Poll Regarding Paul & Romans 7

[JohnRH]

Hello friends,

I'm doing a bit of writing on the true character of Paul and would like to get a feel of the percentage of what Christians think about what Paul said of himself in the unbelievable Romans Chapter 7. Thanks!!

I consider it the post-salvation struggle with sin that all saved people have.

So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

I take that to mean that there IS condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk after the flesh. Not the condemnation of hell; but rather the temporal condemnation that results from walking after the flesh. Paul was saved for eternity, but he hadn't yet been delivered from "the body of this death".

 

[sawdust]

All this discussion and only three votes. Come on lads!!! Cast your vote!!

Increase your options. I vote "Other".

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

More Deception - Instead of Just Being Straightforward:

You cannot possibly get any idea what "percentage" of Christians think of one thing or another, by posting a tiny poll in a tiny thread, that very few people will ever see.

That's not how statistics are done, and I'm pretty sure you know that.
You won't assess what any percentage of Christians in the world believe, and you won't even assess percentages of people in this forum, because most won't even read it.

Surely you know this.
So... what is your REAL reason for conducting a poll?


Maybe you want to bring up a topic, get everyone arguing, while pretending YOU don't have an opinion???



Why don't YOU just give us YOUR opinion UP FRONT, and JUST BE HONEST.

Making fake excuses for a poll, in order to argue some new thing, is just tiresome and deceptive... why don't you just try being honest?

.

Why do you suppose you have a spirit of feeling like people are trying to deceive you?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Increase your options. I vote "Other".

Oh nice! Do tell!

 

[sawdust]

Oh nice! Do tell!

Already did. Post #15

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

'Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?"

Before this he said the wages of sin is death.

I agree "Neither"

Thanks for sharing. I'm not sure that I follow. If Paul wasn't referring to his past or current status, what is an alternate option?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

I believe both of your options are insufficient. Paul is simply stating the condition of man apart from Christ once he recognises the laws of reality (moral and ethical) are of God and are righteous and good. Paul loved righteousness more than his own life, this is why he could recognise this dilemma within.

Thanks for your sharing. However, are you sure that the Laws in question aren't the Laws of Moses?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

so he is not describing the Christian life

I agree. Romans 7 has nothing to do with Gentiles and our Christian life. Romans 7 was written for the Jews exclusively.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

I consider it the post-salvation struggle with sin that all saved people have.

So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

I take that to mean that there IS condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk after the flesh. Not the condemnation of hell; but rather the temporal condemnation that results from walking after the flesh. Paul was saved for eternity, but he hadn't yet been delivered from "the body of this death".

But Romans 7 is dealing with the struggle of the Jew and the Law of Moses. Therefore, this could only apply to Jews struggling in their existence under the Law, which had come to an end some 20-25 years earlier.

 

[Cameron143]

Thanks for sharing. I'm not sure that I follow. If Paul wasn't referring to his past or current status, what is an alternate option?

Let me try it this way:
Romans 5-8 is about the assurance of salvation. The first part of Romans 5 deals with the Father and His connection to assurance. The remainder of chapter 5 deals with Christ and His connection to assurance of the believer. Romans 8 relates the relationship of the Spirit to the believer's assurance.
Chapters 6 and 7 are asides. In other words, Paul anticipated objections would arise. In chapter 6, he anticipates an objection on the basis of license. If salvation is on the basis of grace and not the law, people would sin with impunity. In chapter 7 he addresses the question of what, given salvation is of grace, is the place or purpose of the law. So Paul takes the opportunity to show from his personal experience how the law was insufficient for salvation, but necessary to lead him to Christ.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

So Paul takes the opportunity to show from his personal experience how the law was insufficient for salvation, but necessary to lead him to Christ.

That part made sense to me! - But if what you're saying is true, and I agree with it completely, wouldn't he then be describing his past Spiritual experience and condition?

Thanks, Cameron!

 

[homwardbound]

Hello friends,

I'm doing a bit of writing on the true character of Paul and would like to get a feel of the percentage of what Christians think about what Paul said of himself in the unbelievable Romans Chapter 7. Thanks!!

I see it as his turnover from first birth to second birth, as talked of in John 3, born again to Nicodemus. I see this change is only done (at least for me) by anyone being continually willing to be changed by God for them and through them, not giving up on it to see it too, eventually if not yet. Looking at Paul's story of Saul a Pharisee of Pharisees before he became Paul, he was serious about, what he was doing, before the change happened, best explained to me in Philippians 3. I see people desire to do what is right ( we are born with that knowledge of good and evil in us each) and go after that according to each person's interpretation of it, and then stand on it. That is what Paul did seriously to the point of killing others in testifying Christ the Savior is risen from the dead. When God saw Saul as serious, (Did not do it selfishly for self gain) God revealed himself to Saul in Son as risen appearing to him on that road to Damascus, which would change anyone that had that happen to them also.
Why we all do not get that personal experience, I do not know. Yet for me I read the Bible personally to know this God of Love, that I see Paul expressing about the Law as good and perfect, yet he can't do it perfectly ever. He needs God's lead through it. I personally need that too, and see truth too, I can't do it either, yet seriously want to. I see Romans 7:10 as true too. I see to be dead to the first born birth of my flesh and blood daily, and struggle with that daily
Thanks hope to have given some help in your quest, as God does that for each of us in us, so no need to reply, thanks

 

[Cameron143]

That part made sense to me! - But if what you're saying is true, and I agree with it completely, wouldn't he then be describing his past Spiritual experience and condition?

Thanks, Cameron!

He probably is, or using himself as the universal man.

 

[Edify]

14We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I admit that the law is good. 17In that case, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh; for I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For I do not do the good I want to do. Instead, I keep on doing the evil I do not want to do. 20And if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
21So this is the principle I have discovered: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God’s law. 23But I see another law at work in my body, warring against the law of my mind and holding me captive to the law of sin that dwells within me.b
24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with my mind I serve the law of God, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

1. It is current tense about his current life.
2. With all the I's, he's speaking of himself.
3. V24 states plainly that the mind/heart of himself serves God, but his flesh always wants to sin. This confirms the previous verses before it, esp. V16.
4. NEVER read this by itself to make a conclusion. Paul ALSO writes about pressing/striving toward the mark for the prize. He writes about fighting his flesh to keep it under submission.

In order to understand part of his writings, you must read ALL of his writings. The answers are there.
Anyone trying to reinterpret something symbolic or his previous life is obviously adding to scripture.
It's literally written, so it's literally interpreted.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

He probably is, or using himself as the universal man.

Maybe. However in Chapter 6, Paul includes himself with the Roman Jews who are also struggling under the Old Law (as was Paul over twenty years prior), as those who had been released from the Power of sin. If Paul says that himself and these Roman Jews had been released from the Power of sin, why would he, in Romans 7 say that he was a slave to sin? Furthermore, in Chapter 1, Paul said that he was a slave to Christ. In Romans 1, Paul is a slave to Christ. In Romans 7, he is a slave to the Devil. That's pretty weird, isn't it?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

1. It is current tense about his current life.

But Paul abandoned following the Law of Moses over twenty years earlier. He hadn't followed the Law for decades.

 

[Cameron143]

Maybe. However in Chapter 6, Paul includes himself with the Roman Jews who are also struggling under the Old Law (as was Paul over twenty years prior), as those who had been released from the Power of sin. If Paul says that himself and these Roman Jews had been released from the Power of sin, why would he, in Romans 7 say that he was a slave to sin? Furthermore, in Chapter 1, Paul said that he was a slave to Christ. In Romans 1, Paul is a slave to Christ. In Romans 7, he is a slave to the Devil. That's pretty weird, isn't it?

Not sure I understand the point.

 

[SomeDisciple]

It's about his former life under the law. Otherwise it's pretty much denying the sanctifying power of God: the whole point of our faith is deliverance from the power of sin in our lives and being enabled and empowered to do good. He could not be walking in the spirit and say "I don't do the good works I want to do and do the bad works I don't want to do".

Furthermore, in Chapter 1, Paul said that he was a slave to Christ. In Romans 1, Paul is a slave to Christ. In Romans 7, he is a slave to the Devil. That's pretty weird, isn't it?

Precisely.

 

[Edify]

I believe that it was the thorn in his flesh that he asked God to remove. He probably suffered from a bit of a guilt complex.

I believe that's part of it, but Paul was writing generally about sin in his daily life.
Some people have trouble with this, but that's usually because they/we don't know all the sins they/we commit due to remembering them, properly classifying them as sin, etc.
Some say they they they don't sin every day, yet Jesus teaches us to ask forgiveness daily in His model prayer. Paul also tells us we need to be renewed every day, signifying our need to do so
If Paul, an apostle had problems with his flesh, who are we to say we don't?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

It's about his former life under the law. Otherwise it's pretty much denying the sanctifying power of God: the whole point of our faith is deliverance from the power of sin in our lives and being enabled and empowered to do good. He could not be walking in the spirit and say "I don't do the good works I want to do and do the bad works I don't want to do".


Precisely.

You have clearly studied the Bible, or at least his portion of Scripture, thought by thought, to come to such a conclusion. Impressive. After many, many decades, the Lord just showed me what He has shown you above.