Bible Study The authority of the law: Romans 7

[Jethro Bodine]

SUBMISSION TO WHAT??

Wondering

Sin.

"16Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?" (Romans 6:16 NASB)

You don't have to submit to sin anymore because the old mindset of sin (the sin nature) is not in charge anymore. Like how a now deceased husband is no longer in charge, so you don't have to submit to the things he once commanded you to submit to.

If the sin nature itself is dead, what is it that makes us sin?

Remember, you are the one that decided that the sin nature being dead means we no longer sin, not me. The sin nature being dead means it is no longer in charge. In fact, if it truly is in charge, you do not belong to Christ. Because those who have the Spirit have the mindset of the Spirit. You can not have the mindset of the flesh and the mindset of the Spirit at the same time:

"5...those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,8and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

9However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. (Romans 8:5-9 NASB)

See? Sin itself is not the determining factor here. What mindset you have is. According to what Paul is saying, if you are still in control of a mind set on the flesh you do not belong to Christ. Because he plainly said having the Spirit means you are not in the flesh (vs.9 above), meaning you do not have the mind set on the flesh. IOW, it's impossible to say a Christian has a mind set on the flesh. Why? Because he has the Spirit. He is now in control. That doesn't mean the Christian doesn't sin anymore. It means the old mindset of the flesh is not in control anymore.

Our own lusts, the deception of the enemy, ignorance, etc....all these things cause Christians joined to Christ by the Holy Spirit to act as though they are still in control of the flesh. It can't be a mindset of sin that causes us to sin, because Paul said we "are not in the flesh but in the Spirit". Paul says to actually be in control of the old nature, the old mindset of the flesh, means you don't even belong to Him. But again, that hardly means we who really have the mind of the Spirit won't be fooled into thinking we still are and as a result submit to sinful things again.

 

[GodsGrace]

Jethro,

Okay. I see what you mean by the following statement:
Remember, you are the one that decided that the sin nature being dead means we no longer sin, not me. The sin nature being dead means it is no longer in charge. In fact, if it truly is in charge, you do not belong to Christ. Because those who have the Spirit have the mindset of the Spirit. You can not have the mindset of the flesh and the mindset of the Spirit at the same time:

The mindset of the spirit and the mindset of the flesh. This is certainly what Romans is about.
Paul is saying that he sins in the flesh but not in the spirit. To be cont'd tomorrow. Late here.

It's not that I decided that the sin nature being dead means we no longer sin. It's the logical conclusion because if the sin nature is dead, then what is it that makes us sin? You said:
"Our stupid, fearful, foolish, ignorant, perhaps even arrogant, submission to it. "
I asked Submission To What?
To which you replied:
Sin.
Jethro, if we're submitting to sin, it means the sin nature is still alive. It's the sin nature that causes us to sin.
It has lost its POWER but it has not DIED.
Tomorrow...With scripture.

Wondering

 

[JLB]

Jethro, if we're submitting to sin, it means the sin nature is still alive. It's the sin nature that causes us to sin.
It has lost its POWER but it has not DIED.

Of course.

The sin nature didn't die, nor was it mentioned in Romans 7:4

Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ...

The law was nailed to the cross. Colossians 2:14
The body of Christ was nailed to the Cross. John 19:17-19

The Husband of the Children of Israel was the Lord.

The Lord became flesh, and died for our sins, being nailed to the cross.

The children of Israel are now free from that covenant, so that they can legally be married to the One who was raised from the dead, by which He has made both Jew and Gentile one new man.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro, if we're submitting to sin, it means the sin nature is still alive. It's the sin nature that causes us to sin.
It has lost its POWER but it has not DIED.

Our sin can't be coming from a mindset of the flesh that Paul says Christians don't have anymore because Christians have the Spirit (Romans 8:9 NASB). You have to come to a proper conclusion of what it means for husband 'sin nature' to have died in Christ and the fact that Christians still sin. Your conclusion that we still sin because we still have a mind set on the things of the flesh is not supported by Paul's discourse in any way shape or form, but rather directly and plainly contradicted by what Paul says.

