The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 166

as if you l11Hl only been transferred from made free from Bin, and made 1ervant1 to one b<>ndiage to another, so as t.o show that, God, ye have your fruit unto 1an0Wloation;· e"en f'lO. you ILNl under a.n obligation not to a.nd the end life eternal, For the wages of sin. Aroording to this view of the mean• Bin is death; but tbe free gift of God ls life ing of the passage, "the infirmity of your eternal in Ohriat J'e■ua our Lord, The flesh" has referenoe to dulness of spiritual logioal connection with the previous context perception, udp~ being opposed in a general of the above series of verses, beginning with sense to ,n•rilµ.a. Had they been ,rv,up.a.- ver. 20, as well as the se9.uenoe of thought orurol. they would have discerned .,.a 'l"ov running through them (intimated by the TVrill"'oros "Tau 8,ou without need of any particles ")'4p, ovv, and II~}, is not at onoo l'Uc-h human new of the matter bein~ put obvious. It seems to be 88 follows : the before them (cf. I Cor. ii. 14). Some, "f4P in ver. 20 introduoes a reason for tho however, ta1."ing iur9ivrn.., rijs ua.p1<h to exhort.'ltion of ver, 19, ,ra.pa.<T'Njua.or,, eto. denote moral weakness. which renders the But ver. 20 is not in itself the reason, being att&inment of holiness difficult for man only an introduotiou to the statement of it (cl~ Mark x:iv. 38). understand lu,9pdnr,vov in the verses that follow. The drift of the Afyw as mesning, " I require of you no more whole passage seems to be this: Yield ye. than is ):)OS&ble for your frail humanity; for your members to the sole servica ofrighteouH• I call on you only to render to righteousnees ness; for (ver. 20) ye were once in the sole the same allegiance you once rendered to service of sin, owning no allegiance to sin." This interpretation gives a totally righteousness at all; and (ver. 21) what different me&n.i.ng to the clause. It has fruit had ye from that service? None at the support of Origen, Cbrysostom, Theo- e.11 ; for ye know that the only end of the doret, Calvin, Estius, Wetstein, and others; things ye did then, and of which ye nre now but it does not appear so natnral or probable ashamed, is death. But (ver. 22) your new as the other, which is accepted by most Eervice haa its fruit: it leads to your sancti- modern commentators. For 88 ye yielded fication now, and in the end eternal life. your members aarvants to 11Ilcleannesa a.nd Authorities, however, both ancient and, to iniquity 11I1to iniquity ; even so now modern, are divided as to the punctuation, yield your members servants to righteous- and consequent construction, of ver, 21. In DBIIII unto sa.nctiiic&tion (rather than holineJ!B, the Vulgate a.nd the Authorized Veraion as in the Authorized Version ; the word is (as in the interpretation given above) iryLD.11µ/,s, always so translated elsewhere). the stop of interrogation is placed after This is a setting forth of what must follow " ashamed; " the answer, none, being under- in practice from the view that has been stood, and ''for the end," etc., being the ta.ken of the change in the Christian's posi- reason why there is no fruit. The other tion resembling the transference of bond- way is to to.ke the question as ending at airva.nts from one master to another. They "had ye then," and "tbose things whereof," must devote their members (see above on etc., as the answer to it, and "for the end,'' ver. 13) to the senice of the new master etc., as the reason why they are ashamecl. iil the same way as they had done to that Thus: "What fruit had ye then (when yo11 of the old one; the aims or results of the were free from righteousness)? The works two senice.s being also intimated. The old (or pleasures) of which you are now ashamed service was in giving themselves up to were the only fruit ; you are ashnmed of t1,ndeanr.eu (with reference to sins of seDBu- them now ; for their end is death," The ality), and generally to lu,o,,J.'f, i.e. l.awl.esa- latter interpretation is defended by Alford fleM, c,r disregard of duty; and itB result on the ground that it is more consistent u expressed by a repetition of the latter "with the New Testament meaning of wc.rd. For sin lea.dB to nothing positive; ,ea.,,.,&,, which is' actions,' the • fruit of the lawlf:u cc,ndoc-t only resultB in a habit or man ' considered as the tree, not ' wages ' or state of lawleBIIIleBB; whereas the service • reward,' the 'fruit of his actions.' " This of righteonBn.ess in itself leads to sanctin- is true. But, on the other hand, it may be mtion-io the abiding result of participa- argued that such use of the word ,ca.p1r&s tion m the hc,linetlS of God. " Qui justitim by St. Paul is always in a good sense; he eervinni, proficiunt; 6.vop.,oi., iniqui, sunt wru.ally regards ,in as having no fruits at inilJu.i, nil awplius" (Bengel). all ; to the fruit of the Spirit is opposed, Vera. 20-23.-For when ye were the not any fruit of a different oh&re.oter, but 1ervama ot mi, 7e were free from righteou1- the uorka (lf'"Ya.) of the fiesh (Gal, v. l!J, rua (more literally, to r i g ~ ; ie, yo 22); and in EJ>h. v. 11 (e.g.ain. in opposltio11, were not in a.DY bondage to righteoUIIIlells). to the fruit of th~ Spirit) he speaks of the What fruit had 7e then (i.e. when you unfruitful workl ((no" -ro,1 Aicdp,rou) qf wen, formerly Mlavea of Bin) in thote thingl darkness. Thus the idea of ver. 21, undo~- whereof 7e a.re now uhamed 1 for the end 11tood 11,11 in tho Authorized Version, seem■ ot thOH thinp ia death. But IIOW being closely to correspond with ttmt of t!!,t, on, vr, 1-23.J THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 163