Romans 2:13

2:13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous before God, but those who do the law will be declared righteous.¹

Romans 2:25

2:25 For circumcision² has its value if you practice the law, but³ if you break the law,⁴ your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

Romans 2:27

2:27 And will not the physically uncircumcised man⁵ who keeps the law judge you who, despite⁶ the written code⁷ and circumcision, transgress the law?

Romans 3:20-21

3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him⁸ by the works of the law,⁹ for through the law comes¹⁰ the knowledge of sin. 3:21 But now¹¹ apart from the law the righteousness of God (which is attested by the law and the prophets)¹² has been disclosed –

Romans 5:13

5:13 for before the law was given,¹³ sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin¹⁴ when there is no law.

Romans 8:2

8:2 For the law of the life-giving Spirit¹⁵ in Christ Jesus has set you¹⁶ free from the law of sin and death.

¹tn The Greek sentence expresses this contrast more succinctly than is possible in English. Grk “For not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be declared righteous.”

²sn Circumcision refers to male circumcision as prescribed in the OT, which was given as a covenant to Abraham in Gen 17:10-14. Its importance for Judaism can hardly be overstated: According to J. D. G. Dunn (Romans [WBC], 1:120) it was the “single clearest distinguishing feature of the covenant people.” J. Marcus has suggested that the terms used for circumcision (περιτομή, peritomh) and uncircumcision (ἀκροβυστία, akrobustia) were probably derogatory slogans used by Jews and Gentiles to describe their opponents (“The Circumcision and the Uncircumcision in Rome,” NTS 35 [1989]: 77-80).

³tn This contrast is clearer and stronger in Greek than can be easily expressed in English.

⁴tn Grk “if you should be a transgressor of the law.”

⁵tn Grk “the uncircumcision by nature.” The word “man” is supplied here to make clear that male circumcision (or uncircumcision) is in view.

⁶tn Grk “through,” but here the preposition seems to mean “(along) with,” “though provided with,” as BDAG 224 s.v. διά A.3.c indicates.

⁷tn Grk “letter.”

⁸sn An allusion to Ps 143:2.

⁹tn 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.

¹⁰tn Grk “is.”

¹¹tn Νυνὶ δέ (Nuni de, “But now”) could be understood as either (1) logical or (2) temporal in force, but most recent interpreters take it as temporal, referring to a new phase in salvation history.

¹²tn Grk “being witnessed by the law and the prophets,” a remark which is virtually parenthetical to Paul’s argument.

¹³tn Grk “for before the law.”

¹⁴tn Or “sin is not reckoned.”

¹⁵tn Grk “for the law of the Spirit of life.”

¹⁶tc Most mss read the first person singular pronoun με (me) here (A D 1739^c 1881 Ï lat sa). The second person singular pronoun σε (se) is superior because of external support (א B {F which reads σαι} G 1506* 1739*) and internal support (it is the harder reading since ch. 7 was narrated in the first person). At the same time, it could have arisen via dittography from the final syllable of the verb preceding it (ἠλευθέρωσεν, hleuqerwsen; “has set free”). But for this to happen in such early and diverse witnesses is unlikely, especially as it depends on various scribes repeatedly overlooking either the nu or the nu-bar at the end of the verb.