Romans 7:1-25, saved man or unregenerate man?

[Dell Russell]

I would like to take a fresh look at this, highly and sometimes hotly debated, set of verses. Before we can say Romans 7 is or is not a license to sin for the believer, as I have read through the other thread, we must first know if this man is born again or not in this chapter. I have studied this chapter for a number of years now myself and I come to the conclusion it is indeed a lost man. I will also say, because I believe it is a lost man Paul is describing, it drives a stake in the heart of the gospel message when it is interpreted as a saved man.

As I said, I have studied this chapter for a number of years. I think I have read just about every angle used to prove it one way or the other, and I can see how it is interpreted as a saved man, but once all things are considered I do not believe it can be interpreted correctly as a saved man.

What I would like to do is put forth my own personal studies, along with a few I learned from others, as this debate plays out. (I will clarify which ones are my own and which ones that belong to someone else as I come to them. I like to give credit where credit is due.)

I have noticed, as I studied through Romans, that Paul repeats himself a number of times and in these times he reiterates what has been said thus far and then adds a few words as to where he is going with his argument. In these series of verses it is laid out in the same order as the book of Romans itself is laid out. Also we will see that every time where chapter 7 falls it is in the past tense or describes an unregenerate man.

This is not where he begins these series of verses, but because it is very clear and in the same chapter of the subject at hand I will start in Romans 7.

Romans 7:1-6 has been used to argue over marriage and divorce and remarriage, but I will let someone else hash that one out, as I think at this point that is a side issue to the subject of whether or not this is a saved man or not.

Romans 7:2 and 3 is about chapter 5.
Here in these two verses we have a husband and wife analogy. Many believe the first husband mentioned is the law and it is the law that must die in order for the woman to be free to remarry. But that is not the case here. In fact if you have studied Romans you would notice that Paul contrasts a number of things, flesh to spirit, law to faith, Adam to Christ, life to death, and so on. As you notice here we see it is law to faith and Adam to Christ that has been contrasted. So, in understanding this we see Adam would be the first husband and not the law.
In chapter 5 we see our problem is we are born in the line of Adam and him being the head of the human race. The cure for that is we need to be in Christ, but Christ will not or can not become our head until the Adam part of us is put to death. Paul will tell us how that death takes place in chapter 6.
I think why many believe the first husband is the law probably comes from 7:6. It says, "But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held..." What we must understand is "what died" and then we will understand how we were delivered from the law. Very simply, the flesh, old man, Adam self was put to death by the way of the cross. And because the flesh part of man is crucified the law no longer reigns and rules over the believer, thus we are delivered from the law.

Romans 7:4 is about chapter 6.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 6. Just as Romans 6 tells us we have been crucified with Christ and raised with Christ that we have fruits unto hloiness, this verse (7:4) describes chapter 6 to a T.

Romans 7:5 is about chapter 7.
Here we have a one verse description of the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is in the flesh, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is under the law, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is bound to a life of sin, so is the man of chapter 7.

Romans 7:6 is about chapter 8.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 8. I'll save the commentary as it is self explainatory.

What is important to notice here is the tenses of the verses of 7:4-6. It goes from present tense, to past tense, back to present tense.

Another reason I believe Romans 7 is seen by many to be a saved man is most likely because the man of chapter 7 is so far removed from the lostness of man described in chapters 1:18-3:20. But we can see Paul continues to bring the lost man back up in these series of verses. We see he does this to contrast the lost man to the saved man in these series and seeing this we can easily see how this is done in chapter 7 as well. As we go through this debate we will see Paul uses the same pattern elsewhere besides Romans. The pattern being,
The depravity of man,
The gospel message,
A look back to where we were,
Moving forward.

I hope to have a civil debate on the subject and perhaps learn a few things as well. All of the above is my own personal studies and as best as I can tell is not in any commentary, none that I have read anyway.

In Christ Jesus,
Dell Russell
Pontotoc, Mississippi

 

[mark s]

HI Dell,

In a nutshell . . .

I see Romans 7:1-4 describing the regenerate man's relationship to the Law, that being severed.

Romans 7:5, the law and the unregenerate.

Romans 7:6, again, the regenerate "released" from the Law.

Romans 7:7-13, the Law's effect on the unregenerate.

When we come to Romans 7:14-25, it gets more complex. But here are a couple of things that I look at.

Romans 7:16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good.
Romams 7:17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

This, "no longer I who do it", expresses a couple of things to me. One is that it used to be me who did it, otherwise, how could I "no longer" do it? Another is what the verse states, "I no longer am the one who does it." And so the implication is that something has changed.

I used to be disobedient, but now it's not me, it's sin that lives in me.

So what changed? I did. God regenerated me, and made me a new person. The new me does not sin. But the sin that still lives in me does.

Romans 7:18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.

And he says the same thing again here:

Romans 7:20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Love in Christ,
Mark

 

[haz]

I would like to take a fresh look at this, highly and sometimes hotly debated, set of verses. Before we can say Romans 7 is or is not a license to sin for the believer, as I have read through the other thread, we must first know if this man is born again or not in this chapter. I have studied this chapter for a number of years now myself and I come to the conclusion it is indeed a lost man. I will also say, because I believe it is a lost man Paul is describing, it drives a stake in the heart of the gospel message when it is interpreted as a saved man.

As I said, I have studied this chapter for a number of years. I think I have read just about every angle used to prove it one way or the other, and I can see how it is interpreted as a saved man, but once all things are considered I do not believe it can be interpreted correctly as a saved man.

What I would like to do is put forth my own personal studies, along with a few I learned from others, as this debate plays out. (I will clarify which ones are my own and which ones that belong to someone else as I come to them. I like to give credit where credit is due.)

I have noticed, as I studied through Romans, that Paul repeats himself a number of times and in these times he reiterates what has been said thus far and then adds a few words as to where he is going with his argument. In these series of verses it is laid out in the same order as the book of Romans itself is laid out. Also we will see that every time where chapter 7 falls it is in the past tense or describes an unregenerate man.

This is not where he begins these series of verses, but because it is very clear and in the same chapter of the subject at hand I will start in Romans 7.

Romans 7:1-6 has been used to argue over marriage and divorce and remarriage, but I will let someone else hash that one out, as I think at this point that is a side issue to the subject of whether or not this is a saved man or not.

Romans 7:2 and 3 is about chapter 5.
Here in these two verses we have a husband and wife analogy. Many believe the first husband mentioned is the law and it is the law that must die in order for the woman to be free to remarry. But that is not the case here. In fact if you have studied Romans you would notice that Paul contrasts a number of things, flesh to spirit, law to faith, Adam to Christ, life to death, and so on. As you notice here we see it is law to faith and Adam to Christ that has been contrasted. So, in understanding this we see Adam would be the first husband and not the law.
In chapter 5 we see our problem is we are born in the line of Adam and him being the head of the human race. The cure for that is we need to be in Christ, but Christ will not or can not become our head until the Adam part of us is put to death. Paul will tell us how that death takes place in chapter 6.
I think why many believe the first husband is the law probably comes from 7:6. It says, "But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held..." What we must understand is "what died" and then we will understand how we were delivered from the law. Very simply, the flesh, old man, Adam self was put to death by the way of the cross. And because the flesh part of man is crucified the law no longer reigns and rules over the believer, thus we are delivered from the law.

Romans 7:4 is about chapter 6.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 6. Just as Romans 6 tells us we have been crucified with Christ and raised with Christ that we have fruits unto hloiness, this verse (7:4) describes chapter 6 to a T.

Romans 7:5 is about chapter 7.
Here we have a one verse description of the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is in the flesh, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is under the law, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is bound to a life of sin, so is the man of chapter 7.

Romans 7:6 is about chapter 8.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 8. I'll save the commentary as it is self explainatory.

What is important to notice here is the tenses of the verses of 7:4-6. It goes from present tense, to past tense, back to present tense.

Another reason I believe Romans 7 is seen by many to be a saved man is most likely because the man of chapter 7 is so far removed from the lostness of man described in chapters 1:18-3:20. But we can see Paul continues to bring the lost man back up in these series of verses. We see he does this to contrast the lost man to the saved man in these series and seeing this we can easily see how this is done in chapter 7 as well. As we go through this debate we will see Paul uses the same pattern elsewhere besides Romans. The pattern being,
The depravity of man,
The gospel message,
A look back to where we were,
Moving forward.

I hope to have a civil debate on the subject and perhaps learn a few things as well. All of the above is my own personal studies and as best as I can tell is not in any commentary, none that I have read anyway.

In Christ Jesus,
Dell Russell
Pontotoc, Mississippi

Hi Dell,

We see mention of the carnal verses spiritual minded man in several verses.

Rom 7:14 but I am carnal, sold under sin (This speaks of the lost man, as you claimed).

Rom 7:6-9 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. [sup] [/sup]Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. [sup] [/sup]So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit

Either we are spiritually minded (saved) or carnally minded (unsaved). Paul is speaking of the unsaved man in Rom 7, as you claimed.

Rom 7:25 So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
This verse confirms that we are either spiritually minded (walking in the Spirit) OR carnally minded (walking according to the flesh.

 

[Trekson]

My two cents. I believe it is talking of a saved man "fighting the good fight". With our hearts and minds we live for God but because of our basic nature we will always struggle with sin in our flesh. We will only be able to attain complete victory at death or when we receive our new immortal, incorruptible., glorified bodies.

 

[Dell Russell]

Thanks for the comments. I intend to add to it as time allows.

I understand that we still struggle even after being saved, but so does the unbeliever.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Dell, The struggle isn't the same. There is a big difference between trying to exercise the gifts of the spirit and getting victory over sin and a non-believer just trying to reform himself for personal reasons. It all lies in our motivation.

 

[Dell Russell]

Hi Dell, The struggle isn't the same. There is a big difference between trying to exercise the gifts of the spirit and getting victory over sin and a non-believer just trying to reform himself for personal reasons. It all lies in our motivation.

Hello Trekson,
Thanks for the reply. Here in Romans 7 there is nothing there to think this man is trying to exercise any gifts of the Spirit to get victory over sin. This man is trapped in a struggle between the flesh and his own mind. In fact this man is also completely defeted and has accepted the idea he is serving God as long as he is doing so in his mind.
I'm not saying there is no struggle with the believer, but here in this chapter I see no difference in this man than I do in many lost people I talk to on a regular basis. I understand that many see this as a saved man because of what it says in Romans 8:6; For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. To say one is saved simply because they think about serving God or because they think about spiritual things, is to say almost all people are saved. If just thinking about spiritual things is the qualifier and mark of salvation then surely Paul was wasting his time and all preachers are as well, because many religions think they are doing a pretty good job of pleasing God and or at least trying to pleae God. That would mean all Mormons, Jehovah's Wittnesses, and Jews are just as saved as anyone. When Paul is talking about being spiritually minded he is not talking about those that are thinking about pleasing God or even trying to please God, but rather he is talking about those that do please God. I think this is borne out in the rest of Romans 8.

As I pointed out in the opening post how Paul gave us an analogy and how it is a picture example of how Romans 5-8 is to be interpreted. He does this a number of times and each time it points out how Romans 7 is a lost man. I'll try and post another set of verses that Paul gives us a run down of how the chapters are to be interpreted soon, hopefully in the morning.

In Christ,
Dell

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

Romans 7 .... is written to an observant religious Jew .... (vs 1) Do you not know, brothers and sisters — for I am speaking to those who know the law.

Romans 7 .... is simply an explaination of how the law is no longer in effect (for righteousness) because with Christ it is done by The Spirit ... (vs 6) we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

It's as simple as that.

The rest of the chapter merely discusses the mechanics of Law vs Spirit. A newly converted Jew would need that explained. We do not.

We (here on the forum) are not religious Jews who became Christians.

We are unsave gentile pagans who became Christians..

Keep that in mind as you read Romans and everything makes sense.

Trying to apply Romans literaly to ourselves will just screw with our heads. Same as the book of Hebrews.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Dell, Your words: "Here in Romans 7 there is nothing there to think this man is trying to exercise any gifts of the Spirit to get victory over sin."

That's not what I said. I said, "trying to exercise the gifts of the spirit and getting victory over sin" Two separate things, though as I just re-read this I meant to say "fruits" of the spirit, not gifts, my bad!

One way to study the bible is to see how it applies to your life. So, just as an exercise for this OP, let me re-write some these verses and make it more personal and then you will understand what I mean.

Rom. 5:5-6 - "For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
(This is the way we were before salvation)

6
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."
(This is our goal as believers)

Rom. 7:7-13 is just explaining how the law can't deliver us from sin.

Rom. 7:14-25 - "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
( the law is spiritual but I still have the basic sin nature that my flesh at times can't control) (this is the struggle most young Christians face.)
15
For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do
I.
( I don’t want to look at that pretty girl, yet I do and when I know I should return the extra money the cashier gave me, I don’t. I hate it when I snap at my son but stupid me, I do it anyways)
16
If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
(When I do those things I shouldn’t, I realize it is the law in my heart telling me it is a sin and that’s a good thing)
17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
( Now I realize that it isn’t my spiritual mind that causes me to sin, it is my basic sin nature)
18
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.
(I know that my basic sin nature is not a good thing for when I desire to do good I have a hard time doing it)
19
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
( every time I want to do good, I don’t and most times the sin I don’t want to do, I find myself doing it anyways)
20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
(If I do that which I don’t want to, it’s not my spiritual mind that acts on it but the sin nature that dwells within me)
21
I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
(So, here’s my situation, every time I want to do what is good and right, the devil is right there beside me, tempting me to do the wrong thing)
22
For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
(I know that the law in my heart is a good thing for my spiritual growth)
23
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.
(But my sin nature has another law in my heart constantly keeping me in a state of spiritual warfare towards sin and keeping me captive to what I don’t want to do)
24
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
(I’m sick to death of this warfare, is there any way out? when will it end?)
25
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
(Thank God for what Christ has done. My spiritual new man serves the law of God, but with the flesh I serve the law of sin)

The topic doesn’t end there, however, to finish this line of thought we must go on to Cp. 8.
Rom. 8:1-13

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
(If we walk after the Spirit and not after the sin nature we are not condemned)
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. (self explanatory)
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
(Jesus was able to reconcile our sin nature with our new man by being crucified for our sins)
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
(Thereby the righteous judgment of the law has been fulfilled by His death)
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
( As we grow in Christ we will see our new nature growing more spiritual and our sin nature diminishing)
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
(If we continue to let our sin nature rule us, we will die in our sin but if we master it in our spiritual life we will have peace and eternal life)
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
(Our sin nature is at odds with God, for it has it’s own selfish desires)
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (self explanatory)
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
(We need to realize that our new man can control our sin nature because Christ dwells within us. If Christ’s spirit doesn’t dwell in us than we aren’t His.)
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
(Even though we have Christ in us, this body must die because of the sin nature that is also inside us, but we will live eternally because the Spirit of life also dwells within us)
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
(The same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead will grant our mortal bodies, immortality, incorruptibleness and glorified thereby in effect, “killing” the sin nature within us, when we either die or are raptured)
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
(Our allegiance is to Christ, not our sin nature)
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live
(If we let the sin nature rule us, we will die in our sin but if we put to death the sin nature, we will live)

As I’ve explained in other forums this is a process all believers will go through, until the majority of the time, we are living by the spirit and exercising the fruits of the spirit.

There will always be those moments, imo, every now and then when we fail and that’s the old sin nature trying to rear its ugly head but we need to beat it back down and not let the devil give us a guilt trip for failing. (back to Rom. 8:1)

Anyway, this is why I see this passage as a saved man struggling to get control over his sin nature so that the Spirit can be in control instead.

 

[Stan]

I have heard this interpretation before and quite frankly it sounds very Calvinistic to me. I don't see it in Romans. Remember that Paul used to hunt The Way. He knew where they were, and where the established Jewish synagogues were. The people he was writing to in Romans were Christians, NOT Jews and the fact is that many Gentiles knew the Mosaic Law, especially if they had ANY contact with the Jews. In the first six verses, Paul was helping them to understand the 'law' and how it was perceived by God. Because most of these people knew who Paul was, they accepted his word as not only an Apostle of the Christian church, but as a skilled teacher of the OT law.

Now remember, this is at least 14 years after Paul was saved so in verses 7 - 25, Paul brings in his PERSONAL perspective as it relates to the Jewish Laws, in which he was an expert, and the law that was prophesied in Jeremiah to be written on man's heart, wherein he experienced when Jesus called him. The tenses do change, from past, 7-13, to present, 14-23, and future, 24-25. Verse 26 is Paul's conclusion to the whole chapter. It is all based on Paul's experiences.
Then we go on to Romans 8:1-4, as Paul brings us to the next step of no longer being condemned, even if we feel like it.

 

[Dell Russell]

I have heard this interpretation before and quite frankly it sounds very Calvinistic to me. I don't see it in Romans. Remember that Paul used to hunt The Way. He knew where they were, and where the established Jewish synagogues were. The people he was writing to in Romans were Christians, NOT Jews and the fact is that many Gentiles knew the Mosaic Law, especially if they had ANY contact with the Jews. In the first six verses, Paul was helping them to understand the 'law' and how it was perceived by God. Because most of these people knew who Paul was, they accepted his word as not only an Apostle of the Christian church, but as a skilled teacher of the OT law.

Now remember, this is at least 14 years after Paul was saved so in verses 7 - 25, Paul brings in his PERSONAL perspective as it relates to the Jewish Laws, in which he was an expert, and the law that was prophesied in Jeremiah to be written on man's heart, wherein he experienced when Jesus called him. The tenses do change, from past, 7-13, to present, 14-23, and future, 24-25. Verse 26 is Paul's conclusion to the whole chapter. It is all based on Paul's experiences.
Then we go on to Romans 8:1-4, as Paul brings us to the next step of no longer being condemned, even if we feel like it.

I have heard this interpretation before and quite frankly it sounds very Calvinistic to me. I don't see it in Romans. Remember that Paul used to hunt The Way. He knew where they were, and where the established Jewish synagogues were. The people he was writing to in Romans were Christians, NOT Jews and the fact is that many Gentiles knew the Mosaic Law, especially if they had ANY contact with the Jews. In the first six verses, Paul was helping them to understand the 'law' and how it was perceived by God. Because most of these people knew who Paul was, they accepted his word as not only an Apostle of the Christian church, but as a skilled teacher of the OT law.

Now remember, this is at least 14 years after Paul was saved so in verses 7 - 25, Paul brings in his PERSONAL perspective as it relates to the Jewish Laws, in which he was an expert, and the law that was prophesied in Jeremiah to be written on man's heart, wherein he experienced when Jesus called him. The tenses do change, from past, 7-13, to present, 14-23, and future, 24-25. Verse 26 is Paul's conclusion to the whole chapter. It is all based on Paul's experiences.
Then we go on to Romans 8:1-4, as Paul brings us to the next step of no longer being condemned, even if we feel like it.

Hello Stan,
I'm not sure if you are addressing me or Trekson or perhaps someone else. I think Trekson, but not 100% sure. Trekson is coming from a Calvinist viewpoint. Also, I'm not sure if you think Romans 7 is a saved man or an unregenerate man.
What is your assessment of what I said about how 7:2-6 relates to chapters 5-8?

Trekson,
I read this earlier this week, but did not have time to sit and reply. I don't want you to think I just brushed you off or forgot about you, but I did want to give it some thought, as I see you have. I appreciate your time and look forward to the debate, but I'm not one to get in a rush, as you probably have figured out by now. I read everyone's post and try to reply with as much respect and attention as possible.

Hi Dell, Your words: "Here in Romans 7 there is nothing there to think this man is trying to exercise any gifts of the Spirit to get victory over sin."

That's not what I said. I said, "trying to exercise the gifts of the spirit and getting victory over sin" Two separate things, though as I just re-read this I meant to say "fruits" of the spirit, not gifts, my bad!

Sorry. I saw the "gifts" and "spirit" and thought you were speaking of the Holy Spirit. But then again I would have thought the same thing if you had first put "fruits" I see what you meant, so we'll just move right along, as I see other things in your post that need more attention.

One way to study the bible is to see how it applies to your life.

I suppose you could study the Bible that way, but I think that can lead to bad doctrine, not always, but one must be extreamly careful doing that. I think the better way is to ask God what He is trying to tell us and then apply scripture to our lives and then perhaps we will get a different experience.

So, just as an exercise for this OP, let me re-write some these verses and make it more personal and then you will understand what I mean.

Rom. 5:5-6 - "For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
(This is the way we were before salvation)

Agreed.

6
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."
(This is our goal as believers)

I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean here, but I think you are saying this is something we are looking forward to. Correct me if I'm mistaken. Here Paul is addressing the fact that we have been delivered (past tense) from the law, because that thing that held us to the law is now dead, that think being the body of flesh that was crucified with Christ. Because of that reality we now are to serve in newness of spirit. Christ came as we are, flesh. So, what died with Christ is what died with us as believers.

Rom. 7:7-13 is just explaining how the law can't deliver us from sin.

It does do that, but it also says much more! To lightly brush over this is to miss the stage setting of what is yet to come. Here Paul reaches way back to when he first understood the commandments and the consequences for failing to do them. Understanding that we see this chapter is not speaking of the believers present life, but the life of the unregenerate. If this is a believer in this section then we have a believer that looses their salvation in verse 9-13.

Rom. 7:14-25 - "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
( the law is spiritual but I still have the basic sin nature that my flesh at times can't control) (this is the struggle most young Christians face.)

I am curious about this "sin nature" thing. I have heard of it, but have never been able to pin it down as to what it is or where it comes from. Please elaborate. In the meantime I think this verse only confirms more that this is an unregenerate man, as this man is carnal, so he would have a carnal mind, and this man is sold under sin whereas the believer is bought with a price, the blood of Christ.

15
For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do
I.
( I don’t want to look at that pretty girl, yet I do and when I know I should return the extra money the cashier gave me, I don’t. I hate it when I snap at my son but stupid me, I do it anyways)
16
If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
(When I do those things I shouldn’t, I realize it is the law in my heart telling me it is a sin and that’s a good thing)
17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
( Now I realize that it isn’t my spiritual mind that causes me to sin, it is my basic sin nature)
18
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.
(I know that my basic sin nature is not a good thing for when I desire to do good I have a hard time doing it)
19
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
( every time I want to do good, I don’t and most times the sin I don’t want to do, I find myself doing it anyways)
20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
(If I do that which I don’t want to, it’s not my spiritual mind that acts on it but the sin nature that dwells within me)
21
I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
(So, here’s my situation, every time I want to do what is good and right, the devil is right there beside me, tempting me to do the wrong thing)

This can apply to either a saved person or a lost person. If you think it can not apply to a lost person then I have a mission, or more like an experiment for you to do. At the least you can perhaps prove me wrong and at best witness to someone and hopefully lead them to the Lord. Here it is: Ask around and find someone that will tell you they do not know the Lord as Saviour, you might ask them if they are a Christian or if they are saved. Once you have found your person that admits they are not a Christian, without telling them what you are up to, just ask them if they ever do things they know they have told themselves they would not do ever again. If they say no then give them the gospel and if they say yes then give them the gospel.

22
For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
(I know that the law in my heart is a good thing for my spiritual growth)
23
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.
(But my sin nature has another law in my heart constantly keeping me in a state of spiritual warfare towards sin and keeping me captive to what I don’t want to do)
24
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
(I’m sick to death of this warfare, is there any way out? when will it end?)

Again, this is a wretched man still in the flesh, but we are not in the flesh, because our flesh has been crucified and we are in christ Jesus!

25
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
(Thank God for what Christ has done. My spiritual new man serves the law of God, but with the flesh I serve the law of sin)

This is a two part verse. 25a is the answer to the problem no doubt, but it is an interjection of praise because he is no longer the man of chapter 7. Paul interjects a Thanks to God here, but it is not the summation of chapter 7. The summation comes when he says "So then" in 25b.

I would like to address a few things here before moving on to the next part.

In Christ,
Dell

 

[Trekson]

Dell,
Your words: “I appreciate your time and look forward to the debate, but I'm not one to get in a rush, as you probably have figured out by now. I read everyone's post and try to reply with as much respect and attention as possible.”

As do I. My apologies for being late in responding as well. We had a plumbing situation which entailed tearing up and installing a new floor. I’ve never done that before and it probably took me longer than a professional but it was thousands of dollars cheaper.


My words: But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."
(This is our goal as believers)

Your words: because that thing that held us to the law is now dead, that think being the body of flesh that was crucified with Christ. Because of that reality we now are to serve in newness of spirit. Christ came as we are, flesh. So, what died with Christ is what died with us as believers.

My words: Obviously, our “body of flesh” didn’t die, as we are still here. What died was the spirit of our old man and we have been born again as a new creature (spiritually, not physically).


Rom. 7:7-13 is just explaining how the law can't deliver us from sin.

Your words: If this is a believer in this section then we have a believer that looses their salvation in verse 9-13.

There is nothing in vss. 9-13 that implies a believer loses their salvation. These are just saying the law informs us of what sin is. This doesn’t stop with salvation. These laws become written in our hearts and minds instead of just words in a book. We still need to know what sin is, so we can heed the Holy Spirit as we grow in the grace and knowledge of Christ.


Rom. 7:14-25 - "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
( the law is spiritual but I still have the basic sin nature that my flesh at times can't control) (this is the struggle most young Christians face.)

Your words: I am curious about this "sin nature" thing.

First, our basic sin nature and our "old man" are two separate things. Yes, our old man is the sinner we used to be and our new man is the one we desire to be which is like Christ. Yes, the old man dies, but the sin nature can not until our body dies. It's part of our DNA. The "forbidden fruit" had an eternal consequence for the human race that can only be "cured" when we receive our immortal, glorified bodies or when our spirits depart the mortal plain. It is why believers can still sin. I'm sorry but I don't believe for a minute that there are perfect, sinless christians out there. Sure, there are some that live holier lives than others but they will still sin. No one can live in absolute victory 24/7/365. This doesn't mean that the bible lies, people just assume that every time the bible mentions sin, it is talking about an individual, occasional sin, when it is talking about a "lifestyle" of sin. Two completely different things.


I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
(So, here’s my situation, every time I want to do what is good and right, the devil is right there beside me, tempting me to do the wrong thing)

Your words: This can apply to either a saved person or a lost person.

The difference lies in our motivation, not the battle itself. A believer fights to be more like Christ. It doesn’t matter what an unbelievers motivation is. If it’s not to be like Christ, the battle will never be the same and is inconsequential.

　
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
(I’m sick to death of this warfare, is there any way out? when will it end?)

Again, this is a wretched man still in the flesh, but we are not in the flesh, because our flesh has been crucified and we are in Christ Jesus
!

Respectfully, that’s not true. Our body of flesh has not been crucified, our spiritual old man has. Gal. 2:20


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
(Thank God for what Christ has done. My spiritual new man serves the law of God, but with the flesh I serve the law of sin)

This is a two part verse. 25a is the answer to the problem no doubt, but it is an interjection of praise because he is no longer the man of chapter 7. Paul interjects a Thanks to God here, but it is not the summation of chapter 7. The summation comes when he says "So then" in 25b.

I disagree with your assessment. The praise is because he has learned to live victoriously while still battling the sin nature. This is affirmed in 25b. “So then with the mind (or our spiritual selves) I myself (my spiritual man) serve the law of God; but with the flesh (because of our basic sin nature, we still battle) the law of sin.” (words in parenthesis mine)

 

[Dell Russell]

Trekson,
Sorry to hear about your plumbing. Been there done that, so no apology necessary. The biggest part of that is tearing it all out and preparing everything to go back together.

It looks like you are as convinced that this is a saved man as much as I am convinced it is a lost man. I truly do understand your view, as I have heard it many times.

You made the comment that you don't believe there are any perfect, sinless christians out there. I'll let someone else hash that one out, as I think you and I would not have much of a disagreement on that one. I think many misunderstand and jump the gun when Romans 7 is said to be a lost man. I'm not talking about sinless perfection when I say this is a lost man.

We would both agree this is a man that is struggling within his own strength and failing miserably. And we would probably agree this man is not relying on the help of the holy Spirit. The difference is, you think he is not allowing the indwelling Holy Spirit to help him, whereas I don't think he has the Holy Spirit to help him, because he doesn't have the Holy Spirit.

I think at this point we need to look at another one of the sections I mentioned.

The next section we see will go all the way back to Romans 1 and play out to chapter 8.

This comes on the heals of Paul's question in Romans 6:15. "What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid."
Paul asks this question and then reminds the reader of everything addressed thus far, then continues to make clear of where this is going.

Romans 6:16 is about Romans 1:18-3:20. Paul makes a common sense assessment, of whom one yields to, that is who you are a servant to. This is a very good assessment of Romans 1:18-3:20. In those chapters we see man has given himself over to unrighteousness, therefore becoming a servant to sin. In Romans 1:18-3:20 we see that man has made the choice of turning from God, therefore turning to sin. Because he has turned to sin he is now a servant to sin.

Romans 6:17 is about Romans 3:21 through the end of chapter 4. Without saying this makes it clear that at one time we were servants of sin, but no longer are. Because we have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered [to] you. What was that doctrine Paul delivered to us? FAITH. Faith in Christ was the message and doctrine Paul delivered everywhere he went. It was because we obeyed that message from the heart we are delivered from sin and now have eternal life through Christ. Romans 3:21- chapter 4 is about faith. Faith mentioned in the Old Testament, faith mentioned in the New Testament.

Romans 6:18 is about Romans 5. "Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." How are we made free from sin? By the faith message Paul preached. Not just any faith though, but faith in Christ. Because we now have faith in Christ and have become members of His body we are servants to righteousness, whereas before we were of Adam, carnal and sold under sin. As Romans 5:1 says;" Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

Romans 6:19 is about Romans 6. It is the latter part of this verse that points to this being what Paul is addressing in chapter 6. We see Paul asked the question in 6:1 "Shall we continue in sin." Here in v:19 he tells us, Just as we once yielded to sin and more sin, now we are to yield to righteousness unto holiness.

Romans 6:20 and 21 is about Romans chapter 7. At this point I would like to bring up something. Those that interpret Romans 7 as a saved man see it like this, Chapter 6 is a saint, chapter 7 as a struggling saint, and chapter 8 as an overcoming saint. In other words chapter 7 is only part of the chronological order of the saint. Here in two verses we see Paul bringing up our past lost state. This is very clear in the context, because he says, "when we were servants of sin" and "had ye then". Clearly Paul is not speaking of a saved man in these two verses and this is how the flow of Romans is as well. If Paul is in a chronological flow from sinner to saint to overcoming saint, then why does he keep bringing up the past lost state of the believer? I think the answer is clear.

Romans 6:22 and 23 is about Romans chapter 8. These 2 verses are saying the same as Romans 8. We have been made free from sin, we have fruit unto holiness, and the end of these is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Again, we need to take note of the tenses in vv:19-23. It goes from present tense to past tense to present tense.

These are only 2 examples of several here in Romans. Paul keeps the flow in the same order as Romans is laid out in each one. It's like he gives an example and then he comes at it again in the way we might say today, "This, this and this and then say, In other words, this, this and this. And if you still didn't get it, he gives it to us again a little differently. But each time he doesn't lose his flow.
As I said, there are other places Paul does the same thing and we will look at them in due time.

 

[veteran]

I would like to take a fresh look at this, highly and sometimes hotly debated, set of verses. Before we can say Romans 7 is or is not a license to sin for the believer, as I have read through the other thread, we must first know if this man is born again or not in this chapter. I have studied this chapter for a number of years now myself and I come to the conclusion it is indeed a lost man. I will also say, because I believe it is a lost man Paul is describing, it drives a stake in the heart of the gospel message when it is interpreted as a saved man.

As I said, I have studied this chapter for a number of years. I think I have read just about every angle used to prove it one way or the other, and I can see how it is interpreted as a saved man, but once all things are considered I do not believe it can be interpreted correctly as a saved man.

What I would like to do is put forth my own personal studies, along with a few I learned from others, as this debate plays out. (I will clarify which ones are my own and which ones that belong to someone else as I come to them. I like to give credit where credit is due.)

I have noticed, as I studied through Romans, that Paul repeats himself a number of times and in these times he reiterates what has been said thus far and then adds a few words as to where he is going with his argument. In these series of verses it is laid out in the same order as the book of Romans itself is laid out. Also we will see that every time where chapter 7 falls it is in the past tense or describes an unregenerate man.

This is not where he begins these series of verses, but because it is very clear and in the same chapter of the subject at hand I will start in Romans 7.

Romans 7:1-6 has been used to argue over marriage and divorce and remarriage, but I will let someone else hash that one out, as I think at this point that is a side issue to the subject of whether or not this is a saved man or not.

Romans 7:2 and 3 is about chapter 5.
Here in these two verses we have a husband and wife analogy. Many believe the first husband mentioned is the law and it is the law that must die in order for the woman to be free to remarry. But that is not the case here. In fact if you have studied Romans you would notice that Paul contrasts a number of things, flesh to spirit, law to faith, Adam to Christ, life to death, and so on. As you notice here we see it is law to faith and Adam to Christ that has been contrasted. So, in understanding this we see Adam would be the first husband and not the law.
In chapter 5 we see our problem is we are born in the line of Adam and him being the head of the human race. The cure for that is we need to be in Christ, but Christ will not or can not become our head until the Adam part of us is put to death. Paul will tell us how that death takes place in chapter 6.
I think why many believe the first husband is the law probably comes from 7:6. It says, "But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held..." What we must understand is "what died" and then we will understand how we were delivered from the law. Very simply, the flesh, old man, Adam self was put to death by the way of the cross. And because the flesh part of man is crucified the law no longer reigns and rules over the believer, thus we are delivered from the law.

Romans 7:4 is about chapter 6.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 6. Just as Romans 6 tells us we have been crucified with Christ and raised with Christ that we have fruits unto hloiness, this verse (7:4) describes chapter 6 to a T.

Romans 7:5 is about chapter 7.
Here we have a one verse description of the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is in the flesh, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is under the law, so is the man of chapter 7. Just as 7:5 is bound to a life of sin, so is the man of chapter 7.

Romans 7:6 is about chapter 8.
Here we have a one verse description of chapter 8. I'll save the commentary as it is self explainatory.

What is important to notice here is the tenses of the verses of 7:4-6. It goes from present tense, to past tense, back to present tense.

Another reason I believe Romans 7 is seen by many to be a saved man is most likely because the man of chapter 7 is so far removed from the lostness of man described in chapters 1:18-3:20. But we can see Paul continues to bring the lost man back up in these series of verses. We see he does this to contrast the lost man to the saved man in these series and seeing this we can easily see how this is done in chapter 7 as well. As we go through this debate we will see Paul uses the same pattern elsewhere besides Romans. The pattern being,
The depravity of man,
The gospel message,
A look back to where we were,
Moving forward.

I hope to have a civil debate on the subject and perhaps learn a few things as well. All of the above is my own personal studies and as best as I can tell is not in any commentary, none that I have read anyway.

In Christ Jesus,
Dell Russell
Pontotoc, Mississippi

In my opinion, I think you're taking the subject too far.

Paul was speaking of himself, and all born in the flesh; but mainly about how he finds his flesh always warring with his spirit. He is ultimately pointing out how that battle will continue until Christ returns to redeem us from it, as in the end of the Rom.7 chapter Christ is Who he points to for the release of that in final.

 

[Dell Russell]

In my opinion, I think you're taking the subject too far.

Paul was speaking of himself, and all born in the flesh; but mainly about how he finds his flesh always warring with his spirit. He is ultimately pointing out how that battle will continue until Christ returns to redeem us from it, as in the end of the Rom.7 chapter Christ is Who he points to for the release of that in final.

In my opinion, I think you're taking the subject too far.

Paul was speaking of himself, and all born in the flesh; but mainly about how he finds his flesh always warring with his spirit. He is ultimately pointing out how that battle will continue until Christ returns to redeem us from it, as in the end of the Rom.7 chapter Christ is Who he points to for the release of that in final.

Hello veteran,
I appreciate your input here. My wife reminds me from time to time there are actually other books in the Bible, so she probably thinks I take it too far as well. I think one reason I spend so much time studying Romans and debating about chapter 7 in particular is because I believe to say chapter 7 is a saved man is just not the correct interpretation of it and because to say it is a saved man is to drive a stake in the heart of the gospel message. I think it leaves the believer in a situation of walking by sight and not by faith.

I don't think I'm taking it too far. I'm just following Paul's way of writing and how he laid Romans out, and then repeating himself with his series of summations. It is these series of summations that point out how Romans 7 is indeed a lost man. As this debate continues I will point out all of the summations I have found.

In Christ,
Dell

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

Some gentiles here just don't get it ..... we gentiles were never under the Law in the first place .... the religious Jews were , and they needed a full explanation about this thing called grace and righteousness by faith.

We are gentiles who should focus on Paul's writings to the gentiles .... and stop pretending we are legalistic Jews trying to reconcile with the christian faith by using the book of Romans.

It accomplishes nothing but endless arguments that do not pertain to us anyway. Same as the book of Hebrews.

Writings specifically for the "Jew -who- becomes-a-Christian" have some value to us because we can read the old testament and it's historical laws , and see how it folds over to The New testament with Christ.

Do I have to say it again ?.... STOP PRETENDING YOU ARE JEWS who need LAW vs FAITH explained.

Think about it please.
.

 

[Dell Russell]

Some gentiles here just don't get it ..... we gentiles were never under the Law in the first place .... the religious Jews were , and they needed a full explanation about this thing called grace and righteousness by faith.

We are gentiles who should focus on Paul's writings to the gentiles .... and stop pretending we are legalistic Jews trying to reconcile with the christian faith by using the book of Romans.

It accomplishes nothing but endless arguments that do not pertain to us anyway. Same as the book of Hebrews.

Writings specifically for the "Jew -who- becomes-a-Christian" have some value to us because we can read the old testament and it's historical laws , and see how it folds over to The New testament with Christ.

Do I have to say it again ?.... STOP PRETENDING YOU ARE JEWS who need LAW vs FAITH explained.

Think about it please.
.

Some gentiles here just don't get it ..... we gentiles were never under the Law in the first place .... the religious Jews were , and they needed a full explanation about this thing called grace and righteousness by faith.

We are gentiles who should focus on Paul's writings to the gentiles .... and stop pretending we are legalistic Jews trying to reconcile with the christian faith by using the book of Romans.

It accomplishes nothing but endless arguments that do not pertain to us anyway. Same as the book of Hebrews.

Writings specifically for the "Jew -who- becomes-a-Christian" have some value to us because we can read the old testament and it's historical laws , and see how it folds over to The New testament with Christ.

Do I have to say it again ?.... STOP PRETENDING YOU ARE JEWS who need LAW vs FAITH explained.

Think about it please.
.

So are you saying Gentiles are not under any kind of a law? If so then why are they condemned to death and hell? It is true that Gentiles were not given the Mosaic Law, but the things we Gentiles are condemned for are contained in the Mosaic Law. So with that being said, I do think this applies to any and all. Jew or Gentile. You might think about reading the 10 commandments.

Paul wrote the book of Romans with all of mankind in mind. He even tells us (Gentiles) about provoking them (Jews) to jealousy in order to draw them to the Christ that they have been looking for and the same Christ they rejected and stumbled over.

I never said I was a Jew. I am a Gentile. You must be born through the line of Israel to be a Jew.

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

So are you saying Gentiles are not under any kind of a law? If so then why are they condemned to death and hell? It is true that Gentiles were not given the Mosaic Law, but the things we Gentiles are condemned for are contained in the Mosaic Law. So with that being said, I do think this applies to any and all. Jew or Gentile. You might think about reading the 10 commandments.

Paul wrote the book of Romans with all of mankind in mind. He even tells us (Gentiles) about provoking them (Jews) to jealousy in order to draw them to the Christ that they have been looking for and the same Christ they rejected and stumbled over.

I never said I was a Jew. I am a Gentile. You must be born through the line of Israel to be a Jew.

Hi Dell . I am guilty of taking your original question off track , so rather than carry on that way , I will instead give my version of Romans 7

Whether written for Jews or gentiles we will consider irrelevant for now (although I still say that Paul was explaining this to "those who were under the law"( Jews)

=(although marriage is mentioned several times) the topic is not about marriage ....
=Paul is using an illustration from marriage
=What Paul is trying to point out is that a marriage is subject to certain (marriage) laws (rules) .... but if a husband dies , the wife is no longer bound by those marriage laws. ...... she is released from those laws.
=Paul uses that as an example because the next thing he he says through Christ the law is now dead ... and we are released from it.

Paul then goes on with a bunch of pre-amble explaining some of the purposes of the law as it was originally given .... it was to make us aware of sin .... and make us aware that we could not keep the law .... or stop sinning ..... thus we need a different remedy ..... Jesus Christ (and a life by the Spirit) ...... so now the law is dead (Christ killed it) .... and our requirements to keep it are dead .... just like the marriage example above.

Now comes the perceived snags ..... can we sin all we want now ?? ..... of course not .... we now live by the spirit .....

The best way to understand Romans 7 (life by Law ) is to read Romans 8(Life by the Spirit )

 

[Stan]

Hello Stan,
I'm not sure if you are addressing me or Trekson or perhaps someone else. I think Trekson, but not 100% sure. Trekson is coming from a Calvinist viewpoint. Also, I'm not sure if you think Romans 7 is a saved man or an unregenerate man.
What is your assessment of what I said about how 7:2-6 relates to chapters 5-8?

I was addressing Trekson and I think my post was clear as to what I think of Romans 7.
BTW your response was all messed up. I suggest you use the proper tools from this board, and not try to manually use BBcode if you don't know how.

 

[Dell Russell]

I was addressing Trekson and I think my post was clear as to what I think of Romans 7.
BTW your response was all messed up. I suggest you use the proper tools from this board, and not try to manually use BBcode if you don't know how.

Hello Stan,
I do know it was all messed up (after the fact), but I didn't mean for it to be so. As I am new here and still working my around and trying to figure out how everything works. I have been on a number of other boards and learned to work through the codes in order to go down the line addressing the questions one at a time in order to simplify things. And I did not mean for your post to be mixed in with Trekson's. I am very sorry if I offended you and hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me of any confusion I may of caused.

Hello Arnie,
Stan got on to me about not knowing how to work the codes, so just to give a heads up if this colour coding doesn't work I'll try something else.

Hi Dell . I am guilty of taking your original question off track , so rather than carry on that way , I will instead give my version of Romans 7

Whether written for Jews or gentiles we will consider irrelevant for now (although I still say that Paul was explaining this to "those who were under the law"( Jews)


I wouldn't argue that Paul was addressing Jews specifically, but because there are many places in this letter to the Church at Rome that addresses Gentiles I can't help but believe he was addressing Gentiles as well. After all the Gentiles had spouses and were bound to them by Roman law and I'm sure it worked pretty much the same way. I don't know Roman law, so I could be a little off there, but knowing marriage and how may cultures view it around the world I'm confident it is pretty much the same everywhere.

=(although marriage is mentioned several times) the topic is not about marriage ....
=Paul is using an illustration from marriage

Agreed. Many use this section to prove one is not to divorce and remarry and if they do then they both commit adultery. This can be seen in 1 Corinthians chapter 7 as well, so they are not wrong in using this in Romans to back up their beliefs, but as far as I'm concerned you are correct in saying this is not really about discussing marriage with the exception of drawing an illustration from it.

=What Paul is trying to point out is that a marriage is subject to certain (marriage) laws (rules) .... but if a husband dies , the wife is no longer bound by those marriage laws. ...... she is released from those laws.

I think Paul is telling us we are bound by "The law of marriage" here not that there are a lot of laws and rules that married folk have to keep. It's no different today. Two people take a vow to be married until death do them part, forsaking all others. When one of the two spouses dies then the other one is free to remarry and not be committing adultery. In this case it is the first husband that has died and now she is free to marry another. Here it will be Christ.

=Paul uses that as an example because the next thing he he says through Christ the law is now dead ... and we are released from it.

Here is where most go astray. Many believe the first husband is the law. No the first husband is not the law. The law is still intact and working just fine. It works the same with a couple today. When my grand father died at a very young age my grandmother was freed from the law that bound them together. It wasn't that the law died when my grandfather died, but he died and she was no longer bound to "him" or the law that bound them together.
So if it was not the law that died then we must understand what actually did die. First it doesn't say the law died, but that we are become dead "to" the law by the body of Christ. Not sure as to what version you use, but I use the King James.

So what died? If you will go back and re-read you will see Paul has contrasted a number of things. He contrasts death to life, sin to righteousness, faith to law, Adam to Christ, and so on. Here we see Adam and Christ are contrasted. Why Adam and Christ? The illustration here in Romans 7:1-6 is giving us a picture of everything he has said thus far and what he is about to say. 7:2 and 3 is about chapter 5. In chapter 5 we see our problem is in Adam. Sin comes into the world through one man, Adam. Death passes to all men because of him and for that all sin. All men come from Adam, so therefore Adam is the head of the human race. The cure to that is to be placed in Christ. We are justified because we are now in Christ. When we believe in Christ we are now in the body of Christ and He is now our head and Adam is not.

So the first husband is Adam in chapter 5, the old man crucified in chapter 6, and the body, flesh and members in chapters 6 and 8. Our flesh was crucified on the cross when we believed in Christ. We are crucified with Him, buried with Him, and raised with Him. Christ is now our husband and head and we are the body. We are no longer under the written law, but live and serve in newness of spirit, because we are no longer in Adam or the flesh where the law rules, reigns and condemns to death.

The reason many don't understand this is because they are going by what they see and not by what God says. God says your flesh is dead and we are to reckon it so. To reckon is to count it as a fact! It all comes back to walking by faith and not by sight. Many are trying to "put to death" this flesh when all we have to do is just believe God, walk by faith, and count it as dead. In other words they are turning the work of Christ on the cross into their own work of sanctification. We have too many doubting Thomas's today.

Paul then goes on with a bunch of pre-amble explaining some of the purposes of the law as it was originally given .... it was to make us aware of sin .... and make us aware that we could not keep the law .... or stop sinning ..... thus we need a different remedy ..... Jesus Christ (and a life by the Spirit) Agree. ...... so now the law is dead (Christ killed it) .... and our requirements to keep it are dead disagree..... just like the marriage example above. It's not that the law passed away, but we passed away. Our relationship to the law has changed, but the law did not die. The law still rules and reigns over the living of this world and will still condemn them to hell because of their sinfulness. But it doesn't rule over us, because we have already died and now live in Christ and live according to the Spirit.

Now comes the perceived snags ..... can we sin all we want now ?? ..... of course not .... we now live by the spirit .....
Agreed.

The best way to understand Romans 7 (life by Law ) is to read Romans 8(Life by the Spirit )
I agree with this statement the way it is written, but not in the same context you state it.

Paul's analogy covers chapters 5-8 here.
Romans 7:2 and 3 is about chapter 5.
Romans 7:4 is about chapter 6.
Romans 7:5 is about chapter 7.
Romans 7:6 is about chapter 8.
And you can check out post #13 where he covers chapter 1-8 in Romans 6:16-23.

Most see Chapter 7 as just one part of the Christian life. They see it as being in a chronological order of sinner (chapters 1-3:20), to saved by faith (chapter 5), to struggling saint (chapter 7), to overcoming saint (chapter 8). They miss the continuation of Paul contrasting the sinner to the saint in these series like his analogy of 7:1-6 and 6:16-23 and other places we will get to.

In Christ,
Dell