DIVISION CLUSTER CONSTITUENT Romans 6:1-8:39(Expository Subdivision: Application2 of 3:21-26)

DIVISION CLUSTER CONSTITUENT Romans 6:1-8:39(Expository Subdivision: Application2 of 3:21-26)

INTENT AND MACROSTRUCTURE

All the constituent paragraphs within the Rom. 6:1-8:39 unit are expository. The unit, therefore, is considered expository. It is a further application (or set of applications) of justification by faith to the everyday life of the believer. The three sections of the unit present equally prominent CLAIMS.

BOUNDARIES AND COHERENCE

It seems best to follow a host of commentators here (e. g., Dunn, Harrison, Morris) and consider Rom. 6:1-8:39 as one unit. It is difficult, however, to do so on the basis of lexical coherence. (One can say only that throughout this subdivision there is a heavy use of the second person plural pronoun in contrast to the first person singular starting with chap. 9.) Rather, its coherence derives from the fact that it deals with the practical implications of the doctrine of justification by faith for the daily spiritual life of all believers.

This unit ends, in [[8:39 >rom. 8.39]], with ‘in Christ Jesus our Lord’, paralleling the ending of the previous unit (‘through Jesus Christ our Lord’). In the unit that follows (Rom. 9:1-11:36) the focus shifts from the implications of justification for believers in general to its implications for the Jews in particular.

SUBDIVISION CONSTITUENTRomans 6:1-23(Expository Section: Claim1 of 6:1-8:39)

INTENT AND MACROSTRUCTURE

Both constituents of the [[6:1-23 >rom. 6.1-23]] unit are expository; thus, the whole unit is expository. Both present hypothetical objections to the doctrine of justification by faith set forth in [[3:21-26 rom. 3.21-26]] and Paul’s REFUTATIONS of these objections. The two paragraphs are considered equal, neither being subordinate to the other.

BOUNDARIES AND COHERENCE

The great majority of commentators recognize [[6:1-23 >rom. 6.1-23]] as one unit consisting of two objections- REFUTATION subunits, as is done here. (Morris and Harrison, who take 6:1-14 as one unit and 6:15-7:6 as the next, are exceptions.) Paul in 6:1-23 anticipates an erroneous conclusion that might be drawn from what he has presented, and then he refutes it.

Lexical coherence within [[6:1-23 >rom. 6.1-23]] is provided by words in the semantic domain of slavery: δοῦλος ‘slave’ three times (vv. 16, 17, 20); the verbs δουλόω ‘to enslave’ twice (vv. 18, 22); δουλεύω ‘be a slave’ once (v. 6); κυριεύω ‘lord it over’ twice (vv.9, 14); ἐλευθερόω ‘set free’ twice (vv. 18, 22); and βασιλεύω ‘reign’ once (v. 12).

In [[v.23 >rom. 6.23]] the final boundary marker is once again the phrase ‘in Christ Jesus our Lord’. The opening of the next unit (beginning in [[7:1 >rom. 7.1]]) is marked with a vocative ἀδελφοί ‘brethren’ and a rhetorical question.

PROMINENCE AND THEME

Since the constituent paragraphs of 6: 1-23 are considered coordinate, the theme is drawn from the themes of both of them. They are condensed to eliminate nonthematic material such as orienters and repetitive material.

SECTION CONSTITUENT Romans 6:1-14- (Expository Paragraph: Claiml of 6:1-23)

TRANSLATION

6:1a-eIf...perhaps...[Seetheexpansion below.]

6:2-5Wewhooughttoconsiderourselvesunresponsivetosinfuldesiresshould certainlynotcontinuesinning.[Seetheexpansiononp. 139.]

6:6-8Wemustkeeprememberingthatitisasthoughourformersinfulnature wascausedtoceasetofunctionwhenChristwascrucified.[Seetheexpansion onp. 142.]

6:9-11 You must consider that it is as though you have become unresponsive to > sinful desires and now are living a new way. [See the expansion on p. 144.]

6:12-14 Do not let the desire to commit sin control you; instead present yourselves to God to do righteous things. [See the expansion on p. 145.]

INTENT AND PARAGRAPH PATTERN

At this point in his discourse Paul begins to anticipate some possible objections and to give counterarguments. This style has often been equated, rightly or wrongly, with the diatribe form of argumentation. In effect, Paul is stating in [[6:1-14 >rom. 6.1-14]] an anticipated criticism of what he has just said about justification by faith. There are therefore two levels of paragraph-pattern relations: On the higher level are an objection and a REFUTATION (or they might be called query and RESPONSE). For this reason, and because the whole of 1:18-11:36 is expository, the 6:1-14 unit is considered expository, of the solutionality subtype. The fact that at the lower level there are a number of exhortations (e.g., in 11a, 12a, 13ab, 13e) does not make it hortatory because these are lower-level relations within the higher-level REFUTATION. Paul's main thrust in 6:1-14 is to answer an anticipated objection. The fact that in doing so he feels it necessary to make several exhortations (so as not to have to deal with them later) is recognized, but since this is the lesser of Paul's purposes here, the paragraph is still considered expository. At the lower level, Paul's REFUTATION consists of two APPEALS (Rom. 6:9-11, 12-14) preceded by two bases (Rom. 6:2-5, 6-8).

EXPANSION OF THE OBJECTIONIN THE Romans 6:1 DISPLAY

TRANSLATION

6:laSomeone might say [RHQ] in reply to what I have written [3:21-5:21]

6:1b that since God acted graciously toward us

6:1c because we sinned

6:1d perhaps we should continue to sin [RHQ]

6:1e in order that he may continue to act even more graciously toward us and keep onforgiving us.

6:1d perhaps we should continue to sin [RHQ]

6:1e in order that he may continue to act even more graciously toward us and keep onforgiving us.

NOTES

6:1aSomeonemight say The rhetorical question at the beginning of this verse is the first of a series of rhetorical questions, the others being in Rom. 6:15, 7:7, 8:31, 9:14. Each such question is used by Paul to introduce a hypothetical (and wrong) objection to what he has stated thus far, which in turn leads into an answer to such an objection. The hypothetical objection is also worded as a question and can be considered rhetorical, giving two rhetorical questions in sequence in v. 1. In the display the two are collapsed into one statement. (All rhetorical questions are rendered by nonquestions in the displays.) The first of the rhetorical questions is rendered as the orienter introducing the objection; and the second, the objection itself.

Alternatively, either or both of these questions may be rendered as question forms. If the translator prefers a more literal translation of τίοὖνἐροῦμεν ‘What therefore shall we say?’, in many languages the implicit referent may have to be made explicit: ‘about our being declared righteous by God’, which is the topic of the whole previous section.

in reply to what I have written These words convey the sense of οὖν ‘therefore’, which is taken as introducing a conclusion Paul anticipates could be drawn (or perhaps knows has been drawn) from his whole presentation of justification of faith.

6:1b-c since God acted graciously toward us because we sinnedThe second question in the Greek text presents a wrong inference from the preceding exposition. From the point of view of paragraph pattern theory, a grounds for this inference is implied and therefore supplied in 1b-c. This alternative is chosen for the display. There is another alternative, though with little difference in meaning, namely, to consider 1b-c of the first alternative simply the semantic content of ‘therefore’ by itself, keeping it as Paul’s words instead of the words of an objector. This would give:

6:ld perhaps Paul worded the hypothetical objection in the form of a question. The answer was, to Paul, a foregone conclusion. The objector, however, is raising this as a possible conclusion and this possibility is shown in the display by ‘perhaps’. Alternatively, it could be rendered as a yes—no question, retaining the literal form of the original.

6:1eand keep on forgiving us This phrase is the implied result of God’s grace abounding: if we keep sinning, God will keep forgiving us.

EXPANSION OF BASIS1IN THE Romans 6:2-5 DISPLAY

TRANSLATION

6:2a 1wouldreply,We should certainly not continue to sin!

6:2b It is not right [RHQ] that we continue to sin

6:2c since we oughtto consider ourselves unresponsive to sinful desires [MET]

622d as a corpse does not respond when it is stimulated.

