In Us or By Us? - Glenn Conjurske
In Us or By Us?
by Glenn Conjurske
Paul writes, “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:3-4). Upon this text C. I. Scofield says, “Now, through the Spirit of life, the righteousness which the law required is fulfilled in (not `by’) us, because we walk in yieldedness to the Spirit’s will.” This comment is a very good example of what has been called eisegesis, in distinction from legitimate exegesis—-that is, reading into the Scriptures what is not there, instead of digging out of them what is there. It consists in this case, as often, of taking common speech and forcing upon it a technical meaning, which the author never meant or thought of. “In,” it is insisted, must mean literally, technically “in.” The emphasis is shifted from “us,” where it belongs, to “in,” where it does not belong, and a thought is introduced which is not in the passage at all—-and not only introduced, but made out to be the point of the passage.
Understand, the contrast which was in Paul’s mind when he penned the passage was (obviously) that contrast which he plainly expressed. The contrast of which Paul plainly speaks concerns those “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Why should this contrast be thrust out of sight, and another introduced in its place, which Paul never mentioned? This is unsound interpretation. Its real basis is not what the Scriptures say, but what doctrinal bias wishes them to say. If Paul had meant, “in us, not by us,” he could certainly have said so. I contend that he never thought of such a thing. His point is not that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, not by us, but that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. The other is forced into Paul’s words, not derived from them.
But Scofield is not alone in this interpretation. Evangelicals, and especially Calvinists, determined that man shall have nothing to do in the attainment of his own salvation or sanctification, but that the grace of God shall do all for him or in him, have found this word “in” too convenient to resist, and so have commonly taken it in a technical sense which Paul certainly never meant. Those who know Greek are certainly aware that, from a technical point of view, “by us” is as legitimate a translation as “in us,” and it is so translated by MacKnight. The real fact is, however, the expression means neither “in us” nor “by us,” in the sense in which Scofield and others employ those terms. The meaning is in our case, or in our persons, and it has no reference whatever, one way or the other, to whether we are active or passive in the accomplishment of it.
But further, the sense which Scofield would put upon the words is altogether inadmissible, from the simple standpoint of common sense. To insist upon “in us, not by us,” is not only wresting the sense of this scripture; it is also wresting the things which this scripture speaks of. The subject here is sanctification, or practical righteousness, and in the nature of the case this is not something which can be wrought “in us, not by us.” Thoughts and emotions, which are largely involuntary, might perhaps be implanted within us without any deliberate action on our part, but righteousness does not consist merely of thoughts and emotions, but of deeds. “He that doeth righteousness is righteous.” (I John 3:7). It is a simple matter of fact that deeds must be done, and they must be done by us. Theological notions aside, it is a simple matter of fact and of common sense that every step which we take in the path of righteousness is an act which we do, based upon a choice which we make. The man who is tempted to lie, to steal, to cheat, to compromise, must make a choice and perform an act, either of sin or of righteousness. This he must do consciously and deliberately. It is done by him, and not merely in him.
And observe what it is which is said to be “fulfilled in us.” It is “the righteousness of the law”—-a term which is almost universally (and very rightly) understood to mean the righteousness which the law requires. That righteousness does not consist merely of involuntary emotions, or of anything else which can be wrought “in us, and not by us,” that is, in us, without any deliberate action of our own. The righteousness which the law requires certainly consists of deeds, and not merely emotions.
All of this, indeed, is plainly implied in the very terms of the text: “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” The word “walk” is constantly used in the New Testament, and particularly by Paul himself, to denote our conduct, whether good or bad. To walk is synonymous with to act, or to conduct ourselves. Thus:
Rom. 13:13—-“Let us walk honestly.”
Rom. 14:15—-“Now walkest thou not charitably.”
II Cor. 4:2—-“Not walking in craftiness.”
Eph. 4:17—-“That ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk.”
Eph. 5:2, 8—-“Walk in love.” “Walk as children of light.”
Eph. 5:15—-“See that ye walk circumspectly.”
II Thes. 3:6—-“Every brother which walketh disorderly.”
The plain meaning in all of these is to conduct ourselves, or to act, and a good many further examples might be cited were there any need for it. And is it needful to point out that walking is never a passive thing? To walk is something which we do, not something which is done to us, or for us, or in us, or through us. There is nothing passive about it. A young child, or an old invalid, may be helped to walk, but still he does the walking himself, unless he is dragged or carried, and then he does not walk.
Ah, but your theology requires that man shall be the passive recipient of righteousness, and not the active agent of it. Then, unless you speak purely of imputed righteousness, your theology is wrong. “He that doeth righteousness is righteous.” This is not passive, and neither is walking after the Spirit. The scripture says, “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Now the man who would contend that to walk after the flesh is a passive thing, which we do without effort, choice, endeavor, or personal action, would be laughed to scorn. No more is walking after the Spirit a passive thing. The word “walk” appears but once in the text, to denote both of them.
If this notion, then, of righteousness “in us, but not by us” is true, it must be gotten from elsewhere in the New Testament, not from Romans 8:4. But that is hardly possible, for the real fact is, the New Testament continually, everywhere, requires choice, endeavor, and action of us. Take one example from among hundreds: “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication.” (I Thes. 4:3). Abstaining from fornication is a matter of conscious choice and deliberate action, as it is also where Paul says, “Flee fornication.” And this is called sanctification. Examples of the same sort might be multiplied.
The righteousness of the law, then, is fulfilled in those who act or conduct themselves according to the Spirit. According to the plain meaning of the text, after the analogy of the whole of the New Testament, and in the very nature of the case, that righteousness is something which we do.
Glenn Conjurske