1) a converted Christian who is incapable of living without sin?

2) a converted Christian who is successfully resisting the unholy clamorings of his fallen flesh nature?

3) an unconverted Christian who is incapable of living without sin?

4) an unconverted, non-Christian person who is incapable of living without sin?

5) other:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
What is the truth about the man of Romans Seven? Is he:

1) a converted Christian who is incapable of living without sin?
Why do you use the word incapable?

2) a converted Christian who is successfully resisting the unholy clamorings of his fallen flesh nature?
Why do you use the word successfully?

3) an unconverted Christian who is incapable of living without sin?
This is an oxymoron.

4) an unconverted, non-Christian person who is incapable of living without sin?
By contextual evidence this is nonsense!

5) other:
Maybe you need to read 27 Fundamental Beliefs on the subject. It gives a clear explanation of this in the section on the nature of man. A detailed explanation is also found in the SDA Bible Commentaries on Romans 7.

---

Mogens

[This message has been edited by Mogens H. Sorensen (edited August 28, 2001).]

I believe that the context of Romans 6-8 makes it clear that Paul believes the man of Romans 7 describes a born again believer who is empowered through the indweling Spirit of God to recognize and resist the sinful clamorings of fallen flesh nature.

Apparently Paul employs the word "I" to mean either the mind of the new man or the mind, as it were, of fallen flesh nature. See verse 18 and 25. The context determines which is which.

For example - "For that which I do [the flesh clamoring for sin] I allow not [the new man does not allow himself to crave sin]: for what I would [the flesh would sin if it were possible], that do I not [the new man does not sin]; but what I hate [the new man hates sin], that do I [the flesh loves to clamor for sin]" verse 15.

The "do it" in verse 17 and 20 (KJV) cannot be referring to the actual commission of a known sin. Because Paul would then be excusing sin, which clearly is not possible. Rather I believe the "do it" is talking about the unholy thoughts and feelings communicated to our minds, via our sinful flesh nature. The flesh is guilty of craving sin, not the new man.

Paul is, as I see it, saying that we should not blame ourselves for the existence of unholy thoughts and feelings. These things originate with our fallen flesh and are only temptations which must be resisted through the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Does this not ring right to you? If not, then what does Paul mean when he says in verse 17 and 20 "it is no more I that do it"? What does the "do it" refer to if it doesn't mean the sinful clamorings of our fallen flesh nature? And in verse 15 what is it that Paul "allow[s] not" and do[es] not"?

"Paul is describing the continuing struggle with self and sin, even after conversion..."

In the Blessed Hope,
Mogens

[This message has been edited by Mogens H. Sorensen (edited August 30, 2001).]

Looking @ Romans chapter 7, it seems in obvious context to include Romans chapters 5 & 6 & 8; since Paul uses these Chapters in context on the topic. Then having a posted set of KJV texts for all to read, plug each text into SOP & see what we get. If the number of hits are too many we can say so & post references. How does that sound?

Romans chapter 5:
1 ¶ Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope:
5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
6 ¶ For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 6:
1 ¶ What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.
20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.
21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.
22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans chapter 7:
1 ¶ Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
5 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.
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.
7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
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.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
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.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
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.

Romans 8:

1 ¶ There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
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:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
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.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
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.
10 ¶ And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
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.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
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.
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 ¶ And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
26 ¶ Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29 ¶ For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
31 ¶ What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

------------------
Edward F Sutton

Your words to Mike Lowe have a ring of harshness to them. This public forum is not the place for contentions nor for personal attacks on another person. If you have a personal problem with Mike (as this and some other posts indicate), we have private forums where you may go and work at settling your differences. I ask you kindly to please reread the forum rules which forbid personal attacks on other forum members.

------------------
Jesus is the joy of living
_________________________

Linda

[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited August 29, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited August 30, 2001).]

Mogens

[This message has been edited by Mogens H. Sorensen (edited August 30, 2001).]

Mogens, I too believe that Romans 7 is describing a born again believer resisting the clamorings of sinful flesh nature after conversion. Resisting these clamorings is what I call fighting the good fight of faith. Does this agree with your understanding?

In fact, I also believe that only converted Christians experience this warfare with sin, self and Satan, because all others basically go laong with the sinful desires of fallen flesh nature. Thus, they never really do go through what Paul shares in Romans 7.

Edward, I like your idea of researching this question in the broader context of Romans 5-8. And I also welcome any EGW quotes you might find on the subject.

Would anybody care to comment on my last post? I raised several points which I would like to hear what someone else thinks about them. Any takers?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
What is the truth about the man of Romans Seven? Is he:

1) a converted Christian who is incapable of living without sin?Philippians 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.... don't think so

2) a converted Christian who is successfully resisting the unholy clamorings of his fallen flesh nature? sounds more like it, but with a great deal of struggle and leaning on Jesus

3) an unconverted Christian who is incapable of living without sin? if unconverted would he really care? Would he even know?

4) an unconverted, non-Christian person who is incapable of living without sin? if he recognizes no duty to God, would he? He may lead an exemplary lifestyle, but still not be without sin, only God can take it away and keep us from falling: Jude 1:24 Now unto [b]him that is able to keep you from falling , and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

5) other:[/B]

---

My $0.02

------------------
Examine me, O LORD, and prove me: try my reins and my heart. Ps.26:2
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in men.Ps.118:8

We are all familiar with the sinful voice of our fallen flesh nature. It never ceases to communicate unholy thoughts and feelings, which we must disown and resist as we would the voice of Satan.

Apparently Paul employs the word "I" to mean either the mind of the new man or the mind, as it were, of fallen flesh nature. See verse 18 and 25. The context determines which is which.

For example - "For that which I do [the flesh clamoring for sin] I allow not [the new man does not allow himself to crave sin]: for what I would [the flesh would sin if it were possible], that do I not [the new man does not sin]; but what I hate [the new man hates sin], that do I [the flesh loves to clamor for sin]" verse 15.

Does this explanation sound bogus to you? If so, please explain why, and also share what you think makes sense according to your understanding of truth. Is someone willing to take the time to respond to this request?

The "do it" in verse 17 and 20 (KJV) cannot be referring to the actual commission of a known sin. Because Paul would then be excusing sin, which clearly is not possible. Rather I believe the "do it" is talking about the unholy thoughts and feelings communicated to our minds, via our sinful flesh nature. The flesh is guilty of craving sin, not the new man.

Paul is, as I see it, saying that we should not blame ourselves for the existence of unholy thoughts and feelings. These things originate with our fallen flesh and are only temptations which must be resisted through the indwelling Holy Spirit.

1. What does Paul mean when he says in verse 17 and 20 "it is no more I that do it"? What does the "do it" refer to if it doesn't mean the sinful clamorings of our fallen flesh nature?

2. In verse 15 what is it that Paul "allow[s] not" and do[es] not"? If it doesn't mean that he does not allow himself to fulfill the unholy desires of his fallen flesh nature while he's walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man - then what does it mean?

3. Can we conclude from this passage that Paul is saying born again believers can excuse falling back into the camp of sin by blaming it on the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

2. In verse 15 what is it that Paul "allow[s] not" and do[es] not"? If it doesn't mean that he does not allow himself to fulfill the unholy desires of his fallen flesh nature while he's walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man - then what does it mean?

3. Can we conclude from this passage that Paul is saying born again believers can excuse falling back into the camp of sin by blaming it on the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Lowe:

3. Can we conclude from this passage that Paul is saying born again believers can excuse falling back into the camp of sin by blaming it on the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

---

Mike,

Its a little hard for me to be sure of what you are meaning in your statements but it seems as if you are saying we arent really to blame if we have unholy thoughts running around in our heads

Its not a sin to be tempted but it is to cherish it and allow it to stay there. You can see this by reading the EGW statements below. We are to blame for that. But maybe I just am misunderstanding you though.
-------

God's Amazing Grace, page 295, paragraph 2
Chapter Title: Keeping the Heart
Diligent heart-keeping is essential to a healthy growth in grace. The heart in its natural state is a habitation for unholy thoughts and sinful passions. When brought into subjection to Christ, it must be cleansed by the Spirit from all defilement. This cannot be done without the consent of the individual.
When the soul has been cleansed, it is the duty of the Christian to keep it undefiled. Many seem to think that the religion of Christ does not call for the abandonment of daily sins, the breaking loose from habits which have held the soul in bondage. They renounce some things condemned by the conscience, but they fail to represent Christ in the daily life. They do not bring Christlikeness into the home. They do not show a thoughtful care in their choice of words. Too often, fretful, impatient words are spoken, words which stir the worst passions of the human heart. Such ones need the abiding presence of Christ in the soul. Only in His strength can they keep guard over the words and actions. .

Lift Him Up, page 130, paragraph 9
Chapter Title: Lift Him Up as the Bread of Life
The heart that is stored with the precious truths of God's Word is fortified against the temptations of Satan, against impure thoughts and unholy actions ( Youth's Instructor , July 28, 1892).

Messages to Young People, page 382, paragraph 1
Chapter Title: Unholy Influences at Work
I entreat the students in our schools to be sober-minded. The frivolity of the young is not pleasing to God. Their sports and games open the door to a flood of temptations. They are in possession of God's heavenly endowment in their intellectual faculties, and they should not allow their thoughts to be cheap and low. A character formed in accordance with the precepts of God's word will reveal steadfast principles, pure, noble aspirations. The Holy Spirit co-operates with the powers of the human mind, and high and holy impulses are the sure result. . . .

Thank you for those awesome quotes on being pure and holy in the Lord. Amen! I too agree that we cannot cherish unholy thoughts and feelings. Otherwise, we become guilty of them.

But would you agree that initially the unholy thoughts and feelings that enter our mind originate with our sinful flesh nature? And that we must resist them unto the honor and glory of God by the power of the indwelling Spirit?

Do you have any thoughts on the 3 questions I posed two posts back in this thread on the man of Romans 7?

2. In verse 15 what is it that Paul "allow[s] not" and do[es] not"? If it doesn't mean that he does not allow himself to fulfill the unholy desires of his fallen flesh nature while he's walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man - then what does it mean?

3. Can we conclude from this passage that Paul is saying born again believers can excuse falling back into the camp of sin by blaming it on the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

I found a Scripture index in the SOP search engine.

7:1 - 3 AH 340-1, 344-5
7:6 1SM 213
7:7 6BC 1096; 1SM 229, 241; 2T 512-3
7:7 - 9 6BC 1076
7:7 - 12 DA 608; 1SM 212-3, 347; 3T 432, 475
7:9 SC 29, 30; 2T 554
7:10 6BC 1094; 7BC 915; PP 522; 1SM 237
7:11 2T 554
7:12 AH 310; 5BC 1099; 6BC 1076; 7BC 986; CG 261, 506; COL 391; DA 309; Ev 372; EW 66; FE 238; GC 467, 469; PK 15, 625; PP 123, 365; SC 19; SD 40-1, 361; SL 67; 1SM 211, 216, 219, 232, 302, 324, 363, 371, 373; 2SM 50; 2T 513; Te 42
7:12 , 13 1SM 213
7:13 GC 507; GW 31; 5T 246
7:14 SC 19
7:14 - 23 MH 452-3
7:15 2SG 259
7:15 - 19 MYP 74; 1T 160
7:16 SC 19
7:18 AA 561; COL 161; 2SM 32; Te 113
7:18 - 25 AH 127
7:24 COL 201; GC 461; 6T 53
7:24 marg. DA 203; MH 84; SC 19
7:25 4SG-a 146; 1T 150

------------------
Edward F Sutton

After reading Rom 7:14-25 in the context of Rom 5-8, and also in the context of what the rest of Bible says about conversion, the unholy clamorings of sinful flesh nature, living without sin, and the joy of walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man (maturing in the fruit of the Spirit) - it seems obvious to me that the man of Rom 7 is a born again Christian who is successfully resisting the sinful clamorings of his fallen flesh nature.

Is that how you see it? Or is that how you believe the Bible sees it?

By the way, would anyone care to comment on the three questions I listed above?

Paul was talking about his life as Saul of Tarsus, a religious Jew before Jesus Christ, while he was on his "high horse". Jesus knocked him off his "high horse and blinded his eye, but enlightened his mind & heart.

After conversion to Jesus, Saul the religious failure was now Paul the enabled disciple; with the Saviour Who can & does.

The choices the earlier questions offered afforded no Biblical picture of conversion at all. They stacked the deck un Biblically.

The man of Romans 7 is a religious man but without Jesus Christ. Paul expresses those "without law" to be the various pagan peoples. The people "under law" are the Jews who say they follow God, but exclude Jesus Christ; the peoples "under grace" are both groups from Jews & gentiles having accepted Jesus Christ as their Saviour. Compare 1st Corinthians 9:20,21; Romans 6:15; Galatians 4:4,5 & 5:18.

------------------
Edward F Sutton

[This message has been edited by Edward F Sutton (edited September 25, 2001).]

And what do you think about this paraphrased translation of verse 25:

"So then with the mind of the new man I myself serve the law of God. But with the flesh I serve the law of sin."

His choices are to serve the law of God "with the mind" or the law of sin "with the flesh." Paul seems to be making a contrast, rather than a comparision. He uses the word "but", instead of the word "and." Do you see what I mean?

And can you please explain what you meant by the following:

"The choices the earlier questions offered afforded no Biblical picture of conversion at all. They stacked the deck un Biblically."

Here are those questions restated:

1. What does Paul mean when he says in verse 17 and 20 "it is no more I that do it"? What does the "do it" refer to?

2. In verse 15 what is it that Paul does not "allow" and does not "do"?

3. What and where is the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

1. Religious Jews
2. Non relegious or pagan religious Gentiles
3. Converted Christians

Relegious Jews & Converted Christians both will call the law holy just & good.

So the pagan gentiles are not in Romans 7 group.

The non Christian Jew is zealous to obeythe law, but upon searching - finds he can not do it, because he requires ego autos. Jesus Christ is excluded. However Jesus says "without ME YE can do NOTHING." Keeping God's law is definitly one of those things.

Romans 7 is Paul's deliberate and detailed contrast between the internal landscape of a religious Jew and a religious Christian, useing himself from his own past experience without Christ & present experience with Christ as the contrast.

I recommend reading "The Word was made Flesh" by Larson, Appendix D.

A very Biblical analysis.

------------------
Edward F Sutton

2. What does Paul mean when he says in verse 17 and 20 "it is no more I that do it"? What does the "do it" refer to?

3. What and where is the "sin that dwelleth in me" (verses 17 and 20)?

P.S. I don't have my copy of Larsen's book. It's packed away where I can't get at it right now. But I will read it as soon as I get the chance. Thanx.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Paul tells the non Messianic Jew’s dilemma, then he jumps ahead & tells the solution to the dilemma.
24 “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?”

25 “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Then Paul returns to close the situations of Romans 7 that shows the dilemma of Christless religion . )

“So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” He knows that the deeds of the flesh constitute a large portion of the life record. His concern every Yom Kippur is to obtain the seal of God & be allowed life within His people. He is judged by his works as well as his assent to the law. Here Paul is showing that Jesus Christ is the only source of the Yom Kippur seal of God & not the Jew’s power to try to force himself to try to follow God and keep in a life of Christless failure .

The man of Romans 7 is not a Christian, he is Saul of Tarsus the Christless Jew. The man of Romans 6 & 8 is Paul the converted Christian.

------------------
Edward F Sutton

[This message has been edited by Edward F Sutton (edited September 27, 2001).]

However, I find it hard to imagine Saul blaming his fallen flesh nature for the sins he himself he couldn't overcome in his own power. When he writes - "It is no more I that do it but sin that dwelleth in me" - I don't see how that is any different than what Jesus Himself endured. Every born again child of God must resist the unholy clamorings of our sinful flesh nature, just like Jesus had to.

After describing the terrible internal battle with the clamorings of sinful flesh nature in Rom 7, Paul then goes on to make his punch line in chapter 8. It begins with "therefore" and introduces the comforting thought that even Jesus had to put up with resisting the cravings and unholy desires of fallen flesh nature.

This connection with Paul's description in Rom 7:14-25 and the fact that Jesus also possessed "sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3) strongly suggests to me that what Paul wrote about the conflict between the "mind" and the "flesh" must be understood in the context of what it was like for Jesus to endure the same internal warfare with the clamorings of fallen flesh nature.

And if this correlation is correct then it would be safe to conclude that if that's it the way it was for Jesus then Paul must be talking about a converted Christian in Rom 7:14-25 who, like Jesus, is successfully resisting the clamorings of fallen flesh nature by staying connected to the same source Jesus stayed connected to - namely, God the Father.

This interpretation does not require that we accuse Paul of blame shifting when he says - "It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Instead we can understand Paul to mean - It's not me craving after sin, rather it's my flesh that is clamoring for sinful expression. The "do it" in verse 17 and 20 is referring not to the committing of sin, but rather to the flesh clamoring for sin.

Does that make sense?

Yes, Christianity is more about seeking and saving the lost, but does that make understanding how Jesus saves us personally less important? I'm sure you would answer, No. But when and where is a good place to discuss such matters?

You would like to elaborate on your comment about resisting the clamorings of our fallen nature flesh in the context of Romans 7?

We do, however, need a proper blend in all aspects of whatever we do and study.

Going to the extreme one way or the other doesn't help. For example, we can go to the extreme with the law or we can go to the extreme with grace.

__________________________
In His Love, Mercy & Grace

Daryl

1. The table of show bread - personal and corporate Bible study.

2. The altar of incense - personal and corporate prayer.

3. The golden candle stick - personal and corporate outreach.

4. The holy place - personal and corporate fellowship.

But I'm still curious as to why some of us interpret Romans 7 one way, and others of us an entirely different way. Especially since our interpretations are so radically opposite. How can this be? And does it matter?

For example, I am convinced that the man of Romans 7:14-25 is a born again believer who is successfully resisting the unholy clamorings of his sinful flesh nature.

Whereas others believe the man of Romans 7 is an unconverted person who is slave to sin
and his sinful flesh nature.

And still others believe in a combination of the two. What is the truth about this famous passage of Scripture?

How are we supposed to understand Romans 7 verses 17 and 20?

7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that [it is] good.
7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
7:18 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.
7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
7:23 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.
7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
7:25 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.

I often think of those who stop going to church because they can't give up a sinful habit such as smoking. They feel they first need to kick the habit of this or any other sin before they can even come to church.

What is the end result of that kind of thinking?

How would this and some of the other topics here affect that type of person?

__________________________
In His Love, Mercy & Grace

Daryl

The only reason we should stop going to church is if we stop trying to imitate the sinless example of Jesus. If we give up on Jesus and start clinging to some private or public darling sin then we should stop going to church.

But as long as the example of Jesus is our goal we should continue going to church. Otherwise the church should take some kind of appropriate steps to motivate us to make the right decision about church attendance.

But what is Romans 7:17 and 20 trying to teach us?

__________________________
In His Love, Mercy & Grace

Daryl

But back to the topic, how do you interpet Rom 7:17 and 20?

Romans
7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

By these words is Paul telling us that we can blame our sinful "behaviour" on our indwelling sin? Does that make any sense? Can we excuse sin by blaming sin on sin?

Don't you think it's obvious that Paul is not referring to the actual commission of sin? I believe it is clear Paul is talking about the sinful clamorings of our fallen flesh nature, rather than actually someone committing sin itself. Else our only other option is to conclude that Paul is telling us to blame sin on sin. Do you see any other way out?

That Paul is contrasting the desires of our sinful flesh nature and the desires of our new man mind is clear from the following passages:

Romans 7:17-25 "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing... For I delight in the law of God after the inward [new] man... But I see another law in my members [or flesh], warring against the law of my mind... So then with the mind [of the new man] I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

I believe Paul is clearly describing the internal warfare between nature and nuture which every human being experiences every day. He is contrasting the desires of sinful nature versus the sinless desires of the new man. The "do it" in verses 17 and 20 is not talking about committing sin, but instead it's refering to our fallen flesh nature clamoring for sinful expression. And since the flesh cannot actually commit a sin, the "do it" can only be referring to our fallen nature's natural desire for sin.

In conclusion, Paul writes - "I delight in the law of God [and] with the mind [of the new man] I myself serve the law of God [but my sinful] flesh [wars against] the law of my mind... for I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing... evil is present with me... Who shall deliver me... Jesus Christ... Now then it is no more I [the new man] that do it [desire sin], but sin that dwelleth in me."

What do you the rest of you think?

But "Nothing is apparently more helpless, yet really more invincible, than the soul that feels its nothingness and relies wholly on the merits of the Savior. God would send every angel in Heaven to the aid of such a one, rather than allow him to be overcome." Sons and Daughter of God, p.35.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
What about church discipline? Why would anyone want to attend church if they are practicing a known sin without intending to repent or to try and change his ways? Especially if the church was following proper protocol as outlined in Mat 18 and other places in the Bible and church manual?

But back to the topic, how do you interpet Rom 7:17 and 20?

---

Mike

I think your question here is a good one; and could be related closely to the topic at hand.

Why would someone want to go to church when the are practicing a known sin? As a people, we always say things like "If you experience the pleadings of the Holy Spirit in some area of your life, then you know you have not committed the unpardonable sin."

I have had a time or two when I went to church while practicing a known sin; but the church members "loved me anyway," and it was the love of Christ through others which kept me coming...and eventually, when I was sorry enough for what I was doing; I quit what I was doing overnight!

Rom.7:14-25 is simply a conflict of two natures. Being converted, or unconverted, is not the contextual focus of this passage; although Paul's conversion status is clearly revealed here:

AA.190.001
Before his conversion Paul had regarded himself as blameless "touching the righteousness which is in the law." Philippians 3:6. But since his change of heart he had gained a clear conception of the mission of the Saviour as the Redeemer of the entire race, Gentile as well as Jew, and had learned the difference between a living faith and a dead formalism. In the light of the gospel the ancient rites and ceremonies committed to Israel had gained a new and deeper significance.

That which they shadowed forth had come to pass, and those who were living under the gospel dispensation had been freed from their observance. God's unchangeable law of Ten Commandments, however, Paul still kept in spirit as well as in letter. "

SC.029.003
Paul says that as "touching the righteousness which is in the law"--as far as outward acts were concerned --he was "blameless" (Philippians 3:6); but when the spiritual character of the law was discerned, he saw himself a sinner. Judged by the letter of the law as men apply it to the outward life, he had abstained from sin; but when he looked into the depths of its holy precepts, and saw himself as God saw him, he bowed in humiliation and confessed his guilt.

He says, "I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." Romans 7:9. When he saw the spiritual nature of the law, sin appeared in its true hideousness, and his self-esteem was gone."

I think that by these quotes it is easy to see that Paul was converted...but then, maybe we need to define what being converted is?

Here is another quote I think reflects Paul's controversy between two natures; yet it also attests to the fact that Paul was converted:

RH.1902-06-03.008
"It was a hard struggle for Paul--heretofore able to say of himself, as far as outward acts were concerned, as "touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless"--to see himself a transgressor, all his supposed goodness swept away. It was a hard struggle for him to give up his supposed righteousness, and cast himself for salvation on the One he had despised. But he yielded to the convictions of the Spirit. The far-reaching claims of the law of God took hold of his life, reaching to the thoughts and emotions of his sin-corrupted heart.

With eyes anointed by the grace of God, he saw the mistakes of his life. From a proud Pharisee, who thought himself justified by his good works, he was changed to a humble suppliant for mercy. The tongue, once so ready to blaspheme the name of Christ, became eloquent in sounding the praises of him who had called him out of darkness into his marvelous light."

[ December 27, 2001: Message edited by: DavidTBattler ]

Here is a direct commentary on this chapter from the book Steps to Christ:

"It is not enough to perceive the loving-kindness of God, to see the benevolence, the fatherly tenderness of His character. It is not enough to discern the wisdom and justice of His law; to see that it is founded upon the eternal principle of love. Paul the apostle saw all this when he exclaimed, 'I consent unto the law that it is good.' 'The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.' But he added, in the bitterness of his soul-anguish and despair, 'I am carnal, sold under sin.' Rom.7:16,12,14. He longed for the purity, the righteousness, to which in himsefl he was powerless to attain, and cried out, 'O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death?' Rom.7:24. Such is the cry that has gone up from burdened hearts in all lands and in all ages. To all, there is but one answer, 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.'" p.19.

Here is another testimony of the Spirit of God from The Desire of ages:

"There are many who realize their helplessness, and who long for that spiritual life which will bring them into harmony with God; they are vainly striving to obtain it. In despair they cry, 'O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death?' Rom.7:24. Let these desponding, struggling ones look up. The Savior is bending over the purchase of His blood, saying with inexpressible tenderness and pity, 'Wilt thou be made whole?' He bids you arise in health and peace. Do not wait to feel that you are made whole. Believe His word, and it will be fulfilled." D.A.203.

"In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." 2 Cor.13:1.

Let us bring forth our third witness:

"Wherever the word of God has been faithfully preached, results have followed that attested its divine origin. The Spirit of God accompanied the message of His servants, and the word was with power. Sinners felt their consciences quickened. The 'light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world,' illumined the secret chambers of their souls, and the hidden things of darkness were made manifest. Deep conviction took hold upon their minds and hearts. They were convinced of sin and of righteousness and of judgment to come. They had a sense of the righteousness of Jehovah and felt the terror of appearing, in their guilt and uncleanness, before the Searcher of hearts. In anguish they cried out: 'Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?' As the cross of Calvary, with its infinite sacrifice for the sins of men, was revealed, they saw that nothing but the merits of Christ could suffice to atone for their transgressions; this alone could reconcile man to God. With faith and humility they accepted the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world." The Great Controversy, p.461.

After having heard these worthy witnesses, how could anyone continue to question the fact that the experience described in Rom.7 is that of the man who is longing for that spiritual life which will bring him into harmony with God, that which he is striving in vain to obtain?

Let us read in Romans and see what is done. Rom.3:10, "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." And the 12th verse: "They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." Is that so? Yes. Then how can we talk about a heathen doing good? Does he do good? "There is none that doeth good, no, not one." Someone will say, "If a man has Christ, he can do good." Buf if he has Christ, he is not a heathen. What we are talking about is the heathen.

We need not go to the heathen to inquire; all we need is to go to the Jews. Here is one that was a Jew, like you and me. Rom.7:14, "For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin." The carnal mind is the natural mind. Whose mind is the natural mind? Satan's, that is the mind of self; that is the mind of Satan. Well, let us read further. "For that which I do, I allow not." verse 15. What is the reason I do not allow what I do? What is the matter with it? Why can't I allow it? Because I know it is wrong. It is not good. If it were good, could I not allow it? "That which I do, I allow not." What is actually done then? The good? No, the not good. The bad. The wrong.

"For what I would, that I do not." What would he do? The good. But what did he do? The wrong. "But what I hate, that I do." What did he hate? Sin. He hated the evil, the wrong, the bad. But what did he do? The evil. He did the evil, he did the wrong, he did the bad. Then how much good does the natural mind do? None. Although he hates the bad, how much good does he do? None. He would do the good; but how much of the good that he would does he actually do? None. Now is that so? Yes. It is so; for the Bible says so. Then what in the world is the use of anybody's talking about the heathen doing good, or even a Jew doing good, or any man doing good, who has only the natural mind, and is only the natural man? This is not saying anything as to what he knows; that is not saying whether he has impulses to good or not; that is not the question. He had these impulses all the time, didn't he? He had the knowledge of good, so much that he hated the bad things that he was doing.

Now think of that. There was the natural man; there was a man like you and I and every man born into this world. He had impulses to good; he had the knowledge of good; he hated the evil; but what did he do? Not what did he think? Not what did he know? But what did he do? He did the evil. It is not a question of what he knew. Did he do anything else than evil? No. He knew something else, he knew better, didn't he? Yes. Then let us not pass off our right knowing, for right doing. Let us not pass off our right knowledge for right deeds. Knowledge of right is not doing right. So he did not do any good. Who is that? It is you and I--the natural man. Is that I? Yes. Without the mind of Christ itself, it that I? Yes. Then though I profess to believe in Christ, if the mind of Christ itself is not there, is that I? Yes. Is it you? Yes.

7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

7:18 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.

7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Is Paul blame shifting? Is he saying that when he sins it's really not him sinning but his flesh? What is the "do" he's talking about? does it refer to him actually committing sin? or does it refer to his fallen flesh clamoring for sin?

Good questions.

Let me begin to answer, by asking another question:

When Paul says, "It is no longer I; but sin," what does he mean?

Is Paul saying there is a difference between "I" and "sin?"

What might this difference be, if there is a difference?

Would it be possible that, if there is a difference, that the difference was related to Gal.5:16?

I don't see this as "blame-shifting." How would you answer my questions here?

If you're insinuating Paul is referring to his sinful flesh nature, rather than his sinless new man mind, then I think we're on the same page. Note the following passages on the flesh:

Rom 7:5,18,25 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... 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 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.

Romans 8:1-13
8:1 [There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
8:3 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:
8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
8:5 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.
8:6 For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.
8:7 Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
8:9 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.
8:10 And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.
8:11 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.
8:12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
8:13 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.

Rom 13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to [fulfil] the lusts [thereof].

1 Cor 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring [it] into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

2 Cor 7:1 Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

Galatians 5:16-24
5:16 [This] I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these]; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

1 Peter 2:11 Dearly beloved, I beseech [you] as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;

AH 127, 128 "The lower passions have their seat in the body and work through it. The words "flesh" or "fleshly" or "carnal lusts" embrace the lower, corrupt nature; the flesh of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God. We are commanded to crucify the flesh, with the affections and lusts. How shall we do it? Shall we inflict pain on the body? No; but put to death the temptation to sin. The corrupt thought is to be expelled. Every thought is to be brought into captivity to Jesus Christ. All animal propensities are to be subjected to the higher powers of the soul. The love of God must reign supreme; Christ must occupy an undivided throne. Our bodies are to be regarded as His purchased possession. The members of the body are to become the instruments of righteousness."

NOTE: I believe that these passages teach us that our sinful flesh nature has a carnal mind of its own, a mind which communicates sinful lusts and desires to either our old or new man mind, but is not capable of actually committing sin. Our flesh or carnal mind can communicate sin, but it cannot committ sin.

The difference between the "lusts" or "desires" of the flesh and the "works" of the flesh is the difference between our carnal flesh mind communicating sin, which is only a temptation, and we ourselves actually consenting to own and/or act out the sinful desires of our flesh and actually committing sin.

There is a war going on between the carnal mind of our sinful flesh nature and the sinless new man mind we received when we're born again. "The warfare against self is the greatest battle that was ever fought." SC 43. We may keep our sinful flesh desires under "subjection" but we cannot escape them this side of eternity. Not until Jesus rewards us with sinless flesh when He returns will we have sinless flesh desires.

I believe Paul is describing the greatest battle that was ever fought in Romans 7:14-25. In Romans 8:3 he goes on to share how even Jesus suffered being tempted by the voice of His sinful flesh nature. Compare Heb 2:18 and 1 Peter 4:1,2. But Jesus successfully subjected His carnal flesh mind (the lower powers of appetite and passion) to His sanctified "new man" mind and never once own or acted out the unholy desires of His sinful flesh nature.

And so it may be with us if we will be subjection to the Father just as Jesus was. Check out these powerful quotes:

DA 101.2 "All who would perfect holiness in the fear of God must learn the lessons of temperance and self-control. The appetites and passions must be held in subjection to the higher powers of the mind. This self-discipline is essential to that mental strength and spiritual insight which will enable us to understand and to practice the sacred truths of God's word. For this reason temperance finds its place in the work of preparation for Christ's second coming."

DA 122,123 "The uncontrolled indulgence and consequent disease and degradation that existed at Christ's first advent will again exist, with intensity of evil, before His second coming. Christ declares that the condition of the world will be as in the days before the Flood, and as in Sodom and Gomorrah. Every imagination of the thoughts of the heart will be evil continually. Upon the very verge of that fearful time we are now living, and to us should come home the lesson of the Saviour's fast. Only by the inexpressible anguish which Christ endured can we estimate the evil of unrestrained indulgence. His example declares that our only hope of eternal life is through bringing the appetites and passions into subjection to the will of God.

"In our own strength it is impossible for us to deny the clamors of our fallen nature. Through this channel Satan will bring temptation upon us. Christ knew that the enemy would come to every human being, to take advantage of hereditary weakness, and by his false insinuations to ensnare all whose trust is not in God. And by passing over the ground which man must travel, our Lord has prepared the way for us to overcome. It is not His will that we should be placed at a disadvantage in the conflict with Satan. He would not have us intimidated and discouraged by the assaults of the serpent. "Be of good cheer," He says; "I have overcome the world." John 16:33.

"Let him who is struggling against the power of appetite look to the Saviour in the wilderness of temptation. See Him in His agony upon the cross, as He exclaimed, "I thirst." He has endured all that it is possible for us to bear. His victory is ours.

"Jesus rested upon the wisdom and strength of His heavenly Father. He declares, "The Lord God will help Me; therefore shall I not be confounded: . . . and I know that I shall not be ashamed. . . . Behold, the Lord God will help Me." Pointing to His own example, He says to us, "Who is among you that feareth the Lord, . . . that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? let him trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his God." Isa. 50:7-10.

"The prince of this world cometh," said Jesus, "and hath nothing in Me." John 14:30. There was in Him nothing that responded to Satan's sophistry. He did not consent to sin. Not even by a thought did He yield to temptation. So it may be with us. Christ's humanity was united with divinity; He was fitted for the conflict by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. And He came to make us partakers of the divine nature. So long as we are united to Him by faith, sin has no more dominion over us. God reaches for the hand of faith in us to direct it to lay fast hold upon the divinity of Christ, that we may attain to perfection of character."

DA 149.4 " It was Christ who in the Old Testament gave the warning to Israel, "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Prov. 20:1. And He Himself provided no such beverage. Satan tempts men to indulgence that will becloud reason and benumb the spiritual perceptions, but Christ teaches us to bring the lower nature into subjection. His whole life was an example of self-denial. In order to break the power of appetite, He suffered in our behalf the severest test that humanity could endure."

DA 466.5 "The only condition upon which the freedom of man is possible is that of becoming one with Christ. "The truth shall make you free;" and Christ is the truth. Sin can triumph only by enfeebling the mind, and destroying the liberty of the soul. Subjection to God is restoration to one's self,--to the true glory and dignity of man. The divine law, to which we are brought into subjection, is "the law of liberty." James 2:12.

DA 664.4 "Verily, verily, I say unto you," Christ continued, "He that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also." The Saviour was deeply anxious for His disciples to understand for what purpose His divinity was united to humanity. He came to the world to display the glory of God, that man might be uplifted by its restoring power. God was manifested in Him that He might be manifested in them. Jesus revealed no qualities, and exercised no powers, that men may not have through faith in Him. His perfect humanity is that which all His followers may possess, if they will be in subjection to God as He was."

[ December 28, 2001: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]

"If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it."

No. I said I would not do it. I said that I hated it, and declared that I would never do it again. But I did do it. Then when I hated it, and resolved and re-resolved, and determined that I would never do it again, and yet dit it, what in the world was the matter with me? I had the knowledge, but did not have the power. Now the gospel of Christ, 'which is Christ in you,' that is power; it is the power of God to every one that believeth.

Well, then the natural man is not free, is he? No, sir. He is not in a condition where he can do what he would, even with the bedimmed intellect, and the obscured mind that he has. He cannot live up to his own standard. But is what he would do as he sees it, is that as God would have him do it? No. Or as God would do it? No. Whose righteousness are we to have? God's. Yes, for God's righteousness is what we are to have. And righteousness is right doing. So that it is God's right doing that we must have. Then our undestanding is exceedingly low, even with the light which God has let shine into our hearts. Then where is the good doing of any man in this world who has not the mind of Jesus Christ?

"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."

What is it that is present with us? To will to do good. Then what did that putting of emnity there against Satan--what was that the doing of? Is not it setting the man free to will? Yes. Was it anything more than that? No. Now think carefully of this; I mean on this point. Did that do any more for the man to enable him to do right things, and glorify God, did it do any more for him than to set free his will, that he might choose which master he would have? No. It put the hatred there, and gave him the knowledge of something better. It gives the hatred of evil, leads him out towards the good; but does it enable him to do the good? No.

Now just another thought there. He hates the evil and declares he never will do it; and yet against his will, and against all his being for that matter, it is done. But what is it, and who is it, that actually does it? "Sin that dwelleth in me." And who rules that? Satan. Who is the master of that man? Satan.

Now when the man is set free from that carnal mind, the mind of self and Satan, who controls that man? who then is his master? Christ. Yes. Christ sets him free.

Now carry that thought a little further. When we had the mind of self and Satan was ruling, we said we would not do those evil things, but just those were done. Who did it? "Sin that dwelleth in me." We said we will do so and so. We did not. Who kept us from it? Satan. But now in Christ we are free from him; we have the other mind. We say we will do that. Who does it? Christ. While in the natural mind we refuse, and who does it? Satan. And when in the mind of Christ, we choose and who does it? Christ. Is that so? Yes. It is God that worketh in you both to will and to do, of His good pleasure.

This shows that the man of Romans 7 is longing for something better, for something, Ellen said, he is striving in vain to obtain!

P.S. Romans 8 describes the experience of the man in possession of what the man of Romans 7 is striving in vain to obtain. The battle is the same but now sin has no dominion over him because Christ is in him the hope of glory.

The man of Romans 7 knows defeat and defeat only! The Christian should experience victory some of the time!

[ December 28, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Is the man of Rom. 7 converted? No.

He's 1/2 converted.

As Ellen White describes Paul a little earlier in the chapter, she says that the law did not die, but the carnal mind in Paul died. This is why he had a desire in his mind to serve the law of God. He had progressed in the conversion process to the point that he wanted to do right. But wanting isn't enough.

Comparing the passage to similar wording in Galatians, "The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, so that you cannot do the things that you would." Will power? There's no such thing. The things we would, the things we choose to do, we can't do.

But the previous verse says, "Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

So once the man of Rom. 7 learns to choose to walk in the Spirit, the battle will be won, though hard at times, and he will then do the good things that he wills to do.

I just want to say I am enjoying the study of this general topic; and will be able to post some details soon about what I am observing and figuring.

I believe the "man" of Rom.7 was indeed converted; and that there can be no middle ground, as Bob Pickle seemed to suggest, nor does this man in Rom.7 know all the defeat that adventbeliever seems to have alluded to above.

I am coming to the conclusion that there are, however,some realities in this passage of Romans 7 that not many care to confront and deal with.

The key word I have used in this post is "realities," which has nothing to with the "philosopies" of "salvation" and "conversion" that we see in this thread.

What I find particularly disappointing with this subject, is that it usually tends to leave an air of confusion. Yet, God is not the author of such, is He?

There is nothing personal intended here - so please, no one take it personal.

I am just disclosing some honest impressions of the topic at hand...

Will explain soon.

How could these statements escape our notice?

There were also A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner, God's delegated messengers who commented on Romans 7 as well and they both taught that the man of Romans 7 is the unregenerated man who longs to be delivered from the bondage of sin.

Let me quote Waggoner here, if you dont' mind, and see for yourself if what he says is or is not in harmony with what Ellen White said in S.C. p.19 and D.A.203 and G.C.461?

"If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good." The fact that we do not wish to do the sins that we are committing shows that we acknowledge the righteousness of the law which forbids them. But conviction is not conversion, although a very necessary step to that condition. It is not enough to wish to do right. The blessing is pronounced upon those who do His commandments, and not upon those who wish to do them, or who even try to do them. Indeed, if there were no higher position for a professed follower of the Lord than that described in these verses, he would be in a far worse condition than the careless sinner. Both are slaves, only the latter is so hardened that he finds pleasure in his slavery.

"Now if one must all his life be a slave, it is better for him to be unconscious of his bondage to be continually fretting over it. But there is something better; therefore it is a blessing that we are convicted of sin, and that our slavery is thereby made as disagreeable as possible." E.J. Waggoner, The Gospel in Paul's great Letter, p.7.123,124.

Did not the Lord speak through this man too?

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

"So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."

"That is, of course, while in the condition described in the preceding verses. In purpose he serves the law of God, but in actual practice he serves the law of sin. As described in another place, 'The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." Gal.5:17.

It is not a state of actual service to God, because we read in our next chapter that 'they that are in the flesh can not please God.' It is a state from which one may well pray to be delivered, so that he can serve the Lord not merely with the mind, but with his whole being. 'The very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray that your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it." 1 Thess. 5:23,24.

P.S. Now that I have quoted Waggoner, I invite you to re-read my posts dated Dec.27 at 6:57 P.M. and Dec.28 at 8:33 P.M. It is A.T. Jones who is speaking. It is taken from the 1893 General Conference Bulletin when he was repeating the 1888 message with added power and glory. I was waiting to see if anyone would recognize his style of writing.

Like Waggoner, he made it powerfully clear that the experience of the man of Rom.7 is the experience of the man who is convicted of sin but not delivered yet.

[ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

"But how to perform that which is good I find not."

"All will allow that a Christian must do what is good, some of the time at least. But this experience in Romans 7:21, 'When I would do good, evil is present with me,' shows that the man having that experience does not do good at all. Yet he wants to do good. This is a service in the oldness of the letter. The man is serving the law, but is a slave. There is no freedom in the service; it is bond-service. But now, having tried with all his might to do what he wants to do, and having failed, he finds that in Christ is the perfection of the law, in Him there is life. So the law as it is in the person of Jesus Christ is the law of the Spirit of Life. So he takes the life of Christ, and gets the perfection of the law as it is in Christ, and serves Him in spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. Thus he is delivered from bond-service to the law to freedom in it. There is a wonderful amount of rich truth in that,--'The law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." E.G. Waggoner, Bible Studies on the Book of Romans, p.59.

From bondage (Rom.7) to freedom! Rom.8:1!

[ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

I think a little light just went on. I was trying to figure out what point you were really getting at here; and I think you are trying to say that you see Romans 7 as part of the journey in a believer's life, starting out in bondage, and ending up with freedom in Christ, (Rom.8:1).

Let me know if I am reading you right on that one.

Just an FYI that I am not necessarily saying I am personally confused about this issue; but I am expressing confusion, that seems to be portrayed, within this thread, on what it means to be converted, and to be a believer; and to be "in Christ."

I personally see Romans 7-8 as a complete unit; and not really intended by Paul, make a statement, about if he was converted or not when he did "slip." Lets face the entire BIBLE RECORD on this matter, and realize and accept; the Bible is quite clear: Proverbs 24:16 "For a JUST man falleth seven times, and riseth up again:"

Paul is describing, among other things, this concept, in Rom.7. We need to be careful to not isolate or circumscribe Romans 7 in ways that other parts of Scripture, never would do.

Carnal Man Versus New Man

Quote by Mike:

“There is a war going on between the carnal mind of our sinful flesh nature and the sinless new man mind we received when we're born again.”

Hello Mike

I agree with Daryl…you have been studying lots; and these are really helpful quotes from SOP. I am going to throw out a bit of stuff – mostly questions, geared to clarifying where you are coming from; and expanding on any other possibilities.

I think we are definitely agreed that we can’t blame sin for sin, as you said above. I just quoted the one sentence above from you for now, as it seems to best explain my next question.

It almost seems to me, as though you are saying we have two separate minds, sort of running parallel to one another; kind of like having two hard drives in your computer:
1) The “flesh mind,” and 2) the “new man mind.”

Are you saying that when we are converted, we suddenly start running with this second mind which you are calling the “new man mind?” And that “the flesh mind” then takes a back seat to “the new man?” What might this mean in the believer’s life, if this is what you are saying?

1) Is there a difference, spelled out in the Scriptures, between “the flesh” and “sin?”

2) Rom.7:18 - appears to be saying “in me” is meaning the same thing as “my flesh” Do you agree?

3) Vs.22 – Is “in my heart” the same as “in me” as mentioned in vs.18?

4) Vs.23 – is “the law of sin” the same as “the flesh” in vs.18?

5) Vs.25 – how is “the mind” different than “the flesh?”

6) Is “conscience” (1 Pet.3:16), the same thing as “the new mind?”

7) Are “hidden things of dishonesty”
(2 Cor.4:2), the same thing as “the flesh,” spoken of in Rom.7: 18?

8) In order to see clearly what the Bible tells us about “conversion,” (Ps.51:13,
Mat.18:3), we need the Biblical layout of what we are born with “in Adam,”
(1 Cor.15:22), and what we are born with “in Christ.” (Rom.8:2).

9) What are some possible reasons that the Bible has one specific reference to the phrase
“in Adam;” and seventy seven specific references to the phrase “in Christ?”

I haven't answered one question yet; but this should keep us going for a short while?

Let us console ourselves with the fact that Jesus often answered questions, by asking them. He did it 308 times, within the four gospels! (I counted).

[ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: DavidTBattler ]

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]

Let me know if I am reading you right on that one.
_________
That's right David!

Mike:

The men of Romans 7 and 8 both have sinful flesh. The battle is in the realm of the mind. I agree that the flesh, of itself, cannot act contrary to the will of God. The man of Romans 7 is a Jew who worships every Sabbath at the Synagogue or a church member today who faifhfully attends Church on Sabbath or Sunday. He has been baptized and been in the church for many years.

Nicodemus was a respected leader of the Jewish nation. He was a religious leader. He had been a "spiritual" leader most of his life. But Jesus said to him, "Nicodemus, you must be born again."

"Here was a man in a high position of trust, a man who was looked up to as one educated in Jewish customs, one whose mind was stored up with wisdom. He was indeed in possession of talents of no ordinary character. He would not go to Jesus by day, for this would make him a subject of remark. It would be too humiliating for a ruler of the Jews to acknowledge himself in sympathy with the despised Nazarene. Nicodemus thinks, I will ascertain for myself the mission and claims of this Teacher, whether He is indeed the Light to lighten the Gentiles, and the Glory of Israel.

"Jesus virtually says to Nicodemus: It is not controversy that will help your case: You must have a new heart, or you cannot discern the kingdom of heaven. It is not greater evidence that will bring you into a right position, but new purposes, new springs of action. You must be born again. Until this change takes place, making all things new, the strongest evidences that could be presented would be useless. The want is in your own heart; everything must be changed, or you cannot see the kingdom of God." T.M.367,368.

Now is this applicable to us today, I mean even to the leaders of the Church who may be holding positions of high responsibility? I believe so. And here is the evidence:

"Nicodemus was converted as the result of this interview. The words of Christ are spoken just as verily to presidents of conferences, elders of churches, and those occupying official positions in our institutions." Ibid, 369,370.

Now, if the words of Jesus applied to Nicodemus, how much more did they apply to the rest of the Jewish nation! And they apply to us today with as much force as they did 2,000 years ago! And it doesn't matter whether we have been in the church for only a few years or for many years, or if we have been held in high esteem as Nicodemus was!

I believe that the experience described in Rom.7 is that of the unwilling sinner! He is doing what he hates against his own will but he is seeking the way to freedom which is in Christ Jesus and have not yet found it. (Let us hope that the majority of us have not become so hardened in sin that we are in the same condition of the willing sinner!)

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Ephesians 4:22-24 "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."

Romans 6:6 "Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

Walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man enables us to connect to God in a way that empowers us to recognize and resist the unholy clamorings of our fallen flesh nature. Our flesh communicates sinful thoughts and feelings which we must resist like we would any other temptation. But I wouldn't say that the carnal mind of our sinful flesh nature takes a back seat after we experience the miracle of rebirth. But now we can keep it under subjection.

1 Cor 9:27 "But I keep under my body, and bring [it] into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway."

What would this mean to a believer, if what I'm proposing is true? I suppose it would encourage them to stay connected to Christ. The only way we can avoid the "works of the flesh" is by abiding in Jesus so that the Holy Spirit can empower us to exercise our faculties of mind and body to resist the "lusts and desires of the flesh."

1) Is there a difference, spelled out in the Scriptures, between “the flesh” and “sin?”

It appears as though the word "flesh" has several different connotations. Sometimes it means our body, sometimes it means our fallen nature, sometimes it means our relatives, and sometimes it means our sinful thoughts, words or deeds. Usually the context makes it clear which meaning is intended.

2) Rom.7:18 - appears to be saying “in me” is meaning the same thing as “my flesh” Do you agree?

It seems to me that Paul is clarifying what he means by in me. He's making the contrast between the mind of his "inward man" (verse 22) and the mind of his sinful flesh nature.

3) Vs.22 – Is “in my heart” the same as “in me” as mentioned in vs.18?

The KJV uses the phrase "inward man" instead of in my heart. As mentioned above, I would suggest that my flesh and the inward man are two different aspect of the born again believer.

4) Vs.23 – is “the law of sin” the same as “the flesh” in vs.18?

Seems to me that the flesh obeys the law of sin. Therefore they do not seem to be one and the same thing.

5) Vs.25 – how is “the mind” different than “the flesh?”

Paul seems to contrast the two when he writes - "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

6) Is “conscience” (1 Pet.3:16), the same thing as “the new mind?”

I would say that "having a good conscience" is the result of walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man.

7) Are “hidden things of dishonesty”
(2 Cor.4:2), the same thing as “the flesh,” spoken of in Rom.7: 18?

Again, I would suggest that this is the result of embracing the lusts of the flesh, which then becomes the works of the flesh.

8) In order to see clearly what the Bible tells us about “conversion,” (Ps.51:13, Mat.18:3), we need the Biblical layout of what we are born with “in Adam,” 1 Cor.15:22), and what we are born with “in Christ.” (Rom.8:2).

In Adam we are born with a sinful flesh nature. In Christ we are born again with a new man mind and are partakers of the divine nature.

9) What are some possible reasons that the Bible has one specific reference to the phrase “in Adam;” and seventy seven specific references to the phrase “in Christ?”

Perhaps it's to help us focus on Christ and not Adam? What do you think?

And the Ellen White quotes you referred to do not necessarily disagree with the interpretation I've been advocating. Her application of selected verses from Romans 7 was never intended to explain the entire monologue. She often borrows the language of a passage and applies it to an altogether different context.

AH 127.2 "The lower passions have their seat in the body and work through it. The words "flesh" or "fleshly" or "carnal lusts" embrace the lower, corrupt nature; the flesh of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God."

Here she says the flesh is the seat of our lower passions. The flesh can only communicate sinful thoughts and feelings. It cannot actually commit sin. How we respond to these sinful suggestions determines our guilt or innocense.

When Paul wrote - No good thing dwells in my flesh - I can only conclude from the pen of inspiration that Paul is talking about the voice of his lower corrupt nature. With or without the influence of Satan we must trust in the power of God to resist the sinful clamorings of our fallen flesh nature.

DA 122.3 "In our own strength it is impossible for us to deny the clamors of our fallen nature. Through this channel Satan will bring temptation upon us."

Our fallen flesh nature is what we inherited from our parents dating back to Adam and Eve. It is not Satan. If the devils were to die right now we would still have the voice of our fallen flesh nature to keep under subjection.

Yes, the evil angels work through our fallen flesh nature to tempt and harass us. And the devils are not limited to our fallen flesh nature. They can tempt and annoy us directly, totally bypassing our nature. Jesus was tempted in both ways, and in all ways.

Paul's use of the present tense "I" is not a reference to a third party person. There's nothing in the account to suggest that he's not talking about himself right then and there. When he wrote the book of Romans he was already a born again Christian, and had been for many years.

How does God "deliver [us] from the body of this death"? "Through Jesus"! And in two ways. First, by empowering us to resist the unholy clamorings of the voice of our fallen flesh nature. And secondly, by replacing our sinful flesh with sinless flesh when He returns in the clouds of glory.

Thus, the "do it" in verses 17 and 20 refers to the voice of our fallen flesh communicating to our new man mind sinful thoughts and feelings. There is no other way to interpret this passage unless we conclude that Paul is blaming sin on SIN when he transgresses the law of God.

Whatever else Paul is trying to convey in this difficult passage he certainly cannot be suggesting that when he sins it's not really him sinning but rather it's his sinful flesh nature that's doing the sinning. We're not talking about Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde. This is Paul talking about his present experience.

Which is why in verse 25 he concludes - In the mind of the new man he serves the law of God, even though his flesh serves the law of sin. But so long as he walks in the Spirit and not after the flesh he is not condemned or held personally accountable for the sinful thoughts and feelings communicated by the voice of his fallen flesh nature. See Rom 8:1.

And to settle his point once and for all, Paul cites Jesus as the best example of someone who successfully served the law of God with His mind in spite of the fact that His sinful flesh craved unrighteousness. See Rom 8:3. Jesus condemned the voice of His fallen flesh by always resisting sin and temptation. Never once did He fail, and so it may be with us, is the main point Paul is trying to make.

DA 122.3 "In our own strength it is impossible for us to deny the clamors of our fallen nature. Through this channel Satan will bring temptation upon us. Christ knew that the enemy would come to every human being, to take advantage of hereditary weakness, and by his false insinuations to ensnare all whose trust is not in God. And by passing over the ground which man must travel, our Lord has prepared the way for us to overcome. It is not His will that we should be placed at a disadvantage in the conflict with Satan. He would not have us intimidated and discouraged by the assaults of the serpent. "Be of good cheer," He says; "I have overcome the world." John 16:33."

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]

Mike, to begin with, I do not understand what you are saying about brother Jones. You are turning away from his writings because they confuse you! How would you answer the Lord if He were to ask you what you did with the testimonies which He sent saying that he spoke "in demonstration of the Spirit," and "in clear, distinct lines?" T.M.91,93.

Please share with me what it is you find confusing in what I have quoted from the 1893 General Conference Bulletin from him on Romans 7.

Second, you say, "And to settle his point once and for all, Paul cites Jesus as the best example of someone who successfully served the law of God with His mind."

Mike! Jesus did not serve the law with his mind only, but with his whole being! The man of Romans 7 makes no such claim! Far from it! The man of Romans 7 serves the law with his mind, yes, but not with his body because he is in bondage. His mind wills to do good but he always ends up doing what he hates. "The will is present with me," said he, "but how to perform what is good, I find not." Rom.7:18. He is an unwilling sinner!

I find Jones and Waggoner's writings very easy and simple to understand. But, I must admit, I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Sorry! I don't mean to offend you, Mike! I believe we need to bring our ideas to the infallible test of the Scriptures. The SOP and even the two delegated messengers of the Lord can help us in our understanding of these Scriptures, can't they? And I do believe that on close scrutiny, the statements from S.C. p.19 and D.A. p.203 and G.C. p.461 confirm that the man of Rom.7 is an unwilling sinner.

"If you reject Christ's delegated messengers, you reject Christ." T.M.97. That goes for all of us!

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

We need to keep in mind that Jones and Waggoner did apostasize; and as such, careful attention needs to be given, when using their writings.

The reason I have such a hard time with Jones, but not Waggoner or White, is the argumentative style he uses in the context of a question and answer monologue. His rapid fire method and the literary contruction of his material is foreign to my way of thinking.

Also, I'm not so sure that my salvation depends upon my reading and heeding Jones' books and theology. In other words, by avoiding Jones I do not believe I am also avoiding Jesus. Besides, not everything Ellen WHite wrote about Jones was affirming. But I'm sure you are aware of those quotes, where she says that he must be careful how he states things so as not to confuse the people. Note this quote:

FW 111.1 "I was attending a meeting, and a large congregation were present. In my dream you were presenting the subject of faith and the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith. You repeated several times that works amounted to nothing, that there were no conditions. The matter was presented in that light that I knew minds would be confused and would not receive the correct impression in reference to faith and works, and I decided to write to you. You state this matter too strongly. There are conditions to our receiving justification and sanctification, and the righteousness of Christ. I know your meaning, but you leave a wrong impression upon many minds."

I'm not suggesting that we should never read Jones or that Ellen White opposed his theology. But at the same time I do not believe that everything he wrote was condoned by her. He eventually became imbalanced and left the church altogether. So whether or not he correctly interpeted Romans 7 is a matter open for debate.

Okay, now for the EGW quotes on Romans 7:

SC 19.1 "It is not enough to perceive the loving-kindness of God, to see the benevolence, the fatherly tenderness, of His character. It is not enough to discern the wisdom and justice of His law, to see that it is founded upon the eternal principle of love. Paul the apostle saw all this when he exclaimed, "I consent unto the law that it is good." "The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." But he added, in the bitterness of his soul-anguish and despair, "I am carnal, sold under sin." Romans 7:16, 12, 14. He longed for the purity, the righteousness, to which in himself he was powerless to attain, and cried out, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death?" Romans 7:24, margin. Such is the cry that has gone up from burdened hearts in all lands and in all ages. To all, there is but one answer, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1:29."

NOTE: Her use of these texts confirm what I've been saying. None of us possess the ability to obey the law apart from the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit. Even Jesus confessed this truth for Himself when He said - "I can of mine own self do nothing." John 5:19,30. Her comments in SC do not offer an objective critique of the issues we're dealing with.

DA 203.2 "There are many who realize their helplessness, and who long for that spiritual life which will bring them into harmony with God; they are vainly striving to obtain it. In despair they cry, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death?" Rom. 7:24, margin. Let these desponding, struggling ones look up."

NOTE: Again, this passage addresses the same issues I mentioned above. Nothing here to help in our discussion.

GC 461.1 "They had a sense of the righteousness of Jehovah and felt the terror of appearing, in their guilt and uncleanness, before the Searcher of hearts. In anguish they cried out: "Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" As the cross of Calvary, with its infinite sacrifice for the sins of men, was revealed, they saw that nothing but the merits of Christ could suffice to atone for their transgressions; this alone could reconcile man to God."

NOTE: Once again, no definitive explanation of the man of Romans 7. All of us desire freedom from the clamorings of the carnal mind of our sinful flesh nature. And ultimately we look forward to the day when it will be replaced by a sinless flesh nature.

Admittedly Paul's record of the man of Romans 7 is challenging at best. I suppose it was portions of his writings like this one that led Peter to confess:

2 Peter 3:15,16
3:15 And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
3:16 As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

People today still twist Paul's epistles to support their iniquitous choices and practices in a vain attempt to have their sin and salvation too. No doubt you have met people who cite the man of Romans 7 to justify their often and frequent failures. They usually glibbly say - I'm only human, nobody is perfect - as if man-made lies have more bearing than God-breathed truths.

Laval
We need to keep in mind that Jones and Waggoner did apostasize; and as such, careful attention needs to be given, when using their writings.
___________________

David: How many times I have heard this argument. And every single time this has been my answer:

Have you not read these words:

"It is quite possible that Elders Jones and Waggoner may be overthrown by the temptation of the enemy; but if they should be, THIS WOULD NOT PROVE THAT THEY HAD NO MESSAGE FROM GOD, or that the work that they had done was all a mistake. But should this happen, how many would take this position, and enter into a fatal delusion because they are not under the control of the Spirit of God. They walk in the sparks of their own kindling, and cannot distinguish between the fire they have kindled, and the light which God has given, and they walk in blindness as did the Jews. I know that this is the very position many would take if either of these men were to fall, and I pray that these men upon whom God has laid the burden of a solemn work, may be able to give the trumpet a certain sound, and honor God at every step, and that their path at every step may grow brighter and brighter until the close of time.--Letter 24, 1892, p.5 (To Elder Uriah Smith, Sept.19, 1892.

Uriah Smith had become a determined opponent of these two brethren and their message. But the Lord rebuked him through the pen of inspiration. Joined in his opposition to the Lord's messengers were G.I. Buttler, the president of the General Conference, and a prominent minister by the name of Morrisson whom Sister White says were the counterparts of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram at the time of the rebellion in the wilderness against Moses!

These leaders and some others were defiant towards the Lord's chosen messengers. Ellen White was sent to Australia against her own will. Waggoner was dispatched to England and the hatred towards Elder Jones was so great that in 1906 the brethren decided to take his credentials away and finally, they pressured the officers of his local church to take his name off their church's record book (which was against their own policy) without giving him a fair trial, while he was 3,000 miles away. The Jews gave Jesus a trial, not a fair trial, but at least he had a trial. The Catholic Church gave Luther a trial and most of the reformers were given an opportunity to appear before their accusers but brother Jones, who was only guilty of giving the Third Angel's message, was judged, condemned, and sentenced all at once and in his absence. He never left the church on his own, that is, if he did!

Let us focus on the message the Lord has sent through them. Let us not allow anyone to distract us from the heaven-sent message brought by these two brethren.

And remember that "If we reject the Lord's delegated messengers, we reject Christ." T.M.97.

Mike: This last statement caught my attention many years ago. And the one I have just quoted in my answer to David is, I believe, most worthy of our attention. Please Mike, do not be so quick in your assessment of brother Jones' commentary on Romans 7. These quotes I have shared with you came from the 1893 G.C. Bulletin. If you turn to Selected Messages, p.130, you will see that Sister White referred to the message he gave in 1893 as "the movings of the Spirit of God," "light from Heaven," "the ministration of His Holy Spirit," "the workings of the Spirit of God," "in clear and unmistakable lines." All this is found in the same paragraph!

In the next paragraph she says, again referring to 1893, that "God has wrought in a marked manner and let no one venture to say this is not the Spirit of God."

It was at this Conference, lecture # 12, that Elder Jones commented on the whole of Romans 7. His presentation was "light from Heaven!"

What excuse do we have to offer? The Lord could never justify our objection that Jones' message was confusing when He Himself has told us that he spoke in demonstration of the Spirit, in clear and unmistakable lines! 1 S.M.130.

I have, like you, for many years, been aware of the statement you quoted. It is also found in 1 S.M. p.377,378. In the light of 1 S.M. 130, 131, and 143, it appears to be an obscure statement since all his lectures on the subject of faith and works, taken from the 1893 General Conference, have absolutely nothing questionable in them! I challenge you both to prove me wrong on that! Show me from his 1893 lectures where he was confusing on the subject of faith and works!

In the one picture, we are told in no uncertain terms that in 1893 Jones was speaking "in demonstration of the Spirit, in clear, unmistakable lines," (1 S.M.130) and in the other, that he was "confusing the minds" in 1893! (1 S.M.378) Which is it?

There is something definitely wrong with one of these two pictures!

P.S. Are you able to explain this discrepancy? As far as I am concerned, I go with the weight of all the evidence. The weight of the evidence goes in favor of God's delegated messengers, not against them. Just read T.M. p.96,97 and all doubts will be removed!

If needs be I will quote the excerpts from the 1893 Bulletin where he spoke on the subject of faith and works so we can see for ourselves whether he was confusing the minds or not!

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Did you not just read these words: "If you reject Christ's delegated messengers, you reject Christ." T.M.97.

Do these words mean anything to us? Have we all, as a people, gone daft?

What is the matter with us, Lord? Have we become so hardened in unbelief that even the words of your prophet mean absolutely nothing to us any more? Have mercy on us!

"Yet many have listened to the truth spoken in demonstration of the Spirit, and they have not only refused to accept the message, but they have hated the light. These men are parties to the ruin of souls. They have interposed themselves between the heaven-sent light and the people. They have trampled upon the word of God and are doing despite to His Holy Spirit." T.M.91.

It is obvious that "the prejudices and opinions that prevailed at Minneapolis are not dead by any means; the seeds sown there in some hearts are ready to spring up into life and bear a like harvest. The tops have been cut down, but the roots have never been ereadicated, and they still bear their unholy fruit to poison the judgment, pervert the perceptions, and blind the understanding of those with whom you connect, in regard to the message and the messengers. When, by thorough confession, you destroy the root of bitterness, you will see light in God's light. Without this thorough work you will never clear you souls." T.M.467.

P.S. Anyone who carefully goes over # 12 of Jones' lecture in 1893 will see that the very tone of the study implies that the majority of the delegates believed and taught that the experience described in the seventh chapter of Romans was that of a born again Christian!

But the Lord's messenger had a message for them they could not harmonize with any more than they could find any harmony with his commentary on Rev.3 pertaining to the Laodicean Chrurch. (Lectures # 8 and 9.

"To accuse and criticize those whom God is using is to accuse and criticize the Lord who has sent them. All need to cultivate their religious faculties, that they may have a right discernment of religious things. Some have failed to distinguish between pure gold and mere glitter, between the substance and the shadow." T.M.466, 467.

[ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

I was motivated to do this because of reading statements like these, from the prophet:

"But not all are following the light. Some are moving away from the safe path, which at every step is a path of humility. God has committed to His servants (Jones and Waggoner) a message for this time; but this message does not in every particular coincide with the ideas of all the leading men, and some criticize the words of reproof sent to them of God through His Holy Spirit. What reserve power has the Lord with which to reach those who have cast aside His warnings and reproofs, and have accredited the Testimonies of the Spirit of God to no higher source than human wisdom...

"I would not now rehearse before you the evidences given in the past two years of the dealings of God by His chosen servants; but the present evidence of His working is revealed to you, and you are now under obligation to believe. You cannot neglect God's messages of warning, and cannot reject them or treat them lightly, but at the peril of infinite loss." T.M.465,466.

Greg, the reason why I feel strongly is because the message brought by these two brethren was the latter rain message, the beginning of the loud cry message! The people were admonished by the prophet to receive the message just as God gave it, as He spoke it through His messengers! It was the only way for the message to be received according to righteousness, that is, according to God's own idea of it, as He spoke it!

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Commentary on Romans 7:

"We do great violence to the apostle Paul, that holy man, when we say that in this he is relating his own Christian experience. He is not writing his own experience now that he is united to Christ. He is writing the experience of those who serve, but in the oldness of the letter, and while professedly serving God, are carnal, and sold under sin.

A person sold under bondage is a slave. What is the evidence of this slavery? 'For what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I... For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do.'

Have we ever had any such experience as that in our so-called Christian experience? Yes; we have fought, but with all our fighting, did we keep the law? No, we have made a failure, and it is written upon every page of our lives. It is constant service, but at the same time it is a constant failure.

I fail, I make a new resolution,--I break it, and then I get discouraged, then make another resolution, and break that again. We cannot make ourselves do the thing we want to do by making a resolution. We do not want to sin, but we do sin all the time. We make up our minds we will not fall under that temptation again, and we don't--till the next time it comes up, and then we fall as before.

When in this condition, can we say that we have hope, and that we 'rejoice in hope of the glory of God?' We do not hear such testimonies,--it is solely of what we want to do, and what we have failed to do, but intend to do in the future. If a person has the law before him, and acknowledges that it is good, and yet does not keep its precepts, is his sin any less in the sight of God than the sin of the man who cares nothing for the law? No.

What is the difference between the would-be Christian (the man of Rom.7), who knows the law, but does not keep it, and the worldling who does not keep the law, and does not acknowledge that it is good? Simply this: We are unwilling slaves, and they are willing slaves. We are all the time distracted and sorrowful, and getting nothing out of life at all, while the worldling does not worry himself in the least.

If one is going to sin, is it not better to be the worldling who does not know that there is such a thing as liberty, than to be the man who knows that there is liberty, but cannot get it? If it has got to be slavery, if we must live in the sins of the world, then it is better to be in the world, partaking of its pleasures, than to be in a miserable bondage, and have no hope of a life to come.

But thanks be unto God, we can have liberty. When life becomes unbearable because of the bondage of sin, then it is that we may hope, for that leads to the question, 'O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death?' Mark, there is deliverance, 'I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.'" E.J. Waggoner, Studies in the Book of Romans, p.53,54.

This is exactly what Elder Jones taught at the 1893 General Conference on Romans 7/lecture # 12.
These messages should settle, once and for all, whether the experience described in the seventh of Romans is that of a would-be Christian or not!

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

"Unless he makes it his lifebusiness to behold the uplifted Savior and accept His merits, which it is his privilege to claim, the sinner can no more be saved than Peter could walk upon the water unless he kept his eyes fixed steadily upon Jesus." T.M.95.

"Present your case before God pleading the merits of the blood that was shed for you upon Calvary's cross." Say, "Lord, I have no merit or goodness in myself whereby I may claim salvation, but I present before you the all-atoning blood of the spotless Lamb of God. This is my only plea." F.W.106.

"We must daily apply to the merits of the blood of a crucified and risen Savior that we may become vessels fit for the Master's use." Ibid, 86.

"Through the virtue of the merits of the blood of Christ we may stand unscathed amid the fire of temptation and trial." Ibid, 87.

Therefore, "The only faith that will benefit us is that which appropriates the merits of His shed blood to ourselves." Our Father Cares, p.192.

Greg, have you ever read these words:

"Justice demanded the sufferings of man; but Christ rendered the sufferings of a God. He needed no atonement of suffering for Himself; all His sufferings were for us; all His merits and holiness were open to fallen man, presented as a gift." 7 B.C.913.

"Christ places His own merits upon man and thus elevates him in the scales of moral value with God." Our Fathe Cares, p.121.

In other words, "Jesus was treated as we deserve that we might be treated as He deserves." D.A.25.

As we appropriates His merits to ourselves, the Father loves us as He loves His only begotten Son! There is an awful amount of saving truth here!

What do you think? Are not the merits of His sacrifice sufficient to present to the Father in order to obtain pardon, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit?

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

And yes, it is quite clear what Waggoner believed about the man of Romans 7. It's easier for me to read his transcripts than to read Jones'. From what you've quoted, I can see they believed that the man of Romans 7 is an unconverted Jew who is attempting to obey the law in their own way.

But... what I'm not so clear on is the idea that Ellen White specifically endorsed their thoughts on Romans 7. I suspect she gave a general endorsement to their main point - righteousness by faith. I think it's stretching her generalized commendation by making it say that she endorsed every single thing they ever taught.

I believe from the points that have been shared throughout this thread it is obvious what Paul is trying to teach us in Romans 6-8. The willingness to obey the law without the ability to perform it is a problem we'll have our entire life, whether we are an unconverted Jew or Gentile or even a converted Christian. Only Jesus can empower us to unite both the desire and the ability to obey.

In verse 17 Paul transitions from the past to the present, from then to now. Says Paul - "Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing." As a born again believer he is now conscious not to make the same frustrating mistakes he made before "the commandment came" and he "died." Verse 9.

What do you think?

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]

Mike: At the beginning of your last post, you state that you agree with Waggoner that Paul in Romans 7 is not writing his own experience now that he is united to Christ. And then you turn around and declare that in verse 17 and 18 Paul is writing of his experience now that he is united to Christ!

And then you ask me what I think? I think that it is plain enough that you are contradicting yourself and once again doing violence, not only to the apostle Paul, but to Waggoner as well!

You say: In verse 17 Paul transitions from the past to the present, from then to now." Who says that? Who says that that is what Paul is doing? How could that be in the light of verses 18 and 19?

Ironically, verses 17 to 19 are the strongest proofs from Romans 7, and argued by both Jones and Waggoner as to show that Paul is writing of the bondage to the oldness of the letter.

The born again Christian overcomes the sin that dwelleth in his flesh. He serves the law of God not only with the mind but with his whole being. His confession is: It is not I that doeth it, the good, but it is Christ that dwelleth in me!

Whereas the confession of the man of Romans 7 is quite different: He says: It is not I that doeth it, the evil, but it is sin that dwelleth in me!

What do you think?

P.S. You also stated that you are not sure that Ellen White gave her full endorsement to Jones and Waggoner. On what basis? On the contrary. She said that we could hear the echo of the voice of Christ through them and that they had been with Jesus. She said that they spoke in demonstration of the Spirit and in clear and unmistakable, distinct lines!

At one time, in 1896, she wrote: "How long will you hate and despise the messengers of God's righteousness? God has given them His message. They bear the word of the Lord." T.M.96.

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

What I'm not as convinced about is how they use Romans 7 to establish their premise. I can see their point in verses 4 thru 16, though in verse 6 Paul is talking about now. I find it inconceivable that Paul, that great preacher of righteousness, would pen something that blames sin on SIN. Thus verses 17 and 20 cannot possibly be interpreted to mean - When I sin it is no more I that do it but the sin that dwelleth in my flesh is to be held accountable.

Just like the word now in verses 17 and 20 the phrase no more in the same verses make it clear to me that Paul is contrasting the past and the present, then and now. To paraphrase the meaning of his words I would suggest something like the following:

----------------------------------------------

I was "once alive without the law" and I was "deceived" into believing that I was "blameless, touching the righteousness which is in the law." But when I finally understood the truth about righteousness by faith, my "old man was crucified" with Jesus. "When the commandment came, sin revived, and I died" to self.

But my "sinful flesh" nature still communicates to my new man mind all kinds of unholy thoughts and feelings. "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing." But "the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God."

Ever since my conversion, I now realize that I am no longer the one responsible for the initial existence of these ungodly suggestions. "Now it is no more I that do it, but sin dwelleth in my flesh." Jesus daily "delivers" me from the clamorings of my flesh. Someday the Lord will return and totally deliver me from the "body of this death" by rewarding me with a sinless flesh body.

And even though my flesh lusts after the law of sin and death, Jesus now empowers me to serve the law of life and liberty with my new man mind. I keep my fleshly desires under "subjection", under the control of a sanctified mind. And now I use my faculties of mind and body to honor and glorify God and Saviour.

-----------------------------------------------

Finally, I'm also sorry that I left you with the impression that I believe born again believers serve God with their mind only and not with their body too. Please believe me, I really do believe that Jesus empowers genuinely converted Christians, who walk in the Spirit, to serve Him with all their mind, body, spirit and soul.

Also, I realize that you are worried about the status of my salvation since I have made it clear that I do not agree with how Jones and Waggoner interpret and apply Romans 7. I understand that you believe I am rejecting Jesus' appointed and anointed interpreters of Romans 7. And I appreciate your loving concern. Thank you. I wish I could somehow reassure you and eliminate these fears, but all I can say is that in my mind and heart I believe Jesus is saving me still.

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]

I believe the Lord has a controversy with those who are saying "but," when they read the message He has sent to them through His delegated messengers.

It is like they are saying to God: Let me tell you how to teach Your message! But God says to them: "If you reject God's delegated messengers, you reject Christ." T.M.97.

If we continue to find fault with their message, we will never know what the truth is. "How long will you hate and despise the messengers of God's righteousness? GOD HAS GIVEN THEM HIS MESSAGE. They bear the word of the Lord." Ibid, 97.

"God saves the humble person."

We show humility and submission to God when we have implicit faith in the word of God and in the messages He sends through His chosen messengers!

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: adventbeliever ]

Yes, you are converted.

looks like this is your new hang out

D

This entire passages runs along the same vein of thought introduced in Romans 7, or at least it seems that way to me. Taken together these two scriptures teach that born again believers, who walk in the Spirit and mind of the new man, do not act out the unholy desires of their sinful flesh nature. Which is also what John wrote:

1 John
3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

We cannot read what these texts teach and still maintain the idea that Paul said he is guilty of doing the very things he didn't want to do. It just doesn't say that. He very clearly wrote - "[This] I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh." How can he say it any plainer?

So when you quote Jones and Waggoner as a standard of truth I need to take it home and study it for myself and weigh it out. I hope we can agree upon that.

1 John
3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

We cannot read what these texts teach and still maintain the idea that Paul said he is guilty of doing the very things he didn't want to do. It just doesn't say that. He very clearly wrote - "[This] I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh." How can he say it any plainer?