Rom 7-14-25-a

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

1/40

Triti] UNS (1990) 197-235

ROMANS 7:14-25 AND THE CREATION THEOLOGY

OF PAUL

D.B.GARIINGTONTORONTO AFTIST SEMINARY

TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA

I. INTRODUCTION

In his Tyndale lecture of 1974, J. D. G. Dunn prefaced his studyof Rom 7:14-25 with the observation:

Rom 7 is one of those keypassages in Paul's writings which offers

us an insight into a whole dimension of Paul's thought and faith.Even more important, it is one ofthe few really pivotal passages inPaul's theology; by which Imean that ourunderstanding of it willin large measure determine our understanding of Paul's theologyas a whole, particularly his anthropology and soteriology. Asinterpretations of Rom 7 differ, so interpretations of Paul'santhropology and soteriology markedly alter in content andemphasis. Dispute about a tense, a phrase, a half-verse in Rom 7means in fact dispute about the whole character of Paul's gospel.

1

This statement is methodologically all important, because, atthe end of the day, one's view of Rom 7:14-25 will hinge on one'sassessment of its particular niche within the edifice of the Paulinetheology. If, for example, the commentator sees in the passageprecisely the same articulation of the letter/Spirit antithesis as in2 Corinthians 3 (Rom 2:29; 7:6), then that particular aspect ofPaul's teaching will serve as the larger fabric of which Rom 7:14-25is but a thread. Thus interpreted, the conflict depicted by Paulfrom the vantage point of a believerwould be that of the person

engulfed by the power of sin who has been convicted by the killingletter of the law, who as yet remains within the era of

d ti d h t i d th lib ti f th lif

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

2/40

198 TRINITY JOURNAL

Not Yet and consequent participation in the sufferings of Christ.2

Consequently, Dunn places this portion ofRomans 7 squarelywithinthe believer's experience of the grace of God: depicted is one whohas passed from death to life and yet undergoes the painfultransition from an existence whollygiven over to the flesh to one

whollycontrolled by the Spirit. The person of Rom 7:14-25 is, mostpointedly, flesh and Spirit at the same time. In his struggle withindwelling sin, he is the self-microcosm of the whole of salvationhistory, reproducing the career of Jesus himself, who was weak but

became strong (2 Cor 13:4).3

Clearly enough, then, the exegesis of Rom 7:14-25 is directlycontingent on an appreciation of the whole Pauline picture, or atleast of those areas of the canvass which provide the most directlyrelevant control over the interpreter's approach to theproblematics of the text. It is because of the place allotted to chap.7 in the Pauline theology, not merelyin the argument of the Romanletter,

4that such divergent approaches to the passage have been

engendered. These can be reduced to five: (1) man under thecondemnation of the law prior to salvation,

5with Romans 7 set in

213111111, "Rom 7:14-25/' 264-73; id., Jesusandthe Spirit(London: SCM, 1975) 30818. Dunn applies the Already/Not Yet schema to the structure of Romans 6-8(Romans [WBC; 2 vols.; Dallas: Word, 1988] 1.302-3.)

3Cf. Dunn's earlier article, "JesusFlesh and Spirit: An Exposition of Romans

1:3-4rJTSns 24 (1973) 40-68 (e.g p. 56).*Which is obviously of primary importance. W. S. Campbell writes that

"Perhaps the most serious error one could commit in attempting to make sense of Rom7 is to isolate it from its natural context" ("The Identityof in Romans 7:7-25/'in Studia Biblica 1978. Ill: Papers on Paul and Other New TestamentAuthors [ed. EA Livingstone; JSOTSup 3; Sheffield: JSOT, 1980] 57).

5Defended mainlyby the Germans, to a large extent under the influence of W. G.

Kummel (though not all have accepted Kmm's conclusions respecting the "I" ofRomans 7), Rmer 7unddie Bekehrung des Paulus (1929), rep. in Rmer 7und das des Menschen im Neuen Testament (TB 53; Munich: Kaiser, 1974). To cite a few: HLietzmann, Einfihrung in die Textgeschichte der Paulusbriefe: An die Rmer (H4th ed.; Tbingen: Mohr, 1933); A. Schlatter, Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommenta

zum Rmerbrief(Stuttgart: Calwer, 1935); O. Michel, Der Brief an die Rmer(MeyerK 4; 14th ed.; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978) 225; H. Schlier, DerRmerbrief(HTKNT; Freiburg: Herder, 1977); E. Ksemann, Commentari/on Roman(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980); O. Kuss, Der Rmerbrief(3 vols.; Regensburg:Pustet, 1959-1978); U. Wilckens, Der Brief an die Rmer (EKK; 3 vols.;Zrich/Neukirchen: Benziger Verlag/Neukirchener Verlag, 1978-1982); D. Zeller,

Der Brief an die Rmer (RNT; Regensburg: Pustet, 1985); K. Prumm, Die Botschaftdes Rmerbriefes: Ihr Aufbau und Gegenwartswert (Freiburg: Herder, 1960); R.B lt "R 7 d th A th l f P l " i E i t d F ith

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

3/40

GARUNGTON: ROMANS 7:14-25 199

contrast to Romans 8;6 (2) the normative condition of the Christian,who experiences lifelong frustration as his sin is aroused by thespiritual law of God;7 (3) the Christian who attempts to performthe law without the full aid of the Spirit;8 (4) the person who is inthe process ofbecoming a Christian but is, strictly speaking, neitherregenerate or unregenerate;9 (5) "the distressing experience of anymorally earnest man, whether Christian or not, who attempts tolive up to the commands of God 'on his own/. . ."10 By far the mostpopular interpretations are (1) and (2),11 though variations on allthe above themes have been multiplied almost indefinitely.12

The following contribution to the debate is in agreement withDunn and, as will become evident, indebted to him: Paul's cry ofRom 7:24, "wretched man that I am!" is the product of the overlap

N. Ridderbos, Aan de Romeinen (CNT; Kampen: Kok, 1959); id., Paul: An Outline ofHis Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977) 126-30; A. J. Bandstra, The Law andthe Elements of the World(Kampen: Kok, 1964) 134-49; A. A. Hoekema, TheChristian LooL at Himself(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) 61-67; R. H. Gundry,"The Moral Frustration of Paul Before His Conversion: Sexual Lust in Romans 7:7-25," in Pauline Studies: Essays Presented to Professor F. F. Bruce on His 70th

Birthday (eds. D. A. Hagner and M. J. Harris; London/Grand Rapids:Paternoster/Eerdmans, 1980) 228-45.6E.g., Ridderbos, Romeinen, 163; Hoekema, Christian, 64-65; Theissen, Aspects,

183; A. Feuillet, "Le plan salvifique de Dieu d'aprs l'Epitre aux Romains," RB 57(1950) 390; id., "La citation d'Habacuc 2:4 et les huit premiers chapitres de l'Epitreaux Romains," NTS 6 (1959-60) 65; E. Brandenburger, Fleisch undGeist: Paulus unddie Dualistische Weisheit (WMANT; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1968) 48-49.

7Apart from Dunn (. 2 above), the view is represented, e.g., by J. Calvin, TheEpistles ofPaulto the Romans and to the Thessalonians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,rep. 1973); C. Hodge, A Commentaryon Romans(Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, rep.1972); C. K. Barrett, The Epistle to the Romans (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row,1957); A. Nygren, Commentaryon Romans (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1949); J. Murray,TheEpistle to the Romans (NICNT; 2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959,1965); C.E. B. Cranfield, A Critical andExegetical Commentaryon the Epistle to the Romans(ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975, 1979); L. Morris, The Epistle to theRomans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988); F. F. Bruce, The Epistle ofPaulto theRomans(London: InterVarsity, 1963); id., "Paul and the Law of Moses," BJRL 57(1974-75) 273-74; J. I. Packer, "The Wretched Man in Romans 7," rep. in Keep in Stepwith the Spirit(Tappan: Revell, 1984) 263-70; Campbell, "Identityof ."

8D. Wenham, "The Christian Life: A Life ofTension?A Consideration of the

Nature of Christian Experience in Paul," in Pauline Studies, 80-94; R. . K. Fung,"The Impotence of the Law: Toward a Fresh Understanding ofRomans 7:14r25," inScripture, Tradition, andInterpretation: EssaysPresented to Everett F. Harrison byStudents andColleagues in Honor of HisSeventy-fifth Birthday (eds. W. W. Gasque

G

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

4/40

200 TRINITY JOURNAL

of two ages and, consequently, two antithetical modes ofexistence.This is

the frustration of one who has to try to follow the leading of theSpirit while still in theflesh,the anguish of trying to express thelife of the Spirit through the bodyof death, the longing to be freeofthe tension between old humanity and new, the longing for thelife of the Spirit to have a spiritual bodyas its embodiment andmeans of expression. In a word, it is not the cry of the non-Christian for the freedom of the Christian; rather it isthe cryof

the Christian forthe fullfreedom ofChrist.

13

Dunn is quite right, in myview, to root the exegesis of this muchdisputed passage

14in the doctrine of the two ages. Accordingly, this

look at Rom 7:14-25 is intended to take what, I believe, is a correctinsight and set it within the broadest possible parameters. That isto say, the idea of two ages, inherent in both Jewish and earlyChristian eschatology, is nothing other than the contrast of old andnew creations. The thesis, then, of the following study is that Paul

himself provides ourframework

of interpretation by means of atheologyofcreation, which serves as the sub-structure of Romans 5-8,

15and that 7:14-25 takes its place within this schema of the two

creations.16

The undergirding hermeneutical assumption is that thesingle most important control over exegesis is the history ofsalvation, resulting in an awareness of the position occupied in thathistory by any given biblical text.

NOTE ONTHE "I"OF7:14-25

The ensuing exposition accepts that the "I" of 7:14-25 is Paulhimselfthe so-called autobiographical interpretationbecause"The existential anguish and frustration of w. 15 and 24 is too real,too sharply poignant to permit any reduction of the to a merefigure of style. Whatever else this is, it is surely Paul speakingfrom the heart of hisown experience. I must say that it seems to

13Dunn, "Rom 7:14-25," 268 (italics mine).

14Nygren calls 7:14-25 the "most discussed and fought over" portion ofthe letter

(Romans, 284). Cf. Wilckens, Rmer, 2.97; Kuss, Rmer, 2.481, though I cannot agreethat the text is as unclear as Kuss laments. Bibliographies are provided by Dunn,Ksemann, and Kertelge ("berlegungen," 105-6, . 1). Notice can be taken ofonlyaf

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

5/40


me a rather convoluted process of reasoning which argues boththat the does not denote Paul's personal experience but it does

the experience of everymaneveryman, except Paul!"17

In Phil3:4-7, a passage reminiscent of Romans 7, the ego is undeniablyPaul himself.

1 This essay accordinglyagrees with the analyses,

e.g., of Kertelge19

and Theissen20

respecting the personalreference of the "I" throughout Romans 7. Theissen in particularpronounces Kmmel's arguments to the contrary as"methodologically unusable/' inasmuch as the literary analogiesappealed to by him are inappropriate to Paul.21 The interpretationoffered, for instance, by G. E. Ladd22 and D. Guthrie,23 which seesRomans 7 not as Paul's own experience but as his Christian

evaluation of Pharisaic religion, entails a serious difficulty: notonly does he say "I" when he principally means someone else, hewas, in point of fact, a "wretched man" neither before nor afterthe Damascus Road because of his thoroughly positive relation tothe law, both as a Pharisee and as a Christian. Yet the Paul of Rom7:25 exclaims that he is such a person. When, in other words, washe ever "wretched?" Are we to believe moreover that when Paulcries "wretched man that I am," he is the mouthpiece for otherswho have no consciousness of their own plight?

It is true, of course, that Paul does not write as a private personbut as the representative of a group. One indication of this is in v. 14 (as opposed to ).

24As F. J. Leenhardt

writes, "The statement that the law is spiritual is not a personalopinion, but the faith of all. Thus it is a question here of a credalconfession with the community; hence the use of the plural."

25

Nevertheless he is decidedlya member of that group. In Calvin'swords, Paul depicts in his own person the character and extent ofthe weakness of believers.

26Cf. the "I" of Gal 2:19-20: Paul is

clearlyspeaking of all Christians, ofwhom he is a spokesman. TheI" of the Qumran hymns presents an instructive analogy,//T//

to set his interpretation within the broader theological framework provided bychaps. 5-8.

17Dunn, "Rom 7:14-25," 260 (first italics his, second mine). Cf. Gundry,

"Frustration,"229.

18Cf. C. H. Dodd, TheEpistle to the Romans (MNTC; London: Hodder &Stoughton, 1932) 107.

^

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

6/40

202 TRINITY JOURNAL

inasmuch as the autobiographical and typical elements of the "I"

cannot be separated.27

IL ROMANS 5-8 AND THE THEOLOGY OF CREATION

At the heart of Paul's purposes in the Roman letter lies hisdesign to redefine the people ofGod, i.e., "to redraw the boundarieswhich marked out the people of God."28 Whereas before to be amember of the covenant people was to live within the boundary setby the law, the eschatological people have assumed a new

corporate identity.29

Instead of being the people of the law, the newpeople are "the men of faith" (Gal 3:9), who are committed toChrist alone. In this light Rom 1:5 is a verse of pivotal significance.In declaring that the obedience of faith is a possibility for peopleof all races apart from the necessity of becoming and remainingJewish, Paul has effectively rewritten the ground rules of covenantfidelity: from now on there is "no distinction" between Jew andGentile (1:16-17; 2:11; 10:12, etc.).30 Rom 1:5, then, is "A neat andfitting summary of his complete apologetic in Romans."31

That creation features prominently in Paul's delineation of thenew people is evident from the outset of the letter. Scholars havebeen aware for some time now that Paul's depiction of man and hisplight in Rom 1:18-32 is modeled on the fall of Adam in Genesis 3.32

In fact, the polemic pursued in 1:18-3:20 as a whole is to the effectthat, contrary to its claims, Israel is involved in and repeats theprimal sin of Adam. Far from being the solution to the complex ofproblems occasioned by the first man's apostasy, Israel itself isguilty of idolatry:33 all, including Israel, have sinned and have

27See Theissen, Aspects, 201, n. 37; Longenecker, Paul, 88-90; Wilckens, Rmer,

2.77-78; Michel, Rmer, 225; K. G. Kuhn, "New Light on Temptation, Sin, and Fleshin the New Testament," in The Scrolls and the New Testament (ed. K. Stendahl;New York: Harper, 1957) 102-3. See in addition D. J. Moo, "Israel and Paul inRomans 7:7-12," NTS 32 (1986) 128-29, who relates other instances in which a Jewishwriter closely identifies himself with the group he represents.

Bj. D. G. Dunn, "Romans 13:1-7A Charter for Political Quietism?" Ex Auditu 2(1986) 61. Cf. id., Romans, 2.580-81; W. D. Davies, "Paul and the People of Israel," in

Jewish and Pauline Studies (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 128; M. Black, Romans(NCB; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1973) 38; Bruce, "Paul and the Law of

Moses." 261.^Dunn, "Romans 13:1-7," 61. The recent book of R. D. Kaylor (Paul's Covenant

Community: Jew and Gentile in Romans [Atlanta: John Knox Press 1988]) approaches

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

7/40

GARLINGTON: ROMANS 7:14-25 203

fallen short of God's glory (3:23; cf. 5:12), the image of Godbestowed on man in the beginning (Ps 8:5). It is in the middle of thisargument that Paul pleads for Gentile equality based on God'simpartial judgment (2:1-16). The nations, by virtue of creation,possess the law written on the heart, the functional equivalent ofthe Jewish law inscribed on tables of stone (2:14-15). Accordingly,"the doers of the law" who will be justified in eschatological

judgment (2:13) are defined not in terms of allegiance to the Torahbut of Adam's original mandate to pursue glory, honor, andimmortality (2:7). As the whole of Romans clarifies, only in unionwith Christ, not Israel, is it possible to persevere where the firstAdam failed to do so and thus be vindicated when God judges"according to truth" (22).34

It is Paul's distinctively Christian convictions about Christ,creation, and the people of God which are elaborated in chaps. 5-8.To make a long story very short, he undertakes to demonstrate thatthe new creation has dawned in Jesus of Nazareth. God's plan toremedy the ills of the old creation has been realized not in Israeland its Torah but in Jesus Christ and his church. These chaptersbegin and end on the same note, viz., the vindication of the peopleof God in Christ. 5:1 announces the fulfillment of Isa 32:17-18: "Andthe work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect ofrighteousness quietness and assurance forever. And my people shalldwell in a peaceful habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quietresting places." This, according to the prophet, is to take placewhen the Spirit is poured out from on high (v. 15), in conjunctionwith the appearance of a king who rules in righteousness (v. 1). ForPaul the long-awaited hope of Israel has become a reality for thosewho have been justified in Christ. 8:31-39 forms the coda not only tochap. 8 but chaps. 5-8, with its declaration of the latter-dayvindication of God's elect against the accusations of every enemy.The questions of v. 33, "Who shall bring any charge against God'select? It is God who justifies; who is to condemn?," are extractedfrom Isa 50:8-9, in which the obedient Servant of Yahweh (v. 5)challenges his enemies to set forth their case in the presence of theJudge, confident that he will be vindicated by Yahweh from allwrongdoing. For Paul, of course, the Servant is Christ: it is in himthat eschatological vindication has been secured for the Israel ofGod. In the contexts of both Isaiah 32 and 50 there is the promise ofa restored land and eternal peace, i.e., a new creation, when the

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

8/40

204 TRINITY JOURNAL

8:17) there is the outworking of the ethical principles of this newcreation and the consequent counter-attack of the old, which stillseeks to assert its former dominance.

Thus from 5:1 through the end of chap. 8 one can discern thatPaul runs the entire course of salvation history, from old creation tonew. After the transitional paragraph of 5:1-11, 5:12-21 depicts thedisobedience of the old humanity in Adam and the obedience of thenew in Christ. 6:1-7:6 speaks further of the inception of the newcreation with the death and resurrection of Christ:

35the oldness of

the letter has given way to the newness of the Spirit. As anoutgrowth of an objection raised and answered in 7:7-12, 7:13-25articulates the overlap of the two creations, with its resultanttension in the believer's inward being. Chap. 8, finally, predictsthe glories of the consummated new creation. The sub-structure ofRomans 5-8 therefore can be viewed as the passing away of the oldcreation and the advent of the new.

