Romans 8:12 - A Good Story (Conciliation Series, Part LXI)

 

Consequently then, brethren…

“Storytelling is joke telling. It’s knowing your punchline, your ending – knowing that everything you’re saying, from the first sentence to the last, is leading to a singular goal, ideally confirming some truth that deepens our understandings of who we are as human beings.”

 – Andrew Stanton, “The Clues to a Great Story,” TED Talk

Throughout this study, I’ve heavily stressed the structure of Romans. I’ve been adamant that you do not forget where we are in Romans. Would you believe that we aren’t even halfway done the letter? We’ve come so far, and yet, for all I’ve written, we are merely scratching the surface.

After a long study on vivification, I want to press on in Romans 8. And we are, I promise! But I want to bring something else I’ve been stressing throughout the study into the forefront, consider it alongside the structure, and ideally, show how these two concepts complement each other.

The Bible is not a book (though, for simplicity’s sake, I will refer to it as such.) In truth it is a compilation of 66 books (and, in the past, there may have been more.) Each book in the Scriptures contributes to its main themes, of which there are many. And, as our Pixar-writer-in-chief Andrew Stanton points out, a good storyteller is focused on using every line to contribute to its main themes, and a good story does achieve this goal. It knows its end from its beginning, and, with little exception, would not achieve anything by sharing information with you that would not service the goal.

Now, we are human beings. Sometimes we achieve this goal (Battlestar Galactica, The Wire, and Breaking Bad, to name a few examples,) and sometimes we don’t (Lost, Game of Thrones, and The Walking Dead, to name a few more.) Sometimes this matters, and sometimes it doesn’t. Why? Because storytelling, at the end of the day, is not an exact science. For me, American Beauty does a phenomenal job at sticking to its thesis statement, which is the only reason that the things I witness onscreen are bearable to me in any way. Yet others may not see the value in many of those scenes, and as such, will not be able to handle the subject matter of the film.

Scripture, however, is supernatural by design. It is not one book that ‘appeals to some and not to others,’ though, in our modern world, it may be perceived this way. Scripture is compiling books, from primary and secondary sources, written over the course of 1500 years, with an awe-inspiring amount of cross references. In the photo to your right, for example, you can see a photo made by one “Chris Harrisson,” who worked with a pastor to find over 63,000 cross references between conceptual links, connecting locations, people, places, phrases, and more in verses – and this in the KJV. Imagine how much more accurate this photo would be if the original language were taken into consideration!

The point I’m making is that unlike our stories, such as The Lord of the Rings, written over the course of 15 years, which, while beautiful and detailed, are by no means ‘perfect.’ In contrast, there is a strong case to be made that, despite the fallibility of our translators, the original Scriptural texts, written over the course of 1500 years, are not only beautiful and detailed, but dense and perfect!

We have considered this notion on a smaller scale with Romans. Romans is a small slice of Scripture by comparison, but it is critical in that it unlocks and contextualizes most everything that came before. The Old Testament is the test, and Romans is the answer key. The density and careful nature of Romans has been thoroughly shown in this study, whether you ‘agree’ with every conclusion or not. The fact remains that every single letter is carefully placed, and all evidence deserves most earnest consideration.

This leads me to the drama of the situation: when you ignore this, and ignore the careful placement of each word, and the abundant evidence that speaks to its beauty, we find ourselves in a pickle. We want to know how this stuff changes our lives now. We want to know what we are to do. We’ve read all about this justification, baptism into Christ’s death, the newness of life, the enslavement to God, the exemption from law, the spirit’s law of life in us, the dispositions of the flesh and spirit, the vivification… but what do we do? Many who are in Christ thoroughly grasp that God is clearly in control of the story, and will thus answer, “Do nothing.” If we are referring to salvation, this is a good answer! But life is not static, and if it were, it would make for a boring, and bland story (if Creation had no drama or mystique, it would probably get a 6/10 on IMDB.) And, moreover, it is impossible for us to do nothing on a daily basis, so… what do we do with all of this information that God has given us?

It’s a tough question, and many people will answer in their own way. But the answer, as we will see, is given to us in Romans 8:12-14 (and was previously considered under a different context in Rom. 6:12-14.) God will tell us the effect of everything that came before in this verse.

Why am I stressing this so heavily? Well, because of the other concept I want to talk to you about – the connective tissue of each sentence. Yes, those words “for,” “and,” “therefore,” “wherefore,” and more. If every letter has its careful placement, then these words are just as critical as the actual concepts spoken of in each verse. If we ignore this, then the “pickle” we are in is a lack of context. See, Paul couldn’t have explained “vivification” to you by writing it at the beginning of Romans. Imagine if he had said, “Hey guys! It’s me, Paul, writing to you about the evangel of God. The evangel of God is about ‘justification,’ and it’s through this ‘justification’ that we can talk about vivification!” Well… that’s true, yes, Paul, but is it edifying? How do we understand these doctrines in relation to each other? How do we figure their purpose in our lives? And how would we even begin to apply something like that if no connective tissue existed, or any additional info were given?

I’m getting there, I promise.

What we see, at the beginning of Romans 8:12, is “consequently,” “then,” and “brethren.” All three of these words are careful and exact. Paul has not merely been spouting off randomly, but laying out a structured argument. Did he know he was doing this? I don’t care. But it is written down for us to observe. These three words are a primary example of three chain links in an argument. Without these chain links, we lose the argument. Without the argument, we lose the structure. Without the structure, Romans becomes gobbeldy-gook. If Romans is gobbeldy-gook, then the purpose of the Old Testament also becomes gobbeldy-gook. If so much of the Bible becomes gobbeldy-gook, then the faith we’re learning about loses its logical grounds. If logic is tossed out the window, then we lose sight of our goal, and the point of the story is completely lost. 

The structure reveals an intended goal, but we can’t apprehend the intended goal if we don’t examine the links in the chain. But… what happens when you take the links apart, and reformat them?

Well, you get Baptist theology.

I’m half-kidding. Let’s take a look at the entirety of Rom. 8:12-13, back to back, without including “consequently,” “then,” and “brethren”–

Debtors are we, not to the flesh, to be living in accord with flesh, for if you are living in accord with flesh, you are about to be dying. Yet if, in spirit, you are putting the practices of the body to death, you will be living.

Well… gosh. That sounds rather ominous, don’t you think? When ripped apart from its context, this verse suddenly sounds like you are responsible for whether or not you live or die!!

Obviously, considering everything we’ve read so far, from Romans 1:1 to now, we cannot (and should not) suddenly assert that we are the arbiters of our own salvation or destruction. We would be stating the opposite of the established theme of the letter, that "the evangel is God's power for salvation" (Rom. 1:16.) The argument would cease to make logistical sense, and push the discussion in an entirely different direction!

Yet this is what most churches do!! And they get away with it, too!! The words “consequently,” “then,” and “brethren” – three words that premeditate verses 12 and 13 – may be quoted, but they are completely ignored in favor of what Paul indicates in the rest of the verse!

This unfortunate ignorance is not exclusive to this verse. There are probably a hundred verses like this used by religious pastors to try and make man responsible for their actions, without considering the fact that Paul literally states that your actions here are a consequence of what came before – not the cause.

I have a knack for beating dead horses, so please indulge me. When a verse is ripped out of its context, and certain words are intentionally ignored in favor of an opinion, you get a false supposition and thus a lie. Whether this ignorance is intentional or not is always up for debate (I guess it varies from person to person,) but it does not change the reality of the fact that we are lied to when we are forced to read something apart from its context.

Here’s a good example! Check this verse out. I’ll just read it to you, and you must believe it:

Not to die shall you be dying!

Beautiful phrase! I love not dying! You love not dying! We all love not dying! Who said this? Jesus? He was always talking about life! Or was it Paul? Maybe I’m referencing Romans 9 or something, because I’ve been talking about life beyond the reach of death, and–

What? What’s that?

Oh.

Oh.

Okay. I was just informed by my girlfriend that this verse is actually Genesis 3:4. Let me give you the full verse:

The serpent said to the woman: Not to die shall you be dying! For Elohim knows that on the day you eat of [the tree of knowledge], your eyes will be unclosed, and you will become like Elohim, knowing good and evil.

Many who read this already know that I was misquoting Satan – but for the select few of you who didn’t know… how sinister of me to do this, right? It would be wretched if I ignored the context, and instead said “Hey! It’s in the Bible, so turn off your brain and accept it!” It would make me a hypocrite, give me control over what you learned, and put you at a disadvantage. It would be disingenuous drivel.

Keep things in their context. Don’t ignore “consequently,” “then,” and “brethren.” These are crucial words that unmistakably contextualize Paul’s next statement, and connect it to the rest of the argument. 

I pointed out what happens when we don’t keep things in context.

Now... consider the beauty that is divined when we do.

When we do, we see the narrative. We see the drama unfolding, and a clear structure. A clear structure implies a definite goal. And a definite goal undeniably asserts that there is a point to everything. When we consider the following verses, do not seek to blend them with other verses that have their own context, but allow the Storyteller to tell His story – let Him speak, and let’s be awed by His perfection of the craft.

- GerudoKing