“For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death [mortify] the deeds of the body, you will live.” Romans 8:13 (ESV)
The Conditionality: A Certain Connection
After the first clause, “but if” marks the introduction of a conditional. This conditional can have two implications.
The first is what Owen terms “uncertainty” because the person to whom the conditional applies does not know whether the antecedent will in fact occur. Furthermore, one does not know whether the result will come to pass. This denotation is one of cause and effect, the cause being mortification, resulting in life.
Owen terms the second “certainty” because what the conditional is addressing is the definite connection between the event and the ensuing result. The conditional is only concerned with the connection between mortification and living. It is not concerned with whether or not it will occur—it does not inject possibility it will occur nor the possibility that it will not occur. What is discussed is more of a means and end relationship, not the cause and effect connection of the “uncertain” implication. Owen believes that Romans 8:13 is dealing with this type of connection. Romans 8:13 is not instilling the possibility that either will or will not occur, but simply that one will necessarily follow the other.
God has chosen mortification as the means to life. By God’s grace, he has given us life freely (Romans 6:23). Mortification is necessary for eternal life and is certain to occur in those who have been given eternal life as a gift. If God requires people to find within themselves the means of mortification, then eternal life is not a gift because it is only obtainable through mortification. True mortification results in eternal life. This is where one finds primary motivation to seek mortification—that it will bear fruit in eternal life. But mortification, just like life, is a gift and not attainable through one’s own efforts.
The Persons: Believers
Who is Paul addressing? Paul is addressing believers. This is apparent when the entirety of Romans 8 is observed (Romans 8:1, 9, 10-11). The duty of mortification cannot be given to nonbelievers because this would assume that unsaved men can do good. Such a notion is rebutted by John 15:5 and Romans 10:3-4.
The Cause and Means: The Holy Spirit
Owen first defines what and who is the Spirit. References Owen provides are Romans 8:9, 11, 14, 15, 26 and Romans 9:30-32. The means by which mortification is accomplished is through the Holy Spirit. If one believes he or she can do so without the Holy Spirit, they succumb to the lie that false religion teaches. Mortification through human power is what is propagated by the world and leads to self-righteousness.
The Duty: Mortify
What is meant by the body?
The body is equivalent to flesh mentioned in the first clause. The flesh is the antithetical counterpart of the Spirit. The body/flesh refers to the sinful nature—”indwelling sin”—which oftentimes finds expression through the physical body. Owen considers the “body” through two possible literary devices used by Paul.
If Paul was using metonymy, whereby a term is substituted by another that is associated, the body is another term for the “old self” and “body of sin” (Romans 6:6).
If Paul was using synecdoche, whereby one part represents the whole, the body may represent the whole person, the person in his or her totality.
What is meant by the deeds of the body?
The deeds of the body refer to the outward expression of sin. However, the deeds are not all that need to be mortified. Owen insists that the inward causes must be included in mortification (Matthew 3:10). The deeds of the body, expressed by a believer, will always fail to complete its task. All deeds of the body hope to bring about death, for the wages of sin is death. But by the grace of God, our salvation does not rest on our works, but on the righteousness of Christ imputed to us. Thus, the deeds of the body are futile in completing their ultimate aim. The body is dead because of sin (Romans 8:10) and the deeds of the dead body are sin.
What is meant by mortifying the deeds of the body?
Owen considered the phrase “to put to death” as metaphorical to mean the removal of all strength and ability to act. Indwelling sin, compared to a person (“old self” of Romans 6:6), is crucified with Christ. The indwelling sin that remains is in battle against the “principle” implanted by regeneration. Regeneration is not complete and will continue until one dies. Thus the mortification of the old self continues and the deeds of the body are put to death time and time again until the day of glorification.
The Promise: You Shall Live
The “life” promised is juxtaposed to death in the previous clause. Owen considers the possibility that “life” refers not only to eternal life (explored in “The Conditionality”), but also spiritual life that we already have. Thus, the health of one’s present spiritual life depends on mortification. This is a second motivation to mortify the deeds of the body: to have “vigor, power and comfort” in one’s spiritual life.
