How does Romans 7:3 address the concept of marriage and adultery? Text of Romans 7:3 “So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she will be called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from the law and is not an adulteress, even if she marries another man.” Immediate Literary Context Romans 7:1-6 employs marriage to illustrate a believer’s release from the Mosaic Law through Christ’s death. The analogy turns on one incontrovertible social and legal fact: under God’s revealed order, marriage binds until death (vv. 2-3). Paul’s argument therefore hinges on the permanence of marriage and the moral definition of adultery. Historical-Cultural Setting 1. Jewish Law: Exodus 20:14 proscribes adultery; Deuteronomy 22:22 prescribes death for it. Rabbinic tradition (e.g., Mishnah Sotah 5:1) reiterates the same. 2. Roman Law: The Lex Iulia de adulteriis (18 B.C.) criminalized adultery and allowed the injured husband to prosecute both parties. Paul writes to a mixed church that would know both systems; his statement satisfied both. 3. Common Moral Consensus: First-century inscriptions (e.g., P.Oxy. 2673) label a remarried woman “moichalis” if her first husband still lived. Paul echoes this established terminology to ground his theological point in an uncontroversial social axiom. Old Testament Foundations of Marital Permanence • Genesis 2:24: “a man will leave…be joined…and they shall become one flesh.” This “one-flesh” union is the bedrock. • Numbers 30:2 and Ecclesiastes 5:4-5 highlight the inviolability of vows before God. • Malachi 2:14-16 names marriage a “covenant” and portrays divorce as “violence” against that covenant. Jesus’ Teaching Reinforced Matthew 19:4-6 : “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.” Jesus affirms that death alone dissolves covenant apart from the narrowly defined “porneia” exception (Matthew 19:9); Paul’s statement assumes Jesus’ baseline and employs it for his illustration. Pauline Consistency Elsewhere 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 commands spouses not to separate; if separation occurs, reconciliation or celibacy remains the only options. Verse 39 explicitly parallels Romans 7:3: “A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives.” Paul thus speaks with one voice throughout his epistles. Theological Logic of Romans 7:3 • Law and Covenant: As death severs marital law, so Christ’s death severs believers from the Mosaic jurisdiction (Romans 7:4). • Moral Continuity: Release from Mosaic code does not abolish moral truth; it reorients obedience toward union with the risen Christ (Romans 7:6). • Gospel Pattern: Marriage mirrors the larger redemption narrative—permanent covenant, broken only by death, then followed by legitimate new union (believer with Christ). Archaeological and Manuscript Evidence • Ketubah fragments from the Judean Desert (Yadin, Murabba’at 7) confirm that first-century Jews bound marriages “until death or the coming of Messiah.” • Early Christian papyri (P.Bas. 2.43, 2nd century) quote Romans 7 verbatim, demonstrating textual stability; no variant alters the core teaching on adultery. Practical Implications for Marriage Ethics 1. Remarriage while a spouse lives = adultery. This frames pastoral counsel regarding divorce. 2. Widowhood opens the door to remarriage without moral fault (1 Timothy 5:14). 3. Vows are covenantal, not contractual; civil redefinitions cannot nullify divine parameters. Pastoral Counsel and Restoration For those guilty of adultery, repentance and faith secure forgiveness (1 John 1:9), but genuine repentance includes ceasing the adulterous union (cf. John 8:11). The church must balance grace and holiness, restoring the penitent yet upholding the standard. Conclusion Romans 7:3 teaches that marriage is a lifelong covenant broken only by death, and that sexual union with another living partner constitutes adultery. Paul employs this moral axiom to demonstrate believers’ release from the Mosaic Law through Christ’s death, inviting them into a new covenantal union with the risen Lord. The verse therefore carries simultaneous ethical, theological, and redemptive weight, harmonizing every strata of biblical revelation and vindicated by historical, sociological, and textual evidence. |
    |