Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 7:4

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 7:4” utilice nuestra app.

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 who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

4. Wherefore ] The word marks transition from the facts to the spiritual inference.

are become dead ] Lit., and better, were made dead; a passive verb, suggesting the external, objective work which caused their “death;” viz., the Death of their Representative and Head, the Second Adam.

to the law ] To its claim on you as a covenant of salvation.

by the body of Christ ] Which was slain for you. No reference to the mystical Body, the Church, (Rom 12:5; 1 Corinthians 10; Eph.; Col.;) is to be sought here. The word “ body ” is used, instead of “ death,” probably to remind the readers that the Lord “took our nature upon Him” expressly in view of His death. (See Heb 2:14.) Meanwhile the truth of the connexion between believers and their Head, their Second Adam, is still full in view. By virtue of it the death of the Lord counts as the death of His brethren, in respect of the claim of the Law upon them here figured as the claim of one marriage-partner over the other, to be broken only by the death of one of the two.

to another ] i.e., another than the Law, now regarded as defunct in respect of its claim on them. Observe that the metaphorical language here is not strictly consistent. In Rom 7:2-3, the death of the husband is contemplated; in Rom 7:4 the death of the wife. The change may be explained partly by St Paul’s desire to avoid an expression so easily misunderstood as the death of the Law (see on Rom 7:6); and partly by the unique character of the spiritual fact illustrated here by a new marriage; viz. the death and resurrection (in her Representative, who now becomes her Husband also,) of the mystical Bride. The change in the metaphor, whatever its cause, leaves it unchanged as an illustration. The figure of Marriage, passingly employed here, (and still more so, Gal 4:21-31,) is worked out more fully in Eph 5:23, &c., and in the Revelation. It is largely foreshadowed in O. T.; e.g. in Psalms 45; Canticles; Isaiah 54; Jeremiah 3; and in the many passages where idolatry is pictured by sin against wedlock.

to him who is raised ] The Lord’s resurrection is here brought in, because the “death” (in Him) of His people has just been mentioned. The thought suggests both that they are “risen in Him” to the life of peace with God, and that they partake with Him, as their Risen Head, “the power of an endless life.”

fruit ] offspring. The metaphor is carried into detail. (See for a parallel of more elaboration, Jas 1:15.) The “offspring” here is, obviously, the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal 5:22), Christian virtues; just as the “offspring” of the former marriage had been acts of sin (Rom 7:4).

unto God ] The Father, not Christ. The phrase does not suggest the bearing children to a Husband, but the bearing children to be then dedicated to God. So Hannah bore Samuel “unto God.”

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Wherefore – This verse contains an application of the illustration in the two preceding. The idea there is, that death dissolves a connection from which obligation resulted. This is the single point of the illustration, and consequently there is no need of inquiring whether by the wife the apostle meant to denote the old man, or the Christian, etc. The meaning is, as death dissolves the connection between a wife and her husband, and of course the obligation of the law resulting from that connection, so the death of the Christian to the Law dissolves that connection, so far as the scope of the argument here is concerned, and prepares the way for another union, a union with Christ, from which a new and more efficient obligation results. The design is to show that the new connection would accomplish more important effects than the old.

Ye also are become dead to the law – Notes, Rom 6:3-4, Rom 6:8. The connection between us and the Law is dissolved, so far as the scope of the apostles argument is concerned. He does not say that we are dead to it, or released from it as a rule of duty, or as a matter of obligation to obey it; for there neither is, nor can be, any such release, but we are dead to it as a way of justification and sanctification. In the great matter of acceptance with God, we have ceased to rely on the Law, having become dead to it, and having embraced another plan.

By the body of Christ – That is, by his body crucified; or in other words, by his death; compare Eph 2:15, Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, etc. that is, by his death. Col 1:22, in the body of his flesh through death, etc. Col 2:14; 1Pe 2:24, who bare our sins in his own body on the tree. The sense, is, therefore, that by the death of Christ as an atoning sacrifice; by his suffering for us what would be sufficient to meet the demands of the Law; by his taking our place, he has released us from the Law as a way of justification; freed us from its penalty; and saved us from its curse. Thus released, we are at liberty to be united to the law of him who has thus bought us with his blood.

That ye should be married to another – That you might be united to another, and come under his law. This is the completion of the illustration in Rom 7:2-3. As the woman that is freed from the law of her husband by his death, when married again comes under the authority of another, so we who are made free from the Law and its curse by the death of Christ, are brought under the new law of fidelity and obedience to him with whom we are thus united. The union of Christ and his people is not unfrequently illustrated by the most tender of all earthly connections, that of a husband and wife, Eph 5:23-30; Rev 21:9. I will show thee the bride, the Lambs wife, Rev 19:7.

Even to him who is raised … – See the force of this explained, Rom 6:8.

That we should bring forth fruit unto God – That we should live a holy life. This is the point and scope of all this illustration. The new connection is such as will make us holy. It is also implied that the tendency of the Law was only to bring forth fruit unto death Rom 7:5, and that the tendency of the gospel is to make man holy and pure; compare Gal 5:22-23.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Rom 7:4

Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ: that ye should be married to another.

The sinner married to the law–the believer married to the Lord

I. The sinner, before believing, is married to the law.

1. This marriage involves certain obligations that correspond to those that grow out of the conjugal relation. The husband is the head of the wife, and his duty is to live with her, provide for her, and love her; the wifes duty is to be subject to her husband, consulting his will, and acting faithfully for his interests. If the law, then, be the sinners husband, we may say, Submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord. This is your duty, and it is also your interest. The ten rules of your husbands house are equitable and good, tending as much to promote your own happiness as his honour.

2. This marriage is of the Lord. God has joined the parties together; the marriage was made in heaven. As soon as he is born, the sinner is espoused to the law, yea, before, and there is nothing unfair in placing a sinner under a constitution which is perfectly good. It is just as fair for God to marry the sinner to the law without his consent as to bring him into existence without it. But, in one sense, the sinner has consented. Our first parents consented for themselves and their offspring, and had you been present personally when the covenant was made with them, you could not have refused and been innocent; and had Adam and Eve acted faithfully, the arrangement would have been extolled as wise and good.

3. The chief reason why objections are made is, that it is an unhappy marriage. In the case of unhappy marriages, it is commonly remarked that there is fault on both sides. But this cannot be said of this, for the Husband is uniformly holy, just, and good, and the spouse that faithfully does His will is sure of happiness. But if He be once offended, woe then to the offender; for He will never again be reconciled. Suppose you expostulate, I wish to do Thy will, He will reply, Speak not of wishes, but do it. But I have done it in almost every particular. That is not enough; My will must be altogether done. But I am sorry, and mean to reform. But you cannot now repair the injury you have done. But may I not be forgiven? No–there is no forgiveness in My nature, the soul that sinneth it shall die.

4. But such an unhappy marriage were well dissolved. True, but the marriage is not easily dissolved. It is always a difficult thing to break a marriage. Yet in ordinary eases the wife may desert her husband, or obtain a divorce. But desertion or divorce is impossible in this case. What God has joined together, man cannot and dare not put asunder. The husband, though deeply injured, will not consent to a separation. You may become so depraved as almost to forget that he has any claim upon you. But he will follow you still, and assert his right to you as long as you live. There is only one way of escape, viz., to get married to Him that was raised from the dead. Your second Husband will give ample satisfaction to your first. He will take all your responsibilities on Himself, and deliver you.

II. The believer is married to the Lord. Of the second marriage you may notice, just as of the first, that–

1. It involves certain obligations. The spouse is bound just as before to be subject to her husband in all things. The identical regulations of the first husband are found word for word in the house of the second. If ye love Me, keep My commandments. He that hath My commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me.

2. It is of the Lord, though it is never consummated without the consent of parties. The believer is espoused to Christ before he is born, but the marriage is not completed until consent is given freely and cordially. But mark the wonders of Christs love! He has provided the Spirit to operate on the heart, and make us willing in the day of His power. He has instituted the Christian ministry and, like Abrahams servant, every minister is bound to go to the intended bride and tell her of the riches and honours of his Masters Son, in order to gain her consent.

3. It is a happy marriage–as happy as the other is miserable. Christ loves that sinner as He loves Himself. No man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it. In having Christ, you have all things–pardon, strength, support, and a title to glory. As Elkanah said to his disconsolate spouse, so Christ says to His–Am not I better to thee than ten sons?

4. It is one that can never be dissolved. Whom Christ espouses, He espouses forever. May the spouse then do as she pleases? No; does a woman feel encouraged to insult her husband because she knows he will not put her away? No; she knows he has various ways of expressing his displeasure, though he does not insist on a Separation. The want of his love, the frown on his face, will be felt by an affectionate woman to be dreadful enough.

III. Before a person can be married to the Lord, his marriage with the law must be dissolved.

1. This is in accordance with both the law of God and of man, and the apostle assumed it as admitted and well known. As long as both you and the law are alive the marriage must stand (Rom 7:1).

2. How, then, is it possible for a sinner to be set at liberty? Only by death. No doubt the death of either party would dissolve it, but the Husband cannot die; He is immortal. It is your death, sinner, that must cut the connection.

3. But how can the spouse that dies be married to another? It is the party that survives, that gets married a second time.

(1) But this spouse dies not personally, but by substitute–by the body of Christ. Being represented by Christ, ye were virtually in His person or body when He died. You admire the generosity of the Armenian prince who proposed to the conqueror to give his life as the ransom of his brides what say you to the generosity of Jesus? The bride was so overcome that she could attend to nothing else. What did you think of Cyrus? said her husband. I never observed him. I was thinking of that man who proposed to give his life for mine. Herein, indeed, is love, and if Christs professed spouse refuse to return the affection, let her be anathema maranatha.

(2) But the believer dies to the law also in spirit–his hope and his self-righteous confidence die. Married to the law he was at one time alive, cherishing the hope of being able to please it, and ultimately to enter glory. But the commandment came, sin revived, and he died. Through the law itself he became dead to the law. Its spirituality, its exceeding breadth and purity, put an end to its legal hopes and dependencies. But observe it is not the law, apart from the body of Christ; but the law as magnified and made honourable in that body. In the Cross we see as never before the awful strength and vengeance of the law. If the spouse is alarmed and reduced to despair when she hears her husbands words, she dies altogether when she beholds his doings. She no longer hopes to appease his anger by her repentance, reformation, promises, or duties.

4. At the very time the spouse becomes dead to the law she becomes united to the Lord. The date of her death is also the date of her marriage; hence there is mourning and rejoicing on the same day. There is a strange mixture of emotions experienced, which it is difficult to describe.

5. Let Gods people, then, realise their privileges, and know that they are free. Some who are professedly married to the Lord, act as if their first marriage remained still in force. But ye are not under the law, but under grace; and when the law comes to you demanding allegiance, and threatening wrath as formerly, refer it at once to the Lord Jesus.

IV. It is only when the first marriage is dissolved and the second contracted that fruit is brought forth unto God.

1. The fruit of the first marriage is unto death (Rom 7:5). The offspring of the first marriage is sin, and as soon as it comes into existence it begins to reign over its own parent, and that unto death. It will murder your precious soul; aye, and your husband will give it authority for this purpose–The strength of sin is the law. He will at last in justice abandon his guilty spouse to her own monster offspring–the fruit of her infidelity; and sin shall hold her in everlasting death.

2. But the fruit of the second marriage is unto God, viz., holiness (chap. 6:22); which has–

(1) Its commencement in genuine repentance.

(2) Its essence in love to God and to His plans.

(3) Its external manifestation in the obedience of the life. (J. Lyon.)

Married to Christ

I. To His memory.

1. When the negroes of the Southern States of America were set free, they were, in many cases, placed in a position of deep misery. Their cry reached the ears of many in the North, and amongst those who went to the rescue was a young man of education, refinement, social position, and wealth, who, soon after commencing his arduous work, sickened and died. Arrangements were made to convey the body to the family sepulchre; but many who had been fed, clothed, instructed and comforted by their deceased friend, entreated that his dust might be allowed to sleep in the scene of his generous labours. The mother consented, and the father; but the consent of another was necessary. Could any wonder if it was but tardily given? At length his betrothed gave her cordial assent, declaring that she would live where her elect husband had died, and by devoting herself to his work, would be married to his memory.

2. More than eighteen centuries ago the Son of God came from heaven to our earth. He went about doing good. He bare our sins in His own body on the tree; He rose again, and ascended into heaven. But there is a remembrance of these things by the writings of the evangelists and apostles. By testimony, the Jesus of the past is with us. The birth at Bethlehem, the teaching, miracles, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, can only be memories. Let us be married to His memory–

(1) By frequently thinking of all that He was, and did, and suffered. We cannot visit Bethlehem, Nazareth, and Calvary, but we can think of them.

(2) By cherishing affections corresponding with such thoughts. Thus thinking, gratitude and love will spring up in our hearts. Let us cherish these plants.

(3) By contentedly living on this earth so long as we have a work of God to do. Christ came to this world, and remained until His work was finished. His memory seems to say, Pray not to be taken out of the world, but ask for help to complete your work.

(4) By working, so far as we can, the works He wrought. He healed, and we may be great healers. He comforted, and the weakest may be a son of consolation. He instructed, and all who have religious knowledge may instruct. He made peace, and a little child may be a peacemaker.

(5) By intelligently and devoutly observing the ordinance of remembrance which He founded (1Co 11:23-25).

II. To the fellowship and the service of the living Christ. The law, as given by Moses, has no claim upon us now. Prescription and exclusive sanctity as to place of worship is dead; human priesthood, carnal sacrifices, ritualism, symbolism, the whole Mosaic economy is dead. Let us then be married to the living Christ–

1. By the nonrecognition of the Mosaic institutes. As they who are married, forsaking all other, cleave to each other as long as both shall live, so the disciple of Jesus must cease to be a disciple of Moses, or refuse to be, if tempted to be.

2. By looking, and continuing to look to Him, for every good thing. All that we really need, the mediation of Jesus Christ can secure.

3. By cherishing and expressing true love for Him. Some appear to be content with knowledge without love, and others reduce their love to mere obligation for redemption from hell. But see 1Co 16:22.

4. By obeying His commandments. Verily, these are not grievous; but if they were, true love would make the yoke easy and the burden light. This is one test which Jesus gave His disciples (Joh 14:15).

5. By recognising Himself in His disciples, and by ministering to His needy ones for His sake.

6. By defending His name and His mission.

7. By devoting ourselves to advance the aim of His mediation–to save the world.

Conclusion:

1. I know of no illustration of marriage to the Saviours memory and mission equal to the example of the Apostle Paul. He describes his own death to the law and marriage to Christ, and his previous marriage to the law and death unto Christ, in Php 3:5-10. Paul knew what he was writing when he wrote the text, and as a wife submits herself to her own husband as her head, is subject to him in everything, reverences him, helps him, makes his cares, joys, honours, and burdens her own, and blends her life with his, so did Paul live for Christ.

2. One motive by which we should be constrained to seek and to cherish union with Jesus Christ is this–that only thereby can we live as Gods children. The reference in the text is to the fruit of marriage. Elsewhere, with another reference, the same truth is presented (Gal 5:22-23; Eph 5:9; Col 1:5-6; Col 1:10). The fruit here named is reconciliation to and oneness with God. It is light in the spirit, love in the heart, and righteousness in the life. It consists of all the fruits of holiness and righteousness and godliness. Peter names them as virtue, etc. (2Pe 1:5-7). John represents them as all included in love. Jesus represents union with Himself as essential to all usefulness (Joh 15:5).

3. All coming short of this is traceable to non-union with Christ. Some religious people marry themselves to a system of theology, and the fruit is pride and bigotry; others to a round of ceremonies, and the fruit is self-deception and hypocrisy; others to what they account the Church, and the fruit is a form of godliness without the power; others to a sect, and the fruit is envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharitableness; others but partially identify themselves with Christ, and the fruit is indecision, confusion, and various evil works. The world, the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life make this union partial; in the degree that it is not entire, there cannot be fruit unto God (Psa 45:10-11). (S. Martin.)

The believers new relations

I. Dead to the law.

1. This imparts release from its–

(1) Condemnation.

(2) Penalty.

(3) Bondage.

2. Is effected by the body of Christ sacrificed for us.

II. Married to Christ.

1. The nature of this union.

2. The honour of it.

3. The result of it. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Make a confidant of the Lord Jesus

Make a confidant of the Lord Jesus–tell Him all. You are married unto Him: play the part of a wife who keeps no secrets back, no trials back, no joys back; tell them all to him. I was in a house yesterday where there was a little child, and it was said to me, He is such a funny child. I asked in what way, and the mother said, Well, if he tumbles down and hurts himself in the kitchen, he will always go upstairs crying and tell somebody, and then he comes down and says, I told somebody; and if he is upstairs he goes down and tells somebody, and when he comes back it is always, I told somebody, and he does not cry any more. Ah! well, I thought, we must tell somebody: it is human nature to want to have sympathy, but if we would always go to Jesus, and tell Him all, and there leave it we might often dismiss the burden, and be refreshed with a grateful song. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 4. Wherefore, my brethren] This is a parallel case. You were once under the law of Moses, and were bound by its injunctions; but now ye are become dead to that law – a modest, inoffensive mode of speech, for, The law, which was once your husband, is dead; God has determined that it shall be no longer in force; so that now, as a woman whose husband is dead is freed from the law of that husband, or from her conjugal vow, and may legally be married to another, so God, who gave the law under which ye have hitherto lived, designed that it should be in force only till the advent of the Messiah; that advent has taken place, the law has consequently ceased, and now ye are called to take on you the yoke of the Gospel, and lay down the yoke of the law; and it is the design of God that you should do so.

That ye should be married to another – who is raised from the dead] As Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth, the object of God in giving the law was to unite you to Christ; and, as he has died, he has not only abolished that law which condemns every transgressor to death, without any hope of a revival, but he has also made that atonement for sin, by his own death, which is represented in the sacrifices prescribed by the law. And as Jesus Christ is risen again from the dead, he has thereby given the fullest proof that by his death he has procured the resurrection of mankind, and made that atonement required by the law. That we should bring forth fruit unto God – we, Jews, who believe in Christ, have, in consequence of our union with him, received the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit; so that we bring forth that fruit of holiness unto God which, without this union, it would be impossible for us to produce. Here is a delicate allusion to the case of a promising and numerous progeny from a legitimate and happy marriage.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

4. Wherefore . . . ye also arebecome deadrather, “were slain.”

to the law by the body ofChristthrough His slain body. The apostle here departs fromhis usual word “died,” using the more expressive phrase”were slain,” to make it clear that he meant their being”crucified with Christ” (as expressed in Rom 6:3-6;Gal 2:20).

that ye should be married toanother, even to him that is“was.”

raised from the deadtothe intent.

that we should bring forthfruit unto GodIt has been thought that the apostle should herehave said that “the law died to us,” not “we tothe law,” but that purposely inverted the figure, to avoid theharshness to Jewish ears of the death of the law [CHRYSOSTOM,CALVIN, HODGE,PHILIPPI, c.]. But this isto mistake the apostle’s design in employing this figure, which wasmerely to illustrate the general principle that “deathdissolves legal obligation.” It was essential to hisargument that we, not the law, should be the dying party,since it is we that are “crucified with Christ,” and notthe law. This death dissolves our marriage obligation to the law,leaving us at liberty to contract a new relationto be joined tothe Risen One, in order to spiritual fruitfulness, to the glory ofGod [BEZA, OLSHAUSEN,MEYER, ALFORD,&c.]. The confusion, then, is in the expositors, not the text andit has arisen from not observing that, like Jesus Himself, believersare here viewed as having a double lifethe old sin-condemned life,which they lay down with Christ, and the new life of acceptance andholiness to which they rise with their Surety and Head; and all theissues of this new life, in Christian obedience, are regarded as the”fruit” of this blessed union to the Risen One. How suchholy fruitfulness was impossible before our union to Christ, is nextdeclared.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also,…. Here the apostle accommodates the foregoing instance and example to the case in hand, showing, that the saints were not under the law, the power and dominion of it; since that, as when a man is dead, the woman is loosed from that law by which she was bound whilst he lived, that she may lawfully marry another man, and bear children to him without the imputation of adultery; so believers being dead to the law, and the law dead to them, which is all one, they are loosed from it, and may be, and are lawfully married to Christ, that they may bring forth the genuine fruits of good works, not in order to obtain righteousness and life by them, but for the honour and glory of God; in which account may be observed, an assertion that the saints and children of God

are become dead to the law, and that to them, as in Ro 7:6, and can have no more power over them than a law can have over dead persons, or a dead abrogated law can have over living ones. They are represented as “dead to sin”, and “dead with Christ”, Ro 6:2; and here, “dead to the law”, as in Ga 2:19, and consequently cannot be under it; are out of the reach of its power and government, since that only has dominion over a man as long as be lives the law is dead to them; it has no power over them, to threaten and terrify them into obedience to it; nor even rigorously to exact it, or command it in a compulsory way; nor is there any need of all this, since believers delight in it after the inward man, and serve it with their minds freely and willingly; the love of Christ, and not the terrors of the law, constrains them to yield a cheerful obedience to it; it has no power to charge and accuse them, curse or condemn them, or minister death unto them, no, not a corporeal one, as a penal evil, and much less an eternal one. And the way and means by which they become dead to the law, and that to them is,

by the body of Christ; not by Christ, as the body or substance of the ceremonial law; see Col 2:17; since that is not singly designed, but the whole law of Moses; but by “the body of Christ”, is either meant Christ himself, Heb 10:10, or rather the human nature of Christ, Heb 10:5, in which the law meets with every thing it can require and demand, as holiness of nature, which is the saints’ sanctification in Christ; obedience of life, which is their righteousness; and sufferings of death, which is the penalty the law enjoins, whereby full expiation of sin is made, complete pardon is procured, and eternal redemption obtained; so that the law has nothing more to demand; its mouth is stopped, it is not in its power to curse and damn believers, they are dead to that, and that to them: the reason why the law is become so to them, and they to that, is,

that ye should be married to another; or “that ye should be to another”, or “be another’s”; that is, that ye should appear to be so in a just and legal way; for they were another’s, they were Christ’s before by the Father’s gift, and were secretly married to him in the everlasting covenant, before he assumed their nature, and in the body of his flesh bore their sins, satisfied law and justice, paid their debts, and so freed them from the power of the law, its curse and condemnation, or any obligation to punishment; all which was done in consequence of his interest in them, and their marriage relation to him; but here respect is had to their open marriage to him in time, the day of their espousals in conversion; to make way for which, the law, their former husband, must be dead, and they dead to that, that so their marriage to Christ might appear lawful and justifiable; who is very fitly described by him,

who is raised from the dead; and is a living husband, and will ever continue so, will never die more; and therefore as the saints can never be loosed from the marriage bond of union between Christ and them, so they can never be loosed from the law of this husband; wherefore though they are dead to the law as a covenant of works, and as ministered by Moses, and are free from any obligation to it, as so considered, yet they are “under the law to Christ”, 1Co 9:21; under obligation, by the ties of love, to obedience to it, and shall never be loosed from it. The end of being dead to the law, and of being married to Christ, is,

that we should bring forth fruit unto God. The allusion is to children being called “the fruit of the womb”, Ps 127:3, and here designs good works, the fruits of righteousness, which are brought forth by persons espoused to Christ, under the influence of the Spirit and grace of God; and they are “unto God”, that is, for the honour and glory of God; meaning either Christ the husband of believers, who is God over all blessed for ever; or God the Father, to whose praise and glory they are by Christ; and which is a reason and argument which strongly excites and encourages the saints to the performance of them: and let it be observed, that as children begotten and born in lawful marriage are only true and legitimate, and all before marriage are spurious and illegitimate; so such works only are the true and genuine fruits of righteousness, which are in consequence of a marriage relation to Christ; are done in faith, spring from love, and are directed to the glory of God; and all others, which are done before marriage to Christ, and without faith in him, are like spurious and illegitimate children.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Ye also were made to the law ( ). First aorist indicative passive of , old verb, to put to death (Mt 10:21) or to make to die (extinct) as here and Ro 8:13. The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3-6). The relation of marriage is killed “through the body of Christ” as the “propitiation” (3:25) for us. Cf. Col 1:22.

That we should be joined to another ( ). Purpose clause with and the infinitive. First mention of the saints as wedded to Christ as their Husband occurs in 1Cor 6:13; Gal 4:26. See further Eph 5:22-33.

That we might bring forth fruit unto God ( ). He changes the metaphor to that of the tree used in 6:22.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Are become dead [] . Rev., more accurately, ye were made dead, put to death; because this ethical death is fellowship with Christ ‘s death, which was by violence.

Who was raised. An important addition, because it refers to the newness of life which issues from the rising with Christ. See ch. Rom 6:3, 11, 13, 22. Bring forth fruit. The figure of marriage is continued, but the reference is not to be pressed. The real point of analogy is the termination of relations to the old state.

Rom 7:5In the flesh [ ] . Sarx flesh, occurs in the classics in the physical sense only. Homer commonly uses it in the plural as denoting all the flesh or muscles of the body. Later the singular occurs in the same sense. Paul ‘s use of this and other psychological terms must be determined largely by the Old – Testament usage as it appears in the Septuagint. 38

1. In the physical sense. The literal flesh. In the Septuagint ta krea flesh (plural) is used where the reference is to the parts of animals slain, and aiJ sarkev, flesh (plural) where the reference is to flesh as the covering of the living body. Hence Paul uses krea in Rom 14:21; 1Co 8:13, of the flesh of sacrificed animals. Compare also the adjective sarkimov fleshy 2Co 3:3; and Eze 11:19; Eze 36:26, Sept.

2. Kindred. Denoting natural or physical relationship, Rom 1:3; Rom 9:3 – 8; Rom 11:14; Gal 4:23, 29; 1Co 10:18; Phl 1:16. This usage forms a transition to the following sense : the whole human body. Flesh is the medium in and through which the natural relationship of man manifests itself. Kindred is conceived as based on community of bodily substance. Therefore :

3. The body itself. The whole being designated by the part, as being its main substance and characteristic, 1Co 6:16; 1Co 7:28; 2Co 4:11; 2Co 7:5; 2Co 10:3; 2Co 12:7. Rom 2:28; Gal 6:13, etc. Paul follows the Septuagint in sometimes using swma body, and sometimes sarx flesh, in this sense, so that the terms occasionally seem to be practically synonymous. Thus 1Co 6:16, 17, where the phrase one body is illustrated and confirmed by one flesh. See Gen 2:24; Eph 5:28, 31, where the two are apparently interchanged. Compare 2Co 4:10, 11; 1Co 5:3, and Col 2:5. Sarx, however, differs from swma in that it can only signify the organism of an earthly, living being consisting of flesh and bones, and cannot denote “either an earthly organism that is not living, or a living organism that is not earthly” (Wendt, in Dickson). Swma not thus limited. Thus it may denote the organism of the plant (1Co 14:37, 38) or the celestial bodies (ver. 40). Hence the two conceptions are related as general and special : swma body, being the material organism apart from any definite matter (not from any sort of matter), sarx, flesh, the definite, earthly, animal organism. The two are synonymons when swma is used, from the context, of an earthly, animal body. Compare Phi 1:22; 2Co 5:1 – 8.

Swma body, and not sarx flesh, is used when the reference is to a metaphorical organism, as the church, Rom 12:4 sqq.; 1Co 10:16; 1Co 12:12 – 27; Eph 1:23; Eph 2:16; Col 1:18, etc.

The sarx is described as mortal (2Co 4:11); subject to infirmity (Gal 4:13; 2Co 12:7); locally limited (Col 2:15); an object of fostering care (Eph 5:29).

Rom 7:4Living beings generally, including their mental nature, and with a correlated notion of weakness and perishableness. Thus the phrase pasa sarx all flesh (Gen 6:12; Isa 49:26; Isa 49:23). This accessory notion of weakness stands in contrast with God. In Paul the phrase all flesh is cited from the Old Testament (Rom 3:20; Gal 2:16) and is used independently (1Co 1:29). In all these instances before God is added. So in Gal 1:16, flesh and blood implies a contrast of human with divine wisdom.

Compare 1Co 14:50; Eph 6:12. This leads up to

Rom 7:5Man “either as a creature in his natural state apart from Christ, or the creaturely side or aspect of the man in Christ.” Hence it is correlated with anqrwpov man, 1Co 3:3; Rom 6:19; 2Co 5:17. Compare Rom 6:6; Eph 4:22; Col 3:9; Gal 5:24. Thus the flesh would seem to be interchangeable with the old man.

It has affections and lusts (Gal 5:24); willings (Eph 2:3; Rom 8:6, 7); a mind (Col 2:18); a body (Col 2:11). It is in sharp contrast with pneuma spirit (Gal 3:3, 19; Gal 5:16, 17, 19 – 24; Gal 6:8; Rom 8:4). The flesh and the spirit are thus antagonistic. Sarx flesh, before or in contrast with his reception of the divine element whereby he becomes a new creature in Christ : the whole being of man as it exists and acts apart from the influence of the Spirit. It properly characterizes, therefore, not merely the lower forms of sensual gratification, but all – the highest developments of the life estranged from God, whether physical, intellectual, or aesthetic.

It must be carefully noted :

Rom 7:1That Paul does not identify flesh and sin. Compare, flesh of sin, Rom 8:3. Sec Rom 7:17, 18; 2Co 7:1; Gal 2:20.

Rom 7:2That Paul does not identify sarx with the material body nor associate sin exclusively and predominantly with the body. The flesh is the flesh of the living man animated by the soul [] as its principle of life, and is distinctly used as coordinate with anqrwpov man. As in the Old Testament, “it embraces in an emphatic manner the nature of man, mental and corporeal, with its internal distinctions.” The spirit as well as the flesh is capable of defilement (2Co 7:1; compare 1Co 7:34). Christian life is to be transformed by the renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2; compare Eph 4:23).

Rom 7:3That Paul does not identify the material side of man with evil. The flesh is not the native seat and source of sin. It is only its organ, and the seat of sin ‘s manifestation. Matter is not essentially evil. The logical consequence of this would be that no service of God is possible while the material organism remains. See Rom 12:1. The flesh is not necessarily sinful in itself; but as it has existed from the time of the introduction of sin through Adam, it is recognized by Paul as tainted with sin. Jesus appeared in the flesh, and yet was sinless (2Co 5:21).

The motions of sins [ ] . Motions used in earlier English for emotions or impulses. Thus Bacon : “He that standeth at a stay where others rise, can hardly avoid motions of envy” (” Essay ” 14.). The word is nearly synonymous with paqov passion (ch. 1, 26, note). From paqein to suffer; a feeling which the mind undergoes, a passion, desire. Rev., sinful passions : which led to sins.

Did work [] . Rev., wrought. See 2Co 1:6; 2Co 4:12; Eph 3:20; Gal 5:6; Phi 2:13; Col 1:29. Compare Mr 6:14, and see on power, Joh 1:12.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Wherefore, my brethren,” (hoste adelphoi mou) “So my brethren;” In the light of this illustration, the law is dead, fulfilled, set aside, Mat 5:19-20; Luk 16:16; Luk 24:44.

2) “Ye also are become dead to the law,” (kai humeis ethanatothete to nomon) “You all were also put to death to the law,” to the obligations to the law, to follow or practice its rites and ceremonies, which were abolished in the death of Christ, 2Co 3:7-11; Gal 3:19-25; Col 2:14-17.

3) “By the body of Christ,” (dia tou somatos tou Christou) “Through the body of Christ,” the cross body of Christ, through which first, Salvation was bought for every man; and second, the church was bought as a new service and worship agency of Jesus Christ; Col 1:20-22; 1Pe 2:24; Act 20:28; Eph 5:25.

4) “That ye should be married to another,” (eis to genesthai humas hetero) “That you all might be married or bound to another, of a different kind,” the church, as the agency of Christ (his body of worship and service, a new law or principle of worship and service, of a different kind from the law.

5) “Even to him who is raised from the dead,” (to ek nekron egerthenti) “To Jesus Christ, the one who is raised from the dead,” not to Moses. Today believers in Jesus Christ, children of God, become espoused to be married, (joined) to Christ in Worship and Service obligations, when they are baptized, into the fellowship of his church, Joh 3:28-29; 2Co 11:1-2; Eph 3:21.

6) “That we should bring forth fruit unto God,” (hina kaparphoresomen to theo) “in order that we may bear fruit to God;” in this new manner, as followers of Christ –not Moses –Working, serving, and worshipping under the commands of Christ, thru the church, not Moses, thru the Law. Joh 14:15; Joh 15:14; Joh 20:21; Eph 3:21.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

4. Through the body of Christ. Christ, by the glorious victory of the cross, first triumphed over sin; and that he might do this, it was necessary that the handwriting, by which we were held bound, should be cancelled. This handwriting was the law, which, while it continued in force, rendered us bound to serve (203) sin; and hence it is called the power of sin. It was then by cancelling this handwriting that we were delivered through the body of Christ — through his body as fixed to the cross. (204) But the Apostle goes farther, and says, that the bond of the law was destroyed; not that we may live according to our own will, like a widow, who lives as she pleases while single; but that we may be now bound to another husband; nay, that we may pass from hand to hand, as they say, that is, from the law to Christ. He at the same time softens the asperity of the expression, by saying that Christ, in order to join us to his own body, made us free from the yoke of the law. For though Christ subjected himself for a time of his own accord to the law, it is not yet right to say that the law ruled over him. Moreover, he conveys to his own members the liberty which he himself possesses. It is then no wonder that he exempts those from the yoke of the law, whom he unites by a sacred bond to himself, that they may be one body in him.

Even his who has been raised, etc. We have already said, that Christ is substituted for the law, lest any freedom should be pretended without him, or lest any, being not yet dead to the law, should dare to divorce himself from it. But he adopts here a periphrastic sentence to denote the eternity of that life which Christ attained by his resurrection, that Christians might know that this connection is to be perpetual. But of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church he speaks more fully in Eph 6:0

That we may bring forth fruit to God. He ever annexes the final cause, lest any should indulge the liberty of their flesh and their own lusts, under the pretense that Christ has delivered them from the bondage of the law; for he has offered us, together with himself, as a sacrifice to the Father, and he regenerates us for this end — that by newness of life we may bring forth fruit unto God: and we know that the fruits which our heavenly Father requires from us are those of holiness and righteousness. It is indeed no abatement to our liberty that we serve God; nay, if we desire to enjoy so great a benefit as there is in Christ, it will not henceforth be right in us to entertain any other thought but that of promoting the glory of God; for which purpose Christ has connected us with himself. We shall otherwise remain the bond-slaves, not only of the law, but also of sin and of death.

(203) “ Obæratos “ — debtors bound to serve their creditors until payment is made. — Ed.

(204) That his crucified body is intended, is clear from what follows; for he is spoken of as having “been raised from the dead.” — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(4) Are become dead.Were rendered deadsomewhat stronger than simply ye died.

By the body of Christi.e., by the death of the human body of Christ upon the cross. The Christian, as the last chapter has shown, is so united to Christ that whatever has happened to his Master has happened also to him. Christ was put to death upon the cross; he therefore has also been put to death with Him. But why put to death to the Law? Probably all that is meant is simply that the Christian died, and therefore all the relations contracted before that death came to an end. At the same time he entered upon new relations corresponding to his new and risen state.

The argument can hardly be said to have a logical cogency in a controversial sense. It is not, quite strictly speaking, argument at all, but rather emphatic assertion, with all the weight of apostolic authority, and in a graphic illustrative form. The gist of it all is, You have done with the Law and assumed a new spiritual life in Christ: see that you make this a reality.

That we should bring forth fruit unto God.This mystical and ethical union with Christ will not be unproductive; it will have for its fruit a life consecrated to God.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

4. Dead to the law As the deceased husband was physically dead to the wife, so the widow was legally dead to the husband; that is, she was emancipated from all subjection or relation to him. Similarly, by the apostle’s varied and flexible use of the word dead, the new Church was dead to the departed law. They were emancipated according to the measure of their life in Christ, and the spontaneity of their active holiness, from all pressure of the law.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘On which basis, my brothers, you also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that you should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God.’

In the same way the sacrificial death of Christ (‘through the body of Christ’; compare ‘He bore our sin in His own body on the tree’ – 1Pe 2:24) has made us ‘dead to the Law’. While Jesus was alive on earth men were bound by the Law. Indeed in Gal 4:4 Paul tells us that Jesus Himself was ‘born under the Law’. (And the fact that the Pharisees never directly accused Jesus of breaking the Law demonstrates that He adhered faithfully to it, even by their standards). But when His body was suspended on the cross His body offered in death made us ‘dead to the Law’ because there He died to the Law and we died in Him. As a result we can now ‘be joined to (married to – Rom 7:3) another’. We can become conjoined with the risen Christ, something which will result in our bringing forth fruit unto God in righteous living because we are freed from the Law’s constraints, and experience His risen power. Thus the ‘first husband’ could be seen as Jesus Christ in His life on earth, and the second husband as the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Many, however, see ‘you were made dead to the Law’ as signifying that the Law was her first husband. She was married to the Law, but as a result of its ‘death’ at the cross (Col 2:14), she (the true church) can now marry the risen Christ. And the result will be fruit unto God, the fruit of righteous living (see Gal 5:22). But that is to read in what Paul deliberately does not say, for he does not mention the Law in this regard and that in verses where the Law is mentioned four times. In the light of Rom 7:6 ‘dead to the Law’ simply indicates a death that freed from the control of the Law. (See below for a brief discussion of different interpretations).

However, we must not, because of the detail, lose sight of the wonderful situation that is revealed by this, and that is that our union with the risen Christ is like that of a wife conjoined with her husband. In other words we are as closely united with Him as it is possible to be. As the hymn says, He ‘walks with us, and talks with us, and tells us that we are His own’. He ‘dwells in our hearts by faith’ (Eph 3:17). He has come to make His dwelling in us (Joh 14:23). He says, ‘I will come to you’ (Joh 14:18). Christ lives in us (Gal 2:20). Our eyes are thus on Him, and not on the Law. (We must not let the work of the Holy Spirit blind us to the fact that Jesus Christ Himself and the Father also live within us. We can become too fond of splitting up the Triune God). And as Eph 5:25-27 brings out, He not only dwells within us but is also at work on our lives. ‘He loved the church and gave Himself up for it, that He might sanctify it, having cleansed it with the washing of water with the word, that He might present the church to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish’.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Rom 7:4. Wherefore, my brethren The original word , rendered wherefore, is used in comparison for ut, sic,as, so.You are become dead to the law, means, “because the law is become dead to you;” an hypallage, like that of date classibus austros, “give the winds to the fleet.” By this manner of expression, the prejudice of the Jew is favoured; who might have been disgusted, had the Apostle said, that the law, for which the Jew had so great a veneration, was dead; and yet the sense is the same, because the relation is dissolved, whichever of the parties be dead; as it is all one, whether the fleet be given to the winds, or the winds to the fleet. The Apostle adds, By the body of Christwho is raised from the dead. The resurrection of the dead, which is the gift of God to the obedience of Christ, is a direct and full abolition of the law, which condemns the transgressor to death without hope of a revival: and Christ’s resurrection, as an earnest of the general resurrection, confirmed the abolition of the damnatory sentence of the law, as it stood in the old original covenant with Adam, and in the law of Moses. St. Paul, in the last clause of this verse, alludes to the wife’s bringing forth the fruits of the womb to her husband, which is one way of engaging his affections: see Gen 30:20. The law was an impotent husband, the Gospel is fruitful. St. Paul visibly in these words refers to chap. Rom 6:10 where he says, that Christ, in that he liveth, liveth unto God: and therefore he mentions here his being raised from the dead, as a reason for their bringing forth fruits unto God; that is, living to the service of God;obeying his will to the utmost of their power; which is the same with what is said chap. Rom 8:11. Mr. Locke observes, that one thing which made the Jews so tenacious of the law was, that they looked upon it as a reward or blessing from God; and as a disloyalty to him, their king, if they retained not the law that he had given them. St. Paul endeavours to correct this mistake by the instance of a woman marrying a second husband, the former being dead. It may beworth our notice, that St. Paul having all along, from the beginning of the chapter, and even in this very sentence, said ye; here on a sudden changes ye into we;that we should bring forth;probably to press the argument the stronger, by shewing himself to be in the same circumstances and concern with them; he being a Jew, as well as those to whom he spake. See Locke.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Rom 7:4 . ] does not express the “ agreement ” or the “ harmony ” with which what follows connects itself with the preceding (Hofmann), as if Paul had written or . It is rather the common itaque (Vulgate), accordingly, therefore, consequently , which, heading an independent sentence, draws an inference from the preceding, and introduces the actual relation which results from Rom 7:1-3 with respect to Christians, who through the death of Christ are in a position corresponding with that of the wife. This inference lays down that legal marriage relation as type .

] ye also , like the wife in that illustration quoted in Rom 7:2-3 , who through the death of her husband is dead to the dominion of the law. In this, in the first instance (for the main stress falls on . . [1534] ), lies the point of the inference; analogously with the case of that wife Christians also are dead to the law through the death of Christ, because, in their spiritual union with Him, they have suffered death along with Him. Van Hengel takes in the sense: ye also, like other Christians , which, however, since Rom 7:4 begins the application of what had previously been said of the woman , is neither in harmony with the text nor rendered necessary by the first person .

. ] ye were rendered dead to the law , [1535] so that over you as dead persons it rules no longer (Rom 7:1 ). The dative as in Rom 6:2 ; Rom 6:10 . The passive (not ye died ) is selected , because this (ethical) death of Christians is fellowship with the death of Christ, which was a violent one. Therefore: . . .] by the fact, that the body of Christ was put to death . The conception of the participation of believers (as respects their inner life and its moral self-consciousness) in the death of their Lord, according to which the putting to death of their Master included their own putting to death , is justly assumed by Paul, after ch. 6, as something present to the consciousness of his readers, and therefore views deviating from this ( e. g. that . . . . applies to the atoning sacrificial death, which did away the dominion of the law) are to be rejected as here irrelevant, and not in keeping with the proper sense of . For that . . is meant to be a mild expression for , (Koppe and Klee, following Calvin, Grotius, and others, also several Fathers; comp on Rom 7:2 ), is an assumption as gratuitous, as is a “contraction of the thought and expression,” which Philippi finds, when he at the same time introduces the conception of the putting to death of the law through the body of Christ, which is here alien.

] in order to become joined to another (than the law) this is the object which the . . . . [1537] had, and thereby the main point in the declaration introduced by , parallel to the . . [1538] in Rom 7:3 . Paul apprehends the relation of fellowship and dependence of the Christian’s life to Christ as he had prepared the way for doing so in Rom 7:2-3 , and as was in keeping with his mode of view elsewhere (2Co 11:2 ; Eph 5:25 ff.) under the image of a marriage connection , in which the exalted Christ is the husband of His Church that has become independent of the law by dying with Him.

. .] apposition to , in significant historical reference to . . . . For if Christ became through His bodily death our deliverer from the law, we cannot now belong to Him otherwise than as the Risen One for a new and indissoluble union. The importance of this addition in its bearing on the matter in hand lies in the (Rom 6:3 ; Rom 6:11 ; Rom 6:13 ; Rom 6:22 ) which, on the very ground of the ethical communion with the Risen One, issues from the new relation. Certainly the death of Christ appears here “as the end of a sin-conditioned state of the humanity to be united in Him” (Hofmann, Schriftbew . II. 1, p. 354); but this great moral epoch has as its necessary presupposition just the vicarious atoning power of the which was rendered in the death of Jesus; it could not take place without this and without the faith appropriating it, Rom 3:21 ff.; Rom 5:1 ff.

. . ] The aim not of (Koppe, Th. Schott, Hofmann), but rather because the belonging to is that which conditions the fruit-bearing of the , . ., consequently the final aim of the . . There is here (though van Hengel and others call it in question, contrary to the clear connection) a continuation of the figure of marriage with respect to its fruitfulness (Luk 1:42 ; Psa 127:3 , Symm. and Theod. Psa 91:15 ). The morally holy walk, namely, in its consecration to God is, as it were, the fruit which issues from our fellowship of life with Christ risen from the dead as from a new marriage-union, and which belongs in property to God as the lord-paramount of that union (the supreme ruler of the Messianic theocracy); the bringing forth of fruit takes place for God . The opinion of Reiche and Fritzsche that . taken in the sense of the fruit of marriage yields an undignified allegory (the figure therefore is to be taken as borrowed from a field or a tree, which Philippi, Tholuck, and Reithmayr also prefer) is untenable, seeing that the union with Christ, if regarded as a marriage at all, must also necessarily, in accordance with its moral design, be conceived of as a fruitful marriage . [1539]

[1534] . . . .

[1535] This is expressed from the Jewish-Christian consciousness, nevertheless it includes indirectly the Gentile-Christians also; for without perfect obedience to the law no man could have attained to salvation, wherefore also obedience to the law was expected on the part of Judaists from the converted Gentiles (Act 15 ). As the argument advances, the language of the Apostle becomes communicative , so that he includes himself with his readers, among whom he makes no distinction. Compare Rom 8:15 ; Gal 3:14 ; Gal 4:6 . By our passage therefore the readers are not indicated as having been, as respects the majority, Jews or at least proselytes.

[1537] . . . .

[1538] . . . .

[1539] This view is the one perfectly consistent with the context, and should not be superseded by the prudery of modern canons of taste (Fritzshe terms it jejunam et obscoenam ). Theodoret already has the right view: . , . Comp. Theophylact.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1851
DEADNESS TO THE LAW, AND UNION WITH CHRIST

Rom 7:4. 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 who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

THAT the Gospel is hostile to the interests of morality, is an objection that has been raised against it, from the first promulgation of it by the Apostles, even to the present age. That the Gospel is a most wonderful display of grace and mercy, must be acknowledged: but it does not therefore encourage any man to live in sin: on the contrary, it teaches men, and binds them by every possible tie, to live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world. To this effect the Apostle speaks throughout the whole preceding chapter. He begins with stating the objection urged against the Gospel; What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? And then he answers it at large; and affirms, that the covenant of grace, so far from invalidating our obligation to good works, absolutely secures the performance of them [Note: Rom 6:14-16.]. In the chapter before us he is continuing the same argument, and putting it in a new light: he represents men as by nature married to the law, and bringing forth fruit to sin and death; but afterwards, as separated from the law, and married to Christ, in order to their bringing forth the fruits of holiness to the praise and glory of God.

His words will naturally lead us to consider,

The state to which we are brought by the death of Christ

We are all by nature bound to the law
[God gave his law to Adam as a covenant, promising life to him if he were obedient, and denouncing death against him as the penalty of disobedience. Under that covenant we all are born: and on the terms prescribed by it we look for happiness or misery in the future world. The connexion between us and it is indissoluble; like that of an husband; our obligations to whom nothing but death can dissolve.]
But by the death of Christ we are liberated from it
[Christ, our incarnate Lord, has fulfilled every part of Gods law; enduring its penalties, as well as executing its commands: and this he has done, as our Surety: so that, if we believe in him, we may plead his obedience unto death in bar of all the punishment it denounces against us; and may even plead it also as having procured for us a title to all its promised blessings. Our blessed Lord, in fulfilling the law, has abrogated it as a covenant; and has obtained for us a new and better covenant, of which he himself is the Surety [Note: Heb 8:6; Heb 8:8; Heb 8:13.]. As a rule of conduct, the law does, and ever must, continue in force; because it is the transcript of the mind and will of God, and contains a perfect rule for the conduct of his creatures [Note: 1Co 9:21.]: but as a, covenant it is dissolved; and is, in respect of us, dead; so that we have no more connexion with it than a woman has with her deceased husband: our obligations to it, and our expectations from it, have ceased for ever [Note: Gal 2:19.]. This is a just and beautiful representation of the believers state: perhaps there is not in all the Scriptures another image that conveys a complete idea of our state, in so clear, and so intelligible a way as this. We all see in a moment the bonds by which a woman is tied to her husband during his life, and the total dissolution of them all by his death: we see that the deceased husband has no longer any authority over her, nor can any longer be to her a source either of good or evil. Now if we transfer this idea to the law, and think of the law as a husband that is dead, or as a covenant that is annulled, then we shall have a just view of a believers state respecting it. Throughout the whole context, St. Paul expatiates so fully upon this point, and explains himself so clearly, that we cannot possibly mistake his meaning [Note: ver. 16.]. The only doubt that can arise is, what law he refers to? But this doubt is dissipated in a moment: for he speaks of that law which prohibits inordinate desire; and consequently it is, and must be, the moral law [Note: ver. 7.].]

Such being the liberty which Christ has procured for us, let us consider,

II.

The improvement we should make of it

Our blessed Lord offers himself to us as an husband
[Under this idea he is frequently spoken of in the Old Testament [Note: Isa 54:5; Isa 62:5. Psa 45:10-17, is, as it were, a celebration of the heavenly nuptials.] The same is also frequently applied to him in the New Testament [Note: Joh 3:19. Eph 5:25-27.] In some sense indeed it is the espousal only that takes place in this world [Note: Hos 2:19-20. 2Co 11:2.] The consummation is deferred till our arrival in the world above [Note: Rev 19:7-8; Rev 21:9-10.] ]

In this relation we should cordially receive him
[Our former husband being dead, we are at liberty to be married to another. And where shall we find one who is more worthy of all our love and obedience? If Jesus so loved us when enemies, as to lay down his own life for us, what will he not do for us, when we become bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh; yea, when we become one spirit with him [Note: Eph 5:30. 1Co 6:17.]? To him then let us unite ourselves by faith, and devote ourselves to him as wholly and exclusively, as the most faithful and affectionate of women does to her newly-acquired lord.]

We shall then have the honour and happiness of bringing forth fruit unto God
[By our connexion with the law, we have brought forth fruit only unto sin and death: but by the mighty operation of divine grace, we shall be enabled to bring forth fruit unto God, and holiness, and life [Note: Compare Rom 6:21-22. with our text and context.]. We shall no longer live under the influence of a slavish spirit, aiming only at the mere letter of the commandment, and regarding even that as an irksome service; but we shall aspire after the utmost spirit of the commandment, and strive with holy ardour to make the highest possible attainments, longing, if possible, to be holy as God is holy, and to be perfect as God is perfect. Our services will resemble those of the heavenly choir, who look, and watch, and pant, as it were, for an opportunity to testify their love to God, and to execute, in all its extent, his holy will.

How should the prospect of such fruit stimulate our desires after Christ! Let us bear in mind, that the bringing of us to such a state was the great object which he sought in giving up himself for us [Note: 1Pe 2:24.]; and let it be also the great object of our solicitude in devoting ourselves to him [Note: Rom 14:7-8.].]

From hence then it appears,
1.

How concerned we are to know the law

[It was to those only who knew the law, that the Apostle addressed himself in our text [Note: ver. 1.]: others could not have understood his meaning, but would have accounted all his representations foolishness [Note: 1Co 2:14.]. Thus shall we also be incapable of entering into the sublime import of this passage, if we do not understand the nature of the law, the extent of its requirements, the awfulness of its penalties, and the hopeless condition of all who are yet under it as a covenant of life and death. But if we have just views of the law, then shall we be prepared for the Gospel, and be determined, through grace, that we will not give sleep to our eyes, or slumber to our eye-lids, till we have obtained an interest in Christ, and been received into a covenant of grace with him, as our Husband, our Saviour, and our all.]

How interested we are in embracing the Gospel

[By this we are brought into a new state: we have new relations, both to God and man: our spirit is altogether new, as our attainments also are: our hopes and prospects also are new: A beggar taken from a dunghill, and united to the greatest of earthly princes [Note: 1Sa 2:8.], would experience a very small change in comparison of that which we experience, when we enter into the marriage covenant with Christ. O let us consent to his gracious proposals, and give up ourselves wholly unto him; then shall we know the blessedness of his chosen, and comprehend, as far as such imperfect beings can, the incomprehensible wonders of his love; and after bringing forth fruit to his glory here, we shall be partakers of his kingdom in the world above.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

4 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 who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Ver. 4. That we should bring forth fruit ] The ministry of the word, saith one, is the bridal bed; wherein God by his Spirit doth communicate with our souls his sweetest favours, and maketh them be conceived with the fruits of righteousness to everlasting life.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

4. ] So then (inference both from Rom 7:1 , the general fact, and Rom 7:2-3 , the example), my brethren, ye also (as well as the woman in my example, who is dead to the law of her husband) were slain to the law ( crucified , see Gal 2:19-20 . The more violent word is used instead of , to recall the violent death of Christ, in which, and after the manner of which, believers have been put to death to the law and sin, and the historic aorist to remind them of the great Event by which this was brought about) by means of the (crucified) Body (compare . ., Heb 10:10 ) of Christ, that you should become attached to another , (even) to Him who was raised from the dead (alluding both to the comparison in Rom 7:2-3 , , and to ch. Rom 6:4-5 , . . . .), that we should (here strictly final , as Thol., Meyer, De W., &c. Not merely ecbatic , as Fritzsche) bring forth fruit (alluding to , ch. Rom 4:22 , and at the same time ( Luk 1:42 ) carrying on the similitude of marriage. Not that this latter must be pressed, for there is only an allusion to it: nor on the other hand need the least objection be raised to such an understanding of the words, as any one conversant with St. Paul’s way of speaking on this subject will at once feel: compare 2Co 11:2 ; Eph 5:30-32 ) to (dat. commodi, ‘ to the honour of ’) God .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Rom 7:4 . : the inference is drawn rather from the principle than from the example, but means “you as well as the woman in the illustration,” not “you Gentiles as well as I a Jew”. The last, which is Weiss’s interpretation, introduces a violent contrast of which there is not the faintest hint in the context. The meaning of is fixed by reference to chap. Rom 6:3-6 . The aorist refers to the definite time at which in their baptism the old life (and with it all its legal obligations) came to an end. : Weiss rejects as opposed to the context the “dogmatic” reference to the sacrificial death of Christ as a satisfaction for sin; all the words imply, according to him, is that the Christian, in baptism, experiences a of Christ’s death, or as it is put in Rom 6:6 is crucified with Him, and so liberated from every relation to the law. But if Christ’s death had no spiritual content if it were not a death “for our sins” (1Co 15:3 ), a death having the sacrificial character and atoning virtue described in Rom 3:25 f. there would be no reason why a sinful man should be baptised into Christ and His death at all, and in point of fact no one would be baptised. It is because Christ’s death is what it is, a sin-expiating death, that it draws men to Him, and spiritually reproduces in them a reflex or counterpart of His death, with which all their old relations and obligations terminate. The object of this is that they may belong to another, a different person. Paul does not say : the marriage metaphor is dropped. He is speaking of the experience of Christians one by one, and though Christ is sometimes spoken of as the husband or bridegroom of the Church, there is no Scripture authority for using this metaphor of His relation to the individual soul. Neither is this interpretation favoured by the use of ; to interpret this of the fruit of the new marriage is both needless and grotesque. The word is used frequently in the N.T. for the outcome of the Christian life, but never with this association; and a reference to Rom 6:21 shows how natural it is to the Apostle without any such prompting. Even the change from the second person ( ) to the first ( ) shows that he is contemplating the end of the Christian life quite apart from the suggestions of the metaphor. Christ is described as , because we can only belong to a living person. is dat comm God is the person interested in this result.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Rom 7:4-6

4Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Rom 7:4 “you also were made to die” This is the main thrust of this paragraph (and Romans 6). It related to the analogy in Romans 6 of Christians dying to sin because they are “co-buried” (Rom 6:4) and “co-crucified” (Rom 6:6) with Christ (cf. 2Co 5:14-15; Gal 2:20). Believers are new creatures in Christ (see full note at Rom 6:4), in this new age of the Spirit (cf. 2Co 5:17). Baptism marked the boundary between the old age, old man, and the new age, new man.

“through the body of Christ” This is not referring to the theological concept of the church as the body of Christ (cf. 1Co 12:12; 1Co 12:27), but to Christ’s physical body as in Rom 6:3-11 where, when Christ died, believers, by way of identification through baptism, died with Him. His death was their death (cf. 2Co 5:14-15; Gal 2:20). His resurrected life freed them to serve God and others.

“that we might bear fruit for God” This was also parallel to Romans 6, especially Rom 6:22. Believers are now free through Christ to bind themselves to Christ. This is the continuing marriage analogy. As Christ died for believers, they now must die to sin (2Co 5:13-14; Gal 2:20). As Christ was raised, they, too, are raised to new spiritual life of service to God (cf. Rom 6:22; Eph 2:5-6) and each other (cf. 1Jn 3:16).

Rom 7:5

NASB”For while we were in the flesh”

NKJV”For when we were in the flesh”

NRSV”While we were living in the flesh”

TEV”For when we lived according to our human nature”

NJB “Before our conversion”

This verse is a contrast to Rom 7:4. Rom 7:4 relates to the experience of a believer, as does Rom 7:6. Rom 7:5 described the “fruit” of the life without God’s power (Gal 5:18-24.) The Law shows believers their sin (Rom 7:7-9; Gal 3:23-25), but cannot give them the power to overcome it.

In context this phrase is referring to believers’ fallen, sinful nature inherited from Adam (cf. Rom 6:19). Paul uses this term sarx in two different ways (1) sin nature (the old man) and (2) physical body (cf. Rom 1:3; Rom 4:1; Rom 9:3; Rom 9:5). Here it is negative, but notice Rom 1:3; Rom 4:1; Rom 9:3; Rom 9:5; Gal 2:20. The flesh/body (sarx/soma) is not evil in and of itself, but it, like the mind (nous), is the battleground, the place of confrontation between evil forces of this age and the Holy Spirit. Paul uses this term in a way consistent with the Septuagint, not Greek literature. See Special Topic: Flesh (sarx) at Rom 1:3.

“which were aroused by the Law” This aspect of rebellious human nature, which reacts aggressively to any restrictions, is clearly seen in Genesis 3 and in all humans. The Law set boundaries (cf. Rom 7:7-8). These boundaries were for mankind’s protection, but humans viewed them as chains and limits. The sinful, independent spirit was stimulated by God’s Law. The problem was not the limits (law, cf. Rom 7:12-13), but human autonomy and self will.

“to bear fruit for death” What a stark contrast between

1. Rom 7:5 – bear fruit for God

2. Rom 7:6 – bear fruit for death

Believers have died to death, sin, and the Law and now they live to bear fruit for the Kingdom! Paul paints in black and white (or better paradoxical categories, see note at Rom 8:2). A person is one of two groups-Adam or Jesus (cf. Rom 5:12-21). Those in Jesus are free, unbound, and new (cf. Gal 2:19-20)! Walk in it! Revel in it!

Rom 7:6 “But now” Newman and Nida, A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans, has an interesting comment.

“It is important to notice the parallels between Rom 7:5-6, and at the same time their relation to what follows. Rom 7:5 describes the pre-Christian experience, and has its parallel in 7.7-25; Rom 7:6 describes the present life of faith under the leadership of God’s Spirit, and has its parallel in 8.1-11” (p. 130).

“we have been released” This is an aorist passive indicative. This is a contrast with the imperfect middle indicative of Rom 7:5. Believers had been continually held by sin as revealed in the Law, but now they have been freed by the Spirit through the good news of the gospel. This same word is used of the woman whose husband dies in Rom 7:2.

“having died to that by which we were bound” This is an aorist active participle followed by an imperfect passive indicative. God set believers free through Christ’s death from

1. the curse of the OT

2. their inner sinful selves

They had been continually bound by their rebellion against God’s revealed will, fallen nature, personal sin, and supernatural temptation (cf. Eph 2:2-3)!

“newness. . .oldness” This new spiritual way seems to refer to the New Covenant (cf. Jer 31:31-34; Eze 36:22-32). The Greek term “new” (kainos – kainots) is used by Paul of

1. the newness of life, Rom 6:4 (see full note at Rom 6:4)

2. the newness of the Spirit, Rom 7:6

3. the new covenant, 1Co 11:2; 2Co 3:6

4. the new creation, 2Co 5:17; Gal 6:15

5. the new man, Eph 2:15; Eph 4:24

The term “old” applies to the Mosaic Law and meant “totally worn out.” Paul is contrasting the Old covenant and the New covenant, as does the author of Hebrews (cf. Rom 8:7; Rom 8:13).

NASB, NKJV “so that we serve in newness of the Spirit”

NRSV “so that we are slaves not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit”

TEV “but in the new way of the Spirit”

NJB “free to serve in the new spiritual way”

This is literally “in newness of spirit.” It is uncertain whether this referred to the regenerated human spirit or the Holy Spirit. Most English translations capitalize it, which implies the Holy Spirit, who is ambiguously mentioned for the first time in Romans 8 (15 times). The term “spirit” could refer to the human spirit regenerated and energized by the gospel and the Spirit in Rom 1:4; Rom 1:9; Rom 2:29; Rom 7:6; Rom 8:15; Rom 11:8; Rom 12:11; 1Co 2:11; 1Co 4:21; 1Co 5:3-5; 1Co 7:34; 1Co 14:15-16; 1Co 14:32; 1Co 16:18.

In Paul’s writings “flesh” and “spirit” are often contrasted as two distinct ways of thinking and living (cf. Rom 7:14; Rom 8:4; Gal 3:3; Gal 5:16-17; Gal 5:25; Gal 6:8). Physical life without God is “flesh” (see Special Topic at Rom 1:3), but life with God is “spirit” or “Spirit.” The indwelling Holy Spirit (cf. Rom 8:9; Rom 8:11) transforms the believer into a new creature in Christ (positionally and experientially).

CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS ON Rom 7:7-25

A. Rom 7:7-25 expresses a human reality. All human beings, both saved and lost, have experienced the tension of good and evil in their world and in their own hearts and minds. The hermeneutical question is, “How did Paul mean this passage to be understood?” It must be related contextually to Rom 1:18 to Rom 6:23 and Rom 8:1-39. Some see it as focusing on all human beings and, therefore, see Paul’s personal experience as a paradigm. This interpretation is called “the autobiographical theory.”

Paul used “I” in a non-personal sense in 1Co 13:1-3. This use of a non-personal “I” can also be documented from the Jewish rabbis. If this is true here, this passage would refer to mankind’s transition from innocence through conviction to salvation (Romans 8) “the representative theory” (i.e., Jerome Biblical Commentary, p. 312).

However, others have seen these verses as relating to the terrible continuing struggle of a believer with the fallen human nature (i.e., Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Karl Barth). The heart-rending cry of Rom 7:24 expresses this inner tension. The aorist and imperfect verb tenses dominate Rom 7:7-13, while the present and perfect verb tenses dominate Rom 7:14-25. This seems to lend credence to “the autobiographical theory” that Paul is describing his own experience from innocence, to conviction, to justification and the tension-filled road of progressive sanctification (cf. autos eg, “I myself,” cf. Rom 7:25).

It is just possible that both views are true. In Rom 7:7-13; Rom 7:25 b Paul is speaking autobiographically, while in Rom 7:14-25 a, he is speaking of his experience of inner struggle with sin, as representative of all redeemed humanity. However, it must be remembered that this entire passage also must be seen against the backdrop of Paul as a committed Jewish religionist before regeneration. Paul’s experience was uniquely his.

B. The Law is good. It is from God. It served, and continues to serve, a divine purpose (cf. Rom 7:7; Rom 7:12; Rom 7:14; Rom 7:22; Rom 7:25; Mat 5:17-19). It cannot bring peace or salvation (cf. Galatians 3). James Stewart in his book A Man in Christ, shows Paul’s paradoxical thinking and writing:

“You would naturally expect a man who was setting himself to construct a system of thought and doctrine to fix as rigidly as possible the meanings of the terms he employed. You would expect him to aim at precision in the phraseology of his leading ideas. You would demand that a word, once used by your writer in a particular sense should bear that sense throughout. But to look for this from Paul is to be disappointed. Much of his phraseology is fluid, not rigid. . .’The law is holy,’ he writes, ‘I delight in the law of God after the inward man’ (cf. Rom 7:12-13) but it is clearly another aspect of nomos that makes him say elsewhere, ‘Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law (cf. Gal 3:13)'” (p. 26).

C. The textual evidence dealing with the question, “Is Paul referring to a saved or unsaved person in Rom 7:14-25?” is as follows

1. Unsaved person

a. This was the interpretation of the early Greek speaking church Fathers

b. The following phrases support this view

(1) “I am of flesh,” Rom 7:14

(2) “sold into bondage to sin,” Rom 7:14

(3)”nothing good dwells in me,” Rom 7:18

(4) “making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members,” Rom 7:23

(5) “wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?” Rom 7:24

c. The immediate context of Romans 6 is that we are free from the mastery of sin. The context of chap. 8 starts with “so then.”

d. The absence of any reference to the Spirit or Christ until the close of this context (Rom 7:25).

2. Saved person

a. This was the interpretation of Augustine, Calvin, and the Reformed tradition

b. The following phrases support this view

(1) “we know that the Law is spiritual,” Rom 7:14

(2) “I agree with the Law, confessing that it is good,” Rom 7:16

(3) “the good that I wish, I do not do…,” Rom 7:19

(4) “I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man,” Rom 7:22

c. The larger context of Romans places Romans 7 in the section dealing with sanctification.

d. The obvious change of verb tenses from imperfect and aorists in Rom 7:7-13 to the consistent use of the present tense in Rom 7:14-24 imply a different and new section of Paul’s life (i.e., conversion).

D. The more a believer strives toward Christlikeness, the more he experiences his/her own sinfulness. This paradox fits well this context and the personality of Paul (and, for that matter, most believers; for an opposite view see Gordon Fee, Paul, The Spirit, and the People of God).

A line from a Lutheran hymn by Henry Twells:

“And none, O Lord, has perfect rest,

For none is wholly free from sin;

And they who faint would serve Thee best

Are conscious most of wrong within.”

I think Paul was struggling with his Pharisaic past which gave a structure to his presentation of “Law” and “sin/death.” However, I am also impacted by my own struggle with temptation and sin after salvation. It has surely colored my interpretation. I think Gordon Fee, Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God, represents another valid Christian’s experience and perspective. One thing I know, the tension or conflict between

1. old age – new age

2. old man – new man

3. law – spirit

has been dealt with in Christ! Victory is ours. Never focus on Romans 7 without noting Romans 6, 8. Victory is ours in Him!

E. Sun (preposition in Rom 8:32) compounds in Romans 8

Rom 8:16 – sun + witness/testify

Rom 8:17 – sun + heir

Rom 8:17 – sun + suffer

Rom 8:17 – sun + glorify

Rom 8:22 – sun + groan

Rom 8:22 – sun + birth pains

Rom 8:26 – sun + take hold of

Rom 8:28 – sun + work with/cooperate

Rom 8:29 – sun +conformed

These compounds denote “joint participation with” or “cooperation with.”

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

are become dead = were put to death. Greek. thanatoo. See Mat 10:21. Mar 13:12. 2Co 6:9. 1Pe 3:18.

the law. Compare Rom 2:12-14.

by. App-104. Rom 7:1.

the body: i.e. the crucified body, not the body of Christ mystical (Eph 1:23).

Christ. App-98.

that = to the end (App-104.) that.

raised. App-178.:4.

from the dead. Greek. ek nekron. App-139.

that = in order that. Greek. hina.

should = may.

unto = to.

God. App-98. No analogy here with the persons in the illustration. There the husband is dead. The law is not dead. But we have died to its claims. See Rom 3:19; Rom 6:14. Gal 1:3, Gal 1:23, Gal 1:24.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

4.] So then (inference both from Rom 7:1, the general fact, and Rom 7:2-3, the example), my brethren, ye also (as well as the woman in my example, who is dead to the law of her husband) were slain to the law (crucified, see Gal 2:19-20. The more violent word is used instead of , to recall the violent death of Christ, in which, and after the manner of which, believers have been put to death to the law and sin,-and the historic aorist to remind them of the great Event by which this was brought about) by means of the (crucified) Body (compare . ., Heb 10:10) of Christ, that you should become attached to another, (even) to Him who was raised from the dead (alluding both to the comparison in Rom 7:2-3, , and to ch. Rom 6:4-5, . …), that we should (here strictly final, as Thol., Meyer, De W., &c. Not merely ecbatic, as Fritzsche) bring forth fruit (alluding to , ch. Rom 4:22, and at the same time (Luk 1:42) carrying on the similitude of marriage. Not that this latter must be pressed, for there is only an allusion to it: nor on the other hand need the least objection be raised to such an understanding of the words, as any one conversant with St. Pauls way of speaking on this subject will at once feel: compare 2Co 11:2; Eph 5:30-32) to (dat. commodi, to the honour of) God.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Rom 7:4. ) This word has a stronger meaning than if had been used.-, ye have become dead) which denotes more than ye are dead. The comparison is thus summed up: the husband or wife, by the death of either, is restored to liberty; for in the protasis, the party dying is the husband; in the apodosis, the party dying is that, which corresponds to the wife.- , by the body) A great mystery. In the expiation [atonement] for sin, why is it that mention generally is made of the body, rather than of the soul of Christ? Ans. The theatre and workshop of sin is our flesh; and for this, it is the holy flesh of the Son of God, which is the remedy.-, who is raised) and so is alive [which the law no longer is to the believer].-, we should bring forth fruit) He comes from the second person to the first; fruit corresponds to offspring; for the simile is derived from marriage.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Rom 7:4

Wherefore, my brethren,-[Wherefore introduces a consequence of the general principle of law which has just been exemplified in verses 1-3.]

ye also were made dead to the law-This refers to the crucifixion of the old man with Christ (Rom 6:6), for thereby the believer himself died to the law. For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me. (Gal 2:19-20).

through the body of Christ;-These strong words remind us of the violent death of Jesus Christ on the cross. Into that death we are baptized. This participation in Christs death had been fully established and its significance explained in chapter 6. Here, as there, the union in death becomes the source of union in the new life of the risen Christ. This is confirmed by the following: For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they that live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again. (2Co 5:14-15).

that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead,-[This is the completion of the illustration in verses 2 and 3. As the woman is freed from the law of the husband by his death, and when married again comes under the authority of another, so we, when we are made free from the law and its curse by the death of Christ, are brought under a new law of fidelity and obedience to him with whom we are thus joined.]

that we might bring forth fruit unto God.-The fruit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control. (Gal 5:22-23). It is to Gods honor and glory that we should be fruitful in good works. (Tit 3:8).

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

married joined.

Eph 5:31, same Greek word.

Bride (of Christ). 2Co 11:1-3; Joh 3:29; Rev 19:6-8.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

ye also: Rom 7:6, Rom 6:14, Rom 8:2, Gal 2:19, Gal 2:20, Gal 3:13, Gal 5:18, Eph 2:15, Col 2:14, Col 2:20

the body: Mat 26:26, Joh 6:51, 1Co 10:16, Heb 10:10, 1Pe 2:24

that ye: Psa 45:10-15, Isa 54:5, Isa 62:5, Hos 2:19, Hos 2:20, Joh 3:29, 2Co 11:2, Eph 5:23-27, Rev 19:7, Rev 21:9

that we: Rom 6:22, Psa 45:16, Joh 15:8, Gal 5:22, Gal 5:23, Phi 1:11, Phi 4:17, Col 1:6, Col 1:10

Reciprocal: Son 7:2 – thy belly Son 8:5 – there she Eze 23:4 – they were Mar 4:20 – which Luk 8:15 – bring Luk 20:10 – sent Joh 15:5 – same Rom 6:7 – For he Rom 7:9 – and I died 1Co 6:13 – but for Gal 3:25 – we Col 1:22 – the body Col 2:12 – wherein 1Pe 4:2 – no

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

7:4

Rom 7:4. As physical death breaks the union of persons in marriage, so when Jewish penitent believers died with Christ, that broke the bond between them and the law of Moses. Being free from the law they could become married to Christ, and the offspring of such a union would be fruit unto God.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Rom 7:4. Accordingly; lit, so that. This introduces the application of the figure in Rom 7:2-3.

Ye also, as in the case of the widow.

Were made dead to the law. The idea is not of being dead, but of being put to death, at some single past time, namely, at justification. The expression is chosen, not merely because Christs death was a violent one, but also because it describes the death of Christians to the law as a death incurred by virtue of the administration of the law (Lange); comp. Gal 2:19.

Through the body of Christ. This refers to the death of Christ, either (1) as the ground of justification, or (2) as involving our fellowship in His death. The latter is preferable; it implies the former, and suits the tenor of the whole passage.

That, i.e. in order that, ye should be married to another, one of a different kind. The purpose of the death to the law was union to Christ; the figure of a marriage is still present, and quite appropriate. The exalted Christ is the husband of His Church that has become independent of the law by dying with Him (Meyer).

Was raised from the dead. The idea of a new ethical life is constantly joined by the Apostle to the fact of the resurrection. His own experience gave emphasis to this.

Fruit to God, i.e., for His glory, since Christ is the Husband.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Rom 7:4. Wherefore, my brethren Hence it follows, or by this comparison it appears; ye also Believing Jews, and much more believing Gentiles; are become dead to the law Taken off from all hopes of justification by it, and confidence in your obedience to it: and so likewise it has become dead to you, and has no life or efficacy in these respects; by the body of Christ By the offering up of Christs body on the cross; that is, by the merit of his death, by which it evidently appears, that there is no other way of making reconciliation for sin, or of obtaining deliverance from wrath but by that; his death and sufferings having now accomplished the design of the law, and abrogated its authority; and it, therefore, expiring with him. That ye should be married to another (2Co 11:2;) so that you must now give up yourselves to Christ, as your second husband, that you may be justified by faith in him. The apostle speaks of Christ as the husband of the believing Jews, because he was now become their Lord and head; and he calls him another husband, because they had been formerly, as it were, married to the Mosaic law, and relied on that alone for salvation. And the crucifixion of their old man, or corrupt nature, and their obtaining a new nature, through the death of Christ, was a fit preparation of them for being espoused to Christ. Who is raised from the dead Who is alive himself, and will bestow spiritual life on those that believe on him, and give up themselves to him; that we should bring forth fruit Namely, of holiness and good works, Gal 5:22; unto God To his glory, Mat 5:16; Joh 15:8; Php 1:11. In this passage the union of Christ with his people is represented as a marriage, as it is also Eph 5:31-32; Rev 21:9; Rev 22:17. The apostles probably took that idea from the ancient phraseology concerning the Jews. See on Rom 7:2. But from whatever source it was derived, it is a strong representation of the friendship and endearment which subsists, and to all eternity will subsist, between Christ and believers, and of the happiness which they will derive from his love to them, and from their entire subjection to him.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 4. So that, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should belong to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit to God.

Coming to the application, the apostle approaches his readers anew, and more closely, addressing them as: my brethren. It is as if he were to say to them familiarly: Let us see! Now, then, is it not clear to you all?

The conjunction , so that, cannot be taken, as some have sought to do, in the sense of likewise, or so then. The natural sense: so that, is perfectly suitable, if only the force of this conjunction is made to bear not exclusively on the following verb: Ye are dead to the law, but on the verb with its entire connection: Ye are dead to the law; that ye should belong to another. It is not the death of believers in Christ crucified whose legitimacy the apostle wished to show by the preceding example taken from the law, but the new union of which this death is the condition.

The same need of drawing close to his readers which suggests the form of address: my brethren, leads him also to use the second person, which is more in keeping with the direct application to which he is now coming.

Ye also: quite like this wife who is dead (as a wife) through her husband’s death, and who thus has the right to marry again., ye are dead, or more literally: Ye have been put to death in relation to the law. The first aorist passive here expresses, as usual, the highest degree of passivity. Jesus draws believers as it were violently into communion with Him in His sufferings. This participation in His violent death is not exactly the same in this passage as that spoken of in Rom 7:6 of the preceding chapter. The latter referred to the believer’s death to sin, whereas Paul says here: Ye are dead to the law. Christ on the cross died to the law, inasmuch as this punishment set Him free from the jurisdiction of the law, under which He had passed His life, and from the Jewish nationality which had determined the form of His earthly existence (Gal 4:4). The believer who appropriates this death appropriates also the glorious liberty which in the case of Christ was its consequence. Delivered in Him from the law of ordinances (Eph 2:15), he enters with Him into the higher life of communion with God. When Paul says: by the body of Christ, he reminds us that it was this body which formed the bond between Christ and the theocratic nation (Rom 1:3); and that this bond once broken in His case by death, it is also broken in that of believers, who draw their life from Him. There is no reference in this context to the gift of His body as the price of our redemption (Gess).

The application of the idea of death to believers, in the words: Ye are dead to the law, agrees with the observation we have made on the expression , she (the wife) is annulled, has ceased to be (as a wife), at the end of Rom 7:2. As the new husband is a dead and risen Christ, the wife must necessarily be represented as dead (through the death of her first husband, the law), that she may be in a position to be united to Christ as one risen again. It is a marriage, as it were, beyond the tomb. And hence it is that the apostle is not content with saying: Ye have been put to death in relation to the law; that ye should belong to another, but adds immediately: to Him who is raised from the dead.

We can now understand perfectly how Paul, with this application in view from the beginning, extended the notion of death, which, strictly speaking, applied only to the husband, to the wife, by the term , she is abolished, has ceased to be, Rom 7:2.

It is easy to see that this figure of a marriage between the soul dead in Christ crucified and Christ risen expresses exactly the same idea as we have found already in Rom 6:5, and as was developed in the whole passage Rom 6:6-10; only this idea is resumed here to deduce from it the believer’s enfranchisement in regard to the law. We may therefore thus sum up the contents of these four verses: As by His death Christ entered upon an existence set free from every legal statute and determined by the life of God alone, so we, when we have died to sin, enter with Him into this same life in which, like a remarried widow, we have no other master than this new Spouse and His Spirit.

The object of this new union, says Paul, concluding this development, Rom 7:4, is, that we may bring forth fruit unto God. By this expression he unmistakably continues and completes the figure which he began, namely, that of marriage. The new issue which is to spring from this union between the Risen One and His church is an activity rich in holy works wrought in the service of God ( , to bear fruit unto God). To reject this view of the figure is to show a prudery which is neither in harmony with the spirit of antiquity, nor with that of the gospel itself. It is, in fine, to put oneself in contradiction to the two following verses, which can leave no doubt as to the apostle’s real meaning.

On what does the that depend? Hofmann and Schott hold that it must be connected solely with the last words: to Him that is raised from the dead, that…; Christ is raised to a celestial life that He might communicate it to us, and render us active in God’s service. But the aim of the resurrection cannot be thus restricted, and the sequel proves that the that depends, as is natural, on the principal idea: that ye should be married to another. It is not the resurrection, it is the union of the believer with the Risen One, which has for its end to give birth to a life of good works. This appears from the following verses, in which the apostle contrasts union with the law, which produced fruits of sin, with union with Christ, which results in the best fruits. What has led Hofmann to this false explanation is the desire to account for the transition from the second person plural: ye have been put to death…ye were married…, to the first: we should bring forth fruit: He is raised for us, believers, that we should bring forth…Some commentators, indeed (Meyer, to a certain extent), suppose that the verb in the second person and the pronoun (you) were written from the viewpoint of Judeo-Christians; for, it is said, only people formerly subject to the law could become dead in relation to it. The last verb in the first person is, on the contrary, it is said, written from the standpoint of all Christians. But the author of these lines, being himself of Jewish origin, would require to say, and especially when speaking of Judeo-Christians, we, rather than ye. Comp. Gal 3:13, where, speaking in the name of believers of Jewish origin, he says we, to contrast with them afterward, in Rom 7:14, the Gentiles, and in the end to combine both in a final we. The true explanation of the contrast between ye and we in our passage is simpler. At the beginning of this passage, Paul, to get near to his readers, had passed from the didactic tone to the direct address: brethren! It was a way of saying to them: Understand thoroughly, brethren; it is your own history which was contained beforehand in this legal prescription. A new and still more urgent apostrophe had followed in Rom 7:4 (my brethren), at the point where from the explanation Paul was passing to the application. And now the application being made by the: Ye became dead, that ye should belong, the didactic tone of the treatise recommenced with the: that we should bring forth fruit, which is true not only of the Roman readers, but of the whole Church; and the first person continues (Rom 7:5-6); comp. Rom 8:12-13 (the inverse change). In Rom 7:6 he also affirms, as well as in Rom 7:4, things which at first sight can only suit believers of Jewish origin: that (the law) under the power of which we were held. This is because the apostle does not forget that the experiment of the effects of the law made by the Jews is to the benefit of all mankind. For if the law had continued for the Jews, its maintenance must have issued in extending the reign of the law to the rest of the world; and so it was indeed that Paul’s adversaries understood it (the Judaizing false brethren), so that it is when addressing all believers that he can say: Ye became dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to the Risen One. Calvin also says, speaking of every Christian: From hand to hand, passing from the power of the law, we were given over to Christ. Apart from Christ, the Gentiles would have no other religious future than subjection to the Jewish law.

The apostle had just proved by the law itself that believers, in consequence of the death which they have undergone, may without unfaithfulness cast off the yoke of the law, and contract a new union with Christ. He now points out the grave reason which they have for using this right and preferring this new union to the previous one. The fruits which shall issue from it will be as excellent as those which proceeded from the former were detestable. This expression: fruits, recalls the conclusion of the preceding passage, Rom 6:20-23, where the moral result of the two servitudes was described. Here the subject is two marriages. The contents of the two Rom 7:5-6 were announced in the last words of Rom 7:4. And first, Rom 7:5 : the first marriage and its fruits.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God. [While the marriage lasts the husband (law) has headship and control over the wife (mankind). But death breaks the marriage bond, so that both parties are thereby at once released and made free to marry again. Put the Christian occupies the position of the deceased party. He was united to Christ, being in the humanity of Christ; and being thus in Christ, he was, as it were, married to the law, for Christ was born even under law in its strict Mosaic form (Luk 2:21-27; Gal 4:4); and lived subject to that law (Mat 5:17-18); and died to the law in the death of the cross (Col 2:14). Now we, being united to Christ in all this, are, in him as our representative, also dead to the law (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19), that we might, as one freed by death from marriage to the law (Eze 16:8-38; Jer 2:2; Jer 3:14), be at liberty to contract the second marriage with and to the risen Christ, that in this marriage it might be our privilege and obligation not to obey the law, but to bring forth fruit unto God. The Christian, enjoying a resurrection in Christ, derives untold benefit from a well-recognized legal principle. Ordinarily the liberty from law enjoyed by the dead is of no practical value to them; but the Christian rising, in Christ his representative, from the dead, is free from law and espoused to Christ.]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

7:4 {2} Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the {b} body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, [even] to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth {c} fruit unto {d} God.

(2) An application of the similitude of marriage. “So”, he says, “it is the same with us: for now we are joined to the Spirit, as it were to the second husband, by whom we must bring forth new children: we are dead with regard to the first husband, but with regard to the latter, we are as it were raised from the dead.”

(b) That is, in the body of Christ, to show us how intimate and near the fellowship is between Christ and his members.

(d) Which are acceptable to God.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

"Therefore" introduces an application of the illustration to the readers. The believer has not died to the Law (i.e., been freed from its binding authority) because the Law died, but because we died with Christ. We have died to the Mosaic Law (Torah), not to the Old Testament; the Old Testament is still authoritative revelation for the Christian. But the relationship that once existed between the Old Testament believer and the Mosaic Law no longer exists for the Christian. The body of Jesus Christ is the literal body that died on the cross. Paul viewed Jesus again as our representative, as in Rom 5:12-21 and chapter 6, rather than as our substitute, as in Rom 3:25. Since we died with Christ we no longer have to live according to the commands of the Mosaic Law.

Every believer not only died with Christ but also arose with Him (Rom 6:14). Thus God has joined us to Christ. The phrase "might be joined to another" does not imply that our union is only a possibility. God did unite us with Christ (Rom 6:5). The result of our union should be fruit-bearing (cf. Joh 15:1-6; Gal 5:22-23).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles