Romans 7:4 - Dead to Sin; Thus, Dead to Law - Pt. 2 (Conciliation Series, Part XXIX)

 Part IV: God’s Conciliation, Confirmed

So that, my brethren, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ, for you to become Another’s, Who is roused from among the dead, that we should be bearing fruit to God.

Now that we’ve studied the figure, we can study the explanation of said figure.

This immediately fascinates me, because there are so many different interpretations of the previous verse. Why? If Paul explains it here, then why should we argue about it?

I dunno. People like to argue.

In the figure, we are the woman. I mentioned all the things that this figure was not at the end of the previous article, but I’m going to clarify them here, while explaining the entirety of this figure, and covering as many aspects as He allows. Check this out:

The woman did not die. I referenced that the penalty for disobeying the law was death, but if she remains his until his death, she is freed from the law because he died, not because she died. This immediately shoots down the implication that, because ‘one is subject to law as long as he is living,’ that you, in the flesh are ‘always’ under the 613 laws of Moses. You did not die, but you also were put to death to law through the body of Christ. Jesus died, His body was sacrificed, which freed you from the law.

Now, because there are people that like to be difficult for kicks and giggles, we must ask, “If we’re the woman and Christ is the Man, is Paul saying that Christ was married to sinners?” This is ridiculous, as Israel is clearly considered the Bride of Christ (Unv. 21:2, 9.) Many will proclaim that we, the saints of the nations, are ‘married’ to Christ, and claim that we should consider ourselves ‘one flesh’ with Christ. This is not the case, because we are told we are not to know Christ according to the flesh (2 Cor. 5:16.) We are said to be baptized by spirit, not by water (Acts 1:5-6, Rom. 6:3,) so we are clearly as Christ’s spirit, in relation to God, and not as Christ’s flesh, which, if we focused on, we would be at enmity with Him.

We became one with Christ, when you were baptized into His death. This is a spiritual oneness. Just as a man and wife are spiritually made to be one, so also Christ is this closely imbibed in relation to us (2 Cor. 11:2.) This does not mean that we are the ‘wife’ of Christ, because Israel is the Bride, Christ the Bridegroom. That marital union is still taking place, and God cares deeply about His chosen nation, as we will read about in later chapters. Because we are spiritually one with Christ, we are considered to also be the Bridegroom, as Jesus is the Head, and we are the body, together forming ‘Christ.’

Our Head’s death puts we, the body, to death to Sin as well.

This puts law and grace on two different sides of the cross. Before Jesus’ death, law is active. After Jesus’ death, grace is active. If you recall the twelve administrations study that we performed, you can see that the period of time the ‘law’ reigned is in complete and utter contrast to Paul’s transitional administration, during which this letter was written. Thus we can’t mix law and grace, because they are such polar opposites. There’s no way to have ‘grace through law,’ because one recognizes sin, and, per both the figure in 7:1-3 and all of chapters 5-8, grace does not, but builds the spirit.

Those that say we are ‘still under law’ today (aside from true Jews, that is) don’t seem to really understand that the law is more than just the ‘Ten Commandments.’ Guys, the law is 613 different laws. There are required sacrifices, days and even years allotted to God, jubilees, set prayer times, and much, much more. And if you don’t follow one of them? Well, hell, you’ve broken them all (James 2:10.) What do Baptists and Catholics say about this?

Sounds doable! Count me in!

In the Circumcision evangel, the law still exists (we just quoted James, but Peter and John cover it too.) Grace was given before Christ’s descent for sure (see: the prophet Hosea,) but obviously, as Paul said before, no flesh can follow the law. Faithful Israel (the few that understood that God loved them) thus understood that they were at God’s mercy, which is an effect of grace (Rom. 9:23.) Grace existed, but it was a provision.

The question is: what does Christ’s death do, then, in the Circumcision evangel? The provision of His blood covers all the sacrificial nonsense (1 Pet. 1:20.) But the law is still strived for, which means that Israel is still focused on their sin. Israel, then, recognizes Christ as their Messiah, and they await the beginning of the new covenant as promised in Ezek. 36. Ezekiel 36 clarifies that they will be given new bodies to attain to the law, during the Millennial Kingdom in the fourth eon. The law itself will still exist as, literally, the ‘law’ of this kingdom, but it will be able to rest, out of Sin’s hands, as the living Israelites will be free of the corrupt flesh we dwell in now.

