Page images
PDF
EPUB

not possibly have made use of the first person in this description, had there been absolutely no analogy between the state he was describing and his own; had he designed to represent himself as an exception to his remarks. On the other hand, it is equally clear that he cannot intend to speak of himself only, since his aim is to instruct his readers relative to their own wants. Rather is it true that in his experiences those of the mass of men are to be found reflected. We must express the matter by saying that Paul does indeed speak of himself; but only of himself as a sharer in human nature, as a man; not of his individual, personal experience.

Little is gained, however, by this result, unless we can determine to what period of his life the apostle refers. This question falls in with the other highly important one, whether he is describing the state of a renewed or of an unrenewed person. The verses 7-13 relate, according to the opinion of all interpreters, to the period before regeneration, as is sufficiently indicated by the use of the aorist. But whether verses 14-24 are likewise to be applied to the state before regeneration, is very doubtful, as Paul here changes to the present; and the aorist is not resumed until chapter 8: 2. The question is indeed a difficult one, for, in the first place, it relates entirely to internal goings-on, which cannot be rightly understood without analogous experiences, and a clear-sighted consciousness; and in the second place, the influence of false tendencies in doctrine has confused the inquiry. Pelagian blindness to moral relations, as well as Donatistic rigor, find it easy to assert that there can be no reference to a renewed state, otherwise there would be no mention of sin. Lax moralists or hypocrites, on the other hand, found it convenient to assert that Paul was describing the state of the regenerate; among whom they, notwithstanding their moral corruption, fondly classed themselves.

Besides these opposite false directions, the most pious and learned members of the church have understood this passage differently, according as they were accustomed to estimate more or less human depravity, and thence to judge differently

of the effects of the new birth. It cannot, therefore, surprise us to find the names of Origen, Chrysostom and Theodoret among those who refer the passage to a state prior to regeneration; since the oriental church always inclined to Pelagianism. Even Augustine was at first found on this side; but the further development of his system led him to adopt the opposite view-that, namely, which makes Paul describe the state of the regenerate. He was followed, not merely by the most distinguished theologians of the middle ages, Anselm and Thomas Aquinas, but by the reformers, Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, and Beza. Only since Spener, Francke, Bengel, Gottfried Arnold, and Zinzendorf, has there been a return to the interpretation which makes Paul speak of the state before regeneration, and this interpretation is adopted by Stier, Tholuck and Ruckert.

These theologians, however, admit, with justice, that there is an element of truth in the Augustinian view. For there are moments in the life of the believer in which he must adopt the language here used by Paul. Moreover, the plastic power of the gospel penetrates only by degrees the different tendencies of the inner life, so that similar developments manifest themselves through the believer's whole course; and this leads to the thought that both views may find a point of coincidence in one higher than either. And it might safely be presumed that men like Augustine and the Reformers would not go wholly astray in the interpretation of so remarkable a passage. A further development of the connection will perhaps enable us to discover how such different interpretations have arisen, as well as to determine what is the element of truth, and what of error, in each.

In the first place, it is obvious that the apostle designs to give a complete picture of the successive steps of development in the Christian life, from its beginning to its perfection. In vs. 7-9, he sets out from a point where man lives wholly without law, and concludes, in the eighth chapter, with the glorification of the body. Here the question arises, How many steps are distinctly marked in this process? Indisputa

bly four. First, a state without law, in which sin is dead; secondly, a life under the law, in which sin is alive, and reigns; thirdly, a state in which, through the strength of Christ, the spirit rules, and sin is kept under; and lastly, the state of entire freedom from sin, through the glorification of the body. If, therefore, we choose to understand regeneration as including the first motions of grace in the soul, the whole description may be applied to the regenerate; since even in its earliest stage, the attention is directed to the law, through grace. It is assuredly, however, more correct and consonant with Scripture to call that process only a new birth, in which, after the sense of need has been awakened, spiritual strength is so infused into the soul by Christ, that a new man begins to exist, and henceforth exercises supreme sway in the soul. Consistently with this explanation, the state under the law cannot coexist with the new birth; and it thence follows that since v. 24 expresses the need of redemption, and v. 25 the experience of it, the whole passage (14-24) refers to a state prior to regeneration, and describes the conflict in the breast of a convicted sinner.

The fact that Paul in this section makes use of the present, while in the preceding and following context he employs the aorist, suggests the thought, that he does not intend to consider this state of conflict, as one quite separate and distinct from that of the new birth. There is likewise in the description itself (14-24) a visible progress in the battle with sin; the better I gains the ascendency, and the delight in God's law gradually increases. In a far higher degree is this the case, as expressed in verse 25, after the experience of the redemptive power of Christ; where the renewed man is described as mostly victorious over sin. But the contest continues even after regeneration; and it is evident from express declarations of Scripture, (compare 1 John 2: 1,) that the new man does not always come off victorious; that he has seasons of being assaulted and tempted, yea, most bitterly assaulted. The same truth is confirmed by what is revealed respecting the lives of the apostles, and by the experience of

good men in all ages. If we likewise reflect that, in proportion as the life of faith advances, the spiritual vision becomes sharpened to discern the motions of sin, and the conscience is quickened so as to reprove sharply deviations which, at a lower point of spiritual progress, would have been unnoticed; if we reflect on this fact, we cannot but admit that Augustine and the fathers who followed him were right in asserting, that even a regenerate person could and must employ the language of Paul, vs. 14-24. Perhaps the least exceptionable mode of representing the point is this. Paul in this passage (1424) has a primary reference to the state of the unregenerate, designing to carry on the description connectedly, through all the progressive steps of the Christian life; but, conscious that similar experiences occur in the history of the regenerate soul, his description applies to that likewise. Equally erroneous then are the two assertions; on the one hand, that Paul primarily and immediately refers to the renewed soul, and on the other, that nothing can be found in the experience of such a soul answering to this description. The difference between the conflict and defeat of the regenerate, and the conflict and defeat of the unregenerate is so great, objectively, (see vs. 24, 25,) notwithstanding the subjective consciousness of their near relationship, as to take away all just ground of apprehension that the new birth, by the proposed view, will be robbed of its essential characteristics.

If we now return to the first question, viz., at what period of his life Paul could have used this language respecting himself, it is plain that this could not have been subsequent to the Lord's appearance to him at Damascus, but that he speaks of his inward conflicts while under the yoke of the law. At the same time, the change to the present tense indicates that even in his state at the time of writing, he found analogies to the former which recalled it, though in far nicer applications, and finer relations: "What I would, that do I not, and what I would not, that do I.-O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death!" (Compare 2 Cor. 12: 7.)

PARTICULAR COMMENTARY.

Vs. 7, 8. The first two verses of this passage contain the general ground-thought, briefly expressed, which verse 9 developes more fully. The apostle is describing the relation of sin to the law, as the means of bringing sin out into manifestation. It is in human nature, apart from the law; but only through the law does it manifest itself, and thus become an object of consciousness. It does not, however, thence follow that the law has a sinful character; on the contrary, it is holy, just, and good, as the expression of the holy will of God, of whose eternal, unchangeable nature it partakes. (Ps. 119: 96.) Its tendency is to life only; sin perverts it to death. (Compare verse 10, with Lev. 18: 5. Deut. 5: 16, 33.) What the apostle here asserts is true, then, by no means of the ceremonial law exclusively, but of the moral law, universally; in all the forms of its revelation, to heathens, Jews, and Christians. It is characteristic of this law, taken as a whole, that it offers a barrier against which the tide of sin breaks, and thence rages the more; it hems in the stream of sensual desire by a positive command, (vroλý,) and thus drives it to overleap the command; whereby man becomes sensible of his inward condition.

Peculiar in these verses is the relation in which Paul places άuagría and invμía. At the first glance it appears as if he regarded invμía as the first, άuagría as flowing from it. In the sinful act this is the true relation; the bad desire is the mother of the bad deed. (James 1: 15.) But άuagría expresses here the sinful state in general, which comes into manifestation only in the concrete; and here the relation is reversed. From the universally depraved nature of man proceeds the invvuía, prava concupiscentia, as its first manifestation; and then follows the act. On a more careful examination of the words of the apostle, it becomes evident that this is the relation of ἁμαρτία το ἐπιθυμία which he wishes to express. From the inner depravity, evil desire in all its forms (nãoav èñiðvμíav) flows forth and rises against the law, (xαt

« PreviousContinue »