The Christian’s Warfare

For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Romans 7:22-25

Lest anyone get the wrong idea, I will not be discussing the popular ideas about spiritual warfare, as popularized by the Peretti novels. This sort of dualistic “the-physical-world-is-a-mirror-of-the-spiritual-realm” paradigm is little other than Manichean Gnosticism.

No, we will be looking at the daily Christian battle against the corruption of his own sinful nature, what Paul calls, “the old man.”

The hinge upon which everything swings in this regard is the law of God.

Before a man comes to Christ, he hates the law of God because he thinks it is too severe. He can’t imagine how anyone could possibly be happy under such repressive authority. He believes that the commandments of God are grievous.

Further, he hates God’s law for being, in his view impractical. If he were to read Matthew 5:39, he would reason that turning the other cheek will encourage people to treat you as a doormat. Surely, he thinks God could not really expect that. I mean, if a man smacks you, it is insulting enough as it is. If a right-handed person slaps you on the right cheek, presumably it is a slap by the back of the hand, which would be considered even more insulting than a slap by the open palm. People will walk all over you, he reasons, if you let them treat you like this.

Moreover, he hates God’s law for its breadth. God’s law addresses, not only acts, but even the internal motives from which these acts proceed. The unregenerate man hates anything that peers into his true motives. He is blind to the depravity of his own soul and therefore he will hate anything that exposes this evil for what it is.

And to top it all off, God is not a fad follower. His law does not change with the changing mores of society.

Paul informs us that the Law was given only to show us bluntly our own depravity.  By the deceitfulness of our heart, we not only refuse to obey it, but excuse our violations of with the flimsiest of excuses.  We imagine that our occasional “good days” (like lucky shots on the pool table) represent our real character and that we when we behave badly (our normal behavior), we imagine that we are merely having an off day.

When a man comes to Christ, this all changes. The law of God is no longer an enemy. However, as Edward Elton puts it, “No sooner does a child of God find delight in good things, but his own corruption makes resistance and opposition against that delight of his and seeks to hinder it and shake it out of his heart.” The “law of sin and death” is always fighting against the good and holy law of God - a war waging within us.

If you feel it, first of all be humbled by it. Let this teach you of your need of Christ. The sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit is the only remedy. Mortification, though seldom mentioned in these dregs of time in which we live, is still God’s solution for the battle against the sinful remnants of our old man. The felt struggle should drive you humbly and promptly to the strong tower of Jesus’ strength.

The true believer will feel wretched when he considers the heinousness of his sins against a holy God. Whitefield told his listeners that if they had never felt as David did, saying, “For mine iniquities are gone over mine head: as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me,” (Psalms 38:4), then they were deceiving themselves to think that they were true Christians. John Newton immortalized this sense of sin when he wrote the line, “Amazing grace! How sweet the sound; that saved a wretch like me.” It should worry us immensely if we have never felt this. I'm not talking about the emotionalism Finney whipped his audiences into so that they be assured of their conversion. I mean a sincere and God-given awareness of our true sinfulness. The saintlier a person is, the more intensely he is likely to be aware of this.

However, the believer will not be crushed under the weight of hopelessness. Rather he seeks deliverance from the remains of the resident corruption. Paul writes, “O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” (Romans 7:24) He longs to rid of all the taints of the Fall and to dwell in the pure light of God’s holy presence. 

Reading the very next verse (Romans 7:25 – “I thank God…”) tells us something else: The believer is thankful for every victory God grants him along the way.

Predestinated to Obedience

“Predestination leads to antinomianism,” goes the tired old Arminian objection. They have never gotten tired of this worn out motto, despite the fact that Dort anathematized it as false and every Reformed theologian worth his weight in feathers has torn it to ribbons. Some people never learn. What saith the Scripture? - - -

Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1 Peter 1:2

Peter says, “foreknowledge of God the Father,” referring to His foreknowledge of the Fall, which foreknowledge made it necessary that election should be decreed to take effect not independently from the Son and Spirit (sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ). This shows us five important truths.

1. All three divine Persons are equally concerned in the salvation of sinners. The Father elected them; the Son shed His blood for them; the Spirit sanctifies them.

2. The objects of election were considered, in that eternal decree, as fallen. How else could they be chosen unto the sprinkling of Christ’s blood and sanctification of the Spirit?

3. Election, though productive of good works, is not founded upon them. On the contrary, they are one of the ends for which the elect are chosen. – “Elect unto obedience.”

4. Those who have been elected by God the Father, shall be sprinkled by the Son, that is, legally purified by His atonement as their pardon. Further they shall experience the Spirit’s sanctification in beginning, advancing and perfecting the work of grace in their souls.

5. The elect, this sprinkled and sanctified, are made to obey the commands of God. They imitate Christ as a pattern as they trust in Him as their propitiation.

An Arminian may seize upon my words “made to obey,” and ask, “Are the elect robots?” No. Of course not. God’s people are made willing (Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power. Ps. 110:3). There is no such thing as a willing robot.

Thoughts on Romans 6:1,2

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Romans 6:1, 2 (KJV)

Defining our terms, it's easy to see that "continue in sin" = still live in it.

If Paul’s doctrine had been that salvation depends in any degree upon our good works, no such objection to it could have been made. We know from Romans 3:8 that it was brought against the apostles. We can also gather from Galatians 5:13, 1 Peter 2:16 and Jude 4 that some gave occasion to the charge. But it is a total perversion of the doctrine of Grace. That is what the apostle here proceeds to show. Chapter 1 establishes the sinfulness of the Gentiles. Chapter 2 describes the sinfulness of the Jews. Chapter 3 sums up this line of reasoning, and shows that only by free grace and justification by faith does the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ come. Chapter 4 portrays Abraham as proof of this doctrine. Chapter 5 demonstrates the blessings that flow from it. Then Chapter 6 takes on this error.

Continuing to live in sin once one has died to it is no more logical than to try to live in a house after you’ve sold it. A death row inmate set free, but who refused to leave his cell, would still be legally free even if he didn’t walk in it experientially. His not leaving the cell would not argue against his freedom, but against his understanding of Freedom. This is the situation of one who is saved but continues in sin. His freedom is not lost or retracted, but for practical purposes, it might as well have not been granted.

This would, in fact, never happen in the real world. Its opposite, however, is the actual state of every unregenerate man. Adam alone would have retained memory of his former state of Original Righteousness; the rest of us have been born in prison. Our natural enmity toward God causes us to deceive ourselves into imagining we are free when, in fact, we are in bondage. It is a billion times easier psychologically to convince yourself that you are free when you are not (sort of a moral “Stockholm Syndrome”), than to convince yourself that you are bound when you are actually free. There is nothing to motivate that delusion.

So to get caught up on the question of whether salvation can be lost or not (although one side is definitely correct), is to miss the whole point of this passage. The hypothetical “Christian” who accepts the Lord as Savior and then proceeds to continue in his same life of sin based on the assurance that once he is saved, he can never sin away his salvation, is no Christian at all. We would deny the very existence of such a person. Scripture categorically denies that those who willfully persist in sin were ever elected in the first place because we are elected through sanctification unto obedience. This is “putting God to the test,” and no Christian would ever do this! What kind of “Christian” makes this hypothetical experiment to see whether or not he really can remove himself from Christ’s hand? The notion is simply asinine. This is like a pardoned death-row inmate trying to see whether he can still get executed!

“Therefore it is a desperate adventure to try conclusions, to drink rank poison to experiment the goodness of an antidote, or to wound ourselves mortally to try the virtue of a plaster.” Thomas Manton

This false conclusion overlooks the following:
1. the fact that a Christian has a renewed nature;
2. that justification is more than just forgiveness of sins;
3. the difference between a lapse in Christian character and living in sin; and
4. the fact that justification by its very nature leads on to sanctification.


1. A Christian has a renewed nature.

The Christian life itself begins with death to the old life. It is when we are made partakers of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17). Moreover, the Christian life works from the inside out.

2. Justification is more than mere forgiveness of sins. This is the mistake Whitefield pointed out in Wesley’s theology. Justification is a change of status before God: from “in sin” to “in Christ.” We are translated from the power of darkness to the kingdom of Christ. Hence it is a change wrought in us by God whereby we are changed from in sin to in Him. It may even be considered a change of citizenship (Colossians 1:13).

Furthermore, justification, when God imputes Christ’s righteous to us, has a built-in principle of righteousness (Jeremiah 31:31-33).

3. There is a difference between a lapse in Christian character and living in sin.

It would be false to assert that a Christian will never lapse (David, Peter, etc.). However, equating a lapse in Christian character with an ongoing living in sin will always result in an absolute lack of assurance of salvation. We all know people who fear God will strike them dead with a lightning bolt every time they mess up. I have seen men who have been elders and deacons for decades respond to every altar the pastor gives! How can a man be of any service to Christ’s kingdom when he isn’t even sure if he’s in it?

It dishonors God when we cower in fear when we sin rather than coming boldly before the throne of grace. Christ commanded us to forgive 70x7 a day! Can we expect less of Him than He commands of us? It should be obvious that I am not advocating sin with impunity. That is precisely what Paul's foolish opponents accused Him of teaching. There is a difference between a cowering, servile fear of God that runs and hides from His presence and a healthy, sanctifying fear of God that is confident in the merits of Christ's atoning sacrifice.

4. Justification by its very nature leads to Sanctification.

The whole point of the New Covenant is to ensure holiness (Jer. 31:31-33). Where the Law lacked the power to work holiness in us, the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit brings us by degrees into a progessively closer walk with God. Morever, God only justifies those whom He intends to sanctify (Rom. 8:29, 30). Any Reformed writer worthy of the name has pointed this out.

The order is “justified by faith,” not “justified by sanctification.” The later error gives birth to the objection Paul refutes in this passage! Sanctification is built on the foundation of justification: not the other way around.