We have seen that Romans 1 to 8 falls into two sections, in the first of which we are shown that the Blood deals with what we have done, while in the second we shall see that the Cross 22Note - The author uses ‘the Cross’ here and throughout these studies in a special sense. Most readers will be familiar with the current use of the expression ‘the Cross’ to signify, firstly, the entire redemptive work accomplished historically in the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus Himself (Phil. 2:8, 9), and secondly, in a wider sense, the union of believers with Him therein through grace (Rom. 6:4; Eph. 2:5, 6). Clearly in that use of the term the operation of ‘the Blood’ in relation to forgiveness of sins (as dealt with in Chapter 1 of this book) is, from God’s viewpoint, included (with all that follows in these studies) as a part of the work of the Cross. In this and the following chapters, however, the author is compelled, for lack of an alternative term, to use ‘the Cross’ in a more particular and limited doctrinal sense in order to draw a helpful distinction, namely, that between substitution and identification, as being, from the human angle, two separate aspects of the doctrine of redemption. Thus the name of the whole is of necessity used for one of its parts. The reader should bear this in mind in what follows.—Ed. deals with what we are. We need the Blood for forgiveness; we need also the Cross for deliverance. We have dealt briefly above with the first of these two and we shall move on now to the second; but before we do so we will look for a moment at a few more features of this passage which serve to emphasize the difference in subject matter and argument between the two halves.