6:3a 1want you to remember [RHQ] 6:3b that when we were baptized

6:3c in order to be united to (or, to show we have a relationship to) Jesus Christ,

6:3d it was to declare that it was as though we died with him that we were baptized.

624a Therefore it is as though we were buried with him

6:4b when we were baptized

6:4c in order that we would be unresponsive to sinful desires

6:4d just as those who die are unresponsive [MET]

6:4e and in order that we also would continually conduct our lives in a new way

6:4f just as Christ was resurrected by the glorious power of his divine Father.

6:5a Since we have been united with Christ

6:5b by being totally separated from the former way we lived

6:5c as he was separated from the way he lived when he died, [MET]

6:5d we shall certainly be united with Christ

6:5e by being caused to live in a new way

6:5fjustashewascausedtoliveagain.

NOTES

6:2a I would replyThe fact that Paul is replying to a presumably hypothetical objection is made clear by including the orienter words ‘I would reply’.

certainly not The phrase μὴγένοιτο is simply an emphatic negative reply. It might be represented in English by such abbreviated idiomatic expressions as ‘Absolutely not!’, ‘By no means!’, ‘Heavens, no!’, ‘No way!‘ (cf. 3:4, 6), but in some languages a full sentence may be necessary.

6:2b It is not right The rhetorical question here has the force of an emphatic negative, which in effect duplicates the negative preceding it. Alternatively, a reworded rhetorical question could be used: ‘Should we . . .?’ or ‘Do you think that we . . .?’ But translators should follow the natural patterns for emphatic negatives in the receptor language.

continue to sin These words are a straight-forward rendering of ζήσομενἐν αὐτῇ ‘shall live in it (i.e., in sin)’. This is not meant to imply that Paul was teaching sinless perfection for believers; the sense is ‘not continue to keep on deliberately/habitually sinning’.

6:2c-d ought to consider ourselves unresponsive toThe point of similarity in the metaphor ἀπεθάνομεντῇἁμαρτίᾳ ‘we died to sin’ is insensitivity or inability to be influenced. Here it is rendered ‘unresponsive to’. Some suggest ‘freedom from the power of’, which, though similar, is a personification.

Even after spelling out the metaphor, a problem remains: Christians do not become insensitive to sin at conversion. Paul is using hyperbole here; what he is saying is, as expressed in the display, ‘we ought to consider . . .’ A somewhat more literal translation in which the point of similarity is not spelled out would be: ‘It is as though we died’.

6:2c sinful desiresThe sense of ἁμαρτία ‘sin’ here (and subsequently in chaps. 6 and 7) is somewhat different from its sense in v. 1. What we are to become insensitive to is not the specific sinful acts, but the desire to sin. As noted by BDAG (p. 50.3), in many of these passages Paul’s use of the word amounts to personification. It is difficult to express the idea in the display without nominalizing the word, hence ‘sinful desires’.

6:2d corpseIn some languages it is possible to say ‘dead person’, and in others it is necessary to use a word for ‘corpse’.

6:3a I want you to remember In Romans Paul frequently uses the rhetorical question ‘Do you not know. . .?' to emphasize, not something they necessarily know, but something he wants them to keep in mind, whether they know it already or not.

The conjunctionἢ ‘or' is used a number of times by Paul (and once by Matthew) to introduce a rhetorical question. From the viewpoint of semantics, the question here introduces the grounds for the statement in 2b, and the use of ἤ grammatically prohibits the use of γάρ, the usual introducer of grounds.

6:3c in order to be united to (or, to show we have a relationship to) Jesus Christ The phrase εἰςΧριστὸνἸησοῦν ‘into Christ Jesus’ is taken by most commentators as expressing ‘into union with Christ’ (cf. Hodge, Sanday and Headlam, Alford, Denney, Nygren, Morris, Harrison, Murray, Haldane). But does ‘into’ mean ‘in order to be united to’ or ‘in order to show we are united to’? That is, does baptism place us in the body of Christ or is it an outward symbol of an internal transformation? Here one's theology must decide. The first alternative in the display follows the former; the second follows the latter.

6:3d it was as though we died with him The phrase εἰςτὸνθάνατον αὐτοῦ ‘into his death’ is, in the Greek, emphasized by being forefronted; this is indicated in the display by the reversal of order in the cleft construction. The phrase itself is puzzling, and commentators do not shed much light on it. The display retains the ambiguity. If the alternative in the note for 6:3c were followed, it would give ‘it symbolizes that it was as though we died with him’. Some commentators (e.g., Hodge, Cranfield) take the meaning to be ‘to testify that we have appropriated the benefits of his death’, which has much to commend it.

6:4a it is as though we were buried with himIn this metaphor, it is impossible to make the point of similarity explicit and still preserve theological neutrality. Hence the metaphor is rendered as a simile and not fully spelled out.

6:4c unresponsive to sinful desiresThe phrase here, εἰςτὸνΘάνατον ‘into death’, contrasts with ‘into his death’ in 3d. In the context of not continuing to sin (2b) and a new life (4e), the word ‘death’ has the same metaphorical sense as in 2c, namely, being insensitive or unresponsive to sinful desires.

6:4e conduct our lives in a new wayThe clause ἐν καινότητιζωῆς περιπατήσωμεν ‘in newness of life we might walk’ exhibits several semantic mismatches. The noun ‘newness’ expresses an attribute; ‘life’, an event. ‘Walk’ is a dead metaphor (used frequently by Paul and John to express the idea ‘to live, to conduct oneself’). But since ‘life’ and ‘walk’ both refer to ‘way of life’, ‘walk’ is rendered here by ‘conduct our lives’. Another possibility would be ‘experience that we are living’. The use of the free pronoun ‘we’ with ‘also’ and the forefronting of the phrase ‘in newness of life’ give emphasis to both of these.

6:4f Christ was resurrected The verb phrase ἠγέρθηἐκνεκρῶν ‘was raised from the dead’, which is rendered here as ‘was resurrected’, may have to be rendered more fully in some languages, for example, ‘was caused to live again after he died’.

the glorious power of his divine Father The phrase διὰτῆςδόξηςτοῦ πατρός ‘through the glory of the father’ is expressing means or instrument. The word ‘glory’ is, semantically, an attribute modifying the implied concept ‘power’ (cf. BAGD, p. 257.1b). In REB, TEV, and LB it is rendered in keeping with this. In many languages, kinship terms are obligatorily possessed, hence ‘his’. Other possible alternatives for the meaning of the phrase are ‘by his powerful/glorious Father’ and ‘by his Father acting powerfully’.

The word ‘divine’ is supplied because the primary sense of πατήρ is ‘human father’. This is a figurative usage here, and in some languages, it will not be possible to use the ordinary word for ‘father’ without qualification. This is the reciprocal of the problem involving ‘Son of God’ (see the note on 1:2).

6:5a Since An amplification of the statement in 4a is introduced here by γάρ; εἰ ‘if’ has a causal force expressing factual grounds and isrendered by ‘since’.

6:5b-c by being totally separated from the former way we lived, as he was separated from the way he lived when he died The phrase τῷὁμοιώματι τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ ‘in the likeness of his death’ expresses a comparison in a mismatched way, that is, by the noun ‘likeness’. But in what way can it be said that we died as he died? The theme of the paragraph is separation from sin, and the metaphor of death is used to indicate the finality of the separation.

6:5d we shall certainly beIn using the future tense of the verb ἐσόμεθα ‘we shall be’, does Paul refer to an ultimate union with Christ at the time of our final resurrection or to the new life we receive at the time of conversion? Commentators are divided. The problem with an eschatological interpretation is that the only resurrection in focus in this passage is the metaphorical one in v. 4: a rising to a new life here and now. In the context, a reference to a future resurrection would be irrelevant as a ground for the conclusion that we should not continue in sin (2b) unless Paul had specifically made the point ‘since you will someday be physically raised to a new life in a new body, you should act as though that new life were in effect now’. This he does not do in this paragraph. The display therefore retains the future tense, but spells out the metaphor in such a way that it could be taken to refer to the present new life Paul is dealing with in this passage.

united with Christ There is an ellipsis of ‘united to Christ’, which should be understood as carried over from 5a.

