Philippians 3:6

Php 3:6. Concerning zeal — For the law and the Jewish religion, and for all those ritual observances which they so eagerly enforce, I myself was once so earnest, that I persecuted, and that even to imprisonment and death, those who did not observe them. Touching the righteousness which is in the law — Which is described and enjoined by the letter of it; that is, with respect to external observances; blameless — Quite unexceptionable in my conduct; so that those who knew me most intimately, could not have accused me of any wilful transgression, or of neglecting any of those expiatory rites and sacrifices, which were appointed to be used in case of involuntary errors. “The greatest part of the Jews firmly believed that the righteousness required in the law consisted chiefly in observing its ritual precepts. And therefore, if a person was circumcised, offered the appointed sacrifices, observed the sabbaths, and other festivals enjoined by Moses, made the necessary purifications, in cases of pollution, paid tithes of all he possessed, and abstained from crimes injurious to society; or if he committed any such, was punished for them according to the law, he was, as the apostle expresseth it, with respect to the righteousness which is by law, unblameable. Further, as the ritual services enjoined in the law were not founded in the nature of things, but in the command of God; and as, according to the law, atonement was made for some transgressions by these services, they were, on account of their being done from a regard to the divine will, considered as acts of piety more acceptable to God than even the performance of moral duties. In the third place, as these ritual services were both numerous and burdensome, and recurred so frequently, that they gave almost constant employment to the pious Israelites, the diligent and exact performance of them was thought equivalent to a perfect righteousness, and so meritorious, that it entitled the performer to justification and eternal life. All these erroneous opinions Paul entertained while he continued a Pharisee. But he relinquished them when he became a Christian, as he informs us, immediately.” — Macknight.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3:6 I harshly persecuted the church (see Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-2, 21; Gal 1:13): His actions demonstrated his zeal for Judaism, to which the Good News of Jesus was seen as a threat. • Paul’s righteousness, as judged by human standards, was another indication of his zeal for the law (see also Gal 1:14; for Paul’s later Christian view, cp. Rom 3:23; 7:14-25).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Php 3:6. Διώκων, persecuting) He formerly thought that he was acting most meritoriously.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Phi 3:6 . Probably ζῆλος (neuter) is the correct form here. In N.T. the neuter occurs only in 2Co 9:2 , but it is found in Ignat., and, alternately with ὁ ζ ., in 1 Clem. It is perhaps colloquial (so W-Sch [38] . , p. 84), although ὁ ζ . is that used in LXX. ζῆλος would almost have a technical meaning for a strict Jew at that time in connexion with the fanatical party among the Pharisees who called themselves ζηλωταί ( cf. Schürer, i., 2, p. 80 ff.). Cf. Gal 1:14 , περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων . διώκ . τ . ἐκκλησ . Cf. Gal 1:13 , ἐδίωκον τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ . ὁ διώκων is, in classical Greek, the technical term for the “pursuer” or prosecutor in the law-courts. Strangely enough it was by means of prosecutions that Paul usually persecuted. κατὰ δικ . τ . ἐν ν . “According to ( i.e. , tested by the standard of) the righteousness which belongs to the sphere of the law.” Of course this righteousness, which is here equivalent to right conduct as a whole, is regarded from the point of view of that which justifies before God. For the exceptional prominence which righteousness has in Jewish religious thought, see esp [39] . Weber, Lehren des Talmud , pp. 269 270, and Charles’ admirable note on Apocal. of Baruch , xxiv: 1. Cf. Ps. Sol. 9:9 for a very precise formulation of Jewish thought on this subject. It would be wrong to limit δικ . here merely to ceremonial observances. It includes, most probably, the ordinary moral precepts of the law as well. ἄμεμπτος . Exactly parallel to this description is the case of the rich young man in the Gospels. He also could claim to be κατὰ δικ . τ . ἐν νομ . ἄμεμπ . It was at the next step (Phi 3:7 ) that he stopped short. He was unable to “count all things loss for Christ”.

[38] Sch. Schmiedel’s Ed. of Winer.

[39] especially.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Concerning--Translate as before and after, "As touching Zeal" (compare Act 22:3; Act 26:9).

blameless--Greek, "having become blameless" as to ceremonial righteousness: having attained in the eyes of man blameless legal perfection. As to the holiness before God, which is the inner and truest spirit of the law, and which flows from "the righteousness of God by faith," he on the contrary declares (Phi 3:12-14) that he has not attained perfection.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 6. Concerning zeal] As to my zeal for Pharisaism, I gave the fullest proof of it by persecuting the Church of Christ; and this is known to all my countrymen.

Touching the righteousness] And as to that plan of justification, which justification the Jews say is to be obtained by an observance of the law, I have done every thing so conscientiously from my youth up, that in this respect I am blameless; and may, with more confidence than most of them; expect that justification which the law appears to promise.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6. As to the righteousness which is in the law There can be no doubt he means by this the entire righteousness of the law, for it were too meagre a sense to understand it exclusively of the ceremonies. The meaning, therefore, is more general — that he cultivated an integrity of life, such as might be required on the part of a man that was devoted to the law. To this, again, it is objected, that the righteousness of the law is perfect in the sight of God. For the sum of it is — that men be fully devoted to God, and what beyond this can be desired for the attainment of perfection? I answer, that Paul speaks here of that righteousness which would satisfy the common opinion of mankind. For he separates the law from Christ. Now, what is the law without Christ but a dead letter? To make the matter plainer, I observe, that there are two righteousnesses of the law. The one is spiritual — perfect love to God, and our neighbors: it is contained in doctrine, and had never an existence in the life of any man. The other is literal — such as appears in the view of men, while, in the mean time, hypocrisy reigns in the heart, and there is in the sight of God nothing but iniquity. Thus, the law has two aspects; the one has an eye to God, the other to men. Paul, then, was in the judgment of men holy, and free from all censure — a rare commendation, certainly, and almost unrivalled; yet let us observe in what esteem he held it.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(6) Concerning zeal, persecuting the church.—The word “zeal” (as in Act_22:3) is probably used almost technically to describe his adhesion to the principles of the “Zealots,” who, following the example of Phinehas, were for “executing judgment” at once on all heathens as traitors, ready alike to slay or to be slain for the Law. He shows how in this he departed from the teaching of Gamaliel, when he was “exceedingly mad against” the Christians, and “persecuted them even unto strange cities.”

Touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.—The “righteousness in Law,” which our Lord called “the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees” (Mat_5:20), is the righteousness according to rule, in which a man, like the rich young ruler, might think himself “blameless,” and even hope to go beyond it in “counsels of perfection”—not the righteousness according to principle, which can never fulfil or satisfy itself. While St. Paul confined himself to the lower form of righteousness, he could feel himself “blameless;” but when he began to discern this higher righteousness in the Law, then, he felt the terrible condemnation of the Law, on which he dwells so emphatically in Rom_7:7-12.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. zeal] “of God, but not according to true spiritual knowledge (epignôsis),” Rom_10:2. Cp. Act_26:9-11. He implies here that this “zeal” was perfectly sincere, though sinfully conditioned by a moral blindness. See in this connexion Act_23:1; 2Ti_1:3.

persecuting the church] Cp. 1Co_15:9; Gal_1:13; Gal_1:23; 1Ti_1:13.

the righteousness which is in the law] Lit., again, “in law”; see fifth note on Php_3:5. The reference is to completeness of observance and privilege, from the point of view of the Pharisaic legalist. The most rigid inquisitor in this direction could not have found fault with Paul’s title. See further on Php_3:3.—“In (the) law”:—included within its terms.

blameless] Better, with R.V., found blameless, a good paraphrase of the Greek, which is literally, “having become blameless.”

His title, or temptation, to “confidence in the flesh” was thus compounded of a natal right to the seal of the covenant; hereditary and educated loyalty to the purest Jewish life and practice; personal devotion to the strictest Jewish religionism; the utmost practical energy in its defence; the most minute attention to its rules. Of its kind, the position was perfect.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Concerning zeal, persecuting the church,.... The Vulgate Latin version adds, "of God", as in Gal 1:13. The apostle was very zealous of the traditions of the elders, and for the law of God, and towards God also; though his zeal was not according to knowledge, but blind, ignorant, and furious; which pushed him on to persecute the followers of Christ, and the church of Christ at Jerusalem more especially, in a very violent and outrageous manner; he held the clothes of those that stoned Stephen, Act 7:58; he consented unto his death, Act 8:1; he made havoc of the church at Jerusalem, haling men and women to prison, Act 8:3; he continued breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of Christ, Act 9:1; gave his voice against them when put to death, punished them frequently in the synagogues by scourging them, Act 26:10, and compelled them to blaspheme the name of Christ; was exceeding mad against them, pursued them to strange cities, Act 26:11, and persecuted the church of God exceedingly, more than anyone single person besides,

Touching the righteousness which is in, the law, blameless. This he mentions last, as including the whole of his righteousness, civil, ceremonial, and moral; and which he fancied was so perfect, that whatever righteousness was in the law, or required by it, he had it, and to such a degree, that he was blameless before God and men; that he was justified by it in the sight of God, and could not justly be found fault with by any, or be charged with any defect in his obedience, either to the moral or ceremonial law; which must arise from great ignorance of the righteousness of God, and the strictness of his justice, and of the law of God, and the purity, spirituality, and extent of it, which reaches to the thoughts of the heart, and the first motions of sin; and of himself, the plague of his own heart, of the sin of lust, and of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, in every instance of it.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Ver. 6. Concerning zeal] A blind misguided zeal. {See Trapp on "Rom 10:2"} If zeal be not qualified with knowledge all will be on fire, as the primum mobile, first easily swayed, they say, would be with its swift turning about, but for the countermotion of the lower spheres.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Concerning zeal, persecuting the church - Showing the greatness of my zeal for the religion which I believed to be true, by persecuting those whom I considered to be in dangerous error. Zeal was supposed to be, as it is, an important part of religion; see 2Ki 10:16; Psa 69:9; Psa 119:139; Isa 59:17; Rom 10:2. Paul says that he had shown the highest degree of zeal that was possible. He had gone so far in his attachment for the religion of his fathers, as to pursue with purposes of death those who had departed from it, and who had embraced a different form of belief. If any, therefore, could hope for salvation on the ground of extraordinary devotedness to religion, he said that he could.

Touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless - So far as the righteousness which can be obtained by obeying the law is concerned. It is not needful to suppose here that he refers merely to the ceremonial law; but the meaning is, that he did all that could be done to obtain salvation by the mere observance of law. It was supposed by the Jews, and especially by the Pharisees, to which sect he belonged, that it was possible to be saved in that way; and Paul says that he had done all that was supposed to be necessary for that. We are not to imagine that, when he penned this declaration, he meant to be understood as saying that he had wholly complied with the law of God; but that, before his conversion, he supposed that he had done all that was necessary to be done in order to be saved by the observance of law he neglected no duty that he understood it to enjoin. He was not guilty of deliberately violating it.

He led a moral and strictly upright life, and no one had occasion to “blame” or to accuse him as a violator of the law of God. There is every reason to believe that Paul, before his conversion, was a young man of correct deportment, of upright life, of entire integrity; and that he was free from the indulgences of vice and passion, into which young people often fall. In all that he ever says of himself as being “the chief of sinners,” and as being “unworthy to be called an apostle,” he never gives the least intimation that his early life was stained by vice, or corrupted by licentious passions. On the contrary, we are left to the fair presumption that, if any man could be saved by his own works, he was that man. This fact should be allowed to make its proper impression on those who are seeking salvation in the same way; and they should be willing to inquire whether they may not be deceived in the matter, as he was, and whether they are not in as much real danger in depending on their own righteousness, as was this most upright and zealous young man.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Concerning zeal; not lukewarm, but exceedingly fervent in the strictest observances of the Pharisaic order, which was much in external devotion, Luk 18:12, very solicitous for proselytes, Mat 23:15,25. Herein he was above his equals for years, being exceedingly zealous of the traditions of the fathers, Gal 1:14, (and his zeal had been very commendable had it been in a good matter, Gal 4:18), that which the false apostles contended much for.

Persecuting the church; which he showed all manner of ways in his rage against the church of Christ, conceived by the Pharisees to be opposite to the law of Moses, Act 9:1; 22:3,4; 26:9-12; Gal 1:13.

Touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless; he rises higher yet in his personal obedience; he might have been a zealot in his sect, and yet a hypocrite, if not of a scandalous life; but it seems, in the external observation of those things which the ceremonial or moral law did prescribe, he was, in the eye of man, of a blameless conversation, resembling Zacharias and Elisabeth, Luk 1:6. Men could not tax him, he had behaved himself so conscientiously, Act 23:1; yet when he had his eyes opened, he found here was no such matter of confidence for him before God, 1Sa 16:7; 1Co 4:4. This external performance he found, when enlightened, was far short of internal and perfect obedience, Rom 7:7; and therefore he saw it necessary to change the ground and foundation of his confidence, all that he before rested on, unto Christ alone, 1Co 3:11; 2Co 5:17; not seeking to receive honour from men, but that from Christ only, Joh 5:44.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6. Concerning… touching, and touching of Php_3:5, should have the same translation, meaning as regards, or in respect of. His zeal for the law was shown by his career as a persecutor, when, to save its supremacy, he gave all his energies to the destruction of the Church.

Righteousness—In the rightness, the right conduct, which consisted in observance of the law, he was perfect. Such he was down to the period of his journey to Damascus. All this is said from his old Judaic point of view; and assuredly if there was any value in scrupulous obedience, in persecuting zeal, and in rigorous, unvarying fidelity, it was his. But his estimate of things has now greatly changed; and his persecution of the Church in which he had once gloried he has come to regard as his greatest sin.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Concerning zeal, persecuting the Church. He was not only a Pharisee, but an energetic, zealous Pharisee; he carried out the principles of his sect, thinking that he did God service by persecuting those whom he counted as heretics. Touching the righteousness which is in the Law, blameless. As far as "the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees" went, the righteousness which is "in Law," which consists, that is, in the observance of formal rules; or which is "of Law" (ver. 9), which springs, that is, from such observance, St. Paul was found blameless. "Rara sane laus et prope singularis," says Calvin, quoted by Alford; "videamus tureen quanti eam fecerit." (For the whole of this passage, comp. 2Co_11:21, 2Co_11:22)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Having such a zeal for it as to persecute to the death those who did not observe it. Touching the righteousness which is described and enjoined by the Law - That is, external observances, blameless.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

righteousness

(See Scofield "Rom 10:3").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. Concerning zeal. His zeal for Judaism was demonstrated by the fact that he was a persecutor of the church. What were his feelings concerning this part of his career in shown in 1 Tim. 1:13–16. Blameless. Keeping the letter of the law so as to be blameless in the eyes of my fellow-Jews.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

As for zeal, I persecuted the church

Paul says here that he had been very eager to punish people for following Christ. "I was very determined to hurt Christian believers"

as for righteousness under the law, I was blameless

"I obeyed the law completely"

whatever things were a profit for me

Paul is referring here to the praise he received for being an eager Pharisee. He speaks of this praise as if he had viewed it in the past as a businessman's profit. AT: "anything that other Jews praised me for" (See: Metaphor)

profit ... loss

These are common business terms. If many people in your culture do not understand formal business terms, you could translate these terms as "things that made my life better" and "things that made my life worse."

I have considered them as loss

Paul speaks of that praise as if he were now viewing it as a business loss instead of a profit. In other words, Paul says that all his religious acts of righteousness are worthless before Christ. (See: Metaphor)

translationWords

zeal

persecute

church

righteous

law

blameless

Christ

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

6. ζῆλος. So א*Oba 1:2*. אcD2b, c and the cursives read ζῆλον, the classical form. In Clem. Rom. Ep. ad Cor. both forms are freely used: e.g. διὰ ζῆλος, § 4, διὰ ζῆλον, § 5.

6. κατὰ ζῆλος. Here in the sense of ardour, earnestness; sincere, though sinfully conditioned by moral blindness. (See Act 26:9 ἐγὼ … ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ πρὸς τὸ ὄνομα … δεῖν πολλὰ ἐναντία πρᾶξαι.)—Ζῆλος sometimes takes the meaning of jealousy, rancour; e.g. Rom 13:13, μὴ ἔριδι καὶ ζήλῳ. But this would be out of place here.

διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. See his own words, Act 26:11, περισσῶς ἐμμαινόμενος αὐτοῖς ἐδίωκον, κτλ.: 1Co 15:9, ἐδίωξα τὴν ἐκκλ. τοῦ θεοῦ: Gal 1:13, καθʼ ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν ἐκκλ. τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐπόρθουν αὐτήν.

κατὰ δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐν νόμῳ. Literally, “as to law-included righteousness.” He means evidently completeness of legal observance, with its supposed claims to merit. No inquisitor could have found him defective here.

γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος. Almost, “turning out blameless.” R.V. well, “found blameless.”

On the Pharisaic theory, his position was perfect, his title to “confidence in the flesh” complete.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6. κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν: Ironical. ‘I was so very zealous that I became a persecutor of the church of Christ.’ Zeal for God, for his house, and for his law, was the highest praise of an O.T. saint. (See Num 25:11, Num 25:13; Num_1 K. 19:10, 14; Psa_69 [68]:9. Comp. Act 21:20, Act 21:22:3; Rom 10:2.) Thdrt. comments: οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὴν φιλοτιμίαν, οὐδὲ διὰ δόξαν κενήν, οὐδὲ φθόνῳ βαλλόμενος, ὡς Ἰουδαίων ἄρχοντες, ἀλλὰ τῷ ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου φλεγόμενος ζήλῳ, τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐπορθοῦν.—“Not because of ambition nor for empty renown, neither being smitten with envy like the rulers of the Jews, but being inflamed with zeal for the law, I persecuted the church.”

διώκων: Used adjectively, parallel with ἄμεμπτος. Not as a substantive, as Mey., Weiss, Lips., which occurs with the article (Win. xlv. 7).

δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐν νόμῳ: ‘righteousness which is in the law.’ Δικ. is used abstractly, and then concretely defined by τ. ἐν νόμ. ‘As regards righteousness—I mean that which is in the law’: which resides in the righteous law and consists in its strict observance. Δικαιοσύνη is used here in its objective sense of conformity to an external rule of righteousness. The righteousness is in (ἐν) the law, not in the man: in the man only as he conforms to the law. It is not regarded as an inward righteousness like the righteousness of faith. Comp. ἐκ νόμου (vs. 9), where the righteousness is treated as proceeding from the law. The reference need not be confined to the ceremonial law, for the law is a whole (Gal 3:10).

γενόμενος: ‘having become’: in the course of my pursuit of legal righteousness.

ἄμεμπτος: See on 2:15. Not absolutely blameless, according to God’s standard, but in human judgment. (Comp. Gal 1:14.)

On Holsten’s attempt to impugn the authenticity of the epistle by endeavoring to show in this statement a contradiction of Paul’s teaching elsewhere that man is unable perfectly to keep the law, see Introd. 6. The blamelessness here asserted is according to human, Pharisaic standards.

6. Therefore, living in the power of Christ’s resurrection, he awaits in hope the actual resurrection from the dead, wherein the saving power of Christ will be displayed in the change of the mortal bodies of all believers into the likeness of Christ’s glorified body, and which will inaugurate the absolute and eternal dominion of the commonwealth of God (vs. 21).

The warrant for this confident expectation is the divine power of Christ to subject all things to himself.

κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν τοῦ δύνασθαι αὐτὸν: ‘according to the working whereby he is able’; or, more literally, ‘according to the energy of his ability.’

κατὰ: The change is ‘in accordance with’ or ‘appropriate to’ Christ’s power of universal subjection. The statement both as to the change itself and the power which effects it, is in accordance with 1Co 6:14, 1Co 6:15:53, 55; Eph 1:19.

Ἐνέργεια occurs only in Paul. It is power in exercise; “potentia in actu exserens” (Calv.), and is used in N.T. only of superhuman power. (See Col 1:29, Col 1:2:12; 2Th 2:9.) It is the active energy in which δύναμις displays itself. (Comp. Eph 3:7, and see on ὁ ἐνεργῶν, 2:13.) The power or virtue which was in Christ when the woman touched the hem of his garment (Mar 5:30; Luk 8:46) was δύναμις. In the healing of the woman it became ἐνέργεια.

καὶ: ‘also’ or ‘even,’ marking the measure of the power. Able not only to transform the body but also to subject all things to himself.

ὑπόταξαι: Originally ‘to arrange’ or ‘marshal under.’ Often simply ‘to subject.’ (See 1Co 15:27, 1Co 15:28; Eph 1:22; Heb 2:8; Jas 4:7.)

τὰ πάντα: ‘all things,’ collectively, as vs. 8.

PAUL’S CONCEPTION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH

M. Ménégoz, in his treatise Le Péché et la Rédemption, says that Php 3:8-10 contains the most precise statement of the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith. Without assenting to his view that Christ was justified by his own death and resurrection, I agree with him as to the importance of the statement contained in these verses. It does not contradict any previous utterance of Paul, nor does it present any new feature; but it combines and exhibits as a single conception what are commonly regarded as two distinct elements of the righteousness of faith. These two elements are assumed to be separately treated in the Epistle to the Romans. They are, the initial, objective, judicial act of declaring righteous, whereby a believer is placed in a state of reconciliation with God, and the establishment, through faith, of a vital union with Christ; or, to put the matter more briefly, the righteousness of faith viewed as objective justification and as subjective sanctification. I say ‘regarded’ and ‘assumed,’ because, both on the ground of this passage and of the Epistle to the Romans, I do not regard this separation as justifiable. For I think that these two elements are inseparably united in the Apostle’s conception of righteousness by faith. The distinction between justification and sanctification I regard as largely technical. They represent, it is true, respectively, the initiation and the consummation of the work of salvation; but Paul uses ἁγιασμός both of the state and of the process of sanctification; and that word, in Rom 6:19, is associated with the ‘walk in newness of life’ rather than with the consummation of subjection to righteousness. Having become servants of righteousness, the readers stand committed to an economy of sanctification, in which they are to ‘perfect holiness in the fear of the Lord’ (2Co 7:1. See Sanday on Rom 6:19). The point is well stated by Liddon in his Analysis of Romans, pp. 17, 18: “The δικαιοσύνη which God gives includes these two elements,—acquittal of the guilt of sin, or justification in the narrower sense of the word, and the communication of a new moral life, ‘that the ordinance of the law might be fulfilled in us’ (Rom 8:4). These two sides of the gift of δικαιοσύνη can only be separated in thought: in fact they are inseparable.… The true righteousness is one, not two or more. The maxim ‘justitia alia justifications, sanctifications alia’ is not Paul’s. Paul knows nothing of an external righteousness which is reckoned without being given to man; and the righteousness which faith receives is not external only, but internal; not imputed only, but imparted to the believer. Justification and sanctification may be distinguished by the student as are the arterial and nervous systems in the human body; but in the living body they are coincident and inseparable.”

I think that, so far as justification is a judicial act following upon repentance and faith, it is regarded by Paul as the initial stage of a condition of actual inward righteousness, which is to develop itself in the believer’s experience as fruit from seed. (Comp. Lips. Hand-Com. Ep. to Rom. Einl. p. 82.) Hence I differ from Professor Bruce (St. Paul’s Conception of Christianity, p. 158 ff., Amer. ed.), who claims that the two aspects of justification are separately treated by Paul in Romans. He says: “He does not refer to the subjective aspect of faith as a renewing power till he has finished his exposition of the doctrine of justification. He takes up faith’s function in establishing a vital union with Christ in the sixth chapter.… Does not this amount to the exclusion of faith’s sanctifying function from the grounds of justification?” I think not. For, as Professor Bruce admits, Paul already alludes to the subjective aspect of justification in the opening of the fifth chapter. Being justified, we have peace with God, joy in hope of glory, in tribulation, and in God himself. But, what is more to the point, Paul, in the third and fourth chapters, does not treat of the operation of justification. His main point is the essential quality of justification, as being by faith and not by works of the law. When he does take up the operation of justification in ch. vi., he treats the two aspects in combination. He does not confine himself to what follows justification. He begins with the death to sin. With Christ we die to sin; we are raised up with him unto a walk in newness of life. Union with him by the likeness of his death implies union with him by the likeness of his resurrection. Our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin. “But if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him (here, not only hereafter); knowing that Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death no more hath dominion over him. For the death that he died, he died unto sin once for all: but the life that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus.” Comp. “be found in him” (Php 3:9).

