Skip to main content

Posts

Schreiner: " In other words, unbelievers are slaves to sin in that they always desire to carry out the dictates of their master."

  Rom 6 v 19 19 I am using a human analogy because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you offered the parts of yourselves as slaves to impurity, and to greater and greater lawlessness, so now offer them as slaves to righteousness, which results in sanctification. This verse opens an interesting window on the Pauline conception of slavery to sin. Unbelievers are totally subservient to sin as a power that exerts authority over their lives, but the slavery envisioned is not coercion.  People don’t submit to sin against their will. Rather, they “freely” and spontaneously choose to sin. In other words, unbelievers are slaves to sin in that they always desire to carry out the dictates of their master.  This does not mean that those with addictions (e.g., to alcohol, pornography, or gambling) never wish to be freed.  It means that the desire for these things is ultimately greater than the desire to be freed from them. Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, ed. Robert W. Yarbrough and Joshua W.
Recent posts

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

  There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ.  On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion.  The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin.  The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place without the first. J

Barnhouse: This is why men fear physical death.

  When Adam sinned, he stepped from the halls of light into a chamber of darkness. Though he was physically alive, spiritual life was gone. When the moment came for him to face God, he fled in terror to hide among the trees. He feared to meet the One who had given him all things, and whom he had disobeyed. Sin had done its work. Man had broken fellowship with his Creator, and feared to face Him. This is why men fear physical death. Written in our very being is the fact that physical death ends delay. The God who has been wronged must be faced. The reckoning day has come. Some men profess to believe that death ends all, but the majority are honest enough to admit that something lies beyond, and they are afraid of it. Epicurus expressed the thought of the former group in his letter to Donald Grey Barnhouse, God’s Grace: Romans 5:12–21 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1959), 31.

Fesko: "Adam is the universal federal and covenantal head for the entire human race."

  Rom 5 v 13- 14 (CSB) 13 In fact, sin was in the world before the law, but sin is not charged to a person’s account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin in the likeness of Adam’s transgression. He is a type of the Coming One.  "Paul proves his point regarding the imputation of Adam’s sin by surveying the landscape of redemptive history and dividing it into three sections: Adam Adam ➔ Moses  Moses ➔ Present day It is easy to understand why Adam died and why people after the revelation of the Mosaic law died: They all transgressed expressly revealed commandments of God. God explicitly told Adam not to eat of the tree of knowledge lest God punish him with death. And Israel, like Adam in his state in the garden, received expressly revealed commands from God, who threatened them with death for violating them (e.g., Ex. 21:15–17). But what about the people who lived and died between Adam and Moses? On what basis did th

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

  Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know.  So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated.  Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he knew that his cri

Berkoff: "The law was not substituted for the promise; neither was faith supplanted by works. "

  The giving of the law did not effect a fundamental change in the religion of Israel, but merely introduced a change in its external form.  The law was not substituted for the promise; neither was faith supplanted by works.  Many of the Israelites, indeed, looked upon the law in a purely legalistic spirit and sought to base their claim to salvation on a scrupulous fulfillment of it as a body of external precepts.  But in the case of those who understood its real nature, who felt the inwardness and spirituality of the law, it served to deepen the sense of sin and to sharpen the conviction that salvation could be expected only from the grace of God . L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938), 498–499.

Tripp: Pride is a source of sin out of which so many other sins and their bad fruit grow.

  Pride is a source of sin out of which so many other sins and their bad fruit grow.   Pride crushes compassion and sympathy. Pride makes it very hard for you to be patient and understanding. Pride makes you entitled and demanding. Pride never produces a willingness to forgive. Pride makes you judgmental and condemning.  Pride makes you far more concerned about the sin of others than you are about your own. Pride is the enemy of self-sacrificing love. Pride makes you picky and easily irritated. Pride forces you to deny your wrongs and to shift blame to someone or something else. Pride makes it easier for you to complain than to give thanks. Proud people don’t tend to be peacemakers. Proud people don’t suffer well. Proud people don’t tend to be generous. Proud people tend to think they deserve what is comfortable and tend to hate what is difficult. Proud people envy the blessings of others. Proud people resist confession and are defensive when confronted. Proud people find winning more