King James Version
Romans 7
25 verses with commentary
Released from the Law
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?
View commentary
Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,)—Paul addresses those familiar with nomos (νόμος, "law"), likely Jewish converts who understood Torah principles. The Greek verb ginōskō (γινώσκω, "know") implies experiential knowledge, not mere intellectual awareness. Paul assumes his audience grasps legal binding principles.
How that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?—The verb kyrieuō (κυριεύω, "have dominion") denotes lordship or mastery. Death dissolves legal obligations, a principle foundational to the marriage analogy that follows. This introduces Paul's argument that believers have died to the law's jurisdiction through union with Christ's death (v. 4), enabling them to live under grace's reign rather than law's condemning authority.
How that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?—The verb kyrieuō (κυριεύω, "have dominion") denotes lordship or mastery. Death dissolves legal obligations, a principle foundational to the marriage analogy that follows. This introduces Paul's argument that believers have died to the law's jurisdiction through union with Christ's death (v. 4), enabling them to live under grace's reign rather than law's condemning authority.
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.
View commentary
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law—The verb deō (δέω, "bind") describes legal obligation, used throughout Scripture for binding oaths and covenants. Paul illustrates v. 1's principle with marriage law, universally understood across cultures. So long as he liveth establishes the temporal limitation of legal jurisdiction.
But if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband—The verb katargeō (καταργέω, "loosed/released") means to nullify, abolish, or render inoperative. This same verb describes believers being "delivered from the law" (v. 6). Death doesn't modify the law; it removes the person from the law's jurisdiction. The woman isn't less married; she's no longer under marriage's binding authority because death dissolved the relationship. This parallels how Christ's death dissolved believers' relationship to law-condemnation.
But if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband—The verb katargeō (καταργέω, "loosed/released") means to nullify, abolish, or render inoperative. This same verb describes believers being "delivered from the law" (v. 6). Death doesn't modify the law; it removes the person from the law's jurisdiction. The woman isn't less married; she's no longer under marriage's binding authority because death dissolved the relationship. This parallels how Christ's death dissolved believers' relationship to law-condemnation.
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.
View commentary
So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress—The future passive chrēmatizō (χρηματίζω) means "she will be publicly labeled/divinely warned." Adultery (moichalis, μοιχαλίς) violates covenant fidelity, a repeated Old Testament metaphor for Israel's idolatry. Two simultaneous covenantal allegiances constitute spiritual adultery.
But if her husband be dead, she is free from that law—Eleuthera (ἐλευθέρα, "free") emphasizes liberation, a key Pauline theme (Galatians 5:1). Freedom comes through death's dissolution of the first covenant relationship, not through the law's relaxation. So that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man—The second marriage is morally legitimate because death terminated the first covenant. Similarly, believers' death with Christ allows union with the resurrected Christ without covenantal conflict.
But if her husband be dead, she is free from that law—Eleuthera (ἐλευθέρα, "free") emphasizes liberation, a key Pauline theme (Galatians 5:1). Freedom comes through death's dissolution of the first covenant relationship, not through the law's relaxation. So that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man—The second marriage is morally legitimate because death terminated the first covenant. Similarly, believers' death with Christ allows union with the resurrected Christ without covenantal conflict.
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.
View commentary
Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ—Ethanatōthēte (ἐθανατώθητε, "were put to death") is aorist passive, indicating a completed action done to believers. Through union with Christ's crucified body (dia tou sōmatos tou Christou), believers died to law's jurisdiction. This isn't gradual sanctification but positional identification with Christ's death (Galatians 2:20).
That ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead—The purpose clause (eis to) shows the goal: union with the resurrected Christ. Death to law precedes life in Christ. That we should bring forth fruit unto God—Karpophoreō (καρποφορέω, "bear fruit") contrasts with bearing "fruit unto death" (v. 5). Union with the risen Christ produces life-giving works, impossible under law's condemning ministry.
That ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead—The purpose clause (eis to) shows the goal: union with the resurrected Christ. Death to law precedes life in Christ. That we should bring forth fruit unto God—Karpophoreō (καρποφορέω, "bear fruit") contrasts with bearing "fruit unto death" (v. 5). Union with the risen Christ produces life-giving works, impossible under law's condemning ministry.
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. motions: Gr. passions
View commentary
For when we were in the flesh—En tē sarki (ἐν τῇ σαρκί) doesn't mean physical embodiment but the unregenerate state dominated by sin nature. Paul uses sarx (σάρξ, "flesh") to denote humanity's fallen condition apart from the Spirit's regenerating work (Romans 8:5-9). This refers to pre-conversion existence.
The motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death—Pathēmata tōn hamartiōn (παθήματα τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, "sinful passions/sufferings") describes the aroused desires provoked by law's prohibitions. The law didn't create sin but exposed and provoked it. Energeō (ἐνεργέω, "work/operate") shows sin's active power in unregenerate "members" (melē, μέλη—bodily faculties). The harvest was death, both spiritual and eternal.
The motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death—Pathēmata tōn hamartiōn (παθήματα τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, "sinful passions/sufferings") describes the aroused desires provoked by law's prohibitions. The law didn't create sin but exposed and provoked it. Energeō (ἐνεργέω, "work/operate") shows sin's active power in unregenerate "members" (melē, μέλη—bodily faculties). The harvest was death, both spiritual and eternal.
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. that being: or, being dead to that
View commentary
But now we are delivered from the law—Katērgēthēmen (κατηργήθημεν, "released/discharged") is the same verb as "loosed" in v. 2. Believers are freed from law's condemning jurisdiction through death. That being dead wherein we were held—Interpretations differ whether "that being dead" refers to the law dying or believers dying to law; context favors believers dying (v. 4). Katechō (κατέχω, "held") depicts law holding sinners in condemning custody.
That we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter—Douleuō (δουλεύω, "serve") shows believers still serve, but under new management. Kainotēs pneumatos (καινότης πνεύματος, "newness of Spirit") contrasts with palaiotēs grammatos (παλαιότης γράμματος, "oldness of letter")—Spirit-empowered internal transformation versus external code-keeping. This anticipates chapter 8's Spirit-empowered life.
That we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter—Douleuō (δουλεύω, "serve") shows believers still serve, but under new management. Kainotēs pneumatos (καινότης πνεύματος, "newness of Spirit") contrasts with palaiotēs grammatos (παλαιότης γράμματος, "oldness of letter")—Spirit-empowered internal transformation versus external code-keeping. This anticipates chapter 8's Spirit-empowered life.
The Law and Sin
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. lust: or, concupiscence
View commentary
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid.—Mē genoito (μὴ γένοιτο, "may it never be!") is Paul's strongest negation. Having shown law's inability to sanctify, he defends law's essential goodness. The law isn't sinful; it's holy (v. 12). The problem lies in humanity's sinfulness, not law's nature.
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.—Ouk egnōn (οὐκ ἔγνων, "I would not have known") describes law's revelatory function. Epithymia (ἐπιθυμία, "lust/desire") isn't inherently evil but becomes sinful when misdirected. The tenth commandment (Exodus 20:17) exposed inward heart-sin, not just outward acts. Paul likely references his pre-conversion experience when Torah-light convicted him of internal unrighteousness despite external compliance (Philippians 3:6).
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.—Ouk egnōn (οὐκ ἔγνων, "I would not have known") describes law's revelatory function. Epithymia (ἐπιθυμία, "lust/desire") isn't inherently evil but becomes sinful when misdirected. The tenth commandment (Exodus 20:17) exposed inward heart-sin, not just outward acts. Paul likely references his pre-conversion experience when Torah-light convicted him of internal unrighteousness despite external compliance (Philippians 3:6).
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
View commentary
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment—Aphormē (ἀφορμή, "occasion/opportunity") is a military term for a base of operations. Sin used the commandment as a launching point for assault. Wrought in me all manner of concupiscence—Kateirgasato (κατειργάσατο, "produced/accomplished") shows sin's active work. Pasan epithymian (πᾶσαν ἐπιθυμίαν, "every/all desire") describes the multiplication of sinful cravings provoked by prohibition.
For without the law sin was dead.—Nekra (νεκρά, "dead") means dormant or inactive, not non-existent. Sin existed before Sinai (Romans 5:13) but lacked the consciousness-arousing, passion-stimulating power that commandments provide. This explains the perverse human tendency to desire what's forbidden—prohibition awakens and intensifies rebellious desires.
For without the law sin was dead.—Nekra (νεκρά, "dead") means dormant or inactive, not non-existent. Sin existed before Sinai (Romans 5:13) but lacked the consciousness-arousing, passion-stimulating power that commandments provide. This explains the perverse human tendency to desire what's forbidden—prohibition awakens and intensifies rebellious desires.
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
View commentary
For I was alive without the law once—Ezōn (ἔζων, "I was living") likely refers to Paul's pre-Bar Mitzvah childhood before taking personal responsibility for Torah observance, or more broadly to humanity's pre-Sinai existence. The sense of being "alive" was illusory self-righteousness, unaware of sin's death-sentence.
But when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.—Anezēsen (ἀνέζησεν, "sprang to life/revived") depicts sin awakening like a dormant beast. Apethanon (ἀπέθανον, "I died") describes experiential awareness of spiritual death—the collision between God's righteous standard and human inability. The commandment intended to produce life instead revealed death (v. 10), not due to law's defect but humanity's corruption. This mirrors Genesis 3's pattern: God's command highlighted rebellion, bringing death.
But when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.—Anezēsen (ἀνέζησεν, "sprang to life/revived") depicts sin awakening like a dormant beast. Apethanon (ἀπέθανον, "I died") describes experiential awareness of spiritual death—the collision between God's righteous standard and human inability. The commandment intended to produce life instead revealed death (v. 10), not due to law's defect but humanity's corruption. This mirrors Genesis 3's pattern: God's command highlighted rebellion, bringing death.
And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
View commentary
And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.—Hē entolē hē eis zōēn (ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ εἰς ζωήν, "the commandment unto life") references Leviticus 18:5: "which if a man do, he shall live in them." The law promised life on condition of perfect obedience. Heurethē moi (εὑρέθη μοι, "was found by me") indicates experiential discovery, not theoretical knowledge.
Eis thanaton (εἰς θάνατον, "unto death") reveals the tragic reversal: law intended for life became the instrument of death's exposure. This isn't law's failure but humanity's. The problem wasn't the prescription (law) but the patient's terminal condition (sin nature). Perfect obedience would yield life, but no fallen human achieves it (Romans 3:23). Law reveals inability, driving sinners to the grace-remedy of Christ.
Eis thanaton (εἰς θάνατον, "unto death") reveals the tragic reversal: law intended for life became the instrument of death's exposure. This isn't law's failure but humanity's. The problem wasn't the prescription (law) but the patient's terminal condition (sin nature). Perfect obedience would yield life, but no fallen human achieves it (Romans 3:23). Law reveals inability, driving sinners to the grace-remedy of Christ.
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
View commentary
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.—Exēpatēsen (ἐξηπάτησεν, "deceived/beguiled") deliberately echoes Genesis 3:13 (LXX), where Eve says "the serpent deceived me." Paul traces his experience to Eden's pattern: prohibition aroused desire, sin deceived through the commandment, and death resulted. Apekteinen (ἀπέκτεινεν, "killed/slew") intensifies "I died" (v. 9)—sin actively murdered using law as its weapon.
The deception isn't that law was wrong but that sin promised fulfillment through disobedience while concealing death's consequence. Sin perverted the good commandment into an instrument of destruction. This exonerates law while exposing sin's malicious cunning. The parallel to Eve's deception underscores sin's universal pattern of exploiting God's word to produce rebellion.
The deception isn't that law was wrong but that sin promised fulfillment through disobedience while concealing death's consequence. Sin perverted the good commandment into an instrument of destruction. This exonerates law while exposing sin's malicious cunning. The parallel to Eve's deception underscores sin's universal pattern of exploiting God's word to produce rebellion.
Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
View commentary
Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.—Paul emphatically vindicates law's character after showing its inability to sanctify. Hagios (ἅγιος, "holy") means set apart, reflecting God's nature. Dikaios (δίκαιος, "just/righteous") indicates law's equity and conformity to God's righteousness. Agathos (ἀγαθός, "good") describes intrinsic moral excellence and benevolent purpose.
The threefold description defends law against implications that it's sinful (v. 7) or evil (v. 13). Law perfectly reflects God's character—the problem isn't law's quality but humanity's corruption. This distinction is crucial: sin's misuse of law doesn't taint law's essential goodness. The physician's diagnosis (law) isn't evil because it reveals terminal illness (sin). This prepares for the conclusion that sin, not law, deserves blame for spiritual death.
The threefold description defends law against implications that it's sinful (v. 7) or evil (v. 13). Law perfectly reflects God's character—the problem isn't law's quality but humanity's corruption. This distinction is crucial: sin's misuse of law doesn't taint law's essential goodness. The physician's diagnosis (law) isn't evil because it reveals terminal illness (sin). This prepares for the conclusion that sin, not law, deserves blame for spiritual death.
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.
View commentary
Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid.—Paul anticipates objection: if law is good (v. 12) but produces death (v. 10), isn't good itself deadly? Mē genoito (μὴ γένοιτο)—his strongest negation—emphatically denies this. Law remains good; sin bears sole responsibility for death.
But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good—Hina phanē hamartia (ἵνα φανῇ ἁμαρτία, "that it might be shown to be sin") reveals law's purpose: unmasking sin's true character. Sin's ability to pervert even God's good law into death's instrument exposes sin's exceeding malignity. That sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful—Kath' hyperbolēn hamartōlos (καθ' ὑπερβολὴν ἁμαρτωλός, "sinful beyond measure") intensifies sin's vileness. Law's function is diagnostic—revealing sin's lethal nature and desperate need for remedy.
But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good—Hina phanē hamartia (ἵνα φανῇ ἁμαρτία, "that it might be shown to be sin") reveals law's purpose: unmasking sin's true character. Sin's ability to pervert even God's good law into death's instrument exposes sin's exceeding malignity. That sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful—Kath' hyperbolēn hamartōlos (καθ' ὑπερβολὴν ἁμαρτωλός, "sinful beyond measure") intensifies sin's vileness. Law's function is diagnostic—revealing sin's lethal nature and desperate need for remedy.
The Struggle with Sin
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
View commentary
For we know that the law is spiritual—Pneumatikos (πνευματικός, "spiritual") means proceeding from the Holy Spirit, demanding heart-level obedience beyond external compliance. Law requires love, not mere behavioral conformity (Matthew 22:37-40). But I am carnal, sold under sin—Sarkinos (σάρκινος, "fleshly/carnal") describes the believer's remaining sin nature, not total depravity. Peprāmenos hypo tēn hamartian (πεπραμένος ὑπὸ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, "sold under sin") uses perfect tense—ongoing state from past action.
This begins the disputed section (vv. 14-25): does Paul describe pre-Christian or Christian experience? The present tense "I am," personal pronouns, present struggle, delight in God's law (v. 22), and serving God's law with the mind (v. 25) argue for regenerate experience. Paul describes the believer's ongoing war with indwelling sin—not total dominion by sin (that's the unregenerate state) but real conflict with remaining corruption.
This begins the disputed section (vv. 14-25): does Paul describe pre-Christian or Christian experience? The present tense "I am," personal pronouns, present struggle, delight in God's law (v. 22), and serving God's law with the mind (v. 25) argue for regenerate experience. Paul describes the believer's ongoing war with indwelling sin—not total dominion by sin (that's the unregenerate state) but real conflict with remaining corruption.
For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. allow: Gr. know
View commentary
For that which I do I allow not—Ou ginōskō (οὐ γινώσκω, "I do not know/understand/approve") expresses moral confusion and self-frustration. The regenerate will desires God's law but experiences contradiction between intent and performance. For what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.—Thelō (θέλω, "I will/desire") versus misō (μισῶ, "I hate") shows internal civil war.
This describes the regenerate experience: genuine desire for holiness coupled with failure to achieve it. The unregenerate don't "hate" what they practice (Romans 1:32); they approve sin. Hating one's sin while struggling against it characterizes Christian experience, not unconverted life. This isn't excuse-making but honest acknowledgment that sanctification involves real battle against remaining corruption, not instantaneous perfection. Paul anticipates chapter 8's solution: Spirit-empowered victory.
This describes the regenerate experience: genuine desire for holiness coupled with failure to achieve it. The unregenerate don't "hate" what they practice (Romans 1:32); they approve sin. Hating one's sin while struggling against it characterizes Christian experience, not unconverted life. This isn't excuse-making but honest acknowledgment that sanctification involves real battle against remaining corruption, not instantaneous perfection. Paul anticipates chapter 8's solution: Spirit-empowered victory.
If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
View commentary
If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.—Symphēmi (σύμφημι, "agree with/consent to") means to acknowledge jointly. The very fact that Paul does what he hates proves he agrees with law's goodness—his will aligns with law even when his performance falls short. This is crucial evidence for the regenerate interpretation: the unregenerate don't consent that law is good; they're hostile to God's law (Romans 8:7).
This verse demonstrates the regenerate heart's fundamental orientation toward God's standard despite failure to achieve it consistently. The problem isn't will-alignment (which regeneration accomplished) but power-deficit (which Spirit-empowerment addresses, chapter 8). The believer's struggle isn't whether to obey but how to accomplish the obedience desired.
This verse demonstrates the regenerate heart's fundamental orientation toward God's standard despite failure to achieve it consistently. The problem isn't will-alignment (which regeneration accomplished) but power-deficit (which Spirit-empowerment addresses, chapter 8). The believer's struggle isn't whether to obey but how to accomplish the obedience desired.
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
View commentary
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.—Ouketi egō katergazomai auto (οὐκέτι ἐγὼ κατεργάζομαι αὐτό, "no longer I that work it") doesn't absolve responsibility but distinguishes the regenerate self (new identity in Christ) from indwelling sin (remaining corruption). Oikousa (οἰκοῦσα, "dwelling") present participle indicates ongoing residence—sin still occupies the believer but no longer defines identity.
This crucial distinction separates the Christian's core identity (united to Christ, justified, regenerate) from remaining sin (being progressively eradicated in sanctification). The believer is simultaneously saint (identity) and sinner (experience). This isn't excuse-making but proper theological anthropology: who I am in Christ versus what I still struggle with in the flesh. Romans 6:6's "old man crucified" describes positional death to sin's reign; chapter 7 describes experiential warfare with sin's remaining presence.
This crucial distinction separates the Christian's core identity (united to Christ, justified, regenerate) from remaining sin (being progressively eradicated in sanctification). The believer is simultaneously saint (identity) and sinner (experience). This isn't excuse-making but proper theological anthropology: who I am in Christ versus what I still struggle with in the flesh. Romans 6:6's "old man crucified" describes positional death to sin's reign; chapter 7 describes experiential warfare with sin's remaining presence.
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.
View commentary
For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing—Ouk oikei (οὐκ οἰκεῖ, "does not dwell") indicates permanent absence. En emoi, tout' estin en tē sarki mou (ἐν ἐμοί, τοῦτ' ἔστιν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου)—Paul's parenthetical clarification is vital: "in me, that is, in my flesh." He doesn't say nothing good dwells in him absolutely, but qualifies: nothing good in sarx (σάρξ, "flesh")—the remaining sin nature.
For to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.—To thelein parakeitai moi (τὸ θέλειν πάρακειταί μοι, "the willing is present with me") versus to katergadzesthai to kalon ouch heuriskō (τὸ κατεργάζεσθαι τὸ καλὸν οὐχ εὑρίσκω, "the accomplishing of good I don't find"). Regeneration renewed the will; sanctification progressively empowers performance. This gap between renewed desire and imperfect execution characterizes Christian life pre-glorification.
For to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.—To thelein parakeitai moi (τὸ θέλειν πάρακειταί μοι, "the willing is present with me") versus to katergadzesthai to kalon ouch heuriskō (τὸ κατεργάζεσθαι τὸ καλὸν οὐχ εὑρίσκω, "the accomplishing of good I don't find"). Regeneration renewed the will; sanctification progressively empowers performance. This gap between renewed desire and imperfect execution characterizes Christian life pre-glorification.
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
View commentary
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.—This verse reinforces v. 15's chiastic structure, emphasizing the painful contradiction between regenerate desire and imperfect performance. Agathon (ἀγαθόν, "good") contrasts with kakon (κακόν, "evil")—moral opposites that mark the battlefield of Christian experience.
The repetition isn't redundant but emphatic: this conflict is real, ongoing, and characteristic of authentic Christian life. Paul doesn't minimize sin's remaining power or pretend sanctification means instant victory. Instead, he honestly portrays the warfare described in Galatians 5:17: "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." This realism prevents both perfectionist pride and antinomian resignation.
The repetition isn't redundant but emphatic: this conflict is real, ongoing, and characteristic of authentic Christian life. Paul doesn't minimize sin's remaining power or pretend sanctification means instant victory. Instead, he honestly portrays the warfare described in Galatians 5:17: "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." This realism prevents both perfectionist pride and antinomian resignation.
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
View commentary
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.—Paul repeats v. 17's crucial distinction, bracketing vv. 18-19's elaboration. The repetition underscores the fundamental point: regenerate identity ("I") versus remaining corruption ("sin dwelling in me"). Ouketi egō (οὐκέτι ἐγώ, "no longer I") doesn't eliminate responsibility but distinguishes the Christian's true self (united to Christ) from remaining sin's alien presence.
This framework is essential for persevering in sanctification: believers must fight sin ruthlessly (Colossians 3:5) while maintaining assurance that sin doesn't define them (Romans 8:1). The proper response to failure isn't either minimizing sin ("that's not really me") or despair ("I must not be saved"). Rather: "This contradicts my regenerate identity; by God's Spirit I'll mortify it, confident that Christ's righteousness defines me." This balance enables warfare without works-righteousness.
This framework is essential for persevering in sanctification: believers must fight sin ruthlessly (Colossians 3:5) while maintaining assurance that sin doesn't define them (Romans 8:1). The proper response to failure isn't either minimizing sin ("that's not really me") or despair ("I must not be saved"). Rather: "This contradicts my regenerate identity; by God's Spirit I'll mortify it, confident that Christ's righteousness defines me." This balance enables warfare without works-righteousness.
I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
View commentary
I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.—Heuriskō ara ton nomon (εὑρίσκω ἄρα τὸν νόμον, "I find therefore the principle/law") uses nomos (νόμος) not of Mosaic law but as "principle" or "fixed pattern"—the predictable reality of sanctification's warfare. Parakeitai moi (παράκειταί μοι, "is present with/beside me") depicts evil as a constant companion, not occasional visitor.
When I would do good, evil is present—thelonti emoi poiein to kalon (θέλοντί ἐμοὶ ποιεῖν τὸ καλόν, "to me willing to do good"). The temporal construction emphasizes simultaneity: precisely when believers resolve to obey, opposition arises. This isn't pessimism but realism. Understanding this 'law' (pattern) prevents shock and discouragement when spiritual resolve meets resistance. The Christian life isn't automatic virtue but Spirit-enabled warfare.
When I would do good, evil is present—thelonti emoi poiein to kalon (θέλοντί ἐμοὶ ποιεῖν τὸ καλόν, "to me willing to do good"). The temporal construction emphasizes simultaneity: precisely when believers resolve to obey, opposition arises. This isn't pessimism but realism. Understanding this 'law' (pattern) prevents shock and discouragement when spiritual resolve meets resistance. The Christian life isn't automatic virtue but Spirit-enabled warfare.
For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
View commentary
For I delight in the law of God after the inward man—Synēdomai gar tō nomō tou theou (συνήδομαι γὰρ τῷ νόμῳ τοῦ θεοῦ, "I rejoice together with the law of God") uses a compound verb indicating deep pleasure and agreement. Kata ton esō anthrōpon (κατὰ τὸν ἔσω ἄνθρωπον, "according to the inner man") describes the regenerate self—the new creation in Christ.
This verse decisively proves Paul describes regenerate experience. The unregenerate "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:14) and cannot "delight in God's law"—such delight requires regeneration. The "inner man" is renewed by the Spirit (2 Corinthians 4:16, Ephesians 3:16), producing genuine love for God's revealed will. This doesn't mean perfect obedience but authentic desire—the hallmark of new birth. Paul's struggle isn't whether to obey but how to overcome remaining resistance.
This verse decisively proves Paul describes regenerate experience. The unregenerate "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:14) and cannot "delight in God's law"—such delight requires regeneration. The "inner man" is renewed by the Spirit (2 Corinthians 4:16, Ephesians 3:16), producing genuine love for God's revealed will. This doesn't mean perfect obedience but authentic desire—the hallmark of new birth. Paul's struggle isn't whether to obey but how to overcome remaining resistance.
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.
View commentary
But I see another law in my members—Blepō de heteron nomon en tois melesin mou (βλέπω δὲ ἕτερον νόμον ἐν τοῖς μέλεσίν μου, "but I see a different law/principle in my members") introduces the counter-force to v. 22's inward delight. Mele (μέλη, "members") refers to bodily faculties as instruments of remaining sin. This "law" is sin's patterns operating through the flesh.
Warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members—Antistrateuomenon (ἀντιστρατευόμενον, "making war against") is military terminology for active combat. Aichmalōtizonta (αἰχμαλωτίζοντα, "taking captive") depicts prisoners of war. The "law of my mind" (tō nomō tou noos mou) is regenerate reason aligned with God; "law of sin" (tō nomō tēs hamartias) is remaining corruption. These wage war continuously, with sin temporarily gaining advantage, producing Paul's anguish (v. 24).
Warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members—Antistrateuomenon (ἀντιστρατευόμενον, "making war against") is military terminology for active combat. Aichmalōtizonta (αἰχμαλωτίζοντα, "taking captive") depicts prisoners of war. The "law of my mind" (tō nomō tou noos mou) is regenerate reason aligned with God; "law of sin" (tō nomō tēs hamartias) is remaining corruption. These wage war continuously, with sin temporarily gaining advantage, producing Paul's anguish (v. 24).
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? the body: or, this body of death
View commentary
O wretched man that I am!—Talaipōros egō anthrōpos (ταλαίπωρος ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπος, "wretched I [am], the man") expresses profound anguish over the warfare described in vv. 15-23. This isn't self-loathing (which denies gospel-identity) but righteous frustration over remaining corruption's persistence. Paul hates sin's presence, not his person—the anguish of wanting holiness while experiencing ongoing battle.
Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?—Tis me rhysetai ek tou sōmatos tou thanatou toutou (τίς με ῥύσεται ἐκ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ θανάτου τούτου, "who will rescue me from this body of death?") The question anticipates v. 25's answer. Rhyomai (ῥύομαι, "deliver/rescue") implies external help—self-effort fails. "Body of death" likely refers to the mortal body still subject to sin's corrupting influence, not the body itself as evil. Complete deliverance awaits resurrection (Romans 8:23, Philippians 3:21).
Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?—Tis me rhysetai ek tou sōmatos tou thanatou toutou (τίς με ῥύσεται ἐκ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ θανάτου τούτου, "who will rescue me from this body of death?") The question anticipates v. 25's answer. Rhyomai (ῥύομαι, "deliver/rescue") implies external help—self-effort fails. "Body of death" likely refers to the mortal body still subject to sin's corrupting influence, not the body itself as evil. Complete deliverance awaits resurrection (Romans 8:23, Philippians 3:21).
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.
View commentary
I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.—Charis de tō theō dia Iēsou Christou tou kyriou hēmōn (χάρις δὲ τῷ θεῷ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, "but thanks to God through Jesus Christ our Lord") answers v. 24's question. Charis (χάρις) means both "thanks" and "grace"—appropriate double meaning. Deliverance comes through Christ alone, prompting thanksgiving. This anticipates chapter 8's full answer: the Spirit's empowerment secures victory.
So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.—Ara oun autos egō tō men noi douleuō nomō theou tē de sarki nomō hamartias (ἄρα οὖν αὐτὸς ἐγὼ τῷ μὲν νοῒ δουλεύω νόμῳ θεοῦ τῇ δὲ σαρκὶ νόμῳ ἁμαρτίας, "therefore I myself with the mind serve God's law but with the flesh sin's law"). Paul summarizes chapter 7's paradox: simultaneous service to two masters—regenerate mind serves God; remaining flesh serves sin. This isn't defeatism but realism pending chapter 8's Spirit-solution. The Christian is oriented toward God (mind) while battling remaining corruption (flesh) until glorification.
So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.—Ara oun autos egō tō men noi douleuō nomō theou tē de sarki nomō hamartias (ἄρα οὖν αὐτὸς ἐγὼ τῷ μὲν νοῒ δουλεύω νόμῳ θεοῦ τῇ δὲ σαρκὶ νόμῳ ἁμαρτίας, "therefore I myself with the mind serve God's law but with the flesh sin's law"). Paul summarizes chapter 7's paradox: simultaneous service to two masters—regenerate mind serves God; remaining flesh serves sin. This isn't defeatism but realism pending chapter 8's Spirit-solution. The Christian is oriented toward God (mind) while battling remaining corruption (flesh) until glorification.