Tuesday, December 26, 2023

Derk William Oostendorp on Paul's Teachings about the Law of Moses in Romans 7

  

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)