KJV: Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
YLT: wherefore by works of law shall no flesh be declared righteous before Him, for through law is a knowledge of sin.
Darby: Wherefore by works of law no flesh shall be justified before him; for by law is knowledge of sin.
ASV: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin.
| ἔργων | works |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Plural Root: ἔργον Sense: business, employment, that which any one is occupied. |
|
| νόμου | of [the] Law |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: νόμος Sense: anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command. |
|
| δικαιωθήσεται | will be justified |
|
Parse: Verb, Future Indicative Passive, 3rd Person Singular Root: δικαιόω Sense: to render righteous or such he ought to be. |
|
| πᾶσα | any |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: πᾶς Sense: individually. |
|
| σὰρξ | flesh |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: σάρξ Sense: flesh (the soft substance of the living body, which covers the bones and is permeated with blood) of both man and beasts. |
|
| ἐνώπιον | before |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: ἐνώπιον Sense: in the presence of, before. |
|
| διὰ | through |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: διά Sense: through. |
|
| νόμου | [the] Law |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: νόμος Sense: anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command. |
|
| ἐπίγνωσις | [is] knowledge |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: ἐπίγνωσις Sense: precise and correct knowledge. |
|
| ἁμαρτίας | of sin |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ἁμαρτία Sense: equivalent to 264. |
|
Greek Commentary for Romans 3:20
(διοτι dioti again, δια οτι diaεχ εργων νομου hoti). [source]
“Out of works of law.” Mosaic law and any law as the source of being set right with God. Paul quotes Psalm 43:2 as he did in Galatians 2:16 to prove his point. The knowledge of sin (epignōsis hamartias). The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1 Corinthians 15:56). Paul has shown this carefully in Galatians 3:19-22. Cf. Hebrews 10:3. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew. [source]
The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1 Corinthians 15:56). Paul has shown this carefully in Galatians 3:19-22. Cf. Hebrews 10:3. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew. [source]
Clear and exact knowledge. Always of a knowledge which powerfully influences the form of the religions life, and hence containing more of the element of personal sympathy than the simple γνῶσις knowledgewhich may be concerned with the intellect alone without affecting the character. See Romans 1:28; Romans 10:2; Ephesians 4:13. Also Philemon 1:9, where it is associated with the abounding of love; Colossians 3:10; Philemon 1:6, etc. Hence the knowledge of sin here is not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character. [source]
Not the Mosaic law in its ritual or ceremonial aspect; but the law in a deeper and more general sense, as written both in the decalogue and in the hearts of the Gentiles, and embracing the moral deeds of both Gentiles and Jews. The Mosaic law may indeed be regarded as the primary reference, but as representing a universal legislation and including all the rest. The moral revelation, which is the authoritative instruction of God, may be viewed either indefinitely and generally as the revelation of God to men; or authoritatively, as to the duty incumbent on man as man; or with reference to the instruction as to the duty incumbent on men as sinful men under a dispensation of mercy; or as instruction as to the duty of Jews as Jews. Romans 3:20relates to the instruction regarding the duty incumbent on men as men. “It is the law of commandments which enjoins those outer acts and inner choices and states which lie at the basis and constitute the essence of all true religion. In the background or focal point of these commandments he sees the decalogue, or duologue, which is often designated 'the moral law by way of pre-eminence” (Morison, from whom also the substance of this note is taken). By the phrase works of the law is meant the deeds prescribed by the law. [source]
