Romans 4:16

4:16 For this reason it is by faith so that it may be by grace, ¹  with the result that the promise may be certain to all the descendants – not only to those who are under the law, but also to those who have the faith of Abraham, ²  who is the father of us all

Romans 7:3

7:3 So then, ³  if she is joined to another man while her husband is alive, she will be called an adulteress. But if her ⁴  husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she is joined to another man, she is not an adulteress.

Romans 7:7

7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I ⁵  would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else ⁶  if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” ⁷ 

Romans 13:4

13:4 for it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be in fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain. It is God’s servant to administer retribution on the wrongdoer.

[4:16]  ¹ tn Grk “that it might be according to grace.”

[4:16]  ² tn Grk “those who are of the faith of Abraham.”

[7:3]  ³ tn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing.

[7:3]  ⁴ tn Grk “the,” with the article used as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215).

[7:7]  ⁵ sn Romans 7:7-25. There has been an enormous debate over the significance of the first person singular pronouns (“I”) in this passage and how to understand their referent. Did Paul intend (1) a reference to himself and other Christians too; (2) a reference to his own pre-Christian experience as a Jew, struggling with the law and sin (and thus addressing his fellow countrymen as Jews); or (3) a reference to himself as a child of Adam, reflecting the experience of Adam that is shared by both Jews and Gentiles alike (i.e., all people everywhere)? Good arguments can be assembled for each of these views, and each has problems dealing with specific statements in the passage. The classic argument against an autobiographical interpretation was made by W. G. Kümmel, Römer 7 und die Bekehrung des Paulus. A good case for seeing at least an autobiographical element in the chapter has been made by G. Theissen, Psychologische Aspekte paulinischer Theologie [FRLANT], 181-268. One major point that seems to favor some sort of an autobiographical reading of these verses is the lack of any mention of the Holy Spirit for empowerment in the struggle described in Rom 7:7-25. The Spirit is mentioned beginning in 8:1 as the solution to the problem of the struggle with sin (8:4-6, 9).

[7:7]  ⁶ tn Grk “I would not have known covetousness.”

[7:7]  ⁷ sn A quotation from Exod 20:17 and Deut 5:21.