15:9 and they worship me in vain,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” 5
15:1 Then Pharisees 6 and experts in the law 7 came from Jerusalem 8 to Jesus and said, 9
1:1 From Paul, 11 an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,
2:20 But would you like evidence, 14 you empty fellow, 15 that faith without works is useless? 16
1 tn Or “useless” (so NIV, NRSV, NLT); NAB “nothing”; NASB “futile”; TEV “are not real.”
2 tn Heb “What [is the] profit”; NIV “What did we gain.”
3 sn The people’s public display of self-effacing piety has gone unrewarded by the
4 tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.
5 sn A quotation from Isa 29:13.
6 sn See the note on Pharisees in 3:7.
7 tn Or “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 2:4.
8 map For location see Map5-B1; Map6-F3; Map7-E2; Map8-F2; Map10-B3; JP1-F4; JP2-F4; JP3-F4; JP4-F4.
9 tn The participle λέγοντες (legontes) has been translated as a finite verb so that its telic (i.e., final or conclusive) force can be more easily detected: The Pharisees and legal experts came to Jesus in order to speak with him.
10 tc διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ (dia tou {aimato" autou, “through his blood”) is read at this juncture by several minuscule
11 tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.
12 tn Cf. 1 Tim 1:4.
13 sn Fights about the law were characteristic of the false teachers in Ephesus as well as in Crete (cf. 1 Tim 1:3-7; Titus 1:10, 14).
14 tn Grk “do you want to know.”
15 tn Grk “O empty man.” Here the singular vocative ἄνθρωπε (anqrwpe, “man”) means “person” or even “fellow.” Cf. BDAG 82 s.v. ἄνθρωπος 8 which views this as an instance of rhetorical address in a letter; the pejorative sense is also discussed under the previous heading (7).
16 tc Most witnesses, including several important ones (א A C2 P Ψ 33 Ï sy bo), have νεκρά (nekra, “dead”) here, while Ì74 reads κενή (kenh, “empty”). Both variants are most likely secondary, derived from ἀργή (argh, “useless”). The reading of the majority is probably an assimilation to the statements in vv. 17 and 26, while Ì74’s reading picks up on κενέ (kene) earlier in the verse. The external evidence (B C* 323 945 1739 sa) for ἀργή is sufficient for authenticity; coupled with the strong internal evidence for the reading (if νεκρά were original, how would ἀργή have arisen here and not in vv. 17 or 26?), it is strongly preferred.