the fundamentals: volume 8, chapter 4: paul's testimony to the doctrine of sin

8/20/2019 The Fundamentals: Volume 8, Chapter 4: Paul's Testimony to the Doctrine of Sin

1/15

•

•

•

•

•

•

CHAPTER I

•

PAU L'S TESTIM

1

0NY TO THE DO,CTRINE OF

SIN

•

BY PROFESSOR

F.

AS. B. WILLIAMSJ B. D.,

PH. D• ,

L ~

UTHWESTERN BAPTIST TH EOLOGI CAL SEMINARY, FORT

WORT.H,

TEXAS

•

Theodore Parker once sai,d : ''I seldom use the word

•

. in. The Christian doctrine of

sin

is

the

devil's own. I hate

it utterly''. His view of sin shaped his views as to the

person · of Christ, atonement, and salvation . . In fact, the sin

question is back of one's theology, soteriology, sociology,

evange lism, and ethics. One cannot hold a Scriptural view

of

God

and the plan of salvation without having a Scriptural

idea of sin. One cannot

proc laim

a true theory

of society

unless he, se,es the h.einousn,es ,of sin and its relation to all

ocial ills and disorders. No

man can

be a

su,coessful New

Testament evangeJ.i,st publi shing the Go,spel as ''the powei·

of

God

unto salvation to every one that .believeth'', unless he

has a:n adequate conception

Of

the e11ormityof sin. Nor can a

. rnan ho'ld a consistent theory of

ethics

or liv,e up

to the

highest

tandard ,of

morality,

unless h is gripped with a keen sense

of sin' s seductive nature. ·

SIN A FACT I

:r

fIUMAN HI 'fORY

•

Paul has an exten sive vocabulary · of tertn denoting sin

or sins., In the Epistle to the Roman s, wl1e1·e he elaborate ..

his

doctrine

of

sin,

he

use

ten

general

terms

for

si11

1. ·Apo.p-rla. (l1amartia), 58 times

in

all, 43 in Ro1nans,

t11ising of the tnark, in as, a principle . 2. .ApGprqµ o

(hamarteema), twice,

sin

as an act. 3. llo.pJ./3an1.~

11ara-

basis), five times, tra11sgression, literally walking along by

the line but not exactly according to it. 4. llgp,/.1 °°'~

•

•

49

•

•

•

•

•


2/15

.

•

•

•

•

50

•

-(paraptoma), 15 times, literally a

falling,

lapse, deviation from

truth and uprightne ss (Thayer), translated

''trespass''

in

R.V. 5,.

·~8iKla (

adikia), 12 times, unrighteousne ss. 6.

JAat{3eut, ( asebeia), four times, ungodlines s, lacl


3/15

Paul s Testimony to the Doctrine of Sin 51

recognizes that his readers were ' once dead in trespasses

and sins (2 : 1), and exhorts them to lay aside certain sins

(4 :25:ff). In Colossians, he does the same. In Philippians,

he says less about sin, or sins, but in 3 :3-9 he tells his ex

perience of failure to attain righteou sness with all his

ad

vantages of birth, training, culture, and circumstances. In

the pastoral epistles, he rebukes certain sins with

no

uncertain

voice.

PAUL'S EXPERIENCE THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROOF TO . HIM OF

HIS DOCTRINE OF SIN

Paul was a Pharisee. Righteousne .ss, or right relation

with God, was his religious goal. As a Phar isee he felt that

he

could and must , in himself, achieve righteousness

by

keep

ing the whole written and oral law. This kind of (sup

posable) righteousne ss he afterward describes and re

pudiates. For we are the circumcision, who worship by the

Spirit

of

God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no con

fidence in the flesh : though n1yself might have confidence_

even in the flesh : circumci sed the eighth day, of the stock

of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews;

as touching zeal, persecuting the church; as touching the

.righteou sness which is in the law, blameless. Howbeit, what

things were gain to me, these have counted loss for Christ.

Yea, verily, and count all things to be loss for the excellency

of the knowledgt of Christ Je sus my Lord; for whom

suffered

the

loss of all things and do count them but refuse,

that may gain Chri st and be found in Him, not having a

righteou sness of mine own, even that which is of the law,

but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness

Which is from God

by

faith (Phil. 3 :3-9, Am. Rev.).

His

experience as a Pharisee in trying to work out a

righteousness of his own showed him to be a moral and

religious failure. This experience he reflected in Rom.

7

:7-25

(So Origen, Tertullian , Chrysostom, Theodoret, and most


4/15

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

52

Tlie F·unda11ietitals

•

•

modern New ·Testament scholars, though Augustine and a

few

modern N e,w

T

es·ta.ment

.scholars think th ·e

p

1

a.ssag

1

e·

ref

errs

•

· to the experience of · a Christian). '' Sin, finding occasion

thr ough

the

c

1

onunand1n

1

ent, 'beguiled

me

and

through it

slew

me . .• • • that through the conunandment sin might be-

• •

come'' (be shown to be) ''exceeding sinful.. For we know

hat , the

la,w

is

S,piritttal :·

but I am carnal, 1S

1

0·l

1

d under sin~

For that which I do I kn

1

6w not; for not what I wlould, that

·do

I

practise;

but

wl1at

I

hat e, that

I do . . .

Wretched

man that I am who shall deliver me out of the body of this

death r I thank God through Je s·us Christ our Lord . So

we

see,

tl1at

P'aul by his

experience

with

the

l:aw

wa.s

led

to

. ee that .

'"in

him ,

that is, i11

l1is flesl1, dwelt

no ,

good th ing; ''

that in bi~ mep-ibers is the sin principle enslaving him so

that

he

''is sold

und er .sin'', that

is,

under

the sway of this

sin

prin ,ciple.

He tl1ought ihe

law

could help

him to

be

righteou .s. All it could

,do w·ra,s

to S1how him his

helpless iness

as a sinner and drive hi1n in l1is d

1

espair to Christ as his

only Rescuer ''out of th e body 0£ this death''. All the

righteousness he could

achieve was

insufficient. Orily

God's

o\vn righteousness, given through faith

in

Christ Jesus,

could

sati sfy

the co,nscience o,f the awakened

sinner

or

be ac~eptable

to

God.

•

THE ORIGIN OF SIN

The apostle does not discuss the larger

problem,

th.e origin .

of sin in God's rnor·al universe. Whence

and how

did sin

originally enter the n1oral universe ? Paul does not under

take to

solve

this

problem.

Only

the r'elative

and

temporal

origin of sin, it s entrance into the human race on earth, not

its· absolute a11d ultimate ource , engages the thought of Paul~

But what is his

testimony

asl to

how and

wh

1

en sin

entered

. the human rac

1

e? TT·he class·ic pass

1

age

1

0n the sourrce o,f

human sin is Rom. 5 :12-21. Let us

1

C0

1

nside·r it. Pau .1 testifies

that

sin entered our ra

1

ce

in and

through the disobedience · of

:Adam~ ''As thr ·ough one man sin [dpaprla hamar.tia,, the ,

•

•

•


5/15

Paitl s Testim on,y to the D octrine of S in

53

in prin ciple] entered into the world, and death

by sin;

and so death passed

unto

all

men,

for that all sinned . • ·

as

throu gh one tr espass the jud gment came unto all

men

to

conden1nation • • for as through the one man's dis

obedience

1nan y

were made sinners ( Rom. S : 12, 18, 19).

In thi s parall elism between

Ada1n

and Christ, Pau l is seek

ing to show,

by

contrast, the excellence of grace and the

tran scendent blessednes s of the justified man in Christ H e

is not prim'arily discussing the origin of human

sin.

But

that does not depreciate his testimony. The fact that it is

an incidental and

not

a studied

testin1ony

makes

it

all the

more trustworthy and convincing.

Nor is Paul here simply voicing the thought of his unin

spired fellow-countrymen as to the entrance of sin into our

race. Dr. Ed ersheim says : So far as their opinions can

be gathered from their writ ings, the great doctrines of orig

inal sin and the sin£ulness of our whole nature were not

held by the ancient Rabbis . * Weber thu s summarized the

Jewish

view .

as expre ssed in the Talmud: By the Fall

man came under a curse, is guilty of death, and his right

relation to God is rendered difficult. More than this cannot

he said. Sin., to which the bent and leaning had alre ady

been planted by creation, had become a fact, 'the

evil

im

pulse' ( cor malignum, 4 E s. 3 :21) gained the mastery over

mankind, who can only resist it

by

the greate st effort s ; be

fore the Fall it had power over him, but no such ascendency .

t

The reader is referred to Wi sd. 2 :23ff, Eccl us. 25 :24 ( 33) ,

4 E s. 3 :7 21ff, Apoc. Baruch 17 3, 54 :15, 19, as expression s

of the Jewi sh view of the entrance of sin into the world and

the relation of Adam to the race in the transmission of

guilt.

One of these passages, Ecclu s. 25 :24 ( 33) the sin of the race

is traced back to Eve: from a woman was the beginn ing

of sin .

Life and Ti mes of Je sus the 1\1:ss iah , l. 165.

t Altsyn . T heo]., p . 216.


6/15

•

•

•

•

• •

54

•

The, Fundamentals

••

..

Observe tliat Paul goes beyond th,a statement of any un-

inspired

Jewisli writers ·

1.

In assertitig

tliat

A ,dam and not Eve is the

one

througli

whom sin e1itered into tltterace.

·

2 .

That, in some sense, when A dam

,sinned, all sinned',,

and in /itS

Sinii,ing

'a[l

fi.Jere 1fftadeJJ 1


7/15

Paul's ·Testitttony to the Doctrine of Sin

55

. t

•

•

a fonnal definition of sin~

But by

studying the terms

mostly

011

l1is pen we can detern1ine

his idea

of

si11.

He

uses

mostly

tl1e noun

dµ,apTla.

(hamartia),

58

times, from the

verb

Oµ.apTC:.vtu

hamartano), to miss the mark, to sin. To miss

what mark?

In

,classica·t Greek

it

means ''to mi,ss an

aim'',

''to err ' .in judgment or op,inion''. Witli Paul to sin

is

1

to

miss the

,ma,rk ETHICALLY an.d RELIGIOUSLY. Two, other

wo,rds use,d

by

Pa .ul s,h,ow u"s wh,at the ma,rk missed is :

d,8:1elB (

adikia

)1

unr ,ighteousness,

lack

of

conformity

tq

the will of

God; 1avoµla (an ,om.ia.),

,lawless ,nes ,s, failure to

act or live a

1

ccording

to

the

sta11dard.

of God's

Jaw.

So the

tnark missed is the Divine law .

Ilap0;{3aot,;

(parabasis),

transgression, emphasizes the same idea, failure to measure ,

up to the line of rigl1teousness laid down in th

1

e law.

On th-e

otlter hand,

si11 is

not mere.Zy

a

negation.

1t

is a.

Positive

qitality. It

is

a

'~fall''

(ITap 1rTwµa,

15

times).

This

is

graphica ·11y illustrated by P

1

au'l in

h:is desc ,ription O·f

- _he

Gentile

world's id

1

olatry, sensuality,

an

1

d

imm,orality

(Rom.

1 :1

1

8-32)

1

. ,

First, they

knew Go1d,

fo

1

r

I-le

taugl1t them

about

Himself

in

nature

,at1d in

c

1

ons,ci

1

ence (

1

:1,9,

20). Second1y,

t11ey ref used to

wors,hip

H im

as

Go1d,,

or

to

giv,e

thanks to

Iiim as

tl1e

Giv

1

er of

lall

good things (

1 :21) ,. Thirdly,

they

bega.n to

worship the creature ratl1,er than the Creator, then

gave

themselves

up to

idolatry

in a

descending scale,

wor

shipping

first human images, then those

of

birds,

then

those

of beasts

and

repti1es (1

:22-25). Fourthly,

this

wrong

idea

of

God

and

false relation to

Hi111

degraded

tl1em

into the

grossest sensuality and blackest immorality ( 1 :26-32). Is

tl1is progress of the ra

1

e·? If S·O, it is pr1ogress in th le un-

·f,olding, 0

1

f sin's cumulative po,w

1

er, and that

wl1ere

l1t1man

philosophy and culture were doing their utmost to stem the

ti,de of vice an

1

d

,cont,1·ibute to the advance .me,nt of human

government, thought, art, and ethics in the Roman Empire

-where flourished Heilenistic

c,ultt11Ne.

But Pau ,1 was convinced

from his

own experience and

his observation of society,

•

•

•

J


8/15

I

•

•

•

•

,

56

•

illumined and led as he was by the Divine Spirit, that the

sin principl ,e in men was not an upward . but a downwa1·d

tend ,ency,. a·nd

tl1at in

spite of all the,

philo,sophies, and

aJ.l,

culture and ethics, t·O train men in the upward way, i11tel

Ject.ually, aesthetically, sociall,y, and 1norally, ,s,till tl1ey were

•

•

carri ,ed on dow.n deeper and deeper in v·ice a.s, the,y forgot .

God and followed out the trend of their own thoughts and

desires .

That is,

if

sin

is a

link in

the

chain

of·

man's evolu- .

tion~ Pau ·1 would say it was a d.ow11ward and not an. upw,a·rd

step i11 tl1e long road of man's , development.

Let 11s ook at ano

1

th,er term ltsed by Paul to express God's

atti ·tude towa;rd sin.

'This

is

·the, t

1

er ·111

''w~ath'' ( JPY~),

occurring

20

times in Paul,s epistles~:. Thayer defines, this,

term thus : ''That in God which stands oppose,d

·to

ma·n's

disobedienc

1

e,

1

obduracy,

and sin, and

ma.nifests itsel·f in p·u.nish

ing

the

same.''t

That is,

sin

is

diametri.cally

opposite

to

the

eletne,it of holin.ess and righteoU-Sness tt

1

God s character,

and so

God' '.s rig·h·teous

character

r·evolts

at ·sin in ma·n an·d.

manifests this revulsion by punishing sin. This manifesta

tion of the Divine displeasure ,at s,in is n,ot spasmodic or ar- ·

bitrary. It

is the

natura .l

expressio

1

n

1

0£

a character that

loves

right and goodness. Because he does approve and love rigllt

and goodnes.s., He .must disapprove and hat

1

e unrigh teo.us11es

and evil. Tl1e spo,ntaaeous

expression

of this attitude , of

God's chafacter toward sin is '',vrath''. How l1einous and

eno1·mous

sin must be, if the loving an ,d gra,cions

God., in

whon1 Patti believe:s, thu .s hates and punis,hes it .Its nature

•

must be the opposite of those highe st attributes of , holi-

ness, righteousness, , love. . ·

Ta .ke another term used by Pau1,

v1r 8,1eo~

hupodikos),

guilty (R ,01n. 3 :19). Thayer thus defines this term: ''Unde1·

judgm ,en·t, one who ha.s, lost his suit; with la

dative

of p11·-

*This count follows Mot11to11and Geden, Concordance

Greek Testament) and excltt

1

des

I-Ieb.

fr ,om

Paul's epistles.

t

Gre:,k English Lexicon to New T ,estament ..

•

•


9/15

•

•

•

I

57

•

on, debtor to

one, owing

atisfaction '.*

111

his passage it

· · is used with the dative of God (Oe.~) and

so ''all

the

world''

is

declared by

Patti

to

be

''uncler

;udgment of

God,

having lost its suit with God, owing satisfaction to God''

(and, it being

in1plied, not able

to render satisfaction to

l='J:i1n).

This

passage in1plies that

tlze

essence

.of sin

is

guilt .

Man by sin

is

under iudg1nent , under sentence .

He has come i,ito coi.irt with God, is found ta have broken

God s lazv,

a,id

so

·is

guilty a11d liable

t

1

p

1

unishme11t.

A sec

ondary

element in sin

is

implied in thi s term, the

helplessnes

of man in

in,

''owing

satisfaction

to God'', but not able to

render

it. ·

It must be noted that Pa itl thinks of

this

guilt as

havit1,g

l)lFFERENT DEGREES

accordi11,go the

light

against which

the

s-inner sins

(Rom. 2 :12-14). The Gentile

sins without

the

law,

that

is,

without

knowing

the

requiremen .ts of the

written ·

law, and

so

he perishes

without

the

law,

that

is,

without tl1e

. severity specially provided for the transgressor in the written

law.

But

tl1e Jew,

who sin aaainst

the superior light of

Written 1·evelation, hall recei ve tl1e more severe penalty

Prescribed in the

written

law. 111ne11 are guilty of breaking

God's law,

b11t

the

di,ffe,rent

1·eal1ns of

law affot' d

different

?egrees of tight, and so

the

various transgressors are guilty

in

varying degree s, just a. there are different degrees

of mur

der

and 1nanslaughter,

accordino,

to the circumstance:-

and

m.otives

of tho se

guilty. . .

Paitl uses the term .sin to express three · phases of sin:

F1asT_.

he sin

principle,

or

sin in

the

abstr.oct.

He

.11ses

the. term more

of

ten in·

this

sense

than in

any other,. He

~ften personifies the

sin

principle, doubtless

because

l1e

be

lieves in the per sonal

Satan.

SECONDLY, by

i1nplicatioti

he

teaches

that man

is in

a state

of sin.

(Rom.

S

:18,

19.)

''All

lllen

unto ,condem11atio·n ' n1eans

that me11

are,

in a

state

af

condemnation guilty

of l)real


10/15

ii •

•

,

•

•

,

58

The

Funda1nen,tals

•

-

worthy of punishment. ''Made sinners' · signifies that man's

nature is essentially .sinfu l, and so man

may

be said to be

· u11der

the sin principle, or in

1

the state of sin (

though

this

phrase, in the state of sin, does not occur in Paul, bttt

first in theologians of a later age).

THIRDLY,

Paul uses

.several terms for sin which signify acts of sin. I-Iere he

views

it in the c

1

on

1

crete ,. Men forget

1

God, hate God, lie, stea l,

l,.:ill,coinmit adultery, hate parents, love self, etc., etc. In thi ··

sense he .sees the

st·r·ean1

of hun1an conduct which

is

only the

expression of the sin principle. .

RELATION OF THE LAW TO SIN

•

Does the law produce sin? Is the law sinful in that it

causes men to sin? Not at all, asserts Paul. ''What shall

we say then? Is the law sin?

God

forbid. Howbeit, I had

not

known sin, except through the

law:

for · I had not known

£oveting,

excep ,t

the

law

had said,

Thou

shalt not covet ; but

sin, finding occasion, wrought in me through the command·

ment all manner of coveting; for apart from the law sin is

dead'',

etc., etc.

(Rom. 7 :7-14, R. V.)

Tl1e

following point

see1n

clearly expressed in this passage:

I.

The law is not the

real caus e

of man s

sin.

Not even

its severest demands

can be

charged with causing man's sin.

2. This

is

true,

because

th.e law is

essentially

holy,

righteous,

good ;

holy in

the

double sense

of

being

a

separate

order o,f being and conduct ordained by God and also requir

ing holiness, o,r the following of this separate order of being

· and conduct ; righteous in the sense of being the expression

of God's will and the standard of man's thoughts and ac~

. tions; good in the sense that

it

is ordained for benevolent

ends. It is also called ''spiritual'' in the sense that it

was

given

through God's Spirit

and

conduces to

spirit11ality

if

obeyed from the

right

n1otive.

·

3. B Ut this holy and righteous, good and spi1·it1.tal,aw

beca·nie

' ''THE

OCCASION''

of

si1ining.

Tl1is

P,at1l

illus·tr ,ates

•

•


11/15

t

. Paul~ Testfmon.y to

the Doct~ine of Sin

59

•

•

with the tenth commandment. He

would

not

have

co·veted

· if tl1e law l1ad not s,aid,1Thou shalt no

1

covet. T'he

Greek

'¥ford for

''0

1

ccasion'' (

df/,opµ~)

means

literally

''a base

of operatio .ns'' (Thayer). The sin principle makes the com-

1nand of God its headquarter ,s for a life-long can1paign of

struggle .in man, urgin ,g 11im to evil actions and deterring

him from good ones. There is something in man which re

volts f ron1 doi11g the thing demanded and inclines

him

to

do the thing

forbidden. . Hence,

the sin

principle,

using

this

tendency in man, and so, malcing the la

W

the

base

of

its ·

opera tions, becomes the ''occasion', to sinning.

•

4.

The

law

sho,ws the sinfulness of sin-shows

it

to

be

l1einous in its nature

and

deadly in

its

consequences. l' his

is what Paul intim.ated in Rom. 5 20 when he

said, ''the

law

ca1ne

in

besides

that the trespass might

abound''.

~he

lc1w

sho,ws

men

that

they

are failures in the matter

of achiev-

i11grighteousness ,,

5. Tlie law thus NEGATIVELY p·r1epar·e~ the way for

lead.,

i~g men to Christ as

tlieir only Rescuer. ''Wretched man

tl1at

I

am

I

Who shall deliver me out of the

body

of this

death? I thank

God

throtlgh Jesus Christ our Lord'' (Rom.

7 :24,

25).

The apostle was driven to despair as he

plunged

headlong into persecution and its enormous sins, but when he

1·eached the 1en.id of

his

own s,tre11gth h·e

looke.d up

and ac.-

cepted

delivera11ce

fr

1

01n th

1

e

risen

Christ. · ·

.

REI ..ATION OF THE FLESH TO S,IN

Pau l often uses

tl1e

te·rm ''flesh''

1.u p~) in co·ntr ,ast

With

the tern1 spirit . In

this

sense

flesh, according

to

Thayer,

111eans 'mere I1un1annatu1·e, the earthly natt1re of ·n1an apart

from · Divine

influence;

and tl1eref

ore

prone to sin and op

J)osed t·o God' ''. He rega1·ds the flesh ( occurring 84 times) as

the seat of the ·

sin prinCiple.

''In me, that ·is, in

my

flesh,

dwelleth no good thing'' (Rom. 7 :18). He d.oes not mean

to

deny

that sin as a gu.ilty

act rests on tl1e human will.

f-Ie

•

•

•

•

•

•


12/15

•

•

•

I

•

•

•

60

TJie

Fitndamentals

•

•

· always takes for granted hutnan freedom to choose. Yet

he

regards the

lower

nature

of

man

(his

sarx)

as the element

of weakne ss

and

c,orruption i.n

man, which furnishes a

fie.Id

for the oPeration of the sin principle. The law is the

1

BASE

of operations

(occasion),

but the flesh

is

the open FIELD

where the sin principle operates.

This

sin principle drags

the

higher man ( called ''the inner

man'', Rom.

7 :22, ''the

mind, or reason1 voii~ 7 :25,

or

more usually,

the

spirit)

down in,to the realm of

the

flesh and through the pass .ions,

appetites,

etc. (

Gal. 5 :16, Eph. 2 :3), Iea.ds

tl1e

whole man

•

•

into thoughts, acts,

and Courses

of

si11. . . ·

But we must hasten to

say

tliat ,Paul

does

not adopt the

Platonic lliew that matte r is, evil per se.

Paul does no.t think

of man's physical

structure as

being in itself sinful and his

spirit;

or soul, in itself as holy.

He

merely emphasizes the

serfdom of man under the sway of

the

sin principle on ac-

c,onnt of the weakness )of l1ur,1an flesh. Nor d,oes Pai l claiin

· that human reaso

1

n is fr 1e from sin because it app,-oves tJie

l aw of God. His expre ssion (Ro1n.

7

:25) ''I of myself witl1

•

the mind

[reason]

indeed serve [am

slave to]

tl1e law of

God

;

but

with the flesh the law

of sin'',

only emphasizes

the

· £act

of

struggle in man ;

that

the higher nature does ap-

prove the requirements of God's

law, though

it

cannot meet

those demands because of

the

slaver ,y of his lower nature

1

flesh) to tl1e sin principle. .

I

•

THE

CONSEQ

1

UENCES OF SIN

a:'his

point needs no prolonged discussion.

Paul

thinks of

death, with its train of antecedents, sorrow, pain and all kinds

.

of suffering, as the co,nsequence of sin.

This

means physical

as well as spiritual death, and the . latter ( separation of man

from

fellowship with God)

is

of prime

import

to

Paul. We

need

not

bring Paul into conflict with the claims of modern

natural scientists,

that

man

would have suffered phy sical

death had Adam never sinned.

The

only man that scientists

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•


13/15

•

•

•

Paul s Testi11io11yo the Doctri1ieof

in 61

•

..

k110

1

w is the mortal

man descended from

Adam

who sinned.

The ref ore

they

cannot

logically assert

that man would

have

di,ed had Adam not sinned. Nor need we saj' that

Baul's

cosmic

view

of ·sin, namely,

that the

entrance of the sin

principle into human life by Adam vitiated the wl1olecosmos,

that because of sin ''the

whole ·

creation groaneth and travailetl1

together in pain

until

now''

(Rom.

7

:22), is unscientific.

He here merely asserted

the

great fact that all cosmic

life,

plant,

animal,

and

human,

has

been

made to suffer

because

of the presence of sin

in

man. Who can

doubt it?

See

Rom. S :12-14, 21; 6 :21; 7 :1,Q; 8 :19-25; Eph. 2 :1, etc .

•

THE UNIVERSALITY OF SIN

Paul regards

every

man as a

guilty sinner, however

great

may be his natural

or cultural advantages. He felt that he

had

the

greatest advantages

'fin

the flesh''

to

attain righteous-

•

. ness ( Phil. 3 :3-9), but he had miserably failed ( Rom.

7

:24).

Ther ,efore

all

men have fai,led

(Rom.

1 :18.-2

:29). , But

he is

not satisfied

with

a

mere experiential demonstration of

the

universality o:f

sin.

He likewi se bases

it

on

the

dictum of ·

Scripture (Rom. 3 :9-20). More than that he studied the

facts of hu ,man life, both Jewish and Gentil,e, and so by tl1e

inductive method is led

by the Spirit to declare ''by

the

,vorks , of the law

sl1all

no flesh be justified in f-Iis sight''

•

(Rom. 3

:20); ''All have

sinned

and

are coming short of

the

glory of God'' (Rom. 3 :23).

THE PERSISTENCE OF TI-IE SIN PRINCIPLE

· In Gal. 5:17, 18, Paul tells the Galatian Chri stians that

''tl1e

flesh

lusteth

against

the Spirit,

a11d

the Spirit

against

the

flesh;

for

these are

cont1·ary

the one

to

the otl1er,

that

ye

may

not

do the

things

that ye

would''. Lightfoot

says:

''It is

an

appeal

to their

own consciousness: Have

you

not

evidence of these two opposing principles in your own

hearts ?''*

The

Galati,an

Christians are

exhorted ta ''walk

•

*

'Com~ on Gal,.'' in

loc,o.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•


14/15

•

•

•

•

62

•

•

•

•

in ,the Spirit'' and let not the sin p

1

rinciple, which is not ut-

terly ·

vanq .uished in

the

flesh at

regeneration,

prevlail and

cover them ·in

def

eat and shame . This same pe1sistence of

the sin principl .e is describe

1

d in R

1

om.

1

8 :5-,9, w.here he surely

is describing the experience of believers. Then in Phil.

3

12·

14, he

allu,desl to

his

0 1wt1

Christian exp ·erience 'thu s: ''1

count not tha .t I have already obtainecl ; or am already made

perfect;

b

1

ut I

p

1

res 1 on if so

be that I

n1ay

lay hold

on tl1at

for which

also

I was laid hold on by Chris

1

t

.Jesus ,.

Bre ·thren,

I

lc,ount not

myself

yet

to

have laid l1old. . •

I

press on

toward . the .goal unto the prize

1

of

t.he

high calling of

1

God

in Christ Jesus''. Paul knew by experience that · the old

•

sin

principle still

pursued

h.im

and

that

011 .account o·f the

weaknes :s of th

1

e flesh he had not reached the ''goal'' '

of

prac

tical

righteousnes ,,.

Even

in

his old age ( 1 Tim. 1

:15)1 l 1e

br ,eaks

fortl1

in the co11sciousness of · his own

enormous

in

herent sinf ttlness: ''Faithful is tl1e

saying, a

1

n

1

d wort}1y , of all

acc

1

ept·ation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save

sinners; of

whom

am chief . Every Greek scl10Iar

kn.ows

that :in tl1e last clause, . ''I am'', both pronoun and verb being

exp ,res .sed an

1

d their ,order inv,erted, is emphatic. .Sin pu1·sued

the

great

and consecrated

apostle

·even .

down

·to

gray

hairs.

Sin is a

Napoleo11

c

1

onducting : his disturbing, destructive, and

death

hring1ng campaigns

e.v,en in

the Ch.ristian's lif

1

e. W,e

tnay, by the , grac~ of God and the help 0

1

f the Spirit, make

hin1 pris ,oner on E lba, but he will escape an

1

d continue till

life's latest breath to distract

our

minds

land

def eat our

h1oliest ,amb

1

.itions, Bu.t this . N apoleo11 ·in tl1e realm of our

religious ex.perience ·, like the Napo 'leon in .the

experie ,nce

of

Eu1·0pean kings and nation s,, shal l

1neet

his Wat

1

erloo .

•

•

•

S,IN FINALLY VANQUISHED IN CHRIST JESUS

•

Paul

has

thi.s

thought of conquest in 1nind

in

that unique

pa ssage, Rom.

S.

:12-21.

.The

conquest

o·f sin b

1

y

grace in

1

Ch.rist

Jesus far transcends

th

1

e,

den1olishing power

of

sin

•

•

•


15/15

•

•

•

Pa

1

ul,s

Testi,,,.atty to the

Doctrine

of

.Sin ,

63

handed down

by Adam

to

his

posterity. ''But

,vhere sin

abounded, grace abounded more exteedingly, that as sin

reigne,,d in

d

1

eath,

even so might

grace reign through

righteous- ·

ness un .to eternal life thr ,ough Jesus .Christ our Lord''. Tl1is

is the

apostle's

prean of

triumph as

he draws ·

the last

pen

str

1

ok,e in describ .ing the blesse .dness

1

0£ t.he justified man.

The first historic conquest of sin in

1

Christ was His con

ceptio11 without sin; tho·ugh born of a sinful woman, he.r

sinf'u] natur ·e

wa.s

not handed

down

to

Hi1n.

Tl1en

followed

victory after victory in those thirty silent years in which

He never

yielded

to a

singl·e

sinful

jmpulse; in

the wilderness

Stn1gg·le ·when in tha·t s·upren1e m,oment

He

sai

1

d, Get thee

hence, Satan; on Calvary when I-Ie meekly submitted to

the sufferings of lluman sin, in which submission He showecl

Himself above sin; , in the resurrection when deat ·h was de

feated an

1

d driven

f1·om

his own battle field,

the

grave,

while

fI .e

as the

Son of God arose

in triump1ri

and in

forty

days·

1

afte ,rwa1·d s,at down o·n the right l1and of the Father, to send

to

men the Spirit to apply

and

enforce His mediatorial work.

Then this conquest of

sin is

persona,lize ll n each believer.

At regeneration

the sin

principle is subdued by the Spirit in

·Christ · and the D

1

ivi:ne

nature

.so

im·planted

as

to

gu.arante

1

e

the complete conquest of sin. In the life of co11secration and

service th ie sin principle g o·e is down in defeat st.ep

by

step,

until in death whose sting is sin,. the believer triumphs in

1

Christ on the

last fie·l,d; he f

e

1

els. 1ri0

sting and

knows

the

strif 'e with the sin monst

1

er is, forever passed, and in

1

exul~

tatio ,n ·h·e receives . an al)

undant ent·ranc.e''

to the

ki11gdotn

of

gl

1

ory,

a,s

Paul trit1mphantly

r

1

eceived

it.

(Phil. 1

:21,

23;

2 Tin1. 4

:6-8.),

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the fundamentals: volume 8, chapter 4: paul's testimony to the doctrine of sin

Documents