Verse the Twentieth Verse the Twenty-First
consequence from this, that in Romans 7:18,19, the subject under investigation is a man faced under grace; for it is one thing to feel or perceive some effect of preparing grace; and it is another to be under grace, or to be ruled, led and influenced by grace.
VERSE THE TWENTIETH
If he does that which he would not, then it is no more he that does it, but sin that dwelleth in him.
We have already taken the twentieth verse into consideration. But I here briefly remind the reader, that in this passage, likewise, is manifestly discovered the truth of our exposition which has been adduced; because, in this verse, he says, both that he does what he would not, and yet that he does not do it himself, but sin that dwelleth in him. He does it, therefore, and he does it not; because he does it as a servant who is under compulsion by his master, and who does not execute his own will so much as that of his master, though it is also his own, otherwise he would not perform it; for he consents to the will of his master before he performs it, because he does it without co-action or force; for the will cannot be forced. VERSE THE TWENTY-FIRST
He finds that, where he would do good, evil is present with him. The twenty-first verse contains a conclusion from the preceding, accommodated to the purpose of the apostle upon which he is here treating. For, from the circumstance of this man knowing that “to will is present with him” but not to perform it, he concludes, that “when he would do good, evil is present with him.” But it must be observed, that, in the eighteenth verse, the apostle employs the same phrase about willing, as he here uses about evil; and thus he says, that both to will good, and to will evil, are present with him, or lie close to him. And as “to will that which is good is present with him” through his inclination for the law, and through his mind which approves of it as “just and good,” so “to will evil is likewise present with him” through a certain law of sin, that is, by the force and tyranny of sin, assuming to itself the power, and usurping the right or jurisdiction over this man.
We must now consider whether the essence and adjacency of each (if I may employ such a word) are of equal power; or whether the one prevails over the other, and which of them it is that acquires this ascendancy. It is manifest that the two are not equally potent, but that the one prevails over the other, and that, in fact, “evil is present” in a more powerful and vehement manner: For that obtains and prevails in a man, through the command, instigation and impulse of which he is found to act and to cease from acting. But I wish to see it explained from the Scriptures, how such an assertion as this can be made with truth concerning a regenerate man who is placed under grace; for, in every passage, the sacred records seem to me to affirm the contrary.
THE TWENTY-SECOND AND TWENTY-THIRD VERSES
1. HE delights in the law of God, or he finds a kind of con, delectation with it, after the inward man; but he sees another law in his members, warring against the law of his mind, etc.
2. An argument, from the twenty-second verse, for the contrary opinion.
3. An answer to the PROPOSITION in this argument. The inward man signifies the MIND, as the OUTWARD Man signifies the BODY.
(1.) This is shown from the etymology of the word, and from the usage of Scriptures, especially in 2 Corinthians 4:16, and in Ephesians 3:16,17.
(2.) Proofs of this are given at great length from the ancient Christian fathers.
(3.) Similar proofs are adduced from modern divines
4. The meaning of the phrase, “to delight in the law of God after the inward man.”
5. An answer to the assumption, which is shown to be proposed in a mutilated form, by the omission of those things which are mentioned in the twenty-third verse.
6. An argument, from the twenty-third verse, for the contrary opinion.
(1.) An answer to the proposition in it.
(2.) And to the assumption.
7. A most irrefragable argument deduced from these two verses.
(1.) To the refutation of the contrary opinion.
(2.) To the establishment of the true one, which at first is proposed in an ample manner, and afterwards in an abridged form.
(3.) The proposition is proved by three reasons, which are confirmed against all objections.
(4.) It is proved from the Scriptures, that, in the conflict against sin, the regenerate usually obtain the conquest
8. A special consideration of the text, Galatians 5:16-18, and a collation of it with this passage.
9. An objection, and a reply to it.
10. An objection to the third reason, and a reply.
11. A consideration of Isaiah 64:10.
1. In the twenty-second and twenty-third verses is adduced a clearer explanation and proof of the conclusion which had been drawn in the twenty-first verse, and which agrees with the very topic that the apostle had, in this part, proposed to himself for investigation. But the proof is, properly, contained in the twenty-third verse; because that verse corresponds with these words, “When I would do good, evil is present with me,” an affirmation which was to be proved. The proof is taken from the effect of the evil which is present with the man, and it is the warfare against the law of his mind, the victory obtained over him, and, after such victory, the captivity of the man to the law of sin. The twenty-second verse has reference to these words, “When I would do good;” and it contains a more ample explanation of this willing, from the proper cause, and an illustration of the following verse from things diverse and disjunctive. But in these two verses is contained one axiom, which is appropriately called a discrete or disjunctive axiom; as is apparent from the use of the particle, de “but,” in the twenty-third verse, which is the relative of men though the latter is omitted in the twenty-third verse. It is likewise apparent from the very form of opposition. The antecedent and less principal part of this axiom is contained in the twenty-second verse; the consequent and principal part, in the twenty-third. For the antecedent is employed for the illustration of the consequent, as is very manifest in all axioms. Thus, as in many similar instances,
“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but He that cometh after me, shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with life.” (Matthew 2:11.)
“Though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.” (2 Corinthians 4:16.)
For the particles, indeed, though, since, when, etc., denote the antecedent and less principal part of the axiom; while the particles, but, yet, then, etc., denote the consequent and principal part. “To delight in the law of God,” or, “to find a sort of condelectation in it,” “after the inward man,” is the cause that to will is present with this man. “The evil which is present with him,” is “the law of sin in his members.” The effect, by which the presence of this evil is proved, is contained in these words, “Warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.”
I have considered it proper to offer these remarks to assist in forming a right judgment about a discrete or disjunctive axiom, lest any one should separate the one part from the other, and should account the less principal to be the principal one. Let us now further see what conclusion can be drawn from these two verses, in proof of the one opinion or of the other.
2. Those who hold sentiments contrary to mine, draw the following conclusion, from the twenty-second verse, for the establishment of their view of the subject:
He who delights in the law of God after the inward man, is regenerate and placed under grace;
But this man about whom the apostle is treating delights in the law of God after the inward man;
Therefore, this man is regenerate and placed under grace. They suppose that, in the proposition, they have a two-fold foundation for their opinion:
(1.) Because “the inward man” is attributed to this person.
(2.) Because that same individual is said “to delight in the law of God after the inward man? For, they say, both these adjuncts can appertain to regenerate persons alone. The First agrees with them only, because, in the Scriptures, “the inward man” has the same signification as that of “the new man and the regenerate;” the Second, because it is declared concerning the pious, that “they meditate in the law of the Lord, and that their delight is in it, day and night?
3. To the proposition, I reply, first, that the inward man is not the same as the new man or the regenerate, either from the etymology of the word, or from the usage of Scripture; and the inward man is not peculiar to the regenerate, but that it also belongs to the unregenerate. Secondly, that to delight in the law of God, or, rather, to find a sort of condelectation in the law of God after the inward man, is not a property peculiar to the regenerate and to those who are placed under grace, but that it appertains to a man placed under the law.
(1.) With regard to the first, I say, from the etymology of the epithet, he is called the inward man, relatively and oppositely to the outward man. For there are two men in the same individual, the one existing within the other, and the one having the other first within himself. The first of these is the hidden man of the heart, (Peter 3:4,) the second is the outward man of the body; the former is he who inhabits or dwells in, the latter, he who is inhabited; the former is calculated or adapted to invisible and incorporeal blessings, the latter, to those which are earthly and visible; the former is immortal, the latter is mortal and liable to death. In these two words, not a single syllable occurs which can afford even the least indication of regeneration, and of the newness arising from regeneration. But these three epithets, the inward man, the regenerate Man, and the new man, hold the following order among each other, which the words themselves indicate at the first sight of them. The inward man denotes the subject, the regenerate man denotes the act, of the Holy Spirit who regenerates; and the new man denotes the quality which exists in the inward man through the act of regeneration.
(2.) The sense and usage of Scripture are not adverse to this signification, but, on the contrary, are very consentaneous to it. This will be apparent from a diligent consideration of those passages in which mention is made of “the inward man.” One of them is the text now under discussion; the second is 2 Corinthians 4:16; and the third is Ephesians 3:16,17. Let us at present take into consideration the last two passages.