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 fear of God or with the endeavor of acting uprightly.
And he denies that he did what the law demanded, for this reason, because he did not perfectly
fulfil it, but somewhat failed in his effort.
For not what I desire,etc. You must not understand that it was always the case with him, that
he could not do good; but what he complains of is only this — that he could not perform what he
wished, so that he pursued not what was good with that alacrity which was meet, because he was
held in a manner bound, and that he also failed in what he wished to do, because he halted through
the weakness of the flesh. Hence the pious mind performs not the good it desires to do, because it
proceeds not with due activity, and doeth the evil which it would not; for while it desires to stand,
it falls, or at least it staggers. But the expressions to will and not to will must be applied to the
Spirit, which ought to hold the first place in all the faithful. The flesh indeed has also its own will,
but Paul calls that the will which is the chief desire of the heart; and that which militates with it he
represents as being contrary to his will.
We may hence learn the truth of what we have stated — that Paul speaks here of the faithful,
(^223) in whom the grace of the Spirit exists, which brings an agreement between the mind and the
righteousness of the law; for no hatred of sin is to be found in the flesh.
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,
(^222) “Pii quod perpetrant non agnoscunt, non approbant, non excusant, non palliant;” — “What the godly do [amiss,] they know
not, approve not, excuse not, palliate not.” — Pareus
The verb is used here in the sense of the Hebrew verb which is often so rendered by the Septuagint. See Psalm 1:6;
Hosea 8:4; and Matthew 7:23. — Ed.
(^223) “As the Apostle was far more enlightened and humble than Christians in general are, doubtless this clog (indwelling sin)
was more uneasy to him than it is to them, though most of us find our lives at times greatly embittered by it. So that this energetic
language, which many imagine to describe an unestablished believer’s experience, or even that of an unconverted man, seems
to have resulted from the extraordinary degree of St. Paul’s sanctification, and the depth of his self-abasement and hatred of sin;
and the reason of our not readily understanding him seems to be, because we are far beneath him in holiness, humility, acquaintance
with the spirituality of God’s law, and the evil of our own hearts, and in our degree of abhorrence of moral evil.” — Scott
“What some mistake as the evidence of a spiritual decline on the part of the Apostle, was in fact the evidence of his growth.
It is the effusion of a more quick and cultured sensibility than fell to the lot of ordinary men.” — Chalmers