Romans 6:12

WHAT PRACTICAL USE BELIEVERS SHOULD MAKE OF THEIR DEATH TO SIN AND LIFE TO GOD THROUGH UNION TO THE CRUCIFIED SAVIOUR. (Rom 6:12-23)

Let not sin therefore--as a Master

reign--(The reader will observe that wherever in this section the words "Sin," "Obedience," "Righteousness," "Uncleanness," "Iniquity," are figuratively used, to represent a Master, they are here printed in capitals, to make this manifest to the eye, and so save explanation).

in your mortal body, that ye should obey it--sin.

in the lusts thereof--"the lusts of the body," as the Greek makes evident. (The other reading, perhaps the true one, "that ye should obey the lusts thereof," comes to the same thing). The "body" is here viewed as the instrument by which all the sins of the heart become facts of the outward life, and as itself the seat of the lower appetites; and it is called "our mortal body," probably to remind us how unsuitable is this reign of sin in those who are "alive from the dead." But the reign here meant is the unchecked dominion of sin within us. Its outward acts are next referred to.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom_6:12

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body.

The reign of sin

Let not sin reign because it is--

I. A tyrannic reign.

1. Sin has usurped its sway over the heart. It forms no part in the original plan of our world.

2. It gains the ruling power gradually. If the criminal knew from his first sin the tremendous power it would have upon his life his downward course would have been arrested. The chain was drawn tighter by degrees.

3. As Britons we hate everything oppressive, the public sentiment is against all tyrants; still the greatest of all is tolerated in the hearts of thousands.

II. A dishonourable reign. Occasionally we are obliged to blush at the deeds done in the name of England. But as a rule we are proud of our country, not so much on account of its wealth and military strength as the position it has gained for uprightness. Sin is dishonourable to God and to man. It is the transgression of the best law, and the highest ingratitude.

III. A destructive reign. Peace, moral beauty, and strength are destroyed wherever sin has the ruling power. It is a cancer that eats its way gradually, yet effectually, to the very roots of our being. Conclusion: Subjects we must be; it is for us to decide under whose government. We cannot govern ourselves, we must serve either righteousness or sin. How thankful we ought to be that there is a higher, stronger, purer power ready to enter the heart and rule there. We are under no obligation to let sin have the throne. The Spirit is willing to govern if man will open his heart. (Jenkin Jones.)

The reign of sin

I. What is it for sin to reign over us.

1. All men are sinful (Rom_3:10-12).

2. There is no sin but all men by nature are prone to (Psa_51:5).

3. But there is some sin that everyone is inclined to more than others (Psa_18:23), by--

(1) The constitution of his body (1Co_9:27).

(2) Vocation.

(3) Custom (Jer_13:23).

(4) Condition in the world (Pro_30:8-9).

(5) Temptations (1Pe_5:8).

4. The sins we are most inclined to may have a prevalency over us, either--

(1) Partial (Rom_8:20-21), or--

(2) Plenary, without resistance (Rom_6:12; Rom_6:20).

5. When sin has a full prevalency in us it is said to reign over us. Because we--

(1) Are subject to its power.

(2) Obey its minions (Rom_6:16; Rom_7:5).

II. Why should not sin reign over us. Because--

1. It has no right or title to this kingdom, but only God as--

(1) Our Creator.

(2) Preserver (Act_17:28).

(3) Redeemer (1Co_6:20).

2. We are buried with Christ by baptism into His death, and so are free from sin (Rom_6:1-3; Rom_6:7; Rom_6:10-11; Rom_6:14).

3. If it reign in us it will ruin us (Rom_6:23).

III. How shall we obtain the victory over it. By--

1. Faith in Christ.

2. Prayer (Psa_119:133; Rom_7:24).

3. Watchfulness (Pro_4:23).

IV. Uses.

1. Of examination. That is a reigning sin--

(1) Which is your chief end and greatest pleasure (Col_3:5; Php_3:19).

(2) Which is made habitual by custom (Jer_13:23).

(3) Which your thoughts run most upon and study most for (1Jn_3:8-9).

(4) Which we most willingly submit to (Joh_8:44; Rom_6:13; Rom_7:21-22).

(5) Which we do not love to hear reproved.

(6) That for whose sake we commit others (Psa_18:23), as Davids murder for adultery.

(7) Which distracts us in holy duties (1Jn_2:15).

2. Of exhortation. Consider--

(1) Sin is the greatest slavery in the world (2Pe_2:19; Tit_3:3).

(2) Christ came into the world to redeem thee from it (Rom_3:26).

(3) If sin reign in thee, thou hast no part in Christ (Mat_6:24), for Satan reigns over thee (2Ti_2:26).

(4) Thou wilt have but bad wages for thy service.

(a) In this life--the torture of a guilty conscience--a curse on thy estate (Mal_2:2)--the wrath of an offended God (Psa_7:11).

(b) In the life to come--separation from God--imprisonment in hell (Rom_6:23). (Bishop Beveridge.)

The tyranny of sin

I. The tyranny of sin. It has--

1. Made the body mortal.

2. Developed its lusts.

3. Through it enslaved the soul.

II. The duty of resisting it.

1. We ought, because Christ has redeemed us.

2. We can, through grace.

3. We must if we would be saved. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

An indomitable will needed

If a man has a strong besetment, he must treat it as he would a savage dog. He must keep it kenneled and chained, and never suffer it to go beyond its tether, however it may bark or growl. He will have to say to it every now and then, Down, sir. He will sometimes require the stern resoluteness expressed in John Fosters saying, This soul shall either conquer this body or shall leave it. Ruthless, bloodless, indomitable will is needed sometimes in order that a man may fight well the battle of his life.

Sin dwelling in but not reigning over the believer

1. Some would substitute here in place of mortal, as liable to death, the idea of actual death in Christ. Sin having been plucked of its sting, our Saviour having received it in His own body, therefore there is no more power in our adversary to inflict its mortal poison upon us; he is not only disarmed of his right to condemn us, but of all ability to tyrannise over us. In virtue of his defeat he will not obtain the dominion over our hearts unless we let him. Our resistance, backed as it is by the plea of a Saviour crucified, and by the power of a Saviour exalted, will be greatly too much for him. We who have been baptized into Christ are somewhat in the same circumstances that the children of Israel, after being baptized into Moses in the Red Sea, were in reference to the tyranny of Egypt. Their enemy was engulfed in that abyss over which they found a shielded way; and, placed beyond his dominion, it was now their part to exchange the mastery of Pharaoh for the mastery of God; but those who rebelled were cut off in the wilderness.

2. And this analogy does not fail us if we take mortal in the customary signification. While in these mortal bodies, we are only on a road through the wilderness of earth to the blessedness of heaven. All who are really partakers with Christ in His death have got over a mighty barrier. They have been carried through the strait gate of acceptance, and have now to travel along the narrow way of duty and discipline, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Let not sin reign over us on the passage that we have yet to traverse. Let us stifle every rising inclination for the carnalities of Egypt, and come not under the power of those lusts which war against the soul, till we reach the spiritual Canaan where every inclination to evil shall cease to exist and so cease to annoy us.

3. We cannot fail to perceive how widely diverse the injunction would have been, if instead of, Let not sin reign, Paul had said, Let sin be rooted out; or if, instead of saying, Obey not its lusts, he had bid us eradicate them. The more enviable state, of course, would be to have no inclination to evil, and could we attain that higher state, we would become on earth what angels are in heaven; but if doomed to the lower state during all our abode here, then we may understand that the life of a Christian is a struggle of two adverse elements, and the habitual prevalence of one of them, and that sin is not to be exterminated, but to be kept at bay. Let us try to banish it, and defeated in this effort, we may give up in heartless despair the cause of our sanctification; but trying to dethrone it, and succeeding in this effort, while we mourn its hateful company, we may both keep it under control and calmly look onward to the hour of release. We cannot obtain such a victory as that we shall never feel the motions of the flesh, but we may obtain such a victory as that we shall not walk after the flesh. The enemy is not so killed as that we are delivered from his presence; but, by an unremitting strenuousness on our part, we may keep him so chained as that we shall be delivered from his power.

4. The time is coming when, freed from every opposing tendency, we shall expatiate over the realms of ethereal purity and love--just as the time is coming when the chrysalis shall burst with unfettered wing from the prison in which it is now held; and where, we doubt not, that it is aspiring and growing into a meetness for traversing at large the field of light and air above it. This representation of indwelling sin--

I. Conduces to the peace of a believer. The very occurrence of a sinful desire, or feeling, harasses a delicate conscience, and he may be led to suspect therefrom his interest in the promises. But it will quiet him to be told that there is a distinction between the saint who is struggling below and the saint who is triumphing above.

II. Conduces to the believers progress, for it leads to a most wholesome self-distrust which, for one thing, will save him from needlessly thrusting himself into a scene of temptation. God will grant succour against the onsets which temptation maketh upon us, but He does not engage Himself to stand by us in the presumptuous onsets which we make upon temptation.

III. Leads us to such measures as may strengthen the gracious part of our constitution for every such encounter as cannot be shunned. Temptation will come, though we should never move a step towards it. What, then, is the best method of upholding the predominance of the good principle over the evil one? A fresh commitment of ourselves in faith and in prayer to Him who first put the good principle into our hearts--another act of recurrence to the fulness that is in Christ Jesus--a new application for strength from the Lord our Sanctifier to meet this new occasion for strength which He Himself has permitted to cross our path. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)

Follow after holiness

I. How must we do this?

1. By breaking the power of sin (verse 12).

2. By yielding ourselves to God (verse 13).

II. Is it possible? Grace destroys--

1. The dominion of sin (verse 14).

2. The love of sin (verse 15).

III. Why ought we to do it? It is required--

1. By the obedience of faith (verse 16).

2. By gratitude to God for His gracious help (verse 17).

3. By our merciful emancipation from the bondage of sin. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The obligation of a holy life

I. Its elements.

1. Subjection of natural lusts.

2. Renunciation of the service of sin.

3. Consecration of all the powers to God.

II. Its possibility (verse 14). As Christians--

1. We are not under the law.

2. But under grace.

3. Consequently receive dominion over sin.

III. Its indispensable necessity. Because--

1. Grace requires it.

2. Practice determines to whom we belong.

3. Obedience is the perfection of righteousness. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 6:12-14. Let not sin — Any sinful disposition or inclination; therefore — Since you are regenerate and spiritually alive; reign in your mortal body — That is, reign in your soul while it dwells in your body. Many of our sinful inclinations have their seat in the body, and such evil inclinations as are of a more spiritual nature, are always some way more or less turned toward the body. That ye should obey it — Should yield to and be overcome by it; in the lusts thereof — In the irregular or inordinate desires which it excites within you. Neither yield ye your members — The members of your bodies, or the faculties of your minds; the word μελη, here used, as also chapter Rom 7:5, signifying both, and indeed every thing in us and belonging to us, which is employed as an instrument in performing the works of the flesh, enumerated Gal 5:19-21. For some of these do not require the members of the body to their being performed, but are wholly confined in their operation to the mind. Hence, Col 3:5, evil desire and covetousness are mentioned among our members upon the earth which we are to mortify. As instruments of unrighteousness — Employed in its service; unto sin — For the committing of it. The original word οπλα, rendered instruments, properly denotes military weapons; and may be here used to signify, that those who employ their powers, whether of body or mind, or any ability they possess, in the service of sin, do in fact fight for it, and for its master and father, Satan; and the principalities and powers under his command, against God and Christ, and all the company of heaven. But yield yourselves unto God — Your lawful king, governor, and captain: dedicate yourselves, both body and soul, to his service; as those that are alive from the dead — Who, after having been spiritually dead, are quickened and put in possession of spiritual life; that is, are no longer alienated from the life of God, but have vital union with God; not as formerly, carnally minded, which is death, but spiritually minded, which is life and peace, chap. Rom 8:6; no longer under condemnation to the second death, but justified and entitled to eternal life; and your members — All your powers and abilities; as instruments of righteousness — Instruments employed in the promotion of piety and virtue; unto God — For his service and to his glory; or as weapons, to fight his battles, and oppose the designs of your spiritual enemies. For sin shall not have dominion over you — It has no right, and shall not have power to reign over you. The word κυριευσει, denotes the government of a master over his slave, and might be rendered, shall not lord it over you. As if he had said, Though it is true sin is strong, and you are weak in yourselves, yet if you faithfully strive against it, looking to God for power from on high, you shall be enabled to conquer. For ye are not under the law — Under a dispensation of terror and bondage, which only shows you your duty, but gives you no power to perform it; and which condemns you for your past violations of it, but offers no pardon to any on their repentance. The Mosaic law seems to be particularly intended, and the propriety of what is here observed is well illustrated, in that view, by the apostle in the next chapter. But his words may well imply also, that we are not so under any law as to be utterly condemned for want of a perfect conformity, or unsinning obedience to it. Not under a dispensation that requires such an obedience, under the penalty of death; which offers no assistance for enabling those who are under it to perform its requisitions, and grants no pardon to any sinner on his repentance. For the apprehension of being under such a dispensation would tend utterly to discourage us in all our attempts to conquer sin, and free ourselves from its power. But under grace — Under the merciful dispensation of the gospel, which offers to all that will accept it, in the way of repentance toward God and faith in Christ, a free and full pardon for all that is past, an entire change of nature, and those continual supplies of grace, which strengthen human weakness, and confer both the will and the power to conquer every besetting sin, and live in the practice of universal holiness and righteousness. For the nature of the grace, that is, of the new gracious covenant, under which we are placed, is such, that it does not require an impossible perfect obedience to the law of Moses, or any law, but the obedience of faith; promising, at the same time, the aids of the Holy Spirit, to enable men to do God’s will sincerely as far as they know it, and offering the pardon of sin to all on condition of repentance and faith in Christ, and in the declarations and promises of the gospel through him. Now under this gracious covenant mankind have been placed ever since the fall; ever since God said, The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head; ever since that time the apostle’s doctrine here, Ye are not under the law, but under grace, has been true of all the posterity of Adam; a doctrine which, instead of weakening the obligation of the law of God, written on men’s hearts, or the moral law in any of its requirements, establishes it in the most effectual manner. See note on Rom 3:31.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_6:12.—Sin works bodily desires as the utterances of itself, obedience to which gives it its domain in the body (Wordsworth). Sin personified as a sort of rival sovereign or deity.

Rom_6:13.—Do not wield arms for sin. Be as one who has come out of the world of the dead into that of the living, and whose present life has nothing in common with the former.

Rom_6:14. Under grace.—Both justifying and renewing. In the evangelical state in which grace is offered and bestowed the law is fulfilled and sin overcome. It is from the law as inadequate to effect the sanctification and secure the obedience of sinners that the apostle here declares us to be free.

Rom_6:15.—Christ has freed believers from the curse of the law as a covenant, but not from obedience to the law as a rule. We are now translated from the covenant of the law to the covenant of grace (Bishop Sanderson).

Rom_6:16.—Whoever wishes to be free, let him neither wish nor show any of those things which depend upon others, otherwise he must be a slave.

Rom_6:17. That form of doctrine.—τύπον διδαχῆς. Metaphor suggested by the city where the epistle was written. Corinth famous for casting statues in bronze.

Rom_6:18.—Emancipated, as a slave receiving his liberty.

Rom_6:19.—Meyer renders εἰς ἁγιασμόν, in order to attain holiness, to be ἄγιος in mind and walk. Meyer lays it down that in the New Testament ἁγιασμός is always “holiness,” not “sanctification”; Godet also prefers “holiness.” On the other hand, Dr. Clifford gives “unto sanctification,” and says that ἁγ includes the sanctifying act or process as well as result. Mr. Moule also gives “unto sanctification,” and says that the word indicates rather a process than a principle or a condition—a steady course of self-denial, watchfulness, diligence. Dean Vaughan says that ἁγ indicates an act rather than quality. Bishop Westcott says it may be most simply described as the preparation for the presence of God.

Rom_6:20.—Had neither learned to revere nor obey the commands.

Rom_6:21.—In those things ye had your fruit of which now ye are ashamed. What fruit? None, worse than none; “for,” etc.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_6:12-21

Two services contrasted.—Sin and righteousness are the two claimants for the moral service of man. They are the two forces battling, one for the destruction and the other for the salvation of the race. Sin finds an ally in the fallen nature of man; righteousness appeals to the nobler nature, is supported by the better instincts, and is on the side of the divine order and fitness of things. Nevertheless sin reigns in a very extensive sphere; and every effort is required, and every argument and consideration must be adduced in order that sin may not reign in the mortal body of the believer. Contrast, then, the two services:—

I. The service of sin.—

1. The pleasure of this service is short-lived. Whatever view may be taken of the expression “mortal body,” we shall do no violence to the phrase by making it set forth the short-lived pleasure of sin. The greater part of sin’s pleasure arises from the lusts of the flesh. When the body is worn out, when the physical powers are decaying, sin has no fascinating baits to allure. The old sinner may curse the service in which he has engaged. Why, indeed, should a Christian be under any temptation to let sin reign in his mortal body?

2. The effect of this service is degrading and weakening. Said the old heathen, “I am nobler and born to nobler things than that I should make the soul the servant of the body.” Surely the Christian is born by his spiritual birth to nobler things than the man can be by natural birth, and far be it from him to obey the lusts of the carnal nature. Let him understand the greatness of his moral manhood; let him feel the dignity which grace confers; let him realise the teaching that the service of sin is both degrading and weakening. It is a service of uncleanness. It moves downward from iniquity to iniquity. No chance of promotion in this service—no high ambitions to stir the soul to deeds of lofty emprise. Whatever beauty the soul possesses is destroyed by sin’s handiwork.

3. The fruit of this service is shame and death. This is a kind of fruit which the sinner is compelled to gather, and gather it even in this world. It is an awfully bad sign when shame does not attend and follow the sinner’s course. Indeed, he is dead while he lives. Souls alive to the beauty and glory of goodness feel bitter shame and remorse when they have fallen under the power of evil passions. Why should the man who has tasted the delights of freedom go back to slavery? Why should the man who has trod the mountain heights where God’s pure breezes blow descend to the dungeons where foul miasma swelters? Why should the man who has been entranced by the comely form of righteousness embrace the loathsome carcass of sin?

II. The service of righteousness.—

1. The pleasure of this service is eternal. It is the service rendered by the moral nature, and that is immortal. Righteousness is eternal, and the pleasure which it imparts to its adherents is ever abiding. Soul pleasure is the highest good.

2. The effect of this service is ennobling and strengthening. Man is a temple in ruins. The image has been defaced, the glory has departed. Ichabod is written on the desolation, and the temple is to be rebuilt and the glory regained by yielding ourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and our members as instruments of righteousness unto God. The noblest heroes have been the men of righteousness. God crowned men, the glory of the race. The bright gems of humanity have been the truth-lovers and the truth-servers. The practice of righteousness is strengthening. To do good is the way to be good, to be morally strong. It is always strengthening to follow lofty ideals, and striving continually to realise. Obedience to a form of noble teaching is glorious and enriching. The molten metal run into the form becomes strong and beautiful. The ductile heart run into the form of sound doctrine becomes strong and beautiful.

3. The fruit of this service is lustre and life. “The path of the just is as the shining light.” A bright lustre marks the pathway which they tread. In dark days of the world’s history the sons of righteousness have shone out like lustrous stars from a dark sky. True honour is the crown of goodness. Life in all its fulness is the heritage here and hereafter of those who make for, and zealously pursue after, and perseveringly practise righteousness. We ought then to resist all the efforts made by sin to reign in our mortal bodies. We ought to wage incessant war against sin; and we are encouraged to be brave and bold in the conflict by the reflection that sin cannot gain the mastery except from our own fault. “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” Let not the members of our bodies become the arms or weapons of unrighteousness which sin may use to our undoing. Remember that the moral and material are connected, that body and soul are united. Body and soul, all the members of the body, all the powers and faculties of the soul, all from the lowest to the highest, must be yielded unto God as instruments of righteousness.

Rom_6:21. The future state of the heathen.—In contemplating the future state and prospects of the heathen, it is proposed to show:—

I. That the heathen are sinners against God.

II. That, being sinners, they are justly exposed to the penalty of the divine law.

III. That from this penalty they cannot be delivered without repentance and reformation.

IV. That the heathen in general exhibit no satisfactory evidence of repentance, but the contrary; and

V. The Scriptures teach directly, and not by mere inference, that the end of heathenism is eternal death.

I. I am to show that the heathen are sinners against God. We might infer as much as this from the fact that, like us, they are the children of a fallen father and belong to a depraved and corrupted race. Are not the heathen human beings? Do they not belong to the “one blood” of which God hath made “all men for to dwell on the face of the whole earth”? Are they not the posterity of Adam? If so, then undoubtedly they are depraved and sinful, for this is true of all Adam’s posterity. “By the offence of one the many were made sinners.” “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death hath passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” The Scriptures assert frequently and positively that the heathen are sinners. Thus Paul says to the converted heathen in verses already quoted, “Ye were the servants of sin.” “Ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity.” That the heathen of our times, like those of whom Paul speaks, are “all under sin” is proved by the testimony of missionaries and of other competent and impartial witnesses. Every command of the Decalogue, every precept, whether of natural or revealed religion, is openly and shamelessly violated among them. They are, almost without an exception, idolaters. They are, to a shameful extent, the profaners even of their own sacred things. Instead of honouring and protecting their aged parents, they in some instances abandon them to perish with hunger, in others they burn them or bury them alive, and in others slaughter and devour them. Their murders are frequent and of the most horrible description. “Their lewdness,” says one who had long resided among them, “is such as can never be described by a Christian writer.” Their sacred books rather encourage than prohibit theft. In some places they even “pray that they may become expert in it, boast of it when successfully accomplished, and expect to be rewarded for it in the future world.” “Among the common people of India,” says a veteran missionary, “lying is deemed absolutely necessary, and perjury is so common that no reliance whatever can be placed upon the testimony of heathen witnesses. For a piece of money not larger than a fourpenny-piece they can be hired to swear to anything which their employer requires.” The same missionary adds, “The characters of the heathen have not at all improved since the days of the apostle Paul.”

II. But if the heathen have broken the law of God, then they have justly incurred its penalty. This is my second proposition. The law of God, like every other good law, has a just penalty annexed to it. Nor are we left in ignorance as to what the penalty of the divine law is. It is called in the Scriptures death—the second death. Now this penalty the heathen, by transgressing the law of God, have justly incurred. Accordingly Paul says, referring especially to the case of the heathen, “As many as have sinned without law”—that is, a written law—“shall also perish without law.” Of course the guilt and the future punishment of the heathen will be in proportion to the light they have resisted. It will be far less in degree than though they had slighted the Bible and rejected a freely offered Saviour.

III. But this brings me to my third proposition, in which I am to show that the terrible penalty of the divine law, which the heathen have justly incurred by sin, cannot be remitted to them, or to any other sinners, without repentance and reformation. In the Scripture God makes repentance not only the condition but the indispensable condition of forgiveness. He not only says, “Repent, and ye shall be forgiven,” but “Except ye repent, ye shall all perish.” Of what avail would it be to impenitent sinners were God to pardon them? Retaining their hard and unsanctified hearts, they would instantly and continually repeat their transgressions, and fall again and again under the sentence which had been remitted. And were God to pardon them finally and receive them up to heaven, it would be no heaven to them. They would have no meetness for such a heaven.

IV. And now we come to the question under our fourth proposition—a question on the decision of which the future condition of the heathen most essentially depends. Do they, in their heathen state, repent of their sins? Do they furnish any satisfactory evidence of repentance? Most gladly would we accept such evidence if it were furnished. But where shall we look for it? Is it to be found? Did Paul find the heathen among whom he went publishing the gospel of the grace of God penitently prepared to welcome the truth? Do our missionaries find the same? I would not say that there never was a pious heathen. I hope there may have been some of this character. And as to the final salvation of pious heathen, I do not entertain a doubt. They will be forgiven as soon as they repent. They will be saved through Christ, though they may not have heard of Him in the present life. But do the heathen, in frequent instances, repent? Do they give satisfactory evidence of repentance? These questions I am constrained to answer in the negative. With such facts as these standing out before us and staring us in the face, how can we resist the conclusion that the heathen in general are impenitent, hard-hearted, not only ignorant but perverse, in love with sin, and resolved to persist in it to the bitter end? Such certainly is the conclusion to which our modern missionaries have come. They have the best possible opportunities for forming a judgment in the case, and their deliberate judgment is such as I have stated.

V. I only add that this painful conclusion is sustained by the current representations of Scripture. “The wicked shall be turned into hell, with all the nations that forget God.” I know that plausible objections are urged against this scriptural conclusion; but they are all based on false assumptions, and of course vanish as soon as they are brought into the light of truth. It is said, for example, that the heathen are in a state of invincible ignorance, that they do as well as they know. It is not true that the heathen do as well as they know or as well as they can. They know a great deal better than they do, and might do better if they would. They are criminal, culpable in the sight of God. They feel and know that they are. They know that they are deserving of punishment, and hence the various expedients to which they resort to pacify conscience and appease the anger of their gods. The heathen do not deserve so great punishment indeed as though they had resisted greater light; but they are guilty of resisting and abusing the light they have, and unless they repent and are forgiven must receive a just punishment at the hands of God. Show me that the sinner in the other life, whether Christian or heathen, will ever relent and be humble and begin to feel after God, and I will admit that there may be hope in his case. But the truth is, he will never do this. Let us contemplate that not less than six hundred millions of the present inhabitants of our globe are heathens. Each one of these is an immortal creature, destined to live for ever. Now they have a season of probation. In a mighty stream they are pouring over the boundaries of time; and when once they have leaped those boundaries, where do they fall? They fall to rise no more. There is a remedy for all this evil, and this we have in our own hands. It is the gospel. This offers peace and pardon to those who are guilty and ready to perish. Let the gospel be universally diffused and embraced, and the broad road to ruin is no longer frequented.—Enoch Pond, D.D.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_6:12-21

What is the meaning of “mortal”?—The epithet θνητῷ, “mortal,” must bear a logical relation to the idea of the passage. The object of this term has been understood very variously. Calvin regards it as expressive of contempt, as if Paul meant to say that man’s whole bodily nature hastens to death, and ought not consequently to be pampered. Philippi thinks that the epithet refers rather to the fact of sin having killed the body, and having thus manifested its malignant character. Flatt thinks that Paul alludes to the transient character of bodily pleasures. Chrysostom and Grotius find in the word the idea of the brevity of the toils which weigh on the Christian here below. According to Tholuck, Paul means to indicate how evil lusts are inseparable from the present state of the body, which is destined by-and-by to be glorified. According to Lange and Schaff, the sanctification of the mortal body here below is mentioned as serving to prepare for its glorification above. It seems to us that this epithet may be explained more naturally: it is not the part destined to die which should rule the believer’s personality; the higher life awakened in him should penetrate him wholly, and rule that body even which is to change its nature. The apostle does not say now, “that grace may abound,” words which could only come from a heart yet a stranger to the experiences of faith; but he says here, “because we are under grace.” The snare is less gross in this form. Vinet one day said to the writer of these lines, “There is a subtle poison which insinuates itself into the heart even of the best Christian; it is the temptation to say, Let us sin, not that grace may abound, but because it abounds.” Here there is no longer an odious calculation, but a convenient let alone. Where would be the need of holding that the apostle, to explain this question, has in view an objection raised by legal Judeo-Christianity? The question arises of itself as soon as the gospel comes in contact with the heart of man. What proves clearly that the apostle is not thinking here of a Jewish-Christian scruple is the fact that in his reply he does not make the least allusion to man’s former subjection to the law, but solely to the yoke which sin laid upon him from the beginning. And the literal translation of our verse is not, “For ye are no more under the law,” but “For ye are no more under law, but under grace.” It is understood, of course, that when he speaks of law he is thinking of the Mosaic dispensation, just as, when speaking of grace, he is thinking of the revelation of the gospel. But he does not mention the institutions as such; he designates them only by their moral character.—Godet.

Bold metaphors.—The metaphors in this chapter are extremely bold; yet being taken from matters well known, they were used with great advantage. For the influence of sinful passions, in constraining wicked men to commit evil actions, could not be better represented to those who were acquainted with the condition of slaves, and with the customs by which their lives and services were regulated, than by the power which a tyrannical lord exercised over his slaves. Neither could anything more affecting be devised to show the miserable condition of a person habitually governed.—Macknight.

Paul speaks after the manner of men.—“I speak after the manner of men, because of the weakness of your flesh.” This is an epanorthosis, in which he corrects the phraseology which he has just made use of, in saying that those who are “under grace are made over unto righteousness,” since, on the contrary, they are set at liberty to serve God; and he lays the blame of this catachresis on their weakness as the occasion of it. For as they would not understand him expressing heavenly things in the language of heaven, he is compelled, in teaching them, to employ these similitudes of servitude and liberty borrowed from the intercourse of men: “For as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and iniquity unto iniquity, even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.” In these words we have the conclusion of the syllogism—viz., that those who are under grace should not sin—illustrated by a comparison of similarity with their previous conduct, both the protasis and apodosis of which are illustrated by their end.—Ferme.

Sin as a king.—Sin, as a raging and commanding king, has the sinner’s heart for its throne; the members of the body for its service; the world, the flesh, and the devil for its grand council; lusts and temptations for its weapons and armoury; and its fortifications are ignorance, sensuality, and fleshly reasonings. Death, as the punishment of sin, is the end of the work, though not the end of the worker.—Burkitt.

“Let not sin therefore.”—As if the apostle should say, We preach purity, and not liberty, as the adversary suggesteth (Rom_6:1 of this chapter with Rom_3:8). Let not sin reign; rebel it well; but do not actively obey and embrace the commands of sin, as subjects to your king. Let sin be dejected from its regency, though not utterly ejected from its residency. Give it such a deadly wound that it may be sure to die within a year and a day. Sprunt it may, and flutter as a bird when the neck is broken; but live it must not.

“That form of doctrine.”—Gr., “That type or mould”; the doctrine is the mould, hearers the metal, which takes impression from it in one part as well as another. And as the metal hath been sufficiently in the furnace, when it is not only purged from the dross, but willingly receiveth the form and figure of that which it is cast and poured into, so here.—Trapp.

Christians by grace throw off sin.—“Christians are placed in a condition of which grace is the prominent feature: grace to sanctify as well as grace to renew the heart; grace to purify the evil affections; grace to forgive offences, though often repeated, and thus to save from despair, and to excite to new efforts of obedience. Viewed in this light, there is abundant reason for asserting that Christians, under a system of grace, will much more effectually throw off the dominion of sin than they would do if under a mere law dispensation.” Yet if there be one point where there is most obscurity in the minds of the majority of professing Christians, it is here. That it has largely arisen from an obscuration of the doctrine of sanctification by grace, or rather the unwise sundering of justification and sanctification in discussing this epistle, is painfully true.—Stuart and Lange.

The sense of sin and guilt the foundation of all religion.

I. That the shame and rem rse which attend upon sin and guilt arise from the natural impressions on the mind of man.—It is certain from experience that we can no more direct by our choice the sensations of our mind than we can those of the body. We are taught by the sense of pain to avoid things hurtful or destructive to the body; and the torments and anxiety of mind which follow so close and so constantly at the heels of sin and guilt are placed as guardians to our innocence, as sentinels to give early notice of the approach of evil which threatens the peace and comfort of our lives. If we are perfect masters of the sensations of our mind, if reflection be so much under command, that when we say “Come,” it cometh, when we say “Go,” it goeth, how is it that so many suffer so much from the uneasy thoughts and suggestions of their own hearts, when they need only speak the word and be whole? Whence the self-conviction, the self-condemnation of sinners, whence the foreboding thoughts of judgment to come, the sad expectations of divine vengeance, and the dread of future misery, if the sinner has it in his power to bid these melancholy thoughts retire, and can when he pleases sit down enjoying his iniquities in peace and tranquillity? These considerations make it evident that the pain and grief of mind which we suffer from a sense of having done ill flow from the very constitution of our nature, as we are rational agents. Nor can we conceive a greater argument of God’s utter irreconcilableness to sin than that He has given us such a nature that we can never be reconciled to it ourselves. We never like it in others where we have no interest in the iniquity, nor long approve of it in ourselv s when we have The hours of cool reflection are the sinner’s mortification, for vice can never be happy in the company of reason, which is the true cause why profligate sinners fly to any excess that may help them to forget themselves and hide them from the light of reason, which, whenever it ceases to be the glory of man, will necessarily become his shame and reproach. No vice is the better for being found in the company of intemperance, but becomes more odious in the sight of God and man. And yet how often does vice fly to intemperance for refuge?—which shows what miserable company sinners are to themselves, when they can be content to expose themselves to the contempt of all about them, merely for the sake of being free from their own censure for a season. Were it in the power of men to find any expedient to reconcile their reason to their vices, they would not submit to the hard terms of parting with their reason for the sake of being at ease with their vices. But there is no remedy: as long as we have the power of thinking, so long must we think ill of ourselves when we do ill. The only cure for this uneasiness is to live without thought; for we can never enjoy the happiness of a brute till we have sunk ourselves into the same degree of understanding.

II. That the expectation of punishment for sin is the result of the reason given unto us. The end of those things is death.—There are no certain principles from which we can infer the nature and sort of punishment designed by God for sinners; and as reason has left us in the dark in this particular, so neither has revelation clearly discovered this secret of providence. The representations of Scripture upon this head are metaphorical: the images are strong and lively, full of horror and dread, and lead us to this certain conclusion, that endless misery will be the lot of the unrighteous. But they do not lead us to a solution of all the inquiries which an inquisitive mind may raise upon this occasion. We read of the fire that never goes out, of the worm that never dies, both prepared to prey upon the wicked to all eternity. But what this fire is, what this worm is, that shall for ever torture, and never destroy the wicked, we are nowhere informed. Among the ancient heathens we find variety of opinions, or, to speak more properly, of imaginations, upon this subject; and though none of them can make any proof in their own behalf, yet they all prove the common ground upon which they stand, the natural expectation of punishment for iniquity. The atheistical writers of antiquity entertain themselves with exposing the vulgar opinions of their time; and the unbelievers of our time have trodden in their steps, and pleased themselves mightily with dressing up the various and uncertain imaginations of men upon this subject. But what is this to the great point? If nature has rightly instructed us in teaching us to expect punishment for our sins, what signifies it how far men have been mistaken in determining the kinds of punishment that are in reserve for sinners? Let the learning of the Egyptians pass for superstition, and the wisdom of the Greeks for folly; yet what has the sense of nature to do with them, which teaches us to expect punishment for sin from the hand that made us? And when once the time comes in which that hand shall exert itself, this we may be sure of, that the sinner will find no further subject for laughter and diversion. Men think they gain a great point by bringing plausible reasons against the common notions of future punishment; but suppose these notions to be indeed mistakes, yet if it remains certain from the light of reason, as well as of revelation, that God will punish sin, what does the cause gain by this argument? Will you suppose that God intends to punish wickedness, and yet that He has no possible way to do it? Where lies the defect? Is it want of wisdom to contrive proper means for the punishment of sin, or is it want of power to put them in execution? If he wants neither the one nor the other, we have nothing to inquire after in this case but what His will is; and of that He has given us such evidence that we can never lose sight of it as long as we continue to be reasonable creatures. The power of conscience which every man feels in himself, the fear that pursues every sin, that haunts the most secret and most successful offenders, are great evidences of the common expectation of a judgment to come.

III. That these common notions are the foundation of all religion, and therefore must be supposed and admitted in revealed religion, and cannot be contradicted by it.—Some there have been who, finding no hopes for impunity to sinners under the light of reason and nature, have taken shelter in revelation; not desiring to correct and reform their vices, but to enjoy them, and yet to hide them from the wrath to come. These are great extollers of the mercy and goodness of God displayed in the gospel, great assertors of the extensive and unbounded merits of the blood of Christ, so far as to think it a reproach to their Saviour for any one to teach that the hopes of Christians may be destroyed for sin, since Christ has died to make an atonement for it. Such as these are much pleased with the thought that they do great honour to God by opening to the world the inexhaustible treasures of His mercy, the attribute in which He delights; and think they have some merit and service to plead on account of such pious labour. They imagine they pay great regard to our Redeemer, and are the only true believers in the efficacy of His death, the virtue of which was so great as to draw out the sting of sin, and leave all the pleasures of it behind to be enjoyed by the world. But would these men consider, they would find that they are offering up to God the sacrifice of fools, whilst they divest Him of wisdom and justice, and all other moral attributes, in compliment to His mercy, and represent Him to the world as a good-natured, indolent, inactive Being, unconcerned at what passes among His creatures, and prepared to receive to equal degrees of favour the righteous and the sinner. It is beside my present purpose to show how inconsistent these notions are with the true doctrine of the gospel; and yet I cannot satisfy myself without observing that all the precepts, all the representations of Scripture, all the hopes and fears proposed to Christians, teach us another lesson, and confirm to us this great article of all religion: “that God hath appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness.” This is the gospel doctrine; nor can a true revelation possibly teach otherwise; for God cannot contradict Himself, nor gainsay by His prophets that common light of reason which He has planted in men to be their guide and director. Natural religion is the foundation and support of revelation, which may supply the defects of nature, but can never overthrow the established principles of it; which may cast new light upon the dictates of reason, but can never contradict them. I cannot listen to revelation but in consequence of the natural notion I have of God, of His being, His wisdom, power, and goodness: destroy, then, the principles of reason, and there is no room left for revelation. I see and feel the difference between good and evil, virtue and vice: what spirit must that be which teaches me that there is no such difference? Shall I believe it to be a spirit come from God, when I know that the Spirit He has placed within me speaks the contrary? In which case there is only this choice: either to disown God for my creator, or to reject the spirit which contradicts the law of my creation and the light of reason which God has placed in the minds of men.—Sherlock.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 6

Rom_6:13. Yield your members unto God.—

Take my hands, and let them move

At the impulse of Thy love;

Take my feet, and let them be

Swift and beautiful for Thee.

Take my voice, and let me sing

Always, only for my King;

Take my lips, and let them be

Filled with messages from Thee.

Take my will, and make it Thine—

It shall be no longer mine;

Take my intellect, and use

Every power as Thou shalt choose,—

So that all my powers combine

To adore Thy grace divine,

Heart and soul a living flame

Glorifying Thy great name.

F. R. Havergal.

Rom_6:21. What profit?—“What fruit had ye then?” (Rom_6:21). Walking in the country (says a correspondent) I went into a barn, where I found a thresher at his work. I addressed him in the words of Solomon: “My friend, ‘in all labour there is profit.’ ” But what was my surprise when, leaning upon his flail, he answered, and with much energy, “No, sir; that is the truth, but there is one exception to it: I long laboured in the service of sin, but I got no profit from my labour.” Then answered I, “You know something of the apostle’s meaning, when he asked, ‘What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed?’ ” “Thank God,” he replied, “I do; and I also know that now, being freed from sin, and having become a servant unto righteousness, I have my fruit unto holiness; and the end, everlasting life.”

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Third Section.—The principial freedom of Christians from the service of sin to death, and their actual departure there from and entrance into the service of righteousness unto life by the power of the death of Jesus. (Believers should live in the consciousness that they are dead to sin, just as even the slave is freed by death.)

Rom_6:12-23

12Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in13[omit it in]28 the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye [Nor render]29 your members as instruments [or weapons] of unrighteousness unto [to]30 sin: but yield [render] yourselves unto [to] God, as those that are alive [as being alive]31 from the dead, and your members as instruments [or weapons] of righteousness unto [to]God. 14For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the [omit the]32 law, but under grace.

15What then? shall [may]33 we sin, because we are not under the [omit the]law, but under grace? God forbid. [Let it not be!] 16Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether [either] of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?17But God be thanked [thanks to God], that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have [omit have] obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine [teaching]34 which18was delivered you [whereunto ye were delivered;].35 Being then [And being]made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. 19I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded [rendered] your members [as] servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield [render] your members [as] servants to righteousnessunto holiness [or sanctification].36 20For when ye were the [omit the] servantsof sin, ye were free from [as regards] righteousness. 21What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? [What fruit had ye then therefore? Things whereof ye are now ashamed;]37 for38 the end of those thingsis death. 22But now being [having been] made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness [or sanctification], and the endeverlasting life. 23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ [in Christ Jesus]39 our Lord.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Rom_6:12. Let not sin therefore reign [Μὴ οὖν βασιλευέτω ἡ ἁμαρτίᾳ]. The Apostle conducts the following discussion in a hortatory manner, but without actually “entering the sphere of exhortation,” as Tholuck thinks. [The negative part of the exhortation, Rom_6:12-13, corresponds to νεκροὺς μέν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ, Rom_6:11; the positive part, ἀλλὰ παραστήσατε, Rom_6:13, answers to ζῶντας δὲτῶ̣ Θεῶ̣. So Meyer, Philippi, Alford, Hodge, &c.—P. S.] In a didactic respect he teaches that believers, by their transition from a state under the law to a state under grace, are first properly qualified and pledged to the service of righteousness, but are not free for the service of sin. That is, the true emancipation from outward legalism leads to an inward and free legalism, but not to Antinomianism. The οὖν indicates that Rom_6:11 shall be elaborated. But as the previous section has shown what is conformable to the state of grace in itself, the present section shows what is according to freedom from the hard service of sin, which was presupposed by bondage under the law. Let not sin now reign (imp.). The true sovereign command of grace is opposed to the false sovereign command of sin, which is still present as a broken power (Luther: Observe that holy people still have evil lusts in the flesh, which they do not follow). Tholuck: “Philippi and Meyer correctly remark, that the Apostle does not expressly make any concessions to the concupiscentia [ἐπιθυμίαις]; yet his admonition does not extend any farther than that lust must not become a deed. Sin is represented as ruler in the body, which ruler is served by the μέλη as organs.” That is, however, as the one who has been the ruler; and the methods are at the same time given for destroying the lusts of the flesh, that they—by the life in the Spirit, which also changes the members into instruments of righteousness—should not only be continually ignored, but also annulled. [Alford, in opposition to Chrysostom, who lays stress on βασιλευέω, says: “It is no matter of comparison between reigning and indwelling merely, but between reigning and being deposed.”—P. S.]

In your mortal body [ἐν τῷ θνητῷ ὑμῶν σὡματι]. The σω̅μα as θνητόν must be distinguished, on the one hand, from the σῶμα τῆς ἁμαρτίας of Rom_6:6, and, on the other, from the σῶμανεκρόν of Rom_8:10. The σῶμα τῆς ἁμαρτ. is the pseudo-plastic apparent body of the old man, and, as the sensual side of all sinfulness, is devoted with it to destruction. The body is a σῶμα νεκρόν so far as it no more asserts itself as a second principle of life with, or even superior to, the principle of the Spirit, but yields itself purely to the service of the Spirit. But a σῶυα θνητόν is the body so far as it, as the sensual organism of the earthly existence, has living organs, which shall be purified from the former service of sin and transferred to the service of righteousness. The σῶμα as a false principle is destroyed; the σῶμα as a secondary principle is dead, absolutely helpless; and the αῶμα as the organ of the spiritual principle is transformed into instruments of righteousness. It is called mortal, because its earthly propensity is toward sin and death, and it must be compulsorily brought into the service of righteousness, and exercised as for a spiritual military service in antithesis to the body of the resurrection, which will be the pure power and excellence of righteousness. Meyer is therefore correct in rejecting the interpretation, that θνητόν is the same as νεκρόν (dead to sin; Turretin, Ernesti, and others).

But it may be asked, For what purpose is the adjective θνητὸν?

1. Calvin: per contemptum vocat mortale [ut doceat totam hominis naturam ad mortem et exitium inclinare]. Köllner: It is dishonorable to make the spirit subject to this frail body.

2. Grotius: De vita altera cogitandum, nee formidandos labores hand sane diuturnos. [Chrysostom, Theodoret, Reiche, likewise suppose that the word reminds us of the other life, and of the shortness of the conflict.—P. S.]

3. Flatt: Reminder of the brevity of sensual pleasure. [Comp. Theophylact].

4. Meyer, obscurely: It is absurd to make sin reign in the mortal body, if the Christian is dead to sin and alive to God.

5. Philippi: To call to mind that the wages of sin is death. [Philippi takes σῶμα in opposition to πνεῦμα.]

6. Tholuck, with Bullinger and Calixtus: Because sensual enticements are regarded as inseparable from the present sensuous organism, &c.

[7. Photius, Turretin, Ernesti: θνητόν is figuratively = dead; i. e., corrupt (in which sense νεκρός is often used).]

In all these definitions the relative dignity and estimate of the “mortal body,” which are definitely declared in Rom_6:13, are not regarded; the same members, which until then had been instruments of unrighteousness, henceforth being instruments of righteousness. The organism of earthly existence and action, which has become mortal by sin, is naturally an organism for the service of the spirit. By the dominion of sin in it, its morality became still more intense; but by the normal subjection of sin to the service of the Spirit, it shall be brought with it on the course toward everlasting life (Rom_6:22).

That ye should obey the lusts thereof [εἰς τό ὑπακούειν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτοῦ]. According to the sense, we must supply ὑμᾶς to ὑπακούειν. To the end that ye obey its lusts. Even if the body were holy, its impulses would have to be subject to the dominion of the spirit; much more must they be subject to the spirit, since they are diseased, irritable, excitable, and inclined to self-assertion and demoniacal self-distraction.

Rom_6:13. Nor render your members [Μὴ περιστάνετε τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν]. Without doubt παριστάνειν has reference here to enlistment or delivery for military service. The Apostle is writing to Rome, the metropolis of military affairs, and therefore derives his figure from Roman customs (comp. Rom_13:12); just as he admonishes the Corinthians by expressions that call up the Isthmian games (1Co_9:24), and speaks to the spiritual city of Ephesus concerning the battle with spirits (Eph_6:11-12). Sin is already distinguished as the false ̀βασιλεύς, who causes the false summons to be promulgated that the members shall be ordered into his warfare against righteousness.—Your members. If the body has ceased to be an independent principle, only its members come into consideration (in the good sense of the principle: Divide et impera). According to Erasmus, Philippi, and others, the intellectual forces and activities (perception, will, understanding) are included in the term. According to Meyer, only the physical members are meant (the tongue, hand, foot, eye, &c.), “for which, however, intellectual action is a necessary supposition. The physical members are plainly meant as organs and symbols of ethical conduct (different from the pseudo-plasmatic members; Col_3:5).

As weapons [or instruments] of unrighteousness [ὅπλα ἀδικίας]. Meyer says, of immorality. But, in war, people contend for the right or the wrong; therefore the expression ἀδικία must be strictly retained.—“̔́Οπλα, according to the Vulgate, Theodoret, Luther, Calvin, Bengel, and Meyer: weapons. Calixtus and De Wette [Stuart, Reiche, Hodge, Ewald, Alford], on the other hand: instruments. The former construction can by no means be favored by appealing to the fact that the βασιλεύειν suggests warriors in service, for the trope is already obliterated (?) in that term; but it is favored by the consideration that the Apostle also elsewhere—when he uses ὅπλα in the ethical sense—employs it in the meaning of ‘weapons;’ Rom_13:12; 2Co_6:7; 2Co_10:4” (Tholuck). [Meyer insists that ὅπλα, while so frequently used in the sense of instruments by classical authors, is never thus used in the New Testament.—R.]

To sin [τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ]. Personified as the presumptively false ruler (see Rom_5:12 ff.).

But render yourselves [ἀλλὰ παραστήσατε ἑαυτούς]. We must observe here a double antithesis: first, the aorist παραστήσατε in opposition to the previous present, παραστάνετε; second, ἑαυτούς in connection with the following χαὶ τὰμέλη, in opposition to the previous τὰ μέλη. Both are quite in harmony with the antithesis. For believers have already fundamentally placed themselves as such in the service of righteousness, and in complete unity with the centre of their life, while the man in the opposite service of sin yields his members individually to a foreign power. At all events, the Christian, as the servant of sin, would be led into the contradiction of wishing to remain free himself while he placed his members at the service of sin. On the aorist παραστήσατε, comp. Winer, p. 293; and Tholuck, p. 311. (It denotes, “according to Fritzsche, what happens in the moment; according to Meyer, that which occurs forthwith; and according to Philippi, that which appears once;” Tholuck). Tholuck does not attach importance to the difference between the aorist imperative and the present imperative, since he concurs with those who disregard the temporal reference. We hold, with Herm. Schmidt (De imperativis; Wittenberg, 1833): “The imperative present commands to occupy one’s self with something; the imperative aorist, to accomplish something.” We add to this: That something already under consideration, or already undertaken, must be carried through. [The greater definiteness implied in the aorist must not be lost sight of, whatever view be adopted.—R.]

As being alive from the dead [ὡς ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῶντα̣ς. The ὡς does not introduce a figure, but means rather (comp. Rom_6:11): regarding yourselves as those who are alive, almost = since you are. The phrase is a condensed description of the state of ἑαντούς. While the reference is undoubtedly ethical, yourselves must be taken in its widest meaning—body, soul, and spirit; and the implication is, that the whole man was once dead in sin (not to sin, as Rom_6:11), but now is alive; hence the pertinence of the exhortation. The reference to a field of battle is extremely doubtful, since it introduces a new figure so soon after Rom_6:2-11.—R.] Meyer: Those who, from dead persons, have become living. We assume the figure of a field of battle. The Christians lay there as dead or slain persons, and from dead persons they became alive; therefore they can and should go over to the banner of righteousness.

And your members [καὶ τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν. Hodge paraphrases and: and especially; but καί seems to have an inferential force here.—R.] Because they have become themselves the warriors of God, they must also regard their members as God’s weapons, the weapons of righteousness for God.40

Rom_6:14. For sin shall not have dominion over you [ἁ μαρτίᾳ γὰρ ὑμῶν οὐκυριεύ ει]. The future, according to Melanchthon: dulcissima consolatio; erroneously regarded by Rosenmüller, Flatt, and others, as imperative. If we were to distinguish between the expression of confident supposition (Calov. and De Wette) and consoling promise (Chrysostom, Grotius, and Tholuck), we would prefer the former meaning, since the predominant train of thought throughout is didactic; yet the latter is also included.

For ye are not under law [οὐ γάρ ἐστεὑπὸ νόμο ν]. Notwithstanding the preceding declaration in Rom_5:20, the expression continues to be an oxymoron, since the law is recognized as a barrier to sin. The sense is: freedom from the law gives you so little freedom to sin, that it is only by the exercise of grace upon you that your freedom from sin has begun. [Meyer: “Were they under the law, Paul could not have given this promise (i. e., in the preceding clause), for the law is the strength of sin (1Co_15:56), multiplies sin (Rom_5:20), in which aspect he intends to explain it further in chap. 7.” Law is here used in its widest signification. See Hodge.—R.]

Under the dominion of grace [ὑπὸκάριν], which operates as an inward and new principle of life; while the law, as such, confronted the inward life only as an outward demand—threatening, arousing, and casting down; and in this form it presupposed the dominion of sin. Bondage under the law betokened bondage under sin, without being able to remove it; but it is removed by the dominion of grace, which has become an inward law of life. [The general idea undoubtedly is: “Ye are not under a legal dispensation, but a gracious one” (Stuart); yet the whole context forbids the exclusive reference to the method of justification. “Grace” is here used in its widest sense; “the Divine grace, shown in Christ, is the power under which ye stand” (Meyer), and which assures that ye shall not be under the dominion of sin.—”Gratia non solum peccata diluit, sed ut non peccemus facit” (Augustine).—R.]

Rom_6:15. What then? May we sin [Τί οὖν; ἁμαρτήσωμεν. See Textual Note6Vr—R.]. According to Rückert, Meyer, and others, a new section should commence here; which Tholuck is right in opposing. The unity of the following with the foregoing is the fundamental thought: freedom from sin. Also the reference to the members continues throughout what follows (Rom_6:19). There is, however, a modification. Down to Rom_6:14 the antithesis was rather an ethical demand; but now a religious confirmation predominates. There, the new life was contrasted with the old as a voluntary entrance into the military service of righteousness over against the wicked, mercenary service of sin; here, the Apostle (speaking according to human analogy) presents the obligation of a new service in contrast with the old service. In the present verse Paul therefore brings out prominently the fearful consequence of the impure Antinomian view of the state of grace, in order to condemn it forthwith. To this earnest rejection of a horrible consequence, arising so frequently in ancient and modern times, the conjunctive ἁμαρτήσωμεν corresponds better than the future. [Dr. Hodge well remarks: “Such has been the objection to the doctrines of grace in all ages. And the fact that this objection was made to Paul’s teachings, proves that his doctrine is the same with that against which the same objection is still urged.” This consideration should also prevent any limitation of “grace” to justification.—On μὴ γένοιτο, see Rom_3:4, Textual Note 6, p. 112; comp. Comm. Gal., p. 49, foot-note.—R.]

Rom_6:16. To whom ye yield yourselves. With the know ye not,41 the Apostle points to the analogy of a principle of civil law; but he gives the application in the same sentence with it. To whom you once voluntarily gave and pledged yourselves for obedience [with a view to obedience; Alford] as servants (slaves), his servants ye are, and him ye obey; be it as servants of sin unto death, &c. Thus the two services preclude each other, since the masters deny each other (Mat_6:24). According to De Wette, Philippi, and Tholuck, the emphasis rests on ἔστε; according to Meyer, on δοῦλοι. But the actual being and availing, with its consequence, is plainly the principal idea here; the being servants is at the same time connected with it. The ῷὑπακ. is explained by Reiche: to whom you have to obey. But this weakens the sense.

[Either, or. The disjunctive ἤτοι occurs only here in the New Testament. It lays special emphasis on the first alternative (Meyer). “Either this alone, or that; there is no third;” Hartung, ii. p. 356 f.—R.] The ἤτοι, ἤ, a strong either, or. Sin is personified here too. But the ὑπακοή is personified in opposition to it as the παρακοη (1Pe_1:14); and this is a beautiful expression for the Christian’s freedom in his obedience.42 Plainly, the Apostle here makes the freedom of choice precede the servum arbitrium; according to Rom_6:17, the former was bound a long time ago.

Of sin unto death [ἁμαρτίας εἰς θάνατο ν.] According to Fritzsche and Reiche, physical death is meant; but according to Meyer and Tholuck (the early view of which latter was that it is spiritual death), after Chrysostom, eternal death is spoken of. Meyer’s ground against the acceptance of physical death is that it is not the consequence of individual sin, and cannot be averted from the δοῦλος ὑπακοῆς—an argument which Tholuck accepts. But how could this occur, if there were not in earthly life a hundred-fold gradations of physical death? The death of the suicide, for example, is not to be explained simply by the fall of Adam. And thus spiritual death has its degrees also. Therefore the Apostle speaks of death in general (so also Philippi);43 as, according to 1 Corinthians 15, his thorn is sin, which has eternal death in prospect. Even the forms of the misery of sin which precede death are not to be excluded.

Of obedience unto righteousness [ὐπακοῆς εἰς δικαιοσύνην.] Meyer, just as incorrectly, presents the διχαιοσύνη as the final result for the servants of obedience, in contrast with exclusively eternal death. The righteousness of faith is certainly assumed here; but the “uprightness which is adjudged to believers in the judgment” is gradually developed to its completion from obedience as the form of the new life.44 (On the construction of this verse with Rom_6:17-18 [Rückert and Reiche], by which Rom_6:16 is the propositio major, Rom_6:17 the minor, and Rom_6:18 the conclusion. Comp. Tholuck.)45

Rom_6:17 But thanks to God, &c. [κάρις δὲτῷ Θεῷ, κ.τ.λ.]. It may be asked, whether the first proposition is a mere introduction to the second as the principal proposition, so that the thanksgiving refers merely to obedience (Grotius, Estius, and others); or whether the thanksgiving refers to both propositions (Meyer, Tholuck).46 Tholuck says, in favor of the latter view: “Since ἦτε precedes, and μέν is wanting, ἦτε must be read with all the more emphasis; as 1Co_6:11 : καὶ ταῦτα τίνες ἦτε; Eph_5:8 : ἦτε γάρ ποτε σκότος; and the immediate object of thanksgiving is that this time of the bondage to sin is past.” Evidently, the deliverance from the service of death is in itself already a satisfactory ground for praise and thanksgiving; yea, we naturally thank God for this with the greatest emotion (God be praised: delivered!), although this negative side of salvation cannot be regarded as separate from the positive.

But ye obeyed from the heart [ὑπηκούσατε δέ ἐκκαρδίας]. They were only conditionally voluntary in their bondage to sin; but they have become obedient from the very bottom of their heart.

That form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered [εἰς ὓν παρεδόθητε τύπον διδακῆς]. The simplest solution of the attraction εἰς ὃν παρεδ. is τῷ τύπω̣ τη̅ς διδαχ., εἰς ὃν παρεδόθητε.47 Explanations:

1. Christian doctrine in general (the most common). Meyer says properly to the contrary: By this the expression τύπος would not be explained. Beza, indeed, explains it: A seal under which we are placed to receive its impression.48

2. The doctrinal form of the gospel according to Paul, in opposition to anti-Paulinism (De Wette, Meyer, and others).49

3. Œcumenius, Calvin, and others, have taken the word in the sense of the ideal which the doctrine holds up. For a still more untenable explanation by Von Hengel, see Meyer.

Tholuck first repudiates the presumption of anti-Paulinism. Yet it does, indeed, come into consideration, so far as it judaistically obscured the Pauline doctrine of free grace. Tholuck is then inclined to accept the explanation of Beza, and says “that it is by no means a common expression ‘to be delivered to a doctrine,’ even if, with Chrysostom and Olshausen, we consider at the same time the guidance of God as the active factor.” But the Apostle says, in Gal_1:6, what he holds concerning this type of doctrine in opposition to its obscurations.

God himself has committed them to this school of faith.

Παρεδόθητε is not middle (Fritzsche), but passive. [Winer, p. 245, seems to justify the change to the active form which the E. V. adopts, but there is a good reason for the choice of the passive, viz., the activity of God in committing them to this type of teaching. This thought appropriately follows “Thanks to God.” So Meyer, comp. Philippi.—R.] It follows, from what has been said, that the Church was already won over by the Apostle’s friends to the Pauline form of the gospel. But here the matter treated of is the essential element; the true energy of freedom from the law is the true energy of life in obedience unto righteousness.

Rom_6:18 And being made free from sin [ἐλευθερωθέντε ςδ έἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας. Aorist participle, referring to the definite act of deliverance. The clause stands in close connection with Rom_6:17, not as a conclusion (since οὖν would occur in that case), but rather as an expansion.—R.]. The δέ leads us to emphasize the expression: ye are enslaved, or made servants, &c. From the nature of the case, they knew the negative past—free from sin—earlier and better than this full consequence: ye became the servants of righteousness.

Rom_6:19. I speak after the manner of men. The ἀνθρώπινον is analogous to the κατ’ ἄνθρω πον in Rom_3:5.50 By slavery, which was in full bloom in Rome, the Apostle clearly explains to them the absolute force of the new principle of life.

Because of the infirmity of your flesh [διὰ τὴν ἀσθένειαν τῆςσάρκος ὑμῶν]. The flesh, or the sensuous and susceptible fulness of the body, is not only negatively weak, but also positively diseased and disturbed, both of which facts are expressed by the ἀσθένεια. It may be asked, however, whether the Apostle means here the weakness of intelligence arising from this infirmity, by which he was compelled to represent to them the highest liberty under the figure of servitude (Bengel, Meyer, and De Wette, with reference to 1Co_3:1); or whether he meant their practical infirmity. The first view—that is, the reference to intelligence—appears also in the intimation that the Apostle announces a popular explanation (Vatable, Ernesti, and Rosenmüller). The latter view is favored by Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Calvin, &c.: “I require nothing which your fleshly weakness could not do,” or the like. The thought here could not be unintelligible to the Roman Christians; therefore the practical reference by all means preponderates; but not in the sense already given: “I require of you nothing too difficult; I require only the degree of obedience which you formerly rendered to sin.” The Apostle’s thought can rather be explained by what follows: “Yield your members servants,” &c. That is, even if, in your spiritual life, you feel that you are as freemen, you must nevertheless restrain your members strictly in discipline and obedience on account of the infirmity of your flesh. With all freedom, the question in reference to the bodily members is an appropriate ascetic discipline, such as the Apostle exercised in reference to his own body (1Co_9:27; comp. Gal_5:24); and therefore the figurative form of his expression does not merely correspond to the antithesis as denoting an unlimited obedience, but is established in a more special sense as the requirement of a strict discipline. This view obviates Meyer’s reminder: λέγω cannot mean require. The Apostle does not express a requirement, but a principle; by which analogy the Christian, in his freedom, has to make his bodily life absolutely subject. Lachmann [apparently Olshausen] and Fritzsche unjustifiably make a parenthesis of this clause, ἀνθρώπινον, κ.τ.λ..

[With Bengel, Olshausen, De Wette, Hodge, Alford, and many others, I am disposed to give a decided preference to the first view, viz., that this clause refers to what precedes. Commentators differ as to the force of the terms, but the following positions seem most tenable. Infirmity means intellectual weakness, growing out of their carnal condition (σάρκος, gen. auctoris.) The ethical reference is in σάρξ, not in ἀσθένεια. On σάρξ, see chap. 7.—R.]

For as ye have rendered your members [ὥσπερ γαρ παρεστήσατε τὰμέληὑμῶν. is explicative (Tholuck, Meyer). Δοῦλα, used as an adjective, only here in New Testament (Hodge).—R.] To servitude. The apparently free pleasure was, in fact, a hard bondage under sin.—To uncleanness [τῇ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ.] We hold that ὰκαθαρσία has especial reference to the heathen portion (according to chap. 1.), and to iniquity, ὰνομία, on the contrary, to the Jewish portion (according to chap. 2). Meyer makes this distinction: ἀκαθ. is sin as ethically defiling man; and ἀνομ. is sin as violation of the Divine law. Spener, De Wette, and others, distinguish thus: Uncleanness as defilement of themselves and of sin toward others. Tholuck considers ἀκαθ. as species, and ἀνομία as the generalizing genus of sin. But the genus is declared in what follows. The ἀχαθ., or fleshly sin in the narrower sense, and the ἀνομία, or violations of the law in the narrower sense, converge in the ἀνομία in the wider sense in guilt and condemnation before the law—which constitute the antithesis to ἁγιασμός. Therefore the explanation of unto iniquity,51 εἰς τὴν ἀνομ., as from one sin to others, is incorrect (Œcumenius, Erasmus, Luther, and Grotius). The duality of the service of sin is worthy of note: a service in part to uncleanness and in part to insubordination. This could not be the case (according to the axiom that no man can serve two masters) if both were not connected.

Even so now render your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification [οὕτως νῦν παραστήσατε τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν δοῦλα τῇ δικαιοσυνῃε ἰς ἁγιασμόν]. Righteousness, as the new principle of life, should bear unconditional sway over the members; holiness should be the end and result. Meyer translates ἁγιασμός, holiness. To present holiness. Even Tholuck does not understand the word to mean an effort to be holy. He refers to Rom_6:22; but there ἁγιασμός is still distinct from the τέλος as movement toward the τέλος. He then quotes Heb_12:1-4. But this passage does not decide positively for the expression holiness. For completed holiness is not the preliminary condition for beholding the Lord, but its fruit. But, according to this very passage, ἁγιασμός cannot mean a striving; otherwise we would have to translate: strive after the striving of holiness. The expressions quoted by Tholuck from Basil and Œcumenius do not both prove the same thing. Œcumenius understands by the word, absolute purity; Basil, thorough consecration to the holy God. And this is the sense, ̔Αγιασμός means, first of all, the act of consecration (“According to Bleek, on Heb_12:14, it does not occur among the classics; but Dion. Halic., Rom_1:21, as in the Sept., has it of acts of consecration;” Tholuck), then the condition of being consecrated, or of holiness—an idea which does not perfectly coincide with the idea of completed holiness, and in which there is at once expressed the constant ethical movement, rather than a substantial and quiescent condition.

[On the lexical grounds Lange advances, sanctification is the preferable meaning—one which accords with the context. The issue (not, the end; the use of the phrase in Rom_6:22 is against this) is sanctification, which indeed results in perfect holiness, but comes into view here rather as a progressive state than as an ultimate one. Undoubtedly righteousness describes the principle, and ἁγι. the actual condition (Philippi), but in the sense given by Lange above. Meyer says the word always means holiness—never sanctification—in the New Testament. Compare, on the contrary, Bengel, Rom_1:4.—R.]

Rom_6:20. For when ye were servants of sin [ὅτε γὰρ δοῦλοι ἧτε τῆς ἁμαρτίας]. According to Fritzsche, the γάρ indicates the elucidation of Rom_6:19; but according to Meyer and Tholuck, it announces the establishing of it. It is, however, rather a continued elucidation of the preceding than an establishment of what follows.52 The Apostle answers the question: wherefore should the service of righteousness be a bond-service? Answer: because ye, who were formerly the servants of sin, became free in relation to righteousness. They were not the freemen of righteousness, as though it had made them free, but in relation to it; therefore the dative. The argument lies in the necessity of the complete reversion of the earlier relation. Since sin and righteousness preclude each other, they were free in relation to righteousness, because they were the bondmen of sin. Therefore, since they have now become free from sin, they must be the bondmen of righteousness. The fearful expression, free as regards righteousness [ἐλεύθεροι ἦτεͅ τῇ δικαιοσύνη, dative of reference], does not mean that righteousness had no claims upon you (Tholuck), but that it had no part in you.53 According to Koppe and Reiche, this is ironical; a position opposed by Meyer, and now also by Tholuck. There is certainly nothing ironical in the sentence, but there is in the word ἐλεύθεροι. For we can no more accept it in a strict sense, than that they should be the slaves of righteousness. As this latter bondage is not only freedom, but also spontaneity, so was that freedom the deepest slavery. [That was a sorrowful freedom! Why find irony, then?—R.]

Rom_6:21. What fruit had ye then therefore? Things whereof ye are now ashamed [τίνα οὖν καρπὸν εἴχετε τότε; ἐφ’ οἷς νῦν ἐπαισχύνεσθε. See Textual Note 10.—R.]. Here are two divergent constructions:

1. The question closes with τότε. Then follows the answer. (Thus the Pesh., Theodore of Mopsvestia, Theodoret, Erasmus, Luther, and many others, down to De Wette, Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Philippi.) [So Alford, Webster and Wilkinson.]

2. The question continues to ἐπαισχύνεσθε. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? Answer: None; for the final result of them (these things) is death (thus Chrysostom, Œcumenius, Beza, Calov., Grotius, &c.; Bengel, Meyer). [So Stuart, Hodge, Wordsworth.]

3. Reiche, in conjunction with the latter construction, explains thus: What deeds, of which ye are now ashamed, proceeded from your service of sin (namely, your bringing forth fruit)? This third construction is utterly untenable; χαρπός would then recur as plural in ἐφ̓ οἷς, and χαρπ. ἔχειν would mean: to bring forth fruit.

There are the following reasons against Meyer’s explanation: 1. First of all, he must insert an ἐχείνων before ἐφ’ οἷς, and introduce a negation into the question, in order to explain the form of the answer, τὸ γάρ, &c. 2. The question is, What fruit had ye then? not, What will ye have finally? 3. After the antithesis, it should be made emphatic that they had formerly no fruit, but rather pernicious and horrible deceptions, but that now they bring forth their fruit. 4. By Meyer’s construction, ἐφ’ οἷς νῦν ἐπαισχύνεσθε would be converted into an enervating remark. Meyer says, against explanation No. Rom_1:1. According to Rom_6:22, the question, in antithesis to Rom_6:21, is the having the fruit, and not the quality of it. This is wrong: the χαρπός is qualified, εἰς ἁγια·σμόν. 2. Paul must have written τίασ χαρπούς or ἐφ̓ ὧ̣; as if the metaphorical idea of fruit, or gain, could not be represented in a variety of things. 3. Paul never ascribes χαρπούς to immorality; he attributes ἔργα to it (Gal_5:19); he predicates χαρπός of only what is good (Gal_5:22; Eph_5:9; Php_1:11); indeed, he even designates the ἔργα τοῦ σχότους as ἄχαρπα. But the Apostle says the same thing here, when he asks, What fruit had ye then? He even denies that they had real fruit—the true gain of life. On the other hand, they reaped, instead of true fruit, base deceptions, things of which they are now ashamed, and in which their future death is announced. Comp. Gal_6:8. Tholuck thinks that between the two constructions there is no demonstrative decision.

For the end of those things is death [τὸ μὲν γὰρ τέλος ἐχείνων θάνατος]. Death must be understood here in its complete and comprehensive meaning; not eternal death exclusively (Meyer).

Meyer, with Lachmann, accepts μέν, and translates: for the end is indeed death; but without observing that this contradicts his own construction of the passage. It is only on the first construction that μέν has any meaning. [See Textual Note11. Having already accepted μέν on diplomatic and critical grounds, before carefully considering the exegetical results, I am now disposed to insist upon retaining it, and using it as decisive in regard to the construction of the verse.—R.]

Rom_6:22. But now having been made free from sin [νμνὶ δὲ ἐλευθερωθέντες ἀπὸ τῆς ἁμαρτίας]. The evil relation has been completely reversed by faith.—And become servants to God [δουλωθέντες δὲ τῷ θεῷ Notice the definiteness of the aorist participles.—R.]. God himself here takes the place of διχαιοσύνη, for their relation is now one of personal love.—Ye have your fruit unto sanctification [ἔχετε τὸν καρπόν ὑμῶν εἰς ἁγιασμόν. The present indicates fruit already. The sense: have your reward, seems unjustifiable here. Εἰς is consecutive here (Meyer), as I hold it to be in Rom_6:19 also. ̔ Αγιασμὸν, sanctification, as above, a progressive state, the immediate issue of the fruit of their personal relation to God, the final issue follows.—R.] They have fruit already in this new relation. Meyer: the χαινότης ζωῆς, Rom_6:4.—Or the peace, Rom_5:1. But as, in the Old Testament, the firstlings served for the ἁγιασμός so, in the New Testament, this is done by the whole fruit of the life of faith. Tholuck translates here also: holiness [without excluding the idea of sanctification, however.—R.]

And the end everlasting life [τὸ δὲ τέλος ζωὴν αἰώνιον]. That is, ye have everlasting life. Meyer says, this possession is still an ideal one. It is rather an essential one; Joh_3:36; Mat_5:8; Heb_12:14; 1Jn_3:2. [We must take “life” here in its most extended sense, as “death” in Rom_6:21. Meyer’s difficulty arises from his limiting the meaning of these two words throughout. We have already eternal life in germ; in its fulness it is the τέλος of all our fruit and fruitfulness. Not, however, by natural, inherent laws of development. The next verse sets forth anew the two ends, and the inherent difference.—R.]

