Romans 6 – 8 and Galatians – The case against Christian legalism

 I have presented these posts on Romans 6 - 8 and Galatians because I wanted to look at how the Apostle Paul exhorted Christians to live a godly life day-by-day. It soon became clear that Paul was no advocate of Christian legalism. Although he may have the ultimate aims and purposes of Divine law in mind – righteousness and cleanliness - he does not refer Christians to Covenant law as a means of living a godly life, just the opposite in fact. He argues that the law reveals our self-forfeiture and that the fleshly impulses within the Christian’s physical body take hold of the law and use it’s written codes as a springboard to bring themselves to completion in speech and behaviour. The law is good – it is our flesh that is the problem. Thus there is nothing good in our flesh and he calls our physical body ‘a body of death’ from which Christians will ultimately be released. Legalism leads to ‘deadness’, to criticism and judgement of other Christians, and potentially to a denial of the gospel. It leads to discouragement and a sense of failure.

Paul argues that we cannot deliver ourselves from divine judicial condemnation. Salvation is a free gift of God from start to finish. Whilst we are helpless God brings forth those He has selected by means of the Messiah and the set-apart Breath. As part of this process, the Christian’s ‘old formation’ or ‘old self’ or ‘natural earthy, sensuous self’ is crucified with the Messiah and they become a ‘new formation’ or ‘new self’, which Christians are encouraged to ‘put on’ or clothe themselves with. Possessing the indwelling of the set-apart Breath they are exhorted to walk around within the sphere of Breath. Paul’s emphasis is on Christians using their enlightened and illuminated mind that is enabled to perceive and embrace unseen realities, to reason things through to their proper conclusion. In other words he uses theological teaching. Then he says, exercise enlightened self-control and live life day-by-day in a way that is consistent with God’s calling and their enlightened understanding. The locus or ‘pivot’ of action is away from external written codes and towards the leading of the set-apart Breath. 

Paul is quite consistent when it comes to practical matters of living a godly life day-by-day. So, for example, if we were to look at Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, we would see that it is a letter of two halves. The first half, chapters 1 – 3, is about God’s glorious free gift of deliverance by means of Jesus. The second half is about what this means in practice. If you read chapters 4 - 6 through for yourself you find no appeals to Covenant law. Rather you find appeals to imitate and emulate the love of the Messiah, and to reflect different aspects of the relationship that the Messiah has with those whom God has selected. 

But I don’t want to spend time on these chapters because instead I now want to turn to chapter 1 of Paul’s first letter to Timothy, because once gain Paul looks at Christians who miss the mark because they want to become teachers of law.  

Principles of living a godly life [54] – Deliverance through the free kindness and favour of God by means of Jesus the Messiah

 ‘Rejoice! The free kindness and favour of God by means of Jesus the Messiah our Lord! So then, indeed I am willingly serving God’s law with the mind, but flesh, fundamental principles of self-forfeiture and loss’, (Romans 7 v 25).

Paul has led us to a point of helplessness, even despair, concerning our inability to set ourselves free from, or to overcome the inherent impulses within our fleshly constitution. By means of God’s law we know that God disapproves of certain behaviours – but in knowing God’s Law we begin to perceive our self-forfeiture in every aspect of our being. As we are by nature, our fleshly impulses lead us to self-forfeiture and loss – to divine disapproval and judicial condemnation. Even as Christians who are persuaded of the good news of the Messiah and desiring to live a godly life day-by-day, the intentions that arise within our enlightened mind are being frustrated and opposed by these impulses and energies within our physical flesh. Paul asks, ‘What will rescue and deliver me from out of this, the death body?’

Then, suddenly, Paul talks about rejoicing and giving thanks. Why? Because the answer to his question is, ‘the free kindness and favour of God by means of Jesus the Messiah our Lord!’ We get a sense I think that he cannot contain himself any longer. He thanks God for effecting a deliverance that is beyond his own ability. There is a way of divine approval and Paul places it completely in God’s free favour by means of the Lord Jesus, Messiah. What divine Law cannot do, and what our human constitution cannot do, is being accomplished by means of the Messiah as a result of God’s free favour. 

Paul then succinctly restates what he said earlier in verses 20 – 23. ‘So then’. He sums up the position that he has arrived at thus far. He returns to the polarising dichotomy between his godly intentions as a result of his enlightened mind, and the opposing impulses of his fleshly constitution. This is where he is as a Christian at this present time. On the one hand, ‘I [‘ego’ as governor/controller/regulator] am indeed willingly serving God’s law with the mind’, in my ‘inner man’ or the ‘inside of the cup’. I am agreeing alongside good, clean, praiseworthy divine law and my intention is to honour and praise God in my speech and behaviour. But my ‘flesh [my death-body], is serving fundamental principles of self-forfeiture and loss’. So I sometimes fail to do what ‘I’ [ego/governor/regulator] intend. Because impulses inherent in my fleshly constitution working in opposition to God, are taking me captive and working themselves out from within, They are carrying across into self-forfeiting speech and behaviour that Covenant law condemns and God disapproves of.

Paul maintains the important concept of separation between ‘ego’ – ‘I’ as inner controller/governor/regulator – and the raw energies inherent within his fleshly constitution. He established this position in Romans 7 v 17 - 23. He says, as a Christian, ‘I’ [ego] am not deliberately originating these raw impulses in my flesh from out of nothing by using my mind. Nor am I closely identifying with them. Rather, these impulses and inclinations are inherent within my earthy, sensuous, fleshly constitution, within the fabric of my flesh. Therefore, as a Christian, when I see myself behaving and speaking in ways that God disapproves of, ‘I’ [ego] am not fully, completely and wholeheartedly co-operating with bringing these impulses to fruition. They have taken me captive within self-forfeiture and loss and ‘I’ am grieved by such behaviour. 

Principles of living a godly life [53] – Christians and deliverance

 ‘I am a wretched, afflicted man! What will rescue and deliver me from out of this, the death-body?’ (Romans 7 v 24).

As Paul has reasoned through and analysed the process that leads him as a Christian to speak and behave in ways that God disapproves of, and the situation seems to be depressing and hopeless. And that is indeed the sub-conclusion that Paul reaches in this verse. Paul refers to his physical body as ‘the death-body’ or as it is in some translations, ‘body of death’. Even now, as a Christian, he does not simply desire to speak and act in a particular way and it then happens without fail. As a Christian he does not merely intend to avoid a certain manner of speech or a particular behaviour and then it simply happens as he chooses. This contrariness is certainly my experience as a Christian and I am sure that it is your experience too. What is causing this problem? It is not divine law itself that is at fault, but his physical, fleshly body - his human constitution inherited from his ancestors. His physical flesh possesses raw passions, desires, impulses, energies and inclinations – in short, an impetus that seeks to work itself out to completion by carrying across to the other side from within so as to be manifest in his speech and behaviour. These energies within our fleshly constitution are working in opposition to God such that they lead us away from life. If we follow these impulses and inclinations, they produce increasing levels of blindness and ignorance with regard to spiritual realities, and a hardness or callousness deep within us with regard to spiritual realities, and this in turn leads to further wayward speech and behaviour. These energies, inherent within the fabric of our flesh, lead us to ignorance, insensitivity and unresponsiveness to God – to withering away, dying away and death – hence Paul calls it our ‘death body’. Paul has outlined this process for both Gentiles and Jews in Romans 1 v 18 – 3 v 20 and thus he says, ‘I am a wretched, afflicted man!’. Even as a Christian, enlightened and illuminated with regard to God, the Messiah and the gospel, and closely identifying with delight in the Law of God down from the man within, he still does not manage to live a life of perfect godliness. This is because the contrary impulses within the fabric of his physical flesh take him captive.

This gives rise to Paul’s rhetorical question – ‘What will rescue and deliver me from out of this, the death body?’  Who is able to leave their body in order to be free from these raw passions and impulses so as to serve God in perfect purity? The answer is self-evident, no one has such ability and power. But that is not quite the question that Paul asks. He is no longer looking to himself and his own ability to observe divine law, because he has shown how weak and lacking in ability he is. Instead he looks outside of himself. In effect he asks, ‘Is there anything ‘out there’ that will rescue me from out of my physical constitution, my death-body?’ Every translation reads, ‘Who will rescue me?’ The Greek word can mean ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘which, or ‘why’ – but the word ‘what’ fits better with the next verse than ‘who’. What can deliver Paul? ‘The free kindness and favour of God’, (verse 25a).

Principles of living a godly life [52] – Christians and divine law [5]

 Let’s stand back for a moment to summarise what Paul is saying and to look at the implications for seeking divine approval by means of divine law. 

Paul is saying that –

 

Divine Law is good, clean, honourable and praiseworthy

By means of divine law we gain knowledge of –

No share of divine inheritance, 

Self-forfeiture, and

Divine disapproval

But a polarising distinction exists –

Divine law is related to the realm of breath and the heavenly realm, 

Whereas we exist as a physical, fleshly entity

Before God brings us forth we follow or bring to completion our fleshly impulses

Self-forfeiture takes hold of divine law and the knowledge it presents

Self-forfeiture uses the law as a starting point to increase and become apparent in every aspect and facet

After God has brought us forth as Christians we find two opposing fundamental principles within us –

 

Our illuminated mind agrees that divine law is good, clean, honourable and praiseworthy

‘I’ closely identify with delight in God’s Law with my mind

Our intention is to speak and behave in agreement with it

But

An opposing energy, impetus and movement exists within our flesh

This impetus, existing in my members, takes me captive within self-forfeiture and loss

The result is that

I speak and behave in ways that ‘I’ do not intend

I say and do the very things that ‘I’ despise

This means that

‘I’ as governor/controller am not fully and wholeheartedly doing this, 

Rather, 

It is the energy and impetus of self-forfeiture inherent within my fleshly constitution that produces the behaviour that ‘I’ do not intend

This means that IF I as a Christian turn to seeking to obey divine law in order to promote my divine approval moment-by-moment, THEN I gain knowledge and confirmation of my self-forfeiture, loss and divine disapproval. My knowledge of self-forfeiture spreads into every aspect - into my behaviour, thoughts, passions and intentions - so that my self-forfeiture increases and is clearly seen. ‘Because Law is working down settled anger’, (Romans 4 v 15a).

But Paul has not finished his explanation and reasoning yet, so before I say any more I will continue to look at what he has to say next.

Principles of living a godly life [51] – Close identification with delight in the law

 ‘I closely identify with delight in the Law of God down from the man within; 23 but I perceive another law or principle within my members, waging war against the principle of my mind and taking me captive within the principle of self-forfeiture and loss existing within my members’, (Romans 7 v 22, 23). 

The Apostle Paul introduces another fundamental and vital concept, that of ‘close identification’. He uses the Greek word ‘synédomai’, from ‘sýn’, meaning ‘to closely identify with’ and ‘hēdomai’, ‘to experience delight’, hence the meaning ‘to closely identify with delight’. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. He closely identifies with delight ‘in the Law of God’ down from the ‘man within’ or ‘inner man’. He is referring to the ‘inside of the cup’ of the renewed man, the man brought forth by God. The general sense of the whole passage here in Romans 7 leads us to understand that Paul is referring to the rational aspect of Christians, the principle of the Christian’s enlightened mind, (verse 23), which is in opposition to the earthy, sensuous impulses of their fleshly constitution. 

Paul is talking about Christians here. Bible commentator John Gill is correct when he draws out the polarising difference between Christians and unbelievers. He says of this identification with delight in Gods Law down from the man within that ‘an unregenerate man cannot [closely identify with this delight in the Law]. He does not like its commands, they are disagreeable to his corrupt nature, and as it is a threatening, cursing, damning law it can never be delighted in by him. The moralist, the Pharisee, who obeys it externally, does not love it, nor delight in it. He obeys it not from [out of] love to its precepts, but from fear of its threats. Or from a desire for popular esteem, and low, mercenary, selfish views, in order to gain the applause of men, and favour of God. Only a regenerate man delights in the law of God, which he does as Christ fulfils it, who has answered all the demands of it’. (Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, with slight paraphrasing of his comments on this verse).

But in verse 23, Paul describes the other process or principle that is at work within him, within his flesh, existing within his members, that he does not closely identify with and that is ‘taking him captive’. The Greek word means ‘taken by the spear’, like a prisoner of war, captured within the principle of self-forfeiture and loss. Hence his earlier statement in verse 20, ‘I [ego] am no longer fully working it out to completion, but on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’. He is being taken captive under duress. It is not his intention to be taken captive. It is happening but this does not mean that he is fully compliant, or happily willing to work for the enemy. In World War 2, if the Nazis captured someone, it did not mean that their captive suddenly became a Nazi – they did not suddenly identify with Nazism. That is a fairly clear illustration or image of Paul’s situation.   

‘I’ [ego] as governor/regulator/controller, stand as an intermediary between the impulses that are inherent and at work within my fleshly constitution, and what is carried across into my speech and behaviour. In other words, as a Christian ‘I’ [ego] act as an enlightened ‘regulator’ of what I allow to carry across from within. But imagine the attention of a guard at the guard post, or even the guard himself, being captured or waylaid for a moment. The guard post is then insufficiently unregulated and undesirable material gets carried across to the other side. The Apostle is not giving us freedom to say ‘It wasn’t me!’ or ‘Look what you made me do!’, which in effect is an attempt to say ‘I am not responsible’. No, the injunction of the Apostles is to maturity of understanding and to constant, vigilant watchfulness.

Principles of living a godly life [50] – Christians, ego and divine law [4]

 ‘Now if I [ego] construct this, that I am not intending, I [ego] am no longer fully working it out to completion, but on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me. 21 Therefore I am finding the law or principle that my intention is to manufacture and construct the good, [but] that inner malice and harm is at hand, present with me. 22 Because I closely identify with delight in the Law of God down from the man within; 23 but I perceive another law or principle within my members, waging war against the principle of my mind and taking me captive within the principle of self-forfeiture and loss existing within my members’, (Romans 7 v 20 - 23). 

In verse 20 Paul restates what he said in verse 14, and in the light of what he has said in the intervening verses, he now states it as a sub-conclusion. Self-forfeiture is creating energy, impetus, inclination and movement within his fleshly constitution, within the members of his physical body. This impetus brings to completion speech and behaviour that is not his intention, or even speech and behaviour that he despises. In other words, he is not always completely successful in exercising enlightened self-control and bringing his godly intentions to completion. 

So what is the process and situation that he is describing and how does it relate to good and praiseworthy divine law, and to divine approval moment-by-moment? In verse 21 Paul says that he finds a fundamental principle or process. He says - 

I am desiring and intending to do good in the inner man

Foulness and malice is dwelling within me, in my fleshly constitution

This leads him to a sub conclusion in verse 21. ‘Therefore I am finding the law or principle that my intention is to manufacture and construct the good, [but] that inner malice and harm is at hand, present with me’.  

He then explains this a little more. ‘Because I am closely identifying with delighting in the Law of God down from the man within’. Paul reaffirms not only that the Law down from God is good, but that he is closely identifying with it, agreeing with it and delighting in it. He says that this is coming down from the ‘man within’ as a Christian. In other words he is talking about the intangible realm within him – the ‘inside of the cup’ – and he confirms this in the next phrase, where he refers to his mind. 

This next phrase, (verse 23), is complex, so I will break it down into its parts. He also perceives another fundamental principle or process taking place within him. But this other principle is not taking place within his mind, but rather within the limbs and organs of his body – within the fabric of his fleshly constitution. This fundamental principle of energy, impulse, inclination, impetus and drive within his physical flesh is working in opposition to the first principle that is at work in his mind – in his ‘inner man’. These two fundamental principles within him are in opposition to one another. 

The result is that the impetus within his fleshly constitution is sometimes taking him captive. At this present time, as a Christian, Paul exists in his physical constitution and he is not able to fully, totally and completely live a perfectly clean, godly life day-by-day, because the principle or impetus existing within his fleshly constitution is sometimes taking him captive within self-forfeiture and loss.

Principles of living a godly life [49] – Christians, ego and divine law [3]

 ‘Now at this present time I am no longer fully working out to completion [what I do not intend, or what I hate], on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting dwelling within me. 18 For I know and am appreciating that absolutely no good is inhabiting within me, existing within this, my flesh, because intending and desiring is lying down side-by-side with me, but working out the good to completion, absolutely not. 19 For I am not manufacturing and constructing good that I am intending, on the contrary, the inner malice and harm that I am not intending, this I am accomplishing’, (Romans 7 v 17 - 19). 

Having made his general statement in verse 17, (see the previous post), he now goes on to explain what he means in more detail. From verse 14 Paul has been writing in the present tense and referring to himself as an illustrative example. He is talking to Christians who know law (verse 1), about himself as he is now, as a Christian. He is no longer talking about how things were before he became a Christian. Now ‘I’ [ego] am no longer fully working out to completion what ‘I’ [ego] do not intend. But neither am I perfect and complete. 

In verse 17 he says that self-forfeiture is creating an opposing energy, impetus, inclination and movement within him that brings to completion speech and behaviour that he does not desire, that he even despises. When he uses the phrase ‘within him’ he tells us in verse 18 what he means – he is referring to his flesh - his natural, earthy, fleshly, constitution. He has already pointed out that there is a polarising dichotomy between divine law that pertains to breath in the heavenly realm, and his fleshly [constitution] having been sold across the other side under no share and self-forfeiture’, (verse 14). Thus we find that in Paul’s mind, enlightened by the Breath, he knows, appreciates and agrees with good, clean, honourable and praiseworthy divine law, but at the same time, ‘absolutely no good is inhabiting’ his fleshly constitution. Right there he states the crux, the locus, of the conflict, contradiction and inconsistency within him at this present time, as a Christian.  

What is the evidence for this situation? How does Paul know that this is indeed the case? He knows ‘because intending and desiring is lying down side-by-side with me’ – the intention and desire towards godliness and divine approval moment-by-moment is settled close beside him – ‘but working out the good to completion, absolutely not’, (verse 18b). There is a problem in the process between his good intention and the working out of his good intention by carrying it across to the other side into his speech and behaviour. Paul says that he can see that this is the case because ‘I am not manufacturing and constructing good that I am intending’, (verse 19a). In fact, worse than this, the opposite is sometimes happening – ‘I am accomplishing the inner malice and harm that I am not intending’, (verse 19b). This is Paul, an Apostle, describing the dynamic process within himself at this present time as a Christian. 

I don’t know if this is true of your own experience as a Christian, but it is certainly true of my own experience. I agree with the honour and praiseworthiness of divine law, but with the best intention and desire in the world, I still by no means attain complete and total enlightened self-control. I don’t always end up doing or saying what I intend. I do sometimes find myself doing and saying things that I hate. I find a battle, a conflict, taking place within me, and if I were to say that I am living a perfectly godly life day-by-day, maintaining divine approval by means of my speech and behaviour as a Christian, then I am deceiving myself and fooling no one. 

Principles of living a godly life [48] – Christians, ego and divine law [2]

 ‘And if I am doing this, what I do not intend, I am agreeing and consenting in company with the law that is good and honourable. 17 Now at this present time I am no longer fully working it out to completion, on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’, (Romans 7 v 16, 17).

Paul is drawing out two important principles with regard to the fact that he sometimes behaves in ways that he does not intend or desire, or even in ways that he detests. The first principle is that his behaviour that is contrary to divine law does not mean that he is opposed to divine law. Rather, he agrees in company with divine law that is related to the Breath of God. He agrees that divine law is good, clean, honourable and praiseworthy. 

Then, here in verse 17, he moves on to the second principle with regard to the inconsistency of his behaviour with divine law and his own intentions. He makes the general statement that ‘at this present time I [ego] am no longer fully working it out to completion, on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’. We now reach the crux of the dynamic process that is happening within him and leading him to this contrary behaviour. He says, ‘I am no longer working it out to completion’. He uses a Greek word that in recent decades has fallen into common use – ‘ego’ – ‘I’. He is now looking at what Jesus called ‘the inside of the cup’, the inner, less tangible realm of mind, emotions, desires, intentions and so on. The different facets and aspects within our inner realm – our thoughts, feelings, preferences and so on – emerge into a form of hierarchy in which these various inner aspects become co-ordinated and interconnected. Thus, at or near the top of this inner hierarchy is our co-ordinated sense and locus of ‘I’-ness, our locus of control, regulation or governance. To varying degrees, ‘I’ or ‘ego’ as controller/governor, co-ordinate, evaluate, order and govern the various aspects within – my thoughts, memories, desires, emotions, conscience, attention and so on. ‘I’ do this with the aim of choosing how to act, to do this, not that. 

Paul says that at this present time, now that I am a Christian, ‘I’ as governor/controller am no longer fully working out self-forfeiture and loss to the end result of its completion in speech and behaviour. That’s what I did before God brought me forth. But now, at this present time, ‘I’ am no longer fully carrying across self-forfeiture and loss from within so as to bring it to completion in my speech and behaviour. Nevertheless, I do find that I am speaking and behaving in ways that ‘I’ do not intend. In other words he is saying that ‘I’ [ego/governor/controller] am not fully in control over the energies of self-forfeiture within my fleshly constitution. ‘I’ am failing in my self-governance sometimes. The evidence of this failure is that I sometimes speak and behave in ways that ‘I’ [ego/governor/controller] do not intend. In fact I sometimes speak and behave in ways that ‘I’ [ego/governor/controller] despise and hate. 

So this begs the question, ‘If ‘I’ am not always totally in control, if my speech and behaviour is not always completely what ‘I’ intend, then what is it that is bringing such unintended and undesired speech and behaviour to completion?’ Paul answers straight away. It is ‘the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’. In other words, within the Apostle there is an energy, impetus, inclination or ‘drive’ that sometimes defeats his intentions and considered desires, and overcomes his self-control. 

‘Look what you made me do!’ ‘Don’t blame me! He/she/they/it made me do it!’. That is the unspoken objection to what Paul is saying. The objection is that Paul is saying that we are not accountable for our self-forfeiting speech and behaviour. Indeed, within civil law in the U.K. we have the category and defence plea of ‘diminished responsibility’. When someone behaves or speaks in an unacceptable or illegal way, their responsibility and accountability for what they do and say might be considered to be diminished. If it can be shown for example that they were physically ill at the time of their offending behaviour, such as suffering from a brain tumour that affected and distorted their perception of objective reality, then this would be taken into consideration. Although Paul does not directly address such a potential objection here, it is clear from the verses that follow, as well as his other writings, that he is not proposing such an idea. So with that in mind I will stay with what he has to say here as he goes on to explain what he means. (See further discussion on this theme when I look at Romans 7 v 20 - 25).

Principles of living a godly life [47] – Christians and divine law [1]

 ‘For indeed, I am not knowing or understanding what I am working out and producing. For what I am not intending and desiring, this I am doing, and what I am detesting and hating, this I am manufacturing and constructing. And if I am doing this, what I do not intend, I am agreeing and consenting in company with the law that is good and honourable. 17 Now at this present time, not like before, I [ego] am no longer fully working it out to completion, on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’, (Romans 7 v 15 - 17). 

Paul continues to present himself as an illustration of his teaching. He is now talking in the present tense, having in the past been sold across the other side under the power of self-forfeiture and loss. He was carried across to divine condemnation, but divine law itself did not cause this, nor is divine law inherently bad. The cause of his selling across is the fact that he exists as a fleshly entity, and the result at this present time, as a Christian, is that he does not know or understand his behaviour. There is a fundamental contrariness and conflict within the very fabric of his being. There are certain behaviours and actions that he does not intend or desire to engage in, yet he finds that he nevertheless engages in these very behaviours. There are certain behaviours and actions that he hates and detests yet these are the very things that he sometimes finds himself constructing. 

So how does this situation relate to good, clean, divine law? He tells us in the next two verses. ‘And if I am doing this, what I do not intend, I am agreeing and consenting in company with the law that is good and honourable. 17 Now at this present time, not like before, I [ego] am no longer fully working it out to completion, on the contrary, the self-forfeiture sitting and dwelling within me’, (verses 16, 17).

There are two important principles that emerge from out of this inner conflict and contrariness. He states the first in verse 16. He finds himself doing something – behaving, speaking, thinking – that he does not intend or desire, that he even hates and despises. So the first principle is this - IF he does not intend or desire such behaviour THEN this means that he agrees in company with the good and praiseworthy divine law. IF he does not intend or desire such behaviour, THEN he is not constructing this behaviour from out of considering divine law to be bad or dishonourable. He is not dismissing divine law, or opposing divine law.  

The first principle in relation to divine law is this -

IF we are engaging in speech and behaviour that we do not intend or desire, or that we despise,

THEN we are in agreement in company with good, honourable and praiseworthy divine law

Let’s imagine that I impulsively and opportunistically steal something, even though I do not usually desire to steal, and usually consider stealing to be a transgression of divine law and therefore disapproved-of by God. In stealing I have acted contrary to myself and done something that I disapprove of, that in a more sober moment I did not intend. I am not only acting contrary to myself but also contrary to divine law, which I agree with - stealing is wrong. The first point that Paul is making is that because in my calm and sober moments I do not intend to steal, that I even despise stealing, then in this instance of my stealing, it does not mean that I therefore disagree with or oppose divine law. Rather my behaviour is inconsistent with my usual intentions and with the divine law that I agree with. 

Principles of living a godly life [46] – Divine Law [31] – Flesh, Breath and divine law

 ‘Because we know that law exists related to Breath pertaining to God [pneuma]. But I am fleshly, having been sold across the other side under self-forfeiture and loss’, (Romans 7 v 14).  

Paul continues his explanation of why good divine law does not cause his no share and self-forfeiture. In this verse he changes from the past tense that he has been using since verse 7, and begins to use the present tense. In the previous verses Paul used the past tense in talking about himself, referring to himself before he was a Christian. But he now begins to describe himself at the time of writing. He goes a step deeper to look at some fundamental principles and in doing so he turns to two important and pivotal themes - the polarising difference between Christians and unbelievers, and the opposition between Breath and flesh. These themes run through all of his thinking. He mentions the importance of Breath in the first two chapters of his first letter to the Corinthians, as well as in his letter to the Galatians, and he brings into focus once again here.

He is speaking to Jewish Christians who know divine law, (Romans 7 v 1), and he begins with a view that both he and they share in common – ‘we know that law exists related to Breath pertaining to God’. Divine law is related to Breath, a current or movement that pertains to God and the unseen realm. In other words divine law is not of human origin. It is not merely a moral, ethical or philosophical tradition constructed by scholars in the past and that has then been handed down from generation to generation. Law is of divine origin, it exists in relation to Breath pertaining to God, and the implications of this are that God approves of divine law and that the law is clean and pure. It is virtuous, set apart from the standards, principles and values of the worldly arrangement, and therefore it is good, reflecting life and sensitivity to God, and what God desires and approves of. This divine origin by means of Breath is a fundamental principle that underpins divine law.

Paul then places the Breath pertaining to God and the unseen realm in polarising contrast and opposition to flesh – ‘But I am fleshly’. It is a fundamental principle that I exist consisting of flesh, says Paul. He now begins to use the present tense and he says in effect, ‘I do not exist as breath – I exist as a physical, fleshly being. Although at this present time he is a Christian, this does not mean that he no longer has a physical, fleshly constitution. 

So what is the implication of being fleshly? He tells us right away, ‘having been sold across the other side under no share and self-forfeiture’. The phrase ‘having been sold’ is a ‘perfect participle’ - a form of verb used to indicate an action that was completed before another action began. The action that was fully completed before he became a Christian, and that occurred because of his fleshly constitution, was that he had been carried across to the other side, ‘sold’ under self-forfeiture and loss. What we have seen him describing in the previous verses is his emergent knowledge by means of good, virtuous divine law, was that his self-forfeiture and loss was super-abundant. 

The Greek word translated into English as ‘sold’ is the verb ‘pipraskó’, which primarily means ‘to sell’ or ‘to be sold’, ‘across the other side’. When something is ‘sold’ it passes from one side to the other. It describes the literal act of selling goods or property, as well as being used in a metaphorical sense to describe being carried across under the power or influence of self-forfeiture and loss, reflecting the pervasive nature of this process. Thus, Paul was carried across the other side – penetrating to divine disapproval - as a slave under the rule of self-forfeiture and loss. The emphasis is not on the word ‘sold’ as if any usual act of selling and purchase had taken place, but rather on the effect - he had been carried across under the influence of self-forfeiture. The Greek preposition ‘ὑπο’́ - means ‘underneath’ - with the accusative, implying direction - so as to be ‘under the power of’ self-forfeiture and loss. That is the fundamental principle that underpins what it means to exist as ‘fleshly’ or ‘down from the flesh’. 

Principles of living a godly life [45] – Self-forfeiture, loss and divine law [2]

 ‘Then the good became my death? It cannot come to be! But self-forfeiture and loss, in order to be shown self-forfeiture and loss, is fully working out my death by means of the good, in order that self-forfeiture and loss comes down self-forfeiture and loss beyond measure, by means of the injunction’, (Romans 7 v 13).

Earlier in his letter to the Romans, Paul said, ‘Law is working down settled anger’, (Romans 4 v 15a). He is explaining that statement here. He anticipates a final objection, namely that good, divinely approved law causes his death. Once again he phrases the objection in the form of a rhetorical question – ‘Does good law become my death?’ Does the cause of my death, my condemnation and loss, lie with good, divine law itself? Is divine law the cause of my death, my withering away? Once again he dismisses such a suggestion – such a thing cannot come to happen. 

He then describes the dynamic process once again. It is a slightly complex verse but lets go through it bit by bit. The core of his reply to this objection is that his self-forfeiture and loss already existed, but he did not know it until law came along. Before divine law came along he existed in relative ignorance and considered himself free to behave as he pleased. By means of the injunctions of divine law, Paul came to know self-forfeiture and loss existing within him and he began to realise that he was enslaved to it. In order to be seen to be self-forfeiture and loss, self-forfeiture took hold of the initial starting-point provided by divine law. Self-forfeiture roused up to life and by means of good divine law, it fully worked out towards his death. Every facet, aspect and form of self-forfeiture and loss roused up within him, (verse 8a), with regard to this or that particular injunction. He became aware that he was self-forfeiting in his words, in his behaviours, in his thoughts, in his intentions and in his desires and inclinations, such that his self-forfeiture and loss, and his awareness of it, increased. He came to know more and more aspects and facets of, and the greater extent of, his self-forfeiture. By means of good divine law ‘coming in’, self-forfeiture and loss came down beyond measure – there were too many instances of it to count - and as such it was clearly seen to be self-forfeiture and loss. In the light of divine law there was no doubt that self-forfeiture and loss existed, in abundance. But divine law itself did not cause his self-forfeiture. Rather, divine law revealed the extent and degree of his self-forfeiture, such that it was clearly seen to be self-forfeiture. 

Principles of living a godly life [44] – Self-forfeiture, loss and divine law [1]

 ‘Because self-forfeiture and loss, having taken hold of a starting point by means of the injunction, thoroughly deceived me and by means of it, slew me. 12 So that therefore law is indeed set apart, and the injunction set apart, righteous and intrinsically good’ (Romans 7 v 11, 12).

If we are in any doubt as to what Paul has been saying in the previous verses, he restates what he said in verse 8 so that we are clear what happens to us as ‘unbelievers’ existing within the realm of the flesh. Paul says, ‘I encountered knowledge gained by means of divine law and I initially thought it was a means to gain and maintain divine approval – ‘Do this and I will live’. But instead, self-forfeiture and loss took hold of an initial starting point presented by means of the injunction or commandment. 

Here is the principle or the fundamental process –

Knowledge of divine law raises our self-forfeiture and loss to life, which then begins to take hold within us

By means of the knowledge that he gained from divine law, self-forfeiture and loss thoroughly deceived Paul. He initially supposed that he was going onward to life and that divine law would lead him to life, to divine approval. But self-forfeiture and loss roused up by means of knowing the law, deceived him and slew him. Knowledge of his self-forfeiture put him to dying away and death. By means of the law he found that his self-forfeiture and loss was much greater and more extensive than he initially thought when he first encountered the injunction. 

So this is Paul’s reply to the objection that he stated in verse 7 – ‘Shall we say ‘The law of self-forfeiture and loss?’ Is it divine law itself that creates self-forfeiture and loss within us? On the contrary, divine law itself is good, clean and set apart, and God judicially approves the injunction.

When Christian legalists are faced with those Christians who say that they are freed away from law through the Messiah, they sometimes make out as though such Christians are saying that divine law is ‘bad’, or that the law itself creates self-forfeiture and loss. In reply they then firmly insist that divine law is good and right, and that it promotes cleanliness and godliness, and that David loved divine law, (Psalm 119 v 97, 113, 163, 165). They imply or even say directly that if you do not love divine law and look to it as a means to promote a godly life then there is something wrong with you as a Christian. They question your loyalty to God or even whether you really do believe after all.   

Nevertheless, despite these protests by Christian (or Jewish) legalists, Paul says in verse 6, ‘But now we [Hebrew Christians] are rendered entirely idle away from the law’. He agrees with legalists that divine law is good and judicially approved. But he also says that by means of divine law, self-forfeiture and loss is roused up and is revealed to reach every part and facet of our being. Divine law is not leading to life and holiness, but to withering away and death – to divine condemnation.

I point out once again that at the moment Paul is still looking at those who know law but who are walking around day-by-day down from their flesh, down from the inclinations of their long established physical constitution. He is looking at those who are not entrusting God and His Messiah. 

However, he has one more anticipated objection in mind before he turns his attention to Christians.

Principles of living a godly life [43] – Human nature and divine law [3]

 ‘For separate and apart from law, self-forfeiture and loss is lifeless, 9 and how much I [ego] was living separate and apart from law. But the injunction having come, the self-forfeiture and loss came up to life, and I [ego] withered away. 10 I discovered the injunction penetrating towards life - this penetrated towards death’, (Romans 7 v 8b - 10).

Imagine getting your first motorcycle or car, and having passed your driving test, you go out to enjoy driving for its own sake. It doesn’t matter where you go – it’s the freedom of movement that you now have and the sheer enjoyment of driving. After a while you find yourself in a small town that you have never been to before and it feels wonderful to have the freedom to explore this new location. But as you are driving, someone points out that you are driving in the wrong direction down a one-way street – you are breaking the law. Whilst you were unaware of breaking a law you were free and enjoying yourself. You had no awareness that you were breaking the law, or of any fines or penalties that you might be incurring, or the potential danger you were in. But then someone pointed out that you were breaking the law – a rule of law ‘came in’. As a result, the incurring of all kinds of fines and penalties ‘sprung to life’ in your mind. That is the kind of initial process that Paul describes in relation to divine law in verses 8b and 9. 

The result of knowing divine law is that our sense of freedom, moral rightness and ability begins to wither away. Our former persuasion of being alive vanishes, because by means of knowing the law we see that we have incurred loss of the divine inheritance and self-forfeited away from God’s favour. Our awareness of loss and self-forfeiture springs to life. 

The result was that Paul discovered something in his personal experience. He discovered that the divine injunction towards life, ‘Do this and you will live’ – the injunction towards sensitivity and responsiveness to God and a share in the divine inheritance – was penetrating towards death. It was penetrating towards guilt and condemnation. By means of knowing the divine injunction he came to know loss and self-forfeiture away from God’s favour. Worse still, he came to see his self-forfeiture of this injunction permeating into more and more aspects of his thoughts and behaviour.

So, as a general principle, ‘the injunction having come, the self-forfeiture and loss came up to life, and I [ego] withered away’. The law comes in and I become more and more aware of my self-forfeiture and loss. The meaning is ‘coming up to life again’ - implying that it was previously dormant but was now roused up into new life. Worse still, ‘I’ withered away. This is placed in contrast to ‘I was living’. The effect of the divine injunction was to bring Paul to an awareness of his ‘withering away and dying off’. The essential idea here is that the Law did not answer the purpose that many Jews would claim for it, to cleanse and to give comfort, but that its influence was to produce aggravated, unpardoned guilt and woe. He now saw himself a dead man, dead in sin, dead in law, under a sentence of death. That he had within himself the impulse and energy leading towards death, and all his hopes of eternal life by investing his energy and work is seeking obedience to the law, died at once. ‘I discovered the injunction penetrating towards life - this penetrated towards death’.

Such is the result of knowing divine law. ‘Do this and you will live’ (Luke 10 v 28), but any failure to ‘do this’ does not originate in the injunction itself, but rather in knowing the injunction and by means of this knowledge becoming aware of the extent of loss and self-forfeiture. Our ‘ancient human constitution [is] being corrupted and ruined down from deceitful passionate desires and yearnings’, (Ephesians 4 v 22) – the raw passions and energies inherent in our fleshly constitution.

Principles of living a godly life [42] – Human nature and divine law [2]

 ‘But self-forfeiture and loss, having taken hold of a starting point by means of the injunction, fully worked to fashion within me every aspect of inordinate desire’, (Romans 7 v 8a).

Paul has just said that by means of Covenant or divine law he knows what self-forfeiture and loss is. Covenant Law defines self-forfeiture and loss. Divine law sets boundaries on thoughts, emotions, intentions, speech and behaviours, revealing what God approves of and what He disapproves of. 

So what happens? Knowledge of self-forfeiture and no receipt of a portion (of the divine inheritance) is gained by means of knowing divine law. But knowledge of divine law means that self-forfeiture and loss actively takes hold of a starting point and opportunity presented by means of the injunction. Talking about himself, Paul says that the knowledge of self-forfeiture conveyed by means of divine law fully worked to completion within him. Knowledge of self-forfeiture with regard to covetousness fully worked down within him to produce and accomplish an end result. Namely, this knowledge fashioned and formed all of the individual parts and aspects of covetousness, focused passion, yearning and lusting. The knowledge that Paul attained by means of divine law - that passionate, lustful desire was prohibited - also presented within him the opportunity, the opening and starting point for self-forfeiture and loss. His awareness of what self-forfeiture and loss is with regard to covetousness sprung to life and it worked within him to form self-forfeiture and loss with regard to every aspect of passionate, lustful desire that he possessed. His awareness of self-forfeiture and loss because of his covetousness increased, he saw it as being present in so many aspects of his passionate desires. But it was not the law itself that was producing this result, but rather the ‘self-forfeiture and loss’ within him. It was everywhere within him, often in subtle and unexpected ways. 

The Greek word that Paul uses is ‘hamartia’, which is almost universally translated into English as ‘sin’. In its more strict definition it is a noun derived from ‘A’ – ‘not’ or ‘no’, and ‘méros’ – ‘a part, a share of’, and it emphasises its self-originated or self-empowered nature – in other words, this loss of a share is not originated or empowered by God. Thus, in its fullest sense it is ‘self-forfeiture leading to no-share or portion of the divine inheritance’. It was this ‘self-forfeiture and loss’ that was working within Paul and producing every kind of form of covetousness, which had been defined by divine law. Passionate desire was present in him before he encountered divine law, but knowing the law constituted the initial starting point of knowing the presence and extent of self-forfeiture and loss, which worked within him to form many instances and aspects of self-forfeiture and loss in relation to his passionate desires.

At this point in his discussion, Paul is still thinking primarily of the dynamic process that takes place within ‘unbelievers’ – who are walking around day-by-day down from their flesh, because they are enslaved to their natural, earthy, ancient humanity or physical, fleshly constitution. In other words, this is the dynamic process that takes place when unbelievers encounter divine law. Paul does not introduce the present tense until verse 14. From verse 7 to 13 he uses the past tense, which means that he is referring to himself before God brought him forth. 

Principles of living a godly life [41] – Human nature and divine law [1]

 ‘What then? Will we say ‘The Law of self-forfeiture and loss’? May it not be caused to happen! However, I would absolutely not know self-forfeiture and loss if not by means of Law, for also I would absolutely not know covetousness if the Law had not said, ‘You will not covet’,’ (Romans 7 v 7). 

In verse 5 Paul said that ‘when we existed within the flesh, the passions, the self-forfeiture, actively and effectively worked within our limbs and members through the means of the law, penetrating towards the bringing forth of fruit, the death’. Paul also says elsewhere that ‘law entered close beside in order that the falling away became greater in number’, (Galatians 5 v 20). Law increases the amount of transgressions and the wayward raw passions and energies inherent in the fabric of our fleshly constitution are working in our limbs by means of the law. In other words, divine law is not leading ‘outsiders’ or unbelievers to live a life of set apart cleanliness at all. But when Christians are brought forth by God they are rendered idle with regard to serving God within the sphere of the law.

So Paul immediately anticipates another objection from those who know the law. He frames the objection in terms of a rhetorical question. ‘What then? Will we say ‘the Law of self-forfeiture and loss’?’ Will we say that the Law is at fault? Is Law failing in the purpose of producing cleanliness? Is the Law creating self-forfeiture and loss in us? He answers immediately. ‘May it not be caused to happen!’ 

To illustrate his point he quotes the beginning of the tenth Commandment, ‘You will not covet’, (Exodus 20 v 17; Deuteronomy 5 v 21). The word ‘covet’ means ‘to have focused passion’, ‘to yearn for’, ‘to greatly desire to do or have something’, ‘to long for’, ‘to desire very much’, or ‘to lust after’. Mosaic or Sinai Covenant Law takes an enormous step forward in advance of many other ancient codes, because most of them stopped short at actual action or behaviour. Just a few went on to speech, but few if any laws addressed an individual’s thoughts or passions. But divine law says, ‘You will not covet’, you will not hold on to the thought and passionate desire for something. Coveting proceeds from our heart or deep inner core, (Proverbs 6 v 25), and when it carries across into our behaviour it brings forth self-forfeiture and loss, the thought and desire is brought to completion in the act. 

Paul says ‘in the absence of divine law I would not know that if I covet then I self-forfeit incurring loss. Covenant Law is the means by which I know that I am self-forfeiting. Until the law revealed it, I had no knowledge or consciousness of divine disapproval, self-forfeiture and loss with regard to coveting.’ Without doubt there were those who desired their ‘neighbour’s wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, but before the giving of Covenant Law this would not be readily perceived as a divinely disapproved-of desire for that which was forbidden. Because no written code existed to reveal that God disapproved of such passionate desire. The Apostle did not know covetousness as something that was disapproved-of by God until he was confronted with the law opposing it. The desire might have existed within him, but he would not have known that God disapproved of it to the point of his self-forfeiture and loss. The written codes of divine law place boundaries on his desires, as well as his speech and behaviour, teaching him what God judicially approves of and what He disapproves of. Divine law teaches where lawful indulgence ends, and where self-forfeiture and loss begins.

It is not Divine Law itself that is missing the mark, nor is it failing. So what is the dynamic process that happens? Paul is about to tell us.

Principles of living a godly life [40] – Christians, ‘unbelievers’ and divine law

 ‘Because when we existed within the flesh, the passions, the self-forfeiture and loss were actively and effectively working within our limbs and members through the means of the law, penetrating towards the bringing forth of fruit, the death. 6 But now we are rendered entirely idle away from the law, having died within that holding us down tight, in order that we are serving within new, fresh breath [pneuma] and absolutely not within obsolete writing’, (Romans 7 v 5, 6).

Paul is speaking to Hebrew Christians who know divine law, (verse 1), and said that the law only has authority whilst an individual is alive. When they die, the law is rendered idle. Speaking to his fellow Jewish Christians says, ‘brothers, you also were put to death, the law by means of the body of the Messiah penetrating into you becoming another, the having been aroused from out of the dead, in order that we begin and continue to bear the fruit of God’, (verse 4). I explored this in the previous two posts. 

Divine law had been given to God’s chosen ethnic group – the Jews – as part of the Sinai Covenant. They possessed it as an advantage and privilege. But now Paul is telling these Hebrew Christians that their ‘old self’ has died and that therefore divine law is rendered idle. He now begins to explain why this is the case even for Jewish Christians. In doing so, he first looks back to how these Jews existed before they became Christians.

They existed within the realm of the flesh like everyone else. They were concerned to increase their wealth, comfort and status, and they sought physical pleasures and stimulation. As Jews they were familiar with the written codes of the Sinai Covenant, but this knowledge did not increase their godliness or cleanliness. In fact, just the opposite happened. Why? What was the dynamic process that was taking place? It was this: inherent within their physical constitution, within their flesh, the energy and impetus of raw passions – deep strong emotions – penetrating towards ‘self-forfeiture and loss’, actively worked within their limbs with the result of bringing forth ‘fruit’. They carried the passions, impulses, inclinations and working energies within the fabric of their flesh across into their speech and behaviour, bringing about ‘death’ – insensitivity, unresponsiveness and the darkness of ignorance with regard to God. These disapproved-of energies and passions were defined and increased by means of divine law, resulting in divine condemnation and disapproval, and the judicial sentence of separation. That is the dynamic process that takes place when those existing within the flesh turn to the written codes and regulations of law – including divine law. Wayward passions and working energies within our physical constitution lead us to death by means of the law. ‘Law is working down settled anger’, (Romans 4 v 15a).

‘But now…’. Paul then looks at the situation of these Jews now that God has brought them forth as Christians. A radical yet subtle change has taken place as I have explained in the previous posts. This polarising change includes the death of their old human appearance, such that they ‘are rendered entirely idle away from the law’. They ‘have died within the sphere of that holding us down tight’, (verse 6a). The dynamic process that I have just described in the previous paragraph is a trap that holds its victims tight, resulting in death. But now, the ‘old self’ even of those who possess and know the written codes of Covenant law, has died. In addition, they are transferred from out of the authority of the Levitical priesthood into a new priesthood such that they are rendered entirely idle away from the written codes of Levitical law and the Sinai Covenant. 

‘Ah!’ says the Christian legalist. ‘What Paul means is that they are rendered idle from ceremonial law, but not the moral law!’ But the Apostles do not make such a distinction. When they talk of law they speak of the law as a unified whole. As Paul indicates at the end of verse 6, by ‘law’ he means ‘obsolete writing’, the written codes and injunctions set out through Moses. The Ten Commandments, written in stone. The Levitical law, the written codes of the Sinai Covenant. 

But this does not mean that Christians are therefore opposed to divine law. They are not ‘anti law’ or ‘antinomian’. It does not mean that they now have permissive licence to do what they want. Christians, including Jewish Christians, are rendered entirely idle from the law ‘in order that they are serving’. Their calling is to serve and honour God and His Messiah who has paid the price to buy them back and is now their new Lord. 

So, if Christians are called to serve and honour God day-by-day, set apart from the worldly arrangement and its values, but they are rendered idle from the obsolete written codes of divine law, then how do they do this? How do they know what to do? Paul tells us the answer in verse 6 – Christians ‘are serving within new, fresh breath’ [pneuma]. Uniquely for Christians, the Breath (Pneuma) that is different and set apart from the world (hagios) has been given to dwell within them. So Paul exhorts Christians to serve within the sphere of the fresh, new realm of the breath – to walk around within the realm of the Breath.

Principles of living a godly life [39] – Christians and divine law [6]

 At this present time Christians exist at a kind of mid-point, in a transitional state. They are no longer who they once were but their redemption has not yet reached its end point. Their old human appearance is dead thanks to being brought forth by God in union with the Messiah by means of the Breath, but they are not yet what they will be, indeed, it has not yet been revealed what they will be. Instead, the ‘new and fresh is coming into being’. Christians are in the middle of a transitional process. Their new formation has begun but it has not yet reached its culmination. 

So we have this situation. On being brought forth by God their old human appearance has died and a new formation has come into being. Reminding ourselves of what Paul said in the first four verses of Romans chapter 7, the fact that their old human appearance has died means that – 

The written codes of divine law have been rendered idle in terms of trying to obey these codes as a means of obtaining divine approval day-by-day or in terms of ultimate and final approval on the Day of Judgement. 

Christians are joined in union with the Messiah who has fulfilled the requirements of divine law in his body. He is the spotless Lamb of God. 

Because of this union, Christians are freed from condemnation within the sphere of the written codes of divine law. Instead the law penetrates into them becoming ‘the roused from out of the dead’. 

In II Corinthians 11 v 2 Paul says of the Corinthian Christians, ‘I have joined you to one husband, a set apart virgin to present and stand beside the Messiah’. He speaks of Jesus as their husband because they exist in union with him as their Lord and head.

The purpose of the death of the Christian’s ‘old human appearance’ and their union with the Messiah by means of the Breath, such that they penetrate into becoming ‘the aroused from out of the dead’ is that they actively ‘bear fruit for God’ in their speech and behaviour. They do not seek a life of godliness and good in order to obtain or maintain divine approval by working and expending their energy in such behaviour, but rather, out of loyal service for the honour and praise of God. Such clean speech and behaviour is the ‘fruit of the Breath’, (Galatians 5 v 22). 

Having been brought forth by God, Christians do not own themselves. I have often heard ‘outsiders’ or ‘unbelievers’ say in defence of their preferred behaviour, ‘It’s my body, or my life, I can do what I like’. This is not a Christian sentiment. Christians are bond-slaves of their Lord and Master the Messiah. They have been bought back, redeemed or purchased with a price, and placed in God’s household. By right of purchase, Christians are therefore under an obligation to behave as their Messiah directs. The Messiah purchases the taking away of the Christian’s condemnation by means of the shedding of his own lifeblood and in doing so he places upon them a new obligation to obedience. Those who are redeemed from out of slavery or captivity to self-forfeiture and condemnation are the purchased servants of him who redeemed them – as Paul goes on to say in the next verses in Romans 7.