Thanks for ending this. I kind of expected it based upon previous discussions in which I offered to get into Scripture more in depth with you and you wouldn't do so. When you start the mocking and fallacious inferences it all goes down hill from there.
FWIW, of you do ever desire to do some more thinking about the Greek tenses and the depth of Greek rhetoric, philosophy, drama, etc. built into their language and thus capable of expressing their thinking which is quite different than much of western thought, though we do have the historic present also:
A search for the historic present in literature:
Here's a vivid example from Alice Walker’s essay “Beauty: When the Other Dancer Is the Self”, where she uses the historic present tense to draw readers into a childhood memory:
“It is a bright summer day in 1947. My father, a fat, funny man with beautiful eyes and a subversive wit, is trying to decide which of his eight children he will take with him to the county fair. My mother, of course, will not go. She is knocked out from getting most of us ready...”
Although the events occurred decades earlier, Walker narrates them in the present tense—“is,” “will,” “go”—to create immediacy and emotional resonance. It feels like you're right there, watching the scene unfold.
A quick search of views over time re: historic present and other uses of the present tense:
Quick Definitions
- Prosopopoeia: Rhetorical technique where the speaker adopts another character’s voice.
- Historic Present: Use of present-tense verbs to narrate past events, often for vividness or emotional immediacy.
Interpretive Traditions on Romans 7:7–25 – "I" and Tense Use
- Reformed Tradition (Augustine, Luther, Calvin)
- "I": Paul as a regenerate believer
- Present Tense: Autobiographical, ongoing struggle
- Prosopopoeia: Typically rejected
- Implication: Christian life includes continual tension with sin; Romans 7 is normative
- Early Church Fathers (Origen, Chrysostom)
- "I": Unregenerate or pre-conversion Paul
- Present Tense: Dramatizes pre-Christian experience
- Prosopopoeia: Implied
- Implication: Romans 7 describes bondage under Law, leading to Spirit-filled freedom in Romans 8
- Sanday & Headlam (Early Modern View)
- "I": Possibly autobiographical but rhetorically heightened
- Present Tense: Used for vividness (historic present)
- Prosopopoeia: Possible
- Implication: Tension resolves at 7:25a; pivot to Spirit empowerment
- Stanley Stowers (Modern Rhetorical View)
- "I": Representative figure (likely Jewish, not Paul)
- Present Tense: Dramatic impersonation
- Prosopopoeia: Explicit
- Implication: Romans 7 is a constructed voice showing Law's inability to justify or sanctify
- Will Timmins
- "I": Representative, but with theological connections to Paul
- Present Tense: Rhetorical and experiential blend
- Prosopopoeia: Qualified
- Implication: Merges rhetorical strategy with existential depth; emphasizes interpretive flexibility
- Evangelical Scholars (Douglas Moo, Thomas Schreiner)
- "I": Paul as believer speaking of inner conflict
- Present Tense: Reflects real-time Christian struggle
- Prosopopoeia: Generally dismissed
- Implication: Romans 7 reflects believer's reality before full Spirit-empowered transformation in Romans 8
As I've attempted to point out, this discussion has been going on for a long time. It's a real discussion based in interpretation of context and use of tenses in rhetorical Greek literature.
You're obviously welcome to your opinion, but mocking other opinions IMO puts you in a bad light in the overall discussion.
As I said, I understand both your and
@sawdust views. I also understand the above historical discussions.
