perfect and reveals perfect standards of God’s righteousness.
9. These standards reveal both the sinfulness of the old sin nature and the status produced by the old sin nature—spiritual death.
10. Spiritual death existed before the Mosaic law, but the Mosaic law revealed spiritual death.
Verse 14 – a contrast between the marriage counsellor and the wife. “For we know that the law is spiritual” – the inferential use of the conjunctive particle gar, translated “certainly” or “consequently.” Plus the perfect o)ida used as a present active indicative for cognisance. The form is perfect but it is used as a present tense. The pluperfect of this form is used as an imperfect and it represents something already resident in the right lobe. The conjunction o(ti is used for whatever that cognisance is. It merely introduces quotation marks or presents the content of the cognisance. The subject of cognisance is the nominative singular of nomoj, the law. With it is the generic use of the definite article comprehending the Mosaic law as a completely separate category from all other categories. Plus the present active indicative of the verb to be, e)imi. The present tense of the verb is a static present, it represents a condition which perpetually exists and must be taken for granted as a fact. The active voice: the Mosaic law produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of absolute reality. With it is a predicate nominative, the adjective is pneumatikoj, meaning “spiritual.” “Certainly we know that the law is spiritual.”
Principle
1. The law is spiritual because it comes from God and fulfils the divine purpose in human history related to the angelic conflict.
2. The law is a counsellor of the first marriage to the old sin nature. The law is perfect because it perfectly exposes the old sin nature.
3. The law functions in revealing also the solution. The law is perfect because everything in Codex #2 revealing Christ is perfect and fulfils this objective within the framework of Israel and those who understand Israel.
4. At this point comes a great shift of emphasis. Up to this point the emphasis has been on the culprit, the old sin nature. But because of the transition from the first marriage to the second marriage a new emphasis is placed on the wife who is also the culprit in the first marriage, and potentially a culprit in the second marriage.
“but I am carnal” – the postpositive conjunctive particle de used as an adversative conjunction. It sets up a contrast between the previous clause and this one. The nominative singular subject from the personal pronoun e)gw is in the proleptic position, i.e. it precedes the conjunction; the conjunction is postpositive. This emphasises a transition from the old sin nature husband as the culprit to the wife of the second marriage, the believer as the culprit—“But I.” Plus the present active indicative from e)imi, the verb to be. The present tense is tendencial, used for an action which is purposed or attempted but not actually taking place at the moment. It represents the idea of that which is intended or inclined to occur. So when Paul says, “I am carnal” he is not speaking for himself, he is speaking about the problem for all believers. The tendencial present says in effect, he is not carnal. (A carnal believer cannot write Scripture). Yet, this is in the present tense so obviously he is dealing with a principle and not giving any personal confession. The active voice: Paul as the human author represents the common experience of believers after salvation. The indicative mood is a potential indicative of impulse and condition. The predicate nominative which follows is an adjective, sarkinoj, “fleshly,” belonging to the realm of the flesh. It is a reference to the believer’s return to the first husband, the old sin nature.
Principle: This is the transition to the great inner conflict, away from the marriage counsellor and away from the culprit, the old sin nature, and now into a new stage of our study. Now the conflict begins between the old sin nature, the first husband, and the wife, the believer.
The believer or the wife of the second marriage [to Christ] returns to the first husband, not in sin as such but staying under the influence of the old sin nature through sin. In other words, rejection of rebound just as reversionism is rejection of GAP. The issue is not the fact that we sin, the issue is the fact that do not avail ourselves of the grace system for getting back into fellowship immediately. Carnality is the failure to use the rebound technique, whereas reversionism is the neglect of Bible doctrine. We now change subject from the function of the Mosaic law, the perfect marriage counsellor, and the culprit, the old sin nature, to the failure of the wife in the second marriage; the second marriage where the husband is perfect and cannot sin, where the marriage counsellor is perfect and cannot sin, and where the only weakness in the second marriage is the believer, referring to each one of us. The old sin nature is still there and still says, Come back. There are three ways in which this is accomplished: 1) sin without rebound, i.e. carnality; 2) reversionism, the function of good and evil; 3) eventually two meet and become reversionism. “I am carnal” – the new culprit is the born again believer.
“sold under sin” – the perfect passive participle from pipraskw, which means to sell or to lead astray. Here it means to be led astray. We can never be sold to the old sin nature because we are in a second marriage, we are married to the Lord Jesus Christ (current positional truth). We can be led astray; we are vulnerable. This word was used from the time of Homer for selling, but also used for selling out, or to be ruined, or to be led astray, and sometimes even to be betrayed. We get our connotation from the Hebrew where pipraskw was used in translating the Septuagint. The Hebrew verb is makar which means to be led astray. The perfect tense is a dramatic perfect, emphasising the completed action of carnality or sinfulness with emphasis on the results of the action, the lordship of the old sin nature. Though married to Christ, the second husband, this is the acceptance of the authority of the old sin nature, in this case through carnality. It can also be through reversionism. The passive voice: the believer receives the action of the verb when he exercises his option for sin. The principle also applies to exercising one’s option for good and evil. The participle is a temporal participle, hence correctly translated “when I have been led astray.” He isn’t carnal now, but at any time he is led astray he is. The same thing is true for all of us. Then the prepositional phrase, u(po [authority] plus the accusative singular of a(martia for the old sin nature—“under the authority of the sin nature.” The only thing that breaks the authority of the sin nature after you sin is rebound.
Translation: “For we know that the law is spiritual. But I am unspiritual, led astray under the authority of the sin nature.”
Principle
1. The temporal participle pipraskw emphasises that the believer is only fleshly when he is led astray by the sin nature with its trends toward sin.
2. This verse emphasises the fact that there is an inner conflict as long as we live in this life. And we all have it.
Verse 15 – “For that which I do I allow not.” The explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar for an explanation as to why the believer is the culprit after salvation, whereas the old sin nature was the culprit before salvation. With it is the nominative neuter singular from the relative pronoun o(j, plus the present middle indicative of the verb katergazomai, which means to achieve, to accomplish, to bring about, to produce. Generally it connotes to work out and finally accomplish, and therefore to achieve. “For what I accomplish.” This is the present tense of duration denoting something that happens in the past with results that continue up to the present time. Hence a description of a carnal believer who has compromised the second marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ by going back under the control of the ex-husband, the old sin nature. The is the middle voice of a deponent verb, therefore it is an active voice. Paul produces the action of the verb and represents the status quo in so doing of the carnal believer. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. It is a reference to the achievement of the second marriage, the Christian way of life, and it is a bona fide accomplishment which is frustrated because of the successful function of the old sin nature. In carnality or reversionism the believer is not achieving spiritual maturity through the daily function of GAP. Remember that carnality is not sinning. Sinning is out of fellowship but it does not become carnality unless you stay out of fellowship. In other words, rebound in a reasonable amount of time resolves the problem of carnality before it gets under way. Carnality is following the trend of the old sin nature, unchecked by the rebound technique. The trend of the old sin nature is not checked by self-determination but by the filling of the Holy Spirit, and the filling of the Spirit is only recovered by rebound. So carnality is staying out of fellowship. Reversionism is the next stage in which the believer gets into good and evil, the other two trends of the old sin nature. Then we have the phrase “I allow not” which is simply the negative adverb o)u plus the present active indicative of ginwskw which means to know—“I do not understand.” The present tense is an aoristic present for punctiliar action in present time. Since the indicative mood has not a distinctive tense for expressing the idea of a present fact without reference to progress the present tense is used. Paul produces the action, representing the status quo of the carnal and the reversionistic believer. The aoristic present sets forth the event as now occurring, hence Paul is assimilating carnality or assimilating reversionism in order to make this very personal. “For what I achieve I do not understand.”
Principle
1. Paul assimilating carnality and reversionism does not understand his lack of spiritual growth, his orientation to the plan of God. He is representing himself as a carnal believer, though it is not a reality in his life.
2. Paul cannot comprehend why he is not advancing to maturity, which is the objective for the believer in time. He cannot comprehend his confusion. He must assimilate carnality and reversionism to the maximum, and carnality and reversionism is a state of confusion and disorientation from the plan of God.
3. He cannot understand why he is not receiving those blessings from the justice of God which are so obviously promised to the mature believer.
4. Paul is not fulfilling the temporal purpose for the imputation of divine righteousness.
5. Divine righteousness imputed is the basis for the justice of God providing the five categories of blessing in maturity. They have not materialised and he says, in effect, Why?
6. Paul is not fulfilling the purpose of the second marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ.
“for what I would, that do I not” – the postpositive conjunctive particle gar is used to express a cause or a reason. It is translated “because.” Then the nominative neuter singular from the relative pronoun o(j, plus the present active indicative of the verb qelw which means a desire, in contrast to lust. It is a legitimate desire based upon motivation of doctrine and the filling of the Spirit. The historical present tense is employed when a past even is viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. So he is going back to those moments after salvation when he wanted to glorify God. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Remember that Paul is acting as the representative of carnality and reversionism to produce the action. Then the nominative plural subject from the immediate demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, which simply means “there things,” and it is a reference to the daily function of GAP under the ministry of the Holy Spirit through which maturity is attained. Plus the present active indicative of prassw, which generally means to practise, but it also means to accomplish, with the negative o)u—“these things I am not accomplishing.” This is a tendencial present tense used for an action which is purposed or attempted or desired but not taking place. The active voice plus the negative represents the fact that the carnal or reversionistic believer, as represented here by Paul, is not accomplishing the objective of phase two. The objective is to advance to maturity. This is a potential indicative of obligation and it points to what is expected in reality, but contingency is introduced because of negative volition toward doctrine and failure to rebound when necessary.
Principle
1. Paul represents himself as resolving to advance spiritually, desiring to please Christ and wishing to take in doctrine in order to achieve the objective.
2. But all these good intentions are neutralised by the machinations of the first husband, the old sin nature, with its trends toward sin, good and evil.
3. The old sin nature can do nothing apart from the volition of the believer.
4. The trend toward sin is quickly solved through the function of the rebound technique. Rebound, when practiced, insulates against carnality.
5. The trend toward good and evil can only be solved by consistent positive volition toward doctrine.
“but what I hate, that do I” – the adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast between what Paul resolves or desires to do as a believer in the second marriage and what he is actually doing in going back to the first husband. The ex-husband is making attractive noises which lure the confused wife back to that miserable relationship of the first marriage. With this is the nominative singular of the relative pronoun o(j, translated “but what.” Then the present active indicative of the verb misew, which means to hate. But it is much stronger than that, it means to detest. It is intensified hate. The present tense is descriptive, indicating what is now going on. It is also known as the pictorial present since its distinctive force is to present to the mind of the reader a picture of events in the process of occurrence. The active voice: the normal attitude of the believer toward the first husband, the old sin nature, is misew, detesting it. The indicative mood is a potential indicative of obligation, since the believer should detest the old sin nature and love the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. Plus the nominative plural subject from the immediate demonstrative pronoun o(utoj—“these things,” and the present active indicative of the verb poiew, “I keep doing.” This is a retroactive progressive present, denoting what has begun in the past and continues into the present time. The active voice: the reversionistic believer produces the action of the verb. Paul as the human author is merely representing the reversionist, though he is not a reversionist at this point. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality.
Translation: “”For what I accomplish I do not understand: because what I desire to do, these things I am not accomplishing; but what I detest, these things I keep on doing.”
Principle #1
1. This is a reference to either sinfulness without rebound or the reaction to that sinfulness which is the production of good, eventuating in evil.
2. Such production is tantamount to the wife in the second marriage returning to the ex-husband, the old sin nature, finding it more attractive than the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
3. The linear aktionsart indicates that the believer is consistent in following the trends of the old sin nature, rather than following the authority of the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
4. Obedience to imputed righteousness demands two things: rebound when necessary, and consistent perception of the Word of God.
Principle #2
1. The verse indicates the successful attack of the first husband in the realm of volition. The culprit is the believer with volition.
2. The OSN has overcome the determination of the believer by leading him into a modus operandi which he does not understand, which he often despises, but nevertheless continues in it—for one obvious reason: neglect of rebound; neglect or rejection of doctrine.
3. Therefore, the attack of the first husband succeeds apart from the believer operating under logistical grace. Separate the believer from items of logistical grace and he has no support against the seductive activities of the ex-husband.
4. This means the use of rebound is necessary in order to be filled with the Spirit. The daily function of GAP also becomes necessary; it is the only way to advance.
Principle #3
1. To do things you do not desire to do and to keep on doing them is an obvious warning of the inner conflict between the two husbands.
2. The first husband is the old sin nature, and though divorced through retroactive positional truth desperately continues his activity inside of every believer. He is trying to seduce the believer under his authority and into the trends of sin, good, and evil.
3. The second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ, is standing by to provide the most fantastic blessings through maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
4. To experientially place yourself under orders to the second husband through the daily function of GAP is to turn away from temporary stimulation and pseudo happiness of the devil’s world into a perfect, temporal and eternal happiness provided by the justice of God in the righteousness of God imputed.
5. There is no way for the believer to break out of the dilemma apart from the filling of the Holy Spirit and the daily function of GAP.
6. Only the filling of the Spirit and Bible doctrine resident in the soul can break the power and the influence of the old sin nature in life.
7. While instant provision for sin is provided through the rebound technique there is no instant or immediate solution to good and evil apart from maximum doctrine resident in the soul.
Verse 16 – “If then I do that which I would not.” The conditional particle e)i introduces the protasis of a first class condition. This is supposition from the viewpoint of reality. Then the postpositive transitional particle de, translated here “now—“Now if.” Plus the present active indicative from the verb poiew. This is a descriptive present for what is now going on: Now of I keep doing.” This is a way of describing linear aktionsart in present time. The active voice: the carnal or reversionistic believer produces the action of the verb under the influence/authority of the ex-husband, the old sin nature. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the standpoint of reality. This is necessary for the protasis of a first class condition. Then the accusative neuter singular direct object from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj for what is comparatively near at hand. The neuter gender here refers to what immediately precedes. “Now if I keep doing this thing.” Plus the nominative neuter singular from the relative pronoun o(j, “which,” referring to the demonstrative pronoun which in turn refers to the dilemma of this verse. Then the present active indicative of qelw plus the negative o)u—“I do not desire.” The present tense is a customary present for what occurs in the status of either carnality or reversionism under the influence of evil. The active voice: the negative o)u indicates the correct attitude of the believer toward the desires of the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. He desires to please the second husband. The indicative mood is declarative, representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. “Now if I keep on doing this thing which I do not desire to do.”
“I consent” – present active indicative from sumfhmi [sun = with; fhmi = to speak], to speak with means to agree, to consent: “I keep agreeing.” This is the perfective present for a fact which comes to be in the past but is emphasised as a present reality. The fact of the correctness or accuracy of the Mosaic law existed in the past and is now emphasised as a present reality. The active voice: the believer produces the action through application of doctrine. The declarative indicative mood is from the standpoint of reality.
“unto the law that it is good” – the instrumental of association with the definite article, and the noun is nomoj, “with the law.” The agreement is followed by a conjunction, o(ti, which gives the content of the concurrence. Plus the implied present tense of e)imi, the verb to be, and the predicate nominative singular from kaloj, which means “good” but it is not like a)gaqoj good. A)gaqoj good is good of intrinsic value, but his is good in the sense of denoting a quality in accordance with a purpose. I has many translations: noble, praiseworthy, advantageous.
Translation: “Now if I keep doing this thing which I do not desire to do, I agree with the law that it is noble.”
1. There must be a standard to break through the gloomy enigma of contradiction in the life of the unbeliever: the old sin nature versus our Lord Jesus Christ; the old sin nature versus the marriage counsellor, the Holy Spirit.
2. This standard is the marriage counsellor of the first marriage, the Mosaic law.
3. Therefore emphasis is placed on Codex #1 which emphasises the problem of the first marriage, and Codex #2 which emphasises the solution to the problem of the first marriage—salvation.
4. Once the solution has been accepted—faith in Christ—then the battle between the two husbands begins. There is no battle as long as there is only one husband, but retroactive positional truth divorces us from the old sin nature, the first husband, and simultaneously marries us to the second husband, current positional truth extrapolated from the baptism of the Spirit.
5. In this battle we have a new marriage counsellor in God the Holy Spirit, but we never disagree with the content of the old marriage counsellor, the Mosaic law. We still recognise the Mosaic law for what it is: from God, perfect, having a perfect design, a limited design in its function but nevertheless a perfect design.
6. This information about sin, good, and evil is still correct, still accurate.
7. Therefore we do not reject the standard of the law under the ministry of the Holy Spirit, but we use these standards to define sin for rebound and to alert us with regard to good and evil as a part of the assault on the Christian life.
1. So when the believer keeps sinning or succumbs to good and evil he recognises the nobility and the advantage of the Mosaic law in defining what he does not desire to do.
2. Hence, the Holy Spirit as the new marriage counsellor uses the standards of the law to define sinfulness for the purpose of rebound and to define good and evil for the purpose of avoiding through separation.
3. In Codex #3 the Mosaic law defines divine principles of establishment which counteract both good and evil.
4. Patriotism is the Christian function under establishment, but socialism and the welfare state is a matter of good and evil (the devil’s policy and the old sin nature’s function).
5. Therefore Codex #3 of the Mosaic law, the establishment part of the code, continues to relate the believer to establishment for separation from the function of good and evil.
6. When the believer sins from his own volition he is doing something incompatible with his new marriage to Christ.
7. Therefore he is doing something he does not desire to do.
8. Therefore, he agrees to the advantage of the law in defining that sin, and he agrees also to the advantage of the law in defining establishment, so that the trends of the old sin nature can be avoided in the power and the filling of the Holy Spirit.
9. Therefore the law is advantageous to the believer even though the Mosaic law is no longer the marriage counsellor.
Verse 17 – “Now then it is no more I that do it.” The first word is the adverb of time, nuni. When this is combined with the postpositive particle de it becomes an idiom, so nuni de is literally, “But now.” It is an idiom which should be translated “But as the case really stands.” The next two words are o)uketi e)gw. O)uketi is used logically rather than temporally, hence it means “no longer.” Plus the nominative singular subject e)gw, “I.” Then the present active indicative of katergazomai, which means to achieve, to accomplish, to do, to work out. In this case we translate it “perform.” This is an iterative present denoting what recurs at successive intervals. The middle voice of the deponent verb is taken as an active voice. Paul himself uses himself to represent the modus operandi of the human race under the control of the old sin nature. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verb form from the viewpoint of reality. The accusative neuter singular direct object from the intensive pronoun a)utoj is attributive and is translated “the same.” “But as the case really stands I am no longer performing the same [sin, good, evil].”
Principle
1. The attributive use of the intensive pronoun a)utoj refers to the trends of the OSN.
2. This does not imply lack of cooperation or failure to use one’s own personal volition in the matter of sin, good, and evil. We never perform these acts without the volition being involved.
3. Paul is dramatising the conflict between the ex-husband, the OSN, and the present husband, the Lord Jesus Christ; with emphasis on the believer in the analogy. And in the analogy the believer is the wife.
4. This emphasises how a believer with maximum doctrine resident in his soul understands the problem, and on the one hand honours doctrine and on the other hand renounces and rejects the ex-husband, the OSN. The more doctrine we learn the more we can avoid evil and good.
5. No one ever commits a sin, known or unknown, without involvement of his own volition. Two things are involved: lust [from OSN] and volition.
6. Paul is not denying the involvement of his volition but he is renouncing the function of the old sin nature as the ex-husband.
7. The believer is not the master of his inner life, therefore the need of a marriage counsellor for the second marriage—the Holy Spirit.
8. The Holy Spirit enables the believer’s volition to make decisions which please the Lord Jesus Christ rather than the old sin nature.
9. While volition is involved in the performance of sin, good, and evil, volition is not the source of these things.
10. Only the filling of the Spirit and Bible doctrine resident in the soul can offset the gravitational pull of the OSN soliciting sin, good, and evil.
“but sin that dwelleth in me” – this is not personal sin, it is the old sin nature. The adversative conjunction a)lla sets up the contrast between the previous clause and this one—“but.” Then the culprit of the first marriage, the nominative singular subject of a(martia with the generic use of the definite article use to portray the old sin nature as the now well-known ex-husband. Plus the present active participle of e)noikew [e)n = in; o)ikew = dwell], which means to inhabit or indwell. We can translate it “living” as well. It means to dwell in or to live in—“but the sin nature which keeps on living in me.” The present tense is retroactive progressive present denoting what began in the past, at birth, and continues into the present time. The OSN continues to live inside each one of us after salvation. The active voice: the OSN produces the action of the verb after salvation. The participle is circumstantial. With this is the prepositional phrase e)n plus the locative plural of the personal pronoun e)gw—“in me.”
Translation: “But as the case really stands, I am no longer performing the same [sin, good, evil], but the sin nature which keeps on indwelling me.”
This is why the believer must have, and does have, the indwelling presence of two members of the Trinity—God the Holy Spirit as the marriage counsellor and the Lord Jesus Christ for the purpose of fellowship. Our marriage is union with Christ, the baptism of the Spirit. The indwelling of Christ, however, is only for the believer who is positive toward doctrine—2 Corinthians 13:5 says that Christ comes out of the reversionistic believer. The indwelling of the Spirit is permanent.
1. The inner conflict of the believer and the pressure on volition of the royal family then becomes obvious. We have the pressure of inner conflict, the pressure of desiring to please the Lord, and yet not pleasing Him because of what we are doing, and being cognisant of what we are doing and not pleasing to Him.
2. Inside of each believer is the old sin nature soliciting and seducing toward sin, toward good, and toward evil.
3. Inside each believer is the Lord Jesus Christ, the second husband since salvation.
4. Also inside of each believer is the Holy Spirit, the marriage counsellor of the second marriage.
5. Both Christ, the second husband, and God the Holy Spirit, the new marriage counsellor, indwell the body of the believer.
6. To appreciate all of this there must be another indwelling, i.e. the indwelling of Bible doctrine in the right lobe of the soul, as well as the human spirit. In the human spirit the construction of the edification complex occurs; in the soul the believer advances to maturity.
7. The first attack of the former husband, the OSN, emphasises the source of the conflict and the seduction of human volition.
Verse 18 – “For I know that in me” begins with the postpositive conjunctive particle gar used in the inferential connotation and is translated “In fact” or “Certainly.” Plus the perfect verb o)ida used as a present active indicative for some form of cognisance—perfect in form, present in meaning. With it the preposition e)n plus the locative singular of the personal pronoun e)gw, translated “in me.” “In fact I know that in me.” The question has to be understood on the outside in connection with the angelic conflict, but the problem also has to be understood on the inside. Paul is saying in effect that he understands the problem in himself, and in so doing that he indicates that he has great objectivity. Objectivity becomes the way of learning the problem and therefore finding the solution. So we have cognisance of the problem, the inner conflict between the ex-husband, the OSN, and the marriage counsellor of the second marriage, the Holy Spirit. The principle: Cognisance of the problem must precede awareness of the solution, and its proper application in solving the problem. The correct translation: “In fact I know that there does not dwell in me.” We have to begin again, after o)ida, with the insertion of such as the conjunction o(ti before the prepositional phrase. Between “I know” and “in me” we have two very important Greek words. One is a negative adverb and the other is a verb: the negative adverb o)u is used for the present active indicative of the verb o)ikew which means to inhabit, to live, to dwell, to have one’s habitation or to dwell in something. It is translated, “In fact I know that there does not dwell.” The present tense is a historical present viewing a past event with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: the principle of no intrinsic good indwelling the body produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of Bible doctrine. For the definition of the prepositional phrase we have these words in between: “In fact I know that there does not reside in me.”
Then comes what is comparable to a parenthesis, “that is, in my flesh” – the nominative neuter singular from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, used here for an explanation. With it is the present active indicative of e)imi, and the two words together are simply used as an explanatory amplification—“that is.” Then e)n plus the locative of sarc with the possessive genitive of e)gw—“in my flesh,” a reference to the human body which is the headquarters for the old sin nature, from which headquarters the OSN rules. Satan rules from outside of each one of us, he is the ruler of this world.
1. In total depravity the problem is spiritual death. Total depravity is the imputation of Adam’s original sin to the OSN, and spiritual death is a part of total depravity. Spiritual death means more than no salvation relationship with God, it means ignorance of God’s plan, ignorance of God’s policy.
2. The problem is hopeless in the human body, leaving only the human soul for the area of solution. The solution always deals with the fact that Bible doctrine must become resident in the soul. Spiritual growth and glorification of Christ cannot occur in the physical body, only in the soul.
3. It is the soul, not the body, which is saved at eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.
4. The believer receives a new body, a resurrection body, in eternity.
5. Furthermore, the solution to the problem of phase two or time resides inevitably in the soul—Bible doctrine resident in the soul through the daily function of GAP, plus the filling of the Holy Spirit.
6. Therefore spiritual growth and glorification of the Lord Jesus Christ cannot and does not occur in the body, but in the soul.
7. The divine energy of the filling of the Spirit must replace human energy since the solution is located in the soul and not the body. Human energy and the function of human energy does not glorify Jesus Christ.
8. The spiritual food of Bible doctrine must replace the physical food of life which sustains the body. It is what sustains the soul that counts. This does not mean that we neglect physical food.
9. The human body is the place where physical food is converted into human energy but the soul is the place where doctrine must reside and the Spirit must fill/control for the advance to maturity, and therefore glorification of Christ.
10. What human energy is to the body the spiritual energy of the filling of the Spirit is to the soul.
11. What food is to the nourishment and sustenance of the body Bible doctrine is to the nourishment and sustenance of the soul.
12. Solution depends upon the filling of the Spirit, i.e. the Holy Spirit controlling the battleground, the soul, and the residence of Bible doctrine.
13. All objectives are accomplished through experiential sanctification. Experiential sanctification begins its modus operandi through the filling of the Spirit and the daily function of GAP, and eventuates if persistence occurs in maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
14. Spiritual advance to maturity and the glorification of the Lord Jesus Christ in super-grace status can only be accomplished under the ministry of the Holy Spirit through Whom we convert gnwsij doctrine into e)pignwsij doctrine.
“no good thing” – the accusative singular of a)gaqoj, meaning intrinsic good. It is the object of the verb.
“for to will is present with me” – the explanatory conjunctive particle gar, followed
by the articular present active infinitive of the verb qelw, which means to will, to wish, to desire. It means also to resolve and it connotes the relationship between the volition of the soul and purpose in life. Here the articular infinitive is used as a substantive. The definite article provides the case for converting this participle into a noun. Since the definite article is in the nominative neuter singular that becomes the case for the participle converted into a noun. The definite article informs us that the substantival use of the infinitive is going to be a special noun. It is translated, “for the resolve.” Then the present middle indicative of the verb parakeimai, “is present.” There is the resolve, the will, the desire to please God, to do the will of God. This is the present tense of repeated action, known as the tendencial present, which describes what recurs at successive intervals. The indirect middle emphasises the agent producing the action of the verb rather than participating in the results of the action. The agent is the believer with the inner conflict. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the locative of sphere from the personal pronoun e)gw, translated “in me”—“for the resolve is present in me.” “In fact I know that there does not reside in me (that is, in my human body,) any intrinsic good: and the honourable accomplishment of my purpose is negative.”
1. The desire to please God, the desire to solve the problem, comes from headquarters in the soul—human volition.
2. But human volition cannot solve any problems or make a right decision without logistical support.
3. Man’s volition has been involved from the very beginning when Adam took the fruit from out of the hand of the woman. In the garden Adam and the woman made decisions every day with regard to staying away from the tree. Then one day they both made a decision to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
4. The first sin in the human race, then, was an act of volition.
5. Salvation is a non-meritorious act of volition. The merit lies in the object, not in the subject.
6. After salvation the volition of the believer must make daily decisions in the direction of logistical provision of grace.
7. When sin has occurred there must be a decision to rebound, but the believer must understand the mechanics of rebound.
8. To reach the objective of the Christian way of life daily decisions must be made in favour of perception of doctrine, in favour of rebound when necessary.
9. So Paul describes the believer who is willing to make right decisions but is frustrated by ignorance of doctrine.
10. Volition must have direction. Furthermore, volition must have grace direction.
11. Without doctrinal facts and information the volition is frustrated in fulfilling the divine policy and executing the objective stated in the divine decrees.
12. Volition is useless without direction, without information, without cognisance of doctrine.
13. The resolve is present in the believer but the execution of the resolve demands cognisance of doctrine. You can’t please God until you know how to please God.
This verse states the fact that sincerity is not a Christian virtue.
1. Sincerity is related to volition, but volition without doctrine is helpless in both the execution of the will of God and the attainment of the objective: maturity adjustment to the justice of God. Sincerity is related to volition by way of emotion. Emotion is the connecting link between sincerity and the decisions made from sincerity. Sincerity is filled with good intentions but sincerity is merely emotion trying to take the objective.
2. There is no glorification of Christ apart from maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
3. There is no direct blessing from the justice of God apart from maturity adjustment from the justice of God.
4. There is no maturity adjustment to the justice of God apart from Bible doctrine resident in the soul.
5. So while human volition is sincere in desiring to glorify God, this is not the answer.
6. The best intentions of the sincere believer are destroyed on the shoals of ignorance.
7. How can you fulfil the purpose and resolve to glorify Christ if you do not know how to do it, if you do not know the policy?
8. Ignorance of doctrine interdicts between good intentions and motivations and the fulfilment of the will of God. Good intentions are not the will of God necessarily. Sincere decisions are not necessarily the will of God.
9. Sincerity plus ignorance of doctrine is a guarantee of failure. Sincerity is not a virtue, it is a sign of stupidity.
10. Sincerity without doctrine is the road to reversionism under the influence of evil. It is the road of apostasy.
11. The second attack of the ex-husband, the old sin nature, places emphasis on sincerity and emotional motivation. This is the quickest road to reversionism and the sin unto death.
Review
1. Before any believer can appreciate the divine solution and God’s grace policy he must come to the end of himself—the end of human gimmicks.
2. He must realise that the verse we are studying, for example, states that there does not reside in any of us any ability or talent, or sacrificial function by which we can glorify God.
3. The sincere believer must run out of human solutions before he will accept the divine solutions. The sincere believer is stupid, therefore he has to try every human solution before he tries the divine solution which is Bible doctrine resident in the soul through the daily function of GAP.
4. Honourable accomplishment or execution of God’s will is negative until the believer uses cognisance of doctrine to advance to the maturity adjustment to the justice of God, plus resultant glorification of Christ and maximum blessing from the justice of God.
5. Grace blessing from the justice of God cannot come to the believer by any means of human activity, any system of legalism, but only through doctrine resident in the soul.
6. Honourable execution of the divine plan and the attainment of divine objectives is negative until the believer accepts logistical grace—a right pastor communicating doctrine from the Word of God on a consistent basis.
7. Until you accept the teaching and the authority of whoever your right pastor happens to be your honourable achievement will be negative.
Verse 19 – “For the good which I would I do not.” This is a dilemma that occurs when a believer has a little doctrine. A little doctrine is like a lot of poison, it
confuses you. You must have a lot of doctrine and therefore you have little or no poison. This begins with the nominative neuter singular from the adjective a)gaqoj, good of intrinsic value. With it is the postpositive explanatory conjunctive particle gar, and it is translated literally, “For the intrinsic good.” Plus the nominative neuter singular relative pronoun o(j—“which,” and the present active indicative of the verb qelw which means to purpose, to resolve. There is another word for purpose or resolve: boulomai, which means to purpose or resolve from knowledge, whereas qelw means to purpose or resolve from emotion or sincerity. This doesn’t always hold true but there are cases where it does, and this is one. The present tense is an iterative present for a desire, a purpose, a resolve which occurs at successive intervals. The active voice: Paul, the human author, uses himself to represent the inner conflict. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the present active indicative from poiew with the negative o)u—“I do not do.” “For the intrinsic good which I desire I do not do.” The present tense is a historical present, it views a past event such as carnality or reversionism, or both, with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: Paul, representing the carnal and the reversionistic believer, produces the action of the verb, not when he writes but in the past time. The indicative mood is declarative for absolute dogmatic reality. The intrinsic good or a)gaqoj is the fulfilment of the objective designed by God for each one of us in eternity past.
“but the evil” – the adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast. Then the nominative neuter singular from the adjective kakoj, one of the words for evil, plus the definite article used with abstract nouns in which their character and application is revealed, so it is “the evil”—“but the evil.”
“which I would not” – the nominative neuter singular from the relative pronoun o(j, whose antecedent is kakoj /evil—“but the evil which.” The neuter gender is translated “which,” the feminine gender is translated “who.” Plus the present active indicative of qelw again, with the negative—“which I do not desire.” The present tense is a pictorial present, it gives the mind a picture of what is now going on. The active voice: Paul, representing the reversionist, produces the action of the verb in expressing an inner conflict. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality.
“that I do” – the nominative neuter singular subject from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, and in the singular it is translated “this.” Plus the present active indicative of prassw, the verb which means to practice or accomplish. The present tense is a perfective present, it denotes a continuation of the existing results of reversionism, the practice of evil. The active voice: Paul, representing the reversionist under the influence of evil, produces the action. The indicative mood is the potential indicative of impulse. It goes with sincerity.
Translation: “For the intrinsic good which I desire I do not do: but the evil which I do not desire, this I keep on practicing.”
1. As the policies and objectives of the
Christian way of life unfold in the mind of the believer (through perception of
doctrine) it does not follow that understanding the will of God means doing the
will of God. The first part of the solution is knowing the will of God thr0ough
perception of doctrine, but once you know the will of God the next step is
doing it.
2. The inner conflict between the ex-husband, the old sin nature, and the
second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ, is personified and dramatised in many
biblical passages.
3. Without the filling of the Spirit and the constant perception of Bible doctrine under the ministry of one’s right pastor the evil which the believer does not purpose to do he keeps on practicing.
4. Therefore, part of the problem is to know the objective, and the other part is to attain the objective—the objective being maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
5. Intrinsic good in this verse refers to cracking the maturity barrier through maximum doctrine resident in the soul. Only in maturity do we have the capacity and the security for blessing from the justice of God.
Verse 20 – “Now if I do that I would not.” The postpositive conjunctive particle de is used in a transitional sense here and translated “Now.” Then a conditional conjunction or the conjunctive particle e)i, plus the indicative mood of the verb, and is used for a first class condition, supposition from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the present active indicative from the verb poiew which means to do. The present tense is a descriptive present, sometimes known as a pictorial present, for something in the process of occurrence. The active voice: Paul, the human author, uses himself as a representative of the reversionist. He is not in reversionism when he writes this but he represents the attitude of the reversionist in order for a better understanding of this passage and a personalising of this passage compatible with its interpretaive illustration of the divorce from the old sin nature and marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ as the second husband. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Then the word “that” is really the nominative singular relative pronoun o(j and it should be translated “what” because of the neuter. Plus the nominative singular from the personal pronoun e)gw. The present active indicative of qelw with the negative o)u means purpose, will, or desire. “Now if I am doing what I do not desire.” The present tense is a customary present denoting what may be reasonably expected from the believer who is positive toward doctrine. The active voice: the believer produces the action. The indicative mood is potential of obligation. The potential depends upon perception of Bible doctrine. Plus the nominative neuter singular from a)utoj, the intensive pronoun, the attributive use—“the same I keep doing.”
Principle
1. The believer with cognisance of Bible doctrine does not desire to follow the trends of the old sin nature.
2. But the first class condition of the protasis indicates the reality of doing it anyway.
3. Therefore the intensive pronoun a)utoj, “the same,” refers to production of sin, good and evil. This production or accomplishment of sin, good and evil is what such a believer does not desire to do.
4. There is an inner conflict between what the believer desires to do and what he actually does.
5. This dilemma reveals the fact that there is a strong push-pull activity in every believer, but not in the unbeliever.
6. In fact, the life of the believer is a major battleground between the forces of evil by the old sin nature and the forces of God led by doctrine and the inner ministry of the Holy Spirit.
7. The volition of the believer’s soul is subject to tremendous antithetical pressures from two husbands: the ex-husband of the old sin nature and the new husband, the Lord Jesus Christ as represented by doctrine, and the marriage counsellor, the indwelling Holy Spirit.
8. Only through the filling of the Spirit and cognisance of pertinent doctrine can the believer be enabled to make decisions which are pleasing and honouring to God.
“it is no more I that do it” – the temporal adverb o)ukete which means “no longer.” This means that from the first marriage to the second marriage there is a change of emphasis on who gets the blame. The source remains: the old sin nature. But the volition of the believer now becomes involved, and he is not going to excuse himself, he is just going to show that the source remains the same but the responsibility for controlling the source is entirely different: the source being the old sin nature, and the old sin nature being the ruler of human life, ruling through spiritual death, had the authority before salvation. But after salvation the old sin nature no longer has the authority, the believer’s volition is in the driver’s seat, and therefore the responsibility of the believer for his own decisions becomes a great issue. The believer is not the ultimate source of sin, good and evil but the old sin nature. However, the believer has volition which permits the trends of the old sin nature. The present middle indicative of the verb katergazomai means to bring it about. “I am no longer the one bringing it about.” The present tense is a progressive present signifying the action in progress or in a state of persistence—linear aktionsart present time. The middle voice of the deponent verb—middle in form, active in meaning—Paul represents himself in the illustrative role for the teaching purpose. The indicative mood is declarative for reality in the verbal action. Plus the accusative singular direct object a)utoj—“it,” referring to accomplishing the trends of the sin nature.
“but sin that dwelleth in me” – the adversative conjunction a)lla sets up a contrast between the negative and the positive. Plus the nominative singular subject from a(martia, the old sin nature, with the definite article denoting a previous reference. Then the present active participle of o)ikew, meaning to reside or dwell, make residence in. The present tense of duration denotes what was begun in the past and continues throughout life. Even after salvation we still have the residence of the old sin nature. The active voice: the old sin nature as the ex-husband produces the action. This is a circumstantial participle emphasising the fact that after salvation the old sin nature still makes its headquarters in the human body. Then the prepositional phrase e)n plus the locative of e)gw—“inside of me.”
Translation: “Now if what I do not desire the same I keep doing, I am no longer the one bringing it about, but the sin nature residing in me.”
1. The second attack strategy emphasises the frustration of the divine purpose in the believer by the counter attack of the old sin nature.
2. Again, as before salvation, the old sin nature is the origin of sin, good and evil. But now that the believer is married to the second husband he cannot go back to the ex-husband without being involved. The believer has never committed a sin unless he wanted to do it.
3. The conflict between the purpose to please Christ and the desire to fulfil the lusts of the old sin nature while living in this world becomes a constant push-pull pressure in which the true purpose and meaning of the Christian life is stale-mated by the trends of the old sin nature.
4. The OSN provides both lust and the motivation for the believer’s wrong decisions—the volitional involvement in the trends of sin, good and evil.
5. The believer is not excused because from his own free will he succumbs to the pull pressure.
6. Therefore the first husband is constantly trying to get the ex-wife back under control.
7. When he succeeds the believer is classified as a reversionist under the influence of evil.
8. This leads to the concept in the next verse: the co-existence of both good and evil…..
Verse 21 – “I find then a law.” The inferential illative particle a)ra, in the apodosis of a conditional sentence used to express a result, and therefore it should be translated either “consequently” or “as a result.” With it is the present active indicative of the verb e(uriskw. The present tense is a historical present which views the past discovery with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: Paul discovered this phenomenon of good and evil co-existing in conflict with himself. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. Plus the accusative singular direct object from nomoj which has a variety of meanings. With the definite article used as a demonstrative pronoun it means here a rule governing one’s actions. Therefore it is translated, “Consequently I discovered this principle.” The principle has to do with the co-existence of doctrine from the new husband and evil from the ex-husband. There is a conflict which arises when we get some doctrine.
“that when I would do good” – literally, this is “to me the one wishing to do the honourable.” The conjunction o(ti is used to indicate the content of a principle does not occur until after the dependent clause. The dependent clause has the dative singular indirect object e)gw—“to me.” Plus the articular present active participle from the verb qelw, which means to wish, desire, purpose, will, resolve. The customary present tense is for what is excepted of the believer as a member of the royal family of God. The active voice: Paul represents himself in the status of the reversionistic believer in order to personalise the problem. He is not reversionistic as he writes, he is filled with the Spirit. The participle is a temporal participle and therefore translated “that when I desire.” Plus the present active infinitive of the verb poiew, which means to do. The iterative present tense is used to describe what recurs at successive intervals. The active voice: Paul represents the believer in conflict. The infinitive is the infinitive of intended result when the result is indicated as fulfilling a deliberate objective or aim. Then the accusative singular direct object from the adjective used as a substantive, kaloj with the definite article, meaning “the honourable thing.” The honourable thing includes the maintenance of the filling of the Spirit through the function of rebound and the daily function of GAP, resulting in the attainment of the objective—maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
“evil is present with me” – literally, “that in me the evil resides.” The locative of sphere from the personal pronoun e)gw, preceded by o(ti indicating the content of the principle. Plus the nominative neuter singular from the adjective substantive kakoj—“evil,” and the present middle indicative of the verb parakeimai which means to be present or to reside in—“that the principle of evil resides in me.” The present tense is a retroactive progressive present, evil has resided in us in the past with the result that it continues to right up to the present time. In other words, evil came with the imputation of Adam’s sin to its genetically formed home, the old sin nature. Evil is residence is counteracted by Bible doctrine resident in the soul and the filling of the Holy Spirit. The indirect middle voice is one in which evil produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a dogmatic statement of doctrine.
Translation: “Consequently I discovered this principle: when I desire to do the honourable thing, that the principle of evil resides in me.”
Verse 22 – “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man.” The postpositive conjunctive particle gar is used to express ground or reason. Then the present passive indicative of the verb suneidomai [sun = with; e)idomai = enjoy] which means to be delighted with something, along with those in the periphery. “For along with other believers I am delighted.” This is the customary present tense to denote what may reasonably be expected to occur. The passive voice: this is a deponent verb, passive in form, active in meaning. Paul representing the believer who is positive toward doctrine produces the action. The indicative mood is the potential indicative of obligation. It is our obligation to put something into the soul to offset the residence of evil. That something is Bible doctrine mentioned in the locative of sphere singular from nomoj—the third use of the word in this passage. Here it is used for doctrine in a general sense. Law from God means Bible doctrine here. Plus the ablative of source qeoj. God is the source of that which offsets evil in the soul. The ablative of source emphasises the source of doctrine, the origin of doctrine. The phrase “after the inward man.” Kata with the accusative of place which in the extension of space connotes along, over, through or in. The word usually means “down.” Here it means “in.” The accusative singular of the generic use of the definite article represents a class as being set apart from all other categorising or classification. Plus the adverb e)sw, meaning “inner,” and the generic use for man, a)nqrwpoj—“in the inner man.” The inner man refers to the soul which is the battleground for the great conflict. Everything is decided in the soul.
Translation: “For along with other believers I delight in the law from God [Bible doctrine] in the inner man.”
1. Without Bible doctrine resident in the soul there is no inner conflict, for there is no divine viewpoint to challenge the trends of the old sin nature.
2. Bible doctrine resident in the soul is not only the means of attaining spiritual maturity, which glorifies Christ, but the means for combating the attacks from the old sin nature in the inner conflict. The soul is the battleground.
3. God the Holy Spirit who provides the perception of doctrine also provides the application of doctrine and/or innovation in combating the functions of the OSN.
4. Bible doctrine not only defines sin but reveals the true nature of good and evil.
5. Most believers are ambushed by good and evil.
6. In this battle you not only have to know the terrain [soul] but you have to know the objectives within that terrain.
7. You also have to understand the opposition, the old sin nature.
8. The opposition also seeks to distract from the inculcation of doctrine.
Verse 23 – the opposition. “But I see another law in my members.” The postpositive conjunctive particle de has at least five different uses. Here it is used to simply connect one clause with another with a slight contrast intended. The contrast comes from the opposition to Bible doctrine. Then the present active indicative of the verb blepw which means to see. Blepw is used when you have some doctrine you have learned and finally get a chance to use it. The present tense is the aoristic present for punctiliar action in present time. In an instant of time all of these doctrines that have been collected in the right lobe of the soul are suddenly concentrated on a particular problem and used effectively. The active voice: Paul the human writer uses himself as the illustration for the discovery of the inner conflict. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal action from the viewpoint of reality. With it is the accusative singular adjective e(teroj, another of a different kind. In other words, the enemy. Plus the accusative singular direct object from nomoj, meaning “principle.” “But I see another of a different kind of principle.” It is located in the battlefield area, e)n plus the locative of meloj, plus e)gw in the possessive genitive—“in my members.” Meloj always refers to the body, in which is the old sin nature. The different principle is the principle of opposition, the various functions of the old sin nature.
“warring against the law of my mind” – the present middle participle from the compound verb a)ntistrateuomai, which doesn’t really mean a war. It really means campaigning against. A campaign is a part of a war. In other words, Paul is referring to a specific time when the attack of the old sin nature occurs. The war goes on until we depart from this life by physical death, and we have many campaigns. The principle is campaigning against Bible doctrine. Bible doctrine in this particular verse is fighting a defensive action to wear out the enemy and then counterattack. The present tense is a progressive present for a state of persistence, hence linear aktionsart in present time. The circumstantial participle is for the fact that as long as we are in this life there is a conflict. The antagonistic principle is the operation of the old sin nature constantly attacking, campaigning against the principle of Bible doctrine resident in the soul. The phrase “of my mind” is the descriptive genitive singular from nouj. Nouj is used because it refers to the left lobe of the soul. The right lobe of the soul is called in the Greek kardia, translated “heart.” The left lobe is where information is waiting, either to be processed over to the right lobe where it is usable, or to stay there and to be hooked up with arrogance and pride and to be misused, distorted and abused. The attack is always on the left lobe where doctrine in the left lobe is not strong enough to stand up against the attacks of the OSN. Only doctrine in the right lobe causes spiritual growth. Only doctrine in the right lobe can actually advance the believer, and only doctrine in the right lobe is usable. Doctrine fights in the right lobe only, not in the left lobe. Principle: If you are strong enough you won’t be attacked.
“and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin” – the conjunction kai is used to introduce the result which comes from that which precedes: “and so.” Plus the present active participle of a)ixmalwtizw—“and so making me a prisoner.” This is a retroactive progressive present in which they have been a prisoner in the past because the doctrine was only in the left lobe, and they continue to be a prisoner up to the present time. The active voice: the believer with doctrine in the left lobe becomes a reversionist under attack. The campaign results in becoming a prisoner to reversionism. Plus the accusative singular direct object from the personal pronoun e)gw—“me.” Plus nomoj again, the principle—“making me a prisoner to the principle of the sin nature.” So the sin nature takes captive quite frequently.
“which is in my members” – the articular present active participle from the verb e)imi. The definite article is used as an attributive intensive pronoun, emphasising the fact that the old sin nature continues to reside in the human body after salvation. The present tense is a perfective present denoting the continuation of existing results. It refers to a fact which has come to be in the past but is emphasised as a present reality. The circumstantial participle indicates that from birth we have had the old sin nature, and as long as we live on this earth the old sin nature will be there, and the old sin nature always attacks an unprepared position. The weak position is the born again believer who has doctrine in his left lobe but has never transferred it to his right lobe. He has not followed through on the mechanics of the function of GAP. The definite article is translated “the same.” The active voice: the old sin nature as the subject produces the action. The circumstantial participle says in effect that this is the status quo of mankind from physical birth. Then e)n plus the locative of meloj with e)gw—“the same being in the members of my body.”
Translation: “But I see a different principle in the members of my body, campaigning against the principle of my mind, and so making me a prisoner to the principle of the sin nature, the same sin nature being located in the members of my body.”
1. Power corrupts. The volition of the soul is a basic power which is corrupted by the old sin nature with its trends toward good and evil, as well as sinfulness.
2. There is a constant pressure on the volition from the old sin nature whose headquarters is located in the human body, and Bible doctrine resident in the right lobe is the only deterrent.
3. When there is no Bible doctrine in the right lobe of the soul the old sin nature is the inevitable winner. The OSN makes a prisoner of the believer.
4. Being a prisoner to the OSN results in a life of great misery and divine discipline, and eventually the sin unto death. It also means no possibility of fulfilling the plan of God for your life in phase two.
5. The two conflicting principles within the believer co-exist as long as we live on this earth. The only way to have peace in human history is to be prepared for war. Maximum preparation for war is the only way to have peace. An unprepared nation becomes vulnerable and is subject to attack. So it is in the battleground of our souls. To be prepared we must have doctrine in the right lobe. We are unprepared when it is only in the left lobe. Doctrine in the left lobe does not resist and we become the captives of the old sin nature.
6. The only solution is the filling of the Holy Spirit plus the daily function of GAP, resulting in maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
7. Apart from Bible doctrine resident in the soul the OSN controls the battlefield with tactical victory, especially through involving the believer in good and evil.
8. Therefore power is corrupted and authority is distorted through one of the conflicting principles.
9. The conflicting principle is mutually exclusive with Bible doctrine in the right lobe, and therefore there can be no compromise between them.
10. Both principles reside in the believer, making his life a battleground. The OSN indwells the body; the Holy Spirit indwells the body. The OSN attacks the soul, but is deterred by Bible doctrine resident in the right lobe.
11. Since the OSN is located in the body, as its headquarters, it makes its attacks toward the soul; it does not reside in the soul. It makes its attack through the three trends: sin, good, evil.
12. The verse we are studying emphasises the aggressiveness of the OSN, and the success of the OSN’s attack unless countered from Bible doctrine resident in the soul under the filling of the Holy Spirit. To be made a prisoner in phase two is to become a casualty.
Verse 24 – the despair that comes to the believer in reversionism. “O wretched man that I am!” The word “wretched” has changed its meaning drastically since the KJV was translated. The verse begins with the nominative singular subject from the personal pronoun e)gw, translated “I,” used here for the purpose of expressing the personal misery of the person who is in reversionism. We must understand immediately that Paul is not wretched. As the writer of this passage he is extremely happy and a mature believer, and under the filling of the Holy Spirit he is writing this passage. But in order to personify the difficulties of reversionism he is led by the Holy Spirit to take the position of a reversionist in order to express the disaster of warning discipline, intensive discipline, and eventually dying discipline. The subject demands the inserting of a present active indicative from e)imi. It is understood in this type of structure. This is present linear aktionsart; it is retroactive progressive present taking us right up to the moment of writing. The predicate nominative singular of exclamation from the adjective talaipwroj is next, the word translated in the KJV “wretched.” It means to be totally miserable, and it should be translated “I am a miserable person,” the testimony of every reversionist. By standing alone without the verb it receives even greater emphasis. This adjective perfectly describes the reversionistic believer under divine discipline. Next is the predicate nominative singular from a)nqrwpoj, used generically here for a person. This is the believer whose terrible suffering comes from divine discipline as a result of reversionism. It is dealing with the believer who has rejected doctrine, the believer who is not familiar with the way to go as far as the Christian life is concerned.
“who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” – How do I get out of this jamb? get out of the misery? It begins with the interrogative pronoun, the nominative singular subject tij. We naturally depend upon people to pull us out of the doldrums. When we feel bad we seek happy people. Then the future active indicative of the verb r(uomai, which means to drag out of danger, to drag someone out who is helpless. Plus the accusative singular direct object of e)gw—“me.” The future tense of r(uomai is a progressive future, it denotes the idea of progress in future time. You can be rescued but it has to be done a day at a time, there is no instant rescue here. Doctrine today, doctrine tomorrow, etc. That is the only way to be dragged out, to be rescued from reversionism. The active voice: the question presents an unknown subject, but anticipated by the next chapter as God the Holy Spirit plus Bible doctrine resident in the soul—the rescue team. There is no substitute for this. The interrogative indicative mood assumes that there is an actual fact which may be stated as an answer to the question. Therefore it emphasises the factors of experiential sanctification leading to maturity adjustment to the justice of God. Next is the prepositional phrase, e)k plus the ablative singular from the noun swma, with the definite article to denote a previous reference to the human body as the headquarters and residence of the old sin nature, the ruler of human life. The genitive of relationship singular from the near demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, plus the noun qanatoj—“this death”—“who shall rescue me from the body of this death?”
Translation: “I am a miserable person! who shall rescue me from the body of this death?”
1. While grace covers the function or trends of the old sin nature, grace is not increased through the activity of the old sin nature.
2. Grace is the policy of God whereby divine justice blesses the believer.
3. Therefore grace increases first at the point of justification, and then at the point of maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
4. The grace of God increases in direct proportion to the development of the believer’s capacity for blessing from doctrine resident in the soul.
5. As a believer grows through the function of GAP, grace increases.
6. Therefore grace increases through the filling of the Spirit and perception of Bible doctrine. Maximum inculcation of doctrine results in maximum blessing.
7. Grace is never advanced through the function of the old sin nature.
1. The principle of rescue is an increase of grace.
2. The mechanics of rescue include the filling of the Spirit and the constant daily function of GAP, eventuating in maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
3. God gives us one day at a time for the purpose of perception of doctrine. The perception of doctrine is the only means of spiritual growth.
4. The “body of death” is the residence of the old sin nature in the human body.
5. Rescue or deliverance is the direct result of grace increase or maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
6. Three things occur at salvation which begin the rescue or deliverance: the imputation of divine righteousness to the believer resulting in justification or the construction of the grace pipeline; the real imputation of eternal life to the divinely prepared home or target—regeneration; the baptism of the Holy Spirit which provides divorce from the old sin nature as the first husband, and marriage to the Lord Jesus Christ who is the second husband.
7. Newness of life (Romans 6:4) is the grace environment provided through the baptism of the Spirit for blessing from the justice of God at maturity.
8. Newness of life is better than what the original man and the woman had in the garden.
Principle #2
1. We are forced to go back to the grace policy of the justice of God in blessing the believer.
2. Grace is not increased through the function of the old sin nature.
3. Grace does not provide motivation for living under the power of the OSN.
4. As a divine policy grace cannot and does not motivate the believer to go back to the OSN, the ex-husband.
5. However the only way to avoid this is through Bible doctrine resident in the soul.
6. To the legalistic believer grace always appears to be a licence to sin, while to the antinomian grace appears to be an excuse for sin.
7. Neither viewpoint is correct. Both are antithetical; both are wrong. Neither legalism nor antinomianism can break away from the sovereign power of the old sin nature. The integrity of God does not sponsor the trends of the OSN.
Principle #3
1. Maximum inculcation of doctrine results in grace increase.
2. The soul is the key to spiritual advance to maturity and glorification of Christ.
3. The soul must be occupied, then, by the filling of the Spirit and saturated with Bible doctrine.
4. Again, grace is the policy of the justice of God in providing blessing for the believer in time as well as in eternity. God’s integrity does not depend on sinfulness or the production of good or evil.
5. Acts of personal sin, the production of human good, the modus vivendi of evil do not bring grace blessings from the justice of God. They bring punitive action.
6. The justice of God is the source of cursing and blessing; the justice of God is the believer’s point of reference.
7. Divine justice punishes reversionism, and divine justice provides blessing for growth in grace.
8. You cannot be dominated by the old sin nature after salvation and attain maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
9. Sinfulness or carnality is quickly handed by rebound adjustment to the justice of God, but the OSN’s trends toward good and evil produce reversionism resulting in punishment and discipline rather than blessing from the justice of God.
Principle #4
1. After salvation God has provided a system of doctrine to fortify the soul as a base of operations for the advance to maturity.
2. This system of doctrine provides a daily option from the volition of the soul, the means of placing ourselves under orders to God. That option requires two things: rebound when necessary, and positive volition toward doctrine.
3. Since learning doctrine is the greatest thing we do in life, the daily positive volition toward doctrine is the only way to follow the colours to the high ground of maturity.
4. Self-determination must be related to perception of doctrine under the filling of the Holy Spirit.
5. Committal to Christ means receiving the delivery of the system of doctrine.
6. The soul must be saturated with Bible doctrine to offset the influence of the old sin nature, and at the same time to attain the objective: maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
7. Rejection of doctrinal teaching and ignorance of the system of doctrine in the Word of God is the reason for our failure. Rejection of doctrine which results in ignorance of doctrine is the most serious offence against the second husband, the Lord Jesus Christ. Nothing in Christianity can ever be divorced from perception of Bible doctrine.
Verse 25 – the conflict of options. There are two sentences. The source of the solution is the first sentence and the recognition of the options is the second sentence.
“I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord” begins with the nominative singular of explanation. The noun is xarij which means grace here. Because this is a nominative of explanation there will be no verb. Then the dative singular indirect object from qeoj with the definite article. The generic use of the definite article sets aside God as a unique classification. Literally this passage means, “Grace belongs to the God.” So the solution is God’s solution, not ours. This can be in the Koine Greek an idiom meaning thanks to God, as translated in the KJV, but here “Grace belongs to the God” is the solution. Then comes the prepositional phrase dia plus the genitive of I)hsouj Xristoj—“through Jesus Christ.” Plus the possessive genitive from kurioj with the personal pronoun—“our Lord.”
1. The source of the solution is the second husband, Jesus Christ our Lord.
2. The principle involved in the solution is grace.
3. Grace is the decisive factor in the inner conflict between the old sin nature and the Lord Jesus Christ.
4. This amplifies the reference to grace in Romans 5:2.
5. The believer can be disappointed when friends and loved ones fail, but the grace of God never fails.
6. Our stand does not depend upon other people, our stand depends upon the grace of God.
7. Under the policy of grace the believer depends on divine integrity.
8. Grace is the means by which mankind adjusts to the justice of God.
9. Either mankind will adjust to the justice of God or the justice of God will adjust to him.
10. This is the difference between cursing and blessing from the justice of God.
11. We must remember that God does not possess life; He is life, life uncorrupted and uncontaminated by the old sin nature.
12. Therefore God’s action toward His creatures is never arbitrary, nor the result of indifference. God is governed by the nature of His own character, His pertinent attributes of essence.
1. This brings us to a fortiori—with stronger reason. If the greater is accomplished then the less will not be withheld.
2. If the greater benefit has been provided by the justice of God (justification), it follows a fortiori that the less will not be withheld. The less is blessing in time flowing through the grace pipeline.
3. The blessings flow from the justice of God to the righteousness of God. The direction is the mature believer who has the capacity for such blessing from maximum doctrine resident in the soul, and from the re-programming of the brain calculator with divine viewpoint.
4. The greater degree in a fortiori is not quality or quantity, but degree of effort.
5. If the justice of God can accomplish the greater through grace it follows a fortiori that the justice of God can accomplish the less through grace.
6. If the greater benefit of imputed righteousness was given by the justice of God at salvation, it follows a fortiori that the justice of God will not withhold the less—blessing, prosperity—in time.
7. Blessing and prosperity from the justice of God glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why we are left behind after salvation.
8. Remember that the difference between greater and less in a fortiori is not quality or quantity but degree of effort. The greater is more difficult, while the less is much easier to provide.
9. The provision of blessing and prosperity in time is nothing compared to the provision of imputed righteousness and subsequent justification.
10. If the justice of God provides the greater blessing and prosperity in time it follows a fortiori that the justice of God will provide the less in eternity.
The second sentence is the recognition of the options. “So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God” – two inferential particles, a)ra and o)un. A)ra is an illative particle expressing inference, while o)un is a transitional inferential particle. Put together we have simply “So then.” What follows is Classical Greek in which there are two correlative particles: men, and later on de—“on the one hand, and on the other hand. These give us the options. Then the present active indicative of the verb, douleuw, which means to serve, to be a slave. The present tense is an iterative present, used to describe what occurs at successive intervals or is conceived of in successive periods. The tense connotes the alternatives resulting from the options. The active voice: the nominative singular subject is “I,” referring to Paul who is representing himself as the believer with the dilemma of options. Plus the predicate use of the intensive pronoun a)utoj which is the word “myself.” Plus the potential indicative of obligation, which means that the alternative we have is going to be the potential indicative of impulse (on the other hand). Now we insert “with the mind,” the instrumental of means singular from nouj. Bible doctrine has to be resident in the mind and the believer must be filled with the Spirit for this alternative to be true. So we are talking about an option which puts us on the right track. Plus the dative singular indirect object from nomoj. The phrase is anartharous. Plus the possessive genitive singular from qeoj—“the law of God.” The law of God is the principle of grace function, including rebound for the filling of the Spirit and the daily function of GAP for the maturity adjustment to the justice of God. The principle can only serve in the mind and not in the body where the old sin nature is located. The law of God is the principle of experiential sanctification.
“but with the flesh the law of sin” – de is with men, so this time it means “but on the other hand.” Then the verb is inserted, which is not repeated because in Classical Greek it is understood. The word “flesh” is the instrumental of means from sarc, referring to the old sin nature. The definite article is used as a possessive pronoun—“with my flesh I serve.” Plus the dative singular indirect object from nomoj—translated “law” if it is understood that it is the principle of the old sin nature. The possessive genitive singular from a(martia refers to the OSN—“but on the other hand with my flesh I serve the law of the principle of the sin nature.” The law of the sin nature is the principle of the impulses or trends found in the sin nature—good, sin, evil.
Translation: “Grace belongs to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then on the one hand with my mind I myself serve the law of God; but on the other hand with my flesh I myself serve the law of sin.”
1. Two mutually exclusive principles carry on a continual battle inside of the believer.
2. Each husband has a headquarters. The OSN, the ex-husband, resides in the body but attacks the soul. The Lord Jesus Christ resides in the soul and seeks to control the body through doctrine resident in the soul.
3. The new husband is represented by the Holy Spirit as the marriage counsellor, and Bible doctrine resident in the soul.
4. Both the Holy Spirit and Bible doctrine must control the soul for the believer to serve with the mind the law of God.
5. Through rebound adjustment to the justice of God the believer recovers the filling of the Spirit lost through sin.
6. Through the daily function of GAP Bible doctrine resident in the soul results in spiritual growth and maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
7. Therefore experiential sanctification is the law of God. This includes the filling of the Spirit plus the daily function of GAP, resulting in maturity adjustment to the justice of God.
8. While carnality and reversionism is the law of sin resulting in severe divine discipline, and ultimately the sin unto death.
9. However the sin unto death does not connote loss of salvation, merely the last intensive punishment of the reversionistic believer in time.