Who is Under the Law?

HIM said:

Amen Studyman, it is the context in which chapter seven is to be understood. As it is written, How can we who are dead to sin live any longer therein? For as many of us who were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death. And like Christ, we are risen with Him by the glory of the Father. Knowing our old man is crucified with Him that the body of sin be destroyed that hence forth we serve not sin. For that he that is dead is freed from sin and have risen with Him becoming servants of righteousness being alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Rom 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
Rom 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

Click to expand...

You're mixing law(OT) vs Grace, "letter" vs "Spirit", works vs Faith together, it's two different ways in its fulfilment. 2Timothy 2:15..."rightly dividing the Word of Truth"..

pasifika said:

You're

Click to expand...

You are? My turn to say what you are doing?

HIM said:

You are? My turn to say what you are doing?

Click to expand...

You have the right to voice your opinion.

pasifika said:

You have the right to voice your opinion.

Click to expand...

Not concerning Spiritual things. The following cut and paste is the post you responded too when you stated "You're mixing law (OT) vs Grace, "letter" vs "Spirit", works vs Faith together, it's two different ways in its fulfilment. 2Timothy 2:15..."rightly dividing the Word of Truth"..


Nothing of the sort was done in the following. If you think that was done elsewhere please show and we will show your error.

"Amen Studyman, it is the context in which chapter seven is to be understood. As it is written, How can we who are dead to sin live any longer therein? For as many of us who were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death. And like Christ, we are risen with Him by the glory of the Father. Knowing our old man is crucified with Him that the body of sin be destroyed that hence forth we serve not sin. For that he that is dead is freed from sin and have risen with Him becoming servants of righteousness being alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Rom 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
Rom 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness."

pasifika said:

Hi Studyman, it is impossible for the flesh not to continue in sinning because Sin rule the flesh.

Click to expand...

I have heard this teaching from "many" who come in Christ's Name. But it implies that both the Son of God, and God Himself are lying to mankind. The serpent used the exact same tactic on Eve. That is, to promote the mindset that God doesn't really know what HE is doing and tells men to "do" things they have no capacity to "do".

This is a strong illusion and has been promoted since the beginning by men who quote "Some" of God's Word but is not true according to the Actual scriptures. It seems prudent to point this out though most will not consider.

pasifika said:

So in trying to follow the letter as a way not to continue in sin is a great misunderstanding.

Click to expand...

To follow the "Letter" is for all mankind to die in their sins. You have been wrongly convinced that "Following the Letter" means to obey God. Paul never even implies such a thing, but "many" who come in Christ's Name who Jesus Himself warned about, teach this falsehood every day and have since Eve was convinced, "You shall surely not die". Because men have been convinced by these "other" religious voices that they are all set regardless of what God actually teaches, they believe the lies being taught to them. Paul talks about this.

2 Thess. 2: 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Believing God lied to men, is not Glorifying God, "AS GOD". Paul also speaks to this in Romans 1. The problem is, most men believe this applies to the other guy, never themselves. God's Sabbaths were made in part, to prevent us from being deceiving ourselves.

IS. 58: 7: "and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?"

pasifika said:

You need to know the Spirit it's "spiritual knowledge first" You need the Spirit to give you Gift (s) to begin your journey to rid off sin in your heart.

Click to expand...

God gives HIS Spirit to those who obey Him. But again, most men really don't believe Peter. Acts. 5:32

pasifika said:

As Paul stated, Romans 7:6 "...we serve God NOT in "old way" of the "written code or letter" BUT the "new way of the SPIRIT". This is as clear as a day..

Click to expand...

Like the Holy scriptures teach, to "Serve" in the oldness of the Letter, is to die in our trespasses and sins. The deceiver Jesus and Paul warns about, convinces people that honoring and respecting God in humble obedience, is "Serving in the Oldness of the Letter". This deception is easily exposed 4ever by listening to the Christ of the Bible.

Ez. 18: 31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

But again, many men who call Jesus Lord, Lord, really don't believe in this Christ.

pasifika said:

Don't mix the way of the "letter" with the "way of the Spirit" they are separate in the way they are accomplish.

Click to expand...

Yes, to follow the "Letter" is to die in our sins. But God, His Son, and His "instruction in Righteousness" are all Spiritual. If a man hears the sayings of this Christ, and "Does" them, they will stand "In that day". Thos who hear Him, but "doeth not" His sayings, they will fall and great will be their fall. The Jesus of the Bible teaches us this in Matt. 7.

pasifika said:

That is why Paul writes it this way in Romans 7:6.. "to serve God in "New way" of the Spirit NOT in "old way" of the "written code" or "letter".

Click to expand...

Yes, we rejected God's Laws, rejected His Word's, despised HIS Judgments, polluted His Sabbaths, and our behavior caused our death. But if we "Repent", and follow the instructions of the Christ of the Bible, we can be redeemed, not by following a "LAW", because there is no Law that can give life. As the Christ teaches.

Is. 48: 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. 17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go. 18 O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea:

But by "Putting on the New Man" as the Christ "of the Bible" taught Paul.

Eph. 4: 22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; 23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

The deceiver would have us believe that the Christ of the Bible does this all for you. And this preaching is a great marketing strategy for the religious businesses of this world.

But it's not what the Holy scriptures teach.

Post 1 in a series.

In Romans 7:6, what does Paul mean when he refers to being released from “the Law”. I believe that respecting context forces us to a single conclusion: Paul is saying we are released from any obligations to follow the law Moses. Consider how Paul starts:

Or do you not know, brothers and sisters (for I am speaking to those who know the [a]Law), that the [b]Law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?

This is clearly the law of Moses.

Next, Paul launches in to his famous marriage metaphor:

For the married woman is bound by law to her [c]husband as long as he is alive; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law [d]concerning the husband. 3 So then, if while her husband is alive she [e]gives herself to another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress if she [f]gives herself to another man.

What is “the law” here? Is it the Law of Moses? I am not sure, but the key point is that it for our purposes, it does not matter. Note the “for” at the beginning – a clear indication that what follows is a metaphor: Paul is using the marriage image to say something about the nature of our relationship to the Law of Moses.

This needs to be underscored as I am sure those with motives to suggest that the “law” we are released from in verse 6 is something other than the Law of Moses will want to cast some doubt here. Remember: in verse 1, Paul asks about the jurisdiction of the Law of Moses. He then immediately writes “for……” and launches into the marriage metaphor. The “for” gives us no option than to understand that the marriage metaphor serves to elaborate our relation to the Law of Moses.

I do not want to seem to overstating the obvious, but this point, which I suggest will be obvious to anyone without an agenda, needs to be stressed: No one in their right mind would start with a comment about our relation to the Law of Moses and then use the “for” construction to introduce a metaphor that was not, in fact, all about the Law of Moses. That is simply not how the English works. If you have made a statement X, then write “for……”, you are, by simple necessity of the what the word “for” means, amplifying on what X means. So the marriage metaphor has to be all about our relation to the Law of Moses.

And what does the metaphor say? It tells us about a woman who was joined to one man, then that man dies, and she is free to be joined to another man.

The objective reader cannot help but concede that this model coheres perfectly with the proposal that Paul is about to tell us that we have been fully released from our obligation to the Law of Moses, just as the woman was released from her obligation to her now deceased husband, and now joined to another partner – the Holy Spirit.

By contrast, notice what those who claim verse 6 says we are released from the “law of sin” have to say – but of course they will hide this from you – about the metaphor. To respect the structure of the metaphor – where the woman is released from an obligation - they have to say that we are released from an obligation to the law of sin.

Which is, of course, nonsense.

More later.

Post 2 in a series addressing exactly what law we are released from in Romans 7:6. In post 1, we saw that Paul introduces the chapter by talking about the jurisdiction of the law of Moses. He then uses an analogy to the marriage to elaborate. The point being that, thus far, no “law of sin” is evidenced anywhere in Paul’s argument. Now we get this:

Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you also were put to death in regard to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

What is this “law” that we are now “dead” to? Clearly, the law of Moses! Remember, the marriage metaphor just finished in the preceding verse is inarguably about the Law of Moses for reasons set forth in post 1. Just as the wife has been sundered from her first husband by his death so, too, have we been rendered dead to the Law.

Now people will likely insist that Paul is talking about how we are dead to the “law of sin”. And here we encounter the cynical “bait and switch” - trying to hide what context is clearly showing us – that Paul is addressing release from the Law of Moses – by bringing up something else that we are indeed released from. That is, the law of sin. Yes, we are released from the law of sin. But that is clearly not what Paul is talking about above – he will not even introduce the law of sin until well after verse 6. We are released from both – do not be tricked into thinking that any reference to release from a “law” has to refer to release from the law of sin.

Then we are told this:

5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were brought to light by the Law, were at work in [g]the parts of our body to bear fruit for death.

Again, the evidence is overwhelming – Paul is solely focused on the Law of Moses in verses 1 through 5. Even we forget verses 1 through 4, we know that Paul is referring to the Law of Moses here in verse 5 – does the “law of sin” bring our sinful passions “to light”? Of course not! As my opponents argue themselves, it is role of the Law of Moses to shine light on our sins.

But, just to be charitable, let us allow for the possibility that Paul has, with no indication whatsoever, suddenly shifted to the law of sin and his statement about “sinful passions being brought to light by the Law” is really a clunky, clumsy, misleading attempt to talk about sinful passions that arise from a “law of sin”. Of course, to concede this is to concede that Paul is an incompetent writer – when you say sin is “brought to light” by a law, you are saying sin is revealed by the law, not that it is the cause for the sin. But, let’s forget all this and tentatively proceed under the assumption that Paul is talking about a law of sin here.

Then we get verse 6:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the [h]Spirit and not in oldness of the letter

If verse 5 is really about the “law of sin”, despite the contrivances one is forced into to even generate such an hypothesis, then, yes, the “law” we are released from in verse 6 would seem to be the “law of sin”. But then, how do we explain the second half where Paul clearly says we no longer serve the Law of Moses?! Is anyone going to seriously suggest that that “the letter” is not a reference to the Law of Moses?

How does the assumption that the "law" we are released from in verse 6 is the law of sin hold up in light of what Paul goes on to say? Well, here is verse 7a:

What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? Far from it! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except [j]through the Law….

Think of what you are being asked to believe. You are being asked to believe that Paul is raising the question “is the law of sin sin?” since, as my opponents are claiming that the “law” we are released from in verse 6 is the law of sin. That would be a patently stupid question since the answer is obvious – of course it is.

Let us be clear: it is nonsense to suggest that “the law” in verse 6 is the law of sin since Paul immediately raises the question as to whether that law itself is sin. And of course it is sin if, indeed, Paul is talking about a law of sin – it is a dumb question that needs not be asked. Of course, we all know what actually makes sense here: the “law” we are released from is, in fact, the Law of Moses. In that case, it makes perfect sense for Paul to ask whether the Law of Moses is sin. Why, does it make sense? Precisely because in the second half of verse 6 (if not also in the first half!) he clearly says we no longer need the law. Such a declaration would quite naturally give rise to the possibility that Paul is saying that we no longer serve the Law of Moses because it is bad. And Paul has an answer – no, we no longer need it for an entirely different reason (that I won't get into in this post).

Let’s be clear: the contextual arguments are overwhelming – it is the Law of Moses from which we are released in verse 6. You will see zero arguments from my opponents that systematically address the local context in detail as I have done in these 2 posts. Why no such arguments? The answer is obvious – any attempt to argue that context says verse 6 describes release from a law of sin is torpedoed in many different ways as I believe I have just shown. So we hear crickets.

The argument that verse 6 is about release from the “law of sin” rests entirely on a simple, yet deceptive diversion – yes, we are indeed released from a law of sin, but that is clearly not the law Paul is talking about in Romans 7:6

What is sin? We should not live with sin, that we should know. It is what God has shown, which is contrary to what God says to do, and it is what God says not to do. The commandments God spoke directly are for such. The Torah and the law from God are not in the past. Christ is effective for the priesthood, sacrifice that is needed, and the way for being cleansed in the way needed to be before God. It works for those who come to Christ and are then in Christ, it applies with the essential faith, with God's grace. But what about those who do not come to Christ and are not in Christ? They are subject to judgment without Christ then, penalties in the law represent that. We can see things that were not so in the beginning, the things then being right.

expos4ever said:

Post 2 in a series addressing exactly what law we are released from in Romans 7:6. In post 1, we saw that Paul introduces the chapter by talking about the jurisdiction of the law of Moses. He then uses an analogy to the marriage to elaborate. The point being that, thus far, no “law of sin” is evidenced anywhere in Paul’s argument. Now we get this:

Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you also were put to death in regard to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

What is this “law” that we are now “dead” to? Clearly, the law of Moses!

Click to expand...

Just carry on reading, in the next five verses Paul gives an example of the law he has been writing about in Rom7:4-6:

What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet/one of the Ten Commandments

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. verses7-11

expos4ever said:

Post 1 in a series.

In Romans 7:6, what does Paul mean when he refers to being released from “the Law”. I believe that respecting context forces us to a single conclusion: Paul is saying we are released from any obligations to follow the law Moses. Consider how Paul starts:

Click to expand...

In Romans 7-8:2, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the Law of the Spirit has free us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). So verses that refer to something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in doing should to be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin.

For example, in Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over him and it would be absurd for Paul to delight in sin having dominion over him, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and sin Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under the Law of God. In Romans 6:16, Paul contrasted these two directions by saying that we are slaves to the one that we obey, either the law of sin, which leads to death or of obedience to the Law of God, which leads to righteousness. In Romans 6:17-23, we are no longer to present ourselves as slaves of impurity, lawlessness, and sin, but are now to present ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification, and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so being a doer of the Law of God is His gift of eternal life. In Romans 7:6, it would also be absurd to interpret as if Paul delighted in being held captive to sin, but rather it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive (Romans 7:23). If we were released from any obligation to follow the Law of God, then we would be free to become doers of what it reveals to be sin, which is the opposite of what Paul is saying in this passage.

expos4ever said:

Or do you not know, brothers and sisters (for I am speaking to those who know the [a]Law), that the [b]Law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?

This is clearly the law of Moses.

Next, Paul launches in to his famous marriage metaphor:

For the married woman is bound by law to her [c]husband as long as he is alive; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law [d]concerning the husband. 3 So then, if while her husband is alive she [e]gives herself to another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress if she [f]gives herself to another man.

What is “the law” here? Is it the Law of Moses? I am not sure, but the key point is that it for our purposes, it does not matter. Note the “for” at the beginning – a clear indication that what follows is a metaphor: Paul is using the marriage image to say something about the nature of our relationship to the Law of Moses.

This needs to be underscored as I am sure those with motives to suggest that the “law” we are released from in verse 6 is something other than the Law of Moses will want to cast some doubt here. Remember: in verse 1, Paul asks about the jurisdiction of the Law of Moses. He then immediately writes “for……” and launches into the marriage metaphor. The “for” gives us no option than to understand that the marriage metaphor serves to elaborate our relation to the Law of Moses.

I do not want to seem to overstating the obvious, but this point, which I suggest will be obvious to anyone without an agenda, needs to be stressed: No one in their right mind would start with a comment about our relation to the Law of Moses and then use the “for” construction to introduce a metaphor that was not, in fact, all about the Law of Moses. That is simply not how the English works. If you have made a statement X, then write “for……”, you are, by simple necessity of the what the word “for” means, amplifying on what X means. So the marriage metaphor has to be all about our relation to the Law of Moses.

And what does the metaphor say? It tells us about a woman who was joined to one man, then that man dies, and she is free to be joined to another man.

The objective reader cannot help but concede that this model coheres perfectly with the proposal that Paul is about to tell us that we have been fully released from our obligation to the Law of Moses, just as the woman was released from her obligation to her now deceased husband, and now joined to another partner – the Holy Spirit.

By contrast, notice what those who claim verse 6 says we are released from the “law of sin” have to say – but of course they will hide this from you – about the metaphor. To respect the structure of the metaphor – where the woman is released from an obligation - they have to say that we are released from an obligation to the law of sin.

Which is, of course, nonsense.

More later.

Click to expand...

In the context of Romans 6, you are essentially interpreting Romans 7:1-6 as saying that we need to die to and be released from God's gift of eternal life in Christ. At no point was the woman released from any part of her obligation to obey the Law of God, and if she were to get married to another man after the death of her first husband, then she would still be obligated to refrain from committing adultery, so there is nothing that leads to the conclusion that we are likewise released from our obligation to obey the Law of God. It would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:4 as referring to to the Law of God as if they way to become unified with Jesus is by dying to what he taught or as if the way to become united with God's Word made flesh is by dying to God's Word, or as if the way to bear fruit for God is by dying to His instructions for how to bear fruit for Him, but rather we need to die to a law that was hindering us from being unified with Christ and from bearing fruit for God, namely the law of sin.

In Romans 6:1-2, Paul said that by no means are we are to continue to live in sin that grace may abound, which the opposite of saying that we have been released from our obligation to the Law of God. In Romans 6:3-7, we know that our old self was crucified with Jesus in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing so the we would no longer be enslaved to sin, for one who has died has been set free from sin. So again we are not being set free from the Law of God, but rather we are being set free from the law of sin. In Romans 6:8-10, now if we have died with Christ we believe that we will also live with him and we know that Christ being raised from the death will never die again, death no longer has dominion over him, for the death he died he died to sin, one for all, but the life he lives to God. So again it is sin and death that had dominion over us that we died to, not the Law of God, but rather we are now to live for God in obedience to His law, but you interpret Romans 7:1-6 the other way around. In Romans 6:11-13, So we also must considers ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ and we should not present ourselves to sin as instruments for unrighteousness but present ourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to live and make ourselves to God as instruments for righteousness, so we need to die to the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of God, not the other way around.

expos4ever said:

Post 2 in a series addressing exactly what law we are released from in Romans 7:6. In post 1, we saw that Paul introduces the chapter by talking about the jurisdiction of the law of Moses. He then uses an analogy to the marriage to elaborate. The point being that, thus far, no “law of sin” is evidenced anywhere in Paul’s argument. Now we get this:

Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you also were put to death in regard to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

What is this “law” that we are now “dead” to? Clearly, the law of Moses! Remember, the marriage metaphor just finished in the preceding verse is inarguably about the Law of Moses for reasons set forth in post 1. Just as the wife has been sundered from her first husband by his death so, too, have we been rendered dead to the Law.

Now people will likely insist that Paul is talking about how we are dead to the “law of sin”. And here we encounter the cynical “bait and switch” - trying to hide what context is clearly showing us – that Paul is addressing release from the Law of Moses – by bringing up something else that we are indeed released from. That is, the law of sin. Yes, we are released from the law of sin. But that is clearly not what Paul is talking about above – he will not even introduce the law of sin until well after verse 6. We are released from both – do not be tricked into thinking that any reference to release from a “law” has to refer to release from the law of sin.

Then we are told this:

5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were brought to light by the Law, were at work in [g]the parts of our body to bear fruit for death.

Again, the evidence is overwhelming – Paul is solely focused on the Law of Moses in verses 1 through 5. Even we forget verses 1 through 4, we know that Paul is referring to the Law of Moses here in verse 5 – does the “law of sin” bring our sinful passions “to light”? Of course not! As my opponents argue themselves, it is role of the Law of Moses to shine light on our sins.

But, just to be charitable, let us allow for the possibility that Paul has, with no indication whatsoever, suddenly shifted to the law of sin and his statement about “sinful passions being brought to light by the Law” is really a clunky, clumsy, misleading attempt to talk about sinful passions that arise from a “law of sin”. Of course, to concede this is to concede that Paul is an incompetent writer – when you say sin is “brought to light” by a law, you are saying sin is revealed by the law, not that it is the cause for the sin. But, let’s forget all this and tentatively proceed under the assumption that Paul is talking about a law of sin here.

Then we get verse 6:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the [h]Spirit and not in oldness of the letter

If verse 5 is really about the “law of sin”, despite the contrivances one is forced into to even generate such an hypothesis, then, yes, the “law” we are released from in verse 6 would seem to be the “law of sin”. But then, how do we explain the second half where Paul clearly says we no longer serve the Law of Moses?! Is anyone going to seriously suggest that that “the letter” is not a reference to the Law of Moses?

How does the assumption that the "law" we are released from in verse 6 is the law of sin hold up in light of what Paul goes on to say? Well, here is verse 7a:

What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? Far from it! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except [j]through the Law….

Think of what you are being asked to believe. You are being asked to believe that Paul is raising the question “is the law of sin sin?” since, as my opponents are claiming that the “law” we are released from in verse 6 is the law of sin. That would be a patently stupid question since the answer is obvious – of course it is.

Let us be clear: it is nonsense to suggest that “the law” in verse 6 is the law of sin since Paul immediately raises the question as to whether that law itself is sin. And of course it is sin if, indeed, Paul is talking about a law of sin – it is a dumb question that needs not be asked. Of course, we all know what actually makes sense here: the “law” we are released from is, in fact, the Law of Moses. In that case, it makes perfect sense for Paul to ask whether the Law of Moses is sin. Why, does it make sense? Precisely because in the second half of verse 6 (if not also in the first half!) he clearly says we no longer need the law. Such a declaration would quite naturally give rise to the possibility that Paul is saying that we no longer serve the Law of Moses because it is bad. And Paul has an answer – no, we no longer need it for an entirely different reason (that I won't get into in this post).

Let’s be clear: the contextual arguments are overwhelming – it is the Law of Moses from which we are released in verse 6. You will see zero arguments from my opponents that systematically address the local context in detail as I have done in these 2 posts. Why no such arguments? The answer is obvious – any attempt to argue that context says verse 6 describes release from a law of sin is torpedoed in many different ways as I believe I have just shown. So we hear crickets.

The argument that verse 6 is about release from the “law of sin” rests entirely on a simple, yet deceptive diversion – yes, we are indeed released from a law of sin, but that is clearly not the law Paul is talking about in Romans 7:6

Click to expand...

In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul said that he served the Law of God with his mind in contrast with saying that he served the law of sin with his flesh and he said that the Law of the Spirit has freed us from the law of sin and death, so that is directly connected with how we should interpret what we have been freed from in Romans 7:6. Moreover, in Romans 8:3-7, Christ freed us from sin so that we might be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Law of God and Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. In Romans 7:7, Paul said that the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is precisely so that we should not misunderstand the Romans 7:4-6 as speaking about the Law of God. God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but rather the Law of God is His instructions for how to embody His character traits and His character traits are the fruits of the Spirit, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it (Ezekiel 36:26-27). The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), which he embodied through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of what can equivalently described either as walking in the Spirit or as walking in obedience to the Law of God. The greatest two commandments or the Law of God are to love God and our neighbor and love is one of the fruits of the Spirit, it doesn't make any sense to interpret this passage as saying that we need to be released from God's instructions for how to love in order to be free to love, but rather in order to be free to love we need to be related from a law that was hindering us from following those instructions, namely the law of sin.

Soyeong said:

In Romans 7-8:2, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the Law of the Spirit has free us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). So verses that refer to something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in doing should to be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin.

For example, in Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over him and it would be absurd for Paul to delight in sin having dominion over him, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and sin Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under the Law of God. In Romans 6:16, Paul contrasted these two directions by saying that we are slaves to the one that we obey, either the law of sin, which leads to death or of obedience to the Law of God, which leads to righteousness. In Romans 6:17-23, we are no longer to present ourselves as slaves of impurity, lawlessness, and sin, but are now to present ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification, and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so being a doer of the Law of God is His gift of eternal life. In Romans 7:6, it would also be absurd to interpret as if Paul delighted in being held captive to sin, but rather it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive (Romans 7:23). If we were released from any obligation to follow the Law of God, then we would be free to become doers of what it reveals to be sin, which is the opposite of what Paul is saying in this passage.


In the context of Romans 6, you are essentially interpreting Romans 7:1-6 as saying that we need to die to and be released from God's gift of eternal life in Christ. At no point was the woman released from any part of her obligation to obey the Law of God, and if she were to get married to another man after the death of her first husband, then she would still be obligated to refrain from committing adultery, so there is nothing that leads to the conclusion that we are likewise released from our obligation to obey the Law of God. It would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:4 as referring to to the Law of God as if they way to become unified with Jesus is by dying to what he taught or as if the way to become united with God's Word made flesh is by dying to God's Word, or as if the way to bear fruit for God is by dying to His instructions for how to bear fruit for Him, but rather we need to die to a law that was hindering us from being unified with Christ and from bearing fruit for God, namely the law of sin.

In Romans 6:1-2, Paul said that by no means are we are to continue to live in sin that grace may abound, which the opposite of saying that we have been released from our obligation to the Law of God. In Romans 6:3-7, we know that our old self was crucified with Jesus in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing so the we would no longer be enslaved to sin, for one who has died has been set free from sin. So again we are not being set free from the Law of God, but rather we are being set free from the law of sin. In Romans 6:8-10, now if we have died with Christ we believe that we will also live with him and we know that Christ being raised from the death will never die again, death no longer has dominion over him, for the death he died he died to sin, one for all, but the life he lives to God. So again it is sin and death that had dominion over us that we died to, not the Law of God, but rather we are now to live for God in obedience to His law, but you interpret Romans 7:1-6 the other way around. In Romans 6:11-13, So we also must considers ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ and we should not present ourselves to sin as instruments for unrighteousness but present ourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to live and make ourselves to God as instruments for righteousness, so we need to die to the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of God, not the other way around.


In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul said that he served the Law of God with his mind in contrast with saying that he served the law of sin with his flesh and he said that the Law of the Spirit has freed us from the law of sin and death, so that is directly connected with how we should interpret what we have been freed from in Romans 7:6. Moreover, in Romans 8:3-7, Christ freed us from sin so that we might be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Law of God and Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. In Romans 7:7, Paul said that the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is precisely so that we should not misunderstand the Romans 7:4-6 as speaking about the Law of God. God has not commanded anything that is not in accordance with walking in the Spirit, but rather the Law of God is His instructions for how to embody His character traits and His character traits are the fruits of the Spirit, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it (Ezekiel 36:26-27). The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), which he embodied through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of what can equivalently described either as walking in the Spirit or as walking in obedience to the Law of God. The greatest two commandments or the Law of God are to love God and our neighbor and love is one of the fruits of the Spirit, it doesn't make any sense to interpret this passage as saying that we need to be released from God's instructions for how to love in order to be free to love, but rather in order to be free to love we need to be related from a law that was hindering us from following those instructions, namely the law of sin.

Click to expand...

Do you think Paul was speaking of his christian life in Rom7:14-24? The person is sold as a slave to sin/transgressing God's laws. Im not sure how that would fit in with your beliefs, if you do indeed believe Paul the christian is being written about

under grace1 said:

Do you think Paul was speaking of his christian life in Rom7:14-24? The person is sold as a slave to sin/transgressing God's laws. Im not sure how that would fit in with your beliefs, if you do indeed believe Paul the christian is being written about

Click to expand...

I think that it would make sense if he was speaking about his life before becoming a Christian.