All this to say that the circumcision evangel is a mixture of ‘law’ and ‘grace.’ This gives us yet another major difference between what Paul is teaching, and what the others in the Bible are teaching. Paul is very clearly separating law and grace to the nations, whereas James does the opposite (Jam. 2:10-17.) Paul indicts the Galatians for operating under this notion as well (Gal. 1:6, 3:1.) If you are recognizing law as something you must follow, to any extent, you cannot say you’re a believer in Paul’s evangel, but the Circumcision evangel (Gal. 2:7-8.) This is because the law must take your actions, and thus, your flesh, into account, indebted to do all of the law (Gal. 5:3.)

In contrast, the uncircumcision evangel has no such restriction. You are freely, under grace, able to recognize Christ on a spiritual level (Rom. 1:11.) You, under grace, do not recognize Christ as to the flesh (2 Cor. 5:16,) but as the Head of the new humanity (to contrast the old from 6:6,) as we’ll study in Romans 8. The law does not limit the grace, as we are, literally, alive from among the dead. If we are living, and a new creation, then we are not subject to the law, as we died to Sin when we were intimately imbibed into Christ’s spirit.

These differences are critical. They cannot be ignored. It is explicitly said here that we have been put to death to the law, through Christ’s death. Not ‘put to death through the law,’ as some commentators say, because that’s implying that ‘all Paul is saying is that the law puts you to death, so you need to follow it to change that’ or some such nonsense. You are put to death to the law. This is not said anywhere outside of Paul’s letters. You will not find such a grand declaration in Peter or John’s epistles, because they are inherently involved in law. I will keep on you about the distinctions between Paul’s message and Peter’s message throughout these letters.

When we died to the law, we became Another’s, and this is clearly clarified by ‘Who is roused from among the dead.’ Again, ‘Who is roused’ is passive, showing us that God roused Christ, not Christ roused Christ. Clearly, God roused Christ, because if Christ roused Christ, then that’s an awfully neat trick, and we should be bearing fruit to Him. Yet Scripture here says that we are bearing fruit to God, in the death of our old humanity. Christ is, again, the Channel by which this is willed.

The figure that Paul presented in 7:1-3 is becoming more beautiful to me, the longer I study it. As Knoch points out in his New Testament commentary, God said this concerning man and woman back in Genesis 2:24–

A man shall forsake his father and his mother; he will cling to his wife, and both of them will be one flesh.

The wife is clung to by the man. They are joined together in spirit. The two are one. When the man dies, the wife (a woman’s blessed title in a relationship, that is,) is put to death as well.

This figure is completely confused by the masses. Some say that the man is the same man, or that the woman actually dies, and comes back to life, or that she dies, and then gets married while dead, or that she marries the law, or that the man represents us, and more. These people must not have read Romans 7:4, where the figure is very obviously explained. I’ve wondered for a long time what to make of these people. On one hand, I believe the people that are trying to understand it, but fail, are just not educated on Scripture, and no fault need be accounted to them. But for the studious minds that go into Scripture, and comment on it, and ignore this verse, or, like Rom. 5:18, try to make excuses for it, are one of two things: they are either:

1)    complete imbeciles, as Satan, their father, deludes them, or

2)    they are sinister, because they know better, but since Satan is their father, they knowingly teach the opposite after you explain the truth

I would prefer to believe the former concerning these folk that teach the opposite. I would rather these people (usually pastors of Seventh Day Adventist churches) can’t grasp basic grammar. At least in that case I can just laugh and hand them a 3^rd grade English textbook. But I am at a loss for the other, nor do I have any desire to give them attention, as God has very clearly explained already that this group of people have lost at the cross, and will be reconciled after a long, and likely difficult, judgment at the Great White Throne.

None of this needs to be complicated or convoluted above what it actually is. The simplest logic asks, “Is there a relation between the man’s death causing the woman to die to law and Christ’s death causing the saint to die to law?” The answer’s yes, or else Paul wouldn’t get into it. I mean, look, if Paul didn’t directly say it, then there’d be room for interpretation, but thankfully, Paul did say it, so we really don’t have to guess, which is why I find ‘different perspectives’ on this verse to be so ridiculous.

We are not united with law, or ‘baptized’ into it, the way that we are baptized into Christ. If this were the case, then the figure would fall flat. We were under law, and the difference is that, while under law, we were baptized with water. If we were so closely correlated to the law, then when Christ died to Sin, He would have effectively died to us as well, instead of for our sakes. If a Savior is saving us, He can’t really say we’re dead to Him as He saves us, can He??

Shoot, even presuming that this verse says that ‘we died to the law through the body of Christ’ is insufficient. The text says we were put to death. This is because we did not personally die, but our Lord did. He died, and it is depicted in each necessary, painful detail in the four accounts. Everything we’ve read so far has been a direct effect of His crucifixion. One of my favorite questions to ask Christians is, “What are ten things Christ accomplished on the cross?” (Thanks to Ace Theo for sharing that one.) The answers they give are rarely satisfactory, and few of them ever include, “You have been put to death to the law.”

With this understanding, the only reason you or I, as believers, are still actually ‘dying’ in the flesh right now is because Adam is at fault for corrupting us. Ultimately, it’s his fault, and death courses through our veins, apart from law – hence Paul’s argument in Rom. 5:12-14. But here we have the definitive explanation that we died to law, thus our spirits are freed from law, thus we do not have to worry about the idea that ‘we’re dying because we aren’t following law.’

Okay, back to the marriage thing. So the way we can conclusively prove that we are not ‘married’ to Christ is in the fact that the woman and the man in 7:1-3 are a figure, not facsimile. There are three points to this simple argument. First, the same way we can look at Luke 16’s parable of Lazarus and the rich man and conclusively understand that, if Jesus is giving a parable, with symbolism, that the ‘hellish’ place he described the rich man ending up in is metaphorical, and not true as to fact, we can also look at this passage here in Romans 7 and understand, conclusively, that if Paul is introducing a figure, that it is not true as to fact that we are the ‘wife’ of Christ.

Second, if this were a figure of marriage, it would have to include all of us, as a whole, and not just an individual. Since Paul says, “for you to become Another’s,” we can tell that he’s referencing an individual. In contrast, when speaking of the bride of Christ, Israel is spoken of as a whole group.

And third, that Paul says “for you to become Another’s,” and not “for you to become another Man’s” should clarify that the marriage figure has not been carried over, but the idea of enslavement from Romans 6. The Romans 7 figure is not prioritizing the idea of marriage, but the idea of subjection to law, which tracks with the rest of God’s argument in the letter thus far. If He were introducing the idea that we are ‘married’ to Christ here, He wouldn’t have said earlier that we are baptized into Christ’s death, nor would He continue talking about law, but He would launch into a teaching on the subject, as that would be completely new information that was not true of the nations before that time.

We are enslaved to Him, and thus any idea of ‘legality’ can be thrown away. You aren’t obligated to obey Him, but you will learn, as God would not call you out otherwise. This is all in complete contrast to Israel, who must receive new flesh first in order to appreciate Christ on marital, spiritual, and legal grounds. We aren’t limited to these requirements, because marriage is a figure, not the point. Christ died, which put us to death to the law. The ‘Another’s’ that we became is risen, new, and ascended. He is currently in the celestials, the “ON-HEAVENLIES.” This is further evidence that the ‘marriage’ idea is not the focus, but I digress. Here’s Rogers:

“A greater difference than that which can be found between any two husbands exists between Christ on the cross and Christ in the glory; between Christ made sin for our sakes and Christ Who becomes to us the righteousness of God; between Christ become curse for our sakes and Christ in Whom we have all spiritual blessing; between Christ sent in the likeness of Sin's flesh and for sin and the glorified Christ Whom we no longer know after the flesh.”

What’s the goal of being freed from law? So that we can be fruitful to God!

Take that, legalists!

Really though, this is what it all adds up to. The final point I want to reiterate and expand on about the figure is that the woman is not free. When she is put to death to the law, it is for a purpose – for her to be free to choose another man. The final example, and clarification, that we are not ‘married’ to Christ, should become evident in the fact that the woman’s subjection to her new man puts her back under law, whereas Paul is using the figure to show our freedom from law. He continues his explanation with, ‘this is so you should be fruitful to God,’ but he did not say this of the woman.

Why is this?

Simply, this is now the fourth time that ‘fruit’ has been mentioned. The first time was in Rom. 1:13, and it was inherently connected with ‘spiritual grace-effect’ (Rom. 1:11.) The second time was much more recent, in Rom. 6:21, where it was revealed that each master you are under bears fruit. The consummation of sin’s fruit is rotten – death. The consummation of God’s fruit, in contrast, is spiritual, and you can only bear this spiritual fruit in Jesus revealing Himself to be your Lord.

- GerudoKing