Wright’s Into the Heart of Romans– Part Two

Last updated on: February 8, 2025 at 1:08 am by Ben Witherington

Wright’s Into the Heart of Romans– Part Two 2025-01-27T12:53:22-05:00 Ben Witherington

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

By almost universal consent, Romans 8 is a conclusion to a major subsection of Romans. I would say that we have to recognize it as the climax of the positive arguments or ‘probatio’ in Romans before he goes on to argument refuting some common misunderstandings, particularly by Gentiles, about Israel, and whether or not they are still God’s chosen people, if they have not yet accepted Christ as the Jewish Messiah, a people for whom God has a plan. Without question, the greatest and most detailed exegetical study on Paul’s discussion of the Holy Spirit is Gordon Fee’s, classic study God’s Empowering Presence, not the later edited version but the earlier large study. This certainly has a bearing on interpreting Romans 8, since it is the most Spirit-filled chapter in the whole Pauline corpus. Tom has decided not to dialogue with other professors in this study, which leaves more room for his own exposition, but in this case I think he should have made an exception.

In line with various previous studies, Tom reads Rom. 5-8 in light of his conviction that Paul is telling the story in light of Exodus, the liberation from literal slavery, and indeed in light of the later exile among other things, which is to say in light of Exodus and Deuteronomy’s end in particular. I have been, and continue to be unconvinced by this line of approach, not least because Paul connects the new covenant to the Abrahamic covenant, not the Mosaic covenant, which he sees as an interim arrangement until the coming of Christ (see Gal. 4, and also 2 Cor. 3), and this hermeneutical move changes how we should view Paul’s discussion of the Mosaic law, as opposed for example to the law of Christ mentioned in 1 Corinthians but also in Galatians. As Jesus was to say about the Mosaic teaching on divorce, a good deal of the OT law was given due to the hardness of hearts, and now that the divine saving reign was breaking in, in the ministry of Jesus, new occasions teach new duties, and even the old laws which are continued into the new covenant, or modified, intensified, and in some cases said to be fulfilled and are no longer applicable to either Jews or Gentiles in Christ (see for example Mark. 7, and Mark’s comment there).

I bring this up because of Tom’s discussion of Rom. 7, which is not primarily a discussion about the Mosaic law, or Israel, but rather in Rom. 7.7-13 we have Adam speaking in his own voice about the one commandment he was given, and about the sin that was committed, and the spiritual death that ensued. He is not talking about the Mosaic law covenant which did not exist in his day. And the rest of Rom. 7.14-25 is about all those ‘in Adam’. It is important to note for example verse 22 where the law of the mind of the speaker is one thing, and the law or ruling principle also working in this fallen person is another. While it is possible to argue that Rom. 7.14-25 is talking about Jews in bondage to sin, it seems more likely it is talking more generally about those in Adam, who know something of God’s good law and principles, but because of another ruling principle in them, cannot do it. This sounds far more like the Gentiles described in Rom. 1.18-32, and it is good to bear in mind that in Rom. 2 Paul had already mentioned that there are Gentiles who do various good things mentioned in the law, without being under the Mosaic covenant. And when Paul talks about himself in Phil. 3.6 he says as a Pharisaic Jew in regard to law keeping he was blameless, which totally rules out Rom. 7 being a description of Paul’s pre-Christian life. So to sum up— not every reference to law in Romans or elsewhere is a reference to the Mosaic law, and in any case Rom. 10 says, Christ fulfilled the Mosaic laws demands, and it reached its end, goal, zenith in Him. This does not mean that there were no imperatives or commandments in the new covenant, and some of them were identical to those in the Mosaic covenant, for example ‘thou shalt not commit adultery’ which actually Jesus even intensifies. When you read pp. 36ff. of Tom’s exposition on Rom. 7 it becomes clear enough that it only partially agrees with what I’ve just said. In particular the problem with the Mosaic Law, according to Paul is that it could not give life. It could tell a person what to do, but it could not enable them to do it. So the problem is that while the Mosaic Law was meant to be life giving, its effect on those in the bondage of sin was condemnation rather than commendation, it was not life-giving, it was death dealing. At the same time Paul is emphatic that the Mosaic law in itself is holy, just, and good. But it’s not the Holy Spirit who enables persons to obey God. Here’s Fee’s exposition is especially helpful. Notice there is absolutely 0 reference to the Holy Spirit in Rom. 7.7-25, which is a strong clue this is not about the Christian life, which by contrast is characterized in Rom. 8 as involving the Spirit at every turn.

Education and Religion

History and Religion

Uncategorized

and those in Adam

Rom. 7 is about Adam

Previous Post

February 7, 2025

Wright's Into the Heart of Romans-- Part One

Next Post

February 9, 2025 Wright's Into the Heart of Romans-- Part Three

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz