| || |An Alphabetical Analysis Volume 6 - Doctrinal Truth - Page 56 of 270 INDEX | |
When writing the Epistle to the Romans, Paul could take a wider view of
this term saying, 'There is nothing unclean (common) of itself' (Rom. 14:14).
While it is not to be thought that the common faith and the common
salvation had anything about them which could be classified as defiling or
unclean, we must not forget that Peter, long after Pentecost, told a Gentile
like Cornelius to his face that, apart from the vision given to him, a
Gentile who could be called 'devout', who 'feared God', who 'gave alms' and
'prayed to God alway' (Acts 10:2) would have been called by Peter 'common
or unclean' (Acts 10:28). From all this painful discrimination, the Gospel
entrusted to Paul and shared by Titus was blessedly free. The faith of God's
elect was no longer the preserve of one people, it was now the possible
possession of all men and particularly the Gentile. The fact that Titus was
associated with the 'common' faith is an indication that faith was now open
to the Gentile as well as to the elect Jew, even as it was the glory of
Paul's ministry to be the steward of the Mystery 'for you Gentiles'. 'The
elect of God' is a title given to the saints at Colosse, who were mainly
Gentiles (Col. 3:12). In this sense the ministry of Paul and the ministry of
Titus were the same. It would have been just as true to have said that Paul
was an apostle for the common faith, and that Titus was a minister for the
faith of God's elect.
From Deuteronomy 25:1 we learn from the great law -giver that
justifying the righteous is the opposite of condemning the wicked.
Condemnation translates either krima (Luke 23:40), krisis (John 3:19),
katakrima (Rom. 8:1) or katakrisis (2 Cor. 3:9). An understanding of Romans
8:1 -4 supplies all that the believer and the student needs to open up to him
the teaching of the Scriptures on this subject. Let us therefore consider
First let us note that the words, 'who walk not after the flesh but
after the spirit' in Romans 8:1 are an interpolation introduced into the text
from verse 4.
It may be that some felt that the statement of Romans 8:1 needed some
modifying, that freedom from condemnation, if proclaimed without some limits
and qualifications would be harmful. This is exactly the opposition to free
grace that the apostle anticipated and met in Romans 6:1 and 15. Bloomfield
expresses this uneasiness by rendering the words 'who walk' by 'if they do
walk'; and he quotes other writers who suggest 'so that they do but walk',
'showing that justification through Christ's death can only be made effectual
by sanctification through His Spirit'. With all due regard to this wholesome
association of 'doctrine' and 'manner of life', the introduction of
conditions and qualifying terms here is unscriptural and subversive. Freedom
from condemnation is not conditional upon the walk of the believer; it is
entirely conditional upon the Work of God's Son. We must be free, before we
can think of walking according to the spirit. While we were in slavery, we
were in the flesh, and could not please God.
In Christ Jesus.
the two laws
The law of the spirit of life.