Romans 3:21-26 is Paul’s exposition of the righteousness of God and it is central to his letter to the church in Rome. In this passage, Paul sets out his understanding of God’s righteousness, as well as his view of the gospel itself. In Paul, God’s righteousness is revealed through faith in Jesus Christ, and it is apart from the law (3:21), although Paul later acknowledges that the law still plays and important role in the gospel (3:31).
Historical evidence for the beginning of the church in Rome is sparse. According to Western traditions, the Apostle Peter founded the church at Rome; however, commentators and church historians alike are skeptical of this view because it is unlikely Peter would have visited Rome early enough to have established a church in Rome prior to the writing of Paul’s letter. Additionally, it is unlikely Paul would have planned to visit the church (1:8-15), or have written to the church had Peter been the one to plant the church, as his actions would have violated his policy, “not to build on another person’s foundation” (15:20). According the the fourth-century church father Ambrosiaster, the church in Rome came to faith without coming into direct contact with any of the apostles. Moo quoting Ambrosiaster writes, “The Romans ‘have embraced the faith of Christ, albeit according to the Jewish rite, without seeing any sign of mighty works or any of the apostles.”1 Considering Ambrosiaster’s writing, Moo suggests “Jews who were present at Pentecost carried testimony of the gospel back to Rome and as a result the church was established in Rome.”2 At any rate, Paul’s letter to the church in Rome is important from a historical standpoint as it informs us of the early days of the Roman church. While it is clear from Paul’s letter that he had not yet visited the church, he expresses the intent to one day visit them and his letter serves as an introduction prior to his visit. Who the leaders of the church in Rome were is unclear, but a few names of various members are provided to us by Paul in the final chapter of his letter.3
Many commentators date composition of Paul’s letter to the church in Rome to around AD 57-58 during Paul’s stay in Corinth at the end of his third missionary journey (20:2-3).4 It is clear by the contents of Paul’s letter that the church in Rome at the time of his writing was relatively young, and this may be explained by the history of Rome, for both Jews and Christians were expelled from the region by Emporer Claudius in AD 49 due to tensions between the two groups (18:1-2).5 The necessity of the event suggests to historians that there were already a large number of Christians in Rome at the time. Dunn, for example, estimates the Christian population in Rome at the time of their expultion to be as much as 40,000-50,000.6 Those Jews and Christians who were expelled did not return to Rome until the end of Claudius’ edict in AD 54. If all this is correct, Paul’s letter soon followed the returning population of Christian believers to Rome and reflects the struggles they encountered with their integration into the Christian community in Rome after their return.7 It is clear from Paul’s letter that the church in Rome was a mix of both Jew and Gentile believers (cf. 1:13; 4:1; 11:13; 15:15). Some have suggested that Paul’s emphasis on the law of Moses and his use of the Old Testament in Romans suggests that the church in Rome was primarily Jewish. Dunn suggests, however, that “the church in Rome emerged within the larger context of the Jewish community and traditions and therefore Paul was able to draw from the OT in his teaching because many of the Gentile Christians were proselytes already familiar with the Scriptures.”8
The literary context to which the subject passage of 3:21-26 appears in Romans is within Paul’s discussion establishing the sinfulness of humanity (1:18-3:8), and argument that even God’s covenant people Israel are subject to the impact of sins reign (3:9-20). Paul has established that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23), and that salvation is not possible through the works of the law. In Romans 3:21-26 Paul declares God’s provision, which is the revelation of God’s righteousness, grace and salvation for those who have faith in Jesus Christ (3:21, 24-25). The passage, in effect, marks a transition from Paul’s discussion of the wrath of God and begins his exposition of God’s divine response to humanities dilemma through God’s saving righteousness in Jesus Christ.9
Analysis of the Text
Paul’s opening words in verse 21 —nyni de (“but now”)—indicate a significant transition in his discussion. As previously mentioned, Paul has been discussing the absolute and complete sinfulness of humanity and man’s guilt before God. Up to this point Paul’s discussion has been mostly negative; however, beginning in verse 21 Paul shifts his discussion to the positive theme of God’s righteousness as God’s remedy to man’s sinful condition. Interpreters are divided in their understanding of Paul’s use of the Greek words nyni de (“but now”). Many view nyni de as a temporal marker designating a change or transition within salvation history—it is the dawn of a new period of time in which those who have faith in Jesus are justified (3:24-26). Moo in his commentary notes that this interpretation of the meaning of nyni dei is supported by parallel uses throughout Paul’s letters (cf. Rom. 6:22; 1 Cor. 15:20; Eph. 2:13; Col. 1:22). Moo states, “This contrast between two eras in salvation history is one of Paul’s most basic theological conceptions, providing the framework for many of his key ideas.”10 Moo goes on to write, “As ‘the wrath of God’ dominated the old era (1:18), so ‘the righteousness of God’ dominates the new. ‘Righteousness of God’ means the same here as in Rom. 1:17: the justifying activity of God.”11 Cranfield also argues in favor of a temporal understanding to Paul’s use of nyni dei on the basis that to view the Greek term as sequential one must overlook the importance of the verb
Pephanerōtai (“revealed”) in relation to Paul’s explanation of God’s righteousness.12 Mounce holds the minority view concerning the interpretation of nyni dei as he views the Greek term to be sequential rather than temporal. While Mounce views “But now” (v. 21) to be God’s answer to man’s basic delimma, he views the expression to be in sequential order according to God’s redemptive plan. According to Mounce, “God’s remedy for our lack of righteousness was enacted at a specific time (on the cross).”13 Conversely, most other contemporary exegetes understand nyni dei as temporal rather than logical and emphasize that it indicates the transition of a new phase of God’s redemptive plan.14
In Romans 3:22 Paul continues his discussion concerning the righteousness of God. In the previous verse he declared that “apart from the law the righteousness of God has been revealed” (NASB). Now, Paul declares God’s righteousness may be obtained by “all who believe through faith in Jesus Christ” (v. 22). The interpretive crux of the passage that has been heavily debated among interpreters concerns the ambiguity of the genitive nouns Iēsou Christou and the meaning of the Greek verb pistis (“faith/belief” “faithfulness” or “trusting ones”), which is a participle in the present active mood. The phrase, ““δικαιοσύνη δὲ θεοῦ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς πάντας τοὺς πιστεύοντας. οὐ γάρ ἐστιν διαστολή” more traditionally has been understood as establishing Jesus Christ as the object of faith. However, more recently some interpreters have begun to argue for a possessive genitive, “through the faith of Jesus Christ,” or a more subjective genitive, which is interpreted into English as “through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.”15 In this way, emphasis is placed on the faithful obedience of Christ as He accomplished His father’s will. As Carson points out, with the subjective genitive reading, “the covenant faithfulness “righteousness” of God is revealed through the faithfulness of Jesus the Messiah for the benefit of all.”16 Those who argue in favor of the subjective genitive reading argue that it works best and is supported by other key texts.17 For example, Paul states that redemption came by Christ Jesus (3:24), and in 5:18-19 Paul points out that “it was through the one act of righteousness, the obedience of one man, that many were made righteous (cf. Phil. 1:29; 2:6-11; Gal. 2:16). ”18 Thus, the subjective genitive reading supports the apostle’s other thoughts and statements concerning the redemptive work of Christ and God’s righteousness. McRay in his book argues four points in support of the subjective interpretation. More importantly, McRay points out the coherence the subjective genitive view has with the historical traditions of the church. McRay writes, “the subjectivity of the Latin view has often overshadowed the objectivity inherent in the classical view, which emphasizes the reality of what happened at Calvary separate and apart from any human response to that event.”19 In essence, McRay argues that the subjective genitive places the emphasis back on Christ, rather than man’s response. However, as Carson points out, “the linguistic arguments concerning this matter are far from conclusive,”20 and therefore either interpretation is plausible. Both interpretations may be supported on the basis of the context of the letter, and therefore, the best approach to this interpretive delimma is to interpret each reference to pisteōs Christou in Paul’s letters individually according to context and syntax rather than pressing for uniformity across all of the Pauline epistles.
To conclude verse 22, πάντας τοὺς πιστεύοντας (“for all who believe”). As Cranfield points out, “here for perhaps the first time in the epistle Christ is explicitly referred to as the object of faith. εἰς makes the point that the δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ is for all who believe.”21 Paul emphasizes throughout the epistle the necessity of human belief, as in the case of Abraham (ch. 4). Paul, in this instance says, “all who believe.” All of humanity are subject to the death as a result of sin, so Paul emphasizes the point that God’s righteous response through Christ is available to all.
Paul ends the previous verse by stating “there is no “distinction” or “difference” between Jew or Gentile (cf. 10:12).22Jewett views Paul’s impartiality to be a reference between the racial tensions and segregation between the Jews and Gentiles in Rome.23 However, it may be more appropriate to view this in relation to the way God views the human condition that is common to all humanity. πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον (“for all have sinned”), as both Jew and Gentile (all) have fallen short of God’s glory. The glory (“doxa”) of God in reference is God’s presence and appearance as a pillar by day and fire by night as He led the people of Israel through the wilderness (Exod. 16:7-10). God’s glory was also found in the tabernacle of the congregation (Num. 14:10), and in the temple of Solomon (1 Kgs. 8:11). Most notably the glory of God resides in the person of Jesus Christ (Jn. 1:14). Additionally according to Moo, “the Bible teaches that God’s people are destined to share in that glory; thus doxa also describes the eternal destiny of believers (see esp. Rom. 8:18; Phil. 3:21; 2 Thess. 2:14).”24 The first Adam was made in the image of God and was to reflect God’s glory to the world around him, but he fell to sin and the image was marred and all humanity shares in the results of Adam’s sin. However, the second Adam, Jesus Christ, will restore the image to man through the redemption He purchased on the cross.
In verse 24 Paul makes three statements concerning the righteousness of God that brings justification to believers. First, he says the righteous are “justified as a gift,” that is freely by the means of God’s grace and on the basis of the saving work of Jesus Christ. The “grace” (“charis”) of God is a key theological idea in Paul’s letters. When one is justified as a gift it is free of charge without the fulfillment of any previous conditions. Paul uses the word “grace” to convey the idea to his readers that the redemptive work of Christ has been performed on their behalf freely without any requirement to be fulfilled by them. In other words, redemption through Christ is a free gift from God.
On the basis of God’s grace believers in Christ are δικαιούμενοι “Being justified,” which is a present participle that modifies the “all” in verse 23, and is in reference to Paul’s theme of verses 21-22 of “all who believe.” 25All who were previously fallen and condemned to death as a result of sin who now believe are “being justified.” According to Moo, “The language of “righteousness” (3:21, 22, 25, 26), “justify” (vv. 24, 26), and “just” (v. 26) dominates this paragraph. All these English words come from the same Greek root (dikai-), so they develop one basic theme.”26 Paul’s theme is that God’s righteousness is available to all who believe and trust in the saving work of Christ.
Secondly, Paul states they are “being justified freely by His grace.” (“αὐτοῦ χάριτι”). God declares the justification of man on basis of His grace upon the belief or faith of the believer. Osborn notes, the “by his grace” theme is found ninety-seven times in Paul’s writings to describe God’s underserved mercy.”27 While God’s grace is activated and received through the faith of the believer, it is totally an undeserved “act of God’s loving will,” rather than something man earns by merit.28
The use of Apolytrōsis (“redemption”) in 3:24 as a noun appears elsewhere only here and in Rom. 8:23, 1 Cor. 1:30, and Paul’s prison epistles (Eph. 1:7; Co. 1:14). The Greek term draws from Exodus imagery and the liberation of Israel (Exod. 30:12; Deut. 7:8; 9:26; Isa. 41:14; 43:1; 44:22-24; 62:12; 63:9). The term, apolytrosis, carries with it the basic meaning of “liberating by paying a price.” In the LXX the term is associated with the idea of purchasing one from a death sentence (Exod. 30:12).29 According to Morris, the other closely related word associated with Christ’s redeeming work, “lytron” (“ransom”) derived entymologically and developed over time by use in the early church as a means of specifically and accurately expressing precisely what Christ did as a result of dying on the cross. Morris writes, “Other words were available to denote simple release… But it is worth noting at the beginning that the very existence of this word-group is due to the desire to give precise expression to the conception of release by payment. There is thus a prima facie case for holding that the redemption terminology is concerned with the price-paying method of release.”30 While the contemporary church usage of the term redemption is often used flippantly in the way one would use a gift card for a free cup of coffee, the early church would have understood the significance of the term as it was associated with the purchasing of one from a sentence of death and the imagery fits perfectly with Paul’s communication of the result of Christ’s redemptive work as a result of His death on the cross.
“Whom God ‘set forth’”— Protithēmi – “To Set Forth” or display publicly. This is in reference to God’s action of presenting Christ publicly and setting Him out on display. The term Protithēmi is in the third-person, singular, aorist, indicative. God “setting forth” Christ on display is, according to Longnecker, “somewhat paralleled by Paul’s use of προεθέμην (“I planned,” “purposed”) with respect to his own plans.”31 It was a deliberate act of God that Christ be set out on display as a witness of God’s instrument of salvation for humanity.
Paul goes on to say “as a ‘propitiation’ – Hilastērion – ‘by His blood,’ which is most likely an allusion to a key OT concept of sacrifice. Brown and Twist state that a “number of interpreters understand Paul’s use of the term to be in reference to the mercy seat, the cover over the ark of the covenant on which sacrificial blood was poured. While the term only appears one other time in the NT (Heb. 9:5), it occurs at least 27 times in the LXX (Exod. 25:17-22; 31:7; 35:12; Lev 16:2, 13-15; Num. 7:89 LXX).”32 Longnecker notes the second part of the phrase, “by His blood, through faith” (NKJV), “may be translated either ‘through [the] faith in his blood’ or ‘through [the] faithfulness in his blood.’”33 Longnecker admits the definite article sounds strange as Paul never speaks of “having faith in Christ’s blood,” but would talk about having faith “in God” and/or “in Jesus Christ.” However, “through [the] faithfulness of His blood” may be seen as a reference back to 3:22 and the “faithfulness”of Christ “to the extent of shedding His blood.”34
The Greek term hilasterion “sacrifice of atonement” in classical Greek usage specifically describes the type of death Christ died on the cross and its proper association with blood sacrifice. Moo notes, “in secular Greek, this word and its cognates often refer to various means by which the wrath of the gods could be ‘propitiated.’”35 However, as Moo explains, it was C. H. Dodd, because of his “distaste” for the the idea of God’s wrath, who suggested translating the term hilasterion as “expiation,” which refers to wiping away sins without any reference to God’s wrath. Regardless of Dodds preferences, the term hilasterion is rightly associated with the mercy seat where blood was spilt and sacrificial atonement was made for the sins of God’s people. As Moo states, “Christ, in his sacrifice on the cross, is now the place where God takes care of his people’s sins.”36 Christ’s blood was shed to make atonement for sins, not only present, but for those “previous committed.” Longnecker notes that Paul uses the plural form of “sins,” which is unusual as he usually refers to people being in sin “singular” but in this case it is plural denoting the collective sins previously committed by God’s people.37
Verse 26 begins with Paul stating that Christ’s propitiation was a demonstration of God’s righteousness. The Greek term endeixis (“demonstration”) as it appears is a noun, accusative, singular, feminine form, and carries the meaning of “showing” or “making something known in a clear and convincing manner and therefore ‘shown to be certain or true” according to Louw Nida.38 Other terms closely associated with endeixis are proof, evidence and confirmation. This demonstration of Christ’s atoneing work was performed to declare God’s righteousness to a condemned world, for sins not previously dealt with (Psa. 50:16-23; Acts 17:30). Therefore, the righteousness of God is declared by dealing with the sins of humanity; past, present, and future. As such, God may be declared the “just” and “the justifier” “of the one who has faith in Jesus.” (v. 26). The term dikaioō (“just”) is a verb, present, active, participle and means to “put right with,” vindicate, declare righteous, i.e., to cause one to be in a right relation (cf. 3:24).”39 The sacrifice of Christ was necessary because God had not fully punished past sins; therefore, the sacrifice of Christ was necessary to validate God’s justice and demonstrate that He is the God who justifies those who have faith in Jesus Christ.
Anyone who owes a debt is thankful when they receive forebearance on repayment of that debt. It use to be that around the holidays that banks would allow their card holders the option to skip a payment at Christmas time. While interest would continue to accrue on the principle amount owed, cardholders would be appreciative for not having to make that payment at Christmas time. In such cases, the debt does not go away and the cardholders would be reminded of the reality and existence of the debt with their next statement from the bank. When it comes to the attributes of God, many people are under the misimpression that God is forgetful or simply makes up the rules as he goes. However, this is a mistaken impression of God that some hold as God is righteous and holy and he cannot simply turn a blind eye to sin. For God remains righteous and just and he must judge rightly and justly and this means that he must abide by his perfect law and be true to his word. “The law of the Lord is perfect…” (Psa. 19:7), and it cannot simply be set aside without consequences. Moo in his commentary reminds readers of how C. S. Lewis dealt with this problem in his classic tale, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.
Because of selfishness and greed, a little boy has fallen into the hands of a wicked witch. Aslan, the God character, cannot, for all his immense power, rescue the boy; for he must acknowledge the “magic,” the law of nature, that has given the witch power over the boy. But there is a “deeper magic from the dawn of time” that enables one who dies willingly for someone else to take on that person’s punishment and let them go free. Thus, Aslan allows the wicked witch to execute him.40C. S. Lewis cited by Douglas Moo
There is the deeper law of God’s word that is in effect and governs the events of our lives. Although mostly undetected and frequently ignored, God abides by it and operates within as it corresponds to his righteous judgment. Another point from this passage that is applicable to the lives of believers is the idea of the Jews and how it appears they failed to comprehend their grievious state of sinfulness and how they were just as condemned in their sins as the Gentiles. Too often we see the sins of others and it is apauling to us, yet we fail to recognize our own sin. Paul makes it clear in verse 23 that “All have sinned and fall short…” As such, all of humanity—Jew and Gentile alike—are condemned as a result of their sinfulness and the wrath of God abides on them alike. God makes no distinction, for he is impartial and judges all sinners alike. Believers today struggle with the same issue, and like believers from previous generations, must seek after God for his forgiveness. In Paul’s exposition of God’s grace there also the recognition of sin and should make us aware of our own sinfulness and prompt us to seek God’s forgiveness through faith. It is important to not mistake God’s forbearance for his approval and we should seek God by confessing our sins and seeking his forgiveness.
A basic theme that is address by Paul over and over again in Romans is the importance of Christians realizing who they are and how God views them in Christ. In Romans 3:21-26 Paul again reminds Christians of their status in Christ as a result of this great turning point in world history, which was a demonstration of God’s righteousness in Christ, that began a new age for humanity who now have the opportunity of being restored to a right relationship with God through Christ.
- J. Migne, Patrologia Latina, 17, col. 46 in Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 4.
- Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 4.
- Gerald Lewis Bray, ed., Romans, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998), xvii.
- Joseph A. Fitzmyer S.J., Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 33, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 85. See also James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1–8, vol. 38A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), xliii.
- Everett F. Harrison and Donald A. Hagner, “Romans,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Romans–Galatians (Revised Edition), ed. Tremper Longman III & Garland, David E., vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008), 21.
- James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1–8. Vol. 38A. Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), xlv-xlvi.
- James R. Edwards, Romans, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 10.
- Dunn, xlix-1.
- Frank J. Matera, Romans, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 91.
- Moo, 221.
- C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 201.
- Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 114.
- Barrett views nyni dei as temporal and one of the “great turning points in redemptive history. C. K. Barrett, The Epistle to the Romans, Rev. ed., Black’s New Testament Commentary (London: Continuum, 1991), 69. Similarly, Cranfield forcefully argues in favor of a temporal interpretation of nyni dei.. C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 201.
- Carson names a number of influential commentators who are currently arguing in favor of a subjective genitive interpretation, “Luke T. Johnson, ‘Rom 3:21–26 and the Faith of Jesus’, CBQ 44 (1982), pp. 77–90; Bruce W. Longenecker, Eschatology, pp. 149–50; G. Howard, ‘The Faith of Christ,’ ExpT … (1973–74), pp. 212–214; D. W. B. Robinson, ‘“Faith of Jesus Christ”—A New Testament Debate’, RTR 29 (1970), pp. 71–81; Richard B. Hays, ‘PISTIS and Pauline Christology: What Is at Stake’, in Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers, ed. E. H. Lovering, Jr. (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 714–29. D.A. Carson, “Why Trust a Cross? Reflections on Romans 3:21-26” Evangelical review of theology 28 (2004).
- D.A. Carson, “Why Trust a Cross? Reflections on Romans 3:21-26” Evangelical review of theology 28 (2004), electronic edition.
- N. T. Wright, ‘Romans and the Theology of Paul’, p. 37 n.9. N. T. Wright, ‘Romans and the Theology of Paul’, p. 37 n.9. Kruse provides a lengthy list of commentators who argue in favor of a subjective genitive reading with the following: “Richard B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1–4:11 (SBLDS 56; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983), 171; ‘PISTIS and Pauline Christology: What Is at Stake?’, in Pauline Theology, IV: Looking Back, Pressing On, ed. Elizabeth Johnson and David M. Hay (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 46; Stowers, A Rereading of Romans, 353 n. 4; Douglas A. Campbell, The Rhetoric of Righteousness in Romans 3:21–26 (JSNTSup 65; Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press, 1992), 62–63; Witherington, Romans, 101.” Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, ed. D. A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Cambridge, U.K.; Nottingham, England; Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2012), 180–181.
- Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, ed. D. A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Cambridge, U.K.; Nottingham, England; Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos, 2012), 180–181.
- John McRay, Paul: His Life and Teaching (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003),352.
- D.A. Carson, “Why Trust a Cross? Reflections on Romans 3:21-26” Evangelical review of theology 28 (2004), electronic edition.
- Cranfield, 203.
- William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 237.
- Robert Jewett and Roy David Kotansky, Romans: A Commentary, ed. Eldon Jay Epp, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006), 270.
- Moo, 127.
- Grant R. Osborne, Romans: Verse by Verse, Osborne New Testament Commentaries (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2017), 100.
- Moo, 125-126.
- Osborne, Romans, 100.
- Morris points out the price paid was a half shekel to be paid when the sensus was taken “to give every man a ransom for his soul unto the Lord (Ex 30:12). Morris points out the payment, in essence, releases the man from a death sentence. Leon Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965), 19.
- Leon Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965), 12-13.
- Richard N. Longenecker, The Epistle to the Romans: A Commentary on the Greek Text, ed. I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016), 394.
- Moo, 1996, 231, and Dunn 1988, 170-72 cited by Derek R. Brown and E. Tod Twist, Lexham Bible Guide: Romans, ed. Douglas Mangum (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014), Ro 3:21–31.
- Longenecker, 394.
- Moo, 128-129.
- Moo, Douglas J. Romans. The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 129.
- Longenecker, 394.
- Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996).
- James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
- C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, cited in Moo, 135–136.