Commentari biblici

Chapter VIII

Contents

Paul had now finished his exhibition of the plan of salvation. He had shown that we are justified gratuitously, that is, by faith in jesus christ, without the works of the law. He had proved that, so far from this freedom from the law leading to the indulgence of sin, it is necessary to our sanctification, because the law is as inadequate to the production of holiness in the sinner, as it is to secure pardon or acceptance with god. That such is the insufficiency of the law, he proved by exhibiting its operation both on the renewed and unrenewed mind. Having accomplished all this, he leaves, in the chapter before us, the field of logical argument, and enters on the new and more elevated sphere of joyous exultation. As, however, there is always warmth of feeling in the apostle’s argument, so also is there generally logical arrangement in his highest triumphs.

His theme here is the security of believes. The salvation of those who have renounced the law, and accepted the gracious offers of the gospel, is grown to be absolutely certain. The whole chapter is a series of arguments, most beautifully arranged, in support of this one point. They are all traced back to the great source of hope and security, the unmerited and unchanging love of god in christ jesus. The proposition is contained in the first verse. There is no condemnation to those who are in christ jesus: they shall never be condemned or perish.

1. Because they are delivered from the law; all its demands being fulfilled in them by the mission and sacrifice of christ, Romans 8:1-4.

2. Because their salvation is actually begun in the regeneration and sanctification of their hearts by the holy spirit. Those who have the spirit of christ have the spirit of life, Romans 8:5-11.

3. Not only is their salvation begun, but they are the children of god, and if children, they are heirs, Romans 8:12-17.

4. The afflictions which they may be called to endure, are not inconsistent with this filial relation to god, because they are utterly insignificant in comparison with the glory that shall be revealed in them; and under these afflictions they are sustained both by hope and the intercessions of the holy spirit, Romans 8:18-28.

5. Because they are predestinated to the attainment of eternal life; of which predestination their present sanctification or effectual calling is the result, and therefore the evidence, Romans 8:28-30.

6. Because god has given his son to die for them, and thereby to secure their justification and salvation, Romans 8:31-34.

7. Because the love of god is infinite and unchangeable; from which nothing can separate us, Romans 8:35-39. Thus, from the proximate cause of salvation, or the indwelling of the spirit, does the apostle rise with ever-increasing confidence, to the great source and fountain of all, in the love of god.‹34›

Although, according to this view of the chapter, it is one whole, it may, for the sake of convenience, be divided into three sections.

return to '

Romans 8:2

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, etc. This verse assigns the reason why there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ, as is evident from the use of for, with which the verse commences.

The law of the Spirit is here opposed to the law of sin and death, mentioned in the other clause of the verse. The interpretation of the one phrase, therefore, must decide that of the other. There are three different views which may be taken of the verse.

1. The word law may be used here, as it is in the Romans 8:21, Romans 8:23, of Romans 7, for a directing power; and Spirit, by metonymy, for that which the Spirit produces, i.e. sanctified affections; and the words of life may mean, producing life. The sense would then be, ‘The power of the renewed principle which tends to life, has delivered me from the power of sin which tends to death.’ In other words, ‘The law of the mind has delivered me from the law of sin which is in the members.’ So Beza and many others.

2. The word law is taken in nearly the same sense; but Spirit of life is understood to mean the Holy Spirit, considered as the author of life. The sense then is, ‘The power of the life-giving Spirit has delivered me from the dominion of the law of sin and death in my members.’ So Calvin, and others: “Legem Spiritus improprie vocat Dei Spiritum, qui animas nostras Christi sanguine aspergit, non tantum ut a peccati labe emundet quoad reatum; sed in veram puritatem sanctificet.” The objection to this interpretation, that it seems to refer our freedom from condemnation to our regeneration, he proposes to meet by saying that Paul does not state the cause, but the method of our deliverance from guilt: “Negat Paulus externa legis doctrina id nos consequi, sed dum Spiritu Dei renovamur, simul etiam justificari gratuita venia, ne peccati maledictio in nos amplius recumbat. Perinde ergo valet haec sententia acsi dixisset Paulus, regenerationis gratiam ab imputatione justitiae nunquam disjungi.”

3. According to the third view, the law of the Spirit of life is the gospel, i.e. the law of which the life-giving Spirit is the author. Of course, the other member of the verse, instead of describing the corrupt principle in men, means the law of God, which, as Paul had taught in Romans 7, is incidentally the cause of sin and death. The sense of the passage then is, ‘The gospel has delivered me from the law.’ So Witsius, etc.

This last seems decidedly to be preferred, for the following reasons:

1. Although the two former interpretations are consistent with Paul’s use of the word law, neither of them so well suits the context, because neither assigns the reason why believers are not exposed to condemnation. Paul asserts that those who are in Christ are restored to the divine favor. Why? Because they are sanctified? No; but because they have been freed from the law and its demands, and introduced into a state of grace.

2. It is not true that believers are delivered from the law of sin in their members. If the terms law of the Spirit, and law of sin, are to be understood of the good and evil principle in the Christian, how can it be said that by the former he is, in this life, delivered from the latter? This would be in direct contradiction to Romans 7 and to experience.

3. The terms here used may naturally be so understood, because the word law, in its general sense, as rule, is applicable and is applied to the gospel, Romans 3:27, especially when standing in antithesis to the law of works. The gospel is called the law of the Spirit, because he is its author: see the phrase “ministration of the Spirit,” 2 Corinthians 3:8. In the other member of the verse the law is called the law of sin and death, because productive of sin and death. This is no more than what Paul had said expressly of the law in the preceding chapter, Romans 8:5, Romans 8:13, etc. And in 2 Corinthians 3:6, the law is said to kill: it is called the διακονία τοῦ θανάτου, (the ministration of death,) and the διακονία τῆς κατακρίσεως (ministration of condemnation.) There the same contrast between the διακονία τοῦ θανάτου and the διακονία τοῦ πνεύματος is presented, as here between the νόμος τοῦ θανάτου and the νόμος τοῦ πνεύματος.

4. This interpretation alone assigns an adequate ground for the declaration of the preceding verse. That declaration, the result of all that Paul had yet proved, is that believers, and believers only, are perfectly safe; and the reason assigned is the sum of all the argument from the commencement of the epistle. They are not under the law, but under grace; the law of the Spirit has freed them from the old law of works.

5. The next verse favors, if it does not absolutely demand, this interpretation. It gives the reason why believers are thus freed from the law, viz. it was insufficient for their salvation, “it was weak through the flesh.”

6. The use of the aorist ἡλευθέρωσε, which shows that the freedom spoken of is an accomplished fact, confirms this interpretation. Deliverance from the law of sin in the members is a gradual process; deliverance from the law is effected once for all; and with regard to the believer, it is a fact accomplished.

The words ἐν Χριστῷ, in Christ, may be connected with the immediately preceding words τῆς ζωῆς, the life which is in Christ; or with ὁ νόμος κ. τ. λ., the law of the spirit which is in Christ. As, however, the connecting article (τῆς or ὁ), which is necessary at least definitely to indicate either of those constructions, is wanting, the words in question are generally connected with the following verb, ἡλευθέρωσε, in Christ freed me; that is, it was in him, and therefore through him, that this deliverance was effected. The meaning of this verse, therefore, in connection with the preceding, is, ‘There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ, because they have been freed in him by the gospel of the life-giving Spirit, from that law which, although good in itself, is, through our corruption, the source of sin and death.’ Being thus free from the curse of the law, and from the obligation to fulfill its demands, as the condition of life, and consequently freed from a legal spirit, their sins are gratuitously pardoned for Christ’s sake; they are made partakers of the Spirit of God, are transformed more and more into his image, and God is pledged to preserve them unto eternal life.

return to '

Romans 8:3

This verse is connected with the preceding by the particle γάρ, for. ‘We are delivered from the law, for the law could not effect our salvation.’ The words τὸ ἀδύνατον τοῦ νόμου may be rendered either, the impotency of the law, or what is impossible to the law. The choice between these renderings depends on the grammatical structure of the passage. First, τὸ ἀδύνατον may be taken as the accusative, and the preposition διά be supplied, on account of the impotency of the law; or, secondly, it may be taken as the accusative absolute, as to the impotency of the law, i.e. in view of its impotency; or, thirdly, it may be taken as the nominative, and in apposition with the following clause. The sense would then be, ‘The impossibility of the law — God condemned sin:’ i.e. the condemnation of sin is what is impossible to the law. This is the view commonly adopted, especially by those who understand the apostle to be speaking of sanctification, and who therefore take condemned sin to mean destroyed sin. As, however, that clause does not mean to destroy sin, but judicially to condemn it, the first clause cannot strictly be in apposition with it. The law could condemn sin. What it cannot do is to free us either from its guilt or power. It can neither justify nor sanctify. On this account, the second exposition of the first clause of the verse just mentioned, is to be preferred: ‘In view of the impotency of the law, God sent his Son,’ etc. This insufficiency of the law, as the apostle had taught in the preceding chapters, is not due to any imperfection of the law itself. It is holy, just, and good. It requires nothing more than is right. If men could comply with its righteous demands, the law would pronounce them just. If they were free from the infection of sin, “the form of truth and knowledge in the law,” the perfect exhibition which it makes of the will of God, would avail to maintain and advance them in holiness. But as they are already under sin, under its guilt and power, the law is entirely impotent to their justification or sanctification. The apostle therefore says, that the law is impotent, ἐν ᾧ, because that (see Hebrews 2:18) it is weak through the flesh, διὰ τῆς σαρκός, i.e. through our corruption. It is our being depraved that renders the law weak, or impotent to save. God sending (or having sent πέμψας) his own Son, τὸν ἑαυτοῦ υἱόν. The term Son here evidently designates the eternal personal Son. He was from eternity, and in virtue of his Divine nature, and not in virtue either of his miraculous birth, or his exaltation, the Son of God. The greatness of the work to be accomplished, and the greatness of the love of God impelling him to our redemption, are strongly exhibited in these words. It was not a creature, even the most exalted, whom God sent on this mission, but his own Son, one with him in essence and glory.

Two things are further stated concerning this mission of the Son of God. First, the form under which he appeared in the world; and, secondly, the object for which he was sent. As to the form in which he appeared, it was in the likeness of sinful flesh. It was not simply ἐν σαρκί (in the flesh), clothed in our nature; for that might have been said, had he appeared in the glorious, impassive nature of Adam before the fall. Much less was it in ἐν σαρκὶ ἁμαρτίας (in sinful flesh), for that would imply that his human nature was defiled, contrary to Hebrews 4:15 and to all Scripture; but it was ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας; (in the likeness of sinful flesh), that is, in a nature like to our sinful nature, but not itself sinful. Christ took our physically dilapidated nature, subject to the infirmities which sin had brought into it. He was therefore susceptible of pain, and weariness, and sorrow. He could be touched with a sense of our infirmities. He was tempted in all points as we are. He is therefore a merciful and trustworthy High Priest. The object for which God sent his Son, clothed in this feeble, suffering nature of ours, is expressed by καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας (and for sin). This may mean either on account of sin whether for its expiation or its removal, being undetermined; or it may be understood in a sacrificial sense. Christ was sent for the expiation of sin, or as a sacrifice for sin.

1. In favor of this is the usus loquendi, as περὶ ἁμαρτίας is so often used in this sense: see Numbers 8:8; Psalms 40:7; Leviticus 6:25, Leviticus 6:30; Hebrews 10:6, Hebrews 10:8, Hebrews 10:18; Hebrews 13:11. Thus also in Galatians 1:4, Christ is said to have given himself περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, for, i.e. as a sacrifice for, our sins.

2. The analogy of Scripture, as it is so abundantly taught in the word of God, is that Christ was sent to make explanation for sin, to wash away sin, to offer himself unto God as a sacrifice for sin. When, therefore, it is said that he was sent for sin, or gave himself for our sins, the implication is almost unavoidable that the meaning is, he was sent as a sacrifice for sin.

3. The immediate context demands this interpretation; for the effect ascribed to this sending Christ for sin, is that which is due to a sacrifice or expiation. What the law could not do, was to reconcile us unto God. It was in view of the impotency of the law to effect the salvation of sinners, that God sent his Son to make expiation for their offenses, and thus bring them back to himself.

He thus condemned sin in the flesh; that is, he condemned it in the flesh, or nature, which his Son had assumed. Christ took upon himself our nature, in order to expiate the guilt of that nature. The expiation must be made in the nature which had sinned. As Christ, the apostle tells us, Hebrews 2:14-18, did not undertake the redemption of angels, he did not assume their nature, but took part in flesh and blood. That the words κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν (he condemned sin), does not mean that he destroyed sin, but that he punished it, visited it with the penalty of the law, is evident:

1. Because κατάκρινω never means to destroy, but always means to condemn. It is perfectly arbitrary, therefore, to depart from the ordinary meaning of the word in this particular place.

2. The sacrifice of Christ was the condemnation of sin. That is, he bore our sins. He was made a curse, in the sense that he endured the curse due to sin. His sufferings were penal, as they were judicially inflicted in satisfaction of justice. The proximate design and effect of a sacrifice is expiation, and not reformation or inward purification. When therefore the apostle speaks, as he here does, of what God did by sending his Son as a sacrifice for sin, he must be understood to speak of the sacrificial effect of his death.

3. The context requires this interpretation. The argument of the apostle is, that there is no κατάριμα (condemnation) to us, because God κατέρινε (condemned) sin in Christ. The other interpretation supposes him to say, that there is no condemnation to us, because sin is destroyed in us. That is, we are justified on the ground of our own inherent goodness or freedom from sin. But this is contrary to the Scriptures, and to the faith of the Church.

“Clare affirmat Paulus,” says Calvin, “ideo expiata fuisse peccata Christi morte, quia Legi impossibile erat, justitiam nobis conferre.” The apostle, he adds, teaches, “Legem nihil prorsus habere momenti ad conferendam justitiam. Vides ergo, nos penitus excludi ab operum justitia: ideoque ad Christi justitiam nos confugere, quia in nobis nulla esse potest. Quod scitu in primis necessarium est; quia Christi justitia nonquam, vestiemur, nisi prius certo noverimus, propriae justitiae nihil nos habere.” In saying, however, that the proximate object and effect of a sacrifice is to expiate sin, and therefore that sin is thereby condemned and not destroyed, it is not forgotten that propitiation is the end of expiation; that our sins are atoned for by the blood of Christ, in order to our being restored to his image and favor. Justification is not on account of, or on the ground of sanctification, but it is in order to it and therefore the two are inseparable. The justified are always sanctified, And therefore, so far as the meaning is concerned, there is no objection to saying, that the condemnation of sin of which the apostle here speaks, includes the idea of its extirpation or destruction as a necessary consequence. But it is nevertheless important, not only to a due understanding of his argument, but also to the integrity of scriptural doctrine, to remember that the condemnation of sin in the person of Christ, expresses its expiation by his blood, and not the destruction of its power in us. It is Christ as the substitute of sinners, bearing the curse for them, that is here presented to our view. This even Olshausen admits, who says, “The conclusion of this verse expresses in the most decisive terms the vicarious (stellvertretenden) atoning death of the Savior.”

return to '

Romans 8:4

That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, etc. This verse expresses the design of God in sending his Son, and in condemning sin in the flesh. He did thus condemn it, ἵνα, in order that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled. The meaning, therefore, of this passage is determined by the view taken of Romans 8:3. If that verse means, that God, by sending his Son, destroyed sin in us, then of course this verse must mean, ‘He destroyed sin, in order that we should fulfill the law;” i.e. that we should be holy. But if Romans 8:3 is understood of the sacrificial death of Christ, and of the condemnation of sin in him as the substitute of sinners, then this verse must be understood of justification, and not of sanctification. He condemned sin, in order that the demands of the law might be satisfied. This is the view of the passage given even by the majority of the early Fathers, and by almost all evangelical interpreters, including the Reformers. “Qui intelligunt Spiritu Christi renovatos legem implere, commentum a sensu Pauli penitus alienum afferunt; nique enim eo usque proficiunt fideles, quamdia peregrinantur in mundo ut justificatio legis in illis plena sit, vel integra. Ergo hoc ad veniam referre necesse est; quia, dum nobis accepta fertur Christi obedientia, legi satisfactum est, ut pro justis censeamur.” That this is the true meaning of the passage appears not only from the connection and the course of the argument, but also from the following considerations:

1. It is consistent with the strict and natural meaning of the words. The word δικαίωμα, here used, means, first, something righteous, and then, second, something declared to be righteous and obligatory, an ordinance concept; and, third, a righteous decision, a just judgment, as when in Romans 1:29, the heathen are said to know the δικαίωμα, the righteousness judgment of God; and, fourth, the act of declaring righteous, justification. In this sense δικαίωμα is antithetical to κατάκριμα. The δικαίωμα τοῦ νόμου, therefore, may mean, the righteous requirement of the law, that which satisfies its demands. In strict accordance therefore with the sense of the words, we may explain the passage to mean, ‘that the demands of the law might be satisfied in us.’ That is, that we might be justified. Christ was condemned, that to us there might be no condemnation. He was made sin that we might be made righteousness, 2 Corinthians 5:21. Or, if we take δικαίωμα in the sense of (Rechtfertigungsurtheil) a declaration of righteousness, an act of justification, the same idea is expressed: ‘Sin was condemned in Christ, in order that the sentence of justification might be fulfilled, or carried into effect in us.’ This is the explanation which Eckermann, Köllner, Philippi, and other modern interpreters adopt.

2. The analogy of Scripture. To make this passage teach the doctrine of subjective justification, that we are freed from condemnation or delivered from the law by our inward sanctification, is to contradict the plain teaching of the Bible, and the whole drift and argument of this epistle.

3. The concluding clause of the verse, (who walk not after the flesh, etc.) demands the interpretation given above. In the other view of the passage, the latter clause is altogether unnecessary. Why should Paul say, that Christ died in order that they should be holy who are holy, i.e. those who walk not after the flesh? On the other hand, the second clause of the verse is specially pertinent, if the first treats of justification. The benefits of Christ’s death are experienced only by those who walk not after the flesh. The gospel is not antinomian. Those only are justified who are also sanctified. Holiness is the fruit and evidence of reconciliation with God. There is no condemnation to those who walk after the Spirit; and the righteousness of the law is fulfilled by those who walk after the Spirit. In both cases, the latter clause is designed to describe the class of persons who are entitled to appropriate to themselves the promise of justification in Christ.

4. Finally, as intimated in the above quotation from Calvin, it is not true that, the righteousness of the law, in the sense of complete obedience, is fulfilled in believes. The interpretation which makes the apostle say, that we are delivered from the law by the work of Christ, in order that the complete obedience which the law demands might be rendered by us, supposes what all Scripture and experience contradicts. For an exposition of the last clause of the verse, see Romans 8:1.

return to '

Romans 8:5

For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh. The immediate object of this and the following verse is to justify the necessity of limiting the blessings of Christ’s death, to those who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. The for, therefore, connects this verse, not with the main idea, but with the last clause of the pleading. Men must be holy, because sin is death, whereas holiness is life and peace. The necessity of spirituality, therefore lies in the very nature of things.

They who are after the flesh, those who are in the flesh, the carnal, are expressions of like import, and describe those who are governed by the flesh, or by their nature considered as corrupt. The corresponding series, they who are after the Spirit, who are in the Spirit, the spiritual, describe those who are under the government of the Holy Ghost. Of the former class it is said they mind the things of the flesh, of the latter, they mind the things of the Spirit. The word φρονεῖν is derived from φρήν, which is used for the seat of all mental affections and faculties, and therefore φρονέω has a wide meaning. It expresses any form of mental activity, any exercise of the intellect, will, or affections. They mind (φρονοῦσιν,) therefore, means, they make the object of attention, desire, and pursuit. The things of the flesh, are the objects on which their hearts are set, and to which their lives are devoted. Things of the flesh are not merely sensual things, but all things which do not belong to the category of the things of the Spirit. Compare Matthew 16:23, οῦ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, thou savorest not the things of God. Philippians 3:19, οἱ τὰ ἐπίγεια φρονοῦντες. Colossians 3:2 etc. The English word mind is used with much the same latitude. The idea evidently is, that the objects of attention, desire, and pursuit, to the carnal, are corrupt and worldly; while to the spiritual, they are the things which the Spirit proposes and approves.

return to '

