Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,726
    Blog Entries
    1

    Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

    So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.(Romans 7:14-25)

    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?
    여러분은 주님 안에서 항상 기뻐하십시오. 내가 다시 말합니다. 기뻐하십시오.
    모든 사람을 너그럽게 대하십시오. 주님께서 오실 날이 가까웠습니다. Philippians 4


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    155

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

    So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.(Romans 7:14-25)

    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?
    Absolutely! Read Romans chapter 8 for the solution.

    IN GOD THE SON,
    maverick

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,726
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by maverick View Post
    Absolutely! Read Romans chapter 8 for the solution.

    IN GOD THE SON,
    maverick
    Sorry, which one do you mean absolutely? That he was speaking as a Christian?

    Chapter 8 is good though, I think it might summarize everything in 7.

    But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. (Romans 8)

    Meaning although the body still sins, "it is no longer I who do it?"
    여러분은 주님 안에서 항상 기뻐하십시오. 내가 다시 말합니다. 기뻐하십시오.
    모든 사람을 너그럽게 대하십시오. 주님께서 오실 날이 가까웠습니다. Philippians 4


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    155

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    That he was speaking as a Christian. In fact you can read at Acts 9:11..how he became a Christian. The bottom line is that Christians still sin because the flesh is waring against the spirit. In fact, as a Christian you don't hate sinning then there is something wrong with your Christianity. Also please read 1 John 1:8-10 where it says Christians sin and Jesus Christ intercedes for us. Aslo at 1 John 3:5-10 a Christian will not "practice" sin because the Holy Spirit of God abides in him. Any other questions?

    IN GOD THE SON,
    maverick

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Not of this earth
    Posts
    13,889
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    All Paul is saying here is that we're still tempted by sin after we are born again. Even as spiritual Christians we still live in a body of flesh and this body of flesh we inhabit wars against our spiritual nature.
    This battle will rage within us until we are glorified with Christ after His return but even so it is God's provision and the spirit who indwells that gives us the power to overcome our struggles with our sinful nature.

    Yes, he is most definitely speaking as a Christian here.
    Day by day
    Oh Dear Lord
    Three things I pray
    To see thee more clearly
    Love thee more dearly
    Follow thee more nearly
    Day by day

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    34

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    By Dr. J.M. Strawn
    Contributor – oldhermit

    I. The Principle of Regulated Behavior, 1-6
    “Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man. Therefore, my brethren (Herein the context is confirmed.), you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now, we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.”

    A. The context
    The first thing we have to recognize is that the context of these six verses is not about marriage. Marriage is not the context of Romans chapter seven. The context of chapter seven concerns the relationship of the Jew's to the Law of Moses. Paul simply uses marriage as a symbol to represent that relationship because the same basic principle that governs the one also governs the other.

    Paul speaks of death as the end of one marriage and the beginning of another union, a new union. “If her husband dies,” she is free to marry another. Marriage is the symbol of the arrangement that God had with Israel and as with any marriage, death is the end of that covenant arrangement.
    B. Marriage is a revealed symbol of our relationship with God.
    As in marriage, there is a direct relation between the span of one's life and one's responsibility to the Law. Bear in mind, Paul is speaking to a select demographic – to “those who know the law.” The life span of marriage is limited to the life span of the spouse and the authority of the husband is limited to temporal existence, “As long as he lives.”

    Just as one's marriage to another is limited to human life span, so too, the Jew's commitment to the Law of Moses ended in death. This is certainly true when one died and was assigned to the grave, but this is not talking about that kind of death with respect to this particular relationship. This death occurs in baptism. This death was is liberation from the Law of Moses for the Jew.

    1. How then does this apply to marriage?
    Marriage is governed by the law of exclusivity so the issue is exclusivity and change. This means that a change in the marriage relationship is regulated by law. In order for legitimate change to occur in marriage, exclusivity must be maintained. Both death and adultery lead to a change in the marriage relationship. One upholds the principle of exclusivity and the other does not. One is acceptable to the Lord and the other is not. This means then that biblically defined exclusivity must be the governing factor in the marriage covenant.

    a. The issue of regulation says that if the woman marries another while her husband lives, she is an adulteress. She has violated the law of marriage. Marriage is a divinely regulated institution therefore, regulation from God determines acceptable parameters for marriage; not the flesh, not time, not society, and not culture.
    b. Just as the married woman was bound by the law to her husband so too, Israel was bound her husband – Jehovah, by the Law. (This union was a symbol of still a greater reality. This union had its beginning at Sinai and ended at the cross.)

    Death annuls the force of the Law. The Jew died to the Law through the body of Christ so that he might be bound to Christ, not symbolically as under the Law, but in actuality. Baptism was their participation in death and their joining to Christ in a greater covenant relationship.

    The purpose of this union was that “we might bear fruit for God.” This is the goal of the marriage covenant. Paul tells the Jews that while under the Law, their sinful passions bore fruit unto death but, having been freed from the Law they were privileged to no longer serve in the flesh but in the newness of the Spirit. To seek to remain bound to the Law after having been bound to Christ was nothing less than adultery. You can't go back. That union has been severed by reason of death.

    C. Regulated behavior is a universal constant.
    Marriage is not the only thing the regulation of behavior governs. It applies across the board to all human behavior. Regulation of behavior under the Law can either approve or condemn but it can never save. Regulation of behavior by the Spirit can also condemn or approve but it can also save.

    What Paul was trying to get them to understand, and what he is trying to get us to understand is that grace does not eliminate regulation. Even under grace there are still categories of behavior that the Lord calls sin. There is still adultery and adultery is still sin. Paul says we are not to go on sinning under the guise of taking full advantage of the grace of God. God still does not permit or excuse sin. In 6:15, Paul asks the question and then provide the categoric answer, “Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Absolutely not!” Choosing to continue in sin is not an option in response to grace. We are not permitted to appeal to the grace of God in order to offset our desire to continue to indulge in whatever sinful practices may appeals to us.

    In Christ, the Jew died to the regulations of the Law through the body of Christ by having been “raised from the dead.” He was then free to belong to another for the purpose of bearing fruit unto God; but, this does not mean that he was free from regulation.

    Dying to the Law that “once bound us,” means that Christ had released the Jew from that Law. It is no longer the Law that was to regulate their behavior. From baptism on, it is the Spirit who was to regulate behavior apart from the Law of Moses. Being in the Spirit does not mean that the Jew was free of regulated behavior. He was still accountable to the Law of Christ.


    II. The Irreducible Dilemma of versed, 7-25
    “What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? Absolutely not! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, 'You shall not covet.' But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking a opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

    So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. Therefore, did that which is good become a cause of death for me? Not at all! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful. For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.

    So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.”


    Paul elaborates here on what we are going to call the irreducible dilemma. This dilemma is irreducible because there is nothing you or I can do to reduce it to a point of resolution. The irreducible dilemma is a permanent part of the human condition and it is far beyond the power of man to resolve. Here is how Paul expresses this irreducible dilemma.
    A. Here is the irreducible dilemma.
    The flesh and the Law exist in a perpetual state of contention and there can be no agreement between the two. The Law of God wants one thing but the flesh wants something very different. Paul says that the flesh and everything that goes with it is “sold into bondage to sin.”

    This contradiction between the spirit and the flesh created a paradox in the mind of Paul. “For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.” Searching for an explanation Paul admits, “I do not understand.... I am not practicing what I would like” – spiritual behavior; “but I am doing the very thing I hate” – indulging the flesh. Paul's dismay is obvious. He knows that no human solution can be found to resolve this conflict, this contradiction between what he wants to do and what he does.

    This is the everyday dilemma that each one of us faces as well. Man is compressed between the word of God and the desire to sin. We cannot perfectly obey the word of God and we cannot perfectly resist the desire to sin. This is the essence of the dilemma.
    1. The issue is the struggle of resistance and obedience. These are human efforts in which all of us are lacking. In order to resolve this issue on our own requires the quality of perfection, and none of us have this. If we obey the Law of God perfectly, then the Law cannot hold us accountable or condemn us. However, imperfection in obedience will always results in death.

    In verse 9-10 Paul says, “I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me.” If we resist sin perfectly then the Law has no power over us and death cannot touch us. If not, then sin overwhelms us and we die.

    In verse 25 Paul says, “So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.” Neither the Lord nor the Law are at fault in this dilemma. This is strictly a human dilemma where fault lies in the weakness of the flesh. “I myself… with my flesh” is where the problem lies.

    2. In verse 8 we see that the “desire” to do good is not enough. “Wanting” to do good is not strong enough to control the flesh. “But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells me.”

    Sin has been allowed to become the controlling agent over what we do, and our want and desire to do good are not strong enough to break free from this bondage. We are trapped between the word of God and the desire to sin. While my spirit favors God, my flesh favors the desire to sin.

    Because of this war in the inner man, we are incapable of achieving and maintaining any form of legal perfection. Our control over our mind and our behavior is not enough to resolve this irreducible dilemma. Clearly, we need something else.

    This dilemma cannot be resolved by merely assimilating the Law of God into our minds. This is not enough. Paul was a man who KNEW the law of God. He knew what God expected from him. He wanted to do good. He wanted to be a slave to God, but still he struggled with sin. No matter how much he wanted it, legal perfection still eluded him.

    The answer is to give up the idea of legal perfection. Paul shows that seeking salvation by legal perfection is a dead end. If we have to depend on human efforts to obtain legal perfection in obedience, then we are lost. Legal perfection is a myth. It does not exist. It is an unrealistic and unattainable goal. This is why grace has been supplied to us. Grace fills the gap between our desire to do good and our inability to do it perfectly.

    3. Paul depicts sin as an objective reality that acts through us, so much so that sin overrides our desire to do good just as it did for Paul. Paul says in verse 20 that it is sin living in us that does it. The power of absolute control over sin is simply beyond us. We do not obey God perfectly and we do not resist sin perfectly.

    Through these words of Paul, we are being warned about the power that sin has over us. This means that we cannot afford to flirt with sin. We cannot afford to take sin lightly or dismiss the influence it has over us. When we do this, it does not take long for us to realize that we are in way over our heads. Under our own power, we are not stronger than sin and we are certainly not stronger than Satan.

    4. The idea of sin is amusing to the world and the entire state of Nevada is devoted to the proposition that sin is an attractive, entertaining, and lucrative venture, and they are correct. But to us, sin needs to be understood as something that is frightening, destructive, and deadly. Remember the admonition of 1:32, “and although they knew the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death.” Sin only has one outcome and there is nothing attractive about it.

    The book of Romans teaches us that sin is not just some abstract religious idea. Sin is real, it is concrete, it is an objective reality; and if we do not wise up to this fact in the Church, sin is going to eat us alive.

    Sin's chosen medium of expression is and always has been human behavior. Paul says we are not to allow ourselves to become the victim. We are not permitted to be the instrument through which sin is allowed to function. We have to allow the word of God to establish boundaries for our behavior.

    B. The problem is that sin hates boundaries, 8-13.

    1. Sin hates being controlled in any way. Paul says that sin seeks opportunity through the commandment. The word of God establishes a fundamental principle that sin in general is “utterly sinful.” There is nothing good in it and ultimately, it produces no final satisfaction or happiness.

    In verse 18 Paul says, “I know that nothing good dwells in me.” Paul had a mind full of revealed truth yet, he had a mind and a body that still continued to struggle with sin, and in the end Paul says, “Wretched man that I am!” This is a statement wholly reserved for what I think of as the extreme condition. This would seem to reflect a despondent attitude, one of utter hopelessness and helplessness in dealing with sin, and this was Paul's attitude about himself.

    As Paul reflects upon his struggle with sin (in this particular instance, covetousness), he comes to the stark revelation of his own wretchedness. Why, because he cannot perfectly fulfill what the law demands regarding covetousness, no matter how hard he tries. As a result, sin came alive in him and the Law condemned him to death. If this is the personal assessment of such a man as the apostle Paul, then how much more so of me?

    Why does Paul feel so wretched, because he is caught between two things over which he seems to have no control – the Law of God which he cannot obey perfectly, and the desire to sin which he does not perfectly resist. Paul's dismay is in his own inadequacy and in his own shortcomings to gain control over his own mind and body.
    2. The world has its own distorted gospel that elevates the body as the center of the universe. This gospel of the world tells us that we should love our body, protect it, devote ourselves to its every need and desire. We should indulge it, pamper it, satisfy its every ambition. To love your body is to love yourself.

    This self-absorbed obsession by the world cares absolutely nothing for eternal reality, self-discipline, or morality. These things mean nothing to the world when they threaten to interfere with satisfying fleshly desires, whatever they may be. This is what Paul calls in verse 24, the body of death. This gospel of the world that seeks the gratification of the body as the highest human principle of life is the gospel of death.

    C. So, how do we confront this irreducible dilemma?
    Verse seven tell us that the word of God is the instrument of knowledge. “What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? Absolutely not! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, 'You shall not covet.'”

    The Law of Moses was a control document that was designed to educate man about sin and restrict how far human behavior was allowed to go, and Paul uses covetousness as an example. Paul chose this example because it was a sin with which he personally struggled.

    This sin is self-destructive in so many ways. It can destroy a marriage, it can destroy the fabric of human relations, it can destroy any sense of honor between yourself and others, and it can contaminate rulers and governments when they begin to covet what you own. This was Achin, this was David, this was king Ahab, this was Judas. All of these felt the sting of covetousness and then paid the price for it.
    What is it that we are not to covet? “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

    This is actually one command, “You shall not covet” but, with a complex of applications. Here is why covetousness is so infectious.

    Covetousness is wanting for yourself that which rightfully belongs to another. This then grows into a hatred for your brother because he has it and you do not. This then begins to metastasize into evil against your brother. You begin to plan and scheme ways to obtain it by any means necessary, even through swindle, theft, or murder.

    God has already commanded, “You shall not steal.” How does one begin to steal, by coveting that which belongs to someone else. He has already commands, “You shall not commit murder.” How does one begin to commit murder, by hating his brother because he has something you want.

    D. What is the solution to this irreducible dilemma? 24-25.
    No one, on his own, can hope to free himself from this irreducible dilemma. “Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?”

    Here is a plea of desperation for someone to come to his aid in this debilitating struggle between his mind and his flesh. Paul acknowledges that his flesh is in command of his mind and he feels helpless to gain an advantage. BUT… In the midst of all of this despair and hopelessness there is deliverance from the Lord. “Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord…!”

    God sent Jesus into the world to break us out of this irreducible dilemma. If our sin is utterly sinful, then the salvation of the Lord is utterly saving. Now, in spite of all of our failures in our struggle with sin, in spite of all of our shortcomings, all of our weakness, we can now be free of the law of sin and death. This should give us pause to reflect upon certain facts.
    1. Without Christ, we are lost.
    2. Without Christ, we have no hope of being delivered from this irreducible dilemma.
    3. Without Christ, we remain the enemies God.
    4. Without Christ, the law of sin and death determines the shape of human life.
    5. Without Christ, sin and the law of God would fix our eternal destiny against us, and we would be powerless to overturn it.
    Any hope of the mercy of God depends upon the reality of what Christ has done for us. Clearly, our struggle against sin cannot be waged on our own. Like Paul, we are simply too wretched. BUT... as Paul says, “Thanks be to God...!” and then in 8:1-4 he continues with good news. “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, (What could the Law not do? It could not break us free from this irreducible dilemma, BUT...) God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,626

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

    So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.(Romans 7:14-25)

    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?
    My opinion is that Paul was speaking about himself as he was as a Christian, using the Law of Moses to explain, by comparison, what his plight was under the curse of sin. Paul, however, fully understood he was no longer under the Law. He just wanted others to know the plight we are under, even as Christians, had Christ not come and redeemed us. He was aware that if he had still been under the Law, there was enough to convict him of sin, and send him to his death. He would be rendered illegitimate for eternal life, had it not been for the redemption that Christ won for him.

    In wanting to do the things of the Law, he was not saying he considered himself still under the Law. Rather he showed his pursuit of righteousness in comparison to the righteousness of the Law, so that others could understand his plight without Christ. In doing the righteousness of God, as exemplified under the Law, he showed his desire to be like Christ. But he fully acknowledged that sin was in him, that he was not always like Christ.

    Therefore, Paul acknowledged that insofar as the Law was concerned, he would've been rendered ineligible for eternal life and dead before the Law, had Christ not come and redeemed him. Sin was still in him, but Christ stood in for him, and gave him eternal life regardless. This was so that he could go on in righteousness despite the continuing presence of his sin. He could, in reality, overcome sin with a constant perseverance in obedience to God.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,626

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    This is such a good question, I'd like to pursue it a little further. This verse has haunted me for years. It sounds as though Paul views himself as being under the Law of Moses, and serving the Law "with his mind." In reality, as I'm now considering this, I do believe Paul is only trying to point out that the Law exposed the fact that sin is an entity we're born with and not necessarily in agreement with.

    Paul pointed out that the Law had exposed our sinful nature, which we're not really responsible for. We inherited sin from Adam, and now, as it rises up within us, we sometimes oppose it, and sometimes cooperate with it. But Paul's point is that overall, as a Christian, he does not wish to cooperate with sin, and thus shows his pursuit of a Christian answer for his sin. He shows his wish to pursue righteousness, and not sin.

    Since Paul is not actually choosing to sin, as a Christian, it is "sin in him" that is doing the sinning, and not actually Paul. It is "in Paul," but it is sin doing the sinning, and not Paul. Paul is just the victim, or the body possessed. This shows that Paul can actually choose for or against the sin that rises up within him, beyond his control. Thus, Christ redeems those who do not actually want to capitulate to sin.

    So I believe Paul is using the Law as a portrait of despair, even in the Christian condition, as sin continues to molest us beyond our will. Though the Law is passé in the Christian scheme of things, it continues to portray the dilemma of men, who pursue the righteousness of God in a place where sin continues to condemn us.

    Paul is not actually applying the Law to himself as if he is actually under the Law, but is only using it as if, hypothetically, he was under the Law exposing his need for justification. His inheritance of the sin nature condemned him, while at the same time he did not agree with that sin.

    In serving Christ Paul failed what had been the system of the Law, which counted every sin against men, including the ones they had by spiritual inheritance. All of their aspirations towards righteousness had been invalidated by a Law that did not yet recognize redemption from the sin nature. Men had been dying for inheriting a sin nature that they had not actually been responsible for or willing to indulge in!

    Paul is showing that Christ's purpose had been to deliver men from the Law because not all actually wanted to live in sin to start with. They were only condemned by the Law because of their sinful constitution, and not actually by choice. The choice for Christian redemption thus justifies us as rejecting our sin nature, despite the continuation of our sinful condition.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,726
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by maverick View Post
    1 John 1:8-10 where it says Christians sin and Jesus Christ intercedes for us. Aslo at 1 John 3:5-10 a Christian will not "practice" sin because the Holy Spirit of God abides in him.
    Definitely good supporting Scriptures, thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Paul is showing that Christ's purpose had been to deliver men from the Law because not all actually wanted to live in sin to start with. They were only condemned by the Law because of their sinful constitution, and not actually by choice.
    Interesting, so you would say it actually applied to both before and after he was saved? For example, do you believe Paul while he was still called "Saul" was persecuting Christians against his will?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    All Paul is saying here is that we're still tempted by sin after we are born again ... God's provision and the spirit who indwells that gives us the power to overcome our struggles with our sinful nature.
    So when he said, "Now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me," would you say this applies to when we fail in temptation or fail to overcome? So it is no longer "I" who fail but my flesh only?
    여러분은 주님 안에서 항상 기뻐하십시오. 내가 다시 말합니다. 기뻐하십시오.
    모든 사람을 너그럽게 대하십시오. 주님께서 오실 날이 가까웠습니다. Philippians 4


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bakersfield
    Posts
    4,454

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?
    I think Paul's talking about the general Christian experience. Not necessarily his condition at that point in his life.
    "He's wild, you know. Not like a tame lion."
    C.S. Lewis, "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe."

    "Oh, but sometimes the sun stays hidden for years"
    "Sometimes the sky rains night after night, When will it clear?"

    "But our Hope endures the worst of conditions"
    "It's more than our optimism, Let the earth quake"
    "Our Hope is unchanged"
    "Our Hope Endures" Natalie Grant

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Not of this earth
    Posts
    13,889
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    So when he said, "Now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me," would you say this applies to when we fail in temptation or fail to overcome? So it is no longer "I" who fail but my flesh only?
    Pretty much. We are called to follow God and have our eyes and hearts on Him. We are to "put on the armor of God daily."
    He is our strength, he is our hope and he is our everything. Yeah?
    So when we turn our eyes and hearts away from him, even momentarily, we have succumbed to the flesh instead of accepting God's provision - the power over sin that his indwelling spirit supplies us .

    We have many battles being fought daily within us between our flesh and our spiritual self but we must always remember that we have victory in Christ. He, and so we, are already victors. "..more than conquerors."
    We must also remember that this is not an excuse to sin because there is no excuse for sin. Paul also spoke of beating his body/flesh into subjection and running the race to win.

    We come to hate sin and feel truly contrite if we mess up. Our flesh on the other hand still yearns for the pleasures of the flesh and the temptations the evil one places in our paths and minds. He isn't making any excuses here he's just stating a simple fact of reality.

    In the end, even we who are born again will stumble and maybe even fall from time to time but if we repent of our sin - Turn away from it. It's more than just saying a little prayer saying we're sorry - - he is righteous and will forgive us.
    Day by day
    Oh Dear Lord
    Three things I pray
    To see thee more clearly
    Love thee more dearly
    Follow thee more nearly
    Day by day

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northeast Alabama
    Posts
    4,849

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    All Paul is saying here is that we're still tempted by sin after we are born again. Even as spiritual Christians we still live in a body of flesh and this body of flesh we inhabit wars against our spiritual nature.
    This battle will rage within us until we are glorified with Christ after His return but even so it is God's provision and the spirit who indwells that gives us the power to overcome our struggles with our sinful nature.

    Yes, he is most definitely speaking as a Christian here.
    Amen. So many people use Romans 7 ( out of context ) as a pre-conversion experience of Paul's , when obviously he was speaking as a saved man. He was explaining his war with his flesh and that even though he does war with his flesh, he has ultimate victory. Romans 7 totally refutes the sinless perfection false doctrine and yet many of them still refuse to see these verses at face value.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northeast Alabama
    Posts
    4,849

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old man View Post
    I think Paul's talking about the general Christian experience. Not necessarily his condition at that point in his life.
    I see it as both. Paul was speaking first hand... and not to say he was living in grievous sin. He just knew his flesh and it repulsed him.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Not of this earth
    Posts
    13,889
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pbminimum View Post
    Romans 7 totally refutes the sinless perfection false doctrine and yet many of them still refuse to see these verses at face value.
    Absolutely. "Sinless Perfection" is not only unbiblical it is antibiblical as it is completely contrary to what God's word teaches us.
    Day by day
    Oh Dear Lord
    Three things I pray
    To see thee more clearly
    Love thee more dearly
    Follow thee more nearly
    Day by day

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,626

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Absolutely. "Sinless Perfection" is not only unbiblical it is antibiblical as it is completely contrary to what God's word teaches us.
    I believe those who have advocated for "sinless holiness" have only tried to posit that they are renewed by a sinless Christ, that the sinless Christ actively produces his own righteousness in us.

    That is, it is not just *our righteousness,* but more, the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness. And so, these people feel that in order to say that it is *Christ's righteousness* we must refer to it as a "sinless righteousness."

    Of course, I completely agree with you. Even though Christ is in us, and works the quality of his sinless righteousness in us, that does not mean that our own flawed ways are not mixed in with this righteousness.

    When we love, we love with the love of Christ himself. But that love is somewhat mixed with certain carnal elements that continue to rise up in us, trying to spoil Christ's love. We simply overcome our carnal tendencies by pursuing the revelation of Christ's love and obeying it.

    Totally agree! We have sin in us, as Paul is proving here, and as John says in 1 John 1. We simply "overcome the world," as he overcame the world.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hypothetical Scenario
    By VerticalReality in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Oct 12th 2010, 09:19 PM
  2. Hypothetical question
    By TomH in forum Apologetics and Evangelism
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Sep 4th 2010, 07:07 PM
  3. Discussion Lets play hypothetical?
    By Athanasius in forum Young Adults Fellowship
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: Oct 5th 2009, 08:31 PM
  4. Just a hypothetical question.
    By cwb in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Oct 2nd 2008, 06:51 PM
  5. Hypothetical situation
    By RRWick in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jun 2nd 2007, 03:39 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •