Christian agapê, as man’s surrender to the claim of God’s love within him, is the necessary and uniquely adequate response to God’s demand. It is therefore the supreme norm of the whole of the Christian’s moral activity… But is it the only norm—and, if so, in what sense? Is the Christian subject to moral precepts which are not obviously specifications or explications of the love demand but nevertheless unconditionally binding?^p.150

Can the Christian now rely on the inner promptings of the Spirit to love in such a way that there is no-longer any need for external law, or even the conscience? Is he now “liberated from external law” as a result of the New Covenant?

In some circles nowadays is it simply assumed that this was what Paul taught. “In this Part we enquire into the relationship between love and law in New Covenant morality”^p.151

✱         ✱         ✱

The question of Paul’s attitude towards law is inseparable from that of his attitude towards the Mosaic Law. But it is not to be assumed a priori that the two questions are in every respect identical.… Paul’s view of the Mosaic Law is very finely nuanced.^p.151

Although Paul sees the Mosaic Law as an indivisible whole, he recognizes two aspects

• An oppressive “way to salvation”
• The historical expression of God’s eternally valid claim on man’s obedience.

Updated 2010-01-10 (build:69) by Andrew Fountain