(1) In our passage Paul represents the righteousness of faith as a real righteousness in the believer. It is not founded upon human merit; it is not a righteousness of legal obedience. It proceeds from God and comes to man through faith in Christ (vs. 9). It is not perfect (vs. 12-14). None the less it is an actual righteousness in the man. Justification contemplates rightness—right living, feeling, and thinking. Faith is not a substitute for this rightness. It is its generative principle; its informing quality. God’s plan of salvation is not intended to effect, by a mere legal adjustment, something which cannot be an actual fact. It is not true that God practically gives up the possibility of righteous men, and merely allows the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ to stand for it. God’s intent is to make men personally righteous. Paul does not teach, nor is it anywhere taught in Scripture, that the requirement of personal righteousness is fulfilled for man by some one else, and that man has only to accept this substitute by faith. Rather Paul declares explicitly that God predestined his children ‘to be conformed to the image of his Son’ (Rom 8:29).

I shall not enter upon the discussion of the meaning of δικαιοῦν, since the question does not turn upon that. It may be conceded that the dominant sense of that word is forensic, ‘to declare or pronounce righteous.’ That that sense can be vindicated in every instance, I very much doubt. (See E. P. Gould on “Paul’s Use of δικαιοῦν, ” Amer. Journ. of Theol. vol. 1. No. 1, and W.A. Stevens in vol. 1. No. 2.) But, that question apart, it should be noted that the sense of a declared or imputed righteousness, if it belong to δικαιοσύνη at all, is peculiar to Paul. Elsewhere it has the meaning of personal rightness, or righteous quality. In the LXX it occurs in nine instances as the translation of חֶסֶד, ‘kindness’; while צְדָקָה, ‘justice,’ usually translated by δικαιοσύνη, is, in nine cases, rendered by ἐλεημοσύνη, and three times by ἔλεος. In Mat 6:1, the TR, with the later uncials and most cursives, read ἐλεημοσύνην for δικαιοσύνην; while אa gives δόσιν. (See Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 49 ff.)

(2) This conception of a real righteousness in the believer is opposed to the familiar dogmatic explanation that δικαιοσύνη πίστεως is not a personal but an imputed quality. According to this, the righteousness is not in the man, but in Christ; and Christ’s righteousness is imputed, or reckoned, or set down to his account through his faith. This imputation works no subjective change in the man. It is merely placing to his account the righteousness of another. He is, though not actually righteous, judicially declared to be righteous. Thus Dr. Hodge (Syst. Theol. 3. p. 144 ff.): The imputation of the righteousness of Christ to a believer for his justification “does not and cannot mean that the righteousness of Christ is infused into the believer, or in any way so imparted to him as to change or constitute his moral character. Imputation never changes the inward, subjective state of the person to whom the imputation is made.… When righteousness is imputed to the believer, he does not thereby become subjectively righteous.” Thus justification, having its foundation in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, is only a declarative act whereby a man is pronounced righteous without any actual righteousness in him answering to the declaration, but solely on the ground of another’s righteousness, which, in some inexplicable way, is transferred to his credit. This is simply a legal fiction which reflects upon the truthfulness of God. God declares a man righteous when he is not righteous. “To Paul,” says Sabatier, “the word of God is always creative and full of power. It always produces an actual effect. In declaring a man justified, therefore, it actually and directly creates in him a new beginning of righteousness” (Apostle Paul, Eng. Trans. p. 300).

(3) This is clearly not the conception expressed in this passage. The righteousness of faith which Paul here desires for himself is a winning Christ and a being in Christ. This righteousness is first described generally as knowing Christ, and then, more specifically, as knowing the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings, and being made conformable unto his death; that is to say, the righteousness of God by faith is a being and dwelling in Christ in such wise as that his resurrection, his sufferings, his death, become actual parts of Paul’s experience and active forces in it. Christ is not merely apprehended as an object of trust. He is not merely known as an objective personality. The believer is taken up into his life; and his life in turn possesses the believer, and becomes his informing principle and prime motor. (See Gal 2:20.)

In short, the conception of the righteousness of faith here presented is not that of an external righteousness made over to the believer by a legal declaration, but that of a righteousness which is a real fact in the man, springing from union with the personal Christ. In this mystical union the life and power of Christ are transfused into the believer’s life, so that, in a sense, the personality of Christ becomes his; so that he can say, ‘for me to live is Christ,’ and ‘not I live but Christ liveth in me.’ The old man, the natural ego, is crucified with Christ; the new man is raised up, and, in the power of Christ’s risen life, walks in newness of life, in fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. All the righteousness which inheres in that perfect personality becomes potentially his from the moment that faith puts him into living connection with it. All the experience of Christ’s life becomes a fact and a power in his experience. Did Christ die to sin? He also dies to sin. Was Christ justified from sin by death? So likewise is he. Did Christ rise from the dead? He rises from the death of sin, besides sharing finally in Christ’s physical resurrection. The knowledge of Christ’s death and resurrection is not merely an insight into the historical meaning of those facts. Did Christ suffer? The heavenly nature which he receives from Christ insures for him, as it did for Christ, the contradiction of sinners against himself. Was Christ perfected through suffering? He attains perfection by the same road. Does Christ live unto God? He is alive unto God through Jesus Christ, and all the powers of that divine life descend upon him and work in him to conform him to the image of the Son of God.

Says Calvin (Inst. iii. 1): “First, it is to be held that, so long as Christ is outside of us and we are separated from him, whatever he has suffered and done for the salvation of the human race is useless and without significance to us. Therefore, in order that he may communicate to us what he has received from the Father, he must become ours and dwell in us. Hence he is called our ‘head,’ and ‘the first-born among many brethren’; while we in turn are said to be ingrafted into him and to put him on, because whatever he possesses is nothing to us until we coalesce into one with him.” And again (xi. 10): “Christ, having become ours, makes us partakers of the gifts with which he is endowed. We do not therefore view him as outside of us, so that his righteousness is imputed to us; but because we put on himself and are ingrafted into his body, he has deigned to make us one with himself. Therefore we boast that we have his righteousness.” So, too, Luther (Werke, Erlang. Ausg. 37, 441): “Christ is God’s grace, mercy, wisdom, strength, comfort, and blessedness. I say not as some, causaliter; that is, that he gives righteousness, and remains without. For in that case righteousness is dead, nay, it is never given. Christ is there himself, like the light and heat of the fire, which are not where the sun and the fire are not.”

(4) This passage presents a conception of faith different from that implied in the imputative theory. According to that, faith is merely a medium by which the man is put into contact with something outside of himself—“a mere hand,” as Professor Bruce puts it, “to lay hold of an external righteousness.” According to Paul’s teaching here, an ethical quality inheres in faith. Faith is a moral energy. It “works by love” (Gal 5:6). This accords with Heb. 11., where faith is exhibited as the generator of moral heroism. Righteousness, as already observed, is effected in a believer by the transfusion into him of Christ’s life and character, not by Christ’s righteousness being placed to his account. To assume the latter is to fall back from the gospel upon the law. Paul says, “not having a righteousness of my own which is of the law”; but if the righteousness of faith is legally and forensically imputed, it is of the law. Righteousness has its roots in personal relation to God. Sin is more than bad conduct. Bad conduct is only the result of personal separation and estrangement from the Father, God. The terrible significance of sin lies in the break between a human life and its divine source; and the attainment of righteousness is possible only through the reëstablishment of the original birth-relation, as Christ declared in the words, “Ye must be born anew.” The mere genealogical fact of sonship must be translated into a living, personal relation. This is possible only through faith. A handbook of laws will not effect it. Rules will not establish personal relations. Precepts will not put a son’s heart into a man. He will not love to order, nor obey because he is bidden, nor trust because a trustworthy object is commended to him, nor be meek and merciful because it is right to be so. Being righteous is not a matter of assent to a proposition. It is a matter of surrender to a person. Such surrender comes about only through faith, because only faith has in it that element which draws personalities, lives, hearts together. Therefore faith does not count instead of righteousness. It counts as making for (εἰς) righteousness; with a view to righteousness; as tending to righteousness, just as the corn of wheat counts for the full corn in the ear. Therein is its value. It is counted for what it is, not for what it is not. It is the prime agent in righteousness. The righteousness which is of God becomes in man the righteousness of faith, because in faith, which inaugurates the vital union of the man with Christ, which constitutes personal and not mere legal relation, lie enfolded all the possibilities of righteousness. Faith is presumptive righteousness. It is the native element in which righteousness evolves itself. Righteousness is begun, continued, and perfected in the exercise of the faith which holds the life in living contact with the personal source of holiness; in the trust and self-surrender which make possible the inpouring and appropriation of all heavenly forces. “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness” (Rom 10:10). In Christ the believer becomes the righteousness of God (2Co 5:21). “Faith is that temper of sympathetic and immediate response to another’s will which belongs to a recognised relation of vital communion. It is the spirit of confident surrender which can only be justified by an inner identification of life. Faith is the power by which the conscious life attaches itself to God; it is an apprehensive motion of the living spirit by which it intensifies its touch on God; it is an instinct of surrender by which it gives itself up to the fuller handling of God; it is an affection of the will by which it presses up against God, and drinks in divine vitality with quickened receptivity” (Henry Scott Holland, in Lux Mundi, pp. 17, 18). There is no true faith in Christ without the indwelling of Christ. Paul makes the latter the criterion of the former (2Co 13:5).

Pfleiderer’s treatment of this subject is interesting and suggestive. (See Paulinismus, ch. iv.)

Ellic. Ellicott.

Ead. Eadie.

Lightf. Lightfoot.

Kl. Klöpper.

De W. De Wette.

Lips. Lipsius.

Weizs. Weizsäcker.

Comp. Compare.

Calv. Calvin.

Ans. Anselm.

Calov. Calovius.

Croc. Crocius.

Pisc. Piscator.

Polyc. Polycarp.

Mey. Meyer.

Alf. Alford.

Weiss Der Philipperbrief ausgesetzt und die Geschichte seiner Auslegung kritisch dargestellt. 1859. A most thorough piece of work. It leaves no point untouched, and treats every point with ample learning, conscientious pains taking, independence, and positiveness. It is valuable in studying the history of the exegesis.

LXX Septuagint Version.

Luth. Luther.

Erasm. Erasmus.

Hom. Homer.

Chr. Chrysostom.

Aug. Augustine.

Bib. Bible.

Just. M. Justin Martyr.

A.V. Authorized Version.

Theoph. Theophylact.

W. St. Vincent: Word Studies in the N. T.

R.V. Revised Version of 1881.

Thdrt. Theodoret.

Vulg. Vulgate.

Wetst. Wetstein.

Win. Winer: Grammar of N. T. Greek. 8th ed. of Eng. Transl. by Moulton. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, 8 Aufl., von P. W. Schmiedel. 1 Theil, 1894.

Apocr. Apocrypha.

Aristoph. Aristophanes.

Soph. Sophocles.

Eur. Euripides.

Hdt. Herodotus.

Jos. Josephus.

B Cod. Vaticanus: 4th century. Vatican Library. Contains both epistles entire. Correctors: B2, nearly the same date; B3, 10th or 11th century.

D Cod. Claromontanus: 6th century. Græco-Latin. National Library, Paris. Contains both epistles entire. Corrector: Db, close of 6th century.

F Cod. Augiensis: 9th century. Græco-Latin. Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. Philippians entire; Philemon wanting in the Greek from πεποιθὼς (vs. 21) to the end.

G

Cod. Boernerianus: 9th century. Græco-Latin. Dresden. Wanting Greek and Latin, Phm 1:21-25.

An asterisk added to the title of a MS., as D*, signifies a correction made by the original scribe.

K Cod. Mosquensis: 9th century. Moscow. Contains both epistles entire.

L Cod. Angelicus: 9th century. Angelican Library of Augustinian monks at Rome. Wanting from ἐξουσίαν (Heb 13:10) to the end of Philemon.

אԠCod. Sinaiticus: 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in the convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai, in 1859. Now at St. Petersburg. Contains both epistles complete. Correctors: אa, nearly contemporary; אb, 6th century; אc, beginning of 7th century, treated by two correctors,—אca אcb.

A Cod. Alexandrinus: 5th century. British Museum. Contains both epistles entire.

P Cod. Porphyrianus: beginning of 9th century. Palimpsest. St. Petersburg. Both epistles entire, but many words illegible.

17 National Library, Paris: 9th or 10th century. Both epistles entire.

37 Library of Town Council of Leicester: 15th century. Both epistles entire. See Miller’s Scrivener, vol. i. 202.

Plut. Plutarch.

Ign. Ignatius.

= Equivalent to.

Ril. Rilliet.

van Heng. van Hengel.

WH. Westcott and Hort: The New Testament in the Original Greek.

Tisch. Tischendorf: Novum Testamentum Graece. Editio Octava Critica Major.

Burt. Burton: N. T. Moods and Tenses.

Grot. Grotius.

Beng. Bengel.

Œc. Œcumenius.

Arm. Armenian.

Cop. Coptic, Memphitic, or Bohairic.

TR Textus Receptus.

Goth. Gothic.

Æth. Ethiopic.

Syr. Harclean.

Rosenm. Rosenmüller.

am E. am Ende.

Hoel. Hoelemann.

Lum. Lumby.

Ew. Ewald.

Xen. Xenophon.

Syr. Peshitto and Harclean versions.

31 British Museum: 11th century. Both epistles entire.

80 Vatican: 11th century. Philippians entire; Philemon mutilated.

Dw. Dwight.

Theo.Mop. Theodore of Mopsuestia.

Mich. Michaelis.

Hack. Hackett.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Zeal. Ironical.

Blameless [γενομενος αμεμπτος] . The A. V. does not render the participle, proven or found. Rev., correctly, found blameless.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.