https://youtu.be/0nSyGe95HBA
In our verse by verse study of Romans we are at the last phrase of Rom 7:2 "she is released from the law concerning her husband" the perfect passive indicative of the verb "katargeo" (released), meaning to render null and void, to cancel, to abrogate, to abolish, to rescind, to wipe out, or to set aside.
Here it means to be released from a former association so "she has been released." The perfect tense describes completed action in the past with results continuing into the present that is the reality of being in union with Jesus Christ as the new husband.
The passive voice tells us that the wife that corresponds to the believer receives the action of the verb, the first marriage is null and void by divorce and therefore the law releases her from her first husband who corresponds to the old sin nature.
The indicative mood is declarative for the reality of divorce and release from the first husband. Next is the prepositional phrase "apo" (by) plus ablative of means "nomos" (law), and the ablative of source from the noun "anar" (man)" with the article "ho" (the) making it monadic referring specifically to her former husband and the Mosaic Law so she has been released from her first husband by the Mosaic Law.
Expanded Translation Rom 7:2; "For a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies, she is released by the law (Mosaic Law) from her first husband"
Rom 7:3; explains how Paul's illustrative analogy doesn't work and verse 4 explains how it does work. "So then if while her husband lives" the inferential particle "apa" (then) is used to describe a transition from one thing to another by natural logical sequence.
So in addition to "then" it can also be translated as "therefore" or "consequently." It is followed by what seems to be a redundant word to us in the English so it is left out of the NASB, using the inferential conjunction "oun" (therefore) so in a literal word for word translation we have "then therefore," "therefore, therefore," or "consequently therefore."
We see from this that Paul is using humor to make a point but he is simultaneously advancing his argument from a negative point of view. The corrected translation is "therefore if."
The noun in the genitive case is the subject of a participle in the genitive case. This is the genitive absolute; so it is not grammatically connected with the rest of the sentence. The genitive singular of "anar" (man) is the subject of the participle that is used to specifically to describe a noble person in contrast to an ordinary person who in the Greek language is called "anthropos" (man or mankind).
Then a genitive present active participle from "zao" (live). The retroactive progressive present refers to what started in the past and continues into the present. She is married, doesn't like it any more, and would like to get out of the situation.
The active voice: the husband produces the action of the verb by continuing to be alive as the husband. This is a temporal participle that is translated "Therefore, if while her husband is living."
What follows is not the way the illustration works. This is digression but there is a purpose for it because he is following the thinking of the Roman believers but positionally the divorce between the old sin nature and the new believer is final.
The ex-husband is dead to the wife and the ex-wife is dead to the husband. Believers in Jesus Christ are positionally dead to the old sin nature.
The death or divorce that terminates he first marriage is comparable to retroactive positional truth, while the new marriage to Jesus Christ is comparable to current positional truth.
Salvation adjustment to God's justice not only divorces the believer from the old sin nature that is represented by the first husband, but it also unites the believer to the new husband, the Lord Jesus Christ.
At the point of salvation the believer is positionally delivered from the power and sovereignty of the old sin nature through retroactive positional truth. At salvation the believer also becomes subject to the power and sovereignty of the Lord Jesus Christ through current positional truth.
Therefore, at least theoretically, we are or we should be living to please our new husband. But our new husband has new policies and those policies and procedures must be understood so they must be communicated and He has delegated authority that must be accepted before we can ever please the second husband, Jesus Christ.
The analogy tells us that the believer is corresponds to a married woman who prior to salvation has been under the authority of the first husband who corresponds to the old sin nature.
But now, after salvation, the married woman who is now a believer is no longer under the authority of the first husband but has been placed under the authority of the second husband the Lord Jesus Christ.
All of this positional. None of it becomes experiential until the new believer advances to spiritual maturity. Maturity adjustment to God's justice from maximum doctrine resident and circulating in the soul's stream of consciousness causes the believer's experience to equal the believer's position but experience can never equal position until the doctrinal viewpoint of spiritual maturity is acquired.
"she became married to another man" - the aorist active infinitive of "ginomai "means (might become). It is used here for the wife who has changed her nature to indicate that she has entered into a new condition so she belongs to another.
This includes belonging to another mentally as well as physically. It does not necessarily imply marriage, but it is an intimate relationship with another man other than her husband. Translation: "she has become intimate."
The aorist tense is a constantive aorist that presents the idea of mental and physical intimacy in its entirety. Mental intimacy and spiritual intimacy with the old sin nature is being discussed so it is gathered up into one entirety.
The active voice tells us that the married woman produces the action of the verb with a man other than her husband and, by the analogy, with another who is not the Lord Jesus Christ who is her husband.
The subjunctive mood is potential so it creates the 3rd class condition of if maybe yes, maybe no.
Plus the instrumental of association, and we have the same noun, "aner"(man) but here it is not used to refer to the husband. Here "aner" (man) is used for a man whom she admires but who is no longer her husband.
With it is an adjective in the instrumental singular of association "heteros" (another), referring to another of a different kind.
Translation: "she has become intimate with another man." In the instrumental of association a second party must furnish the means of association. So the other man has initiated to her and she has responded.
The third class of condition of "if" tells us maybe she will and maybe she won't.
One thing is certain,, the congregation in Rome to whom this was originally addressed has already wandered into this area of thinking, so in his genus Paul wanders along with them.
The principle is that when a sheep wanders from the flock you have to go out, or send the dog out, to get the sheep to wander back into the flock. You have to go out and get the sheep; it will not wander back on its own.
The audience has wandered in their thinking, and Paul just takes a little short trip with them to bring them back in. The short trip is in verse 3 where he discusses the iffy possibilities of the situation.
"she shall be called an adulteress" from the future active indicative of "chrematizo" (classified) that tells us that Paul is minding his own business and he not criticizing or judging anyone. The NASB translators translate it "called" but called is translated from the Greek word " kaleo" (call) and that does imply minding someone else's business.
Chrematizo (classify) does not mean to call anyone anything, so the verb should be translated "to classify" or "she shall be classified." He is illustrating a point he is not judging her.
The future tense is a gnomic future for a statement fact that may be rightfully expected under these conditions, it is a statement of fact that is not critical but recognizes the reality of the situation.
The active voice: the married woman who is unfaithful to her husband produces the action of the verb.
However as we noted when we started on this verse this is how the illustrative principle does not work in the analogy, but it also presents the principle that we cannot learn doctrine when we are subjective.
The more triggers you have from your subjective arrogance the more difficult it is to learn doctrine when doctrine crosses the areas that trigger your arrogant subjectivity.
The indicative mood is declarative, expressing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Then the nominative of classification from "moichalis" (adulteress).
Since the nominative case is the classification case it is not unusual for this classification to remain in the nominative. This can also be called the independent nominative that is a grammatical play on words. "So then, if while her husband is living if she has become intimate with another man she shall be classified as an adulteress.
We see here that while this information is necessary for the analogy it is not the way the principle works out in the passage. Because of retroactive positional truth the believer wife is actually divorced and/or dead to the old sin nature that is represented by her first husband.
"but if her husband be dead" the postpositive conjunctive particle "de" (but) again sets up a contrast because it connects two antithetical clauses where a contrast is intended. The contrast is between how the analogy does not work compared with how the analogy does work.
The conditional particle "ean" (if) introduces the protasis of a 3rd class condition, the condition of probability. With it a supposition from the viewpoint of probability. The subject is the nominative singular from "anar" (man) with the definite article "ho' (the), translated making it monadic so we have "but if her husband."
Then the aorist active subjunctive of "apothnesko" (dies). This is the constantive aorist that considers the he action of the verb in its entirety, and this use of the aorist refers to the momentary action at salvation where the divorce occurs.
The active voice: the first husband produces the action of the verb by dying and or being the object of divorce. The subjunctive mood is for a potential subjunctive in a 3rd class condition "but if her husband has died (physical death or divorce)."
This is analogous to the baptism of the Holy Spirit at salvation and resultant retroactive positional truth.
"she is free from the law" from the present active indicative of "eimi" (she is). The present tense is a static present that describes a condition or circumstance that exists perpetually.
He is dead after the divorce is final. It is finalized instantly at the moment of salvation. The active voice: the wife, who is analogous to the believer, produces the action. She is dead to her first husband. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the standpoint of reality.
Plus the predicate nominative feminine singular from the adjective "eleutheros" (free), describing the result of divorce or death; it refers to freedom, with the idea of being independent and not bound.
In this case she is obviously free from the husband, but she is also free according to the law as the marriage counselor. In the second marriage there is a new counselor, the Holy Spirit.
Next we have "apo" (from) plus the nominative from "ho nomos" the law). The definite article 'ho" (the) making it monadic referring specifically to the Mosaic Law.
"so that she is" this is a result clause made up of an infinitive plus a definite article, "tou" (the). This is used for a conceived result that follows the nature of a case so it is assumed to be a logical consequence.
The infinitive is the present active infinitive of "eimi" (she is) with the negative "un" (not)." The accusative singular of general reference for a subject of the infinitive, "autos" (she or her) is the intensive pronoun in the accusative case for the infinitive must have a subject.
It is the feminine form of "autos" (she or her)) so it can be translated "the same one," referring to she who is the same one who was divorced from her husband.