Job 9:20

9:20 Although I am innocent, ¹ 

my mouth ²  would condemn me; ³ 

although I am blameless,

it would declare me perverse. ⁴ 

Job 15:14

15:14 What is man that he should be pure,

or one born of woman, that he should be righteous?

Job 25:4

25:4 How then can a human being be righteous before God?

How can one born of a woman be pure? ⁵ 

Psalms 143:2

143:2 Do not sit in judgment on ⁶  your servant,

for no one alive is innocent before you. ⁷ 

Isaiah 57:12

57:12 I will denounce your so-called righteousness and your deeds, ⁸ 

but they will not help you.

Luke 10:27-29

10:27 The expert ⁹  answered, “Love ¹⁰  the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind, ¹¹  and love your neighbor as yourself.” ¹²  10:28 Jesus ¹³  said to him, “You have answered correctly; ¹⁴  do this, and you will live.”

10:29 But the expert, ¹⁵  wanting to justify ¹⁶  himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

Romans 3:20

3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him ¹⁷  by the works of the law, ¹⁸  for through the law comes ¹⁹  the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:28

3:28 For we consider that a person ²⁰  is declared righteous by faith apart from the works of the law. ²¹ 

Romans 4:5

4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous, ²²  his faith is credited as righteousness.

Romans 9:11

9:11 even before they were born or had done anything good or bad (so that God’s purpose in election ²³  would stand, not by works but by ²⁴  his calling) ²⁵  –

Romans 9:16

9:16 So then, ²⁶  it does not depend on human desire or exertion, ²⁷  but on God who shows mercy.

Romans 9:30

Israel’s Rejection Culpable

9:30 What shall we say then? – that the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness obtained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith,

Romans 11:6

11:6 And if it is by grace, it is no longer by works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

Galatians 2:16

2:16 yet we know ²⁸  that no one ²⁹  is justified by the works of the law ³⁰  but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. ³¹  And ³²  we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ ³³  and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one ³⁴  will be justified.

Galatians 3:16-21

3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his descendant. ³⁵  Scripture ³⁶  does not say, “and to the descendants,” ³⁷  referring to many, but “and to your descendant,” ³⁸  referring to one, who is Christ. 3:17 What I am saying is this: The law that came four hundred thirty years later does not cancel a covenant previously ratified by God, ³⁹  so as to invalidate the promise. 3:18 For if the inheritance is based on the law, it is no longer based on the promise, but God graciously gave ⁴⁰  it to Abraham through the promise.

3:19 Why then was the law given? ⁴¹  It was added ⁴²  because of transgressions, ⁴³  until the arrival of the descendant ⁴⁴  to whom the promise had been made. It was administered ⁴⁵  through angels by an intermediary. ⁴⁶  3:20 Now an intermediary is not for one party alone, but God is one. ⁴⁷  3:21 Is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? ⁴⁸  Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. ⁴⁹ 

Ephesians 2:4

2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of his great love with which he loved us,

Ephesians 2:8-9

2:8 For by grace you are saved ⁵⁰  through faith, ⁵¹  and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God; 2:9 it is not from ⁵²  works, so that no one can boast. ⁵³ 

Ephesians 2:2

2:2 in which ⁵⁴  you formerly lived ⁵⁵  according to this world’s present path, ⁵⁶  according to the ruler of the kingdom ⁵⁷  of the air, the ruler of ⁵⁸  the spirit ⁵⁹  that is now energizing ⁶⁰  the sons of disobedience, ⁶¹ 

Ephesians 1:9

1:9 He did this when he revealed ⁶²  to us the secret ⁶³  of his will, according to his good pleasure that he set forth ⁶⁴  in Christ, ⁶⁵ 

[9:20]  ¹ tn The idea is the same as that expressed in v. 15, although here the imperfect verb is used and not the perfect. Once again with the concessive clause (“although I am right”) Job knows that in a legal dispute he would be confused and would end up arguing against himself.

[9:20]  ² tn Some commentators wish to change this to “his mouth,” meaning God’s response to Job’s complaints. But the MT is far more expressive, and “my mouth” fits the context in which Job is saying that even though he is innocent, if he spoke in a court setting in the presence of God he would be overwhelmed, confused, and no doubt condemn himself.

[9:20]  ³ tn The verb has the declarative sense in the Hiphil, “to declare guilty [or wicked]” or “to condemn.”

[9:20]  ⁴ tn The verb עָקַשׁ (’aqash) means “to be twisted; to be tortuous.” The Piel has a meaning “to bend; to twist” (Mic 3:9) and “to pervert” (Jer 59:8). The form here is classified as a Hiphil, with the softening of the vowel i (see GKC 147 §53.n). It would then also be a declarative use of the Hiphil.

[25:4]  ⁵ sn Bildad here does not come up with new expressions; rather, he simply uses what Eliphaz had said (see Job 4:17-19 and 15:14-16).

[143:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “do not enter into judgment with.”

[143:2]  ⁷ tn Heb “for no one living is innocent before you.”

[57:12]  ⁸ tn Heb “I, I will declare your righteousness and your deeds.”

[10:27]  ⁹ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (the expert in religious law, shortened here to “the expert”) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[10:27]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “You will love.” The future indicative is used here with imperatival force (see ExSyn 452 and 569).

[10:27]  ¹¹ sn A quotation from Deut 6:5. The fourfold reference to different parts of the person says, in effect, that one should love God with all one’s being.

[10:27]  ¹² tn This portion of the reply is a quotation from Lev 19:18. The verb is repeated in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[10:28]  ¹³ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[10:28]  ¹⁴ sn Jesus commends the reply (you have answered correctly). What is assumed here, given the previous context, is that he will respond to Jesus’ message, as to love God is to respond to his Son; see v. 22.

[10:29]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (the expert in religious law, shortened here to “the expert”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[10:29]  ¹⁶ tn Or “vindicate.”

[3:20]  ¹⁷ sn An allusion to Ps 143:2.

[3:20]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “because by the works of the law no flesh is justified before him.” Some recent scholars have understood the phrase ἒργα νόμου (erga nomou, “works of the law”) to refer not to obedience to the Mosaic law generally, but specifically to portions of the law that pertain to things like circumcision and dietary laws which set the Jewish people apart from the other nations (e.g., J. D. G. Dunn, Romans [WBC], 1:155). Other interpreters, like C. E. B. Cranfield (“‘The Works of the Law’ in the Epistle to the Romans,” JSNT 43 [1991]: 89-101) reject this narrow interpretation for a number of reasons, among which the most important are: (1) The second half of v. 20, “for through the law comes the knowledge of sin,” is hard to explain if the phrase “works of the law” is understood in a restricted sense; (2) the plural phrase “works of the law” would have to be understood in a different sense from the singular phrase “the work of the law” in 2:15; (3) similar phrases involving the law in Romans (2:13, 14; 2:25, 26, 27; 7:25; 8:4; and 13:8) which are naturally related to the phrase “works of the law” cannot be taken to refer to circumcision (in fact, in 2:25 circumcision is explicitly contrasted with keeping the law). Those interpreters who reject the “narrow” interpretation of “works of the law” understand the phrase to refer to obedience to the Mosaic law in general.

[3:20]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “is.”

[3:28]  ²⁰ tn Here ἄνθρωπον (anqrwpon) is used in an indefinite and general sense (BDAG 81 s.v. ἄνθρωπος 4.a.γ).

[3:28]  ²¹ tn See the note on the phrase “works of the law” in Rom 3:20.

[4:5]  ²² tn Or “who justifies the ungodly.”

[9:11]  ²³ tn Grk “God’s purpose according to election.”

[9:11]  ²⁴ tn Or “not based on works but based on…”

[9:11]  ²⁵ tn Grk “by the one who calls.”

[9:16]  ²⁶ sn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing.

[9:16]  ²⁷ tn Grk “So then, [it does] not [depend] on the one who desires nor on the one who runs.”

[2:16]  ²⁸ tn Grk “yet knowing”; the participle εἰδότες (eidotes) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[2:16]  ²⁹ tn Grk “no man,” but ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") is used here in a generic sense, referring to both men and women.

[2:16]  ³⁰ sn The law is a reference to the law of Moses.

[2:16]  ³¹ tn Or “faith in Jesus Christ.” A decision is difficult here. Though traditionally translated “faith in Jesus Christ,” an increasing number of NT scholars are arguing that πίστις Χριστοῦ (pisti" Cristou) and similar phrases in Paul (here and in v. 20; Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 3:22; Eph 3:12; Phil 3:9) involve a subjective genitive and mean “Christ’s faith” or “Christ’s faithfulness” (cf., e.g., G. Howard, “The ‘Faith of Christ’,” ExpTim 85 [1974]: 212-15; R. B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ [SBLDS]; Morna D. Hooker, “Πίστις Χριστοῦ,” NTS 35 [1989]: 321-42). Noteworthy among the arguments for the subjective genitive view is that when πίστις takes a personal genitive it is almost never an objective genitive (cf. Matt 9:2, 22, 29; Mark 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luke 5:20; 7:50; 8:25, 48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32; Rom 1:8; 12; 3:3; 4:5, 12, 16; 1 Cor 2:5; 15:14, 17; 2 Cor 10:15; Phil 2:17; Col 1:4; 2:5; 1 Thess 1:8; 3:2, 5, 10; 2 Thess 1:3; Titus 1:1; Phlm 6; 1 Pet 1:9, 21; 2 Pet 1:5). On the other hand, the objective genitive view has its adherents: A. Hultgren, “The Pistis Christou Formulations in Paul,” NovT 22 (1980): 248-63; J. D. G. Dunn, “Once More, ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ,” SBL Seminar Papers, 1991, 730-44. Most commentaries on Romans and Galatians usually side with the objective view.

[2:16]  ³² tn In Greek this is a continuation of the preceding sentence, but the construction is too long and complex for contemporary English style, so a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[2:16]  ³³ tn Or “by faith in Christ.” See comment above on “the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.”

[2:16]  ³⁴ tn Or “no human being”; Grk “flesh.”

[3:16]  ³⁵ tn Grk “his seed,” a figurative extension of the meaning of σπέρμα (sperma) to refer to descendants (L&N 10.29).

[3:16]  ³⁶ tn Grk “It”; the referent (the scripture) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The understood subject of the verb λέγει (legei) could also be “He” (referring to God) as the one who spoke the promise to Abraham.

[3:16]  ³⁷ tn Grk “to seeds.” See the note on “descendant” earlier in this verse. Here the term is plural; the use of the singular in the OT text cited later in this verse is crucial to Paul’s argument.

[3:16]  ³⁸ tn See the note on “descendant” earlier in this verse.

[3:17]  ³⁹ tc Most mss (D F G I 0176 0278 Ï it sy) read “ratified by God in Christ” whereas the omission of “in Christ” is the reading in Ì⁴⁶ א A B C P Ψ 6 33 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 pc co. The shorter reading is strongly supported by the ms evidence, and it is probable that a copyist inserted the words as an interpretive gloss. However, this form of the “in Christ” expression is somewhat atypical in the corpus Paulinum (εἰς Χριστόν [ei" Criston] rather than ἐν Χριστῷ [en Cristw]), a fact which tempers one’s certainty about the shorter reading. Nevertheless, the expression is used more in Galatians than in any other of Paul’s letters (Gal 2:16; 3:24, 27), and may have been suggested by such texts to early copyists.

[3:18]  ⁴⁰ tn On the translation “graciously gave” for χαρίζομαι (carizomai) see L&N 57.102.

[3:19]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “Why then the law?”

[3:19]  ⁴² tc For προσετέθη (proseteqh) several Western mss have ἐτέθη (eteqh, “it was established”; so D* F G it Ir^lat Ambst Spec). The net effect of this reading, in conjunction with the largely Western reading of πράξεων (praxewn) for παραβάσεων (parabasewn), seems to be a very positive assessment of the law. But there are compelling reasons for rejecting this reading: (1) externally, it is provincial and relatively late; (2) internally: (a) transcriptionally, there seems to be a much higher transcriptional probability that a scribe would try to smooth over Paul’s harsh saying here about the law than vice versa; (b) intrinsically: [1] Paul has already argued that the law came after the promise (vv. 15-18), indicating, more than likely, its temporary nature; [2] the verb “was added” in v. 19 (προσετέθη) is different from the verb in v. 15 (ἐπιδιατάσσεται, epidiatassetai); virtually all exegetes recognize this as an intentional linguistic shift on Paul’s part in order not to contradict his statement in v. 15; [3] the temper of 3:1–4:7 is decidedly against a positive statement about the Torah’s role in Heilsgeschichte.

[3:19]  ⁴³ tc παραδόσεων (paradosewn; “traditions, commandments”) is read by D*, while the vast majority of witnesses read παραβάσεων (parabasewn, “transgressions”). D’s reading makes little sense in this context. πράξεων (praxewn, “of deeds”) replaces παραβάσεων in Ì⁴⁶ F G it Ir^lat Ambst Spec. The wording is best taken as going with νόμος (nomo"; “Why then the law of deeds?”), as is evident by the consistent punctuation in the later witnesses. But such an expression is unpauline and superfluous; it was almost certainly added by some early scribe(s) to soften the blow of Paul’s statement.

[3:19]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “the seed.” See the note on the first occurrence of the word “descendant” in 3:16.

[3:19]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “was ordered.” L&N 31.22 has “was put into effect” here.

[3:19]  ⁴⁶ tn Many modern translations (NASB, NIV, NRSV) render this word (μεσίτης, mesith"; here and in v. 20) as “mediator,” but this conveys a wrong impression in contemporary English. If this is referring to Moses, he certainly did not “mediate” between God and Israel but was an intermediary on God’s behalf. Moses was not a mediator, for example, who worked for compromise between opposing parties. He instead was God’s representative to his people who enabled them to have a relationship, but entirely on God’s terms.

[3:20]  ⁴⁷ tn The meaning of this verse is disputed. According to BDAG 634 s.v. μεσίτης, “It prob. means that the activity of an intermediary implies the existence of more than one party, and hence may be unsatisfactory because it must result in a compromise. The presence of an intermediary would prevent attainment, without any impediment, of the purpose of the εἶς θεός in giving the law.” See also A. Oepke, TDNT 4:598-624, esp. 618-19.

[3:21]  ⁴⁸ tc The reading τοῦ θεοῦ (tou qeou, “of God”) is well attested in א A C D (F G read θεοῦ without the article) Ψ 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy co. However, Ì⁴⁶ B d Ambst lack the words. Ì⁴⁶ and B perhaps should not to be given as much weight as they normally are, since the combination of these two witnesses often produces a secondary shorter reading against all others. In addition, one might expect that if the shorter reading were original other variants would have crept into the textual tradition early on. But 104 (a.d. 1087) virtually stands alone with the variant τοῦ Χριστοῦ (tou Cristou, “of Christ”). Nevertheless, if τοῦ θεοῦ were not part of the original text, it is the kind of variant that would be expected to show up early and often, especially in light of Paul’s usage elsewhere (Rom 4:20; 2 Cor 1:20). A slight preference should be given to the τοῦ θεοῦ over the omission. NA²⁷ rightly places the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.

[3:21]  ⁴⁹ tn Or “have been based on the law.”

[2:8]  ⁵⁰ tn See note on the same expression in v. 5.

[2:8]  ⁵¹ tc The feminine article is found before πίστεως (pistews, “faith”) in the Byzantine text as well as in A Ψ 1881 pc. Perhaps for some scribes the article was intended to imply creedal fidelity as a necessary condition of salvation (“you are saved through the faith”), although elsewhere in the corpus Paulinum the phrase διὰ τῆς πίστεως (dia th" pistew") is used for the act of believing rather than the content of faith (cf. Rom 3:30, 31; Gal 3:14; Eph 3:17; Col 2:12). On the other side, strong representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texts (א B D* F G P 0278 6 33 1739 al bo) lack the article. Hence, both text-critically and exegetically, the meaning of the text here is most likely “saved through faith” as opposed to “saved through the faith.” Regarding the textual problem, the lack of the article is the preferred reading.

[2:9]  ⁵² tn Or “not as a result of.”

[2:9]  ⁵³ tn Grk “lest anyone should boast.”

[2:2]  ⁵⁴ sn The relative pronoun which is feminine as is sins, indicating that sins is the antecedent.

[2:2]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “walked.”

[2:2]  ⁵⁶ tn Or possibly “Aeon.”

[2:2]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “domain, [place of] authority.”

[2:2]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “of” (but see the note on the word “spirit” later in this verse).

[2:2]  ⁵⁹ sn The ruler of the kingdom of the air is also the ruler of the spirit that is now energizing the sons of disobedience. Although several translations regard the ruler to be the same as the spirit, this is unlikely since the cases in Greek are different (ruler is accusative and spirit is genitive). To get around this, some have suggested that the genitive for spirit is a genitive of apposition. However, the semantics of the genitive of apposition are against such an interpretation (cf. ExSyn 100).

[2:2]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “working in.”

[2:2]  ⁶¹ sn Sons of disobedience is a Semitic idiom that means “people characterized by disobedience.” However, it also contains a subtle allusion to vv. 4-10: Some of those sons of disobedience have become sons of God.

[1:9]  ⁶² tn Or “He did this by revealing”; Grk “making known, revealing.” Verse 9 begins with a participle dependent on “lavished” in v. 8; the adverbial participle could be understood as temporal (“when he revealed”), which would be contemporaneous to the action of the finite verb “lavished,” or as means (“by revealing”). The participle has been translated here with the temporal nuance to allow for means to also be a possible interpretation. If the translation focused instead upon means, the temporal nuance would be lost as the time frame for the action of the participle would become indistinct.

[1:9]  ⁶³ tn Or “mystery.” In the NT μυστήριον (musthrion) refers to a divine secret previously undisclosed.

[1:9]  ⁶⁴ tn Or “purposed,” “publicly displayed.” Cf. Rom 3:25.

[1:9]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “in him”; the referent (Christ) has been specified in the translation for the sake of clarity.