Romans 7:14-25: The Christian's Remaining Sin and Hope for Future Deliverance (part 8)

by Danny Pelichowski

Contextual Arguments Against the Reformed View: "Allegory"

Another contextual argument that may persuade many to believe that Romans 7:14-25 is not the experience of Paul as a believer is made by the respected scholar Douglas Moo in his Romans commentary. Describing his view of Romans 7:7-25 he states that “Paul is describing his own, and other Jews’, experience with the law of Moses: how that law came to the Jewish people and brought them not “life” but “death” (vv.7-12); and how that law failed, because the reign of the flesh, to deliver Jews from the power of sin (vv. 13-25).”[26] There are some who argue that this passage only deals with Israel by itself and does not have anything to do with the person Paul. The arguments made by these interpreters are wholly allegorical and Dr. Moo uses them to describe especially his view of Romans 7:7-11.[27] The clearest example of this can be seen when he interprets Romans 7:11: “so sin, through the law, “killed” Israel. But although this happened in accordance with the intention of God (cf. 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. Though it is the experience of Israel with the Mosaic law that Paul here describes, the Jews’ experience is symptomatic of that of all people who, in various ways, are confronted with God’s law.”[28] It must also be recognized that Dr. Moo adds the autobiographical aspect into his interpretation in order to make sense of the personal description Paul uses throughout Romans 7:7-25 lessening the overall bent towards allegory. However, as observed, there are portions where Dr. Moo’s exegesis is entirely allegorical.

In brief response, there is no reason to perceive Israel as a nation in this passage unless there is a desire to prove the unregenerate view of Romans 7:14-25. This interpretation has already been charged as an unwarranted allegorical explanation and it is better to view Paul’s personal past and present experience exclusively to be the theme of Romans 7:7-25. There are many nuances to Dr. Moo’s argument that cannot be delved into in the limited space of this paper however this preliminary conclusion should suffice to further continue with an exposition of the text.
_______________________________
26. Douglas Moo, The Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary: Romans 1-8 452
27. Ibid 452, 454, 455, 465
28. Ibid 456