ROMANS VII by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 14, 1869

ROMANS VII.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

This chapter is always appealed to by those who claim the abolition of the law, as proof of their position; but a worse misapplication could not be made. It very clearly proves quite the reverse—the perpetuity of the law. Paul opens with this statement, “Know ye not, brethren (for I speak to them that knew the law), how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth.” Now the question is, What does Paul mean by this declaration?

To clearly show his meaning, he brings up an illustration in the next two verses. Thus he says: “For the woman which hath an husband, is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth.” Now let us carefully notice every part of his illustration as we proceed.

1. There is the woman, 2. The husband, and 3. The law, which binds them together. Let us keep these three distinctly in our mind: the woman, the husband, and the law. He goes on: “But if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.” Now the question is, what it is that dies; the law? Certainly not; but it is the husband which dies. Mark this point. Paul says, “She is loosed from the law.” This same expression, “loosed from the law,” will come up again; so let us mark well how she is loosed from the law. It is by the death of her husband, and not by the death of the law. If a woman’s husband dies, she is loosed from the law, but does that abolish the law? Not by any means.

Paul goes on; verse 3: “So then if while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress.” Here a fourth thing is introduced in the illustration, namely, a second husband. If she marries this second man while the first lives, it makes her an adulteress, because she cannot be lawfully bound to two husbands at the same time. Then Paul says, “But if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress though she be married to another man.” Here again we have the expression, “She is free from that law.” But how is she freed? By the abolition of that law? Not exactly; but by the death of her first husband. Her first husband having died, she is freed, or loosed, from the law, and is at liberty to marry another man. But mark, this same law which binds her to her first husband, binds her to her second husband. This illustration seems to be so simple and plain, that every one ought to see it. Here let us inquire what Paul is trying to teach and illustrate.

Our opponents say that it is a change of dispensations, from the Jewish, to the Christian. We say that it is a conversion of the sinner—the death of the old man, and the uniting of the new man with Christ. The woman represents the Christian; the law represents the law of God; the first husband represents the old man—the carnal man, the sinner; and the new husband represents Christ. These points are so plain that it seems strange that any one should deny them. Paul says, Rom. vi, 6-8, “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; for he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ; &c. In verses 9-11, of the seventh chapter, he says, “For I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.” Now in all this declaration, who is it that dies? It is not the old dispensation that dies, nor the law that dies; but our old man, the carnal mind. Nothing could be plainer than this.

In verse 4, Paul makes the application of his illustration, thus: “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ.” What dies? Not the law, but “ye brethren.” The Emphatic Diaglott renders it thus: “Therefore, my brethren, you also were put to death by the law, through the body of the Anointed One.”

Now when the old man is thus dead, we are, as in the case of the woman, freed from the law, and are at liberty to be married to another; for while the old man lives, the law of God binds us to the body of sin, and thus holds us in a state of condemnation and death. So Paul goes on: “That ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.” The next verses must clearly show that he is talking of the conversion of the sinner, and not a change of dispensations. Thus: “For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” Here our opponents think they find a strong statement in their favor in this sentence: “But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held.” This settles the case, they say, that the law is dead. But we think otherwise. The expression is equivalent to those used with regard to the woman when her husband died. Paul says: “She is loosed from the law,” and “she is free from that law.” Was that because the law had died in that case? Not exactly; but because her husband had died, thus loosing her from the law. So in this case, the Christian is delivered from the law, that being dead wherein he was held; namely, the old man of sin. The Emphatic Diaglott very correctly renders it thus: “But now having died, we are released from the law by which we were held.” This gives the idea exactly.

But the following verses will settle this question, as to which exposition is right, for he proceeds to make an application of it thus: “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. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law, sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death; for sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin.” Verses 7-14. If the position of our opponents be correct, Paul should conclude by saying something as follows: “Wherefore the law is abolished; or therefore the law is

is dead; or hence we are under the new law of Christ; or you need not keep the law any more.” But how very differently he talks from this! Hear his conclusion: “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” Not, “It was holy in some past time;” but it is holy, now, at the time he wrote, thirty years after the crucifixion. Besides all this, Paul is giving his own personal experience, and shows the office which the law performed in his conversion. It was a live and holy law at the time he was converted, many years after the crucifixion; and it had power enough to slay him. Hence we conclude that the law is still alive, and is still holy.

D. M. CANRIGHT.

Monroe, Iowa, Nov. 23.