notes

Main point summary

Although the law promises life to those who keep all of its demands, our stubborn, sinful hearts cannot attain to the law. But the One who has accomplished all of the law's demands offers righteousness and life to all who believe.

9:30-10:5 Arc

editing

NT

Romans 9:30-10:5

mine

na28

What then shall we say?

Τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν;

[We shall say] that the Gentiles, that is, the ones who did not pursue righteousness, received righteousness,

ὅτι ἔθνη τὰ μὴ διώκοντα δικαιοσύνην κατέλαβεν δικαιοσύνην,

now this is the righteousness that is of faith

δικαιοσύνην δὲ τὴν ἐκ πίστεως,

ideaexplanation

Now, Israel who pursued a law of righteousness did not attain to the law.

Ἰσραὴλ δὲ διώκων νόμον δικαιοσύνης εἰς νόμον οὐκ ἔφθασεν.

On account of what?

διὰ τί;

Because it was not of faith

ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως

but as though it was of works.

ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐξ ἔργων•

negativepositive

They stumbled over the stumbling stone,

προσέκοψαν τῷ λίθῳ τοῦ προσκόμματος,

just as it has been written, "Behold, I am setting in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense,

καθὼς γέγραπται• ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν λίθον προσκόμματος καὶ πέτραν σκανδάλου,

and the one who believes on him will not be put to shame.

καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ οὐ καταισχυνθήσεται.

inference

ground

questionanswer

alternative

Brothers, [on the one hand] the desire of my heart and the prayer to God for them is unto salvation,

Ἀδελφοί, ἡ μὲν εὐδοκία τῆς ἐμῆς καρδίας καὶ ἡ δέησις πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν εἰς σωτηρίαν.

for I am bearing witness to them that they have zeal of God,

μαρτυρῶ γὰρ αὐτοῖς ὅτι ζῆλον θεοῦ ἔχουσιν

but it is not according to knowledge,

ἀλλʼ οὐ κατʼ ἐπίγνωσιν•

concessive

[and their zeal was not according to knowledge] because not knowing the righteousness of God

ἀγνοοῦντες γὰρ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην

and seeking to establish their own righteousness,

καὶ τὴν ἰδίαν [δικαιοσύνην] ζητοῦντες στῆσαι,

bothand

they did not submit to the righteousness of God,

τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐχ ὑπετάγησαν.

[and this failure to submit was foolish] because Christ is the fulfillment of the law, attaining righteousness for those who believe,

τέλος γὰρ νόμου Χριστὸς εἰς δικαιοσύνην παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι.

because [Christ fulfilled the law according to what] Moses writes concerning the righteousness which is of the law, "The one doing them will live by them."

Μωϋσῆς γὰρ γράφει τὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ [τοῦ] νόμου ὅτι ὁ ποιήσας αὐτὰ ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς.

The righteousness of God was last referred to in 3:21-22, where it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ eis pantas tou pisteuontas. This is what they were ignorant of. Also 1:17, in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed, the righteousness of faith in order to accomplish faith, for the righteous will live by faith.

Rom. 11:32 is the climactic concluding verse of Romans 9-11, after which Paul erupts in his doxology. This seems to have potential to be the main point of the entire sub-section of discourse - God has consigned all to disobedience so that he might have mercy on all. He will have mercy on whomever he should have mercy and he will have compassion on whomever he has compassion. The law was designed to consign us to disobedience because we did not have the ability to complete it. It was designed to be completed by Christ.

Possibility of this Bilaterally supporting v. 31 and 32d-33b. But it seems like their stumbling is not just a restatement of the fact that they did not attain to the law of righteousness, but an explanation by the distinct statement that Christ, the stumbling stone, has been laid in Zion and they have not believed in him who was the only one who could attain the law of righteousness.

Paul introduces the righteousness that is of faith and the law of righteousness in 9:30–33. He then expounds upon the righteousness of faith in 10:1–5, followed by the law of righteousness in 10:6–13.

na28

discourse

Diagram

scripturetext

components

Romans 9:30-10:4

na28

text

οὖν

subjectverb

solid

drop

equal

revrocket

line

pred

ἐροῦμεν

directobject

Τί

δὲ

Ἰσραὴλ

ἔφθασεν

οὐκ

prepphrase

pstack

cword

εἰς

νόμον

participle

διώκων

vertical

νόμον

δικαιοσύνης

διὰ

τί

rocketship

ἐκ

πίστεως

οὐκ

ἐξ

ἔργων

ὡς

ἀλλʼ

ὅτι

προσέκοψαν

τῷ

λίθῳ

τοῦ

προσκόμματος

γέγραπται

quoteshelf

τίθημι

ἐν

Σιὼν

λίθον

πέτραν

προσκόμματος

σκανδάλου

καὶ

ὁ

καταισχυνθήσεται

οὐ

πιστεύων

ἐπʼ

αὐτῷ

καὶ

ἰδοὺ

καθὼς

table

Ἀδελφοί

μὲν

ἡ

εὐδοκία

ἡ

δέησις

τῆς

καρδίας

ἐμῆς

πρὸς

τὸν

θεὸν

ὑπὲρ

αὐτῶν

καὶ

εἰς

σωτηρίαν

γὰρ

μαρτυρῶ

indirectobj

αὐτοῖς

shelf

ἔχουσιν

ζῆλον

θεοῦ

οὐ

κατʼ

ἐπίγνωσιν

ἀλλʼ

ὅτι

γὰρ

ὑπετάγησαν

οὐχ

τῇ

δικαιοσύνῃ

τοῦ

θεοῦ

ἀγνοοῦντες

ζητοῦντες

τὴν

δικαιοσύνην

τοῦ

θεοῦ

dblaccusative

στῆσαι

τὴν

[δικαιοσύνην]

ἰδίαν

καὶ

γὰρ

Χριστὸς

predicate

τέλος

νόμου

τῷ

παντὶ

πιστεύοντι

εἰς

δικαιοσύνην

τὰ

διώκοντα

δικαιοσύνην

μὴ

equals

ἔθνη

κατέλαβεν

δικαιοσύνην

δικαιοσύνην

τὴν

ἐκ

πίστεως

ὅτι

δὲ

What belongs here? -The law was not... -Their pursuit was not... -The righteousness they sought was not... **does the prepositional phrase have to be adverbial? If so, then it may be between pursuing and obtaining.

I think this must be adjectival because (1) it makes more sense to contrast the Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness yet received the righteousness of faith and (2) it distinguishes this as the "Israel who pursued a law of righteousness" as opposed to the Israel whose sons would be numbered as the sand of the sea.

This makes most sense in apposition because it draws the focus away from the fact that they are Gentiles to the fact that they did not pursue righteousness yet obtained the righteousness from faith.

This could be another clause. However, leaving it in apposition further emphasizes the fact that what he wants to talk about is this particular kind of righteousness, the righteousness that is of faith.

He is talking about the idea of believing. The "Israel who did not believe but tried to work" stumbled over the stumbling stone because they did not believe.

diagram

Grammar Notes, Questions

Parsing -διωκων - imp act part masc nom sg -σκανδαλου - neut gen sg Translation What then shall we say? That Gentiles not pursuing righteousness have attained righteousness (now, this is the righteousness which is from faith)? Now Israel pursuing the law of righteousness did not attain the law. On account of what? That not from faith but as though it was from works. They stumbled with respect to the stone of stumbling, just as it has been written, "Behold! I am setting in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and the one who believes upon him will not be put to shame." Brothers and sisters, the desire of my heart and the prayer to God for them [is that they might attain] the salvation. For I am bearing witness with respect to them that they are having a zeal for God but it is not according to knowledge. For not knowing the righteousness of God and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the goal of the law with respect to those who have faith unto righteousness. Grammar Notes -BDAG suggests that the ὡς in v. 32 falls under the following category --> 3. A m arker introducing the perspective from which a pers., thing, or activity is viewed or understood as to character, function, or role, as; ( c.) with focus on what is objectively false or erroneous -The same phrase παντι τω πιστευοντι occurs along with εις σωτηριαν and another verb meaning "to be ashamed" in Rom. 1:16. -τον νομον τελουσα, translated "keeps the law" is found in Rom. 2:27, perhaps a helpful verse to consider when trying to understand Rom. 10:4. --> Rom. 6:18-22 also refers to το τελος θανατος and το τελος ζωην αωνιον, as well as εις αγιασμον and εις την ανομιαν -Rom. 3:22 also has reference to "the righteousness of God," "faith in Christ," and "all who believe." -Rom. 4:3-5 has Abraham "believed" God and it was counted to him εις δικαιοσυνην (also Rom. 4:9, 22). Also reference to "the one who does not work but believes..." -"All who believe" are referred to as having Abraham as their father in Rom. 4:11. -Rom. 6:16 has the phrase αμαρτιας εισ θανατον ἠ υπακοης εις δικαιοσυνην translated "sin that leads to death or obedience that leads to righteousness." Questions 1. How is εις δικαιοσυνην functioning in v. 4? What is it modifying? What does it mean? -Wallace on the function of accusative prepositions: " In general, the prepositions that take accusative and dative case objects function adverbially, while those that take a genitive case object often function adjectivally. All of this is in keeping with the simple case uses: The accusative and dative are usually connected to a verb and the genitive is usually connected to a noun." (356) - Telic Use: Εἰς can also express metaphorical direction, i.e., goal or purpose (final or telic εἰς ). (Harris, 88) - Ecbatic Use: As well as expressing a goal that is simply aimed at, εἰς can express a purpose that is actually realized (consecutive or telic or resultative εἰς ). For instance, in Ro 10:9–10 belief in the heart that God raised Jesus from the dead leads to righteousness ( εἰς δικαιοσύνην , “and so obtains righteousness/and so is justified”), just as to confess with the mouth Jesus as Lord results in salvation ( εἰς σωτηρίαν , “and so obtains salvation/and so is saved”). Yet earlier ( 10:4 ) the same phrase εἰς δικαιοσύνην may bear a telic sense, “[Christ is the end of the law] viewed as a means of gaining righteousness” (cf. Moule 70). There is a similar alternation of senses for εἰς τό with the infinitive in Ro 4:11 (ecbatic, 2x), 4:16 (telic), 4:18 (ecbatic). (Harris, 90) 2. What is the οτι clause in 9:32 doing? What is it that was "not from faith but as though it was from works?"

Other Notes

Exegetical Notes -Contrary to Moo, who sees more Jew/Gentile focus, the main concern in this passage appears to be the nature of true righteousness and the distinction between pursuing the law unto righteousness and pursuing the righteousness that comes through faith in Christ. -In v. 30, τα μη διακωντα δικαιοσυνην makes most sense in apposition εθνη because it draws the focus away from the fact that they are Gentiles to the fact that they did not pursue righteousness yet obtained the righteousness from faith (though this effect is still present if it is just adjectival as well). This is confirmed when we see a close parallel in v. 31, where διωκων νομον δικαοσυνης is next to Ισραηλ. This participial phrase could be adverbial, but given that the previous phrase modifying the Gentiles is so similar, it makes sense to take it as adjectival or appositional, thus distinguishing the Israel here from the Israel of Rom 9:27. -In v. 30, διακοσυνην δε την εκ πιστεως could be another clause. However, leaving it in apposition further emphasizes the fact that what he wants to talk about is this particular kind of righteousness, the righteousness that is of faith. "They attained righteousness. What kind? The righteousness that is of faith." - 9:33 -- "In citing Isa. 8:14 within Isa. 28:16 , Paul underscores that the word of salvation arrives with judgment. This double-edged character of the promise corresponds to the conjunction of election and rejection laid out by Paul in 9:6-29." (Seifrid, 651) --> This is a similar effect of the conflation of the Hosea/Isaiah quote in the previous passage. Talks about both salvation and judgment, or rather salvation through judgment. -The μεν in 10:1 begins an argument that extends through v. 13. It has the function of drawing attention to the righteousness of the law and the pursuit thereof "on the one hand," while the δε in v. 6 has the function of drawing attention to the righteousness of faith and the pursuit thereof "on the other hand." That vv. 1-5 are a cohesive unit is evident by the uses of γαρ to logically subordinate and connect them all together. vv. 6-13 can be more closely considered on the next assignment. Questions 1. How is εις δικαιοσυνην functioning in v. 4? What is it modifying? What does it mean? -Wallace on the function of accusative prepositions: " In general, the prepositions that take accusative and dative case objects function adverbially, while those that take a genitive case object often function adjectivally. All of this is in keeping with the simple case uses: The accusative and dative are usually connected to a verb and the genitive is usually connected to a noun." (356) - Telic Use: Εἰς can also express metaphorical direction, i.e., goal or purpose (final or telic εἰς ). (Harris, 88) - Ecbatic Use: As well as expressing a goal that is simply aimed at, εἰς can express a purpose that is actually realized (consecutive or telic or resultative εἰς ). For instance, in Ro 10:9–10 belief in the heart that God raised Jesus from the dead leads to righteousness ( εἰς δικαιοσύνην , “and so obtains righteousness/and so is justified”), just as to confess with the mouth Jesus as Lord results in salvation ( εἰς σωτηρίαν , “and so obtains salvation/and so is saved”). Yet earlier ( 10:4 ) the same phrase εἰς δικαιοσύνην may bear a telic sense, “[Christ is the end of the law] viewed as a means of gaining righteousness” (cf. Moule 70). There is a similar alternation of senses for εἰς τό with the infinitive in Ro 4:11 (ecbatic, 2x), 4:16 (telic), 4:18 (ecbatic). (Harris, 90) -The same phrase παντι τω πιστευοντι occurs along with εις σωτηριαν and another verb meaning "to be ashamed" in Rom. 1:16 . In this sense, the idea communicated is that the gospel is the power of God attaining salvation for all who believe. This seems to closely match the sense of Rom. 10:4. -Therefore, the translation that seems best is as follows: Christ is the completion of the law attaining righteousness on behalf of all who believe. 2. What is the οτι clause in 9:32 doing? What is it that was "not from faith but as though it was from works?" -In the midst of his extensive discussion on the nature of the law Rom. 7:10 says "The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me," because it stirred up sin, which, "seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me," he goes on to say in v. 11. Even now that Paul delights in the law of God in his inner being and strives after the obedience of it, he still sees that the law of sin and death dwells in his members. How then can he be delivered from the condemnation of sin and death? It is through Christ Jesus our Lord, so that there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are righteous in Christ Jesus by faith and not by works of the law . -" If, then, we take nomos to denote the Mosaic law and keep the usual relationship of the terms in the genitive construction, what does the phrase mean? Paul connects righteousness language and the word nomos absolutely in only two other verses in Romans: 2:13 and 10:5. 38 In both, Paul pictures righteousness as that which could be gained from the law through “doing.” These parallels suggest that we should understand the phrase to mean “the law whose object is righteousness”: 39 the law “promises” righteousness when its demands are met. 40 It is this “law that promises righteousness” that must then be carried over as the object of “attain” at the end of v. 31 and of the implied verb “pursue” in v. 32a. 41 “Law,” therefore, remains the topic of Paul’s teaching throughout this verse and a half, but law conceived as a means to righteousness. As a result, the term “righteousness” also remains very much in the forefront of Paul’s thinking throughout. 42 We may paraphrase: “Israel, pursuing a law that promised righteousness, did not attain that law. For what reason did Israel not attain the law that promises righteousness? Because Israel pursued that law that promises righteousness not on the basis of faith but as if 43 it could have been attained on the basis of works.” Paul therefore explains in v. 32a why Israel’s pursuit of this “law for righteousness” failed: because she sought to “fulfill” that law by works rather than by faith. Now Paul has nothing in principle against Israel’s seeking to do the law; he elsewhere makes clear that the law legitimately demands works. 44 Why then does he appear to condemn it here? For two reasons. The first and probably primary reason why Paul condemns Israel’s pursuit of “the law of righteousness” becomes clear when we take into account the christological emphasis of vv. 32b–33: Israel’s failure came because she “stumbled over” Christ, refusing to put faith in him. Here Paul suggests that it was not only the manner of Israel’s pursuit of “the law of righteousness” that was misguided 45 ; her very choice of a goal was wrong also: “[The Jews] not only deceive themselves as to the goal, but on the pathway on which they set out they come to a fall.” 46 Israel has chosen to keep her focus on the law, seeking to find righteousness through it, when Christ, the culmination of that law and the only source of righteousness, has already come (see 10:4). 47 For it is only in Christ that the demand of the law is fully met; and only, therefore, by accepting him in faith that a person can find the righteousness that the law promises (Rom. 3:31; 8:4). 48 Second, as we have seen, Paul’s point is not simply that Israel was pursuing the law; she was pursuing the law in terms of its promise of righteousness. Yet Paul has been at pains earlier in the letter to demonstrate that the law’s promise of righteousness (2:13) could never be activated in practice (3:20) because of human sin (3:9). Surely, although Paul does not here make it explicit, we must fill out Paul’s logic with this earlier clear and sustained argument. Israel has failed to achieve a law that could confer righteousness because she could not produce those works that would be necessary to meet the law’s demands and so secure the righteousness it promises. 49 " (Moo, 625-27) -This argument from Moo is highly convincing, as it seems to stitch the entire passage together, not only 9:30-10:5 (I would argue that is only natural to keep 10:5 with 10:4, given that they are connected by γαρ, an explanatory conjunction that logically subordinates), but also the ensuing passage that goes on to explain further the righteousness of faith. Doxological Response -The law promises life and does not deliver because it does not change our heart. John Bunyan is credited with the poem, "Run, John, run, the law commands, but gives us neither feet nor hands. Far better news the gospel brings, it bids us fly and gives us wings." In Christ, who completes the law, who does all of its requirements and thus lives righteously before the Father, we have been given wings! How marvelous, how wonderful is our Savior's love for us! For all who believe, the law of the Spirit of life supplants the law of sin and death as the governing principle of our heart, and we are enabled to walk in the precepts of the law, not to attain salvation but because we have attained it through faith in Christ. We need not stumble any longer, seeking to establish our own righteousness through keeping the law, for Christ who completed the law has been put to shame in our place so that by believing in him we might never be put to shame.

Main point summary

Although the law promises life to those who keep all of its demands, our stubborn, sinful hearts cannot attain to the law. But the One who has accomplished all of the law's demands offers righteousness and life to all who believe.