THE THIRD MAJOR
SECTION OF ROMANS

Note that the table above is intended to demonstrate that Romans 6-8 "belong together". While carefully observing, memorizing and meditating on the vital truths in Romans 6 is foundational for living a life of freedom and growth in Christlikeness (progressive sanctification or present tense salvation), the serious student (which we should all be!) would be wise to study all three chapters carefully as a unit for maximum spiritual benefit. Notice the logical pattern Paul presents -- Romans 6 deals with the believer being dead to Sin, Romans 7 deals with the believer being dead to the Law,  and Romans 8 deals with the believer alive in the Spirit, Who gives us the power to life the "victorious Christina life"! Romans 6 tells us how Sin no longer reigns over us. Romans 7 explains how the Law no longer reigns over us. And finally Romans 8 explains how the indwelling Spirit gives us life and liberty in Christ Jesus our Liberator!

Paul Addresses...
Libertines in Romans 6
Legalists in Romans 7
Liberty in Romans 8

John Newton who was saved by and wrote about Amazing Grace wrote these words for the epitaph of his tombstone...

John Newton, Clerk,
once an infidel and libertine,
A servant of slaves in Africa,
was, by the rich mercy of our Lord and Saviour,
Jesus Christ,
Preserved, restored, pardoned,
And appointed to preach the faith

What shall we say then? - A rhetorical question (One authority has identified 74 rhetorical questions in Romans!) - one that is generally asked for the effect it produces with no answer necessarily expected. The idea is something like "What conclusion are we to draw from the doctrine previously taught?"

Keep the context of Romans in mind (see table above) as you study Romans 6, 7 and 8. In the previous three chapters Paul has focused on crucial need for and provision of justification by faith through grace (past tense salvation) but now begins the practical section on sanctification (present tense salvation) which describes saints as saved from the power of sin through the finished work of Christ. Sin in Romans 6-8 is not a reference so much to the guilt of sin (that is dealt with in Romans 1-5) but with Sin as a power in the believer's life.

S Lewis Johnson has said that in Romans 6-8...

Wrath and justification (of Romans 3-5)...yield to the discussion of sin and sanctification. Justification is restoration to life, while sanctification is restoration to health. Justification brings us from the tomb; sanctification delivers us from the old "threads." (Sermon on Romans 6:1-14)

Compare a similar pattern when Jesus brought Lazarus up from the tomb...

And when He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth." He who had died came forth, bound hand and foot with wrappings; and his face was wrapped around with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Unbind him, and let him go." (John 11:43, 44)

Ray Stedman wrote that

Verses 1-14 of the sixth chapter of Romans are the most important fourteen verses in Scripture, insofar as being delivered from enduring the Christian life to enjoying it is concerned. There is a difference between possessing eternal life, which all Christians have, and possessing that abundant life which the Lord came to give...I saw a sign the other day and it read, "When all else fails, follow directions." That is a good sign to hang over the sixth chapter of Romans." (from his sermon entitled The Day I Died) (Bolding added for emphasis - it is difficult to argue with the venerable Dr Stedman's conclusion! One can't know this section of Scripture well enough! Have you considered committing it to memory? See Memorizing His Word)

MacArthur introduces Romans 6-8 noting that

Paul moves from demonstrating the doctrine of justification, which is God’s declaring the believing sinner righteous (Ro 3:21-5:21), to demonstrating the practical ramifications of salvation on those who have been justified. He specifically discusses the doctrine of sanctification, which is God’s producing actual righteousness in the believer. (MacArthur, J.: The MacArthur Study Bible Nashville: Word Pub)

H C G Moule (Expositor's Bible Commentary) explains that in Romans 6-8...

IN a certain sense, St. Paul has done now with the exposition of Justification. He has brought us on, from his denunciation of human sin, and his detection of the futility of mere privilege, to propitiation, to faith, to acceptance, to love, to joy, and hope, and finally to our mysterious but real connection in all this blessing with Him Who won our peace (cf Ro 5:1-note, Ep 2:14-note). From this point onwards we shall find many mentions of our acceptance, and of its Cause; we shall come to some memorable mentions very soon. But we shall not hear the holy subject itself (justification) any more treated and expounded. It will underlie the following discussions everywhere; it will, as it were, surround them, as with a sanctuary wall. But we shall now think less directly of the foundations than of the superstructure, for which the foundation was laid. We shall be less occupied with the fortifications of our "holy city" than with the resources they contain, and with the life which is to be lived, on those resources, within the walls. Everything will cohere. But the transition will be marked, and will call for our deepest, and let us add, our most reverent and supplicating thought. (The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans) (Bolding added)

H C G Moule (Cambridge Bible Commentary) has a superb title for Romans 6:1-14...

Justification organically connected with sanctification: grace the supreme motive to obedience. Here begins the direct treatment of a great topic already suggested, (Romans  5 through Romans 8) the relation of gratuitous Pardon to Sanctity.  ()

Vine adds that Paul's...

aim in this chapter is to show the inconsistency of continuing in sin after being justified by grace. He makes clear that newness of life and continuance in sin are a contradiction of the new life in Christ. Chapter five constitutes the basis of the teaching of chapter six. Chapter five speaks of the means by which God has bestowed spiritual life, chapter six of how we are to live the life. The leading theme of this chapter is identification with Christ; that is the very essence of the new life. While the keynote of chapter five is “through Christ,” that of chapter six is “in Christ.”...“In Christ” (Ro 6:3, 11, 23) suggests that we are in union of life with Him in glory (He is now exalted and glorified), on the ground of what He accomplished on the Cross. Chapter six has another keynote, namely, “unto God.” That expresses how the new life is to be lived (Ro 6:10, 11, 13, 22). (Bolding added) (Vine, W. Collected writings of W. E. Vine. Nashville: Thomas Nelson or Logos)

Wayne Barber says that...

In Ro 6:1 the Apostle Paul has anticipated a question being asked by those who see grace as a license to sin—the Antinomians. These were the party-goers. "I’m under grace—I can do what I want to do! I’m free in Jesus—I can do what I want to do." Freedom is not the license to do what you want to do, to do what you please. It’s the power to do as you should. It’s a totally different thought. The Antinomians would take what Paul said and try to pervert it...You see, a lot of people still think, "I made a decision years ago. I walked the aisle. I cried big tears and asked God to forgive me. I’m a Christian now, and I can live like I want to live because of God’s grace. He saved me, and He forgave me." Hold it! Hold it! What were you saved from and what were you saved to? You must understand what Paul is saying here. There is no possible way a Christian can go back and live the lifestyle he lived when he was in Adam. Because he is not in Adam any more. He is now in Christ. That is the question he anticipates, and he is going to answer it. (Wayne Barber)

Wuest adds...

So Paul proposes the question, “What shall we say then?”—say then to what? We go back to Ro 5:20 for our answer which we find in the apostle’s statement, “Where sin abounded, there grace was in superabundance, and then some on top of that.”  (Paul’s teaching is that no matter how much sin committed, there are always unlimited resources of grace in the great heart of God by which to extend mercy to the sinning individual) The objector’s thought was as follows; “Paul, do you mean to tell me that God is willing to forgive a person’s sins as often as he commits them?” In response to Paul’s affirmative answer, this legalist says in effect, “Well then, if that is the case, shall we Christians keep on habitually sinning in order that God may have an opportunity to forgive us and thus display His grace?” That is the background of this man’s reasoning." (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans)

Bob Deffinbaugh makes a comment that

"There is a corollary to the principle that grace always outruns and exceeds sin, and it is this: sin always seeks to use that which is good to promote evil." Interesting thought! (Romans 6:1-14 An End to the Reign of Death)

Peter may have been referring to passages like this when he wrote that  in some of Paul's letters there

"are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort (twist or dislocate the limbs on a rack = singularly graphic word applied to the perversion of scripture), as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." (see note 2 Peter 2:16)

ARE WE TO (continually) CONTINUE IN SIN: epimenômen têi hamartiâi: (Ro 6:15; 2:4; 3:5-8,31; 5:20,21; Gal 5:13; 1Pe 2:16; 2Pe 2:18,19)

Continue in sin - Is literally "remain upon the sin". The phrase tends to mean not mere continuance, but perseverance in will ("I want to...") and act (see more discussion on epimeno below).

Sin - As discussed elsewhere (See note on meaning of "sin" below, see also discussion on Sin as the Sin principle or propensity inherited from Adam), it is important to understand Paul's use of the word "sin". In this verse Paul refers to sin (singular) not sins (plural ). In fact, almost all of Paul's  38 uses of sin (hamartia) in Romans 5-8 are in the singular (Ro 7:5 is an exception = literally "the passions of the sins {plural}") and refer to sin as a power (reigning like a king) and not to individual sins (plural) one commits  Here are all the uses of sin in Romans 5-8 -- Ro 5:12 (2x),  Ro 5:13 (2x), Ro 5:20, Ro 5:21, Ro 6:1, 6:2, Ro 6:6 (2x), Ro 6:7, Ro 6:10, Ro 6:11, Ro 6:12, 13, 14 {Note: Ro 6:15 is the verb hamartano and does refer to committing individual acts of sin}, Ro 6:16, Ro 6:17, Ro 6:18, Ro 6:20, Ro 6:22, Ro 6:23, Ro 7:7 (2x and the first use may not refer to sin as a principle), Ro 7:8 (2x), Ro 7:9, Ro 7:11, Ro 7:13 (3x), Ro 7:14, Ro 7:17,  Ro 7:20, Ro 7:23, Ro 7:25 (where "law" ~ the principle of), Ro 8:2, Ro 8:3, Ro 8:10   - As a side note, an interesting exercise would be to go over all of Paul's uses of "sin" in the singular form and make a list of what he teaches.

The Cambridge Bible Commentary notes that...

The strongest statements of the evil and the doom of sin were made e. g. in Romans 1 and 2; but the argument thus far has been wholly occupied with acceptance, with justification (Ed: That is, the fact that justified believers are "accepted in the Beloved" Ep 1:6KJV-note). No part of the passage from Ro 3:9 to this point (Ro 6:1), has purification of heart for its proper subject. (Romans 6:1-14 Cambridge Bible Commentary)

Bishop Moule in his classic devotional work on Romans introduces this section discussing the objection expected in many who have read and reasoned through Romans 1-5...

“We need not, then, be holy, if such is your programme of acceptance.” Such was the objection, bewildered or deliberate, which St. Paul heard in his soul at this pause in his dictation; he had doubtless often heard it with his ears. Here was a wonderful provision for the free and full acceptance of “the ungodly” by the eternal Judge (i.e., justification). It was explained and stated so as to leave no room for human virtue as a commendatory merit. Faith itself was no commendatory virtue. It was not “a work,” but the antithesis to “works.” Its power was not in itself but in its Object. It was itself only the void which received “the obedience of the One” (Ro 5:19-note) as the sole meriting cause of peace with God. (Ed: Here is the question Paul anticipated...)

"Then — may we not live on in sin, and yet be in His favour now, and in His heaven hereafter?"

Let us recollect, as we pass on, one important lesson of these recorded objections to the great first message of St. Paul. They tell us incidentally how explicit and unreserved his delivery of the message had been, and how Justification by Faith, by faith only, meant what was said, when it was said by him. Christian thinkers, of more schools than one, and at many periods, have hesitated not a little over that point. (The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans)

(Moule adds that...) The objection anticipated in this verse is abundantly illustrated in Church history. It may be prompted either by the craving for sinful license, or by a prejudice against the doctrine of purely gratuitous pardon under the belief that it does logically favour security in sin. It is all the more noteworthy that Paul meets it not by modifying in the least the gratuitous aspect of pardon ; not by presenting any merit of the pardoned person as even the minutest element in the cause of pardon. He takes sanctity as entirely the effect of Justification, not at all its cause. (Cambridge Bible Commentary)

Are we to continue in sin? - As alluded to above, Paul begins this next major section (Romans 6-8) with a rhetorical question (asked merely for effect with no answer expected). Rhetorical questions are used in fact to make statements. Paul is responding to preceding verse in which he stated that

where sin increased, grace abounded all the more (Ro 5:20-note).

Vincent comments that this rhetorical question is

A transition-expression and a debater’s phrase” (Morison). The use of this phrase points to Paul’s training in the Rabbinical schools, where questions were propounded and the students encouraged to debate, objections being suddenly interposed and answered. (Vincent, M. R. Word studies in the New Testament. Vol. 3, Page 1-65)

The idea of the rhetorical question is that if grace superabounds where sin abounds, ought we not to continue in it, and commit as much as possible, in order that grace might even more superabound? Why not go on sinning, so that grace may go on covering our sin? God would be getting more glory by our sinning through the covering of our sin.

Paul doesn't expect an answer per se but he does expect us to see the answer in the question. The answer is, we can't continue abiding in sin if we are genuine believers. As he will go on to explain in the next verse we can't live in sin if we died to it.

Some professing Christians think that once a person is saved, they can go on living in sin, a belief best known as antinomianism (anti = against +  nomos = law. The antinomian espouses a doctrine that is "against the law of God" and, based on this faulty foundation, condones a loose view regarding the practice of sin.

Dr Ron Mattoon writing in regard to whether a believer can continue in sin states that...

You cannot do this.

You need not do this. Sin's dominion is broken in your life. You have the power to say "No!"

You must not do this. You must not let sin dominate your life.

You better not do this. Disaster stalks you like a blood hound if you are living sinfully. (Mattoon's Treasures -Treasures from Romans)

Scripture is quite clear that the believer is one who does not practice sin as his or her lifestyle. The apostle John clearly explains that...

No one (Greek = absolute negation = "Absolutely not one person"...) who is born (perfect tense = the birth or regeneration occurred at some point of time in the past when one first believed in Jesus' fully atoning sacrificial death, burial and resurrection [in short, "the Gospel"] and the effects of that new birth continue = thus even the perfect tense points to the permanence of one's new birth and thereby at least to a degree "debunks" the idea that one can "lose" their salvation or "new birth") of God practices (present tense = as their lifestyle) sin, because His seed abides (present tense) in him; and he cannot (present tense  = absolutely does not have the intrinsic capability to continually) sin, because he is born (perfect tense = Again undergirds the doctrine of the "assurance of salvation") of God. (1John 3:9)

Comment: This is an important verse and principle to understand. John is saying if one is born again they cannot continually, habitually commit sins. He is not saying a believer never sins or that a believer in this life ever achieves "perfection". What he does say in essence is that there is a definite "change of direction" (not perfection) when a person is born again (cf Paul's parallel passage describing believers as a new creation in Christ, the evidence being that old things pass away and new things come 2Co 5:17-note). Viz (that is to say), if a person says "I have been born again. I am a believer in Jesus Christ." then such a person will demonstrate a general change in the direction of their life, from a life that relishes in sin, to a life that seeks to live for and please God. Can a believer fall back into "old habits"? Absolutely! But they are miserable. Whereas before they largely enjoyed their sins, now when they sins they are under a deep sense of conviction by the Holy Spirit and may also experience the disciplining hand of the Lord (Heb 12:5, 6-note, He 12:7, 8, 9, 10-note, He 12:11-note) which in fact proves they are truly sons of God (note). Do not be deceived by the false teaching that you can "believe" in Jesus and then continue living in sin just as you did before you "believed". And don't be deceived by the corollary false teaching that says based on your "profession of belief" in Jesus, you can continue living in sin for the remainder of your life, die and wake up in heaven! Wrong! Such tragic souls will indeed wake up, but not in heaven! This is a lie with eternally disastrous consequences! And so Paul begins to address this genre of false teaching in Romans 6:1ff. As an aside, while I firmly believe the saying "Once saved, always saved", I think it can be very deceptive and misleading if the one being described as "saved" has never experienced the truth of 1Jn 3:9 or 2Co 5:17-note.

Another line of false reasoning an antinomian might bring up based on the doctrine of justification by faith alone apart from works is "If good works don't save, then evil works will not condemn either. Why worry about sin? Why try to live a godly life if works don't matter?"

Continue (1961) (epimeno from epí = upon, in or at + méno = abide, endure, continue, stay or remain > epí intensifies the meaning and so this word is a strengthened form of méno and gives the force of adherence to and persistence in what is referred to) means literally to tarry, to stay at or with, to abide in, to continue in.

The most common usage of epimeno in the NT is the literal picture of one abiding, remaining on, tarrying or staying at a place (Ac 10:48, 21:4, 10, 28:12, 14, 1Co 16:7, 8, Ga 1:18)

Figuratively epimeno means to persist in (Jn 8:7), to persevere or to continue in an activity (Ac 12:16) or state, such as in a state of sin in Romans 6:1, in the faith in Colossians 1:23 (note), in the work of teaching in 1Ti 4:16. In which of these are you "persisting", beloved?

Epimeno is the word that John used of the determined Jewish leaders who persisted in trying to induce Jesus to contradict the law of Moses

But when they persisted (epimeno) in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." (John 8:7).

Thus Vine writes that epimeno "indicates persistence in what is referred to" which in Ro 6:2 is sin!

Preacher's Outline and Sermon Bible says that...

The believer's position in Christ shows the utter impossibility of a true believer continuing in sin. The word "continue" means to practice or to habitually yield to sin. A true believer no longer practices sin and no longer yields to sin. He cannot live without sin, not totally, but he no longer lives in sin...Note another fact: when a man turns to God, he turns away from sin (1Th 1:9). It is a contradiction to say that when a man turns to God he turns to more and more sin.

Epimeno - 16x in 16v - John 8:7; Acts 10:48; 12:16; 21:4, 10; 28:12, 14; Ro 6:1; 11:22, 23; 1Cor 16:7, 8; Gal 1:18; Phil 1:24; Col 1:23; 1Tim 4:16. NAS = continue, 4; continued, 1; persevere, 1; persisted, 1; remain, 4; stay, 2; stayed, 3; staying, 1. There is one use of epimeno in the non-apocryphal Septuagint ( LXX) - Ex 12:39.

John 8:7 - see above

Acts 10:48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Acts 12:16 But Peter continued knocking; and when they had opened the door, they saw him and were amazed.

Acts 21:4 And after looking up the disciples, we stayed there seven days; and they kept telling Paul through the Spirit not to set foot in Jerusalem.

Acts 21:10 And as we were staying there for some days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.

Acts 28:12 And after we put in at Syracuse, we stayed there for three days.

Acts 28:14 There we found some brethren, and were invited to stay with them for seven days; and thus we came to Rome.

Romans 6:1 (note) What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace might increase?

Romans 11:22 (note) Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 11:23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again.

1 Corinthians 16:7 For I do not wish to see you now just in passing; for I hope to remain with you for some time, if the Lord permits. 8 But I shall remain in Ephesus until Pentecost;

Galatians 1:18 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.

Philippians 1:24 (note) yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake

Colossians 1:23 (note)  if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

1 Timothy 4:16 Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere (present imperative) in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you.

Epimeno was used to describe someone abiding in some one’s home as a guest with the idea of fellowship, cordial relations, dependence and social intercourse.

Luke uses epimeno with the literal meaning to describe the request of new converts to Peter asking "him to stay on (epimeno) for a few days." (Acts 10:48) and with the figurative meaning describing when Peter "continued (epimeno) knocking" (Acts 12:16) and of Paul and Barnabas' urging of the new converts "to continue (epimeno) in the grace of God" (Acts 13:43).

Paul uses epimeno twice in Romans 11 writing...

Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue (epimeno) in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue (epimeno) in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again. (see note Romans 11:22-23)

Epimeno  was sometimes used of a person’s purposely living in a certain place and of making it his permanent residence. How is it possible that a believer can take permanent residence in the house of sin? Wuest in fact paraphrases it this way... they "asked him to be their guest for certain days." It's as if Paul were asking can a true believer stay on as a house guest of  sin?

Furthermore, Paul's use of the present tense speaks of this abiding as continual. The idea is that the abiding under the rule and reign of Sin is habitual. Paul was not speaking of a believer’s occasional falling into sin, as every Christian does at times because of the weakness and imperfection of the fallen flesh. But he was speaking of intentional, willful sinning as an established pattern of life. He is saying that a genuine believer does  not continually live in habitual sin in the same way as they did when they were unsaved. If that is true of someone you know, they need to soberly read 2Cor 13:5.

S Lewis Johnson adds that Paul is not asking...

about whether one may lapse into sin, but as Shedd says, "he cannot contentedly ‘continue in sin,’ without any resistance of it and victory over it."  (Romans 6:1-14)

Phillips paraphrases it this way...

"Shall we sin to our heart's content and see how far we can exploit the grace of God?"

Or to phrase it another way...

Shall we habitually sustain the same relationship to the sinful nature that we sustained before we were saved, a relationship which was most cordial, a relationship in which we were fully yielded to and dependent upon that sinful nature, and all this as a habit of life?

Paul's question also has theological implications. Specifically, the question is whether there is any relationship between justification and sanctification? In other words, can a person really be saved (justified) and yet continue in the same pattern of sinfulness (lack sanctification)? Can there be a divine transaction that has no impact in the believer's life? The answer is note just of theoretical interest, but has eternal ramifications!

