- Jan 27, 2021
- 5,343
- 9,254
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Just an exegetical note: The theologians have argued for centuries over who the "I" is in Romans 7. The followers of Jacob Arminius thought it was Paul before his conversion; those of John Calvin that it was Paul after conversion. Eisenbaum's variant of the latter that I think is correct is that Paul is speaking for the Gentile-Christians in Rome to the Jewish-Christian house-churches of Rome and describing what happens when Gentiles-Christians accept Torah practice as mandatory. Given the setup in Romans 7:1-6 and Paul's own testimony that was never "apart from the Torah" (Philippians 3:4-6) until he died to Torah (Romans 7:6; see also Galatians 2:19-20), I think this view is correct.
But basic principle is that we still have our "flesh" (Romans 7:14), which has it's ἐπιθυμία ("epithumia", lusts, cravings, desires; see Romans 7:7). So, I stand by my analysis that unless God acts through the Spirit, stumbling is statistically inevitable. Why God does not always choose to give every believer immediate and total dominion over their lusts and cravings, I can only speculate.
Theologians have led me far far away from a biblical understanding of grace, faith, salvation, and assurance.
I don't say this flippantly. I used to love them a lot. I loved Calvinism and was influenced by a lot of Calvinist teaching.
But theres not one of them who get everything right and some of them are so off that its not cute or funny.
I was lied to about so many things, that I just try to know the Scriptures for myself. Otherwise, theres just all kinds of attitudes and bias I can get and have gotten that are against what Jesus said.
I think I still love C.S Lewis. But I don't put his words at the same level as Jesus'.