Soyeong said:

I think that it would make sense if he was speaking about his life before becoming a Christian.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that, I agree with you. The person in those verses is sold as a slave to sin. Paul told the Romans in the previous chapter they USED to be slaves to sin. So, if Paul is writing of his Christian life, he would be writing to people living holier lives than he

under grace1 said:

Thank you for that, I agree with you. The person in those verses is sold as a slave to sin. Paul told the Romans in the previous chapter they USED to be slaves to sin. So, if Paul is writing of his Christian life, he would be writing to people living holier lives than he

Click to expand...

Agreed. It is by the Law of God that we have knowledge of what sin is, so someone who has been set free from being under it has become a slave to sin.

Soyeong said:

Agreed. It is by the Law of God that we have knowledge of what sin is, so someone who has been set free from being under it has become a slave to sin.

Click to expand...

Have they?
For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. Rom6:14

under grace1 said:

Have they?
For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. Rom6:14

Click to expand...

Indeed. The Law of God is where holiness, righteousness, and goodness are our master (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin is where sin is our master, so if we have been set free from being under the Law of God, then sin has become our master, but if we have been set free from the law of sin, then sin no longer is our master. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under the Law of God. In Romans 6:16, Paul contrasted these two directions by saying that we are slaves to the one that we obey, eater the law of sin, which leads to death, or obedience to the Law of God, which leads to righteousness.

Soyeong said:

Indeed. The Law of God is where holiness, righteousness, and goodness are our master (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin is where sin is our master, so if we have been set free from being under the Law of God, then sin has become our master, but if we have been set free from the law of sin, then sin no longer is our master. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under the Law of God. In Romans 6:16, Paul contrasted these two directions by saying that we are slaves to the one that we obey, eater the law of sin, which leads to death, or obedience to the Law of God, which leads to righteousness.

Click to expand...

Its a pity you do not understand Paul's core message. The way to have victory over sin is by not living under the law, living under the law is living under righteousness of obeying it.
Of course, Paul's message is a spiritual message, and can only be understood through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A simple old covenant type message, would not require being led in to truth by the Spirit.

under grace1 said:

Its a pity you do not understand Paul's core message. The way to have victory over sin is by not living under the law, living under the law is living under righteousness of obeying it.
Of course, Paul's message is a spiritual message, and can only be understood through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A simple old covenant type message, would not require being led in to truth by the Spirit.

Click to expand...

If we were not under the Law of God, then we would have no obligation to refrain from doing what it reveals to be sin, which is the opposite of having victory over sin. In Romans 8:4-7, Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God, so those who walk in the Spirit are under the Law of God. The Spirit has the role of leading us in truth (John 16:13), the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Law of God (Ezekiel 36:26-27), and the Law of God is truth (Psalms 119:142).

Soyeong said:

If we were not under the Law of God, then we would have no obligation to refrain from doing what it reveals to be sin, which is the opposite of having victory over sin.

Click to expand...

But Paul says we are not under the law:
For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! Rom6:14&15

To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 1Cor9:20

​

Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. Gal3:23

So, if we are not under the law, why do we not have a licence to transgress it?

​

under grace1 said:

But Paul says we are not under the law:
For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! Rom6:14&15

To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 1Cor9:20

​

Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. Gal3:23

So, if we are not under the law, why do we not have a licence to transgress it?

Click to expand...

While I agree that we are not under the law, Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God such as the law of sin and works of the law, so we should be careful to discern which law he was referring to, and I made the case in post #570 for way I think that Romans 6:14 should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin rather than the Law of God. In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so the has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, and which is the reason why Paul said in Romans 6:15 that those are who under grace are not permitted to transgress it. Likewise, in Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the Law of God is to graciously teach us how to know God and Jesus, which is His gift of eternal life (John 17:3).

In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said in a parallel statement that we are not outside the Law of God but under the Law of Christ, so he equated the two.
The reason why the Law of God leads us to Christ is because it is God's instructions for how to know him, but the reason that it leads us to Christ is not so that we can reject everything that he taught and go back to becoming doers of what it reveals to be wickedness. The fact that we do not have a license to transgress the Law of God means that we are under it.