Paul had already once alluded to distortion of the doctrine of the gospel of grace asking

and why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say), “Let us do evil that good may come”? Their condemnation is just. (Romans 3:8-note)

This argument is apparently exactly what opponents were leveling against the gospel of the grace of God (What a great description of the "Gospel" = Acts 20:24), crying out

If you could be saved just by faith alone in Christ alone, then you could go out and live in sin.

Their argument was that the gospel of grace provided not only a license to sin, but outright encouragement to do so.

Jude addressed a similar issue warning his believing readers of the need to contend earnestly for the faith because

certain persons have crept in unnoticed (aorist tense, indicative mood = a historical reality, stealthily, literally get in by the side like gaining entrance secretly by a side door), those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly (asebes = destitute of reverential awe toward God) persons who turn (metatithemi in the present tense = continually transposing two things one of which is put in place of the other) the grace of our God into licentiousness (aselgeia = acknowledging no restraints, daring whatever their caprice and wanton petulance suggested) and (present tense = continually) deny (arneomai = disown, disclaim connection with) our only Master  (despotes = one who is the absolute owner and has uncontested power over another) and Lord, Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4)

A famous historical instance of such perversion of the gospel of grace is found in the notorious life of the Russian monk Grigori Rasputin, who dominated the ruling family of Russia, the Romanovs, and became a very influential favorite of Czar Nicholas II. Rasputin taught the perverted "gospel" that salvation came through repeated experiencing of sin and repentance. He argued that because those who sin more require more forgiveness, those who sin with abandon will as they repent experience greater joy. Therefore, he reasoned, it was the believer’s duty to sin. In other words Rasputin's doctrine seems to have been

"The more a person sins, the more grace he will receive. So sin with gusto.”

At times this type of thinking has been intellectualized, as in the last century in James Hogg’s "Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner". Today this thinking is very common among those who wish to justify their sexual lifestyles.

Robertson comments that

There are occasionally so-called pietists who actually think that God’s pardon gives them liberty to sin without penalty (cf. the sale of indulgences that stirred Martin Luther). (Robertson, A. Word Pictures in the New Testament)

The idea expressed in Paul's question is alluded to by the inveterate God hater Voltaire's presumptuous declaration that...

God will forgive; that is His ‘business.’

W. H. Auden (widely considered among the greatest literary figures of the 20th century - in his early 20's he lived in Berlin, where he took advantage of the sexually liberal atmosphere) voiced a similar sentiment writing

"I like committing crimes. God likes forgiving them. Really the world is admirably arranged."

Oh, how Rasputin, Voltaire and Auden needed to hear and heed the truth of Romans 6!

Michael Andrus writes that

You are not a Christian because you lead a Christian lifestyle. Rather you lead a Christian lifestyle because you are a Christian. There are tens of millions of religious people in this country of ours and countless millions in other lands, who are staking their eternity upon the notion that they are Christians because they try to lead a relatively Christian lifestyle. But if that were possible, why do you suppose the Apostle Paul, the greatest Christian theologian and missionary of all time, would have spent three chapters talking about justification before he ever got to the subject of how to live the Christian life? The simple truth is that you can imitate a Christian life, and you can fake a Christian life, but you cannot really live a Christian life until you are one. (from "A Call to Holy Living")

Ray Stedman writes...

I heard of a man in this congregation who admitted that he was a homosexual and was living as one. He claimed that he did not need to make any change in his life because, as a Christian, his sins are forgiven. (for full sermon click  Can we Go on Sinning?)

The great Puritan writer John Owens used to say a pastor has only 2 problems: persuading unbelievers they are under the dominion of sin persuading believers they are not under the dominion of sin! Go figure!

Hendriksen describes

Another and far more recent example from life: this man was an ardent evangelist. One of his favorite passages was taken from this very chapter of Romans, “You are not under law but under grace” (see note Romans 6:14). He spoke persuasively, drawing large crowds. However, his immediate neighbor never went to hear him. When someone asked that neighbor, “How is it that we never see you in his audience?” the answer was, “Because I happen to know that his back yard is filled with stolen property.” (Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. New Testament Commentary Set, 12 Volumes. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House)
 

Kenneth Wuest draws our attention to the little word SIN writing that

The first thing we must settle is regarding the word sin, is whether it refers (in context) to sin as an abstraction, namely, to acts of sin committed by the believer or to the totally depraved nature still in him? A rule of Greek syntax settles the question. The definite article (Ed note: Definite article equates with the Greek word for "the") appears before the word (Sin) in the Greek text. Here the article (the) points back to a previously mentioned sin defined in its context. The reference is to sin reigning as king (Ro 5:21-note). There sin is personified since it reigns as a king. But one cannot conceive of acts of sin reigning as king in the life of a person. They (individual acts of sin) are the result of some dominant factor reigning as a king. That can only be the evil nature still resident in the Christian. And here is the key to the interpretation of the entire chapter (Romans 6). Every time the word sin is used in this chapter as a noun, it refers to the evil nature in the Christian. Read the following verses and substitute the words sinful nature for the word sin, and see what a flood of light is thrown upon your understanding of this section of God’s Word (Ro 6:1, 2, 6, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23). (Bolding and color added) (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans)

Related Resources:

More Discussion on "The Sin"
See list of all uses of hamartia in Ro 5-8

Another way of looking at this issue is to note that in this verse sin is singular (in contrast to plural sins as in Ro 3:25-note, Ro 4:7-note, Ro 11:27-note - the only 3 uses of "sins" plural in Romans) and does not refer to the ongoing death of specific sins which is part of our spiritual growth or sanctification. Rather the term sin in this verse refers to sin as a controlling power and as an enslaving tyrant, who prior to our salvation held "full sway" over our moral/ethical decisions!  Paul's point is that believers have died in relation to the power sin was had over us as believers. And remember, it does not make one whit of difference whether or not you "feel" like this is true in your life. Paul's point is that if you are genuinely regenerate by the Spirit, you have been set free from the ruling power of the old tyrant Sin. He does not say you will never commit individuals sins again, for all believers still have the unredeemed (and unredeemable!) fallen flesh nature that seeks to coerce us to miss God's mark (sin) or sidestep His perfect path (transgression, trespass). At the time of Justification believers are set free once and for all from the ruling power of sin, but now in sanctification we must daily, moment by moment fight the battle with our residual, dethroned enemy and we now can do so infused by and controlled by God's Spirit (cp Ro 8:13-note).

J H Jowett has a strong warning for those who would trifle with sin writing that...

Sin is a blasting presence, and every fine power shrinks and withers in the destructive heat. Every spiritual delicacy succumbs to its malignant touch...Sin impairs the sight, and works toward blindness. Sin benumbs the hearing and tends to make men deaf. Sin perverts the taste, causing men to confound the sweet with the bitter, and the bitter with the sweet. Sin hardens the touch, and eventually renders a man "past feeling." All these are Scriptural analogies, and their common significance appears to be this--sin blocks and chokes the fine senses of the spirit; by sin we are desensitized, rendered imperceptive, and the range of our correspondence is diminished. Sin creates callosity. It hoofs the spirit, and so reduces the area of our exposure to pain. (from The Grace Awakening)

THAT GRACE MIGHT INCREASE: hina hê charis pleonasêi (3SAAS): (Torrey's Topic Grace)

That (2443) (hina) means so that, for the purpose of and as in this sentence is usually connected with a verb in the subjunctive mood.

ANTI-NOMIANISM

Who would even ask such a question? Answer? An anti-nomian (anti = against, instead of + nomos = law) is literally one who is against the law, one who advocates "spiritual lawlessness", one who wants to live their life without any encumbering rules whatsoever, one who wants to do as they please. A good "working definition" is found in the OT, in the days of the Judges 21:25-note. Judges is a book which encompasses about 25% of all of Israel's OT history! Have you ever read it? If not, you need to! And as you do, think of "America the Beautiful" and the leaven of lawlessness beginning to spread and defile our beloved land! Revive us O LORD, according to Thy Word (Ps 119:25-note)! Now back to anti-nomianism, the belief that "As long as I believe in Jesus, I have a "fire insurance policy" and I am now free to live any way I want." Can you see the paradox? Out of one side of his mouth, this person says, "Sure I love Jesus" but out of the other side of his mouth "I sure love sin!" -- a bad case of "spiritual schizophrenia"! A veritable spiritual "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde!" "I love Jesus' teachings, but I don't care to follow them!" You get the idea. And you can see how this genre of individual might espouse the fallacious doctrine of more sinning = more grace! In a word Paul says "Wrong!"

Grace (5485)  (charis) is God's unmerited favor (Click for more detailed discussion of amazing grace or charis) Grace is God’s generous favor to undeserving sinners and needy saints. When we depend on God’s grace, we can endure suffering and turn trials into triumphs. It is grace alone that saves us (Ep 2:8, 9, 10-see notes Ep 2:8; 9; 10). Saving grace is God's provision for the believer's sinful past and enabling grace His portion for daily Christian living. The result of receiving God's grace is peace with God or the state of well being that flows from the experience of the sinful creature being reconciled and forgiven.

As Hampton Keathley says

Grace is not license to do as we please, but provides us the power to do as we should. God’s grace insures that those who have been regenerated will persevere until the end of life. This entire work is called sanctification, a work of God “whereby we are renewed in the whole man and are enabled more and more to die daily unto sin and to live unto righteousness” as stated by the Westminster Shorter Catechism (Ro 12:2 note; Ep 4:23-note; Col 3:10-note; 2Cor 4:16).

Wuest characterizes grace as follows:

Might increase (4121) (pleonazo from pleion, comparative of polús = many, much) means to abound, to increase considerably the extent of an activity or state, with the implication of the result being an abundance...in this case that grace might be in abundance or surplus. The question is doesn't increasing in sin, set free a superfluity of grace somewhat like putting more money in circulation?

Pleonazo is aorist tense, active voice, subjunctive mood, the subjunctive with the conjunction hina expressing the purpose of continuing in sin (to increase grace-but as Paul explains this is faulty logic!)

Pleonazo - 9x in 8v - Ro 5:20; 6:1; 2Co. 4:15; 8:15; Phil. 4:17; 1Th. 3:12; 2Th. 1:3; 2Pe 1:8. NAS = cause to increase (1), grows greater(1), have too much(1), increase(2), increased(1),increases(1), increasing(1), spreading(1).

William Newell writes that...

The message of simple grace, apart from all works, to the poor natural heart of man seems wholly inconsistent and impossible. "Why!" people say, "If where sin abounds grace overflows, then the more sin, the more grace." So the unbeliever rejects the grace plan. Moreover, the uninstructed Christian also is afraid; for he says, "If we are in a reign of pure grace, what will control our conscious evil tendencies? We fear such utter freedom. Put us under 'rules for holy living, 'and we can get along." Another sad fact is that some professing Christians welcome the "abounding grace" doctrine because of the liberty they feel it gives to things in their daily lives which they know, or could know, to be wrong." (Romans 6)

John Piper writes that Paul...

plays his own worst adversary in Ro 6:1. He has just said in Ro 5:20, "Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more." Now he asks, "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?" Here is the great objection to justification by grace through faith apart from works of the law. It seems to open the door to rampant sinning. In fact, it seems to invite more sinning because if grace is God's act to forgive and accept sinners on the basis of Christ's righteousness, not ours, then would not that grace shine all the brighter if we kept on sinning? The more sin there is, the more forgiveness there is. And the more sinning there is, the greater must be the righteousness of Christ to compensate for it. So doesn't Paul's radical teaching on justification open the door to careless living and indifference to holiness?" (For full sermon click Are We to Continue in Sin That Grace Might Increase?)

John MacArthur adds that...

Before salvation, sin cannot be anything but the established way of life, because sin at best taints everything the unredeemed person does. But the believer has no excuse to continue habitually in sin. Can he then possibly live in the same submissive relationship to sin that he had before salvation? Put in theological terms, can justification truly exist apart from sanctification? Can a person receive a new life and continue in his old way of living? Does the divine transaction of redemption have no continuing and sustaining power in those who are redeemed? Put still another way, can a person who persists in living as a child of Satan have been truly born again as a child of God? Many say yes. Paul says no, as verse 2 emphatically states." (MacArthur, J: Romans 1-8. Chicago: Moody Press)

Michael Andrus in his sermon on Romans 6 illustrates the heretical teaching of sinning more in order to receive more grace by quoting the following newspaper editorial by George Neavoll who wrote

"I am a great advocate of sin. When I explained this admittedly rather unorthodox position to several fellow parishioners at our church's coffee hour the other Sunday, they appeared...well, stricken. When I expounded on the subject in one of our editorial board meetings last week, I could tell my colleagues were thinking, "Poor fellow. He's finally slipped over the edge." But after I was able to explain myself, my companions good-humoredly admitted maybe I had something--which is just enough encouragement for me to lay out the great Theory of Relative Sin before the Eagle-Beacon's 176,000 subscribers this morning. If the idea catches on, I might even form a group to promote my theory. We could call it the Immoral Minority, Inc. It would be devoted to the popularization, the enhancement, and the steadfast defense of sin--just good old, homegrown American sin...It is only when one sins that one knows the forgiveness of the Lord. Unless one is forgiven, one cannot forgive--and where would the world be if that were the case?"

Such is the genre of false theology that Paul is teaching against.

Bishop Moule writes a thought provoking introduction to Paul's teaching on sanctification in Romans 6-8 and while some of his words are a bit ponderous, the thoughtful, patient reader will benefit from Moule's analysis...

This undesigned witness to the meaning of the Pauline doctrine of Justification by Faith only will appear still more strongly when we come to the Apostle’s answer to his questioners. He meets them not at all by modifications of his assertions (Ed note: "assertions" he has already made concerning justification by faith only apart from works). He has not a word to say about additional and corrective conditions precedent to our peace with God (Ed note: the result of justification by faith as noted in Ro 5:1). He makes no impossible hint that Justification means the making of us good, or that Faith is a “short title” for Christian practice. No; there is no reason for such assertions either in the nature of words, or in the whole cast of the argument through which he has led us. What does he do? He takes this great truth of our acceptance in Christ our Merit, and puts it unreserved, unrelieved, unspoiled, in contact with other truth, of coordinate, nay, of superior greatness, for it is the truth to which Justification leads us, as way to end (Ed note: the truth of sanctification expounded in Ro 6-8). He places our acceptance through Christ Atoning in organic connection with our life in Christ Risen. He indicates, as a truth evident to the conscience, that as the thought of our share in the Lord’s Merit is inseparable from union with the meriting Person, so the thought of this union is inseparable from that of a spiritual harmony, a common life, in which the accepted sinner finds both a direction and a power in his Head.

Justification has indeed set him free from the condemning chain of sin, from guilt. He is as if he had died the Death of sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction; as if he had passed through the Lama Sabachthani, (cf Mt 27:46, Mk 15:34) and had “poured out his soul” for sin (cf Isa 53:12, KJV). So he is “dead to sin,” (Ro 6:2, KJV) in the sense in which his Lord and Representative “died to” it (Ro 6:10); the atoning death has killed sin’s claim on him for judgment. As having so died, in Christ, he is “justified from sin.” But then, because he thus died “in Christ,” he is “in Christ” still, in respect also of resurrection (Ro 6:5). He is justified, not that he may go away, but that in His Justifier he may live, with the powers of that holy and eternal life with which the Justifier rose again.

The two truths (Ed note: Justification and Sanctification) are concentrated as it were into one, by their equal relation to the same Person, the Lord. The previous argument has made us intensely conscious that Justification, while a definite transaction in law, is not a mere transaction; it lives and glows with the truth of connection with a Person. That Person is the Bearer for us of all Merit. But He is also, and equally, the Bearer for us of new Life; in which the sharers of His Merit share, for they are in Him. So that, while the Way of Justification can be isolated for study, as it has been in this Epistle, the justified man cannot be isolated from Christ, Who is his life. And thus he can never ultimately be considered apart from his possession in Christ, of a new possibility, a new power, a new and glorious call to living holiness (Ed note: or daily sanctification).

In the simplest and most practical terms the Apostle sets it before us that our justification is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. We are accepted that we may be possessed, and possessed after the manner not of a mechanical “article,” but of an organic limb. We have “received the reconciliation” that we may now walk, not away from God, as if released from a prison, but with God, as His children in His Son. Because we are justified, we are to be holy, separated from sin, separated to God; not as a mere indication that our faith is real, and that therefore we are legally safe, but because we were justified for this very purpose, that we might be holy.

To return to a simile we have employed already, the grapes upon a vine are not merely a living token that the tree is a vine, and is alive; they are the product for which the vine exists. It is a thing not to be thought of that the sinner should accept justification — and live to himself. It is a moral contradiction of the very deepest kind, and cannot be entertained without betraying an initial error in the man’s whole spiritual creed.

And further, there is not only this profound connection of purpose between acceptance and holiness. There is a connection of endowment and capacity. Justification has done for the justified a twofold work, both limbs of which are all important for the man who asks, How can I walk and please God?

First, it has, decisively broken the claim of sin upon him as guilt. He stands clear of that exhausting and enfeebling load. The pilgrim’s burden has fallen from his back, at the foot of the Lord’s Cross, into the Lord’s Grave. He has peace with God, not in emotion, but in covenant, through our Lord Jesus Christ. He has an unreserved “introduction” into a Father’s loving and welcoming presence, every day and hour, in the Merit of his Head (cf Romans 5:1-2).

(Ed note: Second) But then also Justification has been to him as it were the signal of his union with Christ in new life; this we have noted already. Not only therefore does it give him, as indeed it does, an eternal occasion for a gratitude which, as he feels it, “makes duty joy, and labour rest.” It gives him “a new power” with which to live the grateful life; a power residing not in Justification itself, but in what it opens up.

It is the gate through which he passes to the fountain, the roof which shields him as he drinks. The fountain is his justifying Lord’s exalted Life, His risen Life, poured into the man’s being by the Spirit who makes Head and member one. And it is as justified that he has access to the fountain, and drinks as deep as he will of its life, its power, its purity. In the contemporary passage, 1Corinthians 6:17, St. Paul had already written (in a connection unspeakably practical), “He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” It is a sentence which might stand as a heading to the passage we now come to render. (The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans)

Moule's beautiful analysis begs the question...

John Murray comments  that in this passage Paul...

states the reason why the question should be answered with such decisive and emphatic negation. The reason is not in the form of elaborate argument but in the form of a question to show the inherent contradiction, indeed absurdity, of the supposed inference. "We who died to sin, how shall we still live in it?"...If we died to sin how can we any longer live in it?

Death and life cannot coexist;
we cannot be dead and living
with respect to the same thing at the same time....

It needs to be stressed at the outset in the exposition of this chapter that the fact of having died to sin is the fundamental premise of the apostle's thought. This is the identity of the believer—he died to sin.  (The Epistle to the Romans– Volume I)

May it never be (15x in NAS = Luke 20:16; Ro 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11; 1 Cor 6:15; Gal 2:17; 3:21; 6:14) - Certainly not! (Amplified), By no means! (NIV), Far be the thought (Darby), Impossible!, Absurd!, Nonsense! God forbid that we should ever begin to think like that (Pritchard), What a ghastly thought! (Phillips), Perish the thought! (MacArthur)

This is Paul’s usual way of rejecting an idea indignantly. The King James Version is not literally correctly but certainly gets Paul's point across "God forbid!" (Ro 6:2KJV).

May it never be (me genoito) is aorist tense, middle voice, optative mood, the optative usually expressing a wish and in many NT uses is actually a prayer. The literal Greek reads “May it not become". Paul dismisses the thought of more sins bringing more grace as unthinkable.

Me genoito is the strongest Greek idiom to indicate repudiation (refusal to accept and implies a casting off or disowning as untrue, unauthorized, or unworthy of acceptance) and even conveys the idea of outraged indignation. One could translate somewhat prayerfully as “may such a thing never occur”.

Me genoito expresses...

the revolting character of the rejected assertion, as well as a conviction of its falsehood. (F. Godet - Romans Commentary)

For a Christian to continue in sin, because his sins are forgiven and because grace will abound, is an abominable thought to Paul and it should also be so to all who by grace through faith in Christ are true saints or holy ones.

Why is this point so important to repudiate? In short, justification was not intended as a license to sin, but as liberation from sin. Salvation is God’s provision not only to be declared righteous (justified) but to live righteously (sanctified or growing in holiness). Christian conduct must be consistent with Christian conversion. Do not be deceived. If there is absolutely no change in your moral/ethical life after you ostensibly received Christ as Savior, then you have cause to be in serious doubt as to whether you ever truly received Christ by grace through faith. Faith alone saves but the faith that saves is never alone (see James' "dissertation" on dead versus living faith in Verse by verse notes beginning in James 2:14). (Ponder 2Co 13:5)

As C H Spurgeon aptly put it,

An unchanged life is the mark of an unchanged heart, and an unchanged heart is a sign of an unregenerate life.

If there is no change in your attitudes, in your outlook, etc, etc, then there is a very serious doubt as to whether you ever became a Christian at all! Salvation is not just a "fire insurance" policy to keep us out of hell, but is a personal relationship in which a Person comes to live within us (Col 1:27-note; Ro 8:9-note) and bring heaven into our heart, so that we daily live more and more for the latter and not the former!

I plead with you to not be deceived
and in error on this crucial doctrine.

John MacArthur states the point forcefully writing that

Paul is saying that death and life are incompatible. It is impossible to be dead and alive at the same time. So a Christian can't be living in sin when he has died to it. All who come to Christ make a break with sin, a definite act that took place in the past at the moment of salvation. If someone abides in a state of sin, he is not a believer. The apostle John said, "No one who is born of God practices sin, because he is born of God" (1Jn 3:9). The person who remains in a constant state of sinfulness gives evidence that he has never left his unregenerate state." (from Dying to Live--Part 1)

Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse, commenting on this verse, wrote,

Holiness starts where justification finishes; and if holiness does not start, we have the right to suspect that justification has never started (Romans, vol. 3: Eerdmans, 1961).

Hendriksen comments that

The very suggestion that the end justifies the means, that grace may be produced by living in sin, is so thoroughly obnoxious to Paul that he answers it by making use of one of his characteristic, blunt rejection formulas, “By no means.” (Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. New Testament Commentary Set, 12 Volumes. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House)

Hendriksen goes on to add that

For a Christian, continuing to live in sin is not only impermissible, it is impossible!... (Paul) reminds his readers that something decisive has taken place in his and in their lives. By the grace of God they had died to sin; that is, they had renounced allegiance to their sinful selves and to all the allurements and enticements of this sinful world. (ibid)

Paul answers by showing that it is impossible for a believer to continue in sin, since God’s grace makes provision for an inward change in the believer the moment he receives the Lord Jesus as Saviour, a change in which the power of indwelling sin is broken and the divine nature implanted. This results in the liberation of that person from the compelling power of the Adamic nature, and his acquisition of the desire and power to live a holy life. This, Paul argues, makes impossible a life of sin.

Godet adds that

Just as a dead man does not revive and resume his former occupations, as little can the believer return to his old life of sin; for in his case also there has been a death. (F. Godet - Romans Commentary)

D. Edmond Hiebert explains that there is an important relationship between Biblical truth and one's conduct writing that

There is an intimate connection between truth and godliness. A vital possession of truth is inconsistent with irreverence...real truth never deviates from the path of piety. A profession of the truth which allows an individual to live in ungodliness is a spurious profession.

J. Vernon McGee adds a chilling note writing that...

If one out of ten responding to my invitation to receive Christ is genuine, I feel that my batting average is good. Other Christian workers tell me the same story. A member of the team of a very prominent evangelist has told me that only 3% of their inquirers can be considered genuine converts. So you see, our batting average is not too good, but we thank God for each person who does come to Christ. (McGee, J V: Thru the Bible Commentary:  Nashville: Thomas Nelson)

Ray Stedman says what if

someone asks, "What if a Christian does go on sinning, living in sin, claiming forgiveness, but goes on without any change in his life whatever?" What about that? There are people who are doing that. The answer, in light of this Scripture is very simple: These people simply are revealing that they never truly have been justified by faith; they are not Christians. Let's put it as bluntly as the apostle himself put it. They are deceiving themselves and deceiving others. Though they may do so with good intent, and with utter sincerity as far as they know -- nevertheless the case is clear. It is impossible for your lifestyle to continue unchanged when you become a Christian. It is simply impossible, because a change has occurred deep in the human spirit. And those who protest, and say they can go on living this way, are simply revealing that there has been no change in their spirit, there has been no break with Adam. (Can we Go on Sinning?)

Kent Hughes writes that the

argument that we should continue in sin because we are under grace is absolutely fallacious! The reverse is true. It is impossible to continue living unchanged when you become a Christian. In fact, I will put it even stronger: those who argue that grace allows a buffer for sin—that their sin will ultimately glorify God anyway—are revealing they are not under grace! They are not Christians, no matter how much they argue otherwise. When we have experienced solidarity with Christ, our lifestyle is affected, just as it was by our solidarity with Adam. If one’s life has not changed and if there is no impulse for further change toward Christ, he or she is very probably not a Christian. (Hughes, R. K. Romans: Righteousness from heaven. Preaching the Word. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books)

Wuest comments that

We are occupied in Romans 6, not with the question of what kind of a life the child of God should live, a subject which he presents in chapters 12–16, but with the question of how or by what method the believer is to live that life. The reason why so many children of God who are earnestly trying to live a Christian life which would glorify the Lord Jesus, fail in that endeavor, is because they do not understand the truth of this chapter. (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans)

If you were to view sin as a realm or sphere ("in sin" ~ "in the sphere of sin"), Paul is saying that the believer no longer lives in sphere of sin, continually enslaved to its power. That's not the "atmosphere" a believer "breathes" so to speak. Paul is not saying that Christians never sin. His argument is that since believers have died to sin, they no longer live in that "spiritual" dimension. Salvation is not just a forensic transaction (justification) but salvation sets into action the process of transforming the believer into Christ-likeness (sanctification).

Elsewhere Paul declared that

if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature (in quality); the old things (antiquated, out-of-date things which do not belong to the new life in Christ Jesus) passed away (aorist tense = definite change took place in past at time of regeneration - this same verb describes the passing away of heaven and earth at the final conflagration); behold (as if contemplating a rapidly shifting scene. As in a flash, old things vanish, and all things become new), new things have come (perfect tense = dramatizes the abiding nature of the change introduced by regeneration)." (2Cor 5:17)

MacDonald commenting on (2Cor 5:17) notes that this verse

is a favorite with those who have recently been born again and is often quoted in personal testimonies. Sometimes in being thus quoted, it gives quite a false impression. Listeners are apt to think that when a man is saved, old habits, evil thoughts, and lustful looks are forever done away, and everything becomes literally new in a person’s life. We know that this is not true. The verse does not describe a believer’s practice but rather his position (i.e., justification). Notice it says that if anyone is in Christ. The words in Christ are the key to the passage. In Christ, old things have passed away and all things have become new. Unfortunately, “in me” not all this is true as yet! But as I progress in the Christian life (i.e., sanctification), I desire that my practice may increasingly correspond to my position. One day, when the Lord Jesus returns, the two will be in perfect agreement (i.e., glorification)." (MacDonald, W., & Farstad, A. Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. Nashville: Thomas Nelson)

HOW SHALL WE WHO DIED (with respect) TO (the) SIN: hoitines apethanomen (1PAAI) te hamartia: (Died to sin: Ro 6:11; 5:11; 7:4; Gal 2:19; 6:14; Col 3:3; 1Pe 2:24) (Torrey on Dead, The; Sin)

DIED
DEATH
CRUCIFIED
 (Key Words in Ro 6 - click)

Died to sin - "Freed both from the guilt and from the power of it." (Wesley)

A life characterized by the unabated, unabashed (being at full strength and force), unaltered practice of sin by a Christian is ruled out by the radical transforming nature of salvation.

Newell renders this passage "Such ones as we, who died to sin! How shall we any longer be living in it?" and then explains...

Here we have, such ones as we (hoitines). This is more than a relative pronoun: it is a pronoun of characterization, “placing those referred to in a class” (Lightfoot). Paul thus has before his mind all Christians, and he places this pronoun at the very beginning: “such ones as we!”

He characterizes all Christians as those who died. The translation, “are dead” is wrong, for the tense of the Greek verb is the aorist, which denotes not a state but a past act or fact. It never refers to an action as going on or prolonged. As Winer says, “The aorist states a fact as something having taken place.” Note how strikingly and repeatedly this tense is used in this chapter as referring to the death of which the apostle speaks (Ro 6:2 "died to sin" = aorist tense; Ro 6:6 "crucified with Him" = aorist tense; Ro 6:7 "has died" = aorist tense; Ro 6:8 "have died" = aorist tense; Ro 6:10 "died" {2x} = aorist tense): Mark most particularly that the apostle in Ro 6:2 does not call upon Christians to die to sin but asserts that they shared Christ’s death, they died to sin!

Paul here therefore affirms that it was in regard to their relationship to sin that believers died. He is asserting concerning Christians that they died—not for sin, but unto it.

Paul now asks the question:

“How shall those whose relationship to sin has been broken by their dying, be still, as once, living in sin?”

The answer to this can only be, It is an impossibility. In this second verse, therefore, the apostle is not making a plea to Christians not to live unto sin; but asking how they who died to sin could go on living in it. It is as if one would say, Those who died in New York City, shall they still be walking the streets of New York City?

This does not mean that all Christians have discovered, or walk in, the path of victory over sin; for in this second verse Paul is answering directly the bald bold insinuation of Ro 6:1—that grace abounding over sin warrants and enables one believing that doctrine to go right on in his old life! We know from other Scriptures the impossibility of this (see 1Jn 3:9)

Newell goes on to add that this truth that the believer has to sin's power can be confusing because of the fact that even thought we are believers and are dead to the power of sin, we still

struggle with sin and that (struggle) within (us) is one of the most constant conscious experiences of the believer. But, as we see elsewhere, we must not confound our relationship to sin with its presence! (Ed: Our mortal enemy Sin {Remember Sin in Romans 5-8 is pictured as a cruel tyrant who desires to rule our mortal/physical bodies} is ever prowling around looking for an opportunity to pounce! The difference for the believer is that we now have a new relationship to this old foe!)

Distinguish this revealed fact that we died, from our experience of deliverance. For we do not die to sin by our experiences: we did die to sin (when we first placed our faith) in Christ's death. For the fact that we died to sin is a Divinely revealed word concerning us, and we cannot deny it! The presence of sin "in our members" will make this fact that we died to it hard to grasp and hold: but God says it. And He will duly explain all to our faith." (Ed: This is another reason the reader who desires to live the wonderful life of Victory in Jesus should strive to diligently study Romans 5 and Romans 6-8 as a "unit") (Bolding added) (Romans 6)

In Galatians Paul wrote...

For through the Law I died (aorist tense = past completed, fully accomplished, historical act) to the Law (because Christ paid the penalty for sin that the law demanded - when He died, I died with Him), that I might live to God. (Gal 2:19)

Paul exulted in his spiritual but still very real death writing...

But may it never be that I should boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified (perfect tense = past completed act at a point in time with effect continuing into present = speaks of permanence)  to me, and I to the world. (Gal 6:14-note)

Paul repeatedly emphasized to the churches the truth that the believer has died a spiritual death...

For you have died (aorist tense = past completed, fully accomplished, historical act)  and your life is hidden (perfect tense = past completed act at a point in time with effect continuing into present = speaks of permanence) with (sun/syn = pictures an intimate, irreversible union with) Christ in God. (Col 3:3-note, cf Col 2:20-note) = where "died" = aorist tense and "with" = sun/syn!)

How shall we...still live in sin? - How (pós) leaves no room for the possibility of the continued habit of sin in the Christian, for the Greek word pós means “how is it possible?” In fact according to some lexicons when pós  is used in rhetorical questions the idea is that of rejecting an assumption. In other words "how could one? it is impossible that..."

We or such ones as we (hoítines plural of  hóstis) is a pronoun which places those referred to in a class (see Newell's related note above), thus serving to render the ones referred to as general. In other words, Paul has before his mind all Christians, and he places this pronoun at the very beginning "such ones as we!" for emphasis.

The idea is...

"How is it possible for such as we are, (classified as we are as) born-again children of God, to do such a thing. It is against our nature to habitually yield to the evil nature. We are not persons of such a nature as to do so."

Godet explains "we" noting that

The pronoun hoítines is the relative of quality: people such as we. We have a quality which excludes such a calculation: that of beings who have passed through death. (F. Godet - Romans Commentary)

Adam Clarke notes that stating that one is dead to something was

common among Hebrews, Greeks, and Latins. To die to a thing or person, is to have nothing to do with it or him; to be totally separated from them: and to live to a thing or person is to be wholly given up to them; to have the most intimate connection with them." He goes on to quote Plautus who records (Latin = "Nihil mecum tibi, mortuus tibi sum") "I have nothing to do with thee; I am dead to thee."

Clarke also quotes Persa who says

Thou wast dead to me because I visited thee not.

Died (599) (apothnesko [word study] from apó = an intensifier and thnesko = to die) means literally, to die off, but stronger than thnesko.  Although the NT uses it to refer to natural death, Paul uses it here to refer to believers who are justified by faith in Christ and thus who actually died to the power of sin.

Notice the use of the aorist tense which pictures finality, a once for all, past tense, historical event that in context equates with the moment each of us placed our faith in Christ.  We can translate it "we died once and for all".

Note that Paul does not call upon Christians to die to sin (We died-not for sin, but to sin) but explains that by sharing in Christ's death, they have in fact already died to sin! That is a fact, not an experience. Feelings have nothing to do with it. From God's point of view, He sees the believer as dead, buried and raised (as discussed in the following verses) with the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore united with Him so tightly that you can never be separated. This intimate identification with Christ is the basic truth of Romans 6:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

Ryrie calls our attention to the fact that the major effect of death is

is separation, not extinction: (1) physical death is the separation of body from spirit (James 2:26); (2) spiritual death is the separation of a person from God (Ep. 2:1-note); (3) the second death is eternal separation from God (Rev 20:14-note); (4) death to sin is separation from the ruling power of sin in one's own life (Ro 6:14-note). (The Ryrie Study Bible: New American Standard Translation: 1995. Moody Publishers or Wordsearch)

Pritchard emphasizes that died

is not a present tense—"We are dying to sin"—or a future tense—"We will die to sin"—or an imperative—"Die to sin!" Nor is it an exhortation—"You should die to sin." This is a simple past tense—

"You died to sin."

The simple truth is that if you are a believer, you have already died to sin. It's a past event, an accomplished fact. What is a Christian? Someone who has died to sin." (Free At Last) (Bolding added)

Everett F Harrison observes that...

At this point Paul does not explain when or how we died to sin, being content to state the fact and its obvious implication, that to go on sinning is logically impossible. What he does present here is not the impossibility of committing a single sin, but the impossibility of continuing in a life dominated by sin. Death to sin is not something hoped for or resolved upon by the believer; it is something that has already taken place. It is a simple fact basic to the living of the Christian life.

Moule has an interesting note on we who died to sin...

More literally and fully, we, as those who died to sin. The reference is again to a single past act; the death of the Second Adam, at which His brethren too, regarded as "in Him," "died to sin." See last note on Ro 6:12.

dead to sin See verse 10 note: "He died to sin, once and for ever." (Ro 6:10) It appears then that our "death to sin" (in Christ) must be explained by what His death to it was. And His was a death such as to free Him not from its impulses (for He was essentially free from them) but from its claim, its penalty, endured for us by Him. His death once over, the claim of sin was cancelled1. Therefore, for those who "died in Him," it was cancelled likewise. The phrase thus has, in the strict sense of it, not a moral but a legal reference. But the transition to a moral reference is inevitable when the Redeemer's Death is seen to be the act which exhausted the claim: in that death we see not only the strength of the claim, but the malignity of the claimant. (The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Romans)

In Ephesians 2:1 (note) Paul reminds us that in Adam we were all "dead IN" our sins. Here in Romans 6 Paul reminds us that in Christ we are "dead TO" sin (the power of sin). What a difference the change of prepositions from "in" to "to" makes!

While believers are dead to sin, unfortunately sin is not dead to the Christian. Before we were saved, we chased after sin. Now that we are saved, sin chases after us!

NLT Study Bible...

Just as dying means entrance into an entirely new state of being, our relationship with sin is now different because of Christ's death. To be "dead to sin" does not mean to be entirely insensitive to sin and temptation—believers are still involved in a battle with sin (Ro 6:12, 13, 14). However, Christians no longer have to live as helpless slaves to sin; they can choose not to sin (Ro 6:6,14, Ro 6:16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22).

New Bible Commentary...

To be 'dead to sin', thus, does not mean to be insensible to its enticements, for Paul makes clear that sin remains for the Christian an attraction to be battled with every day (see Ro 6:13-note). Rather it means to be delivered from the absolute tyranny of sin, from the state in which sin holds unchallenged sway, the state in which we all lived before conversion (Ro 3:9-note). As a result of this death to sin, we can no longer live in it (Ro 6:2b)—for habitual sinning reveals sin's tyranny, a tyranny from which the believer has been freed. (New Bible Commentary: 21st century edition) (Bolding added)

Barnes remarks that

"To be dead to a thing is a strong expression denoting that it has no influence over us. A man that is dead is uninfluenced and unaffected by the affairs of this life. He is insensible to sounds, and tastes, and pleasures; to the hum of business, to the voice of friendship, and to all the scenes of commerce, gaiety, and ambition. When it is said, therefore, that a Christian is dead to sin, the sense is, that it has lost its influence ever him; he is not subject to it; he is in regard to that, as the man in the grave is to the busy scenes and cares of this life...All Christians are thus in fact dead to sin. They do not live to sin; nor has sin dominion over them. The expression used here by the apostle is common in all languages. We familiarly speak of a man’s being dead to sensual pleasures, to ambition, etc., to denote that they have lost their influence over him." (Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible)

Death in this verse refers to the separation of the believer from the power of the sinful nature (sin). Before salvation, we were compelled to obey sin's authoritative orders and urgent promptings. Since salvation, sin's power over the believer is broken. Note that Paul is not teaching so-called “eradication of the sinful nature,” (cf 1Jn 1:8, Ec 7:20, even righteous Daniel - compare Ezek 14:20 with Da 9:20) namely, that that nature is taken away completely for Scripture clearly teaches that this nature remains in the believer until we die. (See related discussion on the flesh)

Pritchard illustrates the great truth of died to sin by asking us to

Picture an ancient slave market. If you are a slave, you must obey your master's every word. He speaks, you obey. You are "alive" to his voice because he is your master. But suppose you are sold at an auction to a new master. From the moment of the sale, your old master no longer has any legal right to command you. He can speak but you no longer have to obey. He can command but you don't have to respond. You have "died" to his authority and "come alive" to a new master. Can you still obey the old master? Yes, but you don't have to because he has no power over you unless you choose to give him power. It doesn't make sense to obey your old master when you have a new master. That's the whole argument of Romans 6 in a nutshell. You "died" to your old slave master (sin) and have "come alive" to a new master (Jesus Christ). So why serve sin voluntarily when you don't have to? Why not serve Jesus Christ?" (Free At Last)

Mounce emphasizes that

Death separates. Death to sin removes the believer from the control of sin". Mounce goes on to qualify his comment noting that "Sin continues in force in its attempt to dominate the life and conduct of the believer. But the believer has been baptized into Christ, and that means to have been baptized into Christ’s death as well. Christ’s death for sin becomes our death to sin. Sin lies on the other side of the grave for those who have in Christ died to it. "What Paul was endeavoring to show was that “a real Christian cannot live in sin and that if he lives in sin he proves himself to be a non-Christian even though he is baptized."(Mounce, R. H. Romans: The New American Commentary. Broadman & Holman Publishers)

Vine notes that

There is special stress on the pronoun We, and indeed on the whole clause, which gives a description characteristic of believers, and intimates at once the preposterousness of continuing in sin. The reference is to a definite occasion in our past, namely, when through faith in Christ we passed from death unto life (Jn 5:24, 1Jn 3:14). Death to sin liberates for a new life (Ro 6:4-note, Ro 8:4-note), involves separation from, and discontinuance of relation to, sin. As material objects do not affect the dead physical body, so spiritually a believer is to consider himself as having entered into a corresponding spiritual state with regard to sin. (Vine, W. Collected writings of W. E. Vine. Nashville: Thomas Nelson )

Wuest provides a more detailed explanation of our death to sin asking...

How is it possible for us, such persons as we are, who have been separated once for all from the sinful nature (Ed note: Sin in Ro 6 is personified as the sinful nature which has a ruling power and a realm), any longer to live in its grip?" Death means separation. Physical death is the separation of a person from his body, spiritual death, the separation of the person from God. There is a preposition prefixed to the verb (apo in apothnesko) which means “off, away from,” and is used with the ablative case whose root meaning is separation. This teaches us that there was a cleavage consummated between the individual and his evil nature. God used His surgical knife to cut the believing sinner loose from his evil nature. This occurred potentially in the mind and purpose of God when that believing sinner, elected to salvation before the universe was created, was identified with the Lord Jesus in His death on the Cross (Ro 6:3, 4, 5, 6, 7), and actually, the moment he placed his faith in Him as Savior.

Now, while God separated the believing sinner from the evil nature, yet He did not take it (the evil nature) out of him, but left it in his inner being. John in his first letter (1Jn 1:8) is most careful to tell us that this evil nature remains in the Christian throughout his earthly life and is not eradicated until that Christian dies or is glorified. Let us therefore hold to this, that while there is a definite cleavage between the believer and the sinful nature, yet that nature remains in him until he dies or is glorified.

The tense of the verb (apothnesko) is aorist, which speaks of a once for all act. God has wrought a cleavage or separation between the believer and the sinful nature which is a permanent one, a once for all disengagement of the person from the evil nature. This surgical operation is never repeated. So far as God is concerned, He has so thoroughly done His work that that separation could be permanent. But alas, because of the frailty of man, the Christian at infrequent intervals does yield to the evil nature and sin. But the point is, God has so constituted him, that he need not do so. He has imparted the divine nature which gives the Christian a hatred of sin and a love for righteousness. In addition to this, the Holy Spirit has been caused to take up His permanent residence in him to aid him in his battle against sin, and in his effort to live a Christian life.

To translate and interpret, “How is it possible for such as we, Christians, who have been separated once for all from the sinful nature, any longer to live within its grip?” Let us use a few illustrations. The Christian has the same power over the evil nature that he has over his radio. When a program suddenly comes over the air unfit for Christian ears, he can shut the radio off with a “There, you cannot bring that smut into my life.” Before salvation, the evil nature had absolute dominion over the sinner. Since salvation has wrought its beneficent work in his inner being, he has absolute dominion over it. Believe this, child of God, and act upon it (Ed note: which is what Paul says for us to do in Romans 6:11 [note] "Consider [command to do this habitually] yourselves to be dead to sin but alive to God" and act now based on that truth). The evil nature is a dethroned monarch. Paul personifies sin as a king reigning (Ro 5:21-note, “as sin has reigned as king”).

The Holy Spirit at the time of the sinner’s salvation, enthroned the Lord Jesus in the throne room of the believer’s heart (Ro 8:9-note). He stays on the throne so long as the believer keeps yielded to the Spirit and rejects the behests of the evil nature (Gal 5:16-note, Gal 5:17-note). When the believer sins, the dethroned king, the evil nature, mounts to the throne, with the consequent dethronement of the Lord Jesus. These are cold, hard facts, yet, nevertheless true to the Word of God in its teaching on this subject. However, such a procedure (Ed note: the believer continually giving in to the sin nature) cannot go on indefinitely nor often, for God puts a curb upon such a thing by sending suffering, chastening (Heb 12:5, 6-note, He 12:7, 8, 9, 10-note, He 12:11-note), and the Christian is made most miserable by a guilty conscience and the indwelling Holy Spirit who is grieved at such conduct (cp Ep 4:30-note, 1Th 5:19-note). (Bolding added) (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans)

Wuest goes on to give an illustration

that will show the definite cleavage between the Christian and the evil nature, the disengagement that took place when God performed that major surgical operation. A floor lamp is connected to a wall outlet. It derives its power to give light from the electric outlet in the wall. Just so, a sinner is connected to the evil nature, and derives his incentive and energy to sin, from the evil nature. Remove the connecting plug from the wall outlet, and the light ceases to function. Its source of power has been cut off. Cut the connection between the sinner and the evil nature, and he ceases to function as a sinner. His source of power has been cut off. Upon no other basis can one explain the instantaneous and radical change in the outlook and actions of a sinner saved in a rescue mission, this change more apparent because of the life of gross sin he has lived. Connect the floor lamp with the wall outlet, and it starts to give light again. Connect the Christian with the evil nature still in him, and he sins again. But the point is, he is under no compulsion to put himself back into the control of the evil nature again, nor can he do it habitually, nor frequently. God has so adjusted things in the Christian’s life, that, while he remains a free moral agent capable of choosing between obeying the divine nature or the evil nature, yet, the preponderance of his choices are Godward. Thus does Paul declare the mechanical impossibility of a Christian habitually sustaining the same relationship to the evil nature which he sustained before he was saved.  (Ibid)

THE DEATH
THAT BRINGS
LIFE!

Paul's entire doctrine of the Christian life hangs on the truth that we died to sin and as shown in the following chart is a key word in Romans 6. Ponder these passages interrogating them with the 5W'S & H questions.

Paul reminded the Colossian believers of their identification with Christ's death writing

If (a condition of first class, assumed true = one can substitute "since" for "if") you have died (apothnesko in aorist tense = past tense, accomplished historical fact) with Christ to the elementary principles of the world (the material ways of looking at things and have escaped from the world’s crude and elemental notions and teachings of externalism), why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees... (Col 2:20-note)

In Colossians 3 Paul again reminds the saints that they should seek the things above and set their mind on the things above because

you have died (apothnesko in aorist tense = historical fact) and your (new, real) life is hidden (perfect tense = speaks of permanence = Your new spiritual life is no longer in the sphere of the earthly and sensual, but is with the life of the risen Christ Who is unseen) with Christ in God. (Col 3:3-note)

Paul was speaking of this death when he wrote

I have been crucified (perfect tense = Paul's identification with Christ at the Cross was a past fact that had present spiritual benefits through identification) with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me." (Gal 2:20-note)

Godet has some interesting thoughts on

The practical application of the apostle's doctrine regarding this mysterious death, which is at the foundation of Christian sanctification, seems to me to be this:

The Christian's breaking with sin is undoubtedly gradual in its realization, but absolute and conclusive in its principle. As, in order to break really with an old friend whose evil influence is felt, half measures are insufficient, and the only efficacious means is a frank explanation, followed by a complete rupture which remains like a barrier raised beforehand against every new solicitation; so to break with sin there is needed a decisive and radical act, a divine deed taking possession of the soul, and interposing henceforth between the will of the believer and sin (Gal 6:14). This divine deed necessarily works through the action of faith in the sacrifice of Christ."  (F. Godet - Romans Commentary)

John MacArthur sums up this section noting that...

the phrase died to sin expresses the fundamental premise of this entire chapter in Romans, the rest of which is essentially an elaboration of that cardinal reality. It is impossible to be alive in Christ and also still be alive to sin. It is not that a believer at any moment before going to be with Christ is totally without sin, but that from the moment he is born again he is totally separated from the controlling power of sin, the sin life from which Christ died to deliver him. (MacArthur, J: Romans 1-8. Chicago: Moody Press or Logos or Wordsearch) (Bolding added)

To reiterate, remember that although believers have died to sin, this truth does not mean that the we are in a state of death as far as sin’s temptations and allurements are concerned, as if we were immune to them in the same sense that a corpse is totally beyond the ability to respond to physical stimuli. Every believer knows from experience this is not the case. The difference is that now when sin tempts or allures us (cp Jas 1:14-note, 1Pe 2:11-note), we can say "no" (Ro 6:12, 13-note) whereas before we died to the power of sin, we could not reject the reign of sin in our lives. Remember to first say "yes" to the Spirit of Christ, Who will provide the motivation and the power to say "no" to the strong desires of the flesh (see this pattern in Gal 5:16-note, cp Ro 8:13-note)

WHAT PAUL
IS NOT
TEACHING

To state this important point another way, think of it as what Paul is NOT teaching. He is NOT teaching that sin (the power of sin, the sinful nature) is annihilated or non-existent in me.  He is NOT teaching that as a Christian, I have reached the place where I cannot commit individual sins, although many teachers over the last two millennia have misinterpreted Paul's teaching in this very way.

Henry Morris emphasizes that

Paul is not setting forth a doctrine of sinless perfection, but of freedom from sin’s domination. The Christian may sin, but sinning is out of character. It is a declension from his norm, not his habitual practice.  (Morris, Henry: Defenders Study Bible. World Publishing) (Bolding added)

And note also that Paul is not teaching, as some have taken it, that we should die to sin. They say that this is the way by which we come into the victorious Christian life. They say we ought to begin to crucify ourselves, and die to sin. Paul is NOT saying that we ought to do this but to the contrary he is telling us that it has already been done. Furthermore, Paul does NOT mean that we are dying to sin which is the way some people understand his teaching. They say Paul means that the Christian is gradually changing and growing, and the more he does so, the more he is dying to sin, and there will come a time when he will sort of outgrow all his evil. It doesn't mean that at all.

HOW SHALL WE...STILL LIVE IN IT: pos eti zesomen (1PFAI) en aute: (Ge 39:9; Ps 119:104)(2Cor 5:14, 15 16, 17; 1Pe 1:14; 4:1, 2, 3)

You cannot be dead to sin and, at the same time, live in it.

John gives us a parallel passage writing that...

No one who is born of God practices (present tense = habitually)  sin, because His seed abides (present tense = continually) in him; and he cannot (present tense = habitually and the Greek word for "not" indicates absolutely not - i.e., continuing to live in sin as a lifestyle is a virtual impossibility for the believer) sin (Note: John is not saying a believer never sins but that living in sin is not his lifestyle), because he is born (perfect tense = past completed action with continuing results - speaks of permanence of the new birth)  of God. (See also 1Jn 3:9-preceding notes)

Barclay comments...

How despicable it would be for a son or a daughter to consider himself or herself free to sin, because he or she knew that a father or a mother would forgive.

The psalmist gives us the great antidote for the false teaching that a genuine believer could continue to live in sin...

From Your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I hate every false way. (Ps 119:104-note)

Comment: Why does he hate every false way? He is in the Book and the Book is in him, transforming him, making him more and more holy. Are you in the Book daily?

Notice that what Paul denies is not that you can never commit a sin, but that you cannot habitually "live in it."  Thus "live" implies more than an occasional lapse into sin but speaks of the "atmosphere" in which one lives. Think of a fish in a fishbowl. What is the "atmosphere" in which the fish finds himself? Clearly it is water. In a similar way, the person who is not yet a believer lives in the "fishbowl" of sin, the atmosphere of sin.

John Murray explains that because the new identity of a believer is that he or she has died to sin...

A believer cannot therefore live in sin; if a man lives in sin he is not a believer.

If we view sin as a realm or sphere
then the believer no longer lives in that realm or sphere.

And just as it is true with reference to life in the sphere of this world that the person who has died "passed away, and, lo, he was not: yea, I sought him, but he could not be found" (Psalm 37:36; cf. Ps 103:16), so is it with the sphere of sin; the believer is no longer there because he has died to sin. Failure to appreciate this premise upon which the subsequent argument rests and of which it is an expansion will distort our understanding of this chapter.

The believer died to sin once
and he has been translated to another realm.

(John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, NIC Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965)

Ron Teed asks...

Shall we who have been saved by grace habitually sustain the same relationship to sin that we had before we were saved? Shall we go on with that same relationship where sin had full control and we yielded fully to it? Are we going to pursue that same life of sin? Can a person be saved and continue going on in the same life pattern they had before they were saved? Can there be justification without sanctification? Can a person be truly saved and not truly changed?” Some in our Christian community would say "yes". They claim that if you have ever simply asked Jesus into your heart you will be saved no matter how you live your life. In other words they are saying that justification can exist without sanctification. I think Paul makes the answer to that pretty clear in Romans 6:2. In verse 1 Paul asks: “Should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness?” Then in Romans 6:2 NLT Paul gives us the answer:

"Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it?"

The very suggestion of such a thing is repulsive to Paul. The suggestion that a Christian who has come to faith in Christ could willfully continue in sinful behavior is not only repulsive, it is impossible. We like the comment that Dr. Donald Barnhouse made, and I quote: “Holiness starts where justification finishes. And if holiness does not start, you have the right to suspect that justification (being saved) never started either.” You cannot maintain the same relationship you had to sin before if you have truly accepted Christ as your Savior because the Holy spirit of God comes to live in you when you make that commitment. (Ron Teed Commentary – The Book of Romans)

Hendricksen explains that...

