Sunday School Notes: Romans 7:13-25

¹³ Then was [this] good [thing] death to me? Certainly not! But sin, in order that it might be revealed [as] sin, accomplished death in me through the good [thing], so that the sin may become exceedingly sinful through the commandment. ¹⁴ For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am fleshly, having been sold under sin. ¹⁵ For that which I accomplish I do not understand; for what I wish, this I do not practice, but what I hate, this I do. ¹⁶ But if I do that which I do not wish, I agree with the Law that [it is] good. ¹⁷ Yet now I am no longer accomplishing it, but the sin dwelling in me. ¹⁸ For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is in my flesh, for the willingness is present in me, but accomplishing the good [is] not. ¹⁹ For the good I wish, I do not do, but the evil I do not wish, this I do. ²⁰ But if I do that which I do not wish, I am no longer accomplishing it, but the sin dwelling in me. ²¹ I find, therefore, the law that evil is present in me, the one who wishes to do good. ²² For I delight in the Law of God according to the inner man, ²³ but I see another law in my parts waging war against the law of my mind and taking me captive in the law of sin, the one being in my parts. ²⁴ Miserable man I [am]! Who shall rescue me out of this body of death? ²⁵ Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! Therefore then, I myself with my mind serve the law of God, but with my flesh the law of sin.

Paul continues his defense of the Law. Up through chapter 6, Paul has been telling the church in Rome–in particular those Christians converted from Judaism–that the Law is insufficient for salvation. There is no benefit to be gained before God by the fact that they have the Law and that they attempt to keep it. No amount of zeal and devotion to the Law will earn them the righteousness God requires to be made right with Him. In fact, rather than helping them escape the due punishment for sin, the Law makes them even more guilty before God (5:20). We suggested this is because prior to the giving of the Law, they were aware of right and wrong, and culpable for their sin, but they didn’t recognize the source of that Law. Now they know, not only that they sin, but what the sins are, and against Whom they are sinning. So when they sin, their crime is even more heinous than before.

This argument makes it appear that Paul is anti-Law, saying that the Law, although given by God, is a bad thing. Especially if the Law is something he says leads to death, and the slavery to which Christ broke through his death and resurrection. However, in chapter 7, Paul makes it quite clear that the Law is not sin (7:7), and that the Law is good, holy, and righteous, and is not to blame for spiritual death. And to further make this point, he describes what appears to be a personal battle between his mind, or “inner man,” that knows the Law, and his outward flesh that rebels against it. His point is that the very fact there is this conflict between what he knows he ought to do (i.e., the Law), and the sin his body commits, demonstrates that the Law is good and he knows it.

There is a long-standing debate over this passage, however, and it revolves around the conflict Paul describes: is Paul here referring to himself in his regenerate state, or his unregenerate state? In other words, is he describing himself in his previous life as Saul the Pharisee, or in his current state as a Christian? Here are some of the strongest arguments I have seen for both sides:

Paul the Christian

• the passage is in the present tense, and there appears to be no indication in the text that he’s referring to himself in his former life (as with e.g., Ephesians 2, where he clearly distinguishes past behavior with present).
• Paul says he hates his sin (7:15)–unbelievers don’t hate their sin (see Romans 1).
• the Paul of this passage rejoices in the Law, and recognizes his sinful condition, and his need for a savior (7:24), things the unbeliever wouldn’t do.

Saul the Pharisee

• in verse 14 Paul describes himself as “sold under sin.” The Greek verb (pipraskô) was used with regard to selling into slavery. Yet Paul has said that in Christ we are set free from bondage to sin (6:22, and also coming up in 8:2).
• The way Paul describes the sin “dwelling” in him as having control over his actions does not sound like one who is under the lordship of Christ and in slavery to him.
• If the Christian is a new creation in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17), and has the Spirit of God dwelling in him (Romans 8:9), how can he say that good does not dwell in him if he is speaking as a Christian? (v. 18)

Before studying this passage, I was convinced that the first option, Paul the Christian, was the right way to understand it. Upon further study and reflection, however, I’m not so sure. Without taking away the points made in favor of Paul the Christian (and I think the first argument is probably the strongest), I shall explain why, and leave it to you to determine where you stand (feel free to put forward arguments in the comments).

The first major stumbling block for me was that phrase “sold under sin.” It’s very hard to get around that, especially in the context of this chapter, where Paul has been identifying slavery to sin as something from which Christ came to set us free. Furthermore, Paul will emphasize this point in 8:2.

Also, Paul has just been discussing in autobiographical terms the way the Law functioned in his life, prior to Christ. He wouldn’t have known he was coveting except the Law told him that’s what it was, and the fact that he coveted was not the Law’s fault, but sin taking advantage of the Law to produce covetousness in his life (see last week for a fuller discussion of this). Granted, he was clearly speaking in the past tense there, but there is a consistency with the autobiographical nature of the discussion.

Prior to Christ, Paul was not simply an unbeliever: he was a Jew–a Pharisee, no less, well-versed in the Law. Zealous for the Law, in fact. Even though he didn’t know Christ, surely he could still have loved the Law? Love for the Law does not save–isn’t this one of the points he’s been trying to make with the Jewish Christians? The fact that Paul knew the Law as a Pharisee, and strove to keep it, and even lamented at his inability to keep it, doesn’t necessarily imply he must have been saved. Martin Luther had a similar experience as an Augustinian monk. He was a good Roman Catholic, doing his penances, saying his prayers, and doing all the work he knew he needed to do, but still felt inadequate. His conscience nagged him that he should be doing more, until he encountered the gospel message in Romans 1:17 and was saved. If Paul has his Jewish Christian audience in mind here–those that were still looking to the Law, as well as Christ, for their hope of redemption, a reference to his former Pharisaical life would not be inappropriate, and would perhaps serve as a useful point of identification.

So, I think Saul the Pharisee could have known God’s righteous demands in the Law, loved God’s Law, desired to keep it, but found himself inadequate. Indeed, is the lament of verse 24 the cry of the redeemed soul who knows that his Redeemer lives? When we, as Christians, sin, do we cry out “who will rescue me from this body of death?” or do we go to the one we know can save us, and has saved us? In fact, I think you could argue that verse 25 is redeemed Paul supplying the answer, before giving a summary statement of the passage which segues neatly into chapter 8.

The argument for Saul the Pharisee is by no means flawless. As I said, I think the use of the present tense is confusing. But I think we have to look at the message of this passage, how it fits with what has gone before, and how it fits with what’s to come. From that perspective, I think it’s more consistent to say that Paul is speaking of his prior life as a Pharisee than his present condition as a Christian.

There are a couple of practical points from this passage that I think we need to emphasize. First, the struggle with sin Paul describes is not unknown to the Christian–even if Paul is speaking of his pre-Christian self. Christians sin, and Paul, along with other New Testament writers, elsewhere acknowledges that we sin and need to repent of that sin. Christians battle against temptation, and often fail. But while this struggle is a source of despair for those who don’t know Christ, for the Christian, it reminds us of our frailty, and drives us back to the cross daily.

Second, the debate over whether this is Saul the Pharisee or Paul the Christian is not a critical debate, but I think it can affect how we see ourselves in Christ. If one takes the position that this is Paul the Christian, then we have to acknowledge that we are still in bondage to sin, and that sin still dwells in us and has a controlling power in our lives. Again, this seems to run contrary to what Paul has been saying. On the other hand, if this is Saul the Pharisee, it is a reminder that without Christ, we are in this state of slavery to sin and under sin’s influence regardless of what we know we ought to do. And this sets us up for chapter 8, where Paul speaks of the Christian as set free from the power of sin and death to walk in the Spirit and be led by the Spirit. We are not hopeless sinners crying out “Who will save me?” Rather, we are sinners who have been set free from the power of sin and able to cry out “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!”

As usual, please make use of the comments to discuss this passage, and offer any further thoughts or insights, or to ask questions. Mike, my co-leader, wasn’t able to be with us this past Sunday, so we will probably re-cap this next time to allow him to share his thoughts. However, we do also intend to start chapter 8.