Rom_6:23. For the wages of sin is death [τὰ γὰρ ὀψώνια τῆς ἁμαρτίας θάνατος]. Tholuck: “̓͂ Οψώνιον, and in the plural ὀψώνια, wages of the servant and the soldier; therefore possibly, though not necessarily, a continuation of the figure of military service; comp. ὅπλα, Rom_6:13. Under this supposition, Grotius, Bengel, and Wetstein made χάρισμα to mean the donationum militare. Yet the technical word for such a gift is ἡἐπίδοσις (Fritzsche).” The figurative character of the antithesis lies in the fact that sin pays its soldiers and slaves miserable wages (Erasmus: ὀψώνια, vile verbum), namely, death; but God (as King) pays His children and servants, not a reward, but the honor-gift of His favor, which is eternal life. Tholuck defines the antithesis thus: as far as sin is concerned, her due is according to justice; but, on the other hand, what is received by the believing acceptance of God’s saving blessings can be regarded only as a gift—namely, the imparting of salvation, the eternal completion of life. This antithesis is correct so far as it is not pushed beyond the proper measure, so that justice does not appear as mere arbitrary authority. In the present passage, however, this antithesis recedes; for the question is not concerning the righteous punishment of sin, but the way in which sin itself, regarded as false dominion, pays the reward. The gift of God also, at all events, presupposes the merit of believers, but yet remains a gift, because the whole idea of gain falls to the ground where merit is not considered, and where even the preliminary conditions of good conduct are bestowed as a gift.54 For the idea of wages, see 1Co_9:7. “The plural (more usual than the singular) may be explained from the manifold elements of original natural reward, and from the numerous coins of later money-wages;” Meyer.

In Christ Jesus our Lord [ἐν Χριστῷ Ιησοῦ τῷ κυρίω̣ ἡμῶν. Stuart follows the inexact sense of the E. V.: “through the redemption or atonement of Christ.” True; but not what Paul says here. In Christ Jesus is an expression which has a full, rich meaning of its own. In this case, we may ask whether the phrase limits God, or gift of God, or is used more generally. Meyer says: in Christ it rests, is causally founded, that the gift of God is eternal life. Webster and Wilkinson: in Him, by virtue of His relation to Deity, God is the giver; in Him, we, as united with Him, having an interest in Him, are recipients.—R.]. He is not only the source, but also the central treasure of our eternal life.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. It is certainly not accidental that the word to rule, βασιλεύειν, occurs so frequently in the Epistle to the Romans (Rom_5:14; Rom_5:17; Rom_5:21; Rom_6:12); likewise the word weapons, ὅπλα, here, and in Rom_13:12. See the Exeg. Notes, where reference is made to the Apostle’s similar allusions to local relations in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, as well as in the Epistle to the Ephesians. His epistles in general abound in these evidences of truth to life. In the Epistle to the Galatians, for example, we see very plainly the Galatian fickleness; in the Epistles to the Corinthians, we see the city of Corinth portrayed; and in the Epistle to the Colossians, the Phrygian popular spirit, &c. Such evidences of authenticity are regarded by the critics of Baur’s school as mere cobwebs, while they convert cobwebs of the barest probability into important and decisive evidence.

2. In this section the Apostle passes from the figure of military service to that of servitude, in order to portray, in every relation, Christian freedom in its contrast with the bondage of man in sin.

3. On Rom_6:12. The despotic dominion of sin in the mortal body of the unregenerate, is an ethical copy of physical demoniacal possession. Sin, as a foreign force, has penetrated the individual life, and riots there as lord and master. Christianity now consists essentially in raising the shield of the Spirit against this usurping despotism, in the power of the triumph, dominion, and fellowship of Christ.

4. Rom_6:13. If the real Christian should again serve sin, his conduct would be a voluntary, cowardly, and inexcusable surrender of his arms to a hostile power already overthrown. But, according to the Apostle’s view, the whole life of humanity is a moral struggle of the spirit between righteousness and unrighteousness, in which all the human members are arms that contend for either righteousness or unrighteousness. Man, physiologically regarded, is born naked, without weapons or arms; ethically considered, he is “armed to the teeth;” his members have throughout the significance of moral arms.

5. The conclusion made by non-legal impurity, that sin is made free, because we are not under law, but under grace, is reversed by Paul, who says that, for this reason, sin is to be regarded as abrogated and excluded. The law does not make sinners, but it suits sinners; bondage under the law corresponds to bondage under sin, and the law cannot annul this bondage. To him who stands under the law, his own inmost nature is still a strange form; for the inmost nature, in its living character, signifies the inwardness of the law, freedom from the letter of the law, liberty. To be estranged from one’s self is, therefore, to be still in the bondage of sin, and therefore under that of the law also, as the foreign form of the inmost norms of life. But in grace, man has become at once free from sin and the law, because by grace he has come to himself (Luk_15:15), and because it has written the law, as the word of the Spirit, on his heart.55 On the power of sin, see Tholuck, p. 313; on the nova obedientia, p. 314.

6. On Rom_6:16. Life is throughout a consequence of an established principle, either for death or for life, whether man may have made this principle—his self-determination—more or less clear to himself. Christianity is a thoroughly synthetical view of life—a view of life in its grand, complete, and fundamental relations. Adam, Christ—the state of bond age, the state of freedom, &c.

7. On Rom_6:17. When the Apostle thanks God that the Romans have not merely become Christians in a general sense, but have become obedient to the doctrinal form of the freedom of the gospel from the law, the application of this to the evangelical confession lies very near. The Apostle speaks here of definite doctrinal types, not so much in the formal as in the material sense. The antithesis is judaizing Christianity.

8. On Rom_6:19-20. That the members should be servants to righteousness, is not merely a figurative expression arising from the antithesis that they were enslaved to sin. Rather, this is a demand which follows from the fact that, in consequence of serving sin, they are afflicted with weakness of the flesh; and therefore, notwithstanding the freedom of the Christian spirit—yea, by virtue of it—the morbid and blunted natural forces, the animal natures, must be subjected, watched over, and controlled. Augustine teaches that the little tree, which has grown crooked on one side, is thereby stretched so that it can be bent a little toward the other side.

9. The fruit of the service of sin is first of all represented in bitter disappointments, confusion, disgrace, and shame; finally, in death. The reward of sin is, from its very nature, the low wages for slavish or military service, and in addition to this, further contemptible pay, viz., death. How glorious does the honorable gift of eternal life appear in comparison with this wretched reward! See the Exeg. Notes. We must here reject the exaggerations of the idea of gracious retribution, as well on the side of arbitrary authority as on the side of reward. In human relations, gain is a lower form than merit; but the donation goes far beyond the merit, since it, as the gift of personal magnanimity, will more than outweigh the work of personal worth. Everywhere in the kingdom of love, to say nothing of the kingdom of grace, all idea of merit falls to the ground; but the appropriateness of the reward to the dignity of the child and the worthiness of the servant, which are bestowed by God and religiously and morally appropriated, do not fall to the ground. Grace is not thereby so glorified that it is absolved from justice.56 On the ζωὴ αἰώνιος, see Comm. on the Gospel of Joh_3:15.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The well-established apostolical admonition to a moral course of life: 1. To whom is it directed? 2. What does it require? 3. By what is it established?—Our body is mortal (Rom_6:12).—In whose service should our members be? 1. Not in the service of unrighteousness; but, 2. In the service of righteousness (Rom_6:13).—In which service do our weapons hold out better? 1. Many believe in the service of unrighteousness; but there they are destroyed; 2. Christian experience teaches, on the other hand, that it is in the service of righteousness, for there they remain untouched (Rom_6:13).—Under the law there is death, but under grace there is life (Rom_6:14).—Law and grace.

Should we sin, since we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid! Because freedom from the law is (1) not lawlessness, but (2) obedience to righteousness [comp. Luther’s work, on the Freedom of a Christian Man], (Rom_6:15-23).—What is it to be obedient in heart to the form of doctrine with which we are connected? 1. Not only to be orthodox, but also believing (Rom_6:17).—The form of apostolical doctrine. 1. What must we understand thereby? (The Apostle Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith.) 2. How far is this form of importance for us? (Rom_6:17).—Christian preachers should never forget to so speak after the manner of men that everybody can understand, Rom_3:5 (Rom_6:19).—The fruits of serving sin and serving God: 1. The fruit of the former is death; 2. The fruit of the latter is eternal life (Rom_6:21).—What is the fruit of sin? 1. A fruit of which one must be ashamed; 2. One whose end is death (Rom_6:21).—What is the fruit of righteousness? 1. One of holiness; 2. One whose end is eternal life.—The precious fruit of holiness. It is not only to be regarded as (1) lovely, but (2) it makes wise, and joyous, and blessed (Rom_6:21-22).—Death, and eternal life. 1. The former is the wages of sin; the latter is God’s gift in Jesus Christ our Lord.

Luther: In His death, that even we should die like Him. Observe that believers have still wicked lusts in the flesh, which they do not obey (Rom_6:12).—So long as grace rules, the conscience remains free and controls sin in the flesh; but without grace, sin rules, and the law condemns the conscience (Rom_6:14).

Starke: Sin still arises even in the regenerate, and they can again fall under its dominion; therefore they need the warning (Rom_6:12).—The pious are never without law, and yet not under the law, but in it (Rom_6:14).—Whoever still permits sin to rule over him, cannot be under grace (Rom_6:14).—To be a servant of sin, is the greatest misery; but to have been a servant of sin is the greatest blessedness (Rom_6:17).—Justification impels, moves, and powerfully awakens toward the exercise of godliness; Psa_130:5 (Rom_6:18).

Hedinger: To have piety from compulsion, fear, or politeness, in order to please others, or through one’s own inclination, desire, praise, and advantage, was the delusion and bondage of Ishmael. The children of God are not under the law; 1Jn_4:18 (Rom_6:15).—Christians are not libertines, who can do what they please: they are servants, but servants of God! But where are such servants? How great is their number? Servants of court, fashion, passion, men, the state, self, and the devil, can be seen in abundance.

Cramer: We shall never have a better fate than Paul, all of whose words have been perverted, misinterpreted, and made sinful.—Nothing is more becoming in a servant than obedience. Because we are now the servants of God, we must be steadfastly obedient from the heart until the end, according to God’s word, and not according to our own notion (Rom_6:16).—Quesnel: As the heart is, so is the use of the body. He serves the Lord who has chosen Him from the heart. A true Christian dedicates himself wholly to God, his heart by love, and his body by good works (Rom_6:13).—O blessed servitude with which we serve God! The service of men makes miserable people; but the service of God makes us saints in time and kings in eternity; Isa_14:3 (Rom_6:22).—Müller: God will have no compulsory service; a willing heart is the best offering; in the weak flesh a willing spirit, in the small work a great will; Psa_110:3 (Rom_6:19).—He who is free from righteousness has no part in Christ (Rom_6:20).—As the fruit grows from the seed, so does ignominy grow from sin, outwardly before the world and inwardly in the conscience before God (see Rom_6:21).

Spener: Earnest and true Christianity consists herein: although sin is present, it does not reign (Rom_6:12).—We dare not think, that though the wages of sin is death, Christ has redeemed us from death, so that it will not finally injure us. For the redemption wrought by Christ will not help us any, if we do not become obedient to Him (Rom_6:23).

Gerlach: The body, with its impulses and members, is like a house full of arms or implements, for war or every kind of labor. In the service of sin, these members, the sinful impulses, then become themselves members unto sin (Rom_6:13).—The servitude of obedience is also true freedom (Rom_6:17).—Since, by the gospel, man becomes a servant as well as a freeman, license is just as much excluded as slavish obedience to a foreign power (Rom_6:18).—If righteousness, so rules in us that all our members become its instruments, they will work together for the increase of our holiness (Rom_6:19).—A single glance at the fruit and the reward of sin must fill the Christian with shame, and therefore with abhorrence of the false freedom which abuses grace (Rom_6:21).—The perfect sanctification of man in body and soul is also his true, eternal life; for by the perfect communion of his whole nature with the Fountain of all life, God himself pervades him spiritually and bodily with the fulness of everlasting life (Rom_6:22).

Lisco: Earnest admonition to holiness of life (Rom_6:12-23): 1. Its import (Rom_6:12-14); 2. The impulse to a more zealous sanctification is the grace of redemption (Rom_6:15-23).

Heubner: Freedom from the law is not liberty to sin, or lawlessness (Rom_6:15).—In Christianity, the law of the letter, with its worldly power, does not rule, but the free law of love (Rom_6:15).—Obedience, the practice of God’s will, awakens in us increasingly the spiritual power of life, and obtains spiritual health (Rom_6:16).—Purity and beauty of soul arise only from sinlessness (Rom_6:19).—The remembrance of earlier sins never becomes wholly effaced, but, 1. It keeps the converted person humble and watchful; it awakens, 2. thankfulness for the love and grace of God; 3. sympathy for others.

Besser: Believers are servants of righteousness (Rom_6:12-23).—Unrighteousness is a tyrannical master, who does not release his slaves according to their pleasure, but drives them ever farther from God’s commandments (Rom_6:19).—Servitium Dei summa libertas (Rom_6:19.)—The wages of sin is as manifold as the wages with which a general rewards his soldiers (bread, clothing, money); but its sum is death, empty death.

Lange: The service of sin, at first apparently a voluntary life of warfare, but afterwards plainly a mercenary condition, and finally a state of slavery.—The fearful self-deception in surrendering one’s self to sin: 1. At the outset, slavery instead of freedom; 2. In continuance, always backward instead of forward; 3. Finally, death instead of life.—Voluntary return to bondage is the deepest guilt of sin.—Real death is explained by its opposite. It is not contrasted with the present, but with eternal life.—Eternal life as the fruit of the true service of God in righteousness: 1. As redemption; 2. As gift.

[Tillotson: Sin is the blindness of our minds, the perverseness and crookedness of our wills, and the monstrous irregularity and disorder of our affections and appetites, the misplacing of our powers and faculties, and the setting of our wills and passions above our reason; all which is ugly and unnatural; and, if we were truly sensible of it, a matter of great shame and reproach to us.—Burkitt: Sin, as a raging and commanding king, has the sinner’s heart for its throne, the members of the body for its service, the world, the flesh, and the devil for its grand council, lusts and temptations for its weapons and armory; and its fortifications are ignorance, sensuality, and fleshly reasonings.—Death, as the punishment of sin, is the end of the work, though not the end of the worker.—Grotius: It is the nature of all vices to grow upon a person by repetition.—Clarke: Let God have your hearts, and, with them, your heads, your hands, and your feet. Think and devise what is pure; speak what is true, edifying, just, and good; and walk steadily in the way that leads to everlasting felicity.—Every sinner has a daily pay, and this pay is death.—The sinner has a hell in his own bosom; all is confusion and disorder where God does not reign. If men were as much in earnest to get their souls saved as they are to prepare them for perdition, heaven would be highly peopled; and devils would have to be their own companions.—Hodge: The motive to obedience is now love, and its aim the glory of God.—When a man is the slave of sin, he commonly thinks himself free; and, when most degraded, is often the most proud. When truly free, he feels himself most strongly bound to God, and when most elevated, is most humble.—J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[28] Rom_6:12.—[The correct reading seems to be: ὑπακούειν ταῖς ἔπιθ υμίαιςαὐτοῦ, found in א. A. B. C1., many cursives, most versions and fathers; adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford et al. Griesbach, on insufficient authority, omits all after ὑπακούειν. D. F. insert αὐτῇ, omitting the rest. C3. K. L., some further insert αὐτῇ ἐν before ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις. So Rec.; hence it in of the E. V. All these variations are accounted for by Meyer, who supposes that αὐτῇ was added, first as a marginal gloss, to direct attention to sin as the source of “the lusts,” then incorporated in the text, and subsequent changes made to avoid confusion.

[29]Rom_6:13.—[The idea of military service found in παριστάνετε is better expressed by render, since yield implies a previous resistance, not found in the Apostle’s thought.

[30]Rom_6:13.—[To is the better rendering of the simple datives here, as in Rom_6:19. Unto has a telic force, which makes it equivalent to εἰς. This distinction is preserved in Rom_6:19, but lost sight of by the English translators here.

[31]Rom_6:13.—[As being alive from the dead (Amer. Bible Union) is a good version of ὡσεὶ ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῶντας; but the paraphrase of Alford: as alive from having been dead, conveys the full meaning. Still better is the Revision by Five Anglican Clergymen: as those that were dead, and are alive.

[32]Rom_6:14.—[The article of the E. V. is not only unnecessary, since the Greek phrase is ὑπὸ νόμον, but perhaps incorrect; for the reference may be to “law” in general, rather than to “the (Mosaic) law.” So in Rom_6:15.

[33]Rom_6:15.—[The reading ἁμαρτήσ ο μεν (Rec.) is weakly supported. א. A. B. C. D. E. K. L., have ἁμαρτή σωμεν; adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, and others. This is the deliberative subjunctive; hence: “may we sin.”

[34]Rom_6:17.—[Teaching is preferable to doctrine. See Exeg. Notes.

[35]Rom_6:17.—[To which ye were delivered, εἰς ὂν παρεδ όθητε, is literal, and corresponds with the figure implied in τύπον.—The full stop of the E. V. is unnecessary, as the next verse is closely connected with this one. The form of Rom_6:18 is altered, to make this connection more obvious.

[36]Rom_6:19.—[Ἁγιασμόν may mean holiness, Heiligkeit, or sanctification, Heiligung. Bengel, however, discriminates between ἁγιότης and ἁγιασμός, the former “holiness,” the latter “sanctification.” See i. 4, p. 62, and Exeg. Notes, where Lange contends for the latter meaning here (against Meyer).

[37]Rom_6:21.—[Lange adopts the punctuation of Lachmann, Griesbach, and many others, placing the interrogation after τότε, and making what follows the answer. A great array of authorities can be cited in support of each way of pointing, but this seems to give a better sense to καρπός. Comp. Alford in loco.

[38]Rom_6:21.—[א3. B. D. F1., Lachmann, Meyer, Alford, insert μέν before γάρ. Wordsworth does not insert it in his text, but favors it in his notes. It is omitted by א1. A. C. D3. K. L. It seems more probable that it was carelessly omitted by some transcribers than inserted for any special reason.

[39]Rom_6:23.—[The E. V. again loses the point of the closing phrase, by rendering ἐν, through. The life is emphatically in Christ Jesus our Lord. Hence perhaps Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.—R.]

[40][The German commentators generally take the second τῷ Θεῷ as dat. commodi, and render für Gott. They advance no special reason for it. This view unnecessarily disturbs the parallelism of the clauses, since the second τῷ θεῷ is in strict verbal contrast with τῇ ἁμαρτία. The first τῷ θεῷ is undoubtedly the simple dative after παριστήσατε, but as the same verb must be supplied in this clause, it seems unnecessary to substitute any other regimen here. We render to God in both clauses; the more confidently, since the second clause is but a particularization of the first, to carry out the antithesis. Comp. Stuart.—R.]

[41][Stuart: “I take it for granted that ye know and believe.” Jowett paraphrases thus: “Know ye not that what ye make yourselves, ye are?” This view he takes to avoid tautology, yet this seems to depart from the Apostle’s line of thought.—R.]

[42][Forbes calls attention to the deviation from the strict parallelism in this verse: “of obedience unto righteousness,” instead of “of righteousness unto life.” He intimates that thus Paul marks this distinction: To sin we give ourselves of our own free choice and power as bondsmen, but we cannot of our own free choice, and by any effort of will, give ourselves to the service of righteousness; hence all we can do is to yield ourselves up to God’s grace, to save us, as servants of obedience, for or unto righteousness, as a “gift” to be bestowed upon us, and inwrought into us by His Spirit. He also notices that the direct expression: servants to righteousness does not occur until Rom_6:19—the caution being attributable to anxiety lest such an expression be turned to legalistic account.—R.]

[43][De Wette: “Sündenelend überhaupt.” So Alford: “The state of misery induced by sin, in all its awful aspects and consequences.” The wider view is necessary, since the word occurs frequently, in the remainder of the chapter and in chap. 7., in such a connection that a limitation is unfortunate. Meyer’s exegesis is hampered throughout by his view of θάνατος.—R.]

[44][Prof. Stuart here also confounds δικαιοσύνη with δικαίωσις, and unfortunately paraphrases: obedience which is unto justification. This is open to lexical as well as theological objections. Δικ. is subjective (Hodge).—R.]

[45][Tholuck agrees with Meyer, who takes Rom_6:16 as the major, Rom_6:17 as the minor, but regards the conclusion as self-evident, and hence not expressed.—R.]

[46][So Philippi, Hodge, Alford, and modem commentators generally, taking the first clause as meaning: that it is over. Wordsworth, however, finds here “a mode of speaking, where a bad thing is represented as comparatively good, so that the superiority of what is contrasted with it may appear more clear.” This seems totally irrelevant.—R.]

[47][Stuart prefers to find no attraction, since ὑπακούειν governs the accusative, but there seems to be a modification of the meaning in such cases. On the grammatical difficulty, see Meyer in loco, Winer, p. 155.—R.]

[48][Wordsworth thus carries out the metaphor of the verse: “You readily obeyed the mould of Christian Faith and Practice, into which, at your baptism, you were poured, as it were, like soft, ductile and fluent metal, in order to be cast, and take its form. You obeyed this mould; you were not rigid and obstinate, but were plastic and pliant, and assumed it readily.”—R.]

[49][Adopting this view in the main, we prefer teaching to doctrine. The latter is more abstract, but the reference here seems to be to definite forms of instruction.—R.]

[50][Hodge: “The former characterizes as human the thing said, and the other the manner of saying it.” Comp. Meyer, however.—This apologetic form of expression concerns the description of “true freedom” as a δουλεία.—R.]

[51][A question arises as to the exact meaning of the phrase εἰς τὴν ἀ νομίαν. It may mean, for the purpose of iniquity—i.e., in order to work iniquity (Stuart, Hodge, Meyer), in order that this shall be actually presented, or issuing in iniquity, ἀν indicating the resultant state (Tholuck, De Wette, Alford, Lange). The latter is preferable, because the word seems to refer to a state rather than an act. Besides, its antithesis is εἰς ἁγιασμίν, which indicates the result, as we infer from its use in Rom_6:22.—R.]

[52][The difficult connection of the verse is satisfactorily explained in Webster and Wilkinson: “γάρ restates the view given of their former condition in respect to sin and righteousness, in preparation for the final and most accurate statement of their present spiritual condition (Rom_6:22).” Meyer (who has changed his views), in 4th ed., also finds in this verse a preparation for the full statement of a motive for obeying the precept of Rom_6:19. He groups Rom_6:20-22 as one in thought, calling attention, however, to the somewhat tragical force of our verse, with its emphatic words in the parallel clauses.—R.]

[53][Stuart: “counted yourselves free.” This is an implied irony, and objectionable, for it is not strictly true.—R.]

[54][On χάρισμα, see Rom_5:15 ff.—The antithesis is different here, yet related—there, fall, transgression; here, wages, but of sin.—R.]

[55][Stuart: “Christians are placed in a condition of which grace is the prominent feature: grace to sanctify as well as grace to renew the heart; grace to purify the evil affections; grace to forgive offences though often repeated, and thus to save from despair, and to excite to new efforts of obedience. Viewed in this light, there is abundant reason for asserting that Christians, under a system of grace, will much more effectually throw off the dominion of sin, than they would do if under a mere law dispensation.” Yet, if there be one point where there is most obscurity in the minds of the majority of professing Christians, it is here. That it has largely arisen from an obscuration of the doctrine of sanctification by grace, or rather the unwise sundering of justification and sanctification in discussing this Epistle, is painfully true.—R.]

[56][It is well to note here the saying of Augustine: Gratia non erit gratia ullo modo, nisi sit gratuita omni modo; “Grace is not grace in any sort, if it be not free in every sort.—R.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 6:12. Μὴ, not) Refer the ἀλλὰ but [yield yourselves unto God, Rom 6:13] to μὴ, not [here]: and refer καὶ τὰ μέλη, and your members, etc., to μηδὲ, neither [both in Rom 6:13] [There is a remarkable force in this dehortation on the one hand and exhortation on the other, V. g.]—μὴ οὖν βασιλευέτω, let not sin therefore reign) The same verb occurs in ch. Rom 5:21. A synonymous term in Rom 6:9. It is a correlative of serve, Rom 6:6.—θνητῷ, mortal) For you, who are now alive, are become alienated from your body, ch. Rom 8:10.—αὐτῃ ἐν) This savours somewhat of a paraphrase. Baumgarten and I, as usual, hold each his own opinion, as to the mode of interpreting this passage.—ἐν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτοῦ, in its lusts) viz. σώματος, of the body. The bodily appetites are the fuel; sin is the fire.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_6:12 f. Οὖν] in consequence of this λογίζεσθε, for the proof of it in the practice of life. For this practice the λογίζεσθαι κ.τ.λ[1434] is meant to be the regulative theory. The negative portion of the following exhortation corresponds to the νεκροὺς μὲν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ in Rom_6:11; and the positive contrast ἀλλὰ κ.τ.λ[1435] to the ΖῶΝΤΑς ΔἚ Τῷ ΘΕῷ.

ΜῊ ΒΑΣΙΛ.] With this nothing sinful is admitted (comp Chrysostom); but on the contrary the influence of the (personified) sin, conquering the moral ego, is entirely forbidden,[1437] as the whole connection teaches.

ἘΝ Τῷ ΘΝΗΤῷ ὙΜ. ΣΏΜ.] ἘΝ simply indicates the seat and sphere, in which the forbidden dominion would take place (not by means of, as Th. Schott thinks). As to θνητῷ, every explanation is to be avoided which takes the word in any other sense than the ordinary one of mortal (comp Rom_8:11), because it has no other signification (see all the examples in Wetstein), and because the context contains nothing at all in favour of giving any other turn to the notion of the word. We must reject therefore the opinion that it is equivalent to ΝΕΚΡῷ, as taken in the ethical sense: dead for sin (Turretin, Ch. Schmidt, Ernesti, Schleusner, Schrader, and Stengel). Directly affirmed of the body, the mortality could not but be understood by every reader quite definitely as the physical. The purpose of the epithet however must manifestly result from the relation of motive, in which the mortality of the body stands to the prohibition of the reign of sin in the body. And the more precise definition of this motive is to be derived from the previous νεκροὺς μὲν τῇ ἁμαρτιᾷ, ζῶντας δὲ τῷ Θεῷ. If we are convinced, namely, that we are dead for sin and alive for God; if we account ourselves as those who have put off the ethical mortality (Ὡς ἘΚ ΝΕΚΡῶΝ ΖῶΝΤΑς, Rom_6:13), then it is an absurdity to allow sin to reign in the body, which in fact is mortal. This quality stands in a relation of contradiction to our immortal life entered upon in the fellowship of Christ, and thus the dominion, for which we should deliver over our body to sin, would prove that we were not that for which, nevertheless, in genuine moral self-judgment, we have to take ourselves; since in fact the mortal life of the body, if we yield it to the government of sin, excludes the immortal Christian life described in Rom_6:11. Hofmann imports more into the passage than its connection with Rom_6:11 suggests; namely the double folly, that such an one should not use the power, which the life of Christ gives him over the mortal body and therewith over sin; and that he should permit himself to be entangled in the death to which his body falls a victim, while he possesses a life of which also his body would become joint-participant. This is a finespun application of the true interpretation. Different is the view of Köllner (comp Calvin: per contemtum vocat mortale), that it is here hinted how disgraceful it is to make the spirit subordinate to sin, which only dwells in the perishable body; and of Grotius: de vita altera cogitandum, nee formidandos labores haud sane diuturnos (comp Chrysostom and Theodoret; so also on the whole Reiche). But the context contains neither a contrast between body and spirit, nor between this and the other life. Flatt thinks that Paul wished to remind his readers of the brevity of sensual pleasure; comp Theophylact. But how little would this be in keeping with the high standpoint of the moral sternness of the Apostle! According to others, Paul desired to remind them warningly of the destructiveness of sin, which had brought death on the body (de Wette, Krehl, Nielsen, Philippi, also Maier). But this point of view as to destructiveness is remote from the connection, in which the pervading theme is rather the unsuitableness of the dominion of sin to the communion of death and life with Christ. Others still explain it variously.[1442]

ΣΏΜΑΤΙ] body, as in Rom_6:6; not a symbolic expression for the entire ego (Reiche, following Ambrosiaster and various early expositors); nor yet body and soul, so far as it is not yet the recipient of the Spirit of God (Philippi); for even in all such passages as Rom_8:10; Rom_8:13; Rom_8:23; Rom_12:1 σῶμα retains purely its signification body. But sin reigns in the body (comp on Rom_6:6), so far as its material substratum is the ΣΆΡΞ (Col_2:11), which, with its life-principle the ΨΥΧΉ, is the seat and agent of sin (Rom_7:18 ff. al[1444]). Hence the sinful desires are its desires (αὐτοῦ), because, excited by the power of sin in the flesh, they are at work in the body and its members (Rom_7:5; Rom_7:23; Col_3:5). Sin aims at securing obedience to these desires through its dominion in man. Consequently ΕἸς ΤῸ ὙΠΑΚ. Τ. ἘΠΙΘ. ΑὐΤ. implies theaccording to Rom_6:11 absurdtendency of the allowing sin to reign in the mortal body, which the Apostle forbids.

μηδέ] also especially not (as e.g. 1Co_5:8).

παριστάνετε] present, i.e. place at the disposal, at the service. Mat_26:53; Act_23:24; 2Ti_2:15; Athen. iv. p. 148 B; Lucian, d. Mark 6, 2; Diod. Sic. xvi. 79; Dem. 597 pen.

τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν] your members, which sin desires to use as executive organs, tongue, hand, foot, eye, etc. The mental powers and activities, feeling, will, understanding, are not included (in opposition to Erasmus, Reiche, Philippi and others); but Paul speaks concretely and graphically of the members, in reference to which the mental activities in question are necessarily presupposed. Comp Col_3:5.

ὍΠΛΑ ἈΔΙΚΊΑς] as weapons of immorality, with which the establishment of immorality is achieved. The ἁμαρτία is conceived as a ruler employing the members of man as weapons of warfare, wherewith to contend against the government of God and to establish ἀδικία (opposite of the subsequent ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΎΝΗς). It injures the figure, to which Rom_6:23 glances back, to explain ὍΠΛΑ (comp כּלי) instruments, as is done by many (including Rückert, Köllner, Baumgarten-Crusius, Krehl, Fritzsche, de Wette, and Ewald), a meaning which it indeed frequently bears in classic Greek since Homer (see Duncan, Lex. ed. Rost, p. 844), but never in the N. T. Comp especially 2Co_6:7; 2Co_10:4.

ΠΑΡΑΣΤΉΣΑΤΕ] the aorist here following the present (comp Bernhardy, p. 393), marking the immediateness and rapidity of the opposite action which has to set in. It stands to ΠΑΡΙΣΤΆΝΕΤΕ in a climactic relation. See Winer, p. 294 [E. T. 394], Kühner, II. 1, p. 158.

ἑαυτούς] yourselves, your own persons, and specially also your members, etc.

ὡς ἐκ νεκρ. ζῶντας] as those that are alive from the dead (risen), i.e. those who have experienced in themselves the ethical process of having died and attained to the resurrection-life with Christ. Only thus, in the sense of the moral renovation discussed in Rom_6:2-11not in the sense of Eph_2:1 (Philippi and older expositors)can it be explained agreeably to the context, especially as ὡς corresponds to the ΛΟΓΊΖΕΣΘΕ Κ.Τ.Λ[1449] in Rom_6:11. This ὡς, quippe, with the participle (as in Rom_15:15, and very frequently), expresses, namely, the relation of the case, in which what is demanded is to appear to the readers as corresponding to their Christian state, which is described as life from the dead.[1450]

Τῷ ΘΕῷ] belonging to God, as in Rom_6:10-11.

[1434] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1435] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1437] But Luthers gloss is good: Mark, the saints have still evil lusts in the flesh, which they do not follow, Comp. the carrying out of the idea in Melancthon.

[1442] Olshausen connects thus: let not the sin manifesting itself in your mortal body reign in you. In that case Paul must have repeated the article after ἁμ. According to Baur there lies in θνητῷ the idea: whose mortality can only remind you of that, which it even now is as νεκρὸν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ. But, had Paul desired to set forth the moral death through the adjective by way of motive, he must then have written, after ver 11, ἐν τῷ νεκρῷ ὑμῶν σώματι, which after what goes before would not have been liable to any misconception.

[1444] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[1449] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1450] The ὡς is not the like of comparison (Hofmann, who, following Lachmann, prefers with A B C א the ὡσει, which does not elsewhere occur in the writings of Paul), but the as of the quality, in which the subjects have to conceive themselves. Comp. Wunder, ad Soph. Trach. 394, p. 94; Kühner, II. 2, p. 649. According to Hofmann the comparative ὡσει is only to extend to ἐκ νεκρῶν (and ζῶντας to be predicative): as living persons like as from the dead. But such a mere comparison would be foreign to the whole context, according to which Christian are really alive (with Christ) from the dead, and paralysing the pith of the view, which does not lie in a quasi, but in a tanquam. The Vulgate renders correctly: tanquam ex mortuis viventes. He who participates ethically in the resurrection-life of the Lord is alive from death, but not alive as if from death; just as little is he as if alive from death. Theodore of Mopsuestia rendered the ὡσει, which he read, in the latter sense; referring it to ἐκ νεκρ. ζῶντας together, and explaining the meaning to he that, previous to the actual resurrection, only ἡ κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν μίμησις is required.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 6:12 f. Practical enforcement of Rom 6:1-11 . The inner life is in union with Christ, and the outer (bodily) life must not be inconsistent with it (Weiss). ἐν τῷ θνητῷ ὑμῶν σώματι : the suggestion of θνητὸς is rather that the frail body should be protected against the tyranny of sin, than that sin leads to the death of the body. μηδὲ παριστάνετε … ἀλλὰ παραστήσατε : and do not go on, as you have been doing, putting your members at the service of sin, but put them once for all at the service of God. For the difference between pres. and aor. imper., see Winer, p. 393 f. ὅπλα ἀδικίας : the gen is of quality, cf. Luk 16:8-9 . ὅπλα in the N.T. seems always to mean weapons, not instruments: see 2Co 10:4 ; 2Co 10:6-7 , and cf. ὀψώνια , Rom 6:23 . ὡσεὶ ἐκ νεκρῶν ζῶντας : they were really such; the ὡσεὶ signifies that they are to think of themselves as such, and to act accordingly.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 12, 13. “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey its lusts.Neither yield ye your members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that have become alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness for God.”

In Christ all is done. In the believer all is doing and can be done only with the concurrence of his will. Hence the following exhortation which is connected by therefore.

It might have been thought from certain previous expressions, that Paul did not admit the existence of sin any longer in the believer; but he far from giving himself up to such exaggerations. The very word: “Let not sin reign,” assumes that it is still there. But it ought no longer to be there as sovereign: for it has lost its powerful instrument and auxiliary, the body; the latter has become in Christ the instrument of God. These two aspects of the sanctification of the body, its liberation from sin and its consecration to God correspond respectively to Rom 6:6-7 and Rom 6:8-10, and are developed, the former in Rom 6:12-13 a, and the latter in Rom 6:13 b

The imperative μὴ βασιλευέτω, let it not reign, is addressed grammatically to sin, but in meaning to the believer himself; for it is he who has the task of bringing this reign to an end. The exhortation thus placed as the sequel of what precedes, reminds us of the passage Col 3:5: “Ye are dead (Rom 6:3); mortify therefore (Rom 6:5) your members, which are upon the earth.” It is because we are dead to sin in Christ that we can mortify it in ourselves in daily life. The present imperative, with the negative μή, implies the notion of a state which existed till now, but which must terminate.

We must not, as some do, give to the ἐν, in, the meaning of by, as if the apostle meant that the body was the means by which sin exercises its dominion over us. The natural meaning is: “in your mortal body.” The body is the domain, as it were, in which the dominion of sin is exercised, in this sense, that when once the will has been subjugated by sin, it gives the body of which it disposes over to sin, and this master uses it for his pleasure.

The epithet θνητῷ, mortal, must bear a logical relation to the idea of the passage. The object of this term has been understood very variously. Calvin regards it as expressive of contempt, as if Paul meant to say that man’s whole bodily nature hastens to death, and ought not consequently to be pampered. Philippi thinks that the epithet refers rather to the fact of sin having killed the body, and having thus manifested its malignant character. Flatt thinks that Paul alludes to the transient character of bodily pleasures. Chrysostom and Grotius find in the word the idea of the brevity of the toils, which weigh on the Christian here below. According to Tholuck, Paul means to indicate how evil lusts are inseparable from the present state of the body, which is destined by and by to be glorified. According to Lange and Schaff, the sanctification of the mortal body here below is mentioned as serving to prepare for its glorification above. It seems to us that this epithet may be explained more naturally: It is not the part destined to die which should rule the believer’s personality; the higher life awakened in him should penetrate him wholly, and rule that body even which is to change its nature. — It is obvious that in the last proposition of the verse, the Received reading: to obey it in its lusts, does not yield a simple meaning. To obey sin in its lusts is an artificial and forced expression. The Greco-Latin reading: to obey it, is rather superfluous; what would this regimen add to the idea expressed by the previous words: “Let not sin reign in your body”? The Alexandrine reading: to obey its lusts (αὐτοῦ, the body’s), so far as the meaning is concerned, is preferable to both the others; and it has the advantage besides, as we shall show, of explaining easily how they arose. — The lusts of the body are its instincts and appetites, which, acting on the soul, determine within it the passionate and disorderly motions of sin. The term ἐπιθυμία, lust (from ἐπί, upon, toward, and θυμός, the heart, feeling, passion), denotes the violence with which, under the dominion of bodily appetite, the soul is carried to the external objects, which can satisfy the desires excited within it. Although, then, it is still sin, the egoistical instinct of the soul, which reigns in the body and directs its use, it thus happens that the appetites of the latter become the masters of conduct; for they present themselves to the soul as the means of satisfying the ardent desire of enjoyment with which it is consumed. In this way the beginning and end of the verse harmonize, the reign of sin over the body, and the supremacy of the body over the person himself. But this relation of ideas was not understood by the copyists. As at the beginning of the verse sin was the subject of the verb reign, it seemed to them that the obedience spoken of in the following words was meant to be rendered to it also, and they added (as in the Byz.) the pronoun αὐτῇ, it (sin), which necessitated the adding also of the preposition ἐν, in, before the word ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις, the lusts. Such is the origin of the Received reading. Or, again, they rejected all this final clause, which did not seem to be in keeping with the beginning; and thus was formed the Greco-Latin reading.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_6:12-23

Analysis

Paul having shown, in the preceding section, that union with Christ secures not only the pardon, but the destruction of sin, exhorts his brethren to live agreeably to the nature and design of the gospel, Rom_6:12, Rom_6:13. As an encouragement in their efforts to resist their corruptions he assures them that sin shall not have dominion over them, because they are not under the law, but under grace, Rom_6:14. This is another fundamental principle in the doctrine of sanctification. Holiness is not attained, and cannot be attained by those who, being under the law, are still unreconciled to God. It is necessary that we should enjoy his favor, in order to exercise towards him right affections. This doctrine is not justly liable to the objection, that we may sin with impunity if not under the law, Rom_6:15. The true situation of the Christian is illustrated by a reference to the relation between a servant and his master. Believers, before conversion, were the servants of sin; after it, they are the servants of righteousness. Formerly they were under an influence which secured their obedience to evil; now they are under an influence which secures their obedience to good. The consequence of the former service was death; of the present, life. The knowledge of these consequences tends to secure the continued fidelity of the Christian to his new Master, Rom_6:16-23.

Commentary

Rom_6:12

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, etc. This is a practical inference (ou]n) from what precedes. Since the believer is in fact united to Christ in his death and life, he should live accordingly. The exhortation contained in this and the following verse has a negative and positive form yield not to sin, but give yourselves up to God corresponding to the clauses, dead to sin, and alive unto God, in Rom_6:11. To reign signifies to exercise uncontrolled authority. Sin, although mortified in the believer, is not destroyed. Its power to injure remains after its dominion is overthrown. The exhortation is, that we should not yield to this dethroned adversary of Christ and the soul, but strenuously strive against its efforts to gain ascendancy over us, and to bring us again into bondage. Let not sin reign in your mortal body. This is a difficult clause.

1. Mortal body may be a periphrase for you: Let not sin reign within you; as in the next verse, your members may stand for yourselves.

2. Others say that θνητός (mortal) is to be taken in the figurative sense in which νεκρός, dead, i.e., corrupt, is often used.

3. Others take σῶμα in the sense of σάρξ, corrupt nature, including everything in man as fallen, which is not due to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Thus Calvin says, Nuper admonui vocem Corporis non pro carne et cute et ossibus accipi, sed pro tota hominis massa, ut ita loquar. Id certius colligere licet ex praesenti loco: quia alterum membrum, quod mox subjiciet de corporis partibus, ad animum quoque extenditur. Sic autem crasse Paulus terrenum hominem significat. He says the word mortal is used, per conemptum, ut doceat totam hominis naturam ad mortem et exitium inclinare. So also Philippi, among the modern commentators says that here, as in Rom_8:10, Rom_8:13, (where θανατοῦν τὰς πράχεις τοῦ σώματος is opposed to κατὰ σάρκα ζῆν), σῶμα is the antithesis of πνεῦμα, the latter being the soul as pervaded by the Spirit of God, and the former our nature considered as corrupt. This, however, is so contrary to the general usage of Scripture, that the ordinary sense of the words is to be preferred. Paul does not teach that the body is the source of sin, nor its exclusive or principal seat; but it is the organ of its manifestation. It is that through which the dominion of sin is outwardly revealed. The body is under the power of sin, and that power the apostle would have us resist; and on the other hand, the sensual appetites of the body tend to enslave the soul. Body and soul are so united in a common life, that to say, Let not sin reign in your mortal body, and to say, Let not sin reign in you, amount to the same thing. When we speak of sin as dwelling in the soul, we do not deny its relation to the body; so neither does the apostle, when he speaks of sin dwelling in the body, mean to deny its relation to the soul.

That ye should obey it (αὐτῇ, i.e., sin,) in the lusts thereof, (αὐτοῦ, viz., of the body.) We should not obey sin by yielding to carnal appetites. The common text has here, εἰς τὸ ὑπακούειν αὐτῇ ἐν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτοῦ. Knapp, Lachmann, and other editors, adopt the simpler and better authenticated reading, εἰς τὸ ὑπακούειν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις αὐτοῦ, to obey its lusts, i.e., the lusts of the body. A man, says Olshausen, must always serve. There is no middle ground between the service of sin and the service of God. We have justification completely, or we have it not at all. Sanctification, as springing from a living faith, and as the fruit of Gods love to us, admits of degrees, and may be more or less earnestly cultivated; but this determines, not our salvation, but only the measure of future blessedness. No wisdom or caution, he adds, can guard this doctrine from misunderstanding, whether such misunderstanding arise unintentionally from the understanding, or designedly from insincerity of heart. It nevertheless is the only way which leads to God, in which the sincere and humble cannot err. The key to the mystery, he goes on to say, that the doctrine of redemption, although not demanding good works, produces them, is to be found in the fact that love excites love and the desire for holiness. Hence obedience is no longer slavish. We strive to obey, not in order to be saved or to please God, but because God saves us without works or merit of our own, whom, because he is reconciled in the Beloved, we delight to serve.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

By reigning, Saint Paul meaneth that chiefest and high rule, which no man striveth against, and if any do, yet it is in vain.

An exhortation to contend and strive with corruption and all the effects thereof.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 12. Let not sin therefore reign] This is a prosopopoeia, or personification. Sin is represented as a king, ruler, or tyrant, who has the desires of the mind and the members of the body under his control so that by influencing the passions he governs the body. Do not let sin reign, do not let him work; that is, let him have no place, no being in your souls; because, wherever he is he governs, less or more: and indeed sin is not sin without this. How is sin known? By evil influences in the mind, and evil acts in the life. But do not these influences and these acts prove his dominion? Certainly, the very existence of an evil thought to which passion or appetite attaches itself, is a proof that there sin has dominion; for without dominion such passions could not be excited. Wherever sin is felt, there sin has dominion; for sin is sin only as it works in action or passion against God. Sin cannot be a quiescent thing: if it do not work it does not exist.

That ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.] Αυτῃ εν ταις επιθυμιαις αυτου. This clause is wanting in the most ancient and reputable MSS. and in the principal versions. Griesbach has left it out of his text; and Professor White says, Certissime delenda: "These words should certainly he expunged" they are not necessary to the apostle's argument; it was enough to say, Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies, that ye should obey it. If it be there it will reign there; and its reign supposes, necessarily, the subjection of that in which it reigns. A king reigns when his laws are enforced, and the people obey them. When there is no executive government there is no reign. There may be a royal shadow there, but there is no king.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Let not sin then, etc. He now begins with exhortation, which naturally arises from the doctrine which he had delivered respecting our fellowship with Christ. Though sin dwells in us, it is inconsistent that it should be so vigorous as to exercise its reigning power; for the power of sanctification ought to be superior to it, so that our life may testify that we are really the members of Christ. I have already reminded you that the word body is not to be taken for flesh, and skin, and bones, but, so to speak, for the whole of what man is. This may undoubtedly be inferred from the passage; for the other clause, which he immediately subjoins respecting the members of the body, includes the soul also: and thus in a disparaging manner does Paul designate earthly man, for owing to the corruption of our nature we aspire to nothing worthy of our original. So also does God say in Genesis 6:3; where he complains that man was become flesh like the brute animals, and thus allows him nothing but what is earthly. To the same purpose is the declaration of Christ, “What is born of the flesh is flesh.” (John 3:6.) But if any makes this objection — that the case with the soul is different; to this the ready answer is — that in our present degenerate state our souls are fixed to the earth, and so enslaved to our bodies, that they have fallen from their own superiority. In a word, the nature of man is said to be corporeal, because he is destitute of celestial grace, and is only a sort of empty shadow or image. We may add, that the body, by way of contempt, is said by Paul to be mortal, and this to teach us, that the whole nature of man tends to death and ruin. Still further, he gives the name of sin to the original depravity which dwells in our hearts, and which leads us to sin, and from which indeed all evil deeds and abominations stream forth. In the middle, between sin and us, he places lusts, as the former has the office of a king, while lusts are its edicts and commands.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(12) Mortal.—And therefore at variance with the immortal life just described.

(12-14) Practical and hortatory consequence. Therefore expel sin, and refuse to obey its evil promptings. Keep your bodies pure and clean. Let them no longer be weapons in the hands of wickedness; let them rather be weapons with which to fight the battle of righteousness and of God. You have every encouragement to do this. For sin shall no longer play the tyrant over you. The stern and gloomy Empire of Law (which only served to heighten the guilt of sin) is over, and in its stead the only power to which you are subject is that of free forgiveness.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. Let not sin therefore reign] Here begins the direct moral appeal to the will. This till now has been either withheld, (while the Divine motive was being explained,) or made only indirectly, as in Rom_6:2; Rom_6:6, and Rom_3:31.—Notice how perfectly free and natural is the appeal to the will.

reign] This word implies sin’s presence still in the “mortal body” of the justified; a presence dwelt upon so fully in ch. 7, at the close. But they are to resist and subdue it, just because they are (1) judicially free from its claim, or doom; and (2) freed by a means, exactly such as to bring them into the “newness” of a “life unto God;” i.e. a totally new condition of connexion and intercourse with Him as the Father of their Head. Such a condition, in the nature of things, cannot be merely objective. It is objective as regards the acceptance of believers in the Risen Lord, and His intercessory life for them; but it must also inevitably be subjective on its other side, because the final cause of the objective position is the realization of a subjective spiritual state; namely, that of holiness and love before God. The facts are expressly given in order to work upon the conscience and will. See further, Postscript, p. 268.

in your mortal body] See on “the body of sin,” Rom_6:6. Here the “mortality” is emphasized, because it marks the fact (see further on Rom_8:23) that the deliverance of the body is still incomplete, so that it is still a special field for the action of sin. See below on Rom_7:24.

that ye should obey it, &c.] Better read, so as to obey the lusts thereof; i.e. of the body. This clause explains the word “reign.” Sin “reigns” when the will goes with solicitations to evil—as it does on the whole go, since the Fall, till Redemption gives it the motive power to resist and prevail.—“Lusts:” desires after evil, and away from God, of every kind; whether “sensual” or not. The most refined æstheticism may be as truly a “lust of the mortal body” as the grossest vice, if it perverts the will from holiness.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body,.... Since grace reigns in you, sin should not: seeing ye are dead to sin, are baptized into the death of Christ, and are dead with him, and alive through him, sin therefore should not reign in you, and over you. This exhortation does not suppose a freewill power in man naturally, for this is spoken to persons, who had the Spirit and grace of Christ, and in whom God had wrought both to will and to do of his good pleasure; nor is this exhortation unnecessary to believers, though they are dead to sin, and though God has promised it shall not have the dominion over them, and though reigning sin, as divines say, cannot be in regenerate persons; for though they are entirely dead to sin as justified persons, yet not perfectly so as sanctified: they are indeed dead to sin, but sin is not dead in them; it struggles, it makes war, leads captive, and threatens absolute and universal dominion, wherefore such an exhortation is necessary; besides, though God has promised that sin shall not have the dominion, yet making use of means, such as prayer to God that it may not, striving against it, opposing it, in order to hinder its dominion, are no ways inconsistent with the promise of God, whose promises often have their accomplishment in the use of means: moreover, whereas some divines say, that reigning sin may be and others that it cannot be in regenerate persons, it should be observed, that if by reigning sin is meant, sinning against God out of malice and contempt, with the whole heart, without any struggle against it, or repentance for it, or so as to lose the grace of God, and never rise more, then it must be said that it cannot be in a regenerate man; but if by it is meant, falling into sin against their consciences, knowingly and willingly, so as to distress their minds, lose their peace, and grieve the Spirit of God, so as to be held under it, and be led captive by it, such power sin may have in them, and over them; and therefore the exhortation is not needless; and when the apostle says, let it not reign "in your mortal body", by it is either meant the whole man, or rather the body only, which is the instrument of sinning, and is become mortal through sin; and being so, is a reason why it should not reign in it, since it has done so much mischief to it already: and this also denotes the time of sin's being in us, and of the danger of its reigning in us; it is only whilst we are in this mortal body; and the consideration of our mortality should quicken us to war against sin, and be careful not to

obey it in the lusts thereof; the lusts of the body, or flesh, which are therefore sometimes called fleshly lusts, are many, and have great power and influence; and may be said to be obeyed, when provision is made to fulfil them, when these are the business of a man's life, and the whole of his conversation is taken up in them, without struggle against them, or opposition to them; and heroin lies the reign of sin.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

Ver. 12. Let not sin therefore] As if the apostle should say, we preach purity and not liberty, as the adversary suggesteth, Rom 6:1; cf. Rom 3:8. Let not sin reign; rebel it will; but do not actively obey and embrace the commands of sin, as subjects to your king. Let sin be dejected from its regency, though not utterly ejected from its residency. Give it such a deadly wound that it may be sure to die within a year and a day. Sprunt it may, and flutter as a bird when the neck is broken, but live it must not.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let not sin therefore - This is a conclusion drawn from the previous train of reasoning. The result of all these considerations is, that sin should not be suffered to reign in us.

Reign - Have dominion; obtain the ascendency, or rule.

In your mortal body - In you. The apostle uses the word “mortal” here, perhaps, for these reasons,

To remind them of the tendency of the flesh to sin and corruption, as equivalent to “fleshly,” since the flesh is often used to denote evil passions and desires (compare Rom 7:5, Rom 7:23; Rom 8:3, Rom 8:6); and, To remind them of their weakness, as the body was mortal, was soon to decay, and was therefore liable to be overcome by temptation. Perhaps, also, he had his eye on the folly of suffering the “mortal body” to overcome the immortal mind, and to bring it into subjection to sin and corruption.

That ye should obey it - That sin should get such an ascendency as to rule entirely over you, and make you the slave.

In the lusts thereof - In its desires, or propensities.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Let not sin, therefore, reign, &c. He compares sin and justice to two kings, or generals, under one of which every man fights in this world. Sin is the tyrant, under which fight the wicked, and make their minds and their members the instruments, or arms of iniquity to sin, when they follow and yield to their disorderly lusts. But he exhorts them to live so as to make the powers of their souls, and their members, instruments or arms of justice to God, to fight under God, their lawful king, and under the banner of his justice. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Let not sin therefore: q.d. Seeing this is the case, that you are dead to sin, baptized into Christ, are planted together into the likeness of his death, &c., therefore the rather hearken to and obey the following exhortation. By sin he means the sin or corruption of our nature, the same that before he called the old man, and the body of sin. There are remainders thereof in the regenerate; in them it is mortified, but not eradicated; therefore to them this exhortation is not unnecessary.

Reign; he doth not say, let it not be or reside, but let it not reign or preside; let it not bear sway or have dominion in you; let it not have the upper hand of the motions of the Spirit of God.

In your mortal body; the body (called here a mortal or frail body) is put by a synecdoche for the whole man; and he the rather makes mention of the body, because the parts and members thereof are the usual instruments of sin. Therefore it follows in the next verse, Neither yield your members as instruments of unrighteousness.

That ye should obey it in the lusts thereof; i.e. that you should obey sin in the lust of the body. The gender of the relative article of the Greek, requires it should be so read and understood. The meaning is not as if lusts were in the body alone, for Christ teacheth the contrary, Mat 15:19,20; but because all sinful lusts do mostly show and manifest themselves in and through the body, Gal 5:19.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Therefore—Inasmuch as death to sin is freedom from sin, be ye free from sin. The apostle now in the paragraph 12-23 develops a train of imageries drawn from servitude, namely, to sin or to holiness; contrasting the service of sin and the deathly results with the service of God, which is freedom emerging into the glorified life.

Sin… reign—Sin assumes to be a king; our mortal body (mortal, as sin has made it so) is his claimed realm; that body’s lusts are the mandates which the false sovereign would have us obey.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey the lusts thereof. (The reading of the Textus Receptus, "obey it in the lusts thereof," has but weak support) Though our "old man" is conceived of as crucified with Christ though this is theoretically and potentially our position yet our actual lives may be at variance with it; for we are still in our present "mortal body," with its lusts remaining; and sin is still a power, not yet destroyed, which may, if we let it, have domination over us still. Regeneration is not regarded as having changed our nature, or eradicated all our evil propensions, but as having introduced into us a higher power power of his resurrection" (Php_3:10) in virtue of which we may resist the attempted domination of sin. But it still rests with us whether we will give our allegiance to sin or to Christ. Ou gasin hlyen anelein alla thresin diorywsai (Chrysostom). The lusts, obedience to which is equivalent to letting sin reign, are said to be those of our "mortal body," because it is in our present bodily organization that the lusts tempting us to evil rise. But it is not in their soliciting us, but in the will assenting to them, that the sin lies. "Quia non consentimus desideriis pravis in gratia sumus" (Augustine, "Prop.," 35). "Cupiditates corporis sunt fomes, peccatum ignis" (Bengel). The epithet ynhtw ("mortal") is fitly used as distinguishing our present perishable framework the earthen vessels in which we have our treasure (2Co_4:7) from our real inward personality, eswyen anyrwpov , (2Co_4:16) which is regarded as having risen with Christ, so as to live to God for ever. "Vos enim, viventes, abalienati estis a corpore vestro" (cf. Rom_8:10) (Bengel).

Vers. 12-14. The two dominions.

A renewed application of the subject just discussed. The reign of sin; the reign of grace.

I THE REIGN OF SIN.

1. The self yielded to sin. Man"s higher self reason, conscience, and will should dominate over the "soul" and the "flesh," the mere passions and lusts; man"s spirit should be king. But the true self has been discrowned, and the lower self the lusts has gained the mastery. And in this false mastery of the flesh, sin reigns. Oh, degradation! we are led in chains, and sin lords it over us!

2. The members yielded to unrighteousness. Man"s lower nature should be the instrument of the higher, for the working of all that is just and good. In Paul"s philosophy of human nature the "body" is synonymous with all the active life; and is not the activity of our whole life to be used subordinately to the dictates of the enlightened will? But the activity of life is yielded to the usurping power of sin, instrumental to unrighteousness.

II THE REIGN OF GRACE.

1. The self yielded to God. Man is not an irresponsible ruler of his own nature; his sovereignty is delegated by God. And only in absolute devotion to God does he realize a true self-conquest. God claims again possession of the spirit which has been torn from him by the power of sin. The claim is one of authority; but the authority is the authority of love.

2. The members yielded to righteousness. God requires the homage of the heart; he also requires the service of the life. Only through the heart can the life be rightly swayed. "Not under law." A resurrection, and a resurrection-power. Yes, because he lives, we may live also! But the appropriation of this power is of man: "Present yourselves." Here is the marvellous gift of human freedom, which may be a freedom unto death; but there is the boundless power of love and life! Therefore choose life, that thou mayest live! T.F.L.

Vers. 12-23. The reign of grace.

We saw in last section how the leading facts of our Lord"s life get copied into the experience of the regenerate; so that we have a death and burial, and crucifixion, and resurrection, and new life along with Christ. Sanctification in this way naturally issues out of justification. The apostle consequently proceeds to show that the dominion of sin is broken by the same means as the removal of our condemnation, viz. by outlook to Jesus. We find ourselves to be no longer under law as a condemning power, but under a reign of grace. But if we are under a reign of grace, and not under a condemning law, might we not be tempted to think lightly of sin; nay, more, to sin that grace may abound? To meet this objection, the apostle discusses the reign of sin, and contrasts it with the reign of grace. Sin may be our master, but as the slave of sin we shall get rewarded in shame and death; or righteousness, that is, the God of grace himself may be our Master, and, as the slave of righteousness or slave of God, we shall have our reward a reward of grace, in the development of holiness, and in the gift of eternal life. We cannot do better, then, than contrast the reign of sin with the reign of grace.

I THE REIGN OF SIN. (Vers. 12, 13, 21) And in this connection let us notice:

1. Sin is a very exacting tyrant. In fact, when we become slaves of sin, we cease being our own masters. We lose the dignity of our nature; we lose self-command; we lose will-power and decision of character. Our bodies become the instruments of unrighteousness, and the lusts of the flesh are obeyed. The prodigal in the parable presents vividly the condition of one under the tyranny of sin.Then (Luk_15:11-25) we notice:

2. Sin is a very poor paymaster. For even allowing that it has pleasures to bestow, these are found to be only for a season. (Heb_11:25) After these come shame, remorse, and the horrible tempest which infuriated sin entails. Then comes death, the real wages, or rations (ofwnia from ofon , "cooked meat," see Shedd, in loc. ). This means, of course, alienation from God, and, when it sets finally into the experience, proves a hopeless and helpless condition.

3. The sooner all slaves of sin change their master the better. The reign of sin only tends to torment. The soul that sells itself to such a tyrant is a fool. He is beside himself, like the prodigal, when he does so. He comes to himself when he renounces the tyranny and transfers his allegiance.

II THE REIGN OF GRACE. (Vers. 16-23) Now, in this passage the apostle uses no less than three terms to express the new and better reign. These are "grace," "obedience," "righteousness." And then, dropping personification altogether, he shows how we become subjects and slaves of God. From the slavery of sin it is possible to pass into the service and slavery of God. We may get free from sin, and then shall we be at liberty to serve God and be his slaves. We shall not make much mistake if we take up Paul"s teaching under the idea of a reign of Grace,and here we have to notice:

1. We enter of our own free-will into the slavery of the God of grace. We are not forced into it; we are "made willing in the day of God"s power". (Psa_110:3) The slavery to God is voluntary. It is a yielding of ourselves. In both slaveries we must remember that the will is not forced, but free. We are free in our slavery to sin; we are free when we turn from it to the slavery of a God of grace. No one forces our hand.

2. We enter our state of grace through obeying from the heart that form of teaching whereunto we were delivered" (Revised Version). This refers clearly to the all-important doctrine of justification by faith, through the reception of which we get delivered from condemnation, and started on our course of sanctification. It is most important, therefore, that that doctrine should be faithfully and clearly stated to the soul which is enslaved through sin. It is the very charter of its spiritual freedom.

3. We find that in serving a God of grace we secure holiness of character. For this voluntary and gracious slavery implies the dedication of all our powers to God. We lay ourselves as "living sacrifices" on God"s altar. We find ourselves in consequence visited by an increasing sense of consecration. We learn to live not unto ourselves, but unto him who died for us and rose again. (2Co_5:14) This sense of consecration becomes habitual. We feel that we are not our own, but bought with a price, and therefore bound to glorify God with our bodies as well as spirits, which are God"s. (1Co_6:20)

4. We find this service of grace happy as well as holy. In other words, we find in God an excellent Paymaster. His service is delightful. Feeling that we are less than the least of all his mercies, feeling that we are at best but unprofitable servants, we accept joyfully whatever he sends; we feel that he daily loadeth us with his benefits, and then, regarding the great future, he gives us therein "eternal life." Doubtless we do not, strictly speaking, deserve such rewards; they are rewards of grace, not of debt; they are free" gifts" from a gracious Master. Yet they are none the less welcome. Let us, then, renounce the reign of sin, and accept the reign of grace. Its fruit, increasing with the consistent years, is unto holiness, and its end is everlasting life.We are real freemen only when we have become the slaves of a gracious God. R.M.E.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let not sin reign even in your mortal body - It must be subject to death, but it need not be subject to sin.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

sin

Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The reign of sin definitely closed:

v. 12. Let not sin, therefore, reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

v. 13. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

v. 14. For sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the Law, but under grace.

This is the practical inference and deduction from the preceding discussion. Since the believers have entered into the most intimate union with Christ, with the fruits of His death and with the blessings of His life, through Baptism, therefore they must break with all the former associations: Sin now shall not reign in your mortal body, to obey its lusts. The body of man, also of the believer, is mortal, and as such subject to death and to sin. Man, being mortal, must die. But sin, although it still lives in the body and apparently makes it subject to its own wages, shall not be the lord and master over the body; the sinful lusts should not exert their dominion over the body: they should not make the members of the body their tools and instruments for the working of evil. If the Christians should yield obedience to the lusts and desires of their heart, then they would make their mortal body a sinful body, one that submits to sin, is subject to sin. The sanctification of the Christians will rather show itself in this way; that the Christians control the body with all its members, hands, feet, eyes, ears, tongue. etc. , keeping them back from the service of sin, not permitting the lusts to find their gratification in actual transgressions. The will of the Christians will place itself in opposition to sin and thus keep the body within the bounds prescribed by the Word and will of God. They will not offer their members as weapons of unrighteousness unto sin.

That is the one side of sanctification. But there is also the positive side: Rather present yourselves to God, place yourselves at the disposal of God, as alive from the dead, and your members as weapons of righteousness unto God. The Christians were formerly, before the regenerative power of Baptism came to them, in a condition of spiritual death, Eph 2:1 ff. In that condition they served all the lusts, were subject to all vices. But from this spiritual death they have been awakened and therefore should devote themselves, their life, their bodies, their members, their hearts, their minds, their thoughts, to the service of God, for the promotion of His honor and glory. This does not imply that the Lord demands a false asceticism, but is an admonition which shall find its application in the ordinary, every-day life of every Christian, in the performance of the works of his calling. If the body and all its members thus serve God in the righteousness of life, then the work of sanctification will be carried on in a God-pleasing manner.

And the Christians can obey these commands, follow these injunctions, as the encouragement of the apostle, Rom 6:15, shows. It is not a hopeless struggle in which the Christians are engaged, in which the outcome, from the start, is destined to be unfavorable to their faith and spiritual life, but it is an effort which is bound to succeed. The apostle is joyfully confident, knowing that the power of sin is definitely broken, and that the triumph of the cause of Christ is assured by the completeness of Christ’s work. For sin will not rule over you, it will not gain the ascendancy again. And the reason is: For not are you under the Law, but under grace. The Law ever demands, but does not give the strength to perform its demands, and therefore it cannot deliver from the dominion of sin. But grace, under which we have placed ourselves in conversion, in Baptism, not only delivers us from the guilt and power of sin, but also gives us the ability to withstand sin, to shun the evil, and to do that which pleases the Lord. Thus we renounce all dependence upon our own merit and strength, accept the offer of grace, of free justification as a gift of God, and receive deliverance from sin and the power to please our heavenly Father.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, The duty which the apostle exhorts the Christians to; and that is, to prevent the regency and dominion of sin: Let not reign in your mortal bodies.

But when is sin said to reign?

Answer, When the bent and tendency of the heart is toward sin, and all the faculties of the soul are on sin’s side, and wholly take its part; when sin is not opposed, or but slightly opposed,; when sin is committed industriously, and temptations to sin prevail easily; when persons sin without any sense of sin, with small remorse and check for sin; then sin is in its throne, and reigns imperiously.

But why doth the apostle say, Let not sin reign in your body, rather than in your soul?

Answer, Because sin and lusts do gratify the body exceedingly; that is, the sensual appetite, the brutish part of man: and further, because they are acted and executed by the body or outward man, called therefore the deeds of the body.

But why doth the apostle here call it a mortal body?

Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies.

Answer, 1. To put us in mind that the mortality of our bodies is the fruit and punishment of our sins; that sins having brought in death upon us, our bodies must die for sin.

2. To show the vanity and transitoriness of the delights and pleasures of sin, which do gratify a mortal body, which after all its pamperings, must perish.

3. The apostle may probably call it a mortal body, to show that our conflict with sin shall endure but a little while: ere long this mortal shall put on immortality. It may encourage to be violent in the conflict; ere long we shall be victorious in the conquest.

From the whole, note, 1. That sin is a great and mighty king, which has a regal power over the enslaved sinner. Sin has the love of an husband, the power of a king, and the worship of God, in the sinner’s heart.

Sin, as a raging and commanding king, has the sinner’s heart for its throne, the members of the body for its service, the world, the flesh, and the devil, for its grand council, lusts and temptation for its weapons and armour; and its chief fortifications are ignorance and sensuality, and fleshly reasonings.

O deplorable degradation, that man, who was created God’s subject, is, by his shameful apostasy, become the vassal and slave of sin and Satan.

Learn, 2. That all baptized persons, who are dead with Christ unto sin, are strongly obliged to take care that sin reigns not in them, nor gets any dominion over them, by the desires and interests of this mortal body.

And the obligations which Christianity lays upon us not to suffer sin to reign over us, are many and great; namely, the precepts, promises, and threatenings of the gospel, the assistance of the Holy Spirit, the sense of baptismal and sacramental engagements.

Happy we! if by the help of these sin is dethroned, its empire dissolved, and it no longer reigns in our mortal bodies, that we should obey it in the lusts thereof.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. “Let not sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey the lusts of the same.” This verse is tersely recapitulatory, dropping, for a moment, back to the unconverted state in which sin reigns in the “mortal body.” In justification sin is conquered and bound preparatory to execution in sanctification (5:6).

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey the lusts thereof :

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

12. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body. This must not be, and cannot be, if we are really dead to sin. The body must be mortal, and subject to death, but it must not be subject to sin.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Paul reminds us that grace rules over us, not the law; we are not sin's slaves, but God's slaves.

do not let sin rule in your mortal body

Paul speaks of people sinning as if sin was there master or king that controlled them. AT: "Do not let sinful desires control you" (See: Personification)

in your mortal body

This phrase refers to the physical part of a person, which will die. AT: "you" (See: Synecdoche)

in order that you may obey its lusts

Paul speaks of a person having evil desires as if it sin were a master that had evil desires. (See: Personification)

Do not present the parts of your body to sin, to be tools used for unrighteousness

The picture is of the sinner offering the "parts of his body" to his master or king. One's "body parts" are a synecdoche for the whole person. AT: "Do not offer yourselves to sin so that you do what is not right" (See: Synecdoche)

But present yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life

Here "now living" refers to the believer's new spiritual life. AT: "But offer yourselves to God, because he has given you new spiritual life" or "But offer yourselves to God, as those who had died and are now alive" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

present the parts of your body to God as tools to be used for righteousness

Here "parts of your body" is a synecdoche that refers to the whole person. AT: "let God use you for what is pleasing to him" (See: Synecdoche)

Do not allow sin to rule over you

Paul speaks of "sin" here as if it were a king who rules over people. AT: "Do not let sinful desires control what you do" or "Do not allow yourselves to do the sinful things you want to do" (See: Personification)

For you are not under law

To be "under law" means to be subject to its limitations and weaknesses. You can make the full meaning explicit in your translation. AT: "For you are no longer bound to the law of Moses, which could not give you the power to stop sinning" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

but under grace

To be "under grace" means that God's free gift provides the power to keep from sinning. You can make the full meaning explicit in your translation. AT: "but you are bound to God's grace, which does give you the power to stop sinning" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

sin

obey

lust

righteous

righteous

law

grace

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

12 ff. The suggestion of Rom 6:1 is reversed: the slave is free, the tyrant deposed, the service changed, the instruments of service refurbished, the power of service quickened.

μὴ βασιλευέτω, pres. of the continued reign, under these altered conditions.

ἡ ἁμαρτία, the sin which hitherto reigned.

ἐν τῷ θνητῷ ὑ. ς. Cf. 2Co 4:11 = even in your mortal body; the body, which yet must die, must not be allowed to minister to the deeper death.

ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις α. Cf. Rom 1:24. ἐπιθυμία (sing.) is used in a good sense only thrice in N.T. (Luk 22:15; Php 1:23; 1Th 2:17); otherwise always in a bad sense, of the natural desire when not under the direction of νοῦς or πνεῦμα; cf. Gal 5:16; Eph 4:22; 1Pe 1:14; Joh 2:16.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12.] βασιλευέτω answers to the imagery throughout, in which Sin is a master or lord. It is hardly right to lay a stress on it, and say (as Chrys.) οὐκ εἶπε μὴ οὖν ζήτω ἡ σὰρξ μηδὲ ἐνεργείτω, ἀλλʼ, ἡ ἁμαρτία μὴ βασιλευέτω. οὐ γὰρ τὴν φύσιν ἦλθεν ἀνελεῖν, ἀλλὰ τὴν προαίρεσιν διορθῶσαι: it is no matter of comparison between reigning and indwelling merely, but between reigning and being deposed.

But why τῷ θνητῷ ὑμ. σώματι? Orig., al., explain it ‘dead to sin,’ which it clearly cannot be. Chrys., Theodoret, Grot., and Reiche suppose the word inserted to remind us of the other life, and the shortness of the conflict, or (Theophyl.) of the shortness of sinful pleasures; Köllner,—to point out that it is dishonourable to us to serve Sin, whose reign is confined to the mortal body; Fritzsche, ‘quoniam, qui peccato ministrum se præbet, adhuc in mortali corpore hærere nec nisi fragilis vitæ meminisse videtur;’ De Wette, Tholuck, al., that the Apostle, wishes to keep in view the connexion between sin and death on the one hand, and that συνζῆν which is freed from death on the other. This last view seems the most probable. See 2Co 4:11 and note.

There is considerable uncertainty in the reading of the latter part of this verse. That which I have adopted is supported by the primary mss. and has the approval of Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, and De Wette.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

12. βασιλευέτω: cf. 5:21 of Sin; 5:14, 17 of Death.

With this verse comp. Philo, De Gigant. 7 (Mang. i.266) Αἴτιον δὲ τῆς ἀνεπιστημοσύνης μέγιστον ἡ σὰρξ καὶ ἡ πρὸς σάρκα οἰκείωσις.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Reign [βασιλευετω] . The antithesis implied is not between reigning and existing, but between reigning and being deposed.

Body. Literal, thus according with members, ver : 13.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.