The point of Romans 7 and this thread is we are no longer under the authority of the law to keep us in bondage to sin, because, by virtue of the Spirit, the mind set on the things of the flesh has been replaced by a mind set on the things of the Spirit. The mind set on the things of the flesh was the hook that the law had in us to arouse sin in us and enforce our relationship with sin. But since we no longer have that mindset, because it died in Christ, the law can't make us sin anymore. If we are sinning because we still have a mind set on the things of the flesh we simply do not have the Spirit of God in us and, therefore, do not belong to Jesus. If we do have the Spirit of God and are still sinning, it can't be because we still have a mind set on the things of the flesh. Paul said by virtue of having the Spirit we no longer have a mind set on the things of the flesh. We sin for other misguided, ignorant, even arrogant reasons that are contrary to the true nature and mind set of Christ we have received.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Of course.

The sin nature didn't die, nor was it mentioned in Romans 7:4

Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ...

The law was nailed to the cross. Colossians 1:14
The body of Christ was nailed to the Cross. John 19:17-19

The Husband of the Children of Israel was the Lord.

The Lord became flesh, and died for our sins, being nailed to the cross.

The children of Israel are now free from that covenant, so that they can legally be married to the One who was raised from the dead, by which He has made both Jew and Gentile one new man.


JLB

How is it that a wife is married to the law that governs marriage that it should be a useful analogy to explain our release from the authority of the law of Moses to arouse sin in us and keep us in relationship with that sin? I'm pretty sure my wife is married to me, not the law of marriage that enforces her marriage to me.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The law was nailed to the cross. Colossians 1:14

I think you mean Colossians 2:14
I will be starting another thread to address what Paul is talking about there and in Ephesians 2:11-16.

 

[JLB]

How is it that a wife is married to the law that governs marriage that it should be a useful analogy to explain our release from the authority of the law of Moses to arouse sin in us and keep us in relationship with that sin? I'm pretty sure my wife is married to me, not the law of marriage that enforces her marriage to me.

For your Maker is your husband,
The Lord of hosts is His name;
And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel;
He is called the God of the whole earth.
Isaiah 54:5

The wife [Israel] is married to The Lord, who gave them the law.

He is the Word [law] that became flesh and died.

Now they who were married to Him, are free to marry another, Him who was raised from the dead, so that both Jew and Gentile can serve as one new man.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

For your Maker is your husband,
The Lord of hosts is His name;
And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel;
He is called the God of the whole earth.
Isaiah 54:5

The wife [Israel] is married to The Lord, who gave them the law.

He is the Word [law] that became flesh and died.

Now they who were married to Him, are free to marry another, Him who was raised from the dead, so that both Jew and Gentile can serve as one new man.


JLB

I don't see this as answering my question, but this is not a debate forum so we'll just let what you post stand as it is.

 

[ezrider]

In asking why was the new covenant necessary, I am then asking what did the Old Covenant and the Letter of the Law fail to deliver upon?

The Word of God didn't fail. It did and does exactly what it was/is supposed to do.

Getting at what that might be in another person's head can be a difficult undertaking, particularly if they've staked out theology positions on a faulty premise, such as God's Word being ineffective or the problem and they land in the place of denying it.

So perhaps you can shoot your version out on how that might be?

Why do you continue to assume it is a faulty premise which only prevents you from recalling the simplicity that is in God's Word?
Jethro at least gave an answer to the question, and while I can't disagree with his answer, there is a more substantial reason, But Jethro did post one of the scriptures in his response that does enlighten us as to the reason. And just so there is no mistaking the meaning intended by saying there was a fault or flaw in the law, Paul stated it very clearly: For what the Law could not do.

It had no power to end sin in a person, only power to point it out:

3For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us..." (Romans 8:3-4 NASB)

For What the Law could not do. We certainly know what the Law can do, it has the power to condemn us. By the Law is the knowledge is sin. We know that the strength of Sin is the Law. We know that the Law entered so that sin might abound. We know the law to be effective in these things. By the law is the knowledge of death. So what is it the law could not do?

The law is something by which our unrighteousness is measured by, but it is also a measuring stick for which we gauge our own righteousness by. The Law can make known the measure of our own righteousness, but what the law can not do is make known the Righteousness of Christ.

Romans 8:3-5
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

Christ is the Righteousness of the Law.

Romans 3:19-24
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

The righteousness of God without the law is manifest. That is what the Law could not do. It can not make known to you the Righteousness of God.

Romans 10:1-4
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

 

[JLB]

I don't see this as answering my question, but this is not a debate forum so we'll just let what you post stand as it is.

I'm sorry, I probably didn't fully understand your question the way it was worded.

I will look at your question again and try to answer in a way that does address your question.

JLB

 

[smaller]

Why do you continue to assume it is a faulty premise which only prevents you from recalling the simplicity that is in God's Word?
Jethro at least gave an answer to the question, and while I can't disagree with his answer, there is a more substantial reason, But Jethro did post one of the scriptures in his response that does enlighten us as to the reason. And just so there is no mistaking the meaning intended by saying there was a fault or flaw in the law, Paul stated it very clearly: For what the Law could not do.

For What the Law could not do. We certainly know what the Law can do, it has the power to condemn us.

A lot of people think Grace gives sin/evil the easy off. I don't buy that either.

Your claim remains that the law was faulty, which makes Gods Word faulty. Won't compute.

What the law could not do was to make people "earn" the gift of eternal life. That doesn't mean it's faulty on the Word of Gods part.

By the Law is the knowledge is sin. We know that the strength of Sin is the Law. We know that the Law entered so that sin might abound. We know the law to be effective in these things.

All very true. We also know that the law IS holy, just and good if used lawfully. Romans 7:12, 1Tim. 1:8.

By the law is the knowledge of death. So what is it the law could not do?

The law could not cure or eliminate the fault within the people. (all people)

The law is something by which our unrighteousness is measured by, but it is also a measuring stick for which we gauge our own righteousness by. The Law can make known the measure of our own righteousness, but what the law can not do is make known the Righteousness of Christ.

Which exactly none of us know in full while we are in this present environment in any case.

Galatians 5:5
For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

Romans 8:3-5
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

Christ is the Righteousness of the Law.

Romans 3:19-24
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

The righteousness of God without the law is manifest. That is what the Law could not do. It can not make known to you the Righteousness of God.

Romans 10:1-4
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Nevertheless the Law Is Gods Word, and as such it has it's very legitimate reasons and purposes. However any given person views it is rather irrelevant.

Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

 

[JLB]

How is it that a wife is married to the law that governs marriage

Exactly my point.

The children of Israel were not married to the law, but to the Lord. Isaiah 54:5

The Lord became flesh, and was nailed to the cross.

Now they are now longer married to Him who gave them the law, but to the One who was raised from the dead.

The One who was raised from the dead, gave them the New Covenant, not the law of Moses.

The New Covenant, has both Jew and Gentile.


JLB

 

[Chopper]

Hi everyone, good Sunday to each one in Jesus Name....This is what I was studying this morning.
1Peter 4:1 "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
1Pe 4:2 That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God."

To suffer in the flesh is to say no to a particular desire (lust) that is against a standard of God. We pretty much know what He approves and disapproves, our desires must be approved by God before we act. When we say no to a desire to do or have something that God is against, that is suffering the flesh. To suffer is to say no.

It's not that we won't sin, it's that every time we say no to an inappropriate desire of our flesh, we don't sin that particular sin.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Exactly my point.

The children of Israel were not married to the law, but to the Lord. Isaiah 54:5

The Lord became flesh, and was nailed to the cross.

Now they are now longer married to Him who gave them the law, but to the One who was raised from the dead.

The One who was raised from the dead, gave them the New Covenant, not the law of Moses.

The New Covenant, has both Jew and Gentile.


JLB

jocor showed the problem with this interpretation in post #8:

So, if through their spiritual death they are freed from their marriage to YHWH and are free to marry Yeshua, why does Paul say, "that you may be married to another"? If Yeshua was YHWH, then they are freed from being married to YHWH so that they can marry YHWH???

There is no 'another' to be married to if the old husband and the new husband are the same person. And it certainly isn't adultery if the person you marry while being married is the person you are already married to. So Paul's analogy is not applicable at all if the old and new husband are one and the same person. But like I say, this is not a debate forum. You've stated your understanding, I've stated mine. This is a study where everyone can make a contribution to the discussion.

 

[JLB]

jocor showed the problem with this interpretation in post #8:

There is no 'another' to be married to if the old husband and the new husband are the same person. And it certainly isn't adultery if the person you marry while being married is the person you are already married to. So Paul's analogy is not applicable at all if the old and new husband are one and the same person. But like I say, this is not a debate forum. You've stated your understanding, I've stated mine. This is a study where everyone can make a contribution to the discussion.

Yes, you have stated that the Jews were married to themselves, and I stated that they were married to the Lord.

Here are my scriptures.

For your Maker is your husband, The Lord of hosts is His name; Isaiah 54:5

not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. Jeremiah 31:32

Then I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away and given her a certificate of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear, but went and played the harlot also. Jeremiah 3:8



Maybe you or Jocor could post some scriptures from the old testament, whereby it says Israel was married to themselves and not the Lord?

Since this is a bible study. :yes

There is no 'another' to be married to if the old husband and the new husband are the same person. And it certainly isn't adultery if the person you marry while being married is the person you are already married to. So Paul's analogy is not applicable at all if the old and new husband are one and the same person. But like I say, this is not a debate forum. You've stated your understanding, I've stated mine. This is a study where everyone can make a contribution to the discussion.

Jocor has no scripture in His post.



JLB

 

[ezrider]

A lot of people think Grace gives sin/evil the easy off. I don't buy that either.

Your claim remains that the law was faulty, which makes Gods Word faulty. Won't compute.

It really is a shame that the evil that exists within you continues to resist the fact that this is a claim that I have not made. But you just won't accept that even though I have repeatedly tried explaining it to you. Even so far as to say Paul said it best, plainly written in your Bible. Are you then saying that Paul claimed the law was faulty. Sorry, just don't compute.

FOR WHAT THE LAW COULD NOT DO

It really is quite that simple. For what the law could not do. What the first covenant could not do, thus the need for the new covenant.
For what the law could not do was make known the righteousness of God. You did not even take the time to acknowledge this other than to respond with a scripture from Galatians 5:5, as if we are still waiting for the hope of righteousness, but that hope of righteousness comes by Faith, not by the Law.

Why is the Righteousness of the Lord revealed apart from the Law?

Why do you suppose that the Lord gave unto Adam the one commandment to not eat of the fruit tree of the Knowledge of good and evil?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Maybe you or Jocor could post some scriptures from the old testament, whereby it says Israel was married to themselves and not the Lord?

It's an analogy. We were bound to the mindset of the flesh and did what it desired, like a wife bound to a husband who does what he tells her what to do, and who bears in her the fruit after his own kind. The law of Moses acting like a marriage certificate that enforced her marital union to that mindset.

I see this problem from time to time--people borrowing from one analogy to support and interpret another and justifying doing that simply because the object used in the analogy is the same. In this case we can't borrow from the analogy of God being husband to Israel to interpret another analogy using marriage simply because they are both use marriage as the analogy. No more than we can use the analogy of hearts of stone being made flesh to interpret the analogy of putting off the flesh of the heart in circumcision. Or using the leaven of sin in one illustration to then interpret another analogy of the leaven where the leaven represents the kingdom of God.

 

[smaller]

It really is a shame that the evil that exists within you continues to resist the fact that this is a claim that I have not made.

Which claim? The "faulty Word of God" claim?

As far as evil present, I find it a universal to mankind state, but a state for which few can be honest enough to own up to. I'll count myself in good company. Romans 7:21.

But you just won't accept that even though I have repeatedly tried explaining it to you. Even so far as to say Paul said it best, plainly written in your Bible. Are you then saying that Paul claimed the law was faulty. Sorry, just don't compute.

FOR WHAT THE LAW COULD NOT DO

Who said it was meant to? You've already delineated some aspects of the Law that it is meant to do, and again which most believers run away from as quickly as their denials can carry them:

By the Law is the knowledge is [of] sin. We know that the strength of Sin is the Law. We know that the Law entered so that sin might abound. We know the law to be effective in these things.

Again, brilliant deductions. Let's see what else the law is FOR:

Galatians 3:21
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid:

It really is quite that simple. For what the law could not do. What the first covenant could not do, thus the need for the new covenant.

The Law has it's purposes. They can't be changed or swayed. Even with the New Covenant the intentions of the Laws of the O.T. remain just as much fixed precisely in their intentions.

It was never a one or the other deal. Common mistake though, sadly.

Take if from The Chief Architect:

Luke 4:4
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Not just the ones we happen to prefer.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why is the Righteousness of the Lord revealed apart from the Law?

I think what he's saying is another way to righteousness has been revealed. A way that is not of the way of the law to righteousness.

 

[smaller]

I think what he's saying is another way to righteousness has been revealed. A way that is not of the way of the law to righteousness.

One aspect among a myriad of aspects of the laws is to hammer home the point that we have NO righteousness of our own, and hence the deeply seeded need for the Grace and Mercy of God expressed in Jesus Christ.

Another aspect among a myriad of other aspects of the laws is that God Is and Remains fixed against all evil and sin. I find this quite comforting myself, even though the conclusion is presently against me (and everyone else.)

There are far more things burrowed away in the Laws than we are apt to see by rejecting same. For me, rejecting any Word of God is tantamount to the denial of Christ Himself who IS The Word of God.