Corpus-Paul

["moon-ryul jung" <moon AT saint.soongsil.ac.kr>]

Dear co-interpreters,

Ever since I came convinced that the so called New Perspective on
Paul was on the right track, I tried interpret "hUPO NOMON" that 
occurs in Galatians and Romans so that it simply refers to the covenantal
nomism. I understand that the covenantal nomism has at least three 
important aspects: (1) the Law is the identity marker of being Jewish,
i.e. the people of God, and (2) keeping it is necessary to stay in the
covenant which the people of Israel got into by the grace of God (though
the perfect keeping was not required), and (3) Gentiles should obtain the
identity of Jews by keeping the Law, specifically, getting circumcision in
order to get in the convenant.

I understand that Paul fought againt this "hupo-nomism", i.e. the 
covenantal nomism by saying that God is the God of Gentiles
as well as the God of Jews and so the Gentiles can receive God's 
grace without becoming Jews, that is, without being circumcised. 
   
But there are some verses which seem difficult to interpret by the
premise that hUPO NOMON = covenantal nomism. They are Rom 6:14-15.
So I would like to open a discussion on these verses.


6:14 hAMARTIA GAR hUMWN OU KURIEUSEI. OU GAR ESTE hUPO NOMON ALLA
     hUPO CARIN.
6:15 TI OUN; hAMARTHSWMEN hOTI OUK ESMEN hUPO NOMON ALLA hUPO CARIN;


Cranfield takes hUPO NOMON to mean "under the condemnation of the Law".
It is a traditional understanding. It seems to fits in the context well,
if we assume that "sin ruled over us through the condemnation of
Law". 

James Dunn, in his commentary on Romans, takes hUPO NOMON to refer
to the covenantal nomism. But he does not clearly explain why 
 being under the covenantal nomism makes sin rule over "us",
and not being under it makes sin not rule over "us".

So, do we have better interpretations?

Moon
Moon-Ryul Jung
Associate Professor
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea