"Fatal Flaw" in predestinary theory

[MamaZ]

With in every believer we have the war inside of us. Why? Because we now have a new nature created in Christ Jesus. Before we were born again this war was not within us because sin was natural. Now that we have been born again we abhor sin. This is why we can all state with Paul oh wretched man that I am because knowing we cannot within ourselves walk as we should.

 

[expos4ever]

Actually, I believe it can be taken in the sense of anyone trusting in their own efforts to be at peace with God, and to please Him. What you're taking in a literal sense, may have been more in the emotional sense. He's discussing the inner conflict that is felt, even by Christians. The conflict of knowing what is right, and having this struggle over actually doing it.

I am sympathetic with this, but I am sure you realize the slope you are on when you take a statement like "I cannot do good" and deform into a statement like "I feel like I cannot do good". Or a statement like "I am sold in slavery to sin" and transform it into "I feel like I am a slave to sin". In such cases, I think it is much better to look for an explanation that can make sense of the text without such bendings of meaning. And if Paul is describing the experience of the Jew under Torah, then we can read these statements as is.

Romans 7 might indeed be an exposition into the experience of the struggling Christian if it that is the question on the table. But, and I have not emphasized this yet, the question on the table is the Torah - the Law of Moses. The way you read the text is (arguably) the right answer to a different question. But in Romans 7, Paul is talking about the Torah. And we know from Paul that the Christian Jew is free from Torah (Romans 10, Galatians, lots of other stuff).

The issue in Romans 7 is Torah and this is yet another reason why this cannot be a treatment of the struggles of the Christian:

1Do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to men who know the law—that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives?

So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God.

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code

And there is much more. We need to honour Paul and let him tell us what he wants to talk about. And these verses, and others, clearly and definitively show that it is the Torah that is on the table.

Since the following of Torah has no place in the life of the Christian, Paul simply cannot be describing the experience the experience of the Christian in Romans 7 even if, with some rather imaginative reworkings, one might otherwise understand it to be a transcript of Christian experience.

 

[expos4ever]

I for one will go on record and say it is true of the Christian. I "alone" cannot carry it out - the strength to do good does not come from within me but from Christ. And that is the point of Romans 7 in a nutshell....

But Paul does not say "I without Jesus". In fact by the very terms of the position that you hold - that this is a description of the experience of the Christian, Paul would not be alone - he would have the Spirit. From many other texts, we know that Paul sees God as carrying through the work he started - He will not withdraw His Spirit as you seem to be implying He could.

Again, if this is a transcript of Christian experience, we have the very odd situation of the new creation equipped with the Spirit being occasionally being turned back into the old creation, stripped of the Spirit and alone.

In short we have a reversal of the "born again" state if your reading of this passage is correct.

You seem to be arguing that the "part of me that is me cannot do good but the part of me that is Jesus can". That does not line up with much other Pauline and gospel thinking - when a person becomes a believer, Jesus does not simply move in "alongside" us. We are transformed, we are reborn, we become a new creation.

And that new creation cannot then claim that it cannot do good.

 

[expos4ever]

What you are saying simply doesn't make sense - if Paul's exposition was regarding himself pre-conversion it makes no sense for him to switch tenses. It only makes sense if he is referring to himself presently - post conversion. You need to see it for what it says - not for what you think it says.

No. What I am saying is perfectly coherent and I have already explained this. When Paul speaks in the past tense, he is describing the history of the Jew under Torah. That this is so is evidenced by clear allusions to the giving of the Torah. When Paul speaks in the present tense, he is describing the present (continuing) state of the non-believing Jew under Torah - still rejecting Jesus and still being killed by Torah. Paul echoes this concern in Romans 9:

I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— 2I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4the people of Israel.

 

[cygnusx1]

First of all, I am doing nothing different than what you are doing - drawing a conclusion about what group Paul is talking about here. Paul never clearly and explcitly indicates who he is talking about. However, my conclusion is at least a possible one.

The difference between us is obvious , I take "O wretched man that I am " at face value , you think he means all Israel ! You are the one reading into this passage a nation , not me.

It is simply not possible for Paul to say this about the Christian, as your position requires:

For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out

repeating yourself is a sign of uncertainty and pushiness......... and what you are pushing will not sell. Observe that what Paul is referring to is not a case of a Jew , he speaks about being alive without the Law , address that issue , because he was a Jew from birth , ONLY the Christian is set free by Christs death from The Law ... Romans 7 :1-6.

Whoever Paul is talking about here, it cannot be the Christian since this statement is obviously not true for the Christian.

The statement isn't meant to be taken as an absolute statement ; it isn't that Paul so struggled as a Christian that he never did any good , and it certainly isn't any inner conflict of an unregenerate Jew , they don't have any inner struggle.

Let me ask you directly to answer this question: Is it true that a Christian cannot do good things?

Let me ask you if a Jew cannot do any 'good' things !!

"as to the Law blameless " said UNREGENERATE Paul. Did Paul not obey all the Torah , did he not Tythe , keep Shabbat , serve God with devotion and passion ...... yet you say he couldn't obey the TORAH , what nonesense!!!

My argument is fine. Paul is a Jew. Paul uses the rhetorical "I" to speak about himself as the typical Jew. The fact that Paul writes the following shows us that he must not be literally speaking about himself only:

Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died

Your repeating yourself without answering my objections ...

1. Define "death" in this verse! because Paul was alive!

2. Explain how Paul , born a Jew was alive APART FROM LAW !! Only a Christian is alive apart from the Law.

Paul is talking about the arrival of the Torah - the commandment "came" when the Torah was given - and that was long before Paul was born. Paul also describes himself as being alive apart from the law - this is a description of the state of the Jew before the arrival of the Torah.

ahhh so he wasn't really alive , even though he said he was ... some stretch , no I don't buy what your pushing , If he meant the Jews he quite simply could have said The Jews , he has no trouble in many other Chapters.
BTW , even before Torah came men died , being under the CURSE of Adam , so in what valid sense are "The JEWS" alive before Moses , when they are all under the curse of Adam ... they all must die.

So things are not as simple as you assert. Paul's style is complex and sophisticated.

*trust me , I am a doctor*

But the text I have just given proves that he cannot be simply talking about himself - Paul was not alive when the Torah was given.

Paul wasn't alive when Torah was given , but Paul didn't DIE when it was given ! you are flipping from Moses to the time of Paul forgetting Paul could keep the Law very well as a JEW and he didn't die for sinning against God's Law...... you want to have your cake and eat it too !

 

[AndOne]

You seem to be arguing that the "part of me that is me cannot do good but the part of me that is Jesus can". That does not line up with much other Pauline and gospel thinking - when a person becomes a believer, Jesus does not simply move in "alongside" us. We are transformed, we are reborn, we become a new creation.

And that new creation cannot then claim that it cannot do good.

I never said that Jesus works alongside us! What I'm saying is that with your interpretation of this text that is where it takes us. You have Paul and Jesus working side by side doing good works.

No the point I'm trying to make is that we are transformed, reborn, and a new creation through and by Christ alone. If you are saying that Paul/Christians have it within themselves to do good - then that doesn't match up with the rest of Pauline doctrine - which is a gospel of grace not works.

 

[AndOne]

When Paul speaks in the past tense, he is describing the history of the Jew under Torah. That this is so is evidenced by clear allusions to the giving of the Torah. When Paul speaks in the present tense, he is describing the present (continuing) state of the non-believing Jew under Torah - still rejecting Jesus and still being killed by Torah. Paul echoes this concern in Romans 9:

What I don't understand is how you come to this conclusion. It is not coherent at all - despite your statement that it is. I just doesn't make sense that Paul is talking about the condition of the non-believing Jew.

Look - I'm reading the text for what it says in the clearest of terms. If Paul were using himself as an example of the non-believing Jew than it makes no sense whatsoever that he shifts to the present tense.

Why does Paul talk about the sinful nature then? You've already agreed that the Christian still sins after conversion. Why is that? Chapter 7 explains why - because of the sinful nature. If Paul is talking about a pre-converted Jew then why even bring up the sinful nature? Why does it even have to be explained as such?

 

[expos4ever]

With in every believer we have the war inside of us. Why? Because we now have a new nature created in Christ Jesus. Before we were born again this war was not within us because sin was natural. Now that we have been born again we abhor sin. This is why we can all state with Paul oh wretched man that I am because knowing we cannot within ourselves walk as we should.

I agree with your characterization of the experience of the Christian. But the evidence suggests that Romans 7 is not talking about the experience of the Christian. In high level terms:

1. Paul is clearly talking about the Torah and this means he is talking about Jews;

2. Paul says things that simply cannot be true of the Christian - that he cannot do good and that he is a slave to sin.

 

[cygnusx1]

I think I agree with this, as long as you are talking about "Paul the Pharisee prior to conversion". Again, this material cannot be about the Christian since Paul characterizes himself as being unable to do good and as being "sold in slavery to sin".

Clearly, neither of these characterizations can true of the Christian.

You are mistakenly taking "unable to do good " in an absolute sense in order to build a case that it cannot be a Christian , however this will never fly because even unregenerate JEWS are able to do good ;

Matthew 7:11


If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

Paul as an unregenerate JEW had no problem with the Law ;

Phil 3:6

Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Hardly fits with ; 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.


How could Paul say his old life concerning observation of the Law was blameless ? The answer is that he could observe the Law blamelessly ONLY outwardly , the Law can never deal with the heart that is why so many men have thought themselves righteous , because outwardly they appear righteous , it is only when the Holy Spirit comes and reveals sin within the heart that the real struggle begins , such was the case at the Sermon on The Mount ;

This passage will illustrate the stark difference between keeping the Law outwardly (which unregenerate Paul did without conflict ) , and breaking it inwardly (which Regenerate Paul did !! ) ;

Matthew 5-6



5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. 5:23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 5:24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. 5:25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 5:26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut if off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 5:40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 5:42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 5:47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
6:1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. 6:2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6:3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 6:4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
6:5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6:6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. 6:8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread. 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. 6:14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: 6:15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
6:16 Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6:17 But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; 6:18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

 

[expos4ever]

What I don't understand is how you come to this conclusion. It is not coherent at all - despite your statement that it is. I just doesn't make sense that Paul is talking about the condition of the non-believing Jew.

I have already explained how it makes sense in detail in post 302. Please tell me what you do not agree with from that post.

Look - I'm reading the text for what it says in the clearest of terms. If Paul were using himself as an example of the non-believing Jew than it makes no sense whatsoever that he shifts to the present tense.

If you were reading the text for what it says, you would acknowledge that Paul is talking about the Torah - a matter of relevance to the Jew, not the Gentile. I have already explained the tenses - the giving of the Torah produced death for the Jew. That is in the past. Continuing to live under the Torah still produces death for the Jew in the present.

Why does Paul talk about the sinful nature then? You've already agreed that the Christian still sins after conversion. Why is that? Chapter 7 explains why - because of the sinful nature. If Paul is talking about a pre-converted Jew then why even bring up the sinful nature? Why does it even have to be explained as such?

You seem to be arguing that because the Christian indeed still struggles with his sinful nature, the text must therefore be about the Christian. But the non-believing Jew also has the sinful nature. Paul is describing how a Jew zealous to do Torah, finds that he cannot really "do good" because his sinful nature wins out over his desire to do good.

Again, the fact that chapter 7 decscribes a struggle between sin and the desire to do good, does not mean that this is a text about the Christian.

Madonna probably struggles with getting up early in the morning. Does this mean every text about an unspecified person struggling to get up in the morning is about Madonna? Of course not.

 

[nobdysfool]

The issue is this: We are, by virtue of the New Birth (Regeneration) new men living in the old man's body. It is that old man's body that still wants to sin, still enjoys sin, still cries out for its wants, needs, and desires to be met. The "sin nature" is not some nebulous "thing", it is the old man's physical body. Paul says, "I know that in my flesh (physical body) dwells no good thing."

When Christ returns, these bodies will be changed, transformed into incorruptible bodies, and the so-called "sin nature" will disappear.

As has been said many times:

I was saved, from the penalty for sin

I am being saved from the power of sin

and I will be saved from the presence of sin.

 

[beloved57]

Originally Posted by expos4ever

I think I agree with this, as long as you are talking about "Paul the Pharisee prior to conversion". Again, this material cannot be about the Christian since Paul characterizes himself as being unable to do good and as being "sold in slavery to sin".

Clearly, neither of these characterizations can true of the Christian.
​

The true believer is sold under sin..that was pauls argument in rom 7:

14For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

This is I am sold under sin, is in the present tense when he wrote the letter to romans..paul is both carnal and sold under sin even as a apostle, because he is still in the flesh..

paul could have easily written this in the past tense, if he meant pre conversion, but he didnt..

 

[expos4ever]

First of all, I am doing nothing different than what you are doing - drawing a conclusion about what group Paul is talking about here. Paul never clearly and explcitly indicates who he is talking about. However, my conclusion is at least a possible one.

The difference between us is obvious , I take "O wretched man that I am " at face value , you think he means all Israel ! You are the one reading into this passage a nation , not me.

If you were really taking the text at face value, you would say that this is a description of Paul and Paul alone. Paul never explicitly says that he is talking about any particular group. So, when you infer that he is talking about Christians in general, you are indeed "reading into" the passage.

But your conclusion, unlike mine, cannot survive the actual details. Paul is clearly talking about the Torah here - something that does not apply to the life of the Christian. And he makes statements that need to be badly deformed to fit with your position. When Paul says that he "cannot do good", your position requires this to be revised to something like "I struggle to do good", or "I feel like I cannot do good".

