언어
챗봇 KG 근거 인용 · draft✕
홈 › 주석[칼빈] › 로마서 › 7장

주석[칼빈] — 로마서 7장 · 율법과 내적 갈등

요약
칼빈 주석 · 섹션 22개 · 한국어 번역 있음(한국어 우선) · 본문 보기
아래 주석은 원문(및 번역문) 그대로입니다.
← 6장8장 →

1절 카드 ↗

Though he had, in a brief manner, sufficiently explained the question respecting the abrogation of the law; yet as it was a difficult one, and might have given rise to many other questions, he now shows more at large how the law, with regard to us, is become abrogated; and then he sets forth what good is thereby done to us: for while it holds us separated from Christ and bound to itself, it can do nothing but condemn us. And lest any one should on this account blame the law itself, he takes up and confutes the objections of the flesh, and handles, in a striking manner, the great question respecting the use of the law. (201) 1. Know ye not, etc. Let the general proposition be that the law was given to men for no other end but to regulate the present life, and that it belongs not to those who are dead: to this he afterwards subjoins this truth — that we are dead to it through the body of Christ. Some understand, that the dominion of the law continues so long to bind us as it remains in force. But as this view is rather obscure, and does not harmonize so well with the proposition which immediately follows, I prefer to follow those who regard what is said as referring to the life of man, and not to the law. The question has indeed a peculiar force, as it affirms the certainty of what is spoken; for it shows that it was not a thing new or unknown to any of them, but acknowledged equally by them all. (For to those who know the law I speak.) This parenthesis is to be taken in the same sense with the question, as though he had said — that he knew that they were not so unskilful in the law as to entertain any doubt on the subject. And though both sentences might be understood of all laws, it is yet better to take them as referring to the law of God, which is the subject that is discussed. There are some who think that he ascribes knowledge of the law to the Romans, because the largest part of the world was under their power and government; but this is puerile: for he addressed in part the Jews or other strangers, and in part common and obscure individuals; nay, he mainly regarded the Jews, with whom he had to do respecting the abrogation of the law: and lest they should think that he was dealing captiously with them, he declares that he took up a common principle, known to them all, of which they could by no means be ignorant, who had from their childhood been brought up in the teaching of the law. (201) The connection of the beginning of this chapter with Romans 6:14 deserves to be noticed. He says there, that sin shall not rule over us, because we are not under law, but under grace. Then he asks, in Romans 6:15 , “Shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace?” This last subject, according to his usual mode, he takes up first , and discusses it till the end of the chapter: and then in this chapter he reassumes the first subject — freedom from the law. This is a striking instance of the Apostle’s manner of writing, quite different from what is usual with us in the present day. He mentions two things; he proceeds with the last, and then goes back to the first. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-2" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-1

Source

비록 그는 율법의 폐기에 관한 문제를 간략하게 충분히 설명했지만, 그것이 어려운 문제였고 많은 다른 질문들을 야기할 수 있었으므로, 이제 그는 율법이 우리와 관련하여 어떻게 폐기되었는지를 더 상세히 보인다. 그리고 그것이 우리에게 어떤 유익을 주는지를 밝힌다. 율법이 우리를 그리스도에게서 분리시키고 자신에게 묶어두는 한, 그것은 우리를 정죄하는 것 외에 아무것도 할 수 없기 때문이다. 그리고 아무도 이로 인해 율법 자체를 탓하지 못하도록 그는 육신의 반론을 취하여 논박하고, 율법의 용도에 관한 중요한 문제를 인상적인 방식으로 다룬다.

1. **알지 못하느냐** 등. 일반적인 명제는 이렇다. 율법은 현재의 삶을 규율하는 것 외에 다른 목적으로 사람들에게 주어지지 않았으며, 죽은 자들에게는 속하지 않는다. 이후에 그는 우리가 그리스도의 몸을 통해 율법에 대해 죽었다는 진리를 덧붙인다. 어떤 이들은 율법의 지배가 그것이 효력을 유지하는 한 우리를 묶는다고 이해한다. 그러나 이 견해는 다소 모호하고 바로 이어지는 명제와 잘 조화되지 않으므로, 나는 사람의 생명에 관해 말하는 것으로 보는 자들을 따르는 것이 더 낫다고 생각한다.

**율법을 아는 자들에게 말하노니.** 이 괄호는 질문과 같은 의미로 취해야 한다. 마치 그가 그들 모두가 공통으로 인정하는 것이어서 그 주제에 대해 아무런 의심을 품을 만큼 율법에 무지하지 않다는 것을 알고 있다고 말하는 것과 같다. 두 문장이 모든 율법을 가리키는 것으로 이해될 수 있지만, 논의되는 주제인 하나님의 율법을 가리키는 것으로 취하는 것이 더 낫다.

원주석

2절 카드 ↗

2. For a woman subject to a man, etc. He brings a similitude, by which he proves, that we are so loosed from the law, that it does not any longer, properly and by its own right, retain over us any authority: and though he could have proved this by other reasons, yet as the example of marriage was very suitable to illustrate the subject, he introduced this comparison instead of evidence to prove his point. But that no one may be puzzled, because the different parts of the comparison do not altogether correspond, we are to be reminded, that the Apostle designedly intended, by a little change, to avoid the invidiousness of a stronger expression. He might have said, in order to make the comparison complete, “A woman after the death of her husband is loosed from the bond of marriage: the law, which is in the place of a husband to us, is to us dead; then we are freed from its power.” But that he might not offend the Jews by the asperity of his expressions, had he said that the law was dead, he adopted a digression, and said, that we are dead to the law (202) To some indeed he appears to reason from the less to the greater: however, as I fear that this is too strained, I approve more of the first meaning, which is simpler. The whole argument then is formed in this manner “The woman is bound to her living husband by the law, so that she cannot be the wife of another; but after the death of her husband she is loosed from the bond of his law so, that she is free to marry whom she pleases.” Then follows the application, — The law was, as it were our husband, under whose yoke we were kept until it became dead to us: After the death of the law Christ received us, that is, he joined us, when loosed from the law, to himself: Then being united to Christ risen from the dead, we ought to cleave to him alone: And as the life of Christ after the resurrection is eternal, so hereafter there shall be no divorce. But further, the word law is not mentioned here in every part in the same sense: for in one place it means the bond of marriage; in another, the authority of a husband over his wife; and in another, the law of Moses: but we must remember, that Paul refers here only to that office of the law which was peculiar to the dispensation of Moses; for as far as God has in the ten commandments taught what is just and right, and given directions for guiding our life, no abrogation of the law is to be dreamt of; for the will of God must stand the same forever. We ought carefully to remember that this is not a release from the righteousness which is taught in the law, but from its rigid requirements, and from the curse which thence follows. The law, then, as a rule of life, is not abrogated; but what belongs to it as opposed to the liberty obtained through Christ, that is, as it requires absolute perfection: for as we render not this perfection, it binds us under the sentence of eternal death. But as it was not his purpose to decide here the character of the bond of marriage, he was not anxious to mention the causes which releases a woman from her husband. It is therefore unreasonable that anything decisive on this point should be sought here. (202) This is a plausible reason, derived from [ Theodoret ] and [ Chrysostom ]; but hardly necessary. Commentators have felt much embarrassed in applying the illustration given here. The woman is freed by the death of the husband; but the believer is represented as freed by dying himself. This does not correspond: and if we attend to what the Apostle says, we shall see that he did not contemplate such a correspondence. Let us notice how he introduces the illustration; “the law,” he says in the first verse, “rules, or exercises authority, over a man while he lives;” and then let us observe the application in Romans 7:4 , where he speaks of our dying to the law The main design of the illustration then was, to show that there is no freedom from a law but by death; so that there is no necessity of a correspondence in the other parts, As in the case of man and wife, death destroys the bond of marriage; so in the case of man and the law, that is, the law as the condition of life, there must be a death; else there is no freedom. But there is one thing more in the illustration, which the Apostle adopts, the liberty to marry another, when death has given a release: The bond of connection being broken, a union with another is legitimate. So far only is the example adduced to be applied — death puts an end to the right and authority of law; and then the party released may justly form another connection. It is the attempt to make all parts of the comparison to correspond that has occasioned all the difficulty. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-4" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-2

Source

2. **남편 있는 여인이** 등. 그는 유사성을 제시하여 우리가 율법에서 풀려났음을, 즉 율법이 더 이상 우리에게 어떤 권위도 적절히 자신의 권리로 보유하지 않는다는 것을 증명한다. 비교의 다른 부분들이 완전히 대응하지 않는다는 것 때문에 아무도 당혹스러워하지 않도록, 사도가 의도적으로 조금 바꾸어 더 강한 표현의 불쾌함을 피했다는 것을 상기해야 한다. 비교를 완성하기 위해 이렇게 말할 수도 있었다. "여인은 남편의 죽음 후에 결혼의 속박에서 풀린다. 우리에게 남편의 자리인 율법이 우리에 대해 죽었다. 그러면 우리는 그것의 권세에서 해방된다." 그러나 유대인들을 율법이 죽었다고 말함으로써 그 표현의 신랄함으로 불쾌하게 하지 않으려고 그는 우회하여 우리가 율법에 대해 죽었다고 말했다.

전체 논증은 이런 방식으로 형성된다. "여인은 살아있는 남편에게 율법으로 묶여 다른 사람의 아내가 될 수 없다. 그러나 남편이 죽은 후에는 그 율법의 속박에서 풀려 원하는 사람과 결혼하는 것이 자유롭다." 그런 다음 적용이 따른다. 율법은 우리에게 말하자면 남편이었는데, 그것이 우리에게 대해 죽을 때까지 우리는 그 멍에 아래 있었다. 율법의 죽음 후에 그리스도께서 우리를 받으셨다. 즉 율법에서 풀린 우리를 자신과 연결하셨다. 죽은 자 가운데서 살아나신 그리스도와 연합되어, 우리는 오직 그에게만 붙어있어야 한다. 부활 후 그리스도의 생명은 영원하므로 이후에는 이혼이 없을 것이다.

그러나 더 나아가 **율법**이라는 단어가 여기서 모든 곳에서 같은 의미로 언급되지 않는다는 것을 기억해야 한다. 한 곳에서는 결혼의 속박을 의미하고, 다른 곳에서는 아내에 대한 남편의 권위를, 또 다른 곳에서는 모세의 율법을 의미한다. 그러나 바울이 여기서 모세의 경륜에 특유한 율법의 직무만을 언급한다는 것을 기억해야 한다. 하나님이 십계명에서 의롭고 바른 것을 가르치시고 우리의 삶을 인도하는 방향을 주신 한, 율법의 폐기는 꿈에서나 생각할 것이 아니다. 하나님의 뜻은 영원히 동일해야 하기 때문이다.

원주석

4절 카드 ↗

4. Through the body of Christ. Christ, by the glorious victory of the cross, first triumphed over sin; and that he might do this, it was necessary that the handwriting, by which we were held bound, should be cancelled. This handwriting was the law, which, while it continued in force, rendered us bound to serve (203) sin; and hence it is called the power of sin. It was then by cancelling this handwriting that we were delivered through the body of Christ — through his body as fixed to the cross. (204) But the Apostle goes farther, and says, that the bond of the law was destroyed; not that we may live according to our own will, like a widow, who lives as she pleases while single; but that we may be now bound to another husband; nay, that we may pass from hand to hand, as they say, that is, from the law to Christ. He at the same time softens the asperity of the expression, by saying that Christ, in order to join us to his own body, made us free from the yoke of the law. For though Christ subjected himself for a time of his own accord to the law, it is not yet right to say that the law ruled over him. Moreover, he conveys to his own members the liberty which he himself possesses. It is then no wonder that he exempts those from the yoke of the law, whom he unites by a sacred bond to himself, that they may be one body in him. Even his who has been raised , etc. We have already said, that Christ is substituted for the law, lest any freedom should be pretended without him, or lest any, being not yet dead to the law, should dare to divorce himself from it. But he adopts here a periphrastic sentence to denote the eternity of that life which Christ attained by his resurrection, that Christians might know that this connection is to be perpetual. But of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church he speaks more fully in Ephesians 6:0 That we may bring forth fruit to God. He ever annexes the final cause, lest any should indulge the liberty of their flesh and their own lusts, under the pretense that Christ has delivered them from the bondage of the law; for he has offered us, together with himself, as a sacrifice to the Father, and he regenerates us for this end — that by newness of life we may bring forth fruit unto God: and we know that the fruits which our heavenly Father requires from us are those of holiness and righteousness. It is indeed no abatement to our liberty that we serve God; nay, if we desire to enjoy so great a benefit as there is in Christ, it will not henceforth be right in us to entertain any other thought but that of promoting the glory of God; for which purpose Christ has connected us with himself. We shall otherwise remain the bond-slaves, not only of the law, but also of sin and of death. (203) “ Obæratos “ — debtors bound to serve their creditors until payment is made. — Ed. (204) That his crucified body is intended, is clear from what follows; for he is spoken of as having “been raised from the dead.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-5" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-4

Source

4. **그러므로 그리스도의 몸으로 말미암아.** 그리스도는 십자가의 영광스러운 승리로 먼저 죄를 정복하셨다. 그리고 이것을 하시려면 우리가 묶여있던 기록된 증서가 취소되어야 했다. 이 증서가 율법이었는데, 그것이 효력을 유지하는 동안 우리를 죄에 복종하도록 묶어두었다. 따라서 그것은 죄의 권세라고 불린다. 그것은 그리스도의 몸, 즉 십자가에 달린 그의 몸을 통해 이 증서를 취소함으로써 우리가 해방된 것이다.

그러나 사도는 더 나아가 율법의 속박이 파괴되었다고 말한다. 우리가 과부처럼 원하는 대로 자유롭게 살기 위해서가 아니라, 우리가 이제 다른 남편에게 묶여야 하기 위해서이다. 즉 말하자면 손에서 손으로, 율법에서 그리스도께로 넘어가야 한다. 동시에 그는 그리스도께서 우리를 자신의 몸에 연결하기 위해 율법의 멍에에서 우리를 자유롭게 하셨다고 말함으로써 표현의 신랄함을 부드럽게 한다. 그리스도께서 비록 일시적으로 율법에 자발적으로 복종하셨지만, 율법이 그 위에 통치했다고 말하는 것은 옳지 않다. 더 나아가 그는 자신이 소유한 자유를 자신의 지체들에게 전달하신다.

**죽은 자 가운데서 살아나신 이에게** 등. 그리스도께서 율법을 대신한다는 것, 그래서 그가 없이는 어떤 자유도 주장되지 않도록, 또는 아직 율법에 대해 죽지 않은 자가 감히 자신을 율법에서 떼어놓지 않도록 우리는 이미 말했다. 그러나 여기서 그는 그리스도께서 부활로 얻으신 생명의 영원성을 나타내는 우회적 표현을 채택한다. 기독교인들이 이 연결이 영속적이어야 한다는 것을 알도록 말이다.

**이는 우리로 하나님을 위하여 열매를 맺게 하려 하심이니라.** 그는 항상 목적을 덧붙인다. 아무도 자신의 육신의 자유와 자신의 욕망을 방종하게 하는 구실 아래 그리스도께서 그들을 율법의 속박에서 해방시키셨다고 핑계 삼지 않도록 하기 위해서이다. 그는 우리를 자신과 함께 아버지께 희생제물로 드리셨고, 우리를 새 삶의 갱신으로 새롭게 하신다. 이것은 우리가 하나님께 열매를 맺기 위해서이다. 하늘 아버지께서 우리에게 요구하시는 열매가 거룩함과 의로움의 것이라는 것을 우리는 안다.

원주석

5절 카드 ↗

5. For when we were, etc. He shows still more clearly by stating the contrary effect, how unreasonably the zealots of the law acted, who would still detain the faithful under its dominion; for as long as the literal teaching of the law, unconnected with the Spirit of Christ, rules and bears sway, the wantonness of the flesh is not restrained, but, on the contrary, breaks out and prevails. It hence follows, that the kingdom of righteousness is not established, except when Christ emancipates us from the law. Paul at the same time reminds us of the works which it becomes us to do, when set free from the law. As long, then, as man is kept under the yoke of the law, he can, as he is sinning continually, procure nothing for himself but death. Since bondage to the law produces sin only, then freedom, its opposite, must tend to righteousness; if the former leads to death, then the latter leads to life. But let us consider the very words of Paul. In describing our condition during the time we were subject to the dominion of the law, he says, that we were in the flesh . We hence understand, that all those who are under the law attain nothing else but this — that their ears are struck by its external sound without any fruit or effect, while they are inwardly destitute of the Spirit of God. They must therefore necessarily remain altogether sinful and perverse, until a better remedy succeeds to heal their diseases. Observe also this usual phrase of Scripture, to be in the flesh; it means to be endued only with the gifts of nature, without that peculiar grace with which God favors his chosen people. But if this state of life is altogether sinful, it is evident that no part of our soul is naturally sound, and that the power of free will is no other than the power of casting evil emotions as darts into all the faculties of the soul. (205) The emotions of sins, (206) which are through the law , etc. ; that is, the law excited in us evil emotions, which exerted their influence through all our faculties; for there is no part which is not subject to these depraved passions. What the law does, in the absence of the inward teacher, the Spirit, is increasingly to inflame our hearts, so that they boil up with lusts. But observe here, that the law is connected with the vicious nature of man, the perversity of which, and its lusts, break forth with greater fury, the more they are checked by the restraints of righteousness. He further adds, that as long as the emotions of the flesh were under the dominion of the law they brought forth fruit to death; and he adds this to show that the law by itself is destructive. It hence follows, that they are infatuated, who so much desire this bondage which issues in death. (205) To be “in the flesh” has two meanings, — to be unrenewed, and in our natural corrupt state, as [ Calvin ] says, see Romans 8:8 , — and to be subject to external rites and ceremonies as the Jews were, see Galatians 3:3 ; Philippians 3:4 . Its meaning here, according to [ Beza ] and [ Pareus ], is the first; according to [ Grotius ] and [ Hammond ], the second; and according to [ Turrettin ] and [ Hodge ], both are included, as the context, in their view, evidently shows. — Ed. (206) “ Affectus peccatorum — affections of sins ;” τα παθήματα, etc., — “ cupiditates — desires,” or lusts, [ Grotius ].. The word is commonly taken passively, as signifying afflictions, sufferings; Romans 8:18 ; 2 Corinthians 1:5 ; Colossians 1:24 ; but here, and in Galatians 5:24 , it evidently means excitements, commotions, emotions, lusts or lustings. “Passion” in our language admits of two similar meanings — suffering, and an excited feeling, or an inward commotion. These “emotions” are said to be through the law, — “made known by the law,” says [ Chrysostom ] ; but “occasioned by the law,” is more correct, as it appears from Romans 7:8 , or, “made to abound by the law,” as in Romans 5:20 . The law, instead of making men holy, made them, through the perversity of human nature, to sin the more. “Emotions of sins” is an Hebraism for “sinful emotions” — “The members” are those of the “old man,” and not those of the material body, though it is commonly thought that they are the latter, and mentioned, because they are employed as the instruments of sin: but there are many sins, and those of the worst kind, which are confined to the mind and heart. It is therefore more consistent to regard them as the members of “the body of sin,” Romans 6:6 . — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-6" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-5

Source

5. **우리가 육신에 있을 때에는** 등. 그는 반대 효과를 진술함으로써, 신실한 자들을 여전히 율법의 지배 아래 억류하려는 율법의 열광자들이 얼마나 불합리하게 행하는지를 더 명확하게 보인다. 성령과 연결되지 않은 율법의 문자적 가르침이 통치하고 지배하는 한, 육신의 방종은 억제되지 않고 오히려 터져 나와 만연한다. 따라서 그리스도께서 율법에서 우리를 해방시키실 때에만 의의 나라가 세워진다는 결론이 따른다. 동시에 바울은 율법에서 자유롭게 될 때 우리가 해야 할 행위들을 상기시킨다.

**우리가 육신에 있을 때**라는 말로 그는 그 기간 동안의 우리 상태를 묘사한다. 따라서 율법 아래 있는 모든 자들이 얻는 것은 오직 이것뿐임을 이해한다. 그들의 귀가 어떤 열매나 효과도 없이 그 외적인 소리에 맞부딪힐 뿐이다. 내면으로는 하나님의 성령이 없기 때문이다. 그러므로 그들은 더 나은 치유책이 그들의 병을 고치러 올 때까지 완전히 죄 있고 타락하게 남아 있을 수밖에 없다.

원주석

6절 카드 ↗

6. But now we have been loosed from the law , etc. He pursues the argument derived from the opposite effect of things, — “If the restraint of the law availed so little to bridle the flesh, that it became rather the exciter of sin; then, that we may cease from sin, we must necessarily be freed from the law.” Again, “If we are freed from the bondage of the law for this end, that we may serve God; then, perversely do they act who hence take the liberty to indulge in sin; and falsely do they speak who teach, that by this means loose reins are given to lusts.” Observe, then, that we are then freed from the law, when God emancipates us from its rigid exactions and curse, and endues us with his Spirit, through whom we walk in his ways. (207) Having died to that, etc. This part contains a reason, or rather, indicates the manner in which we are made free; for the law is so far abrogated with regard to us, that we are not pressed down by its intolerable burden, and that its inexorable rigor does not overwhelm us with a curse. (208) — In newness of spirit; He sets the spirit in opposition to the letter; for before our will is formed according to the will of God by the Holy Spirit, we have in the law nothing but the outward letter, which indeed bridles our external actions, but does not in the least restrain the fury of our lusts. And he ascribes newness to the Spirit, because it succeeds the old man; as the letter is called old , because it perishes through the regeneration of the Spirit. (207) That the moral, and not the ceremonial law, is meant here, is incontestably evident from what the Apostle adds in the following verses. He quotes the moral law in the next verse; he calls this law, in Romans 7:10 , the commandment , την ἐντολὴν, which was unto life, see Matthew 19:16 ; and he says, that “by it” sin “slew” him, which could not have been said of the ceremonial law. — Ed. (208) Our common version is evidently incorrect as to this clause. The pronoun αὐτῷ or ἐκεινῷ, is to be supplied. There is an exactly similar ellipsis in Romans 6:21 [ Beza ] and several others, as well as our version, have followed a reading , αποθανοντὀ, which [ Griesbach ] disregards as of no authority; and it is inconsistent with the usual phraseology of the Apostle. See Romans 7:4 , and Galatians 2:19 . — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-7" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-6

Source

6. **이제는 우리가 얽매였던 것에 대하여 죽었으므로 율법에서 벗어났으니** 등. 그는 반대 효과로부터 이끌어낸 논증을 계속한다. "율법의 제약이 육신을 억제하는 데 거의 효과가 없어 오히려 죄의 자극제가 되었다면, 죄에서 벗어나기 위해서는 반드시 율법에서 해방되어야 한다." 또한 "우리가 하나님을 섬기기 위해 율법의 속박에서 해방되었다면, 이것으로 죄에 방종하는 자유를 취하는 자들은 비뚤어지게 행하는 것이다. 그리고 이로써 정욕에 고삐가 풀린다고 가르치는 자들은 거짓말하는 것이다." 그러므로 우리가 율법에서 해방되는 것은 하나님이 그 엄격한 요구와 저주에서 우리를 해방시키시고 우리에게 자신의 성령을 부어주실 때이다. 이것을 통해 우리는 그의 길로 행한다.

**영의 새로운 것으로** 등. 그는 성령을 문자에 대립시킨다. 우리의 의지가 성령으로 하나님의 뜻에 따라 형성되기 전에는, 율법 안에 외적인 문자만 있을 뿐이다. 이것은 실로 우리의 외적인 행동을 억제하지만, 우리 정욕의 격노를 조금도 막지 못한다. 그리고 그는 새로움을 성령에 귀속시킨다. 그것이 옛 사람을 대신하기 때문이다. 문자가 **낡은** 것이라 불리는 것처럼, 성령의 거듭남으로 소멸되기 때문이다.

원주석

7절 카드 ↗

7. What then shall we say? Since it has been said that we must be freed from the law, in order that we may serve God in newness of spirit, it seemed as though this evil belonged to the law, — that it leads us to sin. But as this would be above measure inconsistent, the Apostle rightly undertook to disprove it. Now when he adds, Is the law sin? what he means is, “Does it so produce sin that its guilt ought to be imputed to the law?” — But sin I knew not, except through the law; sin then dwells in us, and not in the law; for the cause of it is the depraved lust of our flesh, and we come to know it by the knowledge of God’s righteousness, which is revealed to us in the law. (210) You are not indeed to understand, that no difference whatever can be known between right and wrong without the law; but that without the law we are either too dull of apprehension to discern our depravity, or that we are made wholly insensible through self-flattery, according to what follows, — For coveting I had not known, etc. This is then an explanation of the former sentence, by which he proves that ignorance of sin, of which he had spoken, consisted in this — that he perceived not his own coveting. And he designedly referred to this one kind of sin, in which hypocrisy especially prevails, which has ever connected with itself supine self-indulgence and false assurance. For men are never so destitute of judgment, but that they retain a distinction in external works; nay, they are constrained even to condemn wicked counsels and sinister purposes: and this they cannot do, without ascribing to a right object its own praise. But coveting is more hidden and lies deeper; hence no account is made of it, as long as men judge according to their perceptions of what is outward. He does not indeed boast that he was free from it; but he so flattered himself, that he did not think that this sin was lurking in his heart. For though for a time he was deceived, and believed not that righteousness would be violated by coveting, he yet, at length, understood that he was a sinner, when he saw that coveting, from which no one is free, was prohibited by the law. [ Augustine ] says, that Paul included in this expression the whole law; which, when rightly understood, is true: for when Moses had stated the things from which we must abstain, that we may not wrong our neighbor, he subjoined this prohibition as to coveting, which must be referred to all the things previously forbidden. There is no doubt but that he had in the former precepts condemned all the evil desires which our hearts conceive; but there is much difference between a deliberate purpose, and the desires by which we are tempted. God then, in this last command, requires so much integrity from us, that no vicious lust is to move us to evil, even when no consent succeeds. Hence it was, that I have said, that Paul here ascends higher than where the understanding of men can carry them. But civil laws do indeed declare, that intentions and not issues are to be punished. Philosophers also, with greater refinement, place vices as well as virtues in the soul. But God, by this precept, goes deeper and notices coveting, which is more hidden than the will; and this is not deemed a vice. It was pardoned not only by philosophers, but at this day the Papists fiercely contend, that it is no sin in the regenerate. (211) But Paul says, that he had found out his guilt from this hidden disease: it hence follows, that all those who labor under it, are by no means free from guilt, except God pardons their sin. We ought, at the same time, to remember the difference between evil lustings or covetings which gain consent, and the lusting which tempts and moves our hearts, but stops in the midst of its course. 8. But an occasion being taken , etc. From sin, then, and the corruption of the flesh, proceeds every evil; the law is only the occasion. And though he may seem to speak only of that excitement, by which our lusting is instigated through the law, so that it boils out with greater fury; yet I refer this chiefly to the knowledge the law conveys; as though he had said, “It has discovered to me every lust or coveting which, being hid, seemed somehow to have no existence.” I do not yet deny, but that the flesh is more sharply stimulated to lusting by the law, and also by this means more clearly shows itself; which may have been also the case with Paul: but what I have said of the knowledge it brings, seems to harmonize better with the context; (212) for he immediately subjoins — (210) It was the saying of [ Ambrose ], “ Lex index peccati est, non genitrix — the law is the discoverer, not the begetter of sin.” “The law,’ says [ Pareus ], “prohibits sin; it is not then the cause of it: sin is made known by the law; it is not then by the law produced.” — Ed. (211) As an instance of the frivolous and puerile mode of reasoning adopted by the Papists, the following may be adduced: quoting James 1:15 , “When lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death,” they reason thus: — “Lust is not simply a sin, for it brings it forth; and when it is sin, it is not mortal sin, for it afterwards brings forth death. “Taking advantage of a metaphor, they apply it strictly and literally, without considering that the Apostle is only exhibiting the rise, progress, and termination — of what? of sin no doubt. The like produces its like. If lust were not sinful, it could not generate what is sinful. Such childish and profane reasoning is an outrage both on common sense and on religion. — Ed. (212) Most commentators take the opposite view, — that the irritation of sin occasioned by the law is more especially meant here. The two ideas, the knowledge and the excitement, or the increase of sin by the law, are no doubt referred to by the Apostle in these verses. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-8" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-7

Source

7. **그런즉 우리가 무슨 말 하리요?** 우리가 새로운 영으로 하나님을 섬기려면 율법에서 해방되어야 한다고 말해졌으므로, 이 악이 율법에 속하는 것처럼 보였다. 즉 율법이 우리를 죄로 이끈다는 것이다. 그러나 이것은 지나치게 터무니없는 것이었으므로 사도는 그것을 논박하는 것이 마땅했다. 그가 덧붙이는 질문, **율법이 죄냐?** 는 이런 의미이다. "그것은 죄를 낳아서 그 죄책이 율법에 귀속되어야 하는가?" **그러나 율법으로 말미암지 않고는 내가 죄를 알지 못하였으리라.** 그러므로 죄는 우리 안에 거하며 율법에 있지 않다. 죄의 원인은 우리 육신의 타락한 욕망이며, 우리는 율법 안에서 우리에게 계시된 하나님의 의의 지식으로 그것을 알게 된다.

율법 없이는 선과 악 사이의 어떤 차이도 알 수 없다는 의미로 이해하면 안 된다. 그보다 율법 없이는 우리의 부패를 인식하기에 너무 둔하거나, 또는 자기 아첨으로 완전히 무감각해진다는 것이다. 이에 대한 설명은 이렇다. **탐심이 있는지** 등. 이것은 앞 문장의 설명이다. 그로써 그는 자신이 말한 죄의 무지가 자신의 탐심을 인식하지 못하는 것에 있었다는 것을 증명한다. 그는 의도적으로 이 한 종류의 죄를 언급했는데, 그것은 위선이 특히 만연하는 것으로, 안이한 자기 방종과 거짓된 자기 확신이 항상 연결되어 있다.

아우구스티누스는 바울이 이 표현에 전 율법을 포함했다고 말하는데, 올바르게 이해하면 맞는 말이다. 모세가 이웃에게 해를 끼치지 않기 위해 삼가야 할 것들을 말씀하고, 탐심에 관한 이 금령을 덧붙였는데, 이것은 이전에 금지된 모든 것들에 적용되어야 한다. 탐심을 우리가 먹음직하게 여기는 악한 욕망들이라고 보면, 의심할 여지 없이 그는 이전 계명들에서 우리 마음이 품는 모든 악한 욕망들을 정죄했다. 그러나 의도적인 목적과 우리를 유혹하는 욕망들 사이에는 많은 차이가 있다. 그러므로 하나님은 이 마지막 명령에서 우리에게 그런 순전함을 요구하신다. 악한 정욕이 동의가 뒤따르지 않더라도 우리를 악으로 움직이지 않을 정도로 말이다.

원주석

8절 카드 ↗

8. For without the law, etc. He expresses most clearly the meaning of his former words; for it is the same as though he had said, that the knowledge of sin without the law is buried. It is a general truth, which he presently applies to his own case. I hence wonder what could have come into the minds of interpreters to render the passage in the preterimperfect tense, as though Paul was speaking of himself; for it is easy to see that his purpose was to begin with a general proposition, and then to explain the subject by his own example. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-9" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-8

Source

8. **그러나 죄가 기회를 타서** 등. 죄와 육신의 부패에서 모든 악이 나오며, 율법은 오직 기회일 뿐이다. 그는 그 지식을 주로 지식에 적용한다. 마치 이렇게 말하는 것과 같다. "숨겨져 어떤 의미에서 존재하지 않는 것처럼 보이던 모든 욕망이나 탐심을 율법이 내게 발견해 주었다."

**율법이 없으면 죄가 죽은 것임이라.** 그는 앞 말의 의미를 가장 명확하게 표현한다. 율법 없이는 죄의 지식이 묻힌다는 것과 같다. 이것은 그가 곧 자신의 경우에 적용하는 일반적인 진리이다.

원주석

9절 카드 ↗

9. For I was alive, etc. He means to intimate that there had been a time when sin was dead to him or in him. But he is not to be understood as though he had been without law at any time, but this word I was alive has a peculiar import; for it was the absence of the law that was the reason why he was alive; that is, why he being inflated with a conceit as to his own righteousness, claimed life to himself while he was yet dead. That the sentence may be more clear, state it thus, “When I was formerly without the law, I was alive.” But I have said that this expression is emphatic; for by imagining himself great, he also laid claim to life. The meaning then is this, “When I sinned, having not the knowledge of the law, the sin, which I did not observe, was so laid to sleep, that it seemed to be dead; on the other hand, as I seemed not to myself to be a sinner, I was satisfied with myself, thinking that I had a life of mine own.” But the death of sin is the life of man, and again the life of sin is the death of man. It may be here asked, what time was that when through his ignorance of the law, or as he himself says, through the absence of it, he confidently laid claim to life. It is indeed certain, that he had been taught the doctrine of the law from his childhood; but it was the theology of the letter, which does not humble its disciples, for as he says elsewhere, the veil interposed so that the Jews could not see the light of life in the law; so also he himself, while he had his eyes veiled, being destitute of the Spirit of Christ, was satisfied with the outward mask of righteousness. Hence he represents the law as absent, though before his eyes, while it did not really impress him with the consciousness of God’s judgment. Thus the eyes of hypocrites are covered with a veil, that they see not how much that command requires, in which we are forbidden to lust or covet. But when the commandment came, etc. So now, on the other hand, he sets forth the law as coming when it began to be really understood. It then raised sin as it were from be dead; for it discovered to Paul how great depravity abounded in the recesses of his heart, and at the same time it slew him. We must ever remember that he speaks of that inebriating confidence in which hypocrites settle, while they flatter themselves, because they overlook their sins. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-10" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-9

Source

9. **나는 전에 율법을 깨닫지 못했을 때에는 살았더니** 등. 그는 죄가 자신에게 혹은 자신 안에서 죽어있던 때가 있었다는 것을 암시하려 한다. 그가 어떤 때에도 율법이 없었다는 의미가 아니다. **살았더니**라는 이 단어는 특별한 의미를 가진다. 율법의 부재가 그가 살았던 이유, 즉 자신의 의에 대한 자만으로 부풀어 올라 아직 죽어있으면서도 생명을 스스로에게 주장했던 이유였기 때문이다. 문장을 더 명확하게 하려면 이렇게 표현하라. "전에 율법이 없었을 때 나는 살았었다." 이 표현은 강조적이다. 자신을 위대하게 여기면서 생명도 주장했기 때문이다.

그 의미는 이렇다. "내가 율법의 지식 없이 죄를 지었을 때, 내가 관찰하지 못했던 죄가 잠들어 있어서 죽은 것처럼 보였다. 반면에 나 자신에게 죄인이 아닌 것처럼 보였으므로 자신에 만족하며 나 자신만의 생명이 있다고 생각했다."

**그러나 계명이 이르매** 등. 반대로 그는 율법이 진정으로 이해되기 시작했을 때 온 것으로 제시한다. 그러자 율법은 말하자면 죽은 자 가운데서 죄를 일으켰다. 자신의 마음의 은밀한 곳에 얼마나 큰 부패가 넘치는지를 바울에게 발견시켰고, 동시에 그를 죽였다. 우리는 항상 위선자들이 자신의 죄를 간과하면서 자신을 자랑스러워하는 그 도취된 자신감에 대해 그가 말하고 있다는 것을 기억해야 한다.

원주석

10절 카드 ↗

10. Was found by me, etc. Two things are stated here — that the commandment shows to us a way of life in the righteousness of God, and that it was given in order that we by keeping the law of the Lord might obtain eternal life, except our corruption stood in the way. But as none of us obey the law, but, on the contrary, are carried headlong on our feet and hands into that kind of life from which it recalls us, it can bring us nothing but death. We must thus distinguish between the character of the law and our own wickedness. It hence follows, that it is incidental that the law inflicts on us a deadly wound, as when an incurable disease is more exasperated by a healing remedy. I indeed allow that it is an inseparable incident, and hence the law, as compared with the gospel, is called in another place the ministration of death; but still this remains unaltered, that it is not in its own nature hurtful to us, but it is so because our corruption provokes and draws upon us its curse. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-11" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-10

Source

10. **내게 생명을 줄 것이라고 생각했던 계명이** 등. 여기서 두 가지가 언급된다. 계명은 하나님의 의 안에 있는 생명의 길을 우리에게 보여주며, 우리가 주의 율법을 지킴으로써 영생을 얻기 위해 주어졌다는 것. 다만 우리의 부패가 방해하지 않는다면 말이다. 그러나 우리 중 누구도 율법에 순종하지 않고 오히려 그것이 우리에게서 이끌어내려는 생명에서 손발을 절어 거꾸로 달려가므로, 율법은 우리에게 죽음 외에 아무것도 가져올 수 없다. 그러므로 우리는 율법의 성격과 우리 자신의 사악함을 구별해야 한다. 따라서 율법이 우리에게 치명적인 상처를 입히는 것은 우연한 일이다. 치유력이 있는 치료가 불치병을 더 악화시키는 것처럼 말이다.

원주석

11절 카드 ↗

11. Led me out of the way, etc. It is indeed true, that while the will of God is hid from us, and no truth shines on us, the life of men goes wholly astray and is full of errors; nay, we do nothing but wander from the right course, until the law shows to us the way of living rightly: but as we begin then only to perceive our erroneous course, when the Lord loudly reproves us, Paul says rightly, that we are led out of the way, when sin is made evident by the law. Hence the verb, ἐξαπατᾷν , must be understood, not of the thing itself, but of our knowledge; that is, that it is made manifest by the law how much we have departed from the right course. It must then be necessarily rendered, led me out of the way; for hence sinners, who before went on heedlessly, loathe and abominate themselves, when they perceive, through the light which the law throws on the turpitude of sin, that they had been hastening to death. But he away introduces the word occasion, and for this purpose — that we may know that the law of itself does not bring death, but that this happens through something else, and that this is as it were adventitious. (215) (215) This verse will be better understood if we consider it as in a manner a repetition, in another form, of what the former verse contains, and this is perfectly consistent with the usual manner of the Apostle. His object seems to have been to prevent a misapprehension of what he had said, that the commandment which was for life proved to be unto death. He hence says, that sin availed itself of the commandment, and by it deceived him, that is, promised him life, and then by it killed him, that is, proved fatal to him. There is a correspondence in meaning between the commandment unto life and deceiving, and between death and killing. In Romans 7:8 , sin, as a person, is said to take advantage of the commandment to work every kind of sinful desires: but it is said here to take this advantage to deceive by promising life, and then to destroy, to expose, and subject him to death and misery. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-12" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-11

Source

11. **죄가 기회를 타서 계명으로 나를 속이고** 등. 실로 하나님의 뜻이 우리에게 숨겨져 있고 어떤 진리도 비추지 않을 때, 사람들의 삶이 완전히 길을 잃고 오류로 가득 차 있는 것은 사실이다. 우리가 올바르게 사는 방법을 율법이 보여줄 때까지 우리는 올바른 과정에서 방황할 뿐이다. 그러나 주께서 크게 책망하실 때에야 비로소 우리의 잘못된 과정을 인식하게 되므로, 바울은 율법으로 죄가 나타날 때 우리가 길을 잃게 된다고 옳게 말한다. 따라서 동사는 사물 자체가 아니라 우리의 지식에 대해 이해되어야 한다. 즉 우리가 올바른 과정에서 얼마나 떠나 있는지가 율법으로 분명해진다는 것이다.

원주석

12절 카드 ↗

12. So then the law is indeed holy , etc. Some think that the words law and commandment is a repetition of the same thing; with whom I agree; (216) and I consider that there is a peculiar force in the words, when he says, that the law itself and whatever is commanded in the law, is holy , and therefore to be regarded with the highest reverence, — that it is just , and cannot therefore be charged with anything wrong, — that it is good, and hence pure and free from everything that can do harm. He thus defends the law against every charge of blame, that no one should ascribe to it what is contrary to goodness, justice, and holiness. (216) This is doubtless true, and it is an example of what the Apostle’s manner of writing is, it being that of the ancient prophets. How various are the words used in the Psalms 119:0 to designate the law or the revealed will of God? and two different words are often used in the same verse. Having spoken of the law in connection with sin, the Apostle may be supposed to have had the character of sin in view in characterizing the law. Sin works depraved desires and lusts; the law is holy: sin deceives and acts the traitor, the law is plain-dealing and just: sin leads to death and misery; the law is good and leads to happiness. The last contrast is evident from what follows in the next verse, “Was that which is good made death unto me?” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-13" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-12

Source

12. **이로 보건대 율법은 거룩하고** 등. 어떤 이들은 **율법**과 **계명**이 같은 것의 반복이라고 생각하는데, 나도 동의한다. 그리고 그가 율법 자체와 율법에서 명령된 모든 것이 **거룩하다**고, 따라서 최고의 경의로 여겨져야 하고, **의롭다**고, 따라서 어떤 잘못의 혐의도 받지 않고, **선하다**고, 따라서 순수하고 해를 끼칠 수 있는 모든 것에서 자유롭다고 말할 때 그 단어들에 특별한 힘이 있다고 생각한다. 이렇게 그는 율법을 모든 비난의 혐의로부터 변호한다. 아무도 선함과 의로움과 거룩함에 반대되는 것을 율법에 귀속시키지 못하도록 말이다.

원주석

13절 카드 ↗

13. Has then what is good , etc. He had hitherto defended the law from calumnies, but in such a manner, that it still remained doubtful whether it was the cause of death; nay, the minds of men were on this point perplexed, — how could it be that nothing but death was gained from so singular a gift of God. To this objection then he now gives an answer; and he denies, that death proceeds from the law, though death through its means is brought on us by sin. And though this answer seems to militate in appearance against what he had said before — that he had found the commandment, which was given for life, to be unto death, there is yet no contrariety. He had indeed said before, that it is through our wickedness that the law is turned to our destruction, and that contrary to its own character; but here he denies, that it is in such a sense the cause of death, that death is to be imputed to it. In 2 Corinthians 3:0 he treats more fully of the law. He there calls it the ministration of death; but he so calls it according to what is commonly done in a dispute, and represents, not the real character of the law, but the false opinion of his opponents. (217) But sin, etc. With no intention to offend others, I must state it as my opinion, that this passage ought to be read as I have rendered it, and the meaning is this, — “Sin is in a manner regarded as just before it is discovered by the law; but when it is by the law made known, then it really obtains its own name of sin; and hence it appears the more wicked, and, so to speak, the more sinful, because it turns the goodness of the law, by perverting it, to our destruction; for that must be very pestiferous, which makes what is in its own nature salutary to be hurtful to us.” The import of the whole is — that it was necessary for the atrocity of sin to be discovered by the law; for except sin had burst forth into outrageous, or, as they say, into enormous excess, it would not have been acknowledged as sin; and the more outrageous does its enormity appear, when it converts life into death; and thus every excuse is taken away from it. (218) (217) This can hardly be admitted. The Apostle in Corinthians evidently states a fact, as he often does, without going into an explanation; and the fact was, that the law proved to be the ministration of death: but it proved to be so through the sin and wickedness of man. — Ed. (218) [ Erasmus ], [ Beza ], [ Pareus ], [ Stuart ], and others, make up the ellipsis by putting in, “was made death to me,” after “sin.” But there is no need of adding anything. The sentence throughout is thoroughly Hebraistic. What is partially announced in the words, “that it might appear sin,” or, to be sin, etc., is more fully stated in the last clause; and the participle, “working ” — κατεργαζομένη, is used instead of a verb, the auxiliary verb being understood. See similar instances in Romans 14:9 [ Calvin ] ’s version is no doubt the correct one. What follows the last ἵνα more fully explains what comes after the first. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-14" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-13

Source

13. **그렇다면 선한 것이** 등. 그는 지금까지 율법을 비방에서 변호해 왔다. 그러나 그 방식이 여전히 율법이 죽음의 원인인지를 의심스럽게 만들었다. 아니, 사람들의 마음은 이 문제에서 당혹스러웠다. 하나님의 그렇게 특별한 선물로부터 죽음 외에 아무것도 얻지 못한다는 것이 어떻게 가능한가? 이 반론에 그는 이제 대답한다. 죽음이 율법에서 나오지 않는다고 부정한다. 죄를 통해 율법의 수단으로 우리에게 죽음이 임하지만 말이다.

**그러나 죄가** 등. 아무에게도 불쾌하게 할 의도 없이, 이 구절은 내가 번역한 대로 읽어야 한다는 것이 내 견해이다. 그 의미는 이렇다. "죄는 율법으로 발견되기 전에는 어떤 의미에서 의롭게 여겨진다. 그러나 율법으로 알려지면 비로소 진정으로 자신의 이름인 죄를 얻는다. 따라서 더 사악하게, 말하자면 더 죄스러운 것으로 나타나게 된다. 율법의 선함을 왜곡하여 우리의 멸망으로 바꾸기 때문이다. 본래 유익한 것을 해롭게 만드는 것은 매우 유해한 것이 틀림없다." 전체의 의미는 이렇다. 죄의 포악함이 율법으로 발견될 필요가 있었다. 죄가 극도의 방종한 방탕으로 폭발하지 않았다면 그것은 죄로 인정되지 않았을 것이기 때문이다. 그리고 생명을 죽음으로 바꿀 때 그 포악함이 더 명백하게 드러나며, 이로써 모든 변명이 그것에서 제거된다.

원주석

14절 카드 ↗

14. For we know that the law, etc. He now begins more closely to compare the law with what man is, that it may be more clearly understood whence the evil of death proceeds. He then sets before us an example in a regenerate man, in whom the remnants of the flesh are wholly contrary to the law of the Lord, while the spirit would gladly obey it. But first, as we have said, he makes only a comparison between nature and the law. Since in human things there is no greater discord than between spirit and flesh, the law being spiritual and man carnal, what agreement can there be between the natural man and the law? Even the same as between darkness and light. But by calling the law spiritual , he not only means, as some expound the passage, that it requires the inward affections of the heart; but that, by way of contrast, it has a contrary import to the word carnal (219) These interpreters give this explanation, “The law is spiritual, that is, it binds not only the feet and hands as to external works, but regards the feelings of the heart, and requires the real fear of God.” But here a contrast is evidently set forth between the flesh and the spirit. And further, it is sufficiently clear from the context, and it has been in fact already shown, that under the term flesh is included whatever men bring from the womb; and flesh is what men are called, as they are born, and as long as they retain their natural character; for as they are corrupt, so they neither taste nor desire anything but what is gross and earthly. Spirit, on the contrary, is renewed nature, which God forms anew after his own image. And this mode of speaking is adopted on this account — because the newness which is wrought in us is the gift of the Spirit. The perfection then of the doctrine of the law is opposed here to the corrupt nature of man: hence the meaning is as follows, “The law requires a celestial and an angelic righteousness, in which no spot is to appear, to whose clearness nothing is to be wanting: but I am a carnal man, who can do nothing but oppose it.” (220) But the exposition of [ Origen ], which indeed has been approved by many before our time, is not worthy of being refuted; he says, that the law is called spiritual by Paul, because the Scripture is not to be understood literally. What has this to do with the present subject? Sold under sin. By this clause he shows what flesh is in itself; for man by nature is no less the slave of sin, than those bondmen, bought with money, whom their masters ill treat at their pleasure, as they do their oxen and their asses. We are so entirely controlled by the power of sin, that the whole mind, the whole heart, and all our actions are under its influence. Compulsion I always except, for we sin spontaneously, as it would be no sin, were it not voluntary. But we are so given up to sin, that we can do willingly nothing but sin; for the corruption which bears rule within us thus drives us onward. Hence this comparison does not import, as they say, a forced service, but a voluntary obedience, which an inbred bondage inclines us to render. (219) This is evidently the case here. As carnal means what is sinful and corrupt, so spiritual imports what is holy, just, and good. As the works of the flesh are evil and depraved works, so the fruits of the Spirit are good and holy fruits. See Galatians 5:19 , and particularly John 3:6 . — Ed. (220) “He is ‘carnal’ in exact proportion to the degree in which he falls short of perfect conformity to the law of God.” — [ Scott ] It has been usual with a certain class of divines, such as [ Hammond ] and Bull , to hold that all the Fathers before [ Augustine ] viewed Paul here as not speaking of himself. But this is plainly contradicted by what [ Augustine ] declares himself in several parts of his writings. In his [ Retractations, B. 1, chapter 23 ], he refers to some authors of divine discourses ( quibusdam divinorum tractatoribus eloquiorom ) by whose authority he was induced to change his opinion, and to regard Paul here as speaking of himself. He alludes again in his work against [ Julian ], an advocate of Pelagianism, B. 6, chapter 11, to this very change in his view, and ascribes it to the reading of the works of those who were better and more intelligent than himself, ( melioribus et intelligentioribus cessi .) Then he refers to them by name, and says, “Hence it was that I came to understand these things, as [ Hilary ], [ Gregory ], [ Ambrose ], and other holy and known doctors of the Church, understood them, who thought that the Apostle himself strenuously struggled against carnal lusts, which he was unwilling to have, and yet had, and that he bore witness as to this confiict in these words,” (referring to this very text,) — Hinc factum est. ut sic ista intelligerem, quemadmodum intellexit Hilarius, Gregorius, Ambroslus, et cœteri Ecclsiœ sancti notique doctores , qui et ipsum Apostolum adversus carnales concupiscentias , quas habere nolebat, et tamen habebat , strenue conflixisse , eundemque conflictum suum illis suis verbis contestatum fuisse senserunt — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-15" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-14

Source

14. **우리가 율법은 신령한 줄 알거니와** 등. 이제 율법이 무엇인지와 사람이 무엇인지를 더 가까이 비교하기 시작한다. 죽음의 악이 어디서 나오는지를 더 명확하게 이해하기 위해서이다. 그러므로 이미 거듭난 사람을 실례로 제시한다. 이 사람 안에서 그가 염두에 두었던 두 가지 모두 더 명확하게 나타난다. 하나님의 율법과 자연인 사이에 얼마나 큰 불일치가 있는지, 그리고 율법이 그 자체로 죽음을 낳지 않는다는 것이다.

율법을 **신령하다**고 부를 때, 어떤 이들이 해석하듯이 단순히 내면의 마음의 감정을 요구한다는 의미만이 아니다. 대조로서 **육신적**이라는 단어와 반대되는 의미이기도 하다. 육신적이 사악하고 부패한 것을 의미하듯이, 신령한은 거룩하고 의롭고 선한 것을 의미한다. 더 나아가 **육신**이라는 용어 아래 사람이 태중에서 가져오는 모든 것이 포함된다는 것은 문맥에서 충분히 명확하며 이미 보여주었다. 그리고 육신이란 사람들이 태어나서 자연적인 성격을 유지하는 한 불리는 것이다. 그들이 부패했으므로 거칠고 땅에 속한 것 외에는 아무것도 맛보거나 원하지 않는다. 이와 반대로 **영**은 하나님이 자신의 형상을 따라 새롭게 형성하신 갱신된 본성이다. 따라서 율법 교리의 완전함이 사람의 타락한 본성에 대립된다. 그 의미는 다음과 같다. "율법은 어떤 흠도 나타나지 않는 하늘의 천사적 의를 요구한다. 그것의 명확함에 아무것도 부족함이 없다. 그러나 나는 오직 율법에 반대하는 것만 할 수 있는 육신적인 사람이다."

**죄 아래 팔렸도다.** 이 절로 그는 육신 그 자체가 무엇인지를 보여준다. 사람은 본성으로 돈으로 산 종들이 자신의 기쁨대로 주인에게 부당하게 취급받는 것처럼, 죄의 노예가 된다. 우리는 죄의 권세에 의해 너무나 완전하게 제어되어, 전 마음과 전 심장과 우리의 모든 행위가 그것의 영향 아래 있다. 나는 항상 강제를 예외로 하는데, 우리가 자발적으로 죄를 짓기 때문이다. 자발적이지 않으면 죄가 되지 않을 것이다. 그러나 우리는 자신있게 죄 외에 다른 것을 할 수 없도록 죄에 내맡겨져 있다. 내면의 지배하는 부패가 우리를 앞으로 몰아대기 때문이다.

원주석

15절 카드 ↗

15. For what I do I know not , etc. He now comes to a more particular case, that of a man already regenerated; (221) in whom both the things which he had in view appear more clearly; and these were, — the great discord there is between the Law of God and the natural man, — and how the law does not of itself produce death. For since the carnal man rushes into sin with the whole propensity of his mind, he seems to sin with such a free choice, as though it were in his power to govern himself; so that a most pernicious opinion has prevailed almost among all men — that man, by his own natural strength, without the aid of Divine grace, can choose what he pleases. But though the will of a faithful man is led to good by the Spirit of God, yet in him the corruption of nature appears conspicuously; for it obstinately resists and leads to what is contrary. Hence the case of a regenerated man is the most suitable; for by this you may know how much is the contrariety between our nature and the righteousness of the law. From this case, also, a proof as to the other clause may more fitly be sought, than from the mere consideration of human nature; for the law, as it produces only death in a man wholly carnal, is in him more easily impeached, for it is doubtful whence the evil proceeds. In a regenerate man it brings forth salutary fruits; and hence it appears, that it is the flesh only that prevents it from giving life: so far it is from producing death of itself. That the whole, then, of this reasoning may be more fully and more distinctly understood, we must observe, that this conflict, of which the Apostle speaks, does not exist in man before he is renewed by the Spirit of God: for man, left to his own nature, is wholly borne along by his lusts without any resistance; for though the ungodly are tormented by the stings of conscience, and cannot take such delight in their vices, but that they have some taste of bitterness; yet you cannot hence conclude, either that evil is hated, or that good is loved by them; only the Lord permits them to be thus tormented, in order to show to them in a measure his judgment; but not to imbue them either with the love of righteousness or with the hatred of sin. There is then this difference between them and the faithful — that they are never so blinded and hardened, but that when they are reminded of their crimes, they condemn them in their own conscience; for knowledge is not so utterly extinguished in them, but that they still retain the difference between right and wrong; and sometimes they are shaken with such dread under a sense of their sin, that they bear a kind of condemnation even in this life: nevertheless they approve of sin with all their heart, and hence give themselves up to it without any feeling of genuine repugnance; for those stings of conscience, by which they are harassed, proceed from opposition in the judgment, rather than from any contrary inclination in the will. The godly, on the other hand, in whom the regeneration of God is begun, are so divided, that with the chief desire of the heart they aspire to God, seek celestial righteousness, hate sin, and yet they are drawn down to the earth by the relics of their flesh: and thus, while pulled in two ways, they fight against their own nature, and nature fights against them; and they condemn their sins, not only as being constrained by the judgment of reason, but because they really in their hearts abominate them, and on their account loathe themselves. This is the Christian conflict between the flesh and the spirit of which Paul speaks in Galatians 5:17 . It has therefore been justly said, that the carnal man runs headlong into sin with the approbation and consent of the whole soul; but that a division then immediately begins for the first time, when he is called by the Lord and renewed by the Spirit. For regeneration only begins in this life; the relics of the flesh which remain, always follow their own corrupt propensities, and thus carry on a contest against the Spirit. The inexperienced, who consider not the subject which the Apostle handles, nor the plan which he pursues, imagine, that the character of man by nature is here described; and indeed there is a similar description of human nature given to us by the Philosophers: but Scripture philosophizes much deeper; for it finds that nothing has remained in the heart of man but corruption, since the time in which Adam lost the image of God. So when the Sophisters wish to define free-will, or to form an estimate of what the power of nature can do, they fix on this passage. But Paul, as I have said already, does not here set before us simply the natural man, but in his own person describes what is the weakness of the faithful, and how great it is. [ Augustine ] was for a time involved in the common error; but after having more clearly examined the passage, he not only retracted what he had falsely taught, but in his first book to Boniface, he proves, by many strong reasons, that what is said cannot be applied to any but to the regenerate. And we shall now endeavor to make our readers clearly to see that such is the case. I know not. He means that he acknowledges not as his own the works which he did through the weakness of the flesh, for he hated them. And so [ Erasmus ] has not unsuitably given this rendering, “I approve not,” ( non probo .) (222) We hence conclude, that the doctrine of the law is so consentaneous to right judgment, that the faithful repudiate the transgression of it as a thing wholly unreasonable. But as Paul seems to allow that he teaches otherwise than what the law prescribes, many interpreters have been led astray, and have thought that he had assumed the person of another; hence has arisen the common error, that the character of an unregenerate man is described throughout this portion of the chapter. But Paul, under the idea of transgressing the law, includes all the defects of the godly, which are not inconsistent with the f

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-15

Source

15. **나의 행하는 것을 내가 알지 못하노라** 등. 이제 그는 이미 거듭난 사람의 더 특수한 경우로 온다. 이 사람 안에서 그가 염두에 두었던 두 가지 모두가 더 명확하게 나타난다. 그것들은 하나님의 율법과 자연인 사이의 큰 불일치, 그리고 율법이 그 자체로 죽음을 낳지 않는다는 것이다.

이 싸움은 사람이 하나님의 성령으로 새로워지기 전에는 존재하지 않는다는 것을 주목해야 한다. 자신의 본성에 방치된 사람은 어떤 저항도 없이 자신의 욕망에 완전히 이끌리기 때문이다. 경건하지 못한 자들이 양심의 자침으로 괴로워하여 자신의 악에서 그렇게 큰 기쁨을 취할 수 없고 어떤 쓴맛을 맛보더라도, 그것에서 악이 미움을 받거나 선이 사랑받는다는 것을 추론할 수 없다. 주는 단지 그들이 어느 정도 자신의 심판을 그들에게 보이도록 그들이 이렇게 괴로워하도록 허용하실 뿐이다. 그들에게 의에 대한 사랑이나 죄에 대한 미움을 심어주기 위해서가 아니다.

그러므로 신실한 자들과 그들 사이에는 이런 차이가 있다. 그들은 자신의 범죄를 상기받을 때 자신의 양심 안에서 그것들을 정죄하는 것을 잊을 만큼 눈이 멀거나 마음이 굳어지지 않는다. 지식이 그들에게서 완전히 소멸되지 않아 여전히 선과 악의 차이를 보유하기 때문이다. 그러나 그들은 온 마음으로 죄를 인정하여 진정한 반감 없이 그것에 자신을 내어준다. 반면에 경건한 자들은 하나님의 거듭남이 시작된 자들로서, 마음의 주된 열망으로 하나님을 열망하고 하늘의 의를 구하며 죄를 미워한다. 그러나 육신의 잔재로 인해 땅으로 끌려 내려간다. 이렇게 두 가지 방향으로 당겨지면서 그들은 자신의 본성과 싸우고 본성은 그들과 싸운다. 그들은 자신의 죄를 이성의 판단에 강제되어 정죄할 뿐만 아니라, 정말로 마음속으로 혐오하여 그것들로 인해 자신을 혐오한다. 이것이 갈라디아서 5장 17절에서 바울이 말하는 육신과 영 사이의 기독교적 싸움이다.

**내가 알지 못하노라.** 그는 육신의 나약함으로 행한 행위들을 자신의 것으로 인정하지 않는다는 의미이다. 그것들을 미워했기 때문이다. 그러므로 에라스무스가 이것을 "내가 인정하지 않는다"로 번역한 것은 적절하지 않지 않다. 따라서 우리는 율법의 교리가 바른 판단에 너무나 일치하여 신실한 자들이 그것을 어기는 것을 완전히 불합리한 것으로 거부한다는 결론을 내린다.

원주석

16절 카드 ↗

16. But if what I desire not, I do, I consent to the law, etc. ; that is, “When my heart acquiesces in the law, and is delighted with its righteousness, (which certainly is the case when it hates the transgression of it,) it then perceives and acknowledges the goodness of the law, so that we are fully convinced, experience itself being our teacher, that no evil ought to be imputed to the law; nay, that it would be salutary to men, were it to meet with upright and pure hearts.” But this consent is not to be understood to be the same with what we have heard exists in the ungodly, who have expressed words of this kind, “I see better things and approve of them; I follow the worse.” Again, “What is hurtful I follow; I shun what I believe would be profitable.” For these act under a constraint when they subscribe to the righteousness of God, as their will is wholly alienated from it, but the godly man consents to the law with the real and most cheerful desire of his heart; for he wishes nothing more than to mount up to heaven. (224) (224) “I consent — consentio — συμφημι, I say with, assent to, agree with, confirm.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-17" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-16

Source

16. **만일 내가 원치 아니하는 것을 행하면 내가 율법이 선한 것을 시인하노라** 등. 즉 "내 마음이 율법에 묵인하고 그 의에서 기쁨을 얻을 때 — 그 범죄를 미워할 때 확실히 그런 경우이다 — 그때 율법의 선함을 인식하고 인정한다. 우리가 경험 자체를 스승으로 삼아 완전히 확신하게 되는데, 율법에는 어떤 악도 귀속시킬 수 없다. 오히려 솔직하고 순수한 마음을 만난다면 사람들에게 유익할 것이다." 그러나 이 묵인은 경건하지 못한 자들에게서 존재하는 것과 같은 것으로 이해해서는 안 된다. 그들은 "나는 더 나은 것들을 보고 인정한다. 나는 더 나쁜 것을 따른다"와 같은 말들을 표현한다. 그들은 자신의 의지가 하나님의 의에서 완전히 소외되어 있으면서 강제로 하나님의 의에 동의한다. 그러나 경건한 사람은 마음의 진정하고 가장 즐거운 열망으로 율법에 동의한다. 그는 하늘에 오르기를 그보다 더 원하는 것이 없다.

원주석

17절 카드 ↗

17. Now it is no more I who do it , etc. This is not the pleading of one excusing himself, as though he was blameless, as the case is with many triflers who think that they have a sufficient defense to cover all their wickedness, when they cast the blame on the flesh; but it is a declaration, by which he shows how very far he dissented from his own flesh in his spiritual feeling; for the faithful are carried along in their obedience to God with such fervour of spirit that they deny the flesh. This passage also clearly shows, that Paul speaks here of none but of the godly, who have been already born again; for as long as man remains like himself, whatsoever he may be, he is justly deemed corrupt; but Paul here denies that he is wholly possessed by sin; nay, he declares himself to be exempt from its bondage, as though he had said, that sin only dwelt in some part of his soul, while with an earnest feeling of heart he strove for and aspired after the righteousness of God, and clearly proved that he had the law of God engraven within him. (225) (225) The last clause of this verse is worthy of notice, as the expression “indwelling sin” seems to have arisen from the words ἡ οἰκουσα ἐν ἐμοὶ — “which dwells in me.” Sin was in him as in a house or dwelling; it was an in-habiting sin, or that which is in-abiding or resident. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-18" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-17

Source

17. **이제는 그것을 행하는 자가 내가 아니요** 등. 이것은 자신이 비난받지 않는 것처럼 변명하는 자의 주장이 아니다. 많은 하찮은 자들이 육신에게 잘못을 전가할 때 모든 자신의 사악함을 가릴 충분한 방어책을 가지고 있다고 생각하듯이 말이다. 그보다는 그가 영적인 느낌에서 자신의 육신에서 얼마나 완전히 달랐는지를 보이는 선언이다. 신실한 자들은 육신을 부정할 만큼 열정적으로 하나님께 순종하는 것에 이끌려 가기 때문이다.

이 구절은 또한 바울이 여기서 이미 거듭난 경건한 자들에 대해서만 말한다는 것을 명확히 보여준다. 사람이 자신과 같이 남아 있는 한, 어떻게 보이든 그는 마땅히 부패한 것으로 여겨지기 때문이다. 그러나 바울은 여기서 자신이 죄에 완전히 사로잡히지 않았다고 부정한다. 오히려 자신이 그 속박에서 면제되었다고 선언한다. 마치 죄가 오직 자신의 영혼의 어떤 부분에만 거할 뿐이고, 마음의 진지한 감정으로 하나님의 의를 갈망하고 열망했으며, 하나님의 율법이 자신 안에 새겨져 있다는 것을 분명히 증명했다고 말하는 것과 같다.

원주석

18절 카드 ↗

18. For I know , etc. He says that no good by nature dwelt in him. Then in me , means the same as though he had said, “So far as it regards myself.” In the first part he indeed arraigns himself as being wholly depraved, for he confesses that no good dwelt in him; and then he subjoins a modification, lest he should slight the grace of God which also dwelt in him, but was no part of his flesh. And here again he confirms the fact, that he did not speak of men in general, but of the faithful, who are divided into two parts — the relics of the flesh, and grace. For why was the modification made, except some part was exempt from depravity, and therefore not flesh? Under the term flesh , he ever includes all that human nature is, everything in man, except the sanctification of the Spirit. In the same manner, by the term spirit , which is commonly opposed to the flesh, he means that part of the soul which the Spirit of God has so re-formed, and purified from corruption, that God’s image shines forth in it. Then both terms, flesh as well as spirit, belong to the soul; but the latter to that part which is renewed, and the former to that which still retains its natural character. (227) To will is present , etc. He does not mean that he had nothing but an ineffectual desire, but his meaning is, that the work really done did not correspond to his will; for the flesh hindered him from doing perfectly what he did. So also understand what follows, The evil I desire not, that I do: for the flesh not only impedes the faithful, so that they can not run swiftly, but it sets also before them many obstacles at which they stumble. Hence they do not, because they accomplish not, what they would, with the alacrity that is meet. This, to will , then, which he mentions, is the readiness of faith, when the Holy Spirit so prepares the godly that they are ready and strive to render obedience to God; but as their ability is not equal to what they wish, Paul says, that he found not what he desired, even the accomplishment of the good he aimed at. (227) The Apostle here is his own interpreter; he explains who the I is that does what the other I disapproved, and who the I is that hates what the other I does. He tells us here that it is not the same I , though announced at first as though it were the same. The one I , he informs us here, was his flesh, his innate sin or Corruption, and the other I , he tells us in Romans 7:22 , was “the inner man,” his new nature. The “inner man,” as [ Calvin ] will tell us presently, is not the soul as distinguished from the body, but the renewed man as distinguished from the flesh. It is the same as the “new man” as distinguished from “the old man.” See Ephesians 4:22 ; Romans 6:6 ; 2 Corinthians 5:17 . But “the inward man,” and “the outward man,” in 2 Corinthians 4:16 , are the soul and the body; and “the inner man,” in Ephesians 3:16 , the same expression as in Romans 7:22 , means the soul, as it is evident from the context. The same is meant by “the hidden man of the heart,” in 1 Peter 3:4 . — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-19" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-18

Source

18. **내 속 곧 내 육신에 선한 것이 거하지 아니하는 줄을 아노라** 등. 그는 선한 것이 본성으로는 자신 안에 거하지 않는다고 말한다. 그러면 **내 속**은 "나 자신에 관하여"라는 것과 같다. 첫 번째 부분에서 그는 실로 자신이 완전히 타락했다고 자책한다. 선한 것이 자신 안에 거하지 않는다고 고백하기 때문이다. 그러나 그런 다음 수정을 덧붙인다. 또한 자신 안에 거하지만 육신의 일부가 아닌 하나님의 은혜를 경시하지 않도록 하기 위해서이다. 여기서 다시 그는 일반적인 사람들이 아니라 두 부분으로 나뉜 신실한 자들, 즉 육신의 잔재와 은혜에 대해 말한다는 사실을 확증한다.

**원함은 내게 있으나** 등. 그는 오직 효과 없는 열망만을 가진다는 의미가 아니다. 그 의미는 실제로 행해진 일이 자신의 의지에 미치지 못했다는 것이다. 육신이 그가 완전하게 행하는 것을 방해했기 때문이다. 이처럼 다음에 이어지는 것, **원치 아니하는 악을 행하노라**도 이해해야 한다. 육신은 신실한 자들이 빠르게 달리지 못하도록 방해할 뿐만 아니라, 그들이 걸려 넘어지는 많은 장애물도 앞에 놓는다. 따라서 그들은 원하는 것, 자신들이 목표로 하는 선의 성취를 이루지 못하기 때문에 행하지 못한다. 그가 언급하는 이 **원함**은 믿음의 준비됨이다. 성령이 경건한 자들을 그렇게 준비시켜서 그들이 하나님께 순종하기 위해 준비되고 노력한다. 그러나 그들의 능력이 그들이 원하는 것과 같지 않으므로, 바울은 자신이 원하는 것, 즉 목표로 했던 선의 성취를 발견하지 못했다고 말한다.

원주석

19절 카드 ↗

19. The same view is to be taken of the expression which next follows, — that he did not the good which he desired , but, on the contrary, the evil which he desired not: for the faithful, however rightly they may be influenced, are yet so conscious of their own infirmity, that they can deem no work proceeding from them as blameless. For as Paul does not here treat of some of the faults of the godly, but delineates in general the whole course of their life, we conclude that their best works are always stained with some blots of sin, so that no reward can be hoped, unless God pardons them. He at last repeats the sentiment, — that, as far as he was endued with celestial light, he was a true witness and subscriber to the righteousness of the law. It hence follows, that had the pure integrity of our nature remained, the law would not have brought death on us, and that it is not adverse to the man who is endued with a sound and right mind and abhors sin. But to restore health is the work of our heavenly Physician. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-21" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-19

Source

19. 다음에 이어지는 표현도 동일하게 보아야 한다. 곧 그가 원하는 선을 행하지 않고 반대로 원치 않는 악을 행한다는 것이다. 신실한 자들은 아무리 올바른 영향을 받더라도 자신에게서 나오는 어떤 행위도 비난받지 않는 것으로 여길 수 없을 만큼 자신의 연약함을 의식하기 때문이다. 바울이 경건한 자들의 어떤 결점들만을 다루는 것이 아니라 그들의 삶의 전 과정을 전반적으로 묘사하므로, 우리는 그들의 가장 좋은 행위들도 항상 어떤 죄의 흠으로 얼룩진다는 결론을 내린다. 따라서 하나님이 그것들을 용서하지 않으시면 어떤 보상도 바랄 수 없다. 마지막으로 그는 이 생각을 반복한다. 하늘의 빛을 부여받은 한, 율법의 의의 진정한 증인이요 동의자였다는 것이다. 따라서 우리 본성의 순전한 완전함이 남아있었다면 율법이 우리에게 죽음을 가져오지 않았을 것이라는 것, 그리고 건전하고 올바른 마음을 부여받아 죄를 혐오하는 사람에게 적대적이지 않다는 것이 따라온다.

원주석

21절 카드 ↗

21. I find then , etc. Here Paul supposes a fourfold law. The first is the law of God, which alone is properly so called, which is the rule of righteousness, by which our life is rightly formed. To this he joins the law of the mind, and by this he means the prompt readiness of the faithful mind to render obedience to the divine law, it being a certain conformity on our part with the law of God. On the other hand, he sets in opposition to this the law of unrighteousness; and according to a certain kind of similarity, he gives this name to that dominion which iniquity exercises over a man not yet regenerated, as well as over the flesh of a regenerated man; for the laws even of tyrants, however iniquitous they may be, are called laws, though not properly. To correspond with this law of sin he makes the law of the members, that is, the lust which is in the members, on account of the concord it has with iniquity. As to the first clause, many interpreters take the word law in its proper sense, and consider κατὰ or διὰ to be understood; and so [ Erasmus ] renders it, “by the law;” as though Paul had said, that he, by the law of God as his teacher and guide, had found out that his sin was innate. But without supplying anything, the sentence would run better thus, “While the faithful strive after what is good, they find in themselves a certain law which exercises a tyrannical power; for a vicious propensity, adverse to and resisting the law of God, is implanted in their very marrow and bones.” return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-22" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-21

Source

21. **그러므로 내가 한 법을 깨달았노니** 등. 여기서 바울은 네 가지 율법을 가정한다. 첫 번째는 하나님의 율법이다. 이것만이 제대로 그렇게 불릴 수 있는데, 의의 규범으로 우리의 삶이 그것으로 올바르게 형성된다. 이것에 그는 마음의 율법을 연결한다. 이것으로 그는 하나님의 율법에 순종하기 위한 신실한 마음의 신속한 준비됨을 의미하는데, 하나님의 율법과 우리 편의 어떤 일치이다. 반면에 그는 이것에 불의의 율법을 대립시킨다. 어떤 유사성 때문에 그는 아직 거듭나지 않은 사람과 거듭난 사람의 육신을 지배하는 불의가 행사하는 이름을 이것에 붙인다. 폭군들의 율법도 아무리 불의하더라도 적절하지는 않지만 율법이라고 불리는 것처럼 말이다. 이 죄의 율법에 대응하여 그는 지체의 율법을 만든다. 곧 지체 안에 있는 정욕으로 불의와의 조화 때문이다.

원주석

22절 카드 ↗

22. For I consent (230) to the law of God , etc. Here then you see what sort of division there is in pious souls, from which arises that contest between the spirit and the flesh, which [ Augustine ] in some place calls the Christian struggle ( luctam Christianam .) The law calls man to the rule of righteousness; iniquity, which is, as it were, the tyrannical law of Satan, instigates him to wickedness: the Spirit leads him to render obedience to the divine law; the flesh draws him back to what is of an opposite character. Man, thus impelled by contrary desires, is now in a manner a twofold being; but as the Spirit ought to possess the sovereignty, he deems and judges himself to be especially on that side. Paul says, that he was bound a captive by his flesh for this reason, because as he was still tempted and incited by evil lusts; he deemed this a coercion with respect to the spiritual desire, which was wholly opposed to them. (231) But we ought to notice carefully the meaning of the inner man and of the members; which many have not rightly understood, and have therefore stumbled at this stone. The inner man then is not simply the soul, but that spiritual part which has been regenerated by God; and the members signify the other remaining part; for as the soul is the superior, and the body the inferior part of man, so the spirit is superior to the flesh. Then as the spirit takes the place of the soul in man, and the flesh, which is the corrupt and polluted soul, that of the body, the former has the name of the inner man, and the latter has the name of members. The inner man has indeed a different meaning in 2 Corinthians 4:16 ; but the circumstances of this passage require the interpretation which I have given: and it is called the inner by way of excellency; for it possesses the heart and the secret feelings, while the desires of the flesh are vagrant, and are, as it were, on the outside of man. Doubtless it is the same thing as though one compared heaven to earth; for Paul by way of contempt designates whatever appears to be in man by the term members, that he might clearly show that the hidden renovation is concealed from and escapes our observation, except it be apprehended by faith. Now since the law of the mind undoubtedly means a principle rightly formed, it is evident that this passage is very absurdly applied to men not yet regenerated; for such, as Paul teaches us, are destitute of mind, inasmuch as their soul has become degenerated from reason. (230) “ Consentio ,” συνήδομαι: it is not the same verb as in Romans 7:16 ; this signifies more than consent, for it includes gratification and delight. See Psalms 1:2 . The verb is found only here. [ Macknight ] ’s version, “I am pleased with,” is very feeble and inexpressive; [ Stuart ] ’s is better, “I take pleasure in;” but our common version is the best, “I delight in.” The γὰρ here would be better rendered “indeed:” the Apostle makes declaration as to his higher principle; and then in the next verse he states more fully what he had said in Romans 7:21 . This exactly corresponds with his usual mode in treating subjects. He first states a thing generally, and afterwards more particularly, in more specific terms, and with something additional. — Ed. (231) Some consider the conclusion of Romans 7:23 , “to the law of sin which is in my members,” as a paraphrase for “to itself;” as the Apostle describes it at the beginning as the law in his members: and the reason which may be assigned for the repetition is twofold, — to preserve the distinction between it and “the law of the mind” in the preceding clause, — and to give it a more distinctive character, by denominating it “the law of sin.” We in fact find a gradation in the way in which it is set forth: in Romans 7:21 , he calls it simply “a law;” in this verse he first calls it “another law in his members,” and then, “the law of sin in his members.” The construction of Romans 7:21 , is difficult. [ Pareus ] quotes [ Chrysostom ] as supposing σύμφηναι from Romans 7:16 , to be understood after “law,” so as to give this rendering, “I find then that the law assents to me desiring to do good,” etc., that is, that the law of God was on his side, “though evil was present with him.” He then gives his own view, it being essentially that of [ Augustine ] : he supposes ὅτι καλὸς from Romans 7:16 , to be understood after “law,” and that ὅτι, in the last clause, is to be construed “though:” the verse is then to be rendered thus, — “I find then the law, that it is good to me desiring to do good, though evil is present with me;” The verse taken by itself may thus present a good meaning, but not one that harmonizes with the context, or that forms a part of the Apostle’s argument. The only other construction that deserves notice is that of our own version, and of [ Calvin ], and it is that alone which corresponds with the context. It has been adopted by [ Beza ], [ Grotius ], [ Venema ], [ Turrettin ], [ Doddridge ], and others. This verse, and the two which follow, conclude the subject, and also explain what he had been saying about willing and doing. He in fact accounts here for the paradoxical statements which he had made, by mentioning the operation and working of two laws, which were directly contrary to one another. It seems to be a mistake that he alludes to four laws; for the law of the mind and the law of God are the same, under different names; it is that of the mind, because it belongs to and resides in the mind: and it is the law of God, because it comes from him, and is implanted by his Spirit. To the other law he also gives two names, the “law in his members,” and the “law of sin.” This view is confirmed by the last verse in the chapter, which contains a summary of the whole. The latter part of Romans 7:23 is in character with the Hebraistic style, when the noun is stated instead of the pronoun; see Genesis 9:16 ; Psalms 50:23 ; and it is also agreeable to the same style to add the same sent

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-22

Source

22. **내 속사람으로는 하나님의 법을 즐거워하되** 등. 여기서 경건한 영혼들 안에 어떤 종류의 분열이 있는지, 이에서 아우구스티누스가 어딘가에서 기독교적 싸움이라고 부른 영과 육신 사이의 그 싸움이 생겨난다는 것을 볼 수 있다. 율법은 사람을 의의 규칙으로 부른다. 말하자면 사탄의 폭군적 율법인 불의는 그를 사악함으로 자극한다. 성령은 그를 신적 율법에 순종하도록 이끈다. 육신은 그를 반대되는 방향으로 끌어당긴다. 이렇게 반대되는 욕망에 의해 충동받아 사람은 어떤 의미에서 이중적인 존재가 된다. 그러나 성령이 주권을 소유해야 하므로, 그는 특히 그 편에 있다고 여기고 판단한다.

**속사람**과 **지체**의 의미를 주의 깊게 주목해야 한다. 많은 이들이 이것을 올바르게 이해하지 못하여 이 돌에 걸려 넘어졌다. **속사람**은 단순히 영혼이 아니라 하나님으로 거듭나게 된 영적인 부분이다. **지체**는 나머지 남은 부분을 의미한다. 영혼이 우월하고 몸이 사람의 열등한 부분이듯이, 영은 육신보다 우월하다. 그러므로 영이 사람 안에서 영혼의 자리를 차지하고, 부패하고 오염된 영혼인 육신이 몸의 자리를 차지하므로, 전자는 속사람이라는 이름을 갖고 후자는 지체라는 이름을 갖는다. **속사람**이라 불리는 것은 탁월함에 의해서이다. 마음과 비밀한 감정들을 소유하기 때문이다. 반면 육신의 욕망들은 방랑하며 말하자면 사람의 외부에 있다.

**마음의 율법**은 의심할 여지 없이 올바르게 형성된 원칙을 의미하므로, 이 구절이 아직 거듭나지 않은 사람들에게 매우 불합리하게 적용된다는 것이 분명하다. 바울이 가르치듯이 그런 자들은 마음이 없다. 그들의 영혼이 이성에서 타락하게 되었기 때문이다.

원주석

24절 카드 ↗

24. Miserable , etc. He closes his argument with a vehement exclamation, by which he teaches us that we are not only to struggle with our flesh, but also with continual groaning to bewail within ourselves and before God our unhappy condition. But he asks not by whom he was to be delivered, as one in doubt, like unbelievers, who understand not that there is but one real deliverer: but it is the voice of one panting and almost fainting, because he does not find immediate help, (232) as he longs for. And he mentions the word rescue, (233) in order that he might show, that for his liberation no ordinary exercise of divine power was necessary. By the body of death he means the whole mass of sin, or those ingredients of which the whole man is composed; except that in him there remained only relics, by the captive bonds of which he was held. The pronoun τούτου this , which I apply, as [ Erasmus ] does, to the body, may also be fitly referred to death, and almost in the same sense; for Paul meant to teach us, that the eyes of God’s children are opened, so that through the law of God they wisely discern the corruption of their nature and the death which from it proceeds. But the word body means the same as the external man and members; for Paul points out this as the origin of evil, that man has departed from the law of his creation, and has become thus carnal and earthly. For though he still excels brute beasts, yet his true excellency has departed from him, and what remains in him is full of numberless corruptions so that his soul, being degenerated, may be justly said to have passed into a body. So God says by Moses, “No more shall my Spirit contend with man, for he is even flesh,” ( Genesis 6:3 :) thus stripping man of his spiritual excellency, he compares him, by way of reproach, to the brute creation. (234) This passage is indeed remarkably fitted for the purpose of beating down all the glory of the flesh; for Paul teaches us, that the most perfect, as long as they dwell in the flesh, are exposed to misery, for they are subject to death; nay, when they thoroughly examine themselves, they find in their own nature nothing but misery. And further, lest they should indulge their torpor, Paul, by his own example, stimulates them to anxious groanings, and bids them, as long as they sojourn on earth, to desire death, as the only true remedy to their evils; and this is the right object in desiring death. Despair does indeed drive the profane often to such a wish; but they strangely desire death, because they are weary of the present life, and not because they loathe their iniquity. But it must be added, that though the faithful level at the true mark, they are not yet carried away by an unbridled desire in wishing for death, but submit themselves to the will of God, to whom it behoves us both to live and to die: hence they clamor not with displeasure against God, but humbly deposit their anxieties in his bosom; for they do not so dwell on the thoughts of their misery, but that being mindful of grace received, they blend their grief with joy, as we find in what follows. (232) Ταλαίπωρος, miser, ærumnosus ; “it denotes,” says [ Schleusner ], “one who is broken down and wearied with the most grievous toils.” It is used by the Septuagint for the word שדוד , wasted, spoiled, desolated. See Psalms 137:8 ; Isaiah 33:1 . — Ed. (233) “ Eripere “ — pluck out, rescue, take away by force ; ῥύσεται — shall draw, rescue or extricate; it means a forcible act, effected by power. — Ed. (234) “This body of death” is an evident Hebraism, meaning “this deadly or mortiferous body;” which is not the material body, but the body of “the old man,” Romans 7:6 ; called the “body of sin,” when its character is described, and the “body of death,” when the issue to which it leads is intended: it conducts to death, condemnation, and misery. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-25" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-24

Source

24. **오호라 나는 곤고한 사람이로다** 등. 그는 자신의 논증을 강렬한 외침으로 마무리한다. 이것으로 그는 우리가 육신과 씨름할 뿐만 아니라 계속되는 신음으로 우리 자신 안에서 하나님 앞에서 우리의 불행한 상태를 한탄해야 한다는 것을 가르친다. 그러나 그는 구원받을 분이 누군지를 의심하는 자처럼 묻지 않는다. 오직 한 분의 진정한 구원자가 있다는 것을 이해하지 못하는 불신자들처럼 말이다. 그보다 이것은 갈망하는 즉각적인 도움을 발견하지 못하여 거의 기절할 것 같은 자의 목소리이다.

그리고 그는 **구원**이라는 단어를 언급한다. 이것으로 자신의 해방을 위해 하나님의 능력의 평범한 행사가 필요하지 않았다는 것을 보이기 위해서이다. **사망의 몸**으로 그는 죄의 전 덩어리, 또는 사람 전체를 구성하는 요소들을 의미한다. 다만 그 안에는 그가 포로의 속박에 묶였던 잔재들만 남아있었다.

이 구절은 실로 육신의 모든 영광을 꺾는 데 탁월하게 적합하다. 바울은 우리에게 가장 완전한 자들도 육신 안에 거하는 한 비참함에 노출되어 있다는 것을 가르친다. 죽음에 종속되어 있기 때문이다. 더 나아가 자신을 철저히 검토할 때 자신의 본성 안에서 비참함 외에 아무것도 발견하지 못한다. 또한 그들이 무기력함에 탐닉하지 않도록 바울은 자신의 실례로 그들을 애통한 신음으로 자극하고, 땅에 체류하는 동안 죽음을 열망하도록 명한다. 그것이 자신들의 악에 유일한 진정한 치료책으로서 말이다. 이것이 죽음을 열망하는 올바른 목적이다. 불경건한 자들도 확실히 종종 절망으로 그런 소망에 이끌리지만, 그들은 현재의 삶에 지쳤기 때문에 이상한 방식으로 죽음을 열망한다. 자신의 불의를 혐오하기 때문이 아니다. 그러나 신실한 자들은 진정한 목표를 향하지만 아직 고삐 풀린 욕망에 이끌리지 않는다. 살고 죽는 것 모두 우리가 마땅히 복종해야 하는 하나님의 뜻에 자신을 복종시킨다.

원주석

25절 카드 ↗

25. I thank God; etc. He then immediately subjoined this thanksgiving, lest any should think that in his complaint he perversely murmured against God; for we know how easy even in legitimate grief is the transition to discontent and impatience. Though Paul then bewailed his lot, and sighed for his departure, he yet confesses that he acquiesced in the good pleasure of God; for it does not become the saints, while examining their own defects, to forget what they have already received from God. (235) But what is sufficient to bridle impatience and to cherish resignation, is the thought, that they have been received under the protection of God, that they may never perish, and that they have already been favored with the first-fruits of the Spirit, which make certain their hope of the eternal inheritance. Though they enjoy not as yet the promised glory of heaven, at the same time, being content with the measure which they have obtained, they are never without reasons for joy. So I myself , etc. A short epilogue, in which he teaches us, that the faithful never reach the goal of righteousness as long as they dwell in the flesh, but that they are running their course, until they put off the body. He again gives the name of mind , not to the rational part of the soul which philosophers extol, but to that which is illuminated by the Spirit of God, so that it understands and wills aright: for there is a mention made not of the understanding alone, but connected with it is the earnest desire of the heart. However, by the exception he makes, he confesses, that he was devoted to God in such a manner, that while creeping on the earth he was defiled with many corruptions. This is a suitable passage to disprove the most pernicious dogma of the Purists, ( Catharorum ,) which some turbulent spirits attempt to revive at the present day. (236) (235) There is a different reading for the first clause of this verse , χάρις τῳ Θέω, “thanks to God,” which, [ Griesbach ] says, is nearly equal to the received text; and there are a few copies which have ἡ χάρις κυρίου, “the grace of our Lord,” etc.; which presents a direct answer to the foregoing question: but a considerable number more have ἡ χάρις του θέου, “the grace of God,” etc.; which also gives an answer to the preceding question. But the safest way, when there is no strong reason from the context, is to follow what is mostly sanctioned by MSS. Taking then the received text, we shall find a suitable answer to the foregoing question, if we consider the verb used in the question to be here understood, a thing not unusual; then the version would be, “I thank God, who will deliver me through Jesus Christ our Lord;” not as [ Macknight ] renders the verb, “who delivers me;” for the answer must be in the same tense with the question. — Ed. (236) “ Idem ego — the same I,” or, “I the same ;” αὐτὸς ἐγὼ [ Beza ] renders it the same — “ idem ego ,” and makes this remark, “This was suitable to what follows, by which one man seems to have been divided into two.” Others render it, “ ipse ego — I myself,” and say that Paul used this dictlon emphatically, that none might suspect that he spoke in the person of another. See Romans 9:3 ; 2 Corinthians 10:1 . The phrase imports this, “It is myself, and none else.” He terms his innate sin “the flesh.” By the flesh, says [ Pareus ], “is not meant physically the muscular substance, but theologically the depravity of nature, — not sensuality alone, but the unregenerated reason, will, and affections.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' Romans Rom 6 Romans Rom Romans Rom 8 Footnotes: Copyright Statement These files are public domain. Bibliographical Information Calvin, John. "Commentary on Romans 7". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/ commentaries/ eng/ cal/ romans-7.html. 1840-57. terms of use • privacy policy • • rights and permissions • contact sl • about sl • link to sl To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use the convenient contact form StudyLight.org © 2001-2026 Powered by Light speed Technology Ads Free Profile .sub-menu{font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;max-width:1260px;width:100%;background-color:#f7f7f7;color:#6b6b6b;border-bottom:5px solid #6b6b6b;display:flex;flex-direction:column;flex-wrap:nowrap;position:absolute;z-index:9998} .sub-menu .menu-group{width:100%;margin:0 5px 0;padding:0 5px 0;border-right:1px solid #6b6b6b} .sub-menu .menu-group-spacer{display:none} .sub-menu .menu-name{font-size:15px;font-weight:bold;color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-name a{color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-ul li a{color:#6b6b6b;} .sub-menu .menu-ul li:hover{color:#DD8000} .search-button{background-color:#6b6b6b;color:#fff;border:1px solid #6b6b6b;-webkit-appearance:square-button;padding:0 5px;font-size:13px} .int-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;margin-top:10px;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%} .int-search-div .int-s-query{border:1px solid #dadada;font-size:13px;padding:0 5px 0;margin-right:5px;width:30%;height:30px;flex:1 1 100%} .int-search-div .int-s-button{width:50px;margin-right:10px;height:30px;flex:0 0 50px} .int-selections-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%;margin-bottom:20px} .int-selections-div .int-s-section{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin:5px 5px 0 0;width:70px;height:30px;flex:1 1 50%} .int-selections-div .int-s-translation{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin-top:5px;padding:2px;width:40%;height:30px;flex:1 1 40%} .lex-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%} .lex-search-div .lex-s-query{border:1px solid #dadada;width:95%;height:30px;font-size:13px;padding:5px;margin-right:5px} .lex-search-div .lex-s-range{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;height:30px;font-size:13px;margin-right:5px;width:100px} .lex-search-languages{width:95%;font-size:11px;display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;justify-content:flex-start;margin-top:

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-7-25

Source

25. **우리 주 예수 그리스도로 말미암아 하나님께 감사하리로다** 등. 그러자 그는 즉시 이 감사를 덧붙인다. 아무도 그가 자신의 불평에서 하나님을 거슬러 비뚤어지게 불평했다고 생각하지 않도록 하기 위해서이다. 우리는 합법적인 슬픔에서도 불만과 조급함으로의 전환이 얼마나 쉬운지를 알고 있다. 바울이 자신의 운명을 슬퍼하고 떠나기를 한숨지었지만, 그는 하나님의 선하신 기쁨에 묵인했다고 고백한다. 성도들이 자신의 결함을 검토하면서 이미 하나님께 받은 것을 잊어서는 안 되기 때문이다.

**그런즉 내 자신이** 등. 신실한 자들이 육신 안에 거하는 동안 결코 의의 목표에 이르지 못하지만 몸을 벗을 때까지 자신의 과정을 달려가고 있다는 것을 가르치는 짧은 에필로그이다. 그는 다시 **마음**이라는 이름을 부여한다. 철학자들이 칭찬하는 영혼의 이성적 부분이 아니라, 하나님의 성령으로 비추어져 올바르게 이해하고 의지하는 부분에 말이다. 이해만이 언급되는 것이 아니라 그것과 함께 마음의 진지한 열망이 연결되어 있기 때문이다. 그러나 예외를 둠으로써 그는 땅에 기어가면서 많은 부패에 더럽혀진 방식으로 하나님께 헌신되어 있었다고 고백한다.

원주석

← 6장8장 →
바이블위키 biblewiki.net · PD/CC0 · status:draft (verified 승격은 사람만) · 요약은 구조 정보만 제공하며 본문 원문을 왜곡하지 않습니다 · Karpathy LLM Wiki 패턴