What is the Gospel?

[Dr. Rich]

Jesus did not say that these people tell Him that they are Commandment Keepers and obey the words of Jesus and God the Father did He? NO. He said they did things in the name of Christ but He never knew them. Please don't co-mingle commandment keeping with doing things and casting out demons in the name of Christ! They are NOT the same.

The people found in Rev. 12:17 keep the commandments and the words (testimony) of Jesus because they are showing God that they truly love Him.

[pnattmbtc]

What's this in response to?

[Dr. Rich]

Your "Very Nice" on Lutz's reply

[Musicman1228]

Quote:

The error here is believing that Jesus with continually forgive you for making the same error over and over.

Nobody is saying that. If you keep doing the same stupid things over and over, then there is something wrong with your walk with Jesus. It would suggest that you haven't really recieved Him.

You are completely correct in this, Richard. Thank you for bringing up the subject of 'stupid'. The only problem with being stupid is that you don't know that you are (generic 'stupid', not you in particular). One of my favorite expressions is this: The problem with 'stupid' is that it is the only universal capital crime, and punishment is given without regard to age, sex, or intelligence or religion.

This is true in everyday life as well as in our spiritual lives. If you are stupid while riding a motorcycle you almost certainly will be killed. (Motorcycle and stupid are virtually synonymous). This is the same with believing something to be true when it is in fact a lie. The problem with the five foolish bridesmaids is that they fit this definition perfectly. They are unwilling to look for the truth because they are sure they already have it (Laodicea). The are foolish (stupid) because they are 'willingly ignorant'.

[John317]

What's this in response to?

You will find the post someone is responding to if you click on [re: Dr. Rich] which is beside the title of the thread at the top left of your post.

It will take you to this post #358819:

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/358819/pnattmbtc.html#Post358819

[Twilight]

Quote:

Twilight: Do you have any evidence that Romans 8:1 has been altered at some point?

Quote:

Robert: It doesn't fit the context....Besides look at the many versions:

The following don't include that added phrase:

American Standard Version

Bible in Basic English

New International Version

Complete Jewish Bible

Good News Translation

GOD'S WORD Translation

Holman Christian Standard

New American Standard

New Century Version

New Revised Standard

New Living Translation

Revised Standard Version

The Darby Translation

Weymouth New Testament

The reason all of the above translations read that way is that they are all based on the Critical Text of one variety or another.

The reading in the Critical Text itself is based on only a handful of Greek manuscripts. In this case, Romans 8: 1 in the above translations is based on codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and D, F, G.

All the other Greek manuscripts contain the verse as it is given in the King James Version. So the KJV is more representative of the how most Christians throughout history have understood Romans 8: 1.

Among the ancient Greek manuscripts that read as the King James Version does are Codex Alexandrinus and the corrected Sinaiticus as well as the corrected Codex D. Many copies of the translations into the vulgate and syriac also read the same.

Thank you for clarifying that John :-)

But if you notice, even if it was a later addition the texts quoted bring across exactly the same point.

So it is not really a point than can be established even without 8:1. :-)

Mark

[Twilight]

and another Amen to that!

pk

Another Amen...

[John317]

Quote:

Twilight: Thank you for clarifying that John :-)

You're welcome, Mark. :-)

Quote:

But if you notice, even if it was a later addition the texts quoted bring across exactly the same point.

So it is not really a point than can be established even without 8:1. :-)

Yes, I agree. It's not a big thing, since there's much evidence signifying the same idea, even without its being said in 8: 1.

[Robert]

Well cut my legs off, and call me shorty.

Where you been Robert?

Funeral....

[Robert]

The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in who? In us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. This can only apply to the believer.

Right, but Romans 8:1-3 apply to our humanity "in Christ". There's no condemnation to the believer who is failing because of his/her position "in Christ". Let's look at this again:

"there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus [why?] 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life [the power of the spirit] set me free from the law of sin and death.

Note, "through Christ" the Spirit set my life under the curse free from,

1] the sin nature (the law of sin)

2] and death

In other words "in Him" I have a humanity that is without indwelling sin (holy flesh) and immortal.

Now verse 3:

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and on account of sin, condemned sin [where?] in the flesh...."

Sin where? What does Paul say? "The law of sin which exists in my members" - my body - my flesh. [Romans 7:23]

So Romans 8:2,3 is talking about our humanity that was "in Christ".

If you add that phrase, "who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" then it negates the meaning of Romans 8:1 (first part) and verses 2,3

[Robert]

Here's Jack on the subject:

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus....

The word “therefore” immediately tells me that this verse is connected with the previous statements that Paul made. What did Paul say previously to verse 1 of chapter 8? Remember, there were no chapter and verse divisions when Paul wrote. What is he saying? He has just told us in Romans 7:14-25 that there is a problem in his life, a problem in every human life. And that is: sin dwells in us. The law of sin is in our members. And in Romans 7:24 he cries out in desperation:

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?

I have a body that stands condemned to death because it has sin dwelling in it. Who will deliver me not from my sin, my acts, but from what I am? That is the issue. I want you to know his answer, Romans 7:25:

Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord!

Now he didn’t explain any further there. He goes to Romans 8 to explain what he means by, “Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord!” In view of this, he says:

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus....

Do you still have sin dwelling in your members? I’m not talking about performance, I’m talking of sin dwelling in you, in your members. The answer is “yes,” because Christians still have sinful flesh. Do you stand condemned? Not in Christ; there is no condemnation for those in Christ.

Now I would like to say for those of you who have the King James version of the Bible, because you will notice, those of you who have a modern translation like the NIV, Good News Bible, or any contemporary version, the second half of verse one from the King James is not there:

...who do walk not according to the flesh [the sinful nature], but according to the Spirit.

The most reliable manuscripts do not have that second part. I am convinced this is a scribal addition, not mainly because of the textual fact but because if Paul put that statement there in verse 1, he would be contradicting his own theology. Because he would be saying that we are justified because we are doing something, we are walking in the Spirit. He would be making sanctification the means of justification, which Paul condemned.

Yes, sanctification is the fruit of justification, never the means. That part, “walking in the spirit and not in the flesh,” does belong to verse 4 but not to verse 1. All that Paul says in verse 1 is that, “There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ.” Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ? The answer is found in verse 2, because something took place in Christ. Romans 8:2:

...Because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

Please notice it’s not through you, but through Christ. Now the words “set me free” are in the past historic tense, the Aorist. It’s something that has already happened in the past. I have and you have already been freed from the law of sin and death, but we have been freed in Christ. Now how could Christ free you from the law of sin and death if he did not assume the nature that had it? Then in verse 3 he goes on to say how this happened, he gives the details. Romans 8:3:

For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man....

The law of God could not free you from the law of sin and death, and he’s already covered that in chapter 7. The flesh is incapable of keeping the law of God because it’s weak. What the law could not do, God did. How did God do it? By sending His own son in a human nature that is like yours and mine.

Now please notice what he condemned. He did not condemn “sins,” your performance or mine. He condemned “SIN,” singular. What is Paul referring to when he uses the phrase “sin in sinful man” (or “sin in the flesh,” as some translations read)? The phrase “sin in the flesh,” found in verse 3, the phrase “the law of sin and death” found in verse 2, the phrase “the law of sin at work within my members” found in Romans 7:23, the phrase “sin living in me” found in Romans 7:17 and 20 are all synonymous terms. Paul is not dealing here with our performance; he is dealing with the source of our problem, the foundation of our problem, which is sin dwelling in me.

[Twilight]

Here's Jack on the subject:

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus....

The word “therefore” immediately tells me that this verse is connected with the previous statements that Paul made. What did Paul say previously to verse 1 of chapter 8? Remember, there were no chapter and verse divisions when Paul wrote. What is he saying? He has just told us in Romans 7:14-25 that there is a problem in his life, a problem in every human life. And that is: sin dwells in us. The law of sin is in our members. And in Romans 7:24 he cries out in desperation:

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?

I have a body that stands condemned to death because it has sin dwelling in it. Who will deliver me not from my sin, my acts, but from what I am? That is the issue. I want you to know his answer, Romans 7:25:

Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord!

Now he didn’t explain any further there. He goes to Romans 8 to explain what he means by, “Thanks be to God — through Jesus Christ our Lord!” In view of this, he says:

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus....

Do you still have sin dwelling in your members? I’m not talking about performance, I’m talking of sin dwelling in you, in your members. The answer is “yes,” because Christians still have sinful flesh. Do you stand condemned? Not in Christ; there is no condemnation for those in Christ.

Now I would like to say for those of you who have the King James version of the Bible, because you will notice, those of you who have a modern translation like the NIV, Good News Bible, or any contemporary version, the second half of verse one from the King James is not there:

...who do walk not according to the flesh [the sinful nature], but according to the Spirit.

The most reliable manuscripts do not have that second part. I am convinced this is a scribal addition, not mainly because of the textual fact but because if Paul put that statement there in verse 1, he would be contradicting his own theology. Because he would be saying that we are justified because we are doing something, we are walking in the Spirit. He would be making sanctification the means of justification, which Paul condemned.

Yes, sanctification is the fruit of justification, never the means. That part, “walking in the spirit and not in the flesh,” does belong to verse 4 but not to verse 1. All that Paul says in verse 1 is that, “There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ.” Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ? The answer is found in verse 2, because something took place in Christ. Romans 8:2:

...Because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

Please notice it’s not through you, but through Christ. Now the words “set me free” are in the past historic tense, the Aorist. It’s something that has already happened in the past. I have and you have already been freed from the law of sin and death, but we have been freed in Christ. Now how could Christ free you from the law of sin and death if he did not assume the nature that had it? Then in verse 3 he goes on to say how this happened, he gives the details. Romans 8:3:

For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man....

The law of God could not free you from the law of sin and death, and he’s already covered that in chapter 7. The flesh is incapable of keeping the law of God because it’s weak. What the law could not do, God did. How did God do it? By sending His own son in a human nature that is like yours and mine.

Now please notice what he condemned. He did not condemn “sins,” your performance or mine. He condemned “SIN,” singular. What is Paul referring to when he uses the phrase “sin in sinful man” (or “sin in the flesh,” as some translations read)? The phrase “sin in the flesh,” found in verse 3, the phrase “the law of sin and death” found in verse 2, the phrase “the law of sin at work within my members” found in Romans 7:23, the phrase “sin living in me” found in Romans 7:17 and 20 are all synonymous terms. Paul is not dealing here with our performance; he is dealing with the source of our problem, the foundation of our problem, which is sin dwelling in me.

Consider this Robert:

In Romans 7:14-25 there are two "laws" in operation. The Law of God and the law of sin.

With those two laws, man is condemned.

But a third law is introduced in Rom 8:2.

It is only "that law" that gives the sinner power to adhere to one law and be free from the negative.

In other words, the "law" (rulership), of the Spirit, sets me free to keep the "law" (Gods Commandments), because it breaks the power of the "law of sin" over me, that is in my members (flesh).

Mark :-)

[pnattmbtc]

Thanks for quoting that Robert. A couple of comments.

One is that I disagree completely with Jack in his reference to "the most reliable manuscripts." I agree with what John317 wrote.

The "most reliable" manuscripts are (supposedly) the oldest ones, which makes some sense in a common sense standpoint. But there's more going on than meets the eye. The better manuscripts were the ones which were used. These were copied, and continued to be used throughout the ages. These were the ones the Waldenses preserved. The older ones remained in better condition because they were rejected and not used.

There is great agreement among the texts which John317 mentioned. These older manuscripts have great disagreement by them. If you go by them, there is a great deal of Scripture you'd have to throw out, if you only took that as authentic that all these older texts agreed upon.

Regarding his comment that it was a scribal addition, I don't know what the evidence for that would be.

The best argument he made was in regards to "therefore." It must be the case that Paul had Romans 8:1 in mind as a conclusion to what he had written before. However, it seems to me quite plausible that the "whole walk according to the spirit" could have been in Paul's mind as what he was just about to talk about.

Regarding the question as to if we still have sin dwelling in our members, Jack answered "yes," on the basis that we have a sinful nature. Christ took this same nature, as Jack himself asserts, so by this same logic it would follow that Christ has sin dwelling in His members. That doesn't sit right with me. I agree that Christ took our sinful nature, but I wouldn't say that Christ had sin dwelling in His members, and I very much doubt that Paul would say that either, which makes me question if this is what Paul had in mind.

One thing I agreed with, assuming I understood it correctly is that Paul in Romans 7 is not speaking so much of before being saved and after being saved as to a principle. I believe the principle is trying to live apart from Christ as opposed to with (or in) Christ. This problem can happen regardless of if we have been saved. That is, if we, even after having accepted Christ, attempt to live apart from Christ, we will have the Romans 7 experience.

Back to Romans 8:3,4. When Paul says:

Quote:

3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

this is clearly referring to the believer.

Jack claims this is not dealing with performance, but this seems to be so clearly dealing with performance, I don't know how one would get around this. The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us when we have faith in Christ. I don't see how us this can be understood. If we don't have faith in Christ, then the righteousness of the law is not fulfilled in us.

Quote:

There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ. Why? Because he received the curse of the law, that the blessing might come on us. Nothing can come to us while we are in him, without first passing through him; but in him all curses are turned to blessings, and sin is displaced by righteousness. His endless life triumphs over everything that comes against it. We are made “complete in him.”

Quote:

The law without Christ is death. The law in Christ is life. His life is the law of God; for out of the heart are the issues of life, and the law was in his heart. The law of sin and death works in our members. But the law of the Spirit of life in Christ gives us freedom from this. Mark that it is the life in Christ that does this. It does not give us freedom from obedience to the law, for we had that before, and that was bondage, and not freedom. What he gives us freedom from is the transgression of the law.

Quote:

Christ’s Work: This is made very plain in verses 3 and 4. God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, “that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us.” “The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” There is no fault to be found with it but with us, because we have transgressed it. Christ’s work is not to change the law in any particular, but to change us in every particular. It is to put the law into our hearts in perfection, in place of the marred and broken copy.

The Weakness of the Law: The law is strong enough to condemn, but it is weak, even powerless, with respect to what man needs namely, salvation. It was and is “weak through the flesh.” The law is good, and holy, and just, but man has no strength to perform it. Just as an axe may be of good steel, and very sharp, yet unable to cut down a tree because the arm that has hold of it has no strength, so the law of God could not perform itself. It set forth man’s duty; it remained for him to do it. But he could not, and therefore Christ came to do it in him. What the law could not do, God did by his Son.

Quote:

The Flesh and the Spirit: “For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.” Note that this depends on the preceding statement, “that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” The things of the Spirit are the commandments of God, because the law is spiritual. The flesh serves the law of sin (see the preceding chapter, and Galatians 5:19-21, where the works of the flesh are described). But Christ came in the same flesh, to show the power of the Spirit over the flesh. “They that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of Christ dwell in you.” Now no one will claim that the flesh of a man is any different after his conversion from what it was before. Least of all will the converted man himself say so; for he has continual evidence of its perversity. But if he is really converted, and the Spirit of Christ dwells in him, he is no more in the power of the flesh. Even so Christ came in the same sinful flesh, yet he was without sin, because the Spirit always led him.

The above are some statements of Waggoner, whose interpretation I agree with.

For anyone interested in seeing more, it can be seen online here: http://www.1888mpm.org/book/waggoner-romans

EGW understood the phrase "condemned sin the flesh" to be dealing with performance. Here's an example:

Quote:

"God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." {ST, January 16, 1896 par. 1}

Satan declared that it was impossible for the sons and daughters of Adam to keep the law of God, and thus charged upon God a lack of wisdom and love. If they could not keep the law, then there was fault with the Lawgiver. Men who are under the control of Satan repeat these accusations against God, in asserting that men can not keep the law of God. Jesus humbled himself, clothing his divinity with humanity, in order that he might stand as the head and representative of the human family, and by both precept and example condemn sin in the flesh, and give the lie to Satan's charges. He was subjected to the fiercest temptations that human nature can know, yet he sinned not; for sin is the transgression of the law. By faith he laid hold upon divinity, even as humanity may lay hold upon infinite power through him. Altho tempted upon all points even as men are tempted, he sinned not. He did not surrender his allegiance to God, as did Adam. {ST, January 16, 1896 par. 2}

I think she's correct too. Christ condemned sin in the flesh by obeying the law in the flesh, so that we, who walk according to the spirit and not the flesh, could also condemn sin in the flesh by obeying the law while in human flesh. This is the way the 1888 messengers understood this text, and it seems to me to be readily understandable that this was Paul's logic. To try to make the logic something else seems rather convoluted to me.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

p:The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in who? In us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. This can only apply to the believer.

R:Right, but Romans 8:1-3 apply to our humanity "in Christ". There's no condemnation to the believer who is failing because of his/her position "in Christ". Let's look at this again:

"there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus [why?] 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life [the power of the spirit] set me free from the law of sin and death.

The power of the spirit sets us free from the law of sin and death, which is that he who sins, dies. In other words, if we choose the principle of sin over the principle of agape, we will die eternally. Why? Because we will not have characters which are in harmony with God or the principles of His government.

Our character does not change when we die. The character we go to the grave with is the character we are resurrected with. If we have characters which are not in harmony with God or His principles, heaven would be a place of torture for us.

Quote:

Note, "through Christ" the Spirit set my life under the curse free from,

1] the sin nature (the law of sin)

2] and death

In other words "in Him" I have a humanity that is without indwelling sin (holy flesh) and immortal.

This seems very meta-physical, and not helpful. It sounds just like a mathematical theory.

That is, if I subscribe to some formula, then I have some position which results in some sort of accounting in heaven. This sounds like what you're saying.

But our problem is here and now. We need to deal with characters and wills out of harmony with God and His principles. How does God fix our character? This is the issue Paul is dealing with.

Quote:

Now verse 3:

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and on account of sin, condemned sin [where?] in the flesh...."

Christ condemned sin in the flesh by obeying the law while in sinful flesh.

Quote:

Sin where? What does Paul say? "The law of sin which exists in my members" - my body - my flesh. [Romans 7:23]

So Romans 8:2,3 is talking about our humanity that was "in Christ".

It's talking about Christ overcoming sin in the flesh. He overcame sin in the flesh, preparing the way so that we could be overcomers as well. We overcome by faith, as He did.

Quote:

If you add that phrase, "who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" then it negates the meaning of Romans 8:1 (first part) and verses 2,3

Not at all. The phrase is a description of those who are not condemned.

It's true that there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. A characteristic of those who are in Christ Jesus is that they walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. This doesn't negate the meaning in any way, and it points forward to the argument that Paul is about to make.

Notice verses 6-8:

Quote:

6For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Those that are in the flesh cannot please God. Why not? Because they are carnally minded, and not subject to the law of God.

The "law of God" is another way of saying "God's principles" which are the principles of agape. That is, those who live in the flesh live contrary to agape, and as such cannot please God. To please God we need to live according to the principles of agape, and to do that we need Christ.

[Just*]

"This shows that there is no ground for the idea that a person must go through a sort of probation and attain to a certain degree of holiness before God will accept him as His child. He receives us just as we are. It is not for our goodness that He loves us but because of our need. He receives us, not for the sake of anything that He sees in us but for His own sake and for what He knows that His Divine power can make of us. It is only when we realize the wonderful exaltation and holiness of God and the fact that He comes to us in our sinful and degraded condition to adopt us into His family that we can appreciate the force of the apostle's exclamation, "Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God." 1 John 3:1. Everyone upon whom this honor has been bestowed will purify himself, even as He is pure." (Christ and His Righteousness) by E. J. Waggoner

[Just*]

2Cor 5:19 = Col 1:21-22 ?

[pnattmbtc]

Lovely quote by Waggoner. I didn't understand you're last post (2Cor 5:19 = Col:1:12-22?).

[pnattmbtc]

It seems to me that in considering the Gospel, too much attention is paid to position as opposed to character. That is, the idea is that Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins, so that if we accept Him as our personal savior, we are fine, regardless of what we do. The problem with this way of thinking is that our character is what determines if we would be happy in heaven or not. Heaven is a place of purity, of peace, of selflessness. If we have characters that demand action, living for for self, has to love for purity, peace, or denying self, how could be possibly be happy in heaven? It's important to keep in mind that our characters do not change when we are resurrected, which is only logical, as their is no way God could change our characters without changing us, which would be a violation of free will.

However, this does not me mean we are saved by what we do. May it never be! We are saved by faith, because only faith can impact our character.

The definition of faith which I like the best (by R. J. Wieland) is "a heart appreciation of the love of God, especially as revealed at the cross." (If one reads Paul with this definition in mind, I think everything fits into place.)

As we recognize the love of God, revealed by the cross, which stands for the whole of Jesus Christ's life, something happens to us, if we do not resist the Holy Spirit. We are led to repentance for our sins, and God is able to write His law into our heart, meaning our principles, values, and thinking begin to change, to be in harmony with that of His Son Jesus Christ. In this way, we become molded to the ways of heaven, so that it becomes not a place of torture, but of joy.

This is the Gospel.

[karl]

It seems to me that in considering the Gospel, too much attention is paid to position as opposed to character. That is, the idea is that Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins, so that if we accept Him as our personal savior, we are fine, regardless of what we do. The problem with this way of thinking is that our character is what determines if we would be happy in heaven or not.

AMEN

[Robert]

You are so far out in left field it's not even funny...

[pnattmbtc]

Just think of it logically, Robert. Why would God take anyone to heaven who wouldn't be happy there?

[oldsailor29]

Just think of it logically, Robert. Why would God take anyone to heaven who wouldn't be happy there?

God wouldn't do that, would He? why that would be pure hell.

[pnattmbtc]

Right, which is why we need characters in harmony with God and His principles.

[Robert]

Just think of it logically, Robert. Why would God take anyone to heaven who wouldn't be happy there?

Let's not go with your "feelings" and "emotion" instead let's go with the context of Romans 7 & 8.

Rob

[Robert]

Again, the context:

That part, “walking in the spirit and not in the flesh,” does belong to verse 4 but not to verse 1. All that Paul says in verse 1 is that, “There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ.” Why is there no condemnation for those who are in Christ? The answer is found in verse 2, because something took place in Christ. Romans 8:2:

...Because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

Please notice it’s not through you, but through Christ. Now the words “set me free” are in the past historic tense, the Aorist. It’s something that has already happened in the past. I have and you have already been freed from the law of sin and death, but we have been freed in Christ. Now how could Christ free you from the law of sin and death if he did not assume the nature that had it? Then in verse 3 he goes on to say how this happened, he gives the details. Romans 8:3:

For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man....