In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

5 “No Human Being Will Be Justified before God” (Rom. 3:9-20) Romans 3:9-20 sums up the first major argument in Paul’s letter to the Romans (1:18—3:20).1 Thus my study of judgment in 3:9-20 will also summarize the meaning and function of the motif in all of 1:18—3:20. In the history of interpretation, most have read Rom. 1:18—3:20 as a universal accusation of sin, but a growing number of scholars now argue that these verses do not make a universal accusation. In part, this is because of the mysterious Gentiles who complete the law in Romans 2, an issue I will explore further in chapter 8. First, however, I will argue in this chapter that Rom. 3:9-20 draws to a conclusion the accusation of 1:18—3:8. Here, Paul uses the motif of divine judgment according to works in order to make a universal accusation against all Jews and Gentiles. According to Paul’s gospel, the whole world is under the power of sin and liable to the condemning judgment of God. 1. So most commentators, e.g., Frederic Louis Godet, Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 60; C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, MFNT (New York: Harper & Bros., 1932), ix; John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, old series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), xxii; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, ICC, new series (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:28; Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), ix; Douglas Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, new series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 33; Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 25; N. T. Wright, Romans, in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 10, Acts, Introduction to Epistolary Literature, Romans, 1 Corinthians, ed. Leander E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 410. Note the last line of Fitzmyer’s commentary on Rom 3:20: “So Paul ends the negative development of his thesis in part A of Romans” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Romans, AB [New York: Doubleday, 1993], 339). Hays has now questioned the major structural break between Rom. 3:20 and 3:21, because of the thematic continuity between 3:1-20 and 3:21-26 (Richard B. Hays, “Psalm 143 and the Logic of Romans 3,” JBL 99 [1980]: 115). But while there is continuity between the two sections, there is also striking discontinuity—in particular, the revelation of God’s righteousness in the death of Jesus Christ. 83 The Meaning of Judgment in Rom. 3:9-20 Paul’s argument in Rom. 1:18—3:20 “takes its orientation from the coming day of judgment.”2 It develops the theme of divine judgment according to works more extensively than any other passage in the letter. After Rom. 3:20, Paul occasionally speaks about the judgment, because it is foundational to his discussion of justification (4:15; 5:9-11, 16, 18; 6:23; 8:1, 33-34) and his prohibition of vengeance (12:18-19). But he does not return to a major discussion of the final judgment until Rom. 14:1-23. Thus the judgment motif is developed most extensively in this first argument of the letter, an argument that finds its conclusion in Rom. 3:9-20. In addition to my examination of the four elements of the motif in 3:9-20 (the agent of judgment, the action of judgment, the ground of judgment, and the object of judgment), I will include a separate discussion about “works of the law” in Rom. 3:20, a phrase highly debated since the rise of the new perspective on Paul. THE AGENT OF JUDGMENT The law, Paul argues, makes an accusation in order to that “every mouth may be shut and the whole world may be accountable to God” (3:19). In Romans 2, Paul has described in detail the final judgment of God, and this is the theme he continues to develop in the conclusion of his argument. The world of humanity will stand before God himself at the judgment. “By the works of the law no human being will be justified before him” (3:20, my emphasis). THE ACTION OF JUDGMENT Romans 3:9-20, like 1:18—3:8, emphasizes the condemning judgment. In fact, Paul’s description of judgment in this conclusion of his...

Share