can you please email me at searching_for_christ@yahoo.com

thanks for your reply. I understand your premise, and I appreciate the thought that is in it. It looks like it’s time for me to have a careful read of the verses you mentioned in your argument. Thanks for taking the time to get back to me.

I’m meeting with a mate on Wednesday to have a chat about Romans 7, which will probably be hard going because he’s the kind of person who will force me to read context and fully understand what Paul’s point is. I’d like to take along what you’ve written in that latest message and see what I can learn.

I’ll get back to you on all of this, it’s a cool section of scripture to wrestle with, for me.

Thanks, brother.

Lets look at Romans 7 as an entire unit, though my argument is that Romans 6-8 is one collective response and we see that by Paul starting off with the question “shall I continue in sin”. Most people think this is a rhetorical answer; however, if we look at the question it is a genuine question of a Jewish convert to Christ who was under the “Law” until Christ had come (Galatians 3).

Paul starts off by saying “for I am speaking of those who know the law”. Now why would Paul says “those who know the law” (verse 1). He then goes into a Jewish law that says “a woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives”. This was Jewish law, and Paul is using it as an analogy to explain the “Law vs Grace” analogy. He then says “when the husband dies she is free”.

He then says “you have died to the law “through” the body of Christ”. He is now contrasting Law vs Grace by contrasting Christ to the Law. Now I have to ask you when were the Gentiles ever “married” (involved in the Old Covenant) to the Law? The “law” was given at Sinai to Jews and Jews alone that is why Paul says in verse 1 “those who know the law” only Jews would have known the law in any real way.

He then says in verse 6 “you have been released from the law having died to that which held you captive” (ESV). Now we have a new problem. When were Gentiles every “alive” to the Law. He goes on to say “that we may serve Christ”. Gentiles were never captive to the Law as a matter of fact Paul says the “law” was the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile, the same “law” that Christ abolished, thus removing the enmity between Jew and Gentile and making one new man in “His” body (Ephesians 2). I would also note that Paul says in verse 5 “while we WERE living in the flesh” (we no longer live in the flesh as believers, please remember this as we move down into the later verses look at flesh vs Spirit contrast).

He then says in verse 9 “when the law came I died”. Now we introduce an new problem. As a believer who is “under grace” and “dead to the law” and “alive to Christ” what happens when the “law comes” to us? Do we die? But Paul says “when the law came I died”! How do we handle that text as believers who are dead to the law and alive to the Spirit? Lets move to our next point.

Verse 14 is a critical verse in this argument. I want you to listen carefully to the present voice of Paul (under your assumption he is speaking in the present as the Apostle or “super Jew”). Paul says “We know the law is SPIRITUAL but I am OF THE FLESH sold UNDER SIN”. Now we have a major problem! Because Paul says earlier in Romans 6:6 “that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin”. He says also in verse 22 of Chapter 6 “But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God”.

Now how can Paul say in 7:14 that he is “sold under sin” but in 6:6;22 say we are no longer “slaves to sin”. Not to mention he says “I am of the flesh”. But in Romans 8

5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

Now Paul is the most inconsistent scripture writer in the world if he can then in the present say “I am of the flesh sold to sin”. Paul also says that we are “slaves to righteousness”, “spiritual not of the flesh”, “slaves to God” “dead to the law”………

So who is Paul referring to? He is speaking of himself who was a Jew trying to live a life under the power of the Old Covenant. When the Spirit comes he sees his utter failure to upkeep the law and the law “being spiritual” that “promised him life” really “killed him”. Thus he must rely on Christ through the Spirit. His attempts to live as a Jew under the Old Covenant was futile. The more he attempted to look at the Law for life it killed him, that led him to turn the Christ and now live under the Spirit.

I do understand what you are saying on the Christian’s experience with Sin. I am saying that no one can make this section of scripture fit that mode. I understand that our sin sometimes beats us down, but again that is not what this verse is conveying. If scripture must have a witness (I think you would agree with that) then no where else does the bible EVER call those who are in Christ “wretched” that would make Christ the husband of a “wretched” bride and the last time I checked He calls her “holy”. Lets start there and see where we can get.

I know the names that Christ calls me, but it doesn’t change the fact that from time to time I fail majorly. And though in Christ we get back up, it’s comforting to know that God still loves us when we fall. There’s an ‘As Cities Burn’ album with a brilliant name (Romans 8 kind of name…) “Son, I Loved You At Your Darkest”.

Maybe I haven’t explained my point? I mean to say that Paul’s words are encouraging in this: many Christians would probably say, if there’s one guy from The Bible writers that they admire more than the rest, it’s Paul. With his immense repentance and turn-around, and going on to write much of the New Testament.

But even Paul struggled, he wasn’t perfect, we can read all about it in Romans 7. And that means that when we’re not perfect, and we struggle with sin, God can still love us the way He loved Paul.

I think I know what you mean about a superjew being super lost, but remember in Philippians Ch. 3 Paul says he was ‘blameless before the law’. So as far as doing the right thing, he was pretty up-there. But he counts it all as loss for the knowledge of Christ.

And that’s kind of what I’m getting at… A defeated Christian may abuse Romans 7… But, a Christian defeated by legalism and the law may find great refuge in Romans 7 – if indeed this is Paul speaking as a Christian.

Here’s a question – if it is Paul referencing himself pre-conversion, why wouldn’t he have said “Oh, what a wretched man I was? Who would rescue me from this body of death? Truly, it was Jesus”.

After all, it’s a letter we’re talking about; and that has a specific method of communicating. If it was prophecy, I’d have to say your conclusion (that Paul is using the voice of Saul) is valid. But it seems you’re drawing something from the scripture out that’s just not there; to excuse a point of view.

If you calling yourself “wretched” makes you feel better, then by all means call yourself “wretched”. Christ however, calls you His bride, Beloved, Holy, and His inheritance. Me calling myself fat and ugly never makes me feel better, but if it works for you then do it. About your statement of a “superjew”. A superjew who had not met the Gospel was “super” lost and this is what Paul is conveying.