A much-debated
point in these chapters is whether the “I” in Rom. 7,14ff. is describing Paul’s
experience before he knew Christ, or his experience after his conversion to
Christ. The main argument for interpreting these verses as a reference to Paul’s
post-conversion experience is the shift to the present tense at v. 14.
Interpreted in this manner, this passage has functioned in the Augustinian tradition
as the key text which describes the continuing influence of sin in a Christian’s
life. However, it has been objected—and this objection is shared by the great
majority of New Testament scholars today—that Pual as a Christian could not
consider himself “sold under sin” (v. 14) or made “captive to the law of sin”
(v. 23). Perhaps it is possible that both this Augustinian tradition and
objectors to it have interpreted this text from a slightly different perspective
than Paul’s perspective in writing it. He wrote it as a Jewish Chrisitan for
Jewish Christians (cf. 7,5). From the previous verses it is clear that the
holiness of the law is at stake (7,7.13). Apparently Paul is discussing this
point because in the previous chapter he had argued that they can now serve
righteousness because they are no longer under the law (6,14f.). This contrast
necessarily raises the question, “Is the law sin?” (cf, 7,7). Paul’s first
answer is to point to the past and to show from this past that the law was not
sin but the power of sin was so great that the law was used to increase sin
(7,7-13). However, if Jewish Christians at Rome were tempted to think that
after the resurrection of Jesus they already lived as Israelites fully incorporated
into the eschatological kingdom established by him, Paul has just begun to
answer their objection. As members of this kingdom they believed that they
already had been given the power to live righteously by themselves. In such a
situation if the law of God could not be a means of guiding them in a life of righteousness,
it would prove that the law itself must be sinful. To answer this objection
Paul must discuss the relationship of the Christian to the law. He does this
when he continues his defense of the holiness of the law in 7,14ff. To defend
the holiness of the law Paul must make it clear that the law still cannot
perform the function of guiding the Chrisitan in living righteously because of
the sinfulness of the flesh which the Christian too still shares. For this
reason, Paul emphasizes that he has been sold under sin. By showing that the
sin lies in himself he proves that the law is good (v. 16). In vv. 21ff. he
shows how the law functions if a Christian tries to use it. He may rejoice in
it (v. 22) and serve it with his mind (v. 25), but because he is in the flesh,
it is used by sin (therefore he calls it GK in v. 23 and v. 25), and this is
the stronger. It is a dreadful thing that sin is so powerful in man that even
the Christian cannot use the holy law of God to live righteously, and so Paul
cries out, “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of
death?” (v. 24). If this interpretation is correct, in 7,14ff. Paul is talking
about a post-conversion experience, but he does not intend to prove that he is
still totally depraved so that he can do no good. Instead his argument is
designed to show that the holy law cannot by itself function in the Christian’s
life because sin is so powerful that even as a Christian he has no possibility of
living righteously by means of the law even though it is holy. (Derk William Oostendorp,
Another Jesus: A Gospel of Jewish-Christian Superiority in II Corinthians [New
Jersey: J.H. Kok N.V. Kampen, 1967], 84-86)
