Featured

Subject to the Power of the Law | Romans 6:14

Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Simply put, mainstream theology ‘claims’ that the Apostle Paul is telling us in this verse, that the Law of God given through Moses is done away with; it’s taught that we are no longer obliged to observe and obey it, because we are “not under law”.

The mainstream premise is, “not under law” means “not required to observe and obey the Law of God given through Moses because it now lacks validity or authority”.

Let’s test that…

Before we look at the original Greek though, let’s use a little critical thinking and logic.

Paul said in this verse, “for sin will have no dominion over you, for you are not under law…”.

Logically then, when you are “under law”, sin will have dominion over you.

If “under law” means “required to observe and obey the valid and authoritative Law of God given through Moses”, then, was not Jesus “under law”? Wasn’t Jesus required to observe and obey the valid Law of Moses? As a son of Israel from the tribe of Judah, of course Jesus was required to obey the authoritative Law of Moses.

However, the mainstream premise now requires Jesus to also be under the dominion of sin!

The argument falls apart right there; For Sin will have dominion over Jesus, for Jesus was required to observe and obey (under) the law’. That makes absolutely no logical, or doctrinal sense.

What about “under grace”? If “under law” means ‘required to observe and obey the law’, then “under grace” must mean ‘required to observe and obey the grace’. It’s the same word in the Greek! Again, this makes no sense whatsoever.

“Under law” can not and does not mean “required to observe and obey the law”. If it did, then according to Paul, sin would have had dominion over Jesus.

Let’s break it down…

Under law” is “ὑπὸ νόμον/hypo nomon” in the Greek. ‘Nomon’, or ‘Law’, is in the Accusative Case. Therefore, according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, Strong’s G5259 hypo/ under means: subject to the power of.

The Law of God has the power to accuse us, and bring charges against us when we violate it; i.e. sin. When our sin has dominion over us, we become ‘subject to that power’ and the Law rightly judges us guilty.

“For sin will have no dominion over you since you are not under law”; Paul directly links sin not having “dominion over you” with not being “under law”. Therefore, if sin “had dominion” over you then you would be subject to (underthe power of the law.

Romans 6:14 has nothing to do with whether or not the law is binding and should be obeyed. It has everything to do with ‘what power you are being subjected to’ now that you are in Christ, compared to before when you walked according to the flesh.

Context, context, context.

What is the context of the surrounding verses?

In Chapter 5, Paul explained that all have sinned, i.e. broken the Law of God given through Moses, which leads to death. He says the Law was brought in, in order to show that sin abounds, or that sin exists in abundance. However, through the mercy and grace of God we have the free gift of redemption offered to us, should we choose to repent of our sins. Our ransom has been paid, and we are now freed from our bondage to sin (sins dominion over us v.14); please read ‘Freed from the law of Sin and Death‘.

Paul starts chapter 6 by asking, ‘shall we continue in sin now that we are baptized into Christ?’ ~

Romans 6:1-3 1What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

Should we continue in the sin that created the need for Jesus to die?

Stop and think for a second; ask yourself, ‘which sin‘ are we not to “continue” in.

According to Paul it’s the same sin he’s been talking about for this entire letter, that is, the sin of breaking the Law of God given through Moses’. This is ‘the Law’ of chapter 5 verse 20, that “came in” to show that sin abounds; “Are we to continue in the sin of breaking the Law of God given through Moses so that grace may abound?” Paul said, “by no means“!

Do you see? ‘By no means are we to break the Law of God given through Moses!‘, says Paul. That’s the sin he just told us we had all been guilty of. Then he stated, even though we are now subject to the power of grace, we should “by no means continue in “that sin.

Think logically, not emotionally.

Paul then claims that those united in Christ, have crucified their ‘old man’ so that we are no longer enslaved to sin, (“sin will have no dominion over you” v.14). Our ‘old man’, the slave to sin, having died to sin, is now acquitted from, or justified from, our prior sins (not guilty “under the law”) ~

Romans 6:5-7 5For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7For one who has died has been justified from sin.

Then Paul referred to the resurrection of the Messiah from the dead because, having no sin himself, death had no dominion over him. Now alive, he lives to do the will of God ~

Romans 6:8-10 8But if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him; 9knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dies no more; death no more hath dominion over him. 10For the death that he died, he died unto sin once: but the life that he lives, he lives unto God.

The next 3 verses by Paul, highlight the context that culminates with the verse in question. The “context” is sins dominion or reign in our lives. Paul is telling us that if we are alive in Christ, we must consider ourselves dead to the act of sinning. He does not say that sin doesn’t exist anymore, he tells us that we are not to obey it now that we are in Messiah.

We must not let ourselves “obey” the lusts of the flesh anymore, which would let sin continue to have dominion over us (shall we continue in sin? v.1).

Paul then instructs us to present ourselves to God as instruments of righteousness. ~

Romans 6:11-13 11Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus. 12‘Let’ not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey the lusts thereof: 13neither present your members unto sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

So, the context up to now has been:

  • All have sinned; i.e. broken the Law of God given through Moses
  • The power of the Law “charges our sins against us”, holding us accountable before God
  • The Law of Moses “came in” to define what sin is and show that sin exists in abundance
  • Shall we continue to sin (continue to break the Law of God given through Moses) so that grace may abound? Paul said, ‘No Way!’
  • Those in Christ died to sin; i.e. died to breaking the Law of Moses
  • The one who has died is justified; i.e. acquitted from ones past sins
  • Therefore, do not continue to let sin “have dominion” in your body all over again
  • Be righteous before God ~

~ present your members to God as instruments of righteousness because sin has no dominion over you since, you are not under law but under grace.

What Paul is saying is this: now that we are in Christ, if we are in Christ, we won’t choose to continue sinning (breaking the Law of God given through Moses) because we have put to death our ‘old man of sin’. With that death, we have died with Jesus, therefore we must consider ourselves dead to committing sin. In His death we are acquitted/justified from our “past” sins. Those past sins are now, no longer ‘subject to the power’ of Law to condemn us. The Law cannot judge us guilty or hold us accountable for our “prior” sins because now we are ‘subject to the power’ of grace for those sins.

Amen and Hallelu Yah!

So, what does Paul say in the next verse?

Romans 6:15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!

This is a repeat question that Paul asked in verse one ~

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means!

Are we to break the Law of God given through Moses and sin anyway because now we’re under the power of grace through faith? Are we to continue in the sin that required the death of Jesus? Paul says ‘no way‘ both times!

Is Paul redefining sin here? Is the sin in verse 6:15 different than the sin in verse 6:1?

Is sin whatever we want it to be? Who is the Potter and who is the clay? Do we as mere humans get to redefine sin? Of course not.

The sin that we are not to continue in is that same sin which put us in the position of needing grace in the first place! “That sin is disobeying the Law of God given through Moses; it always has been and always will be. The definition of sin has not changed, God does not change, and Paul commands us not to continue in that sin .

How did Paul know what sin is? Paul himself told us that the Law of Moses shows us what sin is ~

Romans 3:19-20 19Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are in the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin .

Romans 7:7 Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin .

John is a second witness ~

1 John 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

From where in the Scriptures did Paul and John understand that God’s definition of “sin” is breaking ‘the Law of God given through Moses’? ~

Numbers 15:22-23 22But if you sin unintentionally, and do not observe all these commandments that the LORD has spoken to Moses, 23all that the LORD has commanded you by Moses, from the day that the LORD gave commandment, and onward throughout your generations

David understood that sin is wandering from the LORD’s commandments ~

Psalm 119:10-11 10With my whole heart I seek you; let me not wander from your commandments 11I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.

The prophets witness the same ~

Jeremiah 16:10-11 10What is the sin that we have committed against the LORD our God?’ 11then you shall say to them: Because your fathers have forsaken me, declares the LORD, and have gone after other gods and have served and worshiped them, and have forsaken me and have not kept my law

God’s Law defines what sin is; Paul said so in the verses above!

How does Paul feel about the Law of God given through Moses?

Romans 2:18b and know His will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law;

Romans 2:20b an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

Romans 7:12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

Please, please take note that Paul stated in Romans 3:31, that we are to uphold the Law and not void it, even though we have ‘faith’!!!

It doesn’t get any plainer than that.

Please read ‘Paul Commands Us to Uphold the Law‘ or watch it on YouTube, in order to study and understand the Greek word definitions in this verse.

Final thought: Paul himself obeyed and kept the Law of God given through Moses ~

Acts 2:24b Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself (Paul) also live in observance of the law

Why would he live his life observing the law that nobody is required to observe?

Please read “You Yourself Also Live in Observance of the Law” or you can watch it on YouTube as well.

  • For further study of Paul’s teachings, as well as the original Greek, please see the ‘Page Links’ at the top of this page or blog posts at the bottom. Be a Berean, and test Paul’s doctrines to the “Scriptures”. Please ‘share’ this studyThank you for your time!

(Thus he declared all foods clean) Part 4 | Romans 14:14

Romans 14:14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.

Here we have another verse from the writings of Paul which is ‘interpreted’ by mainstream theology, so as to claim that the Law of Moses, and more specifically ‘the Leviticus 11 Food Laws’, are abolished.

Let’s start with the deception; the ‘truth’ has been hidden from us for far too long!

In almost every single English translation of verse 14, we have the word “unclean”, three times!

This is a lie, three times!!

The Greek word that Paul actually wrote in this verse is κοινὸν/koinon, Strong’s G2839, all three times!!! This is the English word ‘common’, NOTunclean (or should we start calling ‘Koine Greek’, “Unclean Greek”???).

To mean “unclean“, Paul would have used ἀκάθαρτος/akathartos, Strong’s G169.

Instead, the Greek text reads koinon, which means ‘common’, ‘defiled’, or ‘profane’ (as opposed to holy or set-apart).

Therefore, in truth, the verse reads ~

Romans 14:14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is common in itself, but it is common for anyone who thinks it common.

Here is the disconnect: Scripturally, anything ‘unclean is defined by God Almighty. If He said it is unclean, then it’s unclean… Period. Unclean is as bad as it gets. It is impossible for an unclean thing to become ‘common’, defiled, profane, or not-holy’; it’s already worse than all of those!!! The only thing that can become ‘common/defiled/profane’, is something that is ‘clean’ or ‘Holy’.

So, now that we know only something ‘clean’ or ‘Holy’ can becomecommon”, what does that Scriptural fact reveal?

Well, since the apostle Paul actually wrote, “common”, it proves beyond the shadow of a doubt, that it was impossible for the food he referred to in Romans 14:14 to be an unclean animal; it’s impossible!

Paul did not say, unclean’ in this verse; we have been lied to!

The translators have ‘changed’ the Word of God, to twist the context of the verse in order to redefine the doctrinal position of the Apostle Paul, to fit preconceived denominational dogma. This is practically the same kind of deception I expounded upon in the first part of this series, ‘(Thus he declared all foods clean) Part 1 | Mark 7:19’. In that study, I showed how the majority of the modern translators ‘added to the Word of God’, in order to change the context of the Scripture; whether this was done on purpose or in ignorance, it’s still deception.

You need to understand, mainstream theology has kept hidden from us, the Truth of what the Scriptures actually reveal. There is a big difference between ‘koinos’ and ‘akathartos, between ‘common’ and ‘unclean’!

In Acts 10:14, Peter used both “common/koinos” andunclean/akathartos”, in the same sentence, to describe food that he had never eaten, nor would ever eat (see ‘Part 2’ of this study).

What does the text say?

Acts 10:14 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is G2839common or G169unclean.”

Since there was obviously a difference between the two terms to a 1st Century/post-resurrection Disciple of the Son-of-God, shouldn’t we also except the distinction?

Mistranslating a word from the original text in the Word of God, to twist the context, in order to ‘change’ God’s doctrine is blasphemy!

We know that the Bible defines “unclean” animals/meat in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, but when is meat considered “defiled/common”? The circumstances in which ‘animal/meat’ is considered defiled, is when a clean animal dies naturally or is torn by beasts (Leviticus 22:8); or, when the blood has not been properly drained from the clean animal (Leviticus 17:13-14; 3:17, Acts 15). Such animal flesh was considered common, or profane. Similarly, in Acts 15:20, 29, the Christian Council forbade the new converts to eat the meat of a strangled animal, or meat that had not been drained of blood, i.e. common/defiled/profane meats. These are basic food Laws from the Law of Moses.

Here is another disconnect: we have been taught for centuries that anything you can shove into your mouth is ‘food’, and that in times-past, some of it was considered ‘clean-food’, and some of it was considered ‘unclean-food’. That premise is 100% Scripturally wrong! God NEVER said, ‘pig, crab, snake, dog, vulture, etc. were ‘unclean-food’; He said, they were “unclean animals” and “NOT food”! | Leviticus 11.

In the case of Romans 14:14, “defiled or profaned” would have been the correct terms to use, as the meat under discussion was most likely that offered to idols then sold in the marketplace for public consumption. Remember, a lot of these believers outside of Israel were brought up as pagans/gentiles. They knew that some of the meats sold at market could have been used as sacrifices to idols. As Paul mentioned in ‘Corinthians’, we know this was an issue for some of his congregations. This concern among the 1st century believers is completely ignored as Scriptural context by today’s mainstream teachers.

To paraphrase then, the verse should read: “. . . there is nothing defiled of itself; but to him who considers anything to be defiled, to him it is defiled.”

The meat was not in fact defiled. However, those “weak in the faith” believed that, because the meat had potentially been offered to a pagan idol, it may have been defiled.

Paul explained, in 1 Corinthians 8:4-7, that the demon behind the idol is nothing, because “there is no other God but one” (verse 4). Thus, there is no ‘taint’ to the meat that could make it “defiled”.

What does the text say?

1 Corinthians 8:7-8 However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat, are we the better, nor if we do not eat, are we the worse.

So, as we’ve read, Paul by no means claimed God’s Food Laws changed concerning clean and unclean animals. The topic of Law NEVER even comes up!

Mainstream theology ‘assumes’ that Paul endorsed the annulment of the dietary instructions in the Law of Moses; this is called ‘Eisegesis’. If you carefully read the chapter (without that preconceived idea), you will see that theory is false; it’s “assumed.”

To reiterate, Paul is discussing “food” (v.20) that may have ‘become defiled or common (v.14); unclean animal/meat can NEVERbecomecommon or profane, it’s ALREADY worse than that, it’s an abomination! ONLY that which is clean can become ‘common‘!

Most CRITICAL, just 13 verses later, Paul told us that “the Scriptures”, i.e. the Law, the Prophets and Writings, were written for our “instruction”. Those instructions, the ones that the Apostle Paul said are for you and me, they’re how we’re to determine what is food and what is not food; this is his conclusion to the issue of what is considered food.

What does the text say?

Romans 15:4 For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction

Paul told Timothy the same thing ~

2 Timothy 3:15-17 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

What mainstream theology fails to comprehend (and teach), is that Paul is NOT referring to his own letters when he says All Scripture” or “the sacred writings” or “the Word of God”.

Don’t misunderstand me, I am not saying Paul was not inspired by the Spirit of God when he wrote his letters, but think logically not emotionally; think like a 1st Century Berean. When the apostle Paul wrote these letters to Rome and Timothy, the ‘New Testament’ didn’t even exist yet! Paul is referring to the Old Testament, the Law, the Prophets and the Writings, when he says “All Scripture” or “the sacred writings”. The apostle Paul is stating that the Law is ‘profitable for teaching and training in righteousness’! He didn’t say it was abolished, did he? He said, ‘it is profitable‘! Please read ‘The Law: Fulfilled or Abolished?‘.

The Apostle Paul is unequivocally stating that God’s Instructions in Righteousness, are “The Scriptures” (the Law, the Prophets and the Writings), which tell us what is “Set-Apart ‘good’ food to eat”.

In ‘Part 1’, ‘Part 2’, and ‘Part 3’ of ‘(Thus he declared all foods clean)’, we read verses where Jesus, Peter and then Paul, all proved that the ‘Food Laws’ were either, not the topic of discussion, or they are manifestly promoted and upheld.

The Apostle Paul’s letters are ‘interpersonal commentaries’ to address specific doctrines and/or traditions, and how his assemblies were misunderstanding them or disobeying them. In Romans 14, the subject is not whether there was a change in the food Laws (or Sabbath Laws, for that matter)! Please read ‘Context, Context, Context’, which is a study of the first half of ‘Romans’ chapter 14. Verse 1 starts with Paul calling the whole contextual issue ‘an opinion’, not a new command; not a “thus declares The LORD” declaration. The apostle Paul is discussing his ‘opinion‘!

What does the text say?

Romans 14:1 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.

Paul was NOT introducing brand new doctrines; they were NOT ‘secret’ downloads from God that were independent of “established Scriptural doctrine”.

Never, in any of his letters, did the apostle Paul make a new declaration, “Thus says יהוה ”, or “Now the Word of the LORD came to me”, or “Thus, declares the LORD”; Never! He always quoted from the “established Scriptures”, and he said that those “Scriptures” are for our Instruction today.

Let’s use critical thinking and logic, not emotion.

Does God change?

What does the text say?

Malachi 3:6 For I the LORD do not change

The LORD God does not change; whatever has been ‘unclean’ or an ‘abomination’ to Him will never change.

The Lord GOD does not change; to claim that He does is blasphemy.

That being said, according to mainstream theology, Paul’s “mistranslated” statement in Romans 14:14 is a ‘change in the food Laws’. According to current mainstream doctrine, the animals which are listed as unclean, and an abomination to the LORD, have changed.

Mainstream dogma contradicts the established Scriptural truth that GOD does not change.

Lastly, I would like to bring to light another point of context which is NEVER taught from the modern mainstream pulpit:

The first 13 chapters of Romans has Paul promoting, reverencing, upholding, and teaching the Law of Moses:

Romans 2:13 for not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law shall be declared righteous.

Romans 2:18,2018and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law; 20an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth—

Romans 2:2323You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law.

Romans 3:1-21what is the value of circumcision? 2Much in every way.

Romans 3:31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

Romans 7:7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin.

Romans 7:12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being

Romans 7:25 So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind

Romans 8:7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law

If you haven’t already, please read the 16 studies of these, and many other quotes from Paul, on my ‘Romans Page’.

Final Thoughts:

  1. In our “future”, at the End of Days, God’s Judgement will bring a consuming wrath upon those who eat unclean animals; Eating pig’s flesh will still be considered worthy of judgement and punishment by the LORD!

What does the text say?

Isaiah 66:16-17 For by fire will the LORD enter into judgment, and by his sword, with all flesh; and those slain by the LORD shall be many. “Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one in the midst, eating pig’s flesh and the abomination and mice, they shall be consumed altogether”, declares the LORD.”

Is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob a liar???

  1. The Greek word κοινός [koinos/common/G2839], and it’s cognates are used only 4 times in the Septuagint [Old Testament in the Greek], and every time in reference to things “shared in common”. In the Septuagint, the Greek word koinos is never used to refer to “uncleanness” or to something as “unclean”; NEVER!

In fact, in Leviticus chapter 11, the word “unclean” is listed 32 times in regards to animals that are NOT considered food.

  What does the text say?

Leviticus 11:4-84Nevertheless, among those that chew the cud or part the hoof, you shall not eat these: The camel, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is G169unclean to you. 5And the rock badger, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is G169unclean to you. 6And the hare, because it chews the cud but does not part the hoof, is G169unclean to you. 7And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is G169unclean to you. 8You shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall not touch their carcasses; they are G169unclean to you.

There are another 27 usages of the word “unclean” in the this chapter, and every single time in the Septuagint, “unclean” is translated from akathartos/G169, EVERY time!