crucifixion of the old man, like the association with the death and

resurrection of Christ, is by 'reckoning':

'Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto

God through Jesus Christ our Lord' (Rom. 6:11).

The following exhibits the essence of the apostle's teaching.

'I ... am dead to Law ... I am (have been) crucified with Christ' (Gal.

'We ... are dead to Sin ... our old man was crucified with Him' (Rom.

'That I might live unto God ... I live: yet not I' (Gal. 2:19,20).

'Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto

God in (en) Jesus Christ' (Rom. 6:11).

Damnation.  In one passage, the word so translated is

the Greek apoleia, 'destruction' (2 Pet. 2:3), in all other references in the

New Testament  it is the translation of either krima or krisis, while the

verb, 'to damn' is either katakrino (Mark 16:16; Rom. 14:23) or krino (2

Thess. 2:12).  In the word condemnation, the syllable damn changes to demn

but it is the same in meaning.  In usage, however, to damn is much more

severe than to condemn.  A person could hardly be 'damned' for stealing a

loaf of bread, but he could be 'condemned' to pay a fine.  Krino is

translated 'judge' eighty -seven times; krisis is translated 'judgment' forty

-one times; katakrima, 'condemnation', three times; katakrino, 'condemn',

seventeen times; katakrisis, 'condemnation' once.

Krino, means basically, to separate, distinguish or choose.  It should

never be translated 'condemn', for that means that one has come to a

conclusion before the case has been heard.  The addition of kata in katakrino

and katakrisis suggests that the case has gone against the person and so is

rightly translated, 'condemn'.  In the majority of cases, the use of the word

'damnation' should be avoided, it is too awful a word for many of the

contexts in which it appears.  Modern usage associates eternal punishment

with the term, but this is by no means a necessary implication.  The

translation, 'He that doubteth is damned if he eat' (Rom. 14:23) is quite

unjustified.  'He that discerneth or putteth a difference between meats is

condemned, because he eateth not of faith' is better and Moffatt's version

even better still, 'If anyone doubts about eating and then eats, that

condemns him at once; it was not faith that induced him to eat, and any

action not based on faith is a sin'.  We shall not lose, but rather gain, if

the passages which contain the words 'damn' or 'damnation', were all made to

read 'judge', 'judgment' or 'condemn', leaving the ultimate issues to God,

the Judge of all.  The R.V. omits Matthew 23:14 and reads 'condemnation'

in Mark 12:40 and Luke 20:47.  The same is true of Romans 3:8 and 1 Timothy

5:12.  In Romans 13:2 and 1 Corinthians 11:29 the word is changed to

'judgment'.  Lack of discrimination in the observance of the Lord's Supper,

could and did bring judgment that sometimes resulted in actual death (1 Cor.

11:30), but to use damnation of an erring believer is to use a word that

conveys more than can be legitimately intended.

Darkness.  The Scriptures contain a series of antitheses under which all the

doctrinal and dispensational teaching is ranged.  Good and evil; life and

death; truth and lie; flesh and spirit; law and grace; faith and works; and

darkness and light, to instance those that come readily to the mind.