For the kindred adjective δίκαιος righteoussee on Romans 1:17. 1. Classical usage. The primitive meaning is to make right. This may take place absolutely or relatively. The person or thing may be made right in itself, or with reference to circumstances or to the minds of those who have to do with them. Applied to things or acts, as distinguished from persons, it signifies to make right in one's judgment. Thus Thucydides, ii. 6,7. “The Athenians judged it right to retaliate on the Lacedaemonians.” Herodotus, i., 89, Croesus says to Cyrus: “I think it right to shew thee whatever I may see to thy advantage.”-DIVIDER- A different shade of meaning is to judge to be the case. So Thucydides, iv., 122: “The truth concerning the revolt was rather as the Athenians, judged the case to be.” Again, it occurs simply in the sense to judge. Thucydides, v., 26: “If anyone agree that the interval of the truce should be excluded, he will not judge correctly “In both these latter cases the etymological idea of right is merged, and the judicial element predominates. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In ecclesiastical usage, to judge to be right or to decide upon in ecclesiastical councils. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Applied to persons, the meaning is predominantly judicial, though Aristotle (“Nichomachaean Ethics,” v., 9) uses it in the sense of to treat one rightly. There is no reliable instance of the sense to make right intrinsically; but it means to make one right in some extrinsic or relative manner. Thus Aeschylus, “Agamemnon,” 390-393: Paris, subjected to the judgment of men, tested ( δικαιωθεὶς ) is compared to bad brass which turns black when subjected to friction. Thus tested or judged he stands in right relation to men's judgments. He is shown in the true baseness of his character. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Thus the verb acquires the meaning of condemn; adjudge to be bad. Thucydides, iii., 40: Cleon says to the Athenians, “If you do not deal with the Mitylenaeans as I advise, you will condemn yourselves.” From this readily arises the sense of punish; since the punishment of a guilty man is a setting him in right relation to the political or moral system which his conduct has infringed. Thus Herodotus, i., 100: “Deioces the Mede, if he heard of any act of oppression, sent for the guilty party and punished him according to his offense.” Compare Plato, “Laws,” ii., 934. Plato uses δικαιωτήρια to denote places of punishment or houses of correction (“Phaedrus,” 249). According to Cicero, δικαιόω was used by the Sicilians of capital punishment: “ Ἑδικαιώθησαν , that is, as the Sicilians say, they were visited with punishment and executed” (“Against Verres,” v., 57). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- To sum up the classical usage, the word has two main references: 1, to persons; 2, to things or acts. In both the judicial element is dominant. The primary sense, to make right, takes on the conventional meanings to judge a thing to be right, to judge, to right a person, to treat rightly, to condemn, punish, put to death. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. New Testament usage. This is not identical with the classical usage. In the New Testament the word is used of persons only. In Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:35, of a quality, Wisdom, but the quality is personified. It occurs thirty-nine times in the New Testament; twenty-seven in Paul; eight in the Synoptists and Acts; three in James; one in the Revelation. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- A study of the Pauline passages shows that it is used by Paul according to the sense which attaches to the adjective δίκαιος , representing a state of the subject relatively to God. The verb therefore indicates the act or process by which a man is brought into a right state as related to God. In the A.V. confusion is likely to arise from the variations in translation, righteousness, just, justifier, justify. See Romans 3:24, Romans 3:26, Romans 3:28, Romans 3:30; Romans 4:2; Romans 5:1, Romans 5:9; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:8, Galatians 3:11, Galatians 3:24; Titus 3:7. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The word is not, however, to be construed as indicating a mere legal transaction or adjustment between God and man, though it preserves the idea of relativity, in that God is the absolute standard by which the new condition is estimated, whether we regard God's view of the justified man, or the man's moral condition when justified. The element of character must not only not be eliminated from it; it must be foremost in it. Justification is more than pardon. Pardon is an act which frees the offender from the penalty of the law, adjusts his outward relation to the law, but does not necessarily effect any change in him personally. It is necessary to justification, but not identical with it. Justification aims directly at character. It contemplates making the man himself right; that the new and right relation to God in which faith places him shall have its natural and legitimate issue in personal rightness. The phrase faith is counted for righteousness, does not mean that faith is a substitute for righteousness, but that faith is righteousness; righteousness in the germ indeed, but still bona fide righteousness. The act of faith inaugurates a righteous life and a righteous character. The man is not made inherently holy in himself, because his righteousness is derived from God; neither is he merely declared righteous by a legal fiction without reference to his personal character; but the justifying decree, the declaration of God which pronounces