Romans 3:20

3:20 By doing what the law commands refers to obeying the requirements of the law of Moses. While this phrase refers to Jews, the principle extends to all people. If Jews cannot be put in right relationship with God by obeying the law God gave them, certainly other people cannot establish such a relationship through good deeds.

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

Rom 3:20. Διότι) for this reason, because) [Beng. connects this verse with Rom 3:19. But Eng. vers. ‘therefore’).—νόμου, of the law) indefinitely put, but chiefly referring to the moral law, Rom 3:19, ch. Rom 2:21-26; which [the moral law] alone is not made void; Rom 3:31; for it was the works of it that Abraham was possessed of, before he received circumcision. Paul, in affirming that we are not justified by the works of the law, as opposed to faith, not to any particular law, means the whole law, of which the parts, rather than the species, were the ceremonial and the moral; and of these the former, as being even then abrogated, was not so much taken into account; the latter does not bind us [is not obligatory] on the same principle [grounds] as it was [when] given by Moses. In the New Testament we have absolutely no works of the law without [independently of] grace; for the law confers no strength. It is not without good reason, that Paul, when he mentions works, so often adds, of the law; for it was on these that his opponents were relying: and were ignorant of those better works, which flow as results from faith and justification.—οὐ δικαιωθήσεται, shall not be justified) on the signification of this word, see Luk 7:35. In the writings of Paul at least, the judicial meaning is quite manifest, Rom 3:19; Rom 3:24, etc., ch. Rom 4:5, taken in connection with context. Concerning the future tense, comp. v. 30, note.—πᾶσα σὰρξ, all flesh) synonymous with the world, Rom 3:19, but with the accompanying notion implied of the cause: the world with its righteousness is flesh; therefore it is not justified [by works flowing] out of itself.—ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ, in His sight) ch. Rom 4:2, Rom 2:29.—νόμου, law) which was given for that very purpose.—ἐπίγνωσις), the knowledge of sins does not justify by itself, but it feels and confesses the want of righteousness.—ἀμαρτίας, of sin) Sin and righteousness are directly and commensurately opposed to each other [adequate; so that one on its side is exactly commensurate with the other on its side]; but sin implies both guilt and depravity; therefore righteousness denotes the reverse of both. Righteousness is more abundant, ch. Rom 5:15; Rom 5:17. Apol. A. C. says well, Good works in the saints are the fruits of [appertain to] righteousness, and are pleasing on account of faith; on this account they are the fulfilling of the law. Hence δικαιοῦν is to make a man righteous, or in other words, to justify; a notion quite in accordance with the form of the verb in οω: nor is there any difficulty in the derivative verb, but in δίκαιος. He then, who is justified, is brought over [translated] from sin to righteousness, that is, from guilt or criminality to a state of innocence, and from depravity and corruption to spiritual health. Nor is there a homonymy,[37] or twofold idea, [when by analogy things different by nature are expressed by one word], but a signification at once simple, and pregnant in the terms sin and righteousness, the same as also everywhere prevails in the term ἄφεσις, forgiveness, [remission], and in the words, by which it is implied, ἁγιάζω, to sanctify, ἀπολούω, to wash away, καθαρίζω, to purify, etc., 1Co 6:11, notes; Psa 103:3; Mic 7:18, etc. And this pregnant [suggestive] signification itself of the verb to justify, implying the whole of the divine benefit, by which we are brought from sin to righteousness, occurs also, for example, in Tit 3:7; with which comp. 2Co 5:21; Rom 8:4; with which comp. ch. Rom 5:16. But elsewhere, according as the subject under discussion demands, it is restricted to some particular part, and especially to deliverance from sin, so far as guilt is regarded in it: and Paul always uses it so, when, according to his design, he is treating of God justifying the sinner by faith.

[37] See Appendix.

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

Rom_3:20. Διότι] propterea quod, i. 19, not propterea (Beza, Rosenmüller, Morus, Tholuck), is to be divided from the preceding only by a comma, and supplies the objective reason of that ἵνα κ.τ.λ[796] of the law: because the relation of righteousness will accrue to no flesh from works of the law. For if δικαιοσύνη should come from works of the law, the law would in fact open up the way of righteousness, and therefore that ἵνα πᾶν κ.τ.λ[797] would not be correct.[798] As to πᾶσα σάρξ, equivalent to πᾶς ἄνθρωπος, but conveying the idea of moral imperfection and sinfulness in presence of God, see on Act_2:17; 1Co_1:20; and compare generally on Gal_2:16. That with regard to the Gentiles Paul is thinking of the natural law (Rom_2:14) cannot be admitted, seeing that in the whole connection he has to do with the law of Moses. But neither may the thought be imported into the passage with reference to the Gentiles: if they should be placed under the law and should have ἔργα νόμου (Rückert, comp Philippi and Mehring), since, according to the context, it is only with reference to the Jews (Rom_3:19) that the question is dealt with as to no flesh being righteousa general relation which, as regards the Gentiles, is perfectly self-evident, seeing that the latter are ἄνομοι, and have no ἔργα νόμου in the proper sense whatever.

Respecting ἔργα νόμου,[800] works in harmony with the law of Moses, the ἔργα being the prominent conception, works which are fulfilments of its precepts, comp on Rom_2:15. Moreover that it is not specially the observance of the ritual portions of the law (Pelagius, Cornelius à Lapide, Semler, Ammon), but that of the Mosaic law in general which is meant, is clear partly from the expression itself, which is put without limitation, partly from the contextual relation of the clause to what goes before, and partly from the following διὰ γὰρ νόμου Κ.Τ.Λ[802], from which the ethical law is so far from being excluded,[803] that it is on the contrary precisely this aspect of the νόμος which is specially meant.

Οὐ ΔΙΚΑΙΩΘΉΣ.] See on Rom_1:17. The future is to be understood either of the moral possibility, or, which is preferable on account of Rom_3:20, purely in the sense of time, and that of the future generally: In every case in which justification (i.e. the being declared righteous by God) shall occur, it will not result from, etc., so that such works should be the causa meritoria. The reference to the future judgment (Reiche) is controverted by the fact that throughout the entire connection justification is regarded as a relation arising immediately from faith, and not as something to be decided only at the judgment. See Rom_3:21 ff. and chap. 4. For this reason there is immediately afterwards introduced as the counterpart of the δικαιοσύνη, which comes directly from faith, the ἘΠΊΓΝΩΣΙς ἉΜΑΡΤΊΑς, which comes directly from the law. It is certain, moreover, that in Οὐ ΔΙΚΑΙΩΘ. Κ.Τ.Λ[804] Paul had Psa_143:2 in view, but instead of πᾶς ζῶν he put πᾶσα σάρξ as more significant for the matter in hand.

In what sense now shall no one from works of the law become righteous before God, i.e. such that God looks upon him as righteous?[805] Not in the sense that perfect compliance with the law would be insufficient to secure justification, against which the fundamental law of the judge: οἱ ποιηταὶ νόμου δικαιωθήσονται (Rom_2:13), would be decisive; but in the sense that no man, even with an outwardly faultless observance of the law (comp on Php_3:6), is in a position to offer to it that full and right obedience, which alone would be the condition of a justification independent of extraneous intervention; in fact, it is only through the law that man comes to a clear perception and consciousness of his moral imperfection by nature (his unrighteousness). See Luthers preface. That this was the Apostles view, is proved by the reason which follows: διὰ γὰρ νόμου κ.τ.λ[807] See, besides, especially chs. 7 and 8; Gal_3:10. There is here no mention of the good works of the regenerate, which however are only the fruits of justification, ch. 6, Rom_8:2 ff.; Eph_2:10 al[808] Comp Philippi and Morison.

ΔΙᾺ ΓᾺΡ ΝΌΜΟΥ ἘΠΊΓΝ. ἉΜ.] The law, when it places its demands before man, produces in the latter his first proper recognition of his moral incongruity with the will of God. With these words Paul strikes at the deepest root of the matter, Ewald. Respecting γάρ Calvins note is sufficient: a contrario ratiocinator.… quando ex eadem scatebra non prodeunt vita et mors. The propriety of the argument however rests on the fact that the law does not at the same time supply the strength to conquer sin (Rom_8:3), but stops short at the point of bringing to cognition the interiorem immunditiem which it forbids; hanc judicat et accusat coram Deo, non tollit, Melancthon. It is different in the case of civil laws, which are designed merely to do away with the externa scelera, and to judge the works in and for themselves, Rom_13:3 ff.

[796] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[797] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[798] According to Hofmann, in pursuance of his erroneous interpretation of ver. 19, διότι κ.τ.λ. is meant to contain the specification of the reason why the word of the law was published to the Jews for no other object, than that the whole world might be precluded from all objection against the condemning sentence of God. Compare also Th. Schott. But Paul has not at all expressed in ver. 19 the thought for no other object; he must in that case, instead of the simple ἵνα which by no means excludes other objects, have written μόνον ἵνα, or possibly εἰς οὐδὲν εἰ μὴ ἵνα, or in some other way conveyed the non-expressed thought.

[800] For ἔργων νόμου cannot be taken as law of works, as Märcker uniformly wishes. Comp. on Rom_2:15.

[802] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[803] Paul always conceives the law as an undivided whole (comp. Usteri, p. 36), while he yet has in his mind sometimes more the ritual, sometimes more the moral, aspect of this one divine νόμος, according to his object and the connection (Ritschl, altkathol. K. p. 73). Comp. on Gal_2:16.

[804] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[805] In opposition to Hofmann, who in his Schriftb. I. p. 612 urges the ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ against the imputative sense of the passive δικαιοῦσθαι, see Wieseler on Gal. p. 192 f. It is quite equivalent to παρὰ τ. Θεῷ, judice Deo, Gal_3:11. See generally the thorough defence of the sensus forensis of δικαιοῦσθαι in the N. T., also from classic authors and from the O. T. in Morison, p. 163 ff.

[807] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[808] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 3:20 . διότι means “because,” not “therefore,” as in A.V. The rendering “therefore” is perhaps due to the difficulty which the translators had in putting an intelligible meaning into “because”. The sense seems to be: Every mouth must be stopped, and all the world shown to be liable to God’s judgment, because by works of law no flesh shall be justified before Him. This last proposition that no flesh shall be justified in this way is virtually an axiom with the Apostle: it is a first principle in all his spiritual thinking, and hence everything must be true which can be deduced from it, and everything must take place which is required to support it. Because this is the fundamental certainty of the case, every mouth must be stopped, and the strong words quoted from the law stand where they do to secure this end. The explanation of this axiom is to be found in its principal terms flesh and law. Flesh primarily denotes human nature in its frailty: to attain to the righteousness of God is a task which no flesh has strength to accomplish. But flesh in Paul has a moral rather than a natural meaning; it is not its weakness in this case, but its strength, which puts Justification out of the question; to justify is the very thing which the law cannot do, and it cannot do it because it is weak owing to the flesh ( cf. Rom 8:3 ). But the explanation of the axiom lies not only in “flesh,” but in “law”. “By the law comes the full knowledge of sin.” ( ἐπίγνωσις , a favourite Pauline word: fifteen times used in his epistles.) This is its proper, and indeed its exclusive function. There is no law given with power to give life, and therefore there are no works of law by which men can be justified. The law has served its purpose when it has made men feel to the full how sinful they are; it brings them down to this point, but it is not for it to lift them up. The best exposition of the passage is given by the Apostle himself in Gal 2:15 f., where the same quotation is made from Psa 143:2 , and proof given again that it applies to Jew and Gentile alike. In ἐξ ἔργων νόμου , νόμος , of course, is primarily the Mosaic law. As Lipsius remarks, no distinction is drawn by the Apostle between the ritual and the moral elements of it, though the former are in the foreground in the epistle to the Galatians, and the latter in that to the Romans. But the truth would hold of every legal dispensation, and it is perhaps to express this generality, rather than because νόμος is a technical term, that the article is omitted. Under no system of statutes, the Mosaic or any other, will flesh ever succeed in finding acceptance with God. Let mortal man, clothed in works of law, present himself before the Most High, and His verdict must always be: Unrighteous.

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

20. διότι explains how law produces this effect. This sentence, while having particular reference to the Jew, is thrown into the most general form, so as to bring the Jew into line with the Gentile, and then to sum up in one conclusion Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:19.

ἐξ ἔργω ν., put in the most general form: if works done in obedience to law are taken as the basis of judgment.

οὐ δικαιωθήσεται, forensic. Cf. Gal 2:16, as ὑπόδικος; will not be acquitted when judged. Qu. Psalms 143 (142) 2.

ἐπίγνωσις. See n. on Rom 1:28. Realisation of sin as sin is the specific effect of law. Law is therefore educational, cf. Gal 3:24, but not in itself a moral or spiritual force, cf. Rom 1:32. The sentence here is not strictly wanted for the argument, but crops up as an element in S. Paul’s view of law. It anticipates and is developed in c. 7 It is important to observe that in Rom 1:19 to Rom 3:20 S. Paul bases his assertion of the universality of sin and the consequent universal need of man, not upon theory but on observation—his experience of human life, both in Jewish and Gentile circles, generalised by the help of history. It is a historical justification of the need of the Gospel, confirmed by the testimony of scripture and by general experience. In c. 7 he reaches the same conclusion by the searching analysis of his own inner experience, treated as typical—what may be called the psychological justification. Cf. Giff. on Rom 3:18 ad fin.

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.

