Who is Paul talking about in Romans 7? Christian scholars remain divided in answer to this question. Many would say that Paul teaches about the life of the Christian. Having set forth the necessity of dying to the law in vv. 4-6, and further describing the awakening that takes place by the law in vv. 7-12, Paul now embarks on the life of the Christian as he struggles with sin. This seems evident for several reasons. First, there’s a transition from using the past tense in vv. 7-12 to present tense in vv. 14-25. There is no evidence that it is merely a stylistic change but rather a shift in experience to the present tense. Second, “tension and ambiguity” permeates vv. 14-24 even to the point of the cry of victory through Christ. Yet after that victory confession, he returns to the ambiguity and tension in verse 25, giving evidence that the Christian, though delivered from sin’s penalty and power, still lives with sinful tendencies that must be constantly brought to the cross rather than relying upon the law.
Third, the emphasis on the new desire to follow God’s law in vv. 14-25, points this section to believers. He does not want to disobey the law and yet finds himself doing what he does not want. He wills to do good and even joyfully concurs with God’s law in his heart. That kind of passion for following the Lord is certainly not what we read of the unregenerate man in Romans 3:10-12. Fourth, since Romans 7 follows on the heels of Romans 6 where Paul exhorts Christians to no longer let sin reign in their mortal bodies to obey its lusts, it seems natural that he would explain something of the struggle that believers endure regarding sin in this life. Chapters 6-8 deal forcefully with the Christian’s sanctification so it would be normal to address honestly the struggles with the remaining vestiges of sin. Fifth, there’s also the intention in Romans 7-8 to move the Christian forward to see the final glory that belongs to all that are in Christ. Ultimately, at the day of Christ’s final revelation, we will be delivered from these bodies of death! Yet Paul’s intention is not just for the “not yet” but also for the “now,” so he uses the realm of the “not yet” to motivate us in the “now.”
Having set forth this position, there are equally reputable scholars that take just the opposite approach that Paul continues to deal with the unregenerate man in vv. 14-24 as he has in vv. 7-12. First, this position points to the emphasis on the domination of sin and death through the law in vv. 14-24, further explaining that it is only when we get to chapter 8 that Paul explains “life in the Spirit.” Second, those holding to this section referring to the unregenerate man explain the present tense verses as not necessarily indicating present time. Yet, grammatically, the shift from past to present appears too clearly marked to deny that Paul is trying to emphasize present experience. So those of this position explain that Paul is not using personal testimony but is just explaining the present unregenerate condition not that of one who has life in Christ. Third, and perhaps one of the best arguments, is the dramatic difference between the experience portrayed in 7:14-25 and 8:1-17. The great emphasis on those in Christ Jesus and in the Spirit in the latter, stresses this difference as well. Fourth, in explaining how the character in 7:14-25 delights to do the will of God in the inner man, this position holds that this kind of thinking would not be uncommon for Jews who zealously pursued the law for righteousness. Yet having said that, it must be pointed out that this would contradict both Paul’s explanation in Romans 3 of man’s sinfulness as well as that of unregenerate man living in enmity with God in 8:6-8. Fifth, one final reason for concluding this section refers to unregenerate man is the case of the preposition “under.” Paul has consistently used it in chapter 6 refer to one living in the old life without Christ. It would appear strange that he would use “under bondage to sin” (though NASB translates it as “into bondage to sin,” Gk. hupo) in reference to the believer.
So, who has the stronger argument for his position? I think we have to admit that both have excellent points to consider. However, having said that, could it be that this argument over whether or not the Apostle is addressing an unbeliever or a believer may in fact, be off the mark? Could it be that this is only a secondary issue in the grand scheme of things? I found Tom Schreiner’s explanation on target for maintaining the Pauline emphasis on the inadequacy of the law for justification or sanctification.
I would suggest that the arguments are so finely balanced because Paul does not intend to distinguish believers from unbelievers in this text…. Paul reflects on whether the law has the ability to transform human beings, concluding that it does not. The law puts to death unbelievers who desire to keep it, since they lack the power to keep it. They are in bondage to sin and captives to sin, and when they encounter the law, death ensues. On the other hand, believers are not absolutely excluded from this text either. It would be a mistake to read the whole of Christian experience from this account, for, as chapter 8 shows, believers by the power of the Spirit are enabled to keep God’s Law. And yet since believers have not yet experienced the consummation of their redemption, they are keenly aware of their inherent inability to keep God’s law. When believers contemplate their own capacities, it is clear that they do not have the resources to do what God demands [ECNT: Romans, 390; I adapted Schreiner’s arguments for both positions 380-390].
Martyn Lloyd-Jones remarks, “The secret of expounding ‘Romans seven’ is to avoid becoming lost in the details…. Its primary object, its fundamental theme is to deal with the place and function of the Law in God’s dealings with the human race” [The Law: Its Function and Limits, An Exposition of Romans 7:1-8:4, 168].
What is my point, then, in this excursus on the personality involved in Romans 7? It is just this: that we do not become so caught up in figuring out if Paul is talking about unregenerate or regenerate man and thereby miss the point of what he explains. I submit to you that in the long run, it really does not matter if he refers to regenerate or unregenerate (though I think he leans toward the former—there I go interjecting my own thought!). What matters most is that we see his emphasis upon justification and sanctification, not through law, but through Jesus Christ alone. And in order to do that, Paul must explain the power of sin. We understand the sinfulness of sin when we see how sin tries to use the law for its twisted purpose. Do you understand sin’s sinfulness? Most of us would say that we do. Yet the real test of that is how easily we can succumb to temptation and how much we can overlook sin or even excuse it. When we see sin for what it is, it inevitably brings us to the end of the law for righteousness and points only to the cross of Christ as our refuge.
I want to investigate this verse through a series of questions, which helps to summarize where Paul is taking us in Romans 7.
Keep in mind that Paul has both a Jewish and a Gentile audience in the church at Rome. If it were only Jewish then we might come up with a different interpretation of this section. But as we have noted in previous studies, Paul uses law primarily in reference to the Mosaic Law, specifically the Decalogue, but also with reference to the law of God written on the conscience, found even in deeply pagan societies. If anyone attempts to use the law for justification—that is, to put himself into a right relationship with God—then Paul strikes it down. “Because by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin” (3:20). If he tries to use the law for sanctification—that is, actual growth in holiness and conformity to the image of God revealed in Christ—then he will fail as well due to the weakness of the flesh.
So is Paul “anti-law”? Certainly not! Therefore he addresses two specific questions. First, “Is the Law sin?” Paul answers with his patented, “May it never be!” Then he explains that it is only through the law that the knowledge of sin comes, repeating and expanding what he has already stated in 3:20.
Second, “Did that which is good become a cause of death for me?” Paul has explained that instead of seeing the Law as evil or a problem, the Law is “holy and righteous and good.” But he indicated that the law was the seeming cause of his death in vv. 7-11. Was that true? Yes and no; (1) yes in that the consequences of breaking the law result in condemnation. In that case, the law is the cause of death. And even more, as he explains, one feels free to pursue every lust of the flesh until the law shows that his desires are sinful. “I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came sin because alive and I died.” Then it is as though the person has been struck dead by the law. (2) Yet we also have to say, no, the law is not the cause of death for you; sin is the cause of your death: “For sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.” The law may have issued the condemnation but sin carried it out by using the law.
One little but important point that Paul makes through that statement is that sin never has our good in view. Sin is always out to kill and destroy. Would you trust a terrorist organization to baby-sit your children? Would you trust a drug cartel to hold your life savings for good keeping? Then why would you dare to trust sin? We understand that terrorists and drug cartels have evil intentions and that they cannot be trusted. Yet sin is worse, for sin is at the very root of those organizations that kill and destroy. Sin will use something as good and holy as the law for evil purposes.
Why was Paul questioned about his view of the law? He had the audacity to prove that the law could not save or sanctify. As good as is the law, it is totally inadequate to put you in right standing with God or to conform you to the image of Christ. Yet it is not unimportant! “So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
We’ve been discussing law but let us consider what it is. “Did that which is good become a cause of death”? The “good” to which he refers is the Law, identified in verse 12. Obviously, context determines meaning so we have to consider whether one is referring to divine law or Roman civil law in a given passage. Paul’s consideration in Romans 1-11 is primarily on the Mosaic Law, specifically to the moral law. Does that mean he has no consideration of the Jewish civil or ceremonial law? He does deal particularly with the ceremonial law regarding circumcision in chapters 2-4, so he branches out from strictly looking at the moral law. And he does explain that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness, whether civil, ceremonial, or moral (10:4). In each case, though, ceremonial or civil or moral, the law cannot justify or sanctify.
When he tells us that the law is holy, the commandment holy, just (or righteous), and good, then he explains something of the nature of the law. Lloyd-Jones’ explanation proves helpful. The law “is an expression of God’s character. It is the function of the Law to give us a revelation of God, and His being and His character, in order that we may learn what we have to be, and to become, in order to have communion and fellowship with Him” [162]. So we certainly cannot denigrate the law or consider it of no value, either before we come to Christ or after we come to Christ, if it is “an expression of God’s character.” How do we understand the moral nature of God without considering what He values morally? We are not to kill because God values life. We are not to commit adultery because God values purity and faithfulness. We are not to steal because God values work and generosity.
But how does the law, which is made up of commands or duties, teach us about God? We may sometime think that God spent many years thinking up the Decalogue in order to make life difficult for us. That is a wretched thought! R.L. Dabney points out, “Duties [referring to the Law] are not obligatory and right solely because God has commanded them; but He has commanded them because they are right” [Systematic Theology, 352]. In other words, God’s commands are not arbitrary obligations given to us in ways that a prisoner of war camp warden might dish out obligations and duties to prisoners in order to make their lives more miserable. The Law is right because it reflects God’s own moral nature, therefore, our duty toward these commands is the proper disposition of those created in God’s image. These commands reveal the divine standard necessary to enjoy God’s presence and avoid His just wrath.
Yet, strangely, Paul asks the puzzling question, “Did that which is good become a cause of death for me?”
We have already considered this but since Paul repeats it we will too. First, what does he mean by “death” in this case? We can look at it in two ways. (1) Since the wages of sin is death (6:23) then it goes without saying that transgressions of the law result in death. Death is the consequence of sin; and sin is any transgression of the law of God, as the catechism explains. (2) But Paul uses the term “death” in another way. Sin’s twisting and distorting of the law killed his zeal and enjoyment of life. “I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died.” Did he mean die physically? Not in this case. Rather he means that his whole spirit died, his zeal for life died, his enjoyment of life died, so that he came to the place of seeing that every step that he took led ultimately to an eternal death. One may enjoy the pleasures of sin for a passing moment but the stark reality of sin will ultimately jar us, sapping our lives of any hope and sense of pleasure in life. Sin uses the law to accomplish this because sin is always out to rob us of all that God has given to us in Christ.
So was the law the culprit? He has already defended the law against the charge that the law was the direct cause of death. Sin is the culprit, and we must never forget that. “Rather it was sin,” he answers his own question. Sin killed us, not the law. The very thing that we think is so much fun and so liberating is the very thing that ultimately kills us.
Let us linger for a moment of application for believers and unbelievers alike. For those who know Christ: we can get trapped by the passing pleasures of sin. Sin can dupe us into lowering our guard, getting lax in our discipline, compromising convictions of morality and integrity. We glory in the forgiveness that is in Christ, and rightly so. Yet do we presume upon His kindness and grace toward us even as we play with sin’s fire? Sin kills and destroys. So do not let sin reign in your mortal body to obey its lusts. Do not give the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but give yourselves to God and your members as instruments of righteousness to God (6:12-14).
For those among us who have not trusted Christ to redeem you: you are trapped by sin and may not even recognize it. You think that sin is your friend and that the law of God is your enemy. Sin tells you that God is out to rob you of any enjoyment in life. The law will kill you, sin says, so stick with me and you’ll have a jolly good time! God gave His law so that you might understand what true righteousness is like, and so that you might see that you do not have true righteousness in yourself. But He did not give you the law as the end game. It is only the means to awaken you to see what you lack before God so that you might find life through God’s provisions in the gospel of Jesus Christ. You have been frustrated I imagine, while looking at the law and thinking that you just do not have the stuff to follow that kind of strict lifestyle. No, you don’t have the stuff; neither do I. But Christ does. He is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes (10:4). Turn your eyes from what seems to be the austerity of the law to see the wonder of Christ condescending to bear the weight of the law’s demands for you. Every condemning echo that you hear from the law, Christ bore for you at the cross. Flee to Him; trust Him to redeem you from sin’s hold and consequences.
Did you notice the language? “Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.” Remember what Paul has already explained in verse 7. He did not know that coveting was sin except when the revelation of the law hit him between the eyes: “You shall not covet.” Then he found that sin exacerbated his coveting by showing him additional ways to fulfill his covetous heart. Sin commandeered the law to use as the bellows to blow more air over the smoldering fire of unchecked desires in the heart. But did he enjoy life more because of this? Oh no, but on the contrary, he said, “this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me.” Was it because the commandment was evil? Oh no, but rather “sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.” Now, let’s unpack this a bit.
(1) We only come to know sin’s sinfulness through the law of God. Why is that the case? Due to the weakness and sinfulness of our natures, we do not have clear vision to discern good and evil. In order to get the picture of how wretched sin really is, we must see it against a backdrop of righteousness. That’s where the law comes in. “The Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” There’s the backdrop. Now take a sin, any sin, and put it against that backdrop. What do you see? The sin that you thought might not be all that bad suddenly becomes especially horrible!
Take pornography, for instance. What’s so bad about gazing at a little flesh, we might tell ourselves? ‘It’s just skin and there’s nothing wrong with skin! I’m not actually touching anything; besides no one sees me doing this.’ But put that sin against the 7th Commandment, “You shall not commit adultery.” Or, even clearer, put it against Jesus’ explanation of this commandment, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell” (Matt. 7:27-29). That divine backdrop for moral purity exposes pornography for its moral darkness. That particular sin’s sinfulness becomes evident against the backdrop of the law.
We can talk about sin generically and it never phases us. That’s why even talk show hosts can joke about sin or offer the pious platitude, “Well, no one is perfect,” when excusing various sins. But hold a particular sin up to the divine standard in the law. Suddenly, there’s no more reasoning around it by referring to everyone’s imperfections. Instead, we see righteousness before our eyes. We shudder at the sinfulness of sin.
(2) We see how misguiding sin is by the way it uses that which is good, the law, for evil purposes. Paul wants to show “that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.” Yet sin uses the commandment as leverage in our lives to move us toward more sin. Sin does that by playing off of our sinful nature. Sin knows that we are bent toward sinfulness due to the fall in Adam. So he perverts the right use of the law to multiply evil in your life.
Suppose someone goes to work for a bank with the express purpose of stealing depositors’ money. Or suppose someone goes to work for a day care center with the express purpose of abducting a child. Or suppose someone gets on a jet with the express purpose of blowing it up. In each case, the perpetrator took something good—bank, day care, and jet—and perverted its normal use, and even used it to harm others. We would rightly express anger at anyone doing such horrible acts. Yet do we not realize that sin does this to us every day? Sin takes the commandment and twists its meaning, perverts its purpose in order to rob us, put us in bondage, and ultimately, destroy our lives. Lloyd-Jones is right, “And by this deed we see sin’s devilish character, its utter malignity, and its foulness. Nothing too strong can be said about it” [167]. Indeed, sin is utterly sinful!
(3) Even with sin’s malignity, God’s law will not be overturned; the law reveals the utter sinfulness of sin. It is “through the commandment” that sin becomes “utterly sinful.” Utterly means ‘beyond measure, exceedingly,’ or we might say, ‘over the top.’ Yet just as we think that sin has commandeered one of the last truly good things left in this world, sin is exposed for how wretched it is. “The law, which seemed to be victimized by being taken over by sin, emerges as having gained an important objective. It has exposed sin for the evil thing it is” [L. Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, 289, quoting E.F. Harrison, EBC: Romans]. The law puts the spotlight on the evil and deceitfulness of sin.
Yet with that strong showing by the law in the face of sin’s distorting and perverting work, the law is still inadequate to justify you before God or sanctify you as a Christian. The law will do to show us the sinfulness of sin and to reveal that sin in us but it will not do to save and sanctify. Only Jesus Christ will do for that work! Only Jesus Christ liberates from the penalty, power, and ultimately, the presence of sin through His bloody death at the cross.
Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way and you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by South Woods Baptist Church.
Please include the following statement on any distributed copy:
Copyright South Woods Baptist Church. Website: www.southwoodsbc.org. Used by permission as granted on web site. Questions, comments, and suggestions about our site can be sent here.
Copyright 2011, South Woods Baptist Church, All Rights Reserved