Romans 8:6

For to be carnally minded is death. The γάρ here is by many taken as a mere particle of transition, equivalent to but. ‘But to be carnally minded is death.’ The utter incompatibility between the indulgence of sin and a state of salvation is thus clearly expressed. It is impossible that justification should be disconnected with sanctification, because a sinful and carnal state of mind is death. It is better, however, to take γάρ in its usual sense of for. The connection may then be with Romans 8:4, so that Romans 8:5 and Romans 8:6 are coordinate, Romans 8:6 presenting an additional reason why believers do not walk after the flesh. They do not thus walk, for to do so is death. Or, the connection is with Romans 8:5. Justification is limited to the holy, for to live after the flesh is death. The phrase φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός is substantially of the same import with φρονεῖν τὰ τῆς σαρκός, the minding the things of the flesh. It is thus active in its signification. It is, however, more in accordance with the proper signification of the word to understand it as expressing a state of the mind. This is implied in the English version, to be carnally minded. The idea is not merely that the actual seeking the things of the flesh leads to death; but that a carnal state of mind, which reveals itself in the desire and pursuit of carnal objects, is death. And by death is of course meant spiritual death, the absence and the opposite of spiritual life. It includes alienation from God, unholiness, and misery. On the other hand, the φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος is that state of mind which is produced by the Spirit, and which reveals itself in the desire and pursuit of the things of the Spirit. This state of mind is life and peace. Therein consists the true life and blessedness of the soul. This being the case, there can be no such thing as salvation in sin; no possibility of justification without sanctification. If partakers of the benefits of Christ’s death, we are partakers of his life. If we died with him, we live with him. This is pertinent to the apostle’s main object in this chapter, which is to show that believers never can be condemned. They are not only delivered from the law, and justified by the blood of Christ, but they are partakers of his life. They have the φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος which is life and peace.

return to '

Romans 8:7

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God. This is the reason why the φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός is death. It is in its nature opposed to God, who is the life of the soul. His favor is life, and therefore opposition to him is death. The carnal mind is enmity to God, for it is not subject to the law of God. The law of God, however, is the revelation of his nature, and therefore opposition to the law, is opposition to God. This opposition on the part of the carnal mind is not casual, occasional, or in virtue of a mere purpose. It arises out of its very nature. It is not only not subject to the law of God, but it cannot be. It has no ability to change itself. Otherwise it would not be death. It is precisely because of this utter impotency of the carnal mind, or unrenewed heart, to change its own nature, that it involves the hopelessness which the word death implies. Compare 1 Corinthians 2:14, where the same truth is asserted: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God — neither can he know them.” “Nec enim potest. En,” says Calvin, “liberi arbitrii facultas, quam satis evehere sophistae nequent. Certe Paulus disertis verbis hic affirmat quod ipsi pleno ore detestantur, nobis esse impossibile subjicere legis obedientiae … Procul igitur sit a Christiano pectore illa de arbitrii libertate gentilis philosophia. Servum peccati se quisque, ut re vera est, agnoscat, quo per Christi gratiam manu missus liberetur; alia libertate prosus stultum est gloriari.” To the same effect the modern German commentators, whether mystic, rationalistic, or evangelical. “No man,” says Olshausen, “can free himself from himself:” “Von sich selbst kann sich keiner selbst losmachen, es muss eine höhere Liebe kommen, die ihn mehr anzieht, als sein Ich.” “The will itself is fallen away from God,” says Baumgarten-Crusius. And the evangelical Philippi says: “This verse is a strong argument against the doctrine of the so-called liberum arbitrium of the natural man. For this carnal state of mind, which cannot subject itself to the will of God, it is not produced by any act; it constitutes, according to the apostle’s doctrine, the original nature of man in its present or fallen state.”

return to '

Romans 8:8

The necessary consequence of this opposition of a mind governed by the flesh, towards God, is that these who are in this state are the objects of the divine displeasure. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. To be in the flesh, as before remarked, is to be under the government of the flesh, or corrupt nature, to be destitute of the grace of God. It is an expression applied to all unrenewed persons, as those who are not in the flesh are in the Spirit.

Cannot please God. Ἀρέσκειν τινί generally means to be pleasing, or acceptable to any one; Matthew 14:6; 1 Corinthians 7:32; Galatians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:15. Not to be pleasing to God, is to be the objects of his displeasure. Enmity towards God (ἔχθρα εἰς Θεόν) has its necessary consequence, subjection to the enmity of God(ἔχθρα Θεοῦ.) The apostle’s immediate purpose is to show, that to be carnally-minded is death. It must be so, for it is enmity towards God. But those who hate God are the objects of his displeasure; and to be the objects of the wrath of God, is perdition. Surely, then, to be carnally minded is death. In Romans 8:9-11, the apostle applies to his readers what he had just said, and shows how it is that (φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος,) to be spiritually minded, is life and peace.

return to '