Charles Ellicott Commentary Romans 8:3

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:" — Romans 8:3 (ASV)

How was I freed? It was in this way. Precisely at the very point where the law of Moses showed its powerlessness—namely, in its attempt to eliminate sin, an attempt that failed due to the counteracting influence of the flesh—precisely at this very point, God intervened. He did so by sending His Son in a body of flesh similar to the one in which sin resides and as an offering to expiate human sin.

Consequently, God dethroned and eliminated sin in the flesh His Son had assumed. The flesh, once the scene of sin's former triumphs, now became the scene of its defeat and expulsion.

What the law could not do.—Literally, the impossible thing of the Law—that is, “that which was impossible to the Law.” The construction is what is called a nominativus pendens. This phrase, inserted at the beginning of the sentence, characterizes what follows. God did what the Law could not do—namely, condemned sin.

In that it was weak through the flesh.—There was one constant obstacle to the success of the Law: it had to be carried out by human agents, afflicted by human frailty—a frailty naturally resulting from the physical constitution with which humanity is endowed. Temptation and sin have their roots in the physical part of human nature, and they were too strong for the purely moral influence of the Law. The Law was limited in its operations by them and failed to overcome them.

In the likeness of sinful flesh—that is, in the flesh, but not in sinful flesh. This means having a human body that was, to that extent, like the physical constitution of the rest of humankind, yet which was not in Him, as in other people, the seat of sin; at once like and unlike.

And for sin.—This is the phrase used constantly in the Septuagint (“more than fifty times in the Book of Leviticus alone”—Vaughan) for the “sin-offering.” The essence of the original sin-offering was that it was accepted by an act of God’s grace, instead of the personal punishment of the offender. The exact nature of this “instead” appears to be left an open question in Scripture, and its further definition—if it is to be defined—belongs to the sphere of dogmatics rather than exegesis. It must be remembered that St. Paul uses, regarding the sacrifice of Christ, language similar to that used in the Old Testament for this particular class of sacrifice, the sin-offering.

Condemned sin.—The meaning of this expression is brought out by the context. It refers to what the Law was hindered from doing because of the hold sin had on the flesh. That hold is broken through the believer’s participation in the death of Christ. Sin is, so to speak, brought into court, and judgment is rendered against it. It loses all its rights and claims over its victim. It is dispossessed like someone dispossessed of a property.

In the flesh.—In that same sphere—the flesh—where sin had until now held mastery, it now stood condemned and defeated; it could no longer exercise its old dominion.