3. Sinful man does not, according to St. Paul, lack a higher nature. "The inward self (7^^) is capable of renewal (12'), though in sore need of it. For the higher self St. Paul has the term vftv/ia (1 Co 5', 2 Co 7')> though in this sense he employs it spariuglj', and not in our Epistle. More char- acteristic of Romans is the term voDs, which plays 80 prominent a part in the analysis (7'"''). NoDs is an inalienable endowment of human nature, i.e. it belongs to the flesh (cf. Col 2'*), and may be in- volved in its bondage to sin (1**, cf. Tit 1">) ; but it is the highest endowment of the flesh, and is cap- able of conveying to the will the commandment of God (7°) ; but triere its power ceases — St. Paul would have accepted, so far as it goes, Aristotle's dictum that 'understanding alone moves nothing.' The understanding, the higher self, can indeed 'wisli' what is right (7""), but its wish has no power in the face of the flesh wielded by sin — ' to wish and to effect' (Ph 2") requires a vital energy (Ro 6*) which human nature cannot originate.
This vital energy is the Spirit (see Kaii/6nit in 6* 7', cf. 2 Co 5") which inhabits the body of Christ, and dwells in those who are in vital union with Him. The word rffO/ia in this Epistle is nsed, now for the Spirit of God, now for the inward man (see above) as renewed and energized by union with Christ (see Expositor, May 1899, p. 3,50 ff.; Sanday - Headlam, pp. 162 ff., 199 f.). It is this living union with the crucified, risen, and glorified Christ that distinguishes the new self from the old self (xaXaiA? ivSpwiros, 6'), the pre-Christian life ty vapKl, ir raXaiirrrn ypimiaTot, from the regenerate life iv rreiiuiTi, tv Xpi<rr(f, iv
Kaivlrrrfri ^loijs, the obedience of sons from the obedience of slaves — slaves in mind jiossibly to a law of God, but practically to a law of sin (7-' gi6ir.) To make quite clear the perfection of the obedience implied in the new state, St. Paul em- ploys, in 6'^-, with an apology for doing so (v.'"), the term 'slavery' to describe it (cf. 1'); but he proceeds to throw it aside (8") in completing his theology of the Christian life. The son and the slave differ above all in this, that the son's interest is centred on his fathers will, that of the slave is elsewhere. This is expressed in the famous anti- thesis of the two (pporqixara (8*, cf. Ph 2' 3'", Col 3'), by which St. Paul sums up his fundamental distinction of human char."ieter. It must be noted here that the language of ch. 8 postulates the dis- tinct Personality of the Spirit (v.-^"-) not less cleaily than that of 1 Co 2""'- implies His di^'inity. The Spirit dwells in the children of God in this life as an instalment (aircLpxi, 8^, cf. ippa^uv else- where) of the life which is theirs already (v.'"), but to be unveiled in its glory only with the consum- mation of God's kingdom over all His creatures
4. St. Paul's conviction of the profound degrada- tion of human nature is thus at once deepened and relieved by his belief in its lofty capacities and destiny. The latter, tliough to be fully realized only in the life to come, are to be entered upon in this life. We have now to notice St. Paul's doctrine of the transition from the helpless, hope- less old life to the 'life and peace' of the new. Obviously, man cannot by himself cross so vast a chasm. But the ' good-news of Christ ' comes to him as ' the power of God to his salvation ' (P^), if he believes it. Faith, then, presupposes that the Divine power to save has already been directed towards the believer ; and it has as its immediate accompaniment the opening of a life in fellowsliip with God from which the sinner as such is ex- cluded. In other words, by believing, the sinner is in God's sight as though his sin had not been, — he is 'justified by faith.' By justification, then, St. Paul primarily means the non - imputation — the forgiveness — of sin (he equates the two ideas, 4''' etc.). Justification renders possible, for the first time, active righteousness (6'* 8'^-) in God's sight, but it is not pos9il)le to confuse the two in one idea without destruction of St. Paul's most characteristic thought. If once it is grasped that justification means to St. Paul the removal of the impassable barrier set up between God and the soul by sin, and not the progressive assimilation of character to the filial type which springs from reconciliation as its root, and that faith is to the apostle not merely assent to doctrine as divinely revealed, but personal trust in God through Christ, it becomes easy to see how central a place the doctrine of justification by faith holds in St. Paul's system, how unreal is its supposed conflict with tne severest standard of Christian obligation, or the most thankful use of divinely provided means of ^ace, and how profoundly it appeals to the most legitimate and elementary need of human nature, the longing for a gracious God (see Jn 6"). The doctrine, taken by itself, does not ofl'er an account of all that grace does for a man, but of how a man is admitted to grace. The two things are clearly distinguishable in St. Paul, though, of course, in practice they can never be fic])arated (compare carefully Ro 8' with context before and after). Faith, tlien, is to St. Paul the attitude of soul which never regards it.self as righteous before God, but refers all to God's free gift. Its trust in God is absolute ; but it has as its objective foundation certain definite facts (5-- ""■) whicii become material for faith under the influence of the Spirit, wiiu interprets to the soul the Death of Christ as th»