Romans 6:11-14 “Just Cuz”

Here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:

¹¹In the same way, you (pl.) also [should] be considering yourselves (on the one hand) [to be] dead ones to the sin, but (on the other hand) living ones to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. ¹²Therefore, the sin shall not be ruling in your (pl.) mortal body, that [you are] obeying the strong desires of it. ¹³No longer be presenting your members [as] tools of unrighteousness to the sin, but present yourselves to God as ones living out of dead ones and your members [as] tools of righteousness to God, ¹⁴for sin will not rule over you (pl.), for you (pl.) are not under law but under grace.

In the last post, I tried to record what I thought to be the most significant practical observations which I drew from my study of these verses. In this post, I want to record a number of what I suppose we can call exegetical observations. I don’t know that any of this will matter to anyone else, but I want to record these thoughts in case I come back later to this passage and want to remember them.

First, I have made a point of v.11 being the first imperative of the book of Romans: “In the same way, count yourselves…” Someone could object that this particular Greek verb (translated “count”) could be either indicative or imperative, either “You are counting yourselves,” or “Count yourselves…” the verb itself is in what we call the Greek present tense and in that  the indicative and imperative are identical, thus the difference must be drawn from the context. In this case, v.11 is immediately followed by the “Therefore, let not sin rule…” of v.12, where the form of the negative “not” would not be used with the indicative. In v. 12, it is clearly imperative. Also, in verse 13, the “do not offer” is adversatively joined with “but rather offer,” where the first is the same present tense form (where indicative and imperative are the same), but the adversative is an aorist, in which case, they are not the same. It is definitely imperative. Since the two verbs are joined, it makes no sense if the first is indicative but the second imperative. On the basis of all these considerations, I think it conclusive that, in fact, v.11 is to be translated as an imperative. That is why it was stated it so emphatically, even though I did not acknowledge the exegetical considerations which I felt supported my translation.

Speaking of tenses, it is interesting that in v.13, the first “present the members…” is a present tense, while the second “present yourselves” is an aorist. In Greek, tense is not so much about time, as about the kind of action. A present tends to be something on-going or habitual, whereas an aorist is what is called “punctiliar,” which can be a “point in time” or a gnomic sense of just simply stating a fact. I tried to depict this distinction in my fairly literal translation above with my “No longer be presenting your members…but present yourselves…” The two tenses are different and obviously Paul chose them deliberately. I’m thinking it makes good sense that the first is a present, as it is modified with the adverbial “no longer,” which lends itself logically to the idea of ceasing something on-going. As far as the second “present” and it being a punctiliar aorist, some people would say the “presentation of yourselves to God” is a one-time event, supported by Wesleyans and those who hold to what is called “entire sanctification.” I may add some thoughts about that later, but I am personally convinced what the Bible teaches is progressive sanctification, in which case the gnomic “present yourselves” would be simply stating what you should do, without necessarily making any big deal of when or how many times, etc.

One thing I thought very odd was in v.12, where we read, “Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body.” In the “your mortal body,” the “your” is a plural, while the “mortal body” is singular. I tried ot depict this in my translation simply by indicating the plurality of “your” with a parenthetical “pl.” The translation “your” doesn’t bother us in English, since “your” is the same whether singular or plural. However, knowing the Greek is actually plural to me is something odd to be pondered. I still haven’t figured out what to do with that. For now, I’m just noticing.

Also, in v.12, we’re told, “Therefore, do not let sin rule in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires.” One might ask what the “its” is referring to. In other words, are they the evil desires of sin or of your mortal body? Which do they come from? In this case, the Greek answers the question unequivocally, since, in Greek, “sin” is feminine while “body” is masculine, and the “its” is masculine. The evil desires are definitely being said to originate from the mortal body.

This is why, in the last post, I had no problem seeing the real problem for us originating from our Adamic bodies. Sin is obviously the big problem, but I think it highly significant for us all to see the actual difficulty as coming from within ourselves and not see it as simply “sin” out there somewhere causing us trouble. Like someone once pointed out, you can put a piece of wood on a hook, drop it in the water, and generally speaking, the fish will ignore it. On the other hand, put a big, fat, wiggly night crawler on it, and the fish will jump at it. Why the difference? The fish himself has no “desire” to eat wood, while the worm looks to him positively delicious! The difference is in the “desires” of the fish himself. The same is true of us and our “temptations.” The wood isn’t tempting. The worm is. And why? It all goes back to the desires within us.

I don’t want to elaborate on this now, but that leads us back to our need of the Holy Spirit’s indwelling and the problem with our “wanter.” Left to myself, I’m doomed because what I “want” is invariably wrong. A fish wants what a fish wants. Personally I don’t find the wood or the worm appealing. I’m not a fish. I have no problem being “tempted” by worms on hooks. However, I am an Adamic sinner and I want what an Adamic sinner wants. There are plenty of things that do tempt me. I need another Spirit within me to help me instead want good things, right things, godly things. My point is simply to note that, even our text supports my assertion that the problem is arising from within ourselves. The “evil desires” are originating from “our mortal bodies.”

I suppose somewhat along those same lines, it is interesting that what we are presenting in v.13 is “our members.” This is clearly referring to the physical members of our bodies. Sin and righteousness cannot be simply theoretical or hypothetical. Whether we sin or act righteously, we will do it very specifically one way or another with the members of our bodies. I sin with my mouth, my eyes, my hands, my feet, and even with my mind, but always with the members of this body.  At any given moment, if I would evaluate my behavior, I can ask what am I doing with my members? In other words, I can ask, “Where are my feet taking me right now, at this very moment? Am I on my way to do good or, if I’m honest, am I heading for trouble?” I have of late been trying to be very conscious of my mouth. Even as I’m listening to another person (with my ears, by the way), I’m trying to be praying, asking the Lord to help me say words that will represent Him well. What would Jesus say? Every single time my mouth is moving, I’m either speaking good or evil. My words are either somehow expressing love or not. God help us all be more aware of what our body is doing, what our “members” are up to!

One final observation—in v.14, when it says, “For you are not under law but under grace,” I want to note that the word “law” is inarticular. In other words, it is not “the Law.” It is simply “law.” The statement in this verse is not arising from a question of whether we are or are not still under “the Law” (as referring to anything we can take from Old Testament or Mosaic Law). The statement is simply referring to “law” in general or perhaps we could call it the law principle? A born-again Christian does not live under the law principle, the legalistic, performance-based approval system (which by the way is what everyone does naturally). Instead, we live under the grace principle, where we are loved not for what we do or don’t do, but because the Father loves us, which He is free to openly express precisely because Jesus has already paid for our sins.

If I could just throw in this thought, although legalism is the very air us humans breathe (it would seem), yet we ourselves do know something of grace. What I mean is this—consider your children. Do you only love them when they do well? Certainly there are some very wicked, twisted adults out there who do not love their children. However, for any normal parent, can we all agree we love our kids no matter what? In fact, is that not precisely why it hurts so much when they do not do well? Love wants the best for them. It wants to see them happy and making good decisions. But no matter how well they do or don’t do, we always have and always will love them. No matter how far they stray, our arms will always long to welcome them home. We love them “just cuz.” What is that? Grace.

What you and I must do and what Paul is calling us to here in the book of Romans is to realize when it comes to God, we are the children. He doesn’t call Himself “Father” for nothing. Us Christians need to learn to see ourselves as children, as people living under the grace principle, not law. God loves us in Christ “just cuz.”

I love the verse Zeph. 3:17: “The Lord your God in the midst of you is mighty; He will save, He will rejoice over you with joy; He will rest in His love, He will joy over you with singing.” Those words describe exactly what my heart does over my three children, Daniel, Ruthie, and Esther. It’s what God does over me! That’s grace. “Just cuz.”

 

Romans 6:11-14 “Better”

Here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:

¹¹In the same way, you (pl.) also [should] be considering yourselves (on the one hand) [to be] dead ones to the sin, but (on the other hand) living ones to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. ¹²Therefore, the sin shall not be ruling in your (pl.) mortal body, that [you are] obeying the strong desires of it. ¹³No longer be presenting your members [as] tools of unrighteousness to the sin, but present yourselves to God as ones living out of dead ones and your members [as] tools of righteousness to God, ¹⁴for sin will not rule over you (pl.), for you (pl.) are not under law but under grace.

Verse 11 should be recognized as significantly pivotal in the logical flow of this book. After five and a half chapters of profound doctrine, this verse is the first imperative, the first actual command in the entire book. For five and a half chapters, Paul has explained the Gospel, the real truth of what is our problem and the amazing solution the Lord provided for us through Jesus—the doctrine of grace. Here in verse 11, for the first time, he turns to you and me and says, “In the same way, you…” As usual, I have underlined the “you” because it is in fact emphatic in the Greek. Paul is making no bones about it. The Gospel, the doctrine of grace is amazing, but it comes down to you. It is God’s great work through Jesus, but it is absolutely not some hypothetical theory to be debated. It impacts you and me personally.

The antagonists are saying this doctrine of grace will just give people license to plunge themselves gleefully into sin. Although we all know that isn’t valid, yet Paul needs to assert that quite the opposite is true. Because you and I are still living in these “mortal” bodies, we each do have to be (constantly) reminded and reminding ourselves that this grace we enjoy, when properly received, is intended to and must and will change us.

The first thing I want to note is the “In the same way.” In what “same way”? In verses 9&10, we just read, “For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead…death no longer has mastery over Him. The death He died, He died to sin…the life He lives He lives to God.” Now it says, “In the same way…” Why is that? Not surprisingly, grace means you and I become like Jesus! In verse 9 we read, “Death no longer has mastery over Him,” then v.12 says, “therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body…” In verse 10 we read, “The life He lives, He lives to God,” then v.13 says, “Offer yourselves to God…” Far from “gleefully plunging into sin,” grace makes us become like Jesus!

Another thing I want to note is that v.13 calls us to “offer yourselves to God.” Particularly note the “yourselves.” The verse starts by urging us not to offer “the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness,” then ends urging us to instead “offer the members of your body to Him as instruments of righteousness.” However, notice that, in between comes the “offer yourselves to God.” This is grace, not law. It’s not just a matter of stopping doing “bad things,” and starting doing “good things.” No. It’s about offering yourself to God. It’s about a personal relationship. The real truth is all the Lord wants from you is you. To give Him any less is, in the end, to give Him nothing at all. We’re not just “dead to sin.” In v.11, we are “alive to God in Christ Jesus.”

Then I believe it is helpful to note what exactly is our problem. Verse 12 tells us “Do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires.” This is precisely our problem. I was born a child of Adam. That said, I was born with a body and its accompanying spirit that is completely rotten. It’s called “mortal” because it is a dying body. God had warned Adam, “In the day you eat thereof, in dying you shall die.” The wages of sin is death. This body I was born in is literally a “body of death.” Part of its dying and its death are to be found in “its evil desires.” Its spirit has what I’ve called before a “broken wanter.” Its “wants” are evil.

This is what the New Testament calls our “flesh.” In general parlance, the word “flesh” obviously can refer simply to the material body itself, whether human or animal. However, when the Bible refers to our “flesh,” it is speaking of this rotten Adamic body we were born in, but note that body includes “evil desires.” The spirit it came with (my natural spirit) is itself rotten. Again, herein is our problem: I still live in this body. I still have the same rotten spirit.  My natural “wanter” is still broken. We will get to this in chapter 8, but what has changed under grace is not that I’ve resolved to “do better.” What’s changed is that I am now indwelt by the very Holy Spirit of God, the third person of the Trinity! There is another Spirit inside of me which can be my spirit. But therein is the battle. Which spirit will I allow to rule my life?

Also, let us understand that is precisely why we must die physically. This body we were born in, with its rotten wanter, actually needs to physically die. When I die, that old rotten wanter dies too. Death, though it be “the king of terrors,” becomes a merciful judgment. Under grace, death becomes our final ticket to freedom! However, in the meantime this “flesh” lives on…or should I say, dies on. In my Adamic body, I live dying. However, the indwelling Holy Spirit is to me a spirit of life.

We now possess within us the power to conquer ourselves, but not just to “do better.” Not just to somehow stop doing bad things and start doing good, but to actually be different. Herein I believe is what Paul is referring to in v.14 when he says, “For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.” Law is completely external. It’s the rules. Do this. Don’t do that. If that is all there is, you and me are doomed. We will find that sin is still our master. My broken wanter will constantly make the wrong choices. But grace is something so much better. It is a me allowing the Holy Spirit to be my spirit, to change me, to make me want what God wants. As Gal. 5:23 says, “Against such things, there is no law.”

And so, beginning at v.11, the book of Romans has shifted gears from explaining grace to now addressing the wonderful privilege you and I enjoy—living out that grace. It is still a struggle, in fact a mortal struggle, but a blessed struggle at that, precisely because it is all about a real, personal love relationship with God, a daily experience of becoming more like Jesus, of knowing that I really am different, but not because I “do better,” but because the Spirit of Christ within me actually helps me be better.

 

Romans 6:1-10 “Resurrection!”

Here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:

¹What, therefore, will we say? Are we continuing in the sin, in order that the grace may abound? ²May it never be! We who died to the sin, how will we yet live in it? ³Or, do you not know that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? ⁴Therefore, we were placed together with Him through the baptism into the death, in order that, just as Christ was raised up out of dead ones through the glory of the Father, thus also we might walk in newness of life, ⁵for, if we have become united ones with the likeness of His death, we shall be rather also of His resurrection, ⁶knowing this, that our old man was crucified together with [Christ] in order that the body of the sin might be rendered inoperative, that we might no longer be slaves to the sin, ⁷for the dead one has been justified from the sin, ⁸but we are believing that, if we died together with Christ, we will also live with Him, ⁹knowing that, Christ having been raised out of dead ones, death no longer has mastery over Him, ¹⁰for, the [death] He died, He died to the sin once for all, but the [life] He lives, He lives to God.

Resurrection. Life from the dead. I have said for years that, in one sense, the whole point of Christianity is resurrection. Every Easter, my consuming thought is that what we are celebrating is the enormity of what Christianity is all about—Resurrection, life from the dead, a new life, a second chance. As Paul says in v.4, the point is that we should “walk in newness of life,” in v.6, that “we might no longer be slaves to sin.” Resurrection is about putting away the death and misery and slavery of our old lives and suddenly awakening to live a new life of love and joy and peace!

In Jesus’ death, you and me died. Our old life died. And when He arose, He raised you and me too. The darkness, the despair, the endless frustration, all of that ended and you and me arose in Him to walk in the bright light of His love. God was no longer mysterious and distant, stern and threatening. Suddenly He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who loves me with an everlasting love.

All of this is enough to keep us praising Him for all eternity—and longer if that was possible! That brings us back to vv.1&2: “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? May it never be! We died to sin; how can we live any longer in it?” Any born again person is thinking the same thought: “May it never be!!!” That life of sin and misery and endless death is exactly what Jesus saved us from! Why on earth would we want to go back? “Our old man was crucified together with Him!”

This, I would suggest, is exactly what people are missing when they think grace encourages sin, when they think the idea of grace, of unconditional love, will only cause people to cast off morality and plunge gleefully into sin. Tell a pig he’s free to wallow in the mud and of course he’ll run and jump right into it. Tell a lamb and he’ll ask, “Why would I want to do that?” What people are missing is the enormity of resurrection, the fact that grace not only forgives us, it also changes us. When Jesus saved me, I didn’t just “turn over a new leaf.” I died. My old life died; and I arose to live a new life. I’m not a pig anymore. I’m a sheep. Grace made me a new man, with a new dynamo churning within me. I don’t want to live that old life any longer. I want to know God. I want Him in my life. I want to see my world through His eyes, live it His way, When I know His truth, His truth sets me free.

Mentally, I’m back to asking why Paul even needs to explain all of this. Any genuinely born-again believer joins him in his “May it never be!” To us, it is a complete and total logical absurdity. Continue in sin? That is exactly what I died to. Why on earth would I want to live any longer in it???” But then I’m back to acknowledging that he does explain it. I guess it needs to be said because it needs to be said. Somewhere the Defense needs to refute this indictment that grace encourages sin. I suppose I should say I doubt that any of this will ever satisfy the unregenerate persons who raise the challenge. Perhaps it needs to be said more for our sake than theirs? Yes, we know it, but I also have to admit I sure enjoy hearing it.

What a wondrous truth it all is. Life from the dead! I get to live!

While I’m reveling in the wonder of it all, and with all of that said, there are a few exegetical thoughts I want to record. First of all, there are those who have always jumped on vv.3&4 to support the idea that somehow we are saved by being baptized. “All of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death. We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death and raised from the dead to live a new life.” If we grab this verse out of its context, it certainly seems to support their assertion. However, keeping it in its context, there are several reasons I would suggest the assertion is invalid.

First of all, Paul has just spent the first five chapters of this book addressing the doctrine of justification and clearly established that we are saved by grace through faith alone. Now, in chapter 6, he has moved on to the issues of Christian living for those who have been justified by that faith. The subject under discussion here in chapter 6 is not to somehow go back and re-visit the doctrine of justification. My point is just to say, this is a poor context for someone to pull out an isolated verse or two and somehow establish for themselves an entirely new doctrine of salvation, to suddenly interject this idea that an external ceremony is in some way integral to that justification by faith alone. If the act of baptism were essential to that justification, how could Paul have failed to mention it anywhere in those first five chapters, when that was the context, when that was exactly what he was addressing—the means of our salvation? We simply should not be pulling vv. 3&4 out of their context.

Add to that a couple of other considerations: Throughout the New Testament, the concept of “baptism” is used in a much larger sense than just the act of water baptism. In I Cor. 10:2&3, Paul describes the Israelites as having been “baptized into Moses…they all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink…”  John the Baptist said, “I baptize you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit” (Mark 1:8). The ancient peoples were much more “picture” oriented than we are and clearly, as we would read the Bible, their concept of “baptism” was much larger than the act itself.

That thought actually impacts our understanding and even translation of our v.4. As our English versions tend to read, it says, “We were therefore buried with Him through baptism…” Interestingly, that word “baptism” is actually articular. It literally says, “We were buried with Him through the baptism,” which I would suggest should be translated, “We were buried with Him through that baptism…” What baptism? That baptism. The one just mentioned in v.3. Our “baptism into Christ Jesus,” which is the larger picture just like the Israelite’s baptism into Moses. The meaning of the word “baptism” is, of course, actually “immersion.” I think if we were to talk about our “immersion into Jesus” or the Israelites’ “immersion into Moses,” it would be a little easier for us accept that is how Paul is using the word here in chapter 6, as referring to a life-consuming association.

I’m suggesting first of all that we would be pulling vv.3,4 out of their context to try to use them as a proof text for baptismal salvation. Even if someone wants to take that position, I would say the burden of proof is on them to explain why, if it is that important, didn’t Paul even so much as mention it in the first five chapters? Then, add to that the very legitimate exegesis which would allow for the word “baptism” to be here being used in its larger sense of “immersion” into a total life association.

While I’m on it and having brought up the word “immersion,” I also want to say I think we are also on thin ice to try to use these verses as a proof text for what we call immersion baptism. We all like to see in this entire passage the picture of immersion baptism, that going down into the water and up again as being a picture of our death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. I like that picture too, but I have to be an honest exegete and say the same thing—that the point of this passage is not to establish a doctrine of baptism. That may be true, but if we want to get dogmatic, I believe we need to find another passage where that is specifically the context. I know that sounds like heresy, but, once again, I want to be an honest—and a consistent—exegete. I’m saying the baptismal salvation people shouldn’t pull their verses out of context, but neither should we.  The point of this passage is to answer the indictment that grace encourages sin. The whole point of the passage is to establish that Jesus’ resurrection renders that indictment utterly absurd. We all need to be careful, no matter how appealing, not to use these verses to dogmatically make any other assertion. If we would all just let these verses remind us again of the wonder of resurrection, we’d have plenty to keep us busy praising God.

Resurrection. Life from the dead. A new life. Hope. Love. Joy. Peace. I never tire of reveling in this amazing and glorious blessing that Jesus has given us!

 

Romans 6:1-2 “This is My Father’s World”

Here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:

¹What, therefore, will we say? Are we continuing in the sin, in order that the grace may abound? ²May it never be! We who died to the sin, how will we yet live in it?

Pondering on these two verses, what I want to record is probably more than anything a commentary on commentaries. What I mean is that, like so many places in the Bible, literally oceans of ink have been spilt on these verses. Theologically speaking, the discussions all come down to what is called the “Antinomian Controversy.” As nearly all acknowledge, up to the end of chapter 5, what Paul has established is the doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone. That doctrine has been perennially and perpetually impugned as teaching a license for sin. That is “antinomianism” or the teaching that, because we are saved entirely by grace, therefore we are free to sin. The idea is that grace is “against law,” which is where the word “antinomian” comes from, meaning in Greek literally “against law.”

Where do I begin? My first inclination is to dismiss the whole discussion as asinine and utterly unworthy of even acknowledgment. I’m inclined to simply say, “That is so stupid, I refuse to waste one minute talking about it.” Of course, then, I am confronted by the fact that Paul, under the pen of inspiration, does address it. That is exactly the point of verse 1. Okay, I guess I have to admit that, after twenty-one centuries, it’s still getting talked about, so obviously it did and still does need to be addressed.

That would lead to my first lament – that after twenty-one centuries, it’s still being talked about. How can that be, when Paul answers it decisively right here in verse 2? Not only that, but chapters 6-8 here in Romans are very specifically written to address the life of that person justified by the very grace through faith taught in chapters 1-5. In other words, the whole question has already been answered. Why don’t we “get it?” I would sadly suggest it is because so few actually take God’s Word seriously. Men who are supposed to be theologians too often cannot simply let God say what He says. Too often they haven’t studied themselves to even know what He does (and does not) say. Their goal in study obviously is not to truly know the heart of God—and note that is the only study goal that God will bless. Pastors, missionaries, evangelists, Bible college & seminary professors, and all like them are purportedly speaking for God. You’d think the first order of business for them would be to make sure they know what God says! But, alas, we are a generation of spiritual pygmies, too often led by other pygmies. One very good pastor told me one of his biggest fears is to get to Heaven and have God ask him, “Why did you tell them I said that?” With that in mind, he does take his study of the Word and his preaching seriously.

Thank the Lord for those few men who, like my friend, do take God’s Word seriously and teach it accordingly. They’re just too few, and so we go on and on, debating over questions that the Lord answered decisively 2,100 years ago.

My next lament is over the title “Antinomian” itself. I would maintain first of all that it is a straw man. No one who even remotely calls themselves a Christian is ever going to stand up and say, “We’re against all law! We believe grace means we can all run out and sin!” That is what I mean, it is a “straw man.” Such a person doesn’t really exist. Basically, it is a term that guys use as a pejorative against their theological enemies. Interestingly, those enemies may turn around and use the same pejorative against them! Now, there certainly have been cult leaders down through the years who particularly like to dismiss the notion of sexual sin (Jude 4; Rev. 2:20), and that is certainly a very bad thing, but I am guessing, even if you asked them, they would not consider themselves “Antinomians.”

Secondly, I will stick my neck out and say the real problem is that none of these guys have actually repented of their own legalism. Us humans are born incorrigibly legalistic. That is precisely why all “religions” devolve into their own system of “rules.” Even those who do teach grace, turn around and come up with their own system of “do’s and don’ts,” and though they teach grace, they engage in all sorts of mental gymnastics, trying to decide what to do with “law.” I had the same problem for years until I actually took the time to study through the book of Galatians. As I studied, I finally realized it’s not about law at all. Real Biblical Christianity, that wants to live God’s heart, realizes it is all about our relationship with Him. It’s about a love for Him that then turns into love for the people around us. “The law” then becomes for us an expression of God’s heart, part of understanding what is important to Him. We who enjoy grace want to have no interest in sin, not because “it’s the rules,” but because we love Jesus and long to live a life that pleases Him. As Paul said, “I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me, and the life I now live, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me” (Gal. 2:20).

The very fact that men have to argue about law exposes the sad fact that they’ve never repented of legalism themselves. They all get all bent out of shape trying to decide which laws are “still binding,” and then the answer is always either certain laws, or more laws, or less laws, or better laws, …laws, laws, laws. God must sit up in Heaven and say, “Hello? Whenever you get done with all of that, I’d love to have a relationship with you!” What if I told my wife to give me all her “rules” and I’ll work hard at keeping them? Even at the human level, how much better to say, “I love you,” then learn the things that please and displease that person, and seek to live accordingly, not because “it’s the rules,” but out of love? Do we really think God is any different?

Someone will no doubt run across my feeble scratchings and proclaim me a complete heretic, but is not what I’m saying exactly an expression of Paul’s heart right here in the passage before us? What is his answer to the objection, “What you’re saying is, because of grace, we should all sin more!!!” What is his answer? “May it never be! We who died to sin, how shall we live any longer in it?” We “died” to sin. Can we all note that “died” is a very serious word? How dead is dead? Those who know God, who enter into this grace relationship do not simply “turn over a new leaf.” We died.  The idea that grace leads to sin is abhorrent to Paul and also to us who enjoy it. That is crystal clear from the passage before us and, I would suggest, could be “end of discussion” except for people who are in reality still struggling with the whole concept of law to begin with. Again, I will maintain there must be a point for all of us where we repent of our natural and incorrigible legalism. Only then can we expect to truly begin to know the heart of our Jesus and order our lives accordingly.

Of course, even we who know grace, and of whom it can be said that we have “died to sin,” have this on-going struggle with its power. Though it may be a defeated foe, it is still a foe and a very powerful one at that. We Christians enter into this, “You are, but not yet,” where we died to sin, yet we must continue to die daily, and keep it up until the day when Jesus appears and once for all delivers us from this “body of death.” But then I’m running ahead. That is precisely what Romans 6-8 will address.

Once again, I wish it could be true that we would all read Romans 6:1,2, agree that the statement itself, “Grace leads to sin” is totally absurd, then move on. That hasn’t happened in twenty-six centuries, so it won’t any time soon, but it can in your heart and mine. May we all climb into the lap of our loving heavenly Father, then live looking out through His big, strong arms, singing to ourselves. “This is My Father’s World.”