Are You Experienced?
Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful. Romans 7:13
Utterly Sinful – How difficult it is for us to read this passage in Romans without the usual Christian blinders! We have been so convinced that Paul sets the gospel of grace in opposition to the works of the law that we no longer read what the text says. We think that Paul is telling us that the law caused us to sin and therefore, the law is a terrible, awful thing. Of course, Paul firmly denies this conclusion (“May it never be!”), but we just can’t see it any other way. We think that grace means being out from under the law, so that must mean that Paul thinks that the law has to be aligned with sin , or at least no longer useful for us. The problem comes because Paul is making a word play on three different uses of the Greek nomos (law). We’re not Greek. We don’t have that first century Gentile believer background. So, we miss it. Let’s see what happens when we recover Paul’s ingenious word play.
Nomos has three different meanings. First, it can mean a law like the laws of the land. This is its legislative sense. Second, it can mean a rule or principle. It is used this way many, many times by the early church in the discussion of the canon, another word that means a standard or rule. Third, in the New Testament, nomos can be used as a proper noun to mean the Torah. Each time you read this word in Greek, you have to determine from the context which meaning fits. For example, Yeshua was accused of breaking the Roman nomos regarding the divinity of the emperor (remember that they claimed that he said he was a king). This is meaning number one. Then there are many verses where meaning number three is clearly the case (Torah). But sometimes Paul uses nomos as a rule or principle. This verse in Romans is one of those times. Paul makes a play on the Greek word. The Torah (meaning #3) is good, but there is another nomos (rule – #2) in my body, a “law” that works against me. This rule comes into being because once I understand the commandment, I am presented with the possibility of disobeying the commandment and when I disobey, I set a “rule” for myself – my own “torah”. So, God’s Torah is set against my own torah (my rule of practice). God’s Torah is not in opposition to God’s grace. They are two sides of the same coin. What is in opposition to God’s grace is my rules, that is, the way that I incorrectly use God’s Torah to define my own rules for living. In Paul’s letters, “works of the law” is not God’s Torah. It is the twisted version of God’s instructions used to earn righteousness. In other words, my torah is nothing more than legalism. Legalism is opposed to grace! But God’s instructions, His Torah, is not opposed to grace at all because it has nothing to do with grace. Grace is a gift. Torah is instructions after I have received the gift.
In this verse, Paul tells us something very important about the relationship between the real Torah and sin. My own desire to run my life twists God’s perfect instructions into something that is a perverse torah (rule). If I were obedient, I would discover that God’s instructions lead to blessings. But when I disobey, I actually experience the tragedy of sin. I am cut off from the source of life. It is no longer a theoretical potential. Now I know what it means to be separated. Sin becomes utterly sinful. In other words, it becomes real for me.
Every commandment presents me with the opportunity to draw closer to Him. But, at the same time, every commandment contains the potential that I will disobey. There is risk in each one of God’s instructions for life. When I don’t do what He asks, then I change that risk into reality. Then I find that my rule twists His perfect intention into something tragic. That’s what legalism is all about – making Torah do something it was never intended to do. It doesn’t take outright disobedience to discover the sinfulness of sin. All it takes is twisting the commandment so that I do it in order to manipulate God’s favor instead of doing it simply because I love Him.
What is the context of nomos in your life? Which of the three meanings applies to you?
Topical Index: law, nomos, rule, legalism, Torah, Romans 7:13
Skip,
Thank you for this. It is exactly what I was needing. I will be teaching tomorrow on knowing the commandments, and this information gives a clear understanding of nomos. I appreciate your diligence.
This is totally the best explaination EVER on this verse!
THANK YOU!!
I found this word, to coin one of your frequent phrases, “most useful.” Thanks for your dedication to equipping the saints with a better understanding of God’s word, so that we might rightly divide the truth and bring Him glory.
Powerful exposition of a much needed principle. Pivotal necessity for chritian growth. Is there available a catalogue of your word expositions? God be the Glory
Since we moved to the new web site, you are able to search on any of the tags located in every Today’s Word. This usually includes the Scripture verse and several keys words. Just click on the tag and you will get everything that contains the same tagged words. Sometime, of course, there is only one TW with that particular tag, but over time others will be added.
Something which might be related…
James 2:8-If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF,” you are doing well.
Forgive me I do not have current access to the original Greek, but I assume that royal law refers to Torah?
I was reading Kierkegaard’s Works of Love and his exposition of ‘spontaneous love’ (according to ourselves) vs. ‘commanded love’ (according to the eternal/God) I think is most apt here based upon Dr. Moen’s ‘unpacking’ of Paul’s thoughts on the law.
I wonder if this verse above is not immediately connected with our notions of love in contrast to what love really is. Love as our own desire in contrast to love as that which is commanded of us. What’s nice about the verse above is its exposition that it is not hate or disobeying the law that is the problem, but rather (the law itself/our own) law/love which is not properly related or ordered to God’s will. The question is not between the law and disobeying the law, but is rather much more problematic between God’s Law and my Law. Consequently as pointed out by James there is a connection between between Torah (above) and Love (below).
The nuance which Kierkegaard (below) adds to this, is that its not so much that God’s law is opposed to my law (it is, but not in a real opposition, for what could truly oppose God?) But in the sense, only God’s law can truly restore my love back to me when it is being threatened. I think the same applies for Torah. Perversion then, is not in the object, but in the (gaze) how we relate to law and love. In recognition of this perverse impulse in the law and love, Paul shows that through the commandment (what commandment? or is it the act of commanding itself?) that sin becomes utterly sinful. Or as Kierkegaard would put it, in the commandment to love, we realize just how paltry (sinful?) our desire/erotic/friend/lover/preferential love is. Perversion is a result of our failure to humble ourselves to this commandment. This perversion is what Kierkegaard calls Despair. Despair does not come about in the object, but rather shows us that we have a misrelation to the object of our love. (Could this extend even the Law itself?!) Thus when Dr. Moen says, “In this verse, Paul tells us something very important about the relationship between the real Torah and sin. My own desire to run my life twists God’s perfect instructions into something that is a perverse torah (rule). If I were obedient, I would discover that God’s instructions lead to blessings. But when I disobey, I actually experience the tragedy of sin. I am cut off from the source of life. It is no longer a theoretical potential. Now I know what it means to be separated. Sin becomes utterly sinful. In other words, it becomes real for me.”
Analyzing this, It is almost as if we can imagine two ‘houses’, one in which those who love/practice law improperly end up in called “Despair” and the other which humbly submits to the reconciliation of commandment and love in the same phrase “You shall love…” under the house of “Commandment”. Consequently only through commandment do we really realize, ‘Despair’ or ‘the utterly sinful condition we are/were in’ and it is only through humbling ourself to it, that we are made free.
“The commandment consumes and burns out the unhealthiness in your love, but through the commandment you will in turn be able to rekindle it when it , humanly speaking, would cease. Where you think you can easily go your own way, there take the commandment as counsel; where you despairingly want to go your own way, there take the commandment as counsel; but where you do not know what to do, there the commandment will counsel so that all turns out well nevertheless.”
Soren Kierkegaard, Works of Love, 43.
Just something I wanted to share, since this particular ‘unpacking’ has been in my mind these past days.
Thanks for listening. and thanks to Dr. Moen for the great work he does ‘unpacking’.