# I am struggling with Romans 7 and 8



## Kurt Steele (Feb 23, 2016)

The question:

Is Paul talking as a saved man in Romans 7 and then shifting to regenerate state in Romans 8 or is it normative to have this struggle between victory over sin by the Spirit (8) and the struggle (7)?

Practical Application:

I have been really focusing on "putting to death the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit" after reading "Mortification of Sin" by John Owen.

Any insights would be appreciated?


----------



## Romans922 (Feb 23, 2016)

Yes, he's speaking as a saved man in Rom. 7. The struggle with sin (flesh) while being regenerated (Spirit). Romans 8 (even dealing with Rom 7) is that which he goes back to for assurance/comfort in Christ. For though he has remaining sin and it's a struggle, at the same time there is NOW no condemnation in Christ Jesus.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Feb 23, 2016)

Kurt Steele said:


> Is Paul talking as a saved man in Romans 7 and then shifting to regenerate state in Romans 8



I am not sure I understand the question? Do you mean an [un]saved man in Romans 7? Otherwise the saved man and the regenerate state are the same thing. Unless I am missing your meaning.

I loved Owen at the same place. His exposition of Psalm 130 is my all time favorite.


----------



## Kurt Steele (Feb 23, 2016)

The part that confuses me is the use of the present tense in Greek. I John the present tense in a similar way and speaks that persons who continually sin (present tense) do not KNOW God? This has always thrown me off. I always have been told that it is not the perfection of your life but the direction of your life. Cliches do not help me. Does this theological and practical question make sense?


----------



## Kurt Steele (Feb 23, 2016)

I like this answer...please check my additional clarification and please give me feedback...thanks in advance.


----------



## BertMulder (Feb 23, 2016)

> Romans 7:14-25 is a passage concerning which there has been a great deal of discussion and disagreement in the history of God's church. The passage reads: "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent under the law that it is good. Now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 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. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." There have been three main interpretations of this passage which may be summed up as follows: 1) The passage is Paul's autobiographical account of his pre-conversion experience. 2) The passage is not autobiographical, but pictures man in general, or the Jew in particular, apart from Christ, under the law. 3) The passage describes Paul's own experience as a believer. The first interpretation was that of Arminius himself. (Cf._Arminius: A Study In The Dutch Reformation_, Carl Bangs, pp. 186 ff.) Others holding this view of the passage were Pelagius, Erasmus, Socinus, Episcopius, and Grotius. The second view, currently rather popular, was introduced by W. G. Kummel, a German theologian. This position is followed by H. Ridderbos (_Paul_) and A. Hoekema (_The Christian Looks At Himself_). Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Reformed theologians in general maintain the third view of the passage. It is not possible to give a detailed exegesis of this passage in one article and we do not intend to try. (Those who wish to study the passage in more detail may consult H; Hoeksema's_Dogmatics_, pp. 533-546.) What we wish to accomplish is to emphasize the importance of maintaining the correct view of this passage and, at the same time, to indicate some of the serious implications of the Arminian interpretation.



http://standardbearer.rfpa.org/node/38658


----------



## Kurt Steele (Feb 23, 2016)

BertMulder said:


> > Romans 7:14-25 is a passage concerning which there has been a great deal of discussion and disagreement in the history of God's church. The passage reads: "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent under the law that it is good. Now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 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. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." There have been three main interpretations of this passage which may be summed up as follows: 1) The passage is Paul's autobiographical account of his pre-conversion experience. 2) The passage is not autobiographical, but pictures man in general, or the Jew in particular, apart from Christ, under the law. 3) The passage describes Paul's own experience as a believer. The first interpretation was that of Arminius himself. (Cf._Arminius: A Study In The Dutch Reformation_, Carl Bangs, pp. 186 ff.) Others holding this view of the passage were Pelagius, Erasmus, Socinus, Episcopius, and Grotius. The second view, currently rather popular, was introduced by W. G. Kummel, a German theologian. This position is followed by H. Ridderbos (_Paul_) and A. Hoekema (_The Christian Looks At Himself_). Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Reformed theologians in general maintain the third view of the passage. It is not possible to give a detailed exegesis of this passage in one article and we do not intend to try. (Those who wish to study the passage in more detail may consult H; Hoeksema's_Dogmatics_, pp. 533-546.) What we wish to accomplish is to emphasize the importance of maintaining the correct view of this passage and, at the same time, to indicate some of the serious implications of the Arminian interpretation.
> 
> 
> 
> http://standardbearer.rfpa.org/node/38658



This article hit it on the head for me especially this quote "If this view were correct it would mean that the unregenerate is able to know that the law of God is spiritual and that he is carnal, sold under sin (Rom. 7:14); condemns the evil which he does (Rom. 7:15); wills the good and hates the evil (Rom. 7:15, 19); wills not to do the evil (Rom. 7:16, 20); delights in the law of God (Rom. 7:22); thanks God through Jesus Christ (Rom. 7:24, 25). All this, according to the Arminian, is possible for one who is outside of Christ, who lacks the principle of the life of Christ. Such a person, it would seem, would have little need for a Savior! "

I guess the real proof of our regeneration is that are eyes are opened and we hate the sin that we do. The struggle is the proof. Thanks for this article.


----------

