Paul and the concept of ‘sin’ as discussed in Romans 1-8

This is basically self explanatory. Well, the title's straightforward anyway. Hope it's beneficial for you!

Much like many of the ideas that Paul discussed in his letters, it seems that sin is not necessarily a straight-forward matter, but an idea that has many facets. While certainly a word used to describe transgressions and wrongdoings against God, it is also a word that describes a condition that the entirety of man finds themselves in. Some of the language that is used to convey these ideas is phrases that talk about being ‘in’ or ‘of’ the flesh and the spirit. What this language suggests is that there are two distinct, yet linked ideas that Paul is talking about: a temporal, surface level, and action based set of moral codes and a state of existence from which the former flows. In short, what Paul discusses is sin being understood two ways: being justified and adopted by the Father and the imperfection that is a result of being part of a fallen creation.

The overarching theme of Paul’s discourse on being ‘justified’ or ‘righteous’ is that all the world is guilty and that no one is righteous before God by their actions. Paul pretty well sums up what he builds toward in the first few remarks in 3:23, telling the readers that not a single human has ever been without sin because they are part of the fallen creation that groans for restoration (chapter 8). While not worded in such a way that is particularly clear (see later note on 2:9, 10), Paul does firmly establish that no one can be righteous or justified before God of their own accord. It is important to remember Paul’s Jewish background in order to properly process the message of Romans. Judaism prescribes observance of Torah and ritual and atonement sacrifice as necessary to be on good terms with God, so Paul’s language concerning grace abounding all the more is a paradigm shift at best. As we have before discussed, the key issue being expounded upon is a dichotomy between a condition of existence and the repercussions that flow from being obedient or disobedient.

First, we will address the idea of sin being a condition. It is interesting that Paul calls himself the ‘chief of sinners’ (that is, if we take the letters to Timothy to be written by Paul) but does not mention specifically how or in what way he justifies that claim. In both letters to Corinthians, Galatians and in Acts, we learn that Paul has pursued righteousness through obeying the commands of the Law and has surpassed many in this way, but we also see him discounting his own righteousness as being useless in comparison with that of Christ. This idea, along with the mindset of sin being a condition of one’s existence and a multitude of other issues, is brought about by the incarnation of God as man in Jesus Christ. Theoretically speaking, Jews pursued righteousness through adherence to a system, which included Temple sacrifices, observances of festivals, and striving for perfectly obeying the Law. We already know from Galatians 2 and 3 what Paul has to say about the Law, which is that it was and is a tutor to lead us to Christ. This idea comes to fruition in Paul using language that rules the individual out of the equation and simply categorizes all humans into one category: not worthy of the glory (i.e. the presence, mercy, gifts, love, etc.) of God. I think it is important to note that Paul does not say a specific person is a sinner if they do or do not do something, but instead chooses to group prophets, tax-collectors, kings, prostitutes, and even the likes of Moses and Abraham into the one category of imperfection. With this, we see that Paul is not suggesting that people start doing good things in order to earn God’s gifts, but says that God is glorified in taking us from where we are (in sin) to being justified before Him as righteous (i.e. ‘saved’). Paul, wanting to be very careful about the order in which the message is received (so as not to bring about another Corinth episode), tells his readers that 1) God is utterly perfect and has always been so 2) all people have fallen short of his perfection 3) there is nothing to be done on our part to right or correct that and 4) He is pleased to correct it in fulfillment of the Law: Jesus’ death and resurrection. His thoughts on these ideas and the work of Jesus almost certainly reflect Paul’s view on what the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel concerning the Son of Man and the future restoration mean to Him: God, as an incarnate man, fulfilled his promises to restore His people through His own work.

Now, if Paul only means that there is a condition of sin and talking about actions of sin is of no importance, be have missed no less than half of that he has written to the churches that he planted. Since Paul had never been to Rome before, there was little that he actually knew about them and almost no rebuke or correction that he could offer. Instead, he follows up all of the talk about sin being a condition and grace being a gift with a reminder that grace is not there to be defiled and spit in the face of, but like Galatians 5, it would also seem that he suggests that obedience to God is an out-flowing of understanding the work of Jesus and loving Him in response, just as the fruit of the Spirit comes from having the Spirit and not the other way around. How then does Paul make sense of the dichotomy between righteousness before the judgment of God and pursuing righteousness (which he certainly urges the people to do)? The answer is probably found in Paul’s understanding of the Kingdom of God, which is basically that the Kingdom of God is at hand and is still yet to come. If we follow this out to its logical end, it only makes sense that the only way we can please God is to depend on the work of Jesus (3:23) and the only way we can please God is to live in Him (as opposed to the flesh) right now (8:8).

How these ideas come together is probably best explained by Paul’s language about flesh. We can see that Paul has categorized every non-Jesus of Nazareth human being as in the condition of sin, but we also see that Jesus’ work is the prescribed ‘fix’ for that. The bottom line for Paul is that we are all born of flesh, but we are emancipated from that status by Christ. It is possible to not be of the flesh, but to still live in the flesh. It would seem that Paul’s use of the word ‘flesh’ makes it the very antithesis to his language for being ‘in Christ’ and that the language is very similar. If we take this to be true, the most complete way to talk about one’s nature is summarized in three statements.  All are born living in the flesh and apart from Christ (i.e. imperfect, away from God). The work of Christ emancipates from the flesh and allows God to adopt us as children. Those who are in Christ are still able to live as if apart from Christ and in the flesh, which is what he warns against in chapters 7 and 8.

In thoroughly inspecting Paul’s language, it would seem right that he talks about the separate, yet not divorced ideas of temporal sin and sin as a nature. Therefore, in light of understanding the perspective Paul’s takes on the Kingdom of God (and by extension, reality) is like, we see that his message is two-fold: 1) there is nothing that can be done to fix our relationship with God 2) we should strive not to keep messing it up. In saying this, Paul suggests that our ability to do what displeases God of our own accord does not point toward being able to so please Him, showing again his shift from the standard paradigm of Judaism.