2 Great in every way. Firstly, indeed, in that they were committed¹ the sayings of the Almĩghty.

(MISB: Rom 3:2) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#3:2

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. This statement is often used to argue that we should refer to Jewish sources, commentaries, and traditions for our keys to interpret Scripture, and that we should take the Rabbis as authorities. It is to be granted that in the first century indigenous Jews were the experts on Messianic Prophecy, and that burdensome traditions were not so mixed up with Torah as they are now. However, things have changed. Firstly, the house of Judah has rebelled against Messiah, and so they have accordingly rejected and changed their interpretations of formerly acknowledged messianic prophecy. Secondly, the Jewish community no longer has an exclusive access to the Scripture. The house of Israel (the Church), for all its faults in rejecting Torah, has developed vast grammatical, lexical, and linguistic resources to aid in the understanding of Scripture. So if a non-Jew wants to learn Hebrew or interpret Messianic Prophecy correctly, he or she does not have to rely on the Rabbis. For the Scripture is also committed to the house of Israel even if most have been unfaithful with it.

4:1 What then will we say our forefather Abraham found according to the flesh? 2 For when Abraham, was justicedª by works,  he is having a praise, but not before the Almĩghty¹.

(MISB: Rom 4:1) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#4:1a

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 a. Abraham was shown to be right by works. Also he was made righteous by works. The word “justiced” could also be translated “justified, proved right, straightened out, made righteous”, and the Hebrew equivalents can be seen by hovering over the word “justiced”

 1. Paul’s point is that it requires works to support (be loyal to) Adonai. On the other hand Adonai supports us. A house built on sand saw a great foundation stone and moved onto the foundation stone so it could be supported. It weathered a storm, and then declared to the foundation, “I survived this storm because my great roof beat off the rain”; The foundation said, “Don’t you see the floods swirling around the rock below?”

3 For what is the Scripture saying? “And Abraham placed his support in Yãhweh, and it¹ was considered² to him as righteousness³.”

(MISB: Rom 4:3) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#4:3a

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. Mouse over the words in the text. Go do the same for Gen. 15:6 and read the notes there. The word “it” here refers back to the verbal idea, “made his support in Yahweh”. The concept implies two “supportings” that happen together. Abraham gives his support to Yahweh to be sure, but at the same time Yahweh becomes his Support. This corresponds to Paul’s teaching of first “His faithfulness” (Yah’s support), and then “his faithfulness” (Abraham’s support). See Hab. 2:4, which Paul breaks down into “support with works”, and “support without works”. This means Yah’s support without our works. Now you can see what “without works” means. It refers to Yahweh’s side of the covenant by which he supports us.

 2. Hebrew & Greek are more flexible here than the English, so figuring this out depends on knowing the languages or reading this note of explanation. See Gen. 15:6. Mouse over “considered”. The usual sense readers understand is that Abraham’s faithfulness was recognized as righteousness in G-d’s eyes. But to only see this is a miss-focus caused by reading one sided English translations too much and not fully appreciating what “it” refers to. We have three more ideas in the text. 2. “made his support on Yahweh”, which is to say he leaned on his or trusted him. 3. “made his support on Yahweh”, such that Yahweh is the one supporting, and that “it” (Yah’s support) is “intended, planned” for Abraham to become righteous, and 4. “it is planned to him as justice”. This last sense is critical to Paul’s teaching as we will see a few verses down the line. See the note on “righteousness”.

 3. English is not really capable of expressing “righteousness” and “justice” in one word. But that is the way classical Hebrew, Greek, and Latin work. Paul understands from Gen. 15:6 that Yahweh’s support of us is planned to us for “justice”, that is the justice of the cross to pay the penalty for sin so that we might be forgiven. So even though it is usually translated “righteousness”, Paul’s argument hinges on understanding this as “justice”. If one can stretch English a bit, it is not hard to see that G-d’s making a substitute penalty for sin, and then paying it is His “righteousness” (His support, faithfulness). So “righteousness” understood this way has nothing to do with our own morality, nor with Yah’s estimation of our morality in the 4th interpretation of Gen. 15:6—as so often mistakenly supposed by Lutheran or Calvinistic theology, which has been corrected by N.T. Wright, but I would not recommend him unless you have this down pat first. He makes a lot of mistakes and dresses everything up in Churchese.

4 But in the working¹ the reward is not being considered as a favor; if not, then according to what is owed. 5 But for the not working², (but committing³ on the One justicingª the ungodlyⁿ, His faithfulnessº is being considered as justice¹

(MISB: Rom 4:4) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#4:4

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. As most Jewish readers of Gen. 15:6 saw it, Abraham was being faithful, and Yahweh recognized it as righteousness. Meditate on the text a bit in Hebrew, and one will see a lot more than that. The usual interpretation is quite valid. It is, after all, our duty to the covenant to obey the covenant maker. Paul’s point is that the reward of obedience is not a favor or gift. It is simply what is due. We have only been doing our duty. It would be pretty pathetic if that was the sum total of the relationship, because if you take away that which we receive that is not due, and which we do not deserve, then we would find ourselves really shorthanded, more than we can imagine. So “in the working” is what we actually do.

 2. What does Paul mean by “for the not working”? It could also be “in the not working”. Does this mean that one should just “believe only”, and check to see that that being saved involves no contingency of obedience? That’s not what Paul is saying. “Not working” is how we regard Yah’s side of the covenant. This means we should not presume to do the work which he promised to do. It is His side of the covenant, His support, His faithfulness, that is accomplished “without our works”. Recall Romans 3:28. Yeshua pays the penalty without our works. Yeshua’s faithfulness on the cross is intended for our justice—which is exactly what Paul says in the next clause.

 3. Yes, the Greek means “committing” (cf. BDAG). Mouse over the word for Hebrew senses. Paul is still saying that we need to be loyal and obedient for our part of the covenant, which is the condition of receiving His part of the covenant.

 a. The Almighty is the One administering justice for the ungodly. He is balancing justice for the transgressor that repents without any works on the scales. He also is administering a penalty for the repentant ungodly by His own faithfulness on the cross. Yah balances justice without our works, because the only thing on the divine scales is the sacrifice of Messiah paying the punitive penalty for us. Compensatory justice is simply forgiven by divine decree, and a reduced punitive penalty is paid for by Messiah (reduced from eternal death to Messiah’s temporary substitute death in the case of repentance).

 n. The Scripture says that G-d will not “justify the wicked” (Ex. 23:7). The Hebrew word means “acquit” or “declare righteous” in Ex. 23:7. Paul’s meaning is entirely different. The word means “to do justice” to the ungodly. And this is done by Messiah paying our penalty. That is how G-d does justice to us who repent; since we have to admit our guilt, this “justicing” has nothing to do with “acquittal” or being “declared righteous/innocent”. Luther and Calvin did not improve the corrupt theology of the Church. They made it worse by saying that a man is “declared righteous”. That interpretation would certainly make Paul contradict Yah’s judicial rules.

 o. Paul has spoken before about the “faithfulness of Messiah”, and his readers certainly knew that the LXX interpreted “his faithfulness” in Hab. 2:4 as “My faithfulness”. It should be observed that the Church has well trained Christians to always read this text as “his faithfulness” and make them think that Paul is talking about the believers “belief” or “trust”. Such a mistake turns the true good news into a false gospel, wherein believer assent to a promise is counted as perfect righteousness!

 1. The “justice” here is Yahweh’s support to us on the cross. He provides the sacrifice that can pay the penalty. So repenting, we trust him, and he reduces our penalty so that it can be satisfied by his temporary substitutionary death. This is the justice that is accounted for all that give Him their support.

6 just as David also speaks about the blessing of the man to whom the Almĩghty is considering justice² apart from works:

(MISB: Rom 4:6) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#4:6

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 2. Unlike Romance Languages such as Latin, French, or Spanish, Modern English has the tendancy to separate justice and righteousness into separate categories. The word justice pertains to judicial and social matters, while the word righteousness pertains to morality and personal piety. Justice is what someone does to correct the incorrect, or equalize the unequal. It is a noun describing an action. Righteousness is what someone is morally. It is a noun describing an almost passive state or quality in English. However, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew contained the whole range of meaning in one word. We can only translate the best sense in English. However, the other sense also often applies.

2 For I testify to them, because they are holding onto a zeal for the Almĩghty, nevertheless not according to complete¹ knowledge,

(MISB: Rom 10:2) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#10:2

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. The Greek ἐπίγνωσιν means “full knowledge” or “complete knowledge”. Notice the preposition on the front ἐπί. That’s why this word is different than just plain “knowledge”. The mistranslation misleads the Church into thinking Jews are completely without knowledge. This is not true. It also could mislead those who know the Jews have knowledge into rejecting Paul. So the NAS is here corrected.

3 because they are not acknowledging the Almĩghty’s justice¹, and while seeking to establish their own justice², they are not subjected to the justice³ of the Almĩghty.

(MISB: Rom 10:3) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#10:3

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. If someone told you that a Sabbath observing, neighbor loving Jewish person did not recognize what it meant to be righteous, then one would be right to question the veracity of the statement. That is why the translations that have “righteousness” are faulty. What Paul used here is the Greek word δικαιοσύνην, which means “justice” (cf. BDAG, def. 1). The same is expressed by the Hebrew word צְדָקָה or צֶדֶק. So the Greek and Hebrew words covered more ground than the English righteousness, and that is important to know. Because the lacuna (gap) in the knowledge of Rabbinic Jews has to do with divine “justice”, and not knowledge of basic “righteousness” itself. Here is the gap: Messiah is required to forgive any transgressions committed—to individually renew the covenant, and His life is also required to make a complete cleansing of our sin nature at the end of the age. So while the typical Rabbinic Jew knows what righteousness is, such righteousness is bound to be incomplete without a provision for serious sin, and without a provision for final cleansing.

 2. Paul does not mean “own righteousness” here. That would be nonsense. Of course we want to be righteousness, and we want it to become our own righteousness! Doubtless, it comes from the Almighty, and belongs to him also. What Paul really means is our “own justice”, a justice of our own making. And this is where all Israel has failed to understand His justice. And I mean both houses of Israel, which are fallen into the pit. His justice is not satisfied by charity, worship, baptism, saying the sacred name, or G-d donning rose colored glasses that do not see sin. For the repentant, such justice as He requires is satisfied by Messiah Yeshua paying your penalty for sin.

 3. Anyone who understands that it is righteous to observe Torah is going to have difficulty with the usual English translation, “righteousness”. It is not really suitable. In Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, the equivalent term very often meant “justice”, and one had to pay attention to the context to know what kind of justice. Here, what Paul is leading up to, is not an anti-Torah justice, but a pro-Torah justice. The spirit of prophecy is that Messiah had to receive the penalty we deserved (Isa. 53; Gen. 22:8-14; Hab. 1:12). So he has become our “justice”, and since human righteousness is incomplete also, he will become the source of our righteousness too—in the eschaton. Therefore, he is called, יהוה צִדְקֵנוּ (Jer. 23:6) = Yahweh our justice, Yahweh our righteousness.

4 For Mẽssiah is the end¹ of the norm² for justice³ to everyone placing his supportª on him.

(MISB: Rom 10:4) : http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/BasicBooks/romans.html#10:4

(http://www.torahtimes.org/NewTranslation/bibleframe.html)

 1. David Stern and Cranfield suggested that end should be goal. One could argue that the goal of the normal justice of Torah is to send people to Messiah where they can obtain an unusual justice by grace. The “goal” translation, however, depends on making something explicit in English that is not distinguished in Greek. Indeed, “end” can mean “goal” in such phrases as, “the end justifies the means”. If the Greek has the sense of “goal” then we should be able to recognize it in the context without using the word “goal”. We should be able to use the word “end”. The word “goal” also closes off Paul’s primary meaning here. Messiah really is the end—termination of the norm for justice for those entering into trust with Messiah.

 2. The norm at this point is the status quo for justice. There are two kinds of justice administered by the Torah, one is the normal justice in which the sinner pays the penalty, and the other is abnormal justice. This unusual justice applies to those who repent of their sins and for which justice is administered with an acceptable substitutionary sacrifice. So Messiah is the end of the normal justice for the sinner who gives his support to Messiah.

 3. Unlike Romance Languages such as Latin, French, or Spanish, Modern English has the tendancy to separate justice and righteousness into separate categories. The word justice pertains to judicial and social matters, while the word righteousness pertains to morality and personal piety. Justice is what someone does to correct the incorrect, or equalize the unequal. It is a noun describing an action. Righteousness is what someone is morally. It is a noun describing an almost passive state or quality in English. However, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew contained the whole range of meaning in one word. We can only translate the best sense in English. However, the other sense also often applies.

 a. In the Greek the idea is entering into trust. The trust is mutual and covenantal. We trust Messiah to support us in deliverance, and he trusts us to support him with repentance, loyalty, faithfulness. This is having a trust with someone. The English verb “entrust” expresses the Greek idea. It originally comes from the idea of being “in trust” with someone. From the Hebrew standpoint, the hiphil verb conveys the idea of giving one’s support to Messiah, or of making one’s support on Messiah. The Hebrew strongly implies more than belief or assent to facts because the object of the verb is not facts, but a person in whom we place our support. The Hebrew sense implies mutual support due to a wider range of meaning in the prepositions used before the object than in English.