Romans 12:1-2

 

When it comes to outlining books of the Bible, there is often debate and discussion since the reality is that most of the Bible was probably not written with an outline in mind. However, almost everyone agrees that there is a distinct break at the end of Romans 11 and that with Romans 12:1 we are entering into a new section distinct from the rest of Romans leading up to this point.

Up to this point, Paul has—for the most part—been looking at what God has done or is doing or will do. The whole point, especially of the early chapters of Romans, is that man was helpless and unable to do anything to save himself—and so Paul looked at what God could do. But now the focus changes; the foundation is still faith, but now Paul looks at what WE should do as a result of God's actions.

The main theme of Romans is the righteousness of God—that is, the righteousness which God Himself possesses and that righteousness which He dispenses to those who have faith. But the righteousness of God is not merely an ideal that exists within a heavenly plane; it is something that can come and walk in the heart of this very unrighteous world. If the just live by faith, then their life will be different from those who do not have faith and are not just.

The idea of a righteous life is Paul's focus for the next several chapters, and here in these two verses, Paul lays out the foundation for all of this.

Paul begins by saying: “I beseech” This is the core of the sentence, and everything else that follows builds off this.

Let's look now at another time when Paul used similar language. “Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient, Yet for love's sake I rather beseech thee, being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ. I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds.” (Philemon 8-10)

Paul was asking Philemon to forgive and be reconciled to Onesimus. He is encouraging, calling upon, asking, exhorting, pleading with Philemon to undertake a given course of action—all of that is to say, “beseech.” The Greek word here has a very broad range of meanings, but this is the general idea; to beseech someone is to ask or encourage them to do something. The statement “I beseech” is imperative; it is directed at somebody and aimed at getting them to do something.

In that way, beseeching is like commanding; but they are different. Notice that when Paul was speaking to Philemon, he points out that could have given Philemon an order but chose instead to beseech. The idea seems to be that Philemon should have been willing to cooperate without being straight-up ordered to do so.

And I think something of the same idea is here in Romans 12. What Paul is saying could have been put as a command; there are other places in the Bible where the same basic thought is found and is in the form of a command.  Paul could have said: “Thou shalt” instead of: “I beseech thee.” I think the reason he chose this form was that his readers shouldn't have needed that; they shouldn't have needed a direct commandment in order to do the thing in question; simply asking should have been enough.

We should also note the sharp difference between the passage from Philemon and there. In both cases, Paul is beseeching someone to do something. But in Philemon, the fact that Paul is the one beseeching is very important. He is speaking to Philemon not as an apostle, not as a preacher, but as a friend. However, Paul didn't have that sort of relationship with the Romans. In a sense, it doesn't matter that Paul is the one that wrote these verses; any of the apostles, really, any Christian could have written the same thing—because the basis of this request is not Paul's personal authority or character.

So we have the core of this verse—it is a request, an act of beseeching. Now, given that, we can ask several questions: who is being beseeched?; what are they being beseeched to do?; why are they being prompted to do this?; and where will this take them?. We can find the answer to these questions as we look at Romans 12:1-2. (I am treating these verses as if they were one continuous sentence. I had gotten half of this lesson finished before I realized that they are actually two separate sentences; some commentators do take them as two distinct ideas. However, if you take them that way it doesn't make that much difference to what we're saying.)

The WHO--that is, the addressee of this request—is simply identified as "brethren." The Greek word can also be translated 'brothers and sisters' and can refer to a mixed group—it is not gender-specific. The term is used throughout the New Testament as a form of address between Christians; we have run across it already in Romans. In context, the who, the brethren addressed here, are the Christians in the church at Rome, the original readers of this letter. But ultimately, this is addressed to all Christians, even, in the end, to us here today.

And that fact connects back to something we talked about earlier in Romans; that justification—that is, becoming a Christian—is the beginning of the journey and not the end. Even as Christians, there are things we must do—there are admonitions to follow and sacrifices to make. The gospel cries out to the world: “O sinner repent!” But it also has plenty to say to those who have already repented.

There are many within our movement who take this verse as being specifically about entire sanctification and would therefore say that it is addressed to those seeking that experience. And certainly, it does have relevancy in that situation, but I think as we look at it, we will see that it has something to say to all Christians, no matter what stage they are at in their spiritual life.

So Paul is addressing Christians and beseeching them to engage in a certain course of action. But WHAT exactly is it that he is beseeching them to do? There are three things: present your bodies a living sacrifice; resist the pressure of the world; and cooperate with the transformative and restorative power of God. We will look at each of these three things in detail later, but for the moment, I just want to get the big picture clear: what Paul is asking for is a radical change; he is asking them to give themselves fully to God, to exist in a state of deliberate nonconformity; to breath a different air than the atmosphere around them and walk in a different way.

Those addressed were already Christians and had found, in some sense, a deliverance from the world of sin, yet Paul encourages them to make a deeper commitment.

So given how radical this request is, we have to consider the ground of this request; WHY should they listen to it since, as I already said, it is not the personal character of Paul. To answer this question, we should look at one word specifically; the word 'therefore.'

Whenever you see the word 'therefore,' you should look to see what it's there for. It is a connecting word, joining what is said here to that which was said before. And ultimately, I think this word links the entire first eleven chapters of Romans to this verse and what follows.

What has Paul talked about in Romans up to this point? In Romans 1-4, Paul showed how God had provided an atonement for the sins of all mankind so that anyone can find justification and a right relationship with God through faith. In Romans 5-8, Paul showed how God, through that atonement and justification, had laid the foundation for a complete transformation of the believer, a new life, and even, ultimately, a new body and a new world. In these chapters, especially chapter 8, he emphasizes all that God has done and continues to do for the Christian, helping our infirmities so that nothing can come in between and interfere with the course of His love. In Romans 9-11, Paul looked at the plan of God at work throughout history—showing that the present existence of the church was the result of the working of God down through the ages; that over the course of history, God had been carefully arranging and preparing the stage for the birth of Christianity.

In other words, up to this point, Paul has been emphasizing all that God has done; the massive web of divine action which begins and continues the Christian life; the love and even self-sacrifice of God which makes possible our salvation—all that Paul summarizes here as “the mercies of God.” Romans began with the wrath of God, and then from that point forward, Paul has shown God's mercy, love, and kindness, which were at work to save mankind from that wrath.

And because of that, because of all that God has done and is willing to do for us, it follows that we ought to submit ourselves to and follow Him. God has done so much for us that it would be ungrateful to reject His love--and He desires to do so much that it would be irrational to do so. 

God asks for this sacrifice from us, and we are encouraged to do it because of His mercies. But God is not asking for a sacrifice from us because He needs something. Under the Old Testament law, God required the sacrifice of animals, but He also made it clear that He didn't need them in any real sense and was in no lack without them. “If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.” (Psalm 50:12) I think God would say the same thing about the living sacrifice He asks of the Christian. God does not need us in order to do something else; still less does He ask for this sacrifice, as a power-hungry tyrant might, for the mere pleasure of forcing others to submit to his demand.

There is a purpose; that is the WHERE of this command. I use the word where because what we have here is something like the orders for a journey: Paul is asking us to leave the land behind and push out into the deep, but only because we are following a treasure map—there is a goal in all this.

And it is "the will of God." And yes, I realize that on the face of it, that sounds a little strange—that God's will for us is to find His will. I just said that God has a purpose in asking for this sacrifice, but if that purpose is simply His own will, then doesn't that make the whole thing arbitrary? Is this just a more convoluted way of saying: “Because I said so”? No, though God could more aptly use the “because I said so” argument than anyone else. 

We can get to the answer by thinking of it this way:

Life is frequently pictured as a journey; some people just go through one day at a time without any goal or purpose, like men trudging along a path because they have nowhere else to go. But if you want to have an actual goal in life, what is it that you seek? I don't mean specifics—working in such-and-such profession or living in a certain kind of house—I just mean in general. What goals do people seek in life; what goals would people see as worthwhile or admirable?

Some people would seek what is right, for justice or morality. They would say: this is what I really want—to be in the right, to have no reason for guilt or regret.

But that would be too abstract for many people. Many people would just say that they seek happiness—not necessarily at the expense of what is right, but their goal is focused on that which is pleasant, that which is enjoyable.

And still others would say that what they seek is their purpose—they want to find the thing they were meant to do. They wanted to discover the reason they exist and live up to that.

In one way or another, these three things are the things most people search after in life or, at least, would recognize as things to search after. And if you can find them, most people would say you've done pretty well in life. In life, it is certainly worthwhile to search after the right, after happiness, after your purpose--or, to put these in different words, the good, the acceptable, and the perfect. 'Good' means that which is right, that which is morally correct, that which is, well, good. 'Acceptable' means that which is well-pleasing or agreeable. And 'perfect' means that which lives up to or completes a goal. These are different words for those three things, which are the goals of most lives.

But where is it that we can find them? In the will of God. God, as the designer and creator of life, has a plan for it, and only in that plan will we ever fine true goodness, happiness, or our purpose. Do not misunderstand this. In verse 1, Paul is speaking of a sacrifice, and in the verses that follow this passage, we will understand just how much of a sacrifice it may sometimes be to follow God. Seeking the will of God is not easy any more than seeking the best things in earthly life is easy. But the sacrifice is not the goal or the end; the goal or end is the will of God, and in that will is our hope for all that we need and desire in life.

In the KJV these three words (good, acceptable, and perfect) are translated as adjectives describing the will of God. According to the commentators, in Greek, these are nouns: it is “The good, the acceptable, and the perfect—AKA The will of God.” And maybe there is no significance to this point of grammar, but I can't help but think it means this: it isn't just that God's will is one good thing among many other good things—Goodness and the Will of God are more or less interchangeable; the only true goodness exists within God's will.

The goal or purpose of this radical change that Paul calls for is the will of God, for the good, the acceptable, and the perfect. And Paul says specifically that the goal is that we may 'prove' the will of God. This can mean one of two things.

In modern English, we usually associate the idea of “proving” with either scientists or detectives. When a scientist proves his theory, he conclusively discovers what the truth is regarding the phenomena in question. When a detective proves his case, he discovers and establishes the truth regarding the crime. So when we prove the will of God, that means we conclusively discover and establish what God's will is. 

But the word prove means more than that. The Greek word means 'to put to the test' and is associated with testing metals to discover whether or not they are genuine. When a scientist proves his theory, it means that he puts his theory to the test with experiments to show that it is, in fact, true.

So to prove the will of God means not just to learn or ascertain what God's will is; it means putting it to the test in the midst of life; it means actually living out God's will and finding that it is genuine, that it is truly the good, the acceptable, and the perfect. Paul's desire was that God's will would not just be a spot on a map but a place where his readers traveled to and settled down at. It was to be a practical reality, not merely an abstraction. 

So, having mapped out the general shape of these verses, we now need to look more in detail at the WHAT, at what it is Paul is asking his readers to do. And first, we have the word 'present'--i.e., give, yield over. The picture is of a man appearing at God's temple bearing a gift to be given over to God. This picture would have been very familiar to both the Jews and the Gentiles since Jewish religion and the various pagan religions from which the Gentiles were (most likely) converted would have both been built around offering gifts to God or the gods. We are to present a sacrifice. But this sacrifice was not intended to win over the love of God; rather it is a response to the love and mercy of God. It is not a sin offering; still less is it an attempted bribe—it is a thanks offering.

So what is the offering which Paul asks us to give? What kind of gift are we to bring to the temple of our God? It is 'your body.'

Back when we were going through Romans 7-8, we talked about the fact that no matter how far we go in our Christian life, we are still in the body, in a physical existence, living with flesh and blood. And though someday God will remake our bodies into something glorious, at present, we still must face certain limitations, difficulties, and temptations that come with living in this world. Here we come to the other side of that reality—our physical existence here may be limited and, in many ways, unpleasant, but it has its purpose, or at least it may have. It may become an offering to God. Every sane man knows that we must have self-discipline over ourselves—curb and train our physical nature in order to lead a normal, decent life; we must force ourselves to do things we don't want to do and not to do things we do want if we even want to hold unto a job and not get thrown in jail. This is something Paul recognized as well; in writing to the Corinthians, he emphasized the necessity of self-control to a successful spiritual life.

But that is not what Paul is saying here. He is not talking about the dangers or problems of our physical existence but of its potential. It means that everyone has the opportunity to give something to God. We are not all rich enough to give God a fortune; even if God required it, not all of us have a firstborn son to offer like Abraham did. There is only one thing that every person possesses, and that is their own life; therefore, we all have the chance to give something to God, something uniquely and preciously our own.

Now, you might think it strange that Paul says specifically that we are to offer our “bodies” and not our spirit or our soul or our mind. Certainly, the idea is not that our body is given to God, but our soul remains our own. And the use of the word body may be to make the parallel with traditional sacrifice plainer, but I think there is a reason for it, and it has to do with the rest of Romans 12-15. Because what Paul has to say here has to do with how Christians live—and the thing which allows us to live, the car which carries us down the road of life, is our body. And what Paul is going to be mainly looking at in these chapters are the things we do with our bodies—whether specifically bodily functions like eating or things that are incidentally carried on through our body, like talking and the way we interact with others. 

Because while it would be unChristian to say: My body is given to God, but my soul is my own, it would be equally unChristian (and equally silly) to say that my soul is given to God, but my body is my own. To offer our body to God is to give him the practical outworking of our life.

That is why Paul says that this sacrifice is a living sacrifice. Calling it a 'living' sacrifice may have been to make sure it was perfectly clear that Paul was not asking for human sacrifice as some pagans practiced, but I think it can also remind us that this is the sacrifice of our life. As Paul pointed out earlier in Romans, it is an unusual thing to be willing to die for someone or something—but I wonder if it is not often harder to be willing to live for someone. To be a martyr may be the work of a moment; to be a consistent Christian is the work of a lifetime.

Paul also specifies that this sacrifice is to be holy. The word 'holy' has two primary meanings; it means to be morally (or physically) clean and complete. But it can also mean given over to God; it means that which is separated or set apart for Divine use. Sacrifices were considered holy because they were a gift given to God, and for that reason, they also had to be holy in the sense of clean and complete.

Under the Old Testament law, the worshipper first had to find a perfect, whole animal and then offer it to God. But here, the sacrifice is given to God for the purpose of becoming perfect and whole. 

It is holy because it is given to God, separated or set apart for a divine purpose. And for that reason, it is acceptable to God. And perhaps there is a parallel here to the fact God's will is that which is acceptable. God's will is that which is (in the long run, anyway) fitting and desirable to the soul. And the sacrifice by which we obtain it is that which is fitting and desirable to God. We give ourselves to God, and God gives Himself to us, and both these actions are described as acceptable or well-pleasing. 

So what Paul is asking, exhorting, beseeching his readers to do is to make a presentation to God of their bodies--this would be a sacrifice that was living, holy, and acceptable unto God. And this entire act is described as a 'service.'

We use the word service to refer to that which we do for someone, whether for a fellow human, a group of people, society as a whole, or God. Now, the word translated 'service' in this verse is latreia; like service in English it originally had the idea of doing something to serve someone else. But it came to have a more specific meaning.

So when we come together to have church and worship God, what do we call that: it is a church service. Service in that context means a time and place and occasion of dedicated worship of God. Service, here, could be said to be a time or a way of worship. And that is what latreia means; it means the occasion or means of worshipping God. So, for instance, in Hebrews 9:1: “Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” In describing the ceremonial rituals of the Old Testament dispensation, the writer of Hebrews refers to as the divine service; latreia. It Mosaic covenant had its system of worship and its temple. And at the heart of the system of worship of the Old Testament was sacrifice. There was more to OT worship than sacrifice, and sacrifice wasn't the most important thing in the end, but it was the central piece around which everything else was built.

And under the new covenant, there is a new system of a worship and once again, at the heart of it, is a sacrifice. 

Remember that Paul is addressing Christians, and he is asking them to give their body, their self, their life to God—not their sins. Sin can only be cleansed, destroyed, invalidated, canceled, frustrated, put away. But our lives, our essential identity, the person that we truly are—that was made by God and so, at its heart, is something good. When we repent and bring our sins to God, we bring them so that can be thrown away. But when we present our bodies to God in this living sacrifice, it is not as we bring trash to the dump to be cast away; it is not as we bring a dangerous animal to be sedated; it is not as we bring something obscene or criminal to be confiscated—we come as worshippers bringing an offering to be given to God. To the world around us, our lives may not seem to be an impressive sacrifice; to many, when we present ourselves to God, it may look like the widow giving her mite to God. But to God, what we have to give is an acceptable sacrifice, an acceptable form of worship.

And this is the worship that we can give. There is some sense in which the animals and even the inanimate creation worships their creator. The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth forth his handiwork. But we, as human beings, have the ability to worship intentionally and deliberately. We can know God and make the conscious choice to give ourselves to Him. The heavens have always declared the glory of God and can not stop—it means something different when we choose to open our mouths and declare the glory of God. Every waterfall is casting itself down before the presence of the Lord—but it means something different when we make the choice to kneel to Him. An old song talks about the birds in the treetops singing praise to God; they may do it better than we do, but it means something different when we do.

That is the unique, distinctive thing about the worship we give as humans—when we give ourselves to God, we are making a conscious, thoughtful, deliberate, free choice. That sets us apart from everything else in the universe—except maybe angels who we don't know enough about to discuss here. And because of that, our worship is reasonable. 

The interesting thing about the word 'reasonable' is that TCNT translates it as 'rational' and YLT gives it as 'intelligent' while ASV and RSV translate it 'spiritual.' And to many people, in modern English, the words rational or intelligent would be the polar opposite of spiritual. To most people, rational has to do with the mind, and spiritual has to do with the heart. But that distinction, so far as I can understand, does not exist in Greek and particularly does not exist in the New Testament. Whatever compartments and subdivisions may or may not exist within man, the bottom line is that man has the ability to think, to appreciate, to know, and to decide—and that means he has the ability to hear God's word and respond to it—all of which is to say that we, as human beings, have the ability to give to God a conscious, living sacrifice of ourselves, a form of worship which is fitting and proper for us.

“But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:23-24) The kind of worship which is proper for God—the kind of worship which God calls for from us—is a worship that is in spirit and in truth, a worship that involves the totality of the inner man. When we think of worship, we often think of physical things or acts—we associate worship with church buildings and hymnals and pianos and organs. But you can have all that without truly having worship. You can sing and shout for yourself or others without any thought for God. There are church buildings where no worship has happened for years. Because true worship is an act of the human person, the heart and mind and will—and all those external things are important only in so far as they are aids to that true worship.

And that true worship, though it involves many different actions and attitudes, begins with a sacrifice—the living sacrifice of ourselves and for that reason, true worship will always be practical, as we will see in the rest of our passage.  

So, first of all, Paul is beseeching his readers (and, by extension, us) to present themselves to God as a sacrifice. But there is more than that. The next two things are 'be not conformed' and 'be ye transformed.' But to get to exactly what these two things mean, we are going to have to take a detour and talk about more words.

There are two words in Greek that are translated into English as 'form.' They are schema and morphe.  I'm not a Greek scholar, but this is my understanding of these words and their difference. Morphe is the essential form of a thing—the characteristics that make a thing what it is and not something else. So, the morphe of a triangle is having three sides and three angles. Schema means the external and incidental characteristics of a thing. So, if you draw a triangle with a black pencil, then its schema would be black. If you drew it with a red or a blue pencil, it would have the same morphe, but it would have a different schema. 

Now, back to our text. Paul exhorts us not to be conformed to this world. And this word 'conformed' comes from the word schema. In other words, do not take on the appearance and characteristics of the world.

Think of something like putty. It can easily be changed in its shape and appearance. You can roll and twist into different shapes very easily. And the truth is that we, as humans, are a lot like this. We tend to take on the characteristics of our atmosphere; we tend, when in Rome, to do as Romans do. People often act completely differently depending on what group of people they are around. People's habits, forms of speech, style of appearance, and even opinions and interests are molded and even completely transformed based on what those around them do. There are specific exceptions and qualifications, of course, but this can be generally said to be a characteristic of many, perhaps most people. Even people who deliberately act in an unusual or countercultural way often do it because they are influenced by a specific subculture. Nonconformity is often just a certain kind of conformity.

We see this in individuals—sometimes it is almost comic to see how a person changes based on the actions or attitudes of those around them. And we see it on a broader scale as large organizations and people group change and shift to fit the pressure of the general society. Society and culture change in response to worldwide trends. And in the end, everyone in the world changes to fit the pressures of life and existence itself. We see this across time. There are things in our society that 100 years ago were completely taboo and that are now casually accepted. And there are things that then were commonplace and mainstream that are now considered unacceptable or risqué. 

 And the thing is, I think of these changes, some are good and some are bad and a lot are in the middle somewhere. Changing because of the people you are around may make you better, and it may make you worse. If you are molding putty, you can make something beautiful or obscene or simply a big mess. But the putty has no control over that. So long as we are simply conforming to the world around us, we may be made better or worse, but we have no control over what happens. 

But, suppose someone took a piece of cast-iron and tried to mold and form it like putty. Would that be possible? Certainly not easily. lWhy not? Because it is a different material; it has a strength and density that putty doesn't have, which makes it extremely difficult to force it to change shape. The difference between putty and cast-iron is what they are made of. In other words, it is very difficult to change the schema of iron because of its morphe—its essential, defining characteristics are such that you cannot easily force its external, incidental shape to change.

And that brings us back to the other part of our text: be ye transformed. The word translated 'transformed' comes from morphe. The only way we can resist the pressure of our friends, of our society, of life itself, the only we can retain our own characteristics in the face of that which would mold us into something else, is if we have a change in ourselves. We must be transformed if we do not want to be conformed.

Several times, I've referenced the pressure of life itself. And I say that to underscore the fact that the pressure for conformity is not merely what we call 'peer pressure'--it is not merely the intentional or unintentional attempt of other people to force us to become like them. That is part of it, of course, but there is more.

Paul says "be not conformed to the world," but it would be more literal to translate that: "be not conformed to the age." The Greek word is aion, source of our English word 'eon,' a period of time. And while you could interpret that as meaning that we are not to be conformed to the characteristics of our particular time period, most commentators take it in a different sense.

The age means this present age, that is, the course of existence in this world as it currently is. Whatever exactly things were like in that time between creation and the sin of Adam, ever since the Fall, there have been certain things that have held true about life in this world—wherever and whenever man has lived. If we consider that time period beginning with the fall and stretching to today (and extending in our imagination throughout the future until the Resurrection), then we can see that life in this age has had many different forms, and yet it has some underlying similarities.

And the fundamental similarity is that this age, at any part of it, is very temporary. The world passeth away. The only constant is that nothing is constant. Nothing lasts forever; few things last for more than a handful of years. There are many good things within this world; there are many beautiful things; many noble things. But there are no truly permanent things.

Suppose you wanted to build a house and you wanted to model it on some other house. You would not want to try to figure out the blueprint for your house by seeing the other house while it was being built—still less would you want to base your design on seeing the house demolished. No, you would look at the blueprints. If you are wanting a pattern to copy, you want to look at something definite and unchanging—not something in the process of change.

This present age is not universally bad—but it is not a good model for our behavior. That is why we must resist the pressure to conform to it.

Now, having said all that, there is a caveat I want to make. There is a certain value in changing your schema in response to your situation; there is a certain value in being adaptable to circumstances and to other people. Even St. Paul realized this. “And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:20-22)

Paul was able to adapt to different situations; he was able to meet both the Jews and the Gentiles on their own ground in order to witness to them. He changed in response to his environment—so in one sense, you can say that he was conforming to men (if not exactly to the world). But here is the key point—though Paul changed to meet the outside pressure, that pressure was not the defining thing; it was not in control. Paul says that he was as without the law to those without the law—but adds that he wasn't truly without the law, but under the law to Christ—in other words, he could meet sinners and Gentiles on their own ground, but he would not meet them in their sin; he could change some things and still hold unto to other—he adapted without conforming. 

There is nothing wrong with adapting, so long as we do not let the outside pressure become the defining thing. You are not a slave if you choose to do what someone tells you to do; you are a slave when you no longer have a choice. Now, many men would say that they do not conform to the pressure of the world because of their own strong will—they would say that they are in control and not the outside pressure. That is not what Paul would have said. Paul could resist the current of the world—resist it so much that he could even swim with it for a little way without being swept away—specifically because the current was not in control, and he was not in control. It was God who was in control. And that brings us back to our text. The only way to resist being conformed is to be transformed.

And the way to be transformed is by the renewing of the mind. We began with a sacrifice of the body, and here we come to a renewing of the mind. These two things must go together—an internal change and an external change. A changed mind would accomplish nothing without a changed life, and a changed life would be meaningless without a changed mind.

Remember what we saw in the beginning of this lesson—this exhortation is addressed to Christians. Those to whom Paul spoke were already Christians and, therefore, in some sense, had already been renewed; they had experienced a new birth. And yet Paul calls for them to experience a renewal.

Because, as we talked about earlier in Romans, the change God makes in salvation is only the beginning. According to  Robertson, both of these words—conformed and transformed—are in the present tense. In other words, Paul isn't picturing a single point of time when his readers would break out of the mold of the world and embrace a new and changed life.

Think of a balloon. When it is inflated, it has a distinct shape and size. But because there is pressure on it, as soon as it gets the opportunity, it will deflate. Even if you tie the balloon shut so that it can't deflate, over a long enough time, the air will escape through the skin of the balloon.

In other words, there is a constant, unending pressure on the balloon to cause it to deflate. And as long as we live in this world, there is always going to be pressure to conform to the age. That pressure will be greater or lesser at different times; it will appear in different forms. But it is always there to some degree. To resist it, then, we must have a constant counter-pressure. Because we must continually resist conformity to the world, therefore we must have a continual transformation by the renewing of our mind.

The word translated 'mind' here means specifically the intellect, the ability to think and understand. You might think it strange that Paul would use the word mind here instead of heart or soul. And it is possible that he is using the word in a general sense to mean the inner man as opposed to the outer man.

But I do think there might be another idea. Because the reality is that just because our heart—in the sense of our intentions, motives, and desires—is right does not mean that our mind—in the sense of our thoughts and understanding—is right. The most important thing for a parent is to truly love their children and desire what's best for them—but that, in itself, does not teach you how to deal with every situation that comes up in parenting. The most sincere and heartfelt desire for someone's health does not replace a knowledge of medicine. Simply because a Christian desires to live a righteous life does not show him how to live a righteous life. 

And maybe I'm reading way too much into this. But there is one thing to remember about Romans and about the New Testament in general. The people to whom this was written were Christians—but they did not have Christian parents; they did not come from Christian homes. Because Christianity itself hadn't been around that long. The people that comprised the Roman church (the adults, anyway) would all have been raised as Jews or in some variety of paganism or irreligion.

None of these people had been educated from childhood to look at things from a Christian perspective. Orthodox Judaism would have been very close, of course, but for the rest, their entire way of thinking, their habits, their traditions, and their assumptions would have been completely different from the Christian worldview. And just because they became Christians didn't completely change their way of thinking. Even though they were Christians, they still needed a renewing of their minds.

And you would think that this, then, would not apply to those of us who have grown up within the church; you would think that once a person has lived many years as a Christian, they would no longer need this injunction. 

But the problem is that the pressure from the world to conform is constant, as I said before.

First, because we live in a society that, in many ways, is very distant from orthodox Christianity, therefore we always have a pressure to conform, to change our beliefs and practice to match the world around us. And I use the word 'pressure' to keep with this metaphor of conforming—but it isn't always 'pressure' in the sense of intimidation or badgering. This pressure from the world often takes the form of a subtle influence. And unless you are living in complete isolation with zero contact with others, then you are going to experience this pressure. And because it is often so subtle, you probably will not be able to resist by sheer willpower. There must be a renewal on the inside.

Second, because, while there is pressure from other people, from society, to conform to its way, there is also pressure from the world itself—from the disordered nature of the present world order. Even if you are a Christian and all your friends are Christians—even if every single person in the whole world were a Christian—it would still be true that we are living in a fallen world and that the very nature of this world, as it is, puts a constant pressure on us—a pressure to live and think and act differently than we should.

And because this pressure is continual, therefore we must have a continual renewing of our mind in order to counteract that pressure. Thomas Jefferson (I think it was) said that eternal vigilance is the price of freedom; the fact is that eternal vigilance is the price of anything worth having in life; even if you just want to have a clean house, the price will be eternal vigilance. Every day of our life, we will need God's help and an internal renewal.

So, the key point we have been hammering home is the importance of a renewal of our mind. But how does that happen? Obviously, part of it is through the work of the Holy Spirit—something Paul talked about in-depth back in chapter 8. But we shouldn't imagine the Christian just lying back and waiting for God to change Him. There is a part we play. Again, part of that is simply exercising faith—as we've also talked about throughout Romans.

But a part of it is studying God's word and listening to the advice of Godly teachers. If we want to change the way we think and see the world—if we want (in the word of John Chrysostom) to 'think and live like a Christian'--we must study and understand Christian doctrine and practice. 

And do you know what Paul is going to do for the next several chapters? He is going to give advice and instruction about how Christians should live, advice and instruction which has become part of God's word. 

All that follows in Romans builds off this beginning admonition. If his readers headed his admonition to present their bodies as a sacrifice, they would have to resist the conforming power of the world by an internal transformation caused by the renewing of their minds—and so Paul gave what instructions he could to help their minds to be so renewed.

And so it would be that the righteousness of God would be revealed within the lives of the Christians, for it is written that the just shall live by faith.