Homer wrote:Hi Graeme,
If I understand you correctly, your view is similar to that I posted earlier from Lange:
Paul here enters into a remarkable psychological analysis of the working of the law, in order to show that it, although holy and good in itself, cannot effect the sanctification of man, on account of the power of indwelling sin, which can be overcome only through redeeming grace. He gives a chapter out of his own experience, especially out of the transition period from the law to the gospel. In this experience, however, is reflected, to a certain extent, the history of the religious development of humanity as a whole. What is here so vividly individualized, repeats itself also in the experience of every earnest Christian. The law, instead of slaying sin, first brings it to full manifestation (vers. 7-13); in the internal contest it is proven powerless; it leads to the painful confession of helplessness (vers. 14-24); no other hope remains, save the grace of Christ (ver. 25).
Those expositors who follow the later Augustinian view refer vers. 14-25 to the regenerate because they are unwilling to ascribe to the natural man even this powerless longing after higher and better things. On the other hand, those who refer them to the unregenerate, urge this reason, that the regenerate man is not so powerless, so captive to sin, as the person here described, but has overcome the dominion of sin, as the Apostle clearly indicates in chapters 6 and 7. The correct interpretation lies between these two. Paul describes his state, not when sunk in sin, but when awakened to earnest struggles against sin under the scourge of the law, under preparation for a state of grace - i.e., in the period of transition from the law to the gospel, in the Judaico-legalistic state of awakening.
Am I correct regarding your thinking?
The short answer is yes, but I have some issues.
Paul here enters into a remarkable psychological analysis
I would not have used the word psychological - since the remedy is spiritual, there is a case for calling it spiritual. On the other hand there is merit in what Lange has used. Paul quite plainly states that the conflict is between his will and his ability - he wants to do good but can't because 'sin is living in me'.
working of the law, in order to show that it, although holy and good in itself, cannot effect the sanctification of man, on account of the power of indwelling sin, which can be overcome only through redeeming grace.
If Lange means the law of Moses, then I agree with the statement that he has written. But I do not think Paul was talking about the LOM in most of his uses of the term 'law' in Romans 7. Paul shows the law of sin and death to be the ugly underside of the commandments. Jesus speaks to this in the Sermon on the mount - You have heard it said... but I say unto you...
He gives a chapter out of his own experience, especially out of the transition period from the law to the gospel. In this experience, however, is reflected, to a certain extent, the history of the religious development of humanity as a whole. What is here so vividly individualized, repeats itself also in the experience of every earnest Christian.
I agree here as well, but think that the 'transition from the law to the gospel' sounds like Paul considered it was just another notch on his spiritual belts - I really was on the right track back there but with a few minor changes in understanding, I am now that much further along. From what I read, it was not a transition at all, but a major about face. I agree with the comments about the 'religious development of humanity as a whole'. etc.
The law, instead of slaying sin, first brings it to full manifestation (vers. 7-13); in the internal contest it is proven powerless; it leads to the painful confession of helplessness (vers. 14-24); no other hope remains, save the grace of Christ (ver. 25).
This is quite well said. However, I note that Paul switches in vv 7 - 13 from the law of Moses, to the law of sin and death. IMO the LS&D originates when Adam had an apple for lunch, and was ushered out of the Garden of Eden. The law of Moses draws attention to it, exposes it, but does not have any power to over rule it.
Those expositors who follow the later Augustinian view refer vers. 14-25 to the regenerate because they are unwilling to ascribe to the natural man even this powerless longing after higher and better things.
IMO Right conclusion, wrong reason. I do not believe that man is so totally depraved to the point that he is not aware that part of his original created makeup has died and that the remaining part does not yearn for its return. I believe that the real reason Paul has discovered this law of sin and death, is because he had experienced the bondage of it. I also believe that it was not until he saw the blinding light on the road to Damascus, and following, that Paul became aware of this dark underbelly of the commandments. In the forgiveness of God, the death of Christ on his behalf, the wonder of grace, he was opened to the immensity of sin and its hold on the human frame. I am sure he felt, when he was a Pharisee, that he was able to keep the law, and that with effort, he could do a creditable job ('I thank God that I am not like this publican.. I..., I,,, etc' could well have surfaced in Paul's praying). That is, I think of his understanding of sin to be quite superficial.
On the other hand, those who refer them to the unregenerate, urge this reason, that the regenerate man is not so powerless, so captive to sin, as the person here described, but has overcome the dominion of sin, as the Apostle clearly indicates in chapters 6 and 7. The correct interpretation lies between these two. Paul describes his state, not when sunk in sin, but when awakened to earnest struggles against sin under the scourge of the law, under preparation for a state of grace - i.e., in the period of transition from the law to the gospel, in the Judaico-legalistic state of awakening.
If this is the correct understanding, then I wonder how relevant all this is to me. I never was a Pharisee, and have never obsessed with law keeping as Paul was. But since believers today frequently see themselves in this chapter it seems to me that there has to be relevance for every one of us that is greater than Paul's 'transition'. To me that relevance is that we have all experienced, as believers, the desire to do something we really need to do, but simply cannot. And it is not for lack of trying. But when 'dying out to this sinful bondage' and applying the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus over the law of sin and death, we have found victory in Christ. We have proved that what Paul writes about is most relevant to you and me, as believers, from day to day.
So, yes, I see this as primarily speaking to the regenerate, about an issue that has been around since Adam, but not apparent to unbelievers generally until they have been born again. There are some things in our spiritual lives that follow a rational sequence. Jesus was not tempted by Satan until after he was baptized - probably because once Jesus had made this public declaration of his faith and mission, it became a signal to Satan that the war was on. If I had read that Jesus was tempted by Satan, with the temptations mentioned, before his baptism, I would be asking why the timing seemed to be out of sequence.
Thanks for asking for clarification.
Graeme
If you find yourself between a rock and a hard place, always head for the rock. Ps 62..