Romans 7.15-20 ‘what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate, I do”

Romans 7:15-20 St. Paul - “I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do , but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do , I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but its sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do - this I keep on doing. Now if I fo what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but is is sin living in me that does it.”

This so speaks to our thoughts on ‘addiction’ today. The old language of morality was that Good and God were permanent and immutable while world was temporary and impermanent.  This speaks to ego and self too.  The ancients saw the self and false self or ego.  The self was connected to God as the ‘nous’.  This ‘conscience’ or good desire versus the ‘Sin’ which ‘missing the mark’.  I could have good intentions but my desire to do right could be thwarted .  The word to ‘sin’ was an archery term referring to missing the bulls eye.  

Today we consider addiction in the same way. There’s genetic predisposition.  The identical twin alcoholic has a 50% chance of being addicted if his identical sibling is regardless of whether they are raised together. The genetic predisposition is greater for alcohol than other addictions but shows that there’s a variety of ease of becoming addicted depending on parents and grand parents.  

The environment obviously plays a role but where alcohol is banned other addictions prevail.

Evil wasn’t so much Hollywood as just ‘wrong’.  There were spiritual laws, often seen in they Biblical proverbs and other wise sayings that people learned were keys to a good life. Thou shalt not murder is as valid a saying as ‘don’t spit into the wind’ or ‘don’t shit where you eat’.  

The Christian ideal is that there is a loving God and a friend in Jesus who wants you to succeed.  

The road to hell is paved with good intentions says that mostly people aren’t truly psychopathic but go astray.  The metaphor of the journey or the path is throughout spiritual literature.  Detours and set backs abound but there remains the ‘wee small voice’ that can be called Jesus or the Holy Spirit and this points the ‘best’ way. I would argue that this isn’t the ‘only’ way is good guidance like parents give to their children having years of earthly experience before them.

Now Paul is verbose and interprets Christ.  In the NIV there are Bibles with the gospels showing the words or Jesus in red.  Paul shares and interprets Jesus sayings and message. I think he’s right a lot but I disagree with him in some things.  As Christians we reinterpret the teachings for the times.  

This passage is critical though.  It speaks to the essence of morality social and individual.  

Personally I find there is this ‘best intent’.  Today I plan to eat less chocolate, exercise more, fast whatever. What ever is what I consider ‘good today’.  The outcome analysis of my day too often shows that I’ve not exercised as much as intended and I’ve eaten more chocolate.

The ‘flesh is weak’ refers to the ‘war’ that goes on within me between what I ‘intend’ and what I do.  Jesus is God. He sets an example of what I am to do.  The Bible is the source of his statements and the interpretations of his sayings and those of his followers to this day.  My mentor Dr. Willi Gutowski recommended reading the Bible every day.  He and his family did at meal time.  I continue to study the Bible and find it as source of great solace and truth.  

___________

I was raised Baptist.  The Baptist church was a split from the Anglican Church which split from the Catholic Church.  The Anglicans rejected the Pope as the leader of the church.  The Pope is not only the head of the spiritual church but also the head of the Vatican state or country.  Protestants as a group broke from the secular leadership while following much of the same spiritual teaching.  The Church of England rejected the Church of Rome.  Baptists and Mennonites argued most forcefully for ‘separation of state and religion’.  This is fundamental to the American constitution.  Anglicans or Episcopaleans have the King of England as the head of the church.  Baptists see the church as separate from secular society.  They’ve maintained this since 1600’s and the American constitution did  the same.

It’s important to know that Islam has no such separation of church and state.  By Western standards they are 400 years behind social development as are the Buddhists who have a king who heads their church and their religions.  Communism is the religion of aetheism and they do not separate their religious or their prophet Marx or Mao from their state.  

Baptists believed in full immersion of the disciple wanting to be baptised and join the Christian faith. By contrast Catholics and Anglicans believe that an infant can be immersed or sprinkled and they are Christian.  Affirmation of Christianity is done when a person is older and cognizant.  The Baptists believe that a child who dies without baptisms is still pure and goes to heaven while the Catholics believe the child is of this temporal world, sinful so to speak, and impure.  

This is all going on today with the membership of the United States. Can one be ‘American’ legal, illegally or by birth but not live there.  It’s a similar discussion of belonging and who’s in and who’s out.  Are you with me or agin me. Which team are you on.  Baptists believed that God loves us all.  Christians believe that god loves all in general. The image of Satan that Merton wrote in Paraside Lost was of the Devil willfully refusing to turn to god.

We see this in addiction with people insisting it’s their ‘choice’ and their ‘right’ to be impaired and not suffer consequences of their substance abuse. This is seen with the fellow who seeks charity after spending all his money on some addiction and in other societies and cultures he ‘suffered’ consequences .

The whole notion of mens rhea and intent is central to western society whereas ‘determinism’ and ‘fate’ and ‘choice’ remain strong considerations for all that is happening in the world individually and as societies.