Romans 3:21,22

Vv. 21, 22 a. “ But now the righteousness of God is manifested without the law, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ for all and upon all them that believe. ”

The δέ, but, is strongly adversative; it contrasts the revelation of righteousness with that of wrath. The former is presented as a new fact in the history of mankind; so that one might be led to give the word now a temporal sense; comp. the at this time, Romans 3:26, and Acts 17:30. This, however, is only apparent. The contrast with the preceding is moral rather than temporal; it is the contrast between the condemnation pronounced by the law (Romans 3:20) and the new righteousness acquired without the law (Romans 3:21). It is therefore better to give the word now the logical meaning which it has so frequently in the New Testament (Romans 7:17; 1 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Corinthians 14:6, etc.) and in the classics: “The situation being such.” The words: without the law, stand foremost, as having the emphasis. They evidently depend on the verb is manifested, and not on the word righteousness (a righteousness without law, Aug.). The absence of the article before the word law does not prove that the apostle does not mean the term to denote the Mosaic law; only the law is excluded from co-operating in the new righteousness not because it is Mosaic, but because it is law. Under the old dispensation, righteousness came to man through the thousand channels of legalism; in the new, righteousness is given him without the least co-operation of what can be called a law.

We know what Paul calls the righteousness of God: it is the state of reconciliation with God in which man is placed by the sentence which declares him just (see on Romans 1:17).

The verb φανεροῦν, to put in the light, differs from the verb ἀποκαλύπτειν, to reveal, used Romans 1:17, in the figure, not in the sense. The second applies to an object which was hidden by a veil, and which is made known by withdrawing the veil; the former, to an object placed in the shade, and on which rays of light are let fall. The only real difference from Romans 1:17 is therefore this: there, the verb was in the present, for it denoted the permanent revelation of the gospel by means of evangelical preaching; while here, the verb is in the perfect, because it refers, as Morison says, “to the fact itself, which that preaching proclaims.” That fact now finished is the subject expounded in Romans 3:25-26; it is through it that the righteousness of God is set in the light for all times.

But if legal observances are excluded from all co-operation in this righteousness, it does not follow that the latter is in contradiction to the Old Testament revelation in its double form of law and prophecy. These two manifestations of the divine will, commandment, and promise, understood in their true sense, contain, on the contrary, the confirmation of the righteousness of faith, as the apostle will prove in the sequel of this section, Romans 3:27 to Romans 4:25. The law by unveiling sin opens up the void in the heart, which is filled by the righteousness of faith; prophecy completes the work of preparation by promising this righteousness. Thus there is no objection to be drawn from the old revelation against the new. As the new fulfils the old, the latter confirms the former.