For a Christian, continuing to live in sin is not only impermissible, it is impossible! (Ed: See preceding notes) on 1Jn 3:9)  To be sure, Paul knows that even a believer commits acts of sin until the day of his release from this earthly existence....But in the apostle’s theology this circumstance does not provide a valid reason for easy living. Moreover, the notion that a child of God should voluntarily give sin an opportunity to operate, that he should actually encourage it, produces a revulsion in Paul’s heart. He is disgusted with the very suggestion! (Note: Referring to his exclamation "May it never be!")

He reminds his readers that something decisive has taken place in his and in their lives. By the grace of God they had died to sin; that is, they had renounced allegiance to their sinful selves and to all the allurements and enticements of this sinful world. Cf. Col 3:3-note, “For you died, and your life is hid with Christ in God.” All this had happened when they had been converted, had professed their faith, and had been baptized. (Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J.  Vol. 12-13: New Testament commentary: Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House) (Bolding added)

John Knox paraphrases this section asking how can we who have died to sin “breathe its air again?” (Noxious fumes indeed!)

John Phillips rightly notes that...

Nothing can be more unresponsive than a person who is dead. Imagine someone trying to evoke a reaction from a corpse! It can be caressed, commanded, or kicked and no response will come, for the simple reason that it is dead to all such stimuli. God reckons the believer to be dead to the promptings of sin. (The John Phillips Commentary Series – Exploring Romans: An Expository Commentary)

R C H Lenski writes...

How can such a thought of going on in sin arise in the minds of us "who are such as died to the sin"? "How shall we still be living in it?" Logic? sound deduction? The very thought of going on in sin for any reason is in itself a shallow contradiction. It is like having died and yet talking about continuing to live. Only a fool confuses having died and still being alive. Paul points this out sharply: died (aorist, for the act is punctiliar) "to the sin"—still be living (durative) "in it." The power of grace produced this death to sin; how, then, can we still go on living in sin, to say nothing of such an impossibility as causing grace to increase? Here is an answer, indeed.

This is the ethical dative. The thought is as profound as the fact itself. The moment a man is dead he ceases to respond to stimuli. Coax him, command him, threaten him—no response, no reaction. The sphere in which he once moved ("in it") is his sphere no longer. So plain in the physical realm, is it less plain in the spiritual where the genuine realities exist? Once sin was the sphere in which we moved and responded to all this power of sin. Then came grace—oh, that blessed grace so vastly greater than the sin!—and possessed our soul which then and there died to the sin and, being thus dead, ceased living in it, ceased responding to it, the sin reached out to this dead one in vain.

This is the glory of grace that it made us die to sin. This is the abounding of grace over sin that it rendered us dead. This is our joy and delight in grace, the one reason that we embraced it: to be dead to sin. It is, of course, only the negative side, death is negative. Paul will add the positive, the newness of life. The negative explodes the fallacious question, the positive does so still more. Both this death and this new life and newness of life are such great effects of justification by faith through grace that they deserve to be unfolded in detail, and even these details are tremendous. (Lenski New Testament Commentary - The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans)

F E Hamilton notes that in this section Paul is seeking to explain that...

a real Christian cannot live in sin and that if he lives in sin he proves himself to be a non-Christian even though he is baptized (F. E. Hamilton, The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958)

Comment: I.e., water baptism is meaningless if the person lives a life continually under the dominion and tyranny of Sin. Such "rotten fruit" would be good evidence that while the person may have experienced "water baptism" (a natural, human "work"), they have never experienced baptism into the death of Christ (a supernatural, divine "work")! And it is this latter "baptism" which makes all the difference in one's demeanor in this present world and in their destiny in the world to come! Dear reader, I beg of you, do not let anyone deceive you with the deadly false teaching that baptism in water {by whatever means - sprinkling, immersion, etc} can effect regeneration and new birth by the Holy Spirit. Salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone and not by works! See example of Abraham Ro 4:1, 2, 3-note, Ro 4:4, 5-note and David Ro 4:6-note, Ro 4:7, 8-note. cf Ep 2:8, 9-note, see the true place for "works" as the "fruit" of the new birth in Ep 2:10-note)

Paul is asking how we could continue to live in sin as a lifestyle, sinning habitually and perpetually. One who has truly been redeemed by faith in Christ's death for his sins may occasionally slip into a sin, but he cannot live therein.

S Lewis Johnson makes the important distinction noting that Paul...

What Paul is saying, then, in this verse is very important. He means that a believer cannot, in the light of what has happened to him in his representative, go on living in sin. If a man lives in sin, he is not a believer.  (Romans 6:1-14)

Kenneth Wuest explains that

Paul tells us what there is in the inner spiritual and mechanical set-up of a Christian which prevents him from habitually obeying the behests of the sinful nature. These two things are the result of a major surgical operation which God performs in the inner being of every sinner He saves. They are the breaking of the power of indwelling sin, and the impartation of the divine nature. The first is referred to in Ro 6:2 in the words “are dead to sin,” and the second, in Ro 6:4, in the words, “walk in newness of life. (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans)

Adam Clarke quotes Aelian (Var. Hist. iii.13) which records that the

The Tapyrians are such lovers of wine, that they Live in wine; and the principal part of their Life is Devoted to it.” They live to wine; they are insatiable drunkards.

Dr Ron Mattoon comments that...

Death to sin is separation from its power, not extinction. When a person is born again, he has a new power to say "No" to sin, but many times will not use his new power. We are under new management "in Christ." The sin nature that once ruled over us before our salvation no longer has power or authority to dictate our lives unless we give that old nature power and consent to its control. Yes, our sin nature is still within us. There is a difference, however, now that we are saved. We have a choice in the matter in doing that which is right or wrong. We have power to say "No" to wrong. For us to continue in habitual, persistent sin, as we were before we were saved, would mock the grace of God and what He did for us. It would be like rescuing a prisoner of war from an enemy prison camp, and then the freed prisoner returns to the prison from which he was delivered to live in bondage. Such an action would mock those who rescued him. This is what the Christian does to God when he lives in wickedness.

Shall we continue in sin? You cannot do this. You are under new management. You are united in Christ. You have a new nature that loves righteousness and hates sin.

An English earl visited the Fiji Islands. Being an infidel, he critically remarked to the elderly chief, "You're a great leader, but it's a pity you've been taken in by those foreign missionaries. They only want to get rich through you. No one believes the Bible anymore. People are tired of the threadbare story of Christ dying on the cross for the sins of mankind. They know better now. I'm sorry you have been so foolish to accept their story."

The old chiefs eyes flashed like a saber in the sun as he answered, "See that great rock over there? On it we smashed the heads of our victims. Notice the furnace next to it? In that oven we formerly roasted the bodies of our enemies. If it hadn't been for those foreign missionaries that you disdain and the love of Jesus Christ that changed us from man-craving cannibals to Christians, you would never leave this place alive. You better thank the Lord for the Gospel; otherwise we would be feasting on you.

If it were not for the Bible,
you would now be our supper!"

If you are truly saved, you have the Holy Spirit indwelling you to help you battle temptation. The Holy Spirit helps you to say "No!" to sin. You cannot persist in sinful, wicked living often or indefinitely. The Holy Spirit would be grieved, your conscience would be guilty, and you would be miserable. God uses suffering and chastisement (discipline) also to change your course and lifestyle. (Mattoon's Treasures -Treasures from Romans)

Moule on "live any longer therein"...

"Live" is emphatic, in contrast to "dead." St Paul puts it as inconceivable that the soul which is so freed from such claim can endure, after its death in Christ to sin, (or, in other words, after His death to sin for it,) to yield its faculties as before to sin's influence. (The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Romans)

Ray Stedman says that a believer who is living in the sphere and control of sin is like a person trying to start a car with an old battery. Stedman writes

"The other day, a friend and I were pushing an old car because we couldn't get it started. The battery was dead. We pushed it to a station where the service man hooked on another battery to the terminals of the old one; then he said, "Now try it." We switched on the starter button, and immediately there came a surge of power into the engine -- utilizing the energy of the new battery. Where once there was no power, now there was plenty. Now, the trouble in our lives is that we have this old battery that we got from Adam, but it is without power. God declares it to be dead, but we simply refuse to believe that it is dead. We have a certain fondness for it because we have had it so long. After all, it is the original battery that we got when we were born. As a matter of fact, it is a family battery -- it has been passed along from generation to generation, and we hate to part with these old antiques. We refuse to believe that it is no good. Of course, we are encouraged to use it by the flood of sales literature we see, suggesting ways to discover hidden power in our batteries. Or, we are told that the trouble is, we are not pushing the starter button hard enough; if we will learn how to push the starter button harder, we can get it to work -- there is nothing really wrong with the battery, it is the starter button, the motivating source." Stedman goes on to add that "Across this country this morning, in one form or another, there are preachers (who should know better) who are preaching this devilish gospel of "try harder." Nothing could be worse! This business of telling Christians to "try harder and you can make a success of your Christian life" was born right in the pit of hell. I don't know who originally phrased it this way but I have heard many times someone say, "Well, I believe that if I do my best, God does the rest." That is the most damnable lie ever spoken! If you live on that basis, you'll never get beyond doing your best; and, your best isn't good enough, and it never will be! As preachers proclaim the gospel of "try harder," Christians are responding with new resolves to consecrate their old selves to do their best for God, yet, all the time, they are totally ignorant of God's provision of a "new battery", available in Jesus Christ, with sufficient power to meet all the demands of life." (Click full sermon The Day I Died)

Death to sin: Abounding sin is the occasion of abounding grace, but abounding grace is for the destruction of abounding sin. It is absurd to suppose that a medicine should aggravate the disease it cures.

I. BELIEVERS ARE DEAD TO SIN.

Converted men dislike sin:

An Armenian arguing with a Calvinist remarked, “If I believed your doctrine, and was sure that I was a converted man, I would take my fill of sin.” “How much sin,” replied the godly Calvinist, “do you think it would take to fill a true Christian to his own satisfaction?” Here he hit the nail on the head.

“How can we that are dead to sin
live any longer therein?”

A truly converted man hates sin with all his heart, and even if he could sin without suffering for it, it would be misery enough to him to sin at all. (C. H. Spurgeon.)  (Biblical Illustrator)

The Life Application Bible Commentary sums up this section...

LIVING IN SIN
OR
DEAD TO SIN

Living in sin describes a lifestyle of habitual sinful practices. It is a life where sin reigns. Death is the currency of that kingdom. The subjects are slaves, and their future is hopeless. Why would anyone, given their freedom, want to remain in such a place, living such a life?

Dying describes the most frequent way a slave gained freedom (by dying) to illustrate one aspect of the salvation that God has given us through Christ. The problem of sin is so deeply rooted in us that radical action is required to eliminate it. (Barton, B, et al: The NIV Life Application Commentary Series: Tyndale or Logos or Wordsearch)