From: Ronald Wong (
Date: Sun Feb 23 1997 - 15:19:40 EST

Jonathan Robie wrote:
> I'm trying to make a distinction which requires a precise understanding of this phrase, and I'm not sure whether the phrase itself is specific enough to support the distinction. I *think* it is, and I'd be interested in other opinions.
> Roma 7:22 (GNT) sunhdomai gar tw nomw tou qeou kata ton esw anqrwpon
> In this passage, Paul talks about hH OIKOUSA EN EMOI hAMARTIA in contrast to TON ESW ANQRWPON, and seems to be treating them as two different "persons" within him.
> Is it fair to say that KATA means "in accordance with" here, so that there is an EGW here which is separate from TON ESW ANQRWPON, and which chooses between them?

Though I see where you're going...I don't think that Paul is looking
"from without," separating himself from "hH OIKOUSA EN EMOI hAMARTIA"
and "TON ESW ANQRWPON." Though both are seemingly persons within him.
We see that the phrases deal with two natures:
        1. what _I_ desire (QELW)
        2. What _I_ do (POIEW)

I would say...let me say guess instead...that Paul knows what he desires
to do...but what he actually does isn't that!
A question which arises with difficulty then would be: Is the "living
sin" involuntary?
Along with the other Exegetical questions....*sigh* I've seem to raise
more questions than answered. :)

more ramblings....
Ronald Wong
O'Brien, FL

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT