Romans 7
7
1Do you not have da'as, Achim b'Moshiach, for I speak to those who know the Torah, that the Torah exercises marut (authority, rule) over a man so long as he lives?
2For the agunah (woman whose husbandʼs whereabouts are unknown) is bound by the gezetz to her husband while he lives; but in the case that her husbandʼs death can be confirmed, she is no longer an agunah and is released from the gezetz of her husband.
3Accordingly she will be named no'ehfet (adulteress) if, while her husband lives, she becomes another manʼs. But if her ba'al (husband) dies, she is free from the gezetz, so that she is no no'ehfet (adulteress) if she becomes another manʼs.
4So then, Achim b'Moshiach, you also were put to death in relation to the Gezetz through the basar of Moshiach,#7:4 Ps 16:9-10; Ro 8:3 in order that you might become anotherʼs, bound to Moshiach who was given Techiyah (Resurrection) from the Mesim, so that we might bear p'ri for Hashem.
5For when we were in the basar (in the fallen condition of the old humanity), through the Gezetz, the ta'avat besarim, the sinful passions#7:5 i.e., Chet Kadmonʼs yetzer harah of the fallen human condition were working in our natural capacities, so as to bear p'ri for mavet (death).#7:5 cf. Ro 4:15
6But now we have become niftar (freed, deceased) from the dominating ownership of the Gezetz, having died to that by which we were confined, so that we might serve in the Ruach Hakodesh of hitkhadshut and newness and not in the yoshen (oldness) of chumra (stringency, strict adherence to the letter of the law).#7:6 Ro 2:29
7What then shall we say? That the Gezetz is considered as chet (sin)? Chas v'shalom! Nevertheless, I would not have experienced chet (sin) except through the Gezetz; for I would not have known chamdanut (covetousness, greediness) if the Torah had not said, LO TACHMOD#7:7 Ex 20:17 (Thou shalt not covet).
8But Chet (Sin), seizing its opportunity through the mitzvoh (commandment), stirred up all manner of chamdanut (covetousness) in me. For in the absence of the Gezetz, Chet (Sin) is dead.
9And in the absence of the Gezetz I was once alive. But when the mitzvoh (commandment) came,#7:9 Gn 2:16-17 Chet (Sin) became alive,
10and I died. The mitzvoh (commandment) intended as the Derech L'Chayyim (Way to Life) proved for me a means to mavet (death).
11For Chet (Sin), seizing its opportunity through the mitzvoh (commandment), deceived me and, through the mitzvoh (commandment), killed me.#7:11 Gn 3:1-6
12So that the Torah is kedoshah (holy) and the mitzvoh (commandment) is kedoshah and yasharah and tovah.
13Did that which is good, then, become mavet (death) to me? Chas v'shalom! But Chet (Sin), it was Chet, working mavet (death) in me through that which is tovah, in order that Chet might be shown as Chet (Sin), and in order that Chet through the mitzvoh (commandment) might become chata'ah gedolah ad m'od (utterly sinful).
14For we have da'as that the Torah is Ruchanit (Spiritual, of the Ruach Hakodesh); but I am of the basar (fallen humanity) sold under the power of (slave master Chet Kadmon) Chet.
15For I do not have da'as what I do. For that which I commit is not what I want; no, it is what I hate that I do!
16But if that which I do is what I do not want, I agree with the Torah that the Gezetz is good.
17But now it is no longer I doing this, but [the power of] Chet (Sin) which dwells within me.#7:17 Ro 5:13-14; 6:23
18For I have da'as that there dwells in me, that is, in my basar (my fallen humanity enslaved to Chet Kadmon) no good thing; for the wish [to do what is right] lies ready at hand for me, but to accomplish the good is not.
19For I fail to do good as I wish, but HaRah (The Evil) which I do not wish is what I commit.
20But if what I do not wish is that which I do, it is no longer I doing it but [the power of] Chet (Sin, Chet Kadmon, Original Sin) which dwells within me.#7:20 cf. Ro 8:7-8
21I find then it be a Gezetz that for me who wishes to do HaTov (The Good), that for me HaRah (The Evil) lies ready at hand.
22For I rejoice, I have simcha Torah in the Torah of Hashem, so far as the adam hapenimi#7:22 Ep 3:16 is concerned,
23But I see another gezetz (law) in my natural capacities at milchamah (war) with the Torah of my mind and making me a prisoner to the Gezetz of Chet (Sin) which is [a power] in my natural capacities.
24Wretched man am I! Who will deliver me from the body of this mavet (death)?
25Hodu l'Hashem (thanks be to G-d) baMoshiach Yehoshua Adoneinu. So then I myself with my mind serve the Torah of Hashem and with my basar I serve the Gezetz of Chet (the Law of Sin).#7:25 The total spiritual turn-around here described is when the conviction of the intellect, emotion, and will “obey from the heart the form of doctrine laid out here in Scripture” as we are born anew in the humanity of the new Man and die to the old depraved Adam
Currently Selected:
Romans 7: TOJB2011
Highlight
Share
Copy
Want to have your highlights saved across all your devices? Sign up or sign in
THE ORTHODOX JEWISH BIBLE
FOURTH EDITION © Artists For Israel Intl Inc., 2002-2011, 2021.
Romans 7
7
The Believer’s Relationship to the Law
1 Or do you not know, brothers and sisters#tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:13. (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law is lord over a person#sn Here person refers to a human being. as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives, but if her#tn Grk “the,” with the article used as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215). husband dies, she is released from the law of the marriage.#tn Grk “husband.”sn Paul’s example of the married woman and the law of the marriage illustrates that death frees a person from obligation to the law. Thus, in spiritual terms, a person who has died to what controlled us (v. 6) has been released from the law to serve God in the new life produced by the Spirit. 3 So then,#tn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing. if she is joined to another man while her husband is alive, she will be called an adulteress. But if her#tn Grk “the,” with the article used as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215). husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she is joined to another man, she is not an adulteress. 4 So, my brothers and sisters,#tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:13. you also died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you could be joined to another, to the one who was raised from the dead, to bear fruit to God.#tn Grk “that we might bear fruit to God.” 5 For when we were in the flesh,#tn That is, before we were in Christ. the sinful desires,#tn Or “sinful passions.” aroused by the law, were active in the members of our body#tn Grk “our members”; the words “of our body” have been supplied to clarify the meaning. to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the law, because we have died#tn Grk “having died.” The participle ἀποθανόντες (apoqanonte") has been translated as a causal adverbial participle. to what controlled us, so that we may serve in the new life of the Spirit and not under the old written code.#tn Grk “in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.”
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I#sn Romans 7:7-25. There has been an enormous debate over the significance of the first person singular pronouns (“I”) in this passage and how to understand their referent. Did Paul intend (1) a reference to himself and other Christians too; (2) a reference to his own pre-Christian experience as a Jew, struggling with the law and sin (and thus addressing his fellow countrymen as Jews); or (3) a reference to himself as a child of Adam, reflecting the experience of Adam that is shared by both Jews and Gentiles alike (i.e., all people everywhere)? Good arguments can be assembled for each of these views, and each has problems dealing with specific statements in the passage. The classic argument against an autobiographical interpretation was made by W. G. Kümmel, Römer 7 und die Bekehrung des Paulus. A good case for seeing at least an autobiographical element in the chapter has been made by G. Theissen, Psychologische Aspekte paulinischer Theologie [FRLANT], 181-268. One major point that seems to favor some sort of an autobiographical reading of these verses is the lack of any mention of the Holy Spirit for empowerment in the struggle described in Rom 7:7-25. The Spirit is mentioned beginning in 8:1 as the solution to the problem of the struggle with sin (8:4-6, 9). would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else#tn Grk “I would not have known covetousness.” if the law had not said, “Do not covet.”#sn A quotation from Exod 20:17 and Deut 5:21. 8 But sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of wrong desires.#tn Or “covetousness.” For apart from the law, sin is dead. 9 And I was once alive apart from the law, but with the coming of the commandment sin became alive 10 and I died. So#tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “So” to indicate the result of the statement in the previous verse. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life brought death!#tn Grk “and there was found in/for me the commandment which was for life – this was for death.” 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it I died.#tn Or “and through it killed me.” 12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good.
13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? Absolutely not! But sin, so that it would be shown to be sin, produced death in me through what is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual – but I am unspiritual, sold into slavery to sin.#tn Grk “under sin.” 15 For I don’t understand what I am doing. For I do not do what I want – instead, I do what I hate.#tn Grk “but what I hate, this I do.” 16 But if I do what I don’t want, I agree that the law is good.#tn Grk “I agree with the law that it is good.” 17 But now it is no longer me doing it, but sin that lives in me. 18 For I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh. For I want to do the good, but I cannot do it.#tn Grk “For to wish is present in/with me, but not to do it.” 19 For I do not do the good I want, but I do the very evil I do not want! 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer me doing it but sin that lives in me.
21 So, I find the law that when I want to do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the law of God in my inner being. 23 But I see a different law in my members waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that is in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be#tc ‡ Most mss (א* A 1739 1881 Ï sy) read “I give thanks to God” rather than “Now thanks be to God” (א1 [B] Ψ 33 81 104 365 1506 pc), the reading of NA27. The reading with the verb (εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ, eucaristw tw qew) possibly arose from a transcriptional error in which several letters were doubled (TCGNT 455). The conjunction δέ (de, “now”) is included in some mss as well (א1 Ψ 33 81 104 365 1506 pc), but it should probably not be considered original. The ms support for the omission of δέ is both excellent and widespread (א* A B D 1739 1881 Ï lat sy), and its addition can be explained as an insertion to smooth out the transition between v. 24 and 25. to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then,#tn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing. I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but#tn Greek emphasizes the contrast between these two clauses more than can be easily expressed in English. with my flesh I serve#tn The words “I serve” have been repeated here for clarity. the law of sin.
Currently Selected:
:
Highlight
Share
Copy
Want to have your highlights saved across all your devices? Sign up or sign in
1996 - 2007 by Biblical Studies Press, LLC