Luke 10:29

10:29 But the expert, ¹  wanting to justify ²  himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

Luke 16:15

16:15 But ³  Jesus ⁴  said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in men’s eyes, ⁵  but God knows your hearts. For what is highly prized ⁶  among men is utterly detestable ⁷  in God’s sight.

Job 9:20

9:20 Although I am innocent, ⁸ 

my mouth ⁹  would condemn me; ¹⁰ 

although I am blameless,

it would declare me perverse. ¹¹ 

Job 25:4

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

How can one born of a woman be pure? ¹² 

Psalms 143:2

143:2 Do not sit in judgment on ¹³  your servant,

for no one alive is innocent before you. ¹⁴ 

Isaiah 45:25

45:25 All the descendants of Israel will be vindicated by the Lord

and will boast in him. ¹⁵ 

Isaiah 53:11

53:11 Having suffered, he will reflect on his work,

he will be satisfied when he understands what he has done. ¹⁶ 

“My servant ¹⁷  will acquit many, ¹⁸ 

for he carried their sins. ¹⁹ 

Romans 3:20

3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him ²⁰  by the works of the law, ²¹  for through the law comes ²²  the knowledge of sin.

Romans 4:5

4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous, ²³  his faith is credited as righteousness.

Romans 5:1

The Expectation of Justification

5:1 ²⁴ Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have ²⁵  peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Romans 8:33

8:33 Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? ²⁶  It is God who justifies.

Galatians 2:16

2:16 yet we know ²⁷  that no one ²⁸  is justified by the works of the law ²⁹  but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. ³⁰  And ³¹  we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ ³²  and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one ³³  will be justified.

James 2:21-25

2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 2:22 You see that his faith was working together with his works and his faith was perfected by works. 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Now Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness,” ³⁴  and he was called God’s friend. ³⁵  2:24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 2:25 And similarly, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another way?

[10:29]  ¹ 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]  ² tn Or “vindicate.”

[16:15]  ³ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.

[16:15]  ⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[16:15]  ⁵ tn Grk “before men.” The contrast is between outward appearance (“in people’s eyes”) and inward reality (“God knows your hearts”). Here the Greek term ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") is used twice in a generic sense, referring to both men and women, but “men” has been retained in the text to provide a strong verbal contrast with “God” in the second half of the verse.

[16:15]  ⁶ tn Or “exalted.” This refers to the pride that often comes with money and position.

[16:15]  ⁷ tn Or “is an abomination,” “is abhorrent” (L&N 25.187).

[9:20]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ tn The verb has the declarative sense in the Hiphil, “to declare guilty [or wicked]” or “to condemn.”

[9:20]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² 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]  ¹³ tn Heb “do not enter into judgment with.”

[143:2]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “for no one living is innocent before you.”

[45:25]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “In the Lord all the offspring of Israel will be vindicated and boast.”

[53:11]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “he will be satisfied by his knowledge,” i.e., “when he knows.” The preposition is understood as temporal and the suffix as a subjective genitive. Some take בְּדַעְתּוֹ (bÿda’to, “by his knowledge”) with what follows and translate “by knowledge of him,” understanding the preposition as instrumental and the suffix as objective.

[53:11]  ¹⁷ sn The song ends as it began (cf. 52:13-15), with the Lord announcing the servant’s vindication and exaltation.

[53:11]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “he will acquit, a righteous one, my servant, many.” צַדִּיק (tsadiq) may refer to the servant, but more likely it is dittographic (note the preceding verb יַצְדִּיק, yatsdiq). The precise meaning of the verb (the Hiphil of צָדַק, tsadaq) is debated. Elsewhere the Hiphil is used at least six times in the sense of “make righteous” in a legal sense, i.e., “pronounce innocent, acquit” (see Exod 23:7; Deut 25:1; 1 Kgs 8:32 = 2 Chr 6:23; Prov 17:15; Isa 5:23). It can also mean “render justice” (as a royal function, see 2 Sam 15:4; Ps 82:3), “concede” (Job 27:5), “vindicate” (Isa 50:8), and “lead to righteousness” (by teaching and example, Dan 12:3). The preceding context and the next line suggest a legal sense here. Because of his willingness to carry the people’s sins, the servant is able to “acquit” them.

[53:11]  ¹⁹ tn The circumstantial clause (note the vav [ו] + object + subject + verb pattern) is understood as causal here. The prefixed verb form is either a preterite or an imperfect used in a customary manner.

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

[3:20]  ²¹ 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]  ²² tn Grk “is.”

[4:5]  ²³ tn Or “who justifies the ungodly.”

[5:1]  ²⁴ sn Many interpreters see Rom 5:1 as beginning the second major division of the letter.

[5:1]  ²⁵ tc A number of important witnesses have the subjunctive ἔχωμεν (ecwmen, “let us have”) instead of ἔχομεν (ecomen, “we have”) in v. 1. Included in the subjunctive’s support are א* A B* C D K L 33 81 630 1175 1739* pm lat bo. But the indicative is not without its supporters: א¹ B² F G P Ψ 0220^vid 104 365 1241 1505 1506 1739^c 1881 2464 pm. If the problem were to be solved on an external basis only, the subjunctive would be preferred. Because of this, the “A” rating on behalf of the indicative in the UBS⁴ appears overly confident. Nevertheless, the indicative is probably correct. First, the earliest witness to Rom 5:1 has the indicative (0220^vid, third century). Second, the first set of correctors is sometimes, if not often, of equal importance with the original hand. Hence, א¹ might be given equal value with א*. Third, there is a good cross-section of witnesses for the indicative: Alexandrian (in 0220^vid, probably א¹ 1241 1506 1881 al), Western (in F G), and Byzantine (noted in NA²⁷ as pm). Thus, although the external evidence is strongly in favor of the subjunctive, the indicative is represented well enough that its ancestry could easily go back to the original. Turning to the internal evidence, the indicative gains much ground. (1) The variant may have been produced via an error of hearing (since omicron and omega were pronounced alike in ancient Greek). This, of course, does not indicate which reading was original – just that an error of hearing may have produced one of them. In light of the indecisiveness of the transcriptional evidence, intrinsic evidence could play a much larger role. This is indeed the case here. (2) The indicative fits well with the overall argument of the book to this point. Up until now, Paul has been establishing the “indicatives of the faith.” There is only one imperative (used rhetorically) and only one hortatory subjunctive (and this in a quotation within a diatribe) up till this point, while from ch. 6 on there are sixty-one imperatives and seven hortatory subjunctives. Clearly, an exhortation would be out of place in ch. 5. (3) Paul presupposes that the audience has peace with God (via reconciliation) in 5:10. This seems to assume the indicative in v. 1. (4) As C. E. B. Cranfield notes, “it would surely be strange for Paul, in such a carefully argued writing as this, to exhort his readers to enjoy or to guard a peace which he has not yet explicitly shown to be possessed by them” (Romans [ICC], 1:257). (5) The notion that εἰρήνην ἔχωμεν (eirhnhn ecwmen) can even naturally mean “enjoy peace” is problematic (ExSyn 464), yet those who embrace the subjunctive have to give the verb some such force. Thus, although the external evidence is stronger in support of the subjunctive, the internal evidence points to the indicative. Although a decision is difficult, ἔχομεν appears to be the authentic reading.

[8:33]  ²⁶ sn An allusion to Isa 50:8 where the reference is singular; Paul applies this to all believers (“God’s elect” is plural here).

[2:16]  ²⁷ tn Grk “yet knowing”; the participle εἰδότες (eidotes) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[2:16]  ²⁸ tn Grk “no man,” but ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") is used here in a generic sense, referring to both men and women.

[2:16]  ²⁹ sn The law is a reference to the law of Moses.

[2:16]  ³⁰ 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]  ³¹ 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]  ³² tn Or “by faith in Christ.” See comment above on “the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.”

[2:16]  ³³ tn Or “no human being”; Grk “flesh.”

[2:23]  ³⁴ sn A quotation from Gen 15:6.

[2:23]  ³⁵ sn An allusion to 2 Chr 20:7; Isa 41:8; 51:2; Dan 3:35 (LXX), in which Abraham is called God’s “beloved.”