Re: Romans 7.25 (ho autos)
Bzzz, sorry, J. D. G. Dunn got in first.
See his Romans commentary in the Word series.
His translation is `So then I myself . . .' but in his
notes he says:
"The `autos' intensifies and emphasizes the `ego' (BGD, `autos' 1).
But it does not follow, as Kuss rightly notes, that we should translate
`I thrown on my own resources' (BGD), `I left to myself' (Moffatt),
or `I left on my own', that is, before or without Christ
([heaps of references deleted]); that conculsion is determined
more by a particular line of interpretation than by the force of
the words themselves. The `I' which speaks is both the fleshly
`I' (v. 14) and the `inner person/man' (v. 22). The emphasis
is therefore to bring out the fact that it is one and the same `I'
on both sides of the warfare and servitude, carefully expressed
in the `men . . de . . .' construction that follows."
Actually, I am interested in hearing what people think about
the switch from past to present in the middle of Romans 7.
Is it a switch from Adam to Paul (and us) (Dunn's view),
or us before to after conversion, or what? And does
Hebrew `aspect' figure in all this?