6:5f just as he was There is an ellipsis of the words ‘in the likeness of’, represented here by ‘just as he was’.

EXPANSION OF BASIS2IN THE Romans 6:6-8 DISPLAY

TRANSLATION:

6:6a We must keep remembering

6:6b that it is as though our former sinful nature was caused to cease to junction

6:6c when Christ was crucified [MET]

6:6d in order that we would not obey the sinful nature's orders with our bodies, [MET]

6:6e which desire to sin,

6:6f and in order that we would no longer be compelled to sin [MET]

6:6g as a slave is compelled to do what his master wants.

6:7a We have, as it were, been freed from being controlled by sinful desires [MET]

6:7b just as anyone who has died is freed from being controlled by sinful desires.

6:8a Sinceit is as though we died with Christ,

6:8b we believe

6:8c that we shall continue to live with him.

NOTES

[[6:6alogosres:nrsv;ref=Bible.rom6:6a]] We must keep remembering The participial phrase τοῦτογινώσκοντες ‘knowing this’ has been taken by some as introducing the grounds for the argument in the previous verse. But semantically the argument in vv. 6-7 does not serve as a grounds for v. 5; and the occurrence of τοῦτο, which is explicated by the ὅτιcontent clause that follows, also rules against such a relationship. In all the cases where τοῦτο is followed by γινώσκω (cf. Luke 12:39, 2Pet. 1:20 and [[3:3 >1 Pet. 3.3]] [this last also having the verb in its participial form]), there is only a cataphoric reference, never a logical relationship to what precedes. John uses ἐντούτῳ᾽ always cataphorically, in a similar way nine times, all but one being in 1 John 2ff. Rom. 6:6a is therefore taken as introducing a second basis supporting the APPEALS of [[9-11 >rom. 6.9-11]] and [[12-14 >rom. 6.12-14]].

As in [[6:3a >rom. 6.3]], ‘know’ refers not so much to what they already know, but what Paul wants them to keep in mind. JBP has “Let us never forget,” similar to the rendering in the display.

6:6b it is as though our former sinful nature was caused to cease to function The phrase ὁ παλαιὸςἡμῶνἄνθρωπος ‘our old man’ refers to the nature we had before we became Christians: ‘sinful' is clearly implied. The reference to crucifixion is metaphorical; the point of similarity is ‘caused to cease to function’. The rendering in the display is based on Paul's statement in Eph. 4:22 that the old sinful nature still needs to be dealt with.

6:6d-e in order that we would not obey the sinful nature’s orders with our bodies, which desire to sin The Greek is ἵνα καταργηθῇτὸσῶμα τῆςἁμαρτίας ‘in order that the body of sin might be made ineffective’. Commentators disagree as to the meaning of ‘the body of sin’. Some consider it our bodies as controlled by sin (thus RSV and ΙΒ, “our sinful bodies”); others, out sinful nature as the cause of sinful acts by our bodies (taking it as a metonymy); still others, a personification of sin (i.e., our sinful desires). Determining the correct sense hinges a fair bit on the sense given to the verb, which Paul sometimes uses in the sense of ‘make ineffective' (cf. Rom. 3:3, 3:31, 4:14) and sometimes in the sense of ‘abolish, do away with’. Since this verb spells out the purpose of the metaphorical statement in 6b-c (in conjunction with the additional purpose statement in 6f ‘in order that we would no longer be compelled to sin’), it is clear that Paul is not referring to a present or future doing away with the body. Paul does not elsewhere use the expression ‘body of sin’; but since he does use ‘body’ in [[v. 12 >rom. 6.12]] in its literal sense, and elsewhere uses σάρξ to refer to the sinful nature, the expression ‘body of sin’ here is almost certainly not referring to human nature but rather to the body in some way. It seems best to take it as expressing a characteristic of the human body, hence ‘bodies which desire to sin’ in the display. (LB has “sin loving bodies”) The verb ‘made ineffective’ combined with this phrase gives the sense ‘in order that our bodies which desire to sin would not be able to cause that to happen’.