him righteous, is literally true to the fact in that he is in real, sympathetic relation with the eternal source and norm of holiness, and with the divine personal inspiration of character. Faith contains all the possibilities of personal holiness. It unites man to the holy God, and through this union he becomes a partaker of the divine nature, and escapes the corruption that is in the world through lust (2 Peter 1:4). The intent of justification is expressly declared by Paul to be conformity to Christ's image (Romans 8:29, Romans 8:30). Justification which does not actually remove the wrong condition in man which is at the root of his enmity to God, is no justification. In the absence of this, a legal declaration that the man is right is a fiction. The declaration of righteousness must have its real and substantial basis in the man's actual moral condition. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Hence justification is called justification of life (Romans 5:18); it is linked with the saving operation of the life of the risen Christ (Romans 4:25; Romans 5:10); those who are in Christ Jesus “walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Romans 8:1); they exhibit patience, approval, hope, love (Romans 5:4, Romans 5:5). Justification means the presentation of the self to God as a living sacrifice; non-conformity to the world; spiritual renewal; right self-estimate - all that range of right practice and feeling which is portrayed in the twelfth chapter of this Epistle. See, further, on Romans 4:5.Knowledge ( ἐπίγνωσις )Clear and exact knowledge. Always of a knowledge which powerfully influences the form of the religions life, and hence containing more of the element of personal sympathy than the simple γνῶσις knowledgewhich may be concerned with the intellect alone without affecting the character. See Romans 1:28; Romans 10:2; Ephesians 4:13. Also Philemon 1:9, where it is associated with the abounding of love; Colossians 3:10; Philemon 1:6, etc. Hence the knowledge of sin here is not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character. [source]
Equivalent to man. It is often used in the sense of a living creature - man or beast. Compare 1 Peter 1:24; Matthew 24:22; Luke 3:6. Generally with a suggestion of weakness, frailty, mortality; Septuagint, Jeremiah 17:5; Psalm 78:39; Ephesians 6:12. The word here has no doctrinal bearing. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Romans 3:20
Σάρξ fleshoccurs in the classics in the physical sense only. Homer commonly uses it in the plural as denoting all the flesh or muscles of the body. Later the singular occurs in the same sense. Paul's use of this and other psychological terms must be determined largely by the Old-Testament usage as it appears in the Septuagint. 1. In the physical sense. The literal flesh. In the Septuagint τὰ κρέα flesh(plural) is used where the reference is to the parts of animals slain, and αἱ σάρκες , flesh (plural) where the reference is to flesh as the covering of the living body. Hence Paul uses κρέα in Romans 14:21; 1 Corinthians 8:13, of the flesh of sacrificed animals. Compare also the adjective σάρκιμος fleshy 2 Corinthians 3:3; and Ezekiel 11:19; Ezekiel 36:26, Sept. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. Kindred. Denoting natural or physical relationship, Romans 1:3; Romans 9:3-8; Romans 11:14; Galatians 4:23, Galatians 4:29; 1 Corinthians 10:18; Philemon 1:16. This usage forms a transition to the following sense: the whole human body. Flesh is the medium in and through which the natural relationship of man manifests itself. Kindred is conceived as based on community of bodily substance. Therefore:-DIVIDER- 3. The body itself. The whole being designated by the part, as being its main substance and characteristic, 1 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Corinthians 7:28; 2 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 7:5; 2 Corinthians 10:3; 2 Corinthians 12:7. Romans 2:28; Galatians 6:13, etc. Paul follows the Septuagint in sometimes using σῶμα bodyand sometimes σάρξ fleshin this sense, so that the terms occasionally seem to be practically synonymous. Thus 1 Corinthians 6:16, 1 Corinthians 6:17, where the phrase one body is illustrated and confirmed by one flesh. See Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 5:28, Ephesians 5:31, where the two are apparently interchanged. Compare 2 Corinthians 4:10, 2 Corinthians 4:11; 1 Corinthians 5:3, and Colossians 2:5. Σάρξ , however, differs from σῶμα in that it can only signify the organism of an earthly, living being consisting of flesh and bones, and cannot denote “either an earthly organism that is not living, or a living organism that is not earthly” (Wendt, in Dickson). Σῶμα not thus limited. Thus it may denote the organism of the plant (1 Corinthians 15:37, 1 Corinthians 15:38) or the celestial bodies (1 Corinthians 15:40). Hence the two conceptions are related as general and special: σῶμα bodybeing the material organism apart from any definite matter (not from any sort of matter), σάρξ , flesh, the definite, earthly, animal organism. The two are synonymons when σῶμα is used, from the context, of an earthly, animal body. Compare Philemon 1:22; 2 Corinthians 5:1-8. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Σῶμα bodyand not σάρξ fleshis used when the reference is to a metaphorical organism, as the church, Romans 12:4sqq.; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 12:12-27; Ephesians 1:23; Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:18, etc. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The σάρξ is described as mortal (2 Corinthians 4:11); subject to infirmity (Galatians 4:13; 2 Corinthians 12:7); locally limited (Colossians 2:15); an object of fostering care (Ephesians 5:29). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 4. Living beings generally, including their mental nature, and with a correlated notion of weakness and perishableness. Thus the phrase πᾶσα σάρξ allflesh (Genesis 6:12; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 49:23). This accessory notion of weakness stands in contrast with God. In Paul the phrase all flesh is cited from the Old Testament (Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16) and is used independently (1 Corinthians 1:29). In all these instances before God is added. So in Galatians 1:16, flesh and blood implies a contrast of human with divine wisdom. Compare 1 Corinthians 15:50; Ephesians 6:12. This leads up to-DIVIDER- 5. Man “either as a creature in his natural state apart from Christ, or the creaturely side or aspect of the man in Christ.” Hence it is correlated with ἄνθρωπος man 1 Corinthians 3:3; Romans 6:19; 2 Corinthians 5:17. Compare Romans 6:6; Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:9; Galatians 5:24. Thus the flesh would seem to be interchangeable with the old man. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It has affections and lusts (Galatians 5:24); willings (Ephesians 2:3; Romans 8:6, Romans 8:7); a mind (Colossians 2:18); a body (Colossians 2:11). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It is in sharp contrast with πνεῦμα spirit(Galatians 3:3, Galatians 3:19; Galatians 5:16, Galatians 5:17, Galatians 5:19-24; Galatians 6:8; Romans 8:4). The flesh and the spirit are thus antagonistic. Σάρξ fleshbefore or in contrast with his reception of the divine element whereby he becomes a new creature in Christ: the whole being of man as it exists and acts apart from the influence of the Spirit. It properly characterizes, therefore, not merely the lower forms of sensual gratification, but all - the highest developments of the life estranged from God, whether physical, intellectual, or aesthetic. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It must be carefully noted:-DIVIDER- 1. That Paul does not identify flesh and sin. Compare, flesh of sin, Romans 8:3. See Romans 7:17, Romans 7:18; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Galatians 2:20. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. That Paul does not identify σάρξ withthe material body nor associate sin exclusively and predominantly with the body. The flesh is the flesh of the living man animated by the soul ( ψυχή ) as its principle of life, and is distinctly used as coordinate with ἄνθρωπος manAs in the Old Testament, “it embraces in an emphatic manner the nature of man, mental and corporeal, with its internal distinctions.” The spirit as well as the flesh is capable of defilement (2 Corinthians 7:1; compare 1 Corinthians 7:34). Christian life is to be transformed by the renewing of the mind (Romans 12:2; compare Ephesians 4:23). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 3. That Paul does not identify the material side of man with evil. The flesh is not the native seat and source of sin. It is only its organ, and the seat of sin's manifestation. Matter is not essentially evil. The logical consequence of this would be that no service of God is possible while the material organism remains. See Romans 12:1. The flesh is not necessarily sinful in itself; but as it has existed from the time of the introduction of sin through Adam, it is recognized by Paul as tainted with sin. Jesus appeared in the flesh, and yet was sinless (2 Corinthians 5:21).The motions of sins ( τὰ παθήματα τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν )Motions used in earlier English for emotions or impulses. Thus Bacon: “He that standeth at a stay where others rise, can hardly avoid motions of envy” (“Essay” xiv.). The word is nearly synonymous with πάθος passion(Romans 1:26, note). From πάθειν tosuffer; a feeling which the mind undergoes, a passion, desire. Rev., sinful passions: which led to sins.Did work ( ἐνηργεῖτο )Rev., wrought. See 2 Corinthians 1:6; 2 Corinthians 4:12; Ephesians 3:20; Galatians 5:6; Philemon 2:13; Colossians 1:29. Compare Mark 6:14, and see on power, John 1:12. [source]
That mentioned in Romans 9:30. Compare Philemon 3:9; Romans 1:16, Romans 1:17; Romans 3:20-22. [source]
Not the Mosaic law in its ritual or ceremonial aspect; but the law in a deeper and more general sense, as written both in the decalogue and in the hearts of the Gentiles, and embracing the moral deeds of both Gentiles and Jews. The Mosaic law may indeed be regarded as the primary reference, but as representing a universal legislation and including all the rest. The moral revelation, which is the authoritative instruction of God, may be viewed either indefinitely and generally as the revelation of God to men; or authoritatively, as to the duty incumbent on man as man; or with reference to the instruction as to the duty incumbent on men as sinful men under a dispensation of mercy; or as instruction as to the duty of Jews as Jews. Romans 3:20relates to the instruction regarding the duty incumbent on men as men. “It is the law of commandments which enjoins those outer acts and inner choices and states which lie at the basis and constitute the essence of all true religion. In the background or focal point of these commandments he sees the decalogue, or duologue, which is often designated 'the moral law by way of pre-eminence” (Morison, from whom also the substance of this note is taken). By the phrase works of the law is meant the deeds prescribed by the law. [source]
Full or correct and vital knowledge. See on Romans 1:28; see on Romans 3:20. [source]
American Rev., rightly, “I shall fully know.” See on knowledge, Romans 3:20. The A.V. has brought this out in 2 Corinthians 6:9, well known. [source]
In order to set upon already existing sins the stamp of positive transgression of law. Comp. Romans 4:5; Romans 5:13. Note the article, the transgressions, summing them up in one mass. Not, in order to give the knowledge of sins. This, it is true, would follow the revelation of sins as transgressions of law (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:13); but, 1. the phrase because of transgressions does not express that thought with sufficient definiteness. If that had been his meaning, Paul would probably have written τῆς ἀπιγνώσεως τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν onaccount of the knowledge of transgressions. 2. He meant to describe the office of the law as more than giving the knowledge of sins. Its office was, in revealing sin as positive transgression, to emphasize the objective, actual, contrary fact of righteousness according to the divine ideal, and to throw sin into contrast with that grand ideal. [source]
See on Romans 7:5. For no flesh see on Romans 3:20. [source]
Lit. out of the works, etc. Comp. Romans 3:20. Works are characteristic of a legal dispensation. Paul often puts “works” alone as representing legal righteousness. See Romans 4:2, Romans 4:6; Romans 9:11, Romans 9:32; Romans 11:6; Ephesians 2:9. [source]
See on Romans 3:20, Romans 3:26. The meaning to declare or pronounce righteous cannot be consistently carried through Paul's writings in the interest of a theological fiction of imputed righteousness. See, for example, Romans 4:25; 1 Corinthians 6:11; and all passages where the word is used to describe justification by works of the law, as here, Galatians 3:11; Galatians 5:4. If one is a real righteousness, founded upon his conformity to the law. Why is the righteousness of faith any less a real righteousness? [source]
The enmity immediately follows the middle wall of partition, and should be rendered in apposition with and as defining it, and as dependent on brake down, not on abolished: the middle wall which was the enmity. It is used abstractly, as peace in Ephesians 2:14. The enmity was the result and working of the law regarded as a separative system; as it separated Jew from Gentile, and both from God. See Romans 3:20; Romans 4:15; Romans 5:20; Romans 7:7-11. For abolished, see on cumbereth, Luke 13:7, and make without effect, see on Romans 3:3. [source]
Second aorist passive indicative of αναστρεπω anastrephō old verb, to turn back and forth, to live (2 Corinthians 1:12). Cf. ποτε περιεπατησατε pote periepatēsate of the Gentiles in Ephesians 2:2. The desires (τα τεληματα ta thelēmata). Late and rare word except in lxx and N.T., from τελω thelō to will, to wish. Plural here “the wishes,” “the wills” of the flesh like ταις επιτυμιαις της σαρκος tais epithumiais tēs sarkos just before. Gentiles had no monopoly of such sinful impulses. Of the mind Plural again, “of the thoughts or purposes.” Were by nature children of wrath (ημετα τεκνα πυσει οργης ēmetha tekna phusei orgēs). This is the proper order of these words which have been the occasion of much controversy. There is no article with τεκνα tekna Paul is insisting that Jews as well as Gentiles (“even as the rest”) are the objects of God‘s wrath (οργης orgēs) because of their lives of sin. See Romans 2:1-3:20 for the full discussion of this to Jews unpalatable truth. The use of πυσει phusei (associative instrumental case of manner) is but the application of Paul‘s use of “all” (παντες pantes) as shown also in Romans 3:20; Romans 5:12. See πυσει phusei of Gentiles in Romans 2:14. The implication of original sin is here, but not in the form that God‘s wrath rests upon little children before they have committed acts of sin. The salvation of children dying before the age of responsibility is clearly involved in Romans 5:13. [source]
Plural again, “of the thoughts or purposes.” Were by nature children of wrath (ημετα τεκνα πυσει οργης ēmetha tekna phusei orgēs). This is the proper order of these words which have been the occasion of much controversy. There is no article with τεκνα tekna Paul is insisting that Jews as well as Gentiles (“even as the rest”) are the objects of God‘s wrath (οργης orgēs) because of their lives of sin. See Romans 2:1-3:20 for the full discussion of this to Jews unpalatable truth. The use of πυσει phusei (associative instrumental case of manner) is but the application of Paul‘s use of “all” (παντες pantes) as shown also in Romans 3:20; Romans 5:12. See πυσει phusei of Gentiles in Romans 2:14. The implication of original sin is here, but not in the form that God‘s wrath rests upon little children before they have committed acts of sin. The salvation of children dying before the age of responsibility is clearly involved in Romans 5:13. [source]
This is the proper order of these words which have been the occasion of much controversy. There is no article with τεκνα tekna Paul is insisting that Jews as well as Gentiles (“even as the rest”) are the objects of God‘s wrath (οργης orgēs) because of their lives of sin. See Romans 2:1-3:20 for the full discussion of this to Jews unpalatable truth. The use of πυσει phusei (associative instrumental case of manner) is but the application of Paul‘s use of “all” (παντες pantes) as shown also in Romans 3:20; Romans 5:12. See πυσει phusei of Gentiles in Romans 2:14. The implication of original sin is here, but not in the form that God‘s wrath rests upon little children before they have committed acts of sin. The salvation of children dying before the age of responsibility is clearly involved in Romans 5:13. [source]
See on Romans 3:20; see on Philemon 1:6. Full knowledge. See Romans 1:21, Romans 1:28; 1 Corinthians 13:12, where Paul contrasts γινώσκειν toknow γνῶσις knowledgewith ἐπιγινώσκειν toknow fully, ἐπίγνωσις fullknowledge. Here appropriate to the knowledge of God in Christ as the perfection of knowledge. [source]
The phrase only here and 2 Timothy 3:7. Ἑπίγνωσις is a favorite Pauline word. See on Romans 3:20; see on Colossians 1:9; see on 1 Timothy 2:4; see on 1 Timothy 4:3. It signifies advanced or full knowledge. The difference between the simple γνῶσις and the compound word is illustrated in Romans 1:21, Romans 1:28, and 1 Corinthians 13:12. In N.T. always of the knowledge of things ethical or divine, and never ascribed to God. For ἀλήθεια truthsee on sound doctrine, 1 Timothy 1:10. It appears 14 times in the Pastorals, and always without a defining genitive. So, often in Paul, but several times with a defining genitive, as truth of God, of Christ, of the gospel. The logical relation in the writer's mind between salvation and the knowledge of the truth is not quite clear. Knowledge of the truth may be regarded as the means of salvation, or it may be the ideal goal of the whole saving work. See 1 Corinthians 13:12; Philemon 3:8; John 17:3. The latter is more in accord with the general drift of teaching in these Epistles. [source]
(not in the Greek, only the article των tōn), “not as a result of works those in righteousness which we did.” Same idea as in Romans 3:20. [source]
Late verbal from δυς dus and νοεω noeō (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2 Timothy 2:17) and Spitta holds that Paul‘s teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:20, Romans 3:28; Romans 5:20 (with which cf. Romans 6:1 as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. [source]
Present active participle of λαλεω laleō That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true.Hard to be understood (δυσνοητα dusnoēta). Late verbal from δυς dus and νοεω noeō (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2 Timothy 2:17) and Spitta holds that Paul‘s teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:20, Romans 3:28; Romans 5:20 (with which cf. Romans 6:1 as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom.Unlearned Old word (alpha privative and μαντανω manthanō to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T.Unsteadfast (αστηρικτοι astēriktoi). See note on 2 Peter 2:14.Wrest Present active indicative of στρεβλοω strebloō old verb (from στρεβλος streblos twisted, στρεπω strephō to turn), here only in N.T.The other scriptures (τας λοιπας γραπας tas loipas graphas). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16) just as the prophets of old did (2 Peter 1:20.). Note λοιπας loipas (rest) here rather than αλλας allas (other). Peter thus puts Paul‘s Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matt 5:21-44; Matthew 15:3-6; Matthew 19:3-10). [source]