air' (Eph 2-). The same passage describes those who l)ecoiiie sons of Uod as by nature cliildren of wrath (2^), dead not in sin but through trespasses (v.^), sons of disobedience because inwrouglit by this evil spirit (v. 2). Demons are as much part of St. Paul's world as of that which ai)ijears in the Synoptists. He identifies them with the heathen gods (1 Co 10*- 21). Belial is the antithesis of C'hrist (2 Co 6'^). To lapse from Christian conduct is to turn aside after Satan (1 Ti 5^^) ; to be sepa- rated from Christian fellowship is to be delivered to Satan (1 Co 5^, 1 Ti 1-"). And that redemption meant primarily for St. Paul translation from the kingdom of Satan to the Kingdom of God (Col V^), is attested by the form in which he narrates before Agri])pa the story of his commission as Apostle of tlie (ientiles (Ac 26^**). All this is in close corre- spondence with the mind of Jesus, and must be brought with us to a closer examination of the Pauline doctrine of sin.
That sin is essentially disloyalty to God is the substance of the locus classicus on the nature of sin, Ro P^"^"-^ ' Knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks' (v.^^). It will be observed, first, that the Apostle here speaks of sin in its widest signification, including such distinc- tions as are involved in the theological conceptions of original and actual. We have here, therefore, a detinition of sin which must govern all subsequent uses of the term. All the elements which enter into particular sins, or transgressions of known law, are represented — knoAvled^e of God and de- pendence upon Him (v. 2"), wdlful and therefore inexcusable refusal of due homage (v.^^), the incur- ring of guilt and consequently of God's Avrath (v.^^). Further, it is noticeable that the plural 'men,' not the collective 'man,' is used throughout the passage. There is nothing abstract in this general view of sin, even though it be universal (cf. ' all sinned,' Ro 5^2. « all died,' 2 Co 5"). Another point is, that St. Paul is led to disclose this ' vision of sin ' as the necessary postulate of the gospel (Ro P""^^), in Avhich is revealed a righteousness of God ' (v." 3-1). Lastly, there is no confusion, as in the popular mind, between those physical excesses which are called vice, and the inward refusal ' to have God in their knowledge! (v.-^), whether it applies to the sensuous or the spiritual nature of men, which alone is sin. ' God gave them up unto a reprobate mind' (v.^S), with all its consequences to the complex personality of man. This is of great significance. St. Paul's appeal is not to the equivocal testimony of external facts, which con- sidered in themselves are non-moral, but to facts as interpreted by conscience. Fundamentally this is the appeal to personal experience, and it is clear from the Epistle to the Romans, as from the whole Pauline theology, that the Apostle is universalizing his own experience, as he saw himself in the light of the vision of Jesus of Nazareth (Gal pi-", Ro 7^"^^).
Now St. Paul expresses his relation to sin in the phrase 'smdwelleth in me' (Ro 7"). He is describ- ing the common experience of an inward struggle, when neither good nor evil is finally in the ascend- ant. The complete sinful condition would be one of consent (Ro p2, 2 Th 2^2), in which ' the law of sin ' was unchecked by ' the law of the mind ' (Ro 7'-^, Gal 5'''). The terms must not be misunder- stood in view of the modern conception of scientific law. ' Law ' in St. Paul's theology involves the personality of the lawgiver, .so that to find this ' law in the members' (Ro 7"^), to be inwrought by sin, seems to point to an indwelling spiritual presence. Is this a mere figure ? St. Paul reverts to it in a still more significant form. Christians are not to let sin reign in their mortal bodies (Ro &^). Compliance with evil involves an obedience (v.i*), a slavery (v.^'^). There is a close parallel
between those who, as alive in Christ Jesus, are servants of God, and those who being dead in trespasses serve sin (a^v.^'"-^). Two hostile king- doms, two rival loyalties, make their claim upon a man's allegiance. So, when under the form of ' Adam's transgression,' sin is considered in its universal aspect (Ro 5"), a personal sovereignty is again suggested — 'death,' i.e. sin in its consequent development, 'reigned through the one' (v.'''). The effect of Adam's transgression is represented as the establishment of an authority (cf. 1 Co 15"-'', Eph 2- 6'2, Col V^) over his descendants rather than as a corruption of their nature, carrying with it therefore condemnation (Ro 5^^ ; see art. GuiLT) as the due sentence of God upon those who reject His law. This personal embodiment of hostility to the Divine law and government, in view of St. Paul's general outlook on the spiritual world, can be none other than Satan, exercising, as captain of ' spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places' (Eph G^^), not an external compulsion but an inward influence, not therefore impairing the responsible personalities that are indwelt. Thus St. Paul can say, ' Death passed unto all men, for that all sinned (Ro S'^). Sin is always a personal attitude, never a pathological condition. Death is its consequence (v.^^), but the physical analogy of St. James (P^) has no parallel in St. Paul. It is always the sentence, punishment, or wages (6^^ ; see art. GuiLT), the .sequel to the righteous judgment of God (2^). So, too, salvation is not a remedy for mortal disease, but a personal act of kimlness and mercy on the part of an ofl'ended but loving God (Eph p-io 2^ Tit 3^-8). Looking to the state from which men are rescued, it is redemption (Gal 31^ 4^) ; looking to that into which they are brought, it is reconciliation (Ro S'"- ^^ IP^, 2 Co 518. i9J_ Both involve the personal action of the Father's loving will, whereby He chooses to forgive the past and bring back His children into fellow- ship with Himself (Ro 56-8, Col P^-^s ; cf. 1 P ^]% As applied to the individual, this is justification (Ro B^'* 425 5^ al.), which represents not a process of renewal, but an amnesty extended to the sinner. What Christ slew by the Cross was the enmity (Eph 21^- ^^). Its effect, therefore, is not an infused righteousness, but a free pardon whereby sins are no longer reckoned (Ro 4P- *, 2 Co 5^^).