|
Post by John Duncan on Mar 24, 2006 7:53:51 GMT -5
Romans 7 Paul's struggle with sin before he became a Christian.
by John & Ellen Duncan
Can one be living like Paul in Romans 7 and not be in violation to what he taught us to do in Romans 6 and 8?
Compare for yourself below: Romans 7 vs. Romans 6 and 8.
Romans 7:9-25 Paul is:
carnal
a slave to sin
constantly struggling with his flesh's sinful appetites
in bondage to doing wrong Romans 6 & 8 (context of Ch. 7) Paul is:
spiritual as opposed to carnal
free from sin as opposed to a slave to sin
dead to the flesh and its sinful appetites
in freedom to doing right Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am CARNAL, SOLD UNDER SIN. [Was Paul an Enemy of God?] Rom 8:6-7 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the CARNAL MIND IS ENMITY [ENEMY] AGAINST GOD. Rom 7:15,17 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. Rom 6:1-2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we [Paul includes himself here], that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Rom 7:18-19 ..I know that in me (that is, IN MY FLESH,) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Rom 8:8-9 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But YE ARE NOT IN THE FLESH, but in the Spirit... Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, YE SHALL DIE: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Rom 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Rom 6:15-16 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Paul penned Romans 7 to describe his experience prior to becoming a true Christian.
Biblical Scholars Adam Clarke's NT Commentary says regarding Romans 7:14, "by 'I' here he [Paul] cannot mean himself, nor any Christian believer."
John Wesley's Notes on the NT says "St. Paul, having compared together the past and present state of believers... interweaves the whole process of a man reasoning, groaning, striving, and escaping from the legal to the evangelical state. This he does from Romans 7:7, to the end of this chapter."
W. B. Godbey's Commentary on the NT says, "We have here carnal 'I' and spiritual 'I' used contrastively ever and anon. We must not identify them, for the one represents the old and the other the new man, different as sin is from holiness, and Satan from God."
These are just a few among many Bible scholars and students who have decided to "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Tim 2:15)
The Context In literature class you learn that context is to be of primary consideration when reading any text to obtain its correct interpretation. The context is the passages which precede and follow the text being studied. If you examine Romans 6, 7, and 8 together (the front page of this tract may help), both Rom. 6 and Rom. 8 clearly contradict what Paul writes in Romans 7.
When Romans 7 is taken out of its context, one will have a wrong understanding of what the Apostle Paul is saying in this chapter. We must take these chapters together and apply the Laws of Interpretation learned in High School.
Both Rom. 6 and Rom. 8 were written about one who is victorious over sin; however, Rom. 7 describes an inconstant, weak, and unstable hypocrite, unable to deny self and follow Christ.
"But Paul is Speaking in the Present Tense!" One of our main objections is Rom. 7's present tense. However, there is a common verb tense called the Historical Present Tense. This is part of one's ordinary speech and is present in other Biblical passages.
In the textbook Essentials Of English Grammar by L. Sue Baugh, you will find that "writers occasionally use the present tense when reviewing the contents of a book or describing past events to bring them vividly to life for the reader. This form of the present tense is known as the literary or historical present." (2nd Ed., p. 15)
In general, the Historical Present Tense in a passage (1) starts in the past tense to establish its form; (2) the writer then uses the present tense to bring a vivid description of an event. For example: "I was an atheist when I was 20 [past tense]. A neighbor came to me one day to tell me about Jesus... But I don’t want to hear it! [present tense] I am an atheist. I don't believe in God!"
Paul, in Romans 7, follows the same format. Romans 7:9-11 uses the past tense first:
Rom 7:9-11 For I was alive without the law once [past tense]: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me... Paul then commences writing in the present tense to give his readers a vivid picture of the torment in the life of a hypocrite.
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. [present tense to the end of the chapter]
Paul writes Romans 7 in the Historical Present Tense to give hypocrites a chance to closely identify with his struggle with sin prior to conversion.
If you, my friend, can identify with this passage, you might be asking some questions as the Apostle Paul then concludes the chapter with the question, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom 7:24)
"How can I ever get victory over my sinful desires?" The Apostle Paul then answers, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom 7:25)
Yes! This is the answer to victory over sin. Jesus Christ! The NT promises victory, not slavery. Jesus said, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32) "What must I do?" Do as the Apostle Paul, "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom 6:11) "You mean, victory over sin all the time? How can anyone do that?" Through Jesus Christ, "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me." (Phil 4:13) "But Jesus died because I can't keep the commandments!" Jesus came to forgive you from your PAST sins (Rom 3:25). Once you become a Christian you CAN obey His commandments. However, many REFUSE. God would be a tyrant if He gave us commandments that we had no ability to keep. "If ye love me, keep my commandments." (John 14:15) "If I can keep the commandments and be obedient, then I'll be God, because only God is perfect." We are not perfect as God because all have sinned [past tense, Rom 3:23]. Jesus is the only sinless One from birth to death and all eternity. However, we are commanded to be obedient once we are born again. "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" (Heb 5:9). We are to be Christ-like [Christian] and God-like [godly]. We are told to "go and sin no more" (John 5:14). Jesus even says, "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46) Listen to Paul: Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Notice there is no condemnation for those who are walking after the Spirit. Paul tells us in Galatians that if you are walking in the Spirit, you are not fulfilling the lust of the flesh. But if someone is walking in the flesh, they ARE condemned already (John 3:18).
Be honest: are you free from sin or a slave to sin? Jesus saves FROM sin (Matt 1:21). FROM, not IN. (Acts 3:26). Are you free of sin? Are you walking in the Spirit and not fulfilling the lust of the flesh? Have you honestly been set free from all your sin? Flee from sin to Jesus Christ and live the true Christian experience, free from all sin!
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 24, 2006 9:08:03 GMT -5
I understand what you are saying here brother, but not sure I can agree that Paul is talking about himself before he was a Christian. Here's why:
v. 15, "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do."
When was the last time you met a lost person who desired to follow GOd? When was the last time you met a lost person who hated sin?
v. 18, "For I have the desire to do what is good..." v. 19, "...the evil I do not want to do- this I keep doing."
Same question...lost people I meet have no desire to stop sinning.
v. 22 "For in my inner being I delight in God's Law;"
I have NEVER known of a lost sinner who delight's in God's Law!
By the way, he doesn't end this part with what it seems you are saying he ended it with. This is his conclusion in the second part of v.25, "So the, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law; but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin."
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 24, 2006 9:31:42 GMT -5
Paul is speaking of himself as a Christian. (It's PRESENT tense. But, if Paul is speaking of himself as a Christian, how can we reconcile some apparently irreconcilable statements?
I believe that the answer lies, as it so often does, in paying particular heed to the context of his statement. In Romans 7 his subject is the limitations of the law. At the beginning of the chapter he shows that it cannot justify. In the second half of the chapter he shows that it cannot sanctify. Sanctification will fulfil the standards of the law but it will not be accomplished by means of law keeping. Now this is the apostle's message. Make sure you do not lose sight of this controlling fact, that is, the fact that must control our exposition. We cannot treat what Paul says apart from the context in which he says it without running the risk of seriously twisting his meaning. Yet this is precisely what most interpreters have done. Your treatment of the passage does this. So does the usual Reformed treatment that makes this passage the definitive and usual description of Christian experience as if there were nothing beyond constant struggle. But if we keep in mind that what Paul is saying in effect is, "Brethren, just as you were not justified by means of the law, so you cannot be sanctified by means of the law. If you try to live the Christian life by the law you will live a life of struggle and, to a large extent, defeat." Yet this is precisely what we all tend to do by nature. Paul was no exception. He seems to me to confess that he too felt that tendency. If I am right here, and I believe I am, he is describing not his constant battle as a Christian but his failure every time he forgot that sanctification is by faith as much as justification. When he is brought to cry out, "Who shall deliver me?" he remembers that his victory is in Christ, not in the law.
Brother revk,
that last part of v25 was what truely made me realise that it couldn't be a converted man speaking of his conversion.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Mar 26, 2006 2:07:32 GMT -5
As a false convert I wanted to follow God and I even wanted to stop sinning, but I simply could not find it in me to do good. That which I hated, that I did, knowing it was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 26, 2006 2:26:01 GMT -5
This is an awesome tract brother John.
Paul was using a clear literary techneque to describe his experience as a careless sinner, to a convicted sinner, to a converted sinner.
When he expressed "what I want to do I do not do, and what I do is what I do not want to do" he was at the point where he was convicted by the Law but realized that in and of himself he couldn't save himself. But when He looked outside of himself he found the answer. "Oh wretched man that I am. Who shall deliver me from this body of death? I thank God through Jesus Christ the Lord." And thus Saul was converted to Paul!
The problem I see is that so many people stay in Romans 7 when Paul himself did not. Paul moved on to Romans 8!
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 26, 2006 9:05:06 GMT -5
The problem I see is that so many people stay in Romans 7 when Paul himself did not. Paul moved on to Romans 8! This we are definitely in agreement on brother! I don't agree with your interpretation, but if someone is using this to stay as sinful as they can or to walk the fence then they most likely aren't a Christian!
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 27, 2006 17:32:04 GMT -5
Indeed revk, I believe in victory as I suggest in my interpretation, but I note how these brethren just agree with what brother Duncan has stated, even though it flies in the face of the message of the passage.
To say that the 'present tense' is a literary technique is grasping at straws and shows lack of real respect for what Paul is trying to say. Paul knew that what he was dealing with wasn't an easy passage (I believe that this may be one of the things Peter meant when he said that Paul wrote some things that are hard to be understood) so why would he complicate the passage by phrasing it in a different tense?? Just doesn't make sense.
One of the laws of interpretation is that we don't 'force' an exegesis, particularly when we find it difficult to understand clearly. You can't understand some of the statements Paul comes out with, and so you assume that he doesn't mean he is speaking of a Christian experience (even though it's clearly present tense). This is dangerous brethren.
Please, I urge you to try and think about this passage rationally.
God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 19:01:53 GMT -5
It is disrepectful to say Paul was a man sold in sin and was carnal when he clearly testified to being free from sin, for to be carnally minded is death.
I can't believe you guys actually think Paul practiced wickedness and that he continued in sin.
To say Romans 7 was describing Paul rather then Saul flies in the face of Romans 6 and Romans 8. You build heresy when you isolate any scripture and refuse to judge scripture by the scripture.
I think you must have some sort of biased reason to believe that Romans 7 is not describing his conversion.
You guys who don't believe Romans 7 is Paul describing his conversion, is there sin in your life? If so, sin distorts peoples interpretation and it's no wonder you can't see it clearly. You must first get the sin out of your life and then you can clearly see.
Paul clearly starts describing his experience of being convicted by the law and then converted to Christ in verse 7 and continues it to verse 25.
Many "christians" claim the bondage of Saul in verse 15, but I can testify to the liberating experience of verse 24-25. This freedom from sin experience is one that God offers all people, but you must believe it is possible if you are ever going to receive it.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 19:51:07 GMT -5
You build heresy when you isolate any scripture and refuse to judge scripture by the scripture. [/b] I think you must have some sort of biased reason to believe that Romans 7 is not describing his conversion. You guys who don't believe Romans 7 is Paul describing his conversion, is there sin in your life? If so, sin distorts peoples interpretation and it's no wonder you can't see it clearly. You must first get the sin out of your life and then you can clearly see.[/quote] You know what Jesse, I could say the same about your theology. It is obvious to me that you must think you are God or something. There is just NO WAY that you could be wrong is there? You even go to the point that you will make accusations that have no foundation whatsoever. I am really disappointed brother. In my mind, YOU are the one who has sin in his life...PRIDE and you are Blinded by it. Wake up brother!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 19:53:38 GMT -5
Let's not make personal attacks or throw out accusations. All I did was ask if there was any sin in anyones life. I didn't accuse. Let's stick to the text and discuss it.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 19:54:16 GMT -5
Let's not make personal attacks or throw out accusations. Let's stick to the text and discuss it. Hey brother...follow your own instructions...
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 19:58:06 GMT -5
I admit I get it wrong on plenty of things, but the more I study Romans 6,7, and 8 the more I am convinced that the bible teaches freedom from sin and that there is no excuse for sin. Paul of course walked in freedom and here in Romans 7 describes that liberation and people seem to try and make him say something he is not really saying, making this liberating experience an experience of bondage.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 20:06:36 GMT -5
I say let's limit this thread to quoting the actual tract and then discussing it.
If anyone else wants to jump in on this discussion, my encouragment would be to read the entire tract before posting thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 20:09:04 GMT -5
people seem to try and make him say something he is not really saying But don't you see that we agree on this. I think that is exactly what the "sinless perfection" people are doing. It seems like the interpretation you are believing in is one that is "grasping for straws." Like you went to the text already believing about it what you believe about it and made a way to make it work. Can anyone who believes this is "Historical Present" point out another time in Scripture that "tense" was even used. It is funny that I studied Greek under a Greek Scholar and that "tense" was NEVER even mentioned. I am going to look into this, but I don't think there was a such thing in the Greek language...plus you still have a problem with the fact that he ended this little discourse with this: "So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin," not this: "Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!" And let's not get into the "living in sin" thing again...because in the words of Micah, "I am getting tired of repeating myself about that."
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 20:17:35 GMT -5
Remember, there were no chapter and verse until a French translator added them in later. It doesn't actually end with "So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin," Romans 7:25 but only two verses down it says, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." Romans 8:2
Romans 7:25 says this man was a "slave to the law of sin" but then Romans 8:2 says "Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." One verse says Paul was a slave to the law of sin, the other says Paul was free from the law of sin. How can a man be free from the law of sin and a slave to the law of sin? How is this not a direct contradiction and is far from being rational?
Paul again was describing freedom from "the law of sin". Law of sin meaning the reign of sin. As a ruler reigns and controls with is laws, so sin reigns and rules in a sinner. But Christ sets us free from the law of sin.
A Christian is dead to sin. In the greek the word dead could also be translated "useless." And as a dead slave is useless and cannot be controlled, so a Christian is useless to sin and cannot be controlled by it any longer.
There are plenty of greek scholars who agree that this is about Saul and not Paul. John Wesley was fluent in Greek, Hebrew, latin, French (even wrote a french dictionary) and other languages, and Wesley taught that Paul was discribing a liberating experience and not a bondage experience.
This is part of the tract:
Do you see how these are complete opposites and cannot be talking about the same person?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 20:34:24 GMT -5
I understand that there are Greek Scholars who say what you are saying...what I am saying is that I have never even heard of the "Historical Present Tense." I have Greek books and they speak nothing of it. I realize that there may seem like their are contradictions when it comes to interpreting Paul as being a Christian here, but there also seem to be contradictions when it comes to interpreting him as a non-Christian here. Here are some things that I posted earlier and I don't see how they can be reconciled with your interpretation:
v. 15, "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do."
When was the last time you met a lost person who desired to follow GOd? When was the last time you met a lost person who hated sin?
v. 18, "For I have the desire to do what is good..." v. 19, "...the evil I do not want to do- this I keep doing."
Same question...lost people I meet have no desire to stop sinning.
v. 22 "For in my inner being I delight in God's Law;"
I have NEVER known of a lost sinner who delight's in God's Law!
Miles responded by saying that he wanted to stop sinning before he got saved, but couldn't. But what lost sinner has EVER delighted in God's Law? Where can you find a description of a lost sinner in the Bible who delighted in God's Law? The Bible say the very opposite! It says that NONE seek after God, they have ALL gone astray! Can you say that when you witness to people or open air preach to lost sinners that they "delight" in God's Law.
Let's also remember Paul's conversion experience. He thought he was righteous. He was a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee of Pharisees. He gladly persecuted the Church thinking he was doing what was right. He wasn't even looking for God, because he thought he had Him! The Damascus road encounter he had with Jesus wasn't something that Paul (Saul at the time) initiated. How can we say from all of what Paul has said about his conversion experience, when he gives testimony of it and when the book of Acts talks about it, that this is what he is talking about here? I don't think this can be reconciled either. I truly understand that we should live a Holy life as much as is possible and that we should preach that people turn from ALL their sins, but I am not willing to make the Bible say what I think it should say. I am going to believe what it says. A friend of mine who believes Christians can lose their salvation once told me why he believes that, "If you preach to people that they can't, they will just live whatever way they want." What a reason to believe such a thing! A True Christian won't live in sin or practice sin. I don't have to change my theology in order to "make sure" that people live lives of Holiness. If they are Born Again, they have the Spirit of GOd living in them and He will give them the desire to live Holy...that's really all there is to it. By the way I wasn't saying that this little discourse ends in this: ,"So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin," because of the Chapter and verse divisions. I was saying that because of the obvious flow to the section. The next verse starts with therefore, so that must then be the start of a new section in my mind...
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 20:44:24 GMT -5
I wrote this earlier in response to your previous post:
You wrote:
Paul here is describing what it was like after the commandment slew him. He was a convicted sinner but not yet a converted sinner. As a convicted sinner he started to hunger and thirst after righteousness but was not yet filled. What he wanted to do was to be made right with God and what he no longer wanted to do was to sin against him. But neither of these desires were fullfilled until he came to Christ.
A careless sinner does not want to, but a convicted sinner before conversion does. In the scenario Paul describes, he already said the commandment revived and slew him. He was a convicted sinner yet to be converted.
Paul got to the place where he agreed God's law was true. He stopped justifying self and started to condemn self and justify God. So does every sinner before conversion. They get to the place when they agree with God's Law and see themselves in truth. Not only that, they get to the point where they agree so much with Gods law, that they want to actually keep the law.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Mar 27, 2006 20:47:18 GMT -5
I would like to know how you answer this, considering your stance that Romans 7 and Romans 8 are talking about the Christian life:
We must do an internal critique of each others view. I have stepped into your view that Romans 7 is Paul after conversion, and have internally critiqued it and found it to be contradictory. (As my above quote shows)
Can you do an internal critique (step into my view and look around) and find any inconsistency with it?
We run into problems when we start doing external critiques based on our presuppositions. We must adopt each others presuppositions and do an internal critique.
I would like an answer to my internal critique which shows the inconsistency of such a view.
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 27, 2006 20:51:54 GMT -5
Greetings... i know that i may not have much to say on this board, but at least in this way of looking at scripture, it is worth the study....but reading and studing Romans 8:2 . This "law of the Spirit of Life", take the word law, we have all kinds of God's law that work here in the natural, reaping and sowing, and sowing and reaping, and so forth... But the context of Romans 8:2, is that the regulating and activating power and life of the Holy Spirit the driving force behind God's word.. now call be a simple person, but the Holy Spirit is what operates in the heart of the believer. This Spirit of Truth ( Holy Ghost) comes in a sinner and FREES him or her from the power of sin, we see that in Romans 7:23. This Law of the Spirit( by the way another one of God's law) comes into full operation as a believer commits themselves to OBEY the Holy Spirit.. Look at Verse Romans 8:4-5, 13-14.. What happens here, a believer finds a new power operating within, a power through the Holy Ghost, to overcome sin..The Holy Spirit that works within believers allows them to LIVE a LIFE of Righteouness that is seen as a fulfillment of God's moral Law.. This operation of GRACE and obedience to the law of God are NOT IN CONFLICT.. They both point to righteouness and holiness.. Romans 2:13, Romans 3:31, Romans 6:15, Romans 7:12,14.. So what is wrong with what Jesse is saying, it lines up..
But to the verse Romans 8:2 'The Law of Sin and death" in this verse is the controling power of sin, which places a person into bondage to sin..Romans 7:14, and reducing a person to wretchedness 7:24.. The answer is clear...Live by the Spirit and not the flesh, but to do that one must be born-again..
Blessed Regards...
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 21:16:07 GMT -5
Here is the whole second part of 7:25, "So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin." And then 8:1-4, "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 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, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit."
Let's break it down, shall we? In the second part of verse 25, Paul is a Christian. He is a slave to God's law. He is a slave to righteousness. He lives to obey God and His commandments. God is His master and he therefore is obedient to God. When you become a Christian, the "sinful nature" doesn't go away. It isn't eradicated. There is still the trinity of sin: the world, the flesh and the devil. And they won't leave you alone until the day you die. There is one nature in every lost person: the sinful nature. They follow it because it is the only nature they have and will continue to until they are born again. THey are literally "slaves to sin" with sin as their master. The Christian has two natures though. Each Christian has the Spirit of God (the "new man") and the sinful nature. So, in Paul's sinful nature, he is a slave to the law of sin, if he lives by the sinful nature and gives into it. In other words, if he tries to live the Christian life on his own, not in the power of the Spirit, he will be a slave to sin, since NO MAN can live the Christian life in his own strength. While awaiting freedom from the presence of sin, believers still face conflicts between their regenerated minds (or new natures or capacities) and their sin natures or capacities. "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus"...I wonder what people who say you can lose your salvation do with that one? It is through Jesus Christ that we are freed from the law of sin and death and only through Him. Sin no longer has to have control over our lives because we have been set free. We have been given a new nature. We have also been set free from the penalty deserved for our sin "because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free." The law itself, was powerless to set us free. It actually only made things worse. Romans 7:10, "I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death." It was powerless because it was weakened by the sinful nature. Through the Son, sin was condemned..meaning we no longer have to live in sin or be in bondage to it. He did this in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be full met in us through Christ since He is the only one who perfectly kept God's Law. And those who are Christ's, who truly are saved will "not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit."
I would also like to challenge everyone who believes Paul is talking about himself as an unbeliever here to read Romans 7 in the context of the whole book of Romans. Those who seem to keep going back to Romans 6 and 8 seem to think that those are the only three chapters of the book of Romans. This is a letter. None of us would ever open a letter, start halfway through, just read the middle of it and conclude what the writer is trying to say. If you read this book from the beginning, I believe you will get a clearer picture of what Paul is saying here...
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 27, 2006 21:20:41 GMT -5
I am done responding for tonight...will respond more tomorrow. But here is something else to read: www.soundofgrace.com/piper2/piper2001/06-24-01.htm I am glad we are having this conversation...And if I am wrong, I will admit it in the end. I have looked at it from your point of view, but I will look at it again. I am sorry that I got offended by what you said, but let's not accuse people of sin just because they don't agree with us theologically...
|
|
|
Post by Manna on Mar 27, 2006 21:50:46 GMT -5
Here is another angle, one verse Romans 7:9-10,11.. do you think that The Apostle Paul here , when he said that ' I was alive.. once.. what do you think that means?.. and that later " Sin slew me verse 11...But to focus on Romans 7:9, will do..."Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died." Paul said that he died spiritually when sin "sprang to life" within him, but before this happened he was spiritually alive. Here's what a prominent Bible commentary says about this verse:
"Evidently the apostle was speaking of his personal experience as a child and perhaps even a youth prior to his awareness and understanding of the full impact of God's commandments. ... The result was that the principle of sin within made its presence and power known (it sprang to life) in his violations of the commandment. As a result Paul died spiritually" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.466-467)
IF we look to Paul's example, we were all spiritually alive as children until sin "sprang to life" within us. At that point we died spiritually. What does it mean to have been spiritually alive...we were all spiritually alive as children until sin "sprang to life" within us.
Remember back in Genesis 2:15-17 Adam and Eve were spiritually alive before the "Fall":
"The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die. Adam and Eve ate the fruit, they died. No!! they did not die physically, because they lived for several hundred years and had a number of children after being banished from the Garden of Eden.
Instead, they died spiritually, just as Paul said that he had died spiritually when sin "sprang to life" within him Romans 7:9 . Since Adam and Eve died spiritually, this means that they were spiritually alive before they ate the fruit. So does this mean that we were spiritually alive until sin "springs to life" within them, causing them to die spiritually? More verses Bible says that we were all dead in our sins: As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.Ephesians 2:1-2 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. Colossians 2:13 Here it is again The Law of the Spirit again working to them that obey, but also a person can resist the Holy Spirit to the day of grace is gone, even through they have tasted the goodness of the Lord, in 2 Peter 2:15 forsaken the right way, and following the way of Balaam who love the wages of unrighteouness.. Look at happened to Balaam, and in verse 21 says it would have been better for them to had not have known the way to righteouness, than after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them..Who do you think fits this verse(those who can lose there salvation), Noah' helpers who build the Ark, they were with him for many years, and you know he told them to turn , and warned them, and they heard and refused. Just some things to think about here... Blessed Regards..
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 27, 2006 22:13:41 GMT -5
Interesting stuff, Manna. I haven't gone to verify what you've stated but if true, it sure proves much of my understanding of our fallen nature and "original sin". Thanks for your post.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Mar 27, 2006 23:04:00 GMT -5
Good point Manna. Another verse to disprove the doctrine of original sin.
By the way, I say this from experience: Why don't you log on as a member? For some reason people take posts more seriously when it is written by a member. For the longest time I posted as a guest because I did not know I was supposed to log in (I did log in when I first came on the board back in July when it started) so it always showed me as a guest.
You will get more interaction if you post as a member. Even though I was in your shoes once (posting as a guest) I have noticed I still am less likely to read the posts of someone who is not logged in as a member especially if they are long.
God bless and thank you for that insight. I assume you are opposed to the doctrine of original sin?
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Mar 27, 2006 23:37:09 GMT -5
Amen! In fact, I'm not even going to read Manna's post until he/she logs in as a member. ;D
|
|
|
Post by josh on Mar 28, 2006 9:49:52 GMT -5
v. 15, "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do." When was the last time you met a lost person who desired to follow GOd? When was the last time you met a lost person who hated sin? v. 18, "For I have the desire to do what is good..." v. 19, "...the evil I do not want to do- this I keep doing."Same question...lost people I meet have no desire to stop sinning. v. 22 "For in my inner being I delight in God's Law;"I have NEVER known of a lost sinner who delight's in God's Law! Well Paul is a different case here, you have to look at what he was before conversion. Acts 23:6, and Phil 3:5 point out that Paul (then Saul) was a Pharisee, they were people that sought after God. They adhered to the law, and even made a few extra ones Paul had the knowledge of sin by the law (Rom 7:7) and as a religous leader in Israel, is it unreasonable to wonder if he desired to be free from sin? After all he knew he needed saving. Maybe he was relying on his good works? Perhaps Saul hated his sin because he knew it would be the death of him. But like any sinner he was a slave to it, til Christ set him free!
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Mar 28, 2006 13:02:33 GMT -5
Romans 7 Paul's struggle with sin before he became a Christian. Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am CARNAL, SOLD UNDER SIN. [Was Paul an Enemy of God?] Rom 8:6-7 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the CARNAL MIND IS ENMITY [ENEMY] AGAINST GOD. Rom 7:15,17 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. Rom 6:1-2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we [Paul includes himself here], that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Rom 7:18-19 ..I know that in me (that is, IN MY FLESH,) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Rom 8:8-9 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But YE ARE NOT IN THE FLESH, but in the Spirit... Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, YE SHALL DIE: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Rom 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Rom 6:15-16 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? Paul penned Romans 7 to describe his experience prior to becoming a true Christian. When we FIRST look at this passage and see that it is in the PRESENT tense, our FIRST question should be, "is it in ANY WAY possible to interpret this passage in present tense WITHOUT contradicting the scriptures? You say no and you convinced me for some time, but it CAN be interpreted as present tense without any error or erronious doctrines. Let me try to explain: The KEY is recognising the truth of Sanctifying Faith as taught in Romans 6:11 "Likewise reckon ( believe)ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Paul tells us to have faith in this teaching. Hence, Sanctifying Faith. Let me answer the statements of the tract- The carnality of 'Paul' and all believers lies in the "body". The body (incase you haven't noticed) hasn't entered into the blessing of redemption; it hasn't been glorified. It is still prone to desire evil, that is why we MUST mortify it and purge it, why else would Paul tell us to do such? In Rom 8:6-7, Paul is speaking of the MIND not the body. It is a different carnality, a carnality that desires to do evil within the mind. The believer in his mind, hates sin and turns from it, so this is different. Paul speaks again of his body in Romans 7, and the corruption of sin within the "members", which again I urge, shows the need for purging and mortifying in the believers life. In the text quoted in Romans 6, Paul in context is speaking of the believers desire. He says in essence, "shall we desire to continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin, desire to live any longer therein?" In Romans 7 again, Paul backs up what I've been saying, in that he has been refering to his body/flesh. And he has a struggle because the desire to do good was there, but the ability of himself, was not. In Romans 8:8-9 he is continuing on in what he said about the "carnal mind" and he relates the "flesh" to be something that is/was associated with the "carnal mind" and so he shows the believers that they should leave that which remains in them, (the "flesh") because it belongs to the old life. This is backed up in Romans 7:25b where even AFTER Paul's cry of victory in Christ he says that his "flesh" serves the law of sin. The struggle of Romans 7:14-25 as i said before is about Paul as a Christian, speaking about the trouble and struggle he had when he tried to FULFIL the demands of God's Law HIMSELF. His struggle ends in v24 when he again realises that it is ALL OF FAITH in Christ...even our Sanctification. It seems that Paul at times struggled with the fact that at times he was brought into bondage by seeking to please God by his own merits, and he failed every time; just like everyone will. He rejoices again when he realises that it's ALL of faith. Faith in Christ and His ability to keep us holy by trusting in Him. This hasn't been easy to explain, but I have sought to do it as plainly as possible. It seems to me, that those of you who reject this view are guilty of what the Galatian people did, Gal 3:3 "Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" You can't please God (in an acceptance into His holy presence kind of way) by your own efforts to keep the law. Living in the Spirit, by faith, will cause you to keep the law, without frustration of failure. Doesn't the point I have made, show that there is no need to make the passage say something else? It is Present Tense...surely Paul intended this to help us understand and not confuse? God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Juli on Mar 28, 2006 18:22:15 GMT -5
I can't believe you guys actually think Paul practiced wickedness and that he continued in sin. To say Romans 7 was describing Paul rather then Saul flies in the face of Romans 6 and Romans 8. You build heresy when you isolate any scripture and refuse to judge scripture by the scripture.I think you must have some sort of biased reason to believe that Romans 7 is not describing his conversion. You guys who don't believe Romans 7 is Paul describing his conversion, is there sin in your life? If so, sin distorts peoples interpretation and it's no wonder you can't see it clearly. You must first get the sin out of your life and then you can clearly see. Wow. All I can say is, this applies to you too Jesse, and of course you realize that. Like you are amazed at how we "don't get" sinless perfection, I look at your own posts and think "how in the world can this guy NOT see election, predestination, and God's sovereignty just jumping off the pages of scripture??" So perhaps we can both learn from each other. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't have it all figured out yet. I am still learning. But in the short time I've been on this board, I've pretty much been able to clearly see where everyone is coming from. We shouldn't just "push" our own views, but be open to consider other views. We will either walk away strengthened in our own convictions and understanding, or God will bring clarity and refine the areas we are "off" in. And who on here claims to have the absolute best and right answer to all questions and issues? I've been accused on this board (indirectly) of not being a true believer because I still sin. We should each pray over our posts before posting, else our sinful natures will creep in and people will receive things in an incorrect way.
|
|
|
Post by Jules on Mar 28, 2006 18:27:43 GMT -5
I did read the entire thread by the way, as suggested by Jesse earlier on page 1 when the discussion was turning personal. I just wanted to remind everyone that we maybe we should be learning from each other more than we are "teaching" each other. Or at least that is how I see it. I guess that would be a indication of what our motive is - are we posting so we can "discover new truths" or to "impart new truths" And to Miles, my apologies for not logging in, sometimes I forget and post and then see I am not logged in, but because I am LAZY and don't want to re-type everything I just post as a guest. But I agree, regulars should log in already so we can see where they are from, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Mar 28, 2006 18:51:39 GMT -5
I suppose you guys (perfectly sinless ones) believe that Paul is talking about his preconversion state or he is talking in the "historical present tense" in Galatians 5:17 as well? It says, "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." <---Also notice that it's in the KJV, so you guys have had some kind of impact on me...be it ever so temporary
|
|