John Gill's Bible Commentary Ver. 7. What shall we say then? is the law sin ? etc..] The apostle having said, that the motions of sins were by the law, ( Romans 7:5), meets with an objection, or rather an ill natured cavil, is the law sin? if the motions sins are by it, then it instigates and prompts men to sin; it cherishes it in them; it leads them and impels them to the commission of it, and therefore must be the cause of sin; and if the cause of sin, then it must be sin, or sinful itself: what shall we say then? how shall we remove this difficulty, answer this objection, and silence this cavil? To this it is replied by way of detestation and abhorrence, God forbid ! a way of speaking often made use of by the apostle, when any dreadful consequence was drawn from, or any shocking objection was made to his doctrine, and which was so monstrous as scarcely to deserve any other manner of refutation; (see Romans 3:3-5 6:1,2,15); and next by observing the use of the law to discover sin; which it does by forbidding it, and threatening it with death; by accusing for it, convincing of it, and representing it in its proper colours, it being as a glass in which it may be beheld just as it is, neither greater nor less; which must be understood as attended with a divine power and light, otherwise as a glass is of no use to a blind man, so neither is the law in this sense, to a man in a state of darkness, until the Spirit of God opens his eyes to behold in this glass what manner of man he is: now since the law is so useful to discover, and so to discountenance sin, that itself cannot be sin, or sinful. The apostle exemplifies this in his own case, and says, nay, I had not known sin, but by the law ; which he says not in the person of another, there is no room nor reason for such a fancy; but in his own person, and of himself: not of himself at that present time, as is evident from his way of speaking; nor of himself in his childhood, before he came to years of discretion to discern between good and evil; but as, and when he was a grown person, and whilst a Pharisee, ( Philippians 3:5); he did not know sin during his being in that state till the law came, and entered into his conscience, and then, and by it, he knew sin, ( Romans 7:7), the exceeding sinfulness of it, ( Romans 7:13), and that he himself was the chief of sinners, ( 1 Timothy 1:15). Nay he goes on to observe, that by the law he came to know, not only the sinfulness of outward actions, but also of inward lusts; says he, for I had not known lust, except the law had said, thou shall not covet : as it does in ( Exodus 20:17). This is a way of speaking used by the Jews, when they produce any passage out of the law, thus f124 , hrma hrwth , the law says, if anyone comes to kill thee; referring either to ( Samuel 24:11) or ( Exodus 22:1); and a little after, the law says, namely, in ( Exodus 3:5), put off thy shoes from off thy feet, etc.. By lust is meant the inward motions of sin in the heart, any and every desire of the mind after it; not only studied and concerted schemes, how to bring about and compass an evil action; but every loose vagrant thought of sin, and inclination to it; yea, every imagination of the thought of the heart, before the imagination is well formed into a thought; and not only a dallying with sin in the mind, dwelling upon it with pleasure in thought, but even such sudden motions and starts of the mind to sin, to which we give no assent; such as are involuntary, yea, contrary to the will, being the evil [we] would not, ( Romans 7:19), and are displeasing and hateful to us; these are meant by lust, and which by the law of God are known to be sinful, and only by that. These were not known to be so by the Gentiles, who only had the law and light of nature; nor are they condemned, nor any provision made against them, nor can there be any made, by the laws of men: and though these inward lusts are condemned by the law of God, yet inasmuch as they were not punishable by men, and could be covered with the guise of an external righteousness, multitudes who were born under, and brought up in that law, were secure and indolent about them, did not look upon them as sins, or as at all affecting their righteousness; but imagined that, touching the righteousness of the law, they were blameless, ( Philippians 3:6); which was the case of all the Pharisees, and of the apostle whilst such: but when the law came and entered his conscience with power and light attending it, then he saw, such innumerable swarms of lusts in his heart, and these to be sinful, which he never saw and knew before: just as in a sunbeam we behold those numerous little bits of dust, which otherwise are indiscernible by us. Now since the law is of such use, not only to discover the sinfulness of outward actions, but also of inward lusts and desires, that itself cannot be sinful.
Matthew Henry Commentary
Verses 7-13 - There is no way of coming to that knowledge of sin, which is necessar to repentance, and therefore to peace and pardon, but by trying ou hearts and lives by the law. In his own case the apostle would not have known the sinfulness of his thoughts, motives, and actions, but by the law. That perfect standard showed how wrong his heart and life were proving his sins to be more numerous than he had before thought, but it did not contain any provision of mercy or grace for his relief. He is ignorant of human nature and the perverseness of his own heart, wh does not perceive in himself a readiness to fancy there is somethin desirable in what is out of reach. We may perceive this in ou children, though self-love makes us blind to it in ourselves. The mor humble and spiritual any Christian is, the more clearly will he perceive that the apostle describes the true believer, from his firs convictions of sin to his greatest progress in grace, during thi present imperfect state. St. Paul was once a Pharisee, ignorant of the spirituality of the law, having some correctness of character, withou knowing his inward depravity. When the commandment came to his conscience by the convictions of the Holy Spirit, and he saw what is demanded, he found his sinful mind rise against it. He felt at the sam time the evil of sin, his own sinful state, that he was unable to fulfil the law, and was like a criminal when condemned. But though the evil principle in the human heart produces sinful motions, and the mor by taking occasion of the commandment; yet the law is holy, and the commandment holy, just, and good. It is not favourable to sin, which i pursues into the heart, and discovers and reproves in the inwar motions thereof. Nothing is so good but a corrupt and vicious natur will pervert it. The same heat that softens wax, hardens clay. Food of medicine when taken wrong, may cause death, though its nature is to nourish or to heal. The law may cause death through man's depravity but sin is the poison that brings death. Not the law, but sin discovered by the law, was made death to the apostle. The ruinou nature of sin, and the sinfulness of the human heart, are here clearl shown.
Greek Textus Receptus
τι 5101 I-ASN ουν 3767 CONJ ερουμεν 2046 5692 V-FAI-1P ο 3588 T-NSM νομος 3551 N-NSM αμαρτια 266 N-NSF μη 3361 PRT-N γενοιτο 1096 5636 V-2ADO-3S αλλα 235 CONJ την 3588 T-ASF αμαρτιαν 266 N-ASF ουκ 3756 PRT-N εγνων 1097 5627 V-2AAI-1S ει 1487 COND μη 3361 PRT-N δια 1223 PREP νομου 3551 N-GSM την 3588 T-ASF τε 5037 PRT γαρ 1063 CONJ επιθυμιαν 1939 N-ASF ουκ 3756 PRT-N ηδειν 1492 5715 V-LAI-1S ει 1487 COND μη 3361 PRT-N ο 3588 T-NSM νομος 3551 N-NSM ελεγεν 3004 5707 V-IAI-3S ουκ 3756 PRT-N επιθυμησεις 1937 5692 V-FAI-2S
Vincent's NT Word Studies
7. I had not known (ouk egnwn). Rev., correctly, I did not know. See on John ii. 24. The I refers to Paul himself. He speaks in the first person, declaring concerning himself what is meant to apply to every man placed under the Mosaic law, as respects his relation to that law, before and after the revolution in his inner life brought about through his connection with that law. His personal experience is not excluded, but represents the universal experience. 39 Lust (epiqumian). Rev., coveting. See on Mark iv. 19.
Robertson's NT Word Studies
7:7 {Is the law Sin?} (ho nomos hamartia?). A pertinent query in view of what he had said. Some people today oppose all inhibitions and prohibitions because they stimulate violations. That is half-baked thinking. {I had not known Sin} (ten hamartian ouk egnwn). Second aorist indicative of ginwskw, to know. It is a conclusion of a second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Usually an is used in the conclusion to make it plain that it is second class condition instead of first class, but occasionally it is not employed when it is plain enough without as here (#Joh 16:22,24). See on Ga 4:15. So as to {I had not known coveting} (lust), epithumian ouk idein. But all the same the law is not itself Sin nor the cause of Sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful acts.
