{"id":28043,"date":"2022-09-24T12:32:33","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T17:32:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-romans-619\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T12:32:33","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T17:32:33","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-romans-619","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-romans-619\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 6:19"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3 align='center'><b><i> I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n<p> <strong> 19<\/strong>. <em> after the manner of men<\/em> ] More lit., <strong> humanly<\/strong>. He apologizes, so to speak, for using the peculiarly earthly image of the slave-market to enforce a truth of the most exalted spiritual dignity; namely, the necessary conformity of the wills of the justified to the will of God.<\/p>\n<p><em> because of the infirmity of your flesh<\/em> ] i.e., because you are &ldquo;weak&rdquo; to apprehend spiritual truth, as being still &ldquo;in the flesh;&rdquo; affected by that element of your nature which (besides being the stronghold of sin) is always the antithesis of &ldquo;the spirit.&rdquo; This is his reason for going so low for his metaphor; for boldly depicting their state of justification as one also of slavery. No illustration less <em> harsh<\/em> would convey the full <em> reality of obligation<\/em> to their minds.<\/p>\n<p><em> to uncleanness and to iniquity<\/em> ] Two main aspects of sin. &ldquo;Iniquity &ldquo;is lit., and better, <strong> lawlessness<\/strong>. The first of the two words means, the craving for evil as such; the second, the hatred of holy restraint as such.<\/p>\n<p><em> unto iniquity<\/em> ] Lit., again, <strong> unto lawlessness<\/strong>; i.e. &ldquo;with the result of lawless acts on the lawless principle.&rdquo; See <span class='bible'>1Jn 3:4<\/span>, where the Gr. precisely means, &ldquo;sin and lawlessness are convertible terms.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p><em> servants<\/em> ] The word is, of course, emphatic in both parts of the verse.<\/p>\n<p><em> righteousness<\/em> ] See notes above on <span class='bible'>Rom 6:16-18<\/span>, in favour of still referring this word to justification, the &ldquo;gift of righteousness&rdquo; (see on ch. <span class='bible'>Rom 5:17<\/span>) regarded as the new <em> motive<\/em> in the life of the justified; the new power which was to use their &ldquo;members&rdquo; as its &ldquo;weapons&rdquo; against sin. (See on <span class='bible'>Rom 6:13<\/span>.)<\/p>\n<p><em> unto holiness<\/em> ] Lit., and better, <strong> unto sanctification<\/strong>. The Gr. noun indicates rather a process than a principle or a condition. (So too <span class='bible'>Heb 12:14<\/span>.) The result of the new &ldquo;bondage&rdquo; was to be a steady <em> course of purification; a process<\/em> of self-denial, watchfulness, and diligent observance of the holy will of the God of Peace.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>I speak after the manner of men &#8211; <\/B>I speak as people usually speak; or I draw an illustration from common life, in order to make myself better understood.<\/P> <P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>Because of the infirmity of your flesh &#8211; <\/B>The word infirmity means weakness, feebleness; and is opposed to vigor and strength. The word flesh is used often to denote the corrupt passions of people; but it may refer here to their intellect, or understanding; Because of your imperfection of spiritual knowledge; or incapacity to discern arguments and illustrations that would be more strictly spiritual in their character. This dimness or feebleness had been caused by long indulgence in sinful passions, and by the blinding influence which such passions have on the mind. The sense here is, I use an illustration drawn from common affairs, from the well-known relations of master and slave, because you will better see the force of such an illustration with which you have been familiar, than you would one that would be more abstract, and more strictly spiritual. It is a kind of apology for drawing an illustration from the relation of master and slave.<\/P> <P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>For as ye have yielded &#8211; <\/B>Note, <span class='bible'>Rom 6:13<\/span>. Servants to uncleanness. Have been in bondage to impurity. The word uncleanness here refers to impurity of life in any form; to the degraded passions that were common among the heathen; see <span class='bible'>Rom. 1<\/span>.<\/P> <P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>And to iniquity &#8211; <\/B>Transgression of law.<\/P> <P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>Unto iniquity &#8211; <\/B>For the purpose of committing iniquity. It implies that they had done it in an excessive degree. It is well for Christians to be reminded of their former lives, to awaken repentance, to excite gratitude, to produce humility and a firmer purpose to live to the honor of God. This is the use which the apostle here makes of it.<\/P> <P STYLE=\"text-indent: 0.75em\"><B>Unto holiness &#8211; <\/B>In order to practice holiness. Let the surrender of your members to holiness be as sincere and as unqualified as the surrender was to sin. This is all that is required of Christians. Before conversion they were wholly given to sin; after conversion they should be wholly given to God. If all Christians would employ the same energies in advancing the kingdom of God that they have in promoting the kingdom, of Satan, the church would rise with dignity and grandeur, and every continent and island would soon feel the movement. No requirement is more reasonable than this; and it should be a source of lamentation and mourning with Christians that it is not so; that they have employed so mighty energies in the cause of Satan, and do so little in the service of God. This argument for energy in the divine life, the apostle proceeds further to illustrate by comparing the rewards obtained in the two kinds of servitude, that of the world, and of God.<\/P><\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Albert Barnes&#8217; Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><span class='bible'>Rom 6:19-20<\/span><\/p>\n<p><em>I speak after the manner of men.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em> <\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Apostolic exhortation<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>I.<\/strong><strong><em> <\/em><\/strong>Its method. After the manner of men, <em>i.e., <\/em>(Gr<em>.<\/em>)<em> <\/em>humanly&#8211;as men ordinarily speak, borrowing any illustrations from common life. Spiritual subjects are made plainer by familiar comparisons, and so preachers should use simple language and homely illustrations. This was exemplified in Christ, and inspired writers in general. The most useful preachers have ever been those who speak most humanly. The arrow too high flies over the head; too low falls short of the mark.<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>II. <\/strong>The reason for the method. The infirmity of your flesh&#8211;imperfect knowledge through the flesh&#8211;an apology for the use of the expression slaves, etc. Some believers are still babes and carnal (<span class='bible'>1Co 3:1-4<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Heb 5:12-14<\/span>); others are spiritual and of a full age. In Gods family are fathers, young men, little children (<span class='bible'>1Jn 2:12-14<\/span>). The flesh is an impediment to the apprehension of truth. Carnal nature views holiness not as liberty but as bondage. Arguments and modes of speaking to be adapted to the hearers state. Let not the mature and enlightened, then, cavil at methods adapted to reach the immature and ignorant and <em>vice versa.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>III. <\/strong>Its substance.<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. <\/strong>A reminiscence. As ye have yielded your members servants&#8211;<\/p>\n<p><strong>(1)<\/strong> To uncleanness, a characteristic of heathen life in general (<span class='bible'>Rom 1:24<\/span>). Uncleanness is sin against oneself: unchastity of life. All sin is uncleanness; some sins especially so (<span class='bible'>Rom 13:13<\/span>). The greatest slave is he who serves sensual pleasures.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(2)<\/strong> To iniquity&#8211;unlawfulness&#8211;what is opposed to Gods law, and even the laws of human society (<span class='bible'>Luk 18:4<\/span>). Uncleanness and iniquity include the whole circumference of sin (<span class='bible'>Mat 15:19<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><strong>(3)<\/strong> Unto iniquity&#8211;to the practice of iniquity as a result; to an always still greater progress and depth in iniquity. The practice is the necessary effect of the bondage. Sin allows none of its servants to remain idle.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>An enforcement of duty. Even so now&#8211;as heartily and thoroughly, and in consideration of the past yield your members&#8211;<\/p>\n<p><strong>(1)<\/strong> Servants to righteousness. Still servants, but to righteousness instead of sin. Christ gives His disciples a yoke, but it is an easy one. Servitude to righteousness means truest liberty.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(2)<\/strong> Unto holiness&#8211;so as to practise and grow in it. Holiness is that which is in accordance with Gods will, and embraces the whole man (<span class='bible'>1Th 5:23<\/span>). It is a matter of growth. The faithful performance of one duty prepares for that of another. Victory over one sin strengthens us for victory over a second. The practice of righteousness confirms the principle of holiness. Gracious acts strengthen gracious habits, as labour adds to muscle. (<em>T. Robinson, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>Will ye be the servants of sin or the servants of God<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>?&#8211;To determine your choice consider&#8211;<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>I. <\/strong>The contrast.<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. <\/strong>Sin conducts you from iniquity to iniquity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>God will lead you in the path of holiness.<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>II. <\/strong>The immediate consequences.<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. <\/strong>The fruit of sin is shame.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>Of faith is holiness.<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>III. <\/strong>The final result.<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. <\/strong>The wages of sin is death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>The gift of God eternal life. (<em>J. Lyth, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>Forsake the service of sin; enter the service of righteousness<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Then you escape&#8211;<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. <\/strong>Out of disgraceful impurity into true holiness (<span class='bible'>Rom 6:19-21<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>Out of dishonourable servitude into true freedom (<span class='bible'>Rom 6:20-22<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><strong>3. <\/strong>Out of death and condemnation into eternal life (<span class='bible'>Rom 6:21-23<\/span>). (<em>W. Hauck.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>Two ways and two ends<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>I.<\/strong><strong><em> <\/em><\/strong>The one was bitter servitude; the other sweet liberty.<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>II. <\/strong>The one has disgraceful notoriety; the other praiseworthy modesty.<\/p>\n<p><strong><br \/>III. <\/strong>The one has eternal death; the other eternal life. Note what Jesus says of these two ways and their ending (<span class='bible'>Mat 7:13<\/span>). (<em>W. Ziethe.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>The slavery of sin unlawful&#8211;a ground of hope to the sinner<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Luthers domestic, Elizabeth, in a fit of displeasure, left his service without notice. She subsequently fell into sin and became dangerously ill. Luther visited her, and, taking his seat by her bedside, she said, I have given my soul to Satan. Why, rejoined Luther, thats of no consequence. What else? I have, continued she, done many wicked things; but this is what most oppresses me, that I have deliberately sold my poor soul to the devil, and how can such a crime ever find mercy? Elizabeth, listen to me, rejoined the man of God. Suppose, while you lived in my house, you had sold and transferred all my children to a stranger, would the sale or transfer have been lawful and binding? Oh no, said the deeply humbled girl, for I had no right to do that. Very well, you had still less right to give your soul to the arch enemy; it no more belongs to you than my children do. It is the exclusive property of the Lord Jesus Christ; He made it, and when lost also redeemed it; it is His, with all its powers and faculties, and you cant giveaway and sell what is not yours; if you have attempted it, the whole transaction was unlawful, and entirely void. Now, do you go to the Lord, confess your guilt with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, and entreat Him to pardon you, and take back again what is wholly His own. And as for the sin of attempting to alienate His rightful properly, throw that back upon the devil, for that, and that alone is his. The girl obeyed, was converted, and died full of hope.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Changed uses<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Among the spoils taken when Alexander conquered and captured Darius was a richly jewelled cabinet or casket in which the Persian king kept his perfumes and sweet ointments. It was carried to Alexander, who at once turned it to another and nobler use, and added a syllable to its name. He placed in it his copy of the Iliad, saying, This shall no longer be called myrrh box, but Homer box. What the myrrh box became by passing under Alexanders hands illustrates what the soul becomes by passing under the hands of its Divine Inspirer. By unseen influences (as certainly as by the miracle touch) God adds to the graces of a chosen vessel the gift of spiritual power and expression. He makes it empty that He may fill it with greater riches.<\/p>\n<p><strong>For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.<br \/><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The servants of sin<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>1<\/strong><strong><em>. <\/em><\/strong>There is no condition so sad as that of a slave; and no slavery so hard as that of sin. There was once a tyrant who ordered one of his subjects to make an iron chain of a certain length. The man brought the work, and the tyrant bade him make it longer still. And he continued to add link to link, till at length the cruel taskmaster ordered his servants to bind the worker with his own chain, and cast him into the fire. That hardest of tyrants, the devil, treats his slaves in like manner. At first the chain of sin is light, and could easily be cast off. But day by day Satan bids his victims add another link. The servant of sin grows more hardened, daring, reckless in his evil way. He adds sin to sin, and then the end comes.<\/p>\n<p><strong>2. <\/strong>Very often the slaves of sin do not know that they are slaves. They talk about their freedom from restraint, they tell us they are their own masters, that the godly are slaves. Once I visited a madhouse. Some had one delusion, some another. One thought he was a king, another the heir to a fortune. But one thing they all believed, that they were in their right minds.<\/p>\n<p><strong>3. <\/strong>The servants of sin bear about the marks of their master. I have seen gangs of convicts working on Dartmoor. You could not mistake them for anything else if they were dressed in the best of clothing. The word convict is stamped upon every grey face, as plainly as the Government mark is stamped upon their clothing. The servants of sin have their marks also. Look at the shifty eyes, and downward glance of the knave and the false man; the flushed brow and cruel eyes of the angry man; the weak lips and trembling hand of the drunkard.<\/p>\n<p><strong>4. <\/strong>The servants of sin have their so-called enjoyments, these are the baits with which the tyrant gets them into his power. For a time the way of transgressors is made easy and pleasant. The broad road is shaded, and edged with fair fruits and flowers. A saint of old once saw a man leading a herd of swine, which followed him willingly. When the saint marvelled, the man showed him that they followed him for the sake of the sweet food in his hand, and knew not whither they were going. So the servants of sin follow Satan for the sake of the sweet things which he offers, and know not that they are going to their death, even the living death of a lost soul. (<em>J. H. W. Buxton, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>Freedom from righteousness<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Standing altogether outside it, having no relation to it, destitute of it, entirely unaffected by it; strangers therefore to its happy and gainful service. Possessing a freedom which is a bane and a bondage. A planets freedom from the law which preserves it in its orbit; a childs freedom from the restraints of a happy home. This freedom pleases the flesh, but ruins the man; it is not mercifully given, but madly taken; it is Satans miserable choice, Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven. Note the latent irony of the text; Ye were free; but what kind of freedom? A freedom akin to that of hell. Freedom from righteousness a mans greatest misery; freedom in righteousness his greatest mercy. (<em>T. Robinson, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong>Liberty and restraint<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>You hear every day greater numbers of foolish people speaking about liberty, as if it were such an honourable thing; so far from being that, it is, on the whole, and in the broadest sense, dishonourable, and an attribute of the lower creatures. No human being, however great or powerful, was ever so free as a fish. There is always something that he must or must not do; while the fish may do whatever he likes. All the kingdoms of the world put together are not half so large as the sea, and all the railroads and wheels that ever were or will be invented, are not so easy as fins. You will find, on fairly thinking of it, that it is his restraint which is honourable to man, not his liberty; and, what is more, it is restraint which is honourable even in the lower animals. A butterfly is more free than a bee, but you honour the bee more just because it is subject to certain laws which fit it for orderly function in bee society. And throughout the world, of the two abstract things, liberty and restraint, restraint is always the more honourable. It is true, indeed, that in these and all other matters you never can reason finally from the abstraction, for both liberty and restraint are good when they are nobly chosen, and both are bad when they are badly chosen; but of the two, I repeat, it is restraint which characterises the higher creature, and betters the lower creature; and from the ministering of the archangel to the labour of the insect, from the poising of the planets to the gravitation of a grain of dust&#8211;the power and glory of all creatures and all matter consist in their obedience, not in their freedom. The sun has no liberty, a dead leaf has much. The dust of which you are formed has no liberty. Its liberty will come&#8211;with its corruption. (<em>J. Ruskin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P>  Verse <span class='bible'>19<\/span>. <I><B>I speak after the manner of men<\/B><\/I>] This phrase is often used by the Greek writers to signify what was <I>easy to be<\/I> <I>comprehended<\/I>; what was <I>ad captum vulgi<\/I>, level with common understandings, delivered in a <I>popular style<\/I>; what was different from the <I>high flights<\/I> of the <I>poets<\/I>, and the studied <I>sublime<\/I> <I>obscurity<\/I> of the <I>philosophers<\/I>.<\/P> <P> <\/P> <P>  <I><B>Because of the infirmity of your flesh<\/B><\/I>] As if he had said: I make use of metaphors and figures connected with well-known natural things; with your <I>trades<\/I> and <I>situation<\/I> in life; because of your inexperience in heavenly things, of which ye are only just beginning to know the <I>nature<\/I> and the <I>names<\/I>.<\/P> <P> <\/P> <P>  <I><B>Servants to uncleanness<\/B><\/I>, &amp;c.]  These different expressions show how deeply immersed in and enslaved by sin these Gentiles were before their conversion to Christianity.  Several of the particulars are given in the first chapter of this epistle.<\/P> <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Adam Clarke&#8217;s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P> <B>I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh:<\/B> q.d. I accommodate myself to your capacity, because of the weakness of your understanding in spiritual things; therefore I use this familiar similitude of service and freedom, that by these secular and civil things you might the better understand such as are spiritual: see <span class='bible'>Joh 3:12<\/span>. <\/P> <P><B>For as ye have yielded, &amp;c.:<\/B> q.d. The great thing that I desire of you (and it is most reasonable) is this, that you would be as sedulous and careful now to obey God, as you have formerly been to obey and serve sin; to do good, as you have been to do evil. <\/P> <P><B>To uncleaness; <\/B>to fleshly lusts, which defile you. <\/P> <P><B>To iniquity unto iniquity; <\/B>i.e. adding one sin to another; or else by the former you may understand original, by the latter actual sin. He useth three words about the service of sin, and but two about the service of God; wicked men take great pains for hell; oh that we would take the same for heaven. <\/P> <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P><B>19. I speak after the manner ofmen<\/B>descending, for illustration, to the level of commonaffairs. <\/P><P>       <B>because of the infirmity ofyour flesh<\/B>the weakness of your spiritual apprehension. <\/P><P>       <B>for as ye have yielded<\/B>&#8220;asye yielded,&#8221; the thing being viewed as now past. <\/P><P>       <B>your members servants toUncleanness and to Iniquity unto<\/B>the practice of <\/P><P>       <B>iniquity; even so now yieldyour members servants to Righteousness unto holiness<\/B>rather,&#8221;unto (the attainment of) sanctification,&#8221; as the same wordis rendered in <span class='bible'>2Th 2:13<\/span>; <span class='bible'>1Co 1:30<\/span>;<span class='bible'>1Pe 1:2<\/span>: that is, &#8220;Lookingback upon the <I>heartiness<\/I> with which ye served Sin, and the<I>lengths<\/I> ye went to be stimulated now to like zeal and likeexuberance in the service of a better Master.&#8221;<\/P><\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown&#8217;s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><strong>I speak after the manner of men<\/strong>,&#8230;. This refers either to what the apostle had said already concerning service and liberty, things which were known among men, and easy to be understood; or to the following exhortation: what he was about to say, he delivered in a manner suited to their understandings, and was , &#8220;that which was human&#8221;; not angelic, or what required the power, purity, and perfection of angels; or what was unreasonable or impossible, but what was their reasonable service, as men; and might be done through the grace of God, in the strength of Christ, and by the assistance of the Spirit: and though he might have insisted upon it with good reason, that they ought to be more diligent and industrious in the service of God than they had been in the service of sin; yet<\/p>\n<p><strong>because of the infirmity of their flesh<\/strong>, considering that they had flesh, or corrupt nature, and were attended with weakness in knowledge, faith, and obedience; he only pressed this upon them, that in like manner as they had been servants to sin, they would be servants to righteousness:<\/p>\n<p><strong>for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity<\/strong>; what they yielded to the service of sin were their &#8220;members&#8221;; by which, as before, may be meant, either the powers and faculties of their souls, or the parts and members of their bodies, or both; and particularly the latter, as the eyes and ears, the tongue, the mouth, the hands, and feet, which are all employed by a natural man in the drudgery of sin: these are yielded to sin under the form and character of &#8220;servants&#8221;; and as such are governed, directed, and ordered to fulfil this and the other lust, which is done willingly and readily: these members are &#8220;yielded&#8221;, presented, and given up cheerfully to this slavery; which is both scandalous and unrighteous: it is &#8220;to uncleanness&#8221;; which designs all sorts of pollution and filthiness, both of flesh and spirit: &#8220;and to iniquity&#8221;; everything that is contrary to the law, all unrighteousness and ungodliness; and it is added, &#8220;unto iniquity&#8221;; which may design all sorts of sin, a progress in it, adding continually to it; which shows them to have been thorough hearty servants of sin. Now what the apostle exhorts to, and requires of them, is, that<\/p>\n<p><strong>even so now they would yield their members servants to righteousness unto holiness<\/strong>; that is, let the same members that have been employed in the service of sin, be made use of in the service of righteousness: let your eyes be employed in looking and diligently searching into the Scriptures of truth; your ears in hearing the Gospel preached; your lips, mouth, and tongue, in expressing the praises of God, for what he has done for you; your hands in distributing to the interest of religion, and the necessities of the saints; and your feet in hastening to attend on public worship, and observe the testimonies of the Lord: let them be employed under the same form and character as servants, waiting upon the Lord, ready to fulfil his will; and in the same manner, freely, willingly, and cheerfully, and that constantly and universally, in all acts of righteousness and holiness.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: John Gill&#8217;s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P> <B>I speak after the manner of men <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"> <\/SPAN><\/span>). &#8220;I speak a human word.&#8221; He begs pardon for using &#8220;slaving&#8221; in connection with righteousness. But it is a good word, especially for our times when self-assertiveness and personal liberty bulk so large in modern speech. See <span class='bible'>Rom 3:5<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Gal 3:15<\/span> where he uses <span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"> <\/SPAN><\/span>.<\/P> <P><B>Because of the infirmity of your flesh <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">     <\/SPAN><\/span>). Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also.<\/P> <P><B>Servants to uncleanness <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">  <\/SPAN><\/span>). Neuter plural form of <span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"><\/SPAN><\/span> to agree with <span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"><\/SPAN><\/span> (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends.<\/P> <P><B>So now <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"> <\/SPAN><\/span>). Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb <span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"><\/SPAN><\/span>, to present (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">, <\/SPAN><\/span>).<\/P> <P><B>Servants to righteousness <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">  <\/SPAN><\/span>). Repeats the idea of verse <span class='bible'>18<\/span>.<\/P> <P><B>Unto sanctification <\/B> (<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\"> <\/SPAN><\/span>). This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (verse <span class='bible'>15<\/span>). This late word appears only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See on <span class='bible'>1Thess 4:3<\/span>; <span class='bible'>1Cor 1:30<\/span>. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (<span class='bible'>1:17<\/span>) of righteousness (both justification, <span class='bible'>1:18-5:21<\/span> and sanctification, chapters <span class='bible'>6-8<\/span>). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (<span class='bible'>6:1-7:6<\/span>) and illustrates the obligation by death (<span class='bible'>6:1-14<\/span>), by slavery (<span class='bible'>6:15-23<\/span>), and by marriage (<span class='bible'>7:1-6<\/span>). <\/P> <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Robertson&#8217;s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><P>After the manner of men [<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Lit., what is human, popularly. He seems to have felt that the figures of service, bondage, etc., were unworthy of the subject, and apologizes for his use of the image of the slave mart to enforce such a high spiritual truth, on the ground of their imperfect spiritual comprehension. Compare <span class='bible'>2Co 2:6<\/span>; <span class='bible'>1Co 3:1<\/span>, <span class='bible'>2<\/span>. <\/P> <P>To iniquity unto iniquity [<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">    ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Iniquity issuing in an abiding iniquitous state. Lit., lawlessness. It is used by John as the definition of sin, <span class='bible'>1Jo 3:4<\/span>. <\/P> <P>Holiness [<span class='_800000'><SPAN LANG=\"el-GR\">] <\/SPAN><\/span>. Rev., sanctification. For the kindred adjective agiov holy, see on saints, <span class='bible'>Act 26:10<\/span>. Agiasmov is used in the New Testament both of a process &#8211; the inauguration and maintenance of the life of fellowship with God, and of the resultant state of sanctification. See <span class='bible'>1Th 4:3<\/span>, <span class='bible'>7<\/span>; <span class='bible'>2Th 2:13<\/span>; <span class='bible'>1Ti 2:15<\/span>; <span class='bible'>1Pe 1:2<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Heb 12:14<\/span>. It is difficult to determine which is meant here. The passages in Thessalonians, Timothy, and Hebrews, are cited by interpreters on both sides. As in ver. 22 it appears that sanctification contemplates a further result (everlasting life), it is perhaps better to understand it as the process. Yield your members to righteousness in order to carry on the progressive work of sanctification, perfecting holiness (<span class='bible'>1Co 7:1<\/span>).<\/P> <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Vincent&#8217;s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1) <strong>I speak after the manner of men,&#8221;<\/strong> (anthropinon lego) &#8220;Humanly I speak,&#8221; using familiar language and illustrations of men, like slaver , and emancipation as in <span class='bible'>Gal 3:15<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Gal 5:13<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>2) <strong>&#8220;Because of the infirmity of your flesh,&#8221;<\/strong> (dia ten astheneian tes sarkos humon) &#8220;Because of the weakness (sickness or infirmity) of your flesh;- Weakness of their comprehension of Divine truth, <span class='bible'>1Co 3:1-3<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Heb 5:12-14<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>3) <strong>&#8220;For as ye have yielded your members,&#8221;<\/strong> (hosper gar parestesate ta mege humon) &#8220;For just as you all presented (yielded or surrendered) your members,&#8221; in times past, while unsaved, <span class='bible'>1Th 1:9<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>4) <strong>&#8220;Servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity,&#8221;<\/strong> (doula te akatharsia kai te anomia eis ten anomian) &#8220;As slaves to uncleanness and lawlessness unto lawlessness,&#8221; to do one lawless deed after another, to repeated violations of law, <span class='bible'>Rom 13:11-14<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>5) <strong>&#8220;Even so now yield your members,&#8221;<\/strong> (houtos nun parastesate ta mele humon) &#8220;Even so, now and hereafter continually, you all present your members,&#8221; offer or surrender your members, <span class='bible'>1Co 6:19-20<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Eph 4:22-32<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>6) <strong>&#8220;Servants to righteousness unto holiness,&#8221;<\/strong> (doula te dikaioune eis hagiasmon) &#8220;As servants to (do) righteousness (and) unto holiness, as a state of behavior, <span class='bible'>Rom 12:1-2<\/span>; <span class='bible'>Eph 4:1-5<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> 19.  I speak what is human,  etc.  He says that he speaks after the manner of men, not as to the substance but as to the manner. So Christ says, in <span class='bible'>Joh 3:12<\/span>, that he announced earthly things, while yet he spoke of heavenly mysteries, though not so magnificently as the dignity of the things required, because he accommodated himself to the capacities of a people ignorant and simple. And thus the Apostle says, by way of preface, that he might more fully show how gross and wicked is the calumny, when it is imagined, that the freedom obtained by Christ gives liberty to sin. He reminds the faithful at the same time, that nothing is more unreasonable, nay, base and disgraceful, than that the spiritual grace of Christ should have less influence over them than earthly freedom; as though he had said, &#8220;I might, by comparing sin and righteousness, show how much more ardently ye ought to be led to render obedience to the latter, than to serve the former; but from regard to your infirmity I omit this comparison: nevertheless, though I treat you with great indulgence, I may yet surely make this just demand &#8212; that you should not at least obey righteousness more coldly or negligently than you served sin.&#8221; It is a sort of reticence or silence, a withholding of something when we wish more to be understood than what we express. He does yet exhort them to render obedience to righteousness with so much more diligence, as that which they served is more worthy than sin, though he seems not to require this in so many words.  (198) <\/p>\n<p> As ye have presented,   etc.; that is, &#8220;As ye were formerly ready with all your faculties to serve sin, it is hence sufficiently evident how wretchedly enslaved and bound did your depravity hold you to itself: now then ye ought to be equally prompt and ready to execute the commands of God; let not your activity in doing good be now less than it was formerly in doing evil.&#8221; He does not indeed observe the same order in the antithesis, by adapting different parts to each other, as he does in <span class='bible'>1Th 4:7<\/span>, where he sets uncleanness in opposition to holiness; but the meaning is still evident. <\/p>\n<p> He mentions first two kinds &#8212; uncleanness and iniquity; the former of which is opposed to chastity and holiness, the other refers to injuries hurtful to our neighbour. But he repeats iniquity twice, and in a different sense: by the first he means plunders, frauds, perjuries, and every kind of wrong; by the second, the universal corruption of life, as though he had said, &#8220;Ye have prostituted your members so as to perpetrate all wicked works, and thus the kingdom of iniquity became strong in you&#8221;  (199) By  righteousness  I understand the law or the rule of a holy life, the design of which is sanctification, as the case is when the faithful devote themselves to serve God in purity. <\/p>\n<p>  (198) The phrase is taken differently : &#913;&#957;&#952;&#961;&#8061;&#960;&#953;&#957;&#959;&#957; &#955;&#8051;&#947;&#969;  &#8220;I speak what is human,&#8221; that is, what is proportionable to man&#8217;s strength, says [ Chrysostom ] &#8212; what is done and known in common life, as in <span class='bible'>Gal 3:15<\/span>, or, what is moderate, says [ Hammond ] &#8212; what is level to man&#8217;s understanding, says [ Vatablus ] The first proposed by [ Hammond ] is the meaning most suitable here; for the Apostle had previously used reasons and arguments, and sacred similitudes; but he comes now to what is known in common life among men, the connection between masters and servants, and he did this in condescension to their weakness, which he calls the weakness of the flesh, that is, the weakness of which flesh, the depravity of nature, was the cause; it was weakness arising from the flesh. &#8212;  Ed.  <\/p>\n<p>  (199) The different clauses of this verse have been a knotty point to all commentators. Probably the Apostle did not intend to keep up a regular course of antithesis, the subject not admitting of this; because the progress of evil and the progress of its remedy may be different, and it seems to be so in the present case. Sin is innate and inward, and its character, as here represented, is vileness and iniquity, and it breaks out into acts of iniquity: he does not repeat the other character, vileness; but when he comes to the contrast he mentions holiness, and does not add what is antithetic to iniquity. This is a striking instance of the elliptical style of the Apostle. It is not neglect or carelessness, but no doubt an intentional omission; it being the character of his mode of writing, which he had in common with the ancient Prophets. <\/p>\n<p> Then comes the word &#8220;righteousness,&#8221; which I am disposed to think is that which all along has been spoken of, the righteousness of faith; this is not innate, not inward, but which comes from without, and is apprehended by faith, by which sins are forgiven, and God&#8217;s favor obtained; and they who become the servants of this are to cultivate holiness both inward and outward; they ought to present all their members, that is, all their faculties, to the service of this master, so that they may become holy in all manner of conversation. <\/p>\n<p> But if this idea of righteousness be disapproved of, we may still account for the apparent irregularity in the construction of the passage. It is an instance of an inverted order, many examples of which are found even in this Epistle. He begins with &#8220;uncleanness,&#8221; he ends with &#8220;holiness,&#8221; and then the intervening words which are in contrast correspond, &#8220;iniquity&#8221; and &#8220;righteousness.&#8221; Here is also an inversion in the meaning; &#8220;uncleanness&#8221; is the principle, and &#8220;holiness&#8221; is the action; while &#8220;iniquity&#8221; is the action, and &#8220;righteousness&#8221; is the principle. If this view is right, we have here a singular instance of the inverted parallelism, both as to words and meaning. &#8212;  Ed.  <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Calvin&#8217;s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>(19) <strong>I speak after the manner of men.<\/strong>I am using a merely human figure of speech, a figure taken from common human relations, and not a high mystical phrase such as I used just now, because of the dulness of your understanding: that form of expression you might not be able to comprehend; this present figure is clear even to a mind that is busy with earthly and carnal things, and has not much faculty for taking in anything beyond.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Your flesh.<\/strong>This corresponds nearly to what is elsewhere called the carnal mind, a mind alive only to material and sensible things.<\/p>\n<p><strong>To<\/strong> <strong>iniquity unto iniquity.<\/strong>Ye yielded up your members to iniquity for the practice of iniquity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Unto holiness.<\/strong>Rather, <em>for sanctification; to be made holy.<br \/><\/em><\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Ellicott&#8217;s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> <strong> 19<\/strong>. <strong> <\/strong> <strong> After the manner of men<\/strong> I illustrate deep spiritual truth by ordinary images drawn from secular life. <\/p>\n<p><strong> Infirmity flesh<\/strong> Which needs spiritual truth in material shapes. The Roman Christians knew the significance of slavery as a source of illustration, being not only familiar with it, but even being, perhaps, some of themselves <em> slaves. <\/em> He momentarily apologizes for this sort of illustration, and then pushes it to its final and awful result.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Whedon&#8217;s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> &lsquo;I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh. For as you presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification.&rsquo;<\/p>\n<p> Paul then points out that they must not take his illustrations too literally, always a danger with certain types of people. He was using illustrations from life to depict spiritual situations, and depicting sin as though it were a slave-master. And he was doing it because they might not be able to understand anything put more deeply. The development of a spiritual mind could take time. Thus he was speaking in terms of life as they knew it (most of them were slaves or servants, and a few were masters) so that they would understand.<\/p>\n<p> He therefore clarifies exactly what he has meant. They had previously presented their members as servants to uncleanness, and to continuing iniquity. Now therefore they are to present their members as servants to righteousness, to cleanness and continuing goodness, resulting in their being made holy and set apart to God as God works within them. &lsquo;Sanctification&rsquo; means &lsquo;making holy, setting a man apart as separate to God and His ways&rsquo; and so in the end &lsquo;making Godlike&rsquo;. Just as the reception of the free gift of righteousness results in justification (<span class='bible'>Rom 5:16<\/span>), so does the submission of our members as servants of righteousness result in sanctification, as God responds to our submission with the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit (<span class='bible'>Rom 5:1-5<\/span>; <span class='bible'>2Co 3:18<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Servants of righteousness unto everlasting life:<\/p>\n<p>v. <strong> 19<\/strong>. <strong> I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh; for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>v. <strong> 20<\/strong>. <strong> For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>v. <strong> 21<\/strong>. <strong> What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>v. <strong> 22<\/strong>. <strong> But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>v. <strong> 23<\/strong>. <strong> For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ, our Lord.<\/p>\n<p><\/strong> Paul had used a very strong expression: &#8220;slavery of righteousness,&#8221; to illustrate his meaning, a comparison taken from the common relations of men, to set forth the relation of the believers to God. And so he here apologizes: in a way, for using this human figure of the relation of slave to master to convey the great spiritual truth which he intends to impress upon his readers. It was necessary to speak thus plainly, in such homely phrases and figures, on account of the weakness of their flesh, not so much on account of their intellectual as on account of their moral weakness, the heathen Christians still tending somewhat toward laxity in morals, toward abuse of Christian liberty. And therefore Paul continues the application of his strong figure of speech: As they had yielded, offered, set forth, the members and organs of their bodies, bound in slavery to uncleanness, pollution of their own body, soul, and mind, and to iniquity, lawlessness, transgression of the divine Law in general. Such are the fruits of the natural state of man: evil in its various forms, a progression in lawless behavior, one sin being the cause and instigation of another. But their changed status now demands, and the apostle adds the urgency of his admonition: So now offer, set forth, your members as bound under righteousness unto holiness. The believers are not merely obligated to a life of righteousness, but they are in its bonded service. And the result is purity in heart and life, an inward conformity to the divine image, <span class='bible'>1Th 4:7<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle now gives further confirmation to his admonition: When you were slaves of sin, you were free from righteousness. So far as righteousness was concerned, they were free; they were not concerned with righteousness, they were serving another master; they had nothing in common with righteousness, were absolutely unable and unfit to perform anything that would have been acceptable in the sight of God. And what was the result? What fruits were matured under those conditions? What was the product of the slavery of sin? The answer can be only one: Such things as now cause you to be ashamed as you remember your former conversation, for they were horrible vices, shameful delights, which will invariably plunge into death and destruction for both soul and body. Now, however, the situation is reversed: Having been emancipated, set free, from sin, and bound to the Lord, you have in your possession your fruit to sanctification, but the end eternal life. The entire situation presents the contrast to carnal-mindedness. In the case of the believers the evil master, sin, has been deposed; instead, there is the controlling influence of the Spirit&#8217;s power. And the product of the service of God thus entered into is holiness, all desires, thoughts, and actions being devoted to the performing of God&#8217;s will. And the end, the result of this service of righteousness, is eternal life, the fullness of life in the presence of God forever and ever. The apostle, therefore, concludes with an axiomatic statement: For the wages of sin is death; what sin, as the tyrannical ruler, pays its subjects, is their due and well-deserved reward. Sin cannot be allowed to go unrewarded, that is, unpunished. For a confirmed sinner to hope for pardon without atonement is to hope for the impossible, namely, that God will, in the end, prove unjust. But, by a contrast as great as that between heaven and hell: The free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus, our Lord. There is not a word, not a hint of reward here: everlasting life is a free, an unmerited gift of grace and mercy. The punishment of hell is always merited, the bliss of heaven never. In Jesus Christ the possession of eternal life is assured, for He has made its attainment possible, and in and through Him we are placed in possession of this glorious gift. With this blessed goal before their eyes, the believers will also walk circumspectly on the paths of righteousness and withstand every effort of sin to regain the ascendancy, lest they lose the gift which has become theirs by faith and the hope which the heavenly calling holds before them in Christ Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong> Summary.<\/strong><em> The apostle admonishes the Christians no longer to serve sin, but to walk in righteousness, by reminding them of the fact that in Christ Jesus they have died unto sin and have become partakers of the new spiritual life, by which they have become servants unto righteousness and have before them the goal of everlasting life.<\/p>\n<p><\/em><\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p><strong><em><span class='bible'>Rom 6:19<\/span><\/em><\/strong><strong>. <\/strong><strong><em>I speak after the manner of men<\/em><\/strong><strong><\/strong> There was a necessity for some little kind of apology for a figure of speech, which he dwells upon quite to the end of this chapter. This first clause should be read in a parenthesis. <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> <span class='bible'>Rom 6:19<\/span> . Paul had, in <span class='bible'>Rom 6:16-18<\/span> , represented the idea of the highest moral freedom in a form corresponding indeed with its nature as a moral necessity (&ldquo;Deo servire vera libertas est,&rdquo; Augustine), but still borrowed from human relations as  . He now therefore, not to justify himself, but to induce his readers to separate the idea from the form, announces <em> the fact that<\/em> , and the <em> reason why<\/em> , he thus expresses himself regarding the loftiest moral idea in this concrete fashion, derived from an ordinary human relation. <em> I speak<\/em> (in here making mention of <em> slavery<\/em> , <span class='bible'>Rom 6:16-18<\/span> ) <em> what is human<\/em> (belonging to the relations of the natural human life) <em> on account of the<\/em> (intellectual) <em> weakness of your flesh, i.e.<\/em> in order thereby to come to the help of this your weakness. For the setting forth of the idea in some such sensuous form is the appropriate means of stimulating and procuring its apprehension in the case of one, whose knowledge has not yet been elevated by divine enlightenment to a higher platform of strength and clearness released from such human forms. Respecting  see the examples in Wetstein. It is the antithesis of  , Plat. <em> Rep.<\/em> p. 497 C. The expression    in ch. <span class='bible'>Rom 3:5<\/span> is in substance equivalent, since  also necessarily indicates the <em> form and dress<\/em> employed for the idea, for whose representation the Apostle has uttered <em> what is human<\/em> . The  , however, <em> i.e.<\/em> the material human nature in its psychical determination, as contrasted with the divine pneumatic influence (comp on <span class='bible'>Rom 4:1<\/span> ), is <em> weak<\/em> for religious and moral <em> discernment<\/em> , as well as for good (<span class='bible'>Mat 26:41<\/span> ); hence the   (<span class='bible'>2Co 1:12<\/span> ) is foolishness with God (<span class='bible'>1Co 3:19<\/span> ). Others, taking it not of intellectual weakness, but of <em> moral<\/em> weakness, refer it to what <em> follows<\/em> (Origen, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Erasmus, Calvin, Estius, Hammond, Wetstein, and others, including Klee, Reithmayr, and Bisping), in the sense: &ldquo;I do not demand what is too hard (  ., comp <span class='bible'>1Co 10:13<\/span> ); for although I might require a far higher degree of the new obedience, yet I require only the same as ye have formerly rendered to sin.&rdquo; [1483] But the following <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> . <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> introduces not the equality of the <em> degree<\/em> , but, as is plain from <span class='bible'>Rom 6:20<\/span> , only the comparison in general between the former and the present state. Besides, the demand itself, which by this interpretation would only concern a lower stage of Christian life, would be inappropriate to the morally ideal character of the whole hortatory discourse, which is not injured by the concrete figurative form. This remark also applies to the dismembering explanation of Hofmann (comp Th. Schott), who makes <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> form a parenthesis, and then connects <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> . <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> with <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> , so that the thought would be: the weakness of our in born nature gives occasion that our translation into the life of righteousness is dealt with as an <em> enslavement<\/em> thereto, while otherwise it would be simply restoration to the freedom of doing our own will; according to this weakness what is right is not done freely of itself, but in the shape of a <em> service<\/em> . But how could Paul have so <em> degraded<\/em> the moral <em> loftiness<\/em> of the position of the    ! To him they were indeed the <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> (<span class='bible'>Rom 6:22<\/span> ), and in his estimation there was nothing morally more exalted than to be <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> , as Christ Himself was. The Christian has put on Christ in this respect also (<span class='bible'>Gal 3:27<\/span> ), and lives in the spirit of the holiest freedom (<span class='bible'>2Co 3:17<\/span> f.); his subjection to the service of <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> has not taken place on account of his inborn nature incapacitating him for moral freedom (as though it were a measure of compulsion); but on the contrary he has put off the morally weak old man, and so he lives as a new creature by means of the newness of the spirit, and in virtue of his communion in the resurrection-life of Christ in the condition of righteousness, which Paul has here under the designation of <em> bondage<\/em> , accommodating himself by the ordinary human expression to the natural weakness of the understanding, brought into contrast with the having been freed from sin.<\/p>\n<p>  <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> .<\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> .<\/em><\/strong> <strong><em> <\/em><\/strong> [1485] ] <em> Practical assigning of a reason<\/em> for the proposition just affirmed  in <span class='bible'>Rom 6:18<\/span> , in the form of a <em> concrete demand<\/em> . In opposition to Hofmann, who (at variance with his own interpretation of <span class='bible'>Rom 13:6<\/span> !) declares it impossible to clothe the assigning of a reason in the dress of an exhortation, see Baeumlein, <em> Partik<\/em> . p. 86. <span class='bible'>Heb 12:3<\/span> (see Delitzsch) is to be taken in the same way; comp <span class='bible'>Jas 1:7<\/span> ; and see on <span class='bible'>1Co 1:26<\/span> . Hence: <em> for, as ye have placed your members at the disposal<\/em> , etc., <em> so now place<\/em> , etc. Since the discourse proceeds indeed in the same figurative manner, but yet so that it now assumes the <em> hortatory<\/em> form,  .   is not to be put in a parenthesis, but with Fritzsche, Lachmann, and Tischendorf, to be separated from  by a period.<\/p>\n<p>   .   ] The two exhaust the notion of  (<span class='bible'>Rom 6:13<\/span> ), so that  . characterises sin as morally defiling <em> the man<\/em> (see on <span class='bible'>Rom 1:24<\/span> ), and  . (<span class='bible'>1Jn 3:4<\/span> ) as a violation of <em> the divine law<\/em> (see Tittmann, <em> Synon<\/em> . p. 48).<\/p>\n<p>   .] <em> on behalf of<\/em> antagonism to law, in order that it <em> may be established<\/em> ( <em> in facto<\/em> ). The interpretation     , Theophylact (so also Oecumenius, Erasmus, Luther, Grotius, Kllner, Ewald, and others), is, in its practical bearing, erroneous, since it is only the yielding of the members to the <em> principle<\/em> of  that actually brings the latter <em> into a concrete reality<\/em> .<\/p>\n<p>  ] <em> in order to attain holiness<\/em> (<span class='bible'>1Co 1:30<\/span> ; <span class='bible'>1Th 4:3<\/span> f. <span class='bible'>1Th 4:7<\/span> ; <span class='bible'>2Th 2:13<\/span> ), moral purity and consecration to God. To be an  in mind and walk that goal of Christian development is the aim of the man, who places his members at the disposal of  as ruler over him. The word  is found only in the LXX., Apocr. and in the N. T. (in the latter it is always <em> holiness<\/em> , not <em> sanctification<\/em> , [1487] even in <span class='bible'>1Ti 2:15<\/span> ; <span class='bible'>Heb 12:14<\/span> ; <span class='bible'>1Pe 1:2<\/span> ), but not Greek writers. In Dion. Hal. i. 21, it is a false reading, as also in Diod. iv. 39.  stands <em> without the article<\/em> , because this highest moral goal is conceived of <em> qualitatively<\/em> .<\/p>\n<p style='margin-left:3em'> [1483] So also probably Theodoret:                .<\/p>\n<p style='margin-left:3em'> [1485] .  .  .    .<\/p>\n<p style='margin-left:3em'> [1487] In opposition to Hofmann, on ver. 22. But to the Christian consciousness it is self-evident that <em> holiness<\/em> can only be attained under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Comp. Ritschl, <em> altkath. K.<\/em> p. 82.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer&#8217;s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> 19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. <strong> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/strong><\/p>\n<p> Ver. 19. <strong> After the manner of men<\/strong> ] That is commonly, <em> Crassius et rudius loquor, <\/em> by a similitude drawn from human affairs of easy and ordinary observation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><strong> To uncleanness, and to iniquity<\/strong> ] Mark the opposition, there are three tos in the expression of the service to sin; but in the service of God only two. Wicked men take great pains for hell; would they but take the same for heaven, they could not likely miss it. <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: John Trapp&#8217;s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> <strong> 19.<\/strong> ] For the expression <strong> <\/strong> the Apostle apologizes: &lsquo;it is not literally so; the servant of righteousness is <em> no slave<\/em> , under no yoke of bondage; but in order to set the contrast between the former and the new state better before you, I have used this word:&rsquo; <strong> I speak as a man<\/strong> (according to the requirements of rhetorical antithesis) <strong> on account of the<\/strong> (intellectual, as De W. and Thol.: not moral, as Meyer and Olsh.) <strong> weakness of your flesh<\/strong> (i.e. &lsquo;because you are  and not  , and want such figures to set the truth before you.&rsquo;<\/p>\n<p> Orig [39] , Chrys., Theodoret, Calv., Estius, Wetst., al., take these words in a totally different sense: &lsquo; <em> I require of you nothing which your fleshly weakness will not bear<\/em> &rsquo;): <strong> for<\/strong> (explanatory of  .) <strong> like as ye<\/strong> (once) <strong> rendered up your members (as) servants to impurity and to lawlessness<\/strong> (two divisions of  impurity, against a man&rsquo;s self, lawlessness against God), <strong> unto lawlessness<\/strong> (both which,  . and  ., <em> lead to<\/em>  , <em> result<\/em> in it: &lsquo;qui justiti serviunt, <em> proficiunt<\/em> :  , iniqui, sunt <em> iniqui, nihil amplius<\/em> .&rsquo; Bengel: not &lsquo; <em> from one<\/em>  <em> to another<\/em> ,&rsquo; as cum., Theophyl., Luth., Grot., Erasm., al.: because (De W.)  is not an <em> act<\/em> , but a principle), <strong> so now render up your members (as) servants to righteousness<\/strong> (see Rom 6:16 ) <strong> unto<\/strong> (leading to, having as its result, perfect) <strong> sanctification<\/strong> (contrast to  , and both embracing their respective consequences).<\/p>\n<p style='margin-left:3em'> [39] Origen, b. 185, d. 254<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Henry Alford&#8217;s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p> <span class='bible'>Rom 6:19<\/span> .         . <em> Cf.<\/em> <span class='bible'>Rom 3:5<\/span> , <span class='bible'>Gal 3:15<\/span> . Paul apologises for using this human figure of the relation of slave to master to convey spiritual truths. But what is &ldquo;the weakness of the flesh&rdquo; which makes him have recourse to such figures? Weiss makes it moral. The Apostle speaks with this unmistakable plainness and emphasis because he is writing to morally weak persons whose nature and past life really made them liable to temptations to libertinism. This seems to me confirmed by the reference, which immediately follows, to the character of their pre-Christian life. Others make the weakness rather intellectual than ethical, as if Paul said: &ldquo;I condescend to your want of spiritual intelligence in using such figures&rdquo;. But this is not a natural meaning for &ldquo;the weakness of your flesh,&rdquo; and does not yield so good a connection with what follows.       :  defiling the sinner,  disregarding the will of God. If    should remain in the text, it may suggest that this bad life never gets beyond itself. On the other hand, to present the members as slaves to righteousness has  in view, which is a higher thing.  is sanctification, primarily as an act or process, eventually as a result. It is unreal to ask whether the process or the result is meant here: they have no meaning apart.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>after the manner, &amp;c. Greek. anthropinos. Here, 1Co 2:4, 1Co 2:13; 1Co 4:3; 1Co 10:13. Jam 3:7. 1Pe 2:13. Compare Rom 3:5. <\/p>\n<p>infirmity. Greek. astheneia. See Joh 11:4. <\/p>\n<p>flesh. See Rom 1:3. <\/p>\n<p>servants. Greek. doulon. Only here. See App-190. <\/p>\n<p>uncleanness. Greek. akatharsia. See Rom 1:24. <\/p>\n<p>iniquity. App-128. <\/p>\n<p>unto. Greek. eis. App-104. to work. <\/p>\n<p>holiness. Greek. hagiasmos. Only here, Rom 6:22. 1Co 1:30. 1Th 4:3, 1Th 4:4, 1Th 4:7; 2Th 2:13. 1Ti 2:15. Heb 12:14. 1Pe 1:2. <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>19.] For the expression  the Apostle apologizes: it is not literally so; the servant of righteousness is no slave, under no yoke of bondage; but in order to set the contrast between the former and the new state better before you, I have used this word: I speak as a man (according to the requirements of rhetorical antithesis) on account of the (intellectual, as De W. and Thol.: not moral, as Meyer and Olsh.) weakness of your flesh (i.e. because you are  and not , and want such figures to set the truth before you.<\/p>\n<p>Orig[39], Chrys., Theodoret, Calv., Estius, Wetst., al., take these words in a totally different sense: I require of you nothing which your fleshly weakness will not bear): for (explanatory of .) like as ye (once) rendered up your members (as) servants to impurity and to lawlessness (two divisions of -impurity, against a mans self,-lawlessness against God), unto lawlessness (both which, . and ., lead to , result in it: qui justiti serviunt, proficiunt: , iniqui, sunt iniqui, nihil amplius. Bengel: not from one  to another, as cum., Theophyl., Luth., Grot., Erasm., al.: because (De W.)  is not an act, but a principle), so now render up your members (as) servants to righteousness (see Rom 6:16) unto (leading to, having as its result, perfect) sanctification (contrast to , and both embracing their respective consequences).<\/p>\n<p>[39] Origen, b. 185, d. 254<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Rom 6:19. , after the manner of men) Language after the manner of men, is frequent, and in some measure always occurring, whereby Scripture condescends to suit itself to our capacity. Too plain language is not always better [the best] adapted to the subject in hand. The accusative is used for the adverb. [According to our mode of speaking, it may be translated, Ich muss es euch mir massiv sagen, I must speak to you with great plainness and simplicity.-V. g.]-, because of) Slowness of understanding arises from weakness of the flesh, i.e., of a nature merely human, comp. 1Co 3:3. , weakness) Those who desire discourse to be continuously in all respects quite plain, should perceive in this a mark of their own weakness, and should not take amiss [take offence at] a more profound expression of the truth, but they should consider it with gratitude, as an ample benefit, if in one way or the other, they have had the good fortune to understand the subject: at first, the mode of expressing the truth is more sublime, then afterwards it is more plain, as in the case of Nicodemus.-Joh 3:3; Joh 3:15. That which pleases most [the greatest number] is not always the best.-V. g.-    , to iniquity unto iniquity) A ploce[65] not observed by the Syriac version. The word [to] iniquity [] (before which uncleanness is put, as a part before a whole) is opposed to righteousness; the word [unto] iniquity [] is opposed to holiness [end of verse] Righteousness corresponds to the Divine will, holiness as it were, to the whole of the Divine nature. Those who are the servants of righteousness, make progress [i.e., advance from righteousness to holiness, whereby they partake of the Divine nature]; , workers of iniquity are workers of iniquity, nothing more.<\/p>\n<p>[65] See App., tit. Ploce. A word twice put, once in the simple sense, and once again to express some attribute of the word.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Rom 6:19<\/p>\n<p>Rom 6:19<\/p>\n<p>I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh:-He illustrated the truths he taught by examples familiar to man on account of the weakness of the flesh.<\/p>\n<p>for as ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification.-Because as in the days past, before they believed, as they presented their members as servants to sin to work uncleanness and from one stage or degree of iniquity to another, in the same way they were to present their members as servants to righteousness to work out their sanctification.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>holiness <\/p>\n<p>sanctification. (See Scofield &#8220;Rev 22:11&#8221;) <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>I speak: Rom 3:5, 1Co 9:8, 1Co 15:32, Gal 3:15 <\/p>\n<p>because: Rom 8:26, Rom 15:1, Heb 4:15 <\/p>\n<p>for as ye: Rom 6:13, Rom 6:17, 1Co 6:11, Eph 2:2, Eph 2:3, Col 3:5-7, 1Pe 4:2-4 <\/p>\n<p>unto iniquity: Rom 6:16, 1Co 5:6, 1Co 15:33, 2Ti 2:16, 2Ti 2:17, Heb 12:15 <\/p>\n<p>now yield: Rom 6:13 <\/p>\n<p>unto holiness: Rom 6:22 <\/p>\n<p>Reciprocal: Lev 8:23 &#8211; Moses took Lev 13:40 &#8211; hair is fallen off his head Lev 14:14 &#8211; General 1Ki 21:25 &#8211; sell himself Psa 63:3 &#8211; lips Isa 55:13 &#8211; of the thorn Zec 8:6 &#8211; should Luk 15:16 &#8211; he would Joh 8:34 &#8211; Whosoever Rom 6:4 &#8211; even Rom 6:18 &#8211; servants Rom 7:5 &#8211; members Rom 7:6 &#8211; serve Rom 7:23 &#8211; members Rom 12:1 &#8211; that ye 1Co 6:20 &#8211; God 1Co 9:27 &#8211; and 2Co 5:10 &#8211; in Phi 1:20 &#8211; Christ Col 3:7 &#8211; General 1Th 4:4 &#8211; should Tit 2:12 &#8211; denying Heb 13:15 &#8211; the fruit<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>:19<\/p>\n<p>Rom 6:19. After the manner of men is all from one Greek word, and means that Paul uses human language because he is speaking to human beings. Infirmity is explained by Thayer to mean inability to understand another language due to the frailty of the flesh. Had Paul used the &#8220;tongue of angels&#8221; man could not have grasped its meaning. Therefore, their natural reasoning would show them that when they formerly yielded themselves servants of uncleanness, the result of it was iniquity. So now, by yielding themselves to righteousness, the result will be holiness.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Rom 6:19. I speak after the manner of men. I take a figure from human relations, in thus representing Christian freedom as a bond service. (The phrase differs from that used in Rom 3:5, but there seems to be no marked difference of thought)<\/p>\n<p>Because of the weakness of your flesh. Because of the intellectual weakness resulting from the flesh, which is here used in the ethical sense, of depraved human nature (see chap. 7). Others refer the phrase to moral weakness, and explain: I require nothing which your fleshly weakness could not do, and then join it with what follows; for I only require such service as ye formerly rendered to sin. This is open to serious objection, as lowering the moral standard presented by the Apostle.<\/p>\n<p>For as, etc. This explains what was stated in Rom 6:18.<\/p>\n<p>Servants to uncleanness, moral defilement, and to iniquity, violation of Gods law, the two sides of sin (Rom 6:13).<\/p>\n<p>Unto iniquity. This may mean: in order to work iniquity, or, resulting in iniquity; the latter, pointing to a state, rather than an act, seems preferable.<\/p>\n<p>So also, etc. The explanation changes to an exhortation, based on the facts of their experience, both before and since conversion.<\/p>\n<p>To righteousness unto holiness, or, sanctification. The former would express the ultimate purpose or result, the latter the immediate result, coming into view here as a progressive state. The same word occurs in Rom 6:22, and the meaning sanctification seems preferable there, where a further result is spoken of.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Rom 6:19-22. I speak after the manner of men  He seems to mean that his reasoning was taken from the customs of men, and was accommodated to their apprehension; and that he used metaphors and allegories which were well known; because of the infirmity of your flesh  Dulness of apprehension, and weakness of understanding, flow from the infirmity of the flesh; that is, of human nature. Or, as some understand the expression to mean, I recommend a duty to you, suited to human nature; yea, even to the infirmities thereof; that you should do as much for God as you have done for sin, and be as diligent in the service of Christ as you have been in the pursuit of your lusts. For as  In time past, while you were ignorant of the gospel, and many of you the slaves of heathen vice and idolatry; ye yielded your members servants to uncleanness  To various fleshly lusts which defiled you; and to iniquity  Or unrighteousness toward others; unto iniquity  Adding one iniquity to another; even so now  Being enlightened by the gospel to see the evil of such things, and the miserable consequences awaiting them; and being renewed by the influences of divine grace, it is but reasonable that you should be as ready to pursue a pious and virtuous line of conduct, and to do good now, as formerly you were to do evil; and become servants of righteousness unto holiness  Observe, reader, they who are true servants of righteousness, which may here mean a conformity to the divine will, go on to holiness, which implies a conformity to the divine nature. For when ye were the servants of sin  Were under its guilt and power; ye were free from righteousness  You not only had not righteousness enough, but, strictly speaking, had no true righteousness at all; never doing any single action that was truly good, and, on the whole, acceptable to God, because none was performed from such principles as could entitle it to his complete approbation. In all reason, therefore, ye ought now to be free from unrighteousness; to be as uniform and zealous in serving God as you were in serving the devil. What fruit had ye then in those things  Consider, what advantage did you derive from the practices to which you were then habituated, and whereof ye are now ashamed?  The very remembrance of which now gives you pain, and creates in you much remorse and trouble? For the end of those things is death  The word , here rendered end, signifies both the end for which a thing is done, and the last issue of it. It is used in the former sense, 1Pe 1:9; receiving,  , the end of your faith, the salvation of your souls; the end or purpose for which ye believed. But its meaning here is, that the punishment of death, to be inflicted on sinners, is the natural consequence, or issue, and reward of their sin.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Vv. 19. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.<\/p>\n<p>Several critics (Beng., De Wette, Mey., Philip.) refer the fleshly infirmity of the Romans, of which the apostle here speaks, to their intellectual weakness, their inability to apprehend religious truth adequately. This is the reason which has led him to make use of a human mode of speaking, calling the fulfilment of righteousness a servitude, which, from the divine point of view, is, on the contrary, true liberty. What is well-founded in this explanation is the application of the first words of Rom 6:19 to the term servitude used in Rom 6:18. But what seems to me inexact, is to apply the expression weakness of the flesh to a defect of understanding. Does not this explanation contradict what the apostle recognizes in such forcible terms, Rom 15:14 : the high degree of Christian knowledge to which the Church of Rome has already attained? Weakness of the flesh (more literally: proceeding from the flesh) must therefore denote a general state shared by the Romans with the great majority of the members of the Christian Church, consequently a moral rather than an intellectual state; and this is really what the expression used by the apostle naturally indicates. If the obligation to practice righteousness seems to the greater number of believers to be a subjection to a strange principle, it is not in consequence of a want of understanding; the cause is deeper; it is because the flesh, the love of the ego, has not yet been completely sacrificed. From this moral fact there arises even in the Christian the painful impression that perfect righteousness is a most exacting, sometimes even a harsh master, and that the obligation to conform in all points to the will of God makes him a slave. Such is the imperfect moral condition to the impressions of which Paul accommodates his language in the expressions used in Rom 6:18. The ancient Greek interpreters thought this remark, Rom 6:19 a, should be connected with what follows, giving it the meaning: I do not mean to ask of you what goes beyond your human weakness, caused by the flesh; yield your members only to righteousness in the same measure as you formerly yielded them to sin. I do not ask more of you. But it is evident that the apostle, in a passage in which he is describing the standard of Christian holiness, cannot think of abating aught of the demands of the new principle. The exhortation which follows cannot be less absolute than that which preceded, Rom 6:12-13, and which was unaccompanied by any such clause. Hofmann and Schott take the two words  , I speak as a man, as a parenthesis, and join the regimen   , on account of the weakness of the flesh, to the verb: ye became subject, Rom 6:18. According to this view Paul recognizes that the practice of goodness is really a servitude for the believer, subjection to a strange will; and that arising from the persistence of the old nature, and from the fact that the flesh requires to be constantly subdued. But it is very doubtful whether the apostle here seriously called by the name of servitude that Christian life which he represents always, like Jesus Himself, as the most glorious emancipation. Undoubtedly, in 1Co 9:27, he uses the expression , to bring into subjection, but in a figure, and in relation to the body. <\/p>\n<p>The imperative yield proves that the second part of the verse is an exhortation. But in this case why attach it with a for to what precedes? Can an exhortation serve to demonstrate anything? Does it not require itself to be founded on a demonstration? To understand this strange form, we must, I think, change the imperative yield into the form: ye are held bound to yield. We can then understand how this idea may be connected by for with Rom 6:18 : Ye were made subject to righteousness henceforth, since, in fact (for), it remains to you only to yield your members. It must not be forgotten, indeed, that the exhortation: yield your members, was already expressed previously in Rom 6:12-13, and that as logically based on all that preceded (therefore, Rom 6:12), and that consequently the transition from Rom 6:18 b to 19b may be thus paraphrased: ye became the servants of righteousness, for, in fact, as I have shown you, ye have now nothing else to do than to yield your members to righteousness. The only difference between the exhortation of Rom 6:12-13 and that of 18b is that Paul said in the former: do; while here, in keeping with the object of this second passage, he says: And ye cannot do otherwise. By this relation between the for of Rom 6:19 b and Rom 6:18, it may be proved that 19a is indeed, as we have seen, an interjected observation. <\/p>\n<p>There is a slightly ironical touch in the meaning of the second part of Rom 6:19. It concerns the readers to be now in the service of their new master, righteousness, as active and zealous servants as they formerly were in the service of their old master. Ye were eager to yield your members to sin to commit evil, be ye now as eager to yield them to righteousness to realize holiness. Do not inflict on this second master the shame of serving him less faithfully than the first. The old master is denoted by the two terms , uncleanness, and , lawlessness, life going beyond all rule, licentiousness. The first of these terms characterizes sin as personal degradation, the second as contempt of the standard of right written in the law on every man&#8217;s conscience (Rom 2:14-15). This distinction seems to us more natural than that laid down by Tholuck, who takes the term uncleanness in the strictly proper sense of the word, and who takes lawlessness to be sin in general. The broad sense which we give to the word uncleanness appears clearly from 1Th 4:7. The two expressions therefore embrace each, as it seems to us, the whole sphere of sin, but from two different points of view.<\/p>\n<p>From sin as a principle, the apostle passes to sin as an effect. The regimen  , unto lawlessness, signifies: to do all one&#8217;s pleasure without being arrested in the least by the line of demarkation which separates good from evil. This expression , lawlessness, so expressly repeated, and this whole description of the previous life of the readers, is evidently more applicable to men formerly Gentiles than to believers of Jewish origin.<\/p>\n<p>With sin characterized as an evil disposition, as an inward principle, in the two forms of degradation and lawlessness, there is contrasted goodness, also as a principle and as a moral disposition, by the term , righteousness. This is the will of God, moral obligation accepted by the believer as the absolute rule of his will and life. Then with sin as an effect produced in the form of , the rejection of every rule in practice, there is contrasted goodness as a result obtained, by the term : this is the concrete and personal realization of goodness, the fruit of perpetual submission to the principle of righteousness, holiness, or sanctification. The word  is usually translated by sanctification, and this is represented as the progressive amelioration of the individual resulting from his moral self-discipline. It is certain that Greek substantives in  or  are, as Curtius says (Schulgramm.  342), nomina actionis, denoting properly an action put forth, rather than a state of being. But we must not forget two things: 1. That, from the Scripture point of view, the author of the act denoted by the term sanctify is God, and not man; this is established, as it seems to me, by 1Pe 1:2, 2Th 2:13, and 1Co 1:30, where this act is ascribed to the Holy Spirit and to Christ. 2. That even in the Old Testament the term  seems to be used in the LXX. to denote not the progressive work, but its result; thus Amo 2:11, where the LXX. use this word to translate nezirim, the consecrated ones; and Eze 45:4, where it seems to be taken in the same sense as mikdasch, sanctuary. In the New Testament, likewise, it more naturally denotes the result reached than the action put forth, in the following passages: 1Th 4:3; 1Ti 2:15; Heb 12:14. We are thus led to translate it rather by the term holiness. And this seems to be confirmed by the preposition , for, unto, which expresses the goal rather than the way. If it is asked wherein the term , taken in the sense of holiness, still differs from , (Heb 12:10) and  (Rom 1:4; 1Th 3:13; 2Co 7:1), which seem to be completely synonymous, the indication of the shade may be found in the form of the terminations:  denotes holiness as an abstract idea; , as a personal quality, an inward disposition; , as a work which has reached the state of complete realization in the person and life, the result of the divine act expressed by . <\/p>\n<p>The apostle has thus reminded the church of the two principles between which it has finally made its choice, and the necessity laid on the believer to be as thoroughgoing in his new master&#8217;s service as he had been in that of the former; he now labors to strengthen this choice and decision by presenting the consequences of the one and the other condition of dependence. On the one side, shame and death; on the other, holiness and life. Here is the second part of the passage; Rom 6:20-21 describe the consequences of the service of sin to their extreme limit; Rom 6:22 gives the consequences of dependence on God also to their final goal; Rom 6:23, in an antithesis full of solemnity, formulates this double end of human life. <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification. [But thanks be to God that these principles are not mere matters of speculation with you, but have been tested and applied by you in your actual experience, for whereas ye were once the slaves of sin, ye, of your own free will and heart&#8217;s choice, changed your masters, and became, by your obedience to it, the servants or slaves of the principles set down in the Christian or gospel form of teaching whereunto (as is the custom when slaves are sold) ye were delivered for service. Now, I use this illustration of the transfer of slaves, which is taken from daily, secular affairs, not because it is a perfect and adequate representation of your change of relationship in passing from the world unto Christ, but because your fleshly nature clouds your understanding of spiritual ideas, and you therefore comprehend them better if clothed in an earthly or parabolic dress, even if the figure or illustration is defective. Christ is far from being a tyrannical master, and certainly cherishes no such feelings towards you as those which a slave-owner holds towards his slaves; yet the figure nevertheless aids you to comprehend the point which I am now discussing, for you can readily see that, as under the old slavery, you presented your members as servants to impurity and to lawlessness for the purpose of being lawless, so, under the new service, it behooves you to now present your members as servants to righteousness for the purpose of becoming sanctified, or holy.] <\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>DEPRAVITY SUPERSEDED BY SANCTIFICATION<\/p>\n<p>19. For I speak after the manner of a man on account of the weakness of your flesh. While in these bodies, as Wesley well says, we can only think, speak and act through organs of clay. Sense and phraseology must be simplified and adapted to the people. For this reason, the Old Testament abounds in symbolism, and the New in parabolic and materialistic imagery and illustration. In heaven Paul hears language incomprehensible on earth, doubtless because of its pure spirituality (2 Corinthians 12).<\/p>\n<p>For as ye presented your members slaves unto uncleanness and iniquity pursuant to iniquity.<\/p>\n<p>This is a vivid description of the wicked living animal lives, afflictive and even suicidal to themselves. Gods order reversed  the angel down in the mud and the hog on top! The brutal uncleanness peculiar to the wicked gives them a hell on earth  ten thousand aches, pains and sorrows known only to themselves. Thousands of people annually die in the hospitals of this city (New York) and are buried alone in the Potters Field, with no friend on earth to speak a word in the dying ear. Millions of people shorten their lives by brutality and sink into paupers graves. The wicked not only sin against themselves and humanity, but sin against God. Hence this double epithet: uncleanness, which is sin against themselves; and iniquity (Greek, lawlessness, i. e., transgression of Gods laws), sin against God. Here the Holy Ghost specifies the source of all this, i. e., eis anomian, pursuant to iniquity or lawlessness. This word means depravity. In, prefixed to a word, means not. Hence iniquity means the want of equity, i. e., justice. De, used as a word, has a negative meaning, i. e., deprivation. Hence you see iniquity and depravity are synonymous. In this verse we have the affirmation that both uncleanness and iniquity proceed from the common source of human depravity. This is the negative side of the argument. Now, in the prosecution of the affirmative, we find a radical tergiversation take place, eliminating depravity and superseding it by holiness to the Lord. Thus now ye have presented your members slaves unto righteousness pursuant to sanctification. This part of the verse describes the experience following the wonderful transformation of grace. I find here the very pure Greek construction appertaining to sanctification after the wonderful transition as to depravity in the former state when you were slaves to uncleanness and iniquity. Hence it follows as a logical sequence that the deep interior of the heart, where Satan has his throne and the rattlesnakes of inbred sin coil and rattle on all sides, is gloriously expurgated of all evil, Satan ousted, the snakes, reptiles and doleful creatures slain, their blood and bones enriching the soil, now turned over to King Immanuel, who transforms the entire situation into the blooming gardens and beautiful fields of Eden, through which the angels walk, and the songs of the seraphim are wafted on heavenly breezes, and there the Holy Ghost has enthroned Jesus to reign without a rival. The antithesis is profoundly significant, eis anomian and eis hagiasmon: pursuant to iniquity in case of the sinner, and pursuant to sanctification in case of the righteous. Here is the significant fact: the deep, subterranean region of the fallen spirit, occupied by inbred sin and impregnably fortified by the devil, is radically expurgated of all carnal debris, washed in the blood of the Lamb, and filled with the perfect love of God. Consequently the very temptations which formerly stirred the malevolent affections, i. e., anger, wrath, malice, envy, jealousy, prejudice, bigotry, egotism, pride, vanity and all of the selfish predilections, now arouse the very opposite, i. e., love, kindness, pity, sympathy, philanthropy, charity, forgiveness, and an earnest desire to do good for evil. All this follows as a logical sequence from the fact that the old malevolent affections are eradicated and gone, and the benevolent emotions have taken their place. Hence so long as you are truly sanctified, the very incentives which formerly to your sorrow, defeat and disgrace aroused evil, will now only awaken the corresponding good. This is truly a miracle of grace, paradoxical to aliens, but blessedly real to the truly sanctified.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: William Godbey&#8217;s Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Verse 19 <\/p>\n<p>After the manner of men; as usual among men; that is, plainly, and with illustrations drawn from common life.<\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Abbott&#8217;s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n<p>Paul had put his teaching in human terms. He had compared the believer&rsquo;s situation to that of a free person on the one hand and to a slave on the other. He did this to help his readers grasp his point but evidently also to make a strong impact on them. Paul felt constrained to be very graphic and direct in view of their past. They had formerly deliberately yielded to sin. Now they needed to deliberately present (offer) themselves as slaves to God (cf. Rom 6:13; Rom 6:16). This would result in their progressive sanctification.<span style=\"color:#808080\"> [Note: See Larry J. Waters, &quot;Paradoxes in the Pauline Epistles,&quot; Bibliotheca Sacra 167:668 (October-December 2010):435-41.] <\/span> Note again that progressive sanctification is not totally passive or automatic. It requires some human action.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left:36pt\">&quot;. . . what we most earnestly assert is that not only Paul here, but our Lord Himself, and Scripture generally, sets forth that <span style=\"font-style:italic\">only those that know the truth and walk therein, are free<\/span>.&quot;<span style=\"color:#808080\"> [Note: Newell, p. 242. Cf. John 8:31-32, 34, 36.] <\/span><\/p>\n<h4 align='right'><i><b>Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. 19. after the manner of men ] More lit., humanly. He apologizes, so to speak, &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-romans-619\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 6:19&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-28043","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28043","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28043"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28043\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28043"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28043"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28043"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}