Romans 4:1

The Illustration of Justification

4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our ancestor according to the flesh, ¹  has discovered regarding this matter? ² 

Romans 4:12

4:12 And he is also the father of the circumcised, ³  who are not only circumcised, but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham possessed when he was still uncircumcised. ⁴ 

Romans 9:3-8

9:3 For I could wish ⁵  that I myself were accursed – cut off from Christ – for the sake of my people, ⁶  my fellow countrymen, ⁷  9:4 who are Israelites. To them belong ⁸  the adoption as sons, ⁹  the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the temple worship, ¹⁰  and the promises. 9:5 To them belong the patriarchs, ¹¹  and from them, ¹²  by human descent, ¹³  came the Christ, ¹⁴  who is God over all, blessed forever! ¹⁵  Amen.

9:6 It is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all those who are descended from Israel are truly Israel, ¹⁶  9:7 nor are all the children Abraham’s true descendants; rather “through Isaac will your descendants be counted.” ¹⁷  9:8 This means ¹⁸  it is not the children of the flesh ¹⁹  who are the children of God; rather, the children of promise are counted as descendants.

Romans 9:2

9:2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. ²⁰ 

Colossians 1:18-22

1:18 He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn ²¹  from among the dead, so that he himself may become first in all things. ²² 

1:19 For God ²³  was pleased to have all his ²⁴  fullness dwell ²⁵  in the Son ²⁶ 

1:20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, ²⁷  whether things on earth or things in heaven.

Paul’s Goal in Ministry

1:21 And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your ²⁸  minds ²⁹  as expressed through ³⁰  your evil deeds, 1:22 but now he has reconciled you ³¹  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –

Galatians 6:16

6:16 And all who will behave ³²  in accordance with this rule, peace and mercy be on them, and on the Israel of God. ³³ 

Ephesians 2:11-12

New Life Corporately

2:11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh – who are called “uncircumcision” by the so-called “circumcision” that is performed on the body ³⁴  by human hands – 2:12 that you were at that time without the Messiah, ³⁵  alienated from the citizenship of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, ³⁶  having no hope and without God in the world.

Philippians 3:3-5

3:3 For we are the circumcision, ³⁷  the ones who worship by the Spirit of God, ³⁸  exult in Christ Jesus, and do not rely on human credentials ³⁹  3:4 – though mine too are significant. ⁴⁰  If someone thinks he has good reasons to put confidence in human credentials, ⁴¹  I have more: 3:5 I was circumcised on the eighth day, from the people of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews. I lived according to the law as a Pharisee. ⁴² 

[4:1]  ¹ tn Or “according to natural descent” (BDAG 916 s.v. σάρξ 4).

[4:1]  ² tn Grk “has found?”

[4:12]  ³ tn Grk “the father of circumcision.”

[4:12]  ⁴ tn Grk “the ‘in-uncircumcision faith’ of our father Abraham.”

[9:3]  ⁵ tn Or “For I would pray.” The implied condition is “if this could save my fellow Jews.”

[9:3]  ⁶ tn Grk “brothers.” See BDAG 18-19 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.b.

[9:3]  ⁷ tn Grk “my kinsmen according to the flesh.”

[9:4]  ⁸ tn Grk “of whom.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[9:4]  ⁹ tn The Greek term υἱοθεσία (Juioqesia) was originally a legal technical term for adoption as a son with full rights of inheritance. BDAG 1024 s.v. notes, “a legal t.t. of ‘adoption’ of children, in our lit., i.e. in Paul, only in a transferred sense of a transcendent filial relationship between God and humans (with the legal aspect, not gender specificity, as major semantic component).” Although some modern translations remove the filial sense completely and render the term merely “adoption” (cf. NAB, ESV), the retention of this component of meaning was accomplished in the present translation by the phrase “as sons.”

[9:4]  ¹⁰ tn Or “cultic service.”

[9:5]  ¹¹ tn Grk “of whom are the fathers.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[9:5]  ¹² tn Grk “from whom.” Here the relative pronoun has been replaced by a personal pronoun.

[9:5]  ¹³ tn Grk “according to the flesh.”

[9:5]  ¹⁴ tn Or “Messiah.” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed.”)

[9:5]  ¹⁵ tn Or “the Christ, who is over all, God blessed forever,” or “the Messiah. God who is over all be blessed forever!” or “the Messiah who is over all. God be blessed forever!” The translational difficulty here is not text-critical in nature, but is a problem of punctuation. Since the genre of these opening verses of Romans 9 is a lament, it is probably best to take this as an affirmation of Christ’s deity (as the text renders it). Although the other renderings are possible, to see a note of praise to God at the end of this section seems strangely out of place. But for Paul to bring his lament to a crescendo (that is to say, his kinsmen had rejected God come in the flesh), thereby deepening his anguish, is wholly appropriate. This is also supported grammatically and stylistically: The phrase ὁ ὢν (Jo wn, “the one who is”) is most naturally taken as a phrase which modifies something in the preceding context, and Paul’s doxologies are always closely tied to the preceding context. For a detailed examination of this verse, see B. M. Metzger, “The Punctuation of Rom. 9:5,” Christ and the Spirit in the New Testament, 95-112; and M. J. Harris, Jesus as God, 144-72.

[9:6]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “For not all those who are from Israel are Israel.”

[9:7]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “be called.” The emphasis here is upon God’s divine sovereignty in choosing Isaac as the child through whom Abraham’s lineage would be counted as opposed to Ishmael.

[9:8]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “That is,” or “That is to say.”

[9:8]  ¹⁹ tn Because it forms the counterpoint to “the children of promise” the expression “children of the flesh” has been retained in the translation.

[9:2]  ²⁰ tn Grk “my sorrow is great and the anguish in my heart is unceasing.”

[1:18]  ²¹ tn See the note on the term “firstborn” in 1:15. Here the reference to Jesus as the “firstborn from among the dead” seems to be arguing for a chronological priority, i.e., Jesus was the first to rise from the dead.

[1:18]  ²² tn Grk “in order that he may become in all things, himself, first.”

[1:19]  ²³ tn The noun “God” does not appear in the Greek text, but since God is the one who reconciles the world to himself (cf. 2 Cor 5:19), he is clearly the subject of εὐδόκησεν (eudokhsen).

[1:19]  ²⁴ tn The Greek article τό (to), insofar as it relates to God, may be translated as a possessive pronoun, i.e., “his.” BDAG 404 s.v. εὐδοκέω 1 translates the phrase as “all the fullness willed to dwell in him” thus leaving the referent as impersonal. Insofar as Paul is alluding to the so-called emanations from God this is acceptable. But the fact that “the fullness” dwells in a person (i.e., “in him”) seems to argue for the translation “his fullness” where “his” refers to God.

[1:19]  ²⁵ tn The aorist verb κατοικῆσαι (katoikhsai) could be taken as an ingressive, in which case it refers to the incarnation and may be translated as “begin to dwell, to take up residence.” It is perhaps better, though, to take it as a constative aorist and simply a reference to the fact that the fullness of God dwells in Jesus Christ. This is a permanent dwelling, though, not a temporary one, as the present tense in 2:9 makes clear.

[1:19]  ²⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (the Son; see v. 13) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:20]  ²⁷ tc The presence or absence of the second occurrence of the phrase δι᾿ αὐτοῦ (di’ autou, “through him”) is a difficult textual problem to solve. External evidence is fairly evenly divided. Many ancient and excellent witnesses lack the phrase (B D* F G I 0278 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 al latt sa), but equally important witnesses have it (Ì⁴⁶ א A C D¹ Ψ 048^vid 33 Ï). Both readings have strong Alexandrian support, which makes the problem difficult to decide on external evidence alone. Internal evidence points to the inclusion of the phrase as original. The word immediately preceding the phrase is the masculine pronoun αὐτοῦ (autou); thus the possibility of omission through homoioteleuton in various witnesses is likely. Scribes might have deleted the phrase because of perceived redundancy or awkwardness in the sense: The shorter reading is smoother and more elegant, so scribes would be prone to correct the text in that direction. As far as style is concerned, repetition of key words and phrases for emphasis is not foreign to the corpus Paulinum (see, e.g., Rom 8:23, Eph 1:13, 2 Cor 12:7). In short, it is easier to account for the shorter reading arising from the longer reading than vice versa, so the longer reading is more likely original.

[1:21]  ²⁸ tn The article τῇ (th) has been translated as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215).

[1:21]  ²⁹ tn Although διανοία (dianoia) is singular in Greek, the previous plural noun ἐχθρούς (ecqrous) indicates that all those from Colossae are in view here.

[1:21]  ³⁰ tn The dative ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς πονηροῖς (en toi" ergoi" toi" ponhroi") is taken as means, indicating the avenue through which hostility in the mind is revealed and made known.

[1:22]  ³¹ tc Some of the better representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texts have a passive verb here instead of the active ἀποκατήλλαξεν (apokathllaxen, “he has reconciled”): ἀποκατηλλάγητε (apokathllaghte) in (Ì⁴⁶) B, ἀποκατήλλακται [sic] (apokathllaktai) in 33, and ἀποκαταλλαγέντες (apokatallagente") in D* F G. Yet the active verb is strongly supported by א A C D² Ψ 048 075 [0278] 1739 1881 Ï lat sy. Internally, the passive creates an anacoluthon in that it looks back to the accusative ὑμᾶς (Juma", “you”) of v. 21 and leaves the following παραστῆσαι (parasthsai) dangling (“you were reconciled…to present you”). The passive reading is certainly the harder reading. As such, it may well explain the rise of the other readings. At the same time, it is possible that the passive was produced by scribes who wanted some symmetry between the ποτε (pote, “at one time”) of v. 21 and the νυνὶ δέ (nuni de, “but now”) of v. 22: Since a passive periphrastic participle is used in v. 21, there may have a temptation to produce a corresponding passive form in v. 22, handling the ὑμᾶς of v. 21 by way of constructio ad sensum. Since παραστῆσαι occurs ten words later, it may not have been considered in this scribal modification. Further, the Western reading (ἀποκαταλλαγέντες) hardly seems to have arisen from ἀποκατηλλάγητε (contra TCGNT 555). As difficult as this decision is, the preferred reading is the active form because it is superior externally and seems to explain the rise of all forms of the passive readings.

[6:16]  ³² tn The same Greek verb, στοιχέω (stoicew), occurs in Gal 5:25.

[6:16]  ³³ tn The word “and” (καί) can be interpreted in two ways: (1) It could be rendered as “also” which would indicate that two distinct groups are in view, namely “all who will behave in accordance with this rule” and “the Israel of God.” Or (2) it could be rendered “even,” which would indicate that “all who behave in accordance with this rule” are “the Israel of God.” In other words, in this latter view, “even” = “that is.”

[2:11]  ³⁴ tn Grk “in the flesh.”

[2:12]  ³⁵ tn Or “without Christ.” Both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.” Because the context refers to ancient Israel’s messianic expectation, “Messiah” was employed in the translation at this point rather than “Christ.”

[2:12]  ³⁶ tn Or “covenants of the promise.”

[3:3]  ³⁷ tn There is a significant wordplay here in the Greek text. In v. 2 a rare, strong word is used to describe those who were pro-circumcision (κατατομή, katatomh, “mutilation”; see BDAG 528 s.v.), while in v. 3 the normal word for circumcision is used (περιτομή, peritomh; see BDAG 807 s.v.). Both have τομή (the feminine form of the adjective τομός [tomo"], meaning “cutting, sharp”) as their root; the direction of the action of the former is down or off (from κατά, kata), hence the implication of mutilation or emasculation, while the direction of the action of the latter is around (from περί, peri). The similarity in sound yet wide divergence of meaning between the two words highlights in no uncertain terms the differences between Paul and his opponents.

[3:3]  ³⁸ tc The verb λατρεύω (latreuw; here the participial form, λατρεύοντες [latreuonte"]) either takes a dative direct object or no object at all, bearing virtually a technical nuance of “worshiping God” (see BDAG 587 s.v.). In this text, πνεύματι (pneumati) takes an instrumental force (“by the Spirit”) rather than functioning as object of λατρεύοντες. However, the word after πνεύματι is in question, no doubt because of the collocation with λατρεύοντες. Most witnesses, including some of the earliest and best representatives of the Alexandrian, Western, and Byzantine texts (א* A B C D² F G 0278^vid 33 1739 1881 Ï co Ambr), read θεοῦ (qeou; thus, “worship by the Spirit of God”). But several other important witnesses (א² D* P Ψ 075 365 1175 lat sy Chr) have the dative θεῷ (qew) here (“worship God by the Spirit”). Ì⁴⁶ is virtually alone in its omission of the divine name, probably due to an unintentional oversight. The dative θεῷ was most likely a scribal emendation intended to give the participle its proper object, and thus avoid confusion about the force of πνεύματι. Although the Church came to embrace the full deity of the Spirit, the NT does not seem to speak of worshiping the Spirit explicitly. The reading θεῷ thus appears to be a clarifying reading. On external and internal grounds, then, θεοῦ is the preferred reading.

[3:3]  ³⁹ tn Grk “have no confidence in the flesh.”

[3:4]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “though I have reason for confidence even in the flesh.”

[3:4]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “flesh.”

[3:5]  ⁴² sn A Pharisee was a member of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.