But now without law righteousness of God is manifested, borne witness to by the law and the prophets;
Paul has just closed his case: every mouth stopped, the whole world guilty before God. Then come two small words — "But now." The subject turns from what man owes to what God has done.
Everything before this verse has been demolition. Here the building starts.
Frederick W GrantAnd now the way lies open for the gospel. The shutting of man's mouth opens God's. The exhaustion of man's resources throws the full burden of his salvation onto the arm of God. There is no righteousness in man. The gospel cannot reopen that question; it is closed forever.
The first word of the gospel is not pardon — it is righteousness. That order fits what sin actually is.
F. B. HoleGod's righteousness means God maintaining all His rights in a right way. This must come first, because sin is lawlessness — man asserting his own will against God's rights. It is fitting, then, that the gospel opens this way. After the terrible unfolding of man's sin, its first word is "the righteousness of God."
Everything turns on where this righteousness comes from.
William KellyIt is God's, not man's. It has its character, quality, and source from God, not from man… It comes from God for man, not from man for God. So it carries the character and qualities of its source, whoever may be given to benefit from it.
That reframes the very attribute a guilty conscience fears most.
Hamilton SmithIt is natural for a convicted sinner to dread the righteousness of God. He argues that if a holy God deals rightly with a guilty sinner, it can only be to judge him for his sins. It never occurs to the sinner that God can righteously forgive his sins. But when we learn what the righteousness of God is, we discover something else. The very quality in God that we think is against us is the very quality that, above all others, is for us as sinners. It is the solid foundation of our peace as believers.
Law and gospel are not two versions of the same transaction. They run in opposite directions.
Hamilton SmithThe law demanded righteousness from man that he was unable to give. The gospel declares God's righteousness to man, without making any demand on man. It is now clear that God, in righteousness, is proclaiming the forgiveness of sins to the sinner, and justifying the ungodly who believe in Jesus.
So does the gospel cancel the law? The wording of the verse is careful.
William KellyRomans 3:21 does not deny that law exists or that it matters. It shows that God's righteousness is now manifested apart from law.
The last clause guards against the idea that God changed His plan. The Old Testament spoke of this righteousness. But speaking of a thing and showing it are not the same.
William KellyThe law and the prophets did not display the righteousness of God. Yet the law, in various forms, pointed to another righteousness that was coming. The prophets brought it out, if possible, still more clearly in their words. The one supplied types, the others assured that the Lord's righteousness was near to come. But now the gospel tells us it has come. Now divine righteousness is a revealed fact… There is no veil now. There was once, but the death of Christ tore it from top to bottom.
So the newness is in the showing, not in the substance. God had never justified anyone on any other basis.
J. N. DarbyIt is not merely that this righteousness exists; it is now manifested. It existed long before in the purposes of God, since God never justified anyone in any other way. But He did not display it until the gospel was brought out and preached… From Adam onward, no sinner ever stood, or ever could stand, in God's presence except in God's righteousness. But God had not displayed it until now.
Because the righteousness is God's and not man's, the door it opens is as wide as human need.
J. N. DarbyIf this righteousness were man's, it would have to come by the law. The law is the perfect measure of man's righteousness. So it would be only for the Jews, who alone had that law. But it is God's, and by faith, and so for all.
- Verdict. The case against man is closed. He has no righteousness of his own, so God speaks the moment man's mouth is shut.
- Source. The righteousness is God's own. It moves from God to man, never from man to God, so it carries God's character.
- Reversal. The quality a guilty conscience dreads most is the one thing on the believer's side. It is the ground of settled peace.
- Timing. The law and the prophets witnessed to it long before, and no one ever stood before God on any other ground. What is new at the cross is that God now displays it, with no veil.
- Reach. This righteousness comes by faith, not by law. So it is not limited to the people who had the law. It is for all.
righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ towards all, and upon all those who believe for there is no difference;
Paul has just shown that Jew and Gentile alike stand guilty, and now he gives God's answer: a righteousness that comes from God, not from man. Two questions run through the verse: whose righteousness is this, and how far does it reach?
A note on wording: older translations read "unto all and upon all them that believe." Much of the comment below turns on that double phrase. The ESV follows different manuscripts and reads "for all who believe."
This righteousness is not a standard God demands from us. It is something God Himself provides.
Hamilton SmithThis righteousness of God is made known in the gospel, entirely apart from the law. The law demanded righteousness from man that he was unable to render. The gospel declares God's righteousness to man, without making any demand upon man... It is now clear that God is righteously proclaiming the forgiveness of sins to the sinner, and justifying the ungodly who believe in Jesus.
Faith is how a person comes to share in this righteousness. One writer also shows what would have followed if the righteousness had been man's own.
J. N. DarbyIt is the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ. Man has not accomplished it, man has not procured it. It is of God, it is His righteousness; by believing in Jesus Christ we come to share in it. Had it been a human righteousness, it would have been by the law, which is the rule of that righteousness — a law given to the Jews only... It is a righteousness of God for man, because no man had any for God. Wherever there is faith, there it is applied. The believer possesses it.
The older reading has two phrases, not one. Kelly argues that both belong there, and that each word carries its own sense.
William KellyThe manuscripts differ here. Some of the most ancient ones leave out "and upon all." But I agree with those who keep the longer reading. I have little doubt that the words were dropped because the eye or ear caught one "all" and missed the other... The first phrase marks the direction of God's righteousness. It is not, like the law, restricted to a single nation; it addresses itself "unto all" men without exception; but the benefit depends on faith in Jesus Christ, and so it only reaches and takes effect "upon all that believe."
Commentators differ over which reading is original. Another writer pictures the two halves this way:
F. B. HoleGod's righteousness, so to speak, stretches out its hands kindly towards all men instead of frowning on them. And for those who believe, it comes down on them like a robe, so that they stand dressed in it in God's presence. All this happens without righteousness losing its own proper character in any way, or ceasing to be what it is.
The verse ends by cancelling every distinction between people. The reason is not that every person is equally bad. The reason is the measuring rod.
C. H. MackintoshThe only standard for measuring men is "the glory of God." All have fallen short of it — the best as well as the worst — so there is no difference. If it were only a question of conscience, or of human righteousness, there might be some difference. If the standard were only human, some shades of distinction could easily be drawn. But it is not so. All must be ruled by the glory of God, and ruled that way, all fall short alike.
The same words that flatten every human advantage also open the door equally wide.
H. Forbes WitherbyGrace meets us just as and where we are, and meets all men alike, whether Jew or Gentile, philosopher or simple... All are alike in the ruin — all are alike the objects of the remedy.
The verse names believing, and nothing else. So assurance rests on God's word, not on feelings.
The Christian's FriendIt does not say this righteousness is upon those who have this or that experience, or who feel saved. But if you can say, dear reader, that you are one of those who believe, you have God's word that His "righteousness" is upon you. And if "God's righteousness" is upon you, you are fit to dwell in His presence without a spot.
- Source — the righteousness is God's own, revealed apart from law. The law asked man for what he could not give; the gospel makes no demand at all.
- Channel — it comes by faith in Jesus Christ, not by works. A human righteousness would have come by law, and belonged to one nation.
- Reach — it goes out to all without exception, but takes effect only on those who believe.
- Level ground — the standard is God's glory, not human comparison. So the gap between the best and the worst disappears.
- Rest — all are alike in the ruin and alike the objects of the remedy. The believer's title is God's word, not his own experience.
for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
By this point in Romans, the whole human race stands guilty before God. The verse hangs on two words: "all," which leaves nobody out, and "glory," the standard nobody reaches.
The sweep of the word "all" is what makes this sentence so hard to escape. One writer puts the reach of that word next to what human effort can do about it:
W. W. FeredayLanguage this wide leaves no one a way out. It puts the whole human family under God's judgement. And nobody can lift themselves out of that condition. No amount of human effort — reforming your life, giving to the poor, and so on — can wash away a single sin.
Saying that everyone falls short does not flatten every sin into the same weight. One writer draws the line carefully. God will judge each person's works. But for salvation, everyone stands on the same ground.
Frederick W. GrantThe basic truth of the gospel is that there is no difference between one person and another. That does not mean everyone has sinned the same number of times, or as seriously. The day of judgment will bring out that difference. It will put each person who is not saved by the gospel in his place according to his works. So degrees of sin are real, and God will judge them all with perfect fairness. But that is not a question of salvation. As to that, everybody is precisely on the same footing.
Why "no difference"? It comes down to the standard God uses. Change the standard and you could rank people. Keep God's glory as the standard and the ranking collapses.
C. H. MackintoshGod measures people by one standard only: "the glory of God." All have fallen short of it, the best as well as the worst. So there is no difference. If the question were conscience, or human righteousness, there might be some difference. A human standard would let you draw fine distinctions between people. But that is not the standard. God measures everyone by His glory, and by that measure all fall short alike.
Only one man has ever met that standard, which is why comparing ourselves with other people is useless:
W. W. FeredayThere has been only one man in this world whom the glory could own as worthy of it. To Him there came a voice from the excellent glory: "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased" (2 Peter 1:17). In Him, then, we see what the glory of God requires in a man. Do we match Him? Here alone is the true standard by which we can measure ourselves correctly. Suppose a young man wanted to join the royal guards. There is no point in him arguing that he is the tallest person in town. If he is below the fixed height, he is out.
The two verbs are not in the same tense. The sinning is a finished fact. The falling short is still going on. The writer below quotes an older translation, which reads "do come short" where the ESV reads "fall short."
The Christian's FriendNot only have all sinned. Notice the wording too: "all do come short of the glory of God." The correct reading is "do come short," not "have come short." What a standard God gives! God does not say, "You have come short of what you ought to be." Most would admit that; but He says, "You have come short of my glory."
Verse 23 ends with a comma. What follows is not a demand but a gift, and one so unexpected that no guilty person would ever have thought to ask for it.
C. E. StuartNothing will meet their case except being "justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (v. 24). But who asked for this? Who pleaded for it? No one. God in His grace, and in keeping with His love, has given what no creature, aware of its own failure, would ever have asked for. You can imagine a cry going up for forgiveness, so that the deserved punishment might be turned aside. But imagine a sinner who really feels how serious his guilt is. Who could dream of him asking the Judge of all the earth to justify him freely by His grace?
If the falling short is still going on, does it stay true of a believer too? One writer says no, and the reason lies outside ourselves:
William KellyDoes this apply to the believer? On the contrary, no believer comes "short of the glory of God." And how is this? Because there is One in the glory who bore my sins on the cross. And He who is in the glory of God is my life and my righteousness.
- All — the language shuts every door of escape, and no amount of self-improvement removes even one sin.
- Level — degrees of sin are real, and God will judge them; but for salvation everyone stands on the same ground.
- Measure — the standard is God's glory, not conscience or how you compare with other people. By that measure the best and the worst fall short alike.
- Present — the text says we do come short, and the bar is not "what you ought to be" but God's own glory.
- Answered — the verse runs straight on into being justified by His grace as a gift, one no guilty person would have dared to ask for.
being justified freely by his grace through the redemption which [is] in Christ Jesus;
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
whom God has set forth a mercy-seat, through faith in his blood, for [the] shewing forth of his righteousness, in respect of the passing by the sins that had taken place before, through the forbearance of God;
Here God's grace and God's justice meet: a Son set out in public, blood, and a righteousness declared. Commentators ask three things of the verse. What does "propitiation" picture? How does "by his blood" connect to faith? And whose "former sins" had God passed over?
The phrase "put forward" points back to a piece of furniture almost nobody in Israel ever saw. One writer draws the contrast:
Edward DennettThe word translated "propitiation" here should certainly read "mercy-seat." Hebrews 9:5 uses the same word and translates it that way. That explains the term "set forth." In the tabernacle, no one saw the mercy-seat in the holiest place except the high priest, and only on the day of atonement. So it was a hidden mercy-seat. By contrast, Christ as the mercy-seat stands in the open — open to everyone in this day of grace, in the preaching of the gospel. Everyone is free, and indeed invited, to approach.
The mercy seat was God's own throne. Blood made it a place of mercy.
F. W. GrantThe word "propitiatory" is the one the Greek Old Testament uses for the "mercy-seat." ... The mercy-seat was the place in Israel where atonement, or propitiation, stood "set forth." It was the formal basis on which God dwelt in relationship with a sinful people. It was the throne of God, where He dwelt between the cherubim, and the blood sprinkled on it made it a "mercy-seat."
Does the blood attach to faith, or to the propitiation? One writer weighs both views and decides:
The Christian's FriendThis passage is hard to translate, as you can see from the different views people have put forward... The question is this. Do we link "in His blood" with faith? Or do we connect "in His blood" with propitiation, as the means by which propitiation has been made? We adopt the second view without any hesitation. What happened on the day of atonement makes it very clear: the blood sprinkled on the mercy-seat was the propitiation. If that reading is right, faith is how we take hold of Christ, whom God has set forth as the propitiation.
Why does Paul open with propitiation rather than with Christ dying for us? Because of which claim comes first.
F. B. HolePropitiation is what we may call the Godward side of the death of Christ. It deals with the most basic matter of all: meeting God's claims against sin. Meeting the sinner's need must come second. So when Paul unfolds the Gospel in the letter to the Romans, he first mentions the death of Christ as "a propitiation through faith in His blood" (Romans 3:25). Paul does not state substitution plainly until Romans 4:25, where we read of Him as "delivered for our offences."
"Former sins" reaches back to the ages before the Cross. Paul's word here is unusual, and it marks a different kind of dealing:
J. A. Trenchparesis (from pariemi, "to let pass, relax") occurs only in Romans 3:25. There the Authorised Version renders it "remission." That misses the distinction the passage makes between God's ways with the sins of those before the Cross and after it, now that propitiation has been made through faith in His blood... here we must read "for the passing over of sins done beforehand, through the forbearance of God." The Cross declared God's righteousness in passing over the sins of past ages. At the same time it laid the ground for Him now to be "just and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus."
The ESV reflects this reading with "he had passed over former sins."
If God waited before, does He still merely wait? One writer answers with a picture from everyday debt:
William KellyIn the first case He showed His righteousness in passing by the sins that had gone before. Strictly speaking, He could not have remitted their sins in justice, because the atoning work was not yet done. But He did pass them over, and this through His forbearance. In the second case He shows His righteousness in the present time. Forbearance is no longer the question, because the work of atonement is done. For who speaks of a creditor's "forbearance" when the debt is paid in full?
- Displayed — Israel's high priest saw the mercy seat once a year, behind a curtain. God has now put it in open view: Christ, set forth as the mercy seat, and everyone is invited to come.
- Blood — Blood turned a throne into a mercy seat. Commentators differ on whether "by his blood" attaches to faith or to the propitiation; the sprinkled blood of the day of atonement favours the propitiation.
- Godward — Propitiation meets God's claims against sin first. The sinner's need comes next, and Paul states substitution later, in Romans 4:25.
- Passed over — The "former sins" are the sins of past ages, before the Cross. Paul's word means passing over, not full remission: the atoning work was not yet done.
- Declared — The Cross showed God righteous in that forbearance. Now it makes Him just, and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
for [the] shewing forth of his righteousness in the present time, so that he should be just, and justify him that is of [the] faith of Jesus.
The gospel raises a hard question: how can God forgive sinners and still be right? This verse answers it — at the cross God declared His own righteousness, so He can now call a guilty believer righteous.
The verse says "He might be just." Everything turns on who that "He" is.
William KellyMay I not ask any fair mind, Who is meant here? "That He might be just and the justifier," etc. — that who might be just? Answer honestly. "That He might be just." Who is He? Is it Christ just? Or is it not God just by virtue of Christ? There can be no doubt in the world... It is by virtue of Christ, or God could not be righteous in this way on behalf of the sinner. Redemption is the righteous groundwork. The blood of Christ deserves at God's hands that the believer should be justified. And God Himself is just in justifying him.
The phrase marks a change from the ages that came before. The earlier "sins" in the passage are often misread.
Frederick W GrantThe phrase "the sins that are past" in our translation does not mean what the wording may suggest. It is not the sins of a man's past life, up to the moment of his justification. It is the sins committed in the ages before Christ, while God held back. But the ground of His forbearance was not yet made clear. Now, "in the present season" of gospel grace, God does not just hold back or "pass over." He justifies: He pronounces righteous. The cross, the blood of atonement, now declares His righteousness both as to the past and in the present.
To justify means to pronounce a person righteous. God's justice is what makes that possible, not what stands in the way.
W. T. P. WolstonChrist took my place in death and judgment on the cross, and now I get Christ's place before God, by faith in His blood. Is this right? Clearly so... So God, against whom I have sinned, is "just" when He now justifies me. Jesus was delivered up and condemned for my sin. God then raised Him, to prove His satisfaction and delight in Him and in His work of redemption for me. I might go further and say He would be unjust to Christ to condemn me for those very sins for which He condemned His Son... He judges sin, and justifies the sinner who believes in Jesus.
For the guilty conscience, God's righteousness is the last thing to hope in. This verse turns that around.
Samuel RidoutThe sinner feared God's righteousness. He imagined that justice was against him. Now he finds it is for him. Instead of being against him to condemn him, it is the very thing that witnesses for him. God shows His righteousness by justifying the believer in Jesus — by justifying the ungodly. I am a poor sinner with all my sin on me. I am a wretched, guilty soul standing before a righteous God. And I find that His very righteousness is my friend. It is the thing that justifies me.
The verse names who God justifies. Some point to the next chapter, where God justifies "the ungodly," and wonder if the circle is wider.
The Christian's FriendIt is the believer, and the believer only, whom God justifies... But someone may answer that in the next chapter we read of God justifying "the ungodly." True — but not in his ungodliness. The next words add, "his faith is counted as righteousness." So the word describes his state up to the time when he became a believer. God justified him not as ungodly at that moment, but as a believer.
Knowing who the Justifier is does more than settle an argument. It settles a life.
J T MawsonWhat comfort, what deep peace it brings into a life! What stability it gives to faith to understand that it is God who justifies! He is "just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Rom. 3:26). In this bright gospel day He can take to Himself the title of "Him who justifies the ungodly" (4:5). Yes, this title is His glory, the righteous triumph of His grace in a world where sin abounded.
- Cause. The blood of Christ is the righteous groundwork. God justifies the believer because of what Christ has done, not despite it.
- Timing. "At the present time" contrasts with the earlier ages, when God held back and passed sins over. Now the cross declares His righteousness, and He does more than hold back: He pronounces righteous.
- Reversal. The righteousness the sinner dreaded now speaks for him. It would be unjust to Christ to condemn the man whose sins were already condemned in Him.
- Reach. God Himself is the Justifier, and He justifies the believer — the believer only. "Ungodly" describes what the man was until he believed.
- Result. Comfort, deep peace and a settled faith — because God calls justifying the ungodly His glory.