This thread is to meant to clear up an important point of translation/interpretation found in the writings of Paul the Apostle.
It is in response to another thread "Not under the Law", which unfortunately contains disinformation and is misleading.
We did a deep study of this, involving, Koine Greek, modern English idioms, and also translational practices, and present our findings again here.
Preliminaries:
To begin, we believe that most will agree at least on the basic meaning of the modern English idiom, "under the Law".
We also agree as to the basic intent of this common modern English idiom:
Greek Idioms and their Meaning:
Turning now to Paul and the original Greek, we find several similar idioms in the New Testament, each with its own meaning:
____________________________________________
(1) Romans 8:7 (υποτασσεται τω νομων) This is a full Greek idiom but not closely matching the modern English idiom above:
The point here should be further expounded: Paul does not say that the 'fleshly mind' is not obligated to keep the Law, but rather that it is incapable of obediance, which the Law nonetheless demands.
So "(not) obligated to keep" or "(not) under authority to" is actually an improper rendering here. Paul means that the 'fleshly mind' is in a state of transgression through wilful disobediance of the Law.
__________________________________________________
(2) Romans 3:19 (εν τω νομων) - This is another Greek expression which carries similar meaning to the modern English idiom above:
And it is translated just so, in the KJV (AV) and in many other more modern translations as well. The reason is essentially 'dynamic equivalence' or simply matching the meaning rather than the form of the Greek into good English.
In English, "in the Law" would actually be ambiguous, and possibly confusing.
In this case, the English translations generally are correct, clear and unambiguous, and carry the original intent of Paul quite well.
__________________________________________________
(3) Galat. 5:18 (υπο νομον) - "under the Law" (i.e., = under judgement, condemned by the Law, under the penalty prescribed for breaking the Law). Here we find a new expression, another Greek idiom, with a more sinister meaning:
It appears ONLY in Romans, 1st Cor. and Galatians. That is, it is an idiom unique to Paul, possibly originating in his Pharisee training and background. Since it is a technical term invented or coined by him, we must look to Paul to explain its meaning for us, by his own usage and exposition.
Thankfully, Paul provides the definition for us right in Galatians, the first letter to use this phrase.
Here Paul clearly says we are not under the Law, because we are no longer breaking it: "against these things (that we do, led by the Spirit) there isn't any law!".
The idea here is that Paul is claiming we are no longer under condemnation, because we are not transgressing the Law, since we have passed out from under what the Law condemns, and into what the Law approves!
Paul's whole argument would be pointless if the Law were actually cancelled and/or simply no longer applied to Christians, regardless of their behaviour.
In that case, Paul would have simply said,
We remain under the Law in Paul's sense, when we continue transgressing it by doing the works of the flesh, and committing sin, i.e., law breaking. Neither Paul's argument, nor its corollary would work if the Law were no longer in existance and/or applicable to Christians.
This meaning for (υπο νομον) "under the Law" (= condemned) is entirely different from the modern English phrase "under the Law" ('obligated to keep it').
The idea that we need not obey the Commandments finds no support from Paul here. And we certainly cannot arrive at an adequate understanding of Paul's meaning in this case by applying modern idioms in translation which are completely foreign to the Greek idiom Paul is using here.
We'll need Pauls own definition of this phrase (υπο νομον) "under the Law" again, to interpret properly other places where he uses the same expression. (i.e., Rom. 6:14-15, 1st Cor.9:20-21, Gal 3:23, 4:4-5, 21, 5:18).
_________________________________________________
When Paul actually suspends (or more accurately limits the application of) certain laws/obligations, (e.g., the food laws, circumcision and Jewish festivals), we have to look elsewhere for the explanation.
It cannot be found in any novel theory of lawlessness, or 'vanishing obligations' to the Law.
For more on Paul and the Law, try our other thread here:
http://www.christianforums.com/t2378362/
peace
Nazaroo
It is in response to another thread "Not under the Law", which unfortunately contains disinformation and is misleading.
We did a deep study of this, involving, Koine Greek, modern English idioms, and also translational practices, and present our findings again here.
Preliminaries:
To begin, we believe that most will agree at least on the basic meaning of the modern English idiom, "under the Law".
We also agree as to the basic intent of this common modern English idiom:
Nazaroo said:
The modern meaning of 'Under the Law' (an English idiom)
Nowadays, when we say 'under the law', we mean obligated to obey it. For instance, when driving a car, we are under the traffic laws, and are expected to obey them.
This is clearly what Gordon Ferguson* means when he says, 'We are not under the Mosaic legislation as a binding covenant.' and this is what modern readers understand by that expression.
(*quoting "Prepared to Answer" by Gordon Ferguson, p.173; a doctrinal handbook used by the "Church of Christ" USA, in the early 1990s)
Greek Idioms and their Meaning:
Turning now to Paul and the original Greek, we find several similar idioms in the New Testament, each with its own meaning:
____________________________________________
(1) Romans 8:7 (υποτασσεται τω νομων) This is a full Greek idiom but not closely matching the modern English idiom above:
"Therefore the carnal mind is at enmity with God; For it is not subject to the Law of God, nor indeed can it be."
διοτι το φρονημα της σαρκος εχθρα εις θεον τω γαρ νομω του θεου ουχ υποτασσεται ουδε γαρ δυναται
This can be rendered in a variety of ways in English, because English is rich in idioms of similar impact and meaning. The verb "be subject to" or "submit" is effective and clear in its meaning and import in both Greek and English.διοτι το φρονημα της σαρκος εχθρα εις θεον τω γαρ νομω του θεου ουχ υποτασσεται ουδε γαρ δυναται
The point here should be further expounded: Paul does not say that the 'fleshly mind' is not obligated to keep the Law, but rather that it is incapable of obediance, which the Law nonetheless demands.
So "(not) obligated to keep" or "(not) under authority to" is actually an improper rendering here. Paul means that the 'fleshly mind' is in a state of transgression through wilful disobediance of the Law.
__________________________________________________
(2) Romans 3:19 (εν τω νομων) - This is another Greek expression which carries similar meaning to the modern English idiom above:
"We know that whatever the Law (Torah) says, it speaks to those under the Law (Torah), so that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may become accountable to God."
"οιδαμεν δε οτι οσα ο νομος λεγει τοις εν τω νομω λαλει ινα παν στομα φραγη και υποδικος γενηται πας ο κοσμος τω θεω"
The Greek here is literally "in the Law". This is a Greek idiom for "under the Law" in the modern English sense. "οιδαμεν δε οτι οσα ο νομος λεγει τοις εν τω νομω λαλει ινα παν στομα φραγη και υποδικος γενηται πας ο κοσμος τω θεω"
And it is translated just so, in the KJV (AV) and in many other more modern translations as well. The reason is essentially 'dynamic equivalence' or simply matching the meaning rather than the form of the Greek into good English.
In English, "in the Law" would actually be ambiguous, and possibly confusing.
In this case, the English translations generally are correct, clear and unambiguous, and carry the original intent of Paul quite well.
__________________________________________________
(3) Galat. 5:18 (υπο νομον) - "under the Law" (i.e., = under judgement, condemned by the Law, under the penalty prescribed for breaking the Law). Here we find a new expression, another Greek idiom, with a more sinister meaning:
"...the fruit of the Spirit is love, patience, loyalty, self-control
...
If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law
(i.e., condemned) ...
because against these things there is no Law."
5:22-22a ... ο δε καρπος του πνευματος εστιν αγαπη χαρα ειρηνη μακροθυμια χρηστοτης αγαθωσυνη πιστις πραοτης εγκρατεια -
5:18 ... ει δε πνευματι αγεσθε ουκ εστε υπο νομον
5:23b - κατα των τοιουτων ουκ εστιν νομος
Before proceeding, we note that this phrase (υπο νομον) "under the Law" does not occur at all in the entire Old Testament, nor is it found in any of the Gospels, or Acts, or Revelation, or the Letters/Epistles of Peter, John or James. ...
If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law
(i.e., condemned) ...
because against these things there is no Law."
(Gal 5:22-23a, 18, 5:23b)
5:22-22a ... ο δε καρπος του πνευματος εστιν αγαπη χαρα ειρηνη μακροθυμια χρηστοτης αγαθωσυνη πιστις πραοτης εγκρατεια -
5:18 ... ει δε πνευματι αγεσθε ουκ εστε υπο νομον
5:23b - κατα των τοιουτων ουκ εστιν νομος
It appears ONLY in Romans, 1st Cor. and Galatians. That is, it is an idiom unique to Paul, possibly originating in his Pharisee training and background. Since it is a technical term invented or coined by him, we must look to Paul to explain its meaning for us, by his own usage and exposition.
Thankfully, Paul provides the definition for us right in Galatians, the first letter to use this phrase.
Here Paul clearly says we are not under the Law, because we are no longer breaking it: "against these things (that we do, led by the Spirit) there isn't any law!".
The idea here is that Paul is claiming we are no longer under condemnation, because we are not transgressing the Law, since we have passed out from under what the Law condemns, and into what the Law approves!
Paul's whole argument would be pointless if the Law were actually cancelled and/or simply no longer applied to Christians, regardless of their behaviour.
In that case, Paul would have simply said,
"You are not under the Law, because it is no longer valid.", or perhaps,
"You are not under the Law, because it doesn't apply to Christians."
The converse of this teaching is equally clear: "You are not under the Law, because it doesn't apply to Christians."
We remain under the Law in Paul's sense, when we continue transgressing it by doing the works of the flesh, and committing sin, i.e., law breaking. Neither Paul's argument, nor its corollary would work if the Law were no longer in existance and/or applicable to Christians.
This meaning for (υπο νομον) "under the Law" (= condemned) is entirely different from the modern English phrase "under the Law" ('obligated to keep it').
The idea that we need not obey the Commandments finds no support from Paul here. And we certainly cannot arrive at an adequate understanding of Paul's meaning in this case by applying modern idioms in translation which are completely foreign to the Greek idiom Paul is using here.
We'll need Pauls own definition of this phrase (υπο νομον) "under the Law" again, to interpret properly other places where he uses the same expression. (i.e., Rom. 6:14-15, 1st Cor.9:20-21, Gal 3:23, 4:4-5, 21, 5:18).
_________________________________________________
When Paul actually suspends (or more accurately limits the application of) certain laws/obligations, (e.g., the food laws, circumcision and Jewish festivals), we have to look elsewhere for the explanation.
It cannot be found in any novel theory of lawlessness, or 'vanishing obligations' to the Law.
For more on Paul and the Law, try our other thread here:
http://www.christianforums.com/t2378362/
peace
Nazaroo
Last edited: