Romans 7:2 - Where do we find this law?

[Ron Amnsn]

In his illustration at the beginning of Romans 7 the apostle Paul refers to a law that says, "For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage." (NIV) 

Presumably everyone knows that.  But where do we know it from?  Is that law found in God's Law somewhere, or was it one of the laws of Jewish culture or tradition?  Or do we know it only from this passage? 

Apparently Paul wasn't making up a new law, since he was "speaking to those who know the law" and he expected them to know already how it worked.

[Gregory Matthews]

For a similar verse see I Cor. 7:39

To respond to your question:  I do not know.

 

[Ron Amnsn]

6 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

For a similar verse see I Cor. 7:39

That is helpful.

Maybe it is significant that in Romans 7 Paul expected "those who know the law" to be familiar with the body of law containing the marriage law that he referred to, but in 1Corinthians 7 Paul gives the same ruling explicitly to be followed because some (or all) of the believers in Corinth did not already know and follow the body of law in which that marriage law was found. 

Or maybe Paul just repeated the law in 1Corinthians 7 because he was going to comment on that particular marriage practice, which all the believers were already familiar with and following.

 

[8thdaypriest]

From Paul we also get:  1 Corinthians 11:3  But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ. (NRS)

It appears that a women had no legal right to divorce her husband.  The husband could divorce his wife if she left him.  

Apparently men in Judea could legally divorce their wives for just about any reason.  They had to give a "certificate of divorce" to the wife, before sending her back to her father's house.  IF she had committed adultery, then the husband did NOT have to give her this certificate.  Which is why Jesus' teaching was radical, when He told his followers to divorce only for adultery.  And Paul later said that believing spouses could separate, but must remain celibate or be reconciled.  One assumes in these cases, there had NOT been adultery.

[8thdaypriest]

IF the "husband is HEAD of the wife", then a widow no longer has that "head". 

Widows are mentioned in the OT, who remarried.  Most notably Abigail (widow of Nabal) David's second wife, and Ruth who married Boaz.

The LORD speaking to Israel said:    4"Fear not, for you will not be put to shame; And do not feel humiliated, for you will not be disgraced; But you will forget the shame of your youth, And the reproach of your widowhood you will remember no more.

QUESTION:  When was Israel widowed? 

Was it not when Yeshua Messiah DIED on a cross?  Was Israel not betrothed (married) to Him at the first Passover? 

   Jeremiah 31:32 “‘the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD.’”

NOTE:  That "day" was Nissan 15, which began at sundown of the 14th - the day they ate the Passover lamb.  

Isaiah 54:5  “For your Maker is your husband, The LORD of hosts is His name; And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel; He is called the God of the whole earth.”

    Jeremiah 3:14 “Return, O backsliding children,’ says the LORD; ‘for I am married to you.”

    Jeremiah 2:1-3 “Thus says the LORD: I remember you, the kindness of your youth, the love of your betrothal, when you went after Me in the wilderness . . .”

        Anciently the betrothal was the binding marriage covenant.  Adultery during this period of betrothal, was punishable with death.  

Ezekiel 16:32  “You are an adulterous wife, who takes strangers instead of her husband.”

    Ezekiel 16:38  [Speaking of Jerusalem] “I will judge you as women who break wedlock or shed blood are judged; I will bring blood upon you in fury and jealousy.” 

[JoeMo]

Matt. 22, Mark 12; and Luke 20 also discuss this law (in an effort to trap Jesus).  I couldn't find the explicit law in the OT; but Lev. 21:14; Deut. 25:5; and Ezek 44:22 indirectly refer to such a law.

[phkrause]

I was looking for that too, but couldn't find anything!! I'm sure I've seen something to what Paul is talking about? Lets say we never find it, it seems that Paul is telling us right here in that verse what the law about marriage, don't you think?

[8thdaypriest]

Revelation 21:9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, "Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb."

The New Jerusalem is the "bride" - "the wife" of the Lamb.

NT believers are said to be "betrothed" to the risen Christ.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. (NKJ)

Christ is "head" of the church (congregation) as a husband is head of his own wife.

At this point believers are BETROTHED.   The "wedding feast" has not yet taken place.   The consummation has not yet taken place. 

In the parable, Christ is described as returning FROM the wedding, not for the wedding. 

Luke 12:36 "and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately.

Maybe the legal ceremony (the betrothal) takes place in Heaven, when Christ is given dominion of this earth (and of all human kind). 

Perhaps "the wedding" is the ceremony whereby Jesus Christ is "betrothed".  It is not the 7 day "wedding feast", during which the marriage is consummated (according to ancient tradition).

I do not yet understand why believers are portrayed as "guests" in the parable, and are said to be the "betrothed" "wife" in the NT ??

In Matthew 22, the "marriage feast" is all ready, but those invited (as guests) would not come (or showed up without a wedding garment).

In Matthew 25, ten virgins are waiting FOR the "bridegroom".  When the bridegroom arrived, the five wise virgins "went in with him to the wedding (feast?) and the door was shut. 

Presumably the wise virgins "went in" as GUESTS. 

IF Luke 12:36 is a parallel passage, then the "bridegroom" comes FROM the wedding (or marriage ceremony), and his servants then go with Him into the marriage feast.

Maybe - we are LIKE guests, but we are also LIKE a bride.   Maybe Christ turns "guests" into "bride".  Maybe some are  "married" to Christ, while others (the nations) remain as guests.

I find the inconsistencies disconcerting.  They are confusing.  I want all the pieces to fit. 

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

so who is going to peek into who's window to figure these things out?

I agree to a point. I would just add that there are a few things that we have no business looking into, when it comes to other people. Only if we intend to "...Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves..." (2 Cor 13:5)

PS I am not saying my comment to or about you personally. Just the idea of how confusing this all gets when we try to figure it out in every detail for every body. Thats not where God was going with all this stuff.

So - where do you believe "God was going with all this stuff" ??

Mark 4:34 "He did not speak to them without a parable. But privately he explained everything to his own disciples." (NET)

The betrothal, the wedding feast, the bride, the son, the rich man, the wife, the vineyard, the vine, the cursed fig tree, the foolish son who later returned to his father,  the "loyal" son who stayed home, the workers in the field, the coin, the lamp, seeds and weeds, baptism and birth  - all were simile or metaphor - symbolic in the parables that Christ spoke.   Why would we today not seek to understand the meaning (or meanings)?  

Some believe that Ellen White explained all these things, and we need look no further than her writings.  While I can agree that the explanations in her writings are, for the most part very good, I do not believe that she understood all there is to know.  I also believe she wrote some things with serious error (or at least those things were published in her name).  

I believe that we must keep seeking, and keep mining for the precious ore, thereby to better understand our God and His Son, and our relationship with them.  Mrs White herself encouraged her readers to do so.

This seeking and digging must not take away from serving our neighbors unselfishly. 

It must not take away from serving the LORD with heart and strength, which means we teach others and we keep His Law.   (The debate here concerns just how we should keep God's Law today. Was something changed at the cross that effects the way in which we keep His Law?)

[8thdaypriest]

19 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

And there is one "parable" being over-looked here. The one about the woman "caught" in adultery.

My understanding was that this was a real event - not a parable.  That woman really was "caught" in adultery.  Jesus really did begin to write the sins of her accusers in the dirt.