Romans 6:14

“ In fact, sin will not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. ”

We have not here a disguised exhortation, expressed by a future taken in the sense of an imperative: “Let not sin reign any more”...! Why would the apostle not have continued the imperative form used in the preceding verses? It is a future fact made sure to the believer as a glorious promise: “What I have just asked of you (to die unto sin and consecrate yourselves to God), ye will certainly be able to do; for it will be impossible for sin to hold its place longer in you; it will no longer be able to reign over you.” This promise is the justification of the command given Romans 6:12: “Let not sin reign”...! Romans 6:14 is thus the transition from the preceding exhortation to the subsequent development which treats of the believer's emancipation.

The promise contained in the first proposition is justified in the second. The state of grace, χάρις, reconciliation to God, the enjoyment of His favor and the possession of His Spirit, communicate to the soul a victorious power all unknown to the legal state. In this latter there reign the feeling of sin, the fear of condemnation, and the servile spirit, which are the opposite of inward consecration.

And hence sin can be overcome under grace, while it reigns inevitably under law. The apostle has not put the article before the word νόμον, law; for, though he is thinking substantially of the Mosaic law, it is as law that he wishes to designate it here, and not as Mosaic law. What he affirms applies to every institution having the character of an external commandment.

But why use the preposition ύπό, under, and not the preposition ἐν, in, which seems more suitable to a notion like that of the state of grace? Is grace, then, a yoke, as well as the law? Is it not, on the contrary, an inner life, a power? In other connections Paul would certainly have made use of the preposition ἐν, in, with the word grace. But the idea of the whole passage about to follow is precisely that of the decisive control which grace exercises over the believer to subject him to righteousness with an authority not less imperious, and even more efficacious than the law (Romans 6:15-23). And it is this idea which is expressed and summed up by the preposition ὑπό, under.

In the same way, indeed, as the second passage of the section (Romans 6:15-23) is the development of the words under grace, the third (Romans 7:1-6), as we shall see, will be the development of the words, no more under the law. And the logical connection of the three passages is consequently this: After demonstrating in the first that faith in Christ crucified and risen contains in it the principle of a reign of holiness (Romans 6:1-14), the apostle proves that this principle is not less powerful than a law to subdue man to itself (Romans 6:15-23), and that in consequence of this moral subjugation the believer can henceforth without danger renounce the yoke of the law (Romans 7:1-6).