Daniel's thoughts

Hebrews 6:19. "We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure."

My Photo
Name:
Location: La Junta, CO, United States

I am originally from Western Nebraska. My beautiful wife’s name is Shelley. We have two kids. Our daughter’s name is Mae. Our son is Noah. I am a graduate of Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton Grad School. I blog on Biblical theology and exegesis. I’m a youth pastor in Eastern Colorado.

Friday, February 03, 2006

The Flesh and the Spirit

Like most sincere Christians, I struggle with sin. And it's a passionate struggle. There are sinful tendencies within me that I simply despise, and yet secretly love. Here lies the problem. There are things that I do that I wish that I didn't do. My desire to become like Christ requires me to resist these sinful tendencies. I think that most of Christians can say that's true with them as well. So often throughout church history, struggling Christians have found comfort in texts such as Romans 7 and Galatians 5.

However, the more that I study Romans and Galatians the more I realize that these passages have often been misinterpreted. My opinion is that most of us have read our struggle with sin into these texts and, as a result, have failed to grasp the meaning of Paul. Let's take a real quick look at Romans 7:13-25 for now. (In the future, I hope to post on Galatians 5).

Paul writes,
13Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18For 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. 19For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me (ESV).

The first thing that I want to point is this--it is crucial to our understanding of the text that we correctly identify the beginning of this paragraph. Some folks want to start with v. 14 (See the NIV). However, I believe that v. 13 marks the beginning of the paragraph. Why? Because v. 14-25 provides the answer to the question asked in v. 13. If we miss this, we miss Paul's whole argument. Throughout Romans, Paul uses a Q-and-A format. This is how he operates. In v. 13 we have the question that sets the agenda for v. 14-25. And what's that question.

13Did that which is good, then, bring death to me?

What's Paul talking about? The Mosaic Law! The Law was a good thing, a spiritual thing (i.e. inspired by the Spirit). And yet, as the previous verses demonstrate, it brought death to Paul. The Law made Paul realize his own sinfulness. It revealed the inadequacy of his own human attempts to please God. The Law said not to covet and Paul coveted. The problem was clear. Paul was spiritually dead. So here's the issue. How could the Law, being a good thing, bring death to Paul? Look at the answer.

By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.

It wasn't the Law's fault that Paul died. The power of sin which controlled Paul was to blame. And thus, the power of sin used a good thing, the Law, to bring death to Paul. Paul continues to illustrate this in v. 14-25. Look at how Paul describes himself in these verses.

  • I am of the flesh
  • Sold under sin
  • I do not understand my own actions
  • I do not do the thing I want
  • I do the very thing I hate
  • Sin dwells within me
  • 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
This does not describe the Christian. This is a description of a Jewish unbeliever. The Jews believed that they had a right status with God simply because of their ethnic heritage and possession of the Torah. Paul argues again and again that this does not cut it. In fact, the very thing that they were so proud of--the Torah--proves that they stand condemned as covenant breakers. They did not keep the Law nor did they have the ability outside of Christ to do so. That's why Paul adds in v. 21-25.
21So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23but 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. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25Thanks 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.
If we stay in the context of ch. 7, the passage is clearly not discussing the struggle of a believer with sin. Now does this mean that Christians no longer struggle with sin? Clearly not. There are plenty of other texts that illustrate that, but Romans 7 isn't one of them. It deals with the struggle of an unbelieving Jew relying on Torah observance to please God.

4 Comments:

Blogger Mike said...

There are so many good points on both sides of the Romans 7 argument. Appeals to Historical Theology does not help us much as both positions have been held by many (although the "He is a believer" position is still the majority).

You are a brave person to tackle this issue!

I'm going to refrain from argumentation one way or another at this point.


In Christ alone,
mike

6:37 PM  
Blogger TheDen said...

Daniel,

I guess when I read this, I see it differently. Note that I've never studied this and my interpretation may be way off base. (And this may be a long post.) Besides, I think your knowledge of Scripture is dwarfed by your knowledge.

When Paul talks about sin and law ("But when the commandment came, sin became alive") I think he's saying that you can't have sin without laws. If you go back to Genesis 2-3, if God didn't give the commandment to not eat from the tree, Adam couldn't have sinned. So, when God gave His commandment to Adam, the opportunity came. Once the opportunity to break the law comes, sin comes and when sin comes, death is inevitable.

The example he uses is "you shall not covet" and yet he covets.

So, people may reasonably argue that the commandment ("you shall not covet") is what brought him death. Paul says no. The sin (covetousness) is shown to be sin through the law. (Romans 7:13)

He then says that the law ("you shall not covet") is from God and he is of the flesh (carnal). (Romans 7:14)

He doesn't want to covet. He hates coveting but he does it anyway. (Romans 7:15)

Now, if he covets, and knows that the law is good. (Romans 7:16)

Then he has lost control and sin is in control of his life. (Romans 7:17)

If that happens, he knows that God isn't in the center of his life. (Romans 7:18)

He knows this because he doesn't want to covet but covets anyway. (Romans 7:19)

Again, he repeats that sin is in control of his life (Romans 7:20)

At this point, he realizes that the cause of this is evil in his life(Romans 7:21)

How can he get out of this miserable cycle? Through God's law through Jesus Christ. (Romans 7: 22-25)

That's my take on it. I think you're right, he's saying that the Mosaic laws cause him to sin and his only salvation is through Jesus. To do this, however, you have to put Jesus in the center of your life and not have your life ruled by "the flesh." I'm notsure if I'm just repeating what you said but reading and reflecting, that's what I got out of it.

I hope this helps.

11:10 PM  
Blogger Daniel said...

Historically there has been a big debate over this passage. Young Augustine interpreted it to refer to Paul's pre-conversion experience. Then, the whole deal with Pelagius happened. So Augustine changed his mind. Old Augustine then interpreted it as referring to Paul's experience as a Christian. (I tend to think that his view of total depravity to miscontrue his study of the text).

During the Reformation, Calvin went with old Augustine and Arminius sided with young Augustine.

Currently, the best defender of the old Augustine position is James Dunn. And the best advocates of the young Augustine position are Douglas Moo and Gordon Fee.

The old Augustine position (Paul as a Christian) is far more popular with Protestants. I'm not sure about where most Catholics stand on it.

I could speculate on why's it so popular (maybe Christians like to justify their sinful habits?), but that's not really helpful in the long run.

10:27 AM  
Blogger Daniel said...

Shawn,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Great danes, huh?

A couple of observations. The "Law" throughout Romans 7 (and throughout the rest of Romans)is the Law of Moses. Of course, the Law of Moses includes God's moral law, but also includes other issues.

Based on this, I would argue that Romans 7 deals with the purpose of the Torah and thus Israel's relationship to the Torah. In my understanding of Paul's writings, I believe that the Christian is not under the Torah, but the Law of Christ. There are similiarities between these two laws but they are not the same.

11:27 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home