Many Christians have long been taught that the “wretched man” of Romans 7:24 is the Christian, who should realise that conflict between a willing mind and a carnal nature which is not is normal.
We are told that coming to terms with the obvious mental and moral contradictions that result from this teaching is a mark of spiritual maturity; and that we just have to learn to live with our old nature.
Our greatest hope appears to be that someday we may leave the Wilderness of Romans 7 behind us, and “enter in” to the Promised Land of Romans 8.
The first six chapters of Romans address, in turn, man’s lawlessness; God’s righteousness and impartial judgement; our absolute inability to meet God’s righteous requirements; Abrahamic faith; Adam’s sinful legacy and Christ’s life-giving victory; and the believer’s full freedom from bondage to sin.
Why, then, after leading us up the heights with a ringing statement of freedom, does the apostle Paul then appear to lead us down into a morass of mental conflict and spiritual uncertainty?
I use the words “lead us” because in this chapter the behaviour of the apostle Paul is, by his own admission, very contradictory!
How could the high-flying Paul of Romans 8:2 have been so negative about himself in Romans 7:24?
How could the one who writes, in 2 Corinthians 5:17, that any person in Christ is a “new creation,” be 50% old creation?
How could the selfless Paul of Galatians 2:20 be so full of himself, years later? (Galatians was written about 4 years before Romans.)
How could the man who wrote, in Ephesians 2:10, that we are God’s “workmanship in Christ” be such an unworkable model of behaviour?
How could the apostle who wrote, in Philippians 4:13, of being able to do “all things” through Christ’s strength, be so unable to overcome his own sinful nature?
How could the Paul of Colossians 1:13, who wrote of believers having been “delivered from the authority of darkness and transported into the kingdom of God’s Son,” be undelivered himself?
And how could the apostle who, in 1 Thessalonians 4:4,5, exhorted believers to “possess” their bodies in honour and “not in lust,” himself be so lacking in self-discipline?
If living a “wretched” life is a mark of Christian maturity, why then did Paul cry out so desperately for deliverance from it? (Romans 7:24)
Paul’s epistle to the Romans was written to a church comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. That’s why he wrote of having “some fruit among you also, just as among the other Gentiles.” (Romans 1:13 & 1:16; Romans 3: 9-13, 22, 23, 29; & Romans 10:12, 13)
In Romans 11:13 Paul writes: “I speak to you Gentiles…”
In Romans 7:1, Paul writes: “I speak to those who know the Law…”
These are important distinctions. They show that throughout his letter to the Romans, Paul addressed both Jews and non-Jews. In this context, Romans 7:1 is very significant. We’ll come back to it later.
There are three major theories on the identity of the “wretched man.”
One is that Paul was referring to the unsaved man under conviction—the man who knows what he should do, but is unable to do it. But the unsaved man has no “inward delight in the Law of God,” but rather fulfils “the desire of the flesh, and of the mind” (Ephesians 2:3).
Another theory is that Paul was referring to himself when he was under conviction, in the time between Stephen’s martyrdom and his own conversion. But this falls down when we see that Saul (who changed his name to Paul on becoming an apostle) was in fact enforcing the Law—not resisting it!
Yet another theory—the most popular one—is that Paul was writing of the Christian’s ongoing struggle against his own carnal nature. But how could this be the very Paul who had convincingly stated that believers were no longer in slavery to sin, and that sin was not to have dominion over them? (Romans 6:12-14)
In Romans 7:1 Paul addresses “those who know the Law”—his Jewish brethren. Paul then quotes from the Law to make the point that the believer is as dead to Law as a widow is to her deceased husband!
Paul’s reasoning is easy enough to follow—until Romans 7:14, where he begins to use the personal pronoun “I”. It is this that makes us think that he must be speaking of his own experience. He then proceeds to use “I”, “me”, “my” or “myself” about 38 times. That’s why many Christians have concluded that the third theory—that Paul was writing about his struggle with his own sinful nature—is the most likely one.
But isn’t it more likely that Paul was personifying a truth—acting it out—as we see him doing elsewhere in his letters?
Paul explains to the Corinthians that he has “figuratively transferred” to himself and Apollos the problem that has divided the church—its over-emphasis on leadership personalities, rather than on Christ—so that they would “learn in us.” (1 Corinthians 4:6) The Greek word for “figuratively” can mean to clothe oneself with the identity of another. Paul was doing what preachers do when they portray a person—the resurrected Lazarus or Peter walking on water—in order to give their sermons life.
Another example is “a man in Christ” known by Paul to have been “caught up to the third heaven,” where he heard words that were “inexpressible”? (2 Corinthians 12:2-5) Who was that man? Reading on, we discover that it was Paul himself! (2 Corinthians 12:7)
Why does Paul speak of himself in the Third Person? Well, unlike Romans 7, where he uses the personal pronoun “I” to describe an ongoing internal struggle, Paul here avoids the use of that same personal pronoun, because to him it seems immodest to speak of himself as one who has visited Paradise! After all, the danger of pride due to the “abundance of the revelations” is why the Lord has given him a “thorn in the flesh”!
The fact that Paul switched his identity twice elsewhere to make a point makes a good case for him doing the same in Romans 7.
But if Paul is not the “wretched man”—then who is?
The “wretched man” is the Jew who is torn between the demands of the Law and that carnal nature that is contrary to it. Romans 6 is about being “dead to sin and alive to God.” Romans 7 is about “being dead to that which held us”—the Law. (Romans 7:6)
Paul goes on to say that the Law itself is not the problem—sin is the problem! The Law has simply revealed sin as “exceedingly sinful”! The folly of attempting to meet the Law’s requirements without being “in Christ” is clearly shown in the contradictory life of the “wretched man” of Romans 7:14-24.
God’s law revives sin in the unsaved! The carnal nature will always betray the well-meaning conscience! In the morally super-strict Victorian Era, the curved legs of dining tables were discreetly covered, lest lustful thoughts be aroused! Repressed sin is like an inflated ball in water—it rises to the surface no matter how strongly it is held down!
Christian: go direct from Romans 6 to Romans 8, bypassing Romans 7, which was written to those struggling with the Law—not to those living under grace!