AN EXAMINATION OF THE TESTIMONY IN BOTH TESTAMENTS.
BY J. H. WAGGONER.
(Continued.)
As we find no reason to suppose that the Saviour referred to any other law than the one acknowledged at the time of his coming, we will pass on to consider the writings of the apostles on this subject. Paul to the Romans and Galatians speaks much of the law; and we must ascertain whether he brings in a new law, or refers, also, to the one previously existing. It is confidently asserted by some, that the argument of Paul to the Romans, especially chapters ii and iii, is respecting the law of circumcision, and written only to the Jews; and that the law established, is the "law of faith" in Christ. If the law established was the law of faith, would not the question in chap. iii, 31, be superfluous? Do we then make void the law of faith through faith? But if the commandments of God are established by the faith of Jesus, then the words of the Apostle are pertinent. That the Apostle addresses the Jew particularly in some places, we admit, but that the epistle was not written for the Jews exclusively is evident from the very commencement. He expresses his desire to come to them that he might have fruit among them also, "even as among other Gentiles," and says, The gospel is the power of God through faith unto salvation—to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Chap. i, 13, 16. In this same chapter, he gives a catalogue of crimes which have generally been placed to the account of the heathen world, but Paul adds, "Thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art, that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest, doest the same things." Chap. ii, 1. In chapter iii, 9, he says he has before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; evidently referring to chap. ii, 1, as above. He further says that God will render to every man according to his deeds—to the Jew first and also to the Gentile; for there is no respect of persons with God. Chap. ii, 6, 10, 11. Thus the question of national difference or preference is settled; yet we wish to have it borne in mind that Paul acknowledges the two classes, of Jew and Gentile, and brings them both up for examination in this scripture. He then says that as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without
law, and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men. Verses 12, 16. We must here bear in mind that the authorized definition of sin is, "the transgression of the law." 1 John iii, 4. Then what does the Apostle mean by the words, sinned without law? for he also affirms that "where no law is, there is no transgression." Rom. iv, 15. According to these plain declarations, in the entire absence of law, there can be no sin. And if sinning without law and perishing without law, be in the entire absence of law, it will conflict with another declaration, that "Sin is not imputed when there is no law." Chap. v, 13. Verses 13-15 of chap. ii, are parenthetical and explanatory of verse 12, by which the meaning of this apparently obscure passage is made clear. We still bear in mind that Paul is speaking of two classes—Jews and Gentiles. The Jews heard the law; but this gave them no pre-eminence; (except in privilege, chap. iii, 1, 2;) as the hearers of the law are not just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. James says, we should be doers of the word, and not hearers only, as the hearers may be forgetful; "but whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed," or doing, margin. Jas. i, 22-25. We have shown from the scriptures that the knowledge of God's law was general upon the earth before it was spoken to Israel from Sinai. The Hebrews had as little chance to know it as any people on earth. Ex. iii, 7; iv, 23. The Gentiles did not hear it spoken from Mount Sinai; but had a previous knowledge of its requirements—had the work of the law written upon their hearts; this is further manifest in that they might do the things contained in the law; and their consciences must be enlightened by it, in order to bear witness to the propriety or impropriety of their actions, and thus they were enabled to accuse or excuse one another, as the case might be. In verse 17, he addresses the Jew thus: "Behold thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law." If any doubt remains, as to what law is spoken of in this epistle, the doers of which would be justified, here it must be settled; it is the law that the Jew was instructed out of, and rested in; by which he also knew God's will; the law that teaches that a man should not steal; [verse 21;] that says that a man should not commit adultery; [verse 22;] that led to an abhorrence of idols; the transgression of which dishonors God, [verse 23,] and was an occasion for the Gentiles to blaspheme his name. Verse 24. 2 Sam. xiii, 14.
There are two expressions in the foregoing verses, which we wish to notice more particularly. The Jew, who was instructed out of the law, is said to know the will of God. The Saviour uses the same words in John vii, 16, 17: "My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." Here Jesus gave them a test whereby they might discern the truthfulness of his doctrine, and know that it was of God; and it is not every one that says to Jesus, "Lord, Lord," that shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but they who do the will of the Father in heaven. But in order to do the will of God, it must be expressed in such a manner that it can be done, or performed. The mere declaration of a fact, however true, cannot be done—the expression of his will to be done must contain a rule of action, a law. Hence, if any man do the law of God, he will be competent to judge of the doctrine of the gospel of Christ, whether it be of God. The law, embracing "the whole duty of man" is a perfect expression of his will; and as the doctrine of Christ is of God, there is a complete harmony between them. Man was under condemnation for the transgression of God's law—God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself—to save them from their sins; [Matt. i, 21;] hence there must be a perfect agreement between the Father and the Son—the will of God and the doctrine of Christ—the law and the gospel. This agreement is so perfect, so beautifully harmonious, that he that keeps the law of the Father, knows the doctrine of the Son; and in the day of his coming they shall know that he is in the Father, and they in him, and he in them. John xiv, 3, 20. O glorious time! Hasten the day, dear Saviour, when the kingdom of our God shall come, and his "will be done" on earth as it is done in heaven.
Again, Paul asks, "Thou who makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God?" This was the great offence of the Jews. When the nations of the earth were given to wickedness, God confirmed his law to Israel for an everlasting covenant. 1 Chron. xxi, 17. The transgression of this law, as the Apostle declares, dishonors God. The word of the Lord by Malachi, says: "A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of hosts, unto you, O priests, that despise my name." Chap. i, 6. This reproof of the priests continues in chap. ii, where it is said, The priests' lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth. Verse 7. But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law. Verse 8. Thus they dishonor God by transgressing the law; though they made their boast of him, and professed to honor him as their father. See John viii, 38-44.
But it is claimed that the "law of circumcision" is spoken of in the latter part of the second chapter, and throughout the third. Now I do not know of any such law as "the law of circumcision." I read that God made a covenant with Abraham, and gave him circumcision as a token, seal, or earnest of that covenant. Gen. xvii, 11; Rom. iv, 11; Eph. i, 13, 14. The seal of the covenant is distinct from the covenant itself, as the seal of a bond is neither the bond itself, nor the condition of the bond. Circumcision was given as a sign or seal of righteousness—the righteousness, of course, existing prior to the giving of the rite. Rom. iv, 11. So that circumcision, or the sign of righteousness, is of avail, only where the righteousness exists; therefore Paul says, [Rom. ii, 25,] "circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law;" i. e., the seal is valid, where the righteousness exists; "but if thou be a breaker of the law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision;" i. e., if the righteousness is wanting, or lacking, the seal or sign thereof is of no consequence, because it signifies nothing. Consequently the uncircumcision by nature, or Gentiles, if they fulfill the law, shall judge those who by letter and circumcision transgress the law. Verse 27. Hence circumcision is of no consequence only as it is connected with the observance of the law; as is said in 1 Cor. vii, 19, "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God." In these passages there is a very plain distinction between circumcision and the law. He further declares that the distinctions154of Jew and circumcision, in the sense they were formerly considered, are at an end. Circumcision is the operation of the Spirit of God on the heart; [Rom. iv, 11; Eph. i, 13; iv, 30; 2 Cor. i, 22; Col. ii, 11;] and those whose hearts are thus operated upon are Jews, inwardly. Matt. iii, 9; John viii, 37-44; Rev. iii, 9.
The question which follows in Rom. iii, 1, would naturally arise after such declarations, "What advantage then hath the Jew?" And the answer is in no way contradictory to the minds of those who have noticed the privileges conferred on them as a people. Please examine Deut. iv, 7, 8; Ps. cxlvii, 19, 20; Rom. ix, 4. The chief advantage, or privilege, being, that to them were committed the oracles of God. This advantage certainly could not consist in receiving something of no value, but the "lively oracles to give unto us." Acts vii, 38.—For what if some did not believe? Will not their unbelief destroy the faithfulness of God? By no means. God's word is sure if men have not believed; for if their unbelief made the faithfulness of God without effect, he would not be justified in threatening, and clear in judgment. Macknight, verses 3, 4. See Ps. lvi, 4. Here the justice of God's threatening and judgment, is made dependent upon the perpetuity of these oracles given to the Jews. Amen. But some seem to suppose that transgression, or sin, is necessary to the development of God's grace; and because the manifestation of his grace redounds to his glory, our sin, transgression, or unrighteousness, (for all unrighteousness is sin,) will commend his righteousness. God would of course be unrighteous in taking vengeance on the very act which glorifies him. And if this be so, "How then shall God judge the world?" (Not the Jews alone). If my lie more fully develops his truth, making it abound to his glory, why am I counted a sinner? [see 1 Cor. vi, 20;] and why not add, "Let us do evil that good may come?" To make the meaning still more plain, let us use a familiar illustration: A parent has told his child that all unrighteousness is sin, and sin is the transgression of the law; and has given him (the son) certain laws. The father ascertains that his son has transgressed one of his commands, and calls him to an account for his sin; but being full of love and compassion for his son, he says: "My son, for this transgression of law, or unrighteousness you deserve to be punished; but I have no pleasure in your pain; and would rather you would cease to sin, and be free from punishment. Therefore I forgive you this sin, if you will act in conformity to my will in future.—See Eph. ii, 4-8; Rom. vi, 23; Eze. xxxiii, 11; Acts v, 31; Matt. iii, 8. Soon after this, the father finds that his son has been guilty of committing other sins; and on being again called to an account, he justifies himself thus:—"When I first transgressed your laws, your mercy was manifested in the forgiveness of my sin, or transgression; and your love and mercy were never so strikingly manifested as then. Now in order more fully to develop those noble traits of character, and give room for wider displays of your grace, I have committed other sins. But you will not be justified in judging me, as my unrighteousness commends your righteousness, and my disobedience gives room for a display of your love and mercy. You said you were slow to anger and plenteous in mercy; [Jonah iv, 3; Joel ii, 3; Ps. lxxxvi, 5;] and if you pass by my sin, my lie will cause your truth to abound to your glory; suffer me, therefore to do evil that good may come. Further, I enjoyed your favor, or grace, which abounded over my first transgression; now, I fear, if I keep your commandments, I shall fall from grace; therefore I must continue in transgression, or sin, that your grace may abound."
Would this reasoning satisfy the parent who knew that his law was founded in justice, and that those only were deserving his love who kept it? [Ex. xx, 6;] yet this is the method of reasoning adopted by those who strive to make void the law through faith; but Paul says their damnation is just. Here we would ask the objector to examine the following points:—1. What law does Paul speak of in Rom. ii, 13, the doers of which shall be justified? Lev. xviii, 5; Deut. vi, 25; x, 12; Eccl. xii, 13, 14; Eze. xx, 11, 12; Matt. v, 19; xix, 16, 17. 2. Does he not continue to speak of the same law in verses 17-25, and Chap. iii? 3. If circumcision were profitable to the law keeper, and otherwise counted for uncircumcision, were not the oracles of Rom. iii, 2, and Acts vii, 38, the precepts of the same law by which the Jews had advantage, and circumcision profit? 4. Does not Paul clearly show that God will judge the world by these oracles, without respect to persons, or national distinctions?
By doing this law, which the Jew had, directly committed to him, he might and would have been justified; but having heard it, they broke it, and thereby put themselves on a level with the Gentiles; all being under sin. Rom. iii, 9. The scripture is quoted in verses 9-19, to prove that no one has kept the law; and the law speaks to them that are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become subject to the judgment of God. (Margin.) From this it is clear that all are under the law; because all have sinned. Even as Christ was made under the law, [Gal. iv, 4,] by being made sin for us; [2 Cor. v, 21;] having our iniquities laid on him. Isa. liii, 6. And for the reason that all have sinned, no flesh shall be justified by the deeds of the law. Rom. iii, 20. Mark well this point. There is no contradiction between this declaration and Chap. ii, 13; where it is said, "The doers of the law shall be justified;" as he here shows that none shall be justified by it, because they are doers of it. So now, instead of being justified by it, they are condemned by it; for by the law is the knowledge of sin. No conduct can be proved sinful, except by the law.—The theories of some men lead them to a conclusion different from that drawn by the Apostle; but we would inquire, Does the law condemn an innocent man? If not, he must be justified by it; as justification and condemnation stand as opposite, and there is no intermediate state between them.
Now, inasmuch as all are under condemnation, none can be justified by the law: if any are saved, or justified, it must be by the manifestation of God's righteousness, independent of our obedience, or without the law; we having forfeited everything by our transgression. This righteousness is witnessed by the law and the prophets; [Matt. vii, 12; Gal. iii, 24; Acts x, 43;] and is by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all, that believe; for there is no difference; for all have sinned. Justification comes freely (and only) by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to manifest his grace, by his own forbearance, passing over our sins. It is by faith in his blood that we have redemption; [verse 24; Eph. i, 7; Col. i, 9; 1 Pet. i, 18, 19; Rev. v, 9;] for the wages of sin is death; [Rom. vi, 23;] and the life is (in) the blood; [Gen. ix, 4; Lev. xvii, 11, 14; Deut. xii, 23;] therefore the blood is given to make an atonement; [Lev. xvii, 11;] and without shedding of blood is no remission. Heb. ix, 28. Then Christ died for our sins; [1 Cor. xv, 3;] and his blood cleanseth us from all sin; [1 John i, 7;] and for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Heb. ix, 15. Then the death of the sinner is certain; because the law condemns him, he not being a partaker of God's righteousness through faith in the blood of Christ; and the death of Christ was absolutely necessary to our salvation, according to the above scriptures; that God might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Verse 26. What is necessary that God may be just?—Justice demands the enforcement or maintenance of just laws, or principles. In order to the observance of such principles on the part of the agent, the law or rule of action by which he is to be governed, must, of course, be just; then to fully meet the demands of justice, the sanctions or penalties of such law must be rigidly enforced. The judge would not be just, who would let the condemned criminal escape; and the justice of God would not be approved should he pass lightly by the transgression of his law, placing no difference between the righteous and the wicked. Gen. xviii, 25.—The righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ, is declared that he may be just, or maintain the principles of justice, and yet justify those who believe in Jesus, though they had transgressed these principles, or laws. The next inquiry is, What are the principles which God must maintain, in order to vindicate his justice? Of course they must be the precepts of the law which the sinner has transgressed; otherwise he might be just, though he did not punish the transgressor. Now if God has ever given a law by which moral agents were to develop their characters, and has changed, modified, or relaxed the law in any particular, to accommodate it to the circumstances of the transgressor, his justice would be relaxed in the same degree; and after such relaxation, the justice of God's government could not be viewed in the same light, by intelligent moral beings, that it would had he strictly maintained the pure principles of his government. The respect for law decreases in proportion to the possibility of the sinner to escape its penalties.
Again, the principles to be maintained by God in order to his being just, must be the same that a man would be justified in observing. Then if a man would be justified, or stand uncondemned before God, by doing the law, it is manifest that the law itself contains the principles of justification.—This is what God must maintain to be just; and we have already shown how he can justify those who have faith in the blood of Christ, while he vindicates his holy law by letting the penalty fall on the Saviour. Salvation thus given excludes boasting, and brings Jew and Gentile on the same level; and thus, instead of making void the law of God through faith in Jesus Christ, it is established, maintained and vindicated by the death of Christ for its transgression. Verse 31. This holy law has so long been despised and rejected of men, that some of its friends and advocates have so far given way to popular prejudice and early education, as to suppose that the doers of the law would not be justified by doing the law, but by faith in Christ; but we trust that all those who have followed us thus far in the examination of the nature of this law, will see that it is fully sufficient to justify and protect the observer of it; if it is not, it is weak and unprofitable indeed, and the righteous might well say, "It is vain to serve God; and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinances?" Mal. iii, 14. But the Lord says, "O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep my commandments always, that it might be well with them and with their children forever?" Deut. v, 29. But if any are yet disposed to deny the justifying nature of the law, we would inquire of them, if man had never broken the law, would he have needed a Saviour? Or, if Christ had broken the law, could he have been a Saviour? A little examination must satisfy all on this point.
Abraham was justified by faith, [Rom. iv,] his faith being made perfect by his works; [Jas. ii, 22;] and though he were justified by works, he could only glory before men and not before God; as he would have been, even then, an unprofitable servant. Luke xvii, 10; Job xxii, 3; xxxv, 7, 8. He was justified by the faith that he had before he was circumcised, that he might be the father of the faithful, though they be uncircumcised; for all the blessings of the covenant rested in God's promise, and not on the law; for if they had rested on the law, the promise would be of no effect, as all had transgressed the law; then faith would have been void. Verse 14. By the law is the knowledge of sin; and all have sinned. Hence the law, instead of securing blessings, worketh wrath.—Verse 15. But now being justified by faith, [Chap. v, 11,] we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; for we have been at enmity with him by wickedness; [Chap. viii, 7; Col. i, 21;] with neither disposition nor means to be reconciled to him; this he effected by the death of his Son. Rom. v, 9, 10. The idea previously considered is shown in verse 13 and onward. We until the law sin was in the world; but sin is the transgression155of the law; therefore before the law was given on Mount Sinai, the principles of the law were known and transgressed. For death entered by sin, and those who lived from Adam to Moses were judged as sinners, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. These verses clearly prove our position that the hearing of the law, and the entering of the law, and "until the law" refer to the giving of the law on Mount Sinai. In verses 20, 21, the offence (sin) existed before the law was given, and the law entered that sin or transgression might abound, as sin is known by the law; [Chap. iii, 20;] but where sin abounded, grace through Christ much more abounded. Sin reigned, or triumphed, unto death; but grace has triumphed over sin unto eternal life, through righteousness. Now all unrighteousness is sin, or transgression; [1 John v, 17;] and righteousness must be the opposite—obedience. Hence grace is triumphant, bringing eternal life, through obedience. Some might suppose that obedience to the law was only required of Christ, and not of us, because it is said, [Rom. v, 19;] "By the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."—But if the conclusion which we have drawn from the above scriptures is correct, to wit, that righteousness and obedience are synonymous, then the meaning is this: "By the obedience of one shall many be made obedient;" and this is in accordance with the whole tenor of the sacred writings. God gave a perfect law—obedience to it was man's whole duty, and he would have lived had he done it. But he transgressed it, and was thereby brought under condemnation. God loved him even in his sinful state, and sent his Son to die in man's stead. The death of his Son was necessary, because his law was holy, just and good, and must be maintained. Would it not be reasonable to suppose, that, in the death of his Son, God desired rather to bring the transgressor back to obedience to his law, than to release him from further obligation to keep it? If the nature of the law remained unchanged, (as it must, being perfect, a rule of holiness, containing justifying principles,) then the transgression of it must still be wrong, or sinful, and of course still tending to condemnation; and if through the death of Christ we are released from the obligation to keep this holy law, then Christ becomes the minister of sin. Gal. ii, 17. If it had not been a law of purely moral principles, the doers of it never could have been justified; as its observance would not have served to the development of a pure, moral character. As a character cannot be developed without a law, so the character developed must be the exact counterpart of the law performed. If a law, or rule of action, is iniquitous and unjust in its nature, requiring unjust actions, then the person keeping it will also be unjust; but if the law is moral, holy, just, and good, then the observance of it would develop a moral, holy, just, or pure character. We have seen that God always required holiness as the ground of acceptance with him; hence the law that he gave by which man was to form his character, must have been moral and holy in its nature. But moral, holy principles cannot change, neither can they be relaxed nor abolished, and God, their author, still be just. And if Christ justifies the transgressor, in his transgression, he would become accessory to the transgression of a just and holy law, and thus grace would reign through unrighteousness. But all unrighteousness is sin; and the wages of sin is death; hence it is impossible that grace should reign through unrighteousness unto eternal life. Therefore we conclude that faith in Christ does not make void the law, but establishes it, and strengthens, if possible, the obligation resting on us to keep it.
The Apostle in Rom. vi, anticipates the objection of those who would make void the law through faith—make Christ the minister of sin, and sin that grace may abound—professing to commend God's righteousness through Christ by their own unrighteousness, or sin. He says we shall not continue transgressing the law that grace may abound; for if we are in Christ we are dead to sin; if dead to it, we cannot live in it, as death and life are opposites. Here we must proceed in our examination with great caution, as many have misconstrued or perverted the language of the Apostle in chaps. vi, and vii. First we must ascertain what is meant by being dead to sin. It is clearly shown in chaps. ii, and iii, that all the world, both Jew and Gentile, are under the law because all have sinned, or transgressed the law. Thus also Christ was made under the law, because he was made sin for us. He took our condition, was made sin for us, that he might occupy our position, be under the law, that he might redeem them that were under the law, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him. 2 Cor. v, 21; Gal. iv, 4, 5. Perhaps no scripture can be found more strongly expressive of the perpetuity and justice of the law, than that which shows, that, after the Saviour died to meet the demands of the law for us, we must reckon ourselves dead with Christ, and are held under the law, as being condemned by it, until we die with him. But if on the other hand, our opponents have the truth, viz., that the law is dead, then we have presented to us the singular anomaly of a living man being held under the dominion of a dead law? If Christ had abolished the law at his death, or if we could make it void through faith in Christ, then we should certainly be freed from it, without dying to it. All are under sin, and the wages of sin is death; [Rom. vi, 23;] and for this reason, that the law demands the life of the transgressor, the law hath dominion over a man, or he is under the law, so long as he liveth. Chap. vii, 1. The endeavor has been made to use the illustration presented in this chapter to teach an opposite doctrine: The woman is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is free from the law of her husband, and may be married to another. Then if we are married to Christ, as in verse 4, some argue that we are represented by the woman, the law being represented by the husband that is dead. But this is a very unjust conclusion. The illustration plainly teaches that death is necessary to change the woman's relation to the law, while no change in the condition of the law is intimated. But the Apostle draws his own conclusion; he says: "Ye are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;" and in verse 1, before he brings in the illustration, he says, "the law hath dominion over a man so long as he liveth." The whole tenor of his argument in both these chapters, proves it; and in the margin or verse 6, it reads, "being dead to that wherein we were held;" [Whiting's translation:] "being dead to that by which we were held." Macknight, verse 4. "Ye have been put to death by the law;" [verse 6:] "having died in that by which we were held;" [Campbell and Doddridge:] "having died with Christ, we are released from the law." If we are dead to the law, we are no longer under the law: we are free from its curse; and to us there is no condemnation. Our sins are borne away by Christ, who died for them; we die with him to have them removed from us; in this manner being free from, or dead to them; and if dead to sin we cannot live in it; [chap. vi, 2:] and that we are dead to sin we have manifested by being baptized into the death of Christ. Verse 3. As we have died with him, so we have been buried with him by baptism into death; [verse 4:] and as he was raised up from the dead by the glory of the father, so we emerge from the watery grave to live another, or a new life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. Verse 5. If implies, or introduces, a condition: in order to the enjoyment of the promised blessings, we must comply with the condition on which it is based. In order to be in the likeness of his resurrection, for which Paul labored, as well as the ancient worthies; [Phil. iii, 10; Heb. xi, 35:] we must be planted or buried by baptism in the likeness of his death. There is a resurrection not unto life; [John v, 29; Rev. xx, 6:] therefore we must labor to secure, not merely a resurrection, but a "better resurrection," even the "likeness" of Christ's resurrection. So the condition is, not merely "being buried," but "being buried with him by baptism into death"—"planted in the likeness of his death;" and the order as given in the scripture, is this: [1 Cor. xv, 3, 4:] Christ first died for our sins—next was buried—and then rose
again. In like manner, or in this likeness, we must first die to the law, then be buried by baptism, and then rise to walk in newness of life. How can this be done by those who deny the obligation to keep the law under this dispensation; who say the law is dead, and that they do not die to it? If the law is dead they cannot be held by it; and if they are not held by it, they do not die to it. But if they do not die to it, they cannot be buried by baptism into death, but must, if baptized, have been buried without dying, or alive. Hence they cannot walk in newness of life, or a new life, but must be living the same old life they formerly lived—under sin. But he that is dead is free from sin. Verse 7. As Christ died for sin once, but now lives to God, so we must be dead to sin, but alive to God through Christ. If we have been freed from the service of sin, or transgression, we should not let it reign in our mortal bodies, or triumph over us, to cause us to serve it in lust. Verse 13.—Neither suffer our members to be used as weapons in the service of sin, but yield ourselves to God, and our members as instruments in the cause of righteousness, or right doing. Then we shall be free from sin, it having no more dominion over us, because we have died to it, Christ having redeemed us from the curse of the law, and placed us under grace. But when are we placed under grace? Evidently when we are brought from under the law, and that cannot take place until we die to it, seeing the law has dominion over us as long as we live. All, of every dispensation, must be in one or the other of these two conditions:—condemned or justified: under the law or under grace. But if Christ abolished, did away the law eighteen centuries ago, then none can be under the law, but all must be under grace, and "our preaching is vain," there being no necessity of a new life, since all the world, for the last eighteen hundred years have been under grace! Now the Apostle has clearly shown that all are under the law by transgression, and must so remain till they die with Christ—have the body of transgression crucified with him, and then walk in a new life—no longer serve sin, or transgress the law. An objection is strongly urged from this expression in verse 14. Because we are not under the law, it is thought we are not to keep the law; but what law do they say we should not keep? The objector says the ten commandments; and if it does not mean the ten commandments then there is not even the appearance of an objection left. But verses 13-15, directly contradict the idea that we may sin—transgress the law—because we are not under the law. We will paraphrase a few verses, considering that this law is the ten commandments, and sin is the transgression of the law. Verses 14-15. For the transgression of the ten commandments shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the ten commandments but under grace. What then? Shall we transgress the ten commandments because we are not under the ten commandments but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of the transgression of the ten commandments unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that though ye were the servants of the transgression of the ten commandments, ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine whereunto ye were delivered. [Margin.] Being then made free from the transgression of the ten commandments, ye became the servants of righteousness, or right doing, the opposite of transgression. Here it is plainly declared that, after we are brought from under the law and placed under grace, if we sin, or transgress the law, we are again brought under the law; but by abstaining from sin, we continue under grace. And that no change has taken place in the law is evident, inasmuch as the transgression of it still brings death to the transgressor, "for the wages of sin is death;" not was death.
We will further notice the illustration of Chap. vii. "If while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; 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." Verse 3. The application156is made thus: "Wherefore my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him that is raised from the dead." In the illustration the woman was proved by the law to be an adulteress, if she married another before death changed her relation to the law. Of course the law could not die, as she could neither be "accused" nor "excused," without the law; "for by the law is the knowledge of sin." And so in the application: if we have not died to the law, we have no power to be married to him who was raised from the dead; and if we profess to be joined to Christ without dying to the law, according to the application of the Apostle, we occupy the same position before the law, as an adulterous woman. In view of these plain scripture facts, we inquire, "What is the duty of those who have been trampling on God's holy covenant? We see that in order that they may be joined to Christ they must die to the law, and if they have died to it, they should be buried with him by baptism into death, that they may arise and walk in newness of life. But some excuse themselves because they have previously been professed followers of Christ, and transgressed the commandment ignorantly. In order to understand their duty, it is necessary to know how God regards sins of ignorance. Presumptuous sins are worthy of, and to be punished with, death; [Ex. xxi, 14; Num. xv, 30, 31; Deut. xvii, 12; Heb. x, 26, 27;] while sins of ignorance are to be atoned for. Lev. iv, 13-35; Num. xv, 22-29. Paul says he obtained mercy because he sinned ignorantly, in unbelief. 1 Tim. i, 13. The law of God showed him his sinful condition. Rom. vii, 7. He was alive without the law, sin being dead, or having no strength; [1 Cor. xv, 56;] but when the commandment came, imparting the knowledge of, and thereby giving strength to, sin, he saw that he was a transgressor of the law, and stood condemned—under the law. He then died to the law with Christ. Being dead, he was buried by baptism into death—the first time that such an event could possibly take place—and then arose to walk in newness of life; and instead of continuing in the service of sin, the law of God became his delight. Rom. vii, 22. Hitherto he had lived a Pharisee, and although zealous toward God, [Acts xxii, 5,] he was ignorant of God's righteousness. Rom. x, 23; iii, 21, 22. But now, instead of making a formal, self-righteous profession of love to God, he served in newness of spirit, being led by the Spirit of God. To those who walk thus there is no condemnation—the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in them—the enmity to God is slain—the carnal mind removed, and all brought in subjection to God's law, which they now confess is holy, just, and good.