Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadCharles Simeon Commentary - Romans 7:18 - 7:23
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
SPIRITUAL CONFLICTS OF BELIEVERS
OF all evils that can be mentioned, Antinomianism is the worst; because it makes the Lord Jesus Christ himself a minister of sin, and turns the most glorious revelation of his grace into an occasion of unrestrained licentiousness. But whilst we reprobate with utter abhorrence the idea of sinning that grace may abound, we dare not, with some, deny or pervert the Gospel of Christ. We must affirm, that the Gospel offers to us a free and full salvation through the blood of Christ, and that they who believe in Christ are altogether dead to the law, so as to have nothing to hope for from its promises, or to fear from its threats. If, from this assertion, any one should infer, that we think ourselves at liberty to violate the precepts of the law, he would be much mistaken. There were some who put this construction on St. Paul’s statements; to whom he replied, “Shall we then continue in sin, that grace may abound?” and again, “Shall we then sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace [Note: Rom_6:1; Rom_6:15.]?” To each of these questions he answered, “God forbid:” and in like manner we reject with indignation the remotest idea that we would make the Gospel an occasion of sin.
But, whilst St. Paul vindicated himself from this charge, he shewed, that, as a woman who had lost her husband was at liberty to be married to another man, so the law to which he once owed allegiance being dead, he was at liberty to be married to Christ, and by him to bring forth fruit unto God.
The terms however in which he expressed himself seemed to criminate the law, as much as he had before seemed to cast reflections on the Gospel. “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 [Note: ver. 5.].” Here, as he had before denied to the law the office of justifying a sinner, so now, in appearance, he seemed to accuse it as being to him the author both of sin and death. But these representations also he rejects; and shews, that the law had only been the occasion of sin, and not the cause of it [Note: ver. 8.]; and that it had also been the occasion of death, but was by no means the cause of it [Note: ver. 13.]. The proper cause both of sin and of death was the corruption of our nature, which remains with us even to our dying hour; as he himself could testify by bitter experience. This experience of his he then proceeds to describe. But as commentators have differed widely from each other in their explanations of the passage, we will endeavour to shew,
I. Of whom it is to be understood—
That we may bring the matter to a fair issue, we will distinctly inquire,
1. Does the passage relate the experience of an ungodly man, or of one that is truly pious?
[Those who explain it of an ungodly man say, that the whole preceding chapter represents a true Christian as made free from sin [Note: Rom_6:6-7; Rom_6:11; Rom_6:14; Rom_6:18.]; and that to interpret this passage of a true Christian, would be to make the Apostle contradict himself. As for the opposition which the person here spoken of makes to his sinful propensities, it is nothing more (say they) than the ordinary conflict between reason and passion; and it may therefore properly be interpreted as experienced by an ungodly man.
But to this we answer, that, though an ungodly man may feel some restraints from his conscience, and consequently some conflicts between reason and passion, he cannot say that he really “hates sin,” or that “he delights in the law of God after the inward man [Note: ver. 15, 22.].” The carnal and unrenewed mind neither is, nor can be, subject to the law of God [Note: 1Co_2:14.]; it is altogether enmity against God [Note: Rom_8:7.]: and therefore the character here drawn cannot possibly be assigned to an ungodly man.]
2. Does St. Paul in this passage personate a godly man who is in a low state of grace, or does he speak altogether of himself?
[That the Apostle does sometimes speak in the person of another, in order that he may inculcate truth in a more inoffensive manner, is certain [Note: 1Co_4:6.]: but we conceive it to be clear that he speaks here in his own person: for it is undeniable that he speaks in his own person in the preceding part of the chapter, where he tells us what he was in his unconverted state [Note: ver. 7–11.]: and now he tells us what he is, at the time of writing this epistle. In ver. 9. he says “I was alive without the law once;” and then afterwards, in ver. 14. he says, “The law is spiritual, but I am carnal:” and so he proceeds to the very end of the chapter declaring fully and particularly all the workings of his mind. This change of the tense shews clearly, that from stating his former experience he proceeds to state that which he felt at present. Moreover, in the concluding verse of the chapter, where he sums up, as it were, the substance of his confession in few words, he particularly declares, that he spake it of himself: “So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin [Note: To interpret á ὐ ô ὸ ò ἐ ã ὼ , “I the same man,” i. e. not I myself, but I that other person, is such a perversion of language as cannot with any propriety be admitted.].” And this is yet further evident from what he adds at the beginning of the next chapter, where he says, “The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death [Note: Rom_8:2.].”
The only thing that can raise a doubt whether the Apostle speaks in his own person or not, is the strong language which he uses. It is certainly strong language to say of himself, “I am carnal, sold under sin.” But this differs as widely from what is said of Ahab, who “sold himself to work iniquity,” as the motion of a volunteer differs from the motion of a person who is dragged in chains. To understand the Apostle, we must consider the subject on which he is writing. He is comparing himself with the spiritual and perfect law of God. To fulfil that in its utmost extent, was his continual aim: but by reason of his indwelling corruption he could not attain his aim: and this may well account for the strong terms in which he speaks of his corrupt nature. And, if we compare his language with that which the holiest men that ever existed have used in reference to themselves, we shall find that there is a perfect agreement between them. “Behold, I am vile!” says Job; “I repent and abhor myself in dust and ashes.” David also complains, “My soul eleaveth to the dust.” And the Prophet Isaiah, on being favoured with a vision of the Deity himself, exclaimed, “Woe is me, I am undone! I am a man of unclean lips.” And it is a fact, that the most eminent saints in every age have felt a suitableness in the language of St. Paul to express their own experience, just as they have also in those expressions of our Liturgy, “We are tied and bound with the chain of our sins; but do thou, O Lord, of the pitifulness of thy great mercy, loose us!”]
Having shewn that the passage relates the Apostle’s own experience, we will proceed to shew,
II. Its true import—
The Apostle is speaking of that corrupt principle, which, notwithstanding his attainments, still remained within him, and kept him from that perfect conformity to the law of God to which he aspired. This principle he represents as having the force of a law, which he was not able fully to resist. He had indeed within himself a principle of grace which kept him from ever yielding a willing obedience to his indwelling corruption; but it did not so free him from the workings of corruption, but that he still offended God in many things;
1. In a way of occasional aberration—
[To conceive of this subject aright, we may suppose the holy and perfect law of God to be a perfectly straight line on which we are to walk; and the corrupt principle within us to be operating on all our faculties to turn us from it. Sometimes it blinds the understanding, so that we do not distinctly see the line: sometimes it biasses the judgment, so as to incline us, without any distinct consciousness on our part, to smaller deviations from it: sometimes with force and violence it impels the passions, so that we cannot regulate our steps with perfect self-command: and sometimes it operates to delude the conscience, and to make us confident that we see the line, when in reality it is only a semblance of it, which our great adversary has presented to our imagination in order to deceive us. By this principle a continual warfare was kept up in his soul against his higher and better principle, keeping him from what was good, and impelling him to what was evil; so that he often did what he would not willingly have done, and did not what he gladly would have done. Thus, as he expresses it, there was “a law in his members warring against the law of his mind, and bringing him into captivity to the law of sin in his members.” This representation exactly accords with that which he gives of every child of God, in the Epistle to the Galatians: “The flesh Justeth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other, so that ye cannot do the things that ye would [Note: Gal_5:17.].”
This is by no means to be understood as though he acknowledged that he was driven to any gross violations of God’s law; for with respect to them he had a conscience void of offence: but in respect of smaller deviations from the exact line of duty, he could not assert his innocence: he felt, that however much he longed for perfection, “he had not yet attained, nor was he already perfect.”]
2. In a way of constant defect—
[The law of God requires that we should love God with all our heart, and all our mind, and all our soul, and all our strength; and that every action, every word, every thought, be in perfect accordance with this rule. But who has not reason to confess that his very best duties are defective, in extent, in intensity, and in continuance? Who comprehends in any one action all that assemblage of nicely-balanced motives, and purposes, and affections, that were combined in the heart of our Lord Jesus Christ? Who at any time feels all that ardour in the service of his God which the angels in heaven feel? Or, supposing he did at some highly-favoured season serve God on earth precisely as the glorified saints are serving him in heaven, who must not confess that it is not always thus with him? However “willing his spirit may be, he will find that his flesh is weak.” Indeed, in proportion as any man aspires after perfection, he will lament his imperfections; and in proportion as he sees the beauty of holiness, he will lothe himself for his defects: and we doubt not but that St. Paul’s spirituality of mind led him to complain more bitterly of the defects, which, with all his exertions, he was not able to prevent, than he would have done in his unconverted state of more plain and palpable transgressions. It might be supposed that the more holy any man was, the more free he would be from such complaints: but the very reverse of this is true: the persons “who have received the first-fruits of the Spirit, are they who groan most within themselves for their complete redemption [Note: Rom_8:23.];” yea Paul himself, as long as he was in the body, did “groan, being burthened [Note: 2Co_5:2; 2Co_5:4.]:” to his dying hour he resumed at times that piteous moan, “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me [Note: ver. 24.]?”
St. Paul indeed makes a wide distinction between these sins of infirmity, and wilful sins. Of these (these sins of infirmity) he twice says, “If I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me [Note: Compare ver. 17, 20.];” that is, my new nature in no respects consents to these sins; nay, the full bent and purpose of my soul is against them; but the remainder of my in-dwelling corruption, which I hate and oppose to the uttermost, keeps me from attaining that full perfection that I pant after: and therefore I hope that God will accept my services, notwithstanding the imperfection that attends them. In like manner, we, if we have the testimony of our consciences that we allow no sin, but fight against it universally, and with all our might, may rest assured, that “God will not be extreme to mark what is done amiss,” but that our services, notwithstanding their imperfection, shall come up with acceptance before him.]
In considering this experience of the Apostle, we must especially attend to,
III. The improvement to be made of it—
We may learn from it,
1. How constantly we need the atonement and intercession of Christ—
[It is not for the sins only of our unconverted state that we need a Saviour, but for those of daily incursion, even for those which attend our very best services. As Aaron of old was to bear the iniquity of the people of Israel, even of “their holy things [Note: Exo_28:38.],” so our great High-Priest must bear ours: nor can the best service we ever offered unto God be accepted of him, till it has been washed in the Redeemer’s blood, and perfumed with the incense of his intercession [Note: 1Pe_2:5.]. Guard then against all conceit of meriting any thing at the hands of God: guard also against self-complacency, as though you had wrought some good work in which no flaw can be found. If God were to lay a line and plummet to your best deeds, there would be found inconceivable obliquities and defects in them [Note: Isa_28:17. Psa_130:3.]. Be sensible of this, and then you will learn how to value the Pearl of great price, even the Lord Jesus Christ, for whom you will gladly part with all that you have, that you may obtain an interest in him and in his salvation.]
2. What reason we have to watch over our own hearts—
[Carrying about with us such a corrupt nature, and knowing, as we do, that even St. Paul himself could not altogether cast off its influence, how jealous should we be, lest we be led into the commission of iniquity, even whilst we imagine that we are doing God service! Even the Apostles of our Lord, on more occasions than one, “knew not what spirit they were of:” and we, if we will look back on many transactions of our former lives, shall view them very differently from what we once did: and no doubt God at this moment forms a very different estimate of us from what we are disposed to form of ourselves. How blinded men are by pride, or prejudice, or interest, or passion, we all see in those around us. Let us be aware of it in ourselves: let us remember, that we too have a subtle adversary, and a deceitful heart: let us never forget, that Satan, who beguiled Eve in Paradise, can now “transform himself into an angel of light” to deceive us, and to “corrupt us from the simplicity that is in Christ.” Let us pray earnestly to God to keep us from his wiles, to disappoint his devices, and to bruise him under our feet. If God keep us, we shall stand; but, if he withdraw his gracious influences for one moment, we shall fall.]
3. What comfort is provided for us, if only we are upright before God—
[If we wish to make the Apostle’s experience a cloak for our sins, we shall eternally ruin our own souls. His experience can be of no comfort to us, unless we have the testimony of our own consciences that we “hate evil,” of whatsoever kind it be, and “delight in the law of God,” even in its most refined and elevated requirements, “after our inward man.” But, if we can appeal to God, that we do not regard or retain willingly any iniquity in our hearts, but that we unfeignedly endeavour to pluck out the right eye that offends our God, then may we take comfort in our severest conflicts. We may console ourselves with the thought that “no temptation has taken us but what is common to man,” and that “God will, with the temptation, make for us also a way to escape.” We may go on with confidence, assured of final victory; and may look forward with delight to that blessed day, when sin and sorrow shall depart from us, and death itself be swallowed up in everlasting victory.]