I am carnal sold under sin A Study

“I am carnal, sold under sin” A Study of Romans 7: 14 -25

The Interpretations n Paul refers to his experiences as a Christian. n Paul refers to his pre-conversion experiences. n Paul refers to himself in a “rhetorical” fashion.

What Has Spawned The Debate? n The nature of the text. n Doctrinal issues. n Emotional issues.

Important Points To Remember n No interpretation is without difficulties. u u n This is not to deny the possibility of a correct understanding of the passage. We, however, must proceed with caution. We are bound to the text to determine the correct interpretation.

Position 1: Paul Speaks of His Own Experiences As a Christian

Arguments in Favor of the “Christian” Interpretation n The “Christian” interpretation has no conflict with Paul’s use of the first person singular and the present tense. n The “Christian” interpretation is argued to fit within the context of Romans 5 -8, where it is claimed that the subject is the meaning of the life of a Christian.

n The “Christian” interpretation is argued to fit with the character of one who is “in Christ, ” not in the world. u u The speaker is described as “one who delights in God’s Law and in willing the good…and that he does so ‘according to the inward man’ (7: 22), an expression used elsewhere in Paul (cf. 2 Cor. 4: 16) to refer to the Christian believer. ” It should also be noted that the conflict stated in Romans 7: 14, although used as strong proof against this section referring to a Christian, is echoed by Paul in Galatians 5: 17.

The Weaknesses of the “Christian” Interpretation n Although the use of the present tense in relationship to the first person singular (e. g. , “I am carnal…”) is considered strong evidence for the “Christian” interpretation, it falls short of being conclusive. u There are examples of the present tense referring to past actions (Matt. 17: 11 -12; Heb. 10: 9 -10; Rom. 5: 14; 1 Cor. 13: 12).

u The change of tense from past to present in 7: 13 to 14 is said to be made almost imperceptibly, that one could read the whole of the narrative without noticing a change. NOTE: This, however, is a bit subjective.

n To argue that Romans 7: 14 -25 must refer to Paul’s experiences as a Christian because the “context” of Romans 5 -8 addresses the “meaning of the life of a Christian” is to assume too much. First, Romans 7: 7 -8 appears to deal with the experience of one who is outside of Christ. u Mc. Guiggan addresses this issue in the following quote: u

“Besides, Paul’s point in this section is to defend the Law and demonstrate its awful holiness. This he needs to do because he has been saying people need to be brought out from under Law to acceptably serve God and so people might get the impression the Law is in some way evil. Paul wishes to show that it is not only not evil, it is too holy for him; it keeps him enslaved to sin. So under Law (and without Christ) he is a “wretched man. ” (J. Mc. Guiggan)

u Thus, the addition of a parenthetical statement concerning the hopelessness of seeking righteousness under the Law and apart from Christ would, very effectively, stress the great deliverance and blessing we have in and through Jesus Christ.

Is This Describing a Christian? This person is “sold under sin” and a “servant of sin” (see Romans 6: 22, etc). n This person is “captive to the law of sin and death” (compare to Romans 8: 2). n This person has the “law of sin” in his members. (compare to Romans 6: 12). n This person lives in a “body of death” (compare to Romans 6: 13). n

n Nygren’s use of Galatians 5: 17 as an attempt to show that Paul’s language concerning “carnality” and “slavery” to sin are in line with the Christian life fails to address the Galatians passage properly. n Nygren’s attempt to address this problem by arguing for a Calvinistic distinction between “righteousness of faith” and “moral righteousness” falls short of the truth (see 1 John 3: 6 -8).

n Others, however, such as Moses Lard, have straddled the fence, it seems, by interpreting the passage as follows: “I Paul am fleshly; though redeemed, and pardoned, and accepted, I am still fleshly; not wholly so, but fleshly, fleshly still in a body of flesh, from the influence of which, so long as I am in it, I can never become entirely freed. Not only so; I am fleshly, and therefore sold under sin, not completely so, as before my conversion, but still under it, and under it to a certain extent as abjectly as is the slave under his master. For struggle against sin as I may, I still commit it. I seem powerless to abstain from it entirely…Only let his language not be taken too strongly, and it presents no difficulty. ”

Position 2: Paul Speaks of His Pre-conversion Experiences.

Arguments in Favor of the “Pre. Conversion” Interpretation n The description of the individual in Romans 7: 14 -25 and the “losing battle” characteristic of his life are incompatible with the freedom from slavery to sin effected in the Christian. u Consider the language of Romans 7: 1819.

n The description of this individual is indicative of the view a mature Christian would have of his past struggles as a Jew seeking to be righteous under law. u u With each sin he saw the victory of “sin” as it brought him “into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members” (see Romans 7: 22 -23). Despite the fact that Paul describes himself as “blameless” in accordance with the “righteousness which is in the law” (Phil. 3: 6), his complete view of his condition after obeying the gospel was far different than what it was while outside of Christ (Acts 23: 1; Phil. 3: 7; 1 Tim. 1: 12 -13, 15).

n The pre-conversion interpretation fits with the context of Romans 7. That Paul would address the inadequacies of seeking righteousness by law alone after a discourse concerning how a Christian has “become dead to the law through the body of Christ” (7: 4) and “been delivered from the law, having died to what you were held by” is quite understandable. u Consider some quotes from Mc. Guiggan and Jan Lambert. u

n The “now” in Romans 8: 1 helps to show that there is a distinct difference in the time frame addressed and concluded with the “then” of Romans 7: 25. It should be noted that the “then/now” construction is used by Paul elsewhere to refer to the “pre. Christian/Christian” time distinction (Romans 6: 2022; 7: 5 -6). u Romans 8: 1 describes victory (i. e. , “no condemnation”) for all who “walk…according to the Spirit. ” u In Romans 8: 2 Paul, again using the first person singular (i. e. , “me”), exclaims, “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. ” u

The Weaknesses of the “Preconversion” Interpretation n One of the strongest arguments against Romans 7: 14 -25 referring to Paul’s pre-Christian past is, again, his use of the 1 st person/present tense. Why the sudden change from the past tense to the present (i. e. , Between 7: 13 and 7: 14)? Other verses that use the present tense in much the same fashion are located in contexts that are heavily marked by past time narratives (i. e. , Matthew 17: 11 -12; Hebrews 10: 9 -10).

n n n It is argued that Paul’s description of the person in Romans 7: 14 -25 does not fit with Paul’s description elsewhere of his life or that of others before coming into Christ (compare to Phil. 3: 6 and Rom. 1: 18 -32). The view that Romans 7: 14 -25 addresses Paul’s pre-conversion state while living as a Jew fails to give a proper explanation of 7: 25. The force of the “then/now” construction in Romans 7: 25 and 8: 1 as proof of a time change from pre-conversion to post-conversion is weakened by the use of some of the same type terms in relationship to the Christian life in Romans 8.

n Cottrell, in his Commentary on Romans, argues that the description given of the man of Romans 7: 14 -25 fits with other descriptions of Paul himself and should not, therefore, be considered as weighty evidence in favor of the “pre-Christian” position (see 1 Tim 1: 15).

Position 3: Paul Uses the “I” in a Rhetorical Fashion

Strengths of the Rhetorical Position n The direct application to Paul’s life is somewhat, if not completely, avoided. n Most problems with the present tense are also minimized.

Weaknesses of the “Rhetorical” Interpretation One must still determine to whom the text is referring. n When this is done, many of the same doctrinal issues will arise. n Yet, I must admit that Clinton Hamilton’s view that this refers to all men who would try to attain righteousness through law outside of Christ is inviting. n