Romans 1:4

1:4 who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power ¹  according to the Holy Spirit ²  by the resurrection ³  from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 2:8

2:8 but ⁴  wrath and anger to those who live in selfish ambition ⁵  and do not obey the truth but follow ⁶  unrighteousness.

Romans 2:27

2:27 And will not the physically uncircumcised man ⁷  who keeps the law judge you who, despite ⁸  the written code ⁹  and circumcision, transgress the law?

Romans 3:20

3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him ¹⁰  by the works of the law, ¹¹  for through the law comes ¹²  the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:30

3:30 Since God is one, ¹³  he will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

Romans 5:1

The Expectation of Justification

5:1 ¹⁴ Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have ¹⁵  peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Romans 9:6

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 

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 10:5

10:5 For Moses writes about the righteousness that is by the law: “The one who does these things will live by them.” ¹⁷ 

Romans 11:15

11:15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

Romans 11:36

11:36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever! Amen.

Romans 16:11

16:11 Greet Herodion, my compatriot. ¹⁸  Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.

[1:4]  ¹ sn Appointed the Son-of-God-in-power. Most translations render the Greek participle ὁρισθέντος (Jorisqentos, from ὁρίζω, Jorizw) “declared” or “designated” in order to avoid the possible interpretation that Jesus was appointed the Son of God by the resurrection. However, the Greek term ὁρίζω is used eight times in the NT, and it always has the meaning “to determine, appoint.” Paul is not saying that Jesus was appointed the “Son of God by the resurrection” but “Son-of-God-in-power by the resurrection,” as indicated by the hyphenation. He was born in weakness in human flesh (with respect to the flesh, v. 3) and he was raised with power. This is similar to Matt 28:18 where Jesus told his disciples after the resurrection, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”

[1:4]  ² tn Grk “spirit of holiness.” Some interpreters take the phrase to refer to Christ’s own inner spirit, which was characterized by holiness.

[1:4]  ³ tn Or “by his resurrection.” Most interpreters see this as a reference to Jesus’ own resurrection, although some take it to refer to the general resurrection at the end of the age, of which Jesus’ resurrection is the first installment (cf. 1 Cor 15:23).

[2:8]  ⁴ tn This contrast is clearer and stronger in Greek than can be easily expressed in English.

[2:8]  ⁵ tn Grk “those who [are] from selfish ambition.”

[2:8]  ⁶ tn Grk “are persuaded by, obey.”

[2:27]  ⁷ tn Grk “the uncircumcision by nature.” The word “man” is supplied here to make clear that male circumcision (or uncircumcision) is in view.

[2:27]  ⁸ tn Grk “through,” but here the preposition seems to mean “(along) with,” “though provided with,” as BDAG 224 s.v. διά A.3.c indicates.

[2:27]  ⁹ tn Grk “letter.”

[3:20]  ¹⁰ sn An allusion to Ps 143:2.

[3:20]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² tn Grk “is.”

[3:30]  ¹³ tn Grk “but if indeed God is one.”

[5:1]  ¹⁶ sn Many interpreters see Rom 5:1 as beginning the second major division of the letter.

[5:1]  ¹⁷ 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.

[9:6]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “For not all those who are from Israel are Israel.”

[10:5]  ²² sn A quotation from Lev 18:5.

[16:11]  ²⁵ tn Or “kinsman,” “relative,” “fellow countryman.”