 

[MamaZ]

All men have the sinful natures. All men are evil and corrupt from birth..
It is Paul the apostle, who was not less than the very greatest of the apostles—it is Paul, the mighty servant of God, a very prince in Israel, one of the King's mighty men—it is Paul, the saint and the apostle, who here exclaims, "O wretched man that I am!"

 

[MamaZ]

The issue is this: We are, by virtue of the New Birth (Regeneration) new men living in the old man's body. It is that old man's body that still wants to sin, still enjoys sin, still cries out for its wants, needs, and desires to be met. The "sin nature" is not some nebulous "thing", it is the old man's physical body. Paul says, "I know that in my flesh (physical body) dwells no good thing."

When Christ returns, these bodies will be changed, transformed into incorruptible bodies, and the so-called "sin nature" will disappear.

As has been said many times:

I was saved, from the penalty for sin

I am being saved from the power of sin

and I will be saved from the presence of sin.

Excellent post here.. Amen

 

[expos4ever]

It is simply not possible for Paul to say this about the Christian, as your position requires:

For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out

repeating yourself is a sign of uncertainty and pushiness......... and what you are pushing will not sell. Observe that what Paul is referring to is not a case of a Jew , he speaks about being alive without the Law , address that issue , because he was a Jew from birth , ONLY the Christian is set free by Christs death from The Law ... Romans 7 :1-6.

I am only repeating myself since you continue to make the same incorrect arguments. When Paul refers to being alive without the Law, he is, of course, referring to the state of the Jew before the Torah was given. This fits perfectly with the proposal I am putting forward. Note the things that Paul says about the Torah here:
but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died
This is clearly a statement about the giving of Torah. The chapter has been introduced as being about Torah (I have already made this case in an earlier post). When the Torah arrives in Israel, what is the first thing that happens? It condemns the Jew as Moses descends and they are breaking Torah by building the golden calf.
And what says about the advent of Torah bringing death is supported by other statements like this one from Romans 4;
because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
So there is no problem at all with Paul speaking about the Jew being alive before the giving of the Law.

Whoever Paul is talking about here, it cannot be the Christian since this statement is obviously not true for the Christian.

The statement isn't meant to be taken as an absolute statement ; it isn't that Paul so struggled as a Christian that he never did any good , and it certainly isn't any inner conflict of an unregenerate Jew , they don't have any inner struggle.

You are trying to convince us to back off taking this verse literally;

For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

You really interpret this in a manner that takes too many liberties. Paul says that he "cannot do good". You say "it isn't that Paul so struggled as a Christian that he never did any good ". Well, which is it? Your take on what Paul is saying is simply not reconcilable with the claim "I cannot go good". We all know that Paul, as a Chrstian, did plenty of good.

But even if I agree that Paul is engaging in exaggeration as you must claim that he is, and I am open to that - the fact that the entire chapter is about the Torah means that it must be specific to the Jew. So the main body of the chapter cannot be a transcript of Christian experience even if we grant the liberty of treating "I cannot do good" as an exaggeration.

Of course, my position both respects the subject Paul is talking about - the Torah and it takes Paul seriously when he says he is a slave to sin who cannot do good. Those things are true at face value for the Jew under Torah.

 

[AndOne]

I have already explained how it makes sense in detail in post 302. Please tell me what you do not agree with from that post.

Much of what is in that post seems to be based on external information outside of the text itself. For example - how do you know with 100 percent certainty that Romans was written to both Jewish and Roman Christians? All any of us can say for certain is that the book of Romans was written to "fellow believers in Rome."

If you were reading the text for what it says, you would acknowledge that Paul is talking about the Torah - a matter of relevance to the Jew, not the Gentile. I have already explained the tenses - the giving of the Torah produced death for the Jew. That is in the past. Continuing to live under the Torah still produces death for the Jew in the present.

But you haven't explained the tenses, all you have done is restate your position that the entire text is referring to Paul pre-conversion. Sure - continuing to live under the law still produces death - but that is not what is being described there is it? What is being discussed is why he desires to do good but can't.

You seem to be arguing that because the Christian indeed still struggles with his sinful nature, the text must therefore be about the Christian. But the non-believing Jew also has the sinful nature. Paul is describing how a Jew zealous to do Torah, finds that he cannot really "do good" because his sinful nature wins out over his desire to do good.

If the text is as you say - that Paul is talking about the Jews and Torah then what is the point of it? Why is Paul bringing it up here? What is the motivation and the lessen being pointed out?

Again, the fact that chapter 7 decscribes a struggle between sin and the desire to do good, does not mean that this is a text about the Christian.

What would be the harm in reading the text this way? If it isn't right - why not?

Madonna probably struggles with getting up early in the morning. Does this mean every text about an unspecified person struggling to get up in the morning is about Madonna? Of course not.

How do you know Madonna probably struggles with getting up in the morning? Do you know her personally? Has she told you? This is a clear example of that external information that I was talking about above. The key issue in this statement is struggling to get up in the morning - not who is struggling. And that is important to note since in Romans 7 Paul is talking about the struggle to do right verses wrong.

 

[cygnusx1]

If you were really taking the text at face value, you would say that this is a description of Paul and Paul alone. Paul never explicitly says that he is talking about any particular group. So, when you infer that he is talking about Christians in general, you are indeed "reading into" the passage.

Tut tut tut , that will not do , do I really need to show you that the whole chapter is surrounded by "we" , look at the intro , then follow the obvious implication right through till the conclusion , 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit

Paul isn't talking about his own experience because it is interesting , but because it is relevant to all believers. You make his exp disjointed from the overall meaning of the Chapter , and out of synch with Romans 6 and 8 .

But your conclusion, unlike mine, cannot survive the actual details. Paul is clearly talking about the Torah here - something that does not apply to the life of the Christian.

Matthew 5

5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And he makes statements that need to be badly deformed to fit with your position. When Paul says that he "cannot do good", your position requires this to be revised to something like "I struggle to do good", or "I feel like I cannot do good".

and your conclusion is that Paul could do good before the Torah came , but after it came he simply couldn't do a thing but break Torah because his sin revived (you have yet to explain how his sin was dead , seeing as sin exists before the giving of the Law) ... his sin was dead , but now revived because of The Torah , given hundreds of years BEFORE Paul (Israel) was ALIVE OR DEAD , your view demands that the reader several times jumps between Moses and Paul's present day exp without any indicators ! and you think my view torturous , I let the reader decide

 

[AndOne]

All men have the sinful natures. All men are evil and corrupt from birth..
It is Paul the apostle, who was not less than the very greatest of the apostles—it is Paul, the mighty servant of God, a very prince in Israel, one of the King's mighty men—it is Paul, the saint and the apostle, who here exclaims, "O wretched man that I am!"

Good point - he DOES NOT SAY: Wretched man that I was...

 

[nobdysfool]

I am only repeating myself since you continue to make the same incorrect arguments. When Paul refers to being alive without the Law, he is, of course, referring to the state of the Jew before the Torah was given. This fits perfectly with the proposal I am putting forward. Note the things that Paul says about the Torah here:
but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died
This is clearly a statement about the giving of Torah. The chapter has been introduced as being about Torah (I have already made this case in an earlier post). When the Torah arrives in Israel, what is the first thing that happens? It condemns the Jew as Moses descends and they are breaking Torah by building the golden calf.
And what says about the advent of Torah bringing death is supported by other statements like this one from Romans 4;
because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
So there is no problem at all with Paul speaking about the Jew being alive before the giving of the Law.



You are trying to convince us to back off taking this verse literally;

For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

You really interpret this in a manner that takes too many liberties. Paul says that he "cannot do good". You say "it isn't that Paul so struggled as a Christian that he never did any good ". Well, which is it? Your take on what Paul is saying is simply not reconcilable with the claim "I cannot go good". We all know that Paul, as a Chrstian, did plenty of good.

But even if I agree that Paul is engaging in exaggeration as you must claim that he is, and I am open to that - the fact that the entire chapter is about the Torah means that it must be specific to the Jew. So the main body of the chapter cannot be a transcript of Christian experience even if we grant the liberty of treating "I cannot do good" as an exaggeration.

Of course, my position both respects the subject Paul is talking about - the Torah and it takes Paul seriously when he says he is a slave to sin who cannot do good. Those things are true at face value for the Jew under Torah.

Sorry, but that comes off as "don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up." You just repeat the same things over and over again, and never really answer what others have brought up. You demonstrate all the earmarks of a closed mind.

I find it somewhat thin on proof to insist that Paul is writing a long treatise on the finer points of the Torah and Law to an audience that is largely Gentile. It has no real application to them. I'm not denying that there may have been some Jews among the church at Rome, but they were not the prime focus of the letter. It's called Romans, for a reason. If not written primarily to Gentiles, it should have been called Jews.

Paul was not the Apostle to the Jews, he was the Apostle to the Gentiles.

He wrote an Epistle to Jews. It's called Hebrews.