36This is what accounts for the

conspicuous time-element in these chapters. Echoing 3:21, the"eschatological " is present in 5:10; 6:21; 7:6, 17; 8:1; and even

when the "now" of salvation is not expressly mentioned, it isnonetheless just beneath the surface of all those passages that

speak of the definitive break with the old age.From the ethical standpoint, chaps. 5-8 can be viewed as Paul's

delineation of the eschatological (resurrection) life of the people ofGod, those upon whom "the ends of the ages have come" (1 Cor10:11). The frequent occurrence of "life" throughout the sectiontakes us back to 1:17, where, according to Paul's use of Hab 2:4, lifeis the outcome of the righteous man's faith, as well as 4:17-25,

where Abraham's faith was in the God who raises the dead. Thisis the "eternal life" which God will give to those who persevere inthe quest for glory, honor, and immortality (2:7). Ultimately "life"itself is a creation concept, stemming from the opening chapters ofGenesis. In the consummated new creation once again the waywill

be open to the tree of life (Rev2:7; 22:2,14).As one reads chaps. 5-8 in this light, one cannot help but be

impressed with the series of antitheses constructed by Paul, which

^As I have attempted to express elsewhere: "Our Lord's resurrection introduceda new creation. He died to the old age dominated by sin and entered a new era in

which he now lives to God (Rom 6:9-10). His emergence from the tomb at thedawning of the day is symbolic of this truth. As the old creation, the new creationi ll d it i l b th i t i f li ht i t th d k " ("R ti f

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

9/40


in very broad terms may be reduced to the following: (1) 5:1-21: the

justification of life in Christ vs. the condemnation of death inAdam; (2) 6:1-7:6: resurrection life and deliverance from sin inChrist vs. death and bondage to sin and the law; (3) 7:7-8:39: lifeand liberty in union with Christ and the indwelling Spirit vs.captivity to the flesh, even in spite of indwelling sin and thebeliever's groaning for the redemption of the body (7:14-25; 8:18-39). In each instance the motif of the believer's definitive breakwith the past and his entrance into a new state of affairs stands outin prominent relief: an old pattern of existence is broken in order

that a new mode of life may begin. In John Murray's phrase, this isthe Christian's "definitive sanctification."37 The representativesof the old agesin, death, the law, and the fleshhave beenoverthrown and caused to release their grip on those who are "now"in Christ.38

There is accordingly a pronounced christological focus to eachphase of the believer's transformation "from glory to glory" (2 Cor3:18). Chap. 5 highlights our solidarity with Christ as he headsup the recently arrived new creation, in opposition to our former

union with Adam, who is the head of "the present evil age" (Gal1:4). In 6:1-7:6 the believer has died to sin and has been raised innewness of life; because he has died to the law through the body ofChrist, he is discharged from that which held him captive, sothat "now" he serves not in the oldness of the letter but in thenewness of the Spirit. Chap. 8 makes explicit the connectionbetween the sonship of Christians and the sonship of Christ: we arethe sons of God because he is the Son of God. In the Son our lives areno longer characterized by fear and bondage to the flesh; it is to theimage of the Son that we are being conformed, and it is by virtue ofthe indwelling Spirit of the Son that we now walk after the Spirit,as formerly we walked after the flesh.

In sum, given the prominence of eschatological terminology andideas, it follows that in Romans 5-8 Paul announces the arrival ofthe eschaton or, most pointedly, the new creation. In so doing, hisrunning debate with Judaism in Romans is continued into this stageof the letter. The essential difference between Paul and the Jewishoutlook lay precisely in Paul's conviction that in Christ the new

creation, as foretold by the prophets, had arrived. Thus theargument of chaps. 5-8 grows out of what has preceded. For Paulfaith in Christ has secured both justification and the promise to

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

10/40

206 TRINITY JOURNAL

arrived. It is as though this entire portion of the letter were anelaborate commentary on 2 Cor 5:17.39

/. THE FUNCTION OF ROMANS 7:14-25 WITHIN THEDEBATE OF CHAPTERS 6-7

After the assertions of chap. 5 that Christ, not Israel, is God'snew beginning after the fall of Adam, chaps. 6-7, which standtogether as an internal unit of 5-8, are organized around a series ofquestions corresponding to the synagogue debate style.40 As thoughhe were engaged in live argument, Paul here takes up Jewishobjections to the propositions of chap. 5. In every instance Paul'stheology of the new creation and the role of the law within itcomes by way of his answer to the four questions posed by hisinterlocutor. This particular mode ofwriting is employed in Romanswherever Paul is engaged in direct dialogue with Israel; and sinceit finds its most intense expression in chaps. 6-7 (and 9-11), theimplication is that the ideas therein expressed were particularlyoffensive to Jewish convictions. The structure of the section may beset out as follows.

First round of debate: 6:1-14: Does non-allegiance to the Torahinevitably result in a pagan lifestyle?

Second round ofdebate: 6:15-7:6: Does the era ofgrace, as preachedby Paul, necessitate a sinful life?

Third round of debate: 7:7-12: Is the law itself sin(ful) because itawakens the consciousness ofsin?

39Without drawing on the language of creation directly, Nygren analyzeschaps. 5-8 as Paul's exposition of what it means to "live in Christ." This leads himto inquire: "how Paul could suddenly turn, in that context, to a description of theanguished and discordant status of the soul of the man who is under the law"(Romans, 288). Dodd comments similarly (Romans, 108). Campbell adds that at 5:12Paul commences his description of Christian experience. Chaps. 6-8 thereafter serveto make clear how the rule of grace comes to fruition in the Christian life, by comingto grips with those factors which remain stumbling blocks to the attainment ofmaturity. Paul sets forth three conflicts in which the Christian engages, which arenot three separate battles but "one conflict described from three different

" 57) I f i h l i f ibl i

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

11/40


Fourth round of debate: 7:13-25: Is the law the direct cause of

death?Since 7:13-25 is organically one with 7:7-12 in particular, it

will be necessary to say something about the relationship of thesetwo portions of the chapter. The round of debate represented by 7:7-12 is occasioned by 7:1-6, and more especially by vv. 5-6. In v. 5 Paulspeaks of "the desires of sin through the law" which were at workin our members when "we were in the flesh." As in 3:20; 4:15; 5:20,he attaches to the law a negative, i.e., sin-revealing, function.

Furthermore, v. 6 (especially against the backdrop of chap. 6)identifies in the clearest terms possible the law with the old realmof sin and death. Thus the question naturally arises, "Is the lawsin?" (v. 7). As Wilckens notes, Paul's interlocutor calls attention towhat he sees as a contradiction in his argument: how can Paul holdto a basic dictum of Jewish theology, viz., that the law is good, andat the same time ascribe to it evil, i.e., the production of death?41

In answering this new objection, Paul has essentially one thing

to say: even though the law per se is not sin, it was nevertheless bythe law's instrumentality that he came to recognize his ownidolatry. We see, then, in Paul the example of one who was placedunder the discipline of the law, who was "shut up to sin" (Gal 3:22),in order that he might find Christ. In other words, he applies themacrocosm of this salvation-historical principle to the microcosmof his own experience, which, as we will argue, is precisely whathe does in 7:14-25. Therefore Paul demonstrates from his pre-Christian life that the law does indeed reveal sin and increase the

trespass: he is an Israelite in whom the law has achieved itsoverall redemptive purpose.42 This in itself argues that,notwithstanding Gal 1:14 and Phil 3:4-6, at some point in hisPharisaic career Paul was confronted by the condemning letter ofthe law, perhapsthough by no means for certainjust prior to hisconversion and contributory to it.

Especially interesting in Paul's depiction of the law as arevealer of sin are his allusions to Genesis 3.43 Dunn quotes

41

Wilckens, Rmer, 2.84-85.^The supposed contradiction between Romans 7 and Phil 3:4-6 (e.g., Theissen,Aspects, 234-43) is predicated on the assumption that, in the latter, Paul's

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

12/40

208 TRINITY JOURNAL

Ksemann to the effect that "There is nothing in our verses whichdoes not fit Adam, and everything only fits Adam/'44 Dunn alsoagrees with Ksemann in thinking that the rabbinic view thatAdam received the (several) commandments of the law in thesingle command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of goodand evil may well go back to Paul's time. Certainly, he remarks,the belief that covetousness or lust was the root of all sin wascertainly well established among Paul's contemporaries.45

With v. 8 the influence of Genesis 3 becomes more noticeable,inasmuch as attention is focused on the tactics of the Serpent, whopersonifies sin. As Barrett comments, "Sinthe Serpentwas inthe Garden even before man, but had no opportunity of attackingman until the command 'Thou shalt not eat of it' (Gen. ii.17) hadbeen given. It was precisely by means of this command, theprototype of all law and religion, that the serpent tempted man."46

Finally, there is the allusion to Gen 3:13. According to the LXXof this verse, Eve protested that the serpent "deceived []me;" and Paul writes: "through the law" sin "deceived[] me." As Dunn again comments, "It [the Serpent]twisted the instruction of the Creator

givenfor

man'sgood and

made it sound like the legislation of a dictator fearful of losing hisspecial status and prerogatives. Thus deceived, man clutched at agodlike life and grasped onlydeath."

47Paul therefore describes the

law in the same terms as the deceitful workof the Serpent in thegarden. Qualitatively speaking, Paul was deceived as Eve wasdeceived: both were expecting life from something which couldproduce onlydeath. In Paul's case that something was the law. Inso saying, it simply would have been impossible for him moreemphatically to consign the Torah to the old creation purposes ofGod.

The Adam/Eve associations in this segment of the debateconfirm that Paul's thought moves decidedlywithin the realm ofcreation.

48With bold strokes of the pen, he relegates the law to the

convoiteras pas' (Rom 7:7),"in Neotestamentica et Patristica: Eine Freundesgabe,Herrn ProfessorDr. OscarCullmann zu seinem 60. Geburtstagberreicht (NovTSupLeiden: Brill, 1962) 157-165; id., "L'histoire du salut selon le chapitre vu de l'Epitreaux Romains," Bib 43 (1962) 117-51. Theissen, as others before him (e.g., Kmmel,Ksemann, Lyonnet, Schnackenburg), contends that in 7:7-13 Paul makes Adam themodel of his own experience (Aspects, 208). Similarly Bornkamm ("Sin, Law andDeath," 93) entertains the possibility that Paul's "I" is Adam as the representativef i f i f f A

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

13/40


era of man's fall and its consequent ills, likening it to the Serpent,who beguiled Eve. Not that the Torah in itself is evil, because, ofcourse, the burden of 7:7-12 is precisely the exoneration of the lawof God, which is holy, just, and good. Nevertheless the law has

become the instrument of sin's deceitful working and the occasion ofdeath. When, in its sin-mirroring capacity, it exposes idolatry for

what it really is, one can only die in the presence of thecommandment.

49

NOTE ONPAUL, ADAM, ANDEVE

Paul has probablychosen Eve as his primarymodel becauseof the connotations of apostasy associated with Adam. Eve, asPaul later, was enticed by idolatry, but she did not in principlerenounce Yahweh the Creator. Paul, then, places himselfqualitatively in the same position as Eve in the Garden, only withthe law, not the Serpent, as the instrument of his undo ing.Therefore the salvation-historical approach to Romans 7 stillstands, 5 0 or, more accurately, "eine Unheilsgeschichte wirdgeschildert/'

51Paul's experience is analogous to that of Eve's: in

his life-history the law has performed the same function as theSerpent in hers. Thus the law's indictment of Paul as a covetousperson (vv. 7-8) parallels the situation in Eden. As Bruce explains:"Although the prohibition of the forbidden fruit in the fallnarrative is not a part of the law of Moses, it could well beregarded as an anticipatory instance of the commandmentagainst covetousness. And it could be argued that covetousness() is the quintessential sin."

5 2

the first instance, a reference to Adam, who stands in contrast to Christ, the "newman" and "Last Adam." That both referents should co-exist in the same passage isnot surprising, inasmuch as Israel, the "son ofGod," at Sinai represents the inceptionofa new creation and finds itself qualitatively in the same situation of testing as thefirst human couple. Cf. Kim, Origin, 236. Rabbinic commentators accordingly tendedto view the golden calf incident as a new fall.

49Gundry's main thesis is that the "lust" of which Paul was convicted was

sexual desire, commencing with his bar mitzvah ("Frustration," 232-33). The samecase was argued by W. D. Davies, PaulandRabbinic Judaism (3rd ed.; London: SPCK,1970) 23-25. However, taking into account Paul's own statement that covetousness isidolatry (Col 3:5), it makes sense to thinkthat the law convicted him, as a faithful

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

14/40

210 TRINITY JOURNAL

However, although Paul selected Eve rather than Adam forhis Vorlage,

5* we are not to forget that Rom 1:18-32 (3:23; 5:12)

depicts the condition of fallen mankind in Adam-like terms.54 7:7-13 represents a throwback to the letter's earlier assertions aboutman and his plight. Thus Longenecker justifiably writes that Paulis identifying himself with Adam: "For him the experience of

Adam was an historical reality. And since he is identified withAdam, even though as a Christian also identified with Christ, thehistory of Adam is his irrevocable history. When Adam lived, Ilived; when Adam coveted, I coveted; when Adam was deceived, I

was deceived; when Adam died, I died."55

Consequently, Gundryis wrong in distinguishing so sharply between Adam and Eve,

thereby disclaiming the heilsgeschictlich approach to theseverses.

56Eve, after all, was the instigator ofher husband's sin.

IV. ROMANS7:13-25: TWO CREATIONS, ONEPERSON

Following the customary pattern, the issue debated in 7:13-25 isdrawn from what has preceded. The question is: "Was the law,

which is good in itself, the direct and immediate cause of death?"Once more Paul's ansv/er is , with a reassertion that the

law was but the instrument of sin (v. 13).Vv. 14-25 are organically linked to v. 13, which introduces this

last round of debate. Whatever else may be said by way of theinterpretation of these verses, they must be seen as part of Paul'scomplex answer to the objection raised in v. 13.

57Indeed, once this

connection is grasped, it follows that vv. 14-25 are an application tohis present experience of the law's capacity to mirror sin. In otherwords, both before one's entrance into the newcreation (w. 7-12,13)and afterward (vv. 14-25) the law acts as God's instrument to

expose sin and maintain the standard of his holy will. Thisintimate connection of vv. 14-25 with vv. 7-12 strengthens theconviction that the former is indeed autobiographical, because, asG. Lyons observes, Paul makes autobiographical references when hehas been provoked to do so by his opponents.

58It makes sense, then,

to think that Paul is addressing an implied criticism: If you haveentered the new creation, why are you not perfect according to thelaw of God?

The substructure of w . 13-25, then, may be set out as follows:

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

15/40


(1) 13: the issue to be debated is raised and answered with respect

to Paul's past.(2) 14-20: Paul's answer is substantiated by his present experience ofthe law. The argument is pursued in two parallel statements:

14 18a15a 18b15b 1916-17 20

(3) 21-25: summary and conclusion.

A THE LAW AND PAUL'S AWARENESS OF SIN(V. 13)

As is characteristic of the debate format of chaps. 6-7, eachsuccessive question posed by the interlocutor represents a nuancedrephrasing of the previous question. Thus the objection of 7:13, "Didthat which is good bring death to me?" is a spinoff of the one

voiced in 7:7: "Is the law sin?" Indeed, the answer to both questions

is the same: the law is neither sin in itself nor the cause of death inPaul; it is only the instrument through which sin is revealed. Thisis not to minimize the law's powerful salvation-historical functionof making sin "exceedingly sinful," for, instead of assuring Paulthat his standing before God was secure because of his membershipin the covenant people, the law realized in him "God's fuller anddeeper strategy to bring out the character of sin,"

59to the end that

he might gain Christ (Phil 3:9) and become in him therighteousness of God (2 Cor ).

60

. THE LAW AND PAUL'S CONTINUING STRUGGLE WITHSIN(VV. 14-20)

(1) Whether one locates vv. 14-25 within Paul's pre- or post-conversion experience, the conspicuous feature of these verses is

59Dunn, Romans, 1.387. Rom 7:7,13 and like statements can be read as Paul's

response to the Jewish conviction that fidelity to the law is eo ipso to possess life.

Perhaps adapting Ben Sira's phrase "the law of life" (Sir 17:11; 45:5), the author ofBaruch commends to his readers "the commandments of life" (3:9). As J. J. Kneuckercomments, "'Satzungen des Lebens' werden sie gennant, sofern sie, wenn sie befolgt

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

16/40

212 TRINITY JOURNAL

Paul's struggle. Yet, I would submit, it is the very presence of thestruggle that argues forcefully that this segment of Romans is theproduct of Paul's Christian consciousness. Whereas in w . 7-13 Paulis simply dead because of the sin-revealing law, in w . 14-20 (21-25)he is actively resistant to the impulses of indwelling sin because hewills to do what is rightin itself a sign of life.

61Paul's awareness

of covetousness (= idolatry, Col 3:5) was a death experience: all hecould do was acquiesce, as it were: lie down and die before the law'saccusations. But now, because Paul delights in the law of God in theinner person, he strives to do what he knows is acceptable accordingto the law's prescriptions.

62In this regard, though not decisive in

itself, the movement from the past tense of the verbs in 7-13 to thepresent tense in 14-25 is not to be downplayed.

NOTE ON THE PRESENT TENSES OF7:14-25.

Wilckens takes v. 13 as the superscription to vv. 14-23; this, hesays, accounts for the change oftense at v. 14. In other words, w .14-25 describe Paul's on-going condition resultant from the eventof sin's power-grip.

6* Schlier,

64Kuss,

65Kertelge,

66and

Schnackenburg6

^ also assess the latter part of chap. 7 asdescriptive of the situation of the man sold under sin. Theissensimilarly divides Paul's experience of sin and the law in 7:7-23 intoa "narrative part" (7-13) and a "descriptive part" (14-23).

68

Certainly these readings of the text are plausible in themselves,and, given certain presuppositions, internally consistent.

69

However, given the framework of interpretation assumed by me,Dunn's analysis of the tenses is to the point. He refers back to v. 7:"I would not have known ( ) what it was to covet had thelaw not said, 'You shall not covet.'" By the use of the imperfect (in

form pluperfect), "Paul probably intends . . . to describe diebeginning of a continuing experience; he still experiences lust.The covetousness which, as he now recognizes, characterized hispre-Christian past . . . is still a feature of his Christian present.

61Cf. Dunn, "Rom 7:14-25," 271-73.

e2Mutatismutandis, Michel (Rmer, 235) isrightthat Paul's "inner man" is th

pious one ofIsrael, who has insight into the commandments ofGod and consents tothem with his whole heart, yet who experiences the sinfulness offallen mankindand undergoes the tension ofthose who should hold to Yahweh's covenant but need

to offer sacrifice to purify their sin.^Wilckens, Rmer, 2.85.64Schlier, Rmer, 228: "Die Situation des unter die Sunde verkauften

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

17/40


Consequently, 7:7-13 is not an interruption to the flowofthoughtthrough 6 to 8 . . . since it in fact describes the beginning of anexperience which continues for the believerone aspect of Paul'sexperience even as a Christian. Even as a Christian there is still asense in which he can and must say, died and am dead becauseof sin' (cf. 8:10 below)."

70Thus it is actually vv. 7-13 which initiate

the thought of a continuing state resultant from a historicalencounter with the law, and w. 14-25, with their shift to the presenttense, drawa line ofcontinuityfrom Paul's primal confrontation

with the law (v. 7) through its on-going killing effects (w. 8-13) tohis Christian experience of the same sin-revealing law. "The factthat Paul does not make much of the transition [i.e., from past topresent tenses], that his thought moves from past to presentalmost unconsciously, underlines the degree ofcontinuitywhichPaul recognizes between his pre-Christian experience and hisexperience as a Christian. But there is a difference. In vv. 7-13there was no resistance: sin launched its attack, struckhim down,and left him for dead with nofightin him. But in vv. 14ff. we see

battle joinedwe see Paul with a resistance and firmness ofpurpose which was lacking in vv. 7-13. He is still defeated, but he isnow fighting. Where the strength of the counter atttack comesfrom we will not learn till chapter 8, but the suggestion is alreadyimplicit that it is the Spirit joining battle in Paul with the flesh."*1One can appreciate to a degree Theissen's analogy withEpictetus's Discourses(as we shall see below).72 Yet he is liable tothe same charge he himself lays at the feet of Kmmel, viz., thatthe parallel is not really appropriate. Similarities are present, butwhat distinguishes Paul is an eschatology impinging on his psycheand creating a tension lacking in his pre-Christian days.

(2) Paul's struggle is located in the juxtaposition of the

"spiritual" law and his "carnal" self. The designation of the law as"spiritual" has led some to affirm a rather radical inconsistency onPaul's part, since in chaps. 5 and 6 the law was linked with the oldcreation entities of sin, flesh, bondage, and death.73 However, Dunnrightly discerns that the law partakes of a duality (law-sin andlaw-Spirit), as does Paul himself as a typical believer (flesh-sinand mind-Spirit). These dualities are complementary (flesh-law-sin; mind-law-Spirit), allowing Paul to retrieve the law from a

review of Paul's former career as a Pharisee ("Frustration/' 228-29). However, v. 7

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

18/40

214 TRINITY JOURNAL

straightforward identification with sin and death.74

This insightis, in fact, pivotal to an appreciation of the character of Rom 7:14-25; that is, the very genius of the passage is the conflict withinPaul's psyche stemming from the dualism inherent in his experienceof overlapping and competing ages. As the law itself can be joined

with either flesh or Spirit, so can Paul, whose ego is dividedbetween the epochs of Adam and Christ: "The is split and thelaw is split in complementary fashion because each belongs to bothepochs at the same time in this period of overlap between theepoch of Adam and the epoch of Christ, between the era of theflesh and the era of the Spirit.

/,7S

In calling the law "spiritual/' Paul identifies it with the HolySpirit

76and therefore with the age of his manifestation and

working, i.e., the new creation as foretold by the prophets. In morespecific terms, the law is derived from the Spirit and is theexpression of his will.

77Interestingly, the parallels of Matt 12:28

and Luke 11:20 equate the "Spirit of God" with the "finger of God."Exod 31:18, moreover, states that the two tables of the law were

written by the "finger of God." With hindsight, we could say thatthe "finger of God" is a way of speaking of the Spirit, who is theimmediate author of the ten words of Moses. Consequently, if incalling the law "spiritual" Paul contemplates the Spirit as theLaw-Giver, we have a most definite linkwith the creation, since,according to Rom 2:14-15, the Gentiles, as God's image, possess thefunctional equivalent of the law written on tables of stone.

78Paul,

then, would envisage a continuity in the Spirit's workas regardsthe law of God: the same Spirit who breathed into Adam the

breath of life79

and wrote the law of God on his heart rewrote, so to

74Dunn, Romans, 1.387.

75Dunn, Romans, 1.388. Dunn clarifies later that the "I" is not completely

schizoid or split in two: it is the same "I" each time which is either fleshly orwilling to perform the law (ibid., 390).

^"Vom gewirkt, enthaltend, wirkend... das Gesetz isein pneumatisches Wort, ein Wort, vom Geist getrieben" (Schlier, Rmerbrief, 229).Cf. the usage of in 1 Cor 2:15; 15:44ff. The "spiritual body" is the onecreated and fully indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

^Cf. Cranfield, Romans, 1.355-56.

^Cf. Murray,Romans,

1.75.79The Spirit is particularly associated with the creation of man. According toGen 2:7, God breathed into Adam the "breath of life." It is true that the expression is

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

19/40


speak, the same essential law on tables ofstone. And, according to 2Cor 3:3, his writing activities carry over into the new covenant, infulfillment of Jer 31:31-34. The Spirit therefore is inseparable fromthat on-going portion of the Torah which served from the beginningto articulate God's creation will for his people.

80

Whatever we make of that, the law is clearly associated withthe Spirit; and since "Spirit" throughout these chapters is asynonym of the new era, Paul places the law as a sin-revealerwithin the new creation. For him this is not an exclusively old-creation phenomenon, because when he is convicted of sin by thelaw, he yearns all the more for the ideals of the age to come andgroans for the liberation of the sons of God (8:23). In a sense relatedto though distinct from his pre-Christian days, the law still pointsPaul to Christ. By its very "spirituality," i.e., as the product andmirror-image of the Holy Spirit of God, the law makes Paul feel"carnal, sold under sin." Therefore although sin no longer hasdominion over Paul as it did when he was in Adam, in view of whathe longs to be in the Last Adam (obedient), he must confess that heis indeed carnal; and the presence of the good and perfect law ofGod in the age of salvation is a constant reminder that he has notyet been ushered into the consummate phase of his redemption.

In the presence of the spiritual law Paul can only admit that heis "carnal, sold under sin." Linguistic affinities with the choice of

words here have been sought in the LXX,81

but basically to no avail.Paul simply recalls from 6:16-23 the imagery of slavery, inasmuchas captive soldiers in antiquity were normally sold as slaves.Particularly noteworthy is the Greek perfect tense (),

which commonly indicates a present condition that is the result of apast action. In the instance before us "the past action refers back tothe event(s) of vv. 7-11; what is in view is the consequence of thearchetypal 's capture and subjection to death at the hands of sin,the condition of the within the epoch of sin and death."

82

As Dunn further contends, the starkness of the description doesnot preclude Paul the believer, even in view of the aorists of vv. 4-6, because, as in chap. 6, the early aorists (6:1-11) are qualifiedlater by the exhortations for the Christian to become what he

80This is not to say that Paul distinguished between "moral" and "ceremonial"

elements in the Torah as given to Israel, asrightlyseen byBruce, "Paul and the LawofMoses," 266; Risnen, Paul, 16, 23-28; id., "Legalism and Salvation by the Law:

f i

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

20/40

216 TRINITY JOURNAL

already is. In fact, it is characteristic of chaps. 6-8 for Paul to statea proposition in seemingly absolute terms and then qualify.Theologically speaking, this is due to the salvation-historical factthat a new beginning has been made in Christ without the totalobliteration of "the present evil age" (Gal 1:4). In other words:

Paul makes an in-principle statement in clear-cut unequivocalterms at the start of each chapter only to go on immediately toqualify it and to blur the clean-cut lines by showing that the realityof the believer's experience is more ambivalent. The "Already"has to be qualified by the "Not yet"; the indicative of a salvation

process begun has to be qualified by the imperative ofa salvationprocess as yet incomplete.83

Paul, then, even as one who has entered the new creation, still feelsthe effects of his past existence in Adam.

84To be sure, "flesh" and

"fleshly" are synonyms of the old creation, the former life inAdam.

85However, that epoch runs until the end of this age when

finally it gives way to a new heavens and earthand believers arenot exempt from its powerful influence from the present till the

conclusion of history.In this light it is not necessary to assume, as many do, that Paulmeans categoricallythat he is , "sold under sin," and cannever perform the will of God.

86This is to press the language

further than its intended meaning,87

particularly given a contextheavily laden with eschatological qualifications.

88He is carnal in

the sense that he still lives in the flesh (this creation) andparticipates in its condition.

89As he relates to the law, which is

^Dunn, Romans, 1.302-3.^Cf. Karlberg, "Romans 7:7-13," 738 5As Barrett puts it, "flesh" is "human nature living in and for this age"

(Romans, 151). Cf. Michel, Rmer, 230.86Cf. Cranfield, Romans, 1.357; Morris, Romans, 291. "The thesis of the

paragraph, am carnal, sold under sin', is stated categorically and withoutqualification, not because this is the whole truth about Paul the Christian, but

because it is the only part of the truth about himself that the lawcan tell him"(Packer, "Wretched Man," 269. Italics mine.). It is because Schlatter failed to seePaul's own qualification that he stressed the preposition , thus making Paul thepowerless slave of sin (cf. 6:17, 20) (Gerechtigkeit, 240-41). Similarly Ridderbos,

referring to 1 Kgs 21:20, contends that "sold under sin" expresses total subjugation to aforeign ruler, under which a slave is brought (Romeinen, 153). He assumes that the"I" of chap 7 is powerless and therefore cannot be the new man in Christ (ibid 157

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

21/40


nothing but spiritual,90 and anticipates the life of the world tocome, he is forced to recognize that in his flesh dwells much that isat variance with this law, which is good in the unqualified sense.The law articulates new creation ideals, which will be realizedperfectly in the consummate phase of salvation. But until then,Paul must view himself as one who falls far short of the ideal. Incompany with certain of his contemporaries,91 Paul's confessionshould "serve as a reminder that it is precisely the saint who ismost conscious of his sinfulness/'92 Longenecker is right that Rom7:14-25, except for the christological emphasis of v. 25, could alsohave been composed by a Jewish reacting nomist.93 However, the

intensity of Paul's testimony is distinguished precisely by theuniqueness of the christological/eschatological situation in which

90The "spiritual" law, according to Calvin, "not only binds the feet and hands,as far as external works are concerned, but it also applies to the affections of theheart, and requires the sincere fear of God" (Romans, 147).

91 J. H. Charlesworth rightly remarks that the awareness of sin did notoriginate with Paul. See Charlesworth's preface to the reissue of Paulandthe DeadSea Scrolls (eds. J. Murphy-O'Connor and J. H. Charlesworth; New York: Crossroad,1990) xii-xiii; id.. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (New York: Doubleday)2.628-30. Among the most relevant refs. are 1QS 11:9-10; 1QH 1:21-27; 4:29-33; 7:16-18; 12:24-31; 13:13-16. Ksemann points out that in the DSS the awareness of sin didnot lead to despair but caused the saints "to arm themselves more firmly for furtherwarfare under the banner of the Torah." However, he wrongly opposes this attitudeto Paul, who, in his view, "depicts the situation of the pious [before Christ] asobjectively a desperate one" (Romans, 203). On the Dead Sea materials in relation toPaul, see Longenecker, Paul, 115; Michel, Rmer, 243-45; W. Grundmann, "TheTeacher of Righteousness of Qumran and the Question of Justification by Faith in theTheology of the Apostle Paul," in Pauland the Dead Sea Scrolls, 87-88; H. Braun"Rmer 7:7-25 und das Selbsverstndnis des Qumran-Frommen," ZTK56 (1959) 1-18(though, in my judgment, Braun incorrectly sets at loggerheads grace [in Paul] andworks [in Qumran] [ibid. 15]). Kuhn ("New Light," 103-4) shows that the universe ofdiscourse assumed by both Qumran and Paul is the same, viz., peirasmos as thesituation of the believer in the world, who is beset by the "two-power system" of sinand the flesh.

92Dunn, Romans, 1.389. As Morris comments, sin is always a problem for theservant of God, and "Paul is concentrating on the problem area" (Romans, 292).Morris's criticism of K. Stendahl ("The Apostle Paul and the IntrospectiveConscience of the West," rep. in Paul Among Jews and Gentiles [Philadelphia:Fortress, 1976] 78-96) is appropriate. In propounding his thesis that Augustine (notPaul) was the first "introspective man of the West," Stendahl was forced to arguethat Paul's autobiographical statements are merely metaphorical for the holinessofthe law, not an index to his own awareness of sin ("We look in vain for a statementi hi h P l ld k b t hi lf t l i " ibid 91) W h

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

22/40

218 TRINITY JOURNAL

he found himself: the new creation has arrived with the firstadvent ofJesus Christ,

94but it has not come in all its fullness.

(3) If v. 14 introduced the principal combatants of the warfare,the spiritual law and Paul's fleshly self, vv. 15-20 portray the

battle itself. It is exegetically important to recognize that the of v. 15 introduces the explanation of what it means to be "soldunder sin/' i.e., "not an abject, unquestioning servitude, but a slaveryunder protest, the frustrated impotence of one who has to live 'innewness of Spirit' while still 'in the flesh'."

95We note only the

leading features of Paul's conflict.(a) Of foremost importance is Paul's desire to do what is right

according to the "good" law of God. Repeatedly and emphaticallyin vv. 15-20 he assures the Romans that he wills to do God's willand that he agrees () with the law (v. 16) and rejoices() in it (v. 22). One cannot read such adulations of thelaw without thinking, e.g., of Ps 19:7-14 and Psalm 119 in itsentirety, particularly w . 16,24,47, 70,77,97, 111, 127,143,159,165,167, and 174, in which David gives voice to his delight in and lovefor the commandments of the Lord. Paul shares this in common withDavid. However, lying behind his willing ego is also the new

covenant/new creation promise ofJer 31:33 and Ezek36:26, that Godwill give his people a heart to do his will.

96The writing of the law

on the heart (Jeremiah) and the impartation of a heart of flesh inplace of the former heart of stone (Ezekiel) is a way of saying thatthe renewed people of God will desire to obey God's law from theheart and will delight in it, in Paul's words, (v. 22).

97As applied to Paul himself, "this delight is not

94Precisely Michel's observation on the difference between Paul and Qumran(Rmer, 245). We might add that eschatological convictions account for thedivergent attitudes toward the law in Paul and the Dead Sea Scrolls respectively.According to Braun, "Das Heil gilt dem Paulus als Befreiung von der Tora, demQumran-Frommen als Befreigung zu der Tora" ("Rmer 7:7-25/' 16. Italics his.). Inthis sense, Longenecker's remark that Qumran parallels Romans 7 and 8 in piety butnot in theology is appropriate (Paul, 96).

95Dunn, Romans, 1.389. Ridderbos (Romeinen, 155) recognizes that w . 15-25describe more precisely what being sold under sin consists of, but he plays down theimportance ofPaul's "willing I" and his delight in the law, which, as we shall seepresently, actually puts Paul within the era ofsalvation.

96Baruch likewise draws on the Jeremiah prophecy. He promises that God'smercy to a disobedient people will take the form ofa new covenant (2:35), in whichY h h hi lf ill t th b di f th ti "I ill i th

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

23/40


peripheral but belongs to that which is deepest and inmost in hismoral and spiritual being/'98

At the base of these prophecies is Moses' prediction that theredeemed Israel will come to love God with all its heart and soul,

when its heart is circumcised by the Lord (Deut 30:1-10). Alongwith Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36-37, Deuteronomy 30 foretells thetime when Israel would put away its idols and worship Yahwehalone. This has extraordinary relevance for Paul, because it wasprecisely his involvement in the idolatryof the first human couple,repeated by Israel, which was condemned by the law. Therefore

when the apostle speaks of doing "good" (vv. 19, 21), he means notgood in the abstract but devotion to the God of the covenant. ForPaul Deuteronomy 30 has been fulfilled with the preaching of the

word of faith (Rom 10:6-13): he now serves the creator rather thanthe creature (1:25). The case is strengthened if the of 7:17 isPaul's characteristic "eschatological now."

99That is to say, in this

era of salvation "I no longer do it [i.e., sin] but sin which dwells inme.

As observed above, one can envisage in Paul a pattern asrespects the law of God and the human heart. According to 2:15,"the workof the law" is "written on the heart" of the Gentiles by

virtue of their existence as God's creatures. Using this as a point ofdeparture, we might say that God's will was "written" on theheart of Adam; and as long as he remained Unfllen, he compliedspontaneously and cheerfully with that will. When heapostatized, however, he ceased to delight in the will of God, thusbequeathing to his posterity an internally written law marred byhis own disobedience and accompanied by an unawareness of thereality of God.100 This in turn necessitated the writing of the lawonce again on the heart of Adam's descendants in a new act ofcreative power. In one sense, the law was rewritten for Israel atSinai. However, this inscription of God's will was quite purposelynot on the heart but on tables of stone, and Israel, as another Adam(the son of God), breaks the covenant and proves to be as unfaithful(apostate) as the first man. The nation's failure, then, called forththe (re)writing of the law, not again on stone but on the "fleshlytables of human hearts" (2 Cor 3:3). Hence when in the newcovenant the law is definitively written on the heart, it is inprinciple a return to the paradisical condition of Adam before hisfall, in other words, the restoration of the image of God, a new

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

24/40

220 TRINITY JOURNAL

law of God (7:14). In this Paul stands in decided contrast to the"mindset of the flesh," which is hostile to God and cannot pleasehim (8:7).101 Because he serves with his mindthe law of God(7:25b), he is not to be classified with those who live according tothe flesh and set their mindson the things of the flesh (8:6). Thenegative side of the same attitude is that Paul hates his sin (7:15b)and is actually incapable of understanding his own actions when hesins (7:15a),

102given that his mind serves the law of God (7:25). It is

precisely Paul's love of the law and his hatred of his sin whichconstitute the hostilities within and eventuate in the agonized cryof frustration, "Wretched man that I am!" (v. 24). As he himselfmost succinctly puts it, "The desires of the flesh are against theSpirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for theseare opposed to each other to prevent you from doing what you

would" (Gal 5:17).103

If we may hear Dunn again: "In Paul we are

10 1See Murray's remarks, Romans, 1257-58. Reflecting on 8:5, 7, Packer deduces:

"Unless we are to suppose that Paul had reversed his anthropology within the spaceofless than ten verses, we are surely forced by this to conclude that in Rom 7:14-25Paul is not, after all, describing a man in Adam, but a man in Christ" ("WretchedMan," 268). Ridderbos's argument to the contrary is not compelling (Romeinen, 167).

102Cranfield, Dunn, and others prefer to take in the sense of"acknowledge," i.e., Paul does not "approve" or "condone" what he does. Murrayopts for the frequent biblical sense of "know" as 'love" or "delight in" (Romans,1.261); Paul, in other words, hates his actions.

i0 3J. M. G. Barclay maintains that the flesh and Spirit antithesis in Galatians

takes us to the heart of Paul's ethics in a particularly direct way: "It reveals thesituation of believers transformed by the power of the new age and enlisted in theservice of the Lord and yet required to live out that service in the midst of the luresand temptations of the old age by a constant renewal of their obedience to the truthin faith" (Obeying the Truth: A Studyof PaulsEthics in Galatians [Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1988] 215).

Wenham ("Christian Life," 83) denies that Gal 5:17 has any bearing on thethesis herein defended. For him the context tells against the assumption that Paul isdescribing a state of moral frustration. Gundry("Frustration," 239), assuming thatthe "I" of Romans 7 inevitably suffers defeat, also denies that 5:17 is parallel: Theformer is a "dismal defeat," while the latter is a "confident exhortation." LikewiseRidderbos, Romeinen, 163. Admittedly, Paul's aim in Galatians 5 is not to describe astate of frustration: his exhortation is a confident one. Nevertheless the text is notonly "a confident call to live by the Spirit" (Wenham) but also a warning that onemay actually engage in the "works of the flesh." V. 17, then, buttresses theexhortation to walkby the Spirit and not gratify the desire of the flesh (v. 16).Moreover Wenham's attempt to make the clause of v. 17 final rather thanconsecutive carries little conviction because, at best, his distinction between "thet d f th t i b t fl h d S i it" d "th t l d

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

25/40


confronted with the sharpness and frustration of the eschatological

tensionthat is, a tension which even if present elsewhere isrendered all the sharper and more poignant by the fact that theindividual (believer) has already begun to experience thepossibilities and promise of a wholly Spirit-directed life/'

10 4

Furthermore without this eschatological tension the parallel withthe rabbinic "evil inclination" (vm is?) is incomplete.

105

Cranfield concurs that in the Christian two factors aresimultaneously operative: the revelation of God's will in the lawand the activity of the Holy Spirit, who clarifies, interprets and

applies the law.It is where these two are present, that is, in the Christian believer,that the corruption of fallen human nature appearsconspicuously. Here battle is joined in earnest in a waythatitisnotpossible before a man issanctified by the HolySpirit. For inthe Christian there is a continual growth in understanding of the

will of God and therefore also an ever-deepening perception ofthe extent to which he falls short ofit; and this growing knowledgeand the deepening hatred of sin which accompanies it are not

merely phenomena of the Christian's human psychology but theworkofthe SpiritofGod.106

(b) It is at this juncture that a phenomenon of the Paulineanthropology enters the picture, i.e., Paul's distinction between the

104Dunn, Romans, 1.389.

105Dunn, ibid., 391. On the rabbinic doctrine ofthe srm up as the impulse in

man to sin, see, e.g., Davies, Paul, 20-35; Porter, "Original Sin," 3-8; G. F. Moore,Judaism in the FirstCenturiesof the Christian Era (3 vols.; Cambridge Mass:Harvard University Press, 1966) 1.479-96; S. Schechter, Aspects ofRabbinicTheology(NewYork: Schocken, 1961) 242-92; C. G. Montefiore and H. Loewe, eds., ARabbinic Anthology(NewYork: Schocken, 1974) 757-811 (see 326-32 for thetradition that the Torah was given to counteract the evil yetzer); E. Urbach, TheSages: Their Concepts andBeliefs (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press,1987) 471-83; Str-B 4.1.466-83. However, the earliest occurrence of ns in extantJewish literature is Sir 15:15 (as translated by), where it means "freewill," or one's decision to be obedient (cf. 1:26; 21:11; T. Asher1). The closest verbalparallel to Sir 15:15a is Pss. Sol. 9:7 (cf. 4 Mace 1:15; CD 3:3; Tob 4:5). On this

meaning of"isr, see J. Hadot, Penchant mauvais etvolont et libre dans la sagesse deBen Sira (Brussels: Presses universitaires de Bruxelles, 1969) 103; G. Maier, Menschund freier Wille (Tbingen: Mohr, 1971) 97; R. E. Murphy, "Yeser in the Qumran

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

26/40

222 TRINITY JOURNAL

"outer man" and the "inner man" (2 Cor 4:16);107

this is the person in

his basic bipartition. However, each of these two essentialcomponents can be analyzed further and designated variously.

The OuterMan The InnerMan

,

It is important, however, to remember that Hebrewanthropology does not divide man into so many compartments, likeslices of a pie; it is rather aspectival, i.e., the whole man can becontemplated from various points of view, whether the specificterms employed, strictly speaking, have to do with the "inner" or

"outer" person. It is this Hebrew aspectival anthropology which iscarried over into Rom 7:14-25:108

the words and phrases used by Paulto depict his self-conflict have reference to his whole person,

which experiences simultaneously the influences of old and newcreations. Hence the personal pronouns and () are used byPaul in his identification with both aeons. On the one hand, "me"is identified with the "flesh" (v. 18), while, on the other, Pauldenies that it is "I" who sins but sin dwelling in him (v. 19; cf. v.25).

It is necessary, though, to introduce a modification into thisbroad scheme. In at least four instances in chap. 7 Paul clearlydepicts the "inner man" as aligned with the law of God (w. 18, 22,23, 25). In 8:6-7 it is the thought processes () of theChristian which are in tune with the Spirit, as opposed to thethought processes of the flesh, which are at enmity with God. It is

just the inner man, as comprised of the ,which is being renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16). To put it anotherway, only the is the subject of renewal in this

period of coinciding ages; the must await theresurrection of the body (cf. Rom 8:10).109

It is true that the outeri i l d i th f tifi ti (R 6 13 19 12 1 2

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

27/40


Cor 7:1): our "members" are to be presented to God as the

implements of righteousness (Rom 6:13). Even so, the "body,""flesh," and "members" of the believer are never unambiguouslyidentified with the new creation; only the consummate phase ofredemption will place the outer man into a position of non-ambivalence with respect to the age to come, when the believer

becomes (1 Cor 15:44-49).This is not to dichotomize rigidly the constituent elements of

human nature; sin, to be sure, has done its damage in the renewedbeliever's inner being (e.g., 2 Cor 7:1). Nevertheless the

characteristic Pauline doctrine is that the inner man isunambiguously a participant in the new creation, while the outerman is caught up in the ambivalence of the overlapping ages,

which is why "flesh" almost always has negative connotations110

and why in 7:18 the flesh is said to be the "me" in which no goodthing dwells. "Body" likewise exhibits a similar usage.

111

Although the body will be resurrected and then take its place inthe consummated new creation, until that time ambivalence stillattaches itself to body, and for that reason even is never used

in a manner which is unambiguous with regard to the new creation.These data of the Pauline anthropology go far in arguing thatthe subject matter of Rom 7:14-25 is that of man in Christ whoexperiences the most radical cleavage of his humanity possible,the wresting of the constituent elements of his personhood.

112On the

one side, the flesh in particular has become the "headquarters" ofsin;

113on the other side, the inward man, though willing to do the

will of God as a participant in the new covenant,114

is prevented bythe counteraction of his flesh. Such a man divided can only cry out:

11 0Dunn ("Jesus Flesh and Spirit," 44-48) contends that "flesh" always bears

negative connotations. However, in Rom 1:4; 9:5; 11:14 it simply means Jewishhumanity.

mA s Dunn ("Rom 7:14-25," 266) points out, though "body" in itselfis a more or

less neutral term, it can become negative by virtue of qualifying phrases such as"body ofsin." See further his remarks on the relation of "flesh" and "body" (Romans,1.391). We note, however, Gundry's qualification that Paul never uses as a

synonym for in a hamartiological sense (Soma in Biblical Theology [SNTSMS29; Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1976] 43).

112Cf P Althaus as quoted by Kertelge "berlegungen " 110 though Althaus

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

28/40

224 TRINITY JOURNAL

"Wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of

this death!"115

(c) Some further attention must be given to Paul's admissionthat he is fleshly. "Flesh" in Paul's anthropology has, of course,

been explored many times. Our particular interest is in itssalvation-historical associations as they have a bearing on theinterpretation of Rom 7:1-25. From the vantage point of redemptivehistory, "flesh," as a generalization, is concerned with theindividual, but the individual as he relates to the old creation.

116

The force of is precisely that it denotes an unavoidableattachment and tie to this age which must perish beforeredemption can be complete (Rom 8:11, 23), and which thereforedenotes not merely a pre-Christian state. . . . It is precisely thisinextricable attachedness to this age concerning which Paulmakes the judgment "no good thing."

117

Paul, as one born of woman, has entered the present creationdominated by Adam's headship (Rom 5:12-21). By birth he is"flesh" and must remain so until his glorification in the image of

Christ; until he is revealed as one of the sons of God (Rom 8:19), he"groans inwardly" as he anticipates the redemption of his body(8:23). Since he has participated in this creation, his body is dead

because of sin (8:10). Thus Paul's confession that he is fleshly, soldunder sin, and that in his flesh dwells no good thing is an avowalthat he, along with those he represents, is a victim of sin and mustcontinue to experience sin's ravages as long as this era of humanhistory continues. Therefore during the period of concurrent ages"flesh" characterizes Paul and all like him. Rather than being a

sign of his .pre-Christian state, "flesh" within the present setting isindicative ofPaul's continued belongingness-as a whole persontothe present evil age, which has not yet been superseded by the ageto come in its fullness.

118

But Paul is not only flesh, he is also a man of the Spirit. It is, ofcourse, this claim that is the bone of contention in theinterpretation of our passage. It is true that Paul does not say in somany words that he is "Spirit." However, his self-assessmentthroughout Rom 7:14-25 is to the effect that he is squarely within

the era of the Spirit; he has been enrolled in the new covenant,proof of which is his delight in the law of God, his desire to doG d' ill d hi h t d f i S h d t ti l l

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

29/40


compelling if we allow Rom 7:14-25 its legitimate place within theoverall flow of thought from chap. 5 through chap. 8. That is tosay, in principle Paul has left the old creation. Once he was"ungodly," a "sinner/' an "enemy" of God and under "wrath," butnow he has been reconciled to God through the death of his Son andrejoices in the hope of sharing the glory of God (5:1-11). Formerlyhe was in union with the first Adam, but now he has embracedanother, the Last Adam (5:18.). Consequently, the same Paul hasbeen raised in newness of life, and his former willing bondage to sinhas been terminated (6:1-23). At one time he was bound to the lawand obliged to obey it. Now, however, he is married to Christ andis free from the law; he no longer serves in the oldness of the letter,i.e., the Torah as representative of the old creation, but in thenewness of the Spirit (7:1-6). To be sure, the full manifestation ofGod's new creative purposes lies in the future; the sons of God areyet to be revealed, and the creation itself is to be set free from itsbondage to decay (8:18-24). Until then, Paul must undergo thetension resultant from the side-by-side existence of two creations(7:14-25), with the law continuing to perform the same function inPaul as it did when he lived exclusively in the old creation (7:7-12).

It is because Paul is Spirit as well as flesh that our approach toRom 7:14-25 receives an important qualification. As encapsulatedby the parallel of Gal 5:16ff., Paul indeed affirms that the twodimensions of his being run counter to each other and prevent hisliving wholly in one or the other, with the consequence that "thebeliever finds himself torn in two by conflicting desires andimpulses, and his experience as a man of Spirit in the flesh is one ofcontinuing frustration."119 However, the impression perhaps hasbeen left that this passage, thus interpreted, voices the totality ofwhat it means to be a Christian; hence the view herein proposedhas been rejected because, as the assumption goes, it gives rise to aninadequate Christian self-image.120

It is in this circumstance that the connection of 7:14-25 with 8:1-17 must be given its due weight. On the heels of 7:25, 8:1 declaresthat there is no condemnation for those in Christ. In other words, itis precisely the presence of the struggle which is indicative of lifewithin an individual; such a one is not abandoned entirely to theflesh where death only reigns.121 "Therefore/' i.e., because there iswarfare within, "there is no [eschatological] condemnation for

122

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

30/40

226 TRINITY JOURNAL

paragraphs of chap. 8, it becomes equally evident that the promiseof no condemnation is valid only for those who walk by the Spirit

and put to death the deeds of the body; it is only the mind that isset on the things of the Spirit which can please God. Thus, saysPaul, we are debtors not to the flesh but to the Spirit. TheChristian is led by the Spirit and is the son of God; he anticipatesthe glory of God as a fellow heir of Christ. It is, then, the overflowof Paul's thought from 7:14-25 into chap. 8 which places asafeguard over our conclusions respecting the character of theChristian life.123 To adapt Barrett's observation, 7:14-25 does nottell the whole story of what it means to be a Christian but is

written from within the Christian life to account for the role ofChristianity in our experience.124

Consequently, there can be no justification for sin; nor are we leftfloundering in the mire of defeat, depression, and self-pity, asthough victory over sin, at least in some measure, must remain anunknown commodity to us, because "those who belong to Christ Jesushave crucified the flesh with its passions and desires" (Gal 5:24).125

Gal 5:24 is, in fact, directly relevant, coming, as it does, as theconclusion of the parnesis of 5:16-23. V. 16 is an exhortation to

walk by the Spirit and not gratify the desires of the flesh. Such anadmonition is necessary because of the unceasing conflict of fleshand Spirit during the course of this age: "For the desires of theflesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit areagainst the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to preventyou from doing what you would" (v. 17). This is followed by arenewed reminder that the Christian is led by the Spirit and is notunder the law, i.e., the old creation as governed by "the elements ofthe world" (4:3, 9; Col 2:8, 20);126 hence the believer possesses the

God (v. 33 = Isa 50:8-9), those who now groan inwardly as they await theredeinption of their bodies (v. 23).

12Cranfield is convinced, rightly in my view, that we can do justice to the textof Paul "only if we resolutely hold chapters 7 and 8 together . . . and see in them nottwo successive stages but two different aspects, two contemporaneous realities, of theChristian life, both of which continue so long as the Christian is in the flesh"(Romans, 1.356). Regarding the expression "carnal, sold under sin," Cranfieldremarks that understood in isolation from the teaching of chaps. 6,8, and 12ff., thesewords would certainly leave a thoroughly wrong impression of the Christian life.

But, he says, "taken closely together with it, they bring out forcefully an aspect ofthe Christian life which we gloss over to our undoing" (ibid., 357-58).

124Barrett Romans 153

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

31/40


crucial advantage in his "struggle with sin" (Heb 12:4). ThereafterPaul enumerates the "works of the flesh" as over against the "fruitof the Spirit"127 and completes his series of "indicatives" with thesalvation-historical fact that those who belong to Christ havecrucified the flesh,

128or, as he says earlier, their verypersons have

been crucified with Christ, and Christ lives in them (2:20). ForPaul, then, the strife of Spirit and flesh is not grounds for despairand defeat but for perseverance. As R. Y. K. Fung comments, "Thisconditional sentence [i.e., v. 18] clearly shows that Paul does notregard the believer simplyas a helpless spectator or an unwillingpawn in the fierce battle between the flesh and the Spirit; theassumption is rather that the Christian can overcome the flesh bysiding with the Spirit."

129

If it be objected that these are irreconcilable polar opposites,the reply must be that such is precisely the paradox of theChristian, who is weakand strong at the same time (2 Cor 12:10).

130

Thisparadox is the genius of Rom 7:14-25: the Christian isfleshand Spirit at the same time.

131Equally important, however, is the

recognition that Paul's confession of carnality, his inability to do

from Adam, as opposed to the "new creation," which owes its existence to the LastAdam. then would underscore the solidarity ofIsrael and its Torah with therest of humanitya rather startling proposition to afirst-centuryJew.

127"The fruit of the Spirit" is primarilylove and its attendant attitudes, which

distinguish the Christian particularly from the Circumcision Party. See my littlestudy, "Bearing One Another's Burdens. Part One," Reformation Today115 (May-June 1990) 26-30, and, at more length, the second installment of "The Obedience ofFaith in the Letter to the Romans" (n. 34 above).

128Rom 6:5-11 is directly parallel in that the believer, as Christ, has died to

sin, i.e., the old creation as ravaged by sin.12^Fung, Galatians, 251. "How can one who exists temporally in 'the presentevil age' nevertheless enjoy deliverance from it and live here and now the life of theage to come? By the aid of the indwelling Spirit, who not only makes effective inthe believer the saving benefits of Christ's passion but also secures to him in advancethe blessings of the age to come" (Bruce, "Paul and the Law of Moses," 274).Hoekema's objection that Romans 7 makes no mention ofthe Spirit (Christian, 63-64)does not make due allowance for the sweep of Romans 5-8.

13 0'This is the enigmatical in the Christian life. The Christian is at the same

time 'free from sin,' and yet subject to the condition of sin. He is not 'carnallyminded,' and yet the flesh sets its mark on all that he does. No corresponding

enigma rests on the natural man. There is a natural concurrence between will andaction. The natural man is 'carnally minded'; and, in agreement therewith, hisconduct is also carnal" (Nygren, Romans, 299).

131

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

32/40

228 TRINITY JOURNAL

what he desires and the resultant cry of frustration in 7:24, must beunderstood in relative, not absolute, terms. His outpouring of soul,dramatic though it is, cannot be construed as objective evidence thathe has not and cannot attain to measures of victory over sin. Hisorientation is to the future; he longs for total conformity to theimage of Christ (8:29), when his body is redeemed (8:23).

132But

until that time arrives, he can only lament that he falls far shortof the "good" and "spiritual" law. That Paul is looking forward isconfirmed by the question of 7:24b: "Who shall deliver me from the

body of this death?" The answer, of course, is that God will do sothrough Christ (v. 25a), when Paul's adoption is complete (8:23).

C PAUL'S SUMMARY ANDCONCLUSION(VV. 21-25)

(1) These verses are perhaps the most problematic portion ofchap. 7 because of the difficulty of determining what is meant bythe repeated use of .

133According to v. 21, Paul finds

. In v. 22 it is clear enough that is the law of God.However, v. 23 speaks of the in Paul's members

which wages war against the of his mind, taking him

captive to the of sin. V. 25, in its epitome of 7:14-25, posesPaul's essential tension as the service of the of God with hismind vs. the service of the of sin with his flesh.

Two options are open to commentators: either Paul intends as the law of God consistently or he juxtaposes God's lawwith the "principle" of sin. Dunn argues for the former.

134When in

v. 21 Paul concludes , says Dunn, he means"this is what I find the law to be in experience," i.e., "willing aloneis not enough: I still am unable to translate what the law defines as

good into practice."135 Accordingly, both the law of Paul's mind andthe "other law," which assails it ( = "the law of sin") (v. 23), arethe Torah as experienced differently.

136In so describing the law,

Paul purposely uses provocative language "in order to make clearthe two-sidedness of the law in the epoch of overlap between sinand grace."

137Others, however, argue for in vv. 21,23,25 as a

working principle or observed regularity,138

with the result thatGod's law is in conflict with the "law" of indwelling sin. In thiscase it is possible that he uses ironically, with the law of

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

33/40


God and the "law" of sin both commanding him and demanding

obedience.

139

Whichever view of one opts for, the main point emergeswith clarity: Paul's will and mind are joined together in mortalcombat with sin (or "the law of sin") and the flesh. As in thepreceding verses, old and new creations are pitted against eachother, with Paul's true self aligned with the latter, while sin andhis flesh are allied to the former. As a man divided, Paul isconfronted with competing and conflicting forces and must remain sountil God in Christ delivers him from "the body of this death."

That he contemplates himself as a man who has entered theeschatological era is supported by a consideration of thealternative interpretation. Which "man," according to thatapproach, is intended: Gentile man or Jewish man? As a rule, theformer never came in contact with the law as delivered to theJewish nation. At most one can argue only for the condemnation ofconscience as it bore witness to the law written on the heart (Rom2:14-16).

140Yet this is improbable, because in Romans 7 locutions are

used for the law that would have been unfamiliar to Gentile ears

and yet very familiar to Jewish ones: his dialogue is with Israel.As for Jewish man himself, there is indeed evidence that heexperienced what Paul articulates in Rom 7:14-25; but in everyinstance it is the righteous, who have been faithful to Yahweh scovenant. See Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:6-37; Dan 9:3-19; Psalm 44; Prayerof Azariah; Tob 3:1-6; 1 Esd 8:74-90; Bar 1:15-3:8; 1QS l:24b-2:l;11:9-10; 1QH 1:21-27; 4:29-33; 7:16-18; 12:24-31; 13:13-16; CD 20:28-30.

141

13 9"The law of sin may be conceived ofas not only impelling to action that is

antithetical to the law of God but also as dictating such action" (Murray, Romans,1265). Kuss calls the "other law" a "Herrschaftssystem" (Rmerbrief, 2.456).

40Cranfield/ Dunn, Barrett, Wilckens, Theissen, Zeller, and others citeclassical authors who admit to internal struggles of mind and conscience (Bornkammeven refers to Herman Melville's Bitty Budd ["Sin, Law and Death," 103, n. 29]).However, Romans 7 has the Jewish law specifically in view, so that while thesetestimonies are interesting and to some degree helpful (see below), they are notdirectly parallel. The most relevant extra-biblical sources are Qumran and

Apocalyptic.141Cf. the further refis, in Zeller, Rmer, 143-44. One looks virtually in vain inboth pre- and post-destruction Judaism for evidence of Jewish man condemned by the

7/29/2019 Rom 7-14-25-a

34/40

230 TRINITY JOURNAL

(2) In this conflict between the two laws (however interpreted),

Paul acknowledges defeat: "I see in my members another law at warwith the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sinwhich dwells in my members'' (v. 23). Admittedly, his figure isstrong, even extreme, because it speaks not simply of battle but alsoof capture (). As such, the starkness of themetaphor corresponds to that of v. 14b. However, there are twocounterbalancing considerations. For one, as noted above,throughout chaps. 6-8 a pattern is observable: propositions areinitially stated in categorical terms but later qualified. The

salvation-historical indicatives of 6:2-4 are matched by theimperatives of 6:12-23 and 8:1-13. Likewise the indicatives of 7:1-13 are qualified by the realism of7:14-25.

In the second place, to reiterate from before, Paul'sintentionally stark language is not meant to be taken in absoluteterms. "What is in view is not, of course, a final state, any morethan in v. 14b, but an ongoing experience of warfare and defeat (notethe tenses) in which the final outcome of the war in which theindividual finds himself is by no means yet settled/'

142Moreover

"were defeat the only outcome of every battle, or were defeat notexperienced and recognized as defeat, the speaker could have noneof the hope which Paul goes on to express" [i.e., in v. 24].

143

(3) The paradox of Paul's existence is highlighted by the mostdramatic outcry of the chapter: "Wretched man that I am! Whoshall deliver me from the body of this death? Thanks be to Godthrough Jesus Christ our Lord" (vv. 24-25a). On the one side, he is a"wretched man." is a term whose nuances are varied,as attested by the usages in the LXX,

144Josephus,

145and Philo.

146It

can refer to a condition of hopelessness and futility, as in Wis 3:11and 13:10 (referring to those who reject wisdom and engage inidolatry). But it can also describe "the state of a man who is pulledin two directions"

147because the power of the flesh compels him to

idolatrous courses, in spite of his commitment

Documents

Rom 7-14-25-a