nature of all its fruit may be known by one specimen; so in the case of moral beings, one principle of action, call it heart, or governing purpose,' or what you will, pervades the whole conduct of the man, and one clearly ascer tained instance of moral action decides his whole character. Can a man's heart be opposed to all sin, and yet his conduct be sinful? If so, he acts contrary to his own will, which is absurd. If his heart is only opposed to sin in general,' if he has only what is called a 'supreme,' not an entire or perfect purpose to avoid sin, he may indeed, consistently with such a heart, sin more or less as occasion demands; but let him compare such a heart with the law of God, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,' &c., and he will discover that his 'governing purpose' is a sinful one, and therefore corrupts his whole character. Sin, and sin only, is the legitimate fruit of such a 'governing purpose.' This is true of every governing purpose' which falls short of the perfect love of God which the law requires; and when that perfect love of God is attained, sin is no more. If men love God with all the heart, they cannot sin; and if they do not love him with all the heart, their governing purpose is sinful, and therefore they can only sin.

6

James spoke good philosophy when he said, 'He that offendeth in one point, is guilty of all. The principle involved in that saying has a wider sweep than is generally discovered. He that offendeth in one point is guilty of a breach of the whole law; his offense betrays a state of heart, which under similar circumstances would break every specific commandment, and which now violates the spirit of that whole law, which requires universal love. He that offendeth in one point, is guilty of all the sins of the universe, past, present, and to come; for he endorses the whole, and by one act, so far as lies in his power, makes himself responsible for the whole. If ten persons endorse successively a bill of exchange, each one becomes responsible for the whole amount. So every person who commits sin, by so doing endorses the bill of universal sin. What though he has not exhibited so barefaced impiety as others? If he in a single instance commits sin, he places himself in fellowship with all sinners and makes the barefaced impiety of others his own. The accessory is equally guilty with the murderer, and every instance of sin makes him who commits it accessory to the prince of murderers. If this principle is correct, every sinner without exception is as guilty as the devil. Every principle of common law and common sense developes the truth of John's test-He that committeth sin is of the devil.'

$25. PAUL NOT CARNAL;

AN EXPOSITION OF ROMANS 7: 7-25.

"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law, sin was dead. 9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 12 Wherefore the law is holy; and the commandment holy, and just, and good. 13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For that which I do, I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law, that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 18 For I know that in me, (that is, in my flesh.) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19 For the good that I would, I do not but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 21 I find then a law, that when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man : 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin." Rom. 7: 7—25.

THIS passage (especially from the 14th to the 23d verse) is commonly received throughout Christendom, as a description of Christian experience -nay, as the experience of the greatest of the apostles, the best specimen of Christianity. Believing this view of the passage to be palpably erroneous, and exceedingly pernicious, we propose, in the following dissertation, to present some of the prominent reasons for adopting a different interpretation. That our design may be clearly understood, before subjoining the reasons proposed, we present a paraphrase of the passage, as follows, beginning at the seventh verse:

7 We said above (in the 5th verse) that the motions of sin which were by the law, did work in our members, to bring forth fruit unto death. What shall we say then? It appears the law is the occasion of the motions of sins, and the fruit is death. Is the law in fault? Is aggravated guilt and death the object, and legitimate result, of the application of law? God forbid; on the contrary, its object, and actual result is not the promotion, but the exposure, of sin. I should never have come to the knowledge of sin, but by the light of the law; where there is no law there is no sin: where the light of the law (i. e. the expression of the will of God) is feeble, as in the case

of the heathen, there consciousness of sin is correspondingly feeble: and where, as in my own case, the light of the law, by direct revelation, becomes strong, the consciousness of sin, if the sinful principle remains, becomes correspondingly strong. I should never have recognized the existence and guilt of forbidden desire in my heart, if the law had not expressly said, Thou shalt not covet, (i. e. indulge inordinate desire,) thereby carrying its claims beyond external action, into the thoughts and intents of the heart. So that the law, instead of being the efficient cause of sin, is the means of its exposure and condemnation.

8 The fatal result, therefore, of the application of law in my case, is to be ascribed, not to the law, but to my own wickedness. The sinful principle, which was within me before, instead of ceasing to exist in consequence of the additional light and motive of a revealed law, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of forbidden desire. Its evil nature was aggravated and developed by the opposing claims of the law. For before I came to a knowledge of the law, the sinful principle was dead. It made no manifestation of its pernicious power, and I was not aware of its

existence.

9 At that time, sin thus being dead, I was alive, free from the curse of an evil conscience and expectation of wrath, happy, independently of the grace of God. But this was because I had no just views of the law. When the commandment came home to my soul, in its power and spirituality, the sinful principle, which had been comparatively powerless and dead, revived. I became conscious of its existence and malignity. As I have said, its evil nature was aggravated and developed by the opposing claims of the law. As light increased, by the necessity of the case, so long as the sinful principle remained, its malignity and fatal power increased. I became worse and worse, my case more and more hopeless, till I sunk into despair of salvation and died.

10 In this way, the commandment, which was ordained unto life, I found to be the occasion (not the efficient or legitimate cause) of death.

11 It was my own wicked heart, that made the increased light and motive of the law, an occasion of aggravated perversity. I was deceitfully led on by it, from one degree of wickedness to another, till I sunk down under hopeless condemnation.

12 Wherefore, notwithstanding the fatal result of its application, we must pronounce the law holy, and the commandment holy, just, and good.

13 As there is a difficulty in discerning how a thing can be good, and yet be the occasion of evil, that we may view the subject in all its bearings, we repeat the question in substance, which was asked at the outset. How can we pronounce the law holy, just and good, and yet affirm that the consequence of its application was death to my soul? Was that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. Death, as we have repeatedly said, is no part of the design, or legitimate result, of the law, but must be ascribed, in my case, wholly to my own wickedness. In this view of the subject, the malignity of the sinful principle is clearly developed. What greater proof can we have of its evil nature, than the fact that it works death by that which is good? A good principle extracts good from that which is evil.

But here the reverse is true. Evil is extracted from that which is good. Thus sin by the commandment becomes exceeding sinful.

14 But to trace out more definitely, and in detail, the process by which the law becomes an occasion of death, we say the fatal result flows from the incongruity, or opposition, which exists between my nature, or condition, as a man in the flesh, and the claims of the law. For the law is spiritual-its claims extend to the thoughts and intents of the heart-it proposes to control the spirit; of course its claims can be met only by one whose spirit is free, predominant over the flesh: whereas I am carnal, sold under sin. My inferior propensities predominate over my spiritual nature, and lead captive my will. In this state, it is impossible for me to obey the law. They that are in the flesh cannot please God. My spiritual nature must predominate, before I can obey a law whose claims are spiritual. So that the law, shedding its light upon me while in the flesh, only shows me the impossibility of obedience and salvation, so long as the flesh predominates over the spirit. Remaining then in the flesh, the bond slave of sin, the law, which I know is spiritual, and which my conscience approves as holy, just and good, only wakes the sinful principle within me to tenfold malignity and power. 15 Thus I am brought into a deadly warfare with myself. The commandment, like a two-edged sword, pierces even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit. I become, as it were, two beings. Reason, conscience, and constitutional self-love, take sides with God and the law. My inferior propensities, having the will under their control, array themselves against their claims. A conflict commences between my spiritual and carnal nature, in which the flesh uniformly triumphs. For that which I do under the control of the flesh, as a rational being enlightened by the law, I allow not. What conscience and self-love constrain me to wish to do, that do I not; but what I hate, because I know the guilt and ruin it brings upon me, that do I.

16 It is plain, then, if I do that which, as a rational being, I would not, I consent unto the law, that it is good, perceiving its adaptation to secure the well being of my spiritual nature, notwithstanding the opposition of my carnal nature and will to its claims.

17 Now then it is no more I that act thus, in opposition to conscience and the law, but sin that dwelleth in me. The time was, when reason, conscience and self-love consented to the course of my carnal nature and my will, and then it might be said, I did what was done. But now my being is divided; I have, as it were, two wills, at war with each other; and the best half of my nature is arrayed on the side of that will which opposes my actual doings. My fleshly propensities, though they control the will, are unworthy to be called the man. I, as a spiritual being, no longer consent to my own actions. Sin that dwelleth in me, subjecting the whole man to its control, drags me into conflict with the law. While the noblest of my powers, those which most truly constitute me a man, take sides with the law, my actions are uniformly in opposition to its claims. Truly this exhibits the exceeding sinfulness of sin.

18 I now know, since the spiritual claims of the law have enlightened my understanding, and developed my sinful condition, that in me, that is, in my flesh, in the carnal nature which belongs to me as an unregenerate man,

there dwelleth no good thing. It has come to be a certainty with me, that I shall never perform a right action while in the flesh. When I look upon the goodness of the law of God, and upon the happiness of its subjects, as a rational being, I long to obey it. To will is present with me. My hungerings after righteousness even exhibit themselves in efforts, and resolutions of obedience, which either contemplate mere specific action, without a radical change of principle, or respect future, and not present obedience, and, of course, prove abortive. How to perform that which is good, I find not.

19 For the good that I would, I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do. After all my wishes and resolutions, I act uniformly in direct opposition to the dictates of my better nature.

20 And I say again, if I do that which I would not-if my spiritual nature, that which only deserves to be called the man, approves the law which condemns my actions, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me, which, in thus dragging me, I may say, against my will, into conflict with the law, manifests its exceeding sinfulness.

21 I find then at last, by the ruinous conflict I have sketched, I am forced upon the conclusion that sin is an abiding, universal principle within me. The law which controls my spirit, is the very reverse of that law which my conscience approves. The rule by which I live is this- When I would do good, evil is present with me. Being the servant of sin, I am totally free from righteousness. (6: 20.)

22 I hesitate not to use the expression-When I would do good-for I delight in the law of God, after the inner man. I see its goodness and glory, and long to be a subject of it. I look into the kingdom which it sways, and involuntarily delight in the beauty of the prospect. I wish an omnipotent arm would take me up and place me beyond the gate, within its precincts.

23 But how to enter that gate, I find not. A present and full surrender of the sinful principle, a triumph of my spiritual over my carnal nature, alone can give me admission to that kingdom. Here, on the very threshold of obedience and salvation, I find myself morally impotent. I see a law in my carnal nature, warring against the law of God and of my own spiritual nature, and triumphing in the conflict, bringing me into captivity to the law of sin and death. Thus sin, which was dead when I was alive without the law, by the coming of the commandment, has revived, and with merciless, living malignity, is driving me to despair. I am dying to hope and happiness.

24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 (I thank God, who is able, through Jesus Christ our Lord, to deliver a soul thus sinking to perdition, as we shall see in the chapter following.) We conclude then, from what has been said, that I myself, as a man in the flesh without Christ and under law, serve the law of God with my spiritual nature, that which constitutes me a man; and yet with my flesh, that part of my nature which predominates, and controls my will, I serve the law of sin; thus according to the principle stated at the beginning of this discussion, in the 5th verse, by the knowledge and approval of that law which condemns my actions, bringing upon myself aggravated guilt, condemnation and death.