Rom_3:20

Therefore by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight. Therefore. The particle is διότι which is equivalent to δι ̓ ὅτι, on account of which thing, wherefore. In this sense it indicates a conclusion from preceding premises. This would suit this connection, as Rom_3:20 is a fair conclusion from what is said in Rom_3:19 : All the world is guilty before God, wherefore, hence it follows that, no one can be justified by works. This is the conclusion which the apostle has had in view from the beginning of his argument. His whole design is to prove that men cannot be justified by their own righteousness, in order to prepare them to receive the righteousness of God. This view of the connection is assumed in our version by Beza, Turrettin, Rosenmüller, and others. But in the New Testament, διότι is almost uniformly, perhaps in every case, used in the sense of διὰ τοῦτο ὃτι, on this account that, or of the simple ὃτι that. The great majority of commentators therefore render it here, because, as in Rom_1:19; Rom_8:7, etc. Rom_3:20 then assigns the reason of what is said in Rom_3:19 : Every mouth must be stopped, because no flesh can be justified by works. This view is to be preferred, not because more suitable, but because more consistent with the common use of the particle in question. No flesh. When men are called flesh in the Bible, there was originally a reference to their weakness and faults, as the flesh is earthly and perishable. But in many cases there is no such implication; no flesh is simply equivalent to no man. The Greek is here πᾶσα σὰρξ οὐ, κ. τ. λ, every flesh shall not; according to the familiar Hebraism, no flesh shall. The future is used not in reference to the day of final judgment, for the act of justification takes place in this life. It expresses the certainty of the thing affirmed: No flesh shall ever be (i.e. ever can be) justified. The apostle seems evidently to have had in his mind the passage in Psa_143:2 : Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified. Δικαιόω, to justify, is not simply to pardon. A condemned criminal, in whose favor the executive exercises his prerogative of mercy, is never said to be justified; he is simply pardoned. Nor is it to pardon and to restore to favor. When a king pardons a rebellious subject, and restores him to his former standing, he does not justify him. Nor is it to make just inwardly. When a man accused of a crime is acquitted or declared just in the eye of the law, his moral character is not changed. To justify is a forensic term; that is, it expresses the act of a judge. Justification is a judicial act. It is a declaration that the party arraigned is δίκαιος, just; and δίκαιος means right, conformed to the law, To justify, therefore, is to declare that the party implicated is rectus in foro judicii; that δίκη, justice, does not condemn, but pronounces him just, declares herself satisfied. This is the uniform meaning of the word, not only in Scripture, but also in ordinary life. We never confound justification with pardon, or with sanctification. It is always used in the sense antithetical to condemnation. To condemn is not merely to punish, but to declare the accused guilty or worthy of punishment; and justification is not merely to remit that punishment, but to declare that punishment cannot be justly inflicted. Much less does to condemn mean to render wicked, and therefore neither does to justify mean to render good. When we justify God, we declare him to be just; and when God justifies the sinner, he declares him to be just. In both cases the idea is, that there is no ground for condemnation; or that the demands of justice are satisfied. Hence the terms and expressions used in Scripture, convertibly with the word to justify, all express the same idea. Thus, in Rom_2:13, it is said: Not the hearers of the law are just before God (δίκαιοι παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ), but the doers of the law shall be justified (δικαιωθήσονται). Here, to be just before God, (in his sight or estimation,) and to be justified, mean the same thing. It is clearly impossible that the apostle should mean that the doers of the law shall be pardoned. What should they be pardoned for? Doing the law does not call for pardon: it is declared to be the ground of justification. Pardon and justification therefore are essentially distinct. The one is the remission of punishment, the other is a declaration that no ground for the infliction of punishment exists. Quite as evident is it that the apostle does not mean, in the passage referred to, to say that the doers of the law shall be made holy. To justify, therefore, cannot mean to make inherently just or good. In Rom_4:6, he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works. To impute righteousness is to justify. To impute is to ascribe to, to reckon to ones account. But when we pardon a man, we do not ascribe righteousness to him; and therefore, again, justification is seen to be different from pardon. It is quite as clear, that to impute righteousness cannot mean to render holy; and therefore to justify, which is to impute righteousness, cannot mean to make good. In Rom_8:1, the apostle says, there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. Not to condemn is neither to pardon nor to sanctify, but is to pronounce just. Nothing can be clearer as a question of exegesis, than that the word δικαιόω (to justify) expresses a judicial, as opposed to an executive, and also to an efficient act. This indeed is plain from the very form of the statement in this and other passages. It would be utterly unmeaning to say that no flesh shall be pardoned by the works of the law, or that no man shall be sanctified by the deeds of the law. In the fifth chapter of this epistle, Paul uses the phrase sentence unto condemnation (κρίμα εἰς κατάκριμα), in antithesis to sentence unto justification (κρίμα εἰς δικαίωσιν). Justification therefore is as much a sentence, κρίμα, a judgment, a declarative act, as condemnation. It need not be remarked that this a point of vital importance. How can a man be just with God? is the question which of all others most immediately concerns our eternal interests. The answer which Pelagians and Remonstrants give to this question is, that to justify is simply to pardon and to restore to divine favor. The Romanists say, that it is to render inwardly pure or good, so that God accepts as righteous only those who are inwardly conformed to the law, and because of that conformity. Protestants say, that to justify is to declare just; to pronounce, on the ground of the satisfaction of justice, that there is no ground of condemnation in the sinner; or that he has a righteousness which meets the demands of the law. The Romish doctrine of subjective justification, against which the Protestants contended as for the life of the Church, has in our day been revived in different forms. The speculative and mystic theologians of Germany all repudiate the doctrine of objective justification; they all teach in some way, that to justify is to make just; to restore the ruined nature of man to its original state of purity or conformity to the law of God. They are all disposed to say, with Olshausen: Von Gott kann nie etwas als gerecht anerkannt oder dafür erklärt werden, was es nicht ist; i.e., God can never acknowledge or declare that just, which is not so in itself. This is said to prove that God cannot pronounce the sinner just, unless he is inherently righteous. If this is so, then no flesh living can be justified; for no human being in this life, whether under the law or the Gospel, is inherently just, or inwardly conformed to the law of God. The conscience of the holiest man on earth condemns him, and God is greater than our hearts, and knoweth all things. If not righteous in our own eyes, how can we be righteous in the sight of omniscient and infinite holiness? Agreeably to the principle just stated, Olshausen defines δικαιοσύνη, conformity to law, so that not only the outward act, but the inward feeling and disposition answer to the divine law; and δικαιόω is said to express die göttliche Thätigkeit des Hervorrufens der δικαιοσύνη welches natürlich das Anerkennen derselben als solcher in sich schliesst. That is, to justify is to produce moral rectitude, and to acknowledge it as such. See Olshausens Commentary, Romans 3:21. Justification therefore includes two things; first, making a man inwardly just; and secondly, acknowledging him to be so. No man therefore can be justified who is not inwardly conformed to the perfect law of God. This is a sentence of eternal condemnation on all mankind; for there is none righteous, no not one; neither by works nor by faith, neither by nature nor by grace. Blessed be God, this is not the doctrine of the Bible. God justifies the ungodly; that is, he pronounces just those who, personally considered, are unjust. He imputes righteousness to those without works; that is, to those who are in themselves unrighteous. In no instance in the Scriptures has δικαιόω the sense of producing δικαιοσύνη. We do not make God holy when we justify him; the unrighteous judge does not make the wicked holy when he justifies him for a reward, Isa_5:23. He surely is not an abomination to the Lord, who makes the unrighteous good; but he is declared to be such an abomination, who either justifies the wicked or condemns the just, Pro_17:15. This doctrine is not less inconsistent with the faith of the Church than it is with the plain meaning of the Scriptures. The people of God of every denomination are led as by instinct to renounce all dependence upon anything done by them or wrought in them, and to cast themselves, for acceptance before God, on what Christ has done for them. Their trust is in him, and not on their own inward conformity to the law. No previous training, and no trammels of false doctrine can prevent these who are truly under the guidance of the Spirit of God from thus renouncing their own inward righteousness, and trusting to the righteousness of the Son of God.

To justify, then, is not merely to pardon and restore to favor; nor is it to make inwardly just or holy, but it is to declare or pronounce just; that is, judicially to declare that the demands of justice are satisfied, or that there is no just ground for condemnation. The apostle here as everywhere teaches that no human being can be thus pronounced just on the ground of his personal character or conduct, because all have sinned and are guilty before God. This is here expressed by saying, that no flesh can be justified by works of the law. By works of the law are not meant works produced or called forth by the law as a mere objective rule of duty, as opposed to works produced by an inward principle of faith, but works which the law prescribes. It is not by obedience to the law, by doing the works which the law enjoins, that any man can be justified. As to the nature of the works which are thus expressly declared not to be the ground of justification, there are different opinions arising out of the different views taken of the plan of salvation revealed in the Scriptures.

1. The Pelagian doctrine, that the works intended are the ceremonial works prescribed by the Mosaic law. The doctrine assumed to he taught by the apostle is, that men are not justified by external rites, such as circumcision and sacrifice, but by works morally good.

2. The Romish doctrine, that the works of the law are works performed under the stress of natural conscience. The Romish theory is, that works done before regeneration have only the merit of condignity; but those done after regeneration, and therefore from a principle of grace, have the merit of condignity, and are the ground of acceptance with God.

3. The Remonstrant or Arminian doctrine is, that by the works of the law is to be understood the perfect legal obedience enjoined on Adam as the condition of eternal life. Under the gospel, such perfect obedience is not required, God for Christs sake being willing to accept of imperfect obedience. Men therefore are not justified by the works of the law, but by the works of the gospel, which requires only a fides obsequiosa.

4. The modern doctrine already referred to is only a philosophical statement of the Romish theory. Olshausen, Neander, and the school to which they belong, teach that the law as an objective rule of duty cannot produce real inward conformity to the will of God, but only an outward obedience, and therefore there is need of a new inward principle which produces true holiness in heart and life. Das Gesetz, says Olshausen, konnte es nicht über eine äussere Legalität hinausbringen, durch die Wiedergeburt wird aber durch Gnade ein innerer Zustand, die δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ, im Glaübigen geschaffen, der den höchsten Forderungen entspricht (see his Comment. on 1:17). The law can only effect an external legal obedience; but by regeneration, an inward state, the δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ, is produced by grace, which meets the highest demands. The works of the law, therefore, according to this view, the δικαιοσύνη τοῦ νόμου, or ἐκ νόμου, or δικαιοσύνη ἰδία, are those works or that righteousness which men by their own power, without the cooperation of divine grace, can effect; (der Mensch sie gleichsam mit seinen eignen, nach dem Fall ihm gebliebenen sittlichen Kräften, ohne Wirkung der Gnade, zu Stande bringt). Such works or such righteousness cannot justify; but the inward righteousness produced by the grace of God, and therefore called the δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ or ἐκ πίστεως, meets the demands of the law, is true ground of justification. Olshausen, 3:21. See also Neanders Geschichte der Pflanzung, pp. 503-510. The doctrine of the divines of the school of Schleiermacher, presented in formulas more or less mystic and transcendental is, that as we derive corrupt nature from Adam, and on the ground of that nature are condemned, so we derive a holy nature from Christ, and on the ground of that nature are justified.

5. In opposition to all these views, which place the ground of justification, so far as it is a declarative act, in mans own inward character or state, Protestants with one heart and one voice teach that by the works of the law, which are excluded from the ground of justification, are meant not only ceremonial works, not merely the works of the unregenerate done without grace, not only the perfect obedience required by the law originally given to Adam, but works of all kinds, everything either done by us or wrought in us. In proof of this, it may be urged:

1. That the law of which the apostle speaks, is the law which binds all mankind. It is the law, the violation of which renders all men guilty before God, as stated in Rom_3:19. The whole of the preceding argument is designed to show that both Jews and Gentiles, viewed as to their personal character, are under sin and incapable of justification on the ground of their own character or conduct.

2. This law which thus binds all men, demands the highest kind of moral obedience. It is spiritual, extending not merely to the external act, but to the secret motives. It says, thou shalt not covet; thus condemning all irregular or inordinate desires. It is holy, just, and good. It requires us to love God with all the heart, and our neighbor as ourselves. There can therefore be no form or kind of righteousness, whether natural or gracious, higher than that which the law demands, and which is comprehended in the works of the law.

3. The contrast or opposition is never between one kind of works and another. Paul does not teach that we cannot be justified by ceremonial works, but are justified by good works; he does not exclude merely opera ex solis naturae viribus, i.e. works of the unregenerate, and assert that works flowing from a principle of grace are the ground of justification; he does not contrast imperfect obedience under the gospel with the perfect obedience required of Adam; but the opposition is always between works in general, all works, and faith.

4. The works rejected as inadequate are called works of righteousness, Tit_3:5; that is, works of the highest order, for there is no designation of excellence of higher import than that.

5. The works intended are such as Abraham, the father of the faithful, whose obedience is held up as a model to all generations, performed.

6. Whenever the ground of our justification is affirmatively stated, it is declared to be the obedience, the death, the blood or work of Christ.

7. The objection to the apostles doctrine, which he answers at length in Romans 6, supposes that good works of every kind are excluded from the ground of our justification. That objection is, that if works are not the ground of justification, then we may live in sin. There could be no room for such an objection, had the apostle taught that we are not justified by mere ceremonial or moral works, but by works of a higher order of merit. It was his rejecting all works, every kind and degree of personal excellence, and making something external to ourselves, something done for us as opposed to everything wrought in us, the ground of our acceptance with God, that called forth the objection in question. And this objection has been urged against Pauls doctrine from that day to this.

8. Appeal may safely be made on this subject to the testimony of the Church or the experience of the people of God of every age and nation. They with one accord, at least in their prayers and praises, renounce all dependence on their own inward excellence, and cast themselves on the work or merit of Christ. In reference to this cardinal doctrine, Calvin says: Neque vero me latet, Augustinum secus exponere; justitiam enim Dei esse putat regenerationis gratiam; et hanc gratuitam esse fatetur, quia Dominus immerentes Spiritu suo nos renovat. Ab hac autem opera legis excludit, hoc est quibus homines a seipsis citra renovationem conantur Deum promereri. Mihi etiam plus satis notum est, quosdam novos speculatores hoc dogma superciliose proferre quasi hodie sibi revelatum. Sed apostolum omnia sine exceptione opera complecti, etiam quae Dominus in suis efficit, ex contextu planum fiet. Nam certe regeneratus erat Abraham, et Spiritu Dei agebatur quo tempore justificatum fuisse operibus negat. Ergo a justificatione hominis non opera tantum moraliter bona (ut vulgo appellant) et quae fiunt naturae instinctu excludit, sed quaecunque etiam fideles habere possunt. Deinde si illa est justitiae fidei definitio, Beati quorum remissae sunt iniquitates, Psa_32:1; non disputatur de hoc vel illo genere operum; sed abolito operum merito sola peccatorum remissio justitiae causa statuitur. Putant haec duo optime convenire, fide justificari hominem per Christi gratiam; et tamen operibus justificari, quae ex regeneratione spirituali proveniant; quia et gratuito nos Deus renovat, et ejus donum fide percipimus. At Paulus longe aliud principium sumit: nunquam scilicet tranquillas fore conscientias, donec in solam Dei misericordiam recumbant; ideo alibi postquam docuit Deum fuisse in Christo, ut homines justificaret, modum simul exprimit, non imputando illis peccata.

For by the law is the knowledge of sin. No flesh can be justified by the law, for by the law we are convinced of sin. The law condemns by bringing sin clearly to our knowledge as deserving the wrath of God, which is revealed against all sin, and therefore it cannot justify. Ex eadem scatebra, says Calvin, non prodeunt vita, et mors. Επίγνωσις (full or accurate knowledge) is stronger than the simple word γνῶσις (knowledge). When the object of knowledge is something in our own consciousness, as in the case of sin, knowledge involves a recognition of the true nature of that object, and a corresponding experience. The knowledge of sin is therefore not a mere intellectual cognition, but an inward conviction, including both an intellectual apprehension and a due sense of its turpitude and guilt. This is the office of the law. It was not designed to give life, but so to convince of sin that men may be led to renounce their own righteousness and trust in the righteousness of Christ as the only and all-sufficient ground of their acceptance with God.

Doctrine

1. However men may differ among themselves as to individual character, as to outward circumstances, religious or social, when they appear at the bar of God, all appear on the same level. All are sinners, and being sinners, are exposed to condemnation, Rom_3:9.

2. The general declarations of the Scriptures, descriptive of the character of men before the advent of Christ, are applicable to men in all ages of the world, because they describe human nature. They declare what fallen man is. As we recognize the descriptions of the human heart given by profane writers a thousand years ago, as suited to its present character, so the inspired description suits us as well as those for whom it was originally intended, Rom_3:10-18.

3. Piety and morality cannot be separated. If men do not understand, if they have no fear of God before their eyes, they become altogether unprofitable, there is none that doeth good, Rom_3:10-12.

4. The office of the law is neither to justify nor to sanctify. It convinces and condemns. All efforts to secure the favor of God, therefore, by legal obedience must be vain, Rom_3:20.

Remarks

1. As God regards the moral character in men, and as we are all sinners, no one has any reason to exalt himself over another. With our hands upon our mouth, and our mouth in the dust, we must all appear as guilty before God, Rom_3:9.

2. The Scriptures are the message of God to all to whom they come. They speak general truths, which are intended to apply to all to whom they are applicable. What they say of sinners, as such, they say of all sinners; what they promise to believers, they promise to all believes. They should, therefore, ever be read with a spirit of self-application, Rom_3:10-18.

3. To be prepared for the reception of the gospel, we must be convinced of sin, humbled under a sense of its turpitude, silenced under a conviction of its condemning power, and prostrated at the footstool of mercy, under a feeling that we cannot satisfy the demands of the law, that if ever saved, it must be by other merit and other power than our own, Rom_3:20.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A secret setting of the righteousness which is before men, be they never so just, against the justice which can stand before God: now there is no righteousness can stand before God, but the righteousness of Christ only.

By that that the Law can by us be performed.

Flesh is here taken for man, as in many other places, and furthermore hath here a greater force: for it is put to show the contrariety betwixt God and man: as if you would say, Man who is nothing else but a piece of flesh defiled with sin, and God who is most pure and most perfect in himself.

Absolved before the judgment seat of God.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Therefore by the deeds of--obedience to

the law there shall no flesh be justified--that is, be held and treated as righteous; as is plain from the whole scope and strain of the argument.

in his sight--at His bar (Psa 143:2).

for by the law is the knowledge of sin--(See on Rom 4:15; Rom 7:7; and Jo1 3:4).

Note, How broad and deep does the apostle in this section lay the foundations of his great doctrine of Justification by free grace--in the disorder of man's whole nature, the consequent universality of human guilt, the condemnation, by reason of the breach of divine law, of the whole world, and the impossibility of justification before God by obedience to that violated law! Only when these humiliating conclusions are accepted and felt, are we in a condition to appreciate and embrace the grace of the Gospel, next to be opened up.

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 20. Therefore, by the deeds of the law] On the score of obedience to this moral law, there shall no flesh, ουπασασαρξ, no human being, be justified; none can be accepted in the sight of God. And why? Because by the law is the knowledge of sin: it is that which ascertains what sin is; shows how men have deviated from its righteous demands; and sentences them to death because they have broken it. Thus the law is properly considered as the rule of right; and, unless God had given some such means of discovering what SIN is, the darkened heart of man could never have formed an adequate conception of it. For, as an acknowledged straight edge is the only way in which the straightness or crookedness of a line can be determined, so the moral obliquity of human actions can only be determined by the law of God; that rule of right which proceeds from his own immaculate holiness.

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

20. Therefore by the works of the law, etc. It is a matter of doubt, even among the learned, what the works of the law mean. Some extend them to the observance of the whole law, while others confine them to the ceremonies alone. The addition of the word law induced Chrysostom, Origen, and Jerome to assent to the latter opinion; for they thought that there is a peculiar intimation in this appendage, that the expression should not be understood as including all works. But this difficulty may be very easily removed: for seeing works are so far just before God as we seek by them to render to him worship and obedience, in order expressly to take away the power of justifying from all works, he has mentioned those, if there be any, which can possibly justify; for the law hath promises, without which there would be no value in our works before God. You hence see the reason why Paul expressly mentioned the works of the law; for it is by the law that a reward is apportioned to works. Nor was this unknown to the schoolmen, who held it as an approved and common maxim, that works have no intrinsic worthiness, but become meritorious by covenant. And though they were mistaken, inasmuch as they saw not that works are ever polluted with vices, which deprive them of any merit, yet this principle is still true, that the reward for works depends on the free promise of the law. Wisely then and rightly does Paul speak here; for he speaks not of mere works, but distinctly and expressly refers to the keeping of the law, the subject which he is discussing.

As to those things which have been adduced by learned men in defense of this opinion, they are weaker than they might have been. They think that by mentioning circumcision, an example is propounded, which belonged to ceremonies only: but why Paul mentioned circumcision, we have already explained; for none swell more with confidence in works than hypocrites, and we know that they glory only in external masks; and then circumcision, according to their view, was a sort of initiation into the righteousness of the law; and hence it seemed to them a work of primary excellence, and indeed the basis as it were of the righteousness of works. — They also allege what is said in the Epistle to the Galatians, where Paul handles the same subject, and refers to ceremonies only; but that also is not sufficiently strong to support what they wish to defend. It is certain that Paul had a controversy with those who inspired the people with a false confidence in ceremonies; that he might cut off this confidence, he did not confine himself to ceremonies, nor did he speak specifically of what value they were; but he included the whole law, as it is evident from those passages which are derived from that source. Such also was the character of the disputation held at Jerusalem by the disciples.

But we contend, not without reason, that Paul speaks here of the whole law; for we are abundantly supported by the thread of reasoning which he has hitherto followed and continues to follow, and there are many other passages which will not allow us to think otherwise. It is therefore a truth, which deserves to be remembered as the first in importance, — that by keeping the law no one can attain righteousness. He had before assigned the reason, and he will repeat it presently again, and that is, that all, being to a man guilty of transgression, are condemned for unrighteousness by the law. And these two things — to be justified by works — and to be guilty of transgressions, (as we shall show more at large as we proceed,) are wholly inconsistent the one with the other. — The word flesh, without some particular specification, signifies men; though it seems to convey a meaning somewhat more general, as it is more expressive to say, “All mortals,” than to say, “All men,” as you may see in Gallius.

For by the law, etc. He reasons from what is of an opposite character, — that righteousness is not brought to us by the law, because it convinces us of sin and condemns us; for life and death proceed not from the same fountain. And as he reasons from the contrary effect of the law, that it cannot confer righteousness on us, let us know, that the argument does not otherwise hold good, except we hold this as an inseparable and unvarying circumstance, — that by showing to man his sin, it cuts off the hope of salvation. It is indeed by itself, as it teaches us what righteousness is, the way to salvation: but our depravity and corruption prevent it from being in this respect of any advantage to us. It is also necessary in the second place to add this, — that whosoever is found to be a sinner, is deprived of righteousness; for to devise with the sophisters a half kind of righteousness, so that works in part justify, is frivolous: but nothing is in this respect gained, on account of man’s corruption.

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.

(20) Therefore.—Rather, because. All mankind alike owe the penalty for their sins. Because not even the Law can protect its votaries. It has no power to justify. All it can do is to expose in its true colours the sinfulness of sin.

The proposition is thrown into a general form: not by the works of the (Jewish) Law, but by “works of law”—i.e., by any works done in obedience to any law. Law, in the abstract, as such, is unable to justify. It might perhaps, we gather from later portions of the Epistle, if men could really keep it, but no law can be kept strictly and entirely.

Knowledge of sin.—“Full and thorough knowledge.”

In the state anterior to law, man is not supposed to know what is sinful and what is not. Conscience, gradually developed, comes in to give him some insight into the distinction, but the full knowledge of right and wrong, in all its details, is reserved for the introduction of positive law. Law has, however, only this enlightening faculty; it holds the mirror up to guilt, but it cannot remove it.

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

20. Therefore] This verse sums up the great argument begun at Rom_1:18, and more especially that begun at Rom_2:1. The Apostle has laid deep the foundation of the fact of universal and intense sinfulness and guilt. Now he will, in the true order, speak of the Divine Remedy.

deeds of the law] i.e. “prescribed by the Law,” specially by the O. T. as the preceptive revelation; but practically also by its counterpart in every human being—Conscience (see Rom_1:14). That the ceremonial law alone is not meant is particularly plain from the recent quotation of purely moral passages as “the Law” (Rom_3:18). The subsequent argument of the Epistle entirely accords with this, and practically explains that “works of the law” are acts of human obedience viewed as satisfactory, or meritorious, in regard of salvation.

no flesh] “No human being.” So 1Co_1:29; Gal_2:16. See too Joh_17:2.

justified] See note on Rom_2:13.

by the law is the knowledge of sin] The Gr. for “knowledge” is a special word, meaning full or particular knowledge. The idea of sin does indeed always exist in conscience. But the express revelation of the holy will of God calls out and intensifies that idea, and also makes plain the results and doom of sin, without stating any terms of pardon, which it is not the business of the Precept to offer. See the Apostle’s own comment, Rom_7:7-8. It is the revealed Precept which, above all things, makes sin known as evil done against the Holy One.

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.

Being justified freely by his grace,.... The matter of justification is before expressed, and the persons that share in this blessing are described; here the several causes of it are mentioned. The moving cause of it is the free grace of God; for by "the grace of God" here, is not meant the Gospel, or what some men call the terms of the Gospel, and the constitution of it; nor the grace of God infused into the heart; but the free love and favour of God, as it is in his heart; which is wonderfully displayed in the business of a sinner's justification before him: it appears in his resolving upon the justification of his chosen ones in Christ; in fixing on the method of doing it; in setting forth and pre-ordaining Christ to be the ransom; in calling Christ to engage herein; in Christ's engaging as a surety for his people, and in the Father's sending him to bring in everlasting righteousness; in Christ's coming to do it, and in the gracious manner in which he wrought it out; in the Father's gracious acceptation, imputation, and donation of it; in the free gift of the grace of faith, to apprehend and receive it; and in the persons that partake of it, who are of themselves sinners and ungodly. The meritorious cause of justification is,

the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: redemption supposes a former state of captivity to sin, Satan, and the law, in which God's elect were by nature, and is a deliverance from it; it is of a spiritual nature, chiefly respects the soul, and is plenteous, complete, and eternal: this is in and by Christ; he was called unto it, was sent to effect it, had a right unto it, as being the near kinsman; and was every way fit for it, being both God and man; and has by his sufferings and death obtained it: now, as all the blessings of grace come through redemption by Christ, so does this of justification, and after this manner; Christ, as a Redeemer, had the sins of his people laid on him, and they were bore by him, and took away; the sentence of the law's condemnation was executed on him, as standing in their legal place and stead; and satisfaction was made by him for all offences committed by them, which was necessary, that God might appear to be just, in justifying all them that believe: nor is this any objection or contradiction to the free grace of God, in a sinner's justification; since it was grace in God to provide, send, and part with his Son as a Redeemer, and to work out righteousness; it was grace in Christ, to come and give himself a sacrifice, and obtain salvation and righteousness, not for angels, but for men, and for some of them, and not all; and whatever this righteousness, salvation, and redemption cost Christ, they are all free to men.

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

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Ver. 20. Therefore by the deeds of the law] This is directly against Popish justification by works, merits, &c. Those misled and muzzled souls did worse than lose their labour that built religious houses, Pro remissione et redemptione peccatorum, pro remedio et liberatione animae, in eleemosynam animae, pro salute et requie animarum patrum et matrum, fratrum et sororum, &c. These were the ends that they aimed at, as appears in stories. And here observe how the once faithful city of Rome is now become a harlot, Isa 1:21-22; her silver is become dross, her wine mixed with water, yet with blood, now since the Council of Trent, Rev 16:3; Rev 16:5; and this Epistle of Paul to the Romans is now become the Epistle of Paul against the Romans; like as Roma Rome is become Amor inversus. love perverted.

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.

By the deeds of the law - By works; or by such deeds as the Law requires. The word “Law” has, in the Scriptures, a great variety of significations. Its strict and proper meaning is, a rule of conduct prescribed by superior authority. The course of reasoning in these chapters shows the sense in which the apostle uses it here. He intends evidently to apply it to those rules or laws by which the Jews and Gentiles pretended to frame their lives; and to affirm that people could be justified by no conformity to those laws. He had shown Rom. 1 that “the pagan, the entire Gentile world,” had violated the laws of nature; the rules of virtue made known to them by reason, tradition, and conscience. He had shown the same Rom. 2–3 in respect to the Jews. They had equally failed in rendering obedience to their Law. In both these cases the reference was, not to “ceremonial” or ritual laws, but to the moral law; whether that law was made known by reason or by revelation. The apostle had not been discussing the question whether they had yielded obedience to their ceremonial law, but whether they had been found holy, that is, whether they had obeyed the moral law. The conclusion was, that in all this they had failed, and that therefore they could not be justified by that Law. That the apostle did not intend to speak of external works only is apparent; for he all along charges them with a lack of conformity of the heart no less than with a lack of conformity of the life; see Rom 1:26, Rom 1:29-31; Rom 2:28-29. The conclusion is therefore a general one, that by no law, made known either by reason, conscience, tradition, or revelation, could man be justified; that there was no form of obedience which could be rendered, that would justify people in the sight of a holy God.

There shall no flesh - No man; no human being, either among the Jews or the Gentiles. It is a strong expression, denoting the absolute universality of his conclusion; see the note at Rom 1:3.

Be justified - Be regarded and treated as righteous. None shall be esteemed as having kept the Law, and as being entitled to the rewards of obedience; see the note at Rom 1:17.

In his sight - Before him. God sits as a Judge to determine the characters of people, and he shall not adjudge any to have kept the Law.

For by the law - That is, by all law. The connection shows that this is the sense. Law is a rule of action. The effect of applying a rule to our conduct is to show us what sin is. The meaning of the apostle clearly is, that the application of a law to try our conduct, instead of being a ground of justification, will be merely to show us our own sinfulness and departures from duty. A man may esteem himself to be very right and correct, until he compares himself with a rule, or law; so whether the Gentiles compared their conduct with their laws of reason and conscience, or the Jew his with his written law, the effect would be to show them how far they had departed. The more closely and faithfully it should be applied, the more they would see it. So far from being justified by it, they would be more and more condemned; compare Rom 7:7-10. The same is the case now. This is the way in which a sinner is converted; and the more closely and faithfully the Law is preached, the more will it condemn him, and show him that he needs some other plan of salvation.

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

To the end of this chapter, the apostle shews that the Jews cannot be truly justified, and sanctified by the works of the written law of Moses only; that a knowledge of sin, or of what is sinful, came by the law, but if they did not comply with the precepts of the law, this knowledge made them more guilty. Now, at the coming of Christ, the justice of God, that is, the justice by which he made others just, and justified them, cannot be had without faith in Christ, and by the grace of our Redeemer Jesus Christ, who God hath proposed to all, both Gentiles and Jews, as a sacrifice of[3] propitiation for the sins of all mankind, by faith in his blood; that is, by believing in him, who shed his blood and died for us on the cross. It is he alone, (ver. 26.) that is the just one, and the justifier of all. And as to this, there is no distinction. The Gentiles are justified, sanctified, or saved, but by the faith and grace of Christ Jesus. St. Paul does not pretend that the virtue of faith alone will justify and save a man; nothing can be more opposite to the doctrine of the gospel, and of the apostles in many places, as hath been observed, and wil be shewn hereafter. He tells us in this chapter (ver. 20. and 28.) that man is justified without the works of the written law: and he teaches us, that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, that is, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God. And when he seems to say, that men are justified or saved by faith, or by believing, as he says of Abraham in the next chapter, (ver. 3. and 5.) he never says (as some both ancient and later heretics have pretended) that faith alone is sufficient. And besides by faith, he understands the Christian faith and doctrine of Christ, as opposite to the law of Moses, to circumcision, and the ceremonies of that law, as it evidently appears by the design of the apostle, both in this epistle and in that to the Galatians. He teaches us in this epistle (chap. ii. 6.) that God will judge every man according to his works: (chap. ii. 13.) that "not the hearers of the law," but the doers, shall be justified. See also chap. vi. He tells the Galatians (chap. v. ver. 6.) that faith, by which they must be saved, must be a faith working by charity. He also tells the Corinthians (1 Corinthians vii. 19.) that circumcision is nothing, nor uncircumcision, but the keeping of the commandments of God. That though a man should have a faith, that so he could remove mountains, it would avail him nothing without charity. How often does he tell us that they who commit such and such sins, shall not inherit or possess the kingdom of God? Does not St. James tell us, that faith without good works is dead? See chap. ii. Of this more hereafter. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Therefore; i.e. Seeing the Gentiles, by the law of nature, and the Jews, by the written law, are thus subject to the judgment of God; and seeing no one is able to fulfil the law, and satisfy for the breach of it; therefore, &c.

By the deeds of the law; he means the moral law, and not the ceremonial law only or chiefly; even that law that forbids theft and adultery, as Rom 2:21,22, and concupiscence, as Rom 7:1-25; and by which, as this text says,

is the knowledge of sin; to which Gentiles as well as Jews are obliged, and by which therefore they are condemned.

No flesh; a common synecdoche: see Gen 6:3,12, and elsewhere. The same with no man living, in the psalmist; especially being depraved with original corruption, which is called flesh in Scripture.

Be justified in his sight; or be discharged in the court of heaven: the phrase is taken from Psa 143:2, see annotations there.

For by the law is the knowledge of sin: lest any should think that the law hereupon is useless, he goes on to show its use, but a quite contrary one to what they intended. It convinceth us of our guilt, and therefore is far from being our righteousness, Rom 7:7; 1Co 15:56.

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

20. Deeds of the law—Deeds fulfilling the law. The law is that universal law which Jews and Gentiles are alike obligated to obey, the law of universal and eternal right. This law was, for the Jew, embraced essentially in the Decalogue; and the so-called Mosaic law was a system of special enactments designed to bring men into harmony with that central law.

Justified—Made or declared by divine authority just, or pardoned. None can be justified by the law, for all have broken it.

Knowledge of sin—The law, when clearly seen and compared with our own conduct and character, is able only to convict us of sin, not to redeem us from it, or to pardon us for it.

The apostle has now completed his picture of universal human Ruin. Gentile and Jew, the whole world, are condemned by the law and guilty before God. He is ready now to unfold,

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

No flesh shall be justified - None shall be forgiven and accepted of God. By the works of the law - On this ground, that he hath kept the law. St. Paul means chiefly the moral part of it, ver. 9, 19 chap. ii, 21,

26; &c. which alone is not abolished, ver. 31. And it is not without reason, that he so often mentions the works of the law, whether ceremonial or moral; for it was on these only the Jews relied, being wholly ignorant of those that spring from faith. For by the law is only the knowledge of sin - But no deliverance either from the guilt or power of it.

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

sin

Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").

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

Here we have St. Paul’s conclusion drawn from all the foregoing premises: "Seeing all mankind, since the fall, are disabled, by their innate corruption, and actual transgression, to fulfil the law, either natural or written; it must necessarily follow, that by the works of the law can no flesh, that is, no person, either Jew or Gentile, be justified before God, all the efficacy which the law has, being to discover sin, and condemn for sinning: By the law is the knowledge of sin. By the law we apprehend our malady, but by the gospel we understand our remedy."

Learn hence, That no son of Adam, since the breach of the law, can stand justified before God by his best obedience to the commands of the law: By being justified, understand that gracious act in God, whereby we are acquitted, and finally discharged from the guilt and punishment of all our sins.

By the law here, and by the deeds of the law, we are to understand ceremonial and moral law both, especially the latter; for by the moral law, is the knowledge of sin: ’Tis the moral law that forbids theft, adultery, &c. Besides, it is evident that the antithetis, or opposition, runs all along, not between ceremonial works and moral works, but between works in general, and faith: The law of works, and the law of faith are opposed to each other, Rom 3:27.

But why can no flesh, that is, no person, be justified by the deeds of the law?

Ans. 1. Because he is flesh, that is, depraved by original corruption, and obnoxious to the curse of the law, by actual transgression. Now, that which condemns, cannot justify: An after-obedience to the law, can never atone for a former disobedience.

2. Because the best obedience we can perform to the law, is imperfect. Now, he that mixes but one sin with a thousand good works, can never be justified by his works. He that would be justified by his works, must not have one bad work amongst all his works; for that one will lay him under the curse and condemnatory sentence of the the law: Galatians 3. Cursed is everyone the continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.

Nothing that is imperfect can be a ground of justification before God, because the design of God is to exalt his justice, as well as his mercy, in the justification of a sinner.

Again, 3. No flesh can be justified by the works of the law, because all that we do, or can do, is a due debt which we owe to the law: We owe all possible obedience to the law as creatures; and by performing our obligation as creatures, we can never pay our debts as transgressors.

But now, our surety, Christ Jesus, who has given satisfaction for our violation of the law, was under no obligation to the law, but what he voluntarily laid himself under upon our account. And if so, let us eternally bless God with the highest elevation of soul for the gospel-revelation, for sending his own son to justify and save us, by working out a complete and everlasting righteousness for us: And let us plead with him incessantly for the grace of justifying faith, which is as necessary in its place as the death of Christ. One renders God reconcilable unto poor sinners, the other actually reconciled.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. “Therefore by deeds of law shall no flesh be justified in his presence.” In vain have legalists labored to so interpret this plain passage, which occurs so frequently in the Pauline writings, as to make it exclude the New Testament ritual. It is so plain and positive as to be utterly inevasible in the positive exclusion of all deeds of all law. It simply kills the legalistic heresy outright and forever, sweeping from the field the remotest possibility of human works having anything to do with justification. “For through law is the perfect knowledge of sin.” The law is simply the light which reveals sin. The room may be much polluted with dirt, and the inmates think it is clean till the light is brought in, which reveals all of the filth, but has no power to remove it and cleanse the room. This is precisely what the law does. It reveals sin, but has no power to take it away.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin . [Having, by his quotations from the Old Testament, shown that the Jew was sinful, the apostle sets forth the result of this sin. Does the law provide any remedy? Is the Jew right in hoping that it shall afford him immunity from his guilt? These questions have been for some time before the apostle, and they now come up for final answer. We, says he, universally accept the truth that when the law speaks, it speaks to those who are under it. If, therefore, it has no voice save condemnation--and it has no other--and if that voice is addressed particularly to the Jew--and it is--his state is no better than that of the Gentile; he is condemned; and the law thus speaks for this very purpose of silencing the vain, unwarranted confidence of the Jew, that he may see himself in the same condition as the Gentile, and brought, with the rest of the world, under the condemnation of God; and there can be no legal escape from this condemnation, because, by the works of the law, it is impossible for humanity, in its frailty, to justify itself in God's sight--nay, the law works a directly contrary result, for through it comes the knowledge and sense of sin, and not the sense of pardon or justification.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. Therefore, by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified. Since all are found to be sinners, law-breakers, none can be counted sinless; or, in other words, justified. Works of the law. In the Greek, this reads, Works of law. The statement is general, and of course would include the law of Moses. For by the law is the knowledge of sin. Again the article is not found in the Greek before law. Law, generally, when once known, reveals to us that we are transgressors. The savage steals as a legitimate pursuit, but when once he hears the law, “Thou shalt not steal,” his sin is revealed.

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.

20.] The solemn and important conclusion of all the foregoing argument. But not only the conclusion from it: it is also the great truth, which when arrived at, is seen to have necessitated the subordinate conclusion of ver. 19, the stopping of every mouth, &c. And therefore it is introduced, not with an illative conjunction, ‘wherefore’ (which διότι will not bear), but with ‘because.’ Because by the works of the law (God’s law: whether in the partial revelation of it written in the consciences of the Gentiles, or in the more complete one given by Moses to the Jews,—not, by works of law: no such general idea of law seems to have ever been before the mind of the Apostle, but always the law, emanating from God) shall no flesh be justified before Him (the future as implying possibility,—perhaps also as referring to the great day when πᾶσα σάρξ shall stand before God,—perhaps also as a citation from ref. Ps. LXX, οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου πᾶς ζῶν. οὐ.… πᾶσα, which we render by nulla, must be kept in the mind to its logical precision: All flesh—subject—shall be—copula—not justified—predicate).

The Apostle does not here say either (1) that justification by legal works would be impossible if the law could be wholly kept, or (2) that those were not justified who observed the prescribed sacrifices and offerings of the ceremonial law (of which he has never once spoken, but wholly of the moral): but he infers from his argument on matters of fact, a result in matter of fact: ‘Mankind, Jew and Gentile, have all broken God’s law, and are guilty before Him: Man keeps not God’s law. By that law then he cannot arrive at God’s righteousness.’

διὰ γὰρ.…] For by [means of] the law (as before, whether partially known to the Gentile or more fully to the Jew) is the knowledge of sin (whatever knowledge each has,—whether the accusing and excusing of the Gentile’s conscience, or the clearer view of offence against Jehovah granted to the Jew).

The reasoning is:—the law has no such office, in the present state of human nature manifested both in history and Scripture, as to render righteous: its office is altogether different, viz. to detect and bring to light the sinfulness of man. Compare Gal 2:16.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. διότι: ‘because,’ not ‘therefore,’ as AV. (see on 1:19). Mankind is liable for penalties as against God, because there is nothing else to afford them protection. Law can open men’s eyes to sin, but cannot remove it. Why this is so is shown in 7:7 ff.

δικαιωθήσεται: ‘shall be pronounced righteous,’ certainly not ‘shall be made righteous’ (Lid.); the whole context (ἵνα πᾶν στομα, φραγῇ ὑπόδικος, ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ) has reference to a judicial trial and verdict.

πᾶσα σάρξ: man in his weakness and frailty (1Co 1:29; 1Pe 1:24).

ἐπίγνωσις: ‘clear knowledge’; see on 1:28, 32.

THE NEW SYSTEM

3:21-26. Here then the new order of things comes in. In it is offered a Righteousness which comes from God but embraces man, by no deserts of his but as a free gift on the part of God. This righteousness, (i) though attested by the Sacred Books, is independent of any legal system (ver. 21); (ii) it is apprehended by faith in Christ, and is as wide as man’s need (vv. 22, 23); (iii) it is made possible by the propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ (vv. 24, 25); which Sacrifice at once explains the lenient treatment by God of past sin and gives the most decisive expression to His righteousness (vv. 25, 26).

21It is precisely such a method which is offered in Christianity. We have seen what is the state of the world without it. But now, since the coming of Christ, the righteousness of God has asserted itself in visible concrete form, but so as to furnish at the same time a means of acquiring righteousness to man—and that in complete independence of law, though the Sacred Books which contain the Law and the writings of the Prophets bear witness to it. 22This new method of acquiring righteousness does not turn upon works but on faith, i. e. on ardent attachment and devotion to Jesus Messiah. And it is therefore no longer confined to any particular people like the Jews, but is thrown open without distinction to all, on the sole condition of believing, whether they be Jews or Gentiles. 23The universal gift corresponds to the universal need. All men alike have sinned; and all alike feel themselves far from the bright effulgence of God’s presence. 24Yet estranged as they are God accepts them as righteous for no merit or service of theirs, by an act of His own free favour, the change in their relation to Him being due to the Great Deliverance wrought at the price of the Death of Christ Jesus. 25When the Messiah suffered upon the Cross it was God Who set Him there as a public spectacle, to be viewed as a Mosaic sacrifice might be viewed by the crowds assembled in the courts of the Temple. The shedding of His Blood was in fact a sacrifice which had the effect of making propitiation or atonement for sin, an effect which man must appropriate through faith. The object of the whole being by this public and decisive act to vindicate the righteousness of God. In previous ages the sins of mankind had been passed over without adequate punishment or atonement: 26but this long forbearance on the part of God had in view throughout that signal exhibition of His Righteousness which He purposed to enact when the hour should come as now it has come, so as to reveal Himself in His double character as at once righteous Himself and pronouncing righteous, or accepting as righteous, the loyal follower of Jesus.

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

Works of the law. Not the Mosaic law in its ritual or ceremonial aspect; but the law in a deeper and more general sense, as written both in the decalogue and in the hearts of the Gentiles, and embracing the moral deeds of both Gentiles and Jews. The Mosaic law may indeed be regarded as the primary reference, but as representing a universal legislation and including all the rest. The moral revelation, which is the authoritative instruction of God, may be viewed either indefinitely and generally as the revelation of God to men; or authoritatively, as to the duty incumbent on man as man; or with reference to the instruction as to the duty incumbent on men as sinful men under a dispensation of mercy; or as instruction as to the duty of Jews as Jews. Ver. 20 relates to the instruction regarding the duty incumbent on men as men. "It is the law of commandments which enjoins those outer acts and inner choices and states which lie at the basis and constitute the essence of all true religion. In the background or focal point of these commandments he sees the decalogue, or duologue, which is often designated 'the moral law by way of pre - eminence" (Morison, from whom also the substance of this note is taken). By the phrase works of the law is meant the deeds prescribed by the law.

Flesh [σαρξ] . Equivalent to man. It is often used in the sense of a living creature - man or beast. Compare 1Pe 1:24; Mt 24:22; Luk 3:6. Generally with a suggestion of weakness, frailty, mortality; Septuagint, Jer 17:5; Psa 77:39; Eph 6:12. The word here has no doctrinal bearing.

Be justified [δικαιωθησεται] . For the kindred adjective dikaiov righteous, see on 1 17.

1. Classical usage. The primitive meaning is to make right. This may take place absolutely or relatively. The person or thing may be made right in itself, or with reference to circumstances or to the minds of those who have to do with them. Applied to things or acts, as distinguished from persons, it signifies to make right in one's judgment. Thus Thucydides, 2 6, 7. "The Athenians judged it right to retaliate on the Lacedaemonians." Herodotus, 1, 89, Croesus says to Cyrus : "I think it right to shew thee whatever I may see to thy advantage."

A different shade of meaning is to judge to be the case. So Thucydides, 4, 122 "The truth concerning the revolt was rather as the Athenians, judged the case to be." Again, it occurs simply in the sense to judge. Thucydides, 5, 26 "If anyone agree that the interval of the truce should be excluded, he will not judge correctly" In both these latter cases the etymological idea of right is merged, and the judicial element predominates.

In ecclesiastical usage, to judge to be right or to decide upon in ecclesiastical councils.

Applied to persons, the meaning is predominantly judicial, though Aristotle (" Nichomachaean Ethics, "5, 9) uses it in the sense of to treat one rightly. There is no reliable instance of the sense to make right intrinsically; but it means to make one right in some extrinsic or relative manner. Thus Aeschylus," Agamemnon, " 390 - 393 : Paris, subjected to the judgment of men, tested [δικαιωθεις] is compared to bad brass which turns black when subjected to friction. Thus tested or judged he stands in right relation to men's judgments. He is shown in the true baseness of his character.

Thus the verb acquires the meaning of condemn; adjudge to be bad. Thucydides, 3, 40 Cleon says to the Athenians, "If you do not deal with the Mitylenaeans as I advise, you will condemn yourselves." From this readily arises the sense of punish; since the punishment of a guilty man is a setting him in right relation to the political or moral system which his conduct has infringed. Thus Herodotus, 1, 100 "Deioces the Mede, if he heard of any act of oppression, sent for the guilty party and punished him according to his offense." Compare Plato, "Laws," 2, 934. Plato uses dikaiwthria to denote places of punishment or houses of correction (" Phaedrus, "249). According to Cicero, dikaiow was used by the Sicilians of capital punishment :" Edikaiwqhsan, that is, as the Sicilians say, they were visited with punishment and executed "(" Against Verres," 5, 57).

To sum up the classical usage, the word has two main references :

1, to persons;

2, to things or acts. In both the judicial element is dominant.

The primary sense, to make right, takes on the conventional meanings to judge a thing to be right, to judge, to right a person, to treat rightly, to condemn, punish, put to death.

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