Understanding Romans 7:16-17: Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones' Exposition

What is the first deduction Paul draws in Romans 7:16?

According to Dr. Lloyd-Jones, the first deduction Paul makes is that if he does what he does not want to do, he is consenting to the law that it is good. This is "an obvious and inevitable piece of logic." The apostle is saying that his regret over his actions shows he agrees with what the law says about these actions. The word "consent" means "I speak with" - indicating he approves of the law and goes alongside it. This deduction proves that Paul is not criticizing the law itself, but rather demonstrating that "the law itself is in no way responsible for his failure in practice."

What is the second deduction Paul makes in Romans 7:17?

The second deduction in verse 17 is that "it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Dr. Lloyd-Jones calls this "one of the most daring and profound things that has ever been said" and "one of the most astonishing statements in the whole of the Bible." Paul is identifying a division within the personality he's describing - a duality where part of him recognizes the spiritual character of the law and agrees with it, while another part causes him to sin despite his desire not to.

What does Paul mean by "sin that dwelleth in me"?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones explains that Paul reveals two profound truths about sin here. First, "sin is something that dwells in us, takes up its home in us" - it's not something that merely comes from outside as temptation but is "in our very nature" from birth. Second, sin has "terrible power" - it's "more powerful than the voice of conscience... more powerful than a man's willpower" and even "more powerful than the man who has now been given to see the spiritual character of the law." This reveals why mere knowledge, education, or moral teaching can never solve humanity's sin problem.

Why does Dr. Lloyd-Jones say this passage is difficult to interpret?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones acknowledges this is "one of the most difficult passages" he's ever had to handle. The difficulty stems from: 1. The complex psychology Paul is describing 2. The different uses of "I" and "me" that seem contradictory 3. The division within the person being described 4. The complicated nature of sin itself

He notes that even Paul found it difficult to express, which is why Paul inserted clarifying phrases like "that is, in my flesh" in verse 18. Lloyd-Jones states, "This thing is difficult because sin is difficult. What sin did when it came into the world was to introduce complications."

Who is the "I" that Paul refers to in this passage?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones explains that Paul uses "I" in different ways throughout the passage: - Sometimes "I" refers to the whole personality or the person acting - Sometimes "I" refers to the part of the person that recognizes the spiritual character of the law - In verse 18, Paul even distinguishes between two different "me's" within the same person

This duality is critical because "this is a duality that is never found in an unregenerate person." The unregenerate person does not experience this internal division; they are "one in thought and in action" while their conscience troubles them from "outside themselves."

What is Dr. Lloyd-Jones' main conclusion about this passage?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones concludes that Paul's main purpose is not simply to share his personal experience but to demonstrate three key truths:

1. Paul is not disclaiming responsibility for his actions or excusing himself
2. Paul is showing the terrible, exceeding sinfulness and power of sin
3. Paul is demonstrating "the complete inability of the law to deliver us, even when you see clearly the spiritual character of the law"

The passage ultimately shows that "the law can never deliver us" from sin and that our only hope is to be "married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead" - Jesus Christ.