Keep sharing good news without ads.
Source: https://www.sermonindex.net/speakers/bruce-rodgers/romans-5-12-6-23-part-b/
We noticed, you mentioned the emphasis of death. We noticed in chapter 5, death for sin, that's the death of the Lord Jesus. We saw death by sin, now we're reading about death to sin. Would you help us, when did this take place?
This is where the judicial and the experiential merge again. Because this identification with Christ, and I would take the expression that you have in verse 10, that He died unto sin once for all, that's in reference to the cross.
And that should help us to understand that it is not here talking about a moral renouncing of some kind of life, as sometimes we're taught to try to die to sin. But this is a legal relationship that was established.
And in dying to sin, He was terminating that by death, and in that death, and severing righteously any connection to it. Now, obviously He was doing it on our behalf, but this is the, just getting back to this idea, that when we're thinking judicially, we're talking about what happened at the cross, and us being judicially identified with Christ in that death.
When did it happen, as far as spiritually, the moment we were saved? And so the judicial becomes the experiential in the act of faith in Christ. That's when we pass from death unto life. So is that suitable for what you're thinking?
That's the teaching Paul gives in Colossians, for ye died, judicially, and your life is set with Christ and God.
So just getting the link with what has gone before. He has established that we are justified with a righteous standing before God. But now He's going to anticipate the outworking of that. How does that affect us in life?
And He anticipates an objection here, at the beginning, verse 1. The objection is, if there's such grace and we're justified, does that encourage sin? Can we live now as we like? But then He answers it, again, with the provision that Christ has made at the cross.
Where sin abounded, grace overabounded. So should we sin, there will be more grace. Of course, the answer is that we have died with Christ. And then when we come into the next verse, it speaks of our baptism.
That's where we showed it. It actually took place when God saved us, but by our baptism we're showing what took place.
Bruce, I think you have been careful in this, and I think I want to underline it. We talk about position and practice. And we're used to thinking in terms of position and practice. That's Ephesian truth.
But what's here is legal and practical. You've emphasized that, but I think we need to get away from what forms our thinking about our position. Link with Christ in heavenly places, etc. That's body truth.
That's unique to us in this age. I think that what's here is universal for all who have redemption. Whether it's in a past age or an age that's coming. There is an identification, not because they're in the one body with Christ, but because they are represented under the headship of Christ, the federal headship.
So we'll get to what's unique to our age before we're finished. But at this point, it is a link with the headship of Christ that is true for all that are redeemed. From Adam himself, actually, until whoever the last one is out.
That's why I've chosen the word judicial. Yes, I think it's important. To draw attention to the legal standing and so on. Now, the question in verse 1 really betrays two false ideas or attitudes. Not only is it a careless attitude towards sin, but it's also a mistaken idea about grace and its meaning.
Because, and as was already mentioned, this was not just, he wasn't just batting at the air here. This became one of the great corruptions of Christianity in the following two or three centuries through the Gnostic philosophy and so on.
That basically said that you can do as you like because the body is evil anyway. And it's never going to be anything different. And the spirit can be in relation to God and the body do whatever it wants.
And so allowing sin really free reign under grace. And that is completely rejected. But what's interesting here is he starts out not by saying how abhorrent sin is and that you should never think of it again.
That's later in the chapter. The first thing he establishes is the legal severing of the relationship to sin. In this case, it's actually the relationship to Adam. I mean, he's flowing out of chapter 5.
Why did we continue in sin? Why was our life one unbroken line of sin in God's sight? Because of our link with Adam. We can't blame him, but that is the evidence that we are linked with him. That link has been severed.
I think that's what the first part of this chapter is taking up. The link with Adam severed. Unthinkable, therefore, that we would continue. We don't have to live under that dominion because that link was severed.
Even more than that, adding just to what you've said, and I appreciate that, Bruce, this question would never have been asked if salvation was by works. It proves to you that if it was by works, not by grace, the question would never be asked.
It rules that out right away.
Do you see two distinct sections here in the chapter, both beginning with a question? Is there a difference in the first section compared to the second section, the continuance in sin, and then the second section, shall we sin?
Do you see a distinction there? Yes, I think so.
Yeah, I think so. Shall we continue in sin? A professing believer that continues in sin here in this verse, I would say, is an apostate. They're not really saved at all. There are no countenance that a believer would continue in sin.
It's living in sin at the beginning of the chapter. It's visiting sin at the end of the chapter. Is that right? So, impossible for us to live where we once lived, because that connection was severed by the death of Christ.
Yeah, verse 2 would only be a question relevant to a believer. How shall we who died to sin live any longer therein? And died to sin takes us back to the death of Christ, which we came into the good of the moment we were under his headship at conversion.
So, here it's dead to the principle of sin. When we go to 1 Peter 2 .24, it's dead to the practice of sin.
Did I understand you right, Bruce, that you're saying that this is not talking about someone who professes to be a Christian, but is not a real believer? It's a question that a believer might ask erroneously?
Well, whoever asks it. I'm not getting into who's asking the question, but all I'm saying is that the issue that is raised in verse 2 is the issue that is relevant to a Christian. It is a Christian, a believer who died to sin.
So, that's why it says, How shall we who died to sin live any longer therein? And so, he is obviously not permitting anyone to think, Well, then sin is just kind of, you know, the sting is taken away from sin.
There's no consequence for sin. So, I can take a casual attitude toward it. You know, it's no big deal anymore. Isn't it a logical device? Okay, he has been accused in chapter 3, Let us sin. What's that in chapter 3?
He's wrongly accused. Let us do evil. Let us do evil that grace may abound. And what he's doing, he's taking what any objector could take. Could anybody say that this is the case? Well, let me deal with the fact that's not a possibility.
I mean, he uses questions time and time again. We do that too, I mean, as a means of establishing a point. So, you make a point when you're preaching, for example, and then you say, of course, somebody will say, Well, what about this?
Then you answer that. So, it's a logical device that he's using. And probably, although I didn't draw attention to it in the introduction, in each of the sections of the epistle, there's reference made to the law and to our relationship to it or the gospel's relationship to the law.
And while it's always clearly specified that we are not under the law, yet we fulfill the righteous requirements of the law. And so, there is the emphasis of justifying the gospel to his audience from the charge that this is just letting you go off free now and live a life of wickedness.
And so, he's anticipating the objection and answering it here.
So, a new believer started out on the road to heaven. He reads this, dead to sin. But as far as he's concerned, sin is not dead in him. Our old man is crucified.
It seems like he's still alive. Who is he? The verse that takes that even further is 1 John 6. He that hath seen it hath not seen him.
Just to emphasize that again. Yeah, well, that's why it is important to establish here that we're talking about the judicial aspect that my connection to sin has been severed by a death. And that's really my connection to Adam.
As a sinner in Adam, I was bound to that. And I was unable to be freed personally in my behavior, nor could I be freed from the legal accountability that was attached to it. Now, here, someone has entered into humanity, the Lord Jesus.
He has identified himself with us. So, now we have not only the death of Christ for our sins, but we have him drawing closer. And he is dying as me. And in dying as me, as us, he is legally terminating the relationship that existed through Adam's transgression with sin.
And that's what is actually being taught here, right down to the end of verse 7. Just to go to John's question and make this distinction, what we're dealing with here is legal. What we're dealing with in 1 John is familial.
That is, because I have received a life that comes from God, therefore, that life cannot be characterized by sin because it comes from God. So, it's the life that we've received that does not sin. Here, we're talking about a legal connection with Adam and now a legal link, a headship link to Christ.
The moment we trusted Christ, we were merged into that headship. So, to help us understand it then, he appeals first to something that is very familiar to us as Christians, and that is baptism. And so, he is saying, don't you know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ were baptized into his death?
And so, looking at the ritual of water baptism, he says, I want you to understand the spiritual reality that that corresponds to. And so, I'm going to suggest that verse 3 is talking about the spiritual reality.
Verse 4 is really the symbolic act that represents it. I think the therefore, to me, the therefore puts that swing in. I'm thankful for what you've said because my identity with Christ took place at conversion.
And you don't want to get mixed up with it taking place at baptism. It took place then. I was linked with Christ and that headship at conversion. Therefore, I died with him. But I expressed that when I was baptized.
So, for clarity, verse 3 is spiritual baptism expressed in verse 4 as water baptism. Is that what you're saying?
Well, yes.
If you ask whether this is baptism in the spirit, that's a very, very closely related idea. But baptism in the spirit is into life in his body. But this is the identification with him in his death. And so, what I'm saying in verse 3 is that it's the spiritual reality that is being taught in verse 3 and that the physical act of going into the water and emerging is the verse 4 where we have the word likeness of, likeness of.
Are you not finding it easier if you just put legal rather than spiritual into verse 3? It's the legal relationship with Adam. No, sorry. Yeah, with Adam, severed. The legal relationship with Christ formed for me at the moment of conversion.
I came into all the good of that headship the moment I trusted Christ.
I was immersed into death when Christ died. And then we express that in water baptism, verse 4.
Most all believers really would understand the Red Sea, wouldn't they? That Christ died for me. But this is the Jordan, isn't it? And I'm identified with him. I'm going through the waters of baptism. It's not changing me by being baptized, but it's showing what took place as far as God is concerned.
God couldn't mend me. You know what they say? So he ended me. That's me finished. Is the rendering in verse 3 better unto than into? Because into happened at salvation. It didn't happen at baptism. But baptism points to the death of Christ.
Mr. Darby uses unto. It's the same word. And it's translated unto or into many different times. 1 Corinthians 10, it's unto Moses in relation to the Red Sea. The same word is used.
I think what we need to realize is that our coming into life union with Christ could only come by a first identifying with him in his death. That's where the first point of identification has to be. And the other is the outcome that flows from that in his resurrection, then we live and we experience the blessing.
And so I think in the end of verse 4 and then in verse 5, some have suggested that this is looking forward to our resurrection, but I think it's really in the context here looking at the new life that is ours to live as a Christian associated, linked with a living head in resurrection.
So the walking in newness of life in the previous verse there, when did that take place? Did that take place at the moment of conversion or at the moment of our baptism? The moment of conversion.
It's a should here also. So it's not connected so much now with the legal standing but the outcome of that legal standing. And that's at the moment of conversion. I mean, some people have the idea they don't have to live like a Christian until they're baptized.
So you can live like you want and then get baptized eventually. Well, wait a minute. This took place at the moment of conversion. It should mark us at the moment of conversion. We begin to have the style of our life is a new kind of life.
And really, like waiting for years to be baptized is contrary to the word of God. One who has trusted Christ begins to walk in a new kind of life at that moment. That's a moral obligation to him. And there's more to it, but anyway, that's a moral obligation at the least.
And, therefore, should be expressed in his baptism.
So it shows us, too, just how important baptism is to salvation, how closely they are linked.
For baptism, Mr. Maxwell used to say, to baptize somebody, you look for signs of death. It's something that has taken place. To receive men to the assembly, you look for signs of life. And I think that still holds good.
And in case anybody disagrees with this, I would like to just be blatant in saying it. I do not think that we should baptize someone whose habits are still the habits of the old life. Okay, I'm not being hard on that, but I just think baptism says I died to that life, and yet you're living to that life.
So I think that every encouragement should be given to be delivered from the problem. But baptism expresses that I have been, by the grace of God, for the moment, delivered.
Yeah, you don't bury people that are alive. But I think most of us would admit, some of us would, I will anyhow, that I maybe don't even know all about baptism now, but when I was baptized, the main thing I knew was that's what the Lord wanted me to do.
But since then, I hope I've learned a little bit to see the true significance of baptism.
So verse 6 and 7 then, knowing this, is saying that what we have in verse 6 and 7 underlies everything that we've just been talking about in verses before. So this is the spiritual issues that are dealt with, that have been portrayed symbolically by the end of a life, and yet paradoxically the beginning of a new life.
So the old man is what I was in Adam.
Yes, I think that's the best. If you want to say what's the difference between the old man and the flesh, it's virtually synonymous, but the significance of the term the old man, or our old man here, is the identity of a person.
Both Ephesians 4 and Colossians 3 refer to the old man, which is corrupt according to deceitful lusts, the old man with his deeds, and we are credited with having cooperated with the work of the Spirit of God in casting off the old man, and in putting on a new man, which is actually a new identity derived from Christ as the new head.
So if you want to say your old man is Adam, that's about as accurate as you'll get. It's really who you were in Adam. And so that's who was judged. That's who was judged at Calvary in the substitute who represented us.
And this is the astounding grace of the Lord Jesus. The one who stands aloof in all his innocence and purity and holiness from this corrupted humanity, yet there he identifies himself fully with us. And that crucifixion, he experienced it.
But we are to recognize it was really us, it was really me who was being judged and crucified. So Joseph, what did he say? Is the old man yet alive?
Speaking of Jacob, of course. But the old man has been dealt with. Planted is united, isn't it, in the previous verse. So it shows the change. We're united to Christ now, and the link with the old man has been filled.
If the old man's alive, you're unsaved. It's sad to hear some people we think would know better, they keep on speaking of having to deal with the old man. He's judicially dealt with. Again, that's what it is.
It's not something that you do personally. It's done through the work of Christ.
Put on the new man as a garment. Excuse me. The old man was crucified. That's a stated fact. That's a finished act. The flesh was condemned. Unfortunately, the flesh is very much active and able within me.
But it will be. It will be eliminated. It's of the same character. Yes. It's of the same character of life. It's the remnant of that. Really the important thing is to realize this. Until the moment of salvation, I had no legal ability to be disassociated from that old man.
In the death of Christ, that identity has been terminated. And there's been a transfer to a new identity, an entirely new creation in Christ. As this verse expresses, that the body of sin might be destroyed.
Now, again, I don't want to be too dogmatic, but it seems to me that this is using the word body as in reference to our physical body, but as the vessel or the instrument through which sin has operated and expressed itself.
So that that might be destroyed is not obliterated like going into little bits and pieces of nothingness, but it is that it might be rendered powerless, nullified, so that we, now there's a we coming out, there's a person that's come through this, you might say this legal transfer, and we are here alive in a new identity so that we should no longer serve sin because he that has died has been freed from sin.
And so, yes, the old man was me before, but it was the old me in Adam.
Now there's been a legal transfer. Not old in terms of years, but the word conveys the idea of being worn out and useless. And so the body as an instrument of sin should be regarded in that way too, as something that is no longer to be used in that way.
I want to say, brethren, are you saying that it's wrong to say that we have two natures or should we say that we have the flesh and the new nature? Divine nature. We don't have the divine nature.
That's strictly God's. But we do have a new life. New life. I thought maybe it was going to come up in Chapter 7 about the old nature and the new nature. I don't have any trouble.
We use this term. I want to say I don't have any trouble really with the old man. As far as I'm concerned, he was terminated at Calvary. I have problems with the flesh.
But you say that we have two natures.
No, I don't believe that I have the old nature. Okay? I believe that I have a new nature and it came from a divine source, if you like, but I have a new nature that came with that new life.
Galatians teaches us that you have the flesh and you have the spirit and the two are contrary to one another. Totally opposed. What I was thinking here is that Paul... You mentioned at the start, brother, you've got to keep reading to get Paul's logic and he follows on through.
He's going to teach us now in Chapter 6, sin is no longer dominion over us. He's going to deal with the question of sin in Chapter 7 but in Chapter 8 he's going to tell us that under the law they had no power over sin but we have through the Spirit of God.
And we'll come to the Galatian epistle and we'll learn that if we walk in the Spirit we won't fulfill the lust of the flesh. So we'll learn the absolute necessity of the power and liberty of the Spirit of God in our lives.
So you have to follow and read the whole thing to get the total picture.
Yes. So our minds are being instructed. We, in our old land, we have been crucified. We are dead to sin. God tells us that as linked with Christ. We may not feel it but we need to be instructed about that.
And then verse 8, the result of that, now if we be dead with Christ we believe that we shall also live with Him. Now is that introducing the thought of practical living as opposed to merely looking to the future?
Yes, I certainly believe so because just getting back to verse 7 and then coming into verse 8, he that has died is freed from sin. Now that word freed is actually the word justified. But I don't limit it here to just the justification of chapter 3 and 4 as being justified from the condemnation of our sins.
This is clarifying the legal relationship towards sin that death has severed and sin as a master has no longer any legal right to my body, to my life, to my service. And so it's like, in one sense if you look at this in the natural sense it's self-defeating.
If you have to kill somebody to set them free, how does it rescue them? But it's because it's in Christ the substitute and His resurrection. And so we have been legally freed from sin as a dominating master.
And so then verse 8, if we died with Christ, we believe we shall also live with Him. Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more. Death is no more dominion over Him. So we're still looking at the term dominion as it is emphasized.
And verse 14, sin shall not have dominion. That is its authority, its right to have possession of that is being emphasized. So we're being taught our legal freedom first from it. And then we've already touched a little bit on verse 10.
For in that He died, He died unto sin once. We know that there was no moral aspect of that dying unto sin in Christ. But what took place at Calvary is that He entered into, on our behalf, a legal relationship to sin.
And He died as us, a sinful humanity under condemnation. And through the accomplishment in His death, He terminated that relationship. So that has nothing more to say, nothing more needs to be said towards sin.
And the life that He lives in resurrection is in the fullness of a perfect relationship, in perfect harmony with God, all for God's glory and purposes, and we are united to Him. So that's where we are brought then in verse 11.
And that's why I think it's very important when it says, Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, is not pretending anything. It is counting upon this legal change of status and of the relationship cut off and a new relationship entered into in Christ and count on this reality.
Knowing what has happened. It's not the power of positive thinking.
Brother Bruce, just for the sake of the reading, I think you have made it clear, but just to emphasize it. Okay, I am dead unto sin. Is sin dead unto me?
We've got chapter 7 to go yet. Yeah. Got to defend some territory here.
Those words in verse 11, and ye also are quite important. Are we being taught here that we are to reckon the way God has already reckoned? Yes. And could you then help us with the difference or distinction between reckoning, verse 11, and yielding in verse number 13?
Would you help us with that?
Yes. Well, counting on this changed relationship and seeing that we are united with the Lord Jesus in this wonderful bundle of life in relation to God in His grace, now look at sin and say, I don't have to listen to you anymore.
That's the point. So this is where we are to take up our attitude. And this is where our responsibility comes. And as I mentioned back in chapter 5, the issue of authority is of extreme importance in the eventual challenge met in chapter 8 of overcoming sin.
But it's highlighted here. That is, don't let sin reign. Do not yield to its demand. Do not follow its desire. Reject its call.
A new concept has been introduced here. I just emphasize it. The concept of lordship. Verse 9, middle of the verse, death hath no more dominion over him. A newbry's margin, if you have a newbry, hath no more lordship over him.
And verse 11, likewise ye also write yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin. So it is no longer lordship over us as linked with Christ. But now we are alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord. We now have a new master.
We have a new Lord. In verse 12, sin is king. Sin's reigning. In verse 14, sin is Lord. Let not sin have lordship over you. The Lord Jesus Christ is our king. Revelation 19. King of kings. And he's Lord of lords.
So in your unsaved days, sin is king, sin is Lord. The minute you trusted Christ as your Savior, he became your king and he became your Lord.
Bruce, I know you can't afford to go back. There's something I just wondered if we could draw out of the first verses of this chapter. You have death. Christ's death. Christ's death. He died. We died with him.
Why in verse... Sorry. Verse 6. Sorry. Go right back to verse 6. Why is it not our old man died with Christ? Why bring in crucifixion specifically at that point? Well, I think that's the judgment. The idea of the judgment is directed upon him.
That's who it really belongs to. Is that what you're thinking? It's the open shame. It's the total disavowal as far as God's concerned.
Violently dealt with in crucifixion. Terminated.
Sorry, I just took entity tour. Verse 12 links... And we're going to come up against this kind of expression quite a few times through. We've got mortal body. And that comes up again in chapter 8. Your mortal body.
And so on. And so it says, Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that you should obey it in the lust thereof. And this is saying now that your body no longer is to be the instrument of sin. Right.
And so we are to present it to God. Now this is the same term. Yield. It's the same as Romans 12 and 1. So it's a very important link to put Romans 6 and Romans 12 together. And realize we're talking about the same thing actually.
That is a surrender to God. A devotion to God. A placing at His disposal of our lives. Of our very bodies. Because that's where the arena of conflict is going to be between sin and righteousness. Obedience to God.
Yielding to sin. And it goes right back to the Garden of Eden. How did sin gain its mastery? By a disobedience to God's authority. So the restoration is going to be by the acknowledgement of God's authority.
The placing ourselves in His authority. And I think there's a principle of God's character that He is so gracious that He will not run roughshod over us. He desires voluntary submission. It is the reign of grace, of love at work.
Looking to a willing response. And so He's now showing you I'm your rescuer. I'm your deliverer. You need to be consciously subjecting yourself to my authority and to reject that other control and authority.
So we learn here that sin is not reigning, but it is remaining. And so we don't yield to it, but we reckon as we are dead. There are two yields, aren't there, in verse 13.
The tenth sentence is different. Neither yield ye your members. That's a habit of yielding your members. Sin is still alive, as our brother has said. But then when we come to the second yield, it's a surrender that should already have been made or has already been made.
Verses 12 and 13, in what you've said, are actually going back to the statement of verse 6 about the body of sin. It did reign in our bodies, and we habitually yielded to it. It came knocking at the door, and we made a choice, but we just chose to go with it.
We did not have an alternative in that sense, but we do now. So chapter 7 will be dealing with the learning to distinguish between I myself and the sin that is resident within me. But this is where we are so often fooled is because we just accept it as being our own feelings, our own desires, our own will, and so on, whereas it's actually an intruder that is seeking to overtake and masquerade as our true selves.
Now, somebody, I think, had a question or statement?
When it comes to yielding, is that something that we accomplish by personal effort?
It's an act of will, of the will to present yourself to obey.
I guess, maybe to clarify what I'm asking, can I accomplish this by personal effort?
Well, it's really by knowing how God has dealt with it, isn't it?
I agree with that, Bill. It's not so much I'm determined not to sin anymore. It is knowing the relationship I've been brought into now.
What has taken place at Calvary?
The effort will be very much evident in the next chapter. I'm a little stuck in this. But the effort will be evident. But the idea of yielding is being totally passive in God's hand. It's an act of responsibility, but to be totally passive in God's hand.
There is the hammer, sitting right there in my workbench. It's available to me. It's not taking itself off and walking away to do its own thing. It's available to me. An instrument available to God, an instrument available to the Spirit of God, an instrument available to Christ.
Chapter 8 gives us the power to do it. The Spirit of God. And that's the only power.
So we cannot do it. That's the point I was raising. We've got to highlight that with the help of God in chapter 7. It's in harmony with the Spirit of God. That's how it will be successful. So how are we to understand sin shall not have dominion then?
What's the... Practically? Was that the idea? Verse 14, what is he really saying? Is this a promise? Or is he just stating a fact? What is he doing here?
The outcome of that process that you've been examining, knowing verse 6, the body of sin might be nullified, then to reckon that to be so and to yield your members, your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
So practically, that righteousness of which you've been speaking is going to be worked out in the life unto God. Therefore, the result would be sin will not have lordship in the life.
It's actually the answer to the question, shall we continue in sin? And he concludes that answer by saying sin can't have dominion. Now, we need to get to chapter 8 before we can actually understand this totally in terms of our practice.
But in terms of God, and as he sees us legally, it is impossible for us to live under the dominion of sin.
So to make a distinction between the dominion of sin, I think it was brought up already, and the practice of sin. It's possible for us not to continually, habitually practice. It's possible for us to sin.
But impossible for us to be under the dominion of sin. And that brings us to the next section. So we're under the lordship of Christ. I think it's, again,.
We're under His headship. It follows from verse 12, does it not, where it speaks of sin, there's rain in your moral body. So if it doesn't rain, it can't have His dominion.
Yeah, so I think we can see two things. And this is where we keep, we're in this teetering, merging back and forth over it. But first of all, the legal authority of sin has been nullified by the death of Christ.
Oh, Eve. Yes, and so then, the overcoming of sin in its corrupting influence is counteracted by the grace of God operating. You're not under law. That's what's going to give sin its strength. You're under grace, where you have all that God is for you, with you, in you to handle this and counteract that and to enable you to live.
Like a child of God, a son of God. It's interesting you get another hint of law here coming in, but I'm just going to take it up and say it.
Yeah, that's right. There was a responsibility placed on Israel to teach the law to their children. I believe, brethren, we've failed in it in a lot of ways, at least in my own memory. We have a responsibility to teach foundation truths to the believers, and especially to young believers.
And those of us who teach the word of God in the assembly should remember there are foundation truths that are vital to be taught to young people. And you're saying that where we are now is an example of that?
Foundation truths. So the law couldn't give power. We've been talking about the power. We're not under law,.
But we're under grace. So then that immediately triggers another question, and even by the following question helps to interpret the statement that's just been made. So then what then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law, but under grace?
And so that is really now saying that, okay, if I have no longer, if I have no legal accountability, there's no law over me. There's no legal charge that's going to be brought. I'm home free. Does that mean that I can just dabble with sin and it has absolutely no effect, no problem, no consequence?
So what he's arguing from here down is that whenever you yield yourself to sin, whenever you yield obedience to it, it is going to have a consequence, and it's going to be a consequence towards death, towards the destruction of what is precious in life.
It's a futility to involve yourself in sin as well as an incompatibility. And so he's not teaching here that someone would become an unbeliever again and be under the condemnation of the judgment of God and all of that, but that there is no free sin.
There is a slight distinction, I think, between dominion, which goes in the first part of this chapter, and slavery, which goes in the... mastery, which goes in the second part of the chapter. I take it that what we're looking at here is a choice I can make on any given day, and the choice I make to yield to sin will have a tendency to pull me down that pathway, but it's not an irreversible thing as it was in my unconverted days.
So this is the accident of a Christian's life, but it's not an accident. It's a willful choice that brings us into a power that is contrary to what God has in mind for us. But it's not the dominion that we live there.
It's the choice that we make moment by moment that has its effect on us.
