ECT The Man of Romans 7 is a Believer

[glorydaz]

Romans 7 is the issue of what awaits the Believer who attempts to live unto God in his own strength; the very strength the Law had been meant to not only prove is not possible in one's own strength in that one is weak through the flesh, but given what the Law had been meant to prove is set off instead - what attempting to serve God in one's own strength sets off instead....

It sets off the sin in the flesh - so that ye cannot do the things that ye would (cannot serve God).

If Christ is the believer's life, I'm unsure what a believer "trying to live for God in his own strength" even means.

Exactly. That's the difference between the workers and the men of faith....the saved and the unsaved. Romans 7 and Romans 8.

Romans 10:3-4 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.​

 

[glorydaz]

Yes, I was wondering where your greasy grace 'what sin?'

reinforcements are (2 Pe 2:1).


See:

Ro 7:18 McGee, MacArthur

I see....nothing worth reading.

 

[serpentdove]

[Ro 7:18 McGee, MacArthur]I see....nothing worth reading.

Mk 6:11 :mario:

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Note the word "captivity". Are you captive to your sinful flesh? I sure hope not.

Christians become captive to their flesh when they refuse to surrender to Christ in some way or other.

Paul was speaking of how when he did good that his flesh gloried in it, until he gave in to the conviction by the Holy Spirit that it was deep sin.

Many believers on this board do the same thing in glorying in their posts which they thing so wonderful.

LA

 

[musterion]

Actually, Musty, I think you're making a distinction that Paul didn't. If you take that statement at face value, you have to admit he was thanking God that we serve sin in the flesh. Paul quite often makes an exclamation (like a Praise God) and then adds a summation of his previous teaching.

I addressed that. You don't have to agree but you asked what I thought and I offered it.

Paul says to reckon yourself so....dead to sin. Sin has no more dominion over you.

Yep. But it's still very much in our members. That's what ch. 7 is partly about.

I believe what you're saying gives man an excuse to continue to walk according to the old man, which is just what we're not to do.

False. That is absolutely not what I'm saying. Paul flatly precludes that in ch. 6. I don't expect this kind of thing from you -- are you now going to tell me that because I believe in unconditional eternal security in Christ, I also believe we're free to sin all we want?

Nor do we have to.

That's right, we don't have to. I've never believed otherwise.

I see most of Romans 7 as an aside....specifically to show the man under the law why the law is not compatible with the spiritual life.

An aside? When he opens by saying he doesn't want his brothers to be ignorant of something? Whatever Paul says that in his letters he's about to share something very very important, not an aside.

To claim sin still resides in our flesh is contrary to what Paul teaches.

No, that's what he said. But tell me. Where then DOES the believer's capacity to still sin reside?

We do not HAVE to do anything wrong.

True but that is a separate point.

We are the servants of righteousness. It's only when we fall for satan's lie or give ourselves an excuse (I can't help myself) that we do that which is not profitable.

Romans 6:17-18 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.​

Do you believe in eradication? That sounds like what you're driving at.

 

[musterion]

Why is Paul asking "who shall deliver me"? Why is there no mention of the indwelling Holy Spirit in the whole of chapter 7?

I believe that only a regenerated person can feel plagued and trapped by the flesh, as Paul is describing there, because only a believer knows it's no longer who or what he truly is, now that he's been made alive in Christ.

I believe that an unbeliever, someone without the life of Christ, cannot know that particular struggle. They have no reason to know it. True, they can dislike this or that aspect of themselves. They can have a guilty conscience over this or that act. They can know conviction. But they still love themselves more than God. They do not loathe sin AS sin the way the regenerate do because the unsaved have nothing within them to contrast it with.

That's what Paul describes in ch. 7. That internal utter hatred of the old man AS NOT WHO THEY REALLY ARE ANYMORE, that longing to be released from it (which will come with the new body) is unknown and unknowable to those without the life of Christ because there's no new man within them to hate it.

Only a believer can know this struggle...and even then, not every believer lives up to it even though they ARE believers. Just look at Corinth.

 

[musterion]

Also, have you noticed where Paul spoke in present tense in Romans 7?

Paul speaks of the past up to verse 11, where he describes how sin took advantage of the law.

From v. 14 onward, Paul's struggle and agony with flesh is described in present tense, just like his thanking God is present tense.

Don't know about you but I think that might mean something.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

Also, have you noticed where Paul spoke in present tense in Romans 7?

Paul speaks of the past up to verse 11, where he describes how sin took advantage of the law.

From v. 14 onward, Paul's struggle and agony with flesh is described in present tense, just like his thanking God is present tense.

Don't know about you but I think that might mean something.

Ch7 can not be understood apart from ch8. 7 shows the futileness of the flesh and Ch. 8 contrasts that with the victory over the flesh by the presence of the Holy Spirit.

 

[serpentdove]

Ch7 can not be understood apart from ch8. 7 shows the futileness of the flesh and Ch. 8 contrasts that with the victory over the flesh by the presence of the Holy Spirit.

The believer :straight: has intimacy with the Father (Ro 8:15–16). The unbeliever :reals: and make-believer

do not (1 Co 2:14).

 

[musterion]

Ch7 can not be understood apart from ch8. 7 shows the futileness of the flesh and Ch. 8 contrasts that with the victory over the flesh by the presence of the Holy Spirit.

There is no ch. 7 or 8 when you think about it.

 

[Danoh]

There is no ch. 7 or 8 when you think about it.

Yes and no, as there is a three in one dynamic being laid out...

Romans 6: Dead to Sin.

Romans 7: Dead to the Law.

Romans 8: Dead to the Flesh.

 

[musterion]

But it's a letter. I typically don't use chapter breaks when I write letters. Or end punctuation

 

[Danoh]

But it's a letter. I typically don't use chapter breaks when I write letters. Or end punctuation

When was the last time you wrote a letter not only that long, but that laid out an entire Epistemology?

Lol - I'm afraid you and I are at a standstill again...Romans is far more than say hello to so and so...

Far more...

 

[musterion]

Paul didn't write with chapter breaks or verse numbers. Their employ is artificial and often deemphasizes or skews the writer's point.

 

[glorydaz]

Because the Law is spiritual; the flesh - being that it is the flesh - is not subject to the Law; it does at it pleases.

...

Actually, the flesh does whatever the man in charge tells it to do. There are two men...the old man and the new man. The old man is put off when we are crucified with Christ.

 

[glorydaz]

Ignorance always says that.

For it is obvious in Scripture that Paul himself had also had his moments in the fleshly mind's perspective.

Some examples?

 

[glorydaz]

I addressed that. You don't have to agree but you asked what I thought and I offered it.



Yep. But it's still very much in our members. That's what ch. 7 is partly about.



False. That is absolutely not what I'm saying. Paul flatly precludes that in ch. 6. I don't expect this kind of thing from you -- are you now going to tell me that because I believe in unconditional eternal security in Christ, I also believe we're free to sin all we want?

It saddens me that you think I meant any disrespect by what I said. I certainly didn't mean your understanding of Romans 7 would give YOU an excuse to sin. I know you don't think that.

Turns out, I was hoping you wouldn't bow out before we could really discuss a couple of things....and here it looks like I've run you off already. This is truly one of my favorite sections of Romans and everytime someone brings it up, it seems to end the same way....nowhere. :sigh:

That's right, we don't have to. I've never believed otherwise.

Right. So believers aren't "captive", are they?

An aside? When he opens by saying he doesn't want his brothers to be ignorant of something? Whatever Paul says that in his letters he's about to share something very very important, not an aside.

Oh, then "aside" may have been the wrong term. What I meant, was he was turning specifically to his brothers under the law and explaining how the law works with sin (it awakens sin - stirs it up). It's bondage instead of liberty. It's purposes are not what those who serve it think it is.

No, that's what he said. But tell me. Where then DOES the believer's capacity to still sin reside?

In their failure to reckon themselves dead to sin.

Do you believe in eradication? That sounds like what you're driving at.

Not sure what that is....or what you mean by it.

I'm simply talking about how Paul is explaining the law's role in sin.

 

[glorydaz]

I believe that an unbeliever, someone without the life of Christ, cannot know that particular struggle. They have no reason to know it. True, they can dislike this or that aspect of themselves. They can have a guilty conscience over this or that act. They can know conviction. But they still love themselves more than God. They do not loathe sin AS sin the way the regenerate do because the unsaved have nothing within them to contrast it with.

There, that's what I see the Jews (under the law) had. The conviction of knowing the good and not being able to do it. That's what is so frustrating about serving the law of God. Man was not meant to serve the Law. Paul was arguing to the Jews, who thought he was teaching the law was bad, that the Law was good, but it could not give life etc. It actually gave sin power over a man. "I do what I hate and don't do what I would". Romans 7:15

Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.​

So the unregenerate Jews served the law of God with their mind, but they had no power within (as you said).

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Glory,
How does this verse fit your theology--

Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

There is no ch. 7 or 8 when you think about it.

Yes, Paul paints beautiful pictures of truth in His letters, with Romans being the masterpiece. One stroke of a painting does not tell the whole story... Romans, maybe above all other books in the New Testament, needs to be seen as a whole with its exhaustively complete theology. A task that can not be done apart from the Holy Spirit's assistance.