#63. Romans 7:18-20 – Experience – Paul’s second Wave of Lament (Conciliation Series, Part XL)

Part IV: God’s Conciliation, Confirmed

For I am aware that good is not making its home in me (that is, in my flesh), for to will is lying beside me, yet to be effecting the ideal is not.

For. The forceful conclusion from his first wave of “wtf’s to God” launches him into this second wave of lamentation. It’s at this point that Paul has made a necessary, and fair, distinction between himself and the Sin operating in his flesh. Here he realizes that the distinction goes beyond “I am not effecting my will, but Sin is effecting her will.” Here he realizes that, if Sin makes its home in him, then he can’t deny that ‘good,’ that is, the fulfillment of the precept itself (Rom. 7:12,) is not making its home in him. This is called a ‘converse.’ If Sin is making its home in Saul, then good is not making its home in Saul. If good is not making its home in Saul, it is because Sin is making its home in Saul (2 Cor. 6:14-16.)

We have not left his experience as of yet. So he is experiencing this statement firsthand; this is not mere theological jargon, or something Paul logically has to conclude apart from personal revelation. He has experienced this during his time under law, and any honest seeker of the truth can indeed say the same. Even Peter and the circumcision folk apart from Paul could share a similar story (especially after spending ample amounts of time with the Image of the invisible God!!) You simply can’t expect “good” or “ideal” to come from an inherently corrupted person, even if said person can agree with the Creator of “good” as to what “good” is, morally speaking.

Did that make sense? No? Maybe we need clarification. And… oh! Look at that! Paul does clarify, stressing that this good is not making its home in his flesh, specifically (because Sin entered into the world through the flesh – Rom. 5:12.) See, if you can recognize that good is present, then some semblance of good has to be present in you. So it is – in your conscious thought. Your flesh, the display of your action, is where Sin is present (which is why you must be under some law in order for Sin to gain an incentive.) Your conscience, which is in opposition to your flesh (Gal. 5:17,) is good in noting such a disparity between your flesh and the law.     I want to repeat something I said in my older article, here, when writing about Romans 6:6-7–

“You, your spirit, your living self, are not defined by ‘old humanity,’ ‘Sin,’ ‘death.’ These are terms of the past. Dwelling on them is about as effective as trying to remember what the inner walls of your mother’s womb looked like. The more you recognize the depths of your failure, the more you can appreciate the phrase for what it truly is saying; missing the mark is not you. It’s not the summary of your character. It’s not all you amount to. You are His, not yours. So stop worrying about what you do, and enjoy what He is.”

This paragraph is heavily amplified by Paul’s experience under law, but I also want to clarify that the paragraph I wrote here is the after-effect of your justification by faith, thanks to Christ’s death. We may be fleshy, that is, having the quality of flesh, but it does not solely define the inner character of the conscience. That is unique and individual for each person.

The division lies explicitly in the second half of his sentence. To will is lying beside me, he says. He can comprehend the perfection of the law, but he can’t cross the line between “willing” and “achieving.” The barrier of the flesh, being Sin, is this very line that Paul simply can’t step over on his own terms. Only Christ can destroy the enmity in the flesh (Eph. 2:14-16.) Thus, though the will is there, he can’t effect the ideal.

For it is not the good that I will that I am doing, but the evil that I am not doing, this I am putting into practice.

You know the word “For,” gar, is used 305 times in Romans alone? Such a crucial word that God had to use it over three hundred times to get the forceful points across!

Throughout this series, I’ve done everything I can to display the fact that Paul is not mindlessly repeating himself, even in the toughest of passages. This is very much the case here. I’ve seen folks, in this case the one and only Martin Zender, proclaim that Paul is repeating himself all throughout his experience. And, at a glance, this does seem to be the case! But Paul is clearly in a second spiritual proof, thanks to that word ‘for.’ He is running through… well, I’ll call them “spiritual proofs.” A proof, in geometry, is a hypothesis that is tested first mathematically, and then proven with a statement. This statement is then held to high scrutiny with multiple “converses,” “inverses,” and “contrapositives.” They are “spiritual proofs” because these are stronger than regular proofs; these are not mere hypotheses, but facts.

With the recognition that Sin is the culprit, working through his flesh, Saul must learn that, under law, he’s not willing the law to come about. He realizes that, though he consciously conceded the law’s idealism, he can’t be willing good, if good is not actually being effected. And, if you’re not willing good, you must be willing evil, and thus putting it into practice.

This is depressing, because it shines a tragic light on man’s morality. There is no “doing right” under law, because you will always be strong-armed by Sin. And, moreover, it’s not even that he’s weak – he’s trying, and trying, and trying, and he’s also trying. He’s doing everything he can to do ensure that his endgoal – to fulfill the law – will be accomplished. But nooooo, Sin’s a bitch, isn’t it? Sin just takes his little plan and ruins it – just ruins it! With seemingly no effort required. It’s not that Paul’s will wavers, but that Sin has that much more control over his flesh. And sure, enough…

Now if what I am not willing, this I am doing, it is no longer I who am effecting it, but Sin which is making its home in me.

This verse is nearly identical to verse 17, yes. The conclusion is the same, but there are more words, here. The revelation is clearer, more affirmative. It’s not just “I am not effecting ‘it,’” but “If what I’m not willing, this I do, then it’s no longer me doing it.” Sin is given a stronger statement here, too. Sin is making its home in me – Saul is more sure of this, more aware of the reality of his situation.

I displayed a photo of The Joker up there, but that is representative of Sin, not of Saul. Saul, the pharisee, had good intentions. Pure intentions. Damn righteous intentions, in seeking to follow the righteous law. He doesn’t try to do the wrong thing, ever. It just… happens. Can’t you relate to that? It’s not like you tried to commit the fender bender, but you did. It’s not like you tried to misread the verse, or even a sentence in another book, but you did. It’s not like you tried to mess up your dinner with the extra Boston crème donut, but… okay, maybe you do that one on purpose sometimes, but you get the point!

It must be becoming clear to you that this has to be read under the law. The nature of this situation, under grace, naturally will not arise, because under law, you can, and do, the wrong thing. But apart from Mosaic law, you do follow faith’s law, in which all is allowed you, while not all is expedient (1 Cor. 6:12.) In Christ, you are strong in all (Phil. 4:13,) because Christ is the only One who defeats Sin! Nothing can condemn you in this (Rom. 8:1,) but I don’t want to get ahead of myself. God points out the difference between right and wrong under grace, but guides you into following Him, through love. Oh, how much sweeter the calling of grace than the entrapment of this law!

- GerudoKing