Read this chapter online (Crossway edition), click here.
Read this chapter online (Banner of Truth/CCEL edition), click here.
<<<< Previous Chapter | Return to Blog Index | Next Chapter >>>>
May 30, 2008 at 3:44 pm |
At the very opening of Chapter 1, when I saw the verse John Owen was going to analyze, I was waiting for a war cry to reverberate through the pages. I was waiting for an inspiring message to put on the full armor of God and storm the gates of indwelling sin. However, what I found was that I was not alone in mortification. I think pride is a real pitfall in any mortification of sin. Instead of rejoicing that I have the Spirit, that it is by the Spirit that I put to death the deeds of the body, I questioned the reality of such a belief. Isn’t it I that turns away when tempted to lust? Isn’t it I that forces myself to open the Bible every day when I am just too tired? Isn’t it I who bows his head to pray? Isn’t I that tried (and fails) to keep a tight rein on his tongue? Isn’t it I…isn’t it I…isn’t it I…
But the real question is by whose authority is sin to death? By whose power is sin put to death? It is only by the power of Christ crucified and the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Pride makes sanctification about me, which breeds self-righteousness. The gospel says it is all about grace. And grace is antithetical to pride for it is something undeserved and is not from any merit on my part. Grace does not just end with justification! It includes sanctification. And not only that, but glorification as well. The whole plan of salvation is a plan of grace!
John Owen handles the conditional in Romans 8:13 with such meticulous care. At first it appears to be an endorsement of a works-based salvation. But no! Life is a gift of grace given to us through Christ’s atoning work and Paul cannot call it a gift if we must work for it. So not only is life a gift, but so is mortification. The mortification of sin really is a paradoxical set up. We must work to put sin to death, but at the same time it is the Holy Spirit that is putting the sin to death in us. I hope John Owen will flesh this out further as we progress in the book.
So it is all about God and not about me. It is all about the free gift of grace and not about a works-based theology to try to keep my head above the water. God ordains that we be sanctified as regenerate children and that we sweat blood and tears in a battle against indwelling sin. What reassurance we have in Romans 8:30, that sanctification will one day be complete with final glorification!
I pray that the Spirit would continue its work in me and soften my heart, convict me of sin. Like the hymn “I Ask the Lord”, I pray that I might grow in faith and love and every grace. But furthermore, I pray that the Spirit will sustain me through the painful process of growth. And by God’s grace alone will I run the race with endurance.
To His Glory,
Kendrick
May 30, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
The way Owen deconstructs Romans 8:13 is really amazing. By taking section by section the verse really becomes live and by carefully reading it, it sinks in my mind and takes root. After reading this chapter, I didn’t need to memorize the verse or wonder what Paul was intending to communicate. Because Owen continually based his thoughts on the premise—that mortification necessarily leads to life—Romans 8:13 and its deep meaning are ingrained in my thoughts.
Particularly interesting was Owen’s analysis of the cause and means to mortification—the Holy Spirit. Though Paul’s writings time and time again point to the work of the Holy Spirit within the believers, it was refreshing to delve into a single verse and better understand the necessity of the Spirit and His powerful nature communicated all in one sentence.
The “false religion” that Owen talks about is a salvation that is based upon works—that is, apart from the indwelling Spirit. This is a very interesting point. Sometimes I need recognize the fact that He is not only alive and at work in me, but also in the lives of those for who I’m praying. After reading the first chapter of Owen, I have a new look at the work of the Holy Spirit. Not only are His workings far beyond my imagination—thank God—but they are so personal and so intimate in the struggles of the believer. I think the danger in limiting the work of God in my mind can have a perception of “false religion.” The Holy Spirit is our aid in time of trouble (which is always); yet we say, “Although He can do this, I’m sure He can do that…but He probably won’t.” Its funny that finite beings would place the infinite God in a finite box.
This hard heart will continue to limit God in his power, but I pray that the Holy Spirit will soften it so that my mind will realize that by God’s power nothing is impossible. Romans 8:13 is a promise that keeps me going. I must mortify the deeds of the flesh to attain life. This task is too great for such a wretched man who longs for sin at every moment. However, by the Holy Spirit’s work in my life and by the grace of God I am able to mortify the sinful nature in me. This is so profound. No digital letters can describe the joy of this thought. And, so that I do not begin commenting on chapter two out of excitement, I’ll stop here.
- Sammy
May 30, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
Thanks you guys for taking the time to translate Owen to us! It’s quite a task, I’m sure. I had a few random thoughts and some questions. So, I’m reading C.J. Mahaney on humility right now, and all this talk about the work of the Spirit in sanctification reminded me of some of his practical advice on fostering humility. He suggests ending the day by thanking God for His grace in the ways that the Spirit has used you for the day. So, if a ministry went well, to end the day thanking God for that. I think this would also apply to battling sin. End the day thanking God for giving you the desire to battle sin, and giving you the Spirit whose power alone can win that battle. It just seemed like it was great practical advice to battle the pride and self-righteousness that you’ve been talking about that accompanies works-based focus on sanctification by consistently reminding ourselves to thank God for the Spirit’s work.
Personally, I often feel so overwhelmed by my sin that it seems hopeless to try to put it to death. But, knowing that it is the Spirit whose power works in me should “mortify” that excuse completely! For me to say that my sin is too much for me to fight it is true. Praise God, though, that it is not too much for Him to fight it. How silly that I believe the lie that fighting my sin depends on me.
So, here is a big question… How do we rightly understand that it is the Spirit that is working in us and it is His power that changes us, while not falling into spiritual laziness or not blaming the Spirit if we find ourselves remaining in sin?? It seems like I am constantly on a pendulum swinging between a self-righteousness that thinks I am responsible for defeating sin and a defeatist laziness that does not attempt to fight sin at all b/c it the Spirit who will fight the sin in me. Basically, how do we really “put to death the deeds of the body” while sincerely depending on the Spirit?? I’m guessing much of the rest of the book is devoted to this, but I still wanted to hear others thoughts.
In Him,
Kaitlyn
May 30, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
I empathize completely with that problem of swinging between either being lazy by misinterpreting “freedom in Christ” and abusing God’s grace or becoming a Pharisaic legalist. It’s so easy to swerve either way and difficult to tread the middle ground. I think what’s most pertinent to think about is what impact the gospel has on. How does the gospel keep us from abusing the grace, which it is all about. How does the gospel prevent us from swinging to the side of becoming Christians who do not care about our actions and conforming to Christ because we are saved by grace anyway? And what does the gospel have to say about sanctification in general?
To His Glory,
Kendrick
May 31, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
I wanted to comment on something Sammy wrote earlier:
“I think the danger in limiting the work of God in my mind can have a perception of “false religion.” The Holy Spirit is our aid in time of trouble (which is always); yet we say, “Although He can do this, I’m sure He can do that…but He probably won’t.” Its funny that finite beings would place the infinite God in a finite box.”
I was actually talking to a few people about this during chapter camp. We were having difficulty understanding how to both not limit God by placing Him in a ‘finite box’, but also to not assume that He will do the typically unexpected. For example, I know that God can save or heal my family, but am I told to expect that? Sometimes I think I worry that if I allow God to be the ‘miracle worker’, then I will become disappointed and angry with God when the person I’ve been praying for isn’t healed, or isn’t saved. Clearly it would be sin if I were to do that, but honestly I wouldn’t put it past myself. Also, isn’t part of a miracle that it’s incredible and out of the ordinary? We say something is miraculous if we can’t find another explanation for it, or when the odds were against a particular result. Is it wrong for us to expect things that are logical? Does it not glorify God when He works miracles that put us in a state of awe at His power?
Certainly none of this would imply that we wouldn’t continue to pray for people in need and trust that it would certainly be God’s will and power that answered those prayers should an unexpected result occur. But how do we ‘mortify’ the sin of unbelief while not being presumptuous? How much of “… but I don’t think He will” is unbelief, how much is a secret hope that He will do the miracle anyway, and how much of it is an honest assessment of the situation and weighing of statistical data?
Thanks for starting this up, guys :) Much appreciated.
-Amanda
May 31, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
Hey Amanda,
It’s really a great thing to ponder, especially because we approach God in prayer for so many things every day. I think there are two amazing Scripture passages that really speak to this and can help frame our thinking.
“Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” Luke 11:11-13
God is our (Christians) Father and we are His adopted children. This is important, because I think we need to understand that God wants the best for us whenever we pray prayers of petition. However, what is the relationship between a father and a son when a son asks him for things? A son knows that the father will give the son what is best for him. A son knows that if the father refuses to give something to him, it is for his own good, even if the son doesn’t like it at the moment. In the same way, when we petition to God, we first must know that whatever way God answers that prayer, it will be for our benefit (even if it doesn’t seem to be like it at the time).
“”Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”" Luke 22:42
What we can note from this verse is that Jesus does petition to the Father, but not only that, Jesus notes that the Father has the ability to take the cup away if He is willing. Jesus acknowledges the Father’s sovereign will. So we petition, knowing full well that God is able to give what is asked. However, Jesus qualifies his petition with asking the Father to do His will, not necessarily to do what is asked.
Now that we have these two qualifying Scripture passages, let’s turn to the question. First of all, we need to really define what we’re talking about when we say “expect”. To expect something means to presume to know what is going to happen. So we need to be careful with the words that we choose. Should we presume to know what is best for us and to know the will of God at all times? We are definitely supposed to expect that God’s sovereign will will be accomplished. But we should not presume to know (at all times at least) what His will is (outside of what is revealed in Scripture that is).
So what CAN we expect from God? The Bible is full of promises from God that he makes to his people. We can expect that God is faithful and will carry out those promises. We can expect that God will do what is in our (Christians) ultimate best interest for God works out all things for the good of those who love him. We can expect that God will glorify himself in all things.
So I would say in conclusion that we should not expect anything from God except that which He has promised to do in Scripture, a few of which I have listed above. But we are also told to petition to God trusting completely that God will 1) honor His role as our Father and 2) accomplish his will.
Thus we avoid putting God into a “finite” box in the sense that we do not put a cap on what God can accomplish and achieve. We mortify “unbelief” in the sense that we must believe that God is able to accomplish His will. But we should not “expect” God to do anything outside of what He has promised in Scripture to do. So I would say it boils down to what exactly we are expecting.
I’m sure I did not answer all your questions nor that I am 100% theologically correct in the answers I did give. And I’m sure a lot of what I wrote doesn’t even make sense. So please, correct me if you see anything wrong with my interpretation of Scripture.
A question that definitely follows is how we can battle unbelief that God is in full control? How we battle doubt that God is sovereign? Because when these times come we are doubting God’s Word, the promises he’s made and the truth that we have heard.
May 31, 2008 at 5:23 pm |
Okay, so Kendrick and I duked it out on AIM for a while to clarify my question and then come up with some more conclusions. Here’s what they are:
The question is best understood by setting up an imaginary circumstance. Imagine someone who is in the hospital and statistically has only a 10% chance of living. What are normal responses to this situation? What are appropriate responses to the situation?
Normal responses:
1. “He’s going to die.”
2. “I just don’t think it’s in God’s will to heal him.”
3. “It looks as though he is going to die, but God can an might heal him.”
4. “God is going to heal him.”
There are clear issues with responses 1 and 4. The problem with the first response is leaves God out of the picture completely. The problem with the fourth response is that it presumes God’s actions. It assumes that we can somehow know what God’s will is outside of His revealed will from the Scripture.
The implications of the 2nd and 3rd responses are slightly more difficult to dissect. I would state the the 2nd statement is actually as wrong as the 4th statement as they both presume to know God’s non-revealed will.
The third response encompasses quite a bit of information, though. The first portion acknowledges that God has ordered nature a particular way. In the same way that we know to bake something for a certain amount of time, or that we know that falling quite often hurts, we also know that when someone has a 90% chance of dying, they are probably going to die. The second part of the statement, however, acknowledges God’s sovereignty. God is able to move contrary to the pattern which He has set up in nature, but He decides whether or not He will.
This sets up two questions:
1. What is likely to happen statistically, naturally, or by inspection? This can also be seen in how we make decisions. How should we respond to someone? We take in all the data we know of how they typically respond and we speak to them accordingly.
2. What is God likely to do.
The first question we analyze by the data available. The second question should be left alone unless God’s will on a particular subject is directly revealed in His word. Answering the second question would be presuming to know God’s secret will.
Going back to the original responses, we clearly need to be careful on how we respond to things. I think it’s typical, especially in Christian circles, to respond, “I just don’t think God will do —.”
Often when we respond like that, I think we are hoping that whoever we’re talking to actually hears the third response. However, it blurs the lines of what we actually believe. It confuses whether we actually believe that we know God’s secret will. It also confuses whether or not we believe God is actually powerful enough to act against the pattern of nature that He set up.
I think we should be kind to each other by helping each other work out what we actually mean when we’re talking about issues of God’s sovereignty in this way.
All clear? Right then. That was supposed to be short, but theological issues never really seem to be short. Have fun :)
-Amanda
June 1, 2008 at 2:01 am |
Hey Kaitlyn,
Here’s a few thoughts about your question that came up as I was reading it.
Firstly, thank you for those words from CJ in “Humility”, they are a great reminder to not only know we are dependent on God in our heads, but to practice that dependence and bring it back to remembrance.
The big question is definitely big. John Owen actually touches on it briefly in the last paragraph of the second chapter, when he bemoans the lack of evangelical zeal to mortify sin and how it seems to always fall in the category of abusing the grace and liberty we’ve been given or the strict, legalistic, self-sufficient mortification. But he does not go too much into it either in the second chapter. However, we are currently still reading through Owen’s case for the necessity of mortification, and has not yet gotten to the means. So hopefully he will really flesh it out later on.
But why let Big John do all the thinking eh? haha. I think that the foundational understanding on which the discourse needs to rest on is that mortification can only happen in the regenerate soul. The soul that has not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit cannot mortify sin, but only loves sin (even if an unregenerate soul appears to be mortifying sin, Hebrews 11:6 tells us that without faith we cannot please God).
A second understanding is that we do not “depend on the Spirit” as if we can choose not to. Of course there are several times throughout the day that we can choose to follow God’s Word or not, decide to trust God in a decision, etc. But in another sense, we are always dependent on the Spirit because he is the principle in us that allows us to choose to do good. He is the principle that allows us to have fellowship with the Father and the Son. So whether or not we consciously decide to “depend” on the Spirit, in another sense, we always are depending on him.
With those two understandings to frame my thoughts, here are some brief ideas. Depending on the Spirit (in the sense of consciously doing so) may mean to do so in a more abstract way, to remember at all times that it is the Spirit that enables us to mortify sin, and allowing that Biblical truth to shape and renew our minds. Of course we pray for the Spirit’s power and aid in mortification as an actual, practical, concrete outward expression. But inwardly, depending on the Spirit may be to root ourselves in the Biblical truth of grace in sanctification.
And of course, a half truth is not a truth, but a whole lie. Thus, by increased understanding of sanctifying grace, we also will understand that this longing to mortify sin, the desire to mortify it, come not from us but from the Spirit. We do not force ourselves to desire mortification, but it is the Spirit that is cultivating such a desire within us.
So my one thought is really quite simple. How are we to find the right path between those two extremes? By saturating our minds with the Truth, with Scripture, with the Word. We walking in the light when we practice the truth (1 John 1:6, if we walk in darkness we do not practice the truth). The Truth, applied to us by the Holy Spirit, rouses us and spurs us to mortify sin, yet at the same time tempers us to remember it is by grace alone that we are able to mortify.
A rather abstract thought in the sense that it is all about the Word renewing our minds to think Biblically, but really necessary in the world today where Christians are reading the Bible less and less. I definitely don’t read the Bible as I should. Memorizing Scripture about mortifying sin. Preaching the gospel and Scripture to ourselves (Jerry Bridges’ “The Discipline of Grace” really fleshes out this practice well).
How about you? Do you have any specific thoughts or ideas?
To His Glory,
Kendrick