But isn't the born servant of sin here going back again to the unsaved man?
Where it says here, yeah, down further. Yeah, verse 17.
Yeah. Verse 16 before we get to 17. It seems unbalanced there. It says weather of sin unto death. And we would possibly have thought it should say obedience unto life, but it says obedience unto righteousness.
Why is it emphasizing righteousness just in this and not the life aspect?
Well, this is again where I would see the word death here used in a moral sense as what destroys life in its qualities, whereas righteousness is what is essential for the protection of life. We're called to a life of righteousness.
As a born servant of sin in verse 20, you were free as to righteousness. No claims upon you. You disregarded it. But as a born servant of obedience, now it's relative to righteousness. Because the righteousness of God is key in the book.
And it's unto righteousness. So that's characterizing us.
But isn't the righteousness here the practical outworking of the obedience? Yes.
Right, okay, I see what you're getting at. There's actually a logical connection that's missed, and that is that it really should be to life. But the point, life and righteousness are twins. Sin and death are twins.
And you follow that right through. The just, those made righteous, shall live by faith. The law promises life, but it produces death because of us. That's in the next chapter, sorry. So is he now saying in verse 17, if we're there, that actually what characterized us at the moment of conversion was we were totally yielded to righteousness.
We were poured into what produces righteousness. And that ought to, therefore, what happens at conversion ought to characterize us for the rest of our lives. We were glad to just obey. Lord, what would that have me to do?
I don't know what happened to that, but that's what happened at conversion. So obedience is the character of the life. And that's why it is always a touchstone of our spirituality. If we are not obedient, we're not spiritual.
We're not in harmony with God. We're not in harmony with His character in life.
So this obedience would begin a conversion, right, obeying the Gospel. But he's not suggesting in any way that there's any merit to evangelical obedience in terms of win the favor of God by obeying.
No, God has imparted something to us and that's produced in this obedience. There's a character that comes with the one whose one act of obedience brought us into all this blessing. That must, therefore, characterize us.
So the form of doctrine would be the Gospel,.
What they heard first. It probably embraces all truth, but all we perceived was the Gospel to begin with.
I think it shows the importance of the Gospel and it's showing that it's a hard work. It's not just an outward keeping of law or anything like that, but it's a hard work and that's what makes the change.
We're no more servants of sin.
So there's only one form of doctrine. Paul himself had never visited Rome, but he's putting his stamp of approval on the same form of doctrine that he's preaching in other places which they also had received.
So it's really a mold into which we are poured. Actually, repentance is submission to God. Repentance is a prerequisite for salvation, but it doesn't produce salvation. It's not a two-step process. It's faith in Christ alone, but faith in Christ is impossible without submission to God.
So at the moment of conversion, we were submissive to God by the mighty working of the Spirit of God. Faith itself is an obedience. It's an obedient response to a message. That's right.
I think as well there's a thought that it's Christ that's presented in the Gospel. And when you talk about the mold, we're going to be conformed to His image, but what about now? It's interesting that we're type or mold.
It's only one Gospel. It's called a doctrine or a teaching. It's not something... Excuse me saying this, but I'm very serious about it. It's not something for novices who don't know the Word of God to be preaching.
There's only one Gospel. It's sad to say I listen to many Gospels. They're not a Gospel. And so it's important that we teach what the content of the Gospel is. And it's something that we have to learn and understand.
Where do we find it? Roman Epistle. Brother Bruce, would you see a progression here first that there's the yielding of the instruments, then it becomes the obeying, the one that grows up from the other?
So then verse 18, being then made free from sin, you became, and that's literally you were made again. So again, we're actually passive in that. You were made servants of righteousness. So again, this establishes that our salvation was a placing in relationship with someone who is Lord.
And a relationship of submission to that Lord. Being made free from sin goes back to our connection with Adam being severed at the cross of Christ, our identity with Him. Yes, and that's what I just want to do to make sure we keep remembering is that this being made free, being made free, here is legal freedom from sin.
And so verse 19 then, he is in one sense apologizing for making these parallel of servants of sin and then servants of righteousness as slavery because there's such a contrast. The bondage of sin and the life of a Christian are not to be just one slavery exchange for another slavery.
But there's a relationship of a master that is parallel. But the kind of relationship is so absolutely different of the love and joy and obedience to the one who has loved us.
When we see the Hebrew servant come in here, I love my master. There's such a change now. I will not go free.
Sorry, William. I was just going to say in our unconverted days, we were bond servants, slaves of sin. From the moment of conversion, we became bond servants of righteousness. So at what point were we exercising free will?
In our obedience to the gospel. That's right. And while legally we now have a new owner, we're masters, we're servants or bond slaves of righteousness, we do still make choices. Practically speaking. Legally, we have a new master and it's only right that we should obey him.
Brother John here has a question.
Sure. Verse 19 there. There's a downward progression for the unsaved, iniquity unto iniquity. There's an upward progression for the child of God. It's righteousness and then it's holiness. God's character, righteousness.
And God's nature, holiness.
So that's very important to see and that flows right into the final verses there too. We've got about five minutes left possibly. It was an absolute thing in verse 20, right? In our sins, there was no loyalty to, no obedience to, no production of righteousness.
It's absolute. They that are in the flesh cannot please God.
So you could link verse 21 and 22 in this way that we are being asked to reflect soberly on the past. What fruit had you then in those things whereof you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.
And maybe some of us were saved as little children and we learn more about the struggle with sin even as believers. But whatever our past experience has been with sin, reflect soberly. What did it ever do for you?
What bring you into misery, disappointment, the loss of love, joy, and peace, the loss of everything good? And so then respect the new relationship in verse 22. Being now made free from sin and become servants to God, you have your fruit unto holiness and the end everlasting life.
Respect the changed relationship and its rewards. Help me, Brother Bruce.
Death here. I wouldn't want to think of anything controversial, but is this just physical death? Verse 21.
And verse 23. No, I think really it's looking at death in a comprehensive sense. You used the word moral, the moral implications of death. What you have here, the things wherever you're now ashamed, I'm reminded of Adam and Eve.
All they did, I mean, just a minute now, but all they did was they just took fruit. There was nothing shameful in the act itself. There is a great deal that's shameful in the acts of sin, but you don't have to have gone down that road to face the ashamedness of sin.
And so what I'm looking at here is not saying, you know, you lived profligate lives in the past and all that. Anything that was sin, if we get a right look at it in the presence of God, should cause shame.
So there's a folly and futility of sin expressed in verse 23, for the wages of sin is death. Like, what's the point of traveling that road again? What's the point of dabbling in anything that at the end of it you'll feel sick about it, sick of yourself, sick of your thoughts, and whatever it may be, and recognize that it always, ever, only goes towards moral death.
Corruption. But the gift of God, the contrast of the graciousness of God moving into our lives in all His righteous ways, completely looking after our need and bringing us into the beauty of a relationship that is in Christ, that is eternal in its extent and quality.
So there's such blessing that He has for us.
What is the emphasis on in against through, brother?
Well, through is more the instrument that brings you to something or effects something, whereas in is the enjoyment of a relationship, experience together.
So we preach this verse in the gospel, and well we might and should continue, and so on, but there's a slightly different emphasis from what is normally presented in the gospel. It's not death and eternal death, it's moral death and corruption.
And not necessarily projected onto eternal life as in the future, but it's the enjoyment of that life of God now in Christ, in Christ Jesus our Lord, and that's a free gift. That's communicated to us as we are enjoying those things in Christ.
Let me suggest that it could be by Christ Jesus our Lord. In other words, what we have by Christ Jesus.
Yeah, but we're in Him. And we're looking at in Him again. I hate to be just...
No, I don't hate to be, because I'm doing it, just emphasizing the truth. This is not now our being in Christ, in the body, members of Christ, in that sense. It is in the headship of Christ, in our relationship and union with Christ, in that headship.
We are brought under lordship, we are brought into life, and all the fullness of what life means. There's no problem taking it as far as we take it in the gospel. It's there, but the emphasis here is in death and all that sin brings us into here in its shame and in its sorrow and all the rest, slavery.
Whereas the contrast is life, the full enjoyment of righteousness and life and all that God has for us now. Just a foretaste. Yes, the eternal is in view, but that's not the emphasis.
So the first part of 23 then, it's really in Adam, isn't it? Yeah. The second part's in Christ. It's a summary of what has gone before.
Wages and gifts remind us of this. You cannot sin without getting wages. It's the inevitable result, but it's the gift. It's not wages. It's not an inevitable result. It's a gracious giving of what we enjoy.
In eternal life. So are you saying the same for verse 21, the end of verse 21, the end of those things is death? I thought so, Murray. Yeah, sorry. Okay, I know we disagree on that. We'll still get to heaven.
That's right. You can preach it, and I'll preach it right after you. I guess our time is up.