What does it mean that sin lies dead apart from the law?

Explanation:

In Romans 7:8 Paul writes that without the law, sin is dead. We can understand what he means by turning back to Romans 5:13.⁵ There he explains that sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Likely, Paul has in mind the same notion in Romans 7:8 when he writes that apart from the law, sin is dead. That is, Paul likely means that before the law is understood, or given, sin is dormant and ineffective. Sin is still present, but it is not active or powerful apart from the law.⁶

Counterargument:

The problem here is that comparing Romans 7:8 to Romans 5:13 should not lead us to conclude that sin apart from the law means that sin is inactive. That is, according to this argument, since sin is not counted where there is no law (Romans 5:13), sin is not active apart from the law (Romans 7:8). The problem is that sin not counting and sin not being active are two different concepts. For sin could be active but not counted, in the sense of not being punished by God, or at least not being tallied by God. And likely this is Paul’s meaning when he says that sin is not counted where there is no law in Romans 5:13. He is not saying that sin is not active at all, but that God, in his mercy, does not tally sin without a command in the same way that he tallies sin with a command. Of course, if Paul is not saying that sin is not active at all in Romans 5:13, then after comparing Romans 7:8 with Romans 5:13, we cannot conclude that Paul is saying sin is inactive apart from the law.

Response to counterargument:

The argument here is not that Paul says sin is completely inactive apart from the law. Rather, when Paul says sin is dead without the law he means it is not as active or powerful without the law.⁷ Of course, sin is still there and somewhat active, but as Paul says in Romans 5:13, where there is no law, sin is not counted. In other words, where there is no law, sin is not as active.

Response to response to counterargument:

Once again this view fails to remain consistent with itself. For it says that what Paul writes in Romans 7:8 repeats what he already wrote in Romans 5:13, that without the law, sin is not counted. It goes on to say that sin not being counted is equivalent to sin not being as active as when the law is introduced. Of course, sin not being counted is not the same as sin not being very active. The fact is, Romans 5:13 says nothing about the activity or inactivity of sin. Rather, it simply notes that without the law, sin is not counted.

Explanation:

We can follow Paul’s logic to determine that when he says sin is dead apart from the law, he means that sin is dormant, and not fully active apart from the law. For Paul has already explained that sin entered the world through Adam and spread to all men (Romans 5:12). Given that all men have sinned, it is clear that sin is not dead in the sense that no one sins without the law. Thus, we ought to take it that when Paul says sin is dead without the law, he likely has in mind that sin is not as powerful without the law.⁸

Counterargument:

This argument assumes that when Paul refers to sin being dead without the law, he has in mind the law as it relates to every human since Adam. We can detect that the argument makes this assumption because it takes it that since Paul says everyone since Adam has sinned, it cannot be the case that when Paul says sin is dead apart from the law, he means that there is no sin apart from the law. Of course, it might be that when Paul says that sin is dead apart from the law, he has in mind before the time of Adam’s sin. That is, he may have in mind that before Adam was given a command from God, sin was dead apart from the law because there was not yet any sin. Unfortunately, this view must show that Paul has in mind the time since Adam when he refers to sin being dead apart from the law to mean sin not being very active apart from the law.

Response to counterargument:

This view does not have to show that Paul has in mind the time following Adam’s sin to be plausible. Rather, to counter this interpretation, the counterargument has to show that Paul in fact has the time before Adam in mind. In other words, it is not enough to overturn this argument by simply pointing out that Paul may have the time before Adam’s sin in mind when he refers to sin being dead apart from the law, for it leaves open the possibility that he may have in mind the sin following Adam. And if this is right, then this interpretation stands. Rather, for this counterargument to hold, it must show that Paul indeed has the time before Adam’s sin in mind. But this argument has not accomplished this.

One weakness of this view is that it equates death with inactivity. That is, Paul writes that sin is dead without the law, and death is normally taken to mean something like non-existence. But this view takes death to mean not very active but still existent. This view does not explain why we should minimize Paul’s strong language.

Explanation:

To understand what Paul means when he writes that apart from the law sin is dead, we first need to identify who I refers to in Romans 7:7. For in Romans 7:7 Paul writes that if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. Likely, Paul has put himself in the position of Adam to explain the theological implications of sin, which means he is saying that Adam would not have known sin if not for the law.⁹ For before God gave Adam any command, Adam did not know what sin was because there had not been any opportunity for sin. Once the opportunity for sin is presented through the command of God not to eat from the tree, Adam seized the opportunity and sinned. With this in mind, we can detect what Paul means when he says that apart from the law sin is dead. Given that he has Adam in mind in this section, when Paul writes that apart from the law sin is dead, he likely means that apart from the law there literally is no sin, because apart from God giving Adam a command, there had not yet been an opportunity to sin. Thus, sin was dead apart from the law in the sense that there was no sin.

Counterargument:

The problem here is that it is obviously not the case that when Paul refers to I in Romans 7:7, he has Adam in mind. We can determine that Paul does not have Adam in mind because he specifically quotes from the law of Moses, and the command not to covet.¹⁰ That is, in Romans 7:7 Paul says that if the law had not said, You shall not covet, he would not have known what coveting is. Of course, the command not to covet is specifically a command from the law of Moses, and the law of Moses was not given to Adam. Rather, Adam was given the command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. That Paul uses the command not to covet in his example to demonstrate that the law was not applicable before the command, shows that he has something other than Adam’s sin in mind. Of course, if he has something other than Adam’s sin in mind, he is not saying that what sin is dead apart from the law means is that there is no sin yet.

Response to counterargument:

There was a tradition among Jewish rabbis that the law was present in some sense since the time of Adam. That is because, in Jewish theology, there developed an idea that the law was present even before creation.¹¹ Thus, even though Paul refers to the Mosaic law in Romans 7:7, it is not unlikely that he has Adam in mind in this section. Which means that sin is dead apart from the law in the sense that no one has yet sinned.

Response to response to counterargument:

The problem here is that we are not dealing with the theology of some Jewish rabbi, but the theology of the apostle Paul. And we know from Paul’s letter to the Galatians that he clearly states that the law was given 430 years after God made a covenant with Abraham. He then explains the purpose of the giving of the law, and uses all of this to argue that no one will be saved by the works of the law but by the promise (Galatians 3:15–26). Of course, Paul would not undermine his own theology by suddenly suggesting that the law was given to Adam, so we should not assume that I in Romans 7:7 refers to Adam.¹²

Explanation:

We can detect what Paul means when he says that sin was dead apart from the law from the theological depth of this section. For in this section, Paul refers to the fact that he was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and he died (Romans 7:9). Now, we know that through Adam all sinned and because all sinned, death spread to all men (Romans 5:12). Further, Paul says that through the law he died, not physically but spiritually. So we know that no human since Adam is alive in the sense Paul intends. This means Paul likely has Adam in mind when he refers to being alive apart from the law, and dying through the law.¹³ And all of this implies that when Paul says sin was dead apart from the law, it means that there was no sin apart from the law because Adam had not yet sinned.

Counterargument:

We do not need to press Paul too literally in this section. Rather, Paul is using dramatic pictorial language to sharpen the contrast between sin and I, life and death. Paul wants his readers to understand sin as something like a force that is instigated by the law, which is itself holy and good. Paul is aware that the Jews prized the law and now he deliberately turns the tables with rhetorical skill to explain that in fact, the law does not save but brings sin to life.¹⁴

The weakness of this view is that there is no indication from the plain meaning of the text or the context that when Paul refers to I in Romans 7:7 he has in mind Adam. Rather, on the face of it, I refers to Paul himself. Of course, if Adam is not on Paul’s mind, then there is no reason to interpret what it means that sin is dead apart from the law from the perspective of Adam.