Does Romans 7 Teach that Christians Will Continue Sinning? (Ben Witherington)

Study the book of Romans with Dr. Ben Witherington - get the Bible study from our store here: >>> store.seedbed.com/products/the-letter-to-the-roman… Get our best-selling Bible study on the Old Testament - Epic of Eden - from our store here: >>> store.seedbed.com/products/epic-of-eden-by-sandra-…

Paul was not specifically describing his life prior to being a Christian, he is simply describing the life of a person who is trying to please God under the old covenant law system, whether Christian or not. It is impossible to live the Christian life under a regime of self-effort and works. The only way to live the Christian life is through the regimen of the spirit, through faith in the finished work of Christ. That is why Paul exhorts us to live as people who have been set free from the law and not to submit again to the yoke of slavery (Galatians 5:1).

In Romans 7 Paul is speaking rhetorically for us all, the human condition, or the Christian that is wrestling with sin. We will always struggle with sin. If anyone thinks they somehow don't have sin then they are deluded. Im 55 years old and I've never met a sinless person yet. We are considered righteous in Christ but in and of ourselves we aren't sinless at all and thats what Paul is describing.

Finally someone that gets it. Thank you for sharing. I’ve only recently thought wait Paul seems to have figured out away not to sin anymore. That is revolutionary. Many Christian’s think we are powerless against sin. When Paul spells out exactly how to stop sinning. Anyway. Thanks for sharing.

When someone says there’s 7 different interpretations or even less of a passage. We need to stick as close to the scripture (text) as we can. Don’t take liberties with words, symbols or metaphors that are not there. Every time we do that a new denomination is born.

The analysis is incorrect as at v17 Paul says: "Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me". That is, Paul is explicating the vital dichotomy of old man vs New Man which exists in the Christian. There is a non-believer in every Christian, which is why we are elsewhere told that "if we believe not, yet He abideth faithful, for He cannot deny Himself" (2 Ti 2:13).

The rhetorical methodology hinges on Rom. 5:13, which was misquoted. Sin is spoken about, objectively. Paul did not say “I existed before the law.” Sin did.

This was EXCELLENT thank you

If we no longer sin then why does God tell us in the model prayer, to ask forgiveness for our trespasses ???

Paul is explaining that his flesh has carnal passionate desires that he must resist. His flesh wants to do what he doesn’t want to do. “For I know that nothing good dwells in me, THAT IS, IN MY FLESH. For I have the desire to do what is right…” (Romans 7:18) He is clearly explaining that when he refers to himself, he is referring to his flesh and to his spirit which are conflicting with each other. And taking a look at the context of the passage, he is not preaching that we cannot overcome the flesh, only he is saying that the flesh has evil passionate desires that he must fight against

While I agree with Dr. Witherington's equation of the rhetorical I in Romans 7 with Adam, I feel that he leaves out the entire dimension of Israel, under the Torah/Law, as being in Adam. Paul is driving this home in this chapter, he speaks to those who know the Law; he describes the hopelessly divided human condition in reference to the Law, not just to Adam, or humanity in general. This is the bitter irony that Paul is pointing out, the Law actually exacerbated the Adamic plight of Israel, providing no solution. His description of the divided and powerless will, of seeing the good but not being able to carry it out, describes the situation of those under the holy, just, and good law, who delighted in it, as faithful Israelites would have, but continually fell short of its ideals. Paul actually alludes to the Greek philosophers here, who describe the same dichotomy, of seeing the good but not being able to consistently carry it out. His point is that life under the law for Jews brought them to no better a place and condition than the best of the puzzled pagans, a futile and defeated pursuit of an ideal that can't be lived out with any consistency. The solution he arrives at and presents is the death and resurrection of Christ that pronounces no condemnation for those who join with him by faith, and the reception of the powerful and energizing Spirit, who transforms them into the very image of God, and fulfills in them, individually and in their community, the just requirements of the Law/Torah (which he later defines as self giving love), for those who walk in the way of the Spirit...both Jews and Gentiles.

I wish scripture was easy to interpret… would make things so much easier.

Thank you sir.

Sin IS the Human condition! Sin IS what we ARE! NOT what we do or do NOT DO! Transgression of the Law IS an inevitable consequence of the fallen human condition! 1John 3:9.states that a person who has been born-again by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can NOT sin because of the Holy Spirit! Although we sin every single day either in thought or word,if NOT in deed,those sins are NOT credited to the believers account because Jesus Christ has taken upon himself the wrath of a Holy God FOR those sins! We are NO LONGER children of Adam (sin) but children of God! God bless you!

Paul says that he is the chief of sinners

Love Dr W but 7:21ff says that I delight in the law of God in my inmost man while my members impulsively sin, and if Paul is impersonating an unregenerate sinner pre conversion in chap 7, thats a pretty far stretch to think that Mr Sinner pre conversion delights in the law of God in his inmost being with a desire to it but just cannot make it happen in his members. This sounds more like an augustinian paradox to me.

This series is soooo helpful. Thank you for posting.

i totally disagree with Dr Ben on this... Rom 7 has nothing to do with Adam allegorically. It is a biography of Paul. Your argument from philipians is too weak. While Paul strive to be a faithful pharisee, he hated Christ and persecuted the believers. Hence, obviously even as faithful a pharisee he strived to be, he was still the chief of all sinners. There is no salvation outside Christ. We are not saved by our robust fantasy with the law. We are saved by Christ unto good works. Until Christ sets you free, you are still a slave of sin even if you swallow the whole law. This my dear no one can. For if you break just one law, you are guilty of breaking all. Jesus took the law to heart and equated lust with fornication, unrighteous anger with murder and unbelief as the unpardonable blasphemy. We can only gain victory over sin when Chridt sets us free and us we obediently and reverently gaze on him, he sanctifies us to conform into his perfect image. This is why i reject wesleyanism although i was born in methodist and a pentecostal background

I am puzzled by the line of reasoning that Romans 7 deals exclusively with the pre-conversion person. We are a new creation, but I've yet to meet the Christian who no longer feels the difficulties of the flesh. In addition, I'm unsure why Luther is so often made the Wesleyan foil. Luther certainly observed that the struggle to live in the Spirit says something about our spiritual state. The person who feels the pangs and pulls of the flesh is not wholly holy. Even so, it was Luther who wrote the following in his commentary on Romans: "For those who live according to the flesh, in the native state, not yet born again in the Spirit through Baptism or repentance, set their minds on the things of the flesh...But those who live according to the Spirit, men who are born of the Spirit and of God to become new creatures, set their minds on the things of the Spirit, that is, on the good things that are uncreated, that are God Himself." Luther, Martin. Luther’s Works, Vol. 25: Lectures on Romans. Ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, & Helmut T. Lehmann. Vol. 25. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999. Print.

Where can I get a copy of that dissertation on Adamic imagery?