In Romans 6:19a Paul introduces a focused repetition of what he had said in Romans 6:1–18 with a sentence that can be interpreted in various ways. Literally it says something like I say the human thing (anthropinon lego) because of the weakness of your flesh.
Does he mean that he comes to the aid of his readers in terms of the weakness of their sinful nature or the weakness of their ability to comprehend? The NIV opts for the latter interpretation: I am using the example from everyday life because of your limitations.
Such a translation suggests that Paul is using the image of slavery for the sake of the believers. This everyday
image would then supposedly not do adequate justice to the rich reality of the freedom of God’s children and Paul therefore in a sense apologizes for employing this human imagery. He needs to use this inferior image for the sake of the limited conceptions of his readers. Yet translating this passage as because of your limitations
wrongly interprets the words astheneia tès sarkos as suggesting a weakness in terms of comprehension. When the word sarx is used negatively, it refers to human desires and passions, which is abused by sin (see Romans 6:12). When it is used in a neutral sense, it denotes human existence in the body and in time. However, Paul is speaking here about the weakness of the flesh, and that points to the fact that people are weak because of the desires that live in them and that easily turn their members into weapons of unrighteousness. The Christians in Rome are still afflicted with this. In Romans 7:18 Paul uses that same word sarx in the Greek: nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh.
For this reason it is more plausible to translate Romans 16:19a as because of the weakness of our nature
or because of the infirmity of your flesh
as the KJV does. This, however, still leaves us with the question regarding what the meaning is of the preceding words: I am speaking in human terms.
The meaning of this passage must correspond to the weakness of our nature.
This suggests that Paul is here speaking frankly, for he is not speaking abstractly, but man to man. Even though he does not know the Christians in Rome personally, he admonishes them. His letter is not theoretical, but personal. Why does he not speak more abstractly? This is because the readers are still confronted by the weakness of their own nature, even though they now have a better Lord. Paul therefore does not write in terms of speculative generalities, but directly addresses his audience. Hence, we could also render these words as follows: I speak on a human level, frankly, because of the weakness of your nature.
1
19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification.