Re-Examining Romans 1–8 With The Pentateuch

By James M. Howard

[James M. Howard is Senior Pastor, Dillon Community Church, Dillon, Colorado.]

Abstract

This article proposes that understanding the theology of the Pentateuch is critical in understanding Paul’s argument in Romans 1–8, assessing the flow of the epistle, and making sense of its more complicated sections.

***

In Romans, Paul was concerned with how the story of Jesus continued the story of Israel.[1] He needed to understand the story of Israel in light of the death and resurrection of Jesus. Paul did not have the New Testament at his disposal when he wrote. He had the Old Testament (Jewish Scriptures), the writings of the period,[2] and the oral tradition about Christ. His challenge was to make sense of these sources in light of the life, teachings, and resurrection of Christ. This article proposes that understanding the theology of the Pentateuch is helpful in understanding Paul’s argument in Romans 1–8, assessing the flow of the epistle, and making sense of its more complicated sections.

Paul’s Use Of The Pentateuch In Romans 1–8

Some passages in Romans clearly quote the Old Testament. For example, Romans 9–11 quotes the Old Testament at least thirty times. However, Paul does more with the Old Testament than quote it.[3] In Romans 1–8 he also uses numerous conceptual and linguistic links to the Pentateuch to lay a foundation for understanding the work of Christ.[4] Thus, in some ways Romans becomes a Christological commentary on the Old Testament, in that the Old Testament sheds light on the work of Christ and the work of Christ sheds light on the Old Testament.

Watson argues that “Paul’s theology is intertextual in form, in the sense that it is constituted by its relation to an earlier corpus of texts that function as communally normative scripture.” He goes further, saying that Paul cites “individual texts not in an ad hoc manner but on the basis of a radical construal of the narrative shape of the Pentateuch as a whole.”[5] Wright argues further, “When we look at Scripture as a whole it does indeed offer a clear overall narrative: the Creator and the cosmos, the place of humans, the calling of Abraham and his family, and all finding resolution and renewal in Jesus. The point of the covenant with Israel, in the whole of Scripture, is that it was the means by which God was rescuing the children of Adam and so restoring the world.”[6]

When we consider Romans in view of such observations, we see that Paul uses primarily the Pentateuch to explain the work of Christ. When he uses the Prophets, he does so in support of his use of the Pentateuch. The question here is, How do key aspects of the Pentateuch surface in Paul’s theology as expressed in Romans 1–8? In keeping with Paul’s tendency to weave theological threads together over a longer text, the following suggestions are made for understanding how the Pentateuch impacted Paul’s theology.

Creation And Fall (Rom 1:1–3:20)

Even a glance at Romans 1:18–3:20 finds a strong tie to the account of creation and the fall. “What Paul says now must be placed against the backdrop of a wider story of creation and fall. Paul knows that the world has gone horribly wrong.”[7] A few examples will suffice.

The Genesis story of Adam and Eve exposes the nature of sin, which is fundamentally rebellion against God. It is a form of idolatry in that Adam and Eve refused to accept his sovereignty, instead choosing their own wisdom. Genesis 3–11 shows a number of reversals resulting from Adam and Eve’s decision to sin. Rather than rule on God’s behalf, Adam abdicates his authority to the serpent. The ground becomes the enemy. The helper becomes a hindrance. The brother becomes a murderer; the serpent is recognized as an evil force. The cascading effects of sin are devastating[8] as this section records the “almost unimaginable and unrestricted ability of the human race to revolt against God.”[9]

In Romans 1:18–32, Paul sets the stage for exposing the sinfulness of both the Gentiles and the Jews. His first indictment is that people suppress the truth of God’s righteousness. This may be an allusion to Genesis 3 and the fall of Adam (perhaps even 3:10, wherein Adam hides from God because his view of reality is now distorted).[10] If so, Paul is clarifying that this is an actual suppression of the truth. To use Paul’s language, in the Genesis account Adam is “without excuse.” This necessitates God’s redeeming action to both expose Adam[11] and clothe him and provide for him.

This is further bolstered by retelling the story of Genesis 3 in that humanity began to worship created things rather than the Creator (Rom 1:25). Paul makes this clear in Romans 1:23, where he uses language from Genesis 1:24–26 (LXX) to argue his point. Several key aspects of creation are now distorted, including εἰκών (“image”), ἄνθρωπος (“humanity”), πετεινόν (“birds”), τετράπους (“animals”), and ἑρπετόν (“reptiles”).[12] Humanity, rather than reflecting the image of God, has turned to idolatry. “The text asserts that God has revealed something of himself to all people in the world he has made. But it is equally obvious that this revelation is universally rejected, as people turn from knowledge of God to gods of their making (Rom. 1:21–23, 25). Why this is so, Paul will explain elsewhere (5:12–21).”[13]

As he continues his argument, he continues to reference creation and the fall. Paul’s argument that those who turned against God knew better seems to have in mind Adam and Eve as well as later generations (Gen 3–11).[14] The three uses of παραδίδωμι (Rom 1:24, 26, and 28) to describe God’s actions are captured well in Genesis 3–11, wherein God himself saw that every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood (Gen 8:21). “The result . . . is that the creator allows all to reap what they have sown.”[15] Paul concludes Romans 1 with an allusion to Genesis 3 in his reference to death.[16]

Redemption (Rom 3:21–5:11)

As Paul moves to the fall’s solution in Romans 3:21, he anchors his discussion in the Genesis story, using Abraham as the key example.[17] His basic argument is that redemption is made possible through both the faithfulness of Jesus and the faith of the believer.

Beginning with Genesis 12, God introduces his plan to rescue his creation from sin. As Genesis 12 opens, the division of the world into nations (Gen 10–11) provides the foundation for God’s choice to elect one particular nation to bless the rest. This comes in the form of a covenant with Abram and Abram’s obedience. It also reveals God’s continued sovereignty over history. The unfolding story in Genesis reveals God’s increasing commitment of himself to Abraham and his creation. He begins by promising to bless Abraham, to make him into a great nation, and to bless the earth through him (Gen 12). God puts this promise into the form of an immutable covenant (Gen 15) and then confirms the covenant (Gen 17). Finally, God swears to the covenant he has made (Gen 22).[18] The remainder of Genesis explains how Abraham’s family grew, how God protected them in the midst of sin and harsh conditions, and how he moved them to Egypt, where they were given space to grow into a nation. Throughout this section God’s sovereignty continues to shine through the story.

It should now be clear that the “righteousness of God” has surfaced as the key theme going forward (Rom 1:17; 3:21). While hotly debated in all of its various uses and nuances, God’s righteousness surely has as its core the idea of his faithfulness to his promises.[19] Paul has made the argument that Jews and Gentiles alike are in a similar position, and Israel’s failure to be a light to the world has made them part of the problem.

Paul now narrows his view of the solution to one person.

Through Jesus, God has kept his promise to Abraham. God has put Jesus forth publicly as proof of his covenant faithfulness. As noted by Wright, Paul’s use of προτίθημι (3:25) is fundamentally sacrificial in nature in that Jesus is being presented as a sacrifice of atonement.[20] While there is great debate about the meaning of ἱλαστήριον, of significance for this study is the word’s use in Leviticus 16 in the ritual of the Day of Atonement. When the two words are combined it becomes significant that, whereas the annual sacrifice was once hidden behind a cloud of incense in the most holy place, God has now put Jesus forth publicly for all the world to see.[21] “By referring to Christ as this ‘mercy seat,’ then, Paul would be inviting us to view Christ as the New Covenant equivalent, or antitype, to this Old Covenant ‘place of atonement,’ and, derivatively, to the ritual of atonement itself.”[22]

Paul then introduces Abraham as his primary example of faith “apart from the law.” Paul’s direct citations from Genesis 15:5 and 6 and 17:5 (Rom 4:3, 22; 4:17; and 4:18, respectively, not to mention the many allusions) demonstrate that for Paul, Abraham is the primary example of faith. Specifically, Paul is arguing that God justifies the “ungodly” (4:5). Abraham becomes the example of the Gentile included in the people of God by virtue of faith before the law was even given. Looking back to Genesis, Paul can now see that Abraham’s “monotheistic faith” brought him righteousness. Thus, Abraham serves as the key example of one who rejected idolatry for faith in the one true God.[23] In Paul’s argument, the story of Abraham from Genesis and the Day of Atonement in Leviticus come together to explain God’s reconciling love.

Paul further expands on the promise to Abraham, in that he would become “heir of the world” (Rom 4:13). Scholars have long recognized that the Old Testament nowhere makes such a direct promise. However, the idea of inheritance was a central tenet in Jewish understanding of their covenant with God, specifically the land of Canaan (Gen 12:7; 15:7; 17:8; 22:17). By the time of Paul, however, the concept had broadened beyond Canaan to include the whole earth.[24] Psalm 2 picks up the “notion of ‘inheritance’ and declares in no uncertain terms that this now consists, not of one small piece of territory in the middle east, but of ‘the nations’ and ‘the uttermost parts of the earth.’ ”[25] Romans 4:13 thus looks ahead to Romans 8:17–30, in which the inheritance will be the world. By the end of this section, Paul has developed his argument that all who believe the gospel are the “true, forgiven family of Abraham, no matter whether they are Jews or gentiles.”[26]

Before getting to Romans 6 and freedom from slavery to sin, Paul concludes the argument thus far, while building a picture of the Christian life in which the ancient promises are coming true in Christ (Rom 5:1–11).

Nygren argues that the Habakkuk quote in Romans 1:17 reflects the “whole message of this epistle.”[27] This is helpful, in that if Romans 1–4 focuses on the faith required of the righteous, then Romans 5–8 focuses on what it means to live. As noted by Watson, this is supported by the repeated use of ζάω and ζωή throughout Romans 5–8.[28] This focus on life thus “sums up the whole sweep of human history from creation to consummation in the two men Adam and Christ—the one marking out the era of sin and death, the other of grace and life.”[29] Therefore, it makes sense that Paul would introduce the issue of slavery to sin and the need to be freed from this slavery by the ultimate promise of life (5:10).

Paul introduces this emphasis on life by highlighting the reality of peace with God (5:1).[30] Paul is beginning to build the picture that all of the ancient promises of God are now coming true in Christ. As Wright has noted, “At the centre of these promises is the establishment of a loving, welcoming personal relationship between individual humans and the creator God himself.”[31]

Paul explains that this peace comes through Jesus, who has given us access into grace (5:2). With the use of προσαγωγή, Paul is most likely using cultic imagery, specifically referring to access to the temple. The verb προσάγω is used frequently throughout the LXX in a cultic sense, especially in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers.[32] Its primary use is related to an offering or a sacrifice. Wright argues that, in light of Romans 12:1 and 15:16, where believers are described in language of offering, it makes sense here to understand this as temple language. “Just as the Temple symbolized and actualized Israel’s meeting with God, so now Jesus has effected such a meeting between this God and all who approach by faith.”[33] Murray notes this verb is used elsewhere only in Ephesians 2:18 and 3:12, which have cultic overtones.[34]

With this imagery in mind, one should not miss the emphasis on the joyful result of what has already occurred. Namely, the death of Christ has resulted in justification of the believer, peace with God, access to his presence, and genuine hope. As argued by Cummins, “The Creator God’s image-bearing but flawed humanity, who, rescued and renewed through Jesus and the Spirit, may ‘regain their noble status, their “glory,” ’ and now exercise their calling to be stewards of creation. The end of Israel’s exile, a condition recapitulating the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden, also means that the ‘exile’ of the whole human race has at last been dealt with.”[35] In other words, the promise to Abraham is now being realized in Christ.[36] Paul is using this imagery to set the stage for the long-awaited liberation from enslavement.

Enslavement And Exodus (Rom 5:12–6:21)

Paul now turns to the specific issue of death resulting from sin (Rom 5:12–20). Genesis 3 forms the basis for Paul’s argument in this passage, since death came as a result of Adam’s fall.[37] He explains how death occurred and also how God has successfully dealt with the problem of human sin. This lays the foundation for the true exodus from death and slavery to sin (Rom 6). Admittedly, Exodus language does not occur in this section per se, yet the connection between death (Gen 2:17), sin, and ultimately enslavement cannot be avoided.

McConville argues, “The Exodus tradition lies at the heart of the faith of the OT. It is the supreme example of Yahweh’s saving activity on behalf of his chosen people, and as such it becomes a paradigm for all acts of salvation.”[38] It is not surprising then that this theme would lie behind Paul’s argument in Romans 6—freedom from enslavement to sin with the resulting obligation to live faithful lives.

Exodus begins with the family of Israel together in Egypt, though in drastically difficult conditions. Israel is enslaved and in need of deliverance. They face extreme suffering and planned genocide. This surfaces the problem of God’s covenant with Abraham. God’s invitation for humans to share the blessing of being with him marks out the “tenor of the Bible,” yet this invitation seems to be threatened.[39] God then raises an unlikely deliverer in the person of Moses. Paul similarly argues in Romans that while death came through Adam, life came through Jesus.

Paul opens Romans 6 by arguing that the believer has been baptized with Christ into his death, with the result that the believer has died to sin in order to live a new life (Rom 6:1–4). This dying to sin through baptism relates back to the death that resulted through the human connection with Adam (5:12–21). Since Paul uses enslavement language in Romans 6, it makes sense that Romans 5 speaks in terms of death and enslavement.[40] The language of death reigning can now be understood in terms of enslavement. Because we died with Adam, sin reigns and we must obey it—this seems to be at the heart of the enslavement metaphor.[41]

However, all of the metaphors used throughout Romans 6 are polyvalent. It is as though Paul, who is introducing a new and unique concept, is tying together the salvation history of Scripture with the realities of his own world to create a picture accessible to Jews and Gentiles alike. For example, Paul uses baptism as a metaphor of the Exodus in 1 Corinthians 10:1–2, where he describes the Exodus experience of passing through the sea as being baptized into Moses. It is no surprise, then, that he begins Romans 6, on being set free from slavery to sin, with baptism language.[42] Fee argues that the use of baptism imagery in 1 Corinthians is a mixture of type and analogy. In other words, Paul relates Israel’s crossing of the Red Sea in terms of Christian baptism. “They genuinely prefigure us when it comes to our experience of ‘baptism.’ ”[43]

Similarly, the enslavement metaphor would have been easily understood by Paul’s audience because “somewhere between one- and two-thirds of the population were either slaves or former slaves. . . . This social reality is the basis of the comparison Paul draws with service to sin.”[44] Thus, the combination of baptism with enslavement provides a way out of the dilemma. Only death with Christ (baptism) frees people from such enslavement to sin.[45] In keeping with McConville’s earlier statement, the Exodus event is the perfect example of God’s saving activity.

This imagery, therefore, forms the basis for the four imperatives in Romans 6:11–13. As noted by Wright, “If you have been baptized, you belong to the people thus defined, and you must therefore draw the proper conclusions: you, too, have died and been raised. ‘You, too, must calculate yourselves as being dead to sin, and live to God in the Messiah, Jesus’ (6.11). You must work out the fact that you have been brought out of slavery, and stand now as free people on the way to your inheritance.”[46]

In this context, baptism becomes a defining symbol related to the true exodus from sin. As Paul argues in 1 Corinthians 10:1–13, even though the Israelites were baptized—they passed through the sea—God was not pleased with “most of them” (1 Cor 10:5). This leads to Paul’s use of their deaths as an example to keep believers from setting their hearts on evil things (1 Cor 5:6). This parallels Paul’s encouragement throughout Romans 6 to offer oneself as a slave to righteousness rather than to sin. His implied question is Since you have been set free from slavery to sin by going through the new exodus, why do you keep on sinning?

The Law And Wanderings (Rom 7)

Paul’s use of the law is complex and multifaceted. While it is impossible to deal here with all of its aspects, the following key points can be made.

In Romans 2:1–29, Paul introduces the law for the first time. His point in this section is not so much to condemn the Jews as to lay out the proof that Jews and Gentiles alike are sinners and therefore need justification.[47] He appears to begin with a moralist, but has much more in mind with his use of Psalm 62:12 (Rom 2:6).[48] His use of Psalm 62[49] introduces God’s covenant love. “The progression of thought [in Psalm 62:11–12] is that God is able to deliver, and his deliverance is an act of his faithful covenant love.”[50] Paul’s use of Psalm 62 to argue that God will repay all people according to their actions has roots throughout the Old Testament, including the Pentateuch. Paul is using a “widely accepted principle of biblical faith”[51] to describe the relationship between deed and reward. At Sinai, before giving the law, God declared that those who obeyed him fully and kept his covenant would be his treasured possession (Exod 19:5–6). Additionally, the contrast between obedience and disobedience at the end of the wanderings (Deut 28), as well as the offer of life (30:11–20), seems to underlie Paul’s discussion of obedience in Romans 2, especially as it relates to God’s generous gift of eternal life (v. 7).[52]

Further, Paul’s lengthy discussion of life either apart from or under the law (2:5–29) has overtones from the entire law (Exod 19–Num 10). The concept of holiness has at its core the idea that one’s life should be fundamentally different after receiving the grace of God, in marked contrast to a life ruled by evil desires. Oswalt has argued that “one of the functions of the covenant is to make that fact crystal clear to the Israelites.” In other words, the holiness that God expects of his people is behavioral, “and it is a behavior which cuts right across the grain of life, touching every aspect of it, whether personal, social, moral, civil or religious.”[53] This seems to account for Paul’s movement from a general argument (Rom 2:12–16) to a more specific and Jewishly nuanced argument (vv. 17–29) that addresses all of these holiness aspects.

Paul now gets to the main point with Isaiah 52:5 (Rom 2:24).[54] In the Isaiah passage, it appears to the world that Israel’s belief in God was false because he had been forced to surrender his people to superior gods. His reputation was held in contempt because of his apparent inability to defend himself.[55] Yet Isaiah makes it clear that it was because of Israel’s sin, not God’s inability, that they were exiled. Eventually, the world would come to know the truth (Isa 52:5–10). Paul is similarly arguing that it is because of Israel’s disobedience to the covenant that the Gentiles are now blaspheming God. As Dunn argues, “The implication is that just as the exile should have caused Israel then to recognize that they had been resting on a misunderstanding of what the covenant meant, so the Jew now should be reassessing the significance of his covenant status and not simply relying on the fact of his being a Jew and having the law.”[56]

Paul clarifies that the “bearers of the solution have become part of the problem (Rom 2:25–29).”[57] He has argued all along that the Jews are as guilty of idolatry as the Gentiles, and he uses circumcision to demonstrate his point—a reference back to Genesis 17:9–14.[58] His point seems to be simply that circumcision is of no value if the law is not kept. Therefore, the Jews themselves have become lawbreakers and have thus failed to fulfill their mission.

But Paul is not finished. The law led to the increase of trespass (Rom 5:20). Cranfield and Dunn both see this as intentional on the part of God.[59] Paul seems to be arguing that, while death occurred because of Adam, the law increased sin. Cranfield states, “If sin, which was already present and disastrously active in mankind, though as yet nowhere clearly visible and defined, were ever to be decisively defeated and sinners forgiven in a way worthy of the goodness and mercy of God and recreated in newness of life, it was first of all necessary that sin should increase somewhere among men in the sense of becoming clearly manifest.”[60]

This is the picture presented in the Pentateuch. The fall (Gen 3) resulted in death, which was then followed by the decline of humanity into the depths of enslavement to sin (Gen 4–11); the promise to Abraham, which includes the prophecy of actual enslavement (Gen 15); and finally, actual slavery (Exod 1–2). For Paul, this history provides the backstory for the exodus from slavery to sin (Rom 6) and anticipates the whole argument of Romans 7:7–25.

When we come to Romans 7, we have entered one of the most debated and complex areas of Paul’s theology. It is impossible to capture in a short article.[61] Although Romans 7 uses only one direct quotation (Exod 20:17 / / Deut 5:21; Rom 7:7), that quotation is significant, since it establishes the role of the law in exposing sin. In addition, as Watson has argued, Numbers plays a foundational role in establishing the background of Romans 7, especially the wandering section beginning with Numbers 10:11. Paul is moving from the Sinai experience of Exodus 20 to the resulting wanderings recorded in Numbers.

Paul begins by arguing that the believer has died to the law through the body of Christ (Rom 7:1–6). In chapter 7, νομός plays a critical role as it occurs twenty-three times as opposed to two times in chapter 6.[62] In this introduction Paul begins his careful explanation that our sinful passions have been aroused by the law. Rather than argue that the law is a moral guide to follow, he instead argues that the law has become part of the problem. Using the metaphor of marriage, he seems to be arguing that death releases people from obligations under the law. This is consistent with his negative appraisal of the impact of the law (5:20) and the fact that the believer is no longer “under the law” (6:14–15).[63]

This prepares for him to argue that he became aware of sin only because of God’s commandment (7:7–12). This caused sin to spring to life, and death resulted. The gracious gift of God to give his command and therefore the conditional promise of life in Leviticus 18:5 is now overtaken by the reality of death. This is exactly what the wandering section of Numbers describes. Paul’s opening reference to “those who know the law” (Rom 7:1) reveals how important the law is in redemptive history; Paul needs to “tell the story of Israel because it is the story of the world’s redemption.”[64]

Before arguing the possibility of the wanderings as a backstory, the following key points should be made about the law. First, the making of the covenant revealed that God intended his people to share his character. Second, the covenant revealed that Israel and God had entered into a new relationship. The purpose of the covenant was not to make Israel God’s people; they already were, as evidenced by God’s deliverance. Third, the material found between Exodus 19 and Numbers 10 revealed God’s righteousness so that he might live in their midst. “This is why the account of the Tabernacle follows the Book of the Covenant.”[65] Fourth, Leviticus 18 revealed that life is found in obedience to God and avoidance of pagan practices (Lev 18:1–5). In this case, life is more than just physical life.[66] Even more than that, this section revealed that Israel was to operate on a moral level that exceeded that of its neighbors, thus giving insight into what it meant to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exod 19:5–6).[67] Fifth, in contrast to the life promised in Leviticus, Numbers recounts the immediate aftermath of Sinai and continues telling the story of the wanderings, in which the rebelliousness of Israel was revealed.[68] Finally, the call to renew the covenant in Deuteronomy revealed a continuing relationship between God and his people.

This sets the stage for Watson’s proposal that Numbers, specifically the wandering section, is the foundation for what follows in Romans 7:13–25. The first census identified in Numbers 1 turns out to be an “enumeration” for slaughter rather than identification for military service (Num 14:28–30).[69] All of those identified in the first census were later marked for death. In moving from Leviticus to Numbers, the giving of the law at Sinai resulted in death for the entire generation that stood before the Lord at Sinai. As Paul reflects back on this, it seems to become a paradigm, in that he perceives that the giving of the law represented a “sentence of death” for virtually all of its original recipients (Rom 7:10).

Paul more fully explicates Numbers in 1 Corinthians 10:1–13 in order to show that what happened in Numbers serves as an example of the perils of evil and resulting death for disobedience. After citing the golden calf incident (Exod 32:6), he refers to Korah’s rebellion (Num 16), the plague of snakes (Num 21), and the seduction by the daughters of Midian (Num 25). Each of these cases involves death in keeping with Israel’s failure to keep the law and God’s verdict that their bodies would fall in the wilderness (Num 14:29).[70] This seems to be an expansion of his argument in Romans 7:7–12, with the notable difference that the Romans passage focuses more on the role of the law.[71]

It also reflects Paul’s own experience (Rom 7:9–10). The first-person narrative throughout this section seems to arise out of Paul’s interpretation of Israel’s history, specifically Israel’s post-Sinai experience in the wilderness. All of the rebellions cited in 1 Corinthians 10 began with desire and ended in death. Here, Paul seems to have internalized the narrative of Numbers such that Israel’s story has become his own. This may account for the past tenses (Rom 7:7–11) as he engages in “scriptural interpretation.”[72]

Lambrecht argues that Paul is reflecting autobiographically, but that the key to understanding this complex section lies in Paul’s aspect as he thinks through his experience. “Romans 7 was written by Paul after his conversion. Only through justification has he achieved the correct insight into the actual tragic condition of his pre-Christian existence as Jew. One can estimate sin in all its negative dimensions only after having been set free from its domination. Romans 7 especially describes the not yet converted Paul, Paul under the law, in his hopeless situation confronted with this law. The dark, negative side of such a life was not fully realized by Paul prior to the Damascus event. Paul composed Romans 7 with a Christian view of this pre-Christian existence.”[73]

This allows for interpreting Romans 7:7–9 in a broader sense of Paul’s experience as a pre-Christian Jew,[74] the situation of Israel after they committed to keeping the law (the wandering section of Numbers),[75] and the general state of humanity as captured by Adam (Gen 1–3).[76] Once again, the use of a polyvalent argument allows Paul to reflect on a complex and important theological point in a way that ties together the salvation history of Scripture with the realities of his own world in order to create a picture accessible to Jews and Gentiles alike.

This raises the question of whether the law brought death (Rom 7:13). In spite of the complex history of interpretation of this passage, it seems clear that, first, the law is not to blame for death. Being a catalyst is not the same as being a cause. Second, sin used the law to bring about death. Third, giving the law results in the revelation of sin in all its ugliness and devastation. Fourth, the key subject throughout is the intricate relationship between the law and sin and death.

By the time we get to the final section (Rom 7:14–25), the focus is on the impact of the law—death—rather than the promise of life. What was supposed to bring life actually brought death to Adam, Israel, and Paul. The transition to present tenses may be understood in terms of the constant, failed attempt to obey the law and resulting frustration. The resulting death may lie behind Paul’s plea for deliverance from the “body of death” (v. 24).

If this is the case, then Romans 7:14–25 can be understood as an analysis of the failed attempt by both Israel and Paul to live out the Mosaic law. Throughout the Old Testament, obedience to the law is constantly frustrated by sinful behavior. Paul understands this frustration as the result of the desire provoked by the tenth commandment (which seems to summarize the entire law). This also explains the transition from past tenses to present tenses (v. 13): the death resulting from failure to keep the law has led to the present reality of death in all aspects of life (vv. 14–25).

For Paul, the struggles with keeping the law are more than a personal problem. These struggles represent a problem with the law itself. It was incapable of delivering the promised life, since death retained its grip. This explains Paul’s repeated statement about “sin living in me” (vv. 17, 20). If this is a simple explanation of the current life of all believers, then it seems to disagree with Romans 6,[77] where the believer has now been freed from slavery to sin. Rather, it is a retelling of the problem that Israel, too, is in Adam. “The life of Israel under Torah thus becomes like the life of Adam’s descendants, only more sharply focused—but with salvific intent: Israel’s plight, clinging to Torah for dear life but thereby finding it to be the means of condemnation, has one end only in view. The end in question is condemnation.”[78]

Paul’s plea for rescue (Rom 7:24–25) reveals that salvation is indeed unavailable through the law and can be realized only through Jesus Christ. As pointed out by Watson, in Galatians and Romans Paul’s citations from Deuteronomy are drawn from the concluding section (Deut 27–30). The repeated warnings throughout this section in Deuteronomy tend to lose their “conditional character.” Instead, judgment and exile in Deuteronomy are not just a possibility, but a certainty. If the wanderings captured by Numbers typify Paul’s own experience in Romans 7, then perhaps the certainty of Deuteronomy 30, including both exile and return from exile, also lays the foundation for Paul’s language in Romans 7 about the certainty of death and the need for Christ.[79]

Genuine Life (Romans 8)

Paul now turns from his Adam/Christ analogy begun in Romans 5 to the subject of life. Life was the gift of God that the law wanted to give but could not.

As noted earlier, the covenant revealed that life was to be found in obedience to God and avoidance of pagan practices (Lev 18:1–5). “What is envisaged is a happy life in which a man enjoys God’s bounty of health, children, friends, and prosperity. Keeping the law is the path to divine blessing, to a happy and fulfilled life in the present.”[80] God’s design for his people runs throughout the Old Testament. He desired to bring the Israelites out of slavery so that they would enjoy a land flowing with “milk and honey” (Exod 3:8). As noted by Garrett, this phrase occurs some twenty times and represents the language of promise. “In other words, it is a place where one can enjoy life and not merely survive.”[81]

Similarly, God promised a special relationship with Israel in that they would be his people and he would be their God (Exod 6:7). This reflects movement on God’s part to take the relationship to a new level of intimacy. As Oswald has argued, this is the language of matrimony. He is not simply rescuing them from Egypt. He is making Israel his bride.[82] This is what God intended in taking Israel to the Promised Land.

Paul’s argument thus far has demonstrated that this did not happen. The law was incapable of delivering this promise. However, what the law could not accomplish, God did accomplish through Messiah Jesus (Rom 7:24–25). The result, laid out in Romans 8, is breathtaking.

First, there is no longer any condemnation (Rom 8:1–11). Because of what Christ accomplished on the cross, the Holy Spirit has replaced sin as the indwelling power within God’s people. In 2:1–16 Paul left condemnation hanging over the heads of all people. Now he demonstrates that life in the Spirit has removed this condemnation. “The form of 8:1 is that of a dogmatic thesis, formulated without a verb, drawing the conclusion that believers have been set free from sin and death, which was the burden of the argument in the previous sections of 5:1–7:25. This thesis is elaborated in the rest of this pericope as well as in the final pericope of this proof (8:31–39).”[83]

The question of how is answered in Romans 8:3–4. The “righteous requirement of the law” has been fulfilled in us. Moo has argued that the key to understanding this phrase is found in Romans 8:3 in that the law was not able to free people from the law of sin and death. Therefore, Paul is arguing that freeing people from sin (the new exodus of Romans 6) is exactly what Christ accomplished on the cross. “As our substitute, he satisfied the righteous requirement of the law, living a life of perfect submission to God.”[84] The special life promised by God in Exodus is now becoming a reality.

Second, the inheritance is guaranteed (Rom 8:12–30). Wright argues that this “celebratory description” reveals present Christian experience in that the covenant faithfulness of God comes fully into view. “What God did for Israel at the Red Sea, what God did for Jesus at Easter, God will do not only for those who are in Christ but for the whole created order.”[85] We are now co-heirs with Christ and are to receive all that God has promised, since our legal status has changed because of our adoption (8:14–17).[86]

Third, the relationship with God is now guaranteed (Rom 8:31–39). All that Paul has been pointing to thus far is being realized. God’s deep and abiding love now surfaces with clarity. As Cranfield has summarized, “What distinguishes this passage from the others is . . . the fact that the confidence expressed in it is confidence not in the power of human virtue but in the grace of God in Christ.”[87] What was envisioned throughout the entire Pentateuch is finally being realized in Christ.

Conclusion

To understand Romans, it helps to step back and look at the Pentateuch broadly. In Genesis we find that the God of Israel is Creator of all things, but due to Adam’s sin, the curse was pronounced. Fortunately, that is not the end of the story. God stepped in, because of his love as expressed through his covenant, in the family of Abraham. This underlies Paul’s argument in Romans 1–4, where he explains the fall and impact of sin and reveals God’s redemptive program through Jesus, using Abraham as a key example.

Exodus, Leviticus, and the beginning of Numbers tell the story of the enslavement of Israel, the need for God’s redemption through the Exodus, and the making of the covenant. This underlies Paul’s argument in Romans 5–6 as he explains how slavery to sin occurred, using Adam as a key example, and argues for the release from slavery to sin (what Wright refers to as the new exodus).

Beginning with Numbers 10:11 we see that the hope that obedience to the law would result in life actually led to desire and death.[88] This underlies Paul’s argument in Romans 7, where he wrestles with the law and shows how it brought death to humanity in general and Israel in particular.

Finally, in Deuteronomy we see the covenant being reestablished. More importantly we see that God’s promise has not ended. Paul used this along with Leviticus 18:5 as a background to Romans 8 to argue that what was originally envisaged is finally being realized with the New Covenant and the coming of the Spirit. Thus, the genuine life that has overshadowed the entire story is now realized because of Jesus.[89]

Notes

1. The question of purpose for the epistle has long been debated. My statement here is not to lay that debate to rest but to place Paul’s approach within the scope of the Pentateuch and the theology with which he had been raised. In other words, he had to make sense of the Old Testament in light of Christ.
2. For an excellent introduction to the literature of Second Temple Judaism and its impact on Romans, see Ben C. Blackwell, John K. Goodrich, and Jason Maston, eds., Reading Romans in Context: Paul and Second Temple Judaism (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015).
3. For example, NA28 identifies five direct citations and twenty-six allusions to the Pentateuch in Romans 1–8.
4. “Explicit scriptural citations are simply the visible manifestations of an intertextuality that is ubiquitous and fundamental to Pauline discourse.” Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 17.
5. Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 3. Watson expands his study to include the extrabiblical Jewish writings with which Paul interacted. This article, though, looks only at Paul’s interaction with the Old Testament. Two excellent cautions come from Wright and Witherington. “How we label the various echoes and allusions (typology, allegory, or whatever) is not so important. What matters is how the relevant texts would be understood in the first century, both by Second Temple Jews in general and then by early Christians as they saw everything afresh in the light of Jesus and the Spirit.” N. T. Wright, “Responding to Exile,” in Exile: A Con-versation with N. T. Wright, ed. James M. Scott (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2017), 321. “The problem with too many intertextuality studies is they assume that we are just talking about the interaction between texts, when in fact we may be talking about the interaction between memory (faulty or good), oral traditions (recent or long-standing), and sacred texts.” Ben Witherington, Torah Old and New: Exegesis, Intertextuality, and Hermeneutics (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2018), 228. Even Jewett, who rightly emphasizes Paul’s rhetorical approach, states, “The intensive investigation in recent years of Paul’s use of Scripture has resulted in a consensus about its central role in the argument of Romans. A prominent emphasis in the opening of Romans is that the gospel about Christ was affirmed ‘in the holy scriptures’ (1:2).” Robert Jewett and Roy D. Kotansky, Romans: A Commentary, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 25.
6. N. T. Wright, “Yet the Sun Will Rise Again: Reflections on the Exile and Restoration in Second Temple Judaism, Jesus, Paul, and the Church Today,” in Exile: A Conversation with N. T. Wright, 75.
7. Michael F. Bird, Romans, Story of God Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015), 53.
8. Bruce K. Waltke and Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 82.
9. Victor P. Hamilton, “Genesis: Theology,” in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 5:664.
10. This is the view argued by Barrett when he says, “We may suspect that Adam is somewhere in the background, characteristically hiding himself.” C. K. Barrett, From First Adam to Last: A Study in Pauline Theology, Hewett Lectureship (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1962), 1–2. See also M. D. Hooker, “Adam in Romans I,” New Testament Studies 6 (1960): 297–306; M. D. Hooker, “A Further Note on Romans I,” New Testament Studies 13 (1967): 181–83; James D. G. Dunn, Romans, 2 vols., Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1988), 1:53. Schreiner writes, “The passage as a whole is redolent of the fall of Adam, suggesting a reference to all humanity.” Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, 2nd ed., Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2018), 87. For a dissenting view, see Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1993), 274.
11. Allen Ross and John N. Oswalt, Genesis, Exodus, Cornerstone Biblical Commentary (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2008), 54. Ross argues that God’s purpose was to draw from Adam an explanation as to why he was hiding.
12. The triad of birds, four-footed creatures, and reptiles appears together only in Genesis 1:24–26 (LXX) and Romans 1:23–25.
13. Douglas J. Moo, The Letter to the Romans, 2nd ed., New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018), 117.
14. Moo, Romans, 96–98. He argues, “Moreover, their turn to idolatry is described in language reminiscent of OT descriptions of the Fall, suggesting that all humanity is in view.” Wright argues similarly that “Paul is deliberately, though covertly, retelling the story of Genesis 3.” N. T. Wright, “The Letter to the Romans,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 10 (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 432.
15. Wright, Romans, 433.
16. Moo, Romans, 132.
17. NA28 identifies three citations (Gen 15:5, 6; 17:5) and five allusions (Gen 15:5, 7; 17:11, 17; 22:17) in this section—all from Genesis—and one allusion to Leviticus (Lev 16:13–15).
18. Waltke and Fredricks, Genesis, 193–94.
19. M. A. Seifrid, “Righteousness, Justice, and Justification,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander et al. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000), 740–41; “Δικαιοσύνη,” in New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Moisés Silva (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014), 1:740.
20. Wright, Romans, 474. See also Schreiner, Romans, 199–200.
21. Anders Nygren, Commentary on Romans, trans. Carl C. Rasmussen (Philadel-phia: Muhlenberg, 1949), 157–58.
22. Moo, Romans, 253. See also C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols., International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975–79), 1:214–18; Dunn, Romans, 1:170–71; Wright, Romans, 472–77; Fitzmyer, Romans, 349–50. Jewett refers to this as a “kind of a renewed temple.” Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 285.
23. Nancy Calvert-Koyzis, Paul, Monotheism and the People of God: The Significance of Abraham Traditions for Early Judaism and Christianity, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series (London: T&T Clark International, 2004), 136.
24. For a discussion of the expansion of this idea within Judaism, see Dunn, Romans, 1:213.
25. N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2013), 366. Mitchell has argued further that “the theme of how Yhwh’s mashiah will conquer all opposition and rule the world from Zion must be considered as one of the broad, overarching themes of the Psalms.” David C. Mitchell, The Message of the Psalter: An Eschatological Programme in the Books of Psalms, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 245. Similarly, Ross argues, “When God gives his ‘son’ the kingdom, these nations will be his ‘inheritance.’ Ultimately this will take place when the anointed king receives the kingdom.” Allen P. Ross, Commentary on the Psalms: Volume 1 (1–41), Kregel Exegetical Library (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 209.
26. Wright, Paul, 1008.
27. Nygren, Romans, 81. Cranfield writes, “These verses make the point that the life promised for the man who is righteous by faith is a life characterized by peace with God.” Cranfield, Romans, 1:256.
28. Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 53. Ζάω is used in an eschatological sense six times in Romans 5–8 (6:10 [2x], 11, 13; 8:12, 13) and only once elsewhere in the letter (10:5). Similarly, ζωή occurs eleven times in Romans 5–8 (5:10, 17, 18, 21; 6:4, 22, 23; 7:10; 8:2, 6, 10) and only twice elsewhere in the letter (2:7; 11:15).
29. Dunn, Romans, 1:242.
30. This follows the reasoning put forth by the editorial committee of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament to treat this verb as an indicative rather than a subjunctive. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994), 452.
31. N. T. Wright, Paul for Everyone: Romans, 2 vols. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004), 1:81.
32. Karl Ludwig Schmidt, “ἀγωγή,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 1:131.
33. Wright, Romans, 516.
34. John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes, 2 vols., New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 1:160. For other possible interpretations, see Dunn, Romans, 1:247–48.
35. S. A. Cummins, “Paul, Exile, and the Economy of God,” in Exile: A Conversation with N. T. Wright, 233.
36. It can be no accident that Paul similarly sums up the gospel message in Galatians with a quote from Genesis 12:3; 18:18; 22:18 regarding the promise to Abraham (Gal 3:8) and follows this up with a quote from Habakkuk 2:4 (Gal 3:11).
37. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 374.
38. J. Gordon McConville, “Exodus,” in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 5:601.
39. Ross and Oswalt, Genesis, Exodus, 269–70.
40. “This expression is linked with the Adam/Christ terminology, in which each establishes a dominion.” Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 403.
41. Dunn has pointed out that, within Romans 5–8, the language of ἁμαρτία (“sin”) and θάνατος (“death”) reaches a climax in chapter 6, in contrast to νόμος (“law”), which climaxes in chapter 7. Dunn, Romans, 1:301. Additionally, δοῦλος/δουλόω (“slave,” “to enslave”) is used eight times in reference to being enslaved to sin or righteousness, and ἐλευθερόω (“to be freed” from either legal claims or domination) is used three times in relation to sin. Clearly, Paul is putting forth the argument that the believer has died to sin and therefore been set free from slavery.
42. Watson argues that Paul uses the Exodus story and the miracle at the Red Sea as “testimony to God’s saving action on behalf of the people of Israel. . . . Paul reads them christologically, in order to emphasize the typological application to his Christian readers.” Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 383. However, neither Cranfield, Dunn, nor Moo connects Romans 6 to the Exodus event. Cranfield, Romans, 1:295–97; Dunn, Romans, 1:301–03; Moo, Romans, 375–78. This is the point made by Wright when he states that much of scholarship has “played off Romans 6 against Colossians and Ephesians” rather than the Exodus event. Wright, Paul, 422.
43. Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 443–44. Keener goes further and explains that Paul appeals to Israel’s history because even the Gentile Christians have been grafted into that history. Thus, Paul uses the wilderness narrative to challenge presumptions among his audience. Craig S. Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, New Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 84.
44. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 416.
45. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 404.
46. Wright, Paul, 422.
47. Colin G. Kruse, Paul, the Law, and Justification (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 174.
48. Wright, Romans, 439. Wright refers to this as a “deep-rooted Jewish tradition.”
49. See also Proverbs 24:12 and Psalm 61:13 (LXX).
50. Allen P. Ross, Commentary on the Psalms: Volume 2 (42–89), Kregel Exegetical Library (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2013), 374–75.
51. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 204. While the principle is found throughout the Prophets and Jewish literature, it is also established in the Pentateuch in passages such as Exodus 34:6–7 and 32:33–34.
52. As argued by Watson, Paul’s interplay with Deuteronomy in Galatians regarding the law and its curses underlies his use in Romans. “All who stand within the sphere of the law are under its curse.” This is worked out more fully in Romans 9–11. Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 432.
53. John N. Oswalt, Called to Be Holy: A Biblical Perspective (Anderson, IN: Francis Asbury, 1999), 33.
54. With an allusion to Ezekiel 36:20–22.
55. John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 363.
56. Dunn, Romans, 1:118.
57. Wright, Romans, 445.
58. Thomas R. Schreiner, “Circumcision,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993), 138.
59. Cranfield, Romans, 1:292–93; Dunn, Romans, 1:286. Contra Wright, who argues that it is a result of the law rather than its purpose: “Why would God, giving the Torah, intend trespass to increase?” Wright, Romans, 530.
60. Cranfield, Romans, 1:292–93.
61. Even Jewett, who engages the various theories of this highly contested section, provides the following assessment of Jan Lambrecht’s approach: “While I would prefer a more nuanced and more historically grounded formulation that avoids a psychological theory of covetousness, Lambrecht selects the most plausible of the basic approaches to the enigma of Rom 7.” Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 443. With this in mind, my proposal for how to understand Romans 7 follows Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 354–411 and Jan Lambrecht, The Wretched “I” and Its Liberation: Paul in Romans 7 and 8, Louvain Theological and Pastoral Monographs (Leuven: Peeters, 1992).
62. Dunn, Romans, 1:301.
63. Cranfield, Romans, 1:331.
64. Wright, Paul, 1015. As Cranfield states, “The implication . . . seems always to be that, if the people addressed really know—the assumption is that they surely must—the truth which is about to be stated . . . then they ought to recognize the truth.” Cranfield, Romans, 1:332.
65. Oswalt, Called to Be Holy, 29.
66. Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 253.
67. Allen P. Ross, Holiness to the Lord: A Guide to the Exposition of the Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 344.
68. While God does not punish the Israelites for faithlessness in Exodus, he does so in Numbers. This is most likely because they have now committed themselves to the covenant. In other words, the conditional promise of life found in Leviticus has now been overtaken by death. Yet, in spite of the sin of Israel, God continues to show himself faithful by his continued care throughout the wanderings. Roy Gane, Leviticus, Numbers: From Biblical Text . . . to Contemporary Life, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 472; Timothy R. Ashley, The Book of Numbers, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 9; Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1976), 37.
69. “All of those enlisted according to the military conscription census of 1:1–46, indeed every one of those recruited to conquer the land but who were now guilty of rejecting the generous geographical gift, would die.” R. Dennis Cole, Numbers, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 236.
70. Cole, Numbers, 55. “In the rebellion cycles judgment or death or plague is meted upon those who rebel and reject God’s law.”
71. As Milgrom observes, “In Exodus, God does not punish Israel for its murmuring; in Numbers, He does so consistently.” Milgrom says that “there can only be one explanation”: the murmurings in the Exodus event are pre-Sinai, whereas those in Numbers are post-Sinai. “Before Israel accepted the covenant it was not responsible for its violation; indeed, it could claim ignorance of its stipulations.” See Jacob Milgrom, Numbers: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation, JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1990), xvi. Watson further argues that Deuteronomy 30:15 underlies Paul’s argument. “The first part of Paul’s analysis is determined by the life/death polarity (Rom. 7.7–12), whereas the second part is determined by the good/evil polarity (7.13–25).” Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 507.
72. Wright argues that Paul weaves together the story of Israel at Sinai with the story of Adam in the garden. The commandment that was intended to bring life was the Torah itself (cf. Lev 18:5). This, then, is the story of Israel under Torah and explains Romans 5:20 more fully. “The arrival of Torah precipitates Israel into recapitulating the sin of Adam.” Wright, Paul, 1014.
73. Lambrecht, The Wretched “I,” 86. Lambrecht’s proposal led Jewett to state that “a path leading to a potential resolution was opened by Jan Lambrecht.” Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 443. Fitzmyer argues similarly when he states, “In attempting to understand what Paul meant, it is important to keep his perspective in mind, which is that of unregenerate humanity faced with the Mosaic law—but as seen by a Christian.” Fitzmyer, Romans, 465.
74. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 440–51.
75. Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 354–411.
76. Cranfield, Romans, 1:347–51.
77. As well as Galatians 5:16–25, where the answer is to live by the Spirit. This solution is noticeably absent from Romans 7.
78. Wright, Paul, 1017. “There is nothing wrong with being Israel; nothing wrong with Torah. What is wrong is ‘sin.’ ”
79. Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 416–27; Wright, “Yet the Sun Will Rise Again,” 70.
80. Wenham, Leviticus, 253.
81. Duane A. Garrett, A Commentary on Exodus, Kregel Exegetical Library (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2014), 203.
82. Ross and Oswalt, Genesis, Exodus, 329–30.
83. Jewett and Kotansky, Romans, 476, italics added.
84. Moo, Romans, 506.
85. Wright, Romans, 590; cf. Wright, “Yet the Sun Will Rise Again,” 62.
86. Moo, Romans, 518–20.
87. Cranfield, Romans, 1:435.
88. Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 380.
89. “Romans 4 tells the story of Abraham; after the wider perspective of Romans 5, where Paul surveys the entire sweep of God’s purposes from the highest possible point, we resume the story in Romans 6 by coming through the water, by which the slaves are freed, arriving at Sinai in Romans 7 and grappling with the question of Torah, constructing the tabernacle in 8.9–11 (the ‘indwelling spirit’), continuing the journey through the wilderness in 8.12–16 and glimpsing the promised ‘inheritance’ in 8.17–30. This sequence, I suggest, cannot be accidental. It is part of the conscious and deliberate structuring which Paul has given to this, one of his most obviously carefully composed passages.” Wright, Paul, 422.