罗马书第七章

引言 - 脱离律法

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (1.婚約之喻（七1〜6）)

保羅在六14所說的話，具有革命性的含意。如果因爲「你們不在律法之下，乃在恩典之下」，「罪」就「必不能作你們的主」；那麼「在律法之下」就是受罪的轄制，而「在恩典之下」，就不僅是從罪的領域中得釋放，也是脫離律法的統治了。對保羅而言，在「恩典之下」是隨從聖靈而活；「在律法之下」則是「順從肉體活著」（八5、13）151。

保羅不認爲律法有錯——當然，因爲它是神的律法。它禁止罪行，說明義行；以色列中屬神的人都知道，律法可以防範罪。有位詩人曾說：「愛稱律法的人有大平安，什麼都不能使他們絆腳」（詩一一九165）；另一位說：「耶和華的律法全備，能甦醒人心」（詩十九7）。

p 134 可是保羅的說法不同，他是根據自己的經驗而言。神的律法本身不僅宣吿了神的旨意，也表明了祂的性情，「是聖潔、公義、良善的」（七12）。但律法所運行的對象——人的肉體——有問題（八3）；人以爲宗敎就是遵行律法，只要盡力履行律法的要求，「按規矩來」，就可以蒙神悅納。

保羅在六14所說的話，具有革命性的含意。如果因爲「你們不在律法之下，乃在恩典之下」，「罪」就「必不能作你們的主」；那麼「在律法之下」就是受罪的轄制，而「在恩典之下」，就不僅是從罪的領域中得釋放，也是脫離律法的統治了。對保羅而言，在「恩典之下」是隨從聖靈而活；「在律法之下」則是「順從肉體活著」（八5、13）151。

保羅不認爲律法有錯——當然，因爲它是神的律法。它禁止罪行，說明義行；以色列中屬神的人都知道，律法可以防範罪。有位詩人曾說：「愛稱律法的人有大平安，什麼都不能使他們絆腳」（詩一一九165）；另一位說：「耶和華的律法全備，能甦醒人心」（詩十九7）。

p 134 可是保羅的說法不同，他是根據自己的經驗而言。神的律法本身不僅宣吿了神的旨意，也表明了祂的性情，「是聖潔、公義、良善的」（七12）。但律法所運行的對象——人的肉體——有問題（八3）；人以爲宗敎就是遵行律法，只要盡力履行律法的要求，「按規矩來」，就可以蒙神悅納。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (1.婚約之喻（七1〜6）)

在羅馬書本段中，他比別處更詳盡地吿訴我們，他如何發現律法不足以讓人在神面前立於義的地位。前面他曾經暗示過這一點：「律法本是叫人知罪」（三20）——也許不僅是客觀地知曉：罪便是違背律法，也包括：使罪的意識覺醒過來。不僅如此，保羅更無法忘記他畢生最大的罪——逼迫敎會——乃是直接受他效忠律法所激發的（加一13〜14；腓三6上）。就他的經驗而言，脫離罪與脫離律法緊緊相連。在第六章裏，他以奴隸與主人的關係說明脫離罪的情形，現在，在七1〜6中，他用妻子與丈夫的關係說明脫離律法的情形。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (C. Freedom from Bondage to the Law (7:1–25))

Romans 7 is one of the most famous chapters in the Bible. Scholars, preachers, and laypeople alike are fascinated by Paul’s vivid description of human struggle and frustration in vv. 7–25. Along with this fascination has come vigorous debate over the identity of the person depicted in these verses—unregenerate Paul, regenerate Paul, the back-sliding Christian, and the like. These various identifications have in turn given rise to—or, often, been dictated by—significantly different theologies of sanctification. However, for all our legitimate interest in these questions, we must start our interpretation of this chapter on the right foot by insisting that anthropology—the identity and situation of the “I” of vv. 7–25—is a subordinate issue in Rom. 7.

The main topic is the Mosaic law. Paul makes two basic points. First, using the analogy of marriage, Paul argues that a person’s bondage to the law must be p 435 severed in order that he or she may be put into a new relationship with Christ (7:1–6). This, the positive teaching of the chapter, gives rise to questions about the origin and nature of the law. These Paul answers in 7:7–25, where he shows that the law is from God, but that it has nevertheless become the unwitting tool of sin, being used to confirm and imprison in death. Despite its divine origin, the law can neither justify nor sanctify. “What the law could not do because it was weakened by the flesh” (8:3a) succinctly sums up this second major point in Rom. 7.

the assertion of 6:14 and 15 that the believer is no longer “under the law.” Indeed, this statement is the immediate occasion for the chapter, as Paul explains what it means no longer to be “under the law,” how this transfer from the law’s dominion has been accomplished, and why it was necessary.

罗马书（第二版）（C. 摆脱律法的束缚（7:1-25））

罗马书 7 是圣经中最著名的章节之一。学者、传教士和普通民众都对保罗在 7-25 节中对人类挣扎和挫折的生动描述着迷。伴随着这种着迷而来的是对这些经文中描绘的人的身份的激烈争论——未重生的保罗、重生的保罗、倒退的基督徒等等。这些不同的身份认同反过来又产生了——或者常常是由——截然不同的圣化神学决定的。然而，尽管我们对这些问题有着合理的兴趣，但我们必须从正确的角度开始对这一章的解释，坚持认为人类学——7-25 节中“我”的身份和处境——是罗马书 7 中的一个从属问题。

主要话题是摩西律法。保罗提出了两个基本观点。首先，保罗用婚姻的类比，论证说一个人必须摆脱律法的束缚，才能与基督建立新的关系（7:1-6）。这是本章的积极教导，引发了关于律法起源和性质的问题。保罗在 7:7-25 中回答了这些问题，他表明律法来自上帝，但它却不知不觉地成为了罪恶的工具，被用来确认和监禁死亡。尽管律法起源于上帝，但它既不能使人称义，也不能使人圣洁。“律法因肉体软弱，有所不能行的”（8:3a）简洁地总结了罗马书 7 中的第二个要点。6:14 和 15 断言信徒不再“在律法之下”。事实上，这句话是本章的直接契机，因为保罗解释了不再“受律法约束”的含义，这种脱离律法管辖的转移是如何实现的，以及为什么这是必要的。

罗马书 6：14 CUV

14 罪必不能作你们的主；因你们不在律法之下，乃在恩典之下。

7章主要的话题是律法和律法的功用：

如何脱离律法的管辖和为何要脱离律法的管辖？

婚姻的类比论证人必须摆脱律法的约束才能和基督建立新的关系

律法来自上帝但却成为罪的工具导致死亡

v1-6 婚姻的比喻

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (1.婚約之喻（七1〜6）)

他說，婚姻是一輩子的關係。只要丈夫活著，妻子就受他約束；他在世的日子，妻子若離開他，親近另一個男人，就有淫婦的醜名。但丈夫若死了，她就可以成爲另一個人的妻子，而不致遭人非議了。死亡使婚姻關係終止，同樣，死亡也使人與律法的關係中止。保羅應用這個比喩，卻把狀況顚倒過來。在基督裏的信徒相當於妻子，律法相當於她的丈夫，但在比喩中是丈夫死了，而在應用中不是律法死了，乃是信徒死了；信徒與基督同死——然而信徒也同樣不再受律法的捆綁，而能自由地歸於基督。簡言之，保羅的意思即爲：正如死亡中止了夫妻的關係，同樣，死亡——信徒與基督的同死——也中止了信徒從前順服律法的關係，現在他有自由可與基督聯合了。他從前與律法聯合時，不能結出義的果子，但現在與基督聯合，卻可以結出豐盛的義果。罪和死是他與律法聯合的結果；他的新聯合卻帶來義和生命；因爲（正如保羅在別處所言）：「字句是叫人死，聖靈是叫人活」 p 136 （林後三6）。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (1.婚約之喻（七1〜6）)

那因律法而生的惡慾，就在我們肢體中發動，以致結成死亡的果子。律法如何會生惡慾，7〜13節將澄淸。「死亡的果子」是由惡行構成，其「結局」就是死亡，參六21。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (1.婚約之喻（七1〜6）)

不按著儀文的舊樣。直譯爲：「不在字句的舊樣式中」（「字句」指「文字規條」之意，參林後三6）。保羅看自己成爲基督徒之前的生活，是謹守律法的猶太人，順服外在的規條。但現在，聖靈在他裏面供應生活的原則，從前律法則是從外面供應，而且並不完全。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (C. Freedom from Bondage to the Law (7:1–25))

7:1–6 repeats with respect to the law many of the same points that were made in Rom. 6 with respect to sin. As in chap. 6 the believer has “died to sin” (v. 2), and thus been “freed from it” (vv. 18, 22) so that it no longer “rules” (v. 14a), so in 7:1–6 the believer has been “put to death to the law” (v. 4) and thus been “freed from it” (v. 6) so that it no longer “rules” (v. 1). And as in chap. 6 this freedom from sin also means “serving” righteousness, or God, so that “fruit” pleasing to God may be produced (vv. 18–22), so in 7:1–6 freedom from the law means being joined to Christ in a new “service” so that “fruit” pleasing to God may be forthcoming (vv. 4–6). Paul gives two parallel responses to the suggestion that Christians under the age of grace can sin with impunity

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

It has four parts. In v. 1, the general principle on which the teaching of the paragraph is based is given: death severs one’s bondage to the law. This is the case in marriage, where the death of a spouse sets the other spouse “free from” the law that brands a second marriage as adulterous (vv. 2–3). This general principle is applied to Christian experience in v. 4, which is the key verse in the paragraph; Christians, in dying with Christ, have suffered a death that severs their bondage to the law and that makes possible their new relationship with Jesus Christ. Then, in vv. 5–6, Paul shows the need for, and results of, this “transfer of masters” by contrasting the situation of people “in the flesh,” in whose case the law aids and abets sin, with the situation of people who are released from the law and serve in “newness of Spirit.”

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

The focus on the law that now begins makes it almost certain that Paul is harking back to his assertion in 6:14b (see v. 15) that Christians are not “under law.” Paul makes this assertion almost in passing, and it cries out for elaboration—which he now gives.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

2–3 Paul illustrates this general principle with an allusion to the marriage relationship. Perhaps thinking of provisions in the Mosaic law, Paul notes that “the woman who is married642 is bound by the law643 to her husband as long as he lives.” But if her husband dies, she is “released from644 the law relating to her husband.”645 In v. 3, Paul spells out the implications646 of this situation: as long as her husband lives, the woman “will be called”647 an adulteress if she “becomes joined to” (i.e., marries648) another man.649 On the other hand, were her husband to die, she would be “free from the law.” This “law” refers back to “the law relating to her husband” in v. 2, but Paul may have chosen to use an unqualified reference in order to set up his application more effectively. Since her husband’s death frees her from the law, the woman will not be labeled an adulteress if she marries again.650

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

4 In this verse, the center of the paragraph, Paul states an inference654 drawn from vv. 1–3. This inference depends not only on the principle stated in v. 1 but also on the illustration and expansion of that principle in vv. 2–3.655 We might paraphrase: “Recognizing the validity of the principle that ‘death severs one’s bondage to the law,’ you believers can understand that, like this woman, you have through a death been severed from your bondage to the law and been enabled to be joined to another.” “You have been put to death to the law” is reminiscent of the main point of chap. 6: “we have died to sin” (vv. 2 and 11).656 What does this mean?

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

Throughout chaps. 5–8, Paul focuses not so much on the condemnation that comes when the law is disobeyed—“the curse of the law” (Gal. 3:13)—as on the failure of the law to deal with the problem of sin—“the inability of the law” (Rom. 8:3a). Thus, in vv. 5–6, where Paul elaborates v. 4, the law is presented as p 441 not only failing to deal with sin but as actually stimulating sin in the person who is “bound” to it. That law which Jews, not unnaturally, considered a great bulwark against sin is actually, according to Paul, an instrument that sin has used to produce more sin (vv. 5, 8) and to make the sin problem even worse than it was without the law (vv. 9–11, 13). This suggests that, as in 6:14, Paul in 7:4 is viewing the law as a power of the old age to which the person apart from Christ is bound. The underlying conception is again salvation-historical, as is suggested also by the use of the “letter”/“Spirit” contrast in v. 6. Just as, then, the believer “dies to sin” in order to “live for God” (chap. 6), so he or she is “put to death to the law” in order to be joined to Christ. Both images depict the transfer of the believer from the old realm to the new. As long as sin reigns, God and righteousness cannot; and neither, as long as the law reigns, can Christ and the Spirit.

For to be “dead to the law,” as we have seen, means to be delivered from the power-sphere of the law. It does not necessarily mean that the believer has nothing more to do with the law. Thus, positively, as a witness (1:2; 3:21) the law continues to teach the believer much that is indispensable about God’s holiness and the holiness he expects of his people.

Paul views the Jewish experience with the Mosaic law as paradigmatic for the experience of all people with “law.”

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

p 444 5 With his now-familiar “when … now” (vv. 5–6) contrast between the pre-Christian and Christian situations, Paul explains678 why it is necessary that believers be freed from the domain of the law. In describing the person apart from Christ as being “in the flesh [sarx],” Paul means, in effect, that the non-Christian is “enveloped in,” and hence controlled by, narrowly human, this-world principles and values.679 We must again understand Paul’s language against the background of his salvation-historical framework. Paul pictures sarx as another power of the old realm, set in opposition to the Spirit—with which sarx is always contrasted in chaps. 7–8.680 As both Rom. 8:9 and the “when” in this verse make clear, this situation is an objective one in which all non-Christians find themselves and from which all Christians are delivered in Christ.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

the “sinful passions” are those desires to disobey God and his law that are, paradoxically, exacerbated by the law itself. As Paul explains more fully in 7:7–11, the law, in setting forth God’s standard, arouses sins by stimulating human beings’ innate rebelliousness against God. In addition—although this idea is not so evident in this verse—the law increases the seriousness of sin by branding sinful failure as violation of God’s positive decree.

Although Paul has departed from his usual use of the singular “sin,” the remainder of this verse shows that he continues to characterize sin/sins as an active force: the sinful passions aroused by the law were continually “working”686 in the “members”687 of the Roman Christians before their conversion. And death—in all its dimensions—was the result.688

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. Released from the Law, Joined to Christ (7:1–6))

6 Because Paul’s focus is on the law, he postpones what would be the expected contrast between being “in the flesh” and being “in the Spirit” until chap. 8 in order to emphasize once again the Christian’s deliverance from the law (v. 6) and to explore the implications of his teaching for the law itself (vv. 7–25): “But now we have been released from689 the law, dying to that in which we were held captive.”690 p 446 “That in which” the non-Christian is “held captive” is, as the parallel with v. 4 makes clear, the law.691 Believers, however, have been set free from this regime of the law.692

While, however, still preoccupied with the law, Paul knows where he wants to go eventually in his argument, and so he announces it in the last part of this verse: “so that we might serve in newness of the Spirit693 and not in oldness of letter.”694 This is the second time in Romans that Paul has used the letter/Spirit contrast (2:27–29). As in this earlier text, the antithesis is not between the misunderstanding or misuse of the law and the Spirit,695 nor even, at least basically, between the outer demand and the inner disposition to obey,696 but between the Old Covenant and the New, the old age and the new.697 The essence of the old, or Mosaic, covenant, is the law as an external, written demand of God. “Serving” in the old state created by the “letter” meant not, as the Jews thought, a curbing of sin, but a stimulating of the power of sin—and “death” is p 447 the end-product of sin (v. 5). Now, though, the believer, released from bondage to the law, can serve in the new condition created by God’s Spirit, a condition that brings life (2 Cor. 3:6) and fruit pleasing to God (6:22–23). Before Paul goes on to develop the nature of “serving in the Spirit” (Rom. 8), he pauses to explain further the condition of “serving in oldness of letter,” and of being “in the flesh” where the law arouses sinful passions (7:7–25).

罗马书（第二版）（C. 摆脱律法的束缚（7:1-25））7:1-6 重复了罗马书 6 中关于律法的许多相同观点。正如第 6 章中所述，信徒已经“死于罪孽”（第 2 节），因此“摆脱了罪孽”（第 18、22 节），因此罪孽不再“统治”（第 14a 节），因此在 7:1-6 中，信徒已经“死于律法”（第 4 节），因此“摆脱了罪孽”（第 6 节），因此罪孽不再“统治”（第 1 节）。并且正如第 6 章中所述，信徒已经“死于律法”（第 4 节），因此“摆脱了罪孽”（第 6 节），因此罪孽不再“统治”（第 1 节）。 6 这种脱离罪的自由也意味着“侍奉”公义或上帝，以便产生令上帝喜悦的“果实”（第 18-22 节），因此在 7:1-6 中，脱离律法意味着以新的“侍奉”与基督联合，以便产生令上帝喜悦的“果实”（第 4-6 节）。保罗对恩典时代以下的基督徒可以不受惩罚地犯罪的说法给出了两个平行的回应

它有四个部分。在第 1 节中，给出了本段教导所基于的一般原则：死亡切断了一个人对律法的束缚。婚姻就是这种情况，配偶的死亡使另一方配偶“脱离”了将第二次婚姻定为通奸的法律（第 2-3 节）。这一普遍原则在第 4 节中适用于基督徒的经历，这是本段的关键经文；基督徒与基督同死，经历了一场死亡，切断了他们对律法的束缚，使他们与耶稣基督建立新的关系成为可能。然后，在第 5-6 节中，保罗通过对比“肉体”的人的情况（在这种情况下，律法助长和怂恿罪恶）与从律法中解脱出来并在“精神的新样”中服务的人的情况，展示了这种“主人转移”的必要性和结果。

罗马书（第二版）（1. 从律法中解脱出来，与基督联合（7:1-6））

现在开始关注律法，几乎可以肯定保罗正在回想起他在 6:14b（见第 15 节）中的断言，即基督徒不在“律法之下”。保罗几乎是顺便说出了这一断言，它迫切需要详细说明——他现在给出了详细说明。

罗马书（第二版）（1. 脱离律法，与基督联合（7:1-6））

2-3 保罗以婚姻关系为例说明了这一普遍原则。保罗也许是想到了摩西律法的规定，他指出“已婚的女人642 只要丈夫活着，就受律法643 的约束。”但如果丈夫死了，她就“脱离了644 有关丈夫的律法”。645 在第 3 节中，保罗详细说明了这种情况的含义646：只要丈夫活着，如果女人“与另一个男人联合”（即嫁给648），她“就会被称为”647 淫妇。649 另一方面，如果丈夫死了，她就“脱离了律法”。这个“律法”指的是第 2 节中的“有关她丈夫的律法”，但保罗可能选择使用无条件的引用，以便更有效地建立他的应用。由于她丈夫的死使她摆脱了律法，如果这个女人再婚，她就不会被贴上淫妇的标签。650

《罗马书》（第二版）（1. 从律法中解脱出来，与基督联合（7:1-6））

4 在这节经文中，即段落的中心，保罗陈述了一个从第 1-3 节得出的推论654。这个推论不仅取决于第 1 节中所述的原则，还取决于第 2-3 节中对该原则的说明和扩展。655 我们可以这样解释：“认识到‘死亡切断一个人对律法的束缚’这一原则的有效性，你们信徒可以理解，就像这个女人一样，你已经通过死亡摆脱了对律法的束缚，并能够与另一个人联合。” “你们已经死于律法”让人想起第 6 章的要点：“我们已经死于罪孽”（第 2 和 11 节）。656 这是什么意思？

在第 5-8 章中，保罗关注的重点不是违反律法所带来的谴责——“律法的咒诅”（加拉太书 3:13），而是律法未能解决罪的问题——“律法的无能”（罗马书 8:3a）。因此，在第 5-6 节中，保罗详细阐述了第 4 节，他指出律法不仅未能解决罪的问题，而且实际上还刺激了受律法“束缚”的人犯罪。根据保罗的说法，犹太人自然而然地认为律法是抵御罪的强大堡垒，但实际上，罪恶利用律法来制造更多的罪（第 5、8 节），使罪的问题比没有律法时更加严重（第 9-11、13 节）。这表明，正如在 6:14 中一样，保罗在 7:4 中将律法视为旧时代的力量，没有基督的人就被束缚于此。其基本概念再次是救赎历史的，第 6 节中“字句”/“精神”的对比也表明了这一点。正如信徒“死于罪孽”是为了“为上帝而活”（第 6 章），因此他或她“死于律法”是为了与基督联合。这两个形象都描绘了信徒从旧领域转移到新领域的过程。只要罪恶统治，上帝和正义就无法统治；只要律法统治，基督和圣灵也无法统治。

因为正如我们所见，“死于律法”意味着从律法的权力领域中解脱出来。这并不一定意味着信徒与律法没有任何关系。因此，从积极的角度看，律法作为见证（1:2；3:21），继续教导信徒许多关于上帝的圣洁以及他对子民所期望的圣洁的必不可少的知识。

保罗认为犹太人对摩西律法的体验是所有人对“律法”体验的典范。

罗马书（第二版）（1. 从律法中解脱出来，与基督联合（7:1-6））

p 444 5 保罗用他现在熟悉的“当……现在”（第 5-6 节）对比了基督教前和基督教的情况，解释了678 为什么信徒必须从律法的领域中解脱出来。保罗将基督之外的人描述为“在肉体 [sarx] 中”，实际上的意思是，非基督徒“被狭隘的人类世俗原则和价值观所包围”，因此被其控制。679 我们必须再次根据保罗的救赎历史框架来理解他的语言。保罗将 sarx 描绘为旧领域的另一种力量，与圣灵对立——sarx 总是在第 7-8 章中与圣灵形成对比。680 正如罗马书 8:9 和这节经文中的“何时”所表明的那样，这种情况是客观的，所有非基督徒都会发现自己处于这种情况，而所有基督徒都会在基督里摆脱这种情况。

《罗马书》（第二版）（1. 从律法中解脱出来，加入基督（7:1-6））

“罪恶的激情”是那些不服从上帝和他的律法的欲望，矛盾的是，这些欲望因律法本身而加剧。正如保罗在 7:7-11 中更详细地解释的那样，律法在阐述上帝的标准时，通过刺激人类天生对上帝的叛逆而引发罪恶。此外——尽管这个想法在这节经文中并不那么明显——律法通过将罪恶的失败标记为违反上帝的积极法令，增加了罪恶的严重性。

虽然保罗已经不再像往常一样使用单数“罪”，但本节的其余部分表明他继续将罪恶描述为一种积极的力量：律法所激发的罪恶激情在罗马基督徒皈依之前一直在他们的“成员”687 中“工作”686。而死亡——从各方面来说——就是其结果。688

《罗马书》（第二版）（1. 从律法中解脱，与基督联合（7:1-6））

6 因为保罗的重点是律法，他将“在肉体中”和“在灵里”之间的预期对比推迟到第 8 章，以便再次强调基督徒从律法中解脱出来（第 6 节），并探讨他的教导对律法本身的影响（第 7-25 节）：“但现在我们已经从律法中解脱出来了，已经死于束缚我们的东西。”690 第 446 页 非基督徒“被束缚”的东西，正如与第 4 节的平行所表明的那样，就是律法。691 然而，信徒已经从这种法律制度中解脱出来。692

然而，尽管保罗仍然专注于律法，但他知道自己最终想要在论证中达到什么目的，因此他在本节的最后一部分宣布了这一点：“叫我们服事主，要按着心灵的新样693，不按着仪文的旧样694。”这是保罗在罗马书中第二次使用文字/心灵的对比（2:27-29）。与之前的经文一样，对立的不是对律法和圣灵的误解或误用695，甚至至少从根本上来说，也不是外在要求和内在服从倾向696，而是旧约与新约、旧时代与新时代697。旧约或摩西之约的本质是律法，是上帝外在的书面要求。在“字句”所创造的旧状态下“服事”并不意味着像犹太人所想的那样遏制罪恶，而是刺激罪恶的力量——而“死亡”是罪恶的最终产物（第 5 节）。然而，现在，从律法的束缚中解放出来的信徒可以在上帝的灵所创造的新条件下服事，这种条件带来生命（哥林多后书 3:6）和讨上帝喜悦的果实（6:22-23）。在保罗继续阐述“在圣灵中服事”的本质（罗马书 8）之前，他停下来进一步解释“在旧字句中服事”的条件，以及律法激起罪恶激情的“在肉体中”的条件（7:7-25）。

v1：死亡切断了律法对一个人的束缚

v2-3：配偶的死亡使另一方配偶脱离了将第二次婚姻定为淫乱的规条

v4：基督徒与基督同死，经历了一场死亡，切断了他们对律法的束缚

v5-6：对比肉体和灵性表达转换主人的必要性和结果

2-3 保罗以婚姻关系为例说明了这一普遍原则。保罗也许是想到了摩西律法的规定，他指出“已婚的女人642 只要丈夫活着，就受律法643 的约束。”但如果丈夫死了，她就“脱离了644 有关丈夫的律法”。645 在第 3 节中，保罗详细说明了这种情况的含义646：只要丈夫活着，如果女人“与另一个男人联合”（即嫁给648），她“就会被称为”647 淫妇。649 另一方面，如果丈夫死了，她就“脱离了律法”。这个“律法”指的是第 2 节中的“有关她丈夫的律法”，但保罗可能选择使用无条件的引用，以便更有效地建立他的应用。由于她丈夫的死使她摆脱了律法，如果这个女人再婚，她就不会被贴上淫妇的标签。

4“认识到‘死亡切断一个人对律法的束缚’这一原则的有效性，你们信徒可以理解，就像这个女人一样，你已经通过死亡摆脱了对律法的束缚，并能够与另一个人联合。

在第 5-6 节中，保罗详细阐述了第 4 节，他指出律法不仅未能解决罪的问题，而且实际上还刺激了受律法“束缚”的人犯罪。根据保罗的说法，犹太人自然而然地认为律法是抵御罪的强大堡垒，但实际上，罪恶利用律法来制造更多的罪（第 5、8 节），使罪的问题比没有律法时更加严重（第 9-11、13 节）。这表明，正如在 6:14 中一样，保罗在 7:4 中将律法视为旧时代的力量，没有基督的人就被束缚于此。

第 6 节中“字句”/“精神”的对比也表明了这一点。正如信徒“死于罪孽”是为了“为上帝而活”（第 6 章），因此他或她“死于律法”是为了与基督联合。这两个形象都描绘了信徒从旧领域转移到新领域的过程。只要罪恶统治，上帝和正义就无法统治；只要律法统治，基督和圣灵也无法统治。保罗认为犹太人对摩西律法的体验是所有人对“律法”体验的典范。

“律法而生的恶欲”是那些不服从上帝和他的律法的欲望，矛盾的是，这些欲望因律法本身而加剧。正如保罗在 7:7-11 中更详细地解释的那样，律法在阐述上帝的标准时，通过刺激人类天生对上帝的叛逆而引发罪恶。此外——尽管这个想法在这节经文中并不那么明显——律法通过将罪恶的失败标记为违反上帝的积极法令，增加了罪恶的严重性。

v7-25 律法和罪的关系

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (2. The History and Experience of Israel under the Law (7:7–25))

In 7:1–6 Paul teaches that people must be released from the bondage of the Mosaic law in order to be joined to Christ because life under the law brings forth only sin and death. This section brings to a climax the negative assessment of the law that is such a persistent motif in Rom. 1–6 and thereby also raises with renewed urgency perhaps the most serious theological issue with which Paul (and early Christianity generally) had to grapple: How can God’s law have become so negative a force in the history of salvation? How could God’s law be an instrument of sin and death? This dilemma can, of course, be avoided if the divine origin of the law is denied, and this is the route followed by Marcion in the second century. But the rejection of the OT and a great deal of the NT required by this simple and superficially attractive cutting of the theological Gordian knot exposes this solution as the heresy it is. And despite Marcion’s appeal to Paul, it is certainly not Paul’s solution. This he makes clear in 7:7–25.

The law, Paul affirms, is “God’s law” (v. 22) and is “good” (vv. 12, 16), “holy” (v. 12), “just” (v. 12), and “spiritual” (v. 14). How, then, could the law come to have so negative an effect? How could the good law of God “work wrath” (4:15), “increase the trespass” (5:20), and “arouse sinful passions” (7:5)? Paul explains in 7:7–25, pointing to sin as the culprit that has used the law as a bridgehead to produce more sin and death (7:7–12) and to the sin-dominated human being, whose own weakness and internal division allow sin to gain the mastery, despite the goodness of the law (7:13–25). Romans 7:7–25, therefore, has two specific purposes: to vindicate the law from any suggestion that it is, in itself, “sinful” or evil; and to show how, despite this, the law has come to be a negative force in the history of salvation.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (2. The History and Experience of Israel under the Law (7:7–25))

Both major sections of 7:7–25 (7–12, 13–25) follow the dialogical style with which we have become so familiar in Romans: question—emphatic rejection (“by no means!”)—explanation. Paul uses this format in a variety of ways in Romans, but in this case it marks the whole section as something of an excursus. The main line of development proceeds from 7:6b—“serving in p 449 newness of Spirit”—to chap. 8, with its focus on the Spirit in the new age.701 To be sure, there are points of contact between 7:7–25 and chap. 8,702 but these are confined to the first few verses of chap. 8. In labeling 7:7–25 a parenthesis, we must also stress that we mean by this not that 7:7–25 is an unimportant aside but that it is a detour from the main road of Paul’s argument. No one could dispute the importance of 7:7–25 for Paul’s theology of the law and of human nature.

We may divide this section into two major parts, v. 13 being the bridge between the two. In 7:7–12 Paul uses a narrative to show how sin has used the law to bring death.703 Verses 14–25, on the other hand, use present tense verbs to describe the constant battle between the “mind,” which agrees with God’s law, and the “flesh,” or the “members,” which succumb to “the law of sin.” The result, then, is that the law of God, which aroused sin, is impotent to break the power of sin.

《罗马书》（第二版）（2. 律法之下以色列的历史和经验（7:7–25））

在 7:1–6 中，保罗教导人们必须摆脱摩西律法的束缚才能与基督联合，因为律法之下的生活只会带来罪恶和死亡。本节将对律法的负面评价推向高潮，这是罗马书 1-6 中一个持续的主题，因此也再次迫切地提出了保罗（以及早期基督教）必须努力解决的最严重的神学问题：上帝的律法怎么会在救赎历史中成为如此消极的力量？上帝的律法怎么会成为罪恶和死亡的工具？当然，如果否认律法的神圣起源，就可以避免这种困境，而这正是马西昂在二世纪所走的路线。但是，这个简单而表面上有吸引力的神学难题的解决需要拒绝旧约和大量新约，这暴露了这种解决方案是异端邪说。尽管马吉安向保罗呼吁，但这肯定不是保罗的解决方案。他在 7:7-25 中明确表示了这一点。

保罗肯定，律法是“上帝的律法”（第 22 节），是“好的”（第 12、16 节）、“神圣的”（第 12 节）、“公正的”（第 12 节）和“属灵的”（第 14 节）。那么，律法怎么会产生如此负面的影响呢？上帝善良的律法怎么会“惹动愤怒”（4:15）、“增加过犯”（5:20）和“激起罪恶的激情”（7:5）？保罗在 7:7-25 中解释道，罪是利用律法作为桥头堡制造更多罪恶和死亡的罪魁祸首（7:7-12），而受罪支配的人类，尽管律法是善的，但其自身的软弱和内部分裂却让罪占据了主导地位（7:13-25）。因此，罗马书 7:7-25 有两个具体目的：为律法辩护，使其免受任何暗示其本身是“有罪的”或邪恶的暗示；并表明尽管如此，律法如何成为救赎历史中的负面力量。

《罗马书》（第二版）（2. 律法下的以色列的历史和经验（7:7-25））

7:7-25 的两个主要部分（7-12、13-25）都遵循了我们在罗马书中非常熟悉的对话风格：问题 — 强调拒绝（“绝不！”） — 解释。保罗在罗马书中以各种方式使用这种格式，但在这种情况下，它将整个部分标记为某种题外话。发展的主要线索从 7:6b——“在圣灵的新样中服侍”——到第 8 章，重点是新时代的圣灵。701 可以肯定的是，7:7-25 和第 8 章之间有接触点，702 但这些接触点仅限于第 8 章的前几节。在将 7:7-25 标记为括号时，我们还必须强调，我们的意思并不是说 7:7-25 是一个不重要的题外话，而是说它是保罗论证主干的绕行路线。没有人会质疑 7:7-25 对保罗的律法和人性神学的重要性。

我们可以将这一部分分为两个主要部分，第 13 节是两者之间的桥梁。在 7:7-12 中，保罗用一个故事来说明罪恶如何利用律法带来死亡。703 另一方面，第 14-25 节使用现在时态动词来描述“思想”（同意上帝的律法）与“肉体”或“肢体”（屈服于“罪恶的律法”）之间的持续斗争。因此，结果是，引发罪恶的上帝律法无力打破罪恶的力量。

上帝的律法怎么会在救赎历史中成为如此消极的力量？上帝的律法怎么会成为罪恶和死亡的工具？

律法是“神的律”（第 22 节），是“良善的”（第 12、16 节）、“圣洁的”（第 12 节）、“公义的”（第 12 节）和“属灵的”（第 14 节）

为律法辩护：罪利用律法制造更多罪恶和死亡的罪魁祸首（7:7-13）

解释如何的问题：受罪支配的人，尽管律法是善的，但其自身的软弱和内部分裂却让罪占据了主导地位（7:14-25）

因此，罗马书 7:7-25 有两个具体目的：为律法辩护，使其免受任何暗示其本身是“有罪的”或邪恶的暗示；并表明尽管如此，律法如何成为救赎历史中的负面力量。

我是指谁？

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (2. The History and Experience of Israel under the Law (7:7–25))

Because this is the case, the most important teaching of the section is the same however the “I” is identified. The law, God’s good, holy, and spiritual gift, has been turned into an instrument of sin because of the weakness and sinful tendencies of people. It is therefore unable to deliver a person from the power of sin, and people who look to it for such deliverance will only experience frustration and ultimate condemnation. Having said this, however, the identification of the “I” in this passage is not an insignificant matter. It affects, to some extent, the way we understand Paul’s presentation of the law, but, even more, the way we understand the Christian life. And certainly the identification of this “I” affects dramatically the interpretation of individual verses.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (1. The Autobiographical Direction)

1. The autobiographical direction. The average Christian is—understandably!—likely to ask, “What is all the fuss about?” Doesn’t Paul use “I”? Who else except Paul would it be? Most interpreters throughout the history of the church have agreed and concluded that Paul uses egō simply because he is depicting his own experience. Most, however, would quickly add that he describes his experience not because it is unique but because it is typical—the experience of “every person.” Those who defend an autobiographical interpretation differ over what experience in Paul’s life he may be describing in vv. 7–12.706 The following are the main possibilities:

a. The awakening of the sinful impulse at the time of Paul’s coming of age (celebrated, at a later date, in the bar mitzvah, “the son of the commandment”): “I was living without understanding the real power of sin at one time, but when I became responsible for the commandment, sin sprang to life and I perceived myself to be under condemnation”707 (or “perceived myself to be unable to throw off sin’s power”708).

b. The realization of condemnation just previous to Paul’s conversion: “I thought myself to be ‘alive’ in the days when, as a self-satisfied Pharisee, I thought I was fulfilling the law. But when the Spirit began to make clear to me the real, inward, meaning of God’s law, I saw that I was far short of its demands and was, in fact, under condemnation.”709

In vv. 14–25, then, defenders of the autobiographical view think that Paul is describing his experience as a Jew under the law, his immediate postconversion struggle with the law, or his continuing struggle to obey the law as a Christian. (See, further, the introduction to vv. 14–25.)

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (3. The Israel Direction)

3. The Israel direction. Since Chrysostom, some interpreters have understood the egō in at least parts of 7:7–25 (usually vv. 8–10 especially) to be a representation of the people of Israel. “We [the nation Israel] were, relatively speaking, spiritually ‘alive’ before the giving of the law at Sinai. But when that law was given, it gave sin its opportunity to create transgression and so to deepen and radicalize our spiritual lostness.”712 Most of these interpreters, then, think that Paul in vv. 14–25 describes the continuing situation of Jews under the Mosaic law. This is sometimes labeled the salvation-historical view.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (4. The Existential Direction)

Paul is describing his own, and other Jews’, experience with the law of Moses (with some allusion to Adam also): how that law came to the Jewish people and brought to them, not “life,” but “death” (vv. 7–12); and how that law failed, because of the reign of the flesh, to deliver Jews from the power of sin (vv. 13–25).

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (4. The Existential Direction)

As we have noted, the topic of Rom. 7 is the law; and not just “law” in general, but the Mosaic law. This is clear both from Paul’s general usage of nomos and from the context. For Paul, the law is basically the Torah, the body of instruction and commandments given to the people of Israel through Moses at Sinai. This law is the focus of this chapter, which is linked, through 6:14, to 5:20a, where Paul asserts that “the law came in beside”; and this “coming in beside” refers to the giving of the law through Moses (5:13–14; Gal. 3:19). Moreover, the commandment quoted in v. 7 as representative of the law is from the Decalogue (see, further, the notes on v. 7).

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (4. The Existential Direction)

in light of the undeniable autobiographical elements in vv. 14–25, is that Paul uses egō to describe himself—and, by extension, other Jews—in solidarity with the experiences of his people. We know that individual Jews had a lively sense of “corporate” identity with their people’s history. This identification with the people and its history comes to special expression in the Passover ritual, in which each Jew confesses that he or she was a slave in Egypt and was redeemed through the events of the Passover.727 In like manner, I suggest that Paul in vv. 7–11 is describing his own involvement, as a member of the people of Israel, with the giving of the law to his people at Sinai.728 In vv. 14–25, then, Paul describes what the coming of the law meant for himself and other Jews. And since this situation was one consciously experienced by Paul, autobiographical elements are more strongly in evidence in vv. 14–25 than in vv. 7–11.

p 456 We conclude, then, that egō denotes Paul himself but that the events depicted in these verses were not all experienced personally and consciously by the apostle. It is in this sense that we argue for a combination of the autobiographical view with the view that identifies egō with Israel. Egō is not Israel, but egō is Paul in solidarity with Israel.729

罗马书（第二版）（2. 律法之下以色列的历史和经验（7:7–25））

因为情况如此，这一部分最重要的教导是相同的，无论如何定义“我”。律法，上帝善良、神圣和属灵的礼物，因为人们的软弱和犯罪倾向，已经变成了犯罪的工具。因此，它无法将人从罪的权势中拯救出来，而那些指望它来获得这种拯救的人只会经历挫折和最终的谴责。话虽如此，但这段经文中“我”的定义并非无关紧要。它在某种程度上影响了我们理解保罗对律法的阐述的方式，但更重要的是，它影响了我们理解基督徒生活的方式。当然，这个“我”的定义极大地影响了对个别经文的解释。

《罗马书》（第二版）（4. 存在主义方向）

正如我们所指出的，罗马书 7 的主题是律法；不仅仅是一般意义上的“律法”，而是摩西律法。从保罗对 nomos 的一般用法和上下文中都可以清楚地看出这一点。对保罗来说，律法基本上就是托拉，即摩西在西奈山给以色列人民的指导和诫命。这条律法是本章的焦点，它通过 6:14 连接到 5:20a，保罗在 5:20a 中断言“律法是从旁边来的”；而这个“从旁边来的”指的是通过摩西颁布的律法（5:13-14；加拉太书 3:19）。此外，第 7 节中引用的代表律法的诫命来自十诫（进一步参见第 7 节的注释）。

无论“我”怎样定义，本章主题不变：

律法为上帝良善，公义，圣洁和属灵的礼物

因为人们的软弱和犯罪倾向，已经变成了犯罪的工具

因此，它无法将人从罪的权势中拯救出来

而那些指望它来获得拯救的人只会经历挫折和最终的定罪

自传体：

保罗在描述自己的经历，且他的经历不是独一无二的，而是每个人经历的范式

7-13 保罗描述自己作为法利赛人或者成人礼之前以为自己在履行律法，但后来意识到远没有达到要求且被定罪

14-25 作为在律法之下的犹太人，在他信主之后与律法的斗争或者作为基督徒努力遵守律法的经历

罗马书（第二版）（1. 自传方向）

1. 自传方向。普通基督徒很可能会问：“这有什么好争论的？”保罗不是用“我”吗？除了保罗，还会是谁？教会历史上的大多数解释者都同意并得出结论，保罗使用“我”只是因为他在描述自己的经历。然而，大多数人会很快补充说，他描述自己的经历不是因为它是独一无二的，而是因为它是典型的——“每个人”的经历。那些支持自传解释的人对保罗在第 7-12 节中描述的保罗的生活经历有不同的看法。706 以下是主要的可能性：

a.保罗成年时（后来在成人礼中庆祝，即“诫命之子”）罪孽冲动的觉醒：“我曾经生活在那里，却不理解罪的真正力量，但当我对诫命负责时，罪孽就活跃起来，我感到自己受到了谴责”707（或“感到自己无法摆脱罪孽的力量”708）。

b. 保罗皈依前意识到了谴责：“作为一个自满的法利赛人，我以为自己在履行律法，那时我以为自己‘活着’。但当圣灵开始向我阐明上帝律法的真正内在含义时，我看到我远远没有达到它的要求，事实上，我受到了谴责。”709

在第 3 节中。因此，在 14-25 节中，自传观点的捍卫者认为保罗是在描述他作为律法下的犹太人的经历、他皈依后立即与律法的斗争，或者他作为基督徒继续努力遵守律法。（参见第 14-25 节的介绍。）

以色列（救赎历史角度）：

“我”代指以色列，在律法颁布之前和之后以色列的经历

7-13 律法颁布之前以色列为活的，而颁布律法之后加重了罪制造过犯的机会

14-25 由于肉体的统治，律法未能将犹太人从罪恶的力量中解救出来

《罗马书》（第二版）（3. 以色列方向）

3. 以色列方向。自克里索斯托姆以来，一些解释者认为 7:7-25 至少部分内容中的 egō（通常特别是第 8-10 节）代表了以色列人民。“相对而言，在西奈颁布律法之前，我们 [以色列民族] 在精神上是‘活着的’。但是当那条律法颁布时，它给了罪恶制造过犯的机会，从而加深和加剧了我们精神上的迷失。”712 因此，大多数这些解释者认为保罗在第 14-25 节中描述了犹太人在摩西律法下的持续处境。这有时被称为救赎历史观。

《罗马书》（第二版）（4. 存在主义方向）

保罗描述了他自己和其他犹太人对摩西律法的体验（也暗指亚当）：律法如何传给犹太人，给他们带来的不是“生命”，而是“死亡”（第 7-12 节）；以及由于肉体的统治，律法如何未能将犹太人从罪恶的力量中解救出来（第 13-25 节）。

保罗所描述的“我”是自己并延伸到其他犹太人的经历

鉴于第 14-25 节中不可否认的自传元素，保罗使用 egō 来描述自己——并且延伸到其他犹太人——以声援他的人民的经历。我们知道，每个犹太人都对他们的民族历史有着强烈的“群体”认同感。这种对人民及其历史的认同在逾越节仪式中得到了特别的表达，在仪式中，每个犹太人都承认他或她是埃及的奴隶，并通过逾越节的事件得到救赎。727 同样，我认为保罗在第 7-11 节中描述了他自己作为以色列人民的一员，在西奈山向他的人民颁布律法的经历。728 然后，在第 14-25 节中，保罗描述了律法的到来对他自己和其他犹太人的意义。而且由于这种情况是保罗有意识经历的，因此第 14-25 节中的自传元素比第 15-16 节中的证据更明显。 7–11。

p 456 因此，我们得出结论，egō 表示保罗本人，但这些经文中描述的事件并非都是使徒亲身和有意识经历的。正是在这个意义上，我们主张将自传观点与将 egō 等同于以色列的观点结合起来。Egō 不是以色列，但 egō 是与以色列团结一致的保罗。729

v7-13 罪恶的显明

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (2.良心的凳越（七7〜13）)

律法怎麼會剌激人去犯罪呢？本章以下對這個問題的回答，是以第一人稱單數寫的；7〜13節用過去式，14〜25節用現在式。在7〜13節中，保羅說明：進入律法以下的生活，良心的覺醒和內心罪的意識的出現，同時發生。

這些經文中的「我」（包括14〜25節）是否純爲保羅的自傳？或裏面究竟有幾分是他個人的經驗？探討這類問題時，我們必須記住，沒有其他證據可指證保羅在信主之前曾經良心不安。直到復活的主在大馬色路上向他顯現之前，他一直確信逼迫敎會就是服事神。就「我」的自傳體而言，「保羅在此處的自傳，可說是每一個人的傳記153。」

保羅吿訴我們，從前有段時間，他有罪的意識。小時候，在他知道律法以前，他過著無憂無慮的生活。但「監獄的陰影向成長的男孩逼近」，保羅必須遵守律法的那一天終於到了154。遵行律法的首要責任，就是明白十誡，並且順服。人人皆知，禁止的命令反而會剌激人想去作那不可作的事；抽煙的人可能本來忘了.要吸，但一看到「禁止吸煙」的牌子，煙癮就發作了。

而十誡，除了一條之外，全都是禁止人作某事：「不可⋯⋯。」保羅的試探不是拜偶像，或殺人、姦淫、偸竊。出問題的是第十誡，這條誡命多論到內心的態度，不在乎外在的言語或行爲。「不可貪婪」成了一塊絆腳石。在舊約中，這條誡命還包括人不可貪圖的一些特殊項目，如：鄰舍的房屋、妻子、僕人、動物、或一切財產。刺激保羅的，不一定是這幾項；他的問題M深入。貪婪本身就是罪，它的確是許多罪行的根本原因。正如保羅在別處所說，貪婪就與拜偶像一樣（西三5）。它可能是欲求某些不合法的東西；也可能所想要的東西本身是合法的，但是自我 p 139 的欲望太强烈，以致篡奪了神在人心中應有的地位。

保羅說：「如果不是誡命說：『不可起貪心』，我根本不知道貪婪是什麼。但那條誡命讓罪有了橋頭堡，可以攻撃我，結果它使各種貪欲都在我裏面發動了。罪本來是在冬眠狀態，律法卻喚醒了它；因此我一與律法接觸，罪就活過來，把我擊倒了。這眞是個似非而是的眞理！律法賜下的目的，是要人遵守以至存活；但是這個律法帶給我的不是生命，反倒是死亡。」

這個自傳式的解釋，今天已經不像往日那樣普遍被接受。有一位作者形容道，它已經「被貶到荒謬解經的博物館去了」155。但是反對它的論據並不是定論。保羅不認爲自己的經驗很特別；他在這裏所擧的例子，在每一個人身上多多少少都是眞的。七13到八2與五12〜21的人類歷史大綱，有平行之處；在這兩段中，我們都可看出三個階段：(1)律法之前；(2)律法之下；(3)在基督裏脫離律法。也許此處也像五12〜19一樣，保羅心中隱約浮現墮落的故事。貪婪在人間太常見了，出現的姿態形形色色，亞當的墮落中它也插了一腳。並且保羅說，罪「引誘」他（11節），似乎回應了夏娃的怨言：「那蛇引誘我，我就吃了」（創三13）。可是保羅不會以第一人稱單數複述墮落的故事，他必定是根據自己親身的體驗而寫，同時也看出這是人性的共同經驗。至少從這方面來說，他知道自己乃是「自己靈魂的亞當」(2 Baruck 54:19)。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (2.良心的凳越（七7〜13）)

只是非因律法，我就不知何爲罪。參三20。律法的功用是預備性的：顯明人的罪與無能，並且顯明人需要救恩，而惟有神的恩典才能拯救他們。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (2.良心的凳越（七7〜13）)

亞當原本並不感到自己有犯罪的意念，直到因著那條「不可吃」的誡命，他的順服才受到考驗。可是保羅從人類共通的經驗（包括他自己在內），更能洞悉墮落故事的眞諦。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (2.良心的凳越（七7〜13）)

罪藉著那良善的叫我死，就顯出眞是罪。雖然「在律法之下」實際上與「在罪之下」牽扯不淸，但保羅憤怒地駁斥任何視律法等於罪的論調（7節）。律法是良善的，其本身的性質是要賜生命的；絕不會帶人進入死亡。這整件事的禍首乃是罪：當律法吿訴我是非對錯，卻沒有供應我行善避惡的能力，罪就逮住機會了。罪强迫我違背良知，去作律法明文規定不可行的事，讓我招致定罪與死亡。如此一來，我才明白罪的眞面目，看淸它與神及良善完全背道而馳。否則我不可能有這樣的認識。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

This paragraph has two purposes: to exonerate the law from the charge that it is sinful and to delineate more carefully the true relationship among sin, the law, and death. Paul takes care of the first of these purposes at both ends of the paragraph: in v. 7a, with the rhetorical question followed by his characteristic strong negative, and in v. 12, with a closing assertion. Between these, Paul cares for his other main purpose. He admits that, though the law is not sin, it does have a close relationship to sin. For the law brings recognition of sin and even stimulates sinning (vv. 7b–8). In fact, alluding, as we have seen, to his and other Jews’ solidarity with the people of Israel at Sinai, he argues that the coming of the law drove the people even deeper into death, the penalty of condemnation for sin (vv. 9–10a). Strangely, then, the very commandment that was “unto life” became the instrument of death (v. 10b). Verse 11 summarizes: sin has used the law as a bridgehead to deceive and to condemn.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

7 “What then shall we say?”730 brings us back to the dialogical style of 6:1–23. As there, the question raised here reflects a criticism of Paul’s gospel that p 457 he must often have heard. If Paul teaches that the law “increases the trespass” (5:20) and “arouses sinful passions” (7:5), he must believe that the law is by its nature evil and sinful. But if this were Paul’s view, he would effectively destroy any continuity between the law and his gospel, between the OT and the NT, between Moses and Christ. Indeed, many Jews and Jewish Christians accused Paul of holding just such an opinion. Paul is undoubtedly aware that such charges against him have reached the ears of the Roman Christians; so, to prepare the way for his visit and the enlistment of the Romans in his missionary efforts, he seeks here to dispel any such apprehensions.731 “Is the law sin? By no means!”

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

The law is not sin, nor the originator of sin, but the occasion or operating base that sin has used to accomplish its evil and deadly purpose. “Sin is the spider which succeeds in entrapping humankind in the web of death.”747 Paul again personifies sin, picturing it as a power that works actively and purposefully.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

But how is it that the law can give sin the occasion to stir up all these desires? To some extent, the old adage about “forbidden fruits” can explain what Paul means: people, told not to do something, immediately conclude that there must be something fun about it and are motivated all the more, or even perhaps for the first time, to do it.751 Ancient moralists noted this phenomenon, and we p 461 are all familiar with it; witness the result of a parent telling her child, “Now do not go outside and jump in that mud puddle!”

Paul, however, probably applies this conception in a more distinctly theological way: Israel, confronted in God’s law with limitations imposed by its rightful sovereign, was stimulated by that very limitation to rebellion.752 It was only after the Israelites had heard the commandment not to make any idols for themselves (Exod. 20:4) that they had Aaron fashion a golden calf for them to worship (Exod. 32). In just this way the law, abused by the sinful tendency already resident in every person, has been instrumental in stimulating all kinds of sinful tendencies.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

Accordingly, “apart from the law” will not mean “before I became aware of the true meaning, or real force, of the law” (as in the autobiographical view) or “before the law was given to Adam in the Garden” (an interval of time for which the Genesis account does not, in any case, appear to allow754), but, as in 5:13, “before the Mosaic law existed.”755 In the years before Sinai, Paul asserts, sin was “dead” to Israel. This does not mean, of course, that sin did not exist but that it was not as active or powerful before the law as after.756

罗马书（第二版）（a. 律法的来临（7:7-12））

本段有两个目的：免除律法是罪恶的指控，并更仔细地描述罪恶、律法和死亡之间的真正关系。保罗在本段的两端都处理了第一个目的：在第 7a 节中，他用反问句加上他特有的强烈否定，在第 12 节中，他用结束语。在这两者之间，保罗关心他的另一个主要目的。他承认，虽然律法不是罪恶，但它确实与罪恶有着密切的关系。因为律法带来了对罪恶的认识，甚至刺激了犯罪（第 7b-8 节）。事实上，正如我们所见，他提到他和其他犹太人在西奈山与以色列人民的团结，他认为律法的来临使人民更加陷入死亡，即对罪恶的谴责惩罚（第 9-10a 节）。奇怪的是，原本“叫人活”的诫命却成了致人死命的工具（第 10b 节）。第 11 节总结道：罪恶利用律法作为欺骗和定罪的桥头堡。

本段的两个目的：

消除律法是罪的指控

详细描述罪，律法和死之间的关系

7节和13节的驳斥性论述前后呼应

v7-8：律法不是罪但与罪有紧密的关系，甚至刺激犯罪

v9-10：律法的到来加速了人的灭亡

v11：罪利用律法成为引诱和定罪的工具

v12-13：律法是好的；罪通过律法显现；罪通过律法导致死亡

如果保罗教导说律法“加增过犯”（5:20）和“激发罪恶的情欲”（7:5），他一定相信律法本质上是邪恶和罪恶的。但如果这是保罗的观点，他就会有效地破坏律法与他的福音、旧约与新约、摩西与基督之间的任何连续性。事实上，许多犹太人和犹太基督徒指责保罗持有这样的观点。

Moo: 律法不是罪，也不是罪的起源，而是罪用来实现其邪恶和致命目的的场合或领域

Dunn: 罪是一只蜘蛛，它成功地将人类困在死亡之网中

但是，律法怎么会给罪孽机会激起所有这些欲望呢？在某种程度上，关于“禁果”的古老格言可以解释保罗的意思：人们被告知不要做某事，立即得出结论，这件事一定很有趣，并且更有动力去做，甚至可能是第一次去做。751 古代道德家注意到了这种现象，我们对此也很熟悉；亲眼目睹了一位父母告诉她的孩子，“现在不要出去跳泥坑！”

因此，“没有律法”并不意味着“在我意识到律法的真正含义或真正力量之前”（如自传观点）或“在伊甸园中将律法赐给亚当之前”（创世记的记载似乎无论如何都不允许754这段时间间隔），而是如 5:13 中所说，“在摩西律法存在之前”。755 保罗断言，在西奈山之前的几年里，罪对以色列来说是“死”的。当然，这并不意味着罪不存在，而是说它在律法之前不像律法之后那样活跃或强大。

律法并没有约束罪恶，反而刺激了“各种贪婪”（第 7-8a 节），律法并没有带来生命，而是带来了“死亡”（第 8b-10a 节）。

不是因为遵守律法本身是有罪的，或值得死亡，而是因为律法无法实现。这是第 11 节的负担。

但它所服务的最终目的是积极的：以色列被“罪恶束缚”，因此可以学会依靠上帝和他对弥赛亚的承诺来获得生命和救赎。

保罗的意思是，上帝的善诫通过严格定义罪，将罪变成了有意识和蓄意的反抗上帝。罪永远是坏的；但当它涉及故意违反上帝对他的子民的善意时，它就变得更糟——甚至更有罪。律法使罪比以前更加严重，揭示了罪的真面目。

然而，保罗可能以一种更明显的神学方式运用了这一概念：以色列在上帝的律法中面临着其合法君主所施加的限制，正是这种限制刺激了以色列人反叛。752 直到以色列人听到了不为自己制造任何偶像的诫命（出埃及记 20:4）之后，他们才让亚伦为他们铸造了一头金牛犊来崇拜（出埃及记 32）。正是通过这种方式，律法被每个人身上已经存在的罪恶倾向所滥用，从而刺激了各种罪恶倾向。

虽然保罗在第 7-12 节中描述的是以色列人对摩西律法的经历，但正如我们所见，他们的经历是所有以各种方式面对各种形式的上帝律法的人的经历的征兆。因此，以色列的失败和死亡应该提醒我们所有人，救赎永远不能通过遵守律法而获得，而只能通过依靠基督的恩典和怜悯而获得。

v10

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

Paul’s purpose in saying this is probably polemical to some extent. The Jewish people, of course, held the law in high esteem, claiming that it was a restraint on sin and sometimes even attributing to it the power to give life.763 Paul disputes these ideas. The law has not restrained sin but stimulated “all kinds of coveting” (vv. 7–8a), and the law has not led to life but to “death” (vv. 8b–10a).

v11

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

But the attempts of Israel to find life through the law brought only death—not because obeying the law itself is sinful, or worthy of death, but because the law could not be fulfilled. This is the burden of vv. 14–25: that the Jews found themselves under the “law of sin” because, while honoring the law, they could not practice it. So sin, through the law, “killed” Israel. But although this happened in accordance with the intention of God (see 5:20 and Gal. 3:19–26), the ultimate intention this served was positive: that, being “bound under sin,” Israel might learn to look to God and his promise of a Messiah for life and salvation.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (a. The Coming of the Law (7:7–12))

Although it is the experience of Israel with the Mosaic law that Paul describes in vv. 7–12, their experience, as we have seen, is symptomatic of that of all people who, in various ways, are confronted with God’s law in its various forms. Thus the failure and death of Israel should serve to remind all of us that salvation can never be earned by doing the law, but only by casting ourselves on the grace and mercy of God in Christ.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

13 Many interpreters attach this verse to vv. 7–12 since it summarizes the three main points that Paul has made in that paragraph: the law is good; sin is made “manifest” through the law; and sin works through the law to produce death.805

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

What Paul means, in light of Rom. 4:15; 5:13–14, and 5:20, is that the good commandment of God, by strictly defining sin, turns sin into conscious and willful rebellion against God. Sin is always bad; but it becomes worse—even more sinful—when it involves deliberate violation of God’s good will for his people. The law, by making sin even worse than before, reveals sin in its true colors.812

v14-25 内心的冲突

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

本段繼續7〜13節所用的第一人稱單數，卻以現在式代替了過去式。不僅如此，本段也流露出一種內心的掙扎，是前一段所沒有的。在前一段，罪以秘密行動攻擊說話的人，將他打倒；此處，他雖無法勝過敵人，仍然痛苦地奮力掙扎。前一段他所形容的，是他活在「這個世代」中的體驗；此處，雖然舊的時代尙未過去，但「未來的世代」已經來臨，而他正身處兩者的衝突之間157。他好像是一個同時活於兩個標準的人；心中亟盼生活能合乎高標準，但又明知裏面的罪大有能力，不斷把他拉下來，跌到低標準，他有身不由己的悲哀。

這是一個已經嚐到聖靈生命釋放大能的人，來看人沒有聖靈的幫助，在律法之下生活的狀況。保羅本身活在律法之下，在大馬色路上信主之前，他似乎並沒有查覺此處所描述的內在衝突。可是他很可能認識一些信徒，他們雖然信了主，卻仍活在律法的梱綁之中，因爲對福音的自由未能徹底瞭解，也未完全得著。他又知道，一般而言，基督徒是活在兩個世界之中，其中必有衝突。他們目前活在這個世界，有血肉之軀，會受這必朽壞的生命狀況轄制。他們與周圍的人相同，都是亞當的後裔，臣服於「在亞當裏衆人必死」的律。然而，他們在靈裏已經出死入生，脫離黑暗的權勢，進入光明的國度了。他們分享了基督的死、埋葬與復活，已經活過來，「有新生的樣式」，是新世界的公民，神的新創造，不再「在亞當裏」，而「在基督裏」了。

有一日，這個世界將要過去。新時代將在榮耀中建立，這兩個時代的衝突將得着解決。但是，基督徒只要仍活在「兩個時代 p 143 之間」，其生活就必成爲這衝突的戰場，正如加拉太書五17所總結的：「情慾和聖靈相爭，聖靈和情慾相爭；這兩個是彼此相敵，使你們不能作所願意作的158。」

然而，加拉太書五17的衝突，與本段所形容的不是同一件事。本段沒有提到聖靈；若有聖靈在，整幅畫面就不一樣了，會光明得多。本段所描繪的，是一個深知內在生命有强大罪惡權勢的人；內住的罪是個暴君，他對其命令深惡痛絕，卻無力掙脫其魔掌。他認爲自己被脅迫要順服暴君的命令，所作的並不是出於自己，而且正與他們所願作的相反。他喜歡神的律法，想照著去行，知道那是「聖潔、公義、良善的」。但是，儘管他想順服神的律法，裏面卻有股惡勢力，驅迫他去違背律法。「我所願意的善，我反不作；我所不願意的惡，我倒去作」（19節）。

這種與「我肢體中犯罪的律」（保羅如此稱之）搏鬥，卻無還手之力的經驗，大多基督徒都眞正經歷過；因此我們不能輕言保羅在這裏絕不是寫自己的經驗，本段的「我」純屬戲劇性。保羅可以「藉著基督的溫柔和平」勸他的朋友（林後十1），但這種溫柔和平難道是他自然就有的嗎？像他這種熱血沸騰、絕不罷休的個性必定發覺「釘死肉體」不是一件簡單的事——必須勝過急躁的言語、不成熟的判斷，對別人侵犯他使徒的職份亦不能怨恨。寇貴爾(M. Goguel)的說法也許是對的，他認爲這段衝突是保羅初信不久之後的經歷159。但是，無論我們對這一段如何解釋，保羅在使徒生涯的顚峯狀態中，仍然每天操練自己，免得在屬靈的賽跑中落選；他向著標竿——就是神在基督耶穌裏所 p 144 賜從上頭來的呼召——直跑；像這樣的一個人，深知要得「不朽的冕旒」，必須竭力奔馳，「不避塵土與熾熱」。他經常形容成聖之路爲一場賽跑，一次戰爭，因此我們不能以爲他臝得勝利是「不費吹灰之力，眨眼之間的事」。

儘管如此，勝利畢竟來臨了。本段的開始雖然是喪氣的吿白，承認自己無能，但結尾卻是得勝的凱歌。只要我憑著自己的力量來爭戰，就必連嗜敗績，因爲我的心想事奉神的律，可是我的肉體卻不聽使喚，不斷順服罪的律。我是否只有失敗的份兒？是否永遠無法脫離這場夢魘？解放之日是否遙遙無期？感謝神，靠著我們的主耶穌基督，終於有了希望！

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

我是屬乎肉體的，是已經賣給罪了。我「在亞當裏」所承襲的性情，與律法格格不入。律法是「屬乎靈的」，因爲是神的律法；但我的本性卻不屬乎靈(sarkinos,「肉體的」),被一種與我的意志相反的力量所左右。人性之中有一種東西，素來反叛神，想要脫離祂；甚至也在重生的人裏面。保羅在此稱之爲他的「肉體」（參18節），這東西使他完全暴露在內住之罪的權勢之下。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

保羅的內心有一個獨立的證人，就是良心之聲（參二15說明，80頁），見證律法是完美的，並定他不遵行律法之罪。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

但是問題在於，我無法以順服來表明我的愛。「裏面的人」是在基督裏的「新人」，每天按造物主的形象被更新變化（西三10；參林後四16）。從八7〜8來看，很難認爲這裏說話的人不是信徒。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

我眞是苦啊！這個充滿痛苦之情的呼聲，顯明前面的話不是在表達「抽象的辯論，而是一個飽受煎熬的靈魂親身體驗的回聲」163。槐特(Alexander whyte)諷刺那些認爲本段是「保羅特意賣弄修辭手法」的註釋家，說他們所講的無異「稻草人的屬靈經歷」。164

「就稱義而言，信徒已經完全了；但就成聖而言，他們才剛起步。這是個漸進的過程。在初信基督之時，他們對自己裏面敗壞的源頭認識無幾。當基督向他們啓示，成爲他們的救主，靈魂所摯愛的對象，他們的肉體情慾似乎死了，但不久之後，他們會發現它並沒有死。因此有些人在信主之後，心靈所受的試煉，甚至超過他們醒覺自己走迷路的時候。「我眞是苦啊！⋯⋯」是他們的呼聲，直到他們在成聖方面也得了完全。可是那位在他們裏面動了善工的，必定會成全這工，直到耶穌基督的日子165。」

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

25.感謝神，靠著我們的主耶穌基督！在「誰能救我？」的痛苦呼聲之後，緊接著便是這句得勝的宣吿，頗令人驚訝。但答案就在這裏：「惟獨神能！透過我們的主耶穌基督！感謝神！」(NEB)。至於這個拯救是如何才能得着的，怎樣能脫離內住罪的權勢，則在下一章中詳盡敍述。目前，保羅先以這一短句表明，情況不像那位「受苦的人」所擔心的那樣絕望，然後，他回過頭來，將14至24節的道德窮境作個總結。

丁道爾新約聖經註釋--羅馬書 (3.内心的衝突（七14〜25）)

要事奉神的律的内心，是回應良心之聲的心（不可能是十二1聖靈所更新的心思）；照著罪的律去行的肉體，是墮落的本性，將來惟有被死亡所滅。經歷失敗、挫折的是我(I of myself,原文爲autos egō),但「我」(I)旣是信徒，不致被棄置於「自我」(myself)之中；內住聖靈的大能，將使一切全然改觀（參八9〜11）。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

In these verses Paul shows again that the Mosaic law is impotent to rescue people from their sin. For the law informs us of our duties before God, but it does not give us the ability to fulfill those duties. As good as God’s law is, it encounters people when they are already “fleshly” (v. 14b), indwelt by sin (vv. 17, 20). From this situation the law does not, and cannot, rescue us; on the contrary, it reveals the depth of the division in our beings, between willing and doing, the “mind” and the “flesh” (vv. 15–20, 25). Paul’s essential teaching about the inability of the Mosaic law to rescue sinful people from spiritual bondage is the same whether that bondage is the condition of the unregenerate person—who cannot be saved through the law—or that of the regenerate person—who cannot be sanctified and ultimately delivered from the influence of sin through the law.

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13-25））

在这些经文中，保罗再次表明摩西律法无法将人们从罪恶中拯救出来。因为律法告诉我们在上帝面前的职责，但它并没有赋予我们履行这些职责的能力。上帝的律法虽然很好，但它遇到的人已经是“肉体上的”（第 14b 节），被罪恶所困扰（第 17、20 节）。从这种情况中，律法不会也不能拯救我们；相反，它揭示了我们生命中意愿与行动、“思想”与“肉体”之间的深刻分歧（第 15-20、25 节）。保罗关于摩西律法无法将有罪的人从精神束缚中拯救出来的基本教义是相同的，无论这种束缚是未重生的人（无法通过律法得救）的状态，还是重生的人（无法通过律法成圣并最终摆脱罪的影响）的状态。

律法告诉我们在上帝面前的责任，但它并没有赋予我们履行这些责任的能力

律法不会也不能拯救我们；相反，它揭示了我们生命中意愿与行动、思想与肉体之间的深刻分歧

摩西律法无法将有罪的人从属灵束缚中拯救出来的基本教义是相同的，无论这种束缚是：

未重生的状态（无法通过律法得救）

或重生的状态（无法通过律法成圣）

这里形容的是未信的人还是信徒？

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

Should we expect Christian existence to be characterized by the sort of severe struggle described here? Or is this struggle one from which we believers have been rescued by Christ (as chap. 8 might suggest)? Can a Christian suffer the experience described here if he or she fails to live by the Spirit? It is partly because expositors of Rom. 7 exegete this text with an eye on these larger issues that they have divided so sharply over its interpretation. And it may be generally said that the interpretation of few passages has been more influenced by one’s broad theological perspective, experience, and sheer a priori assumptions than Rom. 7:14–25.786

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

Luther, who saw in these verses the classic statement of his view of the believer as “at the same time a justified person and a sinner” (simul iustus et peccator). Justification, being an entirely forensic declaration of the believer’s status “before God” (coram Deo), does not remove the believer from the presence and influence of sin. Thus, even the child of God, as long as he or she is in the earthly body, will struggle with sin and fail to do God’s will. The interpretation of vv. 14–25 in terms of “normal” Christian experience was typical of Lutheran and Reformed theology right into the twentieth century and is still widespread.

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13–25））

我们是否应该期望基督徒的生活具有这里描述的那种严峻斗争的特征？或者，我们信徒是否已被基督从这种斗争中拯救出来（如第 8 章所暗示的那样）？如果基督徒未能靠圣灵生活，他或她会遭受这里描述的经历吗？部分原因是罗马书 7 的阐释者在解读这段文字时着眼于这些更大的问题，因此他们对其解释产生了如此尖锐的分歧。一般来说，很少有段落的解读比罗马书更受一个人广泛的神学观点、经验和纯粹的先验假设的影响。 7:14–25.786

《罗马书》（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13–25））

路德认为这些经文是他对信徒“同时是被称义的人和罪人”（simul iustus et peccator）的看法的经典表述。称义是信徒在“上帝面前”（coram Deo）地位的完全法庭声明，并不能将信徒从罪恶的存在和影响中移除。因此，即使是上帝的孩子，只要他或她还在尘世的肉体中，也会与罪恶作斗争，无法遵从上帝的旨意。以“正常”基督教经验来解释第 14-25 节是路德宗和改革宗神学的典型做法，直到二十世纪，这种做法仍然很普遍。

我们是否应该期望基督徒的生活具有这里描述的那种严峻斗争的特征？或者，我们信徒是否已被基督从这种斗争中拯救出来？如果基督徒未能靠圣灵生活，他或她会遭受这里描述的经历吗？

路德：simul iustus et peccator （基督徒既是被称义的人，同时又是罪人）

称义是信徒在“上帝面前”（coram Deo）地位的完全法庭声明，并不能将信徒从罪恶的存在和影响中移除。因此，即使是上帝的孩子，只要他或她还在尘世的肉体中，也会与罪恶作斗争，无法遵从上帝的旨意。以“正常”基督教经验来解释第 14-25 节是路德宗和改革宗神学的典型做法，直到二十世纪，这种做法仍然很普遍。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

The most important reasons for thinking the experience depicted in vv. 14–25 is that of an unregenerate person are the following:

1. The strong connection of egō with “the flesh” (vv. 14, 18, and 25) suggests that Paul is elaborating on the unregenerate condition mentioned in 7:5: being “in the flesh.”

2. Egō throughout this passage struggles “on his/her own” (“I myself” in v. 25), without the aid of the Holy Spirit.

3. Egō is “under the power of sin” (v. 14b), a state from which every believer is released (6:2, 6, 11, 18–22).

4. As the unsuccessful struggle of vv. 15–20 shows, egō is a “prisoner of the law of sin” (v. 23). Yet Rom. 8:2 proclaims that believers have been set free from this same “law of sin (and death).”

5. While Paul makes clear that believers will continue to struggle with sin (see, e.g., 6:12–13; 13:12–14; Gal. 5:17), what is depicted in 7:14–25 is not just a struggle with sin but a defeat by sin. This is a more negative view of the Christian life than can be accommodated within Paul’s theology.

6. The egō in these verses struggles with the need to obey the Mosaic law; yet Paul has already proclaimed the release of the believer from the dictates of the law (6:14; 7:4–6).

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

For those who find these arguments decisive, vv. 14–25 describe the struggle of the person outside Christ to do good, a struggle that is doomed to failure p 470 because it is fought without the power of God that alone is able to break the power of sin. Deliverance from this situation comes with the converting, regenerating work of God in Christ, who transfers the believer from the realm of “sin and death” to the realm of “the Spirit of life” (v. 24b; 8:2).

First, how does a reference to unbelievers fit with Romans 7:23 (“For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being”)? Doesn’t such delight and longing for God’s law show that a believer is in view? Not necessarily. Many pious Jews loved God’s law and yet didn’t know God. Paul himself testifies that the Jews have a “zeal for God,” though they lacked knowledge (Rom. 10:2). There can be zeal and delight in the law (witness the Pharisees) when one isn’t truly saved.

Second, Paul shifts from past-tense verbs in Romans 7:7–11 to present-tense verbs in verses 14–25. Doesn’t that prove Christians are in view? Not necessarily. Scholars recognize that present tense doesn’t necessarily designate present time. The temporal nature of an action must be discerned from context, since present-tense verbs, even in the indicative, may be used with reference to the past or even the future.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

I find two sets of contrasts decisive. The first is between the description of the egō as “sold under sin” (v. 14b) and Paul’s assertion that the believer—every believer—has been “set free from sin” (6:18, 22). The second contrast is that between the state of the egō, “imprisoned by the law [or power] of sin” (v. 23), and the believer, who has been “set free from the law of sin and death” (8:2).

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13–25））

认为第 14–25 节中描述的经历是未重生之人的经历的最重要原因如下：

egō 与“肉体”的紧密联系（第 14、18 和 25 节）表明保罗正在详细阐述 7:5 中提到的未重生的状态：“在肉体中”。

在整个这段经文中，Egō 都在“独自”挣扎（第 25 节中的“我自己”），没有圣灵的帮助

Egō “已经卖给罪了”（第 14b 节），每个信徒都会摆脱这种状态（6:2、6、11、18–22）

随着第 14 节中失败的挣扎， 15-20 节表明，egō 是“罪律的囚徒”（第 23 节），8：2明确表明信徒已从罪和死的律中得以解脱

虽然保罗明确表示信徒将继续与罪斗争（例如，6:12-13；13:12-14；加拉太书 5:17），但是 7:14-25 中描述的不仅仅是与罪的斗争，而是被罪击败

这些经文中的 egō 与遵守摩西律法的需要作斗争；然而保罗已经宣布信徒从律法的诫命中解脱出来（6:14；7:4-6）

v22 虔诚的犹太人也可以热爱律法却不认识神

这是对基督徒生活的更负面的看法，保罗的神学无法容纳。

对于那些认为这些论点具有决定性的人来说，第 14-25 节描述了基督之外的人为行善而做出的斗争，这场斗争注定要失败，因为这场斗争没有上帝的力量，而只有上帝的力量才能打破罪恶的力量。从这种情况中解脱出来需要上帝在基督里的转变和再生工作，他将信徒从“罪恶和死亡”的领域转移到“生命之灵”的领域（第 24b 节；8:2）。

首先，对非信徒的提及如何与罗马书 7:23（“因为在我内心里，我喜欢神的律”）相符？对上帝律法的这种喜爱和渴望难道不表明信徒在关注吗？不一定。许多虔诚的犹太人热爱上帝的律法，却不认识上帝。保罗自己见证说，犹太人虽然缺乏知识，但他们“热心于神”（罗马书10:2）。当一个人没有真正得救时，他可能会对律法充满热情和喜爱（法利赛人就是例子）。

其次，保罗将罗马书7:7-11中的动词从过去时态改为14-25节中的动词现在时态。这难道不能证明他指的是基督徒吗？不一定。学者们认识到现在时并不一定指现在。动作的时间性质必须从上下文中辨别出来，因为现在时态动词，即使是陈述语气，也可能用于指过去甚至将来。

罗马书（第二版）（b.律法下的生活（7:13-25））

我发现两组对比具有决定性。第一点是自我被描述为“已经卖给了罪”（第 14b 节）与保罗的断言——信徒——已经“脱离了罪”（6:18, 22）之间的对比。第二点是自我的状态是“被罪的律 [或力量] 所束缚”（第 23 节），而信徒的状态是“脱离了罪和死的律”（8:2）。

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

The most important reasons for thinking that the experience depicted in 7:14–25 must be that of a regenerate person are the following:

1. Egō must refer to Paul himself, and the shift from the past tenses of vv. 7–13 to the present tenses of vv. 14–25 can be explained only if Paul is describing in these latter verses his present experience as a Christian.

2. Only the regenerate truly “delight in God’s law” (v. 22), seek to obey it (vv. 15–20), and “serve” it (v. 25); the unregenerate do not “seek after God” (3:11) and cannot “submit to the law of God” (8:7).

3. Whereas the “mind” of people outside of Christ is universally presented by Paul as opposed to God and his will (see Rom. 1:28; Eph. 4:17; Col. 2:18; 1 Tim. 6:5; 2 Tim. 3:8; Tit. 1:15), the “mind” of egō in this text is a positive medium, by which egō “serves the law of God” (vv. 22, 25).

4. Egō must be a Christian because only a Christian possesses the “inner person”; see Paul’s only other two uses of the phrase in 2 Cor. 4:16; Eph. 3:16.

5. The passage concludes, after Paul’s mention of the deliverance wrought by God in Christ, with a reiteration of the divided state of the egō (vv. 24–25). This shows that the division and struggle of the egō that Paul depicts in these verses is that of the person already saved by God in Christ.

If these arguments are found to be decisive, then vv. 14–25 will describe an important aspect of normal Christian experience: the continuing battle with sin that will never be won as long as the believer, through his or her body, is p 471 related to this age. The new age may have dawned, but the believer, until death or the parousia, remains tied to the old age and its powers of sin, the flesh, and the law. Deliverance will come only when God intervenes to transform the “body of death” (vv. 24b–25a; 8:10–11) into the body conformed to the glorious body of Christ (Phil. 3:20–21).794

It’s sandwiched between Romans 6 and 8. It’s in the middle of the section on sanctification of the believer. Just the mere location of that passage, to me, screams volumes that this is dealing with the sanctification of a believer.

The description of Romans 7 of Paul as a divided and sometimes tormented man in relation to the law doesn’t fit with the way he describes his experience before he was a Christian.

In his pre-Christian days, he is anything but a man who is torn because of any perceived failures to live up to the law of God. In Galatians 1 and Philippians 3, he describes himself as having undivided zeal for the law. So the Romans 7 Paul doesn’t fit with the way he described his pre-Christian experience.

In Galatians 5:17, Paul uses language very close to Romans 7, but everyone agrees that in Galatians, it’s a description of Christian experience.

I don’t think Paul is saying the Christian lives under sin as a normal way of life — continually dominated and defeated by sin — but that in the moment of failure, sin gets the upper hand like a slave master temporarily getting control of a person who’s not really his. I think this because both in Romans 6:12 and Galatians 5:1 Paul warns Christians precisely not to submit again to the reign, or to the yoke, of slavery.

This is a response to the objection from Romans 7:24. Can a real Christian cry out, “Who will set me free from the body of this death?” To which my response is, Can a real Christian not cry out, “Who will set me free from this body of death”?

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13-25））

认为 7:14-25 中描述的经历一定是重生之人的经历的最重要原因如下：

Egō 一定是指保罗本人，只有当保罗在后面的经文中描述他作为基督徒的当前经历时，才能解释从 7-13 节的过去时态转变为 14-25 节的现在时态

只有重生的人才能真正“喜爱上帝的律法”（第 22 节），寻求遵守它（第 15-20 节），并“服务”它（第 25 节）；未重生的人不会“寻求上帝”（3:11），也不能“服从上帝的律法”（8:7）。

保罗普遍认为基督之外的人的“思想”与上帝及其旨意相对立（见罗马书 1:28；以弗所书 4:17；歌罗西书 2:18；提摩太前书 6:5；提摩太后书 3:8；提多书 1:15），而本文中 ego 的“思想”是一种积极的媒介，ego 通过它“顺服上帝的律法”（第 22、25 节）

Egō 一定是基督徒，因为只有基督徒才拥有“里面的人”（22）；参见保罗在哥林多后书 4:16；以弗所书 3:16 中仅有的另外两次使用该短语

保罗提到上帝在基督里所成就的拯救之后，这段经文以重申 ego 的分裂状态结束（第 24-25 节）。这表明，保罗在这些经文中描述的自我的分裂和斗争是已经被上帝在基督里拯救的人的分裂和斗争

本章处在6和8章之间，是关乎成圣的信息

信主前的保罗并没有因为律法而饱受折磨

加拉太书5：17 的描述与罗马书7章相近，但那里很明显是信徒的经历

只有真正的信徒才会呼喊：谁能救我脱离这取死的身体？

如果这些论点被认为是决定性的，那么第 14-25 节将描述正常基督徒经验的一个重要方面：与罪的持续斗争永远不会获胜，只要信徒通过他或她的身体与这个时代有关。新时代可能已经到来，但信徒，直到死亡或基督再临，仍然与旧时代及其罪恶、肉体和律法的力量联系在一起。只有当上帝介入将“死亡的身体”（第 24b-25a 节；8:10-11）转变为与基督荣耀的身体（腓立比书 3:20-21）相符的身体时，才能得到拯救。794

它夹在罗马书 6 章和 8 章之间。它位于信徒圣化部分的中间。对我来说，仅仅是这段经文的位置就足以说明这是在处理信徒的圣化问题。

罗马书 7 章将保罗描述为一个在律法方面分裂且有时饱受折磨的人，这与他成为基督徒之前的经历描述不符。

在他成为基督徒之前的日子里，他绝不是一个因为任何明显的未能遵守上帝律法而痛苦不堪的人。在加拉太书 1 章和腓立比书 3 章中，他描述自己对律法有着一心一意的热情。因此，罗马书 7 章中的保罗与他描述成为基督徒之前的经历的方式不符。

在加拉太书 5:17 中，保罗使用的语言与罗马书 7 章非常接近，但每个人都同意，在加拉太书中，这是对基督徒经历的描述。

我认为保罗并不是说基督徒生活在罪孽之下是一种正常的生活——不断被罪孽控制和击败——而是在失败的时刻，罪孽占了上风，就像奴隶主暂时控制了一个实际上不属于他的人。我之所以这么想，是因为保罗在罗马书 6:12 和加拉太书 5:1 中都警告基督徒不要再次屈服于奴隶制的统治或束缚。

这是对罗马书 7:24 中反对意见的回应。一个真正的基督徒能呼喊：“谁能救我脱离这取死的身体？”我的回答是，一个真正的基督徒难道不能呼喊：“谁能救我脱离这取死的身体”吗？

v14

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

14 Paul now explains (Gk. gar) how it is that sin has been able to “work death in ‘me’ through that which is good” (v. 13). This could happen, Paul asserts, p 477 because, while the law is indeed good and spiritual, “I” am “fleshly.” Verses 15–25 justify and develop this statement about himself, concluding from his tragic inability to put into practice what he knows to be right (vv. 15–21) that he is controlled by an alien and negative force—“the law of sin” (vv. 22–23). It is because of his captivity to the power of sin that the law can become the instrument of death.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

In calling himself “fleshly,” Paul may mean no more than that he is human, subject to the frailty of all human beings, whether Christian or not.814 But the contrast with “spiritual” points to a more negative meaning. As in 1 Cor. 3:1–3, where “fleshly” is contrasted with “spiritual,” “fleshly” means “carnal,” subject to, and under the influence of, this world.815 Since “fleshly” in 1 Cor. 3:1 is applied to Christians, it is clear that this adjective itself does not require that the egō be unregenerate.

v17

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

17 “But now … no longer” is logical, not temporal; it states what must “now,” in light of the argument of vv. 15–16, “no longer” be considered true. And what is no longer true, Paul says, is that he can be considered the one who is “doing” these actions that he deplores. At first sight, Paul would appear to be saying something unlikely and, indeed, dangerous: that he is not responsible for his actions. But this is not what he means. His point is that his failure to put into action what he wills to do shows that there is something besides himself involved in the situation. If we had only to do with him, in the sense of that part of him which agrees with God’s law and wills to do it, we would not be able to explain why he consistently does what he does not want to do. No, Paul reasons, there must be another “actor” in the drama, another factor that interferes with his performance of what he wants to do. This other factor is indwelling sin. Sin is not a power that operates outside people, making them do its bidding; sin is something resident in the very being, “dwelling”828 within people, ruling over them like a master over a slave (v. 14b).829

Because of this power of “sin dwelling in me,” Paul is frustrated in carrying out what he knows to be God’s good will. Paul does not, then, transfer responsibility for doing wrong from the individual to an outside influence; he p 482 fixes that responsibility on that power within the person which leads that person to do what is wrong. Because of our involvement in the sin of Adam, sin has become resident in all people; and those outside Christ—such as the Jew under the law, as Paul once was—cannot ultimately resist sin’s power. Thus they are unable to do the good that God requires of them (see 3:9–18; 8:7–8).

v18

For example, he says in Romans 7:18, “I know that nothing good dwells in me” — and then he qualifies it — “that is, in my flesh.” Now, if Paul is here giving a Christian assessment of his pre-Christian experience, then why does he add to the statement “nothing good dwells in me” the qualifier “that is, in my flesh”?

I think, in Paul’s view, the pre-Christian person is only flesh. Only a Christian is more than fallen flesh. He has the Holy Spirit, and that’s why Paul has to say that qualifier: “that is, in my flesh.” There is a good thing in me — namely, the Holy Spirit. So he’s not talking about the pre-Christian Paul, I think.

v22-23

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

One of the strongest arguments in favor of p 485 identifying the egō in this passage with the Christian is the claim that only those regenerated by God’s Spirit can truly “delight in” God’s law.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

(2) For these reasons, I believe that “the other law” is not God’s law in any form, but an “authority” or “demand” that is like, but opposed to, the Mosaic law.852 As in 3:27, Paul plays on the word nomos to create a rhetorically effective antithesis: “I, in my inner being, delight in and accept the authority of the Mosaic law; but I see a competing ‘authority,’ operating in my members.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

Thus sin, working in and through the flesh, makes demands on and gains authority over egō; it can be called “the law of sin.” Using military language, Paul describes this “law of sin” as “waging war”856 against “the law of my mind.” p 488 “Mind” refers to the reasoning side of a person.857 Paul makes clear that the reason of people apart from Christ is perverted and darkened, preventing them from thinking correctly about God and the world.858 Here, however, Paul implies that the mind is an ally of God’s law; many therefore conclude that Paul must be describing a Christian, with a renewed mind able to respond favorably to God’s will.859

v24-25

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

Paul’s cry for deliverance from “the body of this death”862 might express his longing, as a Christian, for physical resurrection (8:10)863 or his desire, as a non-Christian, for rescue from spiritual frustration and condemnation.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

25 Paul immediately supplies the answer to the plea of v. 24b: “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Yet the chapter does not end on this triumphant note but returns to a final description of egō in conflict, as this has been delineated in vv. 15–23. This sequence is one of the most oft-cited arguments in favor of the view that Paul is describing Christian experience in 7:14–25. For Paul’s renewed confession of struggle, after the thanksgiving for deliverance, suggests that the divided egō is precisely that egō which knows that deliverance comes through God’s work in Christ.

The Letter to the Romans (Second Edition) (b. Life under the Law (7:13–25))

On any reading p 490 of the passage, v. 25a is anticipatory of a victory yet to come: on the regenerate view, anticipatory of the final deliverance from the “mortal body” depicted in 8:10, 23; on the unregenerate view, anticipatory of deliverance from sin and death depicted in 8:2–4.

v14

《罗马书》（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13-25））

14 保罗现在解释（希腊语 gar）罪如何能够“通过那善行使‘我’死亡”（第 13 节）。保罗断言，这种情况可能发生，第 477 页，因为虽然律法确实是善的和属灵的，但“我”是“属肉体的”。第 15-25 节证明并发展了关于他自己的这一说法，从他无法将他所知道的正确的事情付诸实践的悲剧性无能（第 15-21 节）得出结论，他被一种外来的负面力量——“罪的律”​​（第 22-23 节）所控制。正是由于他被罪的力量所束缚，律法才成为死亡的工具。

v14：律法是良善的，但我是属肉体的

v15-17：我不能做自己想做的是因为内在的罪

v18-21：在肉体中没有良善以至于顺从罪

v22-23：罪的律和神的律在我里面相争

v24-25：靠着耶稣基督从必死的身体中解脱

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13–25））

保罗称自己为“属肉体的人”，可能只是表示他是人，受制于所有人类的弱点，无论是否是基督徒。814 但与“属灵的”形成对比，则指向更负面的含义。正如在哥林多前书 3:1-3 中，“属肉体”与“属灵的”形成对比，“属肉体”的意思是“肉欲的”，受制于这个世界并受其影响。815 由于哥林多前书 3:1 中的“属肉体”适用于基督徒，因此很明显，这个形容词本身并不要求自我是未重生的。

v17

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13–25））

17 “但现在……不再”是合乎逻辑的，而不是暂时的；它陈述了根据第 15-16 节的论点，“现在”必须“不再”认为是真实的事情。保罗说，不再真实的是，他可以被认为是“做”这些他所谴责的行为的人。乍一看，保罗似乎在说一些不太可能而且确实很危险的事情：他不对自己的行为负责。但这不是他的意思。他的观点是，他未能将自己想做的事情付诸行动表明，除了他自己之外，还有其他因素参与了这种情况。如果我们只与他打交道，从他同意上帝的律法并愿意这样做的那部分意义上讲，我们就无法解释为什么他一贯做他不想做的事情。不，保罗推断，戏剧中一定有另一个“演员”，另一个因素干扰了他想做的事情的表演。这个另一个因素是内在的罪。罪不是在人之外运作的力量，让他们听从它的命令；罪是存在于人身上的东西，“居住”828 在人们里面，像主人统治奴隶一样统治他们（第 14b 节）。829

由于这种“罪居住在我里面”的力量，保罗在执行他所知道的上帝的善意时感到沮丧。因此，保罗并没有将做错事的责任从个人转移到外部影响上；他把责任归咎于导致该人做错事的人身上的力量。由于我们参与了亚当的罪，罪已成为所有人的住所；而那些基督以外的人——比如保罗曾经是律法下的犹太人——最终无法抵抗罪的力量。因此，他们无法做上帝要求他们做的好事（见 3:9-18；8:7-8）。

v18

例如，他在罗马书 7:18 中说：“我知道在我里头没有良善”——然后他限定了它——“就是在我肉体之中。”现在，如果保罗在这里以基督徒的身份评价他成为基督徒之前的经历，那么为什么他在“我里面没有良善”这句话后面加上限定词“就是我肉体中的”？

我认为，在保罗看来，成为基督徒之前的人只是肉体。只有基督徒才不仅仅是堕落的肉体。他有圣灵，这就是为什么保罗必须说那个限定词：“就是我肉体中的”。我里面有一件好事——也就是圣灵。所以我认为他不是在谈论成为基督徒之前的保罗。

v22-23

支持第 485 页将这段经文中的自我与基督徒联系起来的最有力论据之一是，只有那些被上帝的灵重生的人才能真正“享受”上帝的律法。

（2）出于这些原因，我相信“另一条律法”不是任何形式的上帝律法，而是一种与摩西律法相似但相反的“权威”或“要求”。852 正如在 3:27 中一样，保罗使用 nomos 这个词来创造一个修辞上有效的对立面：“在我的内心里，我喜爱并接受摩西律法的权威；但我看到一个竞争的‘权威’在我的成员中运作。

因此，罪在肉体中并通过肉体运作，对自我提出要求并获得权威；它可以被称为“罪的律”​​。保罗用军事语言将这种“罪的律”​​描述为“与我心灵的律”856“作战”。第 488 页“心灵”是指人的推理方面。857 保罗明确指出，基督以外的人的推理是扭曲和黑暗的，阻止他们正确思考上帝和世界。858 然而，在这里，保罗暗示心灵是上帝律法的盟友；因此，许多人得出结论，保罗一定是在描述一个基督徒，他有一个更新的思想，能够对上帝的旨意做出积极的回应。859

v24-25

罗马书（第二版）（b. 律法下的生活（7:13-25））

保罗呼求从“这取死的身体”862 中解脱出来，这可能表达了他作为基督徒对肉体复活的渴望（8:10）863，或者他作为非基督徒对从精神挫折和谴责中解脱出来的渴望。

25保罗立即回答了第 24b 节的请求：“感谢上帝，靠着我们的主耶稣基督就能脱离苦难。”然而，本章并没有以这个胜利的音符结束，而是回到了对冲突中的自我的最后描述，因为这已经在第 15-23 节中进行了描述。这个序列是支持保罗在 7:14–25 中描述基督徒经历的观点的最常被引用的论据之一。因为保罗在感恩拯救之后重新承认挣扎，表明分裂的自我正是知道拯救来自上帝在基督里的工作的自我。

阅读这段经文的任何第 490 页，第 25a 节都预示着即将到来的胜利：从重生的观点来看，预示着最终从 8:10、23 中描述的“必死的身体”中解脱；从未重生的观点来看，预示着从 8:2–4 中描述的罪恶和死亡中解脱。