Romans 7:14-24

E. THE STATE DESCRIBED IN Ch. Romans 7:14-24

The controversy over this profound passage is far too wide to allow of full treatment here. It is scarcely needful to say that conclusions very different from those in the notes have been drawn by many most able and most devout expositors, ancient and modern. Very earnest convictions, mainly based on St Paul's generalteaching, and that of Scripture, alone could justify us in the positive statement of another view.

Here we offer only a few further general remarks.

(1) On the question what St Paul here meantvery little certain light is thrown by quotations from pagan writers describing an inner conflict. For in the great majority of such passages the language manifestly describes the conflict of conscienceand will; and the confusion of the voice of consciencewith the far different voice of personal willis so easy, and no wonder, if Scripture truly describes the state of the human mind(cp. Ephesians 2:3; Ephesians 4:17-18) as to spiritual truth, that we believe that even the grandest utterances of pagan thought on this subject must yet be explained of a conflict not so much of willwith will, as of willwith conscience.

A careful collection of such passages (from Thucydides, Xenophon, Euripides, Epictetus, Plautus, both the Senecas, and Ovid) is given by Tholuck [56], on Romans 7:15. And our conviction on the whole, from these and similar passages, is that either they do not mean to describe a conflict of will with will, or that they betray the illusions to which the mind, unvisited by special grace, must surely be liable regarding the conditions of the soul's action; illusions which this chapter, among other passages of Revelation, tends to dispel.

[56] Whose conclusions are very different from ours.

(2) Suppose the person described in ch. Romans 7:14-25 to be not regenerate, not a recipient of the Holy Spirit; and compare the case thus supposed with the language of ch. Romans 8:5-9. The consequence must be that one who is "in the flesh" (for St Paul recognizes neither here nor elsewhere an intermediate or semi-spiritual condition,) and who as such "cannot please God," can vet truly say, "It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me;" and, "I delight in the law of God after the inward man;" and, "With the mind I myself serve the law of God."

Now is this possible, from the point of view of St Paul's teaching?For consider what he means by the law: not man's subjective view of moral truth and right, but the absolute and profoundly spiritual demands of the True God upon not the approval of man but his whole will.

Surely when Divine grace makes plain to the man the width and depth of thosedemands, he needs a "renewing of the mind" (Romans 12:2) if he is to say with truth, "I delight[57] in the Law;" "I myself with my mindserve it."

[57] A word which it is impossible to explain away.

(3) The supposed impossibility of assigning the language of this passage to one who is meanwhile "in Christ" and "has peace with God" will at least seem less impossible if we remember St Paul's manner of isolatinga special aspect of truth. May he not, out of his profound, intense, and subtle spiritual experience, have chosen for a special purpose to look on one aspect only as if it were the whole? on his consciousness of the element which still called for "mortification," hanging on "a cross," "buffeting," "groans," "fear and trembling," (Romans 8:13; Rom 8:23; 1 Corinthians 9:27; Colossians 3:5; Philippians 2:12, &c.;) almost as if he had no other consciousness?

(4) It is often assumed that ch. 8 is an express contrast to ch. Romans 7:14-25. But it is far more likely that it is written to sum up the whole previous Epistle. (See note on Romans 8:1.) If it is designed as a contrast to ch. 7, surely such words as those of Romans 8:13; Romans 8:23, are out of place.

With this view of ch. 8 there is less likelihood of our taking ch. 7 to describe a state antecedent to the experience of ch. 8. But however, if we are right in our remarks in (3), anyview of ch. 8 still leaves ch. 7 quite free to be a description of (one side of) regenerate experience.

(5) Tholuck (on Romans 7:15) quotes from Grotius the remark that "it would be a sad thing, indeed, if the Christian, as such, could apply these sayings" (those of the pagan writers who describe an inner conflict) "to himself." But those who interpret ch. 7 of the experience of a Christian take it to describe not his experience as a Christian, but his experience as a man still in the body, but who, as a Christian, has been illuminatedtruly to apprehend that infinite Holiness which can only cease to conflict with a part of his condition when at length his trial-time is over.