Romans 6:6

τουτο D-ASN γινωσκοντες V-PAP-NPM
knowing this
οτι CONJ ο T-NSM παλαιος A-NSM ημων P-1GP ανθρωπος N-NSM συνεσταυρωθη V-API-3S
that our old man was crucified with him
..................................ινα CONJ καταργηθη V-APS-3S το T-NSN σωμα
..................................N-NSN της T-GSF αμαρτιας N-GSF του T-GSM
..................................in order that the body of sin may be brought
..................................to nothing
..................................μηκετι ADV δουλευειν V-PAN ημας P-1AP
..................................τη T-DSF αμαρτια N-DSF
..................................and henceforth we should not serve sin

Moo differs in his understanding of this verse from the other commentators and translators. I am not in agreement with his understanding of the verb συνεσταυρωθη used here in this verse, where he equates it with the definite and final death of Christ as result of the crucifixion. I disagree because the finality of the death of Christ is portrayed by his burial (v.4).

I feel we need to understand how they take to crucifixion in the time of Paul. In Jesus’ time, it was the most shameful and painful way to die – and I believe that view would not have changed by much in Paul’s time, in comparison to our present time.

Taking that into consideration, would Paul be referring to the way Jesus died in suffering and shame that our old self should also be crucified in shame and in pain? For it is indeed in shame that we admit to our sins and die to it; and it is in pain that we renounce our old ways which we have become so accustomed to.

Moo also commented that when Paul refers to “our old man”, ο παλαιος ημων ανθρωπος, Paul does not refer to the two parts of the life of a believer – his old nature and his new nature, but to the person as a whole, the entire corporate structure to which he belongs.

This is thought-provoking for me because one, it seem to be in the same line of argument of being “dead to sin”: if the whole old man has died, and the new man now exist in Christ, what then our weaknesses to sin? And two, what about Eph 4:22-24, where Paul commands Christians to “put off the old man” and “put on the new man”, implying that as Christians, we may still have our old nature lying around, which we need to discard in order to be like Christ?

Looks like it's a more-on-Romans 6:6 tomorrow.

Maeghan


Addendum: The "tomorrow" I promised

Behind the contrast between "the old man" and "the new man" is the contrast between Adam and Christ, those who are in Adam exist in the old man and those who are in Christ exist in the new man. In Moo's opinion, it is only by interpreting it this way that we are able to intergrate two apparent conflicting viewpoints in Paul. Where Col 3:9-11 make clear that the believer has ceased to be the old man and has become new man, Eph 4:22-24 commands Christians to put of the old man. And if these phrases look at the person as one who belongs to the old age or the new, respectively, then this conflict is easily resolved. Moo may be right, in that Paul makes it clear that the believer has been transferred from the old age of sin and death to the new age of righteousness and life. The powers of that old age will continue to influence the believer and must be continually resisted - hence the imperatives of Eph 4:22-24. At the heart of the contrast is the eschatological tension between the inauguration of the new age in the life of the believer. What we were in Adam is no more, but until heaven, the temptation to live in Adam always remains. (Moo p.374-5)

How true ... the temptation to live in Adam will always for us remain, and not until heaven is realised for us, we are required to resist and fight, and live a holy life.

Updated Sunday 28th May 2006