Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

See more
See less

Is Romans 7 About Paul?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is Romans 7 About Paul?

    Are we reading autobiography or not?

    The link can be found hereWe often have this view of Jews wrestling under the Law like it was the Islamic system and just hoping that they were good enough to merit the favor of God. They weren't. In fact, the larger question for them was not their faithfulness to the covenant, but God's. After all, they had done what they were to do, and yet here they were in their land which is being dominated by these wicked Gentiles from Rome. It's too easy to take a Reformation scenario and project it back onto Judaism.

    Paul has no wrestling going on in Philippians 3. We don't see any death when the law comes. In fact, how can we even speak of Paul having life apart from the Law? That would not make sense to a Jew. Your whole life was the Law.

    In fact, there's a great danger that if we identify so much with Romans 7, we will fail to identify with Romans 8, and Romans 8 is all about how we live by the Spirit instead of by the Law. If we are living by the Law, we are not living by the Spirit. If we are not living by the Spirit, then the great promises of Romans 8 won't apply to us and we can miss out on the victory over sin.

    I don't want to scare anyone though into thinking that I am calling into question your salvation. Not at all. I am calling into question though your identification. Do you identify with Romans 7 or Romans 8, and Romans 8 indicates at the end that we still struggle, but who can bring a charge against us?

    So what is going on in Romans 7 if it's not autobiographical?

    There are many ideas, but I think Paul is speaking as Adam who he has mentioned in Romans 5. Ben Witherington in What's In The Word? points out that for the rabbis, coveting was also the sin in the garden. This would mean that Adam had life, and then came the law and through that he fell into sin and died. Now the question for Paul's audience is if they identify with Adam or with Christ.

    It's also your question today.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters

  • #2
    Hello, brother Nick!

    First off, nice post.

    I want to ask you a question about that theory of interpretation. In "The Resurrection of the Son of God", Mr. Wright mentions (in a footnote, lol) this interpretation of Romans 7: Paul speaks from the perspective of a non-Christian Jew (in hindsight of course).

    If I may assume that you know that theory also, then I ask: in your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the Adam model versus the Jew model?

    For example, I think the Jew model explains a little better the fact that Paul quotes a commandment from the Law (it bugs me in the Adam model), while the Adam model can explain why it was that commandment in particular (it bugs me somewhat in the Jew model).

    What do you think?
    We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore on Christ's behalf: 'Be reconciled to God!!'
    - 2 Corinthians 5:20.
    In deviantArt: ll-bisto-ll.deviantart.com
    Christian art and more: Christians.deviantart.com

    Comment


    • #3
      I know about both. I just think Witherington made a better case with the more specific commandment and with Adam being mentioned, but it could cover both to some degree.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Bisto View Post
        Hello, brother Nick!

        First off, nice post.

        I want to ask you a question about that theory of interpretation. In "The Resurrection of the Son of God", Mr. Wright mentions (in a footnote, lol) this interpretation of Romans 7: Paul speaks from the perspective of a non-Christian Jew (in hindsight of course).

        If I may assume that you know that theory also, then I ask: in your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the Adam model versus the Jew model?

        For example, I think the Jew model explains a little better the fact that Paul quotes a commandment from the Law (it bugs me in the Adam model), while the Adam model can explain why it was that commandment in particular (it bugs me somewhat in the Jew model).

        What do you think?
        I have not yet read, "The Resurrection and the Son of God" (currently re-reading the first two volumes in that series)....

        But the idea I got from reading Wright's commentary on Romans was that Paul in Romans seven was speaking as Israel in Adam. Paul had already built the case that both Jew and Gentile were in Adam and both groups equally needed to be in Christ.

        Romans 7 shows how Israel in Adam was unable to keep the law even when they had wanted to.
        Aragorn: What do you fear, my lady?

        Eowyn: A cage. To stay behind bars until use and old age accept them and all chance of valor has gone beyond recall or desire.

        Aragorn: You are a daughter of kings, a shield maiden of Rohan. I do not think that will be your fate.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
          I know about both. I just think Witherington made a better case with the more specific commandment and with Adam being mentioned, but it could cover both to some degree.
          Originally posted by Wildflower View Post
          I have not yet read, "The Resurrection and the Son of God" (currently re-reading the first two volumes in that series)....

          But the idea I got from reading Wright's commentary on Romans was that Paul in Romans seven was speaking as Israel in Adam. Paul had already built the case that both Jew and Gentile were in Adam and both groups equally needed to be in Christ.

          Romans 7 shows how Israel in Adam was unable to keep the law even when they had wanted to.
          For example Rom. 7:22, where it [the "inner man" phrase] denotes the inner life of the non-Christian Jew.
          Anyway, mixing both lines of thought sounds good enough. At some point I'll check actual commentaries on it


          Thank you both, and God bless in Jesus!
          Isaac.
          We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore on Christ's behalf: 'Be reconciled to God!!'
          - 2 Corinthians 5:20.
          In deviantArt: ll-bisto-ll.deviantart.com
          Christian art and more: Christians.deviantart.com

          Comment

          Related Threads

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-27-2024, 12:31 PM
          4 responses
          42 views
          1 like
          Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
          Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-16-2024, 06:19 PM
          0 responses
          19 views
          0 likes
          Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
          Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-06-2024, 04:30 PM
          10 responses
          65 views
          0 likes
          Last Post JimL
          by JimL
           
          Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-01-2024, 09:43 PM
          13 responses
          133 views
          0 likes
          Last Post David Hayward  
          Working...
          X