From: Mark Goodacre (goodacms@m4-arts.bham.ac.uk)
Date: Thu May 22 1997 - 10:25:18 EDT
Dear everyone
I have been forwarding our correspondence on Rom. 7 to Dr Matthew
Brookes in Canada who first alerted me to this way of reading the
analogy. He responded to me as follows and I think states things
rather coherently, and so worth circulating:
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 16:03:54 -0400
To: <GOODACMS@m4-arts.bham.ac.uk>
From: Matthew Brookes <brookes@gh1.sims.nrc.ca>
Subject: Rom 7
Dear Mark,
The saga unfolds! It's made me reflect that despite what Jim
Beale says actually Paul's choice of analogy is perfect, because the
law of marriage IS so specific. In other words, the law of marriage
applies only to a specific relationship, ie the two between whom the
marriage covenant is made. Although the law of marriage is global in
its significance, it is necessarily local in its application- 'til
death do us part' - ie the law has a built in self destruct clause
which comes into operation when one partner dies. And it is that law
which 'binds the woman to her husband'. Once the husband is dead,
that law is null and void- it isn't transferred to the new
relationship, it's left behind in the past, and the new relationship
is governed by a new law (in the analogy, the law of the Spirit which
is Life in Christ Jesus (8v2) rather than life in the flesh). That
seems to me to be Paul's emphasis, that the law was never intended to
be anything other than a stopgap- ie it had built in redundancy- it
expires when 'the fullness of time had come', and Christ 'born under
the law redeems those under the law'- by his death we are bought out
of the slavery of the law into the freedom of life in the Spirit.
God bless,
Matthew
------------------------
Dr Mark Goodacre
Department of Theology
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham B15 2TT
Tel.: 0121 414 7512 Email: M.S.Goodacre@Bham.ac.uk
Fax.: 0121 414 6866
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:16 EDT