Dear Friends,

  The following comments on Romans 7 and 8 are from Carrie Bates. Carrie
serves John Reisinger and the Sound of Grace as an editor. Her comments
came after she mentioned to me she was doing a thesis for a college
paper on Romans 7. I mentioned to her we were just recently enjoying a
few posts on the subject and emailed her a copy of my recent comments to
the list. The following is her "quick" reply. She's quite busy doing her
studies so I doubt she will be able to engage us. After you have read
her position I'm sure you'll understand why we at Sound of Grace are
thankful she is on our side. - Moe

--- from Carrie Bates --- Romans 7 ---

The theme in Romans 7 is not soteriological, but redemptive-historical.
Paul is describing a change in eras that has ramifications in the lives
of the people who live in those eras. And yes, I think the divided man
is regenerate, mainly due to the concept of an inner man who delights in
God's law (verse 22).
 
Paul's master and marriage analogies (chapters 6 and early 7) underscore
his point about change in status that results from change in era. In a
marriage relationship, one partner or the other (or both) has to die to
legally dissolve the bond. In Romans, the human partner has died,
through his relationship to Christ (another point in favor of this man
being regenerate). In Hebrews, the law partner has died. So both
marriage partners are dead, but the human partner is metaphorically
resurrected and free to remarry. Paul is not writing about a conversion
experience, since death to the law could not describe the salvation
experience of a Jew or converted Gentile during the Mosaic era. The law
defined the era in which they lived, prior to Pentecost. Under the
Mosaic law, regenerate and unregenerate alike were held to the same
standard. They had to obey the terms of the covenant under which they
lived, simply by virtue of the fact that they were part of the nation of
Israel during the era of the law (from Sinai to Pentecost). They were
slaves to the law. Now that Christ has come, they have a new master.
Their status has changed, but it is not the status change of
justification; it is the status change of a new era, described by Paul
in the metaphors of master and husband.
 
Geologists recognize changes in eras based on the evidence they observe.
Sociologists recognize changes in eras based on the changes they
observe. Theologians need to do the same. In the biblical record, there
are observable era shifts. We start with Adam in a state of innocence.
Then we move to Adam in a state of rebellion and ill-gotten knowledge.
With only minor variations, we move from Adam to Abraham, when God
singles out one people group from the mass of humanity. From Abraham we
move to Moses and Sinai. This is the predominant era in the Old
Testament Scriptures. From the era of the law, we move into the
Messianic era, inaugurated by the resurrection with its subsequent
outpouring of the Holy Spirit. This era continues forever, with the
final stage being the consummation and restoration of all things; the
bringing together in Christ of all things, mentioned in Ephesians 1:10
and Romans 8:22-24.
 
As to the Romans 7:24-25 experience: This rescue is multi-faceted. If
the body of death refers to the experience of a believing Jew or
proselytized Gentile under the Mosaic law, then the deliverance has
occurred with the change in eras. What then, does Romans 7 have to say
to those of us born well after the shift has taken place? Not much.
Galatians warns believers against putting themselves under the slavery
of the Mosaic law, but Romans 7 carries no such warning. What then is
its significance apart from identifying in theological terms the nature
and consequences of the era shift? 
 
John Reisinger argues convincingly that the body of death of verse 24 is
not confined to Jewish believers under the law, but extends to all of
Adam's posterity. We all carry the consequences of Adam's fall in our
bodies. Even in the new era, the ultimate good that we want to do
(perfect obedience to all that Christ demands) is not achievable. As
long as we are in these bodies, there will be a struggle between
fulfilling our legitimate needs in ways that God has ordained, and ways
that we have established from our own thinking. Adam ate the fruit of
the knowledge of good and evil, and until every vestige of the old
creation in Adam is removed, we struggle between God's defintions of
good and evil and our own definitions. The old creation in Adam is
passing, but it will not entirely disappear until the consummation (Rom.
8:19-25). All of creation, the physical earth included, waits for the
redemption of our bodies to be revealed. 
 
So then, Jewish believers and Gentile proselytes are rescued once and
for all from the tyranny of the law. In that way, the rescue of verse 25
is era related. Yet no one is rescued once and for all from the tyranny
of physical corruption until the consummation. We are being changed, but
the complete change is still future. In that way, the rescue is
experience related.
 
Paul's use of "but now," in Romans 3:21 not does signal that a new way
to be right with God has arrived on the scene, because that would be to
argue for two different ways to be justified and would be totally
contrary to the rest of his writing in chapter 3 and elsewhere. "But
now" signals an era shift, a time when the way that the revelation of
God's righteousness changes. Chapters 4 through 8 explain the historical
and theological rationale for the shift and the nature of the shift.
Chapters 9 through 11 deal with Israel's place in God's plan now that
the change in eras has come, and chapters 12 through 15 work out
practical ramifications of life in the new era.

--- end ---