Romans 6:13 - Ranting for a Bit (Conciliation Series, Part XXII)

Part IV: God’s Conciliation, Confirmed

Nor yet be presenting your members, as implements of justice, to Sin…

In the last article, I wrapped up with a very important point from George Rogers – one that I believe to be a more necessary consideration in terms of man’s disposition today than anything else. I’ll repeat his sentence again here:

“Advocates of unrestricted ‘self-expression’ are pleading for the reign of Sin in the mortal body. When man obeys his lusts, he is the slave of Sin.”

That’s right, folks, it’s the political article. I don’t exactly know how to write on this topic without pissing off some people, so I’m going to ease off the “structure” for a bit and perform some of that “stream-of-conscious-thought” stuff Ace Theo talks about. And, no, I don’t have a conservative/liberal mindset. I stick to Scripture, and that fills in the blanks. If it sounds “liberal” to you, or “conservative,” I don’t care. Ok? Ok.

What’s the problem with the word “self-righteous?” That’s right, it’s the “self” part. On its own, self is fine. And on its own, righteous is fine. But put the two words together (particularly in the order of “self,” and then “righteous,”) and you have a nasty issue called “an inflated ego.”

It follows: what’s the problem with the word “self-expression?” Huh. Same issue. See, when I read that from George Rogers, it spoke to something very personal within my soul. I don’t usually like to criticize the political side of the earth. Truth be told, everything has its season (Ecc. 3:1-11,) so I don’t desire to focus on the evil things that have a controlled outcome, by the will of God. Evil, by definition, is temporary, so there’s no need to sit there and let it infest your mind. It’s already in your flesh, and we’re clearly reading a letter that’s explaining, point blank, that it need not leave your flesh and pollute the spirit, because it doesn’t make sense, considering your Lord.

So what’s the problem with self-expression? It’s just people “expressing” themselves, and what’s the harm in that?

People suck.

I know. I guess you may consider me a hypocrite, because I literally just expressed myself, and it’s a shitty disposition anyway. But here’s the thing: I didn’t express myself just now in order to make myself known to you. I did not express with self in mind. I expressed myself, literally, but it was not with intent to glorify my self. If I had said, “I’m cool, and people suck,” then I’m a hypocrite. If I had said, “I like cool things, and I don’t care about your things,” then I’m a hypocrite. If I had even said, “I love God, but hate myself,” then I’m a hypocrite. All three are forms of self-expression, and all three are hypocritical.

I’ll say it again: people suck. We’re five and a half chapters into Romans, and it’s the best news you’ve ever heard. Are you really going to sit here with a straight face and tell me humans don’t suck? As I’ve said before, it’s not our fault that Sin works in us, but that’s the thing that makes humans suck. Sin makes our friends dicks, man. Our lovers cruel. Our family cold. She’s an evil queen, that Sin. And as long as she’s in the flesh, the flesh’s version of “self-expression” is nothing less than a mask for “self-absorbed.”

Now – don’t get me wrong. This is expected of us. None of us can escape it. The truth is, I am a hypocrite, so I will inevitably self-express, because we all do. The only One that didn’t self-express was Jesus, because He is the perfect Image of His Father. Thus, His expression is not “self” based.

Here’s what I’ve learned. Everyone on the planet is eventually going to express Him and only Him, in the same manner that Jesus does now. This is a set thing – it is described in Phil. 2:9-11. It’s not a matter of “if,” but “when.” So, if this is your end goal, and it’s set, then Paul is saying that the goal is undeniably to strive to be conformed to His Image as closely as you can (Rom. 8:29, 1 Cor. 11:1, Eph. 5:1, Phil. 3:3, 10, 17, 21.)

How can you do this if you’re focused on the “self?”

Here is where my “political” sense comes into play. Why does every governmental power fail? Why does every social movement fail? Why does every religious movement fail? Simply put: man is insignificant in comparison to the power of God. Any man-made form of government that is sustainable is driven by control, and maintains that grip through fear. Regardless of intent, man always finds a way to conform their government to their image: that is, of the dying flesh. This was documented perfectly in Israel’s rule, but can be adequately understood through many different empires throughout any era. Governmental power cannot succeed because it strives to perfect 

this flesh.  What’s the result? Say it loudly for the peanut gallery in the back:

Things get worse.

And things get worse to such an extent that we inevitably need a seven year tribulation that wipes this nonsense off the face of the earth.

The social movements don’t help, no. They only distract. I would have to call feminism in almost any form to be one of the most reprehensible doctrines ever considered. No, I’m not talking about the “Jane Austen” feminism, where women are willingly submissive under the principle that the man is willingly loving and seeks not “hers,” but “her.” Jane Austen, the beautiful soul, understood that men and women play this crucial game, and she tells you all about it in Pride and Prejudice. See, it was a story with a plot, not a superhero. Go read it.

That feminism is fine, because it seeks just that: feminine-ism. Our apostle understands it as well, per Eph. 5:22-32. No, I’m talking about that 60’s perversion of the feminist ideology, where women go from creatures we worship, to creatures that “don’t need a man, and can do things just fine.” That feminism is not rooted in a desire for the male/female dichotomy to shine, but in its deterioration.

Now, before you assume I’m going all sexist on you in my example, my issue is not at all that women “shouldn’t have rights” or some such nonsense. Most women are actually smarter than me, and the educated women especially can offer more insight into the male psyche than most men can. They are, literally, the embodiment of the heart and the emotion of our race.

Unfortunately, most men treat them like shit for it. This is because the man doesn’t realize that the emotion is to be cherished and nurtured, and not condemned or criticized. Man lacks that control, that understanding of the heart that women have. Unfortunately, they do not lack a sex drive, and together with their logic, they can delude the woman into believing that sex is, literally, a form of self-expression, aaaaaaaaaaand inevitably, that’s what feminism becomes. Now we live in an era where Lizzo’s “a powerful” feminist icon, or “Nicki Manaj is so liberating,” when in reality, they’ve sold out in the worst way and they’re giving men exactly what they want for profit.

Do you see the issue with this, considering Scripture exists? The profit’s not the issue, funnily enough; both genders have worked out this strange limbo setting where men get what they want, which is sexual content, and women get what they want, which is money. In this case, both are stuck, focused on the flesh, considering only themselves. Neither parties truly love.

The same is true of Catholicism. And Baptism. And Methodist. Oh, the people that made these churches, they just want to get back to Scriptural basics, yeah! But the flesh has Sin in it. You literally can’t focus on the Scriptural basics if your Scriptural basics are disposed to the flesh, focused on the flesh, focused on building up or starving the flesh, and more. Now it’s not “what does Scripture say,” but “what do you think of Scripture?” The reality is that going into an altar and having a confession is, literally, a delusion into self-expression, and conditional forgiveness to a god that doesn’t really care.

What do we learn with this? Well, it takes us back to the initial discussion. Self-expression’s a plague. It gets you all focused on you, and what’s the result? Movies, music, shows, and theater has fallen prey to self-expression, and most movies, music, shows and theater now suck. Very few have something to say, and in fact, if you ask Rodney Paris (of MZTV Archive fame) about this, he’ll show you, through almost any well-written story you bring to him, that it is nothing more than a Shakespearean spin-off.

The truth is that self-expression causes you to focus on the flesh, on your current situation, everything around you. You can’t spend much time focusing on the flesh if you’re focused on God, now, can you? And that’s what Paul is getting at, here. When he says, “Hey, don’t present your members, as implements of justice, to Sin,” he’s not talking out his ass, but he’s also not saying don’t ever sin again. “Sin,” you recall, is capitalized, here. It’s obedience to your new Master, which Paul will break down when we reach Romans 12, that really complements this whole “walking in newness of life” thing.

Now, look at the verse again: presenting your members. Here, it’s not concerned with your spirit, but your body parts. They are “implements of justice,” now. This is what God calls your body; again, God sees the Sin as something you are dead to, and He is something your spirit is living to. Thus He sees your body as an effect of your spirit, not a cause. It is implemented into your justice, and need not be presented to Sin. The flesh itself was held by Sin, but now that your flesh was killed at the cross, and now that Sin’s reign over you has been nullified, your body is no longer living to Sin, and thus you need not worry about presenting your body to God, period. The flesh won’t impress Him (Acts 10:34.) The death process is irreversible. Your body need not be the cause of “self” at all.

- GerudoKing