Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Romans 6

Paul begins his discussion by raising an objection and answering it—an objection that grows out of his presentation of justification, especially the teaching that where sin increased, grace increased all the more (5:20). The query is to this effect: “Are we not able, or even obliged, by the logic of justification, to continue on in sin, now that we are Christians, in order to give divine grace as much opportunity as possible to display itself? The more we sin, the more God’s grace will be required to meet the situation; this will in turn contribute the more to his glory.” The apostle shows his horror at such a suggestion: “By no means!” (see also his repudiation of a similar suggestion in 3:8). It is likely that as Paul taught justification by faith, objections of this sort were raised from time to time by those who feared that his teaching would open the door to libertinism by encouraging indifference to the ethical demands of the law. If so, his answer is forged in years of reflection under divine guidance.

His answer is crisp: “We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?” He does not say that sin is dead to the Christian; ch. 7 is a sufficient refutation of any such notion. Rather, we died to sin. Nor does Paul here explain when or how we died to sin; instead, his emphasis lies on the logical impossibility of a Christian continuing in a life dominated by sin. Death to sin is not something hoped for by the believer; it is something that has already taken place. It is a simple fact basic to the living of the Christian life.

Paul begins his discussion by raising an objection and answering it—an objection that grows out of his presentation of justification, especially the teaching that where sin increased, grace increased all the more (5:20). The query is to this effect: “Are we not able, or even obliged, by the logic of justification, to continue on in sin, now that we are Christians, in order to give divine grace as much opportunity as possible to display itself? The more we sin, the more God’s grace will be required to meet the situation; this will in turn contribute the more to his glory.” The apostle shows his horror at such a suggestion: “By no means!” (see also his repudiation of a similar suggestion in 3:8). It is likely that as Paul taught justification by faith, objections of this sort were raised from time to time by those who feared that his teaching would open the door to libertinism by encouraging indifference to the ethical demands of the law. If so, his answer is forged in years of reflection under divine guidance.

His answer is crisp: “We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?” He does not say that sin is dead to the Christian; ch. 7 is a sufficient refutation of any such notion. Rather, we died to sin. Nor does Paul here explain when or how we died to sin; instead, his emphasis lies on the logical impossibility of a Christian continuing in a life dominated by sin. Death to sin is not something hoped for by the believer; it is something that has already taken place. It is a simple fact basic to the living of the Christian life.

The explanation of how this death to sin occurred follows immediately (vv.3–4): by being “baptized into Christ Jesus.” What is being described is a spiritual reality of the deepest import—not a mere ceremony, not even a sacrament. The metaphor of baptism is clearly used by Paul in a relational sense elsewhere, as in the Israelites being baptized into Moses when they crossed the Red Sea (1 Corinthians 10:2). They became united to him as never before, recognizing his leadership and their dependence on him. Union with Christ means union with him in his death. It is significant that although Jesus emphasized discipleship throughout his ministry, he never spoke of union with himself until he was on the verge of going to the cross (Jn 14–16). He had earlier spoken of his death under the figure of baptism .

Baptism illustrates this vital union with Christ in his death, though baptism does not accomplish it. Apparently, Paul pictures burial with Christ, however momentarily, in the submergence of the body under the baptismal waters. The importance of burial is that it attests the reality of death (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). It expresses with finality the end of the old life governed by relationship with Adam. It also expresses the impossibility of a new life apart from divine action. The God who raised Jesus Christ from the dead has likewise imparted life to those who are his. The expression to “live a new life” is literally “to walk in newness of life,” the walk being the evidence of the new type of life granted to the child of God. This is a distinctive type of life realized only by one united to Christ (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17), so that Christ is its dynamic. In this connection the question arises, Why should the resurrection of Christ be described as accomplished “through the glory of the Father?” It is because “glory” here has the meaning of power, as in the resurrection of Lazarus .

The latter half of v.4 has a noticeably balanced structure (“just as Christ... we too”), recalling the pattern in 5:12, 18, 21. This suggests that the principle of solidarity advanced in 5:12–21 is still thought of as operating here in the significance of baptism. There is no explicit statement that in baptism we were raised with Christ as well as made to share in his death. Resurrection is seen rather as an effect that logically follows from the identification with Christ in his death (but see Col 2:12, where resurrection is verbally connected with baptism).

The explanation of how this death to sin occurred follows immediately (vv.3–4): by being “baptized into Christ Jesus.” What is being described is a spiritual reality of the deepest import—not a mere ceremony, not even a sacrament. The metaphor of baptism is clearly used by Paul in a relational sense elsewhere, as in the Israelites being baptized into Moses when they crossed the Red Sea (1 Corinthians 10:2). They became united to him as never before, recognizing his leadership and their dependence on him. Union with Christ means union with him in his death. It is significant that although Jesus emphasized discipleship throughout his ministry, he never spoke of union with himself until he was on the verge of going to the cross (Jn 14–16). He had earlier spoken of his death under the figure of baptism .

Baptism illustrates this vital union with Christ in his death, though baptism does not accomplish it. Apparently, Paul pictures burial with Christ, however momentarily, in the submergence of the body under the baptismal waters. The importance of burial is that it attests the reality of death (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). It expresses with finality the end of the old life governed by relationship with Adam. It also expresses the impossibility of a new life apart from divine action. The God who raised Jesus Christ from the dead has likewise imparted life to those who are his. The expression to “live a new life” is literally “to walk in newness of life,” the walk being the evidence of the new type of life granted to the child of God. This is a distinctive type of life realized only by one united to Christ (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17), so that Christ is its dynamic. In this connection the question arises, Why should the resurrection of Christ be described as accomplished “through the glory of the Father?” It is because “glory” here has the meaning of power, as in the resurrection of Lazarus .

The latter half of v.4 has a noticeably balanced structure (“just as Christ... we too”), recalling the pattern in 5:12, 18, 21. This suggests that the principle of solidarity advanced in 5:12–21 is still thought of as operating here in the significance of baptism. There is no explicit statement that in baptism we were raised with Christ as well as made to share in his death. Resurrection is seen rather as an effect that logically follows from the identification with Christ in his death (but see Col 2:12, where resurrection is verbally connected with baptism).

In v.5 we encounter a problem concerning resurrection. Is Paul referring to the future bodily resurrection of the saints? Many expositors think so, pointing both to the future tense of the verb (“we will... be”) and to the fact that Christ’s resurrection was indeed a bodily one. But a future tense can indicate what must logically or inevitably occur (cf. Galatians 6:5, which has a future tense). Furthermore, Paul does not say that just as Christ was raised, so we too shall be raised. Instead, he connects the resurrection of Christ with the possibility of a new life in the present for those who are his. In addition, the “for” at the beginning of v.6 shows that what follows is intended to relate closely to the mention of resurrection at the end of v.5. Yet one looks in vain for anything in v.6 that relates to future bodily resurrection. Instead, Paul returns to the matter of participation in Christ’s death and its bearing on freedom from the bondage of sin. Consequently, the resurrection in v.5 has to do with spiritual resurrection— raised with Christ (Colossians 2:12; Colossians 3:1).

The certainty of our present participation in this new resurrection life is grounded on the truth that “we have been united with him in his death.” Clearly this union is not something gradually arrived at through a process of sanctification. Rather it is something established by God that becomes the very basis of our sanctification in Christ.

The problem of sin continues to dominate the thought of this section, and Paul returns to this theme by insisting that “our old self was crucified with him” (v.6). While the relation to v.5 is close, the language now becomes sharper and more realistic—e.g., “united with him in his death” becomes “crucified with him” (cf. Galatians 2:20). Our spiritual history began at the cross. We were there in the sense that we were joined to him who actually suffered on it. The time element should not disturb us, because if we sinned in Adam, it is equally possible to die to sin with Christ.

But what was it that was crucified? “Our old self” is literally “our old man” (GK 4094 & 476; Colossians 3:9). In Eph 4:22, however, the putting off of the old self is a matter of exhortation. In some sense, then, the old man has been crucified; in another sense, it may still claim attention. Since “man” has been used of Adam (5:12, 17, 19), it is possible that what has been crucified with Christ is our place in Adam, our position in the old creation, which is under the sway of sin and death. For Christians, the old self is gone; they belong to the new creation order (2 Corinthians 5:17).

The purpose behind the crucifixion of “our old self” is that sin should be rendered powerless so far as we are concerned. But the expression “body of sin” is a phrase that needs clarification. The term “body” (GK 5393) glances at the fact of Christ’s crucifixion, which he endured in the body. Our body can become the instrument of sin, thus negating the truth of crucifixion with Christ. So “body of sin” seems to mean human body insofar as it may become the vehicle of sin. Its previous slavery to the dictates of sin is broken. This annulling of the power of sin is based on a recognized principle—that death settles all claims. Our union with Christ in his death, designed to deal with sin once for all, means that we are free from the hold of sin. Its mastery has been broken (v.7).