|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 10, 2010 17:10:13 GMT -5
I'm trying to paraphrase Romans 7:14-25 in such a way that shows it doesn't support the original sin stuff. But I also want to make it simple and natural sounding without adding in my own lengthy explanations. For example, I found Jed Smock's commentary on it to be very good but it was more verbose than what I'd like to write. I'd appreciate any critique I could get on the first draft. If anything sounds wrong please let me know. I already think it could be better.
I've heard testimonies from people whose lives were deeply affected by getting a correct understanding of this passage.
Rom 7:14-25 Everyone knows we should always have a spirit of love, but I am selfish. I traded my heart, soul, mind and strength for selfish pleasure. I know that my behavior is wrong. I wish I did good things but I don't. Instead, I just do things that are loathsome. Obviously I know better than to be selfish because I disapprove of my own behavior. So it's not like there's anything about me personally that makes me do bad things. It's just my selfish attitude. It's like I'm possessed by my own selfishness. My attitude is completely wrong. I wish I did good things but I don't get it. I don't do the good things I wish I did. Instead I do the things I'm trying to avoid. Since I really don't want to be this way, it must not be anything about me personally that makes me this way. It's only my selfish attitude. So selfishness is like the law of my life. Even though I wish I did good things, I haven't stopped being selfish. Even though I really like the idea of being loving, I haven't given up my selfish attitude. It's like the two ideas are fighting over me in my mind and I always give in to the selfishness. I'm such a wretched man! It's like I'm trapped with my own rotting corpse. Who will save me? (I'm grateful God sent the Lord Jesus Christ to save me.) So in my mind I know that God's law is best, but I follow the law I've chosen for my life: selfishness.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 10, 2010 18:46:21 GMT -5
docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ASmLiDE6yMC5ZHg4YjIzc18wY241Z2I1ZjM&hl=enClick here to read my whole Romans 7 paraphrase with commentary. 14 For we know that the requirements are spiritual, but I am soulish, living after the flesh, having sold myself into slavery to my own unlawful affections.Romans 6:16-20, Galatians 5:17b 15 I don't understand what I'm doing. I habitually don't do what I prefer to do, because I habitually do what I hate.James 1:8 16 But if I do what I don't prefer, I am actually agreeing with the requirements that they are good.17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but my own fleshly desires dwelling in me.Romans 7:5&20 18 I know that nothing of virtue is in my flesh. However, I am willing to do good (willing to have the right affections) , but, I don't know how to do it.19 I don't do the good that I actually want to do, but I do the evil that I don't want to do.20 Now if I habitually do what I actually prefer not to do, it is no longer I who am doing it, but my own fleshly desires that dwell within me.Romans 7:5&17 21 I find then a standard, that when I desire to do good, corruption (weakness & inability of the flesh) is right there with me.Galatians 5:17b 22 For I delight in the requirements of God according to my true self.23 But now, I see different set of requirements, and they are in my body parts, warring against the standard of my moral conscience, and bringing me into captivity to those requirements of my own fleshly desires which are in my body parts.Romans 7:14, Galatians 5:17b 24 '' O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?'' 25 With the mind, which is my actual being, I truly agree to the righteous requirements of the Law of God, and with the flesh, I serve the requirements of my own fleshly desires, which is death.
|
|
|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 10, 2010 19:12:36 GMT -5
Thanks!
I don't understand this part. If a man does not know how to stop sinning then he can't really be guilty for it because it is an inevitable result of his lack of knowledge. If sin is your only option then it is not even a real option.
If my behavior is caused by my affections and I don't know how to control my affections then I am not responsible for my behavior.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 10, 2010 22:02:17 GMT -5
Thanks! I don't understand this part. If a man does not know how to stop sinning then he can't really be guilty for it because it is an inevitable result of his lack of knowledge. If sin is your only option then it is not even a real option. If my behavior is caused by my affections and I don't know how to control my affections then I am not responsible for my behavior. Hmmm, good point. How else would this be said? to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
|
|
|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 11, 2010 11:14:59 GMT -5
How else would this be said? to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. I think it's a picture of selfish attempts to obey the law outwardly in order to have the pleasure of being obedient. Obeying for the wrong reasons. Which is not obedience at all. Only hypocrisy. The picture of selfish hypocritical struggling is painted on a contrasting background of natural law or the conscience. The person who is saying "to will is present with me" is "carnal, sold under sin". Therefore it is not as if they are truly willing/choosing to love God and neighbor properly. If they truly willed/chose that, they would no longer be "carnal, sold under sin". If they truly don't know how or cannot choose to love then they are not accountable for not loving. But I think the person must only be trying to outwardly do good in order to satisfy their carnality which they haven't given up yet. This of course is a downward spiral of defeat and condemnation, or at "best", hypocritical self-delusion. The carnal mind is not capable of obedience to God's law because it is fundamentally opposed to the greatest requirements of the law. A carnal man is a slave to his selfishness (by choice). So if he tries to ACT unselfish in order to feel like a good person then he will find himself to be a prisoner to the law of sin and death that dwells in him. What he should have done and always could do was not even try to fight off conviction by hypocritical attempts to outwardly obey, but should instead submit his whole heart to God out of love for God. It's like the person was already violating his conscience or the natural law and then a preacher hits him with the ten commandments so the person's conscience rises up in agreement with the preacher condemning the sinners. Now that this moral influence has further stirred up the sinner's conscience against him he has to find a way to feel good again. Either that or humble himself and repent. If the person wants to keep being selfish but drown out the rebuke of their conscience, they may try to obey certain outward commands that they are convicted about. This of course will never work because, as long as they are committed to selfishness, they will only outwardly obey when it conforms to their selfishness. They may obey for a time here and there, but as soon as obedience is not the most pleasurable decision at any given moment, they will be face to face with the fact of their slavery to selfishness. It's not that they can't change this, but that they only want to change outwardly, which doesn't work forever. to will [to be good, to do good] is present with me [is built into my nature]; but how to perform that which is good I find not [because I do not will to do good for the right reasons, only in service to my carnal mind] What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 11, 2010 12:22:40 GMT -5
How else would this be said? to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. I think it's a picture of selfish attempts to obey the law outwardly in order to have the pleasure of being obedient. Obeying for the wrong reasons. Which is not obedience at all. Only hypocrisy. The picture of selfish hypocritical struggling is painted on a contrasting background of natural law or the conscience. The person who is saying "to will is present with me" is "carnal, sold under sin". Therefore it is not as if they are truly willing/choosing to love God and neighbor properly. If they truly willed/chose that, they would no longer be "carnal, sold under sin". If they truly don't know how or cannot choose to love then they are not accountable for not loving. But I think the person must only be trying to outwardly do good in order to satisfy their carnality which they haven't given up yet. This of course is a downward spiral of defeat and condemnation, or at "best", hypocritical self-delusion. The carnal mind is not capable of obedience to God's law because it is fundamentally opposed to the greatest requirements of the law. A carnal man is a slave to his selfishness (by choice). So if he tries to ACT unselfish in order to feel like a good person then he will find himself to be a prisoner to the law of sin and death that dwells in him. What he should have done and always could do was not even try to fight off conviction by hypocritical attempts to outwardly obey, but should instead submit his whole heart to God out of love for God. It's like the person was already violating his conscience or the natural law and then a preacher hits him with the ten commandments so the person's conscience rises up in agreement with the preacher condemning the sinners. Now that this moral influence has further stirred up the sinner's conscience against him he has to find a way to feel good again. Either that or humble himself and repent. If the person wants to keep being selfish but drown out the rebuke of their conscience, they may try to obey certain outward commands that they are convicted about. This of course will never work because, as long as they are committed to selfishness, they will only outwardly obey when it conforms to their selfishness. They may obey for a time here and there, but as soon as obedience is not the most pleasurable decision at any given moment, they will be face to face with the fact of their slavery to selfishness. It's not that they can't change this, but that they only want to change outwardly, which doesn't work forever. to will [to be good, to do good] is present with me [is built into my nature]; but how to perform that which is good I find not [because I do not will to do good for the right reasons, only in service to my carnal mind] In other words, he isn't being honest with himself. I'll get back to you on this and let you know.
|
|
|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 11, 2010 13:32:09 GMT -5
In other words, he isn't being honest with himself. Yes. That's a much easier way to say it. A carnal/selfish person who is convicted by the law. Being honest with themselves will be painful. Like circumcision of the heart. I'm "trying" to be good. I just "can't" obey God's laws. *weep* *whine* *pout* Meanwhile, Hell's just getting hotter and hotter. It's not like "OH, I didn't know if I just stopped being carnal then it would all fall into place! Why didn't anyone just tell me?" The person is "sold under sin" not "sold under ignorance or immaturity". They knew they deserved death without even reading their bible. They are without excuse.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 12, 2010 17:14:43 GMT -5
In other words, he isn't being honest with himself. Yes. That's a much easier way to say it. A carnal/selfish person who is convicted by the law. Being honest with themselves will be painful. Like circumcision of the heart. I'm "trying" to be good. I just "can't" obey God's laws. *weep* *whine* *pout* Meanwhile, Hell's just getting hotter and hotter. It's not like "OH, I didn't know if I just stopped being carnal then it would all fall into place! Why didn't anyone just tell me?" The person is "sold under sin" not "sold under ignorance or immaturity". They knew they deserved death without even reading their bible. They are without excuse. I've been pondering this verse for a while now, and all I get is that he's just not being honest with himself. The thing is, that is not a good way of writing scripture. Like, how does paul think that billions of Christians are going to know that what he is writing is not the way it realy is? It's not very safe to use a stile of writing for Scripture purposes that what he is saying is actually a lie. It's like: "... to will is present to me, but to work out the good, I do not find... but I realy do, I'm just lying to myself (or you). What's worse is if he wasn't talking to himself in that passage of Scripture, but actually telling the readers something; then he would actually be lying to US about his predicament.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 12, 2010 23:03:35 GMT -5
Okay, I think I figured it out. Now, to understand this verse, we must remember what he said earlier in the chapter in verse 14:
"...but I am carnal, sold under sin."
Now, to be carnal is to be selfish and satisfying the flesh, not walking after the spirit.
Paul isn't necessarily lying to us or Himself in verse 18, but only not revealing the full truth of the matter as he already did in verse 14. So, Paul probably doesn't think he needs to explain that he can "perform that which is good" (v:18), so he is only telling us from what he already told us and is now speaking from the carnal side of the matter.
I re-edited my commentary for Romans 7:18. Let me know what you think of this. I edited my commentary & added to the words in the verse for verse 18: ------- I know that nothing of virtue is in my flesh. However, I am willing to do good (willing to have the right affections), but, I don't know how to [without depriving my flesh].
Remember that Paul is portraying a pre-salvation experience. Paul doesn't know how to do good because he doesn't see any alternate action in view without depriving his flesh. (or he doesn't know how to have the right affections that don't conflict with his current ones). Paul can just obey and suffer, depriving his flesh, but that is not any way to enjoy life.
Paul can really obey without having the right affections, but without them, he would be depriving his flesh which he doesn't want to do. He does not have anything else to put his affection on in order for him to stop sinning, except for the ones he has already grown accustom to (the sinful ones). He doesn't have any alternative pleasure other than that which he has been taking pleasure in for him to stop. The law telling him that he must stop is not enough; so he willfully continues to follow after the flesh's affections, which he knows is unlawful, being condemned. The law is not enough for one to stop sinning; it only tells you that you should stop and not how you should. ------
If you can't tell the difference, all I did was alter this sentence (adding the underlined part): Paul doesn't know how to do good because he doesn't see any alternate action in view without depriving his flesh. (or he doesn't know how to have the right affections that don't conflict with his current ones). Paul can just obey and suffer, depriving his flesh, but that is not any way to enjoy life.
I added this: Paul can really obey without having the right affections, but without them, he would be depriving his flesh which he doesn't want to do.
|
|
|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 13, 2010 23:21:50 GMT -5
Okay, I think I figured it out. Now, to understand this verse, we must remember what he said earlier in the chapter in verse 14: " ...but I am carnal, sold under sin." Now, to be carnal is to be selfish and satisfying the flesh, not walking after the spirit. Paul isn't necessarily lying to us or Himself in verse 18, but only not revealing the full truth of the matter as he already did in verse 14. So, Paul probably doesn't think he needs to explain that he can " perform that which is good" (v:18), so he is only telling us from what he already told us and is now speaking from the carnal side of the matter. I re-edited my commentary for Romans 7:18. Let me know what you think of this. I edited my commentary & added to the words in the verse for verse 18: ------- I know that nothing of virtue is in my flesh. However, I am willing to do good (willing to have the right affections) , but, I don't know how to [without depriving my flesh]. Remember that Paul is portraying a pre-salvation experience. Paul doesn't know how to do good because he doesn't see any alternate action in view without depriving his flesh. (or he doesn't know how to have the right affections that don't conflict with his current ones). Paul can just obey and suffer, depriving his flesh, but that is not any way to enjoy life. Paul can really obey without having the right affections, but without them, he would be depriving his flesh which he doesn't want to do. He does not have anything else to put his affection on in order for him to stop sinning, except for the ones he has already grown accustom to (the sinful ones). He doesn't have any alternative pleasure other than that which he has been taking pleasure in for him to stop. The law telling him that he must stop is not enough; so he willfully continues to follow after the flesh's affections, which he knows is unlawful, being condemned. The law is not enough for one to stop sinning; it only tells you that you should stop and not how you should. ------ If you can't tell the difference, all I did was alter this sentence (adding the underlined part): Paul doesn't know how to do good because he doesn't see any alternate action in view without depriving his flesh. (or he doesn't know how to have the right affections that don't conflict with his current ones). Paul can just obey and suffer, depriving his flesh, but that is not any way to enjoy life. I added this: Paul can really obey without having the right affections, but without them, he would be depriving his flesh which he doesn't want to do. That's good. I agree with that. I was also giving some thought to the personification of sin in the passage. I believe Paul uses this personification of sin in order to show how the sinner is the victim of his SIN and not the law - as was asked - did the good law cause my death? It's almost like he's saying NO the only law that killed you is the "law" of your foolish selfishness. The "law" of sin and death which you find yourself a slave to even when you try to be a good religious hypocrite. The carnal man cannot figure out how to carnally obey. Another thing that I wondered about is the similarity in personified sin and the sinner in this passage and in Genesis when God warns Cain. God warned that sin "sin lieth at the door" but in this Rom 7 description, sin no longer "lieth at the door" but now it "dwelleth in me".."in my members". Sin does not simply have "his desire" toward me but now is actively "warring against the law of my mind". God had told me "thou shalt rule over HIM" but now sin is "bringing ME into captivity". The fact that Paul personifies the sinner's sin as if it is an active character in this illustration make me wonder if the sinner himself is not more of a representation of human nature or something along the lines of the natural law theme started in chapter one. I think Jed Smock's commentary focused on that idea. I'll have to review yours and his commentary some more and spend some time working through the whole section. I'd really like to be able to show people that there is no "shadow of turning" in Paul's writings. Thanks for your explanation. If you learn more about any of this please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by logic on Feb 14, 2010 21:13:03 GMT -5
God had told me "thou shalt rule over HIM" but now sin is "bringing ME into captivity". I like this. Instead of being the ruler, he is the slave. As Paul said, "Know you not, that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? (Rom 6:16)" If we yield ourselves servants to obey God, we shalt rule over it (Gen 4:7) Where is this? Is there a link to his commentary? I will; thank you for asking me about Romans 18 in my commentary. I'm glad you brought this to my attention, it needed furhter explaination than I had given. Pluse it made me think about it & gave me a clearer understanding.
|
|
|
Post by benjoseph on Feb 14, 2010 22:32:34 GMT -5
|
|